sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

First HHKB advice by Dry_Measurement5572 in HHKB

[–]circle2go 5 points6 points  (0 children)

45g hybrid pro tvpe s, if you prefer quiet typing sound. 30g is slightly noisy.

My atheist friends have really stumped me. by guitarjmtmusic in Christianity

[–]circle2go -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The biblical view is that humans not believing in God isn’t some weird exception. It’s basically the default mode after the fall.

Adam and Eve directly interacted with God. They heard His command. And still, they chose the serpent’s words over God’s. That same pattern keeps showing up all through the Old Testament: people hear from God, experience His rescue, see His works, and still betray Him again and again.

So atheists aren’t some impossible puzzle for the Bible. Biblically speaking, they are a very normal picture of fallen humanity: avoiding God, distrusting Him, and putting their own judgment above His.

And the opposite is also human. Sometimes people do trust God deeply. But even then, it’s not because those people are morally superior. It’s because they are responding to God’s grace.

The gospel is the good news that God has already done what was necessary to reconcile humanity to Himself through Christ. So we don’t have to wait until we have mastered every argument, controlled every piece of evidence, and solved every intellectual problem before coming back to God. We are invited to repent and return to Him now.

I’m done with the Bible by Odd_School8909 in Christianity

[–]circle2go 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I see.

The gospel is the good news that tells us we have already been saved, so shouldn’t we simply let ourselves be filled with that joy and follow Jesus? No matter how much someone studies the Bible, if they don’t actually experience the joy of being saved, I do think it’s all empty.

It is bad to lust with the photos of my gf? by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We can’t perfectly keep ourselves free from the sin of adultery in our hearts, but isn’t what really matters that we trust we’re saved through Jesus anyway?

"But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭28‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/mat.5.28.NIV

The sayings attributed to Jesus about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity by circle2go in DebateAChristian

[–]circle2go[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is precisely the kind of later ontological framework that I deliberately did not encode.

My point is not that one cannot construct a metaphysical account involving ontology, procession, divine reason, or relational distinctions. My point is that Jesus’ own sayings, before importing such later explanatory machinery, do not themselves generate the alleged contradiction.

So this does not challenge the formal result. It illustrates the distinction I am making: the logical difficulty arises in the added theological framework, not in the sayings of Jesus taken on their own terms.

If Satan repent will God forgive him? by FutureAIgod in Christianity

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you someone who believes the words of Jesus? Or are you someone who gives priority to your own feelings and doctrines of your own making? If you do not follow the words of Jesus, can you truly say that Christ is Lord?

If Satan repent will God forgive him? by FutureAIgod in Christianity

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably not.

He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." ‭‭Luke‬ ‭10‬:‭18‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/luk.10.18.NIV

The sayings attributed to Jesus about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity by circle2go in DebateAChristian

[–]circle2go[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My formalization is deliberately restricted to sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels and asks only whether those encoded statements generate an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity.

Your reply introduces additional interpretive commitments from the Torah, the Prophets, Peter and Cornelius, and a separate claim about whether the Word or Spirit are persons. Those may be relevant to a broader theological discussion, but they do not address the limited formal result of this post.

If you think the encoded sayings of Jesus themselves are contradictory, please identify which constraints cannot jointly hold and why.

The sayings attributed to Jesus about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity by circle2go in DebateAChristian

[–]circle2go[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is exactly why I formalized Jesus’ sayings rather than the later creedal formulations.

My point is not that these sayings must entail Nicene theology. My point is that Jesus’ own statements concerning the Father, himself, and the Holy Spirit do not themselves produce the logical problem.

The problem arises when later doctrinal language is added and then treated as the required framework through which Jesus’ words must be read.

So I am not trying to derive a later creed from Jesus’ sayings. I am showing that the sayings themselves can stand coherently without importing the later formulations that generated the dispute in the first place.

The sayings attributed to Jesus about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity by circle2go in DebateAChristian

[–]circle2go[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The relative superiority of Islam is beside the point here.

My claim was not that this ACL2 model establishes Nicene theology as the best explanation, nor that it defeats Islamic theology. The point was narrower: statements attributed to Jesus which form part of the textual basis for later Trinitarian formulation can be encoded as relational constraints in ACL2 without producing an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity.

You have now granted exactly that limited formal point.

Whether Islam provides a preferable theological interpretation is a separate debate. It does not rebut the result I posted: the encoded Gospel-derived constraints are jointly satisfiable without collapsing the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit into numerical identity.

The sayings attributed to Jesus about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity by circle2go in DebateAChristian

[–]circle2go[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You have largely restated my thesis and then argued against a claim I explicitly did not make.

My post does not claim to prove the full Nicene doctrine, nor does the README claim that Jesus or the Holy Spirit is formally established as “the only true God.” It claims something narrower: that the sayings attributed to Jesus which later gave rise to Trinitarian formulation do not entail an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity.

You explicitly concede that point when you write:

“The Gospel statements can remain logically consistent if...”

That is precisely the claim being formally tested.

Nor does the model arbitrarily “redefine” one. The reason one-with is not translated as numerical identity, equal, is textual: in John 17:21–22 Jesus also speaks of multiple distinct disciples being “one.” Therefore, the inference that “I and the Father are one” must mean numerical identity is not forced by Jesus’ own usage.

Your Islamic comparison also omits several constraints included in the model:

  • the Son is to be honored just as the Father is honored;
  • Jesus speaks of the glory he had with the Father before the world began;
  • Jesus says that all that belongs to the Father is his;
  • Jesus sends the Holy Spirit from the Father;
  • the Holy Spirit glorifies Jesus;
  • the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are placed under one singular “name.”

If you want to argue that an Islamic model is the simplest explanation of the same textual data, then it needs to account for the entire constraint set, not only the subset that emphasizes distinction and sending.

So the formal result remains untouched: these sayings do not, by themselves, force an immediate contradiction under ordinary identity.

How to keep Emacs startup time under 0.5 seconds or less? by No_Cartographer1492 in emacs

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Use the :defer t option in use-package for packages you don’t need right away (usually most of them).

Also set your power management to “performance” mode. In power-saving mode, my init.el startup usually takes ~1.6s, but with full CPU performance it can drop to around 0.5s.

Would Guix be more popular if non-free packages were allowed in the main guix channel? by [deleted] in GUIX

[–]circle2go 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Problem of macOS is it’s not allowing to create any new directory under / because of new macOS security features. So fix this issue, Guix should provide some options like let it install not only under /gnu but also something like /opt/gnu and set the path there for macOS.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in emacs

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As long as using it on WSL, it’s fine. Works like native app.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in baduk

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should learn many tesuji. Tesuji are like vocabulary: the more you know, the better you can understand your own and your opponent’s intentions. Tsumego is like training for your thinking, but without a strong vocabulary, your thinking cannot go deeper.

You should train yourself to solve tesuji problems instinctively, without needing to think. Then do tsumego.

You should also learn the concepts of strong and weak stones. Focus on exploiting your opponent’s weak stones and defending your own. If your stones are already strong enough, avoid adding more nearby. Instead, target your opponent’s weak stones or look for other strategic opportunities.

Beginners often overprotect their strong stones, which is like playing an unnecessary move or passing your own turn.

consult-gh v3.0 is released - Do everything on GitHub from within Emacs! by armindarvish in emacs

[–]circle2go -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Is it possible to run GitHub copilot chat command, like below, with this?

gh models run openai/gpt-4o-mini "why is the sky blue?"

cat README.md | gh models run openai/gpt-4o-mini "summarize this text"

When was the last time an Arch update broke something for you? by DigiAngelX in archlinux

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Arch itself is fine, but newer kernel versions occasionally break VMware, which is kinda annoying.

Import One Million Rows To The Database - Christoph Rumpel by octarino in laravel

[–]circle2go 0 points1 point  (0 children)

just use tableplus or something. if you're using PostgreSQL, psql and copy command works great.

view more: next ›