Perhaps outside engineers will start playing catch-up and adding clones of the proprietary features to an open source branch of SourceForge, but at best the open source version will still lag behind, and it may happen that it will always be so far behind as to be relatively crippled compared with the proprietary version.
I think that's far from certain. One of the premises of the BSD license is that even if someone does take the code and release a proprietary fork, the Open Source model has enough advantages that the community should be able to keep up and even surpass them.
gcc may not be the best compiler in the world, but it's open source. If there is a serious deficiency, it can be fixed without relying on a certain company. We know it will always be there.
Now, tying an Open Source project to a single proprietary compiler or tool is certainly a bad idea. I'm trusting proprietary tool makers less and less every day (based on how Borland is handling Kylix). But tying it to Open Source tools, especially popular ones, is not a problem.
Small college, lab assist, grunt PHP coder, start own business!
I went to a relatively small college and started my freshman year as a lab assistant. I learned some things about Novell (uugh) and networking DOS and Win3.1 computers (double uugh).
But after a couple years of that, plus my CS major, they got interested in me for more stuff. When the college finally got a Net connection and boughtt a nice Sun box to power it, I was the first student they taught UNIX to and became the assistent admin. Lots of fun!
After college I had a couple jobs at consulting companies, the later working with PHP and Perl and databases.
Then I decided what the heck, regular office jobs suck, lots more fun if I run the show myself. So that's what I'm doing. Bought a nice Linux box, put it up at a good colo place, started a Slash hosting and Web development business, and went from there.
I'm getting some customers and they seem to be happy. So if I ever do need to find a regular job for some PHB again (hopefully not) I'll have some references that know that I know something about Linux admin. And keeping a Linux box with several sites on the Net running smoothly is much better experience than installing Linux on a spare partition at home.
Thanks, looks like that is what I needed to know! I thought there was an env variable for setting the @INC, but couldn't find it with a quick look through the docs. It's in the FAQ though... sweet! I hope to have 2.2 up this weekend.:-)
I can do that (blatent plug). We're still at 2.0 and may be for some time, but eventually we'll get upgraded to 2.2 or 2.4.
Or if anyone can tell me how to run two versions on the same server we can start right away. Possibly by dedicating one httpd to 2.2 and having it on its own IP (which I could do) but then I'd have to figure out how to isolate the Slash.pm files from each other. I've heard it said that it can't be done, but there's probably a way...
What gets me is that the FAQ says PG drivers are only in the Enterprise version, while the feature matrix says they're in Enterprise and Pro. I asked in the Borland newsgroups and no one has clarified. Do you know?
That will make the difference of whether I upgrade or not, I think. I'm not paying for Enterprise, nor do i need it.
Well, one wonders if the public domain comment was a bloop by the reporter. How many reporters have called Linux "the public domain operating system", and we ALL know that Linux is NOT PD!
The eclipse.org site itself says that it will be released under an Open Source license "soon".
> Try Transgaming's Winex - they rewrote all of MS's DCOM to do the Inter Process Communication Alexandre was talking about.
Actually that's what I'm using. Just downloaded it yesterday!
Tried to install Hasbro's Interactive Risk and Risk II. Those are the only games I really really want bad. I just love that game, and the XFrisk AI sucks rocks. TEG is a bit like Risk and much better in the AI dept, but not QUITE the same.
Anyway, the original Risk installer starts, then hangs, and the Risk II installer aborts when it can't find a file.
For the record, I had Stardock's Entrepreneur running pretty much perfectly under Codeweavers wine several months ago. haven't tried again with WineX yet.
> You can afford $5 a month right?
Maybe if someone would hire me (independent Web/Linux consultant/developer).....
By far the biggest problem I've had with Wine is the install programs for Windows apps. Most simply don't work -- they either err out saying they can't find some file or DLL, or they'll just hang.
Once you get an.exe installed with its dependencies, however, Wine seems to handle it quite well.
I love traveling -- even seeing new airports and cities. Unfortunately, most "geek" jobs don't require any travel. The farthest I've been paid to travel as an employed programmer is to a lumber mill a mile from our office.
I for one would gladly take a programming job that required 75% or even more travel. (If it involved Linux of course.:-) )
So what's the big deal? Why do others not like it? I can see how it would hurt a social life, but you ARE home sometimes, and it gives you more opportunities to meet "in real life" cyberbabes you meet on the Net.:-)
Well, last quarter when they earned $600,000, they released Red Hat 7.1, which may have helped their sales numbers. There was no distro release this quarter.
However, 7.2 should come out shortly, and it will almost certainly drive their numbers up again.
Not that distros is all they sell, but it does help and could easily be the difference between quarters.
Anyone know if something like this might be possible or easy:?
Have a script that reads the Apache log in realtime. Whenever something gets cmd.exe or XXXX or NNNN or something like that, immediately block all communication with their IP with iptables?
>...so as to completely preclude rational discussion with a broader perspective.
Well, there's a place for rational discussion and endless philisophical arguments. Both sides (atheists and theologins) can do that quite well. But when one knows of God's existence (and I mean KNOWS), what point does all that play? When one has experienced a real God, arguments against His existence (or presence in our lives) have a way of becoming moot. I know you won't like that answer, but like I said, everything about God is different than people expect.
> Yes God is a sovereign being, but so are you
Cool, maybe I should go try to create a solar system or two...
> That being said I personally believe that God is a being either unaware of our conscience existance, or simply too complex an entity to be capable of our limited conscious thought
OK, so you do believe in some kind of God?
Anyway, that statement is a bit absurd. Why wouldn't a God that created us and the universe be able to understand us and our thoughts?
> The church is not God, yet it claims to be.
Well, mine doesn't. Some claim the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church as pretty infallable. I do not.
> and the another 10% to an organisation who spend it on amongst others things:
Yikes, I dunno where you got your ideas of how churches spend tithe money. Mine uses it to pay the pastors, keep up the buildings, send missionaries, and give help to community members who need it (benevolence fund).
As for attitudes towards women, the church (as in body of believers) is fairly progressive in that area. My church allows women to do anything but be senior pastor. I do fully agree with Biblical princiles such as the husband is the head of the house, but he should make all decisions in love for the wife and kids. Beyond that, I think that the Bible's description of the role of women is mostly tied to their early culture. There certainly were strong women in the Bible -- Ruth and Esther to name a couple.
> 1) Reconcile "dont want to push yadda yadda yadda" with "My job is....
What I mean is that I should speak to those who want to hear it, but don't interfere with those that wish to reject it. Christians have tried that in the past, it doesn't work, nor should it.
> Jesus may have told his disciples to go out and preach (did he, I can't remember?)
Yes, the Great Commission -- go preach the Gospel in all the world and make disciples and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit... and that is for us as well, not just the disciples.
>...my amazement that a group of people who have no problem beleiving the stories about Jesus, ie: virgin birth...
well what can I say... you believe the Bible or you don't. If Jesus was God incarnate, and the Gospel accounts are real accounts of His life, as I believe is the case, why should I not believe all that?
> eject out of hand, spirituality, esp, numerology (based on actual observed patterns over millenia), astrology (likewise), tarot reading, divination of any type, natural healing, etc.
That's what I mean by Satan's counterfeit miracles. God can also impart wisdom to people -- it has happened to me and many others I know. Why would you want to ask Satan with all those things when you can ask God?
> Leaving it up to God, however, ensures that no man will see it is done
Justice shouldn't be "left to God" -- He commanded us to see that it is done! (And yeah, I need to really see how I can improve in that area, for one)
> We have clearly evolved from the primate family of species on this planet.
I won't get into that. I think God could have used either 6-day creationism or evolution to put us here. While I tend to believe in the former, proof of evolution is definitely NOT proof against God
> Now, who told you to generalise and say humans have a longing for God?
That has pretty much been the case since ancient times. What culture has never had a religion?
> This book has changed so much from generation to generation, language to language, spin artist to spin artist that if there are any books that have lasted so long, this is by far the least consistant.
Whoa. Sure there have been translations, some more accurate than others, but I mean what the book SAYS -- from Genesis to Revelation. We do have fairly good ancient manuscripts for most if not all of it. And it all agrees on the character of God: He is holy, powerful, loving, disciplining, but also seeks vengeance for sin. His anger is quickly extinguished when one repents.
> you can say there are definately bits that are wrong, then you'll need to identify all of those bits
Perhaps so... I'm talking things like:
1) one account says Judas gave the blood money of Jesus back to the religious leaders, who bought the field in which he hung himself, another says he bought the field himself
2) One account says Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem, another says a colt.
Big deal? Not really in the grand scheme of things. So we need to look at what the Bible is consistent about, and it definitely is about the character of God and how we are to be saved (by faith in Jesus).
> The remainder of your post degraded into speculation
Huh? It's what I've seen and experienced and how I belive in God, and I think it's logical.
Ok, points taken. Thinking about Scripture for yourself is definitely a good thing.
Regarding 1 Cor 15 and the Resurrection:
v3,4: Resurrection (along with death and burial) is of first importance
v6-8: People who the resurrected Christ appeared to. The people Paul was writing to could have checked this out personally.
v14: "And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith."
and keep reading from there. Clearly, if anyone rejects the Resurrection, they might as well live like a pagan. And given that that's exactly what Bishop Spong does, it's hard to give him much, if any, credibility as a "Christian".
But sure, read the book. Can I also encourage you to read through the whole Bible if you haven't already done so? That will give you a foundation with which to judge Mr. Spong's writings. I'm doing that for the first time this year and it's really bolstering my confidence in it. Also perhaps get into some Max Lucado books -- he really writes great stuff.
In Christ (hard to believe I'm saying that on Slashdot!),
Micah
> But both leave enough up to you to let you choose interpretations that fit your end.
RE: Islam -- I just saw a Koran expert on the Fox News Channel who basically said Bin Laden is a sinner in his own religion by encouraging people to commit suicide.
RE: Christianity -- It's quite clear that Jesus teaches peace, not violence. He was the recipient of the most horrible kind of violence immaginable, yet he prayed for their forgiveness. There are acts of violence mentioned in the Bible, but nowhere does Jesus say that is how we are to live today. The main act of violence and destruction will come "in the day of the Lord" when everything will be pretty much annihilated by Jesus Himself and POSSIBLY with the help of His people. That has clearly not arrived yet, and it will be obvious to everyone when it does.
> Is one of the church's key teachings not that you must give your heart, mind , desire, 10% of your income, etc to the Lord?
Heart, soul, mind, strength -- yes. That's what Jesus said is the greatest commandment. And love your neighbor as yourself is right after that. Tithing is a Very Good Idea(TM) but is not a foundational teaching.
> Would that not constitute giving up your sovereignty to God through the church?
Yes, God is sovereign and therefore deserves our full being. The church is just the body of believers.
> Many of the 'heathens' you fail to consider the position of actually came from this background.
Yes, I'm aware of that.
For what it's worth, I don't think I'm "intolerant" and I don't want to push God on anyone who doesn't want Him. I recognize that religion is everyone's choice, and if they want to reject it they can. My job is only to stand up for Jesus to the best of my ability and do what Jesus commanded -- that is love my neighbor, forgive others, do justice, and of course preach the Gospel. Whether any particular person believes is really up to them and the Holy Spirit.
I fully see why people such as yourself find it hard to believe in the message. It *does* sound ridiculous if you look at it from a worldly perspective. Everything about God is totally opposite of what people expect. The last shall be first; the first last. He reveals Himself to the oppressed, not the powerful. Even the Jews expected a Messiah to come who would be politically powerful. They had no idea, even though it was prophesied, that He had to come from a normal family, suffer, and die.
In spite of how ridiculous it seems, I have no doubt about its truth. Everything about the human body and how and why we're here screams we have a Creator. We have intelligence, minds, consciences. Humans in general have a longing to know God (although some people have managed to quench that hole through their own desires).
But why Jesus? Well, the Bible is probably the most consistent book ever written, at least over the span of millennia, and on all the issues that are important. (I won't say it has NO contradictions, because there are a few minor ones, but they can generally be explained by the memorization practices of the Jews.) But about the character of God, the nature of Man, our need to be reconciled to God, and all that, is 100% consistent from Genesis to Revelation. I'm reading the Bible straight through for the first time this year -- I'm almost done and it has only bolstered my confidence in its consistency.
Then there's what I've seen. God does comfort people. He does heal people. He does miracles.
Then there's fulfilled prophesies. Israel returning as a nation is probably the biggest that we can see today. All other ancient cultures are totally destroyed, but not the Jews, God's "chosen" people.
Then there's evil. I really think the nature of evil today matches precisely how the Bible describes Satan. Satan is a liar, a theif, a murderor. His only goal is to destroy the knowledge of God and replace it with counterfeit crap. Take astrology and the occult for example. Those things have real drawing power, but they're not of God.
So I hope this gives you a better idea of where I'm coming from. If you chose to ignore or reject the message, I'll respect you for that. I just hope and pray that you'll give it serious thought before doing that!
> The next step is taking responsibility for your own thoughts and actions - we'll welcome you into the world of the conscious when you do, you know.
I have, believe me. Are you suggesting that just because my thoughts lead me to believe in God I'm not in the world of the conscious? That seems a tad short sighted. (Correct me if that's not what you're saying, but it sounds like it...)
> Do you perhaps feel that since you give your will to God, you are somehow worthy of better understanding man's relationship with a deity?
Maybe not more worthy. And no I can't understand it all. Better than others who don't accept God -- well, sure. My understanding of man's relationship with God is based on what the Bible says and on experiences.
> If you don't believe what the church says, then quite often you wouldn't comprehand God as a figure who can reveal himself.
I'm not sure if it's a matter of comprehending a God who can reveal Himself. He is just so different than anyone who doesn't know Him or believe in Him can possibly immagine. Either you are open to Him or you aren't. And He Himself makes it easier for some to open up to Him than others. No, i don't understand why that is, but it does appear to be true. I believe anyone can be saved, but some will have to make more sacrifices than others.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps outside engineers will start playing catch-up and adding clones of the proprietary features to an open source branch of SourceForge, but at best the open source version will still lag behind, and it may happen that it will always be so far behind as to be relatively crippled compared with the proprietary version.
I think that's far from certain. One of the premises of the BSD license is that even if someone does take the code and release a proprietary fork, the Open Source model has enough advantages that the community should be able to keep up and even surpass them.
That seems likely to happen at some point.
gcc may not be the best compiler in the world, but it's open source. If there is a serious deficiency, it can be fixed without relying on a certain company. We know it will always be there.
Now, tying an Open Source project to a single proprietary compiler or tool is certainly a bad idea. I'm trusting proprietary tool makers less and less every day (based on how Borland is handling Kylix). But tying it to Open Source tools, especially popular ones, is not a problem.
Small college, lab assist, grunt PHP coder, start own business!
I went to a relatively small college and started my freshman year as a lab assistant. I learned some things about Novell (uugh) and networking DOS and Win3.1 computers (double uugh).
But after a couple years of that, plus my CS major, they got interested in me for more stuff. When the college finally got a Net connection and boughtt a nice Sun box to power it, I was the first student they taught UNIX to and became the assistent admin. Lots of fun!
After college I had a couple jobs at consulting companies, the later working with PHP and Perl and databases.
Then I decided what the heck, regular office jobs suck, lots more fun if I run the show myself. So that's what I'm doing. Bought a nice Linux box, put it up at a good colo place, started a Slash hosting and Web development business, and went from there.
I'm getting some customers and they seem to be happy. So if I ever do need to find a regular job for some PHB again (hopefully not) I'll have some references that know that I know something about Linux admin. And keeping a Linux box with several sites on the Net running smoothly is much better experience than installing Linux on a spare partition at home.
Thanks, looks like that is what I needed to know! I thought there was an env variable for setting the @INC, but couldn't find it with a quick look through the docs. It's in the FAQ though... sweet! I hope to have 2.2 up this weekend. :-)
I can do that (blatent plug). We're still at 2.0 and may be for some time, but eventually we'll get upgraded to 2.2 or 2.4.
.pm files from each other. I've heard it said that it can't be done, but there's probably a way...
Or if anyone can tell me how to run two versions on the same server we can start right away. Possibly by dedicating one httpd to 2.2 and having it on its own IP (which I could do) but then I'd have to figure out how to isolate the Slash
What gets me is that the FAQ says PG drivers are only in the Enterprise version, while the feature matrix says they're in Enterprise and Pro. I asked in the Borland newsgroups and no one has clarified. Do you know?
That will make the difference of whether I upgrade or not, I think. I'm not paying for Enterprise, nor do i need it.
Well, one wonders if the public domain comment was a bloop by the reporter. How many reporters have called Linux "the public domain operating system", and we ALL know that Linux is NOT PD!
The eclipse.org site itself says that it will be released under an Open Source license "soon".
Microsoft: "Use Windows instead of Linux. It's guaranteed to produce more revenue!"
...adapted from a Dilbert strip...
IT Guys: "So how is Windows guaranteed to produce more revenue for our business?
Microsoft: "Oh, suddenly this is about your business."
For one thing, it's integrated with GNU Enterprise, which I think has potential to be big.
> Try Transgaming's Winex - they rewrote all of MS's DCOM to do the Inter Process Communication Alexandre was talking about.
Actually that's what I'm using. Just downloaded it yesterday!
Tried to install Hasbro's Interactive Risk and Risk II. Those are the only games I really really want bad. I just love that game, and the XFrisk AI sucks rocks. TEG is a bit like Risk and much better in the AI dept, but not QUITE the same.
Anyway, the original Risk installer starts, then hangs, and the Risk II installer aborts when it can't find a file.
For the record, I had Stardock's Entrepreneur running pretty much perfectly under Codeweavers wine several months ago. haven't tried again with WineX yet.
> You can afford $5 a month right?
Maybe if someone would hire me (independent Web/Linux consultant/developer).....
By far the biggest problem I've had with Wine is the install programs for Windows apps. Most simply don't work -- they either err out saying they can't find some file or DLL, or they'll just hang.
.exe installed with its dependencies, however, Wine seems to handle it quite well.
Once you get an
But how do people deal with install problems?
After upgrading from 7.1, I couldn't log in as my main 'micah' account or as root. Obviously that's not good. I *could* log in as my dad however.
Fortunately I could get in with 'linux single'. I tried changing the passwords, putting in the same ones that were there. Still couldn't log in.
Noted that the passwords were not shadowed. (I'm not 100% sure, but I sure think they were shadowed before the upgrade.) pwconv fixed that quick.
Then I tried changing my passwords to something DIFFERENT. Voila, I could then log in as root and micah!
What the heck!?!
Huh? I just logged into MBNA Net Access with Mozilla 0.9.5. Works and looks fine.
And we're supposed to have rain the next couple days! After months of mostly clear skies! Aaaarghgh!
> The demand for new hardware was definitely dropping off before, now even more so.
And how many tens of thousands of computers were destroyed in the tragedy and will need to be replaced?
My dad even suggested buying Dell and Gateway stock for that reason.
I love traveling -- even seeing new airports and cities. Unfortunately, most "geek" jobs don't require any travel. The farthest I've been paid to travel as an employed programmer is to a lumber mill a mile from our office.
:-) )
:-)
I for one would gladly take a programming job that required 75% or even more travel. (If it involved Linux of course.
So what's the big deal? Why do others not like it? I can see how it would hurt a social life, but you ARE home sometimes, and it gives you more opportunities to meet "in real life" cyberbabes you meet on the Net.
Well, last quarter when they earned $600,000, they released Red Hat 7.1, which may have helped their sales numbers. There was no distro release this quarter.
However, 7.2 should come out shortly, and it will almost certainly drive their numbers up again.
Not that distros is all they sell, but it does help and could easily be the difference between quarters.
Anyone know if something like this might be possible or easy:?
Have a script that reads the Apache log in realtime. Whenever something gets cmd.exe or XXXX or NNNN or something like that, immediately block all communication with their IP with iptables?
This is getting annoying...
> ...so as to completely preclude rational discussion with a broader perspective.
...my amazement that a group of people who have no problem beleiving the stories about Jesus, ie: virgin birth...
Well, there's a place for rational discussion and endless philisophical arguments. Both sides (atheists and theologins) can do that quite well. But when one knows of God's existence (and I mean KNOWS), what point does all that play? When one has experienced a real God, arguments against His existence (or presence in our lives) have a way of becoming moot. I know you won't like that answer, but like I said, everything about God is different than people expect.
> Yes God is a sovereign being, but so are you
Cool, maybe I should go try to create a solar system or two...
> That being said I personally believe that God is a being either unaware of our conscience existance, or simply too complex an entity to be capable of our limited conscious thought
OK, so you do believe in some kind of God?
Anyway, that statement is a bit absurd. Why wouldn't a God that created us and the universe be able to understand us and our thoughts?
> The church is not God, yet it claims to be.
Well, mine doesn't. Some claim the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church as pretty infallable. I do not.
> and the another 10% to an organisation who spend it on amongst others things:
Yikes, I dunno where you got your ideas of how churches spend tithe money. Mine uses it to pay the pastors, keep up the buildings, send missionaries, and give help to community members who need it (benevolence fund).
As for attitudes towards women, the church (as in body of believers) is fairly progressive in that area. My church allows women to do anything but be senior pastor. I do fully agree with Biblical princiles such as the husband is the head of the house, but he should make all decisions in love for the wife and kids. Beyond that, I think that the Bible's description of the role of women is mostly tied to their early culture. There certainly were strong women in the Bible -- Ruth and Esther to name a couple.
> 1) Reconcile "dont want to push yadda yadda yadda" with "My job is....
What I mean is that I should speak to those who want to hear it, but don't interfere with those that wish to reject it. Christians have tried that in the past, it doesn't work, nor should it.
> Jesus may have told his disciples to go out and preach (did he, I can't remember?)
Yes, the Great Commission -- go preach the Gospel in all the world and make disciples and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit... and that is for us as well, not just the disciples.
>
well what can I say... you believe the Bible or you don't. If Jesus was God incarnate, and the Gospel accounts are real accounts of His life, as I believe is the case, why should I not believe all that?
> eject out of hand, spirituality, esp, numerology (based on actual observed patterns over millenia), astrology (likewise), tarot reading, divination of any type, natural healing, etc.
That's what I mean by Satan's counterfeit miracles. God can also impart wisdom to people -- it has happened to me and many others I know. Why would you want to ask Satan with all those things when you can ask God?
> Leaving it up to God, however, ensures that no man will see it is done
Justice shouldn't be "left to God" -- He commanded us to see that it is done! (And yeah, I need to really see how I can improve in that area, for one)
> We have clearly evolved from the primate family of species on this planet.
I won't get into that. I think God could have used either 6-day creationism or evolution to put us here. While I tend to believe in the former, proof of evolution is definitely NOT proof against God
> Now, who told you to generalise and say humans have a longing for God?
That has pretty much been the case since ancient times. What culture has never had a religion?
> This book has changed so much from generation to generation, language to language, spin artist to spin artist that if there are any books that have lasted so long, this is by far the least consistant.
Whoa. Sure there have been translations, some more accurate than others, but I mean what the book SAYS -- from Genesis to Revelation. We do have fairly good ancient manuscripts for most if not all of it. And it all agrees on the character of God: He is holy, powerful, loving, disciplining, but also seeks vengeance for sin. His anger is quickly extinguished when one repents.
> you can say there are definately bits that are wrong, then you'll need to identify all of those bits
Perhaps so... I'm talking things like:
1) one account says Judas gave the blood money of Jesus back to the religious leaders, who bought the field in which he hung himself, another says he bought the field himself
2) One account says Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem, another says a colt.
Big deal? Not really in the grand scheme of things. So we need to look at what the Bible is consistent about, and it definitely is about the character of God and how we are to be saved (by faith in Jesus).
> The remainder of your post degraded into speculation
Huh? It's what I've seen and experienced and how I belive in God, and I think it's logical.
Ok, points taken. Thinking about Scripture for yourself is definitely a good thing.
Regarding 1 Cor 15 and the Resurrection:
v3,4: Resurrection (along with death and burial) is of first importance
v6-8: People who the resurrected Christ appeared to. The people Paul was writing to could have checked this out personally.
v14: "And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith."
and keep reading from there. Clearly, if anyone rejects the Resurrection, they might as well live like a pagan. And given that that's exactly what Bishop Spong does, it's hard to give him much, if any, credibility as a "Christian".
But sure, read the book. Can I also encourage you to read through the whole Bible if you haven't already done so? That will give you a foundation with which to judge Mr. Spong's writings. I'm doing that for the first time this year and it's really bolstering my confidence in it. Also perhaps get into some Max Lucado books -- he really writes great stuff.
In Christ (hard to believe I'm saying that on Slashdot!),
Micah
> Neither religion teaches violence or hate.
> But both leave enough up to you to let you choose interpretations that fit your end.
RE: Islam -- I just saw a Koran expert on the Fox News Channel who basically said Bin Laden is a sinner in his own religion by encouraging people to commit suicide.
RE: Christianity -- It's quite clear that Jesus teaches peace, not violence. He was the recipient of the most horrible kind of violence immaginable, yet he prayed for their forgiveness. There are acts of violence mentioned in the Bible, but nowhere does Jesus say that is how we are to live today. The main act of violence and destruction will come "in the day of the Lord" when everything will be pretty much annihilated by Jesus Himself and POSSIBLY with the help of His people. That has clearly not arrived yet, and it will be obvious to everyone when it does.
Well, IIRC, the book even denies the Resurrection.
If you read 1 Corinthians 15, you'll see that the Resurrection is foundational. If it was proven false, everything we believe and do is in vain.
Ah, OK. :-)
:-)
Well there certainly are fairly good churches out there. I go to one.
> Is one of the church's key teachings not that you must give your heart, mind , desire, 10% of your income, etc to the Lord?
Heart, soul, mind, strength -- yes. That's what Jesus said is the greatest commandment. And love your neighbor as yourself is right after that. Tithing is a Very Good Idea(TM) but is not a foundational teaching.
> Would that not constitute giving up your sovereignty to God through the church?
Yes, God is sovereign and therefore deserves our full being. The church is just the body of believers.
> Many of the 'heathens' you fail to consider the position of actually came from this background.
Yes, I'm aware of that.
For what it's worth, I don't think I'm "intolerant" and I don't want to push God on anyone who doesn't want Him. I recognize that religion is everyone's choice, and if they want to reject it they can. My job is only to stand up for Jesus to the best of my ability and do what Jesus commanded -- that is love my neighbor, forgive others, do justice, and of course preach the Gospel. Whether any particular person believes is really up to them and the Holy Spirit.
I fully see why people such as yourself find it hard to believe in the message. It *does* sound ridiculous if you look at it from a worldly perspective. Everything about God is totally opposite of what people expect. The last shall be first; the first last. He reveals Himself to the oppressed, not the powerful. Even the Jews expected a Messiah to come who would be politically powerful. They had no idea, even though it was prophesied, that He had to come from a normal family, suffer, and die.
In spite of how ridiculous it seems, I have no doubt about its truth. Everything about the human body and how and why we're here screams we have a Creator. We have intelligence, minds, consciences. Humans in general have a longing to know God (although some people have managed to quench that hole through their own desires).
But why Jesus? Well, the Bible is probably the most consistent book ever written, at least over the span of millennia, and on all the issues that are important. (I won't say it has NO contradictions, because there are a few minor ones, but they can generally be explained by the memorization practices of the Jews.) But about the character of God, the nature of Man, our need to be reconciled to God, and all that, is 100% consistent from Genesis to Revelation. I'm reading the Bible straight through for the first time this year -- I'm almost done and it has only bolstered my confidence in its consistency.
Then there's what I've seen. God does comfort people. He does heal people. He does miracles.
Then there's fulfilled prophesies. Israel returning as a nation is probably the biggest that we can see today. All other ancient cultures are totally destroyed, but not the Jews, God's "chosen" people.
Then there's evil. I really think the nature of evil today matches precisely how the Bible describes Satan. Satan is a liar, a theif, a murderor. His only goal is to destroy the knowledge of God and replace it with counterfeit crap. Take astrology and the occult for example. Those things have real drawing power, but they're not of God.
So I hope this gives you a better idea of where I'm coming from. If you chose to ignore or reject the message, I'll respect you for that. I just hope and pray that you'll give it serious thought before doing that!
> The next step is taking responsibility for your own thoughts and actions - we'll welcome you into the world of the conscious when you do, you know.
I have, believe me. Are you suggesting that just because my thoughts lead me to believe in God I'm not in the world of the conscious? That seems a tad short sighted. (Correct me if that's not what you're saying, but it sounds like it...)
> Do you perhaps feel that since you give your will to God, you are somehow worthy of better understanding man's relationship with a deity?
Maybe not more worthy. And no I can't understand it all. Better than others who don't accept God -- well, sure. My understanding of man's relationship with God is based on what the Bible says and on experiences.
> If you don't believe what the church says, then quite often you wouldn't comprehand God as a figure who can reveal himself.
I'm not sure if it's a matter of comprehending a God who can reveal Himself. He is just so different than anyone who doesn't know Him or believe in Him can possibly immagine. Either you are open to Him or you aren't. And He Himself makes it easier for some to open up to Him than others. No, i don't understand why that is, but it does appear to be true. I believe anyone can be saved, but some will have to make more sacrifices than others.