So...why is it religions hate each other and atheists?

At least you understand that “who” is not limited to a person and “what” must always be a verb and its attached “stuff.” Elementary school teachers in my town called it “subject and predicate”, but the communications / journalism template makes it so much clearer.

At least you understand that “who” is not limited to a person and “what” must always be a verb and its attached “stuff.” Elementary school teachers in my town called it “subject and predicate”, but the communications / journalism template makes it so much clearer.

The exact meaning of Elohim is not known though it seems to contain the idea of strength and power.

they refuse to learn that Genesis 1:1 does neither denote cognizance of nor assigns cognizance to Elohim.

they refuse to learn that Genesis 1:1 does neither denote cognizance of nor assigns cognizance to Elohim.

There must be a psychological reason behind this common mindset and it does seem to involve relativism, they seem incapable of understanding things relative to the present, I am convinced its a form of primitivism.

They are all scared to death of dying so belief is a comfort to them.

Does the constitution promise them immortality as a god given inalienable right ?

Depends upon whose version of “proper English” to which you refer. There are English grammar “slaves” who worship the tools and would never call a tree “who.” More power to them; I’ll continue to use the tools in a manner that airs my understanding of mind-bending concepts like that presented in Big Bang. You think calling Big Bang “who” is strange? I’ll call Big Bang “Freddy” if it helps me to understand.

There are too many people who are “white eyes”, in the Chiricahua terminology, folks who will grin at me while stabbing me in the back. Meanwhile, I can depend on you to say what you mean and mean what you say. Perhaps that’s why I trust you; perhaps that’s why I love you.

Perhaps that’s why I trust you; perhaps that’s why I love you.

Queen Elizabeth II, your actual queen for whom you pay and my “adopted” queen that I enjoy for free, says “we”, never “I”, and I’ve never seen two or more of her when she says it.

Life has been wiped out on several occasions.

And all their theories will eventually be proven wrong.

A more sensible reason is that God put the faces on the butterfly to indicate to the intended prey that he had created them for that purpose and to help themselves.

Satan is not doing a bad job in proving you are complete idiot.

There has not been an unbroken sequence of events since the forming of the universe.

Life has been wiped out on several occasions.

The latest from the scientists is that the universe is thousands of years older than first thought.

A brilliant American wag has come up with the brilliant idea that a butterfly developed a face on it's wings to deter a leaping frog from having it as a meal.Humans have tried that tactic on numerous occasions and the result has been that very soon the animal realises that there is no threat and actually takes more of the kind for dinner.

A more sensible reason is that God put the faces on the butterfly to indicate to the intended prey that he had created them for that purpose
and to help themselves.

polyglide wrote:
Satan is not doing a bad job in proving you are complete idiot.

… get a two year old to explain.

You are not doing a bad job in failing to exhibit common decency. Perhaps you might allow a two year old to show you how.

46,XY = male

Apologies for reducing myself to Tosh's level, I should have more sense than to rise to such ignorance.

Snowyflake, you apparently feel qualified to decide on any matter of subjects but have not seemingly the ability to do any in a proper manner

I am used to him, I know, he knows, that I know, that I am right on many occasions but he just wants to keep the matter going,

Sorry, I have given you the benifit of the doubt, you obviously do not understand the truth, sorry again for being so far off, I thought all your posts were for a laugh, do you realy believe what you post?.

The odds of an eye developing by chance, irrespective of any other consideration, is far greater than the odds accepted as impossible.

The odds of an eye developing by chance, irrespective of any other consideration, is far greater than the odds accepted as impossible.

Does this make sense to anyone? What this mean?

The odds of an eye developing by chance, irrespective of any other consideration, is far greater than the odds accepted as impossible.

Can order arise out of chaos given enough time? (I'm asking because I know nothing about chaos theory)