Moon recession and unjustified extrapolation

[lilpixieofterror]

A common feature of cults is that they DISTORT the orthodox position by altering, re-interpreting, adding and/or deleting from that position. That perfectly fits what Theistic Evolution does to orthodox Christianity. So, yes, you guys have indeed created and practice a "Christian" cult. You simply refuse to accept that fact.

That's right because per King Jorge's royal decree, YEC is what orthodoxy teaches and if you're not a YEC, you're not an orthodox Christian. Don't worry that none of the church fathers agreed on this issue. Don't worry that there was a wide range of disagreeing on how creation happened in the early church. Don't worry that not a single creed of the church makes the age of the earth into a central doctrine of the faith. None of that nasty evidence stuff matters to King Jorge. All that matters is that YEC is the center of his faith and if you don't agree with his cult group, by golly, you can't be Christian. It is pretty funny that you attack Jim, Rogue, and myself for being in a 'cult' while you treat YEC as your own personal cult. Irony at its finest.

I just finished answering that (above). Recall the "Christian" cult of the "Rev" Jim Jones. Did he or did he not DISTORT the true teachings of orthodox Christianity so as to satisfy his drug and sex lusts? We all know how that ended. Likewise, Theistic Evolution DISTORTS God's Word so as to promote its own false doctrines and teachings. Just as in Guyana, Theistic Evolution reaps a deadly harvest.

That's right, per the royal decrees of King Jorge, anybody who dares to disagree with the King and his royal decrees, are just like Jim Jones. Never mind the fact that the Jim Jones cult demanded total and complete loyalty to him. Never mind the fact that he totally ignored evidence against any of his positions. Never mind the fact that they committed suicide, after murdering a congressman, and Jorge is trying to assert that we are the same way. None of those nasty fact things matter to his royal highness, he decrees it, so it must be true by his mere royal decree. How does it feel to turn YEC into the center of your faith Jorge?

I repeated part of my earlier post to O-Mudd because it applies with equal force on you.
Hey, Terror, you cannot STAND to hear the truth, it chaps your hide ... it makes you boil over.
Of course, that "boiling over" was why you posted what you did above.

No Jorge, that is your delusion and a false delusion at that. What really is happening is that I'm finding you totally and completely embarrassed yourself and by extent, many Christians around the world and just refuse to even admit you made a single error. At this point in time, the best thing you really can do is just put down the keyboard and walk away since I know admitting you were wrong, in any way, isn't your style. Running away would be the best option, counting in your galaxy sized ego, at this point in time. It has nothing to do with 'boiling over' as it has to do with being totally embarrassed, for you since you're not doing Christ any favors by directly ignoring all the mistakes you've made.

Why not just accept the facts and start the reformation process?

Accept the fact you haven't got a clue what you're talking about? Oh, I figured that out a long time ago, even most of your fellow YEC's have figured to keep a wide berth around you. Hummm... I wonder why...

Oh well ... my job here is never finished.

Never finished embarrassing Christians and Christ, eh?

[Jorge]

That's right because per King Jorge's royal decree, YEC is what orthodoxy teaches and if you're not a YEC, you're not an orthodox Christian. Don't worry that none of the church fathers agreed on this issue. Don't worry that there was a wide range of disagreeing on how creation happened in the early church. Don't worry that not a single creed of the church makes the age of the earth into a central doctrine of the faith. None of that nasty evidence stuff matters to King Jorge. All that matters is that YEC is the center of his faith and if you don't agree with his cult group, by golly, you can't be Christian. It is pretty funny that you attack Jim, Rogue, and myself for being in a 'cult' while you treat YEC as your own personal cult. Irony at its finest.

That's right, per the royal decrees of King Jorge, anybody who dares to disagree with the King and his royal decrees, are just like Jim Jones. Never mind the fact that the Jim Jones cult demanded total and complete loyalty to him. Never mind the fact that he totally ignored evidence against any of his positions. Never mind the fact that they committed suicide, after murdering a congressman, and Jorge is trying to assert that we are the same way. None of those nasty fact things matter to his royal highness, he decrees it, so it must be true by his mere royal decree. How does it feel to turn YEC into the center of your faith Jorge?

No Jorge, that is your delusion and a false delusion at that. What really is happening is that I'm finding you totally and completely embarrassed yourself and by extent, many Christians around the world and just refuse to even admit you made a single error. At this point in time, the best thing you really can do is just put down the keyboard and walk away since I know admitting you were wrong, in any way, isn't your style. Running away would be the best option, counting in your galaxy sized ego, at this point in time. It has nothing to do with 'boiling over' as it has to do with being totally embarrassed, for you since you're not doing Christ any favors by directly ignoring all the mistakes you've made.

Accept the fact you haven't got a clue what you're talking about? Oh, I figured that out a long time ago, even most of your fellow YEC's have figured to keep a wide berth around you. Hummm... I wonder why...

Never finished embarrassing Christians and Christ, eh?

There are many mysteries that I will have to wait to be in Heaven to find an answer. One of those mysteries is if Terror was born as ignorant and irrational as she is or, alternatively, if she put in long, hard hours of study and training in order to attain that status. Inquiring minds want to know.



Jorge

[lilpixieofterror]

There are many mysteries that I will have to wait to be in Heaven to find an answer. One of those mysteries is if Terror was born as ignorant and irrational as she is or, alternatively, if she put in long, hard hours of study and training in order to attain that status. Inquiring minds want to know.

Yep another zero substance and 100% insult fest, from Jorge. Who claims to have all of this 'evidence' for his views, but makes mistake after mistake and just plain refuses to even acknowledge he made a mistake. Being called ignorant by you is like being charged with treason by Joseph Stalin. It would be a badge of honor.

[Jorge]

Refuting compromise was nothing less than a vindictive attack on a man that has never returned the 'favor' (a clear indication of Ross's commitment to the actual teachings of Christ). It exposes not the truth but rather the petty and hateful nature of Sarfati himself. And it does include Sarfati's continued and famous (mis)use of the previously discussed supernova remnants quote.

What else did you think I would expect you to say?

As you define 'cult', every Christian denomination (except your own, of course) is a 'cult'. That is NOT how the rest of the world defines it. There need to be some actual and real violation of a basic tenet of the Christian faith, such as the Trinity or Salvation through Christ's atonement etc.

I have lost count of the number of times that I have patiently (and not-so-patiently) explained that to you - you simply willingly refuse to 'get it'.

What you're basically saying is the same as what any child-level understanding of Christianity would say: believe and confess Christ plus a few basic tenets and then, after that, you can pretty much believe and do anything you please. Is homosexuality a "salvation issue"? Nope - so go ahead and practice it. Is abortion a "salvation issue"? Nope - so go ahead and dump the fetus. Is drinking or drugs a salvation issue? Nope - so go ahead and get drunk and high. Is distorting the Bible so as to enable a false doctrine to prevail a "salvation issue"? Nope - so go ahead and distort God's Word in any way necessary. Etc ... etc ... etc ... etc. Anyone believing as you do, O-Mudd, is so far lost as to be hopeless (except for God's intervention, of course).

Really - Jim Jones??? First, Jim Jones fits into the other category of looking to 1 man's teaching over and above Christ's. And his distortions represented, again, attacks on basic and fundamental tenets of the faith, not some ancillary issue like how long the 'days' of Genesis are.

I found your first sentence above to be quite interesting because that is precisely what Theistic Evolutionists have done, namely, you TEs have put one man's teachings (Darwin: Darwinism in its modern versions) above Christ's teachings (Christ = The LOGOS, the Word of God).

In reality, I am quite content to be labelled a member of a cult by you. Your take on Christian faith is so narrow, so works and 'law' oriented, so full of judgement and arrogance, that anyone following the actual teachings and life of Christ will almost always ultimately be seen by you as belonging to some sort of 'cult'. I would only be worried if you found my faith 'acceptable' to you. For then I would know I had missed the mark by a wide margin.

Jim

Instead of being "content to be labeled a cult member" as you are (whether said label is by me or by anyone) you should be searching long and deep to verify that the label wasn't spot on. Sadly, in this case it definitely is spot-on as I have demonstrated umpteen times to you throughout the years. That you refuse to accept any of it is quite another matter likely involving ego, pride and a stubborn heart. That's outside of my capabilities ... I'll let GOD work with you on that.

Jorge

[Jorge]

Yep another zero substance and 100% insult fest, from Jorge. Who claims to have all of this 'evidence' for his views, but makes mistake after mistake and just plain refuses to even acknowledge he made a mistake. Being called ignorant by you is like being charged with treason by Joseph Stalin. It would be a badge of honor.

Yeah ... okay ... sure ... whatever ...

I still am looking forward to Heaven, when that aforementioned mystery is cleared up.

Jorge

[lilpixieofterror]

Yeah ... okay ... sure ... whatever ...

I still am looking forward to Heaven, when that aforementioned mystery is cleared up.

Jorge

Looking forward to scrubbing those toilets?

[Omniskeptical]

Instead of being "content to be labeled a cult member" as you are (whether said label is by me or by anyone) you should be searching long and deep to verify that the label wasn't spot on. Sadly, in this case it definitely is spot-on as I have demonstrated umpteen times to you throughout the years. That you refuse to accept any of it is quite another matter likely involving ego, pride and a stubborn heart. That's outside of my capabilities ... I'll let GOD work with you on that.

Total and complete gnosticism; experience and perceptions taking the place of real knowledge. You are a complete fundy Jorge.

[oxmixmudd]

I have lost count of the number of times that I have patiently (and not-so-patiently) explained that to you - you simply willingly refuse to 'get it'.

What you're basically saying is the same as what any child-level understanding of Christianity would say: believe and confess Christ plus a few basic tenets and then, after that, you can pretty much believe and do anything you please.

Nope. That is not it at all. And you know it.

You've spent quite a few posts attacking me in general. I find that interesting. You can't support your beliefs theologically (e.g. can't define what the clear reading of Genesis is). You can't defend yourself scientifically (per the last few threads). And so you fall back on nebulous 'against the man', accusations of violations of Christian teaching. No specifics of course. Just accusations. Posh. It's just so much trash talk. The losing tactics of one who lost the debate long ago.


Now, the topic at hand is Lunar Recession. The science shows that the physics of lunar recession is consistent with the measured ages of the Earth and the Moon. The YEC take on it is ignorance based on 60's era linear extrapolations from the current recession rate. This poor model is used for two reasons:

a) most in the target audience don't know its shortcomings
b) it yields the results you want

That is not science. And it is not religion. It is deception.



Jim

[Jorge]

Nope. That is not it at all. And you know it.

You've spent quite a few posts attacking me in general. I find that interesting. You can't support your beliefs theologically (e.g. can't define what the clear reading of Genesis is). You can't defend yourself scientifically (per the last few threads). And so you fall back on nebulous 'against the man', accusations of violations of Christian teaching. No specifics of course. Just accusations. Posh. It's just so much trash talk. The losing tactics of one who lost the debate long ago.


Now, the topic at hand is Lunar Recession. The science shows that the physics of lunar recession is consistent with the measured ages of the Earth and the Moon. The YEC take on it is ignorance based on 60's era linear extrapolations from the current recession rate. This poor model is used for two reasons:

a) most in the target audience don't know its shortcomings
b) it yields the results you want

That is not science. And it is not religion. It is deception.

Jim

Uh-huh, whatever ...

I did run into this today and thought it very appropriate for you,
Terror and other TWebbers. It concerns Lottie Moon, one of the
greatest female Christian missionary evangelists of all times,
who lived in the late 19th and early 20th century.

I've highlighted a few sections :


"Some of Lottie’s [Lottie Moon] letters home were published in the Religious Herald. These too portrayed how lonely she was. As a result, from 1877 her former heart-throb, Crawford Toy**, began exchanging letters with her. By 1881, Lottie was deeply in love with him, and they were planning to marry when she returned to USA on furlough, and then go overseas to Japan as a missionary couple.

**Crawford H. Toy, eventually became Professor of Hebrew and other Oriental Languages at Harvard University.

It was not to be. Toy had become involved in controversy. Following the Civil War, he had studied in Europe, absorbing both Darwinism and the higher criticism and rationalism of German scholars such as Wellhausen, who denied that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

Seeking to harmonize the first chapters of Genesis with the emerging science of his day, Toy held that the days of Genesis 1 were geological periods. However, as a Hebrew scholar, he knew that the Hebrew text required that the term ‘day’ meant a natural day of 24 hours. So he then moved to the view that the writer of Genesis was not describing history but had divided all created things into categories and had assigned them to days for poetic and rhetorical vividness. This too ceased to satisfy him because the Hebrew grammar clearly shows that Genesis is written as historical narrative.

So he eventually began to ask, does not this chapter simply represent the “crude cosmogenic ideas of the Israelites and the Babylonians, from whom the Israelites seem to have got them?” Sadly these ideas brought him to the point where he was convinced that the proper approach to the Bible was to “take the kernel of truth from its outer covering of myth”.

MY NOTE: any of this sound familiar to you? Rhetorical question, of course!

Speaking in 1985, Dr W.A. Criswell, two-term president of the Southern Baptist Convention, summarized: “Dr Toy went into the Unitarian Church and, finally, never went to church at all. He was a world famous scholar, internationally known author, a lovable man. But the virus of higher criticism destroyed his spiritual life and work.”

Lottie was shattered and grief-stricken when she learned of the new theology and liberal beliefs of the man she had once so much admired and now so deeply loved. When asked by a relative in later years if she had ever been in love, she replied, “Yes, but God had first claim on my life, and since the two conflicted, there could be no question about the result.”

MY NOTE: Now there's a woman that knew the score!

She returned to China heart-broken, never to return home to America, never to marry, and died in the Orient, lonely in soul and pouring out her life in ministry to the Chinese people. Later in China, more letters arrived, and she wrote, “The temptation is great. The professor, however, now espouses theories that do not square with God’s Word. … My cross is loneliness.”

MY NOTE: Like I just said, there's a woman that knew the score!

In 1912, following civil war and famine in China, and approaching age 72, Lottie’s physical and mental condition began to deteriorate, and she suffered from depression. Her fellow missionaries recommended repatriation to the USA, accompanied by a missionary nurse. En route, she slipped into a coma, and in Kobe, Japan, went to be with her Saviour (Philippians 1:21–23), whom she had served so faithfully. Her ashes were then buried in her brother’s plot in the Crewe Cemetery in Virginia. Her memorial includes the words “faithful unto death” from Revelation 2:10, “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.”

Lottie Moon’s story has inspired generations and has helped shape the modern missionary movement. Her courage in choosing personal suffering rather than sacrificing biblical integrity continues to challenge—perhaps more than ever, in this age of increasing biblical compromise in the Western church."

You TE's could learn a lot from Lottie Moon. But, of course, you'll simply dismiss her since none of this jibes with your chosen beliefs and, unlike Lottie's choice, those beliefs come FIRST in your life. Oh well ...

Jorge

[HMS_Beagle]

Uh-huh, whatever ...

I did run into this today and thought it very appropriate for you,
Terror and other TWebbers. It concerns Lottie Moon, one of the
greatest female Christian missionary evangelists of all times,
who lived in the late 19th and early 20th century.

What does that have to do with the fact you made a bunch of boneheaded blunders then got caught lying about them?

[klaus54]

Uh-huh, whatever ...

I did run into this today and thought it very appropriate for you,
Terror and other TWebbers. It concerns Lottie Moon, one of the
greatest female Christian missionary evangelists of all times,
who lived in the late 19th and early 20th century.

I've highlighted a few sections :


[Lottie Moon] letters home were published in the Religious Herald. These too portrayed how lonely she was. As a result, from 1877 her former heart-throb, Crawford Toy**, began exchanging letters with her. By 1881, Lottie was deeply in love with him, and they were planning to marry when she returned to USA on furlough, and then go overseas to Japan as a missionary couple.

**Crawford H. Toy, eventually became Professor of Hebrew and other Oriental Languages at Harvard University.

It was not to be. Toy had become involved in controversy. Following the Civil War, he had studied in Europe, absorbing both Darwinism and the higher criticism and rationalism of German scholars such as Wellhausen, who denied that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

Seeking to harmonize the first chapters of Genesis with the emerging science of his day, Toy held that the days of Genesis 1 were geological periods. . So he then moved to the view that the writer of Genesis was not describing history but had divided all created things into categories and had assigned them to days for poetic and rhetorical vividness. This too ceased to satisfy him because the Hebrew grammar clearly shows that Genesis is written as historical narrative.

.

MY NOTE: any of this sound familiar to you? Rhetorical question, of course!

Speaking in 1985, Dr W.A. Criswell, two-term president of the Southern Baptist Convention, summarized:

Lottie was shattered and grief-stricken when she learned of the new theology and liberal beliefs of the man she had once so much admired and now so deeply loved.

MY NOTE: Now there's a woman that knew the score!

She returned to China heart-broken, never to return home to America, never to marry, and died in the Orient, lonely in soul and pouring out her life in ministry to the Chinese people. Later in China, more letters arrived, and she wrote, MY NOTE: Like I just said, there's a woman that knew the score!."

You TE's could learn a lot from Lottie Moon. But, of course, you'll simply dismiss her since none of this jibes with your chosen beliefs and, unlike Lottie's choice, those beliefs come FIRST in your life. Oh well ...

Jorge

And HOW does this address Jim's VERY articulate and concise comments on your bad science AND bad theology?

All you've done is spew yet another irrelevant and insulting ad hom.

Grow up, Jorge. Smell the roses.

If Christianity WERE as you espouse it, I would have been a Dawkinsian atheist a fer piece ago.

You're a disgrace. Pure and simple.

Jorgian YEC = Bad science, bad theology, and a pox on Christianity.

K54

P.S. And would you PLEASE stop doing the biblioidolatric capitalization of "Word" when it refers to the Bible? This is something else you don't know -- it's a hold-over from King Jimmy's time when ALL nouns were capitalized.

[Jorge]

What does that have to do with the fact you made a bunch of boneheaded blunders then got caught lying about them?

Cow droppings at least have utility as fertilizer.
You do not even rate that high, Beagle Boy.

You'd be very wise to give me a wide berth, kiddo.
Of course, we know that "wise" is one thing that you're not.

Jorge

[Jorge]

K54

P.S. And would you PLEASE stop doing the biblioidolatric capitalization of "Word" when it refers to the Bible? This is something else you don't know -- it's a hold-over from King Jimmy's time when ALL nouns were capitalized.

When you start paying my bills, I'll stop using "God's Word";
until that day you can just go whistle Dixie.
I hope that's okay with you. If not, I don't care.

Jorge

[rwatts]

Uh-huh, whatever ...

I did run into this today and thought it very appropriate for you,
Terror and other TWebbers. It concerns Lottie Moon, one of the
greatest female Christian missionary evangelists of all times,
who lived in the late 19th and early 20th century.

I've highlighted a few sections :


[Lottie Moon] letters home were published in the Religious Herald. These too portrayed how lonely she was. As a result, from 1877 her former heart-throb, Crawford Toy**, began exchanging letters with her. By 1881, Lottie was deeply in love with him, and they were planning to marry when she returned to USA on furlough, and then go overseas to Japan as a missionary couple.

**Crawford H. Toy, eventually became Professor of Hebrew and other Oriental Languages at Harvard University.

It was not to be. Toy had become involved in controversy. Following the Civil War, he had studied in Europe, absorbing both Darwinism and the higher criticism and rationalism of German scholars such as Wellhausen, who denied that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

Seeking to harmonize the first chapters of Genesis with the emerging science of his day, Toy held that the days of Genesis 1 were geological periods. . So he then moved to the view that the writer of Genesis was not describing history but had divided all created things into categories and had assigned them to days for poetic and rhetorical vividness. This too ceased to satisfy him because the Hebrew grammar clearly shows that Genesis is written as historical narrative.

.

MY NOTE: any of this sound familiar to you? Rhetorical question, of course!

Speaking in 1985, Dr W.A. Criswell, two-term president of the Southern Baptist Convention, summarized:

Lottie was shattered and grief-stricken when she learned of the new theology and liberal beliefs of the man she had once so much admired and now so deeply loved.

MY NOTE: Now there's a woman that knew the score!

She returned to China heart-broken, never to return home to America, never to marry, and died in the Orient, lonely in soul and pouring out her life in ministry to the Chinese people. Later in China, more letters arrived, and she wrote, MY NOTE: Like I just said, there's a woman that knew the score!."

You TE's could learn a lot from Lottie Moon. But, of course, you'll simply dismiss her since none of this jibes with your chosen beliefs and, unlike Lottie's choice, those beliefs come FIRST in your life. Oh well ...

Jorge

???

Good one Jorge.

We can all post stories about other people for which the moral of the story is "This is just like you Jorge".

[oxmixmudd]

Uh-huh, whatever ...

I did run into this today and thought it very appropriate for you,
Terror and other TWebbers. It concerns Lottie Moon, one of the
greatest female Christian missionary evangelists of all times,
who lived in the late 19th and early 20th century.

I've highlighted a few sections :


[Lottie Moon] letters home were published in the Religious Herald. These too portrayed how lonely she was. As a result, from 1877 her former heart-throb, Crawford Toy**, began exchanging letters with her. By 1881, Lottie was deeply in love with him, and they were planning to marry when she returned to USA on furlough, and then go overseas to Japan as a missionary couple.

**Crawford H. Toy, eventually became Professor of Hebrew and other Oriental Languages at Harvard University.

It was not to be. Toy had become involved in controversy. Following the Civil War, he had studied in Europe, absorbing both Darwinism and the higher criticism and rationalism of German scholars such as Wellhausen, who denied that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

Seeking to harmonize the first chapters of Genesis with the emerging science of his day, Toy held that the days of Genesis 1 were geological periods. . So he then moved to the view that the writer of Genesis was not describing history but had divided all created things into categories and had assigned them to days for poetic and rhetorical vividness. This too ceased to satisfy him because the Hebrew grammar clearly shows that Genesis is written as historical narrative.

.

MY NOTE: any of this sound familiar to you? Rhetorical question, of course!

Speaking in 1985, Dr W.A. Criswell, two-term president of the Southern Baptist Convention, summarized:

Lottie was shattered and grief-stricken when she learned of the new theology and liberal beliefs of the man she had once so much admired and now so deeply loved.

MY NOTE: Now there's a woman that knew the score!

She returned to China heart-broken, never to return home to America, never to marry, and died in the Orient, lonely in soul and pouring out her life in ministry to the Chinese people. Later in China, more letters arrived, and she wrote, MY NOTE: Like I just said, there's a woman that knew the score!."

You TE's could learn a lot from Lottie Moon. But, of course, you'll simply dismiss her since none of this jibes with your chosen beliefs and, unlike Lottie's choice, those beliefs come FIRST in your life. Oh well ...

Jorge

We all can learn from those like Lottie Moon, Jorge. We all must follow through on our commitment to Christ and make hard choices when they present themselves.

What you fail to understand Jorge is that my position on these matters is the result of doing just that. And further, I do in fact respect those who are holding to a different position than mine theologically out of respect for scripture and the dictates of their conscience in terms of how to understand that same scripture - within the bounds of a more historical view of heresy that the one you have presented.

Where you and I do NOT find any common ground is in the fact that you wish to present the falsehood that scientifically one can support a YE interpretation of the text. That is NOT a matter of interpretation. The data as interpreted by the scientific method has only one conclusion as regards the age of the Earth/Moon system or the universe. That is what science supports. To hold to a YE view is to hold to it IN SPITE of science, not because of it. And that is fine, as long as that truth is what is presented.

We could discuss theology for more effectively if we could get past this little pile of rocks. The ONLY way to be an HONEST 'Biblical Creationist' as you define the term is to be against at the very least the majority of the teaching of ICR/AIG and every other group that tries to peddle the false hope that science can be used to back up the position. That is why I reference the parable of the 10,000 vs the 20,000. IF your conscience dictates a YE reading, you must be capable of holding to that regardless of whether science can back if up, otherwise eventually you will realize science can't and doesn't support the position. And those that in ignorance or deception try to convince others it is possible to back this up scientifically are creating HUGE stumbling blocks for faith.

Lottie Moon would likely have been just such a person. She likely could have cared less what science said about it and simply followed her internal convictions.

You think I compromise my faith. But what greater compromise is there than to deny the truth on such a huge scale as YEC requires in regard to what science can support? When one lives a lie, it erodes the heart and conscience.

The solution as I see it is to follow what the scriptures teach where it is clear. Recognize where there is mystery and potential grace where it is vague. And be honest about what modern science and scholarship supports or refutes.

In the end, we all come to a line of faith. A line where we can not support what we believe with objective data. No-one follows Christ in the absence of that leap. So the important part is that we maintain the nature of Christ in that process.


Jim