In the Beginning...

[Cabal]

Is that what they teach in "higher" academia?

Why, does sleeping with your sister have different terminology in your church?

 

[AV1611VET]

Picture's inaccurate.

"Circle" is not 3D.

You might want to take another look @ that picture, Cabal.

And did you get the part of the verse that I highlighted in red?

Can you see how I answered Tomatoman's post quite effectively?

 

[Tomatoman]

AV:

Can you see how I answered Tomatoman's post quite effectively?

You certainly did. However, did the quote you answered me with strike you as ludicrous?

 

[AV1611VET]

You certainly did. However, did the quote you answered me with strike you as ludicrous?

-- No, why?

I know you asked Dove if God created everything while standing @ the North Pole, and I answered from a later perspective (in Isaiah); but I figured you were just resorting to melodrama in order to ridicule the point.

 

[Tomatoman]

Alright, AV, think of the size of the universe and the number of galaxies, stars and planets in it. That would be hundreds of billions of galaxies each comprised of hundreds of billions of stars. If each star only has one planet around it you have very roughly 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the universe. Now according to the bible god "sitteth upon the circle of the earth" while carrying out creation. Now viewed from a universal perspective with billions and billions of solar systems to create, doesn't the bible's account sound a little earth-centric? Laughably so in fact?

 

[AV1611VET]

Alright, AV, think of the size of the universe and the number of galaxies, stars and planets in it. That would be hundreds of billions of galaxies each comprised of hundreds of billions of stars. If each star only has one planet around it you have very roughly 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the universe. Now according to the bible god "sitteth upon the circle of the earth" while carrying out creation. Now viewed from a universal perspective with billions and billions of solar systems to create, doesn't the bible's account sound a little earth-centric? Laughably so in fact?

2

 

[Tomatoman]

I read your post in link '2', it's unbelievable rubbish. How can you believe such retarded nonsense. How?

 

[driewerf]

I read your post in link '2', it's unbelievable rubbish. How can you believe such retarded nonsense. How?

Creationists respect nothing: science not, history not, other people's beliefs not, the truth not and even their own bible is victim of their intellectual vandalism.
if you want to read creationist rubbish, this must be such a fail, that it deserves a gold medal:

Scientists like these atheistic evolutionists also used to believe that the Earth was flat and that large objects fell to Earth faster than small objects; they were wrong on both those counts too. Atheists (based on their religious outlook after all) are not "scientific" in their belief that the universe just kind of exploded into existence all by itself. Rather they are in denial and their religious beliefs stand against known testable-repeatable science. Creationists are the ones standing on the side of science. Since every action has an equal and opposite reaction there must have been a Creator to initiate all that is.

http://www.creationism.org/articles/genesis.htm

 

[MoonLancer]

-- No, why?

I know you asked Dove if God created everything while standing @ the North Pole, and I answered from a later perspective (in Isaiah); but I figured you were just resorting to melodrama in order to ridicule the point.

So Santa is God?

 

[AV1611VET]

So Santa is God?

-- I knew it just be a matter of time before someone said that.

 

[Cabal]

So Santa is God?

No, it's Superman.

 

[MoonLancer]

No, it's Superman.

wow you found out Supermans true identity its Santa

 

[MoonLancer]

-- I knew it just be a matter of time before someone said that.

Its a really silly idea, truth be told. That's what happens when you take modern understandings and pretend that bible writers understood it as such.

 

[AV1611VET]

Its a really silly idea, truth be told. That's what happens when you take modern understandings and pretend that bible writers understood it as such.

Um ... no ... the Bible writers did not understand everything they were writing about.

For example, none of the Old Testament [human] authors wrote about the Church Age (dispensation of Grace).

(In fact, Paul calls it a "mystery".)

That's why you'll see a prophecy with both the Messiah's advent and the Millennial Kingdom both in the same sentence.

For example:

Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

I'll highlight it for emphasis:

Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Notice when Jesus quotes this passage, He stops at the comma:

Luke 4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

Why did He do that?

Because the first part of that passage deals with Jesus' first advent; whereas the second part of that passage deals with Jesus' second advent.

What is separating the two advents?

The Church Age -- the dispensation of Grace.

 

[MoonLancer]

Um ... no ... the Bible writers did not understand everything they were writing about.

For example, none of the Old Testament [human] authors wrote about the Church Age (dispensation of Grace).

(In fact, Paul calls it a "mystery".)

That's why you'll see a prophecy with both the Messiah's advent and the Millennial Kingdom both in the same sentence.

For example:

Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

I'll highlight it for emphasis:

Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Notice when Jesus quotes this passage, He stops at the comma:

Luke 4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

Why did He do that?

Because the first part of that passage deals with Jesus' first advent; whereas the second part of that passage deals with Jesus' second advent.

What is separating the two advents?

The Church Age -- the dispensation of Grace.

I think your grasping at straws.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think your grasping at straws.

Since the alternative would have to be agreeing with you that God wasn't talking about the Arctic Circle, I'm thankful for those straws.

I'd ask you what you thought God meant by "circle of the earth", but frankly, I'm tired of hearing you guys go on and on about how you are so much more edjicatid than anyone who grew up w/o Wikipedia.

You guys like to go on about how much more you know than we do, then get a reality-check when someone points out you're only 24th on the list of academic brouhaha -- which places you at the bottom of the barrel.

 

[Tomatoman]

AV:

Since the alternative would have to be agreeing with you that God wasn't talking about the Arctic Circle, I'm thankful for those straws.

You're grateful even though your interpretation is plain dumb? What genuinely baffles me, AV, is that you don't seem to show any signs of a personal critical faculty. Surely part of you must sit back and think "even though this is in the bible, it is plainly wrong". Being grateful for straws like the ones you are grasping at looks from here like pure desperation.

AV:

I'd ask you what you thought God meant by "circle of the earth", but frankly, I'm tired of hearing you guys go on and on about how you are so much more edjicatid than anyone who grew up w/o Wikipedia.

As the person who wrote the passage was describing a creation myth passed down by word of mouth it is fairly clear what he was describing when he said the circle of the earth. Attributing a divine truth to the passage a couple of thousand years later is, er, worse than grasping at straws.

AV:

You guys like to go on about how much more you know than we do, then get a reality-check when someone points out you're only 24th on the list of academic brouhaha -- which places you at the bottom of the barrel.

Not quite at the bottom, AV. Far, far below us are creationists and their babblings.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not quite at the bottom, AV.

Yes -- at the bottom, Tomatoman.

I can't find it now, but someone recently started a thread where we are @ the bottom of the list of some worldwide clipboard; meaning we are in 24th place.

When I mentioned there were ...

Oh, wait -- nevermind -- I just found it.

QV please: 11.

 

[Tomatoman]

A throwaway joke at the end of my post is what you focus on?

I suppose the rest just didn't register.

 

[AV1611VET]

I suppose the rest just didn't register.

You expect me to dignify that post with a response?