im not an atheist, makes no mathematical sense, nor does the buy(more) bull(shit) god make any logical sense... maybe a deist on my best day, in the end you cannot get something from nothing, paradox if you ask me... but in reality i just dont care.
while in, and moving out of the cult, its like a roller coaster, emotionally, yet, for me, over time, i just take it one day at a time, and if appeasing some special deity is required, well i guess i failed.
lol.
Iriddle - please stop muddling natural evil with all those other things.
Only natural disasters prove beyond all doubt that the god of christian theism does not exist. You need to deal with the hard question I am asking not the easy one I am not.
No plane is going down - the sky isn't falling. This generalised sense of angst is the sine qua non of all apocalyptic religions.
won the premiership.. won the fa cup.. won the champions league.. that's the treble baby.
so amazing after we spent 44 years without anything.
no more "noisy neighbours".. now let's do it again, back-to-back, and achieve new heights - more consecutive premierships than anyone has every done before would be enough..
Rarely seen a team with such momentum and self-belief.
im not an atheist, makes no mathematical sense, nor does the buy(more) bull(shit) god make any logical sense... maybe a deist on my best day, in the end you cannot get something from nothing, paradox if you ask me... but in reality i just dont care.
while in, and moving out of the cult, its like a roller coaster, emotionally, yet, for me, over time, i just take it one day at a time, and if appeasing some special deity is required, well i guess i failed.
lol.
Iriddle - A tsunami proves beyond all doubt that the god of christian theism does not exist.
Collapsing towers and psychopathic Romans are not natural disasters.
What if it isn't just selection bias?
Then why do Muslims have exactly the same stories as christians?
im not an atheist, makes no mathematical sense, nor does the buy(more) bull(shit) god make any logical sense... maybe a deist on my best day, in the end you cannot get something from nothing, paradox if you ask me... but in reality i just dont care.
while in, and moving out of the cult, its like a roller coaster, emotionally, yet, for me, over time, i just take it one day at a time, and if appeasing some special deity is required, well i guess i failed.
lol.
You can believe or not believe, but I can't deny the supernatural "coincidences" that follow the things I pray about. - Iriddle
I was an evangelical, born-again for a decade after the cult. I also noticed these 'coincidences'. Then I became an atheist and nothing changed. It's called selection bias.
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
that has not been done
I just gave you half a million data packed scientific papers. Haven't you read them yet?
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
Radiometric Dating - A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
There is no proof that scientific dating debunks Bible chronology.
59,700 scientific articles explaining why radiometric dating is accurate.
164,000 scientific articles explaining how sedimentary rocks are dated
56,400 scientific articles describing how fossils are dated
134,000 scientific articles describing different radiometric techniques
77,500 scientific articles describing how and why radiometric dating can give false results
Where are your half a million papers showing bible chronology is reliable?
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
Bible chronology is certified as true...
THIS IS begging the question. You have all your work ahead of you to show that 'bible chronology' is anything more than the ravings of Iron Age drug addicts.
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
Fishy your OP is THE VERY DEFINITION of begging the question.
according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.
since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.
Since Jesus validated the creation of Adam and Eve as historical people and JC’s own lineage is traced all the way back to Adam, Bible chronology is certified as true...
Fishy are you familiar with the logical fallacy called ' begging the question '?
