Ahh, "scientists." But even the article mentions previous "scientists" who found differently. But even more the AP article later discloses that they didn't do low-carb, etc. So... how is a study that produced meager results, that doesn't use those diets, a scientific condemnation of those diets?
So, if somebody regularly reads The Message and doesn't grow much spiritually, does that prove that it doesn't matter what translation you read?
Posts
6 comments:
Let's see, take in more calories than you burn = gain weight -- burn more calories than you take in = lose weight...
And they say science is hard :-)
Dan, maybe you'd get more respect from the world if you started referring to yourself as a Doctor of Theological Science.
Then people would listen when we we make appeals such as, "Dan Phillips, a scientist, says..."
Some would say Doctor of Sarcasmetry. (OK, well, maybe now, since I made that up....)
I prefer yours. Theology was once known as the Queen of the Sciences.
Diet matters. But so does metabolism. One person can read THE cream de le creme Bible version of the season and gain spiritually and the other reads the same and is emaciated. Being in the Word and the Word being in ~ matters.
Make sense? :-)
There's also zero mention of exercise, either cardio or strength training!
Diet AND exercise are the keys to physical health.
Law AND gospel are the keys to spiritual health :)
The kind of diet doesn't matter?! Woo-hoo! I guess I'll be sticking with my favorite, then -- the "see-food" diet.
Post a Comment