If you’re still troubled by this, you should seek out a trusted pastor who can speak to your specific situation exactly.

SECOND I READ MATHEW 12-31 DAILY 20 TIMES A DAY TO SEE IF CURSING LEADS TO BEING UNPARDONABLE WHEN AGAIN OUT OF NOWERE I SAID THAT THE HOLY SPIRT GETS ITS POWERS FORM SATAN ALL B.C. WHAT I READ OUT OF IMPULSE AND PREASURE NOT IN A CLEAR MIND CAN SOME ONE OR EVERYONE COMMENT IF GOD will forgive me for such a thing or has his doors closed from the first insult

i need some one to explain to me b.c. i beleive jesus is who he says he is with all my heart but when i said that about the holyspirit it is true that jesus said that you cant never be forgiven so whats even the point of even still beleiving in jesus if i cant be forgiven will someone explain

.. using LaTeX for your articles

It’s really the best typesetting method around — far better than WYSIWYG editors like Word.

Right now, I’m using MultiMarkdown to create the entries in pure text (using Linux and the Kate editor), then convert to LaTeX (and PDF), and also to HTML.

If you haven’t tried MultiMarkdown, you might want to have a look at it. Naturally it doesn’t encompass all of LaTeX, but it’s good for writing articles — with the benefit everything is stored as text, so no worries about compatibility between word processor versions!

If you do take the stance that the Bible is accurate and the universe is six thousand years old, why should we submit and let others believe in 15 billions?

The Bible is accurate — man’s history is about 6 thousand years; the age of the universe is another matter as you’ve got to deal with (at a minimum) the following:

• How long were Adam and Eve in the garden?
• Did entropy apply then (I think not, but others argue)?
• What about the gap theory?
• Has the speed of light slowed down?
• Time is not absolute. 15 billion years in one reference frame is not 15 billion in another. What reference frame do we refer to?

So you see, you’ve got major problems in discussing this issue. I once saw a chart (a loooong time ago) listing various scientific methods on the age of the universe, varying from a few thousand to billions of years. The point is each of them was “scientific”, yet obviously not all could be true.

My point is simple — when dealing with evolution much greater problems exist with the theory than simply the age of the universe. Discussing the age sometimes results in arguments on that point only, leaving other points unanswered.

I’ve written much on evolution, search this site for more and you’ll discover why I don’t generally argue about the age of the universe. It’s not that 15 billion is right, but there’s much more interesting things to discuss.

I just came across a line in this article: http://www.dyeager.org/blog/2008/03/age-of-earth.html

Toward the bottom you say “Just use 15 billion years and be done with it.” with regards to the approach a Christian should hold discussing the topic of the age of the earth with a non-believer.

My stance has been to hold with the number of roughly six thousand years. If we begin with a literal six day creation (for everything), and follow the timeline from Adam to Jesus, the total does in fact add up to roughly six thousand years.

When I do get the opportunity to discuss this topic with others, I make it clear that I do believe that the universe and the earth were created in six days, approximately six thousand years ago. I feel like Genesis is compromised when we relax our stance on the truth of the Bible. I’ve seen this first hand, when the first 20 verses of Genesis are compromised, the entire Bible is compromised.

I understand that its easy to get caught up in a simple number argument with non-believers, but I certainly don’t believe we should sacrifice the truth of the Bible and sit “on the fence” between our faith in the Bible and faith in science.

Ultimately I’m curious what your stance is on the age of the universe? If you do take the stance that the Bible is accurate and the universe is six thousand years old, why should we submit and let others believe in 15 billions?

Thank you for taking the time to read my response. And thank you for taking so much time to provide these great resources. joe

Even more stunning is that over the years many have moved from calling Evolution a Theory, for which it was already absurd, to now being elevated to FACT. No apparent breakthru has occured to cause this great elevation from theory to fact.

Here’s a sample of the kind of interpreting studies I do:

(Genesis) Adam/man (Hebrew-synonyms) = ‘ruddy’, rosy, the flush of red blood

“man became a ‘living soul’ ” (Genesis): soul (Hebrew & Greek) = animal principle/breathing creature

• does not suggest a ‘human’ being but rather a ‘ruddy’ creature (as coming from the ‘red’ earth -dust/ground-primordial soup)

According to my studies of the writings, Adam/man was not initially a ‘human’ being as many believe but rather a ‘ruddy creature of earth’, an animal (which must have been a chimpanzee because of recent human genome DNA mapping).

Religious tendencies are observed strictly in the ‘human’ species. If human beings are in part ‘soul (primate/mammal)’ then why aren’t such tendencies evident in other primates? Could it be because we have something the other primates don’t have?

animal = soul human being = soul + spirit

soul = mortal (of earth) spirit = immortal (otherworldly, aura, transcendent, supernatural)

Prior to being put into the garden, ruddy did not have ‘spiritual’ ability, he only gained that ‘after’ he entered the garden; ‘…and the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had made.’ (Gen. 2:8)

It was the gaining of this other element that enabled ‘one’ primate to change from ‘animal/primate’ to human, and unless he had gained this other element, he could not have changed - thus the reason we don’t see other primates in various stages of change.

I have a brief synopsis of my 15 years of research of the anomaly and its interpreting method, without which I could not have unraveled this information.

They’re literal for sure, but a week isn’t necessarily what you think of as a week. It’s a translational and cultural issue which causes the confusion.

What’s translated Seventy weeks is really seventy sevens. Much like we use the term decade to mean 10 years, seventy sevens means seventy weeks of years. This becomes clear when considering how the Bible describes the period of time of the tribulation — the period of the great tribulation is referred to as:

• 42 months — Revelation 11:2,13:5
• 1,260 days — Revelation 11:3,12:6
• Half of one week (literally “sevens”) — Daniel 9:27
• Times, time and half a time (3 1/2 years) — Daniel 12:7

Obviously, all those periods must be the same length of time, so a few things become obvious:

1. Seventy sevens means weeks of years. That is, Daniel’s prophecy concerns 490 years, or 70 periods of seven years.
2. The Bible uses 360 day years, as most of the ancient calendars did.
3. It’s a literal period of time, and not an allegory.

The seventy weeks of Daniel is actually 70 seven year periods (490) of 360 day years.

The 490 (literal) DAYS will be fulfilled/completed at the Seventh TRUMPET (1 Thess.4:16-17)

No, the seventy weeks of Daniel represent weeks of years. If you’re going to try and make them 490 days, you’ve got big problems trying to reconcile the (what would be) contradictory mentions of the length of time of the tribulation we noted above.

Hopefully that clears it up; you can read the entire commentary on Daniel’s seventy weeks for greater detail if you’re interested.

All end time Biblical prophetic time frames are in actual (literal) time, in other words, a day is a day, a year is a year, an hour is an hour, as it is “written”

Daniel 9:24’s Seventy WEEKS are just that – 70 weeks x 7 days per week = 490 DAYS.

The 490 (literal) DAYS will be fulfilled/completed at the Seventh TRUMPET (1 Thess.4:16-17).

Seventy WEEKS (Dan.9:24) are determined upon thy people (within thy holy city, Jerusalem - Zech.14:2) AND upon thy holy city (Jerusalem), to FINISH the transgression (against the saints of the most High – Matt.24:9, Dan.7:21, Dan.7:25, Dan.8:24, Re.12:17, Re.13:7, Re.13:15, Re.16:6, Re.17:6, Dan.12:6-7), and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy (Dan.8:17, Dan.8:26, Dan.10:14, Dan.11:35, Dan.12:4, Hab.2:3), and to anoint the most Holy.

The most Holy (Dan.9:24) are the remnant (144,000) seen in the city at Revelation 11:13 giving glory to God just prior to the ascension.

Patricia (©) Bible Prophecy on the Web Author of the self-study aid, The Book of Revelation Explained © 1982

Short answer, you’ve assumed what you’re trying to prove (we’re here, therefore evolution happened).

The fact a sequence appears (probability 1) doesn’t tell you how that sequence appeared. Did you deal it? Did your friend? Did you start and someone else finish?

That’s the question — we’re here (probability 1), but how?

The card example is meant to refute those who say wildly improbable things occur all the time (Feynman’s example is perfect) — they don’t (or they’re not improbable). For anyone who does think so, try and call out each card and see how far you get.