/ Forside / Interesser / Andre interesser / Religion / Nyhedsindlæg
Login
Glemt dit kodeord?
Brugernavn

Kodeord


Reklame
Top 10 brugere
Religion
#NavnPoint
mblm 1770
summer 1170
ans 1142
JanneP 1010
e.p. 880
Rellom 850
Teil 728
refi 645
o.v.n. 630
10  molokyle 587
Dr. Don K. Hotie, founder of YECCH
Fra : Mr. D


Dato : 05-07-01 21:07

Dr. Don K. Hotie, founder of YECCH har udfærdiget et par svar eller tre,
som ungjordskreationister kan fyre af over for evolutionister. Jeg ved
ikke hvor sjove de er, men her er de i hvert fald. Linken er:

http://www.swordandspirit.com/YECCH/index2.html

Mr. D


GODLESS EVOLUTIONIST: A belief in an old universe or Earth doesn't
contradict the Bible.
YOUR ANSWER: The heck it doesn't! [good one!]

GE: There have to be more important spiritual issues than how old the
earth is, right?
YOU: I agree!
GE: Great!
YOU: Like how big the Flood was!!!

GE: You know, you refer to me as a godless evolutionist, but I believe
in Jesus as my Lord and Savior.
YOU: Uhhh, I don't think so. Do you believe in death before Adam?
GE: Yes, but...
YOU: Then you may have a head knowledge of Jesus, but not a heart
knowledge. You need to repent, godless evolutionist!

GE: Do you know of all the reputable Christian Hebrew scholars and
theologians and pastors and teachers who believe in an old universe?
YOU: In the last days, even the elect will be deceived.

GE: If the light was "put" between us and the distant stars, then nearly
all of the universe that we see is an illusion and the God of the Bible
is rather deceiving, wouldn't you say?
YOU: But He's the Perfect Deceiver!

GE: The Hebrew word for "day" has several meanings, one of which is "a
long period of time."
YOU: Are you a Hebrew scholar?
GE: Uhhh... no.
YOU: Then you should keep quiet.

GE: I don't see how can you have "morning" and "evening" and "day" for
the first few "days" when the sun isn't present until the fourth "day"?
YOU: God was their light and you must believe it or perish.

GE: According to you the sun was created after the plants, on the fourth
day. But plants need light to survive.
YOU: Hello!!! God was their light and plants can survive one day without
the sun! Think C-L-O-U-D-Y DAY! Duh!

GE: If the sun really were shrinking as you believe, why have there been
perfect solar eclipses recorded for thousands of years of human
history - eclipses in which the Moon perfectly fits in front of the Sun?
YOU: Do you have a degree in heliolunarfitology?
GE: Huh?
YOU: I didn't think so. [good one!]

GE: Even if Adam and Eve were created as mature adults, don't you think
that all their cells were brand new?
YOU: Your point?
GE: Well, then some scientist could have tested them to see that they
were really brand new beings, not old beings.
YOU: Your point?
GE: Well, if they could be tested to reveal their true age no matter how
they "appeared," can't we scientifically test anything on Earth or in
the heavens, and have them reveal their true age?
YOU: Your point?
GE: Are you even listening?
YOU: Your point?
GE: !

GE: There is no evidence of a global flood, just of huge local floods.
YOU: What do you think the Grand Canyon is?! [roll eyes to sky,
muttering the word "moron"]

GE: How could Adam have done all the things mentioned on the 6th "day"
in Genesis if it was only 24 hours long?
YOU: God gave him superhuman pre-Fall strength and abilities! Duh
squared!

GE: Many galaxies are millions of light years away. That means the light
took millions of years to get here. How do you explain that?
YOU: God made the light in between, just like He made the space in
between your head! [then laugh]

GE: Radioactive dating tells us...
YOU: [close your ears immediately and sing some hymn real loud]

GE: The theory of plate tectonics explains nearly everything we see
geologically and is an incredibly slow process lasting hundreds of
millions of years.
YOU: You can explain nearly nothing and your thinking is an incredibly
slow process! [smile smugly because of your cleverness]

GE: Do you understand that one can accept an old universe, yet reject
macroevolution?
YOU: It's both or nothing! [excuse yourself quickly to the restroom]

GE: You say mountains erode, which is true, but do you know they also
build up at the same rate?
YOU: You probably read that in some university textbook!

GE: Your canopy hypothesis breaks many laws of physics.
YOU: We aren't subject to the laws of man, we're subject to God's Laws,
heathen boy!

GE: The speed of light can't change. If it did, we would see its many
effects all over the cosmos...
YOU: Whoa! Excuse me, I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born
last night! [try and keep from laughing too hard at your own cleverness;
it takes away from the humiliation.]

GE: A single family could not have taken care of millions of species of
animals if the flood was global.
YOU: Could have!

GE: Isn't it more reasonable to see the flood as local? Noah's family
could have easily handled local species.
YOU: Look, scholar boy, the Bible says "covered the whole Earth."
GE: But the Hebrew for "earth" also means "the local area"...
YOU: Are you a Hebrew scholar?
GE: Uhh... no.
YOU: Then you should keep quiet. [change the subject]

GE: There is absolutely no evidence that dinosaurs inhabited the Earth
simultaneously with man.
YOU: Using big words doesn't impress me!

GE: Have you ever taken a logic class?
YOU: What's logic got to do with this? Logic is man-made!

GE: You're annoying.
YOU: I know you are but what am I!? [repeat until they capitulate! They
are almost yours!]

GE: I give up.
YOU: I win! I win! I win! [you are victorious! as they walk away share
the Good News by yelling "You'd better repent, heretic cult leader!"]





 
 
Live4Him (05-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : Live4Him


Dato : 05-07-01 22:50


"Mr. D" <s-griis@post5.tele.dk> skrev i en meddelelse
news:3b44da87$0$12822$edfadb0f@dspool01.news.tele.dk...
> Dr. Don K. Hotie, founder of YECCH har udfærdiget et par svar eller tre,
> som ungjordskreationister kan fyre af over for evolutionister.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Personligt har jeg ikke brug for den slags. Jeg synes det er nok med
bibelens egne ord i 1 Mos. Iøvrigt er jeg ikke ungjordskreationist, men alm.
bibeltroende, som mange andre kristne iøvrigt er det.

jørgen.



Ole Madsen (26-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : Ole Madsen


Dato : 26-07-01 12:04


Live4Him <au_536@lite.dk> wrote in message
news:3b44e136$0$250$edfadb0f@dspool01.news.tele.dk...
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Personligt har jeg ikke brug for den slags. Jeg synes det er nok med
> bibelens egne ord i 1 Mos. Iøvrigt er jeg ikke ungjordskreationist, men
alm.
> bibeltroende, som mange andre kristne iøvrigt er det.


Ja bibelen er da nok



Ole





Christina Puhakka Eg~ (06-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : Christina Puhakka Eg~


Dato : 06-07-01 00:27

Mr. D <s-griis@post5.tele.dk> skrev...

> Dr. Don K. Hotie, founder of YECCH har udfærdiget et par svar eller tre,
> som ungjordskreationister kan fyre af over for evolutionister. Jeg ved
> ikke hvor sjove de er, men her er de i hvert fald.

Nå, men det ved jeg. De er RET sjove!
Tak for dem!

Christina



dpwozney (26-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : dpwozney


Dato : 26-07-01 05:38

"Mr. D" <s-griis@post5.tele.dk> wrote in message news:<3b44da87$0$12822$edfadb0f@dspool01.news.tele.dk>...

....
> GE: Many galaxies are millions of light years away. That means the light
> took millions of years to get here. How do you explain that?
> YOU: God made the light in between, just like He made the space in
> between your head! [then laugh]
....
> GE: The speed of light can't change. If it did, we would see its many
> effects all over the cosmos...

The fact that many galaxies may be millions of light years away does
not require that the light from them took millions of years to get here.
Under the conditions that exist between earth and distant stars,
light is taking much less than a second, from our point of view, to
travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000 kilometres (186,000 miles).
Right now, light, in different parts of the universe, is taking
significantly varying amounts of time to travel a given distance.

Andreas (26-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : Andreas


Dato : 26-07-01 22:21

dpwozney@ocii.com (dpwozney) wrote:
> "Mr. D" <s-griis@post5.tele.dk> wrote in message news:<3b44da87$0$12822$edfadb0f@dspool01.news.tele.dk>...
(klip)
> > GE: The speed of light can't change. If it did, we would see its many
> > effects all over the cosmos...
>
> The fact that many galaxies may be millions of light years away does
> not require that the light from them took millions of years to get here.
> Under the conditions that exist between earth and distant stars,
> light is taking much less than a second, from our point of view, to
> travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000 kilometres (186,000 miles).

English: The evidence for this being...?

Danish: Har du noget, der undersøtter det?

> Right now, light, in different parts of the universe, is taking
> significantly varying amounts of time to travel a given distance.

English: Where? And is light taking *less* time to travel those
distances? That light slows down when moving through certain materials
doesn't exactly *help* your case.

Danish: Hvor? Og er lyset *hurtigere* end normalt? At lysets hastighed
sænkes når det bevæger sig igennem visse materialer hjælper ikke
ligefrem dit argument

--
Guds fred,

Andreas

dpwozney (27-07-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : dpwozney


Dato : 27-07-01 06:04

duckling9@hotmail.com (Andreas) wrote in message news:<3b6088d1.49768220@news.cybercity.dk>...
> dpwozney@ocii.com (dpwozney) wrote:
> > "Mr. D" <s-griis@post5.tele.dk> wrote in message news:<3b44da87$0$12822$edfadb0f@dspool01.news.tele.dk>...
> (klip)
> > > GE: The speed of light can't change. If it did, we would see its many
> > > effects all over the cosmos...
> >
> > The fact that many galaxies may be millions of light years away does
> > not require that the light from them took millions of years to get here.
> > Under the conditions that exist between earth and distant stars,
> > light is taking much less than a second, from our point of view, to
> > travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000 kilometres (186,000 miles).
>
> English: The evidence for this being...?
>
> Danish: Har du noget, der undersøtter det?

For years, astronomers have noticed anomalous superluminal flares
from quasars, and paradoxical quasar jet speeds, apparently faster
than the speed of light. This has forced scientists to develop radical
new theories, such as making the quasars closer to us within our own
galaxy.

And of course, the book of Genesis and the genealogy of Christ
in Luke 3, combined with the vast size of the universe and immense
distances to stars, and the discovery of supernova SN1987A,
require that light travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000
kilometres in less than one of our seconds.

> > Right now, light, in different parts of the universe, is taking
> > significantly varying amounts of time to travel a given distance.
>
> English: Where? And is light taking *less* time to travel those
> distances? That light slows down when moving through certain materials
> doesn't exactly *help* your case.
>
> Danish: Hvor? Og er lyset *hurtigere* end normalt? At lysets hastighed
> sænkes når det bevæger sig igennem visse materialer hjælper ikke
> ligefrem dit argument

Wherever gravity is a lot less than on earth, (and where near-vacuum-like
conditions exist), light is taking less of our time dimension to travel
a given distance. Gravitational force affects the degree to which light
is travelling in our time direction.

We know, from Ephesians 3:18, that we live in a four-dimensional
universe. Time (breadth) is a physical dimension just like length,
depth, and height.

Epstein teaches in "Relativity Visualized"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/093521805X/107-5445956-5318964
http://www.appliedthought.com/InsightPress/RelativityVisualized.html
that we are always travelling at the speed of light, c=300000 km/s,
mostly in the direction of time. We cannot travel faster than our
speed of light and we cannot travel slower. It is the only speed we
ever go; everyone is always moving at the speed of light. If you
imagine a graph with time in the vertical direction and space in the
horizontal direction, we are generally always travelling straight
up in the time direction.

Gravity distorts this slightly, so that we are diverted and curve
slightly off the vertical (let it be to the left). Light travels mostly
in the horizontal space direction. In the absence of any gravitational
force, light travels only in the horizontal (our space) direction,
with no travel in the direction of the vertical (our time) direction.
In the presence of gravity light is slightly diverted and the velocity
vector of light rotates slightly up into the vertical (our time)
direction.

For reference or study purposes, I have recently scanned in and
posted calculations and a rough sketch of the time-space diagram
for earth's gravity, available at
http://www.ocii.com/~dpwozney/eph3-18.htm
For a given value for the gravitational time dilation, I calculate
that we are travelling at an angle of 0.0000370 radians off of
the vertical time axis.

Andreas (05-08-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : Andreas


Dato : 05-08-01 16:46

dpwozney@ocii.com (dpwozney) wrote:
> duckling9@hotmail.com (Andreas) wrote in message news:<3b6088d1.49768220@news.cybercity.dk>...
(klip)
> > English: The evidence for this being...?
(klip)
> For years, astronomers have noticed anomalous superluminal flares
> from quasars, and paradoxical quasar jet speeds, apparently faster
> than the speed of light. This has forced scientists to develop radical
> new theories, such as making the quasars closer to us within our own
> galaxy.

"Astronomers"? Which astronomers? Where? When? Where can I read about
this?

> And of course, the book of Genesis and the genealogy of Christ
> in Luke 3,

As opposed to the one in Mat 1?

> combined with the vast size of the universe and immense
> distances to stars, and the discovery of supernova SN1987A,
> require that light travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000
> kilometres in less than one of our seconds.

How? I see nothing in either Genesis or Luke 3 that "require that
light travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000 kilometres in less
than one of our seconds."

Of course, even if it did, it would be irrelevant, unless one could
show that it had any relevance to reality.

> > > Right now, light, in different parts of the universe, is taking
> > > significantly varying amounts of time to travel a given distance.
> >
> > English: Where? And is light taking *less* time to travel those
> > distances? That light slows down when moving through certain materials
> > doesn't exactly *help* your case.
> >
> > Danish: Hvor? Og er lyset *hurtigere* end normalt? At lysets hastighed
> > sænkes når det bevæger sig igennem visse materialer hjælper ikke
> > ligefrem dit argument
>
> Wherever gravity is a lot less than on earth, (and where near-vacuum-like
> conditions exist), light is taking less of our time dimension to travel
> a given distance.

This *might* affect the speed of light, but not by the orders required
to make the universe 6000 years old.

> Gravitational force affects the degree to which light
> is travelling in our time direction.
>
> We know, from Ephesians 3:18, that we live in a four-dimensional
> universe.

No. Eph 3 tells us of the love of Christ. We know, from Einstein, that
we live in a four-dimensional universe.

--
Guds fred,

Andreas

dpwozney (06-08-2001)
Kommentar
Fra : dpwozney


Dato : 06-08-01 20:51

duckling9@hotmail.com (Andreas) wrote in message news:<3b6d6805.7124544@news.cybercity.dk>...
> dpwozney@ocii.com (dpwozney) wrote:
> >
> > For years, astronomers have noticed anomalous superluminal flares
> > from quasars, and paradoxical quasar jet speeds, apparently faster
> > than the speed of light. This has forced scientists to develop radical
> > new theories, such as making the quasars closer to us within our own
> > galaxy.
>
> "Astronomers"? Which astronomers? Where? When? Where can I read about
> this?

The superluminal radio source in the gamma-ray blazar 3C 279
http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/agn/3c279.html

QUASAR M87 JET TRAVELS AT 6 TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT
http://www.achilles.net/~jtalbot/news/M87.html

QUASAR JET EXCEEDS 7 TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT
http://www.achilles.net/~jtalbot/news/3C345.html

MICRO-QUASAR WITHIN OUR GALAXY !
http://www.achilles.net/~jtalbot/news/GRS1915n105.html

Are Quasars Breaking Speed Limits ?
http://www.achilles.net/~jtalbot/amateur/quasars.html/errors.html

Moving Radio maps of Two Superluminal Jets:
http://chemlab.pc.maricopa.edu/astro/jets.html

"Superluminal" Jet Sources Close to Home
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast11jun97_1.htm

Superluminal Motion in Compact Radio Sources
http://www.ira.bo.cnr.it/~tventuri/vlbi2.html

Literature on Galactic Superluminals
http://www.astro.lsa.umich.edu/users/hughes/galsup/abs.html


> > And of course, the book of Genesis and the genealogy of Christ
> > in Luke 3,
>
> As opposed to the one in Mat 1?

Matthew 1 traces the genealogy of Christ only back to Abraham,
whereas Luke 3 traces the genealogy of Christ all the way back
to Adam.

> > combined with the vast size of the universe and immense
> > distances to stars, and the discovery of supernova SN1987A,
> > require that light travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000
> > kilometres in less than one of our seconds.
>
> How? I see nothing in either Genesis or Luke 3 that "require that
> light travel distances vastly exceeding 300,000 kilometres in less
> than one of our seconds."

The genealogies in Genesis and Luke 3 require that the stars in
Genesis 1:16 be made about six thousand years ago. If the stars
were millions of light-years from earth six thousand years ago, and
if the starlight was not created in transit, then the starlight
would have had to have travelled distances vastly exceeding
300,000 kilometres in less than one of our seconds.

> Of course, even if it did, it would be irrelevant, unless one could
> show that it had any relevance to reality.

What is "it" in the above statement? Are you claiming that Genesis
and Luke 3 do not have "any relevance to reality"?

> > Wherever gravity is a lot less than on earth, (and where near-vacuum-like
> > conditions exist), light is taking less of our time dimension to travel
> > a given distance.
>
> This *might* affect the speed of light, but not by the orders required
> to make the universe 6000 years old.

According to my sketch at http://www.ocii.com/~dpwozney/eph3-18.htm
if the gravitational force is quartered, light takes half our time
(i.e. travels half the distance in the direction of our time dimension)
to travel a given distance.

Since the space between stars is mostly empty with negligible,
practically zero, gravitational force, this would allow the light
to travel from distant stars in less than six thousand of our
years.

> > We know, from Ephesians 3:18, that we live in a four-dimensional
> > universe.
>
> No. Eph 3 tells us of the love of Christ. We know, from Einstein, that
> we live in a four-dimensional universe.

In Ephesians 3:18, Paul prayed to the Father that the church, being
rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints
what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height. Paul then
pointed out in Ephesians 3:19 that to know the love of Christ surpasses
and exceeds knowledge of how our physical universe is designed and operates.

Søg
Reklame
Statistik
Spørgsmål : 177502
Tips : 31968
Nyheder : 719565
Indlæg : 6408532
Brugere : 218887

Månedens bedste
Årets bedste
Sidste års bedste