How old is the earth?

[tonychanyt]

So, let's go back to Jesus and the wine. Are you saying that the wine experienced a different timeline for itself than it did for the observers?

The water molecules were instantaneously turned into wine molecules. The human observers witnessed water one moment, then wine, the next moment. For the water molecules, there was a discontinuity in space-time that was a miracle.

 

[Mercy Shown]

The water molecules were instantaneously turned into wine molecules. The human observers witnessed water one moment, then wine, the next moment. For the water molecules, there was a discontinuity in space-time that was a miracle.

Are you suggesting that time be stopped so the observers can make space for an alternate timeline for the wine?

 

[tonychanyt]

Are you suggesting that time be stopped so the observers can make space for an alternate timeline for the wine?

No.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Are you suggesting that time be stopped so the observers can make space for an alternate timeline for the wine?

 

[Mercy Shown]

No.

Then we have a paradox since the changing of the wine took x amount of time while the aging of the wine would have taken, let's say, 300x time. Both x and 300x time would have had to conclude simultaneously for the wine to be delivered to the steward. This would mean that no matter how we label it, the longer amount of time it takes for the wine to age would have to fit in the parameters of the time it took for the delivery.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Then we have a paradox since the changing of the wine took x amount of time while the aging of the wine would have taken, let's say, 300x time. Both x and 300x time would have had to conclude simultaneously for the wine to be delivered to the steward. This would mean that no matter how we label it, the longer amount of time it takes for the wine to age would have to fit in the parameters of the time it took for the delivery.

I think it kind of does matter "how we label it" so that we don't get into the problem of applying a mere speculation, or worse yet, a False Analogy that is then anachronistically applied to the Biblical Origins of the Earth and humanity in contrast to the Age of the Earth in more mainstream, scientific terms.

The label in Jesus' case where the meaning of the wine in Wedding at Cana is at issue should only be seen for what it was----a miracle.

 

[Mercy Shown]

I think it kind of does matter "how we label it" so that we don't get into the problem of applying a mere speculation, or worse yet, a False Analogy that is then anachronistically applied to the Biblical Origins of the Earth and humanity in contrast to the Age of the Earth in more mainstream, scientific terms.

The label in Jesus' case where the meaning of the wine in Wedding at Cana is at issue should only be seen for what it was----a miracle.

Yes. Either way, it was a miracle. In fact, the hidden symbolism is amazing. Jesus' mother got Him to do the miracle before He planned to go public. So, he presented the gospel in this miracle. He chose water pots reserved for ritual cleansing and turned the water contained in them into wine which represented His blood. His blood was really clean where, whereas the ritual water symbolized it.

 

[tonychanyt]

Then we have a paradox since the changing of the wine took x amount of time

in terms of witnessed-time, it was instantaneous

while the aging of the wine would have taken, let's say, 300x time.

in terms of space-time

Both x and 300x time would have had to conclude simultaneously for the wine to be delivered to the steward.

Right.

This would mean that no matter how we label it, the longer amount of time it takes for the wine to age would have to fit in the parameters of the time it took for the delivery.

You are having trouble distinguishing these two concepts of time. Are you familiar with the twin paradox of relativity?

 

[Mercy Shown]

in terms of witnessed-time, it was instantaneous


in terms of space-time


Right.


You are having trouble distinguishing these two concepts of time. Are you familiar with the twin paradox of relativity?

Yes, of course, but even if it were true, it can't account for two stationary objects in the same time and space. We would have to have Christ and the wedding party jettisoned into space at nearly the speed of light, at which time they would achieve nearly infinite mass while the wine sat placidly aging for three months.

 

[tonychanyt]

two stationary objects in the same time and space

What two objects?

 

[Mercy Shown]

What two objects?

The wine and the observers.

 

[tonychanyt]

The wine and the observers.

They occupied different space coordinates.

 

[Mercy Shown]

They occupied different space coordinates.

But to account for the time difference, one would have to be traveling near the speed of light while the other is stationary—unless you have a different theory of time than relativity.

 

[SuperCow]

The water to wine story is not an example of time dilation, and none of the miracles in the Bible have a relativistic answer to them. The possible exceptions are Psalm 90:4/2 Peter 3:8 which might be a frame of reference analogy, the creation story in Genesis 1, and Joshua's battle in Joshua 10:12-14. (Possibly 2 Kings 20:8-11)

Having said that, there's no way to know the mechanism for how God performs miracles. If we could explain them, then they wouldn't be miracles, only science.

Aging water for three months does not make wine, any more than a time shift can turn water into blood, which is the closest comparison elsewhere in the Bible to this miracle. In Exodus, Moses uses God's power to turn all the water in Egypt to blood. Millions of gallons of water containing fish and frogs (apparently lots of them) does not go into another time reference to change itself. God does it, whether it was instantaneous or whether it took some finite amount of time to our reference is irrelevant. Moses presence was incidental. He was just a messenger. Jesus through God just confirmed that God's power to manipulate things at a molecular level is absolute.

When he needs to change matter, he can. Arguing about whether you can attribute it to relativity is silly.

 

[tonychanyt]

But to account for the time difference, one would have to be traveling near the speed of light while the other is stationary—unless you have a different theory of time than relativity.

Do you believe that Jesus changed water into wine?

 

[Mercy Shown]

Do you believe that Jesus changed water into wine?

Yes, but my personal view is it did not require any time shifting. It was more like molecular manipulation. But your theory is as good as mine.

 

[tonychanyt]

Yes, but my personal view is it did not require any time shifting.

Right.

It was more like molecular manipulation.

Right.

But your theory is as good as mine.

What is my theory?

 

[Mercy Shown]

Right.

Right.

What is my theory?

Differing time coordinates. But that would require significantly differing speeds or differing gravitational fields.

 

[tonychanyt]

Differing time coordinates.

Can you quote where I assert that?

 

[Mercy Shown]

Can you quote where I assert that?

Sorry, my mistake. You posted different space coordinates. But excluding science fiction . There would still need to be differing speeds at a significant rate or differing gravitational fields. This seems like a lot of fuss when God can simply manipulate molecules.