RTB

I went to an RTB lecture where Hugh Ross was speaking in response to Stephen Hawking's book "The Grand Design".   While Hawking concedes that there is design, he questions who the designer is; and postulates that once the laws of physics are put into place, there is no longer a need for God or the Designer.   Hugh Ross showed that the premise can be scientifically proven to be incorrect.

Some of the areas focused on are:

• Biblical cosmology says that there is a singular beginning (e.g Gen 1:1), continual expansion (e.g. Isaiah 40-51), constant physical laws (Jer 33:25), and a pervasive law of decay (e.g. Rom 8:20-22). 
• SpaceTime theorems show that an external agent is needed for expansion, which shatters the assumption that all causes are natural.  
• Data also shows that the Bible is not only qualitatively correct, but also quantitatively (e.g predictive temps matching known measurements). 
• In studying Dark Energy or the Cosmological Constant, we see that as the universe gets older there is stronger dark energy and therefore greater expansion.  Also, that this expansion has to be fine-tuned "just right" (too fast and too slow won't allow matter to properly form, but remain in gaseous state) -> needs external agent and existence of miracle
• If cause is not personal but man is, this causes a problem since greater cannot be derived from lesser, since personal > impersonal
• From scientific testing and data, we still do not find any galaxies, stars (e.g. sun), planets, or moons that are the same as ours that would be able to sustain advanced life

Overall, people have admitted being adamant about denying the existence of God, since they don't want to submit to the authority of God due to the rebellious nature of man.  However, scientific evidence is growing for the existence of a Creator.   And from scientific testing and data, we still do not find any galaxies, stars (e.g. sun), planets, or moons that are the same as ours that would be able to sustain advanced life; so our universe is still uniquely created for life.

Origins of Life

• Biblical Predictions - early, under hostile conditions, complex/diverse/abundant, miraculous/instantaneous, and marine only
• Deistic Predictions (matches Hawking's view) - later after enormous time, under benign conditions, huge/concentrated soup, first life very simple, and one species only

=>  Problems with Deistic view:  no time, no soup, oxygen/uv crises, and no homochirality source


A term that came up during the Q&A which applies to many discussions I have often come across is "doctrinally insignificant".    Hugh specifically used this in context of describing the Old Earth vs Young Earth debate.