Christ was and is perfect; the sins of the elect were imputed to him rather than infused into his being. "Trinity" refers to the 3 persons--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--having one nature, God. Jesus is 1 person with 2 natures--fully human and fully God (the Son).
That's funny- trinitarianism is usally rejected as being unbiblical by those who believe in Sola Scriptura. But "Perfect" is a relative term- Jesus suffered temptations during the 40 days in the desert- would a perfect being even have been tempted? He was as capable of sin as we are- but he CHOOSE to be sinless.
I hope by your mention that Jesus could "be moral" that you mean perfectly so (ie., sinless).
Yes- but by choice, not by nature- he was tempted, he just refused to give in to the temptation (though, I must say, sinless even depends on point of view. Sinless in the eyes of God, yes, but very sinfull in the eyes of man; refusing to marry was sinfull in those days, the blasphemy of claiming to be God was a very large sin against the Law of Moses, not to mention the incident losing his composure in the temple, that was practically scandalous; not to mention his teachings of cannibalism!).
God the Father would only accept a pure white sinless lamb as the scapegoat for our sin.
Sinless in His eyes- sometimes sin in the eyes of men is neccessary to be moral.
BTW, Catholics were free to not believe the Immaculate Conception of Mary according to the Council of Trent; it was dogmatized by Pius IX's pontifications in the mid-19th century.
As I said, doctrine develops- The underpinings of the doctrine were there all along, but it took time for man's wisdom to develop enough to see them.
Rather than get caught up in the immaculate conception of Mary's mother's mother, etc., a new kind of grace has been imagined to explain Mary's sinlessness..."prevenient" grace to keep the imperfect (though blessed) Mary from sinning. How convenient.
Or, to put it in physics terms- God exists outside of time, so Mary's yes to his will and the grace to say yes was in her being from before she was born. Time flows one way for finite man- not neccessarily so for God.
Christ almighty, doesn't ANYone know the facts that the President of Iran has no real independent power?
Does it matter in what is essentially a theological dictatorship what the constitution says? As long as he follows Sharia, isn't that what really counts?
Why the hell do you think "liberal" Rasfajani couldn't push any of his policies? Because there is an actual council of mullahs who run the country. They decide the heavy judicial cases, they decide who the president is, what the president can actually do and the military answers to them. They even have a front man. Does your brain work enough to still remember Ayatollah Khomenei? How about the current Ayatollah Khamenei?
And that is supposed to REDUCE the danger? The council of mullahs are the people preaching this garbage to begin with! Do you think for one second that they'd spare infidel life in their search for a unified, worldwide Nation of Islam? I sure as hell don't.
So the fuck what if the president is looney tunes? Ahmanidejad can't do shit. The Guardian Council, the Supreme Leader and the ruling mullahs behind them, on the other hand, are decidely NOT looney tunes (well, they are in that they believe wacko religious crap, but politically they aren't suicidal).
Obviously, you've never read the Koran and what it says to do with unbelievers.
They plan to remain in power. They will not be launching unprovoked attacks on Israel.
Isn't this the same group that took the members of the US Embassy hostage in 1979? And wouldn't an unprovoked attack on Israel, if successfull, actually give them MORE power among militant Islamics, as the people who eliminated the Zionist Threat?
Jesus, fucking learn some facts somewhere other than television. It's rotting your brains. Read some books. And not by those brain-dead troglodytes of Fox 'News', either. Real books by people who actually know history and choose not to lie about it pathologically to serve their greed.
I have- you apparently haven't. This has all happened before- the only difference is the number of people to kill and the technology of the weapons used. The rise of the Ottoman Empire, the Protestant Reformation, the Crusades, the Moorish Invasion of Gaul, the Israeli Revolt against the Roman Empire. It's the same culture- the religion changes, but the culture is the same. It's been creating problems for Western Europe for 3500 years now- repeated genocides, purges, justice systems in which mutilation is the primary punishment, and widescale destruction are the politics of these people, and about 10% of them historically are willing to go to the extremes neccessary to practice this form of politics. The only difference is that they are now about 1/6th the population of the planet- which means we have ~100,000,000 suicide bombers who feel YOUR form of diplomacy is sinfull to deal with. If each of them kills 40 people, including themselves- that's 4 BILLION lives that will be lost before this is over. How many people have to die before you understand that the world can't support a violent Islamic Reformation?
If you reject the notion that God can use men who sinned to record exactly what He wanted to say and exactly the way he wanted to say it (via the writer's life experiences, etc.), then how could you accept that God the Son was perfect even though He came from Mary? (Or in case you rather believe in the anti-biblical notion of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, then consider Mary's parents.)
Actually, I do believe the anti-biblical notion of the Immaculate Conception- since there's 2000 years of Christian belief, study, and reason behind it after all- but Christ wasn't perfect. He became IMPERFECT so that he could live at our level and show you could still be moral despite being imperfect. If he had been perfect, he would not have been able to be crucified- his death shows that his mortal body was imperfect and suffered from the same fate as all who have original sin do.
I'm beginning to think this dictionary attack from spam idea is largely an explanation looking for a problem. It's far more likely that it's a directory attack that you're mistaking for a dictionary attack- that the "lesser known mailserver" has a directory page that was hit by a crawler, thus harvesting the e-mail address.
Exactly my point, thank you. Unfortuneately, that oral tradition and written tradition got lost in the Protestant Reformation- Sola Scriptura, in Martin Luther's words (the original, not the modern one whose holiday we just celebrated) makes "Ev'ry Scullery Maid her own Pope".
War is the failure of politics, the people left standing do not "win", they simply survive to fight in the next one. The strategy "I'm violent and crazy so give up" did not work in Vietnam, did not work for Hitler and nor did it end the cold war, why do you think it would work in Iran?
Vietnam did not apply this technique adequately- otherwise we'd have the island nation of South Vietnam as the only remaining land on the peninsula. Hitler didn't have the bomb. But MAD did end the cold war- though it took the sacrifice of our peacetime economy to do it. The Soviet Union *knew* that if they provoked us, we'd use the bomb like we did in Japan, so they were very careful NOT to provoke us too far. Islam has yet to learn that Allah will not protect them from crazy Americans- we should have hit Mecca 5 years ago on September 12th.
I have to say I find your suggestion the most repulsive idea I have ever read on slashdot. It is born from the same "us and them" philosophy fertilizes terrorisim.
To fight an enemy, you must become like the enemy- haven't you ever read Pliny the Elder's History of Rome? The terrorists understand this is a war of genocide- and will do what it takes to make it one. When will you wake up to the fact that this is an us vs them situation?
The MAD theory of strategic balance says that either everyone "wins" or everone dies. It depends apon all sides having nukes but no side is willing to risk destroying themselves by striking first. The best option would be a lasting peace (MAD or otherwise), the second best is trade and diplomacy. I don't belive the US can stop Iran obtaining nukes if it is determined to do so but I doubt it will attack Israel for the same reason Pakistan did not attack India when it eventually obtained nukes. Iran has seen the enormous boost in international respect given to Pakistan since it joined the MAD group, why would Iran not want to follow suit?
Because Iran does have a madman in control- a man who believes that all Zionists are racist scum and Hitler's holocaust was a hoax. A man who in 1978 helped take Americans hostage. A man who would like nothing better than to see all infidels dead. A man who considers economic engagement to be a weapon of mass destruction in and of itself. Pakistan is not ruled by such a man- but Iran is. The real key to first strike has nothing to do with the other country gaining nukes- it has to do with the other country gaining enough of an early warning system that MAD becomes possible. Neither North Korea nor Iran or even Pakistan and India have this capability yet- if we're going to strike, the time is *before* they have their radar installations in place in Russia.
Human beings are not a perfect creation- that's why sin exists. But something tells me you're just like Moses in a way- you're not ready to hear the fullness of the revelation, and instead cling to childish literal interpretations. Inspirtation is not automatic writing- the author has control, not the source of the inspiration.
Also, if you are in the US, you've got single split phase. If you're in Europe then you have two phase. Are you sure your parents have two phase? How much do they pay for that?
In Oregon, two phase is common (I know, I use X10 in my house, and have problems with the 5v powerline commands getting from one phase to the other). Two 110V wires coming in from the transformer. In the case of the X10 problem, a simple capacitor across the phases (passive coupler in a box behind my dryer- one of the few places I have 220v service) did the trick...but I bet if I had this kind of a problem in my house, I'd blow that capacitor rather quickly.
Everything changes over time- as mankind gains knowledge, he sees new hidden meanings in Scripture and Tradition- he understands more of what the world is, and thus understands the creator of the world better. Moses was a simple desert tribesman....nothing more. What he heard from the Lord was what he wanted to hear, no more and no less.
Who has a e-mail name that appears in a DICTIONARY?!?!?!? The closest I've ever gotten is ted@oit.osshe.state.or.us.edu, and that was a long time ago.
And now that spammers have armies of zombies at their beck and call, they're doing distributed dictionary attacks, which are harder to detect and block.
Uh, don't have your e-mail name something that occurs in a dictionary?
Common first names, first initials with common last names, role descriptions... Heck, we even get spam sent to template@(domain name) because it happened to be active at the time someone tried sending it mail.
I guess I never had a problem- my last name is rather uncommon (400 families in the United States), except that guy who thought my last name and first initial was armenian and kept e-mailing me about the 1927 massacre of the turks...yes, I know that's backwards.
Unless you make your email address really hard to guess....
Most of the ones I've had follow many of the rules of passwords- mixtures of letters and numbers because my prefered name was already taken. The one that I don't do that on, I'm breaking at least 2 of the other rules on.
So, you believe that in order to deter Iran from using nuclear weapons, the United States should use it's nuclear weapons on Iran?
No, I simply believe that there's no way to deter Iran from using nuclear weapons- the best option would be to get the hell out and leave them alone. But since we can't seem to handle that, the other way is to commit genocide on purpose- use Iran as a warning to the rest of the world that we're crazy and will do anything to get our way.
Do you not see the irony in that?
Yep, that's the irony of mutual assured destruction and weapons of mass destruction. The guy with the biggust guns and the craziest leader will always win- and kill billions while doing it.
It's a chicken and egg problem- and probably never. What you see as a problem with SMTP was originally a design FEATURE- privacy wasn't a concern, encryption wasn't a concern, rich text was considered a waste of bandwidth, phishing and spam were just a gleam in a cracker's eye. The *only* concern for SMTP was SIMPLE Mail transfer between dissimilar systems- that is, OPEN COMMUNICATION. Follow a few simple rules, and you too will never need that extra stuff: 1. NEVER post your e-mail on a web page. 2. NEVER e-mail somebody you don't know. 3. NEVER trust private information to a public network. 4. Don't waste bandwith with pictures and crap.
Can be found by reading the Requests for Comment associated with that protocol. In other words there WAS planning involved- a good deal of planning- it's just that the end-users were completely different than the original audience- the original audience were arpanet researchers, whose system was so good it overtook the competeing FIDONet hackers- which resulted in spammers.
Doctrine develops with mankind's understanding of the universe. These are good for proving what doctrine was at the time they were written, but for good dogma you need the addition of Holy Tradition- which tells us how doctrine has developed over time. That's where Sola Scriptura and proof texting has always fallen down for me- it makes Christianity a dead religion, as dead as the trees the book was printed on. Life is change, and to a large extent we've got to change with it.
Well, as I understand it a predetermined universe is consistent with quantum theory, but a deterministic one isn't. There are a few other models, however, that are also consistent with quantum theory...but the shared characteristic is that we haven't yet come up with an experiment that would allow us to chose between them. (Splitting the universe at each quantum transition is one of the consistent models...the rest are similarly weird. Solipsism is another. Notice how usefully different they are?)
The option where a deterministic, but not predetermined, universe is consistent is the one where all of quantum mechanics arises from the error of the experimentor instead of errors in the data- the one where the observer affects the observed to such an extent that the choices of the observer determine the observed.
If you're going to posit a deterministic, not-predetermined universe, then you've got problems with quantum theory that will need resolving. And the limits on the kinds of resolution that will be consistent with the current knowledge-base are rather stringent. An interventionist god would work, but it would need to have been deciding to NOT intervene during the published experiments...or possibly to have been intervening in most of them, there was that period where the J particle (Top quark?) had a different mass depending on whether you were in the US or in Europe. This, and similar fluctuations could indicate that Coyote is the one true god.
Or it all could mean that the difference between the intelligence of God and the intelligence of Man is knowing how to observe without changing the observed. In other words- in knowing how not to intervene, where *all* of the published experiments made the mistake of intervening.
The problem with that is we're about to default on our debts as far as social security guarantees are concerned- so there's no reason to trust that the United States will pay back any other sort of debt.
4. I think Iran has already developed nuclear weapons, and thus anything less than a first strike scenario will work against them. I further believe that the Bush Administration's handling of Iraq proves that they don't have the cajones neccessary to do what it will take to stop Iran- especially since that will make Iran's oil wells and a significant portion of both Iraq and Afghanistan uninhabitable and unavailable for a few thousand years. They don't have the bravery needed to face a world without access to that oil- and so they won't prevent Iran from continuing their nuclear weapons program.
It was two phase- did I say anything different? But the result is the same- the circuits on the phase that was blown on the transformer or the phase wire that had worked it's way loose went out, or rather browned out, while the other phase stayed good.
Exactly right- in the Catholic version, limited free will is allowed- and causes most of the evil we experience (we pay for our own mistakes as a race). Where in a predetermined universe, as opposed to a deterministic one, the physical laws micromanage our very thoughts- at which point science is useless beyond a certain point, because while you may understand what happens, you'll never be able to change it.
Basic networking is like an onion- it has many layers. The average user needs to have a good understanding of the difference between a client, a router, and a server- so they know who to call when their computer comes up with a weird error message. Beyond that, what you describe should do them, I recommend (works on a wide variety of systems) AVG, ZoneAlarm Free, AdAware, SpyBot, and as a backup, a copy of HijackThis! with strict instructions *not* to run it without professional opinion on what to delete and what *not* to delete. Curiously enough- I've got a package I update from time to time on my website that I call the AntiCyberTerrorism Toolkit- that containes 4 out of 5 of these programs.
Quit it, you're taking the superstition out of religion. THEY won't like that....;)
The evangelicals won't like that- but the last 6 Popes have been trying to do exactly that- and older religions are anti-superstitious to begin with (as well as one younger one- Islam's main theological theme of focusing on Allah as a single God is all about the destruction of superstition- the superstition that Mohammed the Prophet saw as being highly *destructive* to his people's advancement).
Slashdot Mirror
Christ was and is perfect; the sins of the elect were imputed to him rather than infused into his being. "Trinity" refers to the 3 persons--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--having one nature, God. Jesus is 1 person with 2 natures--fully human and fully God (the Son).
That's funny- trinitarianism is usally rejected as being unbiblical by those who believe in Sola Scriptura. But "Perfect" is a relative term- Jesus suffered temptations during the 40 days in the desert- would a perfect being even have been tempted? He was as capable of sin as we are- but he CHOOSE to be sinless.
I hope by your mention that Jesus could "be moral" that you mean perfectly so (ie., sinless).
Yes- but by choice, not by nature- he was tempted, he just refused to give in to the temptation (though, I must say, sinless even depends on point of view. Sinless in the eyes of God, yes, but very sinfull in the eyes of man; refusing to marry was sinfull in those days, the blasphemy of claiming to be God was a very large sin against the Law of Moses, not to mention the incident losing his composure in the temple, that was practically scandalous; not to mention his teachings of cannibalism!).
God the Father would only accept a pure white sinless lamb as the scapegoat for our sin.
Sinless in His eyes- sometimes sin in the eyes of men is neccessary to be moral.
BTW, Catholics were free to not believe the Immaculate Conception of Mary according to the Council of Trent; it was dogmatized by Pius IX's pontifications in the mid-19th century.
As I said, doctrine develops- The underpinings of the doctrine were there all along, but it took time for man's wisdom to develop enough to see them.
Rather than get caught up in the immaculate conception of Mary's mother's mother, etc., a new kind of grace has been imagined to explain Mary's sinlessness..."prevenient" grace to keep the imperfect (though blessed) Mary from sinning. How convenient.
Or, to put it in physics terms- God exists outside of time, so Mary's yes to his will and the grace to say yes was in her being from before she was born. Time flows one way for finite man- not neccessarily so for God.
Christ almighty, doesn't ANYone know the facts that the President of Iran has no real independent power?
Does it matter in what is essentially a theological dictatorship what the constitution says? As long as he follows Sharia, isn't that what really counts?
Why the hell do you think "liberal" Rasfajani couldn't push any of his policies? Because there is an actual council of mullahs who run the country. They decide the heavy judicial cases, they decide who the president is, what the president can actually do and the military answers to them. They even have a front man. Does your brain work enough to still remember Ayatollah Khomenei? How about the current Ayatollah Khamenei?
And that is supposed to REDUCE the danger? The council of mullahs are the people preaching this garbage to begin with! Do you think for one second that they'd spare infidel life in their search for a unified, worldwide Nation of Islam? I sure as hell don't.
So the fuck what if the president is looney tunes? Ahmanidejad can't do shit. The Guardian Council, the Supreme Leader and the ruling mullahs behind them, on the other hand, are decidely NOT looney tunes (well, they are in that they believe wacko religious crap, but politically they aren't suicidal).
Obviously, you've never read the Koran and what it says to do with unbelievers.
They plan to remain in power. They will not be launching unprovoked attacks on Israel.
Isn't this the same group that took the members of the US Embassy hostage in 1979? And wouldn't an unprovoked attack on Israel, if successfull, actually give them MORE power among militant Islamics, as the people who eliminated the Zionist Threat?
Jesus, fucking learn some facts somewhere other than television. It's rotting your brains. Read some books. And not by those brain-dead troglodytes of Fox 'News', either. Real books by people who actually know history and choose not to lie about it pathologically to serve their greed.
I have- you apparently haven't. This has all happened before- the only difference is the number of people to kill and the technology of the weapons used. The rise of the Ottoman Empire, the Protestant Reformation, the Crusades, the Moorish Invasion of Gaul, the Israeli Revolt against the Roman Empire. It's the same culture- the religion changes, but the culture is the same. It's been creating problems for Western Europe for 3500 years now- repeated genocides, purges, justice systems in which mutilation is the primary punishment, and widescale destruction are the politics of these people, and about 10% of them historically are willing to go to the extremes neccessary to practice this form of politics. The only difference is that they are now about 1/6th the population of the planet- which means we have ~100,000,000 suicide bombers who feel YOUR form of diplomacy is sinfull to deal with. If each of them kills 40 people, including themselves- that's 4 BILLION lives that will be lost before this is over. How many people have to die before you understand that the world can't support a violent Islamic Reformation?
If you reject the notion that God can use men who sinned to record exactly what He wanted to say and exactly the way he wanted to say it (via the writer's life experiences, etc.), then how could you accept that God the Son was perfect even though He came from Mary? (Or in case you rather believe in the anti-biblical notion of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, then consider Mary's parents.)
Actually, I do believe the anti-biblical notion of the Immaculate Conception- since there's 2000 years of Christian belief, study, and reason behind it after all- but Christ wasn't perfect. He became IMPERFECT so that he could live at our level and show you could still be moral despite being imperfect. If he had been perfect, he would not have been able to be crucified- his death shows that his mortal body was imperfect and suffered from the same fate as all who have original sin do.
I'm beginning to think this dictionary attack from spam idea is largely an explanation looking for a problem. It's far more likely that it's a directory attack that you're mistaking for a dictionary attack- that the "lesser known mailserver" has a directory page that was hit by a crawler, thus harvesting the e-mail address.
Exactly my point, thank you. Unfortuneately, that oral tradition and written tradition got lost in the Protestant Reformation- Sola Scriptura, in Martin Luther's words (the original, not the modern one whose holiday we just celebrated) makes "Ev'ry Scullery Maid her own Pope".
What dictionary includes names with a dash? Much more likely is that you've got it on a web page someplace.
Why not change it to theater1 and thus escape the dictionary attacks? Or theatre1?
War is the failure of politics, the people left standing do not "win", they simply survive to fight in the next one. The strategy "I'm violent and crazy so give up" did not work in Vietnam, did not work for Hitler and nor did it end the cold war, why do you think it would work in Iran?
Vietnam did not apply this technique adequately- otherwise we'd have the island nation of South Vietnam as the only remaining land on the peninsula. Hitler didn't have the bomb. But MAD did end the cold war- though it took the sacrifice of our peacetime economy to do it. The Soviet Union *knew* that if they provoked us, we'd use the bomb like we did in Japan, so they were very careful NOT to provoke us too far. Islam has yet to learn that Allah will not protect them from crazy Americans- we should have hit Mecca 5 years ago on September 12th.
I have to say I find your suggestion the most repulsive idea I have ever read on slashdot. It is born from the same "us and them" philosophy fertilizes terrorisim.
To fight an enemy, you must become like the enemy- haven't you ever read Pliny the Elder's History of Rome? The terrorists understand this is a war of genocide- and will do what it takes to make it one. When will you wake up to the fact that this is an us vs them situation?
The MAD theory of strategic balance says that either everyone "wins" or everone dies. It depends apon all sides having nukes but no side is willing to risk destroying themselves by striking first. The best option would be a lasting peace (MAD or otherwise), the second best is trade and diplomacy. I don't belive the US can stop Iran obtaining nukes if it is determined to do so but I doubt it will attack Israel for the same reason Pakistan did not attack India when it eventually obtained nukes. Iran has seen the enormous boost in international respect given to Pakistan since it joined the MAD group, why would Iran not want to follow suit?
Because Iran does have a madman in control- a man who believes that all Zionists are racist scum and Hitler's holocaust was a hoax. A man who in 1978 helped take Americans hostage. A man who would like nothing better than to see all infidels dead. A man who considers economic engagement to be a weapon of mass destruction in and of itself. Pakistan is not ruled by such a man- but Iran is. The real key to first strike has nothing to do with the other country gaining nukes- it has to do with the other country gaining enough of an early warning system that MAD becomes possible. Neither North Korea nor Iran or even Pakistan and India have this capability yet- if we're going to strike, the time is *before* they have their radar installations in place in Russia.
Human beings are not a perfect creation- that's why sin exists. But something tells me you're just like Moses in a way- you're not ready to hear the fullness of the revelation, and instead cling to childish literal interpretations. Inspirtation is not automatic writing- the author has control, not the source of the inspiration.
Also, if you are in the US, you've got single split phase. If you're in Europe then you have two phase. Are you sure your parents have two phase? How much do they pay for that?
In Oregon, two phase is common (I know, I use X10 in my house, and have problems with the 5v powerline commands getting from one phase to the other). Two 110V wires coming in from the transformer. In the case of the X10 problem, a simple capacitor across the phases (passive coupler in a box behind my dryer- one of the few places I have 220v service) did the trick...but I bet if I had this kind of a problem in my house, I'd blow that capacitor rather quickly.
Everything changes over time- as mankind gains knowledge, he sees new hidden meanings in Scripture and Tradition- he understands more of what the world is, and thus understands the creator of the world better. Moses was a simple desert tribesman....nothing more. What he heard from the Lord was what he wanted to hear, no more and no less.
Neither will protect you from dictionary attacks.
Who has a e-mail name that appears in a DICTIONARY?!?!?!? The closest I've ever gotten is ted@oit.osshe.state.or.us.edu, and that was a long time ago.
And now that spammers have armies of zombies at their beck and call, they're doing distributed dictionary attacks, which are harder to detect and block.
Uh, don't have your e-mail name something that occurs in a dictionary?
Common first names, first initials with common last names, role descriptions... Heck, we even get spam sent to template@(domain name) because it happened to be active at the time someone tried sending it mail.
I guess I never had a problem- my last name is rather uncommon (400 families in the United States), except that guy who thought my last name and first initial was armenian and kept e-mailing me about the 1927 massacre of the turks...yes, I know that's backwards.
Unless you make your email address really hard to guess....
Most of the ones I've had follow many of the rules of passwords- mixtures of letters and numbers because my prefered name was already taken. The one that I don't do that on, I'm breaking at least 2 of the other rules on.
So, you believe that in order to deter Iran from using nuclear weapons, the United States should use it's nuclear weapons on Iran?
No, I simply believe that there's no way to deter Iran from using nuclear weapons- the best option would be to get the hell out and leave them alone. But since we can't seem to handle that, the other way is to commit genocide on purpose- use Iran as a warning to the rest of the world that we're crazy and will do anything to get our way.
Do you not see the irony in that?
Yep, that's the irony of mutual assured destruction and weapons of mass destruction. The guy with the biggust guns and the craziest leader will always win- and kill billions while doing it.
It's a chicken and egg problem- and probably never. What you see as a problem with SMTP was originally a design FEATURE- privacy wasn't a concern, encryption wasn't a concern, rich text was considered a waste of bandwidth, phishing and spam were just a gleam in a cracker's eye. The *only* concern for SMTP was SIMPLE Mail transfer between dissimilar systems- that is, OPEN COMMUNICATION. Follow a few simple rules, and you too will never need that extra stuff: 1. NEVER post your e-mail on a web page. 2. NEVER e-mail somebody you don't know. 3. NEVER trust private information to a public network. 4. Don't waste bandwith with pictures and crap.
Can be found by reading the Requests for Comment associated with that protocol. In other words there WAS planning involved- a good deal of planning- it's just that the end-users were completely different than the original audience- the original audience were arpanet researchers, whose system was so good it overtook the competeing FIDONet hackers- which resulted in spammers.
Doctrine develops with mankind's understanding of the universe. These are good for proving what doctrine was at the time they were written, but for good dogma you need the addition of Holy Tradition- which tells us how doctrine has developed over time. That's where Sola Scriptura and proof texting has always fallen down for me- it makes Christianity a dead religion, as dead as the trees the book was printed on. Life is change, and to a large extent we've got to change with it.
Well, as I understand it a predetermined universe is consistent with quantum theory, but a deterministic one isn't. There are a few other models, however, that are also consistent with quantum theory...but the shared characteristic is that we haven't yet come up with an experiment that would allow us to chose between them. (Splitting the universe at each quantum transition is one of the consistent models...the rest are similarly weird. Solipsism is another. Notice how usefully different they are?)
The option where a deterministic, but not predetermined, universe is consistent is the one where all of quantum mechanics arises from the error of the experimentor instead of errors in the data- the one where the observer affects the observed to such an extent that the choices of the observer determine the observed.
If you're going to posit a deterministic, not-predetermined universe, then you've got problems with quantum theory that will need resolving. And the limits on the kinds of resolution that will be consistent with the current knowledge-base are rather stringent. An interventionist god would work, but it would need to have been deciding to NOT intervene during the published experiments...or possibly to have been intervening in most of them, there was that period where the J particle (Top quark?) had a different mass depending on whether you were in the US or in Europe. This, and similar fluctuations could indicate that Coyote is the one true god.
Or it all could mean that the difference between the intelligence of God and the intelligence of Man is knowing how to observe without changing the observed. In other words- in knowing how not to intervene, where *all* of the published experiments made the mistake of intervening.
The problem with that is we're about to default on our debts as far as social security guarantees are concerned- so there's no reason to trust that the United States will pay back any other sort of debt.
4. I think Iran has already developed nuclear weapons, and thus anything less than a first strike scenario will work against them. I further believe that the Bush Administration's handling of Iraq proves that they don't have the cajones neccessary to do what it will take to stop Iran- especially since that will make Iran's oil wells and a significant portion of both Iraq and Afghanistan uninhabitable and unavailable for a few thousand years. They don't have the bravery needed to face a world without access to that oil- and so they won't prevent Iran from continuing their nuclear weapons program.
It was two phase- did I say anything different? But the result is the same- the circuits on the phase that was blown on the transformer or the phase wire that had worked it's way loose went out, or rather browned out, while the other phase stayed good.
Not all cakes have layers- but all onions do.
Exactly right- in the Catholic version, limited free will is allowed- and causes most of the evil we experience (we pay for our own mistakes as a race). Where in a predetermined universe, as opposed to a deterministic one, the physical laws micromanage our very thoughts- at which point science is useless beyond a certain point, because while you may understand what happens, you'll never be able to change it.
And related to this: GARBAGE IN-GARBAGE OUT. A computer is not a thinking machine, it's only as smart as the data and programs you put into it.
Basic networking is like an onion- it has many layers. The average user needs to have a good understanding of the difference between a client, a router, and a server- so they know who to call when their computer comes up with a weird error message. Beyond that, what you describe should do them, I recommend (works on a wide variety of systems) AVG, ZoneAlarm Free, AdAware, SpyBot, and as a backup, a copy of HijackThis! with strict instructions *not* to run it without professional opinion on what to delete and what *not* to delete. Curiously enough- I've got a package I update from time to time on my website that I call the AntiCyberTerrorism Toolkit- that containes 4 out of 5 of these programs.
Quit it, you're taking the superstition out of religion. THEY won't like that.... ;)
The evangelicals won't like that- but the last 6 Popes have been trying to do exactly that- and older religions are anti-superstitious to begin with (as well as one younger one- Islam's main theological theme of focusing on Allah as a single God is all about the destruction of superstition- the superstition that Mohammed the Prophet saw as being highly *destructive* to his people's advancement).