Seven Earth-Like Planets Found

[lesliedellow]

Isa 13:10 -For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Joe 2:10 - The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining:

Mt 24:29 -Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:


Re 6:14 - And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

So you think the stars are literally going to fall to Earth, do you? Well, knowing you, you probably do.

In case it has escaped your notice, in Acts 2.18-20 Peter talks about one such prediction being fulfilled in his own day, but the Sun is still shining, and the stars are still in the heavens. Clearly, he wasn't a crass literalist, like some today.

 

[Speedwell]

You are in no position to say there was no Daniel, Isaiah, or Adam and Eve. As a christian you may be able to say that, but not as a bible believer with a case.

So if the scripture is not 100% accurate literal history, the characters described in it never existed? Is that true of other historical narrative as well?

 

[Willis Gravning]

And they're only 39 light years away!

Seven Earth-Like Planets Orbit One Nearby Star

That is a very interesting article, thanks for sharing.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

First off, I am not a YEC,

So the genealogy in Luke 3 is lying then?

Did not Jesus refer to the first marriage as taking place in the beginning?

Is physical death a part of God's good creation?

"He will destroy this present universe and create a new heavens and Earth"

Not true. The Bible only talks about the end of the world and mankind's fate.

Not true. It does talk about that.

The Heavens and the Earth Pass Away:

• Revelation 20:11

"...the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them."

Jesus says,
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35).

...

 

[dad]

So you think the stars are literally going to fall to Earth, do you? Well, knowing you, you probably do.

Yes, that is how wrong I think your belief system is about the created universe. Your idea of stars is bogus.

In case it has escaped your notice, in Acts 2.18-20 Peter talks about one such prediction being fulfilled in his own day, but the Sun is still shining, and the stars are still in the heavens. Clearly, he wasn't a crass literalist, like some today.[/QUOTE] Nope. Prophesy has final and intermediate fulfilments. Obviously the ultimate fulfilment was not in that day, but they did start to see it! They saw the spirit poured out, so they knew they had entered the last days. Chilling. Exciting.

 

[dad]

So if the scripture is not 100% accurate literal history, the characters described in it never existed?

They all existed. It is accurate.

Is that true of other historical narrative as well?

It is all true.

 

[lesliedellow]

So the genealogy in Luke 3 is lying then?

I take it you have heard of B B Warfield:

On the Antiquity and the Unity of the Human Race - Wikisource, the free online library

Did not Jesus refer to the first marriage as taking place in the beginning?

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/june/noadamevenogospel.html?start=2

That is page 2 of an article, but the relevant one.

Is physical death a part of God's good creation?

Even if it was allowed that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, if death had not been built into creation, the planet would be slightly over crowded by now, wouldn't you say?

Not true. It does talk about that.

The Heavens and the Earth Pass Away:

• Revelation 20:11

"...the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them."

Jesus says,
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35).

I wished fundamentalists would cut the biblical writers some slack, and allow them the use of poetic licence. See my response to Dad.

 

[Speedwell]

They all existed. It is accurate.

Did you not say that by rejecting the 100% literal accuracy of the scriptures I was denying the existence of Daniel, Isaiah, Adam and Eve?

"You are in no position to say there was no Daniel, Isaiah, or Adam and Eve."

That makes no sense. The accuracy of an historical narrative can have no effect whatever on the events and people it describes.

 

[lesliedellow]

Yes, that is how wrong I think your belief system is about the created universe. Your idea of stars is bogus.

Ah so. The stars are fifty watt light bulbs suspended from an upturned hemisphere.

Okay, got it.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I wished fundamentalists would cut the biblical writers some slack, and allow them the use of poetic licence. See my response to Dad.

No offense, my friend. But with statements like this, there is no need to even have a debate with God's Word. For if one does not agree with the normal standard of how language is communicated then we cannot have a rational discourse with God's Word.

Good day to you.
I think it is best we agree to disagree.


...

 

[Speedwell]

No offense, my friend. But with statements like this, there is no need to even have a debate with God's Word. For if one does not agree with the normal standard of how language is communicated then we cannot have a rational discourse with God's Word.

Good day to you.
I think it is best we agree to disagree.


...

"Normal standard" of what culture? What time period?

 

[dad]

Did you not say that by rejecting the 100% literal accuracy of the scriptures I was denying the existence of Daniel, Isaiah, Adam and Eve?

If one denies that Adam was the first guy and Eve the first gal and that they were created by God Personally, they do not reflect what Scripture says at all.

That makes no sense. The accuracy of an historical narrative can have no effect whatever on the events and people it describes.

No idea what you are trying to say.

 

[dad]

Ah so. The stars are fifty watt light bulbs suspended from an upturned hemisphere.

Okay, got it.

No. We just don't know distance or size. That kills your cosmological models of an uncreated universe.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

"Normal standard" of what culture? What time period?

Simple people.

This would have to include poor people.

"Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?" (James 2:5).

Also, the interpretation has to fit the context.

Heaven and Earth shall pass away but my words shall not pass away.

The context says,

“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

So it is talking about something passing away.

Also, Revelation uses other words to say the same thing.

See. It is simple.

...

 

[lesliedellow]

No. We just don't know distance or size. That kills your cosmological models of an uncreated universe.

So we are going to have thermo-nuclear furnaces falling to Earth, from a distance certainly beyond Pluto.

Okay, got it.

 

[dad]

So we are going to have thermo-nuclear furnaces falling to Earth, from a distance certainly beyond Pluto.

Okay, got it.

Only if the stars really were what you claim, and the distance and size you claim. I have seen your fail in supporting the model. I also lean to another concept about what stars are in the bible, how many visible stars are there? They say there are about 9,096 of them! So if the lights in the sky beyond that were not really categorized as 'stars' in the bible, it is possible that we might best think of them as something else. So, if 1/3 of the actual visible stars fall to earth, that is only about 3,032 stars! If the actual size of stars were something like say, just for example, the size of the space station, which I hear is about the size of a US football field, I think the earth could handle it!?

Now as for the little lights beyond the visible stars, they could be called something else than a star maybe.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So? Does that mean if a mastodon or elephant adapted into a dwarf elephant we would have transitional fossils?

Micro-Evolution is a change within a kind. This is scientific and even observable. Macro-Evolution is a change from a fish to a bird. This is fantasy and it is not observable. People believe in Macro-Evolution by faith and not by any kind of science. It is merely a theory that was drilled into their head over and over and over and over again since they were a child in school and by their watching of movies, etc. The same holds true when people think about "time" in relation to God, as well. They think time works like... "Back to the Future" or something silly.

Also how would you know what was a created kind fossil or one that did transition from a created kind?
He told us to cover the earth, so that means we would need to be quite adaptive. In the future Lions will eat grass and many feel that in the beginning they may have done that also. Wolves also will eat grass. That seems to indicate a lot of changes. If most animals were not meat eaters before the flood, that means a lot of evolving went on also.

Micro-changes. Not Macro-changes. There is a difference.

I see you provided no verses to support your contention that animals and man could not have underwent large changes.

The Bible says, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7).

So no. We did not evolve from monkeys.

Since you have no list of created kinds you also have no way of saying what changed from what or not. To claim no macro changes could occur is to do so by faith and with, apparently no bible support.

You have another chance to find some bible support for your claim.....

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind..." (Genesis 1:21).

24 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:.." (Genesis 1:24-25).

So there are:

1. Whales... their kind.
2. Fowl... his kind.
3. Cattle ...their kind.
4. Every thing that creepeth ...his kind.

And Man was made in the image of God. For it is written,

"So God created man in his own image..." (Genesis 1:27).

...

 

[lesliedellow]

Only if the stars really were what you claim,

Ah, so they are fifty watt light bulbs after all.

Okay, got it.

 

[dad]

Micro-Evolution is a change within a kind. This is scientific and even observable.

The problem is you don't know what a kind is! So how could you say?

Macro-Evolution is a change from a fish to a bird.

Well, what if a bat is a bird? What if it underwent some changes and adaptations? What if a fish grew legs to get around, and adapted a more suitable way to breath also, would we then say it was not a fish? What if a penguin used to fly? Why try to impose arbitrary limits when we do not know what the created kinds were? As a general rule your idea might hold water, but not as some hard and fast rule.

This is fantasy and it is not observable. People believe in Macro-Evolution by faith and not by any kind of science. It is merely a theory that was drilled into their head over and over and over and over again since they were a child in school and by their watching of movies, etc. The same holds true when people think about "time" in relation to God, as well. They think time works like... "Back to the Future" or something silly.

Could be. But that is not why I try to allow a lot of evolving! What if at some stages in history man had a tail? What if Adam used to be able to grow teeth many times when they came out? What if lions adapted or evolved a digestive system to eat meat rather than grass? Who knows?

The Bible says, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7).

Very true.

So no. We did not evolve from monkeys.

I know that. Yet there are many who claim to be in the faith that think that.

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind..." (Genesis 1:21).

The word whale today denotes something other than a fish. Yes fowl were made in kinds. Now if some fowl adapted to a dino, that would not bother me. Notice it doesn't mentions dinos there.

24 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind:.." (Genesis 1:24-25).

Very true, there were created kinds. But I don't see where a kind could not evolve?

 

[dad]

Ah, so they are fifty watt light bulbs after all.

Okay, got it.

How big or far away we do not know. But forget sun sized, basically, until you do know.