Search results

No. He did not. Einstein didn't think time was an illusion

LOL. Does anything exist outside human constructs?

No. Time is an observable fact. Einstein did not say it was an illusion; he said time is not fixed but relative. If you study astronomy, an interesting fact about Mercury is that its day is longer than its year. It revolves around the sun faster than it spins one rotation about it's axis.

Here, an absolute orientation does not apply. Only a relative orientation has meaning. Absolutely not! Time is a function of motion, which exists independent of man. Just because man is metaphysically aware of time does not mean it is a human construct.

Thank you! This is the kind of post I was hoping for. A lot of meat to ponder. Thanks for putting it together.

Friend, it is simply logic, IF-THEN.

Because Jesus does not descend from Joseph.

And the Bible as well that fits the description. Revealed as a bibliatory.

I’m not questioning the decision; only trying to understand its partial application.

Yet, not all food is detestable. How do you explain that?

Does this imply there is true heresy?

It is not false. Satan had fellowship with God.

The question in this Bible Study is, "Does God identify part of his own Creation as detestable?" In Levititus 11:42 it reads: whatever moves on its stomach, goes on all fours, or has many legs — all creatures that swarm on the ground; you are not to eat them, because they are a detestable...

Really? How to you process 34 Do not imagine that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 I have come to turn men against their fathers, daughters against their mothers, and daughters-in-law against their mothers-in-law. 36 You will find you...

As long as you ignore the next verse to fit your agenda.

You are saying it is a name. God did not. See the difference?

No one is denying that Jesus' God is eternal. But notice God did not say his name is "I am." He said that in the next verse.

Yes but it is not "I am." It is common language usage to saying something about yourself IN ADDITION TO YOUR NAME. I might say who I work for if it is for my work. Sometimes I go to a business event for my wife's company. In mingling with her coworkers, I often tell them that I am the husband...

Great! Why don't you show us the evidence of God's work in Scripture as requested in the OP?

Yes, I employ Reductio ad absurdum all the time. It is an effective method to show the absurdity of my opponents argument. It is not illogical but reveals the illogic of your position. Why is "The Big Guy" absurd but "I am" not absurd equating of one's name?