Creation

But the author of the Moses character was still very ignorant but he was learning and had no idea what the reality of the universe was and believed that when he looked at the heavens he was looking at a solid screen like a tent or great blanket.He believed he was not looking at space and stars but rather a thin, uniform, fixed fabric that moved across the night in a regular and predictable pattern. And it was not a good fabric like his tent because it did have holes in it and it did leak and let the water that was above the fabric drip through as rain.

That might be a reasonable interpretation. What I find unreasonable is to try to twist Moses words into some other meaning and to then claim that science is finally coming around to matching what the Bible says.In this case, ICANT is attempting to pretend that Moses had no choice but to use the wrong expression because of the limitations in his language and to then claim that what he really meant matches reality. There are two things wrong with his argument. First, we cannot take ICANTs naked assertions about ancient Hebrew as gospel. He also claims that Moses had no nouns. Secondly, Moses picked his analogy as best he could. If he really failed to describe what he was told or saw, then how should we decide what he meant?As for the latter question, the way to decide cannot be to let the person here most ignorant about science make up an explanation and then say it is what scientist are now approaching or are wrong about. It takes one special kind of person to use that argument, and yet another one to buy into it.

The volume enclosed by the material increases to a certain point and then stops. What science describes is the material itself expanding, and with no particular limit on how much it can expand. That's basically what I'm trying to tell you. You should give up the idea that the ancient Hebrews had any hint of an idea about the expanding universe. They had no words for the concept because they didn't have the concept.

Hi ringo, Yes I know that science claims that the universe in contained inside of a fabric of some kind.But since there is no such fabric that would do what they say that fabric does kind of gives me the idea that they don't know what they are talking about.Apparently they are talking about something that is not made out of fabric.In other words they assume that there is something that can act like they believe it does and they call it fabric for a lack of a known word to describe what they want to say. I have been told on this site that a balloon is like the fabric of the universe and you could put dots on it and as you inflate the balloon it would express how the distance grows between the things in the universe. That is a much worse example of what takes place than Moses stretching out a tent would be.The best example given is the baking of a cake with raisins in it. The distance between the raisins would increase as the cake grows. But that is still a lousy explanation of what is observed, as the cake can only be so big. The distance between objects in the Milky Way varies from time to time due to their orbital routes they take. But the space between those objects does not continue to increase at all times.By the way the distance is not expanding between the Milky Way galaxy and the Andromeda galaxy. They are on a collision courseSince they are on a collision course they could not have been produce out of the same BB. If they had been the space would be increasing between them instead of decreasing.So I say Moses describing the heavens being stretched out like a tent is just as good a description as anything that has been put forth here. At least he knew the volume of the tent would increase as it was stretched out. A balloon will stretch so far and then burst.The universe is still stretching out in all directions Moses was just talking about a huge tent. Just like cavediver was talking about a huge balloon that could just expand forever.God Bless,

The universe is not "contained". It is the fabric. But a tent can not expand forever, so Moses was clearly wrong.

The space between them is expanding, but the force of gravity is stronger at this distance and is attracting them toward each other at a higher rate than the rate of expansion. Galaxies like the Milky Way and Andromeda remain as discrete objects in the Universe rather than flying apart because gravitational attraction exerts enough force to counter rotation and universal expansion.

Wow. Just wow. More Wow. After the big bang, then other forces in the universe can still change the trajectory of some objects.Stop embarrassing yourself by offering opinions on subjects you do not understand. If the BBT is wrong, the explanation won't be related to the ridiculous stuff in this post of yours. Here is more along that same line of reasoning:"The coffee cups in my cupboard are not moving apart. Hence the universe is not expanding." Pretty silly, eh?

What reason have you got to think that the authors of Genesis 1, Job and Isaiah believed that the universe was expanding, other than a wish to make out that these writers anticipated modern cosmology. It seems more likely to me that the Biblical authors thought of God setting up the firmament as a canopy over the flat Earth, as a human being would set up a tent on the ground.

Hi NoNukes, What are the forces or mechanism that can stop space from expanding?Either all space is expanding.
orSome space is expanding and some space is receding. This is what is observed.Since the Milky Way galaxy and the Andromeda galaxy are getting closer together at 250,000 to 300,000 mph, the space between them is receding at a rapid pace.Einstein's general relativity says that matter and energy warp space and time.According to Einstein the stuff in the universe, will determine the ultimate fate of the universe.His theory predicted that the universe must either be expanding or contracting. Because of that he produced his fudge factor.In 1929 Hubble found hard evidence that the universe was expanding. After which Einstein admitted his "greatest blunder" of his career.The fact that the universe was expanding spawned the idea that the universe had to begin as something incredibly small. I have been told here as small as a pinpoint by some and a pea by others.Hubble's proof was the cosmic microwave background radiation — a constant stream of radio waves, coming from all directions in the sky
This afterglow is supposedly produced by the superfast expansion of the small pea sized universe that existed a billionth of a second after T=0.This same afterglow could just as easily have been produced by the light period of undetermined duration in which God created the heavens and the earth prior to T=0 (time as we know it).God created darkness that is found at Genesis 1:2 according to what He said to Isaiah that he recorded in Isaiah 47:5. "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."God frames the light as He is light (pure energy) but darkness did not exist until God created it. At the end of the dark period that existed at Genesis 1:2 with the following period of light God declared day one had ceased. The translators mistranslated the Hebrew word for one as first. The duration of the light period that ended with the darkness of Genesis 1:2 is undetermined as it began in the beginning, whenever that was. The period of darkness that existed at Genesis 1:2 is of an unknown duration as it existed from the moment it was created until it ended with the beginning of the light period of the second day.But ops, science discovered that not all parts of the universe are increasing in distance between each other. Since something is required to hold the universe together and to produce enough gravitational influence to cause some of the object in the universe to be blue shifted rather than red shifted to each other. Something had to be invented to be able to accomplish this feat. As science had to have something to preform such a feat dark matter was assumed to be the culprit. Makes no difference that no one knows what dark matter is or what it is made of, and no one has yet been able to find dark matter but it has to exist. If it don't exist all the theories concerning the universe are nothing more than the imagination of mankind. Dark matter makes up 27% of the universe and dark Energy makes up 68% of the universe. Therefore Dark matter and Dark Energy make up 95% of the universe.That leaves only 5% of the universe being known. You and everyone else here want to take what you know about that 5% of the universe and add your assumptions to that and then tell me that you are correct and I am wrong.I know what makes up the 95% of the universe that you don't have a clue about. You said that, I didn't. Can I quote this statement in my book?God Bless,Edited by ICANT, : No reason given.

Hi ringo, The universe can't expand forever either. It will cease to expand when it reaches a heat death. That will occur when a state of uniform distribution of energy is reached due to results of the second law of thermodynamics.God Bless,

Does expansion have anything to do with thermodynamics at all? It's the space that's expanding, not the stuff in it, and only stuff can contain heat.In any case, it doesn't address what I said. A tent does not expand; it unfolds. Moses had no clue.

Hi Tanypteryx Could you explain in detail how something can be expanding and contracting at the same time? Are you saying that the Milky Way and Andromeda are like a north and south magnet with the ability to attract each other over a distance that would take light 2.5 million years to travel?How much matter would be required to produce that much gravitational attraction?If that is what is causing the Milky Way and Andromeda to be on a collision course why aren't all galaxies on a collision course with IC1101 which extends about 2 million light years from its core? Which makes it up to 6 million light years in diameter, depending on the size of the core.God Bless,

Hi Astrophile They did not have a clue to anything expanding. The word expand did not exist until late middle English. Which would have been somewhere between 1100 AD and 1500 AD.Here is the origin of expand. expand | Etymology, origin and meaning of expand by etymonline

quote:

---

Origin
Latin
ex
out

​

Latin------expandere------------expand late Middle English

​

late Middle English: from Latin expandere ‘to spread out,’ from ex- ‘out’ + pandere ‘to spread.’.

---

But lets get a couple of facts straight.Moses did not choose the English word to describe what he was trying to present for us to read. He used a Hebrew word which our English scholars interpreted to mean spread out.As you can see Hubble used the same word that means to spread out that the word Moses used to describe what happened to the heavens, was translated as by out scholars.Expand definition:
verb (used with object)1. to increase in extent, size, volume, scope, etc.:
Heat expands most metals. He hopes to expand his company.2. to spread or stretch out; unfold:
A bird expands its wings.Apparently The translators could have used any of those descriptions to convey Moses thoughts to us. No one that believes what is recorded in the Bible believes in a flat earth.

quote:

---

Isaiah 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

---

It would be very hard to sit on the circle of a flat earth.There was several pre-Socratic philosophers that believed that the world was flat.Those people have nothing to do with God or the Bible.There is a dome encircling the earth that God placed there to protect the earth from meteorites, solar winds, and other dangers.In Oct of 2017 scientist began talking about a gigantic shield to protect our electrical infrastructure from solar flares.Over the years there has been a lot of misinformation concerning what a Bible believing person believes. That is in part due to the lack of Biblical knowledge that most of God's people have. We are told to study to show ourselves approved to God, which most do not take the time to do. I am not responsible for anyone other than myself and those who attend my church. But I can not control what they choose to learn and remember.God Bless,

Hi ringo I think so.There is no such thing as empty space not even that of a vacuum as it is filled with particles that can pop into existence and disappear which happens all the time.95% of the universe is filled with something that no one knows what that something is. That something is energy and energy contains heat. At some point there will cease to be a transfer of heat and nothing will move.Now if you want to argue that 95% of the universe is void of all existence please present your argument. You can't unfold or unroll a tent without spreading it out. Remember Moses was using the tent as an illustration of what he was trying to convey to us.I don't know anybody here that has ever espoused the idea that the universe is expanding. If the universe is expanding from a central point that actually would require it to be expanding in a complete circle. All the pictures I see and descriptions given have the universe beginning at a point and then expanding in a forward direction from that point.According to the definition of the word 'expand' it can and does be as it is spread out. Not only can it be spread out flat it can also be expanded vertically to increase the volume of the tent.God Bless,

No, I cannot, because that is not what I said is happening. The expansion of the Universe does not keep objects in the Universe from moving in relation to each other within the Universe. If I am on a plane traveling at 300 mph, that doesn't stop me from walking in the opposite direction to the restroom in the rear of the plane.The mutual gravitational attraction between two masses (Milky Way and Andromeda) is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of their separation distance. These two galaxies have enough mass and are close enough for their mutual gravitational attraction to pull them toward each other at a faster rate than the expansion of the space between them.If the Universe is expanding at X miles per second and gravity is attracting 2 objects at X+n miles per second, then the 2 objects will get closer to each other over time. Nope, I didn't say anything about magnets. I'm saying that the Milky Way and Andromeda have enough mass and are close enough (2.5 million light years in this case) for their mutual gravitational attraction to cause them to approach each other at a higher speed than the speed of expansion of the Universe. Obviously, as much matter as is in these 2 galaxies. Remember, it is the product of their masses. The mass of the Milky Way multiplied by the mass of Andromeda divided by the square of their distance. where F is the force due to gravity, between two masses (m1 and m2), which are a distance r apart; G is the gravitational constant.
. All galaxies are attracted to it, and to each other, but the inverse square law says the further they are from each other the weaker the attraction. The expansion rate of the Universe is higher than the rate they are attracted to each other by gravity. There may be galaxies that are close enough to IC1101 that their mutual gravitational attraction causes them to overcome the expansion rate of the Universe and move closer to each other.