Adam and Eve did not have any kids BEFORE they were kicked out. They were supposed to be immortals living the two of them forever in Eden. Note that Adam and Eve were kicked out, not Adam, Eve and the kids.
So, how could god increase the woman's pain in childbirth if the only woman has never given birth?
The highlighted bit is pure guesswork. You won't find this theory in the Bible.
Not in the long term, which is why come Armageddon, God will capture this Adversary and lock him up in spirit prison.
He can't do it before then?
Is it in God's interests to just sit and wait until then?
Who says this adversary is a single character? God was Satan once upon a time. Cp 2 Samuel 24 vs 1 Chronicles 21. All it means is that God was an adversary to David at this point.
If it is a single character, then jesus already defeated him/it in heb 2:14.
Disclaimer: I was raised as a christadelphian (like christian but they claim to be the only ones who interpret the bible correctly) - but recently my search for truth and answers (now ongoing for over 10 years) has led me to discover discrepancies between the Bible and science, and discrepancies in the Bible itself. I kept asking questions of myself and finding it difficult to honestly answer them. When one's faith is challenged and one is faced with undeniable evidence, what does one do? I got sick of accepting and parroting the long list of excuses given for why God can't do everything, why the Bible lies, why God lies, etc. Rather than keep playing the apologetics game, and blocking my ears to conflicting theories, I started listening to science. I looked at the evidence. I looked at it from a fresh perspective. And I was shocked. The conclusions drawn from the evidence are logical, and scientists are not trying to deceive everyone (well, most of them). Their search for truth and answers was the same as mine, but they are a lot further along. Only a fool refuses to listen at this point.
When you start giving God and the Bible the same level of critical thought that you once gave other things (those things or people who questioned your faith), the concepts don't hold up to scrutiny. Everything starts to fall apart slowly.
Now I'm turning into one of those people who demands evidence before believing in something. Is that unfair?
it depends how close you hold it. The apple display is only a retina display at arms length or something isn't it?
so this one could be held a little bit closer and still you wouldn't be able to make out individual pixels.
Those nasty pixels. The curse of technology...and yet here I am typing this on a laptop with clearly visible pixels and would you believe this issue has never concerned me.
but the real question is, why didn't the translators translate Satan as "adversary"? looks like the christians have been stung by their own game - and have been deceived by false teachings.
the hebrew bible knows nothing of this devil character. he was made up, because of a translation blunder.
If there was a devil then he was destroyed by christ (heb 2:14).
The truth of the matter is that you wont find beliefs in a devil outside of the english translation of the bible - because its an artifact of the translation. Instead of translating it to mean "false accuser" it has been left as 'devil'. Same with Satan - that word is a hebrew word meaning 'adversary'.
Have a look - judaism has no concept of a devil.
How odd to find that christians have been bitten by their own game - that a man-made idea has led people astray?
You won't find God if you're not genuinely looking for him. While there may be no proof, you must realize that you are incorrect in saying that "[...] there's not a scrap of evidence [...]."
You may believe what ever you please, but there's no need to be rude or hateful to people who believe in God. Consider the two possibilities: The first is that you're right (there's no God, no heaven, no hell, no eternal life), and there's no need to worry about Christians' beliefs because they're wrong anyway. Disagree with them. Vote against them. Ignore them. Politely tell them "no." The second possibility is that you're wrong and there is God. I suspect that God would be disappointed.
How about if we change it to say "there is tons of evidence, but it points to something that contradicts the bible".
What if your second possibility is true? Can God tell all the atheists "well its your fault you didn't think of THIS (shows evidence)"?
How can man try SO hard to find the truth of our beginnings, and yet when we dont find that it points to God is it somehow OUR fault? Surely that would be God's fault for misleading man through false evidence? Do you believe God is a deceiver? Does God intentionally make it difficult to accept the gospel?
What is faith, if it is not based on evidence? if it is based on evidence, where is the evidence?
Does God require blind faith?
Why would God create people who can think rationally, and then only select the ones who refuse to use this ability?
I'm in australia and the way our landlines work, if the caller does not hang up, the call stays open. Not sure if it is still the same but I've heard of people needing to call someone on a different line hours later to tell them to hang up the first call.
I'm not joking.
Thanks to mobiles etc. these days the call will end once either party hangs up. Not sure if the situation has changed for calls between 2 landlines.
... we find intelligent life...extremely useful in the "stop thinking... God invented man..."... kind of way. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened
What, in the name of God, are you babbling about? You seem to be very hostile against Classical Man's idea of a deity,
And what if the gods of our ancestors were actually alien visitors to our planet? I have been watching the "Ancient Astronauts" series lately on Netflix Streaming and some of the findings make you wonder. In fact, humans might have been a genetic manipulation so we could be useful slaves and mine gold and other valuable resources. If that was true, then god did invent man.
but what about animals? are you suggesting the alien visitors created them too?
I'm not disagreeing with you (I dont think any of us know all the answers) - I'm just showing that this, if true, just raises more questions. It is far from a complete theory.
And yes, I've entertained the possibility of this idea before, but I'm not sold on it.
Unless we find intelligent life living on Saturn, they're going to be a very long ways away. Far enough to be extremely useful in the "stop being solar-centric, stop thinking some magical God invented man, everyone grow the fuck up" kind of way. But so far there's no plausible possibility of external risk at all. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened to a bigger world.
The three scenarios you listed have essentially zero possibility of happening. Science rules the universe, not science fiction.
Just putting it out there, but if one accepts that God created the "bigger world" and that the earth is just one part (and not necessarily among the first) of God's creative works, I dont see how your argument disproves this.
I'm not asking you to believe in a God at all, this is not the debate here. I'm just saying that your reasoning does not disprove anything.
The Bible accepts that there are lots of stars ("innumerable" if you will - "as the sand of the seashore" in number, to use the figure of speech). It held this view long before man invented the telescope (and thus discovered that we cannot possibly number them).
Again, all I'm saying is that such a discovery would not even disprove the Bible, let alone invalidate one's belief in a God.
>>>Has anyone got evidence of any other activity done with this "profile"?
Google supports CISPA.
citation needed.
In any case, I already mentioned this argument as "law enforcement getting their hands on it without a warrant". Sure, my definition might be too narrow, but the general idea is the same.
Without proof that Google does actually collect info for malicious purposes, this all sounds a bit alarmist and conspiracy theorist to me.
Sure, if there is proof, then we all need to change our views on Google, but so far this whole 'Google is evil because they MIGHT blah blah blah' and a bunch of what-if scenarios, is just getting old and tired. As soon as Google does any of these things, their business is finished. Why would they risk that?
I tell friends the same, but they don't listen. They don't seem to care that Google is monitoring their travels across the web and building a profile on them.
...so that they can show them ads they might be interested in. (oh how sinister!).
Has anyone got evidence of any other activity done with this "profile"?
The only arguments I've heard that carry any weight is the "what if someone hacked google" or "law enforcement getting their hands on it without a warrant" - but these would be a concern for many things we use every day, not just Google.
For me, the decision has always been to either live in a cave or just accept that there's a (very very small) risk and just enjoy what everyone else enjoys. The benefit far outweighs any risk IMO. I suspect most people feel the same way (rather than being completely ignorant as many on here seem to assume).
Chromium still wants you to "sign in" anyway - so isn't that the same thing?
meh, I dont know how to program in objective C (i've had a look at it). I can use C/C++, java, python, perl, and have used forms of BASIC in the past too.
I could possibly make more money on iOS, however I'm not really interested. It could just as easily be a huge waste of my time, due to the size of the market now.
So yeah, in the context of commercial development I would have to say you're right, but there is still A market on Android, even if it isn't as lucrative as the others.
but it asymptotes, so you'll keep getting really really close to dying.
I suspect that means the time between coffees would get more critical - say your risk of death from other factors outweighed the lessening of the risk due to coffee...
Google's market is affectively malware-free, although the occasional software may pop up again in the future there because they don't have an extremely intrusive evaluation process. Maybe they, or someone else should create one.
Of course, it only scans Google's own store. I'm still surprised at the number of people who aren't aware of it. I can understand why Google may not want to advertise it too much (such a system can never be perfect), but at the same time it is hurting them not to.
Its currently more convenient to pirate (sorry, bad term but everyone knows what it refers to) movies than buy them.
There are always going to be people who are too stingy to pay $5 to watch a movie, so going after those people is stupid. They are not potential customers. They are also not hurting the industry (because they are not potential customers)
The solution is to target those who would pay for the movie if it was (a) affordable and (b) easily available.
Make it more convenient than the "free" offering, and that way people have something worth paying for.
Slashdot Mirror
Adam and Eve did not have any kids BEFORE they were kicked out. They were supposed to be immortals living the two of them forever in Eden. Note that Adam and Eve were kicked out, not Adam, Eve and the kids.
So, how could god increase the woman's pain in childbirth if the only woman has never given birth?
The highlighted bit is pure guesswork. You won't find this theory in the Bible.
Can a good God allow evil to succeed over good?
Not in the long term, which is why come Armageddon, God will capture this Adversary and lock him up in spirit prison.
He can't do it before then?
Is it in God's interests to just sit and wait until then?
Who says this adversary is a single character? God was Satan once upon a time. Cp 2 Samuel 24 vs 1 Chronicles 21. All it means is that God was an adversary to David at this point.
If it is a single character, then jesus already defeated him/it in heb 2:14.
Disclaimer: I was raised as a christadelphian (like christian but they claim to be the only ones who interpret the bible correctly) - but recently my search for truth and answers (now ongoing for over 10 years) has led me to discover discrepancies between the Bible and science, and discrepancies in the Bible itself. I kept asking questions of myself and finding it difficult to honestly answer them. When one's faith is challenged and one is faced with undeniable evidence, what does one do?
I got sick of accepting and parroting the long list of excuses given for why God can't do everything, why the Bible lies, why God lies, etc.
Rather than keep playing the apologetics game, and blocking my ears to conflicting theories, I started listening to science. I looked at the evidence. I looked at it from a fresh perspective. And I was shocked. The conclusions drawn from the evidence are logical, and scientists are not trying to deceive everyone (well, most of them). Their search for truth and answers was the same as mine, but they are a lot further along. Only a fool refuses to listen at this point.
When you start giving God and the Bible the same level of critical thought that you once gave other things (those things or people who questioned your faith), the concepts don't hold up to scrutiny. Everything starts to fall apart slowly.
Now I'm turning into one of those people who demands evidence before believing in something. Is that unfair?
it depends how close you hold it. The apple display is only a retina display at arms length or something isn't it?
so this one could be held a little bit closer and still you wouldn't be able to make out individual pixels.
Those nasty pixels. The curse of technology...and yet here I am typing this on a laptop with clearly visible pixels and would you believe this issue has never concerned me.
Did God cause Satan?
Can a good God allow evil to succeed over good?
but the real question is, why didn't the translators translate Satan as "adversary"? looks like the christians have been stung by their own game - and have been deceived by false teachings.
the hebrew bible knows nothing of this devil character. he was made up, because of a translation blunder.
If there was a devil then he was destroyed by christ (heb 2:14).
The truth of the matter is that you wont find beliefs in a devil outside of the english translation of the bible - because its an artifact of the translation. Instead of translating it to mean "false accuser" it has been left as 'devil'. Same with Satan - that word is a hebrew word meaning 'adversary'.
Have a look - judaism has no concept of a devil.
How odd to find that christians have been bitten by their own game - that a man-made idea has led people astray?
hmm.
You won't find God if you're not genuinely looking for him. While there may be no proof, you must realize that you are incorrect in saying that "[...] there's not a scrap of evidence [...]."
You may believe what ever you please, but there's no need to be rude or hateful to people who believe in God. Consider the two possibilities: The first is that you're right (there's no God, no heaven, no hell, no eternal life), and there's no need to worry about Christians' beliefs because they're wrong anyway. Disagree with them. Vote against them. Ignore them. Politely tell them "no." The second possibility is that you're wrong and there is God. I suspect that God would be disappointed.
How about if we change it to say "there is tons of evidence, but it points to something that contradicts the bible".
What if your second possibility is true?
Can God tell all the atheists "well its your fault you didn't think of THIS (shows evidence)"?
How can man try SO hard to find the truth of our beginnings, and yet when we dont find that it points to God is it somehow OUR fault? Surely that would be God's fault for misleading man through false evidence? Do you believe God is a deceiver? Does God intentionally make it difficult to accept the gospel?
What is faith, if it is not based on evidence? if it is based on evidence, where is the evidence?
Does God require blind faith?
Why would God create people who can think rationally, and then only select the ones who refuse to use this ability?
Why are they running it on the GPU?
I've had this before.
I'm in australia and the way our landlines work, if the caller does not hang up, the call stays open. Not sure if it is still the same but I've heard of people needing to call someone on a different line hours later to tell them to hang up the first call.
I'm not joking.
Thanks to mobiles etc. these days the call will end once either party hangs up. Not sure if the situation has changed for calls between 2 landlines.
you mean like wall-e?
... we find intelligent life ...extremely useful in the "stop thinking ... God invented man..." ... kind of way. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened
What, in the name of God, are you babbling about? You seem to be very hostile against Classical Man's idea of a deity,
And what if the gods of our ancestors were actually alien visitors to our planet? I have been watching the "Ancient Astronauts" series lately on Netflix Streaming and some of the findings make you wonder. In fact, humans might have been a genetic manipulation so we could be useful slaves and mine gold and other valuable resources. If that was true, then god did invent man.
but what about animals? are you suggesting the alien visitors created them too?
I'm not disagreeing with you (I dont think any of us know all the answers) - I'm just showing that this, if true, just raises more questions. It is far from a complete theory.
And yes, I've entertained the possibility of this idea before, but I'm not sold on it.
Unless we find intelligent life living on Saturn, they're going to be a very long ways away. Far enough to be extremely useful in the "stop being solar-centric, stop thinking some magical God invented man, everyone grow the fuck up" kind of way. But so far there's no plausible possibility of external risk at all. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened to a bigger world.
The three scenarios you listed have essentially zero possibility of happening. Science rules the universe, not science fiction.
Just putting it out there, but if one accepts that God created the "bigger world" and that the earth is just one part (and not necessarily among the first) of God's creative works, I dont see how your argument disproves this.
I'm not asking you to believe in a God at all, this is not the debate here. I'm just saying that your reasoning does not disprove anything.
The Bible accepts that there are lots of stars ("innumerable" if you will - "as the sand of the seashore" in number, to use the figure of speech). It held this view long before man invented the telescope (and thus discovered that we cannot possibly number them).
Again, all I'm saying is that such a discovery would not even disprove the Bible, let alone invalidate one's belief in a God.
I dont think the GP was thinking of Gmail.
If you're using a non-gmail email client on your phone then no, Google wont receive any part of the message, even if you send it.
unless i'm mistaken...anyone know what gets backed up to Google if you enable automatic remote backup?
>>>Has anyone got evidence of any other activity done with this "profile"?
Google supports CISPA.
citation needed.
In any case, I already mentioned this argument as "law enforcement getting their hands on it without a warrant". Sure, my definition might be too narrow, but the general idea is the same.
Without proof that Google does actually collect info for malicious purposes, this all sounds a bit alarmist and conspiracy theorist to me.
Sure, if there is proof, then we all need to change our views on Google, but so far this whole 'Google is evil because they MIGHT blah blah blah' and a bunch of what-if scenarios, is just getting old and tired. As soon as Google does any of these things, their business is finished. Why would they risk that?
Has anyone got evidence of any other activity done with this "profile"?
When Microsoft is accused, nobody asks for "evidence"!
That doesn't answer the question now does it?
The question I posed is not rhetorical. If there is real proof, I'll change my views on Google.
I tell friends the same, but they don't listen. They don't seem to care that Google is monitoring their travels across the web and building a profile on them.
...so that they can show them ads they might be interested in. (oh how sinister!).
Has anyone got evidence of any other activity done with this "profile"?
The only arguments I've heard that carry any weight is the "what if someone hacked google" or "law enforcement getting their hands on it without a warrant" - but these would be a concern for many things we use every day, not just Google.
For me, the decision has always been to either live in a cave or just accept that there's a (very very small) risk and just enjoy what everyone else enjoys. The benefit far outweighs any risk IMO. I suspect most people feel the same way (rather than being completely ignorant as many on here seem to assume).
Chromium still wants you to "sign in" anyway - so isn't that the same thing?
If iOS ever supports live wallpapers, I guess I'll find out won't I?
meh, I dont know how to program in objective C (i've had a look at it). I can use C/C++, java, python, perl, and have used forms of BASIC in the past too.
I could possibly make more money on iOS, however I'm not really interested. It could just as easily be a huge waste of my time, due to the size of the market now.
So yeah, in the context of commercial development I would have to say you're right, but there is still A market on Android, even if it isn't as lucrative as the others.
but it asymptotes, so you'll keep getting really really close to dying.
I suspect that means the time between coffees would get more critical - say your risk of death from other factors outweighed the lessening of the risk due to coffee...
Google's market is affectively malware-free, although the occasional software may pop up again in the future there because they don't have an extremely intrusive evaluation process. Maybe they, or someone else should create one.
Something like "Google Bouncer" ?
http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2012/02/android-and-security.html
Its been around since early 2011.
Of course, it only scans Google's own store. I'm still surprised at the number of people who aren't aware of it. I can understand why Google may not want to advertise it too much (such a system can never be perfect), but at the same time it is hurting them not to.
I've made over $5K off a single live wallpaper. How much have you made on iOS?
I was talking in extremes and speaking generally - and I agree with you regarding Adobe.
Is there any Adobe software that is not riddled with security holes? photoshop?
I was a bit against Apple dumping flash in the beginning but its looking more and more like it was the right thing to do.
But the problem is still the same.
Its currently more convenient to pirate (sorry, bad term but everyone knows what it refers to) movies than buy them.
There are always going to be people who are too stingy to pay $5 to watch a movie, so going after those people is stupid. They are not potential customers. They are also not hurting the industry (because they are not potential customers)
The solution is to target those who would pay for the movie if it was (a) affordable and (b) easily available.
Make it more convenient than the "free" offering, and that way people have something worth paying for.
We spend the first few years teaching them to stand up and talk and then for the rest of their lives we're telling them to sit down and shut up. ;)
you're right.
we should put him in a glass house instead.
Paypal is not a verb. Contrary to popular beliefs not every noun can be verbed. Not without looking like a tool.
Calvin would seriously disagree with you.
yes.
"verbing weirds language". although I dont necessarily agree. ever "phoned" someone?