chris tann,.
in your earlier post you seemed to be under the impression that genesis and science were somehow compatible .
however, the truth is the two are not reconcilable at all.
Though I'm pretty much on board with the OP's presentation, I think it might be argued by Creationists that, in Gen 1:1, the "heavens and the earth" might be understood as 'heavens and [then] the earth", i.e; the listing of the heavens first implies that they were created first.
Of course, one would have to admit that the text does not say "and then the earth".
for one thing, i cant get past genesis, but no matter.. when god told adam and eve if you eat from the tree youll die.
so why did he not simple let them die and not allow the offspring to?.
you see, if i was a god, and i told two people that, id let them die , .
I like your account better, redvip2000.
The bible is often called the greatest story ever told; but it's probably the dumbest story ever told.
a nice example of how the introduction of a competeing species can result in behavioral and anatomical changes in an indigenous one.. http://www.the-scientist.com//?articles.view/articleno/41309/title/rapid-evolution-in-real-time/.
for most of its existence, the carolina anole (anolis carolinensis) was the only lizard in the southwestern u.s. it could perch where it wanted, eat what it liked.
but in the 1970s, aided by human pet trade, the brown anole (anolis sagrei)native to cuba and the bahamascame marching in.
I was thinking the same thing as Billyblobber - this proves that the Flood did happen!!!!
[quote]some might assume that a scientifically-minded person would pick evolution and that a religious person would pick creation.
but not always.. rama singh, professor of biology at canadas mcmaster university, says: the opposition to evolution goes beyond religious fundamentalism and includes a great many people from educated sections of the population.[/quote].
end-of-quote in awake.
I'm marking this too. I'd love to see Dr. Singh's response.
As of now, it looks like more quote cherry-picking by the Society.
When I first started reading it, I immediately knew that the Society's writer(s) would pounce on the "educated sections of the population" and asked myself, 'which section, those with a high school education?' Because those are basically the only people, outside fundamentalists and others with a strong belief in God that view evolutionary theory as a threat, that question evolution as an established fact, and the full quote Dr. Singh basically states the same.
so what have been your experiences with sleep paralysis?
any connection to astral projection?
this has interested me recently as i used to have sleep paralysis quite often years ago.
I used to experience it pretty often - that feeling of being partly awake, but unable to move. I'd try to come up with some way to move an extremity - kick my foot or move a hand, but I had to work at it, and at times I would be able to 'break' the paralysis.
In recent years, I seem to experience it less often. The only factor, besides getting older, that has changed for me is that I moved to a new house. Since then, I experience it less. I also experience less of a thing I used to call "Flying", where I'd dream that I was flying around the house, and often doing so to check the front and back doors for intruders. The sensation of flying actually seemed enjoyable, and after a while, I sort of 'knew' that I was in that dream-state while it was happening. It was like 'hey, I'm flying in my sleep again - this is cool'.
I'm not sure whether the two were related, or were the result of taking sleep aids. But I still take sleep aids (usually Melatonin); even so I now seem to experience these sensations less frequently.
in my most recent talk, i got counseled for using some terms that were not prefered.
for example i said "new testament" rather than "the christian greek scriptures".
i also used the term "gospel", but even worse, i made reference to the "synoptic gospels" and the "gnostic gospel".. i guess i never thought of it before, but when i looked at the societies information on the matter they always say things like, "the so-called new testament..." or "the so-called synoptic gospels..." why with all the "so-called?".
JW GoneBad pointed out nicely their whole issue with the name Jesus Christ, or Jesus. Try thanking Jesus for any thing. Try mentioning Jesus as having anything to do with blessing the congregation, and see what reaction you get. And you had better not speak of having a relationship with Jesus, and yet you can have one with Jehovah.
I'll chime in another word: Service. Don't call a meeting a "service". But it's OK to refer to service in other ways, such as field service. But since the no-good churches call their gatherings a "service", it's wrong to call a meeting such, of course. Apparently, service is something that only happens when you're moving, and can't be rendered standing still.
the latest watchtower, dec 15th 2003, is an out and out attack on the rank and file for dropping into a drowsy state spiritually.
ok, so armageddon didn't come before the generation of 1914 grew old and died.
but does that mean that the big a isn't near?
It's great when these old threads get dusted off.
i really don't get it.. in most sports in most countries your career is rightly over if you commit certain crimes.. but not in the good old nfl !.
it seems players can rape, beat women, abuse children, fight dogs ... and they will not only be allowed to play but they will have an army of fans wearing their names on their shirts and cheering them on.. the abuse and arrogant attitudes seem to exist at all levels - it seems like there is an endless feed of news stories where some high-school or college football players have abused or raped girls and they end up being allowed back to play and people rallying round as though *they* are the victims.. surely, whatever someone's skills as an athlete are, there are some things that simply can't be excused?.
or is winning truly 'everything' and it doesn't matter the cost?.
Two things have finally turned the tide in such matters:
1. The Ray Rice video
2. Social Media
For years, the NFL has been lightly slapping players on the wrist for domestic violonce offenses - one game suspensions in the cases of Dwayne Carsewell (2004), and Brad Hopkins (2005) and Tony McDaniel (2010), for example.
But then the world saw the video of Rice dragging his unconscious fiancee out of that elevator. And then, of course, we saw the video of what happened inside the elevator.
With that video combined with Social Media, you now have an instant Grand Jury, ready to pass judgment and possessing enough evidence to do so.
Underestimating the impact of those two factors (amazingly, corporations and governments still fail to grasp the impact of social media) the NFL was caught with their britches down and botched the entire affair repeatedly.
People who support these abusers also fail to grasp the import of these factors and have found themselves on the wrong side of history - repeatedly. People who rationalize and justify things like child abuse and abuse of women are finding themselves painted into a corner by their own ignorance being exposed for what it is. Because we now see these things and react to them collectively, the old views of the past are shown up as ignorant and outdated.
So now, if they go ahead and support abusers, they do so at their own peril. They risk being classed and cast among the ignorant.
this is quite embarrassing for me to share, but as a 30+ year old single female i have lingering doubts as to whether i can still meet a decent man and get married.. you all know how difficult it is for sisters to find an appropriate partner in the congregation.. and now, all the more so that i've learned ttatt.
i still am bound by low self-esteem, and i do have trust issues, especially with men.
i am very lonely and so i just keep myself busy with work to avoid depression (although it is also a great source of stress).. any other single females out there having similar thoughts?.
SoWhatnow, what I'm saying is that women who are younger, thinner, and prettier are naturally going to be more attractive to men.
If a guy wants to date older women, fine. There are sites like OurTime.com that specifically cater to those who wish to date older men/women.
What bothers me is when men are condemned by women who think that a guy should, for some reason, eschew younger, more attractive women in favor of older ones.
Forrest Heathen said she found it "disgusting". I called her on that, because it's simply natural.
In evolutionary terms, a younger, fitter woman is perceived by males as more fertile, thus there will likely be more success in passing on his genes. It is natural for a man to seek a woman who looks more fit. I'm not saying he has to, or commenting on whether he should or should not. I'm saying don't condemn him for it.
this is quite embarrassing for me to share, but as a 30+ year old single female i have lingering doubts as to whether i can still meet a decent man and get married.. you all know how difficult it is for sisters to find an appropriate partner in the congregation.. and now, all the more so that i've learned ttatt.
i still am bound by low self-esteem, and i do have trust issues, especially with men.
i am very lonely and so i just keep myself busy with work to avoid depression (although it is also a great source of stress).. any other single females out there having similar thoughts?.
Forrest heathen wrote: "It used to disgust me how these guys overlooked some very nice women because they wanted a younger, thinner, prettier bride".
Men are pretty much genetically programmed to seek younger, prettier women. I'm often perplexed as to why men are blamed by women for seeking what they are essentially programmed to seek. We want them because WE find them attractive. Why should we be bound by what YOU think we should find attractive?
Now, I'm sure the 30-something sisters you are referring to are probably fine women, and perhaps quite attractive. But if a guy has a chance to date a girl who is younger and even prettier, well, he will likely do just that. It should not be news that men like women who are "younger, thinner" and "prettier". Men should not be condemned for wanting to follow through on what they naturally desire.
