Unfortunatly I don't have time to answer all your idéeas but let me ask you this. What where the odds that all happenings in the exodus would happen just when Moses needed them? I got no problem with natural explenations to miracles. It's the timing that I find to be a miracle. Sadly I don't belive I can get you to see things in the same way.
What was the paper the officer wanted him sign? What I am thinking of is that I wouldn't want to sign anything that nullified my chances of not getting convicted. Surley you're not forced to sign something like that? Of course if that was only to confirm that he had understod what he got the ticket for he should have of course just signed it and drive on. Thank you, it's always good to learn more about how it works over there:)
I totally agree with you, the cases we hear about the bad apples are not the norm just as the "what if a methed out drugger attacked you" cases not are the norm.
I never said anything about letting someone go but I believe that you can make a situation worse by acting in a way above the need in the specific case. If not at that instance then maybe the next time something happens. There is a chance that you are reinforcing peoples fight instinct by giving the impression that they are getting hurt what ever they do. It doesn't matter what the actual norm for when a tazer is used is. The important thing is what people _feel_ will happen. Maybe we do need more reportings on when the police did use a tazer in good situations. If it's not good news then we need to find a way to minimize the events of bad usage and make sure that there are consequences of using it wrong. Or as you did in your post now explain why a seemingly bad usage might actually have been reasonable.
I would think that a tazer would be good against someone with an ax. Guess it depends on the range the perpetrator appears but if he "appears" at an effective range of the tazer then it would be as good as gun. At longer ranges a gun may be more appropriate.
I agree, the police needs to be able to do their jobs but it must also be possible to hold them responsible for their own actions.
I think what we're disagreeing on is where the line for when force is acceptable should be drawned.
Oh and I think your mom would be displeased with the both of you;)
Ok I can accept that even if thats realy messed up but when I was talking about being aggitated I meant after he had been shot with the tazer and was already handcuffed. Why was a police with probably a couple of years of experience so much more pumped up than someone who at least to his own mind had been wrongfully arrested and tazed? Suerly he couldn't put up more than token resistance at that point? You also say that you should always do what the police tell you but aren't there any limits as to what you need to comply with?
I know that some of the anti-government types would like to think that everyone who's being arrested is just a poor soul being picked on but really that is by far the exception. Just for the record I'm a socialist so I'm hardly anit-goverment _but_, I do live in the belief that it's better to risk letting some guilty persons get away with it than to hurt and/or incarserate an innocent. I belive that the police first step would be diplomacy and only if that fails use any type of physical force. I also belive that the police should not use physical force _unless_ they are being faced with physical force. Some one talking back is not a reason to zap anyone.
I don't know if you have any siblings but lets imagine that you have sister who you're babysitting. As per mothers orders you tell her to go to bed at eight o clock but she refuses. How would your mother react if your sister complained that you punched her in the stomach to get her to comply? This might seem like a strong simile but both you and the police are put in place to protect someone who are weaker than you, needs to follow instructions, might not no the reason to why it is important to follow these instructions and to punch/tazer them might or might not lead to permanent damages.
I belive that there are few at/. who don't think it is ok to use a tazer on a 200 pound dude with an ax. It's the other cases we are conserned about.
So you think it is reasonably to shoot someone with a tazer for not turning around fast enough and puttings ones hands behind ones back? I'm not from the US but shouldn't you say something like "You're under arrest, turn around and put your hans behind your back" and at least say it once before pulling your gun? And "handled it very professionally"? He refused to the read the guy his rights despite that he begged him to do it multiple times. I think the big problem here was that the guy "thought he was in control". He wasn't meak and just accepted what the police said so the police man needed to put him down a peg or two. I love the fact the police was more upset and aggitated than guy being shot.
I'm from Sweden and I'm sorry to say that I have never heard of anyone who visited the US and said that the food is good. Most people seems to be bored out of their skulls and the ones who stayed for a longer spell all complained that they gained weight. Oh and here's a fast test to see if your food is healthy or not. If it has corn syrup, E620-E625 and/or artificial sweetners in it then I would toss it. Preferable in cement and let it sit for a couple of thousand years:) Corn syrup and the artificial sweetners will play havoc with your insulin making you eat more than you need and E620-E625 will short cuircit your brain by bypassing the normal way tastes gets propagated in the brain. I would recommend drinking some booze instead of the last group, you might hurt your brain just the same in the long run but at least you'll get some fun along the way:)
If I still had moderator points I would mod you funny.:)
Actually in Swedish the word for Sun is Sol so we are already using the right name. Do not drag us into your english centered world. It's as bad as thinking that the aliens will talk english;)
Overall I agree with you, asking whther gods exist should be preceeded by asking why we even consider the concept of gods as something that might exist, after all there's nothing that points at the existence of such a being. Well, what kind of proof do you have that builders built the house you are sitting in? If you didnt witness it your self then all your evidence could be false and all your witnesses could lie.:) Now lets imagine that you can't leave your house and that everything you know of the world comes from studying the house. You might be able to determine how the house fits togheter but you can only speculate in how it was built. As to reason to why it was built... Science have a real hard time proving that god doesn't exist or exist for that matter. A prudent man is at least agnostic:)
Thank you. It's refreshing to see a non christian (which I gather you are) who is not as litteral minded as some of the right winged conservative christans. Most christians I know are not that extreme and know that not everything in the bible is true. Just like the muslims we get a bad rep for what the wackos are doing/saying. Some of the stories though are backed by other sources. The use of a tribe for building a city in egypt (exodus) are mentioned in egyptian texts. What I mean is, and this is not aimed at you jandersen, is that unless you actually have studied the bible at an university level then you should be carefull about claiming what stories in the bible is true or not.
You forgot the part where he destroyed a couple of shops, totaly ruined a funeral and wrecked a couple of peoples ability to work in the fundraising buisness.:)
Though I know I will probably not be able to sway you I will still answer your post.
True, they are wistfully talking about killing their enemies and their family but not even in this psalm do they say that this is the moraly right thing to do. They don't say that this is what God want them to do and the psalm doesn't even say they are to do it in Gods name. Reading my post again realised that I was a bit unclear. I did not mean to condone the action of killing babies I mearly wanted to explain why they where saying it and why they where upset. I still don't understand why you feel that this psalm has any revelance for christianity today.
I'm sorry if you felt that I accused you of ignorance though I am not entiarly certain in what way I did so. If it was my two first points then my aim was mainly to explain the background to the psalm and to clarify who "he" in text refered to, both to you of course if you didn't know it and to all other who may have read it and not known the background to it. As to what I didn't tackle, I'm sorry but what did I miss? I would love to try and answer that as well.
I was going to go into lenght in each of this issues, like the fact that the most wellknown inquisition (the Spanish at least to me) was initiated my monarchs of spain with forced support from the pope and the fact that church for a long time opposed the notion that there where such a thing as witches at all and didnt wanted anyone persecuted because of it. But it's to hot right now and I can't find the energy so I admit: it lots of shitty things has been done in the name of christ. What is your point? Do you think Jesus wants this? Do you think that all this happened only because they where christians? People has been good a finding creative ways of killing each other since long before Jesus the human was born and bad people have been good at getting power (like being a priest involves) long before we ever got a pope. Do you think it is so easy to change human habits? Ask some one who is trying to excercise more or someone who tries to remember to keep the toilet lid down if it's easy to change their habits. If that is hard to do then why are you supprised that people who become christians not become perfect at once?
One other thing that always seems to handily forgotten in these cases is that lots of good things has also been done in the name of christ. For instance it was a jesuit priest who strongly opposed the witch burnings and who formulated the foundations for human rights.
Besides I thought this was a discussion about the bible and the teachings of christ and not about the crimes of man.
I was just reminded that the part about an eye for an eye in exodus actually is a limitation of the customs. So instead of doing "a head for an eye" you where only allowed to take an eye. This was to stop feuds from escalating. Besides, this type of ruling is the basis of suing someone in usa:) You get hurt and so you sue them for the amount of money your hurt is suposed to equal. So we might no longer take an eye but the general principle still seems accepted to this day.
I have always wondered why Boney M didn't include that in the song;)
Firstly, you do realise that "he" in these verses not is God right? Second, this is lament written after a people had seen their capital destroyed and their people driven from their country to serve in their opressors service. A bit like Guantanamo or the palestiniers... Third, this psalm is probably quite important for the jews as they have time and again been driven from their homes but for most christians the banishment from Juda is not that important. Fourth, I did say a book of ethics and history. Maybe I should have added cultural as well as this belongs to that as well as historic. Come on people, you're as bad as the ID people if you read the bible like that without knowing the background and reading it so litteraly.
Come on, you can hardly call the crusades, the inquisition and witch-burning for recent time.:) Besides many of these things might have been done in the name of Christ but that was hardly the reason for doing it. In most of those cases it was because dear old capitalism. If Microsoft started selling closed software and calling it open source, would you then say that OS is bad?
"Wrong"? Wasn't that what I said, that you can't use the bible in that way? Oh and I do belive that you need to take the old testament with a grain of salt. What I mostly belive in is Jesus and he said that I shouldn't kill children. If you boss told you yeasterday to write a form in one way and today to write it in an other way, in what way should you do it today?
Feel free to read my other responses higher up but basicly, no I don't belive in the bible I belive in Jesus.
I'm sorry but you are wrong, a christian is someone who thinks that Jesus is Lord. At least the swedish decleration of faith says nothing about believing in the bible.
I have actually read the bible at university so yes I know a bit of the contradictions. But will ubuntu 7.04 contradict ubuntu 7.10? One says 3d is installed by default the other does not. Does that mean that ubuntu is wrong?:) If you actualy had read the passage about turning the other cheek (mathew 5:38-42) you would know that Jesus actually says that the custom with "eye for an eye" is wrong.
And as opposed to the Koran, christians (in generall) do not belive that God has written the bible (or dictated it). The bible is written by man. Of course you will get things that might not be what god wants. That's why you can question it and why you shouldn't take it at face value.
Ok, so maybe not a caveman but do they realy think that God would bother to explain to people who doesn't even know that there is atoms how he created the universe? It's what Pratchett calls Lies for children. God - Ok so afte a couple of million years... Secretary - Hold on, how much is a couple million years? God - Sigh... ok so on the first _day_ I made light using what I like to call the Big Bang. Secretary - Sorry that's too long and my hand hurts. I'll just write God made light on the first day. God - Sigh....
I don't actually see that much problem with being both beliver of evolution and the Big bang and being a christian. I think the problem is that people read the bible like it was a book about natural science instead of what it realy is ie a history book and a book about ethics.
Actually, it's widely known that aspartame causes carbohydrate cravings. Repeat after me: "Diet soda also makes you fat." Actualy this is true for all artifical sweetners. The reason being is that your body of course expect to recieve sugar and therefore start producing insulin. That done the body finds that it now have large amounts of insulin in the body since there wasn't any sugar to brake down. Try to brake it with more diet soda and......ad infinitum
Personaly I go low carb, high fat instead and no artificial addons at all. Been doing it for a year and I no longer goes to sleep at work after lunch and what fat I had around my stomach has gone away.
Does this mean that Apple don't want any games on their phone also? Last I heard that was quite a large market or at least rising. Sounds strange to make a blanket ban on all third party programs. I'm guessing you would have to try real hard to make a network go down with most of the programs people might want to construct.
You got to remember that the bibel is not written by God but by Man. Not all in books in the pentateuken (sorry not certain what they are called in english) is about the relations of God and Man. Many are simply historical or about the laws of the land so to speak. So on the contrary it is possible that the story you are quouting is simply interresting since it tells the story of the Jewish people.
Oh and just to be a complete spitfire, no christians and no jews can sacrifice any more. During the rebuilding of the temple scrolls where found that you only should sacrifice in the temple in Jerusalem. Since the temple is long gone it is no longer possible to offer any sacrifices to God:)
IIRC the 50% you are talking about is arbetgivaravgiften (not sure about the english word for it) which consist of your pension, work disability insurance and parental insurance (money to allow you to be home with a baby) Not sure you can say that the money is stolen from you:)
Personaly Im realy impressed by Ikea and their instructions. To make instructions that doesnt use any words are quite a good feat and I cant remember that I have ever had problem putting one of their furnitures together. And since I'm from sweden I have assembled my fair share of Ikea stuff:)
Ikea spends lot of money on their instructions and there are many companies that are far worse than Ikea so I dont feel its right to complain about them. And as allways you get what you pay for
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunatly I don't have time to answer all your idéeas but let me ask you this. What where the odds that all happenings in the exodus would happen just when Moses needed them? I got no problem with natural explenations to miracles. It's the timing that I find to be a miracle.
Sadly I don't belive I can get you to see things in the same way.
What was the paper the officer wanted him sign? What I am thinking of is that I wouldn't want to sign anything that nullified my chances of not getting convicted. Surley you're not forced to sign something like that? Of course if that was only to confirm that he had understod what he got the ticket for he should have of course just signed it and drive on. :)
Thank you, it's always good to learn more about how it works over there
I totally agree with you, the cases we hear about the bad apples are not the norm just as the "what if a methed out drugger attacked you" cases not are the norm.
;)
I never said anything about letting someone go but I believe that you can make a situation worse by acting in a way above the need in the specific case. If not at that instance then maybe the next time something happens. There is a chance that you are reinforcing peoples fight instinct by giving the impression that they are getting hurt what ever they do. It doesn't matter what the actual norm for when a tazer is used is. The important thing is what people _feel_ will happen. Maybe we do need more reportings on when the police did use a tazer in good situations. If it's not good news then we need to find a way to minimize the events of bad usage and make sure that there are consequences of using it wrong. Or as you did in your post now explain why a seemingly bad usage might actually have been reasonable.
I would think that a tazer would be good against someone with an ax. Guess it depends on the range the perpetrator appears but if he "appears" at an effective range of the tazer then it would be as good as gun. At longer ranges a gun may be more appropriate.
I agree, the police needs to be able to do their jobs but it must also be possible to hold them responsible for their own actions.
I think what we're disagreeing on is where the line for when force is acceptable should be drawned.
Oh and I think your mom would be displeased with the both of you
Ok I can accept that even if thats realy messed up but when I was talking about being aggitated I meant after he had been shot with the tazer and was already handcuffed. Why was a police with probably a couple of years of experience so much more pumped up than someone who at least to his own mind had been wrongfully arrested and tazed? Suerly he couldn't put up more than token resistance at that point?
You also say that you should always do what the police tell you but aren't there any limits as to what you need to comply with?
Live and learn. Thanks for the info.
I don't know if you have any siblings but lets imagine that you have sister who you're babysitting. As per mothers orders you tell her to go to bed at eight o clock but she refuses. How would your mother react if your sister complained that you punched her in the stomach to get her to comply? This might seem like a strong simile but both you and the police are put in place to protect someone who are weaker than you, needs to follow instructions, might not no the reason to why it is important to follow these instructions and to punch/tazer them might or might not lead to permanent damages.
I belive that there are few at
So you think it is reasonably to shoot someone with a tazer for not turning around fast enough and puttings ones hands behind ones back?
I'm not from the US but shouldn't you say something like "You're under arrest, turn around and put your hans behind your back" and at least say it once before pulling your gun?
And "handled it very professionally"? He refused to the read the guy his rights despite that he begged him to do it multiple times.
I think the big problem here was that the guy "thought he was in control". He wasn't meak and just accepted what the police said so the police man needed to put him down a peg or two.
I love the fact the police was more upset and aggitated than guy being shot.
I'm from Sweden and I'm sorry to say that I have never heard of anyone who visited the US and said that the food is good. Most people seems to be bored out of their skulls and the ones who stayed for a longer spell all complained that they gained weight. :) Corn syrup and the artificial sweetners will play havoc with your insulin making you eat more than you need and E620-E625 will short cuircit your brain by bypassing the normal way tastes gets propagated in the brain. I would recommend drinking some booze instead of the last group, you might hurt your brain just the same in the long run but at least you'll get some fun along the way :)
:)
Oh and here's a fast test to see if your food is healthy or not. If it has corn syrup, E620-E625 and/or artificial sweetners in it then I would toss it. Preferable in cement and let it sit for a couple of thousand years
If I still had moderator points I would mod you funny.
Actually in Swedish the word for Sun is Sol so we are already using the right name. Do not drag us into your english centered world. It's as bad as thinking that the aliens will talk english ;)
Now lets imagine that you can't leave your house and that everything you know of the world comes from studying the house. You might be able to determine how the house fits togheter but you can only speculate in how it was built. As to reason to why it was built...
Science have a real hard time proving that god doesn't exist or exist for that matter. A prudent man is at least agnostic
Thank you. It's refreshing to see a non christian (which I gather you are) who is not as litteral minded as some of the right winged conservative christans. Most christians I know are not that extreme and know that not everything in the bible is true. Just like the muslims we get a bad rep for what the wackos are doing/saying.
Some of the stories though are backed by other sources. The use of a tribe for building a city in egypt (exodus) are mentioned in egyptian texts. What I mean is, and this is not aimed at you jandersen, is that unless you actually have studied the bible at an university level then you should be carefull about claiming what stories in the bible is true or not.
You forgot the part where he destroyed a couple of shops, totaly ruined a funeral and wrecked a couple of peoples ability to work in the fundraising buisness. :)
Though I know I will probably not be able to sway you I will still answer your post.
True, they are wistfully talking about killing their enemies and their family but not even in this psalm do they say that this is the moraly right thing to do. They don't say that this is what God want them to do and the psalm doesn't even say they are to do it in Gods name.
Reading my post again realised that I was a bit unclear. I did not mean to condone the action of killing babies I mearly wanted to explain why they where saying it and why they where upset.
I still don't understand why you feel that this psalm has any revelance for christianity today.
I'm sorry if you felt that I accused you of ignorance though I am not entiarly certain in what way I did so. If it was my two first points then my aim was mainly to explain the background to the psalm and to clarify who "he" in text refered to, both to you of course if you didn't know it and to all other who may have read it and not known the background to it.
As to what I didn't tackle, I'm sorry but what did I miss? I would love to try and answer that as well.
I was going to go into lenght in each of this issues, like the fact that the most wellknown inquisition (the Spanish at least to me) was initiated my monarchs of spain with forced support from the pope and the fact that church for a long time opposed the notion that there where such a thing as witches at all and didnt wanted anyone persecuted because of it. But it's to hot right now and I can't find the energy so I admit: it lots of shitty things has been done in the name of christ.
What is your point? Do you think Jesus wants this? Do you think that all this happened only because they where christians? People has been good a finding creative ways of killing each other since long before Jesus the human was born and bad people have been good at getting power (like being a priest involves) long before we ever got a pope. Do you think it is so easy to change human habits?
Ask some one who is trying to excercise more or someone who tries to remember to keep the toilet lid down if it's easy to change their habits. If that is hard to do then why are you supprised that people who become christians not become perfect at once?
One other thing that always seems to handily forgotten in these cases is that lots of good things has also been done in the name of christ.
For instance it was a jesuit priest who strongly opposed the witch burnings and who formulated the foundations for human rights.
Besides I thought this was a discussion about the bible and the teachings of christ and not about the crimes of man.
Perhaps but I'm not at all certain that you are right. I would love to hear about a case where they did it though if you could find me one.
I was just reminded that the part about an eye for an eye in exodus actually is a limitation of the customs. :) You get hurt and so you sue them for the amount of money your hurt is suposed to equal. So we might no longer take an eye but the general principle still seems accepted to this day.
So instead of doing "a head for an eye" you where only allowed to take an eye. This was to stop feuds from escalating.
Besides, this type of ruling is the basis of suing someone in usa
I have always wondered why Boney M didn't include that in the song ;)
:)
Firstly, you do realise that "he" in these verses not is God right?
Second, this is lament written after a people had seen their capital destroyed and their people driven from their country to serve in their opressors service. A bit like Guantanamo or the palestiniers...
Third, this psalm is probably quite important for the jews as they have time and again been driven from their homes but for most christians the banishment from Juda is not that important.
Fourth, I did say a book of ethics and history. Maybe I should have added cultural as well as this belongs to that as well as historic.
Come on people, you're as bad as the ID people if you read the bible like that without knowing the background and reading it so litteraly.
Come on, you can hardly call the crusades, the inquisition and witch-burning for recent time.
Besides many of these things might have been done in the name of Christ but that was hardly the reason for doing it. In most of those cases it was because dear old capitalism.
If Microsoft started selling closed software and calling it open source, would you then say that OS is bad?
"Wrong"? Wasn't that what I said, that you can't use the bible in that way? Oh and I do belive that you need to take the old testament with a grain of salt. What I mostly belive in is Jesus and he said that I shouldn't kill children.
If you boss told you yeasterday to write a form in one way and today to write it in an other way, in what way should you do it today?
Feel free to read my other responses higher up but basicly, no I don't belive in the bible I belive in Jesus.
I'm sorry but you are wrong, a christian is someone who thinks that Jesus is Lord. At least the swedish decleration of faith says nothing about believing in the bible.
:)
I have actually read the bible at university so yes I know a bit of the contradictions. But will ubuntu 7.04 contradict ubuntu 7.10? One says 3d is installed by default the other does not. Does that mean that ubuntu is wrong?
If you actualy had read the passage about turning the other cheek (mathew 5:38-42) you would know that Jesus actually says that the custom with "eye for an eye" is wrong.
And as opposed to the Koran, christians (in generall) do not belive that God has written the bible (or dictated it). The bible is written by man. Of course you will get things that might not be what god wants. That's why you can question it and why you shouldn't take it at face value.
Love your neighbour as you love your self
or the golden rule.
Ok, so maybe not a caveman but do they realy think that God would bother to explain to people who doesn't even know that there is atoms how he created the universe? It's what Pratchett calls Lies for children.
God - Ok so afte a couple of million years...
Secretary - Hold on, how much is a couple million years?
God - Sigh... ok so on the first _day_ I made light using what I like to call the Big Bang.
Secretary - Sorry that's too long and my hand hurts. I'll just write God made light on the first day.
God - Sigh....
I don't actually see that much problem with being both beliver of evolution and the Big bang and being a christian. I think the problem is that people read the bible like it was a book about natural science instead of what it realy is ie a history book and a book about ethics.
Does this mean that Apple don't want any games on their phone also? Last I heard that was quite a large market or at least rising.
Sounds strange to make a blanket ban on all third party programs. I'm guessing you would have to try real hard to make a network go down with most of the programs people might want to construct.
You got to remember that the bibel is not written by God but by Man. Not all in books in the pentateuken (sorry not certain what they are called in english) is about the relations of God and Man. Many are simply historical or about the laws of the land so to speak. So on the contrary it is possible that the story you are quouting is simply interresting since it tells the story of the Jewish people.
:)
Oh and just to be a complete spitfire, no christians and no jews can sacrifice any more. During the rebuilding of the temple scrolls where found that you only should sacrifice in the temple in Jerusalem. Since the temple is long gone it is no longer possible to offer any sacrifices to God
IIRC the 50% you are talking about is arbetgivaravgiften (not sure about the english word for it) which consist of your pension, work disability insurance and parental insurance (money to allow you to be home with a baby) :)
Not sure you can say that the money is stolen from you
Personaly Im realy impressed by Ikea and their instructions. :)
To make instructions that doesnt use any words are quite a good feat and I cant remember that I have ever had problem putting one of their furnitures together.
And since I'm from sweden I have assembled my fair share of Ikea stuff
Ikea spends lot of money on their instructions and there are many companies that are far worse than Ikea so I dont feel its right to complain about them.
And as allways you get what you pay for