« first day (411 days earlier)      last day (4249 days later) » 

1:15 AM
@DavidStratton @TRiG interesting conversation guys. I'm still trying to craft up some poll questions and its good food for thought
@TRiG not a big fan of that kind of humor, but it does make one think...
 
 
2 hours later…
3:11 AM
I can't BELIEVE this wasn't already asked... I wonder how many other basic questions are out there that our experts could address... christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/10128/…
 
3:22 AM
@DavidStratton I think the biggest issue with answering super basic questions here is providing an answer better than other websites out there already.
 
@PeterTurner - re your comment on my answer. So is that a dupe? I looked before posting, but couldn't find the question on the site... It would be a bummer to go to all that effort and have to delete it.
 
Or at the very least, comparable.
 
I guess I hadn't thought of that. I suppose I'd never have thought of posting the question until I saw the one about Hebrews. My first thought was, "Really? That's a real question?" but it occurred to me that there really are people with questions like that...
I won't be actively looking for any more simple questions. You've got a great point. There are plenty of resources already out there covering exactly what I covered.
 
@DavidStratton I think it was @Caleb that made the point somewhere on Meta...
 
I'm looking for it now. I found this, but nothing from Caleb meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/445/… If you find it, let me know. I've been through several Meta posts, but nowhere even close to reading them all.
Or, @Caleb if you remember it...
 
3:32 AM
I think it was a comment in one of the site evaluation posts.
 
OK. I did find this, which seems relevant: blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/02/are-some-questions-too-simple
Following that flowchart, I should probably not have posted that question/answer...
I suppose we'll see if it gets closed. C'est la vie.
 
3:52 AM
@david, yeah, I VTCed it because, like you, no one else would probably ever match those two questions. You've got a better answer though, and it's actually about the Protestant Bible.
 
Hm. I think I'll copy my answer there and delete this question. It may not be an exact dupe, bit close enough for me, thanks!
 
4:06 AM
@El'endiaStarman thanks for closing. Can you delete as well? I'm trying but it says I can't delete, flag for moderator instead.
never mind. figured it out
had to delete the answer first.
 
 
1 hour later…
5:25 AM
@David I undeleted your post. Usually we like to keep duplicate around. You failed to find the original because you had the question phrased differently in your mind. That's normal. Keeping your question around as a closed dup serves as a sign post to anybody else searching with your phrases.
I could have also merged the answers to save you reposting and keep the answer votes, but with a duplicate answer now that is kind of messy.
 
 
4 hours later…
9:01 AM
Hello
How's everyone doing?
 
 
3 hours later…
12:13 PM
Hey guys -- the OP on this question posted a flag saying he "met the conditions" and wants a re-open. Check my comments for my line of reasoning, but I still see more rant than question going on there. If anybody wants to help him with a real re-write -- knock yourselves out.
 
Hey, @Caleb
 
@Noah Hello
 
 
1 hour later…
1:27 PM
warren on October 08, 2012

When I was a kid (and even occasionally still), I’d hear the stories of people saved from lives of crime, debauchery, hedonism, sex, drugs, etc – and want to be like them. I wanted to have that really cool story that everybody hears and says, “wow” to.

What I realized as a late teen, though, was that I had that story – I just hadn’t realized it for years. In looking back, I am happy God didn’t let me have that story – because He gave me one of my own. …

 
 
1 hour later…
2:37 PM
Sorry, @Caleb - misunderstood the logic for the undelete and misapplied it.
 
@Caleb just tried to do some work on it
 
@DavidStratton No worries.
 
3:20 PM
@ThomasShields That's definitely better, but I still think it's problematic in having two issues going on. I would worry less about trying to maintain the author's original intent -- their original intent is never going to be a constructive question -- and isolate one of the two issues. The question about whether the pastoral letters apply today is one issue (probably for another question) and the one of is the issue addressed in other places too should be isolated in that question.
 
@Caleb yeah agreed
@Caleb how 'bout now?
 
@ThomasShields That's reasonably enough that I reopened it. It's at least answerable without starting a massive off-topic discussion.
I see from the OP's other posts/comments that they aren't too into any part of scripture being applicable. If you rule out the entire OT as being obsolete and all of Paul as being just one man's advice and not binding on anybody today and the few bits that are left just represent somebodies impressions of somebody elses teachings ... you aren't left with much to build a case for any doctrine on.
 
 
3 hours later…
6:06 PM
@ThomasShields I'm not sure what kind of humour I'd call that, actually. Fairly mild humour, anyway. It's not massively funny, and not trying to be.
 
 
1 hour later…
7:16 PM
@TRiG I meant the sexual humor
comic humor I love
xkcd ftw
 
7:33 PM
Here @TRiG, have a laugh.
 
@El'endiaStarman please say that's not a serious website
also yeah 90s web design
 
8:11 PM
@waxeagle I love the centered text. I communicates: "I just found this cool feature and I have no clue how terrible it looks!"
 
@JonEricson lol srsly
 
@El'endiaStarman "Since 1973 - Online Since 1997" That could be my motto. (Except, I've been online since 1992 depending on your definition of "online".)
@waxeagle I am disappoint. No blinking text. :-(
 
@JonEricson :)
most annoying thing: underlined text that is not a link
 
@waxeagle Yikes. "FEEL FREE TO DOWNLOAD" rings a bit hollow in that case.
 
@waxeagle That's twice I've seen people complaining that colored/underlined text is not a link. I haven't had that problem because I go for the specific color of blue...
 
8:20 PM
@El'endiaStarman on the web, you have to have a really good reason to underline text that's not a link
it also aggravates me when people put links in text and either don't underline them, or at least don't offset them as a different color
 
@waxeagle That annoys me too when I notice.
 
@El'endiaStarman hidden links in text are a bad idea unless it's some kind of foolish easter egg
but underlining stuff that's not a link is just cruel, you keep mousing over it trying to click and no dice
 
@waxeagle See, I don't have that reaction to underlined text. Not sure why...
 
@El'endiaStarman Too young... ;-)
 
@JonEricson I was thinking the same thing...and I'm only a few years older than him :|
 
8:29 PM
See also:
9
A: New Stack Exchange Beta Theme

Jon EricsonThe "followed" link color is distinctly brighter than the "fresh" link color: (This answer was the link I'd already visited and this question was the link I hadn't visited.) I noticed because I followed the link to the answer and was confused about which link I'd already followed. Just t...

 
8:53 PM
@waxeagle Y'know what's really aggravating? A link that doesn't actually go anywhere.
 
@El'endiaStarman yes.
 
9:07 PM
'If the earth were a globe, the distance round the surface, say, at 45 degrees south latitude, could not possibly be any greater than the same latitude north; but since it is found by navigators to be twice the distance—to say the least of it—or double the distance it ought to be according to the globular theory, it is a proof that the earth is not a globe.'

This sort of thing reduces my mind to a pulp. I can faintly resist when a man says that if the earth were a globe cats would not have four legs; but when he says that if the earth were a globe cats would not have five legs I am crushed.
(some day I'm going to learn how to actually quote stuff), but that website reminded me of this.
 
@PeterTurner it's a real pain in chat
 
9:48 PM
@ThomasShields Interesting, because I don't actually see any sexual humour in that comic. I see "politics of identity" humour.
Seized today. Elderly couple bought shrub at car boot sale, tended carefully-biggest cannabis plant we had seen!! http://t.co/PtQzFIqj
 
@El'endiaStarman "Online Since 1997" -- and never updated in all those years.
 
@BruceAlderman Oddly enough, it has been updated! Unless they just did the Mayan thing and committed all their changes up until 2012.
 
10:04 PM
@PeterTurner I correctly guessed the second paragraph was a GKC quote. Awesome.
 
@JonEricson I just remember that one because I had to listen to it 5 times to make out what the guy reading it on Librivox was saying, I think that was where he finally cracked up.
 
@El'endiaStarman "OVER 100 LINKS". Is that supposed to encourage me to read this thing?
ALL False Science AND ALL False Religion are held together by the weak, Bible-bashing, vulnerable Copernican Lie of a Rotating, Orbiting Earth
Whut? All of it?
I wasn't aware that Copernican thought underlay Hinduism.
> A recent poll in Germany, the USA, UK, found that 15-20% no longer believe the earth is moving!
The one statement on the site which may actually, possibly, be true. Hope not, but I wouldn't actually be too surprised. I'd like to see the polling data, assuming this poll does actually exist.
 

« first day (411 days earlier)      last day (4249 days later) »