Preterism & Creationism

[Guest]

Throm, I have no proof it's only a deduction on my part based on assumptions. One assumption is that this issue has nothing to do with God's power as some YEC make it an issue about since God could have created everything in 24 seconds or minutes per day but rather if God sets up laws of physics and nature then does he abide by the laws he set up even in the creation process. If he establishes oceans and they get filled with fish and vegatation is it over a natural timetable or does God just ignore his laws of nature and create mature things immediately?
Adam probably could'nt really name all the animals in 24 hours and like i mentioned before "evening and then morning" is literally 12 hours not 24 hours and it's a cryptic statement to me. I think it is significant that the other days have specific ends but the 7th does'nt implying it's still continuing. Even though it's not a creation day it could still have an end mentioned for clarity. Exodus 20.11 is establishing the pattern of the Sabbath for man so God uses the expression so man can understand the symbolism in the Sabbath being a reflection of what God did rather then a declaration that the creation days were 24 hours each. The jubilee pattern is a guess on my part but God uses a great deal of symbolism in what he does and i'm guessing that if the 7th day turns out to be 7,000 years then so to the other days and then the jubilees in the OT will be a "type" for the great final jubilee. Steve7150

[Guest]

...since God could have created everything in 24 seconds or minutes per day but rather if God sets up laws of physics and nature then does he abide by the laws he set up even in the creation process. If he establishes oceans and they get filled with fish and vegatation is it over a natural timetable or does God just ignore his laws of nature and create mature things immediately?
Steve7150

Hey Steve,

Just for clarity are you suggesting that you find that God probably didn't create "mature things"? It would seem IMHO that such examples like Adam and Eve (who clearly weren't created as babies) as well as other aspects of creation (soil to support plants, star light, etc.) were created mature. There would also seem to be examples in Scripture were God could possibly have overrode the physical laws of the universe (Josh 10:12-14 or maybe this could be explained naturally?). I personally have no problem though if the earth is in fact a lot older as long as it was God who began the creation process.

Erich <><

[Guest]

Hey Erich, I'm guessing that except for man God did'nt create mature living things. In describing lower living things God says "let the earth bring forth" or "which the waters brought forth" but for man "Let us create man in our image,after our likeness."
Back to the 24 hour belief ,this 24 hour relationship is based on the relationship of the earth to the sun ,yet the light of the sun did'nt reach the earth until the 4th day so until then we "literally" did'nt have 24 hr days.
I also think when God created the heavens "in the beginning" that included the sun and moon and the light referred to as greater and lesser lights on the 4th day are the ability of these lights to be seen from earth after the waters of the firmament were separated by that below and that above. Originally the firmament around the earth was much thicker and denser and blocked light from coming through until God separated it. So on day 4 it's never said that the sun and moon are created but that the lights can be seen IMHO.

[Guest]

Hi all interesting site and comments.
Steve7150's idea of things (outside Adam & Eve) not being created in mature form does not seem very likely to me. Many life forms (mammals for example that suckle thier young) need the presence of a mature form to develop. The phrases "let the earth bring forth" or "which the waters brought forth" seem (to me) to better fit the reproduction cycle, (which of course requires at least sexual maturity) than development from infant to adult, or an evolutionary process of simple to more complex forms. Certainly creation in mature form would not be outside God's ability.
Also one can have a literal 24 hour day prior to the existence (creation) of the sun. One could safely presume God already would know the cycle that He would creating with the sun on day four. Since God has labeled the days prior to day four in the same fashion as the days afterwards there is no reason to presume the earlier days were of any different length. There is no indication within the Genesis account of a dense atmosphere that blocked light and so no reason to speculate such. Unless one wants to harmonize somehow with current evolutinary scenarios. Your assertion that the evening / morning phrase in Genesis indicates a 12 hour period and not 24 hours would mean God "created" only during periods of darkness (night). Perhaps somene familiar with the Hebrew language could comment on what the evening / morning phrase would mean to the Israelites.

Guest makes the point that God has established the laws of nature and so therefore He would abide by those laws even in the process of creation. However it is clear that God is above those laws and He is not bound by them. God can violate them at will. Miracles, such the lame walking, leapers healed, the dead raised, and even Balaam's donkey are examples of this. Creation, by definition is a miraculous event, and so therefore is not necessarily bound to have occured according to current laws. Additionally we should note that Romans 8:20 tells us "the creation was subjected to frustration, and not by it's own choice" (at the time of the Fall ???) and Romans 8:21 tells us "that creation itself will be liberated from it's bondage to decay". From these verses I conclude that even our current Laws of nature have been distorted by Sin. They are not operating in exactly the same fashion as God originally designed. Do you agree ? Also I find no difficulty in Adam naming all the animals in a 24 hour period. For example the names insects, cattle, fish, or dinosaur could take in many different types in a few seconds.

[Guest]

Guest, You made one good point that i agree with which is that many young life forms do need the nursing of parents to survive therefore God did probably create mature life forms also. The phrases "let the earth bring forth" or "which the waters brought forth" are within a creation day and sound to me like a process of development over time.
Certainly God knew what 24 hours was but my point was that type of day in nature did'nt even exist on the earth before day 4. You said God often overrode his laws of nature but that was after sin came into the world and distorted these laws. Of course God can but would he before sin?
I think there is evidence of a dense atmosphere in Gen 1.6 we read "Let there be a firmamemt in the midst of the water,and let it divide the waters from the water." Here we see that there was water above the atmosphere and below the atmosphere. The water above the atmosphere blocked any light from appearing until the 4th day until God said "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night" 1.14 God let there be a greater light for day and a lessor light for night but the sun and moon were created with the heavens in the beginning IMHO. I'm not trying to harmonize with evolution but rather i won't be boxed into 24 hour days simply as an overreaction to evolution which IMO has happened.

[Guest]

I have always found it to be interesting concerning the vast and far reaches of space and time where scientists claim to have found the original place from which the "Big Bang" occurred. They speak of the light that is now reaching us from that distant time past, and our telescopes are able to see back to the original blast because of the light now here.

The problem I have with this ridiculous theory is that somehow this little and insignificant planet we all call home has somehow arrived at where we are far ahead of the light we are now claiming to see for the first time. It makes no sense to me, but I do not claim to have their power of reasoning.

I am still undecided though as to whether I accept a young creation. I do believe that God is fully capable of putting all creation in an instant motion whereas all things are at all developments of progress. In other words, light was put as far or near to its source as God wanted it to be at its creation. I think this would hold true, in theory, with all of creation. As far as we know, God created Adam and Eve as full grown adults but within their own bodies were the seeds for new creations (children).

Just my thoughts.

[Guest]

Hi Allyn,

The point in your second paragraph seems very strong. It would seem that the earth was hurled to its present location from the initial explosion at a speed much faster than that of light, so that we got here millions of years before the light did—even though the earth and the light began at the same time and place! I wonder how someone more scientifically astute might address this problem.

[Guest]

That is a very interesting observation that Allyn has made (and that Steve commented on) and one that seems obvious if weren’t for the fact that we have had this traditional idea of the earth and universe ingrained into our minds by science. Another question along those same lines that I would pose to someone who knows more about this than myself is how do we even know where in the universe the big-bang occurred? In other words looking out at the stars how do we know in which direction the universe is older and in which direction it is younger? If everything came from the same point than I guess in theory one part of the universe as we look at it would appear to be older than if were to look at the stars in the opposite direction, being younger, right? I have never heard a scientist talk about the younger portion of the universe only that these stars we see in the distance (seemingly in any direction) are millions, if not billions of years old. Thoughts? Corrections???

Erich <><

[Guest]

But does'nt Genesis say that the light was created later?
1.1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
1.3 "And God said, Let there be light."

[Guest]

They say that our universe is an expanding universe. They also say that they are able to measure this expansion, therefore they believe they know where to look to find the center.

If I were a person who did not believe in a creator I would then have to logically ask myself, where did the void of space come from? After all, in the minds of these scientists, nothing really is something.

Now, I know also that they believe, or suppose, that our universe is one of an infinite number that have been induced by a repeatitive big bang. They theorize that the universe will someday reach its maximum expansion and then will reverse coarse thus starting the process all over again. How convienent this theory is because it is then a god within itself with no intelligence and no emotion.