Exactly. Indeed, @Edwolf is just confirming it here. He says that my wife and I are two people composed of one substance? Well, if he likes to put it like that. In that case, it means that God is three people, because my wife and I are two people. You can speak to my wife, or you can speak to me, and you can even talk to us both at the same time. But you can't talk to my marriage, because its not a person.
I am surprised that he argues for the three persons view. I have debated the trinity here before, and other views were more popular. But all views got vague when questioned. One Christian summed it up: it is impossible to clearly define the trinity without stating heresy.
John 1:1, 14 show they were one in essence. Also, Colossians 1:19 shows this as well. John 6:37-39 shows they are one purpose.
Except He claims to be equal with God unlike any other prophet in the Bible. He claims to have existed prior to Abraham even though He was only around 30 years old. And I could provide many other examples that show He was very different from a biblical prophet.
He said he saw Nathaniel in a different location even before they ever met physically or saw each other physically. That is a characteristic of omniscience.
I am not saying that that was not also part of His distress but being God also He knew that He would resurrect Himself and reconstitute His body. So that was obviously not all that He dreaded. Since He was also part of the Triune God which the Bible plainly implies it is perfectly reasonable that that experience would also be dreaded greatly if not even potentially more.
Yes, it does, it tells us that their moral code is not the objective moral standard of the universe.
Any nation that puts political prisoners in concentration and re-education camps and harvests their organs and forcibly aborts babies so parents cannot have more than one child is a hell hole IMO and in the opinion of most Americans.
It is taught by the bible and I have seen evidence of it in my own experience of meeting all kinds of people from all over the world. How is that unsubstantiated?
Those are all atheists that were raised in nations founded on Christian principles. I explained that that can help make them keep those principles for a while. But nevertheless if the entire government becomes and remains atheistic and tries to make the nation secular there is a slide toward tyranny. Sometimes gradual, sometimes rather quickly.
While my definition may not be the official definition, it is the natural outcome of a person or society that has an extremely "strong interest in or concern for human welfare, values, and dignity" and makes humanism their entire philosophy of life and morality.
I dont need to, see above.
Yes, primarily run by atheistic evolutionary humanists.
I am not claiming America is a perfect society, no society is perfect, but relative to China it is 100 times superior to it.
I was raised during the Cold War plus you ought read the Gulag Archipelago and the Black Book of Communism, you might learn something. Communism is built upon a foundation of lies and they have to lie constantly to keep the illusion that it works.
They did not stop flights to Europe and America, which caused many of the cases to get to Europe and cause huge death tolls.
They provided no evidence that he misled the people on anything important.
No evidence he has stolen anything since becoming president.
Hardly, he did everything Fauci said to do. And more, he stopped almost all flights from China saving thousands. The experts said 2 million people were going to die, so he has potentially so far saved 1.8 million people.
I didnt say you cant tell the difference between good and evil, even atheists are created with a moral conscience by God. I am saying that if there is no God then there is no objectively existing foundation for good or evil and therefore the distinction is meaningless. In addition, you dont have a rational basis for condemning someone that engages in evil. It is just their subjective personal preference based on the chemicals in their brain produced by evolution, how can you be condemned for something you had no control over?
No, I am just saying that it is human nature (that has not been transformed by Christ) to retaliate evil for evil. Liberals like your self tend to put the natives up on pedestals as if they were early environmental scientists and total pacifists slaughtered by the evil Christian colonists, which is a totally false picture of history.
If the US truly had systemic racism, Obama never would have been elected president TWICE.
No, that was not the only reason we entered the war especially the European theater.
Yes, but often helping subject peoples was the reason for the US getting into some wars.
I will take that as an unable to refute.
Vox is a major source of fake news, they still believe Trump colluded with the Russians. Even American citizens are separated from their children when they commit a crime this happens every day and can last for years or even a lifetime.
It's a curious problem of their own making!
These are all so vague as to be almost meaningless.
See? This is what I mean? You take a single, ambiguous line and create a whole story out of it. Was Jesus joking? Misinterpreted? Meaning something else? Who knows? And why didn't he just say, "Yes, actually, I am God" instead of speaking in Zen koans?
Or God gave him a vision.
As usual, you're just making all of this up, stringing a whole narrative on the flimsiest of evidence. Look, believe all of this if you want, its your religion. Just don't tell us it's based on the Bible, because it obviously isn't.
You mean the one you have failed to demonstrate exists?
I never said that China was perfect, but you seem to be suffering from an extremely large beam in your eye while straining at the motes in other countries'.
You've just said it yourself. The Bible and your personal experiences are not evidence of anything.
Prove it. So far, this is just baseless claims.
Yes.
Thank you, that will do nicely. In future, please use words according to their actual meanings.
And the Christian country let them get away with it? Not that surprising, really, as it was Christians who ran the slave trade in the USA.
Yeah. Genocide. Warmongering. The stripping of civil rights. Systemic racism. Class warfare. Electing a criminal of appalling morals. Nothing to worry about at all.
Funny that you cite your experience as valid while telling me that I can't say China isn't a hellhole just because I happen to live there.
Goodness me. It's like saying that black is white.
Mistakes were certainly made. Having said that, compared to the way the USA handled the coronavirus, China has been a model.
Oh yes. We can all see what a kind, humble, caring person Trump is now. Not at all a spiteful, vindictive, lying con man.
Of course he did. At the same time he was telling the American people that coronavirus was nothing to worry about, and that it would go away very soon, he was also talking in private about how dangerous it was and what a huge problem it would be.
Which would explain his desperate grifting to try to make as much money as possible.
But you're happy with him having been a thief before, right? As if breaking the Emoluments Act as much as humanly possible wasn't also theft.
Here. Go see this: List of Trump's accusers and their allegations of sexual misconduct
The 2 million people was an estimate of the worst possible outcome. And Donald Trump is working hard to get there. Just look at how he behaves, and how he encourages others to behave. "Wear a mask? That's stupid and unmanly. You don't need to be afraid of COVID-19. Yes, all gather round, come together. Hug and kiss. Don't be afraid of some stupid virus."
I know you're saying this, but you just can't prove it. I have to thank you, actually. It's good to have ideas tested. We can now see that the Euthyphro Dilemma still stands, and that Christians cannot claim God as the foundation of their morality.
Remind me again, who came into whose land?
And now the racists are having their revenge. Remind me again, exactly what percentage of the people who work for Donald Trump are black?
As I've said, history is complex. But, unsurprisingly, much of the USA's motive for entering wars was selfishness.
I feel it would be unkind, as well as pointless, to try to correct your views on "benevolent dictators."
I will take that as an unable to refute.
Not according to Dr. Fauci, he said it saved thousands of lives.
Not if it was originally going to be 2 million.
Because there is evidence that they got them from God, there is no evidence the others did.
Because science has shown that by following Gods morals you are much more likely to live longer and have less disease and be happier. And be more courageous.
Sadly you are wrong. And it has also been shown to be accurate when the few times it touches on science.
No, it is because only Christianity taught that there is an objective reality that operates according intelligible natural laws. And that God has revealed aspects of Himself in nature. So Christians wanted to learn more about Him thru His creation, this was a major impetous in the formation of modern science.
No, you cannot take just one verse out of context. Verses must be understood in the context of the entire bible. Jesus also said you must be as wise as serpents but as gentle as doves, IOW you should not allow yourself to be taken advantage of. In addition, we know from history that jewish rabbis used hyperbole to make points this was obviously the case here, he meant you should have an attitude of generosity, He did not mean that you should literally give something to everyone who asks you.
Goodness me, no. I see you've completely misunderstood the situation.
What evidence do you have that Moses and Jeremiah spoke God's words? So far you have given nothing that verifies this.
Sorry, but the Greeks had an advanced science long before the first Christians. They believed there was an objective reality that operates according to intelligible natural laws.
OK, then please take the courageous step to follow Luke 6:30. That verse says to give to every man that asks of you. Please give me every thing you own.
Ah, the command to be wise overrules the command to give to every man that asks of you.
While I dont agree with most of what Trump says and tweets and how he says things, I agree with most of his actions and policies. He has been doing basically a good job getting our nation back to its founding principles.
No, I looked at your links and they basically confirm what I said. Christian businesses will be required to hire people engaging in immoral behavior and he will ban the sale and manufacture of so-called assault weapons, though they really are not assault weapons.
He is re-establishing the existence of America as founded. Biden wants to continue the fundamental transformation of America that Obama started. Who cares what the internation community says about us. He has gotten Germany and other wealthy NATO countries to finally start paying their fair share of their own defense. The Iran agreement was a joke and a funding of terrorism. The climate agreement does nothing to punish the worst offenders like China and India. The American output of carbon has been going down ever since Trump became president.
He did that to scare Europe into paying their fair share and it worked. He will take care of the deficit in his second term if he gets one. I guarantee Biden wont do anything about it.
See above.
No, the ends never justify the means. There may be cases where the truth should be withheld or only partially given but not explicit intentional lying.
There is an external standard relative to humans, God's moral character.
Personal relationships are not based on logic. They involve faith and trust. You can never know with absolute certainty whether someone is being honest with you, but rather you learn to have faith and trust in the person. We learn He is goodness itself thru our relationship with Him, just like you learn someone is good or trustworthy in any human relationship. What is the logical proof that your wife loves you or is a good person?
It is relatively easy and simple using causality and the BB theory as well as the characteristics of the universe.
I am not claiming that it can be proven with absolute certainty. Only that it can be shown to be most likely to be good and sound by experience.
If you can find a non personal source of purpose I will stand corrected.
If you can find a non personal source of purpose, I am all ears. And you cant use living things as an example because that assumes what you are trying to prove.
No, again you are assuming what you need to prove. You are assuming that natural selection can produce truth recognizing beings, ie humans, but how is that possible if natural selection only selects for survivability? A dog cannot determine if it is true that it has a finite lifespan or realize that if it loses a leg it will limp. And etc. Because none of those recognitions increase its survivability.
It is a plain violation of the free exercise clause. So you dont care about violations of the Constitution? Would you also force a jewish baker to bake a cake for a Neo Nazi celebrating Hitlers birthday?
Name one time.
So you have no problems with violating the Second Amendment either? No wonder you like them. Doesn't surprise me coming from someone that admires Communist China.
I doubt seriously he would agree with you on much. He said mans law should be judged how well it accords with Gods law. It sounds like you have never read the letter. How would you determine whether it is immoral or not? As an atheist you dont believe in any objective moral law.
I didnt say person, I said being. A being can be the essence of something. And that being can also be a person. But beings can be the essence of many things, such as a raccoon contains the essence of being a raccoon.
We have built in goodar, ie moral conscience, our moral conscience recognizes what is good. So over time as we know and experience Him we discover He is good, just like you do with any other person.
No, see above how we learn He is good which confirms His words.
From my experience with Him just like you know this about your wife.
By doing good things for me, helping me in times of trouble and etc. Yes, theoretically he could fool me, but so could your wife. Watch that movie based on a true story starring Nicole Kidman about the Russian mail order bride. She fooled her husband completely.
Where did I say that? I said I could prove it to the same level that you can prove that your wife loves you.
No, I never said I could prove it with absolute certainty. That is what faith is.
The same way you believe that what you are seeing really exists. How do you know what you see objectively exists? Or any other of your senses.
You left out (c), it is self evident or (d) you just accept that is generally accurate on faith, like your other senses. My choice is a combination of c and d. But the difference is once you discover that God does exist, then you have more than faith that your senses are accurate, you have logic that they are and that therefore you do have a relatively accurate moral conscience and that conscience gets more accurate over time as you grow spiritually.
If He is the good, then He cannot logically do evil. It would be logically impossible for Him to do evil.
No, actually they dont. What appears to be out of character is probably just a part of their character that you had not seen yet.
Maybe, but see above about our conscience.
He can but as I stated above only after an extended period of rebellion like Pharoah.
It is not proof but it is evidence that God is good since His people (Christians) generally only came up with inventions for the good of humanity like the medical sciences. Of course, that would only be considered good for those that value humans.
God may have used evolution to create humans but I believe the evidence points to creation over long periods of time. Each time the environment changed radically the creator had to salt the earth with organisms that could handle the change. Understood in its original language and from the proper viewpoint that author was trying to convey, I believe that fits the Biblical story of creation the best.
Most anthropologists believe humans came thru the afarensis line.
Not according to all anthropologists as I demonstrated above. Their foramen magnum is also in the wrong place for obligate bipedalism.
Yes, and that is strong evidence that they are not ancestral to humans.
As Dr. Hawkins states above, the transition between Australopithicines and the genus Homo is too large for it to be a transitional form. We have yet to find such a form, if it even exists.dm: But as I describe in the opening post at the thread we discussed, there were a number of steps that led up to the point where it was possible to have larger brains. One of those steps was likely the organization of the brain in such a way that creatures relied more heavily on cognition. This led to social support and advances that allowed future generations to get the adaption of prolonged brain growth after birth.
After the process got started, there were incremental increases in brain size.
