How Close is the "Jimmy Akin Model" to the Urantia Book?

Carl Wieland Used Two Bad Arguments · How Close is the Jimmy Akin Model to the Urantia Book? · Could Pius XII claim assent of opinion to "the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid" in § 36?

I am sorry, I did not "read his paper" but heard him on a video, so I took the last view he presented, and he spent a bit more time on it than on others, as I recall the subjective feel, as that opinion being his own. It is possible I misjudged him on that one, he could simply not be intending to spell out his own view, here is a discussion of it, linking back to his video: Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: A Discussion on one of the subjects of Glossa Ordinaria "Mary is the New Eve" https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2024/04/a-discussion-on-one-of-subjects-of.html Can Catholics Believe Theistic Evolution? - Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World Jimmy Akin | 29 March 2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBssnELtE94

To Jimmy Akin, a convert to Catholicism from Calvinism, and professing at least on some level to not have forsaken the faith since, Adam and Eve were possibly ancestral to all who live now, but far from our only ancestors alive in roughly speaking "their generation" there were in fact at least 10 000 pairs or individuals, as this is considered the minimum viable population or minimum population for genetic viability.

But if so, their sin affected the rest, as they were their "federal head" - with them not being our only ancestors in their generation, they cannot be the ancestral head of all mankind, as the traditional doctrine posits.

Now, look at this from the Urantia Foundation:

Far from the simplistic fable from the Bible, the story of Adam and Eve is a complicated one, and not well-understood by most of the world as yet. In The Urantia Book, we are given a complete picture of this amazing series of events—the mission of Adam and Eve was actually the third of five epochal revelations to our planet…

The human descendents of Adam and Eve sprang partially from the two children that were conceived as a result of default—Cain and Sansa.

Cain was, in reality, the son of Eve and Cano, and Sansa was the daughter of Adam and Laotta. Both Cano and Laotta were human beings—not members of the Violet race to which Adam and Eve belonged. If you have read this story (in the link above), you may recall that the liaison of Eve with Cano meant the default of the Adamic mission. When Adam realized what Eve had done, he “sought out Laotta, the brilliant Nodite woman who was head of the western schools of the Garden, and with premeditation committed the folly of Eve.” And these were the acts which effectively defaulted their mission and doomed both Adam and Eve to their degradation to mortal status.

If all had gone according to the divine plan, Adam and Eve would have procreated between themselves, and then their children would have procreated with each other (this was safe for them, and standard practice, as they were a pure-line race) until their numbers had reached one million. Following this milestone, the pure-line children of Adam and Eve would have begun procreating with the higher races of humanity then living on the earth. In this way the Material Sons and Daughters upstep the biological systems of the races, both physically and spiritually, through their life plasm. And this is the mission of an Adam and Eve to an evolutionary planet such as ours. Theirs is a mission of physical, intellectual, and spiritual upliftment to the evolutionary races of mankind. They are sent from celestial government as a revelation from God, and as biologic uplifters.

Their FAQ, Q: How could there be be descendants from Adam and Eve, if there were only 2 sons mentioned, and if there were sisters, how could they multiply within the same family?

Parallels with Jimmy Akin:

• already a biologically human population on earth before them
• produced by some kind of evolution
• with Adam and Eve enjoying a very special position among age peers
• the Biblical story being a simplification to the point of not being historically truthful as we see historically truthful

But there are also differences, like Jimmy Akin having:

• no affirmation of racism*
• no pretense of getting this from a special post-Biblical revelation by an UFO.

Given that the Urantia book is denying the identity of Jesus with God the Son, we can be glad for Jimmy Akin not getting his cue from that source.

But if Satan can masquerade as an angel of light, is it only through false revelations, and can it never be through intellectual heresies?

Here are some differences of the Bible from the Urantia Book, where Jimmy Akin falls on the Biblical side:

• no affirmation of racism
• no pretense of getting this from a special post-Biblical revelation by an UFO.

And here are some differences of the Bible (taken in the obvious sense and with obvious implications) both from Jimmy Akin and from the Urantia book, in its affirmations about Adam and Eve:

• no biologically human populations on earth before them
• human population from them who in turn were created directly as morphological adults
• they had only descendants, no generation peers
• the Biblical story being partly by them and historically truthful

What if the theory of genetic viability depending on so many is wrong, and even more wrong if applied to our first parents, created without any genetic defects? What if a man writing 4000 pages in a trance whether controlled by Satan or left to one's own prejudices was not much worse than the "science" Jimmy Akin relies on? And if some should cease asking** where I have adherence to the Biblical story as factual from, and start asking where they have an adherence to it being not strictly factual from?
/Hans Georg Lundahl

* See phrases like "the races, while biologically fit, had never been purged of their retarded and defective strains." Pretty close to eugenic prejudice prevalent among Darwinists at the time. ** If they are asking that.

Carl Wieland Used Two Bad Arguments

Carl Wieland Used Two Bad Arguments · How Close is the Jimmy Akin Model to the Urantia Book? · Could Pius XII claim assent of opinion to "the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid" in § 36?

Here is his article, it's reposted "today" on CMI (actually tomorrow's date, but it's already tomorrow's date in Australia), here:

Has an ape learned to talk?
by Carl Wieland | This article is from
Creation 25(3):52–53, June 2003
https://creation.com/has-an-ape-learned-to-talk

Here is bad argument 1:

An ape’s larynx simply does not have that capability. For example, it can’t make the fundamental vowels (a, o, i, etc.) of the human language.

The reason this is irrelevant for capacity for language, as such, rather than for a specific* language, is, languages have different sound palettes. The sound that apes most audibly make would count as vowels. Not differentiated, fundamental vowels, but nevertheless vowels. One human language seems to have only two phonematically different vowels (though lots of versions made pertinent as per stress and surrounding consonants), so, having only one is not an obstacle to human language as such, only to human languages that we have.

But it can be completed into a fairly good argument against apes learning language anyway. Here is how.

Human language has three basic levels. The full sentense, usually breaks down into more than one morpheme. The morpheme, usually breaks down into more than one phoneme. And finally the phoneme. The full sentence or phrase makes the complete sense of a message. The morpheme by itself makes the incomplete sense of a message component like a concept or metaconcept. The phoneme by itself makes no sense, but differentiates morphemes that make different sense. But this means, the phonemes have to be a repertoir.

Now, differentiating vowels is out for the reason that Carl Wieland mentioned.

Differentiating consonants is also out for another reason, the ape's ear captures so low frequencies that hearing certain consonants is impossible.

Now, bad argument 2:

When many deaf children in Nicaragua were raised together in an environment without any spoken language input, they spontaneously developed their own highly complex sign language, complete with rules of grammar and syntax.

This is Communist fake news.

In fact, they had all had some input of at least improvised sign language from their homes, meaning they had been exposed to language input.

What they did was only equallising this into a common language.

The fake news foregoes the fact that children growing up without any human language input at all, during the relevant years, will grow bodily, but will not later be able to catch up with learning human language. If the growing up with beasts occurs after language acquisition has already taken place, the child will recover language if taken to human environments. But if the language acquisition had not yet taken place ...

Meet the 8-year-old girl raised by monkeys
By Gabrielle Fonrouge, April 6, 2017 10:33am
https://nypost.com/2017/04/06/meet-the-8-year-old-girl-raised-by-monkeys/

Two of these had already learned language, apparently the ten year old boy who had been with goats only two years, certainly the first, who didn't come in with capuchin monkeys before five, and one may have been rescured just in time, but for the other three it looks bleak in these cases:

The Week : 6 cases of children being raised by animals
https://theweek.com/articles/471164/6-cases-children-being-raised-by-animals

huck : 'FERAL CHILDREN': ABANDONED BY PARENTS AND RAISED BY ANIMALS
Friday 10 March, 2017, Text by Michael Segalov, Photography by Julia Fullerton-Batten
https://www.huckmag.com/article/stories-feral-children-abandoned-nature-raised-animals

If human babies could develop real language on their own, then Chomsky's atheist** view on human development would be viable. Once mutations had developed the human brain into a certain direction, that brain could, via toddlers creating their talk together, create human language.

This is not so. Barring miracles, and God creating a full grown Adam with a full grown not just language capacity, but even language mastery, that counts as a miracle, the only way for a human baby to acquire human language is via surroundings already having such, and this at very specific times in the baby's development, the transition, basically from baby to toddler. And this is precisely what mutations cannot provide. The human brain already has what's necessary, and feral children still don't learn language when rescued, unless they get rescued a short while after getting feral, or they got into this situation when already toddlers and having some speech. This is a nail in the coffin, not just for Atheistic Evolution, as it is impossible, but for Theistic Evolution too, as it would have made God cruel to His image Adam, before he sinned.

But some medical doctors have a certain degree of professionally conditioned Dunning Kruger about certain subjects outside medicine proper.
/Hans Georg

* It would be relevant for specific languages, but researchers could try to create vowel-poor dialects of these.
** While Chomsky is himself agnostic, while his view has been labelled as "creationist" by fellow Evolution believers, his view on how men became men is an atheistic view insofar as if God existed, on this view, He would be irrelevant.

"thy dwelling place" 3 Kings 8:30

Where Did Jesus Go? · "thy dwelling place" 3 Kings 8:30

That thou mayest hearken to the supplication of thy servant and of thy people Israel, whatsoever they shall pray for in this place, and hear them in the place of thy dwelling in heaven; and when thou hearest, shew them mercy.

Someone writing CMI, a D. S. from Brazil, states this is uncreated:

since 1 Kings* 8:30 says it’s God’s dwelling place and, therefore, eternal, not created.

What does the Bible mean by “heaven of heavens”?
Feedback archive → Feedback 2023
https://creation.com/heaven-of-heavens

I am here not going into the response of Keaton Halley, but simply stating, this is wrong.

God in and of His eternal nature cannot need a dwelling place. He is perfectly corporeal. His dwelling place is where He sits as in a throne room. In the Old Testament, God resided as in a theophany. He was adored by angels, right there, the pearly gates being closed to men, since Adam sinned. In the New Testament, since Ascension, Christ in His human nature is present on this throne. He is adored by the Blessed Virgin Mary, risen like Her Son, by angels, by the souls of faithful awaiting to be present also in body, once they are resurrected.

Hence, the dwelling place of which 3 Kings 8:30 speaks is not just created, but material and in three dimensional space./HGL

* A certain text mass was by the Jews divided into Samuel and Kings, two books, then by Christians into four books, first to fourth Kings. Since first and second Kings are what the Jews called Samuel, the Protestants call them first and second Samuel, and renumber the remainder as "first and second" instead of third and fourth Kings.

Science and Scientific Method

Is this science?

LiveScience : 1.7 billion Tyrannosaurus rexes walked the Earth before going extinct, new study estimates
News, By Harry Baker, 17.V.2023
https://www.livescience.com/animals/dinosaurs/17-billion-tyrannosaurus-rexes-walked-the-earth-before-going-extinct-new-study-estimates

In April 2021, a study published in the journal Science estimated that up to 2.5 billion T. rex individuals lived between 68 and 65.5 million years ago, whenroamed Earth. But a new study, published April 18 this year in the journal Palaeontology, has challenged that number, suggesting the actual figure is probably closer to 1.7 billion.

Do you know how much actual observed remains we have of T. Rex?

30 complete skeleta, plus lots of stray smaller bones.

That is what I recall from the site Palaeocritti. Now, the story is, it once was a paid site, and I enjoyed it. I came to know, perhaps they announced it on their site, that they were no longer paying as per 2016, and the site would close down. I obtained from Nobu Tamura the right to make a salvage blog, but by the end of 2016, I thought the work was needed no more. See here:

Palaeocritti Blog : Good News!
https://palaeocritti.blogspot.com/2016/11/good-news.html

Today, I wanted to go to the google site, remaining, unpaid, to verify the 30 skeleta, after writing above beginning of the essay mentioning them. I got a little shock:

Palaeocritti Blog : Bad News
https://palaeocritti.blogspot.com/2023/05/bad-news.html

Now, it is true, Palaeofieldguide is still up, but it is less precise, saying about T. Rex only "several skeletons" ...

But I think, even with the skeleta being "several" instead of precisely 30, we are very far from the claim of 1.7 or the other claim of 2.5 billion. This kind of extrapolation is to my best estimate not actually science.

Now, some will pretend that at least we have it from the scientific method. Therefore we should trust it, as the scientific method is where we get useful things from. The people who think like this should really watch a video called "the Engineering Method" ... it overdoes the lack of science, notably geometrical, by Medieval Cathedral builders, but it will at least show "modern science" as per after the "Scientific Revolution" is far from necessary for actually getting things done, and done well:

Building a Cathedral without Science or Mathematics: The Engineering Method Explained
engineerguy, 9 May 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ivqWN4L3zU

So, what were you saying again about us needing to trust science, because "scientific method" because that's the one and only thing providing useful knowledge? Nah, not really!/HGL

Where Did Jesus Go?

Where Did Jesus Go? · "thy dwelling place" 3 Kings 8:30

I live a somewhat stressed life. I arrived to the Nanterre University Library a bit before 11, found it closed and realised, it is Ascension Day.

I had a little feast.

In the cyber, I am now ready to write the challenge to Heliocentrics that passed through my head when I realised it was Ascension.

Where did Jesus leave from? Mount of Olives.

Where did He arrive?

Here are some answers that do not really make much sense for a Catholic.

"Into a space ship"

Makes perfect sense to a Raelian or a New Ager, but that is hardly the position of a Catholic.

"Nowhere, He was resumed into a mode of Godhood only, as before the Incarnation"

This impugns the Incarnation. Christ did not cease to be human or cease to have a human, glorified, body, which is not a "spirit body" that's so "spiritual" it can be nowhere, when He rose or when He ascended.

The Incarnation doesn't get cancelled.

"Into another dimension"

I actually quit Palmarian Church back in late 2002 over a quote from the Palmarian catechism, provided by a Sedevacantist friend.

"The Antichrist sees the world from the fourth dimension, the Very Pure Virgin (Virgen Purísima) from the eighth dimension."

To St. Augustine, there are three dimensions of space. Not four, not eight. Just as there are Three Persons in the Blessed Trinity Who created space.

"Into another world"

Like, Narnia or Charn being other universes, separate projects of creation, in CSL's very famous fiction.

This is less obnoxious, insofar as Bishop Tempier condemned the proposition that the First Cause (i e God) could not make more than one world.

VI:9 (34). Quod causa prima non posset plures mundos facere.

34 is the listing in Bishop Tempier's original condemnation on Laetare Sunday in early 1277 (or late 1276, as they put New Year at 25 March or April 1st back then), and in the English retake, it's in chapter VI errores de deo. It's proposition 9 of that chapter.

However, this is still not what Christians have traditionally held.

"The Eucharist shows ..."

that Christ can be miraculously and in a sense exceptionally present in a place through the dimensions of another thing, transsubstantiated into His body or blood, but it presupposes there is some other place where Christ is under His own dimensions. If He's king of Heaven, arguably the foot measure in heaven is 1/6 of His body length, so where six heavenly feet of His body touch six heavenly feet of the surrounding space in Heaven.

"But where is that?"

According to St. Thomas, the Empyraean Heaven is a place, same three dimensions as ours, placed above the fix stars. I would, due to its Biblical name "heavenly Jerusalem" venture it is past whatever star thats just above Jerusalem, neither North or South and neither East or West of it, at a specific time.

The Heliocentrics obviously have a problem with that, as Heliocentrism makes the 0.76 arc seconds of α Centauri (analysed apart from the c. 20 arc seconds considered "aberration of starlight") into parallax, same star in same place observed from slightly different angles. How slight? 0.76 arc seconds = 0.000 000 586 42 of a full circle. This along with the supposition that Earth is what annually twice over moves twice the Astronomical Unit* to opposite sides of the Sun, rather than Sun doing it to opposite places in the Zodiac or Ecliptic plane, makes α Centauri c. 4 light years away, that kind of "info" about fairly many "close" stars leads to a correlation between apparent star size and distance and this leads (with some further assumptions, not necessarily inherent in Heliocentrism, but accepted by Heliocentric astronomers) to a "Milky Way galaxy" c. 88 000 light years across and this being only one of several galaxies. With Geocentrism, by contrast, we can have stars in the relevant sense, i e fix stars, 1 light day up, and that would be then slightly lower than the height of Heavenly Jerusalem above earth. That's where Christ went, that's where He is, that's where He will return from./HGL

* 150 million kilometres (93 million miles) or 8.3 light-minutes according to the wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit

Quick One on CMI

Jesuit accommodation in relation to biblical chronology and Chinese history
by Andrew Sibley, This article is from
Journal of Creation 36(1):53–56, April 2022
https://creation.com/jesuit-accommodation-and-biblical-chronology

The Jesuit missionaries developed a policy of accommodation in relation to Chinese religious and cultural practices in the 17th century. The Order further received permission in AD 1637 to use the Septuagint, instead of the Latin Vulgate, to try and harmonize the biblical chronology with Chinese history.

The Roman Martyrology (for Dec 25) actually has a Septuagint based chronology, since Creation to Flood is 2242 years LXX for Genesis 5, and Flood to birth of Abraham is 942 years, LXX without the Second Cainan, for Genesis 11./HGL

PS, next day, two more quotes. With comments. First:

Without getting into a discussion over whether the Masoretic Text or the Septuagint provide the better chronology, the Jesuit motivation for preferring the Septuagint was not entirely pure, being based upon an accommodation to non-Christian beliefs.

We are dealing with:

• non-Christian beliefs about history and chronology;
• which unlike Egyptian and Sumerian king lists do not flatly contradict the Bible.

We do not deal with:

• non-Christian beliefs about the universe;
• which (unlike spirit beings moving stars) contradict Christian beliefs about the universe.

Why is the distinction an important one? Because for one, anything contradicting the Bible, as such, all text versions and therefore the original autograph of the hagiographer, is clearly in and of itself by that fact alone false. For another, history and chronology tend to be pretty easy to verify, even by non-Christians (and so are some of the items of cosmology, geocentrism being true and spirits moving celestial bodies, or the soul being immaterial and therefore immortal).

Second:

The China missionaries had gained permission from the Vatican in AD 1637 to use the longer chronology of the Greek Septuagint (LXX), instead of the Latin Vulgate that is based upon the Rabbinical Masoretic Text.

Actually, the Masoretic text is from AD 1000 and the Vulgate from AD c. 400. It is a matter of opinian whether St. Jerome had access to the Hebrew text as in being able to read it, or whether he was using Aquila of Sinope. However, it is very clear that the two earliest translations into Greek are the Septuagint and Aquila. The Septuagint was made by people who were waiting for Christ. Aquila made himself a disciple of rabbi Akiba who represented a Judaism which had already rejected the true promised one.

Now, two or three more things, without quotes.

• With all adaptations that Jesuits made to Chinese rituals, they kept the Catholic belief pure.
• The main harm done by Chinese Rites was by people hearing the one describe it (as does Sibley) as a concession to Pagan and erroneous beliefs, and seeing the other, a Jesuit, as a better friend. People started adapting to, not what the Jesuits did, but what their accusers thought they did.
• Their "adaptation" clearly allowed them to make all of Chinese history post-Flood, if not post-Babel (and "they" who "removed from the East" were arguably not all of mankind, but a global élite, keeping in touch with relatives ranging from Thogorma's to Regma's tribes and Jectan's too. The ones concluding against a global Flood were arguably more likely to come from people sharing the esteem for Chinese historiography and also not sharing the Septuagint solution.
• The secular learned men who were here cited as deviating from Biblical history, namely Vossius, Isaac La Peyrère, Giordano Bruno, were none of them Catholics in good standing with their written works too:
  
  
  • Vossius was a Protestant;
  • Isaac La Peyrère was a Jew, who shilly-shallied about converting to Protestantism or Catholicism, and his book was condemned, even if he was saving his soul, dying among Oratorian fathers in Aubervilliers;
  • Giordano Bruno was a Dominican lapsing from the faith who ended up on the stake in 1600, and Protestants and Freemasons have contributed much more than Catholics or specifically Jesuits to give him an undue influence.

PPS, as Sibley is attacking the fact of believing Pagan beliefs about their history, he is in fact attacking the basis for believing Christian history, including existence of Jesus or authorship of the Gospels or founding of a Church that recognised that authorship and the life of Her Founder, at once Divine and Human.

Because, beliefs about the public or otherwise accessible past is the bread and butter of how history is tested. I'll link to previous writings on diverse of the topics touched on in the comment or comments.
/HGL

You are Not Damned for Being Named Darwin

St. Paul had a friend who was called Apollo. And check out this:

Pope John II (Latin: Ioannes II; died 8 May 535), born Mercurius, was the bishop of Rome from 2 January 533 to his death. As a priest at St. Clement's Basilica, he endowed that church with gifts and commissioned stone carvings for it. Mercurius became the first pope to adopt a new Papal name upon his elevation to the office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_II

So, you can be named, as a child, Mercury or Apollo ir Satan or Darwin, you are not damned for it.

You can even have a gematria adding up to 6-hundred-6-ty-6 and not be damned for that. The Antichrist will have that gematria, when it becomes clear he is the Antichrist, I already have a canditate whos's probable, but he will be damned for his deeds, not for his gematria.

However, I think it would be a grave sin to name your children Satan, and it would also be a grave sin to name them Darwin. Or is. A certain Aussie family was mildly chastised on vacation.

Riley Whitelum and Elayna Carausu and their children Darwin and Lenny.

Carausu said the family was unaware the monkeys could be so aggressive while spending time at the picturesque Thai beach.

Parhaps she thought monkeys and apes would be fairly civilised creatures, since "our close relatives"? A belief perhaps encapsuled when she named her boy Darwin? Or more strongly in Whitelum, if he took the initiative.

"I'm not kidding babe, they went for Darwin," Whitelum tells Carausu.
"Lenny literally said 'is it going to get me' and I said 'no mate, no' and then they just went for Darwin.
"I'm really glad the boys didn't get bitten."

Whitelum actually had a bite. Now here is the link:

Aussie family attacked by monkeys at popular beach in Thailand
By Savannah Meacham • Associate Producer, 5:50pm Mar 21, 2023
https://www.9news.com.au/world/australian-family-sailing-monkey-attack-monkey-beach-thailand/

Glad it wasn't their boat they named so ominously ill! God speed their sailing trip./HGL