If God created a 12 billion year old universe 6000 years ago

[quantumfaith]

John Calvin's learned assessment still gives the best picture of the disussion here:

"Moses wrote in a popular style things which without instruction, all ordinary persons, endued with common sense, are able to understand; but astronomers investigate with great labor whatever the sagacity of the human mind can comprehend. Nevertheless, this study is not to be reprobated, nor this science to be condemned, because some frantic persons are wont boldly to reject whatever is unknown to them. For astronomy is not only pleasant, but also very useful to be known: it cannot be denied that this art unfolds the admirable wisdom of God."

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[billwald]

AMEN, and Calvin probably would have said the same thing about biology. When Jesus talked about "a seed falls to the ground and dies before it can sprout" it was probably the best science of that day.

 

[quantumfaith]

AMEN, and Calvin probably would have said the same thing about biology. When Jesus talked about "a seed falls to the ground and dies before it can sprout" it was probably the best science of that day.

Well of course Bill, Jesus knew all science that there was to know, but communicating with His creation who were finite and limited, it would make perfect sense.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Well of course Bill, Jesus knew all science that there was to know, but communicating with His creation who were finite and limited, it would make perfect sense.

Nonsense! Should we also believe that Jesus communicated only the best salvation theory of that day? Should we believe that Jesus communicated the only best concept of sin known in that day? Should we believe that Jesus communicated only the best revelation of God in His day???

Jesus is God in the flesh and his knowledge of biology, cosmology, and everything about true science was not limited to theories of his day but He claimed to be the one who instituted the Sabbath (Mk. 2:27) and therefore the proper interpreter of the Sabbath and he claimed to be the proper interpreter of marriage - ALL OF WHICH WAS PRECULTURAL and within Genesis 1-2. God in the flesh communicated Genesis 1-2 as literal and historical and NEVER dealt with it in any cultural, metaphorical, mystical manner. You guys simply reject the Word of God and exalt your own puny finite wisdom above the inspired revelation by God.

There is nothing unscientific with Christ's statement concerning the seed IF you understand the term "die" if you allow for the Biblical understanding of death to interpret it as it takes in the meaning of decay or decomposition. The outer shell of the seed decomposes in order to give nourishment to the inner germ.

1 Pet. 3: 3 ¶ Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: {standing: Gr. consisting}
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

The Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Godhead, by divine inspiration included the divine institution of marriage within the time frame of the "beginning" of creation through the works spoken by the Second Person of the Godhead -

Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

It is utter foolishness to interpret the first five days of Genesis 1 as millions if not billions of years and yet state that the institution of marriage was "from the beginning of creation." Jesus treated Genesis 1-2 as historical and literal with marriage instituted by God right "from the beginning of creation."

 

[billwald]

>Nonsense! Should we also believe that Jesus communicated only the best salvation theory of that day?

Should Jesus communicated atomic physics and quantum mechanics to his listeners?

 

[Dr. Walter]

>Nonsense! Should we also believe that Jesus communicated only the best salvation theory of that day?

Should Jesus communicated atomic physics and quantum mechanics to his listeners?

He certainly could have if he so chose to! However, the point is that he NEVER validated scientific errors or used langauge that contradicted facts. Furthermore, when he did refer to Genesis 1-2 he NEVER treated it any other way than literal and historical - period.

 

[WestminsterMan]

He certainly could have if he so chose to! However, the point is that he NEVER validated scientific errors or used langauge that contradicted facts. Furthermore, when he did refer to Genesis 1-2 he NEVER treated it any other way than literal and historical - period.

So let it be written - so let it be done!

WM

 

[glazer1972]

I do understand that it may seem as if the universe is that old but God did not create a 12 billion year old universe 6000 years ago. He created a new universe 6000 years ago.

 

[billwald]

What does "create" mean? The designers of "War World" also created an old universe.

 

[David Lamb]

What does "create" mean? The designers of "War World" also created an old universe.

As far as God is concerned, "create" means "bring something into being out of nothing". Psalm 33.6-9:

6 By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. 7 He gathers the waters of the sea together as a heap; He lays up the deep in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD; Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. 9 For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.
​

Genesis 1.1-2:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
​

If "created" in verse 1 meant "made out of pre-existing matter", then verse 2 would be redundant. The two verses would be saying, "In the beginning God took some already-existing matter, and from it formed something formless!

I didn't know what "War World" was, but on looking it up, found:

War World is a unique combat game where players control heavily-armed and fast-moving mechs in furious battles for total annihilation. War World multiplayer offers 4 different gamemodes: Capture the flag, Bomb Assault, Death Match and Team Death Match.
​

Those words, and the pictures on the website, don't seem to indicate an old universe, and anyway, surely you are not suggesting that the act of inventing a new electronic game is comparable to God creating the universe?

 

[seekingthetruth]

If God would have created the universe in a new state, then how could it survive? All of the trees and plants would be seeds. All of the animals would be babies with no adults to take care of them.

The universe had to be created in a mature state in order to survive.

John

 

[David Lamb]

If God would have created the universe in a new state, then how could it survive? All of the trees and plants would be seeds. All of the animals would be babies with no adults to take care of them.

The universe had to be created in a mature state in order to survive.

John

I think the problem is a result of the English language.

"Old" can be the opposite of "new" ("My PC is so old that I cannot run the latest version of the program on it"). But "old" can also be the opposite of "young" ("My grandfather was a very old man")

So I would say that the universe was indeed new when God created it, but that the things that He created were mature. For example, Genesis 1.11 tells us that God created trees, not saplings or acorns. Indeed that verse specifically states that the trees God created were mature enough to bear seeds.

Genesis 1.26 says that He created man fully grown. A baby would not be able to "have dominion over" the fish, birds, etc. A baby certainly would not have been able to "be fruitful and multiply" - that would be taking precociousness too far! :laugh:

When Adam was created, he was new (he'd only just come into existence), but he was not young, at least, not anywhere near young enough to be described as a baby.

 

[Aaron]

Real, and true science unpolluted by agendas is and should be as intellectually pure as theology in that it searches out and seeks to uncover any absolute truth that God places within our reach of understanding. Theology seeks to understand the the attibutes of God and His relationship with creation, particularly humankind. While science seeks insight into His physical creation looking for principles and properties which can impact our "stewardship" of the natual created order.

Just pointing out that this is a philosophical argument and not a scientific one.