Two Plus Two Poker Forums On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read TwoPlusTwo.com

 Notices

 Religion, God, and Theology Discussion of God, religion, faith, theology, and spirituality.

01-12-2019, 11:51 AM   #101
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by neeeel still not backing up your claim. it might almost be an argument, but if it is, it is almost certainly a circular one.
Yes. It takes the form of logic itself: a tautology.

Quote:
 this is most definitely a circular argument ( and therefore invalid, in case you didnt know)
Lol. You're relying on tautological statements to make that deduction (the laws of logic).

Quote:
 Nope. You cant
I've done it. Perhaps you mean you cant?

Quote:
 What does it mean for the universe to be logical, and how do you know?
It gives rise to, and follows the laws of logic.

01-12-2019, 12:42 PM   #102
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Logical statements are internally tautological.
This is false. All squares have four sides, but not all shapes with four sides are squares.

You can have P implies Q without Q implying P. The logical statement P implies Q does not generate a tautology between P and Q. Unless, of course, you're also mangling the word "tautological" the same way you've mangled other mathematical terms and notation (like "topological" and your use of set concepts).

01-12-2019, 12:42 PM   #103
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot But the universe is logical. We make sense of it all the time.
But the universe isn't logical. There are things that don't make sense all the time.

01-12-2019, 12:43 PM   #104
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Yes. It takes the form of logic itself: a tautology. Lol. You're relying on tautological statements to make that deduction (the laws of logic).
LOL. So this is what you've reduced your position to? Do you even logic at all? Or do you just say stuff?

01-12-2019, 12:45 PM   #105
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. This is false. All squares have four sides, but not all shapes with four sides are squares. You can have P implies Q without Q implying P. The logical statement P implies Q does not generate a tautology.
The statements that make up logical laws are tautological

01-12-2019, 12:47 PM   #106
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot The statements that make up logical laws are tautological

There are logical laws that only exist in certain logical systems. They are axiomatic and not tautological. But at this point, I don't really expect that you're using the word tautological correctly, nor do I think you actually know enough about logic to try to advance this argument in a meaningful way.

01-12-2019, 12:51 PM   #107
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. This is false. All squares have four sides, but not all shapes with four sides are squares.
I meant the logical laws themselves, but you can arrange any definitional statement (which is what the logical laws themselves are) into a tautology. This example you've given here is quite indicative of your level of willful misrepresentation.

A square isn't rigorously defined as having 4 sides, as you well know. It's a two dimensional shape that has four sides with each internal angle being 90 degrees.

That definition can be arranged into a tautology thusly:

A square is a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees because a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees is a square.

Last edited by Do0rDoNot; 01-12-2019 at 01:01 PM.

01-12-2019, 12:53 PM   #108
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. Please describe your use of the word tautological. There are logical laws that only exist in certain logical systems. They are axiomatic and not tautological. But at this point, I don't really expect that you're using the word tautological correctly, nor do I think you actually know enough about logic to try to advance this argument in a meaningful way.
Better go back to the beginning Aaron

http://sites.millersville.edu/bikena...th-tables.html

A tautology is something that is always (immutably) true. The converse is a contradiction.

The statement "The universe is inherently logical because logic is inherent to the universe" is tautological because its opposite, "the universe is inherently illogical because illogic is inherent to the universe" is a contradiction.

01-12-2019, 01:02 PM   #109
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Better go back to the beginning Aaron http://sites.millersville.edu/bikena...th-tables.html A tautology is something that is always (immutably) true. The converse is a contradiction.
Okay. Now tell me exactly what statements you think are tautologically true. Because the word "tautology" in the context in which you are using it is a claim about logical statements, not the logical laws themselves.

Also, the "converse" only applies to logical implications (the converse of "if P then Q" is "if Q then P") and not to general statements (there is no converse of "P").

Quote:
 The statement "The universe is inherently logical because logic is inherent to the universe" is tautological because its opposite, "the universe is inherently illogical because illogic is inherent to the universe" is a contradiction.
No, this is you just uttering words that you like rather than words that are meaningful.

01-12-2019, 01:03 PM   #110
neeeel
Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,651
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Yes. It takes the form of logic itself: a tautology.
A tautology is not an argument for your position. Circular arguments are false arguments.

Quote:
 Lol. You're relying on tautological statements to make that deduction (the laws of logic).
Nope, I dont think you understand the laws of logic

Quote:
 I've done it. Perhaps you mean you cant?
Well, I suppose you can define words to mean whatever you want, but then the discussion with others become meaningless unless you can agree on definitions. Inherent most certainly does not mean the same as immutable

Quote:
 It gives rise to, and follows the laws of logic.
How do you know?

01-12-2019, 01:04 PM   #111
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot I meant the logical laws themselves, but you can arrange any definitional statement (which is what the logical laws themselves are) into a tautology.
A "definitional statement" (which we normally just call a "definition") is not a logical law. So you're making an analogy between two different things.

Quote:
 This example you've given here is quite indicative of your level of willful misrepresentation. A square isn't rigorously defined as having 4 sides, as you well know. It's a two dimensional shape that has four sides with each internal angle being 90 degrees.
I never said that I was defining anything. I was talking logic. Were you not talking logic and instead talking something different?

Quote:
 That definition can be arranged into a tautology thusly: A square is a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees because a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees is a square.
Except that a square in hyperbolic geometry doesn't satisfy the angle condition. (And I'll not bother you with the fact that your definition of a square is an abject failure for other reasons, even though... well... obvious reasons are obvious.)

01-12-2019, 01:30 PM   #112
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. A "definitional statement" (which we normally just call a "definition") is not a logical law. So you're making an analogy between two different things.
Logical laws are self-definitional statements. They are also the basic statements of the language of reason.

Quote:
 Except that a square in hyperbolic geometry doesn't satisfy the angle condition. (And I'll not bother you with the fact that your definition of a square is an abject failure for other reasons, even though... well... obvious reasons are obvious.)
Ok, so you're pointing out some mistake in rigorousness I made in my definition that you yourself made when you defined a square as having the property of having 4 sides, and thinking it's a super-smart gotcha moment? You're brilliant.

01-12-2019, 01:37 PM   #113
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Logical laws are self-definitional statements.
Please state what you mean by this.

Quote:
 They are also the basic statements of the language of reason.
Please provide an example of such a statement.

Quote:
 Ok, so you're pointing out some mistake in rigorousness I made in my definition that you yourself made when you defined a square as having the property of having 4 sides, and thinking it's a super-smart gotcha moment? You're brilliant.
LOL - I didn't provide a definition of a square. I invoked a specific property of a square. But I don't really expect you to be able to distinguish between the two ideas given that you haven't shown the capacity to distinguish between other distinct concepts in this and other threads.

Your inability to understand this in any meaningful manner provides me with more evidence to believe that you aren't actually saying anything meaningful as you progress in your presentation. You haven't shown the ability to follow along with basic logic, so I don't have any reason to think that you're going to be successful with anything here.

01-12-2019, 02:06 PM   #114
neeeel
Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,651
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 you can arrange any definitional statement (which is what the logical laws themselves are) into a tautology.
so what? Where do you think that gets you? Im not even sure your statement about squares is a tautology.

01-12-2019, 02:07 PM   #115
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. Please state what you mean by this.
A tautology is a statement that is always true (by definition). Since the laws of logic are tautologies, they are always (immutably) true.

Quote:
 Please provide an example of such a statement.
P v ~P<=>~(P∧~P)

Lots of examples in the link I provided. I won't do your homework for you.

Quote:
 LOL - I didn't provide a definition of a square. I invoked a specific property of a square.
So did I. Just like my properties weren't rigorous enough to define a square, neither were yours.

Quote:
 But I don't really expect you to be able to distinguish between the two ideas given that you haven't shown the capacity to distinguish between other distinct concepts in this and other threads. Your inability to understand this in any meaningful manner provides me with more evidence to believe that you aren't actually saying anything meaningful as you progress in your presentation. You haven't shown the ability to follow along with basic logic, so I don't have any reason to think that you're going to be successful with anything here.
You just implied two posts ago that logical laws aren't tautologous.

Quote:
 Because the word "tautology" in the context in which you are using it is a claim about logical statements, not the logical laws themselves.

01-12-2019, 02:08 PM   #116
Do0rDoNot

Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 830
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by neeeel so what? Where do you think that gets you? Im not even sure your statement about squares is a tautology.
I know where it gets me. The universe is logical <=> the universe is not illogical.

Do you agree that the universe is logical?

01-12-2019, 02:12 PM   #117
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,346
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot A tautology is a statement that is always true (by definition). Since the laws of logic are tautologies, they are always (immutably) true. P v ~P<=>~(P∧~P)
Okay. But this isn't what anyone who is doing logic would call "a law of logic." What you have here is a consequence of the laws of logic. I'm asking you to provide me an example of "a law of logic."

Quote:
 So did I. Just like my properties weren't rigorous enough to define a square, neither were yours.
Uhhhhhh.... right... You're going to tell me that the thing you called a definition wasn't actually intended to be a definition now?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by you That definition can be arranged into a tautology thusly: A square is a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees because a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees is a square.
LOL.

Quote:
 You just implied two posts ago that logical laws aren't tautologous.
I didn't imply that. I asserted that very directly. A tautology is a property of a logical statement. And whatever it is that you think you're talking about when you're talking about "logical laws" are not the type of thing that anyone who does logic would call a "logical statement."

If you wanted to get super technical, we can start talking about the logical operators as functions on boolean algebra, but that would just mask the fact that whatever you're talking about is working on the basis of axioms, and that you really are trying to claim that axioms are tautologies here.

01-12-2019, 02:13 PM   #118
neeeel
Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,651
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot I know where it gets me. The universe is logical <=> the universe is not illogical. Do you agree that the universe is logical?
ok you have totally lost me. How do you get from

Quote:
 A square is a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees because a two dimensional shape which has 4 sides and 4 internal angles of 90 degrees is a square.
to

Quote:
 the universe is logical

01-12-2019, 03:56 PM   #119
lagtight

Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,190
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Do0rDoNot Do you agree that the universe is logical?
No.

Logic applies to statements (or propositions). "The universe" is not a statement or proposition, so to say that the "universe is logical" strikes me as a Category Fallacy.

01-12-2019, 04:05 PM   #120
lagtight

Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,190
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by neeeel A tautology is not an argument for your position. Circular arguments are false arguments.
Actually, all circular arguments are logically valid. Circular arguments are uninformative, but not false. (Technically, arguments aren't true or false, but are rather valid or invalid.)

FWIW, I used to teach logic at a community college.

01-14-2019, 10:27 AM   #121
Mightyboosh
mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 5,341
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Original Position Three points. 1) The ontological argument is an argument you reject, so why do you assume it here? In my experience, most Christians, including major theologians like Aquinas, also reject it. I don't even think the ontological argument really does make the assumption that there is only a single perfect being. Many people using it make your assumption, but it seems like an unwarranted one imo.
I reject it's conclusion (because like Hulme, I don't agree that just because we can imagine something means that it actually exists), not the premise used in the argument that there must be a maximal being no greater being than which can be imagined. That part I agree with.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Original Position 2) You should disambiguate your attacks here. The free will defense really does defeat the claim that a perfect god must create a perfect universe (assuming the possibility of libertarian free will). Imagine two universes. In one universe, everyone always does exactly what God desires, but they do so by God forcing them to do so. In a second universe, everyone always does exactly what God desires, but they do so by their own free choice. Which of these universes is better or are they the same? Well, since many moral theories claim that moral blame or praise should accrue not to just doing the right thing, but to choosing to do the right thing (eg Kantianism), it seems like the second of these universes, at least on some construals of moral value, is better. However, it is logically impossible for God to force someone to freely (in the libertarian sense) choose to do good. Thus, it is not within God's power to deterministically create the maximally perfect universe because the maximally perfect universe is necessarily non-deterministic (given the above assumptions). More concretely, the maximally perfect universe requires freely given compliance from free-willed beings to do the right thing.

Seems that you're using the logic of the ontological argument here. As I said already, I'm not actually convinced by the ontological argument, but more pertinently to my point, in the universe that I think must be the necessary result of the properties awarded to god, there are no moral choices either. Morality may exist in that there are things that are right and that are wrong, but we have no choice about what we do. And yes, the implications of that are not lost on me.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Original Position 3) Given the argument in (2), the argument I thought you were making here is that this defense assumes a non-deterministic universe. But if the world is not deterministic, then how could God have perfect foreknowledge of the future? That is the argument I was trying to defeat with my counterexample of the multiverse. Your discussion of perfection here doesn't address my argument at all, as my argument takes as an assumption that the universe is not deterministic.
God can't not know how everything will be, he knows everything in the moment of creation because he created it. Plus I'm not even sure if Determinism applies here in the sense of everything we do being determined by "previously existing causes" because it's only us that experiences things in such a linear fashion. God doesn't experience time.

I did address the idea of foreknowledge though, I pointed out that it's "not even an issue or a conflict to be resolved because how could he not know what he decided would be".

01-14-2019, 10:33 AM   #122
Mightyboosh
mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 5,341
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by craig1120 Let’s simplify. I believe God transcends reason and logic. You don’t believe a god can transcend reason and logic. Everything else is basically a restatement of those beliefs. This thread would be more efficient if the following question was asked instead: -Do you believe a god can transcend reason? -If ‘no’, then the intellect is your God.
Moving from ad homs to straw men.

I haven't said anything about reason, but I have said that even god has to obey the laws of logic, not because they're some external set of guidelines that he must obey, there isn't anything external to god, but because they're an inherent property of the universe he created, a property we can observe and test, that is useful and predictive, internally and externally consistent (and so, ironically, it's scientific in that it meets the criteria required for something to be considered a scientific theory...)

Unlike you, who are simply awarding powers to god without even being able to explain how they might work and in the face of an explanation that does work, I can offer reasons for my point of view, in that even god can't create a coulder so large that he can't lift it, because that's logically impossible, he also can't be omniscient but know that there's something he doesn't know, or know two contradictory facts simultaneously. These are laws of logic and you'd think you'd agree given that these flawed arguments are often given by atheists as proof that god can't exist and your response should be to simply shoot them down with my response.

01-14-2019, 10:40 AM   #123
Mightyboosh
mmm mmm good

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 5,341
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by neeeel this is most definitely a circular argument ( and therefore invalid, in case you didnt know)
It does seem somewhat nonsensical for you to be using the laws of logic to try to defeat the idea that they don't always apply... it's... illogical....

Quote:
 Originally Posted by neeeel What does it mean for the universe to be logical, and how do you know?
How about you give an example of something that logic would determine illogical, but is true? For example, you could offer two contradictory facts that are both true simultaneously, therebye disproving the law of non-contradiction.

Or another example if you prefer.

01-14-2019, 10:41 AM   #124
tame_deuces
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,650
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron W. But the universe isn't logical. There are things that don't make sense all the time.
Indeed. Little indicates that the universe follows strict logic or is very intuitive.

When we go to certain levels of interactions in physics, even causation seems to fall apart. Not in the sense that there doesn't seem be relationships between events, but in the sense that we can't necessarily tell what is the cause and what is the effect. And determining that is an integral component of logic.

01-14-2019, 09:59 PM   #125
Original Position
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 7,612
Re: On the illusion of Free Will and God's Perfection

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Mightyboosh Seems that you're using the logic of the ontological argument here. As I said already, I'm not actually convinced by the ontological argument, but more pertinently to my point, in the universe that I think must be the necessary result of the properties awarded to god, there are no moral choices either. Morality may exist in that there are things that are right and that are wrong, but we have no choice about what we do. And yes, the implications of that are not lost on me.
I don't see anything of the ontological argument in my response. Please explain.

Your OP was about how to resolve an apparent conflict between free will and a God that is perfect and maximally powerful and knowledgeable. You think there is a conflict because you think a perfect god must create a world without moral choices. Why? There are moral theories that view free will as the basis of morality, so why doesn't it instead follow from this view of god that a perfect god must create a universe that has free-willed beings in it in order for it to have any moral value (surely a requirement of a perfect universe) and so anything that follows from this claim must also be true (including that some things happen that are not what this perfect god intended)? Or that this god doesn't know everything that happens in the future?

Quote:
 God can't not know how everything will be, he knows everything in the moment of creation because he created it. Plus I'm not even sure if Determinism applies here in the sense of everything we do being determined by "previously existing causes" because it's only us that experiences things in such a linear fashion. God doesn't experience time.
You are assuming this when you need to argue for it. Perfect foreknowledge of the future might not be an implication of an omnimax god if (a) an omnimax god would prefer to create a universe with free-willed beings and (b) a universe with free-willed beings cannot be perfectly foreknown.

The dogma that god doesn't experience time is not a requirement of Christian theology nor universally accepted by Christians.

Quote:
 I did address the idea of foreknowledge though, I pointed out that it's "not even an issue or a conflict to be resolved because how could he not know what he decided would be".
This isn't "addressing" it, it is you just asserting your thesis in the face of objections to this specific point. I and others have told you exactly how an omnimax god might not know what he will decide to do - if the future is not yet set because it is at least partially the result of freely chosen decisions that have yet to be made. God can't know what is impossible to know, even an omnimax god.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Links to Popular Forums     News, Views, and Gossip     Beginners Questions     Marketplace & Staking     Casino & Cardroom Poker     Internet Poker     NL Strategy Forums     Poker Goals & Challenges     Las Vegas Lifestyle     Sporting Events     Other Other Topics Two Plus Two     About the Forums     Two Plus Two Magazine Forum     The Best of Two Plus Two Marketplace & Staking     Commercial Marketplace     General Marketplace     Staking - Offering Stakes     Staking         Staking - Offering Stakes         Staking - Seeking Stakes         Staking - Selling Shares - Online         Staking - Selling Shares - Live         Staking Rails         Transaction Feedback & Disputes     Transaction Feedback & Disputes Coaching & Training     Coaching Advice     Cash Game Poker Coach Listings     Tournament/SNG Poker Coach Listings Poker News & Discussion     News, Views, and Gossip     Poker Goals & Challenges     Poker Beats, Brags, and Variance     That's What She Said!     Poker Legislation & PPA Discussion hosted by Rich Muny     Twitch - Watch and Discuss Live Online Poker     Televised Poker General Poker Strategy     Beginners Questions     Books and Publications     Poker Tells/Behavior, hosted by: Zachary Elwood     Poker Theory     Psychology No Limit Hold'em Strategy     Medium-High Stakes PL/NL     Micro-Small Stakes PL/NL     Medium-High Stakes Full Ring     Micro-Small Stakes Full Ring     Heads Up NL     Live Low-stakes NL Limit Texas Hold'em Strategy     Mid-High Stakes Limit     Micro-Small Stakes Limit Tournament Poker Strategy     STT Strategy     Heads Up SNG and Spin and Gos     Mid-High Stakes MTT     Small Stakes MTT     MTT Community     Tournament Events Other Poker Strategy     High Stakes PL Omaha     Small Stakes PL Omaha     Omaha/8     Stud     Draw and Other Poker Live Poker     Casino & Cardroom Poker         Venues & Communities         Regional Communities     Venues & Communities     Tournament Events         WPT.com     Home Poker     Cash Strategy     Tournament Strategy Internet Poker     Internet Poker         Global Poker         MPN – Microgaming Poker Network         BetOnline.ag Online Poker     Commercial Software     Software         Commercial Software         Free Software General Gambling     Backgammon Forum hosted by Bill Robertie.     Probability     Sports Betting     Other Gambling Games 2+2 Communities     Other Other Topics         OOTV         Game of Thrones     The Lounge: Discussion+Review     EDF     Las Vegas Lifestyle     BBV4Life         omg omg omg     House of Blogs Sports and Games     Sporting Events         Single-Team Season Threads         Fantasy Sports     Fantasy Sports         Sporting Events     Wrestling     Golf     Chess and Other Board Games     Video Games         League of Legends         Hearthstone     Puzzles and Other Games Other Topics     Politics and Society     Playground: Well Named Loves Social Science     History     Business, Finance, and Investing     Science, Math, and Philosophy     Religion, God, and Theology     Travel     Health and Fitness     Laughs or Links!     Computer Technical Help     Programming

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 AM.

 Contact Us - Two Plus Two Publishing LLC - Privacy Statement - Top