Because it says so...
 

On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:
On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.


All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

Because it says so...
 

On Jul 15, 2:06*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:

On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, *anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. *It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.

All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

justified? Well, I suppose it depends on how you want to look at it,
eh?

Because it says so...
 

On 7/15/12 4:12 PM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:

On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.

All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

justified? Well, I suppose it depends on how you want to look at it,
eh?



Many of those who do "evil" claim they find their justification in the
bible. Of course, they think they are doing what the bible tells them to
do.

Because it says so...
 

On Jul 15, 3:58*pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/15/12 4:12 PM, Tim wrote:









On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:

On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, *anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. *It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.

All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

* justified? *Well, I suppose it depends on how you want to look at it,
eh?

Many of those who do "evil" claim they find their justification in the
bible. Of course, they think they are doing what the bible tells them to
do.

So, they get blended in with those who do righteously because the too
are 'bible believers?

And naturally, not many look at the good that Christians would do
especially those who would wish to make some kind of dis
accreditation. After all, who wants to read something boring like
that!

, But rather those who want to show a dim view Christians would
rather concentrate on the bad. ie. Those who 'call' themselves
"Christians" and those who would pervert and miss use the Bible.

Therefor, we all get put in the same group.

Works every time.

Because it says so...
 

On 7/15/12 5:06 PM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 15, 3:58 pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/15/12 4:12 PM, Tim wrote:









On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:

On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.

All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

justified? Well, I suppose it depends on how you want to look at it,
eh?

Many of those who do "evil" claim they find their justification in the
bible. Of course, they think they are doing what the bible tells them to
do.

So, they get blended in with those who do righteously because the too
are 'bible believers?

And naturally, not many look at the good that Christians would do
especially those who would wish to make some kind of dis
accreditation. After all, who wants to read something boring like
that!

, But rather those who want to show a dim view Christians would
rather concentrate on the bad. ie. Those who 'call' themselves
"Christians" and those who would pervert and miss use the Bible.

Therefor, we all get put in the same group.

Works every time.


Well, Tim, I'm not aware of any rules that say who can or who cannot
read the bible and then decide that if they wish to spread hate and
evil, they can find whatever justification they think they find in that
book.

You, obviously, make a lot more out of the bible than I do. To me, it's
an interesting book, written, edited and "adjusted" by men that, in the
King James version, at least, uses beautiful language to tell its
stories and histories and superstitions and so forth. It also contains
its share of absolute absurdities. You probably accept many of these as
articles of faith. Your privilege.

Because it says so...
 

On Jul 15, 4:13*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 5:06 PM, Tim wrote:









On Jul 15, 3:58 pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/15/12 4:12 PM, Tim wrote:

On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 7/15/12 2:12 PM, thumper wrote:

On 7/14/2012 12:59 PM, Tim wrote:

I'm glad you brought that up, Harry. It's fascinating that you never
or should I say 'rarely, point out any of the good of the Bible, yet
are quick to choose it's verses that you interpret to be nothing but
blood, bigotry, hatefulness, incest, *anti-science, slavery, down on
women and the like. Then, it shows everyone here that is what you feel
the Bible stands for,

People use their own judgement to decide what the good parts are and
reject or rationalize away the parts they don't agree with. *It is not a
big leap to realize that we are capable of deciding what is good on our
own based on real world consequences.

All sorts of horrific behavior has been "justified" by bible readings.

* *justified? *Well, I suppose it depends on how you want to look at it,
eh?

Many of those who do "evil" claim they find their justification in the
bible. Of course, they think they are doing what the bible tells them to
do.

So, they get blended in with those who do righteously because the too
are 'bible believers?

And naturally, not many look at the good that Christians would do
especially those who would wish to make some kind of dis
accreditation. *After all, who wants to read something boring like
that!

* , But rather those who want to show a dim view Christians *would
rather concentrate on the bad. ie. Those who 'call' themselves
"Christians" and those who would pervert and miss use the Bible.

Therefor, we all get put in the same group.

Works every time.

Well, Tim, I'm not aware of any rules that say who can or who cannot
read the bible and then decide that if they wish to spread hate and
evil, they can find whatever justification they think they find in that
book.

You, obviously, make a lot more out of the bible than I do. To me, it's
an interesting book, written, edited and "adjusted" by men that, in the
King James version, at least, uses beautiful language to tell its
stories and histories and superstitions and so forth. It also contains
its share of absolute absurdities. You probably accept many of these as
articles of faith. Your privilege.

Definite articles of faith. Like the absurdity of Bumblebees flying
(they ain't supposed to, y'know) or mammals laying eggs, that is
unless your a Platypus or an ant eater.. Definite articles of
unexplained science. If you want to accept these. Your privilege.

Because it says so...
 

On 7/15/2012 2:47 PM, Tim wrote:

Definite articles of faith. Like the absurdity of Bumblebees flying
(they ain't supposed to, y'know)...

That's a fallacy Tim.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...blebees-to-fly

Because it says so...
 

On Jul 16, 1:33*am, thumper wrote:
On 7/15/2012 2:47 PM, Tim wrote:

Definite articles of faith. Like the absurdity of Bumblebees flying
(they ain't supposed to, y'know)...

That's a fallacy Tim.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...odynamically-i...

But, even that explanation has been held in question.

http://plus.maths.org/content/buzz-bumblebees

"Based on these experiments we concluded that the [Cambridge]
hypothesis cannot explain the attachment of the vortex throughout the
stroke," said Professor Dickinson. So how does the bumblebee fly? "We
still don't know for sure" - and the bumblebee flies anyway.

Because it says so...
 

On 7/16/12 7:38 AM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 16, 1:33 am, thumper wrote:
On 7/15/2012 2:47 PM, Tim wrote:

Definite articles of faith. Like the absurdity of Bumblebees flying
(they ain't supposed to, y'know)...

That's a fallacy Tim.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...odynamically-i...

But, even that explanation has been held in question.

http://plus.maths.org/content/buzz-bumblebees

"Based on these experiments we concluded that the [Cambridge]
hypothesis cannot explain the attachment of the vortex throughout the
stroke," said Professor Dickinson. So how does the bumblebee fly? "We
still don't know for sure" - and the bumblebee flies anyway.



The bumblebee drinks a lot of ethanol.

Because it says so...
 

On 7/16/2012 4:38 AM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 16, 1:33 am, thumper wrote:
On 7/15/2012 2:47 PM, Tim wrote:

Definite articles of faith. Like the absurdity of Bumblebees flying
(they ain't supposed to, y'know)...

That's a fallacy Tim.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...odynamically-i...

But, even that explanation has been held in question.

http://plus.maths.org/content/buzz-bumblebees

"Based on these experiments we concluded that the [Cambridge]
hypothesis cannot explain the attachment of the vortex throughout the
stroke," said Professor Dickinson. So how does the bumblebee fly? "We
still don't know for sure" - and the bumblebee flies anyway.

"The data support an alternative hypothesis—that downward flow induced
by tip vortices limits the growth of the leading-edge vortex."
James M. Birch & Michael H. Dickinson

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../412729a0.html