PDA

View Full Version : The Amazing Kreskin and Cosmogony


Jack777
February 12th 2005, 03:34 PM
Cosmogony, The Amazing Kreskin, Lies and Delusion

In discussing Cosmogony, I have read that philosophy, theism and worldview are relatively unimportant and treated in a dismissive manner in order to keep the focus on Evolution, the stuff that really counts for some people. However, this would have it so we could be fooled again, deceived, and misled. Keeping our eyes on the goal, keeping our eyes on Jesus is most important. Keeping our eyes on the Creator is most important. So, people discount the efficacy of the Creator to Create and the efficacy of Genesis 1:1 to the point some suggest that we could just take it out of the Bible and it not matter. That is the kind of thinking that Theistic Evolution invokes apparently. I did not say it, someone else said that we could lose that witness of God by Revelation and it not matter. This is a mistake and an error. It says in Scripture that a Great Delusion will be poured out. People will believe a lie, the Big Lie, and The Lie and after awhile we know God gives people up to their own reason and not only allows them to believe a lie but would have it so. The Lie is "hath God said."

"Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird.

And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives."

Proverbs 1:17-18

Is knowing the Creator as unimportant as some would suggest? No!

"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

II Thessalonians 2:8-12

Cultivating a love of truth is important and this does not discount pursuing scientific fact. Fact, in part, is what we see, what we touch and what we feel. It is the Creator we put our eyes on, a priori, not this Creation. Can people be deluded? I think so. I was in Washington D.C. walking along the street and I noticed a newspaper had the headlines about the massacre at Jonestown with a big picture of bodies laying about. Those people were deceived, they were deluded because they believed lies. They were murdered or committed suicide because they believed lies. They believed lies because they believed someone more that they believed the Creator. Not because they did not love the Lord, but because they did not keep their eyes on the Lord. Why did people put up with Koresh? Why did people in the Heaven's Gate commune die? It was not because of many reasons, but was because they believed lies. Things go along well for us and then some time comes when we have a choice to make, choose a fork in the road. One path leads to Life and another to Death. How do you know? Is it by Evolution?

Darby translates the words of the LORD God our Creator Jeremiah put down in reference to the Creator and records for us that others have chosen the wrong path, the wrong way.

"Thus shall ye say unto them:

The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, these shall perish from the earth, and from under the heavens. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his understanding. 13 When he uttereth his voice, there is a tumult of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the end of the earth; he maketh lightnings for the rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasuries.

Every man is become brutish, bereft of knowledge; every founder is put to shame by the graven image, for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them. They are vanity, a work of delusion: in the time of their visitation they shall perish. The portion of Jacob is not like them; for it is he that hath formed all things, and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: Jehovah of hosts is his name."

Jeremiah 10:11-16

Obviously we can be deluded in a lot of ways. The constant that keeps us on track is the Creator and the above passage relates how important God as Creator is.

This is so important to know as a Christian and as a Jew for that matter, or for anyone.

It is so important that Jeremiah recaps at the instruction of Yahweh and specifically details this message and self-explicates. God has him put this down again and elaborates for a reason. God does repeat Himself to us so we will read and learn.

"Jehovah of hosts hath sworn by himself, I will assuredly fill thee with men, as with caterpillars; and they shall raise a shout against thee. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his understanding. When he uttereth his voice, there is a tumult of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the end of the earth; he maketh lightnings for the rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasures. Every man is become brutish, so as to have no knowledge; every founder is put to shame by the graven image, for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them. They are vanity, a work of delusion: in the time of their visitation they shall perish. The portion of Jacob is not like them; for it is he that hath formed all things: and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: Jehovah of hosts is his name. Thou art my maul, my weapons of war: and with thee I will break in pieces the nations, and I will with thee destroy kingdoms; and with thee I will break in pieces the horse and his rider; and with thee I will break in pieces the chariot and its driver; and with thee will I break in pieces man and woman; and with thee will I break in pieces old and young; and with thee will I break in pieces the young man and the maid; and with thee will I break in pieces the shepherd and his flock; and with thee will I break in pieces the husbandman and his yoke of oxen; and with thee will I break in pieces governors and rulers."

Jeremiah 51:14-23

The Amazing Kreskin told us something that should be paid attention to. He created a psychological UFO sighting in 41 people. Afterwards, people began to leave and finally just the news crews was left. As they were packing up, a green luminous form passed overhead. A major broadcast was interrupted to report the sighting. KVBC-TV therefore allowed thousands of viewers to watch a UFO sighting for the first time.

Kreskin warns in a letter that psychological warfare is on a level that is unprecedented and that many people could be deluded by someone with his abilities. Many could be convinced that they were the "Chosen Ones" by seeing messages in the sky a leader "put there."

It is the belief we are willing to accept which guides our vulnerability. It is Faith in the Living God, our Creator that inures and strengthens our ability to withstand on That Day. We all have a "That Day" of some sort, when choosing is important and possibly a choice between Life and Death. Someone objected to my assertion that Genesis 1:1 is of the most importance and we go forward in Faith from there or struggle and leave the Way to Life. He said that Genesis 1:1 could be taken out of the Bible and it would not matter. Solomon supposed a law in the Torah was not important and a prophet said that God could make 10,000 Solomon's but the Law is important. I have a copy on file of the letter signed by Kreskin and it is a good reminder not to believe a lie. We must look to the Creator first. Faith is NOT belief.

rogero
February 12th 2005, 06:10 PM
...

It is the belief we are willing to accept which guides our vulnerability. It is Faith in the Living God, our Creator that inures and strengthens our ability to withstand on That Day. We all have a "That Day" of some sort, when choosing is important and possibly a choice between Life and Death. Someone objected to my assertion that Genesis 1:1 is of the most importance and we go forward in Faith from there or struggle and leave the Way to Life. He said that Genesis 1:1 could be taken out of the Bible and it would not matter. Solomon supposed a law in the Torah was not important and a prophet said that God could make 10,000 Solomon's but the Law is important. I have a copy on file of the letter signed by Kreskin and it is a good reminder not to believe a lie. We must look to the Creator first. Faith is NOT belief. According to the rules of the Cosmogony forum, everyone who posts here must be a theist, ergo believes in a creator. So, I'll have to apologize for my ignorance and ask what is the point of this OP?

If you are upset about the Genesis 1:1 statement made by "someone", why don't you bring up the offending post(s) in context and ask for a reasoned discussion -- in particular from that "someone."

Jack777
February 13th 2005, 05:33 PM
Is what I stated not clear without that?

rogero
February 13th 2005, 05:38 PM
Is what I stated not clear without that?
Yes, it is not clear without that. Would it be such a bother for you to be clear and precise in the purpose of your posts? I know that's hard for you, but please do make the effort -- it is muchly appreciated by all.

R

Jack777
February 13th 2005, 05:45 PM
Look, I just cannot afford to hire a remdial English teacher for you. Reading is Fundamental is a nice program you migght look into.

rogero
February 13th 2005, 06:06 PM
Look, I just cannot afford to hire a remdial English teacher for you. Reading is Fundamental is a nice program you migght look into. The point is, Jack, that you "migght" save us all a great deal of trouble if you would give a clear synopsis of the overly-proliferated OPs you feel compelled to post. A Freshman English Composition student is required to give a clear thesis statement in any of her/his compositions, then defend that statement, then state a conclusion. All you seem capable of doing is spewing extractions of authors with whom you think agree with you.

The main question from me to you is -- what is your point? Are you trying to trash TE? You admittedly accept modern geology and the basics of biological evolution. Also, everyone has is allowed to post in Cosmogony accepts the existence of a deity and the notion of creation. So, again -- what is your point? Are you arguing for a specific form of Christian creationism?

Please be specific and clear!!!!

Jack777
February 13th 2005, 06:14 PM
Rread the post is all I can say.

rogero
February 13th 2005, 06:50 PM
Rread the post is all I can say.
No, why don't you explain to us in a clear manner?

The onus is on you, since you started the thread.

R

Jack777
February 14th 2005, 10:41 AM
What is not clear to you?

rogero
February 14th 2005, 10:52 AM
What is not clear to you? For starters, how is your opus supposed to show that Christian TE has the following characteristic:



"So, people discount the efficacy of the Creator to Create and the efficacy of Genesis 1:1 to the point some suggest that we could just take it out of the Bible and it not matter. That is the kind of thinking that Theistic Evolution invokes apparently. I did not say it, someone else said that we could lose that witness of God by Revelation and it not matter"

Well, "apparently" you're wrong, and I'm quite tired of your repetition of it When are you going to stop trashing TEs for not accepting God as Creator? What's not clear is how your posts are supposed to show this.

And what's the point of this Kreskin nonsense? You're just purely insulting to fellow believers.

Jack777
February 14th 2005, 11:30 AM
How am I insulting to fellow believers?

rogero
February 14th 2005, 01:22 PM
How am I insulting to fellow believers?
Uhh..., by saying that Christian TEs don't believe in God as Creator?

NeilUnreal
February 14th 2005, 02:10 PM
So, people discount the efficacy of the Creator to Create and the efficacy of Genesis 1:1...

I don't discount the efficacy of the Creator to create, I just don't believe Genesis 1:1ff is a literal record of that creation.

I don't even dispute God's ability to have created as literally described in Genesis, I just believe the data show that it was not the means used in actuality.

-Neil

Jack777
February 14th 2005, 02:23 PM
I did not mean to say believers don't believe, that is not my point.

I think Genesis 1:1 means exactly what it says. It also says much more than is obvious. Look at the Hebrew and look at it objectively, look at what it does not say too. Look at it in reference to the rest of Scripture. It took me 30 years before I was able to begin to understand what it says and then some intensive study after that. I am not saying it is obvious.

My post on Luther and Creation provides a clue.

rogero
February 14th 2005, 04:06 PM
I did not mean to say believers don't believe, that is not my point.

I think Genesis 1:1 means exactly what it says. It also says much more than is obvious. Look at the Hebrew and look at it objectively, look at what it does not say too. Look at it in reference to the rest of Scripture. It took me 30 years before I was able to begin to understand what it says and then some intensive study after that. I am not saying it is obvious.


It's too bad not all of us have 30 years of insight into this issue, else we could be as enlightened as you. FYI, I've been interested in origins issue for over 30 years, having been raised quite Fundamentalist, studied geology and chemistry in college and was even a member of CRS for a couple of years in the 1980s. I know George Murphy and Glennn via e-mail and your implication that they somehow aren't as wise about this issue as you is very interesting at the least.



My post on Luther and Creation provides a clue.
Luther lived long before we had any kind of realistic scientific view of the Cosmos. If Luther were living today, do you think he could possibly have a different opinion on Genesis exegesis?

Jack777
February 14th 2005, 04:23 PM
Sometimes I think you just want to find things to be offended about. You use my reply to infer I am claiming special spirituality or enlightenment. That is offensive, but I am getting used to it. Love is not easily offended, yet you guys are offended or try your best to offend people.

It did not even enter my mind to think I am more or less than wise than anyone.

You need to get a new attitude dude.

You miss my point about Luther and Creation. I suspect it is because you either have not read the post or do not understand it, as you do not understand anything else.

rogero
February 14th 2005, 04:37 PM
Sometimes I think you just want to find things to be offended about. You use my reply to infer I am claiming special spirituality or enlightenment. That is offensive, but I am getting used to it. Love is not easily offended, yet you guys are offended or try your best to offend people.

It did not even enter my mind to think I am more or less than wise than anyone.

You need to get a new attitude dude.

....
Baloney. If it didn't enter your mind to think you are more (not less!!!) wise than the rest of us, then you sure didn't say it clearly -- but, oh... I think this problem has cropped up before. :lol:

Dude, the new attitude deal could possibly apply to you as well, no? :wink:

brett
February 17th 2005, 06:03 PM
The point is, Jack, that you "migght" save us all a great deal of trouble....

:lol: Oh man! You're still pointing out typos!? :doh:

Jack777
February 18th 2005, 12:21 PM
I think it helps to avoid discussing anything I posted:ahem: .

rogero
February 18th 2005, 02:44 PM
I think it helps to avoid discussing anything I posted:ahem: .
We've tried to discuss your posts. It's just that they make little sense and you seem unwilling or unable to explain them.

Jack777
February 18th 2005, 03:01 PM
I suppose you are right. I am thinking that someone posts the most important thing they got from a post is assuming I cited a reference from a secondary source and smugly says they have a copy of the book as if I do not is digging at my meaning, then you are right. Then the question of whether or not I put in page numbers in the citation is scholarly is one of the overarching and searing explorations of the meaning derived from what was posted. If that is discussing the posts then I suppose you are right. Picking at almost anything to try and belittle people is the tack that some take. Making sure that almost anything is discussed except the topic is the usual modus. I am thinking that the AAPG method of citations are different than those of the Epigraphic Society Occassional Publications which are different from The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, which is different from those accepted by different publishers of other kinds of literature. So, some use page numbers and some do not. I am thinking that most people would know things like this already and why is it as if I did not know this? There are lots of books in libraries and it seems people would know this already. Instead, it is the biggest news yet to people who say that they are scientists. sylas knew about books and how citations work. Why don't some other people? This is the searing and in-depth thought that you and some seem to bring to posts--quibbling and defocusing and missing the point entirely for the sake of maintaining your position on evolution. Good grief.

rogero
February 18th 2005, 03:24 PM
... This is the searing and in-depth thought that you and some seem to bring to posts--quibbling and defocusing and missing the point entirely for the sake of maintaining your position on evolution. Good grief. What's my position on evolution vis-a-vis your position on evolution? I thought you just admitted in Natural Sciences 301 that you accept that biological evolution (modulo human evolution) occured over the history of the biosphere?

Maybe I'm defensive for good reason -- that I'm sick to death of your continual disparagement of Christian TEs in your threads -- they don't believe the Bible, they don't believe in Creation, etc... I also sick of your ridiculous conflation of the philosophy and social theory that Darwinism has putatively spawned with the scientific theory. Somehow the logical fallacy of that conflation still hasn't sunk into to your noggin. Pointing out that fallacy is not defocusing and far more than a quibble.

Jack777
February 18th 2005, 03:41 PM
I don't think you understand what I have written.

rogero
February 18th 2005, 04:04 PM
I don't think you understand what I have written. Then why don't you explain it? What is your position on biological evolution? If you wish, you can go to the Natural Sciences thread I started and state your position.

My lands, are you ever frustrating!!!

Jack777
February 18th 2005, 04:16 PM
I frustrate myself at times. Don't you think I have explained it already? I will have to think about it some.

rogero
February 18th 2005, 04:27 PM
I frustrate myself at times. Don't you think I have explained it already? I will have to think about it some.
No, you have not explained it. Please see my thread "A Ga+ continuous biosphere without evolution." You say there was speciation after mass extinctions, then you say you accept only sub-speciation (whatever that is?) and then in answer to Rmwilliams you intimate that you may accept all but human evolution.

Given the way you have trashed both the science of evolution and TEs, I think you need to explain, carefully explain, your views!

grmorton
February 19th 2005, 05:44 PM
I think it helps to avoid discussing anything I posted:ahem: .


I actually tend to agree with you here, Jack. I find you very difficult to understand.