[geocentrism] Re: MS illogic
- From: "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 23:08:47 +0100 (BST)
Philip,
You state that, "If you can discount any part of the Bible, then it logically
follows that you must discount all of it."
Why?
The Bible was not written in stone by God, it was put together by a group of
men. Some writings were included, others (of equal antiquity) were rejected.
This is a fact.
If you understand that division by zero is an operation that is undefined in
mathematics, it does not mean that all of mathematics is wrong and should be
discarded. Rather, you would gain an appreciation of which parts were sound and
which needed some degree of caution.
The God shown to us by Christ in the "New Testament" is not the god of the
Jews depicted in the "Old Testament." Yet God does not change. So which one is
the right one?
What does Christ call the Jews in the Gospel of John? What do they call
themselves in the "Old Testament?" The two answers are mutually exclusive. This
is also a fact.
Best wishes,
Neville.
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
@font-face { font-family: Verdana; } @page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in;
margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin: .5in; mso-footer-margin:
.5in; mso-paper-source: 0; } P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in
0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-style-parent: ""; mso-pagination:
widow-orphan; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman" } LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman";
mso-style-parent: ""; mso-pagination: widow-orphan; mso-fareast-font-family:
"Times New Roman" } DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt;
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-style-parent: ""; mso-pagination:
widow-orphan; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman" } A:link { COLOR:
blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; text-underline: single } SPAN.MsoHyperlink
{ COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; text-underline: single }
A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; text-underline:
single } SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION:
underline; text-underline: single } P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN:
0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-pagination: widow-orphan;
mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman" } LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE:
12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-pagination:
widow-orphan; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman" } DIV.MsoAutoSig {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman";
mso-pagination: widow-orphan; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman" }
SPAN.EmailStyle15 { COLOR: black; mso-style-type: personal-compose;
mso-ansi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family: Arial;
mso-hansi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial } DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1 } At 73 Nothing has changed since I was 13. Back then I
was laughed out of class by an ignorant teacher because niether he nor the rest
understood my
question.. He was demonstrating heat radiating downwards, and likened it to
the suns rays heating the earth. As I raised my hand closer to the hot ball he
had and felt the increasing heat.
I asked, if it was the same with the sun, why was it colder on Mt. Everest,
which was closer to the sun.
And then my lack of comprehension was equally evident as I argued with the
teacher that 1 divided by zero had to be one, not infinity...I ignored the
ridicule and, in an attempt to prove THEM wrong, I sat down and slowly divided
one by ever decreasing fractions to finally understand...but you see it was
about language. Zero to a kid was quite logically nothing, not a number.
Logically in physical reality, if you divide something by nothing, you will
still have something left, because you couldn't divide it by nothing.
Can you see why I still believe that "mathmatics" is numbers, not realities.
Replacing numbers with algebra reinforces the idea, that math is a science of
relationships, probabilities and possibilities, mental concepts- not realities.
This is why the Church allowed Galleleo to keep his geometric concept of the
cosmos as a concept in mathmatics, just so long as he did not make it the truth
and thus make God a liar.
Nothings changed. Today I am still asking stupid questions.. And it is still
a problem of language.
Since joining this forum, I have at times been forced to re-examine some
concepts that I have had re science, and learned much. It is not so, that the
Laws are false, but the interpretations.
Strange theoretical concepts like helicentrism, and evolution were ingrained
as synonomous with the laws.. The fantasies of science fiction, as in Startrek
were a reality, which I believed, and todays young scientists have made those
fantasies their inspiration if not their goals. It inspired me to go work for
Britain's Blue streak and then NASA. We are subtly indoctrinated every day and
every where with fantasy. A nice word for lies.
Robert mentioned the common opinion that one cannot go to Hell for holding to
heliocentrism. But it isn't just a scientific subject outside of faith. Where
does this one lie lead to? To Evolution.. And next there was no creation, no
Adam, and finally no Jesus Christ, which is TRUTH .. Not many will escape Hell
for rejecting TRUTH, which is rejecting God through rejecting His Word.
Galleleo was the beginning of the end of TRUTH. Lucifer the prince of lies,
got full control of science.
I truly believe that if belief in HC standing alone does not send one to
Hell, believing in HC and all that follows on from that heresy will lead one
away from the Bible and away from the one true God, and thus to Hell.
If you can discount Genesis, then you can discount any part of the Bible. If
you can discount any part of the Bible, then it logically follows that you must
discount all of it.
Philip.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Tryit now.
Other related posts:
