In criminal justice, there are often criminals who walk free due to errors in procedures, incomplete evidence, etc. The case against them cannot be proven. It doesn't mean they did not commit the crime.
You betta believe it!
Yes. But the earliest "prototype copies" date from the 4th century and 80% of extant christian texts date from later than the 8th century with most dated to around the 11th century.
Those laws punish people of a group, regardless of whether or not they actually have that power or privilege. Your stance does not recognize that and is thusly flawed. The law is supposed to be about individuals and whether what they have done is legal or not, regardless of their sex, race, sexual preference, religions. etc...
Nobody swept Al Franken under the rug.
"God is too Great for man to even comprehend in our puny minds."
They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.
Ah, poor little boy. Is that all you have?
I hate when someone gives a link with thousands of words instead of presenting his own view. You have read it, if you believe it is relevant to assassination of Kaab, why don't you quote this piece in a short comment?
Since you mention 1 Corinthians ?let?s look at I Corinthians: First Corinthians was probably written around 55 CE. It was written mainly to deal with some practical problems that were besetting the Christian community in Corinth. There were problems of cases of sexual immorality (5:1-13), legal issues (6:1-11), issues relating to marriage and singlehood (7:1-40), acceptability of consuming meat offered to idols (8:1-13; 10:1-11:1), issues regarding prophecy and speaking in tongues (11:2-16) and how the rich were relating to the poor (11:18-22). Yet even here Paul was also facing problems with his mission. There are two passages in this epistle where Paul felt compelled to defend his apostleship. The first is:
I had a year of Greek in high school and 3 in college. We read all of these people in those classes. Over and over and over and over again and again. We also read a guy named Herodotus who was really the world's first historian and you can clearly see the difference between what he wrote and the stories about Socrates. Herodotus did not write dramas with a moral to the story. Herodotus also noted that he'd never read a manuscript or narrative he thought was an accurate reflection of the past. The stories about Socrates are dramas placed in a historical setting. Historical narratives do not contain dialog, people all speaking to each other in complete sentences. Nobody talks like that anyway in real life. Historical narratives do not contain long-winded speeches like the supposed sermons from Jesus or say Jeremiah. These are the hallmarks of fiction, not history writing. History writers are not interested in moral philosophical or religious teachings and story telling.
PHII. Inculcation is powerful and can influence any dependent child. Once the mind is developed enough to reason and exercise better emotional control and judgement one may choose to test the magic of make believe, gods and ghosts and thus reason may prevail.
Hmmm, that is what I call "in-congruent thinking. "
As if you're a moderator.