Dearest Vel, I have been asking you the most straightforward question, yet you still fail to answer me. My question is… Can abiogenesis and biological evolution be investigated and evaluated using the scientific method, and if so, to what extent? If you are unable to answer the question clearly, you resort to attacking me instead. When you do, your statement collapses under its own assumptions.

This note explores what real faith looks like in a broken world. It shows how a man or woman can stand firm when culture falls apart, how God strengthens those who trust Him, and why hope rises even in dark seasons. It invites readers into a journey of courage, redemption, and steady confidence in God’s hand at work.

Paul Wallis lies and his Followers From mixla6590 ​​on YouTube to me... DanMason2025, she wrote… it's April 2026, the system is collapsing, the history is exposing, the truth is revealing, the mass awakening is accelerating, you're talking too much. Are you watching April 2026? it's very quick, bible, church religion, politics, medical, school, pharma is exposing so wild. I then responded…. You’re seeing a lot of noise and calling it a pattern.

So, how are we saved in Jesus Christ? Great question, and it deserves a careful answer because this is one of the most misunderstood topics in Scripture. "Faith without works is dead" (James 2:26) does NOT mean works save you. It means genuine faith produces works as evidence. There's a critical difference. Here's what Scripture actually says about what saves: Ephesians 2:8-9 — "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."

My Response to Lowell Jackson, who answered the question. "Is there a purpose for atheism other than hating God?" Lowell, I do see a pattern, but it is not the one you think. Your argument assumes that all God-claims are the same kind of claim, dressed in different cultural language. Zeus, Odin, and the God of the Bible are treated as interchangeable entries on a menu, so rejecting one is supposed to be structurally identical to rejecting another. That is the heart of the argument. The problem is that these claims are not in the same category.

Ilana אילנה Илана answered this question… Is there a purpose for atheism other than hating God? She said…. Which one? This kind of question is ehy I think that the word secular is preferable. Atheists have nothing against any deity. It's simply irrelevant for them To make a religious example — religious Jews have nothing against Jesus. He's simply irrelevant for them…

Chandrasingh5255 on YouTube said Mathew 28:19, Isaiah 48:16, etc., all talk about three distinct divine persons who have the same nature as being God. Yes, the word "Trinity" or the phrase "3 in 1" is not found in the Bible, but that doesn't mean the concept is not true. Also, this doesn't even contradict the verse in Deuteronomy. My response: chandrasingh5255… Matthew 28:19 does not prove three coequal divine persons. It names the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, but naming three does not establish a triune essence, three eternal centers of consciousness, or a later creedal ontology. The verse gives a baptismal formula. It does not define God as “three persons in one being.” That language comes later.

Hello everyone, Dr. Mason here with a question and then an answer from Liz Stapelberg on Quora. Here is the question first. “If God isn't Trinity, then who was Jesus referring to when He said, 'Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit'?" Now here is her answer to the question: she said, “God is not a name; it's a TITLE. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit is the Godhead. They are Three Persons in One Godhead. That means that the Father is God, the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit God. John 1:1 In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD... the Word is Jesus.

Spending time with Atheists lol On Quora, I have a lot of back and forth with atheists. Here is one example. I received this email in my Gmail account, which said. Mary Gentle commented on your answer to: "Why do atheists insist that atheism is not an ideology?" She had said, “I think you’d have to expand on 'certain views of meaning' to get anywhere near an ideology. What you describe so far fits apatheism just as well.” Then I responded to Mary, "That is a fair pushback." Mere lack of belief by itself is not yet a full ideology. I agree that apatheism can also sit at that minimal level, where a person simply does not care much about the God question.

So, to start, let's define some meanings. Omnism is the belief that all religions contain some truth, with no single one holding a monopoly on ultimate reality, and that these faiths often share common goals or wisdom, even if their specific doctrines differ. An omnist recognizes and respects various spiritual paths. I am not an omnist.