Tribulation physics

[Mr Strawberry]

I am not an idiot and can read.

Like most of the members of this forum, I would disagree with at least half of this statement.

 

[dad]

You have demonstrated many times that you are incapable of recognizing real science.

Post a little science in your own words, and we shall see how real it is! Big talk, no action.

And you're wrong. About just about everything.

Let us talk like adults now. The baby thing gets old fast.

Scientific qualifications are a little more rigorous than that.

Rigorous, useless, clueless, pointless, godless. They are many things. I prefer things that are true.

 

[dad]

Like most of the members of this forum, I would disagree with at least half of this statement.

Keep trying, that was almost funny.

 

[florida2]

I do not even have claims. I ask questions and probe what is known by men. That is where the cluelessness resides. God gave clues about space.

You do! You claim that the Earth is in a 'fishbowl' of space where the laws are local and that everything beyond that can't be measured or adequately describeed by science because somehow it works under different physical laws. You also like to claim that the past worked under different laws, unless you have changed your mind about that.

You shout and scream at anyone who challenges these ideas and any evidence which is presented you claim doesn't apply because of the 'fishbowl' without any evidence of your own.

That is not probing what is known by man, that is unscientific dogma which you continually refuse to change.

Please, a little consistency.

 

[dad]

You do! You claim that the Earth is in a 'fishbowl' of space where the laws are local and that everything beyond that can't be measured or adequately describeed by science because somehow it works under different physical laws.

No. I look at what is known, and ask how far that extends. I ask if the far universe could be different. Either way, it doesn't matter cause at least it was in the past.

You also like to claim that the past worked under different laws, unless you have changed your mind about that.

The bible points that out.

That is not probing what is known by man, that is unscientific dogma which you continually refuse to change.

Please, a little consistency.

Science is dogma. That dogma is based on a belief in present laws representing the past and future. They are wrong. Certainly in the future, according to God. The past also, according to God would just not fit our present state laws. The present is inconsistent with the past and future.

 

[Tiberius]

Post a little science in your own words, and we shall see how real it is! Big talk, no action.

Already have done, many times. You were defeated every single time.

Rigorous, useless, clueless, pointless, godless. They are many things. I prefer things that are true.

And yet you deny everything that can be verified as true and instead prefer to base your worldview on old stories that can never be verified.

I'm beginning to think you don't know what "true" even means.

 

[dad]

Already have done, many times. You were defeated every single time.

You are welcome to dream.

And yet you deny everything that can be verified as true

Such as?

and instead prefer to base your worldview on old stories that can never be verified.

Or denied.

I'm beginning to think you don't know what "true" even means.

You would first have to be acquainted with it to know.

Nowthen, if one assumes the bible is true, would you agree that the Tribulation events require a different state?

 

[verysincere]

Nowthen, if one assumes the bible is true, would you agree that the Tribulation events require a different state?

What sort of "state" are you talking about?

 

[verysincere]

Science is dogma. That dogma is based on a belief in present laws representing the past and future. They are wrong. Certainly in the future, according to God. The past also, according to God would just not fit our present state laws. The present is inconsistent with the past and future.

And where does YOUR dogma come from? Where does the Bible state that, "The past also, according to God would just not fit our present state laws."

In your view, how often does God "change the laws"?

 

[Tiberius]

You are welcome to dream.

Is this the best response you've got? You're like a little kid trying to sound tough.

Such as?

Such as how radiodating wouldn't work at all if the laws of the universe had been different in the past.

Or denied.

You can't deny that there are magical fairies living on the moon. See how the fact that something can't be denied isn't actually a good thing?

On the other hand, take a claim that CAN be denied. For example, "I am a male." This claim can very easily be proven wrong. All you have to do is pull down my pants and see what I've got. You could also sample my chromosomes. It would be very easy to show that I am not a male. But the thing is, even though you can put the claim to the test, it will pass each and every one of those tests, because I am a male.

So do you see? A claim that can be tested to see if it is wrong but is never shown to be wrong is infinitely stronger than a claim that can't be tested at all.

You would first have to be acquainted with it to know.

More childish insults...

Now then, if one assumes the bible is true, would you agree that the Tribulation events require a different state?

Maybe, maybe not.

What part of the tribulation do you claim requires a different state and why does it require a different state?

 

[dad]

What sort of "state" are you talking about?

Laws, and forces.

 

[dad]

And where does YOUR dogma come from? Where does the Bible state that, "The past also, according to God would just not fit our present state laws."

It states many aspects of life before this present time and state.

In your view, how often does God "change the laws"?

In history just the once. After the flood. Sure, it also might have been different before the fall, but that is unknown.

 

[dad]

Such as how radiodating wouldn't work at all if the laws of the universe had been different in the past.

Right, how could it?

On the other hand, take a claim that CAN be denied. For example, "I am a male." This claim can very easily be proven wrong. All you have to do is pull down my pants and see what I've got. You could also sample my chromosomes. It would be very easy to show that I am not a male. But the thing is, even though you can put the claim to the test, it will pass each and every one of those tests, because I am a male.

Glad you know that much.

So do you see? A claim that can be tested to see if it is wrong but is never shown to be wrong is infinitely stronger than a claim that can't be tested at all.

A same state past can't be tested.

What part of the tribulation do you claim requires a different state and why does it require a different state?

Mountains leveled, Islands all moving (reverse continental separation)...inability to die, indicative of the long lifespans again perhaps....demons and angels here on earth among men directly....etc...

 

[Skarl]

Right, how could it?

Glad you know that much.

A same state past can't be tested.

Mountains leveled, Islands all moving (reverse continental separation)...inability to die, indicative of the long lifespans again perhaps....demons and angels here on earth among men directly....etc...

You really don't get the concept of basic logic and how it applies to constructing an argument, do you?

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[dad]

You really don't get the concept of basic logic and how it applies to constructing an argument, do you?

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

When noting that events in the bible in a certain time period require a different state, there is no better logic than looking at the facts.

 

[verysincere]

When noting that events in the bible in a certain time period require a different state, there is no better logic than looking at the facts.

Wow! Dad promises to start looking at the facts! Good for him.


.

 

[dad]

Wow! Dad promises to start looking at the facts! Good for him.


.

Got one?