I agree with you on all counts.

To add a little more to your arguments: In the times of Isaiah, the current corrupt greedy humans wanted to only refer to dead prophets that they could misinterpret to their hearts’ content.

There is a guy who was the founder of Less Wrong that summarized religion vs science like this: if God spoke once and every generation after is less enlightened, then following religion sucks. If science allows you to stand on the shoulders of those who came before where you are continuously becoming less wrong then you can actually do good and become better. Note that I am paraphrasing hard.

Religion that I accept is when there is both individual communication from God and collective leadership from someone who has communication from God. This handles edge cases like when you can’t feel God because of “loud hormones/feelings/pain” when you can go to leadership. It also handles you growing at your own pace and creating a personal collection of writings that are like a “you specific scripture”.

Religion lacking these traits leads to you being further from God than your parents.

Seeking religion has risks: there is a real risk of “blind leading the blind”. Good luck if you choose to pursue religion because the standard used for a godly leader was last defined as a prophet/apostle by Jesus with specific rituals to give authority. The catholic church which curated the bible says they never lost authority. All other Christian religions have to make peace with how authority to get answers on behalf of others is obtained.

Have peace on your journey.

I generally try to leave room for everyone at the table, and I think that God can still be worth worshipping. Here is my thought process:

In mathematics there are set theory theorems that prove that some infinities are bigger than others. Therefore a all powerful god (considered infinity over all this observable spacetime) is still progressing (increasing if choosing good) and regressing ( slowing the rate of increase or decreaseing) if choosing evil.

We humans were given the knowledge of good and evil at some point while growing up. We are to be joint heirs with christ (and what power and authority does christ inherit from various ways?). Therefore we humans know and can choose evil or good with infinite side effects some day.

I think/speculate that an infinite god would place hard limits on evil, but I don’t know how that would look like. Therefore if there are hard limits then the definition of this system is one that cannot go to shit.

If the process of creating “good” human-children/heirs with infinite side effects requires real choice (not strawman choice) between good and evil, then how could God create this spacetime to allow this?

I think a tendency toward judging choices and choosing good over evil are the preffered properties that are being selected for. I also think these are Emergent properties of neural nets (i think human intelligence are at least partially from neural nets from physical neurons).

I have greater capacity for evil because I know better. I can see where you come from and I respect it. Please poke holes in my theories where there are issues.

I want to use an analogy. If you have a landlord who seeks rent every month and you don’t give it one month, then you get kicked out and if you can’t transport your stuff on time then it gets trashed.

If that landlord made an exception, then the full force of the law would require the exception to be applied equally. Soon enough the landlord would have his stuff turn to shit.

However if a buddy spotted your rent, then asked you to simply remember him and try to do better, then the landlord could retain the perfect administration and the perfect justice, and your buddy could be able to chill with you in cool places.

Most of the time I hear about God the father being perfect justice like the landlord and Jesus being able to extend mercy from the suffering so he can provide mercy if you promise to do better.

Simply saying “why not have no rules if you make the rules” is a good response, but there are probably some side effects if there are not rules maintained.

Umm, I think his dad had strong genes, he just “looked like a common man” but could have had black, white, Asian, Polynesian features. Assuming his dad was not, then probably this would be “historically accurate” for someone born of two jews

I had to do some antidepressants when I missed sleep this long for a few days. It screwed me up for weeks

Building off of this, some Japanese households will bathe then towel off and let the next person bathe in the same water and shower off after. Therefore there is a 2 stage cleaning cycle.

I don’t have direct experience so call me out if I heard wrong.

As a native speaker, I will try to answer without being pedantic with a dictionary: to be passive aggressive is to answer with an unusual assumption and to act like the other party should have known all along.

E.g. if you want someone to leave and it is snowing, say “I just cleaned off the snow from your car so you can make it home safe. When do you plan on leaving?” This places an expectation and social pressure to accept the gift of cleaning the snow by leaving soon.

E.g. if you want to leave work at 5pm daily and your boss knows this and adds a frivolous mandatory meeting to the office calendar. You can take notes in the meeting then at the end send the email with notes to the recipients and say “this meeting could have been an email with no knowledge lost”. This implies that your boss did a disservice by wasting everyone’s time when they could have just used a secretary and an email and let you keep to your informal time to leave boundaries.

Good luck figuring out and understanding the actual definition!!!

No, I think his crime was that he wanted to take away the whole purpose of life aka living with choice between good and evil. Then the icing was that he wanted God’s glory to be given to him.

My understanding of the purpose of life is that we have no memory of before, we are faced with plausible good and evil choices, and finally we get some hardware that lasts (physical body). There is some irony that the option for evil comes first from lucifer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decree_770?wprov=sfla1

I beg to differ, and i dont consider altering sex ed to be full evil. When people have a lot of money and power and political influence they can do some bad unethical things. Things like requiring “the correct race” to breed and “the incorrect race” to have forced military drafts and mobilizations. It’s right now easier for other immediate goals to … not go that route yet. Let the robots and automation catch up to the depopulation is my guess.

I learned something today about something removed 35 years ago.

Planning my additional research, for someone alive to have gone to the temple and have done these, they would have to be at least 55ish. I’ll try to find someone to talk about it.

I’m curious. The temple has 4 rituals

1. baptism on behalf of your ancestral dead
2. ritual washing
3. promising 5 commandments that are above a regular baptisms promises to gain access to pass through to God’s dwelling with power.
4. marriage for all eternity.

Mormons dance around temple and associated rituals being sacred, not secret, so the command to not cast pearls before swine applies; but certain promises are not to share signals that show you made the extra promises, so just to be sure, mormons treat it all temple info as secret unless they actually thought about the words of the rituals.

I have been able to talk to Mormons outside of temples in pretty deep detail because I was respectful (not mocking).

Please be specific, what part seems to pantomime suicide? I’m thinking baptism on behalf of ancestors?

Shrug

I met two people who hate seatbelts to this day: a old coworker and a pregnant woman. Both were able to wear without complaint with a large binder clip releaving the tension (on the belt at the shoulder)

I memorized the following: “Port wine is red, and none is left in the morning”

Therefore Port - Left and Red and the other “Starboard” is Right and Green.

Having retirement shares as the same shares as the company that one is working at seems to be a huge concentration of risk. If you go out of business, then people lose both current active income and future passive income. I hope that your staff diversify away that risk.

Regarding “retaining control” there are a number of stakeholders that almost never “retain control”.

• customers have no direct control over your strategic direction, but they have indirect vote with dollars. Companies will often hire a “FP&A analyst” to try to guess the trends and the ways that a customer will need to be, but often you need straight up contact with customers (interview a random 25 customers each quarter about questions key to your competencies and areas of frustration before the FP&A guy starts crunching numbers and saying that “this is where the market is” in a garbage in and garbage out manner)
• employees (not management) have no direct control over your strategic direction, but they have an indirect effect on productivity and profits. In my opinion, there should be a benefit like “donation to a office worker union” that represents employees but does not actually make them salt/unionize in your office unless you start the path of enshittification.
• regulators have no direct control over your strategic direction, but they can dry up your supply or your demand with hurdles to jump over. Spending a little bit of money to have a seat at the table in regulations that are directly applicable to your business is an important civic duty of businesses. If you have legal counsel on a retainer, then they should be able to give you a summary of laws and regs that are being considered so you can make your voice heard.
• vendors have no direct control over your strategic direction, but they can produce synergies or referrals if you treat them right. Keeping a pulse on your vendors and being willing to take an insurance policy out incase a crucial vendor will cause you to lose revenue if they fail is a good business.
• Hedge against stupid risk - try to match your variable revenues to variable expenses. Also try to match your fixed revenues to fixed expenses. Example: if you have a lease on a building that costs a fixed amount no matter what monthly, then try to have that office serve recurring contract customers at least equal to the cost of rent. You can then spend the rest of capacity on Variable revenue that correlates closer to the variable expenses like salaries of salespeople.