Einstein ponders matter curving space
Should Christians believe Einstein’s theories (there are two) of Relativity? Should anyone? Since I haven’t seen any scientists oppose the theory (test it, yes; oppose no), I have always assumed that pretty much everyone accepted Einstein’s General and Special Relativity. That’s the position I was writing from when about a decade ago I wrote an article about how people can be convinced to move from believing something is impossible, to believing that that very thing is not only possible, but true. The article is titled Science and the Paradox of the Unbelievable.
The article uses as its illustration the change in the understanding of how gravity works which was ushered in by Einstein’s theory of General Relativity. It starts with the original concept of gravity, formulated by the person many consider to be the father of modern science, Isaac Newton, and went on to show how Newton’s understanding, based in straight forward Euclidean space and standard time, which passes at a steady, unchanging rate, has given way to a new concept of gravity formulated by Albert Einstein in his theory of General Relativity. The point in that article was that many concepts that are common in Einstein’s theory of General Relativity were previously considered impossible and thus inconceivable, particularly to those with a good understanding of Newtonian dynamics.
According to Newton’s theory of gravity it is nonsensical to say things like “space is curved”, “gravity affects light”, the speed of an object affects its weight and length, matter warps space, and dense matter can warp space so severely that it creates a “black hole” from which even light cannot escape. Also, in Newton’s universe space and time are distinct entities. According to Einstein, what really exists is “spacetime” – space and time united into one entity. Spacetime is a like a fabric through which an item can propagate that was probably unimaginable to Newton—gravity waves. In fact, there was a recent powerful confirmation of Einstein’s predicted phenomenon of gravity waves which we (meaning humans) did not have the technology to detect when he predicted it but have since built the technology to detect them. Since then, a massive gravity wave was recently detected as reported in this article.[1]
Drawing of light being curved around the sun in a letter from Einstein to George Ellery Hale, October 14, 1913.
The point of that article was that for those willing to investigate, to “willingly suspend their disbelief” long enough to look at the evidence, Einstein’s theories have proven to be amazingly accurate at predicting things at the large planetary scale like movements of suns and planets. There has even been some success at the tiny scale of atomic particles since his theories are also considered when working with those particles at places like the Large Hadron Collider.[2] (However, fundamentally, Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible.) Relativistic properties of space, time and matter are among the most tested and confirmed concepts in modern science. (I’ve put some of the confirmations in a sidebar here.) Relativity has been so successful in fact, that, as I mentioned, I was not aware of any scientists that seriously doubted the theories, which is why I used it as an example in the article as something once considered false but now considered true.
It has since come to my attention that not all believe in Einstein’s theories of General and Special Relativity. In particular, there are some Christians who doubt the theories, in spite of what appears to be overwhelming support based on measurable data. Such is not the case with the unobserved, philosophical data used to prop up unobservable and unverifiable theories like the Bing Bang and Darwinian evolution. No, Einstein’s theories have been tested with very precise instruments which measure observable entities like light, time and mass.
What’s the Big Deal?
Some are surely wondering by now, what’s the big deal? Wasn’t Newton correct enough for them to use Newtonian physics to calculate trajectories at NASA? Yes, that’s true. But I want to point out that at some critical points physicists say Newton was flat out wrong. Here’s a clip of physicist Sean Carrol explaining, “If’s there’s no such thing as simultaneity, then there’s no such thing as absolute time everywhere throughout the Universe, and Isaac Newton was wrong.”[3]
Simultaneity
For most people, that is a true statement, that is, it’s true that Newton was wrong. Nevertheless, it’s application is limited. It only applies in situations when traveling close to the speed of light or around massive objects that can greatly warp spacetime. But for most of our everyday experiences, that doesn’t apply. Indeed NASA still used (and perhaps uses) Newtonian dynamics (nonrelativistic reference frames) and equations for calculating trajectories for space probes traversing the solar system.[4] So, though “Newton was wrong” as Carroll points out, most don’t go around proclaiming he was wrong and his theories are wrong. This is due to the fact that the math he gave us to make calculations of things like trajectories are still accurate. If that is the case for Newton, since Einstein’s theories have been proven time and time again, and his predictions are more accurate than Newton’s, why is that not the case for Einstein? Why the need to say Relativity is wrong and should not be believed? Now we get to the heart of it.
The Relativity Bogeyman
Lurking among all the successes, and all the verified predictions of General Relativity, is a bogeyman that some would prefer to never see the light of day. It’s not the misunderstanding over the name “Relativity” – which some confuse with moral relativity. No, that’s just an annoying gremlin for which a correction can be made to differentiate the two. Nor is it the identity confusion with the The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. (Which asks questions like, is the moon really there if you’re not looking at it? See Sidebar question 4.) No, the bogeyman I’m referring to has deeper roots and is revealed by the narrator of “Inside Einstein’s Mind” in the following statement:
“Perhaps the most profound prediction of General Relativity, is that our universe had a hot, dense beginning that we call the Big Bang.”[5]
With this statement, some take Einstein’s theory to be support for the big bang. Here is the clip so you can see for yourself:
Big Bang Conclusion from General Relativity
As creationists, what are we to make of this prediction from Einstein’s General Relativity? We know that the universe did not start with a Big Bang, which begins with plasma existing first, that coalesced to stars that then exploded to create the materials for planets. Genesis 1.1 is very clear: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The rest of the chapter explains the sequence. He started first with the earth, which was made of water (not rocks from exploding stars). He created light. Out of the waters he made dry ground appear, covered it with plants, populated the seas and skies with fish and flying creatures. Not until the fourth day did he create the sun, moon and stars. So those who want to say God used the Big Bang to create the universe are clearly abandoning Scripture to do so. There is nothing compatible in the events or the sequences of two events.
I reject the Big Bang, and I have written a number of articles of why it is not, and cannot, be true. A good one to review on some of its many issues (apart from Genesis 1:1 – 2:2 in the Bible) is “Problems with the Big Bang theory“. But, for some, the mere fact that General Relativity seems to point to the cosmos beginning with a big bang is enough to throw out the entire theory of General Relativity. But as the saying goes, let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. The portion of Relativity that is not true is like the bogeyman. The bogeyman exists only in the mind as a phantasm to scare people. But, since it is not real it, can’t really hurt you. The only harm the bogeyman can do is what you allow your mind to do that scares or harms you. The problem is, like anything false, if you believe it, it can lead you to wrong conclusions and wrong actions. The same is true for Relativity. The portion that is not true—the potion that points to the Big Bang as a beginning to the universe—can only harm you if you allow it. We Christians should know better. We know it’s not true, so it should do us no harm. This is similar to the advice the Apostle Paul gave to Christians in the early church who were concerned about food sacrificed to idols. What was Paul’s advice? It follows:
4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.
5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”),
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
2 Cor 8.4-6
If I were to paraphrase, and put it in the context of Big Bang cosmology, it would sound something like this.
Regarding the conclusion that General Relativity points to the universe being created by a “singularity” instead of God:
Even though there is a popular theory known as the “Big Bang” or “The Standard Model of Cosmology”, for us there is only one creation account: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Thus it is God from whom all things came and for whom we live. We know this to be true so let us live in that truth, supporting what we know to be true and denying what we know to be false.
For those who have been afraid of the Big Bang bogeyman, may I suggest we treat it as it is: an idol. It is something we know that is false, that we have nothing to do with. With regards to the rest of Einstein’s theories that are well supported by observational evidence (see the side bar), even if you think the theory is inaccurate, may I suggest you treat it as we now treat Newton?
Most don’t go around saying Newton was wrong, though, for those who believe in Relativity, his description of how it acts was wrong, but his math for trajectories are amazingly accurate in non-relativistic frames. Yet he is accorded respect because, even though the picture of gravity he gave us was incorrect (for example gravity does not act instantaneously particularly over large distances, it acts at the speed of light), his means of predicting motions due to it are still accurate to this day. Can we not do the same for Einstein’s theories? Einstein’s theories allow us to use accurate GPS systems, and we’ve all seen the destructive power of nuclear bombs. It was Einstein’s equation E=MC2 that led scientists to understand there was immense amount of energy stored, essentially locked up, in the nucleus of atoms. If such energy could be released—unlocked—the output would be enormous. I’m not aware of anyone who denies the power of nuclear bombs. Such power was predicted in an application of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity.
So, was Einstein completely wrong? Clearly not. He got much right when it came to a descriptive model of gravity, painting a much clearer picture of the effects of gravity than Isaac Newton. But Einstein was not perfect. Many think he missed the boat when scientists turned to study quantum physics after his theory of gravity was published. The quantum story is another theory with many successful observational tests that I won’t comment on here. My point is Einstein missed the boat. If his theory of gravity points to an erroneous understanding of the creation of the world, he was incorrect in that as well. But, to be precise, Einstein never endorsed the idea of the Big Bang. It was George Lemaître, the Belgian physicist and priest, who came up with the idea. Einstein accepted an expanding universe after seeing Hubble’s observations on red shift, but he never endorsed the idea of a “singularity” at the core and start of the Big Bang.[6] So it’s a bit unfair to judge his theory of gravity based on the fact that some have used it so support the Big Bang, which is something Einstein himself did not support. Particularly when we, as Christians, know the derivative theory—the Big Bang —is false.
So, there you have it. In my humble opinion, Einstein’s General Relativity is, if not an outright true and correct way to view gravitational dynamics (space, warped by matter, pushes on matter (Einstein); not matter pulling instantaneously from a distance on other matter (Newton)). General Relativity is accurate and reliable in predicting all the things it purports to predict. It has passed every test thrown at it, and, thus, has been confirmed many times. But the derivative theory—the big bang theory —is false. It is at best an idol for many, and, at worst, it’s satanic. Don’t let the Big Bang bogeyman frighten you from the truth.
Duane Caldwell | March 9, 2026 | Printer friendly version
Follow @rational_faith_
Notes
Sidebar: Relativity – Supporting Evidence
1. Sharmila Kuthunur, “Record-breaking gravitational wave puts Einstein’s relativity to its toughest test yet — and proves him right again” LiveScience.com February 13, 2026, https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/record-breaking-gravitational-wave-puts-einsteins-relativity-to-its-toughest-test-yet-and-proves-him-right-again
Back
2. Relativistic adjustments are needed and considered at the LHC. The answer from ChatGPT when asked, “Are there verifications of Einstein’s theory of Relativity seen in experiments at the Large Hadron Collider?
Answer:
Yes — Einstein’s relativity (both special and general) is tested constantly at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), though usually indirectly. The LHC was not built primarily to test relativity, but its success depends on relativity being correct
Back
3. Sean Carrol, ref from Nova, Episode “Inside Einstein’s Mind”, 2015 Documentary
Back
4. “Newton showed that the motion of falling apples and orbiting planets are governed by the same force: gravity. His equations are so effective we still use them today to send probes to the farthest reaches of the solar system.”
Narrator, Nova, Episode “Inside Einstein’s Mind”, 2015 Documentary
Back
5. Narrator, Nova, Episode “Inside Einstein’s Mind”, 2015 Documentary
Back
6. Copilot – AI Summary, 3/7/2026
https://copilot.microsoft.com/shares/kiW5yAPh4M4bkP982N4HZ
Back
Image
Composite Duane Caldwell © 2026
