|
Author
|
Topic: Chariots of God (Scripture & Photo Examined)
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
Message 46 of 1310 (751278)
03-02-2015 5:42 AM
|
Reply to: Message 29 by Coragyps
03-01-2015 10:29 AM
|
|
Re: Church of the Immaculate Reflection
Are these chariots of iron, or of some lesser material like bronze or gopher wood? I would have thought that the creator of All Things would have used some fancy composite material that mixed high strength with low weight: like those new fangled tennis rachets. Not simply those materials people had access to in those days.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 29 by Coragyps, posted 03-01-2015 10:29 AM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 48 of 1310 (751280)
03-02-2015 5:44 AM
|
Reply to: Message 35 by ScottRP
03-01-2015 6:04 PM
|
|
Christianity is based on faith. One should not require evidence. So what you are saying is that it is so because you believe it to be so? Grow up.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 35 by ScottRP, posted 03-01-2015 6:04 PM | | ScottRP has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 58 of 1310 (751304)
03-02-2015 9:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Phat
03-02-2015 9:31 AM
|
|
Re: Fracking with Frako
I would argue that evidence alone is insufficient to define a definite reality. What is your rationale for that?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Phat, posted 03-02-2015 9:31 AM | | Phat has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 60 by Phat, posted 03-02-2015 10:21 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 95 of 1310 (751417)
03-03-2015 4:17 AM
|
|
|
I agree with Faith. Why are you jumping to the conclusion that what you see is not demonic in nature? As Faith points out, if it was a Heavenly entity, why not manifest as something more meaningful to a believer? All the best.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 298 of 1310 (752405)
03-11-2015 9:25 AM
|
Reply to: Message 278 by ScottRP
03-10-2015 3:12 PM
|
|
Re: My thoughts on Ezekiel's Vision of God.
I am not lying. I don't think the suggestion is that you are lying; rather you are confusing a speck of dust with a mouse sized chariot. And when asked why you are doing this you reply with "I'm the best at looking at photos and interpreting them as being of mouse sized chariots". Would thi sum int all up?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 278 by ScottRP, posted 03-10-2015 3:12 PM | | ScottRP has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 365 of 1310 (753048)
03-16-2015 10:11 AM
|
Reply to: Message 345 by ScottRP
03-14-2015 6:25 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence
Where did Jesus say there were mouse sized chariots that only show up on camera?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 345 by ScottRP, posted 03-14-2015 6:25 PM | | ScottRP has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 369 by ScottRP, posted 03-17-2015 9:33 PM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 380 of 1310 (753213)
03-18-2015 7:37 AM
|
Reply to: Message 369 by ScottRP
03-17-2015 9:33 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence
Where in your Scritural support does it say that the chariots are mouse sized? Your Scriptural support says the chariots are at Mnt Sinai, not on a random photograph. Nothing you have posted here has any relevance to my question. Try again.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 369 by ScottRP, posted 03-17-2015 9:33 PM | | ScottRP has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 390 by ScottRP, posted 03-18-2015 12:39 PM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 394 of 1310 (753246)
03-18-2015 12:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 390 by ScottRP
03-18-2015 12:39 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence
Of course it's significant. Why would Jesus mess around with out of scale chariot wheels? He could easily make them full sized. Are you honestly saying the creator of all things could not make the chariot wheels proper sized? I find you lack of faith disturbing.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 390 by ScottRP, posted 03-18-2015 12:39 PM | | ScottRP has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2