I know that, but the idea that behind these different names of God are different authors/schools is not accepted by mainstream historians nowadays.

In this particular case, it seems evident that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 have different authors, but not the Elohist and the Jahvist, in that you can’t necessarily link this two passages to others in the Bible which would use the same names for God.

I tend to see in Genesis 1, with the emphasis on the fact that the man and the woman are created as the same time (verse 27) an answer to Genesis 2, which in that case would have been older. In the Bible, a lot of texts are answers to other texts. It totally breaks the idea of inerrancy, but it makes the Bible a very interesting polyphony.

Terms like Elohist are not used anymore by scholars. The documentary hypothesis collapsed in the 70s…

Fantasy is right-leaning while SF is left-leaning. Easy peasy.

I think it was from Asterix and the Secret Weapon, but I lost this book so I can’t check ^^.

There’s no time of Moses. Moses is a mythical character (a lot of Christian like myself has no problems with the findings of archeology).

That’s normal: a free society has laws, even anarchism has rules. Freedom is not anomie.

The problem is that many religions, instead of proposing rules in order to better one’s spiritual life, or instead of thinking of then as a means to an end, make rules an end in themselves. Rules can be freeing, but if they’re their own end, they become confining.

If only certain things matter, then nothing matters. I prefer a God who lets us be free.

No need for toilet paper 😅

And before that, pooping was a social function .

I don’t know why, I find it far easier from my computer. KDE Connect saved my (professional) life.

So how would the judges be appointed under this system and why is it better than having them chosen from the people?

By competition and diploma. A judge is a legal technician. Why elect him on political bases? We do not elect an engineer on political criteria, we take the one who seems the best among the candidates.

If the current system hasn’t prevented political influence, then the method of choosing obviously isn’t guaranteeing unbiased judges anyway, so what’s the point in keeping it as opposed to elected judges?

What’s the point to elect them?

Strong and diverse press, strong and enforced rules against politically motivated decisions. A judge should know that, if they don’t strictly follow the law, they’ll lose their job. This won’t make the thing perfect, but far better than officially political judges.

I will find you.

Oui, mais dans les régimes autoritaires, les paiements sont contrôlés. Et l’utilisation est souvent illégale.

Je trouve que c’est une bonne idée, mais ça résout pas tout.

Alors oui, mais en même temps Mediapart est un journal payant. Donc sauf si on se faut payer l’abonnement, ce n’est pas très discret.

The character is the only one with sunken cheeks; and thinness is a stereotype of poverty; the walls reveal bricks in places, so the house is not properly maintained, another stereotype; the tablecloth follows a fashion, the Vichy, dating from the 30s and associated with the elderly, and the fact of using old and/or outdated clothes/furniture/decor is yet another stereotype. For an image that has few details, that’s a lot.

I didn’t add anything. I just know how to.read an image. Elementary school stuff.

You’re right sorry. So it was envy. But I don’t think it’s the same kind of envy, coming from someone who also left poverty, and felt that too.

It wasn’t envy. It was a normal reaction to an unjust situation.

Look at the walls.