It is currently Sun Aug 19, 2018 12:07 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 121 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:15 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
SteelHead wrote:
Neither huckleberry or nightlion seem to know what constitutes evidence.


Puzzled I checked a dictionary but did not learn anything new. Perhaps Wikapedia would clarify.
It proposes:
"Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence. "

I gather you mean example one, proof. No there is no proof of Jesus resurrection there are reports of the event derived from his early followers.

I started my question about extraordinary claims with the question of how to deal with uncertainties in mind.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:39 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
No I mean evidence: The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

The problem is there are no facts in your "evidence".

Fact: A thing that is known or proved to be true.

Unattributable written accounts penned some 60 years after an event, and the event is supernatural at that, might be evidence in your view, but it isn't in mine. It is not a "fact".

Hypothesis: Jesus resurrected from the dead.
Best available evidence: unattributed, 3rd hand account, written 60 years after the fact.

Not very supportive of the hypothesis, now is it?

Produce the ressurected Jesus. Show that he is indeed the son of God. Then you might have something. What you have now is faith based on myth.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:01 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
honorentheos wrote:
Rereading the latter thread I linked to above, I see that the primary remaining argument was that the belief Jesus was raised from the dead was present in early Christian writings beginning with Paul, which means whatever problems may exist with the accounts in the gospels we have today we ought to weigh the fact that some belief in a resurrected Christ was present at an early stage following his execution by the Romans.


Honorentheos, I certainly agree with this summary. On this thread I could have use more care in selecting examples. In priority the Catholic Church would be first as it was its witness to Paul which Paul reports to have received within a few years of Jesus death. Paul writing being earliest Christian documents we have would be the next witness. I think it is clear that Mark luke Matthew, John had received the general idea of Jesus resurrection but did not have clear details of the discovery or realization so cobbled a narrative as best they could.

In your second link I think you focused a good bit upon the role expectation had in the creation of this strange belief held by the early Christians. I agree that points out the area where doubt best focuses. I do not think that the lateness of the gospel narratives introduces as much reason to doubt a real resurrection as the possibility that hope and expectation generated the belief can be seen as an alternative .

Though some people do ask themselves why there is so much hope focused upon Jesus. Was there something distinctive about him that people were reacting to?(there have been other messiahs who did not rise from the dead)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:07 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
huckelberry wrote:
honorentheos wrote:
Rereading the latter thread I linked to above, I see that the primary remaining argument was that the belief Jesus was raised from the dead was present in early Christian writings beginning with Paul, which means whatever problems may exist with the accounts in the gospels we have today we ought to weigh the fact that some belief in a resurrected Christ was present at an early stage following his execution by the Romans.


Honorentheos, I certainly agree with this summary. On this thread I could have use more care in selecting examples. In priority the Catholic Church would be first as it was its witness to Paul which Paul reports to have received within a few years of Jesus death. Paul writing being earliest Christian documents we have would be the next witness. I think it is clear that Mark luke Matthew, John had received the general idea of Jesus resurrection but did not have clear details of the discovery or realization so cobbled a narrative as best they could.

In your second link I think you focused a good bit upon the role expectation had in the creation of this strange belief held by the early Christians. I agree that points out the area where doubt best focuses. I do not think that the lateness of the gospel narratives introduces as much reason to doubt a real resurrection as the possibility that hope and expectation generated the belief can be seen as an alternative .

Though some people do ask themselves why there is so much hope focused upon Jesus. Was there something distinctive about him that people were reacting to?(there have been other messiahs who did not rise from the dead)


Problem is Paul had a solitary vision. What did he see? Was it Jesus? Was it Exu pretending to be Jesus? Is Paul's vision evidence of the ressurected Jesus, or evidence of an emerging Messianic Jesus mythos? It does not serve as evidence of the resssurection of Jesus. Paul was not there.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:22 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
SteelHead wrote:

Problem is Paul had a solitary vision. What did he see? Was it Jesus? Was it Exu pretending to be Jesus? Is Paul's vision evidence of the ressurected Jesus, or evidence of an emerging Messianic Jesus mythos? It does not serve as evidence of the resssurection of Jesus. Paul was not there.


SteelHead, i mentioned Paul as reporting what previous Christians had reported to him about the resurrection. Pauls own experience would be secondary. I can see your concern for the possibility that Paul's experience was more like the earliest Christian experiences than what the gospels describe.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:28 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
Again, I asked for evidence of the ressurected Jesus and there is nothing but 1st century innuendo. The case for Jesus as a real historical person is tenuous. The case for the ressurected Jesus is non existent.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 1:50 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
Huckleberry, if memory serves you are Christian/non Mormon.

Why do you find Paul's assertion of having seen Jesus believable, but Joseph Smith's not?

Is the evidence for either better than the other?

We have an extraordinary claim - Jesus is ressurected from the dead. And so far the evidence presented to support the claim is anything but substantial.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:31 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
SteelHead wrote:
Huckleberry, if memory serves you are Christian/non Mormon.

Why do you find Paul's assertion of having seen Jesus believable, but Joseph Smith's not?

Is the evidence for either better than the other?

We have an extraordinary claim - Jesus is ressurected from the dead. And so far the evidence presented to support the claim is anything but substantial.


SteelHead, I can remember struggling with the Joseph Smith question.(I was raised LDS) There is evidence against his trustworthiness. The Book of Mormon is such evidence. His lying about polygamy is such evidence. In general I do not find him attractive in what he proposes(particularly polygamy and overreaching authority) I do not want what he brought.

Pauls claim is a part of a group of witnesses. In a sense the strongest witness for me is the image of Jesus which was presented by the Early church. I find it of enough value that I keep it even with the knowledge that there is a possibility that Jesus resurrection is myth.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:33 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
Paul's witnesses occur within his own narrative, and no where else. This is akin to pointning out the number of people who reportedly saw ressurected Jesus in the Book of Mormon as evidence that Jesus actually visited the new world.

There is no other record of either event.

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 3:04 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
SteelHead wrote:
Paul's witnesses occur within his own narrative, and no where else. This is akin to pointning out the number of people who reportedly saw ressurected Jesus in the Book of Mormon as evidence that Jesus actually visited the new world.

There is no other record of either event.


The difference in provenance is very large. It is clear Pauls letters are genuine first century christian documents. It is not at all clear that Book of Mormon reports come from the first century. In fact there is a lot of evidence that they did not.

Now if your point is that just because Paul actually said so does not make it so, then I see that is true. I have agreed there is no objective certainty about Pauls reports. However his reports fall into a network of related reports which increase their importance. For me the picture of Jesus acts and speaking are the most important part of that network. If it had been just Paul seeing things then nobody would have bothered to remember his story.(and I would not bother to believe it if I stumbled upon it)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 3:26 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 10624
Location: Multiverse
huckelberry wrote:
SteelHead wrote:
Paul's witnesses occur within his own narrative, and no where else. This is akin to pointning out the number of people who reportedly saw ressurected Jesus in the Book of Mormon as evidence that Jesus actually visited the new world.

There is no other record of either event.


The difference in provenance is very large. It is clear Pauls letters are genuine first century christian documents. It is not at all clear that Book of Mormon reports come from the first century. In fact there is a lot of evidence that they did not.

Now if your point is that just because Paul actually said so does not make it so, then I see that is true. I have agreed there is no objective certainty about Pauls reports. However his reports fall into a network of related reports which increase their importance. For me the picture of Jesus acts and speaking are the most important part of that network. If it had been just Paul seeing things then nobody would have bothered to remember his story.(and I would not bother to believe it if I stumbled upon it)


There is more evidence for people, places and events in the New Testament than for the Book of Mormon. :cool: Even with all the wild fantasies of the OT, it's probably more credible as well. But the thing is, when you're an entrepreneur, you have to stand out in the marketplace, you have to push a new product, or what you pretend is a new product. Smith was "author and proprietor". Imagine some other guy trying to be the author/proprietor of the Bible, with all prophets, er, profits due. :wink:

_________________
You have made this ludicrous assertion about Israelite religion in the New World. Produce one shred of non-faith based evidence to prove it. --Philip Jenkins


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:37 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 7614
huckelberry wrote:
honorentheos wrote:
Rereading the latter thread I linked to above, I see that the primary remaining argument was that the belief Jesus was raised from the dead was present in early Christian writings beginning with Paul, which means whatever problems may exist with the accounts in the gospels we have today we ought to weigh the fact that some belief in a resurrected Christ was present at an early stage following his execution by the Romans.


Honorentheos, I certainly agree with this summary. On this thread I could have use more care in selecting examples. In priority the Catholic Church would be first as it was its witness to Paul which Paul reports to have received within a few years of Jesus death. Paul writing being earliest Christian documents we have would be the next witness. I think it is clear that Mark luke Matthew, John had received the general idea of Jesus resurrection but did not have clear details of the discovery or realization so cobbled a narrative as best they could.

In your second link I think you focused a good bit upon the role expectation had in the creation of this strange belief held by the early Christians. I agree that points out the area where doubt best focuses. I do not think that the lateness of the gospel narratives introduces as much reason to doubt a real resurrection as the possibility that hope and expectation generated the belief can be seen as an alternative .

Though some people do ask themselves why there is so much hope focused upon Jesus. Was there something distinctive about him that people were reacting to?(there have been other messiahs who did not rise from the dead)

To my mind there are generations of issues that collectively weigh against the resurrection being a historical fact.

For example, many of the writers of the New Testament including Paul present views of the Hebrew scripture and the relationship of Israel with their God being the one true god over all of creation. Yet this scriptural take on human history is demonstrably based on borrowed and evolving mythology representing one branch of mythology among countless others that were all swept aside by the discoveries made available through the scientific method. Paul or even the Jesus of scripture are not uniquely informed about the cosmos in ways that show they are unique while citing stories as fact that clearly are not such as the story of Noah or of Adam. While the OT and the New Testament have actual historic value, it is not uniquely revelatory, and there is clear evidence in both how typical human behaviors were fundamental to the creation of what some today view as the word of God.

That's not easy to overcome.

The gospels can serve as evidence for the historic existence of a person behind the Jesus mythology but the internal evidence presents challenges for anyone who wants to say they should be sufficient for faith to overlook the blatant issues the Judeo-Christian tradition faces when it comes to the progress of human knowledge. Two of the three synoptic are openly nothing more than concatenations of accounts that are contradictory and demonstrably propagandist. The four, the gospel attributed to John, is a work of fan fiction portraying Jesus as something beyond the views of the accounts of Mark or Paul. I don't know that one can seriously look to the New Testament and find sufficient cause for assuming the improbable that Israel happened to be the one culture on earth that believed in the one true God. It could not be due to direct teachings from father to son, Adam to Seth, as this is contradictory to the natural sciences. So for us to take the New Testament seriously we must believe that somehow or other the stragglers sent back to Jerusalem by Cyrus of Persia after their captivity and creation of the proto-Rabbinic Hebrew faith we might somewhat recognize as such did so carrying the favor of the one true God of the universe who then came among them in some form or other, lived, ministered and was executed to then raise (him)self up from the dead...(that really seems like a weird idea in and of itself), and the person who had lasting influence over the continuation of this belief in the one true God of the Universe was a Jewish Roman citizen who claims to have been involved in seeing believers in some form of unknown belief system around this person put to death by the Jewish leadership until he was visited by said one true God of the universe as no longer dead human being.

And what does he do? Tells the people who actually knew the being who turned out to be the One True God of the Universe in human form that he is really the one who knows what's what, and he's got ideas about what the world needs to know so get out of his way. Keep in mind that Paul was antagonistic to James the brother of Jesus and to Peter, and barely met with them at intervals of many years where these meetings were inevitably contentious and over who was teaching the right information about the One True God of the Universe. This Paul dude isn't into girls, and he wants everyone to know that they shouldn't speak in church, and guys would really do best to not marry them and stay away from any kind of icky sex stuff with them. But if you are weak unlike him, the One True God of the Universe has made provisions for that. But really, don't marry if you really want to honor the One True God of the Universe.

On top of which, there are many prolific writers including Philo of Alexandria who would have been contemporary to these events who didn't comment on them. I find the lack of statements on the part of such persons such as Philo who would seem like a person interested in wide spread and supported stories regarding the return to life of a person who had claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and had fulfilled the law deserving to be included among the evidence.

I don't know, huckleberry. There are plenty of accounts of aliens crash landing in the desert of New Mexico in the '50's that have become so permeated into our culture we know automatically what Roswell means and what is significant about it. But I don't believe those stories and don't view the proliferation of accounts and sharing of belief in those accounts to outweigh the evidence against this modern mythological event being true.

Certainly the accounts serve as evidence. And there are plenty of events in human history that are limited to just that kind of evidence that until other evidence comes along must be taken as the best info we have. But when it comes to the resurrection of one Jesus of Nazareth in the 1st C. of the Christian era I think we can include much more that makes it highly improbable. Certainly not worth following that Paul dude's system of beliefs.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 6:39 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 10624
Location: Multiverse
honorentheos wrote:

I don't know, huckleberry. There are plenty of accounts of aliens crash landing in the desert of New Mexico in the '50's that have become so permeated into our culture we know automatically what Roswell means and what is significant about it. But I don't believe those stories and don't view the proliferation of accounts and sharing of belief in those accounts to outweigh the evidence against this modern mythological event being true.

Certainly the accounts serve as evidence. And there are plenty of events in human history that are limited to just that kind of evidence that until other evidence comes along must be taken as the best info we have. But when it comes to the resurrection of one Jesus of Nazareth in the 1st C. of the Christian era I think we can include much more that makes it highly improbable. Certainly not worth following that Paul dude's system of beliefs.


Great connection. UFOs are, among other things, a modern religion. Roswell wasn't promoted for decades after its occurrence, not unlike some of the supernatural events in the New Testament and Mormonism that suddenly show up and become part of the foundations of an apologetic movement. :wink:

_________________
You have made this ludicrous assertion about Israelite religion in the New World. Produce one shred of non-faith based evidence to prove it. --Philip Jenkins


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 8:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7842
Location: What does the fox say?
Mg makes these appeals to word studies, and complexity, now huckleberry is making appeals to the import in lives and populism. When will these religious actually forward a hard piece of tangible evidence?

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:23 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm
Posts: 3715
One true religion handed down from Adam is a ridiculous idea. The Bibles religion is a particular development of the general stew of spiritual stories humans have used to try and understand how life works world wide.

Paul and Jesus's understanding of science and history was limited to what was culturally available to them. I have no reason to expect otherwise.

Of course the Bible is shaped by human experience. That experience is the bedrock of how we understand anything. If some idea appeared not so grounded it would not mean anything to people.

Back from Babylon Jews did not have special favor. they had a hope.

I do not think of God as a busy executive with out time to be born a human in order to help humans.

Honorentheos, your picture of Paul is to my understanding just bizarre.

Roswell?, that's what the Christian story adds up to for you? If so it would make little sense to believe it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:48 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 7614
huckelberry wrote:
One true religion handed down from Adam is a ridiculous idea. The Bibles religion is a particular development of the general stew of spiritual stories humans have used to try and understand how life works world wide.

Paul and Jesus's understanding of science and history was limited to what was culturally available to them. I have no reason to expect otherwise.

Of course the Bible is shaped by human experience. That experience is the bedrock of how we understand anything. If some idea appeared not so grounded it would not mean anything to people.

Back from Babylon Jews did not have special favor. they had a hope.

I do not think of God as a busy executive with out time to be born a human in order to help humans.

Honorentheos, your picture of Paul is to my understanding just bizarre.

Roswell?, that's what the Christian story adds up to for you? If so it would make little sense to believe it.

My view of Paul is based on a few simple historical truths that are significant yet rarely held up and examined. They include his overt lack of shared belief with the Jerusalem apostles. To me this point makes it very difficult for modern people to see the real beliefs and behaviors of the historical Jesus as his closest followers who knew him lost in a struggle with Paul in defining what Christianity became. It includes his earlier antagonism towards Christians in combination with point 1 above. It's difficult to view someone who had a true change of heart towards a group they were violently persecuting as then being antagonistic with the leadership of said group while also being sincere. It strikes me as opportunist born of understanding of the Christian worldview and seeing an opening he could exploit. Again, he seems to be an adaptor of the early Christian invention such that the outcomes do not really tell us much about the original underlying beliefs or people behind them. Lastly, his opposition to the Jerusalem apostles had much to do with opposition to observance of the law, which DOES give us a hint at the beliefs of those closest to the historical Jesus and what they likely believed when he was alive. The bits about his writings being misogynistic was mainly sport on my part. It's conceivable to me that the Catholic tradition of priesthood celibacy could be due to Paul being a-sexual or possibly gay-ish whlle being the kind of person who would codify his own feelings into the teachings he presented to the various churches he started while presenting sexual desire as a weakness.

As to the Roswell point, I'm merely pointing out how outlandish beliefs are reported in our own time. And this reporting is easily seen as insufficient cause to overlook other evidence when it is available. In the case of the resurrection, there is much that is available to consider that IMO outweighs any regard we should give to the handful of reports that show some people in the decades that followed believed it was a true event.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:51 am 
World's Top Zion Scientist
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 9837
Location: North Side of The Apocalrock
The Mind Numbing Continues Like An Intellectual Drunk To Bring On The Stupor.

_________________
The Apocalrock Manifesto and Wonders of Eternity: New Mormon Theology
https://www.docdroid.net/KDt8RNP/the-apocalrock-manifesto.pdf
https://www.docdroid.net/IEJ3KJh/wonders-of-eternity-2009.pdf
My YouTube videos:HERE


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 1:30 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 7614
Nightlion wrote:
The Mind Numbing Continues Like An Intellectual Drunk To Bring On The Stupor.

I love the random Deepak sayings generator too.

http://wisdomofchopra.com

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 11:01 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:53 pm
Posts: 1451
honorentheos wrote:
Nightlion wrote:
The Mind Numbing Continues Like An Intellectual Drunk To Bring On The Stupor.

I love the random Deepak sayings generator too.

http://wisdomofchopra.com
Bookmarked!

"Your consciousness is the womb of total acceptance of mysteries." Like the circles that you find in the windmills of your mind, Amen.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:20 pm 
World's Top Zion Scientist
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 9837
Location: North Side of The Apocalrock
honorentheos wrote:
Nightlion wrote:
The Mind Numbing Continues Like An Intellectual Drunk To Bring On The Stupor.

I love the random Deepak sayings generator too.

http://wisdomofchopra.com

For this I interrupted Sunday Wrestle Mania?

_________________
The Apocalrock Manifesto and Wonders of Eternity: New Mormon Theology
https://www.docdroid.net/KDt8RNP/the-apocalrock-manifesto.pdf
https://www.docdroid.net/IEJ3KJh/wonders-of-eternity-2009.pdf
My YouTube videos:HERE


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: LOL.....LOL....LOL....Evolution PROVEN FALSE
PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:15 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 7217
SteelHead wrote:

Produce the resurrected Jesus. Show that he is indeed the son of God. Then you might have something. What you have now is faith based on myth.


Depends on whether or not you believe in the reality of the First Vision. If Jesus did appear to Joseph, then He is resurrected from the dead.

Pretty cut and dried.

Regards,
MG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 121 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], huckelberry, Johannes and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group