NAME JUST ONE thing....ONE THING...revealed by God....

by Terry 284 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  Jeffro: Comparing 'immaculate conception' myths with in vitro fertilisation is an invalid comparison. One requires the genetic material to come from somewhere, the other requires gullibility and an overactive immagination.

  And yet, the Native Americans believed the whites had magical powers because of a compass needle. Ever stop and think how a culture incapable of comprehending in vitro fertilzation might describe it, due to the lack of knowledge?

  Is matter transference theoretically possible, or not? How about probable? Would it be more likely easier to move a large amount of matter, or a small amount?

  Is genome modification possible? Probable? Already a reality? I have seen a field of glowing tobacco. Wanna know how they did it?

  The fact is, until very lately conception without sexual union was considered impossible. Now we know it is possible. Which means it always has been possible. But it was declared possible long before human science declared it possible, wasn't it, Jeffro?

  He asked for one thing.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Little Drummer Boy

  I may have misunderstood (and that is highly likely ), but when Terry said name one thing revealed by God, I took that to mean explained and not described. If that makes any sense.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Jeffro: Re-ordering the available atoms of water cannot make wine. (You may like to take a look at a periodic table.) It would be necessary to split a portion of those atoms to form a smaller amount of the other elements required to make wine. And maybe a Haz-Mat suit.

  Okaaaay, I suppose this might have some relevance you are going to credit a narrative account from a fairly backwater corner of the globe as being scientifically accurate in its relation of how something witnessed was accomplished. And I think it's cute the way you assume we would currently be able to accomplish the trick if only ... we are only at the far edges of wishing we could do what we know to be technologically possible when it comes to replication and to reordering of atoms. We might need Haz-Mat suits to accomplish this anytime within the next 250 years, but if you look back at how far we have come technologically in the past 250 years perhaps we won't even need a Haz-Mat suit 250 years from now.

  The point of this is, transmutation of one form of matter into another form of matter is theoretically probable and people claim to have seen it done long before humans had the technology. Therefore, an extra-human or super-human source is reputed to have revealed as a reality something we can still only theorize about. Which goes directly to Terry's request.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  5go

  The point of this is, transmutation of one form of matter into another form of matter is theoretically probable and people claim to have seen it done long before humans had the technology. Therefore, an extra-human or super-human source is reputed to have revealed as a reality something we can still only theorize about. Which goes directly to Terry's request.

  No, because evidence has disproven that men in the past could of seen it because, the did not descibe the rather blinding and hot effects of matter conversion. Octam's Razor they saw a natrual phenenom called thought it was a transmutation and then embelished the story a bit.
• 

  AuldSoul

  LDB,

  Explaining things to a civilization incapable of comprehending them would be rather pointless. Reveal means to demonstrate, so I took him to mean "shown" by God (or some extra-human source).

  Telling an ancient civilization about DNA, for instance, would be pointless. Telling them that animals produce pheremones would be pointless. Telling them that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared would be pointless, even if you said that by way of explaining the cool things you could "turn water into", because they will focus only on what they see and would describe it the best they can manage from a position of relatively gross ignorance. So what that you know you didn't really turn water into wine, you can't possibly explain what really happened to people who aren't capable of comprehending it.

  We have reports of things happening that we now know to be scientifically possible and they happened before humans had the technology to accomplish them, or even comprehend how they were accomplished.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  AuldSoul

  5go: ...because evidence has disproven that men in the past could of seen it...

  I am afraid there is no such evidence.

  5go: ...the did not descibe the rather blinding and hot effects of matter conversion...

  This is only theorized as a possible side-effect of one proposed method to achieve matter conversion, 5go. There is no evidence that this is a necessary side-effect for the process to happen at all.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  LtCmd.Lore

  The point of this is, transmutation of one form of matter into another form of matter is theoretically probable and people claim to have seen it done long before humans had the technology.

  Yeah but that wasn't revealed by god, that fact was revealed to us by Rumpelstiltskin. All hail the Grimms brothers!

  Actually the water-into-wine thing had been done before... by Dionysus around 150-ish BC.

  Dionysus is the true god! Let's all get drunk to celebrate!

  Lore
• 

  5go

  This is only theorized as a possible side-effect of one proposed method to achieve matter conversion, 5go. There is no evidence that this is a necessary side-effect for the process to happen at all.

  It takes lots of energy to do that causing light and heat. SEE ATOMIC AND HYDOGEN BOMBS
• 

  Little Drummer Boy

  Right AuldSoul, I agree with you, I wasn't clear in what I was trying to say.

  When I said explain vs. describe, I should have been more descriptive.

  I meant explain as in "God, explain to me how to do something usefull that I didn't figure out on my own." Obviously it would have done no good for God to explain the actual process of converting water into wine if they did not have the technology to do it themselves and could not have grasped it anyway. It would make sense given the context of the bible (assuming for a moment that the water to wine story happened and a God or other advanced being exists that did it) that it would just be stated "He turned water into wine, poof".

  I meant by explained, something along the lines of "God spoke unto me and did explain to me that when I wish to know a certain quantity x, which I do not as yet know, and I have two of them, and together they are four, that I may calculate this by stating it as 2x=4. He did speak to me in his wisdom and show me that, if I divide the 2 sides of what God has called an 'equation', by the number proceeding the x, then I will find the answer."

  See, that would be useful information given by God and would not be hard for ancient man to grasp.

  So, did God do that or anything similar?

  I dunno, but that is what I imagined Terry was talking about, not the stuff that wouldn't actually help early man (like how some woman suppossedly got knocked up without a guy around).
• 

  Terry

  It helps to understand the mentality that is alive and well on XJW Boards throughout the Internet when dealing with solid argumentation :

  1) Logic, consistency in argumentation and the use of critical thinking skills = Arrogance.

  2) Answering each post of worth, even though extending the debate into numerous pages = Obsession

  3) Throwing back a verbal 'rock' when one has first been thrown at you = Angry and mean-spirited person.

  4) Debating without sentimentality or partiality = Arrogance....oh, I see we are back at the start. ;)

  hillary_step, welcome to the melee. Now, if only Alan_F were here we could create a modern day version of Thermopylae!