Rex Kerr

1,519 reputation

312

bio	website
	location
	age
visits	member for	1 year, 8 months
	seen	May 13 at 0:06
stats	profile views	70

	1,519 reputation	bio	website		visits	member for	1 year, 8 months
312 badges		location			seen	May 13 at 0:06

summary answers questions tags badges favorites bounties reputation activity

159 Actions

suggestions reviews revisions comments badges posts accepts all

Oct 12	awarded	Enthusiast
Oct 10	comment	If humans are now genetically tainted by corruption, what was perfection like? This is the only answer that accepted the premise, so I'm tempted to accept it as the correct one...but I think James and Flimzy have made too good of a case that it was the premise that was taken overly far. Still, +1
Oct 10	comment	If humans are now genetically tainted by corruption, what was perfection like? Good points; quite informative!
Oct 10	accepted	If humans are now genetically tainted by corruption, what was perfection like?
Oct 9	comment	If humans are now genetically tainted by corruption, what was perfection like? Thanks! That does help clarify matters.
Oct 9	comment	What is the interpretation of the bow in the cloud after the Flood? This seems like the most parsimonious answer, and therefore likely the correct one.
Oct 9	accepted	What is the interpretation of the bow in the cloud after the Flood?
Oct 9	asked	If humans are now genetically tainted by corruption, what was perfection like?
Oct 8	comment	Why do Christians need to promote their religion to non-believers? Religions that don't encourage their followers to convert others (and don't make up for it by slaughtering, invading, and colonizing) tend to die out. Thus, you would expect every major religion to have an element of proselytizing. Also, it's human nature to share things that seem beneficial or important. The interesting cases are the widespread religions that don't do this much (e.g. Buddhism). I'm not saying that it's not interesting to know the Christian justification, but the universal pattern should also be recognized.
Oct 8	comment	What are the theological implications of “filioque”? It's a side tangent (good answer otherwise), but "a love so strong that it is an actual person" is much more nonsensical than interesting. For example: "This inspiration is so strong that it is coffee." Huh?
Oct 6	revised	Once a believer, always a believer? added 592 characters in body
Oct 6	revised	Once a believer, always a believer? added 8 characters in body
Oct 6	answered	Once a believer, always a believer?
Oct 5	comment	How is it that someone who lived thousands of years ago can “represent” me? @warren - So the question was "How is it logical?" and your answer is "You can't tell."? In order for that to be a good answer, it would be nice to have more justification for the claim that we can't know (or even guess at) the reasoning and/or more explanation of at least what God's standard is for transferral of responsibility.
Oct 5	comment	How is it that someone who lived thousands of years ago can “represent” me? This is more a restatement that Adam is a representative, in that we are held accountable for his actions, than an answer as to why it makes sense. As Chelonian points out, the colonization of the Americas by Europeans does not seem to be a great analogy.
Oct 4	comment	What is the meaning of “anything” in Matthew 18:19-20? @Richard - Surely the conditions you list have been met by the loved ones of people imprisoned and later killed by dictators throughout the ages. So this then raises the question: is this an example of the Bible being in error? Or is the interpretation incorrect somewhere? (Or are the conditions essentially impossible to meet, e.g. because God's will is already set, and only if you happened to guess it and pray accordingly will things unfold the way you wished?)
Oct 4	revised	Is there an argument that God, as a self-proving entity, is necessary for logic? edited title
Oct 4	comment	Is there an argument that God, as a self-proving entity, is necessary for logic? @Richard - It's a sentence fragment. I'll make it less fragmentary.
Oct 3	comment	Is there an argument that God, as a self-proving entity, is necessary for logic? @Richard - Why did you change the title? It no longer matches the question or the accepted answer.
Oct 3	accepted	Is there an argument that God, as a self-proving entity, is necessary for logic?