[0] At the end of this article, I give the link to my final personal statement that gives a complete scientific and Scriptural solution to all of the post-Flood controversies.[1] (My basic reference continues to be the book "Science Declares Our Universe is Intelligently Designed," (Xulon Press April 2002.) [Note: As defined in that book, the term "natural" almost always refers to "physical."] In determining an appropriate theological cosmology, I adhere strictly to the follow requirement. A literal interpretation of the Scriptures must come first. A cosmology must then be chosen that most closely verifies the rationality of this interpretation. Under no circumstances do I first construct a cosmology and then re-interpret or even ignore portions of the Scriptures and then force the Scriptures to conform to this cosmology. At the present time, I believe that it is likely that the general procedure used to realize (pages 196, 235) all the entities within our universe is the mature and functional form scenario that follows the scheme as briefly described within the "general scenario" section on pages 193-210. With respect to the "day-four" appearance of the external universe, as mentioned in my first statement, I now consider an in-transit information model such as (III), as outlined later, with a "hot firmament" beginning scenario as the most Scripturally correct and, hence, as the most likely. The "hot firmament" beginning scenario for a type (II) in-transit information model was previously used (213-215). This corresponds, in my selected case, to the Scriptural us of the Greek term "ast er" meaning "gleam(er)" or "sudden production of a faint light." (As pointed out in the book the type (I) in-transit information model is not a form of deception for those that accept the Biblical account.) Since I am not entirely certain in my present choice, I discuss below more detailed aspects of the hot firmament model. These scenarios are also strongly coupled with the lack of knowledge or the "second distinct" scenario discussed in section 12 in the A U-cosmology paper and mentioned numerously many times in the book. I accept as scientific fact this additional lack of knowledge scenario. (Note: As indicated in "First Revision Typographical Variations or Errors," you may change this "creation day" from day-three to day-four, a more probably creation day for these events to occur. It depends upon what you select as the local environment and the interpretation of the "star" phrase in Genesis 1:16.)
I mention, in the book, that exactly what the notion of expanding, stretching or unfolding means might require new knowledge. The fact is we do have new knowledge. The firmament is but a portion of subparticle substratum that God created. For me, there are two equally-likely possibilities. First, the "stuff" that expands, along with the boundary, is the subparticle substratum. It does so as if it were expanding from a central point. But, due to the fact that this all is within the NSP-world, and due to the "cardinality" of the substratum field this expansion does not alter the fields natural world density, so to speak. For the second possibility, expansion occurs after realization. It is produced by an additional intermediate subparticle that characterizes this additional movement for every realized entity. For this case, the substratum need not be considered as expanding in any manner. Any actual expansion evidence would only reveal itself, if at all, relative to the material being realized from the substratum. The behavior of this subparticle substratum, in every way, is intelligently designed. However, since this formation is always substratum controlled and due to ultranatural laws and theories, I am convinced that any humanly constructed cosmology that purports to explain how our universe developed from some type of primitive material will always contain anomalies that cannot be accounted for. For this reason, I do not endorse as a complete non-ambiguous solution any humanly constructed cosmology that might include an energetic firmament. Indeed, I repeat, that I now consider an in-transit information model as somewhat more likely than the hot firmament model.
Relative to the formation of the exterior universe, its behavior can be partially guided by various theoretical constructs using the notion of the vacuum of particle physics, the ZPF or other theoretical constructs where most assumed entities may be but theoretic artifacts. Since the material realized must mirror the information contained within members of the event sequences, any natural world evidence must first be incorporated within the event sequences, and the evidence would show that such a "central" expansion is taking place. This can either be apparent motion or an actual motion of certain objects as they are observed from the center of expansion. Due to required event sequence formation configurations, the basic "images" formed need not show that their internal structure is expanding. This is equivalent to the analogue notion that the "images" are formed from individual substratum entities that are in "motion" but where the "measurable" density of this substratum is not altered. This leaves the final required images, in their entirety, as the objects that would show evidence of this substratum expansion by either exhibiting evidence for an apparent or actual general motion interpreted as receding from a "center."
[From the technical viewpoint for the first expansion notion, it is the collection of monadic clusters that are expanding. This means that each such cluster "moves" as an entire object. Whether unconstrained material entities actually show an internal expansion depends upon the material or the type of substratum expansion being considered. For the first type of expansion, there is an analogue model as to how objects can move in their entirety. Simple consider building a stationary object while on a moving train. For individuals on the train, the object does not move. For observes on the train station platform, the object is moving in its entirety. But, how this first type of "expansion" is detected, if at all, depends upon whether the monads "move" as a single entity or as a vast collection of clusters.]
Does the operative phrase "And God Said, Let there be lights in the firmament . . . . " refer to the stars, as well as the stated "sun" and "moon"? It seems that two other Scriptural witnesses indicate this. First, Genesis 1:14 states that these "lights" are to "divide the day from the night." What lights yield the "night" division? Two other witnesses yield "The moon and stars to rule by night:" (Psalms 136:9) and ". . . the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, . . ." The phrase in Genesis 1:16 "he made the stars also" is not as it appears in the LXX. This is the interpreter's attempt to make the phrase "parenthetical." The actual rendering should simply be "and the stars" as it is coupled with the previous "made." Thus, the "good (excellent, best)," in Genesis 1:18, refers to the external universe as well. This would require such an external universe to appear to satisfy various "natural laws" that are distinct from those associated with the original solar system entities and, for consistency, it should be realized during day-four. The term "good" refers to the various useful aspects of the exterior universe as described in Genesis 1:14-18 and elsewhere and does not refer to any effects this hostile environment might have upon created humanity since mankind was not created originally to inhabit such an environment. Their environment was the original Earth and, expecially, the Garden of Eden where perceived natural regulations would be different from those of the "exterior" universe. However, this hostile environment could be accorded humanity if they so chose it through their actions. This hostel environment contains with its local environment a covirtual ancient earth as well that has not been realized, yet.
[The type (I) in-transit information model is fully discussed in the referenced book and hot firmament model is but briefly described. Hence, I first discuss a few more hot firmament notions. The hot firmament model is also discussed, with additional details, in section 13 of the paper A U-cosmology.] The "hot firmament" model satisfies these apparent Scriptural requirements since using it the complete formation of the external universe takes place during day-four. (As mentioned, this is a personal alteration to the creation-day mention in the book.) Solar system entities are produced by sudden realization in mature and fully functional form under the probable day-four star formation scenario, or possibly all solar system entities except for the Earth are formed during day-three and "appear" in fully functional form during day-four. The hot firmament process that can occur during a day-four time interval follows the sudden appearance of the mature solar system. Hence, in this case, the external universe does "suddenly appear" in mature and functional form where "sudden" means less than the length of day-four. (The "morphing" boundary is merely considered as a representing a boundary between the external universe portion of the universe event sequence and the piecewise defined original Earth and its local environment portion that develops in a different manner.) There is Scriptural evidence that the notion of "sudden" need not be instantaneous but rather it can mean a longer period during a specific creation-day. This is seen in the wording of some of the day-three events. For the original Earth scenario, the "water" was separated into two branches. As indicated by Genesis 1:9, no other water is realized. There is water above (a boundary for) the firmament and the water world that comprises the original Earth is the remaining portion of the original water. There is the sudden change in this water world where the water now appears to be gathered together into seas and DRY land appears. There is also a "bringing forth" or "production" (i.e. shall become) mentioned. This indicates that an event can take place over a time interval within day-three. This model preserves the exact ordering of events as described in Genesis 1. It preservers the exact realization of the material objects and processes that yields these realized objects as modeled by a type of "mental speaking" or "commanding."
This hot firmament model, which was discovered prior to the detailed version of the Humphreys' model, is considerably different from the Humphreys' model. (See the URL cmodels below.) In terms of the material in the book, this model follows from one branch of a pre-design Genesis sequence where the hot firmament is realized suddenly from the subparticle substratum during day-four. The hot firmament model is a somewhat specific case of a more general in-transit information model (II) that differs from the type (I) model. The type (II) in-transit model is as follows: The collection of physical systems that comprise the original Earth and its local environment are put into a form of suspended animation via a collection of created event sequences. The universe generating event sequences yields a universe in a step-by-step manner, using primitive time, until it arrives at the step that represents its appearance 6,000 (observe time) years ago. There can be no interaction between the exterior universe and the original Earth and its local environment. This allows the entire exterior universe to exist as real entities and to be formed at any rate God chooses using any mode of what we might perceive as physical laws. The hot firmament model is a specific example of this. About 6000 (observer time) years ago, say just "prior" to what is to be created during day-four, the suspension of observer time is lifted and the original earth and its special local environment continues to develop. This uses piecewise defined event sequences. All of the in-transit information then refers to "real" entities. This is all done via a "universe" event sequence, which is a finite collection of physical (natural)-system event sequences. Notice that no physical laws as observed today need be applied to achieve this result. Theologically, God's powerful declaration is all that is needed.
Notice, however, if (II) is applied, then there is a great difference between the observer time notion within the creation-days. In comparison, billions upon billions of day-three 24 hour-periods would have passed where no day-four observer time has past. The same criticism would apply to other similar approaches. This observer time inconsistency can be removed since there is no time notion used in the day-four description for "star" appearance. Hence, one can more freely speculate. There is a simple way to eliminate this observer time inconsistency and the type (I) in-transit criticism by using another "modern" version of in-transit information. It uses the one rule that radiation "propagates " but does not require any alteration in the simple behavior for such propagation.
(III) First, I point out, that just like the DVD or motion picture frame illustration, as the primitive time sequence progresses, each image is "replaced" by the "next" image in the sequence. During day-four and using a covirtual universe event sequence, a "rapid-formation" form of almost sudden appearance can create the exterior universe. A universe event sequence is used to realize our universe via the primitive time sequence in an ordered step-by-step process. This entire step-by-step process need take only a very small period of observer earth time. One can use any observer time interval during day-four, say after the creation of the other day-four entities. Using "piecewise defined" event sequences, there would be no interaction between any "real universe" that is formed and the original earth and its local environment during the "rapid-formation" processes. The entire sequence for a developing universe from same "starting" first moment of primitive time is realized, in order, while the original Earth and is local environment develops via the common 24-hour observer time used for each creation-day. This is but the trivial notion of "speeding-up" of the formation of the exterior universe. (A rather rapid "fast-forwarding" notion for the intuitive DVD or VCR model.) As the sequence is realized at each moment of primitive time, the exterior universe simply continues to develop and as it does it contains a history of previous events via the in-transit radiation. This continues until the primitive time sequence arrives at a particular primitive time moment when the exterior universe in its development corresponds to the development of the original Earth and its local environment. At this moment 6000 years ago, the universe's physical entities coalesce with those of the original Earth and its local environment so that the laws for electromagnetic and particle propagation correspond. The "stars," the dim round shinning things, would appear rather suddenly if there were any one present on Earth to observe this event. Consequently, from the observe time viewpoint and in physical reality, the exterior universe is only 6000 years old relative to it being physically realized, while all the in-transit information can be interpreted as stating that the universe is billions of standard years old. The day-four 24-hour clock has not been altered when compared to the other creation-days. A very important aspect of this mode of creation is that each step in the development of each physical-system observed via in-transit information has actually occurred within the rapidly forming universe.
The simplicity of (III) conceals the actual complexities involved. A universe generating event sequence contains a vast number of correlated and developing physical-systems. For our universe, one member of a library could contain say 10^(75) or even a greater number of physical-systems depending upon how they are related. Then the library itself can have just as many individual and needed universe generating event sequences. So, this yields that 10^(150) or more possible event sequences may be needed. The ultranatural events are also part of each event sequence. Theologically, these form an interface with the theological preternatural world, which itself has an interface with God's pure supernatural world. Hence, as the model predicts, only ultralogic operators can control all of this. Of course, these operators have a higher intelligence signature. Due to the existence of ultranatural theories and laws, as well as ultranatural events, the descriptions for these creationary procedures must be considered only suggestive in character. Further, for these same reasons, these scenario descriptions must be considered as incomplete.
As with all such theoretical discussions, present-day observations yield indirect evidence for the acceptance of the creationary scenarios I have chosen, and I am confident that no evidence will ever contradict these general scenario descriptions. Indeed, I conjecture that the physical universe will reveal signatures that imply that, in general, one of these three in-transit information scenarios is the most likely. Apparently, to match the Scriptures, the firmament should also display a type of encircling or encompassing of the Earth. Such an encompassing appears in Proverbs 8:27. Matthew Henry comments on this passage. "He was not less active when, on the second day, he stretched out the firmament, the vast expanse, and 'set' that as a 'compass' upon the face of the depth,' surrounding it on all sides with that canopy, that curtain." This idea that there is a surrounding or a "circle" about the Earth is also stated in many other "translations." NKJV "When He drew a circle on the face of the deep." NASB "When He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep." Young's "In His decreeing a circle on the face of the deep, . . . ." ASV "When he set a circle on the surface of the deep, . . . ." This has led me to believe that there is some observational evidence that the external universe satisfies the Scriptural notion that the Earth is surrounded by the firmament, a firmament that displays its presence via a "surrounding" notion. This implies that the Earth was designed originally to be the "center" of the universe. But, since the sun, moon, other non-Earth portions of the solar system (probably) and the external universe all were realize during day-four, any evidence that the firmament apparently "surrounds" the Earth would probably also be evidence that the universe surrounds our solar system or even approximately surrounds our home galaxy. (The apparent size of our Galaxy is a rather large number. The notion of approximately would be relative to its apparent size.)
The simplest evidence would be that various galaxies at approximately the same distance from the Earth would generally form spherical-like shells about the local Earth environment. However, since the galaxies are in relative motion, I do not contend that any observed effects need to be continuous effects throughout the cosmos. All that is needed is that enough galaxies satisfy this "shell effect" so that this configuration yields a signature relative to the local environment that implies that the firmament originally satisfied this "circular surrounding" notion. This "surrounding" notion is not related in any way to how the Earth behaves "inside" such a shell-like construction. Further evidence just for the notion of a circular effect might be the possible observed redshift or gravitational effects that would be comprehensible in the sense of Gödel, say, and describable as a universe wide rotational effect. [As derived in The Theory of Infinitesimal Light-clocks p. 68, the Robinson-Walker line-element is totally based upon light propagation properties, the chronotopic interval, Einstein measures via infinitesimal light-clocks, Special Theory alterations in infinitesimal light-clock counts and the selection of a potential velocity. The potential velocity statement used is a combined substratum expression that relates substratum motion to natural world behavior. The metric is not derived using hypersphere notions and is basically a light propagation metric. Of course, the metric can be interpreted in terms of a spacetime metric as measured by infinitesimal light-clocks but does not need to be so interpreted for a redshift interpretation. The potential velocity used in this derivation allows the metric to be directly related to Riemannian geometry. But, the use of this particular potential velocity statement is not necessary for there to be an expansion redshift. Indeed, the actual derivation of the redshift express is independent from the type of potential velocity expression used. A basic redshift expression such as (63.3) in D. F. Lawden, An Introduction to Tensor Calculus, Relativity and Cosmology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1982, p. 182, is obtained in the exact same manner using the infinitesimal light-clock form of the Robinson-Walker "metric" and infinitesimal light-clock measurements. In this derivation, the actual potential velocity does not appear in the (63.3).]
It is totally false that a modern cosmology based upon the Hilbert-Einstein gravitational field equations requires that there by no privileged position within our universe. Some evidence for a privileged position, a type of center from which a surrounding "expansion" originated, is the redshift interpreted as an "apparent" average recession of galactic matter as viewed from our significant observational position in space. Further, it has been suggested that the apparent quantized redshifts might be such observational evidence for a shell effect. Of course, there may be other explanations for this type of redshift from which an individual might choose. Further, since vast motions where introduced during day-four and measurement of such motions are but relative measures, scientifically there appears to be no observational way to determine from within our local environment whether a geocentric or heliocentric or a galaxy centered model is correct.
One of the requirements for the standard Big Bang model is that a "stretching or expansion" that, in general, produces the average recessional motion of galactic matter is needed to cool the hot universe so that subatomic entities can combine and form gross matter. The hot firmament model can follow via event sequences the same notion where the "center" of such expansion is our local environment. In the standard BB model, such an expansion cannot be fully visualized and actually should not be. But, from an event sequence viewpoint, such an expansion can be comprehended as previously discussed. As mentioned, the purpose for this, at the time the exterior universe was realized, is to demonstrate that our local environment was originally selected as a privileged position and the exterior universe "surrounds" it.
I have no doubt that my present selections for external universe creation will be greatly criticized. Many who claim to be Christians, even many Christians who are scientists, will reject both of them. Such scientists continue to present cosmologies that are completely developmental in structure or cosmologies that have little Scriptural support. The cosmologies they invent appear to be yet another example where God has allowed a great delusion to occur. Scripturally, the earth is a very special entity within the universe. Indeed, if the earth were not located at its present unique position within our home galaxy, we would most certainly not be able to observe many features of the external universe and, especially, we could not observe our universe's most wondrous structures.
[2] As previously defined, the term "development" refers to the notion that formation of entities progresses from definable simple stages to definable complex stages via pre-designed event sequences. When restricted to biological entities, one might term such a development as "evolution." At present, I believe that the "natural laws" that existed within the Earth's vicinity and probably throughout the entire solar system, prior to the Flood, and especially prior to the Fall, were considerable different from those that exist today. I accept as scientific fact that all of the Scripturally stated specifically named local objects were all realized rather suddenly at the level of maturity and function that is in accordance with the Biblical description. For example, the slowly rotating "water (with other features, at first, in suspended animation), light, dry land, grass, herb, biological entities, etc." However, what we observe today is very different from what was present during creation week. I am a "Young Earth Creationist" (YEC) in the following sense. Until the Fall, most of the perceivable natural laws applicable to our local environment did not include those that, today, we associated with "aging." The process we call the conservation of energy was also not applicable to all objects. On pages 198 - 199 of the above book, I discuss what I accept as fact relative to the creation statements made in Genesis 1:1-5. Briefly, word analysis of these verses shows that the probably slowly rotating "waters" as first mentioned have a surface and all other features would appear to be in suspended animation. They are to be separated into two portions. The portion under the "firmament" is the portion that is used for the earthly seas and for no other purpose. The Hebrew terms used prior to this separation indicate that before, in observer time, the "dry land" appeared, the "land" was in an "unreal" form. This is exactly the unrealized but pre-designed requirements associated with an MA-model Genesis sequence interpretation for the GGU-model. To be realized in the physical world, God would need to activate the subparticle combination processes and apply a process modeled by the standard part operator. These processes are included as an integral step, for specific physical-systems, with the application of the "God said" ultralogic operator. This is the conjoining of each "universe-wide-frozen frame" and allows a physical-system to develop in observer time.
All original Earth physical events are obtained in the same manner as the "dry land" and "Seas" are obtained via rapid or sudden appearance. There need be no humanly comprehensible regularities that guide the original developments. For example, the objects that appeared during day-three do not require the Sun to have been realized during any previous creation-day. The term Eden (pleasantness) identifies a region in which natural-system behavior was considerably different from that we experience today. Further, locations not in Eden, if any, also display natural-system behavior different from that which we observe today. For example, as discussed in my "Final Personal Statement," there was no rain throughout the entire Earth until the Flood occurred. It is my view that relative to notions not mentioned in Genesis 1-8, speculation should be constrained.
Prior to the Fall, there appears to be a much greater interplay between the ultranatural world and the material world. This is especially true within the Garden of Eden. In this Garden of Eden, the natural-system behavior was very, very different from that observed today. Any differences in natural-system behavior in the Garden of Eden and elsewhere all occurred through realized pre-designed event sequences with possible morphing boundaries. When God cursed the ground (Genesis 3:17), the special perceivable natural laws that excluded "aging" (and human physical death) were altered so that "aging" occurred at an unknown but definite rate via event sequences and clearly other aspects of "Pleasantville" (Eden) no longer applied. The notion of "natural evil" (disease, earthquake, tsunami etc.) would only be slightly present relative to "aging" and "death." Of course, covirtual libraries and events sequences were pre-designed with these possibilities where humankind is either included within or excluded from the event sequences. Attempting to give a "reason" why such pre-designed libraries should have been created in the first place is highly problematic. One becomes very tired of those individuals who continue to insist that they have the same intelligence as that of a deity and can explain in humanly comprehensible terms exactly why God has fashioned a particular procedure, when it has been specially shown via GGU-model conclusions that nothing could be further from the truth. One most learn to simply accept various Biblical notions and statements as those offered by a true higher intelligence. The Bible states that it is Adam and Eve's disobedience that directly caused them to be included within this first level of destructive natural-system behavior. [For comparison purposes only, the event sequences that yield this new local environment can be considered as formed by coalescing of other event sequences. Of course, the event sequences are in realized form.]
As mentioned in the book, during the Flood and due to the selection of a different collection of pre-designed event sequences, previous perceivable natural laws would appear to be altered so that they correspond to those we perceive today. After the Flood, these altered laws, at the very least, are consistent with our present "aging" concepts. This previous approach is altered in statement 3, where the original Earth and local environment is almost completely replaced by a realized ancient earth and its local environment. The Biblically statement relative to a "strong delusion" is a reason why many natural-systems displayed today give the appearance of "age" to those individuals that do not have a special discernment. God's curse has removed much of the natural-system evidence for the existence of this previous perfection. The local environment does not "remember," in major cases, that it was, in the beginning, accorded a special type of none corrupt existence. However, as specifically described in Genesis 1, there are specific animal, including human, and vegetable entities that display secular macroevolutionary anomalies in that their existence is best explained by assuming that they appeared suddenly in mature and fully functional form. Further, other signatures for such "sudden appearance" may also be observed. No unguided materialistic macroevolutionary mechanism will satisfactorily explain all of the actual evidence. Relative to such life forms, the realized branches of the Genesis library appear additive.
The Flood is a significant solution to a problem fostered by humanity itself. Obviously, humankind, knowing the difference between what God considers as "good" or "evil," had chosen "evil" and this forced God, in natural-system terms, to give humanity what it sought - a highly destructive violent environment. This is the type of environment that exists external to the original Earth and its local environment. Consequently, it is not the actual physical environment that has any relationship to "evil." Humankind has simply forced God to place it within an environment that corresponds, from the material natural-system sense, to the physical evil it practices. God, of course, allows humankind a way out of this dilemma, a way to remove the actual "sting" of death, a way to attain "eternal" life in His presence within a new type of Garden of Eden.
In the book, various ways are discussed that lead to such environmental changes. Although it is only necessary that appropriate event sequences be realized, there is an intermediate process that I previously originated that could have produced the Flood and it gives apparent age to our local environment. This is described in the paper Was the Genesis Flood, Along With All of Its Effects, The Result of a Single Physical Event?. Since this procedure must be coupled with a realized branch of the library of ultimate ultrawords that yields event sequences, then a specific ultimate ultraword is all that is necessary. That is, this ultraword is primary and the result might simply be explained without the ultraword notion by application of the metric discussed in the above paper. The application of the realization process to such an ultimate ultraword rather than the special metric approach is my present belief. Once again, due to the existence of ultranatural theories and laws as well as ultranatural events, the descriptions and predictions for this Genesis Flood scenario must be considered only suggestive in character. Further, for these same reasons, this scenario description must be considered as incomplete. As with all such theoretical discussions, present-day observations yield indirect evidence for the acceptance of this creationary scenario and no evidence will ever contradict this scenario description. However, pre-Flood unaltered evidence may exist that will reveal the existence of specific antediluvian natural processes distinct from those gleaned from present-day observations. My YEC stance is based upon the necessity for "great apparent age" as exhibited today by many, but not all, material objects and, in general, is based upon standard earth-time. Earth-time is time measured via any highly periodic earth-bound natural-system behavior. Earth-time is a restricted form of observer time.
[3] Mathematically, the coalescing of all "frozen-frames" can be rationally assumed to be controlled by intelligent agents. As discussed in the book, recent research described in the article The Wondrous Design and Non-random Character of Chance Events or in the paper at arXiv implies that, when first created, statistical models coupled with an allowable perturbation scheme are the most likely bases for the fundamental (particle physics realm) and other internal natural-system behavior for entities within the universe. The use of such a model does not imply aging or error or imperfection. These models, as presented in this research, do not imply any lack of complete Divine control via intelligent agents. Further, the alterations in perceivable natural law mentioned in [2] would necessarily require the same probabilistic and perturbation scheme to be the fundamental character for natural-system behavior as it is observed today throughout the entire cosmos.
Some creationary scientists claim that the statistical behavior within the universe corresponds to the notion that the universe is "cursed" due to human sin. They use as a proof text Paul's statement in Rom 8:22 "For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now." (KJ) This belief is false. The notion of "the whole (all of) creation" is essentially the same as that which appears in Mark 16:15 and Col. 1:23. "The whole creation" Paul refers to in Rom 8:22 is only that of the local earth environment, which is altered from its special character (cursed) due to sinful behavior. This fact is also upheld by the commentaries of Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown.
[4] What "evolutionary" processes I accept, I discuss in my third and Final Personal Statement. Any apparent evolutionary behavior is intelligently pre-designed and all coalescing of frozen-frames is controlled by an intelligent agent. As pointed out, the interpretation that any such behavior is not controlled by a higher intelligence, not related to other intelligent agents and that such processes were the original processes by which our local environment as well as the exterior universe came into being yields a strong delusion. As mentioned elsewhere, there is, at the least, one general comprehensible reason why God may have created the exterior universe in its perceived form. Observationally, it is very possible that this is to show how the original Earth and its local environment was specially and distinctly created when compared to the exterior universe, which is exceptionally hostile to human life.
[5] At present and due to the most recently discovered results mentioned in [3], I tend to reject so-called "common sense" geometric styled models for the fundamental realm of particle physics in that they appear to be anti-scriptural. The Scriptures state specifically (Romans 1:20 and elsewhere) that through investigation of natural-system behavior one should be able to glean some of the invisible attributes of God. Define "common sense" as descriptions that neither depend upon some special knowledge nor comprise profound rationalized knowledge, as the case may be. Under this definition, the teachings of Jesus (Matthew 5 and elsewhere) are far from being what would pass for "common sense," especially today. Further, throughout the Scriptures we are told how very different are God's "thoughts" from those of His created. These facts illustrate that the Divine mind need not follow the concept of human "common sense."
[6] Please note, that I tend to limit my prideful tendency to explain in humanly comprehensible terms what I might imagine are the exact details as to "how" God created anything. The reason for this is the D-model prediction that we are dealing with a God that is not only infinitely powerful in comparable attributes but also infinitely more intelligent than any created entity. I accept the following general statement. It is a scientific fact that the processes that have produced and continue to alter our entire universe, through this very moment, are consistent with the exact ordered sequence of events as described in Genesis 1 - 8 as they are literally interpreted in the strictest sense. Major aspects of this fact have been verified by application of 1 John 2:27 and appropriate physical verification.
[7] I have not stated previously whether I accept the Earth-rotation period for the creation-days. I mention in "Science Declares Our Universe Is Intelligently Designed" that the length of a creation-day most be determined from Scriptural analysis. However, it is clear that there are, at least, six primitive time intervals that can be identified as corresponding to active realizations of event sequences. It is also self-evident that there is no prohibition to corresponding each of these primitive time intervals to Earth-time as measured by one complete Earth rotation, as viewed from our local environment, and as represented by any equivalent highly periodic Earth-bound natural-system behavior as such behavior was originally realized. Hence, I can now accept the time interval for each creation-day as that measured by one complete Earth rotation using an unknown mode of measurement.
For more information as to how my re-formulation of the Special and General theories of relativity eliminated various contradictions from these theories and led to the "hot firmament model" please see Cmodels.
Important: In the following article and my final personal statement, I give my complete, both scientific and Scriptural, solution to all the post-Flood controversies. All of the present day scientific evidence and literally interpreted Biblical statements are consistent with this solution.
Final Personal Statement .
7 NOV 1998; Last revision 23 MAR 2008
Return to home page