The distant starlight
problem
The distant starlight
problem
[The distant starlight problem by Dr. Jason Lisle] "One of the most common objections to a “young universe” is often called the “distant starlight problem.” There are galaxies in the universe that are incredibly far away. These distances are so extreme that even light would take billions of years to travel from these galaxies to the earth. Yet, we do see these galaxies; this indicates that the light has traveled from there to here. Since this process is supposed to take billions of years, the universe must be at least billions of years old—much older than the biblical time scale. It is argued that distant starlight therefore supports the big-bang story of origins.
There are actually several different natural mechanisms that God might have used
to get the starlight here in thousands of years. These have been published in TJ
[now Journal of Creation] and other places and so we will not repeat them here
[for more information, see Does Distant Starlight Prove the Universe Is Old?].
The point here is to show that the objection itself is vacuous. The argument
that distant starlight disproves the biblical account of creation and supports
an old “big-bang” universe is based on faulty reasoning.
First, notice that the distant starlight argument is based on the fallacious
assumptions of naturalism and uniformitarianism. It assumes that the light got
here entirely by natural means, and traveled at a constant rate, over a constant
distance, with time also being constant. Of course, it is possible that God may
indeed have used “natural means” to get the light here. It may also be that some
of the things assumed to be constant in time (such as the speed of light) are
indeed constant, but is there any logical reason why we would automatically know
beforehand that these must be the case? Remember that God created the lights in
the sky to give light upon the earth. This happened during the creation week
where God was creating in a supernatural way.
The evolutionist insists that if we cannot show a naturalistic mechanism for a
particular event of the creation week (like distant starlight), then the Bible
cannot be trusted. This is an unrealistic “heads I win, tails you lose” sort of
argument. Since many of the events that happened during the creation week were
supernatural in essence, it is irrational to demand a naturalistic explanation
for them. It is ridiculous to argue that a supernatural explanation is wrong
because it cannot be explained by natural causes. This would be circular
reasoning. Now, it is perfectly fine to ask the question, “Did God use natural
means to get the starlight from galaxies to earth? And if so, what is the
mechanism?” However, if no natural mechanism is apparent, this cannot be a
legitimate criticism against supernatural creation anymore than a lack of a
natural mechanism for Christ’s resurrection could invalidate that event."
The distant starlight problem , Lisle.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tba/age-of-the-universe-1
“The heavens declare creation and science confirms it.” Jason Lisle
Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Is this your view, SD?"
I think that the light of the stars which we see today
came aged (supernaturally); Similarly, Adam and Eve were created with a certain
age. I agree with Morris except when he throws "time" into the mix of his
"space-time continuum".
Time is not a created thing. Other than that, I think he's about right. God
spoke (big bang
not to be confused with the godless, big bang theory
,
Ge 1:3). It must have
been something!
"...[T]his tremendous creative act of the Godhead might be summarized by saying
that the nuclear forces maintaining the integrity of matter were activated by
the Father when He created the elements of the space-mass-time continuum, the
gravitational forces were activated by the Spirit when He brought form and
motion to the initially static and formless matter, and the electromagnetic
forces were activated by the Word when He called light into existence out of the
darkness. Of course, God is One, and all three persons of the Godhead actually
participated in all parts of the creation and continue to function in the
maintenance of the universe so created."
Morris, Henry M.: The Genesis Record : A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on
the Book of Beginnings. Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Books, 1976, S. 56
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "If one concludes that the vast distances to the stars are illusory, then the distant starlight problem vanishes. If I remember correctly, Satan, being the lord of this world (i.e., the world of the flesh, of crude matter), can make human beings perceive whatever he wants them to perceive. Thus, if your sensory input conflicts with Scripture, your sensory input must necessarily be erroneous."
Don't worry, Geraldo. The stars are there.
It is not a vast right wing conspiracy.
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "I didn't say anything about the stars not being there, you lackwit!"
Oh goodie.
You admit that the stars are there and we are not being deceived by the
prince of the world.
Now that we've established that they are there. Take a looksie at them. Are they
impressive to you in anyway?
Do you have fingers, we hope.
Does your fingerprint make an impact on you in any way?
You said we need a mechanism. We'll get more technical as time goes on but what
do you think about the things right before your eyes?
We have internal knowledge (Ro
2:15), external knowledge (Ps
19:1) and the word of God--therefore men are
without excuse (Ro
1:20). Why don't you humble yourself before
God?
Jer 13:10.
