Light years

[humblethinker]

I like the example of the water to wine account.

In a moment of time Jesus produced wine which from an appearance and logical point of view had to be several months to several years old.

How about the feeding of the 5000 where He produced fish without the necessity of evolution (theistic or otherwise).

HankD

I accept miracles. There is reasonable disagreement as to whether a miracle is "God magic", so to speak, and whether it is that God is merely able to manipulate matter at will using, what are to him, natural processes. Regardless though it is God's working either way, and I believe that He could explain how he did it if he chose to.

 

[HankD]

I accept miracles. There is reasonable disagreement as to whether a miracle is "God magic", so to speak, and whether it is that God is merely able to manipulate matter at will using, what are to him, natural processes. Regardless though it is God's working either way, and I believe that He could explain how he did it if he chose to.

I agree with your disdain for the phrase "God magic" and was upholding the view of "apparent age" and God's use of the same.

There are also other phenomena in the scripture which seem to defy the "natural law" - i.e. the sun "standing still", an iron ax head floating, the dead coming back to life, etc.

Luke 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.

HankD

 

[webdog]

This I can appreciate Webdog. I felt the same way. Do you think agree that there are many godly educated evangelicals that still accept an Old Earth view? Do you think that they have an understanding of the Gen 1 account or do you think that they personally don't know what to do with it?

I do believe there are many godly people who hold to this view in the same way many godly people hold to amilenialism. I believe they are just wrong concerning when to use Scripture literaly vs figuratively.

 

[Greektim]

Are we seeing the star explode in real time, or did it happen millions of years ago and we are just now witnessing it? How is it possible to witness something in real time that happened before even the advent of a telescope? How does it contradict age built in?

You don't appear to be understanding the concept. If a star is 1 million lightyears away and it explodes, then it will take 1 million years for that information (light and the scene of explosion) to reach us regardless of a telescope. Therefore, if we believe that the information of an explosion is built in at creation, that means we are seeing an event that happened a million years ago before creation ever happened. That is a major problem.

 

[Iconoclast]

You don't appear to be understanding the concept. If a star is 1 million lightyears away and it explodes, then it will take 1 million years for that information (light and the scene of explosion) to reach us regardless of a telescope. Therefore, if we believe that the information of an explosion is built in at creation, that means we are seeing an event that happened a million years ago before creation ever happened. That is a major problem.

GT

When Jesus ascended to heaven in Acts 1....do you think he is still travelling,limited by the speed of light, or perhaps As God he just appears where he wants to at the speed of thought? Does science measure the supernatural?

At the rapture believers will be changed literally before you can blink your eye?...how fast is that?

What if the universe is like a fabric, like the curtain at a broadway play,and you change change dimensions to get into the next,scene/place...in a way science is clueless about?

 

[saturneptune]

You don't appear to be understanding the concept. If a star is 1 million lightyears away and it explodes, then it will take 1 million years for that information (light and the scene of explosion) to reach us regardless of a telescope. Therefore, if we believe that the information of an explosion is built in at creation, that means we are seeing an event that happened a million years ago before creation ever happened. That is a major problem.

Maybe a giant Back to the Future Machine would explain it.

 

[Greektim]

GT

When Jesus ascended to heaven in Acts 1....do you think he is still travelling,limited by the speed of light, or perhaps As God he just appears where he wants to at the speed of thought? Does science measure the supernatural?

At the rapture believers will be changed literally before you can blink your eye?...how fast is that?

What if the universe is like a fabric, like the curtain at a broadway play,and you change change dimensions to get into the next,scene/place...in a way science is clueless about?

Then the travel of light must also be supernatural for you to account for this illogical anomaly. And I am mostly critiquing the "en route" view or "age built in" concept for the travel of light. It doesn't work on a logical plane.

 

[humblethinker]

I agree with your disdain for the phrase "God magic" and was upholding the view of "apparent age" and God's use of the same.

There are also other phenomena in the scripture which seem to defy the "natural law" - i.e. the sun "standing still", an iron ax head floating, the dead coming back to life, etc.

Luke 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.

HankD

10-4 Hank. Sounds like we agree that there is an apparent age that is well over the 6000 year YE view. This is an interesting point to concede though. Have you thought about what it means to concede such though? What exactly are you conceding? Are you conceding that it is otherwise reasonable to consider that observing a supernova is proof that the cosmos is "apparently" much older than 6000 years? And the same goes for geological formations, ice cores, ancient tree rings, etc.?

Regarding miraculous phenomena... let's take, for instance, Jesus walking through a wall. As I understand, science would theoretically allow for this. It seems to me that other such phenomena is potentially reasonable to accomplish for a Being who can control and manipulate matter and the natural laws.

To claim that "nothing is impossible with God" affords us nothing really, except only plausibility, and that only for those who already believe those words. The discussion of OE, YEC and Evo should be had between Christian adherents, and therefore, such statements are of less consequence since they are already assumed.

 

[Iconoclast]

Then the travel of light must also be supernatural for you to account for this illogical anomaly. And I am mostly critiquing the "en route" view or "age built in" concept for the travel of light. It doesn't work on a logical plane.

Creation was a supernatural event, then God set what we call natural laws in place, gravity, mass, time,etc.

Miracles are when God over-rides the natural laws.

God is not bound by them[he cannot be bound ,,,as God] unless he wants to participate in them, like in the incarnation of Jesus.

Angels are invisible to our eyes yet they are present and active.Science does not measure them. there are other factors that have not been revealed, but those that are revealed...a 24 day...belong to us.

 

[Greektim]

Creation was a supernatural event, then God set what we call natural laws in place, gravity, mass, time,etc.

Miracles are when God over-rides the natural laws.

God is not bound by them[he cannot be bound ,,,as God] unless he wants to participate in them, like in the incarnation of Jesus.

Angels are invisible to our eyes yet they are present and active.Science does not measure them. there are other factors that have not been revealed, but those that are revealed...a 24 day...belong to us.

So which part of the star exploding a million years ago is the supernatural part? The existence of that information of something that happened before creation? The fact that God can create something that seems to be outside of the time/space continuum that he created? Or that God would be inconsistent with his logical nature to do something like this.

Good news, there are other ways you can explain the million lightyear problem for YEers. I don't think they are all good, but they don't rest on "light en route" or "built in".

 

[humblethinker]

Could God explain it?

Webdog, Hank, Icon,

You do agree that God could explain his act of creation and miracles such that a sufficiently intelligent person could understand it? His acts in this natural world may escape explanation by us but they DON'T escape sensibility and explanation by himself, no? That is, these phenomena are NOT magic, correct?

 

[Iconoclast]

Webdog, Hank, Icon,

You do agree that God could explain his act of creation and miracles such that a sufficiently intelligent person could understand it? His acts in this natural world may escape explanation by us but they DON'T escape sensibility and explanation by himself, no? That is, these phenomena are NOT magic, correct?

HT,

The bible is primarily a message of God's redeeeming LOVE for His people ,in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is written to express who God is and His eternal purpose.EPH3:9-11
As this revelation is progressively revealed since the time of Moses...why would you expect God to speak in the language of science?
Would Moses have understood...laser light? of string theory? todays science is just learning about what God has and may have done?
I sure God could have written the best of science textbooks if that was His design.
But the issue was sin, falling in Adam. redemption,and being restored as image bearers......not to be derailed by science, or philosphy, or logic, or anything else.

the creation account along with Job 38-39 works fine for me.

 

[percho]

Does anyone share my view that Gen. 1:3 is directly related in purpose to Hebrews 2:14.

That to destroy death brought about, "Let there be Light," considering by this moment in time the lamb without blemish and without spot: would shed it's blood?

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18

 

[HankD]

10-4 Hank. Sounds like we agree that there is an apparent age that is well over the 6000 year YE view. This is an interesting point to concede though. Have you thought about what it means to concede such though? What exactly are you conceding? Are you conceding that it is otherwise reasonable to consider that observing a supernova is proof that the cosmos is "apparently" much older than 6000 years? And the same goes for geological formations, ice cores, ancient tree rings, etc.?

Regarding miraculous phenomena... let's take, for instance, Jesus walking through a wall. As I understand, science would theoretically allow for this. It seems to me that other such phenomena is potentially reasonable to accomplish for a Being who can control and manipulate matter and the natural laws.

To claim that "nothing is impossible with God" affords us nothing really, except only plausibility, and that only for those who already believe those words. The discussion of OE, YEC and Evo should be had between Christian adherents, and therefore, such statements are of less consequence since they are already assumed.

I believe "concede" is not the best of words to explain my position which is that appearances can be "deceiving" even in the face of a very convincing set of "evidential" circumstances.

e.g. even the scripture uses terminology such as the sun "setting and rising".

Being YEC I might possibly use the word "concede" but not as of yet.

As such, I don't know how to explain galaxies which are purportedly zillions of light years away being visible in our sky apart from some unknown phenomena in creation which extended the light to earth which I suppose would make the universe earth-centric.

Also, on the scientific front several years ago we began hearing about "C" (speed of light) being perhaps not a constant with the short end of the situation being time dilation and/or compression.

Finally, I am not going to hang my brother (neither should others) on the gallows of unbelief because he/she is other than YEC and neither do I believe would God.

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.​

Ecclesiastes 11:5 As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.

HankD​

 

[OldRegular]

HT,

The bible is primarily a message of God's redeeeming LOVE for His people ,in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is written to express who God is and His eternal purpose.EPH3:9-11
As this revelation is progressively revealed since the time of Moses...why would you expect God to speak in the language of science?
Would Moses have understood...laser light? of string theory? todays science is just learning about what God has and may have done?
I sure God could have written the best of science textbooks if that was His design.
But the issue was sin, falling in Adam. redemption,and being restored as image bearers......not to be derailed by science, or philosphy, or logic, or anything else.

the creation account along with Job 38-39 works fine for me.

Very well said Icon.

The Bible is very clear that God created man!

Genesis 1:26, 27
26. And God 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.
27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 5:1, 2
1.This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2. Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Genesis 9:6. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

1 Corinthians 11:7. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

The Book of Job is a difficult one for me but there are several things about the Book that I love:

1. Job's declaration of faith in the Redeemer: Job 19:25. For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

2. Job's faith in the resurrection of the body:
Job 19:26, 27
26. And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27. Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

3. The futility of man's effort to explain or constrain God with their logic, Chapters 1-31.

4. The truth that God is under no obligation to explain His works to man. We should thank Him continually that he has revealed Himself to us, both through His Creation and His Word!
Job 38:1-11 ff
1. Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2. Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3. Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6. Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7. When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8. Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
9. When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
10. And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
11. And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?

And then there is this [Ref. #3]
Job 40:1-14
1. Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said,
2. Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.
3. Then Job answered the LORD, and said,
4. Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.
5. Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further.
6. Then answered the LORD unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
7. Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
8. Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?
9. Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?
10. Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.
11. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.
12. Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.
13. Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.
14. Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

 

[webdog]

You don't appear to be understanding the concept. If a star is 1 million lightyears away and it explodes, then it will take 1 million years for that information (light and the scene of explosion) to reach us regardless of a telescope. Therefore, if we believe that the information of an explosion is built in at creation, that means we are seeing an event that happened a million years ago before creation ever happened. That is a major problem.

I already explained that. In the same way Adam was an adult on day one and a tree with hundreds of rings was only one day old, the same is true with all creation including galaxies that appear millions of LY away. I don't try to explain it, I accept it on faith.

 

[InTheLight]

I already explained that. In the same way Adam was an adult on day one and a tree with hundreds of rings was only one day old, the same is true with all creation including galaxies that appear millions of LY away. I don't try to explain it, I accept it on faith.

The Bible says the trees grew out of the ground, so they weren't put there mature.

Genesis 2:9 NKJV

And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

...but I understand your point.

I guess the question then becomes, why would God create things with an appearance of age? How does it square with Psalm 19:2? Studying God's creation leads to knowledge and that knowledge tells us that light from distant stars is millions of years old. It seems that believing in YEC causes us to throw our knowledge out the window and create theories like the "age in situ" explanations.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Mind if I inject a couple of anti-old earth scientific facts into this discussion? When old earthers claim to have science on their side, that is actually an ignorance-based claim. Multiple observable scientific facts must be negated for evolution to be true.

First, the moon is moving away from the earth at a measurable distance of 3.8 centimeters per year. This fact would have the moon so close to the earth one million years ago that the magnetic field & daily destruction of the surface of the earth by global tidal waves would have made life on earth impossible. Second, Apollo 11 was designed to land in several feet of solar dust on the moon. It has been established that the moon collects approximately one inch of dust every ten thousand years. How much dust did they find? just under one inch.

These are established scientific facts, not the imaginative theorizations of so-called scientists who work backwards from a preconceived premise.

 

[Greektim]

I already explained that. In the same way Adam was an adult on day one and a tree with hundreds of rings was only one day old, the same is true with all creation including galaxies that appear millions of LY away. I don't try to explain it, I accept it on faith.

But that is not the same thing... not exactly. One more time. The reason tree rings or Adam as an adult is not the same thing as "light en route" is because there is no observable information either Adam or the tree that illogically presents an event prior to creation (time/space). Even tree rings only speak to the age of the tree, not an event. This is different w/ light.

When we see a star a million light years away, we are seeing what that star looked like a million years ago because it took a million years for that light info to get to us. When we see it explode a million light years away, we understand that it took a million years for that info to get to earth. So the explosion took place in time/space 1 million years ago even though we are observing it today. Now if you say that God created that information of an explosion en route, then you are saying that we are visually witnessing an event that never happened in time/space. Yet we observe it as we observe any other thing, just closer by.

For this reason, to say that God created information of an event that never took place en route for us to observe is illogical. If we can observe it, then it happened. I completely reject the notion that when we see those stars explode, we are witnessing a non-event. That is asinine. That is deceptive. That is illogical. For so many reasons, that just doesn't work.

Again, there are other ways around this. But the issue w/ light is that the "en route" view simply cannot stand up under the pressure of logic.

 

[InTheLight]

Mind if I inject a couple of anti-old earth scientific facts into this discussion? When old earthers claim to have science on their side, that is actually an ignorance-based claim. Multiple observable scientific facts must be negated for evolution to be true.

First, the moon is moving away from the earth at a measurable distance of 3.8 centimeters per year. This fact would have the moon so close to the earth one million years ago that the magnetic field & daily destruction of the surface of the earth by global tidal waves would have made life on earth impossible. Second, Apollo 11 was designed to land in several feet of solar dust on the moon. It has been established that the moon collects approximately one inch of dust every ten thousand years. How much dust did they find? just under one inch.

Well, that's easily refuted. To borrow an imaginative theory positing the speed of light not being constant by so-called YEC scientists and applying it to this problem--obviously the rate of movement of the moon away from Earth must have changed. So has the rate of dust deposition on the moon surface.

These are established scientific facts, not the imaginative theorizations of so-called scientists who work backwards from a preconceived premise.

Speaking of established scientific facts, the speed of light is a constant that holds up pretty much any scientific theory or application.

Working backwards from a preconceived premise--um, that would be Ussher's dating scheme.