Disobedience has consequences.

[GrimKingGrim]

No, actually I do accept Genesis both ways, just not both can be true and I don't know which is true since I don't know where the information originated. Whereas everyone else I have ever noticed has decided one way or the other even though they actually don't know where the information came from! That bothers me, I cannot just choose to believe one instead of the other when I don't know which is true, I really am not forced to choose anyway. Have you chosen to believe one instead of the other, and how come you are comfortable to do that?

Simple fundamental flaws.

Like plants with no stored sunlight, having not been able to start photosynthesis yet, surviving for 24 hours without a sun. And Carnivorous plants surviving three whole days without any sustenance til the sixth day because their photosynthetic prowess is inferior.

Day and night being present with no sun.

Man being made of dirt and woman being a byproduct of said dirt.

Man living 9 centuries.

It's far too ridiculous to believe that without any evidence to it being possible in the slightest. It's to be hailed in the same context as The Greek The Creation in my book. But far more mundane if you ask me.

 

[Messy]

Perfect illustration of the point.

Scoff: To show or express derision or scorn

Full Definition of DERISION
1
a : the use of ridicule or scorn to show contempt

It is at this point that unbelief or lack of faith has become a conscious choice for you, and you will refute anything I say.

Well I used to mock God and Christians because I thought it was utterly stupid and since He didn't exist anyway I saw no wrong in it. It's like mocking Santa Claus. That was not a conscious choice at all. My you should have heard my granddad mock and even he got saved. If it's a conscious choice that's more the reaction of the pharisees who were waiting for Him to do a miracle so they could let Him get killed.

 

[TillICollapse]

What's with this 1+1=3 anyway? Is that the way you see theism vs atheism? That's wrong. It is better described as one believing it is 1+1 while the other is believing it is 2. Both choosing to describe the same thing differently.

So you don't think a theist would ever say they would believe 2+2=5 for some reason ?

 

[oi_antz]

Simple fundamental flaws.

Like plants with no stored sunlight, having not been able to start photosynthesis yet, surviving for 24 hours without a sun. And Carnivorous plants surviving three whole days without any sustenance til the sixth day because their photosynthetic prowess is inferior.

Day and night being present with no sun.

Man being made of dirt and woman being a byproduct of said dirt.

Man living 9 centuries.

It's far too ridiculous to believe that without any evidence to it being possible in the slightest. It's to be hailed in the same context as The Greek The Creation in my book. But far more mundane if you ask me.

What is your explanation for the extremely detailed account of generations and heritage in Genesis 5?

 

[oi_antz]

So you don't think a theist would ever say they would believe 2+2=5 for some reason ?

Theists say crazy things when they are desperate. Atheists do too.

 

[TillICollapse]

Theists say crazy things when they are desperate. Atheists do too.

When they are desperate concerning what ?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

What's with this 1+1=3 anyway? Is that the way you see theism vs atheism?

I was explaining away basic knowledge actually and that his claim that belief can just be turned on and off is faulty on the fundamental level.

That's wrong. It is better described as one believing it is 1+1

Which would be all of life and existence

while the other is believing it is 2. Both choosing to describe the same thing differently.

I'd say one believes 2 and the other believes 2.1

One side sees things as they are and will just go for the straight forward answer. The other theist has nearly the same answer but for some reason believes they have gotten more than the other side.

The atheist side that got 2 is really puzzled as to where they get the .1 when the problem was just 1+1 with no extra parameters to the problem.

And so continues the debate.

 

[LostMarbels]

The other thing is this is a unfalsifiable hypothesis. W

Seriously that wasn't a trick question, it was basic arithmetic.

So you see, your claim that you can turn your belief on and off like a switch is faulty if it cannot operate on a basic level like say 2 + 2 = 5. If it cannot operate on fundamental matters of belief as corresponding to understanding then it's not gonna hold up period.

You can't find 2 + 2 = 5 to be believable because basic arithmetic and just counting will tell you 1, 2, 3, 4; 2 + 2 = 2 to 3 to 4. You understand that so you cannot believe 2 + 2 = 5 whenever you want because you understand it will never be correct (in a basic arithmetic sense) and that's just outside your parameters of belief.

My point has been successfully proven.



I did. Guess what I found out.

I don't even know what your point is but cool. Glad you made it.

I'm not going to discount something simply because its is beyond my belief system is what I am trying to convey. There is always the "what if" with me. I want to know truth. I love to learn and the only way to learn is to be wrong at times and learn new things. Then that can be judged by those things I already hold to be true. My belief is steadfast. But my knowledge and understanding is always changing because I look for knowledge. What if there is a way to get 2+2 to =5? What would that mathematical algorithm unlock? Wether false or true, a result is a result. I don't find it foolish to ask crazy questions. Because there is always an answer.

 

[oi_antz]

When they are desperate concerning what ?

Doesn't make much difference really. It's always about wanting to appear right instead of wanting to be right.

 

[TillICollapse]

Theists say crazy things when they are desperate. Atheists do too.

I think some view the theist as something like this: "If the Bible were to say that 2+2=5, I wouldn't question it. I would believe it, and then seek to understand it from that." Can you see why some view the theist in such a way ?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

What is your explanation for the extremely detailed account of generations and heritage in Genesis 5?

Fiction. I can rattle off names and dates. In fact I'm a fiction writer myself so I have actually created detailed heritages and lineage for my universe.

The Creation has a detailed lineage of the gods from the fundamental forces, to the titans, to Kronos to Zeus, but detail doesn't make it real.

 

[oi_antz]

I was explaining away basic knowledge actually and that his claim that belief can just be turned on and off is faulty on the fundamental level.



Which would be all of life and existence



I'd say one believes 2 and the other believes 2.1

One side sees things as they are and will just go for the straight forward answer. The other theist has nearly the same answer but for some reason believes they have gotten more than the other side.

The atheist side that got 2 is really puzzled as to where they get the .1 when the problem was just 1+1 with no extra parameters to the problem.

And so continues the debate.

Can you please explain what you mean? Why are you suggesting that a theist is not describing and viewing the same reality as an atheist? Is that even possible? Plus, how sure are you that the total sum of reality is 2? Can you actually perceive the entirety of reality from any given vantage point?

 

[oi_antz]

I think some view the theist as something like this: "If the Bible were to say that 2+2=5, I wouldn't question it. I would believe it, and then seek to understand it from that." Can you see why some view the theist in such a way ?

Certainly. In fact, those types of theists will see 2+2=5 in the bible even when the bible says 2+2=4. Did you see thast YouTube clip about 47 yesterday? That's them!

 

[TillICollapse]

Certainly. In fact, those types of theists will see 2+2=5 in the bible even when the bible says 2+2=4. Did you see thast YouTube clip about 47 yesterday? That's them!

Yes I posted that clip.

But no need to refer to that clip:

So if you acknowledge this, then how can you say viewing theism in such a way at times is wrong ?

 

[oi_antz]

Fiction. I can rattle off names and dates. In fact I'm a fiction writer myself so I have actually created detailed heritages and lineage for my universe.

The Creation has a detailed lineage of the gods from the fundamental forces, to the titans, to Kronos to Zeus, but detail doesn't make it real.

OK, but why do you suppose the author did this? It is effectively telling a lie. Without genesis 5, I wouldn't mind reading it mythically. But anyway, I only wanted to know why you have chosen to not believe it as fact. Can you please confirm that you think it would have been impossible to happen as it is described? Compared to saying that you think it is most unlikely to have happened that way?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

I don't even know what your point is but cool. Glad you made it.

You do. I give that much credit because you mention it.

I'm not going to discount something simply because its is beyond my belief system is what I am trying to convey. There is always the "what if" with me. I want to know truth.

I mean that's great and all but with this faulty system you're operating on any religion will do because your choice is to believe it before you have reason to. And continue to believe it despite it not meeting your standards for belief. I believe this is why some people can switch religions and even be lured into cults because you're attracted to truth and it's all you want.

I love to learn and the only way to learn is to be wrong at times and learn new things.

Yes but diving in head first to things without any sort understanding of it?

A good bit of advice: question first, don't follow. Ask yourself questions about your faith and give yourself an answer based on your reasoning. Don't give yourself an answer of comfort to preserve your faith, answer yourself.

Then that can be judged by those things I already hold to be true. My belief is steadfast. But my knowledge and understanding is always changing because I look for knowledge.

If your knowledge of a subject changes enough, your belief should change with it come with new knowledge. I'm an ever seeking knowledge guy so I'll always search for things to learn and the best way to do this would be to not start with a definite conclusion before researching.

What if there is a way to get 2+2 to =5?

It was basic arithmetic I stated no extras. Overthinking makes one forget to eat.

What would that mathematical algorithm unlock? Wether false or true, a result is a result. I don't find it foolish to ask crazy questions. Because there is always an answer.

Why is milk?

But seriously don't take an answer from something else and don't just make one up and then try to make it true. Asking questions is good, getting the answers is the fun part. And I take pride in always asking.

 

[LostMarbels]

Man... I bet the Cult of Dusty is having a ball with that clip......

(Pro 14:15) The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Every death is a transition from one state to another state, like birth. This transition is irreversible, and it is different every single time. Although it is true that all life must die, that does not mean that every death is the same. Every death is unique, just as every snowflake is unique.

The process will always be different, the experience will be different, and the end result will be different.

That doesn't really follow. While I will agree that every dying is unique, we are all equally still (and therefore lifeless) after death. There is no difference to you or I after death whether we are buried or cremated, because there is no life or personhood for any of that to matter.

Even though every leaf must fall from the tree in my garden, no two leaves will fall at exactly the same moment or land at exactly the same place. That is not how the universe works; it is full of uniqueness, full of moments that can never be repeated or duplicated. Every leaf will fall in its own unique way.

That sounds rather Epicurean in flavor. Pretty in its own way.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[oi_antz]

Yes I posted that clip.

But no need to refer to that clip:

So if you acknowledge this, then how can you say viewing theism in such a way at times is wrong ?

Ah, OK, the emphasis of this guy's speech has conveyed better than your paraphrase above. I get it now. I think I was like that once upon a time, before backsliding. But when I was called back to the faith I encountered awesome experience of profound truth in the bible. And you might have noticed me taking different approach than these sorts of believers, as I am really questioning the true meaning of biblical texts, turning criticism on doctrines that seem to not add up. Do you know what I am finding? The bible does add up and most Christians don't like counting. Take for example the statement I encountered today, this guy is very resistant, seemingly threatened that I am questioning his assumption about substitutionary atonement. You might have seen it earlier posted to Davian' but here it is again:

The ransom was paid to God; nowhere does the bible indicate that this payment needed to be made --or was paid-- to humans/mankind.

.. Now this guy is rattling off statements from the bible that he thinks support substitutionary atonement, because that is the only way he knows how to view them. But, he actually doesn't want to know why I don't agree. He has jumped the gun here and suggested that there is no scripture indicating the ransom was paid to humans when actually I know two scriptures that state it in no uncertain terms. He appears to also have assumed the ransom was paid to God, and I have asked him for scriptural support for that belief. See, he thinks the bible says 2+2=5, and most Christians do about this, but it doesn't actually say that. They are just seeing it because they want to. They are obsessed with 47.

 

[LostMarbels]

GrimKingGrim
I think you assume too much. As if I have never asked is Christ real? Is God? Is this all some sick game? Why is there so much violence in the OT? What is death, hell, heaven..... on and on and on..... I know who God is because I asked those questions.

Because I'm promised an answer.

(Jas 1:5) If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

I would to surmise the answer to your milk question is milk is produced by the mammary glands of mammals. It is the primary source of nutrition for young mammals before they are able to digest other types of food, and also carries antibodies from the mom to the young in early lactation.