The tower of Babel

[aik]

3 hours ago, Krowb said:

I understand that English not your first language, but you did ask for objective evidence and I have provided a method of measuring the sweetness and juiciness of your apple that can be applied by anyone, at anytime, and anywhere.

You did not understand my question again. I am not willing to know about methods of measurement of sweetness. I am asking by which objective evidence you can know the taste of an apple which is in my hand? 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

On 11/28/2022 at 12:10 PM, DarkBishop said:

Genesis 1

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

Here are where the seeds come into the argument. Notice that God gave man every herb bears seed a day tree bearing seed. He expected them to plant those seeds. It is even reflected in god's curse on Adam in genesis 3. 

 

Genesis 3

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

 

This is an agricultural creation. What I mean by that is the writers of this myth lived in a time that people planted crops to survive. This does not reflect reality. We as a species have only been farming for about twelve thousand years. Before that we we hunted and foraged for our food. 

 

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/development-agriculture

 

This is fact. They have excavated and found a massive amount of evidence that humans depended on a hunting and foraging lifestyle for over one hundred thousand years prior to the advent of farming.

 

Yet in genesis. They are already expected to farm from the very beginning. 

 

As I said before AIK, this is a myth. And it is a myth based on primitive knowledge of the world and their surroundings. It is these very questions that lead me to leave the church and later after seeing more irrefutable evidence I quit believing all together. 

 

Have a nice day,

 

Dark Bishop

@aik

 

Since your up and about now, I want to bring this post back up for your attention. 

 

Why does the bible depict an understanding of farming when we know the earliest humans did not farm? It is a fact. They've excavated and they know that humans were hunter/gatherers long before they figured out how to grow and harvest crops. 

 

Thanks 

DB

[◊ Krowb ◊]

8 hours ago, aik said:

If I am telling you that the apple in my hand is awesome sweet and juicy, how are you going to know it without tasting it? Tell me about objective evidences which will give you a taste of it to know it for sure if it is sweet or not. 

 

I did misunderstand.  When you asked about the sweetness and juiciness I assumed we were discussing sweetness and juiciness, not the more general concept of "taste".  Obviously, the only way to know the taste of a specific apple is to eat that specific apple.  Anything less is not knowledge.

 

However, to know the sweetness and juiciness of an apple is measurable.

 

We must be clear when discussing otherwise we are liable to misunderstand.

 

So are we really discussing apples or did I hit the right mark on my previous response.

 

We can continue after you finish with @DarkBishop, there is no rush here.

[aik]

20 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

@aik

 

Since your up and about now, I want to bring this post back up for your attention. 

 

Why does the bible depict an understanding of farming when we know the earliest humans did not farm? It is a fact. They've excavated and they know that humans were hunter/gatherers long before they figured out how to grow and harvest crops. 

 

Thanks 

DB

What is their base that people did not know at that time how to grow and harvest crops...

[aik]

8 minutes ago, Krowb said:

Obviously, the only way to know the taste of a specific apple is to eat that specific apple.  Anything less is not knowledge.

Could you call it an objective evidence?

 

And could you say that if you have less, for example laboratory results about sweetness and juiciness, you will be satisfied with its taste? Will your objective evidence be enough for you?

 

Please answer and I will continue the line to its goal. 

 

[freshstart]

Maybe this will help you understand, @Aik that we cannot be swayed by an imaginary, God - including Jesus.

I'm just going to substitute "Jerry the Unicorn" for "Jesus." Perhaps this will help you to see how silly it sounds to us:

 

9 hours ago, aik said:

I am not here to provide you evidences. I am here to let Jerry the Unicorn catch you out of the devil's hands by his power.  I am here to let Jerry the Unicorn crush your current foundation in front of your eyes by truth. 

 

If Jerry the Unicorn fails to do it, then you will fail having freedom from your slavery. 

 

We are not enslaved by our beliefs.

You are.

[◊ Krowb ◊]

No, my personal perception of the sweetness of a thing is not objective evidence as to the term "sweet".  Sweetness is a personal concept, not an objective one.  Sugar ratio is an objective measurement.  Different people have different thresholds for when something is sweet.

 

Yes, I would be satisfied to know that an apple I may eat in the future is sweet based on my knowledge of both my personal thresholds of when I find the sugar and liquid content sufficient to label sweet and juicy, and that a particular apple has tested qualities that meet or exceed these criteria.

[aik]

On 11/28/2022 at 6:51 PM, DarkBishop said:

AIK,

 

Your indoctrination and blind faith are astonishing. Your a perfect example of a person who has given up all reasoning in faith to a God. This is the exact same type of faith that Islamic suicide bombers have. They believe that they will be rewarded for their actions by Allah. It is no different. 

 

The scriptures I showed you were stories of God ordering the death of children and infants. And even laughing at infants getting smashed against stones. Laughing AIK!! That God would laugh at his enemies babies being smashed against stones! That is not a loving God. But this doesn't cause you to question your faith. You only justify it in your mind, because of your religious indoctrination. Your the one who is blind to see the truth here. Not us.

 

Here is how I see it. Killing everyone, including men, women, and children was a barbaric practice 4000 years ago. Back then to a less civilized people it was an acceptable practice. And it insured that no one was left to retaliate. There were no children left to grow up and avenge their fathers or mothers. This was directly reflected in their beliefs about God. They felt that their God would revel in his peoples success just as much as they did. 

 

Fast forward 2000 years to the time of Jesus and you'll see a different God. This is when the Loving God comes in. The God that is building a heaven for his people. With mansions and streets of gold. In the old testament God wants them to conquer everyone in Canaan. In the new testament Christians are taught to be meek and lowly. To endure persecution and torture. To turn the other cheek and to forgive. 

 

This is not the old testament God. The new testament God is a drastically different God than the old testament God. Honestly the God of Islam is more like the old testament God than the Christian God. 

 

@walterpthefirst has already brought up the scripture that God doesn't change. So why has God obviously changed between the old and new testament? This is a contradiction. The bible is full of them. 

 

 

I think your mistaken. This is Ba'al 

 

https://www.kchanson.com/PHOTOS/baal2.html

 

Maybe you're getting confused with the ancient dildos archeologists have found. 

 

https://allthatsinteresting.com/history-of-the-dildo

 

It's kind of funny really. But it makes sense. I doubt there were very many men in ancient times that cared whether the woman had an orgasm or not. So they made a solution for that. 

 

No need to reply to this post AIK. If you can't see how horrible the biblical God is from what we've said so far. Your probably not going to see it at all. I'm going to post again later tho. Im wanting to discuss some of the problems about creation myth with you. 

 

Dark Bishop

In the beginning was the Doctrine, and the Doctrine was with God, and the Doctrine was God. 

 

I myself changed the word here to show you that the Doctrine is of God's. I am not changing the scripture by this, because the word Logos means not just a word, but a teaching, knowledge, understanding,, even more than that. Logos i think is similar to the word "Thora". So I just put a synonim here. 

 

So according to Gospel the doctrine was before everything. And then we can see that another doctrine enters the world. It enters into creation and deceives the first men. 

 

4“You will not surely die,” the serpent told her. 5“For God knows that in the day you eat of it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

 

The satan's doctrine here is another one. You will not die, and your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods. 

 

What happened to Eve? 

 

6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom, she took the fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it.

 

Right after she got satan's words she saw that the tree was good for food. Before that she did not pay attention to it. And the tree pleased her eyes. And the tree became desirable for wisdom. It seems that the serpent was true, his words came true, one can say. How did the satan's words influenced on her? When she paid attention to what the Liar is telling, the 'death' became desirable for her (if you understand what i mean). The bad became good before her eyes. Yes, her eyes were opened, but which eyes? Eyes of sin. The world has been changed, values changed in her. But Notice!!! She had not yet eaten it. But the values already changed. Serpent's bite already is working. 

 

Then, as a result of all her desire to be done, she took it and ate it. Eating the fruit was a result of it. Just like as what seed you put in soil, the same tree grow and after that it will give its fruit. As simple as it is. 

 

This is the satanic doctrine, which deceived not only the first men, but also today's christians. It starts from a lie, and if you can just for a second forget Jesus' words who say: 

 

44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies. (John 8:44)

 

There is no truth in satan. and when he lies he speaks his own. So if Jesus said that there was no truth in satan's word only a lie, why so many of us are looking for the truth in those lies? Shall we be successful to find some? No. Because Jesus said, there is no truth it. But what will happen when we start looking for truth in a lie, we will have Eve's eyes obviously.  Seeing the world changed. So we can see that even to see in a correct way it is the gift of God. 

 

And this is the answer to a question about how disbelief can be a sin that @freshstarti think she asked.

So which indoctrination should you accept to live? The God's or Satan's one?

 

Second to which i want you to pay attention my friend. 

Let us compare faiths of Adam and of Job's here. Adam was a man who had everything on Earth, no gadget, no cars, no technologies, yet he had everything under his authority. He was like a king, had no health issues, had not financial issues, none put him to bankruptcy, had his wife beside him. Shortly say No problem. But when his wife told him to do what goes in opposite to which the Lord said, he could not stand at did it. Because he had no knowledge...knowledge about God (my question about apple's taste). Adam had no knowledge that God was his life, who gave him the tree of life for that case. And Adam did what his wife told him. 

 

Now see another man, and also his wife is telling him to betray God's words and die. This is Job. When Job lost everything he had. He lost his business, property, and sons and daughters in a day. So Wife of Job:

 

9Then Job’s wife said to him, “Do you still retain your integrity? Curse God and die!”

10“You speak as a foolish woman speaks,” he told her. “Should we accept from God only good and not adversity?”

In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.

 

Job's wife spoke just like the serpent in the Garden. She says Curse God and die. Do not retain in your integrity. It seems that she is a realist. But she is as realist as Eve in the Garden. What did Job say to her? We mentioned wealth of Adam in the Garden. But please pay attention to what Job has here. He has nothing, he lost his kids, and he is ill with terrible boils from the soles of his feet to the crown of his head. 

 

In this situation what would anyone of us say to God? Look what Job is saying: 10“You speak as a foolish woman speaks,” he told her. “Should we accept from God only good and not adversity?” 

 

Dear Bishop, do you see the faith of Job? What did he knew that you do not know then? Why in a similar situation Job did not betray his God, but Adam could not stand having everything in his life he needed? What is the name of such faith, I ask? Tell me what is that power and where does it come from? Pause!

 

So look now what the New Testament says. 

15For you did not receive a spirit of slavery that returns you to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. (Romans 8:16). 

 

It speaks here about the Holy Spirit. Not a brain @Weezer The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are of God's. The Holy Spirit bears witness and gives evidence to our spirit. He does not tell you here go and do something, He only testifies to us what we need to know. This knowledge comes from God. Job had this knowledge. David had this knowledge. Moses had it, Abraham had it, Paul had it, Peter had it, and everyone who has the Holy Spirit in him he knows it. 

 

All the scientist try to catch a wind. They want to prove something. But they are unable to bear evidence which will be stronger than God's evidence. And this is the love of God to us, to you who did not keep His Spirit by Him only, but shared with us, who believe Him. 

 

Yes Job had serious problems, yes he lost even his wife spiritually, she became like a satan to him. But He says then being in his pains: 

25But I know that my Redeemer lives,

and in the end He will stand upon the earth.

26Even after my skin has been destroyed,

yet in my flesh I will see God.

27I will see Him for myself;

my eyes will behold Him, and not as a stranger.

 

Notice his words: Even after my skin has been destroyed!!!... he allows that God has the right to destroy his skin....Yet in my flesh I will see God. But believes in God's power. We now have more evidence than Job had. Jesus' resurrection from death. Job had not it got. But we have. And we know that his words were true. 

 

So this gift of knowledge of God is from God given to you if you also live with God. 

 

I heard that Job's illness endured almost 5-7 years. For so many years he was in his situation. Yes he had issues with God, as anyone of us, but he believed in God. And God defeated the satan's power at that time by Job's faith only. Satan was the one who wanted to kill Job, as God's representative on the earth. But God defeated him, by letting Job enter into such tribulations and temptations. And at the end of it Job was blessed twice more, and he never cursed God. 

 

This is a doctrine of the Holy Spirit. 

 

Yes, I am indoctrinated and you obviously are indoctrinated right now. But our doctrines are opposite. 

 

God bless you and turn back to Him again.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, aik said:

What is their base that people did not know at that time how to grow and harvest crops...

Here is a brief article on the various ways they date. I am not an archeologist. I did not go to college to learn how to date ancient artifacts so I let them speak for themselves. I know there have been a couple hundred years of research put into this. Much of it done by Christians probably.

 

https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/how-do-archeologists-know-how-old-a-site-is.htm#:~:text=One of the best-known,remains like charcoal or bones.

 

Db

[aik]

51 minutes ago, Krowb said:

No, my personal perception of the sweetness of a thing is not objective evidence as to the term "sweet".  Sweetness is a personal concept, not an objective one.  Sugar ratio is an objective measurement.  Different people have different thresholds for when something is sweet.

 

Yes, I would be satisfied to know that an apple I may eat in the future is sweet based on my knowledge of both my personal thresholds of when I find the sugar and liquid content sufficient to label sweet and juicy, and that a particular apple has tested qualities that meet or exceed these criteria.

Which is preferrable? To eat it and to have knowledge about that sweetness rather than to hear how lobarotory workers found out criteria about its quality and so on? Which is preferrable to have it or to have heard about it? 

 

If to have it is better, then why are you so curious looking for an objective evidence and do not pay attention to words of witnesses who say their knowledge to you from what they have, they have knowledge of taste. I better to go to one who has this apple eaten and can share with me,, than to go to open a book of apple's chemistry and check what taste does it have. Does it make sense not to look for objective evidences in some issues?

[aik]

1 hour ago, freshstart said:

Maybe this will help you understand, @Aik that we cannot be swayed by an imaginary, God - including Jesus.

I'm just going to substitute "Jerry the Unicorn" for "Jesus." Perhaps this will help you to see how silly it sounds to us:

 

 

We are not enslaved by our beliefs.

You are.

Read what i replied to @DarkBishopplease. Maybe it will open your eyes to see something.

[aik]

3 hours ago, midniterider said:

I've tasted the apple. Wasn't that great in the beginning and after a while it just tasted nasty. Why do you want us to taste it again? 

Because your apple was rotten as I see from your words. 

[◊ Krowb ◊]

13 minutes ago, aik said:

Which is preferrable? To eat it and to have knowledge about that sweetness rather than to hear how lobarotory workers found out criteria about its quality and so on? Which is preferrable to have it or to have heard about it? 

 

If to have it is better, then why are you so curious looking for an objective evidence and do not pay attention to words of witnesses who say their knowledge to you from what they have, they have knowledge of taste. I better to go to one who has this apple eaten and can share with me,, than to go to open a book of apple's chemistry and check what taste does it have. Does it make sense not to look for objective evidences in some issues?

 

This sounds very much like an old story I heard.  There was fruit very pleasant to the eye, but isn't it better to know it is good to eat rather than merely being told?  - Why are you making the serpent's argument?

 

Taste is a subjective thing, you do not gain objective knowledge from a subjective experience. Witnesses can be false or mistaken.  How many times in life has someone shared food with you they thought was wonderful and you found not good?

 

Your position is confusing a subjective experience with an objective fact.  This is where we differ, I would prefer to know my subjective preferences and then choose the apple which objectively accords with my preferences than the testimony of a witness with unknown subjective preferences swearing to me "this is a good apple".

 

 

[aik]

3 minutes ago, Krowb said:

 

This sounds very much like an old story I heard.  There was fruit very pleasant to the eye, but isn't it better to know it is good to eat rather than merely being told?  - Why are you making the serpent's argument?

 

Taste is a subjective thing, you do not gain objective knowledge from a subjective experience. Witnesses can be false or mistaken.  How many times in life has someone shared food with you they thought was wonderful and you found not good?

 

Your position is confusing a subjective experience with an objective fact.  This is where we differ, I would prefer to know my subjective preferences and then choose the apple which objectively accords with my preferences than the testimony of a witness with unknown subjective preferences swearing to me "this is a good apple".

 

 

"choose the apple which objectively accords with my preferences"

 

how are you going to do this?

[◊ Krowb ◊]

2 minutes ago, aik said:

"choose the apple which objectively accords with my preferences"

 

how are you going to do this?

Simple,

 

I will choose the Red Delicious over the Granny Smith apples.

 

Red Delicious is a variety of apple known for a high sugar content.  There are some people who swear by the Granny Smith and will be witnesses testifying to its superiority, but I disagree.

 

This really is a gulf between us.  You will accept and weight the testimony of others above objective metrics and I am the opposite.  I am not sure there is a way bridge the divide.

 

What is your reasoning for treating subjective experiences so highly?

 

And more specifically, how do you determine which witnesses to accept and which to reject?  I doubt you would accept the testimony of a Mormon witness.

[aik]

17 minutes ago, Krowb said:

Simple,

 

I will choose the Red Delicious over the Granny Smith apples.

 

Red Delicious is a variety of apple known for a high sugar content.  There are some people who swear by the Granny Smith and will be witnesses testifying to its superiority, but I disagree.

 

This really is a gulf between us.  You will accept and weight the testimony of others above objective metrics and I am the opposite.  I am not sure there is a way bridge the divide.

 

What is your reasoning for treating subjective experiences so highly?

 

And more specifically, how do you determine which witnesses to accept and which to reject?  I doubt you would accept the testimony of a Mormon witness.

Red delicious is preferable for me not because I have laboratory tests of it, but because I have tasted, compared with granny and I am sure now that red delicious is sweeter. Though it may have some individual apples being not so sweet. So if the whole world tells me that red delious has become like a lemon, I would not take it or I will check what kind of 'red delicious' they eat, and give them the right fruit which is the real red delicious. The one which I am eating and know that it is sweet. Am I doing wrong?

 

To have it tasted by your own is more than to have some laboratory results, though I take into account what does laboratory say. 

 

For example we here have companies testing various food in laboratory and give out tesults. We hear them, take into account, but then we go, take it and eat it. And if the taste fits to what they say then they are corrects, but if taste is different, then they are not correct. After I can have more of it to become sure that I think in a right way. Does it make sense to you?

 

But anyway I'm happy to know that we have a common point to stand on it. The Red Delicious. Lol.

[Astreja]

Anyone else getting a Snow White and the Seven Dwarves vibe from all this talk about apples? 

[aik]

14 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Two points before i go off to my afternoon tea, aik.

 

 

Copernicus was not burned at the stake.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

 

Toward the close of 1542, Copernicus was seized with apoplexy and paralysis, and he died at age 70 on 24 May 1543. Legend has it that he was presented with the final printed pages of his Dē revolutionibus orbium coelestium on the very day that he died, allowing him to take farewell of his life's work. He is reputed to have awoken from a stroke-induced coma, looked at his book, and then died peacefully.

 

 

The rest of your post is not objective evidence.

 

It is subjective and we dismiss it as such.

 

Objective evidence is independent of your faith.

 

 

Byeee!

 

 

Good Morning Walter. My cup of coffee and a breakfast . at my work. lol

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HQP8IMjMw5S4nAEL4sH-1cCNnMxbkvPR/view?usp=share_link

 

[mwc]

     Fuji apples all the way.

 

          mwc

 

[Astreja]

I like Macintosh for eating, Granny Smith or Gala for cooking.  Never did understand what people see in Red Delicious - nice texture, but don't really taste like apples to me.

 

Mind you, I grew up in a neighbourhood that was one giant orchard, not far from Rougemont, Québec, and we had several apple trees in our yard.  Might be juuust a bit biased...

[freshstart]

On 11/30/2022 at 10:02 PM, aik said:

And this is the answer to a question about how disbelief can be a sin that @freshstarti think she asked.

So which indoctrination should you accept to live? The God's or Satan's one?

 

Aik, that is not an answer to my question. I asked how it is that disbelief can be a sin and you answered with another question about choosing/accepting an indoctrination between God or Satan-neither of whom are real.

So here is the answer to your question about "which indoctrination I would accept: God's or Satan's:"

 

From which Christmas indoctrination do you accept and live by: the Grinch or Santa Claus?

Note: even though the questions we asked each other are different, our answers are the same. Why do you think that is?

[freshstart]

On 11/30/2022 at 10:02 PM, aik said:

So according to Gospel the doctrine was before everything. And then we can see that another doctrine enters the world. It enters into creation and deceives the first men. 

Aik, What about other sources outside the Gospel? The gospel is a fairytale to us. Its a book of myths. It does not help your case to point to mythology as if it were real.

 

According to my journal I'm a fabulous cook. Does that make it so?

What if I told you God spoke to me and told me to write that? Would that make you believe? What would it take for you to believe that my cooking is outstanding?

[freshstart]

On 11/30/2022 at 10:02 PM, aik said:

This is a doctrine of the Holy Spirit. 

Another myth.

 

On 11/30/2022 at 10:02 PM, aik said:

And Adam did what his wife told him. 

Yep, he ate what was offered. Good man! Too bad Eve didn't yet have the skills to whip up something a little spicier than an apple. The story might have changed dramatically!

[aik]

2 hours ago, freshstart said:

Aik, that is not an answer to my question. I asked how it is that disbelief can be a sin and you answered with another question about choosing/accepting an indoctrination between God or Satan-neither of whom are real.

So here is the answer to your question about "which indoctrination I would accept: God's or Satan's:"

 

From which Christmas indoctrination do you accept and live by: the Grinch or Santa Claus?

Note: even though the questions we asked each other are different, our answers are the same. Why do you think that is?

When you choose not to be with God, then you choose to stay in your sin. This choice is the sin.  Because this choice is made by your faith. So disbilief in God, in His words, is the sin. Because whoever does not believe in God, he stays in his sins. 

 

I don't care about the date of Christmas celebration. I celebrate it from 25 December to 7 Januray every day. Why? Because it is not tied to the Bible teaching or God's doctrine. 

 

I did not understand your note.

[aik]

2 hours ago, freshstart said:

Aik, What about other sources outside the Gospel? The gospel is a fairytale to us. Its a book of myths. It does not help your case to point to mythology as if it were real.

 

According to my journal I'm a fabulous cook. Does that make it so?

What if I told you God spoke to me and told me to write that? Would that make you believe? What would it take for you to believe that my cooking is outstanding?

After reading your journal, I would taste it if it is true or not. Then after that I could say for sure is it a myth or not. But if I read your journal and gor to a shop and take their a similar cook but not of yours, and I say 'I know that dish, it is terrible', and go to everyone and say 'dont ever buy it and eat it because it is terrible, but the @freshstart's journal says that it is outstanding, don't believe this myth'. It would not express the real situatioin. 

 

I klnow that you were christians. The Bible says that if your foundation is Jesus, it will stay forever. If some foundation has been destroyed, i don't care what kind of foundation it is, it is not of Jesus' then, sister.