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.
"Don't worry about what anybody else is going to do… The best way to predict the future is to invent it. Really smart people with reasonable funding can do just about anything that doesn't violate too many of Newton's Laws!" - Alan Kay
"If you get, give. If you learn, teach" - Maya Angelou
If you want to dig-up that clam, then one would logically ask: how could "the creator of everything" have "a child," anyway? And, how or why would that "creator of everything" be so pissed-off at every person that ever existed? Why, also, would the propitiation of that vengefulness consist of a re-creation of ... a Hebrew animal-sacrifice, superimposed on the Roman style execution of a political troublemaker? There is a lot of very fascinating reading on this subject, if you care to look it up. But you'd better be prepared to throw "certainty" out the window. (If your preferred point-of-view is, "The Bible: Absolute, Inspired, Final," as I recently saw on a billboard around these parts, then, "don't go there.")
And-d-d-d ... then you should ask yourself whether it might not be better for you to "just believe it." If you want to. Or, not. "To thine own self be true," and, every time you have the opportunity to do something good for someone else, do that good without asking anything in return. (Including, for that matter, "a mansion in the sky, by-and-by." I don't think that one's number-one concern ought to be seeing that your fire-insurance policy is paid up, nor accusing someone else that "they're gonna burn.")
Remember, we've all got a strong desire to "know" (of course ...), but also "to be right," and "to be the one who is seen to be right." But, I believe, this is one thing where that certainty simply cannot be obtained. (You are welcome to disagree.) Perhaps it is better in the long run to be "right, but silent." Or, "wrong, but silent." Right or wrong, we have no right to throw bricks on the road.
Over the many years since growing-up in a well intentioned but compulsorily-religious household, my own thoughts have become very introspective. I don't rationalize things and I don't debate theology. But I do hear "a still, small voice" sometimes, and whenever I do hear it, I listen. I'm rather of the feeling that, even though I might not have any idea (nor might anyone else around have any idea, either) as to "what God is," I do quietly believe for myself "that God is." God, or something. That there is a greater reality beyond the reach of our senses, and that we nonetheless do sense it, sometimes. Like it or not, we are the blind men in the presence of the elephant.
I don't want to "debate" these things, as though I (or some religious figure) possessed "the TRVTH," and in so doing cause harm or misguidance to the person I am "debating." Truth is, I don't have any idea what the truth is. But I do feel that I have something that is "true enough for me," within the dictates of my own conscience.
Fair enough. I agree with "to each their own" as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else... so there's a problem, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger but we're bound to die. I feel we should be able to say absolutely anything and get away scot free! But, I guess it takes education to know sticks and stones will brake bones but names won't?!. religion is not education! If you teach kids red is blue, it hurts them. If you teach them an eye for an eye or to segregate it hurts us.
Spread the word.
1. (in some Christian beliefs) the supposed abode of the souls of unbaptized infants, and of the just who died before Christ's coming.
2. an uncertain period of awaiting a decision or resolution; an intermediate state or condition.
"the fate of the Contras is now in limbo"
synonyms: in abeyance, unattended to, unfinished; More
Fair enough. I agree with "to each their own" as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else... so there's a problem, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger but we're bound to die. I feel we should be able to say absolutely anything and get away scot free! But, I guess it takes education to know sticks and stones will brake bones but names won't?!. religion is not education! If you teach kids red is blue, it hurts them. If you teach them an eye for an eye or to segregate it hurts us.
Spread the word.
Religion might be education? Just in different pathway. Kinda like Intro to psychology #12 book is not a book about Cooking!
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.