Faith in Christ is Completely Logical

[Ingledsva]

Are you speaking of past tense or now? He is now!

Why do you keep saying things that make no difference?

He has already said he doesn't believe Jesus is God.

However, he answered a post that said GOD was Spirit, - with an answer that said - HE - is flesh and blood.

I assume he meant the opposite, - and I don't understand why he can't just say so.


*

 

[Ingledsva]

Well, I have to agree. The trinity is not something I believe in. I believe in the Godhead, that is, God the father, His son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, separate and distinct in nature and being. God and Jesus Christ having bodies of flesh and bones that is self perpetuating without corrupting blood in the views but pure spirit, and the Holy Ghost being a spirit whose influence fills the memento of space making it possible for all those, worth enough, to tap into that vast knowledge and influence. That belief suits me and fits into the perfect plan of salvation. I ask nobody to follow my belief. For me it is rational and logical, to someone else it might be utter drivel.

This is not logical, - even in the worlds of illogical religions.

For a GOD to be flesh and bone - would mean he would have to have a HUMAN system of blood - which has to be oxygenated with oxygen = breathing an oxygen atmosphere, and cells constantly replenishing themselves for those organs to keep going, and for bone growth, etc.

Why would a GOD need, - or want, - such?

Forgot to say - The Bible says Jesus bled, - so real blood, and human.


*

 

[Twilight Hue]

Based on, correct, but not fact... so idiots??? After all, where is their evidence? It appears they have none, as it is a theory in both senses of the word. So why not attack them?
And what is this mystical property that brings everything into being? Care to take a stab at it? The best we've had so far is: ''I don't know''.

That's why its called theoretical and yes science theory is based on fact. Otherwise it's only an idea or concept if there is nothing factual to base scientific theory on.

Incidentally what produces living beings are cells upon which the field of genetic biology addresses.

There is no, " I don't know." We already know. ;0)

 

[savagewind]

That's why its called theoretical and yes science theory is based on fact. Otherwise it's only an idea or concept if there is nothing factual to base scientific theory on.

Incidentally what produces living beings are cells upon which the field of genetic biology addresses.

There is no, " I don't know." We already know. ;0)

Cells? What causes cells to live?

 

[fantome profane]

Cells? What causes cells to live?

Chemistry

 

[savagewind]

Chemistry

Really? What happens to chemistry when a cell dies?

 

[Bunyip]

Really? What happens to chemistry when a cell dies?

What do you mean? Chemical reactions continue, they just change a little. Usually when a cell dies, the nutrients within are absorbed by the rest of the organism, or ecosystem in the case of single celled life.

 

[fantome profane]

Really? What happens to chemistry when a cell dies?

different chemistry


Where does the fire go, when the fire goes out?

 

[Sapiens]

Everybody's being way too binary. There are things that are clearly alive (e.g. engage in independent respiration or carbon fixation). There are things that clearly are not (do not do so). But there are also any number of things including virus and prions that do neither but that carry on reproduction and that evolve. The clear implication is that there is a continuum and that actual "life" (unlike actual death of something that is alive) is not likely to be controlled (or defined) by something as simplistic as an on/off switch.

 

[Desert Snake]

Cells? What causes cells to live?

The empty room, with the Rolex.

 

[Sonofason]

The truth here involves people who claim something is truth in face of what really and actually is going on. Can you accept that truth?

Yes indeed, I can see quite clearly that you are claiming something to be true despite what really and actually is going on.

 

[Shad]

~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. David D. Deutsch, Institute of Mathematics, Oxford University:
If we nudge one of these constants just a few percent in one direction, stars burn out within a million years of their formation, and there is no time for evolution. If we nudge it a few percent in the other direction, then no elements heavier than helium form. No carbon, no life. Not even any chemistry. No complexity at all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yet we are told by atheists that luck is just fine, luck will do it all... except they are not even honest enough to themselves to see that is the answer. They stick it under the banner of ''Natural'' and think they have the answer to all things; yet their life is not one day longer than before for all their worldly wisdom.

Nice quote too bad it is in error.

Dr. David D. Deutsch

I do not believe that the 'fine-tuning' of physical constants provides any sort of argument for the existence of God or anything else supernatural. That is because if the constants had been set intentionally by supernatural entities, then the intentions of those entities must themselves have been at least as 'fine-tuned' when they set the constants, and that fine-tuning would remain unexplained. Hence that supernatural hypothesis does not even address the fine-tuning problem, let alone solve it.

More generally arguing for supernatural explanations on the grounds that the current scientific explanation for something or other is flawed or lacking is always a mistake. There are two main reasons for that. One is that there are always unsolved problems. But they get solved. Science continues to make progress even (or especially) after making great discoveries, because the discoveries themselves reveal further problems. Therefore the existence of an unsolved problem in physics is not evidence for a supernatural explanation any more than the existence of an unsolved crime is evidence that a ghost committed it.

The second reason is that supernatural explanations are always empty explanations. That is to say, 'the gods did it' is invariably a bad explanation because, as you can see, to invoke that explanation I didn't even have to say what it is they did. It could 'explain' anything whatsoever and hence actually explains nothing.

 

[Sonofason]

The problem there is they haven't got any evidence, and, come to that, they haven't got any claims either ... ahaha

I think its even worse then that. Consider what Jesus said to John in Revelation, "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still."

I don't think they even have a choice anymore. Their choices have been made, and there's no going back. It's done. It's finished.

 

[Sapiens]

Nice quote too bad it is in error.

Dr. David D. Deutsch

I been worken' at the Quote Mine, all the live long day.
I been worken' at the Quote Mine, just to change what they would say.

 

[Sapiens]

I think its even worse then that. Consider what Jesus said to John in Revelation, "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still."

I don't think they even have a choice anymore. Their choices have been made, and there's no going back. It's done. It's finished.

Then why don't you dry up and blow away? What keeps you going if it's done?

 

[Sonofason]

Then why don't you dry up and blow away? What keeps you going if it's done?

I like to rub it in.

 

[McBell]

This is not logical, - even in the worlds of illogical religions.

For a GOD to be flesh and bone - would mean he would have to have a HUMAN system of blood - which has to be oxygenated with oxygen = breathing an oxygen atmosphere, and cells constantly replenishing themselves for those organs to keep going, and for bone growth, etc.

Why would a GOD need, - or want, - such?

Forgot to say - The Bible says Jesus bled, - so real blood, and human.


*

why would a God "have" to anything?

 

[Ingledsva]

why would a God "have" to anything?

Did you miss my last line?

"Why would a GOD need, - or want, - such?"

They are saying God is flesh and bone.

*

 

[McBell]

Did you miss my last line?

"Why would a GOD need, - or want, - such?"

They are saying God is flesh and bone.

*

My apologies.
Why would god "have" to have "HUMAN" {insert something here}....?

 

[Ingledsva]

My apologies.
Why would god "have" to have "HUMAN" {insert something here}....?

What exactly are you trying to ask? We are discussing the Bible God.

The Bible says nothing about God being anything other then Spirit.

Jesus - claiming to be the Messiah, would just be a human.

*