- This topic is empty.
- Posts
By the way, if you suspect someone is copying and pasting material from a website, copy and paste a section into Google and see if the phrase appears anywhere apart from this website.
You will find that I quote and give a reference if I am copying and pasting from somewhere.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 02 2010,07:29) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 01 2010,17:11) God is spiritual and not biological.
He exists both inside and outside of time at the same time.
1) OK, so your god is not biological. I agree with you: if I had been asked what scripture says about your god I would have come up with the same statement.2) That means that either “life begets life” is allegorical and not literally applicable, or if it is literal then Genesis 2:7 must be allegorical, because a spirit breathing into dirt is not life begeting life in any biological sense.
3) The real answer is that indeed life does beget life in the biological sense and it is only creationists who believe that it doesn't.
Stuart
Hi Stuart,1) Great; maybe we are making progress! (Psalm 78:4)
2) Dirt is composed of dead or dormant living matter.
What Gen.2:7 says shouldn't surprise you, because
we as humans are now capable of reanimating dormant
matter and even manipulating the composition of its structure. (Gen.1:26)3) Life begets life is a Scientific principal yet to be disproved by Science.
You mean it is ‘only’ Darwinian evilutionists that believe that it doesn't. (Jer.2:27)God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd
Dormant means alive, not dead. It is only creationists who do not believe that you need life to beget life. Biologists have demonstrated that you do, but Judeo-christian mythology says non-living divine beings can breathe into dirt, and the scripture says nothing whatever about dormant organisms. As usual you are using modern science to add material that is not in the original writing. Doesn't doing that break one of the commandments?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 02 2010,14:07) Ed Dormant means alive, not dead. It is only creationists who do not believe that you need life to beget life. Biologists have demonstrated that you do, but Judeo-christian mythology says non-living divine beings can breathe into dirt, and the scripture says nothing whatever about dormant organisms. As usual you are using modern science to add material that is not in the original writing. Doesn't doing that break one of the commandments?
Stuart
Hi Stuart,Yea; it breaks the commandment
'thou shall not show any Atheist up'!It's always a pleasure discoursing with you Stuart!
Modern Science and Scripture go together hand in glove! (1Tm.6:20-21)
1Tm.6:20-21 …avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science
falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith(in YHVH: the Creator).God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd
Strobel’s “evidence” for a god:
The universe began to exist, and whatever begins to exist has a cause, therefore the universe has a cause
How does he know that anything that begins to exist has a cause? How can he use the word “cause” in a context which time does not exist? Causes come before effects, what does “before” mean at the beginning of the universe? Even if we accept all those logically wrong assertions, what evidence does he have that it is HIS god that is the creator?He doesn’t even know his own mythology. In Genesis, in the beginning there already was an earth BEFORE god said let there be light. How do you feel about him telling lies about what YOU believe in Ed?
”Who created god? Nobody did!
HA! What a moron. He insists NOTHING doesn’t have a cause, then he specially pleads an exception to his OWN insistence, that his god didn’t have a cause. He wants it both ways. He implies that scientists agree with him that his god is “timeless” or “eternal”. That is a religious platitude, because he cannot explain how something can be a cause BEFORE time exists, when before only had meaning in the context of time existing. If there is no time, then there is no “god existed before the universe” because there is no such thing as “before”.This bozo is so completely debunked Ed. Even I can do it, and I’m nothing special. You probably don’t appreciate just how debunked he is by experts in each of the fields he wanders across with his lame “logic”.
Unless you are prepared to accept that he has just given a valid argument for the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bhna) as the creator, which he has just as much as he has argued for his god.
He is tedious, and just wrong, logically and scientifically. I won’t be watching any more of him.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 02 2010,16:52) Ed Strobel’s “evidence” for a god:
1) The universe began to exist, and whatever begins to exist has a cause, therefore the universe has a cause
How does he know that anything that begins to exist has a cause? How can he use the word “cause” in a context which time does not exist? Causes come before effects, what does “before” mean at the beginning of the universe? Even if we accept all those logically wrong assertions, what evidence does he have that it is HIS god that is the creator?2) He doesn’t even know his own mythology. In Genesis, in the beginning there already was an earth BEFORE god said let there be light. How do you feel about him telling lies about what YOU believe in Ed?
3) ”Who created god? Nobody did!
HA! What a moron. He insists NOTHING doesn’t have a cause, then he specially pleads an exception to his OWN insistence, that his god didn’t have a cause. He wants it both ways. He implies that scientists agree with him that his god is “timeless” or “eternal”. That is a religious platitude, because he cannot explain how something can be a cause BEFORE time exists, when before only had meaning in the context of time existing. If there is no time, then there is no “god existed before the universe” because there is no such thing as “before”.4) This bozo is so completely debunked Ed. Even I can do it, and I’m nothing special. You probably don’t appreciate just how debunked he is by experts in each of the fields he wanders across with his lame “logic”.
5) Unless you are prepared to accept that he has just given a valid argument for the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bhna) as the creator, which he has just as much as he has argued for his god.
6) He is tedious, and just wrong, logically and scientifically. I won’t be watching any more of him.
Stuart
Hi Stuart,1) There's plenty of evidence.
2) There wasn't an Earth until God created it. (Gen.1:1)
3) Correct, nobody created God; he is the eternal self existing one!
4) Only in your mind, only in your mind.
5) Platitude.
6) Don't like your precious evilution attacked?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Stu @ Oct. 02 2010,20:24) Debunked Ed. Let it go. Stuart
Hi Stuart,Only in your mind, only in your mind.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd! There is no way Ho say that Stu will ever believe in our God. You can go around in circle with him. No evidence will make him see……when you blind your blind…. Forget it Ed, and go on the Believers section, only my advice….Peace Irene
Quote (Baker @ Oct. 05 2010,08:30) Ed! There is no way Ho say that Stu will ever believe in our God. You can go around in circle with him. No evidence will make him see……when you blind your blind…. Forget it Ed, and go on the Believers section, only my advice….Peace Irene
Matthew 28:19 versus Matthew 10:14. It's a tricky one.Stuart
Quote (Baker @ Oct. 05 2010,08:30) Ed! There is no way Ho say that Stu will ever believe in our God. You can go around in circle with him. No evidence will make him see……when you blind your blind…. Forget it Ed, and go on the Believers section, only my advice….Peace Irene
Hi Irene,May our God bless you more and more!
I will see both you and Georg again in the resurrection!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Stu @ Oct. 05 2010,09:44) Quote (Baker @ Oct. 05 2010,08:30) Ed! There is no way Ho say that Stu will ever believe in our God. You can go around in circle with him. No evidence will make him see……when you blind your blind…. Forget it Ed, and go on the Believers section, only my advice….Peace Irene
Matthew 28:19 versus Matthew 10:14. It's a tricky one.Stuart
Hi Stuart,I'm not so quick to wash my hands of you.
As long as you reason together with me,
there “will be” always hope for Stuart!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Stu @ Oct. 02 2010,16:52) ”Who created god? Nobody did!
HA! What a moron. He insists NOTHING doesn’t have a cause, then he specially pleads an exception to his OWN insistence, that his god didn’t have a cause. He wants it both ways. He implies that scientists agree with him that his god is “timeless” or “eternal”. That is a religious platitude, because he cannot explain how something can be a cause BEFORE time exists, when before only had meaning in the context of time existing. If there is no time, then there is no “god existed before the universe” because there is no such thing as “before”.
The video appears to be removed so was not able to view it.But I thought I should add Stu that your paragraph can be summed up in one sentence.
Stu you are really saying, “I don't understand finite and infinite”.
See much easier to get your point across when you get to the guts of what you are really saying.
Of course infinity contains finite and thus anything with a beginning is finite and anything without a beginning is infinite. God the infinite created creation the finite.
Also, understanding infinite and finite, it seems that you are looking at finite things to prove infinity. Why not just understand it from a mathematical point of view if it is that difficult for you to grasp?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
