Tacoboy

My cousin is a Christian. He has attended seminary, and he has gotten married, and then divorced. I'm aware of the circumstances of his divorce, and they're hardly justifiable with scripture. As best I understand, he and his ex wife have both sinned in their own ways which lead up to their separation, and all of this has undoubtedly caused undue chaos in their kids' lives.

My question however, involves my cousins current actions. He is now pursuing a different woman in a serious relationship. I don't know her standing, and I don't know what she thinks about his situation. I'm fully convinced that by seeking a new relationship my cousin is sinning. It's very clear in the bible that if a divorced man seeks remarriage, he is committing adultery. However, I'm curious as to whether or not his pursuit of this relationship with her would also cause her to commit adultery. I initially thought it would, but scriptural evidence only refers to the divorced man and woman, not the ones they marry. Would those whom they marry be considered innocent in this situation? (except of course tempting them with this sin in the first place) Any insight would be appreciated.

Why were all the tea party representatives upset? The biggest issue that they were fighting for was given to them. There were going to be huge spending cuts, and no immediate tax reform. It seems like it's a victory for them, but several of them were really unhappy about the bill going through, and voted against it. I suppose I don't understand why they're upset, isn't this a victory for them?

I'm not strictly speaking about marriage. It's already clear that not everybody gets married. Look at Paul for example, he lived in celibacy.

I'm more wondering about any type of companionship in life. Something deeper than friendship, but not necessarily a romantic type of relationship. I ask this because I often find myself with people I would consider friends, but nobody I really feel like I can open up to and talk about life with. I had one friend that I was in a discipleship-type relationship with, and I thought that we were becoming more like brothers than friends, but then he started dating somebody, and dropped me like a hot potato. I tried to maintain the discipleship nature of our friendship, but most conversations just felt forced, and it was difficult for either of us to talk.

Does God sometimes take people through life without any type of companionship? Does He purposely leave people without anybody to really encourage them or invest in them? If yes (or if no either really) then is it wrong to try to seek out people to form strong companionship with?

If anybody has biblical examples for this, I'd really appreciate it. I can't find anything that really fits what I'm looking for. Most searches I do online usually just describe marriage. I'd appreciate any insight.

x = c1cos(t) + c2cos(t)

x'' + x = 0

x(π/6) = 0.5

Find a solution of the second order IVP consisting of this differential equation and the initial conditions.

I just can't figure out how to solve for the constants. I just keep getting things like .5 = .5, and 0 = 0. I know the numbers I should be getting, I just don't know how to get there. Can somebody help please?

Apparently they discovered that the current position of stars and planets in correlation with the signs of the zodiac are completely incorrect. The world, as well as the stars and other planets, have changed positions in the last 2000 years. Basically, everything that was held true in astrology has been invalidated. Considering that the basis of this ideology is the theory that the positions of stars and planets strengthen humans, and now knowing that the stars and planets have not been where we thought they were for several generations, doesn't this completely invalidate this belief?

I was wondering what people thought it really meant to be saved?

(This question is for those with a knowledge of the Christian faith)

I have been watching some Paul Washer lately, and he raised up a very good point on what the evangelical Christian community too often holds true.

They believe that all you need to be saved is to pray a prayer, and then your soul is forgiven. Scripture tells us something differently however. We should constantly be reading scripture and reflecting on how our lives are going. It takes more than just praying the prayer to be saved. Sure, it is a very important step, but really, it's only the beginning of the path that leads to unity with the Father in heaven. We should always be trying to grow with God, and we won't always realize that we're growing either. Sometimes it feels like we're not growing at all, but in retrospect, we've grown more than ever before when faced with certain trials God has place in our path. I want to know what other people think about this. Is it enough to pray the prayer? Or does God expect us to constantly work and change our ways.

A 727 jet needs to be flying 200 mph to take off. If it can accelerate from 0 to 200 mph in 30 seconds, how long must the runway be?

I have never dated anybody before. Lately I've been thinking that God might have called me to live the single Christian life. It wouldn't be the first time he's done it. Does anybody know of any resources or testimonies I could use? So far, the only things i ever find just link back to I Corinthians 7. I want to hear from people who've lead fulfilling lives as single Christians.

Has He? I have believed for a long time that God has given each person something that they excelled at in their day to day ministry. That each person was good at something. But lately I've been dealing with this nagging question, what has God given me to help with my ministry/life? I'm not particularly social or charismatic, I'm a bit of a cynic sometimes. While certainly not stupid, I'm not gifted in the field of academia, and my artistic skills are borderline non existent. What has God done for me? I'm really struggling with this right now.

Trolls: Not today please. I normally don't care, but please not today.

I just got over a really nasty cold. Near the end of it, I was blowing my nose, and a huge mass of snot mixed with blood comes out. I was wondering, could that all have been stuck in my sinus cavity? Since then, I've had significantly less pressure, and have been feeling great.

I broke my arm in the beginning of May 2010. 3 weeks ago I got the all clear from my doctor to do pretty much whatever as long as I avoided excessively heavy lifting. I have been doing fine up until today. Today some friends and I went swimming in a state park on Lake Superior. Now it was a nice day and everything, but even this time of year, lake superior is fairly cold (average annual temperature of 40). When I got home from swimming, I moved my arm that had healed just to close a drawer in my room, nothing very strenuous. However, it really really hurt around the location of where it had been broken.

Now today was probably the coldest my arm has ever been since it's healed, and I was wondering if that could have had an adverse affect on where the new bone was. Since it's been summer, there hasn't really been any cold weather or water to affect it. I've swam before, and I've had pains due to atmospheric changes, but this pain was worse than what I've had before. Any advice on the matter would really be appreciated.

I would like to start by saying that I am a Christian, saved by the grace of God. Christ is the way and the truth and the light, and has been a huge influence in my life.

That being said, do any of you acknowledge the difference between micro and macro evolution?

Macro evolution is theory that we went from pond scum to some type of primate to what we are now. It's the theory that so many Christians (myself included) refuse to accept. We were put here by God's grace.

Micro evolution however is an undeniable event in this world. It is observable, and both scientifically proven, and practiced as well. It's used in genetically engineering crops, and used to predict certain aspects of offspring, human and animal alike.

So when you deny evolution, do you deny all of it? Do you just deny macro evolution, or did you not know there was a difference between the two?

Now, I've heard a lot of rhetoric from "Christian" leaders about how this health care bill is a horrible idea. I'm a bit confused however, as to what is so bad about it. It does not prohibit abortion, which is really the only issue I see with it, but all in all, I think it will end up saving more lives than it would end.

If the issue was the money, than it doesn't seem like a very good Christian ideology to oppose it. The money that is collected is going towards enabling millions of people across the nation to improve their lives, and stay healthy. This is an act of charity, mercy, and love in my opinion, both by the people who supported the bill, and in a broader sense, by God's grace. By helping to reduce or even eliminate basic health care costs, these people may not have to live on the cusp of poverty anymore.

Additionally, studies have shown that a major contributor to the choice to get an abortion is poverty, so by helping to reduce poverty, don't you think it's possible that the abortion rate will continue to decrease? Through various efforts by pro-life organizations, from when abortions were legalized to the most recent few years, the annual abortion rate has dropped significantly, so with this legislation, I think it will continue to drop. Low-income families will be fiscally stable enough to have children and provide a more nurturing environment than years past.

All this is not to say there still won't be abortions, but I think this is a step in the right direction to reduce the number of abortions that happen in this country. I think God has acted in this way not only to test those who truly believe in the choice of life, but to help those who are less fortunate in this nation.

Please: Don't call Obama a muslim, communist, or make any other false statement. I am hoping for a mature response. I don't mind if it's contrary to my personnel opinion, but saying "Obama is a Muslim socialist!!" is not really the type of response I'm looking for

My friend is a pretty cool guy. I'm an engineering major, and he's a physics major. However, he's really bad at both math and physics. Despite taking less physics classes than him, I usually end up needing to help him with his homework a lot, especially math. I don't want to be a jerk about it, but I want to try and persuade him to possibly switch major to something he'd be good at. It's a pretty touchy subject, and I could use some help with it.

Does Sidney Crosby really euthanize adorable puppies for fun? And what about the rumors that he has slept with more tramps than Tiger? He also flips toilet paper rolls the wrong way and does not wash his hands after going to the bathroom.

There's a website called kemushen.com and it directs to desiringgod.com

I was wondering what kemushen is/means? I figure it has some sort of religious affiliation, and it looks like it could maybe be a Hebrew or Yiddish word? I don't really know though. Sources would be much appreciated!

I run and swim fairly regularly. I eat healthy food. I wear warm footwear up until I actually go to bed, and I stretch fairly regularly. These are all the things I've heard recommended to help keep good circulation in my feet, but for some reason, my feet still always get ridiculously cold whenever I just stop and lay down to try and sleep, keeping me awake way longer than I want.

I've tried wearing warm socks/slippers to bed but that doesn't seem to help either, usually only making my feet sweaty, but not warm. Any advice on how to help remedy this?

The topic of this random political stir-up is the accusations I've been hearing a lot lately about President Obama being a liar. I can understand that a lot of people disagree with his politics, and quite frankly, I'd be very afraid if everybody agreed with him.

That being said, I would like to know what lies people are referring to when they make these accusations? It's one thing to dislike what he's trying to do in the country right now, but to call him a liar, when in my opinion he's been one of the more honest Presidents we've had (at least in my 19 years on this planet).

A very small number of things I've heard "lies" about are death-panels, health care for immigrants, the Gates incident, and the war in Iraq/Afghanistan.

For the death panels, people seem to think that at a certain age, they will be forced to appear in front of these panels that will evaluate possible euthanization. This however, is not true. The process is referred to as end-of-life counseling, and it is completely optional. If you look it up in the health care legislation, I believe it's in page 421-423 somewhere. The intent of the reform is not to cast off the elderly, but to make sure they're happy with their life in their age.

For health care for illegal immigrants, the only thing that the health care bill extends to is emergency care, and this seems to scare people. What they don't realize however, is that this program is already in place. If you go into a hospital emergency room, they HAVE TO HELP YOU. It doesn't matter if you're an illegal immigrant, a citizen, a criminal, or anything like that. The only person who can reverse this is the person who needs the treatment. This is not a new system, it's just in the legislation and mentions care and immigrants, so the people on the far right are jumping all over it, attempting to tear it apart.

Considering the Gates incident, I've also heard people say Obama is a liar. Is he a liar for stating his genuine opinion on the matter? Calling the actions of the Cambridge police 'stupid' was certainly rash, and likely not the best possible phrasing he could have come up with, but that was his genuine opinion, which is not something you see very often anymore in politics.

As for the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, he wanted to reduce our troops in Iraq, and focus on Afghanistan. I don't see the controversy around this at all except for those saying "we can't leave until the job is done". If the job isn't done, then what about that 'mission accomplished' banner on that aircraft carrier? The only lie I see in this is the reason we entered Iraq in the first place, using the satellite thermal imaging interpretation of analysts, that later, Colin Powell admitted to its fabrication. Yet once we were there we had to 'stay until it was done', even though intelligence pointed to Taliban recuperation in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Obama campaigned on health care reform, and he's pursuing it. He campaigned on reevaluating our military situation in the middle east, and he's made huge strides toward that. People say he's lying, but I don't see any lies here. Controversy? Absolutely. But not lies.

If you read all the way to the end of this, thank you for hearing me out. I'd appreciate any feedback, but please keep it civilized. I'm pretty sure the harshest language I used in the above ranting was 'stupid' and that's only because of what the President said, not in direct deformation of anybody or anything.

So I guess a brief summation of my question is, what lies do people say Obama is telling?

Do you all notice the little thumbs-up / thumbs-down sign for questions? ok good.

This is somewhat of a rant, but it ends in a question I promise.

I notice that when I'm reading answers to other people's questions, a lot of potential good answers receive an alarming amount of thumbs-down ratings. This is especially prominent in the news/events and government/politics sections. However, the answers that are given receive tons of thumbs-downs because the response merely disagrees with the opinion of the person who gave it the low rating.

So my question is, do you think it's a legitimate move to give an answer a bad rating just because it's something you disagree with?

Furthermore, when a response such as "OMG I HATE OBAMA HES HORRIBLE 4 TEH US!!" receives tons of positive ratings and a well thought out logical argument for whatever the question was receives a lot of negative ratings, so many that the question is hidden, do you think that's really how the Yahoo-answer system was intended to work?

I'm getting a bit sick of hearing about all these crazy gun-control scares. Every time any type of gun-control legislation is even hinted at, conservative media goes up in a frenzy, pointing at the constitution and screaming that it's their right to carry firearms.

So my question is this: Why does conservative media get outraged when firearm legislation is introduced and run pointing to the constitution, but when the issue is releasing information to the public via the press, they're strongly opposed to the idea. How can they go running to the constitution for one issue, but then disregard the same bill they rely on for their argument when the tables have turned?