Made in the image of God

@josephw said
Is that a deflection, or did you miss the point again?

It's a point-blank explicit rejection of what you posted.

@fmf said
Then we can agree to disagree on this one.

Sure.

I have zeal, but I'm not a fanatic. Maybe a little crazy. 😜

@josephw said
You're talking to a Christian FMF. Why do you think the whole world wants us and what we believe and know is the truth out of the way? We don't back down when the wind changes course. We have a book, and the words in it are inspired.

Yes, and your Christian faith is the basis of all your speculation and aspirations in these matters, all of which fall entirely within the realm of subjectivity. That you "have a book" and you assert that "the words in it are inspired" does not render your opinions about "the truth" objective.

@fmf said
Your insistence that you "know the truth" is subjective and not objective.

I know the truth both objectively and subjectively.

@fmf said
It's a point-blank explicit rejection of what you posted.

In denial?

Don't get upset. I'm just giving you a hard time. It's for fun, and it keeps me from having a heart attack.

@fmf said
Yes, and your Christian faith is the basis of all your speculation and aspirations in these matters, all of which fall entirely within the realm of subjectivity. That you "have a book" and you assert that "the words in it are inspired" does not render your opinions about "the truth" objective.

I know you have difficulty accepting that there are any absolute truths, but if there were, wouldn't they be understood objectively?

@josephw said
I know the truth both objectively and subjectively.

About supernatural beings and phenomena? No. What you claim regarding "the truth" in this regard is a matter of personal religious faith and is not objective.

It doesn't matter how certain you are that the things you have faith in are true, it does not create objectivity.

@josephw said
I know you have difficulty accepting that there are any absolute truths, but if there were, wouldn't they be understood objectively?

I think there are truths about which we can make objective statements. But the things you claim about supernatural causality are not among them.

@josephw said
In denial?

Don't get upset. I'm just giving you a hard time. It's for fun, and it keeps me from having a heart attack.

No. Your suggestion that I am making an attempt to "own" or "control" this forum, simply by sharing my perspectives, is daft.

@rajk999 said
God has written his laws in the hearts of people. Apparently Christians got left out.

How do you know that, did you read it?

@fmf said
All anyone is doing here is swapping opinions.

That maybe all you are doing.

@kellyjay said
The downfall of Adam wasn't his knowledge or lack of it of good and evil; he desired to be like God buying into the lie that was told to them, not trusting God, not taking God at His Word.

Gen 3:
But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So ...[text shortened]... , she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

Funny, I was talking to this snake the other day, who said that wasn't how it happened at all.

What, you don't believe snakes can talk?

@kellyjay said
That maybe all you are doing.

You too, KellyJay, you too. If what you were sharing were "absolute" and "objective" truth, then I would also believe it. But that's not what you are sharing. You are sharing the 'content' of your faith, which is merely a set of opinions and beliefs about yourself and your God figure.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

It means that the creation of man in Genesis is a story. We know this because we evolved into our current image.

If the clock of time could roll back billions of years to the universe before any life, do you think it would evolve exactly the same way again?

Do you think evolution in any conceivable world makes it inevitable that humans evolve in this same way every time? I mean there is suppose to be blind pitiless chance to it all according to Richard Dawkins.

@sonship said
If the clock of time could roll back billions of years to the universe before any life, do you think it would evolve exactly the same way again?

This is an interesting talking point.

But who would be the people to perceive and decide whether the two timelines were "exactly the same"?