The First Atomic War

After giving a short speech in class (USSO 10100), here's my reflection.

It began with the Germans splitting atoms. Otto Hahn won 1944 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for Nuclear Fission (1938 discovery).

Some would say the purpose of such discovery is for energy, which can be used for good and bad. I beg to differ. Hahns only saw it as a challenge, nothing more.

Hahn's work has been inspired throughout by an invincible desire to solve the problems which he has encountered. Unlike Prometheus, who gave fire to Man, he has never dreamed of giving Man control over atomic energy. - source: NobelPrize.org

One might argue that they just do not wish to make Hahn responsible for the deaths from atomic bombs. That is a poor argument, because it is not only a weak assumption, it also attempts to discredit Hahn in some way, nothing more than slander.

I learned that for some reason (they lack critical thinking and only accept general consensus available at the time), many do not recognize or admit that Japan's technological rise is largely attributed to them having no burden on military budget, that burden is taken by the U.S. The response in class I got was generally: "but military and technology are kind of the same thing". I would say this is the Millennials problem I'm facing - unable to distinguish missiles and war jets from robots and engines. One only has to do with destruction and the other do not necessarily. Unless, they want to make the point (which I wouldn't be surprised at this point with millennials) that missiles and war jets can be used for non-destructive good (now this is where they would be confused of between space rockets and weaponry...bottom line it means they fail to understand the economy of all these).

I'm a bit relived that at least someone has some sense:
"because of the US defense treaty with Japan where Japanese armies were forcibly demobilized, officially disbanded, and rearmament disallowed, much of their defense fell to the US. Because of this, they saved a fortune on defense spending and were able to channel their best and brightest (and their wealthiest) into constant expansion of the Japanese economy and nation building. " - AsiaExpert

Posted in Projects | Leave a comment

Famous People who Went to City College

After the USSO 10100 class, I have to do this.

There are more than I could list, so I'm only listing those whom I have a least some general knowledge about:

Mario Puzo, the one who wrote The Godfather.

Al Nagler, TeleVue founder

Woody Allen, actor, writer (but very liberal), interviewed Billy Graham once - see youtube.

Henry Kissinger, politician during Nixon & Deng XiaoPing's time.

Edward G. Robinson, actor who played Dathan in The Ten Commandments.

Jonas Salk, cured polio, refused patent.

Ira Gershwin, George Gershwin(Rhapsody in Blue)'s brother.

Julian Schwinger, Nobel Prize winner in Physics.

Robert Hofstadter, Nobel Prize winner in Physics.

Bernard Baruch, CUNY Baruch College named after him.

Judd Hirsch, Famous actor who plays lots of Jewish roles.

Robert E. Kahn, Invented the TCPIP (internet)

Ed Koch, Former NYC Major

 

Posted in Projects | Leave a comment

If God is Good, why Does He Allow Evil?

If God is good, why does he not do "good" all the time?

If you love me, why do you not "make love" with me all the time?

Funny how people could come up with essays of defense for the latter, but believe the former to be the best excuse to ignore God.

Posted in Theologization | Leave a comment

Stay Away from Chinese Churches in America?

If someone say it's better to stay away from Chinese churches in the United States, I would say it is a bit extreme, but that is understandable.

The common view why the new generations in America would want to stay away from their immigrant parents' or their ethnic churches is that these churches are too immature. These churches follow the cultural tradition of their home countries - meaning backward, undeveloped.

Here, I'm not interested in the view of those Chinese who automatically stay away from Chinese churches or the likes. Because it is obvious they are the immature ones. They prefer publicity, carrier opportunities, fame, American parties, etc. (Mega churches full of white people seem to offer that). Whatever it is, it is geared to their self-interest.

The former case is quite a challenge. Many immigrant pastors, elders, have certain views brought by them to America from their home culture. Views which is just not permitted in the States in general: e.g. submit to older people even if they are wrong, pastoral nepotism, etc. This result in much dissent within the church and caused many to leave and unattractiveness of the church toward the younger American brought generations.

One might distinguish this problem from a Chinese megachurch. Shouldn't the problem above be restricted to smaller Chinese churches? In bigger churches, one does not need to deal with others so personally all the time, hence less disagreement, less dissent. Any disagreement could easily be dissolved in the whole bureaucracy of megachurches. From what I can observe, cultural differences matter most even in megachurches. The problem with these Chinese megachurches is that they either conform to the American way (which a lot of them actually do, more than they are willing to admit), such as in their youth ministries (all in English, copying the American way as much as they could) or they dilate the need for fellowship - it's a big church after all, just look at the crowd and feel good that you are "in" this fellowship already. The former part is suicidal for the church (this Chinese church will only last for one or two generations); the latter one will turn the church in to a business organization which is likely to eventually go bankrupt (such as California's Crystal Church).

I think America is still brewing the first or second generation of Chinese churches. After this, I can evaluate my thoughts with reality.

The remedy: So should we not have Chinese churches in America? Not so. But thus far, the best form of Chinese church is one that is theologically grounded (Reformed), evangelical (Gospel centered), and bold (willing to make sacrifices for Christ - not for self-ideology like having the American dream). Thus far, The latter challenge is the one I've seen most Chinese pastors in America have failed: "I've finally immigrated to 'paradise', why should I still live like a slave!?!"

Posted in Reflection, Theologization | Leave a comment

Ligonier Class: Two American Revolutions

Prof. Robert Godfrey

First American Revolution -> Denominationalism: good thing in America. In Europe: only True church and False church.

Second American Revolution -> Desire for democratization in America.

Volunteerism: Churches fund themselves, not by government like in Europe. Pros: relationship grew between ministers and congregants; Cons: Preachers accommodate message to people.

Prairie sickness: American was agrarian culture, huge farming land in the Western frontiers, people are very isolated from each other. Less educated.

Peter Cartwright, Methodist, circuit rider. Read his autobiography

Circuit riders and Camp meetings were popular in dealing with problems of the frontiers.

1800-1835 Second Awakening, Charismatic style. Started with the Cane Ridge Revival in 1801. Increase church membership.

Godfrey: Today Methodist churches in decline in number and biblically. But in 19th Century, it was great. "Come now", "don't wait like the Calvinists for some moment of conversion".

Posted in Projects, Theologization | Leave a comment

HP DC7900 network card not working well

At NYGC, one of the TOEFL station (station #11) has problem with internet. Network icon shows some connection but not communicating with DHCP server. I thought it was software problem: network setting issues.

Solution: I just had to clear the CMOS (taking out the battery), and it works fine again.

Posted in Technical | Leave a comment

Crucial Difference between Loyalty and Faithfulness

Ah, but there is a great difference.

Many church members today stay in their churches, support their pastors, out of loyalty. Not faithfulness.

The Bible never speaks of loyalty, but faithfulness. A lot of English translation of loyalty from the Bible come from the Hebrew word Hesed: kindness. Thus, it is really not the sense of loyalty. Loyalty is a concept foreign to Biblical morality.

Before defining what is loyalty and what is faithfulness, let us note that they are not the same. What then is the difference? I find this article rather enlightening:

Loyalty is about the past. It is grounded in the past. It is based on the past. "In the past, I have been here, I grew up here, we knew each other for a long time", hence the supposedly moral demand for loyalty.

Faithfulness is about the future. It is grounded in promise. It is based on hope. Ultimately, one that is faithful to God, is one that depends solely on God.

One who is loyal is no more better than a dog. For it is based on experience. However, one who is faithful does not merely support, but innovatively glorify that which one is faithful to. One who is faithful does not care about the history of relationship, for covenants look ahead and never backward.

The proponent of "loyalty" might say, ah, thus those who are faithful are fools! For they do not seek assurance in their faith! Without past or experience, they blindly step into contractual proceedings. Oh but on the contrary, it is those who are "loyal" who are blind, for they assumed too much: too much of their future and too much of our faith. Unlike the loyal ones, the faithful grounds their faith ultimately in God, and not in past criteria. God, who is perfection, is always faithful to His children.

Posted in Theologization | Leave a comment

How to Download Videos from C-SPAN

Use: http://www.videograbber.net/

Posted in Technical | Leave a comment

The Tech Jobs Today

Graphs, charts that show most sought after coding fields and more.

Link

Posted in Technical | Leave a comment

The City College CUNY Class: USSO 10100 Development of the U.S. and its People

Professor: Johnnie Wilder

This class is probably the best I've ever taken. One shouldn't fail this class unless one does not really want to go to school at all. And by fail I mean less than A.

The topic for this class is so wide I will not enter much content in this thread, but spread them else where:

The Mexican War, The First Atomic War, LBJ, etc.

Posted in Projects | 1 Comment