truthsayer's tags:
truthsayer's most popular posts:
truthsayer reads (127):
Who's reading truthsayer (112):

Another Glance: Cosmic Cafe, Big Bang #2

truthsayer posted on Apr 27, 2007 | views: 605 | Tags: big bang, Science, bibles, quantum physics, cosmology, einstein, Relativity, little knives, universe
My Little Intro
 
Welcome back to my little Cosmic Cafe.  I have your usual table ready, please sit down after you leave your coat and your worries at the door with our hat check girl (borrowed from the Jetson's), Rosie.  May I draw your attention to the pastry bar, prepared by one of the sons of the sons of the sons of the sons (x infinity) of Gad ; )  Notice also the bottomless pots of coffee, tea and condiments.  Please help yourselves and if you will, in the true spirit of my Cosmic Cafe, please, help each other too. : )
 
In Part Four of Fred Alan Wolf's book, PARALLEL UNIVERSES, The Search For Other Worlds; I found this wonderful quote from another little cafe in our universe:
 
"IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS..."
 
In the beginning the universe was created. 
This has made a lot of people very angry
and been widely regarded as a bad move.
 
Douglas Adams
The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
 
A Glance At My Day
 
Today, I found myself commenting on SeanRenaud's blog, and he mentioned the Big Bang Theory in relationship to The Theory of Evolution.  It was a most interesting discussion however we were actually discussing science as it is currently taught in the public education system in America. 
 
At the time, I had no intention to blog today; well, it had crossed my mind to write about the Old Testament Sabbath (Friday sundown until Saturday sundown), and perhaps again on the American Sunday Sabbath...but I thought it was only my idea, so I awaited confirmation from my Lord.
 
I cannot really tell you what exact series of events lead me to the internet for the purpose of ordering more teaching materials...but, I did, and as I wrote down some "wish list" items on my legal pad, I saw some notes from a blog I had planned, but had forgotten to write.
 
So, I decided not to let the 'research' go to waste, and I did my Historical Trivia Quiz #2.  As I wrote that brief, but fun blog, I perused my entire notebook, and realized that I had not written anything in this Glimpse, Glance and Glimmer Series, in quite a while.  But I had nothing prepared!  So, I did what all good truthsayers do.  I prayed.
 
I asked God, in Jesus Name, if he wanted me to write the next blog in this series.  I had prayed earlier for a word of knowledge for someone, and He had lovingly, but humorously obliged me.  So, I waited.  I felt inclined to get my Parallel Universe book, and in regard to my prayer, I jokingly said:  Ok Papa, if You want me to blog on this topic, You must direct me to what You would have me write about! 
 
I had to laugh out loud at the page I opened up to!  It was this quote, and Wolf's discussion of the Big Bang Theory, which I had not even read yet when I wrote the previous Big Bang Blog!  Hey, that sounds like a great name for a cosmology blog....or a 1950's tune on the juke box!
 
How many glimpses, glances and glimmers did it take to get me here? 
 
Well, at least an infinity I would say ; )
 
Here Wolf's most general introduction is worthy of our discussion. 
 
I begin on page 171.
 
 
The Follow Up
 
Cosmology deals with the theory of the early unverse, how all that we can imagine as physical---matter and energy---first began about 15 billion years ago.  This theory has gone through a number of important changes.  We now realize that earlier theories of cosmology, even those that have included Einstein's throry of relativity, must still be wrong because they fail to include quantum physics in their deliberations.  By including quantum physics, we find strong and surprising evidence for the existence of parallel universes at the very beginning of time.
 
In Part Four, we will explore the ideas of cosmology including the ideas of quantum physics.  As we will see, cosmology---usually taken to mean the big bang, or sudden explosion at the beginning of time---as a theory without quantum physics has several inconsistencies.
 
These inconsistencies arise because cosmologists are attampting to fit Einstein's general theory of relativity together with Newtonian physics leaving out anything to do with quantum physics.  The whole question of how properties of matter arise as choices made by an observer is not answered if one leaves out quantum phusics.  If the universe arose in a specific energy state, then someone had to choose to observe the universe in an energy state.  But if the universe is all that there is, where and when did that observer occur?  If the observer is part of the universe itself, then how did the universe give birth to itself?  The only hope of reconciling these and other questions must include quantum considerations.  There is no hope of grasping the universe based solely on Einsteinian relativity and Newtonian mechanics.
 
Cosmology is based on a plain classical Newtonian fantasy.  This fantasy assumes that all matter behaves as if it were made of tiny pointlike particles that move through infinite space and time with predictable positions and speeds at each and every moment.  This fantasy, although quite useful when dealing with large amounts of congealed matter, such as baseballs and automobiles rolling through the streets, doesn't hold water when dealing with atomic and subatomic particles, particularly when they are being created at the time of the big bang.  Something more is required.
 
Nevertheless, the early theories of the big bang were based on classical physical concepts involving the theories of ordinary gas dynamics and thermodynamics.  According to these theories, the universe began as a point that exploded into an expanding fireball.  It is clear today that this early theory is inconsistent.
 
My Comments
 
Inconsistencies.  That word is used three times in this short excerpt from Wolf's book.  You mean to say that there are inconsistencies in science?  You mean inconsistencies don't mean that all science is false...it only means that we need to learn more, study more?  Hmmm, I wonder if we should apply that wisdom to the Bible as well.  Food for thought fellow think babies ; )
 
Anyway, I plan on posting part two of this particular blog sometime this weekend.  I just wanted you to know how much each of you means to the Creator.  That He has tens of thousands of "us" posted all around the planet, just for "you", who ever you may be.  There are many believers in and believers on Jesus Christ, but relatively few that are active in the five fold ministries.  There are more of the 'three fold' variety anyway ; )  (Ones that do not believe in prophets and apostles : ) But, I ask now for your open discussion and questions.  I confess that I find this exerpt to be self explanatory, but I do not expect that everyone else will see it as such.  Quite the contrary.  It is unusual information that most folks just aren't aware of.
 
So, now, with my cup of java, I sit across from you with your own CUPPA, at our little table in the Cosmic Cafe and I ask you:
 
Were you surprised at what the Big Bang Theory is, or was, and what it must become, in order to be considered a solid, comprehensive theory that is useful to understanding the beginning of our universe and perhaps, worthy of teaching to our children?  How do you teach a theory, if our knowledge continues to increase as fast it has, and as the Bible predicted that it would?   
 
How does this new physics, these quantum mechanics, change so many of our presently accepted 'theories' being taught in our schools?  Do you see any other holes in this particular theory?  What other theories would be affected by this observer effect?  Now many of you will say that it has no bearing on you what so ever.   I would suggest to you that it does.
 
Wolf goes on to explain how quantum physics has changed, and how we must change the way we perceive and study ourselves and our universe. 
 
I think you will find it most interesting, and actually, essential for us to at least be familiar with, as we head on towards our mutual future.
 
Peace be with you, fellow think babies, and now...I yield the floor.
 
copyright April 27, 2007, Truthsayer - Cosmic Cafe Series
 
 
 
 


send to a friend del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • truthsayer said on Apr 27, 2007....

    As usual, I think I found most of the typos...but if you find one, please tell me.  I just hate the little buggers!

    truth

  • SeanRenaud said on Apr 27, 2007....
    Ok, I'll bite, you did the same for me after all.  I'll start as I try to with people who have impressed me with a psuedo compliment.  Bravo, unlike 90% of Christians I've conversed with you've sucessfully separated the Big Bang from Evolution rather than trying to link them into a single mass that is difficult to defend as they are so wildly separate.
     
    You're statement on we need to read the Bible and apply more studyis precisely where my problem with non-fundamentalists comes in.  Given long enough and a ::giggle:: liberal enough translation we can find whatever we want in the Bible.  The thing is that usually the Bible is damn clear about what it means and its already been writen, and is claimed its own texts to be complete and irrefutable.
     
    Any scientist worth his salt knows enough to know thathe doesn't know everything.  Science is supposed to be full of holes, some of which may never be filled in.  The word of an omniscient being is supposed to be perfect.
     
    Not to mention that pesky problem of proving you chose the right religion, seeing how the big three are all rather clear on the your either with us or eternaly damned.  :-)
  • beyondtheveil said on Apr 28, 2007....
    truth- Early theories of cosmology were doomed from the beginning because Newtonian and Einsteinian physics deal solely with the macro world, a world that is already formed. Not only that, but there is a huge difference between these two physical views. Einstein's two relativity theories tore down Newtonian physics. The special theory alone delt a death blow to Newtonian ideas of time and distance.
     
    If you include the general theory, which delt a death blow to Newtonian ideas of space and gravity, it is difficult to conceive of how they expected to meld the two. None of these views delt with the formation of particulate matter in any concievable way.
     
    When you mention inconsistencies in science, I'll give you another recent example of this problem. Remember the old "ether" concept, from when, the 1700's? I have read and heard in several places where there are some who want to bring this concept back. There seems to be a problem with things, like light, propagating through space.
     
    But this is why I like science so much. Its like being a kid with a great big story book full of interesting fairy tales.
  • truthsayer said on Apr 28, 2007....

    Boy, I wish you would share that last paragraph with ed ; )

    I have no idea what I am doing up at this hour (2:20am), so this is just a courtesy response...real response to follow at a later hour ; )

    The word of God is perfect, just as 'nature' is perfect.  The word even says that it is the pleasure of God to conceal a matter and that it should please us to discover it.

    But, we are in the process of learning, about nature and God.  Genesis was written thousands of years ago, and says the earth is a sphere...yet look at how long it took us to 'discover' that the earth was not flat, but round...a sphere.

    The Bible is at least as complicated as DNA.  We know DNA exists, yet we learn more about its code all the time. 

    I just spent the evening and the early morning hours doing research, so I don't want to make any huge statements here as I have developed the skill of typing, even with my eyes closed...but, that doesn't guarantee the content! 

    I made that comment about reading the Bible, because I get tired of the circle-talk from others, just like you do.  I hear people say the entire Bible is obviously false because they see 'inconsistencies'.  Believe me when I tell you this, that we are each at different stages of spiritual development and we each have different abilities too.  It is hard enough explaining something to some Christians, try explaining it to a hostile audience that really doesn't care about anything other than, at worst, destroying your credibility, your character, etc. however they can; or, at best, holding on to their own belief system, no matter how frail it is, or how mislead they are.

    (breathe ; )

    I gotta get to bed.  My SO does not compensate for how much sleep I do, or do not get.  I am expected to rise early, no matter what ; )  Welcome to my blog Sean, I really appreciate your stopping in here.  I think that eventually, you may be pleasantly surprised.

    I found some very funny articles tonight (Of course I am verging on sleepy-punchy now ; )  I sent them to myself in email, for use later.  I also bookmarked them, in case you are interested at some point.

    Did you notice any problems with our current theories, in light of what we now know from quantum mechanics?

    Oh yeah...I don't use 'liberal' translations of the Bible...I don't find the Good News Bible very useful at all.  I think it is the most liberal one.  I use the KJV because I have a version that gives me a Strong's reference number, and I can look up the original Hebrew or Greek, word by word.  I also use several different versions of the Bible for a clearer understanding of what others say, and how they are translated...but that is part of my deep study and not applicable to most folks.

    Take care Sean, c'ya soon.

    truthsayer 

  • silverwhisper said on Apr 28, 2007....
    truthsayer, i'm very surprised that someone with your interest in scholarship uses the KJV considering it was produced using secondary rather than primary sources--the vulgate was after all a secondary source.

    i will return later when i have a little more time to read more fully and can comment more substantially, although i'd like to make a suggestion: make cosmic cafe a tag on these blog entries. those of us who might want to find all of the entries would have an easier time doing so if you tagged them all that way. :>

    ed
  • beyondtheveil said on Apr 28, 2007....
    Ed & truth- I like the tag idea. Although I've never used a tag, I'd use it on these blogs.
  • truthsayer said on Apr 28, 2007....

    Good idea ed.  I meant to go through and make all the titles consistent too.  There just doesn't seem to be enough room ; )  Putting it in as a tag is a much better idea.

    I use many different translations, as you know.  I said I use the KJV, because I can go directly back to the Hebrew and Greek.  I don't think I can get much farther back to the original than that, can I?  If I can, do let me know.

    Hey, since you two might still be on here today...It is very rare that I am able to get the search engine to work.  I love search engines, and use them all the time in my research.  I would like to use it on soulcast too, as you have just mentioned.

    What am I doing wrong?  I have never had to ask for help with a search engine before! 

    truth

     

  • truthsayer said on Apr 28, 2007....

    BEYONDTHEVEIL, you and I must have been commenting at the same time last night/this morning! 

    I am sorry it looked like I ignored you.

    The Copenhagen group still tries to combine relativity and classic physics.  They don't like infinities at all!  Remember that large objects still obey Newtonian physics.  It is just that the micro world seems to have a mind of it's own ; )  You mentioned the ether concept or theory?  I will have to look that up, as when I first started writing as truthsayer, some 11-12 years ago, I used to appear and disappear from the ether!  I thought it seemed to resemble a wave.  Now you have me curious...and that can mean more late nights ; )I too find science to be quite a wonder...as long as we maintain our humility and our sense of humor that is!

    There is another theory they have been talking about reviving.  Here's the quote:

    Well, scientists used to believe in Lamarkian evolution (where parents somehow “willed” their children to be better suited for survival) before they accepted Darwinian evolution. Now we are starting to hear theories about how bacteria can somehow consciously make their offspring evolve to resist antibiotics, so maybe Lamarkian evolution just lost a battle and will eventually win the war.

    For me, that is the learning process.  It is an adventure, when we set something aside, only to find later that it might be useful after all.  This is my fascination with science and faith.  My understanding and efficiency in using knowledge depends on my own growth (maturing process), my creativity, my inspiration, motivation and what I will to be and do with this one life that has been gifted to me. 

    Reality, what a blast! 

    truthsayer 

  • beyondtheveil said on Apr 28, 2007....
    truth- Whoa, now you've lost me. The Copenhagen Interpretation by Werner Heisenberg and Neils Bohr, two of the most instrumental in the development of quantum physics, says that there is no deep reality i.e. regardless of how deep you go into the atomic world there is no building block. How does the "copenhagen group", whoever they are, attempt to use classical physics? By the way, relativity is classical also.
     
    I believe ether was considered a wave form, but was dropped from physics around the turn of the century.
     
    Lamarkian evolution, which I'm unfamiliar with, sounds related to a study done in the South Pacific concerning monkeys on an island. One female monkey discovered if she washed a type of potato in the ocean it became fit to eat. None of the monkeys had eaten this potato before. The other monkeys watched her do this and within days they were all eating them. The remarkable thing about this was that other monkeys on different islands in the chain with no contact began washing and eating them too.
     
    Both Lamarkian evolution and this study in turn, seem related to the work of Rupert Sheldrake's theory of Morphogenesis.
  • mobil said on Apr 28, 2007....
    Truth:
     I've always thought it amazing that the Bible named the Earth
    as a Sphere hundreds of years before Columbus sailed the ocean.
     
    I always liked the Big Bang theory. In Genesis, God said; Let there be light"
    From what I understand of the Big Bang, instantly following the Bang, there
    was LIGHT, nothing but PURE LIGHT and for four billion years. NOW, that in
    and of it self says; When God says something, he means it......haha
     
    You talk as if time has a beginning, no, you said; at the beginning of time.
    This is foreign to me. Explain please what there was before time began.
    No clocks yes, but if God snapped his fingers and there was no one to
    hear it, did a second pass?
     
    I was interesting in articles in science also called the String Theory, which
    includes mico, or infinity to smallness, how tiny matter can go. To my
    simple mind it seems we take an atom, cut it in half and cut it in half again.
    It's only a matter of how small our knife need become.......thanks Truth
  • silverwhisper said on Apr 29, 2007....
    mobil, i'm unfamiliar with the scriptural passage to which you refer--if you could oblige me with a citation, i'd be most appreciative.

    ed
  • mobil said on Apr 29, 2007....
    SW:
    Genesis Chapter 1
    In the beginning God created the
    heaven and the earth.  john 1:1, 2
    2 And the earth was without form
    and void; and darkness was upon the
    face of the deep. And the Spirit of
    God moved upon the face of the wa-
    ters. Ps. 33.6; Is 40:13, 14
    3 And God said "Let there be
    light" and there was light.  2Cor.4:6
    4 And God saw the light, that it
    was good: and God divided the light
    from the darkness.
    5. And God Called the light Day
    and the darkness he called Night. And
    the evening and the morning were the
    first day.
     
    SW, this is how the bible begins, it's
    the first chapter in the book of Genesis.
    That's where you'll find it.
     
    I hope this is what you mean, cause I
    copied this from the bible and could see
    no other quote in what I wrote.
     
    On second thought, I bet you are talking about the bible claiming
    the earth to be a sphere? I'd have to dig for that one SW, I've seen
    it before and it's quite amazing when you think about it. If that's what
    you are talking about and I bet it is, because the let there be light
    thing is pretty widely known lol.
    Let's wait till Truth wakes up, she can point you to it in a hurry without
    my having to re-read the bible ok?
  • silverwhisper said on Apr 29, 2007....
    indeed, the sphere thing was precisely my intended meaning. thank you, mobil. i suppose we shall await our good host.

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on Apr 29, 2007....
    It actually says dome or firmament.  For the sake not debating semantics I won't point out that it doesn't really say sphere.  Its one of those, close enough sort of things.
  • truthsayer said on Apr 30, 2007....
    beyondtheveil, mobil, ed and SeanR:
     
    I will be back on tonight.  Gotta build a swing set/jungle gym now that it stopped raining...only have til' dark; but I will be back.
     
    Quickly:
     
    mobile, ed and SeanR:  I am pretty sure that verse is in Job.  But I have to look it up again too.  Sometimes, well, often, the Hebrew provides a more specific meaning.  I'll check that too. 
     
    beyond I think I made a typo.  Misstyping too fast for my own good. I shouldn't rush on topics such as this.  I'll reread/rewrite later too.
     
    Thank you and I'll be back,
     
    truth
  • SeanRenaud said on Apr 30, 2007....
    Genesis
  • SeanRenaud said on Apr 30, 2007....
    Bloody hell I swear I only get cut off when I don't C&P which has become a habit.
     
    Short answer.  Genesis 1:6 (interestng that the last post ends with 1:5) uses the term dome or firmament in the two translations I've read.  I'll give benefit of the doubt and say that was the Bible saying round world though I would like a better verse.
  • truthsayer said on May 01, 2007....

    First, my friend beyondtheveil, who frequently seems to by typing at the exact same time as me, and has twice now, almost been missed!

    Here is a quote from Wolf's book, Parallel Universes, to try to explain how I understand Bohr and the Copenhagen Group, to be related to classical physics:

    In the parallel universe model we dispatch with all of thisuncertainty by putting all possibilities in separate but equal paralel universes.  And we also put the observer of the coin (an example which they use to explain parallel universes, as representative of the object being observed by the observer) in each of those universes observing the chosen attribute.  This wasn't necessary in the Bohr Copenhagen way of seeing things.  There the observer always ixisted in a classical Newtonian universe---this one!  When the ovserver saw the object, the object instantly took on a value associated with what was seen.  This is no longer the case in the parallel universes way of seeing. 

    In the margin of my book, by the first paragraph of page 84 (which actually starts on page 83), I have written my notes so that I remember this:  "The difference btwn Bohr/Copenhagen and parallel universes."

    There is one more short paragraph which might be of interest to you.  It is the next paragraph:

    Noe, this is a little bit tricky.  There is, as far as the observer and the con are concerned, only one observer and one coin.  Each universe represents a possible relationsip between the observer and the coin.  There are four possible relationships:  (Then it goes on to explain these four possible relationships)...

    So, as I understand it, the observer and the measurement device, be it a microscope, or whatever, always remain in this universe because we/they are large objects which obey classic Newtonian physics, while the small objects they observe obey quantum physics.

    I am so glad that I can live by faith, and that I do not always have to have all of the answers before I can proceed.  Since I live by faith, and not by sight, I am free to read science and marvel at the discoveries, but, I do not have to prove them, you know?  Like someone in here said, the more we know, the less we know that we know ; ) Or, the more we know, the more we know we need to learn : )  Either way, science should humble us.

    Thanks for making me look that up again.  It always helps when I have to make sure of something I have said.  It is a humbling experience too.  Thanks beyond.

    I am looking forward to rereading Lamarkian evolution.  I think my mentor mentioned it at the same time we were learning about synchronicity.  This happens in The Way all the time.  We tend to take it for granted now, but clearly, we should not.

    Thanks again.  Great discussion.

    truthsayer

     

     

     

  • truthsayer said on May 01, 2007....

    Greetings mobil:

    Yes, I have found the big bang theory especially interesting since they discovered that quarks were sound.  And as believers, we know that although God had it all planned in his boundless and perfect mind, when he speaks it, IT HAPPENS!!!

    You might find it interesting that in the original Hebrew, God said, Light BE! 

    I think that is so simple and yet so powerful.  We humans, especially in English, tend to use so many words.  There is something so raw and primal about God, that all he has to say are two little words, and it is.  It adds whole new meaning to 'His word cannot return void'...don't you think?  Like you said, 'when God speaks, he means it.'

    Your question about 'at the beginning of time' was a quote from Wolf's book.  My own perception of time is a little different.  Remember when buck__rooster pointed out an apparent inconsistency on my first big bang blog, or the Einstein one maybe??? 

    Anyway, I was discussing time and space as a single concept (developed by Eintstein) as spacetime.  I didn't even get into 'matter' yet.  It was already confusing because I said God exists outside of spacetime...that was not explained well. 

    God is the original, the first, the beginning of everything, and yet, he is the totality of everything...he is the Alpha and the Omega.  He knew in his boundless perfection, that we would need both space and time, as constucts and as a way to understand our reality, and our place in his plan.  That is how I came to understand time and space, or spacetime, and God's place in my universe.  He uses time, he invented time, it is both for our understanding of life, and, he is bigger and better and more, as the sum of the parts of the system.  He is the whole, that is greater than the sum of its parts.

    When did we become aware of time?  That is different for everyone I suppose.  There will be as many opinions, or perceptions of that as there have been humans...and that includes those who ever will be.  Time, as we measure it, began, I suppose when God made the sun and the moon, which is how we measure our days, hours, etc.

    But, we weren't even formed yet.  So, we were not observers yet.  Perhaps before we were here to observe time, it existed in God's time.  I cannot say for sure.  We know that time will exist, and thus, it will still be necessary at least until after the millenial reign of Christ is ended.  Then the Bible says that satan will be loosed again, for a time.  So, it will still exist, and therefore be needed for our understanding, until that 'time' is ended.  After that, it does not say.  I think we will have new needs by then.  It will be a 'time' of fulfillment; perhaps before a new story is told.  Only God knows.  I am just glad that you and I are a part of his plan. 

    I think one of the most interesting things about the passage of time in the Bible, is that there was more than one creation.  In Genesis 1:28, God says:  And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of th esea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    Note that it says replenish...that means that it must have been 'plenished' before!  Who knows how much time there was between creations.  I guess God, like a good parent, doesn't have to explain everything to us all at once! 

    Personally, I always tell my children, when they are trying to use my good nature and the fact that I am usually willing to explain things to them...to get what they want, when they want it...I say:  'I can choose to explain things to you, that is my right; you may ask me to explain things to you, that is the priveledge I have granted you; but I have the right to refuse!   If I decide to explain things to you, please remember to consider it your priveledge and your duty to listen.  ; )  They are usually smiling and nodding long before the reminder is stated!  Sometimes, my silence is a better answer than giving them an answer they cannot possibly understand.

    On that blog about George Washington Carter (historical trivia quiz #2), Dr. Carter had originally asked God to reveal the secrets of the universe to him.  God told him that he could not possibly understand.  So Dr. Carter said, 'ok, then reveal the secrets of the peanut to me', and God obliged him.  No doubt he was smiling with pride at Dr. Carter's humble question.  At least, I think he was ; )

    Anyway, I think time and space, or spacetime, exist for our understanding...not for God's understanding.  It has utility for our relationship to God and each other...for all humans that ever were or ever would be.  It binds us in a way, so that we can benefit from the experience of others, and so that we can know how fleeting this one chance, this one life truly is.  Wait until you get into parallel universes though.  it can provide a way of helping us Christians to understand people that are fascinated with reincarnation and the like.  But, once again, I digress ; )

    I have yet to refresh my memory on String Theory.  I already know that God is the Unified Field Theory...but, they will keep studying and looking, until the right 'time' for their understanding, I suppose.

    Great stuff mobil.  And thank you for helping ed when I wasn't here. 

    We are One in Christ,

    truthsayer 

     

     

     

     

     

  • truthsayer said on May 01, 2007....

    Silverwhisper:

    There are many references and I will gladly list a few.  Unfortunately, there is much debate over this word, and like SeanR's wisdom reminds us in his own words, and the Bible warns us repeatedly...we must not get caught up in the arguments and run the risk of straining a gnat while we are willing to swallow a camel.  Folks debate these things all the time.  It often wearys me.

    I even tried to reach the children's former Hebrew teacher, to get a quote from him, like a good little blogger and former journalist!  But I don't think this number is current.  Then I thought I would link you to the Hebrew online translator I used to use, but I couldn't find it.  I am on the laptop at home now, and it is not bookmarked on here.  It is on my big computer at the office.

    So, I tried to offer you more.  I could not.  I will be blogging about Job 38 later however, and I hope to provide some more details there.  In the meantime, here are several of the Bible verses (but I didn't write them all down):

    Isaiah 40:22; Job 26:7; Proverbs 8:26-27; Genesis 1:6-7, and 14-17. 

    There are many others.   As you know, there are many versions of the Bible.  Some translate that word to be 'firmament' or 'dome' as SeanR accurately explains.  Some say 'flat-round', some say circle, some say compass, some say sphere...this is why I wanted to provide the modern Hebrew word as well as the one in Strongs.  I cannot even seem to find my Hebrew Bible/Messianic Bible. 

    Some say that all nations believed in a flat earth...frankly, I feel sorry for the 'flat earth' folks...I have no idea how they even got started.  There is plenty of historical literature saying that ancient astronomers just about every where, as early as 600 BCE knew that the earth is round.  They knew this merely by observing an eclipse.

    I find Job 38 to be awesome.  Job is often supposed to be one of the oldest books of the Bible.  I don't want to debate when it was written, I leave that to the true Bible scholars to debate amongst themselves...not for us peons (is that spelled right? ; ) on soulcast to debate on my blog. 

    When I write out the text, if I actually do the blog, might interest you.  Of course, it occurs to me here that if it does interest you...you will surely read it as soon as you can!  Job has very special meaning to me, personally....but the description given by God, of his creation, is amazing:  poetic yet full of beautiful, or if you prefer, elegant details.

    Is there anything else I can do for you at this time ed?

    truthsayer

     

     

      

  • silverwhisper said on May 01, 2007....
    you know i'll read it with great interest, truthsayer. i shall investigate those links at my favorite scripture site.

    i shall think upon my findings.

    ed
  • truthsayer said on May 01, 2007....

    That is interesting SeanR.  I have noticed several interesting things in this discussion.  And thank you too, for providing references and explanations for ed, while I was gone.  I wish I really spoke Hebrew, but I always have to remind myself that it was a language lost, and only fairly recently revived.  I often go to the Aramaic, on Syriac websites.  Perhaps I will find a better definition of the word there.  I will mention that one of it's root words also means to move around in a circle and 'revolve'...I thought that was cool.  I found the meaning of that one word, to provide quite a mental picture of my planet both moving around in a circle and revolving as well.  But I get a lot of detailed mental pictures!

    Thanks again for being here with the references and the ensuing discussion.  Do read Job 38, if you are interested...I would love to hear your response to the detailed descriptions in God's response. 

    One of my favorite quotes is in Job, although I cannot at this moment remember which chapter and verse.  Once when I was going through this huge battle between my dad and my siblings, they had transferred their hatred for him, onto me, and Dad's attornies asked me how I could bear it.   I responded with this verse that just floated out of my mouth without even knowing where it was in the Word, but trusting that it was...and when that happens, and it is a verse I am not even familiar with...it is hard to explain, but it is like a message to me, even though I am the one saying it, he is also talking through me:

    Tho he slay me, yet will I trust him.

    One of Dad's attornies started crying, the male attorney teared up too.  It was quite a spiritual battle for all of us. 

    So good to see you here, and hear your contributions Sean.

    Blessings,

    truthsayer

     

  • truthsayer said on May 01, 2007....

    Note to beyondtheveil:

    I am sorry, I didn't proof read that comment at all...I wish this blog had an edit function for comments that was always available to the author of the blog!  I left you all waiting for a long time, so I wanted to get everyone attended to.  Sorry for the typos.  I hope you can wade through them.

    truthsayer

  • SeanRenaud said on May 01, 2007....

    It was already confusing because I said God exists outside of spacetime...that was not explained well. 

    It doesn’t need an explanation, it’s the same concept as a video game.

    .  1:28, God says:  And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of th esea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    Note that it says replenish...that means that it must have been 'plenished' before! 

    I call typo, mis-translation, misunderstanding on this one.  In the beginning means in the beginning, by very definition there can be nothing before the beginning.  Particularly in a tale designed to explain where everything came from.

      There is plenty of historical literature saying that ancient astronomers just about every where, as early as 600 BCE knew that the earth is round.  They knew this merely by observing an eclipse.

    Not that I’m doubting this but I can’t figure out how eclipse=round earth rather than what it is, object passes between you and your light source.  Also, not a peon.  :-P

    Job 38= A long winded version of, who the fuck do you think you are!?

    Very well written though.

    Since we are playing Bible Trivia (A game that for an atheist I excel at, its been while, even amongst Christians where I’ve had to admit I’m a bit out of my depth.  So if I revert occasionally to calling you stupid poopy head it’s because I’m sorta unfamiliar with being on defense in this field.)  Let me put verse out and ask what your take is on it.

    Genesis 3: 22: Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" – New Revised Edition

    22 Then the Lord God said, “Look, the human beings[e] have become like us, knowing both good and evil. What if they reach out, take fruit from the tree of life, and eat it? Then they will live forever!” New Living Translation

    22And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: -- King James Version

    Two specific questions come to mind.

    1.      What was meant by we have become like him and why was this a bad thing?

    2.      Why here does God seem to be speaking as if he had equals?

  • beyondtheveil said on May 02, 2007....
    truth- In reference to your answer concerning parallel universes as opposed to the Copenhagen Group.
     
    I have problems with first, parallel universes. That implies to me, different places. There is no such thing as "places" or "over there". There is no time or distance in reality, in fact, there is no time or distance at the speed of light. And we live in the midst of all of this.
     
    I'm also beginning to release the concept of dimensions. I prefer to look upon dimensions or multi-universes as differences in the vibration of the manifestation of motion.
     
    Second, Wolf and the group are assuming there is a classical universe. There is no classical universe. I believe that has been proven with existing theories and experiments.
     
    Remember, everything we see, hear, touch, feel, think and experiment with is historical. There is absolutely nothing in life experience that is in the "now" moment. Our entire life is lived after the fact. What this means, truth, is that nothing is real as we think of it.
     
    This brings me back to my belief that the "God consciousness" is all that exists. It shows itself to us as motion, or change- same thing. Our "physical" world is an after the "now" view from mediocre senses. Death is a vibrational change, and we re-assimilate with the consciousness.
  • silverwhisper said on May 02, 2007....
    truthsayer:

    i've investigated the scriptural citations you provided. all quotations are from the KJV:

    isaiah 40: 22 quoth:
    it is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

    job 26:7 quoth:
    he stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

    proverbs 8: 26-27 quoth:
    while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. when he prepared the heavens, i was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

    genesis 1: 6-17 quoth:
    and god said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 and god made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 and god called the firmament heaven. and the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 and god said, let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 and god called the dry land earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he seas: and god saw that it was good. 11 and god said, let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 and the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and god saw that it was good. 13 and the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 and god said, let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 and god made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 and god set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

    in all of this, only isaiah 40:22 seems to meet the criteria to which mobil referred (the word sphere or its like) IMHO. proverbs 8:27 gets near to it but to me, requires a certain degree of willingness on the reader's part to take the meaning that mobil does.

    yet even with all of this, isaiah 40:22 seems to my way of thinking to be a metaphoric usage of the word "circle" than a literal one. the bible also speaks of the four corners of the world, implying a square or rectangular map of the world.

    sorry, gentlemen, but to me, scripture does not bear out the inference of the world being round.

    ed
  • mobil said on May 02, 2007....

    Yeah, at this point I would have to agree. It's been many years, but

    I may have heard sphere in a sermon, rather than read it. So far,

    sphere seems a stretch in interpretation doesn't it?

  • silverwhisper said on May 02, 2007....
    well, it's entirely possible your recollection is based on a different translation, mobil. perhaps it's out there and we just haven't found it yet?

    ed
  • beyondtheveil said on May 02, 2007....
    Ed- The "circle of the earth" is a good argument for the believers. The circumference of the earth was calculated almost perfecty in ancient times. Was it Archimedes? If so, that would be around 250B.C.
     
    Also, the "four corners of the world" does not necessarily imply a flat earth. We use square and rectangular maps now almost exclusively, stating a sphere. I think the four corners is stated as we would say "the four directions" or "the four seasons".
     
    Just a thought.
  • silverwhisper said on May 02, 2007....
    beyond: except that the jewish bible predates archimedes by what, two milennia or so? and i agree that it's entirely possible the usage there is metaphoric. that was my intended meaning when i said "isaiah 40:22 seems to my way of thinking to be a metaphoric usage of the word "circle" than a literal one. the bible also speaks of the four corners of the world, implying a square or rectangular map of the world."

    ed
  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    I am here now.  I have to answer SeanR's separately...but since you are all here now...I will add my 2 cents.

    Since the Hebrew language was only recently revived; there is still debate on many of the ancient meanings.  That probably accounts for some of the different translations (which is why I always look at as many as I can, for perspective).

    A young Jewish man tutored our children in Hebrew.  He told us the Hebrew word for either sphere, or orb and gave a brief tutorial at the church we both attended at the time.  I have a few emails out to people that speak Hebrew, and I found someone right here on soulcast too.  I posted a comment and question to their blog (they live on the Sea of Galilee and say that they are translators as well as other talents, giftings, vocations)...but they have yet to reply.  Their nick on here is Trinov.  You might want to look them up...if they check their blog for comments, and respond, they could be an exciting resource for all of us.

    Sphere probably came from some of the descriptions I listed above.  I cannot find an online translator that does not require download, but is more of a search engine.  I will have to go to the office to find it.

    Anyway, good discussion.  I think circle, compass and circuit may refer to more than we understand here.  I don't know where they got the flat-round, description.  I am thinking dimensionally as well...probably my quantum physics literature creeping in again ; )

    The one that says 'compass on the face of the deep' is intriguing because deep obviously implies depth, as opposed to flat...and the face would carry the meaning of the surface of that depth.  (Proverbs)

    The book of Job is full of natural meaning.  Did anyone read Job 38 besides Sean?  Hanging the earth upon nothing, doesn't sound 'flat', but then I am very abstract, and not very linear...thus these things are not the same for me, as for most folks.  Linear thinking is the norm for sure; and very hard for me to understand.  

    Likewise, firmament is translated in Strong's (7549, raqiya, pron'd raw-kee-ah), and means an expanse, i. e. the firmament or visible arch of the sky: - firmament.  So, I guess this implies at least a visible half of a roundness ; )

    I will let you know when I get the answer to my question in email, or on that blog.  Or...if I get into the office before heading out of town again.

    brb...

    Thanks for the input folks. 

     

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    researching the history of pi...

     

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    ...as squaring a circle...you guys are going to think I researched this on a Christian website, but I didn't.  I don't know if it's Christian or not.  I just searched for 'the history of pi'. 

    Here is the text, and I will post a link afterwards, if you are interested.

    A history of Pi

    A chronology of Pi History Topics Index

    Version for printing

    A little known verse of the Bible reads

    And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it about. (I Kings 7, 23)

    The same verse can be found in II Chronicles 4, 2. It occurs in a list of specifications for the great temple of Solomon, built around 950 BC and its interest here is that it gives π = 3. Not a very accurate value of course and not even very accurate in its day, for the Egyptian and Mesopotamian values of 25/8 = 3.125 and √10 = 3.162 have been traced to much earlier dates: though in defence of Solomon's craftsmen it should be noted that the item being described seems to have been a very large brass casting, where a high degree of geometrical precision is neither possible nor necessary. There are some interpretations of this which lead to a much better value.

    The fact that the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle is constant has been known for so long that it is quite untraceable. The earliest values of π including the 'Biblical' value of 3, were almost certainly found by measurement. In the Egyptian Rhind Papyrus, which is dated about 1650 BC, there is good evidence for 4 cross (8/9)2 = 3.16 as a value for π.

    The first theoretical calculation seems to have been carried out by Archimedes of Syracuse (287-212 BC). He obtained the approximation

    223/71 < π < 22/7.

    Before giving an indication of his proof, notice that very considerable sophistication involved in the use of inequalities here. Archimedes knew, what so many people to this day do not, that π does not equal 22/7, and made no claim to have discovered the exact value. If we take his best estimate as the average of his two bounds we obtain 3.1418, an error of about 0.0002.

    Here is Archimedes' argument.

    I hope the links in the text work.  I have to post this comment to see if they work.

    truth

  • silverwhisper said on May 02, 2007....
    truthsayer, round <> sphere.

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on May 02, 2007....
    The hell do alligators kissing have to do with a damned thing?
  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    Yes, they work.

    Sorry for the interruption, I just noticed that you all were comparing the references to corners, which made me think of squares in reference to the words we have been discussing...suddenly I pictured the old diagram of a square in a circle/circle in a square...then I made the association to sphere, cube and thought of volume....anyway, I think like that and had to follow it.

    Anyway, back to the comments at hand.  I think I'll take them on one at a time.

    beyondtheveil...you might be surprised to know that your description of beliefs/understandings are very close to my own.  Parallel universes are one way of discussing things that we do not clearly understand...but many feel that they merely confuse the issue more. 

    I have never seen things as solid, but as vibrating and the frequencies would determine for me their differing states of apparent solidity....or something I think of as density, for the sake of discussion.  Those things that are vibrating at a slower speed would appear to be more dense.  When I wrote the blog, You Don't End At Your Skin...that is the best way that I can describe humans, as I see them. 

    It certainly is hard to put what I see, into terms that most people can understand.  I quit trying for a very long time.  It was just like this secret communication I had with the Creator, and I left it at that.  The chair of physics in Columbia, MO helped me a lot though.  And fired up my interest in quantum mechanics again.  I am supposed to visit the local university this month, and visit with a few people.  They assure me that they are well past calling me crazy now ; )  I'll believe it when I see it!  Ironic, isn't it?!  ; )

    There is a quote from Wolf that offers a similar conclusion to yours...about us experiencing what has already occured in what we call the present.  He finds it disturbing however.  I should look for that, you would like it.  I think it is something to the effect that the use of parallel universes is to experience all possible outcomes at once...which he fears takes away free will, or freedom of choice.  But I know this to be true, that reality as we believe it to be, is rarely, if ever what it truly is.  That is why I remain humble and awed.   The only real difference in you and me is that I have a personal relationship with God and have spent a long time reading his letters to us, with him.

    Great discourse.  Thank you so much.

    truthsayer

     

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    Genesis 3:8 has always made me wonder if some alternate reality was created when Eve and Adam disobeyed God.  Not that he didn't know they would do it, but the fact that they could only hear him, and not see him...yet it says that God was walking in the garden. 

    Ah well...interesting to ponder such mysteries.  I do love a good mystery. : )

     

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    Hi mobil. 

    Thanks for commenting again.  Don't give up yet, as ed knows from his father in law...preachers often use other information, especially in the translations and from linguistics to bring depth and dimensional understanding to their sermons(no pun intended ; )

    truth

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....
    ed, if you are referring to the area of a circle compared to the volume of a sphere...I think I got that a long time ago ; )  But thank you anyway.  truthsayer 
  • mobil said on May 02, 2007....
    Not giving up, this is interesting.....thanks truth
  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    Hi Sean. Now that you are here, I am ready to answer your questions. First, thanks for asking them. Biblical Trivia huh? I like that.

    Anyway, Genesis 3:22

    Remember in Genesis 1:26 when God says 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and lethem rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air..." and Genesis 1:27 when it says, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."

    One of the problems that I acknowledge with translations, is that certain key words were translated differently at different times. It isn't a problem to me, because I go back to Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek. But for discussions like this, it matters.

    There is a term for God that isn't used as often as it should be in the translations. When I use that word for God, it really visibly unnerves my Jewish friends, because it can be associated with the Christian, 'Holy Trinity.' That is the word used when God is used in the plural: ELOHIM. Elohim is the God of 'let us'...Don't confuse this however with The Lord Your God Is One...because he is.

    One is unity, perfect union...so perfect that two, or three become one, or One. In quantum physics, self-consistency is the principle that although the universe may be quite bizarre, making no sense when witnessed from a narrow or rigid perspective, it yields predictions that are consistent with each other. In other words, any principle of physics that may be strange, but to be consistent it can't make a prediction that would violate its own principle. Thus a chain of logic that leads from an original statement to a sequence of statements that contradict the original statement wold not be self-consistent.

    It reminds me of Jesus and the Father being a witness to each other. God cannot violate his own commands or his own word. So, back to Genesis 3:22 and your questions:

    Two specific questions come to mind.

    1. What was meant by we have become like him and why was this a bad thing?

    Being sinless, as we were first created by him, is perfect. But Eve sinned, then Adam sinned too. Eve was tempted to doubt God. She was tempted even with an honorable goal, as your first question implies. It is a good thing to want to be like God...it would be a good thing to accomplish being like God. But satan tempted her with the wrong method...it was supposed to be immediate, and it required sin/disobedience to God, in order to achieve the goal of becoming like him. I have a riddle that I call an infinite conundrum that illustrates this argument that satan used. Unfortunately, it is infinite, but it is infinitely wrong, instead of being infinitely right. One can go off 'forever' in the wrong direction as easlily as one can go on forever in the right direction. I think I'll post it on a blog.

    God did not want us to eat of the tree of life, eternal life, while still being in a state of sin, or separation from God. He had a plan, and we had to walk it out, in order that we should be redeemed from sin, and restored to him. His plan far exceeds satan's plan, as you will see. We also had to learn from our mistakes by living the consequences of our sin.

    At this time, satan can only cause us to doubt, through carefully constructed lies, stories and deceptions. We have to be participants with his deception, or else he has no power over us. Once you are willing to see the lie for what it is, you are freed from the grip of the 'infinite conundrum'.

    There was a line in the Bible that used to haunt me. It said that satan held the prisoners captive, and would not let them go free. I have to find the exact verse.

    There was another verse that haunted me. It said that satan held even Christians captive at his will. I hated those two verses, but knew that they were true and I needed to understand them.

    The questions you have brought up here are at the root of those other two verses that I mentioned. But that is another topic.

    Did I sufficiently answer your first question Sean?

    2. Why here does God seem to be speaking as if he had equals?

    John tells us that in the beginning was the word. The word was with God and the word was God.

    Jesus tells us that if we have seen him, we have seen the Father.

    The Roman guard had more faith than the disciples did when he told Jesus that he didn't have to come to his house in order for his beloved servant to be healed...he also said 'when I send one of my soldiers, they speak for me and they do my bidding' (paraphrased). This really impressed Jesus because the disciples were still trying to figure out that God sent Jesus to do his word, his bidding and be his perfect representative on earth. Jesus praised the guard and in so doing, rebuked his own disciples. Of course the servant was healed just as the guard had believed and had faith that he would...without Jesus going to him in the physical.

    When I refer to the Holy Spirit, I say The Father, The Son, and their Holy Spirit...I see that as where they are all One. Does that make sense to you? They are in perfect balance, perfectly complimentary, etc. Also, there are the elders... I forgot to mention the elders in heaven. They are in the constant company of God. Also, there are the cherubim, the seraphim, the thrones, etc...they are also always near God...some are in constant company with him. The arch angels are for battle and protection. But I am sorry that I didn't include that in the Elohim explanation as well. We could not possibly understand heaven in earthly terms...but he does give us a "glimpse" ; )

    Did I answer the second question to your satisfaction? I can take a little longer and provide the Bible verses if you would like. I wouldn't mind at all.

    Let me know if you have other questions as well. It is my good pleasure to discuss them with you. I enjoy our discussions.

    truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    Wow...I found a cool way to fix typos in my own blog at least. 

    See ya later guys.

    truth

  • SeanRenaud said on May 02, 2007....
    For circular logic the first answer is amazingly clear and will require some extra reading on my part.  As I said its quite exciting and pleasant to find someone who's knowledge of the Bible dwarfs my own, and you understand science beyond a 5th grade level, you understand that you can't possibly be real right?
     
    The second answer is a little less clear but honest it may just be a problem with translations or something that will never be known, atleast not from the cannonical Bible alone which judging from your understanding of the heirarchy of angels suggests you have some knowledge of. 
     
    While your explanation of 3=1 is sufficient I've always had a problem accepting three separate and distinct entities, all capable of communicating with each other, and as evidenced in garden prior to capture they are separte enough that they require to communicate.  If God is capable of mind reading ( A power that seems to come and go at random, same as his ability to effect a person's decisions diretly seems to ebb and flow wildly) her certainly doesn't seem to with his only son.  (Though to be honest I'm not sure why Adam doesn't count as a son :-P)
     
    I don't know if you do this so if not I apologize for this question.  How do you rationalize the 7 days theory with the science.  I've heard that it roughly follows evolution but honest birds and fish on the same day and then everything else doesn't really follow evolution.  The only things that are right is fish-land animals-man.  I could probably roll dice and get it properly, and a very eloquent man in a Guy Fox mask told me that God doesn't play dice.
     
    I've also heard people say that we couldn't comprehend how long it took so he broke it down but when we can't comprehend someting God seems willing to put it into terms that we can comprehend.  He might not say 4.5 billion years. . .He'd say something along the lines of days beyond counting, all the grains of sand, the stars in the sky and blades of grass in the field wouldn't amount to what it took to get here.  99.99999% of the time God says what he means no?
  • truthsayer said on May 02, 2007....

    First let me collect myself.  Very funny start Sean.  I am impressed (still laughing) with you as well.  I just read your statements on the Pelosi thing.  mobil was right.  That comment was pretty good.  But you have been in the Marines, right?  So you understand some things that bloc and LJ couldn't possibly understand. 

    That makes me think of something.  I am not answering your questions in order, but sometimes things happen that way ; )  You know one of the most powerful metaphors (and historical accounts) that God uses to explain things to us, is battle/war/military and government/leadership/citizenship.  It might help you to think of God as talking to you and teaching you in those accounts. 

    There are times where God explains things to us, but depending on our rank, or our level, we will have access to different information.  He is the Creator of strategy, and the Planner of the greatest plan we have ever witnessed or participated in.  He has access to all of the information, Jesus has access to all of the information (He is the Captain of the Host, remember) except for the day and hour of his own return.  This is a mystery that even Jesus has to accept.  There is a strategic reason for this, no doubt.

    The Holy Spirit's purpose is to teach us and remind us of all that Jesus taught us.  He comforts us too...it is frustrating to only have part of the battle plan, but to be a foot soldier, or even higher in command, with others under you, that count on you...but to have only the information that you need to know.

    Jesus spoke in parables to believers and unbelievers, but he took his disciples aside and taught them directly, and I suspect, rather intensely.  During those times he said that he spoke plainly to them.  I have access to information that unbelievers do not, at least until they commit.  I have access to information that some believers do not have, at least until they do their duty.  Not all believers are meant to hold the same rank or the same position.  We all have a special purpose though.  Can you imagine a war being won without the foot soldiers on the front lines?  (I know, I know, the Marines could win wars on their own ; )  There are many in the ranks that have access to far more information than I have...so, I am never quick to judge, but I do test the spirits, as I am accountable for what I think, believe, say and do.  I will one day, have to give an account, or report of myself and my activities.  Fortunately for me, I have the best attorney in the universe/omniverse!

    I think you get my jist.

    Maybe this is the weird quirk of mine manifesting... I often do things backwards ; )Now, your second question from the end (haha) was the timing of God's creation?  Well, you might find this interesting.  Let's take a look at all of the "God saids".

    I am using the NIV for this, because I have made some good notes in it (books were written to be written in, I say ; )

    I am going to write Genesis 1, out of honor for my Creator, and his order, ok?

    1 In the beginning God

    created the heavens

    and the earth.

    2 Now the earth was (a.)formless and empty,

    darkness was over the surface of the deep,

    and the Spirit of God

    was hovering over the waters.

    The (a.) is important, it shows that there is debate over this word in the original Hebrew.  Some scholars say that this should be translated as "the earth became formless".  This is just one reason (among many) that some scholars say tells us there was more than one creation.

    Now, let's get into the GOD SAID's.  I will put biblical quotes in italics.

    In verse three, God said, Light Be!  (paraphrased ; )  And it was.  Then God SAW that it was good.  Remember in quantum mechanics, that there must be an observer?  Then God did some more with the light when he separated it from the darkness.  Then he did something else that was very important.  He CALLED the light day and the darkness he called night.  And there was evening, and there was morning---the first day.

    I think it was in John, he says that Jesus is the light, but the darkness perceived it not.  This is just an aside, and I have to look up the specific scripture.  At this point Jesus is the light.   

    In verse six, God said, Expanse Be, and he told it what to do... God CALLED...AND IT WAS SO.  (paraphrased of course)

    In verse nine God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear."  And it was so.

    In verse 10, God called the dry ground "land, " and the gathered waters he called "seas."  And God SAW that it was good.

    Now we see a pattern don't we?  God SAID, God SAW, God CALLED, etc.  We also see that he merely has to tell these "things" what to do, and they DO WHAT HE SAYS.  Now, that starts to explain a few things doesn't it?  Some things he creates as if with his own hands, and some things he just says "do it", and it happens.

    A favorite little booklet of mine says that words are power and words are energy.  Of course I already knew this from my degree program in human communication theory; and even before I knew that quarks were sound! ; ) 

    In verse 11, God said, "Let the land produce vegetation:  seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fuit with seed in it, according to their various kinds."  And it was so. 

    12 The land produced vegetation:  plants bearing seed acording to their kinds and and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds.  And God SAW that it was good. 

    13 And there was evening, and there was morning --- the third day.

    14 And God said, "Let their be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years,

    15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth."  And it was so.

    (Make a mental note here, to reference that God made light, or Light, earlier)

    16 God made two great lights --- the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.  He also made the stars. 

    17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth,

    18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness.  And God saw that it was good. 

    19  And there was evening, and there was morning --- the fourth day. 

    20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.

    21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird accirding to its kind.  And God saw that it was good. 

    22  God BLESSED them and said, (the first recorded blessing was upon this creation, thus far) "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 

    Then in verses 23-25, on the sixth day, God goes on to do the same thing with the animals of the land.  It isn't until verse 26 that he said, "Let us make man...", as I have already provided the text earlier. 

    Of course, God blesses them, the second recorded blessing in Genesis, and I may quote the rest of Genesis 1, after digesting this for a moment.

    I hope you understand that the Bible is living testimony, a living witness of God.  Each time I read it, no matter how many times I have read it, I read it as if it was the first time, and I receive more from it every time I do.

    Aside from the highlighted, and all caps things I have drawn your attention to, do you see that it doesn't matter to God whether 'he made it', 'he created it', or if he simply tells it to happen?  He did it.  He thought it.  He said it (after he worked it out, on his own, without any help from man/woman who didn't come until the sixth day, and we weren't even the first business of the day ; )  But often the last will be first as you know.

    I truly cannot name the order of the creation according to evolutionists anymore.  I know what they say, but I cannot defend why they have things in that order, other than it made sense to them at the time.  The only real difference in order that I see, if you can look at all of this as if for the first time...is that the report of the creation in Genesis says that the fish of the seas and the birds were created around the same times.

    God set things in order to govern...he created a perfect system for life.  He put us here to have dominion, to be stewards.  How the system has degraded or however we have failed at being good stewards, I will not go into here.  We understand most of this, except for the timing.  There are many theories. 

    I guess I could sum up my philosophy on the matter by saying that from my current knowledge of God, to my current knowledge of quantum physics; I believe that I have sufficient information for my current development and I know that time doesn't exist like we though, I know that space doesn't exist like we thought, and I know a whole host of other things that make me say this:  If God said he did it in six "days", I believe that is possible, and I also believe that it is possible, andn probable that I may not be able to understand exactly how he did it in six days.

    I am sure you have heard me say previously that there are those that believe in more than one creation.  I am sure that you have heard me say that time, since it is not linear, it is convoluted, perhaps like a sea shell...read about Yakov Rambsel.  He worked with some scientists and showed that days used to be longer, and now, we experience our days to be much 'faster'.  The Bible says God will quicken time in the end, for the sake of his elect; or no one would survive the madness.

    Let me take a breather, and you can take a breather...and I will answer your concern about the communication of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, as best I can...but I may have to use some quantum physics, so let us rest a bit, ok?

    I will be back.  I love to keep my word.  My yes means yes and my no means no.  I cannot give you an exact "time" however ; P  But I will be back!  Hopefully tonight.

    I will tell you this though...Adam was a son, he also calls the angels sons, but Jesus was his only begotten son.  We who are believers are all sons of God now, we are adopted, or grafted in...we gentiles are the wild olive tree.  We are the tribes dispersed, however painfully, and when the Tribe of Judah (and Benjamin with them) realizes him whom they pierced, we will all be one in his hand again soon.

    Good night.  You have been a joy to converse with.  Thanks for your sincerity and there are no questions too hard...only answers that we either know or search for.

    Blessings,

    truthsayer

     

      

     

     

  • SeanRenaud said on May 02, 2007....
    Whatever it is you do you should have been a teacher/preacher you have a gift.  Too bad your on the other team.
     
    That said it was really sufficent to say that I believe it was done in 6 days even if I don't know how it was done in 6 days.
     
    I kinda get annoyed with 6 days could mean X, to me that would just make God a jerk.  You take great care to explain and give references when you start talking in Quantum physics, I have no doubt however that you could use a whole list of technical jargon that would send me and most other readers googling every word in your sentence.  Point being that (under these circumstances) you are speaking to your inferiors and you are using terms that while precise and accurate we are capable of digesting.
     
    Your great to talk to as well, not a lot of people hold my attention (in a positive manner, I can be quite vindictive) this long.
  • silverwhisper said on May 03, 2007....
    truthsayer: i should point out that bloc also served in the armed forces.

    ed
  • truthsayer said on May 04, 2007....

    Thank you for telling me that ed.  I guess I am a little surprised then.  Perhaps he/she didn't like the military at all.  I often find myself in awe of the online presence of ex-military.  Unless they are angry, they possess an intelligence that one can only receive in military training and service. 

    I cannot put my finger on it, but there is a sense of honor, commitment and respect for authority that I find severely lacking in our society today, I mean society at large. 

    There is such a spirit of anarchy, and contempt for all authority, in favor or popular opinion...I mean the masses, the general population, seems to think that they are in charge and that they have access to all of the information necessary to make vital decisions for this country, again, based on popular opinion---better than those that actually have all the access to secure information.  The government simply cannot tell us some things.  They should not have to...not everything. 

    I cannot count how many times I had to tell my children, I cannot/will not explain that right now, you cannot understand right now, it is too complicated or something that you just do not need to know.  You must simply trust me in this and do as I say. 

    But then again, we have been through many battles, and thankfully, had many victories; even when they looked like the battle was lost, we would win in the end.  So I guess my children are good soldiers : )  and capable and willing to submit to our authority.  It reminds me of what SeeingRed reminded me of:  The office of the presidency being bigger than the man, or woman.  I love Condoleeza Rice ; )

    Anyway, thanks ed, for letting me know about bloc's service.  I am eternally grateful to all of our service men and women.

    truthsayer

  • truthsayer said on May 04, 2007....

    Thanks for the preacher/teacher comment Sean, and I am honored to be able to 'hold your attention', but it really isn't me you know.  I have this word in me, it abides in me.  Most Christians just don't understand what that means, or they are not quite willing to give up their own notions, to clear the house for true understanding.  Often, it isn't even their fault.  But you I have been told that that I should be a teacher/preacher before.  Even by ed.  My 12 year old daughter was just telling me that this morning, if you can believe that.  I am not taking any of the comments lightly, but humbly considering them.

    I spent eight years teaching Sunday School to Jr. High/Middle School kids (in a United Methodist Church that wasn't exactly open to the Holy Spirit, but they often felt convicted and usually could not argue with the word itself), and I was a youth counselor as well.  I had grown up there and sort of got drafted ; )  but I know that the appointment actually came from God.  Some liked me and would even stand in the hallway, listening to me teach the kids.  They would call me in for consultations.  Others hated me and thus, didn't have the truth in them (we are not allowed to hate our enemies, or the brethren).  Most were observant and polite, like I had something supernatural about me...I did, but they didn't quite want it for themselves ; )  It comes at a cost, or a price that most are not willing to pay.  You have to take up your own cross and follow him.  Not just say that you follow him.

    I learned to listen to people, especially the ones others really didn't want to listen to (youth and old people), and when I got to where I could understand them, I found that I could hear the Lord even more clearly.  When I paid better attention to others, and stilled myself, I could hear him loud and clear.  He taught me how to communicate him, to others.

    I am also a prophet.  He tells me who to talk to, what to say, how long to talk to them, and when I have finished with that person, I am sort of 'released' from the assignment, permanently or for a season.  It is completely up to him.

    It really isn't all that hard to explain anything that I am meant to explain.  If I feel that it is too hard for me, or that I risk confusing someone, I pray and only say what he tells me to say.  I often erase large portions of my writings, when I can tell that it was my words and not his words, my will and not his will.

    The only time you'll see me getting into trouble on soulcast is when I get mad and get into my own flesh...and it has happened, but so far, not to where I have totally lost it ; )  He causes even my mistakes to prosper.  Love covers a multitude of sins you know ; )

    As for you and I being on different teams, I wouldn't be so sure.  There are only two teams really:  Good and evil, True or false.  I do not perceive you as evil at all.  I also believe that you seek the truth.  There is an appointed time (even though time is so confusing for us humans) for everyone and everything.   So unless you perceive me as evil, or a liar/false, I would say that you and I are still experiencing the unfolding of the plan. 

    You have been in the Marines, you understand sacrifice.  It is a beautiful thing, the most beautiful thing one can do for others.  True sacrifice is always life altering to the ones the sacrifice was made for...if they know it was done for them.

    Ok.  Now I am not sure what it is that baffles you about the way that the Father communicated with his Son.  

    Specifically, if you would please clarify this statement:

    If God is capable of mind reading ( A power that seems to come and go at random, same as his ability to effect a person's decisions diretly seems to ebb and flow wildly) her certainly doesn't seem to with his only son.

    Are you referencing Jesus praying to the Father in the Garden of Gethsemene?  I think you mention that just before this statement.  Jesus was not just praying that 'if this were possible, let this cup pass from me', he was about to take on all the sins of every single person that had ever or would ever live, in his own body...he was begotten, he was born in the flesh for just this purpose...but can you imagine what he knew he was about to experience??? 

    My God!  The sins of my own life, if I were to be punished for them, would kill me if I had to suffer the punishment that I deserve (as we will all be judged by the 10 commandments, and I will be held accountable for even thinking of breaking those commands of God, as Jesus told us)!  But my flesh is not a perfect sacrifice. 

    You have no idea what I have been through, and DONE.  All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.  ed said on his blog about an afterlife, I think it was that one...that he knew he had done some bad things.  You yourself have said that you have done bad things and asked once if you were still redeemable!  I could not take your sins into my body and survive the punishment, and, my flesh would be so corrupted, that my physical sacrifice would be akin to some of the sacrifices offered by corrupt priests in the Old Testament, or Cain's sacrifice, which were not their best...but the priests had taken to sacrificing animals that were defective and sickly...boy, I would fit right in there ; ) 

    My sacrifice for your sins would mean nothing, nothing at all.  But Jesus was sinless.  He knew right from wrong before he was weaned, and ate 'baby food'.  But that just shows that he was a just and perfect sacrifice...like you and I, he had to be willing.  Only willing sacrifice is beautiful, and truly perfect. 

    He prayed for strength, but first, he honestly confessed his weakness that he felt in his flesh.  That is how David used to pray, and he was a man after God's own heart.  God never ever looks down on our honesty in confessing our weakness, our anger, our frustration or even our fear...Jesus did just that.  But he didn't stop with that confession, he gathered his strength, his faith, directly from God, during that prayer. 

    He prayed an honest prayer, and in so doing, he heard and saw his Father's answer confirmed for him.  Do you know what he saw?  He saw us.  He saw all of us, that would come to the Father through him.  So he willingly, joyfully and trustingly sacrificed his own will to the Father's perfect plan.  He also prayed that we would be One with him as he was One with the Father.  He sweat blood in the garden.  His sacrifice had begun.

     If the prayer of Jesus to his Father, in the Garden of Gethsemene was your question/concern, did I address it sufficiently?

    If not, ask me again, and I will answer again, but better for knowing exactly what concerns you about this 'communicating with God' thing.  As you say, he reads minds, yes.  It is constant though, not random.  I have heard an elegant explanation:  The Holy Spirit is a gentleman.  He would never force his will on anyone. 

    Do you  understand that Jesus could have refused to lay down his life, even during that prayer?  He wasn't a robot.  He came and lived among us as a man.  He didn't have to do it.  He willingly did it for us, to end our separation from God, to please God who loves us so much that he was willing to give his only begotten son, the only One that could end our separation from him. 

    He did it for me and you Sean, ed, and anyone else that reads this.  He took our punishment for us.  And it hurt.  It hurt bad; physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually.  And he was the only One that could possibly bear it.  All of our sin, all of God's children throughout all time, and all at one time. 

    Talk about mind boggling.  So have a little compassion for the One that held all our sin, all our grief, all our sadness, all our frustrations, all our thoughts, all our petty, bent, broken, self-serving and wicked big and little plans and actions...and while he did it, while he took that upon himself---he interceded for us from the cross.  With all that sin on him and knowing your mind Sean (past/present/future), and my mind (past/present/future), your heart and my heart, and he judged us then and there as he said, Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do! 

    He knew you then as he knows you now; inside and out, past/present/future, the good, the bad and the ugly, from the conclusion to the introduction, he knows all about you.  He knows what makes you tick.  He knows what made you mad.  He knows how disappointed you are.  He is the only one with the answers to your questions.  He made you, after all, and as you say, white bread ain't got nothin on you!  Guess he did alright then, huh?

    As far as the six day creation, and the discussion of time, I am referring to a mathematical theory of time...not playing word games.  I have to look up the name of it.  Matters of time are difficult to manage, since we tend to perceive things from a specific 'moment' in time.  It is not how time really is of course, but that is how we usually discuss it.  God could not increase the number of days, in the end time for instance, but mercifully, he could quicken time for our sakes.  I hope you can get a feel for what I am trying to say.  It isn't the number of days that matter; it is the length of each day that is the key.

    I am honored to have been allowed 'a peek' at your heart,

    and humbled to have been of service to you,

    truthsayer 

     

     

  • truthsayer said on May 04, 2007....
    I am glad that you are finding this to be interesting mobil, and I am honored.  Still, thank you for sticking around ; )
  • hotaka said on May 19, 2007....
    Ha, ha! I recognized that Douglas Adams quote right away.

    Sorry but I skipped all the comments above because I want to go home soon and get ready for my outing in the mountains tomorrow. But I like the cafe and want to add a few of my own comments.

    Firstly, I agree that science will always be incomplete as theories are challenged and changed with new ideas based often on better models. I read once that as quantum theory was explored and multidimensional theories were tested people thought Einstein's ideas were incomplete and tossed them aside. Miraculously, as the new theories proved false, Eistein's ideas were proven again and again to fit in and thus made the theories work. The inconsistancy was often the absence of Einstein's theories. Newton, Maxwell and Einstein were all on the right track, and their ideas must be included in theories of the universe. But especially Einstein seems to have had ideas of great importance.

    I don't know if it can be said that the Bible predicted these theories. The Bible from one point of view is not very concise or clear about issues relating to science.