Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1,144:
Line 1,144: + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 14:36, March 19, 2011
, 14:36, March 19, 2011→John 4:53: reversion explained
: No, the point of the story is that it happened at the same moment. The modern translation should reflect that obvious meaning.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:05, 18 March 2011 (EDT)
: No, the point of the story is that it happened at the same moment. The modern translation should reflect that obvious meaning.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:05, 18 March 2011 (EDT)
:::''No, the point of the story is that it happened at the same moment. The modern translation should reflect that obvious meaning.''
:::''Obviously'', God could have created the Heavens and the Earth in a single moment. He chose to take six days. How do we know this? Because ''He'' told us so, not a mortal. ''Obviously'', the Lord Almighty can't be exhausted. But he chose to rest for the seventh day. Again, we know this as ''He'' told us so Himself.
:::We don't know which time the Lord chose to take to perform the sign of the son. ''Obviously'', it could have happened in an instant. Or a heartbeat. Or with the speed of light or sound. The Lord doesn't tell us His (and not ''our''!) choice. We only have the word of a mortal man, who measured the period up to an hour: the ''seventh hour'' is between 12:30 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. - even between 12:35 p.m and 1:45 p.m. in the summer. This reminds me of Galileo's trials to measure the speed of light with the help of a servant and two shuttered lantern...
:::I'll revert your reversion of my edit - and perhaps I'' get blocked for this, though I am giving ample reason for my acts. Thus you could avoid to address my points, and ignore them like quite a few arguments against items in the list of counterexamples. As Rschlafly said: ''All of the other items also have explanations that do not contradict relativity.'' But I hope that you just answer the following questions:
:::*Do you have any justification for your translation other than '''the Lord ''could'' have done this in a single instant'''? As I mentioned above, the Bible is about what God did, and so your translation shouldn't be be about what God ''could'' have done, neither.
:::*Above, you wrote: ''The instantaneous healing is central to the purpose of the event.'' and ''the point of the story is that it happened at the same moment''. How so? Why has the healing to be spontaneous, when the creation of the world took six days?
:::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:36, 19 March 2011 (EDT)