You sure as hell aren't! lol
Well maybe the constitution needs some more amendments to stop the President from abusing innocent people because of the religion they happen to have been born into.
Yeah, about 30 years after the claimed event and so not contemporary to it. Nor is it known who wrote it. For documentation, that is a big issue.
Stop trying to imply that I'm a Hamas supporter. I don't support Hamas, and I'm not anti-Israel. I am anti far-right hatred, such the kind you peddle here on a daily basis.
So goyim may kill, bear false witness and commit adultery at their leisure.
Good question. Perhaps you could start with a few scientific studies that support your conclusion.
I agree that a lot of the Fundamentalists presume that only *their* version of Christianity is the "right" one, but above he seems to be trying to debate some sort of Deism with a "generic" Christianity.
The point is, this creep is a homophobic bigot.
Further proof that the notion of a ?spy? placed inside the FBI is nothing more than a silly conspiracy theory that does nothing but thrown the men and women of law enforcement underneath a Trump bus.
And you're not a climatologist either, but unlike you, I have actually done some real research. You're just parroting what someone else told you. Better an amateur scientist than a parrot.
Do you know about slavery before Christianity in the Roman Empire and in ancient Greece? What about slavery in the Ottoman empire? What about slavery today? ... top countries are all non-Christian ...
I mean heck, the goatherders who wrote the bible invented a set of objective moral standards, and also invented a god. They could have just invented one or the other.....
The Sausage Sucker posts a piece from RT. I thought you asswipes hated the Russians?
I totally set that up for you too. damn.
It's claimed that Matthew was not in Jerusalem. It has never been proven. His knowledge of Palestinian geography is quite a bit better than Mark's. In my view, though, as an adherent of Matthean priority, Mark's geographical "errors" are actually mainly about making sure Jesus spends enough time hanging out with the Gentiles outside Palestine. Mark thinks Jesus' body is "spiritual," so it's no harder for Jesus to walk to Tyre and Sidon than it is for him to walk on water. Mark is trying to refute some words that Matthew probably put in Jesus' mouth: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 15:24, NASB).
Would this one have been better?
Amounts to the very same thing in my opinion.
Indeed it is both fact and evidince. Not about the magic stuff, but the claims that can be falsified the bible makes many cliams that can be checked. And many have proven to be false