[QUOTE]Originally posted by JonBoy
[B]Scripturally speaking, you could hold your breath forever and live if it was required of you.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JonBoy
[B]

Fine and good, but your situation is not quite up to the task as there are again only two real options:

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ltweintz
[B]

Yes, but I could not do it at will only when required.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ltweintz
[B]

I still think you aren't seeing what I mean.

 

Remember what I said in my previous post. Bad has been removed. So let me paraphrase what I think you are saying to make sure I fully understand you.

bad = doing bad things
neutral = both (bad - watching bad actions take place without intervening) (good - watching good actions take place without intervening)
good = doing good things.

With bad being removed it's not possible to witness a bad event. Therefore neutral not bad.

 

If that doesn't fit, please post your definition of the word neutral.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ltweintz
[B]Remember what I said in my previous post.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by magician
[B]


My goal is to get you to think--really think--about whether Nature is consistent.

 

I know.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JonBoy
[B]If all you have is good, neutral must therefore be less than good (since it is not up to the standard of good) and therefore it is bad.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AlexM
[B]To all and anybody on this board who has ever witnessed a contradiction in Nature - fess up.