We can as well assume that the universe is outside of time.You answered your own question right here:
Precisely. God is outside of time, so the normal idea that everything that exists must have come from something doesn't apply to God.
So you don't believe that young earth creationists can be real scientists? Everything they say must be wrong then, huh?
They can be real scientists.
They can not support YEC with science because it was falsified several hundred years ago by religious men who had enough faith in their god to follow the evidence.
Post #134.
we are likely very near the centre of the universe filled with billions of galaxies with billions of stars in each. This is what Edwin Hubble concluded; his observations of the galaxies redshifts indicated to him that we are at the centre of a symmetric matter distribution. But Hubble rejected his own conclusionthat we are in a very special placeon philosophical grounds.2 And Hubble wasnt alone in realizing this situation:People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations, Ellis argues. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. Ellis has published a paper on this. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.3
Well, because time is obviously a part of the universe, so everything in this universe (which includes the universe itself) is subject to time. God is outside of the universe and so not necessarily subject to time.
The universe itself is not among the set of things "in the universe".Well, because time is obviously a part of the universe, so everything in this universe (which includes the universe itself) is subject to time. God is outside of the universe and so not necessarily subject to time.
So then the article I linked to might be true.
They can support YEC with science. They may not be able to prove YEC with science, but they can certainly support it. YEC is proven not with extra-biblical science, but with the science of theology.
The universe itself is not among the set of things "in the universe".
The universe (and possibly others) could be eternal, while the things within it exist in-time.
There's no good reason to exclude this possibility....(unless, of course, it conflicts with a cherished theological commitment).
I'm saying its possible, as far as we know.So are you saying that the things in the universe came into being, but the universe itself never came into being? Where'd the things in the universe come from, then?
I don't think so. Such a lake is not a necessary being like God would be. Rather, this lake is a contingent being. Hence the same argument cannot apply.
You answered your own question right here:
Precisely. God is outside of time, so the normal idea that everything that exists must have come from something doesn't apply to God.
So are you saying that the things in the universe came into being, but the universe itself never came into being? Where'd the things in the universe come from, then?
The expansion of our universe began 13.8 billion years ago, but whatever happened before then, if "before" even makes sense, is unknown to us.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?