Cross or Upright Stake

[cataway]

Yes, so what? That is one of the dumbest arguments that creationists can make because you are still an ape, you are still a mammal, you are still a tetrapod, you are still a member of vertebrata (I am assuming that you do have a backbone) you are still a chordate, you are still an animal, and you are still a eukaryote.

Try to make a claim that at least seems to help your argument.

Tell me, why do you think that God is a liar? All of the evidence supports the theory of evolution. It is written in the stones. It is written in our genes. Since the evidence all supports evolution you would have to explain how it got there. The only tenable excuse that I have ever heard is that God is a liar.

Even when I was a Christian, unlike you apparently, I did not believe that God was a liar so of course I read Genesis as a series of morality tales. It still works if one does that.

you should also know my children's children, children,children, children will also be humans. that's the way it works. and yours as well

 

[Subduction Zone]

theory of evolution?? and not law of evolution.

In the sciences, if anything, theories outrank laws. You are conflating the layman's use of the word with the scientific use of the word. Theories never become laws Theories are similar to laws, but they include an explanation. Einstein's Theory of Gravity (General Relativity) superseded Newton's Law of Gravity. It is more accurate and has an explanation.

This is the sort of error that those without a science education make. It is a bad argument.

 

[Subduction Zone]

you should also know my children's children, children,children, children will also be humans. that's the way it works. and yours as well

Of course they will be. The theory of evolution tells us that. But your children, and their children, etc. will also still be apes.

A "change of kind" is a creationist idea. Not an evolutionary one. "Kind" is a term that creationists cannot even properly define.

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

I believe that figures like Jesus were common around his time. The only difference that makes Jesus different than the others is that his birth and life were entirely sanctified. I believe Joseph is Jesus father, not just God, as I believe everybody's spiritual parent is God. But the Jews were looking for a messianic-like figure and found it with Christ. My question is: Why does it even matter if Christ died on an upright stake or a cross when the message of forgiveness and empathy has resonated so well amongst most Christians? Like all religions I respect Christians as part of the spiritual web that binds us all, regardless of how Jesus was crucified.

 

[cataway]

In the sciences, if anything, theories outrank laws. You are conflating the layman's use of the word with the scientific use of the word. Theories never become laws Theories are similar to laws, but they include an explanation. Einstein's Theory of Gravity (General Relativity) superseded Newton's Law of Gravity. It is more accurate and has an explanation.

This is the sort of error that those without a science education make. It is a bad argument.

theories outrank laws?? Wow you got that wrong

 

[Subduction Zone]

theories outrank laws?? Wow you got that wrong

You just demonstrated that you are scientifically illiterate. I tell you what, see if you can find a link that supports you. Or you could admit that you are wrong. I know that I can find links that support me.

 

[YoursTrue]

The purpose of the foot platform, as i recall, would have been to make it more torturous, because it would be positioned so the person would only be able to breathe by hoisting themselves up on the platform. Eventually they would tire and lose the strength to hoist themselves up - thus suffocating.

Does it matter? Because to understand this better requires a study of the Greek terms used.

 

[cataway]

You just demonstrated that you are scientifically illiterate. I tell you what, see if you can find a link that supports you. Or you could admit that you are wrong. I know that I can find links that support me.

The scientific method involves formulating hypotheses and testing them to see if they hold up to the realities of the natural world. Successfully proven hypotheses can lead to either scientific theories or scientific laws, which are similar in character but are not synonymous terms.A theory is a well-supported explanation of observations. A scientific law is a statement that summarizes the relationship between variables.

Are theories valued higher than laws?​

No, neither is valued higher than the other because they are different things. A theory explains why something happens, while a law explains how something happens.

Can a theory become a law?​

Yes, if a theory meets an extremely strict mathematical standard, it might become a law. There are very few laws in science, but they all started as a hypothesis and a theory before becoming a law.

 

[Left Coast]

Does it matter? Because to understand this better requires a study of the Greek terms used.

It matters if we care what crucifixion was actually like. Better understanding of this requires more than knowledge of the Greek words involved, it also requires looking back at the actual archeological evidence of crucifixion we have.

 

[Kathryn]

Speaking of the cross, I always watch two movies during Holy Week - Jesus Christ Superstar (great hippie music) and The Passion Of The Christ, which is very difficult to watch actually. But they balance each other out. I don't much care one way or the other as far as "stake or cross," but the cross makes sense to me from a suffering perspective. Ugh.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The scientific method involves formulating hypotheses and testing them to see if they hold up to the realities of the natural world. Successfully proven hypotheses can lead to either scientific theories or scientific laws, which are similar in character but are not synonymous terms.A theory is a well-supported explanation of observations. A scientific law is a statement that summarizes the relationship between variables.

Are theories valued higher than laws?​

No, neither is valued higher than the other because they are different things. A theory explains why something happens, while a law explains how something happens.

Can a theory become a law?​

Yes, if a theory meets an extremely strict mathematical standard, it might become a law. There are very few laws in science, but they all started as a hypothesis and a theory before becoming a law.

I see that you could not find any valid sources. Here is how you failed. You quoted someone but you did not link it. And if anything even your unlinked source supports me more than you. In my post that your responded to I used the qualifier "if anything". You may have some reading comprehension issues because that tells you there is no official ranking, but if there was one theories would be on top.

I even mentioned the fact that Newton's Law of Gravity is definitely inferior to Einstein's General Relativity. The latter is more accurate but that accuracy is not needed to terribly often, unless you are in the delivery service or get lost easily you probably rarely rely on Einstein's theory.

So do you concede, or do you want to try again? You need a link to your source.

 

[cataway]

Exodus 20:4 “You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form* like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth.d 5 You must not bow down to them nor be enticed to serve them,....
walk into a T house [church] and on the wall there is a large "T". do you look to it as something special ? did you forget Exodus 20:4

 

[cataway]

I see that you could not find any valid sources. Here is how you failed. You quoted someone but you did not link it. And if anything even your unlinked source supports me more than you. In my post that your responded to I used the qualifier "if anything". You may have some reading comprehension issues because that tells you there is no official ranking, but if there was one theories would be on top.

I even mentioned the fact that Newton's Law of Gravity is definitely inferior to Einstein's General Relativity. The latter is more accurate but that accuracy is not needed to terribly often, unless you are in the delivery service or get lost easily you probably rarely rely on Einstein's theory.

So do you concede, or do you want to try again? You need a link to your source.

could look at it this way, ok ,you want to be right but get annoyed when ya do not win?? =

sore loser​

---

noun
a person who is habitually angered, irritated, or annoyed when they do not win something or gain a desired advantage:

Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary

---

 

[Subduction Zone]

Exodus 20:4 “You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form* like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth.d 5 You must not bow down to them nor be enticed to serve them,....
walk into a T house [church] and on the wall there is a large "T". do you look to it as something special ? did you forget Exodus 20:4

A bit off topic, but then so was the fact of evolution. You would have to ask other Christians if they bow down to or serve the cross.

 

[Subduction Zone]

could look at it this way, ok ,you want to be right but get annoyed when ya do not win?? =

sore loser​

---

noun
a person who is habitually angered, irritated, or annoyed when they do not win something or gain a desired advantage:

Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary

---

That describes you. The rules were clear. You had to find a reliable source. You quoted a source and did not link it. You lost by the rules of the challenge.

 

[cataway]

A bit off topic, but then so was the fact of evolution. You would have to ask other Christians if they bow down to or serve the cross.

are you saying that has not been done ?? take the big T out of the buildings . do people show up? they feel the need to see something .however “God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.”—JOHN 4:24.

 

[Subduction Zone]

are you saying that has not been done ?? take the big T out of the buildings . do people show up? they feel the need to see something .however “God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.”—JOHN 4:24.

Just because a church has a cross does not mean that people bow down to it. You need to read the whole passage. That is why I said that you would need to talk to other Christians.

 

[cataway]

I see that you could not find any valid sources. Here is how you failed. You quoted someone but you did not link it. And if anything even your unlinked source supports me more than you. In my post that your responded to I used the qualifier "if anything". You may have some reading comprehension issues because that tells you there is no official ranking, but if there was one theories would be on top.

I even mentioned the fact that Newton's Law of Gravity is definitely inferior to Einstein's General Relativity. The latter is more accurate but that accuracy is not needed to terribly often, unless you are in the delivery service or get lost easily you probably rarely rely on Einstein's theory.

So do you concede, or do you want to try again? You need a link to your source.

Theory vs. Hypothesis vs. Law | Difference & Examples - Lesson | Study.com

Understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory. Learn how a theory can become a law. Explore examples of theories, hypotheses, and...

study.com

https://www.masterclass.com/articles/theory-vs-law-basics-of-the-scientific-method

 

[cataway]

Just because a church has a cross does not mean that people bow down to it. You need to read the whole passage. That is why I said that you would need to talk to other Christians.

such people can not worship Jesus with out a cross. They feel they have to have it . what about Exodus 20:4 ?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Theory vs. Hypothesis vs. Law | Difference & Examples - Lesson | Study.com

Understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory. Learn how a theory can become a law. Explore examples of theories, hypotheses, and...

study.com

https://www.masterclass.com/articles/theory-vs-law-basics-of-the-scientific-method

Good you linked your source. It is not the best of sources, but it still supports my claim more than it supports yours. It even listed the exact same example that I did of Newton's gravity being supplanted by General Relativity.:

"

1. 3. The Theory of General Relativity: Albert Einstein's theory claims that massive objects (like the Earth) cause a distortion in space-time, which is experienced as gravity. This theory actually supplanted one of the most famous scientific laws, Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation."

But then it made one clear error that disqualifies it as a source:

"Like theories, scientific laws describe phenomena that the scientific community has found to be provably true. Generally, laws describe what will happen in a given situation as demonstrable by a mathematical equation, whereas theories describe how the phenomenon happens. Scientific laws develop from scientific discoveries and rigorously tested hypotheses, and new theories generally uphold and expand laws—though neither is ever held to be unimpeachably true."

Nothing is proven in the sciences. To claim that a Law is provably true is an error. It even contradicts itself at the end of the paragraph and ignored the example it gave earlier.

But, it is close enough for me to find a better, more accurate article.