Narrow Time Windows
If you haven’t had a chance to see the first 18 chapters of this book review, let me encourage you to go back to the table of contents and browse your way through.
This is a shorter chapter from Dr. Ross, and in it he makes the claim that naturalistic assumptions are necessary for the age of the universe, the age of galaxies, and the age of planets to support life.
A universe and a galaxy must reach a particular age before they can support life. Only when a star and a moon are of a particular age is life possible near them. And only when a planet is of a particular age is life possible on it. For intelligent life, the time limitations are dramatically more constrained.
While Dr. Ross has said that he does not hold to biological evolution as taught by the likes of Richard Dawkins, his statements above endorse the naturalistic ideas of
- cosmic evolution
- chemical evolution
- galactic evolution
- stellar evolution
- planetary evolution
- lunar evolution
- terrestrial evolution
- environmental evolution
As we read scripture, we see that none of these naturalistic ideas are compatible with God’s revelation. These evolutionary theories are simply naturalistic mechanisms proposed IN PLACE OF what God did with his supreme power. It’s not that God could not or has not used natural processes to produce results (He has!). The problem is that Dr. Ross has re-interpreted what God actually said He did in the creative process of Genesis 1 to mean something else.
Age Window of the Universe
For biochemical processes to operate, the universe can be neither too hot nor too cold. As the universe expands from the creation event, it cools, like any other system obeying the thermodynamic laws (the greater volume or surface area, the less heat energy there is to go around.)…These conditions must be just right for liquid water to form and remain in significant quantities in just-right locations. As a result, there are only a few billion years in history if the universe’s expansion when a suitable habitat for primitive life is even possible.
The built-in assumptions that the universe has to be a particular age keeps him from being able to view the Bible from the author’s intended message. We see him make these claims about the age of the universe, but he has no other universes or other billions of years of history with which to compare. How can he possibly calibrate his assumptions since there are no other universes when he’s bound by less than 100 years of experience?
I’m particularly critical of the statement above regarding Ross’s assumption of the formation of liquid water. In scripture we read that once God created water out of nothing, the rest of the universe was formed out of that water. But Dr. Ross assumes that water is just another one of the things that nature formed during its chemical/cosmic evolution. In the past, I’ve asked Dr. Ross about why he feels that the flood of Genesis 6-9 is a minor local flood, and he always (irrationally) points me to 2 Peter 2. Sadly, he joins the skeptics when his assumptions keep him recognizing the creative works and the worldwide judgment of those works in 2 Peter 3 “But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.”
So, you can see that Dr. Ross’s claims that water formed naturalistically and that the flood was just a minor local event in the middle east are NOT permitted by scripture as a whole – but particularly by 2 Peter 3:5-6
In addition to the scriptural problems with water, Dr. Ross must somehow overcome the observational problems with his assumptions about water in relation to the moon. The moon could not have formed by any of the naturalistic proposals put forth AND contain H₂O. Yet, the moon contains frozen H₂O
On p230, Dr. Ross makes claims about the chemical evolution
The fusion of most life-essential heavy elements must await the gravitational collapse of gas clouds into giant stars…In fact, two generations of such stars must burn up in order to build a density of heavier elements sufficient to make life chemistry possible.
At best, these are guesses and at worst wild claims since no one has ever observed the process of a star from birth to death let alone TWO generations of stars from birth to death or the effects on elements of these generations.
Because of the exothermic nature of the heavy elements in chemical formation, there is not a suitable resolution for the evolution of elements with a higher atomic weight than Iron (Fe) at 26.
Notice the superlatives and uncalibrated assumptions in the quote below:
Only in galaxies can the density of heavy elements become great enough to support life chemistry. But even in galaxies the appropriate density of life-essential elements is achieved only at one particular time. When the galaxy is too young, not enough heavy elements have been made in its stars for life chemistry to be possible. When the galaxy is too old, star and planet formation have ceased, and no stars and planets young enough for life chemistry will exist. Life is possible only in galaxies older than about 10 billion years and younger than about 20 billion years.
It’s like saying Adam was too young to speak and name all the animals on the day he was created because only humans older than 2 years old can speak in complete thoughts, and only humans older than ten would be creative enough and with a vocabulary large enough to name all the animals. Ross fills his book with unjustified assumptions at the expense of revelation from God. He continues this pattern into the next paragraph
For life on a planet to be possible, the planet must be warmed by a star that burns at a near-constant brightness and color. For intelligent life to be possible, the star’s flaring activity and X-ray radiation must be minimal…In the first 50 million years after a star as massive as the Sun begins to shine, it burns far too erratically to maintain temperatures suitable for life on an orbiting planet. For the next 500 million years, the X-ray emission is too intense. After that, the flaring activity continues to subside until it reaches a minimum, when the star is 4.6 billion years old.
As if he witnessed and documented this process from beginning to end. But the scriptures tell a different story. On the fourth day God made the sun, moon, planets, and stars. So, Ross’s book is not only in conflict with the Bible, but he has ignored the scientific impossibilities of his yarn about the naturalistic formation of the Sun. The sun would not have been bright enough to provide sufficient heat on the earth a billion years ago when life is thought (by the naturalists) to have emerged. It’s a paradox for old earthists that has no coherent resolution.
Ross’s closing thoughts for the chapter on p233 reveal again his commitment to the modern academic paradigm as his interpretive authority instead of scripture being in the highest place.
A timescale for the universe and Earth of only a few thousand years also contradicts nature, which shows how and why astronomical bodies must be at least a half billion years old to be ready for life.
Ross never concerns himself with conflicts with scripture since he feels free to re-interpret the Bible’s actual text based on the fashionable paradigm that is currently accepted and promoted by the secularists.
As biblical creationists, we can praise God for the consistent nature of his revelation. We do not have to redefine the words in the Bible to accommodate modern academic paradigms or cultural changes in sexuality or political revolutions as we have seen Dr. Ross do. God’s Word is eternal and we can trust God to keep his word regarding the future since we can trust his revelation from the past.
Pingback: Book Review: A Matter of Days 2nd Edition by Hugh Ross | ApoloJedi
Yesterday I pointed out to a bigbang evolutionist that claiming life evolved up a long chain of creatures before GOD decided to take some dust to make Adam must mean that Adma was made from soil containg the excrement, urine, skin flakes and other DNA material from a myriad creatures.
Logically this would both explain why humans have some DNA from many creatures and also have the mutlitude of sicknesses the lpwer creatures are heir to!
Perhaps it also explains why so many evolutionists are as dim as dishwater and as evil as many of the predators that murder other creature’s young?
The magic mantra 4.6 billion years the bigbangers like to quote is a total fallacy based on the silly idea that as lead is found with uranium deposits the lead must be depleted uranium. And idiots claim the halflife, halflife, halflife etc of uranium is 4.6 billion years then the lead must be 4.6 and Earth is 4.6 and today’s sun is also 4.6 billion.
But all bigbangers claim the universe is 13.5, 18.5 or other ridiculous figures.
Bigbangers like to claim Earth agglommerated from dry dust baked to super sterility by billion degree bigbang. And somehow the dust turned into water.
The Bible says GOD made Earth as a ball of water.
The Book of Jasher, kept out of the Bible by Satan’s Catholics, says Earth is filled with water.
I have been saying this a while.
GOD started The Flood by shaking Earth to shatter the crust liek an eggshell to let lots of the inner water burst out.
The fairy tale that stars are super suns is just a fairy tale.
all stars are just groups of hydrogen atoms that sparkle prettily.
the hydrogen came from the water that GOD used to create Earth and the planets. the oxygen in the water reacted with the basic elements to make the solid minerals and the hydrogen floated away.
the stars are all mutually repelling each other except in the galaxies where the gravitational attractions is pulling them together.
the repulson is simply starlight – the same as a $10 radiometer will display.
the stars are able to spread ever further and faster because space is empty and limitless.
Reblogged this on a simple man of God and commented:
It takes a little time, sometimes, to have ground to stand on … apparently. Dr. Ross seems fine using the fallacious arguments he accuses others of using.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Mid-June 2020 Presuppositional Apologetics’ Links | The Domain for Truth
Sharing this on my blog!
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sadly, Ross is wedded to naturalism and accepts any and all evolutionary assumptions to make it work. I read 2 Peter and don’t see anything suggesting a local flood. Accepting a Biblical for our origins is much more consistent.
LikeLiked by 1 person