Paid to care?

flower

flower

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by KingSmith
http:///forum/post/3194096
Have God or Religion explain this with something besides faith or divinity

You can't.
a little story:
A man once asked a Rabbi to give him faith to believe if there is a God. So the rabbi told this story…
Once a man named Moshe was traveling and came to a small town, the people were all huddled in a circle around a small fire trying to get warm.
Moshe took a billows and showed the towns people how to use it. They were so grateful! His billows had made the little fire just burst into big flames and everyone was warmed. They made him a hero and gave him a key to the city. Moshe sold them his billows so they could make their own fire after he left.
Years later he was travelling again, and stopped in the town. The people hated him and cast out his name as a scammer. “What’s wrong” he asked “ last time I was here everyone loved me”
They told him his billows was a fake and a scam, it didn’t work after he left. They doubted it ever worked, just a joke on them.
Moshe couldn’t believe it, “let me see the billows” he examined it and it was fine…worked like it should…So to prove the point, the townspeople took him to the town square to show him how useless it was.
“See for yourself” they said, as they pumped away at the billows with no effect at all on the wood pile. “I see the problem now” Moshe told them, "you need to have a little spark first."
So the Rabbi explained, you must believe in God first…then you can have faith. If you don’t have a least a little spark, I can’t help you.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member

Originally Posted by Flower
http:///forum/post/3194088

Yes Meowzer...sinister.
The very fact that Mithras, which is indeed Greek Mythology is what makes MODERN Christianity downright evil. Constantine had a sinister plot to get rid Judaism and it's off shoot sect of Christianity …He just changed the new movement (Christianity) to his sun god by changing the names. This very much appealed to the pagans..Slick…then he told the pious that he wanted the people who worshipped pagan gods to turn to Christianity and by keeping certain dates and aspects it could be done. Rather than loose the new converts they allowed it, and now it is 1,685 years later and the lie continues, he succeeded and has duped the world..
Reef_Dart21: I have my doubts you ever really read the books...but..
The ONLY reason the bible looks like Greek mythology is because those with a western thought see the verses with the wrong mindset. You see the same words, but understand them differently than the Eastern mind that penned it.
An example:
I was at one of those little churches, not the mainstream. Some lady got up and declared she had a dream…In it she saw a lion come running and when it got to her town it stopped and roared.
The whole place busted out in happy dance shouting the Lion of the tribe of Judah was coming.
When they settled down, I raised my hand to be allowed to speak. I told them that while they see the lion as a kingly beast (western), it is a beast of destruction in scripture (eastern). I then spent the rest of the night showing those scriptures to different people. Yep…I was the party pooper..I got kicked out for being too Jewishy. True story.
To the folks in the USA, the owl as a symbol of wisdom, in the Bible it is a harald of death.
The eagle is a great majestic bird here. In the Bible when it says eagle it means, a volture.
If you think of Jesus as a demi-god it does look like Greek...Hercules was part man, part god. Then toss in human sacrifice, a thing God has hated throughout scripture.
On the subject of sacrifice:
The sacrifice the "new" testament is talking about is like the sacrifice a fireman or a soldier who dies in the line of duty. If they sacrifice their life to save you, then you should live a good life to show honor to thier efforts. If a good man dies for a person who does nothing but evil all his life, it is slap in the face to the good man, because he died for nothing.
Dont act like you know everything what you said is just ONEof theory they created to what really happened. You can ramle on about jeudism and other religions all you want but its not going to change that they are only funny bed time stories. Evolution, as of now, is the only theory to life that has strong evidence against it.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
Originally Posted by YearOfTheNick
http:///forum/post/3193971
ReefDart, show me your sources. Please. Show me some proof... hopefully you can do more than just flap your gums.
Heres some books:
The Blind Watchmaker--by Richard Dawkins
A very clear and eloquent explanation of how the mechanisms of evolution function. Very enjoyable to read. Reading this book is about the easiest way in the world to understand evolution.
River out of Eden --by Richard Dawkins
Somewhat more brief than The Blind Watchmaker, somewhat less technical as well, but just as powerful and beautiful an account of evolution through natural selection.
The Selfish Gene (1989 edition) -- by Richard Dawkins
A reprinting of one of the most accessible and understandable works on the driving forces behind evolution. It is a joy to read, for layman, student, and expert alike.
Evolution and the Myth of Creationism--by Tim M. Berra
This book is really good at answering a lot of supposed evidence against evolution.
Cosmos --by Carl Sagan
The book to the famous TV series. It follows the order, but goes into more detail than the show can, and is very fascinating.
Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors--by Carl Sagan and Anne Druyan.
This is a really interesting book with lots of interesting anecdotes about various relatives to humans. Some of the notes are as interesting to read as the book itself.
The origin of species by Darwin
heres some web pages:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ -explains a little as well as giving some other links
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ - this link if everythign read you will have a great understanding of evolutions basic mechanics.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm - this gives supporting evide
http://ncse.com/ - my favorite this is a site that defends evolution to be taught in schools
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
OK, time for some objective truth, since something that is incorrect has a nasty way of being believed on the internet:
"Flagellar motor defies natural selection in the sense that it has 40 parts in its makeup. None of the parts would have worked in any other way (Year of the Nick)": the bacterial flagellum does contain 40 parts, but all of those parts do perform other tasks in other bacteria, and have been repurposed in the flagellar motor. There is so much scientific literature on this that to assert otherwise reveals either deliberate misdirection or ignorance of the facts.
"Cambrian explosion": I'm so sick of hearing about the Cambrian explosion as if it were some magical event that disproved 150 years of detailed examination. First, this so-called explosion took millions of years - that's MILLIONS. Hardly an explosion. What we do know is that geological and atmospheric conditions changed around that time to favor fossilization, so you see better preservation. Pre-cambrian fossils do exist, and they are obvious precursors to the cambrian genera. In fact, the most common form of life on the planet today (flowering plants) did not appear until after the cambrian period.
"Galapagos? dude, that was disproven LONG ago (YearoftheNick)": Wow, really a far out misstatement. True, the finches do move to different parts of the island at different times of the season, but there is no die-off, and nothing about evolutionary patterns of the Galapagos species has been disproved. In fact, bio-geological evidence is one of the constant and most powerful lines of evidence favoring isolation as a speciation driver.
"Why are humans the only "apes" that developed the ability to communicate vocally or needs artificial means of surviving the elements? Show me the missing link? They have fossils to show the evolutionary stages of other species but not humans. (Reefraff)": Humans are not the only hominid or even "ape" that developed verbal communication. Recent work shows that chimps have an extensive vocabulary, and can warn tribemates of the presence of predators, where the predator is located (sky, ground, tree) and even the color of the predator. Prairie dogs can also warn that "something in yellow is coming from the sunward direction", for example. Speech is no big deal anymore. As for using artificial means of surviving the elements, that is extraordinarily common throughout the animal order. In fact, even invertebrates will manipulate their environment to improve their chances of surviving. As for the missing link, visit the American Museum of Naturel History, the British Museum, or if you are geographically prevented from visiting them , see this web site for a bare introduction to the large number of human ancestral fossils.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3194148
OK, time for some objective truth, since something that is incorrect has a nasty way of being believed on the internet:
"Flagellar motor defies natural selection in the sense that it has 40 parts in its makeup. None of the parts would have worked in any other way (Year of the Nick)": the bacterial flagellum does contain 40 parts, but all of those parts do perform other tasks in other bacteria, and have been repurposed in the flagellar motor. There is so much scientific literature on this that to assert otherwise reveals either deliberate misdirection or ignorance of the facts.
"Cambrian explosion": I'm so sick of hearing about the Cambrian explosion as if it were some magical event that disproved 150 years of detailed examination. First, this so-called explosion took millions of years - that's MILLIONS. Hardly an explosion. What we do know is that geological and atmospheric conditions changed around that time to favor fossilization, so you see better preservation. Pre-cambrian fossils do exist, and they are obvious precursors to the cambrian genera. In fact, the most common form of life on the planet today (flowering plants) did not appear until after the cambrian period.
"Galapagos? dude, that was disproven LONG ago (YearoftheNick)": Wow, really a far out misstatement. True, the finches do move to different parts of the island at different times of the season, but there is no die-off, and nothing about evolutionary patterns of the Galapagos species has been disproved. In fact, bio-geological evidence is one of the constant and most powerful lines of evidence favoring isolation as a speciation driver.
"Why are humans the only "apes" that developed the ability to communicate vocally or needs artificial means of surviving the elements? Show me the missing link? They have fossils to show the evolutionary stages of other species but not humans. (Reefraff)": Humans are not the only hominid or even "ape" that developed verbal communication. Recent work shows that chimps have an extensive vocabulary, and can warn tribemates of the presence of predators, where the predator is located (sky, ground, tree) and even the color of the predator. Prairie dogs can also warn that "something in yellow is coming from the sunward direction", for example. Speech is no big deal anymore. As for using artificial means of surviving the elements, that is extraordinarily common throughout the animal order. In fact, even invertebrates will manipulate their environment to improve their chances of surviving. As for the missing link, visit the American Museum of Naturel History, the British Museum, or if you are geographically prevented from visiting them , see this web site for a bare introduction to the large number of human ancestral fossils.
finally somebody knows what evolution is, everyone else here knows about religion and nothing about evolution other then its bad because it disproves creatiionism. Evolutionism was not created to disprove anything, rather shed some light to the meaning of life and where we came from.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3194148
OK, time for some objective truth, since something that is incorrect has a nasty way of being believed on the internet:
"Flagellar motor defies natural selection in the sense that it has 40 parts in its makeup. None of the parts would have worked in any other way (Year of the Nick)": the bacterial flagellum does contain 40 parts, but all of those parts do perform other tasks in other bacteria, and have been repurposed in the flagellar motor. There is so much scientific literature on this that to assert otherwise reveals either deliberate misdirection or ignorance of the facts.
"Cambrian explosion": I'm so sick of hearing about the Cambrian explosion as if it were some magical event that disproved 150 years of detailed examination. First, this so-called explosion took millions of years - that's MILLIONS. Hardly an explosion. What we do know is that geological and atmospheric conditions changed around that time to favor fossilization, so you see better preservation. Pre-cambrian fossils do exist, and they are obvious precursors to the cambrian genera. In fact, the most common form of life on the planet today (flowering plants) did not appear until after the cambrian period.
"Galapagos? dude, that was disproven LONG ago (YearoftheNick)": Wow, really a far out misstatement. True, the finches do move to different parts of the island at different times of the season, but there is no die-off, and nothing about evolutionary patterns of the Galapagos species has been disproved. In fact, bio-geological evidence is one of the constant and most powerful lines of evidence favoring isolation as a speciation driver.
"Why are humans the only "apes" that developed the ability to communicate vocally or needs artificial means of surviving the elements? Show me the missing link? They have fossils to show the evolutionary stages of other species but not humans. (Reefraff)": Humans are not the only hominid or even "ape" that developed verbal communication. Recent work shows that chimps have an extensive vocabulary, and can warn tribemates of the presence of predators, where the predator is located (sky, ground, tree) and even the color of the predator. Prairie dogs can also warn that "something in yellow is coming from the sunward direction", for example. Speech is no big deal anymore. As for using artificial means of surviving the elements, that is extraordinarily common throughout the animal order. In fact, even invertebrates will manipulate their environment to improve their chances of surviving. As for the missing link, visit the American Museum of Naturel History, the British Museum, or if you are geographically prevented from visiting them , see this web site for a bare introduction to the large number of human ancestral fossils.
A scream to warn of danger or growl as a show of anger is hardly vocalization. Show me a chimp going "Eeek awahhh uggg ugg" then another one brings him a banana and I will buy into it.

I didn't see any mention of fossil records in the link.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3194277
So the explanation is we evolved from Cheetah to Tarzan in a few thousand years?

Did you even read it? Their is evidence from fossils in their and no we did not EVOLVE from cheetahs. We evolved from a common anscetor in which we branched off at certain points in history.
http://www.astro.spbu.ru/staff/serg/...ne/origin.html -this is just a timeline of evolution for homoscapiens
The way evolution works, in theory of course, is at certain points in history a new species is created through natural selection and mutation and eventually branches off form other species. This is why our DNA is close to rats cows and monkeys its because all the previous listed animals branched off near one another (by near i mean thousands of years). Insected branched off early in life which is why our genetic code is is roughly a 23% match to them. We as humans evolved from the original apes/monkeys and created a subbranch of our own. Cheetahs branch off earlier than us and took a different route same as every other species.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
look at these skeletons of arms, even though we utilize them in different ways they still have the same basic structure just varying in shape, size and fingers that become fused not lost. Form is directly related to function for evolution
now use creationism to explain why our dna is so clsoe and we homologus bone structures as other completely different animals?
 
D

dragonzim

Active Member
Originally Posted by Reef_Dart21
http:///forum/post/3194283
look at these skeletons of arms, even though we utilize them in different ways they still have the same basic structure just varying in shape, size and fingers that become fused not lost. Form is directly related to function for evolution
now use creationism to explain why our dna is so clsoe and we homologus bone structures as other completely different animals?
You have to realize that you'll never win an argument against a creationist. The only answer you'll get to your question about bone structure is "god made it that way" and they will never listen to anything other than themselves repeating that to themselves over and over in a mindless chant.
 
flower

flower

Well-Known Member

When all the world was sure the world was flat, a book called Enoch talked of the circumference of the Earth. The book was supposed to have been written about a man who walked with G-d and was taken to the place where angels dwell.
Enoch talked about the round Earth and the orbits of the planets. The book was left out of the Bible because it didn’t meet all three requirements to be included.
What I found so interesting about the book and why I now mention it. That book knew the earth was round, when the rest of the world didn’t. There is also a passage in scripture that speaks of a worm that does not die when man dies. Doctors and scientists about 40 years ago found a worm that comes to life in the human body when you die. So no matter how much they try and preserve a body, it decays.
So ,on just these two instances the scientists discovered AFTERWARD that the Holy writings were more than fancy. I have quite a few little tid -bits like that I have kept over the years. I use these because they are short to relate. The smarter scientists get the more they prove scripture.
On Creation…well the sun and the moon were not created until the 3rd day. Since the luminaries are how we measure time, then logically G-ds time is not ours. I have no problem with science. Darwin is called a THEORY for a reason, it is yet to be proved. They keep trying.
G-d created the rainbow as a sign, scientists can explain what exactly happens in nature to create the bow…To explain it does not disprove that G-d created it in the first place. So even if Darwin could be proven, does not destroy the fact that G-d created it in the first place. It would only mean they figured out how G-d went about it. All science can do is show us the building blocks G-d used in the first place.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
Originally Posted by Flower
http:///forum/post/3194292

When all the world was sure the world was flat, a book called Enoch talked of the circumference of the Earth. The book was supposed to have been written about a man who walked with G-d and was taken to the place where angels dwell.
Enoch talked about the round Earth and the orbits of the planets. The book was left out of the Bible because it didn’t meet all three requirements to be included.
What I found so interesting about the book and why I now mention it. That book knew the earth was round, when the rest of the world didn’t. There is also a passage in scripture that speaks of a worm that does not die when man dies. Doctors and scientists about 40 years ago found a worm that comes to life in the human body when you die. So no matter how much they try and preserve a body, it decays.
So ,on just these two instances the scientists discovered AFTERWARD that the Holy writings were more than fancy. I have quite a few little tid -bits like that I have kept over the years. I use these because they are short to relate. The smarter scientists get the more they prove scripture.
On Creation…well the sun and the moon were not created until the 3rd day. Since the luminaries are how we measure time, then logically G-ds time is not ours. I have no problem with science. Darwin is called a THEORY for a reason, it is yet to be proved. They keep trying.
G-d created the rainbow as a sign, scientists can explain what exactly happens in nature to create the bow…To explain it does not disprove that G-d created it in the first place. So even if Darwin could be proven, does not destroy the fact that G-d created it in the first place. It would only mean they figured out how G-d went about it. All science can do is show us the building blocks G-d used in the first place.


Vladimir Lenin- search him up
mummies- search them up
frozen cavemen- search em up
if you isolate a man in a controlled environment, when he is dead, meaning no outside interaction no way of bacteria entering as well as other forces, the corpse will decompose from it own cells dieing and etc not form a mystical worm eating them. This aint no alien movie that a worm pops out of you, apparently you believe in abiogenesis.
You know what else is a theory? GRAVITY nothing is ever absolute in science and never will be.
What is creationism then? i know its not a proven fact so then it must be a THEORY too
keep trying flowers
 
stevedave08

stevedave08

Member
Originally Posted by Flower
http:///forum/post/3194292

When all the world was sure the world was flat, a book called Enoch talked of the circumference of the Earth. The book was supposed to have been written about a man who walked with G-d and was taken to the place where angels dwell.
Enoch talked about the round Earth and the orbits of the planets. The book was left out of the Bible because it didn’t meet all three requirements to be included.
What I found so interesting about the book and why I now mention it. That book knew the earth was round, when the rest of the world didn’t. There is also a passage in scripture that speaks of a worm that does not die when man dies. Doctors and scientists about 40 years ago found a worm that comes to life in the human body when you die. So no matter how much they try and preserve a body, it decays.
So ,on just these two instances the scientists discovered AFTERWARD that the Holy writings were more than fancy. I have quite a few little tid -bits like that I have kept over the years. I use these because they are short to relate. The smarter scientists get the more they prove scripture.
On Creation…well the sun and the moon were not created until the 3rd day. Since the luminaries are how we measure time, then logically G-ds time is not ours. I have no problem with science. Darwin is called a THEORY for a reason, it is yet to be proved. They keep trying.
G-d created the rainbow as a sign, scientists can explain what exactly happens in nature to create the bow…To explain it does not disprove that G-d created it in the first place. So even if Darwin could be proven, does not destroy the fact that G-d created it in the first place. It would only mean they figured out how G-d went about it. All science can do is show us the building blocks G-d used in the first place.
G-d=God. Just because you don't put the O in, does not mean you didn't say it or use the name. You're not going to go to hell if you write the word/name God. BTW, I won't ignore you because I do read your posts. The one at the beginning of this thread was quite condescending though and that's why I previously wrote what I did. i don't dislike you, I was simply stating an observation I made.
That said, (and this is not intended directly at you flower, just speaking to the topic at the moment) if evolution is a theory and hasn't been proven, then religion and creationism are a theory to the power of 10. It was simply called the theory of evolution when Darwin began investigating it and needed to call it something, right? He hadn't proven anything, he was just starting to put all this information together. Since then though, anyone who says that evolution has not been proven, apparently should not have evolved to begin with because they live under a rock. A rock that kills logic. Religion has nothing, but faith and scripture. I do agree, some scriptures have been verified, but only as far as events, places, and people involved. Nothing extraordinary really.
Also, Gravity.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member
Originally Posted by Flower
http:///forum/post/3194292

G-d created the rainbow as a sign, scientists can explain what exactly happens in nature to create the bow…To explain it does not disprove that G-d created it in the first place. So even if Darwin could be proven, does not destroy the fact that G-d created it in the first place. It would only mean they figured out how G-d went about it. All science can do is show us the building blocks G-d used in the first place.
Their you are right, evolutionism in no way disproves religion however creationism is always brought into doubt when you understand evolution because many of the things discovered was never mentioed in the bible.
answer me this.
If god had talked to some people (dont know who and i dont care) then why would he only explain simple stuff that anyone back then could of came up with and not explain the complexity of life? or medicines? and other benificial items?
 
flower

flower

Well-Known Member

Originally Posted by Reef_Dart21
http:///forum/post/3194308

Vladimir Lenin- search him up
mummies- search them up
frozen cavemen- search em up
if you isolate a man in a controlled environment, when he is dead, meaning no outside interaction no way of bacteria entering as well as other forces, the corpse will decompose from it own cells dieing and etc not form a mystical worm eating them. This aint no alien movie that a worm pops out of you, apparently you believe in abiogenesis.
You know what else is a theory? GRAVITY nothing is ever absolute in science and never will be.
What is creationism then? i know its not a proven fact so then it must be a THEORY too
keep trying flowers

A mummy can only be preserved like in taxidermy..they remove the organs and refill the corpse with herbs. What they preserved is the skin, and bone. Hides and bone can last for hundreds of years.
Freezing will keep everything in a suspended state. Hence your cavemen. I admit the other I am not familiar with.
The article I was talking about concerns scientists who tried to isolate the human body from any outside critters that normally break down the body in the grave. They did nothing to the body for the experiment. They wanted to see what would happen if the natural critters that feed on a body in the grave were not there. The body decayed anyway…upon examination to find out why… they found the worm I mentioned. I don't play with the dead, your wonderful scientists do.
Your giggles only show your immaturity to hold a conversation. It does not change the fact that there is a worm that was discovered which scripture mentioned first. The books are ahead of science in knowledge. Science is the work of trying to find out how G-d did it. They don’t call it that but it is what it is. The two are hand in hand. There is still much for us to learn.
The book and what it says is a fact, it is right there. Refusing to accept the book does not nullify it.
For example; Abraham Lincoln. The man no longer exists and his body is long decayed. Frankly there is no proof he ever was… except what has been preserved in books. who is to say a picture is really him??? A statue, people have been makng them for ages...so what.
If you decide the books on him are B.S..who could disprove your insistence that all that is written or held as proof of him is a fairytale. So to accept a book has any authority, the reader must decide to accept it. If you don’t believe a writing has merit…who can convince you?..nobody.
The books that we believers have as our authority, you reject.
So you have no spark…all the blowing of life giving air will do you no good.
I do not jump up and down claiming evolution is evil, as evolutionists have accused us faith people of doing. . I just wait till science figures it out.
So you say the earth took millions of years to be where it is today…so what, the sun and moon we measure time by wasn’t created until the 3rd day…our measures of time are not the Bible measures. So what...

In the end you can't prove the Holy books untrue, except in your own mind.
 
reef_dart21

reef_dart21

Member

Originally Posted by Flower
http:///forum/post/3194341

A mummy can only be preserved like in taxidermy..they remove the organs and refill the corpse with herbs. What they preserved is the skin, and bone. Hides and bone can last for hundreds of years.
Freezing will keep everything in a suspended state. Hence your cavemen. I admit the other I am not familiar with.
The article I was talking about concerns scientists who tried to isolate the human body from any outside critters that normally break down the body in the grave. They did nothing to the body for the experiment. They wanted to see what would happen if the natural critters that feed on a body in the grave were not there. The body decayed anyway…upon examination to find out why… they found the worm I mentioned. I don't play with the dead, your wonderful scientists do.
Your giggles only show your immaturity to hold a conversation. It does not change the fact that there is a worm that was discovered which scripture mentioned first. The books are ahead of science in knowledge. Science is the work of trying to find out how G-d did it. They don’t call it that but it is what it is. The two are hand in hand. There is still much for us to learn.
The book and what it says is a fact, it is right there. Refusing to accept the book does not nullify it.
For example; Abraham Lincoln. The man no longer exists and his body is long decayed. Frankly there is no proof he ever was… except what has been preserved in books. who is to say a picture is really him??? A statue, people have been makng them for ages...so what.
If you decide the books on him are B.S..who could disprove your insistence that all that is written or held as proof of him is a fairytale. So to accept a book has any authority, the reader must decide to accept it. If you don’t believe a writing has merit…who can convince you?..nobody.
The books that we believers have as our authority, you reject.
So you have no spark…all the blowing of life giving air will do you no good.
I do not jump up and down claiming evolution is evil, as evolutionists have accused us faith people of doing. . I just wait till science figures it out.
So you say the earth took millions of years to be where it is today…so what, the sun and moon we measure time by wasn’t created until the 3rd day…our measures of time are not the Bible measures. So what...

In the end you can't prove the Holy books untrue, except in your own mind.
Do me two favors then
1. Find me a reputable source about the abiogenisis worm.
2. Vladimir Lenin- search him up
Just because of a few lucky guesses doesnt mean its right. Look at Nostradomis (i spelt wrong but who cares) his prediction that did come true made people believe he was an almighty physcic and some even bagen to worship/praise him and think the end is at 2012. However the media leaves out the other 1000 somthing predictions that did not come to be only supporting that people believe what they want to for eithier closure, comfort, or to define the unknown.
Other than books and documents written by the "choosen ones" creationism has yet to find any non circumstantiol evidence.
Noah ark, huge boat find me some reminent.
Jesus burial ground, find me it.
Find me at least some evidence that proves the stories and not evidence that was created by man (such as bibles scripture and etc)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top