Tuesday, April 28, 2009

The Big Bang Theory

II Corinthians 1:12-22

While I was in college, we went through Einstein’s theories and the resulting developments in our advanced physics class. One of the proofs we went through was that there can be no Doppler effect on light under normal conditions. If you’ve been near a railroad track and noticed the raise in pitch of the whistle as the train neared you and the drop as it went away, that is what a Doppler effect is. The speed of the train approaching added to the speed of sound, combined with the nearness of the train cause a distortion of the sound waves. The speed of light is so high, and the nature of light waves are such that a Doppler effect is impossible for light.

Imagine my consternation upon enrolling in a class later in which astronomy was a major factor and learning that we were able to prove the expanding universe as a result of the red shift of light from the movement of planets away from us. This red shift was the Doppler effect on light. The expanding universe was the basis of the Big Bang Theory of evolution, widely accepted as fact What we had just proven in physics was exactly the opposite of what they were teaching us in astronomy. What was the truth?

Astronomy and physics are frequently studied as separate subjects and astronomers and physicists frequently fail to recognize the relationships of physics laws and chemical laws to the universe. The same laws govern everything if the science is valid, and there are no contradictions.

Paul points out that in Christ there are no problems. If the Holy Spirit is directing, things should be clearly seen so that such confusion will not arise. He, Silvanus, and Timothy have tried to live and teach simply and clearly in a way that what God expects is obvious. Their writing does not change this. This should produce mutual rejoicing, that both are following the Lord.

“For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward. For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even to the end; As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (II Corinthians 1:12-14)

Paul had a desire as he described in I Corinthians 16, to visit them and give some additional teaching. While he was there he had hoped to help straighten out some of the other problems. As things worked out, he had not made the trip to them. He could not lightly come to them to teach them. He did not want to cause confusion by presenting contradictory statements or confusing teaching. His approach needed to be both simple and consistent. He needed Spiritual guidance to prevent such confusion.

And in this confidence I was minded to come unto you before, that ye might have a second benefit; And to pass by you into Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Judaea. When I therefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yea yea, and nay nay?” (II Corinthians 1:15-17)

The failure to recognize the relationships between Physics and Astronomy caused my confusion in college. Paul has not separated things to that degree in his teaching, so that there are no contradictions in what they have been taught. Several years ago, I was speaking to Mormon man about Adam and Eve’s sin in the Garden. If I understand correctly, he believed that the forbidden fruit was sex. God had commanded man not to partake of the forbidden fruit, but he commanded them to multiply and fill the earth. Man had to choose which command he would obey. Man chose to multiply and fill the earth, rather than to avoid sex. The man called the necessity to choose which sin to commit a “paradox,” of which he seemed to believe there were several.

Paul says that there were no paradoxes in his teaching, because there are none in God, nor in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Peter says that our doctrine is integrated and cannot be isolated from other scripture in II Peter 1:20-21. “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” Paradoxes and contradictions indicate misinterpretation of God’s word.

“But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us. Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” (II Corinthians 1:18-22)

God’s word is true and can be depended upon. There were and are no contradictions. His promises are sure, bringing God glory. The same God which saved us empowered Paul and the others. That same God has sealed and made our salvation sure forever. He also gave the Holy Spirit as assurance of our salvation.

1 comment:

  1. http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/howdideverythingbegin2.html

    Concerning the Big Bang and expansion, it is an issue that we cannot detect with the naked eye or even with a telescope, no matter how much we look. Revolving and rotary movements of the bodies we can see – at least in the near space – but we cannot see expansion.

    Instead, some have thought that the best piece of evidence supporting the Big Bang is red shift, which can be observed in distant stars. It has been thought that when the spectrums of light in distant galaxies and stars move towards the red end of the spectrum, this indicates expansion. Red shift values of these celestial bodies should indicate their escape velocity and distance, so that all bodies are drawing away from us at a velocity proportional to their distance.

    However, using the red shift as evidence for expansion is questionable. It arises, for example, from the following factors:

    The light of all stars is not red shifted. The first problem with the red shift is that the light of all stars is not red shifted. For example, the Andromeda Galaxy and certain other galaxies show blue shifted light, which means that they should be approaching us. (It has been estimated that the Andromeda Galaxy is approaching us at 300 kilometres a second! On the other hand, the escape velocity of the Virgin Constellation should be 1,200 km/s and that of Quasar PKS 2000 as much as 274,000 km/s. Where do these more than a hundredfold differences come from, if everything began at the same point?) These kinds of exceptions indicate that there may be some other explanation to the red shift values than drawing away from us. Maybe the values have nothing to do with their movements.

    The values of adjacent galaxies. Another problem with the red shift is that some adjacent galaxies may have completely different red shift values, even though they are in connection with each other and quite close to each other. If the red shift value could be really used to tell the distance, there is no way these galaxies could be close to each other: instead, they should be far away from each other. This indicates that the red shift must be caused by some other facts, such as internal reactions and radiation of stars, which can also be detected from the Earth.

    Because of the same matter some researchers deny the importance of the red shift. They say or doubt it having anything to do with expansion. In fact, the whole Big Bang theory is then without its most important evidence:

    I do not want to imply that everyone is of the same opinion regarding the interpretation of the red shift. We do not actually observe the galaxies rushing away from us; the only issue that is sure is that their spectrums have moved towards red. Famous astronomers doubt whether the red shift has anything to do with the Doppler shifts or with the expansion of space. Halton Arp of the Hale Observatory has emphasized that groups of galaxies can be found in space where some galaxies have quite different red shifts; if these groups are really composed of galaxies that are close to each other, they could hardly move at very different velocities. Furthermore, Maarten Schmidt noticed in 1963 that certain kinds of objects resembling stars had enormously high red shifts, up to more than 300 per cent! If these "quasars" are at the distances that can be deducted from their red shifts, they must radiate an extremely large amount of energy in order to continue being so bright. It is also very difficult to measure the correlation between velocity and distance when the objects are really far away. (Steven Weinberg, Kolme ensimmäistä minuuttia / The Three First Minutes, p. 40)