Free Republic

What would be hilarious is if Bibi in turn issued arrest warrants against the same Spanish officials. Mossad would have all of them in Israeli jails in a matter of months.

You realize that all of these collisions you're depending on to explain away the effects of E=MC^2 would themselves create more radiant energy, right? (Laws of conservation of matter and energy.) Adam's fried either way.

But let's think about this for a second as a thought experiment: You're having to posit that light was traveling a couple million times faster (at least) at the time of Adam. So, 2 million squared equals 4,000,000,000,000 (4x10^12, or four thousand billion) times the amount of radiant energy from the sun. So to absorb all that extra energy, you're positing that the universe was 4x10^12 times smaller at that time so as to create the necessary particle density. Congratulations, you now have everything in the visible universe (about 30 billion light-years) condensed into an area the size of our solar system only six thousand years ago.

Consequences:

- It's too hot for matter to form, especially with the increased energy output from the increased speed of light.

- The speed at which the universe would have to expand to get to its current size is so fast that it tears apart atoms, let alone stars and planets. We have a universe today with nothing but thinly diffused hydrogen at best.

- Since the speed of light affects chemistry, you can't get the fine-tuning required to maintain biological life.

- You require constantly shifting laws of physics throughout history. Yet the Bible points to the consistency of the laws of physics as proof of the consistency of God in his moral laws and covenantal fidelity.

And all this because you are insisting on a woodenly literal reading of the English translation of Genesis. None of this is necessary to someone who understands the original Hebrew.

I'm a huge Chuck Missler fan--he got me to take the Scriptures seriously and opened up a whole world to me back in the day--but he's just plain wrong on this. And so is Setterfield. His own biography admits that he never completed his university studies in physics and geology. That's not to say that this automatically invalidates his ideas, but rather that I would want to see his math checked by someone who has the expertise to do so. Go talk to a Christian astrophysicist like Hugh Ross--or even Danny Faulkner, if you insist on having a Young-Earth Creationist. Faulkner admitted years ago in a debate with Ross hosted by John Ankerberg that speed-of-light decay wasn't a feasible defense of YEC. In fact, he admitted that YEC doesn't have a valid physics model.

When even YEC astronomers object to Setterfield's hypothesis, that tells you how weak the position is.

Shalom

It isn't. E=MC^2. If the speed of light was even twice as fast in Adam's day, he would have been incinerated by a sun putting out four times as much radiant energy, or else the solar system could not have remained in stable orbits due to the sun gaining four times as much mass. (Ignoring the conservation of mass and energy for the moment.)

Not to mention that those kind of incredible changes in energy and/or mass could not have been hidden from our modern telescopes. We'd be seeing them every time we looked at distant galaxies.

Shalom

Nobody here is asking you to take our word in anything. By the same token, "he who answers a matter before he hears it, it is a folly and a shame unto him." Scripture also tells us to "test all things, and hold on to the good." Are you prepared to test Rood in all things, including his past record? Are you willing to find out why the criticisms of Rood aren't just about his doctrine (there will always be that for any Messianic or Hebrew Roots Christian from our Sunday brethren), but about his past and his claims?

Cynical Bear has just posted proof that Rood has claimed to be a rabbi in the past. While he may have stepped back from that more recently and removed those references from his "official" sites, the record is there for those who wish to pursue the matter. So is the record for the other issues most of us have with Rood.

I know that Rood is an engaging teacher. He's also one that is very good at pushing the pride buttons: Oh, thanks to Rood, you now know the Truth that both the Church and the Jews are blinded to! And anyone who challenges Rood's teaching must be the instrument of the Adversary to keep men blinded to this Truth!

Don't let pride lead you to reject what we've been trying to tell you out of hand, nor to only get your information about Rood from Rood himself so as to confirm what you want to believe.

If you aren't willing to do your homework in this area, then you're no better than anyone else who blindly follows a tradition of men over the Word of God.

Shalom uv'rekha m'ach Yeshua HaMashiach

Then I definitely understand your frustration.

Has that been time just on this thread, or is this an ongoing conversation?

It's the natural response of the first shock. He's not going to suddenly repudiate Rood here and now on this thread. It takes time to assimilate new information that completely undermines something or someone that you have put a lot of stock in. God willing, editor-surveyor won't just close his ears, but will set out to "disprove" the accusations against Rood by doing his own research--and in the process, will uncover the truth for himself.

But that will take time, and we need to give him that time in sympathetic love, not throw rocks at him. Torah, after all, forbids putting stumbling blocks in the path of one who does not see.

Shalom uv'rekha m'ach Yeshua HaMashiach
Peace and blessings from a brother in Jesus Christ

I know of Rood. In short (and I'm sorry, E-S), he's a false teacher who operates under false pretenses.

He claims to be a rabbi, but he hasn’t been ordained as such by any Messianic or traditional Jewish organization. He is not recognized by any major Messianic Jewish organization. His only known ordination as a minister comes from The Way International, which has its own problems. He keeps making false predictions on the timing of the Second Coming based on his “corrected” Jewish calendar. He makes extravagant and false claims about the traditional rabbis agreeing with him on various issues.

He relies on a supposed "Hebrew original" of Matthew that is, as far as anyone can tell, just a translation from the Greek with a few novel changes. He also casually tosses out passages of Scripture that disagree with him: Most famously, realizing that having three Passovers in John's Gospel account messes up his rather novel interpretation of the 70 Weeks, Rood has declared--without any scholarly support--that John 6:4 was falsely inserted into the text. That is easily refuted by anyone with even a basic knowledge of the Biblical manuscript data and the early Church fathers, or even with just access to Google.

Here’s a good summary of some of the other problems Rood has.

Or just Google michael rood false teacher

Unfortunately, between the extravagant claims, the garish pseudo-priestly costumes, the Gandalfian beard, and an incredible talent for self-promotion, he’s a lot of peoples’ first taste of the Hebrew Roots / Messianic movement. Most seem to start catching onto the false claims and drift away after a few years, but there’s always someone new who has just heard of him and gets caught up in his cult.

Honestly, First Fruits of Zion is a much better resource for someone trying to understand the Jewish roots of the Christian faith and where the Messianic movement is today.

Shalom

". . . the right to bear arms against a tyrannical dictatorship is a different question as to whether Christians need to own guns now in a stable democratic environment."

Uh, riiiiiiight. Has this guy even glanced at the news?

And the gas started talking? And somehow didn’t burn down the bush?

The rum is always gone.

No can do. They aren’t happy, they think they’ll only be happy when everyone not only tolerates, but openly celebrates their particular fetish, so you simply MUST bake that cake.

Yes, because there is already a clear legal precedent that art is “speech” for purposes of the 1st Amendment.

Hey now! Hillary may be a serial liar, a drunk, and a lesbian, but . . . what was the fourth thing you said?

:^)

Yes, my gender has changed over time to “Majesty.” From now on all liberals must address me as “Your Majesty,” to other people as “His Majesty,” and so forth. Anyone who doesn’t do so is simply Buggophopic and must be fired from their jobs immediately.

Seriously. My mom used to kick me out the door on a Saturday afternoon and tell me not to come back until dinner. (I was prone to staying indoors and reading all the time.)

Fascinating observation. Can’t wait to throw it into the mix the next time I’m dealing with a rant from the other side.

“Truce” is Arabic for, “Hang on, I’m reloading.”

Bump to show to my teenage daughter later. Many thanks!