What I see in the COI universe is a model that gives glory to the Father and the Son during creation. It makes everything more real. You don’t have to embrace it, but I could not understand why some people struggle to acknowledge that it is a Biblically consistent option. Somewhat frustrated, I started this article and then found that it is a good starting point to flush out all the theological stumbling blocks.
Well, there sure is a lot in this book to challenge your theology, but when I saw the first few verses of Genesis 1 as revealing God the Father and The Son, before time began, I felt sure that those who love the Father and the Son would rejoice to see their roles depicted in Genesis more clearly. For example, in Genesis 1:2, I saw the formless and void earth, as God picturing the earth, the place for His children before time began. Isn’t this beautiful? We have all heard about predestination (Romans 8:29), and surely we know God’s habit to declares things that are not before they come to pass (Isaiah 41:26, 42:9, 46:10, 48:3-5, Romans 4:17). And further, that He also leaves these things as mystery or secret to be revealed to those who seek him (Proverbs 25:2, Romans 16:25, Ephesians 3:5, Colossians 1:26, 1 Corinthians 2:7).
Then it stepped up a level in Genesis 1:3. The “let there be light” became Jesus, the light of the world, for whom and through whom all things were created, actually creating the entire universe. Isn’t this the first spoken words of God, and we know that all things were created by the Word of God. So this must have been where the universe was created. But Jesus confirmed it in Revelation 3:14 by describing Himself as “the Beginning of the creation of God”. This is again repeated in 3 or 4 different ways in Colossians 1:15-18. Then John 1:1-4 makes it even clearer.
Now contemplate Genesis 1:4 where God separated the light from the dark. Virtually all the matter of the universe exits in stars that emit light, and so this separation can be easily pictured as God distributing all the matter of the universe into the structures we see today, like galaxies, and leaving the dark void of outer space in between. And the iconic equation E=mc² alludes to how Energy (the Power of God), through the light (Jesus) established all the matter in the universe.
How could you not see this as God, presenting a simplified expression of the universe’s creation in Genesis 1:2-4, but now fully revealing it, and most beautiful of all, He revealed His Son. Well, you might get a bit ticked off that He revealed it to a nobody like me rather than to you, but I cannot fix that. However there are two very real concerns. I have talked about these before, but I now think I have a new angle on them.
The first concern is that the COI Universe looks like God, Jesus, did it hands-off. That is, it was an entirely natural process. Yes and No! ...No, because blind Freddy can see that you need God to set things up. But Yes, because once the initial conditions were established (a ball of energy), and the laws of physics were ordained to start time from the outside of the ball, inwards, it was a pretty much an automatic process. But this is the strength of the model — it’s not just that it is Biblically consistent, but that it has a facade of technical verification. That is the way the world can be challenged.
Please consider these points:
A predictable process does not deny God, but it is the way He works. Man can probe the process to discover the awesome nature of our creator God.
The secular world has proven that it will ignore suggestions that “God did it”. Further, they will ignore all manner of technical impossibilities that the Big Bang theory introduces, even the unfathomable question of everything from nothing. In my opinion, the COI model leaves the secular world with no excuse. When Jesus returns, the world will know that the creator of the universe stands before them. ...Wow, that was pretty bold, wasn’t it? Well, get a grip — that is what God’s Timetable is all about.
The second concern is that it seems as if I have changed the plain reading. The Genesis 1 creation account has long been treated as historical commentary, and I agree. But people have tried to fuse The Big Bang Theory and The Theory of Evolution with this account. In this fusion they have actually removed God as creator and they have proposed an all-natural (no God) process. The light of day 1 is to them the explosion of the Big Bang. The atmosphere of day 2 became the subatomic particles released by the explosion collapsing into gas clouds and perhaps suns. Then the dry land of day 3 became the heavy elements and perhaps planets forming. Evolutionary propaganda continues the down-hill slide as vegetation, fish, birds and animals of the subsequent days are mapped to evolution of life. Well, I would love these people, often tagged as Theistic Evolutionists, to read the COI Model and realise they have been completely duped.
The time frames for the creation of the universe under the COI model are extremely rapid. There is simply no way for evolution of the universe, or life, to get the unimaginably long periods of time needed to support the perception that its processes could ever occur. Isn’t that a great thing to be able to proclaim, but alas, when the last galaxy was created, our own, I proposed that something under a million years might be needed for the planetary chemistry to settle in. This was because I expected an initial rapid heating as spherical clouds of sub-atomic particles suddenly materialised, and then collapsed to form their respective planets and suns. I have not been able to predict this time but suggested an upper limit. But what I did show is that for Jesus, the observer, this time was arbitrarily short. It is simple relativity. But again alas, theistic evolutionists really want to create scenarios where they can twist the creation days to millions and billions of years to support presumed timescales demanded by the ‘all natural, no god’ solutions.
What can I say? I did some slight of hand using some physics from a well-respected creation physicist, Dr Russel Humphreys to stop time at the centre of the universe. I have often seen creationists, challenged with apparent age of distant stars, reply with the question, “but where is the clock?” This would often refocus the challenger on the idea that time on earth may have been slower as light travelled from the distant star. The COI universe model does something similar by showing that time on earth actually started after the distant stars were created. But better still, I proposed that it is not “where the clock is”, but “who is holding the clock”.
So, have I made you more comfortable with the COI model? Good, but the biggest challenge is yet to come. When I suggested that the earth, formless and void, was the Father seeing the earth before it was created; and when I saw “let there be light” as the Son creating the universe; I have broken fundamental rules. As historical commentary, the words must be understood within the framework of the language of the day. This is a good principle, but a bad rule. I have said elsewhere that I do not extend this into the things created on days 2 to 6. But in these two verses, Genesis 1:2-3, I have felt that scripture was screaming out that this be seen and its consequences understood. So I cannot apologise for full-filling scripture.
Now some closing comments about the earth formless and void… Many seized on this as a description of a round, water covered planet, surrounded by darkness. This sure sounds logical, but let’s picture the earth we see today. It’s still a round mostly water covered planet floating in the black void of outer space; but you would never call it formless and void. So what made it formless and void in Genesis 1:2? It was because it really was formless and void; without substance — it was God picturing the focus of what He was about to do, before the start of time! Then, at the end of day 1, there was a real water covered planet all ready for days 2 to 6.
I mostly agree with those who demand that the words of Genesis 1 should picture the natural things that they allude to. But now consider your attitude to the ‘all naturalistic’ evolutionary solutions that refuse to let God get a foot in the door. Can’t we confidently say that we hate such proposals? So, am I being unfair in making the following comparison, namely, limiting the light of verse 3 to mere photons is denying God, as Jesus, a foot in the creation door?
Suppose we turn to the next page and read that famous verse in Genesis 2:17, “...the day you eat … is the day you die”. Adam was judged by God the very same afternoon as he ate. But Revelation 20:6-14, 2:11 and 21:8 make it clear that judgement is the second death – and that is what you must avoid. Of course, Adam and his immediate descendants lived up to but not quite 1,000 years. And now we see the declaration in Psalm 90 that “a day is like 1,000 years” was more than just poetic. God’s declaration, “…the day you die”, was exactly fulfilled in a 24 hour day as judgement, and also in a millenium as Adam’s life span, but you have to see God’s perspective. So the early chapters of Genesis are screaming out for us to let God’s ways be used to explain some of the seemingly ‘natural’ terminology. Could this freedom be misused? Tragically yes! …But I am not!
Everything was created by God through Jesus. This suggests there was nothing prior to the creation account. Hence there is a strong assumption that this universe was created from scratch, that is, from absolutely nothing. For a long time steady state theories or infinite recycling theories had been abandoned and science seemed to lock itself into a real once off, start from nothing model, under the Big Bang. But popular science seems to have become uncomfortable with the consequences of this “start of time and space” and previously rejected steady state and recycling models are re-emerging. Some alternatives even have multiple universes that are pictured as bubbles. I only noted these after creating my COI model, and now I even hear that some people are looking for evidence of such universes colliding.
So perhaps some creationists have a pre-disposition to reject my COI model that starts with a matter–space universe that is transformed by God into this space–time universe. That seems sad because they have not read Appendix C3 where I show that this matter–space universe is just a handful of heaven, and heaven existed before this universe. This is actually a theological strength of the COI model. Not that I consciously planned it out, but that handful of heaven – a sphere of water frozen in time, is not a bad picture of something formless and void, and covered by water which is God’s chosen starting point.
During days 2 to 6. God seems to transform matter rather than to create matter. Specifically in regard to Adam, he was created from a handful of dust. How easy is it then to picture the entire universe coming from a handful of heaven? Of course, time, space–time, in this universe did not exist and so time really did start from the Outside In.
I wonder if the whole book – “Page 1: God’s Timetable”, hasn’t already blown the historical commentary rule out the door? ...No, it has not. I still assert that what He described: an atmosphere; land and vegetation etc., really did happen. However, His timetable alludes to much greater things than the natural things He created, real as they were. So, it is still historical commentary, but there is so much more to discover.
What I have proposed for Genesis 1:2-4 is consistent with the nature and character of God, and of Jesus, and gives them the glory. This opens doors to new ways to picture the creation of the universe. The COI universe may be just one of other models to be conceived, if we are allowed to explore these options. To me, the most amazing thing is that my suggestions have not been main-stream for ages, perhaps but for two things: we have limited ourselves by our own understanding, not recognising His ways; and, this is the time that God has chosen to release it.
I hope that this has helped you accept a new way to see the Universe created. If you return to the COI Overview , S4: Biblical Extensions and S5: A beautiful exegesis offer more discussion of the biblical factors behind the COI universe. Chapters 23 to 26 also offer a really strong foundation. …Actually, the technical validation is way simpler than the scriptural validation! Have a look at S6: Technical summary for a brief overview of the mechanics, and then Appendix C4 and S3: Technical Extensions for a more verbose, but more interesting presentation of the way this model unfolded.