The Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology community is an island of crazy all unto itself.
2 Likes
I haven’t been there myself and it’s not on any map that I have. Bottom line: I’m not interested in finding and exploring the island.
I am, however, intrigued by the Higgs Field, described in The Higgs Field, explained - Don Lincoln.
Don’t worry, I’m not asking you to answer any questions I might have. You have yet to demonstrate to me that you can dumb things down as well as Don Lincoln does, much less approach his staff’s video production skills.
Self depreciating humor for the win.
1 Like
I think the fact that Jesus forgave sins before the cross is evidence that the cross was not required for the forgiveness of our sins.
Some argue that Jesus paid for our sins on the cross, but forgiveness of a debt does not require or imply payment. In fact, if a debt is paid it does not need to be forgiven.
2 Likes
Yes, I COMPLETELY deny YOUR plan of salvation. I think it is nothing a concoction you have made up as a means of power and manipulation of other people. I will stick with God’s plan of salvation as described in the actual Bible which I have read for myself.
But this plan of yours is not in the Bible or the creed of Nicea 325 AD defining Christianity.
This is not part of the Bible or the definition of Christianity either. Comes from the book of Enoch which was rejected from the canon of the Bible, because historical Christianity has never bought into that explanation as justified by the evidence. Thus Christians have always been free to make their own decision about this.
I am reminded of the German-Soviet Non-Agression pact of 1939. People who claim to be complete opposites and enemies can agree on things that serve their own agenda of power and evil. So yes the extremists on both sides do not want a reconciliation between science and Christianity because one side wants Christianity destroyed and the other wants science destroyed. But both of these intellectual terrorist groups are simply being dishonest.
1 Like
Pretty sure I saw that article on The Onion.
They must have scooped BabylonBee.
1 Like
Evolutionary creationism , or Christians who accept evolution, is not rejected by most. Each year more and more Christians seem to accept it.
As mentioned Lucifer , from Isaiah, is simply a bad English translations of the KJV based off of the Latin vulgate. Those verses are not about angels.
With that said I do believe in actual spiritual beings like angels, demons and fallen angels.
So you base your religious beliefs only on the books Paul wrote…would that also includ the book of Hebrews which he did not write?
What about the beloved apostle…John? Do you not consider his writings also part of the gospel and that his statements are also descriptive of both the past and future narrative?
And that is why there is also a corresponding rise in scientific publications supporting YEC. It is specifically in response to the heresy of evolution. Movements such as Is Genesis History are a wonderful witness to the Christian view of our biblical origins as inspired by God and written by Moses. I think it a travesty when God’s inspired writings are rent in two by evolution that is very clearly not biblical.
I would be interested in reading the supporting evidence for this theology…are you quibbling about the way the name is translated, or using that as evidence for the denial of his existence and rebellion in heaven?
Could you provide supporting references for this…my understanding is that in fact the story of Lucifer’s fall from grace is actually illustrated quite clearly in Revelation…if it’s also found in the book of Enoch (a non canonical independent source), that actually adds a weight of evidence rather than detracting from it. I wonder, have you searched any early church writers to ensure that they do not also conflict with your belief on this? (Writers such as Origen, Pseudo Dionynisious, Gregory the Great)
Indeed some early groups such as the Cathars and Bogomiles believed Lucifer was involved in the earth’s creation! (Obviously this view fell out of favour but that is beside the point)
“First, . . . to want to affirm that in reality the sun is at the center of the world and only turns on itself without moving from east to west, and the earth . . . revolves with great speed about the sun . . . is a very dangerous thing, likely not only to irritate all scholastic philosophers and theologians, but also to harm the Holy Faith by rendering Holy Scripture false.”–Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615
5 Likes
I base the rationality of my beliefs first on Paul’s seven consensus letters, which, of course, don’t include Junia’s. Work of genius tho’ it is. As for ‘John’, I don’t do autographs. The synoptics of Quelle et al, and ‘John’ and Acts, the other epistles by Peter, Jesus’ two brothers, John (which?) all have less incontrovertible impact than Paul. I have no rational reason to believe in any prophecy - future narrative? - whatsoever, as Paul makes none at all, apart from vaguely, apocalyptically about being twinkled. Whoever wrote Revelation, whichever John it was in exile on Patmos, was writing of the time in apocalyptic. Like Daniel did before.
How’s that?
I linked this once before, but Wikipedia has a good discussion with references. Many of our common representations of Satan have more to do with Milton’s Paradise Lost than the Bilble. War in Heaven - Wikipedia
3 Likes
There is nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort.
If you don’t want me to edit your sentences like this then don’t edit mine in the same way.
I was waiting for you to make that claim. Cults always love to jump on Revelation to invent all sorts of nonsense. But the fact is that Revelation doesn’t support your story at all. Of course no such name as “Lucifer” is used for Satan anywhere in the Bible, but the name is not important – so this tradition of giving such a name to the angel identified with the serpent by Revelation is acceptable. But the story in Revelation is that this war in heaven takes place AFTER Satan seeks to devour the Christ child at His birth.
Hardly… LOL… noncanonical texts include all sorts of Gnostic gibberish and things quite incompatible with Christianity. Next you will be using the Quran to claim that Jesus did not die on the cross… is that why you take exception to the idea that the cross is important? Are you a Muslim? Or will you use the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Judas, or the gospel of Mary Magdalene too? LOL No, thank you!
Origen was also a supporter of Universalism. Are you a universalist? Perhaps you would like to call upon the Mormons too. They are great believers in a war in heaven before the creation of the Earth. No thank you. None of these have any more authority over Christianity than you do. Sharing your understanding or theirs is NOT required in order to be Christian.
1 Like
I mean just read the verses. I never mentioned anything about a rebellion. I clarified what the verses are about being mentioned.
Ahhh…… the H word. Y’all can’t ever go a minute without using. We’re not heretics. I’m not a heretic. I’m just not stupid. I understand more than 4th grade science. Ultimately Young Earth Theists and their beliefs are dwindling and Evolutionary Creationist are gaining momentum. I wonder if it’s the will of God. So many things coming to light recently in the last few decades. From environmentalism, social justice especially against marginalized people like the LGBT community and people of color. The popular vote is consistently headed in one direction. Accountability is being brought to the forefront.
1 Like
I don’t even know what the relevance of this quote even is here…its an absurd interpretation of my post.
Actually, the evidence is that the opposite is true…YEC is experiencing a revival thanks to Science from a Christian perspective. Thankfully we also have an ever-increasing number of secular scientists now recognizing the irreconcilable issues with the Darwinian theory who are jumping ship…the former curator of the Stuttgart state museum of natural history one of them.
Bechly was a staunch supporter of Richard Dawkins [9] and criticized Darwinism . Today he rejects naturalism and materialism and, with regard to biological origins, represents the intelligent design view with considerable doubts about the theory of evolution
The statement above is inaccurate…it is the Latin translation for the word heylel in Isaiah 14:12 translated by Herone in the 4th century Vulgate…one of the oldest complete manuscripts that we have today.
It does not change the fact that Lucifer was known as morning star, the covering cherub in heaven prior to his rebellion and that he was then known as Satan and the devil after he was cast to the earth.
The point I made concerning him is still theologically accurate.