YEC, is the universe expanding?

[ivebeenshown]

Has the exclusion of the book of 2Maccabees been accepted since before Jesus?

Just like I'm studying all of this through discussion with you fine folks... I had previously stated I studied that book.

I'm afraid I will withdraw from our discussions in this field, at least for the time being. I think it is very evident I can not be persuaded into believing that my all-powerful Lord would not be able to create the world in six days and I have other matters to tend to.

 

[Mr Dave]

Just like I'm studying all of this through discussion with you fine folks... I had previously stated I studied that book.

I'm afraid I will withdraw from our discussions in this field, at least for the time being. I think it is very evident I can not be persuaded into believing that my all-powerful Lord would not be able to create the world in six days and I have other matters to tend to.

No-one's denying God's ability to do this. We're disputing whether this is actually how He did it. There's a difference.

 

[de_skudd]

Genesis is written that way (as literal), and that is undeniable. If someone want to make it metaphorical, they are disregarding the plain rendering of the text. That is the real difference.

 

[Assyrian]

Genesis is written that way (as literal), and that is undeniable.

Clearly not, when so many people here deny it

If someone want to make it metaphorical, they are disregarding the plain rendering of the text. That is the real difference.

No one is denying what the plain meaning of the text is, the question is whether it was meant literally or metaphorically.

Gen 49:9 Judah is a lion's cub; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He stooped down; he crouched as a lion and as a lioness; who dares rouse him? Look at the plain meaning of the text; it say that Judah is a young lion, panthera leo. That is the literal meaning of the text. But that is not what the passage means. The text wasn't meant to be taken literally. It is a metaphor. Interpreting the passage metaphorically isn't disregarding the plain rendering of the text. It is taking the plain meaning and trying to understand how we are to interpret it, to understand what sense the plain text was meant.


Oh and welcome to the forum de_skudd.

 

[Wolvrin704]

I read somewhere recently that an explanation of the seeming old age of the universe is that time, which we use to measure such things, is not constant. I guess that could lead into the question of when did time begin?

 

[98cwitr]

no, the speed of light is constant, so constant that mathematical time adjusts to fit the consistency of the SoL.

 

[de_skudd]

Clearly not, when so many people here deny it

I said "undeniable", not that you cannot be in "denial". It is written as literal, regardless of some being in "denial".

Oh and welcome to the forum de_skudd.

Why, thank you

 

[Jase]

God is all-powerful.

Correction - God is most powerful. He can't defy logic.

 

[Jase]

No, it is not that I have more trust than you. I am saying I trust him OVER you.

1) What makes you think Jesus was being literal - he was quite fond of using metaphor in his teachings. Why couldn't his reference to Genesis be no different, if that's what his audience was familiar with? Just because Jesus didn't feel the need to waste the time explaining the scientific inaccuracies of Genesis, doesn't mean he couldn't teach theological lessons from it.

2) How do you know Jesus even knew Genesis wasn't accurate? The Bible seems to indicate that Jesus wasn't given all knowledge like the Father.

 

[Jase]

Oh, no problem. Do know that from a very young age I was captivated by dinosaurs and watched countless documentaries about the history of the earth and evolution. I had never in my life fully accepted Jesus as the truth and the life until earlier this year. So throughout high school, I did learn and accept the 4.5 billion year timeline.

Ironically, I went through the same phase. I grew up believing in Evolution/Old Earth in my Jewish days, and not until becoming Messianic was I taught by conservative Christians, that one must believe in Creationism. I denied evolution and an Old Earth for 3 years. Fortunately, that phase ended, but it seems to be a common transition for young, new Christians to believe the fundamentalist/literalist viewpoint of the Bible is the only option.

I believe God is all-powerful and that undermining the genealogy of Genesis would severely discount the rest of the bible. Adam was a very real person. Hebrews 11 even begins its list with Cain and Abel and includes Noah, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, all equally real people.

God isn't quite all-powerful. However, regardless of how much power he has, his actions still leave behind evidence if they take the form of the actions of Genesis. You can't create a universe without leaving evidence behind. That leaves us 2 options 1) God decieved us by planting evidence in the physical world that contradicts what he actually did or 2) Genesis is not a literal account of creation.

Which sounds more plausible to you?

 

[ivebeenshown]

Correction - God is most powerful. He can't defy logic.

"If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth."

"Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee;"

"The things which are impossible with men are possible with God."

"With God all things are possible."

Can do or be whatever he wants to do or be. He is God, the wondrous and mighty Lord.

 

[Jase]

"If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth."

"Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee;"

"The things which are impossible with men are possible with God."

"With God all things are possible."

Can do or be whatever he wants to do or be. He is God, the wondrous and mighty Lord.

I think those references are embellishments from a human perspective. To us, he can do just about anything practical. However, in Hebrew and Greek, God is described as "Most-powerful", never all.

God can't create a square circle or make 1 + 1 not = 2 - it's impossible even for him.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I think those references are embellishments from a human perspective. To us, he can do just about anything practical. However, in Hebrew and Greek, God is described as "Most-powerful", never all.

God can't create a square circle or make 1 + 1 not = 2 - it's impossible even for him.

If he is the most powerful, then nothing has power above him and he has power above everything else.

How do you dare say God cannot do as he pleases, however he pleases?

 

[rcorlew]

no, the speed of light is constant, so constant that mathematical time adjusts to fit the consistency of the SoL.

The speed of light is not constant, and has been slowing down.

by Alan Montgomery, Mathematician
218 McCurdy Drive, Kanata, Ontario K2L 2L6 Canada
and
Lambert Dolphin, Physicist
1103 Pomeroy Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95051

ABSTRACT



The possibility that the velocity of light, c, is not a fixed constant is reconsidered by statistical analysis of the historical measurements collected from four sources. Our hypothesis testing of the selected data shows the measured value of the velocity of light has decreased over the past 250 years. Furthermore, the probability of some systematic or experimental problem was found to be low. Brief analysis of constants other than c suggests that those constants which involve atomic phenomena and units of time are also apparently changing. A third set of constants with no obvious dependence on c were analyzed and show no apparent variability with time. A variable velocity of light implies that atomic clocks and dynamical clocks do not run in step-that atomic time has been decreasing with respect to dynamical time.


<snip>
Since a non-constant velocity of light (and related changes in certain other "constants" of nature) has profound implications for cosmology and physics we urge further study of the working hypothesis that c is not a fixed constant. For example, Troitskii has suggested a theoretical cosmology in which c is allowed to vary. He claims his model fits the available data as well as the current Big Bang cosmology (Ref 10).


Constancy of the Velocity of Light

Very interesting read, imagine how much of a change the .11 slope would cause over 13 billion years, if anyone has the time to figure that it would be interesting.

 

[SkyWriting]

...Simply put, we can mathematically prove that solar systems exist 13.7 billion light years away, so how is it that the universe was created less than 7000 years ago?

Jesus created old wine in a jar.
Adam was created old enough to speak.
Jesus healed the infirmaries of those He choose to.

God creates in time we don't get to experience.
Science isn't wrong in it's measurements.
Just it's assumptions.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Jesus created old wine in a jar.
Adam was created old enough to speak.
Jesus healed the infirmaries of those He choose to.

God creates in time we don't get to experience.
Science isn't wrong in it's measurements.
Just it's assumptions.

 

[SkyWriting]

The speed of light is not constant, and has been slowing down.

The speed of light is tied in with mass and time.
During a "creation event" the passage of time
as well as the speed of light would be as hard
to predict as what takes place on the other side
of an event horizon.

 

[SkyWriting]

Where is this centerpoint?

Our earth is the center point. I------------I

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]"Viewed from any point, the universe seems to be expanding about that point."[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[SkyWriting]

Which translation's that? It's missing a vital bit from the beginning of 4b.

Yours "When the Lord God made..."
Mine "In the day that the Lord God made..."

The word day is there, Genesis 2:4 Hebrew Texts and Analysis

In the day God did everything, the fields had nothing... but by the end of that one day mentioned it was.

For the record, I'm not a creationist (6 days or 1 ) but just wanted to point out an error you were making in saying that there were several days for creation. It does say that, but it also says it was in one.

Genesis 1 covers all 7 days.
Genesis 2 does generalize on Gen 1 then expands one
relatively important day of mans creation, day 6 - one day.

 

[SkyWriting]

I'vebeen wrote:


That reminds me of the time when a YEC posted

"Evolution makes no sense. If all that were true, then how could elephants have survived the cambrian explosion? They are too big to hide in holes!"

It kinda leaves one unsure of where to start.....

Papias

Start with the reality that some people could just be posting to make other groups of people look bad. For example, your quote does not show up in any searches I made. So I may be talking about you, as you are the only person shown to have said that.