New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator

[Anita Meyer]

All very good questions?

Well for starters its good to see that at least you are checking out my book - well only the first 20 pages which is displayed on the Publishers website anyhow, but there is so much more to it.

Concerning the Giraffe… No, there has not been any fossils found of Giraffes with shorter necks, thus how could a regulating blood valve evolve by a series of natural selections or even survival of the fittest?

No prophesy is not a form of “Time Travel”. What I am merely saying is that BECAUSE PROPESIES (to date) are coming true such as many of the prophesies concerning Jesus… like He was to be born in Bethlehem and sold for 30 pieces… these are prophesies that came true. Thus G-d would never allow Time Travel (outside His own jurisdictions) since it would render all prophesy null and void (this is a very hard concept to grasp).

quantum_wave you say: Science depends on observing and quantifying what we observe. To make an assertion that God did it, and if we look closely enough at nature we can see it, goes against what I think is obvious. The obvious is that if we could ever detect something in nature of such divine origin, and God put it there for us to find, then proof of that primordial divine language would be proof of God.

Yes, this is the whole point! G-d did indeed put it there for us to find. Not only did He put it there in nature (3.14) but He also put it in His word (the Bible). In fact 3.14 can also be equated in the very first sentence of Genesis 1:1 as if to say, if at first you don’t understand it from the very first word (or even smaller letter) it reveals it in the next bigger word… and sentence… and verse… to the next bigger part.

QM you also say: But if there is a God who lays proof out for us, why not just come to each of us in a burning bush and say, “I AM God and you WILL believe in me”?

Because G-d only has to do something once like the flood. As long as it is documented in His Word the Bible it is as good as done for all.

QM you also say: Sometimes striking experiences that people have are interpreted as divine. But there is no irrefutable evidence for or against the existence of God that is in the hands of any individual that can be used to convince other people, IMHO.

Is this the only limits you can expand your mind to. Surely if I could, so could you.

 

[Dywyddyr]

No prophesy is not a form of “Time Travel”.

Yes it is. It involves the transfer of information from one time to another.

Yes, this is the whole point! G-d did indeed put it there for us to find. Not only did He put it there in nature (3.14) but He also put it in His word (the Bible). In fact 3.14 can also be equated in the very first sentence of Genesis 1:1 as if to say, if at first you don’t understand it from the very first word (or even smaller letter) it reveals it in the next bigger word… and sentence… and verse… to the next bigger part.

Supposition: show your "logic".

Because G-d only has to do something once like the flood.

There was no "flood".

As long as it is documented in His Word the Bible it is as good as done for all.

Why should it be believed? What evidence is there that it IS "his word"?

Is this the only limits you can expand your mind to. Surely if I could, so could you.

With respect: you don't seem to have expanded your mind at all. You state in the book that you consider the bible to be literally true and then proceed to display your massive, and, frankly, unforgivable, ignorance of science by misrepresenting it at every turn.

 

[Anita Meyer]

Double post

 

[Dywyddyr]

Exactly the same post but 17 minutes later?
How does that help your case?

 

[Anita Meyer]

You ask? Why should it be believed? What evidence is there that it IS "his word"?

This is what I'm trying to reveal in my book that the Hebrew Language is of Divine origin - namely that of G-d.

 

[spidergoat]

Concerning the Giraffe… No, there has not been any fossils found of Giraffes with shorter necks, thus how could a regulating blood valve evolve by a series of natural selections or even survival of the fittest?.

The laryngeal nerve of the giraffe is one of the best proofs for evolution that exists! This nerve connects the brain and the larynx, and yet it goes all the way down the neck and around a blood vessel near the heart (and is not connected to it) and back up again. An intelligent designer could have re-routed it so that it was only a foot long, but evolution doesn't work that way.

 

[Dywyddyr]

You ask? Why should it be believed? What evidence is there that it IS "his word"?
This is what I'm trying to reveal in my book that the Hebrew Language is of Divine origin - namely that of G-d.

No: you're claiming that we should believe the book is telling truth because it's his word. And that we know it's his word because it should be believed.
Another circular argument.
You have to to show either
A) the bible really is factual or
B) god exists.
And proceed from there.

For example you claim that this so-called "Primordial Language" is of "divine origin", yet for that to be so you have to prove god exists for there to be a divine origin. But the only evidence of god's existence is that the bible says so. Hence: why should we believe the bible?

 

[Anita Meyer]

Spidergoat, G-d’s design works perfectly... when the Giraffe bends down to drink water the valve was designed in such a special way so that it doesn’t pass out from a rush of blood to its head.

How did something like this valve evolve when as I said earlier there simply has not been found any fossils of Giraffes with smaller necks. If this valve was in the process of evolution surely there must be some smaller necked fossilized Giraffes that died (when this valve didn’t work properly) in the archives of science - SOMEWHERE!

A giraffe is a Giraffe, and has always been a Giraffe. And this valve was made/designed perfectly from G-d from the very beginning.


Author Anita Meyer anitameyer1@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator

 

[spidergoat]

The giraffe fossil record is fairly good, with a wide variety of species known from the Miocene. These sported a range of weirdly shaped horns, but all had short necks rather like that of the only other living species of giraffid, the okapi. Only in the late Miocene do we see the fossils of long-necked giraffes. Like modern giraffes, they have an extra vertebra in the neck - recruited from the back - and lengthened neck vertebrae.

Until recently, there was no fossil evidence linking the long-necked giraffes to their short-necked relatives. But as my book went to press, news emerged that Nikos Solounias of the New York Institute of Technology had described a fossil giraffe from the late Miocene and early Pliocene. Its neck is a perfect intermediate between the short-neck ancestors and their long-neck descendants.
Source: www.newscientist.com

 

[Anita Meyer]

Dywyddyr,

Yes, it is circular argument... You either see it or you don’t that is your choice. Some people walk through the field and never see the flowers.

However, if you’re curious you will look into the matter.

Author Anita Meyer
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
anitameyer1@hotmail.com

 

[Anita Meyer]

Looks to me like a completely different animal species, one that would forage more on the ground. It might have the same similar vertebrae but then again so do we as humans share similarities to other things in nature even in our DNA. However and this is the key… just because we share similarity does not mean evolution of any sort took place. All it simply means is that when our Creator created us He did so using the same mechanisms that He knew worked in one thing would also work in the other just like gear mechanisms work the same in the engine of a car as well as an airplane or even an air conditioning unit. Don’t painters use the same colors to draw pictures? Man cannot create a new color in the Rainbow!

Sorry I cant post the link yet, but this animal looks more like a horse.

Author Anita Meyer anitameyer1@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator

 

[spidergoat]

So you ask for a transitional fossil, I point it out, and then you change your tune and say that similarities do not imply evolution.

Giraffes are related to horses, and they had a common ancestor.

Evolution proves that the nesting heiarchy of species we see are not just God's variations on a theme that works. It is a mechanism by which new forms appear with no designer whatsoever. Living things show variation based on random mutations, variation leads to variable survivability. Successful variations breed more variations on that successful form. That's how evolution works. Evolution is not abiogenesis, as you incorrectly claim in your book. Evolution does not explain how the first form came about, although there are several plausible scenarios.

Evolution explains why people have sex. Sex leads to greater variation, which is healthy for the species.

 

[quantum_wave]

...quantum_wave you say:

Science depends on observing and quantifying what we observe. To make an assertion that God did it, and if we look closely enough at nature we can see it, goes against what I think is obvious. The obvious is that if we could ever detect something in nature of such divine origin, and God put it there for us to find, then proof of that primordial divine language would be proof of God.

Yes, this is the whole point! G-d did indeed put it there for us to find. Not only did He put it there in nature (3.14) but He also put it in His word (the Bible). In fact 3.14 can also be equated in the very first sentence of Genesis 1:1 as if to say, if at first you don’t understand it from the very first word (or even smaller letter) it reveals it in the next bigger word… and sentence… and verse… to the next bigger part.

I understand. I have been watching the series, The Story of Maths, and am enjoying it. Numbers and how they correspond to nature and how nature conveys its relationships and complexity through numbers form the origins of math. It is closely tied to religions and faith because religions and the understanding of mathematics came from the same peoples over the same time frames in various societies around the world; the earliest recorded records of the endeavors of man are filled with the origins of religion and the origins of math.

But the maths were in tune with science and enabled science to quantify nature, while religions were in tune with charismatic leaders and the growth of societies. Both math and religion emerged among us almost simultaneously but for different reasons and with different results. Math turned out to be common among people over time and religion tended to perpetuate the divisions among people. I give my appreciation more to the path of science and math through history than to the discord that has survived among religions.

I cannot say that and leave it at that though because of my respect for the good that is done in the world in the name of religion. I don’t blame the discord on religion itself, but on the failure of religions to emphasis a God-fairing common denominator among themselves. If the religious indoctrination of children perpetuates dogma of hate then it goes way beyond a righteous common denominator. The first basic thing I look for in a religion is that in the following of their beliefs they don’t do harm or advocate harm to others. Some religions fail that test and the discord is perpetuated. But the general good that is done in the name of religion cannot easily be replaced by a non religious society. But that is an entire topic in itself .

But if there is a God who lays proof out for us, why not just come to each of us in a burning bush and say, “I AM God and you WILL believe in me”?

Because G-d only has to do something once like the flood. As long as it is documented in His Word the Bible it is as good as done for all.

That sounds like it should be right from the perspective of a believer but there is a problem in that position in reality. God is not just the God of the Bible. Every religion that has a God, has their view of God, and part of the discord that exists among religions is for that very reason. My God is better than your God. Let our warriors prove that God is on our side. And then the victories change hands over the ages and nothing is proved as to which God is the stronger. If you as a religious person don’t have as your second most important mission to merge all God’s into a common God, then you aren’t doing enough to resolve the seemingly endless discord. The answer to a common denominator among religions is not in defining what the common denominator should be, but it is in how, if there is one God, that God can be seen so differently by different religions?

Sometimes striking experiences that people have are interpreted as divine. But there is no irrefutable evidence for or against the existence of God that is in the hands of any individual that can be used to convince other people, IMHO.

Is this the only limits you can expand your mind too. Surely if I could, so could you.

I could too, it is true. But I expand my mind in a different way and in a different direction. I see what can and cannot be proved, and what I find is that God cannot be falsified and the denial of God cannot be proved while the denial of God cannot be falsified and the existence of God cannot be proved.

If there is anything that is eternal, in my view the universe must be eternal in order for God to be eternal. The logic may not be so good, but if the universe is not eternal, either God created it or it came from nothing. If it came from nothing there is no God, and if God created it then where was God for the eternity before creation (or various other arguments of logic like who created God or other logic not worth mentioning).

So the most logical explanation for the existence of the universe to my deluded brain is that it has always existed; it is eternal in the same respect that the God of religions is eternal. If the universe and God share that characteristic then maybe the universe and God are one in the same but there is no evidence one way or the other. Belief in either is an individual decision.

 

[spidergoat]

Anita's premise is illogical. The kind of math she ascribes only to a supernatural entity are in fact found in nature, as the result of simple rules that make the most efficient use of resources.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Correct.

 

[spidergoat]

She reminds me of our Muslim posters who find scientific confirmation of the divinity of the Quran everywhere they look.

 

[quantum_wave]

...Evolution explains why people have sex. Sex leads to greater variation, which is healthy for the species.

I knew I was on the right track .

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

that He alone is the almighty G-d - that indeed "did create" EVERYTHING in existence!

God could not create Himself so I guess He either didn't create EVERYTHING or doesn't exist.

Check out the Creation thread, LG's fighting like Hell in there for all you theists so he needs more help than statements like the quote above.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Yes, it is circular argument...

Therefore it's not proof.

You either see it or you don’t that is your choice. Some people walk through the field and never see the flowers.

And some people prefer to believe they see flowers when it's wheat and chaff.

However, if you’re curious you will look into the matter.

Curious? About what?
The only possible thing I could be curious about in this particular case is the psychology of delusion and/ or self-delusion: i.e. yours.
The human mind is so wonderfully flexible, isn't it? Right down to the invention of self-sustaining rubbish.

 

[Randwolf]

Wasn't there another thread on this? Did it get merged, deleted, what?

Just curious...

Maybe muons?