The Origins of the Universe

[polymath257]

But that *isn't* the modern description. There was no 'combining' and then 'splitting apart'.

Expanding can be described as splitting apart. Something is expanding, after all.

Nope. The two are not even close to being the same.

And it is space itself that is expanding, not anything material.

You should bear in mind that the Qur'an is conveying the account of creation to people who lived in the 7th century. So the words that one should expect should mean something that these people can relate to.

And that doesn't make the falsehoods in the account any less false. It isn't even a good analogy.

But it does go directly against most Abrahamic versions of creation.

How? On the contrary, it goes in the direction of creation ex nihilo. It doesn't confirm it completely, I give you that, but we're one step closer to the religious account of how the world began.

Also, don't forget that the Big bang theory was originally suggested by a catholic priest, Georges Lemaître. I don't see why a priest would advocate a theory that supposedly damages their beliefs, as you seem to imply here.

LeMaitre also warned the pope not to try to use the Big Bang theory as a support of religious views.

The *physics* and the *evidence* supports the BB theory. it has *nothing* to do with religious beliefs.

In particular, in the BB version that LeMaitre proposed there is no 'before the Big Bang'. Time itself starts when the universe does.