Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,747 Year: 4,004/9,624 Month: 875/974 Week: 202/286 Day: 9/109 Hour: 2/3


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy ⇒ Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? ⇒

Summations Only

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
Author Topic:   Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men?
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 1093 of 2241 (746002)
12-31-2014 8:01 AM 		Reply to: Message 1062 by jar
12-29-2014 5:14 PM

Re: or of Jesus
But you can can tell the difference by the effect that it has on you. Being unable to percieve a difference at the time of drinking does not remove the difference.
​
All measurable and rational.
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 1062 by jar, posted 12-29-2014 5:14 PM jar has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 1094 by jar, posted 12-31-2014 8:24 AM Larni has replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 1104 of 2241 (746029)
12-31-2014 12:26 PM 		Reply to: Message 1094 by jar
12-31-2014 8:24 AM

Re: or of Jesus
But you know the effect that it will have so you make decisions based on that.
​
Is that not obvious?
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 1094 by jar, posted 12-31-2014 8:24 AM jar has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 1105 by jar, posted 12-31-2014 12:28 PM Larni has replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 1108 of 2241 (746039)
12-31-2014 6:44 PM 		Reply to: Message 1105 by jar
12-31-2014 12:28 PM

Re: or of Jesus
Of course you know what effect it will have on you: lite beer will not get you drunk.
​
You must know that life beer won't get you drunk and therefor your choice of drink is completely rational.
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 1105 by jar, posted 12-31-2014 12:28 PM jar has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 1109 by jar, posted 12-31-2014 7:33 PM Larni has not replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 1978 of 2241 (748571)
01-27-2015 4:10 AM 		Reply to: Message 1977 by Faith
01-27-2015 3:13 AM

Re: Ask Yourself
But as I said the study it would take is really more than I can handle
​
That's a nice admission. But if you are not in a position to engage in said research (and I'm thinking about not just this subject) is it intellectually honest to make unsubstantiated assertions?
​
All the best.
​
Edited by Larni, : Spellink
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 1977 by Faith, posted 01-27-2015 3:13 AM Faith has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 1979 by Faith, posted 01-27-2015 4:13 AM Larni has replied
  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005

Normal Thread Display
Message 1980 of 2241 (748575)
01-27-2015 4:51 AM 		Reply to: Message 1979 by Faith
01-27-2015 4:13 AM

Re: Ask Yourself
You have asserted your point, not argued your point; as you have (by your own admission) not done the research that would allow you to argue your point.
​
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
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1979 by Faith, posted 01-27-2015 4:13 AM Faith has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Prev12
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024