Except that a respectful, meticulous, attentive and serious reading of the NT automatically and immediately raises questions that those "weird" theories address.
KILL this crowd Curry
Black holes are observable. What goes on inside a black hole is not. There are hypothesis what must happen if the rules of physics still apply but there is no way, even theoretical, to test.
Yes Ms. Bette Davis!
You have answered your own question. I think you are done and you are ready for a new chapter.
LMFAO!! Twinsie I was going to say the same thing.
Good morning, hope everyone is well and has a nice day
To me, an echo chamber is when the opinions are strictly opinions and aren't backed up with facts and people agree without using facts and reason. I find that the people who claim "echo chamber" just want everyone to agree with them regardless if they are actually right or not. I'd rather be an "echo chamber" than to just agree and not use facts and reasoning.
Seriously?? Who continually gets labeled as demented and stupid??
Religions are not all laws. Religion is based on FAITH.
AND--they rely on the public's support.
Ah, poor little boy. Is that all you have?
I think you missed my sarcasm
Therefore the peace of God:
You still understand Gods attitude toward sin. Its not trashed but fades away. It did its job labeling sin. But no one is held to its perfection. Don't play dense tainley.
Ezekiel must have been on pot-LSD brownies.
IT'S YANNY! Yo.
The types who against all of those are less common than you might think. They are certainly much more vocal though.
I said I want
"I recycle, drink responsibly, and try to reduce my carbon footprint!"
Just because Toronto has one of the lowest urban violent crime rates in Canada, and indeed the whole world, is no reason not to be frightened and angry.
Every bible I've seen reads as homosexual. Paul was pretty specific in what he said men shouldn't lay with men. Obviously we see this differently. Be well my friend. Good talking with you.
Wrong again on both counts. The courts have something called judicial review and a series of tests and formulas to map out their decisions. They meet together in a series of conferences to discuss the outcome of those tests and then decide (TOGETHER) the pros and cons of a decision. SO, I highly doubt that their personal pov, belief, opinions, concerns, experiences etc are not discussed and or do not make part of their decision. If lower courts do this and vote differently depending on state, depending on parties and religious affiliation then so do the supreme court justices who re all believers. You simply will not admit to the facts when they are smacking you in the face...
wow, you're out of control you crazy atheist!