Some very bold statements, there. But I do notice you never said when the atmosphere was created. But water was here before the first day. You disagree, but that's not what my Bible says. Follow the verses through.

Yes, that's what I see you doing here.

I think you are jumping to conclusions about him. If you didn't notice, MM substitutes and splices in different definitions for words and meanings that are ... well, not usual. So just because he uses the same words and phrases scientologists or others use, doesn't mean that he believes that way. You need to put in work to attempt to understand him before labeling him.

You mean with a telescope?

I think it's a wrong conclusion here which could be shown by answering, why doesn't the moon have an atmosphere. Do you know what a confounder is?

James, please answer my question. Thank you.

I'm not following this. First of all, how can something be moving faster than the speed of light? That would imply imaginary mass and time moving backwards, according to relativity. Secondly, how does it explain that we are seeing evidence of the death of a star in only thousands of years vs. the millions of years it should be?



That's fine. Just looking for something which makes sense.

This is circular reasoning. Come up with a theory, assume it is true, and if there is any evidence to the contrary, explain that away as not being possibly true because it contradicts the theory.

Another possibility is that the theory is wrong. If a theory is correct, it should be supportable by evidence. God provides us evidence for the things He wishes us to believe. Not overwhelming proof (which would do away with the need for faith, as well as being contrary to the concept of free well -- i.e. overwhelming proof would be), but enough evidence upon which to make an informed decision.

The theory of cosmological inflation includes the concept that there can be causality between points in space that would normally be too far from each other for causality to apply. The specific phenomenon I'm thinking of is the homogeneity of the universe in terms of the dispersion of matter. The explanation is that when the universe expanded during its inflation stage, it "expanded" the light along with it, taking it farther than it could have gone on its own.

Not that I buy all this, but it's how they explain it AFAIK. I hope I made sense.

How long did it take the angel Gabriel to travel from Heaven to Earth to speak to Daniel?

It obviously didn't take very long, which means Gabriel must have travelled much, much faster than the speed of light.

Does that, therefore, mean that Gabriel also travelled into the past?

That would mean that Gabriel came from the future, when he already knew that Daniel was going to need him. Which means he could have taken his time, knowing exactly when he needed to arrive. Which means he didn't need to exceed the speed of light. Which means he didn't go backward in time. Which means he went forward in time. Which means he had to go faster than light. Which means..... LOL

Anyway, on a more serious note, there are theories, such as wormholes, that allow spatial travel that exceeds the speed of light when taken as a whole, but does not exceed the speed of light locally. It works something like a shortcut through space-time. It's possible that angels can travel that way.

Or, since angels are spirits, perhaps they can have imaginary mass, allowing speeds beyond c.

James, this statement is the best commentary on the creation account I've seen so far. It's got the hallmarks of truth - Simple, brief and plausible:


On a different topic, your epitaph fits - Boanerges. I've naturally got that disposition myself. But, the Lord can mold us sons of Zebedee, siphon off the dross of human electricity and make us channels of the pure heavenly current. I've personally been inspired by a lot of your thoughts. It takes divine wisdom to know the difference between watering down the truth to make it more palatable and real courtesy. Please pray for me to that end. You're in my prayers brother. The parting words of a friend to me on his death bed were: "Let no man take your crown".

Enoch walked with God 7 generations after the fall. How? Did an angel pick him up and carry him to heaven every Sabbath? No way, the gate to heaven was still on earth until the flood. He came to the eastern gate that Adam had been escorted out of, and he could see heaven through the portal and hear God's voice. Heaven was right there.

What we know is what we see until truth is shown to be other wise.

My point? We are in a cosmic prison, sequestered from the un-fallen worlds. In our material perspective it looks as if it would be 1.5k light years to get to the horse head nebula beyond which we are sure the Holy City is, but Enoch could see the New Jerusalem from here as if just beyond the gate where the angel was posted. How? Our perception of time and space is subject to our fallen condition. Angels have their own dimension.

It takes two points on a map to triangulate distance and we are on one tiny planet, one perspective. How could we possibly believe we know what truth is relative to space?

Until 300 years after Christ the world was known to be flat by most people.

Up until Galileo in 1615 everyone believed the earth was the center of our solar system.

Up until 10 years ago the expansion of our universe was known absolutely to be slowing down since the big bang, now scientists are scrambling to figure out why the expansion is actually speeding up.

Now they claim they know there is "dark matter" that they can't see, but it has to be there because nothing else could explain the known scenario based off their previous models of understanding. They don't have faith in the unseen God who proves Himself to us daily, but they can have faith in an unseen, unproven hypothesis?

It sure will be a major shock to them when they see why the universe is speeding up its expansion.