Search results

Rethinking this for a minute. If soul is the whole person, then of course the soul is the (an) answer, but not a useful one. It's like saying 1 is 1 and 2 is 2. Or like using a word in its own definition.

Each call only gives a different answer if the seed is different. I did absolutely no development in Python, but the concept is the same in all languages, in all pseudo-random sequence generators, which I spent 35 years working on. That's not to say someone can't come up with a true random...

So was heavier than air flight at one time, as well as traveling across the ocean in a few hours.

If that was your point, then it is incorrect. If the seed and generator are the same, you get the same result, repeatedly. Here's how you do it in Python: Python Random seed() Method This function generates a random number based on the seed value. It is used to initialize the base value of the...

But the soul can exist, function, desire, worship, feel pain, inhabit places without the body? I'm not talking about AI, but about a potential future step. Perhaps man could create a real intelligence...if a soul is a body and breath of life, just like animals have (even if not in the image of...

If you run the same generator with the same seed, you get the same result. There are different generators that will give a different result with the same seed, or same generators with a different seed, like the microsecond difference, as you said.

Random number generators aren't even random. They are randomized by picking a different seed (starting point), which is often a time hack, because it would approximate randomness. Use the same seed, and you get the same answer.

A lot of the older hymns seem much richer than modern Christian music, but I wonder if some of that is because time has filtered out the poorer ones from the past. I.e., they don't make it into our hymnals today. I enjoy the richness of both words and melodies in a lot of the Getty hymns (Keith...

Yeah, I understand what you are saying. So I'll edit the other post to make it clear.

Well, the word "all" being replaced by "we" wouldn't change any rhyme or meter. And the wording is not untrue. Just flagrant in its denial of a universally available salvation, when comparing the two versions.

Soul is not the same as mind. When God breathed into man the breath of life, he became a living soul. When the breath of life leaves us, we die and return to dust. The "soul" appears to be the whole man, at least in Genesis 2. If we are able to create a being that has a mind and body and lives...

That wasn't the only answer he gave you. You should attempt to refute his answers.

I remember. It's "To God Be the Glory". There's a line that says, "Who opened the lifegate that all may go in." Thay changed it to read, "Who opened the lifegate that we may go in."

We have some hymnals from a Calvinist church we used to attend. Some of the hymns have different words to make them fit Calvinist doctrine better, but most are the same. I'll go look up one I'm thinking of.

You're not Michael Cadry then? Sorry...my mistake.

HI Michael. I think I remember you. You are supposedly one of the two witnesses of Revelation.

What's with all the deer prints in the picture?

I didn't. You did. "Author" can mean creator or explainer in words. Moses was the author of Genesis, God was the author (by inspiration) of the words and the author of the heavens and earth. "Author of confusion" is about how things are supposed to be done in the church, and applies more to...

The problem with all of this is that you are arguing against Jesus. He gave us an exact interpretation of Ps 82, and it doesn't fit what you are saying. John 10:33-36 KJV — The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man...

No. I'm talking about God's description of His creative work, that if He calls earth "heaven" then calls the sky and outerspace "heaven", and the calls the dry land "earth", it's confusing to the reader. 🤷‍♂️ I'm not using "author" here as "creator of physical things" but as "giver of the word".