Search results

I parroted nothing and responded directly to your verbatim quoted posts. No, He absolutely was not created in anyway shape fashion or form - period. The only aspect of Christ that hasn't always existed is His physical body which was not created ex nehilo but was grown in Mary's womb just like...

(The length of this post is directly proportional to how bored I am today! Sheesh! It almost glazes my own eyes over! o_O ) It's interesting to me how the global Covid-19 delusion has altered my attitude about conspiracies. In 2019 I would have blown off such talk as an unsubstantiated and...

The point of which was what?

What makes you say that?

You just cannot prevent yourself from double talk, can you. You are such a wolf in sheep's clothing! I should not be having to ask any clarifying questions but I am forced to do so because you're a liar. Is Jesus the Creator? YES or NO. Post a one syllable response to that question...

Perhaps nothing. You evade the single most basic question any Christian could be asked. Not only are you not a trinitarian, I'm not sure that you're even a Christian, except in name only and even that much is given to you by yourself. No you don't. Even the way you've said that is loaded with...

That post made no sense.

What is it about the label "trinitarian" that makes it something you even want to have applied to you? You ARE NOT a trinitarian by anyone's definition other than your own and so I don't get it, why bother with the pretense? What's the benefit of identifying with a group with which you disagree...

Rambling nonsense!

Ps82 will not answer the question directly.

No, we don't and you knew this when you wrote it. Complex isn't the right word. Irrational would be a better word for what Einstein has done to the concept of time. That is a meaningless sentence. Not in any REAL sentence, though. The future does not exist, neither does the past. Existence is...

Too much double talk. Did the Creator die for your sins? Yes or no!

Duration and sequence are themselves ideas. That which is defined entirely by ideas cannot be anything other than an idea itself. All you've done is express the concept of time. That doesn't make it pop into existence in an ontological sense. Location and distance are themselves ideas. That...

The differences are real because they are events and events are real but time is not events. Time is the comparison of events with each other. Time is the act of observing that one event happened before, during or after another event. Likewise, space isn't objects, it is the relationship of...

YES! How many times have I said this to you already? Time has no ontological existence. It is not a thing or a place or a substance or any other sort of ontological stuff. IT IS AN ABSTRACTION! Same goes for space! Time is a convention of language used to convey information related to the...

Well, saying it doesn't make it so, RD. The fact is that it does not matter what sort of explosion it was. It isn't the explosion itself that's the problem, its the mechanical stresses that the acceleration would place on the expelled materials that's the problem. If you have hundreds or...

Perhaps. It expands as fast the the pressure differential permits. As soon as the pressure is released, the expansion would proceed at many times the speed of sound or else there would not have been anywhere near sufficient energy to get the material off the ground at all, much less into solar...

I'd agree with that, especially with the inclusion of that last bit about time not being things in itself. Both time and space are ideas, nothing more.

So, "glaring error" is your terminology not mine, but no, the vast majority of his theory seems very plausible and does an excellent job of explaining a lot of things that main stream geology can't begin to explain and, as best as I can determine, the rest of the theory does not need this...

Yes, that's why I put it in quotes. I'm tellin' ya. I can read these people's minds. .........which is probably why I'm half nuts.