[creation] Re: where to start

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: creation@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 09:08:44 -0800 (PST)

I think Percival makes a realy good point here, about teaching in the churches. 
You may notice just about all information or educational disciplines to Include 
our knowledge of the Bible are taught and or segmented to the point of a real 
difficulty for most people to understand it, much less teach it coherently. I 
am not saying they are wrong the way they are doing it. My point is is that 
fact creates a environment ripe for confusion. This environment really took off 
once Christianity relegated education to the secularist based on the Copernican 
& company philosophy of Biblical 

Relevance. That was my point in my first email. I think we are going to have to 
figure out and accomplish a take back of the education. Since that is the back 
door Satan has used to come in and spread these destructive doctrines. We have 
got to go back and secure that back door. I know that sounds like an impossible 
task. It is in the next 20-30 years however it took Satan 400 to get us where 
we are today so the solution has to be a long term approach in my opinion. That 
is why I suggested a Global approach utilizing other areas that might be 
willing to take hold of a better science so as to created a better environment 
for Christianity. The teaching has to take place in The Churches, in our 
respective areas, for sure, but I believe that only a long term global approach 
will significantly impact the whole. It is just my opinion but I think that is 
where, What and how we need to figure and or apply ourselves to. Just as a side 
note there are plenty of qualified people in the C
 and Geocentric movements to collect and assemble a text book of real science, 
and also teach the fallacy of the Evolutionary arguments for the proposes of 
putting down the Dwarinian arguments and philosophy "Science falsely so 
called". Because if you don?t we will produce a knowledgeable student that 
knows true science but he will not be as efficient in (2Corinthians10:5) 
casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the 
knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of 
Christ. In my opinion it is a "information organization" and "dissemination" 
problem. I think if we had the goods, so to speak, we would be surprised to 
find the number of areas & Churches around the world that would accept and or 
incorporate it. 

Percival Tanierla <percy_tan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Dear friends,

I think creationists should start teaching
Geocentricity= creation in the church instead of
schools. Let us teach our children at their early age
about creation and geocentricity and when they go to
school they already have a good biblical foundation. 
Each family should be encourage to teach their
children about creation and geocentricty. Every
evening John (7 years ) read the Bible and after
short prayer I tell them about Genesis 1- that God is
the creator of all things. I teach them God made the
earth for man and Christ came into this world.

I have six children one is in college; one in
elementary and 2 are in kinder school. I pray that
when they grow older God,s truth would be more real
to them. I think this is one of the best way to
protect our children from error and from deception.


--- "Dr. Neville Jones" wrote:

> I'm very happy with how this group has started,
> Marshall, and this posting from Jack is well
> pitched.
> (For those who haven't already been there, Marshall
> has some detailed and interesting material on his
> website regarding the enormous amount that NASA
> spends on virtual reality -
> www.fixedearth.com )
> Neville.
> Marshall wrote:
> Good response on this important subject, Neville!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Lewis" 
> To: ; 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:46 AM
> Subject: [creation] Virtual/created reality?
> > Dear Forum Members,
> > This item may be of interest to many of you
> especially Neville. I have
> scanned in a number of letters sent to New Scientist
> about concern regarding
> real/simulated data in the media and how to tell the
> difference.
> > Simulation signals
> >
> > From Chris James
> >
> > I strongly agree with Easter Russell (8 January, p
> 25). There should be a
> media code of practice requiring that all
> simulations, artist's impressions
> and so on are clearly marked as such. How authentic
> are the pictures of
> Titan we are being shown from Huygens? New Scientist
> could set a good
> example by stating when its pictures are not real -
> for example, that of
> comet Tempel i on p 28 of the same issue. Eastleigh,
> Hampshire, UK
> >
> >
> >
> > From Roger Taylor
> >
> > I agree completely with Russell, and the sooner
> the better. Modern imaging
> technology is so powerful, and presumably will
> become more so, that it could
> lead to all manner of fraud and deception, and
> ultimately to an Orwellian
> rewriting of history. This is not something we
> should tempt our politicians
> with. Meols, Cheshire, UK
> >
> >
> >
> > From Peter Strickland
> >
> > It is a mistake to think of films or photographs
> as real. When you take
> into account the choices that go into what to point
> the camera at and when
> to film, there is an enormous amount of subjectivity
> involved. Then there
> are choices about zoom, focus and aperture, which
> all affect what is seen
> and how it is portrayed. And then, of course, the
> resulting film or
> photograph will be edited, which will involve
> various digitally applied
> modifications, and, in film, choices about timing,
> sequences and so on. The
> difference between photography and digital imagery
> is more of a perceived
> idea about authenticity than any practical
> difference. Leeds, UK
> >
> >
> >
> > From Stu Witner
> >
> > Once begun, where does one stop, I wonder? For
> example, all images from
> the Hubble Space Telescope are "simulated" in that
> the colours are computer
> generated. The colours are not only beautiful but
> enable researchers to
> learn much more from them than if they were "real".
> >
> > Then there is the philosophical argument, "what is
> truth?", not to mention
> the obvious public taste for drama over reality. I'm
> afraid Russell may be
> tilting at windmills, 21st-century style. Seattle,
> Washington, US
> >
> >
> >
> > There was also an amusing cartoon which I shall
> have to describe in the
> absence of a method for posting.
> >
> > It shows an office with a sign saying 'ECONOMY
> an assitant showing round a bemedalled, uniformed
> 'top brass' type
> character. In the office is an artist painting and a
> lady sitting at a piece
> of electronic equipment. The assistant is saying to
> the visitor,
> >
> > "Ron does lurid images and Sue does crackly sound
> effects".
> >
> >
> >
> > I wonder if any of these people have seen the
> video (available from myself
> on a CD) 'A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the
> Moon'. Check out
> Neville's website, he has beaten the letter writers
> to it!
> >
> >
> >
> > Jack
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.1 -
> Release Date: 1/27/2005
> >
> >
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.1 - Release
> Date: 1/27/2005
> ---------------------------------
> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even
> more fun! 

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

Other related posts: