Big Bang Theory Vs. Old-Earth Debate

I. Acceptance of Creation is growing in spite of overwhelming evidence proving Evolution There is no easy resolution for whats true and evolution or creationism. It is a complex topic with profound scientific, religious, educational, and criticism. How can a student or parent come to grips with this issue? Evolution vs. Creationism provides a badly needed, comprehensive, and balanced introduction to the many facets of the current debates about what should be taught in a classroom or in reality itself. Evolution relies on scientific facts while creationism clings on biblical beliefs. But the legal and

Scientists have found that the Earth was formed about 4.6 billion years ago by collisions in the giant disc-shaped cloud of material that also formed the Sun. As gravity slowly gathered this gas and dust together into clumps, it became asteroids and small early planets called planetesimals. These objects collided repeatedly and gradually got bigger, building up the planets in the Solar System. Although scientists are very close to answering the question, they still continue to search for the exact answer to how the Earth was created. With all the evidence presented, it is hard to refute from scientific theories. This becomes cumbersome to many religions because in their eyes God has always been the creator of the Earth.

The young earth and old earth was not always a debated topic. Before the 18th century not many people believed in an old earth, the majority of people believed that it was about 6,000 years old. But during the 1700s, people began to challenge the age of the earth. Three of the many men who advanced the theory

Newman is quick to point out that there are quite a few variations of the old earth creationist position. Of these, however, he finds three main varieties, which differ primarily in their views on the nature of the days of the creation week. These three categories are: (1) The day-age view. As implied by the title, this view

Did you know that “it has been 50 years since two scientists found landmark evidence for the Big Bang theory?”(Kramer,2014) The Bang Theory aka BBT is the most popular explanation about the start of our universe that is widely accepted/acknowledged. The theory is that “the entire Universe is spreading apart, with distant galaxies speeding away from us in all directions. Run the clock backwards to 13.8 billion years ago, and everything in the Cosmos started out as a single point in space. In an instant, everything expanded outward from that location, forming the energy, atoms and eventually the stars and galaxies we see today.” (Cain, 2013) The Big Bang Theory is possibly right because of the evidence/research backed up by it such as exploration done by Edwin Hubble, data found by both Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, and background radiation that had been found that is believed to be created by the Big Bang.

2. Explain and support your interpretation of the origin of the universe. Here you may want to address evolution, age of the earth, and whether or not it can be reconciled with the message of the Bible.

Old earth, or progressive creationism shares similarities with theistic evolution in that it places the age of the earth at 4-5 billion years ago and the universe at 10-20 billion years ago. However, they are not satisfied with the claim that God-guided evolution brought the world into existence, eventually arriving at the world we live in today. Robert C. Newman, an astrophysicist and New Testament professor acknowledges that it would be possible for God to use evolution as a creation tool, just as it is possible that God created solely through supernatural means. However, he thinks that there are too many unanswered questions left for both positions.

Throughout history, science has always faced challenges from outside groups who work to mold science to their beliefs, ignoring evidence and commonly held facts. Following in the legacy of the flat world and an Earth centered Universe, young Earth creationists bend science to fit their explanations of the Earth’s origin and timeline. Evidence for the ancient age of the Earth is present in every discipline of Earth science and directly refutes claims made by young Earth creationists. It is important to examine these claims and rebut them, as their denial of proper scientific understanding hampers progress and has wider implications for the future of our society.

Throughout Collins’s book he goes through many topics that have been a barrier between science and religion for a long time. I agree with many of Collins’s viewpoints when stuck in-between science and religion. This includes his view on the origins of the universe.

The old-Earth evolution and young-Earth creation debate has been one that has gone on for centuries. Each viewpoint seeks to give an answer to life’s most difficult questions or origins and how the Earth came to be what it resembles today. While the Young Earth viewpoint has remained constant and unchanged throughout the centuries the Old Earth view seems to be continually evolving as new discoveries tend to discredit previous assumptions. One certainty is that both viewpoints take a dogmatic stance against each other in regards to the interpretation of scientific evidence. The purpose of this paper is to compare old-Earth and

The debate over the origins of the earth and of life has captivated and divided America since the late 19th Century. Evolutionists and creationists have battled in courtrooms , churches , academia , and public schools over the course of the 20th century and continue fighting, or attempting to make peace over, this culture war today. The debate has changed between the time of the Scopes Trial and the present in several important ways. First, creationists have developed many more diverse arguments, and employ not only biblical and moralistic arguments, but scientific evidence, logical arguments, and political rhetoric to counter evolutionary theory. Second,

Young earth creationism is what most people mean when referring to “creationism.” This is primarily due to the fact that the creationists most visible in the public eye during the creation-evolution debate were most likely to hold young earth creationist views. Additionally, the terms “recent earth” or “recent creation” have been used to refer to this same position. These terms clearly define their position as one in which the creation of the world occurred somewhat recently, that is, the world is young. However, it obviously doesn 't provide us with much information beyond that. To begin with, how young is the world? In order to help answer this and other questions concerning young earth creationism, biologist and philosopher of science

Young Earth creationists accept biblical creation story of Genesis as well as the Flood, Tower of Babel, exceptionally long life spans biblical characters such as Adam, Noah, Seth, Enos, Methuselah and they also accept that the Earth is around 6,000 years of age and deny that the Earth is any older. Old Earth creationists, acknowledge the possibility to unify the biblical explanation of creation along with the scientific theory that the universe is over 13,000,000,000 years old and the Earth is over 4,000,000,000 years

Under the same idea, the “Old Earth” train of thought is that the “days” mentioned in Genesis were actually up to many millions of years each. This is one of many “theories” that justifies the actual age of the Earth being around 4.5 billion years old. The third view states that the story of creation contained in Genesis is not a literal or even a chronological account of happenings. It is instead a guide promoting a six-day workweek with the seventh day a day of worship to God. The last view is much like the second, in that it considers the “days” to be God’s workdays, which may or may not be equal to an Earth calendar day. Each day represents a period of time that God performed a major task. Each view has the same underlying concept that God created everything, and the way it is today, it the way it was when it was created.

The first position is that of young earth creationism. Additionally, this is what most people mean when referring to “creationism.” This is primarily due to the fact that the creationists visible in the public eye during the creation-evolution debate were most likely to hold young earth creationist views. Additionally, the terms “recent earth” or “recent creation” have been used to refer to this same position. These terms clearly define their position as one in which the creation of the world occurred somewhat recently, that is, the world is young. However, it obviously doesn 't provide us with much information beyond that. To begin with, how young is the world? In order to help answer this and other questions concerning young earth creationism, biologist and philosopher of science Paul Nelson and philosopher John Mark Reynolds, both fellows of the Center for Science and Culture under the Discovery Institute, present with their viewpoint