On 2002-07-31 00:57, alias wrote:
Yes, and I would never do that. So do I have a greater moral standard than God? He is setting a bad example for those of us trying to live by the Golden Rule. :smile:

Yes, I know that God is GOD, and we can't always understand Him, and He works in "mysterious ways"... But can you see the problem that some people have with the whole concept?

Of course I can. But God can not be legitimately compared to Man. The rules are different for each, and in fact God is bound only by those rules He sets for himself.

Also, aren't Good and Evil supposed to be absolutes? And God is all Good? How can He commit Evil? Or is it not Evil if God does it?




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: alias on 2002-07-31 02:22 ]</font>

God does no evil. But just because He can do something and it is not evil, it does not follow that a mortal can do it and have it not be evil.

A few points: if YOU (or I) kill someone, we have no power to reverse that. God can reverse it at will. Further, God created all things, and retains unto Himself the right to undo that creation if He wishes. You and/or I did not create the things we have the power (but not the right) to end.

"But God can not be legitimately compared to Man."

No, but Jesus most certainly can! :smile:

I used to enjoy kicking over an anthill every now and then when I was a kid. But then I grew out of it.

HC: "A few points: if YOU (or I) kill someone, we have no power to reverse that. God can reverse it at will. Further, God created all things, and retains unto Himself the right to undo that creation if He wishes. You and/or I did not create the things we have the power (but not the right) to end."


This should have interesting implications when AI becomes reality.


Good answers everyone. I'll let this go for now since it's in the wrong thread anyway. :smile:



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: alias on 2002-07-31 22:35 ]</font>

On the subject of a possible intersection between the USA and Germany on 4T, and a look at what a 3T Unravelling/4T beginning might look like in another nation:

___________

GERMANY: Love Parade a failure
"Christians from many churches in Berlin and throughout Germany prayed
day and night for two weeks before the Love Parade from 12th-14th July
2002," says Christian Social Agency's (Christlichen Sozialwerk) Winfried
Rudloff. The Love Parade is a Rave party - a music and dance street party
- which has drawn youth from across Europe to Berlin for the past few
years. "For many, the Love Parade is a pit full of drugs (many experienced
drugs for the first time), free sex (the leading float was decorated with a
heart with devil's horns and condom advertising) and empty slogans
('You're all sexy')," says Berlin's Kerstin Hack. "On the weekend of the
Love Parade, we spent much time in worship, interceding for the youth in
our nation. At the same time, Walter Heidenreich held a prayer and
worship conference in the same place as the Love Parade, praying for a
breakthrough among Germany's young generation," say the organisers.
"Despite the attempts in the press to find the positive side of the Parade, it
was actually a complete failure," says Kerstin Hack, "which is a sign that
God is starting to answer our prayers for the youth in our nation. We
believe that the drop in attendance is a sign of a turn-around: young people
are looking for something else - someONE else - than they find in the Love
Parade. The so-called Christopher Street Day - a homosexual
demonstration - also had only half the number of participants as last year.
People are praying." Source: Winfried Rudloff, Kerstin Hack and others, e-
mail office@down-to-earth.de

GERMANY: One quarter of teenagers already Christians?
"In the past few years, some 24% of Germany's 11 million teenagers have
professed to being Christians," according to a study by Focus, an opticians'
magazine. The magazine (issue 5/2002) examined youth surveys, dividing
the 11 million teenagers into various interest groups: ravers, occultists,
homosexuals and young Christians. A quarter of the teenagers consider
themselves Christians, approximately the same number as consider
themselves homosexual. "Something is happening in our nation, particularly
among the youth," says Ludenscheid's Walter Heidenreich. Source: Focus
magazine, http://www.euro-focus.de

On 2002-07-31 14:13, David '47 wrote:
On 2002-07-30 05:55, Croaker'39 wrote:

Christian confusion: Why do they THANK God for saving the coal miners in Pennsylvania but ignore His obvious mischief in causing the mine shaft to flood in the first place? It's like me thanking my wife for helping me endure the problems she inevitably brings into my otherwise untroubled life.

As good an analogy as I've ever seen. Bravo!


... and the response from the X-ians is ...?

_________________
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together :wink:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David '47 on 2002-07-31 14:15 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David '47 on 2002-07-31 14:17 ]</font>

Two points:

1. Christians believe that we are all sinners and that the world is under a curse because of the Fall. The world is therefore a dangerous place, and accidents happen. They are not the work of God, nor even at all times the work of the devil, but rather the result of a fallen world that is decaying around us.

2. Christians believe that we are saved by the grace and mercy of God. God empowers us to also save others... sometimes by giving the good news of Salvation so that they can be saved spiritually, but also sometimes physically. In the case of the coal miners, we thank God for their rescue because we believe it is God who gave us the intelligence, creativity, strength, etc., to effect their rescue. This is probably not the best description but I thought the questions warranted some kind of response.

Why does God allow people to get hurt? I don't have a good answer for that one. The best that I can come up with is that, sometimes, I allow my children to do something which will cause them pain. I don't allow them to get SERIOUSLY hurt, but if my son, for example, insists on climbing on top of something where he might fall and get a bruise, I allow him to do it and i'm there to catch him when he falls and explain that THAT is why I've told him many times NOT to climb up there. A bruise won't hurt him in the long run, but it teaches him to obey me. Now, I'm NOT saying that's what happened here... just that in SOME CASES that may be why God allows us to get hurt... because we insist on doing something that He has forbidden, but the pain drives us back to Him with a clearer understanding of why we shouldn't have gone astray in the first place.

Sorry, didn't see all the postings on the topic on the previous page... guess I should hit "PREVIOUS PAGE" first... !!

Oh my God! BREAKING NEWS: Bush has just called Islam a ?false religion? on television. I wonder what the Muslims think about that. Why would he say something like that?

On 2002-07-31 21:03, Marc Lamb wrote:

- "We are curious, Mr. Saari, as you seem to reside in a place far from the maddening din; What do you think we ought to do?"

On the matter of improving the election chances of the GOP, I would lower taxes (FICA and the excises) to allow the people of America some breathing room.

So you're another one of those 'make the old folks eat dog food' kinda cruel, heartless, typical "vast right-wingers:, huh? Have you no shame, no guilt, no humanity left in your rotten, filty bones, sir?

This is toimprove the GOP's chances not mine.


I would explain to my fellow citizens that Iraq is under the thrall of a Progressive; and as wicked as that is many other lands are equally under the thumb of such people (see Zimbabwe, Cuba, etc.). If Iraq's neighbors are content to live with such Progressives I think we should allow them to have at it. If they wish him gone...let them remove him with their sons and their treasure. If the UK is incensed; let Mr. Blair level Bagdahd with his military. If Mr. Sharon is sore; let the Israeli's try out their WMDs.

Uh, one problemo, se?or Saari, it's called "the free flow of oil." Who buys Iraq's oil today. Which Vice-President's ex-company had contracts with Iraq and Libya without ever informing him?



- "Shall our leaders call for a day, a month, a year of fasting and prayer complete with wholesale deals on sackcloth and ashes?"

I think they could donate their salaries to the Free Iraq Front if they are concerned... those citizens (the NewsCorpians) who agree would surely follow [Mr. Kristol could donate that Enron check]. As to their diets and habiliment, this might be just the ticket...the bottoms of America increase with each passing day; and the fashions are from the gutter and street it would not be that much of lowering to sackcloth; and ashes would be better than botox for what the Boomer's mirrors reflect.

Now you're wishing ill, that good may come: Where do I wish ill?



Has Mr. Hussein even applied for a green card? We certainly opened our wallets and gun closet when he had a difficulty with his neighbor to the East and his subjects in the North. So we can pretend again, along those lines, if it will help us to "feel good about ourselves."



And yes, one less, two less Husseins on earth would make me feel great! Please feel free to donate to Free Iraq Foundation.

- "Shall we go for even greater freedom, greater liberty as to shout our defience at their chains which intend to enslave us?"

Would you have us make our own chains and then taunt the world: "Haha we got the manacles on before you could."?

Perhaps we really screwed up by not selling Japan that oil (in 1940) they wanted, huh? Is freedom worth defending, upholding, cherishing? If so, what is the price of freedom... at times when it is endangered? I live near a VA Hospital, I see the sign as I pass by... The price of freedom is visible here.So you want even larger buildings full of even more Americans {who are often left with festering sores and rodents in their midst while their Masters go to Walter Reed}...is this wishing good that evil may come?

- "What would have us to do, Mr. Saari? We are curious to know."

Delay is life...I would live.

Ten years for old Saddam is long enough... Time to die! I would think this the Province of his Maker.

Also,let me congratulate HRH Marc upon the occasion of their elevation.

Ya lost me on this one. Was not that the Royal WE?

The tadpole speaks,
"Oh my God! BREAKING NEWS: Bush has just called Islam a ?false religion? on television. I wonder what the Muslims think about that. Why would he say something like that?"

Tis the sound of the shrill while running for his foxhole wherein, suddenly, no athiest hide?


The AP news wire reports"

"Bush said he was seeking the cooperation of Arab governments in tracking down the perpetrators of the bombing at Hebrew University in which five Americans were killed.

At the same time, the president reaffirmed that bolstering security is his highest priority.

In an obvious thrust at Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader whose ouster he already has demanded, Bush said security arrangements must serve to protect people and not the ``whims'' of one man.

Later, Bush was due to meet with Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, joining a meeting Peres was set to hold with Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security assistant.

``Today we mourn the loss of American lives,'' Bush said at the outset of his meeting with the king. He said the terrorists were guided by ``some kind of false religion'' and were trying to kill off peace hopes."


Oh, that's right, we don't expect our leaders to actually tell the truth... but to obfuscate, waffle and empathise with our enemies, don't we?


p.s. Surely the tadpole would have cheered himself horse had Bush said the same thing about... the KKK, Catholics, the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition, Christians in general?

What a pathetic froggy fraud you are, sir.









<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-08-01 10:02 ]</font>

On 2002-08-01 07:28, JustinLong wrote:
Sorry, didn't see all the postings on the topic on the previous page... guess I should hit "PREVIOUS PAGE" first... !!

Yeah, no body bothered responding because if he's so blind as to not see the other posts, it's not worth the web space.

[quote]On 2002-08-01 09:31, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

Also,let me congratulate HRH Marc upon the occasion of their elevation.

Ya lost me on this one. Was not that the Royal WE?

Yeah, I guess I went a little overboard on that "We" thing. And, as far as the GOP and taxes go; It is presicely because they are being, and will continue to be demonized on the tax issue that we have seen our last tax cut in my lifetime. Whether this is because they are wimps, or whatever, the so-called Reagan Revolution is dead.

Although I still believe we be 3T, it's bigger, badder, fatter, weaker federal government from here on out, folks.

Article claiming that Boomers are changing the way they deal with pain.

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/...000_1000_pk_03

On 2002-08-01 09:52, Marc Lamb wrote:

...Surely the tadpole would have cheered himself horse had Bush said the same thing about... the KKK, Catholics, the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition, Christians in general?

What a pathetic froggy fraud you are, sir.

Well, I do like to horse around a bit, but I don't cheer that way. Anyway, Marc, how do you differentiate a "false religion" from a true one? Give me a God test for credibility.

Sen. Neil Kinnock on his Iraq hearings.

Straping bombs to children to kill other children is one good barometer that ones "religion" is quite "false". I recall that the Vietcong were good at this too. But at least they sought only to kill GIs.

Hamas is a sick bunch of folks, as sick as the KKK in their heyday. And you intentionally misquoted Bush because you are too blind to see that, and are a select bigot, or you just wanted to stir up trouble over an issue that involved innocent Americans being murdered.

I dare say, that had these been black lynchings... oh forget it.

Is that the best you can do?

Uh-huh.

On 2002-08-01 16:11, Marc Lamb wrote:
Straping bombs to children to kill other children is one good barometer that ones "religion" is quite "false". I recall that the Vietcong were good at this too. But at least they sought only to kill GIs.

Vietcong and the North Vietnamese regime sought to kill not only GI's, also political opponents once they took over power. I am not sure evil does exist, however Marxism is probably one most evil things ever existed.

The current free market capitalist system, while having some nasty effects is generally is a good and moral system to defend. Liberal Democracy, the rule of law, property rights and civic secularism (that includes women?s rights and reproductive rights) worth defending to the brink. If needed to be destroying any opponents who dare threaten it.

The USA is possibly the best country on earth to live, the fact millions want to come there is proof. Mainly because it's political system is more democratic than anyother place on Earth and its economy more flexible than anyother nation.

Anyway I think some people in their notions that the UN should be abolished, while keeping a globalised economic system are yearning for the pre-1914 days when such a sutation existed. There was a much globalised economy (both as globalised as today), also open borders and ascendancy of free market capitalism and liberal democracy. And there was no origistation like the UN around. I do think WW1 ruined what was a promising era ahead. Not to say the 20th century has not had its good side.

On 2002-08-01 16:08, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
Sen. Neil Kinnock on his Iraq hearings.

Such naysayers should be treated with the comiptent they rightfully deserve. We can't take risks like waiting for Hussein to die or be overthrown.

If the USA had that sort of wait and see policy aganist Adolf Hitler during WW2, while attacking the Japanese. Hitler would have finished his conquest of USSR and become too powerful to destory.

Saddam has already declared war aganist the United States, he already did that 11 years old. The invasion of Iraq and his destruction is well worth any risks.

How come you like Fra. Roosevelt?
___________________________

Because he provided great leadership in a time of crisis.

On 2002-08-01 20:41, Tristan Jones wrote:

On 2002-08-01 16:08, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
Sen. Neil Kinnock on his Iraq hearings.

Such naysayers should be treated with the comiptent they rightfully deserve. We can't take risks like waiting for Hussein to die or be overthrown.

Who is "we"?

The invasion of Iraq and his destruction is well worth any risks.

Then I take it that your Aussie troops will do the job. Surely you as an Australian are not demanding that American boys be brought back in bodybags in order to do your dirty work for you?

On 2002-08-01 22:36, Stonewall Patton wrote:


Then I take it that your Aussie troops will do the job. Surely you as an Australian are not demanding that American boys be brought back in bodybags in order to do your dirty work for you?

Mr. Jones might join this volunteer on the new Western Front. I do wonder what the foxhole with the two of them and Mr. Lamb would be like.

On 2002-08-01 22:36, Stonewall Patton wrote:

On 2002-08-01 20:41, Tristan Jones wrote:
Such naysayers should be treated with the comiptent they rightfully deserve. We can't take risks like waiting for Hussein to die or be overthrown.

Who is "we"?

Also, what risk does Iraq pose to you (or me for that matter)? Such missle technology as they may possess is limited in range to less than 1000 miles. On my globe, that doesn't get you much past Libya or Afghanistan. Even with truly favorable winds and the most noxious chemical weapons, I doubt all of Iraq's arsenal could make either you or I sneeze -- unless of course you are with Billy Jeff in the trenches in that region.
In addition, as Saddam is a secular ruler of a secular country, the threat of that old demon, <u>Islamic fundamentalist terrorism</u> is unlikely to come from Iraq.
So, I repeat the question, "what risk?"

Justine,

On this we agree, at least "mostly".

We can gin-up some lame excuse to invade another country without direct provocation, and we're powerful enough to make it stick. What we're also likely to see are 10 or so "me too" wars in the immediate aftermath, using whatever justification we elect to employ for Iraq.

I'm taking bets that the majority of those "me too" wars will NOT be to our liking, too. Any takers?

_________________
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together :wink:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David '47 on 2002-08-02 08:17 ]</font>

"This is the bad thing about power, we begin to think we are special, we begin to think that we are above the law, we become sadists, we become evil. This is one of the reasons that I like Geo Washington. Because he had the good sense to relinquish power." --"Democrat" Posy

How come you like Fra. Roosevelt?

On 2002-08-01 22:25, posy wrote:
Because he provided great leadership in a time of crisis.

Forgive me for questioning your sincerity on this matter, but the Democratic Party remains the party of Fra. Roosevelt. While I do not question the immense importance of this man's sudden appearance on the political stage, in 1933, at a very dark hour of our nation's history, I wonder how many Democrats have honestly examined the man's record after he violated Geo Washington's "good sense" dictum on the abuse of power.

And while I will not rehash those profound, and well documented abuses, I will say that the following Constituional Amendment--ratified soon after such abuses occured--speaks volumes about the wisdom of Geo. Washington, and a chorus of shame on the man who violated such wisdom:


AMENDMENT XXII
Passed by Congress March 21, 1947. Ratified February 27, 1951.

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more that two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more that once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

<FONT SIZE="+1"><center>* * * *</FONT></center>

"Democratic strategists think Bill has smiled on John Edwards's candidacy because he and Hillary want Mr. Edwards to lose to W. in 2004, thus diminishing him and clearing the way for a Hillary run in 2008." --Maureen Dowd (July 31, 2002)

"Interestingly, the most coherent and best received presentation of the New Democrat mantra came not from any prospective 2004 candidate but from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton... That was a common view in a crowd that seemed ready once more to follow the Clinton lead, if not in 2004, then in 2008." --Carl P. Leubsdorf (Friday, August 2, 2002)




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-08-02 09:29 ]</font>