Evidence for God from Science

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Rob wrote:

Audie wrote: I see comparable wackiness in all of the middle eastern sky god religions.

I can see how you would. IMO Mormonism is in a whole class of its own.

In theory, yes, but also in theory, no.

Methinks Audie will one day be Mormon.
She seems of have a soft spot for them.

Knowing that I will get you anyway, you now choose to live fast and dangerous?

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Rob wrote:

Audie wrote: I see comparable wackiness in all of the middle eastern sky god religions.

I can see how you would. IMO Mormonism is in a whole class of its own.

In theory, yes, but also in theory, no.

Methinks Audie will one day be Mormon.
She seems of have a soft spot for them.

Knowing that I will get you anyway, you now choose to live fast and dangerous?

Considering you're over the other side of the world (*not that the world has "sides" -- I don't want my stylistic use of words to be interpreted literally and then called unscientific), I'm not sure how "fast and dangerous" I'm really living.

You have yourself said you think Mormonism is the smarter religion or something the like.
How smart can they be? One wife is enough to handle in my opinion. Who wants to be wrong to many wives?
No, I can only handle being wrong to one.

Now look what you've done. Taken me entirely off-topic.
To make this relevant. No, Paul was an Apostle - he was accepted as such.
Even had a falling out with Peter. Paul won. So Paul should have been the first Pope.
So, how do you like them apples Byblos? *Silence* That's what I thought.

Kurieuo wrote:Even had a falling out with Peter. Paul won. So Paul should have been the first Pope.
So, how do you like them apples Byblos? *Silence* That's what I thought.

Well, it's no wonder the Catholic Church is otherwise known as the Church of Peter and Paul. I'm also pretty sure Peter wasn't saying anything ex cathedra at the time so it really doesn't count.

Byblos wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Even had a falling out with Peter. Paul won. So Paul should have been the first Pope.
So, how do you like them apples Byblos? *Silence* That's what I thought.

Well, it's no wonder the Catholic Church is otherwise known as the Church of Peter and Paul. I'm also pretty sure Peter wasn't saying anything ex cathedra at the time so it really doesn't count.

I thought the Catholic Church was known as the Church of Peter, Paul, and Mary.

Or maybe I was thinking of an old folk group.

But back on topic, only evolutionists, theistic or otherwise, who don't hold to a literal biblical interpretation, would believe Paul was a false apostle.

I splitted the topic: Was Paul a False Apostle? since you started speaking about Jesus.

People
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZTC1xVdGOI

If you lived in ancient Rome you could believe in any god except Jesus Christ who rose from the dead and yet people were believing in Jesus being saved by the preaching of the gospel and how Jesus rose from the dead only to be thrown into the coliseum to be mauled to death by wild beasts,ect yet despite everything the roman government threw at early Christians,Christianity grew and became the dominant religion of Rome.The more Christians that were killed the more others came to take their place to where Christianity could no longer be ignored or stamped out by the roman government. And yet to believe these people would die for a lie is crazy talk they knew Jesus rose from the dead like the apostles preached and taught about and we know it today despite all of the different denominations.This fact unites all Christians even if we differ on other things we agree on the most important thing that Jesus rose from the dead - Catholics,Babtists,Methodists,Pentecostal,etc are united about this although we have to be on the look out for false doctrines.