Grammar

'not a desperate manipulation of whatever scraps you can find to support something you believed before you saw any evidence. 'But where is this desperation where I see common sense you see problems. All evo's do is start swearing and ridicule people, untill they stop this (as proved in this topic) why should I listen to these rude people?

'I have answered all your questions, thus far. Now it's your turn, or are you reaching for the ejector seat handle like Buzzsaw?'No, the topic is about fossils, yes i have listened but the fact is creationist views you are not willing to learn, I'll be honest with you, I'm not interested in dating methods and know little about them. What I know about creation is laypersons level so honestly Mark ask this Buzsaw chap he probably knows more. I am not avoiding questions I completely admitt I am not able to answer!

so it's about numbers to you John. So if everybody agrees to kill but a few disagree does that make the few wrong. Ofcourse not that is bad logic. So really this is an opinion.

'who would you want investigating:'As I do not seek justice on earth I do not care, I know God will provide justice as he would know who done the crime.

'Are you telling me that you would let an innocent loved one go to prison for the murder of another loved one because of a corrupt cop?'Thats not what I said, the law on earth is unjust, therefore even with evidence I could not be certain the man arrested was guilty that is why I totally disagree with the death penalty.That is why I would never be on a jury and that is why I trust in God, as I said I would look to God for justice.

'having the misfortune of being a priest's daughter AND a whore, cursing and blaspheming while arguing...'Ofcourse as I said earlier or in a similar post I take the whole bible as truth : Thou shalt not kill. Also 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'. As I am a follower of Christ and he says we are all with sin , who then has the right to kill someone? because thats what the death penalty IS, killing someone!

'because Jesus did say that it would remain in effect even after his coming. 'But only a man without sin can cast the first stone, according to God no one is without sin therefore NO ONE can deliver the death penalty. Are you understanding what I am saying? therefore what the old testament says is right because Jesus fulfills the scripture and according to him (God with us) NO ONE can cast the first stone!

'You are choosing for your mind to be a barren place.'Gee sorry moma, all I meant by that is you ask me questions then dissapear, and howw do you know my mind is barren ? have you been in my mind?

'How do you reconcile that? 'maybe I cannot reconcile it to my own knowledge, however as you say Jesus usually can, it's not my logic it's Jesus', if he was God with us then why not listen to what he says, afterall he should know and he does.

But what is wrong with what Jesus said, believe me I believe God more than anything in life, but the fact is Jesus answered correctly with saying 'let he without sin cast the first stone' he revealed this to me when I read the old testament and when I was troubled when I heard of stoning to death, I can only admitt to the knowledge I have and I find Jesus always satisfies my questions, afterall I am only a man with an opinion, what do you want from me I've offered all the knowledge I have, I dont see the point in lying and pretending I have all the answers.

Well if we read the whole bible as 'a whole' and accept what Jesus says as I'm sure he knows , if those in leviticus were without sin?are you concerning yourself too much with this? think about the meanin, please read and think what I mean by this:Once in school a bully kicked me (this is true) so I told the teacher and she said 'kick him back Michael' and I didn't want to, I didn't because I thought it was wrong and preferred to (not kick-not kill) so the teacher then said to the bully , 'there you see it's wrong to kick' for some reason she had faith in me and was correct to teach this, I know it's a silly little example but if you think about it I'm sure you'll see what I am trying to say.

'Now you are postulating that the people in the OT were free of sin?'no I'm saying they are with sin , can you read? no wonder people do not hear the truth!'ummm.... God gave the Levitical laws because he knew the good people of the Bible would not follow them,'so you did fail to understand as I thought you might, what I am saying is that a good person is incapable killing or hurting someone and since 'he without sin can cast the first stone' and only Jesus is without sin? do you get it? shall I interprate my own words for you even more?

'2) Do not follow the OT laws. Now we are following Christ, but NOT DOING what God told us to do. 'OR we can win by first reading the OT then if we are concerned about killing someone, we can look at the 'main' law, 'Thou shalt not kill'
and if we are still concerned then we can look at what God himself said when he came to fulfill the scripture, 'let he without sin cast the first stone'. S o if we think for a minute- 'hang on a minute, God said when with us, no eye for an eye anymore? no killing but loving? And since he is the fullfilling of the OT ? do we listen or follow his previous teaching? and even if we do follow the previous teaching we are not without sin to do this? Do you know what I am getting at?

Dear Irishrochhound, I am pleased to hear you want to explain about an old earth. I will definately hear you out.'Would a little grammar be too much to ask for too?'Please point out or suggest what is so bad about my grammar and I will try my best to change it.

'Would a little grammar be too much to ask for too?'There are too many 'too' in this sentence.