The Only Begotten Bastard

[Justus]

 

 

 

 

 

 

No private interpretation needed Justus-  

 

Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation.   

 

 

Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter.

.

.

.

2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

New International Version.

 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 

 

American Standard Version

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

 

Young' Literal translation

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,

 

Orthodox Jewish Bible

20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation.

.

.

.

Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...?

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm

 

 

Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation.   

 

And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation.

 

Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there?

 

 

2 Cor 13:5

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

No wonder those of you who are x christians are just a homely as those who still are. 

 

2 Tim 3:7

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

 

The humble Photon.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon  A massless fundamental particle that your eyes are using to read this, Justus.

why do you think I said the following:

 

there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massless particles

 

Got to go have a great rest of the weekend.

 

 

 

Nobody can tell what you think you are saying.  Nonsense is a poor substitute for an argument.

 

 

Try reading then, 'there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massles particles"    Talk about  ignorance. 

 

 

Ah... I think I get now, Justus.

 

You aren't interested in any evidence about massless particles like photons.  

That's why you consider there to be no reason to talk about evidence for them.  Gotcha!

.

.

.

You believe what you believe about them by faith and private interpretation, given to you by the Holy Spirit.

.

.

.

Evidence just doesn't enter the equation for you.

 

Silly me!   

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No private interpretation needed Justus-  

 

Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation.   

 

 

Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter.

.

.

.

2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

New International Version.

 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 

 

American Standard Version

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

 

Young' Literal translation

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,

 

Orthodox Jewish Bible

20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation.

.

.

.

Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...?

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm

 

 

Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation.   

 

And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation.

 

Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there?

 

 

2 Cor 13:5

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

No wonder those of you who are x christians are just a homely as those who still are. 

 

2 Tim 3:7

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

 

 

 

There's not a lot of point quoting scripture Justus.

 

Especially when it's wrong from get go.

 

Genesis 1 : 1 is wrong.

 

Big Bang theory appears to tells us that this universe had a specific beginning, but the Copernican Principle and Inflationary theory tell us that this is not so.

 

Please try and learn from the links I'm posting about this for your education.

 

BAA.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

BAA, you are so patient.  I admire this quality in you.

[bornagainathiest]

BAA, you are so patient.  I admire this quality in you.

 

Well thanks, FT.  

 

But please bear in mind that Justus' worldview may be so disconnected from our common reality as to be unreachable by me - even though I cite well-tested data and evidence and try to guide him to helpful websites.

 

Here's hoping I can reach him and that he wants to be reached.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No private interpretation needed Justus-  

 

Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation.   

 

 

Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter.

.

.

.

2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

New International Version.

 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 

 

American Standard Version

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

 

Young' Literal translation

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,

 

Orthodox Jewish Bible

20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation.

.

.

.

Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...?

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm

 

 

Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation.   

 

And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation.

 

Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there?

 

 

2 Cor 13:5

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

No wonder those of you who are x christians are just a homely as those who still are. 

 

2 Tim 3:7

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

 

 

So, which is it?  The holy ghost has the final interpretation or jesus christ in each non-reprobate believer has the final interpretation?  Try making sense with your posts, boy.

[mydisplayname]

BAA, you are so patient.  I admire this quality in you.

 

I've learnt more from his posts than I learned in 12 years of school.

[mydisplayname]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No private interpretation needed Justus-  

 

Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation.   

 

 

Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter.

.

.

.

2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

New International Version.

 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 

 

American Standard Version

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

 

Young' Literal translation

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,

 

Orthodox Jewish Bible

20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation.

.

.

.

Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...?

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm

 

 

Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation.   

 

And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation.

 

Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there?

 

 

2 Cor 13:5

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

No wonder those of you who are x christians are just a homely as those who still are. 

 

2 Tim 3:7

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

 

 

 

Anyone know what the word homely means? I've got nothing...

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

Anyone know what the word homely means? I've got nothing...

 

 

 

adjective, homelier, homeliest.

1. lacking in physical attractiveness; not beautiful; unattractive:

 

The definition that I quoted is probably the definition that Justus was using. I found the definition here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homely

[duderonomy]

 

 

 

Wow.  There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly*

 

lol, heck run forest run, omg the zombie going after Hitchens... 

 

 

[snip]

 

 

Thanks for confirming my opinion of you.  Are you high?

 

Is a though a solid liquid or gas?  If it doesn't have mass, it doesn't exist so they say.  Seens this one didn't till wrote it down?

It but man ya'll change the facts faster than it took Darwin to ship those specimens down to the gotlosers Island.  O sorry about the typo something poked me in the ribs,  

Since personally all I have to do hold on til 7 'm off then, ok, something he me in the rib that time right then STHG, so what up the ribs.  Oh that right I got to set  to out the frozen pork ribs to thaw out.  Later.  Guess not possibility of man's origin huH?

 

 

 

Go home, End3. You're drunk.

[francesco]

 

BAA, you are so patient.  I admire this quality in you.

 

I've learnt more from his posts than I learned in 12 years of school.

 

justus also went 12 years of school

or....home school  

[Justus]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No private interpretation needed Justus-  

 

Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation.   

 

 

Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter.

.

.

.

2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

New International Version.

 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 

 

American Standard Version

20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.

 

Young' Literal translation

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,

 

Orthodox Jewish Bible

20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation.

.

.

.

Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...?

 

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm

 

 

Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation.

 

And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation.

 

Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there?

 

 

2 Cor 13:5

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 

No wonder those of you who are x christians are just a homely as those who still are. 

 

 

2 Tim 3:7

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

 

There's not a lot of point quoting scripture Justus.

 

Especially when it's wrong from get go.

 

Genesis 1 : 1 is wrong.

 

Big Bang theory appears to tells us that this universe had a specific beginning, but the Copernican Principle and Inflationary theory tell us that this is not so.

 

Please try and learn from the links I'm posting about this for your education.

 

BAA.

 

 

The theoretical opinion of Nicolaus Copernicus claims that Earth is not in a “central, specially favored position” in the universe.

 

The opinion of Mr. Copernicus is exactly that, an opinion which contains nothing which can even remotely be construed as establishing a legitimate principle.   

 

The Copernican Opinion is a belief has never been proven, it has no data, it demonstrates nothing and is considered to be “in the most general sense cannot be proven”, but in the ‘special sense’ it is implicit in many modern theories of physics.   

 

Since the specific size, shape of the universe is not presumed known, then ipso facto, the position of the earth within the universe is not specifically know to which the Copernican Opinion can neither define nor affirm what is a  “central, specially favored” position.  

 

However, the fact that life exists on earth and with celestial bodies being reportedly observed over 10 billion light years away without any confirmed reports of life being observed then the facts themselves would lead one to the reasonable belief that earth is in a “central, specially favored” position in the universe.  But that is just my opinion. 

 

Genesis 1 : 1 is wrong.

Well, at least we agree on one thing.  But I'll bet for different reasons.

 

You probably hold that in the beginning the Primordial atom created the expanse and matter because God creating the heaven and the earth is just way too simplistic.

 

But Elohim which represents plural, being the Spirits which in Rev 4:5 represents the seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

 

Of course this is foolishness to wise and scientifically enlightened since the visible light is formed by the seven electromagnetic waves which are also visible as evident by the 7 colors of the rainbow.  

 

 

But no, these are not the Spirits which created the massless expanse of dark matter that fills the heaven above at night, since the electromagnetic waves did not come to be until  the Son formed the light pulsating from that celestial body we call the Sun.  But the Spirits did form the celestial bodies of matter, or particles of dust that form the dry land referred unto as earth.  But I digress in my babbling since the Bible is just an old myth fabricated by some old superstitious goat herders.

[bornagainathiest]

Uhhh... No and No and Yes, Justus.

 

No.

The Copernican principle isn't a matter of opinion, it's how the universe works.  I've already told you this and provided you with a link to explain it.

 

No.

The Primordial Atom has been dropped from cosmology and now plays no part in Inflationary Theory.  I've told you this too and provided you with links so that you can learn about these this.

 

Yes.

You are babbling about the Bible, which is just an old myth fabricated by some superstitious goat herders.

(Please remember, you said this, not me. I'm simply agreeing with your description of your own behavior and your appraisal of scripture.)

.

.

.

Fine.

You don't appear to want to learn what science has discovered about the origins of the universe.  

So, Justus can be lead to the science, but he can't be made to read it or accept it.  

That decision's up to him.

.

.

.

In which case... "Have a nice day!"  

 

BAA.

[Justus]

No.

The Primordial Atom has been dropped from cosmology and now plays no part in Inflationary Theory.  I've told you this too and provided you with links so that you can learn about these this.

 

 

 

State the information directly,  remember 1 Peter 3:15

".. and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you...":

or 1 Thess 5:21

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

 

According to the Big Bang theory, the expansion of the observable universe began with the explosion of a single particle at a definite point in time. 

 

 This is an excerpt from COSMIC HORIZONS: ASTRONOMY AT THE CUTTING EDGE, edited by Steven Soter and Neil deGrasse Tyson, 

http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/web/essaybooks/cosmic/p_lemaitre.html

 

Are you going to anal and say that a particle known as the primordial atom has been changed from a particle of mass to a particle without mas which contained all the space, mass, energy and time which formed the known and observed universe?   So in other words in the beginning God created the expanse and mass?  Then if one single particle then how did energy and mass originate since energy and mass can not be created nor destroyed-it can only change forms.

[bornagainathiest]

No Justus, instead I'd point you to this thread...

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/65522-pope-says-christians-should-accept-big-bang-and-evolution/?hl=arching#entry1006043

 

...and to post # 7.

 

Please refer to item # 3.

 

Big Bang Cosmology is part of Inflationary Cosmology - not the other way round.

So what deGrasse Tyson and Soter describe is just part of the ongoing inflationary process.  Our particular universe did explosively originate from a single point.  However, that 'explosion' is not what you think it is.  It's the explosive expansion of the space-time continuum itself... not the explosion of anything else.

 

This is explained here... 

http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/relativity-space-astronomy-and-cosmology/big-bang-classic-confusions/

 

Please read this and understand.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Justus, why you no makey sense?

[Justus]

  You make a good point, why would I think that the Church science would allow one to have an opinion anymore that the Church theology would allow anyone to have an alternative opinion about the scriptures.   

   

    In Genesis 1:1 the term 'Elohim' is defined as plural but they tell you have to understand that the plural "Gods" doesn't mean what you think, it means what they tell you it means.  So if not plural then why did the scriptures just a few short verses later contain the reference to "Let us" make man in our image.  Thus their response, "You are a Heretic-end of the discussion."  Of course some gobber head will come along and make the comment like "why don't you make sense" or some brillant comment as such but one has to have compassion for them since as Dan Qualye is quoted as saying, "It's a terrible thing to be born without a brain"  

 

    Likewise, the the Big Bang isn't an explosion like one thinks either, they have to tell you which is really no suprised since it has long been the scheme of the Church  to invent other  systems of religion, such as evolution to hold man in ignorance of their Creator as quoted by Thomas Paine in part.

 

      The systems of the one are just as false as those of the other, yet are calculated on each other for mutual support. They are founded on nothing;  they hold on no principles; thus, they proceed by no authorities; they have no testable data and they can demonstrate nothing and admit to no conclusion, such as how big is the universe, or what shape is the physical universe.  Knowing neither they claim to know the universe is expanding. But when your theory has no principles then those who believe it probably don't either so they can't distinguish that it is quite possible that the observed motion isn't from expansion of the universe but merely the drift of the objects within the universe.

 

     Such as someone passing out on the on the deck of a boat in a drunken stupor.  Inadvertently, while getting on the boat they disconnected the lanyard from the dock,  While laying there on the deck they transverse in and out of consciousness each time seeing the land growing smaller as the boat drifting away from the shoreline as it is raining.The next thing you know they wake up and can't see any land.  Well geez, taking bits and pieces of the information that they can recall, they perceive that the while they slept that the rain must have floated the earth.   LOL.

 

    Since the physical cosmology of the universe is based upon the scientific theory published in 1931 by Father Georges Lemaître, a Catholic Priest  entitled the "hypothèse de l'atome primitif" or  "Hypothesis of the Primordial Atom" then obviously the cosmic inflation could not have started until after the 'explosion'.

 

   While the "Primordial nucleosynthesis" which is believed by most cosmologists to have taken place from 10 seconds to 20 minutes after the Big Bang, which I believe BAA is trying to communicate is the new theory, doesn't replace the Primordial atom as misinterpreted by BAA also, it only explains why they imagine happened after the initial event occurred in which all space, time, energy and matter was released from a super condensed state to rapidly form the expanse of the known universe.

 

   Whether one calls what they run around in a wheel or cage, it doesn't change the essence of how they really are!  

   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-r-V0uK4u0

[sdelsolray]

This one is a nutter.  Simple as that.

[bornagainathiest]

 

  You make a good point, why would I think that the Church science would allow one to have an opinion anymore that the Church theology would allow anyone to have an alternative opinion about the scriptures.   

   

    In Genesis 1:1 the term 'Elohim' is defined as plural but they tell you have to understand that the plural "Gods" doesn't mean what you think, it means what they tell you it means.  So if not plural then why did the scriptures just a few short verses later contain the reference to "Let us" make man in our image.  Thus their response, "You are a Heretic-end of the discussion."  Of course some gobber head will come along and make the comment like "why don't you make sense" or some brillant comment as such but one has to have compassion for them since as Dan Qualye is quoted as saying, "It's a terrible thing to be born without a brain"  

 

Justus,

 

Please read and understand what a Majestic plural is - in the original Hebrew.

 

http://yhwhechad.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/elohim-and-the-majestic-plural/

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

   (Snip)

[bornagainathiest]

(Snip)

 

    Since the physical cosmology of the universe is based upon the scientific theory published in 1931 by Father Georges Lemaître, a Catholic Priest  entitled the "hypothèse de l'atome primitif" or  "Hypothesis of the Primordial Atom" then obviously the cosmic inflation could not have started until after the 'explosion'.

 

   While the "Primordial nucleosynthesis" which is believed by most cosmologists to have taken place from 10 seconds to 20 minutes after the Big Bang, which I believe BAA is trying to communicate is the new theory, doesn't replace the Primordial atom as misinterpreted by BAA also, it only explains why they imagine happened after the initial event occurred in which all space, time, energy and matter was released from a super condensed state to rapidly form the expanse of the known universe.

 

 Justus,

 

Please read and understand that Inflation preceded the Primordial Atom, because it is a process (not a one-off event) that, once started, repeatedly creates the  conditions whereby 'pocket' universes like ours explosively expand (inflate) from quantum-sized particles.  The inflationary process has been going at least 13.72 billion years and probably much, much longer.  It is the Copernican Principle (also based on evidence, not opinion) that doesn't permit cosmologists, theorists or the Pope to claim that our 'pocket' universe was the first one to inflate and was the only one to inflate.

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2014/05/02/alan-guth-what-made-big-bang-bang/RmI4s9yCI56jKF6ddMiF4L/story.html

 

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Guth

 

Inflation is supported by numerous confirmed, ultra-precise predictions, by a great deal of well-tested supporting evidence and by many correlations.

I've listed these things here...

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62337-how-precisely-would-you-like-that-prediction-to-be-confirmed/#.VGcmD_msUuk

 

and here...

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/61021-a-science-question-for-any-willing-christians/page-4#.VGcxx_msUuk

(see post #68)

 

This should also help you see where you're stumbling.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/61021-a-science-question-for-any-willing-christians/page-6#.VGcuy_msUuk

 

( see post # 108)

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

[Justus]

Please read and understand that Inflation preceded the Primordial Atom, because it is a process (not a one-off event) that, once started, repeatedly creates the  conditions whereby 'pocket' universes like ours explosively expand (inflate) from quantum-sized particles. 

 

 

So if the Big Bang occurred as a result of the Primordial Atom condensing, which you state inflation proceeded.  That explain everything .

 

Wow, your tower extends above the universe itself that you can see other universes.  LOL

[bornagainathiest]

 

Please read and understand that Inflation preceded the Primordial Atom, because it is a process (not a one-off event) that, once started, repeatedly creates the  conditions whereby 'pocket' universes like ours explosively expand (inflate) from quantum-sized particles. 

 

 

So if the Big Bang occurred as a result of the Primordial Atom condensing, which you state inflation proceeded.  That explain everything .

 

Wow, your tower extends above the universe itself that you can see other universes.  LOL

 

 

Since I'm citing the work of others, your beef is with them, not me Justus.

 

Please feel free to e-mail these people and tell them that their confirmed predictions are wrong.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Ravenstar]

ugh… no.. space/time inflated,(creating the space and time for energy and matter to exist) which theoretically caused the primordial atom, if there is such a thing.  I am of the mind that in quantum theory virtual particles (mass, and therefore energy - because in our universe energy = matter, which ends up at a sum of zero) 'pop' in and out of existence all the time.. I think that the manifestation of matter/energy is a property of inflating space/time. It's a virtual probability that happens because there is the space and time FOR it to happen… and it happens, in our universe… in pairs.

 

It's very cool… and I do not understand it except in the most rudimentary and intuitive way.

 

This is a VERY hard concept but before inflation there was no matter, no energy, no universe. no space, no time… nothing but probability. maybe. That's why we can not speak about 'before' the big bang… there was no before, because there was no time.. and time can only exist in space.. because time is a velocity.. a measure of distance, in a way.

 

BAA refers to brane theory, I think. Another very neat mathematical theorem that corresponds with inflationary theory and seems, so far, to work…the math points to multiple universes.. like a bubble bath, sort of. Each universe that inflates is discrete from the others, and may have it's own set of properties.. according to the probabilities.

 

BAA.. am I making sense?

[bornagainathiest]

Hang in there, R.

 

I'm trying to help End, right now.

 

Get back to this tomorrow, ok?

 

BAA.

[Ravenstar]

Sure