Rogue planets? Unwed to any star? Japanese astronomers now claim to have found such free-floating planets. Could it be that Immanuel Velikovsky's infamous book Worlds in Collision is now vindicated?
Was a rogue planet the titular force responsible for some of the Bible's most famous miracles?
Velikovsky is still near-universally poo-pooed, and more's the pity. People still accept the more than 150 year old findings of Darwin in spite of some of his scientific conclusions' complete real(read: modern)-world failure. Let's face it, there were things about the human cell Darwin could not have known; science had not advanced enough to give him a proper view into the inner workings of the cell. He didn't even know about DNA which was discovered (and not by the name 'DNA') 10 years after his Origin of the Species was first published in late 1859.
Before the early 1860's the cell was thought to be simply a bag of protoplasm with a nucleus. Darwin's understanding of DNA, therefore, was non-existent-- though he did have a grasp on the idea of mutations within what would later be called DNA.
I've said all this to say that we often assume that what we know at present is the 'end all, be all' of human understanding. Velikovsky, to many, is considered a crackpot, even though he's been right about a number of things.
But wandering stars? Even the bible spoke of such things... Jude 13
I tend to think God gets things right the first time.
BTW, Are you serious? You friended ER on Facebook? Are you becoming Liberal?
It stands to reason that, if Joshua cried out for the sun and moon to stand in their place until the Israelites had wreaked their vengeance, then somewhere on the other side of the world the night lasted far longer than normal. What natural phenomena occurred that allowed the sun and moon to stand still in the sky for a period of 20-24 hours? an axis shift? What about Moses calling out for the waters to be parted?
The miracle, assuming these were natural phenomena, is not in the parting of the water or the sun and moon standing still in the sky. The miracle is that it actually happened when they called for it. Only God could allow it to happen, just as they asked for it to happen. Besides which, if you'll read the passage in Exodus again it says a strong wind blew and parted the waters. Natural occurrence? the Bible says so. The miracle then is that the Israelites were led to that very spot and that specific time. God led them to a place where a natural underwater berm lay, and with the right amount of wind-force from the right direction the waters parted enough to expose the berm.
Furthermore, Moses didn't part the waters from his own imagination; God told him what to do, and how they would be saved.
Exodus 14:16 [God speaking] "But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea."
God told him what to do and what would happen. It was then Moses' turn to demonstrate some serious faith, but what was that after all the other miracles of God which Moses witnessed prior to the exodus?
Exodus 14:21 "And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided."
God used a natural underwater land bridge, and a strong east wind to part the waters at that specific place.
What natural (as opposed to 'supernatural,' because why should God be limited to only working in the supernatural?) phenomena did God employ to make the sun and moon stand still in the sky for the period of a full day?
You see? Not an evolutionist cop-out at all. Just allowing the Bible to say what it says, where it says it, then extrapolating some commonsense.
As for friending ER... I don't dislike ER. I'm not particularly fond of his politics or his faith, but I'm not going to let these petty things interfere with a civil dialog. Just because ER and I disagree on more than a few points doesn't mean we can't learn from each other, or treat each other respectfully in social settings. I wouldn't ignore ER in a physical public setting-- a dinner party for instance --and I won't do it here either. Yes, I could shun him, but what would that prove?
And for the record, I believe myself to be smarter than him.
Thanks for the correction.