Fully Mature Universe

[Mark Quayle]

It doesn't follow when we consider how light travels. Sure, Yahweh could have created a fully mature universe with stars millions of light years away, but that doesn't explain the fact that it still indicates the distance of its journey.

Nor does it prove that he could not have done it just as @PastorKeith described. Seems to me you are being inconsistent here. You are singling out one principle of nature to counter what he said, yet accepting all the other ones that would seem to counter what he said.

But, regardless, God is more than capable of arranging photons moving at the speed of light in strings 15 billion light years long, in a single instant. Particularly, this should seem to me obvious that he can do so if he is not only the very source of those photons, but their very sustenance. Immanence.

 

[Lost4words]

I used to believe in an old earth but these days i tend to lean towards a young earth.

 

[Jonaitis]

But, regardless, God is more than capable of arranging photons moving at the speed of light in strings 15 billion light years long, in a single instant. Particularly, this should seem to me obvious that he can do so if he is not only the very source of those photons, but their very sustenance. Immanence.

I'm sorry, but that would seem very deceptive on the part of Yahweh to arrange it in such a way that observable science would interpret it wrong. Make the universe young while observing it as if it is mature? It seems like we are only accepting anything if it fits our worldview, but create our own roundabout when it contradicts it.

 

[Jonaitis]

The entire book of Genesis is a historical account, what are you talking about?

You will be surprised to find many various Mesopotamian motifs found in much of the stories of the Torah, including Genesis. This doesn't mean it isn't God's word, but not everything is historical. God can teach his truth through fiction.

I suggest reading Sargon's birth myth and Moses' birth account. It may be a fact that Moses isn't a historical figure, but a representation of the Torah.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I'm sorry, but that would seem very deceptive on the part of Yahweh to arrange it in such a way that observable science would interpret it wrong. Make the universe young while observing it as if it is mature? It seems like we are only accepting anything if it fits our worldview, but create our own roundabout when it contradicts it.

How is that "observable science....interpret[ing] it wrong"? They may well be right. That does not preclude God doing it "in an instant" (saying it from human limited ignorant terminology). As I have said, "Here we are, writing stories and movies about time travel and configuring theories about us manipulating time, yet we can't allow God, the 'inventor' of time, to do as he pleases with what he made???" Even modern cosmology is playing with theories about all time being concurrent, and dependent on this or that, relative to that or this, and all sorts of hyper-real or metaphysical sounding structures, as though observation is causal of fact. Why not God's causation, subject to his will alone. In the end, Time is not subject to anything but God himself.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I'm sorry, but that would seem very deceptive on the part of Yahweh to arrange it in such a way that observable science would interpret it wrong. Make the universe young while observing it as if it is mature? It seems like we are only accepting anything if it fits our worldview, but create our own roundabout when it contradicts it.

How is that "observable science....interpret[ing] it wrong"? They may well be right. That does not preclude God doing it "in an instant" (saying it from human limited ignorant terminology. As I have said, "Here we are, writing stories and movies about time travel and configuring theories about us manipulating time, yet we can't allow God, the 'inventor' of time, to do as he pleases with what he made???" Even modern cosmology is playing with theories about all time being concurrent, and dependent on this or that, relative to that or this, and all sorts of hyper-real or metaphysical sounding structures, as though observation is causal of fact. Why not God's causation, subject to his will alone. In the end, Time is not subject to anything but God himself.

 

[PastorKeith]

You will be surprised to find many various Mesopotamian motifs found in much of the stories of the Torah, including Genesis. This doesn't mean it isn't God's word, but not everything is historical. God can teach his truth through fiction.

I suggest reading Sargon's birth myth and Moses' birth account. It may be a fact that Moses isn't a historical figure, but a representation of the Torah.

If you think Moses was a myth, we live in different realities, so why are we debating?

 

[Jonaitis]

How is that "observable science....interpret[ing] it wrong"? They may well be right. That does not preclude God doing it "in an instant" (saying it from human limited ignorant terminology). As I have said, "Here we are, writing stories and movies about time travel and configuring theories about us manipulating time, yet we can't allow God, the 'inventor' of time, to do as he pleases with what he made???" Even modern cosmology is playing with theories about all time being concurrent, and dependent on this or that, relative to that or this, and all sorts of hyper-real or metaphysical sounding structures, as though observation is causal of fact. Why not God's causation, subject to his will alone. In the end, Time is not subject to anything but God himself.

I don't underestimate God's ability to do such things, but there are observable objective realities that do not align with outdated biblical interpretations. The idea that the universe is relatively old is not something debatable in the modern era. We have concrete evidence in various fields that indicate that the universe cannot be, in fact, young, at least in the way semi-traditional views have provided for a time.

We know that light travels at about 168,000 miles a second, that alone gives us an idea of what we are observing and when in the vastness and far reaches of space. It may seem like the whole community of scientific theories are out to prove an interpretation of a religious view wrong, but this is definitely not the case. It is honest approaches to figure out what is happening around us without a bias lens.

Respected men throughout history, and sadly, men like Martin Luther, have stood against views we now know is concrete fact. Martin Luther figured that Nicolaus Copernicus was overthrowing the Scriptures when he discovered that the Earth orbits the Sun, and made many condemning statements about his character and intentions.

 

[Jonaitis]

If you think Moses was a myth, we live in different realities, so why are we debating?

If you think a person named Moses literally wrote Genesis, then you need to research more about the character.

 

[PastorKeith]

If you think a person named Moses literally wrote Genesis, then you need to research more about the character.

Yes, I am a Christian. Why you are on a Christian forum is beyond me, but it is clear you do not believe the Bible is the Word of God.

 

[Platte]

I believe the Sabbath rest of the law is a mere shadow per Hebrews. The book speaks of the rest of God as not a day (24 hours) but the rest of an inheritance. Which the law also testifies to.

Ex 33:14 And he said, My presence shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest.

De 12:9 For ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which the LORD your God giveth you.
De 12:10 But when ye go over Jordan, and dwell in the land which the LORD your God giveth you to inherit, and when he giveth you rest from all your enemies round about, so that ye dwell in safety;
De 25:19 Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it,
Which rest was in Joshua ( Jesus in Hebrews)
Jos 22:4 And now the LORD your God hath given rest unto your brethren, as he promised them: therefore now return ye, and get you unto your tents, and unto the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of the LORD gave you on the other side Jordan.

Heb 3:16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
1 ¶ Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. {the word … : Gr. the word of hearing } {not being … : or, because they were not united by faith to }
3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

So the Sabbath day was to provide man a day of rest from their hard work necessary to support the family. Modeled after Gods day of rest from his work of Creation.

I don’t see any tie in to the Sabbath day and any of the verses you quoted. And from what I could tell none of them mentioned rest from your work but rather rest from troubles in life.

The Sabbath day of rest is certainly not the only rest God provides for us but the particular rest is a 24 hour day of rest from our work (and a day to thank God and worship Him)

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't underestimate God's ability to do such things, but there are observable objective realities that do not align with outdated biblical interpretations. The idea that the universe is relatively old is not something debatable in the modern era. We have concrete evidence in various fields that indicate that the universe cannot be, in fact, young, at least in the way semi-traditional views have provided for a time.

We know that light travels at about 168,000 miles a second, that alone gives us an idea of what we are observing and when in the vastness and far reaches of space. It may seem like the whole community of scientific theories are out to prove an interpretation of a religious view wrong, but this is definitely not the case. It is honest approaches to figure out what is happening around us without a bias lens.

Respected men throughout history, and sadly, men like Martin Luther, have stood against views we now know is concrete fact. Martin Luther figured that Nicolaus Copernicus was overthrowing the Scriptures when he discovered that the Earth orbits the Sun, and made many condemning statements about his character and intentions.

I don't think you get my point. It doesn't matter that supposedly concrete evidence calls for an old earth. God can make both old and young earth absolutely true, but from differing points of view, cosmologically. Time is not absolute, according to even the supposed concrete evidence. It DEPENDS.

 

[Platte]

I'm sorry, but that would seem very deceptive on the part of Yahweh to arrange it in such a way that observable science would interpret it wrong. Make the universe young while observing it as if it is mature? It seems like we are only accepting anything if it fits our worldview, but create our own roundabout when it contradicts it.

Jonaitis: I did want to add this to your comment.

You mentioned God's Creation 6000 years ago - yet created with Age would be deceptive (to Science). I did want to note that everthing God created at Creation was created with age...whether Adam, the mature animals created, the tall trees, grass...and the universe itself..All were created at the functional age necessary.

God made sure there was nothing deceptive about it by Giving us an account of Creation - that included Creation was approx 6000 years ago - and took 6, 24hours days to complete.

Science is not stating when Creation occured but it does try to provide an age for things. Science gets to actually estimate how old things were at Creation. The DECEPTION is you thinking Science is telling us when things were created - ITS NOT...its telling us how old things are (when they were created).

Also - I keep seeing comments on the speed of light and stars. Please can everyone stop with the speed of light - since we don't know what the speed of light for stars is (since it would be the one way speed of light - which is unknown since we cannot test it).

 

[Jonaitis]

Yes, I am a Christian. Why you are on a Christian forum is beyond me, but it is clear you do not believe the Bible is the Word of God.

Why, because I hold to a different view than you?

 

[Jonaitis]

I don't think you get my point. It doesn't matter that supposedly concrete evidence calls for an old earth. God can make both old and young earth absolutely true, but from differing points of view, cosmologically. Time is not absolute, according to even the supposed concrete evidence. It DEPENDS.

If we discuss the nature of time, then it further confuses what you're trying to convey. It is more relative than most people understand, and for all we know, it may point to a beginningless existence where God is in a cycle of creation and destruction.

 

[Jonaitis]

Jonaitis: I did want to add this to your comment.

You mentioned God's Creation 6000 years ago - yet created with Age would be deceptive (to Science). I did want to note that everthing God created at Creation was created with age...whether Adam, the mature animals created, the tall trees, grass...and the universe itself..All were created at the functional age necessary.

I understand the perspective, but it doesn't explain the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, stellar evolution, radioactive decay, and expansion rate of spacetime that we are observing. It isn't like the universe is fully developed, we are still seeing maturity happening and this gives us a measure of how far all of this has been.

God made sure there was nothing deceptive about it by Giving us an account of Creation - that included Creation was approx 6000 years ago - and took 6, 24hours days to complete.

The problem with 24-hours is that it is only relative to Earth with its distance from, position with, and orbit around the Sun. Furthermore, what about time-dilation? Or the fact that the influence of mass distorts time; time moves faster the further you are from the mass of a celestial object. This was tested and proven true. If you leave a clock in the International Space Station and a clock on Earth, the former will be faster than the latter. This means time is relative.

Also - I keep seeing comments on the speed of light and stars. Please can everyone stop with the speed of light - since we don't know what the speed of light for stars is (since it would be the one way speed of light - which is unknown since we cannot test it).

The speed of light is constant. It does not change...whether it is from a flashlight or a star. This is why it is mentioned, because we can measure how far a star is and how long the journey of the protons it took for us to see it. In other words, this is a useful tool in seeing an old universe.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Jonaitis: I did want to add this to your comment.

You mentioned God's Creation 6000 years ago - yet created with Age would be deceptive (to Science). I did want to note that everthing God created at Creation was created with age...whether Adam, the mature animals created, the tall trees, grass...and the universe itself..All were created at the functional age necessary.

God made sure there was nothing deceptive about it by Giving us an account of Creation - that included Creation was approx 6000 years ago - and took 6, 24hours days to complete.

Science is not stating when Creation occured but it does try to provide an age for things. Science gets to actually estimate how old things were at Creation. The DECEPTION is you thinking Science is telling us when things were created - ITS NOT...its telling us how old things are (when they were created).

Also - I keep seeing comments on the speed of light and stars. Please can everyone stop with the speed of light - since we don't know what the speed of light for stars is (since it would be the one way speed of light - which is unknown since we cannot test it).

I have yet to hear where is this static point by which speed of light is compared.

 

[Mark Quayle]

If we discuss the nature of time, then it further confuses what you're trying to convey. It is more relative than most people understand, and for all we know, it may point to a beginningless existence where God is in a cycle of creation and destruction.

Hardly. That would imply things the Bible does not say nor imply, but speaks throughout in ways that would not include such notions. It may point those who don't know God in such directions, but that is not what the relativity of time actually suggests, if time is truly relative.

 

[ralliann]

So the Sabbath day was to provide man a day of rest from their hard work necessary to support the family.

Ageed.....
Ex 16:23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

Modeled after Gods day of rest from his work of Creation.

For Shadow as most things in the law were.

Heb 4:7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. {Jesus: that is, Joshua }
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. {rest: or, keeping of a sabbath }
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11 ¶ Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

I don’t see any tie in to the Sabbath day and any of the verses you quoted. And from what I could tell none of them mentioned rest from your work but rather rest from troubles in life.

Do you believe God built the heavenly tabernacle in the beginning? He showed Moses the pattern.
Do you believe Jesus was the lamb slain from the foundation pf the world?


Ps 132:11 ¶ The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. {body: Heb. belly }
12 If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore.
13 For the LORD hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation.
14 This is my rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.

 

[Platte]

I understand the perspective, but it doesn't explain the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, stellar evolution, radioactive decay, and expansion rate of spacetime that we are observing. It isn't like the universe is fully developed, we are still seeing maturity happening and this gives us a measure of how far all of this has been.

Yes exactly. Just like Adam was and just like the animals and trees and everything else. Everything has I’ll call a model of life - and whatever point in that model that they were created they continue on that model point moving forward. The trees continued to grow. The model of the universe, what ever that is - science may have a good model - the universe continues from the point in that model God created it….basically how it is now

The problem with 24-hours is that it is only relative to Earth with its distance from, position with, and orbit around the Sun. Furthermore, what about time-dilation? Or the fact that the influence of mass distorts time; time moves faster the further you are from the mass of a celestial object. This was tested and proven true. If you leave a clock in the International Space Station and a clock on Earth, the former will be faster than the latter. This means time is relative.

A day has nothing to do with orbit around the sun. It based only on the rotation of the earth. God said it took him 6 days. He characterized a day a 24 hour period. He repeated it took 6 days and gave us a day 24 hours the Sabbath. It was a day based on 1 rotation as it is today. An evening and a morning. There is NOTHING in the Bible that suggests Creation was anything other than 6 24 hour days. I’ll believe Moses like Jesus said we should.

The speed of light is constant. It does not change...whether it is from a flashlight or a star. This is why it is mentioned, because we can measure how far a star is and how long the journey of the protons it took for us to see it. In other words, this is a useful tool in seeing an old universe.

We do not know what the speed of light is going 1 way. We only know what the 2 way speed of light is. Light bouncing off an object and returning. We do not know the speed of light just getting to that object. That is a fact and without dispute. Now is it logical to assume it’s the same - sure. But that is an assumption - a good one I’m sure - but you can’t use an assumption as an argument against Creation.