• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A new theory for the creation of the universe.

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
It reads very much like apologetics - attempting to affix scripture to sort of support known scientific observation... or, in some cases even match it to what amounts to nothing more than scientific guess-work.
The point really is, that if one accepts that God created all things, then it cannot be avoided that all his creation is using science, not magic, to accomplish this and it must, must, adhere to physical laws. It does not have to adhere to the time-spans scientists like to claim, for their claim is not necessarily correct. Here it becomes a matter of what has been revealed.

There is a scripture that as a Christian, I am not that much a fan of. It says that we must go by faith, not by sight. (2 Cor 5:7) Though, the definition of faith is not what atheists seem to think, it would be so much easier if we could just walk by sight. Having to walk by faith reveals a person's heart condition vis-à-vis God. This, in its own accord limits how much God reveals to us. It also makes it more fun, puzzle like, have to study, search for things, translate things.

If you call this deception, please take that subject up with your maker when you encounter him.
-----------------
I had kind of hoped some comment about being able to understand things clearer now. That did not come forth.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
You may want to re-read Gen 1:1-5.

Verse one: says in the beginning God created the 'heavens'... ( Sun and Stars first )
Verse two: earth's atmosphere was so thick as in darkness (sunlight did Not reach all the way through to earth's surface)
Verse three: the already existing Sun's light finally reached through to the surface of the earth.
Verse four: that sunlight now reaching through to earth's surface was good in God's eyes.
Verse five: a portion of that sun's light was named or called "Day". (only a portion of that 24-hr. day was called"Day")
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
This, in its own accord limits how much God reveals to us. It also makes it more fun, puzzle like, have to study, search for things, translate things.

If you call this deception, please take that subject up with your maker when you encounter him.
What do you call intent to obscure facts, cover tracks and make less apparent your actual motives or drivers? That is what you are saying God has done. Again, you dress it up as "fun" or "puzzle-like" to have to study/investigate/search, but this is just a completely fanciful and sugar-coated way of looking at it. A simple analogy completely breaks this wide open.

Let's say you were interested in knowing something about someone you love. Let's assume you have a significant other, and you wish to know a particular thing about them. When you ask, they are vague, they dodge the question, tell you that you "need to have faith" in them/the situation/etc. In fact, all facts and evidence you can get your hands on indicates that what they HAVE told you is probably false. Let's say now that you finally learn "the facts" - and you are able to speak freely about it all with your significant other. Everything is on the level, there is nothing to fear, and no need to worry - in fact, there never was anything wrong at all, even though the information you were previously given was obscure, even deceptive in order to make you have to look even harder. So you ask about the earlier misdirection and misleading that was done to you, even though there was, literally, no reason for it that you can possibly think of, and they respond that they were simply testing you. Let's pretend they give a satisfactory answer when you ask them "why", so then you move on to ask what would have happened had you failed... they respond that they would have, at best, exiled you to some form of purgatory, and at worst, locked you within a torture chamber... forever. How would all of that make you feel?

I had kind of hoped some comment about being able to understand things clearer now. That did not come forth.
Unfortunately your take on the information only raises far more questions than it answers... especially if assuming God's existence. Just consider the analogy above.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
What do you call intent to obscure facts, cover tracks and make less apparent your actual motives or drivers? That is what you are saying God has done. Again, you dress it up as "fun" or "puzzle-like" to have to study/investigate/search, but this is just a completely fanciful and sugar-coated way of looking at it. A simple analogy completely breaks this wide open.

Let's say you were interested in knowing something about someone you love. Let's assume you have a significant other, and you wish to know a particular thing about them. When you ask, they are vague, they dodge the question, tell you that you "need to have faith" in them/the situation/etc. In fact, all facts and evidence you can get your hands on indicates that what they HAVE told you is probably false. Let's say now that you finally learn "the facts" - and you are able to speak freely about it all with your significant other. Everything is on the level, there is nothing to fear, and no need to worry - in fact, there never was anything wrong at all, even though the information you were previously given was obscure, even deceptive in order to make you have to look even harder. So you ask about the earlier misdirection and misleading that was done to you, even though there was, literally, no reason for it that you can possibly think of, and they respond that they were simply testing you. Let's pretend they give a satisfactory answer when you ask them "why", so then you move on to ask what would have happened had you failed... they respond that they would have, at best, exiled you to some form of purgatory, and at worst, locked you within a torture chamber... forever. How would all of that make you feel?


Unfortunately your take on the information only raises far more questions than it answers... especially if assuming God's existence. Just consider the analogy above.
I am no Oracle of Delphi. What I understand comes from study of the Bible, faith that God knows what is needed, and love of science.
While you are correct in how it raises questions, as to purgatory or torment in some hell, I can assure you that I have scriptural proof for Shakespeare's 'to be or not to be' - is what it is about, and when we die, we are not longer, do not exist, it is 'not to be.'

My thought on your question as to why things are veiled has a simple answer. God had to see humanity rising through years and years of human rule to receive proof needed for the heavenly court case that answers the question whether we have the right to rule ourselves or if his Theocracy is a must while at the same time provide a Messiah for humanity who shall rule this Theocracy.

Thus, my idea about the why of your question comes down to information, and how important in all things it is. If the wrong information comes into someone's hands, it can cause all kinds of problems. If explicit scientific knowledge is obtained by early civilizations, it could perhaps cause an explosion of understanding of premature accurate science. This could have derailed the slow path of growing knowledge that has happened. It was actually the one reason for God confusing the languages at Babel!
Genesis 11:6 . . .“Look! They are one people and there is one language for them all, and this is what they start to do. Why, now there is nothing that they may have in mind to do that will be unattainable for them. . .​
Here, we see that the reason for the confusion of the language was (didn't include this) to make them spread out over the earth to create the races and cultures, and, as stated here, to slow down their technological development until the time for this need occurred at our time of large populations that couldn't survive without it.

Hope you enjoyed the exchange of ideas, and feel free to pose me other challenges as you desire.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Hope you enjoyed the exchange of ideas, and feel free to pose me other challenges as you desire.
It becomes clear that either of us only have wild guesses as to the true nature of things. It also becomes clear that I may be the only one in our conversation willing to admit that my musings are just that.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
It becomes clear that either of us only have wild guesses as to the true nature of things. It also becomes clear that I may be the only one in our conversation willing to admit that my musings are just that.
For all I know, God might have gotten the giggles when he saw my post. However, I do know that if God is the creator of all things as I believe, that his creation is done through science, and application of the physical laws. That there may be much in this that is beyond our ken should be obvious.

Thus, I stand and do not accept that things were done in 6 days of 24 hours each, as I also do not accept that a singularity inflates, explodes without cause, and then up and creates an orderly universe; just like I do not accept the flat-earth claim as it is imbecilic in my eyes, and I think I have a simple elegant proof to how it can be proven wrong.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
I find ALL of the 6 creative days are summed up by the word ' day ' at Genesis 2:4
So, in Bible speak, the word day has shades of meaning. Just as we might speak of grandfather's day or time frame.
There is nothing in Genesis that tells us even if each of the creative days are of the same or of differing lengths of time.
Agree, Earth was Not created on Day One because Genesis is about getting the already existing Earth ready for mankind to inhabit Earth.

Your right about that, the earth was already in existence.long before anything was created on the earth.
So by this, leaves just how old is the earth, seeing the earth as being already in existence before anything was created on the earth?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Your right about that, the earth was already in existence.long before anything was created on the earth.
So by this, leaves just how old is the earth, seeing the earth as being already in existence before anything was created on the earth?

It would seem to me that because of the accuracy of microwaves that CMBR (Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation) dating is probably as accurate as possible in dating the Universe and Earth.
I think that is something like 4.5 billions years for Earth ( planet Earth named by God according to Genesis 1:10 )
What seems to me to be hard for people today to accept that mankind has only been on Earth thousands of years and Not millions as many are now taught.

I recall hearing many, many moons ago, when TV's had antennas, that if you turned on a TV to a channel that was Not broadcasting at the time ( that was channel 2 for me ) that one would see tiny specks or flecks of light running across the dark screen. I was told I was viewing the light coming to us from the beginning or start of our universe finally reaching Earth.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
There is a scripture that as a Christian, I am not that much a fan of. It says that we must go by faith, not by sight. (2 Cor 5:7) Though, the definition of faith is not what atheists seem to think, it would be so much easier if we could just walk by sight. Having to walk by faith reveals a person's heart condition vis-à-vis God. This, in its own accord limits how much God reveals to us. It also makes it more fun, puzzle like, have to study, search for things, translate things.

To me spiritual things means Not sighted things, so walking by faith would mean walking the spiritual walk by conducting one's self by cultivating the invisible fruit of God's spirit (spiritual things) such as listed at Galatians 5:22-23.
Then, those invisible spiritual qualities of faith becomes manifest in one's outward conduct or behavior.
So, we 'walk the spiritual walk' (and talk the spiritual talk - Hebrews 13:15) by faith by using or applying what is recorded in God's Word (Bible) rather then by using visible sighted things as a guide.
God's Word is a lamp ( flashlight ) and a light ( highbeams ) to life's paths and roadway as per Psalms 119:105.
Or, as one person said: Just so we don't drive by faith !.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
The point really is, that if one accepts that God created all things, then it cannot be avoided that all his creation is using science, not magic, to accomplish this and it must, must, adhere to physical laws. It does not have to adhere to the time-spans scientists like to claim, for their claim is not necessarily correct. Here it becomes a matter of what has been revealed.

There is a scripture that as a Christian, I am not that much a fan of. It says that we must go by faith, not by sight. (2 Cor 5:7) Though, the definition of faith is not what atheists seem to think, it would be so much easier if we could just walk by sight. Having to walk by faith reveals a person's heart condition vis-à-vis God. This, in its own accord limits how much God reveals to us. It also makes it more fun, puzzle like, have to study, search for things, translate things.

If you call this deception, please take that subject up with your maker when you encounter him.

Sorry, but have you really read Job, from 38 to 41.

None of the verses where God reply to Job, have any scientific merit. It just God sprouting nonsensical superstitions of his own "so-called" power.

A power that that clearly doen't exist.

I think the Book of Job is nothing more than fiction, an allegory.

But I f this book was truly a true story, then God is nothing but a dumb superstitious fella; ranking God as the village idiot would be insulting to the idiot and overestimation of God's wisdom.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
In the beginning, before anything known to mankind existed, there was a supernatural, intelligent being that created the universe. It is thought that He first created space and then He created matter. It is likely that He supplied the energy from Himself to create the universe. The belief is there was no time dimension at this point and He could have created everything instantaneously but He chose to do it in steps to serve His purpose which was to set days, weeks, months and years for the people He would create later.

What would become to be known as day one, It is probable that He created the heavens and the earth and furnished light from Himself to set up day and night.

It seems to reason that He then made the firmament which separated the waters above it from the waters below and called that day two.

It could have happened on the third day when the waters below the firmament gathered together and for dry land to appear which He called earth. The best estimate is the earth brought forth vegetation, plants and trees bearing fruit after their kind.

On the fourth day, He created lights in the expanse to separate day from night and these were made to give light on earth. The great light, the sun, was to govern the day and the lesser light, the moon, was to govern the night. Up until this event, there was no mechanism for measuring time, IOW, there was no time dimension, now it is in place and waiting for intelligence to measure it. This belief is based on much circumstantial evidence that seems to support this view.

It is likely that He created the creatures in the waters and the birds of the sky on the fifth day. He commanded them to be fruitful and multiply, each after its own kind.

Most think it was day six when He created the living creatures on the earth, each after its own kind. Then He created man in His own image, male and female and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply and to rule over the fish, the birds and over every living creature that moves on the earth.

Even though day four saw a mechanism put in place for measuring time, it was not until day six after the universe was created that there was an instrument, intelligence, to measure time. Most seem to agree with this theory.

There is a difference of opinion on exactly what point the laws of nature were created, some believing it was day one and others think it more likely to be day four.

Since God is outside of time and it means nothing to Him, He had a purpose for using six days, in man’s time frame, for the creation.


“Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exodus 20:9–11, NASB95)


Therefore, unless man can provide a provable explanation, using empirical evidence, of where, when and how space, matter, energy and time came into existence and in what sequence, I choose to believe in the supernatural.

I have tried to use a methodlogy used by science in presenting this new theory.

You remind me of one of my Viking ancestors.

As long as nobody can tell me how thunders and lightnings originate, I choose to believe in Thor.

Ciao

- viole
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
Sorry, but have you really read Job, from 38 to 41.

None of the verses where God reply to Job, have any scientific merit. It just God sprouting nonsensical superstitions of his own "so-called" power.

A power that that clearly doen't exist.

I think the Book of Job is nothing more than fiction, an allegory.

But I f this book was truly a true story, then God is nothing but a dumb superstitious fella; ranking God as the village idiot would be insulting to the idiot and overestimation of God's wisdom.
I can see you have an open mind regarding the Bible!!!
I can also see that it must be a looong time ago you read 38 -41.
-----------
Because I do not remember the entire Bible verbatum in my head, but instantly know that I have read it many times when reading it again, I checked up on your chapters. I didn't get very far before I said, how blind you are. Look at the short following verses. If you have any intelligence you can easily understand the following:
(first speaking about the measurements of the earth. How was the earth put in the habitable zone and having the right size)
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who determined the measures thereof, if thou knowest? Or who stretched the line upon it?

(In a scientific article, it says that at first the entire earth was underwater: Early Earth 'was covered in water' | Metro News
How did God cause the seas to form in basins and the land to come with mountains. So, indeed, in the beginning certain foundations were fixed)

6 Whereupon were 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?

(If you study the earth's early development with its athmosphere, we see this is true. That the sea has set boundaries, limits to where it can go is also a fact. It doesn't just eat up the continents with its never ending pounding)
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 clouds the garment thereof, And thick darkness a swaddling-band for it, 10 And marked out for it my bound, And set bars and doors, 11 And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further; And here shall thy proud waves be stayed?​

So, go ahead and mock, be an unbeliever, but in just the opening of chapter 38, your claim is seen as baseless. If the rest contains similar things, I do not remember, but I will check. The point made was made and shows your claim wrong.
 

Riders

Well-Known Member
Call me stupid but the whole entire OP reads this way to me. The beginning of the bible of how earth is made but I rewrite it in my own words.

Then I claim because the bible uses 6 days to measure earth beginnings and evolution doesnt:this is counted as a new creation theory and proof against the evolution.

I feel like I'm being conned,just a restating of Genesis bravo.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Be glad to, just as soon as you enlighten me where, when and how, space, matter, energy and time came into existence, can you do that. Oh yeah, I would expect to see empirical scientific evidence for your answer.
But where are your evidences for your "theory"?
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Call me stupid but the whole entire OP reads this way to me. The beginning of the bible of how earth is made but I rewrite it in my own words.

Then I claim because the bible uses 6 days to measure earth beginnings and evolution doesnt:this is counted as a new creation theory and proof against the evolution.

I feel like I'm being conned,just a restating of Genesis bravo.


The earth was not created in 6 days.
The earth is Millions if not Billions of years old and not 6000 years old.
As to where do people get that the earth as being created in 6 days or 6000 years old.

There is no where in the bible that said the earth as being created in 6 days or 6000yrs

That's man's teachings, and not what the bible or Genesis teaches.

If you were to take the dinosaurs bones which are Millions if not Billions of years old.That alone should tell you, that earth is Millions if not Billions of years old also. Right
 
Last edited:

jhwatts

Member
I look at science and I have seen on many occasion that it is forced to completely reshape a view in a particular area. An example would be an archeological dig. I have seen this several times, a new dig finds some new piece of evidence and suddenly they must reshape a view due to that find. Science is constantly changing and so my world view is based something that seem to be much more solid and has undergone little change over the last few thousand years. This would be the Christian God.

Why would I base my world view on something that is never the same?

I have a question I would like to have a few here provide me with a answer.

It seems that according to the law of gravity the order of the planets in our solar system should be organized in order from the one of the largest mass to the least. I mean the sun is the most massive and due to the suns gravitational pull those of the largest mass should be closest and decrease in descending order as the masses decrease. Why isn't this the case?

Also there is a vacume in space and so there is no resistance other than large objects.
 
Last edited:
Top