The Big Bang—A Hypothesis

Reason 10: The Big Bang

on May 31, 2007

This “reason” is a fairly bold claim. But just how substantiated is it? First off, let’s take a look at some quotes from fellow scientists about the claims on the origins of the universe:

At the beginning of his book The God Particle, Nobel physicist Leon Ledermann [referring to cosmological speculations like the big bang in science books and articles] writes: “When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up.”1

Big bang cosmology is probably as widely believed as has been any theory of the universe in the history of Western civilization. It rests, however, on many untested, and in some cases untestable, assumptions. Indeed, big bang cosmology has become a bandwagon of thought that reflects faith as much as objective truth.2

Now we can take a closer look at what is actually being proposed:

The Big Bang is not an unsubstantiated theoretical speculation.

The big bang is not an observable event that scientists can duplicate in the lab. It is a hypothesis about how the universe came to be. Such naturalistic man-made ideas are, in fact, speculation about past events. Because there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged big bang, it cannot be definitively substantiated. Compare that to the eyewitness record given to us in the Bible. The Creator (not simply an “eyewitness” to the events of creation, but the actual One doing the creating) has given us a written record of the beginning in the first chapters of Genesis.

Last year’s Nobel Prize was given for observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation that has been traveling for over 14 billion years before being received by NASA’s Cosmic Background Explore Satellite.

This is an amazing assumption! Since nobody knows exactly when this radiation actually started traveling, how do we know when the start date was and thus the period of time which it has been traveling? Again, we see the unnecessary insertion of exorbitant periods of time to force their “reasons” to appear plausible.

This thermal radiation bath, whose temperature is measured more accurately than any other known existing system, has a temperature that is in precise agreement with the predicted value if the Universe has been expanding for 14.3 billion years since the big bang. Moreover, the small temperature deviations observed across the sky agree exactly with what are predicted if gravity worked over the course of several billion to create all of the 400 billion observed galaxies in the universe. Moreover, observations of the primordial background radiation are in exact independent agreement with the predictions of a hot big bang that produced precisely the observed abundance of light elements, hydrogen, deuterium, helium, and lithium, at a time when the universe was 1 second old and had a temperature of 10 billion degrees.

It is peculiar that secular scientists point to Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation as being proof of the big bang when the very fact that the CMB temperature is uniform everywhere presents a tremendous problem for the big bang. There just wasn’t enough time for the exchange of radiation (i.e. light) to allow the temperature to reach equilibrium. It is interesting that they fail to mention this “little” problem in Reason Number 10, which destroys the whole foundation of the argument! Please see “Light-Travel Time: A Problem for the Big Bang” for more on this problem.


  1. As quoted in: The Fire in the Equations: Science, Religion and the Search for God by Kitty Ferguson, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1995, p. 145 (brackets ours).
  2. Burbidge, G., Why only one big bang? Scientific American, 266(2):96, 1992.


Get the latest answers emailed to you.

I agree to the current Privacy Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry, dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ.

Learn more

  • Customer Service 800.778.3390