 | | recognise yourself here?
|
|
(URL) (21 years ago, 28-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I'm not so sure. I think that there are plenty of people who'd rather embrace evil than good, and they do every day. I look at it this way: God says, "Here is the gift of life-- live it however you choose. But life is a mystery, and sometimes (...) (21 years ago, 28-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) It is illogical for an infinite being to even give free will-- it would seem that all is predestined anyway. (...) Never say never, Dave! Isn't pleasure simply a release of endorphines in our little electro-stimulated brains? Couldn't it all (...) (21 years ago, 28-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I'm afraid that the doctrine of free will is incompatible with the notion of original sin; it is logically inconsistent to believe in both. (...) God is limited in other ways, too. God, as an omnibenevolent being, can never take first-hand (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Funny: I want you to express your free will. If you do good, I will love you and reward you in this life and with the attainment of heaven in the afterlife. If you do evil, I will smite you and burn you down in this life and punish you with (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Yeah, that's straight from the mouth of Elihu in the Book of Job. Elihu says God "was angry at Job because he justified himself rather than God" (Job 32.2): "God is greater than man. Why do you contend against him?" (Job 33.12-13). God even (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) As a mental exercise, if you were an omnipotent being and had the ability to improve/redesign/remodel our current universe, how would you do it? (besides making LEGO grow on trees;-) JOHN (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Ultimately evil will be destroyed. Is this a temporal issue? God allows evil only because God respects our free will. People choose evil. (...) Yes. (...) Again, because God respects free will. (...) No. JOHN (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) God intentionally limits Himself by giving us free will (as far as we know). God desires us to have abundant life-- I don't see where this indicates that God is incomplete or imperfect. Perhaps you could say that God is limited, but it is by (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Jurisdictional Question
|
|
Can the courts overturn Executive Orders? (URL) Here's> the one I'm thinking of, which seems to declare itself beyond the reach of the judiciary. Dave! (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I like that proof just fine, but when I've presented it here before (in prior discussions) it's usually been dismissed off-handedly in terms of "His mysterious purpose" or the like. For variety's sake, I thought that I'd try this perfect = (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Did you think the usual proof was to trite? The Problem of Evil A good God would destroy evil. An all powerful God could destroy evil. Evil exists and is not destroyed. ~~~...~~~ Therefore, there cannot possibly be such a good and all powerful (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Well, the chain works like this: To "want" something (such as fellowship), is to imply a lack of that thing (or a desire to prevent the negation/removal of that thing). A being who lacks something is incomplete, and incompleteness indicates (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I don't think that follows from what I said. Any attempts (even Biblical) to describe the infinite will fall woefully short, and attempts to describe God will inevitabley start sounding like anthropomorphizing. Using the third person musculine (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Waffling
|
|
(...) Usagi Yojimbo. To address stuff you go into below regarding eBay, I noted that CGC graded comics went for considerably more than those that weren't graded, though the cost of grading meant you had to have a relatively expensive comic in the (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: (Re: It will be a long, hard slog) or, Why Christine Amanpour is My Girlfriend!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: <snip> (...) And the DU made the point clearer: " What's worse than a bumbling idiot? Why, a bumbling idiot who surrounds himself with bumbling idiot advisors, of course. Our Great Leader must have (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Then you're asserting that God is finite and imperfect? Dave! (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Newsbits -- the Usual
|
|
9/11 Commission Could Subpoena Oval Office Files (URL) "It's obvious that the White House wants to run out the clock here," he said in an interview in Washington. "It's Halloween, and we're still in negotiations with some assistant White House (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Waffling
|
|
(...) What kind of tulip madness was this? Are we talking "Samurai Bunny" comics? Where, when, and why? Do they maintain this absurd value? One of my better killings in comics -- of stuff with which I was actually willing to part -- was for the (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Waffling
|
|
(...) Always a gray area. I have three Ansel Adams photos. Taken from his original negatives, printed by his assistant according to his instructions (Alan Ross, by the way, still the only person approved to make new prints), but they are not (...) (21 years ago, 27-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
