|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 148 days) Posts: 515 From: Tustin, California USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Chariots of God (Scripture & Photo Examined) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2374 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Well done sire.
JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Christianity is based on faith. One should not require evidence. Too funny. What does Zek have to do with Christianity? Zek is a Hebrew (not Christian) prophet and so acknowledged by Islam, Bah', Judaism and Christianity. But your claims should never be accepted simply on faith and do require evidence. Until that evidence is presented and tested you are just spouting bullshit and fantasy.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
What is it that you mean by Poe? Are you atheist? I am certainly not an atheist but so far you have not shown the originality to qualify even as a Poe.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
The problem is that we don't necessarily know the sum and totality of reality. I would argue that evidence alone is insufficient to define a definite reality.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
jar writes: Some claims have no evidence. ...your claims should never be accepted simply on faith and do require evidence. Until that evidence is presented and tested you are just spouting bullshit and fantasy. Evidence is often lacking. The definition of the concept of "supernatural" is a good example. There is no evidence. This does not mean that the concept is a fantasy by default.Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Evidence is often lacking. The definition of the concept of "supernatural" is a good example. There is no evidence. This does not mean that the concept is a fantasy by default. A claim that something is supernatural certainly needs evidence, very very very strong evidence, to be taken as other than fantasy.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Extending our vision beyond mere dust, many believe that it is an "angel orb". Others, including myself believe that it is of a real supernatural spiritual entity. I believe that this photograph is a far lesser form of Ezekiel's wheels, described by the early Jewish Merkabah mystics as a chariot of God. And I believe that you are wrong. I believe it is just a speck of dust. So now what?
I believe it to be unwise to diminish the value of a photograph which may support Ezekiel's Vision of God. I believe it is unwise to employ wishful thinking in order to see things as you would wish that they would be. I asked you earlier and you never explained: What is it that makes you think this thing is something spiritual? Added by edit:
Christianity is based on faith. One should not require evidence. Then why are you going on about photographic evidence?
Many turn their heads in disbelief of evidence. Like how you're turning your head to the fact that it is just a piece of dust?
I believe that the OT shines a small light on Ezekiel's Vision of God. But all these "spirit orbs" are around the same size (the size you would expect from dust). Do you have any photos of these orbs that are any larger than a piece of dust could make? Anything at all approaching the size of what Ezekiel saw? If not, why do you think that is the case? Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given. Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
jar writes: A claim that something is supernatural certainly needs evidence, very very very strong evidence, to be taken as other than fantasy. Ok...point taken. Do we have the right to judge someones belief as fantasy? If so is it because evidence is lacking? Why cant we just say that we dont know if they are right or not? Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Do we have the right to judge someones belief as fantasy? If so is it because evidence is lacking? Why cant we just say that we dont know if they are right or not?
Once they assert that something is more than just a belief, that it is a reality, evidence is required. I have absolutely no problem accepting that Scott believes what he asserts. But without evidence I can only conclude that it is just fantasy.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Do we have the right to judge someones belief as fantasy? Its my hot body, I'll do what I want.
If so is it because evidence is lacking? That, and because we have evidence that what they are looking at is just a piece of dust.
Why cant we just say that we dont know if they are right or not? We could, but in this case we do know; Spirit orbs are just dust. Why withhold the truth and evidence? Why lie about it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
The problem is that we don't necessarily know the sum and totality of reality. I would argue that evidence alone is insufficient to define a definite reality. How else can we? By guessing?Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Larni writes: What is your rationale for that? Personal experience.
Frako writes: Trusting our personal experience.
How else can we? By guessing? Are you suggesting that unevidenced faith is the same thing as guessing?Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden.(Leo Tolstoy)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024