Review by Greg Neyman
© Old Earth Ministries
Review Published 24 September 2013
In typical young earth fashion...when you have no scientific evidence to prove an old earth theory wrong, you merely point out its past discrepancies, and claim to your readers that the theory has to be constantly modified to keep it viable. This is what happens in the article "Big Bang-The Evolution of a Theory," by Answers in Genesis author Danny Faulkner, in an issue of Answers Magazine.1
As Faulkner points out in the opening, over the years, the Big Bang has been changed to adapt to each new problem, and he asks the question, "Are these changes true improvements, or just rescuing devices?" To show whether or not these individual changes are valid is not the point of this article...especially since science has adopted the changes as valid. Instead, we look at Faulkner's line reasoning (or lack thereof).
Faulkner lists several problems over the years that have cast doubt on the big bang theory, and the answers to those problems. The answer which scientists have come up with to each problem is called a "rescuing device." To the young earth mind, this brings up the thought that, instead of scientists recognizing the obvious (that the big bang is wrong and should be abandoned), they came up with methods of saving this failed theory (in the young earth mind, in order to avoid the obvious conclusion that the universe is young).
So what we read from Faulkner is...
About thirty years ago cosmologists attempted to resolve this problem...
So inflation is their rescuing device.
Only after very meticulous data manipulation...
Yet many scientists now claim that the predictions of the theory beautifully matched the data. How can they say that? After the theory failed to correctly predict the data, cosmologists altered the details of the theory to match the data.
Astronomers eventually resolved this problem by reevaluating...
So the big bang model had to adapt to yet another new discovery.
Many scientists today think that the big bang model is very successful in that it can explain all sorts of new observations and problems. But it does this by the endless addition of rescuing devices.
When a YEC reads this article, these are the types of statements that really stand out to them. It gives the reader the impression that the big bang has to constantly change to adapt to new scientific findings, therefore in the YEC's mind, the theory is merely morphing in order to be saved, because after all, the big bang is so revered by secular scientists that it must be saved.
Although Faulkner has fulfilled his purpose to the YEC, by casting doubt about the theory in the YEC's mind, he is actually correct when he states that the theory has to adapt to new problems. This is true of all scientific theories(HINT: Mr. Faulkner, this is called the 'scientific method.') When a theory has to adapt, does that make it any less believable? That depends on the adaptation. Sometimes theories may be thrown out the window, replaced by new ones.
The big bang, and the modifications of it, are an excellent example of the scientific method in action. As new discoveries are made, theories must be examined to see if they need to be changed, or even discarded. Data must be fine-tuned to account for these discoveries. Does fine-tuning cast doubt upon the original theory? Only if it cannot be solved. In the case of the big bang, solutions have been presented that are workable within the theory, and the theory has survived. Contrary to the beliefs of many YEC's, who feel the theory is on its last legs, the big bang is stronger than ever, despite all of the claims made against it by young earth creationists.
At the end of the article, Faulkner brings up Ptolemy, and his cosmological theory which was believed for 15 centuries. He points out that this theory survived due to endless modification...and he suggests "The continued modification of the big bang model is beginning to resemble this cycle. How long will it last?" There is one huge difference. Ptolomy's model was based mostly upon his observations with his naked eye, in other words, it was based upon very little data. The big bang, by comparison, is based upon numerous scientific observations and measurements with precise instruments.
When it comes to a biblical understanding of the big bang, it naturally fits within the creation account as understood by old earth creationists. God created everything we see, out of nothing, 13.7 billion years ago. God said it, and "bang," there it was! The Discovery Channel has an excellent series called "How the Universe Works." The episode below, from Youtube, covers the big bang. When the scientists talk about how the big bang came from nothing, it is a wonderful feeling thinking about how this coincides with the Bible's statement of creation from nothing. Despite the empty, unscientific claims made by young earth creationists, the big bang is alive and well, and the Bible supports it! (If the video does not appear below, you can click this link to view the video on Youtube.)
1 Big Bang-The Evolution of a Theory, by Danny Faulkner, Answers Magazine, V8, N4, Sep-Dec 2013. Pages 50-53. On the web at http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v8/n4/big-bang-evolution-of-theory
If you are not a Christian, and you have been holding out on making a decision for Christ because the Church always preached a message that was contrary to what you saw in the scientific world, then rest assured that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and you can believe in Christ and receive salvation, while still believing in an old earth. Click here for more.
Are you a Christian who believes in young earth creationism? Now that we have shown the many difficulties of the young earth creation science model in this and many other articles, how does this impact your Christian life? If you are a young earth creationism believer, click here.
Comment on this article on its Facebook Post
To learn more
about old earth creationism, see
Old Earth Belief,
or check out the article
Can You Be A
Christian and Believe in an Old Earth?
Feel free to check out more of this website. Our goal is to provide rebuttals to the bad science behind young earth creationism, and honor God by properly presenting His creation.