 |
| Einstein visits Hubble to view the evidence himself |
Introduction
The Bible begins with the resounding statement, “In the beginning
God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1 New International
Version). Genesis Chapter one walks through each period of creation
stating what was done on six days of creation, ending with: “God
saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was
evening, and there was morning—the sixth day” (Gen 1:1 New
International Version). For the duration of this essay the
presuppositions will be that God indeed did create all things, the
Bible is the inerrant word of God, and that the Genesis account can
be trusted. Yet even after these conclusions are weighed in, still
the question must be asked: Did God create the universe in six
literal days or was his method of creation the big bang? This
question has effectively divided the body of Christ on Earth, with
great men and women of faith on both sides of the debate. The two
theories have very little in common but the debate is extremely
heated, with Christians on both sides, as well as atheists and most
in the scientific community blasting both young-earth creationism and
old earth intelligent design, insisting on an old earth evolutionary
view leaving the question of the first cause effectively blank.
There are some similarities, many differences, and both six day
creation and the big bang have science to back up their views.
Old-Earth
View
The scientific
community fought for many years for an eternal universe (thus needing
no creator), but eventually in the 1990s the big bang became the
accepted model (Craig, 2004). There are not only many brilliant
atheistic/agnostic thinkers holding the Old Earth view, but there are
also many brilliant Christian thinkers, most notably: William Lane
Craig, Francis Collins, Norman Geisler, and Frank Turek. Frank
Turek's view on the big bang is summed up in his own words when he
said, “Yes I'm a Christian and I believe in the Big Bang. I just
know who banged it!” In 1929 Edwin Hubble discovered that galaxies
were moving away from each other, and that the universe was expanding
(Netting, 2014). It became clear to Hubble that to go back in time
the universe must have existed at a single point with infinite mass,
before exploding outward (Netting, 2014). According to Nasa's
website (2014) this big bang event occurred about 14 billion years
ago. Einstein's theory of general relativity greatly added to the
big bang model (Netting, 2014). According to Netting (2014) “if we
were to look at the Universe one second after the Big Bang, what we
would see is a 10-billion degree sea of neutrons, protons, electrons,
anti-electrons (positrons), photons, and neutrinos. Then, as time
went on, we would see the Universe cool, the neutrons either decaying
into protons and electrons or combining with protons to make
deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen).“ Coupled with observations on
the rate of expansion of the universe, geologists use a variety of
methods to date rocks estimating the age of the Earth to be
approximately 4.5 billion years old (Lutgens, 2014).
Young-Earth
View
There are many great
minds on the side of the Old-Earth Big Bang view, but there are also
great minds on the side of the Young-Earth six day creation view.
Notable young-earth view holders include: Ken Ham, Tom Wagner, Kent
Hovind, John Morris, and John MacArthur. In very basic terms the
holders of this view look to a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.
The Genesis account of creation indicates that God created everything
in six days, the Hebrew word “yom” translated into English as
“day” (Morris, 1994). The Hebrew word “yom” can mean both a
single solar day and can also mean an extended period of time (Ham,
1995). When observing the word “yom” in context in the Genesis
account the only conclusion can be that the word is referring to a 24
hour day (Ham, 1995). Six Day creationists point to the flaws in the
theory of evolution, such as the absence of transitional forms in the
fossil record, the complex design in living things, the fine tuning
of the universe to allow for life, and unreliability of radioisotope
dating methods (Morris, 1994). Six-Day Creationists also point to
the second law of thermodynamics that says systems tend toward
disorder, not order (Morris, 1994). Therefore time becomes the enemy
of the evolutionary model, not the friend (Morris, 1994). In
addition the fossil record tends to point to a creation view because
fossils tended to appear in a very small period of time, something
referred to as the Cambrian explosion (Morris, 1994). The Six-Day
Creation front tends to spend most of it's time attacking the
evolutionary model instead of building their own scientifically
credible model, which is a problem. Of course confronting evolution
is important, and there are many holes in the theory. To quote
Charles Darwin: “To
suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable [matchless]
contrivances [plans] for adjusting the focus to different distances,
for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of
spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural
selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible
degree” (Wagner, 1994).
Contrasting the Views
The Big Bang theory
and the six day creation model have some similarities but many
differences. Both views attempt to explain the origin of the
universe and the planet Earth. Both views rely upon science and
presupposition to explain their views. Both views are reasonable and
coherent worldviews with solid evidence and implication on both
sides. A lot of the problem has been the incredible hostility on
both sides of the debate. Both sides condemn and minimize the other
side, and finding common ground is quite difficult. In the end both
views approach the evidence with presuppositions. Clearly six day
creationists have an agenda, they believe there is a God, that the
Bible is the word of that God, and that truth can be known (Morris,
1994). On the other side you have a majority of scientists extremely
hostile toward theism and utterly intent on providing models and
systems that exclude any hint of a supernatural first cause. Both
sides have been guilty of generating their own propaganda and
silencing the competition's view. In the early 1900s the scientific
evolutionary view was silenced and condemned by a powerful Christian
majority. Now in the early 21st century the creation view
is openly mocked, ridiculed, and ignored by the powerful forces of
science and the university (Morris, 1994).
Conclusion
In conclusion,
I'm in full agreement with Dr. Francis Collins when he said, “I
believe God did intend, in giving us
intelligence, to give us the opportunity to investigate and
appreciate the wonders of His creation. He is not threatened by our
scientific adventures” (Collins,
2009).
Both the Six Day Creation view and the Big Bang view show compelling proofs regarding the origins of the universe. Six-day creation holds closely to a literal reading of the word of God and also show clear failings in the evolutionary model (Ham, 1995). The Big bang theory looks more to science to prove it's origins, but many good Christians hold to the view of an old earth resulting from a big bang event (Craig, 2004). Both sides of the debate have merits, and though there are some similarities there are major differences between the two worldviews. Science and Religion may never be resolved in a coherent manner, but in the end, if God does exist then he is everything, and if he does not exist then it doesn't matter anyway.
References
Collins, F. (2009,
February 5). The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence of
Belief. TheVeritas Forum.
Lecture conducted from Caltech, Pasadena, California.
Craig, D. W. (2004,
March 18). Beyond the Big Bang: The Ultimate Question of Origins.
TempletonLecture.
Lecture conducted from University of Colorado, Boulder.
Ham, K. (1995,
December 1). The Necessity for Believing in Six Literal Days. Answers
in Genesis.
Retrieved July 1, 2014, from
https://answersingenesis.org/why-does-creation-matter/the-necessity-for-believing-in-six-literal-days/
Lutgens, F. K., &
Tarbuck, E. J. (2014). Foundations
of earth science
(Seventh ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Morris, J. D.
(1994). The
Young Earth.
Colorado Springs, CO: Master Books.
Netting, R. (2014, May 13). The Big Bang. NASAScience. Retrieved June 29, 2014, from http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-powered-the-big-bang/
Wagner, T. (1994, September 1). Darwin vs. the Eye. Answers in Genesis. Retrieved July 2, 2014, from https://answersingenesis.org/charles-darwin/darwin-vs-the-eye/
Related Posts:
Old Earth Evolution vs. Young Earth Creation
No Evidence for God?
Os Guinness and Frank Turek
Is All truth Relative?
Reasonable Evidence for Christianity & Intelligent Design Videos
