If you want a cheap, good, laptop, check out the Pine64 pro. The community orders have started. Me? I'm wating for this six year old laptop to die, or until I have to carry something light overseas -- which will be next year.
In the meantime, on the "some dangerous people use anything to get out of crimes" this cheerful little twerp saith that they had a psychiatric disorder. In the Antipodes, intoxication is no defence.
Amati had been drinking vodka and taking drugs, including marijuana and the hallucinogen MDA, and on Facebook in the wee hours of the morning declared: “Humans are only able to destroy to hate so that is what I shall do.” About 20 minutes later, Amati walked into a convenience store, carrying an ax and with a long knife in his/“her” back pocket. Amati used the ax to attack two customers in the store, inflicting severe injuries, then left the store, later attacking a homeless man on the street.
Regardless, Amati is merely violent, not genocidal, threatening civil war, or molesting children. (Fair warning, you will need mind bleach after the second of those links). That makes him relatively sane -- just another violent, damaged inmate.
Further on Josh Harris. Stacey McCain gives us an example of how to react to such: mourn the loss and pray for his restoration.
We don’t know what we don’t know, but we may speculate that his wife — who had fallen in love with him when he was a evangelical superstar — lost interest in her husband once he ceased to be a celebrity. The Mahaney scandal must have inflicted collateral damage on Josh’s reputation and status as a leader, and what is the church to such a Christian celebrity except a source of status, an adoring audience for his performances? Necessarily, the celebrity pastor’s wife becomes part of the performance, playing the role of Perfect Christian Wife, and what happens when the show is over? What happens when the pastor leaves the pulpit and there is no longer an audience for this performance?
Maybe Josh Harris could learn something from Rollo Tomassi, but as I say, we don’t know what we don’t know. In his Instagram apostasy announcement, Josh Harris went out of his way to apologize to “the LGBTQ+ community.” My hunch is that this was not a coincidence, but I’ll avoid sharing my other hunches about the significance of this.
There are probably many lessons to be learned here, but I’ll skip the didactic approach and simply mourn Josh Harris’s apostasy.
In the email, however, was a discussion of Paul as an apologist. Again, Read the whole thing
First, Paul says God’s “divine nature” should be evident to all. This means we can see the non-moral attributes of God in creation such omnipotence in the created order. “Perceive” means to “perceive in the mind.” “What has been made” means God’s workmanship can be seen. The created order is more than a physical act, but the work of design, or art where the craftsman brings his will, thoughts or emotions, love and skill into it.
Remember, the Greco-Roman religious world which Paul is addressing would have assumed that only the wise were the ones who had knowledge of their gods. Also, being that Paul was Jewish, he knew that Jewish people would have seen the pagans as having no knowledge of the one true God. So Paul is turning things upside down here in saying that knowledge of the true God is available to all. Paul says that God’s existence and attributes can be “clearly seen” (Romans 1:18-20) since they have been “shown” to the unbelieving world through “the things that are made” (nature).
This type of natural revelation is called intuitive knowledge. It is instantaneously apprehended. The issue of moral knowledge is what C.S. Lewis discusses in The Abolition of Man. Lewis recalls that all cultures, Greek, Hebrew, Egyptian, Babylonian etc. show that natural revelation is true. In Romans 2:15, “suneidesis” stands alongside with the “heart” and “thoughts” as the faculty that allows the pagan world to live a life that corresponds to the Jewish people who have the written law (The Torah).Chab123, ThinkApologetics.
The argument Paul is making is not whether people know they have moral knowledge. From an epistemological standpoint, they most certainly do!
Our circumstances may change. The society we live in will change. But the argument for Christ, the nature of this world, and the nature of God does not change.
Do not follow the fashions of this world, or this fallen elite, or be like them.