NolaAuTiger

Which geology science? Uniformitarianism?

It all comes down to interpretation of observable facts. Whose interpretation is correct is where the camps part ways. Here, the observable fact is the fossil. A non-creationist might interpret the fossil as a record of evolutionary history of life from 100m years ago. On the other hand a 6 day (or even 6 millisecond, for that matter) creationist might interpret it as representing a broad sequence of rapid burial by a global flood--hence, the observable fact would not contradict the underlying creationist theory. What about fossil organisms out of sequence with their supposed evolutionary history, or soft tissue within organisms that purportedly died out a million years ago? These latter observations comport with a creationist view.

Superfluous.

You need to read what I said before the comment you're responding to. My point is not that reason and intellect must be disregarded where matters of religion are concerned. Precisely not. A faith that has no rational basis is a false faith--so, for example, that is why I am not a Branch Davidian. Martyrdom is wholly peripheral to whether a faith rests on a rational basis. Accepting multiple eyewitness accounts by people who have nothing to gain by dissembling is rational, and hyperbolic rhetoric to the contrary makes it no less so. To write off such accounts in conclusory fashion with no investigation is, on the other hand, irrational. You simply prove the point that the wise just will not have anything to do with miracles. That is what all of this boils down to.

I will be there, corndog in hand. GOOD GUYS BY 100! War Durn!!

Allere flammam veritatis.

So, everything from Easter morning to the Ascension had to have been made up by those "groveling authors," those "rogues" Thomas Jefferson referred to, presumably part of their clever plan to get themselves tortured and crucified? There is no contrary, credible evidence because the intellectuals of modern age so declare? The "wise" just will not have anything to do with miracles. Got it.

I presume your reference includes Christianity. Respectfully, it is not irrational to accept the testimony of eyewitnesses, who had nothing to gain by dissembling, about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and about what Jesus taught them; or, for that matter, to accept the evidence of later miracles that establish the truth of the Church that Christ founded. What is irrational, on the other hand, is to reject a priori, with no investigation, the possibility of Jesus Christ's resurrection in particular.

thUGA 48 Good Guys 13

We know ICHY . . . we know . . . Spare us your tired argument.

We SUCK

And complete the damned pass!

I'll bite my tongue.

Check out the Fifth Circuit’s analysis from this evening. I posted the link above.

Enter the Fifth Circuit. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/23/23-30445-CV0.pdf @TexasTiger @AU9377

How goes it dub? I like you, very nice.

Got another link? I don't subscribe to the Skew York Times.

I have personal reasons for my position too (which I won't discuss), and I can certainly appreciate yours. We can both agree something, at the very least, must change.

Let's do both.

Absolutely!!

Good. And Mexico's government should pay, and pay severely. Makes Putin look like a choir boy. "Sending troops across the southern border to kill people in a country that is one of our largest trading partners. . . ." Give me a damn break. Do any lunatics on the left give a sh!t about the number of American deaths Mexico's corruption is responsible for? Screw Mexico and its government.

For someone who can appear so intelligent at times, I am always taken aback by your jiggery-pokery.