Actually it is the scientific model first published in scientific form by the Catholic priest in the 1930's, and in the 1950's was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church as being compatible with the scriptures of Genesis. If not mistaken, the Pope which made the decree claimed it was validation for the existence of God and of the Catholic faith.zeke25 said:
The Creation of the Universe
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yep, it's called the GAP theory and pretty much has the same acceptance as the theory of evolution among Christians.rockytopva said:
Just wondering, where did you come up with 15 billion years? Is it just a guess? I mean why not 16 billion? Or 872 billion?
- Dec 31, 2010
- 5,184
- 2,390
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Very much a generality... No way we will know the specifics. And I would imagine as we big better telescopes that we will have to revise these estimates over and over again.walls of jericho941 said:
Brother James
Active Member
God's Word does not tell us how long the earth remained without form, was void, and dark. It just says it came into being "in the beginning". Formless means rather cloud-like, doesn't it? Perhaps swirling mass that had not yet congealed into a planet. Between the word "deep" and the word "And" there is an undisclosed period of time, but we do know that the earth went from being formless to being a planet with waters. Nobody can point to scriptures and say what all happened in what exact timeframe with absolute certainty because God has not given anyone absolute perfect understanding of all of His truths.River Jordan said:
I tend to subscribe to string theory as positted by most physicists today. I find it fascinating to contemplate the things that might go on in those other dimensions that we cannot sense with our five senses. Even the 4th dimension, time, is beyond our ability to comprehend except for the instant of time we are in at any given moment. All other time we can relate to is based on our memory of a state of things that was different than the present moment. Those remembered times do not exist any more for us. But in those other dimension, which God fully occupies, all those moments of time exist and He transcends it all.
That is not biblical, It is scientific. But it helps me to understand how miracles and the entire spiritual realm are just as much a part of reality as the material universe I can see.
God created a fully mature universe just as He created a fully mature man and woman. I don't doubt His word just because we as human can't explain some things by science. IF a fully mature universe appears to be 15 billion years old and all life started out fully mature, so be it.
I doubt very little of how creation happened would be understood by the smartest scientists today, unless they just accepted it the way Christians are supposed to.
It's be at least 7000 - 8000 years that man has tried to understand creation and they are not really ANY closer to doing so.
I doubt very little of how creation happened would be understood by the smartest scientists today, unless they just accepted it the way Christians are supposed to.
It's be at least 7000 - 8000 years that man has tried to understand creation and they are not really ANY closer to doing so.
Yeah this is something Ive always struggle with, how come Christians find this so hard to accept, but yet will believe in a man raised from the dead and put their trust in Him, something they never saw with their own eyes. They will believe in the outlandish miracles of Jesus and the apostles but still the earth has to billions of years old.
Is really that much of a stretch to say that God created it all exactly as it is written. I dont think taking the literal view of biblical creation is taking the literal too far because we are not trying to fathom a natural phenomena, were trying to fathom the workings of God, which no one can do. But when we say such a thing they roll their eyes at us because here we go with the hairy fairy stuff again like were high on crack. There is a major hypocrisy with this stuff. I believe in miracles but at the same time I don't believe in miracles.
Is really that much of a stretch to say that God created it all exactly as it is written. I dont think taking the literal view of biblical creation is taking the literal too far because we are not trying to fathom a natural phenomena, were trying to fathom the workings of God, which no one can do. But when we say such a thing they roll their eyes at us because here we go with the hairy fairy stuff again like were high on crack. There is a major hypocrisy with this stuff. I believe in miracles but at the same time I don't believe in miracles.
Brother James
Active Member
What I have never understood is why some Christians insist that everyone else has to adopt their understanding of a 7000 year old universe. Now, there's nothing outlandish about miracles and I certainly don't need science to know what my faith informs me of. I do find it neat, though, when science comes around and articulates an understanding of what I already know by faith. String theory does that.
No ones asking you to adopt anything brother, well at least not myself personally, I could care less if someone believes the earth is billions of years old. Im just saying why does God have to fit inside the limits of our limited reasoning even our imaginations. The God I believe in is greater then my reason which is why hes my God. When I was an infant I had no idea how my Dad was driving the car, I just trusted that he could drive it and I even marveled at him for being able to do such a complex amazing thing.
Dont get me wrong I think science is an awesome way of discovering just how awesome and complex our God is, and because of science I now have no doubt in my mind that there is a Creator behind it all. I have no problem with people dating the earth, just why does the Biblical account have to be so impossible to believe when the same people will believe in a man risen from the grave and other great miracles written in the Bible.
I apologize if it sounded like I was having a go.
Dont get me wrong I think science is an awesome way of discovering just how awesome and complex our God is, and because of science I now have no doubt in my mind that there is a Creator behind it all. I have no problem with people dating the earth, just why does the Biblical account have to be so impossible to believe when the same people will believe in a man risen from the grave and other great miracles written in the Bible.
I apologize if it sounded like I was having a go.
Brother James
Active Member
I don't believe God gives me eyes to see that the sky is blue and then tells me I must accept on faith that it is red. Now, I can't find God through human reason. That is not why He gave me that human faculty of reason. But reasoning is a faculty that God did give to me. He gave me senses to make sense of my surroundings and the interactions of people and things. I don't believe God requires me to believe things that violate the faculties He has given me. He does require me to accept His Word on those things that are beyond my ability to discern and reason. But seeing how those things fit in with the faculties He has given me is comforting for me. I don't believe God created a universe that is a fascade like the Matrix movie where everything is a faked illusion. I clearly cannot comprehend the immense beauty and intricacy of His creation, but it's not an illusion made to look like something it's not, I don't think.
You're right, it's not an illusion, but at the same time God knows everything, so if He created all the laws of quantum and mechanical physics, then He know what needs to be done. He wasn't about to explain it to ancient man. He wanted man to faithfully obey Him, as they would never have understood, and so it goes today. You may have the faculty to reason but I assure you, that you don't have to faculties to understand God and how His creation came into existence.Brother James said:
Something from nothing is quite a feat, and we really don't need to reason it out, just accept it by faith. As His word says, "One day we will KNOW as we have been known".
Brother James
Active Member
Oh, I was in no way advocating reliance on human reason to understand how God's work of creation happened. I was simply saying that I think the things we can observe with the senses He gave us are reliable. They fit into the whole truth, which only He knows. But I do think God lets us see a tiny corner of the entire reality that is Him. I dont' think He plays games to fool us, or make something appear to be something it isn't. When Jesus walked on the watter, it was not merely an illusion or a psychological game. It was real. And, the positioning of galaxies is also very real, I believe. And the measurements of energy waves reaching the earth are real, not concocted to make us think something that is not true.
Since in order to do that God would have to create starlight depicting events that never actually happened, doesn't that require God to be deliberately deceptive?StanJ said:
Yes, but you are assuming God would be dishonest to put those celestial bodies there and making their light visible immediately. I don't believe it would be and who is to tell God how to create? If you had seen Adam & Eve the day after they were created, would you have said they were 2 days old or 20 some odd years old? God doesn't play games and using that as justification, simply dishonours God.Brother James said:
Science can't even agree on the distance of the Pleiades constellation, which is first mentioned in Job 9:9... see the following link;
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/astronomy-new-findings-stoke-old-row-over-distance-pleiades-1463437
Prior to Darwin's The Origin of the Species, a great majority of Christians believed in a literal rendering of Genesis 1 - a six day creation.
Once Darwin's book came out, people began to place their faith in evolution, and inevitably, even Christians began to falter. There was an enormous gulf between the Bible explanation and this new idea from Science.
There was a rift within the church - there were those who rejected "science" and there were those who sat on the fence.
The Christians who wanted to remain God fearing Christians, while acknowledging the "infallibility" of science, were forced to come up with an in-between explanation, which was found no where in scripture, and so the beginning of the end of a literal Genesis started, Once Christians, who were scientifically minded, saw how God's creation explanation was allegorical, it was not difficult to believe the rest of scripture could be neatly lumped in with an allegorical explanation also.
In my opinion, this is where the great watering down of God's word began in earnest.
Now, people could legitimize all manner of sin, and lifestyles. All of a sudden, homosexuality was no longer a sin in the eyes of an allegorical God. Nor was adultery, or fornication, or stealing, or murder and on and on. Each one of these sins could now be wiped away from the allegorical God.
In some Christian circles, some of the afore mentioned were still considered to be sin, while others could be acceptable in God's eyes.
Today, there are a great number of Christian "camps" If I am an adulterer, I simply seek out a church which allows for my kind of lifestyle. I will be indoctrinated into believing I was born this way. There was a genetic predisposition for my lifestyle, and after all, how could a loving God create me with a sin that actually condemns me to eternal Hell right?
So, once people began equating, or even elevating fallible man's "scientific" explanation, a great many "intelligent" people left the church all together.
For those who still wanted God to save them upon their deaths, an in between explanation for creation had to be found.
How can we explain the creation of the universe, and everything in it, including life, without God's six day fairy tale?
Well, the scientists must know right? Of course they did! After all, these are men of science, they know all the answers.
The Big Bang! Yes, that's what happened, it was the Godless, big bang!
Here is the modern day explanation of the Big Bang. - long ago and far away - everything was nothing. Nothing could fit within a dot on this page. Nothing was extremely dense. Nothing began swirling around and around until it exploded out into??? Wait, we have to rewind...nothing exploded, and at first, nothing expanded into space! Then the rest of nothing became everything, and everything was extremely hot, but then began to cool down - it grew colder and colder, to the point where everything began to gather together, and coalesce. This is where all the planets and suns came from boys and girls. It happened over billions and billions of years.
This was great! Now we can be Christians, and intelligent ones too! This surely is how God did things, because scientists know everything boys and girls! That's when Theistic Evolution was born.
For some reason, people place more credibility on fallible man and his science, over God's own word.
There were no scientists around when God created everything. But in God, we have an eyewitness! We have the word of God! But for some of us, that is not good enough. That is anti-intellectual!
For many years, Christians allowed the atheistic men of "science" to have complete control over science. However, today, we have finally arrived at a place where there are Christian, creationists scientists. These men and women are making it ok to once again take God's Genesis account literal.
The Bib Bang Theory is coming apart piece by piece.
Here is creation scientist, explaining more issues which prove the Big Bang never happened.
This is not a knock on my brothers and sisters who believe a Theistic Evolution, however, it is intended to show that we can understand God's creation account without having to evoke an atheistic explanation.
The following can be found here - BIG BLUNDER
Another Big Bang Blunder
by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *
2014 has been a rough year for supporters of the Big Bang model. In March the BICEP2 radio astronomy team announced purported direct evidence for inflation, which is an integral part of the Big Bang model.1 The media loudly trumpeted this as “smoking gun” evidence for the Big Bang, and some Christians eagerly, but uncritically, accepted the claim.2
Years ago, inflation was tacked on to the original Big Bang model in order to save it from serious difficulties. Secular cosmologists believed these problems could be solved by postulating that the universe went through a period of inflation—an extremely rapid growth spurt—early in its history. Over time, inflation theory became increasingly bizarre, leading to the idea of a vast multiverse composed of infinitely many pocket, or “bubble,” universes.
Many secular scientists loved the multiverse idea. If these predicted universes really did exist, then surely some of them, they argued, would have physical laws allowing the spontaneous generation of life from non-living chemicals. Hence, they claimed that a creator was not needed to explain our existence: We Earthlings simply got lucky and happen to live in a universe whose physical laws permitted spontaneous generation and “goo to you” evolution.
Of course, there is no evidence for the existence of these other supposed universes, and this argument conveniently ignores the fact that spontaneous generation appears to be physically impossible. So even if these other universes did exist, and even if they all had extraordinary laws of physics permitting spontaneous generation, this would still do nothing to explain the origin of life in our universe.3
At the time of the BICEP2 announcement, the Institute for Creation Research pointed out difficulties with the claim and reminded Christians that secular scientists have often made dramatic announcements of alleged proofs for evolution, proofs which were later quietly walked back by secular scientists themselves.4
This alleged “smoking gun” was no exception. A mere two months after the dramatic announcement, even secular scientists were expressing doubts about the claim.5 By early June, the discovery had been discredited by two independent studies.6 One prominent theoretical physicist even called it a “Big Bang blunder” and noted that the BICEP2 researchers made their dramatic announcement to the world before their paper had even been peer-reviewed by qualified scientists.7 This was a serious breach of scientific ethics and protocol.
Worse yet, researchers from King’s College London are now claiming that accepting the BICEP2 results as legitimate would imply that the universe should have collapsed back in on itself shortly after the Big Bang, so that our universe should not even exist!8,9
This debacle should remind Christians of the dangers of trusting pseudo-intellectual secular origins stories over the Bible’s inspired creation account. Rather, we need to go back to Genesis and return to “the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:3), accepting the words of the all-powerful, all-knowing Creator Himself. He was present at the beginning and has given us a clear and perfect account of our universe’s origin.
Bronzesnake
Once Darwin's book came out, people began to place their faith in evolution, and inevitably, even Christians began to falter. There was an enormous gulf between the Bible explanation and this new idea from Science.
There was a rift within the church - there were those who rejected "science" and there were those who sat on the fence.
The Christians who wanted to remain God fearing Christians, while acknowledging the "infallibility" of science, were forced to come up with an in-between explanation, which was found no where in scripture, and so the beginning of the end of a literal Genesis started, Once Christians, who were scientifically minded, saw how God's creation explanation was allegorical, it was not difficult to believe the rest of scripture could be neatly lumped in with an allegorical explanation also.
In my opinion, this is where the great watering down of God's word began in earnest.
Now, people could legitimize all manner of sin, and lifestyles. All of a sudden, homosexuality was no longer a sin in the eyes of an allegorical God. Nor was adultery, or fornication, or stealing, or murder and on and on. Each one of these sins could now be wiped away from the allegorical God.
In some Christian circles, some of the afore mentioned were still considered to be sin, while others could be acceptable in God's eyes.
Today, there are a great number of Christian "camps" If I am an adulterer, I simply seek out a church which allows for my kind of lifestyle. I will be indoctrinated into believing I was born this way. There was a genetic predisposition for my lifestyle, and after all, how could a loving God create me with a sin that actually condemns me to eternal Hell right?
So, once people began equating, or even elevating fallible man's "scientific" explanation, a great many "intelligent" people left the church all together.
For those who still wanted God to save them upon their deaths, an in between explanation for creation had to be found.
How can we explain the creation of the universe, and everything in it, including life, without God's six day fairy tale?
Well, the scientists must know right? Of course they did! After all, these are men of science, they know all the answers.
The Big Bang! Yes, that's what happened, it was the Godless, big bang!
Here is the modern day explanation of the Big Bang. - long ago and far away - everything was nothing. Nothing could fit within a dot on this page. Nothing was extremely dense. Nothing began swirling around and around until it exploded out into??? Wait, we have to rewind...nothing exploded, and at first, nothing expanded into space! Then the rest of nothing became everything, and everything was extremely hot, but then began to cool down - it grew colder and colder, to the point where everything began to gather together, and coalesce. This is where all the planets and suns came from boys and girls. It happened over billions and billions of years.
This was great! Now we can be Christians, and intelligent ones too! This surely is how God did things, because scientists know everything boys and girls! That's when Theistic Evolution was born.
For some reason, people place more credibility on fallible man and his science, over God's own word.
There were no scientists around when God created everything. But in God, we have an eyewitness! We have the word of God! But for some of us, that is not good enough. That is anti-intellectual!
For many years, Christians allowed the atheistic men of "science" to have complete control over science. However, today, we have finally arrived at a place where there are Christian, creationists scientists. These men and women are making it ok to once again take God's Genesis account literal.
The Bib Bang Theory is coming apart piece by piece.
Here is creation scientist, explaining more issues which prove the Big Bang never happened.
This is not a knock on my brothers and sisters who believe a Theistic Evolution, however, it is intended to show that we can understand God's creation account without having to evoke an atheistic explanation.
The following can be found here - BIG BLUNDER
Another Big Bang Blunder
by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *
2014 has been a rough year for supporters of the Big Bang model. In March the BICEP2 radio astronomy team announced purported direct evidence for inflation, which is an integral part of the Big Bang model.1 The media loudly trumpeted this as “smoking gun” evidence for the Big Bang, and some Christians eagerly, but uncritically, accepted the claim.2
Years ago, inflation was tacked on to the original Big Bang model in order to save it from serious difficulties. Secular cosmologists believed these problems could be solved by postulating that the universe went through a period of inflation—an extremely rapid growth spurt—early in its history. Over time, inflation theory became increasingly bizarre, leading to the idea of a vast multiverse composed of infinitely many pocket, or “bubble,” universes.
Many secular scientists loved the multiverse idea. If these predicted universes really did exist, then surely some of them, they argued, would have physical laws allowing the spontaneous generation of life from non-living chemicals. Hence, they claimed that a creator was not needed to explain our existence: We Earthlings simply got lucky and happen to live in a universe whose physical laws permitted spontaneous generation and “goo to you” evolution.
Of course, there is no evidence for the existence of these other supposed universes, and this argument conveniently ignores the fact that spontaneous generation appears to be physically impossible. So even if these other universes did exist, and even if they all had extraordinary laws of physics permitting spontaneous generation, this would still do nothing to explain the origin of life in our universe.3
At the time of the BICEP2 announcement, the Institute for Creation Research pointed out difficulties with the claim and reminded Christians that secular scientists have often made dramatic announcements of alleged proofs for evolution, proofs which were later quietly walked back by secular scientists themselves.4
This alleged “smoking gun” was no exception. A mere two months after the dramatic announcement, even secular scientists were expressing doubts about the claim.5 By early June, the discovery had been discredited by two independent studies.6 One prominent theoretical physicist even called it a “Big Bang blunder” and noted that the BICEP2 researchers made their dramatic announcement to the world before their paper had even been peer-reviewed by qualified scientists.7 This was a serious breach of scientific ethics and protocol.
Worse yet, researchers from King’s College London are now claiming that accepting the BICEP2 results as legitimate would imply that the universe should have collapsed back in on itself shortly after the Big Bang, so that our universe should not even exist!8,9
This debacle should remind Christians of the dangers of trusting pseudo-intellectual secular origins stories over the Bible’s inspired creation account. Rather, we need to go back to Genesis and return to “the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:3), accepting the words of the all-powerful, all-knowing Creator Himself. He was present at the beginning and has given us a clear and perfect account of our universe’s origin.
Bronzesnake
Actually, among European scientists who were predominantly Christian, the ancient age of the earth preceded Charles Darwin by over a century.
As it all happened in an instance, nothing actually HAPPENED prior to that, so I fail to see your logic.River Jordan said:
Well it was ONE theory anyhow.River Jordan said:
You argued that God created a "mature universe" that has the appearance of an ancient age, but isn't actually ancient. A big part of that would have be God creating starlight that is already here and visible (rather than it taking say, 5 billion years to reach the earth). But much of that light is of cosmological events like supernovae. The standard interpretation is that the supernova happened 5 billion years ago and the light from that event took 5 billion years to get here, which means we are actually seeing something that happened 5 billion years ago.StanJ said:
Under your scenario of God creating a universe with apparent age, God deliberately placed the light from the supernova all the way to the earth. What you seem to be saying is that the supernova and God deliberately placing the light across the universe took place all at the same instant.
That seems to me to be a lot of deliberate and unnecessary manipulation for no reason other than to deceive us (God creates things one way, but goes out of His way to make it look like it was created another way).
???????? That comment doesn't make sense in light of what I posted.
again, that is man's way of looking and perceiving. I personally don't know, I accept by faith that what God inspired to have written IS true.River Jordan said:
That man has only recently been able to see light doesn't mean it hasn't always been there. We're just much better at detecting it as our instruments get better.
Astronomers don't all agree on the goings on in the cosmos. Look up the disparity about SN 185 and see.
You don't understand what I mean by theory?
I don't recall any scripture that describes God creating everything one way, but making it appear to have been created another way.StanJ said:
And...? Are you going to use "Scientists don't know everything about the universe" as an excuse to wave away everything from science?
I don't understand what "That's ONE theory" has to do with what I posted.
Similar threads
