Tinky

I say to heck with what the rest of the world thinks. Israel needs to smash these criminals and smash them hard. Negotiating with these terrorists only emboldens them.

Trump's offer to Obama: Release your college and passport records, I'll donate five million dollars to the charity of your choice. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/24/Trump-Offers-Obama-Five-Million-To-release-College-Transcripts No way Obama will take this bait!

KJV only, I presume?

An awful situation! Prayers going out for the loved ones of the deceased!

Of course we can know - it's called common sense. An example would be that if you were standing in a desert in Egypt, and all of a sudden a great wind started blowing, and the wind exposed the head of a sphinx, you would know by simple common sense that the action of the wind, even in the past, didn't carve that sphinx. You would know instinctively that an intelligence was behind it's creation. These reasons come immediately to mind: 1. The idea of a universe birthing our universe, and a universe birthing the universe before it, into infinity, has absolutely no scientific evidence backing it. The theory of multi-universes remains nothing but fantasy. 2. The second law of thermodynamics proves that our own universe is not eternal. In fact, it is heading toward heat death. 3. Our own universe is not birthing another universe. Again, there is zero evidence for it. And frankly, if it were, it would be an argument against infinite regress. 4. You would need an infinite amount of energy to support an infinite regress. Again, the second law of thermodynamics destroys that idea (i.e., "heat death"). Now, you may say that the laws of physics we observe here may not apply in another universe, but the proof of that would be yours to provide. 5. You can't have an infinite if you add any additions to it. (see #3). Meaning, our own universe would not have had a beginning - but, of course, it did have a beginning (Big Bang). 6. And from all I've read, the consensus among physicists is that our universe has an actual end, or a "wall." No. God is not bound by our/such natural order. He supersedes the natural. As it's creator, He must, or He would not "be" God. Again, if God were in any way subjected to the physical laws He created that govern our universe, He would not be the master of His own creation. Let me add that man has created computers that can calculate far faster than our own brains are capable of. Does that mean, being more complex in that regard, computers are man's master? No. Without programming from man, they are useless. If God were bound by the same laws of complexity we are, we would be on par with God. And so again, He would thus not be God.

By casting my vote for Romney doesn't mean I'm voting for Mormonism. I'm voting for the man's political policies. I'd even vote for an atheist as long as they were pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and fiscally conservative.

Modern. But the KJV is quite beautiful to the ear.

Yes. But not in the sense of say, ripple patterns in sand on a beach created by water and wind, or a snowflake created by the same type of processes. I'm speaking about the creation of a universe or biological life. But even still, something as simple as your name spelled out in seashells is enough proof of an intelligence behind it. There's a big problem with it. Infinite regress is scientifically impossible, which makes the rest of your argument moot. That is ludicrous. You're claiming that because God is eternal, then He must be designed. Being eternal simply means being outside of the dimension of time. You're attempting to place God into the physical, and keep Him there. Being the creator of the universe, He can affect His creation in any way He chooses without being bound by the physical laws He created. If God were constrained by His creation, He wouldn't be it's master, and thus not be God.

There's a good reason for that, IMO. These two men are not that far apart on foreign policy and it's challenging for each of them to set himself apart from his rival. The President has continued many of the Bush policies and, if elected, I believe that Romney will leave some of Obama's policies unchanged. Rather than subdued I believe Romney showed restraint and calm in the face of a sitting President (the incumbent ALWAYS has a slight edge) and avoided a situation that could only make him look bad. He looks Presidential on the national stage and that's exactly what he is aiming for. Both men did a really good job of making their points and now....we'll see what effect, if any, this debate has on undecided voters. Let's face it, most of our minds are made up; I think it's only like 5% that is persuadable at this point. Great perspective!

What does that have to do with infinite regress? Anyway, it's pretty simple. If you came upon your name written out with seashells on a beach, you'd know instinctively that an intelligence created it. Yet the atheist can look upon the massive amounts of information in the DNA of even a simple cell, or the magnificent complexity of the universe, and claim that it "just happened" all by itself. Sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

Romney seemed rather subdued last night. Strange.

Lotta money coming into Obama's coffers from foreign contributors as well, yet the MSM is turning a blind eye to that as well.

Maybe they've read the book of Revelation?

Israel never should have given up Gaza in the first place. And the so called "two state solution" will bring nothing but more of the same Gaza type terrorism, but on a larger scale.

10 years? We're in a colossal mess right now!

I doubt anyone but liberals will be surprised by this.

I can't understand how a person or group can claim to be Christian, and yet hate Israel. God Himself said He would bless those that bless Israel and curse those that curse her. Some people do not think that the people in Israel are really descendants of Abraham. And some people believe the earth is flat as well.

You might want to re-think that line of reasoning...for one, it leads to an infinite regress: if everything has to have a creator, then a creator must have a creator, recurse as needed. Well, no. Regress requires the dimension of time, since God is outside of time (being it's creator) He is thus timeless - eternal. Cosmologists state that time itself was created at the Big Bang event, so even secular science confirms that time had a beginning.

Yes, considering the military still uses bayonets.

Amen! Not one inch of the Holy Land should ever be given up!

Praying you will find a good church home.

Or Brad Pitt! Seriously though.... Nitish, men are mostly tempted visually, while a woman's desires are more emotionally driven. You need to retrain your eyes. Easier said than done, I'm sure, but it can be done. Many Christian men I know have mastered it. The trick is to keep your eyes on the woman's face, and if an impure thought enters your mind, never linger on it, squash it immediately. Remember, God equates lust with adultery, and James 1:15 says, "Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death." When lust arises, flee to God in prayer. Hope this helps.

If one is saved they remain saved, because salvation is not based on us at all - it is based on Christ. The Bible says we are sealed with the Holy Spirit, and that our citizenship is already in heaven. To lose salvation means one undoes what was accomplished at the cross, but that work can never be undone. Christians who sin can be chastised by the Lord, and rewards at the Judgment Seat may be lost, but the child of God will yet be saved, "as if through fire." A misbehaving child is still the child of it's parents, the same as a child of God remains as such.

They need to heed James 1:21 "Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you."

I think Ray Comfort said it best when he stated that a painting must have a painter, a building must have a builder, and creation must have a creator.