Ben Carson Thinks Joseph Built the Pyramids.... WTF?

[wizardwatson]

You're welcome. Sadly, many won't find the time to view all five segments of this video.

Well, I just did. And this may be the next book I read. (The Science of God)

The payoff in the video is really awesome. I had considered that the first 6 days were a cosmological parable, but after viewing those videos and hearing his arguments to that effect I doubt anyone will be able to convince me otherwise. His knowledge of ancient texts is also mind-blowing.

And this hour of videos was only about the age of the universe! I'm excited to hear his scientific interpretation of other biblical concepts related to God.

Very fascinating. The Wiz approves.

 

[Dr.3D]

Well, I just did. And this may be the next book I read. (The Science of God)

The payoff in the video is really awesome. I had considered that the first 6 days were a cosmological parable, but after viewing those videos and hearing his arguments to that effect I doubt anyone will be able to convince me otherwise. His knowledge of ancient texts is also mind-blowing.

And this hour of videos was only about the age of the universe! I'm excited to hear his scientific interpretation of other biblical concepts related to God.

Very fascinating. The Wiz approves.

I'm glad you understood the video.

I have no idea why someone would think a day would be without sun shining on the earth. I mean, I was talking about literal 24 hour days and some folks think I was talking about something else. Guess they didn't view the last section of the video.


Edit: And by the way, I have The Science of God and it's great. I let my oldest son borrow it and he hasn't returned it yet.

 

[sparebulb]

Mr. Dr. Ben Carson MD is wrong again.

Everyone knows that the pyramids were constructed to keep the Egyptian razor blades sharp.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Haha...exactly. The Millerite movement and Ellen G. White's continuation of it, was a movement of false prophets.

Are you suggesting that Ben Carson, darling of anti-Obama evangelicals, is not a Christian but a follower of false prophets?

 

[wizardwatson]

I'm glad you understood the video.

I have no idea why someone would think a day would be without sun shining on the earth. I mean, I was talking about literal 24 hour days and some folks think I was talking about something else. Guess they didn't view the last section of the video.

Edit: And by the way, I have The Science of God and it's great. I let my oldest son borrow it and he hasn't returned it yet.

Most people don't like to learn. It's rare to find someone who likes to talk and share and also is eager to learn more. Most who talk are interested in displaying what they have learned. This phenomenon I would say is even more pronounced with those who discuss religion because they have a existential stake in giving an appearance of complete knowledge.

Anyway, I understood it "easier" I guess because I've studied this stuff extensively. I was actually a Health Physics Technician in the army at 19 so I had to learn physics as part of my job but was reading this stuff since grade school.

I wasn't really what I would call a "believer" until my 30's. (37 now) Reconciling the science with theology was certainly a challenge. Excited by this guy, who seems like he definitely would have made that challenge easier, because ultimately all knowledge and learning is helpful in communicating this stuff to other people. In the "sword of truth, shield of faith, helmet of salvation" paradigm, learning what this guy has to say falls into the "sword of truth" category.

It's weird, I was just having a theological debate with my 12 year old over dinner. We watched the first segment of that video together even though I didn't know what was going to be in it. I just knew the guy was going to present biblical concepts from the perspective of science. Can't wait to show him the whole series. He's currently belongs to the "monkey religion" (his own words. Apparently, that's what his classmates term evolutionary theory as). But I got some points by emphasizing what the narrator points out about how 2/3rds of scientists in the 1950's thought the universe was eternal.

So really, I like learning how to reconcile these kinds of things for the benefit of communicating with others. For myself, I'm more obsessed with the future theologically. But God has wrapped all that up in codes and puzzles. Fun but slow going. It'll be nice to study up on some foundational stuff and change tracks for awhile.

Thanks again!

 

[Sola_Fide]

Are you suggesting that Ben Carson, darling of anti-Obama evangelicals, is not a Christian but a follower of false prophets?

Yes. Ellen G. White was a false prophet and false teacher.

 

[Influenza]

I'm glad you understood the video.

I have no idea why someone would think a day would be without sun shining on the earth. I mean, I was talking about literal 24 hour days and some folks think I was talking about something else. Guess they didn't view the last section of the video.


Edit: And by the way, I have The Science of God and it's great. I let my oldest son borrow it and he hasn't returned it yet.

God, why the hell are you talking about understanding the video when you don't understand it yourself. He is saying that the first 6 days of the universe are from the perspective of the location of the big bang, which is supposedly 16 billion years on earth. As science estimates. His entire argument is that the claims of Genesis match the scientific estimates, not that he's disproving modern science...

 

[heavenlyboy34]

It's interesting how you can take inconclusive metaphysical theories to be true yet reject even the most basic science and mathematics

Wut? In the doc3d post you quoted, he is describing some of the implications of Einstein's general relativity.

 

[Dr.3D]

Most people don't like to learn. It's rare to find someone who likes to talk and share and also is eager to learn more. Most who talk are interested in displaying what they have learned. This phenomenon I would say is even more pronounced with those who discuss religion because they have a existential stake in giving an appearance of complete knowledge.

Anyway, I understood it "easier" I guess because I've studied this stuff extensively. I was actually a Health Physics Technician in the army at 19 so I had to learn physics as part of my job but was reading this stuff since grade school.

I wasn't really what I would call a "believer" until my 30's. (37 now) Reconciling the science with theology was certainly a challenge. Excited by this guy, who seems like he definitely would have made that challenge easier, because ultimately all knowledge and learning is helpful in communicating this stuff to other people. In the "sword of truth, shield of faith, helmet of salvation" paradigm, learning what this guy has to say falls into the "sword of truth" category.

It's weird, I was just having a theological debate with my 12 year old over dinner. We watched the first segment of that video together even though I didn't know what was going to be in it. I just knew the guy was going to present biblical concepts from the perspective of science. Can't wait to show him the whole series. He's currently belongs to the "monkey religion" (his own words. Apparently, that's what his classmates term evolutionary theory as). But I got some points by emphasizing what the narrator points out about how 2/3rds of scientists in the 1950's thought the universe was eternal.

So really, I like learning how to reconcile these kinds of things for the benefit of communicating with others. For myself, I'm more obsessed with the future theologically. But God has wrapped all that up in codes and puzzles. Fun but slow going. It'll be nice to study up on some foundational stuff and change tracks for awhile.

Thanks again!

What you said reminds me of this quote.

NRS 1 Corinthians 1:27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;

Again, you are welcome, glad I could help.

 

[wizardwatson]

God, why the hell are you talking about understanding the video when you don't understand it yourself. He is saying that the first 6 days of the universe are from the perspective of the location of the big bang, which is supposedly 16 billion years on earth. As science estimates. His entire argument is that the claims of Genesis match the scientific estimates, not that he's disproving modern science...

No, goober. He is saying that from the moment time STARTED 6 days would be 15 billion years. That is, when the energy first coalesced into matter, which is the point where we can actually say time began (since time requires matter to work on), if you you sat in that frame of reference for 6 days, it would be close to 15 billion years compared to how a watch you wear now would calculate time now in this frame of reference, compared to then.

To say another way. If you could somehow "observe" those six days you spent in that initial frame of reference by some instrument today, it would appear you sat in that frame of reference for 15 billion years.

The six day breakdown in genesis, as the author puts it, is just "for the heck of it". Meaning not only does the 6 days before humans match the cosmological 1,000,000,000,000 seconds to 1 second scientific estimate (which matches the 15 billion years when you calculate 6 days worth of seconds using that ratio), but the way in which the 6 days are biblically narrated matches the cosmological scientific narration of the evolution of the cosmos and life.

 

[Liberty74]

It's more likely aliens built or at least helped build the pyramids than say some Biblical figure did.

Just saying...

 

[jmdrake]

Haha...exactly. The Millerite movement and Ellen G. White's continuation of it, was a movement of false prophets.

Yeah. False prophets like Daniel and John the Revelator.

 

[jmdrake]

Are you suggesting that Ben Carson, darling of anti-Obama evangelicals, is not a Christian but a follower of false prophets?

You know that Sola_Fide is on record saying that he doesn't believe Rand Paul is a Christian right?

 

[jmdrake]

God, why the hell are you talking about understanding the video when you don't understand it yourself. He is saying that the first 6 days of the universe are from the perspective of the location of the big bang, which is supposedly 16 billion years on earth. As science estimates. His entire argument is that the claims of Genesis match the scientific estimates, not that he's disproving modern science...

You've got a reading comprehension problem. Dr.3D's point wasn't that the video disproves modern science but that you can believe modern science and the Genesis account of creation. Maybe it's a logic problem.

 

[jmdrake]

Yes. Ellen G. White was a false prophet and false teacher.

William Miller never claimed to be a prophet and he came up with 1844 based on an otherwise accurate year for year application of Daniel's 2300 day prophet. So you're basically calling Daniel a false prophet. The 2300 prophecy predicted the time of Christ quite accurately. Extend it out and you end up at 1844. Ellen White never had a vision of any kind until after 1844. Clearly Jesus didn't come in 1844 so either the day for the year interpretation was wrong, in which case Jesus coming the first time when He did was just a coincidence, or 1844 was significant for some other reason. Oh, and you don't believe Rand Paul is a Christian so your opinion on this subject in a political forum is moot. Regardless of who you vote for, you're going to vote for someone you don't believe is a Christian. (Maybe you think Huckabee is a Christian?)

 

[jmdrake]

I'm glad you understood the video.

I have no idea why someone would think a day would be without sun shining on the earth. I mean, I was talking about literal 24 hour days and some folks think I was talking about something else. Guess they didn't view the last section of the video.


Edit: And by the way, I have The Science of God and it's great. I let my oldest son borrow it and he hasn't returned it yet.

I need to buy a copy and send it to a friend that used to be a Christian but is now agnostic leaning towards atheism.

 

[jmdrake]

Does Carson believe that the end times are upon us and that he'll take an active hand in guiding it? Does he believe that he talks to God?

I'll be honest, I have a religious litmus test for president and if you pass a certain threshold of "craziness" then I can't trust the person no matter what they say their views are. No, the earth is not 6000 years old and the pyramids didn't hold grain.

The great pyramid didn't hold tombs that's for sure. No hieroglyphs or anything typically found in a burial chamber. Nobody actually knows what it was used for. So if nobody knows what it was used for, how can anybody be sure what it was not used for? Anyway, I wouldn't vote for you for president as you're too narrow minded.

 

[jmdrake]

You're welcome. Sadly, many won't find the time to view all five segments of this video.

This is the first time I saw the other 4 segments. I'll watch them as I have time and share them. I also found this interesting by the same author:

 

[Influenza]

No, goober. He is saying that from the moment time STARTED 6 days would be 15 billion years. That is, when the energy first coalesced into matter, which is the point where we can actually say time began (since time requires matter to work on), if you you sat in that frame of reference for 6 days, it would be close to 15 billion years compared to how a watch you wear now would calculate time now in this frame of reference, compared to then.

To say another way. If you could somehow "observe" those six days you spent in that initial frame of reference by some instrument today, it would appear you sat in that frame of reference for 15 billion years.

The six day breakdown in genesis, as the author puts it, is just "for the heck of it". Meaning not only does the 6 days before humans match the cosmological 1,000,000,000,000 seconds to 1 second scientific estimate (which matches the 15 billion years when you calculate 6 days worth of seconds using that ratio), but the way in which the 6 days are biblically narrated matches the cosmological scientific narration of the evolution of the cosmos and life.

Thanks for essentially repeating exactly what I had typed in both my responses. Unfortunately, statements such as this

What looks like it took millions of years to take place may have only taken a single day when it happened.

remain unsupported

 

[Influenza]

You've got a reading comprehension problem. Dr.3D's point wasn't that the video disproves modern science but that you can believe modern science and the Genesis account of creation. Maybe it's a logic problem.

No. He used that video to support this statement:

What looks like it took millions of years to take place may have only taken a single day when it happened.

Yet the video doesn't support that statement at all.