| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Andrew W" |
| Date: |
24 Apr 2006 05:02:44 AM |
| Object: |
God created the universe backwards |
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon, and
finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see are
older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
--
Andrew W.
"Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence."
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization."
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 07:43:54 AM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon, and
finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the prophet
had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is about the
earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of the creation
had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So God establishes
the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty void, and congeals it
into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the universe begins, but it is
also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 04:00:08 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:WNudnZWly8OIVdHZRVn-uw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon, and
finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the prophet
had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is about the
earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of the
creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So God
establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty void,
and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the universe
begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 09:30:39 PM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:WNudnZWly8OIVdHZRVn-uw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of
the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So
God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty
void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the
universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
LOL
You wish.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 10:07:07 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 05:43:06 AM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9260$0$7528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom the supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke it.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 04:36:58 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:aJudnXZUhL6kYNDZRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9260$0$7528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom the supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke it.
How would you know? Were you there?
You seem to have very limited knowledge about the kind of people that lived
in the past.
There were plenty of very wise men in the early times.
They were men who wrote great philosophy and poetry.
Look them up in a history book.
The Bible reflects the wisdom of the times.
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 10:18:18 PM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444e967d$0$7366$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:aJudnXZUhL6kYNDZRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9260$0$7528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom that supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke it.
How would you know?
Because the wisdom of the Bible STILL exceeds the abilities of men.
[snip the rest of the drivel]
Ike
--
www.eickleberrybooks.com
******************************
The Tree of Life (from "The Character Map")
The Beloved
Faith Hope
Righteousness Judgment Compassion
Courage Integrity Diligence Grace
Discipline of Thought Service Desire Decision and Belief
Glory Honor Power Wisdom Riches Blessing Strength w/Thanksgiving
He Who Loves
******************************
Remove X from address to reply
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 04:54:16 AM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:98CdnYgJKJvqe9PZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444e967d$0$7366$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:aJudnXZUhL6kYNDZRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9260$0$7528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's
word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom that supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke it.
How would you know?
Because the wisdom of the Bible STILL exceeds the abilities of men.
How is it that what one person sees as such wisdom, the other sees as trash?
I've tried reading the Bible many times but I just can't find very much real
wisdom in it.
What is your explanation for this?
Mine is that we are all simply different. We must all find our own truth and
wisdom, but then that seriously puts in question the Christian "narrow gate"
doctrine.
[snip the rest of the drivel]
See this is where it becomes obvious how bigoted Christians can get.
You guys trash everyone else's wisdoms and declare that only yours is right.
You are so absolutely certain that it was only your doctrine that was
breathed by the creation force, yet you have no evidence for it except what
the book itself says.
Any zealot could have put those claims in there.
I think the truth is that the Christian doctrine has you guys hooked
emotionally.
Ike
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 05:23:43 AM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444f434d$0$7527$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:98CdnYgJKJvqe9PZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444e967d$0$7366$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:aJudnXZUhL6kYNDZRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9260$0$7528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:hvKdnfJK4JJJFNDZRVn-vw@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d3c5d$0$7604$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's
word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom that supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke it.
How would you know?
Because the wisdom of the Bible STILL exceeds the abilities of men.
How is it that what one person sees as such wisdom, the other sees as
trash?
I've tried reading the Bible many times but I just can't find very much
real wisdom in it.
What is your explanation for this?
Mine is that we are all simply different. We must all find our own truth
and wisdom, but then that seriously puts in question the Christian "narrow
gate" doctrine.
Not from where I'm sitting it doesn't--it proves it.
[snip the rest of the drivel]
See this is where it becomes obvious how bigoted Christians can get.
You guys trash everyone else's wisdoms and declare that only yours is
right.
You are so absolutely certain that it was only your doctrine that was
breathed by the creation force, yet you have no evidence for it except
what the book itself says.
The evidence is simple: It's the only thing that makes sense.
Any zealot could have put those claims in there.
I think the truth is that the Christian doctrine has you guys hooked
emotionally.
And I think Satan has you hooked "rationally."
Ike
--
www.eickleberrybooks.com
******************************
The Tree of Life (from "The Character Map")
The Beloved
Faith Hope
Righteousness Judgment Compassion
Courage Integrity Diligence Grace
Discipline of Thought Service Desire Decision and Belief
Glory Honor Power Wisdom Riches Blessing Strength w/Thanksgiving
He Who Loves
******************************
Remove X from address to reply
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 06:47:59 AM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y86dnX5xWJSw19LZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444f434d$0$7527$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:98CdnYgJKJvqe9PZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
So there's a chance that at least some of the Bible is not God's
word.
LOL
You wish.
LOL.
Got any proof that God authored it?
Yeah. The wisdom that supersedes the abilities of the men who spoke
it.
How would you know?
Because the wisdom of the Bible STILL exceeds the abilities of men.
How is it that what one person sees as such wisdom, the other sees as
trash?
I've tried reading the Bible many times but I just can't find very much
real wisdom in it.
What is your explanation for this?
Mine is that we are all simply different. We must all find our own truth
and wisdom, but then that seriously puts in question the Christian
"narrow gate" doctrine.
Not from where I'm sitting it doesn't--it proves it.
If you only reply with narrow mindedness and religionism then I will have to
conclude that you have low intelligence as well as an emotional attachment
to your religion.
How about making an effort to answer my question?
What is your explanation for the difference of opinion of the religionists
and non-religionists?
I've told you mine.
[snip the rest of the drivel]
See this is where it becomes obvious how bigoted Christians can get.
You guys trash everyone else's wisdoms and declare that only yours is
right.
You are so absolutely certain that it was only your doctrine that was
breathed by the creation force, yet you have no evidence for it except
what the book itself says.
The evidence is simple: It's the only thing that makes sense.
I think you must have been born recently.
Either that or you live with a pair of blinders on permanently.
You should get out more, and not with blinders.
There are thousands of explanations for how everything came about.
You've settled on only one - the one that features a powerful and righteous
god that will take care of everything for you, and discipline you so that
you don't have to learn how to discipline yourself.
Any zealot could have put those claims in there.
I think the truth is that the Christian doctrine has you guys hooked
emotionally.
And I think Satan has you hooked "rationally."
Are you sure?
Satan is a religious fraternity concept.
What are the chances that a narrow and bloody minded religious fraternity
has things right about the workings of the cosmos?
Who was it that insisted at one time that the sun revolves around the earth,
and imprisoned or killed anyone who tried to say otherwise?
Ike
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 01:12:33 PM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444f5df2$0$7532$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y86dnX5xWJSw19LZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
[snip]
And I think Satan has you hooked "rationally."
Are you sure?
Absolutely. And you prove it with your very next statement.
Satan is a religious fraternity concept.
[snip]
Satan's greatest accomplishment is making people believe the beast doesn't
exist.
Ike
--
www.eickleberrybooks.com
******************************
The Tree of Life (from "The Character Map")
The Beloved
Faith Hope
Righteousness Judgment Compassion
Courage Integrity Diligence Grace
Discipline of Thought Service Desire Decision and Belief
Glory Honor Power Wisdom Riches Blessing Strength w/Thanksgiving
He Who Loves
******************************
Remove X from address to reply
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 03:44:44 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:dOSdnZNQ26GSJdLZRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444f5df2$0$7532$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y86dnX5xWJSw19LZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
[snip]
And I think Satan has you hooked "rationally."
Are you sure?
Absolutely. And you prove it with your very next statement.
Only insane people are absolutely certain about intangible things.
There are people in insane asylums who are absolutely certain that they are
Napoleon Bonaparte, Elvis, or Jesus.
Satan is a religious fraternity concept.
[snip]
Satan's greatest accomplishment is making people believe the beast doesn't
exist.
Ah! That's a very famous religious fraternity slogan.
You guys are full of slogans and mantras.
You continually prove that you are common cultists and you can't even see
it!
Ike
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
26 Apr 2006 03:52:18 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:dOSdnZNQ26GSJdLZRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444f5df2$0$7532$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y86dnX5xWJSw19LZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
[snip]
And I think Satan has you hooked "rationally."
Are you sure?
Absolutely. And you prove it with your very next statement.
Satan is a religious fraternity concept.
[snip]
Satan's greatest accomplishment is making people believe the beast doesn't
exist.
Ike
By the way you dodged my question again.
I think you can't answer it.
Looks like I might be right about you having low intelligence.
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dichard Rawkins" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 10:51:47 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:98CdnYgJKJvqe9PZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Because the wisdom of the Bible STILL exceeds the abilities of men.
And thus exceeds your abilities.
Maybe you should keep quiet about things you yourself say you don't
understand?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 11:41:23 AM |
|
|
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon, and
finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the prophet
had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is about the
earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of the creation
had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So God establishes
the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty void, and congeals it
into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the universe begins, but it is
also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The
Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 01:26:29 PM |
|
|
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of
the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So
God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty
void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the
universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of reference
is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation event
with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a point
of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The Days
provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but all
related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 04:15:03 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6o2dnVojCczOhdDZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored
by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of
the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So
God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty
void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the
universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Yes and you twist the facts to support your unsupportable beliefs.
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation event
with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The
Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Silly. How can a non existent earth be anything?
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
And you see everything from your god centric viewpoint which is blindness to
facts.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 09:36:41 PM |
|
|
"Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:sdb3g.19806$Kn4.17829@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6o2dnVojCczOhdDZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we
see are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored
by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest
of the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth.
So God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the
empty void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm
of the universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye
perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Yes and you twist the facts to support your unsupportable beliefs.
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The
Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Silly. How can a non existent earth be anything?
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
And you see everything from your god centric viewpoint which is blindness
to facts.
Thus saith the fool who says in his heart that there is no God.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 10:04:58 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:dcednWayKoqqFtDZnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Thus saith the fool who says in his heart that there is no God.
What about the fool who says in his heart that only MY God is the true God?
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 05:41:58 AM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d91dc$0$20111$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:dcednWayKoqqFtDZnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Thus saith the fool who says in his heart that there is no God.
What about the fool who says in his heart that only MY God is the true
God?
Jn 10:1-10
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into
the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a
robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
"To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth
his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
"And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the
sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not
follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
"This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things
they were which he spake unto them.
"Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am
the door of the sheep. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers:
but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door: by me if any man enter in,
he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. The thief
cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that
they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly."
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 04:11:09 PM |
|
|
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we see
are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and that
everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored by
humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest of
the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth. So
God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the empty
void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm of the
universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of reference
is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation event
with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a point
of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The Days
provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but all
related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
There's no ambiguity there.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 09:35:45 PM |
|
|
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we
see are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored
by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest
of the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth.
So God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the
empty void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm
of the universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye
perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The
Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and without
form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the point
in time in which the stars could be first seen from the earth-centric view.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view, and
what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from that
perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric vision
of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from here, not an
arbitrary point in space.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew W" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
24 Apr 2006 10:35:44 PM |
|
|
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:I8WdnSw877liF9DZnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and without
form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the
point in time in which the stars could be first seen from the
earth-centric view.
Genesis is about the actual creation sequence, not what was seen from earth.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view,
and what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from
that perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric
vision of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from
here, not an arbitrary point in space.
What prophet? No prophet existed when the earth was created.
Of course you probably mean that he was given a vision of the distant past,
but this is just pious wishful thinking. No where does it say that it was a
simplified vision of the past given by God.
It could just have easily been a dream, or a made up story for the village
people who asked question of the elders.
--
Andrew W.
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of
any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of
existence.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes
God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the
political behaviour of Western Civilization.”
~ Robert Anton Wilson
Religion Exposed!
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~ajwerner
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 05:55:15 AM |
|
|
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444d9915$0$7603$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:I8WdnSw877liF9DZnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and
without form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the
point in time in which the stars could be first seen from the
earth-centric view.
Genesis is about the actual creation sequence, not what was seen from
earth.
Wrong. The very starting point of the account is "the earth was void and
without form," and the rest of the account is written from the earth-eye
view of creation. That's the point of focus.
You're attempts to apply 21st century AD perceptions to a 21st century BC
book is what is in error here.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view,
and what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from
that perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric
vision of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from
here, not an arbitrary point in space.
What prophet? No prophet existed when the earth was created.
No man existed when the earth was created, which means the revelation had to
be prophetic.
Of course you probably mean that he was given a vision of the distant
past, but this is just pious wishful thinking. No where does it say that
it was a simplified vision of the past given by God.
It could just have easily been a dream, or a made up story for the village
people who asked question of the elders.
Pretty accurate dream for a bunch of Judean hillbillies that didn't know the
first thing about celestial mechanics, biological succession, etc. etc.
The universe explodes outward from a central point in the big band, flooding
every corner with light.
Matter begins to congeal to form the various bodies.
The light starts to fade revealing the celestial bodies.
The earth begins to take its ultimate form as seas and lands and earth and
sky separate and congeal.
The plants begin to arise from the waters.
The animals begin to evolve.
Man comes up last.
Not bad, considering Darwin wouldn't even begin to postulate on the order of
formation of things until the early 19th century, several thousand years
AFTER this account was written.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 11:07:32 AM |
|
|
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and moon,
and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we
see are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be authored
by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible is
about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the rest
of the creation had no significance except as it relates to the earth.
So God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out of the
empty void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the rhythm
of the universe begins, but it is also stated from an earth-eye
perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events. The
Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and without
form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the point
in time in which the stars could be first seen from the earth-centric view.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view, and
what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from that
perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric vision
of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from here, not an
arbitrary point in space.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Ya know, Ike...
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of reference is quite lame. You have obliterated the time line carefully laid out by the very book you're trying to support. You're in essence saying the book is so poorly written that it must be interpreted differently than as written. How sad. (I wonder if any other believers agree with you?)
AcesLucky
PS:
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 01:21:14 PM |
|
|
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:5Pr3g.3651$XV5.3638@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and
moon, and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we
see are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the
earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be
authored by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible
is about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the
rest of the creation had no significance except as it relates to the
earth. So God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out
of the empty void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the
rhythm of the universe begins, but it is also stated from an
earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with
now known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events.
The Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and
without form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the
point in time in which the stars could be first seen from the
earth-centric view.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view,
and what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from
that perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric
vision of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from
here, not an arbitrary point in space.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Ya know, Ike...
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's
written in order to bring it in line with now known facts. But to say the
writer had to do this > for a point of reference is quite lame. You have
obliterated the time line carefully laid out
by the very book you're trying to support. You're in essence saying the
book is so poorly
written that it must be interpreted differently than as written. How sad.
(I wonder if any
other believers agree with you?)
AcesLucky
Well, since neither you nor "they" actually know what goes on in Genesis, it
is of no particular consequence.
One does have to wonder how "man and woman" come at the end of the first
account, and Adam near the beginning of the second account.
Hint, hint.
Then again, you have already demonstrated your bias in that you speak of
"believers" and "these tales," belying the fact that you want to keep the
book in your singular mode of interpretation to ridicule it, not recognizing
that there is a level of understanding in Genesis that exceeds your
perceptions.
Ah, but "God forbid" that that should be true, or you would no longer have a
basis for ridiculing it. So you are as constrained to one mode of thought as
"those believers" are in order to keep the battle ground level, making
yourself as dishonest as those you accuse.
And the whole affair does start "In the beginning, the earth was void and
without form," establishing the perspective of the rest of the narrative
from the outset.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "AcesLucky" |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 07:02:18 PM |
|
|
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:5Pr3g.3651$XV5.3638@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:M9b3g.3182$XV5.465@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:Sc73g.3177$XV5.2905@fed1read10...
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
"Andrew W" <removethis_ajwerner@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:444ca245$0$10677$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Genesis says that God created first the earth, then the sun and
moon, and finally the stars (almost as an afterthought).
But there's something wrong here. We know that many of the stars we
see are older than our sun, and our sun is much older than the
earth.
So why does Genesis have the universe being created backwards?
Its almost as if Genesis was authored by humans.
Only an egocentric human would assume that the earth came first and
that everything else in the sky which looks smaller must have come
later.
If that is the case then how much more of the Bible could be
authored by humans?
The first Genesis account is earth-centric, but simply because the
prophet had to have a point of reference and significance. The Bible
is about the earth and the people of earth, so, to the prophet, the
rest of the creation had no significance except as it relates to the
earth. So God establishes the matter (and then there was light) out
of the empty void, and congeals it into the celestial bodies, and the
rhythm of the universe begins, but it is also stated from an
earth-eye perspective.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with
now known facts. But to say the writer had to do this for a point of
reference is quite lame.
LOL.
You don't know how much the "known facts" are in "what's written."
Besides, the bible itself contradicts you by labeling each creation
event with an order, established by Day.
To say the earth was made on Day 1, and the stars on Day 4, is not a
point of reference centric to earth, it is a linear order of events.
The Days provide the points of reference, not the object earth.
(Or were you just being facetious?)
LOL.
The first thing it says is "the earth was void and without form."
In other words, there was no "earth" to begin with. Just emptiness and
formlessness.
Then the writer uses that as a point of reference for the sequence, but
all related to the earth-centric viewpoint.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Like I said. Lame.
Nope.
That's the opening line: "In the beginning, the earth was void and
without form."
Either the earth was made FIRST, that is BEFORE the stars, or it wasn't.
The good book says it was made FIRST, as..on Day ONE.
No, it doesn't.
Go back and read it again.
It later says the stars were made on Day FOUR.
Which, as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the
point in time in which the stars could be first seen from the
earth-centric view.
There's no ambiguity there.
No, there isn't: The prophet saw the vision from an earth-centric view,
and what he saw would be what one would see watching the creation from
that perspective.
Your "reference" label is not only irrelevant, but false!
Not in the least.
You are simply attempting to change the "meaning" or "interpretation" of
common words that are factually false, in order to make them somehow
appear true. This type of lying is below you (or should be). And it's
quite lame. Don't let dishonesty become you.
I'm being quite honest. The first Genesis account is an earth-centric
vision of the creation, and thing appear as the prophet saw them from
here, not an arbitrary point in space.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
Ya know, Ike...
It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's
written in order to bring it in line with now known facts. But to say the
writer had to do this > for a point of reference is quite lame. You have
obliterated the time line carefully laid out
by the very book you're trying to support. You're in essence saying the
book is so poorly
written that it must be interpreted differently than as written. How sad.
(I wonder if any
other believers agree with you?)
AcesLucky
Well, since neither you nor "they" actually know what goes on in Genesis, it
is of no particular consequence.
Yes it is, and yes I do. I go by what it actually says; nothing more,
nothing less. And it matters because what it says is now known to be
factually false, and thereby cannot be the word of an all-knowing being.
(Unless that being is a liar; a possibility I'm ready to entertain.)
One does have to wonder how "man and woman" come at the end of the first
account, and Adam near the beginning of the second account.
Hint, hint.
Then again, you have already demonstrated your bias in that you speak of
"believers" and "these tales," belying the fact that you want to keep the
book in your singular mode of interpretation to ridicule it, not recognizing
that there is a level of understanding in Genesis that exceeds your
perceptions.
Oh I agree; in fact I keep all major religious books that claim to be
fingered by god in my sights. I seek the truth. I'm am allowed to
question. And yes, I agree there is a level of understanding, not just
in Genesis but in everything (The Cat in the Hat, for instance), that
exceeds my perception, especially when it can be interpreted
subjectively in any way anyone likes.
Ah, but "God forbid" that that should be true, or you would no longer have a
basis for ridiculing it. So you are as constrained to one mode of thought as
"those believers" are in order to keep the battle ground level, making
yourself as dishonest as those you accuse.
Quite the contrary. I admitted anyone can interpret anything anyway they
like. But I choose to interpret according to what it actually says! You,
on the other hand, like to change the interpretation of ordinary words
and meanings to agree with now known facts. You do this to cover for the
fact that the actual words and meanings are false when taken as is.
All I did was bust you for it!
You must lie in order to keep your faith. You yourself give clear and
present example of this. For example you stated:
"...as the ambient glow of the big band began to fade, would be the
point in time in which the stars could be first seen from the
earth-centric view."
Now, can you show me where Genesis says ANYTHING about a big bang? ? ? ?
Where on earth did you get a "big bang" from? It's not stated in
Genesis! ! ! !
You got the 'big bang" from SCIENCE! ! ! ! ! ! And since the big band
is taken as factual, based on scientific evidence, you simply changed
your interpretation of Genesis to 'make it agree with the facts' so you
can go on pretending your good book is intelligent and right.
Ah, but your good book clearly states that the earth was created on Day
1, and the stars on Day 4. You are now forced to lie! You ADD points of
view and perspectives that change the meaning of 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 as a
sequence of events, to accommodate the facts that are now known that
were *not* known then!
And THAT my friend, makes you lame.
I therefore conclude with my original statement:
"It's common for believers of these tales to change the meaning (or
interpretation) of what's written in order to bring it in line with now
known facts."
Your friend,
AcesLucky
And the whole affair does start "In the beginning, the earth was void and
without form," establishing the perspective of the rest of the narrative
from the outset.
Ike
www.eickleberrybooks.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: God created the universe backwards |
25 Apr 2006 10:16:14 PM |
|
|
"AcesLucky" <acesLucky@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:cMy3g.3675$XV5.3608@fed1read10...
[snip]
Yes it is, and yes I do. I go by what it actually says; nothing more,
nothing less.
Which shows that you don't know how to read the Bible in the first place.
And it matters because what it says is now known to be factually false,
and thereby cannot be the word of an all-knowing being. (Unless that being
is a liar; a possibility I'm ready to entertain.)
So how does this account for the fact that you snipped (without marking it)
the outline of that first Genesis account that I included in the previous
post that showed that these Judean hillbillies had a fairly sophisticated
(for the time) grasp of the order of creation events about 4,000 years
before Darwin and the evolutionists?
One does have to wonder how "man and woman" come at the end of the first
account, and Adam near the beginning of the second account.
Hint, hint.
Then again, you have already demonstrated your bias in that you speak of
"believers" and "these tales," belying the fact that you want to keep the
book in your singular mode of interpretation to ridicule it, not
recognizing that there is a level of understanding in Genesis that
exceeds your perceptions.
Oh I agree; in fact I keep all major religious books that claim to be
fingered by god in my sights. I seek the truth. | | | | | | | | | |
