Without citing the bible, what marks the bible as the one book with God's message?

[Mark 13:13]

Well, apart from the one you got upset about, but then as you recognised that's what people do if they need to have such things.

Well tbh I never made that one up I accepted someones else's GOD to be something I believe in.

[Cyberman]

Ah - so you at least stand by that other person's model?

[Mark 13:13]

Ah - so you at least stand by that other person's model?

Stand by gives an impression of a static position but as the model allows for further revelation I am free to develop the model further using my subjective
experiences and any further development made by the Church. But TBH we are encouraged to develop our knowledge of GOD by personal experience.

[Ryantology]

But TBH we are encouraged to develop our knowledge of GOD by personal experience.

In other words, you're inventing what you want God to be. I do that when I write fiction, it's fun.

[Mark 13:13]

But TBH we are encouraged to develop our knowledge of GOD by personal experience.

In other words, you're inventing what you want God to be. I do that when I write fiction, it's fun.

Well if by subjective experience and subjective insights what in the extreme the church considers and terms Private Revelations you wish to define as inventing then yes. I would have many scientist in my company.

defination
to originate or create as a product of one's own ingenuity, experimentation, or contrivance

[Cyberman]

Ah - so you at least stand by that other person's model?

Stand by gives an impression of a static position but as the model allows for further revelation I am free to develop the model further using my subjective
experiences and any further development made by the Church. But TBH we are encouraged to develop our knowledge of GOD by personal experience.

It also gives the impression of supporting, upholding and/or defending a position. Whatever interpretation you feel best applies is your own.

[Ryantology]

Well if by subjective experience and subjective insights what in the extreme the church considers and terms Private Revelations you wish to define as inventing then yes. I would have many scientist in my company.

Last time I checked, science was not defined as 'the practice of knowing fictional beings'.

[Mark 13:13]

Well if by subjective experience and subjective insights what in the extreme the church considers and terms Private Revelations you wish to define as inventing then yes. I would have many scientist in my company.

Last time I checked, science was not defined as 'the practice of knowing fictional beings'.

i gave the defination of invent.

of course you can hold the existance of a strange object that has no volume and infinite density and be a scientist, you hold this strange and unprovable object as without it several important theories my collapse but with the "science of the gaps" and gaps in our knowledge is just because we need more time to close the gaps, and it seems every time we close one gap we create more. ( ps I do like science ) . So what scientists call a singularity , I am going to call sciences flying spagetti monster of the gaps as I see no difference in calling something as unbelievable and at present unprovable object at the heart of so much a singularity when we could call it something more fun. Of course when we close that gap the FSM will be in the next.

[Ryantology]

of course you can hold the existance of a strange object that has no volume and infinite density and be a scientist, you hold this strange and unprovable object as without it several important theories my collapse but with the "science of the gaps" and gaps in our knowledge is just because we need more time to close the gaps, and it seems every time we close one gap we create more. ( ps I do like science ) . So what scientists call a singularity , I am going to call sciences flying spagetti monster of the gaps as I see no difference in calling something as unbelievable and at present unprovable object at the heart of so much a singularity when we could call it something more fun. Of course when we close that gap the FSM will be in the next.

You can theorize the existence of a strange object with no volume and infinite density and still be a scientist. You can't state that such an object certainly exists, and instruct others to form a personal relationship with this object, and be anything but a crackpot.

[Mark 13:13]

of course you can hold the existance of a strange object that has no volume and infinite density and be a scientist, you hold this strange and unprovable object as without it several important theories my collapse but with the "science of the gaps" and gaps in our knowledge is just because we need more time to close the gaps, and it seems every time we close one gap we create more. ( ps I do like science ) . So what scientists call a singularity , I am going to call sciences flying spagetti monster of the gaps as I see no difference in calling something as unbelievable and at present unprovable object at the heart of so much a singularity when we could call it something more fun. Of course when we close that gap the FSM will be in the next.

You can theorize the existence of a strange object with no volume and infinite density and still be a scientist. You can't state that such an object certainly exists, and instruct others to form a personal relationship with this object, and be anything but a crackpot.

thats true but you could have a discussion about how many singularities would fit into the volume occupied by the tip of a needle