|
Post by Dillon on Oct 10, 2021 11:44:51 GMT -5
The Roman Edit as I see it Where did the legend of the unicorn come from? Image result for why are unicorn in the bible The unicorn appeared in early Mesopotamian artworks, and it also was referred to in the ancient myths of India and China. Did the unicorns missed the ark? Description. According to the song, the unicorn was not a fantasy, but a creature that literally missed the boat by not boarding the Ark in time to be saved from the Great Flood described in the Bible. Why did Noah leave the unicorn behind? The myth goes something like this: Noah is getting his animal couples together and warning them about the flood. But the unicorns are vain and silly. They don't take Noah seriously, so they get left behind and drown. And that's why we no longer have unicorns. Can unicorns live forever? Abilities. Unicorns are said to have healing powers, and drinking the blood of one can keep you alive when you are sick. They are also believed to have other powers whicn they do with their horns, e.g spells and enchantments. Unicorns also live forever, or until killed. unicorn noun 1. a mythical animal typically represented as a horse with a single straight horn projecting from its forehead. 2. something that is highly desirable but difficult to find or obtain. In www.unicornsrule.com/unicorns-in-the-bible/Numbers 23:22 and 24:8, the Bible speaks of the strength of a unicorn. Deuteronomy 33:17, Psalms 22: 21 and Psalms 92:10 speak of the unicorn’s horn. Job 39:10 and 39:10 both speak of the unicorn not tilling the earth. In Psalms 29:6, the unicorn is likened to a young calf skipping, while Isiah 34:7 mentions unicorns in the same context as bulls and bullocks. Many point to the 1828 version of Webster’s Dictionary as proof that monokeros refers to the mythical unicorn and not some wild ox or rhino. While it is true that Webster’s Dictionary defines a monoceros as a unicorn (MONOC’EROS, noun [Gr. sole and horn.] The unicorn.), there is more to the story. The 1828 dictionary provides more detail in its definition of unicorn: (U’NICORN, noun [Latin unicornis; unus, one, and cornu, horn.] 1. An animal with one horn; the monoceros. This name is often applied to the rhinoceros.) Clearly, the word monceros did refer to a unicorn, but it was more likely a type of one-horned rhino than a mythical unicorn dancing among rainbows. Scientific name: Rhinoceros unicornis - The Indian rhinoceros, also called the Indian rhino, greater one-horned rhinoceros or great Indian rhinoceros, Scientific name: Diceros bicornis - The black rhinoceros or hook-lipped rhinoceros is a species of rhinoceros, native to eastern and southern Africa The world tries hard to discredit scripture
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2021 17:04:11 GMT -5
Yes Dillon some things are hard to discern.
There are one horned goat like creatures I believe, and one horned whale like creatures too ?
Your comments on rhinoceros are good too.
""The world tries hard to discredit scripture"" so they do not have to read God's words, and hence make their lives align with GOD.
But isn't reading poetry mysteries of GOD fun. If we knew all things about GOD we would stop digging into his treasures of words.
Dave has taught me many new things about Scripture, and it has been useful. I do not talk of Fluoride water because we both have common agreement. We discuss the differences most. It is what makes our wives different, that causes us to love her with mystery the most. God knew what He was doing with Scripture.
Shalom
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2022 19:23:53 GMT -5
Greetings Dave You ask me to address my beliefs here? You also bad Don Patton quite a lot for some reason. I have discussed Don before. If you dislike Don so much, than show us a video of the theories you like presented correctly? Rather than criticize somebody else? Here I try to find evolutionary videos that speak of a rapid burial, strangely enough such videos are rare to find. So just what are you really mocking? Small videos showing the fossilization process requires rapid burial youtu.be/8NA1hQXKnFY ( less than 5 minutes) Fossils need a rapid burial, like a river side flod of deposits. youtu.be/7v1JLj07vTY ( less than 5 minutes) Amber proving the fossil record happened quickly youtu.be/l-nKMoudp5U ( less than 2 minutes) Little lad explains fossils from a rapid burial process, with more layers millions of years later. youtu.be/ruvUSo-fB1s (25 minutes) Hydroplate theory, chosen because Dave loves this theory. Again shows rapid burial. 14:44 "as the great flood continued" 17:00 Interesting theory using the earth rolling process? 22:00 earth ripped rolled, 90 East ridge The hydro-plate theory certainly explains somethings nicely. I get the impression you have different theories of the past than young earth Creationists have. OK show us your video that you find meets your view? You also seem to invoke lots of time in your view, and you also present time as a strange process, different to the way most of us see time on the local frame of reference, ie on earth. Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 24, 2022 20:55:44 GMT -5
You ask me to address my beliefs here? You also bad Don Patton quite a lot for some reason. I have discussed Don before. So just what are you really mocking?
Anyone presenting (what is supposed to be) factual evidence That must lie about their opponent is a politician – a salesman – a charlatan - not a scholar
Quote Einstein misrepresenting Newton Quote Schroeder misrepresenting Einstein or Newton Quote any recognized RESPECTED scientist – that lies about other scientists work You CANNOT – because they would be crucified in the scientific community as a liar
A very modern day example of real science Japan researcher agrees to withdraw disputed stem cell paperhttps://www.reuters.com › article › japan-researcher-agr... Jun 4, 2014 — After staunchly defending her work in a rare, monthslong public feud with the prominent Riken institute where she works, Haruko Obokata “has now ... She published – no one could reproduce her work – she was forced to retract her paper – she lost her job – the Japanese held her in jail Ken Hamm – Don Patton – Walter Brown will not stand peer review
Don Patton was forced to remove his fossilized cowboy boot – because it is not a fossil!
Every point Don Patton made in your video – is based upon a lie – a misrepresentation of accepted science ------------------
Here I try to find evolutionary videos that speak of a rapid burial, strangely enough such videos are rare to find. Small videos showing the fossilization process requires rapid burial Your Don Patton argued that His Spider had to remain motionless for several thousands of years to be covered – then fossilized Your Don Patton argued that SCIENCE SAYS – you can lay a fish in the back yard and watch it fossilize -------------------
Hydroplate theory, chosen because Dave loves this theory. Again shows rapid burial. YEP - Brown and the ICR say all fossils were buried at the same moment in history And God was nice enough to deposit them in the correct order of creation
The hydro-plate theory certainly explains somethings nicely. Does not support a global flood – he has several different tidal wave events He also never even comes close to a mechanism or address the energy management His theory also does not blend in – fit with – many other scientific theories However – WEDD + FD-WEDT satisfy many of them and supply all their missing mechanism and cause
I get the impression you have different theories of the past than young earth Creationists have. Correction – young earth creationist have their own theory that is different than the entire world all around them
OK show us your video that you find meets your view?
I do not have a video about Incremental Creation So – any video that supports the correct order of creation will do D posted a good one about Day 3 and coal Any video that suggest Intelligent Design will do
I just copied and pasted these titles from YouTube – I have seen none of them Although – I have read some of - Stephen Meyer
You also seem to invoke lots of time in your view, and you also present time as a strange process, different to the way most of us see time on the local frame of reference, ie on earth.
My views about time are 100% Gerald Schroeder In fact – I published my paper 7 years before his When he published – the comments to me was – wow I sound like him
You used to have his very work posted to your web-page You used to present him as your go to guy on time But you never understood what he wrote – now you say you will remove him
From God’s perspective Day 1 was potentially longer than Days 2-6 Day 2-6 could be explained a logarithmic – Day 2 twice as long as Day 3 – etc etc There were hominids on earth without souls before Gen 2:7 After Gen 2:7 time became measured from Adam’s perspective – your 24hr days
This is what Schroeder said – this is what I said – this is what I say Arguments about time are STUPID – MEANINGLESS – because TIME IS NOT LINEAR
AND - radiometric time dating does not measure the clock - it is a measure of quantity Proof of WEDD
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 24, 2022 23:40:44 GMT -5
Intelligent Design | "Science" Documentary 2019
Instead of sleeping – I watched this from my own list I picked this one only because it was recent – up to date possibly
1- I do support the message of the video – 100% 2- I did not like the style of the video in the beginning – thought of picking another one – but it grew on me – it calms down 3- This video represents my world – my life – for 28 years I worked toe to toe with these types of PhDs – genetics – pathologist -----------
YES – I have sat around those meeting tables with suit (I hate ties) 80% of the time I was in a white lab coat - 20% I was in a disposable lab coat, mask, and bonnet
Deep inside – all the educated people around me – from different specialties – do not believe in evolution – evolution is yesterdays theory
Currently the only other option is the church and your Don Patton / Ken Hamm They want NOTHING TO DO WITH IT – the church has been wrong so often - so consistent – in so many ways – through the centuries
The Legacy of Roman Christendom = IF there is a God – where is He – Robert says he is love and mercy – doesn’t God care – is God weak – is God real
Feel Good Christianity is an empty message --------------------
All of these scientist see Rom 1:20 + Psa 19:2 = all of it points to an Intelligent Design
The whole point of my ministry has been to this group for years – they are my target audience WEDD + FD-WEDT + INCREMENTAL CREATION + THE LOGRYTHMIC DAYS OF CREATION Is 100% science – current – up to date – has not been refuted yet – has been supported by newer evidence – and is 100% SCRIPTURAL
Intelligent Design is obvious to all who look – Rom 1:19-20 Are we in the end-of-days? Real science is validating scripture – scripture is validating real science
The rate of information flow to the general public always lags behind the science It probably takes a new generation of text books – and a cycle of public education
4- MY GOAL – MY MISSION – is not to get these people into a church – my goal is to make them consider just who the Intelligent Designer really is
How - Real science is validating scripture – scripture is validating real science Cultural Conflict Thesis is correct about the church – but science has grown beyond that debate Today – the two paradigms are not in conflict – not in the slightest --------------
Definitions used = Materialism – all there is = biology – no spirit – no spiritual
As you watch this – pay attention to two underlying themes 1 – the back ground propaganda from the media and education against Intelligent Design
2- listen to their reoccurring cry = “We are not materialist – we see the human soul – we experience love – we live with a purpose – we fight for justice – and we can be quite no longer”
As I said – I almost selected a different video – but at 7:50 – I welled up in tears – they are screaming to know God
9:30 - Are we meat robots
10:30 – thoughts changing your brain is wired Dave – training = conditioning – agree If you walk in the spirit you see thing differently – than if you walk in the world
11:45 – trauma to the brain 12:50 – Free Will = Free Wont – we have the ability to say NO YES – our choice is not to follow our bodies (yester ra) selfishness YES – our God give choice is the ability to say NO – to the world
15:15 – again - screaming to know God
No geneticist support evolution! 20:28 – all information comes from an intelligent source
28:04 – “intelligent design, as one sees it from a scientific point of view, seems to be quite real”
28:30 – theories of a multi-verse (infinite possibilities) - is different than String Theory multi-dimensionalism (10D of space/time)
31:30 – evolutions media propaganda YES - the back ground propaganda from the media and education against Intelligent Design
32:30 – proto-cells Proto-Turkey made me laugh out loud
33:30 – Time is not evolution's friend – time is evolution enemy 34:40 - Douglas Axe
39:30 – mutations Dave – exist within a phenotype – not genotype
41:00 – strong arguments against post flood KINDs
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2022 3:41:00 GMT -5
D"Don Patton was forced to remove his fossilized cowboy boot – because it is not a fossil! R" Show me the link and Don commenting, I can't find it?
Update: Yeah I read the cowboy boot....at worst Don is sensationalizing... which is dishonest
One could have presented this better.
So I agree somewhat with you.
However the point is fossilization is normally very rapid as a process, is the point of Don Patton, though I find he make a sensationalizing presentation, stretching the facts, to discredit evolutionists, makes for a poor argument.
D"Your Don Patton argued that His Spider had to remain motionless for several thousands of years to be covered – then fossilized R" OK show me a video where evolutionist people explain fossilization with rapid burial? I can't find one....willing to speak in a video form?
D"I do not have a video about Incremental Creation R" OK so why do you bag others who try to make Creation truthful and evolution wrong?
D"Intelligent Design 3.0 by Stephen Meyer and Doug Axe
Amazing Flagellum : Michael Behe and the Revolution of Intelligent Design R" I have seen these in my education journey
D"My views about time are 100% Gerald Schroeder In fact – I published my paper 7 years before his When he published – the comments to me was – wow I sound like him
You used to have his very work posted to your web-page You used to present him as your go to guy on time But you never understood what he wrote – now you say you will remove him R" I still like Schroeder as a secular scientist, I like his "day one" idea.
I do not have to agree with everything he says, in order to continue liking some of his ideas.
Do you agree with this idea of not having to like everything about a person, still means I can like them?
D"From God’s perspective Day 1 was potentially longer than Days 2-6 Day 2-6 could be explained a logarithmic – Day 2 twice as long as Day 3 – etc etc There were hominids on earth without souls before Gen 2:7 After Gen 2:7 time became measured from Adam’s perspective – your 24hr days
This is what Schroeder said – this is what I said – this is what I say R" That is NOT how Schroeder presents his time....I watched his video years ago and He never says that, .....
you are imposing your ideas over his lectures.
Schroeder says the time was always a yom, but due to space stretching the yom appears to be longer in time in the past. He speaks of relativity as well. He does not speak about "hominids on earth without souls before Gen 2:7", sure I get this one statement of his on other websites, but he does not elaborate further, as you do here?
D"Arguments about time are STUPID – MEANINGLESS – because TIME IS NOT LINEAR R" what do you mean time is not linear? Time moves forward on a frame of reference, at the rate the frame of reference suggests. What on earth are you talking about? Show me a scholar link talking as you do, because you do not write discussion, very well.
Rob liked your video, nicely presented.
“We are not materialist – we see the human soul – we experience love – we live with a purpose – we fight for justice – and we can be quiet no longer”
D" 41:00 – strong arguments against post flood KINDs R" I didn't hear a single argument at all? You make up things...?
Ecoli running for thousands of generations, will change within the limits the DNA they have. Some are bigger, smaller, might make different flagella engines, etc, but they do not make anything outside of the code they were given by God, as a kind. SO what are you talking about Dave?
Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 25, 2022 8:44:41 GMT -5
Update: Yeah I read the cowboy boot....at worst Don is sensationalizing... which is dishonest One could have presented this better.
You mean creationist build their case upon lying about real science And you hold these men in the same regard as Einstein and Newton Dom Patton is a scientific buffoon – he is a charlatan - he is a salesman - he has a political agenda to push – he does NOT do it with facts – he makes up his own facts
However the point is fossilization is normally very rapid as a process, STOP IT – buy a text book – fossilization depend upon availability of minerals and water flow BUT A TEXT BOOK – try impressing others with FACTS and TRUTH
D"I do not have a video about Incremental Creation R" OK so why do you bag others who try to make Creation truthful and evolution wrong? Creation science is not science – it is fake – it is nonsense – it argues against the intelligent Intelligent Design = Rom 1:19 + Psa 19:2 – letting the evidence speak
Intelligent Design is NOT creationism – Intelligent Design people would never fall for Don Patton or Ken Hamm Intelligent Design people think creationists are a religious JOKE Tell me how creationist witness to these scientist – it doesn’t - it makes them (real science and common sense) the enemy
Tell me how creationist witnes for the Lord - by proving that scripture is just relegous folly
D"From God’s perspective Day 1 was potentially longer than Days 2-6 Day 2-6 could be explained a logarithmic – Day 2 twice as long as Day 3 – etc etc There were hominids on earth without souls before Gen 2:7 After Gen 2:7 time became measured from Adam’s perspective – your 24hr days
This is what Schroeder said – this is what I said – this is what I say R" That is NOT how Schroeder presents his time
Read the same paper you said you had posted to your web-site Gerald Schroeder, The Age of the Universe (2013) What you say is a lie – you lack the ability to read and understand English I tire of your pretend ignorance - or Don Patton and Ellen White have taught you is is christian to lie and missrepresent others
D"Arguments about time are STUPID – MEANINGLESS – because TIME IS NOT LINEAR R" what do you mean time is not linear? Evidently – you are not able to understand deep scientific meaning or writing If you cannot understand me – read Gerald Schroeder explaine it within his paper on the age of the universe I tire of your pretend ignorance
D" 41:00 – strong arguments against post flood KINDs R" I didn't hear a single argument at all?
Ecoli running for thousands of generations, will change within the limits the DNA they have. Some are bigger, smaller, might make different flagella engines, etc, but they do not make anything outside of the code they were given by God, as a kind. SO what are you talking about Dave?
YES – and after 60,000 generation they are still just E. coli Variation within a phenotype – NOT genotype Not one of them changed their genotype to become a different species Not one of them became a Kolar Bear – or a Gristle Bear – or a Polar Bear
Dogs can vary into many types of dogs - phenotype Dogs never change into foxes – or raccoons - genotype
Question - if all the genotypes of monkies generated from just 2 if all the genotypes of mice - or bugs - or birds - or mamals - all came from just 2 WHERE ARE ALL THE KINDS OF MAN - they would have evolved upwardly from 8 - if you say Black / White / Chinese / or Arab - you only prove you are a RACIEST
Bears - some men should be giant and feroscious - some small and passive - some should tun into marsupials and hang in trees
You are not consistant - you double speak - you offer doctrin NOT science
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2022 17:09:01 GMT -5
Greetings Dave I am amazed by the Jews. This is really a very beautiful gesture, something I need to take on board myself. I got this from the Messanic Email for today's mediations. I quote" Early warning notice translated to English from Arabic, which was distributed to residents of Beit Lahiya in Gaza, July 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, the last war between Hamas and Israel. In Operation Cast Lead, the war with Gaza from 2008–2009, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) dropped some 2,500,000 leaflets in the Gaza Strip warning civilians of where and when attacks would be made that could cause civilian casualties, like the one above. In addition, the IDF made about 165,000 phone calls along with radio broadcasts just before an attack. It even fired warning shots on roofs (known as “roof knocking”) to further encourage civilians to leave the targeted site. (International Committee of the Red Cross) In another example, Abraham Lincoln, whose rules of warfare during America's Civil War form the foundation of international rules of war today, was reportedly "telling a group of White House visitors about his plans to treat the South leniently after the war. "A guest objected with, ‘But Mr. President, I would think you would want to destroy your enemies.’ "Lincoln replied with, ‘Don’t I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?’” (Jesus’ Twenty Megatruths, by Herb Miller, p. 96) Lincoln’s reply was so profound, it has risen to bumper sticker status--------------------------------------------- D" STOP IT – buy a text book – fossilization depend upon availability of minerals and water flow BUT A TEXT BOOK – try impressing others with FACTS and TRUTHR" My understanding is mineralization process seeping into cavities where flesh rots away is quite rapid, I have seen hats and bottle mineralize in a matter of months, it just depends upon the amount of mineral CaCO3 available in the water, which was super abundant during the Global Flood. D" Creation science is not science – it is fake – it is nonsense – it argues against the intelligentR" Excuse me, but you quoted Creation Science people to me before, Doug Axe, Beher, Sanford, Sarfetti are some I could name.... You are right though some of them may be religious zealots, but overall they are support God as the Intelligent Designer.... Stop being so hard on Don Patton, OK so he a little off sometimes. As for Ken Ham, I never liked him or his ways.... D" Intelligent Design people think creationists are a religious JOKER" Hmm? mindmatters.ai/2021/06/intelligent-design-is-not-what-most-people-think-it-is/I may be outdated? I thought Intelligent Design is another name for God as your agency? Seems to becoming another term for designing systems of biology without God in it? Than I came across this:" intelligentdesign.org/" Our universe and life were produced by intelligent design, not unguided evolution". intelligentdesign.org/articles/what-is-intelligent-design/NOT so simple to define...a long complex page of writing... intelligentdesign.org/articles/what-intelligent-design-is-and-isnt/Unless you’ve been hiding in a cave, you’ve heard of “intelligent design” (ID) and some of its leading proponents-Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, William Dembski
In recent years, philosophers William Dembski and Stephen Meyer have turned this evidence into a formidable argument for intelligent design. Dembski, also a mathematician, applies information and probability theory to the subject. Meyer argues that the usual aimless processes of chance and chemistry simply can’t explain biological information and that, moreover, our everyday experience shows us where such information comes from-intelligent agents
Behe argues that molecular machines like the bacterial flagellum are “irreducibly complex.”
Unfortunately, few are willing to follow Townes’ advice. If we talk about ID, we’re warned, someone, somewhere, will start talking about God. R" SO I try to be simple and child like, Creationists talk freely about God as the Creator, Intelligent Design people don't talk about God at all. D" Tell me how creationist witnes for the Lord - by proving that scripture is just relegous follyR" Well I showed you coal was made during a flood, not as organic matter some how turning into coal, as you claim since day 3 of creation. Give me one example where Don Patton is not witnessing for the Lord? He has whole expeditions overturning the Jews who say Solomon never existed? He found David's temple and Solomon's temple in Jerusalem, which Jews scholars mock. He found also other things in OT times, the Jewish scholars mock. Don Patton also speaks of humans living with dinosaurs showing Job is true. How is that for witnessing. What you do is focus on the bad things about people and criticize. Try focusing on the good Don Patton does. I liked his last video, an expedition to Noah's ark, they found traces of petrified wood with animal dung in it. -------------------- D" Gerald Schroeder, The Age of the Universe (2013) What you say is a lie – you lack the ability to read and understand English I tire of your pretend ignorance R" Hmm? www.geraldschroeder.com/AgeUniverse.aspxWhen we add up the generations of the Bible and then add the secular rulers that followed, we come to fewer than 6000 years.
The question we're left with is, how long ago did the "beginning" occur? Was it, as the Bible might imply, fewer than 6,000 years, or was it the 14 to 15 billions of years that are accepted by the scientific community?
The Jewish year is calculated by adding up the generations since Adam. Additionally, there are six days from the creation of the universe to the creation of the first human, that is the first being with the soul of a human (not the first hominid, a being with human shape and intelligence, but lacking the soul of humanity, the neshama). We have a 6000 year clock that begins with Adam. The six days are separate from this clock. The Bible has two clocks. This is no modern rationalization. The Talmud already discussed this 1600 years ago.
R" Schreoder mentions two clocks, but his conclusion summarizes with one clock?? The reason the six pre-Adam days were taken out of the calendar is because time is described differently in those Six Days of Genesis. "There was evening and morning" with no relationship to human time. Once we come to the progeny of Adam, the flow of time is totally in human terms. Adam and Eve live 130 years before having Seth.
Fortunately, the Talmud in Hagigah (12A), Rashi there and Nahmanides (Gen. 1:3) all tell us that the word day means 24 hours, not sunrise and sun set.
Einstein taught the world that time is relative. That in regions of high velocity or high gravity time actually passes more slowly relative to regions of lower gravity or lower velocity. (One system relative to another, hence the name, the laws of relativity.) This is now proven fact. Time actually stretches out. Were ever you are time is normal for you because your biology is part of that local system The perspective of the Bible for the six days of Genesis is from the only time in the history of time when there had not been a second day. And that is the first day. From the creation of the universe to the creation of the soul of Adam, the Torah views time from near the beginning looking forward. At the creation of Adam and Eve, the soul of humanity, the Bible perspective switches to earth based time. And therefore the biblical description of time changed.
(Nahmanides) says that is the only physical creation. There was no other physical creation; all other creations were spiritual. The Nefesh (the soul of animal life, Genesis 1:21) and the Neshama (the soul of human life, Genesis 1:27) are spiritual creationsR" Schroeder quotes "Nahmanides" saying our universe is the only physical universe we have. Now the fact that the Bible tells us there is "evening and morning Day One", comes to teach us time from a Biblical perspective, from near the beginning looking forward.
If the Torah were seeing time from the days of Moses on Mount Sinai - 2448 years after Adam - the text would not have written Day One. Because by Sinai, hundreds of thousands of days already passed. It would have said "a first day." By the second day of Genesis, the Bible says "a second day," because there was already the first day with which to compare it.
We look back in time, and say the universe is 15 billion years old. But as every scientist knows, when we say the universe is 15 billion years old, there's another half of the sentence that we rarely bother to say. The other half of the sentence is: The universe is 15 billion years old as seen from the time-space coordinates of the earth.R" Yes from another frame of reference. Does Dave understand this term? Today, we look back in time and we see approximately 15 billion years of history. Looking forward from when the universe is very small - billions of times smaller - the Torah says six days. In truth, they both may be correct. Considering the many approximations, and that the Bible works with only six periods of time, the agreement to within a few percent is extraordinary. The universe is billions of years old from one perspective and a mere six days old from another. And both are correct!R" Yes this is due to time being relative to it's frame of reference. Time is not a fundamental constant. Only matter and space and GOD are fundamental components, not time. Time is the movement of matter relative to space. The five and a half days of Genesis are not of equal duration. Each time the universe doubles in size, the perception of time halves as we project that time back toward the beginning of the universe. The rate of doubling, that is the fractional rate of change, is very rapid at the beginning and decreases with time simply because as the universe gets larger and larger, even though the actual expansion rate is approximately constant, it takes longer and longer for the overall size to double. Because of this, the earliest of the six days have most of the15 billion years sequestered with them. Introducing this correction into the exponential equation that details the duration of the six 24 hour days of Genesis Chapter One results in an age of the universe from our perspective of 14 billion years [14, 000,000,000 years]. From the Bible’s perspective of time for those six evocative days of Genesis, the number of our years held compressed within each of those six 24 hour days of Genesis, starting with Day One, would be, in billions of years, respectively, 7.1; 3.6; 1.8; 0.89; 0.45; 0.23.R" I get the impression Schroeder is saying our world is 6,000 years old as yom, according to our frame of reference. But during the first 6 yoms, the frame of reference changed, if we view time from other frames of reference. If we compare our time to the time of the stars for example. To test if Schroeder is on the same page as I am, I would ask him, are the granite rocks God created on day 1 and 2, are these rocks 6,000 years old according to our local earth frame of reference for time? I would also ask him why do you use the term humanoid? Don't you suppose man was genetically engineering humans and making amalgamations with man and beast in those advanced days before the Flood? D" you lack the ability to read and understand EnglishR" I might lack this ability, so discuss the words I post here, and show me where I went wrong? D" If you cannot understand me – read Gerald Schroeder explaine it within his paper on the age of the universeR" I did. I asked for for a scholar who discusses time in not linear? medium.com/@whitbers/time-is-not-linear-time-is-a-spiral-f2c7b723c3ecThe peculiar thing is; time isn’t real. Time is a concept developed by a scientist with a theory that is based on the movement of the earth and sun. Why as humans do we put so much importance on something that is just a theory, maybe it’s because that’s all we have? youtu.be/e_ayxOnqDLsTime is cyclical, based on seasons etc. Time only became linear when the clock was introduced. Time was money and money was time, so the employee controlled us using time. Today we are controlled by the invisible hand of time. We have become the slaves to time. Colonisation involved univeralizing the will of man and his work. Death and Time: Immortality is a way to controlling time. Why should I care about future generations? My grandfather is fertilizer and from this comes profound respect. R" Interesting video, I guess it makes me more senstitive to others views. So in this view, time is not linear. But is this what Dave means? When speaking of Creation Week? I doubt this? I also wonder since man did not arrive until day 6, did God create a mature looking universe? No where have I read that on the same frame of reference, does time become longer while still adhering to the longer rotation of a yom? So Dave you need to explain your view carefully. Schreoder is speaking about looking at time from different frames of reference. Consider a clock on earth and a clock on a plane travelling very fast. We have two different frames of reference. After 100 minutes, the clock on the earth frame of reference measures 100.000 minutes, but the clock on the plane measures 99.990 minutes. There is a difference, because we measure the time on difference frames of reference. Looking from the plane looking down at earth, the time on earth seems longer. Standing on the earth looking at the plane, their time seems to be shorter. One cannot say there were a million yoms on the first yom of Creation. Time does not function in this way. But looking down from heaven unto the earth, we might see the milliom yoms gone by, because the view we see takes so long to reach us, at the speed of light. That is called relativity. Now consider my view of time relative to the local frame of reference on earth. Time always moves forward. Even on Joshua's long day, the sun went backward, but time moved forward. The forward movement of our consciousness of events is all that time allows for. ------------------------ D" YES – and after 60,000 generation they are still just E. coli Variation within a phenotype – NOT genotype Not one of them changed their genotype to become a different species Not one of them became a Kolar Bear – or a Gristle Bear – or a Polar Bear
Dogs can vary into many types of dogs - phenotype Dogs never change into foxes – or raccoons - genotypeR" correct A kind only changes within it's own geneotype, to make newer phenotypes. A kind cannot make a brand new geneotype. SO yes, dogs cannot become raccoons. But dogs can become wolves and dingoes. Not sure about foxes? D" WHERE ARE ALL THE KINDS OF MAN - they would have evolved upwardly from 8 - if you say Black / White / Chinese / or Arab - you only prove you are a RACIESTR" There is plenty of variation in phenotype? In PNG I saw living Crogmagon man with raised eyebrow ridges and sloping skulls. I also saw pygmies and giants, and all sorts of human shapes. Hmm? What would happen to a African meat eating Kalaria desert person, and you put him immediately on a vegetarian diet of veggies and fruit? Would he be OK? Or take a Aborigine and place him in Arctic circle lands to live? Are humans locked into their ecosystem worlds so they cannot adjust to other worlds? I look forward to the day we investigate the genes that causes Koala to eat only gum leaves, and change this so the Koala can eat berries like a different animal might. It is possible the genes is lost for variation? Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 26, 2022 12:04:21 GMT -5
I am amazed by the Jews. This is really a very beautiful gesture, something I need to take on board myself. I got this from the Messanic Email for today's mediations. I quote" Early warning notice translated to English from Arabic, which was distributed to residents of Beit Lahiya in Gaza, July 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, the last war between Hamas and Israel. In Operation Cast Lead, the war with Gaza from 2008–2009, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) dropped some 2,500,000 leaflets in the Gaza Strip warning civilians of where and when attacks would be made that could cause civilian casualties, like the one above. In addition, the IDF made about 165,000 phone calls along with radio broadcasts just before an attack. It even fired warning shots on roofs (known as “roof knocking”) to further encourage civilians to leave the targeted site. (International Committee of the Red Cross) D" How come you think President Putin is bad? He is the only person not willing to support the New World Order, hence the Masons hate him. Putin is bombing bio labs the Masons use for child trafficking. Facebook messages from our friends in Ukraine, say no war is over here. So somebody is listening to fake news. God bless President Putin. More Robert double speak(google)how many civilians killed in ukraine war Ukraine officials suggest the true figure is 15,000. While these estimates vary widely, what isn't in doubt is that people – both in the military and among the general population – are dying and suffering wounds in the fighting --------------------------------------------- D"Creation science is not science – it is fake – it is nonsense – it argues against the intelligent D"Intelligent Design people think creationists are a religious JOKE R" Hmm? I may be outdated? I thought Intelligent Design is another name for God as your agency? Seems to becoming another term for designing systems of biology without God in it?Correct – so why doesn’t this new attitude bring this same community into the church looking for the Judeo-Christian Creator Instead – the movement – is drifting to an alien source – aliens made us Aliens made our moon elsewhere and moved it into place – used as an observation base - to keep an eye on us Creationists talk freely about God as the Creator, Intelligent Design people don't talk about God at all. D"Tell me how creationist witnes for the Lord - by proving that scripture is just religious follyR" Well I showed you coal was made during a flood, not as organic matter some how turning into coal, as you claim since day 3 of creation.Ellen White’s coal revelation is not supported by intelligent design Vegetarian sharks are not supported by intelligent design Rapid speciation after the flood by the evolution of KINDS is not supported by intelligent designGive me one example where Don Patton is not witnessing for the Lord?Don Patton PROVES to the intelligent that Christianity is a religious folly not supported by intelligent Design-------------------- D"Gerald Schroeder, The Age of the Universe (2013) What you say is a lie – you lack the ability to read and understand English I tire of your pretend ignorance R" Hmm? R" Schreoder mentions two clocks, but his conclusion summarizes with one clock??One from God perspective – Comic time and one from Man’s perspective – DUH Time is not linear - Time is relevant dependent upon the perspective of the viewerFortunately, the Talmud in Hagigah (12A), Rashi there and Nahmanides (Gen. 1:3) all tell us that the word day means 24 hours, not sunrise and sun set. And each biblical day contain the years of creation(Nahmanides) says that is the only physical creation. There was no other physical creation; all other creations were spiritual. The Nefesh (the soul of animal life, Genesis 1:21) and the Neshama (the soul of human life, Genesis 1:27) are spiritual creations R" Schroeder quotes "Nahmanides" saying our universe is the only physical universe we have.Correct – He says we only have on uni-verse of physicalityThe other verses of the multi-verse = spiritual Nahmanides is credited with says 10D of space/time 1000 years before science Nahmanides is one of the authors of the ZOHARRobert claims the Kabbalah is worthless – but uses it as validation Just more Robert double speak R" Yes from another frame of reference. Does Dave understand this term?Time is not linear - Time is relevant dependent upon the perspective of the viewer Robert admits he does not understand what non-linear time impliesConsidering the many approximations, and that the Bible works with only six periods of time, the agreement to within a few percent is extraordinary. The universe is billions of years old from one perspective and a mere six days old from another. And both are correct!SIX periods of time – six increments of time = Incremental CreationRobert denies the conceptR" Yes this is due to time being relative to it's frame of reference. Time is not a fundamental constant. Time is not linear - Time is relevant dependent upon the perspective of the viewer Robert admits he does not understand what non-linear time impliesOnly matter and space and GOD are fundamental components, not time. Time is the movement of matter relative to space.YES – time = distance / distance = time Robert did not understand this either – just keep saying 24hr as we measure todayThe five and a half days of Genesis are not of equal duration. I said this – you corrected me with this paper – were you correct?Each time the universe doubles in size, the perception of time halves as we project that time back toward the beginning of the universe. The rate of doubling, that is the fractional rate of change, is very rapid at the beginning and decreases with time simply because as the universe gets larger and larger, even though the actual expansion rate is approximately constant, it takes longer and longer for the overall size to double. Because of this, the earliest of the six days have most of the15 billion years sequestered with them. Introducing this correction into the exponential equation that details the duration of the six 24 hour days of Genesis Chapter One results in an age of the universe from our perspective of 14 billion years [14, 000,000,000 years]. WHAT DID HE SAY – logarithmic time – day 2 represents a half-life of day 3From the Bible’s perspective of time for those six evocative days of Genesis, the number of our years held compressed within each of those six 24 hour days of Genesis, starting with Day One, would be, in billions of years, respectively, 7.1; 3.6; 1.8; 0.89; 0.45; 0.23. WHAT DID HE SAY – logarithmic timeI would also ask him why do you use the term humanoid? Don't you suppose man was genetically engineering humans and making amalgamations with man and beast in those advanced days before the Flood?NOT WHAT HE SAYS – he says humanoid men were created before Adam the man with a soulGerald Schroeder is NOT a Don Patton / Ken Hamm creationist------------------------ D"WHERE ARE ALL THE KINDS OF MAN - they would have evolved upwardly from 8 - if you say Black / White / Chinese / or Arab - you only prove you are a RACIEST R" There is plenty of variation in phenotype?KINDS SPEAKS TO VARIAYION IN GENOTYPE – not phenotype Stop switching the question around so you can have an answer
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2022 15:58:48 GMT -5
Greetings Dave" RP" Seems to becoming another term for designing systems of biology without God in it?D" Correct – so why doesn’t this new attitude bring this same community into the church looking for the Judeo-Christian Creator Instead – the movement – is drifting to an alien source – aliens made us Aliens made our moon elsewhere and moved it into place – used as an observation base - to keep an eye on usR" SO we should NOT engage Intelligent Design either, if it's leading to aliens and not God? D" Ellen White’s coal revelation is not supported by intelligent design Vegetarian sharks are not supported by intelligent design Rapid speciation after the flood by the evolution of KINDS is not supported by intelligent designR" I didn't know you believe our Creator is an alien? I thought aliens on earth are shedim, according to your view? Care to unpack any of these statements into a page of discussion with proof? These are all comments on the past, and according to science I know, we cannot prove the past. SO really Dave you are welcome to your ideas, just as much as I am to my ideas. However I support Scripture better, I feel, whereas you look into the Gnostic writings to add to Scripture, which Scripture says not to. So there is a fundamental difference between us. I use sola scriptoria ( same scripture Essenes copied in AD 55) for my understanding. You use much more than the common received text, you also use the whole Jewish tanak, as other writings,and add them to the Moses torah. I don't do this. So we are different. It says to Moses torah first....compare and test other prophets to Moses torah first. D" One from God perspective – Comic time and one from Man’s perspective – DUH Time is not linear - Time is relevant dependent upon the perspective of the viewerR" Agreed Assuming we science people know anything about time, which we don't.... so I accept this as a theory D" And each biblical day contain the years of creationR" Yes but only if viewed from God's perspective, assuming we can say this at all? We claim to know things, but we don't know hardly anything.... From our clock on earth, the earth was made in just 6 yoms of time. As " Fortunately, the Talmud in Hagigah (12A), Rashi there and Nahmanides (Gen. 1:3) all tell us that the word day means 24 hours, not sunrise and sun set." tell us this is a 24 hour period of time. D" Correct – He says we only have on uni-verse of physicalityR" But that is a human assumption, and really Dave, we know nothing about Science and nothing about God's world, really are we so proud to assume we know anything at all? We can't even proof basic maths, I watched a video last night where a maths person proved 1+ 1 = 2 using over 700 pages of concise formula. Highly complex, in fact the video says maths cannot be all proved, neither is maths all consistent... so really our assumptions are assumptions. D" Robert admits he does not understand what non-linear time implies SIX periods of time – six increments of time = Incremental Creation Robert denies the conceptR" I am not denying your view, only that you can't prove it, nor do I attempt to prove mine. Why do you pretend to know anything? Ps 131:1 LORD, my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty: neither do I exercise myself in great matters, or in things too high for me. We are supposed to be humble enough to admit we hardly know anything about anything. D" WHAT DID HE SAY – logarithmic time – day 2 represents a half-life of day 3R" Yeah I heard this 10 years ago, and read the paper, it's some views of Schroeder I do not agree with. One does not have to agree with anything a secular science person postulates. For starters he is implying he can validate modern science with Biblical science. Than he assumes he knows relative time scales. Bit like Barry Setterfield with his light was faster in the past idea. Like the Psalm 131 says, some things are too great for us. Leave the theories alone. We cannot prove or know anything, mere speculation on the part of Schroeder. D" he says humanoid men were created before Adam the man with a soulR" OK, but I do not support these ideas of Schroeder. One can support some ideas of his, and forget the rest, to make us " fit with cultural manmade views", something Jeff Benner does too, but compromises too much I feel, whereas I listen to other science people, yes, but often do not take on board much of their presentation. For example how much do we know about the DNA? Answer? Hardly nothing so far. Schroeder is biased because he is a Jew, and biased because he tries to fit into evolution ideas, into the Bible. That is his employment, I do not bag him for doing this, I just do not accept all he has to say. D" KINDS SPEAKS TO VARIAYION IN GENOTYPE – not phenotypeR" No absolutely NOT. DO you have any idea how silly you are saying this? The canus kind cannot ever become Equidae kind. Dogs cannot change to horses, even though they might be similar on the outside. Why isn't this possible is because God gave different code to the canus and different code to the equidae kind. If we test the DNA variance between dogs and wolves, how different are they? How much variation in the DNA is variation? If we find the DNA sets are different by 20% what have we measured? Protein coding only. Only knowledge of DNA is not yet rich enough to answer this question. Funny I heard that last night about a maths person speaking about maths. Our current maths is not yet rich enough to answer basic maths questions. So stop pretending you know all things. In truth, we hardly know anything about anything. Ps 131:1,2 Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 26, 2022 18:04:07 GMT -5
RP" Seems to becoming another term for designing systems of biology without God in it? D" Correct – so why doesn’t this new attitude bring this same community into the church looking for the Judeo-Christian Creator Instead – the movement – is drifting to an alien source – aliens made us Aliens made our moon elsewhere and moved it into place – used as an observation base - to keep an eye on us R" SO we should NOT engage Intelligent Design either, if it's leading to aliens and not God?1- these are the influential people that will dictate the next generation of text books 2- these very people are SCREAMING TO KNOW THE LORD – the One True Designed 3 you say – do not witness God to them – they are the enemy 100% a satanic teaching – because it is 0% Judeo-Christian Jews are called to witness – Jer 1:5 Christians are called to evangelize You say – do not witness – to the very people SCREAMING TO KNOW the Intelligent DesignerHow can anyone ever take you serious – I don’t – you will just say anything Meaning – no credibility – just like Don Patton R" I didn't know you believe our Creator is an alien? Care to unpack any of these statements into a page of discussion with proof?WOW – your disrespect is unwelcome - Christian D" One from God perspective – Comic time and one from Man’s perspective – DUH Time is not linear - Time is relevant dependent upon the perspective of the viewer R" Agreed Thank you for finally changing your views – see beliefs changeD"Correct – He says we only have on uni-verse of physicality R" But that is a human assumption, Why does it offend you – when science validates scripture or scripture validates science? Why does it offend you that a Kabbalistic Rabbi understood multidimensionalism 1000 years before String Theory?D" he says humanoid men were created before Adam the man with a soul R" OK, but I do not support these ideas of Schroeder. One can support some ideas of his, and forget the rest, to make us "fit with cultural manmade views", something Jeff Benner does too, but compromises too much I feel, whereas I listen to other science people, yes, but often do not take on board much of their presentation. Why does it offend you – when science validates scripture or scripture validates science?You took one sentence from Gerald Schroeder’s paper and said he supported your view And deny the rest of what he said – you are not an honest scholarSchroeder is biased because he is a Jew, and biased because he tries to fit into evolution ideas, into the Bible. That is his employment, I do not bag him for doing this, I just do not accept all he has to say.INSTERESTING – most Nobel winners – most deep cutting edge quantum physicists are Kabbalistic Ashkenazi JewishWhy does it offend you that a Kabbalistic Rabbi understood modern quantum physic 1000 years before Max Plank – Einstein – or String Theory
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2022 4:26:46 GMT -5
D"You say – do not witness – to the very people SCREAMING TO KNOW the Intelligent Designer R" How do you plan to witness to Intelligent Designers? I am a little person without influence, you are a science person so witnessing might be easier for you.
D"WOW – your disrespect is unwelcome R" I think you shouldn't use the term, as it's very specific in the popular world. So I take it you are not an supporter of Intelligent Design, but you are willing to witness to them, about your faith, whatever that means.
And according to the premise of modern Intelligent Design, I do not support their view either. I see the Creator in heaven as the Creator, and I am not afraid to tell science people this view.
D"Thank you for finally changing your views – see beliefs change R" I haven't changed my view, I have always respected relativity.
D"Why does it offend you that a Kabbalistic Rabbi understood multidimensionalism 1000 years before String Theory? R" No it doesn't offend me at all, however it's a theory, and a theory is all it can be.
D"You took one sentence from Gerald Schroeder’s paper and said he supported your view And deny the rest of what he said – you are not an honest scholar R" Why does that make me a dishonest scholar? I like some parts of his studies, and other parts I don't like. I treat Jeff benner the same as well. Surely Christians are allowed to disagree with some parts of Scripture even? We cannot be ALL on the same page. D"INSTERESTING – most Nobel winners – most deep cutting edge quantum physicists are Kabbalistic Ashkenazi Jewish
R" I stumbled across Schroeder years ago, and I liked him, Wish he spoke more often. Just because he says some things I don't like, is not a problem to me. I can disagree with him and still like him, what's the problem?
I liked my SDA translator of Hebrew and Greek, but we never agreed to hardly anything. He has since died these days. I think he was too secular influenced by modern scholars in His Hebrew and Greek. I am mostly a student of Jeff Benner.
Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 27, 2022 10:14:57 GMT -5
D"You say – do not witness – to the very people SCREAMING TO KNOW the Intelligent Designer R" How do you plan to witness to Intelligent Designers? I am a little person without influence, YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN – with the faith of a mustard seed you can move a mountain Don’t you believe in the Gospel – the word of God
Peter was a fisherman – Mathew was a dreaded tax collector – James and Jude was probably a carpenter like his father and brother -
you are a science person so witnessing might be easier for you. Then stop promoting your 8th grade pseudo-science – as if you were the expert - as soon as you impress then you do not understand what you are saying – they just stop listening to you
Just speak facts – stop making up your own – Seriously – you have a reading comprehension issue – how many year do you promote Gerald Schroeder and never read him?
Modern Intelligent Design, I do not support their view either. I see the Creator in heaven as the Creator, and I am not afraid to tell science people this view. So – you do not believe in Intelligent Design – I believe you – there is nothing intelligent about Ken Hamm or Don Patton You deny Psa 19:2 + Rom 1:20 – why do you deny scripture?
D"You took one sentence from Gerald Schroeder’s paper and said he supported your view And deny the rest of what he said – you are not an honest scholar R" Why does that make me a dishonest scholar? I like some parts of his studies, and other parts I don't like.
I will find one sentence by you – take it out of context and use it to say you are a Mormon supporting Joseph Smith Why does that make me a dishonest scholar? Seriously – you do not know the answer
D"INSTERESTING – most Nobel winners – most deep cutting edge quantum physicists are Kabbalistic Ashkenazi Jewish
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2022 17:00:39 GMT -5
D"So – you do not believe in Intelligent Design – R" And you do, that aliens created our world and have a base on the moon for watching us I support a divine Creator in heaven, Jesus created our world, and rescued our world from sin, like the song"little boy made a boat, put it in the river and a string held the two together" "but the current broke the string..."
That string is the DNA, biological encapsulating the holy words of living.
Eze 28:16 – why do you deny scripture?
D"I will find one sentence by you – take it out of context and use it to say you are a Mormon supporting Joseph Smith Why does that make me a dishonest scholar? Seriously – you do not know the answer R" do you know anything about a person's museum of truth? I study Scripture than for the sake of mockers out there I go looking for others who support my truth in my museum, and I collect human comments here and there I like, disregarding the other statements of humans I don't like. Inside my museum, my collection is consistent and truth abounds, (as I see truth).
What you have done is take a sentence out of context and use it to align that sentence with Mormons. So you now have two museum collections of so called truth, and you take one from one museum to another museum and make mockery out of both. That is not how truth is assembled or learned.
If you wish to mock you have to do so within the collection you are exploring inside the museum under analysis.
To the Moses torah alone we seek truth, we seek other prophets to add truth to Moses account, so the entire museum of truth is true, the term is Bible, a museum of scrolls containing truth. Not all truth from others is in this collection, many books got left out. God did not want them, only this special collection. The Catholics use the word trinity and you are happy to use this term in your Gnostic ideas, does that make you a Catholic Dave? According to you yes.
However I do not use the term "trinity" in my website. I quote " Gerald Schroeder is a Jewish-Christian professor, has some wonderful insights into Creation and our universe. How do we know the universe had a beginning ?
Ge 1:5 And The FAMILY (powers) of GOD called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning was day (yowm) one (echad).
The Hebrew word for "first" (ri'shown) is used to compare one thing to another. The Hebrew word (echad) does not mean first, but means unity , the joining together as one the many parts. Translators change the order of Hebrew words to say, evening and morning was the first day. The Hebrew reads evening and morning was day one. Strange statement." That is all I say of Gerald Schroeder. I liked his analysis of yom echad.
That is it. Nothing else I liked. Scripture tells us not to listen to the precepts of men, but only to the hebrew torah. Hence I write, collecting truth and I suggest others do find some truth here and there, like Newton said as pebbles on the beach of God.
D""INSTERESTING – most Nobel winners – most deep cutting edge quantum physicists are Kabbalistic Ashkenazi Jewish R" God still blesses the Hebrew. Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Apr 28, 2022 8:36:42 GMT -5
D"So – you do not believe in Intelligent Design – R" And you do, that aliens created our world R" I didn't know you believe our Creator is an alien? Care to unpack any of these statements into a page of discussion with proof?WOW – your disrespect is unwelcome – Christian There can be no doubt that your disrespect is intentionally deliberate I have been tolerant – and patient – and you respond with personal insultYou attitude belongs on the playground at recess It is NOT scholarly – or academically helpful to your creditability Grow up – treat me – this form – and the word of God with respect – or go away Rich had you pegged from the beginning – we all know who you are – you just oppose Be honest – what is the definition of alien - you are a word man – get all bothered by words Was God born on earth? – In Australia? Prove to me that your SDA Ellen White family of gods are terresterialand have a base on the moon for watching usOf course you want to hide the archon – don’t believe Paul’s Eph 6:12 or Johns Book of Revelation Both these authors are identified as Gnostic by Roman authorityI support a divine Creator in heaven, Jesus created our world, Which one of your gods created? – god the Father – or the other god the Son? You cannot understand that they are the same beingEze 28:16 – why do you deny scripture?It is all about the arrogance of man / Eve / mankind Why do you have a satan religion built around one verseI quote " Gerald Schroeder is a Jewish-Christian professor, has some wonderful insights into Creation and our universe. How do we know the universe had a beginning ? Ge 1:5 And The FAMILY (powers) of GOD called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning was day (yowm) one (echad). You do not understand his writings – or his level of intellect – just because you found one sentence or phrase means – you just pick and choose one liners that support your Ellen White
We have been all over your 23 + verses – you FAILED to prove you theologySo you resort to personal attacks – name calling – and parroting Ezk 28
|
|