Carolina Nature

Will Cook's personal web site with photographs and information about birds, butterflies, and plants; links to nature resources.

Carolina Recycling Association

State-based recycling association conserves resources by advancing waste reduction and recycling. Includes board, membership, councils, and events. Based in Pittsboro, NC.

Catawba Lands Conservancy

A regional land trust that protects the land, water and wildlife resources of the Southern Piedmont and Lower Catawba River Basin.

Citizen's Handbook of North Carolina's Environmental Information Sources

Lists and links to information sources on a wide variety of topics.

Conservation Trust for North Carolina

Helps protect the state's land and water resources. Features land trust assistance, landowner assistance, public policy, and list of local land trusts across the state.

Environmental Studies at Nicholas School, Duke University, Durham, NC

BA in Environmental Science and Policy, the BS in Environmental Sciences, and the BA and BS in Earth and Ocean Sciences. Master of Environmental Management and of Forestry. PhD's in Coastal Systems Science and Policy, Earth and Ocean Sciences, and Environmental Sciences and Policy. News and events, career services, expert database, elaborate student resources.

If It's Water

Licensed Water Treatment Facility Operator managing watersystems for 15 years. Holds an A-Well, C-Surface, Distribution License, Water MeterTechnician License and a State Certified Drinking Water Lab.

Jeff Pippen's Nature Home Page

Photographs and notes on butterflies, dragonflies, birds, and other animals.

Land Management Group

Environmental consultants offering services in NEPA assessments, soils and wetlands mapping, and waste site investigations. Wilmington, North Carolina.

Land Management Group

Environmental consultants specializing in wetlands, CAMA permits and soil sciences. Company profile, information on services and projects.

wrf3@stablecross.com (Bob Felts) writes:
>Stephen M. Adams wrote:
>> wrf3@stablecross.com (Bob Felts) writes:
>> >Stephen M. Adams wrote:

>> >> I disagree. I didn't single-source my information and understanding.
>> >> Rather, I looked to what the church taught from the earliest times. The
>> >> Scriptures clearly say that the *Church* is the pillar and ground of
>> >> the truth.
>> >
>> >So? You still had to independently evaluate the evidence -- you had to
>> >reach the decision that one particular branch of Christendom was
>> >presenting the truth. In the end it came down to "I, Steve Adams, based
>> >upon the evidence I've examined, have come to this particular
>> >conclusion."
>>
>> I think you have imssed the point - my conclusions in this matter have
>> exactly zero bearing on the truth of the Orthodox position.
>
>Your conclusions are the only thing which lead you to claiming that the
>Orthodox position is true.

>Other people have evaluated the evidence and diagree with your
>conclusions. You can say they are wrong -- they will say you are wrong.
>The only position which you can claim without controversy is "In my
>evaluation of the evidence, I believe that the Orthodox position is
>correct."

You're missing the point. The truth or faslseness of Orthodoxy does not
hinge on my opinion. Either it's True or False. It's True. Wheter you
agree or not changes things not one whit. The Truth is the truth even
if you reject it.


>> Fundamentally, the Scriptures do not teach (and in fact, contradict)
>> your position.
>
>Really?
>a) What is my position? and
>b) What passages contradict it?

Gary has dealt with this - the entire structure of Calvinism is completely
unbiblical. That thread is moving along nicely.

>> As I noted before, you have taken the error that was the source many (if
>> not most) of the ancient heresies and dogmatized it, and refuse to be
>> corrected by the 200 year old witness of the Church.
>
>My "error", if you want to call it that, is that doctrine must be
>supported by the Scriptures. However, every group: Orthodox, RCC,
>Protestant, nutcases, & etc... makes that claim. Either someone can
>uncritically accept one position over another, or critically examine the
>evidence. At that point, one can either rely on:
>1) the claims of one group over another,
>2) their innate ability to evaluate data and come to conclusions, or
>3) the Holy Spirit to lead them and correct them when they are wrong.
>
>1 is a cop-out. 2 is pride. 3 is the only viable choice that I see.

And when they refuse correction???

-Stephen
--
Space Age Cybernomad