Open thread 4/3

thread

762 Comments

  1. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    Is this thing on? (dmmmph dmmmph dmmmph) Can anyone har me?

    Good mornin to ya Kansas

  2. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:57 am | Permalink

    hear*

  3. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:03 am | Permalink

    SEOUL, South Korea (CNN) — North Korea cut off dialogue with South Korea on Thursday, claiming the peninsula was on the brink of another war.

    North Korea is taking aim at South Korea, claiming the peninsula is on the brink of another war.

    North Korea also accused South Korea of driving their relationship to “confrontation and catastrophe.” The country said it was stopping dialogue after South Korea failed to apologize for remarks one of its generals made this week.

    The general said South Korea would attack suspected nuclear weapons sites in North Korea if the North tried to attack the South with atomic bombs.

    The communist nation said it would take unspecified “military actions” to punish South Korea.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/04/03/koreas.military/index.html

    ********************************************

    Isn’t this fun?

  4. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    And on the lighter side…

    NEW YORK (AP) — Maybe men had it right all along: It doesn’t take long to satisfy a woman in bed.

    It’s difficult for men of all ages to make sexual intercourse last much longer, a psychologist says.

    A survey of sex therapists concluded the optimal amount of time for sexual intercourse was 3 to 13 minutes. The findings, to be published in the May issue of the Journal of Sexual Medicine, strike at the notion that endurance is the key to a great sex life.

    If that sounds like good news to you, don’t cheer too loudly. The time does not count foreplay, and the therapists did rate sexual intercourse that lasts from 1 to 2 minutes as “too short.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/04/02/sex.survey.ap/index.html

  5. parkay
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:12 am | Permalink

    “I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
    . . . candidate Obamanation, on prodding his
    daughters, age 9 and 6, into abortion mills, should they become pregnant through fornication [or perhaps even through later marriage]
    [Obamanation is on record in a survey of the Illinois Senate as opposing parental notification and parental consent for secretive abortions. He appears woefully ignorant of the likely severe, long-term, punishing effects of abortion on young mothers, such as depression, substance abuse, suicide, and sexual aberrations.]
    - – -

    New sting You-Tube video is available showing Planned Parenthood in Ohio, New Mexico, and Oklahoma accepting phoned-in donations for the expressed purpose of killing black babies, to reduce the black population.
    See news page
    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/02/more-racist-planned-parenthood-clinics-exposed/
    - – -

    Disgraced former AG Morrison was also stiffing
    attorney Don McKinney for the payment under his
    contract for investigating abortionist quack George Tiller in 2007, figuring no other attorney would then take a contract to investigate criminal abortionist quacks and then also get stiffed for the payment.
    Now attorney McKinney has most of his payment.
    - – -

    Amongst other rolling heads targeted by pro-lifers, the Executive Director of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, Larry Buening, turned in his blinders and resigned Wednesday amid increasing calls for his ouster. Buening tendered his resignation, effective July 1, at a special meeting of the Board that was called to address concerns of ineptitude (like refusing to take any action at all on dangerous quacks threatening public health and safety, like covering up abortion mill crimes and botched abortion deaths) in handling high profile cases.
    Quickly thereafter, BOHA’s General Counsel Mark
    Stafford also turned in his blinders and announced
    plans to step down June 1.
    - – -

    “Dr. Moreau: What is the law?
    Sayer of the Law: Not to go on all fours, that is the law. Are we not men?
    Beasts (in unison): Are we not men?
    Dr. Moreau: What is the law?
    Sayer of the Law: Not to spill blood, that is the law. Are we not men?
    Beasts (in unison): Are we not men?”
    . . . H. G. Wells, “The Island of Dr. Moreau”
    . . .
    Newcastle University in England is now manufacturing living chimera embryos for destructive testing, using cow eggs and implanted human DNA. So far, implantation and birth has not been reported – but there is no denying that such “research” might be considered more productive by the “scientific community” if it were carried that far – and perhaps further. And how can limitations be enforced, if the “subjects” are not fully human?
    How’s your YUCK factor?
    - – -

    “Slaves were considered a commodity to do with
    whatever the vested interests of the day decided.
    Today, in our desire to play God in our embryology
    experimentation, with all its’ unfulfilled promises of miracle cures, and our decision to abort unwanted children, we are no better than those slave traders who put their interests and world view higher than they placed the sanctity and value of human life.”
    . . . Gerard Wilberforce, great, great grandson of successful British anti-slavery campaigner William Wilberforce
    - – -

    Employees of a Hartford, CT laundry found a dead
    stillborn baby among the hospital linens they were
    washing Monday.
    - – -

    A 14-year-old Baytown, TX teenager at Cedar Bayou Jr. High School on Wednesday gave birth in the toilet of a middle school but the full-term baby died when the mother tried to flush the crying infant away.
    No news report yet on whether the rapist knows his
    newborn baby was murdered by this eighth-grader who concealed her pregnancy.

  6. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    hmm, I must have been blessed to get really exceptional men.

    ___

    Nathan, I’m lost and can’t find the thread, but i’ll be there as soon as i do.

  7. lindainks55
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:16 am | Permalink

    Quite a variety in topics introduced by Sol for discussion this morning!

    Let’s see we can talk about war. That means guns and weapons and that is a topic many seem to enjoy cussin’ and discussin’.

    Or, we can talk about sex. Seems that can now be dispensed with quickly so you can get back to the important war and guns topic.

    hmmm.

    Should someone mention all is fair in love and war? And is it?

  8. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    Remember folks, Parkay’s people will be trying to appoint the next Kansas Board of Healing Arts director, I would’nt be suprised if his folks didn’t have a hand in this guy’s resignation.

    If you think they wield no power, think again. And if that scares the pee out of you, Join ProKanDo.

  9. TRUTH
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    Good morning PUKE-AY.

  10. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    Hey, where is the thread where Nathan responded about the evil bible site?

    Did it get removed? Surely not. There was nothing hostile in it.

    I will SO be over the moon if it got axed.

  11. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:28 am | Permalink

    Nevermind I found it- it’s in a clinton thread. THat’s what happens when teh Open thread gets shut down and we’ve gotta go under other headings to have a dang conversation.

    I propose that the WE editors just remove the offending comments instead of closing down the Open threads.

  12. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    Looks like the Repupub. plan of obstructionism is going to bite them in the butt, as well it should. They thought they were being so cute by it!
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080403/pl_nm/usa_politics_congress_dc_1

  13. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    Saw what I suspect were illegal immigrants yesterday. I was driving past a construction area, and noticed a lot more hispanics than I normally see in town. Watched about a dozen workers pile out of one van. Stopped to run an errand nearby. When I came out a couple from the same group were working the landscaping areas in front of this office building. Across the street, they others were up on a roof maybe putting down shingles, I don’t know.

    Anyway, I was suspicious – they were all bantering back and forth even from across the street in Spanish (I had two years of it in college so I can recognize the lingo). Sure was glad it was them doing the manual labor and not me.

    Then I remembered my own family history. Our family historian provided us records of our earliest American relatives coming to America as indentured servants from northern Europe. Upon first hearing about this, I thought it was BS, white folk weren’t slaves. But then I learned that nearly half of white immigrants to North America in the 17th and 18th centuries were indentured servant s. My ancestors worked seven years, basically as slave farm laborers in Virginia before being eligible for freedom. Something happened, and they got in debt to the land owners and ended up working ten years before gaining freedom and moving west.

    I thought about how so many of all our ancestors took the difficult journey leaving their homelands to travel by primitive ships – in the holds of the ship to come to American. How hard it must have been leaving their families
    for the unknown. How difficult to live in slavery. How bad were the living and working conditions these early Americans endured? And later the joy of gaining their freedom, and the hard and long journey west. Even later,
    the records reveal early settlers in Kansas with our family name – working as laborers yet again, for other farmers and ranchers in Kansas.

    I was reminded about how our ancestors, signed their lives away and agreed to work basically as slaves to earn their freedom in America. Records at Ellis Island reveal millions like them. These hard-working self-sufficient men and women help build the great foundation of our nation. I was reminded that these same people did not get any handouts upon their arrival. They were doused for lice after getting off the ships and released to their landlords. They were lucky to get a meal. And medical care? Unheard of.

    So as I got back into my car and started the engine I felt a sense of pride in the tradition these hispanic’s were fulfilling in their role today working as slave labor for Kansas businesses. I knew the nation would go on to great things based upon their hard work and eagerness to improve their lot in life. I also remembered how our Kansas State Legislature helped ensure today’s illegals remain “off the books” and in hiding working for peanuts in
    the rain, heat, and snow so real Americans could make a profit off them. So I momentarily had a great sense of respect and admiration for the efforts of these probably illegal aliens. But then I remembered they are still
    getting social benefits, contributing to the numbers of Americans without healthcare, and getting to attend state university paying resident rates and eligible for college assistance funding. As I departed, I had to stop
    at a stop light right next to where one group was toiling away. With my window open, my Hybrid makes
    not a sound with the engine stopped while at the light. So I could hear them laughing and shouting at each other with playful insults.

    So I remembered my civic duty and turned them in.

    1-866-DHS-2-ICE
    http://www.ice.gov/

  14. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    Should be on this thread, PMama!!

  15. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    Remember, the 3-13 min does not include foreplay.

  16. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    “Looks like the Repupub. plan of obstructionism”

    This has been in the news for months. I’d almost bet democrats will hold both houses of Congress next year.

    It will be your parties turn – to make it or break it. And the whole nation will be watching.

  17. writerdog
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:40 am | Permalink

    OH boy, more making a simple statement into a holier then thou issue. Obama said last week while talking about sex education. That first he would teach his daughters moral values. But that he realized they also needed to be taught the facts and reality of sexual activity. He said he would not want his daughters punished with an unwanted pregnancy or a STD at 16.

    Just now on the Congress floor a rep citied a “presidential candidate” for thinking a Grandchild as a “punishment”. Then went on to say that the opposing party has so little respect for life that they would consider a child as a Punishment!

    NOW back to reality! I considered my self fortunate that my daughter was 19 when I got that call. Why did I consider myself fortunate? Because at the same time, my neighbor was informed that his daughter was pregnant. His daughter was 15! In my lifetime I have personally been exposed to three families that upon finding out their daughter in her teen years became pregnant. And the results were not seen as a joyous occasion, they kicked their daughter out! Sending their teenage daughter out into the cold, pregnant and alone.
    And yes they were Conservative, fundamental Christians. Neither has Obama or the Democratic Party has advocated such responses.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, this rep and his ilk is playing to you, he thinks you are so stupid that rather then attack a policy or a plan put forth. He wishes you to look at a shiny object and not think! And yes this is for my Republican brothers and sisters, when will we finally let those whom would think we are so weak minded. KNOW we are not, there are more of us and unless they have us pegged and we really are that weak minded. Such actions only weaken the party and end up with us having guilt by association.

  18. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    Sol, you seem overly happy about the sex timing thing. Just saying.

    I’m really glad the American people are waking up to the republicans and gonna kick em all to the curb. That’s not JUST the president, but all who staunchly support him.

  19. ksagnostic
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    parkay = scrollover territory

  20. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    Foreplay should count too!

  21. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 am | Permalink
    Sol, you seem overly happy about the sex timing thing. Just saying.

    P_Mom,

    If If try really hard I can almost make it to the bottom end of the time spectrum. Hell just seeing my wife undress… and I’m half way there :-D

  22. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:48 am | Permalink
    Foreplay should count too!
    ________________________________________

    Hell I was 22 before I realized there was something after foreplay :-D

  23. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    McCain’s probably pissed. The GAO refused to dismiss Boeing contesting the award!

  24. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    The sex study is right… It’s not necessarily what you got… It’s what you do with whast you got!! I hear ya Sol!!

  25. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:54 am | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 2, 2008 at 8:15 am | Permalink
    OH OH OH where’s my link.

    http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

    Now, since the bible and koran are so similar in this, seems to me that the guy would be written off as a psycho since that’s what we do here when people say and do things like that.

    We don’t assign the whole Christian religion as bad because of some who abuse.

    Lots of good comparisons in that site there.

    Make sure to read the ‘human sacrifice’ part.

    ksfarmgrrl
    Posted April 2, 2008 at 8:16 am | Permalink
    Sounds eerily similar to the taliban christians, no?”

    God is the same god, both for the Old and New Testament.

    How he deals with his creation is different between the Old and New Testament.

    I do not believe that God condones or approves rape, murder or human sacrifice at any time.

    God will and often has allowed evil to occur as part of His eternal plan of which we as humans cannot understand or have not been given understanding of.

  26. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:57 am | Permalink

    heheheheheheh. HEhehehehehHEHEHEH. HEE HEE HEE HEE!

    Hell, it takes us lesbians 13 minutes just to light the candles…

  27. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    “I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

    Upon examination, I believe the republicans are making a mountain out of mole hill on this one. They will end looking stupid as that “vast rightwing of Christiandom” does not exist anymore.
    And even where it does, common sense prevails.

    Of course Obama will not think his grandchildren to be a punishment. Of course babies come into this world “by mistake” everyday. Only a few of us are honest enough to admit that to even our OWN children. And of course, that does NOT take one iota from the love, attention, and devotion we still have for our children.

    Everytime Obama makes a statement, someone is quick to read into it. I believe he was making a rational comment on children having sex and birth control. He also was advocating keeping communications open with your children.

    1. Teach your children that abstinance is best.
    2. Do not engage in sexual relations casually.
    3. If you do, use protection (STD’s and contraceptives).
    4. Finally, if you do get pregnant, what are your options.

    But having babies sometimes IS a mistake.

    The guy was being honest and republicans are trying to make something of it.

    Can’t we get back to the issues? Can’t we beat him up for being a slimy liberal socialist sucking worm?

    Do republicans like to look petty?

  28. lindainks55
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    It’s difficult to NOT look petty when every comment must be a negative about the opposition.

    There appears to be nothing positive about McCain.

    Guess when you have NOTHING worth defending or supporting…

  29. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    “We don’t assign the whole Christian religion as bad because of some who abuse.”

    The references from the website on rape were all from the Old Testament.

    The Old Testament is not about Christianity, but it is the story of God and his chosen people Israel.

    God deals with his creation differently since Jesus Christ’s first coming.

  30. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    It is one thing to reaad an Old Testament story about a war type situation where entire cities are killed/massacred…. It is another thing when the Old Testament story is quite adamant about God ORDERING such destruction of men, women, children, and even all the animals! There is at least ONE story in the Old Testament, when the armies of God’s people are punished by God for NOT killing all living things in a city!! Those things need to be addressed by the so-called “Apologists”

  31. Sarah Bellum
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    “The Old Testament is not about Christianity, but it is the story of God and his chosen people Israel.” — Merican

    As long as you think Adam is yer grandpa, you’ll never be able to get out of the Middle East. Chosen people my patootie.

  32. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    Clearly another example of Argumentium ignoratium.

  33. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    So,m AUSA, God is NOTT the same Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow??

  34. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:12 am | Permalink

    Hey American Way,

    “3. If you do, use protection (STD’s and contraceptives).”

    Protection does not guarantee you won’t get STDs.

    “4. Finally, if you do get pregnant, what are your options.”

    Is abortion an option and why?

    “But having babies sometimes IS a mistake. ”

    Having a baby may not have been planned, but it is never a mistake.

  35. writerdog
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Hell, it takes us lesbians 13 minutes just to light the candles…

    LOL OMG I took so long resisting saying it KFG… But damn me! I just could not stop it!

    “Hell, it takes us lesbians 13 minutes just to light the candles…”

    ITS BECAUSE OF A LACK OF WICK!!!!!
    Damn this mind, it just does not shut off!

  36. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    Chas,

    Absolutely! God is the same Yesterday, Today, and Forever!

    He dealings with his creation are different from time to time.

  37. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    Thus, God changes!

  38. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    To say that the Old testament is nothing to Christians, when it’s part of the bible, part of the history of THEIR GOD, it is amazing to me that you all pick and choose the pieces from there that you want. Did we NOT just have a big todo on the ten commandments in our public buildings? And who made the most about that? The evangelicals.

    SO right….you can’t just disregard sections of the bible when it is convenient to do so. And without the Old Testament, there is no basis to believe that Christ was really God’s son.

    doesn’t it make FAR more sense that the whole thing is a farce?

  39. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:18 am | Permalink

    Should have been:

    “His dealings with his creation are different from time to time.”

    Typo.

  40. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    The same God that was brutal and believed in rape, murder and sacrifice, is the exact same god you believe in today. He evolves and changes or he doesn’t.

    Take your pick. If he doesn’t evolve and change, then it’s highly likely that Phred Phelps is the true believer. And no thanks.

    Hateful killing rape and murder in the name of God for Christianity. There ya go.

  41. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink
    To say that the Old testament is nothing to Christians, when it’s part of the bible, part of the history of THEIR GOD, it is amazing to me that you all pick and choose the pieces from there that you want. Did we NOT just have a big todo on the ten commandments in our public buildings? And who made the most about that? The evangelicals.

    SO right….you can’t just disregard sections of the bible when it is convenient to do so. And without the Old Testament, there is no basis to believe that Christ was really God’s son.

    doesn’t it make FAR more sense that the whole thing is a farce?”

    The Old Testament lays the ground work for Christianity, but Chritians did not come onto the scene until after the first coming of Christ.

    Are there things in the Old Testament that are bad or we do not understand?

    Absolutely!

  42. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    PMama — Excellent point!! We used to refer to that as the Chinese Restaurant method of Bible interpretation… One from Column A — One from Column B — etc., etc. Till you have all the entrees you want… Then call it, “The Bible Says” :-)

  43. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    Heheheheheheeh Writerdog!

    No, I think it is because we have trouble dealing with the TINY WICKS on candles…

  44. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    Christians.

    Typo

  45. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    doesn’t it make FAR more sense that the whole thing is a farce?”

    If God does not exist as you are essentailly saying above, and this reality is a farce, what is your explanation for this existence?

  46. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    By the way, just so you know, I always knew those passages were in there. Remember I was raised in a fundy religion. I always had trouble remedying how Satan got these people’s souls and that they could have saved themselves from such a fate. It’s a lot to ask of a mere human to have so much that is sinful and leading on the path to death against something you can’t even see. I guess that’s how the JW’s rectified it in their minds, that God would’nt put anyone to hell for eternity for simple disobedience, thus no hell for them.

    Also they made it so there was NO doubt, upon judgement that one would know the true lord…so anyone that was like me, could still be saved in the end. Plays into that whole just and loving god ideal.

    The whole premise is that our lives on earth are merely a test, a drama, we’re puppets to a grand puppet master, bowing to his will of bizarre social obediences. And we believe this based on something written in darn near the stone age.

    Is there anything that we believe today that came from the stone age times? Isn’t it time we evolved?

    I mean come on, how long is the second coming going to actually take?

  47. writerdog
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    Gee if you are going to get all personal and all I have things to do… Later and love you girl! I have things to haul to the dump so of course its rain here! Happens every year….

  48. Grateful_Dave
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    I wonder what the bible has to say about this:

    Police: Man Had Sex With Picnic Table
    Anonymous Tip Led Police To Arrest
    POSTED: 2:46 pm EDT March 28, 2008
    UPDATED: 3:46 pm EDT March 28, 2008
    BELLEVUE, Ohio — Police said an Ohio man has been arrested for allegedly having sex with a picnic table.
    Police arrested Arthur Price Jr. after an anonymous tipster dropped off three DVDs that reportedly showed Price in the act.
    According to NBC Toledo, Ohio, affiliate WNWO-TV, the videos show Price tilting the metal round picnic table on its side and then laying up against it to have sexual intercourse with the table. Afterward, he can then be seen cleaning the table and the deck.

    During questioning, he reportedly admitted to having sex with the table. Police said he also admitted to bringing the table inside his home for sex.
    Price faces four counts of public indecency. He was freed after posting $20,000 bond, authorities said.

  49. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Was he charged with kidnapping?

  50. Phantom
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Definitely one for the Sex Offenders List!

  51. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    Hey Chas,

    Being that you are an ordained minister, I assume, what is the correct interpretation of God’s Word?

  52. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    Why do we exist?

    Now that is a good question. I don’t know. Why do ants exist? Do they have a little ant god and a little ant heaven?

    Why does the solar system exist with millions of planets if ours is the only one God is concerned with?

    It’s scary isn’t it, that our human race might be a big fluke in the evolutionary chain?

    We might look like an amoeba compared to the complexity of a future self.

    Our time on earth is but a sand in the desert.

  53. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink

    Airlines folding… $1,000+ to fuel a Semi… But BUSH thinks the economy is doing just fine!! And healthy, and growing??

    And McCain likes Bush policies??

    Ummmm… OK……..

  54. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    American–

    Obviously, the Bible is a historical document that was written over many millenia.

    One can see the Old Testament YHWH evolving from a single powerful god among many gods–like a Hebrew Zeus–YHWH himself addresses these other gods when he says, “Ye are all Gods and Sons of Gods.”

    The ancient Hebrews like every ancient human society one can find once practiced human sacrifice–the story of Abraham and Issac is the lesson that forms the turning point that YHWH will accept animal sacrifice.

    By the time of the New Testament–2000-3000 years later–even animal sacrifice had fallen into disuse.

    If one refuses to see the Bible as living document that changes in response to people’s understanding of God (like the willfully ignorant fundamentalists do), then one will have a perverse and twisted view of God’s word.

  55. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    “During questioning, he reportedly admitted to having sex with the table. Police said he also admitted to bringing the table inside his home for sex.”

    And of course, no mention of how old the table might be.

    And… while he brought the table inside for the express purpose of sex, at least he didnt take the table across state lines…

  56. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    “Grateful_Dave
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:29 am | Permalink
    I wonder what the bible has to say about this:

    Police: Man Had Sex With Picnic Table
    Anonymous Tip Led Police To Arrest
    POSTED: 2:46 pm EDT March 28, 2008
    UPDATED: 3:46 pm EDT March 28, 2008
    BELLEVUE, Ohio — Police said an Ohio man has been arrested for allegedly having sex with a picnic table.
    Police arrested Arthur Price Jr. after an anonymous tipster dropped off three DVDs that reportedly showed Price in the act.
    According to NBC Toledo, Ohio, affiliate WNWO-TV, the videos show Price tilting the metal round picnic table on its side and then laying up against it to have sexual intercourse with the table. Afterward, he can then be seen cleaning the table and the deck.”
    …..

    Have you looked in the bible to see what is says?

    During questioning, he reportedly admitted to having sex with the table. Police said he also admitted to bringing the table inside his home for sex.
    Price faces four counts of public indecency. He was freed after posting $20,000 bond, authorities said.

  57. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    Grteful Dave — short answer: Heal the Sick!

  58. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    Sorry dog, I didnt mean to include you in the “tiny wick” club…

    Heheheheeh. Love you too dog.

    I have more ‘taters to plant. And it’s raining a little here too!

    I liked it better when we called the landfill the dump. And we used to go out to “the dump” and shoot rats…

    Life in a small town!

  59. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    P_Mom–

    I think it is entirely possible that the 2nd Coming already happened.

    After all, the apostles seemed to believe it was all going to happen in their lifetime.

    The 2nd Coming could have been when Christ arose on the 3rd Day.

    Very soon after, His Church was established that became far more powerful than the Roman government that was the world power at the time . . .

  60. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    “By the time of the New Testament–2000-3000 years later–even animal sacrifice had fallen into disuse.”

    Not totally, CapN — Cf. Luke 2 — Mary and Joseph made sacrifice at the Jerusalem Temple, at the birth of Jesus.

    The LAST of the Human Sacrifices, in the NT, is Jesus on the Cross… The perfect sacrifice for ALL time… The ending of the Law, as it were. As Jesus says from the Cross: It Is Finished!

  61. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    During questioning, he reportedly admitted to having sex with the table.

    Yeah but was it consensual sex? How old is the table?

  62. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    “Having a baby may not have been planned, but it is never a mistake.”

    Maybe AM of USA. I can easily see how Obama might have worded it better. If it’s a poor choice of words, it is still petty.

    We told our children they were not planned. Their response, “You mean I was a mistake?” I’m sure I am not the first to have used the incorrect word on this particular issue.

  63. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    Right, CapN — See the Gospel Reading for April 27 — JOHN 14:15-21…. Also, ALL of the references by Jesus to his coming back again, are BEFORE the Crucifixion… This has been a part of Christian History/Tradition for nearly 2,000 years now…

  64. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    Well, AmWay, mistakes do happen!!

  65. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    “You mean I was a mistake?”

    Answer :

    No, you were a gift.

  66. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Also true, Sol — And sometimes gifts are totally unexpected!!

  67. outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    Here is a comprehensive comparison between Christianity and Islam.

    http://www.faithfacts.org/world-religions-and-theology/contrasting-christianity-and-islam

  68. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    THat is a very good point, one that I’ve never heard before Chas.

  69. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    Thanks, PMama

  70. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    Outlander — In many ways, comparing Islam to Christianity is like comparing apples to oranges… They are both world religions… period… :-) Apples and oranges — both are fruit… period :-)

  71. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    and they both stem from the same place.

  72. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    Yes, they do, more or less, PMama — However, by the time Islam began to expand, Christianity was already pretty much established around the Mediterranean Sea, and even beyond.

  73. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    CapnAmerica,

    I am “American, of the USA”, not “American”.

    Historically, the Bible (Old and New) is estimated to be only thousands of years old (about 6,000 to 7,000).

    “Ye are all Gods and Sons of Gods”

    What verse are you referring to?

    “the story of Abraham and Issac is the lesson that forms the turning point that YHWH will accept animal sacrifice.

    Animal sacrifice originated much earlier than that. The story of Abraham and Isaac is the lesson and foretelling of the first coming of Christ, with God teaching Abraham obedience in the potential sacrifice of Isaac. God later supplied the animal for the sacrifice. Animal sacrifice originated in Adams time once he realized that he was unclothed to provide for clothing from an animal.

  74. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    Mary and Joseph made sacrifice at the Jerusalem Temple, at the birth of Jesus.

    Right, Chas, I had forgotten about that. Also, Jesus’s wrath at the Temple “money-changers” involved those who sold animals for sacrifice, IIRC.

  75. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    That’s what “mythic” means, American–having meaning at many levels . . .

  76. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:00 am | Permalink

    “Ye are all Gods and Sons of Gods”

    It’s in the Psalms… Check a concordance…

  77. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Where in the Psalms Chas?

  78. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    More or less, CapN.. The money changers were CHEATING people on their currency exchange… At Passover, there were people from ALL over the known world in Jerusalem… The Money Changers werent being fair when weighing out coins and other “currency” using accurate weights, and thus cheating worshippers!! And Jesus was appalled that they would do such a thing in God’s Holy Place!!

  79. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Amer. USA — like I said, check a concordance!

  80. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    I gotta go for now — got a lunch meeting!!

    See you all later!!

  81. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    Parkay is a nun, right? Ain’t had nun; don’t want nun, and ain’t never gonna get nun.

  82. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    From the Washington Post (plus a discussion of the business problems of running a newspaper):

    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/achenblog/2008/04/newspapers_and_middleaged_angs.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

    “You accidentally pointed out what is wrong with newspapers–you only are in awe of those on the far left of the political spectrum. When your local newspaper has turned into the Obama Daily Worship and over 50% of the country thinks their editorial page consists of a bunch of aging hippies with issues, why pay to support such irrelevancies? The WaPo has declined into such a partisan rag, that the hundreds of people I know who have ceases subscribing always cite their bias. You just can’t get over yourselves, liberals. Not everyone agrees with you. You ruined newspapers.”

    Dear Karen: When you say “aging hippies with issues” you’re talking about my people. Watch it. But you do note a defect in the kit: I didn’t mean to shortchange the conservative blogs. I regularly dip into National Review, Hugh Hewitt and the gaggle at TownHall, etc., and anyone who reads this blog knows that I link to conservative pundits as well as liberal ones. But I don’t think — correct me if I’m wrong — that Slate and Salon had conservative corollaries back in the 1990s.

    Otherwise, the absurdity and sheer unreasonableness of your comment brings up another issue: A lot of folks on both the Right and the Left have declared, sanctimoniously, that the MSM is being punished for being too (pick one) liberal or conservative. In fact, Alterman peddles this theory, implicitly. But the financial fortunes of newspaper companies aren’t in any signficant way (says here) connected to the political leanings of the editorial board. Liberal papers, conservative papers, they all have the same issue, which is that they’re no longer positioned squarely between consumers and advertisers. [Insert protracted dissertation on Craigslist, struggling department stores that won't spring for display ads, rise of online media with lower ad revenue, etc.] What galls me — really frosts my hackles and gets my dander so far up it’s in the stratosphere — is the pervasive notion that political writing is our main editorial product. Ever actually picked up a newspaper? Notice how much stuff isn’t about McCain and Obama and Clinton? (Lately, at least a third of it.)

  83. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    Psalm 82
    1God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

    . . . .

    6I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

    7But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

  84. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink

    Pro-choice people profess to agree with pro-lifers that society is better off the fewer abortions take place.

    Why is this?

    The arguments I hear from pro- choice show how abortions are GOOD for society.

    Abortions reduce human population
    Abortions reduce the financial strain on parent(s)
    Abortions enable the mother to pursue education.

    Abortion is not morally wrong (ie: it is simply a medical procedure with no psychological side effects).

    What reasons then to pro-choice people have for seeking to reduce abortions?

  85. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    Also

    John 10

    32Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

    33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

    34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, “I said, Ye are gods?”

  86. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:18 am | Permalink

    the videos show Price tilting the metal round picnic table on its side and then laying up against it to have sexual intercourse with the table.

    The table was flat and dry anyway, so get off it’s back!

    What’s with all the sex posts today? do you have any idea how hard it is typing with the keyboard bouncing up and down?

  87. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    I still wana know…

    During questioning, he reportedly admitted to having sex with the table.

    Yeah but was it consensual sex? How old is the table?

  88. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    millenium, a period of one thousand years

    millenia, a period of several thousand years

    6 to 7 thousand years old equals millenia.

  89. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    And also this reference which may be the same (NIV):

    Psalm 82:6:

    6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
    you are all sons of the Most High.’

  90. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    Good point CapnAmerica on millenium

  91. Songbird
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Not now, Parkay. We’ve got a headache.

    Abortion did not begin – and it will not end – with Barack Obama. What WILL end (or greatly reduce) abortion will be the following: 1) Individual responsibility; and 2) societal measures that will not render pregnancy untenable. (See the movie “Bella” for more on #2…..)

    Casting Obama as the evil one probably isn’t accurate. Moreover, it (almost) prevented me from reading the entirety of your post. Stuffing a live, crying baby down a toilet is a monstrous act. And I suspect, given the age of the mother (14), that many were at fault, not excluding the mother. Incidents such as these raise very, very troubling questions – not only regarding the mother but about those surrounding her.

    You seem to be connected – either directly or tangentially – to Operation Rescue. I know the Bible says to ignore the admonitions of unfruitful works of darkness, but I have a suggestion. Perhaps you might suggest that its leadership create a video showcasing its new offices.

    That would probably be more efficacious than wondering whether Mr. McKinney got his twenty-five thou. Or what Mr. Obama will tell his pre-pubescent daughters about abortion.

    But then, what do I know. I’m unfruitful; my outlook is frequently as dark and barren as Boy George’s bathhouse; and I’m one of those weaker vessels, too. So I guess I lose on all counts…….

  92. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    But then, what do I know. I’m unfruitful; my outlook is frequently as dark and barren as Boy George’s bathhouse; and I’m one of those weaker vessels, too. So I guess I lose on all counts…….

    we don’t feel that way about ya, songbird. And what were you dong in Boy George’s bathroom, and with whom?

  93. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    Also, after Adam and Eve eat of the forbidden fruit, YHWH says in Genesis 3:22 “Behold, the man has become as one of us.”

    Redactors and apologists over the millenia have tried to expunge these references to the pantheism of ancient Hebrews, but they never quite succeed, and the careful historical scholar can see the clues they leave behind vividly.

  94. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    Hmmm, the open thread reads today like a Concordance and weird sexual practices hand book.

  95. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    Sorry, I can’t get into this. Y’all are acting like God wrote the book, not a bunch of literary loners.

  96. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    reads today like a Concordance and weird sexual practices hand book.

    Isn’t it the same thing?
    *ducks*

    I always hunted for the dirty parts in the bible. Didn’t everyone?

  97. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    I never could quite figure out why the Old Testament God says, “don’t eat from the Tree of Knowledge, for of the day you eat, you will surely die.”

    But the Serpent (Satan?) pops up and says, “nah, you won’t die.”

    Turns out, the Serpent was right.

    One can’t explain that if one reads it “literally.”

  98. Nano
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    It always saddens me to hear someone claim not to have faith. You just have to wonder what is so wrong with people like that.

  99. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    Foreplay should count too!

    That should bring the time up to 5-15 minutes for a Republican. ;)

  100. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    Ok, Cap’n, they just forgot the “eventually” part of the dying. Since the experiment was aborted, we’ll never know if Adam and Eve would have lived forever. If you think listening to her yammerin’ for 900 years was hell, can you imagine eternity? Maybe Eve didn’t partake first and Adam was just looking for an escape?
    (ok, ladies, start throwing peanuts now)

  101. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    I think there Capn, the word “die” may have implied that before the forbidden fruit was eaten, Adam and Eve may have had eternal life.

  102. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    It always saddens me to hear someone claim not to have faith.

    Nano, you must understand, many have faith–just not in a book, not in some self-righteous hypocrit demanding 10% (like he’s an agent and god needs help finding talent), and not in any religion in general.

  103. Songbird
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Thanks, Ghoti:

    I just allude to B. George sometimes – ’cause back in the 1980s (when he fronted Culture Club) some people told me I looked like him.

    Now, I’d much rather resemble Angelina Jolie (another comparison I used to hear long ago) – but what the hellola. People in Hades, er, HAYS – want ice water on a sweltering summer day, too…….

  104. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    JUAN GONZALEZ: The Bush administration’s treatment of prisoners and interrogation methods is coming under increased scrutiny this week following the declassification of a 2003 memo. The memo shows the Justice Department told the Pentagon that presidential authority overrode numerous laws banning torture or cruel treatment of prisoners in US custody. The memo endorsed assault, maiming and even administering mind-altering drugs on prisoners.

    AMY GOODMAN: Alberto Gonzales, Haynes and Addington and Yoo made up what Sands describes as Bush’s “torture team of lawyers.” Sands argues the actions of these lawyers might have amounted to war crimes and could result in their prosecution overseas.

    http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/3/the_green_light_attorney_philippe_sands

  105. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    ’cause back in the 1980s (when he fronted Culture Club) some people told me I looked like him

    See, I knew I dated you!

  106. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    “CapnAmerica
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink
    I never could quite figure out why the Old Testament God says, “don’t eat from the Tree of Knowledge, for of the day you eat, you will surely die.”

    But the Serpent (Satan?) pops up and says, “nah, you won’t die.”

    Turns out, the Serpent was right.

    One can’t explain that if one reads it “literally.””

    Ah, but the serpent was wrong.

    He indeed, and those who do not confess the Name of Christ, has experienced or will be experiencing a spiritual death. It is just delayed from that time and not immediate.

  107. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    even administering mind-altering drugs on prisoners.

    Geesh, Solly, that was their recreational period. Didn’t you live through the 70s?

  108. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    American o’ USA, I have this really neat bridge over the east river yu can have cheap. Only used on Sundays by a li’l ole lady from Pasadena.

  109. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    A recent entry into the bowels of Hell, the arrival was puzzled by what he saw. Thousands of people in a large room standing on their head in a foul smelling human sewage pit, gurgling struggling to breathe.

    The arrival walked to the next room and saw thousands of people standing in the foul sewage and but they were sipping coffee.

    Satan comes up to the arrival and asked him if he had made up his mind which room he wanted to spend eternity in.

    The arrival emphatically stated, “The room where they were drinking coffee!”

    Suddenly, a demon appeared the ‘coffee’ room, clapped his hands and said, “Okay boys and girls, coffee break is over, back on your heads!”

  110. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    We told our children they were not planned. Their response, “You mean I was a mistake?” I’m sure I am not the first to have used the incorrect word on this particular issue.

    Next time, try “surprise”.

    Even within a marriage, there are surprises. Oy vay, are there!

  111. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    What would Charles Darwin say about instinct by some to kill their offspring?

    Does terminating one’s progeny for the purpose of sustaining one’s financial standing or to avoid negative social stigma make that person more or less fit in light of Darwinistic evolution?

  112. ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    growing up my sister often tormented me about being a ‘mistake’. I was about 30 when she pulled the same in fron of my folks for the 1st time. My mom said, “are you kidding? You were the mistake. You think I wanted another kid 13 months after the last one?”

  113. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    “Chas.Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:40 am | Permalink
    “By the time of the New Testament–2000-3000 years later–even animal sacrifice had fallen into disuse.”

    Not totally, CapN — Cf. Luke 2 — Mary and Joseph made sacrifice at the Jerusalem Temple, at the birth of Jesus.

    The LAST of the Human Sacrifices, in the NT, is Jesus on the Cross… The perfect sacrifice for ALL time… The ending of the Law, as it were. As Jesus says from the Cross: It Is Finished!”

    >>>>

    I almost totally agree Chas!

    Except that Christ fulfilled the Law. The Law is written on our hearts through accepting Christ.

    Scary isn’t it, that we agree on some things?

  114. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    It always saddens me to hear someone claim not to have faith.

    Nano, there are many kinds of faith. Are you only referring to your kind? Even athiests and agnostics have faith.

  115. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    “ghotiphaze
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:49 am | Permalink
    American o’ USA, I have this really neat bridge over the east river yu can have cheap. Only used on Sundays by a li’l ole lady from Pasadena.”

    >>>>

    I’ll pass. I already have a bridge.

  116. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    He indeed, and those who do not confess the Name of Christ

    How is it exactly that Adam or Eve knew of Christ?

    How about all those tribes in South America and Africa that have never seen civilization much less a bible? Are the all damned to hell?

    American Indians? Eskimos? All going to hell? What a great religion you have.

  117. Grateful_Dave
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:04 am | Permalink

    I have a question concerning those bible passages about being god. Who is speaking to whom?

    Thanks

  118. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:04 am | Permalink

    Having an unplanned child is a blessing, once you do realize that it is a gift of God.

    And the blessing just keeps on going when you have grandkids on top of that.

  119. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    Regarding the sex with table issue………

    Are table years and dog years the same?

    Was there any foreplay involved?

    Did the table go all the way on the first date or did it insist on waiting?

    Did the man in question cheat on the table with a park bench?

    What does the man’s wife look like? Any resemblance to the table?

    And most importantly, did they practice safe sex?

  120. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:18 am | Permalink

    “SolDevVB
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:02 am | Permalink
    He indeed, and those who do not confess the Name of Christ

    How is it exactly that Adam or Eve knew of Christ?

    How about all those tribes in South America and Africa that have never seen civilization much less a bible? Are the all damned to hell?

    American Indians? Eskimos? All going to hell? What a great religion you have.”

    >>>>>

    The only answer I have for that is that only God knows the answer for sure.

    In Old Testament times, Christ was present, as is revealed in the prophecies, but had not been revealed. Christ was present at the beginning and was the creator OF the creation.

    About all those who have not been reached today, Christ is the only way to salvation, according to God’s Word, and man shares the responsibilty with God in the Great Commission in the Gospels to spread His Word to all people groups. So there is a burden upon man to play out his part in that, as a coworker of God, but not as the one accomplishing the goal of salvation.

    I hope this makes sense.

  121. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    One word WS,

    Splinters.

  122. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    WSClark,

    Must you be so juvenile?

    What do you think about the the above?

  123. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    I hope this makes sense.

    So then your answer is yes. All those people, through no fault of their own are damned to hell. This is a religeon you choose?

  124. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    Did the “sex with Table” man have a genetic disposition to being attracted to tables?

    What about the “sex with dog” man?

    I think it is a bit harsh to penalize people based upon the genetics with wich they are born. Such people were unfortunate to be stuck in a marriage with a human when they only wanted to be with tables and dogs.

  125. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    religion. Damn thing…

  126. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    Ok. ok. ok. Has to be said.

    Gives new meaning to ‘morning wood’

  127. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    “Must you be so juvenile? What do you think about the the above?”

    Well, excuse the Hell out of me for seeing a little humor in the man on table issue.

    As for the above, there are more than 100 posts “above.” What are you talking about?

  128. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    “SolDevVB
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:21 am | Permalink
    I hope this makes sense.

    So then your answer is yes. All those people, through no fault of their own are damned to hell. This is a religeon you choose?”

    >>>>>>

    It is God’s desire that none should perish, but that all should have eternal life with Him.

    God works in the world and through man to bring this about.

    Will some go to hell? Yes!

    Who? I do not know. Only God does.

    When will this happen? I do not know. Only God does.

  129. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    “Even athiests and agnostics have faith.”

    Athiests certainly have faith – faith that God does not exist. Ever notice how athiests know the Bible better than most Christians?

    Agnostics on the other hand, profess the reasonable belief that they don’t know about the existence of God.

    The above could be a function of my bias.

  130. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    WSClark,

    My posts.

  131. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    The real question I am asking after reading my last post, is bias a form of faith?

    Maybe.

  132. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    If a certain religious faith teaches that there is no Hell for those who reject that Faith, what incentive is there to be a part of that religion?

  133. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    “My posts.”

    I believe in God, I do not believe in the divinity of Jesus, I do not believe in religion, therefore I am not a Christian.

  134. ksagnostic
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    “It always saddens me to hear someone claim not to have faith. You just have to wonder what is so wrong with people like that.”

    Faith in what?

  135. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    “Athiests certainly have faith – faith that God does not exist. Ever notice how athiests know the Bible better than most Christians?”

    Do you have some examples?

    Many atheists have sought to disprove that God exists by searching and studying the scriptures and have found out that they believed in God!

    Lee Strobel is one.

  136. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    I am not an atheist, but I know the Bible better than many Christians, having been brought up as a strict Lutheran and having had read the Bible cover to cover.

  137. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    The best example I have is that Doug who posts here pretty often, I believe, is self-professed atheist, and he has a quite impressive knowledge of the Bible.

  138. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    “Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:33 am | Permalink
    The real question I am asking after reading my last post, is bias a form of faith?

    Maybe.”

    >>>>

    What bias are you referring to?

    I have faith that if I jump off a cliff I will fall.

    I guess I am biased in that regard because of the physical laws.

  139. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    AQmer. USA, since the Law is fulfilled in Christ, as you mention, thus, the Law is NO MORE! A fulfilled contract (which is where that word originates) is a done deal… No more to be done on a fulfilled contract. In this case, the contract is fulfilled on behalf of ALL Creation, by the Sacrifice of Christ – once for all!

    For too many folks, they keep wanting to crucify him all over again, for each new believer! The Sacrifice of Christ was for ALL people of all times and places. And I would add, even for those who have not KNOWN of it!
    Because it was not accomplished by US, but by God. “By grace are we saved through faith; and that not of our own doing, for it is a gift of God.”

    GRACE means UNmerited favor! WE can do nothing to achieve “salvation” — It has been done FOR US… UNmerited/UNdeserved/FREE GIFT… Hope that explains it!

  140. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    Wow, religion Thursday, what?

    The problem with insinuating people are going to hell for not believing in Christ smacks of many sins. The self-righteous RR thinks their religion is the one true religion; the Jews think their’s is, the Muslims think theirs is. And then there’s the rest of us who believe God is way smarter than all the religions put together, and live our lives as such.

    Remember, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone?” I got a feeling many of the stone throwers are going to get glass shards in their hair when all their glass houses come crashing down around them.

  141. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:49 am | Permalink

    Another interesting thing about this blog is how many threads turn into religion threads – this very one being an example.

    What is the benefit of discussing religion with people you don’t even know? I have always wondered about that.

    One of my complaints about Nathan is that he insists upon “debating” on this blog about religion and faith. How can those subjects be debated? Especially the faith matter. You believe or you don’t — end of “debate”.

  142. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:44 am | Permalink
    I am not an atheist, but I know the Bible better than many Christians, having been brought up as a strict Lutheran and having had read the Bible cover to cover.”

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:35 am | Permalink
    “My posts.”

    I believe in God, I do not believe in the divinity of Jesus, I do not believe in religion, therefore I am not a Christian.”

    >>>>

    How can you say you do not believe in religion, but that you do believe in God?

  143. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    Amer USA — “Religion” is a system of belief. Beliving in God is strictly Theistic.

  144. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    “What bias are you referring to?

    “I have faith that if I jump off a cliff I will fall.

    “I guess I am biased in that regard because of the physical laws.”

    I’ll try to spell it out for you. It really is not that difficult.

    Bias is an inclination toward reality that someone accepts without having to re-examine daily. Hence, in that manner, like faith.

  145. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    Spot on, Steven… well stated!

  146. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    The Bible can be debated over its meaning and context. Whether or not people believe it on the other hand won’t be changed by debate.

    I believe that the Bible is true. And I accept that people do not agree with my belief. I will debate my faith in person with people I know and who actually know me. I will refrain doing so on a Blog since living your faith is much more expressive than arguing it’s intellectual merit anomynously.

  147. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:46 am | Permalink
    AQmer. USA, since the Law is fulfilled in Christ, as you mention, thus, the Law is NO MORE! A fulfilled contract (which is where that word originates) is a done deal… No more to be done on a fulfilled contract. In this case, the contract is fulfilled on behalf of ALL Creation, by the Sacrifice of Christ – once for all!

    For too many folks, they keep wanting to crucify him all over again, for each new believer! The Sacrifice of Christ was for ALL people of all times and places. And I would add, even for those who have not KNOWN of it!
    Because it was not accomplished by US, but by God. “By grace are we saved through faith; and that not of our own doing, for it is a gift of God.”

    GRACE means UNmerited favor! WE can do nothing to achieve “salvation” — It has been done FOR US… UNmerited/UNdeserved/FREE GIFT… Hope that explains it!”

    >>>>>

    No, Christ does not need to be crucified again.

    Yes, Christ fulfilled the law.

    Is there still sin in the world? Yes!

    Does the Spirit direct our lives to keep us from sinning and directing us to the law of Christ? Yes indeed!

    Christ fulfilled the perfect law, because man could not, by placing the Holy Spirit in those who believe in Him!

    Have all received salvation because of Christ’s death and resurrection without accepting Him? No!

    What would be the point of that, if man was not involved, by accepting that perfect gift of eternal life with God?

    Did Christ die in vain?

    God desires that all men should COME to him!

    First you must know God, and in knowing, then you must accept Him!

  148. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    anonymously

  149. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

    God is way smarter than all the religions put together, and live our lives as such.

    AMEN

  150. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    “How can you say you do not believe in religion, but that you do believe in God?”

    Easy. I believe that there is a God, but I don’t need a religion to tell me about Him. I do not believe in the Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu versions of God, nor in the tenants of their faiths.

    I believe in God – that’s all.

    I am at peace with my spiritual beliefs.

  151. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    “What would be the point of that, if man was not involved, by accepting that perfect gift of eternal life with God?

    Did Christ die in vain?

    God desires that all men should COME to him!

    First you must know God, and in knowing, then you must accept Him!”
    ==================================

    So you want to insist on having a part in the UNMerited Favor of God (Grace) And you want to tell God who should/shouldnt receive that UNMerited Favor of God??

    Look, if it is UNMerited, that means UNdeserved. That means NOBODY but God has made the decision. John 3 says God so loved the COSMOS (Universe) I dont think inanimate objects can choose their beliefs. Paul says the whole Creation groans in travail, as one giving birth…

    The key is GRACE — UNMerited Favor!! Thank GOD salvation is not up to any of us!

  152. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    #
    Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    “What bias are you referring to?

    “I have faith that if I jump off a cliff I will fall.

    “I guess I am biased in that regard because of the physical laws.”

    I’ll try to spell it out for you. It really is not that difficult.

    Bias is an inclination toward reality that someone accepts without having to re-examine daily. Hence, in that manner, like faith.
    ————————–

    If you stop to examine your faith, you end up losing the process of examination and your faith.

  153. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    “brought up as a strict Lutheran”

    Missouri Synod?

  154. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    Tell us about your God WSClark. Can we all know him?

  155. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    “If you stop to examine your faith, you end up losing the process of examination and your faith.”

    If examination of your faith causes you to lose your faith, then you didn’t have much faith to begin with.

  156. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    I too was raised as Lutheran — but not Missouri Synod.

  157. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    “Missouri Synod?”

    American Lutheran Church.

    “Can we all know him?”

    Unless you are an atheist, you already do.

  158. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Faith can’t be examined or measured, it just is.

  159. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Clark — Did you have a grandfather or great grandfather who was once a Lutheran Pastor in Wichita?

  160. Reverend
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

    How is it exactly that Adam or Eve knew of Christ?

    The age of man is broken up in the bible by administrations. Adam and Eve (minus belly buttons) were the Original Paradise Admninistration.
    They did not know Christ (they didn’t have any written Word to follow as later believers). Their relationship was directly with God.

    I think there are half a dozen or so administrations including the Law Administration which gets a lot of attention. But now, because of Christ, we are under the Grace Administration. Per Romans 10: 9-10, we are saved by believing that Jesus is the Christ AND that he rose again.

    Following Revelations words, the final Administration will be a return to Paradise – where risen man will have a direct relationship with God (thanks Jesus!).

  161. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

    “Did you have a grandfather or great grandfather who was once a Lutheran Pastor in Wichita?”

    I am from Kentucky, via Detroit.

  162. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

    Amen Reverend. :)

  163. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    Missouri Synod. Three long years of Katykillem.
    Left the Lutheran Church in adulthood. Too much of Catholic like crap creeping back in (or there all along but I didn’t notice).

  164. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

    “Reverend” is putting forth a basically 20th Century concept of Bible intgerprettion known as Dispensationalism. Not terribly popular, but it did give birth to the “Schofield Reference Bible” among other things. The founder was one named Darby.

  165. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    Unless you are an atheist, you already do.

    Amen to that.

    via Detroit.

    Explains a lot. Be glad you escaped!!! :-D

  166. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    Just wondered Clark. There was once a Pastor at a Wichita Lutheran church way back in the 20’s, named Dr. Clark — He sort of got thing going, and chartered the congregation for the second time…

  167. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    We all have received the unmerited Favor of God (GRACE), both the righteous and the wicked. (note: I do not consider myself as righteous, but God does thu Christ)

    Do we not all receive rain, sunshine, air to breath, etc? He gave it to all of us.

    I think you are confusing Grace and Salvation. They are not the same.

    No we do not merit salvation, we merit or deserve death, because of our sin, according to the righteous requirements of the law, before a Holy God.

    And yes “John 3:16:
    16″For God so loved the WORLD that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that WHOEVER believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (NIV)”

    Can we merit our own savation? Absolutely not!

    “WHOEVER BELIEVES in him shall not perish but have eternal life”

    Yes, the creation is made anew (INCLUDING THE INAMINATE OBJECTS, ETC).

  168. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    Don’t mean to be a di(k, but have you noticed that a religious conversation goes well sans Nathan?

  169. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    Amen Reverend.

    Well said.

  170. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Ummm Amer USA, GRACE and SALVATION are one and the same — at least where I come from. There is no separation between them.

    Neither Salvation OR Grace are merited! See, I cannot accept what is already given. I can reject it… but I cant accept it!!

    Yes, I come out of the Reformed background, and not the Evangelical/Free background. Sorry!!

  171. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Pretty much, Sol — :-)

  172. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    When will this happen? I do not know. Only God does.

    So you’re saying we’re all predestined? God already not only knows what we’ll do, but if we’ll be going to Heaven or Hell?

  173. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    Faith is the belief in something that can’t be proven.

  174. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    Lutheran: http://adherents.com/Na/i_l.html

  175. Heckler
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Holy Cow, not again…..

  176. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    I keep wondering why God didn’t tell Adam and Eve about Jesus. You know, previews of coming attractions. :) Maybe he (sorry, He) was more concerned with that “Tree of Knowledge” and Satan than the future of Man (and Woman). Maybe He should have let them eat of the fruit and be more knowledgeable. They might not have been so tempted by that fork-tongued devil. ;)

  177. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    “videos show Price tilting the metal round picnic table on its side and then laying up against it to have sexual intercourse with the table”

    And then he cleaned it up!?! All shiny??? Gross.

    I wonder if he lasted long enough to satisfy the table? 3-13 minutes at least?

  178. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    Heckler, we’re all being very polite and kind in our discussion.

    Does God have a sense of humor? I certainly hope so.

    Sol,
    I agree. I’m sure you know what about.

  179. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    RD — I like this one >>>

    “Now Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old received divine approval.”

  180. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    “RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:33 pm | Permalink
    When will this happen? I do not know. Only God does.

    So you’re saying we’re all predestined? God already not only knows what we’ll do, but if we’ll be going to Heaven or Hell?”

    No I am not saying that. I am just saying that no man (not even the Christ) knows when the end times will come. Beware of any man who says he does!

    We still play a part in receiving salvation, but we do not earn salvation.

    Does God know who will be going?

    Because of His position in reference to time and space and matter I would say yes. He is able to see all things.

    Thanks be to God who gives us the victory (over spiritual death) through our Lord jesus Christ!

  181. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    I still want to know if it was consensual and if the table was of age.

    Now about those splinters…

  182. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    Which Seminary did you attend Chas?

    The Reverend Jeremiah Wright Seminary?

  183. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    Well put Chas!

  184. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    Easy Regular

  185. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink
    Which Seminary did you attend Chas?
    ___________________________________________

    *

    So much for the discussion. Y’all have fun.

    *

  186. Reverend
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    ” keep wondering why God didn’t tell Adam and Eve about Jesus”

    John 1:1-5 In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God,…blah, blah, blah.

    The point is God knew in his knowledge that Satan would fall, Satan would destroy the earth (Gen 1:1-2) and man would fall short. God KNEW he would have a Son and that his Son was His plan for redemption.

    Man has freedom of choice. Believe or don’t believe. Do the right thing or don’t. Yin Yang.

    To get man back to God, to get beyond the fallen Satan, he gave his only begotten…blah,blah, blah
    Son.

    So there was no reason for Adam & Eve to know Jesus or about him. They were already in the know and are up there with the main man. They didn’t need Grace and it wasn’t available to them.

    Only since the Acts of the Apostles have we had and needed Grace to reach salvation and the gifts of the holy spirit.

  187. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    “Now about those splinters…”

    Sol, I think it was a metal table. Can you get splinters from a metal table?

  188. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    Reverend,

    Am I sensing sarcasm in your last post?
    Just checking.

    God’s grace has existed from the dawn of creation in that he gives it freely to all in the creation.

    God gave a special gift of grace in Jesus Christ to all who receive him.

  189. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    God KNEW he would have a Son and that his Son was His plan for redemption.

    OK I can’t stay out of this one, especially since it is so civil. If the above is the case, why did God wait so long to send His Son? What about all the folks that died before Jesus died on the cross?

  190. outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    “The problem with insinuating people are going to hell for not believing in Christ smacks of many sins. The self-righteous RR thinks their religion is the one true religion; the Jews think their’s is, the Muslims think theirs is. And then there’s the rest of us who believe God is way smarter than all the religions put together, and live our lives as such.”

    ———-
    And your post JM, also “smacks” of arrogance. You criticize various religions for believing in exclusivity, and then you insinuate that only “the rest of us” have the true answer. Which apparently is that God does not mean what he says in the Bible, because that might be mean and hurt someone’s feelings.

    Now I would never go around and tell people that they are going to hell. I don’t know how God works in peoples lives and that would be totally counter-productive. But I do know what His Word says. And unless I have the guts to share this with others, I am denying my faith.

    John 14:6 “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

  191. Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    Naw, but you better watch out for burrs.

  192. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    Just wondering…

    (chortles)

  193. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Regular: STOP that! Now!

  194. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    outlander,

    So who is the The self-righteous RR?

    Note: I do not judge anyone and knw they are going to heaven or to hell.

    The Word of God is offensive to some and others receive it.

    It really doesn’t have to do with religion, as much as it does with a relationship with God.

    But I do also know what His Word says. And unless I have the guts to share this with others, I am denying my faith.

    John 14:6 “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

  195. Songbird
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Now, this is real interesting……..

    When it’s solely males on the Blog – the religious debates flow fast and freely……….

    When it’s filthy beasts like human females populating the mix, no one says much……

    Gee – maybe St. Paul and/or St. Augustine wuz right: Maybe I really am the second rib. Shittier shape. Weaker vessel.

    Cheaper cut.

  196. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    “If the above is the case, why did God wait so long to send His Son”

    Because God knew in his foreknowledge when the Christmas Tree lights would be invented.

    He KNEW that if he granted Grace BEFORE man had time to progress from the wheel to electricity – they would have no way of celebrating the season properly. No Bing Crosby on the radio, phonograph, no Chestnuts Roasting, and no Rudolph.

    Think about how great that is? God KNEW millions would have to die before along comes Jones…..

    Just so we could adopt the Christmas Tree to represent Jesus’ birth.

  197. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    “God KNEW he would have a Son and that his Son was His plan for redemption.”

    “What about all the folks that died before Jesus died on the cross?”

    Okay, I’ll break one of my own blog Rules since it is a civil discussion.

    The folks who lived before the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, were redeemed through the offering of a sinless, spotless animal sacrifice. It was to be the best of their livestock (sheep in those times). God ruled that blood from a spotless entity had to be shed in order for sins to be forgiven.

    Jesus Christ symbolized for all perpetuity the spotless perfect lamb which is why he is called the “Lamb of God”. Once Jesus (who lived a sinless perfect life) died on the cross, those who believe in the God of the Bible, no longer have to sacrifice an animal since Christ’s blood takes the place of that animal.

  198. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

    Don’t forget man’s (or womens role for you ladies out there) role in the many deaths that occured before Christ!

    Man (and woman) have also been coworkers of Satan as well!

  199. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

    “The fool always laughs at religious truth. If he did not laugh, it would not be the truth.”

    –Lao Tzu, founder of Taoism

  200. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    #
    Songbird
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Now, this is real interesting……..

    When it’s solely males on the Blog – the religious debates flow fast and freely……….

    When it’s filthy beasts like human females populating the mix, no one says much……

    Gee – maybe St. Paul and/or St. Augustine wuz right: Maybe I really am the second rib. Shittier shape. Weaker vessel.

    Cheaper cut.
    —————————

    Songbird,

    I have never referred to any of my female dates as ‘filthy beasts.’

    …at least not within hearing distance. :)

  201. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    You are correct rfl,

    But, the animal sacrifices were covering the sins only for a short time, and not indefinitely.

  202. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    “I have never referred to any of my female dates as ‘filthy beasts.’”

    When did you ever have a female date?

  203. Songbird
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    I have never referred to my ex as a filthy beast, either. Although……his propensity for looking at himself in the mirror all the time compels me to ask him a question.

    “Why wasn’t there a mirror with the caption, ‘Object in mirror much smaller than it actually appears?’ “

  204. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    DATE: noun the oblong, fleshy fruit of the date palm, a staple food in northern Africa, Arabia, etc., and an important export.

  205. Question
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Why would you word it, ” my female dates”.

    Do you go on any other kind of dates?

    Why not just say “go on a date”….

  206. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    There would seem to be two directions here… One direction is to preach TO salvation… Another is to preach FROM salvation. That is usually the difference between the Evangelical/Free/Cons. Wesleyan/etc. and the Reformed/Lutheran/Sola Gratia

  207. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    “Why wasn’t there a mirror with the caption, ‘Object in mirror much smaller than it actually appears?’ “

    heh heh

  208. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    Well, out of here for now… Back later!! Thanks for the good discussion everybody!!

  209. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

    #
    Question
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Why would you word it, ” my female dates”.

    Do you go on any other kind of dates?

    Why not just say “go on a date”….
    ———————–
    Dates with destiny…

    Dates to remember

    Date that will go down in history…

    The Dating Game…

    Semantics, where precision is required I shall invoke it.

  210. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

    ‘Object in mirror much smaller than it actually appears?’ “

    Another stupid government intervention in our lives.
    Like 1.5 gallon flush toilets and restrictive shower heads.

  211. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    Stick Matches: Danger! Fire may cause burns.

  212. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
    There would seem to be two directions here… One direction is to preach TO salvation… Another is to preach FROM salvation. That is usually the difference between the Evangelical/Free/Cons. Wesleyan/etc. and the Reformed/Lutheran/Sola Gratia”

    Please explain your post above, if it’s not too much trouble, that is, my dear Chas.

  213. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    American USA writes:

    He [Adam did] indeed [die], and those who do not confess the Name of Christ, has experienced or will be experiencing a spiritual death. It is just delayed from that time and not immediate.

    *****

    Okay, fine, AmUSA. But you’re interpreting the passage. That’s what the fundamentalists claim they don’t do.

    If you read the passage literally, God says for the very day that thou eatest of that fruit, thou shalt surely die.

    Now if you want to argue that the very day thou eatest means some 900 years in the future as long as Adam is supposedly to have lived, then you’re certainly free to believe that.

    But that’s interpretation. If you’re going to interprete that, then I’m going to interprete that John 14:10 doesn’t mean that only Christians are going to heaven . . .

  214. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    Augh pesky working, I’ve missed way too much on a subject that I have started. I do so wish the Prices were here to insert their .02.

    The whole topic started with what the Koran says vs what the Bible says, and those who spout off that the Koran supports such evil, and so I showed where the Bible certainly does too.

    Thus, iftheir God is evil, so is the Christian god…which to me are both the very same God.

    Where did the difference come that Christians began to evolve past where the Muslims did, because they stayed strict adherents to their version of the WORD, whereas, the Evangelicals seem to think they have too, but obviously NOT, or we’d be living just like many strict Muslim nations.

    I point out the hypocricy, because I’m tired of bible thumpers telling me what others can do because they think their interpretation of the bible is so right that they have all the answers. And when you point out the hypocricy, often you get them to shut up, or deny, or make excuses.

    Look the bible is FULL of contradictions, and this is why I’m just like WS. I believe in a GOD, but I don’t believe in any religion. I think Religion is one of the worst evils on this planet. A guide to hate others, a guide to kill others, justification for discrimination of pretty much anyone. I’m glad some religions have evolved to be more kind. And you can’t just say that happened because of Christ, I mean, if anyone should be killing for god, you’d think it’d be the Jews because their Torah has the most violent of all. But they’re not.

    If you want to believe and whatever, that’s fine, but understand what you’re believing, where it comes from and keep it out of other people’s lives. I don’t go around pushing alienism on you and trying to make it public policy.

    Don’t expect to get away with discriminating against blacks, jews, homosexuals because of your fairy tale book. To me, the god of the bible sucks. I don’t want to be loved by someone like that who knows the future, and sets people up to fail like some big game.

    “rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
    Pro-choice people profess to agree with pro-lifers that society is better off the fewer abortions take place.

    Why is this?

    The arguments I hear from pro- choice show how abortions are GOOD for society.

    Abortions reduce human population
    Abortions reduce the financial strain on parent(s)
    Abortions enable the mother to pursue education.

    Abortion is not morally wrong (ie: it is simply a medical procedure with no psychological side effects).

    What reasons then to pro-choice people have for seeking to reduce abortions?”

    An unwanted pregnancy is bad NO MATTER WHAT THE END RESULT IS, that is the reason for wanting fewer abortions. NONE of the options are a walk in the park. At least we try to address the issue instead of harming women by telling them taht life will be all good and fluffy warm and fuzzy if they choose to keep their baby. IT doesn’t end like that.

    That’s why we support choice to make the decision that is right for the woman at the time, and nobody knows that better than she does. She need not be riddled with your imposition of guilt.

  215. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    “doesn’t mean that only Christians are going to heaven . . .”

    Look on the bright side. In heaven there is no beer…..

  216. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    Wrong, AmWay. You’ve been listening to the flippin’ Baptists again.

    The Celtic Christians — before the Roman Church got there and made them “fly right” with all the pseudo-platonic denial-of-self BS — worshipped one Saint Brigit who had a free flowing “lake of beer.”

  217. Revferend
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    “I’m tired of bible thumpers telling me what others can do ”

    I don’t believe anyone here has told anyone else what to do. Have I missed it?

    I thought I have been reading and participating in a very friendly exchange of ideas and opinions on religion. This is a great thing for this blog to do.

    Am I wrong?

  218. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    “Look on the bright side. In heaven there is no beer…..”

    Well, that settles it, I am definitely not going.

  219. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    Capn,

    There are no contradictions in the Bible if you understand what it is you are reading. An understanding of Greek and Aramaic sometimes is helpful to know the context of what was said in the original language.

    Sometimes, You have to references other passages to understand what is being said in another passage. Regarding Adam’s transgression by eating of the forbidden fruit, he died immediately in that he experiences spiritual death (as explained by the verse below). According to the Bible, we are all born spiritually dead. This is no different than what Adam became AFTER he ate the fruit.

    Romans 5:12
    Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

  220. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

    She need not be riddled with your imposition of guilt.
    -P-Mama

    Okay, no problem. But how does a little knowledge of biological science pared with modern civilization’s respect for human life going to hurt?

    It’s not my fault that unborn babies have a heart beat, brainwave activity and can feel pain. By typing these proven scientific facts, am I imposing my privately held convictions onto another human being? Or am I just being honest about PROVEN FACTS?

  221. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    RFL, someone told you that interpretation and you believed it- there is no way that you sat there, read it, and came to that conclusion. No. Some scholar, while attempting to define and tie it to other works, created that belief. It also is, quite an interpretation when you claim to read hte bible literally.

    You cant have it both ways. If you really thought logically about it, the whole thing is irrational.

    I am loving the discussion, and yes, all too frequently it is being told what rules we should live by according to interpretation. Why do you think the anti-gay marriage thing passed?
    Let gays get married.

  222. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    CapnAmerica,

    There is only one translation and that is God’s.

    “Genesis 2:15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” ”

    “1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

    2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ”

    4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”"

    Did Adam and Eve die a physical death, immediately or later?

    The spiritaul death of them both was still unanswered at that time and we can not answer that correct?

  223. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    “worshipped one Saint Brigit who had a free flowing “lake of beer.”

    OMG, I’m, I’m shocked! Here I’ve been sinning thinking there was no beer in heaven… If they got beer – hell, I might like to go!

    Which biblical text am I to believe?

    if you want to get to heaven
    you got to raise a little hell.

  224. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    RFL, there is quite dispute on when they can feel pain, and i’m afraid my source is a lot more credible than yours is

  225. Truth
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    “attorney Don McKinney”

    Don’t you mean SHYSTER Don McKinney PUKE?

  226. Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.

    Why did he put it there in the first place knowing Adam would eat it anyway?

  227. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    Am way YEah, at the time they had a physical life, for they went on to have a whole gob of kids.

    Cain went and married a woman from another village even. Now how does that happen?

  228. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    American Way,

    Be inebriated (filled or intoxicated) by the Holy Spirit.

    Beer drinking, per se, is not a sin, but……..

  229. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    “SolDevVB
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:56 pm | Permalink
    but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.

    Why did he put it there in the first place knowing Adam would eat it anyway?”

    Ask God.

  230. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    Hey editors, can we have a blog every day, like a chapter o’ the day in the bible? Perhaps after long enough, we can hear every interpretatino there is from all the different religions. IT’ll be great.

  231. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    very sad excuse …ask god

  232. Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    You know, I used to be a Catholic. Lost that path because I heard things like Ask God far too often. You sat here all day telling us what the bible means. Now all you have to offer is Ask God ? So it sounds to me like you’ve been pullin stuff out of your butt all day then.

  233. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 1:58 pm | Permalink
    Am way YEah, at the time they had a physical life, for they went on to have a whole gob of kids.

    Cain went and married a woman from another village even. Now how does that happen?”

    Cain slew Abel, remember? His eyes were not on God. He bore children through probably a sister (tradition at that time was that usually women names were not mentioned in their writings).

  234. Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    He bore children through probably a sister

    So now we have incest? Great…

  235. Ben
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    Vice is nice but incest is best – right Amer-USA?

  236. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:04 pm | Permalink
    very sad excuse …ask god”

    You can ask God anytime. I do not know the answer to why God placed the tree there.

    You say you believe in God, but not in religion. So what is your relationship with God and what is his name other than “God”?

  237. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

    “RFL, someone told you that interpretation and you believed it- there is no way that you sat there, read it, and came to that conclusion.”

    -P_mama

    You are correct. That is why we go to church to learn from scholars who do the heavy digging. However, thanks to Martin Luther and Gutenburg (or the World Wide Web), we can reference everything someone tells us with our very own personal copy of the Bible.

    Romans 10:14
    How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

  238. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    “SolDevVB
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:09 pm | Permalink
    He bore children through probably a sister

    So now we have incest? Great…

    Ben
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
    Vice is nice but incest is best – right Amer-USA?”

    Incest did occur in the bible. It’s well known. But God turned that problem into a promise.

  239. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

    The bible says very clearly that Cain got his wife from nod

  240. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    Well RFL, if God gave us the bible, and we’re supposed to follow it word for word, why then do we need an interpreter to decipher it? Surely now< God would have known that there’d be 1500 different versions and interpretations, you’d think he’d had made it quite a bit more clear.

    See, that’s the problem, you just choose the guy who interprets it the way YOU WANT to interpret it.
    And considering how very shady some of these guys were back in those days, with all that unfettered mental illness running amok, you really think that we’re supposed to believe that they interpreted it correctly?

    Whose to say taht David Koresh wasn’t one of the prophets?

  241. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:17 pm | Permalink
    The bible says very clearly that Cain got his wife from nod”

    Genesis 4:15 But the LORD said to him, “Not so [v] ; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. 16 So Cain went out from the LORD’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, [w] east of Eden.

    17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch”

    There is no mention of where Cain received his wife.

  242. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Political_mama,

    The bible as history is the most authenticated history ever written, even by sources outside of the bible and Christianity. It’s accuracy is unrivaled.

  243. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    My hind end. According to Jeopardy, the most authentically transcribed bible is the one the Jehovah’s Witnesses use.

    Now, do you really wanna go there?

  244. outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    “According to Jeopardy”? The Gospel according to Alex? (Trebek)

  245. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    “Be inebriated (filled or intoxicated) by the Holy Spirit.”

    USA American, I like this one better:

    Eat, drink, and be merry but do so to the glory
    of Gawd.

    I’m good at all those things. Do I get a pass into heaven?

  246. Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    “Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.”

    Who was going to kill him? He just killed the only other man on the planet besides his father.

  247. Ben
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    Did God write the Bible in English? And did He use a pen? Maybe a typewriter? Lightning bolts into granite?

    Has the original manuscript been found?

  248. Max
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    Why can’t we do this in America?

    http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/seagen-tidal-stream-turbine/

    SeaGen Gets Ready To Go

    Paul Taylor: World’s first commercial-scale tidal stream turbine set to be installed. Bristol-based Marine Current Turbines (MCT) is set to deploy its 1.2MW SeaGen Tidal System in Strangford Narrows, Northern Ireland on Easter Monday. Producing enough clean energy for 1000 homes (when fully operational), this will be the first, commercial scale, tidal stream turbine installed and operating anywhere in the world. It will generate one of the most environmentally-friendly forms of energy – it makes no noise, is almost completely below the surface, never runs out and has zero emissions.

  249. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    You guys better be careful picking on Nathan and religion (he isn’t even on the blog to defend himself). He may be the one asking you for your password.

    Do not forget:

    “If the army or the air force, ever
    land on heavens shore,

    They will find the gates are guarded,
    by United States Marines!!!!!!!!!!!!”

  250. American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

    “Did God write the Bible in English? And did He use a pen? Maybe a typewriter? Lightning bolts into granite?”

    God used a Tandy 286 computer in 1981 and wrote the entire bible. He used black font 12 Times New Roman script (with some minor italics and red lettered versions). Not sure which spell checker he used.

  251. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

    “Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink
    My hind end. According to Jeopardy, the most authentically transcribed bible is the one the Jehovah’s Witnesses use.

    Now, do you really wanna go there?”

    I said bible, not any particuler one. Which bible do the JWs use, that is if you know?

  252. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
    “According to Jeopardy”? The Gospel according to Alex? (Trebek)

    That must be from some of the “other Gospels”.

  253. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
    “Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.”

    Who was going to kill him? He just killed the only other man on the planet besides his father.

    It could of been another brother, the bible doesn’t say anything about that. Everything that happened is not in the bible.

  254. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    P-Mama,

    For centuries, only one Greek text was used as the Bible. It was “received” by the church as the closest possible representation of the original text as written by the apostles and prophets themselves. During this process called canonization, there was in-depth study and analysis which resulted in a firm determination of which books were truly inspired and which were hokey.

    Certain writings such as the apocrypha (meaning of questionable origin) were discarded because they were lacking authenticity.

    Today’s minyons of versions are printed and profligated by groups for various intents and purposes for which I do not claim to know. All I know is, I read the Book that has been regarded as the complete word of God since the canonization by the christian church almost 2,000 years ago. That book tranlsated into the english language was popularized by King James of England in 1611 and later revised to the version we read to day in 1770 something (not sure about the date). It was an attempt to clean up all previous english translations by removing all typographical errors. After the “modernization” and statis of the relatively nascent English language, the version we read today was printed in 1782 with no futher changes were required.

    The difficulty in understanding the Bible from my perspective is not in the dialect, but in the seemingly ubiquitous symbolic theology. Also, understanding the mind of God is no mean feat.

  255. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    American Way
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
    “Be inebriated (filled or intoxicated) by the Holy Spirit.”

    USA American, I like this one better:

    Eat, drink, and be merry but do so to the glory
    of Gawd.

    I’m good at all those things. Do I get a pass into heaven?

    Better check with Chas on that.

  256. lindainks55
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    Thank you – all of you – for an interesting discussion that didn’t include judgments. Very refreshing!

  257. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Ben
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
    Did God write the Bible in English? And did He use a pen? Maybe a typewriter? Lightning bolts into granite?

    Has the original manuscript been found?

    Ben – The historical accuracy of the Scriptures is likewise in a class by itself, far superior to the written records of Egypt, Assyria, and other early nations. Archeological confirmations of the Biblical record have been almost innumerable in the last century. Dr. Nelson Glueck, probably the greatest modern authority on Israeli archeology, has said:

    “No archeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries.”

  258. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Seems to me, that if the Catholics were so willing to dismiss certain books of the bible, they were also willing to REWRITE some of the words they found abiguous.

    I mean afterall, they found it necessary to remove the name of God many times over.

  259. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    By the way, I also think the JW bible, is just as accurate as the rest of them…not very.

  260. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Whaat is God’s NAME???

    Thats easy… learned that one back in sunday school…

    Our Father, who ART in Heaven!! :roll:

  261. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    “Has the original manuscript been found?”

    Nope, papyrus tends to wear out. Which is why scribes made a living copying scrolls to keep the Books of the Bible for future generations.

  262. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    “The historical accuracy of the Scriptures is likewise in a class by itself”

    So how did Moses predict the exact date of his own death?

  263. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

    “Nope, papyrus tends to wear out. Which is why scribes made a living copying scrolls to keep the Books of the Bible for future generations.”

    Most of the Old Testament and much of the New was originally written on leather scrolls that were rolled up and bound with thongs.

  264. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Ben,

    On manuscripts:

    http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html

    http://www.christianadvice.net/the_bible_accuracy.htm

    http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible-manuscripts.htm

  265. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    “After the “modernization” and statis of the relatively nascent English language, the version we read today was printed in 1782 with no futher changes were required.”

    Only problem with that is, the translation of much of the King James Version (authorized by Order of King James, 1611) is inaccurate! The RSV(Revised Standard Version) because of its use of newer translations of the dead sea scrolls, is much more accurate!! We must always seek out the best Translation of the old texts.

  266. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    Is it Cupid, Baal (Chas would know this one), Thor, Mercury, etc., etc., etc?

  267. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

    Huh???

  268. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
    “The historical accuracy of the Scriptures is likewise in a class by itself”

    So how did Moses predict the exact date of his own death?”

    Moses was a Prophet and God told him! He didn’t predict it!

  269. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Chas!

    The Name of your God?

  270. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    “Moses was a Prophet and God told him!”

    Moses used the past tense to describe the date of his death – how did he write that if he was dead?

  271. Ben
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Amer-USA – much of the ‘post-Passover’ Bible is pretty good history. However I have never seen good evidence for the 6-Day creation, Adam/Eve, etc.

    For another take on it check here:

    http://aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Age_of_the_Universe.asp

  272. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Amer, USA — Now you re beginning to get pretty far out on a limb!! Virtually NO contemporary Bible Scholars of an international variety, view the first 5 Books of the OT as being written by Moses… That was one of the errors of the King James Translators… The Books of the Tora are not given authorship anywhere in the Texts.

  273. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:19 pm | Permalink
    “Moses was a Prophet and God told him!”

    Moses used the past tense to describe the date of his death – how did he write that if he was dead?”

    Reference please my dear WSClark!

  274. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    And also, neither the Masoretic texts, nor the Septuagint list any authorship for the first five books of the O. T. The Latin Vulgate listed an author, as did Luther’s German translation… as in Erste Buch Mose

  275. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    So the bible receives more scrutiny than any other manuscript and yet you believe less reliable manuscripts about other non-biblical happenings?

    I didn’t mention the authorship of the Torah.

  276. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    Amer USA, now you are starting to sound a whole lot like Nathan!! You being a Bible Scholar know exactly where the death of Moses is recorded… And it IS recorded in past tense!!

  277. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    Ummmm the Torah IS the first five books of the Old Testament…. :-)

  278. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    And, the Masoretic texts and Septuagint are also the Old Testament… AmerUSA… did you hit a brick wall here, or what??

  279. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    You are correct once again about the Torah. I thought you would understand that!

  280. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    “Deuteronomy 34:5-9″ The death of Moses.

  281. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    However I have never seen good evidence for the 6-Day creation, Adam/Eve, etc.

    If the Adam/Eve existed in Genesis exactly like the Bible says they did, and the World was created in 6 literal days by God as implied by the text, what evidence would you expect to see as proof?

  282. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    No I have not hit a wall!

    But the Word of the Lord stands on it’s own, even though you try to tear it down:

    Jesus said, in Mathew 24:35 “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”

  283. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

    Ummmm just where do you see me trying to tear down anything?? Would you care to point that out??

  284. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    After all, it was you l who referred to VERY Biblical sources as non biblical materials…

  285. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    WSClark,

    “Deuteronomy 34:5 And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. 6 He buried him [a] in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. 7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. 8 The Israelites grieved for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days, until the time of weeping and mourning was over.

    9 Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit [b] of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him. So the Israelites listened to him and did what the LORD had commanded Moses.”

    Where is he predicting his own death in the past tense?

  286. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:46 pm | Permalink
    After all, it was you l who referred to VERY Biblical sources as non biblical materials…”

    What “VERY Biblical sources as non biblical materials” are you referring to?

    Seems kind of vague to me.

  287. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    IF Moses wrote the book, then he is also describing his own death… That would seem extremely crystal clear…

  288. outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

    As demonstrated here, you can find plenty of reasons to disbelieve God and the Bible. Any reason will work. And there are many, many atheist web sites that will provide you the ammo to allow you to make arguments against God and scripture, and feel smart.

    But they will never fill the void. They can’t bring you the peace, freedom, and power that you can have with a relationship with the living God. He wants this relationship and is willing to meet you more than halfway. And He is oh so real.

    Truth. Out.

  289. Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:25 pm | Permalink
    Chas,

    So the bible receives more scrutiny than any other manuscript and yet you believe less reliable manuscripts about other non-biblical happenings?

    I didn’t mention the authorship of the Torah.

    – Italics mine –

  290. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

    The “other texts” I listed are Masoretic, Septuagint, and Vulgate.

  291. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

    “what evidence would you expect to see as proof?”

    Actually, it is the evidence that contradicts the six day creation story that is the issue.

  292. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

    “Deuteronomy 34:5″

    Obviously, Moses could not have been the author of Deuteronomy if he describes his death and funeral.

  293. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

    This has been a quite reasonable discussion so far today… I think, however, that its time to bring it to a halt for today. There will be other days, and other open threads…

  294. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    Crystal – in the words of Tom Cruise.

    It is held that someone else wrote the preamble (1:1-5) in Dueteronomy and the report of Moses death in Chapter 34, but hold for the authorship of Moses for the rest of Dueteronomy and the Torah.

  295. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:01 pm | Permalink
    “what evidence would you expect to see as proof?”

    Actually, it is the evidence that contradicts the six day creation story that is the issue.”

    What evidence disproves the creation story?

  296. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Clark, one thing additional… The “lands” shown to Moses by God at Moses’ place of death could not have been there at that time. Zebulon, Naphtali, Ephraim, Manasseh, Judah… None of these were yet in existence as LANDS at the time of Moses. The lands had not yet been broken down into territories until later. They were still wandering in the Wilderness when Moses died.

  297. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    “It is held that someone else wrote the preamble (1:1-5) in Dueteronomy and the report of Moses death in Chapter 34, but hold for the authorship of Moses for the rest of Dueteronomy and the Torah.”

    And WHERE do you find that kind of fiction? AmerUSA, the old HEBREW texts dont name the author of the Torah. The Septuagint doesnt give an author’s name for the Torah!

    The Books of Moses refer at best to a Time Period, except for Genesis. Which is titled elsewhere as the Book of Beginnings (Which is what Genesis MEANS)

  298. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    OK — WHICH Creation Story do you want to talk about?

  299. rfl
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

    OK — WHICH Creation Story do you want to talk about?

    The one that is disproved by the evidence.

  300. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I posted:

    “American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:25 pm | Permalink
    Chas,

    So the bible receives more scrutiny than any other manuscript and yet you believe less reliable manuscripts about other non-biblical happenings?

    I didn’t mention the authorship of the Torah.”

    What I meant is that other less reliable and non-biblical sources of manuscripts are held in higher esteem than biblical sources:

    Interestingly, this biblical manuscript evidence far surpasses the manuscript reliability of other ancient writings that we trust as authentic every day. Look at these comparisons: Julius Caesar’s The Gallic Wars (10 manuscripts remain, with the earliest one dating to 1,000 years after the original autograph); Pliny the Younger’s Natural History (7 manuscripts; 750 years elapsed); Thucydides’ History (8 manuscripts; 1,300 years elapsed); Herodotus’ History (8 manuscripts; 1,350 years elapsed); Plato (7 manuscripts; 1,300 years); and Tacitus’ Annals (20 manuscripts; 1,000 years).

    The manuscript evidence for the “New Testament” is also dramatic, with nearly 25,000 ancient manuscripts discovered and archived so far, at least 5,600 of which are copies and fragments in the original Greek. Some manuscript texts date to the early second and third centuries, with the time between the original autographs and our earliest existing fragment being a remarkably short 40-60 years.

    And yet the bible has more scrutiny placed upon it?

  301. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

    Well, about all that FAITH can say, is that “In the Beginning, God Created the heavens and the earth.” The Bible, of course, is not a scientific text book, and does not pretend to be such. So, it is not fair to argue scientific points and biblical references in the same argument.

    However, Genesis DOES have two distinct Creation stories.

  302. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    One thing you forgot to mention about the bible is that it does not always follow a chronological timeline or order, thus God showing Moses the land and naming it. Items were added in for clarity by the authors and sometimes tieframes skipped around.

    Divide the Word of God correctly!

  303. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    “What evidence disproves the creation story?”

    “The one that is disproved by the evidence.”

    The one hundred and fifty year fossil evidence of the evolution of humans, along with carbon dating of animal fossils and other artifacts.

  304. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

    More – On carbon dating:

    Carbon Dating – What Is It And How Does It Work?

    This is how carbon dating works: Carbon is a naturally abundant element found in the atmosphere, in the earth, in the oceans, and in every living creature. C-12 is by far the most common isotope, while only about one in a trillion carbon atoms is C-14. C-14 is produced in the upper atmosphere when nitrogen-14 (N-14) is altered through the effects of cosmic radiation bombardment (a proton is displaced by a neutron effectively changing the nitrogen atom into a carbon isotope). The new isotope is called “radiocarbon” because it is radioactive, though it is not dangerous. It is naturally unstable and so it will spontaneously decay back into N-14 after a period of time. It takes about 5,730 years for half of a sample of radiocarbon to decay back into nitrogen. It takes another 5,730 for half of the remainder to decay, and then another 5,730 for half of what’s left then to decay and so on. The period of time that it takes for half of a sample to decay is called a “half-life.”

    Radiocarbon oxidizes

    (that is, it combines with oxygen) and enters the biosphere through natural processes like breathing and eating. Plants and animals naturally incorporate both the abundant C-12 isotope and the much rarer radiocarbon isotope into their tissues in about the same proportions as the two occur in the atmosphere during their lifetimes. When a creature dies, it ceases to consume more radiocarbon while the C-14 already in its body continues to decay back into nitrogen. So, if we find the remains of a dead creature whose C-12 to C-14 ratio is half of what it’s supposed to be (that is, one C-14 atom for every two trillion C-12 atoms instead of one in every trillion) we can assume the creature has been dead for about 5,730 years (since half of the radiocarbon is missing, it takes about 5,730 years for half of it to decay back into nitrogen). If the ratio is a quarter of what it should be (one in every four trillion) we can assume the creature has been dead for 11,460 year (two half-lives). After about 10 half-lives, the amount of radiocarbon left becomes too miniscule to measure and so this technique isn’t useful for dating specimens which died more than 60,000 years ago. Another limitation is that this technique can only be applied to organic material such as bone, flesh, or wood. It can’t be used to date rocks directly.

    Carbon Dating –

    The Premise

    Carbon dating is a dating technique predicated upon three things:

    The rate at which the unstable radioactive C-14 isotope decays into the stable non-radioactive N-14 isotope,
    The ratio of C-12 to C-14 found in a given specimen,
    And the ratio C-12 to C-14 found in the atmosphere at the time of the specimen’s death.

    Carbon Dating –

    The Controversy

    Carbon dating is controversial for a couple of reasons. First of all, it’s predicated upon a set of questionable assumptions. We have to assume, for example, that the rate of decay (that is, a 5,730 year half-life) has remained constant throughout the unobservable past. However, there is strong evidence which suggests that radioactive decay may have been greatly accelerated in the unobservable past.1 We must also assume that the ratio of C-12 to C-14 in the atmosphere has remained constant throughout the unobservable past (so we can know what the ratio was at the time of the specimen’s death). And yet we know that “radiocarbon is forming 28-37% faster than it is decaying,”2 which means it hasn’t yet reached equilibrium, which means the ratio is higher today than it was in the unobservable past. We also know that the ratio decreased during the industrial revolution due to the dramatic increase of CO2 produced by factories. This man-made fluctuation wasn’t a natural occurrence, but it demonstrates the fact that fluctuation is possible and that a period of natural upheaval upon the earth could greatly affect the ratio. Volcanoes spew out CO2 which could just as effectively decrease the ratio. Specimens which lived and died during a period of intense volcanism would appear older than they really are if they were dated using this technique. The ratio can further be affected by C-14 production rates in the atmosphere, which in turn is affected by the amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth’s atmosphere. The amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth’s atmosphere is itself affected by things like the earth’s magnetic field which deflects cosmic rays. Precise measurements taken over the last 140 years have shown a steady decay in the strength of the earth’s magnetic field. This means there’s been a steady increase in radiocarbon production (which would increase the ratio).

    And finally, this dating scheme is controversial because the dates derived are often wildly inconsistent. For example, “One part of Dima [a famous baby mammoth discovered in 1977] was 40,000 RCY [Radiocarbon Years], another was 26,000 RCY, and ‘wood found immediately around the carcass’ was 9,000-10,000 RCY.” (Walt Brown, In the Beginning, 2001, p. 176)

  305. Posted April 3, 2008 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

    That would be my best argument for Moses NOT being the author… The later authors of Torah added in those locations, so that people in THEIR time would know what Moses was looking at up there in the Land of Moab… which by then would have been in enemy territory!! The Moabites were later enemies of Israel… So much for Moses writing the books, eh???

  306. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    1. Where is your information from, AM USA?

    2. How do you explain the evolutionary progression of human and human like fossils that have been discovered over the last 150 years?

  307. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Who wrote the Psalms?

    David, Davidic Kings, Asaph……

    Because Asaph only wrote part of Psalms, does not mean he didn’t author it.

    Your logic doesn’t hold water about Moses’ authorship of Dueteronomy.

  308. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Clark — he has not YET put forth the “young earth” concept… Perhaps he doesnt believe in the “young earth” hypothesis??

  309. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

    “WSClark
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    2. How do you explain the evolutionary progression of human and human like fossils that have been discovered over the last 150 years?”

    What evidence? Huge gaping holes in time?

  310. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

    Ummm… excuse me… the authorship of the Psalms is not in discussion. The Psalms had MANY writers… David and Asaph among them

  311. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    You haven’t been listening!

    I have mentioned frequently that I believe creation is only 6,000 to 7,000 years old!

  312. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:06 pm | Permalink
    Ummm… excuse me… the authorship of the Psalms is not in discussion. The Psalms had MANY writers… David and Asaph among them”

    But you would not consider Asaph as an auther of the Psalms because he didn’t write all of it?

  313. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

    AmerUSA — There is NO internal Biblical evidence anywhere that suggests that Moses wrote the books of the Torah. That tradition was very late, and its reference was to the Mosaic time frame… NOT to authorship. Consult ANY of the Rabinnic scholars, and they will tell you the same thing… More than that, it is basically irrelevant as to who wrote the books. MOST OT scholars will hold to the JDEP theory of authorship — Jawist/Deuternonmist/Elohist/Priestly

  314. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

    Jawist = Jahwist

  315. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    “I have mentioned frequently that I believe creation is only 6,000 to 7,000 years old!”

    Ever hear of carbon dating?

  316. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    “But you would not consider Asaph as an auther of the Psalms because he didn’t write all of it?”

    Those are YOUR words… not mine… I said no such thing!!

    Have a nice evening, Nathn!!

  317. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    OK so you are dealing with a young erqth hypothesis, which simply does not have ANY basis in FACTS as we know them… No basis in physics… No basis in Mathematics… I cannot argue against a young earth hypothesis, because it is so totally disingenius

  318. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

    “I have mentioned frequently that I believe creation is only 6,000 to 7,000 years old!”

    The how can you see supernovas that exploded billions of light years away? A universe that is just a few thousand years old would have a dark sky. The speed of light contradicts your myth, that, and the periodic table.

  319. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Thank you for the energetic debate!

    You have a good evening!

    God Bless You!

  320. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

    “What evidence? Huge gaping holes in time?”

    Well the fossil evidence doesn’t just jump up out the the Earth and announce it’s presence. They make new discoveries everyday – some more valuable than others.

    What is not disputable is that human remains have been found that are 200,000 years old.

    http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-02/2005-02-17-voa51.cfm?CFID=280816090&CFTOKEN=28500786

    I will leave the discussion of carbon dating to a real scientist like Dr. Huie, but certainly the dating of the skulls was not off by 194,000 years. Keep in mind also, that these were the skulls of modern humans and not pre-human forms of life.

  321. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

    I would say that the years assigned to a Creation date is in error, because Calendars are a man-made invention. Even the term for ‘years’ back in the early Biblical days was measured differently than it is today.

    As already pointed out, carbon-dating is also in error a lot of times, because of the many factors and interpretation that cause erroneous conclusions.

    No one knows, what they cannot know. :)

  322. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

    What happened on each of the six days of creation in Genesis?

    The account of the six days of creation in Genesis tends to be a controversial subject among Christians. There are various theories to reconcile the biblical account of creation with the secular account of creation. Taken literally, the biblical account of creation does contradict the majority of university textbooks on the issue of our origins.

    On the first day God created the Earth, which at the time would have been a giant ball of water, and He divided light from darkness. The supernatural light would not be talked about in science textbooks.
    On day two God separated the water from the air. In most textbooks, the origins of oxygen would not predate land.
    On the third day God created the land and plants.
    On the fourth day God created the stars and the sun. The Earth predating the sun and stars by three days is considered a heresy among secular scientists.
    On day five fish and birds were created. The birds coming before land animals contradict macro-evolutionary models.
    On the sixth day of creation, land animals and man were created. At this time there was no death on the Earth, and God proclaimed it was good. The six days of creation contradicts the Darwinian model, which claims death predates man.
    In order to reconcile these contradictions with secular science, Christians have proposed several theories. One is the gap theory, which claims there are billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth” and shortly after that Darwinian evolution takes place. Of course this still requires ignoring the various contradictions with secular science described in the six days of creation.

    Another is the day-age theory. This is the belief that each of the six days of creation could represent more than an actual day, as we know according to Einstein’s general theory of relativity, time is relative. A day to God could mean a thousand years to us. Again, this does nothing to explain the contradictions between God’s Word and the word of secular science. Billions of years cannot be added to any particular day, and still reconcile the word of God with the word of the science of today.

    Even if we could miraculously find a place for the billions of years within the six days of creation without sacrificing the inerrancy of the bible, we would then have to accept that death and bloodshed came before sin. Death came as the result of sin. Because of this, the crucifixion was needed to reconcile us to God in accordance with the law of the Old Testament that states that death is the consequence of sin. Reinterpreting the bible to suit the science of the day undermines this concept.

    Another theory is that the Bible is only the word of man, and not the truth. The truth is that science is also the word of man, and it changes from day to day. The proofs of evolution and an old Earth today are completely different from the evidence my father would have learned about going through school. And what we know today will most likely be discarded when the next generation comes along. The Bible, on the other hand, has remained unchanged.

    The final theory is that every word of the Bible is true. Every day, creation scientists are finding more and more evidence to support the six days of creation. There is nothing wrong with science, but in the end it is the fallible word of man.

  323. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

    “The speed of light contradicts your myth, that, and the periodic table.”

    THAT is exactly correct, Doug! The Hubble Telescope, among others, disproves the “young earth” hypothesis.

  324. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the cut and paste American
    http://www.allaboutcreation.org/six-days-of-creation-faq.htm

    Clearly you can’t argue your position on your own merits but you have to steal the work of others. That’s fundy honesty for you.

  325. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

    “Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:13 pm | Permalink
    “I have mentioned frequently that I believe creation is only 6,000 to 7,000 years old!”

    Ever hear of carbon dating?”

    Did you see my post above on carbon dating?

  326. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    The SECOND Creation story in Genesis doesnt put a six day time frame on Creation. In fact it gives no time frame at all!!

  327. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:24 pm | Permalink
    Thanks for the cut and paste American
    http://www.allaboutcreation.org/six-days-of-creation-faq.htm

    Clearly you can’t argue your position on your own merits but you have to steal the work of others. That’s fundy honesty for you.”

    OK Doug, if a link satisfies you better, that is exactly where I got the info. No stealing going on here. It’s the same as a link.

  328. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:29 pm | Permalink

    For the carbon dating doubters…..

    “Did Homo sapiens sail to Australia 176,000 years ago?”

    http://www.jqjacobs.net/writing/downundr.html

    “Thermoluminescence dating, a relatively new technique, produced the 75,000 year old petroglyph date. Previously the oldest dates equaled the limits of the radiocarbon method.”

    And……………….

    “As already pointed out, carbon-dating is also in error a lot of times”

    As previously noted, the dating was not off by 194,000 years. In may be in error at times for various reasons, but it is not off by THAT much and is not off EVERY TIME.

  329. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    American,
    Is your argument that radioactive decay is a myth? Then I suggest you step into the reactor of a nuclear power plant and test your idea.

    There are numerous methods of radiometric dating which disprove your young earth myth.

  330. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Forgetting carbon dating momentarily, there are MANY ancient Sanskrit writings, that are chronicled — that date back a minimum of 10,000 years.

    What we DO have represented in the Bible, is a written form of HEBREW writing that most likely dates back 6 – 10,000 years. But hardly to the beginning of time that recently.

  331. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:31 pm | Permalink

    So how does the speed of light prove the old earth concept then?

    Now before you go and tell me that it is 186,000 miles per second, i already know that.

    Chas – are you still here?

  332. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    “OK Doug, if a link satisfies you better, that is exactly where I got the info. No stealing going on here. It’s the same as a link.”

    It doesn’t matter if you get your info from other sources just cite them rather than steal someone else’s work. One thing I do know is that you’ll never reference any scientific work supporting your position because there is none.

  333. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    “So how does the speed of light prove the old earth concept then?”

    I would have thought it obvious. It takes a certain amount of time for light to travel a certain distance. This time and distance is referenced as a light year. In a year the light travels 9.4605284 × 10 to the 15th meters.

    If the universe is just 10,000 years old then there wouldn’t have been enough time for the light from the stars to reach the Earth. The fact that we see starlight proves the universe is older than 10,000 years.

  334. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    “So how does the speed of light prove the old earth concept then?”

    The furtherest star from the Earth (that has been discovered) is 13.5 billion light years from here. That fact is indisputable, give or take a few thousand light years.

    Now, unless God created the star with the light already in motion, the universe is at least 13.5 billion years old.

    And, of course, why would God create the universe with the light already in motion?

  335. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    Once again, I was not stealing anything. Just using resources.

    Better than just your own opinion eh?

  336. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    One supernova is so bright that it can be observed with the naked eye despite being 7.5 billion light years away.
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/03/21/exploding.star.ap/index.html
    If American is right then we wouldn’t be able to see this supernova. Yet we are, hence American is wrong. ‘Nuff said.

  337. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:39 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    Have you measured the light coming from a distant star to earth? Which one?

    Does light always travel at the same speed as far as man understands it today?

  338. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

    “Does light always travel at the same speed as far as man understands it today?”

    Yes.

  339. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    American,
    Yes, in the vacuum of space it does.

  340. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    How have they PROVEN that the light from this supernova took 7.5 billion years to get here?

  341. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Prooven.

  342. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    I believe the speed of light question has been answered by someone far faster with a calculator than I am… And he makes the point very well… The light from the stars shining TONIGHT… LAST NIGHT… Tomorrow Night… has been travelling for millions of Light Years to get here… The Hubble Telescope has pretty much proven that, and that piece of machinery doesnt argue from anything but a factual basis.

    I LOVE the universe, and all of its mysteries… What a fascinating universe we live in!!

  343. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    Yes American, they developed devices called telescopes and mathematics and are capable of measuring these things.

  344. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    Is space a total vacuum everywhere and are there not black holes out there affecting the speed and bending the light?

  345. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    The point is God knew in his knowledge that Satan would fall, Satan would destroy the earth (Gen 1:1-2) and man would fall short. God KNEW he would have a Son and that his Son was His plan for redemption.

    Well, gee, Rev. That takes all the fun out the day, whatever a “day” is to God… (how many millenia?)

    It’s no wonder he gets so p!ssed off. It’d be like watching TV during the writers’ strike. Same old episodes, cause he already KNEW.

  346. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    Uh oh — now the questions get juvenile… watch out folks…

  347. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    The only way to believe in the creation theory of the Bible as literal is to believe that “God” purposely put AMPLE evidence easily available everywhere that debunks that creation.

    In other words, you have a “God” who does everything possible to bring a great deal of doubt as to his very existence.

    I am not interested in such a “God”.

  348. RD
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    “Now Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old received divine approval.”

    Very nice, Chas. Not necessarily dictionary-like, but it’ll do in a pinch. ;)

  349. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Who made the Hubble Telescope?

    I am not talking of a company here either.

  350. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    “Is space a total vacuum everywhere and are there not black holes out there affecting the speed and bending the light?”

    Any black holes wouldn’t affect the light that we currently see.

  351. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

    Theoretically, at least philosophically the speed of thought is unmeasurable in terms of speed, because it has no relative construct (matter) which requires it to be standardized.

    If one travels at the speed of light, things that are matter appear to remain still.

    If one travels faster than the speed the light, then time appears to be reversed (the curve of time) (The story of the speed of light traveler leaving earth for 100 years and he has not aged, but everyone on earth has)

    In other words, time may not be a linear measurement after all.

    If, in the theory of Creation, God’s mind (whatever that may encompass) create the ‘beginning’ then we have a reference point for a start, but none for the finish.

    If we apply the speed of light time traveler theory, then theoretically God in some sort of ‘thought’ could imagine creating something many times faster than the speed of light thus suspending time to the observer who is ’stuck to the ground.’

    Like those left behind, the earth bound human cannot accurately measure the time it took God to measure time passage, because we cannot know the velocity of what God did. If God did his works faster than the speed of light, time would appear to be reversed, warped and perhaps bent to a degree that is beyond the linear construct understanding of humans.

    So, while the earth languished around for a billion years in human constructed time, God performed his creation in a ‘blink of an eye.’

    We cannot put a timer on God, because God dwells outside the human construct of time.

    i.e.; The term for Omnipresent, which also means presence at all points in time at the same moment.

    Difficult for humans to comprehend, because we use time constructs because of our need to align dates and events together. We cannot comprehend events taking place faster than they should because we are shackled by time.

    Looking up at a star, it takes the light from the star millions of light years to reach earth. For all we know, in the star’s realm, it could have already went super nova and exploded. We on earth would not know for millions of more years because we are restricted by times relationship to distance.

    Omnipresence has no restrictions of distance or time.

    Our human minds will never be able to grasp what we cannot, because it falls outside the possibilities of what we term possible.

    Yet, stars explode and implode without us knowing and on their own ‘time.’

  352. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    RD,

    It is from scripture.

    Chas – do you recall the reference? Hebrews…

  353. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    Regular,
    Can you support that with anything tangible or are you just making stuff up?

  354. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink
    “Is space a total vacuum everywhere and are there not black holes out there affecting the speed and bending the light?”

    Any black holes wouldn’t affect the light that we currently see.”

    How do you know that Doug?

    Balck holes can bend light can they not?

  355. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    “If one travels faster than the speed the light, then time appears to be reversed (the curve of time) (The story of the speed of light traveler leaving earth for 100 years and he has not aged, but everyone on earth has)”

    Of course, this has never yet been proven… String theory would seem to be coming closer to calling Einstein’s Relativity into question… one string at a time… LOL

  356. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

    Actually, Nathan, black holes do not bend light. They absorb it. Check the physics…`

  357. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    Support what Doug? It’s a theory that has existed for quite some time, not my idea, I merely placed it here.

    It’s a philosophical discussion about God versus Man and the restrictions of time versus omnipresence.

    Tangible evidence is not required in philosophy. :)

    Intangibles, things we don’t or cannot know exist as well, therefore the branch of philosophical studies.

  358. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    “How do you know that Doug?
    Balck holes can bend light can they not?”

    For one, if the light was absorbed into a black hole then we wouldn’t be able to see it, yet we do. If the velocity of the light was bent as to slow down the light then that would just make the universe older and still disprove your young universe myth.

  359. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    “Support what Doug? It’s a theory that has existed for quite some time, not my idea, I merely placed it here.”

    It’s not a theory, it’s your unsupported claim. If it is a theory, as you claim, then present the tangible evidence which makes it a theory.

  360. Hud
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

    “Balck holes can bend light can they not?”

    Yes, but if light is bend as it travels to earth it just takes longer to get here.

  361. Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

    Black holes are BARELY out of the realm of theoretical physics… and YOU want to use something of that intensity, to prove a “young earth” hypothesis?? The very science you would use to prove — I dont know what — about a Black Hole… blows a HUGE hole in your “young earth” hypothesis —

    The speed of light has always been the same. Even IF a black hole bent the light, it would still travel at the same speed… Just the same as bouncing light off of a mirror doesnt change its speed either!!

  362. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

    By Relativity theory, faster than light travel is not possible.

  363. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I am not Nathan and I do not know who he is. He does appear on this blog at times. But I am not him.

    Chas, where is the proof that black holes, or other cellestial members do not bend light?

    The earth’s atmosphere bends light and isn’t a black hole stronger than the atmospheric effect?

    Again, your logic does not hold water.

  364. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    Prove that God doesn’t exist Doug. Go ahead, I’ll wait here. :)

    There is a known term for omnipresence wouldn’t you say? The term “I am” in the Bible may have been the first indicator of that term indicates a presence we cannot comprehend as humans.

    Chas, you better recheck your references on bending light.

  365. God
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

    You are all pissants.

  366. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

    The proof that “God” does NOT exist is a great deal stronger than proof that “God” does.

  367. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

    Regular — Omnipresence is a fancy way of saying that in Eternity, Time does not exist.

    God exists in all things and is everywhere present. Which is to say that God is not a corporeal being. I dont know of ANYbody who would argue against the Omnipresence of God!

    However, that says nothing about the speed of light, or about time. The Biblical poet had a way of saying it — A day is as a thousand years in the eyes of God, or, as a watch in the night (about 2 hours).

  368. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

    “Prove that God doesn’t exist Doug. Go ahead, I’ll wait here”

    Well, here we go again. McCluer with his “prove a negative” backasswards logic, knowing full well that a negative cannot be proven.

    So much for this discussion. It was relatively civil and free from trolls until McCluer showed up.

    As usual, his only reason for being here is to draw attention to himself and to disrupt the thread.

    What a jackass you are, McCluer.

  369. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

    Regular,
    It is illogical to disprove the non-existent. The mere fact that you can’t support your claim pretty much sums up your position as unsupportable and certainly not a theory.

    If you claim something is incomprehensible then there is no point in using such a phrase is there?

  370. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

    :Hud
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:55 pm | Permalink
    “Balck holes can bend light can they not?”

    Yes, but if light is bend as it travels to earth it just takes longer to get here.

    Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:55 pm | Permalink
    Black holes are BARELY out of the realm of theoretical physics… and YOU want to use something of that intensity, to prove a “young earth” hypothesis?? The very science you would use to prove — I dont know what — about a Black Hole… blows a HUGE hole in your “young earth” hypothesis —

    The speed of light has always been the same. Even IF a black hole bent the light, it would still travel at the same speed… Just the same as bouncing light off of a mirror doesnt change its speed either!!

    J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:56 pm | Permalink
    By Relativity theory, faster than light travel is not possible.”

    So if a black hole can bend light and it takes longer to get here, how do we measure the light as it travels from there to here with all the possible bends it could be going through?

    Did not man build the Hubble Telescope?

    Did not man come up with the theory of relativity (SP)?

  371. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

    J R, Faster Than Light has been challenged by Scientist for awhile. The ‘Quantum Tunnelers’ Physicists have presented papers, experiments and theories on the subject. Even Einstein admitted that his theories had gaping holes in it that couldn’t explain the speed of light in all instances.

    Light speed requires knowing what media it travels in, (i.e. faster in a vacuum than in water/air, etc)

  372. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

    http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae661.cfm

    “According to Einstein’s General Relativity Theory,light will be affected in the same way matter is affected by gravity. This is because under this theory, we should think of gravity not in terms of vector like forces, but as a consequence of the “shape” of the universe.

    From Newton’s point of view, gravity was a linearly directed force with which all objects with mass pulled on all other objects with mass. His analysis showed that the strength of the force was proportional to the product of the 2 masses attracting one another, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Thus an apple and the earth would pull toward each other, and the apple “falls” from the tree. Since light (whether perceived as a ray or a photon) has no mass, Newton’s equation predicts that it will not be attracted by gravity towards anything, no matter how massive.

    In order to construct a theoretical framework that would be consistent to all observers and that did not rely on some independent fixed reference frame, Einstein had to discard this perception of how gravity works and devise a new understanding. According to this theory, all object with mass alter the curvature of spacetime, the 4 dimensional fabric of the universe. Objects moving through spacetime then simply follow the curves that have been created.

    Since human brains are not good at picturing things in 4 dimensions we usually resort to an analogy in 3 dimensions. Imagine spacetime as a sheet of rubber, stretched flat when there is no matter present. If we place a massive object like a star in this “space” it pushes down into the rubber sheet creating a dimple or pit in the rubber. an asteroid flying by the star would not travel in a straight line as it rolled along the sheet, it would curve as it went through the dip, coming out in a new direction. If an object were going just the right speed, it might get stuck in the dimple and travel around the star in an orbit like a ball around a roulette wheel. So far the predictions of this theory are the same as Newton’s, but now comes a big difference- if light traveled along this rubber sheet of spacetime, it would follow the curve too, since the curvature of space is already created by the star. In fact if the pit is deep enough and the walls very steep, the light might fall into the pit and never escape. (what we call a black hole) Newton didn’t notice this bending of light because it takes very massive objects to get something as fast as light to curve enough that you can notice. This is the same reason we still learn and use Newton’s equation – it works well most of the time. But experiments have shown that in fact Newton was wrong and light IS attracted towards object with mass, as Einstein’s theory predicted.”

  373. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

    No Regular, YOU check the references. Bending light does not slow it down. If you think it does, then you show the formula. I am stating a known fact. Go ahead. Disprove it!

    We have gotten along here all day without your arrogance. We dont need it now.

  374. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

    American,
    It is evident that you have no rebuttal to the fact that the speed of light disproves your notion of a young universe. I am just pondering why you continue to reject reality and hold onto your myth?

  375. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    “Light speed requires knowing what media it travels in, (i.e. faster in a vacuum than in water/air, etc)”

    Are you suggesting that the light from the supernova went through someone’s backyard pool?

  376. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

    WSClark,

    This is an open thread. Treat others with respect please! Okay?

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:00 pm | Permalink
    The proof that “God” does NOT exist is a great deal stronger than proof that “God” does.”

    J R – the burden of proof is upon you!

  377. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

    What all this has to do with evidence of God’s Being is really moot: One look at the complexity of the universe and life itself should be supreme proof of God’s existence

    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/grav_speed.html

    Does Gravity Travel at the Speed of Light?

    “To begin with, the speed of gravity has not been measured directly in the laboratory–the gravitational interaction is too weak, and such an experiment is beyond present technological capabilities. The “speed of gravity” must therefore be deduced from astronomical observations, and the answer depends on what model of gravity one uses to describe those observations.

    In the simple Newtonian model, gravity propagates instantaneously: the force exerted by a massive object points directly toward that object’s present position. For example, even though the Sun is 500 light seconds from the Earth, Newtonian gravity describes a force on Earth directed towards the Sun’s position “now,” not its position 500 seconds ago. Putting a “light travel delay” (technically called “retardation”) into Newtonian gravity would make orbits unstable, leading to predictions that clearly contradict Solar System observations.

    In general relativity, on the other hand, gravity propagates at the speed of light; that is, the motion of a massive object creates a distortion in the curvature of spacetime that moves outward at light speed. This might seem to contradict the Solar System observations described above, but remember that general relativity is conceptually very different from Newtonian gravity, so a direct comparison is not so simple. Strictly speaking, gravity is not a “force” in general relativity, and a description in terms of speed and direction can be tricky. For weak fields, though, one can describe the theory in a sort of Newtonian language. In that case, one finds that the “force” in GR is not quite central–it does not point directly towards the source of the gravitational field–and that it depends on velocity as well as position. The net result is that the effect of propagation delay is almost exactly cancelled, and general relativity very nearly reproduces the Newtonian result.

    This cancellation may seem less strange if one notes that a similar effect occurs in electromagnetism. If a charged particle is moving at a constant velocity, it exerts a force that points toward its present position, not its retarded position, even though electromagnetic interactions certainly move at the speed of light. Here, as in general relativity, subtleties in the nature of the interaction “conspire” to disguise the effect of propagation delay. It should be emphasized that in both electromagnetism and general relativity, this effect is not put in ad hoc but comes out of the equations. Also, the cancellation is nearly exact only for constant velocities. If a charged particle or a gravitating mass suddenly accelerates, the change in the electric or gravitational field propagates outward at the speed of light.

    Since this point can be confusing, it’s worth exploring a little further, in a slightly more technical manner. Consider two bodies–call them A and B–held in orbit by either electrical or gravitational attraction. As long as the force on A points directly towards B and vice versa, a stable orbit is possible. If the force on A points instead towards the retarded (propagation-time-delayed) position of B, on the other hand, the effect is to add a new component of force in the direction of A’s motion, causing instability of the orbit. This instability, in turn, leads to a change in the mechanical angular momentum of the A-B system. But total angular momentum is conserved, so this change can only occur if some of the angular momentum of the A-B system is carried away by electromagnetic or gravitational radiation.

    Now, in electrodynamics, a charge moving at a constant velocity does not radiate. (Technically, the lowest order radiation is dipole radiation, which depends on the acceleration.) So, to the extent that A’s motion can be approximated as motion at a constant velocity, A cannot lose angular momentum. For the theory to be consistent, there must therefore be compensating terms that partially cancel the instability of the orbit caused by retardation. This is exactly what happens; a calculation shows that the force on A points not towards B’s retarded position, but towards B’s “linearly extrapolated” retarded position. Similarly, in general relativity, a mass moving at a constant acceleration does not radiate (the lowest order radiation is quadrupole), so for consistency, an even more complete cancellation of the effect of retardation must occur. This is exactly what one finds when one solves the equations of motion in general relativity.

    While current observations do not yet provide a direct model-independent measurement of the speed of gravity, a test within the framework of general relativity can be made by observing the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. The orbit of this binary system is gradually decaying, and this behavior is attributed to the loss of energy due to escaping gravitational radiation. But in any field theory, radiation is intimately related to the finite velocity of field propagation, and the orbital changes due to gravitational radiation can equivalently be viewed as damping caused by the finite propagation speed. (In the discussion above, this damping represents a failure of the “retardation” and “noncentral, velocity-dependent” effects to completely cancel.)

    The rate of this damping can be computed, and one finds that it depends sensitively on the speed of gravity. The fact that gravitational damping is measured at all is a strong indication that the propagation speed of gravity is not infinite. If the calculational framework of general relativity is accepted, the damping can be used to calculate the speed, and the actual measurement confirms that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light to within 1%. (Measurements of at least one other binary pulsar system, PSR B1534+12, confirm this result, although so far with less precision.)

    Are there future prospects for a direct measurement of the speed of gravity? One possibility would involve detection of gravitational waves from a supernova. The detection of gravitational radiation in the same time frame as a neutrino burst, followed by a later visual identification of a supernova, would be considered strong experimental evidence for the speed of gravity being equal to the speed of light. However, unless a very nearby supernova occurs soon, it will be some time before gravitational wave detectors are expected to be sensitive enough to perform such a test.”

  378. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    “the burden of proof is upon you!”

    Then provide an operational definition of god. So far we are able to test absolutely nothing outside a fictional creation with less attributes that Spiderman.

  379. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    Doug, you are stating that things cannot exist outside of our own constructs. That sort of ruins any motivation for discovery doesn’t it? :)

    Doug, if you claim that my claim of incomprehensibility is false, then you have just disproved yourself, because you cannot comprehend what I am stating.

    That is, something being incomprehensible.

    If incomprehensibility occurs at the smaller level of human comprehension, then certainly it cannot exist on a grander scale.

    Close your eyes Doug, does the universe disappear?

    If you are in an unconscious state, does time stop and if you awake, do you have a recollection of the daily events?

    We are restricted by our physical senses. Wolves can see infrared, humans cannot without devices. Does the wolf world exist in different constructs than ours? :)

  380. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    Actually, Doug, you came from a supernova. There would be no life on this planet without star matter, as just about all of the ingredients necessary for life cannot originate on this planet, but have to have come from an extraterrestrial source, namely supernovas. Heck, the earth itself is probably made up of supernova debris.

  381. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    “This is an open thread. Treat others with respect please! Okay?”

    Do you mean like when McCluer uses an ethnic slur about me, accuses me of being gay, calls me an alcoholic, suggests that I have inappropriate relations with my granddaughter, threaten to beat my son up, challenges me to a fight, etc.

    You mean I should treat him with respect like that?

  382. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm | Permalink
    American,
    It is evident that you have no rebuttal to the fact that the speed of light disproves your notion of a young universe. I am just pondering why you continue to reject reality and hold onto your myth?”

    I am not American, That is another poster on this blog.

    Doug,

    Does light travel in only a straight line and only at 186,000 fet per second?

    Yes or No?

  383. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

    JM Walker,

    Good post!

  384. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    then certainly it cannot exist on a grander scale.

    should read

    then certainly it can exist on a grander scale.

  385. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    Regular,
    If you can’t define it then how are you to measure it? Define your god so that it may be measured. So far you are concluding that something you have no clue about exists, did all these sorts of phenomena, set down a bunch of rules, is able to communicate with us, but we can’t comprehend any of this therefore we can’t attribute any of this to your god.

    Does that sum up your position pretty well? If not, then you can provide something tangible and testable.

  386. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

    AmUSA — Simple answer — yes, and no

  387. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

    WSClark,

    Work out your problems with Regular on you own time. Okay? This is a blog!

    This is in respect to all of us here!

  388. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

    yes it travels at 186,000 mi. per sec./squared…

    Yes it travels in a straight line, of sorts… actually, it radiates outward from its source in all directions at the speed of light.

  389. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:19 pm | Permalink
    AmUSA — Simple answer — yes, and no”

    Is your name Doug?

    Doug?

  390. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

    “Actually, Doug, you came from a supernova. There would be no life on this planet without star matter, as just about all of the ingredients necessary for life cannot originate on this planet, but have to have come from an extraterrestrial source, namely supernovas. Heck, the earth itself is probably made up of supernova debris.”

    That’s what Carl Sagan said, we are all just star dust.

  391. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    “Does light travel in only a straight line and only at 186,000 fet per second?”

    In the vacuum of space it does.

  392. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    “This is in respect to all of us here!”

    Really. Is this an open thread? I will post any god damned thing I want to.

    I notice that you NEVER ask the sons of bitches like McCluer to back down when he insults Cosmos, Doug, J R, Capn’America, P Mom or any other on the left.

    You further NEVER ask McCluer to back off when he CONSTANTLY attacks Chas, claims that he is not a true minister, questions his religion, etc.

    You are a hypocrite, Am USA.

    Nice try anyway.

  393. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Permalink
    Regular,
    If you can’t define it then how are you to measure it? Define your god so that it may be measured. So far you are concluding that something you have no clue about exists, did all these sorts of phenomena, set down a bunch of rules, is able to communicate with us, but we can’t comprehend any of this therefore we can’t attribute any of this to your god.

    Does that sum up your position pretty well? If not, then you can provide something tangible and testable.”

    Doug,

    God is inmeasurable.

    He created everything in the heavans and the earth.

    He gave you life.

    He provides for your every need and some of your desires.

    He establishes the order that is before you, supernovas and the speed of light, etc.

    Test him at your own risk.

    He wants what is best for you.

    The tangible part is the creation itself and those whom he created to be here. Man (Humans)

    This didn’t happen by chance or at random.

  394. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

    The speed of light in a vaccum has been observed.

    The astronauts left laser reflectors on the Moon. Laser beams are occasionally bounced off of them to measure the distance between the Earth and the Moon.

  395. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

    Ever hear of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Doug? Read anything by Schrödinger?

    “Heisenberg is pulled over by a policeman whilst driving down a motorway, the policeman gets out of his car, walks towards Heisenberg’s window and motions with his hand for Heisenberg to wind the window down, which he does. The policeman then says ‘Do you know what speed you were driving at sir?’, to which Heisenberg responds ‘No, but I knew exactly where I was.’”

  396. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

    American, everything you said is contradicted by your first statement “God is inmeasurable.”

    Thanks for making the effort of debunking yourself.

  397. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    “He provides for your every need .”

    REALLY? Huh what AM I missing?

  398. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:31 pm | Permalink

    WSClark,

    Chill!

    I have asked many to get along on this blog!

    Regular and more! I have defended Chas.

    Check the blog!

  399. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    Let’s make with the blessings coming down there God! SHOW ME!

  400. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    “Ever hear of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Doug?”

    Yes, so how does that matter to anything currently being discussed?

  401. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm | Permalink
    “He provides for your every need .”

    REALLY? Huh what AM I missing?”

    What do you need that you don’t have?

  402. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

    “He provides for your every need.

    REALLY? Huh what AM I missing?”

    So God is Heidi Fleiss?

  403. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    Evidently Doug, you don’t understand the principle put forth by Heisenberg then Doug. :)

  404. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    “Regular and more”

    Obviously your rebukes had no effect on Regular, nor does a rebuke have any effect on him. He lives to troll and disrupt.

    If you have spent an hour on the blog, you would know that.

  405. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    J R,

    He gives you life. Are you alive?
    He gives you water to drink. Drink water?
    He gives you friends and family. You have any?
    He gives you rain and sunshine. Get any rain today?
    He gives you food. Ate today?
    Etc. etc.

  406. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

    Heh I know where this is going.

    It’s why Christianity is married perfectly to the Republican party.

  407. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:39 pm | Permalink

    “He gives you food. Ate today?”

    Yeah and it didn’t fall outta the sky either.

  408. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:39 pm | Permalink

    Welp, WSClark wants to get ugly – time to let the blog get lonely once again.

    Have fun talking amongst yourself Libs.

    (poof)

  409. God
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    I also give you death and disease.

  410. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    So God is only Republican? Lord I hope not!

  411. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

    “Evidently Doug, you don’t understand the principle put forth by Heisenberg then Doug.”

    No, I’m just not able to fathom your distortion and misapplication of it as it relates to what is currently being discussed. It’s evident you don’t know what you are talking about otherwise you wouldn’t have avoided clearly explaining yourself.

    It’s pretty much been proven on this thread that your god doesn’t exist because the only definition that has been presented is that god created the universe 10,000 years ago. Since the universe is clearly older than 10,000 years we can safely conclude that your god doesn’t exist.

    Care to whine and make more excuses after being proven wrong?

  412. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    Yea, and mosquitoes, and ants, and spiders and snakes… I dont like spiders and snakes!!

  413. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    “God
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:40 pm | Permalink
    I also give you death and disease.”

    After sin entered in.

  414. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    “He gives you water to drink. Drink water?”

    The water company begs to differ.

  415. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    “Welp, WSClark wants to get ugly”

    Do you mean like when you suggested that I had inappropriate relations with my seven year old granddaughter?

    Ugly like that?

  416. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Doug, I believe God created the heavens and the earth… just that it was more like 14.5 Billion years ago!! LOTS of evidence for that!

  417. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    “He gives you life. Are you alive?
    He gives you water to drink. Drink water?
    He gives you friends and family. You have any?
    He gives you rain and sunshine. Get any rain today?
    He gives you food. Ate today?”

    How did you measure this if you previously stated god is unmeasurable? You have no basis for this statement which only leads me to conclude that you are either dishonest or completely clueless on how to argue your position.

    How many times do you care to be debunked tonight?

  418. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Permalink
    “He gives you water to drink. Drink water?”

    The water company begs to differ.”

    Did man invent water?

  419. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:44 pm | Permalink
    “He gives you life. Are you alive?
    He gives you water to drink. Drink water?
    He gives you friends and family. You have any?
    He gives you rain and sunshine. Get any rain today?
    “He gives you food. Ate today?”

    How did you measure this if you previously stated god is unmeasurable? You have no basis for this statement which only leads me to conclude that you are either dishonest or completely clueless on how to argue your position.

    How many times do you care to be debunked tonight?”

    Where did you get what you needed Doug?

  420. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Man CAN make water.

  421. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    “Did man invent water?”

    Water is created by two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom bound together by hydrogen bonds. Why this needs to be explained to a literate person is beyond me.

  422. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

    “He gives you water to drink. Drink water?”

    I drink beer and God created beer to keep the Irish from taking over the world.

    That is proof that God exists.

    He just started 15 billion years ago.

  423. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:47 pm | Permalink
    Man CAN make water.”

    Man claims to make alot of things, but in reality, he is only taking what is already here and reassembling it into something else.

    How do you think man makes water?

  424. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

    “Where did you get what you needed Doug?”

    I’ll take that as the fact that you are either not tired of being debunked or so absolutely clueless that you don’t know that you have been debunked. But one thing is for certain, you can’t support your claims. Trying to prove the existence of something that doesn’t exist is a pretty daunting task simply because it’s impossible.

  425. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

    I’m still waiting for you to tell us what chant or incantation we invoke for the free food.

  426. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:49 pm | Permalink
    “Did man invent water?”

    Water is created by two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom bound together by hydrogen bonds. Why this needs to be explained to a literate person is beyond me.”

    Weren’t the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom here to begin with?

  427. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:53 pm | Permalink

    And so are millions of other folks wanting some food.

    I guess “God” has forgotten them huh?

  428. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:53 pm | Permalink

    I drink beer and God created beer to keep the Irish from taking over the world.

    So that’s why we’re not in charge. Dammit!

  429. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm | Permalink
    I’m still waiting for you to tell us what chant or incantation we invoke for the free food.”

    You can get it at a rescue mission if you need to, right along with the water.

  430. Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    “Weren’t the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom here to begin with?”

    Oxygen and hydrogen are two of the most abundant elements in the universe. Why I have to discuss the absolute basics of chemistry on a forum populated by adults is beyond me. Are Kansans typically this ignorant of science? I only ask since I was educated in a different state and never knew people so scientifically illiterate until I moved here.

  431. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:53 pm | Permalink
    And so are millions of other folks wanting some food.

    I guess “God” has forgotten them huh?”

    I thought we were talking about your needs J R.

    What are you doing to help those who are starving?

  432. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    Weren’t the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom here to begin with?

    Sigh. . .ah, yes, the infinite regress argument.

    Let’s cut to the chase: What caused God?

  433. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    “I thought we were talking about your needs J R.”

    No let’s talk about everyone’s needs.

    You DID imply that “God” provided for all of man’s needs did you not?

  434. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

    Check out this book — By J. B. Phillips… An excellent autograph work!!

    http://books.google.com/books?id=hOvUiWy25csC&pg=PA7&vq=%22J.+B.+Phillips%22++%2B+%22Your+God+Is+Too+Small%22&source=gbs_toc_s&cad=1&sig=ZyNPnvuqC6CcJAhPjkMXGIfLbXQ#PPA7,M1

  435. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

    “Doug
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Permalink
    “Weren’t the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom here to begin with?”

    Oxygen and hydrogen are two of the most abundant elements in the universe. Why I have to discuss the absolute basics of chemistry on a forum populated by adults is beyond me. Are Kansans typically this ignorant of science? I only ask since I was educated in a different state and never knew people so scientifically illiterate until I moved here.”

    Hey Doug – you sound a little testy here.
    Everybody has common knowledge of the physical makeup of the world, and is not limited to your state alone. I guess you are choosing to be here.

  436. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

    “Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 6:57 pm | Permalink
    Weren’t the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom here to begin with?

    Sigh. . .ah, yes, the infinite regress argument.

    Let’s cut to the chase: What caused God?”

    God is.

  437. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:00 pm | Permalink
    “I thought we were talking about your needs J R.”

    No let’s talk about everyone’s needs.

    You DID imply that “God” provided for all of man’s needs did you not?”

    Yes I did. And he works through man to provide those needs. What part are you playing?

  438. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    “God is”

    His starving millions will be glad to hear that.

    They’ll still starve.

  439. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

    God is.

    You’re certainly free to believe that. But you might as well say “the universe is.” You’re on firmer ground, scientifically.

    Or you can simply regard it as a matter of faith.

    I’d go with that.

  440. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    “Hey Doug – you sound a little testy here.
    Everybody has common knowledge of the physical makeup of the world, and is not limited to your state alone. I guess you are choosing to be here.”

    Dealing with the willfully ignorant is frustrating. Why is it that I even had to bother educating (presumably) adults about the speed of light, the periodic table and how water is formed? This is grade school stuff. I can only imagine that young earth creationists are retarded or they experienced some mental trauma that made them forget basic information.

  441. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    MANY o f the young eaqrth theory people are also the kind of folks who think the moon landing happened in a hollywood studio, qand a few out there still believe the eaarth is flat…

  442. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

    You’re right Chas, they are the same people who will look at all the evidence of the Holocaust and make outlandish excuses for why it didn’t happen. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that the tattoos the Jews had would be claimed to be part of some hip trend. Young Earthers are essentially Holocaust deniers.

  443. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    Some who believe in the young eqarth theory believe that public schools are government schools… talk radio moguls like neil boortz promote that kind of thinking… Therefore, they believe a young earth theory so they can prove to themselves that the government schools are out to get them…

  444. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

    Doug I have met some who are holocaust deniers… but not really that many… they ARE however, anti education, and represent a throw back to 19th century anti-intellectualism

  445. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    Gee, I didn’t know I had elected to take a class from you in the past and “be educated” by you Professor.

    Where is my syllabus?

  446. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

    Young Earthers are essentially Holocaust deniers.

    Don’t know if I’d go that far, but they do employ similar types of “reasoning.” Michael Shermer did an excellent job of analyzing both in his book Why People Believe Weird Things .

  447. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    I have encountered some young eqarth theorists who teach young teen age boys that if they let their hair grow long, they will lose their male genitals… and if the young girls wear pants and jeans, they will GROW male genitals! I can give a name, but I would rather not…

  448. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Now that’s a stretch between the Holocaust deniers and the “young earth creationists “. Man I can’t put the two together.

    Public schools are government schools because you pay taxes and have to send you kids to them.

    Big Brother.

  449. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Many of the far right in religion treat their Bibles like some sort of Talisman; or a means for medical cures; or a good luck charm… For some, carrying their Bibles with them everywhere they go, is referred to as taking the Sword of Truth with them…

  450. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    Does the Wichita City Council administer the public schools in Wichita?

  451. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    Last I heard, parents can send kids to public schools, or private schools, or home school them in Kansas.

  452. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    Actually Chas, you take it with you in your heart.

    And it is the Sword of the Lord. You should know that Reverend.

  453. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    AmUSA — There are numerous groups in existence who are holocaust deniers, AND they believe in the young earth theory.

    ALSO, unless I missed it earlier, you did not respond to my statement regarding TWO Creation stories in Genesis.

  454. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    But if you can’t afford private schools or choose to home school where do the kids go?

    Do you pay taxes Chas? If you do you pay for public schooling.

  455. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:31 pm | Permalink

    Does the City Council, or the County Commission administer the public schools in Wichita??

  456. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:28 pm | Permalink
    AmUSA — There are numerous groups in existence who are holocaust deniers, AND they believe in the young earth theory.”

    I am not one of them. The Holocaust was a tremendous injustice and a tragedy.

    Christians, Poles and many others were killed as well.

    I belive in the young earth theory from a biblical viewpoint.

  457. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    IMHO, AmUSA, there is no Biblical evidence for a young earth theory! And I have not seen any presented here

  458. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:31 pm | Permalink
    Does the City Council, or the County Commission administer the public schools in Wichita??”

    It doesn’t matter Chas, taxpayers pay for it.

  459. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    So, does the City Council, or County Commission administer the Wichita Public Schools?

  460. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

    Taxpayers also elect the School Board.

  461. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    The School Board is NOT the government. Perhaps someone should tell that to Neil Boortz??

  462. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink
    IMHO, AmUSA, there is no Biblical evidence for a young earth theory! And I have not seen any presented here”

    The majority of the orthodox christian believers and theologians (belief in the inherent Word of God)believe in a young earth “THEORY”.

  463. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    Actually, it is a MINORITY who believe in such a thing that is so far off from reality.

  464. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

    And I have never heard of an inherent Word of God either… Inerrant, or infallible I have heard of… I dont believe that either… That is the same as literalism…

  465. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    “Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Permalink
    The School Board is NOT the government. Perhaps someone should tell that to Neil Boortz??”

    Chas, Chas, Chas.

    Who pays the school board?

    Who pays the teachers?

    Who pays for the buildings and energy costs?

    Who pays for the administrators, etc., etc., etc?

    Taxpayers!

  466. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    OK, my error. I mispelled. Inerrant. Without fallicy or error.

  467. Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    i have still seen nothing here that would point to a young earth hypothesis… let alone fact. You just havent been able to do it… Because, quite frankly, it cant be done!

  468. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    40% of the scientists do.

  469. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Does God exist in a box?

  470. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

    “The majority of the orthodox christian believers and theologians (belief in the inherent Word of God)believe in a young earth “THEORY”.”

    Despite scientific evidence to the contrary.

    Question, for young earthers; how can you deny the overwhelming mass of scientific data that indicates that the Earth is far, far, far older than 7,000 years?

    The scientific evidence may be off by a few years, but certainly not BILLIONS of years.

  471. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

    “40% of the scientists do.”

    Do what? Support a Young Earth theory?

  472. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

    Yes.

  473. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

    WSClark,

    http://www.allaboutcreation.org/evidence-for-creation-faq.htm

    Are there many scientists who accept evidence for creation?

    “Creation” is a bit of an equivocal term. It can by used to mean the creation of the universe by God in a very general sense, or it can used to denote the specific belief held by biblical young-earth Creationists that God created the universe over a period of just six 24-hour days about 6,000 years ago. Depending upon which meaning of the term you have in mind, the answer to the above question varies.

    If you mean “creation” in the general sense of the term, a recent survey of American scientists found that about 40% believe in a personal God.1 Belief in God usually accompanies belief in creation. Thus, in the absence of a specific study on how many scientists believe in creation, it is safe to say that about 40% of American scientists believe in some form of creation, whether it be theistic evolution, progressive creation, the gap theory, or young-earth creationism.

    If you mean “creation” in the biblical young-earth Creationist sense of the term, hundreds of scientists openly profess to believe in a recent creation. The Creation Research Society alone claims over 700 Ph.D. scientists.

    In 2001, Dr. John F. Ashton, a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, published a compilation of 50 essays written by 50 Ph.D. scientists who profess faith in young-earth creationism based upon evidence for creation. Dr. Ashton’s In Six Days is available in book stores. In 2002, Dr. Ashton published a sequel entitled On the Seventh Day in which he presented 42 more essays written by 42 more Ph.D. scientists who present the evidence for creation.

  474. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    I’m sorry AmUSA your percentages are just wrong! There is NO biblical evidence for what you claim. NONE! And you havent presented any here either! Yet you cling to it like it was cling wrap on a ham sandwich!

  475. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

    I’ll have to go along with the fact God provided all for man. Where J R and others seem to lose that fact is they think God should give them everything on a platter. Everything is here: air; water; bio-mass; companionship. It is up to each individual to take the responsibility to work for it, replenish it and use it in ways that don’t destroy it for others. Kinda like the Liberal philosophy:-)

  476. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    You got that right, J M Walker… Right out of the George Burns movie, “Oh God!”

  477. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

    AmerUSA… WHERE is your biblical evidence?? And I dont mean Bishop Ussher, who has been debunked many times in the past almost 400 years.

  478. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    In 2001, Dr. John F. Ashton, a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, published a compilation of 50 essays written by 50 Ph.D. scientists who profess faith in young-earth creationism based upon evidence for creation.

    Currently, 868 scientists named Steve have signed a statement that says:

    Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to “intelligent design,” to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation’s public schools.

    NCSE’s “Project Steve” is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of “scientists who doubt evolution” or “scientists who dissent from Darwinism.”

    Project Steve mocks this practice with a bit of humor, and because “Steves” are only about 1% of scientists, it incidentally makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution.

    http://www.natcenscied.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp

  479. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    BTW, you have not answered my challenge about the ancient Sanskrit writings that are chronicled back to at LEAST 10,000 years!

    Now, if you want to argue for the beginnings of the Hebrew civilization being approximately 6 – 10,000 years, I dont have a huge problem with that… But Creation?? NO WAY!!

  480. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

    See, what I think is that you are getting your anthropology all mixed up with your fossil evidence, and scientific data, and the speed of light, and everything else!

    See, the speed of Light for the stars seen by Jesus in Palestine, would have ALSO taken millions of years to reach the earth!

  481. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Young earth? What, because the bible says the universe was made in seven days? And the ancient biblical day was what . . . 24 hours? More like a few billion years. I keep saying, the bible was written so the people of that time could understand it.

    Yep, I can see it now: ” Hey, people! The ground your standing on is 4.3798234 billion yeras old. See that spot of light out there in the night sky? That’s a sun just like ours, but 17 light years distant. What’s a light year, you ask? Thanks for asking. It’s how far a photon travels in a year. O, What’s a photon? Well, when energy is released, it is done so in the form of heat, which ejects photons, which travel at 299,792,458 m/s. What’s m/s? O, Never mind; the earth was created in seven days.”

  482. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

    JM Walker,

    About the only thing harder to provide a good argument for than Young Earth Creation is a quasi Evolution based view on Christianity.

  483. Apophis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

    Where is your evidance of a “creation” story AM USA?

    I’ll be waiting for that “evidance” until the end of time.

  484. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    There are not 2 different Creation stories in the Bible.

    There are 2 summaries of the same creation story in the Bible.

  485. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

    God could easily have created light already traveled as well.

  486. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

    AmUSA —

    BTW, you have not answered my challenge about the ancient Sanskrit writings that are chronicled back to at LEAST 10,000 years!

  487. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    “Belief in God usually accompanies belief in creation.”

    Not true – there are millions of people that believe in God and do not believe in creationism.

    “Thus, in the absence of a specific study on how many scientists believe in creation, it is safe to say that about 40% of American scientists believe in some form of creation, whether it be theistic evolution, progressive creation, the gap theory, or young-earth creationism.”

    That has to be one of the greatest leaps of logic in history.

    I have yet to hear of one respected scientist that feels that the Earth is only 10,000-6,000 years old.

  488. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:40 pm | Permalink

    And which one of the TWO creation myths do you want to use for some kind of proof??

  489. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:42 pm | Permalink

    “God could easily have created light already traveled as well.”

    Why would He?

  490. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Read this from Ken Ham:

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1866.asp

    A young Earth—it’s not the issue!By Ken Ham

    First published in:
    January 1998 AiG-USA Newsletter

    Time and time again I have found that in both Christian and secular worlds, those of us who are involved in the creation movement are characterized as ‘young Earthers.’ The supposed battle-line is thus drawn between the ‘old Earthers’ (this group consists of anti-God evolutionists as well as many ‘conservative’ Christians) who appeal to what they call ‘science,’ versus the ‘young Earthers,’ who are said to be ignoring the overwhelming supposed ‘scientific’ evidence for an old Earth.

    I want to make it VERY clear that we don’t want to be known primarily as ‘young-Earth creationists.’ AiG’s main thrust is NOT ‘young Earth’ as such; our emphasis is on Biblical authority. Believing in a relatively ‘young Earth’ (i.e., only a few thousands of years old, which we accept) is a consequence of accepting the authority of the Word of God as an infallible revelation from our omniscient Creator.

    Recently, one of our associates sat down with a highly respected world-class Hebrew scholar and asked him this question: ‘If you started with the Bible alone, without considering any outside influences whatsoever, could you ever come up with millions or billions of years of history for the Earth and universe?’ The answer from this scholar? ‘Absolutely not!’

    Let’s be honest. Take out your Bible and look through it. You can’t find any hint at all for millions or billions of years.

    For those of you who have kept up with our lectures and our articles in Answers magazine, you will have heard or read quotes from many well-known and respected Christian leaders admitting that if you take Genesis in a straight-forward way, it clearly teaches six ordinary days of Creation. However, the reason they don’t believe God created in six literal days is because they are convinced from so-called ‘science’ that the world is billions of years old. In other words, they are admitting that they start outside the Bible to (re)interpret the Words of Scripture.

    When someone says to me, ‘Oh, so you’re one of those fundamentalist, young-Earth creationists,’ I reply, ‘Actually, I’m a revelationist, no-death-before-Adam redemptionist!’ (which means I’m a young-Earth creationist!).

    Here’s what I mean by this: I understand that the Bible is a revelation from our infinite Creator, and it is self-authenticating and self-attesting. I must interpret Scripture with Scripture, not impose ideas from the outside! When I take the plain words of the Bible, it is obvious there was no death, bloodshed, disease or suffering of humans or animals before sin. God instituted death and bloodshed because of sin—this is foundational to the Gospel. Therefore, one cannot allow a fossil record of millions of years of death, bloodshed, disease and suffering before sin (which is why the fossil record makes much more sense as the graveyard of the flood of Noah’s day).

    Also, the word for ‘day’ in the context of Genesis can only mean an ordinary day for each of the six days of Creation [see Q&A Genesis: Days of Creation for more information].

    Thus, as a ‘revelationist,’ I let God’s Word speak to me, with the words having meaning according to the context of the language they were written in. Once I accept the plain words of Scripture in context, the fact of ordinary days, no death before sin, the Bible’s genealogies, etc., all make it clear that I cannot accept millions or billions of years of history. Therefore, I would conclude there must be something wrong with man’s ideas about the age of the universe.

    And the fact is, every single dating method (outside of Scripture) is based on fallible assumptions. There are literally hundreds of dating tools. However, whatever dating method one uses, assumptions must be made about the past. Not one dating method man devises is absolute! Even though 90% of all dating methods give dates far younger than evolutionists require, none of these can be used in an absolute sense either. [See Q&A: Radiometric dating and Q&A: Young age evidence for more information.]

    Question: Why would any Christian want to take man’s fallible dating methods and use them to impose an idea on the infallible Word of God? Christians who accept billions of years are in essence saying that man’s word is infallible, but God’s Word is fallible!

    This is the crux of the issue. When Christians have agreed with the world that they can accept man’s fallible dating methods to interpret God’s Word, they have agreed with the world that the Bible can’t be trusted. They have essentially sent out the message that man, by himself, independent of revelation, can determine truth and impose this on God’s Word. Once this ‘door’ has been opened regarding Genesis, ultimately it can happen with the rest of the Bible.

    You see, if Christian leaders have told the next generation that one can accept the world’s teachings in geology, biology, astronomy, etc., and use these to (re)interpret God’s Word, then the door has been opened for this to happen in every area, including morality.

    Yes, one can be a conservative Christian and preach authoritatively from God’s Word from Genesis 12 onwards. But once you have told people to accept man’s dating methods, and thus should not take the first chapters of Genesis as they are written, you have effectively undermined the Bible’s authority! This attitude is destroying the church in America.

    So, the issue is not ‘young Earth’ versus ‘old Earth,’ but this: Can fallible, sinful man be in authority over the Word of God?

    A ‘young-Earth’ view admittedly receives the scoffing from a majority of the scientists. But Paul warned us in 1 Corinthians 8:2, ‘And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.’ Compared to what God knows, we know ‘next door to nothing!’ This is why we should be so careful to let God speak to us through His Word, and not try to impose our ideas on God’s Word.

    It’s also interesting to note that this verse is found in the same passage where Paul warns that ‘knowledge puffeth up.’ Academic pride is found throughout our culture. Therefore, many Christian leaders would rather believe the world’s fallible academics, than the simple clear words of the Bible.

    At Answers in Genesis, we believe this message needs to be proclaimed to the Church as a challenge to return to Biblical authority, and thus stand tall in the world for the accuracy of God’s Word. Ultimately, this is the only way we are going to reach the world with the truth of the Gospel message.

    Let’s start 1998 by putting more and more pressure on our Christian leaders to take a long, hard look at how they are approaching the question of the authority of the Bible! Please help us fulfill our mission statement: to bring about reformation in the Church!

  491. Apophis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

    nathan is just doing his “christian arm flailing” again

    No Proof

    Nothing but superstition

  492. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

    Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:38 pm | Permalink
    God could easily have created light already traveled as well.
    =======================
    I’ll give you that… BUT after that moment of creation, as in TODAY… that light you are looking at in the nite sky tonite, haas taken millions of years to get here!! So much for your young earth theory!!

  493. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I think it would be far simpler for you to tell us what parts of the Bible you do believe.

  494. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    Nathn, thqt is probably the lamest qargument you can spout on the young erth theory

  495. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    If you agree that God could have created light already traveled, then why would you then say it took millions of years to get here?

  496. Apophis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    Ken Ham……the guru of anti-science!

    What a JOKE!

  497. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    nATHN, WE HVE been doing good all day here without your rrognce and attcksd… we dont need to strqt thqt crqp now

  498. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    That is probably the lamest argument you could spout on opposing the young Earth theory.

  499. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    Why wouldn’t he?

  500. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    How is asking you what parts of the Bible you do believe an attack on you?

    It is not a complicated question.

  501. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

    Apophis,

    Have you added anything to this discussion besides petty antagonism?

  502. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

    The light WE see now, all these years beyond creation, even on your miniscule scale, as of tonite, haas taken millions of years to get here… see we knoW HOW FAR AWAY THOSE STARS ARE

  503. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

    yOUR SPEED OF LIGHT MIRACLE JUST WONT CUT IT nATHAN… YOU ARE LIVING IN A FANTQSY WORLD WITH THAT YOUNG EQRTH THEORY

  504. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

    I CAN T TYPE GOOD TONITE… FINGERS ARE NOT COOPERATING

  505. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    It is not my speed of light miracle. It is God’s creation.

    Your inability to understand or grasp simple logic is sad.

    You don’t have to agree with it, but you should at least be able to grasp it.

  506. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

    The “God” of the creationists must have created some pretty stupid people. How else can one explain the statement, “God could easily have created light already traveled as well.”

    As WS said, why? You don’t think God created all this so man can have something to do other than bicker about the age of the universe? Einstein said religion without science is foolish. There seems to be a lot of foolish people still out there.

    But in the grand scheme of things, do the creationists really think God is going to place any weight whatsoever on whether or not one believes in ID, or a 5000 year old earth? I would bet He places no weight on any of that, and will judge you on how you lived your life. To think otherwise is to place God in a rather petty position, don’t you think?

  507. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

    i will try to do better

  508. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Dis you read Ken Ham above?

  509. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

    SIMPLE LOGIC??? YOU TRY TO LECTURE ME ON SIMPLE LOGIC??? NATHAN, THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS 186,000 MILES PER SECOND… THERE ARE STARS OUT THERE MILLIONS OF LIGHT YEARS AWAY!!

    SIMPLE LOGIC SAYS IT TOOK MILLIONS OF YEARS TO GET HERE… THAT IS SIMPLE LOGIC… WHAT YOU ARE RAMBLING ABOUT IS SOME KIND OF NONSENSE RELIGIOUS BULL CRAP!!

    I am getting tired of every time I turn around in my career, another bath of brain damaged poeople come along with some new idiot idea about creation, or about how long man played with dinosaurs

  510. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

    God: Do you believe the earth is 5000 years old?

    Dead guy: Uh, no, I think it’s around 4.5 billion.

    God: Heathen: go to Hell!

    Dead guy: Darn!

    God: Do you believe in creationism?

    Dead girl: Uh, no, I believe in evolution.

    God: Heathen: Go to Hell!

    Dead girl: Darn!

  511. God
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

    I put the fossils in the rocks and made light that already travelled here to fool you into not believing in me so you would all go to hell because I love you.

  512. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

    I dont see Ken Ham above, sorry

  513. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    JM Walker,

    On one thing I agree. I don’t think your salvation is based on your belief in a young earth theory.

    If we are going to turn this into a question of “why” did God do this or “why” did God do that, there are plenty more things to wonder about than his creation methods.

    How does my statement about God creating light like that make me stupid?

    If you are unable to have a well reasoned discussion without name calling then why did you even try?

    I am not stupid. As I have said previously, typing back and forth on this blog doesn’t do justice to this argument.

    If you want to get together sometime and discuss this in a non-violent way, I am game.

  514. Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:48 pm | Permalink
    Chas,

    How is asking you what parts of the Bible you do believe an attack on you?

    It is not a complicated question.
    ====================================

    Because it is STUPID!!

  515. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

    God: Do you believe in creationism?

    Nathan: You bet!

    God: Good, You can enter and watch “An Inconvenient truth” 24/7!

    Nathan: Darn!

  516. ksagnostic
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:00 pm | Permalink

    “40% of the scientists do (believe in a young Earth Theory).”

    Followed by this.

    “Are there many scientists who accept evidence for creation?

    “‘Creation’ is a bit of an equivocal term. It can by used to mean the creation of the universe by God in a very general sense, or it can used to denote the specific belief held by biblical young-earth Creationists that God created the universe over a period of just six 24-hour days about 6,000 years ago. Depending upon which meaning of the term you have in mind, the answer to the above question varies.

    “If you mean ‘creation’ in the general sense of the term, a recent survey of American scientists found that about 40% believe in a personal God.1 Belief in God usually accompanies belief in creation. Thus, in the absence of a specific study on how many scientists believe in creation, it is safe to say that about 40% of American scientists believe in some form of creation, whether it be theistic evolution, progressive creation, the gap theory, or young-earth creationism.

    “If you mean ‘creation’ in the biblical young-earth Creationist sense of the term, hundreds of scientists openly profess to believe in a recent creation. The Creation Research Society alone claims over 700 Ph.D. scientists.”

    Uh huh. Your “supporting documentation” does not even come remotely close to supporting the 40% claim. In fact, the logic in the material quoted is laughable in the extreme (40% of scientists believe in a personal god, therefore they must believe in some sort of creation,one of which MAY be YEC and…and…well, we have 700 people with PH.D.’s after their name that believe in young earth creationism).

    But then, “American of the USA” (sounds like a Steven Colbert satirical nickname) takes Ken Ham seriously. Not even most creationists do that.

    Are you pulling our legs here?

  517. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:00 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, we have been doing fine here all day until you come along with your self-righteous attitude, and how nobody is right but YOU… See what happens when you do that?? Are you happy with yourself now??

  518. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    “If you want to get together sometime and discuss this in a non-violent way, I am game.”

    This is violence? Wow, what’s Marine training . . . death?

  519. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    “Why wouldn’t he?”

    Was creation some sort of parlor game that God played with Himself? Of course not.

    Why would God need tricks and illusions? He wouldn’t, of course.

    So to suggest that He made light already in motion is ridiculous.

    Why is it a problem for the “Young Earth” proponents to accept that the universe is at least 13.5 billion years old? That fact does not diminish God in any manner. That fact does not relegate God to a secondary status in any manner.

    It only means that the universe and therefore the Earth are at least 13.5 billion years old.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

  520. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I am not lecturing you on simple logic. I simply pointed out the fact that you can’t grasp a simple logical concept.

    Logic is not based on scientific facts. (Which in this case I am not disputing.) Logic is a system of reasoning or argumentation.

  521. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

    AMUSA — why dont you want to discuss the TWO Creation Stories in Genesis?? Is AmUSA even still here??

  522. ksagnostic
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    “God: Do you believe the earth is 5000 years old?

    “Dead guy: Uh, no, I think it’s around 4.5 billion.

    “God: Heathen: go to Hell!

    “Dead guy: Darn!

    “God: Do you believe in creationism?

    “Dead girl: Uh, no, I believe in evolution.

    “God: Heathen: Go to Hell!

    “Dead girl: Darn!”

    Dead guy and girl: Uhm, dude. Where’s hell? ’cause, you know, we don’t believe in that either.

    God: Darn!

  523. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    JM Walker,

    I introduced the “non-violent” statement because the liberals around here wet their pants and take it as a threat any time I invite them to lunch or dinner.

  524. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

    Then Nathan, you are certainly flunking out in logical argument…

    Speed of Light 186,000 miles per second

    Distnce of Stqrs: Millions of Light Years

    Time to travel to earth: Millions of years…

    HOW MUCH SIMPLER CAN YOU GET???

  525. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, do you DENY the distance to the stars, and galaxies in the universe???

  526. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    If you are going to question the “why” of why would God create something a particular way, then why not simply start with the ultimate question of all…

    Why would God create us at all?

    There are so many questions we could debate the “why” on.

    Choosing to focus on the “why” of creation as if it is the only thing that doesn’t make sense to us is absurd.

  527. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    No. I love space sciene. I have taken several classes on it both in High School and College.

  528. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    So where are these 10,000 year old Sanskrit documents stored Chas?

    How come Indian historians state that Sanskrit was never written down until about 3500 B.C.E.?

  529. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, do you deny the speed of light??

  530. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    And once again, there are not 2 creation stories in the Bible.

  531. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I do not deny the speed of light.

    Do you deny Jesus Christ as the one true God for ALL of man kind, that EVERYONE must have faith in Him to be saved?

  532. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

    Regular, based on some reading I have been doing in the past several weeks, I am afraid you are going to have to provide some pretty good EVIDENCE of that erroneous statement.

  533. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

    Ummmm Nathan, there ARE two creation stories in Genesis… back to back even!!

  534. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Stating scientific facts has nothing to do with the logic of my argument.

    The fact (no pun intended) that you don’t understand that only further proves your inability to understand simple logic.

  535. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

    “Why would God create us at all?”

    Boredom.

    “No. I love space sciene.”

    Then learn how to spell it.

    “Choosing to focus on the “why” of creation as if it is the only thing that doesn’t make sense to us is absurd.”

    Okay, where is the SCIENTIFIC evidence for creationism? Where is the PHYSICAL evidence? How do you discount all of the SCIENTIFIC and PHYSICAL evidence of evolution and the age of the Earth?

  536. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    There are not 2 creation stories in the Bible.

  537. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, I believe in leaving the question of Salvation up to God!

  538. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    “So where are these 10,000 year old Sanskrit documents stored Chas?”

    Go away, McCluer.

  539. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    How about just answering the question Chas?

    Where are these ancient Sanskrit documents stored?

  540. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    And this discussion is not about Jesus at this point in time, now is it?? WHY must you screw up a perfectly good day??

  541. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    Learn how to tell the difference between a typo and a spelling mistake.

  542. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    Like I said James, YOU need to provide the evidence of what you are saying.. This isnt YOUR blog tonite… or, maybe, ever again!!

  543. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    “There are not 2 creation stories in the Bible.”

    They are summaries? Why would God need to summarize?

    They are two different stories describing creation in two different orders.

  544. God
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    No one Knows the mysteries of the universe. Not you, not the smartest scientist, not the pope, not even me; as there are all those pesky other ones that I didn’t create. I must sleep now; come back and tell when that guy who made the artificial DNA genome gets it to boot up. As for black holes, they really are singularities, of no dimension, but of infinite mass. Don’t ask me how I did it. And remember, don’t diss God about his spelling. He’ll do awful things to you.

  545. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

    Go away WS Clark.

  546. ksagnostic
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

    “Chas,

    “And once again, there are not 2 creation stories in the Bible.”

    Actually, yes, there are. You simply interpret the contradictions away. For example, Gensis 1 indicates that God made man and woman on the sixth day. Genesis 2 indicates that God made man, then animals, then woman after the day he rested (the seventh day).

    Not that either story in Genesis has anything to do with reality, except in terms of how they reflected the beliefs of the people who relayed the stories.

  547. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

    “Learn how to tell the difference between a typo and a spelling mistake.”

    It’s hard to tell with you, Price, you spell AND type so poorly.

  548. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

    Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Forgetting carbon dating momentarily, there are MANY ancient Sanskrit writings, that are chronicled — that date back a minimum of 10,000 years”
    ————————————————-
    How about just answering the question Chas?

    Where are these many ancient Sanskrit documents stored?

  549. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

    “Go away WS Clark.”

    Make me, Price.

  550. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    You are not even a Christian. You have proven time and time again that you do little more than distort the Bible at every turn to attack it and Christianity.

    So now all of a sudden you claim to know that the Bible has 2 creation stories?

    LOL

    Once again, they are the same creation story told in two different places. The second one goes into more detail with Adam’s naming the animals and so forth.

    Basic reading comprehension reveals that. (But we wouldn’t want to question your ability to read again WS Clark, you will go off on your typical swearing tantrum…)

  551. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    OK Nathn, you say you dont deny the distance to the stars and galaxies… You say you dont deny the speed of light….

    Then, you believe in the exact opposite of what you say you believe!! LOL Tooo darn funny!!!

    See, you cant believe in all of those millions of light years of distance, and still hang on to 6,000 – 7,000 years of Creation!!

    That has nothing to do with LOGIC!!

    And yes, there ARE two Creation stories in Genesis… And they dont agree!! And you k now what?? It’s OK that they dont agree!! Cause they come from two ancient traditions!! And thats the way it should be!!

  552. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    And now we have the agnostic telling us what the Bible says…

    LOL

  553. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

    Adam’s naming the animals would be the THIRD creation story….

  554. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    When I introduce the variable of an omnipotent God, my argument makes perfect sense.

    Again, logic is a system of reasoning and argument.

    You still can’t seem to grasp that…

  555. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, in Genesis, Ch. 1… WHEN are the humans created??

  556. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    Omnipotence has nothing to do with it… That means God is all knowing…

  557. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    So now there are 3 creation stories?

    Are you just making this up as you go along or what?

  558. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    check that… it means all powerful

  559. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    And God is also Omnipresent, and Omniscient…

  560. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    No. I love space sciene. I have taken several classes on it both in High School and College.

    Okay. So examining the primodial background radiation, it was determined that the universe is about 13.5 billion years old. In fact, the data from COBE matched predictions to an amazing degree.

    Is this somehow an. . .issue?

  561. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Omnipotent means all powerfull.

    Omniscience means all knowing.

    Wow… the so called “Christian” minister doesn’t even know that!

  562. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, in Genesis Ch. 1… WHEN are the humans (male and female) created??

  563. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    I already said that Nathan READ please!!

  564. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    You are just itching at trying to insult me that you don’t even take the time to figure out what I said before you do insult me.

  565. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

    “You are not even a Christian.”

    What does that have to do with anything?

    “You have proven time and time again that you do little more than distort the Bible at every turn to attack it and Christianity.”

    How do I distort the Bible by quoting from it? I thought you fundies believed that every word in the Bible was literal truth.

    “Once again, they are the same creation story told in two different places.”

    No they are not – the order of creation is different in the two stories. If the Bible is the infallible word of God, then why are the stories not in the same order?

    “Basic reading comprehension reveals that”+

    Perhaps you should try to actually READ the Bible, Price.

  566. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

    So, Nathan, you are always ASKING the questions… now its time to answer some… very simple really… I am waiting…

  567. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:26 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Do you believe that Jesus resurrected Lazurus?

    Do you believe that Jesus turned water into wine?

  568. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:26 pm | Permalink

    Clark has not distorted the Bible at all today, Nathan. We have been having a rather good discussion, until you inject your self-righteous over-zealous stuff here…

    Now ANSWER my simple question!!

  569. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    No Nathan… YOUR turn to answer questions, and you might try to stay on point…

  570. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    When you actually quote the Bible and give a detailed description of how the so called “two creation stories” are in contradiction to one another then you will have a point.

  571. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:28 pm | Permalink

    As for Lazarus… NO Jesus did not resurrect Lazarus… He prayed for GOD to act… Then he called Lazarus out of the tomb… GOD raised Lazarus… just as he did Jesus.

  572. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

    So, Nathan, you arent going to answer my question, but everybody else is supposed to answer yours??? Mine isnt even a loded question!! LOL

  573. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    So Chas,

    I would be interested in learning more about these 10,000 year old Sanskrit documents you claim are 10,000 years old or older.

    I can only find references that they are around the 3,500 year old age category.

    Can you point me to your source of information Chas, so I might read up about this revolutionary find of 10,000 year old documents.

  574. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Is there anything in science which accounts for someone being dead and then coming back to life?

    Seems to fly in the face of all science.

    So why do you believe that God raised someone from the dead when there is no scientific explanation to back it up?

  575. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

    And……………

    http://www.deliriumsrealm.com/delirium/articleview.asp?Post=284

    “Two Accounts of Creation in Genesis”

    “It is a widely held belief in the scholarly community is that there are two creation stories in Genesis: the first creation story takes place in Genesis 1, while the second takes place in Genesis 2. The first creation account of man takes place on the sixth day and is as follows: “And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness. They shall rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the whole earth, and all the creeping things that creep on the earth.’ And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them and God said to them, ‘Be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it; and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all the living things that creep on earth.” (Genesis 1:26-28)”

    Bingo.

  576. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:32 pm | Permalink

    Like I told you… show us your evidence!! I have known about the ancient Sanskrit writings for well over 25 years… Where you been?? Oh, thats right, anthropology isnt one of your specialties… or did you just become an expert in that too??

  577. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Day 6.

  578. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    The SECOND Creation story is in Genesis 2 –

    God creates MAN OUTSIDE of the Garden… which was not even planted yet… God places the man in the Garden, BEFORE there is any living thing in it… BEFORE plants, and animals, and fishes, or anything else referred to in Days 1 – 5 of Genesis 1…

    BINGO!!

  579. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

    God is quite the trickster hey Nathan?

    Created light rays already in travel! Ha!

    There isn’t any God.

  580. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

    That’s right Day 6 !!

    And God created both male and female… together!!

  581. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    Quoting “deleriumsrealm” is not quoting the Bible.

    Are you so unable to form a thought of your own on the subject that you have to go to some website to do it for you?

    That didn’t prove anything.

  582. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

    I need to know your source Chas, so I may study up on these 10,000 year old Sanskrit documents.

    Documents that old would change the way we view the history of the world.

    Surely, you can direct me to where I can study up on these 10,000 year old documents you claim exist?

    Come on Chas, the world needs you to share your knowledge of this ancient civilization that was writing language 10,000 years ago.

  583. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    Did I miss getting my little stamp and bingo card? Who has been calling out ball numbers?

    Because I’m not playing Bingo.

  584. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    Try googling Sanskrit Texts + Tibetan Monks

  585. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    It’s like what I was saying earlier.

    What is easier to believe? That some VERY early on active “God” PURPOSELY obscured the evidence for “God’s” own existence?

    Or “God” never existed at all?

    I’ll go with Humanity is on it’s own and should act like it for the win.

  586. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Try to quote the Bible verses and as you do explain what point you are trying to prove.

    You havn’t done anything other than turn your orignal one sentence claim into two…

  587. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Now answer my question:

    Is there anything in science which accounts for someone being dead and then coming back to life?

    Seems to fly in the face of all science.

    So why do you believe that God raised someone from the dead when there is no scientific explanation to back it up?

  588. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

    “Are you so unable to form a thought of your own on the subject that you have to go to some website to do it for you?”

    It’s a bit faster than typing out Genesis i and Genesis II and analyzing the text.

    Considering that Biblical scholars have spent decades breaking down the Bible, it just seemed prudent to use existing analysis.

    But ignore it if you want – like you choose to ignore scientific documentation and physical evidence, etc.

    By the way, still wanting for a fundie to provide SCIENTIFIC and PHYSICAL evidence of creationism.

    If creationism is fact, shouldn’t there be EVIDENCE?

  589. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:41 pm | Permalink

    “Because I’m not playing Bingo.”

    Naw, you’ve been out of the game for a long, long time.

  590. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    The same evidence that Evolution uses is used by Young Earth creationists.

    We simply see things from a different viewpoint.

  591. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

    “The same evidence that Evolution uses is used by Young Earth creationists.”

    So Young Earth creationists use fossil evidence that indicates that dinosaurs roamed the Earth 165 million years ago and that somehow proves CREATIONISM?

    Show me THAT leap of logic.

  592. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17823931.600-oldest-known-chinese-script-discovered.html

    CHINESE writing began as individual symbols thousands of years before the characters were brought together to create a true written language. Symbols that resemble Chinese characters appear on tortoise shells in graves dating back to 6500 BC at a site called Jiahu in Henan Province.

    Written languages mean nada in the time line of man. I have no problem believing man is over 1 million years old, and God took him into His bosom at the garden of eden. Or, at the very least, religion started then.

  593. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

    Yeah Nathan,

    You think your “God” put a bunch of evidence that he does not exist all over the place.

    What? To test faith?

    Mine is tested.

    There is no “God” If there was he would be an absolute joke.

  594. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

    WS Clark,

    To figure out the age of those fossils the sceintists either date them by the geological column or by carbon dating/radiometric dating.

    Both are made on assumptions. When you start with the idea that Evolution happened you simply assume thre premise to build the foundation on.

    I wouldn’t say that Young Earth Creationist use that to support our theory, but we certainly don’t see it disproving it.

  595. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

    It’s written in the ancient Sanskrit texts known as the Vedas, that human civilizations have come and gone many times in the history of the Earth. After each time, the planet had to be repopulated and Cremo speculated that higher beings might have reseeded the planet with life forms. The Vedas also described ‘vimanas’– different types of spacecraft that could travel between planets, subtle dimensions, and into pure consciousness.

  596. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

    “So why do you believe that God raised someone from the dead when there is no scientific explanation to back it up?”

    Define death during that time. Prove Lazarus was dead in the first place. There are many instances of people “coming back from the dead”, because they weren’t dead at all, but in a coma of some kind. So who says there’s no scientific explanation.

  597. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:55 pm | Permalink

    Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:39 pm | Permalink
    Chas,

    Try to quote the Bible verses and as you do explain what point you are trying to prove.

    You havn’t done anything other than turn your orignal one sentence claim into two…
    =========================================

    Nathan are you DENSE??? I cited Genesis Ch. 2…. Are you too dense to READ IT??

    And as for Lazarus, you didnt ask me anything about scientific evidence… You asked me if I believed Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead… And I answered you.

    NOW, you change the subject to scientific evidence?? And you want to hang on to a 6,000 year old Creation time line??? YOU DONT WANT SCIENCE!! YOU WANT TO DEBUNK SCIENCE!!

    Because if you really studied space science, and came up with your stupid idea about God making light that was already here, you would never have passed that class!!

  598. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

    JM Walker,

    Hence the question:

    Do you believe God raised Lazarus from the dead.

    If you don’t believe Lasarus was dead… then that is whole different story.

    I have about 100 other supernatural things in the Bible I can ask you if you believe.

    So lets skip that and reduce it:

    Do you believe that God has performed any supernatural acts (miracles) which science can’t explain or duplicate?

    Water into wine… thousands of fish and bread from one… walking on water… restoring sight… curing disease….etc…etc…etc…

    The question of raising Lazarus from the dead wasn’t about that at all. It was about your belief of something outside of science which is only explained by God’s power.

  599. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

    So Nathan, do you deny car on dating/radiometric dating??

  600. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

    car on = carbon

  601. Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

    “To figure out the age of those fossils the sceintists either date them by the geological column or by carbon dating/radiometric dating.”

    So scientists (notice the correct spelling) were off by 164,990,000 years?

    Damn, talk about a screw up.

    All the scientists were wrong?

    Not likely.

  602. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    Do you believe that God has performed any supernatural acts (miracles) which science can’t explain or duplicate?

    Water into wine… thousands of fish and bread from one… walking on water… restoring sight… curing disease….etc…etc…etc…

    PROVE it.

  603. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

    “Water into wine… thousands of fish and bread from one… walking on water… restoring sight… curing disease….etc…etc…etc…” [Nathan]

    WHY cant you stay on topic??? You get SO Bi-Polar!!

  604. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:00 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I can find no evidence of your claim that Sanscrit is a 10,000 year old written language.

    Here’s ’some’ of the documents I viewed (actually many more – they all say basically the same)

    The Anthropology of Wisdom Literature
    By Wanda Ostrowska Kaufmann

    ISBN:0897894723

    Sumerian has been the subject of controversial proposals purportedly identifying it as genetically related with almost every known agglutinative language. As the most ancient known language, it has a peculiar prestige, and such proposals sometimes have a nationalistic background and generally enjoy little popularity in the linguistic community because of their inverifiability. Sumerian (???????? EME.GIR15 “native tongue”) was the language of ancient Sumer, spoken in Southern Mesopotamia since at least the 4th millennium BC. Wikipedia

    wiki/Sumerian_language

    Egyptian is an Afro-Asiatic language most closely related to Berber, Semitic, and Beja.[1] The language survived until the 5th century AD in the form of Demotic and until the late 17th century AD in the form of Coptic. Written records of the Egyptian language have been dated from about 3200 BC, making it one of the oldest recorded languages known.

    wiki/Egyptian_language

    Dating back to as early as 1500 BCE,[1] Vedic Sanskrit is the earliest attested Indo-Iranian language, and one of the earliest attested members of the Indo-European language family.
    wiki/Sanskrit

  605. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    James, the Vedas go back at least 10,000 years… It is a very widely known fact… I am sorry you cant seem to find it… perhaps if you knew what you were looking for it would help??

  606. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    In case you are not paying attention, I am having a discussion with several other people.

    If I am not addressing you at the start of my post, you may feel free to ignore it and not get confused.

    Let me get you back on track to where we left off:

    Is there anything in science which accounts for someone being dead and then coming back to life?

    Seems to fly in the face of all science.

    So why do you believe that God raised someone from the dead when there is no scientific explanation to back it up?

  607. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    Where are the fishes and the loaves for the poor and starving now there Nathan?

    Part a pond at least!

    It’s all bunk. And it is bunk designed to keep people believing that their station in life is either their fault or divinely assigned.

    It is well past time humanity evoloved beyond it.

  608. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

    #
    Chas.
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

    It’s written in the ancient Sanskrit texts known as the Vedas, that human civilizations have come and gone many times in the history of the Earth. After each time, the planet had to be repopulated and Cremo speculated that higher beings might have reseeded the planet with life forms. The Vedas also described ‘vimanas’– different types of spacecraft that could travel between planets, subtle dimensions, and into pure consciousness.
    ——————————————-

    Never mind Chas, I just read your statement.

    You are no doubt one of the Atlantis believers (references from the Sanskrit claiming some sort of lost continent)

    That explains a lot.

    :roll:

  609. ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:05 pm | Permalink

    Chas are you a scientologist?
    “Vedas also described ‘vimanas’– different types of spacecraft that could travel between planets, subtle dimensions, and into pure consciousness.”

  610. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    The key word you are missing is that they are “arguably” the oldest and “arguably” go back that far.

    There is no such difinitive proof of such.

  611. Steven Davis
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    “Did you see my post above on carbon dating?”

    No. But I am willing to bet all my available money that it is completely delusional.

  612. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

    Anthropology is based totally upon assumptions and is not verifiable by testing, so it has no factual basis. It is a theory. Not Fact. You would have to be there.

    To assume that man has existed for millions of years therefore can not be prooven. It is a theory and is not based on fact. There is no historical evidence for it.

    The earliest recorded history that has been discovered so far only goes back for several thousands of years.

  613. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

    ANTI, I believe you hit a bullseye and it explains a lot about Chas.

  614. ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

    The fake Rev., I knew that he wasn’t “Clergy”.

  615. ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    Creating his own reality- perfect scientology

  616. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    The Rig Veda: The Book of Mantra
    The Rig Veda is a collection of inspired songs or hymns and is a main source of information on the Rig Vedic civilization. It is the oldest book in any Indo-European language and contains the earliest form of all Sanskrit mantras that date back to 1500 B.C. – 1000 B.C. Some scholars date the Rig Veda as early as 12000 BC – 4000 B.C. The Rig-Vedic ‘samhita’ or collection of mantras consists of 1,017 hymns or ‘suktas’, covering about 10,600 stanzas, divided into eight ‘astakas’ each having eight ‘adhayayas’ or chapters, which are sub-divided into various groups. The hymns are the work of many authors or seers called ‘rishis’.

    http://hinduism.about.com/cs/vedasvedanta/a/aa120103a_2.htm

  617. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    Well

    I’ll keep a watch.

    If “God” weighs in here, I have some really tough questions.

  618. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    Yeah Chas, right out of the Ron L. Hubbard handbook.

    You do know that Hubbard claims the Vedic language to be upwards of 100,000 years old?

    Yeah…mmm…okay.

    But thanks for the information, I think I’m up to date on ancient languages for the night. :D

  619. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, I answered your question about Jesus and Lazarus… that you asked ME… not somebody else!! THEN you come back with this scientific crap!! Why cant you stay on point here?? You are jumping all over the place!! And you talk to me about LOGIC??? You cant even stay on topic!! I dont think I want to hear anything more about your delusional belief in logic!! LOL

  620. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    It seems that the evolution argument is very similar to the AGW one. Historical evidence as fact does not exist to prove them and they are only theories.

  621. ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    Closet door OPEN chas

  622. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:22 pm | Permalink

    I called you on the Creation stories… And now you are just pi$$ed…. So, I am going to stop for now….
    ============================

    Good night; Good luck; and
    God bless; whatever you conceive God to be!!

    We had a nice thread while it lasted!!

    Blessings All!!

  623. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

    And now we go back to Chas refusing to answer a question…

    Chas,

    Why do you even bother to get into a religous discussion if you are going to refuse to answer questions?

    Is this how you treat people in your church when they ask you questions?

  624. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    “The earliest recorded history that has been discovered so far only goes back for several thousands of years.”

    Duh? Primitive man could barely talk, nonetheless write. Your statement proves nothing.

    But just out of curiosity, how do you explain dinosaurs – did scientists miss the age of same by 164,990,000 years?

  625. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:26 pm | Permalink

    “And now we go back to Chas refusing to answer a question…”

    How many questions have YOU answered, Price?

    Explain dinosaurs to me – did everyone, all those scientists – miss the dating by THAT much?

  626. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    Good night blasphemer (Chas)

    May the One true God, Jesus Christ, who you must have salvation in to be saved, bless you.

    You are no Christian.

  627. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    Regular, I havent quoted ANYthing from L. Ron Hubbard (guess his mom was old mother hubbard at some point, eh?? LOL) He was a Sci Fi writer at his best… terrible theologian!!

  628. ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

    Chas, DC-9 or DC-10?

  629. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

    Nathan IS a dinosaur there WS.

    He just doesn’t know it yet.

  630. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    WSCLark,

    Again – Anthropology is based totally upon assumptions and is not verifiable by testing, so it has no factual basis. It is a theory. Not Fact. You would have to be there. They have not proven anything!

  631. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

    “They have not proven anything!”

    So answer, did the scientists (all of them) miss the dating by 164,990,000 years?

    Yes or no, no equivocating, just yes or no.

  632. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

    There have been cases that I have heard about that in the same strata of earth, they located fossil remains of dinosaur, man and plant thought to be of different time periods.

    So much for man’s theories.

  633. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

    “You are no Christian.”

    WITH ALL OF YOUR JUDGMENT, TSK TSK…

    FOR THE JUDGMENT YOU GIVE, IS THE JUDGMENT YOU WILL RECEIVE…

    NATHAN IS NO CHRISTIAN!!

  634. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

    The starving millions “American of the USA”

    How does “God” meet their needs?

  635. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    Chs,

    In case you are wondering… I am not afraid of getting the judgement I give.

    LOL

    I actually profess my faith in Christ, I don’t hide from it like you do.

  636. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    What did they prove WS?

    Where are the facts?

    It is only theory!

  637. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    ANTI
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:29 pm | Permalink
    Chas, DC-9 or DC-10?
    ========================

    That’s just plain stupid!! Nobody has said anything about ANY airplanes!! DUMBA$$!!

  638. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:38 pm | Permalink

    NATHAN, WHAST QUESTION DO YOU THINK I MISSED THIS TIME??

  639. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:38 pm | Permalink

    “There have been cases that I have heard about that in the same strata of earth, they located fossil remains of dinosaur, man and plant thought to be of different time periods.”

    Link please?

  640. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    “There have been cases that I have heard about that in the same strata of earth, they located fossil remains of dinosaur, man and plant thought to be of different time periods.”

    There has never been one case of human remains being on the same strata as extinct dinosaurs. Never, not once.

  641. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    “J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:36 pm | Permalink
    The starving millions “American of the USA”

    How does “God” meet their needs?”

    By working through his people and his creation to give to those in need.

    Have you done your part J R?

  642. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:41 pm | Permalink

    nathan, you stupid dolt!! where have you seen me hide from anything?? WE DO NOT AGREE ON ALMOST ANYTHING THEOLOGICAL!! YOU REFUSE TO DEAL WITH BIBLICAL REALITIES!! YOU IGNORE BASIC SCIENCE!! YOU LAUGH IN THE FACE OF SCIENTIFIC FACTS, AND THE LAWS OF PHYSICS… AND THEN YOU ACCUSE ME OF HIDING???

  643. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

    AmUSA — the earth isnt old enough to have that many problems!! LOL

  644. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

    Besides, AmUSA, one isnt supposed to let the left hand know what the right hand is doing… and especially letting others know what one does for charitable benefits…

    Let each do whatever they can… NEVER ask another what they have done for charity!! Not only does it fly in the face of Jesus’ teachings, its just plain Tacky!! LOL

  645. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

    Besides, Iknow of MANY non believers who do a whole LOT for charities all over the world!!

  646. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

    “What did they prove WS?”

    You didn’t answer the question – did scientists – all of them – miss the dating on dinosaur remains by 164,990,000 years.

    Or, if you’re interested 99.9939%.

  647. J R
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

    I sure do “American of the USA”

    I am everyday here trying to get the 90% Christian majority in this country to live up to their rhetoric.

    I hope you will join me sometime on a homeless thread or a thread about Darfur or a thread about settling disagreements short of killing people.

    I don’t believe in the divinity of your Christ. But I DO practice his message.

    And maybe the message is more important than the man.

  648. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    Doug I do believe you are absolutely right!!

  649. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    According to the National Academy of Sciences,

    Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.[1]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

  650. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    I refuse to deal with Biblical realities?

    I am the only one who believes what the Bible says. You are the one who picks and chooses what verses to believe and not believe, not me.

    I believe in scientific facts as well. I simply believe that an omnipotent God is above them.

    If you ever answered my questions which I asked you 3 times we could figure out if you do too.

  651. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    “I believe in scientific facts as well.”

    So when are you going to answer the question about Dino?

  652. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:52 pm | Permalink

    I already answered your question WS Clark. You simply asked it a different way.

    Please refer to my previous answer.

  653. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

    So Nathan, do you believe Jesus is a chicken?
    “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!”

    Or do you pick and choose which to believe?

  654. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:55 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    How does asking what someone has done for Charity fly in the face of Jesus teacing?

  655. Political_mama
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

    “outlander
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 3:58 pm | Permalink
    As demonstrated here, you can find plenty of reasons to disbelieve God and the Bible. Any reason will work. And there are many, many atheist web sites that will provide you the ammo to allow you to make arguments against God and scripture, and feel smart.

    But they will never fill the void. They can’t bring you the peace, freedom, and power that you can have with a relationship with the living God. He wants this relationship and is willing to meet you more than halfway. And He is oh so real.

    Truth. Out.”

    actually Outlander, I feel more peace without religion than I ever felt with it. I always felt like I was sinning, doing something wrong before God, that my heart wasn’t pure enough. I prayed and prayed for strength to be a good person. Of course I was a teen at the time, and being good was so hard to do then. I’m far better off now without the guilt. and that is the truth.

  656. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:58 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    I don’t believe Jesus is a chicken, I do believe in metaphors though.

  657. Posted April 3, 2008 at 10:58 pm | Permalink

    “When you start with the idea that Evolution happened you simply assume thre premise to build the foundation on.”

    “You simply asked it a different way.”

    You still didn’t answer, Price. You have yet to make a definitive statement in answer to the question.

    Try a single word, simple answer – were all those scientists wrong when they established the time of the dinosaurs as being 165 million years ago.

    Yes or no…………………

  658. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    “I don’t believe Jesus is a chicken, I do believe in metaphors though.”

    I figured you’d say that so you would take the metaphor of Jesus and the fig tree to mean we should kill women who have reached menopause since they can no longer “bear fruit”? Or do you pick and choose which metaphors to follow as well?

    Don’t worry, I have loads of them and I know you aren’t very well versed in the Bible so it’s likely you haven’t heard of many of them.

  659. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

    Actually, I’d be more interested about the light thing. Photons are normaily in motion. Is God some sort of practical joker, messing with the normal physical properties of light to create a false impression?

    That’s rather like arguing that frogs are transformed from rocks, because God can do it if he wants.

  660. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, READ Gen. 2:4-24 with a special emphasis on Vs.. 4 – 8

    There you will find the SECOND Creation story in Genesis… It is NOT aa retelling of the first… In fact, it is quite different!!

    MAN is created somewhere, outside the Gardden, for the Garden had not yet been planted, and nothing was growing anywhere, because God had not made it rain… just a mist watered the whole face of the ground… MAN was not created with WOMAN… as in Genesis 1…. WOMAN is made FROM Man…

    MAN is not created at the END of creation, but at the very BEGINNING — in the day that the LORD GOD MADE THE EARTH AND THE HEAVENS…

    There is your contradiction… TWO different stories of Creation… Same Book… Different sources… And yet, thats just FINE, because it tells us there was more than one idea of how we all came to be!! In fact, its a WONDERFUL story!!

  661. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:06 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    You will have to quote me the verse you think Jesus is telling us to kill women who have reached menopause.

    Don’t worry, I have heard most of the petty attacks people like you have on the Bible.

  662. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

    Doug, to make matters more intresting, the hen brooding over her chicks, presents a “feminine” side of God that often goes unnoticed… especially by those denominations who think women shouldnt be ordained pastors..

  663. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

    I know you don’t know dick about the Bible Nathan, so I can believe you never heard of the metaphor of Jesus and the fig tree. How about getting an education about your religion. Don’t they have Bible studies at the cult you attend?

  664. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

    Rage,

    Do you believe in a god at all?

  665. Nathan
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

    Doug,

    I know about that verse. I am wondering about this verse telling us to kill women. Where is that one at?

  666. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:11 pm | Permalink

    Facts may be used to form a theory:

    An apple exists.

    Gravity exists.

    If I drop an apple from 12 feet up onto concrete I theorize that it will smash.

    I haven’t proven anything until I test the theory and then it becomes fact.

    Rocket scientists did basically the same in going to the moon.

    They didn’t prove it could be done before they actually did it, then it became fact.

  667. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    Nathan, you mentioned metaphor so therefore I would assume you understand the concept of metaphor. Try to apply it if you are capable of thinking for yourself.

  668. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    “Try a single word, simple answer – were all those scientists wrong when they established the time of the dinosaurs as being 165 million years ago.”

    Why can’t Price or Am USA answer this question – straight up – no equivocation – just yes or no?

  669. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:15 pm | Permalink

    Rage,

    I manipulate photons all the time each time I render a 3D object. I can increase, decrease or build a photon map.

    I can make a rock into a frog. :)

  670. Regular
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

    …in those days, there were giants…Genesis

  671. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

    “Facts may be used to form a theory:”

    Dinosaurs existed.

    We have found their fossil remains.

    Various dating methods have shown them to be at least 165 million years old.

    Where is the “theory?”

    Either you believe the scientific evidence or you believe that the scientists were wrong.

    Which is it?

    Just yes or no – which is it?

  672. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:17 pm | Permalink

    What they established was a theory.

    Nothing more.

    They didn’t proove anything.

    That’s it.

    They don’t really know, if you will allow, that they can get to the moon!

  673. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:18 pm | Permalink

    So, What about that SECOND Creation story, Nathan… YOU KNOW, THE ONE YOU SAY DOESNT EXIST??

    You going to deal with that, or mess around with metaphors all nite??

  674. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:20 pm | Permalink

    “in those days, there were giants…Genesis”

    I can’t sing, I can’t dance. I’m just standing here selling everything…Genesis

  675. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    AMUSA you got one teeny tiny problem there… They GOT to the moon… so they know it can be done… It is FACT now!!

    Did you sleep through that?? or what??

  676. Rage
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:23 pm | Permalink

    Do you believe in a god at all?

    How is that relevant, other than convenient misdirection?

  677. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Permalink

    The theory that they are putting forth is that the dinosaurs existed 165 million years ago.

    Were they there to test it?

    Again – Anthropology, Carbon dating and Radio dating are all based totally upon assumptions and are not verifiable by testing, so it has no factual basis. It is a theory. Not Fact. You would have to be there. They have not proven anything!

  678. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Permalink

    Rage — dont you get it?? It’s ALL misdirection!! It’s like a Fetish!!

  679. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

    “The theory that they are putting forth is that the dinosaurs existed 165 million years ago.”

    Damn, simple question, simple answer.

    Were the scientists wrong or were they right?

    Yes or no?

  680. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

    Chas,

    Did you read my post? Please read again!

  681. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    American,
    Isochron dating. ‘Nuff said.

  682. American, of the USA
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    Did dinosuars exist before today? Yes!

    Do they exist today? Yes!

    Have the scientists proven that dinosaurs existed 165 million years ago? No!

  683. Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    Damn, can ANYONE answer this question – scientists have dated the dinosaur remains as being at least 165 million years old.

    Were they wrong in their conclusions – yes or no?

    Jeez……………………..

  684. J M Walker
    Posted April 3, 2008 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

    Context . . . context. Beliefs in God are designed by the religion to which one belongs. Some use the bible’