Thursday, August 8, 2013

... on Age of Earth video's by Kent Hovind


1) Creation vs. Evolution : Can Evolutionists be a Laughing Stock?
2) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Age of Earth video's by Kent Hovind
3) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Chaplains vs Councellors and on Creation vs Evolution (feat. Kent Hovind)
4) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Hovind's Dissertation Not as Bad as its Critics on Rational Wiki Think
5) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Hovind - Ross Debate, for Four Videos
6) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on History being Kent Hovind's Weaker Subject
7) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Kent Hovind's supposed failure in Carbon Dating Subject

Video commented on
EKrassner90 : Kent Hovind: The Age of The Earth
gus tucker
Most Christians, including the Catholic Church, believe the Universe came from the Big Bang. Why is it that US xstian fundamentalists disagree? This is one of the many reasons why I find it 'difficult' to believe (understand) what you people say.

I think that people like Kent lack the understanding of a family living in poverty in the third world. Amen Kent! (You really define the word patronising!)


Hans-Georg Lundahl
No, not including the Catholic Church.

Including influential and many Catholics.

Council of Trent states the Holy Bible is inspired in every one of its Scriptures (73 books, and Daniel has a few chapters more) and therefore absolutely inerrant in original manuscript. However only not quite as absolutely so in each translation, but at least sufficiently to exclude doctrinal error in the translation known as Vulgate.

However, whether Vulgate was right or wrong to translate Hebrew ha-shamayim in Genesis 1:1 as coelum (sg) where in other places it translates as plural (coeli) is not inerrant.
several rants on parts of video
(which in general I find good)
You did one wrong thing in attacking St Athanasius.

God really wants us to partake of the Divine Nature - on His terms.

The problem with the devil's words were he was DENYING those terms. Like obedience.

Apocalypse 20 says - verse 4:

"And I saw seats; and they sat upon them; and judgment was given unto them; and the souls of them that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and who had not adored the beast nor his image, nor received his character on their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

Also, note that Proverbs 23 has verse 30:

"Surely they that pass their time in wine, and study to drink of their cups."

That is not same thing as drinking a Budwary or a Plsn. That is drinking a lot of them at a sitting.

Confer 1 Timothy 5:23, confer Ecclesiasticus 31:22

Habacuc 2:15 in my Bible:

"Woe to him that giveth drink to his friend, and presenteth his gall, and maketh him drunk, that he may behold his nakedness."

You just conveniently left out a few clauses stating the bad intentions behind the sinful version of giving one's neighbour drink.

If matter can neither be created nor destroyed ...

First of all, God can create and destroy matter. But getting philosophical, there are four answers to why something seems to be there:

  • 1) eternism

  • 2) creationism

  • 3) evolutionism

  • 4) illusionism

Eternism is true about God. Creationism is true about Cosmos, all kinds, and each individual specimen of it. Another creationism is true about man made objects. GMO's are "created" both ways. Evolutionism is true about individual growth and varieties, and illusionism cannot be true about everything. A false Agamemnon can be a real actor. An unreal Abraham or Nimrod can be a real dream. And so on. And if the false Agamemnon is not a real actor, it may still be a real mistake to take him for Agamemnon. And if the unreal Abraham is not a real dream, it may be a real picture or Moving Pics Film Theatre.

Every unreal something is a real something else.

Using eternism about cosmos is an even older ruse than using BB evolutionism about it.

You know Carl Sagan? He is only marginally BB evolutionist. He is mainly a BB / BC (Big Crush) alternating states eternal cosmos believer, an eternist about the world. Just like Lucretius (who btw was a periodic catastrophist in order to explain why humanity does not keep historic record of all eternity past).

That is also Satanic.

Manlius Boëthius said it very was far from Philosophy or Wisdom.

"The guys are a lot smarter than I am, but I slaughter them because I am right and they are wrong."

Spot on, that is why even some Catholics (this one raises a hand) like Hovind Sr (and Hovind Jr for publishing the material with Hovind Sr).

Universe, etymology.

Versus actually means turn. In verse and prose it refers to turning to a new line when a set number of syllables or syllabic short lengths (two such for a long syllable) have been reached.

In universe it refers [originally, when it referred to anything] to the unified turning of the heavens around the earth each day, in somewhat less than 24 h (the sun, lagging behind it, makes it in 24, since they are 24ths of a solar day).

HBJ, General Science, 1989, p.362 ...

The "nothing exploded" is NOT a a strawman!

ghasp *if my jaw could have dropped to the floor without taking the rest of the skull with it, I guess it would have*

[Re: ] Conservation of angular momentum ... why do some things spin backwards then?

"God did it on purpose to make the BB theory look stoopid".

Well, what about another reverse: reverse parallax, and some stars that show it show more of it than any stars showing ordinary parallax.

Can God (and his angels) have done it or be doing it on purpose to make heliocentrism look "stoopid"?

"Shut your mouth and quit your wine ..."

well, Timothy was told to use some (and Jesus provided some for some others at His first miracle - which also shows how the Blessed Virgin Mary introduced the public miracles of Her Son as much as Himself, that is why we call Her Mother of Our Salvation).

If you have committed ONE SIN you are guilty and going to Hell.

If it is a mortal one, yes.

Even if you were born again before that.

And if you are not, and live long enough, sooner or later you might commit them pretty easily.

How many here know how to get saved if you were already born again by the Sacrament of Baptism and commit one or several mortal sins?

John 20:21-23

That is right. Absolution by apostles' successors! Priests.

After Confession of the sins you need absolution for.

And guess what?

If you are Baptised, you are so to the Death of Jesus to die from sin. It is not something other than Christ's sacrifice.

If a priest absolves you, you are absolved by the authority of Christ who Rose from the Dead. It is not something other than Christ's Resurrection.
video commented on:
EKrassner90 : Kent Hovind: The Age of the Earth part 2
This Kent Hovind guy is a fraud. Some American Christians think they dont have to pay their taxes eventhough they live in the community. They want all the pirks like hospitals, public transport, schools, roads, welfare, civil servants, child welfare agency, police departments etc. But they think that theyre paying too much in taxes. But its GREEDY GREEDY people like Kent Hovind who wants to hold onto his millions.Im glad God doesnt think they should be above the law. Now in jail for a decade.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
"They want all the pirks like hospitals, public transport, schools, roads, welfare, civil servants, child welfare agency, police departments etc. "

They want schools where all are forced to attend and listen to evolution?

They want child welfare agencies some of which take away children from Christian parents?

They want hopsitals to continue abortion, contraception and in some cases mental treatments for Christians?

C'mon! Be real, for once!

And u speak as if there were no bad judges too!

And if the public system supports Jacques Cousteau, and the élite who could raise the Georgia Guide Stones, is it just greed not to want to contribute?

Romans 13 gives a list of reason for, among other things, paying taxes.

There are some things done by modern states clearly not on that list. And those that are might not be even much more than half of the budget.

Not to mention that a man who attacks these and Philip Duke of Edinburgh as well might find less than justice in courts.

Have you missed that Lyndon LaRouche also attacked the Duke of Edinburgh for the "virus" quote before he was convicted for tax fraud?

I mean, if they got Philip right, they might have had a reason to attack him.

If they got him wrong, why did not the attacked man deny the quote or apologise for it, so far ever, and why are two men who attacked him for it convicted by US justice?
Hans-Georg Lundahl [to the video]
Amuse, etymology.

Muse means think, ponder, meditate or daydream (over something).

Amuse originally make someone else muse.

Bemuse is now used for amuse.

Amusement parks are parks that help you to muse - in the sense of daydream.
Col 2:8 - "philosophy and vain deceit" - not that it is further qualified "after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ".

It is not wrong for a Christian to believe in a Philosophy which is consistent with the faith. Which Platonic-Aristotelian philosophy of Church Fathers and Scholastics is, and evolution is not.

Back then Stoicism and opposite Epicureanism were as little after Christ as Evolutionism is now.
classic quote:
"I have a theory about that. About six thousand years ago, God created everything. About 4400 years ago there was a Fluhhdd. So the oldest ... is less than 4400 years ago."
applicable to:
Oldest tree, largest desert, largest coral reef (at least).
slight disclaimer:
He is not a Geocentric (see reverse spin of parallax comment above under link to other video)
clue to why he is in prison:
He insulted Disneyland, CNN, Jacques Cousteau (who had a carreer in French army and resistance) and whoever is behind the Georgia Guidestones abomination. He also joked about a possible threat to petrol consumption. If petrol formed during Flood of Noah, there may be human remnants squished into it. Petrol industry happy? Possibly not.

No comments: