Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Well, you have I guess to ask for a little wisdom. Not everything is literal. But if we can take it as literal, we should. You know, He did say that some of these things were hid from the 'wise', but revealed them to babes. Treat Him like a real person, and don't look at His writings as dumb and dumber, and you will make some good progress.Why not? If God dicated it, as you claim, then how can you not look at it as an exact order?
I heard a christian legend (or was it Jewish?) that the tablets were actually sapphire! Either way, if superman could carve out a little clay, and use his laser eyes to carve things God would have no problem! Heck you'd probably even have trouble even setting a bush on fire, and not having it get burned for hours.How many clay tablets did moses brig with him up the mountain? Or did he use extremely rare and expensive papyrus scrolls?
This means you weigh things as to what they usually mean. Not that you look for some silly thing to twist and tinker towards the topsy -turvy theology that tickles your traditionial thinking!You know, I'm really glad you said this. So the preponderance of the scriptures is that day is 24 hours. Let's look at Genesis 2:4b:
1. That's why they put the "evening and morning" in those days before the creation of the sun. To make sure the reader understood it was a regular day and not the indeterminant length of time.
2. The authors deliberately tie the creation's 6 days and day of rest to the 6 days of work and the Sabbath. They can't do this if you have indefinite amounts of time for each "day".
We could second guess God I suppose. Why the Lord's supper? I think of it mainly as a time to remind us His flesh and blood were sacrificed for us. Without which, we would have no life. Sort of like eating, you eat or die. Anyhow He may have some deeper thing in there somewhere I duno. Saying He made the world in one week, just to get us to celebrate a certain day when it really took Him, you say billions of years, is taking the long way round! Would have saved a lot of time to write a sentence saying, 'take a break, kids'. I was born a catholic, and that sounds a little like some of them might come up with to emphasize their perceived importance of going to church. ha. No, I think He didi it like He said, in several real mornings and evenings. Guess we'll have to disagree on this.It's easier to model the Lord's Supper after eating Jesus's flesh and drinking his blood than modelling it after him absorbing the punishment for our sins, so he uses that analogy to make it easier for us to have a tradition based on it. Likewise, if He wants humans to have a day of rest every week, it's easier to base this on God's creation of the world if His creation is described as taking place over 6 of 7 days, rather than 14 Billion years. It's exactly the same principle.
I think the san deigo guy was saying pretty well this too. Sounds like a good answer. I guess the time theory the way I saw it was short lived. I can think of some possible answers, but, I'd say that ends the theory for now. Thanks.The ring around the supernova took 9 months to get 9 light-months away from the star--why would it take so long if everything outside our 'bubble' was happening so much faster? Further, what does a time bubble have to do with measuring the distance to a star anyway? I don't see how a time distortion would throw off a distance measurement based on a paralax or triangulation measurement. ...
time said:Well, here's an answer on the time ideas I got at another forum
I think the san deigo guy was saying pretty well this too. Sounds like a good answer. I guess the time theory the way I saw it was short lived. I can think of some possible answers, but, I'd say that ends the theory for now. Thanks.
OK, thanks for the answers.Yes, that was what I was trying to say
Although I've let the theory go, as far as publicly goes, as you may have guessed, I'm not one to let go entirely until I'm really convinced. Your points are enough to where, since there could be kids reading these things, I can't make too much of something that just maybe ain't right. --But.... the 'theory' didn't conceive of a 'slower rate of time' out of our area, but of a concept where time did not exist there. The problem you illustrated of course, was how could things behave as if time did exist, when, out there, (says the idea) it didn't. Why would we see things that seem to act in the same way they do here, if they were different. Even if there was some glimmer of hope, I don't suppose you, an atheist, would want to let me know? So, I guess I'll have to shelve it. Thanks again. God bless.If our time ran at a much slower rate than the rate at which time ran outside of our "Bubble" (to give a appearance of "older age" to the rest of the universe), then when we observe apparently distant cosmological events, they should appear to take place much faster than we can predict based on what we know of physical laws.
time said:OK, thanks for the answers.
Although I've let the theory go, as far as publicly goes, as you may have guessed, I'm not one to let go entirely until I'm really convinced. Your points are enough to where, since there could be kids reading these things, I can't make too much of something that just maybe ain't right. --But.... the 'theory' didn't conceive of a 'slower rate of time' out of our area, but of a concept where time did not exist there. The problem you illustrated of course, was how could things behave as if time did exist, when, out there, (says the idea) it didn't. Why would we see things that seem to act in the same way they do here, if they were different. Even if there was some glimmer of hope, I don't suppose you, an atheist, would want to let me know? So, I guess I'll have to shelve it. Thanks again. God bless.
Yes the more I think about it, the more the whole creation seems to be on the same clock. Well, I must admit, I've only looked at the cosmological sciences closely since the last four days or so! So I guess my attempt at a theory should give me some sympathy for people who have spent most of their lives at it, when they find out it was wrong. Besides I think I may be on to something new! Seems like at about the time when the bible is telling us, I believe, that there will be no more time something curious happens. The heavens and earth depart like a scroll, and we see a new heavens! So, I haven't quite got a grasp of it yet, but it sounds like what we see now in our physical world is different than what it will be as the eternal one is revealed like a big movie curtain opening up!it appears likely that we do live in a "time bubble" - it's just that the extent of it is the current extent of the universe
I would ask for examples of each of these claims.Yes, that was what I was trying to say. Same applies for the neutrino burst I mentioned that we observed before we actually saw that supernova. Many other cosmological phenomenon we can also measure accurately from Earth (such as the rotation period and decay of pulsars, rotation of gas shells around black holes, periods of Cepheid variables, and so on)
If our time ran at a much slower rate than the rate at which time ran outside of our "Bubble" (to give a appearance of "older age" to the rest of the universe), then when we observe apparently distant cosmological events, they should appear to take place much faster than we can predict based on what we know of physical laws.
Cheers,
The San Diego Atheist
Yes, thats the other correlary, if time were purely local to our area, then events outside of the bubble shouldn't appear to behave in a fashion such that it appears to use the same metric of time that we have here.
Time did not start to exist when God created the earth, I would think. Otherwise there could not have been a day for which earth was created.This statement is particularly amusing as in it u refute your entire argument as well as the story of creation. You r absolutely right in this statement. Thus, on Day One, when there was NO EARTH, there could not POSSIBLY have been days or a morning or an ...
Matter of fact there are many studies that show that eyewitness testimony can often be incomplete or false, even though the person giving the testimony thought it was true, because the brain is not a camera and can record events much differently than what really happened.
Time did not start to exist when God created the earth, I would think. Otherwise there could not have been a day for which earth was created.
This seems to prove that time exists beyond the boundaries of earth...even in the creation era!
The earth was created in a place time did not exist, as we know it.
The cosmos was also created in this timeless state.
This would account for our inability to understand it's size and scope very well.
Scientists even have invented the inflation theory to cover for the reality that
the cosmos seems to be bigger than the speed of light would allow for.
Likely "time" began after The Fall which started the beginning
of death and all Creation was then affected as well.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?