Old earth or young earth?

[Reynolds]

I disagree. Fully functional does not equal age.

Then he would have been wrong. And a fool for assuming that functionality equals age.

My pickup is not old. It did not start out as a wheel barrow and grow into a truck as the years passed. It was designed to be a truck. It was made a truck. Only a fool would assume it had grown from a wheel barrow.

That analogy is comparing apples and turnips.
A truck is an object that is manufactured. It is not a growing object. God created order. His creation operates by following the laws He set fourth for it. Natural laws, Observable time and again, They always do the same thing. You throw a rock up, it comes down. Creation was a super natural event. It occurred outside natural law. In creation, mature does equate to the appearance of age.

 

[TCassidy]

A truck is an object that is manufactured.

So was the universe. So was Adam.

It is not a growing object.

Neither was the universe. Neither was Adam.

You throw a rock up, it comes down.

Only if you are on or near a gravity well. In fact, the opposite is true. Newton's first law of motion states that an object in uniform motion in a straight line will continue in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force. In other words, minus the application of an external force, you throw a rock and it keeps going ad infinitum.

 

[TCassidy]

Yes, I've read that four times now.

Does this mean that you believe God created the earth and the galaxies during the same literal 7 day creation week and the light from distant starts was created already striking the earth?

Yes.

 

[Reynolds]

So was the universe. So was Adam.

Neither was the universe. Neither was Adam.

Only if you are on or near a gravity well. In fact, the opposite is true. Newton's first law of motion states that an object in uniform motion in a straight line will continue in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force. In other words, minus the application of an external force, you throw a rock and it keeps going ad infinitum.

 

[banana]

Framework interpretation (Genesis) - Wikipedia

 

[Aaron]

OK, Evan6589, we understand that you are recommending we read a book rather than tell us what your thoughts are.

LOL. What do you know of the age of the universe and cosmology other than what you've been told by scientists?

I'm saying consider the explanations of these scientists.

 

[Reynolds]

Only if you are on or near a gravity well. [/QUOTE]
I really just plan on being on Earth.

 

[TCassidy]

Framework interpretation (Genesis) - Wikipedia

What's your point?

 

[banana]

I linked it to show that a literal view of Genesis isn't the only way an innerantist can read those passages

 

[InTheLight]

LOL. What do you know of the age of the universe and cosmology other than what you've been told by scientists?

I'm saying consider the explanations of these scientists.

And I'm saying rather than tell us to go read a book how about you give a summary of what this author says in the book using your own words?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Aaron]

And I'm saying rather than tell us to go read a book how about you give a summary of what this author says in the book using your own words?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

To write a summary accessible to the uninitiated is impossible to do in few words. Google is your friend. You will find friendly and hostile summaries all over the Web.

Saying the speed of light is 'c', so the universe is old is not telling the whole story.

 

[InTheLight]

To write a summary accessible to the uninitiated is impossible to do in few words.

Condescension as evasion. Haven't seen that one before. Congratulations.

Saying the speed of light is 'c', so the universe is old is not telling the whole story.

Ah, the old "speed of light varies" trope. Can't get science to fit into my Biblical view so I will alter a fundamental law of the universe to make it fit.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Aaron]

[Screen Name Edited] Condescension as evasion. Haven't seen that one before. Congratulations.



Ah, the old "speed of light varies" trope. Can't get science to fit into my Biblical view so I will alter a fundamental law of the universe to make it fit.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

You see? You aren't interested in real study. You just want to snort and scoff thinking you already know everything. Read them and find out what they say.

I did not say they said the speed of light varies. They both accept and apply the Special Theory. I said, "Saying the speed of light is 'c', so the universe is old is not telling the whole story."

But this is the end of our interaction about these authors and what they say. Read them if you want to know. Don't if you simply want to whistle in the dark thinking you already know the answers.

Can anyone guess my prediction of what ITL is going to do?

 

[InTheLight]

You see? You aren't interested in real study. You just want to snort and scoff thinking you already know everything. Read them and find out what they say.

No, I want you to explain it in your own words. Give a summation.

I did not say they said the speed of light varies. They both accept and apply the Special Theory. I said, "Saying the speed of light is 'c', so the universe is old is not telling the whole story."

You didn't say anything about it. "Read this book", you said. Well, I read the summary and some of the reviews on Goodreads and Amazon and elsewhere and I got a general idea of the theory proposed in the book.

Near as I can tell, the theory proposed in the book relies on the time dilation effect of gravity. That is, a clock in a high gravity environment will run slower than clocks further away from the gravity source. (If you saw the movie Interstellar this effect was dramatically portrayed on Miller's planet.) So, Humphrey's theory is the earth was the center of creation, and was in a gravity well called a "white hole". Thus, a 24 hour day on Earth was millions and millions of years in distant galaxies. The further away from Earth you got, the "faster" time would appear to be elapsing to a person on Earth.

But this is the end of our interaction about these authors and what they say. Read them if you want to know. Don't if you simply want to whistle in the dark thinking you already know the answers.

Can anyone guess my prediction of what ITL is going to do?

Not read the book? Check.
Aaron going to go silent? Check.

 

[Yeshua1]

I linked it to show that a literal view of Genesis isn't the only way an innerantist can read those passages

Perhaps, but jesus and paul seemed to view it as being in a literal fashion, as real history!

 

[Reynolds]

You see? You aren't interested in real study. You just want to snort and scoff thinking you already know everything. Read them and find out what they say.

I did not say they said the speed of light varies. They both accept and apply the Special Theory. I said, "Saying the speed of light is 'c', so the universe is old is not telling the whole story."

But this is the end of our interaction about these authors and what they say. Read them if you want to know. Don't if you simply want to whistle in the dark thinking you already know the answers.

Can anyone guess my prediction of what ITL is going to do?

I personally do not have time to read every book written. Summarize it and if it interests me, I will read it.

 

[TCassidy]

Now I find myself on the horns of the proverbial dilemma.

I agree with InTheLight that if Aaron expects his posts to be taken seriously he should offer more than "read the book." He should offer a synopsis of at least the point he is trying to make with a citation regarding chapter and page number.

However, I also agree with Aaron that InTheLight often resorts to "snort and scoff" when he, apparently, has little else to offer.

So, what am I to do now?

 

[InTheLight]

Now I find myself on the horns of the proverbial dilemma.

I agree with InTheLight that if Aaron expects his posts to be taken seriously he should offer more than "read the book." He should offer a synopsis of at least the point his is trying to make with a citation regarding chapter and page number.

However, I also agree with Aaron that InTheLight often resorts to "snort and scoff" when he, apparently, has little else to offer.

When someone posits that the earth was created inside a white hole, a gravity well at the center of the universe, and this is the reason why mere days could elapse on Earth while the rest of the universe had millions of years elapse, you snort and scoff. Find support for the white hole gravity well in Scripture. Oh? Not there? Then it's just an attempt to make science fit into scripture.

Never mind the universe is constantly expanding outwards. If the Earth is only 6,000 years old then the light from distant starts, by necessity, according to this theory, can be no more than 6,000 light years away. Right?

According to several reviews I read, several creation research websites have debunked Humphrey's theories and he issued retractions several years after the book was published.

So go ahead and snort and scoff.

Oh, and here's a quote from Aaron, from his infamous Earth is the center of the solar system, and the center of the universe threads.

But I'm told that gravity affects the speed of light. Where more gravity is, then light and bodies are faster. --Aaron

Which is exactly the opposite of what happens.
[Edited to add: Depending on the frame of reference of the observer.]

 

[Reynolds]

When someone posits that the earth was created inside a white hole, a gravity well at the center of the universe, and this is the reason why mere days could elapse on Earth while the rest of the universe had millions of years elapse, you snort and scoff. Find support for the white hole gravity well in Scripture. Oh? Not there? Then it's just an attempt to make science fit into scripture.

Never mind the universe is constantly expanding outwards. If the Earth is only 6,000 years old then the light from distant starts, by necessity, according to this theory, can be no more than 6,000 light years away. Right?

According to several reviews I read, several creation research websites have debunked Humphrey's theories and he issued retractions several years after the book was published.

So go ahead and snort and scoff.

Oh, and here's a quote from Aaron, from his infamous Earth is the center of the solar system, and the center of the universe threads.

But I'm told that gravity affects the speed of light. Where more gravity is, then light and bodies are faster. --Aaron

Which is exactly the opposite of what happens.

One thing that has always puzzled me is why God had to play catch up. He is eternal. He knows all. He did not wake up one day and say "dadgummit, I want a universe and I should have started on it a billion years ago. I am going to have to catch it up and instantly make it old." He had the time for His creation to runs its course. He had time for the big bang to spread out. He had time for light to reach The Earth.

 

[Steven Yeadon]

I don't get it, why can't God create a universe that appears old but was just made mature enough to support human life?

Not to be rude but only to be impolite, I find the idea that God had to wait billions of years to be silly really. Well, God decided to just make his mature universe for human life in six literal days and got down to the more important stuff like raising His new son and giving him a wife after a day of rest. Important actions which would lead to populating the universe he just made, and which would lead to many, many more children if they trusted in His Son Jesus Christ, who created them.