 |
| |
| |
|
Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy
|
|
|
Average Rating:  out of 38 Reviews
|
Price: $14.00
|
|
Sale: $9.57
|
| |
|
Manufacturer: Navpress Publishing Group
|
|
EAN (European Article Number): 9780891097761
|
|
Number of Items: 1
|
| |
|
|
|
Binding: Paperback
|
|
Author: Hugh Ross
|
|
Publisher: Navpress Publishing Group
|
|
Dewey Decimal Number: 231.765
|
|
Publication Date: 1994-03
|
|
Reading Level: 187
|
|
|
| |
|
Description: "IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH."-Genesis 1:1 One of the most commonly held beliefs among Christians and nonChristians alike is that science and Scripture absolutely and irreconcilably contradict each other about the age of the earth. While most scientists affirm an "old universe" theory, may Christians favor a "young universe" interpretation and somewhere in between, million of devout Christian who respect scientific finding are deeply and painfully torn. "How can we love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength if we must separate our minds from our faith?" asks Dr. Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist and a Bible-believing Christian. "Such a separation violates the very meaning of faith." In Creation and Time, Dr. Ross provides a solution to the creation-date controversy that requires no compromise by either the scientist trusting in the facts of nature or the Christian holding to the inerrancy of Scripture. "Dr. Ross graciously examines the scientific merits of a young-earth creation and its biblical foundation. He not only demonstrates the more likely age of the universe, but also celebrates the greatness and majesty of its Creator. Creation and Time is a valuable gift to the Christian community."-Chuck Smith, Jr., senior pastor, Capo Beach Calvary Church, Capo Beach, CA "This is a most important book that should be taught in every church and in the every school to stop the unwarranted war between science and religion."-Allan Sandage, Ph.D., astronomer, Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, recipient of the Crafoord Prize "Creation and Time is the best book on this topic in print. It is a must for anyone interested in the conflict between science and Scripture. Dr. Ross' pleas to overzealous 'young earthers' not to make the age of the earth a test of orthodoxy is long overdue."-Norman L. Geisler, dean of Southern Evangelical Seminary "This is a book whose time has come. Never has there been a more urgent moment to staighten out this deep misunderstanding in the evangelical community."-Ralph D. Winter, general director of the U.S. Center for World Missions
|
| |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
Customer Reviews
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Good Overview of Old-Earth Creationism |
Date: 2006-11-25 |
|
| |
Details: Dr. Hugh Ross has an updated treatment in his newer book "A Matter of Days." I haven't read that one yet, but that may be a place to go after this one.
This book is geared towards Christians who accept the authority of Scripture.
This one was a quick read, but it contained a good bit of information. The three best things found in this book supporting the author's point of view was 1) a biblical defense of "day" in Genesis 1 being longer than 24-hours 2) a theological defense of Old-Earth Creationism (for example: the revelation of nature doesn't lie) 3) a quick examination of some Young-Earth Creationist scientific evidences.
The best biblical evidence for the Old-Earth view was, I found the most valuable. Of these, those that struck me the most were:
1) The seventh day doesn't contain the "morning and evening" phrasing. Psalm 95 and Hebrews 4 relate God's rest to God's favor and peace with God. In other words, the Sabbath rest of the seventh day is ongoing and we should strive to enter that rest via belief in Jesus. If it is ongoing, we are currently living in the seventh day, and it is much longer than one 24-hour period.
2) When you parallel the sixth day account with the account in Genesis 2, that very much looks like longer than one 24-hour period. In the 6th day male and female are created in God's image. In Genesis 2, Adam is created. He names all the animals. He realizes he has no suitable partner. He is put into a deep sleep. God performs surgery on him and creates Eve. He wakes up and realizes Eve is great for him. I think that suggest a longer period of time than 24-hours.
3) Genesis 2:4 reads "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens." So we have an instance where "day" at least means at least 6 24-hour periods. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Ross fails to legitimize progressive creationism |
Date: 2006-08-13 |
|
| |
Details: This book was Hugh Ross's first major effort to defend and legitimize his views on creation, often called progressive creation (PC), as being consistent with biblical orthodoxy. It was published by the once biblically sound publisher Navpress who has since lost all credibility as a trustworthy Christian publisher by continuing to publish works by Ross. This books main aim is to show how the biblical data is consistent with the standard evolutionary views on the order of events in earth history. Though Ross denies that this order proceeded entirely by natural process, especially in biology, he accepts all the evolutionary dates for the major appearances popularized in evolutionary circles. Many of the arguments that Ross uses in this book have been refuted by young earth creationists (YEC's) in books and articles responding to this book. However, Ross seems to have ignored these responses and repeats much of these same arguments today.
The critical reader will find that Ross has failed to demonstrate his position is a real biblical position. Unlike other genuine biblical debates like eschatology, baptism, election, etc. that is debated primarily with biblical arguments, this debate is a debate between one side that uses biblical arguments (YECs) and the other side that ultimately uses scientific arguments (PCs). Sure Ross uses many biblical arguments in this book and others. He knows he has to do this to give the appearance that his views are biblically based and consistent with Christian orthodoxy. Many cults use this same tactic. But like many cults, his main source for defending his position is extra-biblical. What he calls the 67th book of the Bible (pg 56), the `facts' of nature. These `facts' are really just the standard evolutionary order of events that everyone has heard before. It is important for Ross to convince people that science `proves' his position (p. 138). This is needed because he knows without the intimidation of science, very few people will every come to the conclusions he makes from scripture alone. It can be argued that this is Ross's must successful tactic in promoting his position. Instilling fear into non-scientifically trained Christian laypeople that a young earth position will drive people away from Christ (p 122) rather than convincing people with scripture that his position is consistent with the biblical data. Of course there are thousands of scientifically astute young earth creationists who prove otherwise, but Ross ignores them.
This really is the thrust of the so called `debate'. YEC's never make the claim that science proves their position. Sure they use science to support their view, but ultimately its biblical data that their case stands or falls on. PC's on the other hand use scientific data to 'prove' their position is correct. Though Ross will claim his position is consistent with a literal reading of Genesis (p. 143), its clear by arrogantly claiming science proves his position, no biblical arguments alone will ever persuade him. In fact, you will never hear a progressive creationist say that they became a progressive creationist because the biblical arguments compelled them to become one. In this book, Ross acknowledges he already accepted the big bang as a `fact' before he read Genesis (p 143). And its clear this was his primary hermeneutic for long creation days of millions and billions of years. What this does is exclude about 99% of the Christian community from the debate. Only people with earned PhD's in relevant disciples are capable of challenging his views. And when people who have those credentials disagree with him, he dismisses them because the majority of non-Christian secular scientists agree with Ross (p. 118). Of course any non-conservative Christian will never accept a young earth because only conservative Christianity can accommodate this position. This elitist attitude with regard to scripture is textbook cultism. Yes Ross shares many central Christian beliefs with regard to the deity of Christ, and other views, but his position is really an attack on the reliability of the Bible.
Ross also makes use of noted theologians who he claims agree with him. However, by checking out what many of these theologians really believe who will find that they disagree with Ross on many key areas, or make it clear that science is driving their biblical interpretation. For example, Ross often names Gleason Archer and Norman Geisler as supportive of his position. However, neither believe in a local flood like Ross does, and Archer has stated that a `superficial reading of Genesis without considering scientific data leads to 24 hour creation days'.
I encourage Christians to really checkout the claims that Ross makes in this book and others. Many resources are available that respond and refute what he has to say in this book. Too often we Christians are so eager to gain intellectual respectability in a non-believing world at the expense of the word of God. However, we would be much better off putting our trust in the One who knows everything rather than in fallen mankind with limited knowledge who in comparison knows nothing.
Proverbs 29:25 -- The fear of man lays a snare, but he who trusts in the LORD is safe.
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Old Earth Creation |
Date: 2005-07-08 |
|
| |
Details: Evolution does not give all the answers. Paleontologist discovered many Species spanning different intervals of time. The intervals of time are too short to be explained by evolution. Species do not proliferate rather they reduce in numbers. The evidence of dinosaurs suggests a vast array of species.
The earth is old. There are hundreds of reliable scientific tools demonstrating the earth is old. The size and age of the cosmos and the gravitational motion that shapes and moves the universe suggest the earth is old. There are three evidences the earth is old: 1. Expansion of the universe. The cosmos is expanding outward from a starting point which is an infinitesimally small volume. The cosmos has been expanding for 15 billion years and based on the temperature and smoothness of the background radiation, we know the origin must have been very hot and extremely compact, at the time of the explosion. Entropy explains the observed affect of order moving to disorder. The second law of thermodynamics means a tendency for disorder to increase over time. Hydrogen is more ordered and less entropic than galaxies, stars, planets, and life essential elements.
2. Stellar burning. The brightness of the stars tells us how long the star has been burning. Stars convert hydrogen to helium. Based on this conversion process, Stars in our universe may have started forming 1.5 billion years ago. 3. The Abundance of radioactive material. Supernovas produced Uranium 238 and Thorium 232. We know the universe can not be older than a trillion years because Uranium and Thorium have half life of several billion years and these elements can still be found.
Star formation did not have to occur during genesis. 1987, the Large Magellanic cloud was discovered, a Supernova, whose light took 80,000 years to reach earth. This supernova outshined 10 billion other stars. Dr. Hugh says, "It's fear that runs deeper and wider then the specific case of creation time scales. Nature may tell us something-if not long ages for the cosmos and life, something else - that inescapably disagrees with God has said in his word. Then where will the Christian faith be?" Then quoting 2 Timothy 1:7 says, "God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and a sound mind" What are the evidences of nature: 1. fossils representing ancient creatures 2. coal, oil, gas the remains of previous generations of life 3. the earth's crust testifying of rock subjected to past pressures 4. Tree rings, ice layers, erosion of craters and mountains the result of ongoing natural processes.
The known facts: Fact 1: The universe is only billions of years old, not quadrillions or a near infinite number of years. Fact 2: The universe can be traced back to a single, ultimate origin of matter, energy, time, and space. Fact 3: The universe, our galaxy, and our solar system exhibit more than sixty characteristics that require exquisite fine-tuning for their existence, and also for the existence of life.
Where does God fit in? God comes in both before and at the moment of creation. God intervenes along the way, personally designing and crafting a particular galaxy, star, planet, moons, and a set of heavy elements in preparation for his creation of life on one planet, earth. If the universe contained more than 10 billion-trillion stars, nuclear fusion would proceed so efficiently that all of the stars would burn up too quickly and erratically to support a planet carrying life. Fewer than 10 billion trillion stars the stars would never fuse the heavier elements - carbon, nitrogen, oxygen that are essential for life chemistry.
Dr Huges estimates the creation of man at (10,000 - 35,000 years ago) evidence of a Spiritual creature who worshipped. Religious relics have been discovered dating back 8,000 to 24,000 years ago. The First spiritual creatures are in complete agreement with biblical dates. Prior species were intelligent mammals and not spiritual beings or in other words, human.
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Bad Theology, Bad Science |
Date: 2005-06-22 |
|
|
| |
|
Details: I originally was a supporter of Ross' "Day-Age" Theory until reading Universe By Design by Dr. Danny Faulkner and learned of the "White Hole" cosmology coming from Dr. Russ Humphreys. Not only are there numerous problems with the "Big Bang" theory, Ross' theology ultimately negates Christianity's main point, salvation through Christ's death and resurrection. Ross' theology REQUIRES that animals live and die before man's sin, which the Bible states as the cause of death, decay, and suffering (I hope you can see where I'm going with this). Therefore, Ross' "God" is one who enjoys seeeing his creation suffer. In the description on this site, Ross is quoted as saying that God could've created through evolution, but whose to say that God couldn't have created us like he said? |
| |
|
Review Summary: Simply erroneous, though well-intended |
Date: 2004-07-29 |
|
|
| |
Details: This unfortunate book only succeeds in defending the 'science' theories of predominantly unsaved men while downgrading the Holy Bible in the process.
Beware whenever an author attempts to synthesize or integrate the Bible with anything else. You end up with a mixture of iron and clay that collapses under its own tottering weight.
Here the alloy of Genesis and astrophysic-geologic-genetic- evolutionic hypotheses does violence to both sides of the equation.
GENESIS vs. sciencism. They are not equivalent or alloyable. |
| |
|
| |
Similar Products
|
|
|
| |
This Product is similar to and may be found in the Following Categories:
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
