Ten oz

What smears and misrepresent facts are you referencing? Unemployment has steadily falling in the U.S. since 2010. There has been no appreciable change in the trend since Trump took office. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 Getting remains back does nothing to resolve the issues surround nuclear weapons, political assassinations, and human rights violations. Kim Jung-un's position, total power over NK's population, has only been legitimized and strengthen by the Trump admin.

Is it, I don't know that for sure. For all I know a person or organization is already accessing it. Just because DOJ isn't aware of it and FB hasn't acknowledged it doesn't mean it isn't so. I am skeptical of such things. I think best to error on the side that nothing done via the internet is private.

Since 2015 their have been 10,000- 50,000 killed and over 3 million people displace as a result of the war in Yemen. The war isn't getting much news here in the U.S. yet the U.S. has been involved providing Saudi Arabia with munitions and intelligence. 1 - Why isn't Yemen receiving more attention? 2 - Does the U.S. have an obligation to take in more Yemen refugees since we are participating in the war which is displacing them? 3 - What needs to happen to end the war?

Criminal minded persons will inevitably hack it eventually regardless. I don't think FB assisting Law Enforcement will impact that. In my opinion, for now, it will need to be a case by case thing where Law Enforcement should take their probable cause to a court of law and lay out why they need access and what their justifications are.

What is your standard for adequate? California, London, Berlin, and Portugal all have addicts. If your goal is zero addicts no country or region of the world is currently is adequate. Treating drug abuse as a medical problem rather than a legal problem isn't actually that big a change. Hundreds of billions of dollars a year is already being spent around the world to provide medical care for addiction. So switching from a legal focus to a medical focus would save the billions currently being spent within legal systems. Here is the U.S. we counter drug units attached to any number of agencies like the Drug Enforcement Admin, Custom Border Protection, Coast Guard, and FBI. Locally every major metro's Police Dept. has their own special narcotics teams. Countless arrests are made, millions of people have gone to prison, millions put on probation, trillions of dollars has been spent between federal and local efforts and yet drugs are still available in every town seemingly without exception in the USA. Imagine if all that infrastructure (professional staff, facilities, and $trillions) went towards things like education and childcare.

No easy answer here in my opinion. Peoples texts and phone location has been used in investigation to prove people committed crimes. Messenger is a logical extension of that. In extreme case we've seen after things like mass shootings that the perpetrators had been active on social media like FB and their accounts helped connect them to other groups or individuals of interest. So it can be a real tool for Law Enforcement. However people have the right to privacy and Law Enforcement shouldn't be able to just go fishing around without legitimate probable cause. I am on the fence. It is a bit like the Golden State Killer case were investigators were able to zero in on a serial killer because relatives had used DNA ancestry kits. On one hand I think that stuff should should be private but then on the other hand I am glad they caught a killer.

If you read the SCOTUS ruling it clearly takes objection to the way the law was written and ruled on in Colorado itself rather than sides with the Baker. I highlighted a portion in a previous post where Kennedy even said he would have rule against the baker had the law in CO been different. It is important to remember that SCOTUS, like all courts, as suppose to rule based on the arguments presented and the existing law. Even a murderer like OJ walks when a case is bumbled. SCOTUS aren't investigators seeking truth.

The industry has changed. Live performers who are an attraction for the power and enthusiasm for there voice and rhythm alone are nearly all gone. Franklin like so many great crooners before here didn't need latex and fireworks to put on a show. She was a genre to herself and the attraction was always purely her.

Road rage like all rage can often manifest itself in bizarre ways. I rather everyone have their morning cup of coffee than not.

Ehrman is not the gold standard on this issue anymore than Carrier is. If some called him uncle Dave the answer to the OP's question is no.

Right, "Did Christianity start with", Christianity's Jesus is described in the gospel. Again, Tacitus referencing Christian people as Jesus believers is not a description of an individual person named Jesus. The only written works that clearly say a person named Jesus lived and died are the gospels. Josephus didn't say a Jesus lived and died.

Nope, there is a difference between references to the existence of Christians, places or people referenced in the Gospels, and a description of who Jesus as a person was. There are no descriptions of Jesus's life outside of the Gospels. Josephus referring to James as the Brother of Jesus or Tacitus referencing a fire lit by followers of Jesus is not a description of Jesus's life.

Where besides the gospels is there a description for who Jesus was?

@DrP, may question wasn't a criticism. It just seems fairly obvious that anyone in a car speeding to put themselves in a position to make fun of another driver is in the wrong. I find it strange that Phi is entertaining the criticism.

I think you are missing what I am saying. I am referencing what the writers wanted the readers to understand. Obviously water was not turned to wine. Was that a lie the writers were telling with the hope it would be believed or something metaphorical the writers didn't mean to be taken literal? I wasn't comparing Jesus to Joseph Smith. I was using Joseph Smith as an example of someone who wrote something factious but wanted it read as literal truth. If there is any comparison being made it would be to Paul and not to Jesus. This thread isn't asking if Christianity is based on a group of people which the pseudonym Jesus represents. Nor is it asking if men wrote the Bible or God wrote the Bible. It is asking if the specific individual person Jesus, as referenced in the gospels, was a real person. The post you just made would imply the answer is No.

Troy was a location not a specific person. We know from numerous artifacts left by the Tojans and other Greeks that they existed. They had capitals. Troy is said to be a capital. It is referenced in religious, fictional, and nonfictional works. Not just Homer but even Egyptian text. Capitals are known to be real places. Gods and other spiritual figures are not. Could that capital have been called something other than Troy, absolutely. Was there a giant wall, I don't know. Likewise no one here is arguing that Jerusalem or any other location mentioned in the gospels are not real places. Troy to Jesus isn't apples to apples. Paris, Achillies, Helen to Jesus would be. Even still if you made the argument that it isn't known for sure that Troy was a real place I wouldn't object. I can acknowledge that it most certainly could be fictional.

I am saying that it isn't clear that the Gospels were meant metaphorically. Joseph Smith's account of golden tablets weren't meant metaphorically. Joseph Smith could have been delusional or Joseph Smith could have bee a liar but he meant for his claims to be received as literal. Likewise appears to be the case for Paul and whomever is responsible for Luke, Mathew, and Marc. There appear to be claiming something they mean to be taken literal. I suppose it could have been metaphorical and understand as such during that era but I don't know that for sure either way.

Not all historians come to that conclusion and Ehrman is not a uniquely more qualified historian than those who disagree with his work. Belief in the historicity Jesus is guess work. Lots of history is guess work. Troy is understood to have been a real city yet to what extent Homer's Iliad accurately described it is unknown. Until very recently we didn't even know what Denisovans were yet there is a continent full of humans today who have Denisovan DNA. I see no benefit is insisting that unknowns are known. Their is no contemporary evidence for Jesus. Maybe his story was based on a real person maybe it wasn't. Clearly the person described in the Gospels never existed (virgin birth, water to wine, resurrection, etc) which renders then unreliable tales. In my opinion people attempt to rationalize the miracles as misunderstandings or metaphors. I understand why. Clearly an author claiming the impossible can't be taken serious so people attempt to created bridges between what's real and what's not. That is all well and fine but there are Christians today who make wild impossible claims which they absolutely mean to be true and not metaphors. Today all over the world there are Christians who claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues, hear the voice of God, see the virgin Marry, and etc. If Christians today are dead serious about miracles how can one say they weren't just as serious two thousand years ago?

@Phi for All, many Coffee places have drive thrus, nearly all cars have cups holders, no laws prohibit drinking coffee while driving, and if any distracted driving took place it would have been pantomiming. Clearing accelerating in a turn lane above the speed limit to mime someone sarcastically is the greater error. What I am confused by is why it impacted you enough to want to discuss it. I personally seldom drive anymore instead selecting to cycle, walk, or use public transportation. One reason why is because of how dangerous and unpleasant it is to drive. People carry their problems with them during a commute. Maybe they are running late, behind on their mortgage, going through a divorce, or whatever. Any number of things keep people from being focus behind the wheel. I have seen any number of commuting melt downs in mylife where people lose their cool and take to honking, shouting, beating the roof of their car with their fist, and on and on and on. It is my opinion those people already had short fuses due to other situations in their life. People who are fully prepared for their day and on time aren't the ones acting out on the road. Assuming you understand that why did this incident effect you?

Of course. My post was meant to be simple. Those who do not understand evolution do not recognize the differences between Chimpanzee and Bonobo. They see Human as some massive leap which evolution can't account for.

Genes mutate. Everyone, all animals, have mutations. Those mutations range from benign to causing severe disabilities. Under good conditions where a population is thriving there is enough genetic diversity within a species that single mutations are not bred for generations. When something in the environment, natural or artificial, limits reproduction and only those with specific mutations are able to reproduce that is when species begins to diverge. Often a species just goes extinct when environments change enough to impact reproduction. Sometimes enough individuals in a species hang on due to a mutation they have which enables them to make it, reproduce, and continue on. That is how Natural Selection works. When all is well and reproduction is healthy species generally stay the same with limited change on millenia. If a species of ape didn't evolve it is because it didn't need to.

Depends on what you mean by "all Humans". Are both Huck Finn and Tom Blankenship real or was just Tom Blankenship?

Not all humans of legend are real. There no defacto answer here based on tradition.

It would be appropriate for people to doubt anything they didn't have evidence for.

Thousands of years from now if people don't have access to the evidence of Joseph Smith's existence I currently have access to than it would be totally appropriate for them to have doubts.