No, it ain't by any definition of "logical" I've ever seen. The fact that your supposed God ain't evil doesn't mean the term evil must encompass him. That's like saying because my Mercedes can't fly, flight is the absence of my Mercedes.
Encompass Him? What are you talking about? I said evil is the absence of God, that doesn't encompass Him at all.
No it isn't, because your Mercedes isn't the source of the opposite of flight.
Originally posted by DarfiusA typical circular argument. "God is the source of all good so therefore his absence is evil". BS. We know evil exists i.e. morally reprehensible acts, but we don't know that your God exists, so to use an unproven entity to define a known thing is illogical. That's probably why nobody but you (and perhaps other members of your fundamentalist cult) defines "evil" in that way.
[b]No, it ain't by any definition of "logical" I've ever seen. The fact that your supposed God ain't evil doesn't mean the term evil must encompass him. That's like saying because my Mercedes can't fly, flight is the absence of my Mercedes.
Encompass Him? What are you talking about? I said evil is the absence of God, that doesn't e ...[text shortened]... Him at all.
No it isn't, because your Mercedes isn't the source of the opposite of flight.[/b]
The definition you used "encompasses" God as he is a necessary component of the definition. You really need to buy a dictionary, Darfius.
Originally posted by DarfiusThank you.
Absent from a person's decision to do something not in accordance with the will of God.
I disagree in that case.
I know many people who live compassionate, honest lives, that have no conception of God in the manner that you believe. They are not evil, and as matter of fact are always striving to do better each day.
How is that?
Originally posted by eagles54Simple; you just change the definition of evil and even Gandhi is evil.
Thank you.
I disagree in that case.
I know many people who live compassionate, honest lives, that have no conception of God in the manner that you believe. They are not evil, and as matter of fact are always striving to do better each day.
How is that?
Originally posted by eagles54They are not evil in YOUR point of view. Tell me, have they ever lied in their lives?
Thank you.
I disagree in that case.
I know many people who live compassionate, honest lives, that have no conception of God in the manner that you believe. They are not evil, and as matter of fact are always striving to do better each day.
How is that?
That makes them evil from the point of view of a Holy God.
Originally posted by DarfiusHmmm....I don't doubt that, since they haven't yet perfected themselves, they've probably told a lie here or there.
They are not evil in YOUR point of view. Tell me, have they ever lied in their lives?
That makes them evil from the point of view of a Holy God.
What I also have no doubt of is that you have expressed little compassion in these threads, Darfius. As a matter of fact, for all the many posts you've submitted, compassion is one noticably absent quality of each and every one of them.
It's curious that you think you know how God views the 'evil' creatures that just want to live their lives in peace and help others do so.
You should study up about compassion. You need to, for your own benefit.
Originally posted by eagles54Compassion I can give you, eagle. Lies I cannot.
Hmmm....I don't doubt that, since they haven't yet perfected themselves, they've probably told a lie here or there.
What I also have no doubt of is that you have expressed little compassion in these threads, Darfius. As a matter of fact, for all the many posts you've submitted, compassion is one noticably absent quality of each and every one of them. ...[text shortened]... d help others do so.
You should study up about compassion. You need to, for your own benefit.
Here's my idea of an evil deed: forcing Darfius to understand this.
Akbulut's corks and h-cobordisms of smooth simply connected 4-manifolds
Subj-class: Geometric Topology
This is primarily an exposition, combining work of several authors (Curtis, Hsiang, Freedman, Stong, Matveyev, and Bizaca), of the proof that a smooth 5-dimensional h-cobordism between simply connected 4-manifolds is a product off of a contractible piece which itself is diffeomorphic to the 5-ball.
Originally posted by frogstompMy three-year-old knows how to cut and paste.
Here's my idea of an evil deed: forcing Darfius to understand this.
Akbulut's corks and h-cobordisms of smooth simply connected 4-manifolds
Subj-class: Geometric Topology
This is primarily an exposition, combining work of several authors (Curtis, Hsiang, Freedman, Stong, Matveyev, and Bizaca), of the proof that a smooth 5-dimensional h-cobord ...[text shortened]... nifolds is a product off of a contractible piece which itself is diffeomorphic to the 5-ball.
http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GT/9712231
Originally posted by Colettigood for your 3 yr-old son
My three-year-old knows how to cut and paste.
http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GT/9712231
read some of my other posts silly lady
learn to tell the difference between joking and being serious.
btw h-cobordism is describing gluing two balls along their boundaries together to make a sphere. and I'm not getting into knots
maybe you're 3yr old can explain K-theory to you.
I myself tend to leave h-cobordisms out of my math because it makes it impossible to use fiber bundles which I need for gauge fields and the associated LIE rank quasi-particles
Originally posted by frogstompHey. I took my chance when you pasted the text. And you played a good hand - so I give you creadit. You know your stuff.
good for your 3 yr-old son
read some of my other posts silly lady
learn to tell the difference between joking and being serious.
btw h-cobordism is describing gluing two balls along their boundaries together to make a sphere. and I'm not getting into knots
maybe you're 3yr old can explain K-theory to you.
I myself tend to leave ...[text shortened]... fiber bundles which I need for gauge fields and the associated LIE rank quasi-particles
Originally posted by frogstomp😀
Here's my idea of an evil deed: forcing Darfius to understand this.
Akbulut's corks and h-cobordisms of smooth simply connected 4-manifolds
Subj-class: Geometric Topology
This is primarily an exposition, combining work of several authors (Curtis, Hsiang, Freedman, Stong, Matveyev, and Bizaca), of the proof that a smooth 5-dimensional h-cobord ...[text shortened]... nifolds is a product off of a contractible piece which itself is diffeomorphic to the 5-ball.
Good one, frog.
While I'm banging my head over that, I will submit to you "Ideocracy" by de Unamuno. I'd like a 5 page summary of his ideas by tomorrow morning.