Originally posted by Thundar
Checkmate. And an easy one at that.I can only assume that by making this current argument so easy to refute, you were of the impression that people reading your most recent post, were unable to use the scroll bar. 😆
Whether or not one who is outside of time can affect temporal changes is not in question as I will illustrate.
Originally posted by Thundar
Funnily enough, the argument above can be used to rationalize why one who has limited knowledge and control over time, cannot ascertain what one can do with it.Let's rephrase the initial argument a bit:
"Adam_Poe has limited knowledge of other's abilities when utilizing the scroll bar, so he doesn't really know what others are capable of when controlling the scroll bar."
Now if we replace "the scroll bar" with "time" and replace "others" with "God" in the statement above, we end up with the following argument:
"Adam_Poe has limited knowledge of God's abilities when utilizing time, so he doesn't really know what God is capable of when controlling time."
Of course I had to change a few additional words a bit, for the sake of subject-verb agreement. Other than that, I believe the words "God" and "time" fit in quite nicely when substituted.
A better analogy would be, "Just as one who is outside of a room cannot affect anything inside of the room, one who exists outside of time cannot affect anything inside of time."
Moreover, your analogy concedes that God exists inside of time by stating that He is able to "control," "utilize," or otherwise act as a causal agent or affect temporal changes.
Originally posted by Thundar
Although its quite obvious that Yo_IMURBRO often times presents himself poorly, if you really analyze what he said, you'll see that his basic point was actually a very good one. If I'm interpreting what he said correctly, I think what he was alluding to was that when one possesses limited knowledge, one can only come up with limited conclusions.Let me simplify a bit. Time is a very abstract concept. Quite frankly put, none of us in this physical world really has a grasp of it. We know it exists(at least to us), but that's really all we know.
Again, speak for yourself; see below.
Originally posted by Thundar
One of the most brilliant scientists of the century(perhaps one of the most brilliant minds ever), Albert Einstien, has even alluded to the impossibility of man being able to understand the true nature of time, and that time itself is most likely an illusionary concept, put in place by a supreme being to assist man.
This view of time is antithetical to the theory of special relativity that he proposed in 1951. By all means, supply the quote.
Originally posted by Thundar
So when an individual states something like the following:And states so in such an affirmitive/conclusive manner, it's quite apparent that such an argument being made is an extremely limited one, regardless of how eloquent it is in presentation.
Time is currently one of the few fundamental quantities, i.e. a set of units for physical quantities from which every other unit can be generated. Stop projecting uncertainty where none exists.
Originally posted by peejayd
* you know what Gentiles are, right? two verses above it...* Gentiles were not offered salvation before... until Saint Paul came and preached to them the word of God... wrong interpretation of predestination...
Acts 13:44-48The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.
Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us, 'I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT YOU MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.'"
When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
How many Gentiles believed? "As many as had been appointed to eternal life." The inclusion of the additional verses changes nothing.
Originally posted by peejayd
* just another 2 verses above it...* they refused to love the truth and so be saved... err, refusing... predestination or free will?
2 Thessalonians 2:9-12Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved.
For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.
Why did they not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved? Because God sent "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth." Again, the inclusion of the additional verses changes nothing.
Originally posted by peejayd
* yes, seven misinterpreted verses taken out of context...
I have not misrepresented or taken out of context any of the verses in question.
Originally posted by peejayd
* the power to choose? does not address free will?
Originally posted by debbiejo
Well Deuteronomy is talking about curses, not free will. The whole book is about the "Laws, festivals and Sabbaths." And there wasn't a church at that time. Also there was no teaching of hell by Moses. Only curses for not following the laws.
Originally posted by peejayd
* yeah, nice try... 😉
I wish I could say the same to you.
Originally posted by Nellinator
Food for thought:
What if God operates both inside and outside of time? Does that not fit a description of omnipotence?I believe that God does indeed work within time as prophecy would indicate, but time is not the same to God as it is to us, which the Bible indicates.
The problem however, is the fact that God has performed actions in a linear sense, according to the Bible, suggesting that he does exist in a time frame. The Bible says nothing about God not existing within or without Time, so you're argument is pure personal opinion.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Again, speak for yourself; see below.
Okay.
Originally posted by Adam_Poe
This view of time is antithetical to the theory of special relativity that he proposed in 1951. By all means, supply the quote.
“For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one.” —Albert Einstein
Rather famous quote that's used quite often over arguments involving time.
I'll have to look up the *special relativity* theory that you've mentioned a bit more in depth, as I'm not extremely familiar with it. Thus far from what I've read, and from my limited understanding of it, it has to do with particles travelling at light speed, and how its speculated that these particles would be viewed by all in the same way when travelling at light speed.
I'm assuming by you presenting this argument, you'll in some way relate this theory to how the concept time itself should be viewed similarly to how one views these particles moving at light speed. This in turn will support your argument of... "Nothing that exists outside of time can be the cause of temporal changes."
I'm sure shortly after, you'll follow up this argument by insinuating how my lack of or limited knowledge of the theory, prevents me from being able to understand how time works, which is something you clearly understand with your superior knowledge of time and Einstein's "special relativity" theory.
But as we've already "tautologically" discussed, all of this has little bearing on the fact that both of us still possess a very limited understanding time, specifically when getting into extremely speculative topics involving what is possible for one to do(and not to do) when controlling it. Also take note that such an argument is coming from two people who have no control over time, nor have they existed outside of it, making any suppositions we have about what is possible "outside of time" seem even more ridiculous.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Time is currently one of the few fundamental quantities, i.e. a set of units for physical quantities from which every other unit can be generated. Stop projecting uncertainty where none exists.
Sure, we may have ways to measure time, but even those means of measurement aren't really concrete, as they are primarly based on our observations of the physical world around us(i.e., night/day, revolutions of the earth around the sun, location of stars, people and animals aging, etc) - as well as distinct periods of time in which important historical events have occured.(i.e., birth of Christ)
To insiniuate that one conclusively knows what can be done inside and outside of time based on such limited knowledge, is the height of all arrogance, and I'm completely dumbfounded that an intelligent individual such as yourself can't even recognize how silly it sounds.
Originally posted by FeceMan
Dude, you so can't manifest temporal acceleration and then another power during the apparent time frame...What?
I can when using the sword of omens..it gives me "sight beyond sight."
Originally posted by FeceMan
I mean, THUNDERCATS!
You forgot to say "Hoooo!!" Peasent..😛
[EDIT] I hate when that happens. Messes up the joke.
Originally posted by Thundar
“For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one.” —Albert EinsteinRather famous quote that's used quite often over arguments involving time.
In no way does the above quote state:
Originally posted by Thundar
One of the most brilliant scientists of the century(perhaps one of the most brilliant minds ever), Albert Einstien, has even alluded to the impossibility of man being able to understand the true nature of time, and that time itself is most likely an illusionary concept, put in place by a supreme being to assist man.
Rather, it is in reference to his theory of Special Relativity which states that all observers will measure the speed of light to be the same no matter what their state of uniform linear motion is, i.e. that distance and time are perceived differently by every observer.
Originally posted by Thundar
I'll have to look up the *special relativity* theory that you've mentioned a bit more in depth, as I'm not extremely familiar with it. Thus far from what I've read, and from my limited understanding of it, it has to do with particles travelling at light speed, and how its speculated that these particles would be viewed by all in the same way when travelling at light speed.I'm assuming by you presenting this argument, you'll in some way relate this theory to how the concept time itself should be viewed similarly to how one views these particles moving at light speed. This in turn will support your argument of... "Nothing that exists outside of time can be the cause of temporal changes."
I'm sure shortly after, you'll follow up this argument by insinuating how my lack of or limited knowledge of the theory, prevents me from being able to understand how time works, which is something you clearly understand with your superior knowledge of time and Einstein's "special relativity" theory.
If you understand this, then save yourself the trouble of arguing this:
Originally posted by Thundar
But as we've already "tautologically" discussed, all of this has little bearing on the fact that both of us still possess a very limited understanding time, specifically when getting into extremely speculative topics involving what is possible for one to do(and not to do) when controlling it. Also take note that such an argument is coming from two people who have no control over time, nor have they existed outside of it, making any suppositions we have about what is possible "outside of time" seem even more ridiculous.
Originally posted by Thundar
Sure, we may have ways to measure time, but even those means of measurement aren't really concrete, as they are primarly based on our observations of the physical world around us(i.e., night/day, revolutions of the earth around the sun, location of stars, people and animals aging, etc) - as well as distinct periods of time in which important historical events have occured.(i.e., birth of Christ)To insiniuate that one conclusively knows what can be done inside and outside of time based on such limited knowledge, is the height of all arrogance, and I'm completely dumbfounded that an intelligent individual such as yourself can't even recognize how silly it sounds.
[list][*]Time is currently one of the few fundamental quantities.
[*]Fundamental quantities are a set of units for physical quantities from which every other unit can be generated.
[*]Other fundamental quantities include length, mass, and space.[/list]
Please refrain from posting if you do not understand what is being discussed.
Originally posted by FeceMan
Dude, you so can't manifest temporal acceleration and then another power during the apparent time frame...
Temporal phasing would not necessarily preclude the manifestation of other powers within an accelerated field, but those powers with time-dependent properties would be distorted to the degree of relative fifth-dimensional displacement.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
How many Gentiles believed? "As many as had been appointed to eternal life." The inclusion of the additional verses changes nothing.
* that's why i'm asking you, if you know what Gentiles are... Gentiles are known to be unbelievers and non-Jewish... now, how does free will gets into the picture? the Jews believed that they are the ones who will be saved by God, not the Gentiles... that notion is true in the time of Moses...
"Then he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and he came and stood before him; and he said, Behold, I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel; so accept now a present from your servant."
II Kings 5:15
* there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... are the Gentiles appointed to eternal life in this dispensation? nope, my friend because there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... now, what happened next? time comes when Israel turned their backs on God, the result is...
"For a long time Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law;"
II Chronicles 15:3
* God left them... and Jesus said...
"Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it."
Matthew 21:43
* then, Saint Paul came along, and together with Saint Barnabas, they preached the word of God to the Gentiles, because they (Saint Paul and Saint Barnabas) were commanded to be the light of the Gentiles... God offered salvation to the Gentiles in the time of Christianity... whereas in the time of Moses, there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... i hope this clears things up...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Why did they not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved? Because God sent "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth." Again, the inclusion of the additional verses changes nothing.
* no no no, my friend... that's not the way to interpret it... verses 9 & 10 was written (obviously) before verses 11 & 12... so verses 11 & 12 are the effect and verses 9 & 10 are the cause, not the other way around...
"The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders,
And with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false,
So that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
II Thessalonians 2:9-12
* the point is, why did God sent them a strong delusion? because they refused to love the truth... take note of the conjunctions, my friend...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I have not misrepresented or taken out of context any of the verses in question.
* oh, yes you did, my friend... yes, you did...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I wish I could say the same to you.
* yeah, me too...
Originally posted by Bardock42
Prove it, please.
* sure...
Originally posted by debbiejo
And there wasn't a church at that time.
"And the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.
And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:"
Exodus 4:21-22
* take note of Moses and Israel, God's firstborn...
"And so fearful was the appearance, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:
But ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels,
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,"
Hebrews 12:21-23
* the Church of the Firstborn -> Israel...
Originally posted by debbiejo
Also there was no teaching of hell by Moses.
"The law and the prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently."
Luke 16:16
* time element... the law of Moses and the prophets in the Old Testament were until John the Baptist... in the book of prophet Daniel...
"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."
Daniel 12:2
* the opposite of everlasting life is everlasting contempt... that is hell... and it was mentioned in one of the books written by Moses...
"For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains."
Deuteronomy 32:22
* and hell was also mentioned several verses in the Old Testament... 😉
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
In no way does the above quote state:Rather, it is in reference to his theory of Special Relativity which states that all observers will measure the speed of light to be the same no matter what their state of uniform linear motion is, i.e. that distance and time are perceived differently by every observer.
I think you're inferring a lot more than I am from Einstein's quote. Past present, and future represent aspects of "time", so it's quite obvious the allusion being made is that the concept of time itself is "illusionary." So regardless of any conclusions one might draw when observing particles moving at light speeds, time itself still appears to us as a very abstract concept, and seems to not be dependant upon our observations of it.
That being stated, this still doesn't in any way refute the initial point of our knowledge, control, and experiences outside of time being extremely limited, or quite frankly put, non-existant. To insinuate otherwise is very silly.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
[list][*]Time is currently one of the few fundamental quantities.[*]Fundamental quantities are a set of units for physical quantities from which every other unit can be generated.
[*]Other fundamental quantities include length, mass, and space.[/list]
Unless one was present at the beginning of time, then at some point they have to conclude that regardless of how "fundemantal" the methods used to measure time are, our knowledge and understanding of what time represents, is still very faith-based and speculative.
Stop being an idiot.
Originally posted by Thundar
I think you're inferring a lot more than I am from Einstein's quote. Past present, and future represent aspects of "time", so it's quite obvious the allusion being made is that the concept of time itself is "illusionary." So regardless of any conclusions one might draw when observing particles moving at light speeds, time itself still appears to us as a very abstract concept, and seems to not be dependant upon our observations of it.That being stated, this still doesn't in any way refute the initial point of our knowledge, control, and experiences outside of time being extremely limited, or quite frankly put, non-existant. To insinuate otherwise is very silly.
In the quote in question, "the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion," is a direct reference to his theory of Special Relativity in which "distance and time are perceived differently by every observer."
In other words, why is the distinction between the past, present, and future only an illusion? Because "distance and time are perceived differently by every observer."
Originally posted by Thundar
Unless one was present at the beginning of time, then at some point they have to conclude that regardless of how "fundemantal" the methods used to measure time are, our knowledge and understanding of what time represents, is still very faith-based and speculative.
The term "fundamental quantity does not refer to the methods of measuring time. Rather, that time itself is a quantity so fundamental that all other methods of measurement may be derived from it.
Originally posted by peejayd
* that's why i'm asking you, if you know what Gentiles are... Gentiles are known to be unbelievers and non-Jewish... now, how does free will gets into the picture? the Jews believed that they are the ones who will be saved by God, not the Gentiles... that notion is true in the time of Moses...* there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... are the Gentiles appointed to eternal life in this dispensation? nope, my friend because there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... now, what happened next? time comes when Israel turned their backs on God, the result is...
* God left them... and Jesus said...
* then, Saint Paul came along, and together with Saint Barnabas, they preached the word of God to the Gentiles, because they (Saint Paul and Saint Barnabas) were commanded to be the light of the Gentiles... God offered salvation to the Gentiles in the time of Christianity... whereas in the time of Moses, there is no God in all the earth but in Israel... i hope this clears things up...
Again, how many Gentiles believed? "As many as had been appointed to eternal life."
Originally posted by peejayd
* no no no, my friend... that's not the way to interpret it... verses 9 & 10 was written (obviously) before verses 11 & 12... so verses 11 & 12 are the effect and verses 9 & 10 are the cause, not the other way around...* the point is, why did God sent them a strong delusion? because they refused to love the truth... take note of the conjunctions, my friend...
Why would God send "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth," if they had already rejected the love of the truth so as to not be saved?
In other words, why would God send "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth," if they already believed what is false, and did not believe the truth?
Surely, God is not redundant.
No, they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved, because God sent "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth."
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Temporal phasing would not necessarily preclude the manifestation of other powers within an accelerated field, but those powers with time-dependent properties would be distorted to the degree of relative fifth-dimensional displacement.
Originally posted by FeceMan
So, you're saying that they'd be empowered and maximized.
Not at all.
Imagine two men; one who is in an accelerated time frame, and one who is not.
Now imagine that each man fires a gun at a target from the same distance.
Due to the laws of conservation in physics, the bullet fired in the accelerated time frame will have a velocity 30 times greater than that of its non-accelerated counterpart, but with 1/30 of its mass.
Therefore, the total kinetic energy of both bullets is equal upon impact.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Again, how many Gentiles believed? "As many as had been appointed to eternal life."
* even so, my friend... WHEN were the Gentiles appointed to eternal life? remember II Kings 5:15, there is no God in all the earth but in Israel in the time of Moses onwards... and when we say PREDESTINATION, it denotes foreordainment, from the beginning, in advanced... are the Gentiles foreordained in the time of Moses? no, my friend...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Why would God send "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth," if they had already rejected the love of the truth so as to not be saved?In other words, why would God send "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth," if they already believed what is false, and did not believe the truth?
Surely, God is not redundant.
No, they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved, because God sent "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth."
* let us read the verse again:
"The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders,
And with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false,
So that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
II Thessalonians 2:9-12
* firstly, the conjunctions that tells us which is which... "because" tells us of the cause and "therefore" tells us of the effect...
* secondly, the act of refusing is a very big proof of possessing the power of free will...
* thirdly...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
In other words, why would God send "upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they may be judged who did not believe the truth," if they already believed what is false, and did not believe the truth?Surely, God is not redundant.
* they did not believe what is false in the first place, they REFUSED to love the truth... it means that they DO know what is true and what is false... what they did was refused to love the truth... refusing to love the truth is different from believing what is false, so God is surely not redundant... 😉
"And the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:"Israel the people not a church..."Let my people go", Israel
Exodus 4:21-22
innumerable hosts of angels,This does not mention Israel as the first born church and it's not in the OT.
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,"
Hebrews 12:21-23
"The law and the prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently."This is not Moses speaking. I said that Moses didn't teach about hell.
Luke 16:16
"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."This is not Moses speaking. And contempt doesn't mean hell either.
Daniel 12:2
"For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains."
Deuteronomy 32:22
* and hell was also mentioned several verses in the Old Testament... winkHell only means death of the body, grave..etc. And again Moses never taught hell. And why not? He is the giver of the law, surely he would have mentioned it.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
In the quote in question, "the distinction between past, present, and future is only an illusion," is a direct reference to his theory of Special Relativity in which "distance and time are perceived differently by every observer."In other words, why is the distinction between the past, present, and future only an illusion? Because "distance and time are perceived differently by every observer."
😆
Holy over-redundancy for the sake of confusion and tautological mis-representation Batman!!
Now you're just making stuff up. The quote in question was actually taken from a letter written to the family of Michele Besso; a long time friend of Einstein's.
The inference made to Besso's family by Einstein upon his death, was that although his friend had passed away, death was of little consequence to him or others, since time(i.e., past, present, and future) - was only an illusion and that the "timelessness" of life itself, alluded to Besso's presence still being with all of them.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The term "fundamental quantity does not refer to the methods of measuring time. Rather, that time itself is a quantity so fundamental that all other methods of measurement may be derived from it.
😆
When one infers that something is quantitative, regardless of whether or not they infer to it being fundementally so, then logically - they will always be referring to some form of measurement.
*very bad try with both of your above quoted arguments...my friend..😉