Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Gpa

  1. Just to be "technically" correct and to avoid being lectured again; Nicolas, "you" are the one that presented "my" proof when you posted Genesis 1:11- 24. There was nothing more to add. I could post those lines over again but I didn't see the need as you had posted them for me and proceeded to dismiss them as wrong because they didn't follow the exact order you required. So, "technically", I didn't show you the proof. As I said, I've had these discussions before and I know how they progress. We could discuss Genesis line by line and argue each little point ad nauseam but, Why? It has already been done by Theologians and Anthropologists and Evolutionists and Biologists. What would you and I add to the discussion? I know there are others here on this forum that agree with me and are either too smart to expose themselves to needless ridicule or don't see a reason to waste their time on an endless debate. There are others here that agree with you and since the atheists are usually the ridiculers, they must fall into a don't give a damn group. Why do I do it? (my discussion with "aj" a while back for example) I gave it some thought last night and I came to this conclusion. Maybe, It's not about you or me, Nicolas, or aj. Maybe it's for someone else just reading this and seeing, perhaps for the first time: "It does kinda fit". "There have been more accounts in Biblical history verified by archaeological discoveries". "What if the whole Book "is" true". Perhaps they find their faith and belief in God and find their salvation in Christ and their lives improve. Wouldn't it be interesting if "you" helped some one find the faith, you so easily disbelieve. Romans 11:33: "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" (KJV) Note to Cosmo. If you feel it best to move all of these posts between Nicolas and I to an new thread, maybe... Genesis..Right or Not? That might be a good idea and put this thread back on track..Sorry for dragging it astray.
  2. I downloaded the pdf on that study. I'm going to read it tomorrow.
  3. I really considered whether or not I should have made my first comment. I knew better but, I did it anyway. I do know how atheists love to argue, (argument from incredulity), about creation and evolution. I discussed it a few times while in college with other students. I even gave a speech on it. I remember the evolution class, (even though EVERY biology class covers evolution). The very first day, the professor stated, ( this may be paraphrased but as I remember it, it is exactly right) " I am here to teach the class on evolution, not argue about it. I will not entertain any questions on evolution verses creation. Creation is in another class under theology." It was a very good class, worth 4 hrs credit and I got an A. It isn't necessary to agree with something to still understand it but, it is necessary to understand something before you can "disagree" with it and have any credibility. I understand evolution, thanks to a college education. I understand the Bible, thanks to God's grace and wisdom. An atheist can not understand those last two references, so you will not understand what I am trying to demonstrate. As I have stated, I can see a similarity in the creation story in the Bible and the timeline of evolution. You asked to see how and I tried to show it to you but, you are apparently not capable of understanding it. You're demonstrating your lack of understanding of my evidence by dismissing it and then claiming I have presented none. That's a logical fallacy referred to as "moving the goal posts". We have come to the point of arguing for the sake of argument. I can't show you why I believe something when, you dismiss what I show you because you don't accept or understand it. That's a continuum fallacy. I actually don't "need" to prove to you why I believe something, regardless of when or where I state it. I was trying to be helpful since you asked. I also won't be changing my opinion because you don't agree with it. Your posts have been pugnacious but that is expected from an atheist when it comes to these discussions. They do love to be antipathetic. I can only offer the same thing I said in my previous post. "I was only pointing out that there is a reasonable similarity between the timeline of evolution and Genesis, NOT EXACT... SIMILAR, which I still maintain. If you, as an atheist, refuse to believe there could possibly be a God and therefore the Bible can not be correct in anything that connects that God to any process we observe on the planet, then you can not hope to see those similarities. It won't matter how many times and how many ways I try to show you, you will simply refuse to accept there could be. That's just how it is." It's not a round peg and a same size round hole, it's a more general description, a larger hole. The Bible is not a science book but, it has been ,in most instances, shown to be a historical book. Regardless of whether or not you believe it, it can not be simply dismissed as many wish to do.
  4. Wow... did I hit a nerve or something? Even though you ended your post with a smiley wink, I sense a little anger in it. It has been some time since college but, I didn't realize I needed a lecture on scientific theory. The main problem in writing vs. speaking is, it is sometimes hard to convey meaning without inflection or maybe body language. This statement; "The theory of evolution is "a theory", not a law. (even though there are many that wish it would be declared such)" is meant sarcastically, Sheldon. Yes, actually there are many. Dawkins is chief among them. If they could somehow develop a "mathematical proof" for it, then of course they would make the claim. There would be a "Law of Evolution" alongside the Theory of Evolution. I admit I have misstated/misused the term Law before, probably even here but, only when trying to make the point that a Law does come from somewhere. It describes an observation with a mathematical proof. The observation that lead to the proof lead from the question "why" and a reason was hypothesized and tested and the proof developed. Irrelevant for this discussion. What Darwin knew or didn't, is not what's being discussed. You haven't demonstrated how and where "Genesis follows evolutionary timeline quite well (considering their level of scientific understanding)" yet. It is this part of that statement that I use; "Darwin's conclusions on the development of species has errors. It can not be taken "literally" as an accurate description of the process of evolution." To point out the absurdity of the argument "the Bible must be literally accurate in it's statements to be true/correct, which IS the position "you" argue from. It does seem you are arguing that I am against the theory of evolution. I am not. I was only pointing out that there is a reasonable similarity between the timeline of evolution and Genesis, NOT EXACT... SIMILAR, which I still maintain. If you, as an atheist, refuse to believe there could possibly be a God and therefore the Bible can not be correct in anything that connects that God to any process we observe on the planet, then you can not hope to see those similarities. It won't matter how many times and how many ways I try to show you, you will simply refuse to accept there could be. That's just how it is. So, tell me, how does a caterpillar become a butterfly? :)
  5. The good and bad of parallel timelines/universes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpcUxwpOQ_A
  6. If you're comparing apples to apples then, mathematically yes but, just barely. DDR2 and DDR3 are apples and oranges.
  7. I'm not sure the "internet", as we now refer to it, was ever a secret. 1962 At MIT, a wide variety of computer experiments are going on. Ivan Sutherland uses the TX-2 to write Sketchpad, the origin of graphical programs for computer-aided design. J.C.R. Licklider writes memos about his Intergalactic Network concept, where everyone on the globe is interconnected and can access programs and data at any site from anywhere. He is talking to his own ‘Intergalactic Network’ of researchers across the country. In October, ‘Lick’ becomes the first head of the computer research program at ARPA, which he calls the Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO). Leonard Kleinrock completes his doctoral dissertation at MIT on queuing theory in communication networks, and becomes an assistant professor at UCLA.
  8. It's funny that you mention"Yahoos". Yahoo news is the worst and most biased reporting there is. They even exceed MSNBC.
  9. In this case, because there is no reference to it until "after" his actual death in 2013.
  10. I can't find it right now but, I believe it was Darby that explained how we live in the past... by the few milliseconds it takes for your brain to become aware of each passing moment. (Or something close to that)
  11. I suppose it depends on whether you accept the media driven agenda or, actually look at the facts and make your own determination.
  12. You have stated you are an atheist. Trying to convince you God exists and is responsible for the creation of the Universe, and everything in it, the Earth, Moon, Stars would be a good thing, in my mind, but, is not the goal of this discussion. I am simply pointing out the similarities in the Genesis account and evolution. You argue, it doesn't follow Darwinism. I said it follows evolution. First, Darwinism, is not the theory of evolution. Darwin's book; On the Origin of Species, is not the theory of evolution. It is "his" theory on evolution. "I" have a "theory" on evolution. They did play a part in the development of the theory of evolution, as-well-as "my theory". Darwin's conclusions on the development of species has errors. It can not be taken "literally" as an accurate description of the process of evolution. Darwin knew nothing of "Genes". The theory of evolution is "a theory", not a law. (even though there are many that wish it would be declared such) You don't believe in God but, do you... can you... believe in extraterrestrials? Imagine, (as I inferred earlier), after man's great efforts to "explain" the origin of all life on this planet, as he sits with great pride in his accomplishment, an extraterrestrial entity arrives. The highly advanced race says, "We have returned to survey the extent of OUR creation." The incredulous evolutionists counter, "That can't be. We have developed a theory, a theory that "proves" we evolved from single cell organisms." The amused ET's reply, " Well, you are somewhat correct. We did put the DNA code we wrote for you in two single cells that, when combined, form "you". We used the same and a similar process for everything." The despondent evolutionists hang their heads and say, "But how could WE have been wrong?" The knowledgeable ET's say, "Don't be depressed. We terraformed this entire planet with YOU and your comfort and happiness in mind. It is designed to adapt and provide you with everything you could ever need. We spent millions of years designing it." But the evolutionists could not be consoled by the ET's words. They turned and walked away muttering, "We knew we were right. How could we have been wrong? It looked like the best explanation. Not some all powerful entity creating us. We are so smart. How could we be wrong?" The ET's called after them, with a look of disappointment, "We left you an "instruction book"...did you loose it?..." The Genesis account of creation is similar to the Big Bang Theory and Evolution, as-best-as it can be considering when it was recorded. It has undergone many translations and interpretations and while I, as many others, believe it IS the inspired word of God, men can make mistakes. Hebrew words can have several different meanings. You point to Genesis 1:14 (the fourth day) as an inconsistency, with light coming after plants, Genesis 1:11 (the third day). The word "made" in Genesis 1:16 can also be interpreted as "had made" or "set". That is only a partial explanation. The "days" referred to in Genesis "may not" be intended as 24 hour periods but, steps of a process. Genesis 1 and 2 are meant to be taken together as the creation account. I can interpret the first description of creation as the "plan" and the second account as the "action". Here's a little exercise for you, if you wish to try it. You don't actually have to write a reply if you don't want to. Just consider what the explanations might be. I don't know your level of study in biology but; Let's imagine a 6th grade student, (in a school that actually does still teach science) wants to tell you how a caterpillar turns into a butterfly. What would they tell you? Now, imagine you were going to explain it to them. What would you say? Finally, how do you think the 6th grader, or maybe even you, would interpret it, if I explain it, in great detail? Different levels of understanding will give different results.
  13. Really... name one. Hopefully, only until November 8th, 2016.
  14. Recent discussions have referred to the Mandela Effect and alternate realities. I believe this phenomenon is more memory related, not evidence of altered realities, remembered only by a few, never-the-less, a vocal few. Prisoner number: 220/82 28 February 1985: Goldberg is released 5 November 1987: Mbeki is released from Robben Island 12 August 1988: Taken to Tygerberg Hospital where TB is diagnosed 31 August 1988: Transferred to Constantiaberg MediClinic 7 December 1988: Transferred to Victor Verster Prison https://www.nelsonmandela.org/content/page/prison-timeline Mandela Reported Suffering From Tuberculosis August 17, 1988|SCOTT KRAFT | Times Staff Writer JOHANNESBURG, South Africa — Nelson R. Mandela, the 70-year-old jailed black nationalist leader, has contracted tuberculosis and had been ill for days and coughing up blood when he was taken to a Cape Town hospital last week, his attorney said Tuesday. "He's very thin. He's on his feet, but very suddenly he looks very old," the lawyer, Ismail Ayob, said after seeing his client Tuesday morning. Two days earlier, doctors at Tygerberg Hospital, where Mandela is being treated in a wing reserved for blacks, said he had only a chronic lung inflammation and was recovering well. Dr. J. G. L. Strauss, the hospital superintendent, refused Tuesday night to say whether Mandela had tuberculosis, a highly contagious airborne virus that usually affects the lungs. "We stick by what Mandela has authorized us to say," Strauss said. Asked whether Mandela's life is in danger, Ayob said, "I can't say until we get permission for our own doctors to see him." He said he learned of the diagnosis from one of the hospital's doctors. Tuberculosis is a growing problem in this country, with more than 55,000 cases reported annually, according to the South Africa National Tuberculosis Assn. About 3,000 people die every year here of the disease. Mandela's sudden illness, after more than 26 years in prison, could present the white minority-led government with one of its most serious crises in many months, perhaps forcing South Africa to release the black leader soon on humanitarian grounds. Mandela, serving a life sentence for sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government, has become an international symbol of black resistance to apartheid. He is the leader of the outlawed African National Congress, the principal guerrilla group fighting the South African government. Neglect Charged Earlier Tuesday, the ANC issued a statement from its headquarters in Lusaka, Zambia, accusing the government of "callous neglect" in treating Mandela. The statement said the ANC was "reliably informed that before hospitalization (Mandela) was lying in bed, unable to eat and exercise, and had difficulties of speech for a whole week. Although the prison authorities were obviously aware that he was ill, nothing was done." However, the South African Prisons Department, in a statement late Tuesday, said Mandela's illness, which it did not specify, was treated promptly. It said Mandela became ill July 28 and was seen by doctors in his prison cell regularly. Mandela's family, including his wife, Winnie, appealed to President Pieter W. Botha through a family spokesman Tuesday to allow its own team of doctors to see the patient. Botha did not immediately respond. On Sunday, the government said Mandela had undergone minor surgery Saturday to drain fluid from his left lung. It was Mandela's first foray outside prison walls since 1982. After seeing her husband Tuesday, Winnie Mandela was surrounded by hundreds of patients and hospital staff. She raised her fist in a black power salute as black and mixed-race patients shouted "Viva Mandela!" (could this be the source of the memory; "... they have memories of Winnie Mandela's insincere tribute; they have clear memories of the oddly shaped headed body guard of Winnie Mandela etc." Milo.X. referred to?) http://timetravelinstitute.com/threads/retrocausality-and-the-effects-on-a-timeline.10457/#post-89771 The racially segregated hospital is being guarded by police and the fourth floor, where Mandela's room is located, has been sealed off. Pressure Builds for Release International pressure for the black leader's release has been building in recent weeks among supporters as well as opponents of the government. Government officials have acknowledged that Mandela's death in jail would likely make him a martyr and trigger uncontrolled violence among angry blacks. But the government also fears that Mandela's release could result in similar civil uprisings. As recently as July 29, his attorney was telling reporters that Mandela was in excellent health and good spirits. Mandela, now gray-haired, had been riding an exercise bicycle for hours each morning and had the taut skin of a man much younger than his years, Ayob said. But "it is clear that his condition has been deteriorating for some time," Ayob said Tuesday. When Mandela was taken to the hospital, he was unable to speak and was spitting up blood, Ayob said Mandela told him. No Answers Ayob, speaking with reporters upon his return to Johannesburg, said a doctor had given him and Winnie Mandela the diagnosis. The doctor refused to answer Mrs. Mandela's questions, Ayob said. Tuberculosis is a severe problem in South Africa. It is especially prevalent among the country's 26 million blacks, doctors say, because they live in poorly ventilated, overcrowded homes where it easily spreads. Of the 57,457 new cases of tuberculosis reported in South Africa in 1986, for example, 43,000 were cured and 3,100--slightly more than 5%--died. South Africa's health care is generally highly regarded internationally. Johannesburg Bureau Assistant Mike Cadman contributed to this article. http://articles.latimes.com/1988-08-17/news/mn-467_1_winnie-mandela (italics and emphasis mine) Other than... many people misremember the news... most probably, from getting their news 2nd hand, 3rd hand, or from a friend of my nephew's friend's girlfriend's aunt's brother, that said..."Yea, he died...!" there is probably little more I need say. Although, I was very surprised when I heard the President was shot and killed in Dallas, Texas, back in 1963. I remember because I shouted, "What! Nixon dead? Noooo...!" Then I was told, "No, not Nixon, John F. Kennedy". I replied, "Kennedy? I though he was killed on a PT boat back in WWII." Now... If I can get that story out on the internet, how long do you think it will be before a bunch of other people jump on the band wagon and say,"Yea...That's right...That's what I remember too..."?
  15. A vision or prophecy is not an alternate reality in the sense it is usually presented. It is a future reality that may come to be, unless something in the present reality is changed or, regardless of change, it is coming. It is not a past, remembered differently. I hope you slept well. :zzz:
  16. Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. Why do you keep doing this? Are you purposely trying to mislead, or confuse, or deceive everyone? Or, do you just enjoy displaying your ignorance?
  17. Do you ever know what you're talking about?
  18. I don't know why you excluded the first 10 verses but allow me to add them... for context. The Beginning 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. 6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. 9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. Looks like "light" came in verse 3.
  19. That's well said Nicolas. I could only add minutiae that would bore most. (even me):geek: The soul, as I have stated before, is not a part of the biological construct that we call our body. It is not connected physically in any way. It is not dependent on the survival of the body for its survival. It is a non-physical entity and therefore can not be considered in the same frame of reference as the human body. Its existence has to be (is) a matter of belief. :notworthy:
  20. Many consider it a "changed" history. It's similar in that context. The Mandela Effect, its self, is simply misperception, misinterpretation, misinformation, and failure to follow up on a news story or rumor. It is not, proof of an alternate history, or a change made in the past by... ?? ... some unknown entity? It IS evidence of the fallibility of memory. This has been demonstrated, time after time, when comparing witness testimony to the same event at the same time, even two people standing right next to one another might not agree.
  • Create New...