Shila

Yassine- Take a deep breath there buddy

--> @Shila

- Which subject is that?

I never said The Bible was or wasn’t the word of God, I simply made a general statement

K_Michael’s error wasn’t helpful, and I resent that notion of me.

You're going to sit there and tell me the Democrats can't fix democracy now?

When Democrats had huge majorities, from 1932 to 1970, they transformed this country. Presidents like Roosevelt and LBJ signed hundreds of bills from those Congresses into law. We got SS, unemployment insurance, laws to protect the environment, civil rights laws, Medicare benefits, on and on. The Republicans resisted all of it but when they realized they couldn’t stop it and the laws were popular, they eventually joined in.

And what are police officers and society doing to help cops be seen as friendly protectors that have a code in the eyes of the predominantly black communities in US?

That, TWS, is the real root cause and real solution.

What an ass-backwards and wrong way of framing the situation lol.

The correct question is this: what are the civilians doing to get shot? In this case, it appears to be grabbing the gun/taser of an officer. It shouldn't be up to the officers and "society" (whatever that means) to make that situation PR friendly to the black community. It should be up to the people not to commit the serious crime in the first place. 

The crime is the real root cause, and the real solution is prosecuting criminals. 

-> @Shila

->@TWS1405

--> @Shila

I hat you just wrote absolutely zero sense!!! 

Cops are trained to defend themselves from an assailant using their taser against them. Because if they don’t and the cop gets tased, the assailant could and would take their service pistol and kill them and then others in their escape. 

Why wasn’t the taser secured before the officer approached Pamela Turner?

Can you prove it wasn't secure?

Do you know what kind of taser holster he was issued? 

Yeah, didn't think so...

-->

@Shila

No idea what you're getting at.

--> @Public-Choice

--> @TWS1405

I'm waiting to see how being black will somehow tie into this. After all, you blame them for everything else in life.

“Everything else in life”? Nope. Just half the violent crime in this country and the segment that’s overtly racist towards anyone not black (namely whites).

And therein lies your problem. It has not ever been established that these few inserted lines were written by Josephus as I wrote in my very first post here> #3

Stephen wrote:  This will be the very much debated The Testimonium Flavianum, which other scholars believed was added by the Christian apologist Eusebius. Indeed many modern scholars reject it altogether. And further, Josephus doesn't refer to him as a god.

I also wrote :  What Josephus appears to say is extremely very little concerning the biblical Jesus which amounts to just a handful of questionable lines, and these are rejected by many scholars. I am sure Josephus - a priest himself- would have afforded the son of god a little more than a handful of lines, don't you? #14

And I have also written -  It appears to me that you have run out of steam and can only repeat what you have already said and are now reduced to simply repeating your blatant lies and no doubt you will invent new lies. I honestly believed I was going to have a decent conversation on this thread.  

I will only respond if I feel it is necessary.

You simply couldn't stand the pace you deceitful fkn amateur.

--> @Shila

Yep, as I stated Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua is/was a character recorded in historical narratives and we know roughly where he was said to have lived, there's no denying that.

And that's about all one can say for certain.

And yep 1632, that's the point I try to get across. All is made up after the event

--> @BrotherD.Thomas

Did you get your theology diploma from a cracker jack box?

If you go to the Greek and Hebrew you'll find that your analysis is completely uncalled for and taken entirely out of context from its original purpose.

Shila isn't preaching a sermon or leading a church right now. This is a public forum where a discussion is being had. There is nothing in the Bible that says sharing the gospel is a sin.

--> @Shila

Great post!

A Accidental honor killing.  

--> @BrotherD.Thomas

I have never changed genders.   My gender remains the same as it was the day I was born.  

Of course on the forum page for profiles - the characteristics I have identified have changed numerous times.  

I have offered as an explanation for this several factors:

1. I was being stalked by both Brother Thomas and Stephen.  

2. I may have been hacked. 

3. I felt like changing it because I can. 

4. It is actually a similar tactic that Brother Thomas used - since his profile is a fake profile. 

Any and All of these factors are individually or taken together sufficient explanation for the change on my profile. 

And honestly,  the repeated attacks - and defamatory abuse by Brother, Stephen and now Shila or harikrish whatever its name is now - demonstrates reasonable  and overwhelming excuse for my behaviour. 

In any event, au revoir

In relation to God calling me. That is the point.  I did not choose God - he chose me. I would never have chosen God - since I was totally depraved. Total does not mean so evil I was evil - but so totally depraved that I could not save myself.   There was no deceit in what I said. 

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2106-was-jesus-a-liar-and-a-lunatic?page=8&post_number=186

--> @K_Michael

If the Bible isn't the word of God, then what indication do you have that He agrees with it?

I never said The Bible was or wasn’t the word of God, I simply made a general statement

--> @Shila

Why are Americans so fascinated by British classics?

They speak English.  I'd argue that the English are even more entranced by Americans.

Getting old sucks.

--> @Double_R

Trump started no wars, fact checked true.

Another disgusting fact to add on to a disgusting man. When do we get to see some blood for god's sake?

You can list all the awards you want, but that doesn't excuse the disastrous consequences of this man's actions.

Anthony is partly responsible for Covid. He helped secure funding for the gain of function research conducted in Wuhan. He is also on record lying about this ("does not fund gain-of-function research and if it is" -- massive contradiction): Exchange between Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci - YouTube

Keep all this in mind as Anthony talks about the "profound ways" Covid impacted these students

--> @Shila

The cognitive regression of boomers is more of a natural process. 

--> @Shila

Albinos are albinos.

And the colour scale darkens from there on in.

Interestingly there are black albinos, which is to say, people who are racially black who display albinism.

Which sort of puts the old black white issue into perspective

--> @Shila

I hat you just wrote absolutely zero sense!!! 

Cops are trained to defend themselves from an assailant using their taser against them. Because if they don’t and the cop gets tased, the assailant could and would take their service pistol and kill them and then others in their escape. 

This is a joke of a ruling, and Alex Jones can rest certain that it'll be overturned or whittled down to less than 1/10th its current size upon appeal.

--> @Shila

Are you going to honor my request to not respond to my posts?  Or are just going to continue to be a fucking asshole? I think I already know the answer and so does everyone else.

--> @Shila

Your main struggle is with miracles.

YES, minus the miracles,

I don't have any struggles at all. I have many problems with much of the NT and not just the so-called miracles.

 Wrong again you clown.  In many of those threads of mine I have clearly stated that I believe that a man called Jesus existed but that I can never prove my belief...... and neither can YOU! and my position hasn't changed or waivered since the day I joined here.

Correct, and neither can you. 

I simply believe a man named Jesus existed. He believed himself to be- or was led to believe himself to be rightful heir to the throne of David as king of the Jews and Jerusalem. And that it was this belief that got him executed. He performed no miracles and failed miserably to fulfil the requirements of an expected messiah as many messiahs had before him and since.

Speaking in the second person again!?

 I have just covered this blatant lie told by you. And I have shown that I said no such thing. HERE>>

Stephen wrote: Josephus was a high-ranking warrior priest;    of some royal decent, so I am sure he understood the "theology" of the day much better than either you or me. And if you have read all the works of Josephus, you will know that it was he that got his hands on the collection of the sacred temple scrolls after the fall of the city. #14

Have you actually read the works of Josephus? Because I have.#14

Do you see that clown?  No mention at all concerning Josephus' reasons for having the scrolls at all is there? I mention nothing at all of researching Jesus or research at all.

 It appears to me that you have run out of steam and can only repeat what you have already said and are now reduced to simply repeating your lies and no doubt you will invent new lies. I honestly believed I was going to have a decent conversation on this thread.  You simply couldn't stand the pace you fkn amateur.

I have made my position more than clear and more than once.

I will only respond if I feel it is necessary.

--> @Shila

.

Shila,

CEASE AND DESIST NOW!!!

How dare you go against Jesus' inspired words by being a woman and preaching to men?!  Just who in the hell do you think you are?!  Remember, you are nothing but a 2nd class pseudo-christian citizen in being a mere woman, where the man rules over you at all times!  

You have RAN AWAY from the following Jesus inspired passages THREE TIMES NOW in embarrassment not only to you, but to this Religion Forum and Jesus the Christ!  ENOUGH OF YOUR BLASPHEME!

You are in complete violation to Jesus' words shown below in what He thinks about your unsatisfactory gender of being a woman, by not following His doctrine regarding you being a defective women!  Therefore, where do you get the authority to slap Jesus in the face with you creating a thread about Him as a 2nd class woman that is not to "try" and teach men in any way whatsoever and other demeaning biblical facts of your female gender?!

1.  "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." (1 Timothy 2:11-14)

2.  “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman in man. For the man is not of the women; but the woman of the man.” (1Corinthians 11: 3,8 ) 

3.  “I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare.” (Ecclesiastes 7:26)

4.  "The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

5.  "Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered." (1 Peter 3:7)

6.  "It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife." (Proverbs 21:9)

7.  "It is better to live in a desert land than with a quarrelsome and fretful woman." (Proverbs 21:19)

8.  “ It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide house.” (Proverbs 21:9)

9.  "A quarrelsome wife is as annoying as constant dripping on a rainy day. Stopping her complaints is like trying to stop the wind or trying to hold something with greased hands." (Proverbs 27:15-16) 

10.  " Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire." (1 Timothy 2:9)

11.  "For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior." (Ephesians 5:23)

12.  "For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man." (1 Corinthians 11:8-9)

Shila dear, do you want to call Jesus' inspired words above towards demeaning women as LIES?  Then you dig yourself deeper into the hole you have provided for yourself because of the following JESUS INSPIRED passages: 

“EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). 

“And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Luke 4:4) 

“Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says.” (James 1:22)

Therefore, every word of Jesus is to be followed, and a TRUE Christian does what it says to do relative to the two-bit woman, period! Understood Bible fool SHILA?!

Shila, Close this thread of yours to save you from further embarrassment in front of Jesus as He watches you discard His words relative to what He thinks of the lower class woman!   "And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 4:13)

NEXT STUPID AND IGNORANT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN WOMAN LIKE SHILA THAT GOES AGAINST JESUS' TRUE WORDS REGARDING THE INFERIOR WOMAN WILL BE ...?

YES, minus the miracles, !!FFS how many times?  But I have also said that I cannot prove the biblical Jesus existed.  And I have disputed your offering as any type of evidence for his existence too, which has gone completely unchallenged by YOU!.

If you want to derail your own thread by continuously repeating what you offer as evidence, then knock yourself out. But your thread will die a death before much longer.

 Stop telling lies you deceitful fkr.

I have said nor suggested any such thing. What I said was that Josephus was in a better position than both you and I to understand the theology of the times because he was given the temple scrolls after the fall of the city.  AND THAT HE WAS A PRIEST. I mention nothing about it being to do with Josephus "researching or search for the historical Jesus".  If this is how you mean to go on you may as well throw in the towel now, you clown because you won't win a argument by being deceitful and blatantly lying.

here is my full quote and what caused me to say it:

shila wrote: Remember Flavius Josephus was an Historian and not a theologian.

Stephen wrote: Josephus was a high-ranking warrior priest;    of some royal decent, so I am sure he understood the "theology" of the day much better than either you or me. And if you have read all the works of Josephus, you will know that it was he that got his hands on the collection of the sacred temple scrolls after the fall of the city. #14

Have you actually read the works of Josephus? Because I have.#14

Stephen wrote: If you are going to tell blatant lies such as this, you can fk right off.

 Wrong again you clown.  In many of those threads of mine I have clearly stated that I believe that a man called Jesus existed but that I can never prove my belief...... and neither can YOU! and my position hasn't changed or waivered since the day I joined here.

To your one.

Off you go now you deceitful little fkr

That is so great, what is disgusting is that he has that kind of money from being a whackjob lunatic, sad comentary on our society.

--> @zedvictor4

Actually you are wrong, there are ugly people and there are attractive people in appearance.  It is absolute undeniable fact. It isn't some made up social construct.

--> @Best.Korea

- Take a deep breath there buddy

Public-Choice : And all this time I thought you weren't actually Catholic.

And I am not sure they got that correct. You keep referring to yourself in the second person..>>>

Shila wrote: You accepted Jesus as a historical person. The case built by Shila has achieved its objective.

#19

And I am not religious in the slightest.

I know that you clown!!!

And I have disputed the evidence that you put forward that was supposed to support your case for the existence of a biblical and historical Jesus. So simply stop repeating your flimsy evidence and either challenge my disputations or admit they are valid and accept them for what they are, and we can all move on.

Simply repeating and presenting the same argument that I have already challenged won't get us anywhere.And I have disputed the evidence that you put forward that was supposed to support your case for the existence of a biblical and historical Jesus. So simply stop repeating your flimsy evidence and either challenge my disputations or admit they are valid and accept them for what they are, and we can all move on.

Simply repeating and presenting the same argument that I have already challenged won't get us anywhere.

Josephus was a high-ranking warrior priest;    of some royal decent, so I am sure he understood the "theology" of the day much better than either you or me. And if you have read all the works of Josephus, you will know that it was he that got his hands on the collection of the sacred temple scrolls after the fall of the city.

Have you actually read the works of Josephus? Because I have.

--> @Shila

So you are disputing the spelling of  Yeshua, Yehoshua, Jesus. But you are not disputing the person is a historical person behind the name/names.

I am not commenting at all about the historical existence of anyone, nor am I disputing the spelling of anything -- just the claims made in your statement.

Must I be? Because I don't really care.

I did, notice, though, that you couldn't counter the statements I made so you are changing course. Did that website not have anything for you to copy and paste in response?

Just a side note, the following statement was made:

"Jesus' name in Hebrew was “Yeshua” which translates to English as Joshua"

that statement is wrong on at least 3 different levels.

The biblical nickname Yay-shOO-ah is a shortened form of Yehoshua. That name, Yehoshua, is generally rendered into English as Joshua.

So the name "Jesus" would not have been written in Hebrew as "Yeshua" because it was not a formal name, just a nickname.  The sound of the Hebrew nickname is the same as for the word Y'shu'ah, which means "being saved" and it figures that someone would conflate them over time and through the lens/agenda of theology.

--> @Shila @Stephen

And all this time I thought you weren't actually Catholic.

And I accept there was such a man that lived in 1st century Palestine - minus the miracles. But I cannot prove it on the bases of there is so little evidence. It's called being honest with myself.

You on the other hand have offered nothing more than extremely flimsy so-called "evidence".  

So what is the whole point of your thread if not to prove an "historical biblical Jesus" existed?

 But there is absolutely no evidence that any of them were alive at the time as the Christ. We only have stories passed down to us that have gone through many translations.

 What events? And what historians? The same historians that didn't live at the time of Christ in 1st century Palestine.

But we have to face facts at the same time. And I do not accept the New Testament as it has been passed down to us. AND I don't accept your ( or as you put it, shila's ) case as "evidence" enough for the existence of a biblical Jesus either.

Why are you speaking in the second person? Am I conversing with someone other than shila herself?

I do. But you omitted from my quote "minus the miracles". Here> #15 So please, if you are going to use a quote of mine, use the whole quote.

 I don't agree. These flaws have to be ironed out as the conversation moves forward.

You should be prepared to be challenged on your comments, theories, ideas and most of all your "evidence".

If it is of any consolation to you, I don't believe that you will find many here that do not dispute the possibility that the biblical Jesus existed. So, the quicker we do get to the specifics the better for your thread and the conversation. imo

Wow, if you’re not President of the United States (Trump) lying can cost you a lot of money.

https://abc13.com/amp/pamela-turner-killed-by-police-murder-trial-juan-delacruz/12319339/

Finally the proper and just outcome of an officer falsely charged for killing a so-called “unarmed” arrestee who was resisting arrest and armed with the officer’s own taser. 

But as usual and like clockwork, some within the black community are calling for protests (which we all know will only result in more rioting and violence directed at law enforcement) in the wake of the “not guilty” verdict. 

Some commentary on various social media platforms include statements like the judicial system is “fixed.” That simply couldn’t be any further from the truth. A random selection of community members were selected to serve on the jury of no personal relations to the defendant. They heard the evidence and agreed the state failed to meet its burden of proof. Thus, the not guilty verdict. 

Claiming the deceased had a mental disorder isn’t a get out of jail free card. And neither is having several so-called run-ins with the accused either. They lived in the same apartment complex where she assaulted the property manager, which is what the warrant was for. The officer knew her and attempted to serve the warrant. But many in the black community feel entitled to be combative with police, resist arrest and attempt to take their tools off their utility belt and use them against the officer as she did in this case. 

Pamela Turner reaped what she sowed. Her fault. Not the officer’s just trying to do his job. Like all officers who just try to do their job. It’s the citizenry with an attitude that’s the tried and true problem in these all too familiar scenarios that place the officer in a position to defend their life and potentially the lives of others. 

What are you thoughts on this case?

An Asian person would comprehend the comment. A chat bot would not. But thanks for yet another non-sequitur.

--> @bibliobibulimaniac

Does it matter if,

Fellow in the South lynched someone because he hated Blacks, and thought he was decreasing their number in his land as good,

or

Fellow in the South lynched someone because everyone else in the mob was doing it?

Seems more likely than not,

That the instigator was hateful, than noncaring,

Shouldn't the leader who led and incited, ordered and planned be 'most responsible?

Not that the go alongs were 'good.

-> @Tarik

You can agree with something without it being your word.

K_Michael: If the Bible isn't the word of God, then what indication do you have that He agrees with it?

None of which are eyewitness accounts. Although I have no actual reason to deny a man, believing himself to be rightful heir to the throne of Jerusalem existed.

Ok I can see this going circular, so, show us all the evidence.

 This will be the very much debated The Testimonium Flavianum, which other scholars believed was added by the Christian apologist Eusebius. Indeed, many modern scholars reject it altogether. And further, Josephus doesn't refer to him as a god.

 And as it is you that mentions historian Flavius Josephus, he relates to us a very interesting story that causes me to doubt the whole of the crucifixion story and its timing in particular. It may sound very familiar to many readers of the New Testament:

 And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintance. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician's hands, while the third recovered...'The Life' of Flavius Josephus.

Two died where one recovered! An interesting coincidence when we read the account  of and Joseph of Arimathea from the gospels:

“And after this Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus”. John 19:38-42.KJV

The similarities cannot be denied. Isn’t Josephus’ crucifixion story identical to what happened in the case of Jesus’ crucifixion where we are told that there was only one survivor of three and that survivor’s body was asked for by a man we know as a “secret” disciple of Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea?

Is it at all possible that historian Flavius Josephus and Joseph of Arimathea are one and the same person regardless of what we are supposed to know of these apparently two different people?? I suggest that you study and research the origins of the names of both historian Flavius Josephus' and Joseph of Arimathea, you may be surprised what you discover.

No, what Josephus appears to say is extremely very little concerning the biblical Jesus which amounts to just a handful of questionable lines, and these are rejected by many scholars. I am sure Josephus - a priest himself- would have afforded the son of god more than a handful of lines, don't you?

Please read my replies to your comments. It will save me having to continuously repeat myself.

Josephus was a high-ranking warrior priest;    of some royal decent, so I am sure he understood the "theology" of the day much better than either you or me. And if you have read all the works of Josephus, you will know that it was he that got his hands on the collection of the sacred temple scrolls after the fall of the city.

Have you actually read the works of Josephus? Because I have.

All cult leaders of the time recruited followers and an inner circle.

But I have always found this particular recruitment story  more than suspicious. Have you actually read the sequence of events. Well no you haven't because there is no sequence. We are simply asked to believe this in itself was a miracle of sorts. Tell me would you just drop everything leaving your home, employment or business, wife and children simply because a complete stranger, that you know nothing at all about, simply walked up to  you and said " follow me" without a by you leave? It makes no sense at all on the face of it does it? But we are asked to suspend simple common sense and believe this is exactly what happened.

Irrelevant, it neither addresses my point and neither does it prove yours.

Ah yes, Eusebius again, putting words into the mouth of someone that lived hundreds of years before himself.

Stop being so patronising.  And we don't even know who wrote these unreliable ambiguous half stories that make up the scripture. Many theological scholars agree that they are the work of "unknown authors".

I know why you created the thread. And it was YOU that brought the question of if or not Jesus made the claim that he was god.

And let's be perfectly honest, with what you have offered in the way of proof thus far concerning a HISTORICAL Jesus amount to nothing.

And billions of Muslims believe Jesus was only a prophet and not a god or even a son of god. Appealing to numbers is not evidence.

This more than likely means that he and his god are in agreement. Jesus understood the scriptures by all accounts and hadn't come to change them, if the bible is to be believed.

If this is not the case then it is a baffling statement that Jesus made here. Because he also says many things that contradict his own statement. Such as here> 

“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the Son, but the Father only. “ (Matthew 24:36) , clearly showing the two to be separate entities and clearly talking about what he knows and what only his god knows.

This hasn't explained this particular clear contradiction of which there are others. . If Jesus didn't want " his disciples to get ahead of themselves", wouldn't it have been better to stop offering to them ambiguous statements and to keep things on a need-to-know basis?  So your reasoning behind this particular contradiction makes no sense whatsoever.  

Please do not repeat yourself unless it is necessary. Is all this does is stifle the conversation. 

-> @Shila

The objective of this thread was to build a case for the Historical Jesus and to get as many people to accept this simple historical  fact.

 And I accept there was such a man that lived in 1st century Palestine - minus the miracles. But I cannot prove it on the bases of there is so little evidence. It's called being honest with myself.

You on the other hand have offered nothing more than extremely flimsy so-called "evidence".  

Just a side note, the following statement was made:

"Jesus' name in Hebrew was “Yeshua” which translates to English as Joshua"

that statement is wrong on at least 3 different levels.

The biblical nickname Yay-shOO-ah is a shortened form of Yehoshua. That name, Yehoshua, is generally rendered into English as Joshua.

So the name "Jesus" would not have been written in Hebrew as "Yeshua" because it was not a formal name, just a nickname.  The sound of the Hebrew nickname is the same as for the word Y'shu'ah, which means "being saved" and it figures that someone would conflate them over time and through the lens/agenda of theology.

--> @Shila

Would you really have been happy if the 1st pardon ever for a civil infraction happened?

Mashing X for doubt.

--> @Shila

Thank you so very much for being nothing but annoying in every forum I see your name. 

If you have nothing useful to contribute to this conversation, then why bother to post.

--> @Intelligence_06

No sense of humor  huh, that's OK, You don't have to look at them. Its a free country.

I don’t know if I have stated it here, but if I haven’t, now I have.

The concept of sandwich should be interpreted abstractly. It should refer to anything in which one edible ingredient encases at least 180 degrees radially another edible ingredient. In this case, a hot dog, a tortilla taco, they all count as sandwiches. This is the expanded definition. Pasting PB&J on one slice of bread at one side also counts, as some sandwiches are topographically exactly the same. In fact, that is what a hot dog is, only with a much shallower trough and a substitute for a hot dog, albeit extremely different in taste. This also enables pizzas and pies to be sandwiches but if a hot dog is one, they are.

But if you consider pizzas and hot dogs non-sandwiches, we can define x as a continuous variable(but in intervals) where the encased(not the encasing) edible ingredient is visible from the outside from certain angles, in which if x is in 2 intervals and both of those intervals are less than a given value, it is indeed a sandwich. This model can rule out absurd combinations such as covering a hot dog with green sauce, if we add a time variable t: where for a given continuous interval of t, X satisfy criteria that makes f(x, t) a sandwich. What this means is that if a sandwich cannot hold itself together stabily for a long time, it is not one. Covering a hot dog with green sauce does not work as the green liquid does spill. On the other hand, a ham within 2 slices of bread remains structurally the same even if any part of the combination goes rotten.

--> @ILikePie5

I'm just hoping I can keep up this time lmao

The actual "big lie" that people are waking up to is the lie that the government actually fulfills their end of the social contract to protect American Citizens. Increasingly, from both the neolibs and the neocons, it is apparent that the government has abused the authoritative power given to them from the people with the social contract to promote global interests over American citizen interests. See Ukraine for exhibit A; illegal immigration for Exhibit B and the wholesale destruction of the American economy for corporate pharmaceutical and green energy interests for Exhibit C.

--> @Shila

Jesus' name in Hebrew was “Yeshua” which translates to English as Joshua.

Yes, you are right, I used the English translation.