Genetic problems with genesis, the great flood, etc

Of course, the only law that was "fixed in stone" was the Ten Commandments. So the only sexual more that is fixed in stone is "thou shalt not commit adultery" - which is about fidelity, not who-does-what-to-whom. Homosexuality is not mentioned.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

First, you were talking about changes in the law, and whether or not the law is "set in stone". I commented, and I repeat, that the only law that is "set in stone" is the Ten Commandments. Where do you think the expression "set in stone" comes from?Second, it's a different topic, but Paul was not necessarily talking about "general" homosexuality. It seems likely that he was talking about pedophilia, etc.But most important, his thread is supposed to be about the genetic problems of inbreeding from Adam (and/or Noah). It's not about Bible apologetics.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Hi, beLIEve. Randman has a notion that "the past is not static". He likes to invoke a "fip-flop" in the space-time continuum (or whatever) to hand-wave away any evidence that he doesn't like. He claims it's based on physics, but I haven't seen him defend his views in the physics forum yet. Just to let you know, it doesn't pay to get too caught up in his imaginings. Suffice it to say, he doesn't have any evidence that there was a "change". He just wishes there was.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Just to point out your general lack of reading comprehension, I said in Message 24:

quote:

---

... I haven't seen him defend his views in the physics forum yet.

---

Instead of calling me a liar, you could have said that I am mistaken. And instead of giving absolutely no backup for your claims - as usual - you could have given a link to where you discussed it. Until you do so, my statement stands.But my main point was that your Woo-Woo Time theory is useless. It's just an excuse to hand-wave the evidence away.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Maybe we could get him to explain spontaneity to us in terms of Gibbs free energy (or the free energy of his choice ).

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC