Creation vs. Evolution

[MichaelCadry]

I'm not trying to talk about his death. I'm just wondering how you are doing lately. I'm not talking ill of the deceased. Where were you prior to his passing? You all ignored him and weren't there for him. I was and I know what were on his thoughts during the time before he left. I'm not saying that he didn't remain atheist except that he believed in angels. I could try to find an email from him, if I haven't erased them all, and let you find out the hard way. None of you had ANYTHING to do with him in his time near the end, when he was in need, now did you?? I was his REAL Friend!! He was a person to me, not an email buddy!! You speak of things you do not know about, Hed. C'mon, can't we ever chat about things we agree about? You don't know what dying does to a man! There's no where to turn for a friend at that time. Only to God or an angel. He was not all healthy like you. That's why you believe your way and he believed his way.

What do you know about it? Nothing I suggest.

Michael

Dear Hedshaker,

I'm sorry that I got so upset last time. Following is one of Alwight's emails to me and my response or so. See what you think:


Hi Michael,
I now have a fully reclining riser char which is very comfortable and have
managed to finally catch up on some sleep. Currently I have to wait and see
where I may need radio therapy in the future when I have another scan soon, in a
way I don't want to know, of course I'd like to be told that nothing has
changed.
If you can arranged for perhaps one of your angels to make me well again, I'll
be happy to say what happened.
Alan

----Original message----
From : mcadry1@cox.net
Date : Mon, 4 Jul 2016 2:51:58 -0700
To : alanscrivens@btinternet.com
Subject : True Blue!!

Dear alwight,

I hope you are not upset with me over my last post to you. I will stick by you,
no matter what happens. You are a dear friend, and I don't plan on giving you
up for anything. Hope you don't mind. I am not a fair-weather friend. I'll
stick with you to the end. That could be quite a while from now, so try to be
joyful while you can.

I've missed you, but Silent Hunter has been keeping me pretty busy every night
lately. I was up until 5:30 a.m. with him yesterday. I sure was ready for bed
after that. Alan, you might as well be happy while you're still alive. You may
live for a lot longer than they say. Look how you were wrong about the chemo.
My prayers are with you. Only good can come of that!! So you still have your
stoma bag on. Why don't you tell them to operate on you and fix things up
again? You don't have to carry that damn bag any longer!! I don't believe they
are treating you this way. The chemo is done! Time to put you back together
again. They don't know how long you have.

Well Amigo, let me know how you are doing and how you feel soon.

Much Love And Cheerio, Mate!!

Michael


Dear Hedshaker,

This is just one of many. I had to search quite a bit before I found one of his more recent emails. Make of it what you will.

Warmest Regards & Cheerio!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Many of the billions who believe the Bible actually believe as I do that God set evolution in motion, that Gods helpers fostered evolution. They have common sense and an education which overrides superstition. I often hear from Christians that the YEC story of Genesis must be allegorical and not literal, that's how they deal with it.

Old earth evolution was obvious to me before I ever found the Urantia Book.

Dear Caino,

People here don't know what your Urantia Book even insinuates. Let them Google it and then decide if they want to partake of it. Many Christians believe in evolution, but that doesn't make them right about that. They will find out more when they meet their Savior. None of us mind waiting for that. Then we will see if your version of evolution is true.

The apocalyptic writers added the silly threats of plagues to the Book of revelation, but because you believe Jesus wrote that warning, when he returns and has more to say it cant be added to the Bible. That's just dumb.

The writers didn't just add plagues. When you meet God, He will tell you how they were real and not fake.

Its all very simple Michael, the Hebrew writers were just trying to present a consistent story of their history and their faith, they wrote in preacher speak. It was understood at the time to be pseudo-biographical. Later generations converted it into the word of God just like the church converted Paul's letters to the word of God.

But you aren't allowed to agree with me, so we remain at a disagreement.

They wrote in 'preacher speak.' You've got to be kidding with that little gem. You make me laugh.

Surely I am allowed to agree with you, but I don't, so therefore we Do remain at a disagreement. Your beliefs and words are too far-fetched.

I'm not trying to be mean, Caino. Of course, I think you are a nice fellow. We just don't always agree. I'd rather keep you on my Friend's List, of course.

He Will Refine Us Like Silver,

Michael

 

[Tyrathca]

Michael not only is it highly inappropriate to release the private messages of someone else but to do so of someone who has died for your own petty ends is disrespectful.

To then also misrepresent what he said...

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Caino]

Dear Caino,

People here don't know what your Urantia Book even insinuates. Let them Google it and then decide if they want to partake of it. Many Christians believe in evolution, but that doesn't make them right about that. They will find out more when they meet their Savior. None of us mind waiting for that. Then we will see if your version of evolution is true.



The writers didn't just add plagues. When you meet God, He will tell you how they were real and not fake.



They wrote in 'preacher speak.' You've got to be kidding with that little gem. You make me laugh.

Surely I am allowed to agree with you, but I don't, so therefore we Do remain at a disagreement. Your beliefs and words are too far-fetched.

I'm not trying to be mean, Caino. Of course, I think you are a nice fellow. We just don't always agree. I'd rather keep you on my Friend's List, of course.

He Will Refine Us Like Silver,

Michael

Some of the UB revelation is truly bizarre, but I was born onto a Christion world which had already accepted bizarre things as facts, so they became normal. If the Noah flood story wasn't in the Bible and a guy in Time Square started preaching it, we would laugh at him, he might even get arrested!

People don't believe bizarre biblical claims because the sound "true", they are willing to believe suspicious things because they are in the sacred book along side other spiritual truths that are self evident. That is true of my faith in the Urantia Revelation. There is so much that is consistent and makes sense, that the bizarre stuff I just take with a grain of salt.

In friendship
Colter

 

[Rondonmonson]

Many of the billions who believe the Bible actually believe as I do that God set evolution in motion, that Gods helpers fostered evolution. They have common sense and an education which overrides superstition. I often hear from Christians that the YEC story of Genesis must be allegorical and not literal, that's how they deal with it.

Old earth evolution was obvious to me before I ever found the Urantia Book.

The apocalyptic writers added the silly threats of plagues to the Book of revelation, but because you believe Jesus wrote that warning, when he returns and has more to say it cant be added to the Bible. That's just dumb.

Its all very simple Michael, the Hebrew writers were just trying to present a consistent story of their history and their faith, they wrote in preacher speak. It was understood at the time to be pseudo-biographical. Later generations converted it into the word of God just like the church converted Paul's letters to the word of God.

But you aren't allowed to agree with me, so we remain at a disagreement.

I am just wondering friend, why would evolution be needed if God created everything ? I to think so many on both sides do not understand the creation story, but just as there is no YEC, nor is it logical, there also is no evolution.

The Hebrew language had about 4000 words compared to 500,000 in the modern English language, many words had multiple meanings, the word used for Day [YOM] has about 50 meanings, day is the most common, but the original meaning was "to be hot". it can also mean a period of time, chronicles, age, etc.

So each day is only a period of time between the first period and the starting of the next period, from Gods viewpoint, not ours. The first day was 9.2 Billion years, the second day was 3.6 billion years, the third day was 100 million years etc.... God created the universe, He said so, and all scriptures are of God, not men. Man was created 6000 years ago, during the sixth day, which last about 250 million to 300 million years. When man was created, God rested and we are now in the seventh day. Any supposed man of older origins had no imparted Spirit from God and thus was only an animal, not a human being. Just because men told you evolution was true, don't sweat it, men have been lying for centuries.

 

[6days]

So each day is only a period of time between the first period and the starting of the next period, from Gods viewpoint, not ours. The first day was 9.2 Billion years...

Hey Rondo.... Welcome to TOL!
The word Day (yom in Hebrew) is always easy to understand be context. There are many ways to confirm the creation days are 24 hour periods of time by context. For example we can check elsewhere in scripture where the word day is used along with words like 'evening', 'morning', or along with a number (Ex 40 days)...In EVERY one of those situations it ALWAYS refers to 24 hour periods of time.

From the straight forward reading of Gods Word, how can Christians fit millions of years into the Bible? Here are a few answers as to why theistic evolution and long ages contradicts scripture.

A Theologian Answers
Dr Peter Barnes, lecturer in church history at the Presbyterian Theological Centre in Sydney. He wrote: “…if God wanted us to understand the creation week as a literal week, He could hardly have made the point any clearer…. The theological argument is also compelling. According to the Bible, there was no death until there was sin. The creation is cursed only after Adam sinned (cf. Genesis 3; Romans 5:12–21; 8:19–25). This implies that all the fossils of dead animals must date from after Adam’s fall. If there was blood and violence in the creation before Adam sinned, the theological structure of the biblical message would appear to suffer considerable dislocation"

An Atheist Answers
From atheists.org/atheism
"if Adam and Eve and the Talking Snake are myths, then Original Sin is also a myth, right? Well, think about it.

Jesus’ major purpose was to save mankind from Original Sin.Original Sin makes believers unworthy of salvation, but you get it anyway, so you should be grateful for being saved (from that which does not exist)Without Original Sin, the marketing that all people are sinners and therefore need to accept Jesus falls moot.

All we are asking is that you take what*you know*into serious consideration, even if it means taking a hard look at all you’ve been taught for your whole life. No Adam and Eve means no need for a savior. It also means that the Bible cannot be trusted as a source of unambiguous, literal truth. It is completely unreliable, because it all begins with a myth, and builds on that as a basis. No Fall of Man means no need for atonement and no need for a redeemer. You know it.

A Hebrew Scholar Answers (who does not believe Genesis)
James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University, former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford.
"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; .. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.".

A Christian Apologist Answers
Joe Boot, President of Ezra Institute for Contemporary Christianity
“Since the doctrines of Creation, the Fall and Redemption stand in an absolute historical continuum, we get a distorted worldview when we play games with Genesis.

“The apologist seeks to present biblical truth with coherence. In my experience, one cannot even formulate a compelling response to classic questions like the problem of evil and pain without a clear stand with Scripture on the creation issue.

“I have never been able to see how anyone who wants to defend the faith and proclaim the Gospel can compromise the foundation stones of that defence and then expect clear-thinking people to find a proclamation of salvation in Christ compelling.”

A Prof / PhD Biblical Studies Answers
Dr. Tom Wang says "Often, people will use the old argument that we should concentrate on preaching the Gospel, rather than get distracted by ‘side-issues’ such as Creation. But if we cannot believe the record of Creation, then why believe the record of the New Creation (‘if anyone is in Christ, he is a New Creation; the old is gone, the new has come’—2 Corinthians 5:17)?”


An Historian Answers (Prof with 2 PhD's)
Dr Benno Zuiddam“God created this world in a very short period of time, under ten thousand years ago. Whether you read Irenaeus in the 2nd*century, Basil in the 4th, Augustine in the 5th, Thomas Aquinas in the 13th, the Reformers of the 16th*century, or Pope Pius X in the 19th, they all teach this. They all believed in a good creation and God’s curse striking the earth—and the whole creation—after the disobedience of a literal Adam and Eve.”

A Biologist Answers
Dr Georgia Purdom says "many Christians have compromised on the historical and theological importance of Genesis. If Adam and Eve aren’t real people who sinned in the Garden of Eden, and as a result we are all not sinners, then Jesus Christ’s death on the cross was useless. ...the*literal truth of Genesis is so important to the authority and truthfulness of Scripture. It is the very foundation of the Gospel."

Our Creator Answers
JESUS speaking (Or why would they want to)"Haven't you read the Scriptures?They record that from the beginning 'God made them male and female.'"

So, again the question is, how can you (why would you?) squeeze millions of years into Gods Word without compromising the Gospel?

 

[Rondonmonson]

Hey Rondo.... Welcome to TOL!
The word Day (yom in Hebrew) is always easy to understand be context. There are many ways to confirm the creation days are 24 hour periods of time by context. For example we can check elsewhere in scripture where the word day is used along with words like 'evening', 'morning', or along with a number (Ex 40 days)...In EVERY one of those situations it ALWAYS refers to 24 hour periods of time.

From the straight forward reading of Gods Word, how can Christians fit millions of years into the Bible? Here are a few answers as to why theistic evolution and long ages contradicts scripture.

Hello brother, thanks. I am not much into Reading C&P, I do in certain instances where it edifies a point. I like to hear from others about their understandings more so. So I will be honest I just glanced at the rest of your post.

Let me ask you a question brother, have you ever heard of he WMAP/NASA program ? They mapped the whole universe, using microwaves and they can see the universe from its inception 13.7 billion years ago, and guys what the map shows (please google it, very cool) is that Quantum Fluctuations (God) caused the Big Bang and then you had 360,000 years of Inflation/Afterglow, followed by, get this, 400 million years of Darkness (And there was Darkness on the face of the deep, and the Evening and the Morning was the first day) then the first stars started forming, they could not have formed before this period, it is impossible.

But just think, it proves Genesis first day correct, Darkness (Evening) was first, then the light.

YOM means too be hot, that is the original meaning, not day, so the first day had darkness, then "HOT" or Stars. God doesn't need to change the Laws of Nature to create the universe, it is not like He has to wait, God lives in all time periods at once, as soon as He gave the order for creation, it was finished, because God lives in the future also. No reason for God to hurry up creation.

The universe is 13.7 billion years old, and it took God all but the last 6000 years to create it.

 

[6days]

Hello brother, thanks. I am not much into Reading C&P,

I suspect you don't like reading things that contradict your beliefs. The post was my own.

Let me as you a question brother, have you ever heard of he WMAP/NASA program ? They mapped the whole universe, using microwaves and they can see the universe from its inception 13.7 billion years ago

Nonsense. You are confusing distance with time. A light year is the distance light can travel in a year. If you think distance and time are the same thing, then you must believe the universe is almost 50 billion years old. (Light horizon is 46+ billion light years).

and guys what the map shows (please google it, very cool) that Quantum Fluctuation (God)...

Nonsense again. WMAP shows no such thing as a quantum fluctuation causing everything.... And the Bible tells us God is a Holy personal God...not a fluctuation.

caused the Big Bang and then you had 360,000 years of Inflation, followed by, get this, 400,000 million years of Darkness (And here was Darkness on the face of the deep, and the Evening and the Morning was the first day) then the first stars started forming, they could not have formed before this period, it is impossible.

Actually... God created light on the first day, then created the sun, moon and stars on the fourth day.

YOM means too be hot, that is the original meaning, not day, so the first day had darkness, then "HOT" or Stars. God doesn't need to change the Laws of Nature to create the universe, it is not like He has to wait, God lives in all time periods at once, as soon as He gave the order for creation, it was finished, because Gd lives in the future also. No reason for God to hurry up creation.

YOM has many meanings. The meaning in Hebrew (As 'day' is in English) has many meanings but understood by context. The context in Genesis1 is 24 hour days.

The universe is 13.7 billion years old, and it took God all but the last 6000 years to create it.

Jesus said, male and female were from the beginning of creation.... Not at the end.

 

[Tyrathca]

Nonsense. You are confusing distance with time. A light year is the distance light can travel in a year. If you think distance and time are the same thing, then you must believe the universe is almost 50 billion years old. (Light horizon is 46+ billion light years).

Don't do physics, you're obviously not very good at it..... Or bother to read anything about it at all.

So 6days, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and mathematically rigorous explanation for the relatively slow speed of light now and the massive distances we see. Many have tried, such as vague allusions to a different speed in the past (which fail tests against already known observations) or that the objects aren't as far away as claimed (which would mean the universe around us is ridiculously miniature in order to fit everything without crushing and incinerating us) or that the light was "created in transit" (meaning almost everything we see in the sky is a false history, none of it beyond 6,000 light years is real. Which opens a whole load more can of worms if you go into the physics deeper, especially gravity). Clearly you think there is a Creationist explanation for this inconsistency with light and a young universe, so what is your preferred explanation and where can I find information about it?

 

[Rondonmonson]

I suspect you don't like reading things that contradict your beliefs. The post was my own.

The post is your, no doubt, but each one of the sub-posts were C&P, which is fine, but I was being honest, I will not read tons of C&P, I will read a little if it edifies a point. I could C&P the whole bible and the post would indeed be mine.

Nonsense. You are confusing distance with time. A light year is the distance light can travel in a year. If you think distance and time are the same thing, then you must believe the universe is almost 50 billion years old. (Light horizon is 46+ billion light years).

I don't think you even understand what I am speaking of here, it has nothing to do with time nor distance, I spoke of the universe being mapped by using microwaves, just like you can see things on radar with microwaves. http://donsnotes.com/science/astronomy/wmap-timeline.html

Nonsense again. WMAP shows no such thing as a quantum fluctuation causing everything.... And the Bible tells us God is a Holy personal God...not a fluctuation.

Quantum Fluctuations is what Scientists call it, they do not understand it is not Quantum Fluctuations but rather God. You seem to have misconstrued my point. They have discovered God and do nor even understand it. Scientists have discovered you can get something from nothing via Creation, if you have the "Laws of Nature" (Quantum Fluctuations) or a Set of Forces in place. They can see in the WMAP/NASA Map, this Quantum Fluctuations/Laws of Nature.

Quantum Fluctuations (Set of forces/Laws of nature, is a must)
1) Not Physical
2) Acts on the Physical
3) Created the Physical from Nothing
4) Predates the Universe

What does that sound like to you ? The Biblical God !!

1. God is a Spirit He is not a Physical being ( God is a Spirit and must be worshiped in like manner )
2. God said, In the Beginning ( So the Physical had a beginning )
3. God created all matter from nothing ( God created the Heaven and the Earth )
4. God is Eternal, the bible says so in many places.

The point was, scientists have discovered the cause of the Big Bang, because you can't get something from nothing, the problem is they just do not understand what they discovered is God. You missed the point it seems.

Actually... God created light on the first day, then created the sun, moon and stars on the fourth day.

God set the Seasons on the Fourth Day, he did not Create the Sun, Moon and Stars on the Fourth Day, that is a misunderstanding of the word. The Earth was in place on the Second day, the Earth has to have the Sun to hold it into its orbit. Both the Sun and Earth are 4.5 Billion years old. They were both around on the Second day. The First day went from 13.7 Billion years to 4.5 Billion years when the Earth and Sun was created and spoke about. The Second day lasted from 4.5 Billion years BC until the grasses and trees came forth, at about the 900 million BC mark, so it lasted 3.6 Billion years. The Third day lasted about 100 Million years, the Fourth day was God setting the Seasons by placing the Moon in its final resting place, where the Sun would rise in an orderly manner. This day lasted until like 550 Million years to 600 million years BC. The Fifth Day was the Sea Creatures being created, it lasted from 550 M. BC to about 250-300 Million BC. Then the Land Animals were created, it lasted from 300 M. BC to 6000 years ago when man was created. Then God rested. The Dinos were Created and wiped out on the Sixth day.

The Universe is not 6000 years old. And I am a Creationist who knows Evolution is Bogus and of Satan. But we have to be realists. The Universe can not be 6000 years old, it is just nonsensical to me. To others, if they believe that, more power to them, but it makes no sense to me, to each his own.

 

[6days]

So 6days, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and mathematically rigorous explanation for the relatively slow speed of light now and the massive distances we see.

There are several possible answers to this 'dilemma'. But, one possible answer may be in scripture, where it tells us that God spread (and is spreading) the heavens. For a Creator who can speak the universe into existence, how fast could He spread the stars?
Another answer may have something to do with the theory of relativity..... What is the one way speed of light? BTW... How fast did the universe expand initially according to Big Bang 'theory'?

 

[Tyrathca]

There are several possible answers to this 'dilemma'.

Which sounds like you don't actually have a rigorous answer to the dilemma.

But, one possible answer may be in scripture, where it tells us that God spread (and is spreading) the heavens. For a Creator who can speak the universe into existence, how fast could He spread the stars?

This is beyond vague. It sounds like you're proposing a special form of inflation but I can't seem to discern how this would actually help the speed of light issue.

Another answer may have something to do with the theory of relativity..... What is the one way speed of light?

I'm not sure this leads where you want it too or will fit with already known observations. Also VAGUE.

BTW... How fast did the universe expand initially according to Big Bang 'theory'?

I'm sure you can look up the different hypothesises regarding this. It is completely irrelevant to the question of how Creationism deals with the problem of a slow speed of light and a ridiculously large galaxy. You're deflecting, even if physicists had no explanation at all for what we saw that would still not make the problem for Creationism any easier.


As I said, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and rigorous explanation for this problem. After this post I'm still waiting.

 

[Jose Fly]

It is completely irrelevant to the question of how Creationism deals with the problem of a slow speed of light and a ridiculously large galaxy. You're deflecting, even if physicists had no explanation at all for what we saw that would still not make the problem for Creationism any easier.


As I said, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and rigorous explanation for this problem. After this post I'm still waiting.

Because creationism is entirely faith-based. Maybe you should have started by asking 6days if his views on the speed of light are faith-based or scientific. If they're the former, you can't hold them to a scientific standard. But if he says they're the latter, then your questions are appropriate.

 

[Rosenritter]

Dear Hedshaker,

I'm sorry that I got so upset last time. Following is one of Alwight's emails to me and my response or so. See what you think:


Hi Michael,
I now have a fully reclining riser char which is very comfortable and have
managed to finally catch up on some sleep. Currently I have to wait and see
where I may need radio therapy in the future when I have another scan soon, in a
way I don't want to know, of course I'd like to be told that nothing has
changed.
If you can arranged for perhaps one of your angels to make me well again, I'll
be happy to say what happened.
Alan

I wouldn't interpret that as saying Alan believed in angels. More that if an angel made him well again, he would be glad to believe and share the experience, that he would give credit. But to be fair, he wasn't hostile to the possibility of angels, he just needed a reason to believe.

 

[Rosenritter]

Michael not only is it highly inappropriate to release the private messages of someone else but to do so of someone who has died for your own petty ends is disrespectful.

To then also misrepresent what he said...

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

It wasn't anything held in confidence, and the person who is dead is exactly that, dead. The living parties are the ones that might desire confidentiality. If Michael is the only living party, he's the only one affected by it now.

 

[Rosenritter]

I am just wondering friend, why would evolution be needed if God created everything ? I to think so many on both sides do not understand the creation story, but just as there is no YEC, nor is it logical, there also is no evolution.

The Hebrew language had about 4000 words compared to 500,000 in the modern English language, many words had multiple meanings, the word used for Day [YOM] has about 50 meanings, day is the most common, but the original meaning was "to be hot". it can also mean a period of time, chronicles, age, etc.

So each day is only a period of time between the first period and the starting of the next period, from Gods viewpoint, not ours. The first day was 9.2 Billion years, the second day was 3.6 billion years, the third day was 100 million years etc.... God created the universe, He said so, and all scriptures are of God, not men. Man was created 6000 years ago, during the sixth day, which last about 250 million to 300 million years. When man was created, God rested and we are now in the seventh day. Any supposed man of older origins had no imparted Spirit from God and thus was only an animal, not a human being. Just because men told you evolution was true, don't sweat it, men have been lying for centuries.

Do you want to know why "Day" cannot mean millions of years? Because God specifically defines the meaning of "Day" as "evening and morning" which has no alternative meanings.

Genesis 1:5 KJV
(5) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Genesis 1:8 KJV
(8) And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Genesis 1:13 KJV
(13) And the evening and the morning were the third day.

And so on and so forth. The days are defined as containing one evening and one morning. Those are what we know as being roughly twenty-four hour periods.Besides this, logically, look at what was in each day. Plants were created on one day, birds and bees on another. How long would some of the plants survive without birds and bees for pollination?

Yes, Hebrew may be a RISC (Reduced Instruction Set) language, but that doesn't mean it can't be precise with additional definition and context. God both defined day as being "evening and morning" but also provided context with which we can apply our scientific understanding of plant life cycles to see that it must mean something much shorter than a year.

That leaves "day" meaning "day" as in the normal meaning of "day" and not the metaphorical meaning.

 

[Rosenritter]

Don't do physics, you're obviously not very good at it..... Or bother to read anything about it at all.

So 6days, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and mathematically rigorous explanation for the relatively slow speed of light now and the massive distances we see. Many have tried, such as vague allusions to a different speed in the past (which fail tests against already known observations) or that the objects aren't as far away as claimed (which would mean the universe around us is ridiculously miniature in order to fit everything without crushing and incinerating us) or that the light was "created in transit" (meaning almost everything we see in the sky is a false history, none of it beyond 6,000 light years is real. Which opens a whole load more can of worms if you go into the physics deeper, especially gravity). Clearly you think there is a Creationist explanation for this inconsistency with light and a young universe, so what is your preferred explanation and where can I find information about it?

It's perfectly simple. Ask me. I'm a Creationist. I've heard and answered the question before. At least, if your question is the one I think it is. Can you state your question clearly?

 

[6days]

But, one possible answer may be in scripture, where it tells us that God spread (and is spreading) the heavens. For a Creator who can speak the universe into existence, how fast could He spread the stars?

This is beyond vague. It sounds like you're proposing a special form of inflation but I can't seem to discern how this would actually help the speed of light issue.

Yes... it may be vague, because we don't know exactly how God did it. However we do know that in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them.

Another answer may have something to do with the theory of relativity..... What is the one way speed of light?

I'm not sure this leads where you want it too or will fit with already known observations. Also VAGUE.

Already known observations admit that the one way speed of light can't be measured. Einstein called it a convention, suggesting it could be almost anything providing the 2 way speed is consistent with 'already known observations'.

BTW... How fast did the universe expand initially according to Big Bang 'theory'?

I'm sure you can look up the different hypothesises regarding this. It is completely irrelevant to the question of how Creationism deals with the problem of a slow speed of light and a ridiculously large galaxy.*

The 'ridiculously large UNIVERSE' may be even ridiculously largely than you think...a testimony / witness to the 'ridiculously' awesome majesty of its creator.* As I said earlier "Apparently some Oxford researchers now think the universe could be 250 times bigger than current estimates. And, they are suggesting that galaxies at the outer edges of the observable universe are too "well formed" to have occurred right after the Big Bang (Falsely assuming the 'Big Bang' as their starting point). It will be interesting over the next while to see how this changes evolutionary explanations of the age of the universe and other beliefs. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/big-unive...230016820.html"

Regarding you avoiding to answer how fast the universe expanded initially according to Big Bang 'theory'...Perhaps you are embarrassed by some of the VAGUE and silly answers.* Essentially though, the answer is that space expanded faster than the speed of light.
How fast God spread the universe, we don't know.... 1 minute? 24 hour?

As I said, I've never had a creationist cite a consistent and rigorous explanation for this problem.

Amusing how *evolutionists demand rigorous explanations from creationists, when they themselves are satisfied with vague and often psuuedo scientific just so stories. If you wish answers from Biblical astronomers and astrophysicists, you can find them at sites like ICR, Creation.com, AIG, etc.

Again... although we don't know exactly how God created and spread the universe, we know He did.
God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.

 

[Tyrathca]

Amusing how *evolutionists demand rigorous explanations from creationists, when they themselves are satisfied with vague and often psuuedo scientific just so stories. If you wish answers from Biblical astronomers and astrophysicists, you can find them at sites like ICR, Creation.com, AIG, etc.

It's amusing how Creationists demand rigorous explanations from Evolutionists (i.e. this whole thread) when they are satisfied with vague and pseudoscientific just so stories which you have just produced. If you wish rigorous, detailed and TESTED explanations from REAL astronomers, astrophysicists, biologists, scientists in general you can find them in literally every published journal in the developed world.

By the way 6days if there were a widely held Creationist belief about the speed of light issue I would have picked on that already. I was interested in if you had a favoured explanation (or knew a new one I hadn't heard before) but alas vague "just so" stories that don't pass even a little scrutiny seem Ok with you. FYI I just checked ICR, seems their answer is a big fat "don't know/magic", they do have one article which suggests an a decaying speed of light isn't likely though.

Again... although we don't know exactly how God created and spread the universe, we know He did.
God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.

Next time you feel unsatisfied with an Evolutionists answer or complain of "just so" stories I'll remind you of this and how low your standards of evidence and science really are.

Here we have a problem with the creation model which appears to make the creation model impossible or makes god a deceiver and your response is to wave it away in vague claims there must be an answer. This is the equivalent of evolutionists finding rabbits in the precambrian and you have no answer.

 

[6days]

If you wish rigorous, detailed and TESTED explanations from REAL astronomers, astrophysicists, biologists, scientists in general you can find them in literally every published journal in the developed world.

And some of those astonomers, astrophysicists, biologists, scientists in general are Bible believing Christians. However, if the topic is anything to do with beliefs about the past, then they usually publish that in non secular journals.

By the way 6days if there were a widely held Creationist belief about the speed of light issue I would have picked on that already.

The speed of light is not a belief. You are discussing your beliefs about the past vs mine.

FYI I just checked ICR, seems their answer is a big fat "don't know/magic", they do have one article which suggests an a decaying speed of light isn't likely though.

I gave 3 sites as possibilities... there are others. Here is one possibility published in Answers Journal.
https://answersingenesis.org/astron...nchrony-convention-distant-starlight-problem/

FYI it is secularists who have the big fat "don't know/ magic" answers.* IE. What caused* everything? How did life begin? How did consciousness arise? Why believe in your gods of the gaps such as dark matter? ETC,

Again... although we don't know exactly how God created and spread the universe, we know He did.
God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.

Next time you feel unsatisfied with an Evolutionists answer or complain of "just so" stories I'll remind you of this and how low your standards of evidence and science really are.

Keep in mind that God's Word has always stood true through time.* It is secular beliefs that science keeps proving to be false.
Also keep in mind that it is the absolute truth of God's Word which modern science is founded on, and a belief which still inspires scientists to investigate and make discoveries of the world around us. EX. Henry Schaefer, Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the University of Georgia said "The significance and joy in my science comes in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little corner of God's plan."

Here we have a problem with the creation model which appears to make the creation model impossible or makes god a deceiver and your response is to wave it away in vague claims there must be an answer.

You weren't paying attention.* There is no problem. We know God created and spreads the universe. We don't need to know the specifics but there are astronomers and astrophysicists with various ideas.

This is the equivalent of evolutionists finding rabbits in the Precambrian

Its more like the surprise evolutionists admit to when 'rabbits' are found in the Precambrian.
The fossil record is often baffling to evolutionists. One such example is that sophisticated eye designs are found out of sequence according to standard evolutionary thinking and dating. And, mature galaxies found in the distant universe. (Although ToE is flexible and accommodates improbable, unlikely / counter intuitive evidence).* Evolutionists come up with pseudoscientific explanations trying to explain away the evidence. ex. ' It must have evolved in a geological blink'. That type of nonsense gets printed in secular journals,* and swallowed by the gullible.