Nope. It is not a code that was chosen by some intelligence. It is a code selection dictated by circumstances.
Yes, I agree that judges have that discretion. I don’t want to imply that I think this is a good idea, just that it is the law.
I agree. But I will also say that it really offends me as well, because you are speaking of Someone I love very much. I know you can’t relate, but maybe I can compare it to speaking of your Mom in a certain way. Or whoever you care about most in this world.
I agree with you completely. If you don’t believe, you don’t believe. I just didn’t think “blasphemy” was the correct word to use, as it really does refer to God or at least something sacred.
I agree 100%. Though I must say, it really isn’t that easy to “get a job” as a priest.
“For this reason I fall on my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth receives its true name. I ask God from the wealth of his glory to give you power through his Spirit to be strong in your inner selves, and I pray that Christ will make his home in your hearts through faith. I pray that you may have your roots and foundation in love so that you, together with all God’s people, may have the power to understand how broad and long, how high and deep, is Christ’s love. Yes, may you come to know his love - although it can never be fully known - and so be completelly filled with the very nature of God.
Yes, and a worthy distinction you have made Mr. A! I agree with you that the binary numbering system itself is a code dictated by circumstances, but the results of binary code are the product of the thinking, creative human beings who designed the programming source code that is translated into binary code that computer processors to execute. What you say is quite true and well said.
I am not sure what you are offended with here…is it my reluctance to lie to your imaginary friend?
OK, it isn’t blasphemy, but I still think that kind of lie is in the same class as the TV evangelist or the pedophile with the church as his device for reaching children. It is an abuse of trust to those who do genuinely believe.
It is easy enough that hundreds of people did get in who shouldn’t have. This is easy to see by looking at how many settlements have to be paid out by the church for protecting these men.
The core message seems to be (from out here) ‘love me or burn’.
It doesn’t matter if it is numbers or letters which are used (in hexidecimal, some letters are used to represent some of the numbers).
Agreed. We might also discuss other possibilities, such as using another medium besides silicone-based processors. Carbon-based processors, for example, might be used if chemists and engineers find this possible, practical and beneficial. Indeed, some might say (perhaps with tongue in cheek) that geneticists are approaching something like programming for living creatures.
Yes, who am i to judge what is right and wrong. I would be wise to leave that one wiser than myself. For good or bad it is the prerogative, indeed the obligation, of judges to determine the severity or lenience of the crime.
Nope. Is there a reason that I should find this astonishing?Agreed. We might also discuss other possibilities, such as using another medium besides silicone-based processors. Carbon-based processors, for example, might be used if chemists and engineers find this possible, practical and beneficial. Indeed, some might say (perhaps with tongue in cheek) that geneticists are approaching something like programming for living creatures.
My thoughtful A, do you now see the relevance of this discussion and are you not astonished by the conclusions you and i might draw from it?
There is still a clear contradiction. In one passage he says that he is, in the next he is not.Yes, who am i to judge what is right and wrong. I would be wise to leave that one wiser than myself. For good or bad it is the prerogative, indeed the obligation, of judges to determine the severity or lenience of the crime.
We might use the examples of the same judge passing sentence on two murderers
(a) a woman who was brutally beaten by her abusive husband and shot him to protect herself, and who showed remorse and regret for her crime
(b) a serial killer who was previously convicted of murder and who deliberately murdered at least a dozen innocent women while out on parole, and who tells the judge he would gladly kill again
It would seem equitable, i think, that (a) would receive a more lenient sentence than (b).
Mr. A, you being a reasonable person, do you now realize that there is no contradiction between Jeremiah, chapter 3 and Jeremiah, chapter 17?
Yes, you’ve said that several times. I am asking you to be specific about what proof you would accept.
A has already given you an article about “bottling air” (sampling). I’ve already given you an article about showing how air has mass and takes up space. You’ve already been given the chemical composition of air.
See above – how is that not empirical? You need to show why it is not acceptable and be specific about what you area looking for…
What do you think breath is? Breath is air inhaled and exhaled. Do you disagree with this definition? Just because air is being moved does not suddenly make it change from being considered air. You therefore have a different definition of wind then too, and not the one I supplied of “air in motion”? Better contact dictionary.com because their first result for wind is “air in natural motion, as that moving horizontally at any velocity along the earth’s surface: A gentle wind blew through the valley. High winds were forecast.”. You seem to be saying the equivalent of “if you throw a rock its no longer a rock because rocks normally don’t soar through the air”. Please state your definitions and be more concrete in your reasoning as to why you are dismissing breath and wind as air.
Fetus’ breathe in amniotic fluid. I can go to the ocean and breathe in the water accidentally. A normal born human breathes in air to live.
You can test the air’s composition. What would you say, then, is moving the balloon if not the forced in air? Do you also deny things like magnetism and gravity since you can not see and hold them?
Water that turns into ice is still H2O, and can easily turn back into flowing water. A rock that is flying through the air still has the same chemical composition. Wind that is moving still holds the same chemical composition of air, and returns to being “air”. A seed that is now a plant does not have the same characteristics/composition, and can not switch back and forth between the two.
I gave you a very specific definition and chemical proof that says that wind is precisely air in movement. ( dictionary.reference.com/browse/wind ) You need to back up what you are saying here because it is contradictory to posted definitions.
What experiment is impossible for me to possibly experience myself? Are you saying I can not go back to school and do the experiment? Another great thing about science, is that experiments that are done once are not accepted as the end-all-be-all. They are repeated a multitude of times to ensure accuracy in results.
Like what?
How is explaining that you are free to look into any facet of science, show its insufficiency? Personally, I have taken religion classes, I’ve gone on retreats, I’ve spoken with priests, prayed and prayed, and have been to adorations. I’ve tried unsuccessfully to force myself to believe for 12 years. I finally realized that to continue to call myself Catholic would be a lie. I simply can’t make the Catholic logic work for me. I get the feeling that you think Atheists only feel as they do since they can’t experience God with the senses. But its more than just that. Things you can’t experience with the senses here on earth you still can test and get proof that way. Atheists are looking for any way of logically understanding that God exists. You’ve got thousands of religions out there. All of them pretty much look the same.
There IS no discovery, and NO solid proof that God doesn’t exist, and you know it. So let’s move on to the second part of my post
“But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.”
phooney:
Kinda jumping in media res here, but no. The more I hear about and from Padre Pio – from himself and from his devotees, at that! – the less respect it seems I am able to have for him. Some time ago, all I knew was that he was a mystic and a stigmatic, and was reputed to be a very holy man; and I was glad that people had a role model to look up to. Then I heard about his striking a woman who came to him for confession (from a Catholic poster here) and thought it odd; and now you proudly quote him denigrating the suffering and doubt of the very saints so many would see him placed with!