My stepson is always playing his guitar, how can I make it disappear?
Original Question
What are the reactants in the formula Pb+2HCl→PbCl2+H2?
My stepson is always playing his guitar, how can I make it disappear?
Original Question
What are the reactants in the formula Pb+2HCl→PbCl2+H2?
You seem to think the bible says the Sabbath need not be kept because of the new covenant, however Matthew 5:17-18 contradicts that view, because Jesus says that the law hasn't changed. Also if you read carefully you will notice that even in some passages where he's critic of Sabbath, it is directed at the way people do it, and not the act itself.
You're missreading what you quoted. Regarding Jesus a person can be in one of 3 states, for, against or neutral. Your quote says
For the one who is not against us is for us.
Meaning neutral counts as counts as for, therefore Jesus is not against like you claimed. If you would like to keep arguing he's against then quote Matthew 12:30 which is the exact opposite, i.e.
He who is not with Me is against Me
You can't quote something that literally says God told David to number people and claim that's not what it means. He didn't tempt, there's no ambiguity he said "Go number Israel".
Again, you're fidgeting meaning, when someone says the sum is X but I didn't included Y they mean that the actual number is larger than what he said. You're shoe fitting an explanation to try to make it fit.
And yet in John 18:33 he's very chatty, and always replies.
And yet, several times in the bible he regrets what he did, which is only possible by a creature capable of change. Regret means that he would do it differently now, so for example in 1 Samuel 15:10-11 when he said he regrets having made Saul King he means he wouldn't do it now, therefore he has changed.
Also since you quoted something that also tells that Jesus can't change, then he can't be tempted nor die, since that requires change. Therefore Satan never had a chance to tempt him in the mountain, which makes it pointless, also he didn't die when crucified which is a problem to the whole Christianity idea.
Like you quoted God is jealous, but also jealousy is a sin, and God can't be near sin, so he can't be near himself. You can't claim he's a special kind of jealous, jealousy as a whole is listed as an obvious sin in Galatians 5:20, there's no "except when Jealousy is based on passion"
But also he tests followers, for example Abraham. Those being tested can obey or not, not obeying god is a sin, therefore asking someone to do something they don't want is tempting them to sin.
Answer me these citing the bible verse you're using to justify your answer:
The Bible contradicts itself in multiple places, so that's keeping up with the theme.
I literally couldn't care less whether you like the book or not, I'm expressing my reasoning for not liking the writing, you're not forced to agree, nor am I saying that's the reason you didn't liked it. Chill out man.
I didn't expect you to justify it, I'm just saying the book is old and took an unconventional approach to storytelling, it is to be expected that that writing style would not go well with everyone.
I mean, I liked it, but it is a weird book, I don't think everyone will like it, but part of it's appeal is how nonchalant it is about its weirdness. Not sure if the translations capture it, for example I don't think the beginning of the book has the same impact in English: "Many years later, in front of the firing squad", in Spanish that phrase is very weird, it's the continuation of another phrase, it's similar to opening a book and the first page starting with something like "of those, the one of his father taking him to see ice was the most cherished", it makes you pause and look at the previous empty page thinking you've missed the actual first page.
But if anyone is thinking on reading it, do so with a pencil and start a family tree, the book covers 100 years of a family where everyone has the same names over and over.
Well, what do you expect from a compilation of letters from a half frozen scientific explorer telling the tale of how he found an almost dead guy who tells him the story of when a monster told him how a family taught a foreigner to speak and read. Of course the writing would suffer, at one point you're so many layers deep that you have to wonder if Inception took inspiration from it.
Honestly, 2% cut is nothing. If you like your new job better for whatever reason, less stressful, more fulfilling, whatever, 2% is less than nothing, your personal life matters and should weight in.
I don't know about your career paths, but I could see it being a problem if there was opportunity to grow in the old job but not on the new one. But everything else being the same, an insignificant pay cut to do something you like significantly more is a win in my book.
Not really, especially if you're a foreigner it sounds more like you're mixing your genders than doing it on purpose.
There are better ways to insult masculinity/femininity that clearly state your purpose.
It strongly depends on what you want to offend, where the person is from and the gender. Spanish is spoken in many places, and so has many, many variants. For example calling a gay porteño "puto" is just another Tuesday for him, telling it to a very homosexual Spaniard might be the worst insult ever, telling it to a Mexican he might be lost waiting for the actual curse since they use puto as an emphasis, e.g. "puto chingón".
Also Spanish is a gendered language, I can't even think of a curse that doesn't rely on knowing the receiving end gender, since all have masculine and feminine form. With all of that being said, I think the safest bet would be "Hijo/a de puta", every place I know of uses this curse, and even if one doesn't it's very self understanding (unlike chingón, boludo, or gilipollas which are mainly use in their own countries and people from others might not even be fully aware of them)
Dude, the guitar, not the kid.