Joshua

I'd like hockey more if it was applicable to me The one time I tried go-karts I ended up with a chest bruise as a kid that lasted almost a year. Skateboards, surfing, any kind of boarding I don't plan on ever trying. I never messed around much with bikes as a kid, always preferred being on my feet. I tried learning how to ride a bike under someone's pressure several years back and was able to stay on it but never tried any further with it. When I went driving my first time in Driver's Ed I was on the wrong side of the road and almost hit a Mercedes I relayed the aforesaid info to my instructor when he tried to nervously encourage me that if I could ride a bike I could drive a car I can't bike, board, skate (not well anyway, tried for roller skates a couple times but wasn't any good), surf, etc... He asked if I was good at anything for related stuff and I told him "bumper cars" That was hilarious Hockey is a pretty cool sport to watch though, and the Mighty Ducks stuff show it at its most glamorous

But there's no excuse for doing evil deeds or unlawful deeds. The laws I follow are my own morals, my common sense, and my country's laws. Well, most of them anyway. And Zacharias talks about "kamma". This is incorrect - it should be karma, probably. That's right, it's never right to do evil, no matter what good may come of it, Romans 3:8 makes that quite clear. We all deserve eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire. God cannot condone evil. Someone has to pay the penalty for it. God does NOT waffle on sin. However, out of love for us He has given us a chance to have Him pay that penalty on our behalf. This is the Gospel message. Furthermore, we are NOT the same people we were before accepting that payment, for He makes us new people, as Christ says in John 3:7, we are born again. We are changed that so we live to obey God rather then ourselves. Maybe this is where the misunderstanding is occurring? The problem with following the rules of men is what if you're a person like Jeffrey Dahmer who thinks evil persions are perfectly right, moral, and follow common sense? Who are you then to tell him he's not living right? A country's laws may involve you getting sent to prison for 20 years like some have in our court systems. There have been men on the death penalty who've lost years of their lives for no reason, is that ok? What I'm saying is there has to be a higher standard by which to judge what is right and what is wrong. In Hinduism it's called, Karma, in Buddhism it's Kamma, and Zecharias addresses that: (Take note that the Pali language of the Buddhist scriptures has a different sound to some words that have become common in English from Hinduism. Kamma, for example, carries the meaning of karma.) A brahmin is the ultimate caste because they are humble, they do good deeds, and they're content with themselves. My family has been brahmin for as long as I can remember - however, this doesn't influence me in any way. It's part of who I am, and I can't change that. What I can change is what I'll do tomorrow. There's this really annoying person in my Latin class. Should I truly tell him he doesn't have any real friends and that most of the people that know him talk to him out of sympathy? Who would say such a thing? It's merely common sense acting and telling you what is good and what is bad. For example, if you're taking a test and you don't know the answer, but the person next to you has left their paper uncovered, would you look if you knew you weren't going to get caught? Most people would say "no" because they feel they have the dignity and the self-control to be able to take care of themselves without anyone telling them that their sins "are someone else's". And it doesn't bother you that people are considered to have less rights and be of a lower caste with less worth then you simply because they were born poor? That's the way they teach it over in India. The poor are expected to carry the weight of society simply because of the circumstances of their birth. This then is explained as them being born poor in this life because of sins in the past life. Hinduism teaches that ultimately there is no good or evil but that the two meet in Brahmin, I already posted what Zecharias had to say on the issue earlier. The views of Buddhism and Hinduism involve what to me seems a very depressing root of their beliefs. You just keep trying to live better and live better through each life until ultimately you get good enough to just disappear Pretty fatalistic... and depressing. I don't recall ever saying that Christianity involved saying the sins are someone else's, we're responsible for them, and unless we accept Christ's payment on the cross for them, we will be justly punished by God for those sins. Those are my primary reasons for not believing evil is something that's created. It's merely a state of being, not an aura. Being psychotic, being hellbent on something, or being told to do something by a higher power (could also be a government thing) are things we exclude from our definition of evil because they can't help themselves. Or can they? You know what that is effectively relating to? Atheism You'll notice the mention of "dancing to one's DNA" where atheism says everyone is just following their own special path and there is no ultimate good or evil. Here Zecharias quotes Richard Dawkins of Oxford, one of atheism's champions, on page 113: In the state of mental patients, doing simple chores is hard enough. But what about thinking (easily one of the harder functions of the nervous system)? There's so much gray matter and areas we don't even know about. And yet they affect our senses in so many ways. Take Andrea Yates for example - she believed her children were heathens, and the "Devil" told her to drown them. She lived close to where I live now, so I heard more than my share about it. Yet, she was in trauma mentally. Regardless of the fact that she was a Christian, that was a violent sin and a brutal story. Yet she couldn't help it - her mind clouded her judgement and because of the stress on it, she committed the crime. And she was no stranger to death. But what I think you're missing is that simply claiming to be a Christian doesn't make you one nor put you under God's protection as one of His children. Christ said we'll know His disciples by their love for others, and I have often proved, love does not harm others. Therefore those who harm others are not logically Christians. I'll conclude it here. It's your mind, not anyone else's. Be strong and stand up for yourself - if you did a crime, let people know that it was you and no one else. Not God, not the Devil, not any form of creature can enter your brain and tell you how to live your life. What happens to you happens to you alone because of your actions. 'nuff said, it's your fault so confess it. So first you say there's no such thing as evil and then you say to take responsibility for what evil you do? You can't have it both ways, evil can't be both illusory and concrete, which is it? The Bible says that the only way to Christ and eternal life is BY confessing you are wrong and in need of salvation. The first step is to admit that noone but you is responsible and that God alone can save you. You're not far from the kingdom of Heaven.

Seems like this would be a simple moral to the story: This was part of this, which is all pretty interesting, which Solomon wrote: However, Solomon finally concluded the following:

Ooh, ooh, I know, I know!!! The space should be before Grandpa and not after the word "them" right? I wouldn't be surprised if there's a flaw no one else has noticed, and maybe I'll look it over more thoroughly later, I just thought it would be funny to be lazy and pick on the story's grammar.

I've seen the equation before and it's been pointed out that the problem is that the Bible says it's the "love of money" that's the root of all evil, not money itself

You hit on the point I was going to make, the difference between knowledge and wisdom. I say this the younger generation may be more intelligent, but has less wisdom and common sense and knows less truth.

I go to sleep usually around 9pm -12 am, sometimes I stay up well into the morning though. I'm getting back on my sleep schedule though so usually no later then 1 or 2 am at the latest now though. Btw, info tidbit, getting 2 hours of sleep here and another 3 there and another 2 there isn't the same as getting 7 straight hours of sleep. Your body gets all its rest when it's in this deep sleep phase that involves you sleeping like 5 hours or something first if I remember right. That's when dreams happen as well too. I recall reading about it in a highschool psychology book many years ago, but it's been a while... Anyway, just thought you might be interested in knowing that there's a difference in rest between sleeping the same amount of time if it's not all at once.

You can talk to the admin at https://www.godaddy.com/ His YIM is Godisreliable and he had the yeti games all installed on the aforementioned site. Apparently there's some problem with the creator of the games though not wanting them to be slightly altered to be hi-score compatible, so they were taken off the site. Anyway, he can probably tell you more about them. Just too bad the IPB gaming for Xisto can't get those games on here, that would be awesome...

People have said phones or computers, but why not for the simple reason that you can use them to get off the island? Also, depending on if you can't get off the island a water purification device might be nice if there's no water, although then there's the problem of food... If it's an island prison like alcatraz, so food and water aren't a problem, then probably a laptop. Although why they'd let you have a laptop to contact the outside world from a prison I have no idea.

Alcohol impairs your judgement, meaning you're at a higher risk to make even more regrettable mistakes. And if you listen to some former drinkers they can probably tell you that it's only a temporary escape. I had a pastor before who had once been a drunkard but through a relationship with Christ abandoned it utterly. He's talked about it before, and how people use it because it does work, but it's only a temporary escape. It might help you forget for a while, but it doesn't solve anything.As far as I'm concerned, drugs, alcohol, and even devoting yourself to sports or what might be considered healthy pursuits like a job, poetry, writing, etc... are only temporary escapes. They might help you deal with the pain but they don't solve it. I've found one thing that does eliminate it completely, and that's a relationship with Jesus Christ, one of the first things you notice is a clearing of all guilt from your conscience in a way you wouldn't believe. Ironically, there's a very real cure that works like no anti-depressant or drug or substitute of any kind can, and people refuse it despite evidence of the reality of Jesus Christ. I read about a psychologist before who said all he had to do was read Scripture passages to patients and that was often all they needed. But mankind has a tendency to avoid the simple answers to try and work things out on their own, which ends up being a complicated mess.

21 here and in college. I know this is an old thread (I like to bring back old threads, started at the oldest, am already up to page 271 of General Talk topics ) but I'd guess it's somewhat of a clear representation of Xisto user ages. We could use some new input by current users on this topic Interesting, I'm one of the older users

One of my brothers wears one of these things. They had a scandal over someone selling the Cubs believe bracelets without Cubs authorization so I wonder a bit if that could be happening with these things as well...

Three words... "Grasshopper Death Match" I like baseball best, dodgeball would probably be a 2nd favorite. Baseball is about the only game I'll play as a video game, and that rarely. I always preferred actually playing sports physically to watching them or playing them as a video game. Over here in Montgomery we're starting to get some good informal baseball/softball games going at Copley Field. I'm not as fond of softball as I am of baseball, but at least it's somewhat related. I wish they'd let you pitch overhand though Football isn't too bad either. I like basketball but for some reason I have a lot of injury problems when it comes to basketball, and don't recall ever having any kind of an injury from football, whether tackle or otherwise Swimming's good exercise, but like track, I wouldn't like it as a sport. It's basically just a race, not enough variety for me. Soccer is ok but I prefer a sport where I can use my hands more then my feet. Badminton is awesome if you have a lot of birdies being hit at once I like playing it as sheer chaos, you against several people, then it's awesome Volleyball is cool too, but I don't like having too many people playing (more then 4) since it gets too crowded and I like to move around. Tennis I find a bit boring, same with golf and bowling and pool. And pingpong, which I consider a curse upon the sports world (kind of like golf)

And yet what you are implicitly denying is that there is an ultimate moral law. If such things as lying, cheating, stealing, etc... are wrong, then there must be an ultimate moral law that makes such things wrong. I am saying that we are all utterly at fault for our actions, and not only that, we deserve to die an eternal death for them. The difference doesn't lie in being any less guilty, it lies in having your punishment paid for you. There are some problems implicit in the very basics of Hinduism and Buddhism concerning payments for past lives. For one thing, what sins were you paying for in your first life to determine from whence you started? And if life is cyclical and the reincarnations have no beginning, why is there an end? The utter nirvana according to it is complete desirelessness, so then is there not even the desire to see evil ended? Ravi Zecharias mentions in his book Jesus Among Other Gods on page 122: Here's some more on Hinduism specifically from page 119-120: Well, there's your opportunity to start talking about Hinduism Now what are your thoughts on it?

I don't have a religion, a religion is man trying to work His way to God. I'm a Christian. I follow what the Bible says, what Christ told me, and which you are clearly against. Christ clearly says that any reason for divorce other then for fornication is committing adultery: Umm... you mean this??? Well, this is a very good passage for showing that we SHOULD judge people by their actions... Are you SURE this is what you're thinking of? Because it would be highly ironic if so. Here Paul is specifically stating that those in a lifestyle contrary to the Gospel are living in rebellion against God and as he says those that are within the Church are judged by them. (verse 12) The Bible in Basic English translation for verses 12 you might find easier to understand: 1 Corinthians 5:12 For it is no business of mine to be judging those who are outside; but it is yours to be judging those who are among you; So you see my friend, while this passage is again vulnerable to the same critique I made earlier, of what is meant by "judging" (whether as condemnation or a simple moral evaluation) the passage clearly states that those that are within the Church are indeed to be judged in the sense that they can be not included in the Church so long as they continue living in active rebellion to Christ, unrepentant sin involving the aforementioned sins. What you've effectively just done is led us to one of the best passages for evidence of why we SHOULD judge within the Church, and that is why I laughed But did Henry know any consequences would follow of his choice? Yes, strong feelings can exist, that can be simple lust, and he did end up sleeping with the woman, didn't he? I still fail to see your point there. *shrugs* You are right that Catholocism and Christianity are drawn together, in that a lot of Christian saints have been persecuted by Catholocism as they were burned at the stake, murdered through horrible tortures during the Inquisition, turned out in the cold with their garments cut short to freeze to death, etc... So yes, I'll grant you that, there is a connection in that the Catholic Church is more responsible for the deaths of Christians then any other institution in the world. Well, good to hear you use a KJV I suppose. *shrugs*

I've rooted for the Chicago Cubs for the last 6 years or so but I root more for players then teams. I determine which players not only by how they live their lives but how much I like their testimonies. Most of them are found at http://thegoal.com/ but in the case of J.D. Drew and some others, they are found at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ which has a few testimonies here and there. Some of my favorite players are J.D. Drew, Todd Hollandsworth, Jim Thome, Todd Walker, Michael Barrett, Lance Berkman, Mike Sweeney, John Smoltz, Mariano Rivera, and Jimmy Rollins. It's not only because the Cubs are a regional team but also because Walker, Hollandsworth, and Barrett are on the team. If any one of them were to leave I'd be less intent on rooting for them. Also, I don't mind the White Sox winning (Dustin Hermanson is the only favorite player on the team though) as long as they're not facing the Cubs A Cubs-White Sox WS would be awesome! As long as the Cubs won, that is

Christ said not to judge, He also said not to judge according to appearance but to judge righteous judgement? Why don't you explain just what you think He meant in both cases by the word "judge"? The Bible says just lusting after someone you're not married to is adultery. I don't get what your Catholic reference meant, I thought we were talking about Christianity here... Ultimately it comes down to whether you obey God or your own judgement I guess. You yourself say that by your own judgement you think God should have added another "deal breaker," but as the Bible says, let God be true, and every man a liar.

I never said anything about it being a rumor, I read a study about it in a magazine recently, I think it was USA Weekend if I recall correctly. I did a search and found condoms don't stop HPV, although that's not what I'm looking for: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ If I find it again I'll show you, if I'd known I'd be quoting it I'd have kept the article at the time.

Hmm... Some people think Christ was "born" in the sense we think of? Christ said He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. (Revelation 1:8)He claimed to exist before Abraham did. (John 8:58)David knew Him before He ever entered our world in human as flesh as Jesus Christ and even recognized that blessedness comes from trusting Him and that to anger Him is to perish. (Psalms 2:12) In Hebrews 1:10 it says He laid the foundation of the earth. In John 1 it gives an account of how He is God, made everything, and that everything was made by Him.In Philippians 2:6-8 we see that Him coming to earth and using Mary as a doorway for Him, the eternal God by whom all things are made, to step into earth as a man, was something He consciously CHOSE to do. In Hebrews 7:3 we see that Christ has "no father, no mother, neither beginning of days, nor end of life" in the sense that we think of. Jesus Christ was never created. He always existed.Now, I could go on and explain this mystery to you but I've done it so many times on Xisto that frankly I think it might be more interesting to see you give your opinions on this before I throw some more at you to ponder over I want to see what some of the people on the site think just about this so far.

Judaism refuses to accept its Messiah, Jesus Christ, which is what separates it from Christianity. If it did, it would realize the passage in its own Scriptures that says vengeance is God, and He will repay, not us. Christ said to love our enemies and do good to those that persecute us. Furthermore, He clearly stated that the majority of those who call themselves His followers will be either liars or deceived when He said that "few" will find the way to life but "many" will come to Him in the last day claiming to be His only to be told they never Him. (same chapter too, Matthew 7) Christ said that by love will we know who are His disciples (John 13:35) and in Romans 13:10 it says that love is the fulfilling of the Law because it doesn't hurt others. So if we know who are His disciples by their love and love doesn't hurt others, then it would be safe to assume those who start wars and hurt others are not true followers of His, correct? Christ says that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord" to Him will enter Heaven but those that do the will of His Father in Heaven. (Matthew 7:21) I'm going to speak as plainly as I can. You DO NOT become a Christian by calling yourself one, it is a heart transaction. We can't see that transaction but we can see what it produces. If there is no love it is safe to assume there is no transaction. The Bible specifically states that we know we've passed from death to life because we love others. (1 John 3:14) IF AN INSTITUTION/DENOMINATION CLAIMS TO BE CHRISTIAN AND STARTS WARS AND HURTS OTHERS IT IS CLEARLY NOT CHRISTIAN. Christ said the 2 great commandments are to love God and love others. (Mark 12:28-30) Love does not harm others. (Romans 13:10) Therefore whoever is hurting others is actively defying what Christ said are the 2 great commandments upon which hang all the Law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:40)

Well, Ravi Zecharias actually writes the book Jesus Among Other Gods to show the differences between Christianity and other religions I would say some of the differences are that Christianity says you can find eternal life through no merit of your own, it isn't about what works you can do, but about Christ's finished payment on the cross. You gain eternal life merely by repenting, trusting in Him alone, and accepting Him as Lord of your life. Another thing, it deals not with beliefs but with relationships. Christianity is not about demographics but getting in a right relationship with God through Jesus Christ and then growing in that relationship. Now for some of the stuff Ravi points out in his book. He points out that unlike almost anyone in history, Christ not only claimed to be sinless but He also challenged His greatest enemies to find any sin in Him, and they could not do it. Another thing Ravi points out is that Christ did not come to build a worldly empire but one of the hearts. It's why he said His kingdom was not of the world, and why His followers did not fight to protect Him. Even Napoleon realized this great truth, that His kingdom is one of men's souls, not of worldly armies or forces. Also, Christ could have tried to start Christianity in Egypt where He'd once lived or in Rome where they were more partial to multiple deities. But instead He chose to do so in a nation that would be more firmly opposed to the idea then perhaps any other in the world. Cries of blasphemy and attempts to stone Him were commonplace wherever He went. Ravi also points out that not only did Jesus teach or expound His message, but He was identical with the message. He not only proclaimed the truth, He claimed to be the truth. He didn't just show a way but said He was the way. Another thing, Christ didn't attribute people's circumstances to mistakes they'd made in past lives or current lives or that anyone else had made. In John 9 when asked why a man was born blind, Christ answers that it was so the work of God could be displayed in His life. Christ also associated with those society most devalued. Prostitutes loved Him because He showed them compassion and treated them with dignity, yet He utterly denounced the self-righteous. Also, the fact that He not only prophesied that He would die, but that it had been prophesied hundreds if not thousands of years before, and then that He rose from the dead while being witnessed by hundreds of witnesses, is not something emulated by any religion. Christ was not a teacher only, but reknowned as a prophet and a miracle worker by the masses. He didn't do His miracles in a corner either, nor His teachings, He did them even before the leaders of the nations. Because of this, in Acts 26:26 Paul says that even King Agrippa must know of such things, precisely because Christ did work publicly. These were not things which even the rulers could deny. Also, Christianity says that evil is real, the world is real, and time is real. Because of denials of such things other religions like Buddhism and Hinduism which teach reincarnation have some highly insurmountable problems, as Ravi points out. Here's a quote from page 122: Concerning Islam, Ravi points out that the sword and warfare are an intrinsic part of the Islamic faith. In Surah 9:5 of the Koran it says to "slay and fight the idolators wherever you find theM' and says to prepare ambushes for them. This is directly opposed to the kingdom not of this world Christ spoke of, which has nothing to do with political influence or worldly military forces. Ravi points out that popular speaker Deepak Chopra whose Vedic teachings are of spirituality, success, and prosperity, has a religion with millions of devotees living in abject poverty. And so each religion must face the responsibility of answering the questions posed to it. Some other points Ravi makes: Jesus said there is one way to God, Hinduism and Bahaism don't like that. He stated God is the author of life, not something Buddhism likes. And Christ said He is the Son of God, which Islam is not too happy about. These are just a few of the points Ravi makes, maybe I'll point out some more later.

Yeah, the people who'd lived long enough probably just saw Jordan as the next Wilt Chamberlain

Whether science has an agenda or not, people do, scientists do. So many people accept as science those things merely supported by a popular theorist, regardless of the logic behind it. It's like with art, there've been artists who'd put a toilet bowl on a pedestal and call it art, then get away with it because they've found acclaim already. Does that really make it art just because they're considered a good artist? The artist who did that btw was doing it for challenging the system and to point out that flaw, and knowing this, the exhibit is still a widely acclaimed work of art I would argue evolution does precisely what you claim creation science does in seeking to support its preconceived notions that everything came from nothing. By the same notion, belief in evolution exists to support the belief of evolution. At its most basic, it involves scientists who see the wonderful design of our universe and the designs all around us in nature, while denying that there is a Designer. If you say that simply because a branch of science is dedicated to proving one thing in particular (and most are) then that means you cannot accept much of science. Many creation scientists were once atheists and actually of the evolution crowd, some of their best and brightest, who through searching with logic for truth discovered they were supporting the unsupportable. Ironically it is these which are quickly discredited. Or perhaps you falsely heard that a creation scientist is one who spends all their time looking for ways to prove creation science false. On the contrary, these are real scientists working at their jobs, labs, or universities who hold the STANCE that creation is right, just as one believing in evolution would do. It continually shocks me how easily people can discredit them simply because of what they believe, rather then who they are. You arent judging them on an individual basis either by their credentials or their experience but upon their STANCE. How can you expect proof of something if you refuse to listen to those who support it? Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. The Bible doesnt say they were trying to fit their own beliefs in, does it? It simply claims they were searching the Scriptures to see if they were true. Actually, it wasn't for questioning but for rebellion and specific abominations that God took vengeance. Abraham's wife went so far as to laugh at something God said and He didn't "smite" her (Genesis 8:12-15) Moses questioned God's power to be able to use him because he was a bad speaker, which is why God had Aaron do the speaking. (Exodus 4:10-15) God's vengeance came upon nations that attacked or persecuted His people Israel, upon Israelites who rebelled against Him with idol worship, or upon whole nations who committed evil abominations like homosexuality and idol worship, especially worship of Baal or Molech. With them idol worship involved child sacrifice, burning the children alive, and was perhaps the quickest way to get God angry with you. God destroyed many, many nations for this sin of child sacrifice and whenever Israel began to practice it they could be certain of a horrified God's abrupt judgements. God always loved, the Old Testament is filled with references of His love for Israel and His forgiving nature is evident in His willingness to forgive those who became Israelites and worshipped Him. The woman in Jericho became an Israelite, and a whole book of the Bible, Ruth, is about a woman who rejected her nation's heritage to serve the One true God of Jacob. If God's forgiveness is more evident in the New Testament it is because God's wrath is shown as poured out on God the Son so that He is free to deal with all mankind who accept that free gift in love without that justice side of it, since Christ paid for all their sins. Rebellion was still punished with physical death in the New Testament (Acts 5:1-10) and that God still judged nations which attacked His chosen people is clear, for when Rome began to persecute Christianity, God brought instant destruction on what may have been the greatest human empire in the history of the world. There is plenty of proof to suggest God's reality, His masterpiece of creation, though polluted by improper human caretaking, should still be enough to persuade us. The perfect preservation of His dealings with humanity for the last thousands of years by a nation He declared His own, as well as the preservation of said nation like no other, should also be compelling evidence. In spite of having more enemies then any other nation in history, Israel not only still exists but still retains its history, customs, and ways. It has been ruled by other nations, taken into captivity, and been subject to some of the worst genocidal attacks in the history of the world, yet still it stands, surrounded by enemies as always. And finally there is the witness of a Messiah prophecied thousands of years in advance, whose exact death was foretold to the day, who worked miracles and gave teachings who even His greatest enemies could not deny. On top of this the following that became Christianity grew up in a nation committed to refusing Him as the Messiah precisely because Israelites could not deny that He had worked miracles among them, because they'd heard His teachings, and because over 500 of them had seen Him resurrected before He ascended into Heaven. All history is dated based upon Him. He is the most influential life lived on this earth, and people still refuse to accept His witness. Well then, since a holy, righteous, and just God cannot logically condone evil and thus there will be a punishment, and since He cannot logically permit sinners (those who rebel against Him) into His presence, then I'd say you have something to worry about. You're right, I don't view your beliefs as equal, just as I'm you don't view mine as equal. To be frank with you, I view us as exactly the same, we're both worthy of death, the only difference is that I've found mercy and you have not. I don't stand in this grace because of any works I've done, but out of the mercy of my Master. It's only natural for me to want all to have the blessings and abundant life that I myself have found, but I recognize that God has given all the freedom to reject Him or refuse Him. The main thing for me is to provide a witness to others that God wants me to that I may not be accountable to my Master for doing otherwise. If you're placing so much hope upon the Big Bang or related beliefs being correct I would suggest you determine so for sure. It would be a shame to stake your eternity merely on the hope that the words of others, whose merit you have not ascertained for yourself, are correct. Concerning the book by Ravi Zecharias, I frankly gave you a lot of answers dealing with mere logic rather then scientific facts, concerning that last quote which dealt with such facts you said you're not versed in such matters anyway. Ravi didn't write with the intention of making a textbook though, he wrote a book on philosophy which appeals to be the basic logic and wisdom which any human being with an open mind should be able to understand. Those anecdotes as you call them are quotes by many of the most influential men of our day, and he used them to show what some of Christianity's greatest opponents use as their arguments, men like David Hume. In a battlefield of the mind, it's necessary to get varying opinions, is it not? I would be interested in seeing some quotes from a book which you give a higher "grade" to... Oh, and here is another quote from the book that deals less with "anecdotes" and more upon scientific facts.

When sex involves 2 or more partners how can it be safe? I read about how the latex gloves that are basically the same material condoms are made of can't keep the STD germs or whatever from going through them. They can go right through gloves and the safest way is simply abstinence before marriage (and it needs 2 people to work). Anyway, it seems like that's a common misconception that using a condom makes it safe.... Any thoughts?

Yeah, love poetry, it's almost like a journal of what you were like You can look back at it and see how you were thinking and feeling perhaps even better then if you'd written it down somewhere. Plus it's in a more eye-pleasing format Right after I got saved I got bored with Exodus, stopped reading the Bible all the way through for a while just because of it. All the Law restrictions bored me. I love reading the NT though Ditto for Proverbs, some of the stuff like Kings, Samuel, Chronicles, etc... is pretty cool too. I like the story of Jonathan taking on the army of hundreds of thousands of warriors because he figured God could win by many or few and then God gave him a sign he could so with his armor bearer/baggage carrier he decided to charge them In a college age group before we started talking about Biblical superheros (Christ is the best of course ) and someone said Samson was like Superman with the super strength and Jonathan like Batman where he just goes in with the utility tools, lol But anyway, yeah, love both poetry and the Bible