I really can't comment much on your problems, but it sounds like you have very, very flaky hardware to me. Do other kernels (2.4), or (cringe) windows run without problems? The only time I've ever had a 2.6 kernel give me problems is a bios with a bad acpi implementation (fixed by disabling acpi) and a borked video card. I run 2.6 on all my machines, three of which are mission critcal. They currently have been running for over two months stright, which is only becouse I had to move our racks around in some remodling work. I've never had them just randomly stop working at all for the past 4 years.
All I can say is that Intel would have to be increadibly braindead to even think about trying to get people to switch to the Itanium instruction set after the embarresment of the AMD64 fiasco. They must be using the AMD64 instruction set. In fact, since they have a slide that shows Windows XP 64bit compatibility, I'm going to say that I will eat one of my iguanna's (not my best one though) if they are using the Itanic instruction set and not AMD64.
In short, no. There is not even a supported way to upgrade from FC3 to FC4, or even from a FC4 test release. The reason being explained to me was that testing all that upgrading would greatly slow down the release process. Personaly, I'd rather have to wait another month or two for a release then have to fresh install. It's not as big a deal as it is with windows though, since all the user settings are in/home and easy to back up and restore. But for those running servers on FC, ouch.
no. we are in the 7th "day", the one he is resting from his massive creative works on. The saying one day is as a thousand years is just, well, a saying. It's meant to show that time is far, far diffrent for God. That makes sense concidering that time is only the way it is inside the universe, which is something God created. We could speculate about that for days....:)
First, no, he did not look into the future to see adam and eve fail. Thier failure was their choice. When humans were created, there were already untold millons of angels in the heavens. The creature you should be blaming is the one who was named Satan. He was a high ranking angel who cultivated desires for worship that belonged only to God. He is the one who used the serpent as a puppet in the garden of eden. That is why he is called "the original serpent" in Revelation 12:9. Also, that prophacy has already come to pass.
And by this you imply that if you are not an atheist you are not thinking? Hebrews Chapter 11 verse one says "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." The rest of that chapter defines faith even clearer. You can't have faith if you don't think. You must think in order to reason on the 'evident demonstrations' if you are to attain it. Anyone who says differently is either believing purely on emotion, which is a very weak thing, or is trying to mislead.
God did not create humans to suffer. You're blaming the wrong sprit creature. Being omnipotent does not mean he fixes our destiny. That conflicts with free will.
I'm sorry that your life was so miserable that you think that way of God. Perhaps the orthidox church's hypociritcal actions put you off to the whole concept of God. I can't help you by typing. What I can tell you is that people I call my Brothers and Sisters we sent to syberia by the Soviet Governmet becouse of thier faith. Many died for it. Hitler did the same thing. So did many, many other governments, inculding the USA. There is nothing else I can do for you. I pray that you find someone to talk to about this.
Feel free to call anything I say as "handwavy". It's just an excuse to ignore what you don't want to hear.
God needs to vindicate himself? To who?
Humans are not the only creation. But even if they were, he would not have done anything diffrent. What he did was the right thing to do, and God cannot do anything unjust.
If Satan was a perfect angel, how could greed have gotten the better of him?
The same way it got ahold of perfect humans. They have free will. They entertained the idea of being independant from God, and it led them to make the choice to do just that.
If God knows his plan was perfect, why does he have to justify himself to anyone?
See point #1. Also, Gods *right to rule* was brought into question. Lets use an illustration. Lets say that you had children, maybe you do. Now lets say that someone who hates you calls the police and says that you are abusing them, and offers some very poor proof of it. The police, having the duty to protect children, might take them away from you. How do you prove that you are a fit parrent and that the accusation is false? Would you break into the foster home, take them, and run away to somewhere where they cant get to you? No. You would allow the whole mess to pan out until your innocence was proved. Sure, God could have wiped out Satan, and the first Humans and started over. But that would not have proven anything. As a God of Justice (God's four primary attirbutes are Power, Wisdom, Justice and Love) he could not do that.
What will all this Jesus-sacrificing sturm and drang change?
In order to balance the scales of justice, sometihng would need to be given that was equal to the value of what was lost. A perfect human life was lost (Adam), hence a perfect human life (Jesus) would have to be given to attone for that loss. That is the basis of the randsom sacrifice. We were all in captivity to sin until that ransom was paid. Hence we know again that God loves us, and his son Jesus does too.
It's times like these that I'm glad I chose atheism. So very very very much simpler this way.
Yes, it is simpler. You're born, you suffer for about 80 years, you die, your gone. Yep, very simple.
Go right ahead. He'll be happy to tell you that it was not your place to judge anyone, since that belongs to him. The child will be reserected, and you might not be. *You* do not have the ability to see every angle, or read the heart conditon of anyone. God does. Thats why you should follow the example of Michael (who is Jesus in his Heavenly existance) that he set as recored at Jude verse 9.
Sorry, I missed this... Why didn't God KNOW what they did? Of course he did. You've never seen a parent of a child who just broke a window or something come to that child and ask "What did you do?". He was allowing Adam and Eve to expain themselves, even if thier excuse was feeble. Adam: "It's the womans fault" Nice one Adam... way to set an example for all us Men.
You're also bound by the very matter of the tree: Knowledge of Good and Evil. That means, that Adam and Eve didn't KNOW what good and evil was before eating from it, which means how are they supposed ot know they are disobeying God?
I made several other posts explaining the meaning of the tree.
Why didn't God KNOW what they did? Notice how he comes back and goes "Uh.. Why are you covering yourself? Who told you that you were naked?"
Simple. The instant that they ate from that tree and started making decisions for themselves, they pulled away from God and became sinful, flawed, imperfect (btw, the word translated "sin" means "to miss the mark" that being the mark of perfection). When they became imperfect, they became ashamed of their own thoughts and covered themselves. Notice that when they were kicked out, God made "long garments of skin for them" (Genesis 3:21). So he even saw the need for it, now that they were sinful.
And where's the Tree of Life that's guarded by the flaming sword??
What about it? The Cherubs and the spinning sword were at the entrance to the garden, not at the "tree of life". By having a tree called the tree of life, and barring their access too it, God was showing that he was rejecting them from having eternal life, and like a fan's power cord pulled from the wall, they would slowly grow old and die just like the fan would eventually stop spinning.
It all changes
No, it doesn't. John 1:18 says that "No man has seen God at any time". This would include Adam. Genesis 3:8 says that humans "heard" Gods "voice" as if he was walking around in the garden. No one has ever Touched him. The person that Jacob was wrestling with was an angel. That angel could have easily beat him, but it was Jacobs persistence that was being tested. At the end of it, the angel merely touched him and damaged a ligament in his hip. As for the mountain, how else would you address a few million people in the middle of nowhere, and at the same time show your presence? Other similar things were displays of presence and power to strengthen the faith of his followers. And they were all recorded for our benefit.
expected these ignorant children to have enough self controll not to eat the apple?
Self control had nothing to do with it. There were many, many trees in the garden, all with edible fruit on them. The *only* reason they had to eat of that tree was *choice*.
he didn't know that the Morning Star was undermining his commandments, and he didn't put the blame only on him,
You assume that he didn't. Read the account of Cain and Abel. God saw the flaws that Cain had. He warned him that they would lead to trouble. What was he supposed to do? Punish Cain for something he didn't do yet? What about Satan? Do you think he should have done the same? You don't punish someone for something they might choose to do. Thats not Justice.
in his endless love he kicked the kids out and let them fend for themselves.
So now you think that he should have just forgave them and let all the issues (and there were a few) float? Thats not Justice either. Right after it happened, in the first prophacy ever recorded in the bible, God said "And I shall put emnity between you (Satan) and the woman (God's Kingdom/Government) and between your seed (members of Satans Orginization) and her seed (Members of Gods Kingdom). He will bruse you in the head (Satans Distruction) and you will bruse him in the heal (Jesus' death w/ reserection)" This is how God would set things right. At the time, they probbly had very little idea what he meant, although Abel knew that blood would have to be splilled since his first sacrifice was the "best of his flock". God did *not* kick mankind out to "fend for themselves".
They most certionly did know what was right and wrong. In Genisis 3:2,3 Eve told the serpent, which Satan was using as a puppet: "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat, but as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the gardem, God has said, 'You must not eat from it, no you must not touch it, that you do not die.'" Eve would have heard that from her husband, Adam since she did not exist when the command was given. That is probbly why the 'you must not touch it' part is in there. The point is that Adam and Eve *knew* what was right and wrong. By eating of that tree, they were in effect saying, 'We are going to decied for ourselves what is right and wrong becouse we think we know better'. That is why the tree is called "The tree of the knowledge of good and bad".
Nowhere did I say that there was only one tree, but the only one they were not to eat of was the tree of "knowlege" which represented the right to know, or decide, whats good and bad. By eating of it, Adam demonstrated that *he* wanted to be the one to make that decision instead of God.
I wish I could mod you up. You are correct. Also note that the "tree of knowlege of good and bad" did not mean that it held that knowlege. it meant that if they ate from it, they were deciding for themselves what was good and bad, which was not their place. That was God's right alone. Thats another fold in the account that shows the depth of Adams original sin.
Sorry, I'm not familar with what you are refering to. Can you please tell me where that story is located so I can look it up and refresh my memory? I must have fogotten about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Coral Cache Link of the entire article in Print View
I'm trying to find out if access 2003, or at least the 2003 runtime, is working. The codeweavers site seems to be experiancing, um, difficulties.
I really can't comment much on your problems, but it sounds like you have very, very flaky hardware to me. Do other kernels (2.4), or (cringe) windows run without problems? The only time I've ever had a 2.6 kernel give me problems is a bios with a bad acpi implementation (fixed by disabling acpi) and a borked video card. I run 2.6 on all my machines, three of which are mission critcal. They currently have been running for over two months stright, which is only becouse I had to move our racks around in some remodling work. I've never had them just randomly stop working at all for the past 4 years.
All I can say is that Intel would have to be increadibly braindead to even think about trying to get people to switch to the Itanium instruction set after the embarresment of the AMD64 fiasco. They must be using the AMD64 instruction set. In fact, since they have a slide that shows Windows XP 64bit compatibility, I'm going to say that I will eat one of my iguanna's (not my best one though) if they are using the Itanic instruction set and not AMD64.
I *think* this is fixed. When I installed Test 3 I used a reiserfs root and had no troubles with selinux.
In short, no. /home and easy to back up and restore. But for those running servers on FC, ouch.
There is not even a supported way to upgrade from FC3 to FC4, or even from a FC4 test release. The reason being explained to me was that testing all that upgrading would greatly slow down the release process. Personaly, I'd rather have to wait another month or two for a release then have to fresh install. It's not as big a deal as it is with windows though, since all the user settings are in
no. we are in the 7th "day", the one he is resting from his massive creative works on. The saying one day is as a thousand years is just, well, a saying. It's meant to show that time is far, far diffrent for God. That makes sense concidering that time is only the way it is inside the universe, which is something God created. We could speculate about that for days.... :)
I'd imagine there's not all that much to *do* in a perfect garden, anyway, especially if you don't know about S-E-X.)
Genisis 1:28
It wasn't just the garden, they had work to do.
They were told to fill the earth. That means sex.
Wow... thats messed up.
Adam was not decieved. Read 1st Timothy 2:14.
First, no, he did not look into the future to see adam and eve fail. Thier failure was their choice.
When humans were created, there were already untold millons of angels in the heavens.
The creature you should be blaming is the one who was named Satan. He was a high ranking angel who cultivated desires for worship that belonged only to God. He is the one who used the serpent as a puppet in the garden of eden. That is why he is called "the original serpent" in Revelation 12:9. Also, that prophacy has already come to pass.
I am a thinking atheist
And by this you imply that if you are not an atheist you are not thinking? Hebrews Chapter 11 verse one says "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." The rest of that chapter defines faith even clearer.
You can't have faith if you don't think. You must think in order to reason on the 'evident demonstrations' if you are to attain it. Anyone who says differently is either believing purely on emotion, which is a very weak thing, or is trying to mislead.
I covered this here.
ahh... yes. I could type this all myself but...
this seems accurate to my understanding.
God did not create humans to suffer. You're blaming the wrong sprit creature. Being omnipotent does not mean he fixes our destiny. That conflicts with free will.
I'm sorry that your life was so miserable that you think that way of God. Perhaps the orthidox church's hypociritcal actions put you off to the whole concept of God. I can't help you by typing. What I can tell you is that people I call my Brothers and Sisters we sent to syberia by the Soviet Governmet becouse of thier faith. Many died for it.
Hitler did the same thing. So did many, many other governments, inculding the USA.
There is nothing else I can do for you. I pray that you find someone to talk to about this.
Knock Knock
Um, he asked for a non-handwavey rebuttal.
Feel free to call anything I say as "handwavy". It's just an excuse to ignore what you don't want to hear.
God needs to vindicate himself? To who?
Humans are not the only creation. But even if they were, he would not have done anything diffrent. What he did was the right thing to do, and God cannot do anything unjust.
If Satan was a perfect angel, how could greed have gotten the better of him?
The same way it got ahold of perfect humans. They have free will. They entertained the idea of being independant from God, and it led them to make the choice to do just that.
If God knows his plan was perfect, why does he have to justify himself to anyone?
See point #1. Also, Gods *right to rule* was brought into question. Lets use an illustration.
Lets say that you had children, maybe you do.
Now lets say that someone who hates you calls the police and says that you are abusing them, and offers some very poor proof of it. The police, having the duty to protect children, might take them away from you. How do you prove that you are a fit parrent and that the accusation is false? Would you break into the foster home, take them, and run away to somewhere where they cant get to you? No. You would allow the whole mess to pan out until your innocence was proved.
Sure, God could have wiped out Satan, and the first Humans and started over. But that would not have proven anything. As a God of Justice (God's four primary attirbutes are Power, Wisdom, Justice and Love) he could not do that.
What will all this Jesus-sacrificing sturm and drang change?
In order to balance the scales of justice, sometihng would need to be given that was equal to the value of what was lost. A perfect human life was lost (Adam), hence a perfect human life (Jesus) would have to be given to attone for that loss. That is the basis of the randsom sacrifice. We were all in captivity to sin until that ransom was paid. Hence we know again that God loves us, and his son Jesus does too.
It's times like these that I'm glad I chose atheism. So very very very much simpler this way.
Yes, it is simpler. You're born, you suffer for about 80 years, you die, your gone. Yep, very simple.
Go right ahead. He'll be happy to tell you that it was not your place to judge anyone, since that belongs to him. The child will be reserected, and you might not be. *You* do not have the ability to see every angle, or read the heart conditon of anyone. God does. Thats why you should follow the example of Michael (who is Jesus in his Heavenly existance) that he set as recored at Jude verse 9.
see my other post
Sorry, I missed this...
Why didn't God KNOW what they did?
Of course he did. You've never seen a parent of a child who just broke a window or something come to that child and ask "What did you do?". He was allowing Adam and Eve to expain themselves, even if thier excuse was feeble.
Adam: "It's the womans fault"
Nice one Adam... way to set an example for all us Men.
You're also bound by the very matter of the tree: Knowledge of Good and Evil. That means, that Adam and Eve didn't KNOW what good and evil was before eating from it, which means how are they supposed ot know they are disobeying God?
I made several other posts explaining the meaning of the tree.
Why didn't God KNOW what they did? Notice how he comes back and goes "Uh.. Why are you covering yourself? Who told you that you were naked?"
Simple. The instant that they ate from that tree and started making decisions for themselves, they pulled away from God and became sinful, flawed, imperfect (btw, the word translated "sin" means "to miss the mark" that being the mark of perfection). When they became imperfect, they became ashamed of their own thoughts and covered themselves. Notice that when they were kicked out, God made "long garments of skin for them" (Genesis 3:21). So he even saw the need for it, now that they were sinful.
And where's the Tree of Life that's guarded by the flaming sword??
What about it? The Cherubs and the spinning sword were at the entrance to the garden, not at the "tree of life". By having a tree called the tree of life, and barring their access too it, God was showing that he was rejecting them from having eternal life, and like a fan's power cord pulled from the wall, they would slowly grow old and die just like the fan would eventually stop spinning.
It all changes
No, it doesn't. John 1:18 says that "No man has seen God at any time". This would include Adam. Genesis 3:8 says that humans "heard" Gods "voice" as if he was walking around in the garden. No one has ever Touched him. The person that Jacob was wrestling with was an angel. That angel could have easily beat him, but it was Jacobs persistence that was being tested. At the end of it, the angel merely touched him and damaged a ligament in his hip. As for the mountain, how else would you address a few million people in the middle of nowhere, and at the same time show your presence? Other similar things were displays of presence and power to strengthen the faith of his followers. And they were all recorded for our benefit.
expected these ignorant children to have enough self controll not to eat the apple?
Self control had nothing to do with it. There were many, many trees in the garden, all with edible fruit on them. The *only* reason they had to eat of that tree was *choice*.
he didn't know that the Morning Star was undermining his commandments, and he didn't put the blame only on him,
You assume that he didn't. Read the account of Cain and Abel. God saw the flaws that Cain had. He warned him that they would lead to trouble. What was he supposed to do? Punish Cain for something he didn't do yet? What about Satan? Do you think he should have done the same? You don't punish someone for something they might choose to do. Thats not Justice.
in his endless love he kicked the kids out and let them fend for themselves.
So now you think that he should have just forgave them and let all the issues (and there were a few) float? Thats not Justice either.
Right after it happened, in the first prophacy ever recorded in the bible, God said "And I shall put emnity between you (Satan) and the woman (God's Kingdom/Government) and between your seed (members of Satans Orginization) and her seed (Members of Gods Kingdom). He will bruse you in the head (Satans Distruction) and you will bruse him in the heal (Jesus' death w/ reserection)"
This is how God would set things right.
At the time, they probbly had very little idea what he meant, although Abel knew that blood would have to be splilled since his first sacrifice was the "best of his flock".
God did *not* kick mankind out to "fend for themselves".
They most certionly did know what was right and wrong. In Genisis 3:2,3 Eve told the serpent, which Satan was using as a puppet: "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat, but as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the gardem, God has said, 'You must not eat from it, no you must not touch it, that you do not die.'"
Eve would have heard that from her husband, Adam since she did not exist when the command was given. That is probbly why the 'you must not touch it' part is in there.
The point is that Adam and Eve *knew* what was right and wrong. By eating of that tree, they were in effect saying, 'We are going to decied for ourselves what is right and wrong becouse we think we know better'. That is why the tree is called "The tree of the knowledge of good and bad".
Nowhere did I say that there was only one tree, but the only one they were not to eat of was the tree of "knowlege" which represented the right to know, or decide, whats good and bad. By eating of it, Adam demonstrated that *he* wanted to be the one to make that decision instead of God.
I wish I could mod you up. You are correct. Also note that the "tree of knowlege of good and bad" did not mean that it held that knowlege. it meant that if they ate from it, they were deciding for themselves what was good and bad, which was not their place. That was God's right alone. Thats another fold in the account that shows the depth of Adams original sin.
Sorry, I'm not familar with what you are refering to. Can you please tell me where that story is located so I can look it up and refresh my memory? I must have fogotten about it.