« first day (22 days earlier)      last day (4615 days later) » 

8:09 PM
hola gents
 
@JonathonByrd Hey there!
 
I see that my science question has stirred debate as expected :)
nothing like seeing some life come to this forum
How are you @richard?
 
@JonathonByrd: I hope you'll elaborate a bit on what you're trying to accomplish with that question. It looks like it's designed to stir controversy, which of course isn't very useful... but it also seems a bit uncharacteristic of you, so I'm assuming it's just in need of clarification.
 
@JonathonByrd Ooh, not to bad. How about yourself? :)
 
Hello people! :P
 
8:16 PM
That was a quick class...
or maybe time is just passing me by
 
@Flimzy That icon makes me think that you're perpetually laughing. ;)
 
@Richard: I am!
hahahahaha hohohoho hihihi hihihii... heh
 
LOL :)
 
My bounty on my 'tongues' question has not solicited any new answers :( Only new upvotes.
At least that means I recoup some of my rep
hrm.
recoup? I feel that's not the proper spelling
 
recuperate ...recup? "recup" looks worse.
 
8:20 PM
recupe?
reekoop
 
"recoup" looks like "re-coupe" (Argh, let's overthrow the government again!)
 
yeah, right...
 
@Flimzy LOL. I thikn recupe looks right to me.
 
rheakouphf
recoup doesn't trigger my spell check.... recupe does
 
@Flimzy I have been a bit frustrated these last few days. learning server administration is not easy, specially on amazon cloud. nightmare... I'm also running low on sleep. Thus I'm short and stupid with my tongue atm.
@Flimzy But the question has been on my mind. I just don't know how to phrase it
 
8:23 PM
@JonathonByrd: :)
@JonathonByrd What kinds of answers are you hoping for?
 
I'm not sure....
Its just a question
 
@JonathonByrd: I wonder if the root of your question is "How can OECs take the Bible so loosely?"
 
I can see the kind of question, or thought that I have
but i can't pull the question forward in my mind enough to form it
maybe its the lack of sleep.
 
Well... if I can help form your question, I'm happy to :)
And I'm an OEC, so if you need to bounce things off me first, that's fine, too.
 
I personally have a hard time asking or making statements without elaborating on each point, thus my question ended up sounding like a rant
 
8:25 PM
If you need more sleep... I don't think I can help with that :)
 
well lets talk it out
maybe i can form the question better here and we can edit it
 
sure
 
I will state a few premises first
no need to comment on them
 
ok
 
premise: the bible is to be taken literally
premise: the bible is inerrent
premise: to not trust the bible is to not trust gods word
premise: the bible is gods word
premise: most scientists hate god and will not give him glory
premise: most scientists reject the flood
premise: dating methods are based on weak inference
conclusion:
to accept weak inference science over the inerrant word of God is to not trust God.
ok now your rebutal
 
8:28 PM
hehe
 
lol
1 sec
haha
 
... ok
 
whats the linux command to print out the current distro?
 
I'm pretty sure your conclusion stands on its own without any of the premises, it just has two assumptions in it that you'd get people arguing with
 
depends on the distro
 
8:29 PM
haha
i dunno what distro it is
thats what im trying to find out....
 
There's usually a /etc/distroname-release file, like /etc/gentoo-release
 
cat /etc/debian_version for Debian-ish distros (probably including ubuntu)
 
It's in /etc/issue sometimes too, but that's less reliable
 
cat /etc/motd
will probably tell you
 
lno dir cat /etc/debian_version
 
8:31 PM
@MichaelMrozek: I think any OEC will disagree that his conclusions stand on their own :)
@MichaelMrozek: Well, with qualifications...
OECs don't "accept [insert any adjective] science over the inerrant word of God"
 
@Flimzy The main conclusion I got from his sentence is "trusting something that disagrees with God is to not trust God", which seems tautological. Maybe I missed something
 
@MichaelMrozek: Yes, that I agree with. But the bigger (implied) conclusion he draws is "therefore OECs don't trust god"
And that I do not agree with.
 
so hold up
 
@Flimzy Ah. I didn't read enough of the backlog then, I didn't know OECs had anything to do with this
 
we're not arguing the question
we should be thinking of how to phrase it
 
8:34 PM
did you find your distro yet?
 
no distro :( I have gotten no permissions errors on a few of those commands
 
Well, I didn't see a question in there anywhere :). I'm not sure what you're trying to ask; I'm guessing from what @Flimzy said that it's something like "Do OECs not trust God?"?
ls /etc/*release matches nothing?
 
-1
Q: Are scientific findings a test to Christians' Faith?

Jonathon ByrdScience suggest that the earth is millions of years old and many Christians accept this premise. Instead of accepting that God created everything in six days, they accept the finding of scientists based on scientific evidence. I am a literal interpretation Christian and I have strong faith that ...

 
I gave you my understandings, we're to devise a question from them
 
@MichaelMrozek: We're trying to improve this question
@JonathonByrd: I think your question hinges on the first premise you mentioned... "the bible is to be taken literally"
 
8:36 PM
Oh, I saw that. I thought @waxeagle's second revision actually made it ok
 
@MichaelMrozek: It made it less controversial, for sure... I think it's still a bit vague what the actual question is.
@MichaelMrozek: So this is half me trying to understand @JonathonByrd's question... and half him trying to word it so that I can understand it :)
 
@MichaelMrozek yea you're right. that's a good edit
 
@JonathonByrd: I guess it's pretty much impossible for to answer your question without attacking the premise of your question.
 
which premise?
 
Specifically the first one... "the bible is to be taken literally."
I think it's very easy to demonstrate that not all of the Bible is meant to be taken literally.
Surely Solomon's lover didn't have hills in place of breasts, for instance.
or fawns, or whatever it was
perhaps both :)
 
8:42 PM
@Flimzy i think my answer to that question best explains
 
So I think the real question (Unless you actually believe every word is meant to be taken literally) is, "Should the Genesis accounts of creation and the flood be taken literally?"
 
i dunno if SHOULD is good for that Q
that sounds to opinionated for me
 
Well, if you phrase your premise as "The Genesis account of creation and the flood are meant to be taken literally," then at least you won't draw as much violent opposition
I still disagree with that premise... but I think that is at least a reasonable premise... hehe
 
so why dont you feel it should be taken literally?
if science showed that it actually happened, what in the bible would suggest its not to be taken literally?
 
That's a big question to answer
I can try to summarize here.
1) I believe that genre of literature is not meant to be taken literally.
Well, I guess that's the elevator answer :)
For a more comprehensive answer...
 
8:46 PM
if it disagrees with reality then to take it literally is to deny reality...
 
is linux = unix? can I go post my question about yum repositories on unix.SE ?
 
@JonathonByrd: I think so.
@JonathonByrd: I think it's called "Unix & Linux"
@JonathonByrd: Although technically Linux is not Unix... it's a Unix clone... but I don't think they care for the scope of that site :)
 
coo coo
so will we get a custom template after we grow up?
 
I think so
 
@JonathonByrd Yes. Practically every non-beta site has a custom look.
 
8:48 PM
Anyway, some people may come to the conclusion "science disagrees with Genesis 1, therefore Genesis 1 is wrong." That wasn't my process.
 
I think i want to troll the unix SE site now
 
For me it's more like "The purpose of Genesis has nothing* to do with science. It's a figurative narrative to explain our relationship with God."
*I think a "proper" reading of Genesis still makes it at least mostly compatible with modern science, where science actually knows what it's talking about.
But the key is that the purpose of Genesis is not to describe the mechanism of creation, but more the means of creation.
 
0
Q: What are $yum repositories and how do they work?

Jonathon ByrdSo I'm trying install php-mcrypt on one server and git-core on another server. It seems like locating packages is were I'm falling short. (just learning server administration) I'm very ignorant of repositories and how they play into the whole installation bit. I know that I need to add additiona...

But hold on flimzy
 
is that a SE 1.0 site? it's asking me about cookies when trying to create an account yet all my others work fine
 
thats where my question lay
 
8:51 PM
@JonathonByrd s/were I'm/where I'm/
 
ah, there it goes
 
And don't beg to keep the question open.
 
haha
fine... fine..
 
-66
Q: Don't close questions where the user has requested that it not be closed

Adam DavisThe system should search posts for the word "please" in proximity to the phrase "don't close" or "do not close", and if found together disable the close link for the following reasons: They asked nicely They knew enough about the system to understand that posts can be closed, and thus are exper...

 
ok so flimzy
OH OH ! I found my question
 
8:54 PM
nice link @michaelMyers
 
I does my best. That there is the most downvoted question ever on Meta.
 
Why do OEC discount the Book of Genesis?
 
hah
 
@JonathonByrd: rephrase that to "discount a literal interpretation" and I think it's a good question.
 
is that a fair question?
Why do OEC discount the literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis?
 
8:56 PM
@jonathonByrd yum question is overly broad VTC!!!
 
...my chickens are escaping their brooder...
hey
#$*@
don't do that
 
@JonathonByrd: I just have to decide if I want to answer it now :)
 
lol
 
slap you
@Flimzy haha
 
@JonathonByrd: yes, I think that's a good question
@JonathonByrd: It is one of those things that, literally, books have been written on.
 
8:57 PM
I've maybe mentioned this before, but I've heard from a reputable source that a more accurate translation of the start of Genesis 1:1 is "In a beginning..."
 
@JonathonByrd: I have about 5 or 6 of them on my bookshelf :)
@MichaelMyers: I'd be interested in a reference for that
 
"The wind was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings or endings in... But it was a beginning."
 
@Flimzy I know he referred also to a book, but I can't remember what the book was called.
And I've never studied Hebrew myself.
 
@MichaelMyers I loved the answers to that one. :D
 
Can I ask DOS questions on the U&L se?
 
9:00 PM
Especially the "Prevent others from closing it by closing it." answer. That one was awesome. The Yahoo! Answers one was pretty good too. :D
 
9:12 PM
@DTest That'd be not great :)
 
sigh
Why is DJClayworth so argumentative at times?
 
@Flimzy What has he done now?
 
makes me wish I could DV deleted answers!
I think it's funny that editing a deleted answer moves the question back to the top of the list
that's the only reason I noticed it
@JonathonByrd: Are you going to ask your question about OECs and Genesis?
 
@Flimzy: ...how is the deleted answer visible to you at all?
 
@ElendiaStarman: I h4x0r3d the system
@ElendiaStarman: I think they're visible to anyone with > 2000 rep
 
@MichaelMrozek @Flimzy: D'oh!
Remember, I did become a mod before getting 2000 rep... :P
 
i think i need to ask and answer more questions...this <1000 rep is annoying
 
@ElendiaStarman: I'm sure you could step down as mod, if you feel you missed out on that right of passage ;)
 
@Flimzy ...no. I vastly prefer being a mod to passing any [pfft] insignificant milestone.
 
@ElendiaStarman: Yeah... that seems like you... always seeking the easy way out... :P
 
9:22 PM
@Flimzy What can I say? I am a Jedi Master...
...wait, wrong side. >.>
 
Hrm
I had a friend years ago who thought he was a "Christian Jedi"
... he once fixed my sister's car using the power of the force
(oddly it still was broken afterward)
I wonder how I can form this into an on-topic question...
 
lol
 
@Flimzy LOL! :P
 
I also wonder if his mental illness was in any way relevant...
actually, I think I did think of a question somewhat related to this
0
Q: Mental Illness vs. Demon Possession

FlimzyMental illness is a fairly recent idea (in terms of human history). As far as I know, the concept did not exist at all at the time the Bible was written. I have heard some Christians speculate that some of the instances of demon possession recorded in the Bible may have been cases of schizophre...

well there's my best effort at a Christian Jedi question :P
 
@Flimzy (pseudo) +1. :P
 
9:32 PM
haha
 
Well, time for me to head to class.
Seeya guys! :)
 
class? again?
 
Yes. I'm a college student with an evening class... :P
 
sounds... classy?
Is there a Bad Pun badge?
 
@Flimzy If there were, you wouldn't get it because that was a horrible pun.
 
9:36 PM
haha
 
9:50 PM
Howdy @AdamRobinson
 
Hey there, @Flimzy. How goes it?
 
good
 
10:02 PM
@flimzy I see your edits here christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2871/… that's a pretty cool site with all the different bible translations. Unfortunately it doesn't actually link to the New American Bible. Dredges up some nccb bible link from like 15 years ago. It'd work if they changed the domain to usccb.org,
*not that anyone but me cares here
 
@PeterTurner: yeah, Just ran across that today... I know many people (perhaps you included) prefer not to use links when they don't want to show preference for any specific translation, so I thought that'd make for a handy tool.
It's disappointing if it doesn't include your choice translation, though :(
Maybe I shouldn't continue my edits based on that
 
No it's OK, Catholics really don't have some sort of doctrine to only read the New American Bible, it's just what we use in Church.
 
I wish there was a way to only include the English translations in that output
I suppose I could write my own gateway site for that purpose... heh
 

« first day (22 days earlier)      last day (4615 days later) »