Posted by Dr. Bob on January 10, 2014, at 22:46:32
In reply to Lou's reply to Mr. Hsiung-psbvrt, posted by Lou Pilder on January 8, 2014, at 13:56:05
> I do not see that anyone needs to make any jump to the conclusion that unsanctioned posts are considered by you to be supportive and will be good for this community as a whole by you.
I said that because other conclusions are possible. For example, readers could think that I was just not reading the board then.
> Since it is your rule that the statement is not in accordance with, I can not post a repudiation to it for it is not my rule, but yours.
> I will concede that you can post anything that could show that you do not want anti-Semitic statements and other statements that could put down those of other faiths to be seen by a subset of readers as supportiveHere's another idea. I see 2 issues. Maybe we should deal with them separately:
1. What was said about you.
You could repudiate that.
2. Whether a God that imposes burdens is a bad God.
I could address whether saying a God imposes burdens is putting down that God. It seems that's one of the questions raised by the Book of Job:
Misery
by Joan Acocella
December 16, 2013
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2013/12/16/131216crbo_books_acocellaBob
a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:1050116
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20131217/msgs/1058229.html