| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| A 1956 encyclopaedia's view on the computer |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-06-08 23:07:13 |
| Two weeks ago, my grandmother passed away - the last grandparent I had left. As those of you with experience in dealing with deceased family members know, the funeral is only the start; the next part is taking care of the deceased's affairs, which includes going through all their belongings to determine what to do with them. I took care of my grandmother's extensive book collection, and while doing so, I hit something that fascinated me to no end: a six-volume Christian Encyclopaedia from 1956. In it, I found something I just had to share with OSNews. |
|
| RE[2]: Sorry for the religious discussion |
| By Kroc on 2012-06-09 07:01:32 |
|
Jesus said he "came not to abolish the law, but to fulfil it" (Mat5:17); in a sense the old law lead up to the new law. The purpose of the old law was to prepare the Jews for Christ, whom they rejected. No, the old law no longer _applies_ to us, because the Jews at the time had taken the law so far away from it's meaning ("you make the law a burden upon the people") by following the letters and not the meaning. Jesus did away with the law by returning it to it's spirit meaning Mat22:37-40 "...On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets" The old testament and new testament run in parallels. The first half of the Bible is about the physical, the second half is spiritual. The first half is about what happened to provide examples, the second half is about what sort of person you should be. |
 - Score: 5 |
| RE: Sorry for the religious discussion |
| By neutralTTY on 2012-06-09 07:50:25 |
|
Hi (excuse for my poor english). When you (and people) say "The Christians" or "The New Jews", and after you say things like "They use God as an excuse to say "We're loved, and you are hated". " it's not a problem about the religion or about the faith, but it's a problem about the people (as individual human). It's like talking about killers (there are christians, muslims, atheists). Or talking about scientifics or inteligents. There are a film from Bollywood called "My name is Khan" that provides for this situation. The mother of Khan say him: "There are no *** and no muslims, there only have good people and bad people" (it's not the best film but it's a good one, you can saw that). So the problem with the human race is when we confuse between honestity (good/bad) with our beliefs (beliefs I'm not refering to religion, like atehists are believers to their belief: no gods) and then we create perjudice to some groups of people. With religion is the same, you can interpret or misinterpret the same way a mathematician or scientifics interpret or misinterpret theirs formulas. But the misinterpretation don't made us bad or good ones. It's only an individual problem. It's why there can be people that hate other people that don't are like us, because they have a problem perhaps of education, but I think it's not a problem about religion. The same way that a governor (independent about their religion) can make the war to other people even with fake proofs only for personal interests, There can be group of religious people doing the same. A liked the entry because is talking about the history of the computers with a personal point of view, it was very interesting, and about the 50's!! I don't have anything as old as that to check about computers. My condolance to yours. Edited 2012-06-09 08:01 UTC |
| - Score: 1 |
| Sincerity |
| By arsa on 2012-06-09 07:56:48 |
| Thom, thank you for this article - for being so honest and sincere towards yourself and others. You haven't been like that in some of your previous articles, but noone should blame or condemn anyone. So, I'd say you have gievn a great example here on how one should deal with his/her own being. You've also touched some of your readers and made them move in a similar manner. And finally, this article of yours shows that even when we talk about computers, we're still dealing with human souls :-) |
| - Score: 1 |
| Dictionary entry |
| By Toonie on 2012-06-09 08:58:10 |
| Ha.. I have an old dictionary at home, and the entry for 'Computer' reads: "One who computes" :) |
| - Score: 3 |
| You know Thom |
| By allanregistos on 2012-06-09 09:04:58 |
|
> As I was going through her books, I discovered this six-volume set of books, titled 'Christian Encyclopaedia', from 1956. Considering its title and year of publication, my prejudice took over and I assumed it'd just be lots of talk about Christianity's history, with science taking a back seat as soon as it contradicted with religion. You know Thom, I just want you to have a quick lesson on theology and try to read historical proof how Christianity contributed to Science, instead of stereotyping them all because you've heard a priest raping a child, or Creationists tried to demolish evolution in schools. Christianity is more complex than that, you know, religion is not really the cause of all these conflicts, but basically the "HUMAN" behavior, and please do check your behaviour when talking to Christians. It is very unfortunate that these days most of the anti-Christianity talks happened to be from uninformed people who knew nothing of Christian history whatsoever and judge Christians based on their prejudices. Christianity is more complex than that, and it takes a serious heart for anyone to know exactly "WHAT HAPPENED" in the past with regards to religion, conflict, sexuality etc. Edited 2012-06-09 09:09 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: You know Thom |
| By Thom_Holwerda on 2012-06-09 09:34:07 |
|
Being wary of the *scientific* validity of a Reformed Christian Encyclopaedia from 1956 is a very sane approach. Please do not take me for some anti-religion fool. In fact, I have no issues with religion at all - if people find aide and support with religion, then more power to them. I honestly don't care. In fact, I dislike being called an atheist because atheism has become quite militant and poisonous since the rise of the web. I have spent a considerable amount of time studying the world's religions, and I probably know more about each of them than many of their followers do, so please don't get so defense just because I displayed a proper and healthy dose of skepticism - skepticism that I was taught to display by my *Christian* university, I might add. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: Dankjewel! |
| By MOS6510 on 2012-06-09 09:35:30 |
|
Well, Google got it right though! En ik kan het weten. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Beautiful posting |
| By sydbarrett74 on 2012-06-09 09:41:41 |
|
Thom, That was a beautiful and touching eulogy and benediction for your grandmother. My condolences and thoughts are with you (I also have lost all four of my grandparents). Thank you for posting something so personal, yet at the same time universally applicable. |
| - Score: 1 |
| Good book on technology and Van Riesen's ideas |
| By harmhilvers on 2012-06-09 10:16:53 |
|
Thom, although Van Riesen may have been dead for some years now, Reformational Philosophy and its critical thinking about technology did not stop when he died. For example, if you look up the book "Denken, ontwerpen, maken" ("Thinking, designing, creating") by Verkerk, Van der Stoep, Hoogland and De Vries you will find that his thinking is still fresh and – even better – still being renewed. And of course, my sincere condoleances to you and your family. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Sorry for the religious discussion |
| By tidux on 2012-06-09 11:26:21 |
| I think they're sort of the religious equivalent of hipsters - most actual Jewish folks, like my family, moved on from the hateful stuff years ago. What the "New Jews" as you call them don't get, is that the "we are loved and you are hated" message was designed to lift the spirits of a people that was collectively fucked over for millenia. It was never meant to apply to a ruling class. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |