A Way to Think About Free Will and God: Open Theism

What'd you do, take a class in erudite?

You're welcome i'm sure.
Merry Christmas back at you.

Yes. Once Christianity has done that we will all be speaking closer to reality.Unfortunately, others in your (where is jar?) Cult of Ignorance do not view the subject in such metaphorical terms and insist on its physical reality.

"made possible a way" for what? A way to gain the reward without having to perform the tasks of serving the poor, comforting the afflicted, turning the other cheek?Are you suggesting the resurrection is a cosmic cheat code for the penurious and the lazy?

European power politics.

Well, I wouldn't put this in such illustrious terms.True, the church did indeed help preserve some of the prior (or classical) culture, and did study some of what we know today as "the sciences,' but it was all in the service of the church and anything that smacked of challenge to doctrine was suppressed, often violently so.I don't know of anyone who accuses the church of trying to destroy classical culture but I also don't know of anyone (reasonable) who believes the church sought to extend or enhance that knowledge except through the church's lens of superstition. Which is to be expected since it's a religion and is centered/dependant on superstition.As a matter of fact, demonstrable fact, the church's suppression of the society and intellect around it led to a clear and devastating retrenchment of human knowledge and human intellectual advancement that still haunts us this 1000++ years later. We don't call it the dark ages for nothing.Second, ... this is the very crux of religion's problems.When the event described in scripture admits of no naturalistic explanation, then the scripture is wrong. There is never any justification to corrupt the intellect with appeals to majik.

And you are so entitled. Wrong, but so entitled.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Uhh, no. The evidence in the science of a resurrection is quite abundant, specific and conclusive. Literally trillions of organisms, billions of them human, testify to the paucity of resurrection. None. The workings of this universe, so well studied, tested, and confirmed, testify to the invalidity of the physics of resurrection claims.You can deny the science and its veto power over such majik but all this does is show the same delusional desperation Faith shows with here flud. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Well, that's new. At lease to me.Again, this looks and smells a lot like one of Faith's made-up processes when the evidence against her flud gets too deep. Now you can escape the impediment reality puts on the viability of resurrection by claiming Jesus was not resurrected as a human but as a ghost.

Oh.

Is there any difference between this televangelist (videovangelist?) and the hundreds of others out there grubbing and glad handing for money?I hear nothing new here. No explanation of the "evils where there is no human agent responsible".I will not contribute to his eye-count by reading his blog. To me it is the same as accessing Joel Osteen or Westboro Baptist. Eye-count is a surrogate for support.So what is considered "natural" evil (an incongruous term at this point) and what majik (I presume he will invoke majik) does he use to account for it in his god-perfect universe? Some new take on the usual BS we already hear from religionists when justifying "evil"?

Ahh, so it is the usual BS we get from religionists trying to justify evil. Nothing new to see here.