Tribulation physics

[TLK Valentine]

Wow, I went through all the trouble to explain that Mark was just a kid and no one copied anything from him. Then you go right on with your revisionism.

I think you mean "correction." I've actually read Mark's account of the Crucifixion -- why don't you go and read it and we'll discuss the Passover symbolism that Mark inserts?

I really wonder why I even make the effort. Other then maybe there is a lurker somewhere that is interested in learning the truth.

These two sentences don't go together -- a lurker interested in the truth need only ask.

Because if you do not care to abide in the truth, then why should I care what you do? If you get what you want and want what you get, why should that matter to me?

Why should anyone care what you do? You don't see the Passover imagery in Mark, and you're obviously not interested in learning about it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

BTW, I missed the post where you showed that the old testament describes the world as a sphere. Where in the Bible is that?

Lost somewhere in the bluff and bluster, I suspect.

 

[Jamin4422]

I think you mean "correction."

I told you what I mean.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I told you what I mean.

Then I eagerly await you backing up your statements with either internal or external evidence.

But first, be a dear and read Mark's account of the Passion and Crucifixion -- we can swap Passover stories once you do.

 

[Gracchus]

Imagine if Mark Antonacci, an agnostic who was sick and tired at being preached to by his christian girlfriend, didnt decided to prove to her that christianity was a fairy tale and started with researching the shroud. He wouldnt have been a Christian today would he(?)

And his girlfriend wouldn't be putting out would she?

 

[TLK Valentine]

And his girlfriend wouldn't be putting out would she?

Well, she's probably better off -- Antonacci sounds like a real creep.

On the other hand, she may have known his beliefs when she started dating him, so what was her agenda?

 

[dad]

No, not all do.

Nice to know you don't care about having a logical basis for your beliefs.

A also admit? What does that even mean?

Yes, I admit when I don't know something, so do scientists. So?

It's not unimportant, it's just that I'm not obliged to tell you what I said a few pages ago, as you can just check it for yourself.

I told you several times why such assumptions are logical.

If you just believe in a same state past, that is not known, or logical.

He doesn't exist.

I suggest you do the same.

I don't have to disprove a positive claim that has absolutely no evidence to support it.

???

Okay.

He was observed. 2000 years ago. By half a dozen people. And the only source for this is a book.

A dozen eh. You are informed I see.

Which prophecies, aside from Daniel (which isn't as solid as you believe it is)?

Says who? I already showed how God has to be behind the days till Christ prophesy no matter what date one uses. Absolute proof.

It has been established that the present laws apply to the future.

False. Unless you define future by next week.

There's not a single shred of evidence to suggest that they won't apply after a certain, completely arbitrary point in time.

There's not a single shred of evidence to suggest that they will apply after a certain, completely arbitrary point in time.

How can they be shown true for the bible? How does that even work? How can you be true for the bible?

No, but that's not the point. This man really, really believes in what he's preaching, but do you think that makes him credible?

Good thing that's not proven.

It's not a belief. It's a method.

The science method is the same state past and future belief method.

As I said, the authors of the New Testament might have been influenced by the Book of Daniel. What tells you they didn't just take a look at Daniel to see when the prophet will ostensibly die, then claimed he really did die that day?

You know not what you say.

This may sound like a conspiracy theory, but considering that there's not much proof for Jesus' existence, I'd say it's not so far off.

You have an opinion that is no more than a hunch.

 

[dad]

How's that?

Because if Daniel lived in Babylon with certain kings, the later date can't be right.

Yes, I don't have hard knowledge about the far future, but that doesn't mean I can't make assumptions about it.

So can any tramp on the street...so?

So what? So do you. You make assumptions about the past and the future, too!

Not the Tribulation period of the flood time.

A while ago, you actually told me that the reason why scientists are not supposed to make assumptions about the past and the future is that their premises are wrong, i.e. they don't take the bible as serious as you do.

No. Their premises are that the present laws applied. If they listened to God they might know better. As it is, they do not.

Now, you tell me something completely different, the same thing that you told me in the beginning: That making assumptions about the future and the past is absurd in itself.

Childish. The future is the Tribulation and beyond...as I used it here.

Can you please stop moving the goalposts?

Can you go buy a ball?

I can't absolutely know that God doesn't exist. I can, however, know that belief in him is unjustified, as there is no evidence for his existence.

There is evidence. Tons of it. Your choice is to reject it.

Science appeals to me because it actually helps me discover the truth. Your argument is invalid.

That insinuates science knows the truth. OK...so what is truth?

I reason with beliefs? Do you mean I reason on the basis of beliefs, or that I reason against beliefs?

I mean you use a same state past belief to model fantasy worlds.

 

[dad]

Actually it wont be a big blow at all because as I just claimed the shroud isnt the foundation of our beliefs as christians, it is a bonus, and you are entitled to your opinion, but is your opinion based on a totality of research you have done on the shroud, or just your opinion. Imagine if the great appologists like William Lane Craig and Gary habermas believed as you do, we probably wouldnt have much information on the historicity of Christianity would we?\
Imagine if Mark Antonacci, an agnostic who was sick and tired at being preached to by his christian girlfriend, didnt decided to prove to her that christianity was a fairy tale and started with researching the shroud. He wouldnt have been a Christian today would he

God leaves us with breadcrumbs if we are ready to follow the trail this is exactly what the shroud is. My guess is most of the unbelievers will continue to ignore the shroud and make excuses instead of truely researching it. They have made a free will choice havent they

Just as they have all made a choice to ignore my post about God calling the earth a sphere in the old testament way before any atheist or greek doing so(or anyone else on earth), we all know how much atheists are interested in the truth arent we

Ill say it again, Atheism is an emotional worldview not an intellectual one

You talked about the shroud being a result of the resurrection or something like that. Since we do not know the spiritual forces involved in raising the dead to life, how would you know that??

 

[The Engineer]

Because if Daniel lived in Babylon with certain kings, the later date can't be right.

And why not?

So can any tramp on the street...so?

I feel like I'm talking to a wall. Yes, every tramp on the street can make assumptions, but he probably can't do logical assumptions!

Not the Tribulation period of the flood time.

Irrelevant! You still make predictions and assumptions, just as scientists do.

No. Their premises are that the present laws applied. If they listened to God they might know better. As it is, they do not.

Thanks for agreeing with me while telling me you disagree. That's not confusing at all.

Childish. The future is the Tribulation and beyond...as I used it here.

This has absolutely, positively nothing to do with my comment!

Can you go buy a ball?

Neither has this. Your stupid comment doesn't even address the simple fact that you are constantly shifting the goalposts!

There is evidence. Tons of it. Your choice is to reject it.

And your choice is to withhold the evidence, apparently. Or can you give it to me?

That insinuates science knows the truth. OK...so what is truth?

That objects are made of atoms and molecules, that the earth is a sphere, that we evolved from bacteria... do you want a list?

I mean you use a same state past belief to model fantasy worlds.

I can't argue with you, as you are still shifting goalposts.

 

[dad]

And why not?

If Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar lived at a certain then that time is when Daniel lived.

I feel like I'm talking to a wall. Yes, every tramp on the street can make assumptions, but he probably can't do logical assumptions!

Such as?

Irrelevant! You still make predictions and assumptions, just as scientists do.

God made predictions. I just read them.

Thanks for agreeing with me while telling me you disagree. That's not confusing at all.

On what?

This has absolutely, positively nothing to do with my comment!

The future state as I see it comes at the end of the Tribulation. That has everything to do with the end of the present state.

Neither has this. Your stupid comment doesn't even address the simple fact that you are constantly shifting the goalposts!

Your inability to follow should not be confused with some shifting game.

And your choice is to withhold the evidence, apparently. Or can you give it to me?

On what?

That objects are made of atoms and molecules, that the earth is a sphere, that we evolved from bacteria... do you want a list?

Of what...insane claims that you can't support?

I can't argue with you, as you are still shifting goalposts.

Then what can you do? I advise unconditional surrender...fast.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You talked about the shroud being a result of the resurrection or something like that. Since we do not know the spiritual forces involved in raising the dead to life, how would you know that??

C-C has studied the shroud for three years, dad -- I'll attest first hand that he knows his stuff.

Looks to me like he knows more about Spiritual things than you; you might want to stop and learn from him.

 

[The Engineer]

If Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar lived at a certain then that time is when Daniel lived.

That doesn't mean the Book of Daniel was written by him.

Such as?

You want a logical assumption? No problem.

God doesn't exist, because there is no evidence for his existence. There you go.

God made predictions. I just read them.

What tells you that it was God who made the predictions? How do you know the bible wasn't written by humans that were inspired by humans?

By the way, you make predictions that have nothing to do with God, too. You make the prediction that when you walk to your destination, you will arrive at your destination. Your argument is invalid.

On what?

You started your comment with no, which indicates disagreement. You then told me that scientists don't take the bible as serious as you do and that they assume that the rules of the present state will apply to the future, which is an agreement with my comment.

The future state as I see it comes at the end of the Tribulation. That has everything to do with the end of the present state.

It still has nothing to do with my comment, which was about how you changed your opinion.

Your inability to follow should not be confused with some shifting game.

I follow you very well, that's why I arrived at the conclusion that you are shifting the goalposts.

First you told me that making predictions about the future is absurd in itself. No mentioning of God.

Later, you told me that making predictions about the future is completely valid as long as the rules of nature still apply to this future; according to scientists, they do, according to you, they don't, because you assume that God will change them.

Two different, even conflicting opinions, and you switch between them. I countered both of them. The first one by telling you about the necessity of the assumption of consistency, the second by questioning the existence of the tribulation.

On what?

Evidence that God exists.

Of what...insane claims that you can't support?

I think I have plenty of evidence to support the claim that the earth is spherical, thanks.

Then what can you do? I advise unconditional surrender...fast.

You are literally telling me that I should admit defeat because you are using fallacies? Nice!


Now, can you please tell me whether predictions are invalid by their very nature, or whether predictions about the far future are just invalid because they contradict the bible? I can't argue against your point if the point constantly changes.

 

[mzungu]

Except there's not a shred of evidence that anyone has ever been raised from the dead, not by God, not by anything else.

Oh yes they have :

 

[mzungu]

God made predictions. I just read them.

An omniscient being needs to make predictions

 

[mzungu]

Tribulation physics = "And he [Hiram] made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about, and...a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about....And it was an hand breadth thick...." — First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23 and 26

This means that Pi must equal 3 Wow! Imagine if science used the value of Pi as being equal 3

 

[CabVet]

An omniscient being needs to make predictions

Not only that, but he acts "surprised" when we sin (the fall) or when he has to kill everyone for sinning (the flood).

 

[Tiberius]

Oh yes they have :

Hahahaha!!! That was science! You prove my point for me! *Laughs and falls over*

 

[dad]

An omniscient being needs to make predictions

It kinda helped us poor mortals realize that there really has to be a God.

 

[dad]

Not only that, but he acts "surprised" when we sin (the fall) or when he has to kill everyone for sinning (the flood).

Wickedness can only be tolerated to a certain point. This generation included. It doesn't matter if people realize that ot accept it or not, it is a fact.