Eriamjh1138@DAN
Mar 18, 04:22 PM
Apple will continue to sell the iPod classic as long as they are making money on them. I would probably buy one on clearance if they discontinued it and dropped the price. I love having ALL my music in one place without having to choose what to sync.
iPod 3G 40GB owner since 2003.
iPod 3G 40GB owner since 2003.
Le Big Mac
Sep 6, 08:19 AM
And $999? Holy...
Wow! That's great value. Although it looks like the edu-iMac (no bluetooth or superdrive or remote). But at least it's available for those without more money to spend.
As for the spread between 24" and MacPro . . . good that they're reducing the gap. Give people more options!
Wow! That's great value. Although it looks like the edu-iMac (no bluetooth or superdrive or remote). But at least it's available for those without more money to spend.
As for the spread between 24" and MacPro . . . good that they're reducing the gap. Give people more options!
rezenclowd3
Oct 19, 01:31 AM
What would it make you look nerdy?? May i remind you that this is an online forum about computers.
Dude, have you SEEN my picture in the "Macrumors Pics" thread? I AM the definition of a nerd. (Though I at least look/dress "normal") I friggen race "pro" RC Cars, I fix computers, setup servers, airbrush rc car bodies, watch Star Trek, Farscape and BSG!) I am a nerd, but not going to read a book that goes along with a video game. Give me some Ben Bova or Issaac Asimov material instead. Well, almost done with just about everything Asimov wrote...
Shoot, I used to mod orig Xbox's and have used just about every 2nd gen and newer chip that was released for it.....only a nerd would do that :D I stay VERY far from Dungeons and Dragons, Warhammer and Japanese Anime ;-)
Dude, have you SEEN my picture in the "Macrumors Pics" thread? I AM the definition of a nerd. (Though I at least look/dress "normal") I friggen race "pro" RC Cars, I fix computers, setup servers, airbrush rc car bodies, watch Star Trek, Farscape and BSG!) I am a nerd, but not going to read a book that goes along with a video game. Give me some Ben Bova or Issaac Asimov material instead. Well, almost done with just about everything Asimov wrote...
Shoot, I used to mod orig Xbox's and have used just about every 2nd gen and newer chip that was released for it.....only a nerd would do that :D I stay VERY far from Dungeons and Dragons, Warhammer and Japanese Anime ;-)
aswitcher
Aug 3, 11:41 PM
why would u really need a better resolution for the iSight?
Use it as a video/security/iChat/Games camera.
Use it for higher quality still shots.
Have improved video chat quality when real broadband speeds available. I have 1meg up 8meg down, that should be fast enough for some decent video.
its stupid
:eek:
all most people do is take funny pics of them-selves and do iChat
Because the current quality is so low...
And I think you'll find that people do more than that.
And even if thats all they do why not have a higher resolution? Seems plenty of people are doing these things.
if u increase the quality of the iSight for iChat, then it slows the video down
it also will be jerky because the file is large
If you have average machines and broadband yep it does. Whereas if you have more potent dual intel machines, mpeg4 and decent ADSL2+ etc, then you can get better quality video...iChat can already support 4 people communicating now, so 2 communicating with higher bandwidth should be easy *sigh*
and a wireless iSight will just make iChat even slower
Really? How fast is wireless...mmm...up to 54mbps...how fast is decent broadband...1-2mbps up stream...gee wireless is like 25x faster than it needs to be to keep the frame rate up for broadband. Even at range it should be faster.
And there are PLENTY of high end (Axis etc) wireless security cameras out there right now using G to pump back MPEG4 video wirelesly. I even have one.
Maybe you should do some research first before calling people stupid ;)
Use it as a video/security/iChat/Games camera.
Use it for higher quality still shots.
Have improved video chat quality when real broadband speeds available. I have 1meg up 8meg down, that should be fast enough for some decent video.
its stupid
:eek:
all most people do is take funny pics of them-selves and do iChat
Because the current quality is so low...
And I think you'll find that people do more than that.
And even if thats all they do why not have a higher resolution? Seems plenty of people are doing these things.
if u increase the quality of the iSight for iChat, then it slows the video down
it also will be jerky because the file is large
If you have average machines and broadband yep it does. Whereas if you have more potent dual intel machines, mpeg4 and decent ADSL2+ etc, then you can get better quality video...iChat can already support 4 people communicating now, so 2 communicating with higher bandwidth should be easy *sigh*
and a wireless iSight will just make iChat even slower
Really? How fast is wireless...mmm...up to 54mbps...how fast is decent broadband...1-2mbps up stream...gee wireless is like 25x faster than it needs to be to keep the frame rate up for broadband. Even at range it should be faster.
And there are PLENTY of high end (Axis etc) wireless security cameras out there right now using G to pump back MPEG4 video wirelesly. I even have one.
Maybe you should do some research first before calling people stupid ;)
deconai
Aug 3, 12:06 PM
People keep mentioning this.. does anyone have a link to the add that specifically challenges hackers?
No, not a direct challenge. I'm sorry, I was using hyperbole to drive a point home. Apple's not obscure anymore. Even though they control a small portion of the total PC market, I'm seeing more Apple commercials on TV and online than I ever have. They're extremely high visibility now.
And as for the hacker challenge, many believe that the new commercials present a "smug" image of Apple, and one of the commercials specifically touches on the nonexistence of Mac viruses. Now I realize that this is not exactly an open invitation to challenge the OSX 20-ton gorilla, but to some hackers, this does indeed make Apple a target.
No, not a direct challenge. I'm sorry, I was using hyperbole to drive a point home. Apple's not obscure anymore. Even though they control a small portion of the total PC market, I'm seeing more Apple commercials on TV and online than I ever have. They're extremely high visibility now.
And as for the hacker challenge, many believe that the new commercials present a "smug" image of Apple, and one of the commercials specifically touches on the nonexistence of Mac viruses. Now I realize that this is not exactly an open invitation to challenge the OSX 20-ton gorilla, but to some hackers, this does indeed make Apple a target.
Tones2
Mar 29, 09:25 AM
I would definitely prefer a Fall iPhone 5 release if it had LTE.
As for the voice command thing - I don't really care. It's not like it takes that long to press an icon, although it might help some in the cold wiinter when I have gloves on.
Tony
As for the voice command thing - I don't really care. It's not like it takes that long to press an icon, although it might help some in the cold wiinter when I have gloves on.
Tony
lorductape
Nov 7, 08:44 AM
I really hope they put a graphics card in it (even 64MB) and an 802.11N capable wifi card.
hmm... but shouldn't they wait until 802.11n becomes more than just a draft of a format?
and when is the apple product spree going to end!?!?!?!
hmm... but shouldn't they wait until 802.11n becomes more than just a draft of a format?
and when is the apple product spree going to end!?!?!?!
AP_piano295
Mar 29, 10:57 AM
Can you point out any war in history that meets your ivory tower qualifications?
I've always felt that WW2 was justified though the way we ended the war was unfortunate and un-necessary.
I'm also generally in support of intervening to stop genocide/ethnic cleansing.
Unnecessary Wars:
Revolutionary
War 1812
Civil War
Spanish American War
WW1
Korean War
Vietnam War
Desert Storm (Iraq 1.0) maybe necessary but easily avoided
Afghanistan
Iraq War
I've always felt that WW2 was justified though the way we ended the war was unfortunate and un-necessary.
I'm also generally in support of intervening to stop genocide/ethnic cleansing.
Unnecessary Wars:
Revolutionary
War 1812
Civil War
Spanish American War
WW1
Korean War
Vietnam War
Desert Storm (Iraq 1.0) maybe necessary but easily avoided
Afghanistan
Iraq War
Brianstorm91
Jan 11, 04:33 PM
There's an "m" in "there's something in the air", and there's an "m" in "MacBook Pro" therefore it's obviously a new MacBook Pro :D
Isn't it so obvious..
Isn't it so obvious..
Sydde
Apr 11, 08:02 PM
As I said above, free will is a foundational truth that can't be overlooked. God has given you the ability to reject him and you are simply exercising that choice
Sorry to seem to be excessively contrarian, but even here we have a problem. At least I do, some others will probably disagree with me. Of course in the first place, the "god has given you" assertion is irksome. You are apparently not even able to say "you have free will", it has to come from your god person. I mean, I understand where you are coming from, you have to realize that constantly attributing everything to your god person actually tends to detract from what you are saying.
But more importantly, I think the very concept of free will is grossly overstated. "Free will" is actually a very trivial component of human behavior, the lion's share consists of responding to events, which may be of immediate or deferred effect or consequence. Most of what we do involves following well-established patterns, sometimes adjusting a little for a particular situation.
Now I am aware that this kind of Skinnerian behaviorism is a bit extreme for most people to deal with, but my own personal observations (as I go through life and deal with people and animals) have yet to find fault with it. The reality is that I did not choose to believe what I do just as I am not at liberty to just adopt a different belief set. Perhaps a head trauma could turn me into a Baptist or Kufi, but even then, the choice would not be mine. If your god did make us, this is how it did, and the vaporous notion of free will upon which your religion is based is what you want, not so much how things truly are.
Sorry to seem to be excessively contrarian, but even here we have a problem. At least I do, some others will probably disagree with me. Of course in the first place, the "god has given you" assertion is irksome. You are apparently not even able to say "you have free will", it has to come from your god person. I mean, I understand where you are coming from, you have to realize that constantly attributing everything to your god person actually tends to detract from what you are saying.
But more importantly, I think the very concept of free will is grossly overstated. "Free will" is actually a very trivial component of human behavior, the lion's share consists of responding to events, which may be of immediate or deferred effect or consequence. Most of what we do involves following well-established patterns, sometimes adjusting a little for a particular situation.
Now I am aware that this kind of Skinnerian behaviorism is a bit extreme for most people to deal with, but my own personal observations (as I go through life and deal with people and animals) have yet to find fault with it. The reality is that I did not choose to believe what I do just as I am not at liberty to just adopt a different belief set. Perhaps a head trauma could turn me into a Baptist or Kufi, but even then, the choice would not be mine. If your god did make us, this is how it did, and the vaporous notion of free will upon which your religion is based is what you want, not so much how things truly are.
drlunanerd
Nov 8, 07:57 AM
The order status system is still down though on the UK store :(
dillacom
Mar 25, 01:36 PM
oddly enough my ipad 2 w/vzw 3G has stuck on 100% charge for 10 minutes, normally it is clicking away immediately after I unplug the power.
arn
Aug 7, 11:56 PM
What kind of phone is that? Just a mockup?
Looks like it might say "Sony Ericsson" on it.
arn
Looks like it might say "Sony Ericsson" on it.
arn
benthewraith
Aug 2, 10:13 PM
Where exactly is this video? :confused:
Nsutton
Jul 5, 10:08 PM
Cool Idea. Horrible implementation. Why put it in a imac or any desktop!? The angle would hurt like hell and it could never be used in a productive setting (at an office where you have to type all day) also if it only has an iOS layer then how much will it be utilized is it worth to touch the screen to open safari then use the mouse for everthing else.
Edit:
maybe it would be cool to have like an iOS crossover that replaces dashboard and has an app store but not touch screen..
Edit:
maybe it would be cool to have like an iOS crossover that replaces dashboard and has an app store but not touch screen..
R.Perez
Mar 10, 11:21 PM
you can judge me all you want ... my family is both Canadian and American.
I live on both sides of the border.
sorry if I do not support everyone's Anti-American Military views.
Cutting the Military is not for me ... Even though I would have to pay higher taxes, I'd rather scrap all these Government Casinos and Government Bookies we have up in Canada than reduce even one dollar in Military spending.
You still have not explained your position. Why does a country NEED such a large military budget and how does it benefit the citizens of said country?
I live on both sides of the border.
sorry if I do not support everyone's Anti-American Military views.
Cutting the Military is not for me ... Even though I would have to pay higher taxes, I'd rather scrap all these Government Casinos and Government Bookies we have up in Canada than reduce even one dollar in Military spending.
You still have not explained your position. Why does a country NEED such a large military budget and how does it benefit the citizens of said country?
mackarone
Jan 11, 12:53 PM
Maybe an inflatable Mac?
faroZ06
May 4, 11:10 PM
What? Blu Ray failed? When?:rolleyes:
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
redeye be
Sep 12, 02:56 PM
I've downloaded the dmg and the installer has a customize option. In it there is a greyed out option to install "iTunes Phone Driver"... is that just the Motorola Rokr driver?
I noticed this too, and came to check this thread for someone mentioning it.
Jeej!
I noticed this too, and came to check this thread for someone mentioning it.
Jeej!
Jason Beck
Mar 6, 03:12 AM
^
? ... This what? I'm confused.
? ... This what? I'm confused.
txa1265
Sep 13, 12:29 PM
Nope, none of those reviews count until ZP reviews it, because he is the only person not on drugs.
My issue is more that since the downturn and so many print & web sites struggling badly, the impact of AAA advertising money on reviews is now clearer than ever.
I'm not saying that Halo: Reach isn't a great console shooter, just that all of these 11/10 frothing 'bestest EVAR' scores - particularly the ones with more nitpicks than would be present in a 8/10 review of a game without gobs of advertising money - are inherently suspect, because they are bought.
My issue is more that since the downturn and so many print & web sites struggling badly, the impact of AAA advertising money on reviews is now clearer than ever.
I'm not saying that Halo: Reach isn't a great console shooter, just that all of these 11/10 frothing 'bestest EVAR' scores - particularly the ones with more nitpicks than would be present in a 8/10 review of a game without gobs of advertising money - are inherently suspect, because they are bought.
gregorypierce
Apr 11, 02:23 AM
If true this is the most awesome thing that I've ever known a company to do :)
mscriv
Apr 11, 11:57 AM
I object to the notion that good deeds I do are due to vanity, pride etc.
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
I agree. There is so much wrong with the original statement in addition to your point. I consider "goodness" to get your spot in heaven the ultimate in selfishness. Also, what about gods other than Jesus, are the good things performed in their name just as "selfless"?
Ok, good questions and thoughts. Let me explain/expound upon my statement. The bolded part below seems to be what is drawing the most reaction.
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
I am not speaking about conscious motivation within an individuals actions/behavior, although that could be true as we all know people do at times act out of selfish and prideful intentions.
I'm talking about a theological understanding of man's state before God. For those that do not believe in a higher power or absolute truth, man, in and of himself, is the highest order of existence/being/evolution, etc. etc.. Thus, any and all accomplishments of man ("good works") are then viewed as self evident truths to this proposition. Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
I'm in a "helping profession" and work daily with people who seek to support and serve others. Many do this out of the "goodness of their own heart" and genuinely do not seek any form of return for their efforts. On a human level these actions are noble and sacrificial and I applaud them. However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God.
Please understand, this doesn't mean that the positive results of these actions are meaningless. For example, giving food to the homeless is a sacrificial act that does help people in need, but it will in no way earn you "points" with God. The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
It's like I told someone recently in a conversation we were having. I don't stay true to my wife because being unfaithful to her would be the morally wrong thing to do. I could care less about the moral principle of marital faithfulness. My motivation for staying true to my wife is that I have an intimate loving relationship with her and I would never want to hurt her or damage that relationship in any way.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
You may not realize it Sydde, but what you are saying is still along the lines of a works based relationship with God and that is not what the Bible teaches. It's not about a revolving door of "messing up" and and then asking for forgiveness. Christ death paid the price in full for all sin (past, present, and future). What matters is the condition of your heart before him and the intimacy of your relationship with him. Within that context are you seeking your own way including your own selfish desires or are you seeking to be the servant leader he wants you to be. The examples you gave in your post were all of people being selfishly motivated for their own gain.
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
I'd think you would agree that people like Mother Theresa were able to successfully live out their faith with the goal of bringing glory to God while serving others. She's just the first example that pops into my head, but there are countless others. Again, it's not about "religion" making us "better people", that's a selfish manner of thinking. My relationship with God is not about me, it's about him.
"Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus."
"There is always the danger that we may just do the work for the sake of the work. This is where the respect and the love and the devotion come in - that we do it to God, to Christ, and that's why we try to do it as beautifully as possible."
~ Mother Theresa
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection".
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God. When Christ was crucified he tore the temple veil representing that his sacrifice has made the way for man to have a direct relationship with God, no human intermediary is required. As far as prooftexting or manipulating scripture for your own personal motives due to a presenting dilemma, well, I'm sure you already know my answer to this based on my previous comments. Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Fret not my friend. I think there is extreme merit in these discussions and I appreciate the respectful way in which many of us here are able to engage each other on such topics.
As far as me being troubled or in "despair" the answer to your question is both yes and no. I do seek to consistently and genuinely live out my faith and thus I do wish to see other's come into relationship with Christ (you know that whole "go ye therefore" thing in the Bible). However, do I judge others and base my entire relationship with them on evangelistic purposes? No. One of the greatest gifts God has given us is free will, in fact, without free will everything we are talking about falls apart. I respect, just as God has designed it to be, that people have the freedom and the ability to reject him and live their life as they see fit. I love, value, relate to, and learn from others regardless of their spiritual beliefs. It would be foolish of me to limit my relationships with people solely on their spirituality or lack thereof. My goal is to accept people as they are, treat them with dignity and respect, and seek out how I might serve or support them in the context of our relationship.
Besides, if I do happen to get down about it, I know a pretty good therapist. ;)
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to address the questions/comments that had been made. :)
No, sorry, you cannot have that one. "Altruistic" does not coincide with "vanity and self glorification". In my filthy heathen state of unsaved gracelessness, I still do things for which my only reward is a smile. And even when I do have an ulterior motive ("you can return the favor at your leisure, to me or to someone else"), how does that detract from my having done well and good by someone else?
I find this statement utterly appalling. Do those who sacrifice themselves for others do so from selfish motives?
I agree. There is so much wrong with the original statement in addition to your point. I consider "goodness" to get your spot in heaven the ultimate in selfishness. Also, what about gods other than Jesus, are the good things performed in their name just as "selfless"?
Ok, good questions and thoughts. Let me explain/expound upon my statement. The bolded part below seems to be what is drawing the most reaction.
An accurate understanding of original sin does not mean that man is completely "evil" in the sense that we are incapable of doing works that would be considered "good" or altruistic. The human spirit is capable of many good things, but without an accurate understanding of who God is and our relationship to him these good works become nothing but acts of vanity and self glorification that serve only to advance pride and promote self-reliance.
I am not speaking about conscious motivation within an individuals actions/behavior, although that could be true as we all know people do at times act out of selfish and prideful intentions.
I'm talking about a theological understanding of man's state before God. For those that do not believe in a higher power or absolute truth, man, in and of himself, is the highest order of existence/being/evolution, etc. etc.. Thus, any and all accomplishments of man ("good works") are then viewed as self evident truths to this proposition. Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
I'm in a "helping profession" and work daily with people who seek to support and serve others. Many do this out of the "goodness of their own heart" and genuinely do not seek any form of return for their efforts. On a human level these actions are noble and sacrificial and I applaud them. However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God.
Please understand, this doesn't mean that the positive results of these actions are meaningless. For example, giving food to the homeless is a sacrificial act that does help people in need, but it will in no way earn you "points" with God. The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
It's like I told someone recently in a conversation we were having. I don't stay true to my wife because being unfaithful to her would be the morally wrong thing to do. I could care less about the moral principle of marital faithfulness. My motivation for staying true to my wife is that I have an intimate loving relationship with her and I would never want to hurt her or damage that relationship in any way.
Which takes us into rougher territory. If works are relatively insignificant in the scheme of salvation, your absolute moral code starts to crumble and fall in on itself. For, why should a believer bother to follow it if the saviour is always near at hand to forgive and redeem?
You may not realize it Sydde, but what you are saying is still along the lines of a works based relationship with God and that is not what the Bible teaches. It's not about a revolving door of "messing up" and and then asking for forgiveness. Christ death paid the price in full for all sin (past, present, and future). What matters is the condition of your heart before him and the intimacy of your relationship with him. Within that context are you seeking your own way including your own selfish desires or are you seeking to be the servant leader he wants you to be. The examples you gave in your post were all of people being selfishly motivated for their own gain.
In light of the examples of history (perhaps including those in the bible itself), how can you say that religion has made anyone a better person than they would have been? To me, it looks like religion has made the world a worse place than it might have been without it.
I'd think you would agree that people like Mother Theresa were able to successfully live out their faith with the goal of bringing glory to God while serving others. She's just the first example that pops into my head, but there are countless others. Again, it's not about "religion" making us "better people", that's a selfish manner of thinking. My relationship with God is not about me, it's about him.
"Many people mistake our work for our vocation. Our vocation is the love of Jesus."
"There is always the danger that we may just do the work for the sake of the work. This is where the respect and the love and the devotion come in - that we do it to God, to Christ, and that's why we try to do it as beautifully as possible."
~ Mother Theresa
Every time I hear about how we are naturally selfish and corrupt, I hear the utterer trying to apologize for their own faults by expanding them upon all others. As a counselor, you should be familiar with the mechanism called "projection".
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
Yet, again, the absolutes get bent. When believers run up against a moral wall that divides them from their goals, they seek the counsel of a cleric. The cleric typically sympathizes with the believer's plight and very often finds a way to interpret the scripture to turn the question to the believer's favor. So you have your absolutes, but they are also flexible. What good then are they, that they can be molded to suit your needs? How is this better than situational ethics (logic, reason and compromise), other than to employ scholars in the service of the almighty?
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God. When Christ was crucified he tore the temple veil representing that his sacrifice has made the way for man to have a direct relationship with God, no human intermediary is required. As far as prooftexting or manipulating scripture for your own personal motives due to a presenting dilemma, well, I'm sure you already know my answer to this based on my previous comments. Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
I have had more than a third of a century (from teenage years) to develop my philosophy and unbeliefs, and you are obviously quite steadfast in yours, so yes, there can be little doubt of the mexican stand-off. Does it trouble you? As hoary and mulish as I may be, I still find merit in these discussions, because they draw things out into the light that I had not bothered to look at. You do teach me things, though they are almost certainly not the things you intend. I hope you in some way also benefit, it would be a shame to think this only leads you to despair.
Fret not my friend. I think there is extreme merit in these discussions and I appreciate the respectful way in which many of us here are able to engage each other on such topics.
As far as me being troubled or in "despair" the answer to your question is both yes and no. I do seek to consistently and genuinely live out my faith and thus I do wish to see other's come into relationship with Christ (you know that whole "go ye therefore" thing in the Bible). However, do I judge others and base my entire relationship with them on evangelistic purposes? No. One of the greatest gifts God has given us is free will, in fact, without free will everything we are talking about falls apart. I respect, just as God has designed it to be, that people have the freedom and the ability to reject him and live their life as they see fit. I love, value, relate to, and learn from others regardless of their spiritual beliefs. It would be foolish of me to limit my relationships with people solely on their spirituality or lack thereof. My goal is to accept people as they are, treat them with dignity and respect, and seek out how I might serve or support them in the context of our relationship.
Besides, if I do happen to get down about it, I know a pretty good therapist. ;)
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to address the questions/comments that had been made. :)
BornAgainMac
Mar 29, 04:40 AM
Maybe they should just have Candlestick park for a separate event for people that just want to see the keynote.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar