Religion II

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

BTW, as long as I am a troll...

So, Virgin Mary at Fatima = fable...yet Trinity in OT = fact.

More trolling:

Is Jesus Christ the ultimate goalpost move of all time?

I mean, after all, if you can't fulfill the Messianic Requirements of the Old Testament, do away with them and create new ones! SCORE!

How's that for some trolling?

Troll, if only could read, you would know that Jesus fulfilled all the messianic prophecies pertaining to his first advent.

And since you haven't refuted one single argument of mine about the plurality of the godhead in the OT, you should tread lightly on who you mock. Rightfully, Mr. No Answers, you should mock your own naivete and ignorance first and foremost. Besides, who in his right mind would believe that only rabbinic Jews who speak understand the original lingo are smarter than those, with other bloodlines coursing through their veins, who also studied and understand the original language? What makes one group smarter than the other? Oh yeah...you overworked imagination! You're pathetic.

And to add to your pathetic attempt to make something out of nothing, you have failed to take into account that those scholarly, rabbinic Jews are the ones who have written translations from the the original Hebrew into the native language of their congregations, since the vast majority of Jews, scattered throughout the world, don't understand Hebrew. That places those "unschooled" Jews in the same boat that you have placed all Christians who don't read, write and speak the original biblical languages.

Get some help before it's too late...before God abandons you to your reprobate mind.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Troll, if only could read, you would know that Jesus fulfilled all the messianic prophecies pertaining to his first advent.

And since you haven't refuted one single argument of mine about the plurality of the godhead in the OT, you should tread lightly on who you mock. Rightfully, Mr. No Answers, you should mock your own naivete and ignorance first and foremost. Besides, who in his right mind would believe that only rabbinic Jews who speak understand the original lingo are smarter than those, with other bloodlines coursing through their veins, who also studied and understand the original language? What makes one group smarter than the other? Oh yeah...you overworked imagination! You're pathetic.

And to add to your pathetic attempt to make something out of nothing, you have failed to take into account that those scholarly, rabbinic Jews are the ones who have written translations from the the original Hebrew into the native language of their congregations, since the vast majority of Jews, scattered throughout the world, don't understand Hebrew. That places those "unschooled" Jews in the same boat that you have placed all Christians who don't read, write and speak the original biblical languages.

Get some help before it's too late...before God abandons you to your reprobate mind.

YouTube

So much wrong in the above, including putting more words in my mouth that I never wrote.

Now who's the troll?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So much wrong in the above, including putting more words in my mouth that I never wrote.

Followed by a dose of, you implied....

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

I can only say that in each of your posts, there is a WTF moment in which I have to question how you could believe some of the things you say.

It is obvious that in the absence of a physical universe, there are no physical laws. Let's assume for the sake of this argument, that God created the physical universe. The creation of that universe and the assignment of the laws that govern that universe occurred simultaneously. If what I say is true, there is no reason why the laws of the universe had to precede the existence of the universe, and you have to explain where such laws were being held in anticipation of the creation of that universe. Now perhaps God thought up those laws well before he blinked the universe into existence. "I think I'll create gravity in my new universe and things will fall down. That's the ticket." The universe functions in accordance with laws that lead to observations - you know, things we can see. And the universe will continue to function in accordance with those laws until the universe ceases to exist. Why is that so hard to comprehend? The fact that you can't see the illogic of your statement that laws existed that governed something before there was something to govern, should form the basis for an article in Psychology Today.

Did they!? Did they occur simultaneously? Wasn't it you who reminded me the other day that if we are to believe scripture, it took God six (6) days to complete his creation? So how could all the physical laws, even in that creation scenario, all manifest themselves on day one, when on that day all God did was create light and separate light from the darkness? Well...then...since this is the case with the Genesis account, then how much more with the evolution model that took place slowly and gradually over the course of gazillions of years? You're going to tell us that at the instant of the "gestation" of the universe, all the laws were fully operational and in "plug and play' mode?

I would offer a new law of the universe. It is impossible to insult your intelligence.

Not at all, sir. Not by a long shot. Not while you're posting here!

I'll ask again. What law (not theory, but law) has changed or evolved?

They all did! (See above!) The very definition of "evolution" is that it is a process of change. Therefore, the physical laws of this universe could not have possibly been fully mature, developed, functional or operational at its instant of "gestation", any more than a uterus is at the instant of its gestation. Again, to deny the validity of this very logical and obvious fact is to deny that evolution ever took place.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

So much wrong in the above, including putting more words in my mouth that I never wrote.

But you should implied what I wrote!

Now who's the troll?

Find the nearest mirror for your answer.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

But you should implied what I wrote!



Find the nearest mirror for your answer.

I never wrote or implied "only rabbinic Jews" ... for starters.

I may be a troll, but at least I'm not a child.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I never wrote or implied "only rabbinic Jews" ... for starters.

But you implied by giving an example of a rabbinic Jew schooled in the original Hebrew as the end all and be all of Hebrew scholars. And that I should become like him and study the original biblical languages because unless I do...I can't possibly understand what the scriptures really mean -- [b]despite the fact that all the committees of various bible versions, over the course of many decades, have enlisted their own teams of language scholars to do the very work you say I should do.

I may be a troll, but at least I'm not a child.

Nor are you an adult!

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

But you implied by giving an example of a rabbinic Jew schooled in the original Hebrew as the end all and be all of Hebrew scholars.

He's certainly more the be-all end-all when it comes to the meaning of the actual words in the Old Testament than you are...with your 5-10 translations coming from LORD ONLY KNOWS what biased sources.

When you have the original words staring you in the face, and you know how to read them, you don't need someone else's interpretation...

That's why he's better than you. And you're right, that's but ONE example of someone who knows the meaning of the OT better than you do.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Did they!? Did they occur simultaneously? Wasn't it you who reminded me the other day that if we are to believe scripture, it took God six (6) days to complete his creation? So how could all the physical laws, even in that creation scenario, all manifest themselves on day one, when on that day all God did was create light and separate light from the darkness? Well...then...since this is the case with the Genesis account, then how much more with the evolution model that took place slowly and gradually over the course of gazillions of years? You're going to tell us at at the instant of the "gestation" of the universe, all the laws were fully operational and in "plug and play' mode?

They did occur simultaneously with the creation of the universe, given the assumption that the creation story is right. When the universe became the universe, the laws were simultaneously part of that universe. Yes, the laws of the universe were in play at the moment there was a universe. And they haven't changed. No other explanation is possible. N-o-t P-o-s-s-i-b-l-e The universe could not have become what it is if the laws constantly changed. And this is why we can look backwards at the universe. I can't say this any clearer. You are simply wrong if you think the laws of the universe changed.

Originally Posted by boxcar

They all did! (See above!) The very definition of "evolution" is that it is a process of change. Therefore, the physical laws of this universe could not have possibly been fully mature, developed, functional or operational at its instant of "gestation", any more than a uterus is at the instant of its gestation. Again, to deny the validity of this very logical and obvious fact is to deny that evolution ever took place.

The laws of the universe didn't evolve. The theories that explained the laws of the universe did evolve and continue to evolve. I'm thinking I might be able to grab your average third grader and get him to understand that.

Third grader: Why do we get sick.

Me: There are things we cannot see - we call them bacteria and viruses, or sometimes just germs - that cause disease. This has always been true, even though for many, many years people had other strange ideas, like we had been taken over by evil spirits. But eventually we figured out what was going on. We have a big adult name for this. The Germ Theory of Disease.

Third Grader: Gotcha. So people always got sick for the same reason they get sick today, even the first person on earth, but we didn't figure it out until much later.

Me: Yes. You are now ready to explain this to boxcar.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

They did occur simultaneously with the creation of the universe, given the assumption that the creation story is right. When the universe became the universe, the laws were simultaneously part of that universe. Yes, the laws of the universe were in play at the moment there was a universe. And they haven't changed. No other explanation is possible. N-o-t P-o-s-s-i-b-l-e The universe could not have become what it is if the laws constantly changed. And this is why we can look backwards at the universe. I can't say this any clearer. You are simply wrong if you think the laws of the universe changed.

But the universe didn't become the universe on the 1st day. You might want to read the creation account. For a universe to exist, there must be Space, Matter and Time. There is no universe without these three components.

The laws of the universe didn't evolve.

Of course, they evolved, right along with and at the same pace as the universe itself. They evolved to become what we know them to be today.

[boxcar]

[quote=PaceAdvantage;2173778]He's certainly more the be-all end-all when it comes to the meaning of the actual words in the Old Testament than you are...with your 5-10 translations coming from LORD ONLY KNOWS what biased sources.

When you have the original words staring you in the face, and you know how to read them, you don't need someone else's interpretation...

Yeah...but he's not the last word in translating because there are numerous teams of bible language scholars out there who are every bit as knowledge as he is, if not more.

And here's a clue for you: Everyone who has ever learned a language has had to depend on someone's interpretation to one degree or another. So...unless this rabbi of yours had the language down in his head when he was born, he learned it from someone. Live, love it and learn it.

That's why he's better than you. And you're right, that's but ONE example of someone who knows the meaning of the OT better than you do.

So...sayest our resident troll.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

To paraphrase the Fox, "Is your thumb working"? From what I have gleaned it appears most scientists believe as I say -

You are the one making the claim. The burden of proof is yours. If I allow you to shift that burden to me and find nothing then you can claim that I have not looked hard enough, ad infinitum. I'm not taking the bait. No, Sir. You make the claim. It's your job to prove it.

Originally Posted by boxcar

The universe's energy supply is not endless -- not infinite.

That statement demonstrates a total lack of understanding of the law of conservation of energy and the first law of thermodynamics.

Originally Posted by boxcar

The universe is not a perpetual motion "machine".

No scientist is claiming that it is. The definition of a perpetual motion machine is a machine that produces more energy than it consumes. No scientist is claiming that the universe does that. The universe neither produces nor consumes energy.

That's the science. Either you make the effort to understand it or you don't.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So...unless this rabbi of yours had the language down in his head when he was born, he learned it from someone.

Hint: there is no "rabbi of mine." You can substitute him with countless others of the same level of knowledge of the Hebrew language. I don't really care.

Here's a clue for the clueless: Your Bible translations were created by MEN. MEN with biases and faults. You yourself say there are multiple translations each with slightly different translations, and YOU pick the one that makes sense to you, more or less. Good luck with that. And you get off telling me that I'm wrong? I don't think so Mr.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Hint: there is no "rabbi of mine." You can substitute him with countless others of the same level of knowledge of the Hebrew language. I don't really care.

Here's a clue for the clueless: Your Bible translations were created by MEN. MEN with biases and faults. You yourself say there are multiple translations each with slightly different translations, and YOU pick the one that makes sense to you, more or less. Good luck with that. And you get off telling me that I'm wrong? I don't think so Mr.

And your Jewish rabbis aren't "MEN". "Men with biases and faults"? And can you tell us exactly what the biases were of all the teams of language scholars of the various versions? You accuse them of having them, so, Shirley, you must know what they are. Gotta list of 'em?

And by the way, if there weren't differences in the various translations, then that would support your lame theory that all those teams of language scholars conspired and colluded together to make sure they were consistently biased.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And your Jewish rabbis aren't "MEN". "Men with biases and faults"? And can you tell us exactly what the biases were of all the teams of language scholars of the various versions? You accuse them of having them, so, Shirley, you must know what they are. Gotta list of 'em?

And by the way, if there weren't differences in the various translations, then that would support your lame theory that all those teams of language scholars conspired and colluded together to make sure they were consistently biased.

So what makes your biased translation any more valid then mine? Because it fits your narrative of course.

So you can't even claim that it's true. I at least have non-religious Hebrew language experts on my side...maybe you do to. But the point is, you're hanging your hat on a paper hanger...good luck with that.