you may have seen the story of the couple who just gave birth to twins who developed from embryos frozen for 30 years.
i'm delighted for the parents and hope the twins grow to be healthy.
it does pose some questions for those who insist embryos are in fact humans with souls.
You may have seen the story of the couple who just gave birth to twins who developed from embryos frozen for 30 years. I'm delighted for the parents and hope the twins grow to be healthy. It does pose some questions for those who insist embryos are in fact humans with souls.
I know we do not agree about this topic and often the discussion gets heated. Lets try to act respectfully and ask, "Does this story modify your thoughts about when an embryo can be called a person or not?"
there are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
TonusOH...who is Paul?
An enjoyable but impenetrable mystery. It has been suggested that Simon Magnus and Paul (Saul) are divergent traditions about a single man. The names are actually cognates and there are many parallels. Half of early Christians hailed the miracle working Simon as origin of their Christianity, these are also connected to the group that preserved the Pauline epistles. Marcion learned from a Simonian named Cerdo that the epistles by then in circulation had been Judaized, heavily redacted and interpolated. Marcion himself may not have even known of Hebrews as he neither includes or rejects it in his canon. It's all very provocative but too much is lost to be sure of anything.
Language in Hebrews is found verbatim in 1 Clement suggesting the same author reusing his arguments. Problem is we don't know which came first. And the language they share is being utilized differently, in fact opposingly. 1 Clement is impossible to date as internal evidence is contradictory. The work had many recognized additions and interpolations. We don't even know who Clement was and traditions about him are contradictory and come through a procession of hearsay. A Clement is mentioned in the Shepard of Hermas as someone of importance but the work is very different from 1 Clement.
In the end my best guess is that , no one knows.
there are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
Heb 2:3
So what makes us think we can escape if we ignore this great salvation that was first announced by the Lord Jesus himself and then delivered to us (hypo) those who heard him speak?
Here the author argues that his take on soteriology was passed to his contemporary Christians 'by' (hypó (a preposition) – properly, under, often meaning "under authority") those who heard (the Lord) speak. This may be simply rhetorical, saying the tradition had been passed to them from first generation of Christians. Clearly this is not Paul. He adamantly denied getting his take on Christianity from others but rather directly from Christ. It makes much more sense to identify the author with a later period.
a news article has the headline of " ‘case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans"; see https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/19/case-closed-999-of-scientists-agree-climate-emergency-caused-by-humans .
the article says in part the following.. 'the scientific consensus that humans are altering the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the case for global action at the cop26 summit in glasgow.. the degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics, the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related studies.
this means there is practically no doubt among experts that burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating the planet and causing more extreme weather.. a previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991 and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering earth’s climate.. this has been updated and expanded by the study by cornell university that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.. the latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to november 2020 was conducted in two stages.
I also have a vested interest in my own life. And not having had children don't have a genetic investment in the future. So... should I not support improving energy efficiency and new technologies? Should I instead insist nothing can be done to improve our use of resources?
I doubt you feel completely anti-efficiency or anti-technology. You seem rather to believe that it is impossible to have greener energy and keep your lifestyle. Thing is, energy production has already shifted to greener options dramatically in many parts of the world and you probably never noticed.
And the value of good planning and simple passive solar building design can't be over stressed. Such simple and free planning can reduce the largest energy consumer, HV/AC by 50%.
Sure some stuff is oversold. I have a degree in thermal technology and understand the role marketing and capitalism has in promoting some technologies not well suited to the markets they are sold in. Ground (or air) source heat pumps for example work well in climates like the UK or Tennessee but are widely sold in areas with colder climates where they are pointless and inefficient. So some skepticism on the part of consumers is prudent.
It's never an all or nothing situation. We can improve our use of resources with wise use of existing technologies and still have transportation and warm homes.
regardless of belief/non-belief in the bible account, why is the ark nearly always depicted by both believers & non-believers as a huge boat, with a rounded hull & stern, and a tapered bow?
https://arkencounter.com/ .
the ark was crate shaped according to the measurements.
Years ago they drew it as a boat. As I recall From Paradise Lost book drew it boat shaped. It's just another tiny effort to differentiate themselves from other churches. In reality, like was just posted, the OT stories about the ark do not describe the shape. It's over literalizing to assume the author meant a box.
i'll assume we have all felt a jolt of loss when a favorite tv, movie or book character dies.
when i watched the death of the incredible hulk tv movie after years of reading the comics and watch the tv show i was impacted.
funny even today it just feels wrong.
The ending of Blake 7 was a pill.
regardless of belief/non-belief in the bible account, why is the ark nearly always depicted by both believers & non-believers as a huge boat, with a rounded hull & stern, and a tapered bow?
https://arkencounter.com/ .
the ark was crate shaped according to the measurements.
regardless of belief/non-belief in the bible account, why is the ark nearly always depicted by both believers & non-believers as a huge boat, with a rounded hull & stern, and a tapered bow?
https://arkencounter.com/ .
the ark was crate shaped according to the measurements.
regardless of belief/non-belief in the bible account, why is the ark nearly always depicted by both believers & non-believers as a huge boat, with a rounded hull & stern, and a tapered bow?
https://arkencounter.com/ .
the ark was crate shaped according to the measurements.
we had a co talk touching on resurrection, death, seeing family again.
the brother went into scenarios about his family, complete with tears.
i question getting that emotional every time he gives this talk.
I too get squirmy when emotions appears faked or forced. It's hard to do and requires real talent to do well.
I imagine the tears of anti-animal abuse advocates or antiabortion campaigners are real enough, even if they can be invoked by recounting the same stories over again. Again, I don't doubt the motives nor the effectiveness of showing passion for a subject. I may or may not agree with the conclusions.
