Here is the video, I saw it in direct, only when it began, because I then realised this was not the debate he had with Fuz Rana, which I was looking for.
Robert Sungenis Live - Wed Dec 18 2024
Robert Sungenis | 18 Dec. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgss9HpJkcw
The first of the chat comments below was given around the 26 minute mark. But first, his debate with Fuz Rana, which I was looking for:
Age of the Earth Debate | Dr. Robert Sungenis vs. Dr. Fuz Rana - Young Earth vs. Old Earth
Standing For Truth | 17 Dec. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOe8nV_pU9Q
Now, back to the comments in the chat from the direct of the first video. I did not hear Sungenis adress them yet, so my own adressing them is independent of his one:
- Sam Shad
- question: dr where did the scientists that promote geocentrism get their order from? whos behind it
- Sam Shad
- question: im a muslim. did you know quran is also talking about geocentrism
First, I don't think Sam Shad is a cradle Muslim, since Samuel is a name among Jews and Christians, but not among Muslims. He could even be making this up trying to make someone "open up" and "admit" a non-extant Muslim affiliation. Or, he could bona fide be a Muslim but have a screen name calculated to sound English.
Second, is Sam Shad asking about credentials or actually about orders to follow? (The former could be the case if English is not his native language and he struggles with translating concepts that could overlap in his language).
Is he bringing up Geocentrism in the Quran for sympathy or for insinuating someone is acting "on the orders of" some Muslim Cabale?
In the latter case, he's spreading paranoia.
Now, if he meant it in a correct way, though not correct in English, where they have their credentials ...
TESTIMONY OF
GERARDUS DINGEMAN BOUW
https://www.geocentricity.com/bibastron/bouw_bio.html
I graduated in 1967 with a B.S. in astrophysics. That fall I entered Case Western Reserve University for graduate studies in astronomy and a couple of years later got involved with the wrong crowd.
It was there that life interfered with my school work and, more importantly, it interfered with my atheism. I discovered that science could not explain all phenomena. I also broadened my scientific interests tremendously, becoming a generalist.
...
The Lord answered that prayer less than a year later. Early 1976, the late Professor Harold Armstrong, then editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly, wrote a note therein about the diversity of opinions and views in the Creationist movement. To illustrate the breadth of those views, he mentioned a Dutch-Canadian named Walter van der Kamp (photo at left) as an extreme case where a Creationist advocated the literality of Scripture to the point of a stationary earth. Now as an undergraduate at the University of Rochester in Rochester, New York, I'd taken enough relativity theory to know that neither heliocentrism nor geocentricity could be proven or disproven, and so I fired off a letter to Walter asking, in effect, "which Scriptures?"
As to who's paying him, he has this notice:
The Assoc. for Biblical Astronomy
is a Ministry of the Mantua Country Baptist Church
12385 Chamberlain Road, Aurora, Ohio USA 44202
As for Robert Sungenis' associate, Luka Popov was trained at Zagreb University and gets money on the side by teaching Chess:
Adult Chess Improver
https://www.youtube.com/c/AdultChessImprover
And by coauthoring books with Dr. Robert Sungenis.
So, freedom of expression helps. Free enterprise in the bookmarket of ideas helps.
Some guys seem to have no concept of Western freedoms. An African was asking me on Quora whether The American University of Paris was recognised by the French Ministry of Education. It doesn't need to be. It's a free university. It seems he imagined if it wasn't backed by the French Department of Education of Higher Education, it was some kind of scam. On the youtube comments, I was the day before yesterday or day before that in a short debate with someone who tried to tell me:
- a University by definition is controlled by the state (it could have been an East European or someone from former East Germany), and:
- OT theology cannot take the NT or Catholic dogma into account (which is heretical, since the God of the Catholic Church IS the God Who spoke to Moses).
On the former account, he seemed to have this same idea that research is backed by state power, nothing smaller could ever finance it, and if Geocentric research is not backed by the state power in the state where it is conducted, that means its financed by a foreign power. Frankly, if it were conducted on a normal university as a normal project, it would be ONE relatively small research topic, which at any big university gets perhaps 1 % at the biggest of the research money of the university, which also has expenses for teaching all the new students. It's not all that expensive. The Heliocentrics who own Hubble telescope cannot copyright observations in it, so Geocentrics don't need to have an extra big telescope. The research is mainly in how observations are interpreted, consistently with the astrophysics that the Geocentric thinks applicable. And in many countries, donors and paying students between them are able to finance universities without contributions from the state. So, even if it had been as big as a university, there would still be no need for a given state to finance it.
- Prawda i Konsekwencja
- QUESTION: In the case of people suffering from scrupulousness, can it be considered that all private vows they make are probably invalid?
This comment was wildly off topic, I thought someone counted Sungenis as "one of my mentors" which is overdoing it, and hoped his answer could ge across to me, which isn't necessary. Inspired this post:
New blog on the kid: I Think Some People May Think I'm a Scrupulous Person Trying to Keep Private Vows and Suffering From That
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2024/12/i-think-some-people-may-think-im.html
- Ivan Bliminse
- Question: According to book of Job, God gives devil permission to torment Job. So does devil and demons always need approval from God to do what they want?
Permission, not specifically approval.
God gave the Pharao permission for some time to keep the Israelites back, and that was NOT with approval.
But yes, God being Almighty means, nothing happens ever anywhere unless God either orders it or permits it.
The temporal permission is precisely temporal. God will allow no evildoing to continue past Doomsday, except between those already damned. It does not mean God approves the evildoing. Evil man can sometimes repent, demons can't, both will have to cease that sooner or later.
- Steven B
- QUESTION: is evolution racist at its core? Akin and Horn seem to promote evolution. But it seems like pro-evolutionists can’t get around the idea that some animal breeds are “smarter” (1/3)
- Steven B
- QUESTION: ..or more “aggressive” than others. How can pro evolutionists acknowledge this fact while saying it has no bearing on humans. (2/3)
- Steven B
- QUESTION: Its seems that if you think we evolved, that you’d inevitably fall into biological determinism (3/3)
I think evolutionism as to human origins would involve that we are worth what we are worth or at least that we are what we are at least partly because of such traits.
In one age, this might more emphasise race, and in another, differences within each race, but it would fairly inevitably lead to some kind of determinism.
Either way, the ideology that can result easily is bad news for freedoms.
- Joseph Ben YHWH
- Hey robert, always wondered how the geocentric models explains how the sun orbits us if its greater. Im supposing gravity would have it pull us.
- Joseph Ben YHWH
- I get its a theory, the other explanation for why a ball would fall would be density, would a geocentric hold to density?
Dr. Robert Sungenis and myself do not explain it the same way.
In Sungenis, the main cause is the Newtonian one. He just says that the two movements are equivalent, and then it's earth actually being in place that happens.
On my view, God is each day turning most of the Universe around Earth. In it, a substance called aether is turning and heavenly bodies are suspended in it. Hence they also turn around the Earth. Outside this turning portion of the aether the Heaven that's God's throne room is still, because God is not turning it, and within it, lower than the Moon, Earth is also still. God is not turning it and also keeping it from flouting out / up towards the Sun. As to motions over longer times, the heavenly bodies would be moved by angels.
God's not material, angels are not material. Minds have some power over matter. God over all matter (and all created minds). Man over the matter in his body, if it's within the things muscles move voluntarily. Angels over any body, not their own since they don't have one, and basically one thing in one place at a time. It could be a big thing like Jupiter or the Sun, or a small thing, like a raindrop when leading it to form a pattern on a window, which sometimes is taken as hints by people and sometimes angels will use this. Or simmply the fact that the human eye is likely to follow the thing that's moving and projecting the movement on, if he needs the man to look at a particular corner in a particular moment. But whether the angel moves a raindrop on a window pane or Jupiter through the aether, he isn't fatigued by it, he's not exerting muscle force. It's as easy for them as for us to write with a pen. This would be the main cause for the movement of celestial bodies, able to at times override the gravitationally and inertially prompted way of such a body, as easily as I can override the gravitional prompt of a falling pen by catching it mid-air.
Mr. Joseph who thinks it's funny to call himself a son of God (or is he a peacemaker? Matthew 5:9) seems to be under the impression that a geocentric would be denying density. On my theory of the aether, I might explain it a bit differently, attributing substantiality to the light matter of the aether and not just the heavy matter of the nucleons, but I definitely don't deny there is such a thing. To get to Newtonian physics of gravity. I made a mistake earlier when calculating how the daily rotation of the Sun would affect a static earth.
Creation vs. Evolution: Misinformation on St. Robert Bellarmine, I'd Say · New blog on the kid: How would my solution to why Earth stays in place work out, physically? · First Approximation of Improving the Calculation · Second Approximation
The mistake is, I thought Earth would have its movements cancelled out as the Sun came to opposite directions around the Earth, but the problem is so does the aether, which is the locus of vectors. So, counting vectors through the aether, the Sun would be roughly speaking the same side. But it is noteworthy that a calculation I made said that in the absence of any previous attraction in a given direction, which involved the working in of sine values, which only on this theory would be involved in growing and waning pulls into each direction, the starting point for each direction would be in the first second a speed of:
1 s 0.008 m/s
So, 8mm/s. That however was for when the Sun was getting around the corner so to speak. As the aether rotates with the Sun, it's more like it is not getting around any corners or changing directions. Optically yes, vectorially no. Here is the acceleration, anyway:
0.0592651954330057862 m/s2
This means, the Earth would in the first second spontaneously tend to move 6 cm. Easy enough for God to keep back and without that first speed, there is also no accumulation of speed. But actually probably the speed does accumulate enough to make room for tides. Either way, God being of infinite power has no problem keeping this from pulling Earth into an orbit. But you might ask "why would God go against His own laws" — however the result of one factor according to one law is not THE law of God for the universe. God is not morally or aesthetically obliged to let gravitation have its effect in every case, or God would not allow us to hang things up on strings, since that also interferes with the effects of gravitation. If God can allow strings to interfere with gravity, why would He have any obligation to deny His own omnipotence that? This is also a thing in miracles, but when it comes to Geocentric Universe, it's technically not a miracle, because it's a "standing miracle" ... a sign since all time, as in Romans chapter one, just as Jesus did miracles in the normal sense to show He is that same God.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Ember Saturday
and St. Thomas Apostle
21.XII.2024
No comments:
Post a Comment