Mature Universe Theory

[The Barbarian]

38 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

So you cannot provide any example of an object that is formless.

Science uses "formless" in the dictionary sense, a substance that has no fixed shape. 

formless  adjective

1: having no regular form or shape

 

2: lacking order or arrangement

 

3: having no physical existence

 

I think that the meaning in Genesis is more like the Koine Greek χάος.   (chaos)

 

Chaos (Ancient Greek: χάος, romanized: Kháos) is the mythological void state preceding the creation of the universe (the cosmos) in ancient near eastern cosmology and early Greek cosmology. It can also refer to an early state of the cosmos constituted of nothing but undifferentiated and indistinguishable matter.^[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_(cosmogony)

Evidence for the initial state of the universe suggests something very much like that.    I'm thinking that the person who wrote down the first chapter of Genesis was trying to explain God's revelation in terms that made sense in the culture of his time.   

And I'm thinking that he did a pretty good job of that.

[FreeGrace]

15 minutes ago, BeyondET said:

FreeGrace said:

"In a similar way, the account of creation from Adam and Eve was passed down among the generations.  

That's exactly what i was referring to, you made that up, the account of creation from Adam and Eve not from any scholar sources.

So you think Adam and Eve made stuff up?  Really?

[RV_Wizard]

16 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

The only examples you provided were NOT objects, but liquids and gases, which are not objects.

That IS what formless means.  There are three states of matter.   Gaseous cools to liquid, liquid cools to solid.  Genesis 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.  How does that happen, exactly?  Had earth been solid before the creation of light, light would have been blocked on the back side of the planet.  The planet solidifying would explain separating darkness from the light.  This is consistent with both the laws of physics (which God did NOT have to follow) and the details of creation.  This is one possible explanation and is offered as such.  It is 100% consistent. 

Regardless, the timetable of Genesis is very clear.  Atmosphere- verse 7, dry land-  verse 9, vegetation- verse 11, the rest of the universe- verse 14, first life- verse 20.  There is NO provision for long ages anywhere in the creation story.  Whether you take "without form and void" literally or you take it as describing the condition before God began forming the planet He had created, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that the creation took place over a six day period followed by a day of rest.

[FreeGrace]

16 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

FreeGrace said:

So you cannot provide any example of an object that is formless.

Science uses "formless" in the dictionary sense, a substance that has no fixed shape.

RV provided a source that defined 'form' as 3 dimensional and 'shape' as 2 dimensional.  

16 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

formless  adjective

1: having no regular form or shape

2: lacking order or arrangement

 

3: having no physical existence

I think that the meaning in Genesis is more like the Koine Greek χάος.   (chaos)
Chaos (Ancient Greek: χάος, romanized: Kháos) is the mythological void state preceding the creation of the universe (the cosmos) in ancient near eastern cosmology and early Greek cosmology. It can also refer to an early state of the cosmos constituted of nothing but undifferentiated and indistinguishable matter.^[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_(cosmogony)

Evidence for the initial state of the universe suggests something very much like that.    I'm thinking that the person who wrote down the first chapter of Genesis was trying to explain God's revelation in terms that made sense in the culture of his time.   

And I'm thinking that he did a pretty good job of that.

I'll stick with the basic meaning of 'form' vs 'shape'; 3 dimensional.  Even objects that have no "regular form" STILL have a form.  It's just not "regular".  

I don't believe God's creative ability 'lacks order or arrangement' since Psa 33:6 and 9 says that God speaks things into existence.

Moses wrote the Pentateuch, including Gen 1.  Why do you think Jeremiah and Isaiah used the same 2 Hebrew words (tohu wabohu) that Moses did in Gen 1:2 when they were warning about and describing the result of an invading army that was going to destroy the land so that it would be uninhabitable?

[FreeGrace]

15 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said:

 You have accepted the KJV translation, which has been shown to be FALSE because in this 3 dimensional universe, the earth CANNOT ever have been "formless".

Your inability to comprehend 7th grade science concepts renders your entire argument invalid.  

I remain amazed at how tightly closed your eyes/ears are.

[FreeGrace]

6 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said:

The only examples you provided were NOT objects, but liquids and gases, which are not objects.

That IS what formless means.  There are three states of matter.   Gaseous cools to liquid, liquid cools to solid. 

This is irrelevant.  It suggests that God only creates in "states of matter".  As if He is incapable of speaking whole objects into existence by merely speaking them into existence.  That is a pitiful view of how God creates.

As I have said, "formless" is used only for comparison.  Such as an object that lacks certain features that like objects have.  You want the example again?

6 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Genesis 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.  How does that happen, exactly?  Had earth been solid before the creation of light, light would have been blocked on the back side of the planet.  The planet solidifying would explain separating darkness from the light.  This is consistent with both the laws of physics (which God did NOT have to follow) and the details of creation.  This is one possible explanation and is offered as such.  It is 100% consistent.

Are you not aware that one can be 100% consistently wrong?

6 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Regardless, the timetable of Genesis is very clear.  Atmosphere- verse 7, dry land-  verse 9, vegetation- verse 11, the rest of the universe- verse 14, first life- verse 20.  There is NO provision for long ages anywhere in the creation story.  Whether you take "without form and void" literally or you take it as describing the condition before God began forming the planet He had created, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that the creation took place over a six day period followed by a day of rest.

Go ahead and cling to your young earth.  Doesn't matter.  Jeremiah and Isaiah both understood what Moses was describing.

[RV_Wizard]

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Are you not aware that one can be 100% consistently wrong?

You aren't 100% wrong, but you're working on it.  I think you believe in the Bible after the creation.  You've just swallowed the lie of the gap theory so you can hang with the old earth crowd.

Nothing in the Bible suggests or allows for an old earth.

Everything in creation was created in its mature form.

[FreeGrace]

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You aren't 100% wrong, but

You are.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

I think you believe in the Bible after the creation.

I believe what the Bible says more than you.  Because you have rejected the FACT that the earth became a wasteland that was uninhabitable.  Otherwise, Jeremiah and Isaiah would never have used those 2 Hebrew words in the context of total destruction of the land.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  You've just swallowed the lie of the gap theory so you can hang with the old earth crowd.

I have said nothing about any theory.  No one knows what caused the earth to become an uninhabitable wasteland.  But the FACT of what "tohu wabohu"means is beyond debate.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Nothing in the Bible suggests or allows for an old earth.

Except Gen 1:2 literally from the Hebrew.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Everything in creation was created in its mature form.

I fully agree.  But after that the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland.

You just can't let go of the young earth theory.  All because of modern translations that messed up Gen 1:2, just because God didn't give details that were irrelevant to humanity.

[RV_Wizard]

6 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

As if He is incapable of speaking whole objects into existence by merely speaking them into existence.

What God is capable of and what Genesis records that God actually did are different notions.  The seven day week has no other model than the creation week.  Months are determined by the moon's cycles.  Years are determined by our orbit around the sun.  By creating as He did, He gave us the six days of labor and the hallowed day of rest.

6 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

As I have said, "formless" is used only for comparison.  

As opposed to "senseless," which describes the notion that there was a previous existence before the creation of light, dry land or the universe around us.  

2 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

you have rejected the FACT that the earth became a wasteland

I tend to reject things that didn't happen.  You should also.  There is no text that includes the word became.  There is no possibility of an existence previous to the creation of light in verse three, or the formation of land in verse nine.

Revelation 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The Scriptures were complete about 95 AD.  Your favored heresy came from the 17th century.  It is an incredibly stupid, poorly thought out heresy.  It would have been smarter to place the mythical gap between the completion of the world and the formation of Adam.  At least then it wouldn't have to account for the lack of anything; even dry land.  It would just have to contend with the fact that sin and death came from the fall of man.  Of course, the evolution crowd refuse to believe that teaching as well.

 

[BeyondET]

10 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

So you think Adam and Eve made stuff up?  Really?

They didn't teach 6 days of creation like you think. Neither earth became a wasteland.

Edited November 5, 2024 by BeyondET