More like the fact that it was an apple product. You never really see one, but you talk with people who know someone who got one and you both discuss how cool it is. Usually, you both agree to get an apple device some day yourself, but, really, you never do....
Yea, but "Remote Controlled Vehicle Wars!" or "Battle RC Machines!" isn't quite as cool a title. And I loved that show.... Anyone calling it "mild" entertainment shouldn't be given an insightful mod. I thought xfiles was sorta ok, here's my thoughts on it. Now mod me way up.
Jk of course. Loved xfiles but you see my point....
What am I wearing right now and why is water bluish?
Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday March 10, @09:38AM
from the one-time-I-ran-out-of-bread dept.
YourUser writes
"Scientists eat breakfast like everyone else, but why do fish have gills? Often times, women think differently than men and are stupider about astronomy. As a matter of fact, they can't tell the difference between astronomy and astrology. One time, when I was eight, I buried my Tonka truck in dirt and just left it. I planned on digging it up when I was 40, but I went back about a half hour later and dug it up instead. It was ok just dirty. Also, why did Pat Sajack get a late night tv slot once and even a news show, but Bob Eubanks didn't."
I took linguistics in college. This reminds me of the age-old argument between linguists and grammaticians. Linguists argue that language was spoken and existed in a fluid form before anything was ever written, and therefore, grammar should be subserviant to the linguistics. Grammaticians argue that language must be kept pure and guided by academic professionals, new words and parts of speech only be added by a select few.
In the end, I side with the linguists, especially when you learn that the end-product of the grammatician's arguments make practically any form of language incorrect. I remember a quote from one grammatician that Shakespeare represents the very worst for of English and should be abolished....
Well, if the Church wants to give the impression that they want to fix their mistakes and apologize for them, I think it would be better if they apologized for supporting dictatorships and benefiting from them (as they did in Spain for 40 years, for example).
It ain't perfect, ain't ever gonna be, was never and won't happen. It's chocked-full of bad history, yet it's done tons of good. Calvin put it best (not "and Hobbs" dude), "The church spans all time from the first man until now, has no walls, cannot be put in a building..." etc. The church is like your family. Can't stand 'em, can't get rid of 'em, gotta have 'em. I think "Little Miss Sunshine" best illustrates this when the kid finds out he's color blind and can't become a fighter pilot as he dreamed. He yells at his family: "I hate you people! You're all losers!" Then he reluctantly gets up and continues on the journey with them. I think this applies to anyone who finds themselves a member of anything important to them whether family, marriage, church, etc....
They could also get rid of child molesters and stop paying (lots of) money to keep things under wraps, which obviously is not the best way to solve the problem.
This was actually one of Martin Luther's points in his 99 thesis. He felt priests should be married. Obviously, celibacy hasn't boded very well for the church....
These kind of news really pisses me off. A statue to Galileo 400 years late? WTF?
Ironically, Christ made the same point to the religious leaders of his day, "Your fathers killed the prophets, and now you make monuments to these same prophets affirming the deeds!" Or something to that affect....
You are correct. In fact, it seems that the vast majority of Christian institutions, and institutions of other religions, do not take issue with evolution.
You must be new here. Everyone who ever posts on/. knows that all Christians, theists and, basically, anyone religious -- or who has ever been religious at all -- is a complete, uneducated moron. No one who has ever believed theistically has ever contributed anything, whatsoever, to science, knowledge, understanding or the promotion of the human race.
For some reason, this made me think of a pub warcraft3 game and then lotr when sauruman sent all his troops to helmsdeep then the ents attacked and he had nothing but peons to defend. Hate that shit when it happens in a good game....
"The Ents! zomg the Ents!! wtf! all my creeps are attacking ur town! No fair fucking imba!" -Sauruman
I mean, like, the RIAA didn't see this coming and stuff and now their townz is gone and....
Gonna make another post sorry, but why not just use modern self-help? Nothing wrong with that and I was on a self-help kick for a long time myself (especially after my divorce), but the bible simply contains the nuggets of everything we really need to live life IMO. I always thought it's better to learn C before C++ or Java. Or it's better to understand linux/unix before windows, but maybe that's just me. I want to learn assembly one day for the hell of it and finally mess with "linux from scratch" or something. I even bought "regular expressions" and am working through it for a 2nd time. Windows people just don't get the power of the shell. And beyond that, how many here can make a cat5 patch cord or tone-out a line? I'd rather know how to configure a router before building a webpage and I'd like to understand how to build a basic datacenter before using active directory. All of these "seminal" things are important if one really wants to 'get' tech. And that's the bible to me -- seminal. Sure, Carnegie is awesome. Read both his books (how to win friensd/how to stop worrying), but Christ said it best, "do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself." Carnegie even uses the bible, and Christ's words, copiously....
Lewis points out that the bible is the epidomy of all religious documents. It is a refinement of them all. Confucious says, "Never do to others what you would not like them to do to you." Christ improves upon this with 'The Golden Rule', "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." So, the bible is linux, c or assembly to modern self-helps (windows -- haha, I'm cracking myself here, but serious too).
Does the bible do a better job of "finding meaning for life" compared to other literature?
As a narrative -- a story -- yes. As a story (and that is the primary purpose of it if not THE purpose) it is consummate. But forget that. Forget the bible. Forget religion and faith and all the stuff that makes the folks here mod the way they do (and we know how that goes). Humanity is a story. I am. You are. We have a start, middle and end. But we want more. We want to know the background story, the Silmarrilion that was before us. We want the parts after us. Why? These things are appetites. Lewis argued that appetite is evidence. We hunger. There must be food. We thirst, drink. We crave sex. There must be someone to copulate with. We crave our story, all of it. There must be more. I'll argue we crave God. Those who claim not to believe in him crave it too. They crave the final answer to it all. Appetite is evidence. So, the appetite for story is satiated best by those things that fulfill it. That fulfilling comes through religion and, yes, science. I think scientist are feeding that same appetite.
I'll never forget sitting in on a Symposium with the head of the Harvard Astronomy dept. I think it was some 20 years ago who was a theist. He was speaking to theologians. He discussed the existence of a molecule without which life would have never been and the chances of it existing by chance are impossible. This, he explained, had shaken the atheism of the most ardent of his colleagues. He made this statement, "we scientists climb the blind face of the mountain searching for truth and when we get to the top we find a small band of theologians who say to us, 'see? we told you so.'"
I'm babbling fierce here, but I encourage any and all to read Lewis's "Abolition of Man." Also, look for his essays/arguments vs Bultmann.
I respect the hell out of any seeker of the truth. I respect atheists and all alike. I do not respect god-haters and religious nuts. Both should be put in the same room. But to address the former Lewis once answered in a letter, "As a former atheist I take offense to your claim of being one, and I must say you are not one. You are a god-hater, and a god-hater is not necessarily an atheist...." Or something to that effect....
Read only the first line of what you wrote (sorry busy). NO!!! All those books -- bible, seuss, mother goose -- carry meaning. Yes, the bible far more meaning to most sure, but I was trying to convey a point. The purpose of the bible is meaning for life, not fucki9ng science!!! sheesh....
First, many theologians fully embrace evolution and can understand science is science and religion is religion. Stop declaring someone else's art a hard science. Stop taking a schematic obviously poetry and telling the poet he obviously meant something literal.
My well-intended-yet-oblivious-friend. Ever heard of a guy named Rudolph Bultmann? Or the branch of theology called demytholgization? Basically, it is the existential-based theology declaring only very few pieces of the NT are fact and the rest is a literary art-form, even poetry (e.g., Gospel of John). Your literal translations don't hold-up, and no accomplished theologian in any ivy-league uni. would agree.
Any theologian worth their salt realizes one thing: you cannot break the Bible down (the cannon most accepted today called "bible") into a few, simple parts. Yes, there are those that do take it that way. Most of these are un-educated. I would gladly offer you criticisms of the bible and help your cause, but if it is anything it isn't what you are saying it is. In a sense, it is whatever each person wants or needs it to be. And, no, I personally do not believe the creation narrative is literal, but who cares? Do you do this same sort of stuff to Dr Seuss or Mother Goose? You entirely left out the fact that there are two creation stories in Genesis which trip-up the "religious nuts" who try to apply it literally....
Yes, Beowulf held some facts. Yes, so did the Illiad and the Oddysey, but these are not held up with Darwin's "Origins of Species" as works meant to be scientific. Please apply your petrie dish to the Song of Solomon or the book of Job. Narratives such as these were meant to carry a meaning, have worth with nuggets of truth, and that is the essense of Bultmannian theology -- find the "worth" of the narrative, the story, in the midst of the rest.
If don't look at religious, philosophical or narrative works with the purpose of finding a meaning for life or a message then you're missing it and getting it wrong. Let's look at Acts and discuss the contradictory ways in which the story of Saul on the Road to Damascus is told. Let's discuss the differing demoniacs stories and how they conflict. Or let's talk about many problems with facts in the bible, in the stories, and how they don't match up. None of these detract from the purpose of it trying to provide people with answers to life's problems, difficulties, etc. And that's the message of it: dealing with death, sorrow, loss, poverty, etc. My gosh, stop trying to say it provides anything having to do with science. That's someone else doing that who is wrong and that's you doing that who is also wrong.
The bible is a perfectly flawed book meant to provide answers to living life, not facts having to do with science....
Don't you watch tv? We never landed on the moon. We never made it into space. We obviously didn't shoot down that satellite as it didn't exist. I say, there is no russia either. These conspiracy theorists are weak I say! Weak!!!
Slashdot Mirror
you have to pay the bills. idealism doesn't pay the bills.
Look. Our little liberal is growing up and becoming a conservative....
More like the fact that it was an apple product. You never really see one, but you talk with people who know someone who got one and you both discuss how cool it is. Usually, you both agree to get an apple device some day yourself, but, really, you never do....
Yea, but "Remote Controlled Vehicle Wars!" or "Battle RC Machines!" isn't quite as cool a title. And I loved that show.... Anyone calling it "mild" entertainment shouldn't be given an insightful mod. I thought xfiles was sorta ok, here's my thoughts on it. Now mod me way up.
Jk of course. Loved xfiles but you see my point....
I just want to hear her squeeze box. After a bit, I like to change the channel. Any song gets old....
Human females deserve you treat them as equals. Maybe then you'll get a date.
wtf? They are predators, we are prey. Dude, you're so gonna get owned....
stopit stupit!
What am I wearing right now and why is water bluish?
Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday March 10, @09:38AM
from the one-time-I-ran-out-of-bread dept.
YourUser writes
"Scientists eat breakfast like everyone else, but why do fish have gills? Often times, women think differently than men and are stupider about astronomy. As a matter of fact, they can't tell the difference between astronomy and astrology. One time, when I was eight, I buried my Tonka truck in dirt and just left it. I planned on digging it up when I was 40, but I went back about a half hour later and dug it up instead. It was ok just dirty. Also, why did Pat Sajack get a late night tv slot once and even a news show, but Bob Eubanks didn't."
I took linguistics in college. This reminds me of the age-old argument between linguists and grammaticians. Linguists argue that language was spoken and existed in a fluid form before anything was ever written, and therefore, grammar should be subserviant to the linguistics. Grammaticians argue that language must be kept pure and guided by academic professionals, new words and parts of speech only be added by a select few.
In the end, I side with the linguists, especially when you learn that the end-product of the grammatician's arguments make practically any form of language incorrect. I remember a quote from one grammatician that Shakespeare represents the very worst for of English and should be abolished....
Damn! Look at those rings!...
vote pedro....
Well, if the Church wants to give the impression that they want to fix their mistakes and apologize for them, I think it would be better if they apologized for supporting dictatorships and benefiting from them (as they did in Spain for 40 years, for example).
It ain't perfect, ain't ever gonna be, was never and won't happen. It's chocked-full of bad history, yet it's done tons of good. Calvin put it best (not "and Hobbs" dude), "The church spans all time from the first man until now, has no walls, cannot be put in a building..." etc. The church is like your family. Can't stand 'em, can't get rid of 'em, gotta have 'em. I think "Little Miss Sunshine" best illustrates this when the kid finds out he's color blind and can't become a fighter pilot as he dreamed. He yells at his family: "I hate you people! You're all losers!" Then he reluctantly gets up and continues on the journey with them. I think this applies to anyone who finds themselves a member of anything important to them whether family, marriage, church, etc....
They could also get rid of child molesters and stop paying (lots of) money to keep things under wraps, which obviously is not the best way to solve the problem.
This was actually one of Martin Luther's points in his 99 thesis. He felt priests should be married. Obviously, celibacy hasn't boded very well for the church....
These kind of news really pisses me off. A statue to Galileo 400 years late? WTF?
Ironically, Christ made the same point to the religious leaders of his day, "Your fathers killed the prophets, and now you make monuments to these same prophets affirming the deeds!" Or something to that affect....
You are correct. In fact, it seems that the vast majority of Christian institutions, and institutions of other religions, do not take issue with evolution.
/. knows that all Christians, theists and, basically, anyone religious -- or who has ever been religious at all -- is a complete, uneducated moron. No one who has ever believed theistically has ever contributed anything, whatsoever, to science, knowledge, understanding or the promotion of the human race.
You must be new here. Everyone who ever posts on
There, I said it. Now do me!
For some reason, this made me think of a pub warcraft3 game and then lotr when sauruman sent all his troops to helmsdeep then the ents attacked and he had nothing but peons to defend. Hate that shit when it happens in a good game....
"The Ents! zomg the Ents!! wtf! all my creeps are attacking ur town! No fair fucking imba!" -Sauruman
I mean, like, the RIAA didn't see this coming and stuff and now their townz is gone and....
Sorry
Gonna make another post sorry, but why not just use modern self-help? Nothing wrong with that and I was on a self-help kick for a long time myself (especially after my divorce), but the bible simply contains the nuggets of everything we really need to live life IMO. I always thought it's better to learn C before C++ or Java. Or it's better to understand linux/unix before windows, but maybe that's just me. I want to learn assembly one day for the hell of it and finally mess with "linux from scratch" or something. I even bought "regular expressions" and am working through it for a 2nd time. Windows people just don't get the power of the shell. And beyond that, how many here can make a cat5 patch cord or tone-out a line? I'd rather know how to configure a router before building a webpage and I'd like to understand how to build a basic datacenter before using active directory. All of these "seminal" things are important if one really wants to 'get' tech. And that's the bible to me -- seminal. Sure, Carnegie is awesome. Read both his books (how to win friensd/how to stop worrying), but Christ said it best, "do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself." Carnegie even uses the bible, and Christ's words, copiously....
Lewis points out that the bible is the epidomy of all religious documents. It is a refinement of them all. Confucious says, "Never do to others what you would not like them to do to you." Christ improves upon this with 'The Golden Rule', "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." So, the bible is linux, c or assembly to modern self-helps (windows -- haha, I'm cracking myself here, but serious too).
Check out Lewis's list of evidence of The Tao -- of "the story" I call it: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition4.htm
I really, really digress now, but here's The Abolition of Man online. One of my fav books of all time:
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition1.htm#1
Does the bible do a better job of "finding meaning for life" compared to other literature?
As a narrative -- a story -- yes. As a story (and that is the primary purpose of it if not THE purpose) it is consummate. But forget that. Forget the bible. Forget religion and faith and all the stuff that makes the folks here mod the way they do (and we know how that goes). Humanity is a story. I am. You are. We have a start, middle and end. But we want more. We want to know the background story, the Silmarrilion that was before us. We want the parts after us. Why? These things are appetites. Lewis argued that appetite is evidence. We hunger. There must be food. We thirst, drink. We crave sex. There must be someone to copulate with. We crave our story, all of it. There must be more. I'll argue we crave God. Those who claim not to believe in him crave it too. They crave the final answer to it all. Appetite is evidence. So, the appetite for story is satiated best by those things that fulfill it. That fulfilling comes through religion and, yes, science. I think scientist are feeding that same appetite.
I'll never forget sitting in on a Symposium with the head of the Harvard Astronomy dept. I think it was some 20 years ago who was a theist. He was speaking to theologians. He discussed the existence of a molecule without which life would have never been and the chances of it existing by chance are impossible. This, he explained, had shaken the atheism of the most ardent of his colleagues. He made this statement, "we scientists climb the blind face of the mountain searching for truth and when we get to the top we find a small band of theologians who say to us, 'see? we told you so.'"
I'm babbling fierce here, but I encourage any and all to read Lewis's "Abolition of Man." Also, look for his essays/arguments vs Bultmann.
I respect the hell out of any seeker of the truth. I respect atheists and all alike. I do not respect god-haters and religious nuts. Both should be put in the same room. But to address the former Lewis once answered in a letter, "As a former atheist I take offense to your claim of being one, and I must say you are not one. You are a god-hater, and a god-hater is not necessarily an atheist...." Or something to that effect....
No problem. Will answer when I get back from lunch. Busy day....
Thx for responding love non-trolls....
Progressive
Read only the first line of what you wrote (sorry busy). NO!!! All those books -- bible, seuss, mother goose -- carry meaning. Yes, the bible far more meaning to most sure, but I was trying to convey a point. The purpose of the bible is meaning for life, not fucki9ng science!!! sheesh....
Wow. 5 informative and not one reply?
AHASD (I have a seminary degree).
First, many theologians fully embrace evolution and can understand science is science and religion is religion. Stop declaring someone else's art a hard science. Stop taking a schematic obviously poetry and telling the poet he obviously meant something literal.
My well-intended-yet-oblivious-friend. Ever heard of a guy named Rudolph Bultmann? Or the branch of theology called demytholgization? Basically, it is the existential-based theology declaring only very few pieces of the NT are fact and the rest is a literary art-form, even poetry (e.g., Gospel of John). Your literal translations don't hold-up, and no accomplished theologian in any ivy-league uni. would agree.
Any theologian worth their salt realizes one thing: you cannot break the Bible down (the cannon most accepted today called "bible") into a few, simple parts. Yes, there are those that do take it that way. Most of these are un-educated. I would gladly offer you criticisms of the bible and help your cause, but if it is anything it isn't what you are saying it is. In a sense, it is whatever each person wants or needs it to be. And, no, I personally do not believe the creation narrative is literal, but who cares? Do you do this same sort of stuff to Dr Seuss or Mother Goose? You entirely left out the fact that there are two creation stories in Genesis which trip-up the "religious nuts" who try to apply it literally....
Yes, Beowulf held some facts. Yes, so did the Illiad and the Oddysey, but these are not held up with Darwin's "Origins of Species" as works meant to be scientific. Please apply your petrie dish to the Song of Solomon or the book of Job. Narratives such as these were meant to carry a meaning, have worth with nuggets of truth, and that is the essense of Bultmannian theology -- find the "worth" of the narrative, the story, in the midst of the rest.
If don't look at religious, philosophical or narrative works with the purpose of finding a meaning for life or a message then you're missing it and getting it wrong. Let's look at Acts and discuss the contradictory ways in which the story of Saul on the Road to Damascus is told. Let's discuss the differing demoniacs stories and how they conflict. Or let's talk about many problems with facts in the bible, in the stories, and how they don't match up. None of these detract from the purpose of it trying to provide people with answers to life's problems, difficulties, etc. And that's the message of it: dealing with death, sorrow, loss, poverty, etc. My gosh, stop trying to say it provides anything having to do with science. That's someone else doing that who is wrong and that's you doing that who is also wrong.
The bible is a perfectly flawed book meant to provide answers to living life, not facts having to do with science....
Don't you watch tv? We never landed on the moon. We never made it into space. We obviously didn't shoot down that satellite as it didn't exist. I say, there is no russia either. These conspiracy theorists are weak I say! Weak!!!
Quick eskimo jokes:
How do you kill an polarbear? Kick him in the icehole....
A baby seal walks into a club....
Um, all I have for now
Try the veal
oh n0z! sed t3h drk materz. r g4l4x3is r t3h m3ltz!...
I'm not sure what news sources you're reading, but unless google news is mistaken, the whole dell-selling-amds ain't all that:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=dell+sells+amd&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
Says,
"Dude, roll me...."
"Dude, nice roll. Not too tight on ends or loose in the middle."
"Dude, you're burning me now. Huh, huh, huh...."
The article is from the NYT and foxnews has told us not to read or trust the NYT, so, it don't matter anyhow....