--you can ignore it if you want, but it's there. Mounting evidence of a worldwide flood, the catastrophic destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and other biblical stories, long dismissed by sceptics are now slowly being accepted as scientific fact as new technology allows us to uncover archeological evidence at the molecular level. In addition, what are the mathematical chances of a planet's moon 400 times smaller than the sun being positioned exactly 400 times closer to its planet so as to appear exactly the same size during an eclipse? What are the chances that a controversial man such as Jesus, who attracted so much attention during his 30+ years of life, then simply vanished less than 72 hours after his death, despite his tomb being guarded by heavily armed Roman soldiers placed there to prevent this very thing from happening? --and what are the chances of all of these events happening on the same planet being simply a product of random chance? Answer: Next to none.
God's work is all around you - - if you choose to see it.
204d
@mchill said😍 🙂
--you can ignore it if you want, but it's there. Mounting evidence of a worldwide flood, the catastrophic destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and other biblical stories, long dismissed by sceptics are now slowly being accepted as scientific fact as new technology allows us to uncover archeological evidence at the molecular level. In addition, what are the mathematical chances o ...[text shortened]... f random chance? Answer: Next to none.
God's work is all around you - - if you choose to see it.
@eYe said(Don't need scripture from any religion to be close to God.)
Don't need scripture from any religion to be close to God.
Do all religions call it scripture? 🤔
Who said that one does? However, it helps. God's Word is Spiritually alive and active. Jesus is the living Word of God.
(Do all religions call it scripture? 🤔)
No.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
204d
1 edit
@mchill saidWhich god?
God's work is all around you - - if you choose to see it.
Edit. - Ah, you mean your particular god, not someone else's.
204d
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidYou are very deceitful in that what you are droning on about has been explained to you and still you ask the same question. Is it like a cliche with you, something that you ask in a brain dead manner not even going to pay attention to the answer after you ask.
Which god?
Edit. - Ah, you mean your particular god, not someone else's.
203d
@KellyJay saidHow many things have been explained to you over and over and over again, which you ignore?
You are very deceitful in that what you are droning on about has been explained to you and still you ask the same question. Is it like a cliche with you, something that you ask in a brain dead manner not even going to pay attention to the answer after you ask.
Does you ignoring those explanations justify you being called “deceitful” “brain dead” and “cliched”?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
203d
@KellyJay saidI think you are just a little slow Kelly to understand my post.
You are very deceitful in that what you are droning on about has been explained to you and still you ask the same question. Is it like a cliche with you, something that you ask in a brain dead manner not even going to pay attention to the answer after you ask.
If creation is evidence of a creator deity, why does it have to be the one outlined in the OP. Why couldn't that same evidence (creation) be used to evidence the creator god of another religion, say Brahma from Hinduism?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
@mchill saidMounting evidence of a worldwide flood? Quite the contrary is true.
--you can ignore it if you want, but it's there. Mounting evidence of a worldwide flood, the catastrophic destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and other biblical stories, long dismissed by sceptics are now slowly being accepted as scientific fact as new technology allows us to uncover archeological evidence at the molecular level. In addition, what are the mathematical chances o ...[text shortened]... f random chance? Answer: Next to none.
God's work is all around you - - if you choose to see it.
It is understandable that localised floods at that time appeared to encompass the world but there really is no excuse for a modern human being to believe that. (It's a little tragic to be honest with you). You can ignore the facts if you want, but they're there.
And yes, a planet in the Goldilocks zone of a given solar system is rare indeed, but the universe is so unimaginably huge that it's bound to occur every so often. (It's frankly bizarre to think otherwise).
And no, biblical stories are not being slowly accepted as scientific fact. What a thoroughly odd thing to post. - Will Jonah being swallowed by the whale ever be accepted as scientific fact? Will Balaam's talking donkey? Again, quite the opposite is true. The further we get away from those ancient myths the more they appear ridiculous and irrelevant.
203d
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidNothing slow about what I said and you and have been through this before.
I think you are just a little slow Kelly to understand my post.
If creation is evidence of a creator deity, why does it have to be the one outlined in the OP. Why couldn't that same evidence (creation) be used to evidence the creator god of another religion, say Brahma from Hinduism?