The problem is, you can't. All these odd perceptions of hell are taken from works outside the Bible itself - and when you start accepting random tradition as truth, you end up with travesties like the Catholic church.
You've got Sheol in the OT, and Gehenna in the NT. Gehenna is (was) quite literally a location outside Jerusalem, and which was the place a few pagan things such a child sacrifice and eventually became what amounts to a garbage dump. He was talking to people who knew what he meant.
And that's about as explicit as Jesus got without being on an obviously-symbolic tangent. Fire and brimstone? Yes, hell is presented as a fire at times...relating directly to perpetually-burning garbage dump that was Gehenna. Pointy demons? No chance.
So, yes, ignorant people that take words out of context and wouldn't know symbolism if it bit them may get the impression that hell is a fire, but a person with a modicum of reading comprehension can see that the bible is neither ambiguous nor overly descriptive of hell. It's a separation from God, and a separation from all that is good.
-about the "Christian mod" aspect: According to some lines of theology, hell did not exist prior to the resurrection. Just an interesting tidbit.
Know what's really great? Every image of "hell" "demons" and "satan" are entirely secularized. Everything is taken from an errant extrapolation on a lake-of-fire concept. Throw in the imagery of Dante's Inferno, and that's how we arrived where we are now - people took purely symbolic metaphors and turned them into a collective fantasy. When you see a red-skinned horned guy carrying his pitchfork through a fiery subterranean landscape, it's no more based in (Christian biblical) fact than the Lord of the Rings movies.
The truest biblical expression of "hell" is eternal and absolute separation from God, whereas "heaven" is being in His presence. That's it.
That's really odd. I use the status-bar link previewing all the time, and have disabled changing status bar text from JS ever since that feature has been available. This is in various builds of Mozilla since 0.8 or so up through Firefox 1.0. - so if it had been broken along the way, I'd likely notice.
Nah, watch more South Park. The Chewbacca Defense is a defense whereby an unrelated fact is brought in, the inconsistency of that fact is brought up, and thereby innocense is proved. It's a distraction.
If HyperCard's the first thing that comes to mind...you should probably have tried using the Desk Accessories in the classic Mac OS. (er...System Software)
Congratulations, you've met the exception to the stereotype. Welcome to the world at large, where things are not as some would have you believe.
Just because I'm saved doesn't make me perfect.
I'm one of those Christians that tries to give secularists as little to complain about as possible, by living up to what I demand as best I can and being true as best I can. A large percentage of the Dubya-voting contingent has a problem with my ways, but that doesn't make them all the same. That's like saying that all atheists have the same position on all moral issues.
No, the theory of evolution is the leading scientific theory of the DEVELOPMENT of life. The current theory for the ORIGIN of life is "is just happened somehow" and if that's actually scientific at all, you're abusing the term.
In fact, if you take a view of the Bible that is anything but strictly literal, there is not much modern science actually disagrees with.
Carbon dating makes many assumptions that cannot be proven, such as that levels of C14 in the atmosphere are constant over time.
So what makes your theory of "it was written by a guy recently" better than "it was written by a guy thousands of years ago" anyhow? Modern man has proven perfectly capable of fucking up in as grand a fashion as any ancient.
Do some serious looking into the studies that showed the forming of amino acids in controlled situations, and look at how similar their beginning "soup" was to the (likely) early atmosphere of Earth. Then observe the complexity of DNA, and the information contained within. Contemplate the idea of entropy, and the extreme order present in the structure of every one of your cell nuclei. Think of the relatively short period of time that has been given for the developmet of life from initial appearance.
Just because both theories are theories deosn't make them bullshit. We get into trouble when people (from either side, mind you) present THEORY as FACT.
No. They are 'ignorant', for example, because they support the teaching of creationism in schools.
They're not saying to exclude evolution, so you, by EXCLUDING a theory about unrecorded history are promoting ignorance. As soon as you can explain all the holes in evolution (and if you don't think they are both present and significant, you're more ignorant than we thought) I'll explain the holes in creationism.
They are 'gullible' because they reelected the President after he ran on a platform of national security
THIS is the major one to me. And I think it's a mixture of gullibility and apathy. It's well documented the way this President has misled and deceived the public, but people don't care because either (a) they expect politicians to lie, and to them one lie is as good as another or (b) listen to the unfiltered propaganda coming from Crossfire rather than thinking critically about it and realizing how self-contradictory this President has been.
Similarly, I live north of you, in McDonough county. Being a more rural area, there is more of a Republican leaning to this area. Thankfully, the university crowd brings in a liberal contingent from the cities (StL and Chicago, primarily) to counteract the the religious conservative natives.
(You'd think with more farmers, there would be more Democrats thanks to farm subsidies and the like, but apparently being "right" with Jesus is more important than being right with the world.)
And, considering myself a rather devout Christian, I still don't understand the thought process (or lack thereof) at work. I know many of my friends just don't take the time to understand the reasons for voting are more than just a stance on abortion.
After all, Jesus himself gave a pretty clear model LAST time he was here. WWJD? NOT FUCKIN' START A WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST, that's for sure.
I'll tell you why, in my under-informed USan opinion.
As you said, it's a race to pick the least-bad of two bad choices. Either way, wer'e stuck with a President few will truly like. The thing is, if we keep GWB in office, he already has momentum built for his bad decisions. With a changing of the guard and Kerry at the wheel, our country will do little to support Bush's actions so far for the first portion of the new President's term in office. So it's not just picking the lesser of two evils, it's shrewd damage control. It will take time for Kerry to build momentum and start making his own mistakes, while Bush already has a head start.
So voting Kerry into office is hoping that the time he wastes countering Bush's momentum will be wasted, and he'll have less time to mess up the world as we know it.
Then, in four years, maybe we'll have a better pair of candidates to work with. It's not likely [that we'll have to good choices next time], but we're hoping that the shift in policy will at least minimize the negative impact our national government will have in the short term. It's a pessimistic view, sure, but it's the only one I can rationalize.
But, say you have a.1mm-wide concentric scratch that goes 180 degrees around a disc. Unless there's a large amount of error-correcting information before and after the scratch, you've detroyed quite a bit of information on the DVD, but fairly little on a CD.
No, they weren't. They were a major PITA on a daily basis for me, from 1984 through 1989 (which is when I swtiched to NeXTSTEP)
In addition, I would still contend that the type/creator methodology was great for its ability to associate a specific file of a type with one application while another file of the same type could be associated with another application was great. [Apologies for nonsensical run-on sentence.] I wish there had been something in the basic UI that allowed a user to re-assign creator codes through the Finder, but that hole was filled to some extent by various shareware/3rd-party utilities.
I actually have. I still don't agree that is was better, from an end-user-experience level, than the classic Mac OS.
Now, what OS X has turned it into, has definitely added something - but I'll also concede that mixing two such disparate OS heritages into one 'experience' is prone to inconsistency, which is still fairly apparent in OS X.
Only as long as you don't apply it to a homocentric anthromorphic diety, or other such fictional construct. It's terribly crass and likely to get people backing away from you.... You call it design, we call it evolution.
Since when did this become an anti-Judeo-Christian rant? There's no need to bring God into this; what'd he do to you? Kill your dog?
I wouldn't say it was necessarily better or worse - but it had different hang-ups than the Mac OS of the day. There were some areas that I think Be did much better - interface responsiveness, live filesystem queries, and MIME filetypes versus a the 'proprietary' type/creator system. (Granted, the type/creator codes were *great* but BeOS was more in-step with the emerging Internet world.)
[And anyone that seriously contends that the NeXT OS of the day was better than the Mac OS is mentally deficient.]
I'm not sure why it'd be required, though, because All Macs that run OS X can also run the Classic Environment inside it. I suppose for a few fringe compatibility isasues it'd be a blessing, but those are relatively few and far between.
You will also ALWAYS get an integrated graphics adapter on a laptop. Your two definitions of "integrated" got confused. He was saying it's not integrated into the chipset as part of the northbridge, as many x86 machines are. You know the ones, where they have video memory "shared" with system RAM. On the iBook, the Radeon is separate from the system chipset. It has its own memory, and hence its own bandwidth. This is a better solution from a performance point of view, though a bit more expensive to produce since it makes the motherboard bigger, and requires extra memory.
OS9 itself may not boot in a stand-alone fashion (I'm not sure about the remaining G4 machines, but the desktop G5s cannot boot OS9) but the Classic environment still functions extremely well as a compatibility environment if you want to run older Mac OS apps.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, you can't. All these odd perceptions of hell are taken from works outside the Bible itself - and when you start accepting random tradition as truth, you end up with travesties like the Catholic church.
You've got Sheol in the OT, and Gehenna in the NT. Gehenna is (was) quite literally a location outside Jerusalem, and which was the place a few pagan things such a child sacrifice and eventually became what amounts to a garbage dump. He was talking to people who knew what he meant.
And that's about as explicit as Jesus got without being on an obviously-symbolic tangent. Fire and brimstone? Yes, hell is presented as a fire at times...relating directly to perpetually-burning garbage dump that was Gehenna. Pointy demons? No chance.
So, yes, ignorant people that take words out of context and wouldn't know symbolism if it bit them may get the impression that hell is a fire, but a person with a modicum of reading comprehension can see that the bible is neither ambiguous nor overly descriptive of hell. It's a separation from God, and a separation from all that is good.
-about the "Christian mod" aspect: According to some lines of theology, hell did not exist prior to the resurrection. Just an interesting tidbit.
You can also use the Windows computer name; this method is *almost* as reliable as using IP addresses or proper domain names.
Know what's really great? Every image of "hell" "demons" and "satan" are entirely secularized. Everything is taken from an errant extrapolation on a lake-of-fire concept. Throw in the imagery of Dante's Inferno, and that's how we arrived where we are now - people took purely symbolic metaphors and turned them into a collective fantasy. When you see a red-skinned horned guy carrying his pitchfork through a fiery subterranean landscape, it's no more based in (Christian biblical) fact than the Lord of the Rings movies.
The truest biblical expression of "hell" is eternal and absolute separation from God, whereas "heaven" is being in His presence. That's it.
Couldn't tell you about audio because Windows doesn't believe I have a 5.1 setup, so I can only do stereo.
What's your hardware and how's it all connected?
What kind of ridiculous argument is that?
McCain: "People have been doing something legally for quite some time; their actions should remain legal."
You: "While we're at it, something is illegal and has been for some time. Can we change that?"
I'm not saying I disagree on the subject of marijuana, but this kind of shit would get you drummed out of junior-high debate club.
That's really odd. I use the status-bar link previewing all the time, and have disabled changing status bar text from JS ever since that feature has been available. This is in various builds of Mozilla since 0.8 or so up through Firefox 1.0. - so if it had been broken along the way, I'd likely notice.
This is a big ol' clusterfuck of people I have tenuous connections to. Fun.
(Sorta-met you via The Boris, if you don't recall.)
This appears to be a default setting already in Firefox 1.0, so there's no need to create and set the value.
Nah, watch more South Park. The Chewbacca Defense is a defense whereby an unrelated fact is brought in, the inconsistency of that fact is brought up, and thereby innocense is proved. It's a distraction.
If HyperCard's the first thing that comes to mind...you should probably have tried using the Desk Accessories in the classic Mac OS. (er...System Software)
Congratulations, you've met the exception to the stereotype. Welcome to the world at large, where things are not as some would have you believe.
Just because I'm saved doesn't make me perfect.
I'm one of those Christians that tries to give secularists as little to complain about as possible, by living up to what I demand as best I can and being true as best I can. A large percentage of the Dubya-voting contingent has a problem with my ways, but that doesn't make them all the same. That's like saying that all atheists have the same position on all moral issues.
No, the theory of evolution is the leading scientific theory of the DEVELOPMENT of life. The current theory for the ORIGIN of life is "is just happened somehow" and if that's actually scientific at all, you're abusing the term.
In fact, if you take a view of the Bible that is anything but strictly literal, there is not much modern science actually disagrees with.
Carbon dating makes many assumptions that cannot be proven, such as that levels of C14 in the atmosphere are constant over time.
So what makes your theory of "it was written by a guy recently" better than "it was written by a guy thousands of years ago" anyhow? Modern man has proven perfectly capable of fucking up in as grand a fashion as any ancient.
Do some serious looking into the studies that showed the forming of amino acids in controlled situations, and look at how similar their beginning "soup" was to the (likely) early atmosphere of Earth. Then observe the complexity of DNA, and the information contained within. Contemplate the idea of entropy, and the extreme order present in the structure of every one of your cell nuclei. Think of the relatively short period of time that has been given for the developmet of life from initial appearance.
Just because both theories are theories deosn't make them bullshit. We get into trouble when people (from either side, mind you) present THEORY as FACT.
No. They are 'ignorant', for example, because they support the teaching of creationism in schools.
They're not saying to exclude evolution, so you, by EXCLUDING a theory about unrecorded history are promoting ignorance. As soon as you can explain all the holes in evolution (and if you don't think they are both present and significant, you're more ignorant than we thought) I'll explain the holes in creationism.
They are 'gullible' because they reelected the President after he ran on a platform of national security
THIS is the major one to me. And I think it's a mixture of gullibility and apathy. It's well documented the way this President has misled and deceived the public, but people don't care because either (a) they expect politicians to lie, and to them one lie is as good as another or (b) listen to the unfiltered propaganda coming from Crossfire rather than thinking critically about it and realizing how self-contradictory this President has been.
Similarly, I live north of you, in McDonough county. Being a more rural area, there is more of a Republican leaning to this area. Thankfully, the university crowd brings in a liberal contingent from the cities (StL and Chicago, primarily) to counteract the the religious conservative natives.
(You'd think with more farmers, there would be more Democrats thanks to farm subsidies and the like, but apparently being "right" with Jesus is more important than being right with the world.)
And, considering myself a rather devout Christian, I still don't understand the thought process (or lack thereof) at work. I know many of my friends just don't take the time to understand the reasons for voting are more than just a stance on abortion.
After all, Jesus himself gave a pretty clear model LAST time he was here. WWJD? NOT FUCKIN' START A WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST, that's for sure.
I'll tell you why, in my under-informed USan opinion.
As you said, it's a race to pick the least-bad of two bad choices. Either way, wer'e stuck with a President few will truly like. The thing is, if we keep GWB in office, he already has momentum built for his bad decisions. With a changing of the guard and Kerry at the wheel, our country will do little to support Bush's actions so far for the first portion of the new President's term in office. So it's not just picking the lesser of two evils, it's shrewd damage control. It will take time for Kerry to build momentum and start making his own mistakes, while Bush already has a head start.
So voting Kerry into office is hoping that the time he wastes countering Bush's momentum will be wasted, and he'll have less time to mess up the world as we know it.
Then, in four years, maybe we'll have a better pair of candidates to work with. It's not likely [that we'll have to good choices next time], but we're hoping that the shift in policy will at least minimize the negative impact our national government will have in the short term. It's a pessimistic view, sure, but it's the only one I can rationalize.
But, say you have a .1mm-wide concentric scratch that goes 180 degrees around a disc. Unless there's a large amount of error-correcting information before and after the scratch, you've detroyed quite a bit of information on the DVD, but fairly little on a CD.
Which I think is a shame.
For example, my MiniDiscs are nigh-indestructible, but I have numerous CDs that are unplayable.
Granted, the type/creator codes were *great*
No, they weren't. They were a major PITA on a daily basis for me, from 1984 through 1989 (which is when I swtiched to NeXTSTEP)
In addition, I would still contend that the type/creator methodology was great for its ability to associate a specific file of a type with one application while another file of the same type could be associated with another application was great. [Apologies for nonsensical run-on sentence.] I wish there had been something in the basic UI that allowed a user to re-assign creator codes through the Finder, but that hole was filled to some extent by various shareware/3rd-party utilities.
I actually have. I still don't agree that is was better, from an end-user-experience level, than the classic Mac OS.
Now, what OS X has turned it into, has definitely added something - but I'll also concede that mixing two such disparate OS heritages into one 'experience' is prone to inconsistency, which is still fairly apparent in OS X.
Only as long as you don't apply it to a homocentric anthromorphic diety, or other such fictional construct. It's terribly crass and likely to get people backing away from you. ...
You call it design, we call it evolution.
Since when did this become an anti-Judeo-Christian rant? There's no need to bring God into this; what'd he do to you? Kill your dog?
I wouldn't say it was necessarily better or worse - but it had different hang-ups than the Mac OS of the day. There were some areas that I think Be did much better - interface responsiveness, live filesystem queries, and MIME filetypes versus a the 'proprietary' type/creator system. (Granted, the type/creator codes were *great* but BeOS was more in-step with the emerging Internet world.)
[And anyone that seriously contends that the NeXT OS of the day was better than the Mac OS is mentally deficient.]
I'm not sure why it'd be required, though, because All Macs that run OS X can also run the Classic Environment inside it. I suppose for a few fringe compatibility isasues it'd be a blessing, but those are relatively few and far between.
After installing Classic Support, can you choose to boot it stand-alone in the Startup Disk control panel?
You will also ALWAYS get an integrated graphics adapter on a laptop.
Your two definitions of "integrated" got confused. He was saying it's not integrated into the chipset as part of the northbridge, as many x86 machines are. You know the ones, where they have video memory "shared" with system RAM. On the iBook, the Radeon is separate from the system chipset. It has its own memory, and hence its own bandwidth. This is a better solution from a performance point of view, though a bit more expensive to produce since it makes the motherboard bigger, and requires extra memory.
OS9 itself may not boot in a stand-alone fashion (I'm not sure about the remaining G4 machines, but the desktop G5s cannot boot OS9) but the Classic environment still functions extremely well as a compatibility environment if you want to run older Mac OS apps.