Thermodynamics Suggests Creation

[Tree of Life]

I may be posting this in the wrong place. I don't know if it belongs here or in Christian Apologetics. Either way, I believe the subject is both scientific and apologetical.

Let me first say that I am not a physicist nor a scientist. I'm a theologian. So I'm very much a pedestrian when it comes to scientific matters. But from what I understand of thermodynamics (which is not a lot), it appears to me to suggest creation.

By "creation", I mean the idea that the material world had a beginning and that matter and energy are not eternal. Philosophically speaking, either the material world had a beginning and something outside of the material brought it into being (creation) OR the material world is eternal (materialism).

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The second law of thermodynamics is basically the notion of entropy - that the physical universe is tending toward a heat sameness and will ultimately result in a heat death. Currently, energy is concentrated in particular locales in the universe (stars, for example). But the trend is toward this energy being dispersed equivocally to every locale, resulting in a "heat death".

So if new energy cannot be created and all energy is currently being dispersed, the material world cannot be eternal. If it were eternal, then "heat death" would have occurred a long time ago. This suggests that the material world had a beginning, which is the same thing as suggesting creation.

 

[Halbhh]

The expectation that this Universe had a distinct beginning point in time is the mainstream widely accepted idea in cosmology, and this isn't likely to convince a non believer of anything one way or the other regarding God. It would not have convinced me. Though it temporarily convinced me against God as I for a time wrongly thought the young Earth creationism (as unlike other creationists views in which the Universe and Earth are old) was the essentially Christian view. For a time realizing the Universe began billions of years back seemed to mean the Bible was false. But in time I read Genesis early chapters with my own eyes, myself, and much more carefully than most seem to, and realized that young Earth notion isn't even in the text anywhere, but just an viewpoint of some. But what really helped me come to faith was instead reading the things Christ said! (like Romans 10:17) See, if you want real proof, think carefully on the outcome if most all people in the world did such as this: "love your neighbor as yourself" -- what would happen.

 

[sdowney717]

The expectation that this Universe had a distinct beginning point in time is the mainstream widely accepted idea in cosmology, and this isn't likely to convince a non believer of anything one way or the other regarding God. It would not have convinced me. Though it temporarily convinced me against God as I for a time wrongly thought the young Earth creationism (as unlike other creationists views in which the Universe and Earth are old) was the essentially Christian view. For a time realizing the Universe began billions of years back seemed to mean the Bible was false. But in time I read Genesis early chapters with my own eyes, myself, and much more carefully than most seem to, and realized that young Earth notion isn't even in the text anywhere, but just an viewpoint of some. But what really helped me come to faith was instead reading the things Christ said! (like Romans 10:17) See, if you want real proof, think carefully on the outcome if most all people in the world did such as this: "love your neighbor as yourself" -- what would happen.

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

The gap theory assumes a ruined earlier creation due to the fall of Lucifer - Satan and perhaps a heavenly warfare from eons older than the 6 days of creation. I suppose this could go either way, but I view the literal 6 days of creation as the beginning of all created things. God would have created the earth as it is, and it could have seemed older. Adam was not created a child, he was created as a mature adult, so then with the earth.

This verse confirms the seriousness of the 6 days of creation and the seventh day of rest.

Exodus 31:15 Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

 

[Nithavela]

I may be posting this in the wrong place. I don't know if it belongs here or in Christian Apologetics. Either way, I believe the subject is both scientific and apologetical.

Let me first say that I am not a physicist nor a scientist. I'm a theologian. So I'm very much a pedestrian when it comes to scientific matters. But from what I understand of thermodynamics (which is not a lot), it appears to me to suggest creation.

By "creation", I mean the idea that the material world had a beginning and that matter and energy are not eternal. Philosophically speaking, either the material world had a beginning and something outside of the material brought it into being (creation) OR the material world is eternal (materialism).

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The second law of thermodynamics is basically the notion of entropy - that the physical universe is tending toward a heat sameness and will ultimately result in a heat death. Currently, energy is concentrated in particular locales in the universe (stars, for example). But the trend is toward this energy being dispersed equivocally to every locale, resulting in a "heat death".

So if new energy cannot be created and all energy is currently being dispersed, the material world cannot be eternal. If it were eternal, then "heat death" would have occurred a long time ago. This suggests that the material world had a beginning, which is the same thing as suggesting creation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

 

[mark kennedy]

I may be posting this in the wrong place. I don't know if it belongs here or in Christian Apologetics. Either way, I believe the subject is both scientific and apologetical.

Let me first say that I am not a physicist nor a scientist. I'm a theologian. So I'm very much a pedestrian when it comes to scientific matters. But from what I understand of thermodynamics (which is not a lot), it appears to me to suggest creation.

By "creation", I mean the idea that the material world had a beginning and that matter and energy are not eternal. Philosophically speaking, either the material world had a beginning and something outside of the material brought it into being (creation) OR the material world is eternal (materialism).

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The second law of thermodynamics is basically the notion of entropy - that the physical universe is tending toward a heat sameness and will ultimately result in a heat death. Currently, energy is concentrated in particular locales in the universe (stars, for example). But the trend is toward this energy being dispersed equivocally to every locale, resulting in a "heat death".

So if new energy cannot be created and all energy is currently being dispersed, the material world cannot be eternal. If it were eternal, then "heat death" would have occurred a long time ago. This suggests that the material world had a beginning, which is the same thing as suggesting creation.

That's really a new argument, I've just never heard it presented quite like that. Some has already beat me to it but the universe had a beginning, the big bang. Basically the universe is expanding so you project that back in a scientific theory, there's you Big Bang. The second law of thermodynamics has long been used effectively, it's almost as good as abiogenisis probability arguments.

 

[Halbhh]

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

The gap theory assumes a ruined earlier creation due to the fall of Lucifer - Satan and perhaps a heavenly warfare from eons older than the 6 days of creation. I suppose this could go either way, but I view the literal 6 days of creation as the beginning of all created things. God would have created the earth as it is, and it could have seemed older. Adam was not created a child, he was created as a mature adult, so then with the earth.

This verse confirms the seriousness of the 6 days of creation and the seventh day of rest.

Exodus 31:15 Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

The Exodus wording is like the Genesis wording, though more brief. A more pertinent and important question for believers of course is not going to be whether God created -- He created all that is -- or how He did (as He didn't give chemistry or geology or other trivial details), but the actually meaningful question of how we have any version of the sabbath now. That would actually be useful to believers, about the question of whether there should be a period of rest and focus on God each week, whether it can be split into hours over several days and such.

 

[sdowney717]

The Exodus wording is like the Genesis wording, though more brief. A more pertinent and important question for believers of course is not going to be whether God created -- He created all that is -- or how He did (as He didn't give chemistry or geology or other trivial details), but the actually meaningful question of how we have any version of the sabbath now. That would actually be useful to believers, about the question of whether there should be a period of rest and focus on God each week, whether it can be split into hours over several days and such.

The reason was given as a pattern for man to follow, for God worked 6 days creating the heavens and the earth and rested on the 7th day.
This was the commandment for the old covenant.
The new covenant, we are not under this commandment of death for working on the sabbath day, although it was a very good idea back then and still today to give people to lay off working at least one day a week.
Recall Christ said the sabbath was MADE FOR MAN, not man for the sabbath. God could have done His acts of creation in one day or one second, but MAN was important to God, the earth God created to be inhabited by MAN.

 

[Halbhh]

The reason was given as a pattern for man to follow, for God worked 6 days creating the heavens and the earth and rested on the 7th day.
This was the commandment for the old covenant.
The new covenant, we are not under this commandment of death for working on the sabbath day, although it was a very good idea back then and still today to give people to lay off working at least one day a week.
Recall Christ said the sabbath was MADE FOR MAN, not man for the sabbath. God could have done His acts of creation in one day or one second, but MAN was important to God, the earth God created to be inhabited by MAN.

Do you think it's fine for believers to have no days a week in which they rest all day? Is it good enough to have some rest scattered here and there through the week? I'm asking because it's really meaningful, and also your passage quote brings it up forcefully. Practically can we love one another well if we don't have such concentrated rest? We know we need some, but what about having a day of rest, an isolated day. Perhaps this belongs in another thread.

 

[redleghunter]

I may be posting this in the wrong place. I don't know if it belongs here or in Christian Apologetics. Either way, I believe the subject is both scientific and apologetical.

Let me first say that I am not a physicist nor a scientist. I'm a theologian. So I'm very much a pedestrian when it comes to scientific matters. But from what I understand of thermodynamics (which is not a lot), it appears to me to suggest creation.

By "creation", I mean the idea that the material world had a beginning and that matter and energy are not eternal. Philosophically speaking, either the material world had a beginning and something outside of the material brought it into being (creation) OR the material world is eternal (materialism).

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The second law of thermodynamics is basically the notion of entropy - that the physical universe is tending toward a heat sameness and will ultimately result in a heat death. Currently, energy is concentrated in particular locales in the universe (stars, for example). But the trend is toward this energy being dispersed equivocally to every locale, resulting in a "heat death".

So if new energy cannot be created and all energy is currently being dispersed, the material world cannot be eternal. If it were eternal, then "heat death" would have occurred a long time ago. This suggests that the material world had a beginning, which is the same thing as suggesting creation.

Thanks for the OP. I believe you have this thread in the proper place as you are discussing feasibilities instead of rote philosophical or theological positions. As some have mentioned, the prevailing cosmological view is "Big Bang" since I believe the mid 20th century. Therefore, that prevailing view is in fact the universe had a beginning and is not an eternal loop of universes propagating themselves.

 

[sdowney717]

Do you think it's fine for believers to have no days a week in which they rest all day? Is it good enough to have some rest scattered here and there through the week? I'm asking because it's really meaningful, and also your passage quote brings it up forcefully. Practically can we love one another well if we don't have such concentrated rest? We know we need some, but what about having a day of rest, an isolated day. Perhaps this belongs in another thread.

Even on Sunday, I do things, and during the week I take naps.
The OC, if a person was gathering sticks on the sabbath, they were to be stoned....
It is today not required to be so.

Exodus 35:2
Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh day shall be a holy day for you, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

Leviticus 19:30
‘You shall keep My Sabbaths and reverence My sanctuary: I am the Lord.
Leviticus 23:3
[ The Sabbath ] ‘Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work on it; it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings.

6 days to create all things, and the seventh day to rest, was enforced in the OC, violation punished by death, so this was a serious commandment of the Lord to His people.

 

[Tree of Life]

The expectation that this Universe had a distinct beginning point in time is the mainstream widely accepted idea in cosmology, and this isn't likely to convince a non believer of anything one way or the other regarding God. It would not have convinced me. Though it temporarily convinced me against God as I for a time wrongly thought the young Earth creationism (as unlike other creationists views in which the Universe and Earth are old) was the essentially Christian view. For a time realizing the Universe began billions of years back seemed to mean the Bible was false. But in time I read Genesis early chapters with my own eyes, myself, and much more carefully than most seem to, and realized that young Earth notion isn't even in the text anywhere, but just an viewpoint of some. But what really helped me come to faith was instead reading the things Christ said! (like Romans 10:17) See, if you want real proof, think carefully on the outcome if most all people in the world did such as this: "love your neighbor as yourself" -- what would happen.

The reality of creation does not necessarily imply God as we understand Him in the Christian faith. It simply means that the material was brought into existence by something outside of the material.

 

[Tree of Life]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

Would Big Bang proponents suggest that matter and energy are eternal?

 

[Strathos]

No mainstream scientists adhere to the steady state theory anymore anyway.

 

[mark kennedy]

Would Big Bang proponents suggest that matter and energy are eternal?

No, some of the ancient Greeks known as atomists, if memory serves did but since the Big Bang theory I don't think it's been entertained.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I may be posting this in the wrong place. I don't know if it belongs here or in Christian Apologetics. Either way, I believe the subject is both scientific and apologetical.

Let me first say that I am not a physicist nor a scientist. I'm a theologian. So I'm very much a pedestrian when it comes to scientific matters. But from what I understand of thermodynamics (which is not a lot), it appears to me to suggest creation.

By "creation", I mean the idea that the material world had a beginning and that matter and energy are not eternal. Philosophically speaking, either the material world had a beginning and something outside of the material brought it into being (creation) OR the material world is eternal (materialism).

The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The second law of thermodynamics is basically the notion of entropy - that the physical universe is tending toward a heat sameness and will ultimately result in a heat death. Currently, energy is concentrated in particular locales in the universe (stars, for example). But the trend is toward this energy being dispersed equivocally to every locale, resulting in a "heat death".

So if new energy cannot be created and all energy is currently being dispersed, the material world cannot be eternal. If it were eternal, then "heat death" would have occurred a long time ago. This suggests that the material world had a beginning, which is the same thing as suggesting creation.

That's why a priest proposed the Big Bang that they follow religiously..... Big Bangers are more dogmatic than creationists.....

 

[tas8831]

That's why a priest proposed the Big Bang that they follow religiously..... Big Bangers are more dogmatic than creationists.....

Perhaps because there is actually some evidence FOR the BB and none for creationism?

 

[FireDragon76]

Would Big Bang proponents suggest that matter and energy are eternal?

No.

 

[Tree of Life]

Perhaps because there is actually some evidence FOR the BB and none for creationism?

The concept of "creation" that we're dealing with here is simply the notion that the material came from something non-material. Do Big Bang folks think that matter is eternal?

 

[Tree of Life]

No.

If matter and energy are not eternal, then creation must be true. The material exists now but it has not always existed. It therefore arose from something non-material.

 

[FireDragon76]

The reality of creation does not necessarily imply God as we understand Him in the Christian faith. It simply means that the material was brought into existence by something outside of the material.

We actually know as a fact that matter is not eternal, however there is still a great deal of scientific speculation about the early universe and its origins. Research on the LHC in Europe seems to suggest the universe being more "fine-tuned", vs. theories that suggest multiverses or that the universe exists the way it does by random chance.