Genesis 1:1-8: God's First and Second Creation Days

“In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth (1:1). Now the Earth was formless and void, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters (1:2). And God said, ‘Let there be light’ and there was light (1:3). God saw that the light was good and He separated the light from darkness (1:4). God called the light ‘day’ and the darkness he called ‘night.’ And there was evening, and there was morning–one day (1:5).

Then God said ‘Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters (1:6). And God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so (1:7). And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day” (1:8).

God created the universe1

Michiel van Borch 1300 – 1370 AD (God’s Creation Days) (1332)2

Introduction – Mankind’s doubts about God’s claims that He created the universe and the Earth: Jesus Christ proclaims that every word of the Old Testament, down to the smallest letter, to be the accurate word of God; “For truly I say to you, until Heaven and Earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.” (Matt. 5:18). He also referred to the stories of creation, like Adam and Eve, as historical fact and not mere parables (Matt. 19:4). The Apostle Paul proclaimed, “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:1617). Using the Dead Sea Scrolls and other manuscripts, scholars have also verified that the Hebrew texts, certified by Christ, are the same used today.

Despite these assurances, many doubt that God created the universe, the Earth, and mankind as revealed in the book of Genesis. To many, Charles Darwin’s book, The Origin of Species (1869), proved that the Genesis creation account is nothing more than a parable or a myth. According to Richard Dawkins, an Oxford zoologist credited to be one of the most influential modern writers in the area of evolutionary biology: “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”3 Evolutionist George Gaylord Simpson likewise once claimed that: “Man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.”4

Secularists have also gone on the offensive against those who teach God’s role in creation. Dawkins, for example, argues that: “it is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).”5 He further argues that the Genesis creation account is a mere myth that is no more compelling to him that of any other polytheistic or primitive religion:

Nearly all peoples have developed their own creation myth, and the Genesis story is just the one that happened to have been adopted by one particular tribe of Middle Eastern herders. It has no more special status than the belief of a particular West African tribe that the world was created from the excrements of ants. All of these myths have in common that they depend upon the deliberate intentions of some kind of supernatural beings.6

Author Daniel Dennett even suggests that parents who teach their children that evolution by natural selection is false be “quarantined.”7 Science philosopher Basil Willey further argues that: “Science must be provisionally atheistic, or cease to be itself.”8 The American Civil Liberties Union advocates this philosophy in nearly polemic terms: “To reject Creationism as science is to defend the most basic principles of academic integrity and religious liberty.”9

With these kinds of attacks, many believers feel uncomfortable defending their faith in God’s creation according to Genesis. Even worse, few pastors feel comfortable touching the subject. Yet, this falls short of what God expects from believers. He expects every believer to be able to explain and defend their faith to others: “[A]lways be[] ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;” (1 Pet. 3:15). One of mankind’s greatest scientists, Sir Francis Bacon, also lived in a time when people questioned God’s existence and the Bible’s claims about His role in creating mankind. He famously advised how to explain your faith to others: “A little science estranges a man from God. A lot of science brings him back.” This study lists seven proofs of God’s direct creation during His first two creation days.

First, thousands of years ago, Moses used a special Hebrew verb bara to make a bold claim that God created the universe or “heavens” from nothing. For thousands of years, believers had only their faith to defend this claim. For most of human history, scientists believed that the universe had always existed. Yet, in the 20th Century, astronomers confirmed that the universe had a beginning. They also confirmed Moses’ claim that the universe began from nothing. Second, the Bible claims that God exists outside of time, and that He created our time. For centuries, believers had only their faith to defend these claims. Yet, in the late 20th Century, physicists verified that time is in fact a created dimension that had its beginning with the rest of the universe. Third, before Moses wrote the book of Genesis, Job wrote that God “stretched” the universe from a starting point like a tent curtain. For centuries, believers again had nothing but their faith to prove Job’s claims. Yet, also during the 20th Century, astronomers confirmed that the universe is, in fact, stretching apart just as Job revealed four centuries earlier. Fourth, the New Testament claims that Christ holds all things in the universe together. Again, believers for centuries had nothing to defend this statement. Yet, also in the 20th Century, physicists discovered that the forces of physics are fine-tuned and intricately balanced. If they were balanced any differently, no stars, planets or life of any kind would have formed in our universe. Further, physicists have no way to prove how these forces of physics became finely balanced on their own. Fifth, Moses reveals that God created the Earth as a life-habitable place. With a universe as big as ours and the countless other planets within it, many claim that there is nothing remarkable about our Earth. Yet, scientists have now discovered dozens of variables that are necessary to sustain life of any kind. The chance of finding a planet that is capable of hosting life like Earth’s is a statistically impossible event. Sixth, the Bible claims that God separated the waters during the second day with an atmosphere, a sea, and a stable water cycle. Many might assume that this could be a common feature in any Earth-like planet, yet during the 20th Century, scientists also found that the Earth’s atmosphere is fine-tuned through a series of miraculous events that allows for water to exist in all three forms, a necessary condition for advanced life to exist. Scientists have also discovered that our Earth should have had a life-suffocating, heavy atmosphere. Only as a result of a series of miraculous events that led to the formation of the Moon did our Earth become able to host life of any kind. Finally, the Bible proclaims that God covered the Earth with water during day two. Again, for centuries believers had nothing to prove this claim. Yet, also during the 20th Century, scientists confirmed that the Earth was initially covered entirely with water, just as the Bible claims. These accurate descriptions show that the Bible is God’s inspired Word, and His creation contains His finger prints. Together, His progressive creation shows that He so loved mankind that He patiently created the perfect universe and the earth for us to inhabit so that He could fellowship with us.

1.) God’s Creation of the Universe from Nothing. Gen. 1:1.

After the words “in the beginning”, Moses wrote in Hebrew “Eloheim bara ha shamayim we ′erets.” The word “Eloheim” is the plural of the word God or “El.” Although Moses could not have fully understood what was revealed to him, his writings describe the role of the triune God in creation.

God created the universe from nothing10

Moses also used a special Hebrew word “bara”, which translates as “create”. In Hebrew, however, this special verb, or predicate, appears in the Bible with only one subject: God. Astronomer and theologian Hugh Ross explains that the word “bara” can be defined as God’s creation ex-nihilo, or His creation out of nothing which is visible.11 Moses’ use of the Hebrew words “shamayim” (heavens)12 and “′erets” (Earth), collectively refer to God’s creation of the entire universe from nothing.

Other Old and New Testament writers made similar claims. The author of Hebrews and David both proclaimed: “the universe was formed at God’s command” for “he spoke and it came to be.” (Heb. 11:3; Ps. 33:9). Similar claims are also found in the writers of the early rabbis. For example, the rabbi Nahmanides wrote that God first created the universe the size of a mere “grain of mustard.”13

For centuries, believers could only point to their faith to defend these claims. According to Ross, Plato and Aristotle in the 4th Century B.C. popularized the belief that the universe is eternal. Plato, Aristotle, and philosophers that followed them believed the universe to be infinite in both time and space. Building upon Isaac Newton’s laws of gravity, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) reasoned that the universe was both infinite and explainable by purely natural processes.14 Although Kant believed in a “creator,” the creator he imagined was limited to the physical laws he created.

Evolutionary cosmologists have built upon Kant’s earlier theories to suggest that the universe is both infinite and likely to contain numerous advanced civilizations which evolved by natural processes alone. Carl Sagan, a prominent evolutionary cosmologist who refused to believe in God, once speculated, “The cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be.” (Contact.)

Scientific discoveries of the 20th Century, however, have undermined all of these notions. Proof of God’s creation of the universe is now securely established by the following seven factors: (1) Albert Einstein’s mathematical proof of the “Big Bang”; (2) Edwin Hubble’s confirmation that the universe is expanding through the measurement of different light wavelengths from the surrounding galaxies; (3) the 1992 discovery of the background radiation from the Big Bang event; (4) Donald Hamilton’s discovery that the universe is of a uniform age, establishing that the universe was all created in the same explosion; (5) the measurement of dark and “exotic” matter in the universe, ruling out the possibility that the universe will collapse under its own gravity and endlessly recycle; (6) the lack of natural alternative explanations for the creation of the universe that conforms with the scientific method; and finally (7) according to the first two laws of thermodynamics, the impossibility that matter could have spontaneously formed or lasted forever.

First, initial credit for confirming the Bible’s claim of the universe belongs to Einstein. In 1915 and 1916, ten years after Einstein published his theories on Special Relativity,15 he published his second famous theory of General Relativity. After astronomer Williem de Sitter discovered a mathematical error in the second theory, Einstein reluctantly concluded that the universe had to have had a beginning.16 His theory of General Relativity contained ten sets of equations. Subtracting one set of these equations from another yielded yet another equation. The solution to this equation led to the conclusion that everything in the universe is simultaneously expanding and decelerating. The only phenomenon in which expansion and deceleration could occur at the same time is an explosion.17 Yet, according to Ross, Einstein initially refused to believe in the beginning of the universe due to the logical need for a Creator which followed.

Second, in 1929, Edwin Hubble confirmed that the universe had a beginning. By measuring the differences in light colors emitted from forty different galaxies, he established that the galaxies within the universe are expanding away from one another. Moreover, he also established that the galaxies furthest away were moving away at a faster rate.18 He demonstrated that the universe is expanding by discovering that the light from galaxies further away appear redder in color than they should have been. Light has wave frequencies that look like the waves of the oceans when studied up close. The distance between the peaks and valleys of these waves determines the light’s color and also whether it is visible to the human eye. Based upon the earlier discoveries of Christian Johann Doppler in 1842, Hubble concluded that the red shift in the color of the light from galaxies further away could only be explained by a universe that was both expanding and decelerating. This is exactly what one would expect following an initial explosion. By examining the difference in color of galaxies close up and further away, he was also able to estimate the speed at which these galaxies were expanding from a central point of origin. According to Ross, with Hubble’s discovery, Einstein grudgingly accepted “the necessity for a beginning” and “the presence of a superior reasoning power.”19

Third, on April 24, 1992, scientists confirmed the universe’s beginning using a satellite called the “Cosmic Background Explorer” (COBE). The COBE measured the difference in temperature of the background radiation in the universe to discover that the universe had a hot explosive origin billions of years ago. Physicist Gerald Schroeder calls this detectable radiation “a sort of fossil in photons.”20 At the time of the initial explosion, the point of origin reached superhot 1032 Kelvin degrees and then cooled to 3.5 Kelvin degrees. That is 269 degrees below water’s freezing point. Stephen Hawking called this event “the discovery of the century, if not all time.” 21 George Smoot, a University of California at Berkeley astronomer and project leader for the COBE declared: “What we have found is evidence for the birth of the universe.” He added, “it’s like looking at God.”22 Using this radiation, scientists have been able to photograph the universe when it was only .0003 percent its present age. This is “a mere ten billionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second (10 -34 seconds) after the cosmic creation event.”23

Fourth, building upon other discoveries, astronomer Donald Hamilton discovered that the universe is a uniform age. According to Ross, this established that the universe was all created in the same explosion.

Fifth, discoveries regarding “dark matter” in the universe establish that the universe had only one beginning, not many. The force of gravity exerted from dark, invisible and exotic matter (matter that does not strongly interact with radiation) serves as a braking force on the expanding universe. Scientists have confirmed the amount of exotic mass in the universe is about four to eight times more abundant in the universe than ordinary matter. To avoid the need for a Creator, some scientists had proposed that the universe had exploded and collapsed upon itself and re-exploded an infinite number of times like an accordion. Under this theory, the development of life on Earth and the existence of the universe as we currently perceive it would be the result of one chance event out of an infinite number of bounces. According to physicist Robert Dicke, an infinite number of these cycles of expansion and contraction of the universe would “relieve us of the necessity of understanding the origin of matter at any finite time in the past.”24 According to Ross, this creation model coincides with the Hindu and Buddhist beliefs of a universe which itself reincarnates endlessly. Yet, scientific discoveries in the 1990's also ruled out the possibility of the existence of sufficient mass within the universe for the force of gravity to cause the universe to collapse upon itself again.25 Additionally, other discoveries established that even if the universe contained enough mass to end its current expansion, the collapse would yield not a bounce but a thud.26 According to Ross, measurements of the existence of dark matter in the universe now establish that the universe will not collapse at all. Rather, one day it will suffer a “heat death” in which the energy will dissipate and the temperature throughout the universe will reach a constant identical temperature. The discovery that the universe will one day have an end is consistent with the beliefs of Christians.

Sixth, every alternative theory to God’s creation of the universe through the Big Bang falls outside the definition of science. Using advanced particle accelerators, scientists can explain each step of the creation process down to 10-43 seconds after the creation event. This period of time, less than a quadrillionth-quadrillionth-trillionth of a second is far less than the time required to blink one’s eye. According to Ross, to explain the creation events to before 10-43, a particle accelerator 40 trillion miles long would be necessary. In standard notation, this would be a decimal place, followed by 42 zeros and then a one. (.000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,1) To avoid the need for a Creator, astronomer Paul Davies suggests that virtual particles popped into existence during this fraction of a second from an alternative universe by pure chance. He calls this “quantum tunneling”.27 Others propose that matter in our universe popped into existence as a result of a collision between different dimensions in a different realm. In comic books, this is often referred to as the “multiverse.” This is also where these theories belong. These theories fall outside of true science because they can never be tested or proven. Philosopher of science Robert Pennock argues that true science must be capable of being tested and supported by empirical evidence: “To say that a hypothesis has been ‘proven’ in science is not to say that it is deductively certain but that it has been tested and supported well by the evidence.”28 Yet, there is no way for scientists to prove or test that some natural event in a different dimension caused our universe to randomly pop into existence. Scientists who believe that our universe randomly popped into existence due to events in another dimension rely upon their own faith.

Finally, the first and second laws of thermodynamics work together to prohibit a natural explanation for the formation and organization of the universe or other universes. The first law prohibits the creation of new energy or matter. Thus, matter cannot be created ex-nihilo (from nothing) by natural processes alone. The second law states that over time all matter decays from order to disorder. An important part of the second law is the law of proton decay. Protons are positively charged particles which reside within the nucleus of every atom. Each atom consists of at least three quarks. Quarks are subatomic particles that make up molecules. As part of the second law of thermodynamics, it is known that protons decay over time into quarks. Each proton consists of at least three quarks. It is further known that quarks decay irreversibly into antiquarks, pinons (subatomic particles which quarks are composed of), and positive electrons and electromagnetic radiation.

Ross points out that this process occurs at a slow rate of only once per proton per 1032 years. Nevertheless, he argues that because this process is irreversible, all atoms in the universe will eventually decay into irretrievable matter and energy. Even though this process of decay will take an enormous period of time, it is not infinite. Applying both of these laws, no natural explanation can account for the creation of the universe. By the first law, matter had to have existed for an infinite period of time to allow for purely natural processes to explain the known universe. However, according to the second law, all matter breaks down and disorganizes into irretrievable energy. Thus, matter could not have existed for an infinite time. At some point, the matter in the universe or universes will irreversibly decay into subatomic particles that cannot be used again to create new universes.

Accordingly, by process of deductive elimination, all matter in the universe had to be created from nothing, just as Moses revealed in the book of Genesis. Thus, there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt in both God’s existence and His creation of the universe. As David knew long ago, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” (Ps. 14:1). A non cyclical universe also disproves both Hindu and Buddhist cosmologies. As stated by the Apostle Paul, “all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.” (2 Tim. 3:16).

God also revealed thousands of years ago to David that we could gain this knowledge of His direct role in the universe by studying starlight: “The Heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His Hands. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge.” (Ps. 19:1). Do you give praise to God when you look upon the stars? Are you boldly sharing your faith in His creation with others?

2.) God’s Creation of Time in Our Universe. Gen. 1:1 (continued).

The Bible not only correctly foretold the creation of the universe from nothing, it also correctly foretold that God exists outside of our time. The New Testament reveals God’s role creating the universe before time itself began:

This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time. (2 Timothy 1:9)

The hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time. (Titus 1:2)

Ross points out the following verses also imply God’s creation before time itself:

You loved me before the creation of the world. (John 17:24)

He chose us in Him before the creation of the world.

(Ephesians 1:4)

He was chosen before the creation of the world. (Peter 1:20)

By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen is not made out of what was visible. (Hebrews 11:3)

Through Him, all things were made, without Him nothing was made

that has been made. (John 1:3)

For by Him, all things were created: things in Heaven and on Earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. (Colossians 1:16-17).29

God also created time30

Even the first letter of the very first Hebrew word of Genesis suggests the creation of time. The first letter “beth” looks like an enlarged letter “C” turned backwards. (Hebrew is read from right to left). The remainder of the phrase “in the beginning” flows out of this letter, as if enclosed on three sides. Two ancient rabbis commented upon the position of this letter and the fact that the first day is written as “a day” as opposed to the ordinal format of the “first day” to make an amazing prediction that time had a beginning.31 Thousands of years ago, both Maimonides and Nahmanides wrote that the universe did not exist before day one. They also concluded that time itself was created by God and that humans could never know about events prior to the creation of time.32 These two rabbis used only the Hebrew texts to predict something that scientists would not confirm until thousands of years later.

In the late 20th Century, astrophysicists confirmed that time also had a beginning at the same time as the universe, just as the Bible claims. In a series of papers appearing from 1966 through 1967, three British astrophysicists, Stephen W. Hawking, George F. R. Ellis, and Roger Penrose extended the solution of the equations of General Relativity to include space and time. The result was called “the Space-Time Theorem of General Relativity”. This theorem demonstrated that, if General Relatively is valid for the universe, then space and time must have also originated in the same event that brought matter and energy into existence.33 According to Ross, General Relativity itself is considered the most accurately tested scientific theory known to humans today, confirmed “to a precision of 99,999,999,999,999 parts in 100 trillion.”34 Thus, according to Hawking: “Time itself must have had a beginning with the Big Bang.”35 Although Hawking is himself agnostic, Ross notes that proof of his discovery may well rank as one of the most theologically significant theorems of all time.36

Ross also notes that Hawking’s space-time theorem explains the age-old dilemma of God’s foreknowledge of our actions (predestination) and our free-will to either accept or reject God and His commandments. Humans within the time-line have the power to choose to either accept or reject Him. God, existing outside the time-line, knows what choices we will ultimately make.

Ross concludes that evidence that the universe was created out of nothing and that time itself was created with the known universe establishes that the Creator described in the Bible exists:

[A]ll the data accumulated in the 20th Century tells us that a transcendent Creator must exist, for all the matter, energy, length, width, height, and even time, suddenly and simultaneously came into being from some source beyond itself.37

For the atheist, time had to appear as a created dimension by pure chance. There is no process of evolution to explain this. Thus, it requires far greater faith to be an atheist than to believe in the time-proven revelations in the Bible.

Physicist John Schwartz’ discovery of other dimensions in our universe through “string theory” also explains how God, His angels, or even demons can influence mankind without our ability to detect them. Strings are lines or loops of energy that existed in the first seconds of the universe’s existence. During the initial moments of creation, the fundamental particles existed as highly stretched, vibrating, rotating elastic bands under the extreme heat. As the universe cooled and expanded, these lines or loops of energy collapsed to behave as points or particles of matter in the current universe. According to Ross, strings require more than three dimensions to exist. Mathematical proofs of this theory establish that exactly 10 dimensions existed in the initial moments of the creation of the universe. Also according to Ross, “if we knew nothing at all about relativity, this 10-dimensional string theory would have revealed relativity theory in complete form. Such profound, precise, corroboration is both rare and beautiful in scientific research.”38

Also according to Ross, string theory tells us that the universe was created with 10 rapidly expanding space-time dimensions. When the universe was just 10-43 seconds old, the moment when the force of gravity separated from the then unified strong-electro-weak force, 6 of these 10 dimensions ceased to expand.39 Also according to Ross, today the 6 dimensions still remain as a component of the universe, but they are tightly curled up as when the universe was only 10-43 seconds old. These six dimensions have a diameter of 10-33 centimeters, a number so small that they are virtually undetectable.40

Ross asserts that the existence of extra dimensions also confirms the Bible’s claims of God’s extra-dimensionality. On various occasions the Bible reveals that God is close and hears our prayers even though we cannot see Him:

But the Word [God] is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it. (Deuteronomy 30:14).

The Lord is near to thee brokenhearted, and saves those who are crushed in spirit. (Psalm 34:18).

Would not God find this out? For He knows the secrets of the heart. (Psalm 44:21).

The Lord knows the thoughts of man, that they are a mere breath. (Psalm 94:11).

Thou art near, o Lord. (Psalm 119:151).

The Lord is near to all who call upon Him, (Psalm 145:18).

. . . though He is not far from each one of us; (Acts 18:27).

‘Am I a God who is near,’ declares the Lord, ‘and not a God far off?’ ‘Can a man hide himself in hiding places, so I do not see him?’ declares the Lord. ‘Do I not fill the Heavens and the Earth?’ declares the Lord. (Jeremiah 23:23-24).41

Thus, the Bible accurately revealed thousands of years ago the beginning of both space and time from nothing. (Gen. 1:1; Heb. 11:3; Ps. 33:9). These miraculous claims made thousands of years ago should give the Bible skeptic serious pause. Moreover, excluding religions that borrow from the Bible (like Islam), no other holy book makes these kinds of accurate scientific claims.

But what God cares most about is that these revelations boost your faith in Him and draw you closer in your walk. Do you trust in God’s ability to hear your prayers in the amazing universe that He created? Likewise, do you trust in His ability to be near to you and comfort you when you are in pain?

3.) God’s Expansion of Our Universe From a Small Beginning to Its Current Size.

The Bible not only accurately foretold the beginning of the universe, it also accurately revealed the expansion of the universe following the creation event. Before Moses wrote the book of Genesis, Job revealed that God “stretched out” the heavens: “Who alone stretches out the heavens, and tramples down the waves of the sea;” (Job 9:8). “He stretches out the north over empty space and hangs the Earth on nothing.” (Job 26:7) Because Moses would have known of Job’s description of the universe’s beginning, he would have had no need to repeat them in Genesis.42

David later confirmed Job’s revelation of an expanding universe: “Oh Lord my God, thou art very great; . . . stretching out heaven (the stars and the universe) like a tent curtain.” (Ps. 104:1-2).

The prophet Isaiah also confirmed the expansion of the universe in no less than five different descriptions of God’s creation: (1) “[God] stretches out the heavens (the stars and the Universe) like a curtain. And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” (Is. 40:22); (2) “Thus says God the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out. . .” (Is. 42:5); (3) “. . . I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself and spreading out the Earth all alone.” (Is. 44:24); (4) “It is I who made the Earth, and created man upon it I stretched out the heavens with My hands . . .” (Is. 45:12) and (5) “That you have forgotten the Lord your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth. . .” (Is. 51:13)

The prophet Jeremiah also confirmed the expansion of the universe in three verses of his own: (1) “It is He who made the Earth by His power . . . And by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens.” (Jer. 10:12); (2) “Oh Lord God, Behold, You have made the heavens and the Earth by your great power and by Your outstretched arm!” (Jer. 32:17); and (3) “It is He who hath made the Earth by His power, who established the world by His wisdom, and by His understanding He stretched out the heavens.” (Jer. 51:15)

Finally, the prophet Zechariah also confirmed the expansion of the universe: “. . .Thus declares the Lord who stretches out the heavens lays the foundation of the earth . . .” (Zech. 12:1)

God’s stretching of the universe

Only with the discoveries of General Relativity, the red shift in light from other galaxies and the existence of the cosmic background radiation from the initial creation event did astronomers confirm the claims of the Bible.

How could Job, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah, living centuries ago before telescopes and knowledge of modern physics, have made these claims? Their writings establish that the Bible is indeed the hand of God. No other holy book can make similar claims.

For the atheist, these predictions had to be the lucky predictions from five Old Testament writers thousands of years ago. Again, it requires far greater faith to be an atheist than to believe in the many proven revelations about creation in the Bible.

4.) God’s Fine Tuning of the Universe to Make Stars and Planets for Life. Gen 1:3-5.

Genesis 1:3 proclaims: “And God said, ‘Let there be light’ and there was light. God saw that the light was good and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light ‘day’ and the darkness He called ‘night.’” Thus, at one moment after the creation of the universe, He caused the stars to form and emit light, electromagnetic radiation. The Apostle Paul also claims that Christ holds everything in the universe together: “in Him all things hold together.” (Col. 1:16-17). God further declares that He “fixed” the laws that control the heavens and the Earth, what we call physics today (Jer. 33:25). For centuries, believers had nothing but their faith to defend these revelations in the Bible. Yet, like the creation and expansion of the universe, discoveries in the 20th Century also confirm these claims.

God also fine-tuned the universe to make life possible

While summarizing the greatest discoveries in physics of the 20th Centuries, Ross describes a multitude of laws of physics that must be precariously balanced for stars, planets or life of any kind to exist. This fine tuning of the laws of physics defies any natural explanation. The following are seven examples:

(1) The fine tuning of the strong nuclear force constant. The strong nuclear force is the force governing the degree to which protons and neutrons stick together at the atomic nuclei. This force must balance perfectly for atoms to exist. According to Ross, if this force were any weaker, protons and neutrons would not stick together. In such a world, hydrogen would be the only element in existence. Also according to Ross, if the strong nuclear force were slightly greater in strength, protons and neutrons would have such an affinity for one another that each would bond tightly and permanently to one another. In such a universe, there would be no hydrogen, only heavy elements. Ross notes that the strong nuclear force must be so precariously balanced that if it were just 2 percent weaker, or .3 percent stronger than it actually is, “life would be impossible at any time and any place within the universe.”43

(2) The fine tuning of the electromagnetic force constant. Ross also explains that more than forty different elements must be able to bond together to form molecules.44 Molecular bonding further depends upon two factors: the strength of the force of electromagnetism and the ratio of the mass of the electron to the mass of the proton. Focusing on only the electromagnetic force, if it were significantly stronger, atoms would hang on to electrons so tightly that no sharing of electrons with other atoms would be possible. By contrast, if the electromagnetic force were significantly weaker, atoms would not hang on to electrons at all and the formation of molecules would not take place.45

(3) The fine tuning of the weak nuclear force constant. Also according to Ross, if this force were stronger, too much hydrogen would be converted to helium in the Big Bang. As a result, there would be too much heavy element material made by star burning. As a result of that, there would be no expulsion of heavy elements from stars, which are necessary for any kind of life. By contrast, if the weak nuclear force constant were smaller, there would be too little helium produced from the Big Bang. This also would preclude life of any kind from forming.

(4) The fine tuning of the gravitational force constant. According to Ross, if this force were stronger, stars would be too hot and would burn up quickly and unevenly. By contrast, if this force were weaker, stars would remain so cool that nuclear fusion would never ignite. As a result, no heavy element production would ever take place. This again would preclude life of any kind.

(5) The fine tuning of the ratio of number of protons to number of electrons. Also according to Ross, if the ratio were stronger, electromagnetism would have dominated gravity, preventing galaxy, star and planet formation. Likewise, if the ratio were weaker, electromagnetism would have dominated gravity, which would have also prevented galaxy, star, and planet formation.

(6) The fine tuning of the expansion rate of the universe. According to Ross, if the expansion rate were faster, there would be no galaxy formation. By contrast, if the expansion rate were slower, the universe would have collapsed prior to star formation.

(7) The fine tuning of the ratio of electromagnetic and gravitational force constants. Ross also explains that the precise ratio of the electromagnetic force constant to the gravitational force constant must be maintained for life to exist. If the electromagnetic force relative to gravity were decreased by just one part in 10-40 power, only small stars would form. However, if this force was increased by just one part to the 10-40 power, only large stars would form. Nevertheless, for life to be possible, both large and small stars must exist.46 The large stars must exist because only in their thermal-nuclear furnaces are most of the life-essential elements produced. The small stars, like the Sun, must also exist because only small stars burn long enough and are stable enough to sustain a planet with life.47 To explain the complete impossibility of the chance formation of a particle force precisely set at 10-40, which would allow for the existence of life, Ross offers the following analogy:

Consider [a] pile of dimes, one part to the 10-40 power is equivalent to a blind-folded person rummaging through a trillion piles of dimes the size of North America that reached the Moon and picking one, on the first try, which is painted red.48

These are just seven examples. In his book, the Creator and the Cosmos, Ross documents several other forces that must be perfectly balanced for life of any kind to form. Other examples include: (1) The fine tuning of the ratio of electron to proton mass (necessary for chemical bonding); (2) the entropy level of the universe (necessary for galaxy formation); (3) the mass density of the universe (necessary for stable and diverse star formation); (4) the velocity of light (If different, the brightness of light would preclude life); (5) the initial uniformity of radiation (If smoother stars, star clusters and galaxies would not have formed, while if weaker, the universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space); (6) the fine structure constant (a number used to describe the fine structure splitting of spectral lines) (If larger, all stars would be at least 306 times less massive than the Sun, while if smaller, all stars would be at least 806 times more massive than the Sun); (7) the average distance between stars (If larger, heavy element density would be too thin for rocky planets to form, while if smaller, planetary orbits would be destabilized); (8) the decay rate of the proton (If larger, life would be exterminated by the release of radiation, while if smaller, there would be insufficient matter in the universe for life); (9) the nuclear energy level ratio (If larger, there would be insufficient oxygen for life, while if smaller, there would be insufficient carbon for life); (10) the ground state energy level for 4He49 (If larger or smaller, there would be no carbon and oxygen for life); (11) the decay rate of 8Be (If slower, heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars, while if greater, no elements beyond beryllium would be produced); (12) the mass excess of the neutron over the proton (If larger, the neutron decay would leave too few neutrons to form the heavy elements essential for life, while if smaller, the proton decay would cause all stars to rapidly collapse into neutron stars or black holes); (13) the initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons (If greater, there would be too much radiation for planets to form, while, if smaller, there would not be enough matter for galaxies or stars to form); (14) the ratio of the mass of exotic matter to mass of ordinary matter (If smaller, galaxies would not have formed, while if greater, the universe would have collapsed before solar-type stars could have formed). For other examples, see Hugh Ross, Creator and the Cosmos (Nav Press 2001 3rd ed) pp. 154-157.

Without any one of these factors carefully balanced as described above, no life of any kind in the universe would be possible. While many evolutionists claim that life would have evolved differently in a different universe, there would be no life of any kind if stars and planets never formed. There is simply no natural explanation for why these laws of physics would be fine-tuned for stars and planets to exist. Even Einstein, initially an adamant atheist, was forced to admit that God existed in some form.

Evolutionists reject what they call the “God of the gaps” fallacy. More specifically, they reject any creation hypothesis that merely relies upon gaps in our scientific understanding as proof of God's special creation. Instead, evolutionists argue that the creationist must prove that a gap in our understanding cannot and never will be explained through purely natural explanations. The National Academy of Sciences, for example, is likewise against traditional creation-science because it claims that it is limited to negative argumentation.50 Philosopher of science Robert Pennock offers the following explanation of the difference between an “unexplained” gap and what he calls an “uncrossable” gap:

Consider the difference between 'X is unexplained by science' and 'X is unexplainable by science.' The former means that as of yet, X remains to be explained, while the latter expresses the stronger notion that science cannot explain X in principle; that is, now or ever in this or any possible circumstance. There is also an intermediate category of things that might be unexplainable for some practical reason.

If we were confronted with some empirical fact of the second sort for which scientific explanation was impossible - what we may call an 'uncrossable' gap - then we would have to give serious consideration to the creationist alternative. This would not be just a puzzle, but a profound puzzle.51

The multiple fine-tuned laws of physics offer an example of an “uncrossable” gap for atheists. Scientists cannot claim that further research will provide a natural explanation for the fine-tuning of the laws of physics. This fine tuning can only be explained by a divine entity who set the laws of the universe. Furthermore, each scientific discovery only lengthens the uncrossable gap. The number of fine-tuned laws of physics only grows with each generation.

Believers further are not limited to negative argumentation to prove God’s existence. Mathematics professor William Dembski offers the following explanation of how the intelligent design theory can be used to prove God’s existence:

Briefly, intelligent design infers that an intelligent cause is responsible for an effect if the effect is both complex and specified. A single letter of the alphabet is specified without being complex. A long sentence of random letters is complex without being specified. A Shakespearean sonnet is both complex and specified. We infer design by identifying specified complexity.

* * *

Intelligent design properly formulated is a theory of information. Within such a theory, information becomes a reliable indicator of intelligent causation as well as a proper object for scientific investigation. Intelligent design thereby becomes a theory for detecting and measuring information, explaining its origin and tracing its flow. Intelligent design is therefore not the study of intelligent causes per se but of informational pathways induced by intelligent causes . . . It is the empirical detectability of intelligent causes that renders intelligent design a fully scientific theory and distinguishes it from the design arguments of philosophers or what has traditionally been called ‘natural theology.’ Natural theology reasons from the data of nature directly to the existence and attributes of God - typically the Trinitarian God of Christianity with all the usual perfections.52

In effect, a design theorist is a “reverse engineer.”53 Moreover, intelligent design is in fact already used as an acceptable method of inquiry in various other scientific fields. These include, but are not limited to, cryptography, archaeology, forensic science, artificial intelligence, and the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence. If intelligent design can be employed as an accepted science in the search for extra-terrestrial life, the same methodology should be acceptable in the search for extra-dimensional life, i.e., God.54

The fine-tuning of the universe is just one of many examples of “specified complexity” that proves God’s existence. As the Apostle Paul explained: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.” (Ro. 1:20). If God can create the laws of physics, the universe and then stretch it into its present location, is there any problem in your life that is too big for Him to solve?

5.) God’s Fine Tuning in the Creation of the Earth. Gen. 1:2.

In verse two, the frame of reference in the Genesis account shifts from the universe to the surface of the Earth.55 The second verse also reveals that the Earth was initially “unformed” for life and “empty” of the life it presently contains. Also in the second verse, the terms “the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” suggests that the Holy Spirit was preparing for life’s first appearance on Earth. The Hebrew word for “hovering” is “rhap.” Ross notes that this word also appears in Deuteronomy 42:11. In that passage, it refers to a female eagle that is stirring up her nest and “hovering over her young.”56 Although the Earth was initially empty of life, the Holy Spirit was preparing the nest for life’s first appearance.

Like the creation of the universe, the creation of the Earth proves that God actively created as described in the manner revealed in Genesis. His intelligent design is established by the fact that He formed the Earth in exactly the right orbit, around the right kind of sun, in the right kind of galaxy, with a collision of a mars-sized object at just the right time to lighten Earth’s early atmosphere, to soften the crustal plates and to form the Moon. Even the Earth’s magnetic field fluctuates at just the right strength to allow for life to exist. The random chance possibility of all these events occurring without the active intervention of a supernatural creator is also a factor calculated below to be less than one in a trillionth percent chance.

Yet, atheists have sought to convince people that there is nothing special about the Earth. They claim that there must be billions of Earth-like planets in the universe with advanced life like ours.

In 1996, two atheists named Iosef Shklovskii and Carl Sagan established that for the minimal conditions of life, of any kind, to exist a planet must be located at the right distance from a star of the right size.57 Working with just these two parameters, they estimated that .001 percent of all stars would have a planet capable of supporting advanced life. With this estimate, both estimated that a million-plus possible life sites exist within our Galaxy.58

Ross, however, concludes that their initial estimations were grossly optimistic. Their limited two part criteria failed to account for the 113 plus criteria which must exist for life of any kind to exist. According to Ross, the number of known life criteria has further increased by a discovery rate of almost one per month since the 1990's began. In the book, The Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe (Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2000), astronomers Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee reached the same conclusion. Both conclude that at best, only bacteria type life could exist anywhere in our vast Galaxy. Neither, however, sought to explain how even bacteria or similar life could form on its own.

Carbon: The limiting element for any possible life. More than three decades ago, physicist Robert H. Dicke observed that carbon is the only element that is able to sustain life forms of any kind.59 Both Ross and Schroeder note that boron and silicon are the only other elements upon which complex molecules can be based. Both rely upon numerous studies to conclude that boron is extremely rare within the universe and silicon can hold together no more than a hundred amino-acids. Given these facts, Ross, Schroeder and other scientists have concluded that the constraints of both physics and chemistry dictate that life of any kind be carbon-based. Schroeder concludes:

Carbon is the elemental jack-of-all-trades. It falls halfway between being a metal and being a nonmetal. That means it can form compounds with most other elements. Most importantly, carbon compounds can form long chains with itself and include in these chains branches and rings. From such chains, often hundreds of carbon atoms long, the structure of all life is built.60

Thus, carbon-based life being the common denominator for any conceivable life in the universe. This also allows us to qualify where carbon-based life forms could hypothetically form. The following are seven limiting factors for any carbon-based life.

(1) The right type of galaxy: necessary for any possible life. Any carbon-based life can only exist in the right type of galaxy, a spiral galaxy like our Milky-Way. Ross notes that elliptical and irregular galaxies contain active nuclei. These nuclei spew out life-destroying radiation and material. Ross further observes that only five percent of the galaxies within the universe are spiral like ours. According to Ross, the remaining 95 percent of all other galaxies could not, under any circumstances, support life.61

(2) The right part of the right galaxy: necessary for any possible life. In addition to being within the right type of galaxy, life can only exist in the right part of a galaxy. Even in a spiral galaxy, like the Milky Way, life cannot exist in locations where the stars are densely packed together.62 By contrast, in a location far away from other stars, in an elliptical galaxy, life-essential heavy elements are too thinly distributed for life to be possible.63 Ross notes that our solar system is located in the ideal location in the center of a spiral arm of the Milky Way, neither too far or too close from other densely packed solar systems within the galaxy.64 Ross and others have established that life in the center of our Milky Way Galaxy could not exist. The close proximity of the surrounding stars from intense competing gravity would destroy the regular orbit of any planet around any given star. Mormons believe that God was once a human and lived on a planet called Kolab in the center of our Galaxy. If life is not possible in the center of our galaxy, then we can exclude the possibility that God was ever a human on such a planet.65

(3) The right solar system: necessary for any possible life. In addition to requiring the right kind of galaxy and the right location within a galaxy, life requires a single star system. In systems with more than one sun, planetary rotation becomes erratic. With erratic orbits, life destroying climatic changes occur. Ross notes that only a fourth of the stars within our galaxy meet this criteria of being bachelor stars.66

(4) The right size sun: necessary for any possible life. In addition to requiring the right kind of galaxy and the right kind of solar system, life requires the right size sun. Ross notes that a star larger than our own would burn too quickly and too erratically for life on a surrounding planet to be sustained.67 By contrast, if a star is any less massive, the planet must be closer to the star to maintain a temperature suitable for life chemistry. However, when a planet is drawn too close to a star, its rotation period slows from hours to months. This is the case for both Mercury and Venus. With slow rotation periods, life again becomes impossible. Extreme climatic changes eliminate the possibility of life on such planets.68

(5) The planet’s distance from a sun: necessary for any possible life. Even the Earth’s orbit around the Sun is precariously balanced to allow for the existence of life. A change in the distance from the Sun by as little as 2 percent would rid the entire planet of all of its life.69 If we were just slightly closer to the Sun, Schroeder explains that “increased solar heat would prevent water vapor from condensing.”70

(6) The right planetary companions: necessary for any possible life. According to Ross, even our planetary companions exist by no mere accident. Without a Jupiter-sized planet positioned just where it is, Earth would be struck about a thousand times more frequently than it is already by comets and comet debris.71 In other words, Ross concludes that without Jupiter, life-destroying impacts would be common.72

(7) The right magnetic field: necessary for any possible life. Both Schroeder and Ross further note that the planet’s magnetic field, a product of the exact heavy metal content in the planet’s inner core, has to be perfectly balanced to sustain any conceivable life forms. Ross notes that if the Earth’s magnetic field were stronger, all life would be killed through electromagnetic storms. Speaking of the devastating effects of a magnetic field any weaker, Schroeder writes:

This magnetic field does more than merely allow us to set a compass. Its force diverts much more of the potentially lethal cosmic radiation that reaches the vicinity of Earth. We live under a literal magnetic umbrella. Were this cosmic radiation not deflected, it would bathe the surface of the Earth with a continual shower of life-devastating ionization.73

Ross provides dozens of other criteria necessary to find a planet capable of supporting carbon-based life. (See, Hugh Ross, Big Bang Refined by Fire (Reasons to Believe 1998) pp. 18-29)

The maximum possible number of planets in the universe is estimated to be ten billion trillion. (1022) Even with that large of a number, Ross concludes after assigning a variable to each factor that the chance of meeting all of the necessary conditions for a planet to support life is statistically impossible:

[R]esearch finds less than 1 chance in a hundred thousand trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion [=10-99] that even one life-supporting planet would occur anywhere in the universe.74

According to Ross, the observable universe contains less than a trillion galaxies, each averaging a hundred billion stars. Without God’s intervention, not even one planet would be expected, by natural processes alone, to possess the necessary conditions to sustain life. These factors argue beyond a reasonable doubt that our life-sustaining planet was carefully created by God and not as a result of mere random chance. A law of statistics called “Borel’s Law” states that a chance of 1 in 1050 or one chance in 100 trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion is a statistically impossible random chance. Thus, some evolutionists concede that humans will likely never find another Earth-like planet capable of sustaining advanced life.75 The Bible justifiably proclaims, “the heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.” (Psalm 19:1).

6.) God’s Creation of a Life-Habitable Atmosphere and Water Cycle. Gen. 1:6-8.

Genesis 1:7 records that on His second day, “God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it.” Verse 8 references God’s creation of the expanse of the “sky”. The Hebrew words for expanse and sky are raqia and shamayin. Ross notes that both refer to the visible dome above us, though the latter is used more specifically for the portion of the Earth’s atmosphere where clouds form and move.76 Ross further notes that the Hebrew verb asa (meaning “make,” “manufacture,” “fabricate,” or “construct”) implies that God Himself “designed and built” the Earth’s atmosphere.77

Many assume that a life-habitable atmosphere and water cycle must be a common event for any planet of Earth’s size and distance from the Sun. But the formation of the Earth’s atmosphere and water cycle were also miracles that God made possible through the Moon.

God also created a life-habitable atmosphere78

The miracle of God’s creation of the Moon. Earth is estimated to be 4.5662 +/- 0.0001 billion years old. By contrast, lunar rock samples retrieved by the Apollo missions reveal the age of the Moon to be only 4.527 +/- 0.010 billion years old. The rocks of the Moon also have a distinct chemical makeup. Ross notes that its distinct chemical makeup and its younger age establish that the Moon and the Earth did not form together. Rather, the Moon was created as a result of a collision between Earth and a body with the mass the size of Mars. The object was initially nine times the Moon’s mass and one-ninth the mass of the Earth. At the time, the Earth was approximately 40 million years old.79 A collision with a body of mass this size would have blasted all of Earth’s original atmosphere into outer space. The shell, or cloud of debris, arising from the collision, would orbit the Earth and eventually coalesce to form our Moon.80 The impact occurred at just the right angle of 45 degrees and the right impact velocity, relative to the Earth’s motion so as not to destroy the Earth. The Moon in turn let seven things occur to allow God to seed the planet with life.

(1) The dissipation of the early heavy Earth atmosphere. According to Ross, the rules for planetary formation dictate that the greater a planet’s surface gravity and the greater a planet’s distance from its star, the heavier and thicker its atmosphere. Theoretically, the Earth should have an atmosphere heavier and thicker than that of Venus where humans could not exist. Based upon data learned from the study of 2,300 ex-planets planets, Ross concludes that “planets as massive as Earth and as distant from their host star (their “sun”) typically start with a thick, opaque (light-blocking) atmosphere have a measurement of the planet’s atmospheric mass is 6.5 times more massive than Earth and has an atmosphere at least 4,000 times ‘heavier’ than Earth’s atmosphere today. Venus, which measures 19 percent less massive than the Earth (implying that its weaker gravity will be less able to accrete an atmosphere) and 28 percent closer to the Sun (implying that its greater planetary surface temperature will cause more of its atmosphere to dissipate to outer space) nevertheless possesses an atmosphere 91 times more massive than Earth’s. Thus, astronomers estimate that Earth’s primordial atmosphere was at least 200 times more massive [heavier] than our current atmosphere. So light from the Sun (or stars and other heavenly objects) would have been unable to penetrate to the early Earth’s surface.”81 However, due to a miraculous collision with a massive object against the Earth at just the right time, the Earth’s atmosphere is light and thin enough to support life as we know it.82

(2) The creation of the ideal mass density of the Earth. The collision allowed life to occur by increasing the mass and density of the Earth enough to retain, by gravity, a large quantity of water vapor. However, had the object been any larger, the Earth’s mass and density would have increased to have kept life-threatening quantities of ammonia and methane in our atmosphere. Accordingly, it was just the right size.83

(3) The creation of life-sustaining oceans. The collision also elevated the iron content of the Earth’s crust to permit a huge abundance of ocean life. Ross notes that the quantity of iron, a critical nutrient, determines the abundance and diversity of algae which forms the basis of the food chain of all ocean life. This in turn permits advanced land life.84

(4) The creation of the perfect land-to-water ratio to support life. Additionally, the collision played a significant role infusing the Earth’s crust with a huge abundance of radioisotopes, the heat from which drives most of the Earth’s exceptionally high rates of tectonic and volcanic activity which have allowed the continental plates to separate to their current locations. According to Ross, in their current locations, each of the continental plates maximizes the possible distribution of inhabitable land across the Earth.85

(5) The stabilization of the Earth’s axis in its orbit. The formation of the Moon also “stabilized Earth’s rotation axis tilt, protecting the planet from life-extinguishing climatic extremes.” 86 The perfectly timed creation of the right sized Moon gives tangible meaning to the Bible’s declaration that God “established the Earth upon its foundations, so that it will not totter forever and ever.” (Psalm 104:5).

(6) The creation of the ideal Earth rotation rate to support advanced life. According to Ross, the collision of this object with the Earth also played an important role in slowing the Earth’s rotation rate to allow advanced life to live on the planet. Astronomers have concluded that the Moon was much closer to the Earth billions of years ago. This is based upon observations that the Moon is slowly spiraling away as the Earth’s rotation rate slows gradually down.87 Initially, the Earth had a faster rotation rate which caused high winds to exist on the planet. Under these conditions, only lower-life organisms can survive. The formation of the Moon created as a result of the collision over time slowed the Earth’s rotation rate. This served the important role of protecting the planet from life-extinguishing climatic extremes.88 Ross notes that the collision of this object with the Earth occurred at just the right time to transform the Earth from a “formless and empty” place (verse two) to a site where life could one day survive and thrive. Ross concludes that the collision of this object with the Earth at just the right time and just the right place cannot alone be explained by mere chance:

Even if the universe contains as many as ten billion trillion (10²²) planets, we would not expect even one, by natural processes alone, to end up with the surface gravity, surface temperature, atmospheric composition, atmospheric pressure, crustal iron abundance, tectonics, vulcanism, rotation rate, rate of decline of rotation rate, and stable rotation axis tilt necessary for the support of life.89

(7) The changes in the atmosphere to compensate for the Sun’s increased brightness. The Moon’s changes to the Earth’s atmosphere also allowed for God to seed the Earth with bacterial life. This in turn protected the Earth from an increase in the Sun’s brightness. Ross explains that the carbon dioxide and water vapor in the Earth’s atmosphere miraculously worked to retain heat from the Sun that is reflected off the Earth’s surface. Earth’s early atmosphere contained more carbon dioxide and water vapor than our current atmosphere. The first plants extracted carbon dioxide and water from the early atmosphere and released oxygen.90 Increased levels of oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere have corresponded perfectly with an increase in the sun’s luminosity. The Sun shines approximately 35% more brightly today than it did on Earth’s first life forms.91 This has happened because as the Sun burns hydrogen, it is fused into helium. The new helium increases the core density of the Sun. This in turn causes the Sun to gradually burn more intensely with increasingly brighter light. Ross concludes that the increase in the Sun’s luminosity has not extinguished life on Earth because of a decrease in the efficiency of the greenhouse-effect. This decreased efficiency is the result of increased oxygen in the atmosphere.92 If the Sun were slightly more massive, all liquid water would be transformed into water vapor. If the Sun had slightly less mass, Earth would absorb less solar energy and all of the Earth’s water would eventually turn to snow and ice.93

Speaking only to the increased luminosity, Ross notes that there is no feed-back system between the Earth and Sun to explain these two concurrently changing processes. Commenting upon this sheer amazing balance within the atmosphere’s system in sync with the changes of the Sun’s changing luminosity, Ross notes:

Here, the materialists offer no explanation. How could strictly natural Darwinist-processes possibly have anticipated the laws of physics of solar burning?94

Schroeder adds that the Earth’s atmosphere is also precariously formed to prevent the destruction of all life from harmful UV radiation:

The position of the Earth relative to the Sun almost presents a cosmic double bind. The Earth needs to be close enough to get the warmth of the Sun for life. However, accompanying the warming rays of sunlight are heavy doses of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation. UV radiation is so lethal that it is used today to sterilize countertops. At a distance from the Sun where temperatures are acceptable to life, the intensity of UV radiation wreaks destruction on organisms not protected from it. Life bathed in UV would not last long.95

God also placed humans upon the Earth at just the right time. If we appeared sooner, the Earth’s rotation rate would have been faster, causing humans to live on a planet with nearly constant hurricane force winds. If He placed us here later, we would suffer from a desert-like planet as the Sun gets brighter and brighter. One day, however, the increase in solar luminosity will extinguish all life on Earth. The hydrogen in the Sun is expected to last another 5 billion years. Solar luminosity is expected to increase 10 percent over the next 1.1 billion years. The Sun’s surface will grow 1 percent hotter over that period from 99400 F (55000C) to 10,0500 F (55600C).96 Over that period, the Earth will continue to heat up until the stratosphere accumulates water vapor. With the interaction of water vapor with UV light, it is now believed that the hydrogen in the atmosphere will disappear forever. This in turn will cause the oceans to evaporate and life to be extinguished. All of this confirms that our appearance upon the Earth is perfectly timed to the ideal moment in the Earth’s and the Sun’s expected life.

In summarizing all of the miraculous contributions from the collision with the Earth that lead to the formation of the Moon, Ross concludes that mankind should not expect to find any similar planet that is equally capable of sustaining human life:

The number of details fine-tuned to favor life’s possible existence and intervention of a divine Creator. Even if the universe contains as many as 100 billion trillion (1023) planets, probabilities would argue against the existence of even one that by natural processes alone would end up with the just-right surface gravity, surface temperature, atmospheric composition, atmospheric pressure, crustal iron abundance, tectonics, volcanism, rotation rate, rotation rate decline, stable rotation axis and degree of tilt for the benefit of advanced life. Those who want to see a miracle are looking at one whenever they gaze up at the Moon.97

Each of these factors provide cumulative evidence of God’s intelligent design. The careful balancing of the Earth’s atmosphere also provides overwhelming evidence of God’s existence. The progressive acts of formation also eliminates the possibility that God merely set the laws of physics and allowed all things to evolve naturally. Each stage of the Earth’s formation and the life within it required the direct and active intervention of God, just as revealed in Genesis.

7.) God’s Creation of the Oceans. Gen. 1:6.

Finally, Moses made an astonishing claim that the early Earth was covered in water before God created the continents: “‘Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters’” (1:6). David also made a similar claim: “You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters were standing above the mountains.” (Ps. 104:6).

God first created oceans and later the dry lands98

Until recently, believers had no way to prove the claims of Moses and David that the early Earth was initially covered with oceans. At the time the Old Testament was drafted, people assumed that the mountains had always existed.

But discoveries in the 20th Century have again shown the writings in the Bible to have been accurate: “Initially all the land in the Earth’s rocky crust lay below the surface of the deep. Islands and continents arose gradually – think hundreds of years – as a result of volcanism (volcanic activity) and plate tectonics (movement and collisions of large crustal sections). Volcanism and plate tectonics, driven primarily by heat from radioisotope decay in Earth’s mantle, generated the wrinkling of the Earth’s surface. This wrinkling, which eventually pushed land upward above the ocean’s surface, continues to this day, but at a much lower rate. Tectonic and volcanic activity superseded erosion (the wearing down process) until landmasses rose up above the oceans to cover about 29 percent of the Earth’s surface.”99

For the atheist, the change from Earth covered with oceans to an Earth covered with a mixture of oceans and continents may be no big deal. Yet, what explanation can they offer for how Moses and David, thousands of years ago, could have correctly predicted the changes in the conditions of the Early earth?

These facts again show that God progressively intervened throughout the formation of the universe and the Earth. He loved mankind so much that He patiently created the ideal universe and planet for mankind to inhabit. When mankind rejected their Creator, He again showed His love for us by sending Jesus to die on the cross so that we could share in the perfect heaven that He will create for mankind. (Jo. 3:16). If you are grateful for all that God has done to create the perfect world for you and to atone for your sins, what are you doing with your life to thank Him?

  1. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 1986) p. 6.↩︎

  2. quoted by Phillip Johnson, Defeating Darwinism, (InterVarsity Press 1997) p. 15.↩︎

  3. Dawkins, review of Blueprints by Donald Johnson and Maitland Edey, New York Times, April 9, 1989, sec. 7, p. 34.↩︎

  4. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker p. 284.↩︎

  5. Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (Simon &Schuster 1995) p. 519.↩︎

  6. B. Willey, “Darwin’s Place in the History of Thought,” in Darwinism and the Study of Society, (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961) p. 60.↩︎

  7. quoted by Ankenberg & Weldon, Darwin’s Leap of Faith, (Harvest House 1998) p. 84.↩︎

  8. Ross, The Genesis Question (1998), p. 19-20, citing Waltke, Bruce, Creation and Chaos: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Biblical Cosmology (Portland, Oreg.: Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1984).↩︎

  9. The Bible reveals that there are three separate spheres which are collectively referred to as the “heavens”. 2 Cor. 12:2 (the Apostle Paul speaking of himself: “I know of a man in Christ . . .such a man was caught up to the third heaven.”) From a human frame of reference, the third heaven to which Paul referred was the eternal realm we commonly think of when we say the word heaven. According to Jewish and Christian tradition, the second heavenly realm encompasses the stars and the visible universe. (E.g., Ps. 19:1) The first Heaven is the atmosphere surrounding the Earth.↩︎

  10. Nahmanides, Commentary on the Torah, Genesis 1:1, quoted by, Dr. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis And The Big Bang: The Discovery Between Harmony And The Bible (Bantam Books 1990), pp. 64-65.↩︎

  11. “Universal Natural History Theory of Heavens,” Theories of the Universe, (1957) p. 240.↩︎

  12. Special Relativity, initially called the Principle of Invariance, established the two propositions. First, no absolute reference system exists from which motions in space can be measured. Second, the velocity of light with respect to all observers never varies. The velocities of the observers are irrelevant. The velocity of light is represented by the constant “c” in the famous theory E=mc2. As explained by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, the related theory of General Relativity states that “energy and mass are actually different states of a single energy-matter continuum, just as water, stream, and ice are all composed of a single entity, H2O. Energy is matter in its intangible form; matter is energy in its tangible form.” Shroeder p. 67.↩︎

  13. Hugh Ross, Creator and the Cosmos (1995) p.52.↩︎

  14. Id. at 52.↩︎

  15. Hugh Ross, Creator and the Cosmos (1995) at 52.↩︎

  16. Id. at 52.↩︎

  17. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery of Harmony Between Modern Science and the Bible (Bantam Books 1992) p. 77.↩︎

  18. Quoted in Ross, Hugh, The Creator and the Cosmos (1995), p.19.↩︎

  19. Id.↩︎

  20. Hugh Ross A Matter of Days (2nd ed. rtb press 2015) p. 15-16, citing, Mark Peplow, “Planck Snaps Infant Universe,” Nature 495 (March 28, 2013): 417-18; P.Ade, G. Efstathiou, et. al. (Planck Collaboration).↩︎

  21. Quoted in Hugh Ross, Creator of the Cosmos, (1995) p. 64.↩︎

  22. Hugh Ross, The Creation Hypothesis, (1994) pp. 148-151.↩︎

  23. "The Impossibility of a Bouncing Universe," Nature, 302 (1983): 505-07; Bludman, "Thermodynamics and the End of a Closed Universe," Nature, 308 (1983): 319-22. Reported by Ross in The Creation Hypothesis, p. 149.↩︎

  24. Hugh Ross, The Creation Hypothesis, pp. 154-155, citing, Paul Davies, God and the New Physics (1983) pp. 25-43; Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature (1984) p. 243; Paul Davies, A Cosmic Blueprint: New Discoveries in Nature’s Creative Ability to Order the Universe (1988) p. 141.↩︎

  25. Robert Pennock Tower of Babel, Evidence Against the New Creationism (MIT Press Cambridge MA 2000) p. 52.↩︎

  26. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.78.↩︎

  27. The NASB is the only English Bible to correctly translate “day one” in non-ordinal terms.↩︎

  28. Nahmanides, Commentary on the Torah, Genesis 1:1, Maimonides, The Guide for the Perplexed, part 2, chapter 13, quoted by, Dr. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis And The Big Bang: The Discovery Between Harmony And The Bible (Bantam Books 1990), pp. 56-66.↩︎

  29. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, (2nd ed. 1995) p.73 citing Roger Penrose “An analysis of the Structure of Space-Time” Adams Prize Essay, Cambridge University (1966); Stephen W. Hawking “Singularities and the Geometry of Space-Time” Adams Prize Essay, Cambridge University (1966); Stephen W. Hawking and George F. R. Ellis “The Cosmic Block-Body Radiation and the Existence of Singularities'' Astrophysical Journal, 152 (1968), pp. 25-36.) Stephen W. Hawking and Roger Penrose “The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 314 (1970) pp. 529-548.↩︎

  30. Id. at 369.↩︎

  31. John Boslough, “Inside a Mind of a Genius” Reader’s Digest (February 1984), cited in p.120; Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.73.↩︎

  32. Id.↩︎

  33. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.76.↩︎

  34. William Dembski (editor) Hugh Ross, Mere Creation; Science, Faith & Intelligent Design, (InterVarsity Press 1998) p. 370.↩︎

  35. Id. at 370.↩︎

  36. Id. at 370.↩︎

  37. Hugh Ross, Beyond the Cosmos, (NavPress 2ed. 1999) pp. 82-83.↩︎

  38. Hugh Ross, Hidden Treasures in the Book of Job (Baker Books 2013), p. 32.↩︎

  39. Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, at 112 - 113 citing Iosef Shaklovskii and Carl Sagan, Intelligent Life in the Universe, pp. 343-350.↩︎

  40. Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 112.↩︎

  41. Id.↩︎

  42. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.117.↩︎

  43. Id. at 117. Citing John P. Cox and R. Thomas Giuli, Principles of Stellar Structure, Vol. II: Applications to Stars (1968) pp.944-1028.↩︎

  44. Id. at 117.↩︎

  45. Ross observes that the ground state energies for 4He, 5Be, 12C and 16O are even more finely balanced to support life of any kind. The ground state energies cannot be higher or lower with respect to each other without yielding a universe with insufficient oxygen and/or carbon for any kind of life. J.P. Moreland (editor) Hugh Ross, The Creation Hypothesis, (InterVarsity Press, 1994) p. 163, citing, H.S. Lipton, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physics Bulletin, 31 (May 1980) p. 138.↩︎

  46. Philip Johnson Darwin on Trial (InterVarsity Press 1993) p. 7-8, quoted from, Agguillard v. Edwards, 482 U.S. 578 (1987).↩︎

  47. Robert Pennock Tower of Babel, Evidence Against the New Creationism (MIT Press Cambridge MA 2000) p. 165.↩︎

  48. William Dembski Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology (InterVarsity Press 1999) p. 47, 106-7.↩︎

  49. Id. at 108.↩︎

  50. William Dembski, Mere Creation, Science, Faith and Intelligent Design) (InterVarsity Press 1998 p.28.; William Dembski Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology (InterVarsity Press 1999) p. 106.↩︎

  51. Ross notes that the second verse of Genesis, “Darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters,” establishes the frame of reference of God’s creation as told from God’s perspective within the early atmosphere of the planet Earth, not off in outer-space. While other events in outer-space may have preceded the Earth’s formation, these are not central to the frame of reference of the creation account. Thus, the creation account begins in detail once the Holy Spirit appears above Earth.↩︎

  52. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, p. 29, citing R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Work Book of the Old Testament, Vol. 2 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), p. 843.↩︎

  53. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.131, Iosef Shklovskii and Carl Sagan, Intelligent Life in the Universe, (1966) pp. 343-350.↩︎

  54. Shklovskii and Sagan p. 413.↩︎

  55. Robert H. Dicke “Dirac’s Cosmology in March’s Principal Nature” (1961) p.440.↩︎

  56. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery of Harmony Between Modern Science and the Bible, pp.121-122.; Accord, (Hugh Ross The Creator and the Cosmos, p.133.↩︎

  57. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p.132.↩︎

  58. Id. at 133-134.↩︎

  59. Id. at 134.↩︎

  60. Id.↩︎

  61. Id.↩︎

  62. Id.↩︎

  63. Id.↩︎

  64. Id.↩︎

  65. Ross. at 135, citing, Michael Hart, Habitable Zones About Main Sequence Stars, Icarus 37 (1979), pp. 351-357.↩︎

  66. Shroeder at p. 124.↩︎

  67. Id. at 137, citing, “Our Friend Jupiter” Discoverer (1993) p. 15.↩︎

  68. Id., citing, Hugh Ross, Dinosaurs’ Disappearance No Longer A Mystery, Facts & Faith, Vol. 5 No. 3 (1991) pp.1-36.↩︎

  69. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery of Harmony Between Modern Science and the Bible, p. 125 Ross further notes ancient rocks reveal that our magnetic field has followed a “sinusoidal” pattern every ten thousand years. This means that the field has fluctuated precisely within the narrow bounds necessary for life to exist. Hugh Ross, Creation and Time (NavPress 1994) p.106 citing, (Jacobs, J.A.; Russell, R.D.; and Tuzo Wilson, J., Physics and Geology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959) p. 135.↩︎

  70. Emphasis added. Id. at 29.↩︎

  71. Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee, The Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe (Springer-Verlag: New York, Inc. 2000.↩︎

  72. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question (NavPress, 1998) citing Harris, Archer, and Waltke, Theological Workbook, Vol. II, pp. 862, 935.↩︎

  73. Id., citing pp. 701-702; William Gesenius, Gesenius, Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament) (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 (p. 657).↩︎

  74. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 39-40; citing Thorsten Kleine et al., “Hf-W Chronometry of Lunar Metals and the Age and Early Differentiation of the Moon,” Science 310 (December 9, 2005):1671-74; Joel Baker at al., “Early Planetesimal Melting from an Age of 4.5662 Gyr for Differentiated Meteoriates,” Nature 436 (August 25, 2005): 1127-31.↩︎

  75. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, p. at 32.↩︎

  76. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 35, citing Eliza Miller-Ricci and Jonathan J. Fortney, “The Nature of the Atmosphere of the Transiting Super-Earth GJ 1214b,” Astrophysical Journal Letters 716 (June 10, 2010): L74-L79.↩︎

  77. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, p. 32.↩︎

  78. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 40.↩︎

  79. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, p. 32, citing Lewis A. Codispoti, "The Limits of Growth, Nature," 387 (1997), p. 237.↩︎

  80. Id.↩︎

  81. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 40-41; citing, William R. Ward, “Comments on the Long-Term Stability of the Earth’s Obliquity,” Icarus 50 (1982): 444-48; Carl. D. Murray, “Seasoned Travelers,” Nature 361 (February 18, 1993): 615-17.↩︎

  82. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 39-40; citing Neil F. Comins, What If the Moon Didn’t Exist? Voyages to Earths That Might Have Been (New York: Harper Collins, 1993), pp. 53-65; Comins, What If The Moon Didn’t Exist? 4-5, 58; W.R. Kuhn, J. C. G. Walker, and H.G. Marsshall, “The Effect on Earth’s Surface Temperature from Variations in Rotation Rate, Continent Formation, Solar Luminosity, and Carbon Dioxide,” Journal of Geophysical Research 94 (August 20, 1989): 11, 129-31, 136.↩︎

  83. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, p. 32, William R. Ward, "Comments on the Long-Term Stability of the Earth’s Obliquity," Icarus 50 (1982), pp. 444-448; Carl D. Murray, "Seasoned Travelers," Nature 361 (1993), pp. 586-587; Jacques Laskar and P. Robutel, "The Chaotic Obliquity of the Planets," Nature 361 (1993), pp. 602-612.↩︎

  84. The Genesis Question, p. 33, citing, Jeffrey L. Bada, "Origins of Homochirality," Nature 374 (1995), pp. 594-95; Michael P. Robertson and Stanley L. Miller, "An Efficient Prebiotic Synthesis of Cytosine and Uracil," Nature 375 (1995), pp. 772-73.↩︎

  85. Dr. Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question, (Nav. Press 1998) p. 35.↩︎

  86. Ross, p. 35 citing F.M. Walter and D.C. Barry “Evolution of Solar Activity” and The Sun In Time (1991) pp. 651-652; James Kasting and David H. Grinspoon “The Faint Young Sun problem,” The Sun In Time (1991) pp. 447-450.↩︎

  87. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 135.↩︎

  88. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) pp 44-45.↩︎

  89. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 135.↩︎

  90. Gerald Schroeder, Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery of Harmony Between Modern Science and the Bible, p. 124.↩︎

  91. Thomas Hayden “Curtain Call” Astronomy (January 2000) p. 46, 49↩︎

  92. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 41.↩︎

  93. Hugh Ross, Navigating Genesis (rtb press 2014) p. 35-6, citing, P. Jonathan Patchett, “Scum of the Earth After All,” Nature 382 (August 29, 1996): 758.↩︎