Blank

For you x-men buffs, i have seen a picture or two and an action-figure of wolverine with broken skeleton-like claws (though, the action figure's skeleton claws weren't teh broken ). i was wondering, what the heck is up with that? and... it looks cool... but i want to know what happened to him.

yeah man, "gorilla suits". they had hydraulics that enhanced one's strength, a communication system, and there was this thing called the "y-rack" that sounded so cool to me when i was younger, because the main character takes a "y-rack" off the back of his suit and loads up his guns with it (w00t)

I think the original was "Thou shalt not murder". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So...killing is.....ok? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He is simply clarifying what the commandment was, nothing else. although, i think when clarifying it, he implies that "kill" and "murder" are two different words and therefore have different meanings, but similar meanings sometimes too. the oxford dictionary says: "kill: v. 1 cause the death of 2 put an end to or destroy" "murder: n. 1 unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by another v. 1 kill (a human being) intentionally and unlawfully" so you have a square and rectangle thing going. by definition a rectangle is a quadrilateral with four right angles. and a square is an equilateral rectangle. so a square is always a rectangle but a rectangle is not always a square. ?Entiendes?

It is because they wanted to capture a "brain bug" and learn about species' tactics in order to better eradicate them from their numerous inhabited planets. If they nuked it, that would work, but then they would have to nuke all the other planets too and stop the bugs from getting to another planet and then breeding and going to another planet and so on. That is a lot of planets and a lot of nukes. It isn't some Ender's Game where you have basically all the "brain bug's" on one planet. The book was so better and different, sci-fi book fans would really like it i am sure, and any reader for that matter. unless you absolutely loathe sci-fi... if that's the case... why are you reading this still?

they are the same to show consistency... i.e. that it's not made up.

It sounds sort of like those wierdo's who nail their knobs to planks Yeah,then they fight wars over whether it's a metaphor for the flesh of christ or it becomes his flesh through divine grace. Seems a bit silly to me but whatever... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> John 6:25-70, Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22 Judge for yourself what you think He is saying... figurative or not?

so you are saying, that the whole passage is made up? or if it is twisted, that would've been the most boring story if it wasn't twisted. did you even read the passages? did you see the context that the word "virgin" was used in? did you see that the matthew passage doesn't even use the word "virgin"? i mean, you might as well reject the whole Bible if we are going to not work with pre-conceived notions. we have to assume some of the answers here. it's a faith-assertion.

... i think i might do that but Mary was still a virgin, since there are two passages in in different books of the Bible that talk about it and all the context points to her being a virgin. (Luke 1:26-37, Matthew 1:18-19)

and you are too by saying that he was drugged, that he existed, and that they didn't break his bones so you are basically saying that a roman spear can't penetrate and that as a weapon it is the most useless thing anyone has ever made since it won't even hurt the guy in battle, but just annoy him into a state of angry-berserker? i would too, but i was just joking anyway. i meant like, a random person being dug up and having somebody go all science on them. the "all science" part sounds so impersonal, and it made me laugh.

do the scrolling .gif like Nartwak said. you're the only punk here...

"Was I?" yes i haven't had wine vinegar ever (which is what was on the sponge), so i don't know how effective it's duping properties are. John 19:31-35 "Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe." So if Jesus had a spear driven through his side, he couldn't live even if they had drugged him up well. and i hope nobody goes "all science" on anybody's bones. that's just disturbing... "hey, i have a deceased relative at the cemetary. lets dig them up and go all science on 'em"

it is so far off from euthanasia. you know what euthanasia is right? "Bringing about a gentle death in the case of an incurable or painful disease." #1 how is shoot-to-kill gentle? #2 the man was not killed because he was mentally ill. the marshals were not Hitlers, they killed the man because they believed he was a terrorist, and they had no idea until afterward that he was mentally ill

well, that is what the site did basically, it made Siddhartha into a character of Biblical proportions. Like, one of the times it said, "He traveled all over India and preached his doctrine and gospel. He became a saviour, deliverer and redeemer. " and i was wondering, what is he redeeming people for? they never needed to be redeemed. like, Jesus redeems His believers to God, since He is the propitiation for our sins, but i don't see how Sid could redeem people... so in that, the site did kind of pretend that Buddha was Jesus. (i know you were joking about Jesus as Buddhist, but i used the opportunity to write a different response)

if that means that OE rocks, then agreed

ah, good point and very true. HOWEVER, if you look at the 9/11 terrorists you see that they weren't just trying to blow up the airplane with a bomb, but they ended up taking the planes to crash into somewhere instead. a marshal with a gun would've been helpful there. but how an actual terrorist could get into a situation where it is "shoot-to-kill" for the marshals and they have time before the terrorist does anything is hard to conceive of. and also i think only innocents will die, since as you said you couldn't spot them in time anyway, so all agreed here

i think he meant that we are literate enough to realize how illegible that Sig was. or that we are literate enough to realize how much that Sig sucked. or most likely he was implying that you would get banned: "not here, you wouldn't"

i would hug you, but your hubby might kick my butt :ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> ah, thanks for the quote, i read through half the site and didn't see the miracles. By what power did Buddha do those things though? just by thinking about it or what? the site you linked me to kinda made it evident that the person who made the site was a believer in its content, but still very interesting. ideally i kind of want a totally objective site about it, with more facts present as opposed to basically a storybook. wikipedia is as good as any in that case, but i can't get over the strange feeling of being misled when i read it, since anyone can edit it

Yeah man, like this: Marshal1: are you a terrorist!? terrorist: Muhama Jihad! Marshal2: hey, i liked that movie too. terrorist: MUHAMA JIHAD!!! Marshal1: does that mean he's a terrorist?! Marshal2: oh, well, i don't know... terrorist explodes and kills everyone on the airplane THE END Definitely sounds like a good idea to me...

i refer you to Romans chapter 9. It is your new favourite book of the Bible. it is also Reveilled's favourite too, (i enstated that one for him as well. btw i am just joking about giving people their favourite passages in the Bible, if you didn't notice, but that passage explains for what you are asking) i guess i do Wow, i have never been called the most arrogant deist one has ever known. that is... interesting. but you make me laugh since you claimed i said some things that i did not. for example, i know you can't read minds because i am not propping up my ego, even though i enjoy apologetics, and i think God wants me to present Biblical beliefs to others, and that is why i keep presenting my cases. hey man, i am only claiming what i believe, to be true. others here have done the same. Why single me out? "How are you any better than the colonial Europeans who felt the need to teach the Africans through slavery, oppression, and murder?" this one deserves two lol smileys #1 i am not enslaving anyone #2 i am not oppressing anyone #3 i am not murdering anyone #4 i am not european, although i enjoy the British spelling of words. if i do it wrong somebody please tell me. #5 i am not claiming to be "better" than anyone. i was born into the same sinful nature as everyone else, and all sins separate one from God, so my sin is as bad as your sin (although i allow that there are degrees of depravity that sins have. i.e. to kill somebody is more depraved than stealing a candybar) and we all need Jesus to reconcile us to God. Jesus is the leveler here. if you don't have Jesus, i am still not claiming to be "better", but i am saying you need to be reconciled to God since His wrath is upon you for sinning until then. you said: "If you truly followed Christianity, instead of the limited portions which appeal to your engrossed ego, you would not need to proselytize and would accept that everyone has their own journey to make." #1 i do accept that everyone has their own journey to make what makes you think i don't accept that? **runs around threatening to burn people with a blowtorch if they don't start taking the journey i tell them to**... yeah, i am not doing that. i can't really do that anyway since i don't know how to get to all of you and forcefully delete your "unnacceptable" "of the hearth" ways , needless to say it is opposed to my beliefs to do so. #2 "limited portions which appeal to my engrossed ego". you have a way with words that i admire. but i am really not doing what you say i am, even though it might appear that way to you. #3 here is an analogy that i used in the "cbs poll evolution vs. creationism" thread: If you were at an airport, and a person came up to you and said,"i really think you should check where your luggage is right now, because i believe i saw it get knocked off of the converyor belt." I am saying the same thing to you by presenting my truth, except we are not in an airport, and instead of luggage we are talking about your soul. #4 so i would be dismayed if you knew my luggage was knocked off and didn't even inform me, let alone doggedly beseech me about it.

Whoa, Siddhartha did miracles. i am not familiar about this subject, could you link me to a story or two? Caesar though, may be similar to Jesus in some ways, but the ways he is dissimilar are one hundred times more abundant. So the Shakespeare play about Caesar, i have always wondered how much fact it held, neh? since it is a play. according to the play Caesar's senate betrayed to death by shanks, not on a cross. they would've had to get all the nation of Rome to agree that Caesar needed to be hung in order to get him out there on a cross, since there were so many loyalist soldiers and civilians. Jesus made Himself a king?! this is new to me, since He already was king when He was born . and during His life He was not a king at all like Caesar was. Jesus foreknew His betrayer, whereas Caesar is still in disbelief as he is dying, "Et tu, Brute?" ANYWAY THOUGH, what is your point? there are parallels... theoretically there can be parallels with EVERYTHING i don't get it.

that is why the original hebrew word's translation makes no sense when looking at the context. Like, matthew 1:18-19, "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly." Yeah, "virgin" is mistranslated there since it is used so many times (i am being facetious IT IS NOT USED THERE). even if one of the words is "virgin" in one of the passages, that doesn't explain all the other parts about the passage that define the fact that Mary was a "virgin". i would say "please, i would appreciate it if you researched for a few seconds about what you are claiming to be 'facts'." however, that would make me sound very full of myself and i don't even know for sure if what you said is wrong. What i do know is that you led us to believe Jesus was not born of a virgin when He actually was...

good sketches, DS. it's cool to see an artist in the making, keep it up.

Well, i looked at Siddhartha and Caesar, and they certainly did not seem like Jesus at all. #1 Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Saviour sent from God. Caesar does not claim to be one divinely sent. Siddhartha says that being enlightened has nothing to do with deity, but that anyone can become enlightened with enough thought. He emphasised that he was not a god. #2 Jesus does miracles... many of them. too numerous to write (John 21:25). Siddhartha does not do miracles. Caesar does not do miracles. #3 Jesus offers eternal salvation to all who repent and accept it. Siddhartha offers the loss of one's self into something that is basically undefined until you get there. Caesar... was an emperor... #4 Jesus was born of a virgin. Siddhartha and Caesar were born like everyone else #5 Jesus basically kept His ministry centralised around Capernaum. Siddhartha traveled all over india with his beliefs, Caesar ruled an empire. EDIT: and i am barely educated about Siddhartha and Caesar, so if i am wrong please point it out and i'll happily edit it or take back the part that is wrong. Yes and below is why \/ Hebrews 4:12= "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." and i enjoyed your free hot dog story. i think the moral is either that paying for things doesn't matter or that emperors don't abide by their own rules (jk)

oh and one time somebody asked why i use the Bible. it is because it gives more credence to what i am saying, i.e. it's in an old old book studied by many many people, and accepted by many smart people and rejected by many smart people. otherwise it would be like i am coming out with my own thoughts (which are welcome in this thread) and telling you guys them. To me a random person's thoughts on religion aren't as weighty as an integral piece of literature in our society.