GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Have any of you stopped to consider why it is you find Jesus so offensive?
May I kindly and very-politely suggest that ... maybe ... we don't?
I suggest that you should assume that a great many people here are, each in their own (private!) way, "religious." But, they don't necessarily want to talk about such things "at work," except in the F&R Mega-Thread, which certainly could use a couple-hundred more pages ...
What people are very likely to find offensive is "Jesus where He doesn't belong." By that I mean: "of course you're entitled to your opinions and to your beliefs," but it's generally a good idea to be a little bit circumspect in how and when and where you express them ... especially if they would just be seen as "off-topic."
Therefore, may I kindly suggest that "you're really not doing Jesus any favors" by slipping your tracts into a conversation. They pure-and-simple don't belong there.
(And, lest you forget: some people might well take offense at the suggestion(!) that you think that they "find Jesus offensive!" Careful, careful ... Religion is an intenselypersonal matter for a great many people.)
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 08-23-2016 at 06:33 PM.
I personally think that the author of this piece "got a little bit carried away" as he wrote this tome. His references to Old Testament religion, while perhaps well-intended, really don't work (IMHO ...) as metaphors. I also think that he places rather too much credence on things like "Microsoft's [financial] bond rating."
To me, the simple truth of this matter is that companies today are placing far(!) too much confidence in the "EULA = End-User License Agreements" that n-o-b-o-d-y actually reads.
Right now, they're existing in a world where "the relevant laws do not exist ... yet." And, they are "committing the trespasses" that will one day be outlawed. (Such as, say, John D. Rockefeller did in his attempt to make the oil-refining industry "efficient.")
In fact, there are many laws that were engineered to protect privacy. Voice-telephone service is subject to "wiretapping" laws. Other laws say that the US Postal Service can't steam-open ("100% of" (!)) your letters ... as, oh-by-the-way, Google does(!!) do with your e-mails. The Constitution of the United States declares a prohibition against "unreasonable search." And, so on.
It simply takes a little time for the (international ...) legal system to catch up.
In the coming months and years, I believe that you can be absolutely certain(!) that "the legal position of 'the Internet'" will be dramatically different from what it is today. I think that it would behoove us all to firmly bear in mind that "our entire industry, as we know it today," is about to be: Regulated.
"Playtime's over."
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 08-23-2016 at 06:49 PM.
May I kindly and very-politely suggest that ... maybe ... we don't?
I suggest that you should assume that a great many people here are, each in their own (private!) way, "religious." But, they don't necessarily want to talk about such things "at work," except in the F&R Mega-Thread, which certainly could use a couple-hundred more pages ...
What people are very likely to find offensive is "Jesus where He doesn't belong." By that I mean: "of course you're entitled to your opinions and to your beliefs," but it's generally a good idea to be a little bit circumspect in how and when and where you express them ... especially if they would just be seen as "off-topic."
Therefore, may I kindly suggest that "you're really not doing Jesus any favors" by slipping your tracts into a conversation. They pure-and-simple don't belong there.
(And, lest you forget: some people might well take offense at the suggestion(!) that you think that they "find Jesus offensive!" Careful, careful ... Religion is an intenselypersonal matter for a great many people.)
since i can't upvote here, i just quote. and a +1, and hopefully ardvark71 reads this and understands...
The original post treats of the Big Brother tactics of Microsoft (and others) and includes apocalyptic Biblical references. The Mark of the Beast is a mysterious Biblical prophecy in which the forces of evil will control everything, especially commerce. While I tend to think it a stretch to see AntiChrist in Microsoft's strategy, and am not a fan of heavy-handed 'evangelizing', I did not find ardvark71's comments to be entirely off subject, as some have charged.
Actually there is a valid point here. When the first-century writer of the apocalypse wanted to suggest what total control by an "evil empire" would be like, he suggested a situation in which no one was allowed to buy anything, not even food, unless he carried "the mark of the beast". He probably imagined the mark as some kind of brand, because that was a technology he was familiar with (just as Orwell imagined total surveillance via television sets with built-in cameras). But modern technology has made it easy for a future dictator to bring the Apocalypse to life.
Already most purchases are made by electronic means. It is probably only a matter of time before physical money disappears altogether. It already costs the government more to mint money than it's worth. But with everything done electronically, it will be quite easy for any government to cut off anyone they have a grudge against. Suddenly that person won't even be able to by a loaf of bread.
It's only a small further step to create "big data" programs that can can constantly comb overall expenditure records looking for anything that the government might find suspicious.
Have any of you stopped to consider why it is you find Jesus so offensive?
Yes. It was all those threats of eternal torment for people he didn't like. And it was your signature that encouraged me to put a religious link in mine. As the old saying goes, "Jesus loves you, but Athena thinks you're a berk."
Yes. It was all those threats of eternal torment for people he didn't like. And it was your signature that encouraged me to put a religious link in mine. As the old saying goes, "Jesus loves you, but Athena thinks you're a berk."
It's worth pointing out that the people Jesus didn't like were mostly religious hypocrites and rich people who exploited the poor. There's no record of his threatening people with hell fire simply for believing the wrong thing or having the wrong kind of sex.
This was also true of his brother James, who wrote a letter (still preserved in the New Testament) threatening damnation to rich employers who paid their employees starvation wages. Someone with a kooky sense of humour once excerpted that letter and presented the excerpts at an Evangelical congress as the work of the American socialist Upton Sinclair. And everyone said how dreadful it was! They all had very red faces when they discovered that the words came from the Bible.
I suspect that Jesus and James inherited their political views from their mother, who once rejoiced that "He has cast down the mighty from their seats and exalted those of low degree! He has filled the hungry with good things and the rich He has sent away empty!"
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is aangry with his brother bwithout a cause shall be cin danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, dRaca, shall be ein danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Matt. 7:13
13 ¶Enter ye in at the astrait bgate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to cdestruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Matt. 8:12
12 But the achildren of the kingdom shall be cast out into bouter darkness: there shall be cweeping and gnashing of teeth.
Matt. 10:28
28 And afear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather bfear him which is able to cdestroy both dsoul and body in ehell.
Matt. 12:30-37
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not awith me scattereth abroad.
31 ¶Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven aunto men: but the bblasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall cnot be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be aforgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
33 Either make the tree good, and his afruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his bfruit.
34 O ageneration of vipers, how can ye, being evil, bspeak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good atreasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth bevil things.
36 But I say unto you, That every aidle bword that men shall cspeak, they shall give daccount thereof in the day of ejudgment.
37 For by thy awords thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
Matt. 18:8,9
8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into ahell fire.
Matt. 25:41
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the aleft hand, bDepart from me, ye ccursed, into everlasting dfire, eprepared for the devil and his angels:
Mark 9:42-48
There are plenty more, but that should get you started
ok, i stand corrected.
in some of those, there's mention of hell, in others everlasting fire.
close enough to what was said previously.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
as he wrote this tome. His references to Old Testament religion, while perhaps well-intended, really don't work (IMHO ...) as metaphors. I also think that he places rather too much credence on things like "Microsoft's [financial] bond rating."
