[geocentrism] Re: Creationists' treatment of Geocentricity
- From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:20:57 -0500
Philip -- I hope you're mistaken, but I fear you're not. If you check out
Gordon Bane's website, www.geocentricbible.com, he describes celestial
events he sees described in Scripture mid-Tribulation wherein God will in
fact reverse everything -- i.e. make the earth turn, sun stop, stars stop --
that when the sun, moon and stars "crash" into the plenum that it will cause
a third of their parts to actually break off -- a huge catastrophe in which
the sun will go dark for a short time and the moon will turn red. We will
be able to observe this from earth, these heavenly bodies being violently
broken, exploding.. At the same time there will be a terrible shaking on
the earth as God starts it revolving and spinning. It's like God is
saying, you wanted heliocentric? Fine, here it is.
It's www.geocentricbible.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 3:52 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Creationists' treatment of Geocentricity
> Personally, I think the atheist/evolutionists are on the rout.Cheryl..
> I do not think so.. The new Catholics are falling for it hook line and
sinker. I would reckon the athiests have a better chance of finding truth,
than the New Catholics,simply because they have been lead into believing
that they are still Catholic.
>
> Of course I do not leave out of the equation, the Grace of God...
>
> Methinks His power will soon be observed as the heavens are moved, after
the coming nuclear interference in the middle east, the US and Europe.
some say after april ... I hope not I need 12 months to build a new house...
Others give us 1 to 3 years...
>
>
> doesn't really matter does it..
> Phil.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cheryl B.
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:32 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Creationists' treatment of Geocentricity
>
>
> Gary -- A friend of mine recommended I speak to Ken Hovind, a
creationist
> evangelist who has a creation science museum in Pensacola, Florida. He
> wouldn't even discuss the possibility of geocentrism because, in his
> opinion, the heliocentric model was correct. But he did say that, in
his
> opinion, NASA would not try to document the earth's turning because in
> NASA's mind it would be equivalent perhaps to try to document Santa
Claus
> flying over the North Pole.
>
> I agree with Robert's point that Creationist scientists are just
starting to
> gain respectability and don't want to risk being ignored or made a
laughing
> stock (again) or in some cases having lucrative ministries fall apart --
not
> to be cynical.
>
> I was telling my daughter that not too many years ago most of the
churches
> believed in theistic evolution; but the Creationists have over the past
I'd
> say 30 years managed to make Creationism respectable.
>
> Personally, I think the atheist/evolutionists are on the rout. The
> position of the gradualists is so ludicrous that nonexperts like myself
can
> demolish their position -- and I do it all the time. They avoid
debating
> Creationists because they know they'll lose.
>
> They are put in the position of defending the indefensable. Like for
> example, how do male and female creatures manage to evolve independently
> over billions of years until they reach the point when, voila, they can
now
> start reproducing? And of course God had to create the first life forms
> fully grown and developed, lest He have to feed them with an eye
dropper,
> whatever. Spontaneous generation, life arising from dead matter, was
> disproved in the maggots and dead meat experiment. Somebody should tell
the
> evolutionists that.
>
> That's why I agree with Dr. Jones about NASA being frauds. Anybody who
> would believe such nonsense as either gradualistic evolution or
punctuated
> equilibrium (the lame theory the atheists are now trying to duck behind
to
> escape the ludicrousness of their laughable theories of gradual
evolution)
> can't be trusted for their opinions on much of anything else, especially
in
> the area of science, or in their case "science-so-called."
>
> Cheryl
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 3:06 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Setterfield, CDK and ZPE
>
>
> > Gary,
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Just why don't creationists think the Bible is geostatic--this is a
big
> > > problem.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I can give you a good reason, from personal experience.
> >
> > Creationists are already pariahs in their scientific AND RELIGIOUS
> > communities, for challenging the scientific dogma of cosmic or biotic
> > evolution. To adopt Geostatism as an additional crusade would, they
think,
> > put them in company with the Flat Earth society. So, 'to maintain peer
> > credibility', they eschew the GS view, presumably until they can
convert
> all
> > the Darwinistas.
> >
> > For alleged Scriptural literalists to select which verses are 'true',
or
> > true enough to be worth defending, is logically inconsistent and
possibly
> > hypocritical. Faith isn't a cafeteria for the soul, where we pick
what we
> > choose to consume.
> >
> > "Man does not live on bread alone, but on EVERY WORD that comes from
the
> > mouth of God".
> >
> > This is primarily the reason why I'm here with you and not with them.
> >
> >
> >
> > Pax Christi,
> >
> > Robert
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Other related posts:
