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

CEC goals

Expand Messages
  • Victor McAllister
    Changing Earth interpretations of creation and natural history are radically different from those of other creationists. From a modern perspective, Changing
    Message 1 of 4 , Jul 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Changing Earth interpretations of creation and natural history are
      radically different from those of other creationists. From a modern
      perspective, Changing Earth is foolishness. From the perspective of a
      biblical prophet, a scientific understanding of creation would also seem
      foolish. There is not a single verse in the Bible that would have been
      understood by a contemporary in a scientific sense. We, on the other hand,
      learned to reason scientifically so it seems natural to us to interpret
      creation with science. Tailoring the Bible to fit science, even though
      unintended, has resulted in enormous problems, especially with respect to
      the age of the universe. CEC methods are hermeneutic.

      The CEC aim is that ordinary people can be set free from scientific myths
      about beginnings. Our weapon is the Word of God and we often attempt to
      support the text with the only history that is visible as it happened,
      galactic history. The most powerful evidence for creation is that it
      happened as Genesis states. We observe with telescopes how the stars
      continued to come and spread out from originally tohu bohu point sources.
      Billions of galaxies grew into huge, local growth spirals. What is visible
      contradicts every law of science.

      We do not claim to be wise. We believe the Bible means it when it commands
      us not be wise in this age, but rather to accept foolishness if we want to
      be wise. Why? He is taking the wise with their own skills. We anticipate
      that God can use us to bring down the great fortress of mathematical
      reasoning, science itself (2 Corinthians 10:3 - 6) for His great glory.

      Don�t you realize you are offending creation scientists with Changing Earth
      claims? This is unintended. We are going after the enemy, not fellow
      believers. If are standing with them, you likely will be offended.
      Creationist attempts to interpret the Bible with science have brought many,
      even those raised in Christian homes, to reject the Bible. Our methods are
      scriptural. If you have faith as a mustard seed speak to this mountain, Be
      taken up and cast into the sea, it will happen. Notice it does not say
      speak to yourself. I am speaking to the great Western tree, under whose
      branches all people on earth shelter, that it might be uprooted. The Bible
      tells us how the humanist world order will end and only the western system
      fits the great image of Daniel 2. All of those kingdoms will be destroyed
      at once when Jesus comes to reign. Our goals are limited. We are not trying
      to start a war. We only seek to expose the world's way of reasoning so that
      ordinary people can understand creation in a simple manner. So I speak to
      the mountain, to expose its first principle.

      The fundamental principle of western science is the notion that the essence
      of substance is changeless, that matter is not continually changing itself
      relationally as it ages. The Bible predicted the first law (arche ktiseous)
      of the last-days mockers. Peter predicted that the mockers will obfuscate
      the age of the plural heavens and earth�s watery past with their idea that
      all things remain the same. This prophesy has come true since scientists
      are doing the very things the Bible predicted with the very law Peter
      predicted.

      The evolutionists have invented a universe crammed full of invisible
      things. They imagine that the vacuum of spacetime is stretching all light
      passing through the void. They envision the vacuum spreading itself,
      pushing galaxies (that are stationary with respect to local space) to
      almost the speed of light. They speculate that four times as much invisible
      matter exists as the natural, visible kind. They claim a tiny bit of vacuum
      exploded and created everything out of nothing. Their universe is populated
      with all sorts of unsupported myths that contradict the visible evidence,
      such as black holes and the accretion of stars from dust. Why do they make
      all these unsupported claims. Even their definitions, their empirical
      measuring units and their methods largely rely on the first law of all
      scientists - the notion that todays atoms are the same as yesterdays. In my
      experience, evolutionist have no answer when you explain to them that they
      are reasoning with a first law.

      Changing Earth Creation is an attempt to interpret the Bible as the
      ancients understood reality. For example, the Bible states three times
      that the earth spreads out in unbroken continuity, this spreading happens
      above the waters and that even what issues from the earth spreads. A global
      expansion seam runs through every ocean. The continents only fit together
      on a tiny globe without major seas. Ever wonder why it didn�t rain during
      the garden phase? The youngest ocean floor is near the expansion seam and
      the oldest adjacent to the continents. So why is it foolish to believe the
      Bible when it is supported by simple, visible evidence? Carefully consider
      the first law of science. When you deny this assumption, you are well on
      your way to understanding creation like the ancients did and like Changing
      Earth hope to do.

      Victor


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • jimmay@iname.com
      “CEC methods are hermeneutic.” Victor, what does that mean? All methods of interpreting Genesis are based on a certain method of hermeneutics. So, yes, CEC
      Message 2 of 4 , Jul 12, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        “CEC methods are hermeneutic.”

        Victor, what does that mean? All methods of interpreting Genesis are based on a certain method of hermeneutics. So, yes, CEC methods are too, but that doesn’t make them right. I accept that is your view of the proper hermeneutic, but I still vote for the grammatical historical method of hermeneutic as the most reliable for the Bible. CEC methods are modern methods that have not been used in the past for the most part and they go against the traditional interpretation of the Jews and early Church which make them suspect in my mind.

        “The most powerful evidence for creation is that it happened as Genesis states.”

        You mean “we think it happened according to our interpretation of Genesis.” Creationists think it happened differently than you think.

        “We anticipate that God can use us to bring down the great fortress of mathematical reasoning, science itself (2 Corinthians 10:3 - 6) for His great glory.”

        What do you mean by science? Historical science that deals with events in the unobservable past or regular operational science that we can observe, repeat, and verify with our own eyes? God is not opposed to true science. Science is a gift from God and I think He expects us to use science to learn about the world and solve problems. But I don’t think He expects us to elevate science over His Word.

        “Creationist attempts to interpret the Bible with science have brought many, even those raised in Christian homes, to reject the Bible.”

        You are probably right, but at the same time, it has brought many into the family of God as well. I’m sure CEC will have the same effect on people. Some it will drive away and it may even convince some to believe, although personally, I think it will do more driving away than recruiting for the kingdom.

        “Changing Earth Creation is an attempt to interpret the Bible as the
        ancients understood reality.”

        Sounds great, but I think the goal should be to interpret the Bible as God intends us to understand it. It seems to me you can use that idea to make the Bible say almost whatever you want it to say. Your interpretation of Genesis violates the laws of Hebrew grammar and the plain meaning of the words, which is the obvious way that people of all ages would have and did interpret it. This is a problem for the CEC view in my mind. Obviously there is much about CEC that I do not understand. I don’t understand your idea of the first principle or first law. I don’t understand your insistence that everything changes. I think you are reading that idea into Peter’s letter. Peter is obviously saying that things continued the same from creation until now meaning no creation and no global flood. I doubt he was talking about the stability of particles. But whatever, again, I give you an “A” for creativity, effort, and passion!

        jim

        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Victor McAllister
        > Sent: 07/04/12 07:49 AM
        > To: creationtalk
        > Subject: [CreationTalk] CEC goals
        >
        > Changing Earth interpretations of creation and natural history are
        > radically different from those of other creationists. From a modern
        > perspective, Changing Earth is foolishness. From the perspective of a
        > biblical prophet, a scientific understanding of creation would also seem
        > foolish. There is not a single verse in the Bible that would have been
        > understood by a contemporary in a scientific sense. We, on the other hand,
        > learned to reason scientifically so it seems natural to us to interpret
        > creation with science. Tailoring the Bible to fit science, even though
        > unintended, has resulted in enormous problems, especially with respect to
        > the age of the universe. CEC methods are hermeneutic.
        >
        > The CEC aim is that ordinary people can be set free from scientific myths
        > about beginnings. Our weapon is the Word of God and we often attempt to
        > support the text with the only history that is visible as it happened,
        > galactic history. The most powerful evidence for creation is that it
        > happened as Genesis states. We observe with telescopes how the stars
        > continued to come and spread out from originally tohu bohu point sources.
        > Billions of galaxies grew into huge, local growth spirals. What is visible
        > contradicts every law of science.
        >
        > We do not claim to be wise. We believe the Bible means it when it commands
        > us not be wise in this age, but rather to accept foolishness if we want to
        > be wise. Why? He is taking the wise with their own skills. We anticipate
        > that God can use us to bring down the great fortress of mathematical
        > reasoning, science itself (2 Corinthians 10:3 - 6) for His great glory.
        >
        > Don’t you realize you are offending creation scientists with Changing Earth
        > claims? This is unintended. We are going after the enemy, not fellow
        > believers. If are standing with them, you likely will be offended.
        > Creationist attempts to interpret the Bible with science have brought many,
        > even those raised in Christian homes, to reject the Bible. Our methods are
        > scriptural. If you have faith as a mustard seed speak to this mountain, Be
        > taken up and cast into the sea, it will happen. Notice it does not say
        > speak to yourself. I am speaking to the great Western tree, under whose
        > branches all people on earth shelter, that it might be uprooted. The Bible
        > tells us how the humanist world order will end and only the western system
        > fits the great image of Daniel 2. All of those kingdoms will be destroyed
        > at once when Jesus comes to reign. Our goals are limited. We are not trying
        > to start a war. We only seek to expose the world's way of reasoning so that
        > ordinary people can understand creation in a simple manner. So I speak to
        > the mountain, to expose its first principle.
        >
        > The fundamental principle of western science is the notion that the essence
        > of substance is changeless, that matter is not continually changing itself
        > relationally as it ages. The Bible predicted the first law (arche ktiseous)
        > of the last-days mockers. Peter predicted that the mockers will obfuscate
        > the age of the plural heavens and earth’s watery past with their idea that
        > all things remain the same. This prophesy has come true since scientists
        > are doing the very things the Bible predicted with the very law Peter
        > predicted.
        >
        > The evolutionists have invented a universe crammed full of invisible
        > things. They imagine that the vacuum of spacetime is stretching all light
        > passing through the void. They envision the vacuum spreading itself,
        > pushing galaxies (that are stationary with respect to local space) to
        > almost the speed of light. They speculate that four times as much invisible
        > matter exists as the natural, visible kind. They claim a tiny bit of vacuum
        > exploded and created everything out of nothing. Their universe is populated
        > with all sorts of unsupported myths that contradict the visible evidence,
        > such as black holes and the accretion of stars from dust. Why do they make
        > all these unsupported claims. Even their definitions, their empirical
        > measuring units and their methods largely rely on the first law of all
        > scientists - the notion that todays atoms are the same as yesterdays. In my
        > experience, evolutionist have no answer when you explain to them that they
        > are reasoning with a first law.
        >
        > Changing Earth Creation is an attempt to interpret the Bible as the
        > ancients understood reality. For example, the Bible states three times
        > that the earth spreads out in unbroken continuity, this spreading happens
        > above the waters and that even what issues from the earth spreads. A global
        > expansion seam runs through every ocean. The continents only fit together
        > on a tiny globe without major seas. Ever wonder why it didn’t rain during
        > the garden phase? The youngest ocean floor is near the expansion seam and
        > the oldest adjacent to the continents. So why is it foolish to believe the
        > Bible when it is supported by simple, visible evidence? Carefully consider
        > the first law of science. When you deny this assumption, you are well on
        > your way to understanding creation like the ancients did and like Changing
        > Earth hope to do.
        >
        > Victor
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > ============================================
        > CreationTalk email listserv
        > Northwest Creation Network http://nwcreation.net/
        > CreationWiki http://creationwiki.org/
        > ============================================Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      • jimmay@iname.com
        Victor, how many of you Changing Earth Creationists exist on this planet? Just curious. Is there some kind of an official website for CECs? Jim
        Message 3 of 4 , Jul 12, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Victor, how many of you Changing Earth Creationists exist on this planet?

          Just curious.

          Is there some kind of an official website for CECs?

          Jim

          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: Victor McAllister
          > Sent: 07/04/12 07:49 AM
          > To: creationtalk
          > Subject: [CreationTalk] CEC goals
          >
          > Changing Earth interpretations of creation and natural history are
          > radically different from those of other creationists. From a modern
          > perspective, Changing Earth is foolishness. From the perspective of a
          > biblical prophet, a scientific understanding of creation would also seem
          > foolish. There is not a single verse in the Bible that would have been
          > understood by a contemporary in a scientific sense. We, on the other hand,
          > learned to reason scientifically so it seems natural to us to interpret
          > creation with science. Tailoring the Bible to fit science, even though
          > unintended, has resulted in enormous problems, especially with respect to
          > the age of the universe. CEC methods are hermeneutic.
          >
          > The CEC aim is that ordinary people can be set free from scientific myths
          > about beginnings. Our weapon is the Word of God and we often attempt to
          > support the text with the only history that is visible as it happened,
          > galactic history. The most powerful evidence for creation is that it
          > happened as Genesis states. We observe with telescopes how the stars
          > continued to come and spread out from originally tohu bohu point sources.
          > Billions of galaxies grew into huge, local growth spirals. What is visible
          > contradicts every law of science.
          >
          > We do not claim to be wise. We believe the Bible means it when it commands
          > us not be wise in this age, but rather to accept foolishness if we want to
          > be wise. Why? He is taking the wise with their own skills. We anticipate
          > that God can use us to bring down the great fortress of mathematical
          > reasoning, science itself (2 Corinthians 10:3 - 6) for His great glory.
          >
          > Don’t you realize you are offending creation scientists with Changing Earth
          > claims? This is unintended. We are going after the enemy, not fellow
          > believers. If are standing with them, you likely will be offended.
          > Creationist attempts to interpret the Bible with science have brought many,
          > even those raised in Christian homes, to reject the Bible. Our methods are
          > scriptural. If you have faith as a mustard seed speak to this mountain, Be
          > taken up and cast into the sea, it will happen. Notice it does not say
          > speak to yourself. I am speaking to the great Western tree, under whose
          > branches all people on earth shelter, that it might be uprooted. The Bible
          > tells us how the humanist world order will end and only the western system
          > fits the great image of Daniel 2. All of those kingdoms will be destroyed
          > at once when Jesus comes to reign. Our goals are limited. We are not trying
          > to start a war. We only seek to expose the world's way of reasoning so that
          > ordinary people can understand creation in a simple manner. So I speak to
          > the mountain, to expose its first principle.
          >
          > The fundamental principle of western science is the notion that the essence
          > of substance is changeless, that matter is not continually changing itself
          > relationally as it ages. The Bible predicted the first law (arche ktiseous)
          > of the last-days mockers. Peter predicted that the mockers will obfuscate
          > the age of the plural heavens and earth’s watery past with their idea that
          > all things remain the same. This prophesy has come true since scientists
          > are doing the very things the Bible predicted with the very law Peter
          > predicted.
          >
          > The evolutionists have invented a universe crammed full of invisible
          > things. They imagine that the vacuum of spacetime is stretching all light
          > passing through the void. They envision the vacuum spreading itself,
          > pushing galaxies (that are stationary with respect to local space) to
          > almost the speed of light. They speculate that four times as much invisible
          > matter exists as the natural, visible kind. They claim a tiny bit of vacuum
          > exploded and created everything out of nothing. Their universe is populated
          > with all sorts of unsupported myths that contradict the visible evidence,
          > such as black holes and the accretion of stars from dust. Why do they make
          > all these unsupported claims. Even their definitions, their empirical
          > measuring units and their methods largely rely on the first law of all
          > scientists - the notion that todays atoms are the same as yesterdays. In my
          > experience, evolutionist have no answer when you explain to them that they
          > are reasoning with a first law.
          >
          > Changing Earth Creation is an attempt to interpret the Bible as the
          > ancients understood reality. For example, the Bible states three times
          > that the earth spreads out in unbroken continuity, this spreading happens
          > above the waters and that even what issues from the earth spreads. A global
          > expansion seam runs through every ocean. The continents only fit together
          > on a tiny globe without major seas. Ever wonder why it didn’t rain during
          > the garden phase? The youngest ocean floor is near the expansion seam and
          > the oldest adjacent to the continents. So why is it foolish to believe the
          > Bible when it is supported by simple, visible evidence? Carefully consider
          > the first law of science. When you deny this assumption, you are well on
          > your way to understanding creation like the ancients did and like Changing
          > Earth hope to do.
          >
          > Victor
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > ============================================
          > CreationTalk email listserv
          > Northwest Creation Network http://nwcreation.net/
          > CreationWiki http://creationwiki.org/
          > ============================================Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
        • Victor McAllister
          ... We can see the creation with sight, how the stars formed and came out after the plural heavens were created. We actually see the creation of the universe.
          Message 4 of 4 , Jul 13, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:22 AM, <jimmay@...> wrote:

            > **
            >
            >
            > �CEC methods are hermeneutic.�
            >
            > Victor, what does that mean? All methods of interpreting Genesis are based
            > on a certain method of hermeneutics. So, yes, CEC methods are too, but that
            > doesn�t make them right. I accept that is your view of the proper
            > hermeneutic, but I still vote for the grammatical historical method of
            > hermeneutic as the most reliable for the Bible. CEC methods are modern
            > methods that have not been used in the past for the most part and they go
            > against the traditional interpretation of the Jews and early Church which
            > make them suspect in my mind.
            >
            > �The most powerful evidence for creation is that it happened as Genesis
            > states.�
            >
            > You mean �we think it happened according to our interpretation of
            > Genesis.� Creationists think it happened differently than you think.
            >
            >
            We can see the creation with sight, how the stars formed and came out after
            the plural heavens were created. We actually see the creation of the
            universe. No scientists, creationist or evolutionist, can believe what is
            visible because it is a violation of the creed upon which science was
            founded.

            �We anticipate that God can use us to bring down the great fortress of
            mathematical reasoning, science itself (2 Corinthians 10:3 - 6) for His
            great glory.�

            >
            > What do you mean by science? Historical science that deals with events in
            > the unobservable past or regular operational science that we can observe,
            > repeat, and verify with our own eyes? God is not opposed to true science.
            > Science is a gift from God and I think He expects us to use science to
            > learn about the world and solve problems. But I don�t think He expects us
            > to elevate science over His Word.
            >
            > There are two kinds of science. We can observe relations in nature, bird,
            bees, butterflies etc. This kind of science does not require formal
            training. In this sense, Solomon was a scientists since he he spoke of
            trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that
            springeth out of the wall; he spoke also of beasts, and of fowl, and of
            creeping things, and of fishes. 1Kings 4:34 Adam practiced this kind of
            science on the sixth day.

            The second kind of science is philosophy based. All versions of
            philosophical science are structured. They have a foundation - elementary
            assumption - and the system is built upon that first principle. Every
            attempt to tailor the Bible to fit philosophy has always ended in nonsense.

            More than a fifteen hundred years ago, there were many competing versions
            of philosophical science, each with its own first principle. Proclus did a
            study of first principles. In fact He wrote a commentary on Euclid's
            Stoicheia - which is one of the words that means first principle. We call
            Euclid's book Elements - but elements also means very basic things. What he
            noticed was that each of the schools of philosophy had a version of science
            based on a different first principle. However, they never talked about
            their first principles. They just assumed them and blindly went about doing
            their own versions of science with their versions of a first principle.
            This was a thousand years after the first Greek philosophers debated first
            principles for generations. Something must have happened between the early
            philosophers who talked about first principles and the latter ones who just
            assumed them.

            Here is Proclus' observations. Different sciences "have little to do with
            each other since they start from different first principles. . . . No
            science demonstrates it own first principles or presents a reason for them;
            rather each holds them as self-evident. The science knows them through
            themselves, and the later propositions through them . . . Whoever throws
            into the same pot his principles and their consequences disarranges his
            understanding completely by mixing up things that do not belong together.
            For a principle and what follows from it are by nature different from each
            other."

            Today children learn to think, measure and mathematicate with a first
            principle that they never question. Yet the Bible cuts right to the heart
            of the issue by predicting the arche ktiseous - the first law - of the
            mockers of the last days. What is their first law? Peter said they will
            obfuscate the history of the age of the plural heavens - that they came out
            long ago and earths watery history with their idea that all things remain
            the same.

            Please notice that the Bible exposes the historical principle upon which
            western science was founded, The notion that all things remain the same
            (that matter is not changing itself) is the first law of all modern
            scientists.

            �Creationist attempts to interpret the Bible with science have brought
            many, even those raised in Christian homes, to reject the Bible.�

            >
            > You are probably right, but at the same time, it has brought many into the
            > family of God as well. I�m sure CEC will have the same effect on people.
            > Some it will drive away and it may even convince some to believe, although
            > personally, I think it will do more driving away than recruiting for the
            > kingdom.
            >
            >
            People cannot be convinced with logic, science, music or culture to
            believe. We can only come as sinners with nothing but our sin and
            dependence on the sacrifice of Jesus who paid for our sin. (I Corinthians
            chapter 1).


            > �Changing Earth Creation is an attempt to interpret the Bible as the
            > ancients understood reality.�
            >
            > Sounds great, but I think the goal should be to interpret the Bible as God
            > intends us to understand it. It seems to me you can use that idea to make
            > the Bible say almost whatever you want it to say. Your interpretation of
            > Genesis violates the laws of Hebrew grammar and the plain meaning of the
            > words, which is the obvious way that people of all ages would have and did
            > interpret it. This is a problem for the CEC view in my mind. Obviously
            > there is much about CEC that I do not understand. I don�t understand your
            > idea of the first principle or first law. I don�t understand your
            > insistence that everything changes. I think you are reading that idea into
            > Peter�s letter. Peter is obviously saying that things continued the same
            > from creation until now meaning no creation and no global flood. I doubt he
            > was talking about the stability of particles. But whatever, again, I give
            > you an �A� for creativity, effort, and passion!
            >
            > jim
            >
            >
            Hebrew had no verb tenses nor could any ancient person imagine time like
            westerners do. So why do we insist on using modern ideas about time and
            modern grammar to tailor the Bible to fit science? Moses could no more
            have intended a scientific understanding of creation than he could have
            explained the use of a cell phone. Cell phones did not exist, nor did
            western science - because the foundational assumption upon which science
            was contrived was not invented by Catholic friars until more than 2500
            years after Moses.

            Scientists actually measure empirical things that are not even actual. They
            use time as the prime measuring unit and scale thousands of other
            mathematical constants and empirical units from their concept of time. Yet
            every atomic clock in billions of ancient galaxies is clocking a different
            frequency than modern atoms.

            Victor


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.