why do you assume those that have conflicting ideas with you are satanists. Perhaps they are just anons that think what you believe is cancerous and dangerous to society. You claim they do not want to grow and learn, but that is only in your direction right towards your truth.
who gets to dictate what is or is not appropriate for here. The questions that are risen about the legitimacy of the bible and the entire this is biblical line of though are conflicting truths and should be discussed. I addressed you because you made the stupid statement.
according to? you? and?
in before someone claims tagging two anons is shill behavior, just not feeling like giving a fuck and fuck you if you claim that you weak fuck.
not a hard concept. Anons stop questioning it seems when it comes to the bible. OMG those jabs are bad lets mock everyone stupid enough to fall for the push from science but here take my money in the plate and let me hear the words of lies. total fucking sense
you are retarded. where did you learn about Jesus? did the idea just come to you in a magical vision or did you hear about the story and then stopped doing any more research because you had enough of an answer at the time to make your brain happy.
that means nothing. you are as bad as a liberal saying orange man bad.
define biblical? what part exactly? Is it a part that is historically accurate or is it a part that takes bits and pieces off of older stories. Is it the summerian stories, are they accurate? Your definitions are what help bind you.
Maybe I really know Jesus and who you think you know is a lie. Maybe you are speaking to the devil? How would you know, How do I know that you are lying to me, or at least I think you are. Look at the gaslighting language, of trying to say my question are inane, that is the discounting bullshit of a jaded mind wiped loser of a faggot. You obviously have stopped any intellectual pursuit because you are allowing yourself even in your language and your approach to have the theory that you can not be wrong. Eat shit biblefag.
good question. I honestly do not know. Interesting to consider why those words were used. Why do you need to appeal to the bible thumpers, what does it serve. The problem is the bible has problems with the historical narrative and it creates the what exactly biblical means problem. Is it King James biblical, is it Enoch biblical?
disinformation is necessary, how much of a percentage is being released? What would happen if you just stripped away peoples faith all at once, does not really matter the subject.
there is a large difference between being agnostic which is saying something exists but we are not sure of what it is or we need more proof, lots of grey and to be honest its the most honest approach. The problem is the language and the baggage of the words involved that trigger certain reactions.
It is not, you still have three minutes.
its not about what i do or do not want to believe it is that their is that statement that allows for things to be true and not true at the same time. I am not the one who made that post. But the Bible is not the sauce of truth, none of the so called holy books have that distinction.
you did fine, be proud.
shut up. speak 4 self.
so how do you handle the profits lets say the children of said criminals used to enrich themselves. Thinking of people likes Pelosis kids,or would they get swept in because of Rico perhaps anyways.
I never understood the tagging like the VD is doing except that they are hoping people do the filter + replies thing.