Biblical View of Creation

123 posts

Flag Post

The Bible, when studied casually, lends itself to a young version of Earth and the universe. The Bible has a week it designated for creation, and then lists the genealogies of people, and the length of time they lived, all the way to the time of Jesus. Further, we know the year Jesus was born in, and how many years it has been since then. If you were to add up the genealogies, you would find that the Earth is six thousand years old, and would conclude the universe would have to be about the same age, within a week.

If you study the Biblical God, when He says something, He very well means it. There are some allegories and parables, but if God doesn’t make it clear that something is allegorical, He means it literally. His word is His bond, and He makes that very clear. If the Biblical God is true, then the universe is only 6 thousand years old. Erego, if the universe is not only 6 thousand years old, the Biblical God isn’t true.

Science has given us a wonderful tool for measuring astronomical distance using the speed of light. We can measure the distance between us and another object by the time it takes light to travel between us and another object. Consider the Andromeda Galaxy, the nearest spiral galaxy from our galaxy. It is 2.5 million light years from Earth. That means that all the pretty pictures of it that we have, is of light that has been traveling toward us for 2.5 million years.

I consider myself a rational Christian person. As a rational person, I make no attempt to disprove the scientific evidence. As a Christian person, I make no attempt to explain away what God said. I accept what God said, and I accept the science. Neither one are refutable. How can this be?

If you were to go back in time, to a week after creation, and bring with you a telescope, and look for Andromeda, would you find it? If you were to look at Adam, what would he look like? Would he be a freshly joined sperm and egg? I doubt that. Adam would have been created at the optimum age for him to survive in the world. Why wouldn’t God also have created a universe at the proper age for human survival? Is it within God’s ability to create the entire universe by speaking it into existence, but outside of His ability to create it at any age He wanted? Can He speak life into being, but lacks the power to create it at any point in age?

The counter argument I’ve heard the most is the deceptive nature of such a creation. But, God never said He created a universe with no age. There was no deception. If God created an aged universe, that universe would be perfect, traveling light and all.

Do I assert that this is the way that God created the universe? No. I simply assert that the science of measuring age of the universe, and the word of God, are not irreconcilable. God never told me exactly how He did it. That doesn’t mean He didn’t do what He said He did.

The greater point here, is that God is a topic on His own, outside of science. All the scientific evidence for or against God is completely out of the element it belongs in. You could provide undeniable empirical evidence against God, and it would be pointless. You could provide undeniable empirical evidence for God, and it wouldn’t change a thing.

For those of you familiar with the “Apparent Age Theory”, this thread is to discuss the qualities of the theory, as well as the possibility of God beyond human understanding of science.

 
Flag Post

The counter argument I’ve heard the most is the deceptive nature of such a creation. But, God never said He created a universe with no age. There was no deception. If God created an aged universe, that universe would be perfect, traveling light and all.

I would imagine that the main argument against is that it’s unfalsifiable…and even IF religion is outside the bounds of science, it is not outside the bounds of logic. The argument, by definition, is illogical. For all you know, the universe could’ve been created when I woke up this morning, if we’re to ignore the physical signs of evolution in favor of some half-assed escape clause that lets you keep the bible literal.

I also find it hard to believe that Creationists accept the biblical geneaologies as ‘the literal word of God’. That is pretty clearly the word of Moses relying on Jewish apocryphal history. If, as you say, you’re a rational Christian, then it’s rational to accept that the Bible was written by men (over a long span of time) and therefore prone to error and contradiction.

 
Flag Post

MyTie, thank you for the illuminating argument. I have tried to read it as carefully as possible, as I do sometimes misunderstand your arguments.

The biggest single issue I have, is this bit:

The greater point here, is that God is a topic on His own, outside of science. All the scientific evidence for or against God is completely out of the element it belongs in.

As Janton points out, your God is outside the realm of current science, but he is not outside the realm of logic. Therefore there must be consistencies to his being, rules he follows, or rules of interaction with the universe that his nature follows. In other words he is not outside the reach of science.

It would be a great thing I think, if we could reach out and find a god, be able to interact in a reliable, recordable manner – allow everyone to interact directly, rather than by prayer or by preacher. That is what discovery can eventually give us, if there’s one to find.

 
Flag Post

You’re right, when Bible God says something, it’s pretty obvious what he means, hence why there’s only one bible theology and interpretation.

I don’t disagree with your conclusion though. If the universe were created yesterday as it was today, we wouldn’t know. Doesn’t mean that’s what happened, though.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:


If you were to go back in time, to a week after creation, and bring with you a telescope, and look for Andromeda, would you find it? If you were to look at Adam, what would he look like? Would he be a freshly joined sperm and egg? I doubt that. Adam would have been created at the optimum age for him to survive in the world. Why wouldn’t God also have created a universe at the proper age for human survival? Is it within God’s ability to create the entire universe by speaking it into existence, but outside of His ability to create it at any age He wanted? Can He speak life into being, but lacks the power to create it at any point in age?

Your logic ignores the inconvenient bit about science dating fossils and artifacts of humans much much older than Adam could hope to be.
In terms of the above this universe snipped into existence would include many living humans as well as their artifacts and the bones and artifacts of their Ancestors. Which would still be counter to some of the claims in the bible.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:
Originally posted by MyTie:


If you were to go back in time, to a week after creation, and bring with you a telescope, and look for Andromeda, would you find it? If you were to look at Adam, what would he look like? Would he be a freshly joined sperm and egg? I doubt that. Adam would have been created at the optimum age for him to survive in the world. Why wouldn’t God also have created a universe at the proper age for human survival? Is it within God’s ability to create the entire universe by speaking it into existence, but outside of His ability to create it at any age He wanted? Can He speak life into being, but lacks the power to create it at any point in age?

Your logic ignores the inconvenient bit about science dating fossils and artifacts of humans much much older than Adam could hope to be.
In terms of the above this universe snipped into existence would include many living humans as well as their artifacts and the bones and artifacts of their Ancestors. Which would still be counter to some of the claims in the bible.

“Unless God deliberately made those fossils for the lulz of confusing people”

I’m just guessing at the counter argument you’ll get there but pretty sure that’s it.

My main question re: creationism is ‘Why?’. Why would a God bother doing all that. Also, is there only one God or a God race? If there is just one then how did they come to exist and where do they live as it’s clearly not in the universe as they created the universe so inhabited somewhere before hand.

 
Flag Post

Why would a God bother doing all that?

A lot of people wonder this. I would assume because if a God is alone, he/she/it may get bored and may want to be recognized for it’s power.

…only one God or a God race?

Another good question. If you ask any person of a belief, it will depend on what they believe.

If there is just one then how did they come to exist?

Ah, a very well-known question. Gods are generally seen as everything. If we are finate, they are infinate. We would have to believe they have always existed. The reason this is argued is because that we are finate, we cannot understand/comprehend as to how something can start from nothing.

…live as it’s clearly not in the universe as they created the universe so inhabited somewhere before hand.

Hehe, quite a mystery huh?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

MyTie, thank you for the illuminating argument. I have tried to read it as carefully as possible, as I do sometimes misunderstand your arguments.

The biggest single issue I have, is this bit:

The greater point here, is that God is a topic on His own, outside of science. All the scientific evidence for or against God is completely out of the element it belongs in.

As Janton points out, your God is outside the realm of current science, but he is not outside the realm of logic. Therefore there must be consistencies to his being, rules he follows, or rules of interaction with the universe that his nature follows. In other words he is not outside the reach of science.

It would be a great thing I think, if we could reach out and find a god, be able to interact in a reliable, recordable manner – allow everyone to interact directly, rather than by prayer or by preacher. That is what discovery can eventually give us, if there’s one to find.

I find that God does have rules, mainly the rules He sets. It seems that God must follow God’s rules, based on the Bible.

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

The counter argument I’ve heard the most is the deceptive nature of such a creation. But, God never said He created a universe with no age. There was no deception. If God created an aged universe, that universe would be perfect, traveling light and all.

I would imagine that the main argument against is that it’s unfalsifiable…and even IF religion is outside the bounds of science, it is not outside the bounds of logic. The argument, by definition, is illogical. For all you know, the universe could’ve been created when I woke up this morning, if we’re to ignore the physical signs of evolution in favor of some half-assed escape clause that lets you keep the bible literal.

I also find it hard to believe that Creationists accept the biblical geneaologies as ‘the literal word of God’. That is pretty clearly the word of Moses relying on Jewish apocryphal history. If, as you say, you’re a rational Christian, then it’s rational to accept that the Bible was written by men (over a long span of time) and therefore prone to error and contradiction.

Well, God did designate Moses to be His speaker. Moses was the chosen vessel for transmitting the words and desires of God to people. To call the accounts of Moses into question, and the Bible into question, is to draw the judgement of God into question because of who He chose for His words. To do that is to argue against God entirely, and therefore, against His existence. Either the Biblical God is God, and the Bible is accurate, or the Biblical God is not. There is no middle ground. There isn’t a “sort of” Biblical God.

So, we are left with your argument about logic. You argue that it is “illogical” based on some “half assed escape clause”. I assert that it is not only logical, but MORE logical to create an aged universe than it would be for God to have made a universe at the “birth” point of the universe, and then have waited millions of years for the point where it would be optimal to sustain life. That is no escape clause. That makes perfect logical sense. If I were God, and I were going to create a universe for the purpose of having humanity for love and companionship, I would make the universe at the perfect age for that end.

Don’t just say that it is illogical. Explain how it is illogical to presume that a God could have created the universe at it’s perfect time.

 
Flag Post

Everything you just said is jingoistic, human-oriented thinking. We are the special little center of the universe and the creator of that universe sped everything up so he could get to fucking with our lives. Seems like a wild supposition based on personal validation rather than a clear logical step from being a creator to creating.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by dd790:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:
Originally posted by MyTie:


If you were to go back in time, to a week after creation, and bring with you a telescope, and look for Andromeda, would you find it? If you were to look at Adam, what would he look like? Would he be a freshly joined sperm and egg? I doubt that. Adam would have been created at the optimum age for him to survive in the world. Why wouldn’t God also have created a universe at the proper age for human survival? Is it within God’s ability to create the entire universe by speaking it into existence, but outside of His ability to create it at any age He wanted? Can He speak life into being, but lacks the power to create it at any point in age?

Your logic ignores the inconvenient bit about science dating fossils and artifacts of humans much much older than Adam could hope to be.
In terms of the above this universe snipped into existence would include many living humans as well as their artifacts and the bones and artifacts of their Ancestors. Which would still be counter to some of the claims in the bible.

“Unless God deliberately made those fossils for the lulz of confusing people”

I’m just guessing at the counter argument you’ll get there but pretty sure that’s it.

Yes indeed it commonly is the counter argument presented. But the argument for the reason of gods actions changes from A. making the universe as if it was an older universe so that it would be better suited to mankind to B. making the world seem older to deceive Mankind about its true nature.

So B. is not a counter argument but actually an different argument entirely. One that is less contradictory to known facts but makes god a willful deceiver. A willful deceiver who punishes the people who he deceives for not seeing through his deception and follow his revelation. A deception that is so good and presents so much evidence that its a part and basis of many different scientific theories.
While his revelation is so poor and lacking in evidence that it is part and basis of no scientific theories and actual contradicts many of them.

 
Flag Post

It’s possible that you’re right TC.

It’s possible that science and logic are capable of revealing God, whatever that may be to you. It’s also possible that logic, though mighty indeed, may run into solid walls of ambiguity it may never breach. Perhaps the answers we search for will forever be beyond our comprehension, or even our perception.

Nobody alive is capable of truly disputing TC’s claim, or any faith-based arguments. Changes can always be made to suit the evidence; such is the nature of belief and confirmation bias. It’s like trying to prove that heaven doesn’t exist because it was said to be above the clouds and we haven’t found it yet.

And future science is as weak or as powerful as you would care to imagine, but stating what it will or won’t accomplish is as much an opinion as one’s religious beliefs, which will vary in strength based on the content of the argument and proximity to modern day.

 
Flag Post

So you’re arguing that the Earth IS in fact 6,000 years old, but it was created to LOOK as if it was 4,500,000,000 years old? So how about the Bible stories that describe this early Earth as having nobody but Adam, Eve, Caim and Abel? About all the different civilizations that lived before, during, and after that period? What about the flood? etc.?

 
Flag Post

Everything the Bible says is completely true? So we’re all inbred? Hmm, that actually does explain a lot.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by WolfgangAzureus:

So you’re arguing that the Earth IS in fact 6,000 years old, but it was created to LOOK as if it was 4,500,000,000 years old? So how about the Bible stories that describe this early Earth as having nobody but Adam, Eve, Caim and Abel? About all the different civilizations that lived before, during, and after that period? What about the flood? etc.?

It isn’t created to look that old. It was created to “be” that old. At least, that’s the theory. A universe at the optimum age for human survival. As for the people that came before, which people are those?

Originally posted by TheBSG:

Everything you just said is jingoistic, human-oriented thinking. We are the special little center of the universe and the creator of that universe sped everything up so he could get to fucking with our lives. Seems like a wild supposition based on personal validation rather than a clear logical step from being a creator to creating.


I challenge you to say this again, only this time, be more confrontational. I don’t think it’s possible. How about we try to discuss the possibilities here, not see which of us can piss farther.

 
Flag Post

I challenge you to say this again, only this time, be more confrontational.  I don’t think it’s possible.  How about we try to discuss the possibilities here, not see which of us can piss farther.

He’s not wrong. This is exactly the sort of thinking that led to church dogma on geocentricism – the idea that the sun revolved around the earth. If the earth revolves around the sun, then the sun was not purposely made for the benefit of mankind, so the thinking went. The dogma of geocentricism stifled scientific progress in the name of human arrogance about our place in the universe. Similarly you could look at the idea, from genesis, that all the animals were made to serve man, the result of which was the complete denial of animal rights for centuries.

It’s an amusing recurring conceit for a religion that claims humility as one its central virtues, and pride as one its deadliest sins.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by DrOctaganapus2:

A lot of people wonder this. I would assume because if a God is alone, he/she/it may get bored and may want to be recognized for it’s power.

Then why in the biblical hell make it nigh impossible to prove that (a) God(s) exists?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by DrOctaganapus2:

A lot of people wonder this. I would assume because if a God is alone, he/she/it may get bored and may want to be recognized for it’s power.

Then why in the biblical hell make it nigh impossible to prove that (a) God(s) exists?

If there is anything I’ve learned in my short time as a TA, it’s that students say the darnedest things.

Maybe there is a god, and he made us all so he could laugh at the ridiculous shit we say.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by WolfgangAzureus:

So you’re arguing that the Earth IS in fact 6,000 years old, but it was created to LOOK as if it was 4,500,000,000 years old? So how about the Bible stories that describe this early Earth as having nobody but Adam, Eve, Caim and Abel? About all the different civilizations that lived before, during, and after that period? What about the flood? etc.?

As for the people that came before, which people are those?

Homo floresiensis extinct 14,000 years ago
Homo neanderthalensis extinct 28,000 years ago
etc
Even Homo sapien has been around for ~200,000 years. Writing is older than the Biblical Earth (8,000 years), Domestication of animals (10,000 years), Domestication of dogs (15,000), Pottery (17,000), Musical instruments (35,000), …, Fire (800,000).

In Biblical Earth were all these discoveries made 6,000 years ago or were humans just created with 10’s, even 100’s of thousands of years of knowledge of them?
If so this is now moving into the realms of a God that not only deceives with tricks he has planted to deceive us as to the age of the universe, but also manipulated the thoughts of humans to believe they had known things for millennia.

I thought deception, lies, and manipulation were more the devil’s job?

 
Flag Post

This is still a deceptive god, it created a universe in which the apparent history of the universe is grossly different from the “true” history, and in which the consequences for belief in the apparent over the “true” is hellfire and damnation.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Redem:

This is still a deceptive god, it created a universe in which the apparent history of the universe is grossly different from the “true” history, and in which the consequences for belief in the apparent over the “true” is hellfire and damnation.

Exactly, it does seem strange that a God would create a universe to look like one thing, then damn people who believe what it looks like over what He says it really is.

I thought Biblically God created humans to have free will because angels don’t and he sort of got bored of them.
Why would a God go to all the trouble to give humans free will only to tell them what to think?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by TheBSG:

Everything you just said is jingoistic, human-oriented thinking. We are the special little center of the universe and the creator of that universe sped everything up so he could get to fucking with our lives. Seems like a wild supposition based on personal validation rather than a clear logical step from being a creator to creating.


I challenge you to say this again, only this time, be more confrontational. I don’t think it’s possible. How about we try to discuss the possibilities here, not see which of us can piss farther.

Haha, I don’t like you, but I like you.

You, first of all I don’t consider you a rational person…a rational Christian, maybe, I believe what you tell is what you turly believe, I don’t think you tell lies, I have seen you answer honestly, for the most part…and I agree some what with your argument here, but I don’t see why a perfect God would need to put Creation outside of human understanding…we are supposedly in His image, so why then should things be so mysterious? Shouldn’t we be able to understand exactly how He created the universe? Why would He think that it would not be important to us to know the beinging of Creation?
your argument feels to me like God put us into a glass jar and punched some holes in the lid and basically said “don’t worry about what’s outside, it’ll make no sense to you”
I don’t like that idea of a God.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

I challenge you to say this again, only this time, be more confrontational.  I don’t think it’s possible.  How about we try to discuss the possibilities here, not see which of us can piss farther.

He’s not wrong. This is exactly the sort of thinking that led to church dogma on geocentricism – the idea that the sun revolved around the earth. If the earth revolves around the sun, then the sun was not purposely made for the benefit of mankind, so the thinking went. The dogma of geocentricism stifled scientific progress in the name of human arrogance about our place in the universe. Similarly you could look at the idea, from genesis, that all the animals were made to serve man, the result of which was the complete denial of animal rights for centuries.

It’s an amusing recurring conceit for a religion that claims humility as one its central virtues, and pride as one its deadliest sins.

Catholicism has WHAT to do with Biblical teachings? The Bible says nothing about the Sun revolving around the Earth. Don’t ask me to account for everyone’s view.

Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by DrOctaganapus2:

A lot of people wonder this. I would assume because if a God is alone, he/she/it may get bored and may want to be recognized for it’s power.


Then why in the biblical hell make it nigh impossible to prove that (a) God(s) exists?

Because He desires faith.

Originally posted by dd790:
Originally posted by Redem:

This is still a deceptive god, it created a universe in which the apparent history of the universe is grossly different from the “true” history, and in which the consequences for belief in the apparent over the “true” is hellfire and damnation.


Exactly, it does seem strange that a God would create a universe to look like one thing, then damn people who believe what it looks like over what He says it really is.


I thought Biblically God created humans to have free will because angels don’t and he sort of got bored of them.
Why would a God go to all the trouble to give humans free will only to tell them what to think?

Since God doesn’t explain Himself to you He is deceptive?

Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by TheBSG:

Everything you just said is jingoistic, human-oriented thinking. We are the special little center of the universe and the creator of that universe sped everything up so he could get to fucking with our lives. Seems like a wild supposition based on personal validation rather than a clear logical step from being a creator to creating.


I challenge you to say this again, only this time, be more confrontational. I don’t think it’s possible. How about we try to discuss the possibilities here, not see which of us can piss farther.

Haha, I don’t like you, but I like you.


You, first of all I don’t consider you a rational person…a rational Christian, maybe, I believe what you tell is what you turly believe, I don’t think you tell lies, I have seen you answer honestly, for the most part…and I agree some what with your argument here, but I don’t see why a perfect God would need to put Creation outside of human understanding…we are supposedly in His image, so why then should things be so mysterious? Shouldn’t we be able to understand exactly how He created the universe? Why would He think that it would not be important to us to know the beinging of Creation?
your argument feels to me like God put us into a glass jar and punched some holes in the lid and basically said “don’t worry about what’s outside, it’ll make no sense to you”
I don’t like that idea of a God.


We were made in His image, but we weren’t made Gods. Really, for His plan, it wasn’t necessary to make us into Gods. Do we really need to understand creation in order to love? Do we need to have all mysteries revealed in order to obey? Faith is important to God, and we can’t have faith if we know everything. Everything that was necessary to know was given to us.

 
Flag Post

It isn’t created to look that old. It was created to “be” that old. At least, that’s the theory. A universe at the optimum age for human survival.

Couldn’t he just make a universe that would be perfect, and the appropriate age? Having to time-stasis the aging of the universe seems to be an admission to limits of power.

Also, would that not still invalidate the Days story of Genesis? If it /is/ that old, as opposed to merely seeming that way, then that story would still be false.

That said. I would stress the importance of non literal readings and returning to source. The word used for “Day” in the original hebrew script Yom has a specifically figurative connotation. It refers to the abstract passage of time, an ear mark of transition, of epochs. The exact same word is translated in other biblical passages in regards to that definition. Just about anywhere you see “And so it came to pass… something something”

 
Flag Post

Since God doesn’t explain Himself to you He is deceptive?

Since He created something to look like something it’s not I’d say that is close to the definition of deception

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

It isn’t created to look that old. It was created to “be” that old. At least, that’s the theory. A universe at the optimum age for human survival.

Couldn’t he just make a universe that would be perfect, and the appropriate age? Having to time-stasis the aging of the universe seems to be an admission to limits of power.

Also, would that not still invalidate the Days story of Genesis? If it /is/ that old, as opposed to merely seeming that way, then that story would still be false.

That said. I would stress the importance of non literal readings and returning to source. The word used for “Day” in the original hebrew script Yom has a specifically figurative connotation. It refers to the abstract passage of time, an ear mark of transition, of epochs. The exact same word is translated in other biblical passages in regards to that definition. Just about anywhere you see “And so it came to pass… something something”

Yes, and the same word is used to describe the “day”. Even today, that word in Hebrew is used to describe a day, which Hebrew tradition is from 3pm to 3pm. In fact, every time these “days” are specifically numbered in the Bible, they always refer to a day passage, such as Genesis 7:12. This is not to say that “he lived happlily, till the end of his days”, but that “he lived for another 3 days”. Do we see the difference? Another indicator that this was not a “indefinite and figurative” amount of time is due to the end of verse 5 of chapter one, which says “there was morning and evening the first day”.

Concerning the “limitation of God” to not create a “perfect” universe, but instead to create an “aged” universe: I think there is a specific reason the universe was created as it is. The ability is left in it to lot be perfect, but to allow choice, and to allow free will, and the decision to have faith, which requires a window for doubt. This is not to say that God was limited in the form of universe He could create, but created this universe because it was exactly what was required.