...............................................................................................................................................
.
BY JOHN D. MORRIS, PH.D.
The Big Bang model
for the origin of the universe certainly does not come from Scripture.
No one could, and
historically no one ever did, propose such an event as the starting point for
creation simply by reading Genesis and the related passages.
If we recognize the
empirical nature of true science, that scientific models derive from
observations of data in the present, then we recognize that the Big Bang idea
of the unobserved past is not even good science.
What we observe are
points of light, each with certain unique luminosities, certain spectral bands,
and other features like nebulous gas clouds.
With the exception
of an occasional explosive destruction of a star, these points of light are not
seen to change or move with respect to one another.
Their past may be
theorized, but there well may be more than one legitimate view of history.
But no star has
been seen to form, and we certainly have not observed the Big Bang.
In this view, all
of these processes occur too slowly to be observed.
Even after a
million years, the location of the stars would remain the same, as far as we
could tell.
It turns out that
everything we think we know about the universe is really a
mathematical model.
To be fair, the Big
Bang mathematical history does handle this array of data to the satisfaction of
many working in the field (although many observations remain problematic).
The question is,
are there other mathematical models which work better?
More importantly
since Big Bang ideas conflict so obviously with the plain sense of Scripture
(Earth created on Day One, the Sun and stars on Day Four, etc.), are there
other mathematical models of history more compatible with Biblical history?
ICR adjunct
professor Dr. Russell Humphreys has produced just such a model in his
book, Starlight and Time.
Is it right? I
don't know — he doesn't know.
His claim is only
that his mathematical model is more Biblical and more scientific than the Big
Bang mathematical model.
Perhaps there are
others even better which no one has thought of yet.
The Bible doesn't give the details, but it does say that all
creation was "very good" (Genesis 1:31), perfect for God's
purpose at the end of Day Six.
Since the "lights in the firmament of the heaven
(were) to divide the day from the night; and . . . be for signs, and for
seasons, and for days, and years" (verse 14), they must have been
visible on Earth at least by Day Six, and useful by man in keeping time.
Since God was using creative processes during this
creation period, processes which are not now observable, we can't know for sure
how He did this; we can only speculate.
At the least the universe must have been mature, able to
accomplish its intended function.
Today, as we view the stars, our response should be one of
praise to the Creator, giving Him (not a naturalistic mathematical model) the
glory for its creation.
And maybe someday, in eternity, He will give us the
privilege of exploring the infinite universe, understanding it more fully and
more completely, praising Him as Creator.
Dr. John Morris is President of
ICR.
The
Institute for Creation Research (ICR) wants people to know that God’s Word
can be trusted in everything it speaks about—from how and why we were made, to
how the universe was formed, to how we can know God and receive all He has
planned for us.
After
50 years of ministry, ICR remains a leader in scientific research within the
context of biblical creation. Founded by Dr. Henry Morris in 1970, ICR exists
to conduct scientific research within the realms of origins and Earth history,
and then to educate the public both formally and informally through
professional training programs, through conferences and seminars around the
country, and through books, magazines, and media presentations.
No comments:
Post a Comment