[deleted]
> It's not how I think things should be done, but how I think things
>were done that is the problem here. Jesus is the same yesterday, today,
>and forever, so it seems like a good assumption that He has run the
>universe similarly in the past as in the present. If the physical
>condition of the earth is not a meaningful source of information about its
>past, why do you try to find geological evidence compatible with your
>views? We agree that creation should be comprehensible and in accord with
>Scripture.
[deleted]
If indeed "Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so it seems like
a good assumption that He has run the universe similarly in the past as in
the present," wouldn't that imply that the universe had no beginning? I
suppose what you mean is that whatever rules God used to create, those rules
are "time-invariant"--whatever that mean to someone outside of spacetime.
How difficult it is to talk about God vis a vis His creation.
Moorad