by Garner Ted Armstrong and Paul W. Kroll
When you look up into the starry heavens on a clear night you can see about 6,000 to 7,000 stars with the naked eye.
Where did those stars come from?
Why are they in existence? Who or what regulates those stars—and the entire universe?
The universe is an AWESOME entity.
Most astronomers accept what is thought to be a proven observation—that the universe is expanding. When one realizes the distances astronomers tell us of, it’s frankly bewildering. The human mind must struggle to grasp its size.
Spanning Cosmic Distances
Have you ever wondered just how large are even short distances in the universe? Or how large the earth is in comparison to other astral bodies? How large, for example, is the earth in comparison to the sun—which itself is just a second-rate star? Let an astronomer explain:
“Suppose we make a scale model where the distance of the earth to the sun, ninety-three million miles, is just under one-quarter of an inch.
“Now take a dime [or a sixpence] out of your purse.
“On the scale of our model the orbits of the four inner planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars fit comfortably on this coin with the orbit of Mars represented by the circumference.
“The orbit of Neptune, the outermost large planet, will be fourteen inches across.
“And on the scale of our model where will the nearest star be? Exactly one mile away from the dime. This is the closest star. The center of our star system or galaxy, would be over six thousand miles [or the distance from Los Angeles, California to London, England] from the dime, and the millions of other galaxies very much further away.” (This Universe of Space, Peter Millman, pages 15, 16. All emphases ours throughout article.)
Journey to the Planets
When we travel to work or to shop, we usually judge distance in terms of how long it takes us to get to a certain place.
Let’s plan out a few journeys. We’ll make a cosmic trip to the sun—and beyond!
We climb into a jet plane. Soon we’re winging along at the speed of sound—750 miles per hour. How long would it take for us to reach the sun?
FOURTEEN YEARS!
We increase the speed to three times that of sound—or 2250 miles per hour. Our destination is Saturn or Neptune. But we’d better forget about going. We’ll never make it—because it would take us over a hundred years to get there.
We try a new means of travel.
According to scientific experimentation, light travels approximately 186,000 miles per second in our solar system. To find out the distance light travels in one year, we multiply:
186,000 x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 24 hours x 365 days.
That means light—at least in our solar system—travels 5,865,696,000,000 miles per year—approximately six trillion!
Astronomers, of course, must assume that the laws of physics, as observed in our solar system, hold true for all parts of the universe. They must assume that the speed of light is constant across space and time, and that no unobserved physical phenomena ever enter the picture.
But are astronomers measuring these immense distances correctly? Or are factors involved which they don’t understand?
Will astronomers once again need to seriously revise cosmic distances as they did in 1952—a revision which one author labeled about as serious to astronomy as the stock market crash was to the world economy in 1929!
Now, we’re ready for a new kind of ride—a space ship that roars through space at the speed of light. (Of course, it’s totally imaginary!)
“Instead of fourteen years, it would take us only eight minutes to reach the sun.
“In a half hour we would arrive at Jupiter, in one hour at Saturn, and at the end of five hours we would pass the outermost planet, Pluto” (Design of the Universe, Fritz Kahn, page 132).
Still a long time—at that speed!
On to the Stars
But the sun and the planets are our virtual “neighbors.” In cosmic terms, the distance to the sun and planets are merely inches and less.
Our solar system, for example, is merely one tiny part of the Milky Way galaxy. The sun, astronomers claim, is around 30,000 light years from the center of the Milky Way—if your mind can conceive of such immense distances.
Our sun is but a dwarf star among a spiral of over a hundred billion other stars of varying size—all in our galaxy. This Milky Way galaxy—100,000 light years in diameter and 20,000 light years thick at the center—is only one of billions in the universe.
But let’s continue our 186,000 miles-per-second journey through space. We want to travel far beyond the planets to some of the “nearer” stars.
“We settle down, unpack our books, open our typewriter and begin a report on the solar system. We have dinner, we play cards, we grow tired at our usual bedtime and go to sleep.
“The next morning we look out the window again. Alpha Centauri is not a bit brighter…we begin to worry. ‘How long will it take us to reach Alpha Centauri?’ ‘Four and a half years’ is the reply.
“Four and a half years—traveling at a speed of 186,000 miles per second—will bring us only to the nearest star! ‘And when do we get to Sirius, the brightest of our neighbors?’ ‘Eight and a half years from now.’ ‘And Alderbaran?’ ‘Fifty-five years.’
“We cannot believe our ears. Fifty-five years!”
“No hope of arriving there and coming back to tell about it.
“But Rigel is much brighter and seems to be closer. So we question him about Rigel. The man with the time-table in his hand answers us sternly: ‘Rigel? You won’t get there. We will get there in five hundred and forty three years:’…and still we would not have left the immediate neighborhood of our own village” (Design of the Universe, Fritz Kahn, page 132, 133).
There are, declare astronomers, millions of stars, separated by many light years, in our own galaxy alone. And our galaxy is only one among an estimated ten billion! Each galaxy is itself thought to be separated by a million light years.
As one author stated, an ant determined to crawl across the United States has more chance of accomplishing its task than man has to even BEGIN to cross the universe!
It’s no wonder Job cried out, speaking of God, “Who alone spreadeth out the heavens…who makes Arcturus, Orion and Pleiades” (Job 9:4-9).
At the Outer Limits
Astronomers have been shocked to realize that man is approaching the outer limits of his ability to measure the universe.
“Out there” is a vast region to which man cannot penetrate.
One author put it aptly, when he admitted:
“Our knowledge is confined not only in space but also in time. Techniques of radio astronomy are developing and they will soon reach out to this boundary wall, but without hope of going beyond it.” (The Limits of Science, Pierre Rousseau, page 176, 177.)
But what remains on the “other side”?
Astronomy remains silent.
“We have reached the unknown, our terminus,” he continues. “We sought the end of the universe and it has none. Our most powerful techniques leave us face to face with the unexplored void…we do not know what lies beyond the frontier of the perceptible universe” (page 180).
Yes, man’s mind is limited!
He is reaching the barrier of his observable universe.
The Basic Questions
How does this universe—as infinite as it appears to be—operate on mysteriously lawful principles?
Where did the matter in this “infinite” universe come from? Who or what was responsible for bringing this universe into existence? Or was it “always” here? Where is the universe headed?
These are the basic questions. Yet, science has no answer!
You’ve just read a few facts concerning the size of the universe. It’s staggering, awesome—even what little we can grasp of its size. But size is just one factor.
Rotations of astral bodies and their interrelationships can be mathematically predicted. There are laws that guide and direct the functioning of this universe.
Could this all have evolved? Did it always exist? Did matter mysteriously come out of “nothing”?
These are basic questions you need to know the answers to. And believe it or not—you CAN find the answers.
We humans are normally inquisitive. The whole impetus of scientific research—especially in the fields of geology, astronomy, biology and many, many of their more special studies—is that of a thirst for knowledge.
Basically, it is a desire to understand the origin of things.
We want to know why, from our earliest moments. We want to know how a certain household machine works. We want to know who made certain things. Little children began asking where they came from, much to the flustered embarrassment of many youthful parents.
Perhaps answering these more simple questions is not so difficult.
And yet—even that childish wonderment—taken back to the earliest beginnings of the human race, deals with the origin of mankind.
But here we find a great paradox!
Man, in all his sciences, must finally admit he does not know, by himself, where all this vast universe, with the solar system and life on this earth, came from.
So he invents lame excuses.
Why? Because he is driven by a motive.
What MOTIVATES Man’s “Knowledge”
He doesn’t even recognize what these motives are.
But let’s hear from a famous evolutionist. Here is a shocking admission about motives. About reasons for denial of supernatural origins. Reasons for rejecting a special creation of everything, and for seeking to explain creation WITHOUT a Divine Creator!
“I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption…
“For myself as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaningless was essentially an instrument of liberation…from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom; we objected to the political and economic system because it was unjust…There was one admirably simple method of…justifying ourselves in our political and erotic revolt: we could deny that the world had any meaning whatsoever. Similar tactics had been adopted during the eighteenth century and for the same reasons….The chief reason for being ‘philosophical’ was that one might be free from prejudices—above all prejudices of a sexual nature.”
The author concluded: “It was the manifestly poisonous nature of the fruits that forced me to reconsider the philosophical tree on which they had grown.” [Emphasis ours.] (Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means, 1937, pp. 312, 315, 316, 318.)
There you have it!
That is a remarkable fulfillment of Bible Prophecy.
The Bible plainly states why atheistic thinkers wish to keep consciousness of God out of their minds! There is an underlying motive as the Bible reveals.
Listen. “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge [that is, in their education], God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents…” (Rom. 1:28-30).
What a blistering indictment!
God says it is obvious He exists by looking at His handiwork.
He said, “…that which may be known of God is manifest [EVIDENT] to them; for God hath shown it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen [by looking at the creation, the material universe; the marvelous, interdependent life forms on this earth!], being understood by the things which are made…” (Rom. 1:19-20).
But the human, carnal mind does not like to acknowledge God. Why? Because man, in his huge vanity, will not recognize any supreme authority over his life!
He resents God as His Ruler! He doesn’t want any God telling him what to do—how to live—laying down codes of conduct, and enforcing penalties for broken laws!
The true motives in atheism, and a desire to be “willingly ignorant” (II Pet. 3:5) are the motives of intellectual vanity and human lust!
Too many people have a totally false concept about evolutionists!
Many seem to assume these men to be completely objective in their approach. It’s assumed evolutionists first tried the Bible; that they studied it, pondered it, read it, wondered about it—sincerely looked into it—and then found it lacking!
Not so!
They reject it without allowing their minds to wonder whether it could be so.
And the same holds true for the ancient pagan philosophers who helped perpetuate the lie of “no God.” The only difference is their motives were clear to all!
All By Chance?
Notice what Plato asserts: “They [the philosopher-educators of the ancient world] say that fire and water, and earth and air, all exist by nature and chance…and that as to the bodies which come next in order—earth, the sun, and moon, and stars—they have been created by means of these absolutely inanimate existences…after this fashion and in this manner the whole heaven has been created…not by the action of mind, as they say, or of any God, or from art, but as I was saying, by nature AND CHANCE ONLY” (Plato, Dialogues, Laws X, section 889).
Is this any different from the ideas today? Absolutely not! Except for modern, scientific garb.
Today, most scientists refuse to accept the possibility that there is a Creator God—even though they admit they cannot explain the origin of matter or the existence of laws.
Notice what one scientist dogmatizes:
“It is the business of science to offer rational explanations for all the events in the real world, and any scientist who calls on God to explain something is falling down on his job.
“This is one piece of dogmatism that a scientist can allow himself” (The Mystery of the Expanding Universe, William Bonnor, page 119).
Did you catch that?
Scientists dogmatically assume that the existence of the universe has a rational—and that means a physical—explanation.
But can the existence of the universe be physically explained? Is it possible to account for the universe’s beginning on the basis of laws now in existence?
Remember, most scientists assume that the universe has always been as it now is—guided by the same laws (where did they come from?) as it is today.
Scientists Admit Ignorance
But do astronomers offer any real answer for the origin of the universe? After all, it DOES exist! And we want to know why.
If it is superstitious to accept the existence of God for the creation of the universe, then we need another reasonable and thoroughly provable explanation of the origin of the universe.
But here science remains silent!
True, if it vociferously rejects the idea of a Creator God. But in the same breath it admits, “We have no idea of how the universe originated.”
Let’s examine a few ideas of the scientists themselves, as they admit, en masse, “We just don’t know.”
Robert Jastrow, director, Goddard Institute For Space Studies, admits:
“Science offers no satisfactory answer to one of the most profound questions to occupy the mind of man—the question of beginning and end” (Red Giants and White Dwarfs, page 53).
George Gaylord Simpson, eminent paleontologist, states very frankly:
“The theory just outlined [evolution] obviously does not yet answer all questions or plumb all mysteries…it casts no light on the ultimate mystery—the origin of the universe and the source of the laws or physical properties of matter, energy, space, and time.
“Nevertheless, once these properties are given…” (This View of Life, page 21).
“Properties?” What properties? How can serious-minded scientists casually wave aside the WHOLE QUESTION of the origin of the universe by calling the vastness of it all, the myriad laws, the intricate design, the breathtaking powers and forces working within it all, “properties”?
But they try.
Then, having waved aside the whole question they’re trying to answer, they go on to explain, how “once these properties are given” they can use various guesses as to the origins of the solar system, the earth, and ultimate life upon it.
But we have proved in past articles—and will in future—that even once these properties are given, evolution has as much, if not much more of a problem, explaining the creation.
But then, where did matter, energy, laws—the universe—come from? Science says it doesn’t know. But it allows itself to dogmatize that it couldn’t be created.
More Admissions
But let’s continue with some further admissions:
Lincoln Barnett, writer of science books for the layman, tells us:
“Cosmologists [those who try to answer why the universe is as it is and where it came from] for the most part maintain silence on the question of ultimate origins, leaving that issue to the philosophers and theology” (The Universe and Dr. Einstein, page 108).
But cosmologists and astronomers tell us that it is superstitious to accept a Creator God. Yet, they maintain silence.
Why?
Because they don’t know. And what they know points to the irrevocable truth—as some privately admit—that there HAD to be a Creator God, having supreme mind, that brought the universe into existence.
James A. Coleman, professor of science and popular science writer startles us with these words:
“Modern cosmology and cosmogony, like other branches of science, are concerned with investigating the laws of the universe. They DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER questions relating to an Original Cause—that is, where the laws of the universe came from or how they came into being” (Modern Theories of The Universe, page 197).
As a teacher, Dr. Coleman must face students, who ask, “Where did matter come from?” After all, it’s a logical question.
Dr. Coleman admits, “When giving a lecture on the origin of the universe, a scientist usually finds it difficult to handle questioners who persistently demand to know WHERE the material originally came from which now makes up the universe” (Modern Theories of the Universe, page 198).
Yes, scientists probably find it difficult to “handle” questioners who would be so persistent! But you can believe—many of them are “handled.” Many a college student, asking embarrassing and persistent questions of biologists, paleontologists, astronomers, ecologists and the like, are quite handily handled.
Subjected to ridicule, referred to the “Scopes’ trial,” or simply told to shut up about it, these eager questioners soon learn how to avoid the bad grades and embarrassing classroom scenes. They’re “handled” all right—as shocking as it may sound to the uninitiated.
By the thousands, young collegians are told to forget all belief in God; to cast aside all traditional values and “absolutes.” They are subjected to a great deal of intellectual pressure to simply be quiet about religion and God in scientific classrooms.
Asking “Why” is Meaningless?
Fred Hoyle, famed astronomer, says that even asking questions as: “Where did matter come from?” is meaningless.
“There is an impulse to ask WHERE originated material comes from. But such a question is entirely meaningless within the terms of reference of science.
“Why is there gravitation? Why do electric fields exist? Why is the universe?
“These queries are on a par with asking where newly originated matter comes from, and they are just as meaningless and unprofitable.”
But, why? Is it really logical to reject an answer when no other is forthcoming?
He continues:
“If we ask why the laws of physics…we enter into the territory of metaphysics—the scientist at all events will not attempt an answer…WE MUST NOT GO ON TO ASK WHY.” (Frontiers of Astronomy, page 342.)
But is it really meaningless to ask why? Or does the author want you to think it is, so you won’t?
Science Cannot Answer “Why?”
Scientists don’t know why there are laws, why there is matter, why there is a universe, why there is life. And they admit it!
Sir Bernard Lovell, famed astronomer and Director of the Nuffield Radio Astronomy Laboratories, Jodrell Bank, reviews the problem of the origin of the universe.
“Any answer lies outside the scope of scientific observation and theory and…the answer to the cosmological problem may well contain other factors than observational astronomy and theoretical cosmology” (Our Present Knowledge of the Universe, page 73).
What are the “other factors?” None other than the Creator God!
Harlow Shapley, one of America’s foremost astronomers, made an amazing admission. Although science knows something about what the Universe is composed of, and a certain amount about how it works, Shapley confessed, “But when it comes to ‘why’ we’re stuck. All we can say is ‘God only knows.’ And the information is classified.
“Science has found the basic hydrogen atom, but who made the hydrogen atom? Science comes up against some things which are unanswerable as yet.”
When There Is No Proof—ASSUME!
What do scientists do when they cannot prove a theory?
The very first thing to do, seemingly, is assume!
A college textbook on geology declares, without the slightest hint of blushing, “Since the problem of the ultimate origin of the universe may be beyond the reach of human science, it is better for us to commence our discussion with the assumption that certain arrangements of matter and space are already in existence” (Stokes, Essentials of Earth History, p. 127).
Notice! Where do scientists begin? Where do they start? With assumptions! With matter already in existence.
Since accounting for the origin of the universe is too painful a scientific headache for most astronomers, they conveniently start with just a smattering of theory about the origin of matter, and then proceed to an already full-blown, fantastic universe complete with stars, planets, galaxies, and everything else!
Outside Science?
Evolution colors all scientific thinking, including the realm of astronomy. But it has not led to any satisfying answers!
Scientists themselves admit, when pressed, “We are today under the spell of the evolutionary thinking begun 150 years ago by Kant and Laplace in astronomy, by Thomas Vuckle and Herder in history, by Buffon, Lamarck and Darwin in biology.” They confess, “We the children of these generations automatically think in terms of evolution, assume that everything had a beginning, and that this beginning was ‘chaos.’ ”
And then, striking at the root of the problem, they are beginning to wonder, “The question now arises as to whether astronomical problems can be solved by evolutionary trains of thought” (Kahn, Design of the Universe, p. 202).
Dr. Jesse L. Greenstein, astrophysicist at the California Institute of Technology, said in regard to the origin of the universe, “It is a terrible mystery how matter comes out of nothing.” He asked, “Could it have been something outside science?” Dr. Greenstein confessed, “We try to stay out of philosophy and theology, but sometimes we are forced to think in bigger terms, to go back to something outside science.” (Los Angeles Times, July 30, 1961.)
You have now read with your own eyes the problems astronomers face. God is rejected as Creator.
But cosmologists have no substitute for Him. They admit that the origin of the universe cannot be explained.
Origin of Universe a Mystery
Science has no answer for the origin of our universe.
Yet, much of science dogmatically insists on rejecting the only possible answer—that of special creation by the great Architect of all that exists!
God has not left science without a witness!
Scientists should be the most awestruck of all men about God! Scientists, with their various apparatuses for observation, measurement, and experimentation, should be men of deep spiritual conviction, absolutely thunderstruck by the magnificence of the things they study!
Some are. By no means is all science completely atheistic. Many leading scientists have come to see the hand of a Divine Creator in our material creation—but they are vastly outnumbered by those who deny that powerful hand.
So—admitting they have NO ANSWER—they fall back on an ancient superstition.
And superstition it is.
Strange as it may seem, atheistic science stands guilty of the very thing for which it accuses “Creationists.” It stands guilty of incredible dogmatism—repeated insistence on doctrines not proved—not tested—not observed; and it stands guilty of clinging to some of the most ancient superstitions ever to be hatched in the demented minds of savages of dim ages past—that this material creation “evolved” by accident, and that man came from animals!
This orderly universe operates on laws. It is upheld by laws. It exists for a great purpose—a purpose so far beyond the wildest imaginings of most professing Christians it would take their breath!
The very One who did all the creating came to this earth with a message about that great purpose. But men rejected His message—while professing to accept His person.
But this Work of God accepts the whole message of Christ! We do NOT deny the accurate, measured, carefully proved scientific data of this modern age—we welcome it enthusiastically! But we DO most seriously reject myth and superstition. And evolution is precisely that.
