I provided a link to my cosmogony in the OP. Matter is eternal.With you prescribing that Your god has developed over time. Does your god have a beginning, i have read where you, use the term from the get go in connection with your god.
Does your theology have any coherence? Erickson admitted that the orthodox trinity is logically "absurd from the human standpoint" - which is true for several reasons. Shall we consider just one of those reasons? Let's do.Does your god have a beginning...
See my last post (282)._
Again did your god have a beginning.
That verse doesn't clearly indicate it. But when I have a moment, I'll show you one that is clear enough.Speculate on Psalms 33:9
For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.
Where are your x number of years in this verse.
That verse doesn't clearly indicate it. Shall we discuss some verses more clear? Let's do.Speculate on Psalms 33:9
For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.
Where are your x number of years in this verse.
Speculate on Psalm 33:9? Speculate on verses such as Isaiah 55:11 and Psalm 33:6:Speculate on Psalms 33:9
For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.
Where are your x number of years in this verse.
That verse doesn't clearly indicate it. Shall we discuss some verses more clear? Let's do.
For the most part, I absolutely HATE politicians. I mean, I hate their behavior. Most of them are liars and hypocrites. Imagine a father who says to his son, "Work hard. Follow my EXAMPLE of labor." If he himself never actually worked hard, he is behaving like a politician - a liar and total hypocrite! In terms of setting the EXAMPLE of labor, what should we expect? A great leader sets a great example. When HE says, "Follow my example of labor," what should we expect? That he only labored one day out of his life? Maybe six or seven? The greater the leader, the greater the example he sets. Therefore if God says, "Follow MY example of labor," how many days of labor should we expect this to mean, in terms of setting the example?
Let's start with Genesis 2 (bearing in mind what I said that a leader who CLAIMS to have worked, but never really did so, is a total liar and a total hypocrite):
"By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work" (Gen 2).
What work exactly? YECs take this to mean six or seven lazy speeches that cost God NOTHING in terms of actual hard work! Across 7 24-hour periods! Heck, I myself had already worked harder than that before I was even six years old! Worse yet, God says He RESTED from all His work! Rested from what exactly? Lazy sloth?
And it STILL gets worse (if it is even possible to plunge deeper than rock-bottom). He goes on to say, hypocritically, "Follow my example of labor" !!!!! He does this in Exodus:
"Six days you shall labor and do all your work...For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day."
An exponentially great leader sets an exponentially great example. Therefore the seven days of Genesis MUST refer to a period of time exponentially greater than 7 calendar days. After all, where did the daylight come from? There was no sun in place as yet, not until Day Four. 2Cor 4 suggests it was the Light of Christ's face.
Across the 4 billion years of earth's history (if science dating is correct), God shined His Light into the galaxy at least six times, and quenched it six times, to create seven Galactic Days and nights. He did this to lay down HIS (exponential) example of working six days as a basic model/example of labor for us all to follow.
It took Him 4 billion years to shape the earth because He was engaged in a learning process. If it had been quick and easy for Him, it would not merit any praise.
Speculate on Psalm 33:9? Speculate on verses such as Isaiah 55:11 and Psalm 33:6:
"By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth" (Ps 33)
By speaking, the Son breathes forth the Holy Breath/Wind (the Third Person) to perform His work (in this case to shape the earth). Hence Genesis says, "The [Breath/Wind] of God hovered over the waters." Have you ever been on the ocean? Did you notice that wind/breath hovers over the waters? But in this case it was the divine Breath/Wind.
To summarize. God expects us to labor/work for 50 years. To drive the point home, He tells us that He set the EXAMPLE of labor/work. Since His example is by default exponentially great, we must multiply 50 years exponentially to comprehend it. That means millions or billions of years, or something in that ballpark.
And let me add that an intangible, immaterial Spirit could not have shaped the earth. Molding a lump of clay requires tangible, material hands.
I don't want to go in circles. I already quoted the Catholic Encyclopedia saying that Tertullian's view was semi-Arian. I realize that a lot of people are participating in this thread and you may be forgetting what I already wrote, so this will be my last response.And? You haven't proven that Tertullian's view was polytheism (Tritheism ).
Both ruach and pneuma mean air/wind/breath. But they clearly refers to a supernatural kind of air/wind/breath. Try blowing air into a corpse and it will not become alive. The spirit is a type of matter or energy or something else that is invisible like air but it is not air because it gives life.No that translation of ruach/pneuma originates in a homosexual pagan philosopher named Plato who invented immaterialism. One of the main points on my thread on the biblical evidence for materialism is that ruach/pneuma clearly means physical wind/breath.
You are talking about ordinary matter and I'm talking about extraordinary matter-energy. Dark Matter and Dark Energy that fill up the universe are they solid figures seated on a sold throne as you described God?!!Um...er..uh...I'm discussing metaphysics. Matter is anything tangible, it need not be arranged/structured into atoms, much less human protoplasm (flesh). Yes, Tertullian probably realized that the soul should not be classified as flesh, even though it is material. Again, thanks for the quote that confirms what I said.
This thread has been quite active and hasn't given you a chance to read and comprehend responses. No, the article doesn't refer to 3 solid figures. Like your view, it refers to 2 solid figures and a person of spirit.I only read the first few paragraphs. Let me know if I missed something. The article referred to three solid figures, if I recall correctly, in a polytheistic sense - meaning the Three are not really One. I agree that such a view is unbiblical.
Please don't lie.
Please don't lie. I never said any such thing, nor would I imagine it even for a moment.
How can intangible hands mold clay? And why bother mold it? If God magically creates things ex nihilo, why didn't He simply pop the earth into existence fully molded already?Really ???
He changed water into wine without treading the grapes...
Not tired? Then it wasn't real labor/work.Rested form His work means, that he ceased His work. God was not physically tired and had to rest. He simply stopped His creation was finished.
Exactly. His ways are exponentially higher than our ways - exponentially more virtuous. That means He labors/suffers exponentially longer than what He asks of us, instead of hypocritically lying about having done real labor/work, as a politician would do.“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord.
9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts.
Um...er..uh...Have you ever seen a magician? He manipulates matter before your very eyes, and yet too quickly for you to figure out how he does it! Today's computers easily process millions of instructions per second. If man-made machines can move that fast, how fast do you think Yahweh can move? Fast enough to fill baskets of food faster than the eye can detect, somewhat like a magician? I'd say so!-I am wondering, do you just abhor the account of the feeding of the 5000. I guess you would have had Jesus, to get in a boat and go out with a net and catch the fish to feed the people.
And? Relevance? See post 282 for an example of incoherence in the traditional version of the Trinity. ANY version of Trinitarianism is likely an improvement on the traditional version. I haven't studied Tertullian's version, but I suspect it's probably similar to mine. Wouldn't surprise me. Scripture says that the Son was begotten of the Father. Does orthodoxy have any coherent explanation of what that means? Of course not. One possibility is that the Son was shaped out of the divine Word, at some point in time, as to sit on the throne alongside the Father. This does NOT mean created, it's just a change of shape. Until then, arguably, the Father was not really "Father" (since He had not designated a Son as yet). That's probably where Tertullian stood, and at least it's logically coherent, not some piece of unintelligible gibberish that orthodoxy expects us to swallow hook, line, and sinker, at penalty of excommunication or conflagration on a stake.I don't want to go in circles. I already quoted the Catholic Encyclopedia saying that Tertullian's view was semi-Arian.
Living? Yes. Supernatural? No. There is nothing supernatural/magical about resurrecting the dead. It's just physical dexterity. At death, the hand of God removes the material soul from the body. Whenever His hand places that soul back into the body, and surgically heals the body if needed, it's called resurrection.Both ruach and pneuma mean air/wind/breath. But they clearly refers to a supernatural kind of air/wind/breath. Try blowing air into a corpse and it will not become alive.
Dark matter? You seem to be confusing physics with metaphysics.You are talking about ordinary matter and I'm talking about extraordinary matter-energy. Dark Matter and Dark Energy that fill up the universe are they solid figures seated on a sold throne as you described God?!!
So you just add a lot of nonsense to scripture like every other cult.Um...er..uh...Have you ever seen a magician? He manipulates matter before your very eyes, and yet too quickly for you to figure out how he does it! Today's computers easily process millions of instructions per second. If man-made machines can move that fast, how fast do you think Yahweh can move? Fast enough to fill baskets of food faster than the eye can detect, somewhat like a magician? I'd say so!
Um...er..uh...Have you ever seen a magician? He manipulates matter before your very eyes, and yet too quickly for you to figure out how he does it! Today's computers easily process millions of instructions per second. If man-made machines can move that fast, how fast do you think Yahweh can move? Fast enough to fill baskets of food faster than the eye can detect, somewhat like a magician? I'd say so!
Right. Claiming that Yahweh has the ability to manipulate matter, for purposes of feeding the hungry, is nonsensical and cultic. Gotcha.So you just add a lot of nonsense to scripture like every other cult.
Not very original.