The Big Bang
‘Something From Nothing?’
Introduction
A. The reason I am teaching on the topic of evolution verses creation is so that you can get access to scientific information that the public schools are censoring for fear that it might show how foolish the teaching of evolution really is. Science professors, like the one in the movie Expelled, biology teachers, astronomy professors will do whatever it takes to prevent people from hearing anything that challenges evolution. They will make fun of scientists or teachers who teach creation, try to intimate people who say they believe in creation, and even seek to legally keep it out of the schools. So much for being ‘open minded!’
B. I am not a scientist but I am a person who can think and I feel I should be allowed to ask questions and challenge theories that I am taught. This material we shall look at today is presented to you not so much that you can remember all of it and use it in an argument with an evolutionist. It is presented with the hope that you will see that the Biblical teaching of creationism is good science and that you will get this truth settled in your heart once and for all.
C. If you get into a discussion with an evolutionists rather than trying to remember all this material it might be better to approach it this way. “I know there is good scientific research available for anyone who is ‘open minded’ enough to challenge the theory of evolution. I can get it for you if you are really interested in educating yourself.”
D. Show the Creation Magazine and the Answersingenesis.org on screen. This coming Saturday, June 28, we will be caravanning down to see the Creation museum in Cincinnati. If you truly are interested in educating yourself and getting good scientific research done by brilliant scientists, geologists, nuclear physicists, molecular biologists, cosmologist, I invite you to come along. I can promise you that you will not regret it and it will change your life if you have any questions at all about evolution or creationism.
Is it really that important that we believe in creation? Mark 10:6
A. Let me give you at least three reasons why this is so important. Some people say, what is the big deal, so long as I believe in Jesus what does it matter if I believe in evolution or creation? Well it does matter and let me show you why.
1st Jesus believed in the story of creation. In Mark 10:6 we find Jesus making reference to the story of creation as He taught about marriage between a man and a woman. He declared that marriage is to be between a man and a woman because “from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” Evolutionary ideas about the rise of man from apes has caused all sorts of confusion today. The confusion over marriage between man and woman today can be traced to the teaching of evolution. Humans were specially created by God and are not simply highly evolved primates. It is clear that Jesus believed in the creation story and He used it as a basis for His teaching for marriage. If we reject creation we make Jesus a “false teacher.”
2nd If we can reject the plain teaching of Genesis, why can’t we reject the plain teaching of other scriptures? This is all about foundations. We are in a war of ideas that are contrary to God’s Word. This puts in question the divine inspiration of God’s Word. Either it is from God or it is from men. If you can dismiss this part of the Bible, then the entire Bible is built on a weak foundation. A building on a weak foundation is sure to collapse at sometime, which is what is happening in many churches today. They have destroyed the foundation of the Bible. If the creation story is not true, what about the genealogies that list every name all the way back to Adam? How can we have millions of years with these genealogies? We can’t. Either the genealogies are correct or they are also wrong. Either the Bible can be trusted or it cannot. If we reject Bible teaching just because it is hard to believe or science says it is impossible, then why not reject Jesus’ virgin birth and His resurrection from the dead, or His miracles? Just because creation is hard to believe and some scientist are saying it couldn’t have happened this way we cannot reject this. Ultimately we must come to grips with the fact that God’s Word often tells us things that only faith can accept, even before science is able to support it. We can do our best to prove these things out by scientific research and historical research but ultimately we have to choose who we will believe, the Word of God or the word of men.
3rd The creation story gives us the entire foundation for the salvation of man. If there was death, disease, suffering and destruction before man sinned then the whole concept of sin and its curse is now without any basis and the need for salvation is no longer necessary. According to the creation story, everything was created good, without death, disease, suffering and destruction. It was not until Adam and Eve sinned that these things came upon the earth. Jesus came to pay the price for this sin by His sacrifice on the cross. His death and resurrection have broken the curse of sin and have brought the gospel or the spreading of God’s kingdom on this earth. Without the creation story as we read it in Genesis we have no plan of salvation. Our only hope is that someday man will evolve and be good. But with six thousand years of history filled with wars and corruption we don’t have much hope.
B. The belief in the teaching of creation is not really optional. Evolutionary teaching has far reaching effects. It is not simply something that Christians can take or leave. Evolutionary ideas have fueled racist attitudes and set the stage for such atrocities as the Holocaust. Evolutionary ideas are totally contrary to God’s teaching that man was created in God’s image. The teaching of evolution is now found in every part of education, sociology, psychology, physiology, astronomy, law, finance and so on. Basically everything is said to be the product of evolution. However, today we shall look at two major forms of evolution: The evolution of the universe or the Big Bang Theory and Chemical evolution or the Origins of Life Theory
What does the Bible say?
A. Does the Bible teach evolution? The simple answer to this question is “No.” In Genesis 1 we read the account of the creation (not the evolution) of everything, the universe, the sun, moon, and stars, the planet earth with all its varied plant and animal kinds, including the pinnacle of God’s creation, humans. Nowhere in this account do we read about molecules-to-man evolution. Furthermore, there was no time for evolution, for God supernaturally created everything in six literal days (Exodus 20:11, 31:17).
B. The Bible teaches that God created the universe in six literal days. It is clear from the context in Genesis that these were days in the ordinary sense (i.e., 24-hour days) since they are bounded by evening and morning and occur in an ordered list (second day, third day, etc.). Where do you think we get the idea of a seven day week? We know where we get the calendar year, earth rotates around the sun. We know where we get the month, the moon rotates around the earth. We know where we get the 24 hour day. The earth rotates on its axis. But where do we get the week? There is no scientific evidence that gives us a week. It came from creation. God created the week!
C. Any study of the Hebrew language will clearly show that these are 24 hour days. There simply is no other way to interpret this if you approach it with an unbiased mind. On the other hand if you are determined not to believe the bible you can come up with all sorts of ways to fit the big bang into scripture. Since evolution teaches the universe has evolved over billions of years you just change the meaning of ‘day’ to billions of years. Creationists don’t believe in the billions of years we believe in a young earth that started about 10,000 years ago with creation.
D. Some argue that there is a major difference between “make” and “create.” The Hebrew words are asah and bara, respectively. They argue that God created some things, for example, the heaven and the earth as recorded in Genesis 1:1 and the marine and flying creatures as recorded in Genesis 1:21. They then argue that God made other things, perhaps by evolution from pre-existing materials, for example, the sun, moon, and stars as recorded in Genesis 1:16, and the beasts and cattle as recorded in Genesis 1:25. Though, they are often used interchangeably, as seen clearly where asah (to make) and bara (to create) are used in reference to the same act (the creation of man, Genesis 1:26–27). Nothing in Genesis 1 leads to the conclusion that God used evolutionary processes to produce His creation.
The Evolution of the Universe: The Big Bang
A. The big bang is the most prominent naturalistic view of the origin of the universe in the same way that Darwinian evolution is the naturalistic view of origin of living systems. The difference between what the Bible teaches about the origin of the universe and what the evolutionists teach can be summed up as follows: the Bible teaches that “in the beginning God created” and the evolutionists teach, in essence, that “in the beginning nothing became something and exploded.”
B. According to the big bang, our universe is supposed to have suddenly popped into existence and rapidly expanded and given rise to the countless billions of galaxies with their countless billions of stars.
C. All logic predicts that if you have nothing, nothing will happen. It is against all known logic and all laws of science to believe that the universe is the product of nothing. This concept is similar to hoping that an empty bank account will suddenly give rise to billions of dollars all on its own. ‘The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing, zero, nada. And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere.” This is a quote from a leading evolutionist science magazine. This is a serious scientific problem with the teaching of the Big bang theory.
D. The Big Bang theory is actually more of a religion. It requires more ‘blind’ faith to believe in the Big Bang theory than it does to believe in a God who always existed. If it all started with a compressed ball that eventually exploded, then it is fair to ask, ‘Where did the ball come from?” If you dare ask that question you will get this answer, ‘Why it always was just there! You just have to believe” Wow now that sounds more like a religion than a science. The same people who find it hard to believe that God always existed can turn right around and believe that there always was this large ball ready to explode.
E. No matter how we go at this search on the origins of the universe we will always come back to this question. “Where did it come from?” If we start with gas, where did it come from? If we start with a large ball, where did it come from? Eventually you have to decide that matter always existed, it had no beginning, it always was. And you have to believe that with blind faith.
F. On the other hand there is good evidence that the universe had a beginning. This can be shown from unbiased scientific research and the Laws of Thermodynamics, the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences.
1st Law: The total amount of energy in the universe is limited.
2nd Law: The amount of energy available for work is running out.
G. If the total amount of energy is limited, and the amount of energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy. So the best solution is that the universe must have been created with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down.
H. To believe in the big bang religion requires you to deny the facts of science and requires you to deny the Scientific laws of Thermodynamics. It requires you to believe that the universe always existed, had no beginning and caused itself to develop. That takes a lot of blind faith. Now I ask you, is it any different from believing that God always was? Therefore I propose that the big bang believe is truly a religion base on ‘blind faith’
I. The irony is, of course, that the universe did come out of nothing. But it didn’t come out of nothing, by nothing. As always, Big Bang scientist want the effect without the cause; so much so that they’re now coming up with new ideas to help support the failing Big bang theory. One leading evolutionists now proposes that advanced aliens could have created our universe.
J. It is absurd for evolutionists to ridicule creationists for believing God made everything out of nothing while evolutionists maintain that somehow nothing turned itself into something.
Chemical Evolution: The Origin of Life
A. What about the origin of life, chemical evolution? It is commonly believed, because it is taught in our schools and colleges, without anyone being allowed to challenge it, that laboratory experiments have proved conclusively that living organisms evolved from nonliving chemicals. Many people believe that life has been created in the laboratory by scientists who study chemical evolution.
B. The famous experiment conducted by Stanley Miller in 1953 is often quoted as proof of this. Yet the results of such experiments show nothing of the sort. These experiments, designed as they are by intelligent humans, show that under certain conditions, certain organic compounds can be formed from inorganic compounds.
C. In fact, what the intelligent scientists are actually saying is, “If I can just synthesize life in the laboratory, then I will have proven that no intelligence was necessary to form life in the beginning.” Their experiments are simply trying to prove the opposite that an intelligence is required to create life.
D. If we look carefully at Miller’s experiment, we will see that what he did fails to address the evolution of life. He took a mixture of gases (ammonia, hydrogen, methane, and water vapor) and he passed an electric current through them. He did this in order to reproduce the effect of lightning passing through a mixture of gases that he thought might have composed the earth’s atmosphere millions of years ago. As a result, he produced a mixture of amino acids. Because amino acids are the building blocks of proteins and proteins are considered to be the building blocks of living systems, Miller’s experiment was hailed as proof that life had evolved by chance on the earth millions of years ago.
E. There are a number of objections to such a conclusion.
1. There is no proof that the earth ever had an atmosphere composed of the gases used by Miller in his experiment.
2. Where did the lightening come from?
F. The next problem is that in Miller’s experiment he was careful to make sure there was no oxygen present. If oxygen was present, then the amino acids would not form. However, if oxygen was absent from the earth, then there would be no ozone layer, and if there was no ozone layer the ultraviolet radiation would penetrate the atmosphere and would destroy the amino acids as soon as they were formed. So the dilemma facing the evolutionist can be summed up this way: amino acids would not form in an atmosphere with oxygen and amino acids would be destroyed in an atmosphere without oxygen.
G. The problems outlined above show that, far from creating life in the laboratory, the chemical evolutionists have not shown that living systems arose by chance from nonliving chemicals. The only explanation for the existence of living systems is that they must have been created by intelligent design.
Conclusion
A. Does it matter if a Christian believe in evolution or creation? Yes evolution is totally contrary to biblical teaching and under minds the entire story of salvation.
B. We have seen that the Bible does NOT teach evolution. Those who try to fit it into the Bible have no support. It is merely caused by lack of education.
C. True science and research will always support the truth that all things were created by God in six days. The creation is not billions or millions of years old it is around 10,000 years old. There is no demonstrable evidence for the big bang, and chemical evolution has failed miserably in spite of evolutionists’ attempts to create living systems in the laboratory. It takes more ‘blind faith’ to believe in these ridiculous ideas than it does to believe that God was able to create the entire universe in six days. He could have done it in one second, but chose six days to give us a pattern for living, six days of work and one day of rest.
