What’s an invisible church?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that’s good to know Tiribulus; that you’re not a nutcase (:
…this thread: Forums - T Nation - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness was a good one. Great discussion with Cortes, and a good learning experience. The wiki-definition i posted earlier does reflect my opinion pretty accurately, though…[/quote]
I think you meant that. Like I’ve told you before. Nothing I believe began with me or some modern one note movement. I will look at that thread.
And oh yeah, yes it IS necessary that we pray for you. I have no idea what your future holds, but I do know two things for sure. One is that God has put you specifically on my heart for some reason. Two is that I cannot help but love somebody I’m praying for and that helps me in these conversations.[/quote]
…i’m not sure what to say to this except, thank you…
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
What’s an invisible church?[/quote]
There is a saying that the church is not a building, but the people that are part of it. Growing up we learned a visual with your hands about the chruch. I will try and explain the visual with words, but I will screw this up.
The saying goes, Here’s the Chruch, here’s the steeple, open the doors and see all the people.
Here’s the chruch, You interlock your fingers inward kind of making a box with your hands with your fingers on the between your palms.
Here’s the steeple, put both of your index fingers in the air.
Open the doors, pull your two thumbs towards you.
And see all the people, pull the heal of your palms apart and all your fingers are the people in the church.
The church is a group of people that are bound by their love and affection for Christ and each other. The church building is just a place that you sit in. The early church met up in people’s houses, and not in buildings. They did go to the Jewish Synogogue on regular occasion until they were kicked out. The people are not invisible, but their conection with each other are. The church is everywhere 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus’ name.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…let’s determin that shall we? I was talking about:
[emphasis mine]
“Meta-ethical relativism is the meta-ethical position that the truth or falsity of moral judgments, or their justification, is not objective or universal but instead relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people.”
…you on the other hand was talking about [i assume]:
“Normative relativism is the prescriptive or normative position that as there is no universal moral standard by which to judge others, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when it runs counter to our personal or cultural moral standards.”
…i agree with the first definition, not the second…[/quote]
Do you really think this gets you out of the moral relativist trap? Ummmm…no, it doesn’t. It just merely complicates your position a little and makes you feel like you’ve got a well-thought out, more sophisticated “philosophy” than straight moral relativism… But moral relativism - either flavor - is incoherent.
[/quote]
…so by all means, let’s not discuss the definitions and why we feel that way. The definition of moral relativism i agree with is clear enough. If you want to discuss that, fine, otherwise just let it rest…[/quote]
Well, it’s been pointed out to you many times by many different people - myself included - that moral relativism (of whatever kind) is self-refuting, for it contains it’s own absolutes. Why this doesn’t sink in I don’t quite know. But I’ll keep trying and will explain if you’d like.
Moreover, it fails to account for the following: if values are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people, and that group of people happen to be racist, to what would you appeal in criticizing or changing these communal values?
Et cetera…
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< The church is everywhere 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus’ name.[/quote]
Yes. The catholics will quite strenuously object to this, but the invisible church consists of every actually redeemed truly born again believer from all ages regardless of what earthly church or denomination they belong to. The visible church are those who claim to be Christ’s own regardless of whether they actually are or not and make no mistake. There are and have been multitudes in all ages that have named the name of Jesus, but bear the fruits of carnality or just plain darkness. Many churchES, especially American ones are full of these people every Sunday
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that’s good to know Tiribulus; that you’re not a nutcase (:
…this thread: Forums - T Nation - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness was a good one. Great discussion with Cortes, and a good learning experience. The wiki-definition i posted earlier does reflect my opinion pretty accurately, though…[/quote]
I think you meant that. Like I’ve told you before. Nothing I believe began with me or some modern one note movement. I will look at that thread.
And oh yeah, yes it IS necessary that we pray for you. I have no idea what your future holds, but I do know two things for sure. One is that God has put you specifically on my heart for some reason. Two is that I cannot help but love somebody I’m praying for and that helps me in these conversations.[/quote]
…i’m not sure what to say to this except, thank you…
[/quote]The pleasure really is mine. Lemme just say that you’ve misunderstood entirely if you think Christians, at least this one, is holding hell over your head as some sort of self satisfying weapon. IE, “yeah well you just wait, you’re sure gonna get yers come judgment day”
Yes, I believe hell is real and Yes, those not born again into the eternal life of the risen Son of God will be sentenced to it if they die in their sins, but no sir. I am not allowed and have no right to hope anybody goes there. I should be going there.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
<<<Many churchES, especially American ones are full of these people every Sunday>>>[/quote]
Agreed whole heartedly brother.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…let’s determin that shall we? I was talking about:
[emphasis mine]
“Meta-ethical relativism is the meta-ethical position that the truth or falsity of moral judgments, or their justification, is not objective or universal but instead relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people.”
…you on the other hand was talking about [i assume]:
“Normative relativism is the prescriptive or normative position that as there is no universal moral standard by which to judge others, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when it runs counter to our personal or cultural moral standards.”
…i agree with the first definition, not the second…[/quote]
Do you really think this gets you out of the moral relativist trap? Ummmm…no, it doesn’t. It just merely complicates your position a little and makes you feel like you’ve got a well-thought out, more sophisticated “philosophy” than straight moral relativism… But moral relativism - either flavor - is incoherent.
[/quote]
…so by all means, let’s not discuss the definitions and why we feel that way. The definition of moral relativism i agree with is clear enough. If you want to discuss that, fine, otherwise just let it rest…[/quote]
Well, it’s been pointed out to you many times by many different people - myself included - that moral relativism (of whatever kind) is self-refuting, for it contains it’s own absolutes. Why this doesn’t sink in I don’t quite know. But I’ll keep trying and will explain if you’d like.
Moreover, it fails to account for the following: if values are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people, and that group of people happen to be racist, to what would you appeal in criticizing or changing these communal values?
Et cetera…
[/quote]
…and i’m sure i refuted those points, but why that doesn’t sink in i don’t know. You don’t have to appeal to a higher order to be able to criticize or change something you don’t agree with. You simply need to make a good case why you think that something needs changing, that’s all…
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that’s good to know Tiribulus; that you’re not a nutcase (:
…this thread: Forums - T Nation - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness was a good one. Great discussion with Cortes, and a good learning experience. The wiki-definition i posted earlier does reflect my opinion pretty accurately, though…[/quote]
I think you meant that. Like I’ve told you before. Nothing I believe began with me or some modern one note movement. I will look at that thread.
And oh yeah, yes it IS necessary that we pray for you. I have no idea what your future holds, but I do know two things for sure. One is that God has put you specifically on my heart for some reason. Two is that I cannot help but love somebody I’m praying for and that helps me in these conversations.[/quote]
…i’m not sure what to say to this except, thank you…
[/quote]The pleasure really is mine. Lemme just say that you’ve misunderstood entirely if you think Christians, at least this one, is holding hell over your head as some sort of self satisfying weapon. IE, “yeah well you just wait, you’re sure gonna get yers come judgment day”
Yes, I believe hell is real and Yes, those not born again into the eternal life of the risen Son of God will be sentenced to it if they die in their sins, but no sir. I am not allowed and have no right to hope anybody goes there. I should be going there.[/quote]
…then i state again for the record that, if what you say about the afterlife is true, i’d rather burn in hell than to spend eternity in heaven. I could have been the biggest asshole ever to have existed, and still go to heaven after a sincere deathbed conversion. But if i lived my life according to my conscience, be kind and thoughtful and caring, without a belief in your god that would all be for nothing…
…it doesn’t matter how much you pray for me; if living a good life isn’t enough then i go down happily…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…let’s determin that shall we? I was talking about:
[emphasis mine]
“Meta-ethical relativism is the meta-ethical position that the truth or falsity of moral judgments, or their justification, is not objective or universal but instead relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people.”
…you on the other hand was talking about [i assume]:
“Normative relativism is the prescriptive or normative position that as there is no universal moral standard by which to judge others, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when it runs counter to our personal or cultural moral standards.”
…i agree with the first definition, not the second…[/quote]
Do you really think this gets you out of the moral relativist trap? Ummmm…no, it doesn’t. It just merely complicates your position a little and makes you feel like you’ve got a well-thought out, more sophisticated “philosophy” than straight moral relativism… But moral relativism - either flavor - is incoherent.
[/quote]
…so by all means, let’s not discuss the definitions and why we feel that way. The definition of moral relativism i agree with is clear enough. If you want to discuss that, fine, otherwise just let it rest…[/quote]
Well, it’s been pointed out to you many times by many different people - myself included - that moral relativism (of whatever kind) is self-refuting, for it contains it’s own absolutes. Why this doesn’t sink in I don’t quite know. But I’ll keep trying and will explain if you’d like.
Moreover, it fails to account for the following: if values are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of a group of people, and that group of people happen to be racist, to what would you appeal in criticizing or changing these communal values?
Et cetera…
[/quote]
…and i’m sure i refuted those points, but why that doesn’t sink in i don’t know. You don’t have to appeal to a higher order to be able to criticize or change something you don’t agree with. You simply need to make a good case why you think that something needs changing, that’s all…
[/quote]
Forget the “higher order.” Forget all that. You keep getting stuck on that. Just think logically.
If all you’ve ever known is A, you cannot reflect upon A (that is, consider the truth of it; assess it; judge it; criticize it, et cetera) unless you have something (a principle, a value, or whatnot) that is independent of A (did not arise out of A, cannot be explained by A, et cetera.)
That^ seems to me to be an indisputable proposition. Granting me the initial and conditional “if,” will you agree to this at least?
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…and i’m sure i refuted those points, but why that doesn’t sink in i don’t know. You don’t have to appeal to a higher order to be able to criticize or change something you don’t agree with. You simply need to make a good case why you think that something needs changing, that’s all…
[/quote]
Forget the “higher order.” Forget all that. You keep getting stuck on that. Just think logically.
If all you’ve ever known is A, you cannot reflect upon A (that is, consider the truth of it; assess it; judge it; criticize it, et cetera) unless you have something (a principle, a value, or whatnot) that is independent of A (did not arise out of A, cannot be explained by A, et cetera.)
That^ seems to me to be an indisputable proposition. Granting me the initial and conditional “if,” will you agree to this at least?
[/quote]
…you’re forgetting the greatest human ability: imagination. Yes, you may not have ever known something other than A, but a creative mind can imagine B or C or even D. That is enough. If the idea is potent enough, and there’s enough support for that idea, people can change their outlook even if the idea is radically different from what they’re accustom to…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…and i’m sure i refuted those points, but why that doesn’t sink in i don’t know. You don’t have to appeal to a higher order to be able to criticize or change something you don’t agree with. You simply need to make a good case why you think that something needs changing, that’s all…
[/quote]
Forget the “higher order.” Forget all that. You keep getting stuck on that. Just think logically.
If all you’ve ever known is A, you cannot reflect upon A (that is, consider the truth of it; assess it; judge it; criticize it, et cetera) unless you have something (a principle, a value, or whatnot) that is independent of A (did not arise out of A, cannot be explained by A, et cetera.)
That^ seems to me to be an indisputable proposition. Granting me the initial and conditional “if,” will you agree to this at least?
[/quote]
…you’re forgetting the greatest human ability: imagination. Yes, you may not have ever known something other than A, but a creative mind can imagine B or C or even D. That is enough. If the idea is potent enough, and there’s enough support for that idea, people can change their outlook even if the idea is radically different from what they’re accustom to…
[/quote]
Okay, good. So, via the imagination (and reason too - why not reason?) we can discover something (a principle, a value) outside of (independent of) A. by which to judge (assess, consider, reflect upon, criticize) A. Correct?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
<<< …then i state again for the record that, if what you say about the afterlife is true, I’d rather burn in hell than to spend eternity in heaven. >>>[/quote]You only say that because you do not know what it is you are saying and I am not even primarily talking about the horrors of hell. I’m really not.[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< I could have been the biggest asshole ever to have existed, and still go to heaven after a sincere deathbed conversion. >>>[/quote]Yes you could. The thief on the cross is proof of that, but you could not plan it that way ahead of time. Salvation is a gift that nobody has a right to.[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< But if i lived my life according to my conscience, be kind and thoughtful and caring, without a belief in your god that would all be for nothing…>>>[/quote]Yes it would. Because like Paul told the Galatians if justification before God were by the works of the law then Christ died for nothing. People could just be good enough, but there is no such thing. I’ll say again, Ghandi and Manson will spend eternity in the same hell unless Manson repents, which could happen. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<<…it doesn’t matter how much you pray for me; if living a good life isn’t enough then I go down happily… >>>[/quote]Oh yes it does and oh no you won’t. It matters because it is obedience to God and He inexplicably listens when His children earnestly intercede on someone’s behalf though the answer is up to Him. I am sincerely betting that when I get to heaven I will find out that people were praying for me that I’ve never even known about in this life.
There’s no such thing as a good life apart from the righteousness of Christ friend and anybody who tells you different is a liar and does not know the Father OR His Son. Not for me, not for you, not for anybody. “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), “there is none righteous, no not one” (Romans 3:10) “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” (The Acts of the Apostles 4:12)
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that’s good to know Tiribulus; that you’re not a nutcase (:
…this thread: Forums - T Nation - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness was a good one. Great discussion with Cortes, and a good learning experience. The wiki-definition i posted earlier does reflect my opinion pretty accurately, though…[/quote]
I think you meant that. Like I’ve told you before. Nothing I believe began with me or some modern one note movement. I will look at that thread.
And oh yeah, yes it IS necessary that we pray for you. I have no idea what your future holds, but I do know two things for sure. One is that God has put you specifically on my heart for some reason. Two is that I cannot help but love somebody I’m praying for and that helps me in these conversations.[/quote]
…i’m not sure what to say to this except, thank you…
[/quote]The pleasure really is mine. Lemme just say that you’ve misunderstood entirely if you think Christians, at least this one, is holding hell over your head as some sort of self satisfying weapon. IE, “yeah well you just wait, you’re sure gonna get yers come judgment day”
Yes, I believe hell is real and Yes, those not born again into the eternal life of the risen Son of God will be sentenced to it if they die in their sins, but no sir. I am not allowed and have no right to hope anybody goes there. I should be going there.[/quote]
…then i state again for the record that, if what you say about the afterlife is true, i’d rather burn in hell than to spend eternity in heaven. I could have been the biggest asshole ever to have existed, and still go to heaven after a sincere deathbed conversion. But if i lived my life according to my conscience, be kind and thoughtful and caring, without a belief in your god that would all be for nothing…
…it doesn’t matter how much you pray for me; if living a good life isn’t enough then i go down happily…
[/quote]
Getting sucked in, damnit…must resist.
Eph, as you know, I have a young son, not quite a year and a half old. For the most part, thankfully, he is a really good kid. He is very sociable, friendly, smiles a ton. He eats all his food, even his vegetables. He is very affectionate and loves to play, and he plays nice when he does. By pretty much anybody’s standard, anyone would say that I have a good kid.
My son, though, he has this one habit. He’s got lots and lots of toys, and he likes those toys. However, his favorite thing to play with is long, sharp pointy things. Now, he doesn’t mess up the house or hurt anyone else with them. He doesn’t poke things or make scratches or do anything wrong. However, I think you’ll agree that having your very young son, who’s just learning to walk, toddling around with two 16 inch chopsticks with very pointy ends…well, it’s just not a good situation, is it?
So I sometimes have to take those pointy things away from him. And you know what he does? He cries! He cries like crazy and he’s angry at me and sometimes he even throws himself down on the ground kicking and screaming. He just cannot believe the injustice. He cannot fathom why I would do such a cruel thing to him. And if I try and comfort him, at those times, by petting him or hugging him or trying to give him any other toy, woah buddy, I had better watch out, because he’s just not having none of that.
Your other issue about assholes having deathbed conversions is covered in the story of the prodigal son. I’m sure you know it, but if you haven’t recently, go back and give it a read. Even self-proclaimed morally-relativistic atheists should find the story itself beautiful.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< The church is everywhere 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus’ name.[/quote]
Yes. The catholics will quite strenuously object to this, but the invisible church consists of every actually redeemed truly born again believer from all ages regardless of what earthly church or denomination they belong to. The visible church are those who claim to be Christ’s own regardless of whether they actually are or not and make no mistake. There are and have been multitudes in all ages that have named the name of Jesus, but bear the fruits of carnality or just plain darkness. Many churchES, especially American ones are full of these people every Sunday[/quote]
For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
“There am I in the midst of them”… This is understood of such assemblies only as are gathered in the name and authority of Christ; and in unity of the church of Christ. St. Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae.
I’m on page 7 of that thread Ephrem. I’ll have to continue tomorrow. You will not be shocked to learn that I agree with Cortes. We’ve been over this too. If there is no supra human court beyond which there is no appeal? Everything is meaningless. Might does in fact make right in all cases, period.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…and i’m sure i refuted those points, but why that doesn’t sink in i don’t know. You don’t have to appeal to a higher order to be able to criticize or change something you don’t agree with. You simply need to make a good case why you think that something needs changing, that’s all…
[/quote]
Forget the “higher order.” Forget all that. You keep getting stuck on that. Just think logically.
If all you’ve ever known is A, you cannot reflect upon A (that is, consider the truth of it; assess it; judge it; criticize it, et cetera) unless you have something (a principle, a value, or whatnot) that is independent of A (did not arise out of A, cannot be explained by A, et cetera.)
That^ seems to me to be an indisputable proposition. Granting me the initial and conditional “if,” will you agree to this at least?
[/quote]
…you’re forgetting the greatest human ability: imagination. Yes, you may not have ever known something other than A, but a creative mind can imagine B or C or even D. That is enough. If the idea is potent enough, and there’s enough support for that idea, people can change their outlook even if the idea is radically different from what they’re accustom to…
[/quote]
Okay, good. So, via the imagination (and reason too - why not reason?) we can discover something (a principle, a value) outside of (independent of) A. by which to judge (assess, consider, reflect upon, criticize) A. Correct?
[/quote]
Correct.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
<<< …then i state again for the record that, if what you say about the afterlife is true, I’d rather burn in hell than to spend eternity in heaven. >>>[/quote]You only say that because you do not know what it is you are saying and I am not even primarily talking about the horrors of hell. I’m really not.[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< I could have been the biggest asshole ever to have existed, and still go to heaven after a sincere deathbed conversion. >>>[/quote]Yes you could. The thief on the cross is proof of that, but you could not plan it that way ahead of time. Salvation is a gift that nobody has a right to.[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< But if i lived my life according to my conscience, be kind and thoughtful and caring, without a belief in your god that would all be for nothing…>>>[/quote]Yes it would. Because like Paul told the Galatians if justification before God were by the works of the law then Christ died for nothing. People could just be good enough, but there is no such thing. I’ll say again, Ghandi and Manson will spend eternity in the same hell unless Manson repents, which could happen. [quote]ephrem wrote:<<<…it doesn’t matter how much you pray for me; if living a good life isn’t enough then I go down happily… >>>[/quote]Oh yes it does and oh no you won’t. It matters because it is obedience to God and He inexplicably listens when His children earnestly intercede on someone’s behalf though the answer is up to Him. I am sincerely betting that when I get to heaven I will find out that people were praying for me that I’ve never even known about in this life.
There’s no such thing as a good life apart from the righteousness of Christ friend and anybody who tells you different is a liar and does not know the Father OR His Son. Not for me, not for you, not for anybody. “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), “there is none righteous, no not one” (Romans 3:10) “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” (The Acts of the Apostles 4:12)
[/quote]
…you just called me a liar. You better pray for me T; i’ll never be part of the flock…
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that’s good to know Tiribulus; that you’re not a nutcase (:
…this thread: Forums - T Nation - The World's Trusted Community for Elite Fitness was a good one. Great discussion with Cortes, and a good learning experience. The wiki-definition i posted earlier does reflect my opinion pretty accurately, though…[/quote]
I think you meant that. Like I’ve told you before. Nothing I believe began with me or some modern one note movement. I will look at that thread.
And oh yeah, yes it IS necessary that we pray for you. I have no idea what your future holds, but I do know two things for sure. One is that God has put you specifically on my heart for some reason. Two is that I cannot help but love somebody I’m praying for and that helps me in these conversations.[/quote]
…i’m not sure what to say to this except, thank you…
[/quote]The pleasure really is mine. Lemme just say that you’ve misunderstood entirely if you think Christians, at least this one, is holding hell over your head as some sort of self satisfying weapon. IE, “yeah well you just wait, you’re sure gonna get yers come judgment day”
Yes, I believe hell is real and Yes, those not born again into the eternal life of the risen Son of God will be sentenced to it if they die in their sins, but no sir. I am not allowed and have no right to hope anybody goes there. I should be going there.[/quote]
…then i state again for the record that, if what you say about the afterlife is true, i’d rather burn in hell than to spend eternity in heaven. I could have been the biggest asshole ever to have existed, and still go to heaven after a sincere deathbed conversion. But if i lived my life according to my conscience, be kind and thoughtful and caring, without a belief in your god that would all be for nothing…
…it doesn’t matter how much you pray for me; if living a good life isn’t enough then i go down happily…
[/quote]
Getting sucked in, damnit…must resist.
Eph, as you know, I have a young son, not quite a year and a half old. For the most part, thankfully, he is a really good kid. He is very sociable, friendly, smiles a ton. He eats all his food, even his vegetables. He is very affectionate and loves to play, and he plays nice when he does. By pretty much anybody’s standard, anyone would say that I have a good kid.
My son, though, he has this one habit. He’s got lots and lots of toys, and he likes those toys. However, his favorite thing to play with is long, sharp pointy things. Now, he doesn’t mess up the house or hurt anyone else with them. He doesn’t poke things or make scratches or do anything wrong. However, I think you’ll agree that having your very young son, who’s just learning to walk, toddling around with two 16 inch chopsticks with very pointy ends…well, it’s just not a good situation, is it?
So I sometimes have to take those pointy things away from him. And you know what he does? He cries! He cries like crazy and he’s angry at me and sometimes he even throws himself down on the ground kicking and screaming. He just cannot believe the injustice. He cannot fathom why I would do such a cruel thing to him. And if I try and comfort him, at those times, by petting him or hugging him or trying to give him any other toy, woah buddy, I had better watch out, because he’s just not having none of that.
Your other issue about assholes having deathbed conversions is covered in the story of the prodigal son. I’m sure you know it, but if you haven’t recently, go back and give it a read. Even self-proclaimed morally-relativistic atheists should find the story itself beautiful.[/quote]
…goddammit! First i’m called a liar and now i’m like a child? Thanks buddy!
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m on page 7 of that thread Ephrem. I’ll have to continue tomorrow. You will not be shocked to learn that I agree with Cortes. We’ve been over this too. If there is no supra human court beyond which there is no appeal? Everything is meaningless. Might does in fact make right in all cases, period.[/quote]
…welcome to reality…