insane

It's funny though... I doubt anyone would complain or yell "discrimination!" if the rule was enforced on heterosexuals but not homosexuals.

I fail to see how a verse saying that anything is possible with God makes Christianity pointless. My point about that verse explaining away anything was that (if you read between the lines), it is often taken out of context. *With God*, anything is possible. If you're doing something contrary to God's character, you're hardly with God anymore, are you? It has to be something in God's will for it to be possible, as if you're not in God's will, you're not "with God". And I would argue that it is out of God's character to be contradictory, and as I believe, someone who will physically conquer (in your opinion) Assyria can not do so peacefully, it's a contradiction. God wouldn't make 2 = 3, and he wouldn't make peace not peace. But this is all my opinion, and can be ignored as a formal argument. Yes but this military commander you speak of will conquer the Assyrians. This verse really makes it seem like the military commander is always in existence. His origin *is* *from* old, *from* days of yore. Those are words usually used to speak in present or past tense. What do you make fo that verse? You explained away the presence of the word eternity, but left the basis of my argument (sort of a straw man). And lastly... This really sounds like a concluding statement. If there were a colon or semi colon (see v.3) after the word 'peace' instead of a period, I would believe the rest of the text selection to be talking about the same person, but it really seems to be concluding a thought, and then moving on. (sorry for the misorganization of my post)

There is proof that she was warned to stop showing affection at school, repeatedly broke the rules and was repeatedly disciplined for her refusal to follow the rules. There is NO PROOF that she was discriminated against. You can't site her unproven claims as evidence. So you're saying we shouldn't believe a single thing we read? No, he's saying don't trust what *she* says. His quotes came from (suposedly) unbiased sources, whereas your quote was from the defendent herself.

Wait... what? Where does it say eternal? That's gross misinterpretation. Nowhere is the word eternal used. And nowhere is timeless to be found. And also, "coming in peace" is so ambigious it could mean anything. And like I said, Jesus did NOT come in peace; he caused a whole load of trouble. I used the NASB, which is commonly known (amongst Bible readers) to have aimed more at accuracy than the NIV. Eternal ~ timeless... I was just reiterating it. Okay then. That verse can be used to explain away anything.

Dude, lay off the TV and movies...

While this isn't an argument or anything... I believe what you say is true about financial status, and that's a very sad state to have come to. The justice system depends on who has the most money? :S not cool...

Yea, I pretty much agree here. I know the high school I went to had rules against certain "PDA" (public dislays of affection).

But the same argument applies to innocent people being killed. If the justice system was perfect, then innocent people wouldn't be killed. I don't think the justice system is supposed to act as a deterrent to doing bad deeds because that is just impossible. It appears that even though people know they will be sentenced to death for doing something they will still go ahead and commit crimes - so it is impossible for a justice system to prevent crimes, it merely exacts punishment for the crimes afterwards. Okay, just trying to clarify here - the justice system is unperfect because it allowed imperfect beings to apply it? That would make sense to me.

Not really... I just don't want to be someone who bases my opinions on one random fact thrown at me :P I'm not saying that they *aren't* being racist... I'm just saying it will take more than that to convince me that they are. While I agree with the first four of your facts... Is sort of... I dunno. Here, I'll use an example. A plane crashes because it's wings weren't designed properly. Oh... how horrible aerodynamics must be! This plane applied the principle of aerodynamics wrongly, therefore aerodynamics is a bad thing. is ~ to People applying the death penalty wrongly (Racistly), is really irrelevant to the goodness/badness of the death penalty itself. Application vs. principle... applications are always irrelevant to the principle. It's the people applying the death penalty that are racist, and if they're going to use the death penalty racistly, then theyre going to use whatever other sentence given racistly. (and I'm sure that there are cases where the death penalty is applied correctly, and justly... which of course is dependent on someone's standing on your 5th fact..)

I'm okay with the death penalty in this issue. He *knew* the law, and he *knew* that if he was caught, he'd be sentenced to death. I have no sympathy for him. However, I think that hanging is a little "barbaric" (for lack of a better term).

Not to mention the sample data for the graph used was of *one* city over a ten year period, over ten years ago.

Hey!! At least you moved it to the advertisement thread :P that beats alot of our users right there :lol: (the ones that advertise anyways)

Thats Nickelback isn't it? :? :wink: Well considering half a dollar is 50 cents I'd be inclined to say that hannibal is right. I have no idea how much a nickle is though? 5 cents :P

I never said Bethlehem isn't a place, I said that there is also a clan of Bethlehem. And in Micah 5:2, it is referring to the clan. And, Christ didn't come from anyone. He has no lineage besides God and Mary, and Mary's lineage isn't really recorded (women weren't recorded). And I'm saying Micah 5:2 is referring to the place. Shown through the verse in Samuel where there were Ephrathites living in Bethlehem. There's Biblical evidence for Mary being of King David... I'll find it in a sec, and even if I don't, concluding that Mary isn't from King David is denying the antecedent. Just because there isn't evidence Mary comes from King David, doesn't mean it isn't true. And while I'm at it, we can also point out that since Mary and Joseph were wed, Christ became the legal son of Joseph, and therefore became part of King David's lineage. Certainly. The first "He" is said to be eternal, timeless, and coming in peace. A mere military conquerer would not be eternal, timeless, and definatley wouldn't come in peace. There.

Nah, it's H0H 0H0. Think about it, our postal codes are always letter-number-letter number-letter-number

I like not knowing ahead of time :P

It would be handy if you used a period now and then.

err yea, don't bump old topics needlessly.

What is there to make out of it? If you go onto read into verse 15, Bethlehem is clearly described as a place (as David tends sheep at Bethlehem), and David was the son of an Ephrathite, and Christ comes from David. No, it doesn't matter. You're assuming the "He" (the military conquerer) in v6 is the "He" in v2-4. It seems that the "He" in v2-4 is described as one whom already exists ("His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity" (NASB)), and one whom will come in peace. Doesn't sound like a non-messianic military conquerer to me. Therefore, I don't believe that it is the same person being talked about. Therefore I don't believe Matthew made a mistake and so any argument concerning such is irrelevant.

Mm mm New York :)

Hmm examples examples.... Well... i cant think of any really good examples. But again im saying, how can you say that there is the absolute, if some people do percive it... There is no way to prove absolute evil. There is mostlikely things that we all do that others think is evil, but that couldnt be, cause that would mean the whole world is evil and good at the same time... compleatly conterdicting eachother. You're right...there is no way to prove absolute evil. It doesn't mean its not there. To say evil is relative is to say no one can do any wrong and everything should be acceptable in society. EVERYTHING. Because everyone perceives everything differently. So I can murder people if I want to. While I'm on your side, that is an appeal to consequences... just because it would have bad consequences if it were true, doesn't mean it can't be true that morality is subjective. Again, I am a firm believer in moral absolutism, I just don't like the appeal to consequences argument.

Even though you like learning by ear, I suggest learning how to read tablature. This is how alot of guitar music is written, and is super easy to read. Also, if you like learning by ear, you can tab the music yourself for future reference.

One might argue that there is a difference between murder and killing. For instance, in war, I hardly see the countries at war seeing the deaths as murders, but as killings? Not too sure, but the definition of such things, could make a difference about whether or not " 'murder' is wrong" (which is ironic coming from you :P).

Nice to see you're so sure of yourself :roll: Runescape, DAoC, Asheron's Call Oh mi gawd lol you used :roll: Well done you were sad enough to go research it. You've earnt yourself a loser medal! Oh grow up. You were acting like you were the king, calling the posters names, because you thought that your knowledge was oh-so-superior and that you knew better. Then someone shows you up, and you respond by what? Insulting him? Real logical, real mature.