IamJoseph

Instead of mentioning Prophets, mention what the Prophets of the Hebrew bible say - and point it as wrong?

Which universe do you live in - did it have a BEGINNING? Is that really a mad prophet saying so - or a debatable issue which makes one like you sweat....duh!? :wave:

IamJoseph

The term imaginary is a metaphor used to explain a point. There is no alternative - that is why I asked if you can add an imaginary $5 to an imaginary infinite amount of $.
negative. Thoughts are not a crime - you cannot take one to court for thinking bad. The thought allows one to consider right from wrong - and if he thinks wrong [graduating to coveting], he is more apt to do wrong. A decent person is greater than an innocent person.

'WHERE A REPENTENT SINNER STANDS - THE MOST RIGHTIOUS CANNOT'

spamandham

You're not getting it. It's logically impossible, not merely improbable, that there could be a pre-uni, since time is an aspect of the universe. "pre-uni" is a contradiction.

The same way I would explain it to modern urban people, with a biology course and appropriate texts and labs.

It's just plain silly to pretend that your favored ancient civilization had advanced technology but had to dumb their writings down. Their writings are dumbed down for the obvious reason that they were scientifically ignorant. Your position is totally irrational, rooted in your cult indoctrination.

It is not. Bats and birds are not the same species. They're not even the same family. But they are the same Biblical 'kind', flying kinds - exactly what you would expect from scientifically ignorant ancient tribesmen basing their classifications on obvious similarities.

Why would I waste time answering such an absurd demand?

The evidence, as you call it, is not even slightly credible. The silly book you worship is no different in 'kind' than the Vedas or the pyramid texts.

IamJoseph

But that's what I say. The uni is finite - in absolute terms - not like a half pregnancy.

Then how come the world follows only one sources laws - exclusively? Then how come you have no other source to say the uni is finite? I think you are confused by a deceptively simple texts: how would you write it 3000 years ago - would you say sub-atomic particles - or would you use the term 'dust'? Would you say 'species' or would you say 'kinds'?





This is not a contradiction of Genesis' version of species [kinds]. While bats are air born, they mutiply that way; if your saying they are half air and half land - this is catered to in Genesis. Even differentials are made in vegetation - land based shrubs, underground root plants and tall trees. there is no deficiency in biology in this source - do you know which source said a pig has a hidden biological trait not shared by any other of the trillions of life forms - you try saying something similar today? And to negate any fluke work - it also says three other animals have the exact opposite of those traits!

Because it is encumbent.


I don't want to say anything negative of the Vedas. However, the Hebrew bible remains the world's most believed writings, by period of time, cencus and impact - even those who never condone any theologies live by the precepts and laws of the Hebrew bible - all of their rights come from here and nowhere else. Unless you have another source which says:

EQUAL RIGHTS FOR THE STRANGER AS THE INHABITANT

ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINNETH IT SHALL PAY

those desert wonderers were pretty good, no?

:wave:

Julio

Jehovah was a tribal idol, capable of the crudest crimes. He was also a perpetual & habitual LIAR. See this example here of deity madness:

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

2Sa 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

Did that child of David and his fornication with Bathsheba have any guilt, so that Jehovah had to kill it?!…
Double-tongued, two-faced, that Jehovah idol!

jon-eli

Heh heh... Someone's gonna get smited.

Lógos Sokratikós

It doesn't make me sweat.

The universe as all things that exist had to have a cause.
What is the cause? God.
Does God exist? Yes.
Who was the cause of God?

Wow great.
The truth is there is no solution yet. Or ever, but I can live with that.

I don't answer mysteries with the first fantasy that occurs in my head, especially if those fantasies were forced upon me by a society that believes we must follow the incoherent babblings of ignorant prophets, rather than sound research criteria.

It might be satisfying for you, and that is comprehensible.

spamandham

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But either way, it's nonsense to talk about a time before the universe.

It'd be nice if you stuck to a single train of thought and drove it to ground rather than spouting every nonsense argument you can come up with in an attempt to confuse yourself.

If I had scientific knowledge 3000 years ago, I would use that language rather than the language of ancient tribesmen. Why do we not use dumbed down language today? Are we inherently smarter?

Neither the word 'species' nor the concept it represents are found anywhere in Genesis. Bats and birds are no more closely related biologically than bats and lizards. Yet the book you idolize classifies them as the same 'kind'; a classification rooted in a total ignorance of biology, as is expected from an ancient tribe with no modern scientific knowledge.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Please cite the chapter and verse.

Hardly.

If that's true, it's irrelevant.

Exodus 21 prescribes different treatment for Hebrew slaves vs. foreign slaves. Is that equal treatment?

I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in their society, if that's what you mean.

Amaleq13

That is exactly why it has no place in any secular law book.

Way to completely miss the point.

Amaleq13

Unless, as with Hawking, you suggest a different sort of time from what we perceive. But your interlocutor doesn't understand that concept, either, so it isn't likely to help.