truefusion

Depends on the religion you're comparing it with. Many religions try to explain how life works, this is what Science does. However, some of the explanations in these religions are said to be direct revelations, but some are said to be known through observation. Indeed, but when it deals with life, the one that learns may not be the one that was acting but the observers. However, "trial and error" implies that the person knew beforehand what they were getting themselves into. Of course, all of that knowledge is an a posteriori, or at least it's supposed to be. Or if you've really learned your lesson—don't do it ever again.

You can read in your dreams, maybe not whole books and stuff. I've read stuff in my dreams before: small things, and they were in English, too. But good luck remembering what you've read in your dreams, though. I can only remember that i've read a few words, but i can't remember which words they were.

Text within quote bbcodes do not give the user credits. However, by placing what needs to go into the quote bbcode, you help prevent any deduction of credits; that is, if you properly contribute to the forums, the topic or post that you made won't be dealt with a moderator or administrator. I sent it to the spam can 'cause i found that French source you got it from. The rules state not to plagiarize. In the Xisto Readme, there is a link that leads you to a topic about copyrights. In that topic, it explains that a translation of text does not do away with its copyright protection.

Number 1 looks like a drumkit mixed with the interior of a sports car. It's interesting, but i don't see myself placing my feet on there, and i don't see what all the "drums" can be used for. For number 2, i can't use a computer that far down—even if i were a gamer. Number 3, i hope the computer isn't hooked up to the treadmill. As for number 4, i'd hate to try and turn it into a desk. I would assume that the bed is what provides weight to keep the thing from tilting over. If i were to place my computer parts on there, i would expect the thing to fall over. Also, i hope that thing is built to reduce labor. Number 5, no comment.

He did not imply nor say any of those things. And they can use it as a ground for such a thing—a study will always be a study. Of course, that's to assume that the parent(s) taught themselves the right thing. When you think about the commands or teachings given to you, you can determine the reason(s) why they were given to you, on whether those things are useful, beneficial or just plain non-sense. The way i interpret the verse that this topic is based on is like this: Listen to your parents when they are correct. Back then, a lot of people did foolish things which literally cost them their lives. But foolish behavior, no matter what era you're in, can still cost you your life. And, just like the laws in the Bible, the laws established today in many countries are set to provide common sense; however, some people need to learn the hard way, but this hard way can literally cost you your life.

The problem with MySQL in your script is that you close the MySQL connection before you even do anything to access or modify the database. On, i would assume, line 11, you close the MySQL connection, but on line 18 you try to access the MySQL database with the mysql_query() function—this won't work. Although in PHP you don't have to use mysql_close(), but if you're going to use it, make sure it's at the end—after all other MySQL queries. I don't think that's possible, unless you want to do the work for them.

That error may be because the database information was not included in the PHP script that was trying to execute a MySQL query.

I have asked some of these questions before to certain scenarios in my life and have been able to answer them. I am unsure on whether or not you seek them to be answered, but if you want, i could attempt to answer some.

You're right: i did use Luke 3:22 to back Matthew 3:16 up, but not in the way you're saying. I quoted both because of how they both reference the Spirit: one says "Holy Spirit" the other says "the Spirit of God."—my intention here was to prove that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, not to prove God's omnipresence. The verses following those two were to prove God's omnipresence; i just had to first prove that the Spirit of God is the Holy Spirit. A bit ambiguous and patently impossible for him to do for every one who believes if he is not omnipresent which is why 1 John 3:24 becomes important to clarify this. I agree that it would be impossible for God to do so if He were not omnipresent. I see that John 14:23 can only be taken in its literal form, and i agree that the part "make our home with them" can be considered in two senses: use their home as home, or use their bodies as home. And yes, it makes perfect sense to use John's letters to clarify what is written in the Gospel of John. Although i didn't directly mention the Father itself or the Father's abilities in my previous post (nor did the context of the quote to your post mention the Father but God alone), i agree, the Holy Spirit is not the Father and vice versa (whether by purpose or other means), but the Spirit, as indicated in many areas of the New Testament, is the Holy Spirit, which in turn makes God omnipresent. I can understand why you believe the Father isn't omnipresent, as "the Father" in and of itself—that is, when left alone—is just a concept, a name, a title attributed to God because of how God works and acts and because believers in Jesus Christ are adopted by God. The purpose for the Father is different than the Holy Spirit's purpose, that is why the Father itself does not require to be omnipresent; but lack of requirement doesn't mean lack of something. Also, i have checked out Acts 2:2–4, and If i study the context of your statement, you're saying that the Father and the Holy Spirit have different purposes, which as i have mentioned agree, but that doesn't contradict anything i believe in. My intention in my previous post was not to correct but to provide insight. However, i am uncertain of what you declare as the Creation and what it has to do with the Holy Spirit or omnipresence or whatever else we've been discussing. If you could, please clarify, as the only reference i can think of that deals with the Spirit of God and creation is when God's Spirit was hovering over the waters. Also, if we go a few verses back from 1 Cor. 6:19 till we reach verse 11, it shows that Paul, the author of 1 Corinthians, agrees that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God.

There is a reason for Him to have omnipresence: Given certain verses (Matthew 3:16; Luke 3:22; John 14:23; 1 Corinthians 6:19), one can come to the conclusion that omnipresence is required in order to be capable of dwelling within hundreds of people. True, omnipresence isn't really needed for knowing things.

I'd say this is another one of those "blame the religion, for the followers are doing [this]" topics but no where in your post do you blame any religion. The way you spoke before and after this implied that you were limiting things to the USA. And although they said they were going to torture the poor fellow, they didn't command him to convert; they commanded him to thank Jesus, but that's not commanding him to convert. [1]If that ever happens, we'll find out, won't we? [2]Why, all answers to this question are relative. You really can't attribute anything to God that He Himself hasn't. [3]It may depend on how the media plays a role in the ordeal, if America were to be called to kill in the name of God, that is. But we'll see if it happens. [4]Assuming this is asked in general: No for everything after "attack them"—so long as this country we would be attacking is doing what the Nazi's did, and similar things. Outside the assumption that this is asked in general: You're assuming such would be the case; that is, you're, in my opinion, exagerrating. [5]What? What's going on now? Why, from what i've seen and heard, America has never dove into a war that didn't have a self-centered reason.

I personally find a PHP configuration with safe mode on to be annoying. It has also been removed in PHP 6. You can find out everything about PHP's safe mode here: http://de1.php.net/features.safe-mode

No need to find the name of the film, i've heard about this plenty of times (I think it was even mentioned on the BBC website, too). I have been skeptical for the following reasons: How does one know that the manuscript that reads 616 is the original, when there is only one that reads 616 surrounded by many 666 manuscripts? That is, i have seen no objective reasoning on why to conclude that the one that reads 616 is the original. Caesar existed during the time of Jesus, so that would mean that if this John existed a few centuries afterwards, this John lived for a few centuries along with Caesar. It assumes that John had a grudge against Caesar for placing John on the island; that is, they assume Caesar is the beast. Early church "fathers" were talking about this book near the middle of the 2nd century and on ward (Book_of_Revelation#Early_views). Meaning, if we were to count a few centuries back, that would mark John before 100 B.C., making the book of Revelation written before "the others." I have not seen how they came up with a numerical translation of Caesar's name nor the reasoning behind it. (There are other reasons for my doubt, but i can't remember them...) The only scientific data i see that can come from this is the way they dated the manuscript. I say, leave Science for non-religious things, and leave Theology to religious things. And although the book of Revelation mentions a "last battle," it also goes into deep description on how judgment will occur, the signs that come from it, where the Jews and Gentiles will be placed, who will get tossed in the "lake of fire" (a.k.a "the second death"), etc.—some of which can also be found in the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament, where Caesar was non-existent.

Remove :first-letter and modify a bit: h1.title {background: gold;}For background image: h1.title {background-image: url(path_to_image.ext);}Do note, however, that the golden background may cause some visual issues with the first letter of the H1 element with the title class.

You may have to make your own function or set up for this. But i did a quicky function that should work fine for your needs: function remove_element($arr, $val){foreach ($arr as $key => $value){if ($arr[$key] == $val){unset($arr[$key]);}}return $arr = array_values($arr);}You can rename the function if you want.

I'm not interested in receiving credits. Thanks for the offer, but i didn't help 'cause there was a credit reward. And good luck with that tutorial.

In the coding, what's before the gradual fader script? I mean, besides the 1: PHP script? Could be an echo statement that was missed or something.

I believe in God and what He has revealed. I believe the Abrahamic religion is the most consistent with life when compared to other religions. I believe everything has a reason for its existence—whether or not we know about it yet. I believe it is perfectly logical to believe in God. I believe in the Messiah, Jesus, and his resurrection. I'd continue, but i can't mention everything i believe in all in one go. Could you elaborate on why it shouldn't have been included? The Book of Revelation (a.k.a. the Revelations of John) goes into deep description on what the Book of Daniel mentions concerning the Last Day, so if the Book of Revelation shouldn't have been, then so shouldn't have the Book of Daniel—but they both exist. Is it because it talks about an ending with judgment? Is it because you believe it preaches falsehood? I can't think of any objective reason why it shouldn't be included.

Am i right to assume the GIMP? The Zelda wallpaper looks better small. I would recommend working with more colors for backgrounds and getting used to blending in renders. I don't really judge text, but a lot of people make things easy for them by placing text in front of a dark area of the sig and mixing up the colors for the text.

Voting for Kansukes. Interesting grunge, grid mix, matches well with the render. Nice contrast. Not fond of the extra darkness on the left side that gets overpowered by the bright right side, though.Coolcat's entry seems a bit "dry" to me, if you will. Interesting positioning of the text, though.

Nice work, like the gloss. Is that Bryce material? And i'ma assume Photoshop. You're an active user. We don't really get many, if any, wallpaper requests (i don't think i've ever seen one), but your sig work is good. I'd go with a yes.

Since i am currently in the process of making my own Ubuntu-based distro and will be including Flock as one of the browsers to choose from, i figured i'd make a tutorial out of how to install Flock manually, since there appears to be no package for it in Ubuntu's repository and many other popular distros, and it is said that only Ultima Linux has Flock available. For those that don't know what Flock is, rather than going into deep detail here, i'll just provide a link to the browser's site: http://www.flock.com/ And yes, to start, you're going to have to go to that link in order to download Flock for Linux. This whole process is relatively simple and easy to understand. However, this tutorial assumes that you know how to navigate to the directory where you've downloaded Flock to—whether it is by using the cd (change directory) command or using a GUI (a.k.a. "open terminal here"). After downloading Flock for Linux, navigate to that location in a terminal (i use Konsole), then type this in the terminal (or copy and middle click): CONSOLE sudo tar -C /opt -xzf flock-*.linux-i686.tar.gz This will extract Flock into the opt directory—yes, installation is just a simple extraction, just like Firefox. This directory is normally empty and is often used to install programs in. Since the opt directory is owned by root, we needed to use sudo in order to extract Flock there. Once you receive another prompt, we can start making a desktop entry for Flock. A desktop entry will allow Flock to show up in the system's menu; in this case, (K)(X)Ubuntu's menu. Type the following (or copy and paste) in the terminal: CONSOLE sudo nano /usr/share/applications/flock.desktop This will enter you into a terminal-based text editor. Copy the following into the terminal: [Desktop Entry] Version=1.0 Encoding=UTF-8 Name=Flock Comment=Flock Web Browser Exec="/opt/flock/flock" GenericName=Flock Web Browser Icon=/opt/flock/icons/mozicon128.png Path=/opt/flock StartupNotify=true Terminal=false TerminalOptions= Type=Application X-KDE-SubstituteUID=false X-KDE-Username= Categories=Network;Application; GenericName[en_US]=Flock Web BrowserAfter you've copied it all, hit Ctrl+X on the keyboard to exit. It'll then ask you if you want to save changes: hit "y" for yes. Then it'll ask for file name: hit enter on the keyboard since it's already there. And now you can close the terminal: manual installation complete. You should now see Flock available in your system's menu. How do I upgrade to a newer version when available? Simply remove the previous, old Flock archive, download the new release, and repeat command one (the one that extracts Flock into the opt directory). (You may, however, be able to upgrade it when the browser informs you that a new version is available—but i have yet to test this out.) Why install it in /opt and not in ~/ (user's home directory)? Although that'll work too, i based this tutorial on /opt just in case that user account gets deleted with its home directory, ruining the Flock installation for other accounts (if any). If you have any questions, ask here.

I'm not sure if the PHP file you attached was the original or modified one, but i'm attaching a modified one with escaped single quotes. index.template.php If it doesn't work now, then i don't know what's wrong with it. But i recommend editing your files in an editor that supports syntax highlighting. I'd recommend Geany.

I'm sure you could with CSS. I stopped caring a long time ago—even before i converted to Linux. My templates work great in Opera, Firefox and Konqueror; but i build for Opera regardless.

It's easier if you create a user ID that gets randomly generated every time a user logs in, and keep track of them like that—this is how i have it in some of my scripts. This way, if someone were to log into the same account, it would kick the previous user off. The only problem with this is if there's a "battle" (i.e. both kicking each other off simultaneously) that gets started from this, but i don't see that as a big enough problem to worry about. However, if you were to follow the suggestion provided by sonesay about keeping track of all logged in users, you could limit the session by IP address: if it doesn't match, deny access for the time being.