yes, they can believe what ever they want they can even say it, just can not act on it.
let me know when Enki gets here.
who told you that?
and that person deserves trust because, and why do you think Jesus died on the cross?
how do you know he died on the cross though? Who told you?
interesting, sauce on ireland please
so you heard voices. People used to be institutionalized for that. Why are you assuming what I think?
I am not implying anything you yourself said you heard imaginary voices. Who exactly are the way the Truth and the life or are you trying to say they are one person? Do they have a physical address that one might be able to send a certified letter to? I am not leading into anything you are the one saying you talk to imaginary forces and base your beliefs off what they tell you to do.
I thought he died in pakistan or maybe it was japan. I just have not heard Ireland that one is new.
You said you speak to the way the truth and the life. So is that one person or three? Do they have a twitter page with a blue check mark are they verified?
what would you rather, deep digs on nothing that can be changed?
so do they have a facebook page maybe, because these are concepts and if you just heard it is in your head.
I am not projecting you claimed you talked to three people, or is it one with three names? Just answer the question to clear up any miscommunication. So if I claim that the way the truth and the life talked to me, how would you know if I was lying? Would it be based on a feeling you had if I talked to who i claimed I talked to? Or is this where you toss fruit into the conversation?
You did not, which is why I am trying to make you clarify? Was it three or one, how did you communicate with this person, or was it not a person? was it an alien did it have three tits, i hope they have three tits. But how did you talk to this "thing". You want a so called honest conversation so who is this Truth the way and the light, how did you communicate with them? Maybe you could just clear up this confusion.
who is claiming insider knowledge, this is public areas of debate that scholars have been debating for centuries as opposed to just accepting the narrative. Who is gaslighting the person asking questions or the one trying to pain the picture of what has been being discussed. Are christian beliefs beyond questioning and reproach? Sounds more like you had to IP hop to stop a narrative and try to as you said gaslight people into acting one way or the other instead of just reading and making up their own fucking minds.
you are the one having to gaslight. You talk about conflation and language, could Jesus return in a ufo? Maybe the ancients did not have a word for that? But if that is the case then the current narrative falls apart. It either is what it is or it is open to interpretation, and if its open to interpretation then is it the correct one?
shit posting is a calling.
kek.
suddenly it is about the board.
Truth only matters if if it is your truth.
Its a waste of time because I will not accept your crap.
gaslight me harder daddy.
so now you are saying Jesus Christ is the way and the truth? Could not have said that sooner before you IP hopped. So how did you have this conversation with him? Why should I agree to disagree. GAS LIGHT ME DADDY HARDER HARDER
HARDER HARDER MORE GASLIGHTING DADDY
sticky black and brown after drinking pepto glue. I grossed my self out with that one.
ooh thats the way like it daddy.
did I lose track. Fuck it might be. Might not be. Shit happens.
you never discuss it, in order to discuss something you have to be willing to be wrong. You are not willing to be wrong. I am. Unless you are willing to be wrong about Jesus you are never actually having a fair conversation about religion.
So would I, I do not doubt a creator, I doubt man's interpretation of complex ideas and lies associated with it including what Jesus may or may not have said. For instance there are scholars who trace Homeric elements in the new testament and the ideas of platonic thought. It was after all first written in Greek so it would stand that ideas would transfer. There are just too many questions for any person to claim 100% certainty in a world proven of lies. It would be safer to treat everyone as you said and then figure it out together. But unless you are willing to be wrong to be wrong you care more about the destination than the journey.
make oaths actually be binding. No serving of foreign princes and kings and papacies or other groups.
politicians should be basically agnostic in their approach because they have to serve people of all faiths and their personal beliefs should not come into play. However they do much to the detriment of the nation.
it should. all brotherhoods and societies and lodges and groups and may what ever you worship have mercy if you are in a magic the card game tournament.
it is a direct assault as it is literally the government not only choosing a religion to protect but by threatening institutions with government money compelling them to adopt foreign speech definitions.