former speed of light

Evidence of the spirit world? The light at the end of a tunnel? The fact that the physical and spiritual will merge in time? Something tells me you want physical evidence you can see and touch, for something you cannot see or touch. Yet I cannot touch the cup o soup cosmic soup creator some prefer to believe in, and neither can they, yet they believe. Part of the reason they believe is because they see how fast our physical light moves, and extrapolate backwards as to how long ago it traveled at that speed, to the great distance it came. They come up with great age as a result. They call that evidence!

quote:

---

However, scientists are also unable to disprove the existence of fluorescent green unicorns,

---

Hec, they can't even disprove the cosmic cup o soup creator that spewed out the universe! Wait a minute, they came up with that one.

quote:

---

Well, they are experts at explaining physical phenomenon (NDEs)without the use of subjective assumptions (such as a spiritual world)

---

Since the spiritual is far more important than the physical, and God Himself is a spirit, they are missing the camel, and straining at the knat.

quote:

---

You're basing your case of spiritual lights experienced during NDEs on a book that does not talk about any tunnels or any lights at the end of it

---

It talks about life after death, and that is what this is about.

quote:

---

Well....yes...yes it certainly mentioned the after-death. But then again, so do other religious texts.

---

Then maybe there's something to it!

quote:

---

"Believe what I believe, and you'll see what I see"

---

Perhaps I should switch over to the I can't see it, so it isn't real, so disbelieve with me line?

quote:

---

Care to explain why people should feel comfortable with a tunnel and light at the end?

---

You misunderstood. I meant that God would send to greet them someone or ones they would feel comfortable with.

quote:

---

Firstly, you're still relying on the fact that all of the above is correct and true because it "seemed" to you to be the case

---

Actually no, it's not because I dreamed it up. God's word speaks of these things. Tunnel? No I don't recall this being mentioned, but the other side, to which we must go, is well mentioned, and since the tunnel is what people see, it is reasonable to assume that that is the passage for them there. Simple as 2 + 2 =4 -- people go somewhere at death, a known quantity. people see lights at the end of a tunnel at death - a known quantity. So it is a simple equation here.

Wrong? Well, it seems like the distances may be pretty close, actually, after all. Congratulations on the hard work. If we were to measure how long it would take an angel to get to the furthest star, we would see really, basically no time at all. Spirits, you see are not limited to the physical constraints. Fine. God too, bingo, He's there, same story. My point was and is, that if the spiritual universe was at one time together with our physical one, then the time needed to get to the furthest star was really basically none at all. So then, if there was a seperation, of the two planes, then what we have left, that now lights our way to the furthest star, is our physical universe light. The only kind we know. This light would take (crike) billions of years to get there!! So, when we use the physical (in this case the light we now have) to measure how long it would take--lo and behold, it now would take a very very long time to get out there! So, if we ignore or are unaware of the spiritual, then we would think it was billions of years ago when the light originated! Actually, it was as God outlined clearly in the bible, only thousands of years ago. If we believe only the present physical things we see, we get a very silly long time instead of the real time of creation. Hope I outlined my position here for you.

quote:

---

I never said you dreamt it up. I said whatever you observed (be it testimonies, biblical text, or whatever) SEEMS to suggest to you that there exists a spiritual world.

---

God is the One suggesting it, so who am I to argue?

quote:

---

But the above is, of course, what you THINK is the case because it SEEMS to be true.

---

Actually, it is because, after a careful study of God's Own words, and the way He says things work, I use my God given little intellect, and put together the pieces of a simple puzzle, all the while cross checking, to be sure my own ideas don't enter into the equation.

quote:

---

There is no evidence to suggest ANYTHING goes ANYWHERE (except that our body goes rigid and cold) after death.

---

Who said the cold physical body goes somewhere? You gotta be kidding! Not till the Rapture at least. Are you trying to make it clear you do not believe in a life after death, God, and Heaven, and the supernatural? OK we can see that, so what? What do you want me to do--convert?

quote:

---

Science is not about what is "right": it is about what is "useful" at this point in time.

---

Useful to whom? God? Christians? The devil? ? Pagans?

quote:

---

You really have NO idea what science is about, do you. Science is not about "truth" - it is the rejection of falsehood.

---

And what is falsehood? Any thing that allows for God, or the spiritual? Anything that goes beyond your relatively retarded powers of perception?

quote:

---

Thus IF other religious texts constitute evidence for the after-life, then the bible is not unique in a portrail of after-life, and we have no way of knowing which religious text we should adopt (since they all have "something to it").

---

Correct. So if you are looking to adopt, chose carefully.

quote:

---

Thus in summary, science is ALWAYS based on falsehood, yet it perpetually tries to reject falsehood

---

Not at all, true science is based on understanding the real truth the best we know how, not on always loving and embracing, and wallowing in falsehood.

You say the measurement of the speed of light in not 'any part' of the reason that star distances are measured? I guess I just dreamed up the term 'light year'!!
It is a part of it, a big part. Someone else out there want to talk to this guy?

Good. this is precisely the point I was interested in. If such a concept is invalid, that's fine with me, I'm not an einstein. So let's look at this.

quote:

---

light-years away is going to go black once the light that was allready here after the seperation has traveled past and the new light hasn't had time to reach us

---

What I thought of it as, was that, if the seperation did occur, the spirit world (world is so much easier to type than 'universe' so hopefully the word will do from now on)would have passed out of our perception and sight. All we were left with, would have been the physical world we know. OK, so one day, before this happened (if it did) we see a far star in the sky, and it's light gets to us right away. If it 'twinkles' or blinks, we see it pronto.
Next day, and we are seperated now. Looking up, I still see the star. It kinda looks a little different maybe, but there it is. Problem is, God has now put us under the constraint of the physical, which includes time. I guess maybe He didn't want the demo to go on forever, almost like shareware.
The only light that can exist in my new physical world is so slow now, it would take a billion years for it to get to the star, when only yesterday it got here right away.
The way I picture it, the former light, left in it's place this slow stuff in it's entire path, or trail. So it is still coming right from the star uninterupted, but now takes a long time to get here. No black outs. (unless it was right in the creation week this happened, and the cosmic light that existed before the sun was the spirit light, but that's too complicated for me, and I don't think so anyhow)
OK so the former light now replaced in place by the only light the P world can handle. It never started out at a slow speed from the star, but came to be as the former was seperated, and this took it's place.
Could this be?

In essence you are simply saying I can't see God! I can't measure a spirit, so it just ain't so. Like the farmer who saw a giraffe for the first time, shook his head, and said, "there just ain't no such thing".

quote:

---

May I ask that you address: 1) the claim of your use of circular reasoning, 2) your idea of true/false science, 3) your idea of good/bad knowledge, and 4) the claim that the bible explains the process of ANYTHING in detail

---

Creation of the world was laid out in detail. What came first, man and woman, timeframe, etc.
Good bad knowledge? If it goes against man, enslaving or killing or infecting him. ( bio nuclear warfare etc, mind control)Genetical monstrosities - tinkering with God's creation. Good? how about some medical things, pasteurization, cures, etc. Then there is just knowledge, say not so bad or good, but too much for a sinful fallen man, who will use it badly.
Circular reason? Basically someone's view of belief in God, who omits healings, prophesy fulfillments, miracles, answered prayers, angelic help, etc as evidence, and thinks God is not the center of the circle, so thinks it is objective to call it that.

quote:

---

claims as the true face of reality, then you are stating them as real and this is where problems arise.

---

Sorry to hear that. But I am afraid unbelievers will always have problems.

quote:

---

There is a line (though sometimes vague) between believing something to be true, and stating that it is true. I hope that you will heed this line more carefully next time.

---

Jesus said preach the gospel to every creature, not only if you are a superman in believing every jot and tittle. So I guess He doesn't really heed you either. Perhaps you ougta try heeding Him!

quote:

---

See the cars on the road? See the tap on the sink? See the wealth of knowledge on the internet? These are the indirect consequences of scientific progress/discoveries, and they make our lives more convenient. This is how science "helps" us.

---

So what? You saying it's all good and helpful? Porn, air pollution, war? There is both good and evil.

quote:

---

Falsehood is anything that has been shown to be inconsistent with physical evidence. For example: water boils at 20 degrees celcius at 1 atm pressure is falsehood. Anything that has not been supported by physical evidence (such as the existence of King Arthur, Santa Claus, or God) is dismissed as an unsupported claim and will not be accepted until physical evidence which lends support to the theory has been found.

---

Gee, this is all news to me, only the physical exists, and is real, or important. By the way, do you have a brain? Of course, or you could not write. Do you have thoughts? Can you prove it to me physically? Are they all good thoughts? Could these thoughts be influenced in any way by forces you can not touch? Did you ever love anyone, say a mother? Can you touch love? Is it real?

Yes

Why do you ask?

post 88 explains my thoughts, and how it only now takes time.

No. The light we see, if my model is correct, would only take our physical world light that long to get there. The majority and most important part of God's creation is the spirit world. Before seperation it would not take that long to get there.

Long gone past us? I guess you didn't see post 88. The idea was that the physical light took over the path, so by my calculations it would not all go past for, in the case mentioned, a billion years. (at it's present speed) But at it's speed several thousand years ago before said seperation, it would be instant more or less. Just as spitits themselves can travel instantly to far away, with no time needed. It's like saying God travelled to a star a billion light years away for a visit, and got there in a flash, but then saying it must have taken Him a billion years because our light only goes that fast. Sorry, the spirit world is not bound by time nor tide.

Star a billion light years away we'll call 'F'. Before seperation, it was -time from F to earth=0 After seperation it was time from F to earth=1 billion light years. Before, the stream of light we'll call S (and today's physical light we'll call P) So at seperation, P replaces S in place, still as a stream. Almost like the physical light was part of the combined light and rode on it's coattails at S speed. Now, however, as S was seperated, P was on it's own, and could only manage a slow speed. So any light as the guy said in one post that 'went past us' after the seperation, would only be P speed. Meanwhile I envision an uninterupted flow, with S being gracefully replaced by P.
So far, I see no one with any reason to doubt this. (Unless they don't believe in the Spiritual at all)

Several thousand years ago, according to this idea.