What I had held since the beginning of our post is that your insistence that the Church has permitted science to rule out, where, how and when, life comes from. And that there is a possibility of life had come into existence by the mere help with the assistance or guiding power of God. Who’s no pope, so far, have accepted that premise as not even hiphothecally. I’ am six days creationist. That it is all. By Lateran IV, Trent and Vatican I, these three councils have declared the inerrancy of sacred scriptures. That implied “six days creation”. What St. Bellarmine said was that if it was true (which it wasn’t) that the earth revolves around the sun; we must assert that we had misinterpreted the Holy Writ, and not that scriptures were wrong or not inspired by the Holy Ghost (which it is a blasphemy). Then you brought out the encyclical of pope XII, which it allowed theologians to go deeper into scriptures or scrutinize for any doubt regarding the six days account of creation. Pius XII, in
@gene546 - "Could you please explain me, how that is the universe is a closed system and the Earth is not."
I already did, but I'll try again.
"For you assert that the universe is closed and the earth is not."
...and went on to explain why.
"Isn’t the Earth contained inside the universe?"
Yes, but I'm not sure why that's relevant. A closed system is one which does not interact with anything outside of itself. In general, we can consider the universe a closed system, because there's nothing outside of it to interact with. On the other hand, the Earth interacts with the rest of the universe. It is not closed. Therefore, the average complexity of the universe is decreasing, but specific areas within the system are becoming more complex. The breakdown of the sun is powering an increase in complexity on Earth.
Could you please explain me, how that is the universe is a closed system and the Earth is not. For you assert that the universe is closed and the earth is not. Isn’t the Earth contained inside the universe? The conclusion of your argument can be classified as “Non sequitur.” Gene546
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the Second Law of Thermodynamics argument has been beaten down so many times it's almost boring to tell you how wrong it is. The simple explanation is this: the Law applies only within a closed system. The universe is a closed system, but the Earth is not. The Earth receives energy from the sun. The sun is becoming less ordered, but it is powering an increase in complexity here on Earth.
If part B of your argument were true, you couldn't have written it.
Physics is the worst enemy of the pseudo-science of evolution. Thermodynamics, this second law assure us that the entire universe is running down to total chaos; how is that evolution is then running against this law? Or in another words uphill for a) natural process always tends toward disorderliness. B) The simple will never produce the more complex, for as I said about: the universe is running to a total destruction that is to say the natural systems are degenerating from order to disorder. Evolution requires the opposite. It requires the universe tu run uphill. Gene546
“Thine are the heavens, and thine is the earth: the world and the fullness thereof thou has found: the north and the sea thou has created.” Psalm 88:12-13 “for there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but according to their own desires, they will heap themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the Truth, but will be turned unto fables.” -2 Timothy 4:3-4 “Thou in the beginning, O Lord, didst found the earth: and the works of thy hand are the heavens. They shall perish, but Thou shall continue: and they shall all grow old as a garment. And as a vesture shalt Thou charge them, and they shall be changed; but Thou art the selfsame, and thy years shall not fail.” -Hebrews 1:10-12 gene546
“The theorists hold that the Big Bang started 13.5 billion years ago in the Planck dimension from a volume of10^-40 cubic centimeters with a diameter of 3.14 *10^-13 centimeters, and was filled with particles of 1.62*10^-33 centimeters packed solidly and having a density of 4.22*10^93, and a gravitational attraction between each particle of 1.3*10^49 dynes (roughly 10^46 greater than the Earth’s gravity). These theorists conveniently choose the Planck dimension in order to avoid infinite the infinite dimensions demanded by a singularity. The advocates postulate that a group of these Planck particles numbering 10^60 spontaneously broke away, creating a hole of 3.14*10^-13 centimeters in diameter but which was filled in 2*10^-23 seconds. For some unexplained reasons, the implosion does not absorb the 10^60 particles (even though the gravitational attraction is immense), and the 10^60 Planck particles do not remember that they are supposed to cease existing in 4*10^-44 seconds but keep ex
The galaxy formation paradox, “The real problem of galaxy formation remains very much unsolved. The greatest difficulty is that we still have no idea what induced the formation of the first bound objects in an expanding universe.” Nature, 255:275-276; see also: J. Binney, 1981b, in The structure and evolution of normal galaxies, ed. S. M. Fall and D. Lynden-Bell, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. J. Binney, 1982b, Annual review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 399. As you may see, I have documented all my information, from the same astronomers that somehow, are not convinced, totally, that the Earth is not the center of Mass of the universe. As for the YouTube video it does not meant anything to me. Gene 546
Three ways according to science to prove that the Earth spin on its axis “1) the Coriolis force, 2) centrifugal forces, and 3) the Sagnac effect, and this is the response to these presumptuous proofs: they implicitly denied is the equal valid premise that the rotation of the external world, the universe can cause the very same inertial forces-centripetal and Coriolis. That premise is known as the Mach’s principle. Mach’s idea can be stated as: The inertia of any system is the result of the interactions of that system and the rest of the universe. In other words, every particle in the universe ultimately has an effect on every other particle.” Galileo was Wrong the Church was Right Volume I, pp.381
Posted 06/16/09 www.RemnantNewspaper.com) At a scientific convention in Chicago in 1980, over 150 of the world’s leading evolution experts faced the facts of the fossil record and virtually pronounced the death of Darwinism.
They admitted that after 120 years of digging, the fossil record showed that there are no fossil links between one species and another, i.e., there are no transitional fossils. Thus, it was acknowledged that there is indeed a genetic barrier between species which renders impossible the theory that mankind evolved from apes. These findings should have buried evolutionism forever as a serious scientific concept. Yet, the opposite has happened. Staggering numbers worldwide have continued to embrace evolution’s false doctrines in preference to scriptural and other evidence relating to man’s true origin. Writing in Nature, vol.123, evolutionist D.M.S Watson offers a typically atheistic, yet r
So as far as I know, I have not, and I will ever have offended any of the “Xanga” members. Nor ever I have said an offensive word to no one. I have dispelled all the doubts about my position as a religious person, and I will hold on fast on it. I don’t have knowledge or wisdom but, I have the ability to use “common sense.” As all the members on this site have different abilities to exchange with others. That it’s my aim: to exchange knowledge, and engage in sound arguments to sustain my premises, as all of you can do it. However, you’re free to discharge, or reject me as your friend. Feel free to do so. For I have the best friend, who will never abandon me: the Triune God in the Lord Jesus Christ. gene546
About the INERRACY of Sacred Scripture: Pius IX condemned the following motion: “The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the OT and the NT there are contained mythical inventions.” Pope Leo XIII: “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred.” Pope Pius X, condemned the notion: Divine inspiration does not extend to all Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts each and every one, free from every error.” Pope Benedict XV: “…the divine inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture without distinction, and that no error could occur in the inspired text.” 1964 Pontifical Biblical Commission: “…that the Gospels were written und
Let me bring some quotes from those who attack the view of the centrality of the Earth into the sphere of the universe: “We occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth…This hypothesis cannot be disproved.” Astronomer Edwin Hubble “The Earth is indeed the center of the universe. The arrangement of quasars on certain spherical shells is only with respect to the Earth…Consequently, both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for cosmological reasons. Astrophysicist: Y. P. Varshni “It might seem that if we observe all other galaxies to be moving away from us, then we must be at the center of the universe.” Physicist: Stephen Hawkins “I can construct for you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center and you cannot disprove it based observations. You can only exclude on philosophical grounds.” Physicist: F. R. E
Hello, Gene. I'm happy to know you. I'd first like to thank you for sending me your invite and allowing the opportunity for friendship. I appreciate your comment on my featured blog too. In case you didn't notice, I'm Jewish and, maybe you've also guessed from my ID, I support Israel. I too once had a dream of joining the rabbinate, but that turned out to become another fleeting moment in my life. I've been married almost 18 years now and have one son. One issue that I do agree with you on is on gay marriage. In fact, I wrote a blog about that not long ago: http://zionlover.xanga.com/702592962/gay-marriage-equality-or-anarchy Like you, I also believe that religion should be based on reason. So it seems we do have some basic things in common. Norm
In keeping with my customary approach to the Bible, I’ll quote some of the passages that hold the immovability and centrality of the Earth in the vastness of the universe. “Who shakes the Earth out of its place, and its pillars tremble; who commands the sun and it does not rise; who seals up the stars; who alone stretch out the heavens , and trampled the waves of the sea; who made the Bear and Orion, the Pleiades and the chambers of the south; who does great things without understanding, and marvelous things without number. Job 9:6-10 and also, therefore you say, “What does God know? Can He judge through the deep darkness? Thick clouds enwrap him, so does he not see, and he walks on the vault of heaven.” Job 22:13-14 He has described a circle upon the face of the waters at boundary between light and darkness. The pillars of heaven tremble, and are astounded at his rebuke. Job 26:10-11, now, some quotes from well known physicists: “We wouldn’t kn
“The Sols Scriptura is found in the OT” FALLACY In the OT God gave authority to the priesthood to interpret the law and issues binding doctrine based in those interpretations, even with regard to criminal and civil issues, both through Divine Revelation (cf. Lev. 20: 1-27, 25: 1-55), in the NT He endowed the Church with a charisma to teach infallibly. Deuteronomy 17: 8-12 states…gene546.