@cmsj@BradCGZ@AboundingMyths The core was 47 columns of 5-inch thick steel at the base.
They can't take damage straight down and wouldn't be damaged by concrete that collapsed into dust by the time it got to the bottom.
They were left standing and fell from their base afterwards.
They were demolished.
@MobiusDick I'd be defining gods as symbolic.
God most high is truth.
Objective truth in the most fundamental sense is existence, confirmed by time.
The laws of physics are another god. One "created by" truth due to their unchanging nature and existence.
Therefore that god created us.
@SuiWuzHere@darwintojesus@MobiusDick You aren't religious or a theologian, so you didn't understand them and that's okay. Many Christians don't either.
This video is part 1 and there's a whole other lesson about how there's actually a god of law and a god of truth that are separate.
@MobiusDick You're assuming a sentient designer when the claim of god is not necessarily a claim of a being.
Only judeo-christians reading children's bibles believe this.
Unfortunately that's a lot of them.
@MobiusDick@SuiWuzHere@darwintojesus You're conflating symbolism with actualism.
If God represents truth, which is objective consistency, then the laws of nature which remain consistent would be sustained by truth.
The laws of nature created and sustain the universe which is created and sustained by god.
@PGastarbeiter@rbrtcoloradosci@JamesonMic24650@darwintojesus Yes, the god most high created the god that created the world.
The spiritual narrative is that the world is run by a legalistic god who shows no mercy.
That's why the god most high sending his son as a sacrifice freed humanity according to these "legal" rules.
It's symbolism.
@MassDebaterX@Colin0rga@JamesonMic24650@darwintojesus Ignorance is assuming you know what god is and then doubting that assumption.
Why assume you're right if these believing in god disagree that you are?
Is it because the dumbest person you've heard describe god sounds like they're wrong?
Now isn't that cherry-picking?
@MobiusDick You have to prove that treating religon as a scientific and unfalsifiable claim is accurate.
Only then is it logical to treat it as a factual claim and withhold belief.
If it's a symbolic claim then you are doubting it because you don't understand the symbolic translation.
@rastamarat@TravisHyer@darwintojesus Oof. For someone who clearly values wit, you seem extremely comfortable showing ignorance.
Calling knowledge fruit because it was symbolized that way in a parable is just silly and you know it.
@darwintojesus Atheists believe in Christianity.
I was an atheist for 20 years.
I realized that I believed I knew what Christianity was, so I could "disprove" or at least reasonably doubt it when in fact the narrative I knew was wrong and I "believed" Christianity was something it wasn't.