Absurdities of so called science

[Nathan Poe]

Quick question, dad (let the fact that I'm willing to address you testify to my boredom tonight)

1. You believe that the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, etc. were in a different state in the past, up until a point you refer to as "The Split," due to your peculiar reading of the Bible.

Let's refer to this state as state "A."

2. After the Split, the laws of the universe reconfigured themselves to the present state, what we here commonly refer to as "reality," but for this discussion, will call state "B."

3. At some point in the future, when the giant golden cube of New Jerusalem descends upon us, the laws will change once again to what you originally call a "merged" state...

but, seeing as how, according to you, we will how powers and abilities far beyond anything recorded in the Bible from pre-slpit days, would it be accurate to say that this will not be a regression back to state "A," but something completely new and different? A State "C," perhaps?

I just want to clear things up before we go any further.

 

[dad]

Quick question, dad (let the fact that I'm willing to address you testify to my boredom tonight)

1. You believe that the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, etc. were in a different state in the past, up until a point you refer to as "The Split," due to your peculiar reading of the Bible.

Let's refer to this state as state "A."

2. After the Split, the laws of the universe reconfigured themselves to the present state, what we here commonly refer to as "reality," but for this discussion, will call state "B."

3. At some point in the future, when the giant golden cube of New Jerusalem descends upon us, the laws will change once again to what you originally call a "merged" state...

but, seeing as how, according to you, we will how powers and abilities far beyond anything recorded in the Bible from pre-slpit days, would it be accurate to say that this will not be a regression back to state "A," but something completely new and different? A State "C," perhaps?

I just want to clear things up before we go any further.

Well, can you tell me what powers Adam had?? Some suggest that he was master over the universe, the weather, the animals, everything! Just like the second Adam, Jesus was also master over the sea, etc. So, tell us how you can know this???

As for the pre flood stage, after te fall, it sounds a lot like the 1000 yr reign of Christ after He returns, right down to the lifespans. It is after this, that the new heavens come. Therefore, to fibne tune, irt seems we have the ore fall universe possibly being the same as the new heavens? That leaves the milenium, and the pre flood time. And of course, the present. Of these four, the pre fall and post milenium sound pretty close to the same. This could mean that a big big big change is coming at the return of Jesus! Seemingly, a return to the spirit included type state on earth, at least, but not the universe?

The new heavens, or universe would be after the thousand years. You heard it here first, folks. Be astounded.

 

[dad]

http://psychcentral.com/lib/2008/why-alcohol-and-depression-dont-mix/

http://www.brighteyecounselling.co.uk/alcohol-drugs/alcohol-makes-depression-even-worse/

This is all I have left to say. Anybody else with a sane mind will hopefully realize to never give alcohol to anybody suffering from any sort of depression. Do not believe the crap that some people spew on here, "giving wine to those in deep sorrow" is wrong and all the evidence shows it is a bad idea.

No, I disagree. Not when the deep sorrow is seen in the light of the ancient meaning. Their drugs simply take the place of the wine.
Pr 31:6 - Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.
The severoty is in the ready to perish bit. Like morophine these days.


" Verse 6. Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish
We have already seen, that inebriating drinks were mercifully given to condemned criminals, to render them less sensible of the torture they endured in dying. This is what was offered to our Lord; but he refused it."

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=pr&chapter=31&verse=6#Pr31_6


"[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Geneva]Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish…
Thou, O Lemuel, and other kings and judges, rather than drink strong drink yourselves, least to excess; give it out of your great abundance and liberality to poor persons in starving circumstances, who must perish, unless relieved; it will do them good, moderately used; and should they drink too freely, which they ought not, yet it would not be attended with such bad consequences as if kings and princes should; and wine to those that be of heavy heart;
of melancholy dispositions, under gloomy apprehensions of things; pressed with the weight of their affliction and poverty: or, "bitter in soul" F9; such as God has dealt bitterly with, as Naomi says was her case, and therefore called her own name Marah, which signifies bitter; of such a sorrowful spirit, and one thus bitter in soul, was Hannah; and so Job, and others; persons in great affliction and distress, to whom life itself is bitter;"

http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=pr&chapter=31&verse=6

So, it is not mere so called depression here, but a life and death sorrow. Not something reccomended, for example, to kings, or others.
[/FONT]

 

[thaumaturgy]

So, tell us how you can know this???

(Emphasis added)

Does this apply to you as well, Dad? What do you know and how do you know it?

Therefore, to fibne tune, irt seems we have the ore fall universe possibly being the same as the new heavens?

Getting a bit sloppy on the keyboard there, having a bit of the strong spirits from earlier in the discussion?

That leaves the milenium, and the pre flood time. And of course, the present. Of these four, the pre fall and post milenium

Millenium has two "l's" (payback for your obsession on my misspelling "aeolian" in an earlier thread. Ironic isn't it? You reap what you sow.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Millenium has two "l's" (payback for your obsession on my misspelling "aeolian" in an earlier thread. Ironic isn't it? You reap what you sow.)

Millennium has two ens in it.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Millennium has two ens in it.

touche! Brilliant! Thank you.

 

[AV1611VET]

touche! Brilliant! Thank you.

I assume my time'll come ---

 

[Nathan Poe]

Well, can you tell me what powers Adam had?? Some suggest that he was master over the universe, the weather, the animals, everything!

Ah, but that had nothing do to with the Split, dad -- whatever powers and abilities Adam may have had, he would've lost at the Fall, not the Split.

As far as being "master over everything," Isn't that God's job description?

Just like the second Adam, Jesus was also master over the sea, etc.

Biblical mythology tells us that Jesus was God incarnate -- so how he was supposedly able to do this is no mystery -- except perhaps for one such as yourself who covets His power.

So, tell us how you can know this???

This is your theology, dad -- I'm just summarizing you. So how can you know this?

As for the pre flood stage, after te fall, it sounds a lot like the 1000 yr reign of Christ after He returns, right down to the lifespans.

According to you, dad, the 1000 year reign will be even better, tho...

(btw, you're quickly becoming incoherent.)

It is after this, that the new heavens come. Therefore, to fibne tune, irt seems we have the ore fall universe possibly being the same as the new heavens? That leaves the milenium, and the pre flood time. And of course, the present. Of these four, the pre fall and post milenium sound pretty close to the same. This could mean that a big big big change is coming at the return of Jesus! Seemingly, a return to the spirit included type state on earth, at least, but not the universe?

Ok, this is completeand total gibberish -- I mean seriously, you're not even trying to speak English here.

Most I can figure out is that you're claiming that somewhere along the line there will be fourth state of existence -- State "D," perhaps?

Please dad, once more, with a coherent thought process this time...

The new heavens, or universe would be after the thousand years. You heard it here first, folks. Be astounded.

Actually, dad, we didn't hear it here first -- we heard it from the Bible long before you. And the Bible describes it much better than you -- although still not credibly.

Sorry dad -- nobody's astounded with you.

 

[BananaSlug]

No, I disagree. Not when the deep sorrow is seen in the light of the ancient meaning. Their drugs simply take the place of the wine.
"[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Geneva]Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish…[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Geneva]Thou, O Lemuel, and other kings and judges, rather than drink strong drink yourselves, least to excess; give it out of your great abundance and liberality to poor persons in starving circumstances, who must perish, unless relieved; it will do them good, moderately used; and should they drink too freely, which they ought not, yet it would not be attended with such bad consequences as if kings and princes should; and wine to those that be of heavy heart;[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Geneva]of melancholy dispositions, under gloomy apprehensions of things; pressed with the weight of their affliction and poverty: or, "bitter in soul" F9; such as God has dealt bitterly with, as Naomi says was her case, and therefore called her own name Marah, which signifies bitter; of such a sorrowful spirit, and one thus bitter in soul, was Hannah; and so Job, and others; persons in great affliction and distress, to whom life itself is bitter;"[/FONT]

Again, I am not talking about those on the brink of death. According to the views expressed in your post it is okay for the poor to drink ("pressed with the weight of their affliction and poverty"). People who are "heavy of heart" or in "deep sorrow" are not given drugs that act the same way as alcohol. People with clinical depression often have chemical imbalances in their brain. The medicine is meant to correct those imbalances. Those who have suffered a severe loss (spouse, parents, children, etc) should never drink alcohol in an attempt to relieve their suffering. Often such actions can lead to suicide or other bad ideas.

I do not disagree with providing painkillers to those in severe pain. I disagree with providing alcohol to those who are "heavy of heart," "in deep sorrow," or whatever words you want to use to describe clinical depression. The fact remains that giving alcohol to people who are severely depressed is a horrible thing to do. Nothing from the Bible can justify the fact that alcohol is a depressant and giving it to those who are "heavy of heart," will more likely cause more problems. I know there are other people on this forum who agree.

Sorry dad, the Bible is wrong in that little tidbit of information. I find it funny to give wine to those of "heavy heart" but then the Bible calls wine "a mocker and anyone who is led astray by it is not wise." Sorry dad.

 

[dad]

(Emphasis added)

Does this apply to you as well, Dad? What do you know and how do you know it?



Getting a bit sloppy on the keyboard there, having a bit of the strong spirits from earlier in the discussion?



Millenium has two "l's" (payback for your obsession on my misspelling "aeolian" in an earlier thread. Ironic isn't it? You reap what you sow.)

It isn't really. I wasn't harping on a silly spelling mistake. I looked up something you posted, if I recall right, to see what it meant. Therfore, the wrong spelling was an issue, since I think you meant something else!! Focus.

As to what I know, we can start by what science knows, and doesn't know. I have tried to do that.

If you want to be staked to the ground, with a chain that revolves around only present state knowledge, and laws, you cannot know anything more. You must content yourself with that handicap, learn to live with it. Just don't yell at those way over the hill, looking out at the wonders beyond that worn out little horizon!

You may not pass. Not any further than that, unless you lose the shackles, and chains that hold you. Your only recourse is to try to convince us that there are no Alps! Nothing more than what is near the stake. That all areas over and beyond observation, are bound by the same chain!! And you must prove it. Too bad you can't.


I read the map that the creator gave, that explained that there was a lot more. It gives the way, and the details, to a large degree.

Hope that puts fishbowl physics in pespective.

 

[dad]

Again, I am not talking about those on the brink of death. According to the views expressed in your post it is okay for the poor to drink ("pressed with the weight of their affliction and poverty"). People who are "heavy of heart" or in "deep sorrow" are not given drugs that act the same way as alcohol. People with clinical depression often have chemical imbalances in their brain. The medicine is meant to correct those imbalances. Those who have suffered a severe loss (spouse, parents, children, etc) should never drink alcohol in an attempt to relieve their suffering. Often such actions can lead to suicide or other bad ideas.

I do not disagree with providing painkillers to those in severe pain. I disagree with providing alcohol to those who are "heavy of heart," "in deep sorrow," or whatever words you want to use to describe clinical depression. The fact remains that giving alcohol to people who are severely depressed is a horrible thing to do. Nothing from the Bible can justify the fact that alcohol is a depressant and giving it to those who are "heavy of heart," will more likely cause more problems. I know there are other people on this forum who agree.

Sorry dad, the Bible is wrong in that little tidbit of information. I find it funny to give wine to those of "heavy heart" but then the Bible calls wine "a mocker and anyone who is led astray by it is not wise." Sorry dad.

To misuse wine is not wise. Being led astray to real misuse, obviously is not wise. Neither is misusing morphine. But there is a time, for godly men, when strong help is needed. The issue seems to be you think it is at the drop of a ha=t, No. That is not the meaning or spirit of the text. I win.

 

[dad]

Ah, but that had nothing do to with the Split, dad -- whatever powers and abilities Adam may have had, he would've lost at the Fall, not the Split.

Well, the powers Adam had obviously were before any universe change. Point? Man fell, but the earth, apparently, was still affected by the laws that goverened the universe. The ground was cursed, I don't recall that reaching to the stars, or center of the earth?!

As far as being "master over everything," Isn't that God's job description?

That depends if He gives someone a job, to be master. Obviously the Head Honcho is God. No one suggested, as you know, that Adam was master over God. Ridiculous.

Biblical mythology tells us that Jesus was God incarnate -- so how he was supposedly able to do this is no mystery -- except perhaps for one such as yourself who covets His power.

No mystery? Tell us how, then. The bible also tells us Jesus became a man, rose from the dead a man, as well in an eternal body, He still has. We shall be like Him, it says. Not sure why you seem intent on debasing men, even after they come to His glorious kingdom.

I heard an idea that Adam indeed was originally to rule over the powers of nature as well. (Vernon Magee) I have no reason to doubt it. Not have you given us any.

This is your theology, dad -- I'm just summarizing you. So how can you know this?

What I can know, is that science does, and cannot know. That is what we are looking at here. As well as the absurd conclusions that so called science must come to, in the end of their wrong reasoning, based on a false foundation.

There are cluse as to the actual state of things in the future, and a clear similarity to the far past.

According to you, dad, the 1000 year reign will be even better, tho...

(btw, you're quickly becoming incoherent.)

Better than what? In what way? The people living on earth will have similar life spans, and crops will grow fast, etc. It will be better, in most ways than the period from the fall, till the split, since Jesus is here! But the new heavens do not come till after the thousand years.

Most I can figure out is that you're claiming that somewhere along the line there will be fourth state of existence -- State "D," perhaps?

Please dad, once more, with a coherent thought process this time...

It was deep, so it would require more than a sntence or two to result in any undertstanding. We could keep it simple, and say that the past and future are different than the present.

Actually, dad, we didn't hear it here first -- we heard it from the Bible long before you. And the Bible describes it much better than you -- although still not credibly.

Sorry dad -- nobody's astounded with you.

Why you pretend that I said be astounded at me, I have no idea. Seems terribly childish, patronizing, and foolish. And, I am not sure what you think you heard in the bible, funny I never heard a thing about a different state universe, myself, before? Neither did I read about the partially different state affected surface of the earth in the pre flood, and 1000 year reign of Jesus? Ask around, if you think otherwise.

 

[thaumaturgy]

...

 

[dad]

...

....

 

[MoonLancer]

....!

 

[Nathan Poe]

Well, the powers Adam had obviously were before any universe change. Point? Man fell, but the earth, apparently, was still affected by the laws that goverened the universe. The ground was cursed, I don't recall that reaching to the stars, or center of the earth?!

Then you need to actually read the Bible sometime -- your knowledge of it would be considered pitiful, if you merited pity.

Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

Paul here is referring to a post-Fall, not post-"Split" world -- please note the phrase "the whole creation."

You really should confer with AV1611VET on this one, dad -- at least he makes more of an effort to be Biblically consistent.

That depends if He gives someone a job, to be master. Obviously the Head Honcho is God. No one suggested, as you know, that Adam was master over God. Ridiculous.

Adam was certainly not master over all of Creation -- there was at least one part of it which was off-limits to him (Tree of Knowledge)

No mystery? Tell us how, then. The bible also tells us Jesus became a man, rose from the dead a man, as well in an eternal body, He still has.

Technically speaking, I suppose you could call it a "mystery," even though it isn't -- the "mystery" of the Incarnation. It's so simple, only the willingly dense don't get the concept: Jesus was fully human, but at the same time, fully God.

This serves to differentiate Him from other mythological heroes, who, as sons of gods, were 50% God, 50% human. Jesus, OTOH, was 100% human but paradoxically enough, also 100% God.

Being 100% God makes Jesus' accomplishments child's play.

This is basic Christianity, dad -- I'm a bit surprised you don't know this.

Surprised, but hardly disappointed.

We shall be like Him, it says. Not sure why you seem intent on debasing men, even after they come to His glorious kingdom.

I can see why you would covet Jesus' power for yourself, dad. This time, I'm neither surprised nor disappointed.

I heard an idea that Adam indeed was originally to rule over the powers of nature as well. (Vernon Magee) I have no reason to doubt it. Not have you given us any.

Well, I heard an idea that Adam was originally to have the power to exude Cheese-Whiz from his pores on alternate Tuesdays. Seeing as how the story didn't go that way, we can speculate just about whatever we want without fear of being proven wrong.

What I can know, is that science does, and cannot know. That is what we are looking at here. As well as the absurd conclusions that so called science must come to, in the end of their wrong reasoning, based on a false foundation.

Which then raises the question of what makes your foundations any less false? Seems that you only reject that possibility because you choose to -- thus putting your own beliefs (at least in your own mind) on the same level as established science -- this despite the fact that half of your beliefs are incoherent blather.

Religion has great potential to make the impotent feel important -- but don't let the illusion of power go to your head, dad.

There are cluse as to the actual state of things in the future, and a clear similarity to the far past.

Similar, if we accept the "clues" at face value, but not identical -- that's all I was trying to point out originally, before you got insecure.

Better than what? In what way? The people living on earth will have similar life spans, and crops will grow fast, etc. It will be better, in most ways than the period from the fall, till the split, since Jesus is here! But the new heavens do not come till after the thousand years.

See now? All you had to do was say that -- State "A" + Jesus = State "C."

It was deep, so it would require more than a sntence or two to result in any undertstanding. We could keep it simple, and say that the past and future are different than the present.

And also different from each other -- that's the point I was getting at.

Why you pretend that I said be astounded at me, I have no idea. Seems terribly childish, patronizing, and foolish.

That's ok dad -- we're used to it. After all, you're going to rule the universe someday, right?

And, I am not sure what you think you heard in the bible, funny I never heard a thing about a different state universe, myself, before?

Ah, so you did make that part up -- kudos for your (much-delayed) honesty.

Again, you really need some sit-down time with AV1611VET to get your story more in line with Scripture.

(And given the nature of the debates I've had with AV, I'm sure he can appreciate the irony of me recommending him to you)

Neither did I read about the partially different state affected surface of the earth in the pre flood, and 1000 year reign of Jesus? Ask around, if you think otherwise.

Nope, turns out you did concoct it all from whole cloth. Too bad people still laugh at you -- the joke will be on us if you actually get it right.

 

[dad]

....!

......!!!

 

[dad]

Then you need to actually read the Bible sometime -- your knowledge of it would be considered pitiful, if you merited pity.

Well, if you dared make a point, we could see how worthy your boasting was! I have read some of the bible.

Paul here is referring to a post-Fall, not post-"Split" world -- please note the phrase "the whole creation."

Says WHO??? He is referring to the state of man, not discussing the laws of physics. This is news?

You really should confer with AV1611VET on this one, dad -- at least he makes more of an effort to be Biblically consistent.

That's what you think. We all do what we can.

Adam was certainly not master over all of Creation -- there was at least one part of it which was off-limits to him (Tree of Knowledge)

Well, if I pranced around Eden, changing the weather at a whim, seeing what stars I wanted to at night, cuddling the woman made for me to cuddle, and etc, I think I would appreciate the one restriction that was there! Adam was not God, after all, but merely to have dominion. Under God, of course.

Technically speaking, I suppose you could call it a "mystery," even though it isn't -- the "mystery" of the Incarnation. It's so simple, only the willingly dense don't get the concept: Jesus was fully human, but at the same time, fully God.

So??? Point?? He still has the body He rose with, as He will always have.

This serves to differentiate Him from other mythological heroes, who, as sons of gods, were 50% God, 50% human. Jesus, OTOH, was 100% human but paradoxically enough, also 100% God.

Being 100% God makes Jesus' accomplishments child's play.

God in a body of a man. That He did for us, not because, I suspect He wanted some little body of flesh.

This is basic Christianity, dad -- I'm a bit surprised you don't know this.

Surprised, but hardly disappointed.

If you never had it wrong, why would you have admittedly backslid??

I can see why you would covet Jesus' power for yourself, dad. This time, I'm neither surprised nor disappointed.

We do and will have power. Better than your cockroach as a relative beliefs, I'd say!

Well, I heard an idea that Adam was originally to have the power to exude Cheese-Whiz from his pores on alternate Tuesdays. Seeing as how the story didn't go that way, we can speculate just about whatever we want without fear of being proven wrong.

Well, I heard it from a Dr, not a dreamer. Go figure. And he had scriptures oozing out his pores to support it. You should be so lucky.

Which then raises the question of what makes your foundations any less false? Seems that you only reject that possibility because you choose to -- thus putting your own beliefs (at least in your own mind) on the same level as established science -- this despite the fact that half of your beliefs are incoherent blather.

Ludicrous claptrap, I reject the belief in a same state as science, because it is NOT science, nor proven, nor known, nor knowable, nor biblical, etc.

Religion has great potential to make the impotent feel important -- but don't let the illusion of power go to your head, dad.

Impotent? Like who, Solomon? Abraham? David? Adam? Noah? ....??? Seems like you may be projecting here..at least your posts lead one to thinkk so.

See now? All you had to do was say that -- State "A" + Jesus = State "C."

Say what?

That's ok dad -- we're used to it. After all, you're going to rule the universe someday, right?

Personally, I have few ruling plans. However, Jesus will rule with His Own. Being one of them, I can only have so much modesty, before it is false modesty.

Let us be comforted that the relatives of the evos, the cockroaches will not rule.

Ah, so you did make that part up -- kudos for your (much-delayed) honesty.

No. I put together the clues. Try it sometime.

Again, you really need some sit-down time with AV1611VET to get your story more in line with Scripture.

If he had a bone to pick with me, do you not think him man enough to step out, and do it??

Nope, turns out you did concoct it all from whole cloth. Too bad people still laugh at you -- the joke will be on us if you actually get it right.

I concocted the split merge theroy, yes. Thanks. From the whole history of man, the whole bible, and the whole science that I saw. So?? Are you sad that I never stuffed the universe into a speck, or made flatworms our close relative? Get over it.

 

[Danyc]

......!!!

?

 

[Danyc]

Ludicrous claptrap.

Yup, that's basically it.

Personally, I have few ruling plans. However, Jesus will rule with His Own. Being one of them, I can only have so much modesty, before it is false modesty.

And being immodest is better than being falsely modest?

I'm pretty sure they're the same thing.

Let us be comforted that the relatives of the evos, the cockroaches will not rule.

The relatives of humans, you mean. But then, we are also the relatives of the eagle, the lion, the tiger, the whale, the owl, the peacock, the viper...

Just like you to bring up a cockroach. But then, all animals are beautiful in their own ways. I wouldn't expect you to understand this.

I concocted the split merge theroy, yes. Thanks. From the whole history of man, the whole bible, and the whole science that I saw. So?? Are you sad that I never stuffed the universe into a speck, or made flatworms our close relative? Get over it.

I find it hard to believe that you alone on this planet are the one with true knowledge of the mysteries of the universe.

Am I really talking with such a person?

For on thing, you are woefully inconsistent-- you should be given medals and awards out the wazoo for your work. However you constantly make mistakes in everything you type. In other words-- you're not really reliable.