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

intrinsic change

Expand Messages
  • Chuck
    Victor it is clear that intrinsic change to matter is central to your entire Changing Earth Creation idea. In a final attempt to understand what you are saying
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 24, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Victor it is clear that intrinsic change to matter is central to your entire
      Changing Earth Creation idea. In a final attempt to understand what you are
      saying could you please tell me what exactly about matter do you consider to
      be changing. You've mentioned the nature of its being but that does not make
      any real sense. The type of stuff you refer to would require changes in many
      properties of matter. For example you claim that the Earth orbited closer to
      the sun in the past but yet its year was longer such that while measuring
      6,000 years, it would be the equivalent of 4.5 billion years or mote. Since
      orbital periods get shorter the closer you get to the sun to accomplish this
      you would have to reduce gravity by a factor of over a million, this would
      reduce Earth's escape velocity to less than 0.44 inches per second and the
      sun's to less than 1.6 inches per second which any human could achieve by
      something as small as sneeze, So it seems that the first time Adam or Eve
      sneezed they would have gone flying out into space. Yes I'm using today's
      units but you have given nothing else to work with.



      Please just explain it if you can. Do not include any of your personal
      interpretations of the Bible or claimed observations just a strait forward
      explanation of what you mean by intrinsic change and what you think is
      actually changing. One reason you idea comes across a nonsense is that you
      have been very vague on this.





      ------ Charles Creager Jr.

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

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

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

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





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • VictorM
      ... The Apostle Paul argued that the creation is enslaved to change in Romans 8:19 - 22. Paul used the word gar at the beginning of verse 19, 22 and 22. It
      Message 2 of 3 , Sep 25, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck" <chuckpc@...> wrote:
        >
        > Victor it is clear that intrinsic change to matter is central to your entire
        > Changing Earth Creation idea. In a final attempt to understand what you are
        > saying could you please tell me what exactly about matter do you consider to
        > be changing.

        The Apostle Paul argued that the creation is enslaved to change in Romans 8:19 - 22. Paul used the word gar at the beginning of verse 19, 22 and 22. It means truly, especially the causal reason for something. Paul uses the word creation four times in four verses. In verse 22 he explains this as the whole creation is right now in bondage to corruption.

        In verse 20 Paul twice uses the verbs hupotasso - to place under in an orderly fashion. Polybius used hupotasso for troops that obey their generals in an disciplined fashion. At some unspecified point God commanded the creation to passively degenerate. God did not actively ruin His creation. He cursed the ground and the animals with a passive curse.

        The second hupotasso verb is an active participle. The creation obeyed in an orderly manner by actively degenerating itself.
        Does this text mean that matter is actively corrupting itself in an orderly manner? Origen, a Greek speaking Christian who wrote extensively 250 years after Christ, understood this as qualitative changes in all things. In the context of physics, phthora is change in the direction of ruin that comes from within.

        In verse 22 Paul uses two Greek together verbs to illustrate how this internal corruption works. The whole creation groans together. If you lived in Jerusalem in 70 AD, all the inhabitants would groan together. Each individual in the city would experience the horror of a Roman siege - the hunger, the disease, the engines destroying the walls and the mahem within the city. Every individual would experience the pillage, rape and slavery after the final assault.

        The second together verb is together pains used of childbirth where muscle contractions and many complex hormonal changes act in an orderly sequence. Both together verbs are present active - showing that the ENTIRE creation creation is acting in a together manner right now.

        By the way the Second law interpretation is contradicted in at least three ways by the text itself.


        > You've mentioned the nature of its being but that does not make
        > any real sense. The type of stuff you refer to would require changes in many
        > properties of matter. For example you claim that the Earth orbited closer to
        > the sun in the past but yet its year was longer such that while measuring
        > 6,000 years, it would be the equivalent of 4.5 billion years or mote. Since
        > orbital periods get shorter the closer you get to the sun to accomplish this
        > you would have to reduce gravity by a factor of over a million, this would
        > reduce Earth's escape velocity to less than 0.44 inches per second and the
        > sun's to less than 1.6 inches per second which any human could achieve by
        > something as small as sneeze, So it seems that the first time Adam or Eve
        > sneezed they would have gone flying out into space. Yes I'm using today's
        > units but you have given nothing else to work with.
        >
        >

        Epistemology is not just the study of knowledge, but to question its historical basis.

        Western science came about when the Catholic friars adapted the system of the pagan Aristotle to fit their religion. Thomas came up with a new idea which he developed from Latin verbs. He imagined that everything can change in many ways, as Aristotle agreed. However, since the Catholic notion of God is that He is changeless, then the being or essence of things must have come from the changeless God. Eventually the Catholics regarded this as the essence of substance is changeless. They accepted that everything can change - but what a thing is - its intrinsic nature - its essence - came from God and therefore cannot change unless the substance is destroyed and ceases to be. That idea eventually became the foundational basis for western science. Peter calls it a first law - arche ktiseous of the last days. Tens of thousands of Christian children go to school today learning to think with this first law. Most of them have serious problems with the age of the universe when they get out into the world, primarily because they are trying to understand the creation with the very first law that the Bible predicted will be used to obfuscate the age of the plural heavens.

        You are trying to understand the universe with symbolical representations of reality, mathematical notions that were contrived with the "first law" of science.

        1. Time has no existence, never has and never will, either for God or man. Humans use a mental framework we call time to regulate our lives and write our histories. God also references things to our time framework, but time has no actuality - it is only in our mind as the wisest man, Solomon, explained. Scientists live in a world of symbols in which they scale their CONCEPT of time (based on the notion that atoms are perpetual motion engines) into tens of thousands of "empirical" measuring units and mathematical "constants". Mass, energy and time have no actuality. We only observe massive objects and faster or slower processes, but there are no fixed references anywhere in the whole universe. Everything is observed to changing in an orderly manner as the Apostle Paul stated.

        2. Once you question the first law, you can examine the universe using light, instead of symbolical representations of reality. What we observe is exactly what the Bible states. We see that orbits always accelerate, relative to the previous orientation of bodies. We observe how every atom accelerates its clock rate in an orderly manner, relative to its previous clock-rate. We observe how the Earth continues to grow in size along a great expansion seam, exactly as the Bible states three times. We observe how the stars came out as billions of galaxies grew into huge growth spirals as the space matter takes up, its inertial properties and its atomic clock rates all change together. That is known as relational change, together change, change that happens in parallel in an orderly together manner.

        You cannot get to Changing Earth Creation while standing on the first law of science. You cannot adapt the Bible to fit science. Tens of thousand have tried for a few centuries now. The more they have tailored the Bible to fit the western system, the more excuses they give for people not to believe the Bible. Why? Your standard of truth is science, which was built on a first law, the very idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last days.


        TO understand creation and earth history biblically.

        1. First things come first and you must examine the elementary basis for science as Peter said - know this first.

        2. You must accept the Bible authoritatively with respect to creation and earth history, as the ancients would have understood it. You must become a fool in order to become wise. In fact He warns us that if we seek to be wise in THIS AGE, we will deceive ourselves because He is taking the wise with their own skills (1 Cor 3).

        3. The triumph of the word of God over science is not far off. It will result in enormous persecution. It is not a minor thing to make the greatest form of reasoning the world has ever known - foolish. However, God will get great glory when HE wipes science off the face of the Earth. Future generations, during the millennium, will thank God that the world is no longer being destroyed by scientists and technologists. God will prove once again that man cannot come to Him through his own wisdom. People will read Daniel chapter 2 and notice the past was destroyed with the present because the heritage passed down from those pagan kingdoms (the western system). Our world will be ashes under their feet as every man lives in an agricultural setting, under his vine and fig tree. They will rejoice in the Savior who not only saved them from sin but redeemed the earth and destroyed the destroyers of the Earth.

        There is not a single verse in the Bible that requires a scientific mindset to understand it as an ancient person would. In fact, they could not think scientifically because the Catholic friars had not yet "solved" the problem of matter changing itself with their ideas about being and essence. There is no being or essence visible anywhere in the universe. All we observe is everything changing in an orderly manner, which is what Change Earth Creationist accept.

        Victor

        > Please just explain it if you can. Do not include any of your personal
        > interpretations of the Bible or claimed observations just a strait forward
        > explanation of what you mean by intrinsic change and what you think is
        > actually changing. One reason you idea comes across a nonsense is that you
        > have been very vague on this.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------ Charles Creager Jr.
        >
      • Chuck
        From: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of VictorM Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 1:47 PM To:
        Message 3 of 3 , Sep 26, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          From: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com] On
          Behalf Of VictorM
          Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 1:47 PM
          To: CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [CreationTalk] Re: intrinsic change

          >--- In CreationTalk@yahoogroups.com <mailto:CreationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>
          , "Chuck" <chuckpc@...> wrote:
          >>
          >> Victor it is clear that intrinsic change to matter is central to
          >> your entire Changing Earth Creation idea. In a final attempt
          >> to understand what you are saying could you please tell me
          >> what exactly about matter do you consider to be changing.
          >
          > The Apostle Paul argued that the creation is enslaved to
          > change in Romans 8:19 - 22. Paul used the word gar at the
          >beginning of verse 19, 22 and 22. It means truly, especially
          > the causal reason for something. Paul uses the word creation
          > four times in four verses. In verse 22 he explains this as the
          > whole creation is right now in bondage to corruption.
          >
          > In verse 20 Paul twice uses the verbs hupotasso - to place
          > under in an orderly fashion. Polybius used hupotasso for
          > troops that obey their generals in an disciplined fashion.
          > At some unspecified point God commanded the creation
          > to passively degenerate. God did not actively ruin His
          > creation. He cursed the ground and the animals with a
          > passive curse.
          >
          > The second hupotasso verb is an active participle. The creation
          > obeyed in an orderly manner by actively degenerating itself.
          > Does this text mean that matter is actively corrupting itself in
          > an orderly manner? Origen, a Greek speaking Christian who
          > wrote extensively 250 years after Christ, understood this as
          > qualitative changes in all things. In the context of physics,
          > phthora is change in the direction of ruin that comes from within.
          >
          > In verse 22 Paul uses two Greek together verbs to illustrate how
          > this internal corruption works. The whole creation groans together.
          > If you lived in Jerusalem in 70 AD, all the inhabitants would groan
          > together. Each individual in the city would experience the horror
          > of a Roman siege - the hunger, the disease, the engines destroying
          > the walls and the mahem within the city. Every individual would
          > experience the pillage, rape and slavery after the final assault.
          >
          > The second together verb is together pains used of childbirth
          > where muscle contractions and many complex hormonal changes
          > act in an orderly sequence. Both together verbs are present active
          > - showing that the ENTIRE creation creation is acting in a together
          > manner right now.
          >
          > By the way the Second law interpretation is contradicted in at least
          > three ways by the text itself.



          OK, so the intrinsic change to matter you are talking about is corruption or
          degeneration. Fine but that does not explain anything else you are claiming.
          It does not explain how you can have smaller orbits with longer periods.

          That said the key point in your entire comment is that creation is actively
          degenerating itself in an orderly manner. This is actually consistent with a
          thermodynamic description of the observed degeneration (corruption) of the
          universe. You mentioned the second law of thermodynamics but that is only
          part of the picture because it does not describe what it actually going on.
          However I recently had a paper published in the Creation Research Society
          Quarterly called Entropy and Applied Energy that presents a thermodynamic
          principle that does a far better job of describing this degeneration.

          See reprint of Entropy and Applied Energy here
          http://tinyurl.com/Entropy-Energy

          When this principle is applied to the observed degeneration of the universe,
          the observed degeneration is shown to come from the random motion of
          molecules resulting from heat. This random molecular motion is present in
          every thing and over time causes everything to disintegrate. Thus every
          object in the universe can be said to be actively corrupting itself. The
          energy for the process comes from heat energy absorbed from the rest of the
          universes the random molecular motion of which can accurately be described
          as the entire creation actively corrupting itself in an orderly manner. The
          reason why I can call it an orderly manner is that I can describe what is
          happening mathematically which requires a degree of order.

          >> You've mentioned the nature of its being but that does not
          >> make any real sense. The type of stuff you refer to would
          >> require changes in many properties of matter. For example
          >> you claim that the Earth orbited closer to the sun in the
          >> past but yet its year was longer such that while measuring
          >> 6,000 years, it would be the equivalent of 4.5 billion years
          >> or more. Since orbital periods get shorter the closer you get
          >> to the sun to accomplish this you would have to reduce
          >> gravity by a factor of over a million, this would reduce
          >> Earth's escape velocity to less than 0.44 inches per second
          >> and the sun's to less than 1.6 inches per second which any
          >> human could achieve by something as small as sneeze, So
          >> it seems that the first time Adam or Eve sneezed they
          >> would have gone flying out into space. Yes I'm using
          >> today's units but you have given nothing else to work with.
          >
          > You are trying to understand the universe with symbolical
          > representations of reality, mathematical notions that were
          > contrived with the "first law" of science.

          That first law of science would actually be that the universe is
          understandable and not you so called first law derived only from your
          erroneous and unauthoritative translation of II Peter 3:4.

          Actually what I have been trying to do in this case is understand what you
          are trying to say but you seem to be incapable of putting it into terms that
          make any real sense. I think I now understand why, I was trying to find a
          rational description of a concept that is inherently irrational. If your
          notions of intrinsic change were valid they would still have to produce a
          viable reality. To produce a viable reality what changes has to change in a
          manner that objectively fits with observable data however you refuse to
          present any description (clearly by design) of what is going on that would
          allow objective fits with observable data.

          You are correct that to adopt a changing earth creation position requires
          abandoning the first law of science, but that it is not the law you claim as
          such. The first law of science that adopting a changing earth creation
          position requires one to abandon is the idea that the universe is rationally
          understandable place. You have resort to a notion that explains nothing,
          describes noting, and predicts nothing.

          I finally do fully understand your changing earth creation position. It is
          clearly a position of cowardly retreat from having to actually deal with the
          attacks being leveled against Biblical Christianity and Biblical Creation,
          since it is deliberately immune from objective scrutiny, and allows you to
          pigeon hole any observation that contradicts it as resulting from your so
          called first law. That is why I can show you page after pager of data that
          totally contradicts your claims but yet you keep repeating those same claims
          as if that data did not exist. That is also why you can not present an
          understandable concept to those us who see the universe as rationally
          understandable place.





          ------ 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/>





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