Reply With Quote
man those were fun times.
you thought he could be the antichrist!
you told me to go to a dark place with a ouija board...
light some candles...
draw a pentagram on the floor and profess that i don't believe in demons...
and then see what happens.
yikes
man those were fun times.
you thought he could be the antichrist!
AND those that believe it IS scientifically proven have to do so on grounds of faith - believing theories such as eternally existing multiverses to avoid the theological ramifications of t=0.
I should press to end any mischaracterization of our positions...
Just so that we have a tally:
Official position: I don't know how this universe came into existence. What I believe is that at t=0, "everything in the universe" appeared. A 'big-bang' explosion is assumed by observing the expanding nature of our universe. I don't know how the 'big-bang' itself happened because it is not observable anywhere near t=0, as such my 'origins' premise cannot be scientifically verified. I believe science will eventually answer the question.
RandomGuy
Blake
Official position: I believe that the universe came into existence with the power of GOD's spoken WORD, JESUS. As a being of light, GOD spoke energy into creation at t=0 (in the beginning), and light appeared (from this cosmic energy explosion all matter and visible light condensed). Time had a discrete beginning. Matter and Space had a discrete beginning. These premises cannot be scientifically verified but this portion of the Scripture account matches what can be observed in the heavens. I don't believe that science is fundamentally equipped to answer the 'origins' question - because the event not fully observable, not repeatable, and has limited measurability.
Phenomanul
A zeal for GOD's Justice trumped the former.
he just didn't have any "zeal" for the old testament.
lets talk ouija!!!!!!
Indentured servitude? Under Roman rule.Nope, not referring to "respect your masters"
I'm referring to the parts that say "slavery is OK"
Umm ok.
OT slave systems are bound to the context of the Old Covenant prior to Christ's arrival --> hence not a part of what Christianity endorses. You've tried to suggest that before. It's not the first time.
I absolutely suggested it before. It stands.
You rolling withbut it was the old covenant
What happened?
As I've stated repeatedly Evolution doesn't answer the Origins of Life question. Many Evolutionary adherents, however, believe that naturalistic origins are not only possible but are a proven fact. YET there is no evidence for life coming from non-life. Many famous experiments purportedly claiming the creation of amino acids (precursor genetic nucleotides) seem to gloss over one important element: chiefly, that their interference/direction in any proposed series of chemical reactions is tantamount to taking a 'designer role'. In other words, all they've managed to support is that the creation of even the smallest of life's molecules requires a designer --> a Creator. But apparently no one else is able to see past the slight of hand.
And like the coward you are, you probably never did. Am I right?
Why? Would a demon have came fire ants on his face?
Well when Jesus shows up the temperature drops, so I'm guessing the opposite..
I don't think it's ok. The New Covenant rises above it. But keep spinning.I absolutely suggested it before. It stands.
You rolling with
Neat. Six day creation Bible God thanks you for your support.
Of course, if creation of molecules requires a designer, then who designed God's molecules
No, old covenant/new covenant tangent spinning is irrelevant when it comes to evil deeds.
Evil deeds like slavery. ...which Jesus daddy said was cool.
you still believe that ouija board ?
that antichrist ?
Pretty much the definition of Special Pleading. God does not get a "get out of evil free" card.
I reject the premise that God is "above morality." Even granting, for the sake of argument, that it exists.Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.[1][2]
The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight (e.g., a reference to common sense) or an application of a double standard.
As for my "evil mind". My mind is not evil. Also rejected, as you have failed to prove that either, even according to your own conceptual framework.
The definition that "human = created depraved" is rejected as not in evidence either. That is precisely one of the things what we are discussing, and you don't get to wave it around as some sort of given.
I can prove god's evil. words and deeds, using the same bible you use to claim his perfection. You don't get to have it both ways, "bible is true" and "god is perfect" are two mutually exclusive propositions to anyone being honest.
Show any new testament verse that states slavery is evil or wrong.
there's that as well
LOL again redefining the framework of your view of GOD to make YOUR selective criteria 'stick'.
It's explicitly stated in the Gospels...
Oh... but wait, you chucked them out the window... threw out the baby with the bathwater.
No matter what I say, you will counter with a non-biblical position because you don't believe any of it. In that context your framework is askew.
I'm just saying that your belief in the supernatural, good and evil, is not your fault.
The NT doesn't say a lot of things (especially when anachronistically trying to use it as an explicit, catch all, be all, end all list of do's and don'ts).
Even then you would have to show me where the purpose of Jesus ministry was to overthrow the social political system of his time...? For Him to then set about establishing such explicit criteria.
I'm pretty sure JESUS said, "LOVE thy neighbor as thyself."
I'm pretty sure JESUS said, "Treat others in the manner that you want to be treated."
NOW show me how modern-day slavery, and all of its abuses are inclusive of both of those statements.
Still not quite there.
I don't know how this universe came into existence. What I believe is that at t=0, something happened. A 'big-bang' explosion is a reasonable conclusion based on observing the expanding nature of our universe. I don't know how the 'big-bang' itself because I am not an expert in the field of cosmology. From what I have read, a lot of the equations that govern our universe breakdown in the absence of spacetime. I assume that the people who study it have some reasonable theories that fit the available evidence, and I am willing to accept those theories as being tentatively true, since I have no reason to believe otherwise. I believe science may eventually answer the question.
Blake will have to fill in the blank for himself.
"something from nothing" is a meaningless construct of your own, useful for your strawman, but really useless in scientific terms. "nothing" is a very, very slippery thing to attempt to define.
Your absolutist logic is what is fallacious. Is a jury or a judge inherently evil when rendering a guilty verdict?
The new testament is the core of your moral system. Jesus commented a great deal as to what to do or not to do. Why should slavery be any different?
Does the new testament, or the old testament say slavery is inherently evil or wrong?
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
