Note to England NT: Marcus and Jesse should not be separated in pics

seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Egypt
seen from Colombia

seen from United States

seen from Jamaica
seen from United States
seen from Philippines
seen from Costa Rica
seen from Malaysia
seen from Brazil

seen from United States

seen from India
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from Brazil
seen from United States

seen from Thailand

seen from Malaysia

seen from China
Note to England NT: Marcus and Jesse should not be separated in pics
The Idea of Divine Power
The omnipotence paradox is when the whole notion of total power seems to be self-contradictory. For example: Can God create a stone too heavy for God to lift? On one hand, omnipotence involves being able to do absolutely anything. On the other hand, there are some actions that seem impossible for an omnipotent being to do, such as ‘fail at a task’ or ‘be defeated by another being’. If omnipotence itself is impossible, then there cannot be any omnipotent beings.
It is also questioned whether omnipotence can be compatible with other characteristics traditionally ascribed to the Christian God, such as omnibenevolence – it would be illogical for God to be able to do evil (because He’s all powerful) and unable to do evil (because he is all loving). Also, omniscience – how could God add to his knowledge (because he has the power to do anything) and unable to add to his knowledge (because he already knows everything).
Passages in the Bible that support his omnipotence:
“And God said ‘Let there be light’ and there was light.”
“He who made the Pleiades and Orion, who turns midnight into dawn and darkens day into night, who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out over the face of the land – the Lord is his name”.
“God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie”.
“God cannot fail”.
“With God all things are possible”.
Christian theologians take the view that if God did not have supreme power, he would not be able to do the things necessary for human salvation. For example, to create and carry out his plans for the universe; to resurrect people from death; to give eternal life in heaven. Anselm and Descartes developed on this when they formed the ontological argument: God is ‘that than which no greater can be conceived’, so if God were anything less than omnipotent, we would be able to conceive of a greater, more powerful being; so, God, by definition, must be omnipotent.
Descartes
Descartes argued that God can do absolutely anything, even that which is logically impossible, such as making a square circle or making 2 + 2 = 5, because God is the supreme perfection and so cannot have any limitations. He is the source of logic and has the power to suspend it or replace it whenever he wants to, so the laws of mathematics only exist because God created them that way, and he has the ability to override them. He believed any other understandings of omnipotence put restrains on the greatness of God and dishonoured it. God can see how to be contradictory because he is omnipotent.
However, most Christian scholars argue that this understanding of omnipotence is mistaken – logical contradictions are not ‘things’. It is not lack of power that prevents God from creating a square circle, but the fact that a square circle is nonsense.
His view turns God into an unpredictable tyrant who might do anything, so we cannot rely on him. If he has power to do anything, he could turn against us or do evil at any time, or his moral rules might change at any minute, so it makes it impossible for people to have a relationship with God or trust him for their salvation. It creates difficulty for theodicies which suggest that God could not act in any other way he does without depriving us of our free will. Suffering is a price that has to be paid in order to make free choices, but if Descartes is correct and God is capable of absolutely anything such as suspending the laws of logic even to prevent evil, it prevents God from being perfectly loving.
Aquinas
Aquinas argues that God is completely omnipotent in the sense of being in charge of the whole world, creating it and keeping it in existence. Aquinas said that God is omnipotent because: ‘he can do everything that is absolutely possible’, qualified by saying that ‘everything that does not imply a contradiction is among those possibilities in respect of which God is called omnipotent’. So he can do anything logically possible, but of it is not logically possible that it cannot be done by God, because something like a square circle cannot be made at all. Therefore, God cannot do anything that is inconsistent with his nature because that would imply a contradiction – he has no body, so he cannot swim or die and he is perfectly good, so he cannot deceive or do any other form of evil.
Swinburne
Swinburne takes Aquinas’s view in saying that God’s omnipotence means he can do anything, but this has to be understood properly. He can do and create all ‘things’ but self-contradictory definitions do not refer to ‘things’. A square circle is not a ‘thing’, a stone too heavy for God to lift is not a ‘thing’, so God couldn’t make them. This is not a challenge to his omnipotence.
Vardy
James Vardy suggests that God’s omnipotence is much more limited than previous Christians have suggested – he is not in control of the whole of history, or able to move things around like pieces on a chessboard, and it is wrong to suggest that everything happens because of the will of God. Instead, he created the universe in such a way that his ability to act is necessarily limited, because if not everything would not be able to exist in the way it does. However, this limitation is self-imposed – nothing limits his power except when he chooses.
John Macquarrie
Macquarrie emphasises that any limitations on God’s omnipotence are self-imposed. He is not constrained by logic, nor the physical world, nor by the actions of human beings, but is constrained in his omnipotence merely because he chooses to limit his own power out of love for humanity.
This idea of God’s self-limitation has been explored particularly in the context of Christology to answer questions based around how Jesus could be the Son of God if he didn’t always showcase God’s attributes. Theologians have developed a doctrine known as ‘kenosis’, meaning self-emptying’, in which Jesus emptied himself of some of his divine attributes before coming to Earth to make his encounter with humanity possible.
Macquarrie and other thinkers emphasise the need for believers to remember that when they speak of the power of God, they are using analogy, and His power is very different from our own. The word ‘power’ refers to power within this world, so when it is applied to God it cannot be applied literally because He is infinitely greater than we are. Following Aquinas, he argues that there will always be aspects of God’s nature that remain unknowable to us – we can understand/express them partially with the use of analogy, but we only have small fallible human minds so they’re difficult to comprehend. Issues with religious language are a key to understanding the attributes of God.
However this raises the question, how can a God who has limited his own power still be omnipotent? Whether it is self imposed or not, it is still limited – His power is not absolute.
A.N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne
They argued that absolute omnipotence in the sense of total power would not be a perfect quality and that we should think of God as a being whose power cannot be surpassed by any other being rather than as a being with total power.
Hartshorne considers that total power means that nothing else is able to put up any resistance at all to that power, so a totally omnipotent God would have total control over everything, and nothing would be able to do anything unless God allowed it and controlled it.
If I am trying to cut a branch, it will show some resistance so I will have to squeeze the clippers quite hard, but I am stronger than the branch so I can do the clipping. However, if I had total power, it would offer no resistance at all and would be like slicing through melted butter. There is nothing impressive about conquering something that puts up no resistance, like praising someone who came first in a race with no competitors.
Therefore, other beings are able to put up resistance to God but his power is still greater – this is more impressive than a being that nothing can challenge. God’s omnipotence means that God can overcome all resistance, not that God will need no resistance.
Hi sea, I hope you’re doing okay. I saw a thread earlier on Twitter about Louis being offered a role to play a part in a film about football. Apparently he turned down the role to focus on the band but not long after the band went on hiatus. Knowing that he put 1D first, instead of his own personal wants really makes me upset, especially knowing that other member turned around accepted Dunkirk as soon as he was free. Which then makes me wonder if he turned down the role because he was forced to or if he personally chose not to do it.
The rumor in early 2016 was that Louis was being considered to play footballer James Vardy in a biopic. Louis went to Vardy’s wedding that year, and they took this interesting photo.
So the band was already on hiatus by this time.
Louis also said in interview that at the time of this wedding, late May 2016, was when he found out that Jay’s leukemia was terminal.
As it turned out, the Vardy project was never made, but as of 2019, there were some rumors of it still being a viable project.
Nevertheless Louis did America’s Got Talent that year, and toward the end of 2016, he wrote Back to You and Always You. Of course, Harry was already filming Dunkirk. Most likely Louis knew the band wasn’t going to come back.
Jamie Vardy announces international reitrement
Anything is possible in Football
‘Run, Leicester, run’ says Italian coach Claudio Ranieri
‘Run, Leicester, run’ says Italian coach Claudio Ranieri
Claudio Ranieri (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Claudio Ranieri is a smart man.
He must be.
He’s a crowd-pleaser.
And he knows how to grab the headlines.
The Italian manager of the English Premier League leader Leicester City had journalists in a tizzy with his statement comparing his giant-killing squad to a lovable, fictional movie character, Forrest Gump.
Tom Hanks as the title character on the film…
View On WordPress