Is scriptural human "spirit", our consciousness and perception of reality?

[pantheory]

22 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

Your animal flesh in anchored to flames.

 

I seldom use my anchor or flames since I have always been a vegetarian. Don't like to eat or hurt other animals including humans 

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

16 minutes ago, midniterider said:

 

The author(s) of the bible were fairly low IQ imo. 

k, explain this then:
 

 

[pantheory]

14 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

k, explain this then:
 

 

Seven was symbolic in the Bible and other literature in Israel and the surrounding areas of the time, which communicated a sense of “fullness” or “completeness”

In the Bible it simply means full of, and completely BS. Maybe someday you might realize this -- and become much wiser.

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

20 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

No, i already said The Plan is from the future AFTER you made your choices.

So, then, if I can make a choice god doesn't know I'll make, then god is not omniscient.  But, if the plan is from some predetermined time after I have made my choices, then per the plan, my choices have already been determined, which means that even if god isn't technically making my choices for me, I am also not technically making them either.  I am simply following the script of a screenplay which has already been written (by god?).  Thus, the decisions have already been set in stone and cannot be changed.  Neither me nor god can change them.  This means god is not omnipotent. 

 

So, free will is yet further evidence that your god cannot exist as he is described. 

 

 

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

12 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

So, then, if I can make a choice god doesn't know I'll make, then god is not omniscient.  But, if the plan is from some predetermined time after I have made my choices, then per the plan, my choices have already been determined, which means that even if god isn't technically making my choices for me, I am also not technically making them either.  I am simply following the script of a screenplay which has already been written (by god?).  Thus, the decisions have already been set in stone and cannot be changed.  Neither me nor god can change them.  This means god is not omnipotent. 

 

So, free will is yet further evidence that your god cannot exist as he is described. 

 

 

You can try and squirm out of it all you want ...you still have a choice right now.

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

14 minutes ago, pantheory said:

Seven was symbolic in the Bible and other literature in Israel and the surrounding areas of the time, which communicated a sense of “fullness” or “completeness”

In the Bible it simply means full of, and completely BS. Maybe someday you might realize this -- and become much wiser.

 

Yeah, i can tell you didn't watch any of it. Cause if you did you would understand the impossibility of man to have written The Bible.

[pantheory]

9 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

Yeah, i can tell you didn't watch any of it. Cause if you did you would understand the impossibility of man to have written The Bible.

 

The Bible wasn't written by God, since there ain't no such thing -- But the Jews that wrote it were the smart folk that could read and write -- which was a great rarity at that time. The people that believed it had questionable wit.

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

3 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

The Bible wasn't written by God, since there ain't no such thing -- But the Jews that wrote it were the smart folk that could read and write -- which was a great rarity at that time.

i get it, you won't watch 10min of video because you would rather fry

[TheRedneckProfessor]

12 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

You can try and squirm out of it all you want ...you still have a choice right now.

Obviously I am not trying to squirm out of anything.  I am merely applying logic to your claim.  If I truly have free will, then god cannot be omniscient.  If god already knows what I will choose, then I do not truly have free will.  And if the consequence of exercising free will is eternal damnation and hellfire, then it is certainly not free will.  And if god cannot change the choice I will make, then god is not omnipotent. 

 

In logic, this is known as the rule of non-contradiction.  Basically, it means that A is A and cannot be anything other that A.  A can equal B; but A cannot be B.  The most relevant aspect of the rule of non-contradiction is that A cannot be not-A.  

 

What we see in this thread, is that the god of the bible simply cannot exist as he is described.  Because he cannot be both present and not present.  We saw this in your attempt to claim god was outside of time and space and again in your attempt to scare us with hell.

 

Now, we are seeing that god cannot simultaneously be omniscient while not knowing my current decision; nor can god be omnipotent whole not being able to change the decisions he has already predetermined I will make.

 

Again, son, logic simply makes your god impossible.  This is not to say there cannot be a god of some other flavor and stripe; but your god simply cannot exist as he is described.  Nor is this to say you shouldn't keep right on believing whatever pickles your prick.  But I don't buy it and never will.  I'd much rather trust my own logic and intellect than your personal interpretation of 2000 year old fairy tales.

 

[pantheory]

Just now, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

i get it you won't watch 10min of video because you would rather fry

 

I don't fry since I'm a vegetarian, as I explained above. I know you believe that stuff but hopefully someday you will wake up from an intellectual slumber.

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Obviously I am not trying to squirm out of anything.  I am merely applying logic to your claim.  If I truly have free will, then god cannot be omniscient.  If god already knows what I will choose, then I do not truly have free will.  And if the consequence of exercising free will is eternal damnation and hellfire, then it is certainly not free will.  And if god cannot change the choice I will make, then god is not omnipotent. 

 

In logic, this is known as the rule of non-contradiction.  Basically, it means that A is A and cannot be anything other that A.  A can equal B; but A cannot be B.  The most relevant aspect of the rule of non-contradiction is that A cannot be not-A.  

 

What we see in this thread, is that the god of the bible simply cannot exist as he is described.  Because he cannot be both present and not present.  We saw this in your attempt to claim god was outside of time and space and again in your attempt to scare us with hell.

 

Now, we are seeing that god cannot simultaneously be omniscient while not knowing my current decision; nor can god be omnipotent whole not being able to change the decisions he has already predetermined I will make.

 

Again, son, logic simply makes your god impossible.  This is not to say there cannot be a god of some other flavor and stripe; but your god simply cannot exist as he is described.  Nor is this to say you shouldn't keep right on believing whatever pickles your prick.  But I don't buy it and never will.  I'd much rather trust my own logic and intellect than your personal interpretation of 2000 year old fairy tales.

 

 

i already explained this is a virtual test ...this place is virtual ...we are virtual ...GOD is Omniscient BECAUSE this is virtual. An Omniscient GOD is doing the smart thing and Virtually Finding His CHILDREN.

[pantheory]

1 minute ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

 

i already explained this is a virtual test ...this place is virtual ...we are virtual ...GOD is Omniscient BECAUSE this is virtual. An Omniscient GOD is doing the smart thing and Virtually Finding His CHILDREN.

 Most in this forum would like to live an eternal life in heaven, as long is there's sex there, but few if any like to believe in fairy tales for intellectual children.

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

Just now, pantheory said:

 Most in this forum would like to live an eternal life in heaven, as long is there's sex there, but few if any like to believe in fairy tales for intellectual children.

Flesh and blood does not inherit The Kingdom of GOD. You love your sex more than CHRIST ....you are going to pay dearly for it.

[◊ Krowb ◊]

All this talk of virtual reminded me of something so I did a search for "virtual" on the site and found our friend PittsburghJoe had quite a bit to say about things being virtual.  When I inquired further, I realized his position is the opposite of our current interlocutor.

 

RKI says we are in the virtual - as a test.

PittsburghJoe said God's realm is the virtual - reality is the result of sin because sin is decoherence of the virtual.

 

Whatever shall we do!  Two competing Christians appointed by god spreading two contradictory messages - each wholly assured in their personal salvation from a literal (not figurative or virtual) hell.

 

Two bad they don't generally come in pairs.

[pantheory]

4 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

Flesh and blood does not inherit The Kingdom of GOD. You love your sex more than CHRIST ....you are going to pay dearly for it.

I feel certain that you're a good person, but realize that the road to intellectual slumber is filled with good intentions.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

23 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

i already explained this is a virtual test

No.  You already asserted that this is a virtual test; and I already rejected that assertion for lack of compelling evidence.  Therefore, any further claim you build upon that assertion, such as god is virtually omniscient without being omniscient in reality, will equally be rejected until your original assertion is supported and substantial evidence is provided for the claims built on it.  This is how rational skepticism works, son.

[midniterider]

1 hour ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

How many times do i have to say GOD doesn't force His Will?

 

Guess I dont have to worry about hell then. 

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

2 minutes ago, pantheory said:

I feel certain that you're a good person, but realize that the road to intellectual slumber is filled with good intentions.

Both trees have knowledge ...you chose the tree of death.

 

i'm not sure if hell is for infinity or not ...but do you want to chance spending one minute there?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

11 minutes ago, Krowb said:

Two bad they don't generally come in pairs.

That would make them a double slit!

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

No.  You already asserted that this is a virtual test; and I already rejected that assertion for lack of compelling evidence.  Therefore, any further claim you build upon that assertion, such as god is virtually omniscient without being omniscient in reality, will equally be rejected until your original assertion is supported and substantial evidence is provided for the claims built on it.  This is how rational skepticism works, son.

 

Do you think radio waves are cool? They are virtual while they propagate ...you keep pretending that non-locality isn't a thing.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 minute ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

i'm not sure if hell is for infinity or not ...but do you want to chance spending one minute there?

Then you'd best get to namo-ing before it's too late!  Quan Am will pour out her endless mercy upon you so you won't be a hungry ghost for 500 epochs.  Namo, son!  I'm the motherfucking LIGHT, bitches!

[pantheory]

Just now, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

Both trees have knowledge ...you chose the tree of death.

 

i'm not sure if hell is for infinity or not ...but do you want to chance spending one minute there?

 

Don't worry, there ain't no such thing as hell. Unfortunately there ain't no heaven either. We are simply just one of the family of Great Apes.  Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. From dust we evolved, and to dust we all shall return.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 minute ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

Do you think radio waves are cool?

Not particularly, no.

 

2 minutes ago, Reborn_Kingdom_Image said:

you keep pretending that non-locality isn't a thing.

And you keep pretending that science is somehow going to prove your particular interpretation of the christian religion. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

By the way, @Reborn_Kingdom_Image, don't think it goes unnoticed how quickly you change the subject every time one of your major grandslam arguments gets refuted.  

[Reborn_Kingdom_Image]

7 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

That would make them a double slit!

 

Do you know about this? Have you ever looked into what the experiment is telling us?