Real life spidey sense

Anderson Silva VS Forrest Griffin UFC 101
Uploaded by IZOPN. - Check out more sports and extreme sports videos.

I don't blame Griffin for getting up and running out of the octagon like he did. After getting knocked out like that, I would've too. Talk about a mismatch. It just goes to show that Griffins 70% heart/toughness 30% skill style can only take him so far.

Logic vs emotion

My prediction for Ufc 104 Mauricio vs Lyoto is a tough one. The logical part of me says Machida will win, but the emotional experienced fighter side of me says Shogun will win. I think I'll go with Lyoto, since not only is he undefeated, Mauricio has is not bringing anything to the table Lyoto has not seen before.

Prediction: Lyoto UD.

Fun with theodicys

First off, before I begin, I am not conceding the gratuitous POE is a problem. Despite the incompetent atheists assertion to the contrary, not only do I know what the gratuitous POE is, I know how to effectively deal with it as well. The best and most logical response to the gratuitous evil POE is they are begging the question the evil is gratuitous, since our ignorance does not = lack of reasons for God. It basically amounts to someone thinking of an evil scenario and saying it is gratuitous. In any case, it is often fun to play around with theodicys.

The theodicy of constant principles in response to the gratuitous problem of evil.

God created the universe with constant principles and laws. Water always boils at temperature X it freezes at temperature Y etc. etc. blah blah blah you get the point, anthropic principle ad nauseam. At this point and in this respect specifically, God stepped back and let his machine do what it is designed to do. Now this machine will undoubtedly kill people and cause suffering in its operation, but the death and suffering of some people and animals is insignificant to the amount of good caused by things like constant gravity laws and freezing temperatures for organ transplants. The suffering of a deer burning to death in the woods from a forest fire caused by a lightning strike pales in comparison when those very things that created that scenario helps get nitrogen to the grown to aid plant growth(lightning) the temperature that wood ignites has helped people cook their food and keep warm during winters. No one calls the inventor of the pencil evil because someone died as the result of being stabbed with a pencil. The question that follows would be "God has the power to stop all of the evil that his machine would be responsible for, unlike the inventor of the pencil, so why doesn't he?," and the obvious answer would be because then the laws wouldn't be constant. Science would be nonexistent since it depends upon the laws being the same every single time, our ability to predict, plan, or do anything for ourselves would be non existent as well. I might want to light a fire to cook, but find I cannot because someone around me might get burned to death or the stove might blow up. I might want to go for a swim in the beach but cannot for the suns light has been extinguished because it has caused wild fires in california, etc. etc. I am sure you get the point.

The wii has officially won the console wars.

Apparently it takes priority over drug raids.

You know how every holiday season the stores all sell out of Nintendo Wiis? Well, that's because they're so awesome -- just ask the cops in Polk County, Fla.

In the midst of a drug raid on a house that apparently took nine full hours and cost $4,000, cops apparently were distracted by Wii bowling. Reports say they started the game up within 20 minutes of entering the house and spent hours playing it.

Perpahs they are gladiators then.

Fik Meijer author of 'History's most deadly sport the Gladiators' makes a very interesting observation about the motivations of some Roman citizens to become gladiators.

"Many were motivated by the prospect of escaping poverty. When they were unemployed or underemployed and struggling for their own basic needs, life as a gladiator offered security."

As anyone remotely familiar with the history of boxing which is often referred to as the poor mans sport, it describes almost the exact same reasons people became boxers in the past(great depression) and today. Another interesting tidbit mentioned in the book describes how the concept of promoters was found in those days as well.

"Because gladiator shows attracted such huge crowds at the time of the Roman Empire, the sponsors had to lay down large sums of money to get the most renowned fighters into the arena at all."

Aaron the incompetent atheist pt. 5

More nonsense from the incompetent atheist.

Theo, this is what you need to understand. God is perfectly moral, therefor God can only do moral things. God is also all powerful, thus he does things the best possible way and in the most effective way.

That is why God is obligated to the GPG. The fact that that wasn't obvious to you just shows that you are not trying to do anything here but prove your right, and do this with out considering what I am even saying.

I knew you had nothing. We'll deal with this nonsense one by one. First, I should post the points he's ignored.

1. Aaron is ASSUMING that lowering the GPG is going against the will of God.
2. Aaron is Assuming that Gods existence and 'all goodness' is dependent upon God choosing the GPG.
3. Aaron is assuming that God is obligated in some way shape or form to choose the GPG.

1. God is perfectly moral, therefore God can only do moral things.
This is just more ignorance of basic Christian theology. God is not judged by our moral standards, anymore than Roy Jones Jr is judged by amateur boxing standards. So God is perfectly moral, but the fact our moral system is inferior to His means we cannot judge His actions by our moral system. So Aaron is defining GPG in moral standards that God does not adhere too, assuming that God defines evil in the same way we do as well. Now, if this is supposed to address my points I don't see how it does. If we define evil as suffering and assume that God defines it that way too, then it is not against Gods will to lower the GPG since God has inflicted suffering in the forms of judgments and warnings many times. For ignorant people like Aaron, it goes like this:

1. Suffering lowers the GPG.
2. God has caused suffering through judgments and/or warnings.
3. Therefore lowering the GPG is not against Gods will.

So Aaron is once again incorrect. If we define evil as suffering, then lowering the GPG is not against Gods will nor is His existence dependent upon the GPG nor is He obligated in anyway shape or form to choose the GPG, thus, in addition to #3 being false, his entire argument collapses based upon the unproven and incorrect assumption that Gods existence is dependent upon maintaining the GPG, despite clear evidence it is not the case.


God is also all powerful, thus he does things the best possible way and in the most effective way.

This is just stupid. Aaron, like every other ignorant skeptic that asserts these things forgets the fact that just because one is all powerful does not mean one needs to use that power 100% of the time. For instance, the most effective way to eliminate evil would've been to wipe out the entire human race, including Noah, but because God is merciful, God choose not to kill Noah. This is why assertions like Aarons are both ridiculous and completley ignorant of basic behavior. God most certainly is all powrful but He can certainly choose exactly how He utilizes that power. God choosing to not do something in the most effective way and best possible way is no more unreasonable or unlikely than Roy Jones jr choosing not to fight well below his full potential either. The skeptic might respond, well you're conceding that God is not all powerful, but I am doing no such thing. If you're saying that God is not all powerful because He chooses not to do things in the most effective and best way 100% of the time all the time, then you're conceding that Roy jones jr is not a good fighter because he chooses to not fight the best he can 100% of the time, or conceding that you're not a smart/fast/good artist etc. If you ever choose to not utilize your talents to their full potential all the time 100% of the time.


It really amounts to the following. God by Himself is 100% good. God created the universe to be 100% good. Status quo of goodness is maintained. God allowed evil to come about resulting in something other than GPG, but since Gods existence is not dependent upon maintaining the GPG nor is it against His will to allow or even personally lower the GPG Aarons ridiculous argument falls apart. The skeptic might inquire 'so why did God create' to which one can easily answer, 'because God wanted to create,' to which the skeptic might respond, 'well if God is all powerful then he does things in the best possible way and in the most effective way, but God - creation is the best possible way and in the most effective way. We have God + creation, which is not the best possible way nor the most effective way, so God must not be all powerful,' to which the theist responds. 'Gods choice to do something other than the best possible way and in the most effective way has noting at all to do with his capacity of His power. The capacity of Gods power is not dependent upon its use, because sometimes He might choose not utilize all of that power 100% all of the time.'
One might as well concede that michael phelps is not a fast swimmer because sometimes he treads water or plays in a swimming pool. One might as well concede Usain Bolt is not a fast runner because he jogs sometimes. One might as well concede Floyd Mayweather is not a good boxer because he play fights with his children or spars.

Were did you talk about supralapsarianism? Are you serious that that has nothing to do with what we are talking about? Actually it has everything to do with what we are talking about, you're just too stupid to see it.

No, it does not. You might think it does, due to your ignorance, but it does not. #3 is already false and not only that, you're begging the question assuming God is obligated to choose the GPG and assuming Gods existence and all goodness is dependent upon Him choosing the GPG. It clearly isn't, supralapsaianism has nothing at all to do with those refutations to your argument, try again.

No you're being the idiot here. I used the qualifier, "with the exception of size and scope." You didn't understand the analogy. How can you use your free will to get rid of aids or the flu or cancer? How can you use your free will to get your head out of the mouth of a lion? The world is like one giant room filled with shit like this. Some of us are lucky enough to never encounter it, others are not so lucky and free will has jack shit to do with it Theo. Seriously, go to a cancer ward and tell the patients there to cure themselves with their magical "free" will.

Tell a poor kid in Africa with malaria it's his fault for living in Africa. This is how you chose to answer the fucking question? No wonder I am the only person who actually reads your blog.

Where on earth did I ever say that you can use your free will to get rid of aids or the flue or cancer? where? Like I said, state your point clearly, if you have an argument MAKE IT, other wise shut up. Your stupid assertions and appeals to emotion are laughable.

Btw I love how you really racked up youtube subscribers and ratings after that amazing video to mine? Your at what, 0 subs now? Each video has a 1.5 star rating? Funny thing was that the other Christians who responded, and to whom I responded to, all have 4-5 star ratings, and all gained subs from the experience. Just saying...

Equating the validity of my video with the # of subscribers and ratings? testament to your illogical reasoning right there.

All this goes back to your laptop analogy. Answer me one last question, what's a more perfect laptop, one that can get viruses, or one that cannot?

Stupid question that ignores just about everything I've said. Obviously a more perfect laptop is one that cannot get viruses, but you're under the very ignorant assumption that Gods existence or attributes is dependent upon making the most perfect laptop.

To say with absolute certainty that the earth will always revolve around the sun, would be beyond ignorant. One day the earth with be consumed by the sun and no longer do this. The earth could also be dislodged from orbit, or any other variety of possible things.

Quote mine much. I never once said the earth will always revolve around the sun. Try again. I notice you ignored my 2+2=4 example as well.

You also don't know with absolute certainty that the earth in fact exists, nor for that matter do you know that the sun exists.

Well then you've called just about every single scientist, astrophysicist and astronomer ignorant, close minded, and self deceptive.

Aaron the incompetent atheist pt. 4

Theo, were did I say God created the world evil? Please show me quote. This is the straw man. I never said "created the world evil" I said created a world with evil in it. Please for the sake of Christ show me were I said "God created the world evil." I said god created natural evils in the world, but that's not the same thing.

Now you're trying to change the word 'the' with the word 'a' as if that changes anything. It doesn't. We're talking about one world and one world only, which is THIS WORLD. So in this sense, the word 'the' and the word 'a' are synonomous since they both refer to the same thing. With that being said, the following quote should suffice.

Creating a world with evil is not "the good".

In this quote he even says evil was instantly present.

God created the world. The world has evil in it. God created the world with evil in it, even it was instantly present,

You say I have changed my stance 7 times, but you if you read the 7 quotes it's obvious that they all say the same thing... So what are you on about?

This is just funny!

This quote:

1. No no no. God is morally obligated to do the good. Creating a world with evil is not "the good". Even a 2 year old can see that, right?
Is obviously not the same as this quote:

2. All fine and good, and not really addressing my point. The question is this: Why is there evil in the world and were did it come from?Why is there evil in the world and were did it come from?
Which is obviously not the same as this quote:

3. if god created a world with the potential for evil, a created a world with evil in it.

Another stupid assertion from Aaron.

God created a world with evil in it. That's a tautology, it's absolutely true. An argument from a bible verses is not a logical argument, specially if the evidence of existence proves the opposite.

God did not create a world with evil in it, God created a world with no evil in it and allowed evil to come into existence. Back to your old assertions again I see. An argument from a bible verse is a logical argument, especially in this case since you're arguing against my God whose characteristics and actions are found within those bible verses. The evidence of existence does not prove the opposite, in fact, the evidence of existence proves that God allows a world with evil, He did not create it. God creating the world all good at 10:00 knowing that evil will come into existence at 11:00 still means the world was good at 10:00. God did not create the world at 11:00, since it was already created at 10:00.

Why don't you address supralapsarianism? Are you scared?

I did address it, I said it was largely irrelevant to the argument at hand and it is.

Premise 3 admits my argument, and is my point. Right now, it is not the GPG. Lowering the GPG is going against the will of God as far as I can see. When all is said and done, billions of creations will be in hell, and trillions more will have suffered through life. How is that the GPG?

Then you are being logically inconsistent. What part of that do you not understand? You say God created a world that has evil in it because of #3. Going by that logic, God created the world with the GPG because of #1 and #2 and #4. You cannot have it both ways. Either God created the world with evil in it based upon #3 or God created the world with the GPG based upon 1,2 and 4.
Secondly, you are once again ASSUMING that lowering the GPG is going against the will of God, just like you ASSUME that Gods existence and 'all goodness' is dependent upon God choosing the GPG, just like you ASSUME that God is obligated in some way shape or form to choose the GPG. You are begging the question. You need to either provide evidence for these ridiculous assumptions or shut up about it.

BTW if that is supposed to be a syllogism it is neither sound nor valid. The conclusion doesn't follow logically from the premises. I am not sure what you are trying to assert with those 4 points.

it wasn't supposed to be a syllogism you ignorant moron.

Theo, you don't express yourself in a way that I can clearly understand. If you spent less time telling me I was illogical, and spent more time demonstrating it, perhaps I would understand what you are trying to say. But you don't, and I can't.

The irony of the first statement is hilarious, since Aaron is the one that is constantly changing what his point is.

Try this, remove the personal insults and just tell me what you actually mean. It will be much better for both of us.

No, the insults will remain as long as you continue to constantly change your points, ignore my questions and points, and refuse to concede your mistakes. You've read the rules you half wit, around here you get treated how you treat others.

What? God didn't place us in the world then?

Let me give you an example. I lock you in a room with a lion, a tiger and a bear. I also put parasites in the water and infectious disease in the air. Would I morally culpable for your death? Certainly from a legal stand point I would.

How is this analogy any different from God placing us in a world with natural evil, with the exception of size and scope?

You're an idiot. That is one of the stupidest comparisons I've seen in my life. First off, there are multiple rooms, thousands of rooms, rooms without lions, tigers or bears, diseases or parasites. Secondly, no one is locking people in there, as you have the option to go to whatever room you want to go to. Third God has not only provided ample ways to both get out of the room and avoid any dangers one might find themselves in if they were in the wrong room but your fellow man has as well. So people have the means and will to both leave the room or survive and even make life good in the rooms they might not initially like. It is the equivalent to blaming a 4 star general for the death of a soldier despite the soldier had both the tools to survive and used his own free will to get him into the situation in the first place, knowing full well the dangers of the situation. Exactly the kind of stupidity I've come to expect from you. Finally, in regards to your stupid comment about legal stand points, you once again show ignorance in basic Christian theology. God is not subject to our morals or our legal system. Try again. What moral system or code that God is subject to did God break?

If one of your family members dies of cancer and you going to say it's their fault for being alive? Are you going to say that the millions of people who suffered from leprosy deserved it for contracting it? Will you say that the millions who died of the black plague deserved it for living were they did died?

I don't even know what on earth these questions have to do with anything? seriously. What is the point of these questions, where on earth have I said people who suffered from leprosy deserved it for contracting it? what are you saying? Why don't you make your point in a clear manner instead of asking vague questions?

Will you ever address my claims in a fair way with out distorting my arguments?

Pot, kettle, black. Not only that but I have been addressing them in a fair way without distorting them, you either need to be more clear or admit that you've got nothing and you're only changing up your points because you don't want to admit you're wrong.

How can you be absolutely sure of any knowledge? Absolute sureness of knowledge is the greatest sign of ignorance, self deception and close mindedness. You are a paragon of this Theo, which is why I get such a laugh out of you.

Get your stupid, ignorant, poor attempts at proverbs outta here, not only are you once again assuming that I am absolutely sure of any knowledge but if one were to concede your stupid assertion makes sense, I anyone asserting 2+2=4 or the earth revolves around the sun is ignorant, self deceptive and close minded.