Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s logic 
Sujet : Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 29. Mar 2024, 02:07:16
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <uu50nk$3ca7i$11@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/28/24 10:53 AM, olcott wrote:
On 3/28/2024 6:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 3/27/24 11:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/27/2024 9:34 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 3/27/24 10:07 PM, olcott wrote:
All of the different denominations having their differing views
proves that (at least) to the extent that they differ they are
incorrect.
>
And the key is to actually STUDY to see what is the REAL truth behind all the variations, and what differences are important, and what are actually insubstantial.
>
When you actually KNOW what the Bible says, and talk to others who also KNOW what the Bible says, you can discuss things with people even from very dofferent backgrounds, and find agreement.
>
You get the big disagreements from people who don't actually know the Bible, but just the "Dogma" of their religious community. These are not really beleivers or possibly not even really "Christians" that Christ will take in the last day.
>
>
It seems to me that all those things that do not pertain to righteousness can be ignored.
>
Righteousness is having a Right Relationship to God. Ignoring who he is makes that impossible.
>
>
Things such as this:
Is the Godhead three different beings or one being taking three forms?
>
>
But not correctly understanding who he is makes it impossible to have a right relationship to him.
>
Many churches differ on the trinity.
Right, and just like you point out that many people may claim to be "Christians" but are not living a "Christian Life", many churches have also formed based on wrong ideas about the Bible.
One of Satan's best methods is to get people to think they are "sage" in a Church, even thought ath Church isn't actually teaching them the truth.
There are also a number of things that don't have a "single" interpretation that must be followed, but different people can legitimately worship God acceptably in different ways.

 
Yes, there are details that we do not need to (or in fact can not) understand.
>
But God expects us to do all that we have the power to do, then he can do the rest.
>
Intentionally neglecting what he says, puts you outside his Grace.
>
 

Date Sujet#  Auteur
24 Mar 24 * Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?41olcott
24 Mar 24 +* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?38Fred. Zwarts
25 Mar 24 i`* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?37olcott
25 Mar 24 i +* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?35Fred. Zwarts
25 Mar 24 i i`* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?34olcott
25 Mar 24 i i `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?33Fred. Zwarts
25 Mar 24 i i  `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?32olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   +* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?29Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i`* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?28olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?27Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i  `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?26olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i   `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?25Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i    `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?24olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i     `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?23Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i      `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?22olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i       `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?21Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i        `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?20olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i         `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?19Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i          `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?18olcott
26 Mar 24 i i   i           `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?17Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   i            `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?16olcott
27 Mar 24 i i   i             `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?15Richard Damon
27 Mar 24 i i   i              `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?14olcott
28 Mar 24 i i   i               `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?13Richard Damon
28 Mar 24 i i   i                `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?12olcott
28 Mar 24 i i   i                 `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?11Richard Damon
28 Mar 24 i i   i                  `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?10olcott
28 Mar 24 i i   i                   `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?9Richard Damon
28 Mar 24 i i   i                    `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?8olcott
29 Mar 24 i i   i                     `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?7Richard Damon
29 Mar 24 i i   i                      `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?6olcott
29 Mar 24 i i   i                       `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?5Richard Damon
29 Mar 24 i i   i                        `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?4olcott
29 Mar 24 i i   i                         `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?3Richard Damon
29 Mar 24 i i   i                          `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?2olcott
29 Mar 24 i i   i                           `- Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?1Richard Damon
26 Mar 24 i i   `* Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?2Fred. Zwarts
26 Mar 24 i i    `- Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?1olcott
26 Mar 24 i `- Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?1Richard Damon
24 Mar 24 +- Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?1Richard Damon
25 Mar 24 `- Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?1olcott

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal