The Time Bubble Theory

[funyun]

"The parables were not stories discussing actual events. They were often common stories known to the Isrealites that Jesus altered in order to make his point in a powerful way"
Well if one doesn't really believe the rest of it, sure, why not, kiss that goodbye as well. The crazy old liar probably never even rose from the dead?

You're right. He probably didn't.

 

[time]

"Genesis 2 is a powerful attack on the Egyptian idea "
Sorry not buying your baffling, bible belittling balony. My faith is not for sale, or rent, or discussion. I've heard your sorry milk toast for a backbone wishy washy, mamby pamby, phoney faith talk before. Keep your mental yoga, mind bending excuses for lack of faith. You'll never move mountains or heal the sick or raise the dead, or afford to buy a clue even with that. Without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. Why not try to ask Him for the genuine article? Either that, or wait till He returns, and ask Him if you can stick your finger in His wounds.

 

[time]

"You're right. He probably didn't."
Kidding aside, you can bet your life on it.

 

[time]

"Since the global flood has been falsified"
Relax, the flood happened. You were misinformed. Be happy.

 

[funyun]

Time, why don't u shut up and stop spouting nonsense that does nothing to further this debate? Quoting scripture and fundie brainwashing techniques means nothing to us.

Your **** really is starting to get annoying, and I'm starting to get angry. You whine when ppl "don't act civilized" then proceed not to act civilized yourself. Either have an adult discussion or get the hell off of the forum.

 

[time]

"nothing to further this debate"
Why, are you gonna type more asterxes if you continue getting whumped?

 

[Arikay]

Show us then.

So far when it comes to evidence, you are 0/1. maybe you should try and improve this ratio.

Show us the evidence for the flood.

"Since the global flood has been falsified"
Relax, the flood happened. You were misinformed. Be happy.

 

[time]

"Show us then"
Perhaps a flood thread would be something to spend time on. So far I am guaging the input I received on the time theory so far. That shouldn't take to long! A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still. So I don't really spend time arguing much about God with those who are not sincere.

 

[Arikay]

Go for it.
I hope to see some actual evidence in that thread.
I'm hoping to see some actual evidence in this thread too, but that doesn't seem like it will happen.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

"The parables were not stories discussing actual events. They were often common stories known to the Isrealites that Jesus altered in order to make his point in a powerful way"
Well if one doesn't really believe the rest of it, sure, why not, kiss that goodbye as well. The crazy old liar probably never even rose from the dead?

I did not call Jesus a liar. The parables are like Aesop's fables. The fictional story conveys a message to the audience. Jesus took the Jewish equivalent of Aesop's fables and altered them to show the Jews were getting things wrong. It is often easier to convey wisdom through a story than through lectures.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

"Genesis 2 is a powerful attack on the Egyptian idea "
Sorry not buying your baffling, bible belittling balony. My faith is not for sale, or rent, or discussion. I've heard your sorry milk toast for a backbone wishy washy, mamby pamby, phoney faith talk before. Keep your mental yoga, mind bending excuses for lack of faith. You'll never move mountains or heal the sick or raise the dead, or afford to buy a clue even with that. Without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. Why not try to ask Him for the genuine article? Either that, or wait till He returns, and ask Him if you can stick your finger in His wounds.

The Egyptians had a story about a god who is given the choice between consuming from life or knowledge of moral order. He consumes from the knowledge of moral order and is praised because this supposedly brings eternal life. Genesis 2-3 attacks this idea by having eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil bring death and suffering. Ancient Hebrews familiar with Egyptian myths would understand the meaning of Genesis 2-3. A person not familar with Egyptian myths would have more difficulty in understanding because they only see the response, not the stimuli.

 

[Aggie]

"The problem is that if you hold on to a literal interpretation of Genesis, God is a liar either way"
No He telling the truth.

He's much more of a liar if Genesis 1 and 2 are literal than if they aren't. Does He expect us to believe that Day, night, morning and evening all existed before there was a sun?

There are a few more things that would have to be lies if they can only be interpreted literally. I listed them in my last post here:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=1803739#post1803739

I should probably bump that thread, because most of the creationists here are now acting as though it doesn't exist.

 

[SanDiegoAtheist]

"the way you compare the two is by judging how long it would take light to travel through that portion of space"
Yes, according to how we measure time in our created sphere. This means we think if time were the same (or even applicable) outside our bubble, that it would limit all things the same way.
"From a different point of reference, what one person measured as time would appear to be space and vice versa, but the distances would still be equal."
Yes, this is how it would work if God, and all creation were in the dome, or bubble, that God made for us.
"We are ruled by time in the same way that we are ruled by space, meaning that we will always inhabit it"
Well for Christians we can look forward to a 'time' where there will be 'time no more'! And as already mentioned, God isn't bound by time now. So we will not always be ruled by it.
"showing that time moves at slightly different rates in different places"
Yes, and they are travelling in our bubble. I think of it like a gigantic geodesic dome, covering our solar system. In it, we are bound by time.
"Nature is trying very hard to make us succeed, but nature does not depend on us. We are not the only experiment." Buckminster Fuller

I'm curious - how do you explain events such as supernovae that we've observed (and we've observed several) in our supposed time-bubble that match in duration with the predicted length of time (a few days to a few weeks) our models predict?

After all, if time were significantly faster or slower outside our "time-bubble", the cosmic events which we DO witness happening outside our local space SHOULD last significantly shorter or longer (depending on what the relative rate difference is) than theory predicts (since our theories are based in OUR time frame of reference).

Putting it simply - do you have even a single SHRED of evidence that time behaves differently outside our local space? Thought not. On the other hand, cosmic events like supernovae, pulsars, their frequencies, and the predicted decay over time of those frequencies, even the eating patterns of black holes provide PLENTY of evidence that even at billions of light years away, the time scale is roughly the same as here (aside from small differences caused by Einsteinian Relativity).

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

 

[funyun]

"Show us then"
Perhaps a flood thread would be something to spend time on. So far I am guaging the input I received on the time theory so far. That shouldn't take to long! A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still. So I don't really spend time arguing much about God with those who are not sincere.

"We're only gonna die from our own arrogance
That's why we might as well take our time"
--Bad Religion

I'd like to echo Arikay and say that I'm hoping some proof of Time's claims will emerge at some point in this thread.

 

[lucaspa]

Hi, I was over at EVC forum, and was able to come up with a theory. Here it is.
" The Time Bubble Theory
Time is a factor applicable to us. The time it takes light to travel as it relates to us is the speed of light. The time it takes light to travel the further away from us, and our created enviorment -becomes relative. All things it does out of our realm, are not the same as here, (near what will be the center of the universe). Therefore what would take 'here' so much time to happen, as you get very distant, takes less and maybe no time to happen!

Uh, no. That's not relativity. Instead, under relativity there is no such thing as instantly knowing about events. Events still take "time" to happen, but the farther you are from them, the longer in the past the event will be before you learn about it.

Instead, what this guy is assuming, apparently, is that the farther away we are the closer to the speed of light we are moving and thus, the more time dilates for us. But he has it backwards. Thus, our time would be moving so slowly relative to another's time frame that what apparently took a year for us took 100 years for them.

So what we are seeing then (in the cosmos) is not the record of what happened in some distant past, it's Now. Time, if not applied universally would seem to make more sense. So 'Time = Distance (divided by) Speed' is not true universally.

It is for the speed of light, because that speed is constant. Instead of time changing or the speed changing, what you have is the wavelength of the light changes.

 

[lucaspa]

"Since the global flood has been falsified"
Relax, the flood happened. You were misinformed. Be happy.

The Flood was falsified by 1831. Rev. Adam Sedgwick, when he retired as President of the Royal Geological Society in 1831, put the final nail in the coffin. There is simply too much evidence out there that couldn't possibly be there if a global flood had really happened.

 

[lucaspa]

He has a big book, so He must have some thoughts.

Allah has quite a big book, too. Do you think Allah exists? This is just a poor criteria on which to decide the existence of entities.

 

[lucaspa]

Genesis 2 is a powerful attack on the Egyptian idea that one could gain immortality through knowledge of moral order. However, by treating it as a literal event, you miss this completely.

I haven't heard this interpretation before. It sounds interesting. That would make Genesis 2 a match for Genesis 1 being an attack on the Babylonian pantheon. A kind of symmetry in how the editor put Genesis together: refuting the religions of Israel's closest neighbors.

Can you run us thru it in more detail, Fragments?

 

[lucaspa]

The Egyptians had a story about a god who is given the choice between consuming from life or knowledge of moral order. He consumes from the knowledge of moral order and is praised because this supposedly brings eternal life. Genesis 2-3 attacks this idea by having eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil bring death and suffering. Ancient Hebrews familiar with Egyptian myths would understand the meaning of Genesis 2-3. A person not familar with Egyptian myths would have more difficulty in understanding because they only see the response, not the stimuli.

That would explain the two trees but having the focus only on one! Neat. And you're right. As in Genesis 1, it means we have lost the all important historical context! Which god is this and do you have a source?

 

[lucaspa]

"Genesis 2 is a powerful attack on the Egyptian idea "
Sorry not buying your baffling, bible belittling balony. My faith is not for sale, or rent, or discussion. I've heard your sorry milk toast for a backbone wishy washy, mamby pamby, phoney faith talk before. Keep your mental yoga, mind bending excuses for lack of faith.

This ad hominen rant is irrelevant. This isn't "lack of faith", it's reasoning faith at its best. It's trying to understand the message God intended, instead of trying to force a message on God. And it remembers that God is speaking to particular audiences thru time and that He uses language and images appropriate to that audience. Instead of looking thru 21st century glasses and saying, from human pride, what God had to mean.

You'll never move mountains or heal the sick or raise the dead, or afford to buy a clue even with that.

Why not? It's a better faith than you've been peddling because it tries to be closer to God, not dictate to Him.

Without faith it is impossible to please God.

Without faith in a literal Bible, it's impossible to please Biblical literalists, but that isn't who we are interested in pleasing, is it?

For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.

And this is seeking at its best. The way you are advocating isn't seeking, it's dictating to God. I can't see how that can end well.

Either that, or wait till He returns, and ask Him if you can stick your finger in His wounds

Worked for Thomas, didn't it?