Feed on Posts or Comments 24 October 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 10 Oct 2011 12:27 am

These two things are related – they show that religion is broken

These two things are related – they show that religion is broken. The first one is a cartoon:

The scientific method vs. the creationist method

In the scientific method, a scientist starts with facts and uses them to draw conclusions. In the creationist method, a creationist starts with Biblical nonsense and tries to find any facts that happen to match the nonsense by coincidence.

The problem is, that exact same process is how the religious arrive at their version of morality, as demonstrated here:

Morality vs. religion

“Morality is doing right no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told no matter what is right.” Thus the religious end up with a Bible that advocates slavery, murder, misogyny, etc. and a group of religious people try to defend that kind of nonsense.

Religion is bankrupt. Any thinking person can see that. The site WhyWontGodHealAmputees can help you understand how bankrupt religion is.

39 Responses to “These two things are related – they show that religion is broken”

  1. on 11 Oct 2011 at 3:55 am 1.Anonymous said …

    Relevant image

  2. on 11 Oct 2011 at 12:36 pm 2.Observer said …

    #1 Precisely.

  3. on 18 Oct 2011 at 4:42 pm 3.james said …

    science can not explain the creation of life. It only goes back as far as the single-cell organism. Who or what created that? and Why can no scientist not only explain where it came from or how it was created. Scientist can not produced, create, or even re-create the single-cell organism. Something created it, since you have all the answers tell me what created the single-cell, then do me one better find someone who can create it. Face it mankind wasn’t meant to understand everything then they wouldn’t need God.

  4. on 18 Oct 2011 at 5:31 pm 4.Lou (DFW) said …

    “3.james said …

    “science can not explain the creation of life.”

    Great, another god of the gaps proponent.

    James, at one time science couldn’t explain a lot of natural events that it can explain now. When science couldn’t explain them then, it didn’t mean god did it.

    If you think that god did it, then please provide some evidence for your imaginary god. Otherwise, your comment is irrelevant.

    Face it, YOU weren’t meant to understand everything. That’s why we need scientists, not an imaginary god.

  5. on 18 Oct 2011 at 10:03 pm 5.Blaze said …

    Christianity isn’t about religious dogmas, creeds, and rituals. It is about the relationship you have with Jesus Christ. You keep saying there is no scientific evidence for God (there is), but there is also no evidence for evolution. The lack of transitory forms in the fossil record, the Law of Biogenesis, and probabilty all tear the theory apart. It has been proven that it is IMPOSSIBLE for life to arise from non-life. There are NO transitory forms in the fossil record, only hundreds of complete forms. I would welcome any questions anyone at all anyone has for me.

  6. on 18 Oct 2011 at 10:11 pm 6.Severin said …

    5 Blaze
    “It is about the relationship you have with Jesus Christ.”

    Why doesn’t this guy Jesus finally address to me?
    How can I have relationship with someone who is permanently hiding from me?

  7. on 19 Oct 2011 at 12:24 am 7.DPK said …

    “There are NO transitory forms in the fossil record, only hundreds of complete forms.

    Parroting creationist propaganda. Do your research. You can start here:
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

    The most amazing thing about the fossil record is, given the earth’s violent geological history, why there aren’t more gaps in the record than there are?

    Regardless, evolution, biogenesis, whatever herring you try to throw into the mix, have nothing to do with the reality of imaginary gods or other supernatural beings.

    If you have scientific evidence for god, as you claim to, present it. We have all been waiting to hear about it.

  8. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:19 am 8.Anonymous said …

    Blaze, if you have this personal relationship, as you put it, are you then claiming that your talk to Jesus and he talks to back to you?

  9. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:36 am 9.Ben said …

    The fossil record does nothing to support evolution. It changes almost monthly. The evolutionist are more confused today more than ever.

    Now when you get the artist involved to paint the nice pictures for the textbooks, it does look very nice. But when you look at actual facts verses guesses and speculation, its just a cute fairy tale.

  10. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:53 am 10.Lou (DFW) said …

    9.Ben said …

    “The fossil record does nothing to support evolution. It changes almost monthly. The evolutionist are more confused today more than ever.”

    No, Ben, YOU are the one who is confused about evolution.

    “But when you look at actual facts verses guesses and speculation, its just a cute fairy tale.”

    While also ignoring the DNA “facts” of evolution, please provide us with the “actual facts” that show evolution to be “just a cute fairy tale.”

    And while you’re at it, please provide the “actual facts” that your imaginary god is nothing more than “just a cute fairy tale.” After all we are here to discuss GOD, not evolution.

  11. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:01 am 11.Anonymous said …

    So, Ben, you prefer things to stay the same?

    It sounds like you are arguing that the bible, which represents the superstitious beliefs of bronze and iron age goat herders, most of whom could neither read nor write – fairy stories which they inherited from even more primitive people, should be accepted today as the epitome of all knowledge?

    Are you aware that the people whose ideas that you hold in such high esteem, would be considered educationally subnormal or mentally retarded by today’s standards?

    It baffles me why anyone would willingly embarrass themselves in this way.

    But still, educate us, if you will. Please provide the evidence of your god’s existence and explain the process by which your god was created.

  12. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:16 am 12.DPK said …

    I had a discussion with a xtian once who informed me that the Apostle Paul was a very learned man who had, and I quote, “the equivalent of a PHD from a major university today.”
    Now, I try to be polite, but I couldn’t help but laugh out loud in his face. How could someone who lived in a time with no comprehension of chemistry, biology, physics,geology, even simple geography… no concept of the cosmos, the nature of matter or even the most rudimentary life science ever be thought to have the equivalent of a third grade education, no less a doctoral degree?

    Yet, Ben and his cohorts have no problem accepting their writings as eternal and unquestionable truth. What a crock!

  13. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:17 am 13.Lou (DFW) said …

    11.Anonymous said …

    “Are you aware that the people whose ideas that you hold in such high esteem, would be considered educationally subnormal or mentally retarded by today’s standards?

    It baffles me why anyone would willingly embarrass themselves in this way.”

    Because he is “educationally subnormal or mentally retarded by today’s standards.”

  14. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:18 pm 14.Mitch said …

    Lou?

    Could you share some of the DNA facts that prove evolution? I assume you will be providing the facts that support evolution across species.

    Thanks

    Mitch

  15. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:40 pm 15.Lou (DFW) said …

    “14.Mitch said …

    “Could you share some of the DNA facts that prove evolution? I assume you will be providing the facts that support evolution across species.”

    No, I will not. (Unless I’m mistaken, it’s already been posted here.)

    First of all, you will simple counter that they are evidence of ID or god.

    Second, I first asked Ben to “provide us with the “actual facts” that show evolution to be “just a cute fairy tale.” I haven’t received any reply. Why aren’t you asking Ben to share his “actual facts?” Ben’s “actual facts” would be soundly rejected by science, whereas science has an entire field of study that provides “actual facts” that explain evolution. I also repeatedly asked Crum to provide the math that he claimed shows that “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.” Did you challenge his claim? You challenge science, but not some bozos on a blog who happen to share your belief in an imaginary god? Their claims and the science of evolution are irrelevant. The only relevant claim is that god exists, but you NEVER, EVER provide any evidence to dispute.

    Third, this blog isn’t a forum about discussing evolution. It’s a forum for discussing god and religion. If you want to more deeply discuss evolution rather than simply claim that it’s “only a theory” to defend your lack of evidence for your imaginary god, then find an evolution forum. But I know you won’t do that.

    Fourth, the fact of evolution is irrelevant to the existence of god.

    Finally, even IF evolution was somehow proved to be false, it still doesn’t affect or change the fact that you or anyone else don’t have any evidence for your imaginary god. I personally NEVER rejected the fantasy of god because of evolution. I reject the fantasy of god for the same reasons I reject the idea of leprechauns and Santa Claus – there’s no evidence that they exist, there’s no reason to assume they exist, there’s no theory for them to exist. They are nothing but fantasies. Fantasies are not real. A rejection of science doesn’t make them real. Falsification of evolution doesn’t make the fantasy of god real.

    If you actually have a genuine interest in learning about DNA and evolution, then start here:

    http://bioinformaticsonline.org/

    Mitch, I’m curious as to why you and other anti-evolutionists demand explanations as to how evolution works, but you never ask how gravity works. Science much more greatly understands how evolution works than it understands how gravity works. Does that mean to you that because gravity cannot be explained by science that god must exist? Is that really the limit of your intellect?

    The crux of the matter is this, if you could only provide evidence of your imaginary god, then we wouldn’t be discussing Big Bang, abiogenesis, evolution, etc. All of these things are irrelevant to the existence of god, yet those are the things you want to discuss. You never discuss the existence and reality of god because he doesn’t exist. You can be shown example after example of evolution, but you can NEVER show us any examples of your imaginary god anymore than you can for leprechauns and Santa Claus. Why not, because the ONLY evidence you have for god is your belief in him. Your belief in god is no more evidence for him than is a child’s belief in Santa Claus evidence for him. It’s that simple.

    Now, stop trying be smart by challenging scientific evidence for the fact of evolution (much smarter people than you have tried and failed) and provide evidence for your imaginary god.

  16. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:46 pm 16.Observer said …

    #14 Mitch says “I assume you will be providing the facts that support evolution across species.” WTF? Do you know what evolution is?

    If you are actually interested in learning something, versus spilling theistic stupidity, there is a circa 2005 video on here where a smoking gun for a common ancestor for the great apes is shown in GREAT detail.

    Besides, what is wrong with the website provided above by DPK at #7?

  17. on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:47 pm 17.Observer said …

    “on here” referred to this blog. I believe it was posted by Lou(DFW) DPK or some other rational thinker.

  18. on 19 Oct 2011 at 5:04 pm 18.Lou (DFW) said …

    16.Observer said …

    “Besides, what is wrong with the website provided above by DPK at #7?”

    To be fair, it doesn’t discuss DNA. But I vaguely remembered a Discover Magazine article that I read some time ago. I was able to find it here:

    http://discovermagazine.com/2009/mar/19-dna-agrees-with-all-the-other-science-darwin-was-right/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=

    and

    http://discovermagazine.com/2006/sep/carrollinterview

    After I found this article I searched more on the interviewee, molecular biologist Sean Carroll. I found:

    “Carroll’s studies have uncovered evidence that an ancient common ancestor—a worm-like animal from which most of the world’s animals evolved—had a set of “master” genes to grow appendages, such as legs, arms, claws, fins, and antennas. Moreover, Carroll noted, these genes were operational at least 600 million years ago and are similar in all animals, from humans to vertebrates, insects, and fish. What is different, however, is the way these genes are expressed, leading some animals to develop wings, and others to grow claws or feet.

    “We found the same mechanism in all the divisions of the animal kingdom,” Carroll noted. “The architecture varies tremendously, but the genetic instructions are the same and have been preserved for a very long period of time.”

    Carroll is also probing the common fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, to elucidate how genes control the development and evolution of animal morphology, or form. This innovative approach to studying evolution has led scientists to a more detailed understanding of how animal patterns and diversity evolve.”

    He also said:

    “Changes in species traits occur through changes in DNA, but until recently, we had very few examples that pinpointed those changes responsible for adaptations. Now we have many examples, and some broader trends emerge—such as the repetition of evolution in exquisite detail, in different species, at different times, in the origin of similar traits.”

    Coincidentally, I found something he said that so much better expresses what I think about people like Mitch, Ben, Crum, Hor, and the rest who continuously attempt to defend their fantasy and attack atheists:

    “Would you publicly debate an intelligent design advocate?

    No. And I don’t think astronomers should debate astrologers nor surgeons debate faith healers. The ID proponents have succeeded in gaining enormous attention for a notion that the scientific community and the courts have found lacking any scientific substance. ID is an outgrowth of a desire to undermine evolutionary science, which is perceived to be a threat to their religious worldview.

    What has been overlooked in the whole furor is that many denominations fully support the science and teaching of evolution. They have reconciled their faith and theology with modern science. That is a far more interesting area of discourse than the tired, empty arguments of evolution denial.”

  19. on 19 Oct 2011 at 5:14 pm 19.Anonymous said …

    Mitch said: “I assume you will be providing the facts that support evolution across species”

    No, it’s incumbent upon to you to first prove that your god is anything but imaginary, then provide a cogent argument for why he won’t heal amputees. That’s the subject of this blog.

  20. on 19 Oct 2011 at 5:25 pm 20.DPK said …

    16.Observer said …

    “Besides, what is wrong with the website provided above by DPK at #7?”

    To be fair, it doesn’t discuss DNA.”

    To be fair, it wasn’t posted in response to a question about DNA. It was posted in response to the claim that there were “no transitory forms in the fossil record.” a statement that is outright false. There are. And the paper posted goes into great detail to describe them AND to explain why we don’t see more. The preservation of fossils, particularly of land based animals, is an exceeding rare event. Creationists seem to be of the opinion that every creature that ever lived leaves a fossil record. This is simply not true.
    I’ll bet in 1000 years there will be no fossilized evidence of christians either.

    Note also, that my response went completely unchallenged…. again.

  21. on 19 Oct 2011 at 5:42 pm 21.Lou (DFW) said …

    20.DPK said …

    “To be fair, it wasn’t posted in response to a question about DNA. It was posted in response to the claim that there were “no transitory forms in the fossil record.” a statement that is outright false.”

    Yes, I didn’t mean to imply otherwise if I did.

  22. on 19 Oct 2011 at 8:47 pm 22.Mitch said …

    Lou

    Thanks for providing the link. However I find no facts that DNA supports evolution across species.

    Maybe you could just pull a few of the facts and post them on the blog?

    Thanks

    Mitch

  23. on 19 Oct 2011 at 9:06 pm 23.DPK said …

    The Discover magazine article is ALL about DNA supporting evolution. Did you even read it? How about you pull a few of the facts and dispute them with actual evidence rather than claims, or do you fall into the article’s conclusion that:

    “It is a cultural issue, not a scientific one. On the science side our confidence grows yearly because we see independent lines of evidence converge. What we’ve learned from the fossil record is confirmed by the DNA record and confirmed again by embryology. But people have been raised to disbelieve evolution and to hold other ideas more precious than this knowledge. At the same time, we routinely rely on DNA to convict and exonerate criminals. We rely on DNA science for things like paternity. We rely on DNA science in the clinic to weigh our disease risks or maybe even to look at prognoses for things like cancer. DNA science surrounds us, but in this one realm we seem unwilling to accept its facts. Juries are willing to put people to death based upon the variations in DNA, but they’re not willing to understand the mechanism that creates that variation and shapes what makes humans different from other things. It’s a blindness. I think this is a phase that we’ll eventually get through. Other countries have come to peace with DNA. I don’t know how many decades or centuries it’s going to take us.”

    For a more in depth analysis, try here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
    please read it before dismissing it.
    D

  24. on 19 Oct 2011 at 10:30 pm 24.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Mitch said …

    “Maybe you could just pull a few of the facts and post them on the blog?”

    “One shocking discovery was the relationship between our eyes and bug eyes. You wouldn’t think they had anything in common, right? Bug eyes, with 800 facets, work by different optical principles than human eyes. For almost a century and a half, biologists thought that they had evolved independently, from scratch, and that eyes had been invented many times in the animal kingdom by completely different means—different recipes in different groups of animals. We have now discovered that these eyes are formed by what is recognizable as the same gene, even though those animals have been evolving separately for 500 million years. When we took the mouse version of this gene—the same gene we find in the human—and put it in the fly and tweaked it, we induced fly eye tissue.”

  25. on 20 Oct 2011 at 2:47 am 25.Horatiio said …

    Mitch,

    Good Luck! This is what they consider facts. DNA supports microevolution, nothing more. We have never even observed macroevolution (across species) therefore the DNA cannot support such.

  26. on 20 Oct 2011 at 2:56 am 26.Anonymous said …

    Mitch and Horatio, now it’s your turn.

    Please provide the facts and evidence that support your position that a magical being created man from dust and woman from mans rib.

  27. on 20 Oct 2011 at 3:29 am 27.DPK said …

    There is a term for people like Horatiio and his above post makes it obvious… it is “willfully ignorant.”
    Hor, you are a posterchild for what is wrong with religious thinking.

  28. on 20 Oct 2011 at 4:01 am 28.Anonymous said …

    DPK, how did you know that your friend wasn’t a godless when she died. Like you, you turned from god. These kind of things happened to godless people like you, so don’t expect god will favour you with good things narrow minded atheists. You all godless atheists be cast to hell. By the way, are all the staff of this website amputees that you are all crying like babies.GOD YAHWEH IS NOT IMAGINARY.

  29. on 20 Oct 2011 at 10:54 am 29.Mitch said …

    “How about you pull a few of the facts and dispute them with actual evidence rather than claims,”

    What claims? Lou made the claim. Now do you mean assumptions with you comment? Yes assumptions are made but what facts actually exist? If you can provide a few I would be glad to make some comments.

    Thanks

    Mitch

  30. on 20 Oct 2011 at 12:35 pm 30.Lou (DFW) said …

    29.Mitch said …

    “What claims? Lou made the claim. Now do you mean assumptions with you comment? Yes assumptions are made but what facts actually exist? If you can provide a few I would be glad to make some comments.”

    Mitch, first of all, the “claim” I made was in reply to the claim Biff #9. I didn’t make any outright claim to begin.

    Second, apparently did you not read my #15.

    The only relevant claim that is part of the reason for this blog is to discuss god and religion – provide evidence for god.

  31. on 20 Oct 2011 at 12:52 pm 31.Observer said …

    #27 DPK You are correct in describing the likes of Mitch and Hor as “willfully ignorant”. Others like Biff, Ben et al. are obstinately ignorant. Why anyone would choose to remain ignorant when presented with so many opportunities to improve their lot leaves me flummoxed.

  32. on 20 Oct 2011 at 1:12 pm 32.DPK said …

    28.Anonymous said …

    DPK, how did you know that your friend wasn’t a godless when she died. Like you, you turned from god. These kind of things happened to godless people like you, so don’t expect god will favour you with good things narrow minded atheists. You all godless atheists be cast to hell.

    Ok first off… what the hell are you talking about?
    Secondly, I thought god loves me?
    Thirdly, why is your god so insecure that he has this pathological need for me to believe in him? So much so that he will “cast (me) to hell” if I simply ask that he reveal himself. I mean, if it’s soooooo important to him, why doesn’t he just “show up”?
    You sound like a compassionate and loving christian…. yeah, right. Have a nice day. If there is a hell, no doubt I’ll meet you there.

  33. on 21 Oct 2011 at 4:24 am 33.RJ said …

    RE: #31 – Observer

    “Why anyone would choose to remain ignorant when presented with so many opportunities to improve their lot leaves me flummoxed.”

    What leaves me “flummoxed” is the idea that they believe Jesus is in their hearts—fully witnessing their lies, arrogance and troublemaking. And that doesn’t bother them.

  34. on 21 Oct 2011 at 1:36 pm 34.Observer said …

    #33 RJ “What leaves me “flummoxed” is the idea that they believe Jesus is in their hearts—fully witnessing their lies, arrogance and troublemaking. ” Aptly so.

    You can lead an ass to water, but you can’t make it drink.

  35. on 23 Oct 2011 at 7:12 am 35.Anonymous said …

    RJ said “What leaves me “flummoxed” is the idea that they believe Jesus is in their hearts—fully witnessing their lies, arrogance and troublemaking. And that doesn’t bother them.”

    Earlier, Blaze said “Christianity isn’t about religious dogmas, creeds, and rituals. It is about the relationship you have with Jesus Christ. You keep saying there is no scientific evidence for God (there is), but there is also no evidence for evolution. The lack of transitory forms in the fossil record, the Law of Biogenesis, and probabilty all tear the theory apart. It has been proven that it is IMPOSSIBLE for life to arise from non-life. There are NO transitory forms in the fossil record, only hundreds of complete forms. I would welcome any questions anyone at all anyone has for me.”

    And like the typical theist ran away and hid like a coward when people actually asked questions. How typical, how sad, and how obviously deluded these fools are.

  36. on 23 Oct 2011 at 2:23 pm 36.DPK said …

    Like Horatiio who “no longer debates” god’s existence with atheists, (however he does show up here on a regular basis to lie and make false claims.. to what end, no one knows) religious dogma NEVER stands up to questioning. Because it is not based on evidence or even logic or reason, or even common sense. It is based on superstition and legend.
    Anyone following these discussions cannot help but see the trend. The theists will make some claim or assert a point of view. Others will challenge it, point out the flaws in reasoning, or provide evidence or reasoning as to why it is incorrect. The theists ignore it and change the subject. They never even answer direct questions. Why is this? The answer has to be either they don’t bother to read anything but what they write themselves, or they have no answer, so they must avoid the questions in order to avoid having their delusions exposed.
    When my dog is exposed to something she wants, but knows she is not supposed to have, like a tasty sandwich left withing reach on the coffee table, she turns her back and looks in the other direction. She’s a pretty smart dog. When the theists are confronted with knowledge or understanding that their faith deems dangerous, they simply turn away from it and refuse to acknowledge it’s existence, less they be seduced. Tragic… willful ignorance.

  37. on 24 Oct 2011 at 3:41 am 37.A Christian Guy said …

    Sorry, didn’t have the time to read all the comments above this one, so if the point i’m about to bring up has already been addressed, you’ll have to excuse me.

    THE BIBLE, DOES NOT ADVOCATE SLAVERY.

    Somebody please, give me a verse were it says “And God said THEREFORE ALL MEN, HAVE SLAVES” (those of you who would qoute leviticus, and paul, be forewarned that is slightly perdictable, so try to think outside of the box if you can. if not, that’s fine too.) Also, it should be noted, that slavery was ENDED IN ENGLAND, BY CHRISTIANS, THE FORERUNNER OF WHICH, WAS WILLIAM WILBERFORCE. A devout Christian.

    Murder. really? “Thou shalt not murder.” don’t need to give any more attention to that one.

    As for Misogyny, Jesus calls men to love their wives as Jesus loves the church (christians) Jesus loves all Christians perfectly. As far as mistreating women goes, even a feminist isn’t gonna complain if a man loves a woman perfectly. No misogyny there.

  38. on 24 Oct 2011 at 1:30 pm 38.DPK said …

    Nice try, trying to preempt the biblical verses in Exodus, Leviticus, Luke, Colossians, etc… that demonstrate that god seems to have no real issue with owning slaves. Your request to “think outside the box” is nothing more than “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”

    Fact is, the bible does both advocate and condone the taking and keeping of slaves. The fact that it prescribes fair treatment for them is also evidence of approval. Further, where is the “thall shalt not own slaves” commandment? Even Jesus never directly admonished slaveowners.

    The fact that christians later in history agreed that slavery was wrong is meaningless. Unless you argue that the bible is not in fact the inerrant word of god. The southern christian slave owners in the US regularly used the bible as defense of their right to own slaves. Don’t be foolish.

    As far as murder and mysogyny, “thou shalt not kill” is given as a commandment once, but instructions from the lord to kill all manner of people for all manner of sins are given over and over and over. Yahweh himself was one of the greatest mass murderers of all time… so, really?

  39. on 27 Oct 2011 at 8:10 pm 39.benson abraham said …

    I was very much eager to see something like this. Because i am such a person or may be the only one who is currently doing his PG in biotechnology, but still believes that earth was formed in 6 days.
    You may think that i am a true christian believer , but it is not so, I am a polythiest. I believe that all religions and science is from God, so that he can decieve us.
    How??
    1. God is all powerful, so only someone like HIM can be a threat to him.
    2. Man had that potential. RECALL : when moses went to pharoah, he dropped his stick, which became a snake. But the other magicians also did the same. The only difference is that God’s power overpowered.
    If mankind would have gone in the same path, maybe a day would have come when our powers would have overpowerd God’s.
    Tell me what is he supposed to do to hide his power (technology) away from us? The answer is simple, somehow make him believe that he is created not in the image of God, but some kind of a monkey.
    3. Time is applicable to man, but not God. We cannot change the past, but God can.
    RECALL : In the wedding of cannan, jesus converted water into wine. First there was water in the jar,which is the truth. Second, after the conversion there was wine in the jar, which is the truth. Now how much you test, you can never come to know that initialy it was water in the jar. So what will you believe to be the truth?
    Think!
    If God change the history of earth, then in wat will you believe, the one that was intially created or that has been altered.
    [In the whole bible, there is only one place, where is a mention of particular word or a spell (which we are all familiar off) which would have probably change the history of the earth.]
    4. I am a polythiest, so i believe that other religions from the same God. Because if, there would have been no concept about good, bad, sin, heaven etc. no body could have understood what the apostles meant by saying Jesus has sacrificed his life to save us from our sins.
    If i am wrong please correct me and follow me on bensonabraham86 in TWITTER
    THANK YOU!!!
    BE A FREE THINKER…….

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply