Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Science can't say, one way or another. So, you have no evidence for same past claims. The evidence of a real spiritual element known to man, combined with the bible give us the different past and future. If you want to limit yourself to natural only science, you cannot know either way.blunthitta4life said:So what evidence is there that the universe was different (spiritual) before the laws of physics as we know came about?
The standard model requires that. But if the standard model is not required, we lose the need for the redshift interpretation!I don't think you understand redshift. Redshift is a concept itself that requires an expanding space. It is the space at which galaxies are traveling that is expanding.
ÃÂoppleganger said:Shouldn't any discussion, involving greater than light speeds involve Quatum Physics, String Theories, and Multi-Demensional Space?
Suggest what? You seem to think you have some valid point, spit it out. You see, if the quantum did, as many feel it does, involve waves coming from the future, and the past, this means they may have come from a different past and future! No wonder they seem kind of strange here!As well as the fact that these particles or waves can be present in two places at once? Which seems to suggest that ... brrrrriiinnng ..... Oh excuse me the phone BRB.
Balderdash. Show us the assumptions upon assumptions that lead to that claim. Have you seen this happen in the last hundred years??? Or does it depend of something millions of years in the imaginary making??SyntaxVorlon said:No it would not. Type Ia is an event where a neutron star in a binary system siphons off enough mass from its sister star to cause the neutron star to transition into blackhole form. The resultant nova exhibits the same spectra in every case and if I'm not mistaken it can be corroborated to black hole theories.
No, it does no such thing! Not even close. You simply put a little barrage of nonsense faith based claims together. More space does not mean expansion, does it? The hubble constant is rife with assumption! The distances also! Everything. A review is in order. How do you know that the wavelength shift was not a result of the split?The evidence this presents to expansion is the fact that for a distant galaxy with these events occuring, we can measure this spectra and observe the shift in wavelength caused by its apparent radial velocity and observe a greater shift in any more distant galaxy because the velocity of recession is v = H*d, that is the Hubble parameter times distance. The fact that there is more space between us and the second galaxy means that more space is expanding and thus gives us an apparent velocity between us and that galaxy.
Science can't say, one way or another. So, you have no evidence for same past claims. The evidence of a real spiritual element known to man, combined with the bible give us the different past and future. If you want to limit yourself to natural only science, you cannot know either way.
Balderdash. Show us the assumptions upon assumptions that lead to that claim. Have you seen this happen in the last hundred years??? Or does it depend of something millions of years in the imaginary making??
No, it does no such thing! Not even close. You simply put a little barrage of nonsense faith based claims together. More space does not mean expansion, does it? The hubble constant is rife with assumption! The distances also! Everything. A review is in order. How do you know that the wavelength shift was not a result of the split?
Yes, it has happened numerous times. With billions of galaxies and billions of stars it is almost a given that at least one is occuring right now.Balderdash. Show us the assumptions upon assumptions that lead to that claim. Have you seen this happen in the last hundred years??? Or does it depend of something millions of years in the imaginary making??
Yes, it does. That 'barrage of nonsense' was straight up cosmology. And the assumptions are reasonably few, and most of them are common assumptions about the way math works. Assumptions, I'll freely admit, but ones that, if incorrect, would probably mean the computer in front of you could not work.No, it does no such thing! Not even close. You simply put a little barrage of nonsense faith based claims together. More space does not mean expansion, does it? The hubble constant is rife with assumption! The distances also! Everything. A review is in order. How do you know that the wavelength shift was not a result of the split?
Seems to me you can't comprehend mine.blunthitta4life said:Nonsense faith based claims you say? It seems to me you are unable to comprehend SyntaxVorlon's response.
False! If you are talking about supernovae, (or etc) what we see is a record of things that already happened. Unless, you are talking about less then 4400 ly away!?SyntaxVorlon said:Yes, it has happened numerous times. With billions of galaxies and billions of stars it is almost a given that at least one is occuring right now.
I know, so??Yes, it does. That 'barrage of nonsense' was straight up cosmology.
And the assumptions are reasonably few,
False, explain that one. Computers do not depend on fairy tales, and the same past myth!!!!and most of them are common assumptions about the way math works. Assumptions, I'll freely admit, but ones that, if incorrect, would probably mean the computer in front of you could not work.
They do however depend on quantum mechanics working, through which the analysis of photons emitted by the excited states of different atoms(spectroscopy) is given its theoretical backing. So if quantum physics is wrong, then fine, we can't say that time extends past ~10,000 years when human history starts being recorded, but that means that we were awfully lucky to get digital electronics working otherwise.False, explain that one. Computers do not depend on fairy tales, and the same past myth!!!!
This doesn't even parse, slow down and explain why you believe my statement was false.False! If you are talking about supernovae, (or etc) what we see is a record of things that already happened. Unless, you are talking about less then 4400 ly away!?
Several of them are virtually unprovable, at least by Godel's theorem. But those same assumptions can be easily shown to be in use in the science that theorically backs up much of the technology we use today.But monsterously huge, and utterly unprovable!
But you only scratch the surface. Looking at the quantum level a little deeper, we see that more is at work, than just the laws of the natural universe.SyntaxVorlon said:They do however depend on quantum mechanics working, through which the analysis of photons emitted by the excited states of different atoms(spectroscopy) is given its theoretical backing. So if quantum physics is wrong, then fine, we can't say that time extends past ~10,000 years when human history starts being recorded, but that means that we were awfully lucky to get digital electronics working otherwise.
Modern physics describes the universe in such a way, that it is fairly simple to deduce its age, simply from the distances accross which light must travel at a specific speed.
But I accept all that, as far as it can be shown to apply. Your point is that, because it now applies, it always will, and did! Think about it. Ridiculous.Several of them are virtually unprovable, at least by Godel's theorem. But those same assumptions can be easily shown to be in use in the science that theorically backs up much of the technology we use today.
GPS for instance is utterly impossible without a great deal of quantum-mechanical knowledge and the ability to do transformations using general relativity.
But I accept all that, as far as it can be shown to apply. Your point is that, because it now applies, it always will, and did! Think about it. Ridiculous.
I don't NEED to make physics fit anything. You can't extend it into the past, so it matters not at all. There is no physics in heaven. We're better than that. The forever state rules. Physics is terminally ill, and quite dated. It is a fishbowl concept. You can't experiment with the spiritual, and the great beyond includes the spiritual. Your limits are clear and present.blunthitta4life said:And all you are doing making physics fit your personal interpretation of the bible. You haven't done a single thing to prove anything you've put forward: no experiements nor proofs. Think about it.
I don't NEED to make physics fit anything. You can't extend it into the past, so it matters not at all. There is no physics in heaven. We're better than that. The forever state rules. Physics is terminally ill, and quite dated. It is a fishbowl concept. You can't experiment with the spiritual, and the great beyond includes the spiritual. Your limits are clear and present.
There is no physics in heaven.
Physics is terminally ill, and quite dated.
You can't experiment with the spiritual, and the great beyond includes the spiritual. Your limits are clear and present.
The same or different past, either one, cannot be proved by science. That is the point.blunthitta4life said:So there is no scientific bases for your split theory then?
Yes, there is descriptions of heaven and the future, and today's physics don't apply!How do you know? Have you been to heaven? Is there biblical support for a heaven without physics claim?
I wasn't asking. I was telling. I know it works fine, thank you very much. But only in the confines of the present and a time period of several thousand years.Actually it is working quite fine. Thanks for asking.
So, the bible has weight, and what it says is important to many millions.
That is bible support, which is what is required for a bible case. You asked for bible passages.ÃÂoppleganger said:Ok..... so show me the bible passages that support your theory.
http://www.geocities.com/lovecreates/split.zip
This is your proof?!? This is PsuedoReligioScience at best! Theres more evidence for Atlantis than theres is for this!
Millions believe the bible, which means they believe in a spiritual. They also believe that this world and heavens, or universe will pass away. I kid you not. Ask around. Obviously, some new idea, like the different past state is not widely accepted yet. Why? -Because it is nor well know. The idea is solid biblically.You say millions of christians want to know, I seriously doubt that! You say that many christians hold your view! Theres way more evidence to support The Kaboe of Gen 1:2 than there is support for this, which from past conversations you don't believe in!
That's me, and yes, one could call it that.The author himself says its just a theory.
This aint hard scientific observable evidence.
Well, who cares what you believe? What is important is what the bible says, and what science can deal with, and what the evidence actually is. What it is NOT is a same past, that much is certain!Personally, I don't believe in this split merge theory, anymore than I believe Zeus or the fallen angels were gods. This is totally inconcievable that we went on for 7 pages plus of this stuff for this, what a scam.
I admit some of it is intriging, but hardly scientific. Who's to say the sun's light would be any different in the past or future than what its is already, when nothing compares to his glory, anyways.
There are many spectrums of light, and light wave frequencies.
Of course He did, but the question is when!!!?? If our present state universe came to be at the split, then that is when they came to be! NOT at creation. That puts us in a temporary physical only universe, different from the created state of the past, and from the new heavens of the future! Big news.God put the rules of nature, physics, etc ... in place why don't you play by them, instead of selling us your crap, Snake Oil Salesman!
At least I have a case. I don't worry about sticks and stones, only real evidence, and solid science and bible. Run along now Dopp. Find a minor league game somewhere.ÃÂoppleganger said:Your a nutcase DAD!
ÃÂoppleganger said:...empty blah..