Unless you watch Fox, then the world is coming to an end every time a stranger or an unknown car comes down your street. Especially if they have darker skin.
Unless you watch Fox, then the world is coming to an end every time a stranger or an unknown car comes down your street. Especially if they have darker skin.
Everything’s a conspiracy, even if it hasn’t happened yet.
VP’s can’t do that, genius. “He didn’t do the thing he couldn’t do when he couldn’t do it!”
Every religion apart from Christianity dies without lies
Quoted for posterity.
There it is. Your true colors.
I guess religion and atheism are on equal footing, then.
How do these people figure out where their opponent lives?
consumers were willing to pay more as their paychecks rose and they were sitting on loads of savings accumulated during the pandemic.
Wait, who got more money dumping into their savings?
I had no idea she said that. No, I’m not a Thatcher fan.
Why would they panic? They’ll just play their usual pigeon chess: knocking the pieces over, crapping on the board, and flying off to announce that they have won.
You run out of other people’s money. You can squeeze labor to starvation working in a salt mine. However, if most all people lose all their money, capitalism is done, and currently runaway capitalism is doing everything it can to increase that disparity.
Infinite growth requires infinite bodies to feed it.
“Me when I lie”?
Go talk to the wiki I got that from if you want to argue with someone else about whether something is true or not.
That’s not what I said.
However, like Arthurian Legend, it doesn’t mean some guy like Jesus didn’t exist, or an aggregate of characters weren’t assembled to be him on story.
That’s what I said.
I used Arthur as a fellow mythology, along with a conditional “or” he could be an aggregate character.
The moment of resurrection itself is not described in any of the gospels, but all four contain passages in which Jesus is portrayed as predicting his death and resurrection, or contain allusions that “the reader will understand”. The New Testament writings do not contain any descriptions of a resurrection but rather accounts of an empty tomb.
So therefore I stand by the premise that changes have been made, and what existed in 100 is not what we have today.
You’ll have to forgive me if I bow out. I do not share your beliefs, nor am I willing to continue to argue over religious texts that are self-referencing to constitute proof.
And they get pretty obvious in big subs like /cars and /gaming. So many posting opinions like car magazines or gaming reviews do - point out nit-picky negatives that are relatively inconsequential to the product, softball other criticism, but give an overall decent review. Heaven help you if you actually voice an opinion critical of the object, because you’re allowed to have that opinion as an individual, that doesn’t toe the line and you get instant downvotes.
See, now you’re moving the goalposts. You made a sweeping statement that Christianity is as-is compared to the first century CE. Yet here you are breaking it down and excluding things.
Let’s just face it, you don’t mean Christianity as a whole is same as 2kyr ago. It isn’t. They held on to some facets of it, got rid of others, but kept the main themes like resurrection and the like. Heck, there are even some that suggest the resurrection story was added centuries later.
Nonetheless they are different. And you skipped past the whole “little is known” part, not to mention all the parts that got tossed out along the way.
You said:
An interesting thing about what we have now in Christianity though is that it basically spawned as-is in the first century
The article says:
Little is fully known of Christianity in its first 150 years; sources are few.
So you’re making a huge, sweeping statement that Christianity as we know it today is based on something…we don’t know much about? There are 6 major Christian denominations, not to mention hundreds of smaller ones. Which one is the “as-is” one? The one that is exactly “as-is” from CE 100?
You mean besides a couple dudes running around telling us to be cool to each other?
You didn’t even read the wiki entry, did you.
It also doesn’t take into account rising property taxes, business tax, rising maintenance costs. I’m not arguing in favor of these dirty landlord companies that jack up the rent at every opportunity, however you’d have to control interest rates and the ridiculous home prices if you want to keep rents reasonable based on a percentage of mortgage costs.
I don’t know that this is the case. It’s roughly like 33% of the people say the judges are too liberal because they’re liberal, another 33% say the judges are to conservatives because they’re conservatives, and another 33% don’t have a clue. That ~66% of conservative + liberal aggregated are the 7/10. I wouldn’t call it woke, I would call it opposing opinions on what side the judges are one and the perspective of the respondent.