My little boy leaving me toungue tied.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

My in-laws surely consider, for example, Shostakovich and Stravinsky as Classical, and I think they died maybe in the 1960's.

Rachmaninoff as well, IMO.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Rachmaninoff as well, IMO.

Absolutely. I love him. In fact, we were listening to him today when the questions came.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Absolutely. I love him. In fact, we were listening to him today when the questions came.

To discuss natural selection, perhaps you could put some of the Motor City Madman's stuf in the CD and crank it up. Ain't nuthin' better than discussin' biological studies with the sounds of Cat Scratch Fever in the background. And foreground.

Ted Nugent rocks.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

To discuss natural selection, perhaps you could put some of the Motor City Madman's stuf in the CD and crank it up. Ain't nuthin' better than discussin' biological studies with the sounds of Cat Scratch Fever in the background. And foreground.

Ted Nugent rocks.

Good idea. "Son, our forebears were something like this."

[Cali Coug]

I have always thought that natural selection and creationism are the same thing. Things evolved to a point, and once they reached a point satisfactory to God, He instilled the Light of Christ.

Thus the commandment to "multiply and REPLENISH the Earth."

You can't replenish what you didn't already have.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

I have always thought that natural selection and creationism are the same thing. Things evolved to a point, and once they reached a point satisfactory to God, He instilled the Light of Christ.

Thus the commandment to "multiply and REPLENISH the Earth."

You can't replenish what you didn't already have.

I am with you on this, though you were able to say it much better than I ever could have.

[Detroitdad]

My daughter is six and insatiably curious. She asks me about DNA and how it controls what we look like, natural selection, etc., all the time. I always answer with the scientific explanation, to the best of my meager knowledge.

We don't attend church often. Nor do we do the bible stories or BOM stuff. But she has a super Catholic friend in her kindergarten class who is always telling her stuff about bible stories. So she asks me about them. My bible stories are a bit rusty, so I give her the low down on Adam and Eve. And she looks at me and gives me the "yeah, right" look. Oops. I made a parental boo-boo. I might be raising a cynic. I guess we better do some of the religious stuff after all. The poor child needs to be prepared for the grillings she gets from her grandparents at the very least.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

I have always thought that natural selection and creationism are the same thing. Things evolved to a point, and once they reached a point satisfactory to God, He instilled the Light of Christ.

Thus the commandment to "multiply and REPLENISH the Earth."

You can't replenish what you didn't already have.

One problem: the hebrew word for which the translators supplied REPLENISH is most likely a mistranslation. Of all of the occurences of the hebrew word "male" in the bible (some 249 times), it is translated as "replenish" only seven times:

accomplish, 7; consecrate, 15; expired, 3; fill, 107; fulfil, 28; full, 48; fully, 2; gather, 2; misc, 14; overflow, 2; replenish, 7; satisfy, 2; set, 6; wholly, 6.

The most common translation, as is here seen, is "fill," which frankly makes the most sense in this context. At any rate, no definitive doctrine can truly be derived from the distinction between "fill" and "replenish," as the difference came about only in the translation from Hebrew to English.

This, of course, does not debunk any sort of evolution theory, which is entirely possible. It does show that this argument can't support that theory.

[realtall]

Originally Posted by creekster

You should at least add some classical jazz to the rotation. You don't need to wait another 50 or 60 years to know that Thelonius Monk or Charlie Parker had it right.

Why only classical and how do you define classical?

Most people define it as anything orchestral and/or anthing ever written by a now-dead composer. In reality it is just one of the musical composition periods: Middle Ages(400-1400; Leonin & Perotin - this stuff isn't exactly easy listening), Renaissance(1400-1600; de Prez & Palestrina), then Baroque(1600-1750; Bach & Handel), Classical(1750-1820, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven), Romantic(1820-1900; Berlioz & Brahms), and Modern(1900-2000; Bartok, Adams). My favorites are Bach, Handel, Beethoven, & Brahms.

[Robin]

One thing I like about an understanding of the Bible and the Christian tradition is the way it opens up a whole different level of understanding of so much Western civilization lit. I want my son to be able to enjoy reading Moby Dick, or The Red Badge of Courage and understand the nuance the author has put there.