For trinity believers: Does your world come unravelled if Jesus is not God,but ONLY Gods Son?

[Eli G]

Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ...

Mmmh, interesting belief.

How can you prove it?

 

[shunyadragon]

Mmmh, interesting belief.

How can you prove it?

There is no proof in religious subjective claims for any religion. All religions are subject to subjective belief. You could not prove Jesus was the Messiah either without actual evidence other than citing scripture without provenance of authorship or text recorded at the tome the events occurred.

Remember the Jews reject the Christian claims of the fulfillment of prophecies. You cannot prove them wrong for believing that the prophecies refer to future Hebrew Kings that restore the Kingdom of Israel. In fact a plain reading of the prophecies support the Jewish belief.

 

[Trailblazer]

Mmmh, interesting belief.

How can you prove it?

I cannot prove it, except to myself.
How could anyone prove that Christianity is true?

The process whereby I proved it to myself is called Independent Investigation of Truth.

Independent investigation of truth means that one should always investigate the truth for ourselves if we want to know the truth.
People should never take anyone else's word for what is true.

"The first Baha’i principle is the independent investigation of reality. Not found in any sacred Book of the past, it abolishes the need for clergy and sets us free from imitation and blind adherence to unexamined, dogmatic beliefs. Baha’is believe that no soul should follow ancestral or traditional beliefs without first questioning and examining their own inner landscape. Instead, the first Baha’i principle gives each individual the right and the duty to investigate and decide what they believe on their own."

Independent Investigation of Truth

 

[Dimi95]

No, the universalist perspective is not a contradiction. The problem remains concerning the many diverse conflicting claims of 'Truth.' The universalist perspective simply tries to understand the diverse and conflicting beliefs as they are and what they believe not which one's claim of 'Truth' is valid. The claims of any one conflicting belief the only 'Truth,' is problematic from the fallible human perspective.

The only difference in Christianity is that you have 'truth' in a person.Truth is a personal being.
In the person of Christ is established the connection between God and humans.

Its the Law of the Spirit that is established.

John 15:12-17 reads
"My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.You are my friends if you do what I command.I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you. This is my command: Love each other.

It is the unconditional love that Jesus gives.It is the level of emphaty that he had towards his people that separates him from every other being.


Its tragic when something bad happens to someone.
Well , what if they deserve it?
And What if something bad happend to someone who clearly doesn't deserve it?
And when you see all this questions what would be the most tragic story?

Well , for me its the worst possible thing happening to the person who least deserve it.

Becauuse its not just the fact that Christ is innocent , he is also good.
And he is not just good , he is good as it gets.

And yet his life is the tragedy of the passion - the worst possible punishments visited upon the least deserving person.

But its also way much worse then that.
The Romans disgned crucifixion to be a terrible torture,and in that kind of torture your mind feels it consciously.

Crucifixion by death was for murderers and thieves , but for a Jewish man named Jesus, who claimed to be the Messiah, it was the ultimate sacrifice.

Jesus’ death was prophesied in the Old Testament hundreds of years before He was crucified. When the Roman soldiers took Jesus before Pilate, the disciples already had abandoned Jesus.

Psalm 80:1
"Oh, give ear, Shepherd of Israel,
You who lead Joseph like a flock;
You who are enthroned above the cherubim, shine forth!"

Psalms 100:3
"Know that the Lord Himself is God;
It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves;
We are His people and the sheep of His pasture."

John 11:10-13
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it.The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep."

Here is where Jesus claims to be the good shepherd.And note how he uses 'The Man'.
It says 'The man'- as plural to men.He does not include himself in that category since he claimed to be the shepard

Isaiah 50:6 says
"I offered my back to those who beat me and my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard. I did not hide my face from mockery and spitting."

Psalm 22
"My life is poured out of me like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My strength has dried up like sun-baked clay, My tongue sticks to the roof of My mouth."

Psalm 22
"Everyone who sees me mocks me, they sneer and shake their heads saying, Is this the One who relies on God? Then let the Lord save Him!"

Jesus could have come down off the cross at any time and had myriads of angels at His disposal; but instead, He said, 'Father forgive them for they know not what they do.'

Psalm 109:4 reads
"I love them but they try to destroy me with accusations even as I am praying for them!"

Isaiah 26:19
"But those who die in the Lord will live; their bodies will rise again!!"

Matthew 14:24-26
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?"

So why would Jesus ask anybody to lose their life for him and not for God?

Or are they now one ?
In which sense one ?
And what is one ?
And how are they one ?
Because he is going to the Father ?
Was not the Father greater then him?
How are then Jesus and the Father one ?
He knew that he was going to the Father , and yet he did not bother to say i am going to the truth.
But instead of that he said : "I am the truth."

So for me it is pretty clear:

Jesus claimed to be God.

It is irelevant what we think , since he claimed that.He was crucified and killed for that blasphemy 2000 years ago , under Pointus Pilate.

That is written in history.
To date , archeologist have discovered more then 5800 Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament.Not the Bible , just the New Testament!
The earliest fragment of the Gospel of John was found in Egypt and dates to the second century A.D.
Well,How close does that relate to the original? Less then 30 years.
Do you know how much Latin manuscripts does Christianity posses and how they date?
Do you know how much letters are there of The Apostolic Church Fathers?

Faith with Works - tradition.
And not just tradition , but maintaing that tradition.
That is how Christianity was preserved

Some will say The Bible , but did the Fathers had a written Bible in the 2nd century?
How did that faith survived in the first 300 years?

For certain , they did not have a Book.

I come from the very core of Christian belief.

That is also a contradiction of what we can call knowledge based on objective verifiable evidence. Science fortunately does not claim 'Truth.'
Claims of 'Truth' are the venue of the many diverse conflicting religious beliefs each claiming to be the 'Truth' and others false.

Yet , no one claimed 'Truth' as Christ did.

The philosophy of science is the basis for Methodological Naturalism that has its basis on the objective verifiable evidence of our physical existence only. It is neutral to any subjective religious claims.

I never said that Philosophy of science takes a stand on any religious claim.

I just said that Science does not determine truth and Philosophy of science talks more about it.

I made no such claim. In fact I believe in the previous post and this one emphatically deny this.

In some sense , i can agree with that.

 

[Dimi95]

Your description of science is OK, but you need to clarify what you accept as the knowledge of science.


Do you accept the knowledge of science of a universe ~13.5 billions of years old, a solar system and earth ~4.5 billion years old, and the evolution of life ~3.5 billion of years?

I have already answered this in another topic.

'Some have described the potassium-argon clock as being a clock without hands-without even a face.

Perfect example of this is the Richard Leakey case.He discovered Skull 1470 near the east shore of Lake Rudolf in Kenya and thought the skull was 2.6 million years old.Leakey’s Skull 1470 was initially dated at Cambridge Laboratory (England) with the potassium-argon method. The first date was 221 million years.After more tests they got another date of 1.8 million years from the University of California, Berkeley.'

So it is not as precise as we taught

We are not talking about 'Truth,' but the knowledge of science based on the objective verifiable evidence.

We are talking about faith , and truth is more close to faith then science.

 

[shunyadragon]

The only difference in Christianity is that you have 'truth' in a person.Truth is a personal being.
In the person of Christ is established the connection between God and humans.

Its the Law of the Spirit that is established.

John 15:12-17 reads
"My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.You are my friends if you do what I command.I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you. This is my command: Love each other.

It is the unconditional love that Jesus gives.It is the level of emphaty that he had towards his people that separates him from every other being.

Its tragic when something bad happens to someone.
Well , what if they deserve it?
And What if something bad happend to someone who clearly doesn't deserve it?
And when you see all this questions what would be the most tragic story?

Well , for me its the worst possible thing happening to the person who least deserve it.

Becauuse its not just the fact that Christ is innocent , he is also good.
And he is not just good , he is good as it gets.

As believed by Christians.

And yet his life is the tragedy of the passion - the worst possible punishments visited upon the least deserving person.

But its also way much worse then that.
The Romans disgned crucifixion to be a terrible torture,and in that kind of torture your mind feels it consciously.

Crucifixion by death was for murderers and thieves , but for a Jewish man named Jesus, who claimed to be the Messiah, it was the ultimate sacrifice.

As believed by Christians

Jesus’ death was prophesied in the Old Testament hundreds of years before He was crucified. When the Roman soldiers took Jesus before Pilate, the disciples already had abandoned Jesus.

No, the Jews would disagree it is their language and their Book. Prophecies to the Jew refer to the promised King of Israel

Psalm 80:1
"Oh, give ear, Shepherd of Israel,
You who lead Joseph like a flock;
You who are enthroned above the cherubim, shine forth!"

Psalms 100:3
"Know that the Lord Himself is God;
It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves;
We are His people and the sheep of His pasture."

In the Psalms to the 'Lord Himself is God' is God. Poor translation of the Hebrew. No indication from the Hebrew perspective that this refers to Jesus.

John 11:10-13
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it.The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep."

Here is where Jesus claims to be the good shepherd.And note how he uses 'The Man'.
It says 'The man'- as plural to men.He does not include himself in that category since he claimed to be the shepard

Isaiah 50:6 says
"I offered my back to those who beat me and my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard. I did not hide my face from mockery and spitting."

Vague interpretation of what Jews would refer to the King of the JEws.

Psalm 22
"My life is poured out of me like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My strength has dried up like sun-baked clay, My tongue sticks to the roof of My mouth."

Psalm 22
"Everyone who sees me mocks me, they sneer and shake their heads saying, Is this the One who relies on God? Then let the Lord save Him!"

Vague? How are the Psalms relevant here? They are not prophecies.

Jesus could have come down off the cross at any time and had myriads of angels at His disposal; but instead, He said, 'Father forgive them for they know not what they do.'

Psalm 109:4 reads
"I love them but they try to destroy me with accusations even as I am praying for them!"

Isaiah 26:19
"But those who die in the Lord will live; their bodies will rise again!!"

Matthew 14:24-26
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?"

So why would Jesus ask anybody to lose their life for him and not for God?

Or are they now one ?
In which sense one ?
And what is one ?
And how are they one ?
Because he is going to the Father ?
Was not the Father greater then him?
How are then Jesus and the Father one ?
He knew that he was going to the Father , and yet he did not bother to say i am going to the truth.
But instead of that he said : "I am the truth."

So for me it is pretty clear:

Jesus claimed to be God.

Disagree

It is irrelevant what we think , since he claimed that.He was crucified and killed for that blasphemy 2000 years ago , under Pontus Pilate.

That is written in history.
To date , archeologist have discovered more then 5800 Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament.Not the Bible , just the New Testament!

Almost all well after 300 AD

The earliest fragment of the Gospel of John was found in Egypt and dates to the second century A.D.

Still very late with no reference to anything during the life of Jesus.

Well,How close does that relate to the original? Less then 30 years.
Do you know how much Latin manuscripts does Christianity posses and how they date?

Yes, the scrapes and pieces date mostly after 150 AD to 300 AD

Do you know how much letters are there of The Apostolic Church Fathers?

Faith with Works - tradition.
And not just tradition , but maintaing that tradition.
That is how Christianity was preserved

Some will say The Bible , but did the Fathers had a written Bible in the 2nd century?
How did that faith survived in the first 300 years?

They did have a collection of Hebrew scriptures. Also there were letters and travels of Paul. There is evidence they had a simple short gospel Q about 50 0r so years after Christ

Actually I believe the gospels were compiled by Hellenist Christians in Asia Minor from a shorter gospel and teachings of Paul.

For certain , they did not have a Book.

True

I come from the very core of Christian belief.

So? So do the believers in any of the diverse conflicting religions.

Yet , no one claimed 'Truth' as Christ did.

I believe every religion talks about 'Truth' in their beliefs. The one 'Truth' all religions believe is their God.

I never said that Philosophy of science takes a stand on any religious claim.

I just said that Science does not determine truth and Philosophy of science talks more about it

The philosophy of science does not talk about 'Truth.'

 

[shunyadragon]

I have already answered this in another topic.

What is your answer HERE?

'Some have described the potassium-argon clock as being a clock without hands-without even a face.

Perfect example of this is the Richard Leakey case.He discovered Skull 1470 near the east shore of Lake Rudolf in Kenya and thought the skull was 2.6 million years old.Leakey’s Skull 1470 was initially dated at Cambridge Laboratory (England) with the potassium-argon method. The first date was 221 million years.After more tests they got another date of 1.8 million years from the University of California, Berkeley.'

So it is not as precise as we taught

Snipes of old references out of context concerning radiometric dating are not current concerning the accuracy of multiple dating methods today. I believe I remember this conversation and at the time you were responded to and corrected. Yes you are behind in your science. We use multiple dating references today and they are accurate.

Please use current scientific references and be specific, because it reflects your overall view of how scripture is understood in context of history, science and archaeology.

We are talking about faith , and truth is more close to faith then science.

Failed to respond. Your view of science is relevant.

 

[Trailblazer]

The only difference in Christianity is that you have 'truth' in a person. Truth is a personal being.

Christ said He is the Truth because He brought the Truth from God to humanity.
Truth is not a person. Jesus was a person who brought the truth from God, who is the Eternal Truth.
Baha'u'llah was also a person who brought the truth from God, who is the Eternal Truth.

In the person of Christ is established the connection between God and humans.

Christ established the connection between God and humans because He was the mediator between God and humans.
In this new age, Baha'u'llah established the connection between God and humans.

“And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

 

[Dimi95]

No, the Jews would disagree it is their language and their Book. Prophecies to the Jew refer to the promised King of Israel

I do not expect anything else from Jews.

In the New Testament, Pilate writes "Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews" as a sign to be affixed to the cross of Jesus. John 19:21 states that the Jews told Pilate: "Do not write King of the Jews" but instead write that Jesus had merely claimed that title, but Pilate wrote it anyway.

In the Psalms to the 'Lord Himself is God' is God. Poor translation of the Hebrew. No indication from the Hebrew perspective that this refers to Jesus.

Psalm 100:3 Lexicon: Know that the LORD Himself is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves; We are His people and the sheep of His pasture.

biblehub.com

Jesus said 'I am'.
That is why the Jews considered his sayings as blasphemy

Vague interpretation of what Jews would refer to the King of the JEws.

Read Zachariah 11 (the whole chapter)

"I told them, “If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it.” So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.
And the Lord said to me, 'Throw it to the potter'—the handsome price at which they valued me!"

So i do not bother myself with what Jews are saying.If they want to discuss prophecies , we will discuss prophecies.Usually they fail to stand and they run away offending the other side.

Vague? How are the Psalms relevant here? They are not prophecies.

Where did you learn that?
Who makes the standard about prophecies?

Actually I believe the gospels were compiled by Hellenist Christians in Asia Minor from a shorter gospel and teachings of Paul.

Where is your evidence?

So? So do the believers in any of the diverse conflicting religions.

I am not so sure they are so near as i am but ok , argument accepted.

I believe every religion talks about 'Truth' in their beliefs. The one 'Truth' all religions believe is their God.

I agree.
But no one claims it in the way Jesus claimed.

The philosophy of science does not talk about 'Truth.'

Science also does not talk about truth.

 

[Brian2]

In conjunction with other prophecies it represents the promised return of the Messiah as experienced by the disciples.

The promise was that the Comforter would dwell with and in the disciples Jesus was speaking to.
In conjunction with other things in John Chapters 14, 15 and 16, we see that the Comforter is the Holy Spirit promised to those disciples also, and that He would remind those disciples of everything that Jesus had told them.

John 14:25 “All this I have spoken while still with you. 26 But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Then we see that the promised Comforter is also the Spirit of Truth, as well as being the Holy Spirit.
How you manage to make the Comforter (Spirit of Truth) into Baha'u'llah when He is shown by the scriptures to be the Holy Spirit (which came at Pentecost) is beyond me.
I know that this is something you have to do because Baha'u'llah did say that He is the Spirit of Truth, but it must cause some cognitive dissonance for you when the Bible meaning is so plainly against it.
So in the end this denying the plain meaning in the Bible becomes commonplace for you and I guess you actually think that what you are saying is true.

It is specific to the promise of the when the Messiah returns the Nation of Israel will be restored. as promised. Edict of Toleration (1844) - Wikipedia

The Edict was seen by some especially among the religious as a specific sign leading towards the fulfillment of prophecy.

Research conducted by Michael Sours[5] into this subject and the records of the development of the Edict did not refer directly to the Jews but rather infers religious tolerance through ending executions for apostasy for Jews that seemed to convert making their social situation easier while actually keeping their personal and group identity in their Judaic religion. Jerusalem has had the largest Jewish population in Palestine in recent centuries since about 1844[8] and been majority Jewish since about 1852.[9]

The Edict was first publicly commented upon by Reverend Edward Bickersteth in his publication, Practical Guide to the Prophecies in the 1844 edition.[4] Adventist William Miller, and those that disagreed with him, though unaware of the Edict and the diplomacy around it, still looked to the fortunes of the Ottoman Empire even in the period.[10] Miller pointed to the year because of the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8:14, relying on the Day-year principle. The 2300 days are understood to represent 2300 years stretching from 457 BC, the calculated starting date of the 70 weeks prophecy based on the 3rd decree found in Ezra, thus leading to 1843/4. Bickersteth acknowledged the same interpretation and added a second - Ezekiel 4:5 - as a parallel to start the clock for understanding Revelation 9:15; taking 390 years as a period for persecution of Christians in the End time. Bickersteth takes this persecution from the triumph of Ottoman rule of Constantinople in 1453, thus 1453+390 is 1843/4, directly before these events. Thus, independently of Miller, a number of Christian authors followed the significance of this declaration from Bickersteth including Alfred Edersheim,[11] a Jewish convert to Christianity and a Biblical scholar, and Henry Grattan Guinness[12] who broadened the themes of the understanding of the edict and its importance, and into the early 20th century with Worth Smith who mentioned it in his 1934 Miracle of the Ages.[13] Adventist mention of the Edict wasn't until 1917.[14]

Thornton Chase, commonly recognized as the first convert to the Baháʼí Faith of Occidental background, noted the Edict in his publication The Bahai Revelation published in 1909.[15] An Irish convert to the religion, George Townshend was the first broadly published to mention the Edict in Baháʼí literature in 1944[5] when he wrote:

What prophecies did Jesus fulfill that cannot be considered coincidence or subjective claims? Are there any specific prophecies that you can cite that specifically point to the date of the fulfillment by Jesus from the Torah?

There are supposed to have been a number of things that have happened that made it easier for the Jews to return their promised land.
Baha'i picks out the 1844 Edict because it coincides with the 1844 date that is supposed to coincide with the coming of Baha'u'llah. But does it even do that?
I hear the 1844 is also special for the Mormons who say that the santuary was reconsecrated then,,,,,,, the priesthood was restored etc.
Dan 8:14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”
I'm not sure why anyone would want to start the 2300 days prophecy from 457BC when that is just the start time for the 70 week prophecy and has nothing to do with the 2300 days.
I don't know what Ezek 4:5 has to do with any of it.
I don't know why there is any need for a day for a year understanding of the 2300 days.
When I read the Daniel 8 prophecy I read:
Daniel 8:9 Out of one of them came another horn, which started small but grew in power to the south and to the east and toward the Beautiful Land. 10 It grew until it reached the host of the heavens, and it threw some of the starry host down to the earth and trampled on them. 11 It set itself up to be as great as the commander of the army of the Lord; it took away the daily sacrifice from the Lord, and his sanctuary was thrown down. 12 Because of rebellion, the Lord’s people[a] and the daily sacrifice were given over to it. It prospered in everything it did, and truth was thrown to the ground.
13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, “How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, the surrender of the sanctuary and the trampling underfoot of the Lord’s people?”
14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”

This seems to mean imo that from the time that the daily sacrifice was taken away and his sanctuary thrown down, to the reconsecration of the sanctuary would be 2300 days, and that is was going to be a literal days.
It's no good to just start wherever you want and not bother about what exactly the prophecy says.
Sure Baha'u'llah is supposed to have brought an understanding of these things, but when it does not make sense then that is evidence against that idea.

In reference to actually reading the prophecy to find out what it says, I would say the 1290 day prophecy of Daniel 12 is a good case. The prophecy says this:
Daniel 12:11 “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days.
In this site" Prophecy of Daniel; Modifications of Baha'u'llah and the New Era
we see that the start of the 1290 days was when the prophethood of Muhammad was proclaimed in the country of Hijaz.

So what has this to do with the daily sacrifice being abolished and abomination the causes desolation being set up? (who knows, maybe they were saying that Muhammad is the abomination that causes desolation)
But do you see what I mean. For Baha'i it is just numbers that end up at the right year and have nothing to do with the actual prophecies in the Bible.

There are more things about the interpretation of this prophecy by the Baha'is which are very strange also, but I won't mention them now.
What I will say is that the 1290 days has no need to be changed to a year for a day interpretation.
The 1290 days is just a specific period of time close to the time Jesus will return, the last few years before that happens imo.

 

[Dimi95]

What is your answer HERE?

Snipes of old references out of context concerning radiometric dating are not current concerning the accuracy of multiple dating methods today. I believe I remember this conversation and at the time you were responded to and corrected. Yes you are behind in your science. We use multiple dating references today and they are accurate.

Please use current scientific references and be specific, because it reflects your overall view of how scripture is understood in context of history, science and archaeology.

Again , your assumption is wrong.
No one corrected me on that.
Please show me how i am behind

Failed to respond. Your view of science is relevant.

How does science interact with truth?

We are talking about truth.

 

[shunyadragon]

Again , your assumption is wrong.
No one corrected me on that.
Please show me how i am behind

I did today we use multiple dating methods to date fossils, and actually more sophisticated radiometric dating methods. Again you need to cite current references and be completely certain of any unfounded assertions of dating methods instead of selective snipes from old sources.

Yes, I believe this has been addressed before, because it is a common erroneous claim by a number of Creationists.

How does science interact with truth?

Extremely important to understand the difference between the methods of understanding the real world through objective evidence, and the limits of what can be called 'Truth.' You have previously made at least on erroneous statement concerning the Philosophy of science and the claims of 'Truth' in this thread.

Unanswered question: Do you accept the knowledge of science? Claims of subjective 'Truth' do not trump the objective evidence of science.

We are talking about truth.

Unfortunately there is no objective evidence that any one of the many contradictory conflicting religious claims of different religions represent any sort of absolute "Truth"

 

[metis]

Perfect example of this is the Richard Leakey case.He discovered Skull 1470 near the east shore of Lake Rudolf in Kenya and thought the skull was 2.6 million years old.Leakey’s Skull 1470 was initially dated at Cambridge Laboratory (England) with the potassium-argon method. The first date was 221 million years.After more tests they got another date of 1.8 million years from the University of California, Berkeley.'

So it is not as precise as we taught

Science is a process, not a conclusion. As time has gone on, there a better understanding of what works best to give more accurate measurements. As an anthropologist, now retired, we have to rely on experts in sciences different than ours for dating purposes, and they, like us, have gotten more accurate as time has gone on.

IOW, we're all "a work in progress".

 

[Endure]

The Gospel of John
Chapter1 - Word is God and became flesh -God the Son
Chapter 14&16 - Holy Spirit sent when Jesus goes back to His Throne
Chapter 17 - Father and the Son are One- they are one but 2 persons. Are you saying the Father and Son are the same person like Jesus was talking to himself?

More of your misrepresentation of Scripture.

John 14:21,23 Jesus says that "HE" will come to live with those who love and obey Him.

HE will.

And in those 2 verses, He mentions a 3rd person of the trinity not one single time.

 

[Endure]

Not sure what you believe, do you believe Jesus Christ is God incarnate?

That's what the Bible teaches.

 

[Endure]

When I asked you before how many
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you said one and now you say 3?

Nope.

Your post said 3 gods, but you weren't aware that you said it so I pointed it out for all to see.

That breaks the parameters of your trinity position. In all arguments for the trinity, proponents are always very careful to reassure that God is ONE, not 3 gods.

Your post violated that when you made God 3 gods.

More points for ONEness.

 

[Dimi95]

I did today we use multiple dating methods to date fossils, and actually more sophisticated radiometric dating methods. Again you need to cite current references and be completely certain of any unfounded assertions of dating methods instead of selective snipes from old sources.

No , you need to present your evidence,since you claim that is from old sources.

Most people assume that radiometric dating can find ages for almost anything.But that is not the case. It’s especially problematic for dating early human remains.

Radiometric dating relies on three assumptions:

-We can reasonably reconstruct the conditions when the process started.
-The rate of change has stayed the same throughout the past.
-Nothing has happened to contaminate the process.

An hourglass “clock” is a good analogy for understanding how all dating methods (not just radioactive decay) work using physical processes. They begin with three crucial assumptions. If the assumptions are wrong, then it doesn’t matter how accurate the measurements are ,the conclusion will still be wrong.

*The original number of unstable atoms can be known. Scientists assume how many atoms appeared at the beginning based on how many parent and daughter atoms are left today.

*Scientists assume that radioactive atoms have changed at the same rate throughout time

*The daughter atoms were all produced by radioactive decay. Scientists assume that no outside forces, such as flowing groundwater, contaminated the sample

These three assumptions can never be proven about rocks in the past. After all, who was there to continuously measure the rate to verify it stayed the same as today’s rate? Who witnessed the starting conditions? And who has continuously monitored the process to confirm that it was not contaminated? No one!

Yes, I believe this has been addressed before, because it is a common erroneous claim by a number of Creationists.

Feel free to present it.

Extremely important to understand the difference between the methods of understanding the real world through objective evidence, and the limits of what can be called 'Truth.' You have previously made at least on erroneous statement concerning the Philosophy of science and the claims of 'Truth' in this thread.

No i did not , i just stated that Philosophy of Science explains how Science does not determine truth - nothing else.

Unanswered question: Do you accept the knowledge of science? Claims of subjective 'Truth' do not trump the objective evidence of science.

For certain , we can't state the answer in one sentence.

I always chose to make an argument of the Theory of Evolution.

I belive in what Darwin observed,but i am not sure that the mechanism of mutation and natural selection can bear all the weight that's put on it.
Like producing consciousness and so on..

Unfortunately there is no objective evidence that any one of the many contradictory conflicting religious claims of different religions represent any sort of absolute "Truth"

Then please state on what grounds should we talk about truth and i will follow it.

 

[Dimi95]

Nope.

Your post said 3 gods, but you weren't aware that you said it so I pointed it out for all to see.

That breaks the parameters of your trinity position. In all arguments for the trinity, proponents are always very careful to reassure that God is ONE, not 3 gods.

Your post violated that when you made God 3 gods.

More points for ONEness.

What is one , since you are so smart?

 

[Eli G]

I cannot prove it, except to myself.

That I thought. Thanks for your honesty.
I can prove Jesus is God's Son, though; there is not comparison with your spiritual leader.

"The first Baha’i principle is the independent investigation of reality. Not found in any sacred Book of the past, it abolishes the need for clergy and sets us free from imitation and blind adherence to unexamined, dogmatic beliefs. ...

Mmmmh, interesting.
Bahais first need to question BahaUllah under that premise. He is not superior to Jesus in absolutely anything.

 

[Dimi95]

Science is a process, not a conclusion. As time has gone on, there a better understanding of what works best to give more accurate measurements. As an anthropologist, now retired, we have to rely on experts in sciences different than ours for dating purposes, and they, like us, have gotten more accurate as time has gone on.

IOW, we're all "a work in progress".

Yes , and i agree with you.

Just because we don't know yet , doesn't mean we will not know.

But untill oposite is proven , we take the data and evidence that we have and rely on them.

There are still errors in dating fossils.I assume also that with time they will be more accurate and we will know more.