Romans 3:23
For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard.
Romans 5:12
When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam’s sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned.
Inerrant scripture words say all men (and women) sinned
Look up the Greek, all and everyone means all and everyone
So every HUMAN sinned per the inerrant scriptures
So, here’s the options:
A) scripture is wrong, everyone didn’t sin and is not born a filthy little sinner
B) Jesus was FULLY MAN, which would have to include sin because the Bible says so, or he wouldn’t be a spotless lamb; He made a conscious decision not to sin, and he absolutely could help it (unlike Paul’s claims in Romans 7)
C) God put on a disguise; He acted like he was fully human but he wasn’t ( in which case living a sinless life is easy for God because he spoke the universe into existence)
Philippians 2:7
….but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
He only took on the likeness of man not his full sin nature, in which case he didn’t play by the rules for us
No Christian has ever honestly answered this question
Let’s examine the premise we have been programmed to believe and critically examine the text
It has to be all one or the other for the story they tell us to be true
The truth is uncomfortable sometimes
So, which option is least damaging to the narrative?
was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Moderator: Moderators
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #51Fair nuff.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 1:03 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #49]The laws of logic are a description of what we believe to be objective reality.The laws of logic are built into, and bound by logic. Not so the laws of theism, where any unexplained phenomena are explained by a god that is not built on logic (see the trinity and other illogical, contradictory claims).
There are three fundamental laws of logic.
1. The law of identity
2. The law of noncontradiction
3. The law of the excluded middle
We believe these are true simply because the laws of nature allow them to be true.
Can be does not mean must beI. This is the greatest god of the gaps we're apt to encounter. What lies beyond the universe, being hidden from observation, allows the theist such flights of fancy, that tossing aside logic seems the logical thing for em to do.But the laws of nature are bound to this universe. So anything that exists outside of this universe does not have to follow the natural laws of this universe because they have to be different. So things that seem not logical to us can be perfectly logical so a being outside of this universe.
The most parsimonious explanation here is that logic holds outside the universe as well. Otherwise it becomes 'logical' that beyond the universe, bullfrogs are really horses, and horses are fields of wheat. After all, if gods exists outside our observable universe, I can declare the same absurd illogical condition does too.
Yet when logic or science refutes biblical claims, you'll object, and put it down to "Naw now, God's all supernatural and all".EarthScienceguy wrote: We are talking about a being that does not need space, or time to exist and can exist everywhere at the same time.That is actually physics saying that. It is just another case where science agrees with Bible.JK wrote: Can? There's enough wiggle room in 'can', I suppose, for the theist to make an unevidenced assertion.
No, the theory of realitivity may allow for such, while NO science has put truth to the claim.EarthScienceguy wrote:Einstein's theory of Relativity says that the future is just as real as the present and the past. Relativity would say that the future and the past have already occurred. This is why many in the field of cosmology do not believe in free will.JK wrote: A being can't currently exist in a future that ain't here yet. To propose otherwise is illogical.
Where have you shown the laws of logic no longer apply outside the universe - if there's even something beyond it?EarthScienceguy wrote:They are only logical absurdities because you are bound to this universe and the laws of this universe. Any being that exists outside of this universe the laws would operate differently.JK wrote: But we can sure explain a good bit of it by realizing the illogical absurdity built into the various claims.
You have an hypothesis - something exists beyond the universe.
You declare, by fiat - that something there ain't bound to logic.
Then you declare there's a god 'out there' and he don't like how we carry on.
You fail to show that whatever it is beyond the universe is not bound to logic, but ya can't show either to be truthful statements.
It's illogical to claim to know what exists beyond the universe, unless one can see beyond its boundaries. Boundaries we've yet to venture beyond. It's therefore illogical to declare logic no longer applies beyond those boundaries. Just as it's illogical to claim logic does apply beyond em.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #52[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #51]
I did not declare anything. If you do not like the idea of laws changing outside of this universe then write a letter to the atheist cosmologist that are coming up with these theories.
It is not my hypothesis. These are the theories of cosmologists that are mostly atheists. It is really illogical not to believe that something exist outside of this universe unless you believe that the universe is eternal.You have an hypothesis - something exists beyond the universe.
Again not my declaration. These theories come from cosmologists that are mostly atheists. Like for example Shawn Carroll who says that the "mother universe" that created all of the other universes in the mutliverse must have equal regions where entropy can run forward and backward. So time can run in both directions. One of the main reasons for the rise of the multiverse theory is so that different universes can have different laws of nature.You declare, by fiat - that something there ain't bound to logic.
I did not declare anything. If you do not like the idea of laws changing outside of this universe then write a letter to the atheist cosmologist that are coming up with these theories.
There is something that has to exist outside of this universe. That is what all of your atheist cosmologists say anyway.Then you declare there's a god 'out there' and he don't like how we carry on.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #53Hypotheses are not theories, no matter how proud folks are of em. Until we can observe or sense what lies beyond the universe, speculation is the best we've got.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 2:41 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #51]
It is not my hypothesis. These are the theories of cosmologists that are mostly atheists. It is really illogical not to believe that something exist outside of this universe unless you believe that the universe is eternal.You have an hypothesis - something exists beyond the universe.
That you have to be told this repeatedly speaks poorly of your self professed 'EarthScienceguy' moniker.
Hypotheses are not theories, no matter how proud folks are of em. Until we can observe or sense what lies beyond the universe, speculation is the best we've got.EarthScienceguy wrote:Again not my declaration. These theories come from cosmologists that are mostly atheists.JK wrote: You declare, by fiat - that something there ain't bound to logic.
Hypotheses are not theories, no matter how proud folks are of em. Until we can observe or sense what lies beyond the universe, speculation is the best we've got.EarthScienceguy wrote: Like for example Shawn Carroll who says that the "mother universe" that created all of the other universes in the mutliverse must have equal regions where entropy can run forward and backward. So time can run in both directions. One of the main reasons for the rise of the multiverse theory is so that different universes can have different laws of nature.
I mean in terms of your being a proponent, but I'll try to be more precise.EarthScienceguy wrote: I did not declare anything.
Hypotheses are not theories, no matter how proud folks are of em. Until we can observe or sense what lies beyond the universe, speculation is the best we've got.EarthScienceguy wrote: If you do not like the idea of laws changing outside of this universe then write a letter to the atheist cosmologist that are coming up with these theories.
Such is your hypothesis, unevidenced though it be.EarthScienceguy wrote:There is something that has to exist outside of this universe.JK wrote: Then you declare there's a god 'out there' and he don't like how we carry on.
Please don't clump me into a clod of claims I have NOT made.EarthScienceguy wrote: That is what all of your atheist cosmologists say anyway.
Of course it's fun and stimulating about what may exist beyond the observable universe, but it'll remain speculation for a good bit of time to come.
This is why I challenge your claims regarding god existing beyond the universe, and how logic doesn't apply. Both are speculative hypotheses at best.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #54[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #53]
Another person who thought he was an atheist but now understands that he is nothing more than agnostic. Atheism is dead.
Thank you,This is why I challenge your claims regarding god existing beyond the universe, and how logic doesn't apply. Both are speculative hypotheses at best.
Another person who thought he was an atheist but now understands that he is nothing more than agnostic. Atheism is dead.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #55Whether atheism is dead or not has no bearing on your inability to show a god exists beyond the universe, or that logic no longer applies beyond it.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 3:06 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #53]
Thank you,This is why I challenge your claims regarding god existing beyond the universe, and how logic doesn't apply. Both are speculative hypotheses at best.
Another person who thought he was an atheist but now understands that he is nothing more than agnostic. Atheism is dead.
I notice often theists're quick to fret anything but challenges to their claims.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 5993
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6607 times
- Been thanked: 3209 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #56We are talking about a hypothetical being. We do not know if existing everywhere at once or not needing space or time is even possible.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am We are talking about a being that does not need space or time to exist and can exist everywhere at once.
We don't know precisely how Superman in invulnerable, but if we did would he then not be Superman?EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am If you can explain everything about God then He would not be God. The being you are describing would simply be a man.
This is just one of those flippant throw away lines that are just patently ridiculous and do not really warrant any consideration.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am And that is what most atheists want they want God to be a man like themselves.
That should not be the cue to then invent all sorts of attributes for God that have never been demonstrated and cannot be tested.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am In any conversation about God there will be a point where the limitations of humanity will not be able to describe the limitless nature of God. How can that not be the case?
Once again, assuming facts not in evidence. That said, worship is one of the most worthless pastimes anyone can engage in anyway.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am God is bound by the laws of nature God made the laws of nature. If that is not the cause then He should not be worshiped as God.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2690
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 484 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #57[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #47
Who says they're confined to space, time, life and death? They're gods. If "the God of Israel" doesn't have to be confined to Israel, the gods of Olympus don't have to be confined to Olympus.If you believe in the gods of Olympus that are confined to space, time and life, and death. Have at it.
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #58Can you prove any of this you have stated?Athetotheist wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:23 pm [Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #47
Who says they're confined to space, time, life and death? They're gods. If "the God of Israel" doesn't have to be confined to Israel, the gods of Olympus don't have to be confined to Olympus.If you believe in the gods of Olympus that are confined to space, time and life, and death. Have at it.
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #59Can you prove any of this you have stated?brunumb wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:05 pmWe are talking about a hypothetical being. We do not know if existing everywhere at once or not needing space or time is even possible.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am We are talking about a being that does not need space or time to exist and can exist everywhere at once.
We don't know precisely how Superman in invulnerable, but if we did would he then not be Superman?EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am If you can explain everything about God then He would not be God. The being you are describing would simply be a man.
This is just one of those flippant throw away lines that are just patently ridiculous and do not really warrant any consideration.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am And that is what most atheists want they want God to be a man like themselves.
That should not be the cue to then invent all sorts of attributes for God that have never been demonstrated and cannot be tested.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am In any conversation about God there will be a point where the limitations of humanity will not be able to describe the limitless nature of God. How can that not be the case?
Once again, assuming facts not in evidence. That said, worship is one of the most worthless pastimes anyone can engage in anyway.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:38 am God is bound by the laws of nature God made the laws of nature. If that is not the cause then He should not be worshiped as God.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2690
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 484 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #60Can you prove anything you have stated?OneWay wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 8:32 pmCan you prove any of this you have stated?Athetotheist wrote: ↑Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:23 pm [Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #47
Who says they're confined to space, time, life and death? They're gods. If "the God of Israel" doesn't have to be confined to Israel, the gods of Olympus don't have to be confined to Olympus.If you believe in the gods of Olympus that are confined to space, time and life, and death. Have at it.