The Speed of Light (revisited)
Response to comment [from other]: "Is there any evidence that c (which is both the speed of light in a vacuum and the conversion factor when matter is converted to energy) can be exceeded?"
Noguru, you are not gay as some have suggested here (or at least I hope not). I have no clue to answer your question. But if you are interested in traveling faster in space Henry M. Morris had something interesting to say (it sounds like there could be worm holes out there if I read Morris right based on an interpretation of Ge 1:14-19): "[T]here is no assurance of the uniformity of the speed of light at such tremendous distances. There exist respectable models of relativity and space curvature, for example, which yield light motions such that light would reach the earth even from infinite distances in only a few years. Finally, there is no reason why God could not, if He had so willed, created “pulses” in the trails of some of the light waves created traversing space in the beginning.
"When it says, "Let there be light", God is talking about the same thing we are..." "I disagree. In my view Genesis was written by the first man to make this realization [light is used in the Bible as a metaphor for understanding] [and write it down."
I think God meant literal light. Later, he used light as a metaphor Glory of God. Ps 104:2; 1Ti 6:16. Purity of God. 1Jo 1:5. c. Wisdom of God. Da 2:22. Whatever makes manifest. Joh 3:21; Eph 5:13. Christ the source of all wisdom. Lu 2:32; Joh 1:4,9; 8:12; 12:46, etc.
I also think that Adam, Eve, Moses, etc. were a lot smarter than people of today (Entropy [or Negentropy]--things get worse not better due to the effect of sin on the world). Moses may have known under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that light demonstrated righteousness.
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "If God did it then
why doesn't He do it again, these days? I think it would be obvious
as light from very distant galaxies would be arriving every day. The
sky at night would probably be infinitely bright. Also, we would be
able to see galaxies flash into existence and obliterated in a few
days because effect would precede cause. Although that would shut
astrologists up (I certainly wouldn't mind that).
Plus this is more of a Genesis problem rather than a "Relativity is
not true" problem..."
God's handiwork is obvious (Ps 19:1). The best argument secular scientists have is a singularity containing a mass of goo. You don't get our mass so you'll have to come up with your own goo.
Star light arrives from stars everyday. Our planet was likely created with light already having arrived. God created a daylight and a dimmer night light. Dr Morris says:
Ge 1:1-2:
Ge 1:3-5:
"[I]t is obvious that visible light is primarily meant, since it was set in contrast to darkness. At the same time, the presence of visible light waves necessarily involves the entire electromagnetic spectrum.
"Give twelve (12) examples that support this assertion of the Psalmist (Ps 19:1).
I'll start with ten--ten little fingers and ten little toes that you did not thank him for today. From an intricate fingerprint to the stars above, God is clearly seen.
Now, here are thirty-six more examples of "twelves" that you won't pay attention to:
"Are you whining about
the genesis of the planet? And if so, is it
the genesis of the earth or the genesis of
the universe as those are too far different
things.
Yes, light arrives from distant stars
everyday. However, you say that in the
beginning light traveled faster than light.
Unfortunately this is not observed today.
Thus, an old earth makes more sense because
light from distance stars does not wildly
arrive on earth and we know that light from
a distant star won't arrive until the
appropriate time."
Light could have been created already having traveled. God created day light and night light. The stars seem to be almost an after thought. As if God tossed them in for good measure. Morris writes:
You are correct. We do not observe what happened. We have only theories. But one was there--God. Our earth and universe came into existence just as he said it did. No scientist has ever disproved the Bible. Morris continues:
"There is no need to try to correlate this simple record of the making of the stars with various modern theories of stellar and galactic evolution. It is sufficient to note that these are all at best only interesting speculations, none of which is generally accepted and all of which encounter important objections. On the other hand, there is no reason at all (other than naturalistic prejudice) not to believe that the stars were made just as they are now. No one has ever seen a star or galaxy evolve, or change at all."Response to comment [from an atheist]: "All I ever see are fingerprints and stars. What am I missing?...How about showing that angels actually exist?"
Why should a Christian be concerned with showing you that angels exist (2 Thes 1:8)?
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "Well then forget it. If you're just gonna explain everything by saying God did it, I'm not gonna bother. It's a waste of both our time. And I respect your professionalism with the citations and proper quotation but it somewhat unnecessary. I'm willing to accept most of what you say unless I ask for some cites. Very nice though. Just remember, a cite truth does not make [it true]."
I believe that the Bible. It is the inspired word of God. Christians are accused of dismissing science but that is not true. We have the same data but we interpret it differently. I think that the Bible has answers. Of course it takes faith; but as one atheist said, it took more faith to maintain his atheism then it did to believe the Bible.
"Except for the fact that matter would cease to exist or stars would cease to shine, or other bizarre things, if the speed changed much. It turns out that c is a key part of many physical constants...Magic will solve a lot of difficulties. But why even bother talking about the science, if you want to call up a handy miracle every time your theory has a problem?"
It will take a miracle for secular scientists to explain creation. To prove something, you must be able to recreate it and scientists cannot do this. So, they must give their next best guess. God spoke and the universe came into existence. Here is what you are looking for--"bara". The word "created" means that God created something from nothing. Scientists cannot duplicate this act (Ro 4:17, Heb 11:3). Secular scientists are willing to consider everything except for God. With that handicap, you will come up with all kinds of ridiculous explanations--like goo. You come up with handy goo (which is matter and you cannot even claim that) and we believe the only evidence ever given to man in God's revealed word.