In another thread, Shane and Bravus opened the question of how elements came into existance in the first place.

This is an area where literal Genesis Christians and modern science need not disagree.

The science that went into building the Atom Bomb in WW-II and the study of their explosions after WW-II taught us a lot about how "the elements" are formed out of more primitive stuff.

The name "element" is a bad one - it comes from a time when the alchemists / early chemists believed that they could not be further broken down - before the discovery of proton, electrons, and neutrons, and before the modern "nucleus of protons and neutrons with a surrounding layer of electrons" model was developed.

Now we understand that it is possible for a 'mist' of protons and neutrons and electrons to 'form droplets' of Hydrogen, and that the Hydrogen droplets will in turn be pulled together by gravity to make stars, and those stars are hot and dense enough to cause nuclear fusion, and that fusion will produce some of the elements that we know - and will also cause huge nuclear explosions that will produce the other elements.

Our understanding and maths and computers are good enough that we can predict what proportion of iron, aluminium, lead, oxygen, silicon, etc would come out of this process - and the prediction matches what we see in the universe around us.

The maths and computers also predicts the microwave radiation background - and indeed it was predicted before it was found.

All this started way before the events in Genesis - and before life of Earth. Yet we can still see much of it happening in the universe.

As I have told my kids - it appears God really likes explosions!

/Bevin

And where did the protons, neutrons and electrons come from?

It is also possible, even likely, tht God said, "Let there be light" and spoke the stars into existance.

At some point things are there because they are - because God made them (Christians) or "just because" (atheists).

We agree that God started everything.
We agree that God sustains everything.

I don't understand why you need God to have created whole stars rather than creating a big-bang.

/Bevin

Jesus spoke and dead men came to life. Jesus spoke and the storm became calm. Jesus spoke and crippled men were able to walk. There is creative power in just the voice of God. The Apostle John calls Jesus the "Word" and says, "all things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being."

The disciples were awestruck when Jesus spoke to the storm and it obeyed Him. They said, "Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!" That is the same kind of awe we should have as we explore science. Protons, neutrons and electrons didn't just randomly evolve out of nothing and bump into each other, form a big star and than blow up. The ultimate Intelligence designed them and spoke them into existance.

Evolutionists that insist on being honest with themselves are giving into the idea of Intelligent Design. As they learn more about the complexity of the universe on a grand scale and DNA on a micro-scale their honesty requires them to admit it couldn't have happened all at random. Advancements in knowledge are causing more doubt for natural selection than support of it.

While many secular scientists haven't got off the ice altogether, they have backed away from where it is cracking and observe water is evident.

The Bible does provide us information on this question. Here is a reference from the Psalms:

"By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth:

For He spake, and it was done: He commanded, and it stood fast."

Somewhere else in Scripture, we read that God will change the heavens as a garment. I don't recall exactly where that is.

Seems pretty clear. But, I have a question for Bravus: Do you believe that God is capable of doing that? Is God able to instantly create stars, galaxies, etc., to set them in motion, and to create the laws of physics?

Dave

Nobody is claiming that protons etc evolved.

As far as we can tell, the current laws controlling the behavior of subatomic particles have been constant throughout the visible universe.

And, yes, that does suggest to me a God behind it all, who created the laws and who created and sustains the particles following those laws.

However, when we look at the universe, it is obvious that it is not standing still. We see super-novas, we see galaxies colliding, we see everything swirling around - like I said, God seems very fond of fire-works.

/Bevin

Absolutely - I said so in the other thread. God is infinite and omnipotent, and can do literally anything that He (not just we) can imagine. He could have created stars and galaxies instantly, in the form of stars and galaxies, or he could have initiated the Big Bang and created the laws of nature in that instant, then allowed the universe to grow. Either is miraculous, either leaves God in his role as Creator. All the astronomical evidence suggests that he did the latter... but if we apply the 'created mature' argument then the evidence makes it impossible to distinguish between these possibilities.

Neither contradicts the Genesis account, unless it is read as saying that the Sun, moon and stars were literally created in creation week, less than 10,000 years ago.

and, unlikely the situation on Earth where the fossils make it look like death was present, it makes no theological or practical difference whether the stars were made a long time ago, or made more recently looking like they were made a long time ago.

For what it is worth, the Spirit of Prophecy says God created many other worlds before He created the earth. So it would logically follow that if that were true, He would have created stars for those worlds too.

True enough. And perhaps that is where the matter may rest.



The Genesis account says that He created the sun and moon on the fourth day of Creation week. It seems to indicate that the stars were already in existence. The idea of God's creating the sun, even mature, AFTER He created a planet that orbits around the sun, would seem incomprehensible and so obvious a violation of the laws of physics, and of basic common sense, as to be laughable--EXCEPT for the possibility that God Himself held the planets in orbit prior to His creation of the sun. After all, He created light before He created the sun, and the atmosphere before He created the sun. Couldn't He, as well, have sustained this planet before He created the sun? He is the omnipotent God.

It would seem reasonable to this student to conclude that God did things 'outside the box' when He created this world. Since He created the laws of physics, He is also able to bypass the laws of physics. But that would be beyond our comprehension. And THAT, I submit, is the rub when it comes to scientists, who want to quantify everything! Since they cannot understand how it could happen, then they conclude that it must not have happened! I propose, my dear professor, that God is greater than our box. And I recall God's words to Moses, when that worthy observed another violation of physical law, a bush burning but not being consumed, 'Take off thy shoes from off thy feet: for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."

Dave

Re: Genesis 1:14-19

The following are, in my opinion, stated in the above passage:

God created the sun, moon and stars.

God set them in place in a manner that they established a daily cycle--light followed by dark, followed by light etc.

The daily cycle began on the 4th day.

I do not think that the above passage demands that the sun, moon, and stars were created on the 4th day.

In my conception Genesis deal primarily withe the organization of the Earth, and not with issues regarding the creation of the Universe, except to say that God created.

I will suggest that the above passage allows for a creation of the sun, moon and stars at a previous time when the Universe was created. If so, this would simply have the above passage telling us that on the 4th day a daily cycle of light and dark came into play which has previously not be in opperation.

Yes, that raises additional questions.

You have stated it as your opinion. Do you have any authority to back up your opinion? Or is it just your opinion?



What is your exegetical basis for saying that?



You are referring to Biblical Hebrew. What specifically in the Hebrew passage do you cite as authority for your statement?

I think it is silly to address impossibility of things when you consider a concept of God. I agree with Dave when he pointed out that we want to rationally explain God by way of laws of physics and logic, and (if you believe that God did exist and is uncaused) He created these laws and is not bound by these.

Some stuff like... Can God create a rock he can not lift? It's a paradox that can only exist in human mind as we think of things as being limited, and the mere idea of infinity is incomprehensible concept as it is impossible to accurately imagine it.

I believe that Tolstoy was right when he said, if God did not exist we would have to invent one. It would be difficult to make sense of reality without underlying creative intelligent force behind it.

Anyone could create a star if they could generate a hydrogen cloud big enough and trigger its collapse. To transport enough hydrogen to a specific place in the universe might be a little difficult with our technology. If one had enough energy and could synthesize enough hydrogen molecules to form a star is another possibility.

If a big enough cloud of hydrogen collapses rapidly enough, fusion of hydrogen into helium can begin and a star is born. I don't believe in magic, and I don't believe God used magic to create the universe and life on Earth. If he spoke and something appeared, someone else was involved in the process to make something happen or appear.

God created the Law of Cause and Effect to govern our lives and the universe. I suppose it's OK to believe he used magic, but I don't see magic in the Bible, only science and technology light-years beyond our comprehension, and certainly beyond the understanding of its writers.

A more scientific description in the Bible of the beginning of the universe and life would have been nice, but we're left with only terse and cryptic information. We can come closer to the truth if we read between the lines, interpolation, or try to see what lies before and after, extrapolation. We're unlikely to understand it all until we are given that information by those who put us here on this little jewel of a planet.

Not in response specifically to Aliensanctuary but to the thread as a whole.

Certainly it would be straining at gnats while swallowing camels to suggest that, while God can create the entire universe by speaking, He can't find a way to sustain the earth for a day until he gets around to making the sun. That kind of 'logical' thinking just annoys me.

I think I've already stipulated that there's no meaningful way of distinguishing, based on the evidence, between:

A. God created the entire universe, appearing mature, a few thousand years ago and
B. God set off the Big Bang, let the universe 'cook' for 14 billion years or so until it was ready (remember, time is basically irrelevant to him) and then created life on earth a few thousand years ago

Dave brings in the Biblical evidence - or at least a particular reading of it, different from Gregory's reading of the same texts - and that's perfectly fine, though not an empirical test. I refer everyone to the 'honest creationist' thread.

General observation

Imagine a being with no beginning sitting around doing nothing for eons and then all of a sudden making a universe. Why not imagine a being who has been making things forever and is still busy doing so?

All of the evidence that humans can see indicates that something has been happening for a long long time.

mel

You've got something there, melvin. Perhaps God and 'making things' are one process. Sort of like in Einsteins relativity theory where space and time do not exist separately.

Norman Mailer believed that God is still evolving! Perhaps he is right. Who knows!

I doubt if there is any human who has the capacity to imagine endless and beginingless time and space even though it is obvious that no other model would work. To refer to something called "the big bang" as a beginning is, dare I say, shortsighted for the question then becomes what was there before that?

Any discussion of origins has to assume there was someone or something there previously and unless it is specified exactly what "beginning" we are talking about the whole exercise is useless.

And before a certain person asks me for biblical proof I will just state that the onus is on him to disproove. All of the above is obviously my personal opinion.

mel

Gary Zukov's book The Dancing Wu-Li Master about the new physics says the same thing about particle physics. Many scientists now have given up on it for the same reason. After you find that an atom is made of protons and electron, then you need to find what they are made of - quarks? and what are they made of? - and it just keeps on going. He says it looks like everything is made of 'nothing.' A good book written for ordinary people.

So what was before the big bang? Zukov mentions an incomprehenible idea (which doesn't mean it is not true) that all time and space are present here and now; past, present and future are co-terminous.

There was no "where" for something to be before that.

In fact there was no "before" either, as space, time and matter were all created in the "big bang".

Isn't quantum mechanics fascinating?

Graeme

I think Adventists have much less difficulty with such questions as we believe God was creating the universe long before He created Earth. Many Adventists believe Earth was the end of creation, or the crowning act of creation. It is not difficult for Adventists to concede the universe is very old.

Fascinating! Amen!

All is created from nothing. That's probably why quantum science finds at the center of matter, the basic "building-block" for everything - is - nothing!

Hey Planey (ooops cross that out...cant use names here) you said "all were CREATED in the big bang" surely you must have now become a creationist!

So Einstein built a spacecraft and then invented a time compessor that made a lightyear equal a nanosecond of earth time.
next day he got up a bit early, cranked up his craft and took off. Very soon he saw a wall ahead and he hit his brakes. The
sign on the wall said "This is the end there is nothing beyond"
Did he believe the sign?

mel

(Hey, Anybody) The universe is expanding they say. Into what? Nothing. Not even space. Space only exists in relation to objects when some thing "occupies" it. So as our universe expands it creates space...? Unless maybe there is another universe out there in relation to ours and therefore space exists outside our universe between the universes.

But is it possible for there to be another universe? If ours was created from nothing then space is no longer full of nothing. "Nothing but nothing" no longer exists. Is nothingness infinite? Hmm. I'm beginning to feel infinitely stupid!