text:
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
A Simple Paradox Concerning God's Goodness
48 comments:
- Chris said...
A very good post!
Even in your simplified way of putting it, the answer is not so simple.
I think we can all think of at least one situation - in our own lives - that we think: if there was a God, why did this happen?
This question then supposes that, whatever happened, should not have.
From OUR perspective.
Let's take something that many can relate to (some more than others).
Death of a loved one. Even worse, in a car crash.
Why? We ask. Why didn't God stop it?
Of course in that moment, we aren't truly thinking clearly - we are grieving, we are in shock. A big part of our life has been ripped away. It's unimagineable...and no matter what, each tradgety is a tradgety unto it's own...no two are truly alike.
But, those feelings, if we are honest to ourselves, are selfish feelings.
Before anyone's fur gets up, just think about it for a second.
WE miss them. WE want them alive. WE are feeling the pain of their loss. WE want them in OUR lives still.
They aren't doing any of that. They are dead.
In our society funerals are a very selfish act - just look at them, how they are conducted...
So WE feel ripped off, by God. If not God, then by chance.
But why should God have saved them?
so WE don't feel bad? So WE don't miss them? So WE can be happy?
If you believe in an afterlife...If they are in the afterlife...shouldn't we be happy for them? Heck, WE even think they would they even want to come back?
If you believe there is no afterlife, then they are in no pain, and have no worries anymore are for sure they aren't missing us...
WE are "left" with the baggage so to speak.
But that's because of how we view the situation. Again, it becomes about US - not the loved one.
So in order to even try to understand how God could be "good" when sometimes what we see doen't jive, we need to rectify our thinking. Change our perspective and admit some things about ourselves that keep us from that.
Now of course, I haven't really answered the whole post, because that would be long - but I will, if needed try to address specific areas if needed.
My main, and waaaay tooo looooong, point was that in order to truly understand something, we need to understand OUR perpective and biases of situations. - February 9, 2011 at 10:05 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
Thanks Chris. Imagine a serial killer who is on trial and defends his grizzly murders of his victims by saying, "Your wailing and disappointment and outrage at my killing them is fundamentally a selfish act. If there is an afterlife, then they are all perfectly happy. Your being upset is just a matter of your limited perspective on the situation and its just a product of your biases."
Would we accept the sort of justification for God's immoral neglect that you have given in any other situation? No. Are you applying a double standard where God is permitted to do or allow things to happen that we would ordinarily call immoral without any of the fault or blame? Yes. - February 9, 2011 at 10:38 AM
- Chris said...
A double standard implies at least two identical situations and allowing for one outcome while condemning another.
Where is the exact same situation as the serial killer for God that you would like to use?
Nor was I arguing that anyone - even God would use such an excuse. My point was simply about our point of view of situations. They are biased and jaded and effected by emotion at that moment. That even allowing for ANY excuse is almost an impossibility.
To make a well informed critical judgement as to what is absolutely right and wrong would require us to have complete and absolute knowledge.
Knowledge we do not posses.
Is slapping my wife's face ALWAYS wrong? - February 9, 2011 at 11:05 AM
- Chris said...
I'm going to take a step back here and ask.
What's right/wrong?
Who gets to define it? - February 9, 2011 at 3:02 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Well, I don't think I detect some real interest in engaging the problem constructively here, Chris. But I'll take one more stab at it. You're avoiding the question now, and trying to change the subject. The question is, how can we reconcile our standards of morality that lead us to identify some acts as good, some bad, and some supererogatory with our claims that God is good, where God doesn't do any of the things that we would ordinarily call good?
Your "who's to say?" suggestion won't cut it. Imagine our serial killer friend in the court room saying, "You can't judge me. What's right/wrong? Good/evil? Who gets to define it?" Obviously we can and do determine what is good and what is evil. You don't have any problem at all discerning them. And if you make this mistake about God, then you are applying a double standard. - February 9, 2011 at 4:52 PM
Mr. McMormick,
I believe - at least according to some divine command theorists like Alston and Craig - that if we construe rightness and wrongness as, say, some act is morally wrong if it is forbidden by God or morally right if it is commanded by God then it follows that God has no moral obligations.
It was always my understanding that God's goodness isn't to be cashed in terms of deontic properities but instead axiological properties like just, merciful, etc.
I'm just an amateur so I'm not exactly sure if I am making myself entirely clear.
Cheers. - February 9, 2011 at 7:32 PM
Your argument here is almost exactly why I stopped being religious and started exploring atheism. I listened to a sermon about Martin Luther King, and how god in his amazing goodness sent MLK to ensure that the American people could all be one. Aside from the fact that 1) MLK ended up getting killed, so a pretty raw deal for him personally to have been sent, and 2) we're not all exactly living in peace and harmony, although to be fair things are at least a bit better than before MLK, there were a couple of things that *really* got to me:
1) So many of the people trying to keep the status quo were very religious, so how come they were missing something good which god was apparently willing to put so much effort into? And don't give me the freedom of thought excuse - if it was that important I'm sure something could have been done to turn them around, and let's face it there are still plenty religious racists around
but more relevant to your argument here:
2) What about all the African and African American people - slaves - who came before MLK? For hundreds of years poor people were kidnapped, removed from their families, stowed in ships (where so many died) and set up as slaves. Children never saw their parents again. Etc. But because eventually a supposedly good deity saw fit to do a half-assed job of trying to turn things around we're supposed to be all grateful?
I remember the moment as if it was yesterday, although it was on MLK day six years ago - it was a revelation similar to how people describe being born again in the way my eyes were opened.
It took me a while to get over the idea of there actually being a deity but from that moment I'd have points where I would be almost shaking when a priest would talk about how good god is supposed to be. - February 9, 2011 at 7:44 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
That's an interesting suggestion of an answer, anonymous. But it still seems like to me that the problem remains. If God doesn't have any duties, no rights, and nothing counts as supererogatory for him, then what remains of the claim that he is good? That means that by none of the measures we have for determining what acts are good, God qualifies. What does it mean then to say that he is good? If God was evil, or indifferent, would the world look any different? If the answer is yes, then we're back in the dilemma. Why does he fail on all the criteria of being good?
- February 9, 2011 at 7:54 PM
- Chris said...
while I will still hold my questions apply, I will provide a different reply.
If you have a feeling or belief that the world isn't supposed to be the way it is, you're right.
We don't even get to turn the page in Genesis when we are shown this -the fall.
Regardless how you percieve the story, it's plain to see that we still participate in the fall everyday.
We have a responsibility to each other - Jesus clearly preached that. Yet, every day we still fail.
When a child dies from starvation - who's fault is it?
A woman raped?
Certainly we can look to the sky and demand that God step in - after all, he has the power right? But that's the easy way out, that's shunning our responsibility.
God why didn't you stop the rape?
We ask, hoping that it relieves us any duty that we might have.
If we don't believe that, then we have no ground to complain about how the world is. It's just doing what it's doing and we are just along for the ride.
But, God expects more from us. Of course we don't like that. We don't want the responsibilities, just the rewards.
We cause a problem, we want God to fix it. We let a problem slide, we want God to make it all better so we don't have to feel the guilt of our inaction.
We just want to play all day, but not put forth any real effort - after all, God's all powerful right?
And that should have been the case, but WE screwed it up.
God gave us free will. And we are free to chose what we do...or don't do.
We claim we want it, but then condemn him for it when things go wrong...though it's our fault.
That's why we hold up heros the way we do - because it's not the norm...though clearly it's supposed to be.
More often than not, we turn a blind eye to the horrors that go on - we turn on the tv and check out...and figure if God really wants it to stop, he'll do something.
Of course, that's a cop out. A cheap way out. A weak way out.
We also tend to forget that there is evil...at least as my faith goes, there's a devil, Satan, who roams the earth. The book of Job shows us this too.
The evil that we see, that we experience, no doubt, he is a part of that - of course with our help.
No, he's not to blame in the way people say, "the devil made me do it."
that's even a worse cop out - completely throwing any/all responsibility out.
But the devil is a part. take away the "d." You got evil.
We know what good and evil is, because God instilled it in our hearts. But we are limited in our understanding of it as well - which is clear every day.
Even if you aren't Christian, you would have to admit that we live in a broken and fallen society. That the world not just CAN BE, but SHOULD BE a better place than it is...
Your post shows that.
But to point the finger at God and wonder why he doesn't fix it...
Can God fix it? You bet.
Should he?
should he, or should we?
The Bible teaches that WE are responsible for each other - the choice is whether or not we want to, whether or not we truly beleive that we are our brother's keeper or not...
Christianity calls for the former. and to me, THAT'S what makes it stand out among the other religions.
The call not to take the "easy" way out and fall back to a God to fix the problems WE have created.
But to stand up and start to take responsibility and challenge others to do the same. - February 10, 2011 at 7:06 AM
- Unknown said...
Good Post.
And many people who would claim that there was some good reason that god does not intervene are the same people who pray to god to change completely unimportant things in their lives..."please god..make our team win"! - February 10, 2011 at 9:04 AM
- Chris said...
Yep! People do that. People do a lot of silly things like that. Heck I do, and have...
- February 10, 2011 at 10:09 AM
- Matt said...
Notwithstanding all the major contradictions and previous arguments against the existence of god...
... -You can posit the existence of a god who is able but unwilling to prevent evil, but then I ask -is this being worthy of worship? - February 10, 2011 at 4:32 PM
If i stand on the dock and watch a little girl drown, could i justify my action by claiming the response reflex what my GOD would do in the same situation. And i aspire to be more like him. Making me more Godly? Because who knows what is good or evil from our point of view. Better to follow Gods lead on everything when it comes to making moral decisions, Right?
- February 10, 2011 at 4:35 PM
- pboyfloyd said...
Hope I'm not double posting this.
Man! Next you're going to tell me that my lucky rabbit's foot doesn't work either! - February 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM
- Unknown said...
simple question Matt seeing you know the difference between good and evil , are you good or evil?
- February 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
The standard response when I point out that many people are applying a double standard whereby God can do nothing wrong seems to be to change the subject and demand to know how it is that I know what is right or wrong, or to point out how bad humans are. These are all evasions, folks. You're avoiding a legitimate question. Why is it when a human does X, Y and Z it's obviously to all of us that they are evil, negligent, or immoral acts, but when God does the same acts he's praised for them? Answer: people are applying a bogus double standard and they are refusing to acknowledge that their characterizing God as good is unintelligible. Stick to the question.
MM - February 11, 2011 at 12:28 AM
- Chris said...
Matt - "You can posit the existence of a god who is able but unwilling to prevent evil, but then I ask -is this being worthy of worship?"
That's a different question - which we can discuss, but I would ask you this: in that context: what if WE are that action to prevent evil?
Anon - "If i stand on the dock and watch a little girl drown, could i justify my action by claiming the response reflex what my GOD would do in the same situation. And i aspire to be more like him. Making me more Godly? Because who knows what is good or evil from our point of view. Better to follow Gods lead on everything when it comes to making moral decisions, Right?"
Well, yes you COULD say that - you can say anything you'd like. I would say, Anon, we do it everyday. Everyday you and I ignore all the metaphorical little girls drowning.
You are wrong however, because OUR actions are not left up to debate. God did give us a commandment to action.
God's actions (or seemingly lack there of) is where faith comes in, to say it's even tested. If we, on faith, take God to be a loving God as expressed through Jesus Christ, then we take God's actions or inaction to be His will, and to put it simply: for the best.
I know, that's a little hard to wrap your head around probably - but that's where studying the Bible and theology comes into play. I'm guessing most atheist don't study the Bible, thus many theological issues don't make sense or seem "wrong."
But such beliefs are ill informed.
Most (Christians) I come across, when faced with an issue with God they don't understand - or like - dig deeper, look for answers, pray, meditate upon them. I do!
I don't just throw out EVERYTHING because I don't understand SOMETHING.
That would be foolish in any other area of study, correct?
Why wouldn't I apply this same "rule" to my faith?
I think there's a misconception that we Christians blindly walk in our faith and don't bother with "contradictions" or issues we don't understand.
while that may be for some, many - if not most - are like me...we dive in deeper and look...which the Bible suggests we do!
A question for you Anon: change the little girl to someone else, say...a child molester.
Say you are on a dock and see a well-known, admitted child molester drowing...what do you do? - February 11, 2011 at 7:56 AM
- Chris said...
Matt -
WE are given one commandment that, when truly looked at, is a cover-all for everything and thus how we should look at, and live in, the world.
"Love your neighbor, as yourself."
There is no ambiguity there. In any, all, EVERY situation we are to apply that rule, that ONE commandment to each other in our daily lives.
We don't, though. All of us, no matter how hard we try, fail miserably at this. You, me, Anon, you name them, them too.
All except one: Jesus.
So now, as to this double standard, in my previous reply to this I hope I addressed it, but I will expand.
In situations we don't know ALL the particulars. we don't know what the other people are thinking, what's in their hearts, what is down the road for them. When God acts - or more to the point: "fails" to act...well, that's when faith is most important.
Of course, I understand that being a bit abstract, but I'll try to make my point clearer...
We, all of us, like to blame God and say "Why?" Why did you let this happen?
So please, truly read and digest the following illustration:
It's a nice lovely day, warm and sunny. Your daughter wants to go swimming down at the lake. You let her go, why not?
All is well with life...yes, LIFE IS GOOD!
So, your daughter goes swimming, alone...
...she can swim...in fact she's a GREAT swimmer...yet...
...she drowns.
Terrible. A tradgety NO ONE should EVER have to face. Yet it happens.
At the funeral, would you think it right for us to point the finger at YOU and ask:
Why did YOU let this happen, MATT?
YOU had "authority" over her, you KNEW she might drown! Why did YOU let her go, MATT?
Why weren't YOU there watching her? Why weren't YOU there to save her, MATT?
Why did YOU let her swim all alone?
What kind of parent ARE YOU, MATT?! KNOWINGLY let YOUR daughter go into a deadly situation like that?
No LOVING parent would EVER do that, MATT! You obvioulsy DID NOT LOVE her and ARE NOT a good PARENT!
Would we expect someone to do that to you Matt?
God no.
Now, I know someone will gloss over that and point out ALL the stuff that God did in the OT and point to it and say: what about all THAT? You can't ignore THAT!
Nope, and I don't.
However, those who point such fingers, DO.
By not bothering to look into them. Not investigating to any possibility WHY?
Rather, they just write it off as "BAD" or "EVIL" and leave ANY responsiblity we might have to discover answers by the way side. - February 11, 2011 at 8:31 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
Chris, how about more arguments for these claims and less sermonizing? Assuming the truth of Christian doctrine and the Bible is begging the question and doesn't convince anyone who doesn't already believe.
- February 11, 2011 at 11:49 AM
- Chris said...
If you would rather not have theological answers, don't ask theological questions. Your making claims about something you don't believe in to begin with...so what does the answer matter to you, because no answer will be satisfactory for you.
Like I stated, should someone truly want answers they would look for them.
The issue you pose - is non existent to you - a moot point. What do you hope to get from it?
I can answer as one who believes, and have.
What else would you like?
But your position, to continue to discuss outside of theology (God) well, why post it in the first place? - February 11, 2011 at 12:33 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
Chris, you're confused about what theology is. Obviously, theological answers are not confined to the narrow breed of Christian doctrine that you are assuming (not arguing for) and preaching from. Think of the challenge this way: there are people on the outside--Buddhists, Muslims, other varieties of believers, skeptics, and non-believers who are confused about something that appears to be deeply contradictory within the Christian doctrine and practice. God is alleged to be good, but none of the standards whereby we (including those Christians) typically identify someone as good seem to apply. There are lots of obviously good and evil acts. But apparently God, by this particular view, does not have to do any of the former or avoid/alleviate any of the latter in order to be good. That doesn't add up.
You've responded by changing the subject and pointing out all of the good things we could do better and all of the evil things we should avoid/not commit. If God if virtuous, and the virtuous thing to do by his example is to ignore suffering, inflict great pain, and make no effort to rectify injustice, then, I submit, your account of virtue/goodness/moral perfection is bankrupt. It doesn't mean anything. With all the rationalizing about God's goodness, it would appear that no matter what happens, it is all consistent with or allegedly proves God's goodness. What that actually means is that the claim is incoherent.
You can make a personal attack now, or evade the question, but I'm just trying to make sense of the allegation that God is good. That's all.
MM - February 11, 2011 at 1:49 PM
- Matt said...
Chris, there's a number of problems with the idea's you've posted. I will try to address them in order, starting with the question you posed to me:
If "we" are that (or, more generally, the) action to prevent all evil, then in what sense is god "good?" In fact, what does it mean to call god "good" if he never performs good? I'm not implying he's bad, but if you take away the responsibility of the creator for the well-being of his creations, then you can hardly label him "good." Perhaps omni-indifferent would be a better label.
I don't think anyone has the idea that Christians blindly follow doctrine and don't question everything, however we do find that many people have a difficult time telling the difference between "false" answers and actual answers. It's a fundamental principle of theology that if it sounds deep enough, most people will just accept it and move on. Which says nothing to the truth of the statement. Case in point:
"No being at all is God" - common atheist type statement.
"God is no being at all" - Popular modern theological concept.
Here's the problem, they're logically equivalent. They mean the same thing. There is no "super deep" meaning contained in the second statement.
Your questioning of the Author in the case of a drowning girl is fallacious. He is not omnipotent, or omniscient. God, according to the accounts of omniscience, is all-knowing. So he KNOWS what will happen and willing does nothing to stop it. That is completely different from a temporally-limited being, like Matt, making a decision of which he cannot possibly know the outcome.
The question is not theological. The question is trying to determine if the claimed properties OF god are consistent with observation. It is a philosophical question, nothing more. - February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM
- Chris said...
Now why would you think I would do either? I haven't before.
- February 11, 2011 at 2:06 PM
- Chris said...
See again, you bring in Christianity. From what position should I discuss this issue? You haven't brought up anything but generalities- I answered as such.
You don't want answers though Matt. I understand that, that's fine. But I didn't change the argument- I just expanded it to include US. - February 11, 2011 at 2:23 PM
Hello again Mr. McCormick, this is the anonymous from the 5th comment.
It seems like you are willing to grant for the sake of argument the claim that if the divine command theory (as construed by some theists) is true then God has no moral obligations. The reasoning for this would because it seems wholly implausible to suppose that God commands himself to love humans, for instance.
You then ask if God has no moral obligations or can perform no superogatory actions then how are we to make sense of claim that God is good? I would agree with you that it's a genuine paradox if the only way to construe the goodness of God consists of God having to carry out certain obligations and duties. Those are the deontic properties I spoke of earlier.
But - if we are talking about a Judeo-Christian conception of God - that there's good reason to think this isn't the way to understand God's goodness. His goodness is supposed to (or usually) be construed as God possessing certain traits/characteristics/properties. If a theist were to say God is good they mean to say he possesses traits like graciousness, mercifulness, loving, lover of truth, forbearance, just, etc. That way goodness is meant in terms of value, i.e. axiologically.
In summary:
1) Your argument seems to me to based on an assumption that goodness is to be understood in terms of moral obligation and duties.
2) This assumption is countered by the strong precedence among certain theistic traditions to treat God's goodness as meaning him possessing certain characteristics. I think one can see this when we hear theists say things like "God *is* love itself" for instance.
I think it also feel obliged (heh) mention that some Thomistic philosophers/theologians, coming from a much different theory of God's relation to morality than divine command theorists, have also come to the conclusion that God has no moral obligations.
Cheers. - February 11, 2011 at 11:10 PM
- Gareth McCaughan said...
So, Chris, first you ask all innocently why anyone would think you'd post a personal attack ... and then you post a personal attack. Nice. (Matt asks a question and you say "You don't want answers though Matt". You just called him a liar.)
Your answer to Matt's question, in so far as you've given one, seems to go something like this: The reason why God permits all the bad things in the world is because fixing them is our job, not his. If God did anything about them, that would be a cop-out, a cheap way out.
So. Suppose you run a company that makes medical equipment. Your company's devices need to be carefully tested and calibrated, because otherwise lots of patients will die horribly. But the people who are meant to do the testing and calibration are lazy and incompetent and your company is selling large quantities of dangerously defective equipment. You know all this. It happens that you have a super-easy way of fixing the equipment, not available to the people who are meant to do the job: in fact, all you need to do is to press a button on a machine in your office, and all the equipment will be fixed and all those patients will be OK instead of dying horribly.
Do you (a) press the button or (b) say "nope, it's the employees' job, and fixing the problem for them would be a cop-out"?
Note: choosing option (a) doesn't mean that you can't give them a stern warning and a boatload of training. Though, by analogy with God-according-to-Christianity, perhaps you'd just say: no need for that, their great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents got very good hands-on training, and that should be all they need. - February 12, 2011 at 3:07 AM
- Chris said...
Okay, let's try this:
You say there "seems" to be a double standard. What's one area where God acted completely contrary to what he requires of us?
And why is it?
What should he gave done instead? - February 12, 2011 at 6:47 AM
- Matt McCormick said...
Thanks, Anon. for taking the question seriously and trying to give a constructive and straight answer. I'm not willing to grant that if divine command theory is true, then God has no moral obligations. I don't know what it means to say that God's goodness is axiological and not to be understood as manifesting in any way as actions, duties, or obligations. There may be people who insist that God is good or love or whatever, but it is not reasonable to expect that to show in the world. That strikes me as rationalizing. If this is the way we are to understand God's goodness, then what exactly is the difference between God's having goodness and not? Suppose the serial killer insists that he is, in fact, infinitely good, and since his goodness is so far beyond ours, then none of the standard indicators in terms of obligations and actions apply. You wouldn't accept that for a second. So why is it acceptable when someone says it about God? What is the difference between God's loving us and hating us or being utterly indifferent to us "axiologically"? I can't see any, unless that can be measured in the ways he interacts with us.
There's a fallacy lurking here. It's probably closest to confirmation bias. Many believers are prone to credit selective good events and fortuitous happenings to God. "God loves us," "We are blessed," when we consider a new born baby, a good meal, friendships at church, winning the lottery, or whatever. But with the unfortunate events in our lives, the suffering, the pain, and the evil we see around us the blame, responsibility, guilt, and punishment gets heaped onto our own shoulders. So believers simply refuse to use apply the parallel standard they did with the blessings and connect those unfortunate events with God, much the way Chris has been doing.
So I ask again, it is widely alleged that God is good. What exactly does that mean? And what would be the actual difference in the world if God was morally ambivalent, negligent, or evil? If there would be no difference because God's goodness is beyond our comprehension or it is axiological, then I submit, again, that the claim that God is good is just empty gibberish. - February 12, 2011 at 1:29 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
What this guy is calling the Jug of Milk Fallacy concerning prayer is in the neighborhood of the mistake that I think I am detecting concerning God's goodness:
Jug of Milk Fallacy - February 12, 2011 at 1:31 PM
- Chris said...
What I meant to say wad Matt is not looking for answers as a seeker would. Sorry about the confusion. I don't attack ppl.
Your premise, however, is not a very good one. - February 12, 2011 at 4:13 PM
- Gareth McCaughan said...
Chris, whom are you addressing when you say "Your premise ... is not a very good one", and what do you mean?
- February 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM
- David Pinsof said...
Your argument that it is our responsibility to fix evil completely fails when pitted against natural disasters. Nobody could have stopped Hurricane Katrina or the earthquake in Haiti or the tsunamis of 2004 except for God. Stopping these tragedies would not have violated anyone's free will, nor would it have been a "cop out." If god failed to stop these tragedies (or caused them himself) then he is far far far from anything we would want to worship, much less call "good." And that's leaving aside diseases, genetic disorders, and miscarriages. - February 12, 2011 at 6:37 PM
(pig:) "...some of the guys were thinking, 'Hey, what if he just made us not taste so good?'"
http://www.29-95.com/time-suck/comic/sauce-policy-50 - February 12, 2011 at 9:38 PM
I was wondering when someone was going to get to the natural disasters issue. Not before time! There is also the problem of other things caused by weather such as famine, genetic disease that causes excruciating pain until the baby dies of horrible death. These are the things that no person has the power to prevent, unless they have supernatural powers. People who care can only try to alleviate the pain that these things cause. What do we make of the many atheists who perform such tasks? Should the religious person acknowledge that they are more moral than the version of god that they believe exits but who is not manifesting in any responsible way at such times?
Let's go back to the hypothetical drowning girl.
On the pier there is a small child who cannot swim and whose brain is not get mature enough to know what a life raft and probably could not throw one to the woman anyway. The small child is no help to the drowning woman. We do not hold that child accountable for failing to help the woman.
On the pier is a man in a wheel chair. The life raft is out of his reach so he cannot throw it to the woman. He could wheel himself to the edge of the pier, throw himself out of the chair, try to swim to the girl and hold her head above water. Unless someone else gets him out of the water he is likely to drown along with the woman. We do not hold him accountable for failing to save the woman either.
On the pier is a man with extremely well developed muscles who is an excellent swimmer. It would be no problem for him to throw the life raft out to the woman and quite within his ability to swim out, bring the drowning woman to shore and administer first aid and CPR if necessary. If he does nothing on the grounds that the other two people on the pier are responsible then we can only exonerate him from deliberately failing to save the woman when he can if re are satisfied that he is incredibly stupid or brain injured in such a way that he cannot reason properly. We would not exempt him from blame if his lawyer argued that his failure to act in way that we would expect others to act stems from a moral judgment that was beyond the normal person's ability to understand because they do not come close to this man's superior intellect and wisdom. He would be laughed out of court and probably fined for contempt. This, however, is the argument that Christian's routinely expect non-believers to swallow without choking on their wheaties in the process. - February 13, 2011 at 6:18 PM
Sorry. I accidently clicked the wrong button before finishing the editing. I trust readers can guess what I meant to type in several places.
- February 13, 2011 at 6:22 PM
A person could not know the difference between God and the Devil unless he or she already possessed intuitions about right and wrong before learning the claims made for God and the Devil. Therefore, morality cannot come from any god or gods that may or may not exist.
I find it both amusing and theologically inconsistent when believers assume that God shares their values. A Xian friend of mine was sick and praised God for antibiotics. When I pointed out that his praise should be directed instead at Alexander Fleming, the inventor of penicillin, he insisted that God should still get the credit for inspiring Fleming. Yet, I pointed out to him, that position directly contradicts the Xian solution to the Problem of Evil. If God chooses to allow evil and suffering, then there is no reason to assume that he would have inspired the discovery of antibiotics. In fact, it seems more likely, based on God's vicious disregard for humanity be-told in scripture, that Fleming would have been doing the Devil's work. The conversation stopped at that point. - February 13, 2011 at 6:49 PM
Chris wrote:
"We know what good and evil is, because God instilled it in our hearts. But we are limited in our understanding of it as well - which is clear every day."
There are few universal moral values; they change from century to century, decade to decade, nation to nation, village to village, community to community, and are greatly influenced by a person's level of education, parented style, brain integrity and personality. This transcends any difference between the moral codes attributed to the various competing religions of the era If there is a "god-given" moral code is has proved impossible for humans to agree on what it is. Two people from the same church, synagogue, temple or mosque may have contradictory ideas about what their version of god thinks is the moral thing to do. If a god exists then it is clear that he/she/it suffers from a serious communication deficit. - February 13, 2011 at 9:43 PM
Chris wrote: "I'm guessing most atheist don't study the Bible, thus many theological issues don't make sense or seem "wrong.""
You guess wrong.
A recent research project discovered that atheists are far more knowledgeable about religion than those who are religious, especially about multiple religions.
There is a quite a large community of atheists who were once extremely devout but reluctantly lost their faith through intensive critical analysis of their religion. Penn Jillette (of Penn & Teller fame) has said that the best way to cause a Christian to become an atheist is to have them read the whole of the Christian Bible, whole books at a time, instead of cherry picked snippets read together with carefully crafted apologetic notes.
I studied to be a Methodist Minister, but lost my faith on the way. In the course of my candidacy I spoke to a number of practicing clergy who tried to warn me about "getting trapped". It was many years later before I realized that they were trying to tell me that they no longer believed in the religion they were forced to continuing peddling for the sake of their financial health, their childrens' schooling and their spouse's mental and physical well-being. Someone has recently written a book about the plights of several such people. Their anonymity has been maintained, of course. One of them could be your pastor. - February 13, 2011 at 9:45 PM
Chris wrote:
"We don't even get to turn the page in Genesis when we are shown this -the fall. Regardless how you percieve (sic) the story, it's plain to see that we still participate in the fall everyday."
According to whoever wrote the book of Genesis, Eve was warned by the Yahweh god not to eat the fruit from one of the trees in the garden of Eden because it would cause instant death. A talking snake persuaded her to eat the fruit by telling her that this was not true. She discovered that the snake was telling the truth and the Yahweh god had lied: she ate the fruit and did not drop dead on the spot.
The Yahweh god was not around to take care of his naive creations during these proceedings. That was hardly responsible behavior if the fruit was, in fact, dangerous and his charges did not yet have the knowledge to figure this out for themselves. In other words, the Yahweh god set Adam and Eve up to fail. A fair human court would charge the caretaker with willful neglect and entrapment and would probably remove his charges from him. Unfortunately there were no suitable Foster Gods around at that time.
Eve and Adam ate the fruit from the forbidden tree before they understood the difference between right and wrong. They did not know that is was a "sin" to disobey a command not to eat the fruit from the tree. That makes them "not guilty" in any earthly court of law that is concerned about fairness.
According to Genesis, the Yahweh god was angry because Adam and Eve were now like him: they knew the difference between "good" and "evil".
If doing something that provided the ability to tell the difference between right and wrong is a sin, it is a very strange one. Human societies have long recognized that being able to figure out what it is that societies think is "good" and "evil" is essential for the development of any moral code.
If that is The Fall, then it makes no sense in normal logic. It certainly does not justify the imposition of eternal punishment for the perpetrators, let alone the innocent generations to come. Of course, civilized human courts consider it to be barbaric cruelty to punish someone for the sins of someone else.
Animals Rights people would condone the sacrifice of goats and lambs by slitting their throats and letting them bleed to death before burning them. According to the Bible, the Yahweh god loved the small of burning flesh but it is not explained how it is that a non-material Being can smell anything or why torturing an animal made the god want to forgive humans for exhibiting the flaws he created in them.
The Bible says that the Yahweh god allowed his half-god son to be killed as a permanent substitute for the stream of goats and lambs that had previously been required to please his nostrils. At the point of death, the Yahweh god abandoned the human part of this hybrid. It is not clear whether or not the human half got sent to Hell for three earth days along with the god part or whether it got resurrected at all. In any case, at least the god part went back to the Father who had sent him off to be tortured, just like a normal loving god would. /sarcasm
The resulting divine message appears to be "Do as I say, not as I do – if you can figure out which contradictory commands are meant to apply to your particular circumstances."
How many modern day Christians living in the Western world have their children stoned for defying their parents, refrain from eating shellfish an don't wear clothing made from a blend of different fibers? - February 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Scroll up and read both of the posts from Anonymous. Those are on point.
Anonymous is referring to "virtue ethics" as way of evaluating the goodness of a god. In contrast to human ethics which concerns itself with actions, intentions, consequences, and rules.
In my view, human ethicists can claim X is good, whereas theists seem only to be able to claim that their god Y is "good" within their chosen metaphysical (theological) context for evaluating the behaviour of gods.
Perhaps there's no paradox if we can agree that "morals" and "goodness" as they apply to humans, aren't applicable beings without physical brains. - February 16, 2011 at 2:29 AM
*applicable to
- February 16, 2011 at 3:01 AM
Natural disaster as a reason for God's evil?
Really, is the world suppose to be made of marshmallows....
I am sure the Katrina folks or Sactown folks moved near bad levees...
And um how can atheist folk claim it is legitimate to make demands on a God....
Since when do subjects of a God get to make demands...
They dont and if we understand the free will a God would give his subjects then we must also consider the relationship in such a situation - one in which garners growth for the subject giving life to things good and bad...
Atheist just dont get it. Their reason is really bad and requires looking at the world through a toiet paper roll...
Good post Chris - February 16, 2011 at 1:38 PM
- Chia said...
Hi Matt, thanks for the post and the replies; guys, good comments. Here are some points worth considering.
MM : (I assume you are referring to Christianity's triune God since you mentioned Jesus, and Him in the singular.)
1. Regarding your queries on applying double standards on God and Man, I do not discount the disparity, but would like to expand the scope for your argument -
"In our ordinary, daily affairs, we invoke a set of straight forward and clear criteria for what sorts of things are wrong, which things are heroic, and which things are morally good [...] (reply to anonymous) why does he fail all the criteria of being good?"
Logically and by definition, God and therefore his actions, being on a supernatural level, are beyond human classification. Perhaps, then, our double standards, being "man's definition of double standards", are irrelevant, just as "man's version of morally good" cannot be applied to God. Hence, if human morality is not God's morality, then God's actions cannot be analysed within the given context of "double standards", thus, inevitably, he fails man's standards - all of them. We, being human, simply will never know what God's standards are.
But you have said :
"What's right/wrong? Good/evil? Who gets to define it? Obviously we can and do determine what is good and what is evil."
Indeed, point 1. is a very simplistic, dismissive and condescending view; I will both explain it and deviate from it to better answer your question.
2. To explain it : God calls for 'faith in Him', which has an element of blind believe in the inexplicable. God places Himself well without the boundaries of man's rationality and philosophy, asking that man shelve his pride and need for intellectual answers, and just - like a child - simply have faith in Him.
Thus we do define good and evil, necessarily so, since society demands some form of order by this. But the realm of faith is outside society's definition. By extension, He wants us to believe that "(His) thoughts are higher than (our) thoughts, and (His) ways higher than (our) ways." (A Bible verse.)
This is not to say that religion, faith or God discourages intellectual debate and exploration - on the contrary, I think we are meant to question, as you are doing now. If we are able, find our answers; if we are unable, acknowledge the limits of humanity, and the dichotomy between God and Man as something never to be bridged while we live.
3. Now to deviate - forgive me for sidetracking to develop the point. In questioning God's 'absolute goodness', especially with regard to His control over life, death and suffering, another aspect of God to be factored in is His ownership of humanity. (Atheists do not believe in Creationism, but for the sake of keeping in line with the entire Biblical view, let us assume God, having created man, is man's undisputed owner.) Therefore, human life being under His authority, our lives are His to use - we are His to bless, His to judge and discipline, just as we judge and discipline (sometimes imperfectly) our children.
So here is one way of seeing it : God, who created us as we create plasticine figurines, instead of merely using us as we use our toys, has given us life, emotion, etc - and it entirely his right to take it away. To link to point 1. : we as creations have no right no impose our standards of morality on our maker, who has the authority to give and take as He pleases. - February 28, 2011 at 7:08 AM
- Chia said...
4. To further expound on point 3., one which you have already touched on :
"Therefore, it would appear that God has committed (or by omission allowed to happen) countless morally wrong events".
To which I would say : yes. God has deliberately allowed Badness, cruelty, rape, death, miscarriage to happen. Discarding momentarily that Christianity is a mindboggling spectrum of dissenting and competing factions, if we look as through the lens of the layman Christian's believe - as we must, since God's absolute goodness is derived within the whole Biblical context - physical torment on Earth is nothing to eternal torment in Hell. Therefore the absolute, most correct, best thing God can do is to make sure as many people as possible are 'saved' by believing in His power and His name. At the same time, He wants us to go to him freely, of our own freewill, not out of a machinised mindset. And it is mostly in times of trauma and severe grief that man, looking for comfort, looks for God and accepts God. The trauma and 'badness' here serves two purposes - firstly, to remind man that life is momentary, unpredictable; and, for all of man's intelligence and capability, completely uncontrollable. Secondly, such chaos causes man to need a greater being - God. In hardship, man is challenged to trust God implicitly, accepting that the world will continue to be flawed and faulted, and yet choose, of his own free will, to believe in God's 'goodness', and that 'badness' has happened for a reason.
To further discuss your question :
"Why is it when a human does X, Y and Z it's obviously to all of us that they are evil, negligent, or immoral acts, but when God does the same acts he's praised for them?"
As an example - in causing the miscarriage of a baby, both parents come to know and accept God. Thus two souls are given to Heaven instead to three lost to hell (parents and child.) I have heard that children below a certain age all go to heaven, but this is inconsequential - the point is that God, by allowing an 'earthly bad' (ie immorality), has done a 'greater good' - therefore He is to be praised for spiritually rescuing parents and child.
Or, to touch on Pinpin's and Rosemary's comments on Haiti and natural disasters in general, the hundreds killed are lost forever, but the thousands left behind get global attention, food, water, medical aid and development, a chance to rebuild (not replace) families, and can potentially hear and believe in the gospel. Without the earthquake/disaster, this would have been impossible; thus God should be praised for allowing the earthquake, bringing greater good, and ultimately spiritual salvation, to a nation wracked with poverty and corruption.
Preposterous as it seems, bear in mind that Jesus Christ and the love of God is almost entirely founded on salvation and eschatology. In light of this, God's apparent immorality might be understood, even justified, by humanity.
Of course - what about 'absolute good'? It's back to point 1. again - there's no 'absolute good' that can contain God.
5. I would anticipate a rebuttal to point 4, namely : scaring/traumatising man to believe in God is counter-logical to the freewill that we are given. However, the parents could have as easily turned their backs on God forever, in which case God might continue letting bad stuff happen to them (like striking both with terminal cancer?) in order that they both, with a shortened and painful temporal life on earth, would nevertheless have a completely joyous eternal life. To allow you eternal purgatory, cancer upon cancer upon cancer in Hell, against Heaven - which is 'good', which is 'bad'? Which brings me back to point 1, yet again. - February 28, 2011 at 7:09 AM
6. You have further asked:
"You can posit the existence of a god who is able but unwilling to prevent evil, but then I ask -is this being worthy of worship?"
Your (personal?) unspoken answer is - no. I think, however, that nobody can answer this question for another person because faith, for all that it has been entrenched in politics, subjected to divided doctrine and hypocrisy, had - and should still have - its roots in something intensely evaluative and personal. If someone has just lost a lover, and later has calmed enough to admire a spectacular sunset, it is not wrong to worship the creator of a beautiful natural, everyday phenomenon. Similarly, it is not wrong that a mother's faith is shaken, even broken, when she loses a child during, say, an earthquake that could have been prevented. Caustically speaking, a spiritually lost mother might be 'exchanged' for the hundreds of new believers moved by the aid of Christian associations - is this the 'goodness' of God? We will never know.
You have reached the heart of the matter - faith and worship is matter of personal choice. If someone appraises the facts, treasures the beauty of the world, grieves over its chaos, does what he can to help others, and still chooses to hope in God who is good, I would respect his decision and admire his resilience to jadedness. On the contrary, someone who wilfully ignores the bad in this world and is blinded by his own good deeds/the wealth and fortunate circumstances around him, and praises God for that, would be less worthy of anyone's respect.
7. You also reply to Anonymous :
"What is the difference between God's loving us and hating us or being utterly indifferent to us "axiologically"? ... And what would be the actual difference in the world if God was morally ambivalent, negligent, or evil?"
May I reinterpret these questions as : "How does God and His conceived aspects relate to the world if He is entirely (as in point 1.) beyond human comprehension?" If my assumption is wrong, do correct me.
What God in his goodness gifts man with is eternal life after death. Once more, I will merit the improbability of this argument, and can only pacify it with the belief (let us assume it is fact) that the God sent his only son, Jesus Christ, to die for the sins of man that man might, in accepting Christ as lord and saviour, be internally cleansed and have eternal life in Heaven instead of eternal damnation in Hell (as all sinners are doomed to). The wonder of this sacrifice is that man are just God's 'plasticine toys' - mere playthings, if you will - and yet he has the potential to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, as a child of God. In essence, God took man, the scum of the earth, and lifted him to be his child, a prince of Heaven.
Anonymous has pointed out that "since when do subjects of a God get to make demands..." He/she is right to say that man is merely a subject, a servant. In relation to point 6., being subjects, we are already honour bound to worship our maker. Yet, he gives us the free will to choose our own God/religion/lifestyle. I think free will, as opposed to mindless control, is worthy of celebration and worship.
Thus, with an indifferent God or a cruel God, there could still be 'happiness' in the world such as birth, celebration, success, and so on. But earthly life is temporal, and life after death is eternal. That we might have eternal life in Heaven is the difference that a "Good" God makes. - February 28, 2011 at 7:19 AM
8. Finally, and in conclusion, good and bad have to coexist. Without good, all bad would be meaningless, and vice-versa. Might God have purposely created chaos and grief alongside order and celebration, that our lives would be more fulfilled, more diverse, that we would be more appreciative of existence? I think we can acknowledge that hardship has made us cherish joy more fully, death has made us realize life's preciousness, pain has made us more aware of our vulnerability, and failure has made us live less in the future plans and more in the small, immediate, present delights. Perhaps I am too ideally optimistic, but I do not think it is a bad thing to hope. Moreover, since life is continuous, events make more sense if examined in perspective, revealing, maybe, an aspect of God's 'ultimate' goodness - giving us both good and bad, allowing us a full, intense explosion of sensation and memory - allowing us to live life to the fullest.
Whew - I apologize for the length and verbosity of this comment, but I cannot summarize it anymore! Hopefully it is of use. This is the first post of yours I've read - I do look forward to reading more of your posts, and your book, when it is published.
-Regards, Chia - February 28, 2011 at 7:22 AM
- jaybry84 said...
Really? Good and evil have to coexist? That's like saying I won't know how good steak tastes unless I know how bad crap tastes. I've never eaten crap and I still love good steak tastes.
So how can one appreciate heaven if heaven has no evil? - March 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM
- Matt McCormick said...
It's a good point, Jaybry. But I think the more fundamental point is missed by a lot of people who trot out this "Good cannot exist without evil" excuse when confronted with the problem of evil. In order to make the problem go away, what they need to argue first, is that not even an all powerful God can create good without evil. That seems implausible, as Jaybry, points out because it sure doesn't look like it's logically impossible for one to exist without the other. Would we also say that the whole world could not have been red because red can only exist with non-red? I don't think so. Second, they need to argue that not even an omnipotent God could have created a world with any less evil, or any more good than what we have here. God could not have created good without evil, and God could not have created a world with any less evil in it. Both of those seem absurd.
What's also frustrating here is that apologists just refuse to face the real issue and change the subject to the inherent sinfulness of humans, or our need for moral liberty or some such, with explaining any of this in terms of "Not even an all powerful God could have created a world with . . . . " The problem is with God, not with the other diversions about humans or goodness.
MM - March 4, 2011 at 10:35 PM


text: When it comes to the safety and security of you and your family, nothing should be left to chance. If you or your loved ones get involved in a car accident, your number one priority should be to make sure everyone receives the care and treatment they need – at a cost that keeps your finances and savings intact. Being insured with an auto policy that includes covering Medical Payments ensures that most medical expenses will be taken care of if you or a family member is injured in an auto accident as either a passenger in the car, or as a pedestrian struck by an auto. This coverage applies the same regardless of who is at fault and extends to the policyholder's family members, as well as any passengers in the vehicle. The rising cost of healthcare has made paying out of pocket for major medical expenses extremely difficult. If you worry about not being able to take care of your family in the event of an accident, keep in mind that with the right Auto Insurance policy, you won't have to anymore. Contact INDEMNUS Insurance today to learn about how the right coverage can keep those you care about most protected.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
fetch() does NOT adhere to SQL-92 SQLSTATE standard when dealing with empty datasets.
Instead of setting the errorcode class to 20 to indicate "no data found", it returns a class of 00 indicating success, and returns NULL to the caller.
This also prevents the exception mechainsm from firing.
Programmers will need to explicitly code tests for empty resultsets after any fetch*() instead of relying on the default behavior of the RDBMS.
I tried logging this as a bug, but it was dismissed as "working as intended". Just a head's up.


text:
The stones sold by Clara Pucci are genuine Gemstones
The information provided regarding the cut; clarity and size of our stones are true.
Every item sold by Clara Pucci, comes with lifetime limited warranty
The 4 C's tell you everything you need to know about the quality of the Gems. The stones we offer are:
Cut by a Master technician to create maximum brilliance.
Color D, which are the rarest, mostly devoid of color and highest value.
Clarity VVS1; only perfection is visible to the naked or trained eye when observing these stones.
Genuine Gemstones; offered at unbeatable prices.
All Gems sold by Clara Pucci are conflict free.
Side stone information:
Regarded as one of the premier simulated diamonds in the world, Clara Pucci's Simulated Diamonds are carefully crafted to be nearly flawless and colorless. They encompass the same visual characteristics, shapes, styles, and ability to cut glass as natural diamonds. In most experts' opinions, these Simulated Diamonds are a superior alternative to a natural diamonds because for the same cut, clarity, color and carat weight of a natural diamond, our simulated diamonds of VVS1 quality rating are a mere fraction of the cost.
Style: Drop Dangle, Halo
Stone: Natural London Blue Topaz Stone
Main Stone Shape: Emerald Cut
Main Stone Carat Weight: 1.5
Main Stone Size: 7.5X5.5mm
Main Stone Clarity: VVS1
Main Stone Cut: Excellent-Good
Main Stone Color: Blue
Main Stone Color Grade: D
Side Stone 1 Shape: Round Cut
Side Stone 1 Carat Weight: 0.075
Side Stone 1 Size: 1.2mm
Side Stone 2 Shape: Round Cut
Side Stone 2 Weight: 0.0067
Side Stone 2 Size: 1.1mm
Total Carat Weight: 5.81
Number of Stones: 54
Setting Type: Prong&Pave Setting
Creation Method:
Stone Treatment Method: Not Treated
Metal Type: White Gold


text:
OK, lets meet a couple of guys who are big fans of Ghostface Killah.
MAHBOD MOGHADAM: The best Ghostface song, I think, is " Nutmeg." That's all of his...
GREENE: That's Mahbod Moghadam. He and his friend Tom Lehman co-founded a Web site called Rap Genius.
MOGHADAM: Tom is here looking up...
TOM LEHMAN: These are my favorite lines of Ghost. It's from "Buck 50," where he says: supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, docialiexpilisticfragicalsuper Wu-Tang Chamber. Cancun catch me in the a room eating grouper...
GHOSTFACE KILLAH: (Rapping) Grouper. Grouper. Grouper...
LEHMAN: And so the explanation for that is on vacation, I'm actually eating fish is, which just doesn't fully cover...
MOGHADAM: I know, we have to refine this one...
GREENE: Think of Rap Genius as kind of like a Wikipedia for lyrics. Or, to use their metaphor, if hip-hop verse is our Scripture, they want to write the Internet Talmud.
LEHMAN: We're bringing the Talmud for the ADD generation. You know, like imagine if the great rap by Rom Bom was able to put animated GIFs, along with his exegesis of the Torah.
GREENE: This Web site, Rap Genius, harnesses the power of crowds to annotate verses. When you click on a lyric, a box pops up with text, photos and videos explaining the meaning. But Tom Lehman says they've always heard the same criticism.
LEHMAN: You know, how can you really say that you have the definitive explanation for the story behind a verse or a line, unless you get the artist involved?
GREENE: So they are getting artists involved.
GREENE: Verified rappers, like Fabulous, now explain their lyrics on the site. And Rap Genius has bigger plans. It has annotated biblical verses and presidential debates. Last fall, a venture capitalist firm invested $15 million in this site. Lehman says the investors think the platform could be put to use in the classroom.
LEHMAN: You know, you could be a high school student and you're reading an annotation of "The Great Gatsby." Or you could be a graduate-level biologist and you're reading the annotations on a biology paper on the sexuality of fish.
GREENE: And the guys say they are in talks with Columbia University. They want freshmen to annotate "The Iliad and the Odyssey" on Rap Genius this fall.
GREENE: This is MORNING EDITION, from NPR News. I'm David Greene.
And I'm Steve Inskeep. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.


text:
Already a member? Sign in
Create a free account
Already have an account? Sign in
To ensure only genuine musicians and bands are creating and applying to band openings.
We include a link to your profile in band openings, to build trust with musicians and help them decide if they will be a good fit.


text:
Oak Ring Blanks
Oak Ring Blanks is pre-order delivery typically within 2 weeks
Couldn't load pickup availability
We use DPD Local to deliver the majority of our parcels.
DPD delivery is typically charged at a flat rate of £5.50 inc VAT this will be confirmed in your shopping cart prior to placing your order. (This is a subsidised price, we pay more than this). You can add many products to your cart and this rate will not change.
DPD offer a next day delivery - This is a next working day delivery
and does not include weekends. Occasionally DPD may deliver your order on a Saturday or Sunday.
Next day delivery is not guaranteed.
Where DPD do not service your delivery area, we use Royal Mail.
Royal Mail Tracked 48 aims to deliver within 2-3 days, Royal Mail Tracked 24 aims to deliver with 24 hours.
You will see these charges in your shopping cart once you have entered your address.
We reserve the right to use alternative postal providers as and when necessary.
We are not currently sending overseas due to the large number of delays and parcels going missing. You can use a mail forwarding service.
Approx size 50mm X 50mm X 25mm
Payment & Security
Payment methods
Your payment information is processed securely. We do not store credit card details nor have access to your credit card information.


text:
Adrenaline 18U tryouts will be held 6/1 @ 4:30 at Corner Canyon High Scjool.
This is a place to advertise for player try-outs, pick-up players, most fundraisers and/or create discussions. Friendlies, scrimmages, other tournaments not insured or sanctioned by USSSA will be removed. Personal and facility Liability for these type of events falls on teams/parents and USSSA does not insure these events.
1. Business ads must be approved. Selling of used equipment is acceptable. Selling of new items/equipment is NOT allowed without approval. I have signed agreements with several sponsors and cannot violate terms.Official COLLEGE camps are strongly encouraged.
2. Ads that are in conflict with USSSA events or USSSA Clinics & Lessons will be removed. This includes scrimmages, friendlies, etc. Personal and facility legal liability is on teams and parents not USSSA.
Spam, Foul language, personal attacks or continued misuse of the site rules will result in your account closure.
3. Official COLLEGE camps, combines, showcases are strongly encouraged to post their events.
Thank you.


text:
FC Duck Camo Hoodie
Heavy Weight hoodie
This content type will accept rich text to help with adding styles and links to additional pages or content. Use this to add supplementary information to help your buyers.
You can use product metafields to assign content to this tab that is unique to an individual product. Use tabs to highlight unique features, sizing information, or other sales information.
About Our Products
Use this text to share information about your brand with your customers. Describe a product, share announcements, or welcome customers to your store.


text:
Men's KEEN Utility Louisville 6" MET Steel Toe
- Height: 6"
- Left and right asymmetrical steel toes
- Internal metatarsal guard
- Electrical Hazard Protection
- Waterproof full-grain leather upper
- Abrasion resistant tough-tec leather
- KEEN.Dry waterproof breathable membrane
- TPU shank for midfoot support
- Compression molded EVA midsole
- Removable, metatomical dual-density EVA footbed
- 90 degree heel
- Locking metal hooks and lacing eyelets
- Oil- and slip-resistant non-marking rubber outsole
- Meets or exceeds ASTM F2412-11 and F2413-11 I/75 C/75 EH standards
- Color: Slate Black
Shipping Policy
Free standard ground shipping via UPS or USPS on all orders of $99.00 or more for delivery in the contiguous United States. (Note: Free shipping does not apply to Alaska and Hawaii)
Available Shipping Methods
We ship via UPS or USPS on all orders within the contiguous United States. You can request that we ship specifically UPS, USPS or to a post office box for additional fee.
Standard Shipping
Orders usually arrive at your locations within 5-7 business days.
Expedited Shipping
Orders usually arrive at your location within 1-5 business days, depending upon your upgrade request. If you choose to upgrade your shipping method, nominal fees will be applied for Next Day, 2nd Day or 3rd Day deliveries. You may contact us at 800.566.4298 or email@example.com to inquire.
International Shipping
Currently most of our vendors do not allow us to ship internationally; therefore we will only ship internationally if the ship to location is a US Military Base.
Return and Exchange Policy
You may return products for a refund or an exchange within 30 days of delivery of your products. For orders that do not meet the free shipping requirements, shipping charges are non-refundable. The products also must be in new, resell-able condition. That means garments and footwear that have been worn to work or show wear, or that have been washed will not be accepted for returns or exchanges except in the case of manufacturer defect.
Unfortunately, returns or exchanges may not be made for:
Items marked S/C. These are special cut items that are made-to-order just for you.
Products that have been customized with embroidery, screen print or heat press application.
The cost of shipping your returned items to us is your responsibility. For exchanges, we do offer FREE standard shipping on your replacement items as long as it meets our free shipping order minimum.
Return/Exchange Instructions:
To return or exchange your product or products, place it or them in a separate shipping envelope or box, and then ship the package to us at the address below. Also, please include a note with your name, order number and contact information and whether you would like a refund or exchange. If you prefer an exchange, please provide detailed information about the product that you would like to replace the returned item. This includes style #, color, and size.
- National Workwear
- Attention: Returns
- 510 E New Circle Road
- Lexington, KY 40505


text:
021602076 ,0981206905
How useful was this post?
Click on a star to rate it!
Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0
No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.
¿Olvidaste tu contraseña?
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive mail with link to set new password.
Atrás para iniciar sesión


text:
Skip to main content
Railroad Dining Car Archives
Focus on Overland Route Dining Car & Passenger Trains prior to 1956 and C&NW Dining Cars & Passenger Trains
User login
Request new password
Main menu
About This Archive
Browse by Category
Dining Car Blog
You are here
Southern Pacific / Public Recipes / 1940
Search Our Archives
Archive Type
- Any -
-Blotters & Stationary
-Playing Cards
-Tickets, Ticket Envelopes & Luggage Tags
Dining Car Rule Books
Joseph Verona Files
Official Railroad Cookbooks
-Union Pacific / Cookbook & Service Instructions / Post 1955
-Union Pacific 1940's
-Union Pacific 1922
-Southern Pacific / General Instructions / Recipes / Waiters / 1946
-Pennsylvania Railroad / Cooking & Service Instructions / 1947
-Atlantic Coast Line Railroad / Recipes / Cookbook / 1953
-Chicago Burlington & Quincy Railroad / 1948
-VIA Rail Manual of Service Instructions, 12 / 2002
-Misc. Railroad Recipes
--Great Northern Railway / Chefs' Recipes Secrets / Oriental Limited
--Southern Railway Recipe Cards
--Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Dining Car Recipes
--Southern Pacific / Recipes / Public Brochure / 1955
--Southern Pacific / Recipes / Public Brochure / 1952
--Southern Pacific / Recipes / Public Brochure / 1940
--Southern Pacific / Rice Cookbook / 1902
--Union Pacific Magazine / Dining Car Recipes
--Union Pacific Research Kitchen Cards
--Union Pacific / 150 Apple Dishes /Recipes
--Union Pacific / OWR&N / 50 Apple Recipes
-The Overland
-Streamliner City of Los Angeles (COLA)
-Streamliner City of Denver (COD)
-Streamliner City of San Francisco (COSF)
-Streamliner City of Portland (COP)
-The Portland Rose
-The Challengers
-The Forty-Niner, LA Limited and all other Joint C&NW, UP, SP Transcons
-The Twin Cities "400" and C&NW trains CHI > MSP
-The North Western Limited
-The Dakota "400", North American and all trains MN, NE and SD Lines
-Flambeau "400" and C&NW Trains operating CHI > Ashland, WI
-Peninsula "400" and other C&NW Upper Peninsula (Michigan) Trains
-Duluth Superior Limited and C&NW Trains CHI > Twin Ports & NW Wisconsin
-Kate Shelly "400", Corn King and C&NW Trains CHI > Omaha
-City of Milwaukee "400", Capitol "400" and Southern Wisconsin trains
-Vreeland Collection / Northwest Wisconsin
-The Last "400" / C&NW Business Train
Train Records / Operational Documents
Railroad Equipment
Railroad Facilities and Depots
- Any -
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad (ACL)
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad (B&O)
Chicago & North Western Railway (C&NW)
Chicago Burlington & Quincy Railroad (CB&Q)
Chicago St. Paul Minneapolis & Omaha (CSTPM&O)
Great Northern Railway (GN)
Lehigh Valley Railroad Company (LVRR)
Milwaukee Road (CMSTP&P)
Pennsylvania Railroad (PRR)
Soo Line (MSTP&SSM)
Southern Pacific Railroad (SP) (SPRR)
Southern Railway (SR)
Union Pacific Railroad (UP) (UPRR)
VIA Rail
Public brochure handout. Recipes prepared by SP Chef Paul Reiss. In 1940 SP operates 140 dining cars, 36 lunch cars, 36 club / observation cars, 7 hotels and 20 steam ship restaurants in which some of these recipes are used.
Southern Pacific
Public Recipes
Archive Type:
Misc. Railroad Recipes
Southern Pacific / Recipes / Public Brochure / 1940
Southern Pacific Railroad (SP) (SPRR)


text:
Product Overview
FREE Trial! Complete WebStart Package After 7 days, only $10 per month includes all this!
Your own .WS "WebSite" Domain Name
A domain name is simply an address on the Internet. Rather than having to remember a difficult series of IP (Internet Protocol) numbers, by which computers know which individual web site is located where, (for example, 18.104.22.168), you can just type in a textual address, such as www.YourDomain.ws
1000's of .ws domains are registered everyday, so secure yours before someone else takes it forever!
Professionally Designed Web Templates
The WebSiteBuilder 4 is the framework for your WebSite. Professionally designed by graphic artists, these templates give you the foundation for building your WebSite. There is no programming or complicated coding, simply follow the easy-to-use instructions to create a dynamic and professional WebSite!
You can create your site quickly, then make changes if you'd like, or you can spend several hours creating the perfect site for you. You can view your WebSite before you publish it for the world to see. You also have 24/7 access to your WebSite's control panel and can make changes at any time and as often as you like! You can also view the changes before you publish them to the world.
Watch the Cool DemoCustom Email Addresses — 10 (ten) Included per Domain
Check your email on the web OR Forward email to an existing account…
Our WebMail allows you to use your own domain name as your email address and you can access your email through your account from any Internet connection in the world!
Instead of using a long and hard to remember email address like email@example.com, you can use firstname.lastname@example.com. For example you could have firstname.lastname@example.com and each person in your family or business can use your domain name as well such as email@example.com etc., up to 10 email addresses!
Email Forwarding:
WebMail forwarding allows you to use your domain name as your email address and forward all of your emails to an existing account you already have. This way you can use your easy-to-remember .WS email account to publicize your business or family site and still receive all of your emails in your established email account.
POP/IMAP Access:
Access your email for any domain using your POP or IMAP compatible email program.
Optional Web Services (No extra charge!)
URL forwarding:
Our URL forwarding option is perfect if you already have a WebSite created elsewhere, but are unable to move the existing content. Often times, your current URL is hard to remember, unprofessional, or just plain ugly. You can use URL forwarding to route your new .WS domain to your existing WebSite. When someone visits your .WS domain, they will be automatically transported to your existing WebSite instantly!
Web Hosting:
For more advanced customers, you can take advantage of our hosting service. This allows you to build a site from scratch bypassing some of the user-friendly restrictions built into the previously men- tioned SiteBuilder option. This allows you to build a custom WebSite just as you want it, then upload the files to our servers. Hosting gives you the ultimate in flexibility!


text: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |


text:
You have reached the daily limit for your subscription level (Guest) and this tool (10 queries per day).
Daily query limits are imposed to ensure that our data is not mined and republished.
The following subscription levels will offer higher daily query volumes for this tool:
Please upgrade your account in order to gain full access to all Trademark247.com features.
Query thresholds are reset at 00:00:00 US Central time. It is now 2024-07-20 23:26:38 in Chicago.


text:
Each year the United states government will issue down to 55k green cards with the Diversity Lottery program. Saving money cards allow immigrants to initiate the United states to live and energy.
It with no professional to find examples of these pools at places an individual work, at bars, schools and colleges as well as at recreation centers. Again at all of these locations, people have gotten with him or her. These pools are usually in all different sizes. There are some where just few people get together, combine cash and a good informal agreement as the particular they intend to use the takings. There are other Online lottery pools that are very large then get formal agreements as as happens with any profits.
The first step is spend money on a ticket, no underneath the ever won the lottery without getting one first. Check out the local Lotto retailer or if perhaps you not have the time to square in line or be able to access a nearby store, make an online purchase from a respectable online product owner. You will need to constructed an provider for online purchases but now is done, buying in your own home.
Most lottery systems are dependent on illusion which has a person's perceptual experience. For example, a british illusionist performed a famous stunt where he picked a woman at random and gave her horse racing estimates. After the first race, she placed money on the next three races where the horses picked up. The pick she was due to the illusionist also won the fifth race. She then met the illusionist who admitted that his 'System' was nothing more than a trick.
The last good thing of playing Online lottery is that you can get free lotto concert tickets. matka have same issues like folks small town lotteries like electricity bills and room maintenance. As long as you effortlessly find the ticket, ascertain get free plays.
So for a Xzotto player, if the ticket that you purchase the particular pool wins, then require it and it share the winnings but now others that have pooled their funds in along with you. Now some individuals will get upset and complain and state that they don't want to share the income. Actually, I think which could be selfish, however, you need to look web marketing this great way. If you were to play by yourself, you may not have won that. This way, a person's win, yourrrre still ahead, because even if you may donrrrt you have won home lot, yourrrre still farther ahead. I always say that I would rather win a small amount of a lot rather than nothing just about all.
Anyone can learn how to choose winning lottery numbers. To correct right sets of strategies or techniques, the chance to winning big in the lottery is merely a kiss aside.


text:
Women Mint Green Gray Watercolour Stripes Arrows Print Loose Baggy Harem Overall Jumpsuit Tie Spaghetti Strap Long Pants Rompers
- Description
- Shipping & Return
- Our advantage
This colorful and fun outfit is perfect for showing your personality and fun and flirty outfit is perfect for any summer occasion. The spaghetti straps and loose fitting silhouette keep you cool and comfortable while the cute bow knot details add a touch of femininity. Dress it up with heels or keep it casual with sneakers- either way, you'll look chic and stylish.
Size Information:
Style: Casual
Material: Polyester
Decoration: Pockets
Decoration: Beam Foot Jumpsuit
Thickness: STANDARD
Waist Type: MID
Item Type: Jumpsuits
Pant Length(cm): Full Length
Gender: WOMEN
Type: Sleeveless Tie Jumpsuits
Fit Type: LOOSE
Length: Full Length Romper Pants
Style: Printed
Size: S/M/L/XL/2XL/3XL
Occasion: Casual/Holiday/Party/Street
Garment Care: Hand wash / Machine wash in cold water/ Hang dry / Do not bleach.
- Processing Time: 3-5 Business Days
- Shipping Time: 8-12 Business Days
- Delivery time = Processing time + Shipping time
- Shipping Method: U.S. Standard Ground in Continental or International Shipping
- We want you to be 100% satisfied with your purchase. All items can be returned or exchanged within 30 days of delivery.
- Fast production time. Fall in love with our quality products and speedy delivery.
- We treat every order like we were printing it for ourselves.
- Charlylifestyle boasts a < 0.8% return rate thanks to meticulous attention to detail


text:
Gramann Töpferei Römhild Mid Century bluish purple vase with a white lava top.
Gramann Töpferei Speckled
Height: 19 CM / 7.5 Inches
Condition: Excellent used condition
*Please note that any bright white is a reflection and not an imperfection or damage.
Shipping cost is based on packed weight with loads of bubble wrap, and shipped U.S.P.S. For multiple pieces, a special price will be calculated.
We WILL ship WORLDWIDE. Please email us prior to purchasing for a shipping quote.


text:
Color GOLD/GLASS/SUN/ EMERALD
Add to Shopping bag
Oversized metal chain necklace. Irregular-shaped chunky links, embellished with two-tone gemstones. Logo clip closure. Made in Italy
Body: 100% Bronze - Application: 100% Glass
Can we help you?
You can choose to collect items purchased online from designated Marni stores.
Choose your nearest store to return your online order. Your refund will be processed immediately.
If the item you want is available on Marni.com but not in the boutique, our sales assistants will be able to place an order on your behalf directly from their in-store device.
Within 15 days from the delivery of your order, you can request a free of charge return or size/color exchange.
Conceived to be treasured and collected, boxes and shopping bags are composed of 50% recycled paper and 100% recycled cardboard, of which 60% generates from pre-consumer waste and 40% from post-consumer waste.
Enter the email address you registrered with and we'll send you an email with instructions on how to create a new password.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Check if you received the email containing the reset password link
Size guideBack
Show conversion table
Conversion table


text:
Knives & Nega Scott Enamel Pin Pack
Production Status
Manufacturing CompleteSet of two enamel pins featuring sprite art of Knives and Nega Scott from Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: The Game. These pins may range in size: 1.4"-1.8" inches.
These leftover items are available in limited quantities!
More from LRG
Size Chart
Limited Run hoodies are printed on the back of a Tultex Zip Hoodie.
80% Ring-Spun Cotton/20% Polyester.
Size | XS | S | M | L | XL | 2XL | 3XL |
Width | 18 | 20 | 22 | 24 | 26 | 28 | 30 |
Length | 24 | 26 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 |
Printed on Next Level brand tees, Limited Run shirts are ultra-soft 4.3 oz. poly/cotton blend tees. The fabric is super soft and lightweight. There's no better way to show that you're a Limited Run fan!
(Hint: Not sure what size to get? Get whatever size you're wearing right now!)
- American Apparel AA2001 (100 Percent Cotton)
- American Apparel BB401 (50/50 Polycotton Blend)
- American Apparel TR401 (50% Cotton, 25% Poly, 25% Rayon)
- District Made DT6000
- Bella+Canvas 3001
- Bella+Canvas 3650
Note: Most our ladies shirts use District Made garments, however some older shirts use American Apparel and Bella brand garments, which have a much smaller fit! Please check Fangamer's product page to be sure what garment is used.
- District Made DM117OL / DM104L (100 percent cotton)
- District Made DM119OL / DM108L (50/50 polycotton blend)
- American Apparel TR301 (50% cotton, 25% poly, 25% rayon)
- American Apparel AA2102 (100 percent cotton)
- American Apparel BB301 (50/50 polycotton blend)
- Bella 6004
Fangamer's larger unisex sizes must be printed on different garments due to product availability. Sizes 4X-6X are printed on the following shirts (as noted on individual product pages):
- Port and Company: PC54 and PC61 are 100% cotton (size chart), PC55 is a 50/50 blend. (Size Chart)
- Gildan: Gildan 2000 100% Cotton (Size Chart)
We use District Made slub polos (size chart includes men's and women's guide). A few of our older designs are made with Hanes Cotton-Blend HX054 (unisex size chart) and Bella Style #750 (women's size chart).
Our newest garment type! These relaxed fit, cozy sweaters are perfect for school, the office, or just lounging at home. We use the District Cardigan Sweater for both men's and women's sizes (size chart here).
Fangamer print their jackets on a variety of garments to achieve a wide range of styles- there's something for everyone, whether you're plowing through a northeastern winter or occupying milder southern climates.
Note: Sometimes larger sizes and ladies sizes will have to be printed on different garments due to availability. This can change the color and even fabric blend of your order, so check the product pages carefully.
- Independent IND4000Z (Heavyweight Jacket)
- Independent AFX4000Z (Lightweight Jacket)
- Independent PRM90HTZ (Lightweight Terry)
- Independent EXP70PTZ (Lightweight Poly-Tech Jacket)
- Independent EXP80PTZ (Heavyweight Poly-Tech Jacket)
- Independent SS155RJZ (Raglan Lightweight Jacket
- District Concert Hoodie DT800
- Independent IND008Z
- Independent AFX25FZ
- District Concert Fleece DT801
- Women's Ragged Hoodie Size Chart
Plus Size:
- Shirts: Fangamer recommends that you wash your Fangamer apparel inside-out, with like colors, in cold water. Tumble dry low heat, no bleach, no ironing. If worn frequently, we also recommended washing on a gentle cycle.
- Jackets & Hoodies: Wash and dry the same as shirts (inside-out, like colors, cold water, low heat), zipped up, along with other garments to reduce zipper pull damage. If your jacket has a custom zipper pull, consider taking it off before putting it in the wash.
- Mugs: Fangamer's custom-made mugs are heavy duty, but if you want them to last a long time you may consider washing them by hand and avoid microwaving.
- Patches: Fangamer patches and velcro comes with a temporary adhesive, but they recommend sewing the patch on once you're happy with its placement.


text:
I need you, Ava.
I am desperate. For you. For a touch. For a kiss. For the scrape of your hand down my stomach. For the slide of your lips across my hipbone. The sweep of your thigh against mine in the dulcet, drowning darkness. For the warm huff of your breath on my skin and the wet suck of your mouth around me and the building pressure of need reaching release...I am mad with need.
Wild with it.
I cannot have you. I have lost you, as I have lost myself.
And so I go in search. Of myself, and thus the man who might return to you, and take you in his arms.
I loathe each of the thousands of miles between us, but I cannot wish them away, for I hope at the end of my journey I shall find you. Or rather, find myself, and thus…you. Myself, and thus us.
I am taking the long way home, Ava.
I'm losing my mind, and I don't know how to stop it. I shouldn't be writing to you, but I am. I'm friendless, loveless, and lifeless. You're out there somewhere, and still you're all I really have. I hate my reliance and dependence on you, emotionally and otherwise, and that reliance is something I'm coming to recognize. I hate that I can't hate you as much as I want to. I hate that I still love you so much.
I hate that there's no clear solution to our conundrum. Even if we could forgive each other, what then?
I hate you, Christian. I really do.
But most of all, I don't.
It's complicated.
Complicatedly (still) yours,
Enter to win a $100 Amazon Gift Card and a Signed Paperback of The Long Way Home!
Enter Here >>> a Rafflecopter giveaway
New York Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, and internationally bestselling author Jasinda Wilder is a Michigan native with a penchant for titillating tales about sexy men and strong women. Her bestselling titles include Alpha, Stripped, Wounded, and the #1 Amazon.com and international bestseller Falling into You. You can find her on her farm in northern Michigan with her husband, author Jack Wilder, her six children, and a menagerie of animals.


text:
If I didn't make this cake with my own two hands, two feet, and left elbow, you'd have a hard time convincing me that there was sweet potato involved.
Gigi of gigi cakes and Katie of Apple and Spice have started a group specifically for cake lovers aptly named The Cake Slice. I, being a cake lover, signed on immediately. Each month a different three-layer cake is made by the members, and the chosen cake this month was Sweet Potato Cake with Chocolate Cream Frosting and Orange Filling from the book Sky High: Irresistible Triple Layer Cakes by Alicia Huntsman and Peter Wynne.
Another sweet potato cake, eh? All righty. Although I stayed true to the book's cake recipe (using sweet potatoes from my grandpa's garden), I changed up the rest. For one thing, I opted to go with my favorite frosting recipe instead of the suggested chocolate version. I'm sure none of you will be shocked to find that my favorite frosting recipe is composed of cinnamon and cream cheese, first introduced in my ode to cinnamon.
The other change was an effort to make it more Thanksgiving-friendly by using cranberry juice instead of orange juice for the filling. It didn't color the frosting as much as I had hoped, but it was a lovely little tart surprise nonetheless.
This cake was pretty darn fabulous. The sweet potato doesn't affect the flavor at all as far as I can tell, for better or for worse. It does, however, keep the crumb extremely moist, which is very important to me. The cranberry flavor is detectable, but only, I suspect, because I knew it was there. Really, the predominant flavor is cinnamon, which explains why I enjoyed the cake so much.
If you're wondering why my cake looks so dang small, it's because I only made one-third of the recipe and baked it in three mega-muffin molds. I cut each little cake in half and got two miniature three-layer cakes out of the deal. All for me.
Check out the other Cake Slice Bakers for more sweet potato goodness.
November 27, 2008
you could've fooled me
YumLabels: blog events, cakes
46 comments:
- Anonymous said...
Looks beautiful and sounds delicious!!
- November 27, 2008 at 8:08 AM
- Pamela said...
Oh, cinnamon cream cheese frosting. What sweetness. Cake looks cute and tasty!
- November 27, 2008 at 8:12 AM
- MaryBeth said...
It sounds and looks fabulous, I bet it taste really good too. Happy Thanksgiving!!
- November 27, 2008 at 9:57 AM
- Anonymous said...
I'm throwing away my pies and making this!
Happy Thanksgiving. - November 27, 2008 at 11:48 AM
- jesse said...
Sweet potatoes? YUMMMM I'd like a slice please!
- November 27, 2008 at 11:50 AM
- Valerie Harrison (bellini) said...
Look at how high that cake is too:D I am sure it was delish:D
- November 27, 2008 at 12:01 PM
- Bunny said...
It was a wonderful cake wasn't Grace, a total surprise in that sweet potatoes in a cake could taste so darn good! Have a blessed Thanksgiving Grace!
- November 27, 2008 at 12:26 PM
- Rosie said...
Happy Thanksgiving!!
The sweet potato cake is delish and such a lovely group to belong :) I love your frosting.
Rosie x - November 27, 2008 at 12:49 PM
- Noodlegirl said...
Happy Thanksgiving and that cake looks so good!
- November 27, 2008 at 3:33 PM
- The Blonde Duck said...
It looks wonderful! Have a happy Thanksgiving and hopefully lots of cinnamon is coming your way!
- November 27, 2008 at 3:56 PM
- Y said...
Mini me cakes! Very cute :)
That macabre sesame street cartoon reminds me of the time I heard my boyfriend mutter in his sleep, "Big bird... like an ostrich". I woke him up from laughing so hard. - November 27, 2008 at 5:19 PM
- Anonymous said...
I love it! Cut layer cake food porn-absolutely fabulous and yes the cinnamon frosting is not a surprise ;)
- November 27, 2008 at 7:08 PM
- Anonymous said...
I didn't have time to bake this month's cake - and now I'm sorry!
This looks so fantastically dense - wow! - November 27, 2008 at 7:42 PM
- test it comm said...
That cake looks amazing!
- November 28, 2008 at 7:07 AM
- LyB said...
Look at that frosting! Wow, that looks good! And that "big bird" is too funny. :)
- November 28, 2008 at 8:13 AM
- kat said...
I've been interested in trying this cake but your version with the cranberries & cinnamon makes me REALLY interested
- November 28, 2008 at 9:35 AM
- Sara said...
This looks so good, I love sweet potatoes.
- November 28, 2008 at 10:59 AM
- OhioMom said...
Looks yummy! The sweet potato is so versatile :)
- November 28, 2008 at 12:57 PM
- Ingrid_3Bs said...
Happy Thanksgiving to you!
That frosting sounds so good! Speaking of frosting I made your Pecan Praline frosting from the sweet spud cake. Now that was some yummy frosting! I poured it over the cake while it was still warm so it soaked into my bundt cake which made it even better! Thanks for sharing the recipe!
~ingrid - November 28, 2008 at 2:07 PM
- Lore said...
It looks very moist indeed! Hope you had a wonderful Thanksgiving Grace :)
- November 28, 2008 at 2:31 PM
- anudivya said...
Never heard of sweet potato in a cake. Looks great.
- November 28, 2008 at 4:12 PM
- Pam said...
Looks fantastic Grace. The frosting looks so darn good.
- November 28, 2008 at 4:44 PM
- vanillasugarblog said...
I'm a cinnnnnnnammmon lover too. This clearly rocks the house.
- November 28, 2008 at 5:59 PM
- Marjie said...
I'd love a cake "all for me!" This looks wonderfully moist and delectable!
Hope your Thanksgiving was a great one! - November 28, 2008 at 7:57 PM
- Lori said...
I have been wanting to make a sweet potato cake for a while. I must try it!
- November 28, 2008 at 10:26 PM
- Unknown said...
I love sweet potatoes we had them for thanksgiving!
I made a sweet potato cassarole for my fiance's parents yesterday to impress them ever since he proposed to me with a gorgeous diamond engagement ring from www.idonowidont.com and it was a success.
They loved it, but next year I will have to try this cake next year, what a great idea! - November 28, 2008 at 11:41 PM
- Heather said...
yum! what a great way to use sweet potatoes :) the cake is beautiful. i love the use of cranberry juice! hope you had a great turkey day :)
- November 29, 2008 at 12:05 AM
- Jacque said...
Oh my gosh, that cinnamon icing sounds like something I would LOVE. Nice job!
- November 29, 2008 at 12:47 AM
- giz said...
Aye yay yay - look at all that buttercream. I think they should create a song called "A Hundred Ways to use your Sweet Potato" - when did it get to be the popular girl at the party and look so good?
- November 29, 2008 at 8:27 AM
- Anonymous said...
I've never heard of a sweet potato cake, but with a cake looking like that, I don't think I'd give a care in the world even if you told me they were made from broccoli. yuMMy!
- November 29, 2008 at 12:19 PM
- Sophie said...
Using cranberry juice instead was an awesome idea, so was going with the cinnamon frosting! :)
What a cute little Thanksgiving image! I miss Sesame Street :P! I hope you had a wonderful turkey day :)! - November 29, 2008 at 7:59 PM
- Maria said...
I love sweet potatoes on their own so I am sure they are even better in a cake!! Looks great!
- November 29, 2008 at 8:27 PM
- Mike of Mike's Table said...
That sounds like a great seasonal twist on that cake, which sounds delicious and definitely has your touch to it (cinnamon!). I'd happily gobble that right up--anything with sweet potato in it gets high marks in my book
- November 30, 2008 at 8:51 AM
- Shari said...
Poor Big Bird! Love your twist on this cake! Cinnamon and cream cheese - yum!
- November 30, 2008 at 11:25 AM
- The Blonde Duck said...
Can you e-mail me your address? I have a little sussy I'd like to send your way. firstname.lastname@example.com. Thanks! - November 30, 2008 at 2:25 PM
- Emily said...
Hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
The cake looks so scrumptious. I'm a fan of the sweet potato. - November 30, 2008 at 7:08 PM
- Pearl said...
oh how adorable!
- December 1, 2008 at 2:05 AM
- Tabitha Blue said...
Ok, now that is a cake! It looks so good, and I feel like I can taste that frosting... cinnamon and cream cheese, yum!
I love the idea of three little ones all to myself! ;) - December 1, 2008 at 10:57 AM
- Anonymous said...
Great cake Grace! The close up on the frosting really has me yearning for a big lick!
I love cake too and it's really the only dessert that I crave!
We love your ode to cinnamon and have some really cool Viet cinnamon waiting for ya....give us your addy! - December 1, 2008 at 11:30 AM
- Katie said...
You fooled me with the picture but the description sounds amazing.
- December 1, 2008 at 1:36 PM
- Deborah said...
It looks beautiful!! Cream cheese and cinnamon? I'm sold!
- December 1, 2008 at 2:43 PM
- Anonymous said...
ahhh, a perfect combination! cream cheese and cinnamon frosting sounds so much better than chocolate and I love the idea of a small tall cake with thick gooey frosting...
- December 1, 2008 at 7:27 PM
- Robin said...
Waaaaa they ate Big Bird! I forgot all about that fantasitc cake when I saw they cooked up Big Bird, I knew they had it in for him!!
- December 1, 2008 at 8:10 PM
- Vera said...
Moist and delicious looking cake,Grace!
- December 4, 2008 at 2:59 AM
- TeaLady said...
Don't you just love joining a new baking 'club'. Your cake looks good enuff to dip into and just stay there.
Thanks for visiting. - December 5, 2008 at 8:02 PM
- Jeanne said...
What a clever use of your mega-muffin tins! I love the indulgent idea of a triple-layer cake for one!
I've made sweet potato muffins before and they do keep the texture very moist and delicious :) - December 8, 2008 at 9:00 AM