Even if it was truly was, humans are still faillible:

• the texts are transcripted thousands of times, and errors made during transcriptions are eventually reproduced.
• the texts can be modified voluntarily during retranscriptions, maliciously or not.
• parts of texts are lost and found again.
• texts reference other extinct texts or what was considered common knowledge that was not written down. So we can only infer from there.
• Hebrew uses an abjab alphabet, which means no vowels, so certain written words can be different depending on what vowels you ascribe to them.
• texts are translated by people with biases and objectives as to what it should convey (like the US Evangelicals with the NIV).
• etc.

So even if the original text was given divinely, it would end up being distorted.

This is why I’m not comfortable saying the Bible is okay with abortion. It can be interpreted that way, for sure, but it’s not a definite statement.

It really feels like Reddit circa-2023, particularly the bad ways. Lemmy.world is the worst for that.

It might, but that’s not enough to say the Bible is okay with abortions, and the rest of the texts might contradict that interpretation anyway. The NIV is pretty unique in translating directly into miscarry. If I search for those passages in English right now on search engines, I’m not even guaranteed to end up on that version, it took me a few tries.

I’m guessing this is the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. Which is not a consensus at all.

I’m not sure if you’re aware, but the Old Testament is written mostly in Hebrew and each passage has had thousands of interpretations and translations over time.

My does not say this at all was too strong in light of the different versions, but you can make the Bible say a lot of things.

Look at other translations, including in languages other than English and you’ll see that the “miscarry” is pretty unique to the NIV.

You can check out the Wikipedia article on this passage to get an idea as to how complicated it is.

It does not say or imply that at all. Maybe in some translations/adaptations/interpretations, but not in most of them, and there is no full consensus.

I agree with this. Overwatch 2 is FOMO galore. It stressed me out.

With Overwatch 1, most content came back later, with exceptions for the charity skin and a few small things.

The law can be broad with allowances to define specifics by decree, executive order or the equivalent.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I recommend this Mastodon account for more retro ads: https://botsin.space/@gamemagprintads

deleted by creator

Are you open to translations? Élisabeth Vonarburg is a great author, and her older books have been translated into English.

YouTube is still gonna recommend disgusting videos in “For You”, even if you report them constantly.

Is the film just completely deleted, or can it leak eventually?

KHTML was the basis of WebKit and then Blink/Chromium, so the community did make something. It was just overtaken by the corporate projects, for those same reasons you mention.

I honestly don’t assume anything about his role at Blizzard. His nickname was with Afrasiabi’s on a World of Warcraft item. Also, on the game development side, the Overwatch leadership team’s misguided obsession with making Overwatch into a MMO has significantly hampered the evolution of the game.

Anyway, better to avoid parasocial stuff regardless. I liked his updates and videos, and that’s it.

Recording my next fart would be a better use of energy than Bitcoin.

I think it’s okay, I would have voted against it, but they really need to be careful with their website design.

The first time I went to their website, I left immediately because I got a big pop-up with 404. Tried again, same thing. Third time, I saw it was just a pop-up asking for then-optional registration.

Thankfully, they changed their pop-up design since then.

The article mentions all that, but it seems that no one has read it.