It actually says sea monsters, sea beasts, sea creatures, or dragons in Psalms 148:7, varying on translations. Pretty sure dragon is just a reference to monstrous ocean life, taking it pretty out of context there.
As far as the sun orbiting the earth in Psalms 19:4-6, it actually just says the sun goes across the sky. Every analogy falls apart if you dissect it to death in any arena. Say the expansion of the universe being related to filling a balloon with air, if you don't think about it too hard it can make sense, everything is moving away from the center fairly equally. This however doesn't quite work out in the brain so good if you wonder what color the balloon is, how does the little knot get tied up every time to not result in sudden mass shrinking, are comets the spit/breath that occurs from a person breathing in the balloon, is it a person or a machine breathing into the balloon, what alternate universe is the balloon pumper in, etc.
Anyways by all means counter-debate those who think I'm full of hot air, just try to keep it civil :)
Ricky Gervais puts this best.
"You can't do it with a maths book, why can you do it with the word of god?"
You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion.
First... who says dragons never existed, actually there is quite a bit of evidence that they possibly did exist, the only problems science has with them is that they cant find any remains, If they were HUGE flying creatures, They could have had no bone structure what so ever, OR maybe they did like elephants and all went to one place to die, in the ocean perhaps.
You need to be banned from threads that require a semblance of thought before you ruin this one with your utter homeschooled nonsense, just like the last one.
Atheist and strong believer in the ancient alien theory. Look it up on Youtube. It's just a theory but it makes a whole lot more sense. Just think. lol...
What I think Zeldarules was trying to say was "inb4 trolls".
Definitions of 'atheïsm' and 'agnosticism' tend to be a vague, but I lie closest to being an agnost, I think. I'd like to believe there's something larger, but I'm also sure that we cannot prove the existence of such a thing right now. Possibly not ever, but I think that's something we can't know either.
That's atheism.
Agnosticism is when you believe there is a higher power but it is unknowable or hasn't revealed itself.
It'd be unscientific to state that "there is no god", in the same way it'd be unscientific to state "there are no invisible pink unicorns". You can't prove it, so it's reasonable to state that there might be a god. That's where atheism and agnosticism split.
Atheism states alright, current religions have had thousands of years to prove their claims and provided nothing. I reject their beliefs.
Agnosticism states that yeah, there probably is a higher power, but it doesn't write books, it doesn't sacrifice it's children and it generally has nothing to do with us. I don't reject their beliefs outright, but I know you're making shit up.
"I hate something that you're talking about, so I'm going to shove my opinion in your face despite it being as relevant and welcome as a penis in your salad."
0
Ricky Gervais puts this best.
"You can't do it with a maths book, why can you do it with the word of god?"
You don't get to make your own personal bible edits. Either the King James is the word of god, or it's not. If, as you say, it's not, then don't attempt to defend the assertion.
0
You need to be banned from threads that require a semblance of thought before you ruin this one with your utter homeschooled nonsense, just like the last one.
0
Can't let this one slip by. It's easy to be sarcastic as an atheist towards such a statement; I'm really not trying to.
Do you really, actually believe that? That there are really no historical or factual errors in the bible?
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html
Can you really reconcile that with your assertion?
Psalms 148:7
Even the dragons praise the Lord.
19:4-6
The sun moves around the earth.
0
I hope you're young.
0
No.
Reread.
It'd be unscientific to state that "there is no god".
It's unscientific because nobody can make that claim. It's impossible to prove a negative.
0
No. It's not a theory. Don't disgrace the word.
0
Buddhism involves no faith and no worship. Buddha doesn't grant prayers.
Google define
0
@Taintedwisp: Go
Pascal's Wager refutations
Point #5 is my favourite. It's entirely possible for there to be an afterlife and you, as a Christian, be completely wrong and "loose".
0
That's atheism.
Agnosticism is when you believe there is a higher power but it is unknowable or hasn't revealed itself.
It'd be unscientific to state that "there is no god", in the same way it'd be unscientific to state "there are no invisible pink unicorns". You can't prove it, so it's reasonable to state that there might be a god. That's where atheism and agnosticism split.
Atheism states alright, current religions have had thousands of years to prove their claims and provided nothing. I reject their beliefs.
Agnosticism states that yeah, there probably is a higher power, but it doesn't write books, it doesn't sacrifice it's children and it generally has nothing to do with us. I don't reject their beliefs outright, but I know you're making shit up.
0
Tick the "always a threat to attackers" box on your buildings, or give them a dummy weapon.
Also buildings are units as much as marines are units. Don't give out retarded advice.
Alternatively why not just drop the silly area validator, and just use an offensive autocast with range whatever and a filter for enemy units?
0
Starbow sounds like a cheap cider.
0
"I hate something that you're talking about, so I'm going to shove my opinion in your face despite it being as relevant and welcome as a penis in your salad."
0
Can we maybe have one SotIS thread where people don't crawl out of the woodworks to bawl their eyes out?
0
TIME TO START A NEW PROJECT
0
Support how? Surely asking is enough. Anything more just becomes obnoxious and reduces the chance that the devs will actually stick with this.