Evidence for God from Science

So from where do we determine the proper source? It seems to me that any source or lexicon from which you could possibly you refer to will be written by men. And men have the possibility of being wrong. I pointed out that in this case all the lexicons agreed. If you think that any of them are wrong...

But what you've offered is come across, to me, as nothing more than a broad buckshot going in a million different directions at one time. This is quite a change of tune, because previously you've said I only had two arguments and I haven't said anything more than these. In fact I have had about thr...

What the? The grammar MEANS that the Logos ceased being the Logos? This is by far the worst I've seen you put forward anywhere in this thread. Let me quote Louw and Nida: to come to acquire or experience a state - ' to become.' . . . "the Word became a human being' or 'the Word became a person...

An angel appeared to Abraham as the agent of God, just as an angel appeared to Moses as the agent of God ('God sent as both ruler and deliverer through the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush', Acts 7:35). Funny . . . I don't see where it says that an angel appeared. It says YHWH appe...

Another good post, Forty. You know more about this than I do. You're welcome. I haven't read as much on the subject as I would like, but I'm trying. So the DH doesn't dominate any more..."Nevertheless, no new paradigm has replaced it, and scholars continue to draw on its terminology and insigh...

Let's see: a mustard seed and a stone on one side, and the living Word of God on the other. Yeah, they're comparable alright :roll:. See you're doing it again. You're ignoring the grammar on the basis of what you assume the LOGOS to be. Just walk through those questions and see what you come up wit...

Here's the short version: "J" wrote a the story representative of South Judean interests. "E" wrote the same story reflecting Northern Israel's interests. When the North and South united, the Priests in charge could not get rid of either well known document, so he (they) wrote &...

That's very clear to me also. If God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, then Christ was not God. If the water is in the glass, the water is not the glass. Yes but the water can't be in the glass and the glass in the water at the same time unless they are one in the same can they, like...

* GINOMAI: It is your claim that the LOGOS could not GINOMAI SARX, because the LOGOS is (in your view), eternal in a sense which would prevent it becoming SARX. Yet the fact is that the text itself tells us that the LOGOS did GINOMAI SARX. You're not in a position to deny this unless you want to th...

Trinitarians believe He is God as well as the Son of God, so I still see no contradiction or a denial of His diety. I know you believe that he is God as well, but the fact is that 'son of God' does not mean 'God', any more than 'son of FFC' means 'FFC'. Jesus said, very clearly, 'Look, you don't ha...

Excellent post and references, Forty - Thanks. I have read Finkelman and Silverstein and have heard Dever speak (Biblical Archaeology Review Convention). Your other sources also look great; I read your excerpts and website sources for them all. I'm a big fan of Dever, even though I don't accept his...

No he was not 'obviously being facetious', nor was he comparing himself with the wicked judges. He says very clearly 'God called them THEOI, and you want to stone me for saying I am the son of God?'. And you don't see the facetiousness in Jesus' words in comparing himself to clearly wicked Judges? ...

1. John 1 says that no one has ever seen God; Gen 18 says that Yahweh Himself appeared to Abraham. How do you get around that? An angel appeared to Abraham as the agent of God, just as an angel appeared to Moses as the agent of God ('God sent as both ruler and deliverer through the hand of the ange...

Jac, if your complaint is that there's a post of yours I've left unanswered it's not because I'm refusing to answer it, it's because I just haven't managed to get around to it yet. I'm having to answer posts from several people, and I don't always get the time to address each post. I usually deal wi...

Fortigurn, Jesus was obviously being facetious when He compared himself to the wicked Judges called gods in Psalm 82, who were completely inadequate to the task of exercising divine judgment. No he was not 'obviously being facetious', nor was he comparing himself with the wicked judges. He says ver...