[geocentrism] Re: earth turning
- From: "John Roodt" <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:59:40 +1000
I take your point, Phil.
However, I think that the clay only turns during the molding. When it
hardens in the kiln I think its standing still.
No need to read past this point...this is just for fun... I have some
trivial questions
Regarding an old Earth...I'm happy to accept it because Jesus already
demonstrated it by turning water into a really good wine. Is it possible to
chemically detect the age of a wine? And if so, what would we have noticed
about the wine that Jesus turned the water into? Just curious -- I'd
appreciate any insight.
And, by the way, I'd take a fun bet that Adam and Eve did not have
belly-buttons.
What about our feet and ears continuing to grow all of our lives? Scary
thought! What do you think Adam and Eve looked like after 900 years? A cross
between Dumbo and a Hobbit? There must be a lot we don't know about the
human body. Maybe some of the vestigial organs or junk DNA once served a
useful purpose -- or would if we lived long enough.
John
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:48 PM, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> Scripture to mean that the Earth is "turning" or "spinning".
>
> It shook my confidence in them.
>
> John
> Well maybe the author when writing it was familiar with turning clay to
> make pots, an ancient technology indeed. all his peers would have known I
> respect the creationists, but their science is flawed and they do harm ...
> They ignore that God Created an old earth, which pure logic demands.. Adams
> trees had age rings, were not hollow, and his garden had a river of well
> worn age. I would imagine he even had a navel, as though he came by an
> umbilical cord, but he had no mother.. Philip
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* John Roodt <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 25, 2008 9:54 AM
> *Subject:* [geocentrism] Re: correction
>
> I agree with you Bernie. I obviously didn't explain that well enough.
> You've taken that quote out of context.
>
> I have a lingering doubt -- about the size of a mustard seed :-) -- that
> the Bible actually says that the Earth is physically immovable as in "the
> fixed frame of reference of the Universe". But rest assured, whatever it
> does say I am confident that the Bible will prove to be true, regardless of
> what Science says today.
>
> The ICR (Institute for Creation Research) are very credible (to my limited
> knowledge) and they believe that the Earth spins. I read an explanation for
> why they believe the Earth spins that used this Scripture in Job.
>
> Job 38:12
> Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to
> know his place; 13That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the
> wicked might be shaken out of it? 14 *It is turned* *as clay to the seal*;
> and they stand as a garment.
>
> (The NIV translates verse 14 as: "The earth takes shape like clay under a
> seal; its features stand out like those of a garment." )
>
> I found it bizarre that they thought the "turning as clay" to mean that the
> Earth turns towards the Sun.
>
> After the Flood subsided, I imagine the Earth's surface to be a muddy
> sludge that then hardened with the Sun's heat and took shape in the same way
> that clay hardens into a seal -- its new features standing out like those of
> a garment. I can't see how the ICR can be dogmatic about interpreting that
> Scripture to mean that the Earth is "turning" or "spinning".
>
> It shook my confidence in them.
>
> John
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> *John wrote:*
>> *"Does it really matter to us whether or not we rotate and orbit or just
>> stand still?*
>>
>> *Yes it matters a great deal because a non-moving, non-rotating Earth*
>> *proven to the satisfaction of the masses, would give the Bible a great
>> degree*
>> *of credibility. People would think, "against all odds they were right,
>> the Bible*
>> *must be the word of God."*
>> *Then they would investigate the Bible and discover other truths like a
>> Judgment Day to account for their behavior during their time on Earth. A
>> person is judged*
>> *by their thoughts, words and deeds and the intentions and motivations
>> behind*
>> *their thoughts words and deeds. Great rewards and severe punishments are
>> given.*
>> *When people believed this there would be little crime or war. No dead
>> one million*
>> *Iraqis. No Ali Abbas with his arms blown off.*
>> **
>> *Secondly, in order for the Earth to be stationary the stars have to be
>> able to *
>> *go around nightly, so that eliminates the 78 billion light year radius*
>> *of the universe and then that destroys the 14 billion years built upon
>> that radius,*
>> *which knocks out the time prop needed for organic evolution.*
>> *When people realise their fellow man must have been created and not
>> evolved*
>> *from bacteria or animals then again, they would have greater respect and
>> awe*
>> *for other created humans and not bomb them or do evil to them. In fact*
>> *ig there's great rewards they might be more inclined to help*
>> *and to do good to others.*
>> **
>> *Bernie *
>>
>> --- On *Tue, 9/23/08, John Roodt <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>>
>> From: John Roodt <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: correction
>> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 9:55 PM
>>
>> :-) no problem, Phil. And, no, I am not a clever scholar.
>>
>> We're like a company of soldiers all marching to the beat of the drum in
>> our own heads, and each of us loudly protesting that we're the only one in
>> step.
>>
>> But even though we should probably end this discussion, I see no reason to
>> apologise to this forum.
>>
>> Wasn't it the Scripture that caused us to question the current model of
>> the Universe? Even though we had no scientific proof, we were confident that
>> the Bible held a contrary view, and we were inclined to believe it.
>>
>> In fact, Neville's website initially quoted the Scriptures that indicated
>> that the Earth was fixed and could not be moved.
>>
>> I asked the question ages ago whether or not the word 'moved' meant a
>> physical movement as opposed to: "my heart is steadfast and will not be
>> moved", or "I was moved to tears" etc. No one answered it. But I have
>> watched the debates to see if the question would be answered anyway.
>>
>> So it's significant that Neville appears to believe little of what the
>> bible says, and that you and I (and others) can differ so much in our
>> interpretation of what the bible says. Does it really matter to us whether
>> or not we rotate and orbit or just stand still? What matters is that there
>> is an apparent discrepancy between what Science says and what we believe the
>> Bible says. At least that's how it appeared when I joined this forum. Maybe
>> you've all moved beyond that and I haven't. My only concern is: "what is the
>> truth?"
>>
>> We both love the truth; we read the same Scriptures; and we pray to the
>> same God for understanding on these matters and others far more important
>> than whether the Earth moves or not. How then can we be so far apart?
>>
>> I don't know -- but I'll move on now.
>>
>> With respect to all,
>> John
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:48 PM, philip madsen
>> <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> Peter came in with some biblical comments that seemed to deny Jesus was
>>> God. along with other, Therefore I can answer those points together with my
>>> response to Johns below. inserted in brown.. Philip.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>
>>> *From:* John Roodt <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 24, 2008 10:18 AM
>>> *Subject:* [geocentrism] Re: correction
>>>
>>> Phil,
>>>
>>> Catholics overlook one glaring truth. JESUS EXISTED BEFORE THE WORLD
>>> BEGAN!! In what possible sense could Mary be his mother in Heaven?!? A
>>> Mystery perhaps but Elizabeth did say it..
>>>
>>> 42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed art thou among
>>> women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And whence is this to me
>>> *that the mother of my Lord should come to me? *
>>>
>>> Some Catholics may overlook it ! but they are not "clever scientists"
>>> like myself, and would hardly be expected to comprehend the complexities of
>>> time space and eternity. Thats why Heaven is called a place of many
>>> mansions!
>>>
>>> I have already asked John using this same quotation , did he understand
>>> the difference. "Before Abraham was born, I AM". Time is temporal or
>>> temporary.. Eternity in temporal terms is compared to an everpresent
>>> "now" A mystery to 3D human brains, but fully experienced in the next world.
>>> " We pray ....." Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
>>> Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be..."
>>> beginning = ever shall be..
>>>
>>> What has Mary to do with Him?
>>>
>>> 46 And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. 47 And my spirit hath
>>> rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 *Because he hath regarded the humility of
>>> his handmaid: for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me
>>> blessed. 49 Because he that is mighty hath done great things to me:* and
>>> holy is his name.
>>>
>>> Jesus entered this world for a purpose ... He wasn't created here the
>>> way we are. He already existed. He is no-one's Son but God's alone. Mary is
>>> NOT the mother of God.
>>>
>> And whence is this to me *that the mother of my Lord should come to me? *
>> She is not even the mother of Jesus in glory -- how could she be?
>>
>> You've said it yourself, Catholics make "Graven images of things in Heaven
>> and Earth and pay them homage"... how much more evidence must you see of
>> pagan worship before your eyes are opened and you see the truth?
>> *You read into my words a thing I did not say.* And it is off subject,
>> unless you are only interested in Catholic bashing.. I am not into
>> protestant bashing, and will not be drawn into such a slanging match here.
>> Sufficient to say, no catholic may pay homage to images or things. Respect
>> absolutely, as I would hope you give to the Holy Book, lest someone commit
>> sacrilege with it. You could not see, or else ignored my accent on humility
>> in all things as promoted by Mary.
>>
>> The Bible is an incredible work. Consider how God allows sinful men to be
>> the writers of His Word. Even Jesus did not commit anything to writing -- He
>> knows that He can get man to write down His eternal and perfect truths. Even
>> though they are weaved into the fabric of human existence -- interlaced with
>> the stories of sinful human lives. It is truly amazing. How awesome, and
>> wise, and great is our God. The depth of His Wisdom is unfathomable.
>> Thus here may I take the quote Peter used and His comment..
>> It is in vain that they keep worshiping me, because they teach as
>> doctrines commands of men.'
>>
>> So, unless a doctrine such as Mary veneration is in the Bible, it is a
>> doctrine of men. Peter. "Consider how God allows sinful men to be the
>> writers of His Word. Even Jesus did not commit anything to writing -- He
>> knows that He can get man to write down His eternal and perfect truths"
>>
>> And if you did not hear it from His mouth, how can you be absolutely sure
>> the Bible is not a collection of the *doctrines of men!*
>>
>> *Jesus* *selected 12, many more than the few of the testaments. Yet it
>> was the men who followed centuries later who decided to collect
>> and authorise the Books into a canonised NT of Scripture. "Doctrines of
>> men " As are the Quran or the Book of Mormon!.... They cannot authorise
>> themselves.. *
>>
>> Mary is just a blessed part of the fabric through which God wove His plan
>> for salvation. Jesus himself said that no-one born of woman was greater than
>> John the Baptist -- not even Mary. How could she be exalted above even John
>> the Baptist?
>>
>> These issues are your preferred interpretation. If you are indeed a clever
>> scholar then I must weigh your opinion against other clever scholars who
>> also are very well educated men. *And after that, then one must wonder
>> which if any has the guidance of the Holy Ghost.*
>>
>> That the most intelligent of scholars in the world are unable to find
>> consensus on so many issues raised by Bible study, is fair evidence to show
>> how in-appropriate is the idea that the Bible Alone suffices unto salvation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for efforts to explain your position, but I think you need to step
>> back and re-look at what you believe.
>>
>> Be sure I believe nothing blindly. I said above, "And after that, then one
>> must wonder which if any has the guidance of the Holy Ghost. " If it was on
>> scholarship alone, I would have no faith. I firmly believe that those men
>> whose apostolic succession is proven by the historical continuity of
>> "laying of the hands" in ceremonial sacramental ordination all the way back
>> to the Apostles, and to Christ Himself are the most logical group whose
>> scholarship would be guided by the Holy Ghost; that same group of men who
>> collected and authorised the Holy Scripture and protected it throughout the
>> centuries.
>>
>> I agree, we have exhausted the subject here. Its been an enjoyable
>> discussion. My Prayers as always are with you and all the members of the
>> group. Many thanks to Neville for his tolerance and for allowing us to
>> proceed. Regards, Philip.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:05 AM, PETER CHARLTON <
>> peter.nambo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is an awful lot at stake here. How terrible for either of us to
>>> cling to our beliefs at the cost of our souls. Incidentally, is there a
>>> consequence to denying Mary as "Queen of Heaven"?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A good question indeed for Jesus said 7 It is in vain that they keep
>>> worshiping me, because they teach as doctrines commands of men.'
>>>
>>> So, unless a doctrine such as Mary veneration is in the Bible, it is a
>>> doctrine of men.
>>>
>>>
>>> 46 While he was yet speaking to the crowds, look! his mother and
>>> brothers took up a position outside seeking to speak to him. 47 So
>>> someone said to him: "Look! Your mother and your brothers are standing
>>> outside, seeking to speak to you." 48 As an answer he said to the one
>>> telling him: "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 And
>>> extending his hand toward his disciples, he said: "Look! My mother and my
>>> brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven,
>>> the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
>>> Also, Jesus showed us that even he himself was not to be venerated, let
>>> alone his Mother, only his Father in heaven, MT 19:16 And, behold, one came
>>> and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have
>>> eternal life?
>>>
>>> MT 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none
>>> good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
>>> commandments.
>>>
>>> Pete Charlton
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
