Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genesis 1 interpretation
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 46 of 55 (51282)
08-19-2003 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Newborn
08-19-2003 5:54 PM


Re: response
newborn writes:
He didnt said ...
Try the third person singular.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Newborn, posted 08-19-2003 5:54 PM Newborn has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 55 (51302)
08-20-2003 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Newborn
08-19-2003 5:54 PM


Re: response
Okey-dokie.
quote:
When the 'deep' was created, it was a black hole.
Well, I suppose a black hole could be considered 'deep.'
quote:
Under gravity, it collapsed
Black holes don't collapse. They have already collapsed to infinite density. That is what makes them black holes.
quote:
and the temperature, pressure and density increased to the stage where thermonuclear reactions occurred and nucleosynthesis took place.
Wrong. Gravity inside a black hole overcomes everything, even the nuclear forces. Protons, neutrons, electrons and even their component parts collapse. The only thing left is gravity. No protons, neutrons, and electrons means no nucleosynthesis and definitely no thermonuclear reactions.
quote:
Intense light was everywhere inside the black hole.
No it wasn't. Photons emitted below the Schwarzschild radius are sucked irretrievably into the singularity.
quote:
The collapse is considered to have lasted one day
Right... why?
quote:
and then, in a creative act of God, the black hole was converted into a white hole.
Aha! Magic. So much for science.
quote:
This is when the waters above the expanse, the expanse and the waters below the expanse were differentiated.
The waters above space, space and the waters below space were differentiated? Does that really make sense to you?
quote:
With expansion came cooling - and at about 3000 Kelvin, atoms would have been formed and the expanse would become transparent.
hmmmm.... we had nuclear reactions and nucleosynthesis way back in the black hole? Why are we doing it again now? Actually, this is the proper place for such things, but it conflicts with previous statements.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Newborn, posted 08-19-2003 5:54 PM Newborn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by John, posted 08-21-2003 5:38 PM John has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 48 of 55 (51314)
08-20-2003 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Newborn
08-19-2003 5:54 PM


Re: response
Newborn,
Newborn writes:
Ok,Parasomnium,do you know what thermonuclear reactions are? and nucleosynthesis?
Yes. And yes.
Newborn writes:
And i am surprised about another error of yours,I thought i were the foreign one but the phrase "would have been formed" is a passive form meaning a event in a past more antecipated than the told past.At least i learned that in the English class(dont remember if passive is the apropriate designation).He didnt said "Atoms were formed" neither "Atoms would form" neither "Atoms would be formed"
I tried to follow your reasoning, but after the word 'surprised' I got lost. What you are saying is gobbledegook to me.
Anyway, you still didn't answer my question. I'll repeat it one more time and if you don't give me a straight answer in your next post, I'll consider our discussion closed. The question is "How can there be water before there are atoms?" No beating about the bush please.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Newborn, posted 08-19-2003 5:54 PM Newborn has not replied

  
Newborn
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 55 (51618)
08-21-2003 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by doctrbill
08-19-2003 11:06 PM


Doctrbill,i mean that God only speaks in the language of the people to whom he gave inspiration.People of that time arent so advanced like we are and thus God will not tell them about white holes nor event horizons.I dont know why the big sound.For me it is very natural and logic what God did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by doctrbill, posted 08-19-2003 11:06 PM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by doctrbill, posted 08-21-2003 10:01 PM Newborn has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 55 (51629)
08-21-2003 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by John
08-20-2003 1:24 AM


Re: response
Newborn, bud, how about a response?
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by John, posted 08-20-2003 1:24 AM John has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 51 of 55 (51706)
08-21-2003 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Newborn
08-21-2003 5:04 PM


newborn writes:
... i mean that God only speaks in the language of the people to whom he gave inspiration.People of that time arent so advanced like we are and thus God will not tell them about white holes nor event horizons.I dont know why the big sound.For me it is very natural and logic what God did.
An interesting thought but it doesn't address the question I posed for you.
How do you justify putting words in God's mouth?
How do you justify editing the "Word of God " in the following ways?
1) Reordering the sequence of events {stars before light and sun before vegetation};
2) Altering physical features {substituting "vapor canopy" for a solid Firmament};
3) Reversing cause and effect {uplift of earth versus subsidence of waters}; and
4) Quibbling over the timeframe {days versus aeons}?
Furthermore - how do you explain that Genesis One is virtually identical with the Babylonian creation myth?
db

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Newborn, posted 08-21-2003 5:04 PM Newborn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Newborn, posted 08-31-2003 8:32 PM doctrbill has replied

  
Newborn
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 55 (53123)
08-31-2003 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by doctrbill
08-21-2003 10:01 PM


READ
PARASOMNIUM,I ALREADY GIVE AN ANSWER FOR YOUR QUESTION BUT YOU JUST DIDNT UNDERSTAND IT.IN THAT REPLY I SHOWED THAT THE AUTHOR WROTE THE WORD "WATER" AFTER THE PHRASE "NUCLEAR SYNTHESIS" .
THE PHRASE "ATOMS WOULD HAVE BEEN FORMED" REFERS TO THE LAST ONE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by doctrbill, posted 08-21-2003 10:01 PM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by doctrbill, posted 08-31-2003 10:57 PM Newborn has replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 53 of 55 (53136)
08-31-2003 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Newborn
08-31-2003 8:32 PM


Re: READ THIS !!
NEWBORN writes:
PARASOMNIUM,I ALREADY GIVE AN ANSWER FOR YOUR QUESTION ...
WHY DID YOU ATTACH THIS MESSAGE TO MY POST?
WHY HAVE YOU NOT RESPONDED TO MY POST? {#51}
newborn writes:
... i mean that God only speaks in the language of the people to whom he gave inspiration.People of that time arent so advanced like we are and thus God will not tell them about white holes nor event horizons.I dont know why the big sound.For me it is very natural and logic what God did.
What? God isn't going to give them advanced knowledge? He's going to let them remain ignorant until the atheists figure out what is really going on? Them let then learn the truth from atheists?
ONCE AGAIN
How do you justify putting words in God's mouth?
How do you justify editing the "Word of God " in the following ways?
1) Reordering the sequence of events {stars before light and sun before vegetation};
2) Altering physical features {substituting "vapor canopy" for a solid Firmament};
3) Reversing cause and effect {uplift of earth versus subsidence of waters}; and
4) Quibbling over the timeframe {days versus aeons}?
Furthermore - how do you explain that Genesis One is virtually identical to the Babylonian and very similar to other ancient creation myths?
------------------
http://www.sun-day-school.us

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Newborn, posted 08-31-2003 8:32 PM Newborn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Newborn, posted 09-05-2003 9:06 PM doctrbill has replied

  
Newborn
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 55 (54114)
09-05-2003 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by doctrbill
08-31-2003 10:57 PM


Re: READ THIS !!
Doctrbill,God gave advanced knowledge to people THROUGH scientists because its God that gaves inteligence and capacity to them.Atheists cant do anything without God.This is independent of whether we are atheists or not.God is good and wanna to be with us.He blesses everyone.But it is man that rejects God.Man is the worst enemy of himself(Satan only plays with him if he let).
Ok
1)Light could exist without stars (electron-positron anihilation).
2)Then fotosynthesis can occur for vegetation.
3)Cant water concentrate in a region of space through gravity ?
And therefore the molecules of water cant break and through nucleosynthesis form land?It all depends only on quantum mechanics but who says its parameters (like h) cant vary?
4)Through general relativity the author of the link explains it(in his book of course).He says that under gravity time in the referencial of the Earth was slower than in further regions of the universe.
Ok,Satan was there when God made the world and when he inspired people to write Genesis.Considering that people who worship gods other than God are really worshiping the devil its no surprise that
the cosmologies are identical.(How do you explain for example pyramids in South America and in Egipt?)The religions of the world werent invention of people.They had contact with the demons (or the angels) at least once.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by doctrbill, posted 08-31-2003 10:57 PM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by doctrbill, posted 09-05-2003 10:32 PM Newborn has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 55 of 55 (54124)
09-05-2003 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Newborn
09-05-2003 9:06 PM


newborn writes:
God gave advanced knowledge to people THROUGH scientists because its God that gaves inteligence and capacity to them.
Yet here you are attempting to tell the majority of scientists that they are wrong.
...God is good and wanna to be with us.He blesses everyone.But it is man that rejects God.Man is the worst enemy of himself(Satan only plays with him if he let).
Your thoughts and your arguments might improve if you could leave religion out of it long enough to reason scientifically. God is not a scientific concept, and your particular brand of religion is unacceptable to many, otherwise religious, scientists.
1)Light could exist without stars (electron-positron anihilation).
How does this create the 'evening and morning' effect?
2)Then fotosynthesis can occur for vegetation.
It takes a lot of energy to accomplish photosynthesis; and that energy has to be present within a certain narrow bandwidth. Electron-positron anihilation on a scale large enough to produce enough light energy would surely produce other, unwanted, side effects. And what of the wavelengths?
3)Cant water concentrate in a region of space through gravity ?
And therefore the molecules of water cant break and through nucleosynthesis form land?
Is this a question or an answer? One must consider the effect of solar wind on water vapor; Or has the sun not yet been created? Nucleosynthesis is what goes on in stars. It is simply not going to occur in liquid water.
It all depends only on quantum mechanics but who says its parameters (like h) cant vary?
Another question? Inventing new laws of physics are we?
4)Through general relativity the author of the link explains it(in his book of course).He says that under gravity time in the referencial of the Earth was slower than in further regions of the universe.
The man in question spent a lot of time here last year but showed us nothing which could satisfy the laws of physics as they are known. Besides, the scripture makes it clear that the author intended to indicate literal, twenty four hour, days.
Satan was there when God made the world and when he inspired people to write Genesis.Considering that people who worship gods other than God are really worshiping the devil its no surprise that
the cosmologies are identical.
The other cosmologies came long before Genesis was written. Isn't it more likely that Genesis was copying the science of its own time?
(How do you explain for example pyramids in South America and in Egipt?)
The pyramid is a natural/logical form in that it provides structural stability. The pyramid may be inspired by the cone. Even sand will assume a conical shape when poured out upon the ground.
The religions of the world werent invention of people.They had contact with the demons (or the angels) at least once.
Religion is the invention of man. One does not need supernatural input to perceive the political advantage of controlling others.
Thank you for your effort.
------------------
"I was very unwilling to give up my belief." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Newborn, posted 09-05-2003 9:06 PM Newborn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024