Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2021 22:18:21 GMT -5
In trying to rehabilitate this thread back to questions for gratu. Matthew places Jesus' birth squarely during the reign of Herod the Great. Indeed, the central dramatic event driving Matthew's infancy narrative is Jesus' escape from Herod's slaughter of all the male children under two years of age in the town of Bethlehem (Matt 2:16). This story cannot be given even a hint of credibility. Such an unprecedented slaughter of innocent children would have left its mark for years on the local population, as well as on those who documented the events of the day. Yet, despite the unparalleled brutality represented by the heinous murder of so many innocent children, not a single other source, Christian or non-Christian, makes any mention of this event. There is no mention of it in any Roman documents from that time period, or in any Jewish sources, such as the Talmud and the Mishna, both of which contain commentaries on local events. It is also not mentioned by Josephus, the principle Jewish historian of that time period, who wrote in extensive detail about events in the region and who would have relished the opportunity to add to the catalogue of wrong doings by Herod. There is also no mention of a slaughter by Philo, a prominent who also wrote at that time. Josephus' silence on this event, given both his detailed discussion of so many other events that took place at this time and his particular antipathy towards Herod leaves Matthew's account questionable. And so we find ourselves gathered around for bible study and we find the subject is Matthew's "Slaughter of the Innocents." We have all been taught the bible is the word of God therefor it can not be false. But think clearly for a moment if that idea is flawed. Please consider my rambling for a few minutes before you consign them to the round circular file. Matthew places Jesus' birth squarely during the reign of Herod the Great. We find Matthew's infancy narrative is Jesus' escape from Herod's slaughter of all the male children under two years of age in the town of Bethlehem (Matt 2:16). But here's the problem. This story cannot be given even a hint of credibility. Why not? Because such an unprecedented slaughter of innocent children would have left its mark for years on the local population, as well as on those who documented the events of the day. And yet, despite the unparalleled brutality represented by the heinous murder of so many innocent children, not a single other source, Christian or non-Christian, makes any mention of this event. There is no mention of it in any Roman documents from that time period, or in any Jewish sources, such as the Talmud and the Mishna, both of which contain commentaries on local events. It is also not mentioned by Josephus, the principle Jewish historian of that time period, who wrote in extensive detail about events in the region and who would have relished the opportunity to add to the catalogue of wrongdoings by Herod. And then I'm not sure if this ties in here but I seem to think so. While thinking if the slaughter of the innocents was a literary device and not a fact what if Herod and all Jerusalem knew of the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem (Matt2:3), and indeed Herod slaughtered the children of the whole town in the course of looking for Jesus (2:16), why is it that later in the ministry no one seems to know of Jesus' marvelous origins (13:54-55), and Herod's son recalls nothing about him (14:1-2)? Matt 13: 54-55 seems to indicate they did know who Jesus was just because they didn't mention every detail doesn't mean they didn't know about his origins. as to Matt 14: 1-2 i Believe Herods guilt and fear and belief in reincarnation over ruled any sensical comments from him in those verses. and needless to say we only have to look to our own modern population to see how quickly people forget their own history or any details about it. what is that old saying "shoot quickly and bury them deep" or even "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"... and then there is this take on the magnitude of the massacre: aleteia.org/2017/12/28/how-many-holy-innocents-were-killed-by-king-herod/
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 19, 2021 22:34:35 GMT -5
In trying to rehabilitate this thread back to questions for gratu. Matthew places Jesus' birth squarely during the reign of Herod the Great. Indeed, the central dramatic event driving Matthew's infancy narrative is Jesus' escape from Herod's slaughter of all the male children under two years of age in the town of Bethlehem (Matt 2:16). This story cannot be given even a hint of credibility. Such an unprecedented slaughter of innocent children would have left its mark for years on the local population, as well as on those who documented the events of the day. Yet, despite the unparalleled brutality represented by the heinous murder of so many innocent children, not a single other source, Christian or non-Christian, makes any mention of this event. There is no mention of it in any Roman documents from that time period, or in any Jewish sources, such as the Talmud and the Mishna, both of which contain commentaries on local events. It is also not mentioned by Josephus, the principle Jewish historian of that time period, who wrote in extensive detail about events in the region and who would have relished the opportunity to add to the catalogue of wrong doings by Herod. There is also no mention of a slaughter by Philo, a prominent who also wrote at that time. Josephus' silence on this event, given both his detailed discussion of so many other events that took place at this time and his particular antipathy towards Herod leaves Matthew's account questionable. And so we find ourselves gathered around for bible study and we find the subject is Matthew's "Slaughter of the Innocents." We have all been taught the bible is the word of God therefor it can not be false. But think clearly for a moment if that idea is flawed. Please consider my rambling for a few minutes before you consign them to the round circular file. Matthew places Jesus' birth squarely during the reign of Herod the Great. We find Matthew's infancy narrative is Jesus' escape from Herod's slaughter of all the male children under two years of age in the town of Bethlehem (Matt 2:16). But here's the problem. This story cannot be given even a hint of credibility. Why not? Because such an unprecedented slaughter of innocent children would have left its mark for years on the local population, as well as on those who documented the events of the day. And yet, despite the unparalleled brutality represented by the heinous murder of so many innocent children, not a single other source, Christian or non-Christian, makes any mention of this event. There is no mention of it in any Roman documents from that time period, or in any Jewish sources, such as the Talmud and the Mishna, both of which contain commentaries on local events. It is also not mentioned by Josephus, the principle Jewish historian of that time period, who wrote in extensive detail about events in the region and who would have relished the opportunity to add to the catalogue of wrongdoings by Herod. And then I'm not sure if this ties in here but I seem to think so. While thinking if the slaughter of the innocents was a literary device and not a fact what if Herod and all Jerusalem knew of the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem (Matt2:3), and indeed Herod slaughtered the children of the whole town in the course of looking for Jesus (2:16), why is it that later in the ministry no one seems to know of Jesus' marvelous origins (13:54-55), and Herod's son recalls nothing about him (14:1-2)? Matt 13: 54-55 seems to indicate they did know who Jesus was just because they didn't mention every detail doesn't mean they didn't know about his origins. as to Matt 14: 1-2 i Believe Herods guilt and fear and belief in reincarnation over ruled any sensical comments from him in those verses. and needless to say we only have to look to our own modern population to see how quickly people forget their own history or any details about it. what is that old saying "shoot quickly and bury them deep" or even "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"... and then there is this take on the magnitude of the massacre: aleteia.org/2017/12/28/how-many-holy-innocents-were-killed-by-king-herod/Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 19, 2021 22:45:38 GMT -5
Matt 13: 54-55 seems to indicate they did know who Jesus was just because they didn't mention every detail doesn't mean they didn't know about his origins. as to Matt 14: 1-2 i Believe Herods guilt and fear and belief in reincarnation over ruled any sensical comments from him in those verses. and needless to say we only have to look to our own modern population to see how quickly people forget their own history or any details about it. what is that old saying "shoot quickly and bury them deep" or even "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"... and then there is this take on the magnitude of the massacre: aleteia.org/2017/12/28/how-many-holy-innocents-were-killed-by-king-herod/Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction. That's why they call them apologists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2021 1:04:00 GMT -5
Matt 13: 54-55 seems to indicate they did know who Jesus was just because they didn't mention every detail doesn't mean they didn't know about his origins. as to Matt 14: 1-2 i Believe Herods guilt and fear and belief in reincarnation over ruled any sensical comments from him in those verses. and needless to say we only have to look to our own modern population to see how quickly people forget their own history or any details about it. what is that old saying "shoot quickly and bury them deep" or even "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"... and then there is this take on the magnitude of the massacre: aleteia.org/2017/12/28/how-many-holy-innocents-were-killed-by-king-herod/Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction. if you don't want your posts to draw contrary information to yours then i suggest you might want to stop posting...
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 20, 2021 10:01:38 GMT -5
Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction. if you don't want your posts to draw contrary information to yours then i suggest you might want to stop posting... That's not the problem, my purpose is to get others to think, which it seems I fail totally.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 20, 2021 11:20:13 GMT -5
From A History of Religion - The First 500 Years" by Dr. Gary E Hill
"What does it benefit the average Christian to find out and understand the legacy that exists in their religious heritage? Many people are taught to adhere to religious belief systems without understanding anything about their origin. Religions are not just a set of practices, nor are they sixty minuet sermons on a selected day. A simple definition of true religion from the Latin verb religare can be said as indicates a relationship that produces a positive reverence, fear, and respect to God‖. This reverence produces attitudes of the heart producing acts of adoration, rather than a ritual. The Greek Hill 2 threkseia ‘ (Strong, Kohlenberger, Swanson G2579) refers to the outward expression as well as the content of faith.‖ (Douglas, Tenney, Silva 1223)"
"positive reverence, fear, and respect to God" This begs the question why? What has a fictional god done to beg these?
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 20, 2021 15:59:07 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2021 0:52:15 GMT -5
Here's God's reply to the 'question' that intelchips is supposedly is asking me NOW. Clearly intellchips gives evidence that he cannot come to believe in God and those who keep trying to help him have much more patience that I do. I am quite satisfied to look back across a whole my own life ans SEE God in so many personal experiences that I will never doubt that God exists and never have doubted that He exists. And while I would like to help intelchips out of his old pioneer barn that has no windows, I have watch the stubborn lack of any affect. He that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Heb. 11:6) In fact in the time that I have posted on this board with barely puny evidence that my posts have helped anyone who posts here motivated my switch from posting for TMBers to posting for readers who were never 2x2s. My observations on this board are that 2x2ism is a training ground for Atheism. And so, because I will not willingly waste my time forever, some days ago I attempted to delete my account here and move on to more fruitful places – but could find no method for deletion of a TMB account. If I had found such a method this post would not be here. go to your profile click the button "edit profile" go to the category "settings" go to the bottom of it and you will see the delete your account option click on it and follow any prompts and then save settings
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2021 1:11:44 GMT -5
go to your profile click the button "edit profile" go to the category "settings" go to the bottom of it and you will see the delete your account option click on it and follow any prompts and then save settings
Thanks Wally – this is the fourth time in several days that I have posted regarding the well hidden method to delete ones own account on this board – but I'll give er try – if successful be encouraged that after over a year of trying to help all on this board, I accept that you are one who may well be a real believer in spite of 2x2ism – farewell.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jan 21, 2021 1:21:35 GMT -5
Matt 13: 54-55 seems to indicate they did know who Jesus was just because they didn't mention every detail doesn't mean they didn't know about his origins. as to Matt 14: 1-2 i Believe Herods guilt and fear and belief in reincarnation over ruled any sensical comments from him in those verses. and needless to say we only have to look to our own modern population to see how quickly people forget their own history or any details about it. what is that old saying "shoot quickly and bury them deep" or even "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"... and then there is this take on the magnitude of the massacre: aleteia.org/2017/12/28/how-many-holy-innocents-were-killed-by-king-herod/Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction.
Not so much an excuse as an explanation of why history may not have recorded it as a huge event, as explained in this excerpt from the linked article'
"Professor William F. Albright “estimates that the population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus’ birth to be about 300 people. The number of male children, two years old or younger, would be about six or seven.” Other scholars claim the number was between 10 – 20 male children in Bethlehem and the surrounding area.
This low number of deaths is the likely explanation for why there exist no secular historical accounts of the massacre. Simply put, a handful of children killed by a local ruler was not “noteworthy” enough".
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 21, 2021 9:14:28 GMT -5
Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction.
Not so much an excuse as an explanation of why history may not have recorded it as a huge event, as explained in this excerpt from the linked article'
"Professor William F. Albright “estimates that the population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus’ birth to be about 300 people. The number of male children, two years old or younger, would be about six or seven.” Other scholars claim the number was between 10 – 20 male children in Bethlehem and the surrounding area.
This low number of deaths is the likely explanation for why there exist no secular historical accounts of the massacre. Simply put, a handful of children killed by a local ruler was not “noteworthy” enough".
Hi Dan William F. Albright a much respected pioneer in his filed. While I'm not well versed on the magnitude of how many children were supposedly killed I do know that many of his ideas have been replaced by his peers. In any event it may be tradition that gives us all the impression it was many children that were killed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2021 13:40:09 GMT -5
Not so much an excuse as an explanation of why history may not have recorded it as a huge event, as explained in this excerpt from the linked article'
"Professor William F. Albright “estimates that the population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus’ birth to be about 300 people. The number of male children, two years old or younger, would be about six or seven.” Other scholars claim the number was between 10 – 20 male children in Bethlehem and the surrounding area.
This low number of deaths is the likely explanation for why there exist no secular historical accounts of the massacre. Simply put, a handful of children killed by a local ruler was not “noteworthy” enough".
Hi Dan William F. Albright a much respected pioneer in his filed. While I'm not well versed on the magnitude of how many children were supposedly killed I do know that many of his ideas have been replaced by his peers. In any event it may be tradition that gives us all the impression it was many children that were killed. that has got to be one of the sliest admission that one possibly got something wrong, without saying they were wrong...
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 21, 2021 13:54:23 GMT -5
Hi Dan William F. Albright a much respected pioneer in his filed. While I'm not well versed on the magnitude of how many children were supposedly killed I do know that many of his ideas have been replaced by his peers. In any event it may be tradition that gives us all the impression it was many children that were killed. that has got to be one of the sliest admission that one possibly got something wrong, without saying they were wrong... Seems I remeber something along the lines of The first non-Christian reference was made by centuries later by Macrobius (c. 395–423), who writes in his Saturnalia: "When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered killed, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son." Byzantine liturgy estimated 14,000 Holy Innocents while an early Syrian list of saints stated the number at 64,000 and then Coptic sources raise the number to 144,000. I wasn't there but I do know a fair number of current scholars acknowledge that it is was a fictional ploy written into the gospel along with many others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2021 14:24:17 GMT -5
that has got to be one of the sliest admission that one possibly got something wrong, without saying they were wrong... Seems I remeber something along the lines of The first non-Christian reference was made by centuries later by Macrobius (c. 395–423), who writes in his Saturnalia: "When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered killed, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son." Byzantine liturgy estimated 14,000 Holy Innocents while an early Syrian list of saints stated the number at 64,000 and then Coptic sources raise the number to 144,000. I wasn't there but I do know a fair number of current scholars acknowledge that it is was a fictional ploy written into the gospel along with many others. ah back to business as usual... populations do ebb and flow but the ottomans record a population of about 1500 around 1596 in 1867 it was around 4000 in 1885 about 6,000 and then around 2007 25,000 none of those numbers could have ever have yielded 14,000, 64,000 or 144,000 killed children. i believe the only fictional ploy or porkies being told is by those stating those large numbers and those "current scholars" who wish to discredit the bible. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem <<< not the greatest source but does appear to contain the most information about bethlehems population over the years... lets face it with only about 10-20 children killed(tragic though it is) it was not that big of an event worthy of being recorded by the people of the time...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 21, 2021 18:43:08 GMT -5
Hi Dan William F. Albright a much respected pioneer in his filed. While I'm not well versed on the magnitude of how many children were supposedly killed I do know that many of his ideas have been replaced by his peers. In any event it may be tradition that gives us all the impression it was many children that were killed. that has got to be one of the sliest admission that one possibly got something wrong, without saying they were wrong... The critical word, Wally, is "possibly". Indeed, it is NOT a commitment to any certainty. It's how wise/truthful people express their agreement that possibilities remain, as opposed to inarticulate argumentative readers who can't understand that it is quite okay not to commit to any possibility, logical or imaginative.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jan 25, 2021 4:04:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 25, 2021 4:19:07 GMT -5
Seems I remeber something along the lines of The first non-Christian reference was made by centuries later by Macrobius (c. 395–423), who writes in his Saturnalia: "When he [emperor Augustus] heard that among the boys in Syria under two years old whom Herod, king of the Jews, had ordered killed, his own son was also killed, he said: it is better to be Herod's pig, than his son." Byzantine liturgy estimated 14,000 Holy Innocents while an early Syrian list of saints stated the number at 64,000 and then Coptic sources raise the number to 144,000. I wasn't there but I do know a fair number of current scholars acknowledge that it is was a fictional ploy written into the gospel along with many others. ah back to business as usual... populations do ebb and flow but the ottomans record a population of about 1500 around 1596 in 1867 it was around 4000 in 1885 about 6,000 and then around 2007 25,000 none of those numbers could have ever have yielded 14,000, 64,000 or 144,000 killed children. i believe the only fictional ploy or porkies being told is by those stating those large numbers and those "current scholars" who wish to discredit the bible. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem <<< not the greatest source but does appear to contain the most information about bethlehems population over the years... lets face it with only about 10-20 children killed(tragic though it is) it was not that big of an event worthy of being recorded by the people of the time... That is just it, wally.
It wasn't recorded at the time because it didn't happen
The whole story was made up much, much later by the gospel writers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2021 9:16:10 GMT -5
ah back to business as usual... populations do ebb and flow but the ottomans record a population of about 1500 around 1596 in 1867 it was around 4000 in 1885 about 6,000 and then around 2007 25,000 none of those numbers could have ever have yielded 14,000, 64,000 or 144,000 killed children. i believe the only fictional ploy or porkies being told is by those stating those large numbers and those "current scholars" who wish to discredit the bible. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem <<< not the greatest source but does appear to contain the most information about bethlehems population over the years... lets face it with only about 10-20 children killed(tragic though it is) it was not that big of an event worthy of being recorded by the people of the time... That is just it, wally.
It wasn't recorded at the time because it didn't happen
The whole story was made up much, much later by the gospel writers!sorry maybe i wasn't clear enough. it wasn't recorded because there were only 10-20 children killed. in days when whole cities were put to the sword it would not have been a blip on the radar...good try though
|
|
|
For gratu
Jan 25, 2021 12:36:06 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by nathan on Jan 25, 2021 12:36:06 GMT -5
Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction. if you don't want your posts to draw contrary information to yours then i suggest you might want to stop posting... *** Intel wants people to take his information as truth without challenging, he gets upset when we question his information.
|
|
|
For gratu
Jan 25, 2021 12:38:33 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by nathan on Jan 25, 2021 12:38:33 GMT -5
That is just it, wally.
It wasn't recorded at the time because it didn't happen
The whole story was made up much, much later by the gospel writers! sorry maybe i wasn't clear enough. it wasn't recorded because there were only 10-20 children killed. in days when whole cities were put to the sword it would not have been a blip on the radar...good try though ** These atheists used to be 2x2s but they forget the event of killing the innocence children was foretold or prophesied hundred of years in the Old Testament.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Feb 21, 2021 16:37:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 21, 2021 17:29:40 GMT -5
Seems you have an excuse for every literary fiction. That's why they call them apologists. Wally's source is from an apologist site, Aleteia - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleteia
Aleteia is an online Catholic news and information website founded in 2011/2012 by Jesús Colina via the Foundation for Evangelization through the Media. It has the approval of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications and the Pontifical Council …
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Feb 21, 2021 17:33:30 GMT -5
if you don't want your posts to draw contrary information to yours then i suggest you might want to stop posting... *** Intel wants people to take his information as truth without challenging, he gets upset when we question his information. "he gets upset" Really? Can you point to any place on this forum where I show signs of being upset? If you choose to believe fables that doesn't upset me in the context of this forum. If at the level of government making laws I have to follow and you do so based on your belief in fables then I shall become upset.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 17:42:03 GMT -5
That's why they call them apologists. Wally's source is from an apologist site, Aleteia - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleteia
Aleteia is an online Catholic news and information website founded in 2011/2012 by Jesús Colina via the Foundation for Evangelization through the Media. It has the approval of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications and the Pontifical Council …
facts are facts...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 17:47:13 GMT -5
*** Intel wants people to take his information as truth without challenging, he gets upset when we question his information. "he gets upset" Really? Can you point to any place on this forum where I show signs of being upset? If you choose to believe fables that doesn't upset me in the context of this forum. If at the level of government making laws I have to follow and you do so based on your belief in fables then I shall become upset. Nazi Socialism Feb 9, 2021 at 10:03am "Is it me that can't express an idea or you that can't read with understanding?" sounds at the very least a bit annoyed....
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Feb 21, 2021 19:02:33 GMT -5
"he gets upset" Really? Can you point to any place on this forum where I show signs of being upset? If you choose to believe fables that doesn't upset me in the context of this forum. If at the level of government making laws I have to follow and you do so based on your belief in fables then I shall become upset. Nazi Socialism Feb 9, 2021 at 10:03am "Is it me that can't express an idea or you that can't read with understanding?" sounds at the very least a bit annoyed.... In what world have you ever been correct? I'm as stoic as you can find.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 21, 2021 19:48:13 GMT -5
Wally when will you start using Facts to back up your reasoning? It's not enough to just say "Your wrong" and then move on. Give us an Hour lecture on why Nathan is wrong? i do and i don't. my prerogative. i feel no obligation to give a dissertation every time i state an opinion or fact i understand. i tend to keep it fairly short generally a paragraph or less. sometimes i supply links sometimes i don't. i definitely quote scripture though often. i've also been known(rarely) to copy and paste longer articles of others. but i tend to like short summaries best. getting to the point is always better i say. dating systems do NOT add up with the bibles(yes its not a history book) record of time. going by Jesus's lineage takes us back 6,000 years to Adam and Eve and stops. then the creation story accounts for 6 days of creation and 1 day of rest. You might(i doubt it) be able to convince me the day mentioned is a God day(1000 years = 1 day) and not a Human day(24 hrs)so i might consider the earth to be 13,000 years old. either way though humanity is only 6,000 years old. that said here is a link about why almost all dating systems are poor or false: biblicalscienceinstitute.com/origins/creation-101-radiometric-dating-and-the-age-of-the-earth/ There in lies is the problem. your link is : biblicalscienceinstitute.com
The Biblical Science Institute is a creation-themed science ministry The Biblical Science Institute is a Christian ministry using one book, the bible, -trying to combine "science" with "theology."
When attempting to find accurate scientific knowledge for all of the world, -using only one belief from one book does not work for several reasons.
Christianity use one religious belief, -out of the multitude of religious beliefs relying one book.
There are many other religious beliefs using different religious texts in the rest of the world which reach different conclusions than Christianity.
The scientific method does not and cannot limit it's research to only one part of the world or universe for that matter.
So, if you need accurate universal knowledge you can depend on, -you cannot rely on individual reginal beliefs. It is just that simple.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 20:25:01 GMT -5
Nazi Socialism Feb 9, 2021 at 10:03am "Is it me that can't express an idea or you that can't read with understanding?" sounds at the very least a bit annoyed.... In what world have you ever been correct? I'm as stoic as you can find. i'm as right as rain....fess up...you get annoyed/upset along with he rest of us St. Intelchips...good try though
|
|