Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: wrag on November 16, 2005, 04:20:30 PM
-
And it looks like it's gonna happen..............
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3169812,00.html
That's gotta hurt!
-
Not only that... I hear that fiftteen of the nineteen 911 hijackers were Saudi.
Imagine!
-
Just to be more humane, I understand they don't do it all at once, but gives the convict (victim...) a day or so to recoup after a certain amount of lashes... I think.
They really need to get out of the friggin middle age....
I'm becoming ever more convinced to resign from the church with all the issues with different religions.
Christianity isn't all that good either, we're only couple of hundred years ahead of Islam - culturally.
Seems to be only more trouble, and I don't need religion to know the right from wrong.
Wonder why I haven't already done that, because I could resign from the church via internet!
Ain't the technology just marvelous or what?
-
I'm surprised you're more angry about the punishment than the "crime"
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
I'm surprised you're more angry about the punishment than the "crime"
J_A_B
The middle age sentance is about the crime.
It's stupid... so medieval.
-
You ever stop to think that Lashes might actually work over prison time?
That is, for a real crime though...
-
Originally posted by Fishu
...and I don't need religion to know the right from wrong.
..
Err, ummmm, in your case, I think you do need it.:eek:
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Just to be more humane, I understand they don't do it all at once, but gives the convict (victim...) a day or so to recoup after a certain amount of lashes... I think.
I should hope so. 750 lashes with a cat is a death sentance. I wonder if they use a cane like they do in some Aisan counties or if it's something more like the cat of nine tails.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Err, ummmm, in your case, I think you do need it.:eek:
Says who? A republican christian?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Says who? A republican christian?
I voted both democrats and republicans in our last election, and I'm not a church goer.
Next...
-
Sinner!
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Just to be more humane, I understand they don't do it all at once, but gives the convict (victim...) a day or so to recoup after a certain amount of lashes... I think.
They really need to get out of the friggin middle age....
You think it's outdated that they lash people, but not that they're punishing him for speaking his mind?
-
We so invaded the wrong Middle eastern **** hole.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Sinner!
I'm a God-fearing individual, I just don't believe you need organized religion to believe. My beliefs are more along the agnostic (sp)lines.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I'm a God-fearing individual, I just don't believe you need organized religion to believe. My beliefs are more along the agnostic (sp)lines.
Okay... er... in that case... Sinner!
:)
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
We so invaded the wrong Middle eastern **** hole.
Give this man a cigar.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Give this man a cigar.
Are you saying that we should have invaded another Middle East country? Which one, and for what reasons?
-
Bet if we Nuked SA at least 3 times... watermelon would cease and we'd own the Worlds largest Glass and Dimond land. It's like cuttin the head off the snake and the tail will die.
Gotta luv Rudy G. in NYC when offered the big check from that SA Bastage, shortly after 9/11, he threw it back into his face!
~We didn't start the fire~
Billy Joel
Mac
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
We so invaded the wrong Middle eastern **** hole.
Which country should we have invaded, and for what reasons?
I am about 99% certain you will not answer, and 100 % certain that if you do answer, you will look bad.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
You think it's outdated that they lash people, but not that they're punishing him for speaking his mind?
G'damnit, can't you read what I said just couple of minutes later!?
THE WHOLE FRIGGIN MEDIEVAL SENTANCE WAS CRITISIZING OF THE OUTDATED LAWS OUT THERE!
Is it now readable for you too?
Selective reading & comprehension crap...
-
Originally posted by Fishu
G'damnit, can't you read what I said just couple of minutes later!?
THE WHOLE FRIGGIN MEDIEVAL SENTANCE WAS CRITISIZING OF THE OUTDATED LAWS OUT THERE!
Is it now readable for you too?
Selective reading & comprehension crap...
SO I'm confused you are saying that you don't like the sentence (IE the lashes) but he's still a criminal? :huh
-
hehehehhehhehehehheh..
gawd, whotta tool. :aok
-
Hello Fishu,
Originally posted by Fishu
I'm becoming ever more convinced to resign from the church with all the issues with different religions.
Christianity isn't all that good either, we're only couple of hundred years ahead of Islam - culturally.
Seems to be only more trouble, and I don't need religion to know the right from wrong.
I'm curious about your statements above, but I don't want to take you out of context or put words into your mouth. So please let me know what you think.
You state that Christianity is "only a few hundred years ahead of Islam - culturally", this would seem to indicate that you believe that the purpose of religion is to reflect the progressive edge of the culture and to change as the culture changes. Therefore presumably, if the progressives in the culture are currently saying that adultery is wrong, the church will also preach adultery is wrong, then if a few years later the progressives decide adultery is ok, the church will change it's stance and preach that adultery is ok. Thus as the culture changes, or "evolves" as some would put it, "Christianity" must evolve with it, and so too must its declarations of right and wrong.
If that is the case what is right and what is wrong? Is it what the culture thought a hundred years ago, or what the culture thinks today, or what it will think a hundred years from now? I'm really eager to get your answer to that question in particular.
Does God have any opinion on these matters or does he change his mind to reflect the culture? If so, what kind of God is He? Do we really believe such an arbitrary and culture defined being even exists? Why bother with religion at all, if it really is only intended to mimic the popular culture.
- SEAGOON
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
I'm curious about your statements above, but I don't want to take you out of context or put words into your mouth. So please let me know what you think.
It was more about that how important part a religion has in a state..
Couple of hundreds years ago christianity had an important part in the politics, but nowadays the church doesn't anymore have even nearly as much influence on the politics and people aren't as motivated to defend their political views with religion, or defend the religion with strict laws.
In the middle east the religion has an important part in the politics - it is present in every day life and has a state reinforced status.
Without a doubt it also affects the culture.
As such, I'd say the middle east is culturally (religion wise) about couple of hundred years behind the west.
Over time they will become more liberal with the religion like the west, but that will take at least hundred years.
Hopefully this answers your question... and hopefully there wasn't too many grammatical errors mixing it up.
I'm not so fond of a religion controlling the daily life of people, even less the politics.
People who want to follow a religion can do so, but they shouldn't dismiss the 'pagans' for not doing so or tell others what to do because of their religion.
The muslim countries are pretty much all doing the opposite, behaving like the christian countries in the past.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
In the middle east the religion has an important part in the politics - it is present in every day life and has a state reinforced status.
As I understand it, there is a delicate balance the Saudi Royals play with the Wahabbi clerics.
If the royals denounced the Wahabbi's the Sauds would be out on thier collective ass.
I think it is more the Wahabbi Clerics giving the Saudi family legitimacy instead of the royals supporting the clerics.
-
Simple solution to the relevancy of those freaks. ANWAR. Drill it. In the meantime, make hydro-cells feasable and cost nuetral. The technology is there, it just has to be refined to make it safe for the general idiot on the street.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Simple solution to the relevancy of those freaks. ANWAR. Drill it. In the meantime, make hydro-cells feasable and cost nuetral. The technology is there, it just has to be refined to make it safe for the general idiot on the street.
ANWAR is just a temporary solution, but by all means drill it. Everything in this society runs on oil and fuell cells aren't gonna change that, also there's not enuff platinum available to make them ever feasible and cost effective in a large scale. Hydrogen is just a medium, how are you going to produce it cost effectively? Nuclear power is one option but we are running low on uranium also, it's price will skyrocket if there's any major increase in nuclear power production.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Are you saying that we should have invaded another Middle East country? Which one, and for what reasons?
Saudi Arabia.
Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were Saudi. According to the 9/11 Commission, Saudi Arabia was a rich fund-raising ground for al Qaeda.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I'm a God-fearing individual, I just don't believe you need organized religion to believe. My beliefs are more along the agnostic (sp)lines.
Hey Rip, why god-fearing?
Honestly, if ya think da Big Man, Mr Bigtime Owner of the Big DZ In The Sky is something to be feared, isn't that sort of at odds with 'im being a good hearted cool dude?
I mean yeah, sure I could fear our labrador even if he's cool. He can potentially kill me. But his nature is gentle.
So the G-man cannot be compared to old Max. The parallel I'm trying to draw is pretty obvious though. Don't pull Max's tail. Don't mess the Ultimate Swooper's things. And you oughtta be ok.
An entity needs to utilize fear when it cannot garner authority or respect in other ways. My opinion, naturally.
-
Hi St. Santa,
Originally posted by StSanta
Hey Rip, why god-fearing?
Honestly, if ya think da Big Man, Mr Bigtime Owner of the Big DZ In The Sky is something to be feared, isn't that sort of at odds with 'im being a good hearted cool dude?
I mean yeah, sure I could fear our labrador even if he's cool. He can potentially kill me. But his nature is gentle.
So the G-man cannot be compared to old Max. The parallel I'm trying to draw is pretty obvious though. Don't pull Max's tail. Don't mess the Ultimate Swooper's things. And you oughtta be ok.
An entity needs to utilize fear when it cannot garner authority or respect in other ways. My opinion, naturally.
In the bible the "fear of the Lord" that a God-fearing individual has is not a reference to a kind of craven or cowed fear that someone would feel towards a tyrant or a brutal thug. The fear of the Lord in the Bible is more the feeling of respect, awe, reverence, and honor that a son should feel towards a strong father.
In it, there is a relationship implied between the person and the Lord, one in which the Lord is respected and loved both for who he is but also because of his dealings with that person. One is also definitely aware of his ability to rightly chastise, and eager to avoid that situation. The Lord is kind, but not indulgent. Longsuffering and patient, but not so much so that he will spoil his children or leave them unchastened when that is what they need. Therefore those who fear the Lord are called wise, in fact they do so because they are wise, while those who do not rightly fear him are described as foolish.
Here are a few biblical passages that unpack this concept more fully:
And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require of you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments of the LORD and His statutes which I command you today for your good?" (Deuteronomy 10:12-13)
In the fear of the LORD there is strong confidence, And His children will have a place of refuge. The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, To turn one away from the snares of death. (Prov. 14:26-27)
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction. (Proverbs 1:7)
Wisdom and knowledge will be the stability of your times, And the strength of salvation; The fear of the LORD is His treasure. (Isa. 33:6)
Do not let your heart envy sinners, But be zealous for the fear of the LORD all the day; For surely there is a hereafter, And your hope will not be cut off. (Prov. 23:17-18)
Then the churches throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace and were edified. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, they were multiplied. (Acts 9:31)
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by mora
Nuclear power is one option but we are running low on uranium also, it's price will skyrocket if there's any major increase in nuclear power production.
Source please?
I want to see a document signed off by the IAEA stating the above.
<<< Taught nuclear weapons, war and arms control and did ALOT with FBR, PWR and LWRs at University of Illinois.
Wolfala
-
You can't run a country on a book of religion..not by a heap,a lump or a smidgion.
frank zappa
-
I'm a God-fearing individual, I just don't believe you need organized religion to believe. My beliefs are more along the agnostic (sp)lines.
Yet you believe that you can be righteous in your belief and judge another man for not having one. That's the definition of a religious extremist.
That's what AQ is made of.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Source please?
I want to see a document signed off by the IAEA stating the above.
<<< Taught nuclear weapons, war and arms control and did ALOT with FBR, PWR and LWRs at University of Illinois.
Wolfala
I don't have link, but I read in a technical magazine that all the known uranium is going to last for 60 years at the current level of consumption, if there's no major technological breakthrough in more efficient reactor technology and mining. If we want to power all cars with hydrogen (which is impossible with the current fuel-cell technology, a rotary "Wankel" internal combustion engine might be another solution), the nuclear power production must be increased manyfolds. That would mean that the uranium supplies would last only a few decades, and the production of uranium would peak long before that, and it's price would skyrocket.
-
Current usage is about 68,000 tU/yr. Thus the world's present measured resources of uranium in the lower cost category (3.5 Mt) and used only in conventional reactors, are enough to last for some 50 years. This represents a higher level of assured resources than is normal for most minerals. Further exploration and higher prices will certainly, on the basis of present geological knowledge, yield further resources as present ones are used up. There was very little uranium exploration between 1985 and 2005, so a significant increase in exploration effort could readily double the known economic resources, and a doubling of price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured resources, over time.
This is in fact suggested in the IAEA-NEA figures if those covering estimates of all conventional resources are considered - 9.7 million tonnes (beyond the 3.5 Mt known economic resources), which is some 140 years' supply at today's rate of consumption.
source (http://www.uic.com.au/nip75.htm)
-
i ve heard only the toughest of the the tough can take 15 lashes without passing out from the pain.
-
Hey SeaGoon. You're one of the Christians who's fun to discuss with. Enjoyed reading your posts while in lurk mode.
Originally posted by Seagoon
In the bible the "fear of the Lord" that a God-fearing individual has is not a reference to a kind of craven or cowed fear that someone would feel towards a tyrant or a brutal thug. The fear of the Lord in the Bible is more the feeling of respect, awe, reverence, and honor that a son should feel towards a strong father.
That's respect, not fear. While to some it may be a matter of semantics, I don't think it is.
To use a real life example: I respect the canopy I am flying. It's very small, high performance and it can do incredible things. It can also turn around and bite me on the ass. Spin up for seemingly no reason. It's ground hungry and throws a lot of altitude in a turn.
Had I feared the canopy, I would not be jumping it. There is a certain element of fear involved yes, but it is not the main thing giving "authority".
The G-man is my main man. He knows a lot of cool tricks and I wouldn't want to piss him off. But I don't fear him as such because what sets of his anger is behaviour I find morally wrong and thus try to avoid. We're pretty much in agreement there, me and 'im.
The relationship is pretty clear: he is inifinitely much more powerful than me and could turn me into a toad if he wanted to. He won't do it unless he feels he needs to (I hope). So, perhaps I should fear that, but I don't. Can't stop it if he decides to on a whim. I trust 'im to be more fair than that.
And, even with all his power, I still got free will ya know? So, as long as I am ready to accept all the consequences of my actions - he really cannot stop me. That would be against his own essence. If he follows the rules. No one knows if he does, though some claim to have knowledge of a) his intention to follow the rules and b) what the rules actually are. So he could stop me. Maybe. Who knows. It's not massively important anyway. I do my thing and then we see how things turn out.
Anyway, so we have this massively powerful benign deity who quite obviously has a huge amount of humor (see Boy Bands for instance, or the way our eyes evolved). The dude is gonna forgive most mistakes I make, as long as they are just that - mistakes, and as long as I strive to improve myself. And I have this Free Will thing. Which is really a nifty thing to have. So we have this relationship right? He chills out and if I do something he disapproves of, he can fry my arse in a variety of ways. On the other hand, as long as I am ready to accept the consequences of my actions, I can do whatever I want. No stopping me from his side, he's cool with that.
What does stop me from randomly walking around killing people is not so much the threat of eternal damnation (from which I am sure some fear could spring), but rather my internal moral compass. Perhaps his test to me is to see how well I can align my actions with my internal compass - and how my internal compass is aligned to his house rules. Maybe I get to know this some time, maybe I don't.
So, respect is in order. But my actions are not guided by fear of godly punishment, but rather by my own morals. Religious people sometimes are quick to suggest that it is of divine origin but that the owner can corrupt it. I don't know, so I will just say it's possible it is and it's possible it's not, because that's a whole other discussion.
As far as the Bible goes, I think Jesus himself would be pretty upset about how the King James bible came to be. Selective editing? What about all the stuff that was left out? I mean, c'mon, there were lots of people writing about the guy who got nailed up because he asked us to be nice to each other. History is written by the winners, and what we have today is the Winner's Bible Version. In other words, Free Will in action again. My guess is the G-man is chuckling at all this and mumbling "no no no my children, that wasn't what I meant!". Though many of us are misguided, I feel that those who proclaim to have the answers is more so than others. This is not directed at religions as such, but more of a general observation of mine.
The Bible says fear the G-man. My internal compass says respect the dude.
-
Hmmm..........
Language? Original vs translation? Is the original word FEAR or RESPECT THE POWER OF?
Just wondering.
The 6th commandment in original is not kill it is murder. Dictionaries seem to be changing rapidly. When I was young the ones I read had different meanings for the words slay, kill, murder, execute, etc.... Now I'm seeing stupid stuff like under murder ... "to murder" and under slay ... "to slay" how nice but still no real actual explanation of the word or the original meaning of the word. Also these words, as are many others, begining to come under an all of them mean the same thing deffinition. Which to me is very inaccurate.
I understood word slay ... to meet a known opponent, in combat, on a battlefield, and one does not leave the battlefield alive.
The word murder .... to take the life of an innocent person.
-
I think we should worship Engineers.
And follow the verses of calculus and physics.
Then all war would end all religion would end. Most importantly of all reasoning instead of faith would conquer all.
Hail to the gods of integrals and derivatives beotches!
-
Ahh the religion of peace, how I bask in it's warmth.
-
Originally posted by Glasses
I think we should worship Engineers.
And follow the verses of calculus and physics.
Then all war would end all religion would end. Most importantly of all reasoning instead of faith would conquer all.
Hail to the gods of integrals and derivatives beotches!
"nothing can be engineered before it is technicianed"
-
Heh Glasses, unless you're talking software engineers.
Conversation:
Dude 1: this domain model is totally screwed dude
Dude 2: No it ain't. It's sound and reflect the real world requirements
Dude 1: No, it's retarded and non extendable.
Dude 2: Like you know anything. I made my first program manually punching holes in cards, you n00b.
Dude 1: w00t?
Dude 2: and .NET sucks.
Dude 1: TO WAR TO WAR!
-
Therefore with my reasoning. We Should Worship Kurt Tank. :rofl
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Saudi Arabia.
Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were Saudi. According to the 9/11 Commission, Saudi Arabia was a rich fund-raising ground for al Qaeda.
Country of origin doesn't have any correlation to where they trained and recieved support. That being said, I think Saudi Arabia is our friend only on the surface and for economical reasons. But remember, they kicked Osama out of their country, he was welcomed and supported elsewhere.
If you didn't fear your dad when you screwed up, he wasn't doing his job. I think the original meaning is easy to discern. "God fearing" simply describes a respect that acknowledges the all encompassing power of the subject over oneself. That's my take on it at least.