Hi Steve,
You seem to have overlooked my analysis of Moffat’s Variable Speed of Light hypothesis. That’s understandable, these threads can get very complex and hard to read. For your edification, here’s a link:
In order to support a young earth, it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the speed of light has changed. You need to be able to demonstrate that the changes were large enough, and recent enough, to squeeze the evidence for 13.8 billion years’ worth of light travel into just six thousand.
This isn’t about evolutionary presuppositions. This is about mathematics and measurement.
2 Likes
Why don’t you read the published research article and find out.
Good morning J.
Exactly.
And as the radiometric dating equation is dependent on the speed of light, the faster the speed of light, the shorter the time required.
Here’s a university’s website discussing this.
http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/eens211/radiometric_dating.htm
Hi Chris.
No. I did not overlook it. I didn’t see it. I only saw a couple of emails, and I did not see one showing your post.
1 Like
And…?
Is God not capable of ensuring that humans are accurately inspired, to accurately write down the information?
I think this is the actual issue here.
We’re talking the God, who inhabits eternity, yet dwells with those who are humble and contrite. Isaiah 57:15.
We’re talking the God who holds the cosmos in the span of his hand. Isa. 40:12.
We’re talking the God who spoke the cosmos into existence, Psalm 33:9.
We’re talking the God who formed man from the dust, and fashioned the woman from the side of man. Gen. 1:26-2:7.
We’re talking the God who became a man, dwelled among us, and then gave himself over to be killed to take on our sin, and be raised again, as to justify us, 100% by him. Romans 4.
We are not talking some man-made concoction, who’s too inept to handle beyond what man is incapable of fathoming.
Either he’s able to accurately inspire, so that we accurately document it, or he’s not.
And if he’s not— how can we know what can, or cannot be trusted as reliable information?
If he cannot be relied on to ensure that we get the creation of the cosmos correct, how can we trust him to accurately detail the rest of the narrative, the future, past, or present?
And I have to admit— this took me over 35 years to realize.
Either God is able to ensure that we are accurately inspired to accurately document the important things or he’s not.
After 40 years of testing, applying, etc… I believe that he is indeed capable of doing EXACTLY that.
I believe that he’s able to, and indeed motivated to…
Accurately inspire, and accurately ensure that we accurately get the correct information.
You now have to decide for you— is he? Can he? Did he?
If not, then why do you believe?
If he is— don’t you think it’d be worth your while to make sure you resolve your conflicts with his written testimony?
Hi Steve,
I’ve no idea where you’re getting the link between the radiometric dating equation and the speed of light from — it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the article that you linked to.
In any case, what you’ve said doesn’t address my point: you need to demonstrate not only that the speed of light has changed, but that it has changed by a factor of many millions within the past six thousand years.
Moffatt et al don’t come anywhere close to demonstrating that.
1 Like
While this is a nice discussion of radiometric dating I also didn’t seen any mention of the speed of light. Can you point out where you think this was stated?
This was stated:
Is God not capable of inspiring humans to write allegorical and metaphorical myths that speak of deeper spiritual truths? And I don’t use the term “myth” in a negative sense. Myths have been a vital part of human experience and philosophy for millennia, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with something being a myth. Even Jesus taught in parables.[quote=“Steve_Buckley, post:46, topic:36755”]
Either he’s able to accurately inspire, so that we accurately document it, or he’s not.
And if he’s not— how can we know what can, or cannot be trusted as reliable information?
[/quote]
Perhaps you should look at it from the other end. Instead of focusing what God can do, why don’t you focus on what God did do? To put it another way, if we can’t trust God’s creation to tell us the truth, then why should we trust God’s word? It would seem to me that the best option is to reconcile the creation and the word so they say the same thing instead of clinging to a position where the creation is at odds with your interpretation of the Bible.
[They say] “We do not know how this is, but we know that God can do it.” You poor fools! God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so.–Willam of Conches
2 Likes
Such accelerated decay rate would have turned the Earth into a boiling slag heap. Joe Meert has the definitive guide on the problems with accelerated decay:
1 Like
Because I’ve read such foolishness before - to no practical benefit - and see no reasonable way for you to defeat the concluding comments of
@jammycakes
“In order to support a young earth, it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the speed of light has changed. You need to be able to demonstrate that the changes were large enough, and recent enough, to squeeze the evidence for 13.8 billion years’ worth of light travel into just six thousand. This isn’t about evolutionary presuppositions. This is about mathematics and measurement.”
and @Chris_Falter!
“Hi Steve, The Variable Speed of Light (VSL) hypothesis and the inflationary hypothesis are 2 competing ways of solving the horizon problem. According to the inflationary hypothesis, the universe is 13.78 billion years old. According to the VSL hypothesis, the universe is 13.78 billion + 2 or so extra years old. The reason that astronomers are so convinced that the universe is 13.78 billion years old is that all of the spectrographic observations of light show that the Lorenz Invariant holds.…”
and @T_aquaticus !
“Such accelerated decay rate would have turned the Earth into a boiling slag heap. Joe Meert has the definitive guide on the problems with accelerated decay…” http://chem.tufts.edu/science/geology/adam-eve_toast.htm1
Ok. so you don’t think that the bible is a book of historical record, and the experiences of the writers who met, and experienced God?
How do you know that I have not looked at it from the other end?
I’ve been at this following Jesus thing for 40 and a half years (I started in my late teen years). I did my undergrad in physics, and am a journeyman sheet metal mechanic. I’m also a stage 4 metastatic melanoma survivor, living with my cancer for over 30 years now. I have further spent 14 years discussing the bible with atheists/agnostics since October 2003.
Moreover—
My entire daily world is highly practical, and solving real world problems.
As for your comment on interpretation, I have long found this a curious statement. Are you someone who believes that words used in everyday society suddenly take on a magical, or somehow unknowable, or unreliable set of meanings, solely when they are used in the bible?
I ask this, because of your statement, which implies that I somehow have a special, mystical set of means to reassign words meanings which they never possessed anywhere else.
Good night. I’m starting my day at 4 in the morning, so it’s past my bedtime now.
Before I go, I’d like to know how you interpret the following statement.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever would believe in him would not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but that through him the world might be saved.
@Steve_Buckley, how do you compare an immortal being “giving” another immortal being as anything like a human father giving his biological son… with the possibility of never ever seeing that son again?
Your attempt at comparison is hollow and counter-indicative of the situation…
The Bible frequently states who is writing any given part down so we can tell when it was. It tells us directly that the first five books weren’t written until Moses’ time. Did they draw on existing oral tradition? Sure. Were they inspired by God? That’s the whole point, right? Were they direct eyewitness accounts by Adam or Eve or Seth or Cain? No. Do they sound like direct eyewitness accounts, or like the historical records we find in the rest of the Bible? No. What do they sound like? They don’t sound like Hebrew poetry any more than they sound like later historical chronicles. They’re halfway in between, sui generis. How should you interpret them? Probably not quite literally.
1 Like
The evidence all around us demonstrates that the creation story in the beginning of Genesis is not a historical record. If you insist on claiming that Genesis can only be a historical record, then you are implying that the Bible is false since the evidence demonstrates that a literal Genesis (in the YEC sense) is false.
I also see no reason why a person who experiences God could only write a literal historical record, and nothing else. Just look at all of the Psalms. Are those supposed to be literal accounts of literal events? Look at the parables that Jesus taught. The claim that everything in the Bible is either literal or false is a rather narrow and unnecessary view.[quote=“Steve_Buckley, post:52, topic:36755”]
How do you know that I have not looked at it from the other end?
I’ve been at this following Jesus thing for 40 and a half years (I started in my late teen years). I did my undergrad in physics, and am a journeyman sheet metal mechanic. I’m also a stage 4 metastatic melanoma survivor, living with my cancer for over 30 years now. I have further spent 14 years discussing the bible with atheists/agnostics since October 2003.
Moreover—
My entire daily world is highly practical, and solving real world problems.
[/quote]
Then why would you adopt an interpretation of the Bible that is contradicted by almost everything we know about in science? That seems like the most impractical approach I can think of.[quote=“Steve_Buckley, post:52, topic:36755”]
As for your comment on interpretation, I have long found this a curious statement. Are you someone who believes that words used in everyday society suddenly take on a magical, or somehow unknowable, or unreliable set of meanings, solely when they are used in the bible?
[/quote]
There is your black/white worldview again. Why can’t it be both? Why can’t some words be literal and some be metaphorical or allegorical? Why does it have to be all one or all the other?[quote=“Steve_Buckley, post:52, topic:36755”]
Before I go, I’d like to know how you interpret the following statement.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever would believe in him would not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world but that through him the world might be saved.
[/quote]
It is a literal description of the tenets of Christian theology.
How do you interpret this passage?
Psalm 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
Does this mean that the Bible is an actual lamp? Should I be able to fix a Bible to the front of my car and be able to see where I am driving at night? If a Bible does not self-illuminate, does this mean the Bible is false?
2 Likes
Wow… so… actual scientific research, done by academic and research physicists is foolishness?
Moffatt is not from ICR, AiG, etc… The guy is a cosmologist. Not a cosmetologist. Cosmology is the academic study of the cosmos. It’s a sub-topic of astrophysics.
How does this work in your world?
I don’t think there is a comparison. From what I’ve read however, God did invite Abraham into communion, letting him experience what it’d be like to offer one’s own son. Genesis 18-22.
I wasn’t however making any kind of a comparison here. I was asking the person I responded to how they read/interpret the given statement by Jesus.
Please G.
Don’t clip things to support your biases. It’s unbecoming someone of intelligence. It’s further irritating because it is a standard practice of the atheists I’ve been talking with on the internet for the past 14+ years.
Really?
I see the evidence all around us as demonstrative of a creative intelligence, of superior power, intellect, wisdom, insight, perspective, understanding, and several other adjectives which show a superlative nature beyond comprehension. Or… as the Psalmist says— the heavens declare the glory of God…
I find this rather amusing that you are using an hypothesis to base your opinions of the bible on.
As stated, I’ve been reading the bible for just over 40 years now, have studied physics, and while I wholeheartedly dismiss evolution, there are dozens of questions I have, and have chosen to set them aside (not as unimportant, but as tertiary to issues of greater importance), so I can continue to learn more about the God whom I trust in.
YEC, whatever you think it is, is something I consider something of a misnomer.
Easy.
Moses spent 40 days with God, came down, broke up an orgy, and bachanal-style party, only to go up, and spend another 40 days with God. And while the narrative is scant, it’s pretty clear that he spent a lot of time talking about a whole lot more than just God’s carving up 2 tablets with 10 commands.
I do think that Moses cleared up the issue of this though near the end of Deuteronomy, chapter 29, vs 29.
God has kept plenty of things secret, but has given us what we need to live a life honorable towards him— for us, and our descendants throughout all generations.
What I think is cool however is that God did not close the door of learning for us, but swung it wide open, so that we don’t have to remain in the proverbial dark. According to Proverbs 25:2, we read that it’s the glory of God to conceal a matter, and the honor of kings to search them out.
We further read in Psalm 25, vs 14, that God shares his secrets with those who fear him. And we further read that he delights in those who fear him (Ps. 147:11).
I see no reason to believe that the narrative in the bible is anything other than literal records of literal events. It may indeed use a form of poetry, or narrative unknown to us in today’s modern world of high tech, and literary conciseness. But to me, and untold millions of others, we’ve not yet found reason to discount it.
The thing I find curious, and the reason i stated what I did regarding the all or nothing approach has to do with the fact that there’s much of earth’s history we are simply unaware of. So to claim that just because the bible leaves us with more questions than answers, it cannot be taken literally, is foolish, and hubristic to the nth degree.
Just because you trust what you call science does not make it accurate. It simply means that there are some people out there with incredible imaginations, and they’ve conflated their imaginings with legitimate scientific investigation, and findings.
Science is about observation. Interpreting those findings obtained through observation is a philosophical construct. One which requires either facts not known, or imagination, to fill in the gaps.
You didn’t answer my question. How about actually answering my question, so I can decide how to accurately respond to your answer, and continue forward.
It’s not rocket science, nor is it a trick question. It’s simply stated, and requires an honest answer, so I can know which direction to go next. IF you want me to take you seriously, then you have to take me equally seriously. If not, then we can stop right here and now. [quote=“T_aquaticus, post:55, topic:36755”]
It is a literal description of the tenets of Christian theology.
How do you interpret this passage?
Psalm 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
Does this mean that the Bible is an actual lamp? Should I be able to fix a Bible to the front of my car and be able to see where I am driving at night? If a Bible does not self-illuminate, does this mean the Bible is false?
[/quote]
Curious… so not only do you not answer my question, you turn it back to me. Come on T! Answer the question already. Did it ever occur to you that if evolution is real, and death originates prior to some creative event, that this statement (John 3:16-17) is based on a false premise?
Let’s take this a step further. PAul, in Romans 5 says that death entered the world because Adam sinned. This means that there was no death prior to the incident in the garden, where Adam ate the fruit. Paul further elaborates on the idea in Romans 8, saying the whole creation groans and travails in agony, waiting the redemption of the sons of God.
I.e., all of creation was subjected to this misery by Adam and his sin
Ok, moving on…
Ever read Ezekiel? I’m reading it right now, for my morning readings.
In chapter 43, we read the following.
2 And behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east. His voice was like the sound of many waters; and the earth shone with His glory.
I find this interesting, and helps me to get a better picture of Genesis 1:3, where it states that God said let their be light, and there was light… 3 whole days prior to the sun/moon/stars being created.
For the first time, it helps clarify the idea— God’s Word IS Light. Especially when we read in 1 John 1, that God is light, and in him there is no darkness.
So… yes. I do indeed believe that God’s Word is a lamp, and light. It illumines our way through life, so we can see clearly.
So, to help here… I’ve always been taught that the bible is the best way of interpreting the bible.
I.e., it interprets itself. But you’re not going to find all the answers in a single paragraph, or a single chapter of a single sub-book. As one teacher I’m familiar with states— the book of revelation contains over 800 allusions to the old testament.
I.e., you want to understand revelation— read the old testament.
If you want to understand, you’ve got to read. Not once, twice, or even just a few times. And reading alone doesn’t cut it either. Reading and prayer.
As for the poorly thought out joke about mounting a bible to the front of your car…
It’s not a physical light which can be used like that. It is however a light which shows us our sin, in God’s Perspective. It’s a light which sheds truth on lies, falsehoods, etc… It’s a light which gives us hope, when we believe it, against the darkness of life’s griefs, pains, and losses.
Here’s a novel thought for you.
We read in Exodus that Moses spent 80 days with God. Do you really think that they just sat there watching God carve 2 tablets, and then Moses carving two tablets? Do you really think it took 40 days for God’s finger to write out 10 commandments?
Have you seen how slow 3D printers operate?
2 Likes