Earthage 101

A creationist forum to discuss how old the Earth is...All about how God may have done it. No argument whether God did it. We all believe he did.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Young Earth or Old Earth? Here is where to post your thoughts!

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 22 ... 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 5 of 40]

We need investigation, not arbitrary exclusion of what is scientifically unfashionable. In particular, Christian colleges, funding sources, and fellow scientists should not excommunicate young-earthers. We should encourage debate among all those who see the Bible as God's Word but have differences in interpretation. We should criticize those who make Science their god.

View user profile
I went to Hell on Tuesday but only stayed a few hours on Cemetery Beach (I'm not joking, you can't make this kind of stuff up). It wasn't that good for snorkeling and kind of hot on the beach so we left. Hardly anyone was outside in the heat which was a real surprise and it wasn't a gate guarded community so it was easy to get out. I thought it would be special, but it didn't seem that much different than the rest of depraved communities we have traveled through in our daily lives.   I don't think I'll be going back again as once is enough for me but only God knows for sure. 

Thanks for your response on some of my questions,  I am glad to see some agreement with my views!

I believe the 'spirit' of a fixed law is fulfilled when the form of the laws doesn't change with the situation. That is if the physical law is 2x+y*z-V=o before an event occurs then it is the same during and after. In the above the V term is a God controlled variable term that stays constant for almost all events but God has the option of changing it to another value  at any time  or place in the universe as the need arises. The cosmological 'constant' in the General Relativity equations I believe, may be such a term. Presently, according to our science community it seems to have taken on a very high value  at the moment of creation and is now a very low value throughout the universe and causing stretching or universal acceleration of space-time. This is called dark energy by many of the cosmologists.  Quantum mechanic's hidden variables may be another control variable that God uses to control types of matter and it's interactions.  

I also agree with you that God is without restrictions and is unfettered.  But I think you have missed my point. God's hands are not tied with the fixed laws He created. He can do everything He needs to do in this universe by using the control variables like the one stated above in His fixed laws.  

[Bret]- 'YES! ... of coarse He could have put [additional genetic code in the original kind (like bacteria)]... but sadly for evolutionary theory ... we don't find this to be the case when we examine single-cell life forms!'

Happily, I would argue that we don't find any evidence in each 'kind' that extra genetic code was added either that would result in several species from a particular kind of species.    Genetic code and its packaging throughout the cells in a multicellular life form is unique within each species and also throughout all species. The copying process in meiosis and embryonic development is not perfect as I am sure you are aware.  We find variations in genetic code and each life-form's storage structure throughout the entire bio mass on this planet with virtually every living thing having a different genetic code  and degree of activation of sequences through its structure.  For example, homo sapiens have millions of differences in the nucleotide sequences.   You have confirmed what I was hoping to that excess genetic code in the progenitor is not carried by any species.

My point was related to God being able to develop advanced species from single cells initially by the information imbedded in the environment, deterministic laws, and hidden variable controls that only God controls. The genetic code in bacteria does not have to support the development of all species that ever existed on our planet (nor could it). God adds the information as necessary during the natural copying process of meiosis and mitosis. He slowly develops the different species over a long evolutionary time period through the information rich deterministic environment and hidden variable quantum controls so that occasionally new species naturally pop into existence from their parents during birth.  No new physical laws are necessary or even desirable. 

[Bret]- 'It is my (personal) belief that God IS the Law !!!'

I believe you mean that God controls what the laws are in each set of dimensions that He chooses to create. If so, I agree with you. If not,  please explain what you mean by this terse remark.  

The expression that you used 'poke a hole in the skin' of our universe to get to Heaven would require extra-dimensional travel.  I don't believe that is permitted by the laws of physics that confine us to this universe. Only God can make it possible for our spirit (information) to get there.  Poke as much as our scientists might, I personally don't think it possible for humans to break through to the other side. I believe the dimensions that God set up are impenetrable materially due to the physical laws. I do believe, however, that God can convey information and our spirit (information) between   sets of dimensions such as Heaven or into a new creation. The Bible doesn't speak of another set of fixed laws like the ones for this world, but does mention a new creation where God exists with mankind.  I believe there must be a dimensional manifold with new physical laws in the new creation that permits us (our information) to operate and grow into the beings that God wants us to be. I know this view is due to the scientist in me and may be speculative, but it is my best attempt at trying to rationalize,  comprehend, and convey to others the process that I believe God uses for Creation of other sentient beings. At least it certainly encourages stimulating discussions. 

If you care to take a stab at my other questions, I went through my posts back through Mar 2nd when we turned our discussion to evolution and numbered my questions with a '#) '.  My list of issues was posted on Jan 24th.  Foremost on my list is whether you believe any of the verses that I listed earlier are symbolic of spiritual characteristics or if they were real physical incarnations made of real matter. If made of matter how did they work? How about the two trees in garden for instance; how could the real fruit they produced provide eternal material life or knowledge of good and evil for the Adam and Eve?  It seems to me that eternal life and knowledge are both beyond the physical realm and can only be spiritual (informational).  So how can something physical like the juice or flesh of an apple for example provide eternal life or give knowledge. If seemed your earlier post claimed these trees were physically incarnated so you must  have some rational explanation as to how material entities produce spiritual products like eternal life and knowledge of good and evil. 

Lee Arrow



Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun May 15, 2011 6:54 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Spelling)

View user profile

103 *** The Law is the Law! *** on Wed May 11, 2011 2:59 pm

The Caymans!
I hope that you visited the Grand Cayman ... as there is a Township there called "Hell" !!!
I've been there twice ... so I guess you could say that I've been to Hell & back!

I promised to answer all of your questions ... but you've thrown so many of them out there
that I'm sure that I've missed a few? Here are a couple that I remember:

QNLOFL1) Don't you think He might have built into them some clever control features to allow Him to perform these miracles?
YES! ... I believe that God could have created everything any way that He wanted to!
But ... don't you think that having controllable variables contradicts the definition of a "Fixed" Law?
Doesn't the term "Fixed" Laws imply that these Laws can NOT be changed or tinkered with?

QNLOFL2) Do you think God incapable of creating laws that work for Him to accomplish His will?
Again ... I believe that God is without restrictions or limits!
I don't believe that God can tie His hands together so tight that even He cannot untie them!

Question3) Went something like ... If you believe that God programed extra information into
the animals that He created ... to help them to diversify and adapt to changing environments
then why couldn't He have programed the information for Man into an amoeba?
YES! ... of coarse He could have ... but sadly for evolutionary theory ... we don't find this to
be the case when we examine single-cell life forms!
I would have a little bit of a harder time arguing against the converse though!
You know ... if evolutionary theory were to claim that lesser life forms evolved from Man!

I would also like pose an additional theory to your & Stu's belief that God and the other spirits
are governed by a "different" set of Laws ... as opposed to our Physical Laws!
It is my (personal) belief that God IS the Law !!!
The Bible does not speak of any Spiritual Laws that govern their existence?
I believe that thinking they must exist ... is just the way that Man's logic and adherence to the
Physical World ... makes believing "out of the box" very difficult to accept!
I believe that if we could reach the end of the Universe ... then poke a hole through its skin ...
when you passed through to the other side ... you would be "IN" the presence of God !!!



20 Bret*11

View user profile

104 Close But Not Quite Coherent on Wed May 11, 2011 12:48 am

Greetings from the Cayman Islands and sorry for the delay. It's family vacation this week.

Bret, thanks for the background, it helps me in my replies to you. 

Stu, thanks for your reply, we are still not quite understanding each other based on your last post. I will try to address these non-coherences in our views.

[Stu]- 'This is NOT a diversion. This is the crux of the debate! '

Okay, I agree that whether or not popping animals into existence is a reasonable alternative to evolution is important to this debate.  But calling it the crux of the debate is exaggeration.  We have discussed popping animals into existence already and we are covering the same topic again, it is one of my reasons for calling your previous post a diversion. 

My concern about a diversion is related to addressing my issues that I listed many weeks ago to you. Your responses to these issues is long overdue.   I was trying mostly to get you to state whether or not you believe Ge 1, 2, & 3 contains any symbology and where it occurs if it does. You seem very reluctant to do this. For me, this is the real crux of the debate. I believe there is plenty of symbology in these chapters and I can't get your opinion on the verses I listed previously. I believe that you might fear admitting that you believe some of the verses in the above chapters are symbolic and therefore those verses undermine your claim against evolution since if some are why not the verses that Adam was made by God from dust and Eve was made by God from Adam's rib. Please be forthcoming on this point. 

I agree with the first and third of your  four statements but not the following:

[Stu]- 'we all agree that God has higher (transcendent) spiritual laws that are totally independent of the physical laws. (you call them "informational"). '

Your statement has muddled the laws of nature, the laws of heaven, spiritual laws, and information. Again, information is totally different than the laws. Dimensions and the mathematical relationships between them establish the physical laws; heaven has its set and our world has its set. God who is eternal and informational established both sets of dimensions with their corresponding laws and He is independent of both but has created both and the laws for each. If you are talking about spiritual laws like 'Love your neighbor' that is purely informational and not a natural law on earth or a inter-dimensional relationship in Heaven either.  It is a relational spiritual law between two entirely information entities (you and I for instance) that has nothing to do with physical laws that have to do with inter-dimensional relationships.  I am having great difficulty getting you to understand the difference between information and physical laws but I will continue to try if you have the patience and desire. 

[Stu]- 'Well Lee, you have just explained how God popped Adam into existence. God chose to use the informational control variables at His disposal to create Adam. Why would you discredit your own hypothesis?'

Thanks, Stu, I was explaining how He did it, but I don't believe you understood it the way I intended.   I thought I was explaining to you how God can use the natural laws (that we are both call fixed laws) for controlling evolution as well as creating miracles. My purpose was to show you that a special creation of new physical laws is unnecessary and counterproductive. Also, popping plants and animals into existence is not realistically compatible with natural laws.  It definitely works for bringing pure energy into our universe in an instant but horribly for low temperature cellular matter as I described in an early post on this blog. The natural laws work well with meosis/mitosis and natural birth only. God can control these operations at the cellular level to bring new species into the world through natural processes. I don't believe I have discredited my view at all by what I have stated. If you think I have please be explicit of how. 

Lee



Last edited by InfinitLee on Wed May 11, 2011 10:01 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Clarification)

View user profile

105 Transcendent Laws (reply) on Sun May 08, 2011 3:02 am

Lee -- This is NOT a diversion. This is the crux of the debate!

Did God use evolution to create Adam or did God "pop him into existence" (your terminology)?

You say evolution. Bret, Lucien and I say -- POP. You discredit POP based on your interpretation of Jer 33:25 that God made a covenant with the fixed physical laws and won't violate this covenant. (I have previously argued against that interpretation, but it is another subject.) Right so far?

On the other hand, we all agree that God has higher (transcendent) spiritual laws that are totally independent of the physical laws (you call them "informational"). This is the realm in which God operates as the "omni-" Creator and Sustainer of our existence. As He decides to exercise His will in the world, He implements it through the physical laws He created. Correct?

Your hypothesis is that God uses independent control terms in these physical laws (e.g., cosmological constant and the hidden variables in quantum mechanics) to direct them in such a way that they accomplish His will. Correct? So then, this is how God intervenes in nature and human affairs. In other words, this is how God does miracles. Correct?

Well Lee, you have just explained how God popped Adam into existence. God chose to use the informational control variables at His disposal to create Adam. Why would you discredit your own hypothesis?

View user profile http://christperspectives.wordpress.com

106 *** 2-Sides of the SAME Coin! *** on Sat May 07, 2011 1:00 pm

Leisure-Lee ...

I cannot argue the fact that if I had hung tight for a couple more years ...
and earned myself a Sheepskin as you did ... I would have enjoyed a more lucrative
lifestyle ... and likely a more singularly focused career!

Instead ... I (as yourself)... went to work in the Aerospace Industry ... but wearing
a white lab-coat vs. a white shirt & tie!
It was your job to analyze data given to you ... and use it achieve some predetermined
objectives ... that would ultimately generate some monetary profits for the Corporation
that you were currently working for!

I (on the other hand) was the guy that was actually generating the data that you used!
I'm not saying that you were not capable of doing it ... but just that you were being
paid too much money to spend all day (every day) in the testing lab!

My testing career started out (like most) with the application of strain gages to
tensile, compression, and shear test specimens!
Then using an Instron (or United) testing machine to break them at variable temps ...
from cryogenic to as high as 2000*F!
Actually ... when I first started ... we were still plotting and calculating Tensile
Strengths, (Young's) Modulus, and their Standard Deviations all by hand!
I remember when the early Computer controlled testing machines came out ... they were
fraught with all kinds data collection & analyzing problems! (The days of using DOS!)

Becoming quickly bored with the simple repetition of (most) Mechanical Testing ...
I found myself reading through volume after volume of ASTM standards and then questioning
our Engineers as to why some of our testing procedures seemed to deviate from the
actual ASTM standards that we were citing on our test results!
Most of the Engineers found this attention to detail to be annoying!
But ... a couple of them realized that I was begging to be challenged!
This lead me to become (for the next dozen or so years)... their go-to guy for all
of their specialty projects ... as well as letting me cross-train with the select few
other technicians that did our Chemical, Thermal, & Optical testing in the lab!

This helped me to negotiate a better pay-scale when I was hired by a smaller testing
laboratory that was looking to broaden their (in-house) testing capabilities ... and
needed someone that could set-up, calibrate, and run several different pieces of
sophisticated material analyzing equipment!
This included Atomic Absorption, Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR), and Ignition Spectrophotometers!
As well as ... a Thermal Mechanical Analyzer (TMA) & a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC)!
But ... the coolest piece of equipment that I used to use ... was the (SEM) !!!
(Scanning Electron Microscope)

After leaving the world of (indoor) laboratory testing behind ... I moved into the
field of Geological testing and analysis!
Again ... I found myself as the guy that was collecting samples & generating the data for
the Geologists ... that were making the BIG bucks ... while rarely ever leaving their offices!

Now ... (and for the last couple of years) I've been involved with the Importation of
live tropical marine fish, corals, and invertebrates!
Learning about the thousands of different species (and sub-species)... has been very
interesting ... and quite necessary ... as I have to deal with Federal Fish & Wildlife
Agents on (almost) a daily basis!

Though not intentional ... I've (by actual hands-on experience)... made myself qualified
to discuss Topics that include: Physics, Chemistry, Geology, & Biology (at least Marine) !!!
For all of the other Topics that we discuss frequently on this Forum ... I have acquired
my knowledge from extensive reading about ALL of the various viewpoints ... from
books written by those that hold to each view separately ... and NOT just the one
that I believe fits the data-set to the most logical conclusion!

I believe that God helped me to get a very well-rounded education in various fields
of knowledge ... in spite of my Free Will to make some really bad decisions in life!


20 Bret*11


View user profile

107 Transcendent Laws on Tue May 03, 2011 12:50 am

Bret,
Thanks, for providing your background and well wishes! Never give up on learning, remember as a coheir with Jesus, you will eventually need to know everything!

Stu,
I agree with you; we are still not communicating. Somehow you didn't comprehend the essence of what seems to be a poorly written statement although I tried to make it clear. I will try to comment on your misperception of my view to attempt to get it across to you better this time.

[Stu]- 'You honestly believe that everything can be reduced to physical law.' ...
'The supernatural is transcendent to the natural and not contingent on it. God controls the supernatural through a set of higher laws most of which are known only to Him. He is not constrained to work through the "fixed physical laws" governing "earthly bodies."'

I do not believe that everything can be reduced to fixed law. I have always agreed with your second statement above. The spirit (or information as I like to call it) is totally independent of the physical laws. As I stated in my posts recently and earlier, heaven has a different set of laws by which it operates and which were God created. Go check my posts out. The new creation will have a new set of laws which will be God created. Certainly God does not have to operate by any of these laws but has freely created (or will create in the future) the laws needed for Him to accomplish His will. Based on what we've learned from Je 33:25, He makes a covenant with these laws He creates and uses them. God being omnipotent controls all the laws: the ones in Heaven and the ones in our universe. His spirit is not constrained by physical laws. The spirit, mind, personality, and a host of many characteristics are information based and separate from any physical laws. Information can be hosted on an unlimited number of platforms (or implementations of various physical laws ). Actually there is very little of value in this world that is reducible to physical law (quarks, bosons, and leptons under the influence of the four different field types). Virtually everything that interests God in this world is spiritual (informational). The primary purpose of physical laws was to generate a dimensional manifold for the production of human spirits where they could battle against sin.

God freely chose to create and control from Heaven the fixed physical laws of this creation and the information it supports that includes us and our sin. I have been trying to explain the implementation of scripture through natural laws and God provided information. I have no issues or contention with the verses you continue to quote. You don't seem to be comprehending that I am trying to explain how God can use the laws and information that He created to make all that exists in this world. He doesn't need to change the laws each time He makes a miracle; He just exercises the controls He has built into the laws He already created. This control is based on information He provides to the natural laws on a localized basis. In turn, the matter in our universe is affected and miracles result. If God provides no additional input to the laws, then everything proceeds as planned. God remains in full control of this universe at all times without having to change the physical laws. This would be much easier than having to create new laws for each miracle. The existing fixed laws that He controls (and has made a covenant with) provide a simpler solution than the new laws or magic that you are proposing for each miracle.

After all that I have said on this topic how can you honestly insinuate that I believe that 'everything can be reduced to physical law'. You are not trying very hard to understand what I have posted if that is what you believe. I have been very clear about the separation of body and spirit (physical laws and information). You should know that by now. Sorry, I have to be tough with you sometimes, but you seem to easily drift into misrepresenting my views to others.

This seems like another diversion, to avoid answering the questions I have asked you or issues I've raised. I thought we were going to debate evolution, but you keep trying to go back to old topics. Your time would be better spent attempting to address the inconsistencies I surfaced earlier related to the Genesis 1,2,& 3 and their relationship to your position on evolution. You are a good Bible scholar, I really mean this. I just think you have missed the correct interpretation of Genesis 2 & 3 in not seeing that it is symbolic of the spiritual realm as opposed to being historical documentary of real entities. If your view that Ge 2&3 is supplemental to Ge 1 and there is no symbology used in the key verses that I have listed, you should be able to address my issues. I would really like to have a pleasant logical discussion on these issues with you. QTL1A) By the way do you think any symbology was used in Genesis 2 and 3 or do you think that all verses are historical and the items described are materially real as Lucien does? QTL1B) Or are some of the passages symbolic of spiritual concepts?

Lee No



Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue May 03, 2011 11:11 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : grammar, technical correction re gluon)

View user profile

108 Physics or Miracles? (con't) on Mon May 02, 2011 1:54 am

Lee wrote:

To answer Stu's question, God performs all of his miracles through these fixed laws which He created. There are independent control variable terms included in the physical law equations like the 'Cosmological Constant' term in the General Relativity equation which is a local physical law that God could use to move a mountain, create an earthquake, crack a veil, or Jesus to use to walk on the water. Quantum Mechanical Laws have hidden variables in one of the theories (David Bohm version) that God could use to make water into wine, and make the dead appear to the living as apparitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lee,

Now I understand why we can't successfully communicate on this topic. You honestly believe that everything can be reduced to physical law. I think this is a remnant of our physics training in school where we are taught to abandon "all that supernatural and mythological stuff." But when you and I came to Christ we discovered that there is a higher and parallel reality -- the spiritual; the super-natural; the kingdom of God.

40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.... 50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15)

The supernatural is transcendent to the natural and not contingent on it. God controls the supernatural through a set of higher laws most of which are known only to Him. He is not constrained to work through the "fixed physical laws" governing "earthly bodies." As Paul explained to the intellectuals of his day on Mars Hill (Acts 17)

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

Stu

View user profile http://christperspectives.wordpress.com

109 *** Congratulations Lee *** on Sun May 01, 2011 1:58 pm

You finally made it to the finish-line of nessecary employment!
Now ... you can finally do all of those things that you've wanted to do in life ...
but just never had enough spare time to enjoy them as you can now!

As for your former employ ... I was pretty sure that you had told me that you were involved
in the aerospace industry! The BS degree in Engineering from the early 70's was what I was
not as clear on ... from our previous communications!

I'm what is know as a College dropout!
I made the HUGE mistake of thinking that I could take a year off from Classes ... so I could
work full-time (instead of just on the weekends as I had been doing)... and make enough
money to fix-up my car ... and then blow the rest on Wine & Women!
I was a Math major with a minor in Physics!
I had good grades ... but 18-units/semester (and working on the weekends) was just burning me out!
All of those people that told me that it's almost impossible to refocus on your education ...
once you've stepped into the World of full-time employment ... were definitely right!

I will explain my Employment history in my next Post ... and you just might be surprised at
some of the similarity (early on) with your more focused & consistent career choice!

Sleeping in until noon! Beer for breakfast!
Oh! ... how I long for retirement as well !!!


20 Bret*11

View user profile
I don't believe this to be much of a debate. I answer your question and ask you some, but I never seem to get any answers back, just more questions. I believe presently that none of you have legitimate answers for my questions. So be it, but don't claim in the future that you have a Biblical basis for your anti-evolution stance, because you don't. If you do, you can't seem to articulate it.

I have answered your questions in previous posts, but you have not understood what I stated obviously or you wouldn't have asked me again. I wish you would try a little harder to understand my posts. Lucien won't even read them from top to bottom. This gets very frustrasting as it seems to me that you have a mental block to comprehending these concepts that I have spelled out numerous times to all of you. Maybe we scientists, have a different language with different meanings that other English speaking people can't comprehend. I try to describe these concepts as simply as I can. I'll keep trying to do a better job of it!

Here is a short reply that hopefully Lucien will read and all will understand relating to new physical laws versus fixed old laws. When you propose that the fixed laws became valid 144 hours (six 24 hour days) after the initial creation event, you imply that another set(s) of physical laws were in operation prior to that time or for the better part of the creation week (144 hours to 13.7 billion years). These would be new physical laws, that would be entirely speculative without any evidence of their existence. I don't want to be involved in this speculative discussion of what these alternate physical laws could be, as I believe it would be foolish to discuss them. The astronomical evidence supports fixed laws that go back to the initial Big Bang event on 'Day 1' when God created the heavens. The scientists have been looking at astronomical data for an indication of changing physical laws and they haven't found any that is significant. God also said they're fixed and we would be speculating about something that according to God didn't happen as well. You might want to also consider the following, God continues to use the existing physical laws after 'Day 6' and while using them, He has pulled off some really fine miracles according to the Bible. QNLOFL1) Don't you think He might have built into them some clever control features to allow Him to perform these miracles? QNLOFL2) Do you think God incapable of creating laws that work for Him to accomplish His will?

To answer Stu's question, God performs all of his miracles through these fixed laws which He created. There are independent control variable terms included in the physical law equations like the 'Cosmological Constant' term in the General Relativity equation which is a local physical law that God could use to move a mountain, create an earthquake, crack a veil, or Jesus to use to walk on the water. Quantum Mechanical Laws have hidden variables in one of the theories (David Bohm version) that God could use to make water into wine, and make the dead appear to the living as apparitions.

Bret, I have been an engineer and scientist for 37 years (recently retired) that worked on all kinds of systems for aerospace companies. I've designed, analyzed, built, troubleshot, and delivered many types of hardware. Most of it has been related to space technologies and system's engineering where I had to identify problems in the design that occassionally try to defy the existing physical laws. As you can see, I have had some experience with what you all are trying to do with your alternative set of laws during the first six 'Days' (or billions of years as the case is likely to be).

QNLOFL3) How about you, what is your claim to authority on these matters?

Lee Wink



Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun May 01, 2011 2:24 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : grammar)

View user profile

111 *** Why is this so hard for you to accept? *** on Sat Apr 30, 2011 2:28 am

Lee ...

You said ... "Against the great amount of evidence that the laws have been fixed since the Big Bang, if you define the laws to be anything you want, to support these spiritual entities that I have pointed out in Genesis 2&3, irrational discussion would ensue since anything goes with these imagined changes of the laws. This seems to be the direction that you both are proposing for discussion. I am sure that new physical laws could be shown to produce anything your heart desires. However, there is no limit to the folly that could be rationalized. Any laws can create anything. Crazy talk is just not something that I want to indulge on this blog, as all readers and God will think us loons."

Again ... I'm sure glad to know that you would NEVER call anybody STUPID ???

First of all ... You know! ... I know! ... and everyone that can read English knows! ...
that I've NEVER EVER EVER in ANY post on this Blog (or any other)... claimed that there
were ever any new (or different) Laws of Physics!

May I ask YOU a question?

Did the Laws of Physics create God? ... or did God create the Laws of Physics?

May I also ask you to tell us what earned degree(s) that you hold? ...
When (what year(s)) did you receive it/them? ...
What exactly is it that you do for a living?
(Not just your fancy "title"... but what do you actually (tangibly) do on a daily basis?)
I believe that you've told me before (in the past)... but honestly I'm not sure if I
remember correctly? ... and would prefer to have you tell me ... rather than guess?

We both know that your formal education is more impressive than mine ... so this has
nothing to do with "one-upmanship" !!!
I just thought that maybe I could create an analogy about what I've been trying to
say to you ... in your area of expertise ... as to hopefully avoid any further confusion
about the concepts that I'm trying to express about the symbiosis between God & Science!

If these questions seem too personal ... or make you feel uncomfortable in any way? ...
I totally understand!



20 Bret*11

View user profile

112 stopped reading on Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:23 pm

Lee,

I stopped reading your latest monstrously long post.
In the first lines you say Bret and I deny the physical laws.
If you had read Bret's message you will see he actually said something about them kicking in after 144 hours.
Not sure if I agree with that statement entirely, but your comment just is non-sense.
Why would I even bother reading the rest if you state another lie.
Just because we believe that some things were created instantaneously (as do you when it comes to the heavens and the earth) it does not mean we live outwith reality.
If anything, you live out of reality as you want to see symbols in things that could perfectly well be the real thing.

Lucien (away for the weekend)

View user profile

113 Physics or Miracles? on Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:30 pm

Lee,

Would you please help me understand again how these historical events (which you believe actually occurred) are explained by the fixed physical laws:

  • the veil in the temple torn in half

  • tombs opening and bodies being raised from the dead and appearing to many

  • an angel coming down from heaven and rolling away the stone

  • Jesus rising from the dead


stu wrote:50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 And behold the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split.
52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;
53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.
2 And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it.
3 And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow.
4 The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men.
5 The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified.
6 "He is not here, for He has risen,

Matthew 27,28: Literal or symbolic? Historical or spiritual? Natural or supernatural? Fact or fiction?

View user profile http://christperspectives.wordpress.com
Lucien and Bret,

It is obvious from your responses, that neither of you can rationalize any of these Biblical entities I've listed based on the existing laws of physics. Call it a false dichotomy if you will, as you continue to deny the existence of real physical laws like they just don't exist in this world and they can be just about anything that you can imagine that supports your interpretation of the Bible which includes a seven 24 hour day creation week, fruit like apples that give eternal life or knowledge, real talking snakes. Your interpretation that has led you to changing physical laws is fantasy and a delusion. This is even bad exegesis of the Bible because God clearly stated that He made a covenant with the fixed laws of heaven and earth in Je 33:25. In the beginning God put the laws into place at the creation event and stuck with them as He states, not because He has to but because He wanted to and said He did. You are risking a lot of credibility by stating that the natural laws are not foundational and changed after a few days without God or the writers saying anything about it in Genesis. People will think that you are living in a fantasy world (not in touch with reality) and then stop taking you seriously on all topics. I have thought about doing this myself a few times, but felt that God wants me to try to get you through the lies that Satan has trapped you into believing. So I press on.

My request for a description was merely trying to get you to address the entities that you have claimed are made of physical matter in Ge 2 & 3 and believe cannot be symbolic of spiritual entities. If you accept them as symbolic of spiritual concepts, my issues go away. This is an easy solution for our issues, but, alas, you refuse to accept this simple solution. You must have too much at stake to accept these verses as symbolic: your entire position on evolution! If any of this allegory is symbolic, then why not the part about making Adam from dust or Eve from Adam's flesh. No wonder you want to change the laws of physics to support your views! Your case against evolution would transform from nothing into dust!

Originally, I was trying to get you to establish boundaries for these entities between physical matter and spirit so that we could work on the proper exegesis of these passages. Some of your questions wouldn't have been asked if you thought through the spiritual and material aspects of these verses. I believe that some of these things that I have listed are real in the spiritual dimensions and historical as well but not made of physical matter. If you did the same analysis, we might be able to reach a common position. The world we live in consists of both aspects: physical matter and information/spirit. Correct exegesis confirms this to be the case as Jesus stated we are body and spirit. The spiritual realm is informational and temporarily incorporates matter from this universe for its existance but is independent of it. Our bodies in this world serve as a temporary home for our spirit. Heaven has its own set of laws which we know nothing about but do know from the Bible that the new creation will host our eternal spirit in our new bodies when we get there. As far as our present existence is concerned, we do know a lot about the laws of physics which governs matter and they don't permit animals to pop into existance out of nothing on Day 3, 5 or Day 6. Only the universe can pop into existence from nothing based on the existing laws that God created with it at that moment.

Against the great amount of evidence that the laws have been fixed since the Big Bang, if you define the laws to be anything you want, to support these spiritual entities that I have pointed out in Genesis 2&3, irrational discussion would ensue since anything goes with these imagined changes of the laws. This seems to be the direction that you both are proposing for discussion. I am sure that new physical laws could be shown to produce anything your heart desires. However, there is no limit to the folly that could be rationalized. Any laws can create anything. Crazy talk is just not something that I want to indulge on this blog, as all readers and God will think us loons. Thanks for the offer, but I think I will stick to the existing laws of physics with which I have substantial familiarity and God said that He has a covenant with. The existing laws are amazing enough for me as God used them to make this wonderful universe. Virtually all scientists especially the sane ones have the view that the physical laws are fixed and have extensive data to support this view for this universe. I would like to stay clear of any discussions of other universes or temporary laws during the first six 'days'. By the way, these laws, based on the evidence, would have been around for a lot longer than 144 hours, try 13.7 billion years. I will safely stay on God's and the scientist's side of this issue to avoid being a heretic and looking like a fool to our God.

Maybe if you had some Biblical justification for changing the laws on Day 6 for instance, it might justify your strong stance that the physical laws changed. That would make your view a little more palatable that the laws were changed. This different physical laws view is very hard to swallow without some significant justification. Of course at this point, I expect you will claim though that the 'fall' resulted in the physical laws changing. Unfortunately for your stance, most Bible experts would tell you that the fall was related to a spiritual fall or separation from God's grace and protection in the garden. There is nothing to indicate that the physical laws of heaven and earth were altered. You have intentionally misinterpreted scripture to support your young earth and anti-evolution views. To me, the proposed altering of physics that you are imagining at the fall are totally unfounded both scientifically and Biblically. But in fairness to you I should give you a chance to produce your justification and Bible verses that clearly indicate that God popped animals and plants into existence as well as your belief that He changed the laws of physics on the 6th Day of Creation. To this end, I would like to see your exegesis of Biblical phrases though that has led you to this false premise of changing physical laws. Perhaps you have some support that I have forgotten or verses that I didn't understand that support your view. Please have a go at it, I would really like to see some rational Biblical evidence for your position other than conjecture and imagination.

Lee Laughing study



Last edited by InfinitLee on Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:27 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Punctuation)

View user profile

115 *** A False Dichotomy! *** on Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:10 am

Lee ...

I believe that Lucien makes a good point here!
You're creating a false dichotomy ... then asking us to resolve it!
As I promised you before ... I am willing to answer every single question
that you honestly cannot resolve ... but you need to accept OUR premise ... not yours!
I totally agree with you ... that our explanation of Genesis events make little or
no sense when viewed resting upon your imposed restrictions!

Most of our irreconcilable differences are derived from your premise that God's very
1st act of creation ... was that of the "Fixed Laws" of Physics!
Like I have stated before ... I personally believe that God locked these physical laws
into place ~144 hours later than you believe they became insurmountable!
You might not agree with this minor delay ... but if I'm right ... then ALL of your
problems with the Scriptures easily go away!

Then (all of a sudden)... not only those with a PhD can understand how to read and
understand God's Word ... but (also)... those with a "D" average on their report cards!
Maybe this is why God told us to never call anyone stupid or worthless?

If accepting my premise still doesn't seem to resolve your proposed contradictions ...
then please explain why? ... and I'll address each and every one separately!



20 Bret*11

View user profile

116 Logic & theology & good exegesis on Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:22 am

How can Lee's sins (and mine, Bret's, Stu's, etc.) be transposed unto Jesus the Christ who died for us on the cross, both physically and spiritually?
How? Explain how this legal action can take place in natural terms.
You cannot.
Likewise i cannot explain how eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil caused the curse and the fall. But I do know and believe that was the consequence of that action, as God said so.

Yet you ask me to use natural laws to describe things that I have no problem with believing came in existence in a supernatural way.
You are asking me to use your self-imposed rules to explain my worldview. (allowing no to very little supernatural means)
You mention instantaneous creation of animals and man as incredible. Yet you have already conceded that the heavens and the earth were created instantaneous ex nihilo.
Is that the exception you have allowed yourself that confirms the rule? (actually this famous saying is a logical fallacy)

You can ask me to explain numerous passages how they came to be, work out, operate in the natural, but I do not require everything to be explained by natural laws.
If you want to be consistent, you should explain how the eating of the fruit caused the fall and how your sins were transferred to Jesus in natural terms.
To ask me to do that using your rules is wholly unfair and unrealistic.

This debate should be one of Biblical exegesis, theology & doctrine and logic and godly moral.
You will likely counter this by saying I have admitted defeat, but people who honestly consider this will realise that limiting the Bible to be either natural or symbolic is in fact limiting God and not the best of positions to be in.

You should ask me, or rather yourself:
Can I imagine/envision the things that are talked about in the Bible.
And you can.
You can imagine a tree because you have seen one before.
You can imagine fruit (whether it be an apple or pomegranate or something else).
You can imagine a snake.
You can imagine hearing a sound, just like Jesus and the people heard in John 12:28-29.
Am I next to describe how a city with streets of gold can be, using natural means only.

Let's set aside the purely natural and do what good exegetists do: examine what God actually says (and it was so) and what it means, in context.


Lucien

View user profile

117 Fruit for Thought? on Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:28 am

Lucien,

It seems that you believe everything in Ge 2 and 3 that I have identified as an issue is historical and really existed physically and functionally in the garden. The talking snake is the only potential exception, since you have accepted the talking snake symbolically as a real snake that has been in dwelt by Satan in a recent post. This means to me that you accept some of the text as symbolic but very little of it. I view this encounter with the talking snake as non-historical but symbolic and a spiritual allegory of mankind's desire to commit sin. Consequently my issues with your beliefs still exist, as you have made a minimal attempt to justify how each could physically exist in this world. I think we can safely drop item 9)as it doesn't seem to matter as much any more, since the other items produce so much conflict between our views. I thought if I enumerated them there would be at least some of them that you might claim as symbolic and not real physical entities. Maybe if we go through them one by one, we can at least come to some understanding of the other's position.

1) The chronological sequence differences between Ge 1 & 2 remains unresolved except that your answer helps by stating that the events pertain locally to the garden. The issue when the rain first fell is still at issue, there is a great deal of natural evidence and Biblical support in Ge 1 that rain fell in this area over millions to billions of years and that area was under water as well before rising above ocean level. Your response did not address the differences in the chronology of the animals. QFT1) Did God recreate and pop the same plants and animals into existance again from the dust since He had created them on earlier Days 3 & 5 since the garden was created on Day 6 from your perspective? Your curt response didn't really address the issues that I surfaced.

There are a number of items that I have listed from Genesis 2 & 3 that obviously defy the existing physical laws: creating field animals (cattle, etc) and Adam instantaneously from dust, growing Eve instantaneously from a piece of rib, a snake without a voice box indwelt by Satan that can talk to Eve, two different trees made of wood that can grow fruit that when eaten by humans can produce eternal life and the other knowledge of good and evil, the flaming swords held by angels/cherubims. This is why I choose to think of these passages as symbolic of other spiritual concepts. QFT2) Can you provide some concept of what these were materially made of and how functionally they worked since you think they were materially real entities e.g. what is the fruit made of and how can it produce eternal life for human flesh? QFT3) How can the physical ingrediants in the fruit provide what is necessary to give a human soul eternal existance? If you don't think that some of them were made out of matter but spiritual entities, please let me know which ones.

I really don't think you have thought about the implications of some of your responses. A reasonable logical reply requires separating out the material world from the spiritual!

Lee scratch



Last edited by InfinitLee on Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:25 am; edited 2 times in total

View user profile

118 interesting link? on Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:54 am

http://creation.com/a-tale-of-two-fleas


Lee, check out my post on August 21, at 7.58.
I shows you an evolutionary tree, the straw-man that evolutionists like to put up about creationists, and what we actually believe.
This ties in with my analogy of "tree, grass, orchard". I hope it helps you understand what we YE's believe.


Lucien

View user profile

119 Thanks Lee on Tue Apr 26, 2011 4:28 am

I appreciate you quoted those two messages.
It means that you went to the effort on looking at some of my statements again.
On the other hand, it shows us how difficult our discussions can be when we are (all?) so focussed on our own views.

In the messages you referred to, I was trying to get across to you I do believe there is some symbolism in the Bible, but yet you stuck with saying that I don't believe in symbolism.
A few days ago you reverted to saying that I don't believe there is symbolism in Genesis and I requested you to substantiate this statements with quotes.
Now you have finally come to say that I don't believe there is symbolism in Gen. 2&3.
This is (finally) close(r) to the truth.
I am glad that we have arrived here, but I hope you can understand how frustrating it is for me (/anyone) to have words put in their mouths.

I do think that everything said in said in Gen. 2&3 should be taken as prose/narrative. Not everything was/is history, as some is talking about the future. I don't see any problems with taken the text as literal.
To answers your points:
1) Ch.1 is the rough outline of the whole. Ch.2 speaks more specifically of events in the garden of Eden.
2) From dust we are made and unto dust we shall return. No, we will not devolve over millions of years, the returning to dust will be much quicker, depending on burial or cremation.
3) Ribs have a protective 'sleeve' and if carefully removed, the rib will grow back. Woman means 'of/from man'. Bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh. Note the flesh was from man, but the spirit from God.
4) There were two special trees and there will be a special tree (Rev. 22:2).
5) see 4)
6) The devil is referred to as a serpent, dragon, but also a fallen angel, as well as Lucifer, etc. I think it was the devil manifesting himself as the creature that spoke to Eve, or possessed it. The creature was real though.
7) The fruit was real. However, the consequences of eating it were infinitely greater than any penalty we can conceive now for being disobedient.
Cool I believe the angels were really there. For how long? Not sure, the Bible does not explicitly say, but it could be until the earth was destroyed by the global Flood.
9) where would you want me to start.

I think it is important for all readers of this forum to realise that for the YE view, that Bret and I hold, the straightforward reading works quite well, but it is only in the OE view that problems start creeping up, and thus complex explaining (away) is required.

A question for you:
L1) how do you square up the order of creatures as found in the fossil record with the order of creation in either Gen. 1 or Gen. 2 (you can pick whichever chapter is easier for you to match up with evolution).


Lucien

View user profile

120 Ge 2 & 3: Historical Documentary or Allegory? on Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:19 am

Lucien,

On March 30th 2011, you stated 'I also thought I had been clear that historical, narrative prose must be taken as read.' Then on March 31st you also stated at the bottom ' I'll just read it [the Bible] and and take what is written as a given and at face-value.' It seems to me (and I expect other readers), that you have consistently been defending the literal material embodiment of physical entities related to the verses in Genesis 2 & 3 and about Ballaam's talking donkey in your posts. This led me to believe that you do not accept any of the verses in Genesis 2 or 3 as primarily symbolic. Perhaps I have mixed you and Bret up on your positions related to the use of symbology in Genesis but I don't think so.

Bret said on Jan 19 2011•' Is it possible for the account [Ge 2&3] to be allegorical or symbolic as opposed to a documentory?
In Theory ... Yes?
In Reality ... Not a chance!'

It seems to me that all of my fellow debaters have taken the view that Genesis 2 and 3 is non-symbolic as the primary intent of the passages and all of the entities discussed in these passages where realized historically and made of real physical matter. If I have been wrong, about this, my apology, if not, please clarify your position on how they were physically realized and what they were made of. Here is a short recount of our issues due to my view that the following are symbolic 1) conflicts between Ge 1&2 related to the chronological sequence, 2) Adam made from dust and God's the breath of life 3) Eve made from Adam's side 4) the tree of life and its fruit 5) the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and its fruit, 6) the deceptive talking serpent 7) the fruit that Adam and Eve ate 8 ) the cherubims /angels with flaming swords that stood guard over Eden on the East 9) and any other potential symbolic verses that you care to point out in Ge 2&3 that you take literally.

Lee Shocked

View user profile

121 Agreement on Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:02 am

Oddly, I find myself in agreement with Lucien on his last post. With one additional comment, some symbolism is included in the descriptions eg appearance was like lightning, white as snow. Welcome back Stu! There is hope!

Bret, I agree with you that scientists that have Christian views are heavily persecuted by those that are atheists. Still we proceed fully aware of the consequences. I have experienced this myself personally in my industry, so you are preaching to the choir. The quest for religious truth has always been made very painful by the minions or victims of Satan that have fallen prey to his many lies and distortions. Still, good science strongly supports Christianity and tightens the noose around his lies. Logic, investigation, and truth are on Christianity's side.

Lee Smile



Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:34 am; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : Added response/comment, spelling, clarification)

View user profile
Literal.
Historical and spiritual.
Natural and supernatural.
Fact.

View user profile

123 He is Risen! on Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:42 am

50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 And behold the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split.
52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;
53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.
2 And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it.
3 And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow.
4 The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men.
5 The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified.
6 "He is not here, for He has risen,

Matthew 27,28: Literal or symbolic? Historical or spiritual? Natural or supernatural? Fact or fiction?

View user profile http://christperspectives.wordpress.com

124 *** Our little shrinking violet of Humility *** on Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:40 pm

Lee ...

Do you think that maybe you could dial-back the condescension just a tad ???
I'm sure glad to know that you would never call Lucien or I "Stupid" ???
It's never wise to underestimate your opponents!

I will gladly address ALL of your problems with the Genesis text in the near future!
But ... for right now I would like to address just a couple of things that have been
posted and need to be expanded upon just a little bit!

The ONLY form of Science being taught in EVERY major University of any notoriety
is 100% pure Naturalism !!!
Did you forget that you went with Stu to see the movie Expelled?
If a professor even mentions "Intelligent Design" as anything but lunacy ... they have
just ended their career ... and will be black-listed as a Religious rube!

You mentioned Antony Flew as someone who was converted from Atheism because
of scientific evidence that convinced him of God's existence!
I happened to have read his book "There is a God"... that he co-wrote soon after his
change of heart! He cited the complexity of DNA ... & the inconsistencies and inadequacy
of Darwinian evolutionary theory as his main reasons for concluding that there must
be some kind of Supernatural Intelligence that created "Life" !!!
Sadly ... he was instantly considered anathema by his former peers ... who believed
every word that came out the this mans mouth for over 50 years ... until he said that
God must exist ... and then their only explanation was that poor Antony had finally
gone senile on them!
Even more sadly ... he died just over a year ago ... before he was ever convinced to
accept Jesus as his Lord & Savior! Antony Flew's conversion to Deism served only
to destroy his Worldly credibility ... while at the same time leaving him with the same
eternal destiny that we hoped and prayed that he would avoid !!!

Another person (recently mentioned) that decided to destroy his credibility with the
Scientific Community ... was Dr. John Sanford !!!
I have also read his book "Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome"... and have
to totally agree with Lucien about this being a MUST read for anyone who is serious
about wanting to understand the truth about genetic mutations!
Lee! ... I challenge you to read this book with an open mind?
Before you poo-poo this guy as just another Stupid Ignorant Buffoon because I think
that he's worthy of listening to ... here are his credentials:

He was a Cornell University Professor for nearly 20-years before retiring!
He earned his PhD in Genetics!
He has published over 80 scientific articles in "Peer Reviewed" journals!
He has over 30 Patents related to the field of genetics!

But ... because he has made the complete conversion from Atheist to Born Again Christian
(of course) he no longer has ANY credibility with his former peers!

I'm sure that a fellow Christian (such as yourself) would NEVER consider his Spiritual
conversion as detrimental to his academic education and career ... but more likely as
a broader understanding of the science of genetics ... now that the restrictions and
constraints of Naturalism have been removed from his thinking !!!


20 Bret*11




View user profile

125 You just gotta love him on Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:41 am

Despite statements like:
"How can we have a meaningful discussion on technical biological issues which you know very little about when we can't even have a meaningful discussion on Biblical issues which you do know something about (albeit distorted)?"


[sarcasm]
It's amazing Lee, that you seem to know so much about me, without having even met me, and only corresponded with me for a year or two on this forum.
[/sarcasm]

Lee, please quote (date and time) where I said that Genesis does not contain symbolism?
Reason is, that I doubt that I said that, as I already have pointed out, but you seem to have it in your skull that I did.
One symbol would be the dreams that Joseph interpreted.
So, I do believe there is symbolism, but before you now gloriously claim that you have converted me, please be so kind in giving me the exact reference where I stated that I do not think there is symbolism in Genesis.

Seeing that you hold that Gen. 1 and 2 contradict, can you first please state which of the two chapters evolution tallies up with so we can compare the order of appearance of various creatures?

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 5 of 40]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 22 ... 40  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum