Apparent Age Theory

[StJohnCalvin]

Here is a brief post concerning my position on origins.

1. I am a literalist when it comes to the account given in Genesis
2. Therefore, the earth and everything therein was created in exactly 6 days consisting of 24 hours each.
3. God made Adam and Eve to appear to be a certain age (specifically speaking of Adam and Eve, the age of which they could bear children)
4. God made all other things on the earth to appear to be a certain age
5. The universe was created in the same manner, as the account in Genesis states it.
6. Even though things appear to be millions if not billions of years old, they are in fact only at most 15,400 years old.

 

[KerrMetric]

Here is a brief post concerning my position on origins.

1. I am a literalist when it comes to the account given in Genesis
2. Therefore, the earth and everything therein was created in exactly 6 days consisting of 24 hours each.
3. God made Adam and Eve to appear to be a certain age (specifically speaking of Adam and Eve, the age of which they could bear children)
4. God made all other things on the earth to appear to be a certain age
5. The universe was created in the same manner, as the account in Genesis states it.
6. Even though things appear to be millions if not billions of years old, they are in fact only at most 15,400 years old.

As long as you don't try to justify points 5 and 6 as anything but supernatural phenomena and that we are being deceived then fine.

I have no problem with the all supernatural approach - I have a problem when some people want to twist science to reflect that.

 

[Willtor]

As long as you don't try to justify points 5 and 6 as anything but supernatural phenomena and that we are being deceived then fine.

I have no problem with the all supernatural approach - I have a problem when some people want to twist science to reflect that.

I actually don't think this would qualify as deception. I don't think it's correct, but I don't think it would be deception.

 

[ebia]

I actually don't think this would qualify as deception. I don't think it's correct, but I don't think it would be deception.

If God deliberately created a universe with billions of years of history that never happened how would that not be deceitful?

 

[Dannager]

Here is a brief post concerning my position on origins.

1. I am a literalist when it comes to the account given in Genesis
2. Therefore, the earth and everything therein was created in exactly 6 days consisting of 24 hours each.
3. God made Adam and Eve to appear to be a certain age (specifically speaking of Adam and Eve, the age of which they could bear children)
4. God made all other things on the earth to appear to be a certain age
5. The universe was created in the same manner, as the account in Genesis states it.
6. Even though things appear to be millions if not billions of years old, they are in fact only at most 15,400 years old.

That's cool. There's no problem with believing that, just like there's no problem with believing that God created the universe, as is, last Thursday and gave us all memories to reflect a lengthier past.

The problem comes when you try to restrict science. You see, science deals with the observable. When we observe that the Earth appears old, we make evaluations based on that fact. It allows us to make predictions about other things we may find and explore our history (not to mention make other, related scientific progress), whether or not that history actually took place or was instead fabricated. It doesn't matter to science. Science will always observe what it can and will not rely on any supernatural explanations.

 

[notto]

The earth has an appearance of history, not just an appearance of age.

Did God create Adam with a scar from when he skinned his knee when he was four?

Did the trees in the garden have scars from lightening strikes and insect damage?

IF what you say is true, then the earth and the universe have scars and evidence of a history of evens that never happened.

 

[chaoschristian]

Welcome to the Origins Theology Forum!

Your point #3 raised a question in my mind - a general, thinking out loud sort of question: if God created Adam and Eve to be of child-producing age, then technically they could have been 12, perhaps a little younger, but let's stick with 12.

All the art and images I've ever seen associated with the Garden and A&E (no, not the cable channel) depict them as adults.

Yet, in some regard, it makes more sense to think of them as children.

Hmmm, going to have to noodle on that one for awhile, even if there's no real way to answer it for sure.

Anyway, welcome to CF!

Here is a brief post concerning my position on origins.

1. I am a literalist when it comes to the account given in Genesis
2. Therefore, the earth and everything therein was created in exactly 6 days consisting of 24 hours each.
3. God made Adam and Eve to appear to be a certain age (specifically speaking of Adam and Eve, the age of which they could bear children)
4. God made all other things on the earth to appear to be a certain age
5. The universe was created in the same manner, as the account in Genesis states it.
6. Even though things appear to be millions if not billions of years old, they are in fact only at most 15,400 years old.

 

[The Lady Kate]

If God deliberately created a universe with billions of years of history that never happened how would that not be deceitful?

Precisely! Age is not just a number... it is a history.

You can cut down a tree and count its rings to learn its age... but the rings would reveal much more than that. God could create a tree with false rings... but that means a false history to go with it.

 

[depthdeception]

Here is a brief post concerning my position on origins.

1. I am a literalist when it comes to the account given in Genesis

What exactly do you mean by this? I interpret Genesis "literally" as well in that I think the word "day" has a reasonable correspondence to a general conception of "day." IOW, I don't think "day" is code for 24 precise hours or 1 billion years, etc.

However, even though I interpret the words literally, I am stilll an avid proponent of big bang cosmology and evolutionary theory. Why? Because I do not think the "literal" (referring to the meaning of the words) meaning of the Scriptures are attempting to tell us something scientific about the universe.

One must be extremely careful in how one uses language like this, especially in reference to the Scriptures. What is a "literal" meaning of this text is probably not the same to the modernistic/scientific paradigm of the contemporary reader as it was to the ancient writers.

2. Therefore, the earth and everything therein was created in exactly 6 days consisting of 24 hours each.

Is there anything within the text that would suggest an "exact" frame of reference? I don't think so. The Hebrew word for "day" is quite loose and amenable to a variety of experiences of time.

3. God made Adam and Eve to appear to be a certain age (specifically speaking of Adam and Eve, the age of which they could bear children)

Well, that is where the story in Genesis picks up. There is no textual reason to assume that they did not "begin" at a different age.

4. God made all other things on the earth to appear to be a certain age
5. The universe was created in the same manner, as the account in Genesis states it.

If you wish to believe this, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. However, you have effectively moved beyond the evidence of the texts which you claim as being normative for your understanding. The Genesis accounts do not state that the universe was created with an apparent or certain age. That is a inference which you are deriving from your hermeneutical approach. However, it is far from obvious in the text to someone who does not share your presuppositions.

6. Even though things appear to be millions if not billions of years old, they are in fact only at most 15,400 years old.

Again, there is nothing in the text (or in phenomological evidence, for that matter) upon which to base this. Hebrew geneaologies are far from attempts at precision. Therefore, assuming that Adam and Eve were the first humans and that they were created a few days after the beginning of all creation, the geneaologies may have huge gaps that do not account for innumerable generations. Again, your estimiate of "15,400 years" is assuming that the writers of Genesis are attempting to communicate a series of data that would conform to the modernistic/scientific criterion of historicity. Many would not make that assumption about the biblical writers.

 

[Willtor]

If God deliberately created a universe with billions of years of history that never happened how would that not be deceitful?

It would not be deceitful if God wanted to create a universe of immense size and allow us to appreciate its immensity. If God created the universe in 6 days, at its current size, we would have no knowledge of almost any of the stars in our galaxy (let alone the universe at large). But if God set the light to where it would have been if the universe had been ancient (red shift and all), then we would have the opportunity to appreciate the grandeur of what He made. Pockmarks in the Earth and the Moon would, similarly, be for aesthetic appeal.

I don't know how to deal with background radiation or radioactive decay. But I'm sure I could come up with something, given some time. Again, I don't agree with it. The more I attempt it, the more it looks like a, "how the zebra got its stripes," story. However, I don't think it necessarily implies deceitfulness on the part of God.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

this creation with apparent age has extraordinary philosophic problems.

google
"brains in a vat" "last thursdayism" or even "creation with apparent age" to see the extent of the discussion. the issue is labelled omphalos, so that is a good google search as well.

suffice it to say that this apparent age leads to solipism and looses the whole developmental process.

 

[depthdeception]

It would not be deceitful if God wanted to create a universe of immense size and allow us to appreciate its immensity. If God created the universe in 6 days, at its current size, we would have no knowledge of almost any of the stars in our galaxy (let alone the universe at large). But if God set the light to where it would have been if the universe had been ancient (red shift and all), then we would have the opportunity to appreciate the grandeur of what He made. Pockmarks in the Earth and the Moon would, similarly, be for aesthetic appeal.

This might be a crazy idea, but perhaps God didn't create the universe just for us to appreciate. Perhaps there is something inherently valuable to the whole of creation in God's mind. Again, I know it's crazy...

Seriously, though, this is one of the major problems I have with strict creationist ideas about the universe--they are entirely focused upon humanity and ignore the fact that creation itself has an inherent value apart from humanity.

 

[Willtor]

This might be a crazy idea, but perhaps God didn't create the universe just for us to appreciate. Perhaps there is something inherently valuable to the whole of creation in God's mind. Again, I know it's crazy...

Seriously, though, this is one of the major problems I have with strict creationist ideas about the universe--they are entirely focused upon humanity and ignore the fact that creation itself has an inherent value apart from humanity.

Yeah, again, I don't think it works on very many levels. But I also think it's not a question of God being deceitful. I'm always hesitant to draw conclusions along those lines for any view. It doesn't mean I don't, but that I'm hesitant to do so.

 

[ebia]

It would not be deceitful if God wanted to create a universe of immense size and allow us to appreciate its immensity. If God created the universe in 6 days, at its current size, we would have no knowledge of almost any of the stars in our galaxy (let alone the universe at large). But if God set the light to where it would have been if the universe had been ancient (red shift and all), then we would have the opportunity to appreciate the grandeur of what He made.

But that light from the stars (for example) tells us about a history that never happened. The pock marks on the moon tell us about the history of the moon. When we put together the bits we find a consistant story of history. If that history never happened I really don't see how you can say that writing it into the universe is anything other than deceitful.

 

[Willtor]

But that light from the stars (for example) tells us about a history that never happened. The pock marks on the moon tell us about the history of the moon. When we put together the bits we find a consistant story of history. If that history never happened I really don't see how you can say that writing it into the universe is anything other than deceitful.

These things only tell us about the past insofar as we ask them. Remember that for the near totality of human history, man has not asked these sorts of questions. It seems to me that if God didn't want us to ask scientific questions, but rather simply to appreciate things as they are, there would be no question in our minds of deceit.

 

[Dannager]

But again, the point is not whether or not the universe was created with apparent age. Frankly, that doesn't matter. Science will continue to explore the apparent history of the universe because that is the only thing that science can explore.

 

[gluadys]

Seriously, though, this is one of the major problems I have with strict creationist ideas about the universe--they are entirely focused upon humanity and ignore the fact that creation itself has an inherent value apart from humanity.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The material universe, including the earth, was created for Lucifer and the angels, perhaps billions of years (our time) ago.

It was an 'estate' and 'habitation' for the angels. It was Lucifer's 'Kingdom', or, 'merchandise'. God does not need a material kingdom. His is spirit, and superior to the material kingdom created for Lucifer.

When Lucifer rebelled, earth (and other astral bodies) were damaged in the battle and subsequent casting down of Lucifer/Satan. As Satan fell with an enormous burst of energy (as lightning) the earth's shell may have cracked like an egg, resulting in massive destruction, and drifting, fragmented land masses.

All terrestial life would have died, and the earth would have been in the condition described in Genesis 1:2.

God then restored the life support system: atmosphere, fertile earth, plant, animal, and sea life, before creating man, thus beginning His plan of restoring the order and dignity of his damaged kingdom: The restitution of all things.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

The material universe, including the earth, was created for Lucifer and the angels, perhaps billions of years (our time) ago.

It was an 'estate' and 'habitation' for the angels. It was Lucifer's 'Kingdom', or, 'merchandise'. God does not need a material kingdom. His is spirit, and superior to the material kingdom created for Lucifer.

When Lucifer rebelled, earth (and other astral bodies) were damaged in the battle and subsequent casting down of Lucifer/Satan. As Satan fell with an enormous burst of energy (as lightning) the earth's shell may have cracked like an egg, resulting in massive destruction, and drifting, fragmented land masses.

All terrestial life would have died, and the earth would have been in the condition described in Genesis 1:2.

God then restored the life support system: atmosphere, fertile earth, plant, animal, and sea life, before creating man, thus beginning His plan of restoring the order and dignity of his damaged kingdom: The restoration of all things.

i was wondering where the token GAP theorist was on this board. bet you have a Schofield Reference Bible on your desk *grin*.....

 

[ebia]

These things only tell us about the past insofar as we ask them. Remember that for the near totality of human history, man has not asked these sorts of questions.

On the contrary, man has always tried to make sense of these things. Until recently the particular tools we use were not available, but man has always tried to make sense of the world around us - curiousity and reason are part of the God given gift that makes us special.

It seems to me that if God didn't want us to ask scientific questions, but rather simply to appreciate things as they are, there would be no question in our minds of deceit.

Part of appreciating things is understanding them. We can now appreciate the size of complexity of the universe, but exactly that same understanding that tells us the size also tells us the age and something of the history. And it's the same curiousity that drives us to want to understand something of our creator.