Danielle

Cold is a relative concept: it’s converse is Hot, not Heat.

But even within the student’s own logical structure, the student is wrong by thier own argument. The student claims that -458°F is equal to No Heat, then makes a later claim that Cold is the Absence of Heat. The absence of something is typically understood as meaning there is nothing of that something. The Absence of Heat is therefore No Heat, which means that Cold, as defined by the student, does exist.

Student : What about Darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as Darkness?…Darkness is the Absence of Something… [sic] You can have Low Light, Normal Light, Bright Light, Flashing Light . . . [sic] But if you have No Light constantly, you have nothing and its called Darkness, isn’t it? In reality, Darkness isn’t. If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn’t you?

As with the Heat-Cold example, Darkness (Dark), in everday usage, is a relative concept, the converse being Lightness (Light). And the same mistake is also being made: says Darkness can’t exist then provides a definition to back up the claim that allows Darkness to exist.

It is also not neccessary to make Darkness Darker for Darkness to exist, based on the definition of Darkness the student provides. Darkness is the condition of “No Light constantly”; there is no need for a darker darkness.

Student : Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality. You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD. You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure.

That’s a non sequitur: starts off by claiming the Professor is making a logical fallacy called a Premise of Duality, but then goes on to talk about finiteness and measurability. And anyway, just because something may be not-finite (e.g., God) does not mean it can not also exist within a duality.

Student : Sir, Science can’t even explain a Thought.

Yes, and no. I can’t say of the top of my head what science is able and not yet able to explain on thought, but I’m fairly sure there are some things that can, at the very least, be basically explained.

Student : It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

Electricity is a vernacular term, not a scientific one. Even so, science has a pretty darn good understading of what is generally called electricity. And science understands magnetism.

The student rambles on about evolution. Usual Creationist claptrap. Easily refuted, and not neccessary to go into here.

Then the student presents his coup de grâce: how can we know the professor even has a brain?

[ka-thunk] -Head hits desk in stupifaction-

Scientifically speaking, we can test the hypothesis “The professor has a brain” quite easily. We have access to PET scaning and CT. If that is not evidence enough we can cut a hole in the professors skull and see the brain. The claim is testable and falsifiable.

That the professor says that we need to take it on faith that he has a brain is not a statement any such professor would (presumably) make. It is the argument of a theist trying to justify faith by putting the words into the mouth of a ’scientific type’.

But even so, we can be reasonably certain that the professor possesses a brain. No sentient being has ever been observed that has not had a brain, at least those that have been examined. We can make an inference based upon our experience of the natural universe.

Though inferences can be incorrect, they are still useful, if used properly. Even skeptics (unless they’re ultra-hard core) use inferences in everyday life (and even then, I’d posit that the ultra-hard core ones do, too). After all, we don’t walk out into the middle of traffic because there is an absence of evidence to conclude that this time no harm will come of us. It is entirely reasonable to infer that if one does so one may very well be involved in a collision with a vehicle, causing great harm – even death – to oneself.”

http://holocenehominoid.blogspot.com/2009/07/atheist-professor-of-philosophy-speaks.html

The Jews believe in a monotheism aproach to God. They believed that because the God said in Isaiah 44:6- Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. This belief of Monotheism is also correct for us today. There is but one God (Mark 12:32).

Now the next thing to understand is that this one God is a spirit. John 4:24- God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and truth.

Once we understand that their is one God, and this one God is a Spirit, we must understand who Jesus is.

The mighty God was manifested in the flesh. God is manifested in Jesus. Remember, Isaiah 9:6 tells us- For unto us a child is born and unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus said in John 10:30- I and my father are one. The Jews had answered him in verses 31-33-
Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Now that we know Jesus is God, and that God is God. We run into a problem, there is but one God. So who really is God?

Jesus said in Revelation 1:18- I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

God had said He was the first and the last in Isaiah 41:4, and 44:6.

The problem is that people can’t understand how Jesus could be both Man and God. But He was.
As a man, Jesus hungered, as God He feed five thousand people. As a man, Jesus experianced pain. As God he healed the sick and raised the dead.

The scripture says in 1 Timothy 2:5- For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. God in His experience as a man, bridged the gap between God and man, through the sacrifice on the cross.

In the NIV edition of the Bible, Titus 2:13 moves the comma to read- the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Showing us that their are not two different people in the God head, but only one Jesus Christ.

Jesus told Phillip “He that seeth me hath seen the Father.”

Jesus, the man prayed to the Spirit in Heaven. Not all of God went into Jesus, God was both in Jesus and in Heaven.

Let me ask you something. Jesus was called the Son of David. Is he the literal son of David? He must be because people take literally the Son of God.

Or could it be that Son of had a deeper meaning? Back then Son of meant in the flesh. Jesus was also God in the Flesh.

I found a website that actually worked to get a free IPod Touch! It should work for you too, it takes a few weeks to get it but hey it’s free!

http://absolutelyfreestuff.info/ipod.php – Click Here to get yours.