I know I am not answering the question. What I am saying is that faith is both the power and the mode of transportation.
Learning Genesis
- Thread starter TubbyTubby
- Start date
- Status
I've read your scripture several times and tried to see a connection with the accepted theory of big bang expansion but I've failed again, sorry.
"The things which are seen were not made of things which are visible"
This is about as close as I can get, this means that the cosmic microwave background radiation (things which are not visible) created the Universe (things which are seen)?
It's a pretty tenuous link but I can almost see how you link the scientific theory with the bible. Having said that, it's so vague that it could be set against hundreds of possible theories in many different areas of science.
Are you sure about this? Have you given it a lot of thought and prayer?
I know I didn't explain it well, but let me give you an example that maybe will make what I am saying clearer.
Someone is unsaved. God created that person to be saved, but they have free will. God has hope and trusts for that person believing in advance in the actuality of their salvation, but even though he has faith for them (he by faith sees them to be who he created them to be and believes this for them, otherwise they couldn't get saved because it would be by our own faith only. It is God's faith (which comes to us by the power of the Holy Spirit) that calls us to him, but our faith that believes and that accepts what He believes for us (the acceptance of Christ is our acceptance of what he by faith believed and did for us). When we are saved what is happening we are having faith which is then an open portal for God's power (because God's faith is not blocked by unbelief) that then creates the reality of the Holy Spirit in us because we believed. All faith is faith from God. Without God we could have no faith for everything would be fear and doubt. God is working through the measure of faith that he put in us when we use our faith. It is God's faith (belief) that manifests power through us. Doubt is a closed portal to God because it blocks God with unbelief. Faith is an open portal that allows Gods power to come through belief. God's faith is power because whatever he believes is truth and truth is manifestation of His reality.
I am not saying we are the power. What God has faith in is truth. Truth is manifestation. Even ideas are manifestation in the mind. This is energy (power). If our faith is not in God's will there is no power however. I am talking about God's will.
When God created He actualized what He wanted manifested. The words had power because the faith was manifest power in the words. This was the catalyst. He didn't need another mode of transportation for the words. His faith believed the creation and actualized it. By an open portal, there was no impurity (unbelief) to obstruct His faith because His faith is perfect belief.
I hope I am explaining this more clearly.
Excellent! Thanks for teaching me something new...
If you mean the background radiation map from the very early Universe, the big bang signature if you like, and before the first stars formed then I'm not sure it could be called light as we know it. It's a picture of variations in temperature.
No its not just that. Do your homework...it is the reflection of a radiant burst....they can label it by any name (dark radiation is very commonly used)...but let me give you an example...stare at a camera with a flash...once flashed close your eyes...see it? It is proof that it was there, that it happened...
God said "Let there be Light and there was light". When He said it it was (instantaneously, like the Bog bang theorists conjecture in their replacement myth)...otherwise I must believe that absolutely everything came from within absolute nothingness for no actual reason (again absurdity), OR I can make up a tale which defines the sum total of all matter/energy as eternal (having always existed albeit in an infinitismally small point like the cosmic egg theory, which is truly great science fiction and nothing more)...Aristotle (a very brilliant man) knew nothing of this Creator God, but even by pure reason alone concluded there must have been an uncaused first cause....we call Him God and He has identified Himself as YHVH of Hosts.
If you mean the background radiation map from the very early Universe, the big bang signature if you like, and before the first stars formed then I'm not sure it could be called light as we know it. It's a picture of variations in temperature.
No its not just that. Do your homework...it is the reflection of a radiant burst....they can label it by any name (dark radiation is very commonly used)...but let me give you an example...stare at a camera with a flash...once flashed close your eyes...see it? It is proof that it was there, that it happened...
God said "Let there be Light and there was light". When He said it it was (instantaneously, like the Bog bang theorists conjecture in their replacement myth)...otherwise I must believe that absolutely everything came from within absolute nothingness for no actual reason (again absurdity), OR I can make up a tale which defines the sum total of all matter/energy as eternal (having always existed albeit in an infinitismally small point like the cosmic egg theory, which is truly great science fiction and nothing more)...Aristotle (a very brilliant man) knew nothing of this Creator God, but even by pure reason alone concluded there must have been an uncaused first cause....we call Him God and He has identified Himself as YHVH of Hosts.
Yes. Explain how this fits into your model of an entirely material view of the universe that establishes as true ONLY that which can be proven by the scientific method (and I have not begun to expose the shortcomings of that method which IF you are truly a rational man you must consider)?
Are you asking WHY does a solar eclipse only happen with a new moon?
Tell me the shortcomings about the theory of solar eclipses and I will try to answer.
Last edited:
So TubbyTubby, which coloured ribbon are you holding and which coloured ribbon are you offering Paul?
BTW, English is your first language is not it? I ask this out of a genuine interest in understanding your posting.
Y'see I see many 'crossed transactions' in your replies which might, just might be the product of a person who is battling with the language in use.
Then again, it might be that you are mostly using your 'child ego' to reply to the 'adult ego' of other posters here.
Which is it I wonder?
BTW, English is your first language is not it? I ask this out of a genuine interest in understanding your posting.
Y'see I see many 'crossed transactions' in your replies which might, just might be the product of a person who is battling with the language in use.
Then again, it might be that you are mostly using your 'child ego' to reply to the 'adult ego' of other posters here.
Which is it I wonder?
No, what you post is clear enough Olivia. You do have a unique way of expressing yourself, but I for one really appreciate the spiritual(ized) flavour of your posts.
My ego is what it is I suppose Calvin, there's not much I can do about that.
English is my first language and I have been taught it to a respectable level I think, at least relative to my peers. If you interpret how I word my posts as being some level below your understanding of the English language then I can only apologise.
No of course not...I am asking what I asked. There is no way any rational person can construe that out of what I posted...either it is a game you are playing or you refuse to recognize the obvious answer (and do no ask me what that is...just answer my question)
Explain how this phenomena fits into your model of an entirely materialistic view of the universe that establishes as true ONLY that which can be proven by the scientific method (and I have not begun to expose the shortcomings of that method which IF you are truly a rational man you must consider)?
OK, so I see I left you out in the cold on that one.
or was that another 'crossed transaction?
OK, so I see I left you out in the cold on that one.
I have no idea what you are talking about in this or your previous post about my language skills. Please explain.
I was quite honestly trying to make sure I understood what you were asking before I answered. I wasn't trying to be evasive or elusive. I'll re-read and try to respond.
Sorry, I thought you were...so how can science explain this darkness n the middle of the afternoon noted by Roman historians?
The origin of our moon is still debated but the favoured theories tend towards it's origin as being from some major collision in the early earths history and smashing the material from the earth into orbit which formed the moon over time.
These theories are more likely because of the similarity of the geology of the earth and the moon and because the size ratio makes it unlikely that the moon already existed and was captured by the Earth.
The Moon is 400 times the distance from us than the Sun and 400 times smaller making them appear the same size from our viewpoint causing a solar eclipse. It's orbit is not exactly in the same plane as the Earth-Sun so only a few times a year the Moons shadow hits the Earth causing an eclipse.
These theories are more likely because of the similarity of the geology of the earth and the moon and because the size ratio makes it unlikely that the moon already existed and was captured by the Earth.
The Moon is 400 times the distance from us than the Sun and 400 times smaller making them appear the same size from our viewpoint causing a solar eclipse. It's orbit is not exactly in the same plane as the Earth-Sun so only a few times a year the Moons shadow hits the Earth causing an eclipse.
But Tubby, we already established it was NOT a Solar eclipse...it was on the day of a full moon!?! I already knew what causes that!
My apologies, this was why I was trying to clarify the question so that I didn't insult anyones intelligence. I do have a tendency to skim read things sometimes and miss an important point like here, its not intentional just one of my failings.
So Thallus reported "Indeed the whole known world fell under a sudden darkness" when the Moon was full. Well I can't explain that with a scientific, or Galilean if you like, understanding of the mechanics of our Solar system.
I have no idea what it would mean, maybe he was speaking metaphorically? I don't know.
Actually, I was not making a direct comment on your language skills TubbyTubby. I was discussing your communication skills....is there a difference?? I think there is.
For other readers who don't know, but are mildly interested, I was musing about a thingy called 'transactional analysis'. Applying that analysis technique to your communications here is really very informative.
calvin,
aka the profiler.
As it was then, so it is now....scoffers seek to dismiss truth in favour of the comfort of darkness.
- Status