Smith

The original ones with the deep blue are some of the most beautiful pistols around. I agree with Jack on the black epoxy ones. It just doesn't fit as well. The store i just started working in got a deep blued Browning HP of all things and I like to look at it ..... a lot! Here's some pics of the two I shouldn't have let get away. It's an FN with the factory SFS system and a Browning Mark3 both .40's. However, they should have just said no to this variant!

Feeding issues. The increased feed area keeps the larger round from hanging as much. The .223/5.56 is small enough to where the small non-m4 ramps really only make a difference in full auto type shooting.

No I got your point, been around for a long time. We just see it from different vantage points. as to "does the chess game matter" .... yes, very much so. The one who knows, wants you to realize his greatness and it is only in the futility of your efforts to change the unchangeable that YOU come to realize his greatness.

Well ... neither. funny thing is Arminius considered himself a good Calvinist and Calvin (IMO) would not recognize the Hyper Calvinism of the 21st century. I'm am really neither but see value in some of both of their thinking. You have to remember they were coming out of Catholicism and some of their critiques were reactions to the state of the church at that time period. Their understanding of scripture and theology was somewhat limited and tainted because of the lack of exposure prior to these events. Long way of saying I believe in God's full sovereignty and man's free will. Exactly where those two intersect and I don't know, but the scripture indicates both and the early writers had no problem with it. In fact many of the problems Paul addressed in the early church where issues where groups became too extreme in either thought. BTW - my education is in the Southern Baptist "tradition", but within SB there are camps on both sides of that debate and it is a hot topic ATM. Most protestant denominations tend to pick a side more than SB.

I don't understand your poll choices.

It has no impact on free will. The fact he knows all possible variations of choices and consequences doesn't mean I didn't choose. Because I am limited in my knowledge the choice is free will. That would account for how God could know all and yet allow free choice. Of course this is yet another debate that will never die and is perhaps longer and more drawn out than any other that's been started here!

Don't get a 20". The 6.8 was designed to be optimal in the 16" and under barrels. You gain virtually nothing in a 20" except weight. You also want to make sure it is a Spec II chamber and a 1:11, 4 groove barrel. Stay away from the 1:9.5 barrels. While 1:10, 6 groove work they are not the best for 6.8. Stag started using the 4 grove 1:11 but some of their earlier models used the 1:10, 6 groove.

I have no problem with String or M-theory. In fact I can see perfectly how that would encompass things like heaven and hell and how God can be timeless in a world set in time. It would also explain how God could see the past and future in every variable since he would be moving in the other folds where we are limited to this one dimension. Like Jaime said it is speculation since we are limited in what we can see, but it would explain some of the supernatural aspects of God description that he indicates will be available to us in eternity that are limited to us now. Very interesting theories non the less.

i always find it amusing the "religious leaders" they like to interview and quote. kinda like when they interview someone from the south. They seem to find the most redneck, backwoods guy in overalls.

Great analogy! +1!

Yes, except the Bible is true. It is our understanding that is catching up and developing to comprehend. How is that different than science? We believe until we have evidence to the contrary then we change the model to fit our understanding.

What if your beliefs end up lining up with said "mega church". Are you not a free thinker? Is a free thinker a person who only believes something contrary to others? How exactly would that bring things together more? I do understand where the sentiment comes from, however. There are many on both sides who believe only what they are told and do not search through those things to find truth. There are those who are against because of a reaction to something they can't understand and there are those who believe in things simply because they are too lazy to try and understand. Both are wrong.

couple of problems. There are at least 4 Earth ages using Biblical text ranging from 10k years to roughly a few million. The debates on these are interpretations of "days" and a few other issues. You also have to consider the time between the creation out of the "void" and the first day of creation. There is no time indicated between theses events. Again a worldwide flood would account for all these issues as well as the carbon dating inconsistency and gaps current science can't rectify. As to OS and the geologist statement, they can't even get a consensus on dates of Niagara falls or the Grand Canyon. IN fact one recent study has found that Niagara Falls is actually 10k years younger than previously thought. Scientist are like politicians. Get ten of them in a room and you'll end up with a 10 front civil war. Just saying there are some unexplained issues with the flood, but the flood explains vastly more questions than it leaves unanswered. I might add that is scientific theory at work . To the guy talking about heated comments, I thought this was actually a pretty civil thread compared to Glock butt and 9mm vs .45

How is that an issue? The flood would explain many things including fossils of sea life on mountains in the middle of Asia, oil deposits in deserts, earth age randomness, etc. However, if you reject that you have to come up with other theories that explain those points.

Hello pot ....... That's my point. You can't make that claim without using that claim. It's a circular argument. Prove otherwise. You can't and in doing so you would again prove the point that they both take leaps of "faith". Not arguing with you, just making the point OS.

Problem is both take an element in faith. Both can be tested only so far. The interesting thing to me is the more we learn in science the more the Bible holds it's own. That being said the Bible was not written as a book of scientific fact but rather as a narrative by people with a perspective that was not rooted in modern scientific or historical models. That's where a lot of the problems people have reconciling the two. It's like trying to read Huck Finn as a history text book. It gives some great insights into history, but the narrative of relationships, adventure, etc is the main focus. hawking has gone back and forth depending on what ever the new theory is and I have no problem with that. It is his field of study and discipline to do so. As far as timeliness, the Biblical model holds much more in the terms of accuracy and consistency than macro-evolution (barring those who hold to tradition instead of what the Bible actually says:rolleyes:). Macro evolution makes a series of assumptions early on in evolution that involves setting base timeliness arbitrarily long in order to make most of the theories work. Then they have to back trace and make adjustments from the present. All that to say both take relatively equal "leaps" of faith based on things unseen and unkown. Make your jump carefully ..... and not emotionally.

I found pretty much the same things you have between the two brands. I do like the size of the 19, but the XD's trigger is better and can be improved quite a bit with some minor work. That being said I hate the grip angle of Glocks and the bore axis of the XD's is too high for me to shoot well so I have neither anymore.

You definitely won't be going this weekend!

I do find it interesting that the same 6% voted "A" across the board.

6.8 SPC. Prices are coming down and it is what an AR should have been. The 6.5 is nice but there are other more mainstream platforms that do it better.

Yeah, I was a big Salma fan before she was big time, but "Frida" almost ruined it for me.

Here's some Salma for ya!

Great quote! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeOXsA8sp_E&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll7rWiY5obI

Not sure I see your point. There was a law against impersonating military service, which is what they ruled against.

I like your reference markers! somebody eats out a lot!