Their writings might not have had quotations in it. But I'm sure they understood that one could quote someone or write what someone else says and the importance of not distorting or changing what God told them to write. They say " the Lord says.....". Sounds a lot like quotes, whether they actually used quotes or not.
True, somewhat subjective...as all time is subjective or relative...like I have been saying. When I say literal, I mean in the relative/subjective sense that days occur to humans today. I agree time is a nonsensical concept to God, but He wrote the Bible and made the universe for us humans, and thus created a subjective time for us.
I actually have grown in this area. I was thinking to myself, how would I write about a flood if I was telling a story. If I just said, a big boat...well how big, elephant size, football field size etc. now that I know we are talking football field size, I know you meant big, even if that used measurements to make a figure of speech. Obviuolsy they didn't have football fields back then. Like if I was so hungry I could eat a horse....if you never saw a horse I would say, I was so hungry, I could eat a 7' long by 6' tall hunk of meat. Details make the story to emphasize how hungry I was.
So I am starting to look at some stories differently. Some unnecessary details become necessary for the story telling. But still some don't, like limiting 120 days. I'll open a new thread for that one.
The problem with usuing details to tell a story theory......is that you run yourself into the other biologos theory that is ruined by saying God is not deceptive. Where biologos believes that the earth could be ~5000 years old old 13.7 billion years of "false history" as you call it planted, which is ruled out because God is not deceptive.
But why is it deceptive for God to " plant false history" to tell a story, but it isn't for man to " plant false details?
Can you elaborate on this? Are you saying females have this? Or what other animals? Muscles help or bones move, don't reinforce, and fat cushions them, skin protects them. I'm not sure I know what you mean when you say reinforce them?
Not to measure time....but they are used in the atomic clocks, the quartz oscillators.
I am not debating the accuracy of atomic clocks it is an extremely accurate MEASUREMENT of time. But that is all it is doing, like an hourglass, measuring time. We just discovered that hour glasses measurements can be manipulated by different gravity, and we discovered a factor ( speed ) that changes the measurements of the atomic clock.
I know this, this proves what I am saying. So do Hafele-Keating experiments.
There are many many factors that our age is a measurement of and so many can be manipulated. The theory of relativity says basically, the faster you go, the slower time goes. The time of happening doesn't slow, just the time measurement that you are relative to. Atomic clock measurements slow, your aging slows, every measurement we know of slows, effectively time is slowing....but not the time of happening.
If you traveled a year at 95% speed of light, you would age 1 year, but the people of earth would have aged 3.2 years. 3.2 years is the time of happening.
To extrapolate this to my theory. God created the universe in 3.2 years, but in the time of happening, it only took 1 year. Or 13.7 billion years, it 7 days.
Again, not using the proper terminology from my first post has confused this some I believe. I should have used relative time and happening time from the beginning.
The reason an atomic clock moving faster ticks slower is because for it, time is slowing down, but it is really just the atoms slowing down, as it measures atomic oscillations. But the eaths revolutions around the sun didn't slow, the time of happening didn't slow, just the relative time to the object at that speed. Our time is relative to speed, and since on earth, we are basically all moving at the same speed, our time is the same. But even if you traveled 99% the speed of light, and relative time moved slower for you, the time of happening doesn't change.
We are subject to a relative time, as our planet, our solar system, and even our galaxy is moving at a speed. But God is outside of time and relatively, He is in the realm of time of happening. The beginning happened, the creation of the universe happened regardless of the earth revolving around the sun, regard
Less of an hour glass sands of time falling, regardless of a quartz oscillating, regardless of a cesium atom oscillating with a quartz oscillation feedback, time happens, history happened.
I know it is sci-fi, but you will never be able to time travel. You can go into the further possibly....by traveling fast enough that your relative time slows and when you stop the future is here, but you can never go back into the past, it happened. I would even guess that God cannot go into the past. But since He is outside of time and has no relative speed, And being all knowing, could have manipulated the past (when the past was present) to get the future outcomes He wanted. He can slow and probably stop time, but I don't think He can affect the past or change the time of happening. I see plenty of evidence of Him manipulating relative time, but not one of Him changing the time of happening or the past. Relative time as we know it began when In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, and all the laws of physics and relativity and energy as we know them today.
I absolutely agree, it is just my time lapse theory. I am fine if you don't believe in my theory. What I am more trying to explain is that you are not understanding my theory. I am debating you that time is relative and that atomic clocks measuremeasure relative time, not time of happening. Hafele-Keating experiments Prove that.
But again sorry, that is probably my fault for not using proper terminology to begin with.