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.
Of course I can.If you notice my claim was from a book by the author of "The China Study". To be sure reductionism has huge commercial support and billions of dollars are made with its seductive logic but there is very little evidence that individuals components have any value at all. It is the sum total that makes the difference. Not the minute detail.
Doesn't matter what semantics you put on it. People will still ask you to support your claims.
The testimony of the early church fathers. I knew nothing about the Bible for the first 25 years of my life. When I did start to read the Bible I was very skeptical and I really did not trust anyone. I allowed the Holy Spirit of God to guide me and lead me I to the truth. Everyone has to discover God for themselves. You have to decide for yourself if Matthew wrote the book of Matthew. I can not make that determination for you. If we come to a different conclusion that is fine. I know what works for me and I assume you are able to determine what works for you.What evidence do you have that the gospels were written by the disciples?
Yep, that is why I mostly deal with what science can support and show evidence for.Doesn't matter what semantics you put on it. People will still ask you to support your claims.
The testimony of the early church fathers. I knew nothing about the Bible for the first 25 years of my life. When I did start to read the Bible I was very skeptical and I really did not trust anyone. I allowed the Holy Spirit of God to guide me and lead me I to the truth. Everyone has to discover God for themselves. You have to decide for yourself if Matthew wrote the book of Matthew. I can not make that determination for you. If we come to a different conclusion that is fine. I know what works for me and I assume you are able to determine what works for you.
Where?I did
I am more interested in science.At least my opinions
I don't think of it as so. Digestion is not my stomach.Are they the same thing? Is your physical body the same exact thing as your awareness/consciousness?
I can call the tree outside my window "God", and I can see it. So what?That's why I find the dark energy god to be so boring by the way.On the other hand I can actually *see* the thing that I'm calling "God".
Indeed <snip yet another false dichotomy>.Observing the vast and intricate, often conflicting rationales for why these gods are indistinguishable from nothing can be fascinating.
Pattern recognition is poor science. Do these lines look curved to you?
https://www.csun.edu/science/ref/reasoning/expertise/pattern-recognition.html
FYI, your aversion to using pattern recognition when you suits you is another great example of a completely *unscientific* bias you hold.
It depends what one's motivations are.
Some go towards; "what works for them" or in other words, what is comforting to them. Others, peel back the layers, look for objectivity and search for what is most likely true, based on the available evidence.
You are free to agree with who you desire of course, but I have consumed the works of many NT scholars and historians, who study the NT for a living. There are some things these folks come to consensus on and one of them is; the gospels were penned by anonymous authors, around 40-70 years after Jesus died.
The phrase the disciple whom Jesus loved (Greek: ὁ μαθητὴς ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ho mathētēs hon ēgapā ho Iēsous) or, in John 20:2, the Beloved Disciple (Greek: ὃν ἐφίλει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, hon ephilei ho Iēsous) is used six times in the Gospel of John,[1] but in no other New Testament accounts of Jesus. John 21:24 claims that the Gospel of John is based on the written testimony of this disciple.
Since the end of the 1st century, the Beloved Disciple has been considered to be John the Evangelist.[2] Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, First, Second, and Third epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. Some modern scholars now believe that he wrote none of them.[3] Opinions continue to be divided, however, and other renowned theological scholars continue to accept the traditional authorship. Colin G. Kruse states that since John the Evangelist has been named consistently in the writings of early church fathers, "it is hard to pass by this conclusion, despite widespread reluctance to accept it by many, but by no means all, modern scholars."[4] Thus, the true identity of the author of the Gospel of John remains a subject of considerable debate.
I knew the ignore feature had it's benefits.
Jesus was a Panentheist? Won't everyone here be surprised.Since I quoted Jesus from the Bible talking about us being *one in God*, I've already done my part.
lol. One is a good as the next, if they are all fictional.You've yet to explain why Panentheism isn't a "biblical-type" representation of God.
The testimony of the early church fathers.
I knew nothing about the Bible for the first 25 years of my life. When I did start to read the Bible I was very skeptical and I really did not trust anyone. I allowed the Holy Spirit of God to guide me and lead me I to the truth. Everyone has to discover God for themselves. You have to decide for yourself if Matthew wrote the book of Matthew. I can not make that determination for you. If we come to a different conclusion that is fine. I know what works for me and I assume you are able to determine what works for you.
Where?
I am more interested in science.
I don't think of it as so. Digestion is not my stomach.
I can call the tree outside my window "God", and I can see it. So what?
Jesus was a Panentheist? Won't everyone here be surprised.
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.
lol. One is a good as the next, if they are all fictional.
Pattern recognition is poor science.
I meant, here in these forumshttp<snip>
<looks for substantiation of this opinion, so as to show it is not yet again a misrepresentation of the actual concept - see nothing>If that were actually true you would reject Hawking's claim about "net zero energy" universe based on *chemistry* alone, not to mention nearly every branch of physics.
Category error. Seeing more or less of the stomach will not determine if it is digestion or not. One is a process, the other an object.So we might only be able to observe a small portion of the whole organism for all I know.
Why? You don't. That "potential" is only opinion.So now you have an empirical definition of the term to work with, and a potential *cause* of all life.
There are ten articles on the first page.Why do all these science articles disagree with you?
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?...a=X&ei=PEGgVZrIDpK0ogS7i6GwAw&ved=0CB8QgQMwAA
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?