LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-29-2013, 07:54 AM   #76
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 6,911
Blog Entries: 51

Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
You asked me why the quotation marks. That excerpt is my best answer. But if you insist--not every "Jew" in fact most "Jews" aren't by New Testament standards. Members of Christ are "grafted in" where "Jews" who reject Christ are severed. So the physical Israel is not, but those of the faith of Abraham are.
Clear as mud, as we say in Oldham. Are you saying Jews who reject New Testament standards (whatever they are) aren't Jews? If, by "New Testament standards", you mean Christ's teachings - that's obvious. If they accepted them, they'd be Christians. So: Jews are Jews, not "Jews". Your Jesus was a Jew, don't forget.
Getting back to Isaiah. Let's assume he wrote some of what is ascribed to him. Then other later editors put stuff in, relating to the reign of Cyrus and the birth of the Messiah, to make them seem like prophecies.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 02:04 PM   #77
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
Clear as mud, as we say in Oldham. Are you saying Jews who reject New Testament standards (whatever they are) aren't Jews? If, by "New Testament standards", you mean Christ's teachings - that's obvious. If they accepted them, they'd be Christians. So: Jews are Jews, not "Jews". Your Jesus was a Jew, don't forget.
Getting back to Isaiah. Let's assume he wrote some of what is ascribed to him. Then other later editors put stuff in, relating to the reign of Cyrus and the birth of the Messiah, to make them seem like prophecies.
I'm pretty certain it's generally accepted by serious scholars that Isaiah wrote the foremost chapters, more than the first 9.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 02:42 PM   #78
TB0ne
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 14,210

Rep: Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
I'm pretty certain it's generally accepted by serious scholars that Isaiah wrote the foremost chapters, more than the first 9.
Oh?? Based on WHAT? You still haven't commented on/replied to my previous statements, and commented on "sorry sources" before, saying that such scholars were "biased" and "skeptics". Now, when it suits you, they're to be taken seriously?

Or do you mean such 'scholars' who think that "The Flintstones" was a documentary?
 
Old 06-29-2013, 03:25 PM   #79
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,334
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347
Bind can't learn to see. Unless, thanks to Science. Wonder how many actual blind believe in the stupidity of "his will"?

Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-29-2013 at 03:39 PM.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 03:35 PM   #80
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by TB0ne View Post
Oh?? Based on WHAT? You still haven't commented on/replied to my previous statements, and commented on "sorry sources" before, saying that such scholars were "biased" and "skeptics". Now, when it suits you, they're to be taken seriously?

Or do you mean such 'scholars' who think that "The Flintstones" was a documentary?
The primary definition of a troll is someone whose intent is to sow discord. My intent all along has been to persuade some toward unity to Christ. I've never attempted to put anyone at enmity with anyone else. You have considerable influence here TBone, but apparently you would have me to be at enmity with you and the Linux community. And yet apparently, I'm the troll.

As to your previous statements (35 and 36?), I answered one. I've asked you to summarize the other, as it's not well written and the questions are scattered. I suppose you want me at your beck and call? Sorry, you may be strong but I serve another.

Last edited by bluegospel; 06-29-2013 at 03:38 PM. Reason: spelling
 
Old 06-29-2013, 03:43 PM   #81
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,334
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
I serve another.
exactly, born in to bondage, lucky for you you weren't taught to be a suicide bomber (or worst have to live after killing in the name of ∞) like religions do, fact.

Perpetual motion
"Through its morally ambiguous characters, the series explores the issues of social hierarchy, religion, civil war, crime, and punishment. It is the most recent big-budget work to have contributed to the popularity of the fantasy genre in mainstream media."
oops? dealet me

Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-29-2013 at 04:35 PM.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 03:44 PM   #82
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,334
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
I serve another.
exactly, born in to bondage, lucky for you you weren't taught to be a suicide bomber (or worst have to live after killing in the name of ∞) like religions do, fact.

Perpetual motion
"Through its morally ambiguous characters, the series explores the issues of social hierarchy, religion, civil war, crime, and punishment. It is the most recent big-budget work to have contributed to the popularity of the fantasy genre in mainstream media."
Hiccup

Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-30-2013 at 06:34 PM.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 04:52 PM   #83
TB0ne
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 14,210

Rep: Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
The primary definition of a troll is someone whose intent is to sow discord. My intent all along has been to persuade some toward unity to Christ. I've never attempted to put anyone at enmity with anyone else. You have considerable influence here TBone, but apparently you would have me to be at enmity with you and the Linux community. And yet apparently, I'm the troll.
...which sums up 'troll' behavior nicely. I have ZERO influence here, and no one 'hates' you, or has enmity towards you at all. Your behavior is (in my opinion), childish and troll-like. This opinion is shared by others, based on the posts in this thread and in others. And wasn't it YOU, YOURSELF that admitted to troll-like behavior in another post in this same thread?? Now it's "I'm not the troll! You are!!"????

You are NOT doing your 'cause' any favors with such behavior. And in case you haven't noticed, you are ANNOYING people with such things. People may enjoy debate or intelligent discussion, but threads like this don't seem to qualify on either count, since you don't seem to respond logically, or even admit that ANYONE can be right, when they don't agree with you.
Quote:
As to your previous statements (35 and 36?), I answered one. I've asked you to summarize the other, as it's not well written and the questions are scattered.
Sorry, but it is very well written, and not scattered at all; if you have trouble following it, I can't help that. Again, it appears you are not interested in rational discourse or debate, but rather dodge anything that is uncomfortable for you, and employ circular logic to 'prove' what you say. You are not afraid to employ a double-standard (see your previous post about 'serious scholars', and the one before that where you lambast said-scholars for being "biased" and "skeptics") when convenient, and employ misdirection (see your post about being a troll "whatever that is"...you were told several times, two years ago, and could have easily looked it up...but decided to play the "poor me, please tell me" card) to try to derail anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Quote:
I suppose you want me at your beck and call? Sorry, you may be strong but I serve another.
There is nothing I would EVER want from you, or people like you, except silence. The whole point of LinuxQuestions is, AMAZINGLY, LINUX. Not "bible debate"...not "unity to christ"...there are plenty of places where this would be welcomed.

The only reason you post here, is that it's probably the only place where you're not banned for this.

Last edited by TB0ne; 06-29-2013 at 05:03 PM.
 
Old 06-29-2013, 05:05 PM   #84
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,334
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347
generality nonLinux so... (maybe that's the troll bait\trap) "The primary definition of a troll" it's debatable like all religion\*, which should ring bells if u can think out side the box

Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-29-2013 at 05:46 PM.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 12:43 PM   #85
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by TB0ne View Post
...which sums up 'troll' behavior nicely. I have ZERO influence here, and no one 'hates' you, or has enmity towards you at all. Your behavior is (in my opinion), childish and troll-like. This opinion is shared by others, based on the posts in this thread and in others. And wasn't it YOU, YOURSELF that admitted to troll-like behavior in another post in this same thread?? Now it's "I'm not the troll! You are!!"????

You are NOT doing your 'cause' any favors with such behavior. And in case you haven't noticed, you are ANNOYING people with such things. People may enjoy debate or intelligent discussion, but threads like this don't seem to qualify on either count, since you don't seem to respond logically, or even admit that ANYONE can be right, when they don't agree with you.

Sorry, but it is very well written, and not scattered at all; if you have trouble following it, I can't help that. Again, it appears you are not interested in rational discourse or debate, but rather dodge anything that is uncomfortable for you, and employ circular logic to 'prove' what you say. You are not afraid to employ a double-standard (see your previous post about 'serious scholars', and the one before that where you lambast said-scholars for being "biased" and "skeptics") when convenient, and employ misdirection (see your post about being a troll "whatever that is"...you were told several times, two years ago, and could have easily looked it up...but decided to play the "poor me, please tell me" card) to try to derail anyone who doesn't agree with you.

There is nothing I would EVER want from you, or people like you, except silence. The whole point of LinuxQuestions is, AMAZINGLY, LINUX. Not "bible debate"...not "unity to christ"...there are plenty of places where this would be welcomed.

The only reason you post here, is that it's probably the only place where you're not banned for this.
ou're very good giving totally unconstructive criticism. If only you were that good receiving constructive criticism.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 01:22 PM   #86
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 26,990
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743Reputation: 2743
OK, let's get this thread back on track. All posts hereafter please address the topic at hand and in a respectful, inviting and constructive way.

Thanks in advance.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 02:06 PM   #87
TB0ne
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 14,210

Rep: Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473Reputation: 2473
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
ou're very good giving totally unconstructive criticism. If only you were that good receiving constructive criticism.
...which leads to the question, "How would you know, since you've never offered any?"

As unSpawn said, bluegospel, stay on topic. Several questions were posed to you related to this thread, which you have not answered. If you're not going to participate in a discussion that you, yourself, started, you should ask the moderators to close this thread.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 06:10 PM   #88
Nbiser
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2012
Location: Maryland
Distribution: Fedora, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, Knoppix, Helix,
Posts: 279
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 41
I don't have the time to go through all of the arguments in this thread. However, I am willing to hear the arguments of the atheists and to counter them in a logical manner. Of course, I will give my own arguments against atheism as well.

As a Christian, I think that there are three major areas that prove the existence of a god, and particularly, the Christian God. The first is through philosophy, the second is through nature, and the third is through the scriptures. I will get around to the original topic of the thread in my section on the scriptures.

From a philosophic stand point, there is a strong argument for for the existence of a God. Let us take a brief look at the stand point that the atheist has on life: he believes that there is no supreme all powerful being, no overriding power.......and if he carries out his belief to the logical end, there is no authority at all, everyone is a piece of cosmic dust, that will die eventually......and go into nothingness. If he carries out this reason to its obvious conclusion, there is no right or wrong, no sense of ethics; as a matter of fact, he would believe that there is nothing wrong with killing, raping, and destroying. In short, he believes that there is nothing wrong with killing 30 kids and adults in a school shooting. I'm not saying that all atheists take their belief system to its logical conclusion; I'm just saying that if they are consistent atheist, they will take their reasoning to its final end.......total destruction of the world as we know it. However, Christians believe in an all supreme and all powerful being, who sets the standards of right and wrong, and will punish and reward accordingly.

As far as nature goes, it is easy to see the existence of a God. Let us look at the dilemma that the average atheist is in. He believes in evolution, and scoffs at the idea of an infinite being who made all things. However, when he looks carefully at evolution, he can't get away from the infinite! He believes that the world was formed from atoms and molecules, that molded themselves into large physical bodies, and that eventually cells developed. However, where did that first atom come from? It had to come from somewhere! Perhaps, he says, it had no beginning. Ah, but now he is saying that an atom.....is infinite! There is no getting away from the fact that there is an infinite being or thing when it comes to nature. Something had to come, before time, and make the world. The Christian religion is really the only religion that accounts for this. The Christian religion teaches that God existed before time, that he is an infinite being, who created the world to show forth his power and majesty. Other religions either fail to give a satisfactory account of this, or don't mention it at all. It is thus easily seen that there had to be an infinite substance, thing, or being......and that the Christian religion is the only religion to successfully account for this.

Now that I have laid down the foundations for my final, most on topic, and most important section, we can proceed to examine the scriptures themselves. There must needs be something infinite, and something eternal, some sort of lawgiver or judge, who can control the earth. The Bible lays down who this is, and how he does things. In the Bible, we see the creation of the world, and from here, the Bible flows in an uninterrupted flow, with the only incongruities in the text imagined ones that can be cleared up by looking at the original Greek and Hebrew texts and at other passages in scripture. We see prophecy predicting the coming of Christ as far back as the time of King David, who, by the way, is recognized by almost all historians to have ruled in Israel......with all sorts of archaeological support for this fact. In the Psalms, most of which were written by David or in his time period, are an unlimited number of references to Christ. We can see references to Christ in all of the major and minor prophets, even with references to the kind of death that he was going to die. Christ himself, confronted his Jewish opponents with these prophecies, and, just as was prophesied, God blinded their eyes. Today many have blinded their own eyes, and darkened their own hearts to keep from seeing and understanding the truth. The apostle Paul talks about this the Book of Romans, Chapter 2, verses 4 &5: "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgement of God;" And also in Romans 9:20 "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why has thou made me thus?"

In conclusion. A I stated a the beginning I am willing to hear and answer logical arguments. However, as you write back, remember Romans 9:20 "Who art thou that repliest against God."

Nbiser

Last edited by Nbiser; 07-03-2013 at 09:43 AM.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 08:19 PM   #89
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 15,417
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995Reputation: 3995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
From a philosophic stand point, there is a strong argument for for the existence of a God. Let us take a brief look at the stand point that the atheist has on life: he believes that there is no supreme all powerful being, no overriding power.......and if he carries out his belief to the logical end, there is no authority at all, everyone is a piece of cosmic dust, that will die eventually......and go into nothingness. If he carries out this reason to its obvious conclusion, there is no right or wrong, no sense of ethics; as a matter of fact, he would believe that there is nothing wrong with killing, raping, and destroying. In short, he believes that there is nothing wrong with killing 30 kids and adults in a school shooting. I'm not saying that all atheists take their belief system to its logical conclusion; I'm just saying that if they are consistent atheist, they will take their reasoning to its final end.......total destruction of the world as we know it. However, Christians believe in an all supreme and all powerful being, who sets the standards of right and wrong, and will punish and reward accordingly.
A total non-sequitur. Ethics have nothing to do at all with a god. One can be an ethical person without ever believing in god, for example based on the simple "Don't do to others what you don't want to be done to you!" I personally rather find it rather scary how many believers only don't do the things they accuse atheists of wanting to do because of the fear of a supreme being, instead basing this on their own morality.

Quote:
As far as nature goes, it is easy to see the existence of a God. Let us look at the dilemma that the average atheist is in. He believes in evolution, and scoffs at the idea of an infinite being who made all things. However, when he looks carefully at evolution, he can't get away from the infinite! He believes that the world was formed from atoms and molecules, that molded themselves into large physical bodies, and that eventually cells developed. However, where did that first atom come from? It had to come from somewhere! Perhaps, he says, it had no beginning. Ah, but now he is saying that an atom.....is infinite! There is no getting away from the fact that there is an infinite being or thing when it comes to nature. Something had to come, before time, and make the world. The Christian religion is really the only religion that accounts for this. The Christian religion teaches that God existed before time, that he is an infinite being, who created the world to show forth his power and majesty. Other religions either fail to give a satisfactory account of this, or don't mention it at all. It is thus easily seen that there had to be an infinite substance, thing, or being......and that the Christian religion is the only religion to successfully account for this.
Sorry, but reading this it seems to me that you neither know much about the science behind this (by the way, the christian god and evolution are not mutual exclusive, ask the pope), nor do you seem to know much about other religions, when you claim that the Christian religion is the only one that accounts for this (at least Judaism shares the same creation story with Christianity).

Quote:
Now that I have laid down the foundations for my final, most on topic, and most important section, we can proceed to examine the scriptures themselves. There must needs be something infinite, and something eternal, some sort of lawgiver or judge, who can control the earth. The Bible lays down who this is, and how he does things. In the Bible, we see the creation of the world, and from here, the Bible flows in an uninterrupted flow, with the only incongruities in the text imagined ones that can be cleared up by looking at the original Greek and Hebrew texts and at other passages in scripture. We see prophecy predicting the coming of Christ as far back as the time of King David, who, by the way, is recognized by almost all historians to have ruled in Israel......with all sorts of archaeological support for this fact. In the Psalms, most of which were written by David or in his time period, are an unlimited number of references to Christ. We can see references to Christ in all of the major and minor prophets, even with references to the kind of death that he was going to die. Christ himself, confronted his Jewish opponents with these prophecies, and, just as was prophesied, God blinded their eyes. Today many have blinded their own eyes, and darkened their own hearts to keep from seeing and understanding the truth. The apostle Paul talks about this the Book of Romans, Chapter 2, verses 4 &5: "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgement of God;" And also in Romans 9:20 "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why has thou made me thus?"
You realize that the authors of the gospels were well aware of those predictions and had no problem at all to adapt their stories to them?

But anyways, I can't see how any of this is related to the question about the number of authors of the book Isaiah.
 
Old 07-01-2013, 11:24 PM   #90
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: infinity; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth
Distribution: any UNIXish that works well on my cheapest with mostly KDE, Xfce, JWM or CLI but open ;-)
Posts: 1,334
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347Reputation: 347
edit:\ok done. :D

Nbiser++ you\we assume(.) But, for yours here, now: why assume atheist over the more scientific agnostic or nihilism++?

Killing is not cool (I don't support it) but is dying? One dose not have to kill but death?☠?that's why "believing" is easier, especially after getting taught wrong (which you wouldn't know you'd just ;believe;) and history proves this; read every science\religious book ever recorded to see BIG change\difference\etc from “fact"(\stupid) to “fiction”(/smarter) nonstop. Is the earth round, no there's mountains and valleys!
(but not infinitely earth dies too)

“where did that first atom come from?” I guess gods were sitting around infinitely and just decided,,, NOW, LOL but I assume ta see your answer to be the same as my guess\only-not-for-god$\devils but the molecules...infinity(space and time; hard to wrap our heads around I know) easier to 'believe' and not learn, is that not why religion wants teaching cut from schools or is that a money\power thing too?
(i achoo )
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
One can be an ethical person without ever believing in god,
And, of course vise versa...

Heaven would be as boring as hell in infinity so now we dream of vampires and zombies so we could potentially still end our fables...

gods and devils have to go together for the kids hu, in my fantasy world K(indergarten)1-25 existes for ALL and NO devils! Opinions\onions∞: going to "text"\believing-your-environment vs actual thinking supports "truth"...

C'est la vie, enjoy!
…………..*.
……..*………*
…..*……………*
…*………………..*
..*………………….*
.*……………………*………*….*
*…………………….*…*…………..*
.*…………………….*……………….*
..*…………………….*…………….*
…*…………………………………*
…..*…………………………….*
……..*………………………*
………..*………………….*
……………*……………*
………………*……….*
…………………*…..*
………………….*..*
……………………*
……………………*
…………………..*
……………………*
……………………..*
………………………..*
…………………………..*
……………………………*
………………………….*
……………………….*
………………………*
…………………….*

Last edited by jamison20000e; 07-02-2013 at 09:30 PM. Reason: you know
 
  


Closed Thread

Tags
human stupidity, pointless


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Multiple connections to singular shell session jhwilliams Linux - Software 1 07-24-2009 06:35 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration