Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Ross Is A Christian And An Astronomer

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on October 21, 2004 12:24:03 UTC


It seems you are putting being a Creationist on a higher level than being a Christian. To be a Creationist, you have to believe what a bunch of Jewish Rabis wrote down thousands of years ago. They were not Christians. So why do you take what they wrote down so Literally?

Ross argues that if the universe were only 6,000 years old, and if the speed of light is a constant, then we could not see the Milky Way with our naked eyes. In order to see the entire galaxy with a telescope, the universe must be at least 100,000 years old. In order to see other galaxies, the universe must be at least a million years old just because it takes that long for light to get here.

The only argument that I can see as possibly making the universe only 6,000 years old is if God created the light already on its way to the earth. If so, then there is no reason why God could not have created the universe yesterday.

So there are two alternatives. Either God created the universe with everything already in motiuon and with light from all stars already on its way here, Or God created the universe from scratch billions of years ago and has been molding it since then to eventually produce intelligent life. Scientists believe in the latter alternative just because it is so much more reasonable. It is a much more efficient and dramatic way to create life. There is no drama if creation has everything already in motion.

By the way, scientists believe this as a matter of faith. Science is actually a religion of sort. But one that is logical and in which certain principles can be verified experimentally. But most of us accept the rest of science on faith. I am a theoretical physicist concerned with cosmology. Most of cosmology is speculative since we cannot do any verifying experiments. So I have to take on faith even the cosmology that I develop myself.

For example, I take on faith that the speed of light is constant. That has been proven experimentally but not by me. So I have to believe that all the scientists who measured the speed of light in a vacuum were not lying. So truth is fundamental in science, just as God wants it to be.

God gave us experimental science so that we could determine what is true and what is not true of what we can measure. If we cannot measure it then we do not know what is really true about it. Most of cosmology cannot be measured and so we do not really know if any of it is true. But we can measure the speed of light. So we know as truth that what we see in the heavens must be billions of years old.

But you are entitled to your own beliefs. By contributing to this forum, however, you are putting your beliefs on the line, so to speak. Perhaps you will find a way to defend them without slippage.


Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins