Cosmology is not a degree in cosmetics, even though distantly related; it means "the science of the origin and development of the universe." Kosmos is the Greek word for "world." All forms of that Greek word are found 187 times in the New Testament, translated, "world." With this in mind, I ask you to consider Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 (also Is 42:5, 44:24; Jer 10:12, 51:15) :
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.
I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
Scientists look at space, "the heavens," and what they see there looks, acts, and interacts like Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 describe. If you start with what you see, the physical universe, you would say that Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 describe it. How did Isaiah know? He didn't have the information that modern day astronomers and physicists possess. He didn't own a telescope. However, I will say that he had the information. It was given to him by God, because God stretched out the heavens as a curtain.
Scientists see an effect that is what Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 describe, but with a naturalistic presupposition or bias, the Big Bang as the hypothesis. All the scientists see is the effect. There is no proof a big bang occurred. Before the Big Bang theory, Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 were written. However, supernaturalism answers all the questions, connect all the dots.
The language of "stretcheth out the heavens" in Isaiah 40:22 and 45:12 affirm an expanding universe. It is from a Hebrew term, which was used in tentmaking. If any of you have erected a tent, you know that part of the process is stretching out or expanding outward the tent material. If creation is treated as a hypothesis or theory, there is epistemic support in the beginning of a finite, expanding universe. Concerning the big bang, the physicist who won the Nobel Prize for his discovery of cosmic background radiation, Arno Penzias, said:
The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the first five books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.
I like to compare what we see to walking on to a crime scene. No one but the one who committed the crime knows what happens. Everyone else is looking at the same evidence. No one is neutral. With the science, a creationist still approaches the physical evidence like a scientist.
One illustration I've read is a wet car in the drive way. Why is it wet? It's wet, but the road is dry. The sky is blue. Not only that, but a bucket with a wet sponge sets beside the car on the driveway.
The more evidence we get, the more clues we have, the better or the more likely the explanation of divine creation. It doesn't get easier to give a naturalistic explanation.
No comments:
Post a Comment