You don't think this is a gross oversimplification? I mean, it partially explains the federal income tax system, but it doesn't even come close to explaining the tax system as a whole.
Not a bike-thieving scoundrel. Just a stolen motorcycle buying kid. But being on probation and also being a ward of the state, I think they just want to stop him from hanging out with his friends.
The kid was not a "thief". What he did was buy a motorbike from another kid for $200, and the bike he bought turned out to be stolen. The whole court thing is because the kid is both a ward of the state and on probation for having shot someone with a pellet gun.
The child in question didn't steal a bike. He bought the motorbike from some kid named Skye for $200. Cop saw him riding it without a helmet, pulled him over and upon research found out the bike was stolen, and he was charged with receipt of stolen property.
I dunno. I think I'd rather be given additional probation (he had just had his annual review for shooting someone with a pellet gun), a 21 day detox program, and restrictions on computer usage than the alternative of a juvenile with a record and drug problems being sent to a California state prison for five years.
Pretty much everyone I've met from everywhere has complained about there being nothing to do. Didn't matter if they were from Europe, New York City or even Rosco, NY (population 597). Anywhere you live, it's what you make of it.
I was initially going to tear into several points of your argument like pointing out that a combination of all the Judeo-Christian religions does, in fact, represent more than 50% of the world population (though the fact still doesn't refute your argument). But attacking your post like that would merely be argumentative because I agree with your essential point, that the Bible isn't without flaws, and isn't the word of God. Still, there was really no need to start what becomes an emotionally charged monologue insulting other people's Gods.
It's the insulting rants against the more fundamental elements of the religion that tend to push moderates closer to the fundamental side, as such rants (when not presented tactfully) stir up deep seeded resentments and emotions.
Those religions that believe in a benevolent god figure tend to have underlying commonalities that one would expect from such philosophies. The golden rule being one element that always resurfaces, forgiveness and understanding being another, etc... Whether it is a god created by man in his need to believe in something else, or whether it is an actual creator god, these positive messages have been passed down with all of the negative prejudices and hatreds. And if anything, striving to overcome our own weaknesses to become something better than we are is a major element of the human condition. What's so wrong or incompetent with that ideal, that hope?
Isn't this argument assuming only a single timeline? If one could see multiple futures from every possible decision made, then you could both see the future and have free will in the present.
A central theme of Christianity is free will. Hence the concept of being tested by god (Job, Noah and Abraham, etc..) There are thousands of choices each day placed before people, some more difficult than others.
The concept that god is working through people is attributed when someone makes a choice that would be considered to be (by the one attributing it) the thing god would want them to do. It is also often attributed to someone who makes the opposite choice.
The reason these things are attributed to god are as a way to give positive praise to people who act in a manner you approve of, or to explain to others the horrible things which occur in life. It's used as a method to explain away coincidence and utterly random misfortune.
It is not however meant to suggest that we have no free will. Unless you're a Calvanist...but I think their whole argument is based from a different set of precepts though they come to the same conclusion as you.
I can guarantee you that there is not even one thousand pages written in the bible on the workings of the Divine or of the Afterlife. Which is far fewer than thousands.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't think this is a gross oversimplification? I mean, it partially explains the federal income tax system, but it doesn't even come close to explaining the tax system as a whole.
He paid $200 to a guy named Skye for the bike. He was never charged with stealing a bike, but with receiving stolen property.
Not a bike-thieving scoundrel. Just a stolen motorcycle buying kid. But being on probation and also being a ward of the state, I think they just want to stop him from hanging out with his friends.
Luckily this case had nothing to do with bicycles then.
The kid was not a "thief". What he did was buy a motorbike from another kid for $200, and the bike he bought turned out to be stolen. The whole court thing is because the kid is both a ward of the state and on probation for having shot someone with a pellet gun.
The child in question didn't steal a bike. He bought the motorbike from some kid named Skye for $200. Cop saw him riding it without a helmet, pulled him over and upon research found out the bike was stolen, and he was charged with receipt of stolen property.
I dunno. I think I'd rather be given additional probation (he had just had his annual review for shooting someone with a pellet gun), a 21 day detox program, and restrictions on computer usage than the alternative of a juvenile with a record and drug problems being sent to a California state prison for five years.
These both sound like much better methods than my old 1 inch from the screen method.
This, I never realized...if this works I will tithe to you.
You just referred to people as resources. Doesn't that bother you?
Elwood: What kind of music do you usually have here?
Claire: Oh, we got both kinds. We got country *and* western.
Pretty much everyone I've met from everywhere has complained about there being nothing to do. Didn't matter if they were from Europe, New York City or even Rosco, NY (population 597). Anywhere you live, it's what you make of it.
I was initially going to tear into several points of your argument like pointing out that a combination of all the Judeo-Christian religions does, in fact, represent more than 50% of the world population (though the fact still doesn't refute your argument). But attacking your post like that would merely be argumentative because I agree with your essential point, that the Bible isn't without flaws, and isn't the word of God. Still, there was really no need to start what becomes an emotionally charged monologue insulting other people's Gods.
It's the insulting rants against the more fundamental elements of the religion that tend to push moderates closer to the fundamental side, as such rants (when not presented tactfully) stir up deep seeded resentments and emotions.
Those religions that believe in a benevolent god figure tend to have underlying commonalities that one would expect from such philosophies. The golden rule being one element that always resurfaces, forgiveness and understanding being another, etc... Whether it is a god created by man in his need to believe in something else, or whether it is an actual creator god, these positive messages have been passed down with all of the negative prejudices and hatreds. And if anything, striving to overcome our own weaknesses to become something better than we are is a major element of the human condition. What's so wrong or incompetent with that ideal, that hope?
Ok, you wait there while I go to snap a picture of the milky way from a distance.
Well at least there's an excuse for protestants.
Isn't this argument assuming only a single timeline? If one could see multiple futures from every possible decision made, then you could both see the future and have free will in the present.
I always thought that the Apostles creed was more well known and basic than the Nicene.
Your signature has won yet again sirrah. I tip my hat to you.
A central theme of Christianity is free will. Hence the concept of being tested by god (Job, Noah and Abraham, etc..) There are thousands of choices each day placed before people, some more difficult than others.
The concept that god is working through people is attributed when someone makes a choice that would be considered to be (by the one attributing it) the thing god would want them to do. It is also often attributed to someone who makes the opposite choice.
The reason these things are attributed to god are as a way to give positive praise to people who act in a manner you approve of, or to explain to others the horrible things which occur in life. It's used as a method to explain away coincidence and utterly random misfortune.
It is not however meant to suggest that we have no free will. Unless you're a Calvanist...but I think their whole argument is based from a different set of precepts though they come to the same conclusion as you.
I believe you mean "Omniscience" which is all-knowing. Not "Omnipotence" which is all-powerful.
The Bible doesn't claim to be the "One True Word of God".
It gets that label from fundamentalists.
That's right. No one ever gets called on the details on Slashdot. Ever.
I think the term your searching for is Catholic Doctrine.
I can guarantee you that there is not even one thousand pages written in the bible on the workings of the Divine or of the Afterlife. Which is far fewer than thousands.
But they don't use it in any official capacity anymore to belay the snickering of their peers. (grin)