I have read basically two different explanations of the size of the observable universe.

1) The diameter of the observable universe is 13.7 billion light years, determined by the distance light has travelled since the Big Bang. It seems that most of the sources on the Internet give this explanation.

2) The radius of the observable universe is 13.7 billion light years, since we can see that far in all directions. This one makes more sense to me though.

Can anyone elaborate on which one is correct and why there is so much ambiguity on the subject?

Because their not really seeing 13.7 billion years of light space at all.
Light in our dimension in being bent into a circle, it's something to do with the speed of time here being different than the rest of the universe.....we are in some kind of a slow-motion time warp.
A temporal differential.

Don't think three-dimensional, think four...
hieght, width, breadeth..and time, (or frequency, creating diiferent dimensions stacked up and down, on different plane of existance. The root of the word "planet" is "plane".

There are heavens and earth, the stars and planets....and right here, on the same stars and planets, there are different "worlds" The Word says: "He "framed" the worlds also"....That dimensions."

The ones above are faster, the ones below, well I'd rather not know, but anyway thats it.

The bible says: "a day to god is a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day"....

Heaven is a dimension right here in us ...around us, but its faster than this.....Vibration...frequency...motion.
This ratio would mean 365,000 to1 ...light (here) travels at 186, 000 miles per second.

186,000 X 2 + 372,000....the dimension where God is speaking of is traveling at a frequency, or vibration of just under two times the speed of light...(for us) That would make them right here where we are but out of phase with us enough so we can't perceive them....

Our senses in this world have adjusted to the same frequency and thats all they usually can register...But sometimes, when the body is weakened the man inside, can see through.

When Man fell, from being an immortal creation.....He fell into time from eternity.

The ratio would be 365,000 to 1...one day is a thousand years.
The bible said this is the beginning of the 7th milinuem.
It's been 7000 years not 13.7 billion.

Take 13.7 as the radius.....divide this by our "temporal" differential of 365,000 to 1.

See what you get.......37,503 years and thats light space now, not including movement of expansion, which would make the figure much less.




TheVisitor

:eek:

Don't mind TheVisitor, he's just a guy I stupidly invited from a theology forum.

OK, Visitor...
I'll bite.
AGAIN.

(one of these days I will learn my lesson)



Originally posted by TheVisitor
The ones above are faster, the ones below, well I'd rather not know, but anyway thats it.

Why do you think we have "stacked" dimensions?
Why do you think the ones above move faster?
Is there any way to observe or test this idea (I refuse to call it a theory, or even hypothesis)?


Originally posted by TheVisitor
Heaven is a dimension right here in us ...around us, but its faster than this.....Vibration...frequency...motion.
This ratio would mean 365,000 to1 ...light (here) travels at 186, 000 miles per second.


Where does the 365,000 come from?
If one day is 1000 years AND 1000 years is a day, then why would you multiply rather than divide?
Or why don't they cancel each other out?
How do you know if and when iot is faster and/or slower?
Do you think that maybe this was not meant literally?


Originally posted by TheVisitor
186,000 X 2 + 372,000....the dimension where God is speaking of is traveling at a frequency, or vibration of just under two times the speed of light...(for us) That would make them right here where we are but out of phase with us enough so we can't perceive them....

Please elaborate on what makes you think it is just under 2c.



Originally posted by TheVisitor
The ratio would be 365,000 to 1...one day is a thousand years.
The bible said this is the beginning of the 7th milinuem.
It's been 7000 years not 13.7 billion.

But if the bible was God's word spoken to man, and you are arbitrarily deciding to factor time here by 365,000 wouldn't you want to be consistent and then it then be 7000 years times 365,000 or 2,555,000,000 years old?



Originally posted by TheVisitor
Take 13.7 as the radius.....X 2 = 27.4 billion divide this by our "temporal" differential of 365,000 to 1.
See what you get.......7506 years,

Temporal differential, huh?

Have you published this yet? :rolleyes:

A prophet of God said this when speaking of Einstien's theory.
The man had revelation from God...but didn't always explain himself.
He said heaven is a dimension faster than this.
He went there for a few moments in 1955, it was not a vision but real...people hugging him, shakeing his hand, all young and beautiful. He said it was only a few feet above this one.

He said ( in the early 1960's) "They'll find out some day, there not seeing 150 million years of lightspace..it's bent around in a circle.
I have thought of that for nearly twenty years and not knew what it means...

Then I did some calculations. 365, 000 to 1 is the differential if you assume 1000 years is a day.
Now take the speed of light in this dimension "C", and the observed total light they say has traveled 13.7 billion light years,
At this ratio....13,700,000,000 % 365,000 = 3753 years....from heavens perspective, which is where God was speaking from when he gave the revelation to His prophets.

Heaven is a faster dimension than this.....just under 2C from "our" perspective. The ratio....2xC=372,000 miles per second.
This is all movement by them, not just linear travel...so it's a vibration or frequency to us...365,000 is just under 372,000 which is 2xC

Now Hell is below, it may be slower....You heard it said you will be in torment for ever and ever...that is not eternity, but a very long time....the word used in the greek mean done away with..to the vanishing point.
So the same time difference between heaven and earth...is also between earth and hell, making it out of phase with our senses to...and incredibly sloww compared to us

The rich man in hell..lifts up his eyes..."please send Lazarus to bring me a drink, remember.....and was told "theres a great gulf fixed lazzarus cannot go to you or you to him..
A day to God is a thousand years, ......AND....a thousand years is a day..... Earth or this dimension of it.....is in the middle.

365,000 to 1.................1 to 365,000

Thats 1000 years ....3651/4 (actually) X 1000 = 365, 250 for heaven's time differential to earth.
And one day in hell is like a thousand years.....Jesus said something like that....said you would give your entire life, everything to trade just so your sins could be one less.
One day 1 to 365,250......each day of your life would be a thousand years in hell to pay...(thats why I said I'd rather not imagine it....)

I also saw a episode of "VOYAGER", where they get stuck in orbit around a planet with this same kind of differential.
They are only there for a few days, while the planet below goes from primitives to space travel, time on the planet passing thousands of years.

The bible doesn't repete itself for nothing...every word has a proper meaning.
God created the heavens and the earth...it says in genesis, and it goes on to say, "and He framed the Worlds also".
Thats not speaking of the same thing.

It's clues are all through the scriptures..For example: To receieve the revelation of God a believer is "Quickened" up into heavenly places in Christ Jesus.
In another place it says: "He is the judge of the Quick and the Dead."

Thank you for your very clear concise logical explanation.
Seriously.

It makes sense to me now.

Not that I necessarily agree, but I do understand why you think that and where the idea comes from.

Thank you.

Don't mind TheVisitor, he's just a guy I stupidly invited from a theology forum.
Not at all. In fact, I have to say that I am quite impressed with the amount of thought he has put into combining scientific ideas of the past century with Xian ideas. I think he has a great imagination. I suppose it probably gets tiresome after awhile though. :D

So, anyone have any useful feedback on my original question?

Ya its number 2, but remember this is all very theoretical the actual nature of the whole universe is still hypothetical. We still don't have the answers and there are many things that don't click. Still it is better for us to not yet know or understand then to make it up and believe in mythology. You can believe in a divine force but don’t you dare say religion is right over science.

Hey Squirrel,

I thought it would be more interesting to find out what actual astronomers say.
This is "Ask an astronomer" at Cornell.

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=151

Can I calculate the size of the Universe by converting light years to
kilometres?

My bright teenage son, after considerable calculation, has concluded that the universe is approximately 68 sextillion miles wide. He based his calculation on the basic 186K mi/sec speed of light x the estimated 15 billion year age of the universe. When I pointed out that 15 billion years of expansion is not the same as 15 billion LIGHT years of expansion, he asserted that I was in fundamental error on that point. I don't mind being in error, but do mind that one of us, now, has clearly gone astray in his basic understanding. If it is me, please set me straight!

From the current rate of expansion of the Universe, astronomers infer that the age of the observable Universe is about 15 billion years. In other words, if we assume that the Universe has been expanding at a constant rate since the Big Bang, then the rate of expansion tells us how far back in time the expansion started, which we take to be the beginning of the Universe. If the Universe is 15 billion years old, then light has had 15 billion years to propagate, and so the statements "15 billion years old" and "fifteen billion light years apart" are completely equivalent.

The catch is going from light-years to miles. In the local Universe, we know the conversion, since for all intents and purposes we live in a locally flat, spatially "euclidean" Universe ("euclidean" just means that the three angles of a triangle on a surface add to 90 degrees; this is true for a sheet of paper (which is flat), but not on the surface of a sphere or a saddle (which are both curved)). However, when we look at large distances we have to take the 4-dimensional curvature of the Universe into account. In essence, your son has calculated an accurate "radius" for the observable Universe provided that the Universe is flat (a sort of 4-dimensional sheet in spacetime in which light travels in straight lines), and that the rate of expansion of the Universe has remained constant.

Today, we think that half of your son's assumptions are right. Observations indicate that the Universe is either flat, or so big that the curvature is negligible. However, there is recent evidence that the rate of expansion of the Universe is increasing with time; that is, galaxies are moving away from each other *faster* today than they were in the past. This means that the observable Universe is *more* than 15 billion years old. It also means that the energy density of the Universe at present is dominated by "dark energy", a substance with "negative mass" that pushes the Universe apart rather than pulling it together like regular matter does (sound like science fiction? It still is, for the most part, since scientists don't yet have any idea what dark energy is...). The presence of dark energy also affects the curvature of the Universe in the past, which then throws off the conversion from light-years to miles. This is perhaps the best reason why cosmologists avoid using actual distances altogether, unless they are trying to figure out precisely what that conversion factor is.

After 15 million years of expansion, is the universe 15 or 30 million years "wide"??? My son asserts that because the expansion is one of space rather than matter, its total dimension = its time of expansion. This logic escapes me. If is is "expanding," surely it is doing so in all directions at once, thus yielding, to my (admittedly fallible) logic the necessity of its "furthest limits" moving diametrically away from each other. I.e., being two years separated in one year's expansion. Am I confusing time and distance here?

Note that in the above paragraphs I have been careful to use the term "observable Universe" rather than Universe. The Universe itself, or the maximum amount of space that we will eventually be able to see given an infinite amount of time, may well be infinite. In quoting a size of the Universe we infer how far we can see in one direction (15 billion light years), and how far we can see in the other direction (15 billion light years) and add the two to get a size (30 billion light years). An age of 15 billion light years in each direction therefore leads us to infer that we are at the centre of a sphere with radius 15 billion light-years, and hence that the Universe is 30 billion light-years "across". The trick, however, is that because the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic, every observer must measure a size of the Universe that is 30 billion light years... even ones that are at the "edge" of our observable Universe! This means that either the Universe is sufficiently curved that space doubles back on itself (like on the surface of a sphere), or that the actual Universe is much larger than the observable one.

(Actually currently something like 13.7 Billion * 2 = 27.4 Billion lyears across.)

I don't believe a lot of this. As you'd have to believe that nothing exists past the end of the non-observable universe.
If The observable universe is roughly 30 Billlion light years across.
What happens when we travel 15 Billion light years in any direction?

This is also a good article by a High energy nasa bloke.
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/971124x.html

None of this really matters to me.
You are asking a bunch of cavemen why it rains. Sure they all have interesting theories, but the theories will probably not be proved in our life times.

The way I personally think of it is we are walking along a beach with a high beam flashlight at night. Anything not illuminated in the flashlight doesn't exist.

Even though we can look back and see what appears to be the formation of the Universe I can't help but imagine we are just looking at a soap bubble of a structure on top of a much larger structure.
I think what we are observing is the birth of the local universe.

It seems the highest form of hubris to assume we know anything at all yet. Check back in a few thousand years and perhaps we'll have learned the answer.

Thanks
PT

I too am a believer in multi-big bangs.

Lovely icon to go with your username, Fetus.

What going on? You know I’m starting to get sore on my @$$ from all this kissing.

WellCookedFetus said:
You can believe in a divine force but don’t you dare say religion is right over science.

========================

Ok, but your going to be well cooked over this one.....

Let's just compare the two, Science...and The Bible.
Let's go into the history of the Bible just a minute and see where It come from. It was written by forty different writers. Forty men wrote the Bible over a space of sixteen hundred years apart and at different times, predicting the most important events that ever happened in world's history, and many times hundreds of years before it happened. And there is not one error in the entire sixty-six Books. . No author but God Himself could be so accurate. Not one word contradicts the other. Remember, sixteen hundred years apart, the Bible was wrote, from Moses to John at the Isle of Patmos: sixteen hundred years. And was wrote by forty different authors. One didn't even know the other one, and they never had It as the Word. Some of them never even seen the Word. But when they wrote It, and was understood to be prophets, then when they put their prophecies together, each one of them dovetailed one to the other.

Look at Peter, who announced on the day of Pentecost, "Repent every one of you and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins." Paul had never heard nothing about it. He went down to Arabia for three years to study the Old Testament to see Who this Pillar of Fire was that spoke to him on the road, saying, "Saul, why persecutest thou Me?" How could he be wrong? He never even consulted the church at all. And fourteen years later when he met Peter, they was preaching the same thing, word by word. That's our Bible.

What if we went now and took sixty-six medical books that deals with the body, wrote by forty different medical schools, sixteen hundred years apart? Wonder what kind of continuity we'd come up with?
When George Washington, our president... About two hundred years ago for pneumonia they pulled his toenail out and bled him a pint. What if we took... Let's go a little further on some things that we so attracted to today; that's science.

What if we took forty different scientific journals from sixteen hundred years apart and see what we'd come up with? A French scientist three hundred years ago proved by science, by rolling a ball, that if any terrific speed was obtained over thirty miles an hour, the object would leave the earth and fall off. You think science would ever refer back to that? Is any continuity with that now, when they drive down the street on the road here, hundred and fifty miles an hour? See? But he scientifically proved that by the pressure of the ball rolling across the ground, that at thirty miles an hour, that any object would lift up off the earth and go away, fall off in space.
No, there's no continuity to that......

But not one word in the Bible contradicts the other. Not one prophet ever contradicted the other one. So.... the Bible is the Word of God to all true believers.
Now, you couldn't get no accuracy in what doctors would agree upon. You can't even get accuracy of them now. You can't get accuracy in science now......
The wisdom of man....is but foolishness to God.


---------------------------------------------------
"Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"

Oh please your killing me I can't breath... need oxygenating fluid... must stop laughing!

TheVisitor:

There are a couple of problems with your thesis.

1. The bible is a <b>compilation</b> of writings. If you were compiling a book, would you select writings which contradicted each other (unless you wanted your book to be a compilation of opposing views)? The compilers of the bible selected books which they thought fitted well with each other. They deliberately left out writings which contradicted the included writings in a major way. Nevertheless...

2. They didn't do that great a job. The bible is still riddled with contradictions. I don't know where you get the idea that the is "not one error in the entire sixty-six books". Demonstrably, there are many errors, and also blatant contradictions.

You compare the bible to the development of medicine. The thing is, though, that medicine is a science. As such, it is open to change as our knowledge increases. The bible, on the other hand, allows for no change. You are required by the fundamentalists to accept the literal truth of every word (and, presumably, to use double-think where it contradicts itself). The bible never changes, and anybody suggesting it is wrong is a heretic.

<i>A French scientist three hundred years ago proved by science, by rolling a ball, that if any terrific speed was obtained over thirty miles an hour, the object would leave the earth and fall off.</i>

I'll call your bluff on this one. Which French scientist? Where can I find this "proof" you refer to? Do you in fact have any evidence for your statement at all?

<i>But not one word in the Bible contradicts the other. Not one prophet ever contradicted the other one.</i>

You only have to read the first couple of chapters of Genesis to find two contradictory stories of creation, and things don't get any better after that.

<i>You can't get accuracy in science now......</i>

The period of the a particular binary pulsar system has been measured to an accuracy of at least 0.0000000000000001 seconds. For an object many hundreds of light years away, I think that's pretty accurate, don't you?

For comparison, the bible thinks the value of pi is 3.

How did the discussion go from science to magic?

..can't give it a 'size'

originally posted by James R
Demonstrably, there are many errors, and also blatant contradictions

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

There are no contrdictions.
I find more truth from it every day.
It's like an onion riddled with multi-layer paralells and truths in shadows and type so deep they stretch beyond the capacity of human understanding
Thats why Jesus said "you must be born again, or you will in no wise "see" (understand) the kingdom of God.

No scholar or seminary student can do anything but scratch the surface of whats there, and blindly guess at it's meanings.
Thats the source for the so-called contridictions.
It is only mis-interpretation, through men reading it with the human spirit, not the spirit of God.

The truths are spiritually discerned as they were written spiritually.

Visitor,

You must also take into account that there have been many translations in the Bible's history. To get the original text of God's word, you must read it in the original language. Language is a very delicate thing. Translations never mean the same thing.

The mathematics in the Bible, I am guessing, are probably consistent, but take Genesis or Revelations for an instant. Think about if the translator misinterpreted the text over a concept. There might have been an overall theme that the translator didn't catch due to syntax change or some other part of grammer.

All I am trying to assert is that the Bible is the all-consistent, pure, and flawless relic that you make it out to be. If you look at it from my point of view, it might help you sort through some issues.

Thanks.

<i>It is only mis-interpretation...</i>

So, at the very least, the bible is ambiguous, because people can interpret it differently.

It`s like comparing `modern science` with the `Simpsons`...

But, i`ll go on with this humorous thread...

If i remember correctly, there was a great meeting of al the bishops of Christendom, in 325AD at Constantinople... where they decided what the doctrine was and which books to include into the bible...

Yes, they tried to make everything consistent and even rewrote sections... (from memory)
It seems that they left out the `fact` that jesus had a brother James , and (3?)sisters...
The Bible claims that there was light in the Universe on the first day; but in <b>Genesis 1:14</b>, the sun was not created until the 4th day...Doh!
Also the bibles `secret` mathematics involved ancient babylonian theology; the use of the number 7 and 40 seem to crop up too often...
Like as in the great flood story ...
http://www.geocities.com/blobrana/features/flood.htm

The exodus `red sea` crossing was actually the `<b>reed sea</b>` (in the delta region), and was not just one mass movement, but one of <b>many</b> over centuries...

The translation for Mary as a VIRGIN was incorrect, it actually meant ~<i>young maiden</i>...
http://mysite.freeserve.com/blobrana/features/magi.htm

Perhaps we need another update/patch to amend these?

(It would be good to read that the world was created 4.6 billion years ago, or the universe 13.7.....)
But overall i would say that as a ancient record of events, it a good resource...

As for modern science..... ;)

You should go to a theology forum and say that! Those people can back up their bible pretty well except for the fact that they need to interpret it anyway they want to defend their claims… only proving that that bible is not a conclusive source of information.

Like I said, no contradictions only mis-intepretation
Those who stuggle with it's meaning, are perhaps reading someone elses mail....
But I will attest to the fact, there are no contradictions....

The two creations in Genesis, the mis-conception of the virgin birth...i.e. maiden does mean virgin., but Mary was not above other women in any supernatural way, she was favored to be chosen, thats all
These and other so-called errors are not errors as they seem, things were written by God, so they would need God's spirit in man to be properly interpreted. In the Bible lies the power to restore Man to the position he fell from with the power to create a world with his word alone.
Do you think He would let this power fall into his enemies hand, without it being in His plan.?
This power is now being returned to it's rightfull owner, after 6000 years.

There are many things that have been mis- construed, and it started shortly after Paul left the scene, and really got going in the 325 Nicene Council mentioned above.
That created a monster in the name of the christian church that slaughtered 68 million in the dark ages alone.

That is not a true representation of Christ's people. That is the anti- christ....They are against the Word, mixing thier false creeds and interpretations with truth to make a decieving lie. Christ was the Word............anti-Word is anti-Christ.
Not the unbeleivers, they don't believe it at all.
The anti-Christ is very religious, like Cain was.....and today are impersonating Christ.
Not only do they decieve the one's drawn into their trap, but discredit Christ to the outside world with their false interptations of His Word, and thier hypocracy.

He has always had a small reminant here with the truth in each age, for those really looking, whom He choses to call.
Thats who's mail it is, .....Not organized religion's, God never did start one, and when here in the flesh Jesus stood against them with every word he spoke.
He's doing the same thing today.

No scholar or seminary student can do anything but scratch the surface of whats there, and blindly guess at it's meanings. ... It is only mis-interpretation, through men reading it with the human spirit, not the spirit of God.

That's not true, TheVisitor. The Lord of the Rings is the true word of God. I know it doesn't seem to elaborate much on this, but that's because people aren't interpreting it through the true spirit of God, like I am.

The Bible is just a distraction invented by Sauron to draw people away from the truth of his evil ways. If you would but open your heart to the message of LOTR and have a little faith, you would understand God's true purpose for us. I will pray for you in this regard.

Your friend in Frodo,
Jade Squirrel


Martin Luther was a German Catholic priest who felt that the Pope was misinterpreting the word of God. He founded the Protestant religion, so that lay people could misinterpret the word of God for themselves. (From the Online Atheist Dictionary).

Actually, Jade isn't as psyhcotic as she may seem. I don't know where I heard this, but I know that Tokien was a really big Christian, and there have been books written discussing the link between The Lord of the Rings and the Bible.

Why oh why would anyone care about the Bible?

A few thousand years ago when I was a young man everyone
believed in Gai, Zeus, Ares and Poseidon.
These where illogical Gods with silly complex contradicting stories all their own.
Yet people believed in it. They loved it. You brought fish to Venus when your love life was bad. You brought fresh game to Ares when your war wasen't going well. Ususally to burn in a brazer so the gods could get it's essence.
It seems silly now, or is it.
People belived it just as strongly as they believe in the myth of Christ and Satan today.

Throw off the chains of ignorance. We are all animals with the “god” given ability to think for ourselves.

If God really existed there would have been no Holocaust, no evil. I’m sorry but I stopped believing in God’s plan when it was proved to be fallacy again and again.

Oh what’s the use? Take it to a theological forum will ya? I want people to help me think not chase my tale.

:bugeye:

Originally posted by monkey
Why oh why would anyone care about the Bible?

People belived it just as strongly as they believe in the myth of Christ and Satan today.

Throw off the chains of ignorance. We are all animals with the “god” given ability to think for ourselves.

If God really existed there would have been no Holocaust, no evil. I’m sorry but I stopped believing in God’s plan when it was proved to be fallacy again and again.


I'm not going to criticize you for not believing in God, because I think that you are just as wrong as I am for believing in him. So, that also gives you no right to critcize me for having faith in God.
You said it yourself
the “god” given ability to think for ourselves. That's why there was a Holocaust and that's why there is evil. And, what is God's plan to you? Are you implying God had a plan? The majority of the Christian faith is, well...faith.

I think it's silly to debate the existence of a mythical being.

It's your right to believe anything you want.
As it's also your right to discuss it.

I just get tired of wasting time on this or any fictional entity.
I'd like it if the discussions on this board where limited to the observable.

For the record I do believe in many things I can't see. I have faith in these things, like gravity.
I would have more faith in God if he would show himself.
Since he hasen't he can't. Since he can't he won't.

But I do believe in Yogi Bear. I have excepted him into my heart.
For at least He offers Pikanic baskets to all. Boo boo.

Don't you dis Yogi. He is the one true Bear.

The argument is age old, and will never be "limited to the observable", despite what you may wish. And God can show himself, why He does not, ask some one who knows more than I. Oh...how the Hell do you believe in "Yogi"?

First It's been Nice talking to you.

My real points besides the Yogi joke were the following.

I believe that a scientific forum is Not the correct place for a discussion about the existence of God.

In fact the original message was a query about the size of the observable universe.

What do I believe?
I believe that if God exists the only thing he has demonstrated to humanity is that he is either too busy or important to bother with them anymore.

I don't blame him for this. Having meet humanity I put it right up there with the Cobra or the mole rat for decency.
Besides He's a busy guy.
I mean he must be busy and all what with the creating and begetting and what not.

Probably the most important.
Let's say there is a God.
If God does exist there is no one living on the face of the Earth that can act as a spokesperson for him.
No one.

And If (S)he has a problem with me I'm sure (S)he'll let me know.

We would be less then insects to such a creature.
I for one would not dare put words into God's mouth,
It would be well just rude.

Besides, I haven't earned it. I haven't evolv...
Oh, uh sorry, I forgot, me bad.

Now Yogi I can understand.

He's Real.
He's Tangible.
Simply He is.
Well He is a Bear.

He even has a nemesis.
Ranger Smith.

In fact the original message was a query about the size of the observable universe. All conversations change topic at one point or another. It's just always been that way. Whether it be a real life conversation, or a forum. Anyway, there are a lot of questions that we simply don't know the answer to. One of them is this: Why does God let bad things happen? Well, there just is no answer. Plain and simple. None. Now, as for Yogi, did he make the Universe? I think not.

Sorry got ta go.
See ya soon.

For the record I do believe in many things I can't see. I have faith in these things, like gravity.
Actually, monkey, you don't need to have faith in these things because faith is belief without proof. There is proof of gravity.

Don't ever let a Xian accuse you of having "faith" in science. Science requires no faith; it requires proof.

You know the moral monkey was trying to say is that the faith one has to believe in Santa, Tooth fairy, Buggyman, Yogi Bear,,, ect. is the same as believing in god! :D

Originally posted by monkey
Check back in a few thousand years and perhaps we'll have learned the answer.
Sorry, I don't expect to live that long unless I start believing in Jesus and am thereby granted everlasting life. And it's not looking good for me there. I'll have to go with our current best guess.


Originally posted by alice
universe is expanding..infinitely..so..
..can't give it a 'size'
My question was limited to the size of the observable universe, for which we can estimate a size because we can observe it.


Originally posted by James R
For comparison, the bible thinks the value of pi is 3.
Ha ha! 1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2. Classic Bible verses! While we're on the subject, here are my two personal favorites:

“Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”
-Acts 1:18

[Said Jesus to Peter,] “Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me.”
-Matthew 16:23

Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
:eek:

Don't mind TheVisitor, he's just a guy I stupidly invited from a theology forum.
Thanx a lot!
Anyway, most ancient mythologies have contradicting stories.

To TheVisitor,

Isn't the Jewish year 360 days? I am almost certain that anytime the work "year" is used it referrs to 360 days.

-AntonK

To TheVisitor,
Isn't the Jewish year 360 days? I am almost certain that anytime the work "year" is used it referrs to 360 days......-AntonK

============

I believe your right...360 days.

Just like 360% in a circle...........
Which would make 12 - 30 day months.

This may have been the way the earth was before the "Great Flood" and the axis of the world tilted 23 1/2 degrees.

:eek: Are you now saying that the year was 5 and a quarter days shorter in the past because of the tilt of the earth's axis?

That’s impossible! The earth had to be in a slightly closer orbit for the year to be a few days shorter, the tilt of the earth as no connection. The tilt or wobble of the earth only controls the seasons. It is possible that the tilt could be out of sync with the orbit, that would produce the effects you want, but the tilt would naturally sync with the orbit do to tidal effect (because the earth has a parabolic orbit) this process though is horrifically slow and takes billions of years not the ~6000 that you need.

That’s impossible! The earth had to be in a slightly closer orbit for the year to be a few days shorter, the tilt of the earth as no connection

============

This doesn't nessesarily have to be true.
But I'm not saying the world was on a perfect 360 day orbit, either.
It would make since though, 360% is a perfect circle.
Anything out of balance "slows down".
A 3-speed fan blower like those used in a common central air-conditioning system has to be tested for "vibration" before instalation.
If the blower wheel is slightly un-balanced, the motor doesn't even have the power to reach the RPM's to shift into the next gear..
Your talking centrifical force, anything spinning when throwed out of balance....will slow down.
I beleive man caused this catastophy, through science they had before the flood.
The bible says the conditions of mankind would be the same today as it was then.
Matthew 24:37 - "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be"
We don't have today, the ability to built the pyramids...
Can you imagine the force of the explosion it took to "tilt" the earth 23 1/2 degrees, and throw it farther away from the sun.
Looking down at the Himaliyan mountain range from space, it forms the ridge of a crater over 500 miles across.....
Russia today has a 100 megaton bomb,..... whats to stop us from making a 1 Gigaton weapon, or 10 Gigaton weapon....
Man has developed nuclear energy today....this is a common source of power.
The stars are powered by fusion. Man before the flood had 10 of our lifetimes to accumulate knowledge, living to be over 900 years old.
We attained nuclear power in less than 50 years of experimentation.
What excludes the posibilty of man as I have descibed, not man so-called "science" and archeology today would paint them as having been, also having discovered this common source of power.
Nothing.

:eek: :m: Gwa ha ha! You can't be for real! So first you propose that the earth's tilt has something to do with the amount of days we have in a year. You appear to like the number 360 because that happens to be the number of degrees we ascribe to our measurements of circles. There is no reason why that number needs to correspond to the number of times the earth spins on its axis in the duration of time in which it makes one orbit of the sun!

Now you are proposing that earth became tilted because of a massive nuclear explosion caused by a bomb that the ancient Hebrews were able to design and construct due to their unusually long life spans on the order of 900 years! Perhaps it wasn't "the great flood" that eradicated the dinosaurs after all, but Noah (who was a nuclear scientist by night) who discovered that he could split a plutonium-239 isotope into two smaller fragments with a neutron, and that this would result in an incredible amount of energy in the form of heat and gamma radiation to be released. :bugeye:

Wow, I have never seen such grasping for straws to make the data fit. This is priceless.

TheVisitor...
Are you a air conditioner repairman? If so, then you have a crap job, you could be a televangelist with your artful bullshitting skills.

not kidding man, you could make millions

ZERO MASS

Can you imagine the force of the explosion it took to "tilt" the earth 23 1/2 degrees, and throw it farther away from the sun

============

If you read the scriptures concerning the world before the flood, It was watered by the dew that evaporated in the afternoon, and condensed at night.
There had never been rain on the earth to that time or even a single cloud.

It was "knocked" off it's axis by man, who tampering with science and nature cauesd the destuction. The imbalance caused the poles to shift, the areas that were tropical to become artic and visa-versa. however, the area around the pyramid site seems to have remained a center point.
God said, I will destoy...but let man do it to himself.
This is the way God does things many times.
He said I will delever my people...but sent Moses and empowered him to bring them out.
Believe what you will, but a prophet said this was what happened, and I believe it......
It lines up with the scriptures perfectly.

TheVisitor,

by the way where did all the water come from to make a world wide flood?

you knock a perfectly balanced terrarium off it's axis, melt the polar ice caps, break up the fountains of the deep...all that water in the atmosphere with out seasons condenced.......


You figure out the rest.

Your telling me there i enough water in the polar ice caps? If all the ice caps in the world melted it would raise sea levels 200 feet... that’s not enough to cover all land heck that’s barely enough to get ride of the “wang” state (Florida) infact there is not enough water on the whole planet to cover all land and there never was and never will be.

Are you actually trying to claim the flood didn't happen..?

That's just what they thought then too.....
Theres no water up there, .......
Where's it going to come from....?
Funny how those spirits are still around.
God takes the man, but not the spirit that was on the man.
It stays to come back upon another.
Noah preached for 120 years without a single convert.
They were a very scientific age, just like today.
Satan had blinded their eyes......just like today.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Are you actually trying to claim the flood didn't happen..?

I have seen some evidence that says there could have been a large flood in mesopotamia around when the bible says. I think it was on discovery channel. Do you have any scietific proof of a flood that covered the entire world? I would like to see it, to me it sounds highly improbable.


Originally posted by TheVisitor
They were a very scientific age, just like today.
Satan had blinded their eyes......just like today.

Scientific, indeed...except that it was in no way like our modern age. How was it scientific? And what exactly makes the prehistoric biblical world at all like the world of today?

Oh yeah, and every time you say Satan temped humanity or something like that, you sound like a child. I mean, all your credibility (what little you have) falls through the floor.

ZERO MASS

Actually today is not a very scientific age a good percentage of the world will agree with me.

Satan had blinded their eyes......just like today.
So basically, only you and whoever agrees with your crackpot theory is blinded by Satan. What arrogance! :o

its perfect this way no one can tell him hes wrong!

Perhaps that would explain his persistence despite no one here buying any of that nonsense. :m:

So basically, only you and whoever agrees with your crackpot theory is blinded by Satan. What arrogance!
===========

You couldn't even get a cut-down right....it should read:

So basically, only you and whoever agrees with your crackpot theory is (NOT) blinded by Satan. What arrogance!

And you want to criticize the bible........
Don't quit your day job.

Well at least we agree TheVisitor, your delusional and live in a fairy word with goddess, angles and devils. We on the other hand don't but you can claim that Satan is blind us those reaffirming your delusion and making it impossible for us to argue against you. Let me guess Satan makes everything bad in the world and all people are inherently good at their core its just Satan is tempting them right?

Originally posted by TheVisitor
So basically, only you and whoever agrees with your crackpot theory is blinded by Satan. What arrogance!
===========

You couldn't even get a cut-down right....it should read:

So basically, only you and whoever agrees with your crackpot theory is (NOT) blinded by Satan. What arrogance!

And you want to criticize the bible........
Don't quit your day job.
I think you got the meaning of what I was saying despite my oversight in including the word 'not'. Hmm... now let me do some editing of your posts:


"Theres [sic] no water up there"

"They were a very scientific age" [Noah and those who lived in his time were an age, eh?]

"you knock a perfectly balanced terrarium off it's [sic] axis, melt the polar ice caps, break up the fountains of the deep...all that water in the atmosphere with out [sic] seasons condenced [sic]"

"It was "knocked" off it's [sic] axis by man, who tampering with science and nature cauesd [sic] the destuction [sic]."

"the areas that were tropical to become artic [sic] and visa-versa [sic]"

"He said I will delever [sic] my people"


And that is just in your prior three posts! You didn't hear me complaining about your awful grammar and spelling. The point is that semantics, while important for clarity of communication, do not affect the validity of the argument one is making.