‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 > 
 
   
 

The things that happened before the appearance of God in the universe

 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3808
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
25 December 2018 07:16
 
MrRon - 24 December 2018 03:10 PM

I’ve already made the distinction between the subjective “life” of a photon and the objective fact of their existence in our spatial temporal universe. In essence, I AGREE with those sources on the “perspective of a photon.” Why aren’t you getting this?

Throughout this thread, you’ve been contradicting yourself; moving the goalposts, so to speak.

MrRon - 17 December 2018 03:19 AM

How can anything exist independent of time?? And doesn’t eternal mean “lasting forever”, which necessarily entails time?

MrRon - 18 December 2018 04:54 PM

Again, eternal means “lasting forever”, which necessarily entails time. Therefore, God must exist in time.

MrRon - 19 December 2018 06:07 AM

OK. So what’s the difference between something existing “outside” of time and something existing “independent” of time? I would think that neither of those are affected by time, no?

MrRon - 22 December 2018 03:51 PM

Eternal means “lasting forever”. Which entails time.

MrRon - 23 December 2018 10:00 AM

I don’t disagree that photons themselves experience neither time nor distance. But we observe, detect, and measure them in time and space. I don’t regard something that manifests in and can be observed, detected, and measured in time and space as being “independent” of time and space.

The “lasting forever” part is the give away. If time is not a component of “lasting forever”, then the phrase has no meaning.

MrRon - 23 December 2018 05:43 PM

“A time that is dependent on reference frame and spatial position” is still… time! Moreover, describing the malleability of time does not render it outside of or independent of anything. It’s simply the way our universe works. Nothing new or noteworthy in your analysis.

It’s a quote, not my analysis.

Are you equating photons with causality?

Now you’re just being silly if you think the photon doesn’t have to travel any distance to reach us from the Sun. It has to travel 93 million miles through space and time to get here (again, I’ve already noted that if you ARE the photon then the situation is quite different). But to imply that it objectively travels no distance and arrives here simultaneously with its emission from the Sun is just wrong.

Quantum mechanics is the one being silly.  Quantum mechanics says zero time, zero distance.

Also, photons have no mass. So I’m not sure it’s even accurate to categorize them as a “thing”.
. . .
I’m pretty sure about the photons. But whether to include them in the same category as every other (mass-containing) object in the universe is another matter. They certainly do have properties unlike anything else though.

Photons are gauge bosons, and there are others.

MrRon - 24 December 2018 03:10 PM

“Lasting forever”. What do you think that means? Is time a component of “lasting forever”? At any rate, as I have already pointed out to EN, the word “eternal” is ambiguous. I concede it has more than one definition. And therefore it’s not very useful for the purposes of this discussion.

Poldano - 16 December 2018 01:11 AM

I think God exists independently of time; that’s what eternal really means. Therefore the notion of God having a beginning or a starting time for appearance in our universe is inaccurate.

Eternal, adjective, without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (opposed to temporal).”

Temporal, adjective, of or relating to time.”

Eternal does not entail time; by definition, it opposes time.  The definition is not ambiguous.

Merry Christmas.

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
25 December 2018 08:14
 
GAD - 23 December 2018 10:28 AM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:10 AM
GAD - 22 December 2018 12:33 PM
TwoSeven1 - 22 December 2018 12:24 PM

To your first point:

The Bible provides a clear explanation for quite a few things.  Whether you accept the Bible or not determines how you categorize it.  Plenty of proof of the historical accuracy of the Bible exists.  It can be found online quite easily.  Saying that a historically accurate document is irrelevant is like saying we shouldn’t care about history books.

2nd point:

You are the one using the point that scientists claim that something can come from nothing.  My original point was that something cannot come from nothing, therefore, something always existed.  The incredibly dense singularity would patently classify as “something.”  It cannot be nothing.  Virtual particles also classify as “something.”  They cannot be nothing.

3rd:

It is relevant.  How can so many Old Testament documents accurately prophesy about New Testament events that happened?  The precision is actually astounding if you care to investigate.

4th:

I put my personal disclaimer on that response because I knew it probably wasn’t what you were asking for.  I could have asked you the same hypothetical question, but it doesn’t seem worth while for our discussion, so I haven’t.  Why would I concede anything without a reasonable argument taking place first?  I don’t expect you to concede by that method either.  The hypothetical question has no value here.

Your 1st and 3rd points disqualify you as a completely ignorant common variety theist nut.

Disqualify from what?

Pretty much any discussion of reason or science as your arguments are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition.

Ok Mr. Thought-Policeman, but I’ll need to see some credentials that prove you’re authorized to enfore the law on thought.

Sarcasm aside, your point is commonly known as an ad-hominem fallacy.  You can provide a reasonable arugment as to why I am disqualified, but until then your point is meaningless.

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
25 December 2018 08:44
 
MrRon - 23 December 2018 05:32 PM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:37 AM

The historical accuracy of Biblical prophesy is relevant.  How could it be ignored?

So do you put any stock in the prophecies of other holy books?

There is a difference between claiming historical accuracy and being historically accurate.

I am not understanding your argument against my original point.  I am simply saying that it doesn’t make sense by any standard to say that it’s possible for something to come from nothing.  A photon, “virtual particle,” singularity, ect., are all things.  They cannot be nothing.  It doesn’t make sense to say that virtual particles created something, but they themselves didn’t exist.  Saying a photon is nothing because it has no mass is nonsensical.  A photon patently is something.

Nobody is saying that “virtual particles created something.“ The virtual particles don’t exist at first, but then they appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space. Now I agree that that doesn’t seem to make much sense, but it is what is observed on quantum scales:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/

I never said a photon was nothing because it has no mass.

My original point is this:  If someone can believe that something always existed, why is it hard to believe that God always existed?

What do you mean by “God”?

What self-fulfilling/vaguely-fulfilled prophecies are you talking about?

Any and all so-called “prophecies” in the Bible.

What prophecies in the Bible that should have been fulfilled haven’t been fulfilled?

For one:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

How does prophesy being fulfilled prove God’s existence?  The proof is in the pudding.

What is the very BEST fulfilled prophecy that proves God’s existence?

And, if it can be shown that your book contains contradictions and/or errors, would that change your mind?

Ron

What does it matter what stock I put or don’t put into other “holy books?”  As far as the conversation goes, we should only be concerned with what is true or not.

How can something emerge from nothing?  Doesn’t that contradict reason?

Not all scientists agree that space is empty either, so one would have to prove that space itself is in-fact nothing, before they could claim to have proved that something came from nothing.

By God I mean, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  The God of the Bible.

Do you understand the context of the verses you quoted and what they mean?

The very best prophecies that prove God’s existence are all of them.  How else could prophecy come if God wasn’t involved?  Apart from God, would it be possible for a man to precisely describe events that happen 500-700 years later?

I already explained that I’m not going to answer your question.  It would be better to finish our discussion than to pretend either of us is going to concede before a reasonable argument takes place.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
25 December 2018 09:56
 
TwoSeven1 - 25 December 2018 08:14 AM
GAD - 23 December 2018 10:28 AM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:10 AM
GAD - 22 December 2018 12:33 PM
TwoSeven1 - 22 December 2018 12:24 PM

To your first point:

The Bible provides a clear explanation for quite a few things.  Whether you accept the Bible or not determines how you categorize it.  Plenty of proof of the historical accuracy of the Bible exists.  It can be found online quite easily.  Saying that a historically accurate document is irrelevant is like saying we shouldn’t care about history books.

2nd point:

You are the one using the point that scientists claim that something can come from nothing.  My original point was that something cannot come from nothing, therefore, something always existed.  The incredibly dense singularity would patently classify as “something.”  It cannot be nothing.  Virtual particles also classify as “something.”  They cannot be nothing.

3rd:

It is relevant.  How can so many Old Testament documents accurately prophesy about New Testament events that happened?  The precision is actually astounding if you care to investigate.

4th:

I put my personal disclaimer on that response because I knew it probably wasn’t what you were asking for.  I could have asked you the same hypothetical question, but it doesn’t seem worth while for our discussion, so I haven’t.  Why would I concede anything without a reasonable argument taking place first?  I don’t expect you to concede by that method either.  The hypothetical question has no value here.

Your 1st and 3rd points disqualify you as a completely ignorant common variety theist nut.

Disqualify from what?

Pretty much any discussion of reason or science as your arguments are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition.

Ok Mr. Thought-Policeman, but I’ll need to see some credentials that prove you’re authorized to enfore the law on thought.

Sarcasm aside, your point is commonly known as an ad-hominem fallacy.  You can provide a reasonable arugment as to why I am disqualified, but until then your point is meaningless.

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

 
 
MrRon
 
Avatar
 
 
MrRon
Total Posts:  1864
Joined  14-08-2008
 
 
 
25 December 2018 15:30
 
bbearren - 25 December 2018 07:16 AM
MrRon - 24 December 2018 03:10 PM

I’ve already made the distinction between the subjective “life” of a photon and the objective fact of their existence in our spatial temporal universe. In essence, I AGREE with those sources on the “perspective of a photon.” Why aren’t you getting this?

Throughout this thread, you’ve been contradicting yourself; moving the goalposts, so to speak.

And yet you can’t point to a single contradiction or moving of the goal posts.

MrRon - 17 December 2018 03:19 AM

How can anything exist independent of time?? And doesn’t eternal mean “lasting forever”, which necessarily entails time?

MrRon - 18 December 2018 04:54 PM

Again, eternal means “lasting forever”, which necessarily entails time. Therefore, God must exist in time.

MrRon - 19 December 2018 06:07 AM

OK. So what’s the difference between something existing “outside” of time and something existing “independent” of time? I would think that neither of those are affected by time, no?

MrRon - 22 December 2018 03:51 PM

Eternal means “lasting forever”. Which entails time.

MrRon - 23 December 2018 10:00 AM

I don’t disagree that photons themselves experience neither time nor distance. But we observe, detect, and measure them in time and space. I don’t regard something that manifests in and can be observed, detected, and measured in time and space as being “independent” of time and space.

The “lasting forever” part is the give away. If time is not a component of “lasting forever”, then the phrase has no meaning.

MrRon - 23 December 2018 05:43 PM

“A time that is dependent on reference frame and spatial position” is still… time! Moreover, describing the malleability of time does not render it outside of or independent of anything. It’s simply the way our universe works. Nothing new or noteworthy in your analysis.

It’s a quote, not my analysis.

It’s a quote intended as a rebuttal/analysis of my comments. And again, there was nothing new or noteworthy there.

Are you equating photons with causality?

Now you’re just being silly if you think the photon doesn’t have to travel any distance to reach us from the Sun. It has to travel 93 million miles through space and time to get here (again, I’ve already noted that if you ARE the photon then the situation is quite different). But to imply that it objectively travels no distance and arrives here simultaneously with its emission from the Sun is just wrong.

Quantum mechanics is the one being silly.  Quantum mechanics says zero time, zero distance.

Talk about moving goal posts! Quantum mechanics is irrelevant and unnecessary to estimate the distance from the Sun to the earth, and, knowing the speed of light, the time it takes for photons to get here. You’ve disingenuously introduced quantum mechanics as a diversion. Besides, you yourself posted this:

“… it was only a short 8 minutes for those photons to cross the vast distance from the Sun to the Earth”. That doesn’t sound like “zero time, zero distance” to me!

Also, photons have no mass. So I’m not sure it’s even accurate to categorize them as a “thing”.
. . .
I’m pretty sure about the photons. But whether to include them in the same category as every other (mass-containing) object in the universe is another matter. They certainly do have properties unlike anything else though.

Photons are gauge bosons, and there are others.

Another diversion.

MrRon - 24 December 2018 03:10 PM

“Lasting forever”. What do you think that means? Is time a component of “lasting forever”? At any rate, as I have already pointed out to EN, the word “eternal” is ambiguous. I concede it has more than one definition. And therefore it’s not very useful for the purposes of this discussion.

Poldano - 16 December 2018 01:11 AM

I think God exists independently of time; that’s what eternal really means. Therefore the notion of God having a beginning or a starting time for appearance in our universe is inaccurate.

Eternal, adjective, without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (opposed to temporal).”

Temporal, adjective, of or relating to time.”

Eternal does not entail time; by definition, it opposes time.  The definition is not ambiguous.

What does “lasting forever” mean?


Merry Christmas.

Ron

 
MrRon
 
Avatar
 
 
MrRon
Total Posts:  1864
Joined  14-08-2008
 
 
 
25 December 2018 15:35
 
TwoSeven1 - 25 December 2018 08:44 AM
MrRon - 23 December 2018 05:32 PM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:37 AM

The historical accuracy of Biblical prophesy is relevant.  How could it be ignored?

So do you put any stock in the prophecies of other holy books?

There is a difference between claiming historical accuracy and being historically accurate.

I am not understanding your argument against my original point.  I am simply saying that it doesn’t make sense by any standard to say that it’s possible for something to come from nothing.  A photon, “virtual particle,” singularity, ect., are all things.  They cannot be nothing.  It doesn’t make sense to say that virtual particles created something, but they themselves didn’t exist.  Saying a photon is nothing because it has no mass is nonsensical.  A photon patently is something.

Nobody is saying that “virtual particles created something.“ The virtual particles don’t exist at first, but then they appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space. Now I agree that that doesn’t seem to make much sense, but it is what is observed on quantum scales:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/

I never said a photon was nothing because it has no mass.

My original point is this:  If someone can believe that something always existed, why is it hard to believe that God always existed?

What do you mean by “God”?

What self-fulfilling/vaguely-fulfilled prophecies are you talking about?

Any and all so-called “prophecies” in the Bible.

What prophecies in the Bible that should have been fulfilled haven’t been fulfilled?

For one:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

How does prophesy being fulfilled prove God’s existence?  The proof is in the pudding.

What is the very BEST fulfilled prophecy that proves God’s existence?

And, if it can be shown that your book contains contradictions and/or errors, would that change your mind?

Ron

What does it matter what stock I put or don’t put into other “holy books?”  As far as the conversation goes, we should only be concerned with what is true or not.

Agree. So do you think the other holy books are true?

How can something emerge from nothing?

Read up on physics and you’ll have a better understanding of how virtual particles can emerge from nothing. This probably isn’t the place for a deep dive into such a complex topic (plus, I’m no expert). I’ve already suggested a book.

Doesn’t that contradict reason?

Not any more than the idea of an eternal all-knowing, all-powerful being. 

Not all scientists agree that space is empty either, so one would have to prove that space itself is in-fact nothing, before they could claim to have proved that something came from nothing.

See above.

By God I mean, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  The God of the Bible.

OK.  If it can be shown that the Bible contains contradictions and/or errors, would that change your mind?

Do you understand the context of the verses you quoted and what they mean?

Certainly. Can you interpret them without doing the typical apologetic gymnastics necessary in order to salvage this obviously failed prophecy? 

The very best prophecies that prove God’s existence are all of them.  How else could prophecy come if God wasn’t involved?  Apart from God, would it be possible for a man to precisely describe events that happen 500-700 years later?

Weak sauce. You can’t name the BEST one?? Which events were accurately described 500-700 years in advance that meet the following criteria?
1) It must be accurate.
2) It must be in the Bible and not a modern reinterpretation of the text.
3) It must be precise and unambiguous. Vague predictions don’t count.
4) It must be improbable. Lucky guesses don’t count.
5) It must have been unknown. Ideas of the time don’t count.

I already explained that I’m not going to answer your question.  It would be better to finish our discussion than to pretend either of us is going to concede before a reasonable argument takes place.

The question is part of the discussion. In fact, it’s essential for the discussion. Because if there’s nothing that can change your mind then what’s the point of the discussion? Just be honest and come out and say that you cannot possibly be wrong, and no facts will ever change your mind. That would save us a lot of time. 

Ron

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
26 December 2018 11:41
 
MrRon - 25 December 2018 03:35 PM
TwoSeven1 - 25 December 2018 08:44 AM
MrRon - 23 December 2018 05:32 PM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:37 AM

The historical accuracy of Biblical prophesy is relevant.  How could it be ignored?

So do you put any stock in the prophecies of other holy books?

There is a difference between claiming historical accuracy and being historically accurate.

I am not understanding your argument against my original point.  I am simply saying that it doesn’t make sense by any standard to say that it’s possible for something to come from nothing.  A photon, “virtual particle,” singularity, ect., are all things.  They cannot be nothing.  It doesn’t make sense to say that virtual particles created something, but they themselves didn’t exist.  Saying a photon is nothing because it has no mass is nonsensical.  A photon patently is something.

Nobody is saying that “virtual particles created something.“ The virtual particles don’t exist at first, but then they appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space. Now I agree that that doesn’t seem to make much sense, but it is what is observed on quantum scales:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/

I never said a photon was nothing because it has no mass.

My original point is this:  If someone can believe that something always existed, why is it hard to believe that God always existed?

What do you mean by “God”?

What self-fulfilling/vaguely-fulfilled prophecies are you talking about?

Any and all so-called “prophecies” in the Bible.

What prophecies in the Bible that should have been fulfilled haven’t been fulfilled?

For one:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.“ (Matthew 16: 27, 28)

How does prophesy being fulfilled prove God’s existence?  The proof is in the pudding.

What is the very BEST fulfilled prophecy that proves God’s existence?

And, if it can be shown that your book contains contradictions and/or errors, would that change your mind?

Ron

What does it matter what stock I put or don’t put into other “holy books?”  As far as the conversation goes, we should only be concerned with what is true or not.

Agree. So do you think the other holy books are true?

How can something emerge from nothing?

Read up on physics and you’ll have a better understanding of how virtual particles can emerge from nothing. This probably isn’t the place for a deep dive into such a complex topic (plus, I’m no expert). I’ve already suggested a book.

Doesn’t that contradict reason?

Not any more than the idea of an eternal all-knowing, all-powerful being. 

Not all scientists agree that space is empty either, so one would have to prove that space itself is in-fact nothing, before they could claim to have proved that something came from nothing.

See above.

By God I mean, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  The God of the Bible.

OK.  If it can be shown that the Bible contains contradictions and/or errors, would that change your mind?

Do you understand the context of the verses you quoted and what they mean?

Certainly. Can you interpret them without doing the typical apologetic gymnastics necessary in order to salvage this obviously failed prophecy? 

The very best prophecies that prove God’s existence are all of them.  How else could prophecy come if God wasn’t involved?  Apart from God, would it be possible for a man to precisely describe events that happen 500-700 years later?

Weak sauce. You can’t name the BEST one?? Which events were accurately described 500-700 years in advance that meet the following criteria?
1) It must be accurate.
2) It must be in the Bible and not a modern reinterpretation of the text.
3) It must be precise and unambiguous. Vague predictions don’t count.
4) It must be improbable. Lucky guesses don’t count.
5) It must have been unknown. Ideas of the time don’t count.

I already explained that I’m not going to answer your question.  It would be better to finish our discussion than to pretend either of us is going to concede before a reasonable argument takes place.

The question is part of the discussion. In fact, it’s essential for the discussion. Because if there’s nothing that can change your mind then what’s the point of the discussion? Just be honest and come out and say that you cannot possibly be wrong, and no facts will ever change your mind. That would save us a lot of time. 

Ron

What does my opinion on other “holy books” prove or disprove?  My opinion doesn’t affect the truth of a matter, nor does yours.

If no one is claiming that something can come from nothing, as you stated earlier, why do you push the point that scientists claim that something can come from nothing?

In what way did the prophecy fail?  I’m not going to interpret what you mean and reply to my own interpretation.

The 500-700 B.C. window I refer to contains many prophecies about Christ that were fulfilled by his coming.  For example, Daniel 9.

To my knowledge, the Bible doesn’t prophesy about God’s existence.  However, God’s existence is asserted in the very first verse of the Bible, and all throughout it. My point is that Bible prophecy is proven true by history, and we can come to the conclusion that God exists because of the validity of Biblical prophecy.

I disagree that there is value in the hypothetical question.  If I don’t answer a question it doesn’t mean that I can’t or won’t change my mind.  It means I am not answering a question.  I already explained why I am not answering the question.

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
26 December 2018 11:49
 
GAD - 25 December 2018 09:56 AM
TwoSeven1 - 25 December 2018 08:14 AM
GAD - 23 December 2018 10:28 AM
TwoSeven1 - 23 December 2018 10:10 AM
GAD - 22 December 2018 12:33 PM
TwoSeven1 - 22 December 2018 12:24 PM

To your first point:

The Bible provides a clear explanation for quite a few things.  Whether you accept the Bible or not determines how you categorize it.  Plenty of proof of the historical accuracy of the Bible exists.  It can be found online quite easily.  Saying that a historically accurate document is irrelevant is like saying we shouldn’t care about history books.

2nd point:

You are the one using the point that scientists claim that something can come from nothing.  My original point was that something cannot come from nothing, therefore, something always existed.  The incredibly dense singularity would patently classify as “something.”  It cannot be nothing.  Virtual particles also classify as “something.”  They cannot be nothing.

3rd:

It is relevant.  How can so many Old Testament documents accurately prophesy about New Testament events that happened?  The precision is actually astounding if you care to investigate.

4th:

I put my personal disclaimer on that response because I knew it probably wasn’t what you were asking for.  I could have asked you the same hypothetical question, but it doesn’t seem worth while for our discussion, so I haven’t.  Why would I concede anything without a reasonable argument taking place first?  I don’t expect you to concede by that method either.  The hypothetical question has no value here.

Your 1st and 3rd points disqualify you as a completely ignorant common variety theist nut.

Disqualify from what?

Pretty much any discussion of reason or science as your arguments are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition.

Ok Mr. Thought-Policeman, but I’ll need to see some credentials that prove you’re authorized to enfore the law on thought.

Sarcasm aside, your point is commonly known as an ad-hominem fallacy.  You can provide a reasonable arugment as to why I am disqualified, but until then your point is meaningless.

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

Until you explain how my arguments are “ignorance, myth, magic and superstition,” then what you have said is pointless.  You seem to think that I will surrender my argument based on a statement with zero evidence.  You may have guessed that I won’t quit responding to this discussion because you attempt to discredit me.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
26 December 2018 12:03
 

Daniel 9 prophecy is easily debunked if you bother to get your information from a source other then ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. 

Here are a few of the many.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks
https://infidels.org/library/modern/chris_sandoval/daniel.html
https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
26 December 2018 12:14
 
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 11:49 AM
GAD - 25 December 2018 09:56 AM

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

Until you explain how my arguments are “ignorance, myth, magic and superstition,” then what you have said is pointless.  You seem to think that I will surrender my argument based on a statement with zero evidence.  You may have guessed that I won’t quit responding to this discussion because you attempt to discredit me.

You discredited yourself with your own ignorance, myth, magic and superstition whose only evidence is the ignorance, myth, magic and superstition of a magic book that is only magic because the “men” who wrote it say it is. That is a circular argument that shows just how intellectually challenged you are. And no, I didn’t guess you would stop, I know all to well how invested in ignorance, myth, magic and superstition people like you are and you just can’t stop yourself from wanting to show your ignorance to everyone, over and over and over again.

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
26 December 2018 14:07
 
GAD - 26 December 2018 12:03 PM

Daniel 9 prophecy is easily debunked if you bother to get your information from a source other then ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. 

Here are a few of the many.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks
https://infidels.org/library/modern/chris_sandoval/daniel.html
https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/

Here is some good information to counter:

http://tektonics.org/af/danieldefense.php

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
26 December 2018 14:10
 
GAD - 26 December 2018 12:14 PM
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 11:49 AM
GAD - 25 December 2018 09:56 AM

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

Until you explain how my arguments are “ignorance, myth, magic and superstition,” then what you have said is pointless.  You seem to think that I will surrender my argument based on a statement with zero evidence.  You may have guessed that I won’t quit responding to this discussion because you attempt to discredit me.

You discredited yourself with your own ignorance, myth, magic and superstition whose only evidence is the ignorance, myth, magic and superstition of a magic book that is only magic because the “men” who wrote it say it is. That is a circular argument that shows just how intellectually challenged you are. And no, I didn’t guess you would stop, I know all to well how invested in ignorance, myth, magic and superstition people like you are and you just can’t stop yourself from wanting to show your ignorance to everyone, over and over and over again.

At least you put some links on your other post.  I responded to that.

I can’t see how demeaning someone on here is helpful to anyone?

 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1807
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
26 December 2018 14:16
 
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 02:10 PM
GAD - 26 December 2018 12:14 PM
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 11:49 AM
GAD - 25 December 2018 09:56 AM

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

Until you explain how my arguments are “ignorance, myth, magic and superstition,” then what you have said is pointless.  You seem to think that I will surrender my argument based on a statement with zero evidence.  You may have guessed that I won’t quit responding to this discussion because you attempt to discredit me.

You discredited yourself with your own ignorance, myth, magic and superstition whose only evidence is the ignorance, myth, magic and superstition of a magic book that is only magic because the “men” who wrote it say it is. That is a circular argument that shows just how intellectually challenged you are. And no, I didn’t guess you would stop, I know all to well how invested in ignorance, myth, magic and superstition people like you are and you just can’t stop yourself from wanting to show your ignorance to everyone, over and over and over again.

At least you put some links on your other post.  I responded to that.

I can’t see how demeaning someone on here is helpful to anyone?

Out of curiosity, are you an Adventist? For what it’s worth, some of my favorite relatives are SDAs, and I respect their faith enormously. Those people have accomplished much good in the world, and neglected to simultaneously mess things up like the Roman Catholics have.

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  343
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
26 December 2018 14:43
 
nonverbal - 26 December 2018 02:16 PM
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 02:10 PM
GAD - 26 December 2018 12:14 PM
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 11:49 AM
GAD - 25 December 2018 09:56 AM

I simply point you back to your own arguments that are based on ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. You disqualified your self, that’s not on me.

 

Until you explain how my arguments are “ignorance, myth, magic and superstition,” then what you have said is pointless.  You seem to think that I will surrender my argument based on a statement with zero evidence.  You may have guessed that I won’t quit responding to this discussion because you attempt to discredit me.

You discredited yourself with your own ignorance, myth, magic and superstition whose only evidence is the ignorance, myth, magic and superstition of a magic book that is only magic because the “men” who wrote it say it is. That is a circular argument that shows just how intellectually challenged you are. And no, I didn’t guess you would stop, I know all to well how invested in ignorance, myth, magic and superstition people like you are and you just can’t stop yourself from wanting to show your ignorance to everyone, over and over and over again.

At least you put some links on your other post.  I responded to that.

I can’t see how demeaning someone on here is helpful to anyone?

Out of curiosity, are you an Adventist? For what it’s worth, some of my favorite relatives are SDAs, and I respect their faith enormously. Those people have accomplished much good in the world, and neglected to simultaneously mess things up like the Roman Catholics have.

Hello there,

I’m not SDA, but I hold respect for those folks as well.  They generally seem to have deep conviction about what they believe.

I am definitely a Christian, though, and would probably be best described as non-denominational.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17630
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
26 December 2018 15:45
 
TwoSeven1 - 26 December 2018 02:07 PM
GAD - 26 December 2018 12:03 PM

Daniel 9 prophecy is easily debunked if you bother to get your information from a source other then ignorance, myth, magic and superstition. 

Here are a few of the many.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks
https://infidels.org/library/modern/chris_sandoval/daniel.html
https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/

Here is some good information to counter:

http://tektonics.org/af/danieldefense.php

Of course you have a link to a pet nut who goes against all modern critical scholarship to justify your (and his) ignorance, myth, magic and superstitious beliefs, that goes without saying as people like you just want to believe, not spend a lifetime studying to try and manipulate history and the bible to justify your god and magic book of choice.

 

 
 
‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 >