Whatever we're doing in Iraq

who believes the bible is true history.
Matthew makes the connection, and he was one of those given the storytelling job by Jehovah. Once this happens, then your sources may be correct about other definitions, but they aren't relevant.
And if Matthew, writing in the first century of our common era, says that Joseph domiciled in Nazareth, that's where Jesus grew up. And note how many references to that city and its area there are in the gospels. People much closer than we to the time and place didn't question the accounts.

Worst, in doing all this you miss the point of the bible's message, so you miss any possible benefit from that. Who's interested in distracting you from it, do you think?
Regards, Doug in New Mexico

I prefer research to unquestioning belief, esp. in a book that is demonstrably flawed. The thing that worries me is that so many people put more time and effort into buying a car or a house than they do into the study and choice of their faith.
In any other context,the reliance on any one source as a means of deciding an issue would be unacceptable esp if more than one source were available.
You rely on just the bible DR to decide matters of archaeology,history,geography etc.The work done in all these fields deserves serious consideration. The bible has and had a context. It did not just drop out of the sky.
God gave us the gift of inquiry so we would have a safeguard against duplicities and fabrications.
1 Corinthians 7:25
"Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.
"2 Corinthians 11:17
"That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting."
"It is an act of virtue to deceive and lie, when by such means the interest of the church might be promoted." - Bishop Eusebius (260-339)

I think it's a good one: http://www.answers.com/topic/nazareth

I wish things had gone much better in Bosnia, too.

Dan

Doesn't change a thing or accomplish a thing

in this thread is that in spite (or perhaps BECAUSE) of the naysayers who have been firmly dug in, GOOD is being done in Iraq and in other Middle East countries that they didn't believe and still don't want to believe would happen.

It's not going to happen overnight....but it's going in the right direction (peace....which is what the naysayers have been screaming all along... "give peace a chance".... throughout SE at every opportunity)

This is the closest most of these countries have come to stepping up to the plate in God only knows how many years....and the handful of terrorists trying to stop it are NOT stopping it from happening.

TONI

So do I.

Dan

here in SE by having some members actually agree that things ARE going better in Iraq than what they perceived would happen.

I think that you are arguing just for the fact that you think you can beat something to death and refuse to accept the answers you are getting.......which is that things are already going better there.

Faster doesn't equate to better, and I suspect that faster is what you really want.

TONI

I'm not arguing anything. I'm not even arguing what I really want, although your suspicion is wrong.

I wish things were going better in Iraq. It's just that simple.

Dan

No matter what way you cut it, it's better than what was there with Saddam for nearly 50 years....and it's better than that in a relatively short amount of time.

What do you want to be better? Be exact so we can figure out what in hell it is that you want for an answer here......

TONI

I was just stating a wish.

Dan

He makes a statement and then beats it all over the place without ever saying anything.

I wish things were going better in Iraq.

Dan

better that they had elections, better that your not there?

its all in the eyes of the beholder, you see the deaths from the scum i see the scum dieing by the hands of free iraqis.

you see the benevolent saddam as a kind soul, i see him for what he was a sub human who should have been shot on site as a dirtbag

He's trolling

DE

Or for some support for his accusation.

Dan

what you are doing! Circles and more circles Not playing your game!

My statement has been the same throughout the thread.

Dan

It seems as though most of the frequent flyers maintain the same circles within the box of postings and replies.

The only other consistent circles I see is the CNET logo.

Post away Dan. I read your post and welcome your opinions. I don't always agree, and most of the time I don't respond simply because I don't *always* have that equal knowledge or enough understanding of the subject matters discussed.

You offer a different enlightment in which at times worth re-thinking.


CL

This thread should have been one post long. It started out as trolling and he achieved his goal because people responded, and responded, and responded.

If you respond to refute a trolling thread, you lose. If you respond to a trolling thread to correct obviously inaccurate statements, you lose.

The ONLY way you can win is to ignore ALL trolling threads. Every time. This place has turned into junk lately because it's infested with crap like this. There's nothing in this thread worth keeping and they're laughing at everybody who responds.

Ignore, every time.

DE