A non-creationist interpretation of Genesis

Although it is most likely that we exist in a Multiversal System...where there would be an Infinite Linear Time Line...Linear Time is specific to Multi-Dimensional Space-Time.

If you were to use just a single aspect of our Space-Time Dimensionality....that being One Dimensionality....time no longer exists as a Linear Construct and really doesn't exist at all as we understand it....thus all points of position and all points in Linear Time become the same point One Dimensionally.

This is a fact and thus my statement is viable.

AboveAlpha

 

Well, outside of the fact that the universe is here, and that would be my "proof", I must ask a question. If something isn't observable, is it true?

 

I have seen no example of me "making things up" which I would consider lying.

 

I disagree that the O.T. is incosistent.

 

I also find Genesis inconsistent.. References to Lilith included. There were many accounts that were cobbled together during the time of King Omri..

None of that is a problem for a believer unless one thinks the creation story is history or science.

 

It's only a "fact" in the way Incorporeal uses the word, meaning anything you happen to believe is a fact.

 

What references to Lilith are you referring too?

 

I usually try to go with Merriam Webster.

 

Then you aren't dealing with a fact.
You are dealing with a belief.

 

such as.............

 

Conflating the two incompatible stories of Judas' death.
You can't possibly assert this as a fact.

 

I can't take sole credit for the reconciliation of the stories, but yes, if you believe the claims of scripture, such as I stated, "God cannot lie", then its a fact.

 

You have made one story the only possibility and now call it a "fact".
Being dishonest to us really doesn't matter in the long run, but you are lying to yourself when you think the reconciliation that you like suddenly becomes a "fact".

 

well, I would consider the claims of dishonesty less than factual, but that's OK. I don't consider that story the only one possible, but, I just haven't heard a better reconciliation.

 

So with that kind of tenuous evidence, you are willing to call the story a "fact"?
Would you like to reconsider that characterization, or shall I maintain my assertion of dishonesty?

 

The funny thing is that: none of this has to do with your statement which was: “NOTHING....is an impossibility as just discussing NOTHING provides proof there is SOMETHING.”.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=312953&p=1062996280#post1062996280
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=312953&p=1063084305#post1063084305

 

Where did you go? Too embarrassed to respond?
It's ok. Everyone says dumb stuff now and then.

 

Indeed ! I have my mirror do you? By mirror I mean to see who has in the past made dumb stuff public....like this post I suppose ...lol~

reva

View attachment 22580

 

Did you mean like your use of [sic]?

 

No I was taking artistic license. Gotta’ love those outs. Besides, if I were serious I would be careful not to make mistakes. I rarely edit for grammatical errors, like this one; ~

reva

 

Well, at least now we know you aren't serious.
It's actually a great relief.
The use of [sic] was an attempt to display your intellectual credibility, but not knowing what it's used for kind of backfired on you.

 

worst avatar ever

 

Show me one example of NOTHING.

AboveAlpha

 

You're so missing the point.