Can you handle the Truth?

Started by Allankles432 pages

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I don't follow you.

You cannot believe that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life on one hand and believe in evolution on the other hand. That is blatant contradiction. It is like saying I do at the altar to your wife in one breath then saying I don't in the next.

Why not? We can't say macroevolution happened for sure or not, but that shouldn't affect what religion you believe in.

If it's about God as a whole you can choose to believe that God created evolution. It really isn't that radical to believe in both because the two ideas are not on the same level.

Originally posted by Ordo
But there is a real jeebus!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jeebus

😆

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[Absolutes: gravity is universal,

Actually Dark Energy violates this.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
air (h2o) is necessary for life,

First of all Air and H2O are not the same thing. Secondly there are a variety of bacteria capable of living without either.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
you cannot be in two places at the same time.

Violated quite often on the quantum level.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I don't follow you.

You cannot believe that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life on one hand and believe in evolution on the other hand. That is blatant contradiction. It is like saying I do at the altar to your wife in one breath then saying I don't in the next.


What is necessary to gain salvation? Tell me the exact, unalterable criteria that form the minimum for it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
you cannot be in two places at the same time.

Originally posted by Ordo
Probly also false.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Violated quite often on the quantum level.

interesting technicality here.

if by "you" JIA is referring to any piece of matter, they yes, it is, as best we can tell, violated by some quantum phenomenon (though it is arguable if this is real or simply represents our inability to explain things).

if he means "you" as in a single individual, it is more complicated. Theoretically, a person could be cloned and a brain reverse engineered to be identical to your own (both, especially the last, are currently outside of our technological abilities), in which case "you" would be in two locations and there would be no way for an outside observer to differentiate between the original and the clone.

However, when talking about quantum level phenomenon, like photons appearing to go through 2 slits at the same time, it is almost assuredly that this could not occur. Much like the mathematical reasons for why consciousness cannot be a quantum phenomenon, quantum interactions are far too unstable to last in such a complex system. A single photon in a weird experiment? sure. Every atom in a person's body simultaneously?

The only way I could see would be a sort of Star Trek style transporter which, instead of disassembling an individual, simply reproduced them, which is essentially the cloning option. In both cases it is entirely arguable as to whether the new "clone" represents you being in two places or two identical things being in two locations, the latter being fairly unimpressive (aside from the identical human aspect).

But, if we are talking about the inner "you", the "you" that feels like it is sitting in your head controlling your actions, that will not occur. Mainly, such experiences are governed by the Newtonian physics of our neural biology, not quantum effects, which only occur in the presence of stimuli on receptors. Essentially, you would be talking about two different bodies receiving different information which is eventually ending up in the same place, this inner "you". Unfortunately, this inner "you" is largely illusory and cannot receive information that is coming into the sensory organs of another person, except indirectly. The best you could ever have is two identical biological entities, whether cloned or quantum-ly replicated, with separate minds. Depending on where you draw that "you", it could be either evidence for or against "you" being in two places at once.

lol, ha, so much writing. That was even more just to see if I could explain the concept properly 😛

Originally posted by Ordo
Probly false, besides, gravity cannot be explained by science, which is less than the proof for evolution (which you ignore)

AIR is not necessary for life

H2O is WATER, dumbarse

Probly also false.

Conclusion: You suck at fact/science.

I meant oxygen not h2o just goes to show that I am human.

Gravity is universal this is an absolute.

Nothing living can continue to live without oxygen is also an absolute.

You cannot be in two places at the same time is also an absolute.

Time is linear and moves as it were in one direction. Hence, you cannot be in the past and in the present simultaneously. This is also an absolute.

Originally posted by inimalist
interesting technicality here.

if by "you" JIA is referring to any piece of matter, they yes, it is, as best we can tell, violated by some quantum phenomenon (though it is arguable if this is real or simply represents our inability to explain things).

if he means "you" as in a single individual, it is more complicated. Theoretically, a person could be cloned and a brain reverse engineered to be identical to your own (both, especially the last, are currently outside of our technological abilities), in which case "you" would be in two locations and there would be no way for an outside observer to differentiate between the original and the clone.

However, when talking about quantum level phenomenon, like photons appearing to go through 2 slits at the same time, it is almost assuredly that this could not occur. Much like the mathematical reasons for why consciousness cannot be a quantum phenomenon, quantum interactions are far too unstable to last in such a complex system. A single photon in a weird experiment? sure. Every atom in a person's body simultaneously?

The only way I could see would be a sort of Star Trek style transporter which, instead of disassembling an individual, simply reproduced them, which is essentially the cloning option. In both cases it is entirely arguable as to whether the new "clone" represents you being in two places or two identical things being in two locations, the latter being fairly unimpressive (aside from the identical human aspect).

But, if we are talking about the inner "you", the "you" that feels like it is sitting in your head controlling your actions, that will not occur. Mainly, such experiences are governed by the Newtonian physics of our neural biology, not quantum effects, which only occur in the presence of stimuli on receptors. Essentially, you would be talking about two different bodies receiving different information which is eventually ending up in the same place, this inner "you". Unfortunately, this inner "you" is largely illusory and cannot receive information that is coming into the sensory organs of another person, except indirectly. The best you could ever have is two identical biological entities, whether cloned or quantum-ly replicated, with separate minds. Depending on where you draw that "you", it could be either evidence for or against "you" being in two places at once.

lol, ha, so much writing. That was even more just to see if I could explain the concept properly 😛

I mean you physically.

You physically cannot occupy space in two different places simultaneously. For example, you cannot physically be in Paris France and London England at the same time.

This is an absolute.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I mean you physically.

You physically cannot occupy space in two different places simultaneously. For example, you cannot physically be in Paris France and London England at the same time.

This is an absolute.

No, that's a theory. One that quantum mechanics has made questionable.

Originally posted by King Kandy
What is necessary to gain salvation? Tell me the exact, unalterable criteria that form the minimum for it.

You must believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that God has raised Him from the dead. You must confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. But at the same time you cannot believe in evolution because this is like saying I don't at the altar after saying I do.

Originally posted by Allankles
Why not? We can't say macroevolution happened for sure or not, but that shouldn't affect what religion you believe in.

If it's about God as a whole you can choose to believe that God created evolution. It really isn't that radical to believe in both because the two ideas are not on the same level.

Creation happened the way God describes in His Word--the Bible--or it didn't.

There is no alternative.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You must believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that God has raised Him from the dead. You must confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. But at the same time you cannot believe in evolution because this is like saying I don't at the altar after saying I do.

The third criteria has nothing to do with the first two. So, you are saying that there are three and only three criteria for gaining salvation?

1. Belief in Jesus
2. ... not really sure because you wrote weird but i'm guessing this is something like "repent to jesus".
3. Belief that evolution is false.

These are the three criteria that gain salvation, correct? Or have you willingly misinformed me?

.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Creation happened the way God describes in His Word--the Bible--or it didn't.

There is no alternative.

The bible is subject to human error, as it was written by man and as you know, man is flawed.

So yet another possibility, God created the process of evolution, but those being inspired by God during the scribbling erred and wrote down the wrong thing, it happens.

The list goes on.

Originally posted by King Kandy
The third criteria has nothing to do with the first two. So, you are saying that there are three and only three criteria for gaining salvation?

1. Belief in Jesus
2. ... not really sure because you wrote weird but i'm guessing this is something like "repent to jesus".
3. Belief that evolution is false.

These are the three criteria that gain salvation, correct? Or have you willingly misinformed me?

To believe in Jesus Christ is to believe in His Word. You don't confess Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior and then deny that His Word is true. It does not work that way. It is like saying I do at the altar to your bride then denying that everything that your bride has said to you up to that point is not true.

Originally posted by Robtard
The bible is subject to human error, as it was written by man and as you know, man is flawed.

So yet another possibility, God created the process of evolution, but those being inspired by God during the scribbling erred and wrote down the wrong thing, it happens.

The list goes on.

You are free to believe that if you wish but I choose to believe that the Bible is infallible.

The Bible is given by inspiration of God hence, it is without error.

It was written by Paul. Who was a misogynist, evidently jealous of Jesus's success and wanted his own type following and his own rules which he liked. Jesus was chilled out reformist and Paul was this uptight person with many complexes. He tried to cure his complexes through writing the Bible.

True story.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There are no real warlocks and wizards.

This man was a voodoo priest before becoming a believer in Jesus Christ.

YouTube video

http://spiritlessons.com/Documents/Bishop_Earthquake_Kelley/Bishop_Earthquake_Kelly.htm

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
To believe in Jesus Christ is to believe in His Word. You don't confess Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior and then deny that His Word is true. It does not work that way. It is like saying I do at the altar to your bride then denying that everything that your bride has said to you up to that point is not true.

Then once again, I ask you to tell me what the bare minimum criteria for salvation is. Evidently your earlier one was not complete.

Originally posted by Allankles
Why not? We can't say macroevolution happened for sure or not, but that shouldn't affect what religion you believe in.

Since there is no such thing as macroevolution in modern scientific theory, its as irrelevant as alchemy.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I meant oxygen not h2o just goes to show that I am human.

Not, it means you are dumb.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Gravity is universal this is an absolute.

False.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Nothing living can continue to live without oxygen is also an absolute.

False.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You cannot be in two places at the same time is also an absolute.

Theoretically False.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Time is linear and moves as it were in one direction. Hence, you cannot be in the past and in the present simultaneously. This is also an absolute

Theoretically false.

Good Job: Zero out of Five

Originally posted by King Kandy
Then once again, I ask you to tell me what the bare minimum criteria for salvation is. Evidently your earlier one was not complete.

I have already given you the bare minimum if there is such a thing. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Word made flesh.

You cannot separate the Lord Jesus from the Word. Jesus is even called the Word of God.

John 1:1, 14
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Revelation 19:13
He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His Name is called The Word of God.