How Old is the Earth? Really??

[quantumfaith]

Hasn't the "Big bang" theory been discredited by evolutionary scientists themselves now though?

Hasn't light itself been accelerated/slowed down, some even calimed stopped in lab settings?

That would migigate against light as a constact velocity rate throughout universe.. Good By red Shift!

isn't the string theory of Stephen hawkins taking hold, as to Eternal universe?

if so, why say that, IF they hold to NO way there could be eternal god, yet postualate can be etrnal universe, something from nothing?

1. No the Big bang has not been cast aside, however, the ardent "atheists" continue to attempt to design cosmological models which do not require the action or input of a deity.
2. Personally, at present I do not personally ascribe to light velocity change, there has been much written to "discredit" that. (not being disrespectful)
3. Although I do admire the mind and intellect of Hawking, I do not agree with his conclusions, which by the way were completely philosophical

 

[OldRegular]

OR, I very respectfully disagree. You are referencing the "naturalist's" perspective of the Big Bang event, not the theists.

I am referencing the initial concept of the Big Bang: "Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity."

Now the theists who compromise with evolution apparently want to eliminate this "infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something" and replace it with "nothing".

Not really kosher, is it?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I am referencing the initial concept of the Big Bang: "Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity."

Now the theists who compromise with evolution apparently want to eliminate this "infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something" and replace it with "nothing".

Not really kosher, is it?

One does not have to compromise with "Evolution" in order to utilize some form of "Big-Bang" cosmology to describe the creation of time, space and matter. To say that there was a "Big-Bang" or initial creative act from nothingness to Time, space and matter, and to credit that cosmological moment to God's doing something ex nihlo is not to compromise with "Evolution" as they are not inextricably interrelated.

As far as starlight goes......God created light itself on day 1, and presumably those heavenly bodies which "rule" them on day 4...read closely:

DAY ONE:
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness....
... And the evening and the morning were the first day.

DAY FOUR

Gen 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:.......
... [he made] the stars also......
.....And to rule over the day and over the night,.....
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Stars are not the fundamental "generative" source of all of their light....they "Rule" over the "light" and the day and night, and they are for signs and seasons. God answered the distant starlight objection to Young Earth Creation in Chapter 1.....knowing it would be made. He shut it down early....
That being said....I do think that it is the case that whatever other scientific arguments have been made, it does seem that the speed of light is NOT a constant.... That it at least can be intentionally slowed down. (At least in a laboratory)
Q.F. or someone else, may know some more about this than I do.

 

[OldRegular]

One does not have to compromise with "Evolution" in order to utilize some form of "Big-Bang" cosmology to describe the creation of time, space and matter. To say that there was a "Big-Bang" or initial creative act from nothingness to Time, space and matter, and to credit that cosmological moment to God's doing something ex nihlo is not to compromise with "Evolution" as they are not inextricably interrelated.

The initial concept of the Big Bang was the existence of an "infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity." That is, matter/energy is eternal, an evolutionary premise.

It is a compromise with evolution anytime we desert the Revelation of God for the postulates of evolution!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

The initial concept of the Big Bang was the existence of an "infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity." That is, matter/energy is eternal, an evolutionary premise.

O.K. maybe....and if it is spoken of in that sense than it is wrong...but that is why I spoke of "utilize some form of "Big-Bang" cosmology to describe the creation of time, space and matter....not the built in assumption of pre-existing time space and matter.

It is a compromise with evolution anytime we desert the Revelation of God for the postulates of evolution!

A statement of piety....but meaningless if we are in no way comparing them, and no one here who will postulate some form of a "Big-Bang" is. They are simply not inextricably interrelated...as I already said:

God's doing something ex nihlo is not to compromise with "Evolution" as they are not inextricably interrelated.

"Big-Bang" is cosmology....

"Evolution" is Biology

 

[OldRegular]

O.K. maybe....and if it is spoken of in that sense than it is wrong...but that is why I spoke of "utilize some form of "Big-Bang" cosmology to describe the creation of time, space and matter....not the built in assumption of pre-existing time space and matter.



A statement of piety....but meaningless if we are in no way comparing them, and no one here who will postulate some form of a "Big-Bang" is. They are simply not inextricably interrelated...as I already said:



"Big-Bang" is cosmology....

"Evolution" is Biology

You really need to brush up on the entirety of the evolutionary concept. The following is an interesting read that may help!

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112083/jewish/Theories-of-Evolution.htm

 

[freeatlast]

One thing for sure is there was no big bang. Nothing does not explode. There was nothing, God spoke and things came to be. The reason science wants a big bang is because they want to rob God of His glory in creating everything from nothing by simply speaking it into existence. There is absolutely no evidence of any big bang. In fact if we accept the laws of physics based on what is now our own solar system the big bang is impossible based on its own theory.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

One thing for sure is there was no big bang. Nothing does not explode. There was nothing, God spoke and things came to be. The reason science wants a big bang is because they want to rob God of His glory in creating everything from nothing by simply speaking it into existence. There is absolutely no evidence of any big bang. In fact if we accept the laws of physics based on what is now our own solar system the big bang is impossible based on its own theory.

The big bang is future...

2 Peter 3:10 (KJV) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

 

[freeatlast]

The big bang is future...

2 Peter 3:10 (KJV) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Yep! That is the only big bang that God is involved in. :thumbsup:

 

[quantumfaith]

I am referencing the initial concept of the Big Bang: "Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity."

Now the theists who compromise with evolution apparently want to eliminate this "infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something" and replace it with "nothing".

Not really kosher, is it?

It is not a problem for me, but I speak only for myself.

 

[quantumfaith]

One thing for sure is there was no big bang. Nothing does not explode. There was nothing, God spoke and things came to be. The reason science wants a big bang is because they want to rob God of His glory in creating everything from nothing by simply speaking it into existence. There is absolutely no evidence of any big bang. In fact if we accept the laws of physics based on what is now our own solar system the big bang is impossible based on its own theory.

What language did God use to speak it into existence?

 

[Winman]

The scriptures say God created the heaven and the earth. We think of space as nothing, but it is something. There is some matter even in deepest space and all sorts of forces.

So, originally there was nothing there as science says. God created the heaven and stretched it out. This agrees with science.

Where the scriptures disagree is how long it took, the scriptures say one day, and that is what I believe. Science disagrees with scripture on the order of creation, the scriptures say the Earth was created before the sun, moon, and stars, and that light existed before the sun.

But to say God created the heaven out of nothing and stretched it out is scriptural.

 

[Fred's Wife]

Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

 

[Yeshua1]

What language did God use to speak it into existence?

Either Aramiac, as it was "mother tongue" of Yeshua OR

the tongues of Angels paul referenced!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

You really need to brush up on the entirety of the evolutionary concept. The following is an interesting read that may help!

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112083/jewish/Theories-of-Evolution.htm

No, I don't, as I am apparently capable of distinguishing between Cosmological and Biological Evolution....This article is gaseous, stupid and irrelevant to anything I have said...You think one thing when you hear Evolution....or "Big-Bang". some who have no problem with SOME FORM of ex-nihilo creative act of God wherein all time space and matter all called forth by a "...And God said" are not arguing FOR.....the particular straw-man that you are arguing AGAINST...Do you realize that you are trying to debate against something that no one here supports???? Seriously, do you actually realize that...? I am a YEC myself....I just happen to know what certain post-modern apologist appeal to when they speak of a cosmological event called a "Big-Bang"....it is a creative act of God.............What it is.......is Christians stealing the term, from the godless people who are trying to use it and shoving it right back into their face.

Study the Kalaam Cosmological Argument first....then get back to me.

 

[OldRegular]

What language did God use to speak it into existence?

The same language He used when He said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

 

[Yeshua1]

No, I don't, as I am apparently capable of distinguishing between Cosmological and Biological Evolution....This article is gaseous, stupid and irrelevant to anything I have said...You think one thing when you hear Evolution....or "Big-Bang". some who have no problem with SOME FORM of ex-nihilo creative act of God wherein all time space and matter all called forth by a "...And God said" are not arguing FOR.....the particular straw-man that you are arguing AGAINST...Do you realize that you are trying to debate against something that no one here supports???? Seriously, do you actually realize that...? I am a YEC myself....I just happen to know what certain post-modern apologist appeal to when they speak of a cosmological event called a "Big-Bang"....it is a creative act of God.............What it is.......is Christians stealing the term, from the godless people who are trying to use it and shoving it right back into their face.

Study the Kalaam Cosmological Argument first....then get back to me.

science CANNOT get to the place where it states 'in the beginning, God", as that is a direct revelation from him to us, accepte by faith, not able to get to by human reasoning and scientific method.. that takes you to the place where God, and His bible gets us in that door!

 

[OldRegular]

No, I don't, as I am apparently capable of distinguishing between Cosmological and Biological Evolution....This article is gaseous, stupid and irrelevant to anything I have said...You think one thing when you hear Evolution....or "Big-Bang". some who have no problem with SOME FORM of ex-nihilo creative act of God wherein all time space and matter all called forth by a "...And God said" are not arguing FOR.....the particular straw-man that you are arguing AGAINST...Do you realize that you are trying to debate against something that no one here supports???? Seriously, do you actually realize that...? I am a YEC myself....I just happen to know what certain post-modern apologist appeal to when they speak of a cosmological event called a "Big-Bang"....it is a creative act of God.............What it is.......is Christians stealing the term, from the godless people who are trying to use it and shoving it right back into their face.

Study the Kalaam Cosmological Argument first....then get back to me.

Your understanding of evolutionary theory is lacking. It does not just address biology but all that exists. Also Scripture tells us: Thou shalt not steal. [Exodus 20:15] even the BIG BANG THEORY.

Now if you want to think BIG BANG do so to your hearts content. If you want to connect the BIG BANG to the creation of the universe and all that is in it then by all means do so to your hearts content. You still do not understand evolutionary theory as long as you say it addresses only biological evolution. And BIG BANG has nothing to do with creation ex-nihilo by God regardless of what you or anyone else claims. The BIG BANG THEORY is based on pre-existing matter/energy. Scripture clearly teaches creation ex-nihilo, that means out of nothing, by God. I don't need to steal some false theory from evolutionists.

 

[freeatlast]

What language did God use to speak it into existence?

The bible does not say He used any language.

 

[Fred's Wife]

What language did God use to speak it into existence?

What difference does it make?