Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.1. How do explain Original Sin is there was no literal Adam and Eve?
???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
.
your post is meaningless without a practical application for whatever you are discussing ... not existence, your arbitrary and capricious statement of "God".
when you are referring to christianity just have the courage to say the existence of the christian god or if not whichever God you are referring to or as an open discussion for the Deities definition.
there is no "necessity" for the christian god ... than a self motivation for personal gratification.
.
I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.
Why? Should I have gone to a shrink so he could explain the theological axioms of human psychology to me?I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.
not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.1. How do explain Original Sin is there was no literal Adam and Eve?
???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.1. How do explain Original Sin is there was no literal Adam and Eve?
???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
So you have a degree in not believing the bible stories?not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.1. How do explain Original Sin is there was no literal Adam and Eve?
???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
mindless troll girl strikes again.......do you ever post anything relevant little girl?..........not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
What is it, in a "graduate level theology class" that you learn about a 6,000 year old earth, Arks that don't exist and talking serpents?
I have a degree in what you will never understand......So you have a degree in not believing the bible stories?not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.???....Original sin is not a concept of a "first sin"......it is a concept of a sin of our origin or nature as human beings....."we are sinful because we are human beings", not "we are sinful because of something Adam and Eve did once".......
you didn't even know that, did you.....
I just wasn't aware that the Benny Hinn Institute offered "graduate level" degrees in Sunday School.mindless troll girl strikes again.......do you ever post anything relevant little girl?..........not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.
What is it, in a "graduate level theology class" that you learn about a 6,000 year old earth, Arks that don't exist and talking serpents?
Maybe you're the moron who was teaching me in sunday school?I have a degree in what you will never understand......So you have a degree in not believing the bible stories?not in sunday school, in a graduate level theology class......I know, I went to sunday school. Trying to make me feel guilty if I don't let myself be "saved" by their god. Even at an early age I could tell that it was nonsense.several.....and was taught it in a class.......I bet you read that in a book.
.Lunchbox!
I remember many years ago Stephen Jay Gould talking about how he wished most of the people promoting evolution would shut up because they are making things worse. Arguing for evolution when they really have no clue what they are talking about. I think he was talking about Hollie.
No where that I'm aware if does Evolution claim that one species can evolve into another completely different species, but hey, she's an illiterate moron so what can one expect?
.PredFan: No where that I'm aware if does Evolution claim that one species can evolve into another completely different species, but hey, she's an illiterate moron so what can one expect?
well, there is an ordinary process Metamorphosis for a variety of beings that transform themselves from one form to another - it is only logical that the same process is employed for the transformation from one species to a new one.
.
The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
PredFan: The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
.
they are two distinct beings, what is the difference -
a simple imagination can invision the step in that process that would lead to an absolute change were it so desired.
Given the complexity of life and the fact that the paleontological record overwhelming reflects, not a gradual appearance of an ever-increasingly more abundant and varied collection of species, but a series of abrupt appearances and extinctions of fully formed biological systems, it's not unreasonable to argue that we are looking at a series of distinct, creative events orchestrated by an intelligent being over time.
does mdr, et all refute Metamorphosis ... crossing the void from one to another ?
becoming the intelligent designer is the goal whether one exists or not, just do it the right way, the Triumph of Good over Evil for the one that does exist displays little to no mercy.
.
No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
PDF: No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
.I remember many years ago Stephen Jay Gould talking about how he wished most of the people promoting evolution would shut up because they are making things worse. Arguing for evolution when they really have no clue what they are talking about. I think he was talking about Hollie.
No where that I'm aware if does Evolution claim that one species can evolve into another completely different species, but hey, she's an illiterate moron so what can one expect?
.PredFan: No where that I'm aware if does Evolution claim that one species can evolve into another completely different species, but hey, she's an illiterate moron so what can one expect?
well, there is an ordinary process Metamorphosis for a variety of beings that transform themselves from one form to another - it is only logical that the same process is employed for the transformation from one species to a new one.
.
The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
PredFan: The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
.
they are two distinct beings, what is the difference -
a simple imagination can invision the step in that process that would lead to an absolute change were it so desired.
Given the complexity of life and the fact that the paleontological record overwhelming reflects, not a gradual appearance of an ever-increasingly more abundant and varied collection of species, but a series of abrupt appearances and extinctions of fully formed biological systems, it's not unreasonable to argue that we are looking at a series of distinct, creative events orchestrated by an intelligent being over time.
does mdr, et all refute Metamorphosis ... crossing the void from one to another ?
becoming the intelligent designer is the goal whether one exists or not, just do it the right way, the Triumph of Good over Evil for the one that does exist displays little to no mercy.
.
No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
PDF: No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
your answer is telling and silly, of a typically brain dead bibleized zombie ...
what is the liquid solution transition "being" in the cacoon - being of course the biblical physicality ?
.
..
well, there is an ordinary process Metamorphosis for a variety of beings that transform themselves from one form to another - it is only logical that the same process is employed for the transformation from one species to a new one.
.
The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
PredFan: The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
.
they are two distinct beings, what is the difference -
a simple imagination can invision the step in that process that would lead to an absolute change were it so desired.
Given the complexity of life and the fact that the paleontological record overwhelming reflects, not a gradual appearance of an ever-increasingly more abundant and varied collection of species, but a series of abrupt appearances and extinctions of fully formed biological systems, it's not unreasonable to argue that we are looking at a series of distinct, creative events orchestrated by an intelligent being over time.
does mdr, et all refute Metamorphosis ... crossing the void from one to another ?
becoming the intelligent designer is the goal whether one exists or not, just do it the right way, the Triumph of Good over Evil for the one that does exist displays little to no mercy.
.
No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
PDF: No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
your answer is telling and silly, of a typically brain dead bibleized zombie ...
what is the liquid solution transition "being" in the cacoon - being of course the biblical physicality ?
.
I can't even understand wtf you are babbling about. The butterfly and the caterpillar ate not two different species or two different beings, or two different anything. They are both the same creature.
..
well, there is an ordinary process Metamorphosis for a variety of beings that transform themselves from one form to another - it is only logical that the same process is employed for the transformation from one species to a new one.
.
The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
PredFan: The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
.
they are two distinct beings, what is the difference -
a simple imagination can invision the step in that process that would lead to an absolute change were it so desired.
Given the complexity of life and the fact that the paleontological record overwhelming reflects, not a gradual appearance of an ever-increasingly more abundant and varied collection of species, but a series of abrupt appearances and extinctions of fully formed biological systems, it's not unreasonable to argue that we are looking at a series of distinct, creative events orchestrated by an intelligent being over time.
does mdr, et all refute Metamorphosis ... crossing the void from one to another ?
becoming the intelligent designer is the goal whether one exists or not, just do it the right way, the Triumph of Good over Evil for the one that does exist displays little to no mercy.
.
No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
PDF: No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
your answer is telling and silly, of a typically brain dead bibleized zombie ...
what is the liquid solution transition "being" in the cacoon - being of course the biblical physicality ?
.
I can't even understand wtf you are babbling about. The butterfly and the caterpillar ate not two different species or two different beings, or two different anything. They are both the same creature.
.PDF: I can't even understand wtf ( christian expletive ) - The butterfly and the caterpillar ate [sic] not two different species or two different beings, or two different anything... They are both the same creature.
Ok, I tried to talk sense to you but that was futile. Stay ignorant for all I care. Good luck with it..The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
PredFan: The caterpillar and the butterfly are not two different species.
.
they are two distinct beings, what is the difference -
a simple imagination can invision the step in that process that would lead to an absolute change were it so desired.
Given the complexity of life and the fact that the paleontological record overwhelming reflects, not a gradual appearance of an ever-increasingly more abundant and varied collection of species, but a series of abrupt appearances and extinctions of fully formed biological systems, it's not unreasonable to argue that we are looking at a series of distinct, creative events orchestrated by an intelligent being over time.
does mdr, et all refute Metamorphosis ... crossing the void from one to another ?
becoming the intelligent designer is the goal whether one exists or not, just do it the right way, the Triumph of Good over Evil for the one that does exist displays little to no mercy.
.
No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
PDF: No they aren't two distinct beings. A caterpillar and a butterfly are the same. They are at a difference stage of their life, but their DNA is exactly the same.
your answer is telling and silly, of a typically brain dead bibleized zombie ...
what is the liquid solution transition "being" in the cacoon - being of course the biblical physicality ?
.
I can't even understand wtf you are babbling about. The butterfly and the caterpillar ate not two different species or two different beings, or two different anything. They are both the same creature.
.
.PDF: I can't even understand wtf ( christian expletive ) - The butterfly and the caterpillar ate [sic] not two different species or two different beings, or two different anything... They are both the same creature.
because you say so ? ... one has wings, that doesn't count -
wtf (expletive) are you talking about ... of course, there is only "humanity" in your book, how coincidental to your response.
* they all look the same
at any rate the above is a composite illustration of boundless evolutionary parameters and possibilities free from physical limitations.
.
oh I remember......you were the halfwit who mistakenly thought he was precocious......You got stuck when I asked you how marsupials got from Australia and back, and turned all red and blew up!could be......did I slap you a lot for not listening?......because its obvious you didn't.....
????.....the chrysalis?.....what is the liquid solution transition "being" in the cacoon - being of course the biblical physicality ?
.
