Highest Paying Job On IT?
-
We have reached an end again, I feel - my final words (feel free to offer your own closing remarks - how could anyone hope to stop you!!) - you appear to be accepting my main argument almost in totality! As you were forced to do, you have had to move into the world of INTERPRETATION (debationg the meaning and use of the word 'deaconess') in order to refute my quotes. This doesn't make you right, or me right - we may both be wrong. All I am demonstrating is that you CANNOT show objective proof of the bible's validity - your interpretation differs from mine, and probably from everyone elses' also. God must have been having a lot of trouble wiht the grammer checker when he wrote the bible. >> Well, as I have often noted, my interpretation requires God to act, so unless >> I was hell bent on deluding myself deliberately, my interpretation is proven >> by the fact I believe God made a promise and I have personal proof that He >> kept it You offer two simple choices for your own faith : (1) god exists, has given your specific promises via the bible, and delivered in the contract. (2) you are subject to some form of delusion. We will just have to disagree, I feel, as to which of these two outcomes is more likely!! (but I'd just like to add that being deluded is not that same as being unintelligent, so don't feel bad!) >> And still elude the majority today, as the Bible prophecied. Indeed Jesus >> asked of His return 'will I find faith on the Earth ?' >> ... >> Deliberate illiteracy and lack of faith are not God's fault. If the world was ' >> perfect under mens control there would be no point in Jesus coming back You must be very happy to be amongst the chosen few, who have been able to see through the confusion. Undoubtedly the rest of us poor fools will live to regret the way we snicker at those who know "the truth" that somehow eludes us. Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
We have reached an end again, I feel - my final words (feel free to offer your own closing remarks - how could anyone hope to stop you!!) ;P - you appear to be accepting my main argument almost in totality! As you were forced to do, you have had to move into the world of INTERPRETATION (debationg the meaning and use of the word 'deaconess') in order to refute my quotes. This doesn't make you right, or me right - we may both be wrong. All I am demonstrating is that you CANNOT show objective proof of the bible's validity - your interpretation differs from mine, and probably from everyone elses' also. God must have been having a lot of trouble wiht the grammer checker when he wrote the bible. The point is simply that in this case you're quoting an ENGLISH Bible, which I showed deviated from the original text. Yes, I find myself again arguing based on interpretation of this verse or that, because that is the realm you force me into by virtue of the fact you want to argue about the Bible rather than test it's veracity by looking to see if the promises it makes are kept. The very nature of the Bible is such that once it becomes an academic debate the odds of God being given a chance to act on His behalf are all but lost. The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff. Arguing about commas in Habbukuk is unlikely to yield a similar result. >> Well, as I have often noted, my interpretation requires God to act, so unless >> I was hell bent on deluding myself deliberately, my interpretation is proven >> by the fact I believe God made a promise and I have personal proof that He >> kept it You offer two simple choices for your own faith : (1) god exists, has given your specific promises via the bible, and delivered in the contract. (2) you are subject to some form of delusion. We will just have to disagree, I feel, as to which of these two outcomes is more likely!! (but I'd just like to add that being deluded is not that same as being unintelligent, so don't feel bad!) Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. >> And still elude the majority today, as the Bible prophecied. Indeed Jesus >> asked of His return 'will I find faith on the Earth ?' >> ... >> Deliberate illiteracy and lack of faith are not God's fault. If the world was ' >> perfect under mens control there would be no point in Jesus coming back You mus
-
We have reached an end again, I feel - my final words (feel free to offer your own closing remarks - how could anyone hope to stop you!!) ;P - you appear to be accepting my main argument almost in totality! As you were forced to do, you have had to move into the world of INTERPRETATION (debationg the meaning and use of the word 'deaconess') in order to refute my quotes. This doesn't make you right, or me right - we may both be wrong. All I am demonstrating is that you CANNOT show objective proof of the bible's validity - your interpretation differs from mine, and probably from everyone elses' also. God must have been having a lot of trouble wiht the grammer checker when he wrote the bible. The point is simply that in this case you're quoting an ENGLISH Bible, which I showed deviated from the original text. Yes, I find myself again arguing based on interpretation of this verse or that, because that is the realm you force me into by virtue of the fact you want to argue about the Bible rather than test it's veracity by looking to see if the promises it makes are kept. The very nature of the Bible is such that once it becomes an academic debate the odds of God being given a chance to act on His behalf are all but lost. The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff. Arguing about commas in Habbukuk is unlikely to yield a similar result. >> Well, as I have often noted, my interpretation requires God to act, so unless >> I was hell bent on deluding myself deliberately, my interpretation is proven >> by the fact I believe God made a promise and I have personal proof that He >> kept it You offer two simple choices for your own faith : (1) god exists, has given your specific promises via the bible, and delivered in the contract. (2) you are subject to some form of delusion. We will just have to disagree, I feel, as to which of these two outcomes is more likely!! (but I'd just like to add that being deluded is not that same as being unintelligent, so don't feel bad!) Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. >> And still elude the majority today, as the Bible prophecied. Indeed Jesus >> asked of His return 'will I find faith on the Earth ?' >> ... >> Deliberate illiteracy and lack of faith are not God's fault. If the world was ' >> perfect under mens control there would be no point in Jesus coming back You mus
Must ... stop .. answering ... Christians's ... posts ... Arrgghh, it's no use, I must have one more say! >> The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff Very convient for god that his words are vague enough to beyond examination in an 'academic debate'. I find it strange that the Old Testament god had very little trouble making it clear to pharoah just what was expected, and what the pain might be - not much room to 'interpret' things there, no need for 'faith', and no fear of 'academice debates' muddying the content. "let me people go, or suffer the death of all first born children" - a fairly direct set of words, methinks! >> Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to >> spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. Well, have I got good news for you!! Just go to 'www.randi.org'. The James Randi Education Fund offers $1 million US to anyone would can demonstrate proof of 'supernatural' behaviour. This includes faith healing!! Just bring yourself, you sick leper cousin, or any number of blind people along and you can collect the prize. Of course, it seems strange to me that after 10 years of testing such claims no one has yet collected, but there you go - perhaps god doesn't want any documented, tested, proof of such claims!! >> To be honest it kind of depresses me that so many start from the >> presupposition that there is no God and thus ignore the fact He has offered to >> prove it. I would have thought that since over 95% of the world believes in some form of religion, it would be far more depressing to think that so many good, honest, faithful people are in fact missing the point of it all, because god chose to be so bloody obtuse in his use of words. And I really must go... ----------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
Must ... stop .. answering ... Christians's ... posts ... Arrgghh, it's no use, I must have one more say! >> The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff Very convient for god that his words are vague enough to beyond examination in an 'academic debate'. I find it strange that the Old Testament god had very little trouble making it clear to pharoah just what was expected, and what the pain might be - not much room to 'interpret' things there, no need for 'faith', and no fear of 'academice debates' muddying the content. "let me people go, or suffer the death of all first born children" - a fairly direct set of words, methinks! >> Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to >> spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. Well, have I got good news for you!! Just go to 'www.randi.org'. The James Randi Education Fund offers $1 million US to anyone would can demonstrate proof of 'supernatural' behaviour. This includes faith healing!! Just bring yourself, you sick leper cousin, or any number of blind people along and you can collect the prize. Of course, it seems strange to me that after 10 years of testing such claims no one has yet collected, but there you go - perhaps god doesn't want any documented, tested, proof of such claims!! >> To be honest it kind of depresses me that so many start from the >> presupposition that there is no God and thus ignore the fact He has offered to >> prove it. I would have thought that since over 95% of the world believes in some form of religion, it would be far more depressing to think that so many good, honest, faithful people are in fact missing the point of it all, because god chose to be so bloody obtuse in his use of words. And I really must go... ----------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
Must ... stop .. answering ... Christians's ... posts ... Arrgghh, it's no use, I must have one more say! *grin* this is why I NEVER say 'this is my final post' anymore. >> The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff Very convient for god that his words are vague enough to beyond examination in an 'academic debate'. I find it strange that the Old Testament god had very little trouble making it clear to pharoah just what was expected, and what the pain might be - not much room to 'interpret' things there, no need for 'faith', and no fear of 'academice debates' muddying the content. "let me people go, or suffer the death of all first born children" - a fairly direct set of words, methinks! You're playing word games again. I didn't say the Bible doesn't stand up to academic discussion, or I would not have bothered. I said academic discussion cuts off the possibility of God actually DOING something because He is not given the opportunity, which comes not when you grab an online concordance and try to find ways to prove God wrong, instead of giving Him a chance to prove He is right. >> Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to >> spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. Well, have I got good news for you!! Just go to 'www.randi.org'. The James Randi Education Fund offers $1 million US to anyone would can demonstrate proof of 'supernatural' behaviour. This includes faith healing!! Just bring yourself, you sick leper cousin, or any number of blind people along and you can collect the prize. Of course, it seems strange to me that after 10 years of testing such claims no one has yet collected, but there you go - perhaps god doesn't want any documented, tested, proof of such claims!! God is not a performing monkey. It amazes me how people can pull God down to the level of a circus geek. I know people who became Christians after being skeptics BECAUSE they were healed and could not deny it. How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Does He need to heal every time I tell him to in order to prove He CAN heal ? >> To be honest it kind of depresses me that so many start from the >> presupposition that there is no God and thus ignore the fact He has offered to >> prove it. I would have thought that since over 95% of the world believes in some form of religion, it would be far more depressing to think that so many good, honest, faithful people
-
Must ... stop .. answering ... Christians's ... posts ... Arrgghh, it's no use, I must have one more say! *grin* this is why I NEVER say 'this is my final post' anymore. >> The words are meant to inspire faith, which leads to God doing stuff Very convient for god that his words are vague enough to beyond examination in an 'academic debate'. I find it strange that the Old Testament god had very little trouble making it clear to pharoah just what was expected, and what the pain might be - not much room to 'interpret' things there, no need for 'faith', and no fear of 'academice debates' muddying the content. "let me people go, or suffer the death of all first born children" - a fairly direct set of words, methinks! You're playing word games again. I didn't say the Bible doesn't stand up to academic discussion, or I would not have bothered. I said academic discussion cuts off the possibility of God actually DOING something because He is not given the opportunity, which comes not when you grab an online concordance and try to find ways to prove God wrong, instead of giving Him a chance to prove He is right. >> Well, if being deluded causes miracles to occur in my life, causes my body to >> spontaneously heal itself for example, then what the hell - I'm all for it. Well, have I got good news for you!! Just go to 'www.randi.org'. The James Randi Education Fund offers $1 million US to anyone would can demonstrate proof of 'supernatural' behaviour. This includes faith healing!! Just bring yourself, you sick leper cousin, or any number of blind people along and you can collect the prize. Of course, it seems strange to me that after 10 years of testing such claims no one has yet collected, but there you go - perhaps god doesn't want any documented, tested, proof of such claims!! God is not a performing monkey. It amazes me how people can pull God down to the level of a circus geek. I know people who became Christians after being skeptics BECAUSE they were healed and could not deny it. How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Does He need to heal every time I tell him to in order to prove He CAN heal ? >> To be honest it kind of depresses me that so many start from the >> presupposition that there is no God and thus ignore the fact He has offered to >> prove it. I would have thought that since over 95% of the world believes in some form of religion, it would be far more depressing to think that so many good, honest, faithful people
Remind me to hijack someone's thread again sometime soon and we'll continue this ! >>God is not a performing monkey Actually, I kind of feel you're putting down highly trained monkeys with comparisons like this. >> How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Just one - just ONE person who can verify, rather than testify, to the fact. Testimonials are the lifeblood of all charlatans and conmen - and vitally important to the modern god business too. Show me 1000 people who can testify they were healed 'by faith' and you prove either they are right and there is a god who heals, or they are wrong, and there is another explanation. - so it's really not much proof of anything. Show me one piece of verifiable evidence and you have your proof, beyond doubting. Show me one case of someone with an xray showing a broken leg, and 24 hours another xray showing no break whatsoever. Show me one case of someone a hole in the heart, and 24 hours later the hole is completely gone. Show me one case of a severe knife wound to the body where 24 hours later there is no physical trace of the wound. Don't show me speeches by blind people who can see again - there are documented medical explanations for spontaneous cures of various eye diseases. Don't show me speeches by cancer vitims that 3 months later appear to have no symptoms - spontaneous remission of cancer is a documented medical event - and is often followed at a later time by a resurgence of the disease (unfortunately). Studies show that the rate of cancer remissions amongst pilgrims to Lourdes is actually lower than in the general population. So either Lourdes is a Satanic trap, or god hates whinging pilgrims enough to punish them for asking!! Nice one, lord!! >> Nor is it His fault He is gracious enough to save people just because they ask I suppose the 7000 people killed in the WTC events were given a change to 'ask' before it all happened ?? Perhaps they were all misguided individuals who will never have the chance to ask? Or maybe they're just plain dead, and this whole god thing is just something the rest of us can waste our time on? Aloha... Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
Remind me to hijack someone's thread again sometime soon and we'll continue this ! >>God is not a performing monkey Actually, I kind of feel you're putting down highly trained monkeys with comparisons like this. >> How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Just one - just ONE person who can verify, rather than testify, to the fact. Testimonials are the lifeblood of all charlatans and conmen - and vitally important to the modern god business too. Show me 1000 people who can testify they were healed 'by faith' and you prove either they are right and there is a god who heals, or they are wrong, and there is another explanation. - so it's really not much proof of anything. Show me one piece of verifiable evidence and you have your proof, beyond doubting. Show me one case of someone with an xray showing a broken leg, and 24 hours another xray showing no break whatsoever. Show me one case of someone a hole in the heart, and 24 hours later the hole is completely gone. Show me one case of a severe knife wound to the body where 24 hours later there is no physical trace of the wound. Don't show me speeches by blind people who can see again - there are documented medical explanations for spontaneous cures of various eye diseases. Don't show me speeches by cancer vitims that 3 months later appear to have no symptoms - spontaneous remission of cancer is a documented medical event - and is often followed at a later time by a resurgence of the disease (unfortunately). Studies show that the rate of cancer remissions amongst pilgrims to Lourdes is actually lower than in the general population. So either Lourdes is a Satanic trap, or god hates whinging pilgrims enough to punish them for asking!! Nice one, lord!! >> Nor is it His fault He is gracious enough to save people just because they ask I suppose the 7000 people killed in the WTC events were given a change to 'ask' before it all happened ?? Perhaps they were all misguided individuals who will never have the chance to ask? Or maybe they're just plain dead, and this whole god thing is just something the rest of us can waste our time on? Aloha... Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
Remind me to hijack someone's thread again sometime soon and we'll continue this ! Yeah, that's be fun *weary sigh* >>God is not a performing monkey Actually, I kind of feel you're putting down highly trained monkeys with comparisons like this. Very cute. I hope you don't think this offends or upsets me. It's just plain sad. >> How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Just one - just ONE person who can verify, rather than testify, to the fact. The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough, when the fact is the only verification possible is within your grasp. The whole *point* is that no matter what happens outside of your body, you will be able to take whatever slant on it you like. That is why God offers proof to the individual, because not only does it require each individual to have enough faith to ask God Himself if He is there, it is also the only proof that is unassailable. >> Nor is it His fault He is gracious enough to save people just because they ask I suppose the 7000 people killed in the WTC events were given a change to 'ask' before it all happened ?? Perhaps they were all misguided individuals who will never have the chance to ask? Or maybe they're just plain dead, and this whole god thing is just something the rest of us can waste our time on? It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point, but the fact is that all who died lived in a country where the Bible is freely available, regardless of the fact that religious charlatans also are in no short supply. So yes, all had a chance, if they took it or not. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
-
Remind me to hijack someone's thread again sometime soon and we'll continue this ! Yeah, that's be fun *weary sigh* >>God is not a performing monkey Actually, I kind of feel you're putting down highly trained monkeys with comparisons like this. Very cute. I hope you don't think this offends or upsets me. It's just plain sad. >> How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Just one - just ONE person who can verify, rather than testify, to the fact. The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough, when the fact is the only verification possible is within your grasp. The whole *point* is that no matter what happens outside of your body, you will be able to take whatever slant on it you like. That is why God offers proof to the individual, because not only does it require each individual to have enough faith to ask God Himself if He is there, it is also the only proof that is unassailable. >> Nor is it His fault He is gracious enough to save people just because they ask I suppose the 7000 people killed in the WTC events were given a change to 'ask' before it all happened ?? Perhaps they were all misguided individuals who will never have the chance to ask? Or maybe they're just plain dead, and this whole god thing is just something the rest of us can waste our time on? It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point, but the fact is that all who died lived in a country where the Bible is freely available, regardless of the fact that religious charlatans also are in no short supply. So yes, all had a chance, if they took it or not. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
"... and when god made man she was only joking..." ;) --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots ... and the linux zealots still aren't being sterilized"
-
Remind me to hijack someone's thread again sometime soon and we'll continue this ! Yeah, that's be fun *weary sigh* >>God is not a performing monkey Actually, I kind of feel you're putting down highly trained monkeys with comparisons like this. Very cute. I hope you don't think this offends or upsets me. It's just plain sad. >> How many such people need to exist to prove God CAN heal ? Just one - just ONE person who can verify, rather than testify, to the fact. The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough, when the fact is the only verification possible is within your grasp. The whole *point* is that no matter what happens outside of your body, you will be able to take whatever slant on it you like. That is why God offers proof to the individual, because not only does it require each individual to have enough faith to ask God Himself if He is there, it is also the only proof that is unassailable. >> Nor is it His fault He is gracious enough to save people just because they ask I suppose the 7000 people killed in the WTC events were given a change to 'ask' before it all happened ?? Perhaps they were all misguided individuals who will never have the chance to ask? Or maybe they're just plain dead, and this whole god thing is just something the rest of us can waste our time on? It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point, but the fact is that all who died lived in a country where the Bible is freely available, regardless of the fact that religious charlatans also are in no short supply. So yes, all had a chance, if they took it or not. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
>> Very cute. I hope you don't think this offends or upsets me. It's just plain sad Actually, its an attempt to lighten the tone slightly. Perhaps I need to add a few humor hints. >> The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough No, I believe I've made this very clear - just ONE is enough. I find it amazing in today's world that so many people make so many claims, yet NOT ONE can produce simple verifyable proof. Testimony is circumstantial. Believe it if you will, or if you must - but don't offer it as proof. >> it is also the only proof that is unassailable Thanks for adding that - a perfect description of what I am sure is Osama bin Laden's justification for his behaviour. Since he KNOWS he is right, and not amount of external proof can alter that, then his perceptins and choices can freely override anyone elses. he is, after all, right (because he knows he is)! >> It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point I see my point has escaped you ... this is no 'low blow' - this is what angers me most about any religious nonsense. The WTC events are so full of complexity and tragedy that your simplistic 'them and us' routine is deplorable. Really, Christian, don't you ever ask yourself why god worked so hard in the Old testament to provide proof of his word ? Back then he didn't ask for believe without evidence. He talked through burning bushes, destroyed cities, flooded the world. He argued with pharaoh and Moses, and the mother of Moses, and was forced to use physical demonstrations of his presence and power to convince people of his abilities and desires. Then suddenly he stops this 'hands on' idea, and goes into 'stealth' mode, where the only proof is 'internal'. When Moses wanted proof, when the Hebrews doubted the word, they got the parting of the Red Sea. You get the ability to talk in a language that no one on earth, including yourself, can understand. Why is it that in an era when we can actually test, record and measure the acts of god, they become 'subtle', unable to be detected except 'within'. You don't have a problem with that slight inconsistency ? You must work very hard at ignoring the obvious! Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
"... and when god made man she was only joking..." ;) --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots ... and the linux zealots still aren't being sterilized"
My wife insists that if god were a woman things would be a lot better in this corner of the galaxy. The Taliban appears to disagree. I'm staying out of it, in case she is right. -------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
"... and when god made man she was only joking..." ;) --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots ... and the linux zealots still aren't being sterilized"
Very true. :-D I should know, I'm part of the joke... ;) Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd
(andy.metcalfe@lineone.net)
http://www.resorg.co.uk"I'm just another 'S' bend in the internet. A ton of stuff goes through my system, and some of the hairer, stickier and lumpier stuff sticks." - Chris Maunder (I just couldn't let that one past ;))
-
"... and when god made man she was only joking..." ;) --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots ... and the linux zealots still aren't being sterilized"
The version I heard was 'Of course God made men first, you always work on a rough draft before the final version. While that got a small grin, the sig is hilarious, I love it !!! Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
-
>> Very cute. I hope you don't think this offends or upsets me. It's just plain sad Actually, its an attempt to lighten the tone slightly. Perhaps I need to add a few humor hints. >> The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough No, I believe I've made this very clear - just ONE is enough. I find it amazing in today's world that so many people make so many claims, yet NOT ONE can produce simple verifyable proof. Testimony is circumstantial. Believe it if you will, or if you must - but don't offer it as proof. >> it is also the only proof that is unassailable Thanks for adding that - a perfect description of what I am sure is Osama bin Laden's justification for his behaviour. Since he KNOWS he is right, and not amount of external proof can alter that, then his perceptins and choices can freely override anyone elses. he is, after all, right (because he knows he is)! >> It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point I see my point has escaped you ... this is no 'low blow' - this is what angers me most about any religious nonsense. The WTC events are so full of complexity and tragedy that your simplistic 'them and us' routine is deplorable. Really, Christian, don't you ever ask yourself why god worked so hard in the Old testament to provide proof of his word ? Back then he didn't ask for believe without evidence. He talked through burning bushes, destroyed cities, flooded the world. He argued with pharaoh and Moses, and the mother of Moses, and was forced to use physical demonstrations of his presence and power to convince people of his abilities and desires. Then suddenly he stops this 'hands on' idea, and goes into 'stealth' mode, where the only proof is 'internal'. When Moses wanted proof, when the Hebrews doubted the word, they got the parting of the Red Sea. You get the ability to talk in a language that no one on earth, including yourself, can understand. Why is it that in an era when we can actually test, record and measure the acts of god, they become 'subtle', unable to be detected except 'within'. You don't have a problem with that slight inconsistency ? You must work very hard at ignoring the obvious! Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
>> The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough No, I believe I've made this very clear - just ONE is enough. I find it amazing in today's world that so many people make so many claims, yet NOT ONE can produce simple verifyable proof. Testimony is circumstantial. Believe it if you will, or if you must - but don't offer it as proof. Yes, but which one ? The ONLY one you would truly accept is if it happened to you. Don't for a minute kid yourself otherwise, it's true. Which is neat, because that's precisely what God offers you, and the reason the proof He offers is personal. >> it is also the only proof that is unassailable Thanks for adding that - a perfect description of what I am sure is Osama bin Laden's justification for his behaviour. Since he KNOWS he is right, and not amount of external proof can alter that, then his perceptins and choices can freely override anyone elses. he is, after all, right (because he knows he is)! I'm not talking about a state of mind or an idea, and to be honest you are so deliberately ignoring what I DO say that I wonder why I'm bothering. >> It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point I see my point has escaped you ... this is no 'low blow' - this is what angers me most about any religious nonsense. The WTC events are so full of complexity and tragedy that your simplistic 'them and us' routine is deplorable. I'm not sure what it is you mean ? I'm not sure when my view has been overly simplistic, or especially when it has involved 'us and them'. I honestly can't even guess what you mean - I've only discussed my views on religion because you've pursued them. I am very careful as a matter of netiquette not to seek to turn this forum into one to dicuss my views on religion, although I obviously am happy to bite if someone starts the ball rolling. I fully expect you to explain yourself here because I must say while I don't find your deliberately obtuse and willfully ignorant views on my religion offensive, I am astounded that you'd say such a thing in this context. Really, Christian, don't you ever ask yourself why god worked so hard in the Old testament to provide proof of his word ? Back then he didn't ask for believe without evidence. He talked through burning bushes, destroyed cities, flooded the world. He argued with pharaoh and Moses, and the mother of Moses, and was forced to use physical demonstrations of his presence and power to convince people of his
-
My wife insists that if god were a woman things would be a lot better in this corner of the galaxy. The Taliban appears to disagree. I'm staying out of it, in case she is right. -------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
Ben Elton claims that if God were a woman , Vaginas would have teeth. Cut the incidence of sex crimes to zero overnight!;P
-
>> The trouble with people like you is that no verification will be enough No, I believe I've made this very clear - just ONE is enough. I find it amazing in today's world that so many people make so many claims, yet NOT ONE can produce simple verifyable proof. Testimony is circumstantial. Believe it if you will, or if you must - but don't offer it as proof. Yes, but which one ? The ONLY one you would truly accept is if it happened to you. Don't for a minute kid yourself otherwise, it's true. Which is neat, because that's precisely what God offers you, and the reason the proof He offers is personal. >> it is also the only proof that is unassailable Thanks for adding that - a perfect description of what I am sure is Osama bin Laden's justification for his behaviour. Since he KNOWS he is right, and not amount of external proof can alter that, then his perceptins and choices can freely override anyone elses. he is, after all, right (because he knows he is)! I'm not talking about a state of mind or an idea, and to be honest you are so deliberately ignoring what I DO say that I wonder why I'm bothering. >> It's a low blow to use such an emotional issue to try and prove your point I see my point has escaped you ... this is no 'low blow' - this is what angers me most about any religious nonsense. The WTC events are so full of complexity and tragedy that your simplistic 'them and us' routine is deplorable. I'm not sure what it is you mean ? I'm not sure when my view has been overly simplistic, or especially when it has involved 'us and them'. I honestly can't even guess what you mean - I've only discussed my views on religion because you've pursued them. I am very careful as a matter of netiquette not to seek to turn this forum into one to dicuss my views on religion, although I obviously am happy to bite if someone starts the ball rolling. I fully expect you to explain yourself here because I must say while I don't find your deliberately obtuse and willfully ignorant views on my religion offensive, I am astounded that you'd say such a thing in this context. Really, Christian, don't you ever ask yourself why god worked so hard in the Old testament to provide proof of his word ? Back then he didn't ask for believe without evidence. He talked through burning bushes, destroyed cities, flooded the world. He argued with pharaoh and Moses, and the mother of Moses, and was forced to use physical demonstrations of his presence and power to convince people of his
Christian, Obviously I've ruffled your feathers enough for one day! >> Yes, but which one ? The ONLY one you would truly accept.. Well, for the third time, let me state it clearly (although I doubt you or anyone can claim it has not been clear from the start) - I would accept ANY one verified claim of faith healing. Just one. Simple, verified data, based on more that the testimony of the recipient. Despite your attempts to tell me what I would and would not accept, and despite my stating clearly a number of possible conditions, we still arrive at the same point. You have twice claimed to have 'proof' of faith healing, and when challenged you have eventually backed down, stating that (a) you don't see the point in offering any proof, because it wouldn't be accepted and (b) that's not really your main point anyway, since the REAL point is the 'gift of tongues'(or, presumably, any of the other gifts bestowed by the holy spirit - prophecy, for example. I assume you believe in the power of prophecy? Wait ... lets not go there - I feel another long string of posts coming!!). From this, I conclude that (a) you yourself are not in posession of, and have never been given, verified evidence to support claims of faith healing, and (b) you also don't feel this is really the issue. Fine, lets agree then that you have no PROOF of faith healing (plenty of testimony from friends perhaps, and even personal experience, but no verifiable data), and you can stop throwing it into the discussion at random intervals as you have done in the past. Do we agree that this concludes any rational discussion of your knowledge of faith healing, or do you wish to continue this point - perhaps offering some evidence ? >> I'm not talking about a state of mind or an idea, and to be honest you are so >> deliberately ignoring what I DO say that I wonder why I'm bothering Well, sorry if I'm ignoring what your saying - I must admit that I don't think I'm ignoring you, but perhaps we are just drifting too far apart at the moment. My understanding is that you are trying to say the only proof that is unassailable is 'internal' proof. If you KNOW it to be true, then that is all that matters. I was trying to point out, via the 'bin Laden' example, that self belief can be both dangerous and misguided. In other words, rather than question the 'unassailablity' (is that a word?) of internal beliefs, I tried to demonstrate that to ignore outside evidence and focus only on an internal belief system is a potentially dangerous path.
-
I prefer Holy Grail overall, but some of Brian is probably amongst Pythons finest moments. My favourite is the guy on the hill who had a vow of silence. That kills me every time, and is on par with the killer rabbit of Holy Grail IMHO. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
My favourite is the guy on the hill who had a vow of silence. Juniper berries. :-D What about the scene where one of the men wants to have babies. "Where's the foetus going to gestate, in a box?" "Don't you oppress me." Michael Martin Pegasystems Pty Ltd Australia martm@pegasystems.com +61 413-004-018 "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace" - Victor Stone
-
I can agree that the mission is doomed to failure - I have previously had a long discussion with Christian along the lines that 'faith' and 'logic' oppose each each other in fairly strong ways. I have no illusions about my ability to convince a strong 'believer' to change their minds - any more than I feel I can present a logical argument strong enough to convince someone with multiple personality disorder that they are, in fact just one person, not two (or more). From their perspective - a purely internal one, unsubstantiated in any way by objective measurement, they ARE multiple people. I just like to watch Christian fall back on his "inner beliefs", and force him to continually admit that his reality and 'evidence' is available to him only, and is purely subjective. That's enough of a 'victory' for me, and all I can reasonably hope to achieve. I will take your suggestion regardling the importance of 'faith' under advisement, and get back to you on that one. I think there are enough examples of the ability to live a good life without the need to involve faith - and a fairly bad life with 'faith' (did someonoe say "bin Laden" ??), and therefore it seems to me to be a largely optional activity at this time! >> will be those who rely on logic who will be far more surprised by 'the truth' >> than those who rely on faith I must say that the history of the last 1000 years appears to a continuous crumbling of faith in the face of logic - I see little evidence that this trend will reverse in the near future. ----------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
"I must say that the history of the last 1000 years appears to a continuous crumbling of faith in the face of logic - I see little evidence that this trend will reverse in the near future. " Yes, but I have faith that logic alone will ultimately fail to provide the complete answer. "I never met anyone I didn't like" Will Rogers.
-
I prefer Holy Grail overall, but some of Brian is probably amongst Pythons finest moments. My favourite is the guy on the hill who had a vow of silence. That kills me every time, and is on par with the killer rabbit of Holy Grail IMHO. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
-
Christian, Obviously I've ruffled your feathers enough for one day! >> Yes, but which one ? The ONLY one you would truly accept.. Well, for the third time, let me state it clearly (although I doubt you or anyone can claim it has not been clear from the start) - I would accept ANY one verified claim of faith healing. Just one. Simple, verified data, based on more that the testimony of the recipient. Despite your attempts to tell me what I would and would not accept, and despite my stating clearly a number of possible conditions, we still arrive at the same point. You have twice claimed to have 'proof' of faith healing, and when challenged you have eventually backed down, stating that (a) you don't see the point in offering any proof, because it wouldn't be accepted and (b) that's not really your main point anyway, since the REAL point is the 'gift of tongues'(or, presumably, any of the other gifts bestowed by the holy spirit - prophecy, for example. I assume you believe in the power of prophecy? Wait ... lets not go there - I feel another long string of posts coming!!). From this, I conclude that (a) you yourself are not in posession of, and have never been given, verified evidence to support claims of faith healing, and (b) you also don't feel this is really the issue. Fine, lets agree then that you have no PROOF of faith healing (plenty of testimony from friends perhaps, and even personal experience, but no verifiable data), and you can stop throwing it into the discussion at random intervals as you have done in the past. Do we agree that this concludes any rational discussion of your knowledge of faith healing, or do you wish to continue this point - perhaps offering some evidence ? >> I'm not talking about a state of mind or an idea, and to be honest you are so >> deliberately ignoring what I DO say that I wonder why I'm bothering Well, sorry if I'm ignoring what your saying - I must admit that I don't think I'm ignoring you, but perhaps we are just drifting too far apart at the moment. My understanding is that you are trying to say the only proof that is unassailable is 'internal' proof. If you KNOW it to be true, then that is all that matters. I was trying to point out, via the 'bin Laden' example, that self belief can be both dangerous and misguided. In other words, rather than question the 'unassailablity' (is that a word?) of internal beliefs, I tried to demonstrate that to ignore outside evidence and focus only on an internal belief system is a potentially dangerous path.
Obviously I've ruffled your feathers enough for one day! Apparently you have as little a life as I do - I spent the work day answering you between coding, now I'm at home doing battle with CCmdTarget, and you're still posting. >> Yes, but which one ? The ONLY one you would truly accept.. Well, for the third time, let me state it clearly (although I doubt you or anyone can claim it has not been clear from the start) - I would accept ANY one verified claim of faith healing. Just one. Simple, verified data, based on more that the testimony of the recipient. Come now, you're honestly claiming if I produced, for example, the record of a persons death in a hospital while connected to life monitoring equipment, and resurrection an hour or so later when prayed for, you wouldn't claim the machine was broken ? When you say verified you open several cans of worms - verified by whom, verified how, etc. No, you wouldn't accept it, you're only saying this because you assume it does not exist. On the other hand, you're claiming this would be more proof to you than being healed yourself ? Despite your attempts to tell me what I would and would not accept, and despite my stating clearly a number of possible conditions, we still arrive at the same point. You have twice claimed to have 'proof' of faith healing, and when challenged you have eventually backed down, stating that (a) you don't see the point in offering any proof, because it wouldn't be accepted and (b) that's not really your main point anyway, since the REAL point is the 'gift of tongues'(or, presumably, any of the other gifts bestowed by the holy spirit - prophecy, for example. I assume you believe in the power of prophecy? Wait ... lets not go there - I feel another long string of posts coming!!). Whoa. When on EARTH did I back down ? ON the contrary, I pursued the fact that if you want proof it is available to you individually, and that personal experience is the only proof that is likely to convince you. From this, I conclude that (a) you yourself are not in posession of, and have never been given, verified evidence to support claims of faith healing, and (b) you also don't feel this is really the issue. Fine, lets agree then that you have no PROOF of faith healing (plenty of testimony from friends perhaps, and even personal experience, but no verifiable data), and you can stop throwing it into the discussion at random intervals as you have done in the past. Do we agree that this concludes any rational dis
-
My favourite is the guy on the hill who had a vow of silence. Juniper berries. :-D What about the scene where one of the men wants to have babies. "Where's the foetus going to gestate, in a box?" "Don't you oppress me." Michael Martin Pegasystems Pty Ltd Australia martm@pegasystems.com +61 413-004-018 "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace" - Victor Stone
Yeah, that's a good one too. I finally split my DVD rip of that movie tonight to fit onto CDR's so I can back it up. Come to think of it, I may watch it now... Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
-
"I must say that the history of the last 1000 years appears to a continuous crumbling of faith in the face of logic - I see little evidence that this trend will reverse in the near future. " Yes, but I have faith that logic alone will ultimately fail to provide the complete answer. "I never met anyone I didn't like" Will Rogers.
Logically, you might be right! I prefer to take the approach that questions of 'faith' continue to underly so many problems and issues, and the relentless application of logic offers a cleaner future. I'd rather ask "why" instead of simply agreeing 'okay' - but that's just me, I guess! Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
Hi, Today, whiled I was coding some telnet stuffs, all of a sudden, I was stuck how much my doing job pays. I know that any job's paying depends on many factors, but I wanna know which one is the blowing job on IT industry. I guess I should design my career path at these times. I'm 25-year old engineer and have 3-year of professional Windows programming experience. So I wanna ask you guys which career path would make me paid most? Money, especially for me, means almost everything.(All of my family depends on my earning.) Personally I want myself being a able-engineer, but in reality my situation want me more money :-( So, one simple question. Which career path will make me most money? What would you suggest?.. Regards, Ryan -p.s If this posting sucks, sorry..Pardon me.. I don't remember whose signature this is, that.."Money talks, but all mine ever said was good bye."
I would say my job is highest profile and paying job in the IT world. I recently received a letter via snail mail addressed to the Manager of the Internet. Since assuming this role I have Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and most Fortune 500 CEO's paying me Protection Money. If they don't I will just turn off the Internet. Also I now have all the girls chasing after me. Unfortunately there can only one Manager of the Internet. If you want the job you must defeat me in combat. None of this Nancy Boy gun play shit either. Just you and me, each with the following weapons. A jar of Vegemite :vegemite: and a spoon, a carton of Coopers Sparkling Ale and a bottle of Bundy Rum and some Coke. Now we have 6 hours to finish this off. Whoever has finished everything first or has the least leftovers after the 6 hours has finished wins. Vomiting is an automatic forfeit. Who's on for the title? ;P Michael Martin Pegasystems Pty Ltd Australia martm@pegasystems.com +61 413-004-018 "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace" - Victor Stone