Search results

You should watch the vid on the Shroud of Turin in the Evidence to Be Seen thread. The Shroud is a unique 3D image. The geometric scientists at the university in Italy discovered it is not one image but several images made through the depth of the cloth. Various changes in the orientation of...

I think this is the fallacy of secularism. Just because we can explain how an event ocurred does not make it any less miraculous. My wife recently cut her eyelid nearly off. Given the circumstances, it is a miracle that she did not lose her eye. I doubt a surgeon, with one swing of his scapel...

Not an assumption. Familiar with Occam's Razor? To recognize the existence of miracles but deny their supernatural cause is the basis for cognitive dissonance. Simple cause and effect. But I think you owe it to yourself to read the Evidence to be Seen thread. And I must say, if you knew more...

Again, we strongly disagree.

Mary, not everyone has thought everything through all the time. Many have preliminary thoughts on things but can be reasoned with. I won't add, then there are Roman Catholics, but I think you get my drift. One thing has nothing to do with the other thing. If you want to start a thread on the...

It totally changes the frame of reference. The reference point is Jesus being raised bodily, as opposed to spirit. The raised with a human nature is a red herring. Have a nice day.

Not so! Evidence are data points. An intelligent mind sees the mathematical function, relating all. Let me give you a working definition of faith. Faith is not beliefs. Everyone has believes. Faith is acting on those beliefs - even when evidence is lacking. An example of faith is the evidence...

In yesterday's sermon, the pastor talked about an adverse witness. @ByGraceThroughFaith is an adverse witness, weakening his own case. He cannot admit a single weakness to his position, showing his positon is not reasonable. I am interested in your defense of the trinity based on logic, rather...

No. Your claims of Hebrew knowledge do not impress me. Every translation says Deutoronomy 6:4 says God is one, which is alone, and no translation says God is 3-in-1. Saying something is "clear" does not make the trinitarian case. And bringing up verses already refuted show you have once again...

I see. You have no where to go in this debate and your gigantic ego will not allow you to capitulate and submit to reason. So, your claws come out and pretend I am saying ridiculous things. It is not my job to guide anyone to the truth. Jesus is the truth. And the Holy Spirit will lead people...

And your solution to this?

You are playing the What if game again. No, I would not say that. Your scenario is like the grand jury analogy. Scripture has the answer but you just don't want to hear it. Scripture says to submit to the authority you are under. You propose circumventing the authority you are under.

I think you are playing a semantics game. We are no longer under the law and you are making a legalistic argument. And repeating yourself again.

Mary. This ground has already been covered numerous times. I doubt answering it again will cause your eyes to see.

We cannot disagree more! Interpretation is for translators. It is a misnomer to say courts 'interpret' the law. They apply the law to a given case. Most of the time, it really is not that hard. Law. Facts. Logical Conclusion. Spirit conveyed.

Yea right! The juxtaposition of God - in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature - contrasted with Jesus is ubiquitous and arguably the best evidence that Jesus is not God. There are so many verses that trinitarian has to do a Jedi mind trick on themselves, this is not the God you are looking...

I'm drinking strawberry lemonade from DD.

That's my observation as well.

It did not escape my attention that your recent flurry of Hebrews was to ignore the Scripture verses and question asked. Given your claim that the Holy Spirit is a person, can you, at least, admit he has no personal name and answer the question about recognizing being the object and subject of a...

No. Not 'the Father' but God in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature is talking to his adopted Son, 'today' I will be your father, means there was a day before that day where that was not the case, right?