Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11346Re: [CreationTalk] Re: The Beginning of Time

Expand Messages
  • Alan Cassidy
    Oct 7, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Also, the language didn't exactly limit the science or prophecy we can find in the Bible with the ancient languages, as long as the Bible is translated with fidelity and in the fear of God.


      I quoted Psalm 139:15-18 once in a forum discussion to show how you find a description of DNA in the Bible, and one atheist responded by asking why I changed the wording around to make it look like DNA. He was reading a different translation no doubt. Here find the King James translation, where "members" makes much more sense in context than the word "days", because it refers grammatically to the word "substance". All your members were written in God's book before they were formed.


      15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, [and] curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
      16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all [my members] were written, [which] in continuance were fashioned, when [as yet there was] none of them.
      17 How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
      18 [If] I should count them, they are more in number than the sand: when I awake, I am still with thee.


      Another favorite of mine is Nahum's vision of either cars at night on a busy freeway or, taken in context, military vehicles that shoot fire out their nozzles like happened at Waco in 1993 (as shown in this clip<http://tinyurl.com/8actgkm> which is part of the documentary at <http://tinyurl.com/9jv4u4k>, the clip that NBC showed once a year later):

      3 The shield of his mighty men is made
      red, the valiant men [are] in scarlet: the chariots [shall be] with
      flaming torches in the day of his preparation, and the fir trees
      shall be terribly shaken.
      4 The chariots shall rage in the
      streets, they shall justle one against another in the broad ways:
      they shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightnings.


      But "chariots shall rage in the streets" invokes an image of traffic jams... And it's talking about context for "the day of his preparation".


      We have a FACT-based faith, based on demonstrable overwhelming sets of eyewitness accounts, history, repeatable science, and honest logic. Paul said our beliefs are NOT old wives' tales or old fables --ancient people's pagan views of the world-- but are based on the eyewitness account of more than 500 people, and his own first-person encounter, and the entire history of the Hebrew peoples, documented miracles. Of course the ones who wrote it all down are the ones who believed the evidence before them, and so we have the Creation-deniers of today saying that the Bible doesn't count simply because it was written down by the ones who experienced it, saw it and felt it personally, simply because they made the obvious conclusions.

      Prophecy was one landmark on my way from atheism to belief in Genesis One. If the Bible had no problem describing events thousands of years ahead into the future, would describing history be more difficult?






      ________________________________
      From: Chuck <chuckpc@...>
      To: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 10:19 AM
      Subject: RE: [CreationTalk] Re: The Beginning of Time


       
      You totally missed my two points be. The first being that you are making an
      over generalization about ancient people when it is quite possible that some
      of then that we have no record of may have made that break through in
      thought and were simply stifled by the society in which they lived I was not
      making any statements about the general mode of thinking. Your description
      of the general mode of thinking of post-flood ancient people is basically
      correct but it may not have been absolute, and it may not have even been
      pre-flood.

      You seem to have totally missed my main point being that God is not limited
      by the mode of thinking of the humans that wrote and originally received the
      Bible. In communicating to us, God is however limited by our language, but
      if you limit the Bible to the mode of thinking of the humans of the time it
      was written not only do you miss out on amazing evidence for divine
      inspiration but you are be risking great error.

      I under stand your claims about intrinsic change as being corruption as well
      as the fact that your entire first law bit is base on a grouse
      mistranslation and misinterpretation of II Peter 3:3-6.

      II Peter 3:3-6

      3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days

      scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

      4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for

      since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they

      were from the beginning of the creation.

      5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word

      of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing

      out of the water and in the water:

      6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed

      with water, perished:

      The reason the idea that the intrinsic properties of matter are fixed is not
      what is being referred to here is that it does not fit the entire
      description.

      Not only do you have discount over four hundred years of English
      translations and replace it with your own personal translation. By the way
      the Latin Vulgate which was translated in the 4th century (only about 300
      years after II Peter was written) backs up "beginning of the creation"
      translation of verse 4. The point is that I cam point to translation after
      translation spanning 1700 years and all you can do is point to your own
      unauthoritative translation.

      That said while idea that the intrinsic properties of matter are fixed does
      fit "all things continue as they were" to a degree, it does not mach the
      rest of the context because that is not what the scoffers are using or even
      have used to attack creation and the Genesis Flood. The principle that has
      been and is being used by scoffers to attack creation and the Genesis Flood
      is geological uniformitarianism. It fits the phase "all things continue as
      they were" perfectly while actually being used by scoffers against creation
      and the Genesis Flood.

      So the entire bases for your Changing Earth notion does not fit the text and
      your translation is clearly at odds with every other translator of last 1700
      years.

      ------ Charles Creager Jr.

      Genesis Science <http://gscim.com/> Mission

      Online <http://store.gscim.com/> Store

      Genesis <http://genesismission.4t.com/> Mission

      Creation Science Talk <http://creationsciencetalk.blogspot.com/>

      _____

      From: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of VictorM
      Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:12 PM
      To: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [CreationTalk] Re: The Beginning of Time

      >
      >
      > > No ancient person could think scientifically.
      >
      >
      >
      > Prove it! Yes ancient languages up until Greek were very poor for
      expressing
      > scientific thought, but that does not mean that out of the millions of
      > people that lived from Adam to about 300 BC that not one of them could
      think
      > scientifically. Any one who did would have had a huge problem
      communicating
      > their ideas in a language ill-equipped for it. The point is that you are
      > making an over generalization.
      >
      >
      >
      > Even if true that's not really relevant since God can supersede Human
      limits
      > such that we should not expect God to have limited his words to the mode
      of
      > thought of the ancient Israelites. What you are say is akin to the
      > accommodation theory, which I think we can both agree is a liberal
      > compromise view,
      >

      The early peoples left records which are not remarkably different from the
      Bible in some respects.

      1. They never tried to understand the universe with scientific thinking.
      They explained things with god-stories. For the Jews, Elohim created and
      managed the universe but He was good to all that He made. For the pagan,
      planet gods were responsible although they were mean-spirited and often
      fought wars with each other.

      2. With respect to history, they saw change in the very places we use
      mathematical modeling to imagine constants. All the ancients considered that
      the first generations lived in the great time. Josephus lists the historians
      of the major societies of his day and says all of them agreed that the
      earliest people lived for a thousand years. The King Lists from Mesopotamia
      showed that their earliest kings reigned for tens of thousands of years -
      compared to later kings. Job clearly mentions that the seas dried as a
      marker for the few days of their lives and their faces changed before they
      died during the dinosaur age. Yet Job lived around the time of Abraham -
      after the flood. (Dinosaurs and geological ages in few days are biblical and
      are supported by the evidence from the fossils).

      3. The Earth and the planets continued to change. The oceans were newly
      formed, according to Ovid. The planets had devastated the Earth during close
      passages when they became giants, Titans. Later generations, although they
      still feared Venus, no longer mention its horns. The Bible also mentions
      close passages and planet shatterings.

      4. The pagan Greeks tried to invent science for hundreds of years, but were
      unsuccessful because they could not find a way around the problem of
      intrinsic change, phthora. Science only arose in the Catholic west after the
      friars invented brand new ideas about being and essence. They did so because
      they were following pagan ideas about how God was changeless and existed in
      an eternal state outside of time. The Catholic idea that God created time
      was central to their doctrine of God. Yet the Bible never says these things.

      5. Only in western Europe did those who were philosophically minded build
      science on this notion that the intrinsic properties of matter are fixed,
      not emerging. Scientists think, measure and mathematicate with a first law,
      the law Peter predicted for the last days. This prophesy has come true.
      Scientists have filled the universe up with magical things to preserve their
      blind creed that the properties of matter are fixed, not continually
      emerging.

      So how could the prophets of the Bible even imagine science. The law of
      science had not been invented until westerners imagined it?

      Changing Earthers accept what is visible as real, that every atom changes as
      it ages. The visible history of the universe is the most powerful evidence
      for a literal, biblical creation, rather that a westernized interpretation.
      God is going to get great glory when He makes foolish the wisdom of this
      age, science, as He promised. How could science fail? When we fight with the
      word of God and when our obedience is complete, we will bring down the great
      fortress of speculative reasoning raised up against the knowledge of God.

      http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2cor10:3-6
      <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2cor10:3-6&version=NASB>
      &version=NASB

      I recommend to you the ancient way of thinking used by the biblical
      prophets, which Changing Earthers try to follow, instead of tailoring the
      Bible to fit western science.

      Victor

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 10 messages in this topic