Changes

227 bytes removed ,  19:25, January 18, 2022
→‎Creationist and Theistic Evolutionary Views: Mangled sentences fixed. See Talk,
Line 17: Line 17:     
==Creationist and Theistic Evolutionary Views==
 
==Creationist and Theistic Evolutionary Views==
−
The universe appears to be [[Fine tuned universe | fine tuned]] for life to some contrary to more than 99.99...% of the universe having no life, suggesting that God set the laws of physics that allow the universe, complexity, and life to exist. Scientists have been baffled by these "coincidences" as they examine the parameters of the big bang and other physical constants.
+
The universe appears to be [[Fine tuned universe | fine tuned]] for life, suggesting that God set the laws of physics that allow the universe, complexity, and life to exist. Some creationists argue that the Big Bang theory is part of an effort to deny [[God's]] creation of the universe.  Christian physicists, such as Dr. John Hartnett,<ref>http://creation.com/starlight-and-time-a-further-breakthrough</ref> have claimed that the Big Bang theory was constructed to account for serious pitfalls to the [[theory of evolution]], particularly the needed timescale of billions of years, amply contradicted by terrestrial and astronomical evidence.  Thus, the big bang is trotted out by atheist evolutionists to silence [[creationist]] opponents.
   −
Some creationists argue that the '''Big Bang theory''' is part of an effort to deny [[God's]] creation of all of existence.  Christian physicists, such as Dr. John Hartnett,<ref>http://creation.com/starlight-and-time-a-further-breakthrough</ref> have claimed that the Big Bang theory was constructed to account for serious pitfalls to the [[theory of evolution]], particularly the needed timescale of billions of years, amply contradicted by terrestrial and astronomical evidence.  Thus, the big bang is trotted out by atheist evolutionists to silence [[creationist]] opponents.
+
Young earth creationist scientists argue that the Big Bang Theory is scientifically unsound.<ref name="BB Critique">Thompson, Bert, Harrub, Brad, and May, Branyon [http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=1453 The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique] ''Apologetics Press'', May 2003 - 23[5]:32-34,36-47.</ref><ref>Brown, Walt, 2001, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html Big Bang?]</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/309</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2047</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/343/</ref> In addition, [[young earth creationism]] holds that the book of Genesis is historical in nature and that [[Bible exegesis]] warrants a six-day creation with each day being 24 hours.<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Days_of_creation Days of Creation] (CreationWiki).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp Genesis Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>Niessen, Richard, [http://www.icr.org/article/164/ Theistic Evolution and the Day-Age Theory] ''Impact'' 81, March 1980.</ref>
−
 
  −
Young earth creationist scientists contest the Big Bang Theory stating that it is scientifically unsound.
  −
<ref name="BB Critique">Thompson, Bert, Harrub, Brad, and May, Branyon [http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=1453 The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique] ''Apologetics Press'', May 2003 - 23[5]:32-34,36-47.</ref>
  −
<ref>Brown, Walt, 2001, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html Big Bang?]</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/309</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2047</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/343/</ref> In addition, [[young earth creationism]] holds that the book of Genesis is historical in nature and that [[Bible exegesis]] warrants a six-day creation with each day being 24 hours.<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Days_of_creation Days of Creation] (CreationWiki).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp Genesis Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>Niessen, Richard, [http://www.icr.org/article/164/ Theistic Evolution and the Day-Age Theory] ''Impact'' 81, March 1980.</ref>
      
Some Old Earth Creationists and Theistic Evolutionists argue that the Big Bang is in fact mentioned in the Bible. <ref>[http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#big_bang_the_bible_taught_it_first http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#big_bang_the_bible_taught_it_first]</ref> Some Christian apologists who believe in an old earth, such as William Craig use the Big Bang as an apologetic, arguing that it proves that the universe had a beginning.<ref>Strobel, Lee. ''The Case for a Creator''. Zondervan, 2004.</ref>
 
Some Old Earth Creationists and Theistic Evolutionists argue that the Big Bang is in fact mentioned in the Bible. <ref>[http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#big_bang_the_bible_taught_it_first http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2000issue03/index.shtml#big_bang_the_bible_taught_it_first]</ref> Some Christian apologists who believe in an old earth, such as William Craig use the Big Bang as an apologetic, arguing that it proves that the universe had a beginning.<ref>Strobel, Lee. ''The Case for a Creator''. Zondervan, 2004.</ref>
SkipCaptcha
906

edits