Non religious black females.
Options
Comments
-
the earlier point i was trying to make was that man has free will becuase the future has not been 100% settled that's what open theism basically says. it's why you can pray and change your potential future. This does not mean ? does not know the future he knows it but he knows it as POSSIBILITY other events he knows as certainty.
If ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient. Omniscience is knowing everything. If there is even one thing ? does not or cannot know, he is not omniscient. Your position requires that you abandon the doctrine of omniscience.I am not a professor that is a special skill i don't have, everything i have found on the internet about the open view does not give a good enough understanding when compared to the actually books.
You don't have to be a professor to explain your p.o.v.
I didn't search for that wiki article; you linked us to it. It was good enough for you then.. why not now? -
the earlier point i was trying to make was that man has free will becuase the future has not been 100% settled that's what open theism basically says. it's why you can pray and change your potential future. This does not mean ? does not know the future he knows it but he knows it as POSSIBILITY other events he knows as certainty.
If ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient. Omniscience is knowing everything. If there is even one thing ? does not or cannot know, he is not omniscient. Your position requires that you abandon the doctrine of omniscience.I am not a professor that is a special skill i don't have, everything i have found on the internet about the open view does not give a good enough understanding when compared to the actually books.
You don't have to be a professor to explain your p.o.v.
I didn't search for that wiki article; you linked us to it. It was good enough for you then.. why not now?
It was good enough for what i meant it to do which was give a simple quick summary that was all. yes omniscience is knowing everything but the future is not a thing. ? knows my futures events as possibility and some of my futures events as certainty. so the future has not been fully made. -
but the future is not a thing.
Yes it is. That's why you used the word "the" to refer to "it". This is a red herring anyway. If ? is omniscient, he knows all things and "non-things" (whatever) which includes your future action/decision if you want to go that route. Like I said, if ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient and open theism denies ? 's omniscience. Case closed.
-
but the future is not a thing.
Yes it is. That's why you used the word "the" to refer to "it". This is a red herring anyway. If ? is omniscient, he knows all things and "non-things" (whatever) which includes your future action/decision if you want to go that route. Like I said, if ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient and open theism denies ? 's omniscience. Case closed.
You don't close cases you hypocrite ?
something either exist or it does not the future does not exist it is a mental projection with no reality. Open theism upholds all gods powers and does not redefine ? it's simply a different view on the reality ? has created. -
Fallacies stinking up the joint again.
-
the earlier point i was trying to make was that man has free will becuase the future has not been 100% settled that's what open theism basically says. it's why you can pray and change your potential future. This does not mean ? does not know the future he knows it but he knows it as POSSIBILITY other events he knows as certainty.
If ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient. Omniscience is knowing everything. If there is even one thing ? does not or cannot know, he is not omniscient. Your position requires that you abandon the doctrine of omniscience.I am not a professor that is a special skill i don't have, everything i have found on the internet about the open view does not give a good enough understanding when compared to the actually books.
You don't have to be a professor to explain your p.o.v.
I didn't search for that wiki article; you linked us to it. It was good enough for you then.. why not now?
It was good enough for what i meant it to do which was give a simple quick summary that was all. yes omniscience is knowing everything but the future is not a thing. ? knows my futures events as possibility and some of my futures events as certainty. so the future has not been fully made.
So some of your future he knows with certainty and some not. Yea you're just making up ? . -
No nudes of non-religious chicks, this thread failed...
-
^^^ Julianne Moore is an atheist
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Cl9qn9V03gw/T_OjD-x_tyI/AAAAAAAAKlw/RqD4hGnaKAI/s1600/Julianne+Moore+nude+03.jpg
-
BlackxChild wrote: »the earlier point i was trying to make was that man has free will becuase the future has not been 100% settled that's what open theism basically says. it's why you can pray and change your potential future. This does not mean ? does not know the future he knows it but he knows it as POSSIBILITY other events he knows as certainty.
If ? doesn't know what you're going to do before you do it, he is not omniscient. Omniscience is knowing everything. If there is even one thing ? does not or cannot know, he is not omniscient. Your position requires that you abandon the doctrine of omniscience.I am not a professor that is a special skill i don't have, everything i have found on the internet about the open view does not give a good enough understanding when compared to the actually books.
You don't have to be a professor to explain your p.o.v.
I didn't search for that wiki article; you linked us to it. It was good enough for you then.. why not now?
It was good enough for what i meant it to do which was give a simple quick summary that was all. yes omniscience is knowing everything but the future is not a thing. ? knows my futures events as possibility and some of my futures events as certainty. so the future has not been fully made.
So some of your future he knows with certainty and some not. Yea you're just making up ? .
The Lord frequently tests his people to find out whether they’ll remain faithful to him (Gen. 22:12; Exod. 16:4; Deut. 8:2; 13:1–3; Judges 2:20–3:5; 2 Chron. 32:31).
The Lord sometimes asks non-rhetorical questions about the future (Num. 14:11; Hos. 8:5) and speaks to people in terms of what may or may not happen (Exod. 3:18–4:9; 13:17; Jer. 38:17–18, 20–21, 23; Ezek. 12:1–3).
The Lord frequently speaks of the future in terms of what may and may not come to pass (Ex.4:1-7; Ex. 13:17; Ezek 12:3). -
This lord indeed is a hypocritical and jealous lord
-
DreadlockRasta wrote: »This lord indeed is a hypocritical and jealous lord
? can be jealous but hypocritical NO. -
DreadlockRasta wrote: »This lord indeed is a hypocritical and jealous lord
? can be jealous but hypocritical NO.
? is a ? then if he has a weak ass emotion like jealousy... -
BlackxChild wrote: »DreadlockRasta wrote: »This lord indeed is a hypocritical and jealous lord
? can be jealous but hypocritical NO.
? is a ? then if he has a weak ass emotion like jealousy...
? is like a jealous husband, you are the ? ? the whole block and he will beat your ass when he gets home.
The desire to have something that does not belong to us is jealousy but our worship belongs to ? . -
There is some good information on the show................
One Dr. was equating consciousnesses with movement............
Plants have a different process of movement and therefore a different level of consciousness......
They showed that the plants could smell & feel............
I did not watch the entire episode, but it was interesting........
I think it might have been new, cannot find anything on youtube..........
The movement of plants is mechanical, e.g. phototropism. Species of vines have the ability to climb walls, fences, etc. but are not conscious of it. Sentience entails subjective awareness; it is the response to sense impressions. While plants can react, they do not respond, which demands conscious thought.
There is an ongoing debate on whether or not subatomic particles are "conscious" due to their unpredictable nature. I do not believe this is so. What do you think?
I downloaded the series on my kindle. Have you seen the Life After Death episode?
The plant episode is probably not new. The last episode to be released was about aliens and it aired very recently. I haven't watched all the episodes yet but when I find the one we've been talking about, I will try to link you to it.
I think you are opposed to your fellow evolutionists on this one.............
The episode about aliens shows how plants respond, i.e. conscious thought..............
The premise is that life on alien planets may have "evolved" similar to plant life on earth, and that their level of consciousness is different..........
Yes, subatomic and DNA type "particles" are conscious...........
I haven't watched all of the episodes, the whole life after death deal is best described by Noble Drew Ali.............Hark, now, let every creature hear,
"Time never was when man was not."
"The thoughts of Allah cannot be circumscribed. No finite mind can comprehend things infinite. All finite things are subject unto change. All finite things will cease to be because there was a time when they were not."
The bodies and the souls of men are finite things, and they will change, yea, from the finite point of view the time will come when they will be no more. "But man himself is not the body, nor the soul; he is a spirit and a part of Allah."
HOMAGE: NOBLE DREW ALI
If you watch the clip I posted, you can clearly see the vine "smell" and then react to the tomato plant...........
