Republicans and evangelicals

[Lanya]

What's interesting to me is how the rules have changed from biblical times.

Then, homosexuality was an abomination.  The sin of Onan was as bad, or so I understand.  That's spilling your seed upon the ground.
This makes sense from a biological viewpoint.  Don't do stuff that won't make children.  Men, marry and you're allowed more than one wife.  Especially if the first one's infertile.  Getting married, being fruitful and multiplying, those were imperatives.  FOr God's Chosen People, really, it was biologically imperative.

Now we have Jesus, who was unmarried.  I wonder what people thought?  "Mary, Jesus should be settling down about now, he's what, 20?"   And he never married, at least it's not disclosed to us that he did. 
I wonder if people whispered and spread rumors about Jesus?   And reviled him?

Doing so to any person today, whether gay or straight, illegal immmigrant, naturalized citizen or born here, a member of a different racial or ethnic group....that would be doing the same thing to Jesus. 
Who could do that?

[hnumpah]

The sin of Onan was as bad, or so I understand.  That's spilling your seed upon the ground.

Go back and reread it. Onan's sin was not spilling his seed upon the ground, it was disobeying God. This was because he refused to impregnate his dead brothers wife, according to tradition, and 'spilt his seed upon the ground' rather than get her pregnant. The story is in Genesis 38.

[The_Professor]

Thought I would throw that in for a response.

No, if you add together the generations, literally, it all adds up to around 60,000 years. Also, carbon dating is inaccuirate for many reasons, one of which is that it predisposes detereoriation at the same rate and yet there is on way to guarantee th environment was the same years ago as today. This affects the process.

Regardless, I still advoate that a return to old fashioned values would be best. Obviously, society will continue its move away from traditional values until "Everything goes" is the mantra. Even the Bible indicates it will.

Doesn't mean I have to sit back and let it happen quietly.

[Lanya]

The sin of Onan was as bad, or so I understand.  That's spilling your seed upon the ground.

Go back and reread it. Onan's sin was not spilling his seed upon the ground, it was disobeying God. This was because he refused to impregnate his dead brothers wife, according to tradition, and 'spilt his seed upon the ground' rather than get her pregnant. The story is in Genesis 38.

______________________

I had no idea, Bear, thank you. 

[Amianthus]

Also, carbon dating is inaccuirate for many reasons, one of which is that it predisposes detereoriation at the same rate and yet there is on way to guarantee th environment was the same years ago as today. This affects the process.

The environment does not affect nuclear decay. Nuclear decay is governed by the nuclear weak force, one of the four fundamental forces of the universe.

[The_Professor]

For anyone to indicate that homorsexuality is not a sin per Biblical standards, as I have heard some say, is simply incredible. Now, you can say that it is not "bad" by current standards, and that is different.

As far as debating evolution versus Creationism, we cna certainly create a separate thread, if you want.

[Plane]

Also, carbon dating is inaccuirate for many reasons, one of which is that it predisposes detereoriation at the same rate and yet there is on way to guarantee th environment was the same years ago as today. This affects the process.

The environment does not affect nuclear decay. Nuclear decay is governed by the nuclear weak force, one of the four fundamental forces of the universe.

Two items and a disclaimer.

The environment determines a lot about how rapidly Carbon 14 and other isotopic elements are formed .For all of history the sun has producerd carbon 14 in our atmosphere at a very steady rate, which then decays at a steady rate. In prehistory this might not have been so .

The Nuclear Weak force is steady since we have discovered it , how long is that?

Disclaimer , I am not going to p-retend that I really know the Bible so well that I know exactly the diffrence between what parts are poetic , allegorical , metaphoreistic or actual with 100% certainty.  I think that Solomans beloved did not have a neck precicely and literally like a tower , but that Johna really did get swallowed by a great fish.

    If these two things I think  turn out to be both wrong I would be only a little surprised.

[Amianthus]

The environment determines a lot about how rapidly Carbon 14 and other isotopic elements are formed .For all of history the sun has producerd carbon 14 in our atmosphere at a very steady rate, which then decays at a steady rate. In prehistory this might not have been so .

Yes, and we have other dating methods to use to validate the figures over the ~50,000 years that radio carbon dating is valid. For dating outside that range, other techniques are used. Besides, the dating takes into account variations in the formation of C14 - that's why the date is always a range, not an exact date.

The Nuclear Weak force is steady since we have discovered it , how long is that?

The nuclear weak force is a fundamental force - if it changes, the entire universe would have to change at the same time. Besides, it's perfectly balanced for our observable universe - if it gets any stronger, all the atoms in the universe would break down, turning the entire universe into a cloud of subatomic particles. If it gets any weaker, everything in the universe would collapse in on itself.

[Plane]

The environment determines a lot about how rapidly Carbon 14 and other isotopic elements are formed .For all of history the sun has producerd carbon 14 in our atmosphere at a very steady rate, which then decays at a steady rate. In prehistory this might not have been so .

Yes, and we have other dating methods to use to validate the figures over the ~50,000 years that radio carbon dating is valid. For dating outside that range, other techniques are used. Besides, the dating takes into account variations in the formation of C14 - that's why the date is always a range, not an exact date.

If there were a dust cloud or a strengthening of the magnetic feild around the earth the formation of carbon 14 would be diminished for a while , if there were a lot of volcanic activity there could be a period in which carbon from stocks that were already depleated would saturate and dilute the atmosphere. If erosion were to open a Uranium mine the area downstream would be highly radioactive for an eon.

  How exactly does cross checking with another tecnique confirm that one tecnique was accurate without first proveing that the other tecnique was?

The Nuclear Weak force is steady since we have discovered it , how long is that?

The nuclear weak force is a fundamental force - if it changes, the entire universe would have to change at the same time. Besides, it's perfectly balanced for our observable universe - if it gets any stronger, all the atoms in the universe would break down, turning the entire universe into a cloud of subatomic particles. If it gets any weaker, everything in the universe would collapse in on itself.

If all forces changed together would the change be noticeable to us?

At quantum levels of energy uncertainty is a hard rule , but from the great number of particles involved comes a statistical certainty and an appearance of steady rates of change.

The fabric of space seems to burble with pairs of spontainious creating and disapearing charges, the nuclear weak force does not include a clock so what makes a photon spring from a charged electron orbit at this moment rather than the next moment? What makes radioactive decay seem steady for the century or so we have been studying it?

   It can't be that our sample of cosmic behavior is too small to be a good survey?

[sirs]

What's interesting to me is how the rules have changed from biblical times.

Then, homosexuality was an abomination.  The sin of Onan was as bad, or so I understand.  That's spilling your seed upon the ground.
This makes sense from a biological viewpoint.  Don't do stuff that won't make children.  Men, marry and you're allowed more than one wife.  Especially if the first one's infertile.  Getting married, being fruitful and multiplying, those were imperatives.  FOr God's Chosen People, really, it was biologically imperative.

Now we have Jesus, who was unmarried.  I wonder what people thought?  "Mary, Jesus should be settling down about now, he's what, 20?"   And he never married, at least it's not disclosed to us that he did. 
I wonder if people whispered and spread rumors about Jesus?   And reviled him?

Doing so to any person today, whether gay or straight, illegal immmigrant, naturalized citizen or born here, a member of a different racial or ethnic group....that would be doing the same thing to Jesus. 
Who could do that?

Regardless, it's still a version of "breaking the rules", as Kimba made reference to when discussing Adultery, and a sin, in the eyes of God.  Can't get around that moral obstacle I'm afraid, no matter how supportive you are of the "non-choice" brigade

[Lanya]

Regardless, it's still a version of "breaking the rules", as Kimba made reference to when discussing Adultery, and a sin, in the eyes of God.  Can't get around that moral obstacle I'm afraid, no matter how supportive you are of the "non-choice" brigade

_________________________________________________

I'm sure each of us has broken some rules that our respective faiths taught us were very important. 

In the end, it isn't our judgement that counts anyway. 

[sirs]

I'm sure each of us has broken some rules that our respective faiths taught us were very important. 
In the end, it isn't our judgement that counts anyway. 

Has anyone implied otherwise?

[Lanya]

I'm sure each of us has broken some rules that our respective faiths taught us were very important. 
In the end, it isn't our judgement that counts anyway. 

Has anyone implied otherwise?

_______________

Lots of time is spent railing against homosexuality and abortion. My point was simply, there are other sins. We are all sinners.
  Those are not the Big Two of Sins.
 It seems odd that some  churches view them to be the most important.

[sirs]

My point was simply, there are other sins. We are all sinners.

Again, who's implying otherwise??  I think your confusion (or more likely the tactic here) is to blend how we're not to judge who's been accepted to heaven or not (God's domain) with we're not to judge anyone's wrong doing, which we are absolutely commanded to do.  Some obviously more overt & even obnoxious than others, but we are indeed to judge others by their actions

[Amianthus]

If there were a dust cloud or a strengthening of the magnetic feild around the earth the formation of carbon 14 would be diminished for a while , if there were a lot of volcanic activity there could be a period in which carbon from stocks that were already depleated would saturate and dilute the atmosphere. If erosion were to open a Uranium mine the area downstream would be highly radioactive for an eon.

And we would know this from other sources, such as forensic examination of tree rings.

  How exactly does cross checking with another tecnique confirm that one tecnique was accurate without first proveing that the other tecnique was?

All dating techniques have been proven to be accurate within their margin of error by documented objects. We do have objects created from natural products that are dated, you know.

If all forces changed together would the change be noticeable to us?

The four fundamental forces are a by-product of the creation of the universe. If they were different, the whole universe would be different. Under some theories, they are even considered seperate dimensions, much like time in the Einsteinian view of the universe.