NASA and scientific spam: Answering the Bible with more of non-creating speech
Every true Christian has heard the accusation that “Christians just defend the Bible with the Bible” as if that were an evil or a sign of automatic lack of rigorous proof. In reality, it is those who are slaves to non-creating speech that answer the Bible with the more of non-creating speech and continually appeal to the non-creating nature of THEIR speech as evidence of the supposed lack of creation within ALL speech as if their speech was the only speech in total reality. They actually do what they falsely accuse Christians of doing: speak a word which is powerless to create and answer God through us with more of non-creating speech as if it were its own proof of truth simply for being spoken.
If that were not enough to simply see that as truth, God in the Bible Said as Creating Speech that that very condition was and will be so: as Christians we have hard evidence of that there are two distinct languages, ( Jesus Christ as Word of God/Creating Speech and non-creating speech/anti-Christ ) and the antagonism between them –we have the whole of what is going on while those in non-creating speech have no explanation for the presence of any other than their own speech –which is why they deny God and can’t do any other no matter how long they see their lies are lies. We as Christians have hard evidence that non-Christians must stay within the bounds and common sense of their speech and be lead to destruction because of it while believing the whole time they are “correct”.
1John 4:4-6 *Ye* are of God, children, and have overcome them, because greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world. *They* are of the world; for this reason they speak as of the world, and the world hears them. *We* are of God; he that knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. From this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
and
1 Corinthian 2:12-16 But *we* have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things which have been freely given to us of God: which also we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, communicating spiritual things by spiritual means . But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him; and he cannot know them because they are spiritually discerned; but the spiritual discerns all things, and *he* is discerned of no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord, who shall instruct him? But *we* have the mind of Christ.
————
The word science these days seeks to encapsulate “free willed, dispassionate inquiry into physical phenomena articulated in will-neutral media ( will neutrality being one of the supposed attributes of non-creating speech within its own definition of itself as something other than a living spirit ) for the public to consume as intellectual entertainment”.
Even that is thrown out the window in this spam piece from NASA. “New Gamma-Ray Burst Smashes Cosmic Distance Record” in which the lie of evolution and Very Old Universe are supposedly validated with Numbers and terms like ‘red shift’ …complete with phrases that are supposed evidences of free will as independent minds finding out the same thing at the same time and thus validating its truth: “NASA’s Swift satellite and an international team of astronomers have found..” plus ” Tanvir’s team, gathering nearly simultaneous observations using one of the European Southern Observatory’s Very Large Telescopes on Cerro Paranal, Chile, arrived at the same number…” supposedly equal truth.
One would expect those in non-creating speech to be in the same non-creating mathematics and when involved in the same agenda to arrive at the same Numbers within that lie. And yet, even within non-creating speech what is the non-creating/’will neutral’ odds on that one?
There is of course some sprinkling of mathematics terms to make it seem real science: micron, light years, billions, 400th anniversary, ” right next to the real meat of the spam; the terms “incredible”, “amazing” and “What makes it even better..”
For a spam piece hawking the lie that the universe is really really really really really OLD and thus large and thus every time we see something new in space it ergo, ipso facto and therefore MUST have traveled a long, long, long, long , long, long, long , long, long distance and so must be have been traveling a looooong time so that not just anyone could see it but your “scientists” –who at least in theory are out there looking up truth to bring it back to you specifically during your life time–, it is quite good for economy of effort, depending as it does on the dullness of mind and attention span of all those institutionalized in the lie of free will, the lie of evolution, non-creating numbers and non-creating speech as a whole with its false measurements.
Understand that anti-Christ is forced to say you are anti-intellectual and therefore anti-truth if you deny he is the sole speech in total reality and from there you will see all his nonsense if you are in Christ.
We see a lie that is not millions of years old but only as recent as October of last year that goes:
Until recently, experts were grappling with an even more fundamental question about GRBs: what the heck are they? Astronomers had observed these astonishing bursts since the 1960s, but nobody could imagine an event powerful enough to create them.
The answer eventually came from Stan Woosley, a theoretical astrophysicist at the University of California in San Diego. He suggested that when young, supermassive stars with low metal content collapse under their own weight to form black holes, the stars’ rotation funnels the explosive energy into two streamlined jets that shoot out from the stars’ poles, like the axis of a gyro. We only see the burst if one of these two jets happens to be pointed toward Earth. The concentration of energy into narrow jets is why GRBs that we do observe appear so remarkably bright.
Answer? No doubt the Hindu/Arabic non-creating mathematics makes it seem it might be true. It was a suggestion.
Now it is being hawked as a proof of the Big Bang within a larger lie of billions of year old universe at exactly the time when ’scientists’ need such a ‘proof’ because the lie of the Big Bang has so many holes in it that they say are holes. They introduce the very particular doubt to doubt and then solve it ..seven months later in such a manner as to seem to absolutely validate that both a ’scientific method’ was followed as a ‘dispassionate, free willed inquiry into physical phenomena’ and the lie of evolution as truth simultaneously.
Satan calls that smooth: control the inquiry by putting forth your own set of flaws and then appear to solve them in a timely fashion for public consumption.
Let’s review another scientific hoax that gave evolutionists exactly what they needed to hear on a very timely basis that also appeared to solve pre-arranged flaws/’enigmas’ in an overall lie of evolution: Piltdown man.
excerpted from Wikipedia:
The Piltdown man hoax had succeeded so well because at the time of its discovery, the scientific establishment had believed that the large modern brain had preceded the modern omnivorous diet, and the forgery had provided exactly that evidence. It has also been thought that nationalism and cultural prejudice also played a role in the less-than-critical acceptance of the fossil as genuine by some British scientists [4] . It satisfied European expectations that the earliest humans would be found in Eurasia, and the British, it has been claimed [4], also wanted a first Briton to set against fossil hominids found elsewhere in Europe, including France and Germany.
…
Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard listed a mammal similar to Piltdown Man as one of the ancestors of humanity in his book Scientology: A History of Man and borrowed the Piltdown moniker. His text states that “it is so named not because it is accurately the real Piltdown Man, but because it has some similarity”; Piltdown Man would be exposed as a hoax just months after the publication of Hubbard’s book.
While Scientologists may be going on about ‘Thetan thinking technology’, and NASA may be going on about a universe that is billions of years old as lies, all of them are lies. They may be lies that compete with each other in media space instead of outer space. They may love each other and form a basis for a whole false religion. But whatever emotional niche they come from, they are all still lies all the time.
Instead of asking why something is seen in front of you as understanding why God put it in front of you to see and understand, and how it works and what is going on in front of you, liars would have you asking what is going on “trillions of light years” away from where you are now. When the going gets tough in that lie, they trot out a doubt to seem to answer it later on in such a way as to validate the larger lie while seeming to do pop humility as not knowing something just long enough to cover over the deceit.
Read the Piltdown Hoax again and see that there was heated “debate” within the whole evolutionary community over things that all sides were lying about. Which came ‘first’: an “omnivorous diet” or a “large brain”? That kind of “ask a question to look like you are inquiring into something” begs to be “solved’ in favor of the overall lie no matter who wins when the emotional show is over. Inevitably, somebody has to got to get a geek award for “solving it”. There has to be the smack of real competition over the award. Somebody has to be gracious when they don’t get it and gracious when they do.
Piltdown liars lapped it up for over forty years –and kept advanced degrees even after it was exposed as a hoax and they had taught it as truth and as a sound basis for rejecting Jesus Christ for over 40 years within the lie of free will.
Now read this about a previous ‘exploding star’ phenomena:
The chances of two simultaneous supernovae explosions so close to each other is maybe 1 in 10,000, Soderberg said. The odds of looking at them at the right time with the right telescope are, well, astronomical.
Add to that the serendipity of the Berkeley team viewing the same region with an optical light telescope. It took pictures of the star about three hours before it exploded.
Daaang. Three hours? How lucky can you get, eh? Over and over.
Isn’t it odd how concepts/spirits like ‘lucky’, “science as functional proof of free will”, ‘free will’ and ‘evolution’ need each other to survive as concepts that even appear to work even though none can survive serious scrutiny and just happen to keep popping up next to each other in the media in non-creating speech?
A bright spot in the sky, picked up as or by the use of electromagnetic waves means ..nothing, to prove the Big Bang or even “dying stars” that supposedly implode because a naturalistic, evolutionary cause that would never bother your smug belief in your own free will just ‘happened’.
The use of non-creating speech leads those within it into a box that forces them to re-cycle its old lies about how the universe began expressly because of the non-creating nature of the speech itself. Instead of “the sun got in on with the moon and out popped the universe” or “the turtle rode a mouse to the end of the world and ..so began the universe ” sort of lie that denies Jehovah in favor of other names as Creator, because those names never can prove the powers they claimed to have had to create all that is, the same lies are re-cycled in more ’scientific’ terms that simply denies creation at all.
and so science fans:
“…What if the missing GRBs really are missing?
“That would teach us something very interesting about the Universe,” says Gehrels.”
But whatever happens , they want you looking very very very very far away and not in front of you. Unless Jesus Christ has grace you won’t need the Martian from Bugs Bunny pointing his P-3 Enebulizer at you to destroy your attention span. You’ll have NASA, saying no matter what is found or how it is found, orchestrating the chorus in media space: ‘the truth is very very very very very far away!’ while a soft feminine voice repeats over and over as supposed Local Truth in the background: ‘You come from apes. The universe is billions of years old. You have free will. You have free will. The lack of a creator proves it. The lack of a creator proves it. There is only one speech in total reality. There is only one speech in total reality.’
————-
“The truth is way way way way way out there and is very very very very very very old ..if only we could know it’ is obviously the mindset of NASA science writers. And yet, they just so happened up on the very ‘proof ‘ they were missing …seven months ago.
Deu 30:11-14 For this commandment which I command thee this day is not too wonderful for thee, neither is it far off. It is not in the heavens, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to the heavens, and bring it to us, that we should hear it and do it? And it is not beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, that we should hear it and do it? For the word is very near to thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
Proverbs 17:24 Wisdom is before him that hath understanding; but the eyes of a fool are in the ends of the earth.
Romans 10:6-11 But the righteousness of faith speaks thus: Do not say in thine heart, Who shall ascend to the heavens? that is, to bring Christ down; or, Who shall descend into the abyss? that is, to bring up Christ from among the dead. But what says it? The word is near thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach: that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thine heart that God has raised him from among the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart is believed to righteousness; and with the mouth confession made to salvation. For the scripture says, No one believing on him shall be ashamed.
In the Name of Jesus Christ, Amen