SkyHigh

Good try big guy, but basing your opinion on the name I use in some random forum. Weak

As I thought, can't answer a direct question then plays internet tough guy You're just proving my point

Wait! You claiming to be from RP? Let's see how truthful you are and probably nobody else will get this Who fan the boys and girls club in the 80"s? And for bonus points what was his magic trick? May not have served but I know Regent

I said you weren't good enough to shine their boots As far as your soldier boy fantasy I have no interest in engaging, nor would I give out anyones name on an anonymous message board, particularly to someone struggling with mental health(ie you) as I would worry you may act out your delusions on real patriots

I have never been a member of any armed services. I have done some charity work for the legion but that completely irrelevant. What I do have is enough respect for them not to pretend to be some soldier boy. I know guys that have been in actual combat, they don't act like little soldier boys either, it's the complete opposite, because they too have respect

Yes, in fact there are many fiction writers I respect, fortunately non of them served in the armed forces either

It's a good thing you're just living out some internet fantasy and were never actually armed by " Her magesties forces " because that would be scary, I've known many people that have served bravely and you sir lack the mental health and critical thinking skills to shine their boots

I will start by answering your question directly, then I may ramble a bit, hahahah Is science necessary for faith? No That being said, the interjection you have just quoted me on was in response to someone completely misrepresenting science in an attempt to discredit years of intellectual pursuit, based solely on his limited interpretation of an ancient text I completely agree that when speaking about origins religions can, should and (when speaking to reasonable people) mostly do speak almost entirely on a metaphysical level ( which I honestly have little time for) As for share in common, first it's pretty hard to find someone else in the same pew at church that have the same view on metaphysics as you never mind the same denomination, or religion or just any other person of faith, but the idea of going through the world with any strong presuppositions seems closed minded to me, I try to limit mine to reality exists and we all share it. I will say I do appreciate the original poster views, as they lead more people out of the oppression of religion than any non believer ever could.

Please define socialism in one sentence as you understand it

First I probably know more about the Bible than you, and second you want to insult me be a man and do it to my face Aren't you supposed to act Christ like?

Oh apologies I thought you believed in the classical Christian god always described as omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent. What god do you believe in? As for the Christian god he most certainly is responsible for everything that happens as he willed the world to be, and instead of some random parable that would need heavy interpretation to be considered an answer to this question how about we use the inerrant word of God himself. Isaiah 45:7 I form the light,and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: (or calamity, misery, distress, whatever your preferred translation) I the LORD do all these things. There are many others, I specifically chose this one because it is not open to interpretation.

I'm able to digress because people like you prove my point for me. The Bible is off topic? The only book that claims knowledge of Jesus is off topic? As far as people like tacitus and josephus(who parts of his writings are most likely forgeries) they at best said people said some dude named Jesus did some stuff, neither of them were Christian I already spoke to Paul's authenticity ,but he never met Jesus ( or at least he didn't mention it) his "vision" wasn't even until roughly 5 years after the crucifixion As for the gospels, the concensus amongst scolars both religious and secular fully acknowledge that the names attributed to the gospels were added after by church fathers or scipes, and were written between 70 and 120ad, in a language (greek) different than what was spoken by Jesus( Aramaic) and his followers and were oral traditions passed down for decades before being written down None speak as eyewitnesses. Mathew uses a third person narrative, and borrows heavily from Mark, written approximately 20 years before Mathew Luke literally starts with the author saying he's writing down things told to him by actual eyewitnesses, or maybe just people that talked to people who talked to eyewitnesses ( nobody knows) not things he saw himself Again did some messianic, apocalyptic preacher named yeshua exist around year 30? probably, was that man ( or men, some have proposed its a combination of a few self-proclaimed "prophets") the divine son of God referenced in the Bible? Probably not

In the interest of being honest (often a foreign concept to theists, but I digress) yes the gospels are completely anonymous and furthermore don't speak in the first person and make no claims of even being written by someone contemporary to the life of Jesus.ie; my second cousins wife's sisters ex roommate told me about this dude that did some cool shit Paul on the other hand, is historical and most historians including secular, confirm that some of the letters published in the New Testament were written by Paul, now others have been confirmed forgeries and of those authenticated most are just semantic debates over doctrine to other early Cristian church leaders The more you know and all.. hahahaha

Dictatorship? How silly. If good policy comes out of this is time will only tell , but calling it a dictatorship just shows your lack of understanding of the basic workings of Westminster parliamentary governments. This is what happens when political philosophies are based on partisan buffoonery and ignorance instead of demonstrable facts.

The only science that has any actual value are those that have been peer reviewed, if you have any creationist literature that corresponds to that most basic criteria I would of course consider it fully, on the other hand pointing to a group of laymen ( on this or any topic) providing post hoc rationalizations to their presuppositional approach to everything is of little interest to me nor should it be to anyone, as all of science accepts evolution by means of natural selection the balls in your court my friend, I'm excited to see your Nobel prize worthy research, seriously!!!!

A noble pursuit

Well being that god doesn't exist the answer is no. Now if we're to look at Christian doctrine the answer is a resounding yes, everything that happens is part of gods "redemptive plan" every evil, every war, every natural disaster, every starving child, every pedophile and rapist and of course every illness, disorder, disease, virus, etc, etc, etc.....

https://www.scielo.br/j/gmb/a/PVhHPkJBW8FWvLyKHdRyGsh/?lang=en Here's some information from people more qualified than both of us at vulgarizeing complicated scientific principles, please take the time to read this.

Well i don't believe "sin" exists as that is a concept exclusive to the bible bur in direct response to your question, no i donot believe a blood sacrifice can absolve one of anything. As for those who use Jesus as thier "scapegoat" honestly i feel sad for them, thinking one needs some omnipotent master to keept them on the straight and narrow denies them a the self actuating power of the human will.

Theory in the "scientific realm" is synonymous with and can be replaced by Law. Scientists, unlike theists possess the humility to admit we don't (and may never) know everything

With some basic research you will quickly realize that vaccines and evolution are ostensibly based on the exact same scientific principles, so by not accepting both you're expressing what is called. Cognitive dissonance, another thing i would suggest you research

Yes! Creationists are most certainly poisoning young minds, by denying the entirety of established scientific consensus and raising children without critical thinking skills

The idea that some apocalyptic messianic preacher named Yosef existed in the early 1st century is not only possible but probable, as for the stories about said preacher in the new testament, they on the other hand are neither probable nor possible

They like to think they are but in reality aren't , ie environment, multiculturalism etc.. Montréal and Outaouais definitely vote liberal but the rest votes Bloc or PQ and their politics vary based on leadership ( there only platform being Canada bad) and the Quebec city region votes mostly conservative

He was Premier as a liberal for 3 mandates but was considered by many as "right" for a liberal