GTWT

There are (at least) two sides to every story.

Formed in 1811 by a massive log-jam produced by the New Madrid earthquake, Caddo Lake is no longer strictly speaking 'natural', since the dam has been largely replaced with earth & concrete to stabilize it. Caddo Lake is our only lake if you don't count smaller bodies of water such as oxbow lakes & playa lakes.

Seven, if you count Marshall, which was capital of Missouri during the War of Northern Aggression.

That obsolete offense just scored 70 points.

There are. Their development as citizens works best when both their coaches and their professors have positive effects. They are, after all, student-athletes.

MGT, you know nothing about me.

Dude, do you really think it was smart to troll a future opponent's fan site while your team is performing the way it is today?

I don't think you're implying that UNT players would resort to violence against those they disagree. Doesn't sound like good citizenship.

When the football coach turns out a product (educated citizens) that change the world, then you'll be right.

While I'm happy having SL as UNT Head Coach, I really feel that NCAA Div I salaries are out of control. How many top professors would SL's salary bring to UNT? I understand that if the $$$ wasn't spent on SL it wouldn't magically find it's way to academics, but the contrast is obscene.

Great write-up - thanks. I really liked, “We knew he was coming back,” Ejiya said. “No one was freaking out that bad. It would take more than just a Power Five school. We knew he was staying.” It's going to take a special offer to pry Littrell away from UNT. When that offer comes he'll be gone. Until then, enjoy the ride.

One last post on this subject then I really am stopping. I haven't said that omniscience equates control. Omniscience equates knowledge, 100% certainty. If God knows I'm going to choose Dr. Pepper, then I will choose Dr. Pepper. If I choose Coke then God wasn't omniscient. You're welcome to the last word.

I appreciate the discussion. You've all been polite & courteous. Rather than simply repeating the same argument ad nauseum I want to simply recap my position & then be done with it: You can have an omniscient god. You can have free will. You cannot have both. It's illogical. Obviously, it's also possible that neither the omniscient God nor free will exist. But that's another can of worms. Tight lines!

You are compelled to make the choice that the omniscient God knows you will make. If you make any other then that God was mistaken & not omniscient. Not causal, but if God is wrong about what you will do, then She's not omniscient.

If God absolutely knows what you're going to do, how can you do anything different?

So you see "free will" as compatible with an omniscient God?

Perhaps not robots, but we are constrained to do what our omniscient Creator knows we will do.

Who created us with the knowledge that we would have this would have this characteristic?

God participated in the murder of His Son. He did so to redeem us for all the evil we commit. Evil He knew we would do when He created us. He could have made us better. Instead He created a breed He knew was flawed. He knew from the beginning every petty, mean, evil thing we would do. That makes Him responsible for all the evil we do. That makes Him responsible for the torture & death of the good man Jesus, His son. Being omniscient & omnipotent has its price. By the way, I have a 'universe', in the same sense as I have a home town or a country.

God, being omnipotent & omniscient, was responsible for the children killed by His agents. In my universe the killing of innocent children is a moral crime, thus God a criminal. Of course, that only holds if you think the OT is the inerrant Word of God. If you view it as a collection of sayings & myths of an emergent culture in a chaotic time & place then you judge the culture and not the deity.

MGT, If you find comfort in the prophesy of a second coming then your religion is a blessing to you. You can't expect, however, that all others will agree with you.

In the first passage it was the Lord who said, "Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children." In the second, whom exactly is the "I" if not God? I think you're trying to absolve Yahweh from crimes He obviously committed, at least if you accept the Gospel as incontrovertible evidence. I don't, by the way. As for the inability of an omniscient God to commit collateral damage I think you understand the concepts better than to suggest that an omnipotent, omniscient god could do something unintentionally.

“Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children." Ezekiel 9 "Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children." Isaiah 13 Of course, I'm sure the children deserved the wrath of God. By the way, how can anything an omnipotent God does be "collateral damage"?

So God judged those babies deserved to be bashed against the rocks?

Both Old & New are venerated as "The Word of God". How do you reconcile the very different messages?