I like to post about new perspectives and finds in the sciences of human origins, paleontology, geomorphology etc.
It is not uncommon for me to have well-meaning Christians and others on steemit express their opinions in the comments sections of these posts. These, mostly well-meaning comments, invariably reflect some aspect of a notion that the biblical creation is perceived by them to be at odds with the consensus views of modern science regarding the age of the planet, how it formed, how life emerged and evolved and our relationship as humans to the animal kingdom and our evolution therefrom.
Some feel that to accept the current scientific perspectives rejects the teachings of the bible regarding “The Creation” and threatens faith in God.
I hold a different opinion, I find that studying the natural sciences does not diminish my faith but instead enriches my understanding of God and His creative processes and leaves me more in awe of Him and what He has done each day.
I used to do a regular Sunday post about these types of topics but there was a patch of not so much activity on steemit and the audience was less engaged.
With all the new users joining steemit daily it may be time to reinstitute my Sunday posts to balance the posts I place on natural sciences and have something to link to in response to comments I get on these posts during the week.
The creation in Genesis
There is a widely prevailing notion that the seven days of creation in Genesis 1 are seven twenty four hour periods. This notion stems from a strictly literal interpretation of the scriptures as they stand in English and stems to an extent from medieval times.
In medieval times the Christian world in Europe consisted of a mostly illiterate populace taught doctrines as they received them from the widespread and universal Catholic Church. Bibles were not in English but Latin and you believed was what you were told to believe.
What you were told to believe were interpretations of doctrines and scripture based on creeds developed and adopted over the centuries by the religious and political elite.
Prior to the universal Catholic Church and its monopoly on doctrine and the interpretation of scripture, dictated by creeds, views and interpretations were far more divers.
One simply needs to go to the writings of the early Christian Fathers and other writers in the first few centuries after Christ to get an indication of the diversity of the interpretations that were held, discussed, entertained and written about. These were stamped out in the council of Nicaea and systematically eradicated, with little challenge in the centuries that followed.
Then along came the renaissance, the reformation and the age of enlightenment, which changed the status quo and broke the monopoly of the Catholic Church and medieval processes and thinking. People could read, religion diversified, science emerged and amongst many other things, people could begin to think for themselves again.
In spite of the reformation however much of religious thinking has remained burdened with medieval notions, interpretations and ideas that were so prevalent, widespread and universally accepted. True the reformers reformed some fundamental doctrines, but many remain unchanged centuries later, literally unscathed.
One of these is that of an ex nihilo creation occurring over the period of seven, twenty four hour days.
The age of enlightenment, modern science and all of its discoveries have vastly enriched or knowledge of the universe, its systems and processes and life in all of its diversity.
I doesn’t take much reading of the natural sciences to quickly detect a discrepancy between what we have learned through these sciences and the medieval notions of planetary and human origins.
Many Christians will probably now be objecting saying “But it says so in the bible”.
To which I reply “Does it? Or are your interpretations of what you read there simply skewed by long held medieval notions and interpretations”
Let me use a very familiar instance to illustrate.
We all know about the three wise men that came bearing gifts to the baby Jesus in a manger.
Actually two aspects of the above statement have no scriptural basis or evidence:
- The number of wise men are never disclosed only that there are three types of gifts.
- The wise men never visited the manger but only appeared in Bethlehem when Jesus was living in a house as a toddler and that is why Herod didn’t order the slaughter of newborns but the slaughter of children below the age of 2
We are so used to nativity scenes and other narratives that this clouds or perspective of what the scriptures actually say, even when we read them for ourselves.
But that is enough for now...
Next time I will delve into what the creation in Genesis is actually about…
i totally agree with your post and believe that "a little knowledge of science makes you an atheist and in-depth knowledge of science makes you firm believer in God"
Now, that is well said.
Nice art. Also this is what ive always felt about the genesis story. And as we learn more about evolution it makes more and more sense. Given dinosaurs are early precursors to, and eventually evolved into, birds one could poetically describe the time of dinosaurs, before the rise of mammals, as the day of birds and fish. Then later more advanced creatures evolved and finally man shows up. If you flip the genders around and conceive that Eve was created first and Adam was a product of her the whole rib metaphor makes more sense given we start as female and then later become male. Or consider that each member of Adam and Eve's family wasnt a single individual but a certain breeding or genetic grouping it again makes more sense. The big bang could be described as "let there be light!" The formation of the planets could be "separating the waters from the waters" after all how would you describe such cosmic events to the ancients?
Im no longer Christian but I still feel one has to view scripture with a certain poetic and metaphoric lense.
The dinosaurs birds descend from were land animals. Genesis says land animals came after birds.
Correct, I will be discussing this in more detail in the follow up
I would be more interested to see your answer to my other post, which recounts the first few verses in Genesis where yom is defined. Light is separated from darkness, light is named day (yom) and darkness is named night. This is a literal day, is it not? It is said to have an evening and a morning as well.
and where is the afternoon... but we will get there
I found my study of anthropology to... diminish my view of science.
What I was taught in anthropology was much like the three wise men (magi) visiting the stables / manger.
What I was taught sounded really plausible and had me questioning my beliefs and previous knowledge. (which was good, but an unstable time) So, then I got out of college, and learned about all the hoaxes involved in the field of anthropology. And I learned that all the things taught to me as facts where little more than theories with very little evidence (in some cases, none)
I was very disappointed in science.
The biggest lie in anthropology is that the evidence of micro evolution is proof of macro evolution. (when there is no proof, and some can argue, no evidence.)
There is no distinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution. The latter is just a lot of the former. Those terms are also not used by real biologists. They were invented by creationists specifically so they could concede examples of evolution that can be directly observed (in single celled organisms, because they live, reproduce and die so rapidly) but still deny that it happens to multicellular life, or that it can proceed far enough that speciation occurs.
The problem with this is that evolution does not only happen to small things. It acts on anything capable of self-replicating with occasional copying errors (mutation). There are also no magical boundaries that stop evolution at a certain point, preventing a species from changing until it is unrecognizable.
The concept of "kinds" is another one that only creationists take seriously. It does not exist in biology. Creationists say "Wolves can evolve into dogs but they both still look like dogs, so they are the same kind." To say that they look samey to human beings is not terribly scientific.
There's also the matter of the archaeopteryx. It is a clear example of a proto=bird but with saurid features, such as the dinosaur snout with sharp teeth instead of a beak. Interestingly, the genes for those saurid features have not been lost, just switched off, and still exist in the genome of modern birds.
Because of this, scientists have been able to switch those genes back on in fertilized chicken eggs, and the resulting chicken embryos had dinosaur shaped snouts with teeth instead of a beak.
Birds have those genes because they descended from dinosaurs. Fish don't have those genes. Insects don't have them. Are birds and dinosaur the same "kind"? I would say not, they look(ed) very different. So then how does a creationist explain the archaeopteryx fossil remains, or the dormant saurid genes in modern birds?
Thanks for typing this up saved me the work.
The word kind in the bible(for non-creationists) would better be understood as "inheritance"
Perhaps I can save you even more work:
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/to-christians-who-accept-evolution-is-nature-obviously-the-work-of-an-intelligent-designer-the-authors-of-the-bible-apparently
https://steemit.com/scams/@alexbeyman/don-t-get-tricked-bro-how-to-recognize-a-cult
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/diagram-of-a-memetic-virus
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/jesus-predicted-a-first-century-return-that-did-not-occur
https://steemit.com/science/@alexbeyman/substance-dualism-the-creationism-of-the-21st-century
A lot of us Christians take the 7 days of creation, or 7 periods of organization as seven earth 24 hour periods, not taking into account that John the apostle stated in the book of Revelation that the divine day is composed of 1000 of our earth years. That being said it would make the Earth about 13,000 years old according to a litteral and holistic interpretation of the Biblical times line. That would make the univers about that same age that Edwin Huble estimated it to be, before geologists fudged his calculations to accommodate their millions of years of sedimentation hypothesis This begs the question how was all the sedimentary rock on the continents deposited and creatures so perfectly presserved in those sedaments with no sign of decomposition? Could it be that during a time when the Earth was subjected to emence tidel forces and its temporature drop passed the dew point that these condition combined to caused aquafers to rise and the mist soked atmosphere to condence in a torential rain that lasted 40 days and 40 night covering the earth with boiling water under extreme pressure depositing millions of year of sedement in the course of a single year and stacking life forms in an appearent order of evolution, that actually lived on earth together at the time, through the prosess of centrafugation.
I've read the theory's of centrafugation liquefaction and the like. The have some major difficulties if you actually go out into the field and test them. Fossilized track-ways and other fossilized remains of bio-activity or fossilized geological processes just to name two.
Anthropology, like everything has its quacks, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater...
Oh yes, micro-evolution is completely fascinating. The emergence of new sub-species... I am sure we will see some actual happening in the next couple generations.
Like the new large coyotes (or small wolves) that have taken over the in between lands of north america.
There were lots of different translations (from latin) of the bible in the middle ages, look it up. The objections of the Catholic church was not translations per se, but rather the hugely different versions written by people not fluent in latin or simply that the native language wasn't sufficiently developed to encompass the nuances and full meanings of the latin version (Biblia vulgata).
See for example Cambridge History of the Bible: "the vernacular appeared simply and totally inadequate. Its use, it would seem, could end only in a complete enfeeblement of meaning and a general abasement of values. Not until a vernacular is seen to possess relevance and resources, and, above all, has acquired a significant cultural prestige, can we look for acceptable and successful translation."
Also, the notion of the medieval period as a backward and simpleminded period has been thoroughly revised by historians. It is quite ironic that for example the "burning century" (witchhunts) was between 1550-1650, and that witches and magic was deemed as superstition during most of the middle ages.
I would also point out that the Catholic church interprets Genesis symbolically and not literally. The view that the earth was created in 7 days is held solely by (some) protestants.
Lastly I must mention that the notion of "medieval notions of planetary [...] origins was not developed by the church, but was based on aristotelic theories from the classical period, which ironically, was the period the so-called age of enlightenment defined itself a continuation of a.k.a. the Renaissance.
This is not a Catholicism bash, in case anybody interprets it as that, Catholicism was simply a monopoly for a long time and that has lasting impacts still visible today in various forms.
As you point out Catholicism has move on while other protestants have not:
“God is not a demiurge or a magician, but the Creator who gives being to all entities,” he said. Catholics have long accepted that the creation story as written in the book of Genesis in the Bible can stand along the scientific theory of evolution and that the two are not mutually exclusive.
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/10/28/pope-francis-comments-on-evolution-and-the-catholic-church
FromWikipedia
Well, @gavvet if you argue that interpretation determines the viewpoint of others, it also determines your viewpoint.
The argument about the origin of the world will always be a philosophical point, base on interpretations and the underlying faith which guide that interpretation. Even the scientist who claims facts is only doing it from a point of faith, even if that faith is in a theory of evolution.
Thanks for an interesting article.
yup, views are affected by the perspective we approach things from.
Yes, the Hebrew "yom" can mean an indefinite period of work, but it can also mean a literal day.
To figure out which the authors meant, we should examine the context. In the context of Genesis 1:4-5 where God creates separates day (yom) from night, and the evening and then morning of the first day follows, it's quite clear the authors were referring to literal days which are light out and have evenings/mornings rather than indefinite work periods which don't:
"And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."
Christians who accept some of what science has to say balk at this and say it must be mistaken, because otherwise the Bible would be wrong, and they presuppose that it can't be. There is a much simpler alternative explanation: Christianity is false, and the authors of scripture made many such errors in their proclamations about the world because they did not actually have any specially revealed information about it.
An article of mine you might benefit from reading
I think perhaps you arrive at your "simpler alternative" a little to quickly, wait for the next one for a further discussion of "yom" etc.
You have not described any out of the box thinking. Everything laid out here still takes place very much within the box, or framework of belief, which presupposes that Christianity is true.
If you actually stepped outside of that box for even a brief moment, you would see it the same way you currently see Islam, Mormonism, Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses and so on.
The laying of the foundation occurs within the box, next time we step outside the box.
Congratulations @gavvet!
Your post was mentioned in my hit parade in the following category:
I did mention these arguments if you remember early on when we discussed religion. I believe you are at a tipping point right now, questioning whether the church has simply created these stories or borrowed from earlier myths.
I understand that personal revelation is a big thing among believers but as you continue your search towards our origins(like you are currently do), you are going to find out that people from India, see Buddha in the miracles as much as Muslims see Mohammad.
The concept of monotheism was born from the jewish community that was fleeing Egypt. If you read the original Tor'ah the first line reads "At the first day the Gods created....". The Bible made it singular later on. Polytheism was popular in Egypt but the Jewish people created a heresy, wanting to worship only one.
Hence we have today monotheism, with the three major religions. Nonetheless, we still observe the semi-gods like angels and Lucifer, all playing their own role in the pantheon of creation much like before.
At the end one question remains. If God created everything so he can play around, then who created God? If the answer is "nobody, always existed" then why skip the extra step and admit the obvious truth that everything, always existed and just gets recycled over and over again.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence, and definitely, there are no evidence whatsoever that a God created all these.
Hold those thought's we will visit them again soon.
looking forward
Thank you @gavvet you got a good point. The way of reading the bible is to inter-connected with the scriptures from books. And everyone reads it differently. So the meaning also comes out different for humans.
Agreed, very good post! Also, there's a curve ball. If the speed of light is not a constant (and according to the latest research, it might actually be slowing down), then the whole time/space thingy at the time of the Creation was so different, we simply can't apply the notion of measuring it with days or years. God speaks to all generations in the language corresponding to their world view and is not in the least concerned with teaching us science. Thank you for the post.
Now that is very important to keep in mind...
Dr. Michael Heiser gives an excellent treatise on the Flat Earth theory, for example. The issue is of the same nature as brought up in your post. Starts around 1:33 Blessings.
How do we know its slowing down? We've stopped measuring the speed of light.
In fact! How do you measure the speed of light? There aren't any scientific measurements for measuring the speed of light any more.
I do not hold kin with the theory of relativity. I agree with Tesla that its speed of gravity, not the speed of light.
And, the speed of light seems to be different in different mediums. And our universe does not seem to all filled with vacuum...
anyway, I would love to here where you heard of light slowing down hypothesis.
And God speaks to me all the time about physics / metaphysics.
Thanks for your reply! I myself am not committed to the theory, but here's an interesting covering of it by Dr. C. Missler:
Used to love this guy. But I had to choose between him and Moses. 8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. I went for Moses.
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Col. 2:16-17 KJV)
I do not disagree with that . Just that Exodus 20 says "seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God". The sabbath was 24 hours so from that it would be logical to conclude that the first 6 days were normal 24 hours.
Oh I get it, pardon my being dense! I'm comfortable with the literal interpretation myself, just thought to mention this other theory. We all see through a glass darkly... :)
Chuck missler is one of my favorites.
Yes, mine too!
Excellent.
Hello Friend, Happy day to you and the whole family
The science of ATA proves the Colonel religion
God Almighty created the universe in 7 days
I read that in the Bible and you have the Bible also there is in the book of God the Koran
Science is in line with the religious approach
Mhhhh. 8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. This seems literal enough right?
Hold that thought, more to come on that line
Interesting ideas here, I really love your bio thou "Cynics do not contribute, skeptics do not create, doubters do not achieve." Such truth!
Agreed, I see it every day
its almost stoic i'd say, is it an original quote? also thanks for upvoting my advertising campaign, you allowed me to do some SEO backlinking to improve steemits google results long term :P
anytime
I'd love to have you as a follower :] Im going to be doing some much larger things come monday :]
Also, lets not forget the scriptures were written by men no more divine than any of us and to take their word as the word of God is as questionable as taking the words of the congress as the word of the American people. The men that wrote/compiled the bible got their knowledge from other sources most of us are not privileged to view, therefore we are taking their words on faith and also the early church had/has it's own agenda. Very interesting post and topic, I truly look forward to your Sunday posts on this topic. Thanks for sharing.
I hope I don't disappoint, interesting choice of avatar.
It would interest me and probably other readers of this post to get comment(s) about Genesis 6 and the Book of Enoch. Many pastors avoid this subject of fallen angels having offspring with humans. I believe that is why we had the flood. The gene pool was corrupt. Some folks believe that fallen angels never went away and are still here with us. The ice is melting in Antarctica. The belief is that a higher intelligence of order exists there under the ice. Hybrids are out there and some have witnessed unusual beings approach them. Anyone wish to comment.
"Sons of God" also refers to holders of the priesthood, they did not need to be fallen angles, just men who forsook their covenants to go after worldly women.... but that a whole new topic.
There are things yet hidden that will soon come to light. I believe all the UFO phenomenon has a lot to do with this topic and will be a great deception in the near future.
We were not there, so there cannot be any reliable testimony with believable certainty. However, testimony of personal experience is more believable. I trust what I know and realize that even personal knowledge can be skewed. I believe in the beginning God...
No eye witness account by a mortal for sure, but a record of a revealed account is possible.
I'm looking forward to seeing another post on the topic. This is interesting -followed
nice....your post deserve my upvote and resteem....
After reading your post,what i came across is that you neither have knowledge of Bible nor about God.You are puzzled in ourselves ,God can create and destroyes universe within fraction of second,he (god) does not need seven day or 24 hour or perform any work.Whatever is written in Genisis 1 about creation is Correct.God with his will can create universe in seven day or in fraction of second is upto him.We don't have such mind to understand the way the god Do.
if we think whatever you are saying like "it's strictly literal interpretation of the scriptures about creation of nature"is correct then how can it can be possible that same interpretation will also lie in holy Quran.
For proof please see the following
Quran Sharif - Surat Al Furqan
Verse 25:59: - All'ji khalakassmaavaati val'arj va ma bainhuma fi sittati ayyaamin' summastwa alal'arshi arrh'maanu fs'al' bihi Khabiran' (Kabiran') |59|
Translation: The God, who is narrating Quran Sharif, is telling Prophet Muhammad that, He is the same God Kabir, who created the entire nature, whatever is between the Earth and Sky in six days, and on the seventh day, sat on the throne in His Eternal Place (Satlok), above. Ask a (Baakhabar – one who is fully acquainted with Him) Tattavdarshi Saint for the information about Him. To know about the real knowledge of that Supreme God and how one can attain Him, ask a Tattavdarshi Saint (Baakhabar); I do not know about him.
This concludes that Bible and Quran both give same knowledge about the creation of nature in seven days.This also proves that writer is ignorant of real fact about God and holy books,using his brain to interpret real information to fool the reader.
Hi @gavvet, allow me to enhance your view point taking example from Hindu Mythology...
The scriptures are meant to teach us using analogies and stories, it all depends how big your mental frame is to think outside of the box to understand the true meaning. Example
In our scriptures it is said that God had taken 10 different avatars (or re-births) in different forms. Those rebirths in sequence are:
The first form being a Fish, Turtle, Wild boar, half Human half animal, Dwarf man, Full grown but uncivilized man, Cultured social man, then as Krishna - a man who wanted to establish moral human society (even if some past written/unwritten laws had to be broken, as those laws were dictated by previous humans itself), some theories says that Jesus were the last avatar of God (but that's for later discussion)
Scientifically speaking it is now believed that each Avatar (or form) of God depicted the life on Earth - as Life originated from Sea in form of fish, then there were amphibians, then wild animals, then early humans, then humans started framing some laws to separate Social life from Jungle Rule.
Isn't this beautiful - the scriptures that were written 1000s years before contained such an amazing analogy
Hare Krishna, the last form of God was most notorious and clever fellow - we can discuss about his teaching on a different form
I'm certainly not someone you'd label as "religious", but this is an excerpt from an HBO special than ran back in the 90's called "Earth & The American Dream". It was a very striking and powerful documentary told with historic film footage while hearing quotes from highly famous and historic figures spoken by famous actors. This excerpt was spoken by Harrison Ford, and I love how it breaks Genesis down.
My interwebs where I am today is a but slow, will have to check it out tomorrow, then reply.
That was a cool excerpt, thanks for the share.
Great Article!
Thanks
This is surprising but it makes sense. Even before the internet, almost everything that people learn (except that in education) such as in news and entertainment are influenced by what seemed to have the largest control of money and power (i.g. political and religious elites).
Going to what's happening now. We seem to have a chance to finally be able to get away from those influences as easily with internet and decentralization, and thus, have more diverse knowledge.
As for the reason why, I'm not sure. Maybe it's god's/gods' works or just how humans evolve naturally with increasing complexity through time. All I'm sure of is that we're going to that direction.
"when the student is ready, the teacher will appear" perhaps it's just a more appropriate time now.
Yeah. Perhaps.
My favorite theory to explain biblical creation (I don't hold to strict creationism), is that God, while creating the Earth 6000 years ago, also created 13 billion years of the past to make it all happen. All such stories are more important to me in the underlying principles they illuminate and not their factualness. In this case it points out the falsity in our sense of time that makes such a thing seem impossible.
Interesting way to frame that perspective.
I am also a believer, God said a thousand years is like a wink of an eye, therefore anything is possible in my humble opinion could have been 7 days or it could have happened over a long time. But for sure if we get the chance to speak to God we will know hopefully we get there.
This is a great post! I really enjoy reading things with the message that "We can both be right." There is room for science and religion in this world. It does not have to be a choice... if people have an open mind.
The more open our minds the more tolerant we are of holding many diverse and conflicting opinions. With time we are then able to resolve their seeming discrepancies
No, the 7 days were at least 1000 years. As King David say's 1000 days is like a day in the life of Gd
Hold that thought, there are other ways of looking at days too
Great exposition.
God bless you for sharing
The truth is within ;)
Very well said, those who think outside the box are on the path less traveled
Upvoted for both your insights and writing. I would like to know how you view meditation. Also do you have some type of philosophy and or theology degree. :) Nice to meet you @gavvet
None of the above, I'm a lay person.
@ gavvet i like it's,thanks for sharing upvote and resteem for you.....!
I agree with you.
I think that time along with the speed of light is not a constant.
Also, it was different before the fall of man. After the fall, I think man was limited to this 3 dimensional world.
This is something that makes me doubt my faith haha
Great Article
I am under the impression that almost every religious text is written as an allegory. Perhaps there are hints of actual and literal events, but they're taken more as historical fiction rather than works of strictly nonfiction. The Genesis story is very hard for me to pull apart, but it definitely contains quite a bit of allegorical messages. I look forward to your future posts!
that's what I will be exploring next
Thanks my brother @gavvet for helping you and I appreciate that very much
I look forward to your posts, It is refreshing to look at things with a new perspective.
i resteem for you pleas help me upvote
Batman is the answer.
if you can't be yourself always be batman...
To God one day is a thousand years...that is to say God can manipulate time (if its a clever god anyways)...science tells us that time and space, at the beginning of this universe, was elastic...and to a point still is...so when i look at the timescale in the bible, i have to make adjustments to my time scale.
What i infer from the texts is that the creator spent some time in this space/time continuum, creating that which i am in at the moment. I dont believe for one minute/second/millennia that 24 hrs was in vogue at the time seeing as the creator didnt wear an eggtimer...the only timepieces it had at the time was solar ( the sun ) or the galaxy time ( which is a lot longer )
I do acknowledge evolutionary theories and take the idea readily on board...time is elusive tho...i have too much or not enough...and where i originally come from (spirit) its totally different to here...and here i can stretch it out or contract it....peace bro look forward to the next one
Thank, I think you will like it.
Have a look at Lloyd Pye, Everything You Know Is Wrong. One of the most revelling talks out there.
very nice, interesting postt @gavvet I hope you can go through my blog and observe my publications that it is about the current situation that my Venezuelan country lives
Great post! I grew up in a pentecostal preacher's house, and over time, gaining my B.S. in Bilology, lots of of discrepancies, as you mentioned. Im interested to see where this goes and if our ideas are similar. Thank you for posting this!
I've had a similar path.
I really enjoyed your piece, do keep em coming, would love to read more..
thanks
Hello I'm new in steemit, I'm following you, so I read all the stuff I like, so I chose it. Unfortunately, my little voice is not worthy of you. I have tried to distract myself to see if I am getting a bit of a charm. Hmmm one shows $ 3.50 and one today has reached $ 9 maybe we need to understand our audience here. Look at them as consumers. What are they starving Maybe, I keep trying new corners.