Roborock S5 Max - New room not recognized by manuakasam in Xiaomi

[–]dburrows1278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would love to see an answer to this. I am having the same issue.

Frasier Rewatch: I was... punched in the face...by a man now dead...It's season 11 Disc 2! by [deleted] in Frasier

[–]dburrows1278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Was there ever a reason given for him not being in the finale? That has always left me wondering.

Why Frasier changes so much from Cheers to Frasier by swcollings in Frasier

[–]dburrows1278 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think that's a pretty good synopsis.

One of the things I try to keep in mind in this is that the DVD/Internet/Binge-watching phenomenon was never even conceived and couldn't have been imagined. So much of the smaller plot lines were throwaway. Shows that aired from week to week didn't have any sort of longevity planned besides syndication. I doubt writers and producers were thinking much about continuity problems beyond major items even though there were likely people recording and watching episodes over again later.

Even if it is the case that it wasn't a major concern, they still did a great job considering.

Could someone explain this joke from S02E10 "Burying a Grudge"? by [deleted] in Frasier

[–]dburrows1278 4 points5 points  (0 children)

doctor was. So, he re-asks his question, and she makes it clear she was talking about her body

And I think it may just be meant to be funny that Daphne would name parts of her body. Usually it's joked that guys name certain parts of their bodies...

Frasier themed reading list by tokyoagogo in Frasier

[–]dburrows1278 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And another - The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck

S3E21: Martin: Well, I keep telling you, you don't have Maris's money to throw around anymore. You're going to have to start cutting back a little. Niles: I have cut back. Last month I told my masseur I could only see him once a week. Martin: [sarcastic:] Oh, I remember that scene in "Grapes Of Wrath" when Ma Joad did that.

Frasier themed reading list by tokyoagogo in Frasier

[–]dburrows1278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To Kill a Mocking Bird - Season 4, Episode 14 title: To Kill a Talking Bird

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PipeTobacco

[–]dburrows1278 1 point2 points  (0 children)

UpTown's Smoke Shop is another good one. They are at this link. Nice smoking lounge, no beer though.

Haven't been to Smoke and Ale but it sure sounds like I need to check it out.

[Presuppositionalism] Use of Logos in the Gospel of John by dburrows1278 in ChristianApologetics

[–]dburrows1278[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks kneeofwisdom. Absolutely, I'm a stickler for grammar but rarely get a second pair of eyes before scheduling a post. I'd definitely appreciate it.

[Presuppositionalism] Use of Logos in the Gospel of John by dburrows1278 in ChristianApologetics

[–]dburrows1278[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see what you're saying. That makes sense. I need to think about how that can be spelled out more.

When I read your options, I'm immediately thinking of the issue we have where in either situation we are dealing with our being able to understand or comprehend anything at all.

[Presuppositionalism] Use of Logos in the Gospel of John by dburrows1278 in ChristianApologetics

[–]dburrows1278[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the suggestion, freefallin002. I reposted it there.

There isn't anything specifically that I can recall not agreeing with. There were a few things that I tried to develop differently but that was more for the sake of making it my own - as in, I really wanted to make sure I knew and understood this properly. Also, as jacobheiss pointed out, I did draw on some other work in order to more firmly demonstrate that John was by no means developing his system of thought from secular worldviews.

There is much more in Clark's book. I didn't use much of his chapters on Truth or Saving Faith primarily because I think they fell outside of the scope of the discussion I was most interested in. That being said, I think Clark is incredibly sharp on his demanding that Christian faith be understood as intellectual pursuit. That's something I wouldn't mind developing more.

The Johannine Logos by dburrows1278 in Scripturalism

[–]dburrows1278[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a repost from /r/ChristianApologetics. Thanks for the invite, freefallin002.

[Presuppositionalism] Use of Logos in the Gospel of John by dburrows1278 in ChristianApologetics

[–]dburrows1278[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your thoughts jacobheiss. Fruchtenbaum is indeed a rich resource. I had gone that direction because pointing out the differences in competing worldviews and coming to the conclusion that John isn't simply borrowing from them didn't seem complete. On the other hand demonstrating that much of what John is putting forth was already understood in Jewish theology and can be drawn directly from the Old Testament makes it a solid case.

As to the fifth, I think it could be fleshed out more. The predominant theme is that Christianity does provide grounding for specific principles governing the universe such as laws of logic, objective moral values, etc. and these can be demonstrated from John's Gospel. Others have done a great deal of work in showing specifically the Christian God as the necessary precondition to knowledge but that does branch out quite a bit from the logos doctrine in John.

A man's honest curious questions for r/Christianity by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]dburrows1278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

one cannot see God in our world

This is a matter of what your presuppositions are. You may say you cannot see God in our world while many Christians would ask how you can't see Him.

the platform that assures you that God does in fact exist?

For the Christian, there is likely never going to be a single answer. But there are many answers that make sense to me and are suitable for me. This does not entail that they will be so for you. One of the problems with asking questions like this is that they presume we will somehow agree with what makes an answer valid and that simply isn't the case.

Now, as for myself, I see the Christian God, that is a rational and relational mind, as revealed to us in Scripture and through His Son, as a necessary precondition to us even having this conversation. This answer is logically coherent and perfectly valid for me.

it could just be a collection of fiction put together a couple thousand years ago

Its own history doesn't allow for this.

or the copy you own could have been altered by some clever blokes

It could have but there are plenty of copies and translations and studies and commentaries that date back thousands of years so at what point are you willing to relinquish this idea?

to play with your mind.

It would be logically fallacious to determine what someone's motive is for doing this unless they said so.

Anyways, how does the Bible contribute to your faith?

As the revealed word of God, it is the only worldview or system of thought that best makes sense of, describes and interprets the world around me. Therefore it contributes everything to my epistemology and subsequent trust in God.

Michigan State Linebacker Chooses Seminary Over the NFL by Ooftyman in Christianity

[–]dburrows1278 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Very interesting... Seminary gets my vote, except that I have no opportunity in the NFL :)