beowulf

That's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that it is a good litmus test for what I was talking about (textual criticism, reliability, etc.) It doesn't mean that the majority is right in every instance (e.g. slavery in the South...abortion in the U.S.). That's not what I'm talking about. If you lived 500 years ago your beliefs would be different. Your own words show that. You base your beliefs on a majority.

Doesn't sound like much of a consensus to me. The difference in translations can sometimes be a lot. Where you get huge variations is in the interpretations. Not just in current denominations but in same denomination over time. Five hundred years ago the Roman Catholics interpreted their Bible much differently then today. So where is this consensus?? You can't even settle on one translation. Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in the Trinity! They base that on their interpretation of their translation of the Bible. The only reasonable conclusion is that there is no consensus!

That is simply not true. I say something is true. You ask why. I say, because that's what the Bible says. A Jehovah's Witness also says something is true. You ask why. He says, because that's what the Bible says. Then, what we need to do is look into a historical context. Now if my interpretation of what the Bible says matches up with what the vast majority of scholarly folks throughout history (who have done all the heavy lifting of translation from the original languages) have come up with, then I have great cause to think that what I am reading is reliable. On the other hand, for example, if the Jehovah's Witness New World Translation (produced by the Watchtower Society) doesn't match up with what anyone else is saying (e.g. with regard to the Trinity, deity of Jesus, etc.), then I have great cause for concern. With regard to the Moral Law in the Pentateuch (1st 5 books of the Bible or the books of the Law). I believe there has been consensus on that for a very very long time. Which translation of the bible do you use? There are so many! Since there are so many different translations of the bible how can there be a consensus on what the bible says? The Jehovahs Witnesses believe that their translation is the only correct translation and that their interpretation is the only correct one. Just like every other religion out there! The Roman Catholics believe that their translation is the only correct one and their interpretation is the only correct one. So where is the is consensus?? I only put forth two examples of conflicting translations and interpretations of the bible. There are many many more! I don't see any consensus! btw I am very familiar with Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs.

To be fair atheism really isn't a belief system. There are no rules or anything to believe in. It's simply disbelief. Now there are atheists that act similarly to devout religious people.

Considering that there has never been a consensus as to what the proper interpetation is there is no way pin down what the actual "Gods Laws" are! So with out knowing exactly what those laws are how can anyone say they haven't changed? "There are no believable gods."

God's moral standard has not changed from Genesis to Revelation or until now...nor will it ever. God is the same in the past, present, and future. He does not change. That is one of his incommunicable attributes. That is your opinion. It's not supported by any evidence.

It's possible that mine could (hopefully, not to a large extent, though) because I'm human and God, throughout the course of my life, is conforming me to His standard (I've got a very long way to go). However, my shortcoming is not the point. The point is that God's standard does not change. It's pretty well established that according to the Bible that standard has changed. The real problem is that the standards are ambiguous and subject to interpretation. The ten commandments that you submitted as being "Gods Moral Law" is interpreted in many different ways and there is no way to say which is correct. For an almighty and omnipotent being your god isn't very clear on his laws. "There are no believeable gods."

There was a reason for the Protestant Reformation. Sola Scriptura, sola fide. The church in Rome wasn't always apostate...but they are now...and they certainly do not represent the Church as a whole. The Priesthood is not the head of the Church. Jesus Christ is. What evil men do in the face of what is right does not discredit the standard. Everyone will be judged by God for what they have done...in the end. As for the rest, let's be sure to mention that the Crusades (not defending the atrocities but I'm sure they occurred on both sides) began because of Muslim aggression. Ah yes the old "they're not really christians anymore" argument! Any time someone brings up atrocities done in the name of christianity or any christians that you don't agree with out comes the "They're not really christians". Such a cop out and bullshit excuse. There is no objective or absolute moral law in christianity.

I am sure not all evangelicals are like those people in that movie.

Right and those people in Jesus camp absolutely believe that they are right and moral. The evanglicals believe they are right. Each christian group has their own reasoning as to why they are right and the others are wrong. How does anyone know what the proper explaination is of the scriptures is if no one can agree on anything? It's all so subjective. There is no way to define the correct interpretation of the bible. In fact from friends and people that I have met who consider themselves christian, they all just find a church that fits their personality and personal beliefs and go with it. Everything that I have seen about christianity shows that there are no absolutes.

I can tell you not all christians share your view or the views in that video. There are no absolutes when it comes to morality. I have no interest in debating the fine points of christian mythology. My point is that your statement that there is a "Moral Law of God objective (and absolute)" is not true. Even among christians there is no consensus. What is and isn't moral is different from person to person.

Your Youtube link is just one interpretation. Many people believe differently.

And those ten commandments are subject to interpretation. Just like many christians don't share your interpretation of the bible. There is no one single moral code. What one person considers to be morally right can often be viewed differently by others.

There is no such thing. Morality varys from person to person, culture to culture and over time it has changed. Slavery was once considered to be morally correct in the US and in many other cultures. The Bible is not consistent with regard to morality. In the old testament it's morally right to stone someone to death for various infractions. Some of which very few today would agree with.

"There are no believable gods."

Yeah, Zach is a great flyer! That's a great example of how beneficial lots of tunnel time is for improving flying skills. Bottom line if you want to be a better freeflyer, go to the tunnel. Zach works at the Skyventure Colorado tunnel and is a great instructor.

The pilot said he had difficulty keeping the engine running, but he landed with out any other problems. The really interesting landing was the Caravan. It was a dead stick landing! He used up most of the runway at Skydive Dallas. It kept gliding and it seemed like he was going to run out of runway.

I can agree with your post. Here is my list of emergency exits. 1. Cessna Caravan 10,000 ft, Engine loss, Not configured for exiting. Waited for pilot instructions and exited on command one at a time. 2. Cessna 206 loss of manifold pressure at about 2,500 feet. Pilot asked if I wanted to ride the plane down. I declined and I said hell no and exited. ( The door was removed from this plane ) 3. Twin Otter, right engine loss between 4,000 ft and 5,000 ft, waited for instructions from pilot and exited on command one at a time. Each time I had a very strong urge to get out of that plane. Nothing is better motivator then the engines making a loud noise and in the case of the Caravan the prop was locked in place and not moving. The first time I have ever seen a prop stationary in flight! The 206 didn't make a loud noise, the pilot informed us of the engine problem and gave us the option of landing with the plane. Like I would really land with the plane when given the option of jumping! Especially a plane with engine problems!

Ah, sorry about that I was thinking of Marion Barry, the DC Mayor. Just googled Marion Jones, never even heard of her.

How can you understand Martha Stewart? Her own greed drove her to break the law. She knew, she would be breaking the law and did it any way. She's a phony (claimed for years she was from New England and was really from New Jersey). Is her 'white collar' crime different from the blue collar crime of selling dope? Is this another case of someone being 'excused' because they are wealthy? The law is the law. A road-kill toad has more class than Martha Stewart. Chuck Well I don't know too much about that case, but since it's a white collar crime I can understand how some people might think it's not that big of deal or that she was wrongfully accused. This doesn't mean I feel that way. I really don't have an opinion either way, she broke the rules got caught and went to prison. Now Marion Jones was caught on tape smoking crack. No ambiguity there!

Having done 3 emergency exits, with one happening last weekend, always wait for direction from the pilot. Just opening the door can make things much worse. Last weekend we had the right engine go out on a Twin Otter at between 4,000 ft and 5,000 ft. If the door was open at the time or the door was opened before the pilot was ready it would have made the situation much harder for the pilot to deal with. But we had plenty of altitude and everyone waited for instructions from the pilot. Once the pilot was ready and gave the ok we opened the door and exited one at a time as instructed by the pilot. Remember it's not just your life that is on the line.

I am willing to bet that most if not all of the swoopers who have had close calls like yours or actual canopy collisions would have similar answers. If they had spotted the traffic then they wouldn't have made the turn. It goes to show that it's more difficult to clear your airspace before executing a high performance turn then most people think. You and the guy in the pink canopy got lucky. The two guys in Perris were not so lucky. It seems that the only way to really be certain of clear airspace is to do hop n pops and be the only person in the air or have coordinated landing pattern with others also doing hop n pops.

uhh how can you say Marion Jones did nothing illegal? Crack cocaine is still illegal and has been for a long time. Martha Stewart I can understand.

Mesh Liner, a must have for wind tunnel use and hot days!! Just to clarify ... Arms mostly, legs not such a big deal

Awesome story!!!