Wednesday, July 17, 2013

... on Redemption, Flood and Paradise

Series on Discovering Religion:

... on Autumn's why she is an atheist video and some commenters

It is through above that I know the channel Discovering Religion.

... on Apocalyptic fears of Atheists and some more
(on Ep 01)
... on Young Earth
(on Ep 02)
... on Redemption, Flood and Paradise
(on Ep 03, 04 1/2, 04 2/2)
... on Copy Right issues, Scientific Theories and Adam's children's sibling marriages, not forgetting bananas
(on Ep 05, 06)

commenting on
Discovering Religion: Ep 03 - Purpose of Christ
Hans-Georg Lundahl
1) Yes, we hold that Christ is Risen - Happy Eastertide - and founded a Church, and that He and His Church have both spoken unequivocally for Genesis, and that Genesis does therefore not only have the human credibility it shares with other creation stories and flood stories, and not only the further human credibility it has by providing a credible geneaology between creation and known Jewish History, but divine credibility as well.

2) You lean heavily on the "proven" and "scientifically proven" old ages of say trilobites (which are partly forged for tourists in Morocco) or triceratops.

a) you do not here provide the scientific proof but assume it, except for ...

b) contrasting from beginning to end modern science with early Jewish bronze age tribes, as if it were a given conclusion which of them was more likely to be right, and ...

c) assuming the geological column. Wr has Tertiary Fauna bn found above Triassic on earth?

d) Just forgot about creation of petrol.

How can scientists prove or have proven that the ONLY way for it to have formed is by a million year perduring process, when they cannot even have tested it if it works at all?

And how can they have proven that it cannot be an original part of creation (ok, it's sticky, so perhaps it is not "very good" but it was very well hidden back then, so in no direct conflict with all was very good either).

3) We Catholics do not believe that wishing for Salvation and believing Christ died to give it is enough on our part to get Salvation. This means we are not Evangelicals, it does not mean we are no Creationists.

Council of Trent condemned the proposition that confidence in Christ's Sacrifice is enough, it did certainly not condemn the literal existence of the first two men who were the first sinners, Adam and Eve, man and woman, also first married couple.

So you believe in a deceitful god who tricks us into believing the world is 4500 milllion years old when it really is only 6000 years old just to test how far we are willing to ignore the evidence just to become saved? You worship a lying deceitful god? I feel sad for you.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
There is no active deceit in allowing scientists to deceive themselves by evaluating evidence with methods which really presuppose that God is left out from any explanation they are willing to accept.
You got it all backwards. It is not like scientists say "Let's assume there is no god and see where the evidence leads us". They say "let's see where the evidence leads us", they make no assumption of a god bu they also make no assumption there is no god. If evidence for god were to pop up scientists would announce "Proof of god found" and those presenting the evidence for god would probably get a nobel prize.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
That is the official program as officially stated.

I have caught arguments redhandedly in un-stated atheist assumptions, like - latest example when discussing small and young universe - stars supposedly needing to self ignite and therefore have a greater mass than Jupiter that has not self ignited.
that preacher is hilarious, did he really say a retarded god who couldnt get it right the first time he wouldnt want to worship ?? isnt that EXACTLY why in the bible he summoned the so called flood? to fix what he messed up and regreted making man?? this is crazy, he dismissed his own beliefs himself, arggggghhh, religion makes me wanna puke sometimes
Hans-Georg Lundahl
No, the flood was not because God had bungled the previous creation, but because man had made him "regret it" by bungling himself.
and commenting on:
Discovering Religion: Ep 04 -The Flood (1 of 2)
Hans-Georg Lundahl
First of all, I plead stumped for one. Extinction of Aquatic Reptiles.

Second, I claim you got one very wrong.

There have never been fossiles of vegetarian lions, they became carnivores just after the fall. Even man would obviously have eaten meat:

a) as a ritual part of sacrifice (like Abel who sacrificed a lamb),

b) as part of Nodian debauchery

It is only righteous man in ordinary circumstances (i e outside sacrifice) who started eating meat after the Flood.

Carnivores wr carnivores just as thorns wr thorns straight after the fall of Adam. By his sin death...

Third, if men and dinosaurs coexisted at the same time, it does not absolutely mean same places also.

One of the best fossile records for any one dinosaur is for T Rex - a magnificent total of 30 fossiles.

My theory is it may even have been not a created kind as such, but a Genetically Modified Organism - due to Nodian Scientists abusing their knowledge of Genetics. And that similar experiments were conducted on other kinds resulting in other dinos.

Fourth, timeline according to geological column.

Do we have one?

As far as I have verified for fauna at least, the Lagerstätten of such an era are not under or over those of such another era.

At a place, Triassic fossiles may need some diggng for, as far as I know you do not find Tertiary fossiles less in need of digging just above them. Anywhere on earth where paleos are looking for dinos and such.
no answers
were given me so far
and commenting on:
Discovering Religion: Ep 04 -The Flood (2 of 2)
Hans-Georg Lundahl
Distant starlight first. As already said, I challenge the distance measuring techniques for obtaining those distances, since I am Geocentric.

However, the "God stretched out" theory is not totally absurd. If stars were much closer when created and stretched out under such circumstances that light beams always continued to reach earth?

I think it may brake down, which is one reason I prefer Geocentrism - and discarding the distances offered by current scientists, "outside solar system".

Meaning of course, that I usually accept distances as given "within solar system" but that is far less than even one light year.

Next, dates of Flood and Cultures:

Roman Martyrologium for Dec 25 gives the birth year for Jesus Christ as:

"Anno a creatione mundi, ... quinquies millesimo centesimo nonagesimo nono; a diluvio autem, anno bis millesimo nongentesimo quinquagesimo septimo; a nativitate Abrahae, anno bis millesimo quintodecimo; a Moyse et egressu populi Israel de Aegypto, anno millesimo quingentesimo decimo"

Flood was in year 2242 after Creation and 2957 BC. Moses is about 1 C. earlier than in Protestant chrono.

And, point has been made by Creationists before, I am making it again: these cultures may very well be dated wrong, and too old by some centuries.

Like due to lower C14 content of athmosphere back when woods and bones etc. come from, making for apparent older age. One of the simplest answers, basically (though details may entail complexities) for a YEC.

Third, tectonics of new continents and Himalaya: Creationists generally believe these were created during flood, very fast, before Tower of Babel and thus before these post-Babel cultures you mentioned (some wrongly dated) and that tectonic movements have considerably slowed down since.

Hovind whom you love to hate so much has actually been very pushing about earth not having as high mountains before and during flood as afterwards.

Fourth, how did marsupial species get to Australia/(Ulimaroa and Tasmania) and South America (one or two live there too, I seem to recall) after flood? Can have been on floating vegetation drifting across the sea, by action of angels, and all under the ultimate providence of God, of course.

And fifth - I nearly forgot - how come the rivers of paradise stay in place after the flood?

I quote Haydock for Genesis ch. 2:

"Paradise lay probably to the east of Palestine, or of that country where Moses wrote. The precise situation cannot be ascertained. Calmet places it in Armenia, others near Babylon, &c. Some assert that this beautiful garden is still in being, the residence of Henoch and Elias. But God will not permit the curiosity of man to be gratified by the discovery of it, chap. iii. 24. How great might be its extent we do not know. If the sources of the Ganges, Nile, Tigris, and Euphrates, be not now changed, and if these be the rivers which sprung from the fountains of Paradise, (both which are points undecided) the garden must have comprised a great part of the world, (Haydock), as the Ganges rises in India, and the Nile about the middle of Africa. (Tirinus)"

So, we do not know that all of Paradisal Tigris and Euphrates are all of present such, nor that all of Phison and Gehon are all of Ganges and Nile.

They may have continued outside Paradise.

If certain flat countries got little sediment during flood, river beds before and after flood may be near identical, due to preserved geodesics.

The Gehon which corresponds to Nile may have been both Nile and early narrow version of Mediterranean. And so on.
no answers
were given me so far

No comments: