There Has Forever Been A Universe

Whether you're a bigbangist, a oldearthevolly, or a youngearthcreashist, you have that nagging question/problem of "What before." So for both ideologies, this,imo, is the only compatible answer to your dilema.For the bigbangist, your only solution to the problem of the first existence of something is that there has always been something.For the creationist of either the young earth or the old earth persuasion, the problem becomes more complex:
1. If you have no universe before Genesis 1, you have no Biblical eternal God Jehovah, who scripture says is "the same yesterday, today, and forever," for if there was ever a beginning of the universe (everything existing) then you have a strange god floating out there in empty space with nothing around him and nothing to do for all eternity previous to "creation." Not even a throne to sit on. Certainly this doesn't cut it with being "the same yesterday, today and forever," as the text states.2. Imo, God has been creating and destroying things in his eternal universe forever to suit his good pleasure and plan.3. Genesis one, one states that God created the heavens and the earth. That, imo is a prefacing statement for what follows. What it is saying is this: "Whenever heaven and earth began it was God who made it." Period. That's all this opening statement is saying.
Then in the verses of Genesis chapter one and two to follow, God explains what he did with/to the earth which he had at some time, unknown to man, created.4. The sun and the moon were, according to the text, created subsequent to day 3 and before day four ended.5. Since the earth was alread present in day one, the earth preceeded the sun, moon and stars. This brings up the question, "Which stars?"
The heaven and earth of Genesis one, imo has to be refering to the heavens pertaining to the earth. That is logically our Milky Way Galexy.6. The text says the sun and moon originated the measurement of days, years and seasons. So we MUST, imo, assume from this that the length of days, years, and seasons before day 5 is UNKNOWN TO MAN, since (a)nobody knows how long day four was before the work of day four was finished. and (b) Days one, two and three have no specified length either of the "evenings and mornings" of these days.The text, imo, gives the exact length of days 5 and 6 in which the animals, birds, and mankind was created. Those days and all the days subsequent to that were measured by the sun, i.e. 24 hours, consisting each, first of an "evening" of relatively darkness and secondly, "morning," of relatively daylight.There's a starter. What do you think?[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-15-2003]

quote:

---

What I think is that you are ignoring the findings of physics, paleontology, biology, and chemistry over the last couple of centuries to fit a worldview based on an old book

---

If the Genesis record is true, the flood was the first rain and the atmosphere would be such that our dating methods would not work for pre-flood things. For one thing there would be far less carbon 14 produced. Things would test much older than they really are.

Morris's ICR at ElCajon, Ca has produced an excellent video on how the Geological Column does not fit well in the Grand Canyon and another on the sudden layering and sedimentation of the Mt St Hellens Volcanoe canyon which the volcanoe cut overnight.With little use for fire, no nitrogen producing lightening, no forest fires, long life, and other factors, the carbon14/nitrogen14 dating, imo, wouldn't work for testing over about 3500 years or so (if there was indeed a flood)I've read some strong arguments on the uranium tests(the specifics of which I can't recall), but don't know enough about the others to comment until I could do some research on them.

quote:

---

THere is just one little problem, in that carbon dating is NOT take for granted, it is tested. Dendrochronology is the best known but there are other methods such ice cores and varve counting. All of these methods go back more than 10,000 years.

---

But how would a test compensate with the different atmosphere the world would have if there where a flood and if there were a vapor eanopy over the earth previous to the flood? The nitrogen/carbon factors would be unknown for a test.

quote:

---

Neither Henry Morris nor the ICR are reliable sources of scientific information.
Their stated mission is to convert people to their religious cause, not to advance scientific understanding of nature.

---

ICR's videos on the Grand Canyon and on Mt St. Helens depict a scientific interpretation of what is observed at these two locations which, at least, offers a sensible argument for the global flood. The Grand Canyon video documents sediment layers inconsistent with the geological column as well as a topography indicating that at one time there could have been a large body of water above the canyon which suddenly broke loose and cut the canyon. in the Mt. St. Helens video of the significant canyon cut by it, there is some interesting layering patterns visible, showing a fairly good model of what could have happened at the Grand Canyon on a much larger scale.I have viewed both videos and though I don't agree with all ICR teaches, imo, these are impressive arguments for the flood. The data offered in these videos is clearly more scientific than evangelistic.

quote:

---

I do not see what was prior to creation as being anything of importance to us, that to me would be God's problem... and none the less God can not be contained by the universe... This probably is one of the biggest mysteries... Well I pray that if God would reveal this to us than let him do so in his time.

---

Hi JL.
Possibly you would agree with me that what we actually read in Genesis one is as foundational to creationism as pillars are to a large bridge. Imo, young earth creationists who are claiming that the entirety of the observed universe began a mere six milleniums ago or so, are presenting a huge credibility problem which pictures their eternal majesty of the universe in a very small and temporal framework.
1. We Christians continually remind one another that our god, Jehovah, god of the Bible, is the "same yesterday, today, and forever."
2. If we stop a few minutes and ponder what that implies, imo, we MUST conclude that a few thousand years is relatively a few blinks of his eye and that if he is the creator today, he must have been the creator forever, having a universe around him. He simply could not be a very impressive god if he were floating around in space with nothing around him and nothing to do for all eternity previous to this little heartbeat of a mere six thousand years.I would welcome any comment you would care to offer on any of the specifics of my opening post to this thread.

quote:

---

It appears to me that you are giving the universe the respect that God deserves here, I believe that the universe itself cannot contain God.

---

My 60's Webster Dictionary defines the word "universe" as including everything that exists. I believe that God exists, sitting on a thing called a throne, which exists, in a place/location called Heaven which is located in the universe.

JL, my appologies for not addressing all your responses. My time here is limited. IMO, your interpretation of Genesis one fails to factor in the "before" problem as well as other problems. Mine, imo, is less faith based and makes more sense when you really take time to think about it. Biblical faith is works best with a sensible foundation to support it.