If you think I deny Christ, then when I affirm his mission (even as he defines it to you) then you should thank me for stepping in the right direction. If you have no evangel for those who affirm Christ's mission, what evangel do you have?

SwampRangers.com has always admitted to being a membership organization.

Your inability to acknowledge a difference between what is thought and what is said continues, which was my initial point.

Now, perhaps you recognize that the laws of physics as we know them are incomplete and perhaps you recognize that those deeper laws that God has preset, such as the ones he uses for "miracles" and "resurrections", are also part of the laws of physics, but your inability to acknowledge difference between thought and word suggests you don't recognize this either.

If you recognize that the laws as known are incomplete, you'd have no problem with variable lightspeed; but if you believe constant lightspeed is the whole of the law then you'd be surprised, as I said. Of course when we discussed it you hemmed and hawed, sometimes going with millions and sometimes with billions, without indicating what you actually believe. So I'm not sure you want the debate.

The challenge I lay to people is as to new experiments that can be constructed. We can talk that if you like, but you seem to prefer to deal with interpretation of evidence already submitted. To that end I submit that the resurrection of Jesus in 33 AD (with 3D photographic evidence recorded in the Shroud of Turin) demonstrated an exception to currently-known laws of physics. The spontaneous reorganization of the body and soul into the glorified life displayed by Jesus (and a number of others at various times) requires energy from currently-unknown sources and may even require violation of current lightspeed assumptions.

Do you mean the laws as known by God (in which case variable lightspeed need not violate those laws)? Or do you mean the laws as currently known by man (in which case the resurrection does violate those laws)?