Creation - When was it
buildontherock
2012-02-092025-03-09

In Christianity there are two opposing views of the creation of the universe. One says that it predated the creation of mankind by uncountable years an the other is that it all came into existence the same time as mankind. Is there any evidence in science that tips the scale in favour of one oppinion? In this article I deal with that subject and in another I deal with scripture,  but there is much more to be said on the subject of creation.

Space and time

There are some highly philosophical thoughts on space and time that make no sense to me but one thing I gain is that space and time must occur together. Whenever you create here you create there and since two physical objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time. If object a can move to object b's position, there must be time. The same rules must apply whether or not there are objects in the space. If however there is proof that a physical object exists then there must be space and time therefore if the Earth exists there must be space and time.

I have previously presented this argument in reverse and I apologise to anyone to whom that may apply. Please carefully evaluate what I say for yourself that is why I try to provide the basis for my arguments. I said that time cannot exist without space is indicated by the very meaning of time. Time means change, or in other words for time to have meaning there must be a was a now and a will be. If these are all the same there is no time. For there to be change then something must change. It must shift (it must be in a different state) and for it to shift there must be space. In other words if a point source remains a point source then there is no time. I now want to correct this by saying that it is only true if all that can be considered for change is a body in the most general sense. For example if a thought can change and the thought does not depend on matter then time will exist without space (but thoughts only actually occur within some body). This is said to accommodate an existence that does not depend on matter but even then, It is now left to prove that there is such a thing as a body without size. The mere fact that there is a thought means that there is change, but I cannot speak to the nature of the change unless I understand the nature of the body. Matter, however, cannot exist without time since there had to be a time before the matter existed. I talk more on this in my sectionGod exists outside of space and time.

Time is really a measurement of change. The whole reason why the concept of time exists is that things change and we can record that using some unit of time. If time does not exist then any time t1 = t2 = t3 and so on where t1 is time number 1 and t2 is time number 2 etc. Let us say that δt means a very small amount of time. If angel a1 exists at time t1 and did not exist at some time t2 = t1 – δt (i.e. time t1 minus a very small time), then time existed because it shows that that something changed and there can be no change without time. Because if δt==0 ( will always be equal to zero, i.e. there can never be a small enough time that is not 0) then the angel always existed since t1 = t2 but we just saw in scripture that they (angels) did not always exist therefore time existed.

If angels have size (occupy any space) then the following is also true. If angel a1 is at point p1 and angel a2 is at point p2 = p1 +δp then if there is no space δp is 0 and p1=p2 which is impossible by definition. Two objects with size cannot occupy the same space at the same time. Size relates to objects that can be at rest. Size is different from mass because mass deals with density which depends on matter. Mass is how much matter that can be packed into a space.

Time and space existed in an absolute sense before the earth and the universe, which is kind of obvious, since things must occupy space and if one preceded the other then there was time. The same rules must apply whether or not there are objects in the space. If there is proof that a physical object exists then there must be space and time therefore if the Earth exists there must be space and time. As a matter of fact if an object of any size exists then then there must be space and if it exists even for an instant there must be time.

Grandfather paradox

Time and space existed in an absolute sense before the earth and at the time of the universe, which is kind of obvious, since things must occupy space and if one preceded the other then there was time. The same rules must apply whether or not there are objects in the space. If there is proof that a physical object exists then there must be space and time therefore if the Earth exists there must be space and time.

If someone went back and killed your grandfather before your father was born what would happen to you. Would you have existed? Questions like this are pursued by people who in my opinion believe in weird science. Time travel, in the sense of going backward and forward in time, falls into this category. It is nonsense to me. This is different from what Einstein was talking about. Einstein recognised that space and time must exist together as one continuum. As I understand it he postulated that space was bent and moving therefore if you could find the shortest route you would shorten the time. If you could bend (warp) the continuum you could control time from your perspective. At first it was also thought the whole universe rotated around an axis. If you could stand still you could travel to anywhere or rather anywhere would come to you. But it was proved that the universe does not rotate about an axis so that went up in smoke.

A key objection to the six-day creation is the absence of light for the animals and trees to flourish. This is a trivial matter and is dealt with in Revelation. There was in fact a source of inexhaustible light and more importantly, heat.

Revelation 22:5 [KJV]And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

God Exists Outside of Space and Time

I hear people repeating this nowadays but what does it mean? Is it true or is it nonsense. I go with nonsense. It breaks the theory of relativity so it is not science at all. If something exists outside of time then it exists at no time. It something exists outside of space then it exists at nowhere because there is nothing outside of space by the very definition of space. I believe that Satan is rolling on the floor when he hears Christians say that God exists outside of time and space because they are basically saying that God does not exist. He exists at no time and no place, that is what they are saying.

God occupies space

God is spirit.

John 4:24 [KJV] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth

According to God spirit has dimensions.

Matthew 17:20 [KJV] And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you
Luke 17:6 [KJV] And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you.

So according to God spirit can be quantified by dimensions, even it you argue that those dimensions are two dimensions or a thousand the fact still holds. Anything that has dimensions occupies space by its very definition. In this case the description is three dimensional i.e. length x width x height. If spirit occupies space then God occupies space and hence lives within space.

God occupies time

God defines himself in terms of time.

Revelation 22:13 [KJV] I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last
Psalms 90:2 [KJV] Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God
Isaiah 40:28 [KJV] Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding

Both of these statements are expressions of time. There is nothing in the Bible talking about before time because that does not make sense. If something happens there is a time that it happens otherwise it has not happened. The beginning means at the beginning of time and the end means at the end of time. Everlasting means all time.

God fills up time and space

What is supported by scripture is that God seems to fill up time and space.

Jeremiah 23:23-24 [KJV] Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off? [24] Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.
Psalms 139:7-12 [KJV] Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? 8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. 9 If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; 10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me. 11 If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me. 12 Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

Even though it does not exactly say that, because it talks in terms of the heaven relating to this solar system, there is a strong suggestion that through God's spirit they occupy all space. If that is true and the universe is constantly expanding that means that God is constantly expanding and is aware of developments on a scale that does not even make sense.

Psalms 147:4 [KJV] He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.
Isaiah 40:26 [KJV] Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.

God is great enough that they do not need people to talk foolishness to express praise and glory. Based on scripture God may be immaterial but they have size and occupy space. Anything else is superstition as far as I can see.

Time

John 8:56-58 [KJV] Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

This is an expression that tells us where it came from. The context is clearly time and in the end of verse 58 it tells us where time came from. Time came from the existence of God. Before Him there was no time and time is counted from Him. Time is not something that scientist can tinker with to go backwards and forwards, it is an expression of the existence of God. Consequently we cannot separate God from time or time from God. What is, is and God is. This of necessity is time, all the time that there is.

There is a commentary in Wikipedia on I am that I am. under the caption Hebrew Bible we find:

The word AahYah is used a total of 43 places in the Hebrew Bible, where it is often translated as "I will be" – as is the case for its first occurrence, in Genesis 26:3 – or "I shall be," as is the case for its final occurrence in Zechariah 8:8. Used by God to identify himself in the burning bush, the importance placed on the phrase stems from the Hebrew conception of monotheism that God exists by himself for himself, and is the uncreated Creator who is independent of any concept, force, or entity; therefore "I am who I am" (ongoing).[citation needed]

Some scholars state that the Tetragrammaton itself derives from the same verbal root, following a rabbinical interpretation of Exodus 3:14, but others counter that it may simply sound similar as intended by God, such as Psalm 119 and the Hebrew words shoqed (watching) and shaqed (almond branch) found in Jeremiah 1:11-12.[citation needed] Whether the Holy Name (written as YHWH) is derived from AahYah or whether the two are individual concepts is a subject of debate among historians and theologians.[citation needed]

In appearance, it is possible to render YHWH (יהוה) as an archaic third person singular imperfect form of the verb ahyah (אהיה) "to be" meaning, therefore, "He is". It is notably distinct from the root El, which can be used as a simple noun to refer to the creator deity in general, as in Elohim, meaning simply "God" (or gods). This interpretation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — AahYah "I am". Other scholars regard the triconsonantal root of hawah (הוה) as a more likely origin for the name Yahweh.

WikipediaI am that I amWIKIPEDIAhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am2017-05-18

One of God's names  is time. It is who He is. Because of Him things happen and without Him nothing could. He is the source. So then what do people mean when they say that God exists outside of time? Actually I don't know. I have never heard anyone give a rational explanation. Is it true? Well in my opinion no, not according to what He has said about Himself. He and time exist together. 

Space

Colossians 1:17 brings me to the same conclusion about space that John 8:58 tells me about time.

Colossians 1:17 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

God and space exist together. All things exists in space. Space came from God in order for Him to place all things. Space existed from the first time that God wanted a thing because He needed somewhere to put it. I should say rather that space existed from the time of the existence of God because God occupies space. The question then becomes how much space? Did He always want somewhere to put things? I have no Idea. There are other complications too. This verse is talking about Christ whom we understand has always existed with the Father? Did they always want to be separate yet one? If they were always separate then space always existed because separate means that they occupy different space. We know that they are one because Christ said so (John 10:30,38). We know that they are separate also from John (John 1:1-3). These are the straight uncomplicated facts as I see them.

So does God exist outside of space and time? Not that I can see from the scriptures. They exist together.

Light years

A more reasonable objection is the existence of light years. If light years as measured by modern science is correct then there should be no visible record of a universe beyond 6,000 years. That is to say that at the 6,000 light-year point, all that we should see is creation coming instantaneously into being as God did at the creation. This is not the case and in fact we see that far beyond 6,000 years the universe looks the same. The assumption made by many creationist is that the earth and the universe were created 6,000 years ago based on the statements made in genesis 1. I personally do not see this as an incontrovertible conclusion. Consider reading what the Bible seems to say on the matter.

A light-year is a unit of distance. It is the distance that light can travel in one year. Light moves at a velocity of about 300,000 kilometers (km) each second. So in one year, it can travel about 10 trillion km. More p recisely, one light-year is equal to 9,500,000,000,000 kilometers.

Why would you want such a big unit of distance? Well, on Earth, a kilometer may be just fine. It is a few hundred kilometers from New York City to Washington, DC; it is a few thousand kilometers from California to Maine. In the universe, the kilometer is just too small to be useful. For example, the distance to the next nearest big galaxy, the Andromeda Galaxy, is 21 quintillion km. That's 21,000,000,000,000,000,000 km. This is a number so large that it becomes hard to write and hard to interpret. So astronomers use other units of distance.

In our solar system, we tend to describe distances in terms of the Astronomical Unit (AU). The AU is defined as the average distance between the Earth and the Sun. It is approximately 150 million km (93 million miles). Mercury can be said to be about 1/3 of an AU from the Sun and Pluto averages about 40 AU from the Sun. The AU, however, is not big enough of a unit when we start talking about distances to objects outside our solar system.

For distances to other parts of the Milky Way Galaxy (or even further), astronomers use units of the light-year or the parsec . The light-year we have already defined. The parsec is equal to 3.3 light-years. Using the light-year, we can say that:
  • The Crab supernova remnant is about 4,000 light-years away.
  • The Milky Way Galaxy is about 150,000 light-years across.
  • The Andromeda Galaxy is 2.3 million light-years away.
Dejoie, Joyce and Truelove, Elizabeth "Libby" StarChild Question of the Month for March 2000Starchildhttp://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question19.html2011-10-20

and we can see them.

The Doppler effect

The Doppler effect is observed when a siren is moving towards us, reaches us and then moves away. When the siren is moving towards us it has a high frequency sound, when it reaches us it sounds normal and when it is moving away it has a low frequency sound. The siren is not actually changing but the difference between the speed of the vehicle and the speed of the sound waves make it appear so. At the front of the approaching siren the two speeds get combined (sound wave + vehicle) and when it is moving away the speed of the sound-waves gets reduced and it sounds stretched.

Red shift

When we talk about a star being light-years away it is obvious that we have no physical tool to measure the distance, what is actually measured is the redshift of the star. As I understand it the universe and everything in it is expanding because everything is moving apart at different rates. Now i am not proposing a belief in the Big-bang but at the same time I am not one to deny true science. What I mean by true science is science that stands the test of the scientific method where hypotheses are accepted as fact only when they have stood up to rigorous proof. From my layman's reading this seems to be the case with light years but not with the Big-bang. Even thought it gets linked with a belief in a big-bang the two are very different. In other words, a big-bang assumes that something can come from nothing but light years do not.

Now as I was saying: things cannot move apart if they have the same velocity. Any two items moving in the same direction can only move apart if their speeds are different. On the other hand electromagnetic waves, like light, always have the same speed. All objects are moving towards the edge of the universe. some are ahead of us and some are behind. Both those ahead and behind us are moving away from us relatively, or to say it another way, the distance between us is increasing whether you are behind or in front. The Doppler affect shows how this affects sound but this moving away also affects light. The light is not actually changing but relative to us it appears to be. Because it is moving away relatively it would appear to be stretched. If the planets were coming together then it would appear to be compressed. A planet that is far away towards the edge of the universe appears to be be moving away at the same rate as one that is as far away but towards the centre of the universe or in any other direction so the stretching affect can be used to measure distance in any direction.

Red shift is used to measure this stretching effect but scientists have to compensate for any change in the light wave that has come about because of expansion of the universe. General expansion of the universe would expand all things and therefore stretch the light too. To do this they use the light from a type 1a supernova but the science of this is beyond me. That is how I understand the concept and it seems plausible to me.

What is 'red shift'?

'Red shift' is a key concept for astronomers. The term can be understood literally - the wavelength of the light is stretched, so the light is seen as 'shifted' towards the red part of the spectrum...

The red shift of a distant galaxy or quasar is easily measured by comparing its spectrum with a reference laboratory spectrum. Atomic emission and absorption lines occur at well-known wavelengths. By measuring the location of these lines in astronomical spectra, astronomers can determine the red shift of the receding sources...

European Space AgencyWHAT iS RED SHIFT?European Space Agency (ESA)http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/What_is_red_shift2011-10-20

To that I would add the following. All electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light. Gamma rays are the shortest waves and radio waves are the longest. In terms of the visible spectrum we cannot see waves at either extreme, we see from red to violet. violet is the smallest and beyond violet or Ultraviolet waves are too small to see. Visible light increases in wavelength from violet to blue, green, yellow, orange and red. Then it becomes to long to see as it goes beyond red or Infrared, then we have microwaves and finally radio waves. So as the universe expands the light waves get relatively longer from the perspective of any object or old light is shorter than new light for practical purposes.

To use red shift it must first be calibrated by using standard candles. This is really another subject, but first the correlation between colour and brightness is determined from nearer objects by using things like parallax, which in turn depends on direct measurements of closer objects using the time it takes for electromagnetic waves to bounce off the closer objects and return.

inverse square law
a law stating that the intensity of an effect such as illumination or gravitational force changes in inverse proportion to the square of the distance from the source.oxforddictionaries​.com​inverse square lawoxforddictionaries​.com​http://oxforddictionaries​.com​/definition​/english​/inverse-square-law2017-06-11

Light follows the inverse square law so that i~1/r2, or intensity∝ 1/distance2 where intensity of the object i is inversely proportional to the distance from the object r. If you know the actual intensity of the object and the and the apparent intensity of the object then you can calculate r, which is how far away the object is, by using intensity1/intensity2 = distance1/distance2.

So lets say you know that there is a type of star called a light-bulb star that always is of the same brightness. Some of these stars are close enough to measure their distance by bouncing EM waves off of them so you calibrate their spectrum by using the close ones. Parallax is measuring something from the same distance away but one measurement is to the left or right or above or below the other. The distant objects also appear to move to the left or right or up or down by some distance. Using trigonometry you can work out the distance of the objects by how much they shift. You can then find many more light-bulb stars that are too far away to use direct measurement by EM waves, that can be calibrated by using parallax and the inverse square law. Calibration of red-shift involves matching their spectrum to how far away they are. Once your calibrations are correct you can rely solely on the spectrum to identify how far away a light-bulb star is. This is a simplified version of the theory but it uses the same principle.

Now I am not the smartest, and I willingly admit to that, but I cannot see the argument against light years. I hear people say that some mathematicians have shown that it does not take light years for light to travel light years because of space warps and time warps but to my limited understanding it is weird science.

The space and time warps

What I understand is that time and space form one continuum. In other words space makes no sense without time although there could be time without space in some weird existence where nothing with size exists. In the real world if a is an object in space and b exists in every space outside of a (e.g. b moves around so fast that anywhere you look you see it there except where a is). If a exists in space then b cannot exist in the same space at the same time, therefore in order for b to occupy as space there must be time. The two go hand in hand for real world events. If it is true that space warps or bends then one can use where the bends are closest to travel greater relative distances in the same time. If it were possible to move about or warp space then you could move anywhere at will. In other words if you could compress, twist or warp the way to work so that the road at your destination bends to be one step away or is compressed to be one step away, then you could take one step to work. That is kind of common sense but some of the more extreme assumptions that people come up with just don’t make sense to me and they use them with this pompous look down the nose attitude that says I am smart; this is a mystery; you just don’t understand. Well I don’t. The space time continuum is a mathematical concept which I will quote from Stanford University, https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html Because space consists of 3 dimensions, and time is 1-dimensional, space-time must, therefore, be a 4-dimensional object. It is believed to be a 'continuum' because so far as we know, there are no missing points in space or instants in time, and both can be subdivided without any apparent limit in size or duration. It was invented because of the demands of the theory or relativity which require that both the time and the space must always be part of the equation for accurate results.

Fossils

This is a particularly difficult subject to tackle because the evidence for and against the fossil record of extending beyond 6,000 years seems to be biased and dotted with hoaxes. For example on one hand we have the man footprint in dinosaur track theory countered by Glen Kuban and experts. They were found to be dinosaur tracks not human footprints. On the other hand we have the prehistoric men that turn up ever so often and are found to be all sorts of composite artifacts.

What is a fossil? dictionary.com defines it as:any remains, impression, or trace of a living thing of a former geologic age, as a skeleton, footprint, etc.

Basically it is a record of life before recorded history and is not as most people assume a cast of a prehistoric creature. There is a useful article on fossils noted on 2011-11-11 at fossilsforsale.com . There are of course many other sites on the web but I like that one because it is relatively simple reading and also pretty comprehensive in my view.

A creationist view of fossils is that they all occurred at the flood which itself occurred 2,000 years after the Earth was populated by any living thing and 4,000 years before the present (give or take a few years of course).

Where did the pitch come from?

Genesis 6:14 (KJV)14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.

The obvious point here is that there was pitch before the flood so the question that I want to present is how did we get pitch? Pitch (or as it is commonly called today coal-tar pitch, asphalt or bitumen) is an organic material that does not need to come from natural deposits in the earth; it can be and has been manufactured for many centuries. The ingredients appear to be pine sap and coal. There is even a species of pine called pitch-pine. Pliny also records that it was produced from birch, Celtic *betu- "birch, birch resin”, from which we get the name bitumen. Coal can be produced by incomplete combustion of wood e.g. by burning it in oxygen-starved air. This practice is still done today in my home country by covering the burning wood with dirt. Now this may answer the question of where Noah’s pitch came from but it does not answer the question of where the natural deposit in the earth came from and where coal or petroleum used to produce it industrially came from but of course there is the catch all that God can do anything.

The general term used for fuels found in the earth is fossil-fuel. Fossil fuels represent part of the fossil record; another part includes limestone which is commonly used for building. The big challenge to creationist and scientist using the fossil record to refute or corroborate the Bible is how long did it take to form and under what conditions.

Science shows that we have fossilized dinosaurs but why do we not have fossilized horses, rats and sheep etc in far greater abundance, and where are the fossilized people? If they all lived together then there should be a representative amount of fossil of all. Instead we appear to have a selection of fossils that largely represent creatures that are considered extinct. If all fossils were created at the flood then fossils should present a snapshot of the world at a specific point in time and not a range. The law of averages would suggest that the more abundant creatures should produce the larger number of fossils and if the pre-flood world and the post-flood world are essentially equivalent (Noah appears to have ensured this) then the fossil record should represent life today. Both creationists and science agree that the fossils were created in a great catastrophe which caused them to be buried suddenly; only the flood meets this criterion in recorded history. Under these circumstances it is not reasonable to expect that the most numerous constituents of the planet would be in the minority. We have fossil records of tiny crustaceans, bacteria and even a mite on a spider’s back therefore size in not the issue. Fossils present a lot of good questions but no concrete answers.

Conclusion

Unfortunately I cannot prove when the original creation of the universe occurred from science or any other source. Nobody can, because it began with the existence of God, but I have demonstrated that it had to happen because what we know as time and space could not have spontaneously appeared with our present laws of existence. God came into existence and all that we know comes from them i.e. the universe is their existence and is made from them. It does not make sense to conceive of something outside of them i.e. outside of the universe. To me saying that the universe expands is equivalent to saying that God continues to grow; as I quoted earlier, (Colossians 1:16-17 [KJV]) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. There is more to be said on the proof for creation in other articles on this site. I believe that I have also demonstrated that it could not have happened 6,000 years ago if we have light that is older than that. Using techniques like red-shift it has been calculated that objects much further that 6,000 light years away exist and hence they must be older than 6,000 years old for that light to reach us. Other articles will also show that the Bible never claims that the universe or the planet earth was originally created 6,000 years ago.