Re: Making money from Java



"Judson McClendon" <judmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:idilf.56223$s92.48841@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> "Judson McClendon" <judmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> "Peter Lacey" <lacey@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Judson McClendon wrote:
>>>>>
If you know or have been exposed to more than one
>>> language, you will know that it is sometimes difficult, perhaps even
>>> impossible to express *exactly* the same statement in two languages.
>>
>> No it isn't....
>>
>> "This is bull***"
>> "Dieses ist Bull***"
>> "C'est connerie"
>> "???bull*** ????"
>>
>> It depends entirely on the statement.
>
> Thanks, I didn't know you thought I was so obtuse as not to know that. :-)
>
I think you're more than obtuse, but what I think doesn't matter. What is
under discussion is what you SAID. ("...sometimes difficult, perhaps even
impossible to express *exactly* the same statement in two languages." Yet,
people make a living from doing this every day.)

>>>But my point was that, Jesus, being the actual author of all Scripture
>>>(through inspiration of the Holy Spirit), the He is certainly free to
>>>articulate those Scriptures in any way He sees fit. From what rational
>>>standpoint would a finite created being be able to challenge his infinite
>>>Creator's actions? ;-) There's far less distance between a microbe and a
>>>man (both being finite) than between a finite man and infinite God. That
>>>gulf is vast beyond human comprehension. God can bridge the gap to us,
>>>but man could never bridge the gap to God, without God's help. Nor could
>>>man understand God, or anything about God, without Divine revelation. For
>>>a man to think otherwise is the epitomy of conceit and foolishness. :-)
>>>
>>
>> Judson, I have kept out of this because I see it as a pretty tedious
>> thread, with no minds about to be changed, even though some of the
>> viewpoints and opinions expressed are "interesting".
>>
>> However, with the above you may have gone too far.
>>
>> It isn't even logical. There is no conceit or foolishiness in seeking to
>> understand God. It is a necessary path to growth.(Whether you succeed in
>> reaching the understanding or not...)
>>
>> Yet, you have defined God to be ineffable, unknowable, infinite and
>> therefore unable to be understood.
>>
>> Er... man is created in His image, and is NOT ineffable, unknowable,
>> infinite, or unable to be understood. And throughout the Bible this
>> infinite superior being behaves like a spoilt brat. Raining frogs,
>> destroying cities, and killing children just to show how powerful He is.
>> (More like an insecure 6 year old than the Lord God of Hosts. Certainly
>> not very infinite when it comes to wisdom, or restraint... )There are
>> many bright minds who are capable of dealing with the infinite... why
>> should dealing with God be any different?
>>
>> You are saying that anyone who disagrees with you is either conceited or
>> foolish. I say, anyone who says that people who disagree with him are
>> either conceited or foolish, has closed his mind and stopped listening.
>> An unkind person might call this arrogance.
>>
>> Draw your own conclusions.
>
> You misrepresent what I am saying.

(Even when I quoted it and responded directly to it? I fail to see how that
is misrepresentation.)

> If you choose to believe that a finite created being can "understand" an
> infinite, indifferent God with no interest in being understood, then feel
> free.

Thank you for the permission to think freely. I choose to believe no such
thing, any more than I choose to believe your original statement to the
contrary.

>But it is indeed the height of human arrogance and folly to think so.

Folly, possibly. Arrogance? How so? It is arrogant to close your mind and
believe the only possible "correct" position is the one you hold. (At least,
some people would call THAT arrogance; people who agreed with the position
would call it "certainty of correctness". There are other possible
viewpoints on it also. None of them is "wrong"...)

Sorry. :-)

No apology is required. In posting to CLC I expect whatever I get. If I
couldn't stand the heat I wouldn't be in the kitchen. Furthermore, I do you
the courtesy of believing your intention was not malicious.

>You couldn't even inscribe an infinite number in a finite universe, let
>alone understand (comprehend) an infinite God with a finite mind.
>
I'm certainly having difficulty following your argument, so perhaps you are
right.

> But I did not say that it was bad for man to want to understand God, or to
> try to understand God, I don't know where you got that from what I said. I
> certainly didn't mean to imply that.
>
"That gulf is vast beyond human comprehension. God can bridge the gap to us,
but
man could never bridge the gap to God, without God's help. Nor could man
understand God, or anything about God, without Divine revelation."

Makes the attempt kind of pointless, wouldn't you say? My personal viewpoint
is that the satement is false, but that conclusion, (or any other), can only
be arrived at by an attempt to understand. I further contend that that
attempted action is good for Human beings, whether they attain understanding
or not.



<snip>

>>>
>>> The difference between us is that I know God personally. Nothing special
>>> about me, God is eager to have a relationship with all of us. With you
>>> as much as with me or anybody else. We were created for this very
>>> purpose.
>>
>> Was He lonely then? Did He need respect and admiration? Not very well
>> adjusted is He? I guess that explains His irrational behaviour in the OT.
>
> You can ask God those questions when you see Him. :-)

Well, couldn't you kind of slip in a few questions of this nature in your
daily chats with Him :-)?
>
>>>God became a man and died on a Roman cross to provide a way for our
>>>offenses against Him to be forgiven, marked "Paid in Full".
>>
>> Why did they require a blood sacrifice in order to be forgiven? Why
>> couldn't Jesus just say "Hey, folks, look, there's a much better way than
>> all this robbing and killing and rampaging that's going on. Be kind to
>> one another. Forgive the people who rip you off, have a kind and loving
>> heart. You'll be amazed at how much better the world could be. Oh, and my
>> Father (who is really me, but we'll wait until you've all learned to read
>> before going into that one...) says, if you turn over a new leaf all the
>> previous wicked stuff you did will be wiped clean. Clean slate. You can
>> have as much chance at Heaven as those Pharisees and High Priests have...
>> level playing field, everybody equal, just behave better..."
>>
>> Then, there would be no need for all the ensuing nastiness, with
>> perfectly good temple veils being rent and darkness on the land and Mel
>> Gibson having to exorcise his Catholic School upbringing...
>>
>> What kind of God requires His own son to be tortured to death to pay off
>> the debt of Mankind?
>>
>> Just forgive it. We can do it with Third World debt, and we are far from
>> infinite, wise, omnipresent, or omnipotent.
>
> We are far from Holy as well. :-)

Fair comment... but it avoids answering the question, which I did not intend
to be rhetorical.
>
>>>It's easy to meet God.
>>
>> My understanding is that anyone who has since Moses, never returns to
>> talk about it...
>
> Perhaps your 'understanding' is not without a tiny flaw here and there,
> eh? :-)
>

Possibly. Still, I do get by...

>>> All you have to do is to ask with a sincere heart (you have to really
>>> mean it) for God to reveal Himself to you. A lot of people have met God
>>> that way,
>>
>> And a lot of people have deluded themselves that way, too. I've attended
>> at least two Billy Graham Revivals (very good shows) and seen the power
>> of mass hysteria working...
>>
>>> "God, if you are really there, then reveal Yourself to me." Then get
>>> ready, because once you meet God for real, and His Holy Spirit comes to
>>> live within you, you don't have to guess, you *KNOW* that God is real. I
>>> speak to God, and He speaks to me.
>>
>> So, He has bridged the gap because you couldn't? But you did by asking,
>> even though you previously stated it wasn't possible. There was this
>> infinite all powerful Being who decided He might as well have a chat with
>> Judson. And to what purpose would that be? Presumably He knows what
>> you're going to say before you say it, and He already knows what His
>> response will be before He makes it. Kind of a pointless conversation
>> isn't it? And He's doing this all the time with legions of the
>> faithful... well, I guess if you are infinite you have to try and pass
>> the time somehow... Maybe He should just start another pointless thread
>> on CLC... maybe He has... maybe this is it...
>
> Once again, you *entirely* distort what I said. I said precisely this:
> "God can bridge the gap to us, but man could never bridge the gap to God,
> without God's help." God made it possible for me (or anyone else) to reach
> Him by becoming a man and dying on a cross to pay the penalties of our
> sins that separate us from a Holy God, then enabling us through the power
> of His Holy Spirit to receive Jesus as our savior. The power that bridges
> the gap between God and man is God's power, not ours. We are helpless and
> defensless before a Holy God, without His own intervention. Every day of
> my life I thank God that He did make that intervention in Jesus Christ.
>
Well, I respect your right to do that. But I don't. And I still want to know
why it was necessary. Moses spoke with God and nobody died. So did a number
of the OT Prophets, if we are to believe the Bible. If God is so Holy that
he is defiled by contact with Man, then, He isn't much of a God for Mankind.
What exactly were these "sins" that such a terrible price had to be "paid''
for? If the wages of sin is Death, are we allowed to at least see the
charge *** we are being called to account for? I'll gladly take
responsibility for my own sins, but why must I (or Jesus, for that
matter....) die for things I never did? How is that just? Where is the love
and mercy in it?


>>> But, this is a personal thing between God and each of us. God is not
>>> going to force Himself on anybody who doesn't want Him.
>>
>> Ah, so there IS free will? But if He's infinite there cannot be... any
>> choice I make will include God, and will have been foreseen by God. It
>> seems to me that He's finite when it suits your argument and infinite
>> when that suits your argument.
>
> You're twisting the issue again.

Is there anything I could write here, apart from "Amen, Judson", which would
not be considered "twisting the issue"...?

You have already made this accusation several times when I simply responded
to what you wrote. Twisting the issue is not a rhetorical device I normally
employ (and especially not when the argument can be won on merit without the
neeed to resort to such devices). Perhaps you might review whether what you
wrote is actually what you intended, or perhaps you might choose your words
more carefully, to convey the shades of meaning you adhere to. Or even
refute my response with logic, instead of claiming I am shifting the
argument.


> Before God created the universe, He knew everything. He knew every
> thought, every action, every subatomic particle by name, and every
> interaction all of them would have until the end of time. He knew
> *everything*.

And you know this .... how?


>But for His own reasons, He has chosen to give man free will. God decided
>that man would have a choice to believe in Him or reject Him.

That is the same single valued argument presented by fatalists. Everything
is the will of God. Every example I can show of what I consider to be free
will is simply the will of God. It is not arguable. You either believe it or
you don't. If I reject God, in your argument above, that was what he wanted
and had pre-ordained. If I accept God, in the same argument, THAT was what
he wanted and had pre-ordained.... No argument is possible. It is simply a
matter of faith.

>I don't know why God did it this way, I am a finite created being, after
>all. :-)
>
Or, you might simply be a collection of cells that became what it is over a
very long period of time...

This is such a lame argument... "Don't ask me.... I'm only Human". As if
this apology excuses us from the need for any independent rational thought.
No responsibility; God runs the Cosmos... If it sucks, it because we
displeased Him, or He wants it that way...


>>> All of us have a choice, we can reject God and spend eternity without
>>> God, or receive God and spend eternity with God.
>>
>> Or, you could just die and have your atoms redistrubuted back to the
>> Cosmos from whence they came, with NO eternity (other than the Laws of
>> Thermodynamics, guaranteeing the eventual heat death of the Universe....
>> NOT eternal, but certainly a very long time (unless you're infinite, of
>> course, in which case the life of the Universe would be the blink of an
>> eye...))
>
> If you are correct and I am wrong, I will die and cease to exist and never
> know the difference. But if I am right and you are wrong, you will spend
> an eternity apart from God in never ending torment. That's not a very good
> bet, no matter *what* the odds.

You obviously don't understand much about betting. I gladly take the bet. If
I am wrong, and for my honestly held beliefs I am to suffer eternal torment,
I'd rather do that, than cosy up to some megalomaniac sadist who demands
worship by the misuse of power and intimidation, and for whom I can find no
respect. If I am right, then the only basis for morality and decency is that
it makes the world a better place for all of us. There is no requirement to
propitiate a petulant and volatile deity, so efforts in this direction are
simply a waste of time. Behave better because it makes life better, not
because you'll burn in Hell if you don't.

>
>>>If you want to meet God, He is ready and waiting. But the choice is up to
>>>each of us. Personally, I would rather spend eternity with Someone who
>>>was willing to die for me, even before I knew Him. :-)
>>
>> Even if you were right, I wouldn't want to spend eternity with someone
>> who was ready to die for me before I met him... it shows a marked lack of
>> judgement, on his part. Besides, I never asked him to die for me (I
>> wouldn't ask that of anyone... )quite happy to take responsibility for my
>> own transgressions, thanks.
>
> It was only before you knew Him. God knew you from before the foundation
> of the world. But God certainly gives you that option. :-)

That is a good and fair response. The only one I can find here... Thanks for
that.

Pete.



.