Evidence for God from Science

bbyrd009 wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

bbyrd009 wrote:

Philip wrote:Rick, let's take the matter of Jesus' confirmations of the OT as being Scripture, and that He came to fulfill the OT - how can those things be true, but not literally so? Now, I'm not asking whether Jesus was saying the Scriptures themselves were all LITERALLY true (as they can be true in various ways) - I'm asking how His CONFIRMATIONS that the OT is ALL God-given can be TRUE, without His assertions about this matter not being FACTUALLY true? Did He say this or not? Is it true or not? Because if it is not, then we have lots of creative writing and the ramblings of men indiscernibly mixed in with God's word. So which is it? Are such statements of Jesus literally true (meaning they are FACTUALLY so), or not?

i think the problem here is imagining that there is such a thing as objective or "factual" truth, when truth is better characterized as a moving target, perhaps; and evidenced by the "fact" that you cannot name any absolute truth, none whatsoever. Try, and see what happens. The Bible Itself will disagree with you, imo.

You do realize that if there is no objective truth and all truth is subjective ( which must be the case if there is no objective truth) then what you said is, at best, truth for you and at worse, no truth at all.

then i invite you to state an objective truth, and you should have no problems doing that!

There are no married bachelors.

A triangle has 3 sides.

And there you go.

the flesh profits nothing, but go with that then. may as well be in an exotic dance club, imo, but whatever. If you ever want to discuss spiritual truths, let me know. Any bachelor who has had sex is married in God's eyes. Any triangle is a two-dimensional device, not an actual thing, even, with four dimensions--it does not even qualify as "fleshly," iow, it is a useful mathematical concept. Have a nice day.

Murder is wrong.

It's wrong to rape children.

God is existence.

bbyrd is a troll

I WYN DA INTERWEBZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jac3510 wrote:bbyrd is a troll

I WYN DA INTERWEBZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe he's right, and we're all wrong.

Wait, he can't be right. That would be objective.

I told you guys not to feed the trolls. I just wish I were smart enough to take my own advice.

me too. I keep coming back here expecting some actual engagement. An example, a Scripture, something. I don't recollect demanding that my pov be the right one anywhere? I suggested a perspective, is all. Yikes.

murder is wrong--yet you eat meat
It's wrong to rape children--but it is ok to send them to public school, and program them for worldly success. You are intentionally avoiding spiritual truth, and your last try,
God is existence,

is equally carnal, wadr, if i understand your definition of "existence." I am not even trying, but see how each of these might be refuted, quite easily. Is it wrong to "murder" someone in agony? Is it ok to belittle someone, and pretend that you have not murdered them in your heart?

Who defines "children?" Who defines "rape?"

the point is not that i disagree with you, but that the truth depends. On these questions. Of course "it is wrong to rape children." So we make a law, wherein many guiltless people are ensnared and punished, also, who did nothing wrong. Besides this, your concept of "rape children" was once a widely accepted social practice. It's wrong to "rape" anyone, in our collective opinions, but these are not truth or even facts, they are accepted conventions.

I tell you it's objectively wrong to murder, and you respond with this?

bbyrd wrote:
murder is wrong--yet you eat meat

I wrongly assumed you are intelligent enough to know the difference between a real definition of murder, and a hippy, weed influenced, Woodstock influenced, bleeding heart liberal definition that says killing animals to eat them, is murder.