[__ Science __ ] A Mature Universe

[AIG.com]

God created the universe mature. Instead of giving just an appearance of age, God created it fully functional, according to the Bible.

Continue reading...

 

[Barbarian]

This idea depends on the concept of God as deceptive. Not the God Who spoke to Abraham.

And not His universe in which we live.

 

[Truthfrees]

God created the universe mature. Instead of giving just an appearance of age, God created it fully functional, according to the Bible.

Continue reading...

thanks - good points

 

[tdidymas]

God created the universe mature. Instead of giving just an appearance of age, God created it fully functional, according to the Bible.

Continue reading...

From the link: "God didn’t make Adam a baby—He made him an adult." This is traditional speculation, since the text doesn't say he was created as an adult. Obviously not as an infant, since infants need someone to take care of them in order to survive. But children having everything they need to live in front of them, and having daily communications with God, have no need for someone else's care to survive. Therefore "baby or adult" mentality is a straw man argument.

So then, God could have created Adam as an adolescent. And the 6th day when Eve was also created could have easily been more than a single day, since Adam had to have time to name all the animals among other things before Eve was created. We have no idea what the time frame was that Adam and Eve were in the garden, but we know it was some time because it says Adam walked with God daily. They also had to have time to forget God's command to refrain from eating the forbidden fruit, as is typical of temptation.

So here is a question I have yet to hear or read anyone adequately answer: if the universe is only 6,000 years old, then how could we observe a supernova that happened (in light years) over 160,000 years ago? Is God deceiving us about how old the universe is? Or are we misinterpreting Genesis 1?

If anyone has a link to an adequate answer to this question, please share it, tks.
TD

 

[Barbarian]

God could have created the universe, complete with "mature" everything, including planted memories, just this morning.

The supernova question is a killer, because it means God would have to have faked the existence of something complete with faked radiation on the way to the Earth, to cover it up.

This would require that God deliberately deceives us. Which is theologically unsupportable. Gerald Aardsma's "virtual history" doctrine was developed precisely to deal with that dilemma. It's an interesting idea, and it avoids some of the logical flaws such as the one you mention. But not all of them.

Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Comparisons of Biblical Creation Alternatives

Aardsma is one of a growing number of creationists who are trying to find an honest and intellectually consistent YE creationist explanation for the evidence.

In a presentation at the conference, Wise showed a slide of a fossil sequence that moved from reptile to mammal, with some transitional fossils in between. He veered suddenly from his usual hyperactive mode to contemplative. “It’s a pain in the neck,” he said. “It fits the evolutionary prediction quite well.” Wise and others have come up with various theories explaining how the flood could have produced such perfect order. Wise is refining a theory, for example, that the order reflects how far the animals lived from the shore, so those living farthest from the water show up last in the record. But they haven’t settled on anything yet.

“We have nothing to fear from data,” Ross told me. “If we’re afraid, it means we don’t trust God’s word.” The older generation of creationists “would come up with an explanation or a model and say, ‘This solves it!’ I’m a bit more cautious and at the same time more rigorous. We have lines of possibility that we continue to advance but at the same time we recognize that this is science, so the explanations are subject to change with new discoveries.”

Rock of Ages, Ages of Rock (Published 2007)

They may never persuade other scientists the earth is young, but creationist geologists are having an impact on other Christians.

www.nytimes.com

It's a healthy trend, I think.

 

[Truthfrees]

So here is a question I have yet to hear or read anyone adequately answer: if the universe is only 6,000 years old, then how could we observe a supernova that happened (in light years) over 160,000 years ago? Is God deceiving us about how old the universe is? Or are we misinterpreting Genesis 1?

1. the creation on the earth is 6000 years old - the bible doesn't talk about the universe at all

Genesis 1:1-5 says in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth became void

When God said LET THERE BE LIGHT that was the beginning of just our section of the universe

2. imo the dating methods used to make these claims are suspect - here's some articles that address the incorrect dating evolutionists use:

Search | Answers in Genesis

answersingenesis.org

Creation.com

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

A letter with questions regarding the age of the earth - IanJuby

Recently, while Dr. Carl Baugh was on a research trip, questions coming into the Creation Evidence Museum were being forwarded to me. One of them was an excellent letter from a Doctorate in Nuclear Physics. He had asked many pertinent questions which I often hear. So I thought I would post it...

ianjuby.org

 

[tdidymas]

1. the creation on the earth is 6000 years old - the bible doesn't talk about the universe at all

Genesis 1:1-5 says in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth became void

When God said LET THERE BE LIGHT that was the beginning of just our section of the universe

2. imo the dating methods used to make these claims are suspect - here's some articles that address the incorrect dating evolutionists use:

Search | Answers in Genesis

answersingenesis.org

Creation.com

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

A letter with questions regarding the age of the earth - IanJuby

Recently, while Dr. Carl Baugh was on a research trip, questions coming into the Creation Evidence Museum were being forwarded to me. One of them was an excellent letter from a Doctorate in Nuclear Physics. He had asked many pertinent questions which I often hear. So I thought I would post it...

ianjuby.org

When you say "the creation on the earth," I'd like to know how you define it. Are you talking about the Earth's geology, or only life on Earth?

It can be seen that in Gen. 1:2 that before anything else was created, the Earth existed, since it says "the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters" - I take this to mean the Earth already existed and was covered with water before the lands were formed higher than the oceans.

But then what do you do about the sun, moon, and stars created on the 4th day?

I'm not asking about dating methods, and I don't go for the "became void" idea (like there was some life or civilization prior to Adam and Eve, as I don't see that Gen 1 is written in that sense).
TD

 

[Truthfrees]

When you say "the creation on the earth," I'd like to know how you define it. Are you talking about the Earth's geology, or only life on Earth?

for sure the creation of light and life on the earth - possibly the earth too - gap theory says we are the 2nd creation on the earth - the first was destroyed and God started over with us - don't know enough about gap theory though

 

[Truthfrees]

It can be seen that in Gen. 1:2 that before anything else was created, the Earth existed, since it says "the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters" - I take this to mean the Earth already existed and was covered with water before the lands were formed higher than the oceans.

But then what do you do about the sun, moon, and stars created on the 4th day?

God is light - so when He said light be light appeared - (Revelation says God is the light in heaven not the sun or the moon) - the sun and moon were then created later to perhaps give a different light? - pretty cool though

 

[tdidymas]

for sure the creation of light and life on the earth - possibly the earth too - gap theory says we are the 2nd creation on the earth - the first was destroyed and God started over with us - don't know enough about gap theory though

I don't go for the gap theory then, as it looks like wild speculation to me. The closest I have come to it is a gap in time between v. 1 & 2 where the heavens & earth were created, and then the earth surface shape and life was formed later. I just don't go for the idea that there was a previous creation on earth that was destroyed. I just don't see it in scripture, as I think it takes a fertile imagination to make it say that. It certainly doesn't answer my question in any real sense.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

God is light - so when He said light be light appeared - (Revelation says God is the light in heaven not the sun or the moon) - the sun and moon were then created later to perhaps give a different light? - pretty cool though

I'm fairly certain that light exists in the spirit realm which is a different set of dimensions, and might not be the same kind of electromagnetic energy that exists in the physical realm. However, the text just doesn't say that the light emanates from God (as in "let there be light"), even though we can surmise that everything physical comes from God, since in Colossians it says that all things are held together by Him.

I guess I'd like to make a point now about the Bible not being a science text book. I think the main controversy is in the fact that many people are trying to make it that. Those who attempt to claim that Gen. 1 must be interpreted scientifically, and it has to fit in the western scientific paradigm, or else the foundations of Christianity is undermined, are the ones who are actually undermining the faith of many. I don't buy it.

So, back to the text, if we assume that Gen 1 creation process is scientifically sound, we can see that light existed prior to the sun, moon, and stars. But this of course assumes that "day" means a 24-hour period, since it also says "evening and morning." However, "day" for the first 3 days could not be what we know as evening and morning, because the sun and moon didn't even exist yet. Light has to somehow make an evening and morning by a supernatural miracle, rather than by natural means. So we have to surmise on how to interpret it, since exegesis isn't adequate to make sense of it scientifically.

There is something wrong with the picture. Can you see where I have a problem interpreting it from a scientific point of view? And this is why there are so many disagreements, because there are too many assumptions that have to be made outside of acceptable hermeneutical rules. This is why I have a problem with someone claiming that God created it mature 6000 years ago, as if it already existed for 13B years. There is something wrong with the picture.
TD

 

[Truthfrees]

I don't go for the gap theory then, as it looks like wild speculation to me. The closest I have come to it is a gap in time between v. 1 & 2 where the heavens & earth were created, and then the earth surface shape and life was formed later. I just don't go for the idea that there was a previous creation on earth that was destroyed. I just don't see it in scripture, as I think it takes a fertile imagination to make it say that. It certainly doesn't answer my question in any real sense.
TD

yes - i was recently given some info on gap - a billye brim video - still have questions about the things that weren't said in that video - iow what was said made sense but i have a lot of questions that weren't discussed

 

[Truthfrees]

I'm fairly certain that light exists in the spirit realm which is a different set of dimensions, and might not be the same kind of electromagnetic energy that exists in the physical realm. However, the text just doesn't say that the light emanates from God (as in "let there be light"), even though we can surmise that everything physical comes from God, since in Colossians it says that all things are held together by Him.

I guess I'd like to make a point now about the Bible not being a science text book. I think the main controversy is in the fact that many people are trying to make it that. Those who attempt to claim that Gen. 1 must be interpreted scientifically, and it has to fit in the western scientific paradigm, or else the foundations of Christianity is undermined, are the ones who are actually undermining the faith of many. I don't buy it.

So, back to the text, if we assume that Gen 1 creation process is scientifically sound, we can see that light existed prior to the sun, moon, and stars. But this of course assumes that "day" means a 24-hour period, since it also says "evening and morning." However, "day" for the first 3 days could not be what we know as evening and morning, because the sun and moon didn't even exist yet. Light has to somehow make an evening and morning by a supernatural miracle, rather than by natural means. So we have to surmise on how to interpret it, since exegesis isn't adequate to make sense of it scientifically.

There is something wrong with the picture. Can you see where I have a problem interpreting it from a scientific point of view? And this is why there are so many disagreements, because there are too many assumptions that have to be made outside of acceptable hermeneutical rules. This is why I have a problem with someone claiming that God created it mature 6000 years ago, as if it already existed for 13B years. There is something wrong with the picture.
TD

yes i can see what you are saying -

the hebrew for evening and morning really says light waning - light waxing - this exact same phrase is through Genesis 1 -

iow the way i see it scientifically is it is the exact same time span for the first 4 days as for the last 3 days and every day since then until the heavens and earth are rolled up like a scroll - then perhaps we go back to no time being kept