[~ot] why is programming so fun?

[Yigal Chripun]

John Reimer wrote:
> Hello Yigal,
> I can only shrug at this, yigal (if there is a way to do so politely);
> and yes, I did read all of your post.  It's no wonder you chose to be
> athiest if you were taught these details from your Jewish Bible.  These
> are all unusual teachings, and, if you will pardon me, quite
> innacurate.  Indeed, I do believe that the hallmark of the Hebrew
> contribution to the Christian Bible is its extreme accuracy and
> astounding consistancy over several thousands of years of existance --
> the Hebrew scholars were so accurate in copying the old testament books
> that there is no other book or source that is comparable.  This is a
> miracle. :)
> 
> Every discovery of more scripts continues to show this accuracy.  No
> other "holy" book has this record.   And this is why the Christian,
> through the Gospel message of the New Testament, can make such claims:
> Christianity merely claims that the conclusion of the prophecies lies in
> Jesus Christ as the Messiah.  While some interpretation will be
> inevitable, the Bible is actually astoundingly clear in its message and
> leaves very little to imagination for the reader.  And while
> translations to other languages always causes a slight loss of meaning
> in the original, the message comes through completely intact.
> 
> Forgive me if you don't convince me immediately that you are an expert
> in these matters -- use of a few Hebrew words don't astonish me -- we
> all have access to dictionaries and texts of the Hebrew source to
> research these things. I'm sure that you know that the Jewish tradition
> is to reject Jesus as the Messiah (and all are taught to do so from a
> young age) even though he fit all descriptions and predictions by the
> Jewish prophets (from his birth in Bethlehem to his humiliation and
> death).  It also doesn't surprise me if rabbis and other teachers have
> offered varying definitions of the God of the Hebrews.  Your offering
> above is likely not the only one.
> 
> However you were taught, I just wanted to note that none of the
> doctrines you noted above can be found clearly represented in the old or
> new testament. Indeed, if you feel interpretations were how they came
> about, I can only say that they would have had to be stretched very far
> to do so.  The Bible always has had a clear definition of who God is and
> his plan for humanity.
> 
> -JJR
> 
> 

look, I do not wish to discuss religion with you. unlike BCS who's open
to other views you clearly are not, and I will not waste my time beyond
this post to argue with you. In the same way I will not waste my time
trying to explain what the color blue is to a blind man.

you have your view of the world which you think is absolute based on
your seemingly very strong faith and therefore anything I say must be
wrong. and that's based on:
"the nth-hand re-interpretations of m-times "translated" stories related
by /man/, and attributed to the will, actions or purpose of a god" as
"Me Here" put so accurately in his post.

There's a saying in Hebrew that says: "the Torah has 70 faces" meaning
that everyone can read and see a different meaning in the text and in
fact the Jewish faith expects all Jews to read and learn the bible
themselves, unlike The preachings practiced in a church.
I have my own understanding of the bible and of course I do not
necessary believe everything I read. What I said was the Jewish view
based on the very close examination of the [original!] text. as a
Christian you do not have a say in what the Jewish view should be.
your view is different based on your interpretation, sure, but have you
ever read the bible yourself? have you read the Hebrew version of it?
there is a very good reason why the pope knows Hebrew, and wares a
yarmulke (found that word in an online dictionary...).

since I'm an atheist and a Jew, please keep your Christian preaching to
yourself (in the Jewish faith preaching is a very grave sin!)
all I posted in my original view was the Jewish understanding of the
bible which is not "wrong" as you seem to imply, but merely different
(Id say more accurate based on the text in the Hebrew edition version
1.0 as I like to call it, but not an absolute truth). what your version
of the bible says is irrelevant to the Jewish perspective.
If the Christian version changed some of the concepts (for example the
'one'ness of god...) well, than it applies to Christians only.

in an analogy - you cannot say that my perfectly working D.1 based
application is wrong because your D.2 compiler does not compile it, or
even that your version is better. for example, I do not like the current
D2 const concept and do not wish to use it and you cannot claim that I'm
wrong based on your use of the D2 const. it may work for you but it
doesn't have to work for everyone.

The bible is very clear to the reader only if you read the children's
edition with illustrations. to say that "the Bible is actually
astoundingly clear in its message and leaves very little to imagination
for the reader." is like saying the D2 const regime is simple,
understandable and clear in its message.

--Yigal