-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The story of Jesus and his love is the old, old, older story.
Hymn: https://www.hymnal.net/en/hymn/h/1064
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]I love to tell the story
Of unseen things above,
Of Jesus and His glory,
Of Jesus and His love.
I love to tell the story,
Because I know ’tis true;
It satisfies my longings
As nothing else can do.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="class: chorus"]I love to tell the story,
’Twill be my theme in glory
To tell the old, old story
of Jesus and His love.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TD]I love to tell the story;
More wonderful it seems
Than all the golden fancies
Of all my golden dreams,
I love to tell the story,
It did so much for me;
And that is just the reason
I tell it now to thee.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TD]I love to tell the story;
’Tis pleasant to repeat
What seems each time I tell it,
More wonderfully sweet.
I love to tell the story;
For some have never heard
The message of salvation
From God’s own holy Word.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TD]I love to tell the story;
For those who know it best
Seem hungering and thirsting
To hear it like the rest.
And when, in scenes of glory,
I sing the new, new song,
’Twill be the old, old story,
That I have loved so long.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Hymn: https://www.hymnal.net/en/hymn/h/1064
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]I love to tell the story
Of unseen things above,
Of Jesus and His glory,
Of Jesus and His love.
I love to tell the story,
Because I know ’tis true;
It satisfies my longings
As nothing else can do.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="class: chorus"]I love to tell the story,
’Twill be my theme in glory
To tell the old, old story
of Jesus and His love.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
2
[/TD][TD]I love to tell the story;
More wonderful it seems
Than all the golden fancies
Of all my golden dreams,
I love to tell the story,
It did so much for me;
And that is just the reason
I tell it now to thee.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
3
[/TD][TD]I love to tell the story;
’Tis pleasant to repeat
What seems each time I tell it,
More wonderfully sweet.
I love to tell the story;
For some have never heard
The message of salvation
From God’s own holy Word.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
4
[/TD][TD]I love to tell the story;
For those who know it best
Seem hungering and thirsting
To hear it like the rest.
And when, in scenes of glory,
I sing the new, new song,
’Twill be the old, old story,
That I have loved so long.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I'm trying to follow the discussion. This is a hypothetical scenario to Leannaix about if the child molestor has free will or not? If he doesn't have free will, then it's not his fault he rapes the 2 year old because of the chemicals in his brain... where as, if we say he had free will, the predisposition to rape the 2 year old could (or could not) be there, but he can still exercise free will and NOT do it?
Does Leannaix think we don't have free will? Do atheists in general typically believe we don't have free will? Do you personally believe atheists cannot have free will? If you believe they can't, it is because they believe they are made up of chemical reactions and so it is impossible to believe they have free will?
Sorry, just trying to catch-up and make sense of what everyone is talking about.
Does Leannaix think we don't have free will? Do atheists in general typically believe we don't have free will? Do you personally believe atheists cannot have free will? If you believe they can't, it is because they believe they are made up of chemical reactions and so it is impossible to believe they have free will?
Sorry, just trying to catch-up and make sense of what everyone is talking about.
K
There is a passage in the bible that settles this debate at least for me and it is found in the Gospel of Luke. I think Chap 22 I'm not sure but I can look it if searching is a problem. But it is the passage where Moses is talking to the rich guy who is in hell and the rich guy ask for a drop of water. Then ask, that Moses send some back to warn his brothers of this place. Moses replied, they have the law and the prophets if they will not believe them they would not believe even though one came back from the dead.
A person bent on being there own God, will not accept another God it, is biblical fact. Unless of course, they get in a place where the gospel is preached and the Holy Spirit breaks that hard ground, But even then if they reject time and time again, The Holy Spirit will no longer tug at their heart. Saying My Spirit will not strive with man forever.
A person bent on being there own God, will not accept another God it, is biblical fact. Unless of course, they get in a place where the gospel is preached and the Holy Spirit breaks that hard ground, But even then if they reject time and time again, The Holy Spirit will no longer tug at their heart. Saying My Spirit will not strive with man forever.
K
Romans 1
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
I am an atheist and I believe we all have free will. My gut feeling is that most atheists would agree with me on this. We still must recognize, at the same time, that as hominins our actions are directed to some extent by constraints placed upon us as a species by evolution, but within that framework I would say we have free will, which in all likely-hood is a gift of our greater intellect.
I think T_Laurich's intention is to show that the knee joint is not connected to the leg bone. 
In other words it doesn't belong to Lucy. I've looked into this since his post, and I would agree, and so would all the scientists. The point is it doesn't matter. The features that show Lucy walked on two legs are present, not just in the knee, but in other parts of her skeleton as well. Here's another point: this is not the only skeleton we have for Australopithecus afarensis. For example, in 1975 the remains of some 13 individual members of this species (perhaps a single family?) was discovered in one location. They had all apparently been killed at the same time, though as yet we don't know how. We have enough bones from individual finds to put together a full representation of Lucy's skeleton even though her own skeleton was not complete. Lucy was a member of a species that possessed both ape and human characteristics in her skeleton. She looks for all the world like a transitional species between apes and humans which is why T_Laurich is so anxious to make you think she is a fake. Just remember her remains are only one of many examples of her group that have been found.
In other words it doesn't belong to Lucy. I've looked into this since his post, and I would agree, and so would all the scientists. The point is it doesn't matter. The features that show Lucy walked on two legs are present, not just in the knee, but in other parts of her skeleton as well. Here's another point: this is not the only skeleton we have for Australopithecus afarensis. For example, in 1975 the remains of some 13 individual members of this species (perhaps a single family?) was discovered in one location. They had all apparently been killed at the same time, though as yet we don't know how. We have enough bones from individual finds to put together a full representation of Lucy's skeleton even though her own skeleton was not complete. Lucy was a member of a species that possessed both ape and human characteristics in her skeleton. She looks for all the world like a transitional species between apes and humans which is why T_Laurich is so anxious to make you think she is a fake. Just remember her remains are only one of many examples of her group that have been found.
Unscientific? Why would you say that? What has science got to do with this?
Inconsistent? Not at all. The tradition of Santa Claus is merely a pleasant adult conspiracy intended to bring pleasure to children and adults alike at this wonderful time of year.
Unkind? How? When I was the age of the girl in this poster I too wanted to get out of going to church. I can identify with the kid in the pic (I think it’s cute and perhaps a little mischievous), though I would not have traded away my Christmas presents for anything.
I stand by what I said above, I see the campaign as simply promoting a secular Christmas. If you want to believe December 25th was actually the birthday of Jesus, go right ahead and believe this. It doesn’t hurt anyone or anything and it’s a good excuse to set up a lovely manger scene above the fireplace. I am all in favour of tradition.
Inconsistent? Not at all. The tradition of Santa Claus is merely a pleasant adult conspiracy intended to bring pleasure to children and adults alike at this wonderful time of year.
Unkind? How? When I was the age of the girl in this poster I too wanted to get out of going to church. I can identify with the kid in the pic (I think it’s cute and perhaps a little mischievous), though I would not have traded away my Christmas presents for anything.
I stand by what I said above, I see the campaign as simply promoting a secular Christmas. If you want to believe December 25th was actually the birthday of Jesus, go right ahead and believe this. It doesn’t hurt anyone or anything and it’s a good excuse to set up a lovely manger scene above the fireplace. I am all in favour of tradition.
Unscientific? Why would you say that? What has science got to do with this?
Inconsistent? Not at all. The tradition of Santa Claus is merely a pleasant adult conspiracy intended to bring pleasure to children and adults alike at this wonderful time of year.
Unkind? How? When I was the age of the girl in this poster I too wanted to get out of going to church. I can identify with the kid in the pic (I think it’s cute and perhaps a little mischievous), though I would not have traded away my Christmas presents for anything.
I stand by what I said above, I see the campaign as simply promoting a secular Christmas. If you want to believe December 25th was actually the birthday of Jesus, go right ahead and believe this. It doesn’t hurt anyone or anything and it’s a good excuse to set up a lovely manger scene above the fireplace. I am all in favour of tradition.
Inconsistent? Not at all. The tradition of Santa Claus is merely a pleasant adult conspiracy intended to bring pleasure to children and adults alike at this wonderful time of year.
Unkind? How? When I was the age of the girl in this poster I too wanted to get out of going to church. I can identify with the kid in the pic (I think it’s cute and perhaps a little mischievous), though I would not have traded away my Christmas presents for anything.
I stand by what I said above, I see the campaign as simply promoting a secular Christmas. If you want to believe December 25th was actually the birthday of Jesus, go right ahead and believe this. It doesn’t hurt anyone or anything and it’s a good excuse to set up a lovely manger scene above the fireplace. I am all in favour of tradition.
I think Christmas and Easter should be celebrated because, sadly, many people only attend Church once or twice a year. It is an opportunity to encourage them to attend more frequently. Personally, I could do without the gift-giving bologna between family, friends, and co-workers. As for giving to those in need, I think we should do a better job of that year 'round.
I think T_Laurich's intention is to show that the knee joint is not connected to the leg bone. In other words it doesn't belong to Lucy. I've looked into this since his post, and I would agree, and so would all the scientists. The point is it doesn't matter. The features that show Lucy walked on two legs are present, not just in the knee, but in other parts of her skeleton as well. Here's another point: this is not the only skeleton we have for Australopithecus afarensis. For example, in 1975 the remains of some 13 individual members of this species (perhaps a single family?) was discovered in one location. They had all apparently been killed at the same time, though as yet we don't know how. We have enough bones from individual finds to put together a full representation of Lucy's skeleton even though her own skeleton was not complete. Lucy was a member of a species that possessed both ape and human characteristics in her skeleton. She looks for all the world like a transitional species between apes and humans which is why T_Laurich is so anxious to make you think she is a fake. Just remember her remains are only one of many examples of her group that have been found.
In other words it doesn't belong to Lucy. I've looked into this since his post, and I would agree, and so would all the scientists. The point is it doesn't matter. The features that show Lucy walked on two legs are present, not just in the knee, but in other parts of her skeleton as well. Here's another point: this is not the only skeleton we have for Australopithecus afarensis. For example, in 1975 the remains of some 13 individual members of this species (perhaps a single family?) was discovered in one location. They had all apparently been killed at the same time, though as yet we don't know how. We have enough bones from individual finds to put together a full representation of Lucy's skeleton even though her own skeleton was not complete. Lucy was a member of a species that possessed both ape and human characteristics in her skeleton. She looks for all the world like a transitional species between apes and humans which is why T_Laurich is so anxious to make you think she is a fake. Just remember her remains are only one of many examples of her group that have been found.
The jaw protrudes.
The brain cavity is small.
There is nasal hole as in a chimpanzee rather than a nasal bone as in a human.
This looks more like a chimpanzee head...
Link: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Chimpanzee-Head.jpg
Than a human head...
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/e/7/c/d/12923863261071580622skull-md.png
