Zealot was an excellent book.
Viviane
JoinedPosts by Viviane
-
48
Jesus was a False Prophet - But was he deluded or deceitful?
by cofty inany objective reading of the gospels makes it plain that jesus believed his parousia would happen within the lifetime of his generation.. his followers believed in his imminent return until the day of their deaths.. his false prophecy damaged the lives of his disciples in a similar way to that done by the lies of modern cults like the watchtower.
peter and others walked out on their wives, children and businesses to follow him around palestine.
jesus taught them to put their families and other normal concerns in second place to their task of spreading his message - which turned out to be false.. the question is what he was up to?.
-
-
-
55
A medieval question for you, if you believe in god....
by snare&racket inmany ancient believers of god used cognition to 'think' their way from belief to atheism.
what initially seems a silly question to reason over, can actually destroy a whole theology.. here is a question made famous by 'saint' thomas aquinas, believers in a almighty god with unlimited ability, please have a think about this..... the omnipotence paradox:.
"could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even he could not lift it?
-
-
Viviane
Your blunder calling a question a quote is at the end of post 335 in black and white ,yet you still deny it
I deny nothing because there is no blunder. I quoted your question and asked who said what you were asserting. It's quite telling that you refuse to asnwer and instead choose to attempt to obfuscate instead of prove a single one of your points. Quite telling indeed. Almost like you realize your mistske and instead want to accuse others of making your mistake.
Don't you think people can read this in plain english and see who is telling the truth ?
Indeed, I think they are quite capable of recognizing your errors. Can you?
-
55
A medieval question for you, if you believe in god....
by snare&racket inmany ancient believers of god used cognition to 'think' their way from belief to atheism.
what initially seems a silly question to reason over, can actually destroy a whole theology.. here is a question made famous by 'saint' thomas aquinas, believers in a almighty god with unlimited ability, please have a think about this..... the omnipotence paradox:.
"could an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that even he could not lift it?
-
-
Viviane
by default power without love and consideration is ruthless
Prove that. Power could be motivated by pity but not love, by hate of one thing but not love of another thing. You are asserting a mutual exclusiveness that you haven't proven. All your work is ahead of you.
take away the' so called" limitation of God's love what is left ? .. ruthless love
It's not so-called, it is. And rutheless is not what's left since you haven't proven it's not motivated by hate of something else and not simply a lack of love.
How can limiting love be anything but a negative and ruthless love ?
Well, you just used your premise as your conclusion, so I am not sure what you are asking. Perhaps if we put this in math terms? Just because X doesn't = Y doesn't mean it equals the opposite of Y, it could mean nothing or an entire range of things that are not Y, like red or seashell or decay rate of uranium. Similarly, power NOT limited by love could equal any number of things besides rutheless, such as hate, comfort, desire, time of day, how a person in Australia slept last night, etc.
You are simply asserting it MUST be ruthless because you haven't explored or conceived or any other options.
You know what a quote is right ?
You know what by default means right ?
Of course. That's why I used both accurately, silly bear!
-
81
Physics: What are your thoughts on life in the 4th,5th,and higher dimensions?
by EndofMysteries inif you do a little research there are many physics forums, discussions, and books about this.
it's a bit challenging to grasp but it's very interesting.
if there is life on this higher dimensions, they could see us yet we would be unable to see them.
-
-
Viviane
and just because you used "please" does not make the "stop" less of an imperative or order.
Since you edited after I posted, I'll update in a new post.
Just because you felt put upon doesn't make it an order. Get over your hurt feelings if you want to have an adult discussion. I'm not going to treat you like my 7 year old neice in a conversation.
BSW: look at your clock/watch and see how you travel and at what rate through time.
No idea who BSW is, but looking at a watch will only tell you that you are traveling at the normal rate due to locality of frame of reference, unless you are extremely close to a black hole, in which case time could be passing at an appreciably different rate for your head and hand, in which case you would also be dead and not able to observe it. That's what I mean by understanding the physics you discuss.
help us all learn by correcting each "wrong fact" ?, one at a time.
Been doing that all along, go re-read my posts if you missed anything. And, BTW, you haven't posted "wrong facts", just errors.
That should be interesting to contemplate, a long time ago we were inside the Big Bang,(how else would we have got here?),
We are still inside it. When would we have escaped?
-
81
Physics: What are your thoughts on life in the 4th,5th,and higher dimensions?
by EndofMysteries inif you do a little research there are many physics forums, discussions, and books about this.
it's a bit challenging to grasp but it's very interesting.
if there is life on this higher dimensions, they could see us yet we would be unable to see them.
-
-
Viviane
Yes. Galaxies. You didn't even realize you were talking about them when you mentioned things at great distance, at the fringes looking all stretched out and being the smallest. The oldest galaxy observed is 13.1 billion years old, formed 700 millions years after the Big Bang. Since you mentioned things at the fringes of time being smaller and that galaxy is at the fringe, you didn't realize you were talking about it.
This is why I say you don't realize what you are saying. You continually say things that are flat out wrong and refuse to put the work in the learn the basics about the things you talk about. Don't misunderstand, I would LOVE for you and I to have a conversation about the nature of the universe, but that can't happen until you have a basic grasp of the things you are talking about.
For instance, why do you claim things at the fringes appear stretched out yet are the smallest? What science, observation or math leads to you to say that in contradiction of the all of the known physics of the universe?
-
81
Physics: What are your thoughts on life in the 4th,5th,and higher dimensions?
by EndofMysteries inif you do a little research there are many physics forums, discussions, and books about this.
it's a bit challenging to grasp but it's very interesting.
if there is life on this higher dimensions, they could see us yet we would be unable to see them.
-
-
Viviane
No one used an imperitive. Grammar is also not your strong point, apparently. If you are going to be wrong AND accuse me of something, you need to be right about one or the other. So far, you are wrong about both.
Clearly you don't get physics. Galaxies we see that are billions of years old don't look bigger than they are due to light stretching. If you actually understood the implications of thinking that, the reasons why it's ridiculous would be immediately apparent.
I fully expect that you will, as you have done on every other thread I have encountered you, continue to assert wrong facts, bad science, attempt to claim you are right by saying no one else gets it and eventually quit posting in the thread after repeatedly being asked for evidence of your claims and providing none.
-
81
Physics: What are your thoughts on life in the 4th,5th,and higher dimensions?
by EndofMysteries inif you do a little research there are many physics forums, discussions, and books about this.
it's a bit challenging to grasp but it's very interesting.
if there is life on this higher dimensions, they could see us yet we would be unable to see them.
-
-
Viviane
Prologos, please stop making claims about science until you get a better education in it. Galaxies we see are not really smaller because of stretched out light or spacetime.
-
132
the bible and its prophecies
by Crazyguy ini have been doing a lot of research on the bible and its roots so to speak and its becoming clearer that the jews like other races took gods and stories from others and made them their own.
its also become clear that many of the books were written later then stated, like daniel probably written about a hundred years before christ and some of it maybe even after.
but what i don't get is the prophecies.
-
-
Viviane
Discusion of the future is the discussion of prophecy. Why do you try to end the conversation when your errors and hypocrisy are pointed out?
-
132
the bible and its prophecies
by Crazyguy ini have been doing a lot of research on the bible and its roots so to speak and its becoming clearer that the jews like other races took gods and stories from others and made them their own.
its also become clear that many of the books were written later then stated, like daniel probably written about a hundred years before christ and some of it maybe even after.
but what i don't get is the prophecies.
-
-
Viviane
So?
-
132
the bible and its prophecies
by Crazyguy ini have been doing a lot of research on the bible and its roots so to speak and its becoming clearer that the jews like other races took gods and stories from others and made them their own.
its also become clear that many of the books were written later then stated, like daniel probably written about a hundred years before christ and some of it maybe even after.
but what i don't get is the prophecies.
-
-
Viviane
Thank you, kaik.