- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,251
- 52,666
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
That's right --- they exclude God from their literature --- and IMO, they should include Him in it.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You used the word Exclude not the word Disagree.
How should God be included in Computer Science lit?That's right --- they exclude God from their literature --- and IMO, they should include Him in it.
How should God be included in Computer Science lit?
A persons name and a Bible verse do not answer the question. You claim God is excluded yet you refuse to explain how God should be included. Why is that?
- Charles Babbage was a creationist.
- Job 38:35 could be a reference to digital communication.
- [bible]Job 38:35[/bible]
A persons name and a Bible verse do not answer the question. You claim God is excluded yet you refuse to explain how God should be included. Why is that?
Again - "How should God be included in Computer Science lit?"
Proof doesn't have much value to you, does it?I haven't a clue --- I don't read computer science lit --- let alone write it. Find someone who writes it and, if possible, tell them to include God in the places that contradict Scripture (if those places exist).
My point is that where science literature contradicts Scripture --- science literature is wrong.
Proof doesn't have much value to you, does it?
You make statements then when called on them you claim you didn't say what you said you did. When called on that you then dance around the point.I am not in the "proving business" --- God is.
You guys don't understand. I said where science disagrees with the Bible, science is wrong.
God gave us brains and expects us to use them; but not to discredit Him.
It's okay to build technology (now), but just don't forget Who gave us the resources (and when).
You make statements then when called on them you claim you didn't say what you said you did. When called on that you then dance around the point.
Does you Bible only detail 9 of the 10 commandments?
No - the automated testing of one of my software applications is still running so I have time continue this discussion.Okay, trivista, I'll dance on outta here, then. I have a feeling study hall is almost over anyway, right?
No - the automated testing of one of my software applications is still running so I have time continue this discussion.
But I guess when called on your past statements it is easier to hurl insults than admit you danced around the truth.
Medical and agricultural research excludes God from their literature by creating video games and the movie Jurassic Park?The parts where they exclude God from their literature.
Medical and agricultural research excludes God from their literature by creating video games and the movie Jurassic Park?
You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Wikipedia said:Ancient OriginsDeveloped independently by geographically distant populations, evidence suggests that agriculture first appeared inSoutheast Asia, in the Fertile Crescent area of Mesopotamia. Around 9500 BC, farmers first began to select and cultivate food plants with specific characteristics.
So... the parts of the Bible that say illness and mental defect are caused by evil spirits... they should be put into medical tecxtbooks over the bits about pathogenic organisms and neurochemical imbalance?You guys don't understand. I said where science disagrees with the Bible, science is wrong.
So... the parts of the Bible that say illness and mental defect are caused by evil spirits... they should be put into medical tecxtbooks over the bits about pathogenic organisms and neurochemical imbalance?
James 5
5:13 Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms.
5:14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
Acts 19
19:12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.
19:15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? 19:16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.
So... straight answer time... would you like medical texts to replace antibiotics with touching the handherchief of Paul?
uhuh... and you base this on? does this mean there is now a part of the Bible you don't believe? And back to the initial question... you want medical texts to have God in them, I've cited you a bit of the Bible that says man is ailed by bad spirits... which you have dismissed... so what, exactly, is it you want medical texts to change?No I would not --- I don't believe in that stuff anymore. I believe God still heals today, but not for the reasons He did in the book of Acts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?