Genuine Love

[JamesG]

Yes generally it is excreted if not used.  2 to 3 µg per day is the recommended daily dose exceeding that it will be excreted so in other words you are literally pissing away your money on that shit. Excessive intake of vitamins has shown to be a factor in certain cancers. This has only recently been studied and will likely cause damage to the holistic vitamin medical approach in the coming years. Any promise they make in their advertisement  is just bullshit as your body is not utilizing their "megadose"

[Bhim]

You lack grace Bhim despite your wonderful Hindu childhood.  You might consider limiting you input here as you are growing more and more unworthy of input not only in my mind, but I am sure others as well.

 

Be honest with me: you don't think I had a wonderful childhood.  You think my parents raised me to be a heathen idolater like them and that we should all be converted to Christianity.  Is that not correct?

[Guest end3]

 

You lack grace Bhim despite your wonderful Hindu childhood.  You might consider limiting you input here as you are growing more and more unworthy of input not only in my mind, but I am sure others as well.

 

Be honest with me: you don't think I had a wonderful childhood.  You think my parents raised me to be a heathen idolater like them and that we should all be converted to Christianity.  Is that not correct?

 

Wow Bhim, you saw the sarcasm.  Masters degree?

[Bhim]

You lack grace Bhim despite your wonderful Hindu childhood.  You might consider limiting you input here as you are growing more and more unworthy of input not only in my mind, but I am sure others as well.

 

I don't lack grace, I actively choose not to exercise it.  If I lacked social graces maybe I could be excused for my bad behavior.  As it stands, you are well within your rights to label me an unapologetic asshole.

 

Look around you, I'm not the only one who's ceased to take you seriously.  Feel free to cut out your word salads any time and start making cogent arguments.  It's a Sunday, and since I don't go to church I could do this all evening.

[Bhim]

Wow Bhim, you saw the sarcasm.  Masters degree?

 

Sarcasm is easy.  I saw beyond the sarcasm all the way to the feigned neutrality. If you think we're all a bunch of hell-bound pagans, I'd only ask that you admit it to me directly.

[Guest end3]

 

You lack grace Bhim despite your wonderful Hindu childhood.  You might consider limiting you input here as you are growing more and more unworthy of input not only in my mind, but I am sure others as well.

 

Be honest with me: you don't think I had a wonderful childhood.  You think my parents raised me to be a heathen idolater like them and that we should all be converted to Christianity.  Is that not correct?

Was my first assessment not good enough that you have to ask twice?  You lack grace.  And you choosing to not exercise it is evidence of your beliefs, no?

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

I think we  have been down this road before end except it wasn't chemistry it was psychology. I love that you have an interest in science I to was stunted in developing my education because of church that's why I studied art as my focus. I plan on going back to college to get a bachelors in physics  and then study quantum physics for a masters. That being said I understand my limitations while I feel I can learn almost all scientific concepts rather easily I don't know everything.

 

I personally understand what you are doing. I did this while I was in college and high school. Co-opting scientific concepts and creating mirror images of them in the bible or spirituality. I think I should be able to follow you so go ahead and give the example you were thinking of. I am a fast learner so don't hold back if I am lost at any point I will just study more about analytical chemistry since spiritual quantitative analysis is something you made up and I assume is based on the former.

Thanks James,

 

Just wondering why we see Christ becoming our "internal standard" when it come to the "measure of a man".....to the point of actually ingesting the standard into our bodies.  This seems more than just coincedental.  To my understanding, the reason we use internal standards in analytical measurement is so the standard is introduced to the matrix effects, analyst errors, etc., so that we can understand the effects of the matrix.  This seems very much like God the Father sending Christ to experience humanity.

 

As Bhimbo says, maybe this is not profound, but still seems so close to modern reality it is very hard for me to ignore.

 

The red  I highlighted to point out the assumptions you are making

The blue is what appears as word salad but I get what your saying and from my understanding seems close enough. Correct me if I am wrong but, The Internal standard is used to understand the effects of the analyte. I think this simplification will make your analogy easier to work with. So I will go from there

 

Jesus is the internal standard of which god can use to understand/measure humanity(the analyte).

 

when you break it down and simplify what you are saying it puts things into perspective. Now all this is based off of your highlighted assumptions. For the sake of argument lets say god is real. This does not make  your assumptions true. If god created the universe and is all knowing he would not need an internal standard. the internal standard is used because we are not all knowing and is an indirect way to perform analysis of an analyte we cannot directly measure. For your assumptions to be true you have to give up a lot from god to get there. I am glad you saw a parallel but, you are devaluing your god to get there. This smells like you are deconverting you just don't know it yet. It is also completely unnecessary even within Christian theology to make this comparison and likely would not be accepted by most honest theologians. You might find some support from apologists who have no problem lying/misrepresenting facts to convert people to god.

 

I realized the devaluation thing myself, yet per the fundamental story, I understand that God would "measure" Christ in our place, chosing the "soul" of the person though the measure of Christ.  "No man come to God except through Me" type thing.

 

now this is the point at which you will lose all of us. As you are unnecessarily adding terms from a scientific concept to Christian terminology. If you subtract the analytical chemistry from what you are describing it doesn't change anything. here is an example using a simple equation.  A+v=B      A+0=B

A= your concept v=the value related to your concept of analytical chemistry B=the principles of your concept or the core of your idea.

 

v=0 in other words it holds no value to your concept.

 

Adding this terminology just confuses your point. It also becomes deceptive and misrepresentational

 

Having to think out my analogy myself, but thanks.  So if God were the standard and Jesus the internal standard(IS), then the ratio would be ONE...lol,(we are ONE).  Sorry, I love it when that happens.  So if we place the IS into the unknown matrix(humanity), the Heaven bound would need to have a  "one" or no admittance.  It would be true that there would be no "ones" if the entity preparing the comparison/measurement had inherent error(s), but the assumption is that God has no error.......so we should expect a one when IS is added to the matrix, i.e. Christ to humanity. 

 

I kind of think this overrides the omni argument in that it's not a test of God, but a test of man, no?

[mymistake]

 

So if God were the standard and Jesus the internal standard(IS), then the ratio would be ONE...lol,(we are ONE).  Sorry, I love it when that happens.  So if we place the IS into the unknown matrix(humanity), the Heaven bound would need to have a  "one" or no admittance.  It would be true that there would be no "ones" if the entity preparing the comparison/measurement had inherent error(s), but the assumption is that God has no error.......so we should expect a one when IS is added to the matrix, i.e. Christ to humanity. 

 

I kind of think this overrides the omni argument in that it's not a test of God, but a test of man, no?

 

 

Are you drunk?  What does any of this mean?

[Bhim]

Was my first assessment not good enough that you have to ask twice?  You lack grace.  And you choosing to not exercise it is evidence of your beliefs, no?

 

Ah, I get it, you're conflating the two meanings of the word grace. Very funny. Hinduism has a wicked and graceless belief in karma, therefore we are incapable of showing grace to others; is that about right?

 

I'll be straight with you. My motivation for being an asshole with you is threefold. First, I have little patience for vague and vacuous arguments. Responding to thoughtless posts is both futile and frustrating, and I'm simply not going to waste time writing with more effort than you put into your comments. Second, you're a Christian, which essentially means you believe in subjecting non-Christians to a holocaust. This is exactly what the doctrine of eternal conscious torment entails, and there is no way around that except to be intellectually dishonest in your interpretation of the Bible (which would be fine with me, since this is what liberal Christians do). Third - and this is related to the second point - you like most evangelicals are incredibly dishonest about your beliefs. This is not at all directed personally at you. Evangelicals will rarely tell someone to their face "you're going to burn in hell." Oh yes, evangelicals make up excuses about how such bluntness will not bring anyone to Christ. But behind the semblance of pragmatism is the obvious fact that they know it is cruel and hateful to tell someone they will burn for all eternity. Evangelicals know they subscribe to a hateful belief, and yet continue to do so.

 

The third point is perhaps what I should focus on. Am I making a lot of general assumptions and projecting them onto you? Yes, but not without some reason. You come in here with highly general comments meant to entice us to convert to Christianity, but avoid the issue of eternal hell. You do not deny that you hold this belief, but refuse to affirm it either. What is it? Are you ashamed that Jesus is an order of magnitude worse than Hitler? You should be, and perhaps this indicates that you're not really a bad guy. Most evangelicals aren't. You guys hold to an evil and wicked belief simply because it's the central tenet of your faith. You don't want to leave the religion of your forefathers (just look at the unpleasant fate that's befallen many members of this forum who did). And as someone who chose not to leave the religion of my own ancestors, I can understand the sentiment, even if I don't respect it. But if you think we're going to hell, just say so and stop dancing around the issue. Because I'm not here to talk about particle physics. I already get paid to do that when I'm at work.

[Bhim]

Are you drunk?  What does any of this mean?

This is why I told him that his posts are vague and vacuous.  I'm willing to address End's arguments, but his posts have to actually mean something first.

[JamesG]

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

[Guest end3]

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

Not drunk MM, and I'm sorry y'all don't follow.  That is not my intention.

 

Let me try again.

 

If God sees Christ in us as a method of selection, then God should see 100% Christ in us rather than a some diminished amount of Christ because of Christ being human here on earth.  For example, if God looks at me or some human, there would be some ratio of "perfection" to "sin".....the creation/created being the value x and the subjection of x to it's environment(the fallen world), some value where x< 1.  But given that Christ is placed in us though faith and communion, then x = 1 still holds.....Christ not entering this world by a fallen father or a product of the sin environment.

 

Now, apply this to the internal standard analytical method and it seems rather slam dunkish.

 

I don't know that it proves anything other than if there are no non-truths to the comparison, we would consider it fact?  And I don't know at this jucture how we would consider a Spiritual fact.  Nor does science to some appreciable level.

 

Hope that helps.  It was amusing to me to see the ratio of  standard to the internal standard as one, much like Christ and The Father being One.  I'm not crazy, just had not seen that before.

[Bhim]

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

 

It's typical evangelical rhetorical style, to the extent that evangelicals are skilled in rhetoric at all.  Most evangelicals are stupid.  Or more specifically, according to (http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/evangelicals-and-education/) it would be better to say that a lot of stupid people are evangelicals.  They talk nonsense, and when called out on their foolishness they would have us believe that we aren't understanding the profundity of their claims.  Their answer to everything is either "you need to look more closely at the facts" or the more desperate "you can't see the truth unless you believe in Jesus."  Evangelical argumentative tactics follow the model of the New Testament: they promise a lot and deliver nothing.  And because they are so uneducated, they don't see why the rest of us find their line of reasoning absurd.

 

Oh, the same study cites that almost one half of Hindu Americans have post-graduate education and that we are much more likely to report high levels of income.  Evangelicals love to cite poverty numbers in India as evidence of God's curse on us for our alleged idolatry.  I'd love to see them explain this one.  Maybe they think we're praying to demons for money or something.

[Guest end3]

 

Was my first assessment not good enough that you have to ask twice?  You lack grace.  And you choosing to not exercise it is evidence of your beliefs, no?

 

Ah, I get it, you're conflating the two meanings of the word grace. Very funny. Hinduism has a wicked and graceless belief in karma, therefore we are incapable of showing grace to others; is that about right?

 

I'll be straight with you. My motivation for being an asshole with you is threefold. First, I have little patience for vague and vacuous arguments. Responding to thoughtless posts is both futile and frustrating, and I'm simply not going to waste time writing with more effort than you put into your comments. Second, you're a Christian, which essentially means you believe in subjecting non-Christians to a holocaust. This is exactly what the doctrine of eternal conscious torment entails, and there is no way around that except to be intellectually dishonest in your interpretation of the Bible (which would be fine with me, since this is what liberal Christians do). Third - and this is related to the second point - you like most evangelicals are incredibly dishonest about your beliefs. This is not at all directed personally at you. Evangelicals will rarely tell someone to their face "you're going to burn in hell." Oh yes, evangelicals make up excuses about how such bluntness will not bring anyone to Christ. But behind the semblance of pragmatism is the obvious fact that they know it is cruel and hateful to tell someone they will burn for all eternity. Evangelicals know they subscribe to a hateful belief, and yet continue to do so.

 

The third point is perhaps what I should focus on. Am I making a lot of general assumptions and projecting them onto you? Yes, but not without some reason. You come in here with highly general comments meant to entice us to convert to Christianity, but avoid the issue of eternal hell. You do not deny that you hold this belief, but refuse to affirm it either. What is it? Are you ashamed that Jesus is an order of magnitude worse than Hitler? You should be, and perhaps this indicates that you're not really a bad guy. Most evangelicals aren't. You guys hold to an evil and wicked belief simply because it's the central tenet of your faith. You don't want to leave the religion of your forefathers (just look at the unpleasant fate that's befallen many members of this forum who did). And as someone who chose not to leave the religion of my own ancestors, I can understand the sentiment, even if I don't respect it. But if you think we're going to hell, just say so and stop dancing around the issue. Because I'm not here to talk about particle physics. I already get paid to do that when I'm at work.

 

No, I truly believe you wish me to be some stereotypical redneck so you may claim discrimination.  Your previous post, probably because of your culture doesn't match with mine in the fact that we would not have been so offensive......grace per my definition.  I may not agree with your belief, but don't "feel sorry" for you that you have it or whatever circumstances lead your parents to produce progeny as yourself. 

[Guest end3]

 

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

 

It's typical evangelical rhetorical style, to the extent that evangelicals are skilled in rhetoric at all.  Most evangelicals are stupid.  Or more specifically, according to (http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/evangelicals-and-education/) it would be better to say that a lot of stupid people are evangelicals.  They talk nonsense, and when called out on their foolishness they would have us believe that we aren't understanding the profundity of their claims.  Their answer to everything is either "you need to look more closely at the facts" or the more desperate "you can't see the truth unless you believe in Jesus."  Evangelical argumentative tactics follow the model of the New Testament: they promise a lot and deliver nothing.  And because they are so uneducated, they don't see why the rest of us find their line of reasoning absurd.

 

Oh, the same study cites that almost one half of Hindu Americans have post-graduate education and that we are much more likely to report high levels of income.  Evangelicals love to cite poverty numbers in India as evidence of God's curse on us for our alleged idolatry.  I'd love to see them explain this one.  Maybe they think we're praying to demons for money or something.

 

Pretty sure I make more money than your post grad egocentric self

[Bhim]

No, I truly believe you wish me to be some stereotypical redneck so you may claim discrimination.  Your previous post, probably because of your culture doesn't match with mine in the fact that we would not have been so offensive......grace per my definition.  I may not agree with your belief, but don't "feel sorry" for you that you have it or whatever circumstances lead your parents to produce progeny as yourself.

 

I have no idea if you're a stereotypical redneck or a sheltered suburbanite who's comfortable condemning non-Christians to hell because he's never met one.  Actually I know plenty of rednecks who are not evangelical Christians, so I wouldn't imagine that this description fits you.

 

You still haven't been particularly forthright about your belief on whether or not I'm going to an eternal hell.  Isn't this the kind of thing you should tell someone?  Who's the real asshole here?

 

Pretty sure I make more money than your post grad egocentric self

 

The lady who takes out my trash at work makes more money than me, and she also can't put a sentence together.  And when debating religion, being able to construct a readable sentence is the more crucial skill, isn't it?

[Bhim]

No, I truly believe you wish me to be some stereotypical redneck so you may claim discrimination.  Your previous post, probably because of your culture doesn't match with mine in the fact that we would not have been so offensive......grace per my definition.  I may not agree with your belief, but don't "feel sorry" for you that you have it or whatever circumstances lead your parents to produce progeny as yourself.

 

Heh, wait a second.  You do know I'm an American-born and speak fluent English, right?  I'm not in any way offended by your misconception, it's a fairly common one in fact.  It's important for you to know, however, that the reason I don't understand your posts is that they're largely incomprehensible.  Someone else thought you were drunk posting, and admittedly the thought crossed my mind too.  You wouldn't be the first evangelical to preach the words of Jesus while enjoying worldly pleasures that he prohibits.  Seriously, you need to start making sense if you want to be taken as anything other than a sideshow on this forum.

[JamesG]

 

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

Not drunk MM, and I'm sorry y'all don't follow.  That is not my intention.

 

Let me try again.

 

If God sees Christ in us as a method of selection, then God should see 100% Christ in us rather than a some diminished amount of Christ because of Christ being human here on earth.  For example, if God looks at me or some human, there would be some ratio of "perfection" to "sin".....the creation/created being the value x and the subjection of x to it's environment(the fallen world), some value where x< 1.  But given that Christ is placed in us though faith and communion, then x = 1 still holds.....Christ not entering this world by a fallen father or a product of the sin environment.

 

Now, apply this to the internal standard analytical method and it seems rather slam dunkish.

 

I don't know that it proves anything other than if there are no non-truths to the comparison, we would consider it fact?  And I don't know at this jucture how we would consider a Spiritual fact.  Nor does science to some appreciable level.

 

Hope that helps.  It was amusing to me to see the ratio of  standard to the internal standard as one, much like Christ and The Father being One.  I'm not crazy, just had not seen that before.

 

Alright since you  are not going to drop the jargon lets just assume the highlighted red is correct. Lets just say you are not just making stuff up and using terminology incorrectly lets just assume you are correct.

 

Where  are you going with this? what does it mean that jesus is the Internal standard  where are you going with the analogy?

[Guest end3]

 

No, I truly believe you wish me to be some stereotypical redneck so you may claim discrimination.  Your previous post, probably because of your culture doesn't match with mine in the fact that we would not have been so offensive......grace per my definition.  I may not agree with your belief, but don't "feel sorry" for you that you have it or whatever circumstances lead your parents to produce progeny as yourself.

 

Heh, wait a second.  You do know I'm an American-born and speak fluent English, right?  I'm not in any way offended by your misconception, it's a fairly common one in fact.  It's important for you to know, however, that the reason I don't understand your posts is that they're largely incomprehensible.  Someone else thought you were drunk posting, and admittedly the thought crossed my mind too.  You wouldn't be the first evangelical to preach the words of Jesus while enjoying worldly pleasures that he prohibits.  Seriously, you need to start making sense if you want to be taken as anything other than a sideshow on this forum.

 

Those were my thoughts.  You keep preaching Hindu and culture in my opinion.  I'm sorry you don't understand my writing.  I will try to work more diligently at fleshing out the blank spots,   That is about all I can do.  Please quit beating me up about it.  I have given you some history so that you might understand.  Again, please speak to the discussion at hand or decide you can't because you can't understand my writing. 

 

 

No, I truly believe you wish me to be some stereotypical redneck so you may claim discrimination.  Your previous post, probably because of your culture doesn't match with mine in the fact that we would not have been so offensive......grace per my definition.  I may not agree with your belief, but don't "feel sorry" for you that you have it or whatever circumstances lead your parents to produce progeny as yourself.

 

I have no idea if you're a stereotypical redneck or a sheltered suburbanite who's comfortable condemning non-Christians to hell because he's never met one.  Actually I know plenty of rednecks who are not evangelical Christians, so I wouldn't imagine that this description fits you.

 

You still haven't been particularly forthright about your belief on whether or not I'm going to an eternal hell.  Isn't this the kind of thing you should tell someone?  Who's the real asshole here?

 

Pretty sure I make more money than your post grad egocentric self

 

The lady who takes out my trash at work makes more money than me, and she also can't put a sentence together.  And when debating religion, being able to construct a readable sentence is the more crucial skill, isn't it?

 

I think the Bible is pretty straightforward about people going to hell if they have no faith in Jesus.  To that, I would hope there is no eternal hell and that we all are going to Heaven.  But if it is, it is.

[Guest end3]

 

 

End again take  the scientific terminology out of your concept it adds nothing. It proves nothing it equates to me  saying.

 

The sun rises Jesus rose from the dead therefore the sun proves jesus existed.

 

This is a bad application of logic. You are proving nothing just drop the science bit and spit it out stop trying to confuse the argument you are trying to make.

Not drunk MM, and I'm sorry y'all don't follow.  That is not my intention.

 

Let me try again.

 

If God sees Christ in us as a method of selection, then God should see 100% Christ in us rather than a some diminished amount of Christ because of Christ being human here on earth.  For example, if God looks at me or some human, there would be some ratio of "perfection" to "sin".....the creation/created being the value x and the subjection of x to it's environment(the fallen world), some value where x< 1.  But given that Christ is placed in us though faith and communion, then x = 1 still holds.....Christ not entering this world by a fallen father or a product of the sin environment.

 

Now, apply this to the internal standard analytical method and it seems rather slam dunkish.

 

I don't know that it proves anything other than if there are no non-truths to the comparison, we would consider it fact?  And I don't know at this jucture how we would consider a Spiritual fact.  Nor does science to some appreciable level.

 

Hope that helps.  It was amusing to me to see the ratio of  standard to the internal standard as one, much like Christ and The Father being One.  I'm not crazy, just had not seen that before.

 

Alright since you  are not going to drop the jargon lets just assume the highlighted red is correct. Lets just say you are not just making stuff up and using terminology incorrectly lets just assume you are correct.

 

Where  are you going with this? what does it mean that jesus is the Internal standard  where are you going with the analogy?

 

I stated it only in Christian terms thinking you had the scientific understanding already.

 

Not a big deal about the analogy, just facinated that the parallel exists.   Again, I think we could use the process as evidence just as we use it in science, but we have no understanding of "spirtual quantification".

[JamesG]

"I think the Bible is pretty straightforward about people going to hell if they have no faith in Jesus.  To that, I would hope there is no eternal hell and that we all are going to Heaven.  But if it is, it is."

 

End3 you mentioned you make quite a bit of money earlier. Do you own a house or property? You cant get to heaven unless you donate everything to the poor its pretty clear on that.

 

Point is there is no possible way to get to heaven as each path excludes the other the bible is pretty straightforward about the impossibility of going to heaven.

[JamesG]

"

 

I stated it only in Christian terms thinking you had the scientific understanding already.

 

Not a big deal about the analogy, just facinated that the parallel exists.   Again, I think we could use the process as evidence just as we use it in science, but we have no understanding of "spirtual quantification".

 

I get the scientific understanding of it and I get the Christian terminology I am granting that you are using them correctly. Aside from there is a parallel what are you trying to point out? I can draw the same parallel to FSM/Hindu gods etc. please continue and explain otherwise it is all pointless if there is nothing else to elaborate other than a parallel.

[mymistake]

 

 

If God sees Christ in us as a method of selection, then God should see 100% Christ in us rather than a some diminished amount of Christ because of Christ being human here on earth.  For example, if God looks at me or some human, there would be some ratio of "perfection" to "sin".....the creation/created being the value x and the subjection of x to it's environment(the fallen world), some value where x< 1.  But given that Christ is placed in us though faith and communion, then x = 1 still holds.....Christ not entering this world by a fallen father or a product of the sin environment.

 

Now, apply this to the internal standard analytical method and it seems rather slam dunkish.

 

I don't know that it proves anything other than if there are no non-truths to the comparison, we would consider it fact?  And I don't know at this jucture how we would consider a Spiritual fact.  Nor does science to some appreciable level.

 

Hope that helps.  It was amusing to me to see the ratio of  standard to the internal standard as one, much like Christ and The Father being One.  I'm not crazy, just had not seen that before.

 

 

The only thing I can get from that is that you might not be a Trinitarian or you might not believe in the divinity of Christ.  Your "slam dunkish" is nonsense.  It's not even a coherent idea.  It's definitely a far cry from a fact.  Of course there are non-truths to the comparison.  What God?  What Christ?  Where was it established that God has the power to see anything at all?  Where was it established that sin exists?  The whole thing is a non truth.  You are trying to combine real things (science) with fantasy.

[Guest end3]

"

 

I stated it only in Christian terms thinking you had the scientific understanding already.

 

Not a big deal about the analogy, just facinated that the parallel exists.   Again, I think we could use the process as evidence just as we use it in science, but we have no understanding of "spirtual quantification".

 

I get the scientific understanding of it and I get the Christian terminology I am granting that you are using them correctly. Aside from there is a parallel what are you trying to point out? I can draw the same parallel to FSM/Hindu gods etc. please continue and explain otherwise it is all pointless if there is nothing else to elaborate other than a parallel.

We use one to define evidence, why not the other? 

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

If God sees Christ in us as a method of selection, then God should see 100% Christ in us rather than a some diminished amount of Christ because of Christ being human here on earth.  For example, if God looks at me or some human, there would be some ratio of "perfection" to "sin".....the creation/created being the value x and the subjection of x to it's environment(the fallen world), some value where x< 1.  But given that Christ is placed in us though faith and communion, then x = 1 still holds.....Christ not entering this world by a fallen father or a product of the sin environment.

 

Now, apply this to the internal standard analytical method and it seems rather slam dunkish.

 

I don't know that it proves anything other than if there are no non-truths to the comparison, we would consider it fact?  And I don't know at this jucture how we would consider a Spiritual fact.  Nor does science to some appreciable level.

 

Hope that helps.  It was amusing to me to see the ratio of  standard to the internal standard as one, much like Christ and The Father being One.  I'm not crazy, just had not seen that before.

 

 

The only thing I can get from that is that you might not be a Trinitarian or you might not believe in the divinity of Christ.  Your "slam dunkish" is nonsense.  It's not even a coherent idea.  It's definitely a far cry from a fact.  Of course there are non-truths to the comparison.  What God?  What Christ?  Where was it established that God has the power to see anything at all?  Where was it established that sin exists?  The whole thing is a non truth.  You are trying to combine real things (science) with fantasy.

 

I hear you MM, but for the sake of the discussion?  What would be wrong with letting you mind consider.