Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG



 Science > Physics > Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "George Hammond"
Date: 01 Mar 2005 02:47:53 AM
Object: Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG
GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG
Dr. John Ankerberg (D.Div.) is the producer and host of the
nationally televised program, The John Ankerberg Show. An
ordained Baptist minister and former pastor, he is also a member
of the Board of Directors of the National Religious Broadcasters
(NRB). He has also authored and co-authored around 60 books:
http://www.raptureready.com/who/John_Ankerberg.html
He is also founder and director of the
Ankerberg Theological Institute:
http://www.ankerberg.com/
SEVERAL DAYS AGO, I saw Dr. Ankerberg and several scientists
on t.v. discussing their belief that the BIG BANG is actually
the "Biblical Creation" described in Genesis. In order to make
this identification, they believe that the word "day" in the
expression "God created the world in 7 days" must be "reinterpreted"
so that a "day" does not actually mean "24 hours", but actually
means "2-Billion years", hence:
"7 days" = 14 Billion years
and this explains how the Genesis story actually describes the
BIG BANG, which as we know happened 13.7 Billion years ago.
-----------------------------
AS A PHYSICIST AND THEOLOGIAN...... I FIND THIS
KIND OF MANGLED NAIVETE NOT ONLY RIDICULOUS.....
I AM SIMPLY AMAZED THAT A DOCTOR OF DIVINITY AND
HIGHLY RESPECTED DEFENDER OF THE FAITH SUCH AS DR
JOHN ANKERBERG COULD BE SO COMPLETELY IGNORANT
ABOUT MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD BY
HIM A LONG TIME AGO... SUCH AS WHAT KIND OF
"CREATION" IS ACTUALLY DESCRIBED IN THE BOOK OF
GENESIS.
I AM SIMPLY APPALLED!
-----------------------------
First of all, Genesis is not a "heuristic fairy tale"
made up by second rank school teachers. The writers of
Genesis were highly educated persons of the first rank of
society with intelligence on a par with Aristotle, Newton
or Einstein, and most of them, including Moses himself were
high ranking state officials connected with the royal courts
of Egypt, Babylon or Israel.
Secondly, the Genesis story is not "metaphorical and
fictional", it is meant to be an accurate literal description
of what the first human beings on Earth actually saw when they
first opened their eyes. YES.... it is a description of what
the first Homo Sapiens sapiens actually saw when they first
appeared on Earth between 40 and 100,000 years ago. And
furthermore, unbeknownst to John Ankerberg, the biblical
writers who wrote Genesis.. KNEW THAT when they wrote it!
They were far less stupid and primitive than Dr. Ankerberg
believes. The writers of genesis knew full well that the
Genesis story happened on the order of "thousands" of
years prior to them (e.g. that the human race was only that
old), and that furthermore, the Earth itself was probably
much much older than that. They were not stupid.
What Dr. Ankerberg does not realize is that there are
TWO CREATIONS:
THE TWO CREATIONS
1. The creation of "reality itself" approximately
40,000 years ago when Man first appeared.
Notably, this includes the creation of "time
itself", since time is part of "reality".
2. *Within* this reality, there is the Big Bang
creation of the Universe, which *within reality*
occurred 13.7 billion years ago. Note that the
creation of reality itself, MUST logically precede
ANY event that "occured within reality" no matter
HOW OLD it is, simple because the "creation of
reality" includes the creation of "time itself".
The Biblical writers of Genesis had NO IDEA of the
occurance of the BIG BANG nor did they have to care
or worry about it. It is IRRELEVANT to either God
or Religion. Only the first event listed above has
any relevance to the theory of God or Religion...
and that is the *creation of reality itself*.
THE UPSHOT IS.... that the BIG BANG has ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING to do with the Biblical Creation described
in Genesis. And anyone who does not understand that
there are:
TWO CREATIONS
is unfit and unqualified in either Theology or Science.
FINALLY... all of this boils down to a simple point that
for any event, there must be:
1. The observer
2. The observed
What Dr. Ankerberg does not comprehend is that:
1. The observer was created 40,000 years ago.
2. the observed was created 13.7 billion years ago.
And, this means that the BIBLICAL CREATION actually
PRECEEDS the BIG BANG because the Biblical Creation
"created time itself"... and therefore NOTHING can
"precede the Biblical Creation" NO MATTER HOW OLD
IT IS! And until that is understood, you do not
"comprehend either the Bible or Creation, or God
or Religion itself".
If Dr. John Ankerberg would consider inviting me on
his nationally televised t.v. show, I would be glad
to accept his invitation.
By the way, a SCIENTIFIC PROOF of all this has been
published by HAMMOND in the peer reviewed literature,
and copies of those papers appear on my website:
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
====================================
please ask you news server to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===================================
.

User: "Pyriform"

Title: Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG 03 Mar 2005 05:11:19 PM
George Hammond wrote:
<reams of drivel, as usual - snipped>
Never mind all that, George. What we want to know is: are you
"rapture-ready"?
.

User: "Apocalypso Now"

Title: Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG 01 Mar 2005 10:57:05 PM
Oh, now you're a physicist AND a theologian -- George, you're getting a lot
of mileage out of that 40-year-old Master's! And speaking of which, what
have you been doing in the meantime -- you keep harping on CV's; what's your
employment history? (Labs you've worked at, &c.)
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:Z_VUd.10994$Ba3.9443@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...

GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG

Dr. John Ankerberg (D.Div.) is the producer and host of the
nationally televised program, The John Ankerberg Show. An
ordained Baptist minister and former pastor, he is also a member
of the Board of Directors of the National Religious Broadcasters
(NRB). He has also authored and co-authored around 60 books:

http://www.raptureready.com/who/John_Ankerberg.html

He is also founder and director of the
Ankerberg Theological Institute:

http://www.ankerberg.com/

SEVERAL DAYS AGO, I saw Dr. Ankerberg and several scientists
on t.v. discussing their belief that the BIG BANG is actually
the "Biblical Creation" described in Genesis. In order to make
this identification, they believe that the word "day" in the
expression "God created the world in 7 days" must be "reinterpreted"
so that a "day" does not actually mean "24 hours", but actually
means "2-Billion years", hence:

"7 days" = 14 Billion years

and this explains how the Genesis story actually describes the
BIG BANG, which as we know happened 13.7 Billion years ago.

-----------------------------

AS A PHYSICIST AND THEOLOGIAN...... I FIND THIS
KIND OF MANGLED NAIVETE NOT ONLY RIDICULOUS.....
I AM SIMPLY AMAZED THAT A DOCTOR OF DIVINITY AND
HIGHLY RESPECTED DEFENDER OF THE FAITH SUCH AS DR
JOHN ANKERBERG COULD BE SO COMPLETELY IGNORANT
ABOUT MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD BY
HIM A LONG TIME AGO... SUCH AS WHAT KIND OF
"CREATION" IS ACTUALLY DESCRIBED IN THE BOOK OF
GENESIS.
I AM SIMPLY APPALLED!

-----------------------------

First of all, Genesis is not a "heuristic fairy tale"
made up by second rank school teachers. The writers of
Genesis were highly educated persons of the first rank of
society with intelligence on a par with Aristotle, Newton
or Einstein, and most of them, including Moses himself were
high ranking state officials connected with the royal courts
of Egypt, Babylon or Israel.
Secondly, the Genesis story is not "metaphorical and
fictional", it is meant to be an accurate literal description
of what the first human beings on Earth actually saw when they
first opened their eyes. YES.... it is a description of what
the first Homo Sapiens sapiens actually saw when they first
appeared on Earth between 40 and 100,000 years ago. And
furthermore, unbeknownst to John Ankerberg, the biblical
writers who wrote Genesis.. KNEW THAT when they wrote it!
They were far less stupid and primitive than Dr. Ankerberg
believes. The writers of genesis knew full well that the
Genesis story happened on the order of "thousands" of
years prior to them (e.g. that the human race was only that
old), and that furthermore, the Earth itself was probably
much much older than that. They were not stupid.

What Dr. Ankerberg does not realize is that there are
TWO CREATIONS:

THE TWO CREATIONS

1. The creation of "reality itself" approximately
40,000 years ago when Man first appeared.
Notably, this includes the creation of "time
itself", since time is part of "reality".

2. *Within* this reality, there is the Big Bang
creation of the Universe, which *within reality*
occurred 13.7 billion years ago. Note that the
creation of reality itself, MUST logically precede
ANY event that "occured within reality" no matter
HOW OLD it is, simple because the "creation of
reality" includes the creation of "time itself".


The Biblical writers of Genesis had NO IDEA of the
occurance of the BIG BANG nor did they have to care
or worry about it. It is IRRELEVANT to either God
or Religion. Only the first event listed above has
any relevance to the theory of God or Religion...
and that is the *creation of reality itself*.


THE UPSHOT IS.... that the BIG BANG has ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING to do with the Biblical Creation described
in Genesis. And anyone who does not understand that
there are:

TWO CREATIONS

is unfit and unqualified in either Theology or Science.

FINALLY... all of this boils down to a simple point that
for any event, there must be:

1. The observer
2. The observed

What Dr. Ankerberg does not comprehend is that:

1. The observer was created 40,000 years ago.
2. the observed was created 13.7 billion years ago.

And, this means that the BIBLICAL CREATION actually
PRECEEDS the BIG BANG because the Biblical Creation
"created time itself"... and therefore NOTHING can
"precede the Biblical Creation" NO MATTER HOW OLD
IT IS! And until that is understood, you do not
"comprehend either the Bible or Creation, or God
or Religion itself".

If Dr. John Ankerberg would consider inviting me on
his nationally televised t.v. show, I would be glad
to accept his invitation.

By the way, a SCIENTIFIC PROOF of all this has been
published by HAMMOND in the peer reviewed literature,
and copies of those papers appear on my website:

====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE

http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
====================================
please ask you news server to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===================================


.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
Re: Earth's AirConditioner; NaCl versus aluminum
Re: Septic messes up on MIGHT versus MUST
Re: Septic messes up on MIGHT versus MUST
Torque versus power
salvaging the small morsel of truth in String Theory; Critique of TV-show on String Theory versus AtomTotality
Robertson versus Philips screwdriver Re: new way of describing ellipse for math
what spin 1/2 is in physical reality Re: Robertson versus Philips screwdriver Re:
Re : Magnetic versus gravity actions
Re: the real proof of FLT and Natural Numbers parallelNewtonianMechanics versus Quantum Mechanics
GPS versus source dependency / ballistic theory
Einstein Versus the Physical Review
Multiplication As Summation Versus As Statistical Independence
Diffraction Gratings versus Prisms
NEEDED: Equation for pressure drop in a leaking container versus time
convection versus rotation - and plate tectonics
 

NEWER

pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER