Evidence for God from Science

Seveneyes,

The 13.7 billion years happened within the universe, so it happened in time. Plus, God is the One that told us that the lights in the heavens are time keepers. They say that the universe is billions of years old. The only thing that happened independent of space and time, was the creation of space and time.

It sounds like your talking about our view of creation and God's view of creation, without making a clear distinction in your writing.

Genesis 1:14 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years

Dayage, that's a great point. If God gave us the stars to mark the years, why would He then deceive us by making the universe look old, by viewing the very stars used to mark years, if the universe was young?

RickD wrote:Genesis 1:14 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years

Dayage, that's a great point. If God gave us the stars to mark the years, why would He then deceive us by making the universe look old, by viewing the very stars used to mark years, if the universe was young?

I am not saying that he deceived us, only that the creation took place outside of time and that time was instituted. The main point is that science does not know the reason for creation and since it clearly was outside of time, if the creation was to have intelligent life, then we supersede the dinosaur. These things that we perceive in RELATIVE time with our linear view of it is the result of a massive creative event that I believe had a ripple effect backward in time. God did not endeavor to explain to us all of physics or the nature of say DNA in the Bible. He gave us what we needed to know and more is being revealed. There is a mystery to the nature of the universe and there is a reason that science and the bible seem at odds concerning the timeline, however, God did create the universe and our linear view of time does not hold a candle to what the reality actually is.

seveneyes wrote:These things that we perceive in RELATIVE time with our linear view of it is the result of a massive creative event that I believe had a ripple effect backward in time. God did not endeavor to explain to us all of physics or the nature of say DNA in the Bible.

very interesting idea I've never considered before. Don't know if it has any merit or not (in physics that is) but it's certainly interesting enough to explore further. Do you have any material or links that discuss that?

seveneyes wrote:

RickD wrote:Genesis 1:14 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years

Dayage, that's a great point. If God gave us the stars to mark the years, why would He then deceive us by making the universe look old, by viewing the very stars used to mark years, if the universe was young?

I am not saying that he deceived us, only that the creation took place outside of time and that time was instituted. The main point is that science does not know the reason for creation and since it clearly was outside of time, if the creation was to have intelligent life, then we supersede the dinosaur. These things that we perceive in RELATIVE time with our linear view of it is the result of a massive creative event that I believe had a ripple effect backward in time. God did not endeavor to explain to us all of physics or the nature of say DNA in the Bible. He gave us what we needed to know and more is being revealed. There is a mystery to the nature of the universe and there is a reason that science and the bible seem at odds concerning the timeline, however, God did create the universe and our linear view of time does not hold a candle to what the reality actually is.

I agree with Byblos - that certainly is an interesting idea. Definately one to ponder over.

Seveneyes, I'm sorry, my response wasn't towards your post. It was directed at the common YEC belief that the universe is young, but looks old.

Do you have any links that explain what you're talking about? It seems, you've peaked our interest.

The idea of transcendent time difference from the perspective of God vs. the perspective of man is pretty effectively presented and championed by Gerald Schroeder.

Here's a list of his books at Amazon.

http://amzn.to/GCDWk9

Canuckster1127 wrote:The idea of transcendent time difference from the perspective of God vs. the perspective of man is pretty effectively presented and championed by Gerald Schroeder.

Here's a list of his books at Amazon.

http://amzn.to/GCDWk9

I'm vaguely familiar with Schroeder. Doesn't WLC believe in something similar?

I think WLC does speak of it at times, but I have to confess I'm not conversant enough with Craig to answer that fairly or definitively.

Craig believes God was in a timeless state outside of creation. Now what that may be like is anyone's guess.

They say that the universe is billions of years old.

That is the fallacy of reification. Stars don't 'say' anything. People, using methods that have unprovable presumptions, say how old they view the universe.

The distance light has travelled from the stars is one indicator of how old the universe is. YEC's stating that God started the light's journey on its way to earth is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and smells of desperation.

I dont have any links to anything on the subject. I just sort of came across the Idea from other things that have heard and seen happen. I think that for me it really comes down to the fact that I believe that even though we are in this universe, what is outside of it is what really defines what life is and is the whole reason for it. So to me, time being relative shows that we are still connected to the timeless reality and therefore, 13.7 billion years is a ridiculous thing to ponder in the light of eternity and has no bearing on anything. I think that it is pretty clear that the linearity that we perceive in time is also kind of strange in a multidimensional universe. Why do we only view in terms of past and future like a 2 dimensional line and why do we assume that looking backward will answer everything?

I think of time being instituted by God. I wonder if it works like blowing bubbles. Think of yourself holding a bubble maker and blowing into it. If the bubble maker is the point of time institution and the bubble time itself. The first thing that comes our of the bubble stick is the far side of the sphere and then finally the beginning of the sphere. Creation outside of time means that the past and future have already been created and are like a sphere floating in timelessness. The things that haven't happened yet have in fact already happened... Or, creation is still taking place, the bubble is still being blown. The future and past are still growing which tells me that the creation begins not in our distant past, or in our distant future. The bubble blower evidently would be right in the middle somewhere.

I am not actually attempting to say that I am right about anything here, or create some new doctrine. All I am sure of is that timelessness is important in understanding our origins and it is not looked at by most anyone. It is not even questioned. The whole theory of evolution bases itself on assumptions about time.

jlay wrote:

They say that the universe is billions of years old.

That is the fallacy of reification. Stars don't 'say' anything. People, using methods that have unprovable presumptions, say how old they view the universe.

No. I don't think so Jlay. You may argue that people aren't hearing it right, but there is data and the stars do speak and the data and interpretations we have in many areas are accurate enough to support a tremendous amount of technology and theoretical predictions that are right far more often than not. The stars are speaking in that regard and God has revealed Himself through His creation as well as through Scripture and most centrally through Christ.

From a YEC position however that believes that things like the Speed of Light wasn't constant or that God created things with an appearance of age and denies science has the means to recognize it, the stars then no longer speak but are gagged and told to sit in the corner. Creation becomes a deception on God's part to mislead us by saying one thing in Scripture and then silencing creation.

The hermeneutic applied to Scripture is not Scripture itself. Examining that hermeneutic and validating it or rejecting it in part by how well it conforms with the reality of God's creation surrounding us, isn't a rejection of God. It's a rejection of an implausible and inaccurate hermeneutic that needs to be set aside so that the Scriptures and Creation can reunite in the duet they were intended to be.

Silvertusk wrote:The distance light has travelled from the stars is one indicator of how old the universe is. YEC's stating that God started the light's journey on its way to earth is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and smells of desperation.

Silvertusk, I'm not going to speak for jlay, but I don't think he believes that either. I think that is a desperate attempt by some YECs to reconcile the appearance of age, with their YEC belief. Not all YECs believe light was created en route. That would make God a deceiver, IMO. If the light we see wasn't from a star, but only appeared to be from a distant star, then that's pretty good trickery on God's part.