No I'm not wrong. The bible is contradictory which is why it is impossible to be taken literally. That was my point.
Corners of the world is used as figures of speach even today
You cant say that the bible is the literal word of God, but then say in the parts you don't like it was a figure of speech. You can't have it both ways.
Actually be never discovered "America". He discovered the American Continent. Specifically the Bahamas and Cuba. He never touched foot on what we now call America.
Both evolutionists and creationists have difficulty explaining many parts of their theories and demand patience, but the relative magnitudes of uncertainty between the two theories are hardly worth comparing.
Simply because when a creationist is challenged with a concept that cannot be explained, the answer invariably is "well God is all powerful and therefore he...(fill in the blank with an illogical work of God that removes the uncertainty in question)".
When you have a magic hole filler like that of course your theory will be complete!
In discussions with creationists about evolution, it quickly becomes clear that they have a simplistic and incorrect understanding of the science backing up evolution, and use this flawed understanding to try and cast the theory in doubt.
The bible states numerous times that the earth is "firm" and "immovable". Therefore it cannot be a sphere orbiting the sun now can it?
Also the bible references "earths four corners" something that's only possible if the earth was flat, and Daniel 4:10-11 references a tall tree that is visible to the farthest reaches of the earth. Also only possible if the earth was flat.
So if you take the bible literally, then you must believe in a flat earth.
No consensus on this but, a star going through the red giant phase expands to approximately 200 times its diameter, and we are sitting at about 110 x farther out than the radius. So it's likely we will get swallowed. However some speculate that the earth will expand it's orbit so that it does not get swallowed.
Maybe somebody will be around to watch the Andromeda galaxy crash into ours after all.
Actually, even the bible tells us this is so. "Ashes to ashes... dust to dust...".
Could interpret this literally and say that we (the Sun, Earth and life on it) are made from interstellar dust initially, and that's where we end up when the solar system ends its life and turns back to ashes and dust when the sun explodes.
While I would tend to agree with you based on the people I've met, I suspect there really isn't any relevant data regarding the opinions of Christians *worldwide* on that point. Whether or not it's a vast majority, or a majority, or maybe a shaky whatever, I don't think that anyone really knows.
Well its easy enough, and generally accurate, to take the official position of the governing church body and say this generally reflets the opinion of its members.
Of the 2 billion christians worldwide, 1.5 billion are Catholics that officially reject the young earth theory. That's a majority just accounting for a single denomination.
Of the next most popular (in order) are Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican, comprising another 370 million, neither believe in a young earth.
Only fundamentalist Protestant denominations believe in this nonsense, so yeah there is data and I can safely say that a majority of Christians are not young - earthers.
OK, what about supernovae? This is the remnants of the explosion of a star that is at the end of it's life.
Supernova SN1987A is determined to be about 170000 light years away (a recent, near supernova). That means the star exploded 170000 years ago for us to see the explosion in 1987.
So for the young earth theory to be correct, God must have created the star already exploded, then created the light of the star (that didn't really exist), and the explosion, in transit so we would *think* that the star exploded. You don't call this trickery?
That's understandable given that the Wooly Mammoth lived in the icy extreme north and south while Noah lived in the area around Egypt.
Likewise it is understandable that he couldn't get to animals that lived in similar areas like penguins, the arctic wolf, polar bears, snowshoe rabbits, reindeer, caribou, etc... Oh wait.. Nevermind.
And even Christians believe in Microevolution (evolution inside a Species ex. wolves -> dogs) but not in Macroevolution (Amoeba -> Human) theres a huge difference.
Please do not associate creationism and ID with Christianity. Only a small fundamentalist sect of Christianity believes in such things. The vast majority of Christians throughout the world do not believe in such nonsense.
Actually, since there is only one true God, and names serve only to differentiate between similar objects, I would argue that God has no, and needs no name.
You'd rather have the Church decide? When they effectively stagnated science and astronomy for hundreds of years as they insisted the earth was flat and at the centre of the universe, and threatened scientists like Copernicus and Galileo and their supporters with death? (the church position was that since God created the earth and the universe for man, then earth HAD to be at the centre and not some speck of insignificant dust orbiting a star)
I find it much easier to believe in evolution than to believe that God went through this elaborate lie to trick us. I mean faking a fossil record is one thing but creating the universe with light already in transit so the stars would look like they're been there for billions of years?? Or creating the image of a supernova such that we would think that it exploded billions of years ago but didn't really?
Come on. Get a grip. I believe in God but I cant believe he's a coniving trickster that the fundamentalists seem to think he must be.
Screw the keyboard, I've come up with a better interface for my car.
Instead of a steering wheel, you turn the car by leaning in your seat left and right, much like in a motorcycle. This is much more intuitive, not only for motorcyclists, but for new drivers that grew upon bicycles - must less of a learning curve.
Gas and brake are now tied to your forehead -lean forward to accelerate and back to slow down. I thought of tying this to handlebars like on a motorcycle but realized drivers then couldn't drink coffee and talk on the phone so widespread adaptation would have been hindered.
I estimate at least a 15% increase in driver efficiency, even more if you are a regular commuter. I'm also releasing the new interface into the public domain without any royalties, in the hope of widespread adaptation over the more common and archaic "wheel" method of steering.
ATI's recent driver optimizations for OpenGL are enough to vault the single Radeon X1800 XT ahead of the GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB, but the Radeon X1800 XT in CrossFire can't quite sustain that lead.
If there is one area that ATI really sucks in is their OpenGL drivers.
In my experience, OpenGL applications run several times faster on nVidia hardware than on equivalent ATI hardware. I refuse to buy ATI anymore as I've got screwed over too many times with their shitty OpenGL drivers.
Maybe people should stop blaming the rating system and start blaming the distributors and the theatre chains for not showing NC-17. I mean really, the rating system is only there so individuals can make an informed choice as to whether they want to see or not see a move based on the content and their own value system. This break's down when the distributors decide for you based on the rating, or if every movie receives an 'R' just so it gets on the distribution list.
Blaming the MPAA for low distribution because of the rating is like blaming the label on the pack of cigarettes for giving the smoker cancer.
Slashdot Mirror
I have - several times and several other religious texts. I just haven't remembered every friggin line.
Give me a break. Jeez.
Actually be never discovered "America". He discovered the American Continent. Specifically the Bahamas and Cuba. He never touched foot on what we now call America.
Simply because when a creationist is challenged with a concept that cannot be explained, the answer invariably is "well God is all powerful and therefore he ...(fill in the blank with an illogical work of God that removes the uncertainty in question)".
When you have a magic hole filler like that of course your theory will be complete!
In discussions with creationists about evolution, it quickly becomes clear that they have a simplistic and incorrect understanding of the science backing up evolution, and use this flawed understanding to try and cast the theory in doubt.
Actually thank the bible for that one.
The bible states numerous times that the earth is "firm" and "immovable". Therefore it cannot be a sphere orbiting the sun now can it?
Also the bible references "earths four corners" something that's only possible if the earth was flat, and Daniel 4:10-11 references a tall tree that is visible to the farthest reaches of the earth. Also only possible if the earth was flat.
So if you take the bible literally, then you must believe in a flat earth.
Pick Ada, then you can get an interesting job in aerospace, instead of a boring job writing shitty web applets.
$5 says it will. We'll settle after it happens.
No consensus on this but, a star going through the red giant phase expands to approximately 200 times its diameter, and we are sitting at about 110 x farther out than the radius. So it's likely we will get swallowed. However some speculate that the earth will expand it's orbit so that it does not get swallowed.
Maybe somebody will be around to watch the Andromeda galaxy crash into ours after all.
You're night. My mistake. However we'll be more than just burnt since the sun will expand beyond the orbit of Jupiter.
I just remember seeing the minister reading it out of a book at a funeral and assumed it was the bible. However I will assume you are correct.
Since the quote is based on a passage from Genesis which IS in the bible, I'd say my comment is close enough to be accurate.
Actually, even the bible tells us this is so. "Ashes to ashes... dust to dust...".
Could interpret this literally and say that we (the Sun, Earth and life on it) are made from interstellar dust initially, and that's where we end up when the solar system ends its life and turns back to ashes and dust when the sun explodes.
Can't believe the parent was modded as Flamebait. It was funny as all hell.
what gives you the idea that my mind is closed ?
Well its easy enough, and generally accurate, to take the official position of the governing church body and say this generally reflets the opinion of its members.
Of the 2 billion christians worldwide, 1.5 billion are Catholics that officially reject the young earth theory. That's a majority just accounting for a single denomination.
Of the next most popular (in order) are Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican, comprising another 370 million, neither believe in a young earth.
Only fundamentalist Protestant denominations believe in this nonsense, so yeah there is data and I can safely say that a majority of Christians are not young - earthers.
OK, what about supernovae? This is the remnants of the explosion of a star that is at the end of it's life.
Supernova SN1987A is determined to be about 170000 light years away (a recent, near supernova). That means the star exploded 170000 years ago for us to see the explosion in 1987.
So for the young earth theory to be correct, God must have created the star already exploded, then created the light of the star (that didn't really exist), and the explosion, in transit so we would *think* that the star exploded. You don't call this trickery?
That's understandable given that the Wooly Mammoth lived in the icy extreme north and south while Noah lived in the area around Egypt.
Likewise it is understandable that he couldn't get to animals that lived in similar areas like penguins, the arctic wolf, polar bears, snowshoe rabbits, reindeer, caribou, etc... Oh wait.. Nevermind.
Please do not associate creationism and ID with Christianity. Only a small fundamentalist sect of Christianity believes in such things. The vast majority of Christians throughout the world do not believe in such nonsense.
lol
Actually, since there is only one true God, and names serve only to differentiate between similar objects, I would argue that God has no, and needs no name.
You'd rather have the Church decide? When they effectively stagnated science and astronomy for hundreds of years as they insisted the earth was flat and at the centre of the universe, and threatened scientists like Copernicus and Galileo and their supporters with death? (the church position was that since God created the earth and the universe for man, then earth HAD to be at the centre and not some speck of insignificant dust orbiting a star)
I find it much easier to believe in evolution than to believe that God went through this elaborate lie to trick us. I mean faking a fossil record is one thing but creating the universe with light already in transit so the stars would look like they're been there for billions of years?? Or creating the image of a supernova such that we would think that it exploded billions of years ago but didn't really?
Come on. Get a grip. I believe in God but I cant believe he's a coniving trickster that the fundamentalists seem to think he must be.
Yup, that good old American justice system-whoever tells the most convincing lies gets off
That pisses me off too. We can get beautiful hi-res pictures from the moons of Saturn, but I can't get a decent cellphone connection downtown.
Screw the keyboard, I've come up with a better interface for my car.
Instead of a steering wheel, you turn the car by leaning in your seat left and right, much like in a motorcycle. This is much more intuitive, not only for motorcyclists, but for new drivers that grew upon bicycles - must less of a learning curve.
Gas and brake are now tied to your forehead -lean forward to accelerate and back to slow down. I thought of tying this to handlebars like on a motorcycle but realized drivers then couldn't drink coffee and talk on the phone so widespread adaptation would have been hindered.
I estimate at least a 15% increase in driver efficiency, even more if you are a regular commuter. I'm also releasing the new interface into the public domain without any royalties, in the hope of widespread adaptation over the more common and archaic "wheel" method of steering.
Where do you live? Mexico?
Power has gone out two, maybe three times in 20 years here.
If there is one area that ATI really sucks in is their OpenGL drivers.
In my experience, OpenGL applications run several times faster on nVidia hardware than on equivalent ATI hardware. I refuse to buy ATI anymore as I've got screwed over too many times with their shitty OpenGL drivers.
Maybe people should stop blaming the rating system and start blaming the distributors and the theatre chains for not showing NC-17. I mean really, the rating system is only there so individuals can make an informed choice as to whether they want to see or not see a move based on the content and their own value system. This break's down when the distributors decide for you based on the rating, or if every movie receives an 'R' just so it gets on the distribution list.
Blaming the MPAA for low distribution because of the rating is like blaming the label on the pack of cigarettes for giving the smoker cancer.