|
|
Post by echnaton on May 26, 2011 7:42:45 GMT -4
I've always had the feeling that if given a choice between heaven and New Zealand, I'd choose New Zealand. Particularly since they finished off the Dark Lord Sauron and made the place safe again.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on May 26, 2011 12:57:39 GMT -4
Someone the other day was going on about how he couldn't wait for Jesus to appear--though of course he wouldn't dream of predicting the Apocalypse, because the Bible says not to--and all I could think was, "But I like it here!" Yeah, it rains a lot--we have the same climate here in Olympia as there is in parts of New Zealand, in fact. But it's pretty, largely because of the rain. On a clear day, I can go to the top of Tumwater Hill and see two mountain ranges, or bits of them of course. Most of the city is hidden in trees. And sometimes, you can even see bald eagles swooping by, because at least one nesting pair lives in town. Heaven would have to be pretty good to beat this.
|
|
|
|
Post by twik on May 26, 2011 17:08:46 GMT -4
Someone the other day was going on about how he couldn't wait for Jesus to appear--though of course he wouldn't dream of predicting the Apocalypse, because the Bible says not to--and all I could think was, "But I like it here!" Yeah, it rains a lot--we have the same climate here in Olympia as there is in parts of New Zealand, in fact. But it's pretty, largely because of the rain. On a clear day, I can go to the top of Tumwater Hill and see two mountain ranges, or bits of them of course. Most of the city is hidden in trees. And sometimes, you can even see bald eagles swooping by, because at least one nesting pair lives in town. Heaven would have to be pretty good to beat this. All this and no mortgage payment?  |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on May 26, 2011 17:29:13 GMT -4
Well, rent, in my case. But yes, that would be nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by redneckr0nin on May 28, 2011 3:07:17 GMT -4
The world will end at 6:00......6:30 in Newfoundland.... Little Canadian humor for you all. I just want to say the rapture did happen as I was the only one righteous enough to be chosen( any Christians here my blasphemy is meant in humor and no way to offend) and am sitting up here with Jesus and Luke playing some call of duty and eating Doritios. The Internet connection heaven has is outstanding and makes T1 look silly. I downloaded three flicks at Bly-ray quality I'm like one minute. You guys don't know what your missing...oops wait a minute I just told you.... So I guess you do know now!! Don't worry round two of the draft is coming up Oct isn't it? I'll put a good word for you all with management try to get you in on this wave.... I got your backs guys!!
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 21, 2011 14:11:03 GMT -4
Someone the other day was going on about how he couldn't wait for Jesus to appear--though of course he wouldn't dream of predicting the Apocalypse, because the Bible says not to--and all I could think was, "But I like it here!" Yeah, it rains a lot--we have the same climate here in Olympia as there is in parts of New Zealand, in fact. But it's pretty, largely because of the rain. On a clear day, I can go to the top of Tumwater Hill and see two mountain ranges, or bits of them of course. Most of the city is hidden in trees. And sometimes, you can even see bald eagles swooping by, because at least one nesting pair lives in town. Heaven would have to be pretty good to beat this. Heaven will be here, but it will be an improvement in every way over what is already here, with none of the good lost. |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 21, 2011 21:10:54 GMT -4
Someone the other day was going on about how he couldn't wait for Jesus to appear--though of course he wouldn't dream of predicting the Apocalypse, because the Bible says not to--and all I could think was, "But I like it here!" Yeah, it rains a lot--we have the same climate here in Olympia as there is in parts of New Zealand, in fact. But it's pretty, largely because of the rain. On a clear day, I can go to the top of Tumwater Hill and see two mountain ranges, or bits of them of course. Most of the city is hidden in trees. And sometimes, you can even see bald eagles swooping by, because at least one nesting pair lives in town. Heaven would have to be pretty good to beat this. Heaven will be here, but it will be an improvement in every way over what is already here, with none of the good lost. Does that mean Houston will still have its (normally) lush climate but with no hurricanes in September? |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Jun 22, 2011 11:46:43 GMT -4
Unless you really LIKE hurricanes. Then you get them daily.
|
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jun 22, 2011 14:48:19 GMT -4
Unless you really LIKE hurricanes. Then you get them daily. I'm reminded of this exchange for some reason: Calvin: If heaven is good, and if I like to be bad, how am I supposed to be happy there? Hobbes: How will you get to heaven if you like to be bad? Calvin: Let's say I didn't do what I wanted to do. Suppose I led a blameless life! Suppose I denied my true dark nature! Hobbes: I'm not sure I have that much imagination. Calvin: Maybe heaven is a place where you're allowed to be bad! |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 22, 2011 15:24:29 GMT -4
I'm reminded of this exchange for some reason: Calvin: If heaven is good, and if I like to be bad, how am I supposed to be happy there? Hobbes: How will you get to heaven if you like to be bad? Calvin: Let's say I didn't do what I wanted to do. Suppose I led a blameless life! Suppose I denied my true dark nature! Hobbes: I'm not sure I have that much imagination. Calvin: Maybe heaven is a place where you're allowed to be bad! Interesting that someone named Calvin is speculating about denying his true nature... I like Hobbes' first response - "How will you get to heaven if you like to be bad?" Not "if you do bad things," but "if you like to be bad". The path to heaven lies in changing one's true nature, not in denying it and "acting" good, but in honestly wanting to do good. |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Jun 22, 2011 16:25:32 GMT -4
Well, some might argue that denying one's own true nature is bad in itself, and a source of evil. That if we *truly* follow our nature, it's not going to lead us wrong.
So, Calvin would have to ask, "what do I want to do that is truly *bad*? Do I really want to do evil, or just want to do what my nature tells me to do, even if (on earth) that would lead me into conflict with others?"
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 22, 2011 16:31:42 GMT -4
Well, some might argue that denying one's own true nature is bad in itself, and a source of evil. That if we *truly* follow our nature, it's not going to lead us wrong. It seems like a copout to me, like people who claim to be sociopaths or have Asperger's not because they do but because they think it gives them an excuse to be jerks. |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 22, 2011 17:48:26 GMT -4
Well, some might argue that denying one's own true nature is bad in itself, and a source of evil. That if we *truly* follow our nature, it's not going to lead us wrong. I'm not making an argument that someone should deny their "true" nature, but rather that if you don't like the consequences of following your "true" nature that you need to change your nature. The counter argument - that it's always bad to go against your "true" nature - would lead to the conclusion that if you were created evil then you will be evil, and you have no choice in the matter. Something of a Calvanist viewpoint, actually. Yes, Calvin should ask whether his desires are truly evil. If they are, then he either has to accept being evil or make some changes to his desires. |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 22, 2011 18:50:57 GMT -4
Is there such a thing as a broadly defined true nature of a person? What would makes one persons tendencies to behave in one way verses another either true or natural. The consequences of ones actions are far more important than some supposition about their nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 22, 2011 19:43:50 GMT -4
As you might imagine, I have put a lot of time and energy into considering how I act. It's an interesting question, really. Is the fact that I don't hit people every time they irritate me proof that I'm a genuinely good person despite the chemical imbalance which leads to my poor impulse control? Or is it that I'm better socialized than I could be? Come to that, how much of my wanting to hit people every time they irritate me is based on the chemical imbalance and how much of it is that everyone wants to do that? I do believe that people really do have a "true nature," but I don't believe it's very easy to know from the inside or out.
|
|
