BagOfNothing.com

Everyone knows the pecking order in a family has everything to do with age. The oldest sibling usually rules the roost. But what if you get cheated out of the title because of Daylight Saving Time?Peter Sullivan Cirioli was dubbed “Baby A” at WakeMed Cary when he arrived early Sunday morning.

“Yes, Peter was born first, it was at 1:32 a.m.,” mother Laura Cirioli said.

Thirty-four minutes later, Peter’s twin sister, Allison Raye Cirioli, known as “Baby B,” made her entrance into the world.

Because of Daylight Saving Time, Allison’s time of birth was 1:06 a.m., which makes her 26 minutes older than her brother even though he was born first.

“We just never even thought about it until after he was born and then we realized it was going to happen. It was really kind of amazing,” Laura Cirioli said.

The proud mother and father said they don’t really care who was born first, they are just glad to have two healthy babies. They do suspect the daylight savings predicament will be fodder for sibling rivalry.

“We’ll let them work that out between themselves. I don’t want to get into the middle of it,” Jason Cirioli said.

Peter and Allison were expected to leave the hospital Tuesday night.

Link

Despite their radical difference in size, these two dogs have something in common – Gibson the Great Dane and Boo Boo the toy Chihuahua are both world record holders. Measuring a whopping 107cm, gentle giant Gibson was named tallest dog back in 2004. Joining him in the hall of fame for 2007 is tiny Boo Boo who only measures 10.16cm tall and is smaller than Gibson’s head.

The two celebrity hounds, who were both bred in America, met up to celebrate Guinness World Records Day 2007.

Full Article

Of all the men to wear the uniform, which one player stands above all the rest? FOX 4 puts the question out to fans across Texas to debate and decide, “Who’s No. 1, the greatest Cowboy ever?”

Link

The countdown started on Monday, and so far #10 is Don Meredith and #9 is Mel Renfro.  You can watch the list on KDFW Fox 4 around 9:50 PM. 

This certainly does make for some interesting debate.

Currently there are 12 players in the Ring of Honor.  I wonder if someone not in the Ring of Honor will make their list?

I think the most obvious choice for #1 is Roger Staubach, but I wonder if they will trick up the list to draw some controversy?

On questions relating to the Bible’s treatment of family and morals, one might expect assurance, if not rigidity, from Evangelical Christianity. So, it may surprise many to learn how “live” the topic of divorce remains in Evangelical circles. Last month, the cover story of the monthly Christianity Today was titled “When to Separate What God has Joined: A Closer Reading on the Bible on Divorce.” The heated controversy provoked by the story showed how Biblically flexible some Evangelicals can be – especially when God’s word seems at odds not just with modern American behavior, but also with simple human kindness.

As the article’s author, the British Evangelical scholar David Instone-Brewer, points out, for most of 2,000 years Christians have viewed divorce through two scriptural citations. In Matthew, the pharisees ask Christ, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?” Jesus refers to the Old Testament and then replies, “Whoever divorces a wife, except for sexual indecency, commits adultery.” The apostle Paul adds in the book First Corinthians that a Christian is “not bound” to a non-Christian spouse who abandons him. Simple, right?

Instone-Brewer radically reinterprets the first passage using, of all things, quotation marks. The Greek of the New Testament didn’t always contain them, and scholars agree that sometimes they must be added in to make sense of it. Instone-Brewer, an expert in Jewish thought during Jesus’s era, writes that Christ’s interlocutors were not asking him whether there was any cause at all for divorce, but whether he supported something called “any-cause” divorce, a term a little bit like “no-fault” that allowed husbands to divorce wives for any reason at all. Instone-Brewer claims Jesus’s “no” was a response to this idea, and that his “except for sexual indecency” condition was not a statement of the sole exemption from God’s blanket prohibition, but merely Christ’s reiteration of one of several divorce permissions in the Old Testament – one he felt the “any-time” advocates had exaggerated. Finally, Instone-Brewer tallies four grounds for divorce he finds affirmed in both Old and New Testaments: adultery, emotional and sexual neglect, abandonment (by anyone) and abuse.

Full Article