Pat is full of shit if he asserts God is punishing the sexually promiscuous America with all these social problems and even 911 and unless you bring God in so we can place Her on trial if true, it will simply remain bullshit.
And what does even that have to do with the topic?
In addition, IIRC what was said is that Pat Robertson was wrong more often then a stopped clock.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
Because it is a bunch of garbage, just like the universe beginning to exist in and from non-existence.
God Bless,
? How is "in the beginning God created the heavens including the Earth" any different than what scientists basically say?
It is clear that the Universe DID have a beginning, 13.9 billion years ago.
Gen. 1:1 In the beginning, (the Formative/Cosmology Era), God, (the Uncaused First Cause, or the Dark Energy which pre-existed the material Universe, perhaps), created... (all that which has followed the Big Bang from the singularity of Planck Time which consisted of
Seven Stages: 1) The Inflation Era 2) The Quark Era 3) Hadron Era 4) Lepton Era 5) Nucleosynthesis Era 6) Opaque Era 7) Matter Era,... in an enormous Einsteinian energy transformation, E = mC^2),... ... the (matter composing the) heaven (beyond the Solar System) and the (accretion disk which congealed into the planet) earth.
Pat Robertson finally got something right. He should be congratulated. Him actually getting something right is a big deal and maybe he might even get a gold star in his permanent record.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
How is "in the beginning God created the heavens including the Earth" any different than what scientists basically say?
That's obvious. the Big bang happened 14 billion years ago, the earth was 4 billion years ago.
That's a 10 billion year lapse between the formation of an early universe and the formation of the earth.
If you divide the age of the universe up into thirds, the earth has only existed in the last 3rd, not "in the beginning."
The earth is a very late phenonena in the existence of the universe. Your geocentric model has not been a part of scientific thinking for hundreds of years.
I don't know if Pat got all of the details right, but he did indeed get the most important thing right. Teaching your kids crap is the best way to lose their attention. It's also a pretty good way to insure that they can never be involved in a whole bunch of scientific careers that they might otherwise find enjoyable and profitable.
And all for what? To embrace beliefs that have absolutely no bearing on your salvation or following Christ? Then where is the profit?
And Pat got the next most important part right as well. If you believe that God created the universe, then you must believe that the universe is a testimony to God. I just don't see how it could be otherwise.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
Pat says you have dinosaur fossils and you have radiocarbon dating and Bishop Ussher is wrong, and you should teach your children what science reveals as evidence of reality.
Of course it isn't just radiocarbon dating, but a whole slew of radiometric and other dating methods that all show the earth is old, very old, and they show it in a consistent pattern, a pattern that cannot be explained by such methods being erroneous or prone to massive errors.
The age of the earth is not a matter of debate, it is a matter of looking at the evidence and either:
(A) accepting the evidence and theories of science as the best consistent explanation, or
(B) rejecting the evidence of virtually every science known in favor of a belief, and an interpretation, that is contradicted by the evidence and theories of science.
™ Version 4.2
(1)