Axxman

First of all...there is NOTHING wrong with Exxon giving out grants of $10k to examine the "other side" of the story. It should raise alarm bells in any logical persons mind that people complain whenever somebody gets paid to scientifically examine the another possibility. You should be happy that there are people investigating BOTH SIDES of the issue. Unfortunately...that is not the case with global warming. I think its funny that you call those $10k grants "big money." Are you joking? Exxon would have to give out 650,000 of those grants to equal the money the US gov't puts into the study (approx. $6.5 billion.) Thats not counting the nearly $14 billion dollars given by private donations to enviromental causes. The estimated world-wide financial global warming budget is $80-$100 billion dollars!!! And you think the "real money" is getting in good with Exxon? Seriously. Richard Branson (CEO Virgin Air) donated $3 billion by himself to the cause of global warming. The leftist agenda has but ONE GOAL in American society. Socialism. Anytime the leftists can find a way to limit freedom they have shown they will do so by ANY means necessary. Global Warming is just another path to the same goal. They want to tell us what cars to drive, how much fuel to use (and what type), they want the gov't to be in control of AS MANY ASPECTS of our freedom as possible. Be it healthcare, education, or lightbulbs...they believe that the gov't is better prepared to care for people than the individual themselves. In the case of global warming (like healthcare) there is the added bonus of getting VERY WEALTHY in the process. ALgore for example. He has been shown to use VERY LARGE amounts of energy in just about everything he does in his private and public life. However, Algore has found a "fix" for that. He has the ability to "offset" that wasted energy by contributing to the global warming community. Just like that SUV you keep saying you drive around...its okay for you to drive it because you "offset" that energy by preaching global warming. ALgore is good because he made a global warming movie. It doesn't matter that it showed in 3500 theaters that each emit more greenhouse gases in an hour, than my car does in a week. This isn't science..its bull. The global holocaust crowd would be far more credible if they weren't backed by a regime that has shown time and time again that they will say, and do anything to enforce their ideology. The hypocrisy of the "faces" of global warming should alert ANY reasonable person to their duplicity. So there you have it... money, power, and political agenda is MORE THAN ENOUGH reason for the socialists to promote an "environmental hoax."

Totally right on. It is a state sponsored religion called the Church of Global Warming...ALgore is their Priest. It is secular humanism at its finest.

Seems to me that Angry Dragons would have believed in a "flat earth" back in the day too...just cuz that was the scientific status quo. You gotta remember. Global Warming is BIG MONEY. There are literally BILLIONS of dollars out there for people who are working in some aspect of global warming. So for any "renegade" scientist who comes along trying to disprove global warming...he's literally affecting the bottom line for ALOT of people. Scientists aren't the ONLY people counting on global warming. There are entire industries set up with gov't grant money, and private "fear" donations. A scientist who promotes "climate holocaust" is far more likely to receive funding, and media attention. The US Gov't alone gives $6.5 million annually to fund this "science." Even manufacturers get gov't money to "study" alternative fuels, and processes. If our utility bills are raised due to "market forces" the gov't will step in to investigate price gouging...but those same utilities are lauded if they raise prices to offset "climate change analysis." It is absolutely insane to trust the "scientific" community if it has been compromised. Anytime opposing views are stiffled for financial purposes, there is a compromise. There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. -- Mark Twain

Fitzgerald began this Libby witchhunt when he was publicly embarrassed. He embarrassed himself by launching this whole thing without ANY shred of evidence against the people he was REALLY after. He then "settled" on Libby. Whatever his motivations, it is clear by comments he's made during and following the trial that he HAD TO win this case "at all costs." Irregardless of HOW he got the job...he clearly turned against those people and became a headhunter because he had to save face. It doesn't take a genius to look around and see that Libby has gone off track against Republicans. He is a democratic hack who indicted 60 straight Repubs. He is enjoying the "free media pass" that he gets in indicting repubs. Ken Starr was roundly criticized by the media for trying to compel Monica Lewinski's mother to testify...oddly, the media is silent when their Fitzy boy pulls the same tricks. Purely political.

I'm gonna fall on the same side as Marnie and Giaour on this one. Its a frustrating issue, with politics at its heart. Scooter Libby was NOT found guilty of "outing" a CIA officer...cuz he didn't. This entire episode came down to ONE thing...is it possible that Libby forgot? While it was evident throughout the entire trial that EVERYONE forgot at least some part of the details (including Tim Russert and his band)..the only person on trial for forgetting was Libby. So while the jury acknowledged that "

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney

There should have been an "I hope so" choice.

I think its too bad that so many Christians judge other Christians based on things they don't know. When will people realize that you have to see people as they are, and trust in God. There is good and bad in Christian music. Amy Grant cheated on her husband while singing her puff-pop Jesus jingles..so clearly her "image" had little to with what she was really about. Some of you rockers may remember "Seventh Angel" (now defunct) from the early/mid '90s. They were so heavy with screaming and noize...but it was noize that ANY rocker could comprehend. Their lyrics were tough to decipher, because they were screamed so fast. One particular day, I was having a particular struggle, and I prayed about it and left it up to God. I couple hours later I was listening to the Seventh Angel tape (yeah, the "tape") on my walkman, and one of their songs spoke to my situation so clearly I was stunned. It was like the lyrics were being recited to me in plain spoken english. I broke down in tears, because it was a CLEAR answer to my problem. I know God can use His ministers in a variety of ways. I've seen Christian thrash bands stop in the middle of a song if "moshing" got out of control. I've seen bands praying for the lost "hecklers" in the audience. I saw a band manager get kicked in the face when he was on his knees praying for a guy. I'm not here saying that EVERY Christian Heavy Metal act is sincere or "righteous." I am here saying that if you are judging them by their look, or music style, or dance....you should reconsider. Joy is a VERY big word and has a variety of expressions...don't try to package it a small box.

Since when is the can't buy/can't sell period a bad thing for those who believe in the immenent return of Christ? This doesn't concern me at all. Its just an I.D. card that allows people to accurately I.D. you. If you DON"T want people to I.D. you...then don't get a stinkin' I.D. card!!! It makes NO sense to me for people to want an ID card (and all its associated privileges) but then act indignant that people will be able to identify them with it. For those who don't have it figured out...I.D. = IDentification

Alcohol is the most abused drug in our society. It is dangerous and lethal. To say "alcohol does nothing wrong to people" is almost unimaginable to me. Even in small amounts alcohol has an effect on your body. Irregardless of your position in regards to "wine" in the bible...it is not a good idea to promote even the slight use of alcohol. One 4oz. glass of wine is enough alcohol to make a 120lb female have a BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) too high to drive in most states.

FoC...I will be directing all my comments in this discussion in the other thread. I think it will save us a both a bit of time, so we don't have to keep checking and replying in each thread. Peace.

Hey Hamburgers... Nah...I try "real hard" to not be judgemental about it (although I realize its hard to control how you sound in a post...lol.) What you do in the privacy of your home in regards to alcoholic beverages is between you and God. My biggest thing is "social drinking"..I'm really against that simply because it is impossible to "always" know the scope of your influence. I think in our society it has been proven that alcohol, in even small amounts, has an effect. While one drink may not outwardly effect you, there is an effect. I also don't believe Jesus drank alcohol socially...or at least there isn't enough evidence that he did. For me, most of the time, these convo's are just fun examinations. I don't put too much emphasis on trying to change the world through "forum chatter"...lol.

It makes no sense for aged women to be told to "be moderate" in their use of alcohol...unless you believe there is no such condition on younger women. Furthermore, why didn't he give permission to older men to drink wine in "moderation?" If all these people were drinking wine on a daily basis (as some of you claim) then these random entries that people use to permit its use, seem oddly out of place. Are women suddenly higher up the food-chain than deacons...who are forbidden to drink? What about Timothy? This guy suffers from stomach ailments and yet Paul still feels the need to offer permission to drink "a little" for medicinal purposes. Too bad Timothy wasn't an aged woman...he wouldn't have had all these problems. This is clearly not a permission to drink alcohol moderately. The word "much" is only used in Titus and Timothy. If non-alcoholic grape juice is intended in Timothy and Titus, the intent of the qualification shifts from the level of intoxication to the matter of gluttony. This brings us to the issue of "self-control" which also neatly ties in with what Titus 2:4 tells us older women are to teach younger women. Younger women are to be taught self-control and purity...there is NO WAY you can tie in the moderate use of alcoholic beverages in the context. Christians have been taught to wear blinders on their eyes in regards to the word "wine" in the bible. The word "oinos" is such a broad word. It is not acceptable to narrow the word down to one simple meaning based on what the word means in today's language. Paul could have JUST AS EASILY been referring to over-eating in regards to older women since oinos also could mean raisins or ... *gasp*...grapes!

"Moderation" is NOT a biblical principle. The ideology of "moderation" was developed by liberal christians who desired an excuse for their dabbling in worldliness.

You guys are a tough crowd. My "Prisons are full of spanked kids" comment was NOT a statistical fact (or I woulda posted it.) My entire post was a way of showing that spanking leads to inconsistent results. Spanking doesn't lead to prison any more than candy bars do (or fruit loops.) The point is that using pain compliance is not a fool-proof way to get results...sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I had written about 3 more paragraphs..but decided against it. I was afraid I was sounding judgemental, and I don't intend to. I think we should all do whatever the Holy Spirit guides us in...which I hope we all do. I really dislike spanking, I think there are other Godly options. I will support anti-spanking laws based on what I believe God's word would have me do. Peace.

You know...this reply would be all well and good if prisons weren't full of people who were spanked. It makes God, and the bible, look real stupid when you say...spanking is the ideal biblical form of punishment. Really?? Then why do some kids who are spanked become evil, and some kids who aren't grow to be responsible adults? Is it possible that the bible is wrong...or is it MORE possible that you are wrong. As I said before...my mother was never hit by her parents and she grew to be a wonderful mother who raised solid kids. My dad was spanked and he beat the holy crap outta me and my mom at least once a week (until he found Christ.) Kinda puts a damper on scripture reading it the way you do. How is the above scenario played out everyday if spanking is supposed to be the ideal punishment? Disclaimer: Obviously, some spanked kids turn out very well, and some unspanked kids are evil. The point is the inconsistency of results by translating the bible the way pro-spankers do. I mean, if you apply the same narrow-mindedness to other parts of scripture you could just as well justify slavery, suppression of women, polygamy, incest and infanticide

Cool, you post it...I'll explain it. Question for ya. When Solomon wrote

We can certainly agree on that. I'll stick with the compelling convo we have already established.

Thanks! I gotta believe that its just coincidence that the words "a stick (for punishment..." are the leading definition of your lexicon, The "shebet" is used a mere 140 (out of 190) times to mean tribe...and not always figuratively, but literally. I've glanced through the uses of the word and I'm not sure in which case a "stick" is approporiate. The ONLY use of the term that even comes close to being described as an instrument for hitting is the "club" usage, which refers to a sheperds weapon to scare off preditors or defend the flock from harm. In no way, is the club an instrument of "loving correction." Like David said "thy rod (the defensive weapon) and thy staff (the instrument of guidance) they comfort me." Again, there are various meanings for the rod of correction...why do Christian parents insist on picking the meaning that says "hit your kids."

Men like Solomon...in Proverbs 20...he said "wine is a mocker." He didn't say "getting drunk" with wine is a mocker. He didn't say"some wine" is a mocker. He said "Wine IS a mocker...whoever is deceived by it is unwise."

Hi Emily... Is it mere coincidence that the verse you picked made the implication that discipline is supposed to be "painful?" While I won't go so far as to say its a bad translation of the intended meaning...but painful doesn't have to mean physical pain. The greek word for "painful" in this case is "Lupe" (strong's #3077.) We're not talking physical pain, but rather "sorrow" or "grief." These are beautiful verses about Gods interaction with us in a nurturing and instructive way. It is to give us hope that although God does set us straight from time to time...don't lose hope because there is a greater purpose in it. I can see NO WAY that a person could use this scripture to condone physically hitting their child.

Ovedya...I am sorry to have caused you resentment. I hope you can see the opposite side of the coin when I tell you how upsetting it is to me to have Christians who act just the way I described. You did exactly what many Christians do...you made an excellent point when you said the scriptures give "clear instruction" from God about training our children. Where I get upset is the implication that God wants us to hit our kids...and that is by no means the "clear" instruction God has given us. Peace

Bro...First let me offer a quick disclaimer. Being fairly new here I don't know some of you guys that well (I hope to change that). I have been writing my posts assuming you are from the U.S., but I now see you are from NZ. My apologies on any confusion. I don't believe in universal free will. I don't believe that God treats us a science experiment that he placed in the back of the closet to run amock. I believe God is VERY active in our every day lives. While there is a certain extent of "free will" in our lives, for the most part it is just human arrogance and pride to think that we have some effect on the world outside of God's influence. If people get the gov't they deserve then there would be no America, because there are VERY FEW people that deserve the luxuries, freedoms, and opportunites that the USA provides. Why do I deserve America? Based on what I deserve...I should be the mayor of a town called "Hell." But because of God's mercy and grace, I have been chosen to be a son in His Kingdom. Everything I have, and everything I am is because God allowed it. I also don't "blame" God, nor should anyone. God is not the focus of my blame, God is the focus of my praise. I praise Him for everything He provides. The good and the bad. The easy and the hard. We are really in no position to question God's motives. Romans 9:20,21 who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it,