I have decided to put the cat among the pigeons.
About 1998 I wrote and published a web page about the Beginning of the earth, using a different literal interpretation of the verse in Genesis about Day 4, so this is a new version with more supporting science.
First the problem
There is much controversy about the age of the galaxies and the cosmos. One major problem for the creationists is if the entire cosmos was created of day 4 of creation week about 6000 years ago then how can we be seeing light from distant galaxies from over 6000 light years distance, since the light could not have traveled the distance in such a short time. There are several scientists who have devoted a great deal of time to explaining this.
My answer explains how light from distant galaxies is here already, without any fudging factors, dark matter or dark energy in the calculations, no gap in the Bible, no added time, actually no calculations! It is such a simple concept it is self explanatory.
There is no "GAP" in the Bible
This is NOT a GAP theory, there is no gap, the days 1 through 7 and onwards are consecutive 24 Hour days. I make no change to the Bible, only reading what it actually says, and I don't add to it as people usually do by assumption.
Look at God's history. He said he is eternal, always was and always will be. If he always was then that must include time before the earth was formed, and in fact time before any stars or galaxies were formed since he made them all.
There was no-one there on day 4 to speak to, and the account may not have been written down until months or even hundreds of years later. In my belief once God started to create the earth and solar system there is no gap or time added, everything is as it is in the Bible, 6 normal days about 6000 years ago, and 6 is mans number, and 7 is God's number, so there is a thousand years yet to come.
No time added
No time is added to the Bible, but God is eternal and made many creatures in Heaven, and they had time to rebel before the earth was formed. If there was not time in God's realm, or his time dimension, before the earth, then the rebellion must have been almost instantaneous because the snake very soon had it in for Eve. If you claim there was NO time before God created the earth, then when God said he is eternal do you construe that to mean he came into existence 5 minutes before he made the earth, or 5 years, or 5 trillion years? How do you evaluate "always was" except that you cannot even imagine such a long time. Similarly how do you quantify "always will be" except that it is beyond our imagination? When I was a schoolboy in the '40s it was hard to imagine how long it would take to become an adult, and to get to 1999 seemed impossible, time beyond comprehension. Now thinking of time in heaven my imagination of time fades into mist at about one thousand years, but 10,000 and we are still there and singing! And ten trillion, can you understand that? How about ten trillion years in the past? God was there then. We can only express time in earth years as we have no other measurement to use, except eternity, and always was, and always will be.
Evolutionist ideas
The evolutionists claim that the galaxies are in fact very old, that the cosmos is homogeneous when seen on a large scale, that we are not in any preferred position, and no matter where you are it will look much the same as there is no center, so we are not there. But evidence shows there is a center!
At this stage I will side with the evolutionists in only one point, that the galaxies are in fact very old, because they look old, with trails that account for thousands and millions of years.
I heard on radio an astronomer say that she had some Christian teaching but when she started to look at the stars and galaxies she just could not believe that God could have made all those galaxies on day 4. To her this disproved the Bible and the existence of God, destroying the claims of just 6000 years for the earth and galaxies, reducing the Bible to just a book of useless myths. I think that this obvious conflict turns a lot of people away from God because christians just believe that all the galaxies were created on day 4, and have no explanation for the obvious ages shown by trails of gas and debris left by collisions between stars and galaxies, showing perhaps hundreds of millions of years since the collisions. It's no wonder that many go with the ages shown by the stars, rather than the common interpretation of Genesis. It's our misinterpretation of the Bible that drives them away.
An indication of the time before the earth can be seen in the following scientific quote, which is typical of much research.
The Tadpole Galaxy (UGC 10214), is a spiral that has been
disrupted by a collision with a smaller galaxy. The interaction has drawn out
a tail of material extending 390,000 light-years from the Tadpole, clearly
requiring timescales well in excess of a few thousand years.
If the debris in the tail left behind, and with the Tadpole moving away, for example: if they are separating at one hundredth the speed of light, it takes about four hundred million years to form the tail so far. At a more realistic speed it accounts for a very much longer time frame.
Enter Tadpole Galaxy (UGC 10214) into Google search
and you will get several options to view the images.
Red Shift of light, Is there a center ?
Research into the light from distant galaxies has found a puzzling thing, the values of the red shift that is used to calculate the speed of recession is in discrete steps, not in every possible variation as would be in the case of a vehicle with a siren that is approaching it could have every change of pitch up to the maximum of it's speed.
The quantisation of red shift has been studied and debated for many years and it is now firmly established that it comes in discreet steps of 0.024% of the speed of light. There is also a minor step midway between these steps. If the redshift was entirely due to the recession speed, then in the natural you should be able to find such a mixture of recession speeds that every possible frequency of red shift would be represented, or could be, between the minimum and maximum, just as the speedometer in the car shows every possible variation of speed up to its maximum. Red Shift is like keys on the piano each one is distinct from the others. Taken from our position in all directions the red shift values seems to form concentric circles around us. There are anomalies of significantly differing redshift values within some galaxies.
There were some difficulties in the final proof that the redshift was in discreet steps, until someone realised that we were measuring from a moving platform, that is as the earth sped around the sun, this added to, or subtracted, from the measurement of the light speed depending on which direction the readings were taken.
There is something intrinsic in the redshift or the creation of galaxies that sets the value for each galaxy to the value for each ring, otherwise the ring pattern would not appear, being obscured by randomness of the values. Though this is not perfect it is basically true in every direction with some misplaced stragglers in the gaps.
Thus by using red shift theory to calculate the distance it is about 3 million light years between peaks or rings (another paper says it is 1 million light years between rings). Surveys of all the galaxies around us shows that they are in concentric rings and we are very close to the center. If we were shifted 2 or 3 million light years then the pattern of concentric rings would be obscured and we probably would not have realised that the symmetry existed. Refer to the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.
As this is now certain, those supporting the Big Bang hypothesis will have to do some major reworking, but perhaps not so much, as all the mass came out of a central point, the basic assumption of the theory, so that is the center, according to the big bang model. If we were last out of the source imagined by the the hypothesis then we have just sat there, except of course how did the gas ejected from the source point get turned into galaxies? That is something the evolutionists cannot explain. The actual process is inferred to have happened and is buried in rhetoric because "we know it happened, must have", but the explanations of gas forming stars that go nova to produce all the heavy elements fails on many scientific points. So I don't believe the Big Bang idea, because of all its scientific problems.
Even though evolutionists put on a brave face or use grand rhetoric and claim publicly to have solved the problems, there are many admissions from evolutionary and atheistic scientists that certain parts in their research field cannot be explained, and if you list all these problems, from various fields together, you find that nothing can be explained by the evolutionary theory about the formation of the cosmos, and particularly of our young solar system.
Respected cosmologist George Ellis says:
'People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations,' Ellis argues. 'For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.'
'You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that. (Gibbs, W. W., 1995. Profile: George F. R. Ellis; Thinking Globally, Acting Universally. Scientific American 273(4):28-29.)
Current explanations of how light came from billions of light years
distance in just 6000 years, which I do not accept, but it needs to be discussed.
A scientist with Ph. D. in physics has put out a DVD about the problem of the distant light being here already, just one of many by various people on the subject using much of the data that evolutionists also have.
One example of bad science I don't agree with
One scientist bases his explanation on gravitational time dilatation. Gravity affects time and has been shown, or calculated by the difference in a clock in a deep mine and one on top of a high mountain, and then again in the atomic clocks used in space having to be calibrated slightly differently. So in the beginning all the mass of the cosmos was very close, so a clock in the center would be very slow, virtually stopped, while the galaxies moving out into the distance would have a faster time and would be emitting their light from closer so it would be here by now.
The trouble with this idea is that the cosmos must have spread out perhaps to at least part way towards its present spacing or life could not exist on earth, first because on the high gravity, second because of the radiation from nearby galaxies. Also the light trail left by rapidly receding galaxies would be false. If galaxies that are now 16 billion light years distant left a near central point, say 500 to 1000 light years diameter, 6000 years ago as seem to be required by this gravitational time dilatation theory, they would have to travel at 16 billion light years divided by 6000 years per annum, = 2,666,666 light years per annum to get into their present position by the present time. This greatly exceeds the speed of light, and science rules that nothing can exceed the speed of light, so the light trail left behind would actually be going away from us, a minus value, so we still would not get any light from them until they stopped, why did they stop, that breaking would require enormous effort, and then 16 billion years later the light would arrive at a speed and frequency we could see. If galaxies were moving away very rapidly from this gravitational time dilatation why did they stop that breaking would require enormous effort
***********************
? That would take a lot of directed energy, but who would direct it? Alternatively if God created them at that distance on day 4 then the light should not be here yet, unless he created it as it would be eventually. I cannot see how this gravitational idea would work without leaving a trail of false information that would mislead us and make it seem that God is a liar for making deceptive information about the cosmos.
Other comments on this and on the speed of light have been moved to the bottom.
The simple solution
So why do the creationists want galaxies to be very young? Because they read the Bible and add assumptions to what they read. I came to this conclusion myself and later on read that someone had put forward this idea in the 1930's but was rubbished by the evolutionists and no doubt by the "Christians". It makes me wonder what sort of a God some Christians believe in, since they claim He has always existed, so He was around for a time even greater than equivalent to trillions of trillions of earth years and apparently did nothing until about 6000 years ago, in their thinking!
Nothing existed before God created, but when did he start creating? What did he create first? We only have information on when he created the earth, but that does not exclude or preclude the possibility of anything he did before then. I believe that Lucifer's (now called Satan) rebellion was long before the earth was created, and was the reason the earth was created as a safe place to test out spirits before taking them into heaven. Some use a so-called "Satan's Rebellion" as an excuse for claiming that a once good world was destroyed in Genesis Ch1 v1 "The earth was formless and void" to insert great ages to fit the assumptions of evolution. What it means is God created a mass of water, with no land showing, so it was formless and void, just ocean, land appeared on Day 3.
Given that the oldest most distant galaxies that Hubble can see well are about over 16 billion light years away, the light is very faint and the exposures very long and the camera must be exactly in line all the time, and since the light is here they would be at least 16 billion years old, and beyond them are many other galaxies perhaps twice as old or more, we may be seeing well beyond 400 billion years. But my God is older than that! He has always existed, and is a creating God, He makes things, always has. Stars galaxies, angels, creatures in heaven, in fact even made our solar system and stocked it with all sorts of life that would reproduce after it's own kind. Simply put the galaxies are so old that the light was passing through our space here long before God put our solar system here, so there never was a light time travel problem, we just imagined it because of our assumption, that "He made the stars also." meant that it was on day 4 that he made them. But he didn't tell us on day 4 because we weren't there until day 6. Also there were waters above, and there were no rainbows, meaning there were clouds or vapour above that stopped direct sunlight, so it might not have been possible to see the stars until after the Flood, when the waters above had all fallen. Possibly the full explanation about creation might not have been given until after the flood, at which time the stars would have been visible. This would mean that Adam might not have seen the stars. Possibly the original text may have clarified this, but I have found that the translators into English often interpret according to "convention" rather than exact meaning. How can we search for hidden truths when the translators have obliterated the clues?
What the creationists problem is!
God gave us an account of the creation of our solar system and of life, and when recounting Genesis Ch1: day 4 He states that he made the sun and the moon. Since this was the first time He had referred to anything beyond the earth He also commented that He had also made the stars, this could refer to only our planets which appear very bright. But I think most people consider it refers mainly to the galaxies. This is usually in two sentences, the first is that he made the sun and moon, which he had just stated the purpose of, the second that He made the stars, V16. He does not clearly state when He made the stars that are beyond our solar system. It could be just a comment that He had also made the stars, but at some other unstated time. He didn't go into an explanation of when he made them as he probably thought it would become obvious later on. In V17 God set them [the two great lights] in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, this is only about our solar system.
There are many places in the Bible where God states that he stretched out the heavens:
Isaiah Ch.44:12 It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens: I marshalled their starry hosts.
Also Isaiah 40:22, 42:5, 48:12, Jeremiah Ch.10:12, and others.
So what was stretched out?
Looking at our solar system Pioneer and Voyager are about to leave our solar system, so how do we define our system? The solar wind blows dust and debris outwards and forms a sphere of relatively clear space, at the edge of which it presses against the interstellar media showing a barrier called the Heliopod, at about 110 astronomical units, ie (110 times the earth to sun distance) where the outward pressure balances against the pressure of the interstellar media. If the interstellar media came into our solar system it would interfere with our planets and the fine tuning of the solar system.
What has been pushed out within our system is a large amount of water forming many dirty icebergs. These are called Trans-Neptunian Objects. There are thousands that measure over 100 Km across, however the space is so vast that Pioneer and Voyager are unlikely to be impacted by any of the fragments out there.
I believe that God's reference to "pushed out" refers only to what he was doing in our solar system, and the recession of the galaxies was already happening from eons ago, so as to keep them under control and move them away from the area where he was making them. There is however some evidence that there is no recession, which would mean that the red shift is not a measure of recession but is an effect of the energy or tuning of the light emitting particles, and the cosmos is static, mentioned above. I have to look further into that.
So where did the water come from?
Genesis Ch.1:2 Now the earth was formless and empty darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.(NIV)
In the entire sphere there was nothing except water, thus there were no features at all. Russell Humphreys used this as the basis for calculating the magnetic fields of planets before they were measured by specially equipped spacecraft, and he got them right, whereas the evolutionary theory was usually that there should not be any magnetic field left because of the assumed ages.
In verse 6 God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water" . Probably at this time surplus water was thrown out to the far distance, but some kept handy in orbits to form our planets on day 4. Some seems to have been just outside the earth in the exosphere as protection from the sun after day 4 since there were no rainbows before Noah's flood, until in Genesis Ch.7:11 "and the floodgates of the heavens were opened" and all the water came down. The sun may have initially been much hotter and would have kept the water as super-heated steam, but cooled down and at the time of the flood God may have cooled it to drop the water, as part of the flood. It seems that the first step in creating is to make water, then change water into other elements.
God made the galaxies by the word of his mouth and he knows them all by name. If he could name stars at a thousand a second, since it takes time to form or think the sounds, then in a day of 8,726,400 seconds he could only form 8,726,400,000 stars, leaving trillions of trillions unnamed and therefore uncreated. Even a trillion a second is not enough, which is a good reason to believe that he was just saying "See all those stars out there, I made them, it's been my hobby". Actually he had no-one to speak to, except the other two of the God Head, until two days later, but he was dictating the account for us later on.
The NIV Bible.
Gen 1:13 And there was evening, and there was morning the third day.
Gen 1:14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years,
Gen 1:15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so.
Gen 1:16 God made two great lights the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.
Gen 1:17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth,
Gen 1:18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And there was evening, and there was morning the fourth day.
Read the Bible very carefully. Does it actually say that God created the distant stars and galaxies on this very day, day 4, or does it say that when he was dictating to us about the events of day 4 that he also told us that he had made the stars, as this was the first time that he drew our attention to beyond the earth? Though it is written as if talking to us Adam wasn't here until day 6, and the dictation and writing down the history may have happened years later, perhaps to Noah after the flood. If he did make all the galaxies on day 4 then he has deliberately built into them highly deceptive information showing great age and events that never happened, I don't believe that God would do that.
If you ignore the " He also made the stars" it is clearly about out solar system only, and "evening, and there was morning the fourth day" cannot have any bearing on distant galaxies.
Hubble pointed at a tiny patch of southern sky in repeat visits (made over the past decade) for a total of 50 days, with a total exposure time of 2 million seconds. More than 2,000 images of the same field were taken with Hubble's two premier cameras: the Advanced Camera for Surveys and the Wide Field Camera 3, which extends Hubble's vision into near-infrared light.
This is a tiny patch of Hubble deep field showing galaxies billions of light years distant. If you could count stars, their planets etc at 1000 a second, and the rest in the sphere around us you would be still counting in decades. And many will argue that God created them all as part of his day 4 activity. That would mean that he also added false information showing great ages just to deceive us, as in the spirals in the two photos below.
This illustration (below) compares the angular size of the XDF field to the angular size of the full moon. A finger held at arm's length would appear to be about twice the width of the moon in this image. Note that this illustration does not show the actual observation of the XDF relative to the location of the moon. (Illustration Credit: NASA; ESA; and Z. Levay, STScI; Moon Image Credit: T. Rector; I. Dell'Antonio/NOAO/AURA/NSF)
If you believe that God is eternal then what was He doing in the equivalent of trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions of earth years before the present? Do you think He was capable of making things?
Can you think of anything He could have made? Is there any evidence that it was made long ago?
Looking at the galaxies you can see evidence that they are very old, so who made them and when? To say that God made them on day 4 means that he has built connecting trails and interference and collision evidence that deceives us.
Would He deliberately manufacture evidence to deceive us? I am sure he wouldn't, so then I take the evidence as a true indication of time as we understand it in earth years, since we have no other way we can estimate and understand time. The spirals on these two galaxies seem to have fully wound around, which would take a very great time.
If God created these two "as is" as things of beauty, can we be blamed if we take the appearance of age as evidence of great age?
On the other hand the Solar System looks very young, strong magnetic fields where according to evolutionary theory there shouldn't be any. Violent volcanoes even on moons that would have frozen solid within a billion years. Whenever the evolution theory can't explain something, evolutionists call on their "god of necessity" to save the theory, another asteroid did it, the evolutionary theory is saved again, the proof that their "god of necessity" it did, is that if not, then the whole theory would be proved false. Evolutionist astronomers tend to joke about the "tooth fairy" being the only evidence for "Dark Matter" since it cannot be seen or measured. But if it is not used in the calculations, as if it existed, then the whole theory of the evolution of the galaxies would be proved false. They have to call on the "tooth Fairy" again to get "dark energy" to fix a problem in their theory. After all the mumbo jumbo, and calling on the Tooth Fairy to solve their equations they still have the cheek to berate Creationists who
ACTUALLY KNOW the GOD who created everything.
In the case of Miranda, a small moon of Uranus one asteroid could not have done it, some evolutionists theorise it took 5 precisely targeted asteroids to beat it up without sending it entirely out of orbit, an unbelievable supposition to protect the evolutionary theory. A number of precisely aimed asteroids of precise weight, speed and composition are used to support the explanations for some aspect of Mercury, to destroy Venus' theoretical moon, which it probably never had, and a really big asteroid the size of Mars hit the earth to create our Moon. The evidence is? Only that the "god of necessity" or the Tooth Fairy, is needed to support the evolutionist ideas on the formation of the solar system. According to Stephen Hawking's latest book he still doesn't know how stars are formed, so presumably nobody knows, so don't believe it when evolutionists claim to know how it happened
So where did the water go to?
I take Genesis as true because as well as the above, there is so much water on earth that if you leveled out the sea floor and the land there would be 1 1/2 miles depth of water over the entire globe. With that much water how can we not have had a global flood as the continental plates settled down on the newly formed earth? It is surprising that there is any land! The water is still here, with the seafloor pushed down and land and mountains pushed up, it is in a reasonably stable condition. I live on the southern end of the "ring of fire".
There are many things about our solar system that evolutionary ideas cannot explain, nor can they explain how gas became stars and created the heavy elements, and created the fabulous galaxies we see. Rather than their "god of necessity" the Tooth Fairy, I prefer the God who loves people and who can communicate with us, and who made the galaxies, and us.
TIME
Some people claim that there was no time before the earth was created, that God "created time" so what kind of substance is "time"? God didn't have to create "time" as it is just a measurement of between then and now, or now and some future point in "time". So then what does God mean when he says he is eternal and has always existed? Did he just pop into existence just in time to create the earth? Surely by time he means something we can understand, and we only understand the measurement of time by our experience of it compared to earth events and our own life. The excuse that God exists in his "time" which is different to out "time" would seem to discredit God, as we cannot understand his claim of always existing, if we cannot relate it to our experience of "time". To be honest with us he would have to use measurements we can understand, or explain that his time is totally different to ours, and that it equates to great ages, or as some would have us believe, that it equates to just before he created the earth, which is expressed by some scientists as "there was no time before the earth was created" meaning no time anywhere in the cosmos apparently. The earth had no time before it was created, just as I had no time before I was conceived, but neither of these has any effect on the great passage of time throughout all the space of the cosmos and beyond.
The straight forward meaning of the Bible is the best at all times, so God must mean he always existed, and always will, using a measure of "time" that we understand. I back the Bible in that he has always existed for eons and eons, as far back as you can imagine, and further than that.
SPACE
Some say, and it seems to be a scientific claim, that there was no space in the beginning and that as the cosmos expands it CREATES space. I cannot accept this view. Space was always there, it is just nothing. What is the substance of space, what is it made of, how can the cosmos create it? It just fills the empty space that was there. I can imagine a time long ago when if there was no God there was just a vast empty space from infinity to infinity in all directions, no atoms no energy no light or other forces encompassing all of the space, from infinity to infinity, and there was always time, but nothing to measure it with, no intelligence to want to measure it, and it cannot be recorded. Space is just an empty area, it doesn't have to have anything in it, you can't stop it existing, by emptying it or filling it, it always existed. Far beyond the farthest galaxies, beyond the furthest that light and radiation have reached there is still vast space yet to be filled. Then I have a problem, I cannot imagine how anything could come into existence from nothing, no primordial point to explode into the "Big Bang" nor how God could come into existence out of nothing, but I stake my life on it that God is real and he is a creator, and can be communicated with by believers, particularly through the Holy Spirit. Since God is spirit and in the spiritual realm, and we are not, we cannot understand the mechanics, chemistry, if any, or the life processes, nor can we measure anything in that spiritual realm, it has to be by reaching out and accepting Jesus as Lord to get the spiritual connection established. There are many spiritists, witches Satanists etcetera who know that the dark side exists, to their ultimate destruction.
Is there a purpose for you personally?
From the information in the Bible, this is a summary of what I think has been Gods activity from an inconceivably long time ago which may help you to understand why we are here and what your purpose in life should be.
First God would be playing around making stars and galaxies. This would be like people who get fascinated with fireworks, making bigger and bigger displays, but in the end this is an impersonal activity. Eventually God made living beings, some in Revelation Ch 4:8 Day and night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy holy is the Lord God almighty, who was, and is, and is to come", Then in Verse 10 the 24 elders fall down and worship: "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being".
As time progressed God decided to create a very beautiful powerful angel to help with singing and music, so it must have a much greater free will and ability, and so he created Lucifer
( AKJ only other versions the (spiritual) King of Tyre) bright and shining and decorated with every precious stone
(Ezekiel,ch.28v:13). After a while many of the creatures in heaven became enamored with Lucifer and he became proud and puffed up. Lucifer started to imagine himself as being like God, and decided that he wanted to sit in an honored position on "the sides of the north" commensurate with his opinion of himself, and be like God. He was elevating himself without permission, and when God stopped him he rebelled, taking with him one third of the beings who knew God and that he created beings such as Lucifer and themselves.
The battle evicting the fallen angels and creatures may have left a bad feeling in heaven, perhaps making some feel that they too might be evicted. God decided that to avoid this he would create beings with full self control and freedom, but would do it in a place where they could not see heaven, and so would be free to follow their own desires and choose to seek God and follow His ways or to spurn God. As the fallen angels and beings would have access to them they would have to make decisions which would show if it would be safe to bring then into heaven or not. The main requirement is that they will not rebel in heaven, and will respect God and his standards.
The solution was to create the earth and solar system on a fairly quiet outer arm of a central galaxy which would give the best view of the rest of creation, so that as mankind increased in ability we could search the heavens for evidence of God's power. It is up to you to decide which side you will be on, with God or eternally separated from God. God wants people, he loves you and has sent Jesus to pay for your sins as God sees them but the offer is only valid for those who accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour. This is the standard that gives God the assurance that you won't rebel when you get to Heaven. This is freely open to everyone but if you don't want it, and right to the end you reject it, then ultimately Jesus
does not pay, so
you must pay for your sins, but you can't after this life, nor in this life, as God's standards are much higher than we can understand. There is no way you can qualify for entrance into Heaven, by doing good deeds, saying the Rosary, buying Indulgences etcetera, these are not in the Bible, so search the New Testament for how to become right with God. After this life the only question is "did you accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour, and keep to it?" If not you are living rubbish and thrown out. That is a miserable continuous living outcome!
To find out more about this read the verses often used to help people to come into a relationship with God.
The verses to read.
The original longer version giving a better outline of the spiritual aspect from the beginning of time is:
Beginning
If you already know Jesus try the events of Passover week, which is often confusing as it is in bits and pieces in the Bible, but the file puts it clearly in time order.
passover week events.See what Jesus did so he could pay for your faults and have you in heaven for all eternity.
DVDs on our solar system and Galaxies
The best information I have found, better than the books I have and several other DVDs on our solar system and the galaxies, is :
What you aren't being told about ASTRONOMY, Vol 1, 2, and 3.
Vol.1 is about evolutionary/big bang based theories, having problems in explaining our solar system, and evidences that show evolutionary assumptions on the formation of the solar system to be wrong and unable to account for what we now know about the solar system.
Volume 2 is about stars and galaxies and how present scientific theories tend to prove that the stars don't exist, because there are so many direct conflicts scientists cannot explain.
Volume 3 is about our created universe, contradictions in the Big Bang, redshifts as a measure of expansion, or not, multiverse ideas and failure.
These DVDs are highly professional, with many quotes from evolutionary scientists disclosing the inability of all the present theories to explain galaxies, and our solar system. The price is very low to get the information out to the public.
www.CREATIONASTRONOMY.COM
Example from above, of bad science I don't agree with
In another presentation, possibly as a different version of the theory of time dilatation above, on a DVD explains that Day 4 lasted long enough for the light from very distant galaxies to travel the distance. I assume from this then to see light from 16 billion light years distance here already, then day 4 would have to be 16 billion years duration for distant galaxies just mentioned. He is probably counting on gravitational time dilatation reducing the actual time, but remember that on Day 6 the planet earth must be safe for humans and all the animals the birds and the bees. So how close must other galaxies be to get the gravitational time dilatation, how fast can they be moved away on days 5 and 6, and will they be at a safe distance by day 7? If the massive amount of gravity needed is suddenly moved away that might have a catastrophic decompression effect on the earth. Then you have to explain how, if galaxies moved away very fast then were virtually stopped at their present distances, then their recession trails would be false, and we wouldn't see anything true until 16 billion years later, using the example above. Then how to explain that Andromeda has a blue shift and is coming towards us at 100Km/sec, it will take a while to get here from 2.5 million light years, but if at slight angle it could miss by light years.
Considering the Whirlpool Galaxy at 23 million light years distance, day 4 must have been slowed to allow 23 million years time in the distance, for the light to be here already, or day 4 plus the succeeding days totaled that, assuming that day 5 didn't switch to a normal 24 hours duration. God is outside our time, so was he sitting twiddling his thumbs for 23 million years while this got set up?
I think this is more of a joke than the "day age theory", as we are already seeing clusters of galaxies at over 300 million years distant, so how long was day 4? How much time dilatation would you have to have? It is normally taken as 24 hour days just as it says,
I don't see any justification for tweaking the scripture to fit the assumption.
He needs to do some serious work on the ramifications of his theory if he wants it to stick.
I totally reject the gravity well idea, as this is just a sneaky way of creating aeons of time for day four. This is the same as the "day age" theory where each day was a long period of perhaps 1000 years or several thousand. This was intended to give God time to create all the galaxies on day four, and so hold to the usual assumptions about what the Bible actually says. It is much better to read the Bible and not make the usual assumption about Day Four, as then the great age of the cosmos and the obvious young age of the earth are in full agreement with the actual wording of the Bible.
This researcher is not alone in this as there are many other highly qualified scientists who are trying to solve the problem of the light being visible here within 6000 years from billions of light years distance.
Another research, which I don't fully accept though its latest version seems to solve all the problems.
Another research is based on the fact that the speed of light, and therefore many atomic constants, has slowed down slightly. Over the years that attempts have been made to get the exact speed of light, scientists have given their best value and the calculated maximum error. These actually trace a decreasing speed where the calculated speed is generally slower than previous calculations, approximating a cosecant squared curve ( roughly a quarter circle starting straight down, incredible speed, to now being almost horizontal with little change) judging from the small sample of scientific research available. Sometimes the same equipment was used many years later and got a lower reading, and not able to get the previous higher speed. Bradley, 1740, 300650Km/sec and about 63 calculation to the present accepted value 299,792.458 Km/second. When set out in a graph they do show a definite slight curve.
Calculating this backwards into the past, the speed of light could have been virtually instantaneous not very long ago. Even if light was a million times faster then, light from 16 billion light years distant would still take 16 thousand years to get here. If creation was 6000 years ago we will see that light in another ten thousand years. Considering light as a wave and a thousand times faster about 6000 years ago, then the doppler effect of light approaching 1000 times faster, would raise its frequency above our visual range and people on earth would not have been able to see it. Now that light is at normal speed it still takes 16 billion years to get here, so we are seeing an image from 16 billion years ago, showing what happened then, otherwise we have been deceived by false information.
If light was 1000 times faster or more, then might it have come at us like a laser used for cutting metal, but diffused, and from all directions, and exterminated us as Xrays would?
As everything is decaying and slowing down it must have been "wound up" at the start. There must be some limiting factor on how much an atom can be wound up or energised, some point at which the electrons speeding around the nucleus would be likely to spin off into the distance and the nucleus also destroying the atom. Also there must be a point where there is not enough energy to stop the electrons slowing down and collapsing into the nucleus. I think this would severely limit the maximum and minimum speed of light.
But being able to calculate the curve to an earlier state does not mean that we should. This is the same fundamental error that evolutionists make in saying that because the cosmos is expanding we can project that back to the beginning, a small dot at the center that contained everything. It can be calculated but that does not mean we should assume it to be true, there could be massive amounts of scientific evidence or practical limitations that proves it wrong, that we haven't found out about yet.
The latest on the speed of light is viewable at:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96g4GGt1TJA
The final conclusion of the video is that by calculating the change in the speed of light back through history, and because this is related exactly to atomic decay rates, the dating of rocks by nuclear decay can be corrected. The result is that the entire cosmos was created just 10 to 6 thousand years ago.
My objections are:
1 Could light actually have been so fast? Is it right to take it to the logical mathematical limit, when there may be scientific limits we don't know about yet?
2 I see evidence of great ages in such things at the tail of The Tadpole Galaxy (UGC 10214) ( shown above) Its spiral that has been
disrupted by a collision with a smaller galaxy. The interaction has drawn out
a tail of material extending 390,000 light-years from the Tadpole, clearly
requiring timescales well in excess of a few thousand years.
3 I think it may be acceptable to calculate it back to a point that allows time for the debris and inter-reaction evidence that is seen out in the cosmos.
One scientist asks "How can we see light from billions of years if the earth is only 6000 years old, a problem that has plagued scientists
{who consider the universe/cosmos to be young}. In the eyes of many it discredits the Word of God".
Text in brackets added
Kenny:- Not so! It is only some Christians who want the galaxies to be young. Actually their great age upholds the Word of God, that he is eternal and always was, and is, and always will be, and was always making something or doing something, he never sleeps. A God who creates for the fun of it. That's my God!
Is the Bible wrong about the age of the earth?
Kenny:- No! But that is separate from the age of the Universe, God's hobby for eons.
Your comments, for or against, welcome.
This page operated by Kenny:-
http://creationtheory.mysite.com/
Email
kennyern@outlook.com
You may copy pages provided you keep the URL and email address on all copies.
Go to main index.
Other people's web pages
creation.com. Covers just about everything on evolution/ Creation/ Intelligent Design/ God.
creation.com/contents-all-creation-magazines Access to the Magazine articles.
creation.com/journal-of-creation-archive-index More technical and scientific.
http://evolution.htmlplanet.com/An effort to correct some of the problems with evolutionists more fanciful claims.
http://creationresearch.net/Good scientific articles, and free Email news articles on research reports from scientific papers.
http://www.askjohnmackay.com/ Numerous articles on questions about evolution and ID, and Christianity.Good emails on latest science.
Also on http://www.youtube.com/user/askjohnmackay#p/u and articles on http://evidenceweb.net
The CARMEL ALERT email about what is happening in Israel.
(Email: kiwi@netvision.net.il Facebook: http://www.facebook.com out.of.zion.ministries Twitter: www.twitter.com outofzionmnstry)
http://www.trueorigin.org/ Good scientific articles related to various aspects of science, besides those listed here.
Hydrothermal Origin of Life? The chemistry and theory of the situation.
Why Abiogenesis Is Impossible. Scientific details of the problem of the accidental start of life.
Origin of Life: Instability of Building Blocks.
ATP: The Perfect Energy Currency for the Cell.
http://angelfire.com/ak5/once_saved A disastrous tale of woe. Make sure you don't get caught out with one of these Bible verses that warn of the loss of salvation.
Go to main index.
Email:- This page operated by Kenny:-
http://creationtheory.mysite.com/
Email
kennyern@outlook.com
You may copy pages provided you keep the URL and email address on all copies.
.
