Two! Four! Six! Eight! JaySecrets Prevaricates!

[Fuzzy1975]

Psalm 19:4–6 (KJV): 4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

This doesn't support the earth orbiting the sun, nor even that the sun is the center of the solar system. Hell it doesn't even purport that the Earth is the center of the Universe.

It means "The heavens and the sky offer testimony about God both night and day. This revelation reaches everyone, just as the sun in its strength appears daily and reaches everywhere. This establishes, in part, the idea that all people have ample evidence telling them that God exists"
That from a bible study site.....
https://www.bibleref.com/Psalms/19/...y about God both,telling them that God exists.

 

[JaySecrets]

This doesn't support the earth orbiting the sun, nor even that the sun is the center of the solar system. Hell it doesn't even purport that the Earth is the center of the Universe.

It means "The heavens and the sky offer testimony about God both night and day. This revelation reaches everyone, just as the sun in its strength appears daily and reaches everywhere. This establishes, in part, the idea that all people have ample evidence telling them that God exists"
That from a bible study site.....
https://www.bibleref.com/Psalms/19/Psalm-19-4.html#:~:text=The heavens and the sky offer testimony about God both,telling them that God exists.

Psalm 19:5-6 contains several interesting scientific facts. In speaking of the Sun, the psalmist suggested that “his going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it; and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.” For years, Bible critics scoffed at Bible believers, stating that this verse taught the false concept of geocentricity (i.e., the Sun revolves around the Earth). Then it was discovered that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of our solar system. People subsequently felt that the Sun was stationary, with the Earth revolving around it. Only fairly recently has it been discovered that rather than being fixed in space, the Sun actually is in an orbit of its own. In fact, it is estimated to be moving through space at the rate of 600,000 miles per hour, in an orbit so large it would take approximately 220,000,000 years to complete just one orbit. How did the psalmist portray such accurate statements—when people of this day, and for centuries afterward, taught that just the opposite was true? And, by the way, there is another gem packed away in these two verses. The psalmist hinted at the fact that the Sun is the source of energy for the Earth (“and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof”). An amazing statement, is it not, considering when it was written, and by whom?

From another Bible study site

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Psalm 19:5-6 contains several interesting scientific facts. In speaking of the Sun, the psalmist suggested that “his going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it; and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.” For years, Bible critics scoffed at Bible believers, stating that this verse taught the false concept of geocentricity (i.e., the Sun revolves around the Earth). Then it was discovered that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of our solar system. People subsequently felt that the Sun was stationary, with the Earth revolving around it. Only fairly recently has it been discovered that rather than being fixed in space, the Sun actually is in an orbit of its own. In fact, it is estimated to be moving through space at the rate of 600,000 miles per hour, in an orbit so large it would take approximately 220,000,000 years to complete just one orbit. How did the psalmist portray such accurate statements—when people of this day, and for centuries afterward, taught that just the opposite was true? And, by the way, there is another gem packed away in these two verses. The psalmist hinted at the fact that the Sun is the source of energy for the Earth (“and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof”). An amazing statement, is it not, considering when it was written, and by whom?

From another Bible study site

Where is the link to the bible study site. Otherwise you are once again just spewing words. I used three sites in my rebuttal, though I only quoted and cited one site.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I don't know. I was asked and I answered. Ask Spidey what it has to do with the thread.

More lies. You brought up that there are fake religions. I asked you about that after you brought it up.

 

[RoryN]

The (currently) most pious member of the PB lies constantly, and vehemently supports a proven serial liar for President.

Truth.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The (currently) most pious member of the PB lies constantly, and vehemently supports a proven serial liar for President.

Truth.

A liar, misogynist and someone who has no respect for the sanctity of marriage.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

A liar, misogynist and someone who has no respect for the sanctity of marriage.

But hey, his Religion say's he can just confess and ask for forgiveness.

 

[JaySecrets]

Where is the link to the bible study site. Otherwise you are once again just spewing words. I used three sites in my rebuttal, though I only quoted and cited one site.

https://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/08/16/the-orbit-of-the-sun/

 

[Fuzzy1975]

https://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/08/16/the-orbit-of-the-sun/

Thanks for this interpretation.

From the article:

"People subsequently felt that the Sun was stationary, with the Earth revolving around it. Only fairly recently has it been discovered that rather than being fixed in space, the Sun actually is in an orbit of its own. In fact, it is estimated to be moving through space at the rate of 600,000 miles per hour, in an orbit so large it would take approximately 220,000,000 years to complete just one orbit."

If recently is 1918, then I agree.

" How did the psalmist portray such accurate statements—when people of this day, and for centuries afterward, taught that just the opposite was true?"

Aristarchus predicted this in 230 BC.

"The psalmist hinted at the fact that the Sun is the source of energy for the Earth (“and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof”). An amazing statement, is it not, considering when it was written, and by whom?"

Duh, ever felt the heat from the sun....

Sorry but I'm sticking with my citation as being the correct meaning...

 

[Pad_Foot]

Yup! The Psalmist knew about the rotation of the Milky Way! You forgot to mention that our galaxy is also tracking through space on route to a collision.

All this was known to those writing in Biblical times. Then it was forgotten ? Have you seen Galileo’s hand? Some say still flipping the Church off (probably not true.. cuz Italians don’t use “the finger”), but they excommunicated the man!!

You know better than all those who came before you.

So we agree on the point in time of ALL Creation?? Long before “His story” began 12,000 years ago?

And… volcano doesn’t get its heat from the sun.

 

[ll74]

Yup! The Psalmist knew about the rotation of the Milky Way! You forgot to mention that our galaxy is also tracking through space on route to a collision.

All this was known to those writing in Biblical times. Then it was forgotten ? Have you seen Galileo’s hand? Some say still flipping the Church off (probably not true.. cuz Italians don’t use “the finger”), but they excommunicated the man!!

You know better than all those who came before you.

So we agree on the point in time of ALL Creation?? Long before “His story” began 12,000 years ago?

And… volcano doesn’t get its heat from the sun.

Religion tends to have views that are convenient until things change. Then they have explanations for why things changed.

 

[jomar]

Until it's born and then... Are you kidding me? Conservatives and Christians are the number one demographic of people adopting and fostering kids, and that's by a LOT.

That’s nice but so what? Your side wants them born then shuts down support programs for the women you force to carry to term. So you’re essentially pro-birth but not pro-child

 

[butters]

i can't waste my time arguing back and forth with someone so delusional he's a creationist. ffs. there's only one good reason anyone can believe that crap today and it's a lack of good education, where science is dismissed as 'just theories' and hold less water (flood reference, ya) than biblical tales. jeez.

 

[JaySecrets]

That’s nice but so what? Your side wants them born then shuts down support programs for the women you force to carry to term. So you’re essentially pro-birth but not pro-child

We want less GOVERNMENT spending BECAUSE they are clunky and inefficient. Do you know how little of the money from taxes for those programs actually gets to the women? Most of it goes to a bloated bureaucracy where everyone wants their cut before the women see any of it! We want less GOVERNMENT spending so that private citizens and non-profs and churches, all equipped to do that outreach most effectively and efficiently, the ones who already do it on very limited budgets, can have access to do MORE! We are actively trying to get real help TO the women by getting the resources to those who are actually good at it! Same with the children. And we already put our money and time where our claims are. So how are we just "pro-birth but not pro-child"? We are the ones DOING the pro-child and pro-mother work, not the liberals. The stats bear that out to be true. I've shown those stats before. Your side keeps equating bigger government with more compassion. Our side understands that bigger government means more government power and less individual freedoms.

Oh, and if the social welfare programs aren't there, they aren't costing the tax payer. Which means that single mother keeps a lot more of her money. Which means she needs far less assistance and has a better route out of poverty. Your side uses compassionate sounding words, but they actually have horrible outcomes. My side uses language that isn't emotionally appealing, but leads to actual freedom and real compassion in the community. Which side really cares in the end? Hmmm...

 

[JaySecrets]

i can't waste my time arguing back and forth with someone so delusional he's a creationist. ffs. there's only one good reason anyone can believe that crap today and it's a lack of good education, where science is dismissed as 'just theories' and hold less more water (flood reference, ya) than biblical tales. jeez.

https://www.icr.org
https://answersingenesis.org

Since it's so easily disproven and non-scientific, go to these scientific sites, bring up your challenges (they have really great in-site search engines), even contact them with your questions and objections. They will actually respond. Then post your entire interaction, unedited on here and show how you disproved those stupid Creationists. Should be easy since you have science on your side.

 

[ll74]

https://www.icr.org
https://answersingenesis.org

Since it's so easily disproven and non-scientific, go to these scientific sites, bring up your challenges (they have really great in-site search engines), even contact them with your questions and objections. They will actually respond. Then post your entire interaction, unedited on here and show how you disproved those stupid Creationists. Should be easy since you have science on your side.

Fyi - neither of those sites is scientific. They both are layman/non-scoentists reading through scientific data and giving their layman/religious perspectives about each. (I.e. scientists discussing missing genomes with the commentary -"how do they know it's missing?")

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

We want less GOVERNMENT spending BECAUSE they are clunky and inefficient. Do you know how little of the money from taxes for those programs actually gets to the women? Most of it goes to a bloated bureaucracy where everyone wants their cut before the women see any of it! We want less GOVERNMENT spending so that private citizens and non-profs and churches, all equipped to do that outreach most effectively and efficiently, the ones who already do it on very limited budgets, can have access to do MORE! We are actively trying to get real help TO the women by getting the resources to those who are actually good at it! Same with the children. And we already put our money and time where our claims are. So how are we just "pro-birth but not pro-child"? We are the ones DOING the pro-child and pro-mother work, not the liberals. The stats bear that out to be true. I've shown those stats before. Your side keeps equating bigger government with more compassion. Our side understands that bigger government means more government power and less individual freedoms.

Oh, and if the social welfare programs aren't there, they aren't costing the tax payer. Which means that single mother keeps a lot more of her money. Which means she needs far less assistance and has a better route out of poverty. Your side uses compassionate sounding words, but they actually have horrible outcomes. My side uses language that isn't emotionally appealing, but leads to actual freedom and real compassion in the community. Which side really cares in the end? Hmmm...

Render unto Cesar that which is Cesar’s

 

[butters]

Fyi - neither of those sites is scientific. They both are layman/non-scoentists reading through scientific data and giving their layman/religious perspectives about each. (I.e. scientists discussing missing genomes with the commentary -"how do they know it's missing?")

as if i have the time to waste with such nonsense, too. it's what they do and life is too short.

I don't have the patience nowadays. I let younger (or bored) people waste breath engaging with such insanity; i'm not paid to educate the willfully deaf, blind and religious... been there, tried it, made zero difference.

 

[ll74]

as if i have the time to waste with such nonsense, too. it's what they do and life is too short.

I don't have the patience nowadays. I let younger (or bored) people waste breath engaging with such insanity; i'm not paid to educate the willfully deaf, blind and religious... been there, tried it, made zero difference.

I just read through the first entries on each. Both incorrectly interpret scientific studies and suggest that this "destroys" the evolution position rather than understand their error.

 

[jomar]

We want less GOVERNMENT spending BECAUSE they are clunky and inefficient. Do you know how little of the money from taxes for those programs actually gets to the women? Most of it goes to a bloated bureaucracy where everyone wants their cut before the women see any of it! We want less GOVERNMENT spending so that private citizens and non-profs and churches, all equipped to do that outreach most effectively and efficiently, the ones who already do it on very limited budgets, can have access to do MORE! We are actively trying to get real help TO the women by getting the resources to those who are actually good at it! Same with the children. And we already put our money and time where our claims are. So how are we just "pro-birth but not pro-child"? We are the ones DOING the pro-child and pro-mother work, not the liberals. The stats bear that out to be true. I've shown those stats before. Your side keeps equating bigger government with more compassion. Our side understands that bigger government means more government power and less individual freedoms.

Oh, and if the social welfare programs aren't there, they aren't costing the tax payer. Which means that single mother keeps a lot more of her money. Which means she needs far less assistance and has a better route out of poverty. Your side uses compassionate sounding words, but they actually have horrible outcomes. My side uses language that isn't emotionally appealing, but leads to actual freedom and real compassion in the community. Which side really cares in the end? Hmmm...

If you are actually doing what you’re saying then good for you.

But I haven’t seen any reports saying your good charitable work is meeting the needs of single mothers (since you mentioned them) or other mothers in need of programs such as wic. Yes, I saw some of your stats on adoption and foster care (that don’t prove what you claim it did), not for what you mentioned in your post here. And you do a fine job of sounding reasonable while exaggerating the magnitude of what you say your Christian community is doing and minimizing the real world needs of moms your side forces to bear children in the face of Repub led diminishing resources.

 

[butters]

I just read through the first entries on each. Both incorrectly interpret scientific studies and suggest that this "destroys" the evolution position rather than understand their error.

don't get me wrong, i'm glad someone calls these people out on their brands of bullshit... i just can't be bothered any longer,for the most part anyway.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Hmmm... I have responded to you and your crowd. You have spammed every post I make, and every thread, and have flooded the zone.

Spaming is someone posting the same thing over and over, be it a site, or a message. I am participating in a thread. Don't like me calling you out, stop posting. Simple.

I have simply responded to your positions with my own, citing backing information. So, 1, where is the violation and, 2, how am I guilty of ANYTHING you have not done at length?

• Do not upload any copyright protected images, text, audio, or video. If you did not create a photo or other work, you probably do not have the legal right to post it on the forum. Fair use laws allow some very limited posting of copyrighted material, such as short excerpts from articles (please limit to under four paragraphs) and screen captures from movies, under certain circumstances. Please do a Google search under “Fair Use” if you want to understand this issue better. Members repeatedly posting copyright materials without authorization of the copyright owner will be banned.

I can bring up a dozen posts of yours in the last day where you never once cited the creator/copyright owner and also where you used more than what would be considered "Fair use".

It is no surprise to me that you are actually too mentally incompetent to understand these rules, so maybe you will just get a warning....

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Spaming is someone posting the same thing over and over, be it a site, or a message. I am participating in a thread. Don't like me calling you out, stop posting. Simple.

• Do not upload any copyright protected images, text, audio, or video. If you did not create a photo or other work, you probably do not have the legal right to post it on the forum. Fair use laws allow some very limited posting of copyrighted material, such as short excerpts from articles (please limit to under four paragraphs) and screen captures from movies, under certain circumstances. Please do a Google search under “Fair Use” if you want to understand this issue better. Members repeatedly posting copyright materials without authorization of the copyright owner will be banned.

I can bring up a dozen posts of yours in the last day where you never once cited the creator/copyright owner and also where you used more than what would be considered "Fair use".

It is no surprise to me that you are actually too mentally incompetent to understand these rules, so maybe you will just get a warning....

I’ve reported him for it as well, we’ll see what admin does.

 

[ll74]

Spaming is someone posting the same thing over and over, be it a site, or a message. I am participating in a thread. Don't like me calling you out, stop posting. Simple.

• Do not upload any copyright protected images, text, audio, or video. If you did not create a photo or other work, you probably do not have the legal right to post it on the forum. Fair use laws allow some very limited posting of copyrighted material, such as short excerpts from articles (please limit to under four paragraphs) and screen captures from movies, under certain circumstances. Please do a Google search under “Fair Use” if you want to understand this issue better. Members repeatedly posting copyright materials without authorization of the copyright owner will be banned.

I can bring up a dozen posts of yours in the last day where you never once cited the creator/copyright owner and also where you used more than what would be considered "Fair use".

It is no surprise to me that you are actually too mentally incompetent to understand these rules, so maybe you will just get a warning....

It's amazing how so many people can't figure out or don't understand what citing your sources is about. They must've failed creative writing.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It's amazing how so many people can't figure out or don't understand what citing your sources is about. They must've failed creative writing.

Yep, and how many have been banned multiple times for failing to understand.