Did Christ really exist ?

[Skywalker]

The ignorance of how the justice system works is profound. Criminals get off scot free all the time, especially rapists because patriarchal judges don’t seem to believe that rape is a bad thing..

By definition those judges aren't just judges.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolution is not proven or science. Macroevolution has never been recorded.

Oh my, actually yes. Evolution has been shown to be a fact. Macroevolution has been observed in the lab, and in the field and there are endless records of it. You need a scientific education to understand tis. You may be confused because theories are never "proven" but if you take gravity as a fact then by the same standards evolution is a fact.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The ignorance of how the justice system works is profound. Criminals get off scot free all the time, especially rapists because patriarchal judges don’t seem to believe that rape is a bad thing..

Now that is simply not true. Rapists getting off is a rarity and that is why it strikes outrage the few times that it does happen.

Judges can determine sentences. If they impose an unjust sentence, but they can be overturned. They can also determine that the recommended sentence is unfair and at times give a more lenient sentence.

 

[firedragon]

The ignorance of how the justice system works is profound. Criminals get off scot free all the time, especially rapists because patriarchal judges don’t seem to believe that rape is a bad thing..

I think you are absolutely right.

I dont think that judges think rape is not a bad thing, but "it certainly does seem like that" looking at the number of convictions globally against actually cases. Yet, it is more of a problem with the system. The whole system.

Yet I must say again, it certainly does seem like they believe rape is not such a bad thing. Certainly does.

 

[Skywalker]

Oh my, actually yes. Evolution has been shown to be a fact. Macroevolution has been observed in the lab, and in the field and there are endless records of it. You need a scientific education to understand tis. You may be confused because theories are never "proven" but if you take gravity as a fact then by the same standards evolution is a fact.

The macroevolution that you are talking about is genetic engineering or exagarated situations of microevolution. Gravity is logical. Having an intermediate organ isn't logical.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The macroevolution that you are talking about is genetic engineering or exagarated situations of microevolution. Gravity is logical. Having an intermediate organ isn't logical.

Nope, wrong. Nothing to do with genetic engineering.

Evolution is logical Intermediate organs are well understood. Do you want to learn or do you just want to spout nonsense?

 

[Skywalker]

Nope, wrong. Nothing to do with genetic engineering.

Evolution is logical Intermediate organs are well understood. Do you want to learn or do you just want to spout nonsense?

What's an example of intermediate organs?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What's an example of intermediate organs?

Technically all organs are "intermediate". It is hard to think of one that is not. Do not make the mistake of thinking of the organs in their present form as a goal. They are not, they are a result. And there is nothing stopping them from evolving new purposes down the road.

 

[Skywalker]

Technically all organs are "intermediate". It is hard to think of one that is not. Do not make the mistake of thinking of the organs in their present form as a goal. They are not, they are a result. And there is nothing stopping them from evolving new purposes down the road.

In what sense are all organs intermediate? There are no vestigial organs. All organs have a design and a purpose.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In what sense are all organs intermediate? There are no vestigial organs. All organs have a design and a purpose.

You do not even understand the terms that you use. Many organs are vestigial. Vestigial does not mean "without purpose". A vestigial organ is merely an organ that does not still do a past job. it may have a new one, but that does not mean that it is not vestigial. And there is no evidence of design. Design is a claim that creationists have not been able to support.

Vestigial Organs - Definition And List Of Vestigial Organs

Vestigial organs are organs, tissues or cells in a body which are no more functional the way they were in their ancestral form of the trait. It is authentication of evolution and hence, were helpful in explaining adaptation.

Here is a list of just seven vestigial organs in the human body. They may still "work" but they do not have their original job:

7 Vestigial Features of the Human Body

 

[Skywalker]

You do not even understand the terms that you use. Many organs are vestigial. Vestigial does not mean "without purpose". A vestigial organ is merely an organ that does not still do a past job. it may have a new one, but that does not mean that it is not vestigial. And there is no evidence of design. Design is a claim that creationists have not been able to support.

Vestigial Organs - Definition And List Of Vestigial Organs

Vestigial organs are organs, tissues or cells in a body which are no more functional the way they were in their ancestral form of the trait. It is authentication of evolution and hence, were helpful in explaining adaptation.

Here is a list of just seven vestigial organs in the human body. They may still "work" but they do not have their original job:

7 Vestigial Features of the Human Body

Vestigial organs are a form of microevolution. I believe in adaptations but not to the scope of macro evolution.

 

[rational experiences]

The status...all humans living thinking and believing.

How would a human believe in spirit unless that human had witnessed it. To claim experience and to also claim I now believe.

To believe owns 2 circumstances, to believe for a self imposed choice agreement or to believe due to experience.

Science also is a belief. To own self presence and then to believe in what a scientist quotes I know and understand. Then I will design and build, then control and react.

To copy he quotes, I can copy what created creation reacts. Because if creation did not exist then nor would he. So if he placates false ideals, then he places mind and psyche into those false ideals. If creation and reactions did not exist then nor would I. Yet it was thought for science only.

A human quotes I have always known I was a spirit being. When I die I also know I still am a spirit being.

So then you have to go about explaining all reasons why.

Such as okay then who created God?

A spiritual status would then exist to quote. God the fallen O bodies went to Hell as they burst. Before that status no God existed and only eternal with the living spirit existed. That spirit made a choice to sample change. Change was not nor neve was first known.

Not as a self anywhere. For science might claim I can design, but they do not own information about after when change is exacted.

That is the spiritual reason why and how and what inane purpose would a spiritual state force change to endure change and less than what it previously owned.

Innocence and not owner nor experienced change. The conditions.

Science has always said where creation came from had to own a previous placement in their thoughts as a higher state.

God burning O historic, owns and releases in re burning evil manifested spirit images and forms.

Hence we always knew we came from a place of spirit and we entered the Heavens from that spirit. The Eternal.

The eternal the highest and purest and holiest state of spirit being. Not in creation.

It is not difficult to think upon that status and say yes it is possible is it?

Yet science does not want to think upon a status where they personally can not obtain power, manipulate for energy to convert. Yet energy he also quotes once did not exist if he claims it can be created. Which is what he does claim.

For a psyche to exhibit such thoughts means that he knew that energy had been created once. As a history how and why did God as O bodies...masses of sounds and masses of the eternal be lost into exploding burning.

Where we state the spiritual being then knew what change meant...and never wanted change to exist. Which humans still exhibit today consciously for they claim that they do not die.

Only consciousness, a thinker can claim that they do not die, when the physical form does. So you would ask where did consciousness begin. And it began with and in the eternal.

How we come about to claim. Okay scientist. Whenever you talk first two human parents you claim first two human parents.

When you say they never existed your statement is just about O God, the Earth, a planet, a stone mass that created its owned atmospheric spirit that was Immaculate in its formation.

You personally are not there. Your traits, brotherhood, group, greed, powermongering controller is real. You claim you own everything just because you named it as a human.

If God owned a spirit it is not named a SON...it is named Immaculate. Its owned spirit status to which you do not own. Its history.

Then if you taught that you sacrificed your own life in science conditions of change, and quote, because I owned the heavens to live a healthy and holy life. The only time I own as a quote is real for that human expression.

As a logical ability to think first as an equal without claiming a status about the human ability to think.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Vestigial organs are a form of microevolution. I believe in adaptations but not to the scope of macro evolution.

Where did you get that idea from? I doubt if you even know the difference between micro and macro evolution. Creationists generally are totally ignorant about the sciences. And since you insist on maintaining your ignorance you will have no way to understand how you are calling God a liar.

One thing that you probably do not understand is that the fact of evolution is not an ant-Christian idea. In fact most Christians accept the fact, just as they accept the fact that the world is a sphere. All that evolution does is to correct bad the bad theology of a literal interpretation of Genesis. Genesis portrays God as being incompetent and evil. If that is your God then you are welcome to him.

 

[rational experiences]

If a human quotes God taught me....then science did.

If science, just human expressed says science told me I was wrong, then it did...as a God quote.

Then you say how was a scientist wrong actually? When he placates that science told him he was correct....God themes? Because he first chose what was wrong, science. Want superseded common sense or rationale.

Want therefore already said to the human male group you are correct by motivation agreement. Then science told him as science that he was wrong. Did not listen to science advice and did it anyway.

Common sense. What is the highest state of God in science?

O a stone bodied planet fused and cooled and sealed.

No science status whatsoever. Meaning for science to practically exist beyond thinking theisms he placates changes to the mass of Earth, the stone, subject to a design that involves gaining the machine first to own the reactive applied choice.

Hence he unsealed God the planet by first origin...to build a machine.

As the planet is natural and is not any machine condition rationally.

Science to think placates all of the natural advice first...so science is correct says science. Yet the scientist, a human motivated by wants was first and always will be wrong.

How does a human know in science conditions using all human science quotes that they are wrong. As a human first?

They get life sacrificed. Live the conscious experience which is self advice, versus those who are not sacrificed claiming highest status, yet to be sacrificed.

So science quoted, there is only one Son of God, the human man/male baby to adult Father self. Isn't that reality?

Yes.

So you Father adult self sacrificed the future of the human baby life. Wrote a paper about it, then did it again and are still doing it today. Babies born sick and mutated, with you claiming the presence mutation saved them?

Yes, says the liar in science.

The mutation never saved life, the destruction of life was stopped and the human gained the mutation because of it. To be attacked and changed.

God he quotes held 2 conditions.

God the dust fusion ground mass fission, my researched observations. Radiation effect.

Then God the heart and core mass radiation release extra. Not included in my thesis.

That extra radiation mass core released is how AI the effect transmits falsification of holy dust chemical nuclear fission information. Never before seen by vision or the brain theist before. In the state reactive changes to mass.

So he was coerced by that subliminal idealism due to nuclear chemical dust destruction, the removal of the mass upon Planet Earth as a God theme.

God he says creates energy, as he, the male and scientist invents it his owned self.

As God never created energy. God only evolved its own presence, planet and its own immaculate spirit. God owned.

So the scientist quotes no MAN is God, as a science correct teaching. And science cannot argue against common human sense.

 

[Skywalker]

Where did you get that idea from? I doubt if you even know the difference between micro and macro evolution. Creationists generally are totally ignorant about the sciences. And since you insist on maintaining your ignorance you will have no way to understand how you are calling God a liar.

One thing that you probably do not understand is that the fact of evolution is not an ant-Christian idea. In fact most Christians accept the fact, just as they accept the fact that the world is a sphere. All that evolution does is to correct bad the bad theology of a literal interpretation of Genesis. Genesis portrays God as being incompetent and evil. If that is your God then you are welcome to him.

Evolution is different from adaptation and speciation. Adaptation is an improved function. Birds have beaks that adapt over time. But they don't change from birds to something else. People's skin adapts in the sunlight. People from regions near the equator have darker skin than people from Europe. Darwin believed that over time animals would change from one race or family or kind to another. I agree with people who believe in evolution that speciation exists, but it only exists in terms of variations with kinds. There are great danes and chihuahuas and collies and beagles but when dogs evolved from wolves into the breeds that exist today there wasn't a change of kinds. There's a difference between different subspecies or variations and changes of kinds.

 

[rational experiences]

Evolution quotes once a hot dense state, cooled by conditions allowing cooling.

To evolve, then it re evolves by word description. A claim that once it had to be a higher status other than burning to evolve back into an adapted body.

The higher species, healthy bird is seen by the study. A human applying thinking. A chosen human concept. Which should be notified to any human who thinks.

You chose the study and you choose the theme to which the self human motivation agrees upon first. A claim to know and realise for self human feelings.

The healthy bird exists. It remains existing. Yet a changed bird also exists. So then the study would quote, a condition changed the healthy bird. It was sacrificed of its owned higher species and so adapted to its changes.

Now if you then include 2 different islands in that thesis. Islands pop up from beneath water. Or history quotes, land mass can snap off from the mainland by underground fusion changes. Which would involve internal radiation releases ground releases from a core.

Heart condition, Earth O God planet core says science sacrificed and changed life, yet life survived the self preaching idealism.

When you bring to the scientist human attention all bodies that you choose to study are natural and complete to own self form....being in term an end. To own an end means completed and formed.

In conversion to own an end is a reaction, yet it changed a higher presence before it. Science teaching itself.

Therefore in truth there is no information to quote a link to all bodies to be put back together......for then none of the natural bodies would even own form.

To claim what separates everything. The answer they exist in separate forms a correct scientific answer. If you tried to impose not a scientific answer then you are not telling any truth in the status science.

 

[Skywalker]

Evolution quotes once a hot dense state, cooled by conditions allowing cooling.

To evolve, then it re evolves by word description. A claim that once it had to be a higher status other than burning to evolve back into an adapted body.

The higher species, healthy bird is seen by the study. A human applying thinking. A chosen human concept. Which should be notified to any human who thinks.

You chose the study and you choose the theme to which the self human motivation agrees upon first. A claim to know and realise for self human feelings.

The healthy bird exists. It remains existing. Yet a changed bird also exists. So then the study would quote, a condition changed the healthy bird. It was sacrificed of its owned higher species and so adapted to its changes.

Now if you then include 2 different islands in that thesis. Islands pop up from beneath water. Or history quotes, land mass can snap off from the mainland by underground fusion changes. Which would involve internal radiation releases ground releases from a core.

Heart condition, Earth O God planet core says science sacrificed and changed life, yet life survived the self preaching idealism.

When you bring to the scientist human attention all bodies that you choose to study are natural and complete to own self form....being in term an end. To own an end means completed and formed.

In conversion to own an end is a reaction, yet it changed a higher presence before it. Science teaching itself.

Therefore in truth there is no information to quote a link to all bodies to be put back together......for then none of the natural bodies would even own form.

To claim what separates everything. The answer they exist in separate forms a correct scientific answer. If you tried to impose not a scientific answer then you are not telling any truth in the status science.

That doesn't explain how those birds evolved into a different kind of being. The Galapagos island finches are an example of microevolution not macroevolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolution is different from adaptation and speciation. Adaptation is an improved function. Birds have beaks that adapt over time. But they don't change from birds to something else. People's skin adapts in the sunlight. People from regions near the equator have darker skin than people from Europe. Darwin believed that over time animals would change from one race or family or kind to another. I agree with people who believe in evolution that speciation exists, but it only exists in terms of variations with kinds. There are great danes and chihuahuas and collies and beagles but when dogs evolved from wolves into the breeds that exist today there wasn't a change of kinds. There's a difference between different subspecies or variations and changes of kinds.

Nope, there is no difference. It is all evolution. As I said you do not understand what you are arguing again. And there is no "changing from birds into something else". A change of kinds is a creationist strawman. For example you are still an ape. Your ancient ape ancestors did not "change into something else".

And "kinds" is a garbage term that creationists cannot define. You really should try to learn a bit. Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. Only the ignorant deny it. There are no honest and informed creatonists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That doesn't explain how those birds evolved into a different kind of being. The Galapagos island finches are an example of microevolution not macroevolution.

Nope, they are an example of macroevolution. Once again you do not understand the terms that you are abusing.

 

[rational experiences]

That doesn't explain how those birds evolved into a different kind of being. The Galapagos island finches are an example of microevolution not macroevolution.

They survived sacrificed was the scientific determined reference.

You would quote the mutation/change was therefore held of an original bird species and their family had been attacked to diversify bodily form.

If you claim that variations cannot all exist within the same nature, when it does, then what is the actual point of your questions? The reality is a human self motivation to own a self claim in self life that you know it all.

That human motivation was a teaching to state the reason why life gets destroyed by a human belief that they can know everything. And then you would wonder why a human is motivated to own that claim.

Then it arrives to self human presence, self thinking ability and I want to personally be the inventor creator of everything. Which means in reality you want to be everything that already exists in all their natural forms as the thinker.

You would wonder what was motivating the human thinker to behave in this motivated cause.

And then come to a human conclusion that the original human scientist who made all of the science claims whilst natural in its highest states existed is now possessed by his own science thoughts today. As his owned human scientific thinking origins...as a falsification of his owned human ideals.

As a self teaching assessment, the ability to understand human behaviour in human life.