if you are working out...you should be focused on that and not other people
Nonbelievers don't claim to be experts on the existence of god, their only task is to test the veracity of religious argument.
"Trump says steel imports are a threat to national security. The defense industry disagrees"
Yup. Sounds about right to me..
As an atheist, yes I follow reasonable evidence. If the experts say they found verifiable evidence of an original Nazareth, then I can except that. It is actually no big deal and only proves that the original city existed. That in no way validates the issues (non-verifiable miracles, stories based in magic, ambiguities, contradictions) of the Bible.
Raphael Rodriguez?s essay would be a good start it is available online and is a few pages. But the questions about the criteria for historical authenticity have been discussed in academia for the last 10 years.
I read this article the other day lol.
Billy is scared of me! ??
I never block anyone, with the exception of those bots or whatever they were a couple weeks ago. Kind of fun to watch the forehead vein bursting open??????
Not really, the OT god is a big old jerk. He muders folks in anger, all the time. He allows somone to have thier life ripped apart for a bet. He asks for a man to kill his son as a sacrifice and so on.
not at all! the split and delegation of the imperial power was a necessity. it was an attempt to delegate the enormous task of running the empire and to try and ensure some kind of peaceful succession, which was a total clusterf*ck throughout the history of the empire.
I suspected that. I - myself - spent my entire education in a Catholic School. They are the ones who coined the sentence: "give me a child, and I will give you a Jesuit".
I'll start giving a damn about how many tourists do or don't go to Nazareth if I decide to vacation there. In the meantime, what I do give a damn about is what religious origin stories can tell us about the ways that religions exercise power. That means investigating the stories and critically sifting them to separate truth from falsehood. If your point is "Nobody knows, so who cares?", my counterpoint is "Nobody knows, so let's go with the argument with the better evidence." If I didn't care, I wouldn't be debating... and if you didn't care, neither would you :)
Not including me. I wasn't alive at the time. But man creates characters the same way: imagining their qualities, writing down their qualities into stories to inform character, then having others read this story.
Lol! I've heard from women that, certain physical.... deficiencies... can be tough to overcome I've been told. When a woman holds up her index finger, raises her eyebrows and nods her head, and I go..."really?" and she says..."yes, he wasn't really hitting anywhere close to the right places" I kinda felt bad for the guy.
Of course we are. I answered your question and you didn't like that I was able to answer it without God.
Like in a court of law, yeah...many suggestions of the truth off the facts presented. There's only one truth though. Its interpretation your side suggesting truth, with God evidence suggesting truth. You reject God by accepting another. It's how it works, intentionally...weeds out those that simply don't want God. It matters apparently to God, like us. We give our heart to Whom we choose and it matters. God too
Nice quote. What other cute quotes can you cherry pick?
I agree in the sense that ending government (and insurance company) involvement in healthcare slowly will result in costs declining. If hospitals want to stay in business, they will be forced to lower costs. The large portion of medical expenses go to overhead at the insurance company level, rather than actually paying for a doctor's time and material.
Would you be less anxious if we didn?t pick on people who brought it on themselves? Lololol
It all comes down to what the contract says.
In general, Christianity has changed its views on a lot of things, and while I agree that the Bible is anti-gay if Christians want to get rid of that part, then cool. I have no problem with them doing so.
"In April 1983, Social Security reforms were passed. The reforms enabled our government to collect what accumulated to the $2.6 trillion in the Social Security Trust Fund. (The $2.6 trillion is a combination of taxes collected and accumulated interest.)
Your subjective and hypocritical standard is noted.
You have no clue where to begin, a person who doesn't believe in arithmetic could never solve an equation.
I think it would have been cool if he was stoned to death, or drowned. Instead of wearing a cross, people would be wearing a stone, or a bucket of water.
No. Haters of our rights are libs.
The OP is an open question. I don't see how asking a question can be speaking for all anything.
Do you disagree?
*snort* True story.
Not at all
Tightly written, cohesive! No scholar believes this.
You seem to be unfamiliar with the basics of constitutional democracy.
Nobody is confused. Amung his observations involved his insider take on the Fox audience( you) and a cult like unwillingness to even consider a fact that is negative to Trump.