And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the known universe both past and present - all looking back to that single thread of context, to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interactions that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the know universe both past and present - all looking back to that single thread of context, to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interactions that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the know universe both past and present - all looking back to that single thread of context to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interactions that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interactions that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interactionS that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from what amounted to a mustard seed, an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable, a snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context to an average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population collectively generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial, and if so, all the worse. This is why there is one gospel.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodianship of Christianity. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out, and that the body of Christendom is a living, breathing entity.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will. I think Jesus Christ is biologically significant and significant in more ways than I care to write out.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger chain of interaction that have led to speech. Same is true of Christ, take that as you will.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but a larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board. None had the right faculties for correlating all their contents.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of all the cognizant eyes of the universe itself both past and present - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context. An average fucking day in Rome.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die. Same across the board.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome and even more typical of the pharisees. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from an execution that was basically an everyday thing in Rome. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed, from what was basically an everyday thing in Rome. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread of context.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. It has subtely shifted the frame of the cognizant eyes of the universe itself - all going back to that single thread.

In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. It has done what no king or conqueror ever could. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved due to those who were themselves shaped by Christianity.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things. That knowledge then evolved.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to wither and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks and Romans would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to with and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian. Greeks would have kept killing eachother over it and hoddle in their little mystery schools, for their bud to with and die.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, or even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. A snowman in a desert is more believable than Christendom's success. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism for a reason and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, even with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism and it came from a mustard seed. A man walking on water is more believable. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact itself defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. Christianity should have died by 300, with the apostles and their gruesome fates, yet it conquered the world - it was and is the strongest meta-organism and it came from a mustard seed. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it just doesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, weep about the aesthetic in how it judt foesn't sound cool or acerbic enough, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Keep in mind these cultures from which either science or reasoning stems had their own mythological structures and they had them for a reason.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written. In anycase, there are a lot of parallels that can be made between narrative and biology, keep in mind that FOXP2 isn't the only gene responsible for speech, but an larger interaction.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger. Can the body of a population generate an abstract thought? Not if the organs for it are malignant and adversarial.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own, which values knowledge among other things.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it is more miraculous than anything ever written.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", it more miraculous than anything ever written.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical", more miraculous than anything written.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter. The impact defies cause and effect if that can be called "magical".

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner. Think bigger.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these edicts are like organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

What I'm saying here is that our moral faculties preserved knowledge and that there is an eminent basis for it and that these are like these organs of a collective body that has a mind of its own.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout. Read some Kant.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.

You can whine all you like, tack "bullshit" onto everything without even coming close to my point. You won't understand until you're older sailorscout.

And there was no reasoning or science before Christ?

Within unstable and isolated bodies with no way to truly persist. Without Christendom, it would be a showerthought. None of it would have come into bloom without the custodian.

Are you trying to say Jesus gave us abstract thought

In a collective manner.

And this is all the plan of some magical being that transcends all physical laws but is real because you compared him to a gene?

My beliefs are different from others in the sense that he doesn't have to transcend physical laws, and that it truly doesn't matter.