Understanding LGBTQ sexuality

147,755 Views | 1803 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by Forest Bueller_bf
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 12:32p, 12/22/23
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science. God is revealed in the Christ Child (incarnation) with the eyes of faith not the eyes of natural. The eyes of faith see love in the Christ child and God's gift of grace. I can see the Incarnation of the Christ made known in Jesus. I do not need a supernatural that flies in the face of reality. Surely, you believe in reality.

If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. Those are all supernatural events, not scientific. Much of scientific theory is man trying to explain the supernatural, whether they realize it or not. Sir Isaac Newton understood this; many do not m. When they leave God out of the equation they get it very wrong, often embarrassing themselves in the process.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Reply Quote
3
Harrison Bergeron
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 1:18p, 12/22/23
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science. God is revealed in the Christ Child (incarnation) with the eyes of faith not the eyes of natural. The eyes of faith see love in the Christ child and God's gift of grace. I can see the Incarnation of the Christ made known in Jesus. I do not need a supernatural that flies in the face of reality. Surely, you believe in reality.
We know ... you just believe in doodling little kids.
Reply Quote
3
GrowlTowel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Harrison Bergeron • 1:24p, 12/22/23
Harrison Bergeron said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science. God is revealed in the Christ Child (incarnation) with the eyes of faith not the eyes of natural. The eyes of faith see love in the Christ child and God's gift of grace. I can see the Incarnation of the Christ made known in Jesus. I do not need a supernatural that flies in the face of reality. Surely, you believe in reality.
We know ... you just believe in doodling little kids.
And abortion. Lots and lots of abortions. Especially for the blacks.
Reply Quote
5
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:13p, 12/22/23
For some people, science has become their God. How foolish.

"The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good."
Psalm 14:1

"The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt doing abominable iniquity; there is none that does good."
Psalm 52:1

"For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened."
Romans 1:21

"Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things."
Romans 1:22-23
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
BusyTarpDuster2017
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 9:02p, 12/22/23
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science....
Science points to the supernatural.

Arno Penzias, Nobel Prize winner in physics:

"Astronomy leads us to an unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing and delicately balanced to provide exactly the conditions required to support life. In the absence of an absurdly-improbable accident, the observations of modern science seem to suggest an underlying, one might say, supernatural plan."
Reply Quote
4
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 9:05p, 12/22/23
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science. God is revealed in the Christ Child (incarnation) with the eyes of faith not the eyes of natural. The eyes of faith see love in the Christ child and God's gift of grace. I can see the Incarnation of the Christ made known in Jesus. I do not need a supernatural that flies in the face of reality. Surely, you believe in reality.


Would you like some alphabet soup to go with your word salad?

Yes, your arguments are similar to Gnosticism. I did not fail to make a connection, you failed to accept it, just like you fail to accept Jesus as the Son of God.

I don't need to prove the supernatural to demonstrate that one cannot believe in the Incarnation while not believing in the supernatural.

You may not "need" the supernatural, but you sure could use some basic logic lessons. The incarnation is God taking on flesh and dwelling among us. This does not depend on "the eyes of faith" to be true. It is either a true, supernatural event or it is not true at all. If it is true it does not depend for its veracity on whether you or I think it is true.

Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:08p, 12/22/23
F'off Taylor Swift!

We have a leading candidate for Woman of the Year 2024! I was SHOCKED that this person was born with male body parts.

Reply Quote
1 edit
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30p, 12/22/23
I'd rather be trapped in Buffalo Bill's pit putting lotion on my skin than get coaching from this 'person'...

Reply Quote
1 edit
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Bauer • 10:39p, 12/22/23
These freaks might be the ultimate misogynists.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Reply Quote
2
Waco1947
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to historian • 8:40a, 12/23/23
"If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. These are faith assertions not scientific ones. These declarations for me are faith and as such I believe them but they are not science and you cannot prove that they are science. Your argument needs more than "yes they are!"
Theology is done on the basis of faith; theology only rationalizes what is accepted on the basis of faith in the first place. We, Christians, hold as delf-evident that God is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. "

There is no such thing in science. Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.


Reply Quote
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 9:36a, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
"If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. These are faith assertions not scientific ones. These declarations for me are faith and as such I believe them but they are not science and you cannot prove that they are science. Your argument needs more than "yes they are!"
Theology is done on the basis of faith; theology only rationalizes what is accepted on the basis of faith in the first place. We, Christians, hold as delf-evident that God is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. "

There is no such thing in science. Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.


sciencists who try to prove that there is not a God are on a fools errand because science is designed to prove natural phenomenon. Some of the most renowned scientist for hundreds of years understood this, it's only the current last generation or two of scientists who believe that science is a replacement.

For all those that say that the Bible is just a bunch of stories, there is correlating and confirming information between the Judean Bible, and the cuneiform wall reliefs found in the Assyrian palace at Nineveh.

The Assyrians defeated the Judeans about 40 times, except for the capital city of Jerusalem, where Hezekiah was promised by God that Jerusalem will not fall.

Simple question, can you believe that man has invented or fixed anything? Or do you believe that God has instructed man to create things?

Have you ever thought about the fact that there were a dozen inventors around the world all working on the same idea at the same time, this has happened for multiple different inventions across the last several hundred years? The lightbulb, the FM, radio, even the mechanical heart.

The evolution of science has moved through God, not in spite of Him.
Reply Quote
2
KaiBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 10:01a, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
"If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. These are faith assertions not scientific ones. These declarations for me are faith and as such I believe them but they are not science and you cannot prove that they are science. Your argument needs more than "yes they are!"
Theology is done on the basis of faith; theology only rationalizes what is accepted on the basis of faith in the first place. We, Christians, hold as delf-evident that God is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. "

There is no such thing in science. Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.


You have been blathering the same circular arguments for many years. Round and round you go.

Bottom line is that you simply have wasted countless hours attempting to justify your own self created ' theology ' . A theology that is completely at odds with the core values of legitimate Christianity. A theology invented in the vain attempt to rationalize your destruction behavior.










Reply Quote
1
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 10:21a, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
"If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. These are faith assertions not scientific ones. These declarations for me are faith and as such I believe them but they are not science and you cannot prove that they are science. Your argument needs more than "yes they are!"
Theology is done on the basis of faith; theology only rationalizes what is accepted on the basis of faith in the first place. We, Christians, hold as delf-evident that God is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. "

There is no such thing in science. Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.




How many scientists do we need to see who accept things on the basis of faith for you to admit you are wrong? Is one enough? Ten? Fifty? There are innumerable scientists who accept things on faith.

If a person disbelieves the existence of God, as you do, it makes him an atheist, not a scientist.

These things that you claim are not scientific assertions (that God created the universe or that Jesus, God Incarnate, rose from the dead) are not "scientific" assertions in that they are experimental tests, but they are assertions of physical fact.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Waco1947
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:22a, 12/23/23
Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.
Reply Quote
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 10:26a, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.


Again, how many scientists do we need to find to prove that your assertion that scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith is false? According to science, we only need one.

God does not need to be reconciled to science. The fools errand is yours with your claim that God does not actually exist.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
nein51
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:26a, 12/23/23
Like the claim that men can be women? That science? I'm supposed to believe those dudes? lol. Riiiiiight.
Reply Quote
3
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 11:40a, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.

Here is a list of some of the most famous scientists in history who believed in God.

Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Arthur Compton (1892 1962)
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Ernst Haeckel (1834 1919)
Erwin Schrödinger (1887 1961)
Francis Bacon (1561-1627)
Francis Collins (Born 1950)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Gottfried Leibniz (1646 1716)
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Guglielmo Marconi (1874 1937)
Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
James Clerk Maxwell (1831 1879)
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
John Eccles (1903 1997)
Louis Pasteur (1822-1895)
Max Planck (1858-1947)
Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
Robert A. Millikan (1868 1953)
Werner Heisenberg (1901 1976)
William Harvey (1578 1657)
William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)

I wonder why quantum physicist nick named it the "god" particle..

Science flows through God, science does not disprove God
Reply Quote
3
Oldbear83
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 11:50a, 12/23/23
Waco, your post continues a proof of your divorce from Christ.

You can either put God first or Man first. By demanding God bend the knee to Science, you have - by definition - abandoned God as King.

Your every post demands your own opinion be held superior to Scripture.

Good luck with your trust in laboratories over the Creator of the Universe.
Reply Quote
4
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 8:09p, 12/23/23
Waco1947 said:
"If you do not believe in the supernatural then you do not believe in God. He is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. These are faith assertions not scientific ones. These declarations for me are faith and as such I believe them but they are not science and you cannot prove that they are science. Your argument needs more than "yes they are!"
Theology is done on the basis of faith; theology only rationalizes what is accepted on the basis of faith in the first place. We, Christians, hold as delf-evident that God is infinite, spoke the universe into existence, sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins, and He rose from the dead three days later. "

There is no such thing in science. Scientists cannot accept things on the basis of faith. Every claim must be verified, and contrasted with experience itself.

Theologians who attempt to reconcile a "supernatural God" with science are on a fools errand.



I don't need to prove them because they are self evident facts.

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above declared his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge." Psalm 19:1-2

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world." Romans 1:18-20

Science may not be able to prove these facts but science also cannot disprove them. They come from a higher authority, a perfect God while science comes from imperfect men & women.

I'm neither a scientist nor a theologian but I understand enough of both to see where they agree and where they don't. And I see that science doesn't have all the answers.

You act like science is able to provide the facts and is trustworthy. We all know better than that: climate scientists have been manipulating us for decades with predictions of doom that are ALWAYS proven wrong. Heck, I remember before all the Global Warming hoax they were predicting a new ice age! In recent years, we have Dr Fauci & the rest of the establishment scientists who lied repeatedly about COVID. There are many more examples.

Too many scientists are bought off (using taxpayers' money) by corrupt politicians with an evil agenda and too many (not necessarily the same group) are so arrogant they think they know it all or some say will. They are fools trying to play God but the One True God is greater than all of them. Faith is an easy choice because God never fails.

"Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, 'He catches the wise in their craftiness.'"
I Corinthians 3:18-19
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Reply Quote
2
2 edits
JXL
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Waco1947 • 12:43a, 12/24/23
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
D. C. Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
DC You have argued vociferously and repeatedly against the supernatural, where God intervenes in the natural world. True

Instead, the reality of God, you have argued, is exclusively "spiritual." True, again. God is spiritual.

Romans 8: 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you.


Do you deny this? If so, I am a bit concerned that you may suffer from memory problems. I do not deny what you are saying. Indeed, it is a good representation of my beliefs

This argument is in the same family of arguments that Gnosticism is in. Please this connection for me. My understanding of the Spirit and spiritual is captured in Romans 8 above


1 John 4:9-10, which you quote in your next response, goes entirely against your argument against the supernatural. When God "sent his one and only Son into the world," this represents a supernatural act. This represents God personally intervening in the physical, natural world. There is no other explanation for the incarnation as described as in the Gospels.

9This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Your thought process, where the all loving God is spiritual, is in the same family of thought as Gnosticism, where there's a lower God who made the material Eve in the true God whose world and a higher god who is spiritual and can only be known throughelieve specialt bel knowledge. In certain Gnostic thought, Jesus was not actually God in the flesh but he only "seemed" to have a physical body. It is not that you are espousing, as it were, "orthodox Gnosticism," but your arguments share a number of similar attributes with Gnosticism, particularly when it comes to the physical vs. spiritual.
I don't believe in any "lower god" but I believe in God., the one true God


You need not believe in a "lower god," but the God that you do believe in is entirely beyond the physical and never intervenes in the physical world. In that sense, you do believe in a "higher god," as it were, and that is similar to gnostic thought. Again, you aren't promoting pure Gnosticism, but, as they say in Los Angeles area real estate to make people feel like they are close to the important people by calling neighborhoods "Beverly Hills-adjacent," your arguments are Gnosticism-adjacent. You fail to make a connection.

Assertions need some logical evidence which you failed to produce.

You don't believe in the Incarnation because you don't believe in the supernatural True!
and the Incarnation is supernatural.

So "the one true God" you espouse isn't the Christian God, it's a different God of some sort.

You need to come home.
"The Incarnation is supernatural" I do not believe in the supernatural. What is your proof of the supernatural? If the world of which I John speaks happens within the confines science then you asking me to believe in your fantasy of the "supernatural". I do not believe in the supernatural but I believe in science. God is revealed in the Christ Child (incarnation) with the eyes of faith not the eyes of natural. The eyes of faith see love in the Christ child and God's gift of grace. I can see the Incarnation of the Christ made known in Jesus. I do not need a supernatural that flies in the face of reality. Surely, you believe in reality.




You appear to have answered my question by saying that you are right and John the Apostle is wrong.
Reply Quote
6
KaiBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:05a, 12/24/23
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KaiBear • 12:24p, 12/24/23
KaiBear said:
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?


Can God save a hooker?
Reply Quote
4
KaiBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to D. C. Bear • 12:35p, 12/24/23
D. C. Bear said:
KaiBear said:
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?


Can God save a hooker?


Yes

It it helps if the hooker is

A. Mentally stable.
B. A real human and not a computer bot.


So why continue year after year ?
Reply Quote
2
ShooterTX
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to D. C. Bear • 1:19p, 12/24/23
D. C. Bear said:
KaiBear said:
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?


Can God save a hooker?
99% of the time, a hooker is either some form of slave; or they have chosen to be a hooker out of desperation.

So it is very easy to "save" a hooker... all you need to do is set them free from their situation, and teach them that there is a savior for their souls as well.

In this case, Waco47 has made a conscious decision to reject Jesus and follow Satan.

Comparing Waco47 to a hooker is a major insult to the prostitute.
ShooterTX
Reply Quote
6
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:39p, 12/24/23
c'mon man - this has to be trolling at this point.

Back in the day, this is when candid camera or Punk'd would come out and say "gotcha"!!

Reply Quote
2 edits
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Bauer • 3:09p, 12/24/23
With all of this trans craziness it's often very difficult to know whether these people ard genuinely nuts or very good pranksters. I tend to take most of them at face value. It's unfortunate that our culture is in a very real deteriorated state. Our country has been turning away from God wholesale through various psychoses (decades of the Sexual Revolution perversion, the Climate cult, rampant narcissism, rampant immaturity, racism run amok, CRT, cultural Marxism, etc).
Reply Quote
1
Harrison Bergeron
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to historian • 3:11p, 12/24/23
historian said:
With all of this trans craziness it's often very difficult to know whether these people ard genuinely nuts or very good pranksters. I tend to take most of them at face value. It's unfortunate that our culture is in a very real deteriorated state. Our country has been turning away from God wholesale through various psychoses (decades of the Sexual Revolution perversion, the Climate cult, rampant narcissism, rampant immaturity, racism run amok, CRT, cultural Marxism, etc).
I think there are some genuine pedos like 47, but many are just trying to get attention by being stupid.
Reply Quote
1
D. C. Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ShooterTX • 3:14p, 12/24/23
ShooterTX said:
D. C. Bear said:
KaiBear said:
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?


Can God save a hooker?
99% of the time, a hooker is either some form of slave; or they have chosen to be a hooker out of desperation.

So it is very easy to "save" a hooker... all you need to do is set them free from their situation, and teach them that there is a savior for their souls as well.

In this case, Waco47 has made a conscious decision to reject Jesus and follow Satan.

Comparing Waco47 to a hooker is a major insult to the prostitute.


Sorry you don't like the Ahmad Dixon reference, but the point still stands.

Do not underestimate the power of God's grace, even in the face of anti-Christian zealots such as Waco47. The chief example wrote much of the New Testament.
Reply Quote
1
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:34p, 12/24/23
Of course they did...

Reply Quote
1
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Harrison Bergeron • 3:42p, 12/24/23
Harrison Bergeron said:
historian said:
With all of this trans craziness it's often very difficult to know whether these people ard genuinely nuts or very good pranksters. I tend to take most of them at face value. It's unfortunate that our culture is in a very real deteriorated state. Our country has been turning away from God wholesale through various psychoses (decades of the Sexual Revolution perversion, the Climate cult, rampant narcissism, rampant immaturity, racism run amok, CRT, cultural Marxism, etc).
I think there are some genuine pedos like 47, but many are just trying to get attention by being stupid.

I don't know if he's a pedo, some other kind of pervert or criminal, a troll, or just someone who gets their jollies by stirring up debate. There are too many people who crave attention and often will do stupid things to get it. Social media is flooded with examples.
Reply Quote
4th and Inches
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Bauer • 4:12p, 12/24/23
Jack Bauer said:
Of course they did...

ugh.. its ok to add POC into all white historical stories, its ok to add alphabets into hetero historical stories but its not ok to actually portray the story correctly..

People have lost their minds!
Reply Quote
3
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4th and Inches • 4:42p, 12/24/23
It's perverts trying to insult all Catholics, probably because they refuse to lie about the immorality of the alphabet mafia.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Jack Bauer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:10p, 12/24/23
Reply Quote
4
historian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jack Bauer • 9:06p, 12/24/23
And possibly not totally sane!
Reply Quote
ShooterTX
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to D. C. Bear • 10:05p, 12/24/23
D. C. Bear said:
ShooterTX said:
D. C. Bear said:
KaiBear said:
Years of various posters attempting to have a rational discussion with a phoney ,minister ' who steadfastly refuses to disclose exactly where he obtained his theology ' degree ', bragged about promoting abortion to dozens of women, and ignores any and all teachings of Jesus Christ that don't fit into his lifestyle.


Why continue the effort ?

After all these years does anyone really believe 47 is going to admit his errors and embrace legitimate Christianity ?


Can God save a hooker?
99% of the time, a hooker is either some form of slave; or they have chosen to be a hooker out of desperation.

So it is very easy to "save" a hooker... all you need to do is set them free from their situation, and teach them that there is a savior for their souls as well.

In this case, Waco47 has made a conscious decision to reject Jesus and follow Satan.

Comparing Waco47 to a hooker is a major insult to the prostitute.


Sorry you don't like the Ahmad Dixon reference, but the point still stands.

Do not underestimate the power of God's grace, even in the face of anti-Christian zealots such as Waco47. The chief example wrote much of the New Testament.

I understand where your heart is here... but this is also a very poor comparison.

Saul was persecuting Christians because he didn't know any better. Once he was confronted with the truth, he did a 180 and became a major Christian preacher & missionary.

Waco has been presented with the truth over and over again... and he still rejects it. This is not someone who is in need of a Road to Damascus experience. This is someone who has been knocked to the ground, and then believed that it was a demonic attack.
ShooterTX
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.