Continuing

I May Feel Like Exonerating Mike Gendron, But I Won't Admire Him · A Comment of Mine Sparked a Debate · Which Went On ... and Was Censored? · Continuing · Carolina Jackson Continued · Antecedent Will, Clarity of St. Paul, Access to Apostolic Tradition

Carolina Jackson

@carolinajackson7621

@hglundahl Genesis 3:15, the proto-evangelium, has nothing to do with Mary. The woman is Eve, & the seed of the woman is Jesus

Mary is blessed among women bc she bore Jesus, not bc she was sinless.

The story of Jahel killing Sisara has nothing to do with Mary.

The torn veil meant we all have direct access to God for the forgiveness of sins; we don't need a priest anymore.

Look, I suggest we leave our conversation here. U believe certain things, & I believe others, & we will never make each other change our views. Peace & blessings to you.

EmberBright

@EmberBright2077

@carolinajackson7621 Regarding Exodus 18. It is regardless, the beginning of a government for God's people. Jesus even alludes to their teaching authority in Matthew 23:3, regarding the Pharisees. Where the Jewish equivalent of the Magisterium is not infallible, the New Covenant one is, as following Jesus's other promises.

Regarding your claim that the food that satisfies is "fellowship with Jesus through the Holy Spirit". Or maybe it's the actual food that Jesus offers, which is Himself, as He describes in John 6. One part of the Passover lamb is to eat the lamb, and Jesus is the Passover lamb.

If one were stuck on a desert island without the Eucharist it would be unfortunate, but you would not be at fault for not participating in the fullness of the Christian life and the New Covenant, as you couldn't have done otherwise.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 Hello! 1. In Mathew 23, Jesus actually condemns what was happening with the chair of Moses. What makes u think that the Magisterium is above human mistakes?
2. The chair of Moses has nothing to do with the Magisterium.
3. Yes, u & I have different views about communion.
4. Regarding evolu..., I'll break it in short messages to see if it is not deleted.
Bendiciones!

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 1) He condemns their actions, but he affirms their authority.

2) It is a prefigurement of the Magisterium. Just like many preconfigurments of the New Covenant that are found in the old.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 I sent one mini comment about ev, just 2 lines, & it was deleted.

@EmberBright2077 the NT mentions pastors & teachers, elders (or bishops & deacons). Period.
There is absolutely no reason we could take from the word of God to conclude the chair of Moses is part of the NT church

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 Teachers, that we've already established in a previous conversation, are appointed. You can't appoint yourself as a teacher.

In the OT, we have a religious authority established and operated through by God, and in the NT acknowledged as having legitimate authority. In the NT, Jesus gives special authority to the Apostles, particularly Peter, using language that harkens back to God's authorities in the OT.

You can deny it, but I would put it in the same bucket as an atheist who denies the preconfigurments of Christ in the OT, and says there's no reason to believe them.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 "we" have not established anything! R ideas are r ideas. I believe what the Lord says without adding:

"And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also."

(2 Timothy 2, 2) Faithful & able are the 2 only conditions to teach.

"We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your[a] faith; 7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is TEACHING, then teach; 8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead,[b] do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

Teaching is a spiritual gift, not a special appointment.

U have to decide if you want to believe God's Word or man's Word. U r putting r trust in a human institution that is deceiving u about science, about salvation & about basically everything.

But u can still turn around & run to Jesus.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@carolinajackson7621 A few things.

1) Mary is a woman, and since the seed of the woman is Jesus, Mary is the New Eve. Jesus calls Her woman two or three times, off the cuff Cana and "woman see thy son" at Calvary, I think there was a third occasion between.

2) In a Catholic Bible three women are called "blessed among women" and in a Protestant Bible two women.

Jael, Judith and Mary / Jael and Mary.

The parallel is too striking to overlook. The words are a military award for a woman, and the one and only man She could have in any sense crushed the head of is the Serpent.

3) The torn veil means the OT priesthood is over. John 20:21--23 makes it very clear that there is an NT priesthood, in which Jesus makes ten of the Twelve sharers on the evening of Resurrection Sunday.

While the OT priesthood is over, the NT priesthood isn't.

4) During the OT, there was a chair of Moses. In the NT there is a chair of Peter. While the OT lasted, I'll differ from Ember Bright and say the chair of Moses was infallible in formal decisions. It could not mislead while active, it could only occasionally or even finally apostatise and cease activity. Nothing in Matthew 23 says the chair of Moses was then teaching error formally. Jesus is just speaking out against power abuse.

No one is saying the chair of Moses is part of the NT, we are saying it is a prefigurement of the NT Magisterium.

5) Faithful and able are not the two only requirements, in the quote you give, those men are also subject to a third condition, appointment by St. Timothy, like St. Timothy was appointed by and received the imposition of hands from St. Paul, like Sts. Paul and Barnabas received the appointment and imposition of hands from a group in Antioch which ay have included St. Peter (some think Simon Niger is Simon Peter), and which in turn had received it from the Apostles who had received it from Jesus in John 20.

So, formal teaching in the Church very much is a special appointment.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 "I would put it in the same bucket as an atheist who denies the preconfigurments of Christ in the OT"

As an Atheist or Jew.

Otherwise agreeing.

Has Carolina made an attempt of posting evolution related on your subtitles to the K-pop star, yet?

EmberBright

@hglundahl No. I don't know what's going on if they don't go up.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 Ok, may I post the answer on Australia under our conversation there?

EmberBright

@hglundahl Sure

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 Will do so!

Under another video

skipping the pre-talk.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"Perhaps you are claiming that dating methods are inaccurate."

Some of them are not only inaccurate but totally off.

"This is blatantly false, as we have many different dating methods that all corroborate each other,"

Usually not, actually. For each sample, there is modest or no overlap of methods.

"from tree rings,"

Like the other lignine based clue to the past, written documents from the time we are looking at, it's usually more and more fragmentary, the further you go back. At a certain point, it may be too fragmentary to give a good clue about absolute chronology.

"to carbon dating,"

My speciality. I am doing a re-calibration using Biblical chronology.

"radiometric,"

Other than carbon? Pretty useless, actually.

"varves,"

The periodicity of which cannot be guaranteed, so, useless.

"rock layers, etc."

You have rock layers of fish over rock layers of trilobites. Tells us which creatures escaped the mud of the Flood easiest.

You do not have rock layers of extinct mammals over extinct dinosaurs or of either over extinct pelycosaurs.

"These dating methods can even be corroborated by texts written by civilizations when such a crossover exists. Either they all agree with each other because they are correct, or because God wants them to look correct."

Or, simply, they don't all agree.

If Egyptian and Sumerian records agree with carbon dates, putting Third Dynasty of Ur or Narmer prior to Abraham (i e prior to c. 2000 BC), that's perhaps because Satan was well aware of the rising carbon levels, knew (from God) how carbon 14 would be used in end times, and was able to adapt the lies of Pagans to those misleading dates.

"I have already explained how your answer fails."

No, you haven't.

"I'll give it a read, thanks for the tip. Of course, 20,000 years for this dating still precludes your interpretation of the Flood happening 4000 years ago."

20 000 BP for glacial maximum is in a large degree dependent on carbon dates, like where vegetation was in the ground, it wasn't covered with ice, and vegetation can be carbon dated.

This triggers the recalibration I make for carbon, so glacial maximum is roughly a bit before 2700 BC.

"What I'm saying, is that the entire geologic column, which exists across the whole planet, has a radioactive decay."

You are in that case very deluded about what amounts of it include radioactive samples.

"This is the basis of radiometric dating."

Which is not done for most parts of the geologic column, like if you get a radimetric time for Permian or its periods, it's based on some samples in much more Permian geology and palaeontology. And they chose the samples that accord with Triassic being younger and Carboniferous being older.

"When this decay occurs, there is a release of heat. The dating of the Earth according to this method is 4.6 billion years."

That age is based on one or two meteorites, supposedly both hitting earth and starting their decay right when Earth was supposedly formed billions of years ago.

Two meteorites have sth like the weight of shall we be generous and say 5 metric tonnes?

Earth is supposed to be 5.972168 × 10^24 kg or 5.972168 × 10^21 metric tonnes, that makes Earth a bit more than 10^21 times more massive than those two meteorites. How is that a heat problem, even if I had suggested a more rapid decay, which I haven't?

// the uranium series from 238U to 206Pb, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years //

So, my suggestion is, if lead-206 is present in roughly equal mass to uranium-238, it's because it started out that way, rather than there being no lead-206 and twice as much uranium-238. That means zero accelerated decay, and zero heat problem.

"It's worth noting that we have tried to speed up this decay in laboratories to see if it's possible, and have been unable to. If you want to say it sped up anyway, and squeeze all of that radioactive decay into a period of 6000 years, 4000 years, or 1 year, depending on the young earther, you have all that heat occurring at once. This is not concentrated on a single point - this is happening everywhere. The heat involved is enough to melt the crust of the Earth many times over, the planet being a molten ball. The entire planet would be at 100,000 degrees Celsius, compared to the Sun's surface being 5000 degrees Celsius. This is before we factor in the heat of tectonic movement."

Since I don't believe in speeding up decay or that being necessary for accounting for the 4.6 billion years supposed age for a few tonnes of meteorite, you are adressing a straw man. I only have to deal with the tectonic movement.

"I'm getting this from Gondwana Research, but if you don't like the numbers, then you have to at least acknowledge the principle: 1) that radioactive decay happens, and releases heat. 2) this decay happens at an unchangeable, measurable rate. 3) The amount of decay, and by extension its heat release, has been measured to 4.6 billion years. 4) If we compress the time of the decay, we also compress the time of heat release. 5) This necessarily means the Earth was hotter corresponding to the amount you have compressed the timeframe. Conclusion: The Earth - even if you don't like the numbers - must have been ridiculously hot all over if we imagine the radiometric dating is wrong and the decay has happened in such a short amount of time."

I don't think we have even one sample for "The amount of decay, and by extension its heat release, has been measured to 4.6 billion years." See my take on those few meteorites. Apart from that, you are vastly overdoing how much of the so-called geologic column involves radioactive samples. The most present radiometric method would be K-Ar, and that's only for lava. And lava that cools quickly (like under Flood water) will contain lots of argon that was never potassium.

"The numbers I've heard go up to about 100,000 degrees, but let's lowball it to 1000 degrees. This completely destroys the ecosystem, and kills all life on Earth. Even if we lowball it to 100 degrees."

We don't have to. I'm not speeding up the decay.

"This is not even touching on things like the Flood would have killed all plant life on Earth by burying it all in salt water for a year, etc."

Under floating vegetation mats, pockets of sweet water can be preserved.

This supposing the water of the Flood was heavily salty. If it wasn't, the problem doesn't exist.

"Fair enough. But that still leaves the question, where are you getting this from?"

1) Australia had people prior to Cook and van Diemen.
2) These come from Shem, Ham or Japheth according to Genesis 10:32.
3) If we look at when crossing would have been easy, c. 2700 BC (alias 20 000 BP, "last" Glacial Maximum) would be an option.
4) That was c. 250 years after the Flood, Noah was still alive, so was Shem and presumably Ham and Japheth, all of which had helped to construct the Ark.
5) So, the facts show the technology would have been available.

"Fair enough - as far as I can tell, it is the oldest human remains in Australia."

Thank you.

"That said, we have evidence of the people being there that dates back to 65,000 years, in the form of axes and art tools. While Google can find this very easy, if you want me to give you something specific, look up "Australia human history 'rewritten by rock find'" on the BBC website. But, even if we ignore all that, 40,000 years still precludes a 6000 year old Earth."

I did.

// Radiocarbon dating was used on charcoal samples but this has a limit of about 50,000 years.

To go beyond that, the team used the method of optically stimulated luminescence (OSL). //

Charcoals dated to 50 000 BP now could be from pre-Flood wood. Perhaps vegetation that didn't survive the Flood, but lay around when Noah's family arrived, perhaps pieces from the Ark, which was built in pre-Flood times.

OSL would be one of the dating methods I consider as "fudge factors" ...

@EmberBright2077 You had asked about the archaeology of ship building:

The Oldest Art in Greece is Not What You Think
Rare Earth | 25 May 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDR0UzznuVg

Deer date to 12 000 BP / 10 000 BC, so ship with sails date back that far too.

10 000 BC is just before Babel in my recalibration:

2633 av. J.-Chr.

36,973 pcm , donc daté à 10 883 av. J.-Chr.

2607 av. J.-Chr.

43,398 / 43,438 pcm, donc daté à 9507 av. J.-Chr.

So, within 17 years of the start of Babel.

2633 BC (real / Biblical chronology) is c. 100 years after Last Glacial Maximum a bit before 2700 BC.

@EmberBright2077 Here is my series of re-calibration tables, by the way:

New blog on the kid : Mes plus récentes tables de carbone 14
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2024/05/mes-plus-recentes-tables-de-carbone-14.html

Waiting for Ember Bright

to answer that one, I return to ...

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 Radiometric dating doesn't actually measure age but the ratio of the radioactive "parent" element to the stable "daughter " element. Lava rocks of recent volcanic eruptions rendered an age of millions of years.

Neither does TREE DATING, since under certain circumstances, trees cam grow more than 1 ring a year.

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 Newly formed rocks are all parent material, so you can't date them.

Tree rings can also produce no rings in a year as well.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 "In cases where the actual age of the rock is known, radiometric dating techniques typically give wildly erroneous ages. For example, rock formed in a lava flow from Mt. St. Helens in 1986 was radiometrically dated as 2.6 million years old! If, every time you read a newspaper report concerning an incident about which you had first-hand knowledge, you found that the newspaper report was totally wrong, how many of these would you read before you began to suspect that all the reporting was wrong?"

@EmberBright2077 Contrary to popular opinion, there are many evidences of a young universe, what would rule out evolution. Some of those evidences: receding magnetic fields in planets, shape of the arms of spiral galaxies, shallow layer of lunar dust, geological activity on the moon, existence of comets, ADN found in dinosaur bones... those are just a few among many more

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 Trying to radiometricly date newly formed rocks is like trying to measure a semi-truck on a kitchen scale. It doesn't mean the scale is unreliable, simply that you've abused it.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 ...there simply isn't a scale to measure age for stuff older than a few thousand years.

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 There are many. Radiometric dating being one. You can't disprove it by saying it doesn't measure new rocks correctly any more than you can disprove kitchen scales by saying it can't measure a semi-truck correctly.

Another example might be using a metal detector on wood, and saying you've proved that metal detectors don't work.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 Hello again!

The TRUE GOSPEL: Jesus + nothing

The CC GOSPEL: Jesus + works + sacraments + purgatory + submission to the CC.

U have to decide what u believe. Jesus can save r soul. The CC cannot help u in the day of judgment.

Run to Jesus!

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 Without trying to be insulting, I thought you were better than this. Your comment is nothing but empty rhetoric that I would expect to see copy/pasted by propagandists.

You are presupposing that the thing you believe is the "true gospel" (the one invented by Martin Luther in the 16th century).

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 nothing can be better, wiser & humbling than discovering that we cannot add anything to what Jesus has done.

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 More empty rhetoric. No one is talking about "adding' to what Jesus has done.

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 if u think that Jesus atoning death is not enough for our salvation, then u are adding requirements to it.

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 It's not a matter of it being "enough", it's a matter of what was done.

If you want to commit to your rhetoric, why bother with Christianity at all? You don't need faith, Jesus's death was enough right? Why are you adding to his sacrifice?

Carolina Jackson

@EmberBright2077 yes, what was done was Jesus' sacrifice

Faith does not add. It's a reaction, an answer to what was done by Jesus.

EmberBright

@carolinajackson7621 So would you commit, and say faith is unnecessary?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 You are doing fine on the justification or salvation question.

You just said that K-Ar is useless on newly formed rock, would that be because of Argon being trapped in it?

Well, in the Flood, lava would have cooled quickly and trapped lots of argon.

Tree rings ... no living tree has more than c. 5000 tree rings, and if the Flood was 5000 years ago, that's no problem.

When it comes to overlapping tree rings to get back to "10 000 years ago" or sth, the pieces that are supposed to overlap get smaller and rarer and you rely more and more on carbon 14 before even starting to look for a fit for a piece of wood, and this makes tree ring calibrated carbon 14 beyond a certain time back circular.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 If faith is a reaction and an answer, so can good works be such.

Sacraments are the normal transmission of Christ's work, and Purgatory, well, even you probably believe in Purgatory on Earth, as many who believe in OSAS will say that nevertheless God will chastise you if you sin after being saved. Sacraments and Purgatory are acts of God, so only good works, and as said, if faith is a reaction and an answer, so are good works (Ephesians 2:10).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 "(the one invented by Martin Luther in the 16th century)"

Technical quibble, he actually did believe Baptism was salvific, and he also believed God was the one working in this sacrament, for some reason he seems to have had to redefine the Mass for applying the same logic to the Eucharist.

EmberBright

@hglundahl Thanks

If we imagine the flood trapping lots of argon, why is it that the geologic column seems to have not only variation, but variation consistent with what we would expect to find in an Old Earth model? If your model is true, we would expect to find most of the geology to be homogeneous, which we don't.

I'll drop tree rings for now, I just don't know where to go with it for now. Perhaps I'll come back to it if I do some more research.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@EmberBright2077 "the geologic column seems to have not only variation, but variation consistent with what we would expect to find in an Old Earth model?"

The variation we find in fauna is perfectly compatible with Young Earth Creationism.

In drill holes and in Grand Canyon, you have several superposed faunas, and they are in both cases marine faunas. Solution: the sea had several layers of fauna when the Flood buried them in mud.

In fossil graveyards, at any point, you find one level of land fauna.

I actually checked this myself, while the site palaeocritti was up.

In Karoo, the Tapanocephalus assemblage zone is near surface part of the Permian and some other assemblage zone is near surface other part of Permian or Triassic (Moschops assemblage zone would be Permian).

You don't ever find "near surface Triassic, then dig, then somewhat subterranean Permian and then even lower an even older Permian" ... not in Karoo, where Permian and Triassic both exist, not elsewhere, most places of land fauna they don't both exist.

And it was an evolutionist résumé of paleontology that I was consulting, not a work by YEC apologetics. The answer is simply that Permian and Triassic are different faunal biozones back when the Flood struck.

Above disappeared on this thread

so, I reposted it under the other video. THEN I reposted it once again, from the library instead of the cyber. Seems to stick now.

Carolina Jackson

@hglundahl when I became a true Christian, I started to help my mom in caring for my grandfather bc the Holy Spirit showed me the selfishness in my heart. Yes, good works are a reaction, but don't bring anything to our salvation.

Jesus did not institute any sacraments

I don't know what OSAS is.

I don't believe in purgatory in earth, but I do believe in God's discipline when we sin after being saved. (Hebrews 12, 6-11)

If u r a father, Happy Father's Day.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@carolinajackson7621 I am not a Father.

OSAS is also called "eternal security" (already here on earth), and is short for "once saved, always saved" ...

Many who believe in that believe those who sin after being saved are chastised. I call that Purgatory on Earth because Purgatory really is once one is already finally saved. Doesn't contribute to saving you, just is about getting clean before you enter Heaven.

Jesus instituted seven sacraments, and I'll be happy to show you the places in the Bible, if you ask.

@carolinajackson7621 Btw, your view of what happened when you started helping your mom sounds pretty Catholic.

Except one thing. As eternal security is wrong, good works contribute to staying saved. Not doing them would contribute to falling into mortal sin, and therefore damnation. Philippians 2:12,13.