Pure Spirit? Really?

Czernobog

Gold Member
Sep 29, 2014
6,184
495
130
Corner of Chaos and Reason
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
Not even going to bother responding to that bullshit. Instead, I'll just wait for someone to actually respond to my OP.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
 
The explanation is simple. That came from ancient writings from a time when stories of Gods and supernatural occurrences were taken at face value. No one questioned whether you could actually hear a supposed god walking. Later, when all those ancient manuscripts were compiled, and people could compare the obvious discrepancies,they began making up things to explain those discrepancies away. There are lots of discrepancies throughout the Bible, and even more convoluted beliefs to try to make them all fit together.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
Not even going to bother responding to that bullshit. Instead, I'll just wait for someone to actually respond to my OP.
That’s the truth
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
Except that's not what it said. It says they heard his footsteps. One's footsteps cannot make a sound unless one is physical.

Next.
 
The explanation is simple. That came from ancient writings from a time when stories of Gods and supernatural occurrences were taken at face value. No one questioned whether you could actually hear a supposed god walking. Later, when all those ancient manuscripts were compiled, and people could compare the obvious discrepancies,they began making up things to explain those discrepancies away. There are lots of discrepancies throughout the Bible, and even more convoluted beliefs to try to make them all fit together.
Sooo...the shit was just made up. And we're supposed to take the bible seriously, why?
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
Not even going to bother responding to that bullshit. Instead, I'll just wait for someone to actually respond to my OP.
That’s the truth
It's really not, but even if it were, it doesn't address the question in the OP. I'll assume that you have no answer. You are dismissed.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
Except that's not what it said. It says they heard his footsteps. One's footsteps cannot make a sound unless one is physical.

Next.

Depends on what version of the Bible you use, but the main version of the Bible that is the most used is the KJV, and that verse says that they heard His voice as He was walking in the garden.

Next.

BTW, why the snark? I was actually trying to answer your question, not get into a pissing contest. At least, until you started it.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
Not even going to bother responding to that bullshit. Instead, I'll just wait for someone to actually respond to my OP.
That’s the truth
It's really not, but even if it were, it doesn't address the question in the OP. I'll assume that you have no answer. You are dismissed.
How are you going to post something and “dismiss” people with answers you don’t like. The bigger issue in your post needed to be addressed before answering the question. But whatever bye and enjoy your safe space SJW
 
Just like their wasn't a giant dude up on the mountain yelling for Moses to come up there.Same with the "voice" of the burning bush.Same with Noah.Same with Yeshua until he died and went home for orders on what to do next.People were more in tune then. The same way a Kogi in Colombia can smell animal urine from a couple hundred feet and even ID it as male or female ( confirmed with trail cams). It was before football, Fox News, NASCAR and porn ! The things that are most important to the 2 legged tards of today.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
Except that's not what it said. It says they heard his footsteps. One's footsteps cannot make a sound unless one is physical.

Next.

Depends on what version of the Bible you use, but the main version of the Bible that is the most used is the KJV, and that verse says that they heard His voice as He was walking in the garden.

Next.

BTW, why the snark? I was actually trying to answer your question, not get into a pissing contest. At least, until you started it.
Yeah.,..that's the problem with the King James. While the Old English is lyrical, the translation is, by far, the least accurate. You see, the word translated as "voice" in that verse is קוֹל(qowl), which acvtually means, either voice, or sound. However, the only other time "voice" is used is when it is actively ascribing the sound to a person speaking. Hence, the more logical translation in 3:8 is as it is found in the NIV - "Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day,"

Otherwise, if it was his "voice", what was he saying, and why was that not recorded, as it is every other time qowl is translated as "voice"?
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.
If God didn’t exist science wouldn’t exist. Common sense.
Not even going to bother responding to that bullshit. Instead, I'll just wait for someone to actually respond to my OP.
That’s the truth
It's really not, but even if it were, it doesn't address the question in the OP. I'll assume that you have no answer. You are dismissed.
How are you going to post something and “dismiss” people with answers you don’t like. The bigger issue in your post needed to be addressed before answering the question. But whatever bye and enjoy your safe space SJW
I dismiss responses that are non-sequiturs. If you would like to be recognised, try responding on topic.
 
Just like their wasn't a giant dude up on the mountain yelling for Moses to come up there.Same with the "voice" of the burning bush.Same with Noah.Same with Yeshua until he died and went home for orders on what to do next.People were more in tune then. The same way a Kogi in Colombia can smell animal urine from a couple hundred feet and even ID it as male or female ( confirmed with trail cams). It was before football, Fox News, NASCAR and porn ! The things that are most important to the 2 legged tards of today.
I would refer you to post #15. I already addressed the inaccurate translation of the King James.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
Except that's not what it said. It says they heard his footsteps. One's footsteps cannot make a sound unless one is physical.

Next.

Depends on what version of the Bible you use, but the main version of the Bible that is the most used is the KJV, and that verse says that they heard His voice as He was walking in the garden.

Next.

BTW, why the snark? I was actually trying to answer your question, not get into a pissing contest. At least, until you started it.
Yeah.,..that's the problem with the King James. While the Old English is lyrical, the translation is, by far, the least accurate. You see, the word translated as "voice" in that verse is קוֹל(qowl), which acvtually means, either voice, or sound. However, the only other time "voice" is used is when it is actively ascribing the sound to a person speaking. Hence, the more logical translation in 3:8 is as it is found in the NIV - "Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day,"

Otherwise, if it was his "voice", what was he saying, and why was that not recorded, as it is every other time qowl is translated as "voice"?
The KJV is a modern English translation.

And you're not fooling anyone; you're not trying to get a theist to explain the discrepancy.
 
The typical argument for why no objective, verifiable evidence of the existence of God is that God is a being of pure spirit, and science can only observe the physical.

Okay. So, someone explain Genesis 3:8.

I'll give it a shot.........................

God is a being of pure spirit and energy, which means that He would communicate via telepathy, and the reason they "heard" Him is probably that they heard Him thinking or more likely, felt His presence.

I mean, think about it..................when a person prays, they generally bow their heads and pray silently. That means they are using telepathy to speak to God.

BTW...................small favor next time...............could you include the whole Bible verse along with your OP next time? It sucks to have to go look up the verse on Google just so I can answer your question.

And no..................I'm not gonna post the verse for you either. If others want to know what the verse says, they can look it up themselves like I did.
Except that's not what it said. It says they heard his footsteps. One's footsteps cannot make a sound unless one is physical.

Next.

Depends on what version of the Bible you use, but the main version of the Bible that is the most used is the KJV, and that verse says that they heard His voice as He was walking in the garden.

Next.

BTW, why the snark? I was actually trying to answer your question, not get into a pissing contest. At least, until you started it.
Yeah.,..that's the problem with the King James. While the Old English is lyrical, the translation is, by far, the least accurate. You see, the word translated as "voice" in that verse is קוֹל(qowl), which acvtually means, either voice, or sound. However, the only other time "voice" is used is when it is actively ascribing the sound to a person speaking. Hence, the more logical translation in 3:8 is as it is found in the NIV - "Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day,"

Otherwise, if it was his "voice", what was he saying, and why was that not recorded, as it is every other time qowl is translated as "voice"?

Thank you for saying that the KJV is full of errors. Most Christians would yell and scream if you said that to them. But, what do you expect from a book that was translated from Hebrew, to Greek, to Roman, to English?

If you're only sticking point is that they heard His voice but didn't record it, ever consider that God may have been humming or singing to Himself? He may have been particularly happy that day.
 
The explanation is simple. That came from ancient writings from a time when stories of Gods and supernatural occurrences were taken at face value. No one questioned whether you could actually hear a supposed god walking. Later, when all those ancient manuscripts were compiled, and people could compare the obvious discrepancies,they began making up things to explain those discrepancies away. There are lots of discrepancies throughout the Bible, and even more convoluted beliefs to try to make them all fit together.
Sooo...the shit was just made up. And we're supposed to take the bible seriously, why?

I certainly take the Bible seriously, but not literally. There is a lot of honest guidance and comfort to be found in the bible. I use it for that. If you choose to take it literally, that's fine, but my life experience and logic doesn't allow me to do that. If it is more than I think it is, I hope someone will show me where I am wrong. It would be great to just let someone, or something make my decisions for me, and not have to worry if things will turn out for the best.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top