One click access to weather forecasts for major Idaho cities including Boise, Idaho Falls, Moscow, and Lewiston.

Forecasts, warnings, and radar images.

Five day forecast and satellite photos.

Idaho Live Cams, forecasts, satellite pictures, radar images, weather maps, and weather links.

Offers current conditions, seven day forecasts, area weather maps and satellite pictures for cities statewide.

Index of links for WxUSA Weather pages for localities in the state. Pages include links to current conditions, forecasts, radar, maps, weather cams, kid's weather, and hurricane links for each city.

In article , Robert Sutherland
says...

>Mr.Johnson:
>
>1. You write: "Yet many are blinded by the false definition of
>'perfect' that allows Job to be considered perfect by 'declaratory
>righteousness', i.e., he was perfect only because God said so, NOT
>because he obeyed all righteousness."
>
>I concur. Job's righteousness is real not forensic or imputed. I
>suspect others are confusing common grace and special grace.

Spoken like a true Thomist;)

>All human beings have sufficient common grace to know and do what is
>right.

Expect to encounter some friction over this assertion.

>We can infer that from the self-evident truth "ought implies
>can".

Well, _some_ of us can infer this. But A rather disturbingly high proportion of
regular participants in this NG rejedt the truth you label 'self-evident'.

>Job has consistently done that which is right.

And what I find even _more_ disturbing is how many participants deny _this_
truth. I can't see how anyone can read the whole book and miss the moving
examples of very great righteousness that Job displayed through his whole life.

Yet I have at least an inkling of how they miss it: they allow themselves to
become distracted by the _apparent_ transgression on Job's part when he opens
his lips to speak in Job 3:3, and goes on to say more and more shocking things,
things that _sound_ like blasphemous accusations against God (especially in
theologically biased translations).

>Job's "persistence in his integrity" (Job 2:3; cf. Job 27:5) is
>inconsistent with that righteousness being merely forensic or imputed.

Absolutely.

>If it were merely forensic or imputed, then persistence would be
>irrelevant since that state of forensic or imputed righteousness would
>be incapable of being lost.
>
>Job's "blamelessness" (Job 1:1,8; 2:3) is from the Hebrew "tam" which
>means "whole", "complete", "sound", "lacking in nothing". The same
>word is even used to describe Satan's sinlessness prior to his fall.
>(Ezekiel 28:3)
>
>2. You write: "Your reference to such a large section, Job 27:1-31:33,
>leaves it unclear why you think that Job made this specific complaint:
>others have read it as something rather different, that Job was
>demanding specifically why God had allowed _Job_ himself to be so
>smitten."
>
>Job asserts God is the author of some evil:

Now this is where I have to disagree with you, even at the risk of being lumped
together with your fundamentalist opponents;)

> the evil that befell him (Job 2:10; 16:12-14)

Now let's look at the verses and see if the wording _really_ has quite that
implication"

But he said unto her: 'Thou speakest as one of the impious