This is a weak argument that was used in the trial when this modern pseudoscience you speak of was made illegal so that we do not poison children's minds in public schools.
Children have a right to REAL science not perverted modern mythology.
YOU have no credible evidence at all.
Non sequitur.
Your particular brand of mythology makes you a minority that carries no credibility what so ever.
There is no WE here. You have your own version no one else follows or even cares about.
Exactly! many people refuse credible knowledge in favor of faith they often know NOTHING...
a deity can do nothing as they do not exist at this point in time outside mythology
The question is purely imaginative.
If something could be designed, there might be something that exist outside mythology in a pattern we would be able to tell.
before attributing something to something...
Well actually his opinion carries credibility as no god has ever been prove to exist. All have mythological origins and only show mans hands on their definitions.
False. The unknown authors never even knew the temple was rebuilt.
the author seems to know about Antiochus' two campaigns in Egypt (169 and 167 BC), the desecration of the Temple (the "abomination of desolation"), and the fortification of the Akra (a fortress built inside Jerusalem), but he...
That is the only thing you stated historical. The rest was not.
many people promoting pseudoscience use one truth then sneak pseudoscience is. If you ever decided to support what you posit with CREDIBLE sources, you would not be questioned.
Credible academic study. NOT faith alone or a perverted literal reading the ruins the beauty of the text.
By years of academic study, and knowing what academic reality dictates, OVER what mythology dictates.
I trust gnostic and he carries the credibility you never have possessed . You have...
How do you explain the islamic genocide against Christians.
Where muslims are a minority muslims scream for minority rights!
Where muslims are the majority, there are no minority rights what so ever!
I use it for some things myself. But it has to be taken with a grain of salt due to its theistic agenda, and lack of academic freedom.
My reply was a credible criticism of the institution.
No assault. You have made many anti academic and scientific claims in the past.
Because I know you and what you posit as knowledge. You change history to meet your faith based needs, not what the evidence proposes and what academia teaches.
I like your post.
For me. When I realized only humans created and defined the concepts, it gave all the religious dogma and text more meaning and beauty because everything positive people think about god, came from people.
All the things people love about religion only people did. For me...
Your taking my reply out of context.
It was in reply to a fallacious statement that generalized reality. My reply was in clear context to that reply, and not meant to be read literally on its own.
I question this because muslims kill muslims even genocidal, over sectarian difference alone, let alone the terrorism and murder and torture of Christians and jews
There are many areas that are probably pseudoscientific.
In 1992, the university drafted a new Statement on Academic Freedom,[86] specifying that limitations may be placed upon "expression with students or in public that: (1) contradicts or opposes, rather than analyzes or discusses...