Is Jesus the Word of God?

[DOTR]

According to the Christian Church He is.

 

[ding]

SPOILER ALERT: not actually a miracle.

I don't think it is possible to see it any other way.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don't think it is possible to see it any other way.

Yes, you said that already.

 

[Borillar]

The Lamb of God promised

Who's God? Which god? What god?

God is his own son, who also moonlights as a ghost and a dove and a word. They call each other and send each other even though they are all one in the same.

 

[BS Filter]

The Lamb of God promised

Who's God? Which god? What god?

God is his own son, who also moonlights as a ghost and a dove and a word. They call each other and send each other even though they are all one in the same.

Close, but not quite. God can do whatever He wants. He can even make a jackass speak, and this forum is proof.

 

[ding]

I don't think it is possible to see it any other way.

Yes, you said that already.

Actually I didn't already say that, Fort Fun.

 

[ding]

The Lamb of God promised

Who's God? Which god? What god?

God is his own son, who also moonlights as a ghost and a dove and a word. They call each other and send each other even though they are all one in the same.

Close, but not quite. God can do whatever He wants. He can even make a jackass speak, and this forum is proof.

What denomination are you?

 

[ding]

The Lamb of God promised

Who's God? Which god? What god?

God is his own son, who also moonlights as a ghost and a dove and a word. They call each other and send each other even though they are all one in the same.

Often times ignorance is insolent.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Actually I didn't already say that, Fort Fun.

Of course you did. You see, we have chatted before.

 

[ding]

Actually I didn't already say that, Fort Fun.

Of course you did. You see, we have chatted before.

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Prove it. Prove me wrong.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Uh... I would just soothe you and say, "my bad, I guess I was wrong" about such a mundane bit of minutiae before I would go searching for times you said something equating to this.

So, I do this now: Ding, i hereby declare victory for you.


*Ding grabs his brown paper bag and breathes into it for 90 seconds*

okay, that was cathartic. Now, moving on... I understand that you think there is "no other way of looking at it". The crazy thing about such a statement is that we have been looking at it in other ways for , literally, hundreds of years. You really need to catch up! So, to say one CAN'T even look at it another way seems to be a bit of manufactured self-constraint.


I mean, take me, for instance. I can look at it both your way and my way. I see both ideas as possible. You don't. Correct? Or, no?

 

[ding]

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Uh... I would just soothe you and say, "my bad, I guess I was wrong" about such a mundane bit of minutiae before I would go searching for times you said something equating to this.

So, I do this now: Ding, i hereby declare victory for you.


*Ding grabs his brown paper bag and breathes into it for 90 seconds*

okay, that was cathartic. Now, moving on... I understand that you think there is "no other way of looking at it". The crazy thing about such a statement is that we have been looking at it in other ways for , literally, hundreds of years. You really need to catch up! So, to say one CAN'T even look at it another way seems to be a bit of manufactured self-constraint.


I mean, take me, for instance. I can look at it both your way and my way. I see both ideas as possible. You don't. Correct?

So you are saying that you don't know how to use the search feature?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Uh... I would just soothe you and say, "my bad, I guess I was wrong" about such a mundane bit of minutiae before I would go searching for times you said something equating to this.

So, I do this now: Ding, i hereby declare victory for you.


*Ding grabs his brown paper bag and breathes into it for 90 seconds*

okay, that was cathartic. Now, moving on... I understand that you think there is "no other way of looking at it". The crazy thing about such a statement is that we have been looking at it in other ways for , literally, hundreds of years. You really need to catch up! So, to say one CAN'T even look at it another way seems to be a bit of manufactured self-constraint.


I mean, take me, for instance. I can look at it both your way and my way. I see both ideas as possible. You don't. Correct?

So you are saying that you don't know how to use the search feature?

What a lame response, you sissy. Answer the question. Did I, or did I not, identify a distinction between our positions?

 

[ding]

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Uh... I would just soothe you and say, "my bad, I guess I was wrong" about such a mundane bit of minutiae before I would go searching for times you said something equating to this.

So, I do this now: Ding, i hereby declare victory for you.


*Ding grabs his brown paper bag and breathes into it for 90 seconds*

okay, that was cathartic. Now, moving on... I understand that you think there is "no other way of looking at it". The crazy thing about such a statement is that we have been looking at it in other ways for , literally, hundreds of years. You really need to catch up! So, to say one CAN'T even look at it another way seems to be a bit of manufactured self-constraint.


I mean, take me, for instance. I can look at it both your way and my way. I see both ideas as possible. You don't. Correct?

So you are saying that you don't know how to use the search feature?

What a lame response, you sissy. Answer the question. Did I, or did I not, identify a distinction between our positions?

First of all, I don't believe you can be objective about anything that you have a preference for.

Secondly, how do you know I haven't already and what you are seeing is the result of an objective analysis?

 

[ding]

Then it shouldn't be that hard for you to prove I said that before, right?

Uh... I would just soothe you and say, "my bad, I guess I was wrong" about such a mundane bit of minutiae before I would go searching for times you said something equating to this.

So, I do this now: Ding, i hereby declare victory for you.


*Ding grabs his brown paper bag and breathes into it for 90 seconds*

okay, that was cathartic. Now, moving on... I understand that you think there is "no other way of looking at it". The crazy thing about such a statement is that we have been looking at it in other ways for , literally, hundreds of years. You really need to catch up! So, to say one CAN'T even look at it another way seems to be a bit of manufactured self-constraint.


I mean, take me, for instance. I can look at it both your way and my way. I see both ideas as possible. You don't. Correct?

So you are saying that you don't know how to use the search feature?

What a lame response, you sissy. Answer the question. Did I, or did I not, identify a distinction between our positions?

I'm curious, how many different options do you think exists for how life made the leap from inorganic matter?

 

[hobelim]

You beg for forgiveness and try to get closer to God by defiantly doing the very thing, practicing idolatry, that is already under the condemnation of God under penalty of death, according to scripture.

Again, that is your belief, not mine. Why is my faith your business?

It is not a belief. Its a fact. Scripture condemns idolatry. If you don't believe me you can look it up.


And in case you were sleepwalking and didn't know, you plaster your vile and degrading beliefs all over the place which make it my business to sweep them up into the trash.

Anyway, I thought that you would make a great example for others who might not share your bravado about sinning and actually seek a way out of insanity, what the authors of scripture called hell, and hope to return to the land of the living and being restored to a right mind by God before they die the second death, the death of the body...

Why would that bother you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

how many different options do you think exists for how life made the leap from inorganic matter?

Two!: Magic, or "not magic".

I say, "not magic". I think we have a fairly decent idea of how physics works on most scales, and I think we have a fairly good idea of how life arose via an effective theory of abiogenesis. Now , may there be gods? yes, certainly, there may very well be gods, by any definition thereof. No definitions of of gods can be ruled out, really. That's the shortcoming of magical thought: it removes the one good way to test the truth of an idea.

 

[ding]

how many different options do you think exists for how life made the leap from inorganic matter?

Two!: Magic, or "not magic".

I say, "not magic". I think we have a fairly decent idea of how physics works on most scales, and I think we have a fairly good idea of how life arose via an effective theory of abiogenesis. Now , may there be gods? yes, certainly, there may very well be gods, by any definition thereof. No definitions of of gods can be ruled out, really. That's the shortcoming of magical thought: it removes the one good way to test the truth of an idea.

So you believe that inorganic material assembled itself into life?

Is that correct?

 

[ding]

You beg for forgiveness and try to get closer to God by defiantly doing the very thing, practicing idolatry, that is already under the condemnation of God under penalty of death, according to scripture.

Again, that is your belief, not mine. Why is my faith your business?

It is not a belief. Its a fact. Scripture condemns idolatry. If you don't believe me you can look it up.


And in case you were sleepwalking and didn't know, you plaster your vile and degrading beliefs all over the place which make it my business to sweep them up into the trash.

Anyway, I thought that you would make a great example for others who might not share your bravado about sinning and actually seek a way out of insanity, what the authors of scripture called hell, and hope to return to the land of the living and being restored to a right mind by God before they die the second death, the death of the body...

Why would that bother you?

The New Testament is scripture, Einstein.

And since I don't know what crazy religion you follow, I don't even know if you believe in God or scripture.

 

[ding]

how many different options do you think exists for how life made the leap from inorganic matter?

Two!: Magic, or "not magic".

I say, "not magic". I think we have a fairly decent idea of how physics works on most scales, and I think we have a fairly good idea of how life arose via an effective theory of abiogenesis. Now , may there be gods? yes, certainly, there may very well be gods, by any definition thereof. No definitions of of gods can be ruled out, really. That's the shortcoming of magical thought: it removes the one good way to test the truth of an idea.

Since you have a good idea how physics works maybe you could explain to me the sequence in which life assembled itself from inorganic material.