Madhya Pradesh
From Kristos Vocabulary Booster
| Table of contents |
Etymology
Hindi मध्य प्रदेश (madhya pradeśa) "middle province", from Sanskrit मध्य (madhya) "middle, central", प्रदेश (pradeśa) "region, country".
Proper noun
Madhya Pradesh
Translations
- Chinese: 中央邦 (zhōngyāngbāng)
- Dutch: Madhya Pradesh
- Estonian: Madhya Pradesh
- French: Madhya Pradesh
- German: Madhya Pradesh
- Hindi: मध्य प्रदेश (madhya pradeśa)
- Japanese: マディヤ・プラデーシュ州 (madhiya puradēshu-shuu)
- Swedish: Madhya Pradesh
See Also
Wikipedia article on Madhya Pradesh
Bob Felts wrote:
>
> >
> > After you answer me that simple question, perhaps you can tell me
where
> > the laws came from to begin with and why aren't they also evolving?
> >
>
> How do we know that they aren't? Isn't there still some question
about
> the constancy of, say, 'c' or the cosmological constant?
>
IF the laws are not constant then there is no standard left. The
problem is, all men operate under the Christian presupposition - that
the universe is created, orderly and has providential care behind it.
No. Of course this is never confessed or admitted. But how could it
be otherwise? Science *presumes* order. Where does order come from?
The moderator may wish to end this thread, but it is a thread which he
himself started when he dismissed the literal interpretation of the
Genesis record. Like atheistic evolutionist, it seems even "religious"
evolutionist do not like having their phantasm brought out into the
real world.
I sought not to discuss the scientific creationist answers to
evolutionary objections. I sought to illustrate the fact that todays
science is now producing varied reports which substantiate a created
universe in the time frame of the Biblical record. As the many
authropomological objections over the last two centuries have all been
debunked, so now we are equally seeing, one after another, the
evolutionary objections debunked.
Yes, both positions require faith.
Yes, both positions are religious in nature.
But no, cosmic, chemical, stellar, organic and macro evolutionism does
not have science supporting it.
Micro evolution is not debated by the creationist. "After their own
kind" is not reflected by the evolutionist who confuses that with
"after their own species."
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))
