u/JoeBrownshoes

ARRRR-chitecture!

Not sure if the question is clear but I'm just wondering if there is a method to wrap a single strand of paracord with a braid, probably using paracord with the "innards" removed, so that I can stiffen it up?

I've noticed Justin uses phrases like "why would I need redeemed" or "so and so doesn't need saved"

​

To me he's missing "to be" in those phrases. I just saw someone else online say it like that. Is this some kind of regional dialect thing to drop "to be". I've never heard it said before.

From dictionary.com

Theory

[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee]/ ˈθi ə ri, ˈθɪər i /

noun

1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena.

Einstein's theory of relativity.

Synonyms:doctrine, law, principle

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

--------

Just get them to realize there are two different meanings for the word theory. Get them to differentiate these two definitions before you discuss anything further.

I was thinking about this as a kind of version of baby paste or like a response to "morals are objective because God" line of thinking.

1. Get the person to agree that slavery is immoral.

2. Get them to explain why it is immoral.

3. Go over the fact that slavery is approved of by God and then never specifically condemned thereafter (the conversation will probably get stuck here if you really try to get them to agree to this, so don't be too much of a stickler)

4. Ask them: suppose God returned to speak to mankind and said "this isn't the second coming, that's happening later, but I just wanted to clarify something since there seems to be some confusion: slavery is totally fine with me as long as it's not Hebrews being enslaved. I thought I made that clear but you guys seem confused. No, it's totally fine as long as you follow the rules I laid out. Ok?" And then disappears.

5. Ask them: should that hypothetically happen, what would happen to your earlier position that slavery is immoral. Does it cease to be immoral now that God clarified his own position on it? Does that change the rightness of it? Would it change your feelings about it?

I think this would cause a few cogs to fly off the mental assembly lines of callers.

I figure in the 30% range myself.

Richmonder? Richmondite? Richmondian?

I know I could look it up but figured it'd be more fun to ask you guys.

In fact it is worse since (some interpretations) say that you will be tortured for ETERNITY

In the US, Christians often decry that atheism is being "pushed as a religion" or "forced on kids" or something of that nature. So I can safely assume that those complaining about it would be absolutely up in arms if an atheist government ever came into power and started enforcing atheism as a belief under threat of a lifetime of imprisonment and torment.

I know the usual apologetic for this and that some Christians believe in annihilation rather than torment, so let's change it up slightly. Let's say the atheistic government said "If you fully accept atheism into your heart then we will provide you with a good, happy life in our nation. You will have full liberty and benefit of citizenship. However if you still have doubts about atheism being true and correct (and we have special thought machines that can tell if that's true) then you will be rounded up and murdered.

To be clear, I ALSO think this would be a horrible, unjust system that I would never wish to be implemented in any way, shape or form so I would be right along side you fighting it if it happened. But the fact that I feel that way means I feel the same way about a religion that declares essentially the same thing, only worse.

And yet this same concept is exactly what most Christians interpret the Bible to be saying and they somehow describe it as "love" or "justice" when it clearly isn't.

I think this applies very exactly to Islam as well, but not so much to Judaism so I didn't it the "Abrahamic" tag and went with Christian.

Quote:

"No. It's not supposed to be. There isn't supposed to be a way to resolve the paradox neatly, because that would make God a logical construct - something we deduce from reason instead of being above it entirely and often acting in a way that does not respect what humanly makes sense. You can say that in the time it was written, no one had much respect for human rights and the mosaic law was actually comparatively merciful and that it was long ago, and we shouldn't read it literally in the first place, but I'm sure you wouldn't be convinced by that and have heard it before, but I would submit to you that the apparent discrepancy is intentional, and to force you to not rely on what makes sense, but have to make a leap of faith that forces you to rely more on God instead of reason or your own whims, but part of that is that it often requires you to be able to trust him even when there is no way to humanly make sense of it - and whether you choose to accept or reject that is up to you, but the bible here is to confront you with the paradox so that you can make a leap either way, if that makes sense. It is designed to test your reason and self-reliance to show why you cannot lean on them, hence regarding the conquest of Canaan, what happened is less important to faith than how it is transforming you right now."

For one night only he should allow believers 30 seconds to pray for him to, you know, see the truth of Jesus, recant his atheism, lose followers etc.

Take notes of what exact things were prayed for and then a couple of weeks later, check in and see how effective the prayers have been.

If prayer is so powerful, then with the power of a whole night of sincere prayer from believers surely it'll cause Justin to be restored to his full faith, right??