Chinchilla
Well-Known Member
Not particularly ...
So you cherry pick what you like
Acts 20:27 King James Version (KJV)
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
Upvote
0
Not particularly ...
I think you mean "mass".
And... things were heavier or lighter... before the theory of gravity.. and it only depends on gravity if you need to explain a globe model and why people don't fall off the bottom.... or which is the bottom...
So... gravity made the outside of the globe the top and the top is all around and we are all drawn to the center... Problem solved...
1 Corinthians 3:19 King James Version (KJV)
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
1 Timothy 6:19-21 King James Version (KJV)Back to the Chinchilla? Are you tag teaming?
What is the context of that quote, as in what is being addressed by Paul in chapter 3? Why do you think it applies to ideas about the cosmos?
Ok right somehow it was in the back of my mind that passage referred to Lucifer and I didn’t re-read the context before posting.
1 Timothy 6:19-21 King James Version (KJV)
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
What makes you think that Paul was talking about different understandings of the cosmos here?
Because it's not coherent with Scriptures .
Not coherent with your understanding of the scriptures perhaps. It’s still a bit of a stretch though, there’s nothing in the text to suggest Paul was thinking about how teachings on creation should be interpreted, if this was an issue at the time.
So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?
None of this explains anything more than the fact that things fall down.The story is told ... of Sir Isaac Newton napping under an apple tree ... when an apple fell and hit him on the head. Happenings like these led to the initial study on the phenomenon of gravity ... long before we contemplated a spinning disk.
From https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question232.htm
Every time you jump, you experience gravity. It pulls you back down to the ground. Without gravity, you'd float off into the atmosphere -- along with all of the other matter on Earth.
You see gravity at work any time you drop a book, step on a scale or toss a ball up into the air. It's such a constant presence in our lives, we seldom marvel at the mystery of it -- but even with several well-received theories out there attempting to explain why a book falls to the ground (and at the same rate as a pebble or a couch, at that), they're still just theories. The mystery of gravity's pull is pretty much intact.
So what do we know about gravity? We know that it causes any two objects in the universe to be drawn to one another. We know that gravity assisted in forming the universe, that it keeps the moon in orbit around the Earth, and that it can be harnessed for more mundane applications like gravity-powered motors or gravity-powered lamps.
As for the science behind the action, we know that Isaac Newton defined gravity as a force -- one that attracts all objects to all other objects. We know that Albert Einstein said gravity is a result of the curvature of space-time. These two theories are the most common and widely held (if somewhat incomplete) explanations of gravity.
In this article, we'll look at Newton's theory of gravity, Einstein's theory of gravity and we'll touch on a more recent view of the phenomenon as well.
Although many people had already noted that gravity exists, Newton was the first to develop a cohesive explanation for gravity, so we'll start there.
In the 1600s, an English physicist and mathematician named Isaac Newton was sitting under an apple tree -- or so the legend tells us. Apparently, an apple fell on his head, and he started wondering why the apple was attracted to the ground in the first place.
Newton publicized his Theory of Universal Gravitation in the 1680s. It basically set forth the idea that gravity was a predictable force that acts on all matter in the universe, and is a function of both mass and distance. The theory states that each particle of matter attracts every other particle (for instance, the particles of "Earth" and the particles of "you") with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
So the farther apart the particles are, and/or the less massive the particles, the less the gravitational force.
So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?
Both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution are very well established major theories, with enormous levels of verification and evidence. The ToE is stronger, probably, than the BBT, but it's sort of like saying 'steel is fairly strong but titanium alloy is stronger' - either one will serve for tableware with no danger of failure due to stress. At this point there are no known major issues with either theory. Details to be filled in? Yes. Serious difficulties? No.
So do you believe in evolution and big bang aswell ?
One of the most ignorant, arrogant and totally useless displays of a celebrity actor/scientist... ever.. for the argument for gravity was Neil Disgust Tyson dropping a mike on the stage.... totally no point was made, no evidence and not conclusion could be drawn from it.
Meanwhile, all the sheeple applauded it.
Do you not have problem with death before sin in ToE ? If Jesus came to restore things , that would mean he came to restore everything prior to sin but there still would be death.As well as what? As far as I know evolution is the best available explanation regarding how life has developed and diversified on earth. The Big Bang? Seems legit, I mean as an explanation for the mechanics of how everything in the physical universe came to be.
Here’s a more literal, word for word, translation of the first verses of Genesis, from The Mechanical Bible:
In the origin Elohiym shaped the skies and the land, and the land had existed in confusion and was unfilled, and darkness was upon the face of the deep water and the wind of Elohiym was fluttering upon the face of the water.
As you can see it’s more about bringing order than creating ‘stuff’. John H Walton in his book The Lost World of Genesis One delves into thinking about ‘creation’ in the ancient world, and, along with a technical analysis of the Hebrew, draws out what the account was likely to have meant to the first Israelites, which was quite different to our assumptions about the text today.
Do you not have problem with death before sin in ToE ? If Jesus came to restore things , that would mean he came to restore everything prior to sin but there still would be death.
But we are told there will be no more death .
Revelation 21:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
None of this explains anything more than the fact that things fall down.
The difference is that thing fall down in the USA and they fall down in Australia... and the two "downs" are in opposite directions.. there in lies the problem.
Sorry I don’t get the connection you are making there.