pajarito

I was on an Army SF HALO team. I, however, have never freefalled out of a C-5. I've got friends who have, though. The largest aircraft tailgate exit that I've done is a C-17 (and that was huge). A jump ticket would cost you a lot. You'd have to give up part of your life to the military.

Baaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!

That's amazing! I've flown in C-5's. The size is overwhelming.

Caw! Caw!

Oh...it gets worse.

I think there is one even bigger now. Isn't there some Russian airplane bigger than the spruce goose?

That's one heck of a story!

Did you read my quote concerning the laws of the Old Testament vs. the ones of the New? Did you read my comments on the differences between Biblical truths/laws vs. denominational tradition? Of course Christianity changed when it split off from Judaism. Jesus ushered in the new covenant with his people. Many of the old Jewish laws were cast aside. For instance, circumcision used to be a sign of the old covenant. It is an important tradition to me for personal reasons but I do not believe it is necessary today for religious reasons. Foundation morals are different from these. I’m talking about the 10 Commandments. I’m talking about Jesus saying to love your neighbor as you love yourself. I’m talking about love God with all of your heart, mind, soul, and strength. These haven’t changed in thousands of years. In reference to what denomination I adhere to, I would have to say Reformed Baptist. I hold to many Presbyterian (PCA; not PCUSA) principals as well as Southern Baptist. Sorry if I missed your point. I agree with you but there are those types of people on both sides of the fence. Those with blind faith who hold to rules just because that’s all they’ve ever known and they can’t make their own decisions. There are also those who don’t adhere to any standards but their own because it’s too much of an inconvenience. It convicts their wrongs and they want to party and have fun. That could very well be considered a crutch. I think that even people with blind faith, however, are covered. I don’t think it matters how you get there as long as you are genuine. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it (Luke 18:17). I agree. *** By the way, I do think a discussion on why it appears that so many people raised in the Catholic faith later turn against it and sometimes against Christianity would be a good one. I notice that a lot. Maybe it's just me.

I'll answer you first because I think It's the easiest to respond to. Believe it or not, I think I agree with this entire statement. I've already stated a lot of what you just did. You'd have to define exactly what harms another human being in the last statment, however. But I think I agree with you.

I completely fail to see your point. Both are essentially condemning sin.

I’m speaking for Christianity and not other religions. The basis for Christianity has not changed and some foundation morals shouldn’t either. The interpretation of tradition and the way a particular church or denomination delivers the message has and will. Like I said before, this in no way alters the source. There are churches that even go against the fundamentals, however (i.e. gay clergy), but this does not make it right in the eyes of God. It certainly does not follow his written Word. I have stated before and I agree that non-Christian or non-religious people have the ability to know right from wrong and in fact may lead moral lives. I never said that you had to be Christian to be moral. I think I’ve said that before…. It seems to be very common for some Catholics to be turned from the Catholic faith and sometimes even from Christianity. That would be an interesting topic of discussion. In my opinion, if someone told you in Catholic school that “Premarital sex is just wrong, so don’t do it!” then they were doing you an injustice. Especially in a religious setting, I’m surprised that they didn’t quote “Jesus warned, you have heard…’You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” The Bible says that adulterers and fornicators (those who have had sex before marriage) will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Christian churches, whatever denomination, should teach from the Bible. Again, this is not debated. I did examine my own morality for a long time and lived by my own rules and came to the realization that I fall very short of a higher standard. I didn’t become a Christian until 98 and I’m 34. You’re generalizing when you say, “Often these people find religion and take that set of morals pre-packaged and live their lives according to those morals” and insinuate that religious people have a “lack of understanding of how a moral person can live in an immoral world.” Exactly! And the ones that are created by independent minds are no better or worse than ones that come in a book. AGAIN, this is not debated. I agree that morals created by independent minds may not necessarily be bad and, therefore, immoral compared to religious ones. It doesn’t mean that they are all good but it surely does not mean that they are all bad. I AGREE WITH YOU ON THIS POINT.

This says essentially what I said in an earlier post. (From previous post) “However, I know many nonreligious and moral people. I never said that if you weren't a Christian, you were immoral. I believe that God places in all of us a basic internal understanding of what is right or wrong (basically speaking).” However, as in your example, works do not make you a righteous person. Even Carnegie with his very generous gift has sinned against God. Repeat. Refer to previous post. There are both religious and non-religious people who do bad and good things based on their morals. Hence, all men are sinners by nature. This is not in dispute. Yes, but where do they derive their morals. Are they just based on societal norms? As you can see from current events, social norms change just like the shifting sands. What is considered obscene now won’t be in another 10 years. Why is it a fallacy that you might need to have a moral system handed down to you by God to be valid? Prove that. Humans are flawed and imperfect. Also, you’re inferring that attempting to lead a life according to the example set forth by Jesus is “simple” and, therefore, easy. I have to say, in my experience, it is much harder than living by my own rules. It takes a lot of thought. I catch that subtle attempt at condescension. Are you insinuating that you or others who are humanistic are more intelligent or have more insight than those who believe in divine guidance because they make up their own rules? Are you insinuating that you’re smarter than me and that I do not think on my own? Everybody has a framework or a “codified morality” that they work within. Even those who make up their own have boundaries set by themselves. I can tell you that my “framework” has opened my options up infinitely. I have a much larger vision of what’s possible than I had before. To quote an older philosopher: To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8:31-32

Don't get me wrong. Chuckie can hang. You've just got to get him a little sick and you can abuse the hell out of him for the rest of the night. I wish I had pictures from about 14 years ago.

My answer is my cousin SkymonkeyOne and I have outdrank him. I've been witness to the Monkey hacking up tequila in the bushes outside Ray Porterfields house. And that was in his younger days. Busted!

I agree that if I take out “sinners by nature” that most people would have agreed with my statement. It alleviates them from some personal responsibility. I also agree that everyone has the capacity to do bad. Christian, Atheist, Agnostic, Hindu, Muslim, or anyone else. Does everything you just said in any way discredit the 10 Commandments? I’m guessing that you’re referring to the laws of the Old Testament as opposed to the ones of the New. You’re throwing around accusations of inconsistency and unreliability but I don’t see any specifics references to back up your disbelief. In reference to the laws of the Bible and their supposed inconsistencies, I posted the following weeks ago in a Patriotism forum concerning gay marriage that relates to our discussion: The commands of the Old Testament are divided generally into moral law, ceremonial law and civil law. The moral law (e.g., the 10 commandments) remain in effect and few people would question that. The ceremonial law (sacrificing 2 oxen, etc.) was fulfilled in Jesus' sacrificial death and the New Testament teaches that it is not binding anymore. The civil law (stoning for adultry, etc.) was the law of the nation of Israel, which operated as a Theocracy, and is not the civil law of any other nation. The argument about gay marriage is a deep, dark hole in the ground from which there is no escape until there is some common ground from which the discussions can spring. I can agree that we're not going to stone homosexuals, just as Jesus didn't pick up a stone and start stoning the woman caught in adultry. Jesus didn't condone her conduct (in fact, he said to her "Go and sin no more"); it's simply that everyone in the crowd (other than Jesus) was also guilty under Jesus' standard (if you've looked at a woman and lusted after her in your heart, you've committed adultry). Interestingly, stoning for adultry was not acceptable under Roman law at that time and Jesus would have actually violated the civil law if he agreed to the stoning. Different laws referred to different times and for different purposes, not all of which are required or applicable today or even from the Old Testament to the New. I’ll agree with you that many people today misinterpret much of what’s in the Bible. This is nothing new and has been the case for centuries. That doesn’t in any way discredit the source. I say because a basic understanding of right and wrong is not good enough. The question was would I vote for a Non-Christian for President. I would not because I believe that all people are sinners, by nature. Yes, I believe God places a basic understanding of what is right and wrong in all people, however, if left to follow our own desires, we will always lean towards selfish needs and personal gratification (i.e. sin) (i.e. I don’t care what’s going on in the world as long as the economy is good, I’m making money, and my lifestyle that I’ve grown accustomed to doesn’t change). I’m not saying that all people will do selfish things all the time. I’m saying that it is in our nature to do so. I believe that once a person has a relationship with Jesus, there is an internal desire to know God, to think of others instead of ourselves, and to do things for His will and not our own. That is a characteristic that I require in a person I vote into the office of the Presidency.

The cat splatter scene is the best one in the movie!

My steak aaaalways tastes better when I know it came from a cute, big eyed, brown cow that some say was mistreated and that was killed in what some would consider an inhumane way. (licking my teeth) ... Yum!

What a hateful statement. First, nobody can follow the laws set forth in the Bible to the letter. Aside from that, your statment would be like me saying that all Athiests are evil cult members, rapers of women, and sacrificial baby killers. I know that's not the case so I won't make that ignorant generalistic statement.

What I'm saying is that all people, religious or not, are sinners by nature and have the capability of doing bad. My particular religion sets a standard for morality. That's what I should stive for although I don't always. I can never entirely meet that standard. Therefore, there is, in fact, a set relation between belief in my religion and morality. However, I know many nonreligious and moral people. I never said that if you weren't a Christian, you were immoral. I believe that God places in all of us a basic internal understanding of what is right or wrong (basically speaking). What you choose to do with that is your choice. The second part can be debated all night long and already has before on dz.com. However, I personally believe that the Christian Bible is the Word of God. It was written by men but inspired by God himself. This was passed down to me (and you). It is my standard for morality. I probably have already heard all of the objections you're about to fire back at me. Authenticity, historical accuracy, etc. In answer to your question, however, no, I don't do right just because my Minister tells me to. I try to do it because that's what God says to do.

9-11 isn't the only example of people doing evil things. Are you honestly telling me that atheists are incapable of doing evil? I derive my set of standards and morals from a higher source. If one does not, the standards and morals are made up by the individual. Everybody is different and would have their own versions of what they feel is right or wrong. This is simply not true. Acknowledgement of God by the State in no way endorses a particular religion. This has been covered in great detail in previous posts.

I agree with PhillyKev. He's right on!.................Did I just say that?!!! I'm leaving.

The reason is that we are all people whether you're religious or not and are, therefore, fallable. No, I don't necessarily need the threat of everlasting punishment to cause me to behave in a moral fashion...but it helps. I am not in any way advocating that the gov't arm itself with the power and authority of a diety (not that it could). Separation of church and state does not, however, prohibit the acnowledgement of God. I'm saying that I believe our gov't needs the grace of God to remain great.

So if you agree that there is no set relation between religious belief and the ability to do the right thing then why would you not vote for an atheist/ non believer. It just seems petty to me. That's not what I said. Do I think that good (and bad) things are done by nonreligious people. Sure. Do I think that good (and bad) things are done by religious people. Sure. However, I do think there is a set relation between my religious belief and the standards for what is considered right and wrong. That's not something I leave up to humanistic determination. Therefore, I personally would not vote for a President who did not believe in my God.

Beutifully taken out of context....again....congratulations.

Too broad a question.