[~ot] why is programming so fun?

[Tower Ty]

Yep definately a nutter

a religious nutter at that .

Thats two of my nockers proved to be so .

I hope there are not too many more on the D bandwagon .
Both John Reimer and Jesse Phillips seemed influential in the development of D .
It does not auger well if they turn out to be so, because their personal beliefs tend to butt in at some point.

Anyway everybody has a right to believe what they like and good luck to them. 







John Reimer Wrote:

> Hello e-t172,
> 
> > A related citation:
> > 
> > "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
> > Then he is not omnipotent.
> > Is he able, but not willing?
> > Then he is malevolent.
> > Is he both able and willing?
> > Then whence cometh evil?
> > Is he neither able nor willing?
> > Then why call him God?"
> > ~Epicurus (341 BC - 270 BC)
> 
> 
> Yes, this sort of debate does go waaaay back, doesn't it? :)
> 
> The above is does not disprove God.  It just shows that the writer doesn't 
> appear to like the God that put him in this world, nor the universe he appears 
> to be stuck in. He's quite put out about it, in fact.  God could have made 
> automotons, but I suppose he figured people should have a choice in the matter. 
>  
> 
> It's not really that clever for the creation to question the creator.   Much 
> less to judge the Creator.  By what standard does Epicurus question God about 
> evil.  This God has not only set the standard that defines evil but has also 
> promised to judge all evil finally.  And he also defined how one is saved 
> from this evil.   Does Epicurus decide for himself what he sees as evil in 
> the process of "disproving" God?  What does Epicurus perceive "evil" to mean?
> 
> The strange thing is that people continue to complain about evil but refuse 
> to turn away from it in their own lives, or to adopt the plan that frees 
> them from that bondage to it.
> 
> People condemn themselves and then shake their fist at God for not making 
> things the way they want.
> 
> -JJR
> 
>