But that's the point, dude. You DIDN'T address point #2. Animals mimicking speech without understanding it is not "talking animals", even if they know that "this sound gets that result". We're talking about a story in which a serpent (and another, with a donkey) had a conversation.
The verse you cited does indeed mean that God, as a concept, is considered to be outside of time-and-space; however, that has no bearing on it being a veiled prediction for either the Special or the General Theories of Relativity... especially since the concept of timelessness has nothing to do with either of those. As a cryptic messages go, that one fails on every level.
The verse in fact implies that God is not connected to the dimensional causality of Einsteinian Relativity, where space-time "bends" in response to a connection between speed and to mass. No reasonable person would have read that verse and concluded that it referenced a scientific principle, before that principle was discovered; you are just reading it in-reverse and making whatever you like fit the data.
The verse you cited does indeed mean that God, as a concept, is considered to be outside of time-and-space; however, that has no bearing on it being a veiled prediction for either the Special or the General Theories of Relativity... especially since the concept of timelessness has nothing to do with either of those. As a cryptic messages go, that one fails on every level.
The verse in fact implies that God is not connected to the dimensional causality of Einsteinian Relativity, where space-time "bends" in response to a connection between speed and to mass. No reasonable person would have read that verse and concluded that it referenced a scientific principle, before that principle was discovered; you are just reading it in-reverse and making whatever you like fit the data.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
