prophecy that was fulfilled

[Stormer0628]

Speaking of Ptolemy he was an Egyptian.
There came a time of a seven years famine in all lands but the prosperous one was just Egypt.
All countries went to Egypt to buy foods and even Jews gather them and settled there for so long years.
It was the Jew (Joseph) that brings fortunes of Egypt that is why Egyptians adored the Jews and respected them.
Ptolemy in his time believe the stories of old and the fortune that Jews brought in his land.
That is why Ptolemy try to reincarnate/copied what Jewish of ancient times believe in but copying is fake and not
the real one because they are not the chosen people.

Ptolemy was a Macedonian Greek, one of the generals of Alexander the Great. He lived around 367 BC – 283/2 BC.

If you are going to rely on the bible for history, you will be disappointed to know that many historians, even biblical ones, will find it hard not to frown at you. It's just that many of the events and dates indicated in the bible do not add up: it's clear that the writers either had no real history of chronology of events, or they were merely practicing the writing device called "artistic license" where authors do no mind mixing up dates and events in order to come up with their coherent storylines. Now combine artistic license and vāticinium ex ēventū and you have the essence of the bible: nobody in the science community would stake their names using it as a historical yardstick, historical source. Many of the events mentioned in the bible are either nonexistent, do not follow true events, attributed to a wrong king or emperor, or placed in a time far different than the true time they actually occurred in history.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

there is nothing theoretical when all the data and evidence is there. if one is not going to rely on historians and all the materials they have dug up, which materials are we going to depend on then?

that the jews copied the idea of priesthood from the babylonians was settled long ago by archaelogists digging up the whole lands of israel and comparing texts left and right. who are these archaelogists? they are none other than mostly israeli scientists themselves. their findings are all over the place, if only people are interested to look them up.

the myth of religions is as old as human life itself, spurred on by the issues of human existence.

the jews are well aware of the mythical nature of their religions. you don't see them fighting over that fact, unlike those who are not aware that the issue has been settled in the land where Judaism and Christianity sprang from.

There is no ending of the religions and myth even we filipinos worship Baal before then.

note that even today the land of Israel are mostly Judaism they never believe Jesus as the messiah but they believe
Jesus as an important figure of the past. There is no problem if all the archaeologists are Israelites the problem is if
you depend on them and hold their views as facts/truth.

you should not fully rely on archaeological discoveries because there in no ending in doing that.
what they discover today and claim that it is a fact will later retract when another discoveries spring later.

science is good and their theories but other scientific findings are still a theory until proven to be true
that is why science is self correcting.
At one time science believe that the earth was flat and then later they found out that it is a sphere.
i should rely on ancient text corroborated by many different authors of many different times rather than relying on a self correcting issues.

 

[Stormer0628]

There is no endless of the religions and myth even we filipinos worship Baal before then.

note that even today the land of Israel are mostly Judaism they never believe Jesus as the messiah but they believe
Jesus as an important figure of the past. There is no problem if all the archaeologists are Israelites the problem is if
you depend on them and hold their views as facts/truth.

you should not fully rely on archaeological discoveries because there in no ending in doing that.
what they discover today and claim that it is a fact will later retract when another discoveries spring later.

science is good and their theories but other scientific findings are still a theory until proven to be true
that is why science is self correcting.
At one time science believe that the earth was flat and then later they found out that it is a sphere.
i should rely on ancient text corroborated by many different authors of many different times rather than relying on a self correcting issues.

We could only go as far as the evidence show. We do not just look at their views: we look at the pieces of evidence that made them come up with their views in the first place. As it stands now, they have probably dug up all the areas of Israel and other regions for any chance their conclusions will ever be changed. The conclusions are as good as fixed. The matter of the Davidic or Solomonic empire, for example, do not hold up: no structures in Israel could even justify the biblical claim, even after they had almost exhausted the whole area of Israel for such claims of grandeur. What the archaeological proofs show, however, are the presence of similar kingdoms contemporary to these periods, with the exact grandeur and structures as described, just not in Israel but neighboring kingdoms. It is writing practice as old as fiction itself: appropriating the achievements of another for your own.

From the Genesis to the Noah myths, the Jews borrowed freely from existing texts in Babylon-Sumeria, for example the tale of Gilgamesh, and another one before that, Ziusudra, etc., the tale of Enki, Enlil, etc, thousands of years before the Jews could even have their nation or religion.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

Ptolemy was a Macedonian Greek, one of the generals of Alexander the Great. He lived around 367 BC – 283/2 BC.

If you are going to rely on the bible for history, you will be disappointed to know that many historians, even biblical ones, will find it hard not to frown at you. It's just that many of the events and dates indicated in the bible do not add up: it's clear that the writers either had no real history of chronology of events, or they were merely practicing the writing device called "artistic license" where authors do no mind mixing up dates and events in order to come up with their coherent storylines. Now combine artistic license and vāticinium ex ēventū and you have the essence of the bible: nobody in the science community would stake their names using it as a historical yardstick, historical source. Many of the events mentioned in the bible are either nonexistent, do not follow true events, attributed to a wrong king or emperor, or placed in a time far different than the true time they actually occurred in history.

Serapis was an anthropomorphic god created by the Greek pharaoh Ptolemy I. Ptolemy I chose Serapis to be the official god of Egypt and Greece.
Ptolemy I Soter, (born 367/366 bc, Macedonia—died 283/282, Egypt), Macedonian general of Alexander the Great, who became ruler of Egypt (323–285 bc) and founder of the Ptolemaic dynasty.
yes he was born a macedonian but died there in egypt. his entire general life was in egypt.

here grasp it.
when you were born going to adulthood to elderly and die here is your account.
at first you utter your first word then you will be guided until can fully speak
then you will be taught how to write so on then you will die.

ancient text never existed at first human civilizations.
all they did was an oral memorization. generations come and generations go
until came a time the oral tradition put into writings by someone who were well verse of the topic.
the dates of the ancient text that do not matched the order of the story of the bible cant be put into question
if you understand the moldings of humanity until we became just like superman.

if someone in his time write the words from isaiah then it doesnt mean that isaiah himself wrote it
only that his writings were from the words came from isaiah according to oral tradition he received.
that is true to other scriptures and writings. the author can be in ancient time or later but the words they
receive was really an ancient ones.

your history said that we don't have original writings found because what we have were a copies of copies.
meaning what we have now is not original but from a copy of another languages and those languages were a
copies of another languages.
that is why when carbon dating they appeared to be not so ancient because they are not original.

take a look at the summerian cuneifrom science dated it as 4000 years older.
the oldest artifacts we have because it was written in stone tablets unlike
the text in manuscripts,scrolls,papyrus they eventually decay through times.
so dating here should not be put into questions.

 

[Stormer0628]

Serapis was an anthropomorphic god created by the Greek pharaoh Ptolemy I. Ptolemy I chose Serapis to be the official god of Egypt and Greece.
Ptolemy I Soter, (born 367/366 bc, Macedonia—died 283/282, Egypt), Macedonian general of Alexander the Great, who became ruler of Egypt (323–285 bc) and founder of the Ptolemaic dynasty.
yes he was born a macedonian but died there in egypt. his entire general life was in egypt.

here grasp it.
when you were born going to adulthood to elderly and die here is your account.
at first you utter your first word then you will be guided until can fully speak
then you will be taught how to write so on then you will die.

ancient text never existed at first human civilizations.
all they did was an oral memorization. generations come and generations go
until came a time the oral tradition put into writings by someone who were well verse of the topic.
the dates of the ancient text that do not matched the order of the story of the bible cant be put into question
if you understand the moldings of humanity until we became just like superman.

if someone in his time write the words from isaiah then it doesnt mean that isaiah himself wrote it
only that his writings were from the words came from isaiah according to oral tradition he received.
that is true to other scriptures and writings. the author can be in ancient time or later but the words they
receive was really an ancient ones.

your history said that we don't have original writings found because what we have were a copies of copies.
meaning what we have now is not original but from a copy of another languages and those languages were a
copies of another languages.
that is why when carbon dating they appeared to be not so ancient because they are not original.

take a look at the summerian cuneifrom science dated it as 4000 years older.
the oldest artifacts we have because it was written in stone tablets unlike
the text in manuscripts,scrolls,papyrus they eventually decay through times.
so dating here is should not be put into questions.

Exactly. Now applying what you said, look up the time difference between the Old Testament texts and those from Sumeria, Babylonia, or Egypt: the time difference is just staggering: thousands of years before they came to the hands of the purported OT writers. The tablets retelling the tale of Gilgamesh or Ziusudra, for example, are thousands of years older than the copy, the Noah narrative in the bible. What is more astounding is that the OT account almost copied it word for word.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

Exactly. Now applying what you said, look up the time difference between the Old Testament texts and those from Sumeria, Babylonia, or Egypt: the time difference is just staggering: thousands of years before they came to the hands of the purported OT writers. The tablets retelling the tale of Gilgamesh or Ziusudra, for example, are thousands of years older than the copy, the Noah narrative in the bible. What is more astounding is that the OT account almost copied it word for word.

in your own words i figure out that you believe that the OT copied only from these ancient text from Sumeria, Babylonia, or Egypt.
Let me share you an insights maybe it is helpful.

there was a theory about Anglo-israel. it means that israleites cover the whole world by means of travelling
and settled there anywhere there foot reaches to. other tribes reached as far as america, europe, etc even to the ends of the earth.
Even we Filipinos have the mixed of their blood.
now the story of adam and eve was repeated in the story of noah.
noah's decendants cover the whole world that is why your zumeria, babylonia, egypt text were taught to be
copied by jews which in fact where not because they all are of the same roots.
The story in artifacts sounds alike but the places, the actors were different.
there is no secret why it became like that because you know what oral tradition is.
it means in different countries they have there different languages.

take a look at the example of our boys scout days.
we have the contest that is called "relay the message"
take five groups composed of twenty each then relay a message from the last to the first
and you found out that the outcome is very different from each others.
what the original message you give the reply were always distorted.

zummeria,babylonia, egypt, israel, etc have all the same ancestors therefore there message was the same
only that it was distorted through times.
that is why god chooses israel as his chosen people to relay the true messages of ancient time.

 

[Stormer0628]

there must be thousands of tall tales about the jews out there barely making sense, even to the jews themselves. but they'll never mind as long as the stories contribute to the national coffers or individual income, like what's happening in hollywood.

if you are going to talk about prophecies and history, you must remember that the nation israel itself is relatively young compared to the old masters babylonia, egypt, sumeria, india, the whole mesopotamian civilizations. the official history of israel only started after they were returned from babylonia.

the trouble for people is believing all the text in the old testament, which was itself created and compiled only after they became officially a nation. to bolster their statehood, they included myths that made it appear like they had a long history before they were conquered by the assyrians and the babylonians. that is just so farther from the truth. the whole of canaan were peopled by minor tribes that the jews were members of. tribes, not nations. they only decided to unite as a nation with state religion after they were returned to their land.

all the stories of abraham, moses are later found to be pure inventions, all derived from ancient myths from other civilizations.

the authors of the old testament can never be ascertained, including the book of isaiah. what is clear is that some of the later kings had a hand in that, the kingdoms that emerged out of babylon. king hezekiah himself was seen as the true author of isaiah. the trouble is that parts are using different styles from the rest, and the others coming from a totally different era before they were compiled and made to appear as single work.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

there must be thousands of tall tales about the jews out there barely making sense, even to the jews themselves. but they'll never mind as long as the stories contribute to the national coffers or individual income, like what's happening in hollywood.

if you are going to talk about prophecies and history, you must remember that the nation israel itself is relatively young compared to the old masters babylonia, egypt, sumeria, india, the whole mesopotamian civilizations. the official history of israel only started after they were returned from babylonia.

the trouble for people is believing all the text in the old testament, which was itself created and compiled only after they became officially a nation. to bolster their statehood, they included myths that made it appear like they had a long history before they were conquered by the assyrians and the babylonians. that is just so farther from the truth. the whole of canaan were peopled by minor tribes that the jews were members of. tribes, not nations. they only decided to unite as a nation with state religion after they were returned to their land.

all the stories of abraham, moses are later found to be pure inventions, all derived from ancient myths from other civilizations.

the authors of the old testament can never be ascertained, including the book of isaiah. what is clear is that some of the later kings had a hand in that, the kingdoms that emerged out of babylon. king hezekiah himself was seen as the true author of isaiah. the trouble is that parts are using different styles from the rest, and the others coming from a totally different era before they were compiled and made to appear as single work.

not a secret they were all giant nations before israel became a nation.
let me narrate so that we can continue to our discussions and can help you understand what believers think.

when God called Abraham to become his friend these nations that you say were already there a giant ones.
abraham begot isaac and isaac begot jacob whom god later called him israel because he was going to possess
a land (canaan) and become a nation. that is nation israel now.
note this and understand it: that all the people living on earth have only the same father it was noah.
so regardless if they are giant nation or not it doesn't matter.

if you well aware of the canonization of the bible you can have a different views from these other Christians.
almost all christians believe like this that the bible were fallen from heaven which in truth is not.
catholic church fathers and fathers of protestants create the bible.
they were the ones responsible of which book should be included and which book excluded.
if they have divine intervention? i dont think so.
what i believe is they compiled writings of different forms and times IN GOOD FAITH.

you believe that abraham and so on were all inventions and they are myth.
well that's how you see it but for me they are here written to make people
understand the events of the past so that we know on what to do and what not to do.

and exactly every happenings of the past became legends and myths through times
because who will defend them? no one lives!

they were remnants my friend. they compiled it to become one because the story is one and the same
how could you not compiled them when you understand that the story are the same? of course you will.
now let,s go back to the isaiah - the dead sea scrolls found the book of isaiah intact in full text that is
no addition and no subtraction.

as i said before every discoveries should not to be the bases of your arguments because there came a time
when another discovery that will correct the previous ones.
discoveries are worthy to unravel the past of course but discoveries doesn't stop and is still working in progress.
what they said today that it is a fact will later retracted again if another discovery happened.

now if you will not believe in jesus works you should atleast believe that there is God.
when science said that big bang created the multi verse. then why is that these multi verses
were so harmonize that they float and have there own paths? why not until today they
are colliding to each other? why they are govern by their own gravity and pulling each other
but never colliding?
why is earth still exist and we still breath if no one govern them?
why the apes still apes and not become a man?
there is a designer my friend and that we call God.

 

[Stormer0628]

you may recite lengthy bible passages as you like, but they hardly constitute evidence of their authenticity. In other words, you'd be lucky to find materials outside of the bible that corroborate those tales about abraham, moses, isaac, not from the bible itself. it's fine citing biblical passages, but you well know this hardly constitutes scientific historical method.

the same with the idea of god, anything at all to anchor as solid works to corroborate the claims. i don't believe in the slightest bit for the necessity of any god in existence. the laws of physics alone are enough to create the universe and everything else. adding another entity just adds to the whole problem, further complicating the issue.

it is fine to talk about discoveries that may later rewrite the stories. the case of the bible, OT and NT, is a different case: the simple abundance and proliferation of materials that disprove them are conclusive enough. you mentioned the book of isaiah found in the caves along with other scrolls. you overlooked the fact nothing in this work proves who was the true author. it only bolsters the contention that there were many versions added and subtracted later on as the needs of the religions themselves change.

on the other hand, if we're just talking about belief and faith, well nothing that can be done about it. i may write here as much as i like about relevant materials, but in the end it's going to be an exercise in futility. it's clear we're going that way, so i don't think there' no need to add further more.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

you may recite lengthy bible passages as you like, but let's agree on one thing: find me an evidence of their authenticity. In other words, find me other works outside of the bible that corroborate those tales about abraham, moses, isaac, not from the bible itself. it's fine citing biblical passages, but you well know this hardly constitutes scientific historical method.

the same with the idea of god, anything at all to anchor as solid works to corroborate the claims. i don't believe in the slightest bit for the necessity of any god in existence. the laws of physics alone are enough to create the universe and everything else. adding another entity just adds to the whole problem, further complicating the issue.

it is fine to talk about discoveries that may later rewrite the stories. the case of the bible, OT and NT, is a different case: the simple abundance and proliferation of materials that disprove them are conclusive enough.

that is why this thread is only for believers i address it to them
but i welcome you also because maybe if i give you some insights
you will look at them and think of them and also to understand an atheist better.

if i tell you that the truth will only given to those who will seek for it, you will not believe.

the one thing that i can share to you outside of the bible is the
harmony of the universe/or they say multi verses.
because i believe in everything that there is a cause and effect.
not a single thing exists without its creator.
think of something and learn why they exist? find out the root
and you well eventually lead to big bang
then again they say who created big bang? when you say God
they say who created God? hahaha the arguments never ends...

 

[Stormer0628]

i edited my last reply.

anyway, yeah let's leave the matter about the bible, prophesies, and authenticity behind.

the big bang is not the currently accepted full version of the beginning of the universe.

what is accepted is that spacetime itself is the creator of all things, of universes if you will.

you only find yourself into unending questions of cause and effect if a thing is shown to be incomplete, that it cannot cause itself.

but spacetime, or space itself, is known to always have this vacuum energy. it cannot be caused. it cannot be reduced.

when this vacuum energy expanded in time, the fluctuations became radiation which later cooled to become the supergalaxies, galaxies, cosmic web, solar systems, and the planets that we know as the entire universe. and yes, even life itself. it's all there in the evidence.

god does not figure in this picture. totally.

all you need is space to get you a universe. god? the idea is not needed. at all.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

i edited my last reply.

anyway, yeah let's leave the matter about the bible, prophesies, and authenticity behind.

the big bang is not the currently accepted full version of the beginning of the universe.

what is accepted is that spacetime itself is the creator of all things, of universes if you will.

you only find yourself into unending questions of cause and effect if a thing is shown to be incomplete, that it cannot cause itself.

but spacetime, or space itself, is known to always have this vacuum energy. it cannot be caused. it cannot be reduced.

when this vacuum energy expanded in time, the fluctuations became radiation which later cooled to become the supergalaxies, galaxies, cosmic web, solar systems, and the planets that we know as the entire universe. and yes, even life itself. it's all there in the evidence.

god does not figure in this picture. totally.

all you need is space to get you a universe. god? the idea is not needed. at all.

what science said today im very sure they will retracted it later maybe not in our time.
only scientific discoveries that were proven to be true that cant be retracted much like the
newtons gravity.

take a look in this example of albert einstein's theory
who will not believe einstein in his era?

Einstein’s Static (or Stationary) Universe
A static universe, also called a “stationary” or “Einstein” universe, was a model proposed by Albert Einstein in 1917. It was problematic from the beginning. Edwin Hubble’s discovery of the relationship between red shift obliterated it by completely demonstrating that the universe is constantly expanding.


if i say who created space? but no time will tell and another discoveries
will show up and debunking another mans claim.

- - - Updated - - -

as i see it every discoveries conform to what the old text says
i speak of a proven one and not the still a theory

 

[Stormer0628]

what science said today im very sure they will retracted it later maybe not in our time.
only scientific discoveries that were proven to be true that cant be retracted much like the
newtons gravity.

take a look in this example of albert einstein's theory
who will not believe einstein in his era?

Einstein’s Static (or Stationary) Universe
A static universe, also called a “stationary” or “Einstein” universe, was a model proposed by Albert Einstein in 1917. It was problematic from the beginning. Edwin Hubble’s discovery of the relationship between red shift obliterated it by completely demonstrating that the universe is constantly expanding.


if i say who created space? but no time will tell and another discoveries
will show up and debunking another mans claim.

Even if something else supersedes, replaces the accepted Inflation Model, I doubt much of the essential details will also be changed. The Big Bang, for example, was not rejected, it's just the Inflation Model completes the Big Bang more, accounting for scientific data that the Big Bang cannot explain. The fact that space can generate a universe all by itself is also beyond question for any future model to contend. As it stands now, the most likely to be scrutinized is the details of a multiverse, which may prove to be the last barrier to human understanding, beyond which our knowledge cannot go anymore.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

Even if something else supersedes, replaces the accepted Inflation Model, I doubt much of the essential details will also be changed. The Big Bang, for example, was not rejected, it's just the Inflation Model completes the Big Bang more, accounting for scientific data that the Big Bang cannot explain. The fact that space can generate a universe all by itself is also beyond question for any future model to contend. As it stands now, the most likely to be scrutinized is the details of a multiverse, which may prove to be the last barrier to human understanding, beyond which our knowledge cannot go anymore.

The big bang doesn't debunked the story of creation it only conforms to it.

you said fact about that space can generate a universe all by itself is also beyond question for any future model to contend?
maybe but still that is maybe we don't know the future yet.

the big bang as it is called,
that was the seed of the universe. In which all things came into being. A seed following creation laws, in which someone with much advancement had thus created this seed which became the universe we see today.

space, or vacuum is not empty, in fact, the very source of all creation resides in the vacuum energy.

The very instructions or rules of creation apply within or are governed by the vacuum. A set of rules, so that all
matter emerging from the vacuum field, is sustained but following basic creation laws.

these laws make vital, for all sub-atomics, atoms, molecules and lattices....microbiology/biology and the formation of life, also
following a discrete set of creation law.

creation laws set by the entity which is behind the vacuum field. creation laws put into the seed of the universe, at the beginning of all creation. therefore, someone with greater, much greater advancement could have easily created the universe.

This being, would have used another universe to draw understanding and experience from, and thus recreate the conditions for the starting of another universe, thus ours.

using the vacuum, the unseen and very small to lay all foundations for all larger structures.

hence, an atom can mirror a solar system.

As above, So Below is old saying, but it applies here......all smallest structures mirror the larger ones.
The vacuum can thus be a membrane for this to occur

 

[Stormer0628]

The big bang doesn't debunked the story of creation it only conforms to it.

you said fact about that space can generate a universe all by itself is also beyond question for any future model to contend?
maybe but still that is maybe we don't know the future yet.

the big bang as it is called,
that was the seed of the universe. In which all things came into being. A seed following creation laws, in which someone with much advancement had thus created this seed which became the universe we see today.

space, or vacuum is not empty, in fact, the very source of all creation resides in the vacuum energy.

The very instructions or rules of creation apply within or are governed by the vacuum. A set of rules, so that all
matter emerging from the vacuum field, is sustained but following basic creation laws.

these laws make vital, for all sub-atomics, atoms, molecules and lattices....microbiology/biology and the formation of life, also
following a discrete set of creation law.

creation laws set by the entity which is behind the vacuum field. creation laws put into the seed of the universe, at the beginning of all creation. therefore, someone with greater, much greater advancement could have easily created the universe.

This being, would have used another universe to draw understanding and experience from, and thus recreate the conditions for the starting of another universe, thus ours.

using the vacuum, the unseen and very small to lay all foundations for all larger structures.

hence, an atom can mirror a solar system.

As above, So Below is old saying, but it applies here......all smallest structures mirror the larger ones.
The vacuum can thus be a membrane for this to occur

creation laws? the bible could not even get it right about bats and birds and you're bringing up creation laws? if you find me an ancient biblical passage about the structure of the atom perhaps i'll take a second thought.

- - - Updated - - -

there are of course speculations about virtual worlds—that is, that our universe could be a simulation, but that would remain as speculation until we find a way to detect signatures that we can verify. until then, it's all speculation.

that would, of course, include speculations about advanced civilizations able to generate these universes. these advanced civilizations would then have the technologies that would make them equal to the gods of our language. these are all fine, but until then we're stuck to what we know thus far.

atoms mirroring universes, now that there is an interesting conjecture. there is an apt math and science for that, pertaining to the role of scales in mathematics and physics. you might want to look up the amplituhedron. you might like it.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

creation laws? the bible could not even get it right about bats and birds and you're bringing up creation laws? if you find me an ancient biblical passage about the structure of the atom perhaps i'll take a second thought.

- - - Updated - - -

there are of course speculations about virtual worlds—that is, that our universe could be a simulation, but that would remain as speculation until we find a way to detect signatures that we can verify. until then, it's all speculation.

that would, of course, include speculations about advanced civilizations able to generate these universes. these advanced civilizations would then have the technologies that would make them equal to the gods of our language. these are all fine, but until then we're stuck to what we know thus far.

atoms mirroring universes, now that there is an interesting conjecture. there is an apt math and science for that, pertaining to the role of scales in mathematics and physics. you might want to look up the amplituhedron. you might like it.

nah just go on your ways believing what theory of these days given.
i myself will follow the old ways and not be madly in love with these so called theories.

birds and bats we have an account on how they existed. but to say that man came from apes? hmmm.

maybe i became an atheist if you can prove that there is no designer of this universe.
the universe is so astounding great that the planets never collided with each other.
if perhaps this universe exists without the designer would you think we have a chance to live and survive?
they will always colliding in each right from the beginning before they formed.
and they can't form either because they are always hitting its other.

i want to formally end the discussions here with you
thank you for the time because we two have different point of views.

 

[Stormer0628]

nah just go on your ways believing what theory of these days given.
i myself will follow the old ways and not be madly in love with these so called theories.

birds and bats we have an account on how they existed. but to say that man came from apes? hmmm.

maybe i became an atheist if you can prove that there is no designer of this universe.
the universe is so astounding great that the planets never collided with each other.
if perhaps this universe exists without the designer would you think we have a chance to live and survive?
they will always colliding in each right from the beginning before they formed.
and they can't form either because they are always hitting its other.

i want to formally end the discussions here with you
thank you for the time because we two have different point of views.

well, not just birds and bats, actually. i might also add about how the bible mentioned dragons and unicorns like they were real, making people believe in them for so long. men and apes share a common ancestor, yes, and the evidence are so long from various disciplines: genetics, archaeology, anthropology, geology, and so on, that it would take a herculean task to disprove all these evidences. nothing in the intelligent design and creationist camp could ever realistically dent the theory of evolution as it stands now. but nobody stops someone from believing otherwise, yes.

our local universe is 13.772 billion years, and we have ample evidence for that based on the speed of light for a certain distance. the bible puts the age of everything at 6,000 years and had it all wrong in cosmology but this fact is hardly registering in the minds of believers, so yeah, that says a lot there.

as the inflation model clearly states, the speed of the expansion of space is faster than the speed of light. that explains why all the structures in the universe came from radiation first. when these formed into subatomic particles, collisions did take place, but the rules of quantum mechanics and gravity ensured they stick long enough to the script of how all the largest particles and structures would proceed to form from then on. the reason the spectral lines of the big bang only starts about 300,000 years after the start of the universe is that too much collisions were taking place to allow for light to pass. when the radiation cooled enough, light was able to pass, and that is what we detect in our instruments, given by the microwave background radiation.

but anyway we are going farther than our original topic. but yeah, thanks for the time and space, man.

 

[themanwithanironrod]

bilib na bilib talaga ang mga atheists sa age of the earth na kesyo daw 13.7 billion years old.

bigyan ko kayo ng insight,
para magkalaman naman at magkaroon ng kunting pang unawa.
for the record let us put the scientific assumption as correct data
but correct doesn't always mean true ha.

when big bang happens clouds of dust daw muna bago naging formed into planets instantly
abrupt daw yung formation nila e according to scientific study.
ang problema dito is walang makapagpatunay na totoong nangyari ito
so basically it is just a widely accepted ASSUMPTION!
kung assumption mga ka-SB doesn't always mean correct ha so dito pa lang may problema na.

now balik tayo sa dating teknik,
meron tatlong klaseng carbon ang living things at kung ito ay mamatay na right then
the absorption of carbon stop.
sa laboratory they extracted this one carbon type called carbon14 dahil daw
ang rate of decay nito is constant until all of them becomes lead.
halimbawa kung pagkamatay ng isang living thing ang kanyang carbon14 right then is 100%
then through time it is constantly decayed into lead and base sa study it became 50% carbon14
at an approximately 5700+ years.
ang problema dito is sino nman makapagpatunay na after 5700+ years yung carbon14 ay totoong 50% nalang?
pero again base sa study ito at dahil walang makapagpatunay ito ay isang widely accepted ASSUMPTION lang.

for some reason dahil hindi living thing ang rocks marami sila interpolation and derivation from carbon14 until they came up
sa correct formula on how to date the age of rocks.
remember umabot sila dito dahil sa assumption.
assuming talaga ang science eh kaya nga ang motto nila is ganito "science is self correcting" that is why huwag agad
maniwala dahil kung meron na naman scientific discovery na bago it will debunked the past discoveries.

ngayon ito na they dated the oldest rock here on earth and found to be 13.7 billion years old DAW.
ok assuming it is correct dahil galing sa assumption din e.
paano nila nakuha na ito ang age of the earth?
ganito yun kumuha sila ng samples doon sa meteorites na bumagsak sa earth and they dated them to be
at 13.7 billion years old.
assuming this is correct data nagtugma sila diba.

ganito ang paliwanag ng science.
the age of the rock here is the same age as the meteorites that is floating everywhere in space outside our planet.
granted this is correct base on their assuming data gathered.

ang problema ay ganito;
walang makapagpatunay na ang pagbuo ng planets were instant/abrupt. wala ni isa!
pwede rin naman kasi slowly through time nabuo ang planets.
so dapat hindi tayo assuming na ang meteors at ang pagkabuo ng planet earth ay magkaedad!
paano naging magkaedad ang isang bato na ganun lang kalaki sa ulo mo kumpara doon sa
mga bato na naging ganito na kalaki sa mundo natin?
ibig kung sabihin hindi mo pwede ikumpara ang edad ng bato doon sa pagkabuo ng maraming bato at naging planet earth.
kung bato lang pag uusapan pupuwede they are at the same age pero nuong mabuo na at naging earth
hoy hoy hoy ibang usapan na yun.

- - - Updated - - -

punta naman tayo sa biblical accounts dahil kesyo daw sabi ng ilang kristyano
at according sa chronology ng bible nasa 6000 years old lang.

hati ang mga kristyano dito at yung iba neutral lang
yung nagclaim na 10000-6000 ang edad ng earth sila yung tinatawag na YEC
or young earth creationists.
yung OEC naman sila yung nagclaim na Old Earth Creationists.
may kahalong scientific study sila.

ngayon ganito ang unang sabi ng bibliya,

The Story of Creation
1 In the beginning, when God created the universe,[a] 2 the earth was formless and desolate. The raging ocean that covered everything was engulfed in total darkness, and the Spirit of God was moving over the water. 3 Then God commanded, “Let there be light”—and light appeared. 4 God was pleased with what he saw. Then he separated the light from the darkness, 5 and he named the light “Day” and the darkness “Night.” Evening passed and morning came—that was the first day.

note that hindi nagsimula talaga sa creation of planet earth andito na daw eh the earth was formless and desolate na daw.
may kulang dito hindi talaga nagsimula sa pasimula yung narration sa genesis.
kaya huwag nyo akusahan na 6000 years old lang ang claim ng mga kristyano.
dahil para sa mga old earth creationists it will take ample time until it became livable.
thousand years,million years, billion years? on one knows
wala pang immortal na nagpakita at nagsabi kung ano talaga totoong nangyari sa creation of universe.