₦airaland Forum

My job is to tell you the truth, mine is not to convince you, The Holy Spirit is supposed to lead you into all truth,

I have told you the truthful information that the Bible says that the Universe is Geocentric,
I have told you the truthful information that Creation account shows that the Earth was created before the Sun, hence could not have revolved around the Sun,
I have told you the truthful information that even Scientific principles and deductions prove and show that the Universe is Geocentric,
I have told you the truthful information that Heliocentricity is unbiblical and its one of the bed rock of evolution,


Whatever you or anybody else for that matter makes of the truthful information I have provided, is yours and yours only, , "it is written:

Rev 13:9 If any man have an ear, let him hear.
"

Above all things I pray to God Almighty that you and I make it to the marriage of the Lamb ,

My Work with you is done, later, God bless you,

First and foremost, STOP STOP STOP, ALL THIS NONSENSE, you are merely trying to be sneaky with biblical interpretation, the bible is very clear no need for you to try to be sneaky by pretending that Joshua's account was not a literal account. It was a literal account deal with it, GOD IS NOT AN AUTHOR OF CONFUSION, GOD SAYS WHAT HE MEANS AND HE MEANS WHAT HE SAYS,

-- CREATION ACCOUNT IS NOT A CONTEXTUAL STATEMENT --

-- JOSHUA ACCOUNT IS NOT A CONTEXTUAL STATEMENT --

GOD HIMSELF SAID HE CREATED EVERYTHING IN 6-LITERAL DAYS.(why is that so difficult for you to understand).
GOD HIMSELF SAID HE CREATED THE EARTH BEFORE THE SUN, (why is that so difficult for you to understand).
THE EARTH CANNOT BE REVOLVING AROUND THE SUN FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT GOD HIMSELF SAID HE CREATED THE EARTH BEFORE THE SUN,


Secondly, For goodness sake please check my previous posts, check all that i have written as rebuttals in response .
Crosscheck the facts that i have presented and then try to disprove "line by line" all the biblical verses that i have presented, instead of presenting completely unrelated bible  verses in our botched attempts at trying to twist what God clearly says.

Stop beating around the bush, its either you believe the bible or you believe your own logic,

WHY IS IT SO BLOODLY DIFFICULT FOR YOU PEOPLE TO ACCEPT THE BIBLE FOR ITS WORD, WHY ARE YOU ALL TRYING TO SAY THE BIBLE SAID SOMETHING ELSE WHEN IT DID NOT,

INFACT PLEASE ABEG TRY AND SHOW LINE BY LINE WHERE THE BIBLE SAID ANYTHING THAT SUPPORTS YOUR VIEW,

I see your dilemma.  The fact that the earth is rotating on its axis, revolving round the sun and tilting on its axis at the same time is wrong because the writer of Joshua thought that was impossible. Interesting!

WOW, WOW, HOLD ON, WHERE DID YOU GET ALL OF THAT FROM THE BIBLE ,

Let me repeat, in case you can't still see the point i am making,


1. The Bible is true.

2. I did not say the writer of book of Joshua said anything is impossible, on the contrary, i am even the one claiming here that what the bible said in the book of Joshua is exactly truthful contrary to the opposition of you people (and I have provided scientific references to back it up, so that those who trust science more than the bible can at least likewise see the point I have been trying to make). As a matter of fact, the only people in error here are those people saying that the writer of Joshua implies that the Universe is Heliocentric, THE BIBLE ITSELF CLEARLY SAYS THAT THE UNIVERSE IS GEOCENTRIC.

Please check my previous and original posts and also check your facts , I DON'T WANT TO KEEP REPEATING MYSELF, 

3. We must never re-interprete the bible to fit what the world thinks is true, human history is full of errors, scientific history is full of errors, only biblical history is known to be consistent and true.
Infact it is outrightly deceitful for anyone to claim that Book of Joshua claims that the earth is rotating on its axis or that the earth is revolving around the sun.
Saying that alone amounts to the fact that the person in question is disregarding Biblical fact and scientific principles and experiments. Infact it shows clearly a lack of understand and faith in God for such a man to want to change or re-interprete the bible to make it fit current ideas about Heliocentricity. I am even the one fighthing tooth and nail just to show to you and others that the Bible is True when it says the universe is Geocentric, I provided Joshua's account to back that up, I provided Genesis account to back it up, I also provided scientific references to back up my statements.

So please go through ALL my posts before making erroneous statements,

Notice from bible verses below that:


Jos 10:11  And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.
Jos 10:12  Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon .
Jos 10:13  And the sun stood still , and[b] the moon stayed[/b], until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven , and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
Jos 10:14  And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel



4. The Bible did not say the earth is rotating on its axis, (I don't know how come your own bible now says that the earth is rotating on its axis), please show a bible verse that supports your view, STOP GUESSING, STOP RE-INTERPRETING THE BIBLE, SHOW THE BIBLE VERSE THAT SUPPORTS YOUR STATEMENTS,

5. The Bible did not say that the earth is revolving around the sun, (I don't know how come your own bible now says that the earth is revolving around the sun), please show a bible verse that supports your view, STOP GUESSING, STOP RE-INTERPRETING THE BIBLE, SHOW THE BIBLE VERSE THAT SUPPORTS YOUR STATEMENTS[/b]

, What is even more embarrasing and saddnening about this case is that even science itself does not support Heliocentricity, hence how come you people are hell bent on supporting a false dogma (linked to the theory of evolution) is really mindbungling,

I pray God opens your eyes, because all your statements are not only disheartning, they are outright saddnening,

1. First and foremost, I would advise each and every one to go through my original post (i.e. the first post of this thread), go through it line by, understand it and cross-check your bible for biblical references,

2. if you are still not convinced after the first stage,  Then check my rebuttals to comments on this thread,

3. If you are still not convinced after the second stage then check and read up on the following, hopefully they would help you see the light in scientific support of geocentricity:



- Varshni's rings of quasars

- Redshift Steps

- The Sagnac experiment

- Michelson-Morely experiment

- Large Scale Structure of the Universe (Van Flandern, Tom; Meta Research Bulletin 9:48, 2000. Citing; science, 288:2121, 2000)


4. If none of the above helps, unfortunately i no longer have an idea of what to do to help you see the point,

I apologize for breaking my promise not to reply directly to you debosky, I had to because, your statements and conclusions were similar to someone trying to squeeze ideas into the bible, when the bible clearly said something else different from what you are interpreting it to be.

Yes I understand if you guys are disturb by the fact that the Bible clearly gives a Geocentric View, compared to the generally held Heliocentric view, hence its understandable that you guys are a little uncomfortable, however what i would not accept nor allow is if you are now trying to "reinterprete the bible" in other to make it look like the bible was either vague on the issue ,  (am sorry but the bible was very very very clear) or that the bible was supporting the heliocentric view of the universe,

Genesis creation account, and, [b]account of Joshua [/b]clearly shows that the Bible represents a Geocentric View, SO DEAL WITH IT, because God's Word would not change because you are not comfortable with it.

First and foremost guys and gals, please try go through the simple summary of Relativity motion that i have already explained earlier, a clarity of it would help you to understand that Satellite videos from space are inherently flawed once you consider the simple fact of theoretical physic that makes it obvious that those satellite videos can only show you the "relative motion" between EARTH and the SPACE-TIME FABRIC, it does not and cannot show you the ABSOLUTE MOTION of SPACE-TIME ITSELF. Also it cannot show the ABSOLUTE MOTION of EARTH itself, hence why it cannot be an absolute means of determination of whether or not the EARTH is moving or not.

Infact let me try to help you understand the concept of this relative motion satellite videos even further. I am going to use a crude 3-dimensional analogy:

1. Imagine that there is an orange at the center of a spherical bowl that is completely filled with water such that you somehow manage to anchor an orange " at the geometrical center of this spherical bowl"
2. Now notice that can analysis this setup as " having an orange being submerged at the center of the spherical water volume" or " as having the orange being surrounded by a spherical water volume"
3. Assume you use your to start whirlpool in the water centered around the center of the spherical bowl (i.e. the whirlpool goes around the orange at the center of the spherical bowl), Imagine that there is a tiny cameraman A placed on the orange , and another tiny cameraman B is place inside the turning water (and he turns along with the whirling water in such a way that he does not feel the movement of the water at all).
4. Obviously, it is easy to see that Cameraman A (standing on the orange) would interprete the event to mean that the Orange is stationary and the water is going around the orange.
5. In constrast however it is also easy to see ,  it is likewise easy for the Cameraman B (who is going round and round with the water) to wrongly think that the water is stationary and that it was the orange that was turning.
6. Obviously it becomes clear that both Cameraman A and Cameraman B cannot be both correct at the same time, however it must be noted that from the principle of relativity, both Cameraman A and Cameraman B are actually correct by their observation provided you put into consideration their frame of reference.
7. THE ONLY PERSON THAT CAN GIVE AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON IS SOMEONE OUTSIDE THE SPHERICAL BOWL OF WATER (GOD in our case, ), since both cameramen A and B (everyone on earth and space are still both inside our own spherical bowl) are inside the spherical bowl of water, hence their(our) frames of references are invariably going to affect their observation so much so that we can only obtain a relative sense of motion.

The above scripture refer to the fact that NO HUMAN can move the earth. In that sense, the earth SHALL NOT be moved because we are INCAPABLE of doing that.

, stop reinterpreting the scripture to fit your worldview, wow,

Kindly please show me "by highlighting boldly" where and how the scriptures quoted show that the bible was saying that NO HUMAN can move the earth,
Don't interprete to me what you think the bible said, your interpretation is worthless, instead clearly show me by highlighting boldly where the bible said the earth is moving,

1st the issue with the 6-day literal days, now this one also,


Don't you realise that you are re-interpreting the bible in other to make it fit popular opinion,
Don't you realise that the bible is true whether or not popular opinion agrees or not,
Do you now see what i mean when i said it was dangerous to try to interprete the bible to fit the observation,
Don't you realise that the bible said the EARTH WAS CREATED BEFORE THE SUN,
SO can you kindly tell me what exactly it was that the EARTH WAS REVOLVING AROUND BEFORE THE SUN WAS CREATED,

I am astounded that you don't realise the ramifications of your statements,

For goodness sake even if you refuse to believe anything else that I saw, at least try to see from the creation account in Genesis that the bible clearly said that the EARTH was created before the SUN and MOON, so how for goodness sake can you now still reason that you believe in Heliocentricity, knowing fully well that that the EARTH existed before the SUN, hence the EARTH couldn't have been revolving around anything, meaning that HELIOCENTRICITY IS ONLY POSSIBLE IF THE SUN WAS EXISTING BEFORE THE EARTH.

Am afraid but if you can't see the relationship between Evolution and Heliocentricity, then i can't help you, no matter what i say.

To say am dumbfounded with your opinion and state of mind concerning biblical truth would be an understatement,

If we judge by SENSES, then the earth is stationary and the sun and moon are moving. This is likely what Joshua experienced.

Stop trying to put your interpretation into the bible, the bible did not say "the earth stopped moving",  "the bible did not say the earth was stationary", the bible said: SUN and MOON both stopped moving,

Stop trying to put your own logic into the bible, by implying that you think you know what Joshua experienced, the bible already told us what Joshua experienced, the bible said that the SUN and MOON stopped moving , nothing more nothing less,

The only reason that i am thinking of, which probably makes you to have a problem believing the bible is true when it said "the sun and the moon stopped moving", is probably because current general public opinion goes against the possibility of the sun and moon stopping because public opinion assumes without proof (i repeat without proof) that the earth is going round the sun and that the earth is rotating on its axis, 

As far as I am concerned, I WOULD TAKE THE BIBLE AT ITS WORD, WHEN THE BIBLE SAID THE SUN AND THE MOON STOPPED, (meaning they were moving in the first place for them to have stopped),

You can go ahead try to re-interprete the bible to fit your "opinion of what you think the bible is saying", good luck to you.

-----------------------------------

I have given you the experiment of Foucault, conducted ONLY on the earth, without going to space to confuse you. It shows CLEARLY that the earth is rotating. Can you disprove this well established experiment as well?

Finally concerning your Foucault Pendulum, the Foucault Pendulum does not prove that the earth is rotating. Instead the effect noticed via the Foucault's Pendulum is easily explained not to be true via Mach's Principle, (again I repeat that Foucault Pendulum has nothing to do with any postulation of a fantasy rotation of the earth. Infact even, the Coriolis effect would also exist under a Geocentric View of the Universe, hence negating the presence of those effects alone as proofs for Heliocentricity.

So please henceforth please understand that the Mach's Principle shows that Foucault Pendulum does not prove that the Earth is rotating,

----------------------------------

Moreover ALL SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTS SPECIALLY DESIGNED BY MICHELSON TO SHOW EARTH'S ROTATION HAVE FAILED TO DETECT OR SHOW ANY ROTATION OF THE EARTH.

not that the biblical account is wrong but one thing you have to realise is that though some of the scriptures were inspired, it was written by ancient men in the way they understood it.

hmm, isn't that a smart way of saying, Helicentricity is correct because the bible cannot be right.

1. I am not trying to justify the bible
2. The bible is true i am not trying to prove its true.
3. I am merely trying to open the eyes of those people who think they can try to squeeze in worldy views into the bible, so that they can clearly see that its either the believe the bible at its word or not at all.
4. Accepting both Heliocentricity and Geocentricity is a misnomer for a prophesing Christian since its obviously clear that they both cannot be true at the same time, as they are self contradictory.

Please can u kindly go through the original post and point out line by line where the problems are, so that it can be clearly seen, which one of Heliocentricity or Geocentricity you think is true, since they both cannot be true at the same time.

I think that doing the above would be better than pointing fingers of better than adequate understanding of the bible.

thank you,

Amazing how satellite pictures and videos are illusions but 'space-time' movement isn't.

, come on now you can do better than that , that is basic university physics.

Notice my statement, I said the illusion of motion with a "frame of reference" (i.e. where the observer is observing from) occurs as a consequence of the relativity.

I did not say space-time is an illusion, please get your facts straight and read through the original post properly, no need to support a dogma via mere misrepresentation of words or statement.

Anyway i am not going to repeat myself, since i have already explained the theory of relativity in simple english, in the original post of this thread, showing why relative motion of the earth from the view of the observer in space (via satelitte videos) can both be interpreted as the relative motion of spacetime against a stationary earth or a relative motion of earth against stationary space time, so you see, nothing spectacular as been said or pointed out by the above quotation.

, yes you can scoff , By the way do you realise that spacecraft paths and trajectories are also calculated based on the assumption that the earth is stationary (something contrary to Heliocentricity) ,

@debosky, @bawomolo , and @posters, yes you are all welcomed, by the way I have seen your initial comments and i have made some modifications to my initial original posting (you would notice the modifications if you painstakingly go through the original posting), so that my reason and arguments are better presented and defended.

Yes i know most of you probably think I am crazy or something, I would also probably have said the same thing about myself before now, assuming I didn't understand the depth of the question this thread is trying to bring forward and answer at this moment in time.

Your kind contribution would be kindly welcomed,

Bawomolo, hello how are you, I hope all is fine and great with you, thank God Almighty,
i know you would have remember by now that "i am not really moved by insults", considering that I left Nairaland for around less than a year because the usernames SYSUSER, SYSUSERX were banned from Nairaland and also because i had lost interest in the forum itself by that time.

Please note that no more personal replies would be directed to either bawomolo or debosky , this thread was started in other to get an informed discussion and not unneccessary personal ridiculing.

Thank you.

DISCLAIMER
----------------

Please if you think your faith is not strong enough, i would advise you not to read nor go through this post, because certain points are going to be raised in defence of the Bible against what your senses tell you so much so that they can either strength or destroy your faith in God and the Bible.
-------------


The Bible is true, irrespective of what your eyes and senses seem to be telling you, don't be deceived, things are not always what it seems, hence why there are things called "visual illusions". Also i have come to realise via study and personal research that there are certain things stated in the bible that clearly shake the foundation of everything we have been taught to be true till this day. Unfortunately, the issue of geocentricity or heliocentricity is one of those issues that is bound to challenge the foundation of either our thinking or belief.

Yes i know some people would scoff at the idea of even trying to consider whether or not Heliocentricity is true or not considering that there is an apparent majority of people who belief in it. However i must inform you that though its true that the majority might have the loudest voice on an issue, yet it still does not determine whether or not what they believe is actually truth or not. Proper and thorough investigation helps to determine the real truth.

Yes i have also flirted with the idea of saying that bible is just being contextual in certain instances, yet it is easy to see that the bible clearly shows that some of those verses are actually records of "physical literal events", and not contextual representation of those events or deeds.

Yes I know this topic would seem like madness and stupidity to certain people, infact certain Christians would question why it is the it is being brought up. Nonetheless let us remember that the Bible clearly says that:


Jud 1:3  Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.



1Pe 3:15  But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be[b] ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear[/b]:


Fortunately for us Christians, the issue of Heliocentricity or Geocentricity goes a long way to provide a test of faith and logic because it strikes at the foundation of our faith. Thus making it an important issue to sort out as Christians. Meaning that if we ourselves are not able to completely overcome any doubts brought about by issues like Heliocentricity and Geocentricity, then we are invariably saying there are uncertain about areas of the Bible that we cannot contend for nor rationalise relative to what we have been taught to think.

Hence their is a serious dilemma which i want each and every person who considers himself a True Christian to please consider and re-examine, because we need to consider whether or not

1. We can always believe your own eyes and senses, whether or not the Bible says or states otherwise.

2. We as True Christians are ready to go over the ledge in faith with the bible,  against generally accepted ideas and against even our own physical senses.

3. A lot of things that you believe are dangerously connected in terms of their falsehood or their being based on generations of falsehood, so much so that you soon realise that merely disproving just one of them makes a lot of other things dependent on them to fall down and collapse. Yes a lot of things in science and everyday life have been built and developed on top of those falsehoods of which people are either too scared to confront or too scared to accept as not being true.

Relativity:
-----------------
Before I start, now there is a little thing known as "relativity" in physics. Relativity simply means the interpretation of a motion between two bodies is dependent on the frame of reference of the observers and where those observers are standing. for example:
- Someone standing on the moon or on earth or on sun would give different interpretations of the motions of either the moon or earth or sun because his/her frame of reference would be different.

- Likewise to a person in a supersonic plane, a snail moving on the ground would look stationary, because the speed of the plane is extremely fast relative to the frame of reference of the observer.



A. According to Creation (i.e. 6 literal days creation) ,  which I completely believe, the bible says that the Earth was created before the Sun.

B. According to Evolution the sun existed before the earth,


Hence present day, cosmologist believe that the:


1.  Earth is going round the Sun,
2.  Earth is rotating on its axis,
3.  Even Pictures and videos from space give the visibly seen impression that the earth is rotating on its axis.


Yet in contradiction to the above generally believed points, the bible says that

1. The Earth is stationary in position, suspended in space and circular according to the bible, according


Isa 40:22  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: - - - - obvious spherical nature of the earth



Job 26:7  He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and[b] hangeth the earth upon nothing[/b].  - - - - suspension in space



1Ch 16:30  Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved. - - - - stationary earth



Psa 96:10  Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously. - - - - stationary earth



Psa 93:1  The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved. - - - - stationary earth


2. The Bible also says that the moon and sun are the ones going around the earth, not the other way round (- - - - yes i know it sounds different from what our senses and education tells us).


Jos 10:11  And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.
Jos 10:12  Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and[b] thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon[/b].
Jos 10:13  And[b] the sun stood still[/b], and[b] the moon stayed[/b], until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
Jos 10:14  And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel


Please notice the following that can be observer from the above bible verses:

           a. The Sun stood still,  i.e. the Sun stopped moving.

           b. The Sun must have been moving for it to have stopped in the first place.

           c. The Moon stood still ,  i.e. the Moon stopped moving

           d. The Moon must have been moving for it to have stopped in the first place.

           e. THE BIBLE MAKES IT CLEAR THAT both the Sun and the Moon stopped moving AT THE SAME TIME

           f. The Bible did not say that the "Earth stopped rotating",  so why do we Christians assume that it said so.

           g. The Bible did not say that the "Earth stopped moving" ,  so why do we Christians assume that it said so.

           h. The Bible did not say that the Earth was rotating in the first place,

           g. If people refuse to believe the bible and thus choose to say that the Earth merely stopped moving around the sun (to make the sun remain in the same place on earth), then it means that for the Moon and Sun to have been seen to stop moving at the same time, then it means they were both not moving in the first place. This is because if we assume Earth is moving around the sun and the Moon is moving around the earth, and the Sun is stationary, then it means that both the Moon and Sun can never become stationary at the same time that the Earth stops moving. This is obvious from simple geometry.


3. The original Michelson–Morsley experiment was NEVER successful, hence there has NEVER been a scientific experiment that proofs that the Earth is rotating nor was it proved that Ether existed or did not exist. By the way it was an experiment that would have shown that the earth was moving through space, yet the results were completely negative,

4. Another Michelson experiment that occurred "around" 1925 via a huge grant from the university of Chicago also failed to detect any rotation of the earth.


5. Also via laws of logic, since the Earth was created before the Sun (by biblical 6-literal day creation accounts which i completely believe) ,  then can you please tell me exactly what it was that the Earth was supposed to be encircling before the Sun was created (if Heliocentricity is assumed).


6. Please let us note that it has been said scientifically that both Heliocentricity (i.e. Stationary Space-time + moving Earth) and Geocentricity (i.e Stationary Earth + moving Space-time) would both produce/allow for the " Coriolis effect". Hence the existence of the Coriolis Effect alone is not a scientific proof for the existence or non existence of either Heliocentricity or Geocentricity.

7. Penultimately, the problem of the existence of the North Star makes things far worse for an Heliocentric view, .simply for the fact that an Earth rotating around the Sun can NEVER NEVER ever have anything called a North Star, for the simple fact that the any star above the earth's north pole area would "constantly" be changing as the if the earth were to be revolving around the sun. Thus the only possible way that North Star can remain aligned is if and only if the EARTH IS STATIONARY , something that is only possible under a Geocentric view.

8. Finally, in response to those who think satellite videos and images are proof for rotation of the earth, please understand that it is deceptive and erroneous to visually try to determine whether or not the earth is rotating or not based on pictures and videos from satellites in space or space station. This is because our eyes "would only get deceived by the illusion of relative motion". By this, I mean our eyes would make us think that space-time is moving around the earth assuming we were standing on the surface of the earth and then looking into space (because our brain automatically takes earth as a stationary reference). At the same time our same eyes would also tell us that the earth is rotating, assuming we were in space looking down on earth, (because our brain in this case automatically takes space as a stationary reference). Hence merely trying to deduce whether or not the earth is rotating merely via what our eyes are seeing, is simply doomed to fail because our results would always give us something different based on our frame of reference. (That was why i tried to simply the basic principle of theory of relativity earlier)

Finally to those who mentioned that the case of Foucault's pendulum proves the earth is rotating, this is not true. Instead the effect noticed via the Foucault's Pendulum is easily explained not to be true via Mach's Principle.
By the way do you realise that the logic of "INERTIA" likewise reveals that it can also be argued that the "non-existence of rotation forces effect on us who are on the surface of the earth" negates the fact that inertia implies that we ought to feel the effect of a earth rotational speed of around 1669.8 km/h.

Also note that If Heliocentricity is assumed or Geocentricity is assumed i.e. the relative motion "illusion effect" result is still the same even if if Space-time is stationary and Earth is moving (within space-time) or If Earth is stationary and Space-time (which encompasses the earth) is moving. Hence it becomes easy for the keen observer to observer the inherent issues of relative motion based on point of observation.

Hence whether we like it or not, there is a seriously big problem between either believing either the Heliocentricity or Geocentricity in relation to Biblical 6-literal day creation. Each of us has to make a decision as to whether or not it is the earth moving through space-time around the sun or is it space-time rotating around the earth and dragging everything else along with it (including the sun).

Hence we have a big problem in our hands:


1. Do we believe Heliocentricity (i.e. the view that the Earth is rotating on its axis and that it is going around the Sun and that the Sun is stationary at the center of the solar system) ?. If the answer is Yes, then there is a big problem because the Bible clearly states that the Earth was created before the Sun.

2. Do we believe the Geocentricity (i.e. the Earth is not rotating and that it is not going round the Sun, but rather that Space-time is actually the one going round the earth, to make it even more interesting, the Bible says the Earth is stationary.)


,  I HOPE AND PRAY THAT YOU WOULD MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE YOURSELF, 

GOD BLESS YOU

, totologically tricks of logic, chai,

That you and i do not completely understand something does not make it false,

Lack of understanding by either of us is not proof for non-existence of what the bible clearly states in plain english, "unless of course you want to believe that" the Bible was lying and being misleading via those verses stated about.

Take heed to know that Knowledge is not equal to Understanding, hence why each True Christian needs to ask for both from God Almigthy,

Exo 35:31  And he hath filled him with the spirit of God, i[b]n wisdom[/b], in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship;


Please don't assume your lack of understanding of the Trinity as a basis of fact for its non-existence, that is dangerous territory!!!!, full of assumptions,

Either take the Bible at its Word or don't , don't try to cherry pick what you choose to believe and what you refuse to beleive.


Thank you,

THE TRINITY WAS IMPLIED AND NOT EXPLICITLY STATED

,

hence by your logic,

God Almighty was lying by His "implication" when He said ,

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.



Also by your logic,

Christ Himself was also lying by His "implication" when He said ,

Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.



Please let your arguments be rooted in biblical verses and not on philosophy, eternity is a long time, its better to be on the side of the Bible than on popular opinion,

.If u want to reject all extra -bibical beleifs of the catholic church u should first of all start with the trinity.there is no way in the bible where the trinity is explicitly stated,It was part of the church beliefs handed down by church fathers(traditions).J

from above link, here  goes your answer,

http://www.wcg.org/lit/god/trinitybible.htm

Here goes your answer:


Joh 10:27  My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28  And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh 10:29  My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Joh 10:30  I and my Father are one.

Joh 10:31  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.



Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.



Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:



Joh 10:27  My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28  And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh 10:29  My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
Joh 10:30  I and my Father are one.
Joh 10:31  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.



2Co 13:14  The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghos[/b]t, be with you all. Amen.



1Pe 1:2  Elect according to the foreknowledge of [b]God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the b[b]lood of Jesus Christ[/b]: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.



Rom 15:16  That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.



1Co 6:11  And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.



1Co 12:4  Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Co 12:5  And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
1Co 12:6  And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

I trust him to be unbiased.

, , you are kidding right, hmm, i thought a particular trustworthy book called "THE BIBLE" said no man was good except God Himself, (hence no single man is 100% trustworthy)

By the way, Seun is my good friend , but come on , even I cannot be trusted to be unbiased, how much more Seun or anybody else, hence WHY SALVATION IS BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH IN CHRIST, SINCE NO SINGLE PERSON IS TRUSTHWORTHY ENOUGH TO EARN IT, likewise no single person is trustworthy enough to moderate perfectly while being 100% unbiased,

The last time i checked: Seun was an Atheist,
Yes asking he knows who I am , and he knows what my views are,

@dayokanu,

u are on your own, don't worry the days of watching EPL at faj cafe instead of going to study would be kept secret,

imagine if nairaland was already popular in the days of Eldorado,

@dayokanu

Kanu,

, did Prof Taiwo teach you to be wasting "chemical engineering resources" on San Siro,

you have a lot to answer for,

Okay let me make something clear,

1. Do I know 100% that the Behemoth is that Dinosaur in the diagram,

Answer: No
Why: Because the bible did not call the animal a dinosaur, (considering that a dinosaur is a recent word, )

2. Do I know 100% that the Behemoth is not an Elephant and also is not an Hippo

Answer: Yes
Why: Because the bible makes it clear that the animal in question has a "cedar like tail" , and neither the elephant nor the hippo has a cedar like tail.

3. Does that make the Amplified Bible translation dangerous and misleading on that particular instance

Answer: Yes
Why: Because it is found to be misleading on that particular instant of Behemoth, and thus we are no longer sure of any other instant in which it is actually also found to be misleading, but which we don't yet know about.

4. So am i wrong to also assume, that the Behemoth was a dinosaur

Answer: Yes, and I apologise for that.
Why: Because as far as I know, the bible english translation does not give us another name for the animal that would help us know that it is 100% a dinosaur.

You are convinced the behemoth is the hebrew/aramaic name for dinosaur based in your own understanding and have condemned the translators of the Amplified Bible, NLT,NASB and other translators to hell because they also tried to do the same thing you are doing with a different result.

Please point out from my statement where i have condemned anyone to hell, please don't attribute to me what i have not said, thank you.

I am just amazed how people are so convinced they are right and use it as an affront and prove evolution wrong. If evolution is wrong, use scientific principles to challenge it and leave the bible out. Trying to define the bible to arrive a pre-conceived disposition is what you accuse others of doing but doing same just like Mr Dawkins is fighting religion the same way and using the same tactics he is accusing religion of doing.

Fortunately, we cannot leave the bible out of the discussion  for two reasons,

1. Evolution (in all its forms) claims to deals with Origin of life as we know it, hence it directly or indirectly sets itself up against the Bible simply because the Bible tells us why we are here, how we came to be here and how life began, so whether you or anyone else for that matter claims to like it or not ,  The Bible is here to stay, in the discussion,

2. Evolution is not science, infact science has been disproving all the theories of evolution one after another .e.g. Bacterium Flagellum, irreducible complexity, proteins, spontenous generation to mention just a few have started to make evolution look more and more like a fairy tale for Adults,

3. Science does not claim to deal with origin of life, science tries to explain how things work not why and how it started in the beginning, evolution is the one trying to do that.

4. Finally Evolution influences the world view of those who belief in it, hence invariably dettermines how they see life and how they make decisions in life,
e.g. Bible says though shall not kill, hence a Bible believing person knows that Abortion is murder,
       Bible person knows why we have morals and the issue of right and wrong in the world, however Evolution does not have any frame of reference to determine right or wrong or morals for that matter, hence evolution invariably supports an immoral view to life, since their absolutely no basis for having morals in the evolutionary world view,

I rest my case thank you,

@lady

Here are professional debaters that accept that scripture alone is unbiblical.

, , how sad,

By the way, when you say professional debaters, do you mean "debaters" that make it a profession (i.e. make money from it) or debaters that speak the truth at all times,

Any way sha, whether they are professional debaters or not is irrelevant, the most and only important thing is that is their statement in agreement with the bible or not, end of story.

Any statement made by any man is not the "standard" by which a True Christian lives, also neither are Catholic Traditions supposed to be copied by ANY TRUE CHRISTIAN:

True Christians are supposed to be :


Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.


, hence true christians are expected to ignore all traditions and professional debaters and instead focus on Christ ALONE.

Thank you,

Thank you for the response, i would try and go through your response later (i am kinda distracted right now, and not really willing to go through it now, ),

Accept my apologies for any misconceptions,

Later,

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.



Act 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:


Hence it is irrelevant whether or not a group of Bishops or Pastors or Deacons or lawyer or engineer or whoever were the ones who added to the bible, their own so called "translated" or "additions" or "interpretations" in either an amplified bible or de-amplified bible.

The important thing is that it is NOT ALLOWED, for obvious reasons such as the one of Behemoth versus Hippo versus Elephant,

THE BIBLE MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS, WE DO NOT NEED TO RE-INTERPRETE IT TO KNOW WHAT IT MEANS,

Thank you,

would you give me a criteria to discredit certain versions of the Bible?

, YES I would, because:

1. The job of interpretation is that of the Holy Spirit not those who translated the bible.

2. Hence ANY, I repeat, ANY bible translation that include their own interpretations or footnotes or meanings into the bible passage being read are simplying doing what is known as "brainwashing", simply because they are trying to tell you what the bible, hence trying to do the job of the Holy Spirit (something not permitted by the Bible itself, )

3. Those "so called translations" have been known to either completely remove or reduce or suppress entire verses of the bible that do not agree with current world view, (e.g. catholic translation which removed the thou shall not worship graven image part, ),

4. Hence you need to try to read a Bible translation that does not have "any footnote" , hence that does not try to tell you what the bible is saying, simply because trying to do that is not their job, and they know it,

5. It is such flawed translations that give the false ideas that you now obviously have as per the Behemoth, Hippo has no Cedar like tail, Elephant has no Cedar like tail, hence its either the Bible is lying by saying the animal in question has a Cedar like tail or its the particular bible translations that are lying by trying to imply that the Bible is talking about an elephant or an Hippo, its obvious to see who's lying (The Word of God does not need any human help, end of story, ) , any way sha, still the choice is yours, make your own decision about what you would believe, we are all going to stand before the judgement throne as individuals and not as translation biased groups,

Thank you, God Almighty loves you

Okay, sorry, maybe we started on the wrong foot here, because you keep giving off pheromones that keep giving the impression that you have other possibilities of how creation might [/b]have occurred different from what the Bible clearly says in black or white.
Please help me and others reading this thread to please understand you more clearly:

Hence my questions are these:

1. I need to know what your stand is concerning either Creation or Evolution, no equivocation please!.

2. Is Creation true and Evolution false, or,

3. Is Evolution true and Creation false.

4. If you say Creation is True, then how many days or years or months did you think it took God to start and finish the job.

5. Can you please show me where and how the bible says that a single day (consisting of 1 day-time + 1 night-time) in which man woke up and slept is different from our own single day that we have today (since it seems you have an impression that a single day "[b]might" have meant something else than what we have today) , irrespective of whether we use 24hrs or 30 hours to subdivide that particular day or not.

Hence you answers would determine the next line of action or question,

That is still debatable whether it is a hippo or elephant.

hippo or elephant , you are kidding right , Yea right,


ob 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
Job 40:16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
Job 40:17 He moveth[b] his tail like a cedar[/b]: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
Job 40:18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
Job 40:19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
Job 40:20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
Job 40:21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
Job 40:22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
Job 40:23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
Job 40:24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

Please bible students should please check the following and let us do a little bit of bible study here,

Let's note that the bible said that


Rev 18:3  For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the[b] merchants of the earth[/b] are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.


Rev 18:11  And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:
Rev 18:12  The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,
Rev 18:13  And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men.
Rev 18:14  And the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and all things which were dainty and goodly are departed from thee, and thou shalt find them no more at all.
Rev 18:15  The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing,



Rev 18:23  And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for[b] thy merchants were the great men of the earth[/b];for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.



Questions
-----------------


1. Who are the Merchants

2. Who is the bible refering to as "HER"

banom:
How can i get to that guy ?, i was told he still lives, I just heard he was a capenter and for 18 years he was helping his father making furniture, and from his record, i guess he was a genius, i want him to construct one for me,

How do i get to him ?

, in this last days (which we are in right now),


2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,


, in the words of Stephen,

Act 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.



, in the words of Christ Himself,

Luk 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.


Let it be Lord ,

OLAADEGBU:
The onus is on you to tell us why the transitional fossils are missing, since your theory teaches that one kind of animal had evolved into another, that is, from goo to you via the zoo.  Have you or anyone ever observed this transition?  Guess what, Prof. Richard Dawkins has eventually composed himself and come up with an answer; "evolution has been observed it's just that it hasnt't been observed while it's happening."  What a genius. 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/1107spectator.asp

, lol,  , yea right,

I am also a very good footballer and I'm better than ronaldinho,  , its just that i have not played enough for people to see me play at all,

Talk about "illogical logic ",,

Sometimes you just have to marvel at the fact that the Devil (Lucifer, Satan whatever u choose to call him) seems to be very good at making something that is basically senseless and illogical to still become so appealing to so many people,, that some people would do or say anything just to protect it, , "yes he even pulled it off with i.s.l.a.m sef", , now Evolution is trying the same trick,

Chai, the body of Christ don suffer no be small,

, it is well sha, even inside the well,

it has occured to me that most traditions "Easter", "Christmas", "Santa Claus", "Valentine", seem to be recognised worldwide by default even by people that call themselves "True Christians".
My question however is that should a person who considers himself or herself a "True Christian", care for or even bother to celebrate such days at all ,

1. if your answer is Yes, is there Bible verses to back it up.

2. if your answer is No, is there also Bible verses to back it up.

Am a Bible believing person so i would appreciate giving answers that have biblical basis, I am not interested in "Philosophical statements" (they are worthless to me, ),

o

OLAADEGBU:
Large Gaps

These quotes from evolutionist scientists are so much for the evidence of the transitional fossils that you are now celebrating. Who is deceiving who?

"There are all sorts of gaps: absence of gradationally intermediate 'transitional' forms between species, but also between larger groups - between, say, families of carnivores, or the orders of mammals. In fact, the higher up the Linnaean hierarchy you look, the fewer transitional forms there seem to be." (Eldredge, Niles, The Monkey Business: A Scientist Looks at Creationism, 1982, p. 65)

"It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. , Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and (we) both reject this alternative." (Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, p. 229-230)

"All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt. Gradualists usually extract themselves from this dilemma by invoking the extreme imperfection of the fossil record." (Gould, Stephen J., The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 189)

"One of the most surprising negative results of paleontological research in the last century is that such transitional forms seem to be inordinately scarce. In Darwin's time this could perhaps be ascribed with some justification to the incompleteness of the paleontological record and to lack of knowledge, but with the enormous number of fossil species which have been discovered since then, other causes must be found for the almost complete absence of transitional forms." (Brouwer, A., "General Paleontology," [1959], Transl. Kaye R.H., Oliver & Boyd: Edinburgh & London, 1967, p. 162-163)

"[color=#990000]There is no need to apologize any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In some ways it has become almost unmanageably rich, and discovery is out-pacing integration. The fossil record nevertheless continues to be composed mainly of gaps."[/color] (Neville, George, T., "Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective," Science Progress, vol. 48 January 1960, p. 1-3)

"The record jumps, and all the evidence shows that the record is real: the gaps we see reflect real events in life's history not the artifact of a poor fossil record, The fossil record flatly fails to substantiate this expectation of finely graded change." (Eldredge, N. and Tattersall, I., The Myths of Human Evolution Columbia University Press, 1982, p. 59, 163)

"Gaps between families and taxa of even higher rank could not be so easily explained as the mere artifacts of a poor fossil record." (Eldredge, Niles, Macro-Evolutionary Dynamics: Species, Niches, and Adaptive Peaks, 1989, p. 22)

"The fossil record is much less incomplete than is generally accepted[/color]." (Paul, C.R.C, "The Adequacy of the Fossil Record," 1982, p. 75)

"[color=#000099]Links are missing just where we most fervently desire them, and it is all too probable that many 'links' will continue to be missing." (Jepsen, L. Glenn; Mayr, Ernst; Simpson George Gaylord. Genetics, Paleontology, and Evolution, New York, Athenaeum, 1963, p. 114)

"For over a hundred years paleontologists have recognized the large number of gaps in the fossil record. Creationists make it seem like gaps are a deep, dark secret of paleontology, " (Cracraft, in Awbrey & Thwaites, Evolutionists Confront Creationists", 1984)

"In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favour of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation." (Ridley, Mark, "Who doubts evolution?" "New Scientist", vol. 90, 25 June 1981, p. 831)

"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualist accounts of evolution." (Gould, Stephen J., 'Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?' Paleobiology, vol 6(1), January 1980, p. 127)

"The curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps; the fossils are missing in all the important places." (Hitching, Francis, The Neck of the Giraffe or Where Darwin Went Wrong, Penguin Books, 1982, p.19)

"If life had evolved into its wondrous profusion of creatures little by little, Dr. Eldredge argues, then one would expect to find fossils of transitional creatures which were a bit like what went before them and a bit like what came after. But no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures. This oddity has been attributed to gaps in the fossil record which gradualists expected to fill when rock strata of the proper age had been found. In the last decade, however, geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them." (The Guardian Weekly, 26 Nov 1978, vol 119, no 22, p. 1)

"Given that evolution, according to Darwin, was in a continual state of motion, it followed logically that the fossil record should be rife with examples of transitional forms leading from the less to more evolved. , Instead of filling the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational intermediates between documented fossil species." (Schwartz, Jeffrey H., Sudden Origins, 1999, p. 89)

"Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of "seeing" evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists the most notorious of which is the presence of "gaps" in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them. The gaps must therefore be a contingent feature of the record." (Kitts, David B., "Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory," Evolution, vol. 28, 1974, p. 467)

"A persistent problem in evolutionary biology has been the absence of intermediate forms in the fossil record. Long term gradual transformations of single lineages are rare and generally involve simple size increase or trivial phenotypic effects. Typically, the record consists of successive ancestor-descendant lineages, morphologically invariant through time and unconnected by intermediates." (Williamson, P.G., Palaeontological Documentation of Speciation in Cenozoic Molluscs from Turkana Basin, 1982, p. 163)

It is just astounding why a sane and thinking person would want to put his "faith" in something that as inherently flawed and increasingly being shown to be false as evolution, and yet the same person would want to claim to be scientific or logical or open-minded. Can't the person see that he/she is throwing away a chance that those already condemned by death would do anything to have a second chance at.

At times i simply don't understand the rationale, it beggars belief,

I think True Christians really have to thank and praise God Almigthy that , "He choose to show mercy to whom he choose to show mercy to" otherwise it would have been a case of this:
"

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
"

OLAADEGBU:
@debosky and the gang,   

I now understand another reason that explains the struggle you guys are going through, and this is due to the gap theories that you subscribe to, which holds a literal view of Genesis, a belief in an extremely long but unidentified age of the earth and an obligation to fit the origin of most of the geologic strata and other geologic evidences between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.  I realised that some of them even oppose the evolution theory but believe in an ancient origin of the universe, supported by some bible commentaries, such as Dake's, .  Click on the link below to find out the problems with this gap theory and see the consequences of pichting your tent with this theory.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/gap-ruin-reconstruction-theories

thank you jare , I have also tried to reason with him that fixating on "spirit over water conundrum" is merely a symptom of trying to take an idea outside of the bible and then put it into the bible by claiming that a the spirit "might" (guess work) have moved over the waters for millions of years or whateever.

A Day since creation has always been "daytime + night time", however it seems that is simply not enough, hence why i have pleaded with him to realise that he's falling into the trap of "lies" popularised by the certain so called "evolutionary Christians".

Infact i think i also mentioned somewhere on a thread to someone (unfortunately I can't remember) that this idea of not believing God is Truthful when HE said He created everything in 6 literal days (where 1 day = 1 daytime + 1 night time) , simply stems from the fact that some people (like me in the past before now, ) were also brainwashed into believing the GAP THEORY of trying to squeeze millions of years into the bible in other to try to believe creation and evolution at the same time.

Am sorry but i think the Bible is okay without extra additions from outside ideas, thank you  atheists and evolutionist and progressive creationist and gap theorist, you input is not needed to make God True, HE already is the Truth, The Way and Life,

STOP PRESS
----------------

correction Cesare Borgia was not a spaniard, rather he was a spanish-italian

chukwudi44:
no2atheism u re sick, there is no difference b/w u and atheists.where did u read that paul and moses were blacks

Am sorry that you first line of attack is for you to call me sick, its unfortunate.

1. Yes knowing whether or not Christ, Moses, Paul we black or not is irrelevant in the issue of salvation,

2. Yes Christ died for all people irrespective of their skin colour,

3. What I am talking about in the case of Christ, Moses, Paul and others being people that we would consider "black" people today is based on the fact that it would open the eyes of many people reading this now ,  to the understanding that it is dangerous to just believe and not crosscheck against the Bible what we have watched in movies, what we have been taught in schools and what we have been indoctrinated with while growing up ,
By the way, I also used to think that those people who said Christ was black, were just "nutjobs", until I searched and checked the scriptures myself, to see if what they said was in agreement with the scriptures or not.

4. Christ himself in the book of revelation (the book about this our last days) said that some set of people are going to be lying about their true identity, guess the people he said are going to lying about their true identity, The Jews.

Rev 2:9  I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them [b]which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. [/b]

Rev 3:9  Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, [b]which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
[/b]


Now ask yourself, who exactly are the people calling themselves Jews in this our present generation, yes you got right, some European White people are the ones calling themselves Jews, please study and find out about Sephardic Jews, Ashkenazi Jews and Falasha Jews,

By the way, things start getting much more interesting when you realise that you would hardly be able to recognise any difference between a Falasha Jew and an Ethiopian.

(Remember the bible says we should study to show thyself approved, also remember Berean Christians are expected to go back and crosscheck the Bible themselves, they are not just expected to remain indoctrinated by what someone else has said.)
So in essence some people calling themselves are actually not the same people as the blood line of the ancient Isrealites,
You know what I am going to believe Christ Himself and The Bible ,  even if my senses, past indoctrination and other people are screaming against it, hence the reason why I feel compelled to let people see what I am talking about, before they make judgements against me for taking a stand solely based on what the bible clearly says and not on what people popularly believe.

Now a True Christian considers that the Bible is "true" in every way, meaning that if the bible says something is "black" and every other person says it is "white", who exactly are we supposed to believe even in the face of insults, Yes we are supposed to believe the Bible.
Remember the case in which "almost everyone" was saying the earth was flat, yet the bible had already said the earth was round, also remember that the bible had already said the "earth was hanging on nothing", yet we just recently discovered through science that the earth was suspended on nothing in space. So you see, popular opinion is not always indicative of biblical truth, hence why True Christians have to always stand back and make sure whatever they believe is in agreement with the bible, simply because popular opinion would pass away but the Word of God Almighty would always be true, no matter the opposition from you and I.


5. Yes the bible also instructs us to speak the "truth" in all things no matter the consequence , 

6. Yes I know the catholic church claims Christ, Moses, Paul and others are "white",  hence i know i am going to anger a lot of catholics because of my statements. However all catholics and other angered Christians should please note that most of your Christ portraits that you have probably seen were either based on the image of a Spaniard known as Cesare Borgia, born (September 13, 1475 – March 12, 1507) alongside other depictions of Biblical characters as white by European artists of which Michael Angelo was one. Now ask yourself the question since those Europeans were not there during the time Christ how did they know what he looked like,
(see picture of Cesare Borgia below at the end and compare it to the image of Christ that you have been indoctrinated with)

a. Is it possible to find what the Romans thought Christ and others looked like, since the romans had existed during then
b. What exactly did the bible say Christ and others looked like.

Fortunately for us, there exists some "roman coins" (shown below at the end) depicting impression that the romans (who were white people by the way), clearly showed that the Jews of that time were clearly "Not White".


7. Yes I know Hollywood portrays Christ, Moses, Paul and others are "white",

8. Yes I know it is disturbing, and scary for people to realise that they've been brainwashed and lie to when it comes to the Ethnicity of Moses, Christ, Paul and others, I was also shocked when i realised that what the Bible clearly says about them is different from what we have all been brought up to believe about their ethnicity.

9. Yes the bible instructs True Christians to be as gentle as doves at the same time be as wise as serpents, "meaning we must get our facts and head right both in the spiritual and physical realm", and the only way to get out facts right is to check exactly what the bible says in each situation.

10. Yes I know the Catholic church has ancient images and idols of Mary and Christ portraying them as black, yes please find out: even your so called Popes have been known to secretly bow down to the black Madonna (yes please check catholic history, you'll be suprised the amount of lies and things that would be dug up),

11. Some catholic representatives have been known to gradually replace images and statues of black statues with White ones over the ages.

12. Some catholic representatives have been known to claim that "lie" that the reason those statues and images became black was because they darkened over time, funny that they saw that because the "white eye ball areas" of those statues somehow don't darken over time despite that they claim that the idols had darkened over time.

13. Yes the bible clearly shows that Ham and his descendants Cush, Mizraim (i.e. who is also known as Egypt or Kemet) are people we would consider today to be "black" people, you can check that up in the bible for your own confirmation.

14. Recent Historical and Archeological findings goes to show that it is true that Civilisations known as Nubia, Egypt and Olmecs were indeed black civilisations, yes i know the present people in Egypt don't look black, well that is because Arabs invaded them and colonised the area, just the same way as "White South Africans" are not the same as the "Native Black South Africans", "White Americans" are not "Native Americans", "White Australians" are not the same as the "Black Native Australians", unless off course you want to believe that 400 years in the future it would be okay for people then to claim that "White South Africans descended from the Native Black South Africans".

15. Biology shows us that for Noah to have been the father of all races, then it means that he and his wife combined to produce both the white genes and the black genes in their children ,

16. Please note that someone can be an ancient Isrealite and not be an ancient Jew, why!?, well the answer lies in the fact that a Jew is anyone with comes only from the Tribe of Judah, while an Isrealite is anyone who comes from any of the Tribes that make up Isreal.

17. So now here is what we know:

a. We know that the Ethiopians are people considered to "black" , 
b. We know that Egyptians are also people consider to be "black" , (Bible says so for those faithful enough to believe and take the Bible at its word, physical evidence also shows so for those not so believing)


So now based on those two points let's see what the Bible tells about the ethnicity of Moses (an Isrealite), Paul (a Jew an Isrealite), Christ (a Jew and Isrealite) ,
,


Infact don't you realise that Moses had to be someone with black skin (i.e. a Black Man, Negro, Blackee which ever one you wish to call him) considering that he was brought up in the house of Pharaoh as an egyptian even while isrealites had already started to suffer persecution from the egyptians, he was mistaken for an egyptian by the daugthers of his father inlaw when he fled Egypt after killing the egyptian and also considering that the family of Isreal ( i.e. Jacob) were mistaken for Egyptians when they were on the procession to bury the dead during the time of Joseph before Moses. Yes Ancient Egyptians and Ancient Egypt was essentially a Black Man's Civilisation (yes the Arabs in Egypt today are mere intruders and trespassers just as Europeans who colonised American are not the original owners of America) 



Exodus 2:11  And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
Exodus 2:12  And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
Exodus 2:13  And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?
Exodus 2:14  And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known.
Exodus 2:15  Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well.





Exodus 2:17  And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock.
Exodus 2:18  And when they came to Reuel their father, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon to day?
Exodus 2:19  And they said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and also drew water enough for us, and watered the flock.



Gen 50:7  And Joseph went up to bury his father: and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt,
Gen 50:8  And all the house of Joseph, and his brethren, and his father's house: only their little ones, and their flocks, and their herds, they left in the land of Goshen.
Gen 50:9  And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen: and it was a very great company.
Gen 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, which is beyond Jordan, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation: and he made a mourning for his father seven days.
Gen 50:11 And when the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning in the floor of Atad, they said, This is a grievous mourning to the Egyptians: wherefore the name of it was called Abelmizraim, which is beyond Jordan.


d. Paul himself was mistaken for an Egyptian (a black man) by the certain people during his time.



Act 21:37  And as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek?
Act 21:38  Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Act 21:39  But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people.



e. God Himself refered to the Isrealites as a people that are like the Ethiopians,



Amos 9:7 Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the LORD. Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt? and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?





,

SO PLEASE CAN YOU KINDLY GO THROUGH ALL THAT I HAVE SAID ABOVE AND STILL DECIDE TO HAUL INSULTS AT ME, MERELY FOR FOLLOWING WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.

HENCE  EACH OF US IS LEFT WITH AN UNUSUAL CHOICE, WE EITHER IGNORE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS AND BELIEVE WHAT EVERYBODY THINKS OR WE IGNORE WHAT EVERYBODY THINKS AND BELIEVE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS,

Obviously from @chukwudi44 comments it seems that my own crime is for believing for the bible says,