Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Harry Edmon

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14
46
Your Turn / Re: Any Trump supporters inclined to reconsider?
« on: November 10, 2016, 11:57:19 AM »
Interesting and informative article on the democratic nature of our electoral system:
http://www.taraross.com/2016/09/electoral-college-myth-3-the-electoral-college-is-undemocratic/
Note that states are free to choose their electors in whatever way that is authorized by that state legislature.   You do not have to have a "winner takes all" system in a state.   Maine and Nebraska choose some of their electors based on who wins the vote in each congregational district.   I think it is still the case that a state legislature could even choose the electors themselves with no popular vote by the people of that state.   However I seriously doubt any state legislature would choose to do so - they would be out of office so fast your head would spin.

47
Yakimow does it again he found a Virginia Alum and completely distracted me from my work - I missed the resolution from the floor which has to do with pro-life issues. As with most pro-life issues in the LCMS it passes with 95% of the vote. I believe it created a task force to study life, cloning, fetal tissue research, etc. issues. Someone who was paying attention help me out. And someone else get Yakimow out of here...
According to the Convention Facebook page it was 3-04.

48
2016 LCMS Convention / Re: Tuesday Afternoon Elections
« on: July 12, 2016, 07:15:16 PM »
Does anyone have any idea about the geographical diversity of the united list?  I know that some of the slots are geographical in nature and so don't matter, but I'm just wondering if the list shows any geographical bias beyond simply where Lutherans are thicker on the ground?
One thing I noticed, almost no one from the Northwest District.    No surprise there.

49
2016 LCMS Convention / Re: Tuesday Afternoon Elections
« on: July 12, 2016, 07:13:47 PM »
Concordia St. Louis Regents - Ordained
Senkbeil (UL/I) 67
Knippa 33

Concordia- STL Regents - Lay #1 (Just switching up the way I am listing names here - to add some suspense.
Edmond (UL - floor nominee) 29, 42, 53
Hegland 24, 24.7, 47
Johnson (UL) 12, x, x
Schlueter 20, 22.4,x
Weingarth 13, x, x

United List and floor nominee wins the first slot

Concordia - STL Regents - Lay #2
Hegland
Johnson
Schlueter
Weingarth

And an upset -  Hagland with the win over the united list candidate.

That's my boy!   And it is still "Edmon"!   Since Paul has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics telescopes will now be issued to all students. :)

50
P.S.  It is Paul Edmon (he is my son, so I should know).

Thank you for the correction - and please thank him for allowing his name to stand.

In my defense I just copied whatever the closed captioning folks put up on the screen!
No problem.  I think I might have one of the most misspelled 5 letter name around.   There is a city within 5 miles of me called "Edmonds, Washington", so for the most part it is a lost cause!

51
Paul Edmund - Massachusetts, CSL Board of Regents. - 79% vote to add him

George Lowrey Jr., Texas, LCMS board of directors - 72% vote to add him

J. Brent McGuire, Texas, Texas Board of Regents - 80% vote to add him

Alan Taylor, Texas Board of Regents - 82% vote to add him

Joy Anderson, Concordia St. Paul - 76% vote to add her

And the rest of the folks give up. Nominations are closed.

Word of coffee leaked out and now Jim Butler, Scott Yakimow, and Mark Hoffman have joined me. Still room for more...

P.S.  It is Paul Edmon (he is my son, so I should know).

52
Your Turn / Re: Collective Guilt After Orlando
« on: June 22, 2016, 05:55:59 PM »
Collective Guilt - Romans 3:23
Solution - Romans 3:24

53
2016 LCMS Convention / Re: And So It Begins...
« on: June 01, 2016, 03:47:00 PM »
From President Harrison's facebook page:

Quote
From my President's Report Part II for the upcoming convention. Delivered at the Floor Committee gathering last weekend.
3. Task Force on Dispute Resolution. I am not in favor of wholesale revision of our dispute resolution process. It has many valuable attributes. I did, however, request that a task force evaluate the system and make some suggestions, which they have done (pp. 297ff.). Concerns about the system arose from years of dealing with a case (now resolved) where the system had repeatedly failed. The system does need clarification and improvement. The current process is too long. The current process affords no appeal. The process needs panel members with stronger theological credentials. The current bylaw on dissent is unclear. The task force has made some suggestions. I would personally prefer any appeal to the president, or reference to the president in general in the reconciliation process be an appeal or reference to the praesidium. We must have a system, which actually works, however, we must avoid centralization as much as possible. If district presidents are to be subject to the same ecclesiastical oversight as parish pastors, and that’s a real “if,” then it may be wise to consider placing the action in such cases in the hands of the praesidium, rather than the president. We count on the wisdom of the task force, the floor committee and finally the convention.

54
I don't know if we will receive printed copies, we have in the past.  I intend to download mine to my tablet and use that for the convention, probably rather than the printed copy if they send it out.  Smaller, lighter, easier to schlep around.  Besides, while the workbook is an important reference and good to look at before the convention, the really important book will be the first Daily News.  That will have the actual resolutions to be voted on once the floor committees finish working on them.  Overtures in the convention workbook may or may not see the light of day and are usually changed, sometime almost beyond all recognition.

I'm not sure that they will let you bring it into the voting delegates area. Electronic devices are usually prohibited.

Peace, JOHN
They allowed them in 2013.   You were supposed to make sure you had your device in "Airplane" mode to prevent electonic communications between the delegates.

55
Your Turn / Re: The Binding Nature of Synodical Resolutions
« on: February 02, 2016, 10:56:53 PM »

I have yet to have anyone show me where my interpretations are chock full of errors. I go where the evidence leads. Sometimes it can lead down more than one interpretive path.

That's interesting, I see your errors pointed out constantly on this list.   But you refuse to see.   So I will go back to what I usually do on this list: just watch and shake my head at the people who explain away clear Scriptures with strange interpretations of their own.

56
Your Turn / Re: The Binding Nature of Synodical Resolutions
« on: February 02, 2016, 05:07:00 PM »
I also think a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 - 2 is an effort to put God in a box. 

Have you considered that God put Himself literally and physically into a box?  The box being the flesh of Jesus Christ.

... Fletch
All of Scripture is basically God putting himself in a box since in the Truth of His Word He self-limits what He will and won't do.

By the way, I have a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences, my oldest son has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics and neither of us have any problems with a 6 day creation.    Are there any other Ph.D. in science that are on this thread?


So what does a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences or Astrophysics have to do with biblical interpretation? How literate are either of you in Hebrew and Greek? I worked with a man with a Ph.D. in voice, but I wouldn't trust him to be my physician (or even my plumber).
Well, it is obvious that your education also has nothing to do with science, so why would I pay any attention to you when you opine on that?    I would never trust you with biblical interpretation since you have shown through your posts that your interpretations are chock full of errors.

57
Your Turn / Re: The Binding Nature of Synodical Resolutions
« on: February 02, 2016, 05:02:57 PM »
I also think a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 - 2 is an effort to put God in a box. 

Have you considered that God put Himself literally and physically into a box?  The box being the flesh of Jesus Christ.

... Fletch
All of Scripture is basically God putting himself in a box since in the Truth of His Word He self-limits what He will and won't do.

By the way, I have a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences, my oldest son has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics and neither of us have any problems with a 6 day creation.    Are there any other Ph.D. in science that are on this thread?
Impossible! You are lying! Your son's naive, anti-science take on creation surely prevented him from understanding any true science classes!


Unless he got his Ph.D. from a Concordia.

My Ph.D. is from Purdue University and I currently work at the University of Washington.   My son's Ph.D. is from the University of Minnesota and he currently works at Harvard.

58
Your Turn / Re: The Binding Nature of Synodical Resolutions
« on: February 02, 2016, 12:18:04 PM »
I also think a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 - 2 is an effort to put God in a box. 

Have you considered that God put Himself literally and physically into a box?  The box being the flesh of Jesus Christ.

... Fletch
All of Scripture is basically God putting himself in a box since in the Truth of His Word He self-limits what He will and won't do.

By the way, I have a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences, my oldest son has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics and neither of us have any problems with a 6 day creation.    Are there any other Ph.D. in science that are on this thread?

59
Your Turn / Re: The Binding Nature of Synodical Resolutions
« on: January 29, 2016, 02:31:54 PM »
If we are to accept six 24-hour day creation and thus a young (6 to 10 thousand year old or so) universe, how do we account for the seeming size of the universe and that light from the farthest reaches of the universe would have taken millions of years to reach earth, the fossil record, and radiometric dating of rocks and formations that again seem to indicate multi mega year age for the earth?  How do we account for the observable phenomena that seem to demand a much older universe and earth?
One possibility is the Omphalos Hypothesis.   It was named after the title of an 1857 book, Omphalos by Philip Henry Gosse, in which Gosse argued that in order for the world to be "functional", God must have created the Earth with mountains and canyons, trees with growth rings, Adam and Eve with hair, fingernails, and navels (omphalos is Greek for "navel"), and that therefore no evidence that we can see of the presumed age of the earth and universe can be taken as reliable.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14