Re: Y2K -- James Elite Board 2001! version 2.0

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

Subject: Re: Y2K

Author:
James

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 17:13:58 09/20/00 Wed
In reply to: Terry 's message, "Re: Y2K" on 21:58:33 09/19/00 Tue

> Comments throughout the message.....
>
>
> You would be surprised at this. Shoot em at me and Ill
> go at it :> I love this kind of stuff.

okay
>
> It is scientifically prooven that your brain operates
> in diffrent ways around diffrent people. For
> instance... when you and I talk, I go back to the way
> we were in the past. All fun and games and stuff with
> the new underlining maturity. When I am around
> Marines, I am all buisness, 100% hard ass. When I am
> around Heather and Allyson, I am kind, soft (well as
> soft as I get anyway), caring, ect. This is all done
> by your brain firing syapsis and checmical release.
> Therefor, love can easily be exaplined as the release
> of certain brain made chmicals into your body and the
> inner workings of the brain.

Maybe but does that prove that "love" exists between two people? It just proves that the brain reacts differently to different people. My point is what we define as "love" cannot be proven. We know it exists and we all call it what it is, but there is no tangible proof of it. Only what we say, and do, which could be lies, or tricks.

Another thing. Napoleon was a great general right? Well prove to me he was using scientific proof. It's impossible. We can't see Napoloen act in his wars and gather imperical data. Nor can we interview him or get his uniform measurements. But we all pretty much accept that he was a real general and he was one of the greatest. But why? Because it was written down in a History book that we have no way of knowing if it was really true or not do we? Nope.
>
> Historical proof is cool. I personally think Jesus
> existed. Ok. I exist. You exist. Does that proove he
> was Gods son? Does my existance proove that my dad is
> truly my dad? No. We have DNA to proove that now adays
> but anyone could write a story about anyone back then.
> And with time ALL history fades. No matter what your
> talking about. And it is prooven fact that King James
> DID change alot of the bible in order to oppose his
> rule on his people. Just like when the Lutherns made
> their own religion, they changed beliefs. And so forth
> and so forth.

Changed beliefs maybe but not the Bible. The Catholic church at the time supressed literacy so that nobody could do what Luther and Henry VIII did. THEY could read Latin and could see in the Bible that there were things that were wrong with the Catholic way of doing things. However look at this. Every Bible on this earth pretty much says the same thing. There are no gross differences in any Bible these days. They may be worded slightly different, but the content is the same. It always has. My Bible is nearly word-for-word the same as the Catholic Bible. It even has the same content of the Jehova Witness Bible. I do not think KJV changed anything in the Bible except the Language it was written in. However if you know he did I would like to know where you got that info cause I would be very interested in reading it.
>
> Do not think I am striking against the Xian religion
> because I am not. I respeact it and actually like a
> lot of its teachings. It just sounds as though your
> getting a bit peeved.

Nah I'm not. I'm giving you what I know and vica versa. I love talking to people about Christinaity it is one of my favorite topics.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]