Login or register


Last status update:
Date Signed Up:6/07/2011
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#31746
Highest Content Rank:#28685
Highest Comment Rank:#2409
Comment Thumbs: 1581 total,  1746 ,  165
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 81% (81/100)
Level 215 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 216 Comments: Comedic Genius
Content Views:1
Total Comments Made:355
FJ Points:1590

latest user's comments

#11 - The next part is best. "When it comes to my daug… 08/21/2012 on Political Views +29
#36 - "Why are we laying in the parking lot?" "Yo… 08/21/2012 on One day she'll represent... 0
#68 - Not a christian, but was raised that way. Here's my understand…  [+] (5 new replies) 08/21/2012 on Think about these... +4
#71 - anon (08/21/2012) [-]
i am lds but heres my opinion upon the whole why evil exists problem in your responce.
Evil is the lack of good. The lack of morality (or to some, faith is included) makes them evil. You cannot describe cold, thus except as the lack of heat. Evil is an example of the lack of good. Heard something like that from a source that claims to be Einstein, but stuck with me.
User avatar
#72 - cheesymuffins (08/21/2012) [-]
I've heard that before as well. If you describe it as a lack of good, does that mean people can be born inherently good, or inherently lacking good? Why would a god who is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient allow so much lack of good, or allow it at all? Surely a god would rather a completely good world, or find ways of diminishing any gaps in goodness.
#75 - anon (08/21/2012) [-]
Then we wouldn't have free will, God could surely destroy evil in a moment but in doing so he would destroy any free will we as humans have to choose.
User avatar
#79 - cheesymuffins (08/21/2012) [-]
But must the lack of goodness be so complete in some cases? For example, a young child is abused, raped, and murdered. The person who did those things was definitely lacking a large amount of goodness, but couldn't the choice of abusing, raping, and murdering the child be taken off the table? Or, if that isn't possible, couldn't a god intent on keeping free will, but still omnibenevolent/potent/scient provide some more convincing arguments via direct contact, miracles, signs, etc to the murderer to make him choose something else?

What about cases that don't involve human choice, like deadly incurable diseases, fatal accidents, attacks by wildlife, or possible apocalyptic events (like the meteorite that destroyed the dinosaurs)?

And if god gave us free will to choose what we want, why would he punish us eternally for wrong choices? Why give entities free will but only provide one positive option? (I recognize that you didn't mention any particular belief in this particular circumstance, but it is common to many christian theologies.)
#80 - anon (08/21/2012) [-]
Addressing the first issue: By taking that choice off the table he is limiting free will and by very definition any restraint of free will destroys it completely.

I think Jesus was a pretty convincing argument, other than that wouldn't any definitive action by God remove the faith that is central to the belief in him. If there was proof then you wouldn't need to choose to believe in him, you wouldn't be able to deny his existence.

As for the other stuff I have no idea. I struggle with the same questions.

The last point, Hell is not so much a prison of pain as it is a place separate from God, it is simply existing distinctly separated from the power and love of God.
#23 - I am one of those. 08/20/2012 on seems about right +1
#20 - Car holding up a train? Must be a volvo. 08/19/2012 on How is this Possible? 0
#75 - Looks like maybe a Russian from WW2. Killed before slinging a grenade.  [+] (2 new replies) 08/17/2012 on Rhumba Beat 0
#98 - anon (08/17/2012) [-]
Looks like someone who once had a family that loved him. I bet his Wife died wondering where his body was.
User avatar
#105 - DropDeadShred (08/17/2012) [-]
Nah, she probably died thinking "oh shit I'm dying"
#267 - In both Star Wars and Star Trek, they only traveled in their o… 08/17/2012 on I just blew your mind 0
#3 - In that first panel, the way you drew the couch and the note a… 08/16/2012 on I dont need it... (READ... 0
#1 - Reminds me of a video where the cameraman was trying to film t…  [+] (1 new reply) 08/16/2012 on Behind every porn video +1
#2 - ragingbrony (08/16/2012) [-]
#14 - Well, they may or may not be. It depends on how you set it up.…  [+] (2 new replies) 08/16/2012 on I just blew your mind 0
User avatar
#15 - charagrin (08/16/2012) [-]
That makes sense. But they would first have to establish the exact direction and velocity of other systems, stars, planetoids, astroids, etc. Right? Like if Miami was the center of the galazy, and a frighter off the coast was traveling south at ten miles an hour, and you found another ship while out in your boat. To know where the ship will be at a specific point in the future you will have to know which direction it is going, as well as its speed, etc. But what about gravity wells, astroid fields, solar winds, and the like diverting it off its path randomly. Again in a small area it would not be noticieable, but in something as vast as the universe itself.....
User avatar
#267 - cheesymuffins (08/17/2012) [-]
In both Star Wars and Star Trek, they only traveled in their own galaxy, not the universe. But, the answer to your question is yes and no. Yes, as in knowing the location, speed, direction of movement, and mass of all the objects would be necessary for proper navigation. There is a way of making navigating the galaxy more consistent, however: you can treat systems as being roughly one unit on large scales. For example, you can treat all the solar system as one unit, everything from the sun to the kuiper belt, when you're in interstellar space. When you need to move within a planetary system, however, you can 'zoom in' on that system, and then show the movement and masses of objects within the solar system for navigation purposes. Also, with things like the asteroid belt, you can treat the systems as roughly planar, and just treat it as a band of impassable space, and go over it. Doesn't work so well for the kuiper belt, which is more like a bubble, but a manned ship with sensors of modern capabilities will be able to navigate it by hand.