Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141445 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:11
Fozzi  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
news:Rnd0f.1484$eW1.969 [at] okepread04...
> It couldn't be selfsustaining.
>
> The Second Law of Thermodynamics demands that everything goes down from
> order to disorder.
>

True

> Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
> were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
> that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect and
> full of order.
>

The one does not actually follow from the other


> Otherwise, we're left to a one time event, which created it. Either way,
> the
> universe had to come from Something Perfect, which is true. God created
> the
> heavens and the earth.
>
> Kees
>

maybe he did, maybe he didnt, given no-one was there to witness it, that
makes your precious little book hearsay, and proof of nothing but the
(admittedly rather impressive) imagination of its author, a brilliant work
of *COMPLETE TOTAL AND UTTER FICTION*






> "Jim Phillips" <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote in message
> news:Pine.SOL.3.96.1051003124550.7769R-100000 [at] mail...
>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005, George Peatty wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 13:44:23 -0400, "Nog" <nognog [at] adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >God only exists in your tiny little head.
>>>
>>> That statement assumes a self-sustaining universe. One that is not
>>> self-sustaining requires a Sustainer for everything else that dwells
>>> therein.
>>
>> Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
>>
>> --
>> Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
>> "I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
>> Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
>> Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
>> violent." -- Dan Savage
>>
>
>
>
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141446 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:42
pv+usenet  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> writes:
>Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
>were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
>that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect and
>full of order.

Um, no. Quite the opposite. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141447 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:43
jayembee  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:

> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote:
>
>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
>>
>>> But then there is a huge difference between an animal and a human.
>>> We have spirits and animals don't.
>>
>> How do you know they don't?
>
> Humans have the capability of worship.

How do you know animals don't?

> Take for instance this newsgroup, devoted to a show, where people
> come discuss it and say what they like about it. You don't see that
> with animals.

We know that animals communicate with each other. We don't,
however, know what they communicate about, other than a
limited set of very basic ideas

> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.

Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
it incontestable fact.

-- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141449 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:54
Kees Boer  
I don't follow your thinking. If I put time on the x-axis, and order on the
y-axis. I.e. order is a function of time. Then you would get a negative
slope, if you were to graph the Second Law Of Thermodynamics.

Thus we say that as x approaches negative infinity, y approaches positive
infinity.

Kees

"Paul Vader" <pv+usenet [at] pobox.com> wrote in message
news:11k2rcj3io9a4ee [at] news.supernews.com...
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> writes:
>>Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
>>were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
>>that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect and
>>full of order.
>
> Um, no. Quite the opposite. *
> --
> * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
> like corkscrews.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141450 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:56
Kees Boer  
"Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> news:Rnd0f.1484$eW1.969 [at] okepread04...
>> It couldn't be selfsustaining.
>>
>> The Second Law of Thermodynamics demands that everything goes down from
>> order to disorder.
>>
>
> True
>
>> Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
>> were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
>> that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect
>> and
>> full of order.
>>
>
> The one does not actually follow from the other
>

See my answer to Paul Vader.

>
>> Otherwise, we're left to a one time event, which created it. Either way,
>> the
>> universe had to come from Something Perfect, which is true. God created
>> the
>> heavens and the earth.
>>
>> Kees
>>
>
> maybe he did, maybe he didnt, given no-one was there to witness it, that
> makes your precious little book hearsay, and proof of nothing but the
> (admittedly rather impressive) imagination of its author, a brilliant work
> of *COMPLETE TOTAL AND UTTER FICTION*
>

Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book." And it isn't a little
book. It is the biggest bestseller in all of history, translated into more
languages than any other book.

Kees




>
>



>
>
>
>> "Jim Phillips" <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote in message
>> news:Pine.SOL.3.96.1051003124550.7769R-100000 [at] mail...
>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005, George Peatty wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 13:44:23 -0400, "Nog" <nognog [at] adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >God only exists in your tiny little head.
>>>>
>>>> That statement assumes a self-sustaining universe. One that is not
>>>> self-sustaining requires a Sustainer for everything else that dwells
>>>> therein.
>>>
>>> Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
>>> "I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
>>> Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
>>> Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
>>> violent." -- Dan Savage
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141451 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 19:58
Kees Boer  
"jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote in message
news:glq2k1hc9o8171alr38v0f54a9nt0ulicn [at] 4ax.com...
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
>
>> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> But then there is a huge difference between an animal and a human.
>>>> We have spirits and animals don't.
>>>
>>> How do you know they don't?
>>
>> Humans have the capability of worship.
>
> How do you know animals don't?

Observation. I live with an animal. He is a celebrity and even has his own
website. http://www.aboutcorgi.com He gets requests for autographs, but
he'll never ask for an autograph from anyone, even though he's gotten them.


>
>> Take for instance this newsgroup, devoted to a show, where people
>> come discuss it and say what they like about it. You don't see that
>> with animals.
>
> We know that animals communicate with each other. We don't,
> however, know what they communicate about, other than a
> limited set of very basic ideas
>
>> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.
>
> Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
> it incontestable fact.
>

Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible. He doesn't lie. Thus when the Bible says
something, it is TRUTH. It is a situation like CASE Closed, no questions
left to be asked!

Kees



> -- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141453 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 20:29
Fozzi  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>
> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."

Complete rubbish


>And it isn't a little book.

Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible doesnt
even match even one volume of the rig veda in size


It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,


which version, there are at least 20

translated into more
> languages than any other book.
>

again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that one

try again

fozzi
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141457 ] Mo, 03 Oktober 2005 23:30
George Peatty  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:46:18 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

>Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?

Why do you think it is?
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141458 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 00:14
mchary  
In article <em83k1hqt9ip4vagilbnv9rd3g6s0533ck [at] 4ax.com>,
George Peatty <pttyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:46:18 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:
>
>>Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
>
>Why do you think it is?


It's here.
--
An experiment in publishing:
http://www.ethshar.com/thesprigganexperiment0.html
The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141459 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 00:27
Bo Raxo  
"Michael Alan Chary" <mchary [at] panix.com> wrote in message
news:dhsagi$hr1$1 [at] reader1.panix.com...
> In article <em83k1hqt9ip4vagilbnv9rd3g6s0533ck [at] 4ax.com>,
> George Peatty <pttyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
> >On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:46:18 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net>
wrote:
> >
> >>Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
> >
> >Why do you think it is?
>
>
> It's here.

So is the flame at the head of a match. Doesn't make it self-sustaining.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141460 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 01:00
Kees Boer  
"Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
>>
>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>
>> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
>
> Complete rubbish

What do you have against the Bible?
>
>
>>And it isn't a little book.
>
> Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible doesnt
> even match even one volume of the rig veda in size
>
Still not a little book! It actually consists out of 66 books.


>
> It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,
>
>
> which version, there are at least 20
>

Same book, different translations.

> translated into more
>> languages than any other book.
>>
>
> again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that one
>
Funny, never even seen that book, and I used to smuggle Bibles onto Soviet
ships! The Bible has been pretty much translated into every language. There
is a group of translators called the Wycliffe translators, who have even
translated it into many of the smaller languages.



> try again
>
> fozzi
>
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141464 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 02:04
Fozzi  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
news:hKi0f.2073$eW1.1738 [at] okepread04...
>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
>> news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
>>>
>>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
>>
>> Complete rubbish
>
> What do you have against the Bible?
>>

The bible itself, nothing
christians in general, nothing
people who try and use a message of peace, love and brotherhood to spread
agendas of hate, intolerance and persecution

EVERYTHING



I remind you of something that is said in your precious little book

"first remove the log from thine own eye before seeking to cast the speck
from thy brothers eye"


>>
>>>And it isn't a little book.
>>
>> Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible doesnt
>> even match even one volume of the rig veda in size
>>
> Still not a little book! It actually consists out of 66 books.
>
>

bound into one volume, which once again reverts it to one book



>>
>> It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,
>>
>>
>> which version, there are at least 20
>>
>
> Same book, different translations.
>

wrong, i suggest you read some history, the latin vulgate contains two
instalments not present in the king james, the coptic texts are
significantly different than both and thats just three of them. The gospels
put together by the council of alexandria (where the bible was first
collated) called by justinian contains 4 instalments not contained in any
modern one


>> translated into more
>>> languages than any other book.
>>>
>>
>> again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that
>> one
>>
Funny, never even seen that book, and I used to smuggle Bibles onto Soviet
> ships! The Bible has been pretty much translated into every language.
> There is a group of translators called the Wycliffe translators, who have
> even translated it into many of the smaller languages.
>


you smuggled bibles onto soviet ships, yet you have never heard of the basic
text of soviet education, a book which the political commissar and all the
officers on those ships were required by law to have copies of, yeah right

cheers
fozzi
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141466 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 02:06
Bo Raxo  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
news:hKi0f.2073$eW1.1738 [at] okepread04...
>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> > news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
> >>
> >> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>>
> >>
> >> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
> >
> > Complete rubbish
>
> What do you have against the Bible?
> >
> >
> >>And it isn't a little book.
> >
> > Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible doesnt
> > even match even one volume of the rig veda in size
> >
> Still not a little book! It actually consists out of 66 books.
>
>
> >
> > It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,
> >
> >
> > which version, there are at least 20
> >
>
> Same book, different translations.
>
> > translated into more
> >> languages than any other book.
> >>
> >
> > again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that
one
> >
> Funny, never even seen that book, and I used to smuggle Bibles onto Soviet
> ships! The Bible has been pretty much translated into every language.
There
> is a group of translators called the Wycliffe translators, who have even
> translated it into many of the smaller languages.
>
>


Yawn. Trashy romance novels and phone books are both printed in huge
numbers - that doesn't make 'em full of profound truths. If you think the
Bible's popularity equals brilliance, then Britney Spears is your idea of a
genius.


Bo Raxo
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141468 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 02:53
phyphor  
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 09:12:16 -0700, "John Shocked"
<jshocked [at] hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Beth Smarr" <beth.smarr [at] verizon.net> wrote in message news:1kQ%e.1851$ka6.1531 [at] trnddc03...
>> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>>> PLEASE remove alt.startrek from all follow-ups. This is off topic for our NG.
>> It is off topic for all sensible folks on or off line.
>> Beth
<snip>

OH FOR FUCKS SAKE, John!


Give this shit up. You're not gonna convince anyone, and obviously,
nobody will convince you, so why keep up the fucking pretense?

You bitch about sodomy in BSG. Nobody else really sees such a thing,
but you STILL harp on it. Why keep posting about it? What can you
possibly accomplish?

-LMB
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141470 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 04:12
Hannibal Fortune  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:

> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote
>>
>>> Humans have the capability of worship.
>>
>> How do you know animals don't?
>
> Observation. I live with an animal. He is a celebrity and even has his own
> website. http://www.aboutcorgi.com He gets requests for autographs, but
> he'll never ask for an autograph from anyone, even though he's gotten them.

(1) What do autographs have to do with worship?

(2) Maybe he doesn't ask for autographs because he doesn't want them.

(3) Maybe he *is* asking for autographs and you just don't understand him.

>>> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.
>>
>> Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
>> it incontestable fact.
>
> Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible.

He did? You know that for a fact? How?

> He doesn't lie. Thus when the Bible says something, it is TRUTH.
> It is a situation like CASE Closed, no questions left to be asked!

Then why are there inconsistencies throughout it?

For example...let's look at Genesis.

Adam and Eve eat the fruit, yadda, yadda, yadda. They have two sons,
Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel. God banishes Cain.

So far, so good.

So now Cain goes to Nod, and settles down. Takes a wife. OK, where
did the wife come from? Up to that point, according to the Bible, there
are only three people on the face of the Earth (four, if you want to count
the late Abel). And now suddenly there's this other place with more
people?

And then it goes on for a short list of begats, after which we get to 4.25:

"Adam knew his wife again, and bore a son and named him
Seth, for she said, 'God has appointed for me another child
instead of Abel, because Cain killed him.'" (New Revised Standard Version)

Nothing is said about Adam and Eve having any children between
Abel and Seth. So again, where did those other people come from?

-- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141472 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 04:35
Kees Boer  
"Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:1Gj0f.6493$U51.5924 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> news:hKi0f.2073$eW1.1738 [at] okepread04...
>>
>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
>>> news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
>>>>
>>>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
>>>
>>> Complete rubbish
>>
>> What do you have against the Bible?
>>>
>
> The bible itself, nothing
> christians in general, nothing
> people who try and use a message of peace, love and brotherhood to spread
> agendas of hate, intolerance and persecution
>
> EVERYTHING

Who is doing that? It is the Christians, who've gotten the vast majority of
persecution.
>
>
>
> I remind you of something that is said in your precious little book
>
> "first remove the log from thine own eye before seeking to cast the speck
> from thy brothers eye"
>
Yes, Jesus said that.

>
>>>
>>>>And it isn't a little book.
>>>
>>> Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible doesnt
>>> even match even one volume of the rig veda in size
>>>
>> Still not a little book! It actually consists out of 66 books.
>>
>>
>
> bound into one volume, which once again reverts it to one book

Ok, how many times have you read the entire book. It's so little, it will
take you no time.
>
>
>
>>>
>>> It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,
>>>
>>>
>>> which version, there are at least 20
>>>
>>
>> Same book, different translations.
>>
>
> wrong, i suggest you read some history, the latin vulgate contains two
> instalments not present in the king james, the coptic texts are
> significantly different than both and thats just three of them. The
> gospels put together by the council of alexandria (where the bible was
> first collated) called by justinian contains 4 instalments not contained
> in any modern one
>

Yes, the Latin Vulgate is a Latin translation. I'm talking about the Greek
New and Hebrew/Aramaic Old Testament. . The books were confirmed in these
different counsels.

>
>>> translated into more
>>>> languages than any other book.
>>>>
>>>
>>> again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that
>>> one
>>>
> Funny, never even seen that book, and I used to smuggle Bibles onto Soviet
>> ships! The Bible has been pretty much translated into every language.
>> There is a group of translators called the Wycliffe translators, who have
>> even translated it into many of the smaller languages.
>>
>
>
> you smuggled bibles onto soviet ships, yet you have never heard of the
> basic text of soviet education, a book which the political commissar and
> all the officers on those ships were required by law to have copies of,
> yeah right
>

Yes, but I didn't go sniff through their personal libraries. I would not be
suprised that they had that book. I'm just saying that it is not true that
that book was translated into more languages than the Bible.

> cheers
> fozzi
>
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141473 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 04:37
Kees Boer  
No, Britney, although relatively immensily successful has not have had even
1 % success of what the Bible has had. Even people that don't believe the
Bible go around quoting It.

Kees



"Bo Raxo" <invasions_r_us [at] thepentagon.removethis.com> wrote in message
news:VHj0f.2626$4h2.2321 [at] newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> news:hKi0f.2073$eW1.1738 [at] okepread04...
>>
>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >
>> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
>> > news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
>> >>
>> >> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>> >> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
>> >
>> > Complete rubbish
>>
>> What do you have against the Bible?
>> >
>> >
>> >>And it isn't a little book.
>> >
>> > Actually it is compared to most religious texts, the entire bible
>> > doesnt
>> > even match even one volume of the rig veda in size
>> >
>> Still not a little book! It actually consists out of 66 books.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > It is the biggest bestseller in all of history,
>> >
>> >
>> > which version, there are at least 20
>> >
>>
>> Same book, different translations.
>>
>> > translated into more
>> >> languages than any other book.
>> >>
>> >
>> > again not true, stalins short course to socialism has you beat on that
> one
>> >
>> Funny, never even seen that book, and I used to smuggle Bibles onto
>> Soviet
>> ships! The Bible has been pretty much translated into every language.
> There
>> is a group of translators called the Wycliffe translators, who have even
>> translated it into many of the smaller languages.
>>
>>
>
>
> Yawn. Trashy romance novels and phone books are both printed in huge
> numbers - that doesn't make 'em full of profound truths. If you think
> the
> Bible's popularity equals brilliance, then Britney Spears is your idea of
> a
> genius.
>
>
> Bo Raxo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141474 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 04:42
Kees Boer  
"Hannibal Fortune" <hannibal.fortune [at] terra.com> wrote in message
news:18n3k11jui8ti585lolf71as8ct9kmfugi [at] 4ax.com...
> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
>
>> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote
>>>
>>>> Humans have the capability of worship.
>>>
>>> How do you know animals don't?
>>
>> Observation. I live with an animal. He is a celebrity and even has his
>> own
>> website. http://www.aboutcorgi.com He gets requests for autographs, but
>> he'll never ask for an autograph from anyone, even though he's gotten
>> them.
>
> (1) What do autographs have to do with worship?

The act of wanting and treasuring a piece of paper that someone wrote their
name on is a light form of worship.
>
> (2) Maybe he doesn't ask for autographs because he doesn't want them.
>

That's right.

> (3) Maybe he *is* asking for autographs and you just don't understand him.
>

I understand him alright.

>>>> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.
>>>
>>> Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
>>> it incontestable fact.
>>
>> Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible.
>
> He did? You know that for a fact? How?
>
The Historical, Prophetic, Archeological, and Scientific evidence.

>> He doesn't lie. Thus when the Bible says something, it is TRUTH.
>> It is a situation like CASE Closed, no questions left to be asked!
>
> Then why are there inconsistencies throughout it?

Which inconsistencies?
>
> For example...let's look at Genesis.
>
> Adam and Eve eat the fruit, yadda, yadda, yadda. They have two sons,
> Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel. God banishes Cain.
>
> So far, so good.
>
> So now Cain goes to Nod, and settles down. Takes a wife. OK, where
> did the wife come from? Up to that point, according to the Bible, there
> are only three people on the face of the Earth (four, if you want to count
> the late Abel). And now suddenly there's this other place with more
> people?

Have you considered that considerable time might have elapsed between these
verses?

>
> And then it goes on for a short list of begats, after which we get to
> 4.25:
>
> "Adam knew his wife again, and bore a son and named him
> Seth, for she said, 'God has appointed for me another child
> instead of Abel, because Cain killed him.'" (New Revised Standard Version)
>
> Nothing is said about Adam and Eve having any children between
> Abel and Seth. So again, where did those other people come from?
>
I'm not saying that the Bible has a total history of every single thing,
birth that happened. That doesn't make it not true.

I mean, you wouldn't accuse CNN of not telling the truth, because they
didn't report what Bush had for lunch? What time he woke up, etc...
Likewise, not everything is in the Bible, that doesn't make it not true.

Kees



> -- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #141489 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 08:49
jayembee  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:

>> (1) What do autographs have to do with worship?
>
> The act of wanting and treasuring a piece of paper that someone
> wrote their name on is a light form of worship.

So what, does that mean that people who worship God just want his
autograph?

>> (2) Maybe he doesn't ask for autographs because he doesn't want them.
>
> That's right.

So what are you saying now? That not wanting autographs means that
he's incapable of worship?

>> (3) Maybe he *is* asking for autographs and you just don't understand him.
>
> I understand him alright.

How do you know that?

>>>>> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
>>>> it incontestable fact.
>>>
>>> Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible.
>>
>> He did? You know that for a fact? How?
>>
> The Historical, Prophetic, Archeological, and Scientific evidence.

Scientific evidence that God wrote the Bible Himself? Oh, this I *have*
to hear? Let's have it.

>>> He doesn't lie. Thus when the Bible says something, it is TRUTH.
>>> It is a situation like CASE Closed, no questions left to be asked!
>>
>> Then why are there inconsistencies throughout it?
>
> Which inconsistencies?
>>
>> For example...let's look at Genesis.
>>
>> Adam and Eve eat the fruit, yadda, yadda, yadda. They have two sons,
>> Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel. God banishes Cain.
>>
>> So far, so good.
>>
>> So now Cain goes to Nod, and settles down. Takes a wife. OK, where
>> did the wife come from? Up to that point, according to the Bible, there
>> are only three people on the face of the Earth (four, if you want to count
>> the late Abel). And now suddenly there's this other place with more
>> people?
>
> Have you considered that considerable time might have elapsed between
> these verses?

It doesn't matter. It's the *sequence* that's important. Eve doesn't give birth
to Seth, her third child, until *after* Cain leaves for Nod and finds a wife
there. Therefore, the people in Nod could not have been born of Eve.
And yet, Eve is supposed to be the mother of all life.

>> And then it goes on for a short list of begats, after which we get to
>> 4.25:
>>
>> "Adam knew his wife again, and bore a son and named him
>> Seth, for she said, 'God has appointed for me another child
>> instead of Abel, because Cain killed him.'" (New Revised Standard Version)
>>
>> Nothing is said about Adam and Eve having any children between
>> Abel and Seth. So again, where did those other people come from?
>>
> I'm not saying that the Bible has a total history of every single thing,
> birth that happened. That doesn't make it not true.
>
> I mean, you wouldn't accuse CNN of not telling the truth, because they
> didn't report what Bush had for lunch? What time he woke up, etc...
> Likewise, not everything is in the Bible, that doesn't make it not true.

It's not just a question of leaving something out. It's leaving something
*important* out. Genesis Chapters 10 & 11 are a catalog of begats that
really serve very little purpose other than to explain where Abraham
came from, and yet God the Author couldn't be bothered to tell us
where the folks of Nod came from?

Let's see, what else does God tell us in, according to you, His own words:

Exodus 21 [God says to Moses] "These are the ordinances
that you shall set before them [the Israelites].

"2 When you buy a male Hebrew slave, he shall serve six
years, but in the seventh he shall go out a free person,
without debt."

Hunh. Sounds like God thinks slavery is OK.

"7 When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall
not go out as the male slaves do."

Double hunh. Not only does God think slavery is OK, he
thinks it's OK for a father to sell his daughter into slavery.
What a guy.

"15 Whoever strikes father or mother shall but put to death."

Wow. Isn't that a little harsh?

"27 Whoever curses father or mother shall be put to death."

Even harsher.

This is elaborated on in Deuteronomy 21:

"18 If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will
not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them
when they discipline him, 19 then his father and mother
shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of
his town at the gate of that place. 20 They shall say to the
elders of his town, 'This son of ours is stubborn and
rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a
drunkard.' 21 Then all the men of the town shall stone
him to death."

So tell me, Kees...if your son was disobedient, would you
bring him to be stoned to death? If not, why not? Isn't that
what God said he wants?

-- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143398 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 15:57
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

> It couldn't be selfsustaining.
>
> The Second Law of Thermodynamics demands that everything goes down from
> order to disorder.

Wow, a creationist who gets the 2nd Law wrong--what a surprise.
Does the term "closed system" mean anything to you?

> Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
> were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
> that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect and
> full of order.

Faulty premise--you assume that the universe is a closed system.

> Otherwise, we're left to a one time event, which created it.

The universe could be cyclic, there could be more than one (even an
infintie number). See? There's more than one possible explanation.

> Either way, the
> universe had to come from Something Perfect, which is true.

Why? Because you prefer it that way?

> God created the heavens and the earth.

That's a belief, not a theory. And you don't even specify which god
(yahweh, zeus, amaterasu).

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143399 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 15:59
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

> I don't follow your thinking. If I put time on the x-axis, and order on the
> y-axis. I.e. order is a function of time.

Only in a closed system. You fail to understand that the universe
has not been demonstrated to be a closed system.

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143400 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:01
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> > news:Rnd0f.1484$eW1.969 [at] okepread04...
> >> It couldn't be selfsustaining.
> >>
> >> The Second Law of Thermodynamics demands that everything goes down from
> >> order to disorder.
> >>
> >
> > True
> >
> >> Thus there is an indirect relationship between time and order, or if you
> >> were to graph it, you would have a continual negative slope. This demands
> >> that in eternity past, it had to come from something eternally perfect
> >> and
> >> full of order.
> >>
> >
> > The one does not actually follow from the other
> >
>
> See my answer to Paul Vader.
>
> >
> >> Otherwise, we're left to a one time event, which created it. Either way,
> >> the
> >> universe had to come from Something Perfect, which is true. God created
> >> the
> >> heavens and the earth.
> >>
> >> Kees
> >>
> >
> > maybe he did, maybe he didnt, given no-one was there to witness it, that
> > makes your precious little book hearsay, and proof of nothing but the
> > (admittedly rather impressive) imagination of its author, a brilliant work
> > of *COMPLETE TOTAL AND UTTER FICTION*
> >
>
> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book." And it isn't a little
> book. It is the biggest bestseller in all of history, translated into more
> languages than any other book.

It also says that, among other things, wearing a cotton/poly blend
shirt is a one-way ticket to hell. Has your wardrobe doomed you to eternal
torment?

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143401 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:07
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, George Peatty wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:46:18 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:
>
> >Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
>
> Why do you think it is?

I have no reason to believe otherwise.

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143402 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:09
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> > news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
> >>
> >> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>>
> >>
> >> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
> >
> > Complete rubbish
>
> What do you have against the Bible?

My real complaint is towards the christian sects that worship the
bible rather than the god of the bible. The poor bastards don't realize
that they're breaking their own first commandment.

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143403 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:06
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

>
> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote in message
> news:glq2k1hc9o8171alr38v0f54a9nt0ulicn [at] 4ax.com...
> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> But then there is a huge difference between an animal and a human.
> >>>> We have spirits and animals don't.
> >>>
> >>> How do you know they don't?
> >>
> >> Humans have the capability of worship.
> >
> > How do you know animals don't?
>
> Observation. I live with an animal.

So? Maybe your animal is really stupid.

> >> Take for instance this newsgroup, devoted to a show, where people
> >> come discuss it and say what they like about it. You don't see that
> >> with animals.
> >
> > We know that animals communicate with each other. We don't,
> > however, know what they communicate about, other than a
> > limited set of very basic ideas
> >
> >> The Bible describes us as having a body, soul, and spirit.
> >
> > Yeah? So? Just because the Bible says something doesn't make
> > it incontestable fact.
> >
>
> Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible. He doesn't lie. Thus when the Bible says
> something, it is TRUTH. It is a situation like CASE Closed, no questions
> left to be asked!

I have a few:

How did Judas die?
Were humans created before or after animals?
Do you believe that wearing a cotton/poly blend is a sin?
Do you believe it's okay to kill a child that is disobedient?
Do you believe that it's wrong for a slave to run away from his
master?
Do you follow the dietary laws as outlined in the bible?

I have some more, but those should get you started...

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143404 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:22
Jim Phillips  
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:

>
> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> news:1Gj0f.6493$U51.5924 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> > news:hKi0f.2073$eW1.1738 [at] okepread04...
> >>
> >> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >> news:5Me0f.6203$U51.4860 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>>
> >>> "Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:7he0f.1612$eW1.871 [at] okepread04...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Fozzi" <efor6920 [at] bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> >>>> news:gDd0f.6200$U51.2283 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book."
> >>>
> >>> Complete rubbish
> >>
> >> What do you have against the Bible?
> >>>
> >
> > The bible itself, nothing
> > christians in general, nothing
> > people who try and use a message of peace, love and brotherhood to spread
> > agendas of hate, intolerance and persecution
> >
> > EVERYTHING
>
> Who is doing that? It is the Christians, who've gotten the vast majority of
> persecution.

Romans stopped persecuting Christians about 1700 years ago. Since
then the primary group that has persecuted Christians is other Christians.
I think the Jews have Christians beaten handily for the dubious distinction
of most persecuted religion.
Christians have used the bible to excuse hatred, torture, slavery,
murder--the list is endless. Yes, the bible has many lovely messages in it,
but you shouldn't be blind to the ugliness in it as well.

--
Jim Phillips, jay pee aitch eye el el eye pee at bee see pee ell dot net
"I would bring up Ann Coulter's comment about blowing up the New York
Times...there's a lot of hateful, violent rhetoric that spews from the
Right. The Left is snide and sarcastic, the Right is dangerous and
violent." -- Dan Savage
Bonehead creationist 'science' (was Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2) [message #143405 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:44
pv+usenet  
Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> writes:
>On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Kees Boer wrote:
>
>> I don't follow your thinking. If I put time on the x-axis, and order on the
>> y-axis. I.e. order is a function of time.
>
> Only in a closed system. You fail to understand that the universe
>has not been demonstrated to be a closed system.

That's the least of his logical faults. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143406 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:50
pv+usenet  
Hannibal Fortune <hannibal.fortune [at] terra.com> writes:
>For example...let's look at Genesis.
>
>Adam and Eve eat the fruit, yadda, yadda, yadda. They have two sons,
>Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel. God banishes Cain.
>
>So far, so good.
>
>So now Cain goes to Nod, and settles down. Takes a wife. OK, where
>did the wife come from? Up to that point, according to the Bible, there

This always makes me laugh too. Here, right at the beginning where even the
laziest reader shouldn't have gotten bored and stopped yet, is proof that the
book they're reading is abridged. The Christian bible expunged the story of
Adam's first wife, Lilith, but didn't do a fixup of the rest of the text so
that the edit actually makes sense. This is infallibility? Hack publishing
houses do better jobs.

Of course, there's also the matter that Genesis describes two different,
and contradictory, origins of the earth at the same time. And, a bit
further on in this same book, tells two different stories of the flood
too. Bad editor, no gopher wood for you. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
More bonehead creationist 'science' (was Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2) [message #143407 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 16:51
pv+usenet  
"Kees Boer" <keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> writes:
>>> Yes, it does. God wrote the Bible.
>>
>> He did? You know that for a fact? How?
>>
>The Historical, Prophetic, Archeological, and Scientific evidence.

Which would be a knockout punch, if *any of it actually existed*. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143410 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 17:56
galt_57  
Kees Boer wrote:
> "Jim Phillips" <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:
> > Kees Boer wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes. But the only problem with your reasoning is... we are not
> >> animals.
> >
> > By any reasonable definition of animals, humans are animals. Why
> > is that idea so offensive to some people?
> >
> Well, in some ways, if you look at it purely biologically, we are
> like animals. But then there is a huge difference between an animal
> and a human. We have spirits and animals don't.

What is a "spirit?" Can you prove this? My dog doesn't have one? Why
not?

> >> God has created us in His image.
> >
> > So god has breasts and a penis? Kinky.
>
> No, we are made of three parts, body, soul, and spirit. God is a
> Triune Being. God, The Father, God, The Son, and God, the Holy Spirit.

What proof do you have for this? None.

> Have you ever read the entire Bible? Also, what part of a Biblical
> God do you not believe in?

The idiotic Gawd who speaks in Exodus 20-31.

> > What do you see as more dangerous: exposing children to hatred
> > and violence, or exposing them to sex?
> >
> Both of them are dangerous. Sex is made to be used in the confides
> of marriage as a Sacred union between a husband and wife. Not to be
> flaunted about.

So women should be forced to wear a burqa and a chastity belt, right?

> Jesus gave His life for you, so that you wouldn't go to Hell.

Prove it. Even the Biblical account shows he didn't give up anything.
His life was restored.

> It is not God's desire for you to spend an eternity seperated from Him.

Yet [He] hides constantly and produces scientific evidence that
disproves the Biblical creation accounts.

> He wants all to be saved, that's why He gave His Son.

All nothing but rumor. The son came. The son went. Nothing changed.
Jesus didn't even teach basic rules of sanitation. He didn't even stay
dead. Gawd could produce an infinite number of other sons.

> There is no gloating over any one going to Hell. The facts are clear
> though. You have sinned. If you were to pay for your sin, you'd have
> to spend an eternity in hell. To go to heaven, you must be perfect,
> hence your own efforts and good works can never get you there. God
> wants you in heaven, but your sin is the problem. Thus God send
> His Son, Jesus Christ to die on a cross for you, so that if you simply
> trust Him as the One, Who paid for your sin, you can be totally forgiven
> and be assured that you are going to heaven after you die.

This is all unsubstantiated rubbish. Pull your head out and grow up a
little.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143413 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 21:47
jayembee  
Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

>> Excuse me, but God wrote that "precious little book." And it isn't a
>> little book. It is the biggest bestseller in all of history, translated into
>> more languages than any other book.
>
> It also says that, among other things, wearing a cotton/poly blend
> shirt is a one-way ticket to hell. Has your wardrobe doomed you to
> eternal torment?

I don't recall seeing that in there, but it does say that long hair on a
man is "degrading to him" (I Corinthians 11:14). How ironic is it that
every image we have of Jesus shows him with long hair?

-- jayembee
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143414 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 23:15
Lizard  
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 14:34:09 -0400, "Kees Boer"
<keesboer [at] integrity-computing.net> wrotC:DRIVE_E

>Yes, but we aren't animals. We are created in the image of God, whether you
>like it or not.
>

Hey, speak for yourself. I, for one, would not murder babies because
their parents weren't slavish enough in their devotion to me.
Re: More bonehead creationist 'science' (was Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143416 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 23:50
George Peatty  
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 14:51:22 -0000, pv+usenet [at] pobox.com (Paul Vader) wrote:

>The Historical, Prophetic, Archeological, and Scientific evidence.

>Which would be a knockout punch, if *any of it actually existed*. *

If you can't see it, it's only because you choose not to see it. The Bible
is the most rigorously attested book in human history.

Here's one article I like:

Is Science Finding God?

The past two centuries, more than any other time in Western civilization,
have seen two former partners, Christianity and science, pitted against
each other. Or so it would seem to the casual observer. If one only relied
on most secular media for information about the perceived battle, one would
think that the two were mutually exclusive human experiences. Science, we're
told, deals with reality. Christianity, on the other hand, is a matter of
faith only, with no practical connection to the real world.

To be sure, part of this misconception has been the fault of the church. In
areas of science and art, it has, to a significant extent, abdicated its
responsibility to influence our culture. Much of the fault, however, lies
with the world of science which has become drunk with its own achievements
and denied the Creator of science itself.

But science and Christianity were once happily married. The Reformation gave
rise to the scientific method through it's declaration of a rational God
whose laws were worthy of discovery. Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler;
probably the three most influential astronomers of all time, were devout
Christians as were many of science's early heroes. But something happened
two centuries ago that nearly caused a divorce. The rift got its biggest
boost during the so-called Enlightenment of the 18th century. Rationalism,
the Enlightenment's major philosophical pillar, taught that all knowledge
could be discovered using rational thought without any supernatural
revelation. Naturalism, a close cousin to rationalism, stated that we live
in a closed system of natural causes and effects. Not only was the
supernatural not necessary, according to the naturalists, it was
non-existent. The Enlightenment's philosophical attack on the validity of
the Bible had a powerful effect.

These two worldviews could hardly have been more at odds with each other.
While the Bible expressed a God who existed outside the natural universe,
the Enlightenment taught that since the natural universe was all that
existed, there was no need for God. The Bible called humanity to worship a
holy God in humility and trust. The Enlightenment taught that man was his
own god and was accountable only to himself. For much of Western society the
enticement to move from a God-centered worldview to a man-centered worldview
won out.

Emerging from the Enlightenment's influence, Charles Darwin's Origin of the
Species, published in the 1850s, had a profound effect on the relationship
between science and Christianity. The book, which popularize the notion that
man and all other living things had evolved from lower organisms, further
excluded God from the realm of scientific inquiry.

Without a doubt, many in the scientific community have, especially over the
past two hundred years, considered God and Christianity irrelevant at best
and anti-scientific at worst. One might think, looking only at the surface
of the issue, that science and the notion of the God of the Bible never
really did have anything in common. But a closer examination of the history
of science during those two centuries reveals another story. Many of
science's most profound and innovative thinkers were people of faith.

William F. Albright, considered the foremost archaeologist of the 20th
century, began his excavations of the Middle East skeptical of the Bible's
historicity. But his discoveries turned him into a believer. He concluded:
"The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical
schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries...has been progressively
discredited. Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of
innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of
the Bible as a source of history."

We all have Michael Faraday to thank for the electric motor, the
transformer, and the electric generator. His profound Christian faith drove
him to discover the laws of God. Faraday is widely acknowledged as the
greatest experimental genius of all time. On his deathbed an interviewer
asked him what his speculations were concerning the hereafter. He answered,
"Speculations? I have none. I am resting on certainties." Then he quoted 2
Timothy 1:12: "I know Whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able
to keep that which I've committed unto Him until that day."

Sir William Herschel, discoverer of the planet Uranus and other important
facts of astronomy saw such Divine design in the universe that he declared:
"The undevout astronomer must be mad."

William Ramsey, the foremost archeologist of Asia Minor, was schooled to
believe that the New Testament was merely a second century fabrication.
However, when he went to the field to examine the evidence for himself he
found that the places, topography, antiquities, titles and technical terms
accurately matched those of the New Testament. With regard to the book of
Acts he concluded: "Luke's history is unsurpassed in respect of it
trustworthiness."

Other Christians whose scientific discoveries affect our everyday lives
today include Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics; James Maxwell, the
formulator of the electromagnetic theory of light; John Michel, the father
of seismology and predictor of black holes; Samuel Morse, inventor of the
telegraph; Sir Isaac Newton, discoverer of the universal law of gravitation;
Blaise Pascal, the father of modern mathematics; and Louis Pasteur,
formulator of the germ theory of disease. These thinkers and many others
like them saw God's fingerprint on the natural world they studied.

Although science and Christianity have never been divorced , the last
couple of hundred years have seen a rocky marriage. But in recent years the
two have begun to find more common ground than differences. Most of the
commonality has come as a result of new discoveries in science.

Prior to the twentieth century the prevailing view among astronomers was
that the Universe had no beginning. It was called the steady state theory.
Contrary to the steady state theory the Bible clearly states that God
created the Universe from nothing at some fixed point in history.
Discoveries in the twentieth century by Hubble, Einstein, and others gave
unmistakable evidence of a beginning to the Universe. Their discoveries
shook the scientific world and forced many scientists to reconsider their
theology.

In the last ten to twenty years new discoveries in the fields of
micro-biology, astronomy, genetics, physics, and other disciplines have
given rise to the Intelligent Design movement among scientists. As science's
understanding of our world grows exponentially it is discovering with the
same rapidity how finely tuned and carefully designed everything is--from
the tiniest cell structure to the countless galaxies. This movement is
swiftly finding a place in a scientific community that once scoffed at or
ignored God and the Bible as outside the realm of science.

New books on the subject of intelligent design are making their way into
science's hallowed halls and the bookshelves of homes. Some secular media
outlets are even picking up on the story because the implications of this
recent scientific movement in science are too profound to ignore.
Intelligent Design is poised to have a deep and lasting effect on science in
the decades to come. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the news of the divorce of
Christianity and science is premature. In fact, the marriage is on the mend.

Thanks to Fred Heeren, author of Show Me God," published by Searchlight
Publications, for information on scientists of faith referred to in this
article.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143417 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 23:52
George Peatty  
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 09:57:20 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

>Faulty premise--you assume that the universe is a closed system.

And, you assume that it is not. A property that you have not demonstrated
... Further, there is enough disagreement within the scientific community
itself to make the issue an open question. In the end, we believe what we
want to believe, and that much, at least, we have in common.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143418 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 23:58
George Peatty  
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:01:26 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

> It also says that, among other things, wearing a cotton/poly blend
>shirt is a one-way ticket to hell. Has your wardrobe doomed you to eternal
>torment?

It says no such thing. You do greatly err, knowing neither the Scriptures,
nor the power of God, as Christ once said to the legalists of His day.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143419 ] Di, 04 Oktober 2005 23:57
George Peatty  
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 09:57:20 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

> That's a belief, not a theory. And you don't even specify which god
>(yahweh, zeus, amaterasu).

It is both, And, it could be tested. In the history of modern scientific
thought, it was taken for granted for centuries. Only recently, since the
so-called "enlightenment" - a misnomer, if ever there was one - has it been
questioned.

The evidence supporting the creation account of the universe is dismissed as
irrelevant, and the account itself dismissed as fable, and all this is done
a priori without any investigation whatsoever into the claims.

It is a specious premise that asserts that scientific inquiry is valid as
scientific inquiry when it explicitly excludes God from the explanation.
That's not science. That's dogma, and polemics.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143420 ] Mi, 05 Oktober 2005 00:08
George Peatty  
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:07:13 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

>> >Why do you think the universe isn't self-sustaining?
>>
>> Why do you think it is?
>
> I have no reason to believe otherwise.

And, I have no reason to believe it is .. That is, after all, the
point. Your belief about the nature of the universe, that you use to
extrapolate the non-existence of God, is an assumption. Nothing more. You
accept that it is so, but cannot demonstrate that it is so. I choose to
make different assumptions, and they lead me to different conclusions about
who God is, who I am, and the nature of the universe.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143421 ] Mi, 05 Oktober 2005 00:05
George Peatty  
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:47:42 GMT, jayembee <jayembeenospam [at] snurcher.com>
wrote:

>I don't recall seeing that in there, but it does say that long hair on a
>man is "degrading to him" (I Corinthians 11:14). How ironic is it that
>every image we have of Jesus shows him with long hair?

Since no photographic exists, such images amount to conjecture, and there is
plenty of reason to think they are unsupported conjecture at that. Note the
phrase: "the traditional law of the Jews on the subject was strict."

From Barnes' Notes:

1 Cor 11:14
No reason can be given, in the nature of things, why the woman should wear
long hair and the man not; but the custom prevails extensively everywhere,
and nature, in all nations, has prompted to the same course. "Use is second
nature;" but the usage in this case is not arbitrary, but is founded in an
anterior universal sense of what is proper and right. A few, and only a few,
have regarded it as comely for a man to wear his hair long. Aristotle tells
us, indeed (Rhet. 1:-see Rosenmiuller), that among the Lacedemonians,
freemen wore their hair long. In the time of Homer, also, the Greeks were
called by him kareekomooontes (NT:2863) Achaioi (NT:882), long-haired
Greeks; and some of the Asiatic nations adopted the same custom. But the
general habit among people has been different. Among the Hebrews, it was
regarded as disgraceful to a man to wear his hair long, except he had a vow
as a Nazarite, Num 6:1-5; Judg 13:5; 16:17; 1 Sam 1:1:ll. Occasionally, for
affectation or singularity, the hair was suffered to grow, as was the case
with Absalom (2 Sam 14:26); but the traditional law of the Jews on the
subject was strict. The same rule existed among the Greeks; and it was
regarded as disgraceful to wear long hair in the time of Aelian; Hist. lib.
9:c. 14. Eustath. on Hom. 2:v.
(from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)
Re: More bonehead creationist 'science' (was Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143422 ] Mi, 05 Oktober 2005 00:27
pv+usenet  
George Peatty <pttyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> writes:
>If you can't see it, it's only because you choose not to see it. The Bible
>is the most rigorously attested book in human history.

You keep saying it, and it keeps not being true. Stop making stuff up. *

--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
Re: Homosexual Intent of Scifi Channel for your Kids #2 [message #143423 ] Mi, 05 Oktober 2005 00:11
George Peatty  
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 10:09:26 -0400, Jim Phillips <jphillip [at] bcpl.net> wrote:

> My real complaint is towards the christian sects that worship the
>bible rather than the god of the bible. The poor bastards don't realize
>that they're breaking their own first commandment.

Nonsense. Completely irrational. The God we worship is the Author of the
Bible which reveals him. To the degree the Bible reveals the heart, will
and mind of the Divine Being, our reverence for each is a distinction
without a difference.
Vorheriges Thema:Way to go Takei, is Bakula next?
Nächstes Thema:A real ST post - Starship Exeter
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 19 16:31:19 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,09346 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered