Rapidly Matured Creation--Dr. Byl

Discussion in 'Natural Revelation and God's Creation' started by Afterthought, Oct 4, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Afterthought

    Afterthought Puritan Board Junior

    Some people believe mature creation is a deceptive solution to the starlight problem in a young universe. I disagree, but Dr. Byl presents a workaround solution to the deception objection: all that we observe happened, but at an accelerated rate in a miraculous manner. The creation of stars and galaxies was miraculously, rapidly matured, like the plant God grew for Jonah. The last objection to mature creation is then answered: there is no deception because it did all happen. This is actually a solution I had thought about previously some years ago, so I am glad to see someone with standing write it up.


    The comments are useful, as are the comments and follow-up post here: http://bylogos.blogspot.com/2018/08/cosmology-at-creationism-conference.html

    For my own thoughts on the post,

    An astronomer could make (and an astronomer friend of mine has made) an objection that if this were true, we would see a blue-shift. The comments also point out other issues, e.g., a huge energy flux on Earth as light arrived. However, I would point out that these are miraculous processes, so we cannot simply use our present laws of physics to rule it out (as Dr. Byl himself starts to argue in the comments in the follow-up post). Nevertheless, if one is really that concerned about energy fluxes, he notes that the accelerated processes could be assumed to vary with distance from the earth in just the right manner.

    Can this solution be proven to be correct? No. It is not an hypothesis without precedent in the Scriptures, but it cannot be proven. However, because it is a possibility, it shows the limitations of scientific objections to the Creation account based on starlight: science cannot rule out the miraculous since it does not and cannot study it. Scientific objections to the Creation account are thus philosophically nullified by this theoretical possibility.

    It is not as though a believer who holds to YEC needs to find an answer, of course: it suffices to say, God says it occurred that way, he is wise and powerful enough to accomplish it, knowledgeable and truthful enough to trust what he says, and so therefore it must have occurred that way, despite the objections of our scientific reasonings. The possibility is merely useful for helping one see how our scientific reasonings might have gone wrong and for providing an extra philosophical hypothesis (so it cannot be objected that every other possibility has been ruled out, therefore the science must be correct).
  2. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable

  3. Parakaleo

    Parakaleo Puritan Board Sophomore

    I, for one, think you have "standing", Ramon!
  4. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Doctor

    Light could also been traveling at different rate of speed than currently, or is faster in different sections of the Universe.
  5. Taylor Sexton

    Taylor Sexton Puritan Board Junior

    Is there a name for the phenomenon that occurs when the beginning of one word and the end of the following word form another word, and you keep seeing that word instead of the actual two separate words? I keep seeing this thread and thinking it is about rapture theology: "Rapidly Matured."

  6. Taylor Sexton

    Taylor Sexton Puritan Board Junior

    Heaven forbid.
  7. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable

    No label exists. So we have to invent one. We know Kangaroo words exist as defined by logolologists, such as encourage, which is a word carrying around nearly a full quiver of other words. So the phrase "rapidly matured" should be what we will call a Kangaroo phrase.
  8. Taylor Sexton

    Taylor Sexton Puritan Board Junior

    Noted, and I will keep looking.

    Sorry, this was totally off topic, but annoying enough that I simply had to post about it.

    Carry on...
  9. TheInquirer

    TheInquirer Puritan Board Freshman

    Regarding the "deception" argument - I may be a simpleton but it seems to me that if God told us how he did it, it is hard to classify it as "deception."
    • Like Like x 1
    • Amen Amen x 1
    • List
  10. Jeri Tanner

    Jeri Tanner Moderator Staff Member

    I so appreciate John Byl! Thanks for posting this, it needs to be more widely talked about and grasped.
  11. Contra_Mundum

    Contra_Mundum Pilgrim, Alien, Stranger Staff Member

    The miracle of turning water into wine, Jn.2: was that "deceptive?" Because, aging wine takes time, fact; and the master of ceremonies was convinced that (oddly) the host had "saved the best wine for last." But Jesus had only just turned water into the wine under consideration.

    The "deception" canard stands against not just one miracle, but all miracles. If naturalistic progression is the "rule" for how everything we see came to pass, then miracles of any kind--not just creative miracles or the original creation of everything--renders the observer's frame of reference normative and authoritative, and justifies every ounce of skepticism.

    I'm not going to argue with a committed theistic evolutionist or another alternative-view person who is bound to make the Genesis account fit his preconception. But, I will suggest that he's inconsistent when he affirms other miracles in the Bible, instead of accepting naturalism's accounts of those as well (based on every observer's autonomous, authoritative, neutral and unbiased, ever-truth-seeking, never axe-grinding-against-his-Creator perspective, and God's supposed solicitous regard for the fallen human "sounds flaky to me" detector).
    • Like Like x 4
    • Amen Amen x 2
    • List
  12. De Jager

    De Jager Puritan Board Freshman

    If we believe that God created stars "ex nihilo", then it really isn't much of a stretch to believe that he created all the light travelling between the star and earth in the same "ex nihilo" moment.
  13. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member

    Not to get technically picky, but...

    The first words of God recorded in Genesis are the command for light to be.
    And light was.

    As far as I can make out, the next step brought about the heavens and earth.

    Agreeing with your point, though, God made light and put it where he thought best.
  14. De Jager

    De Jager Puritan Board Freshman


    I think the basic thing to keep in mind is that creation is a giant miracle - and you don't explain miracles by science.

    I listened to a sermon on creation by John MacArthur and that was his main message.
  15. Ben Mordecai

    Ben Mordecai Puritan Board Freshman

    I think the "deception" argument has a bit more weight because the Bible tells us that they are "for signs and seasons." To me, this could carry the implication that their observation should yield true information.
  16. Ben Zartman

    Ben Zartman Puritan Board Sophomore

    They do: we can tell time and navigate ships by their precise, predictable movements. If one cares to look it up in an almanac, one can tell what season of the year it is by what constellations are at the horizon at the twilight times; the sun travels north, then south again and back, etc.
    But the truest thing their observation conveys is the glory of God (Psalm 19), showing His handiwork. When we observe redshift and blueshift and try thereby to pin an age on the universe, it is we who are misinterpreting the truth that the heavens convey: that there is a great Creator, and the whole creation is full of His glory.
    There is no deception in the apparent age of things: God declares that He made everything in six days. God made Adam and Eve of apparently mature age. So it's no jump of logic to see that God made many things mature ("scientists" tell us the sun is a middle-aged star), and their presence is not meant to deceive, but to cause us to give God glory.
  17. Jeri Tanner

    Jeri Tanner Moderator Staff Member

    God does send a delusion, but only in the sense that hardened hearts who hate him will willfully misinterpret the signs of creation. Maybe it’s akin to his hardening of Pharoah’s heart- they are storing up wrath upon themselves because they refuse the Creator’s testimony of how all these things came to be.

    I know many sincere Christians hold to a long age of the earth and to some type of theistic evolution, but they have been needlessly ensnared by philosophies of men.
  18. TheOldCourse

    TheOldCourse Puritan Board Sophomore

    It's greatly encouraging to me to see you, Ramon, continue make an uncompromising stand on Biblical revelation in an environment where, I'm sure, you receive little sympathy for it--perhaps even among other Christians in the field. May God continue to bless you in your endeavors there and, if you ever find your way up to SW Virginia, drop on by!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page