You ignored the rest of the question. Do you oppose Christian expansion in non Christian areas like China?
You didn't answer the question...
What race specifically are you talking about when calling me a racist?
Oh, wow...She needs therapy.
Which is why he said he would run a deficit for 2 years.
If you reread the OP you'll see that I wasn't trying to disprove God, and in fact specified that that
Pick this one: 16
I honestly don't remember me commenting on any anti-Muslim cartoon festival, whatever you mean by it. And I hardly ever refer to Muhammad's marriage with a 9 year old Aisha, because it was the norm at that time. The problem is not what Muhammad did or not, but the fact that Sharia uses his example to establish Islamic norms
If you get to use abortion bombers to smear the GOP, I get to use Mohammed Atta to define the DNC.
Sadly, if you had been chosen by Christ your hatred would have been abolished.
"The Truth", is not a 'concept', 'idea', 'scientific fact', or even 'multiple' truths.... It's One Person. The Person of Jesus.
The mechanism is design, just for the record. It's a well known thing, though not an easy thing to define. But I trust you don't mean to deny the existence of design - cars, computers, music, etc.
"God created us imperfect. So we will not stop being imperfect. That will go on forever, with every baby born. So why must a penalty be beared?
If your putting the NYT in the "use often" category you might be a lefty.
Have you spent anytime studying the life and works of people like Mother Teresa? Beyond what you think about her theology, you can very clearly see that her faith was in something that caused her to love and sacrifice for others.
Jesus was a carpenter, in a time and a part of the world where everything was made of rock
According to Christian theology, both the Gospel of John and Genesis are the inspired word of God. The creation account in John is just as valid as either account found in Genesis. Do you mean to say that Koine Greek is an earlier form of Greek than Modern Greek? I'm aware, and I never said otherwise. Logos is still the word used in the original text.
"But what the heck, you win"- I?m not here to win. I?m here to establish the truth, and unmask the manner in which your version is false.
God is the author of the Bible. That is enough for me.
"The presenter has invented a theory for which she has no evidence whatsoever and yet she presents it as if it is fact. Shocking."
Jesus says every word in the OT is righteous and true.
But it is about where I wouldn?t be comfortable with women around. Just like Victoria?s Secret.
>>"Jesus Christ did exist."<<
Well, if you want to view this as a black or white matter, then I have no sane choice but to believe that he was literally crazy.
Sort of renders your remark about the Gospel of Judas worthless.
If objective morality exists then we cannot know it. Such value would necessarily be intrinsic to an objective reality outside ourselves, and we seemingly have no way to observe intrinsic value outside ourselves. Which means that objective morality, if and however it should exist, is pretty moot as far as practical considerations go.
Most posters seem to be confused over objective morality. The key feature of it is the assumption of moral realism: that there is such a thing as morality as a real feature of our universe.
What kind of self respecting pimp drives Corolla?
Truth may not change but there are many variations of the Truth. Which one is the right one and why?
Hacking is a very specific term. What you're describing is influencing, which clearly took place.
I do to. :-) It's not like construction is a not-for-profit business. That builders are choosing to pass the material cost on to homeowners and keep a healthy profit for themselves is a choice they are making...
So the SCOTUS decisions are also not valid either?
Homosexual advocates want to, without proof, declaim that homosexuality has biological roots, they are ?born that way.? They want to convince people that if people are born homosexual in the same way that they are born black, then any moral objections to homosexuality are the equivalent of racial prejudice! But there is an unstated ethical proposition that congenital features are by definition immune to moral judgment. Well, homosexuality may have a strong biological basis, but so does pedophilia, rape and violent crime. There is as much, if not more, evidence that alcoholics are ?born this way,? than homosexuals. Answering the question of whether a particular inclination is inborn or acquired is not the same as answering the question of whether it is good or bad: Nobody is going to sing songs about how racists, rapists and alcoholics are ?born this way,? nor should they. When the moral case is INCONVENIENT to make, the easiest thing to do is to pretend that it is not there, and defer to ?science.?
"Anecdotal evidence", not conclusive evidence.
Overturning laws is part of a just system that progresses with knowledge.