bstach

Volumes of debate have been written on whether being Christian means being a pacificst. There are plenty of Christians on both sides of the debate that have informed, well thought out arguments. Personally, I do not equate "love thy neighbour" and "turn the other cheek" with "thou shall lay down and be a doormat"

In all my life I have never understood why it need be any more complicated than that. I don't neccessarily disagree with Dawkins on that point, just the arguments he uses to support it. The process of interpreting the Bible that I am trying to describe is refered to by Theologins as the " Hermeneutic Circle ". Basically, any part of the text must be interpreted within the context of the whole of the text as well as the historical and cultural context that it was written in. Thus it really takes repeated readings and reflection of the whole Bible to really zero in on the meaning of any particular passage. And an understanding of history and ancient culture is important for accurate interpretation. This all sounds like alot of work! Add all the ideosyncracies real people bring to the table and its no wonder that there is disagreement on what various parts mean.

Okay, here is a direct quote from Dawkins: This is an Old Testament reference. Did I not previously point out Christians are not bound by Old Testament law?

If you are describing his argument correctly, Richard Dawkins clearly does not understand a key aspect of Christianity: Christians are not bound by the old testament law. Christians really only have one law: love thy neighbour. If Dawkins doesn't understand this, it brings the whole bookinto question. Dawkins anticipates that very question and goes on to decipher the New Testament in similar manner, again making the point that today's interpretation of even the New Testament is selective, and rarely literal. The question is if, as most religious people advocate, morality is supposedly absent without religion, on what basis do we choose the bits of morality that suit us out of the Bible (or the Koran, as well)? As for "Love thy neighbor": he also makes a point that the historical context of this command was specifically for the jewish people: to love one another- "love another jew". i.e.Tribalism. He claims the command, at the time it was written, did not apply to also love non believers, although in modern times that has come to be the accepted interpretation of it. The story of the good Samaritan suggests otherwise. Same with meeting the Samaritan woman at the well. Both of these stories were scandalous to the Jews (for the reason Dawkins mentions). They clearly demonstrate that Jesus was intentionlly *inclusive* of non-Jews (which really pissed off the Jewish religious leaders, btw). How does Dawkins explain that away? Regardless, why does anyone find it surprising that different people interpret the Bible different ways? Everybody frames what they read within the context of their personal experience. To complicate things, some parts of the Bible are clearly literal, others clearly figurative but there is some grey area. Add to this deceitful men who choose to intepret the Bible in a manner that suits there sinful hearts and men who seize the opportunity to use 'religion' as a tool for money and power...and you get the situation we have today. Jesus taught that true religion is bringing justice to the powerless, feeding the hungry and so on.

If you are describing his argument correctly, Richard Dawkins clearly does not understand a key aspect of Christianity: Christians are not bound by the old testament law. Christians really only have one law: love thy neighbour. If Dawkins doesn't understand this, it brings the whole bookinto question.

I didn't find the kitty litter pitch too bad. Short crux and off-vertical slope, the run-out didn't bother me. The upper slabby pitches got my attention more (the 10a ones). Even then, Squamish 5.10a for sure. Just do it; its good times. I agree that early season the crux may be the descent if you chose the walk-off. Pay attention to the snow conditions and come prepared (i.e. consider axe, sturdy boots and maybe even crampons). Only you can judge your skill on moderately steep, possibly icey slope. Then again, it might be easy plunge-stepping if the snow is right.

Did anybody else watch this steaming pile of shit? The producers seriously need to study some reputable Egyptology and should study some economics and learn how the Central Bank really operates.

Take an "air" guitar. Ba-dump-bump!

Would help to say where you are located...Seattle, Portland or The Great White North

That is awesome :tup: I've boiled eggs with the in-suite coffee maker. It takes about two hours to get them fully hard-boiled and most coffee makers auto shut off after 1 hour. So be aware you need to cycle the power after and hour. A few boiled eggs plus a bowl of Cheerios and OJ == bfast of champions. (milk and OJ kept cold in the ice bucket, of course)

I know, but ya got to love that. My very first time at Squamish, about 1 mo before the trip, I'd ripped every finger tendon in my left hand. I'd tried to get on stuff in the gym right before the trip so as to stretch out my muscles and try to get a feel for the rock before the trip, but it was excruciating, so I was just going to go because I'd earlier told my buddies I would. First route - I just eyeball a line from the ground, jump on it. Fingers weren't stressed at all. After I get down my buddy Bill looks it up in the guide and it says 10d. That was back when 10d meant something....well, in Yosemite it meant something anyway:-) Sure made me feel good though. Ya I love that, you go to check and on-sight a 12a sport climb and all the 5.10 climbers are like 'wow are you sponsored' and your like 'that was boring I wonder if I can climb it on clean pro' thump, thump

I agree that the proposed uses are so opposite in their requirements that a dual purpose rope will just suck for one or the other or both. My suggestion: Get 10.5mm for top roping (50m or 60m -whatever you can get cheap, but 60m is prefered) Get 20 or 30m 8mm for glacier travel/scrambling (not sure why double is suggested above - maybe for leading or rescue). I have a 20m 7mm static line that i take scrambling - great for giving my wife a TR on tricky sections, short raps or easy/safe(-ish) glacier crossings (don't lead on it though).

yb3GLKTvQ-U

Is Yak Peak alpine or cragging with an alpine feel?

Has anyone suggested making "Past 24 hours" a drop down with "climbing only" and "climbing plus spray" options? Either way, nice job admins, I like the change. I know where to find spray when i need a fix.

I bought some modeling paint from the hobby store. Cheaper than nail polish (unless your wife has a few she bought and now hates the color), and more colors to choose from. Haven't put it on yet, so i can't say if it works better or worse.

You could catch him sharing a bong with Kevbone.

There are some things we can't protect our kids from. And on the bright side, there are alot worse things he could be doing. Just encourage him to wear a helmet. I work in healthcare and there are way too many kids coming in the ER with heads smashed from snowboarding falls.

Thats nothing a good lawyer can't get around. I wipe my ass with your disclaimer. lol

What are best bets for a cheap hotel that is not too scummy or scary? I stayed at Arizona Charlie's on Decatur (just off Charleston, well located for climbers) for $44/night two weeks ago. This was mid-week, I think generally the prices go waaay up on the weekend at all hotels I know of. I've stayed at Wild Wild West for $35/night a few years ago. I wouldn't stay there again, room smelled and was dirty.

Put plastic bags over your feet before you put them in the shoes.

Can't afford the $10/night?

You have an erie similarity to your avatar pic

Read my post again...

So doubling up on cams instead of hexes implies one is sewing it up too much and climbing beyond their limit? This wasn't meant to be a shot at people who carry double racks. The gear you need ultimately depends on the route. Having a double rack does add a margin of safety in that you are more likely to have exactly the piece you need, but at the expense of a heavier load. I was thinking about alpine climbing when I wrote this; for cragging, carrying a heavier rack is less of an issue. I just prefer to climb with a lighter rack and do alpine routes a grade or two lower than my on-site ability - allowing me to run it out and carry a lighter rack. This is just a personal preference, not a shot at anybody. Also, for routes where I know doubles are needed, I usually combine my partners rack, thus I don't need to own doubles. If your climbing partners do not own any protection, then this could be a problem for you.