[~ot] why is programming so fun?

[Don]

Yigal Chripun wrote:
> Me Here wrote:
>> BCS wrote:
>>
>>> have you ever had a pet? Which reason did you use for keeping it? 1, 2 or 3?
>>>
>>>
>>>> 1/ It enjoys watching us suffer floods, plagues, earthquakes, wars,
>>>> starvation and pestilance.
>>>>
>>>> 2/ It is so ego-centric that it needs the adulation of billions (what
>>>> would this number mean to an omni-present being?), in order to feel
>>>> good about itself.
>>>>
>>>> 3/ It a mechanism whereby a few strong minds effect control of large
>>>> numbers of weak minds.
>>>>
>> Sorry BCS, but I have come to expect better arguements from you during our
>> breif association on this forum.
>>
>> The direct answer to your question, is "none of the above". 
>>
>> There is a distinct and huge difference between:
>>
>>  	- "keeping a pet"--feeding it, taking it for walks, petting it. Simply
>> enjoying the affection it demonstrates--of its own volition-- and the
>> companionship it provides.
>> and 
>> 	*Creating* a entire race of sentient beings, along with a million other
>> species, a world, and a universe containsing millions of galaxies and billions
>> of stars...
>> 	And then compelling them to subscribe and adhere to a set of (variously) 10
>> commandments; 613 rules; etc. etc. on pain of eternal damnation if they fail to
>> believe, subscribe and adhere...PURELY FOR MY OWN AMUSEMENT.
>>
>>
>> And that last uppercased part is the point. Give, describe, or otherwise
>> elucidate *one* reason, justification or purpose to creating sentient beings,
>> endowing them with "free will", decrying them from using it;  and condeming
>> them if they do?
>>
>> The *only* "explanantion I'ev ever been offereed from "believers" for this
>> question, is "its just an experiment".. But, if the creator is all-poerful, and
>> omni-present--and it must be, if it is a "god"--then it knows the outcome for
>> the experiment starts, so there is no purpose other than one of the 3 above,
>>
>> b.
> 
> A side note - the "modern" concept of hell is entirely Christian. the
> original word in the bible is גיהנום which is a concatenation of  גיא בן
> הינום which is the valley of the son of Hinom. it's a place in Jerusalem
> where lived the above mentioned family and they practiced evil acts
> according to the bible. they worshiped one of the ancient idols (can't
> remember now which one..) and this required sacrificing your own first
> born of something of that nature. 

It was Molech. You had to throw your firstborn son into a furnace and 
perform religious ceremonies as he was burned alive.
This is where the image of flames in hell comes from.

> The bible uses that term to refer to a
> place of pure evil and this is a real location on earth, in Jerusalem,
> you can come and see it yourselves.

In later times it was used as a rubbish pit. In the New Testament's use 
of gehenna it's essentially an incinerator for evil.

> the word שטן (the devil) has two meanings one of which is "obstacle" and
> the other refers to one of god's angels which of course never "fall from
> the sky" or anything like that. Satan represents in the bible the role
> of the prosecutor. God is the judge and he put Satan on the job of
> pointing our faults since god is merciful and cares for his creations,
> and didn't want to do it himself.

> Btw, angels are _not_ people with wings. מלאך is the word in the bible
> and it literally means "a messenger". they can take a form of a human
> just like they can be elements of nature like wind.

This sounds mostly correct to me. I'm surprised John disagreed with it.
BTW, Another similar bizarre belief is that 'Lucifer' is Satan. Lucifer 
= Latin for the planet Venus, also known as the morning star. The Bible 
is very explicit that 'Lucifer' is Jesus, not Satan (see the second last 
verse of the New Testament, for example!). It's a good example of how 
common these types of misconceptions are.

(Another classic: the Bible never says that Jesus was born in a stable.
Hasn't anyone ever heard of Middle Eastern hospitality??).

Please don't assume that Christianity is based on blind faith. Those of 
us who are evangelicals are constantly trying to find the places where 
we've made mistakes, places we've ended up believing all kinds of 
rubbish. Which is why I like talking to atheists, since you can 
potentially learn the most from people you disagree with.

 > "pain of eternal damnation" does not exist in the bible or in the Jewish
 > faith.

Some similar concepts do, though. See the last few verses of Isaiah.

> just wanted to give a Jewish prespective on the subject. carry on with
> your debate.