Take a look at Deuteronomy 21:8 Pretty brutal in our eyes, but then disrespect today is not an issue of life or death. It was back then.
What ever happened to RESPECT
- Thread starter imadiver2
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Green_Manelishi
Contributor
bwerb:
I don't know; I am only 43 years old. Do you? Do you believe it's millions of years old and the result of random chance? Do you believe in viewing the evidence of .... through the lens of the revealed word of God or do you chose to force the revealed word of God to "jibe" with theories that at their heart are intended to prove there is no God?
BWERB:
Yes, I do. God created them. He did after all create the physical world, etc. On the other hand, some evolutionists will tell you (because they told me) that the "law" of gravity (and entropy). are not 'really' laws. It's just that gravity has not yet failed; but could someday and that entropy is mis-understood and mis-applied by creationists. That was the explanation used to "prove" the theory of evolution despite its lack of evidence. That is to say that just because there is no evidence and that it's not being observed does not mean it did not happen and is not happening.
BWERB:
In so far as science does not disagree with the revealed word of God. Many of the most brilliant minds in science were studying "the world" to better understand it, not to find why it exists. It exists because God wanted it to exist.
To tread the middle of the road, "God used evolution" would be an example, calls into question the veracity of the entire Bible. If He cannot be trusted with such a simple declaration as "In the beginning ...", then why trust Him at all?
BWERB:
Did He just cause it "to explode and go on its merry way" or did He create it as the Bible claims He did? "Good" and "very good"? Evolution (death and destruction) is such a wastefull process; certainly beneath a loving, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent God.
BWERB:
I am already "up to my eyeballs" in books to read:
Alexander Hamilton
The American Prophecies
The Purpose Driven Life (hosting/leading a group)
As well as redesigning the website (adding "Flash"), seeking a patent, and searching for a different job.
I'll add your book to the list.
H2Andy
Contributor
ah, Mike... please clear some PM's? I can't send you one cause your mailbox is
full =(
full =(
bwerb
Hoser/English Translator, eh
I agree Mike...you should see where Canada has taken it...our "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" allows such brilliant things as not letting the community know that an extremely violent guy listed as a "serious risk to reoffend" has escaped from a half-way house because it violates his privacy (he escaped and killed a man before the police revealed that they were "powerless" to reveal the information.)
This is just one example from a week or so ago of where the "law" is so far away from the common sense of the community.
This is just one example from a week or so ago of where the "law" is so far away from the common sense of the community.
Hey Andy...
Our earliest doucuments relied on a belief in "God". There was no seperation of "Church and State". In fact, you can't find anything like that in our Constitution, as it is a fairly recent concept. I respect that you are a lawyer and understand the law far better than I ever will, but I thought you might find that interesting.
Personally, I think God took the billions and billions of years needed to create our planet. I don't think that the fossil record is a hoax, and I really feel that those who feel that the Bible tells us that the earth is X number of years old, are missing the entire point. There are some really cool things that make this world possible.
For starters... ice. As things get colder they get denser. EVERYTHING that I know of solidifies denser than it's liquid form. Not ice. And if it didn't float, we would not have life on this planet. One of those things, that makes ya go "hmmmnnnnn".
Our earliest doucuments relied on a belief in "God". There was no seperation of "Church and State". In fact, you can't find anything like that in our Constitution, as it is a fairly recent concept. I respect that you are a lawyer and understand the law far better than I ever will, but I thought you might find that interesting.
Personally, I think God took the billions and billions of years needed to create our planet. I don't think that the fossil record is a hoax, and I really feel that those who feel that the Bible tells us that the earth is X number of years old, are missing the entire point. There are some really cool things that make this world possible.
For starters... ice. As things get colder they get denser. EVERYTHING that I know of solidifies denser than it's liquid form. Not ice. And if it didn't float, we would not have life on this planet. One of those things, that makes ya go "hmmmnnnnn".
H2Andy
Contributor
NetDoc:
nod, this is a very popular belief. however, the first
sentence in the First Amendent to the US Constitution states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
of religion or prohibiting the free excerise thereof."
this is in fact a separation of church and state, a key
departure from all other governments existing at that time,
which had "official" religions and persecuted those who
didn't belong.
the US was truly the first secular nation in the West since Constantine adopted the Nicean Creed in 325 AD (?),
and in fact it paved the way for all democracies existing today, where the basic human right of not having the
government interfere with your religion, either by forcing you
to worship or by denying you the right to worship, is
pretty much a given.
Green_Manelishi
Contributor
NetDoc:
I think you meant 21:18 ..
21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son [is] stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; [he is] a glutton, and a drunkard.
21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Yes, OT very brutal. And we've become so much more, um, less brutal? Not.
Sometimes when God chastens us and we do not harken to Him it's a brutal reckoning. Still, He loves us. But neither He not a human parent can allow our 'bad apple' to spoil the whole bunch.
Again, God talking to Israel and taken out of context. Old Testament dictates intended to keep Israel from falling into apostacy, etc. Not that it worked; they were a stubborn and stiff-necked people and the kingdom eventually divided ... The rest is HIStory, as it were.
Potapko
Contributor
Boy, there are too many posts here to respond to them all. 
The Bible defines pretty clearly that the intent in the passage is 24 hour days. Liberals try to interpret it differently to fit with another world view but they can't prove it from the text. The Bible says the evening and the morning was "THE FIRST" day. the Evening and the morning was the second day, and so on. You can try to redefine the word, "yowm" used in Scripture if you want to, but the Scripture defines it for itself. It is used 1860 times in the Bible and in at least 1800 of them it refers to a "normal" day.
True, it also is used as a period of time in a few passages, but in the context of Genesis and the creation, as it fits with the other passages of Scripture, a literal day is the clear meaning. You do not have to agree of course. I do not want to force this on anyone.
Somebody said "a better translation would be"...... Since God gave us His Word, perfectly, we know what the translation should be. The Bible.. believe it or not, the choice is yours.
Oh yes,
having to fight for arable land does not mean that it does not exist. The overpopulation myth has become quite popular these days.
Like I said, too many posts and too many...dare I say it. attacks on someone you do not agree with. You have the right to any opinion you want to hold, I'll stick to the Bible as written. Thanks
The Bible defines pretty clearly that the intent in the passage is 24 hour days. Liberals try to interpret it differently to fit with another world view but they can't prove it from the text. The Bible says the evening and the morning was "THE FIRST" day. the Evening and the morning was the second day, and so on. You can try to redefine the word, "yowm" used in Scripture if you want to, but the Scripture defines it for itself. It is used 1860 times in the Bible and in at least 1800 of them it refers to a "normal" day.
True, it also is used as a period of time in a few passages, but in the context of Genesis and the creation, as it fits with the other passages of Scripture, a literal day is the clear meaning. You do not have to agree of course. I do not want to force this on anyone.
Somebody said "a better translation would be"...... Since God gave us His Word, perfectly, we know what the translation should be. The Bible.. believe it or not, the choice is yours.
Oh yes,
having to fight for arable land does not mean that it does not exist. The overpopulation myth has become quite popular these days.
Like I said, too many posts and too many...dare I say it. attacks on someone you do not agree with. You have the right to any opinion you want to hold, I'll stick to the Bible as written. Thanks
Potapko
Contributor
H2Andy:
This is the typical smokescreen thrown by the "secular America" crowd.
Please take the time to explain how placing a statue of the ten commandments is "making a law"
Please explain how allowing, not forcing, the teaching of creation in school is CONGRESS "making a law"
The first amendment in it's first drafts read, establishing of a "Christian denomination" . Read the history. The founding fathers did not want a State religion, period. To use this to outlaw the teaching of religion is a very secular and twisted interpretation.
Just my opinion of course.
Green_Manelishi
Contributor
H2Andy:
You are practicing revisionist history.
Separation of church and state is lifted from a letter that TJ wrote to the Danbury (CT) Baptists. It occurs NOWHERE in the US BOR.
The 1st Amendment is intended to protect the church (believers) from the state (the Feds) not to prevent the faithful from living their faith out in public life, including if they were serving the public in some official elected capacity.
Some of the original colonies had 'state' supported churches and many of the FF were (nominally) Christian. If they were not they did not cry "shut up" when the faithful wanted to pray, worship or otherwise on "gubmint" property. Noone forced them to pray or worship. Sadly, now all it takes is ONE person to cry foul and NOONE is allowed to practice Christianity, or simply acknowledge God, in public.
Similar threads
