Isaac Denny

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@fawzydawah You got wounds in your hands and side? Lines on your back? No? Then you’re not my God✝️

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@TheExBeliever As a former ape, nah bro imma need some evidence for that.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@AbaddonSpeaks @bp26_p Where does Ps 49 say it is talking about just a sinful man? It says it can “never suffice”. Not “well it could if we didnt sin”. Then it says “God will ransom my soul” in v15

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@AbaddonSpeaks @bp26_p Ps 49:7-9 a man cannot ransom another. That’s pretty clear. Comparing christ to adam in that chapter establishes his humanity but does not rule out his divinity

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@bp26_p @AbaddonSpeaks Yeah makes no sense for a single human, with no divine nature to ransom the whole of humanity.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia And a mind sets the parameters that defines that path as the right one. Thanks for the convo

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia Not subjective all the same. Subjective morality grounded in humanity changes as humanity changes; on a whim. God does not change or contradict his nature. I am not arguing it is arbitrary and disconnected from a mind if that is your definition of objective.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia He can't do something that the objective moral system says is immoral because the moral system is defined by his nature. It is not arbitrary and disconnected from him in a way that he can go against it

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

Right but in order to get the path, you admit a mind had to define efficiency = shortest route. So, it's still defined by a mind. Additionally, morality is a little different from the shortest path example in that there could be multiple shortest paths, but they are not all equal in morality. There is more to define than just the initial parameters, which also requires a mind.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia That's where we are disagreeing. He does not need to be constrained by that morality to be considered perfectly moral. The law is a reflection of his perfect moral nature, not something we must judge him by to show he is moral. that would be circular

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia No. god’s nature is the standard, so he is perfectly good by what he is, not by conforming to a rule outside himself. It's a false dilemma you got there

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia I’m not sure I follow. You admit a mind defines efficiency, which parallels to defining what is moral.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia Not sure how you get there... God's nature defines the system, so he is not subject to it. It is grounded in his essence, not arbitrarily defined

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

The analogy flops, bro. It assumes the parameters of efficiency are set, which requires someone or something to set it.

"Asking for a mind is like saying 'the most efficient path through a forest requires a mind to create it.'"

The efficient path requires a mind to set the parameters for efficiency, so I need something else.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@Branch_Dwidian @DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia That's what I'm saying: the objective standard is grounded in God's nature, his mind, which defines universal truths and reality. God doesn't just decide morality or reality based on his opinion or personal feelings whatever that would mean.

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @Branch_Dwidian @DP323X @lostinganglia Objectivity means independent of creaturely opinion, not independent of every mind. A necessary divine nature can ground moral facts without making them subjective the way human preferences are.

It does not change from subject to subject. It is defined once and holds for all

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia So, you are saying there are multiple "efficient" paths depending on what metric you pick. Okay, who/what picked the metric??😆 We're talking ab 1 objective standard, not multiple options

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia In your analogy, who says what efficiency is? is it to minimize the time it takes? or the distance walked? There is no "most efficient path" if nobody defines what efficiency means. And why is the path authoritative over the us? why isn't it optional?

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia Wow. The dishonesty here is crazy. I know you aren't claiming there is one. You made a positive claim that if there was one it wouldn't need a mind. PROVE IT! IF THERE IS ONE how did it get there? We say God, you say "uh idk"

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia how did it get there then?

[Isaac Denny @IsaacDenny4]

@DaviddRhome @DP323X @lostinganglia That doesn't answer my question. I asked you does it exist or does it not?

do you just not believe anything? is that your position?😆

Have a nice day