Can God display the fullness of His glory in a multidimensional universe that appears to be young?


(Larry Crouch) #1

Is it possible for God to display the fullness of His glory in a multidimensional universe that appears to be young?

Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.

Only Assumptions:
1.God is capable of creating ex nihilo.
3. Light makes the creation visible.
4. Light travels 300,000,000 m/s.
5. There is an observer within the creation living on Earth.
6. The observer has eyes that use light to perceive the creation.

Is it possible to display the fullness of His glory?

If YES, how could He display the size/glory of the known universe in a universe that appears to be young when distances are measured in Light Years?

If NO, He must create the universe with the appearance of very old age.
** Therefore, He is bound to the appearance of old age in order to display the fullness of His glory.**

If He is bound to create a universe that appears to be old in order to display the fullness of His glory it seems to me there are only two options.

Vital Point - He has the ability to do either option !

  1. He follows natural law and it takes 13.82 billion years.
  2. He speaks the fully formed universe into existence.

(Matthew Pevarnik) #2

Or just maybe the universe is just 13.8 billion years old. No assumptions required.


(Larry Crouch) #3

Why the mocking tone ?


(Matthew Pevarnik) #4

Sorry, it was just 2 Peter 3 getting the best of me. Ever since I’ve abandoned YEC I’ve been extra mocking and willfully ignorant of reality. Let me try again.

By multidimensional, do you mean like 4 dimensions (3 of space and one of time) or string theory ten dimensions?

By appears to be young, what do you mean? The universe definitely does not appear to be young in any way shape or form. The only way people find any youth is by a certain selectively literal interpretation of the Scriptures.

I don’t see how any of these are relevant to your questions below. But I just don’t quite get your universe that ‘appears to be young.’ Maybe we could start there instead of getting into this philosophical Aha gotcha moment that excuses God for making the universe look old and look like it evolved but not really.


#5

It is worth keeping in mind that the stars visible to the naked eye are within about 4,000 light years away. The only exception is Andromeda which is an entire galaxy. There are no other galaxies visible to the naked eye.

If all we need is 4,000 light years for the night sky we see, then the universe doesn’t need to be 13+ billion years old. It is only very recently that we have been able to see farther than 4k light years, and people didn’t seem to think that the universe was any less glorious before that.


(Larry Crouch) #6

Very Good Point. Although, the pattern of revelation in His Word is progressive. Many had faith in the Messiah long before they knew that He was Christ Jesus.

1 Cor 13:12 - For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

It fits perfectly that His natural revelation would follow the pattern of His special revelation (His Word).

Look at the glory of His majesty that we are now able to see. Distances in the heavens that describe a God WITHOUT limitations. Like never before, we now can see “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” (Psalm 19:1)

That’s why I said “the fullness” of His glory. Because when light is the vehicle to display His full glory distance is required. Visualizing distance in our universe necessarily requires the appearance of age (time for the light to travel to our eyes).

Would you agree that distance is required to display His FULL glory?

Would you agree that distance implies age?


#7

That doesn’t change the fact that people considered the Universe to be just as glorious with stars just 4,000 light years away. You don’t need stars and galaxies billions of light years away for a glorious universe.


(Larry Crouch) #8

What about in 2017? He created the universe for you and me too, not just for ancient people.

If we could only see 4,000 light years away would we be in awe in the same way as when we haven’t found the end of what seems like an infinite space. What about for those that may be living in 2117?

How do you think He could communicate His attribute of being “Infinite” within a small universe?


#9

You don’t think the night sky is glorious?[quote=“Hisword, post:8, topic:36287”]
How do you think He could communicate His attribute of being “Infinite” within a small universe?
[/quote]

Our universe is finite, so I’m not sure where you are going with that one.


(Larry Crouch) #10

[quote=“T_aquaticus, post:9, topic:36287”]
You don’t think the night sky is glorious?
[/quote] Not even 1 % as much as when I see the Hubble images. Does the night sky display this ?https://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/04/22/science/hubble_antenna/hubble_antenna-jumbo.jpg


(Larry Crouch) #11

We don’t know if the universe is or is not finite. https://phys.org/news/2015-03-universe-finite-infinite.html

We do know that we haven’t found the edge of it. So for 2017, the evidence points as much to an infinite universe as a finite one.


(David Heddle) #12

Just to be slightly pedantic we know the visible universe is finite, something like 40 billion light years across. We don’t know if the overall universe is finite, although the flatness of the universe is at least circumstantial evidence that the overall universe is much bigger than the visible. (Like the local flatness of the earth indicates that the earth is big, and by contrast the large curvature of the Little Prince’s home indicates that his world is small.)


(Larry Crouch) #13

@heddle David, thanks for your input. Not just because of your answer but… it’s so awesome to hear from someone that conducts research in experimental electromagnetic nuclear physics at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility !! I’m obsessed with the majesty of God and I wish I could pick your brain!


#14

So you are saying that the night sky was not glorious until the 21st century?


#15

Hisword is measuring the universe by visible matter, so the universe is finite in that sense.


#16

Due to the expansion of space the visible universe, the universe you are talking about, has to be finite. It’s edges are defined by the speed of light and the expansion of space. Once expansion adds up to the speed of light you arrive at the edge of the visible universe, and that is a finite volume with a finite number of stars.

So why not have a finite visible universe with a radius that is 6,000 light years. You clearly think a finite universe can communicate things about God, so why not a finite universe where the most distant visible stars are 6,000 light years away?


(Larry Crouch) #17

@T_aquaticus I must not have made myself clear. I’m not measuring anything. I’m particularly interested in how God displays and declares His glory. What is visible to the human eye, including images from telescopes like Hubble etc … , certainly has the most impact in communicating to mankind the vastness and glory of our God. However, as we all know, we are able to translate the electromagnetic spectrum in ways that are understandable as well. These things that were once invisible to ancient peoples are now visible to us and the purpose of our being able to view these things is for His glory. The reason not to have a finite universe with a radius of 6,000 light years is because that is fiction. I want the truth!


#18

What was visible to the authors that wrote those scriptures was the night sky that you and I see with the naked eye.[quote=“Hisword, post:17, topic:36287”]
However, as we all know, we are able to translate the electromagnetic spectrum in ways that are understandable as well. These things that were once invisible to ancient peoples are now visible to us and the purpose of our being able to view these things is for His glory. The reason not to have a finite universe with a radius of 6,000 light years is because that is fiction. I want the truth!
[/quote]

If you are saying that the Universe is 6,000 years old then any star we see beyond 6,000 light years is a fiction. Those Hubble images you are talking about are a fiction. Another example is Supernova 1987a that is about 170,000 light years away. We have pictures of the star before and after the supernova explosion. If you are claiming that the Universe is 6,000 years old then that star never existed, and that explosion never occurred. It is simply a fiction.


(Matthew Pevarnik) #19

@Hisword see for more detail about this particular supernova:
http://chem.tufts.edu/science/astronomy/SN1987A.html

Ok good. How did the light get here in so little time? And what do you mean by it appears young? It doesn’t, not on any scale. And the light tells of a great history. One article on the BioLogos sight that details this well is:


(Larry Crouch) #20

I have never said the universe looks young. My point is the exact opposite!