I present the following with some caution.
It comes from Hugh Ross, who is a good guy from what I can tell about the man, and who does significant apologetics work, particularly in developing things like the arguments for God’s existence based on the apparent design of cosmological and local astronomical constants. I’m glad he’s out there, doing that work.
But when Hugh strays into certain areas, he makes mistakes (like all of us). For example, I think that his interpretation of Genesis 1 is demonstrably wrong (he advocates the day-age interpretation of the hexahemeron, and that dog just won’t hunt).
In other cases Hugh advocates things that I don’t consider demonstrably false but that I’d am highly skeptical of.
Put the following into that category. I present it here not because I think it’s true but because I think it’s an interesting (if far-fetched) idea.
His idea is this: The ages of the patriarch are to be taken literally and the consequent dramatic shrinkage in the human life span has a natural cause that science may have unwittingly stumbled across.
Take it away, Hugh!
In my own and others’ writings, the Vela supernova (a massive stellar explosion that occurred early in the human era) has been identified as the possible culprit. It seems this event may be at least partly responsible for the cosmic radiation that keeps people from living longer than 120 years or so. In recent months, however, a new and much more likely suspect has been identified.
First, some background. Deadly, cancer-causing (life-shortening) radiation comes from two main sources: 1) the decay of radioactive materials in Earth’s crust, and 2) massive stellar explosions (supernovae) within the Milky Way Galaxy. Cosmic radiation from supernovae (and their remnants) showers the Earth all the time. Most of that radiation is benign and fairly constant, just electrons and protons moving at less-than-dangerous velocities. But some—such as the electron-stripped atoms of oxygen and iron moving at hyper-fast velocities—can do major damage to living things.
Since 1996 Anatoly Erlykin and Arnold Wolfendale have been studying cosmic radiation’s particle energy spectrum—in particular, the high end (above a quadrillion electron volts per nucleon). They have found two peaks in the spectra, protruding high above the background. These peaks, they say, are the signature of a single, major event—a local, recent supernova blast. In other words, the thousands of supernova remnants scattered throughout the Milky Way Galaxy account for the relatively constant radiation background, but the two peaks tell of a local, recent supernova, the shock waves of which would have increased the velocities of oxygen and iron nuclei, turning them into killer radiation.
Initially, Erlykin and Wolfendale loosely identified this supernova as one closer than 3,000 light years and more recent than 100,000 years ago. These features suggested the Vela supernova (distance = 936 light years; eruption date = 20,000-30,000 years ago) as a prime possibility. With improved data, however, Erlykin and Wolfendale have been able to make a more positive identification. This particular supernova occurred so close to Earth that our solar system likely resides just inside the shell of its remnant. That remnant itself, they point out, occupies a significant portion (up to 40 degrees) of the sky—so vastly spread out that astronomers would have had great difficulty distinguishing it from the background.
While I don’t think it likely that Hugh’s astronomical explanation for the shortening of the Genesis life spans is likely the correct one, it is quite possible that such supernovae are having a depressing effect on the human life span. There really are deadly stars out there in the sky spitting out radiation that will cause cancers in humans that would not otherwise occur. I just don’t think the effect is likely to be as dramatic as Hugh does. There are plenty of other things on Earth to kill you besides cosmic radiation (like germs, for example), and this change (together with the others he mentions) does not strike me as being at all likely to explain the shrinkage of the Genesis life spans.
That’s not to say it’s not interesting to think about, though.
I have read several of Hugh Ross’ books about creation and find them interesting and beneficial. While I haven’t read them much since my reversion to Catholicism (and therefore leave open the possibility that Hugh has flip-flopped on his views), they do not advocate a literal 6-day creation timeframe. In fact the goal of his ministry, Reasons to Believe, is to show that Genesis and the fossil record can be reconciled, especially by not subscribing to a 6-day creation timeframe.
If this was true then if we insolated a human being from the natural radiation that does reach Earth then wouldn’t we see an increase in his lifespan?
they do not advocate a literal 6-day creation timeframe
Yes, that is correct. They don’t advocate a six 24-hour day timeframe. They advocate the day-age hypothesis (each day represents an age of geological time), which in my opinion is a demonstrably false reading of the Genesis text.
Oops. I stand corrected. Sorry.
No problem! 🙂
Could someone explain how the day-age idea is demonstrably false?
Jimmy,
I’m sorry if this digresses too much from the topic at hand (maybe it should be a separate blog thread), but how do you recommend reading Genesis 1?
Could someone explain how the day-age idea is demonstrably false?
I’m sorry if this digresses too much from the topic at hand (maybe it should be a separate blog thread), but how do you recommend reading Genesis 1?
I’ll do a post on these for tomorrow.
I’ll do a post on these for tomorrow.
Thanks!
(I don’t want to be “pushy,” but I would appreciate it if you would be sure to cover the translation of the Hebrew word that is translated “day,” because Mr. Ross makes this a key part of his point and I would like to know the truth of this.
Physicist Gerald Schroeder has an interesting explanation for the age of the universe. Genesis talks about 6 days of creation but science talks about a universe that is 16 billion years old.
Schroeder attempts to reconcile bible and science through the expansion theory. Universe is 16 billion years old looking back from our space-time coordinates. From the space-time coordinates of Genesis it looks like 6 days. Because of the expansion, looking back in time from where we are the 6 days have been stretched out so that it looks now like 16 billion years.
http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html
“There really are deadly stars out there in the sky spitting out radiation that will cause cancers in humans that would not otherwise occur. I just don’t think the effect is likely to be as dramatic as Hugh does. There are plenty of other things on Earth to kill you besides cosmic radiation (like germs, for example), ”
Could it be that the radiation also kills even more billions of germs that otherwise might do us in?
The issue of time is a red herring: the passage of time is entirely dependent on the frame of reference of the observer. From the point of view of someone traveling at the speed of light since the dawn of time, no time at all has passed since then.
Pick your frame of reference carefully and you can set the age of the universe to whatever time you like between zero and 16 billion years.
PVO
“The issue of time is a red herring: the passage of time is entirely dependent on the frame of reference of the observer. From the point of view of someone traveling at the speed of light since the dawn of time, no time at all has passed since then.”
That is the point; the frame of reference. From our space time coordinates looking back we see 16 billion years. From creation looking forward we see 6 days. The expansion from the creation until now is a factor of a million million. A million million times 6 days divided by 365 = 16.5 billion years. This is science.
I just wish the fundamentalists would consider the actual physics before they got wrapped around the axle of young-earth apologetics. There’s nothing in the Bible itself which demands it. It’s egoism to assume the frame of reference of the Revealer of Genesis is/was the same as our frame of reference here and now.
“….but how do you recommend reading Genesis 1?”
The way Pope Benedict reads it. See his book on Creation (I think it is called “In the Beginning.”) Among other things, Genesis is VERY CLEARLY a polemic against the religions of the surrounding people. For example, it deliberately uses words that referred to gods. When it says that God created the sun and moon (greater light and lesser light), it was to signal to people that the sun and moon were not gods and not to be feared, as they were merely creations. The leviathan in Hebrew is related to the word for the chaos monster overcome by the hero if the “Babylonian Genesis,” and hence a way of saying that there is not another power equal to God. The two creation stories are also a polemic against the fertility religions of the people of Canaan – the serpent was a symbol of the fertility religion.
Of course, Genesis is a lot more too, and the Pope covers it all.
Pope Benedict, besides being our Holy Father, is a brilliant, brilliant, very learned theologian who brings everything together so beautifully. Before going off half-cocked on personal interpretations, read him!
I’m not a scientist, but this guy comes off to me as more amateur than me.
All radioactive materials wear out with time, known as “radioactive decay”. The rate at which they decay is known as “half-life”, or the amount of time that half of any amount becomes not radioactive.
As all radioactive materials decay, those which found their way to Earth during its formation have also decayed, therefore there’s less radiation on Earth now than before.
Take Plutonium, with a short half-life of 20000 years. In a period of about 450000 years, all of it is gone. That’s why it exists only nowadays as a by-product of nucelar reactors.
According to his theory, the decrease in radiation levels by one of the two major radiation sources would mean that we’d live longer than the patriarchs. Granted, an increase of cosmic rays might compensate the lower radiation from Earth itself, but it’s varied above and below current levels in the past few millenia, not steadly increasing as he suggested.
I’ve been having highly technological dreams since 2004, many which include phenomena which leads me to research. I recently dreamed there was an 11 point global quake, the earth tilted about 23 degrees (estimate), and flipped.
My research led me to some genreral understandings about geodynamics, electromagnetics, etc. In the process, I also came to the revelation that the decrease in lifespan had to do with electromagnetics.
It is a scientific fact that the earth’s electromagnetic field has been dramatically decreasing over the years. It is the earth’s magnetic field that protects us from the sun’s harmful radioactive particles. As the earth loses more of this protection, the earth will be dramatically affected by the solar rays fulfilling bible prophecy in the book of Revelation.
I have also found that there is a disease in association to this phenomena called Magnetic Field Deficiency Syndrome. Its symptons include depression, stress, anxiety, chronic fatigue, and immune deficiencies. Magnetic Therapy has proved to improve the health of those who suffer from this illness.
After considering all these findings, I am convinced that had the earth’s magnetic field been as strong as once believed, it would only be inevitable that human’s would live longer, healthier, as well as powerfully mentally charged lives. This weakening of the electromagnetic field has to be part of the fall. And will continue to weaken until the poles are forced to flip. All climactic results will bring about the return of Jesus Christ.
Please see dream blog: http://www.prophecywatcher.com
Blessings.