Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Abraham went there with the full intent to end Isaac's life.But if Abraham would have had an epiphany on the way and realized that God wasn't actually going to have him kill his son, then he wouldn't have been demonstrating any faith by taking Isaac up into the mountains.
The exact spot where Isaac was to be sacrificed is the exact spot where Jesus Christ was crucified.Mountains? What mountains?
Oh wow, thanks for pointing that out. I just did some research and it seems that the highest point in Moriah would have been Golgotha, where Christ was crucified. That's very interesting.The exact spot where Isaac was to be sacrificed is the exact spot where Jesus Christ was crucified.
You're quite welcome, my friend ---Oh wow, thanks for pointing that out. I just did some research and it seems that the highest point in Moriah would have been Golgotha, where Christ was crucified. That's very interesting.
Notice the play on words?Genesis 22:8 said:And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
Notice the play on words?
1Though some people hate to see threads get OT, I actually enjoy it. I do not mind that my thread is OT because I think everything that could be said about it was said. So here is a new question. Is getting OT more of a creationist diversion tactic, or a "evolutionist" tactic? I see many creationists go OT when confronted with difficult questions.
Though some people hate to see threads get OT, I actually enjoy it. I do not mind that my thread is OT because I think everything that could be said about it was said. So here is a new question. Is getting OT more of a creationist diversion tactic, or a "evolutionist" tactic? I see many creationists go OT when confronted with difficult questions.
I was going to ask, "Does God have mass?" It doesn't make sense that a non-physical being could make physical matter from literally nothing.So are you saying God is not made of matter? I've stated before why you are wrong.
I don't think He does.I was going to ask, "Does God have mass?"
Does it make sense that a non-physical omnipotent Being can?It doesn't make sense that a non-physical being could make physical matter from literally nothing.
Then no wonder it doesn't make any sense.I was going to ask, "Does God have mass?" It doesn't make sense that a non-physical being could make physical matter from literally nothing.I don't think He does.Does it make sense that a non-physical omnipotent Being can?No. And I must clarify that I'm only speaking for me.Interesting reply.
Does that work the other way around?
Can a physical omnipotent being create non-physical reality?
That was meant as a joke; since you mentioned getting off-topic.
Well, it worked.
This much should be obvious. An omnimax being is logically impossible. Not to say that one cannot or does not exist, but that its existence would be illogical.Then no wonder it doesn't make any sense.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?