Wednesday, October 3, 2018

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 18 updates in 5 topics

Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 04 09:37AM +1300

On 04/10/18 09:25, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> break into fragments.
 
> The soft tissue discoveries had not only DNA, but also blood
> cells, collagen, and it had in-tact structure and form.
 
This has all be been well and truly debunked:
 
https://letterstocreationists.wordpress.com/dinosaur-soft-tissue/
 
A good quote from that paper:
 
"Growing up with a conservative Christian background, she [Mary
Schweitzer] had believed that the secular science establishment promotes
themes like evolution out of a desire to discredit biblical faith.
However, when she took an actual paleontology class, she saw things
differently [27]:
 
I think the thing that surprised me most about that class was that I had
no idea, coming from a conservative Christian background, that
scientists are not all trying to disprove God in whatever way they can.
What we were not told growing up is that there's a lot of very rigorous,
hard science that allows us to interpret the lives of organisms we've
never seen—and knowing this made me rethink a few things, because I know
God and God is not a deceiver. If you step back a little bit and let God
be God I don't think there's any contradiction at all between the Bible
and what we see in nature. He is under no obligation to meet our
expectations. He is bigger than that."
 
--
Ian.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 04:54PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 4:37 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
> had believed that the secular science establishment promotes themes like
> evolution out of a desire to discredit biblical faith. However, when she took
> an actual paleontology class, she saw things differently [27]:
 
Many people's faith is destroyed by modern school entities, in-
cluding textbooks, teachers, professors.
 
> deceiver. If you step back a little bit and let God be God I don't think
> there's any contradiction at all between the Bible and what we see in nature.
> He is under no obligation to meet our expectations. He is bigger than that."
 
It isn't the teachers that are always trying to do this. It's the
evil spirits within them.
 
Many people are servants of Satan (literally) without knowing about
it. They move for the reasons the evil spirits put into their
thoughts, which are not the reasons why the evil spirits are moving,
but they are "using" the person to accomplish their goal, without
them knowing about it.
 
Sin always leads to "steal, kill, destroy" in some form.
 
The Bible warns also about "science falsely so-called," and teaches
us to maintain our faith in the light of what appears to be contra-
dictory evidence.
 
One such example of where this has borne fruit is in the area of
genetics research. The study of DNA has revealed so much com-
plexity that it could not have come about by random chance. It
was clearly, clearly, clearly designed.
 
Christians have said that all alone, and now science has finally
caught up and revealed enough through technology to say yes, it
is designed.
 
Stalwarts will continue to say it is not designed, but it is so
obvious. There are single DNA encoding sequences that are used
in 12-different functions, encoding the same DNA to RNA through
an editor, which removes certain parts here, and not there, and
uses certain encodings here, and not there, such that if you
were to alter even one gene in those sequences, one of the 12
things it relates to would cease to function, and the organism
would be non-viable.
 
It's like having a 12-way crossword puzzle. One letter out of
place and the entire thing collapses.
 
It is a number so far beyond the number of atoms that exist in
the universe that it came about by random chance. It makes it
impossible in all but the absolute most extreme view.
 
And when you factor in the diversity of life, the beauty, the
form and purpose, the inherent single-designer signature found
in all of it ... it's obvious we were designed.
 
I could not see it before I came to faith. Now it's obvious. I
imagine it will be the same for everyone until they're saved.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 04:56PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 4:54 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> The Bible warns also about "science falsely so-called," and teaches
> us to maintain our faith in the light of what appears to be contra-
> dictory evidence.
 
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A19-21&version=KJV
 
19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation
against the time to come, that they may lay hold on
eternal life.
20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust,
avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions
of science falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Grace be with thee. Amen.
 
It's interesting Paul places that "oppositions of science falsely
so called" in there with profanity and vain babblings. :-)
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 03 02:03PM -0700

On Wednesday, 3 October 2018 22:21:47 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > and when? That is defamation.
 
> Multiple times. You have criticized me and called me names
> falsely. Most everyone here has done so.
 
So criticizing you is wrong? Where is it written that Rick C. Hodgin
is infallible or even holy and so criticizing him is crime or even
blasphemy? You are just like the rest of self-righteous liars who
pretend something that they are not.
 
> > I am programmer, not some sort of criminal.
 
> The Bible teaches ...
 
Yes, sure, I have done several things inconsiderately or carelessly or
mislead others out of vanity or bride. But I always regret because I
consider that I did not make our world better place. That does not give
you any rights to lie that I have done something bad to you.
 
> And there are over 600 separate laws that God gave Moses, and
> are still in effect for man.
 
These laws were given to the Chosen Nation, Jews not to me, "gentile",
by that book. So I haven't given any orders nor ways to wash my sins
with blood sacrifices like Jews in that book. Therefore I just try to
live my life decently.
 
> > I have just honestly said what I think about your behavior. And you are
> > clearly liar who thinks he is holy and therefore your lies are also holy.
 
> You have denied God.
 
Where? I have only shown several times that you are liar. I have always
said that god has all rights to do whatever god wants to do and can
request anything from me anytime.
 
> You have compared the Christian God to other lower-case "g" gods.
 
Where? I have written that by Quran Allah is same god of Christians
and Jews, and that the Scriptures given to Christians and Jews were
correct, and Messiah was sent and yet it did not help Jews and
Christians who are still disobedient. I have not lied, search Quran
translation and read 29.46 and 29.47. But Quran is also not written
for me but for Arabs.
 
> with a false accusation against me, stemming from that sin-
> induced hate in your heart for God spilling out into all of the
> things of God.
 
How can I ever rebel against god? God can do whatever he pleases.
And yes, you are liar who thinks himself being holy. You are not
god. Sure, I have read Bible, there's nowhere said that you are
holy; god owns you nothing. I don't have any reason to hate god.
And I can't hate even you, Rick, being stupid is usual, being
annoying is usual and being liar is also usual. It just makes you
boring, untrustworthy and not charming ... that's it.
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 04 10:09AM +1300

On 04/10/18 09:56, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Grace be with thee. Amen.
 
> It's interesting Paul places that "oppositions of science falsely
> so called" in there with profanity and vain babblings. :-)
 
Science as we know didn't exist back in biblical times. They would be
referring to something completely different.
 
--
Ian.
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 04 10:16AM +1300

On 04/10/18 09:54, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> an actual paleontology class, she saw things differently [27]:
 
> Many people's faith is destroyed by modern school entities, in-
> cluding textbooks, teachers, professors.
 
Strong faith coexists with the truth, only fragile or distorted fail
will be destroyed.
 
>> He is under no obligation to meet our expectations. He is bigger than that."
 
> It isn't the teachers that are always trying to do this. It's the
> evil spirits within them.
 
There you go again, can't face the truth and fall back on "sin"... Read
what Schweitzer has to say, her core faith is undamaged by the truth.
 
> genetics research. The study of DNA has revealed so much com-
> plexity that it could not have come about by random chance. It
> was clearly, clearly, clearly designed.
 
Such complexity that couldn't have come about by random chance in your
time-frame, but over 100s of millions of years? Read up on probability.
 
--
Ian.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 05:24PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 5:03 PM, Öö Tiib wrote:
> is infallible or even holy and so criticizing him is crime or even
> blasphemy? You are just like the rest of self-righteous liars who
> pretend something that they are not.
 
It's the content and the way you criticize me, which is because I
am teaching you about the author of the universe.
 
> mislead others out of vanity or bride. But I always regret because I
> consider that I did not make our world better place. That does not give
> you any rights to lie that I have done something bad to you.
 
There are going to be a lot of (by Earthly standards) moral,
ethical, hard-working people in Hell. It has to do with whether
or not your sin was forgiven. Not other things.
 
> by that book. So I haven't given any orders nor ways to wash my sins
> with blood sacrifices like Jews in that book. Therefore I just try to
> live my life decently.
 
There will be no people who survive judgment day without Christ,
Öö Tiib. Many of those people who lived in areas where Jesus
was never taught will still be saved, because they heard His
voice calling them in their heart, and they answered and follow-
ed Him. But unless they are of that spirit, and you will know
them by their fruit, it will not be so for others.
 
 
> Where? I have only shown several times that you are liar. I have always
> said that god has all rights to do whatever god wants to do and can
> request anything from me anytime.
 
I am not a liar, Öö Tiib. I defy you to present any evidence
of where I have lied on anything.
 
You have said today:
-----[ Begin ]-----
I think he believes that he gets more brownie points when people are
angry at him. Therefore he tries to troll us. Typical technique of his
is being as boring, annoying, perturbing and groundlessly accusing as
possible. He does never answer any questions, he ignores what was
posted and deliberately misunderstands the little he reads. Sometimes
he posts outright nonsense directly or indirectly from parody sites and
when pointed at it then it is not his fault but of some other similar
idiot from YouTube. Why such people never fear that they misinterpret,
misrepresent and disservice their god? Brownie point from Jesus:
-----[ End ]-----
 
"Therefore he tries to troll us." -- I do not troll anyone. I
am legitimately teaching. Every one of my posts has that same
teaching position.
 
"Typical technique of his is being as boring, annoying, perturbing
and groundlessly accusing as possible." -- The things I state are
things which are described directly and exactly in scripture. I
can back up everything I've posted about anything I've posted in
the area of Christianity or observing people's behavior as being
sin with Bible verses.
 
"He does never answer any questions," -- I answer many questions.
I do not always give the exact answer the person intended, but I
judge things by multiple factors, not just reading posts and then
issuing replies. I discern intents behind certain posts, and have
to address those intents, because the author of the things being
written are not just the sole individual, but also the evil spirits
they've let in guiding their thoughts toward certain questions,
etc. It is truly an extreme maneuver to do well consistently, and
it is very difficult to do it right. I stand by the things I have
written, and I will back up anything brought into question with
direct verses of scripture.
 
"he ignores what was posted..." -- I do not ignore what was posted.
I may miss things because I can't read every post on the Usenet
groups I subscribe to all the time. But I do not ignore anything
I read. It's as I say, I am discerning more than just the raw
words on the posts. There is spiritual movement behind them. It's
why I spend time responding to some extremely vulgar people like
Leigh and Peter Cheung, and others I discard and do not reply to
at all for far lesser "offenses" (by outward appearance). The
spirit guides the Christian from within, and there are times we
know to be silent. It's not an ignoring, however.
 
"...and deliberately misunderstands the little he reads." -- I do
not deliberately misunderstand anything. I do often misunderstand
things I read due to dyslexia, but when called on it I correct it.
 
You have written so many lies about me today, calling me in my
service to God everything except a servant of God. Do you see
this?
 
> Christians who are still disobedient. I have not lied, search Quran
> translation and read 29.46 and 29.47. But Quran is also not written
> for me but for Arabs.
 
"Why such people never fear that they misinterpret, misrepresent
and disservice their god?"
 
You brought the entirety of religious deities into one grouping
there and used the lower-case "g" "god" identifier.
 
God Almighty, the God of the Bible, is not on par with other gods.
Other gods exist, but all of them were created. None of them are
the Alpha and the Omega, the Great I AM, the eternal God who was,
and is, and is to come, the Almighty.
 
What I am trying to teach you is that distinction a) exists, b)
is completely real, and c) is non-trivial. God is who God is,
and He deserves to be recognized for who He is.
 
> And I can't hate even you, Rick, being stupid is usual, being
> annoying is usual and being liar is also usual. It just makes you
> boring, untrustworthy and not charming ... that's it.
 
God says "do not do this..." and you do it anyway. That is you
in rebellion against God.
 
You know in your heart you have sin. You've heard the teaching
that all men everywhere are now called to repent and come to
Jesus asking forgiveness for their sin ... yet you will not do
it. At least not yet.
 
Jesus said:
 
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A30&version=KJV
 
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that
gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
 
By His own teaching, since you are not with Him, you are directly
against Him and scattering abroad. You are in full rebellion a-
gainst Him, and will suffer the wrath of that rebellion on Judgment
Day.
 
/IT'S WHY I TEACH YOU ABOUT THIS TODAY/ ... because today you can
still be saved. After you leave this world /IT WILL/ be too late.
And no one knows when they're leaving this world. One unexpected
health issue, and it's all over.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 05:26PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 5:09 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> so called" in there with profanity and vain babblings. :-)
 
> Science as we know didn't exist back in biblical times.  They would be
> referring to something completely different.
 
It wasn't Paul writing that. It was the spirit of God prompting
Paul to write what He wrote. As such, the spirit of God wrote it
for multiple audiences over time.
 
Given also that in Daniel the angel had already told Daniel that
in the end-times knowledge would increase and people would go to
and fro ... it's a natural continuation of the original prophesy.
 
And what they had back then in terms of science still serves as
much of the foundation for what we have today. Many forms of
math are credited back to people B.C.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 04 10:32AM +1300

On 04/10/18 10:26, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> It wasn't Paul writing that. It was the spirit of God prompting
> Paul to write what He wrote. As such, the spirit of God wrote it
> for multiple audiences over time.
 
That's a half arsed cop out. They would even have had a word for science.
 
> And what they had back then in terms of science still serves as
> much of the foundation for what we have today. Many forms of
> math are credited back to people B.C.
 
Maths is irrelevant. The principles of contemporary science came much,
much later.
 
--
Ian.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 05:32PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 5:16 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> cluding textbooks, teachers, professors.
 
> Strong faith coexists with the truth, only fragile or distorted fail will be
> destroyed.
 
Strong faith in Jesus Christ is truth. He then leads the
person to rightly understand the things around Him. He
then calls people to stand up for Him and reclaim what the
enemy tried to steal, for the enemy always only comes to
steal, kill, destroy.
 
>> evil spirits within them.
 
> There you go again, can't face the truth and fall back on "sin"...  Read what
> Schweitzer has to say, her core faith is undamaged by the truth.
 
I am telling you the truth, Ian. If you'll look and see you'll
find evidence. Why do people have road rage? Why can't people
stop the addiction they can't stand being a part of their life?
Why are some people willing to destroy their marriage for a
fling, when they know it's wrong.
 
We are all tempted, lured, prompted, continually by evil spirits
to do bad things. They want us in sin, a doorway to them moving
us in this world.
 
It's before you, Ian. It's obvious if you will get past your
first denial and seek the truth objectively.
 
>> was clearly, clearly, clearly designed.
 
> Such complexity that couldn't have come about by random chance in your
> time-frame, but over 100s of millions of years?  Read up on probability.
 
I have. The video I posted shows what the probability of it
coming into existence is. It's 10^(340,000,000) power for a
single cell to come about by undirected natural processes.
The probability of a single protein coming into existence by
random chance is 10^164 power.
 
There are only 10^80 atoms in the entire universe.
 
At 35:23:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00vBqYDBW5s&t=35m23s
 
It is absolutely impossible for all life on Earth to have
evolved from the Big Bang + aftermath.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 05:35PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 5:32 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> math are credited back to people B.C.
 
> Maths is irrelevant.  The principles of contemporary science came much, much
> later.
 
They were thinking, Ian. That's the point. They were not content
to believe the things of God, and were seeking to understand things
in worldly forms.
 
It's written about in the Book of Acts, by the way, if you want to
read it.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com>: Oct 03 10:25PM


>> Multiple times. You have criticized me and called me names
>> falsely. Most everyone here has done so.
 
> So criticizing you is wrong?
 
Same old. Rick is insane, no point in discussing anything with insane
person.
 
 
--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Oct 04 01:06AM +0300

On 3.10.2018 23:15, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> match the semantics for character types, I'm sure there are
> (at least) two schools of thought on that question. AFAICT
> the Standard doesn't impose a requirement either way.
 
Wow, after following this thread for quite some time I believe I now
have finally found a case where C is qualitatively better then C++ ;-)
 
char x = 65;
printf("%c", x);
printf("%d", x);
 
Here, the value and its interpretation are separated, which makes sense
because there are different interpretations. This makes the code more
modular and more flexible than is possible with C++ streams.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Oct 03 01:55PM -0700

On 10/3/2018 5:57 AM, David Brown wrote:
 
> After reading Chris Vine's posts and having another quick look, it
> appears that his code does not in fact have race conditions, even though
> that is how Chris Thomasson described his own code.
 
My code just shows what happens when one has a broken implementation of
the fetch-and-add function. It boils down to:
______________________________
static std::atomic<unsigned int> g_racer(0);
 
 
void racer(unsigned int n)
{
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
// Race infested fetch-and-add op
unsigned int r = g_racer.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
r = r + 1;
g_racer.store(r, std::memory_order_relaxed);
}
}
______________________________
 
Wrt the standard, this is free of race conditions and/or undefined
behavior. However, wrt the actual logic of the implementation of said
fetch-and-add operation: it is busted. This creates a seemingly endless
stream of data. Just for fun, I was thinking about seeing what happens
if it were to emit bits. Actually, when the system is under load the
"quality" of the "random numbers" seem to get better.
 
It seems like the bit stream can be used to infer some information from
the system. If it is under heavy load, the quality of the "random" bits
should be "better" than ones derived from a system state that is
basically doing nothing.
 
 
> C11, and 1.10p21 in C++14 I think). But these define data races as
> mixing atomic and non-atomic accesses, whereas the code uses only atomic
> accesses.
 
Right. Everything is working off a global std::atomic<unsigned int>
called g_racer.
 
 
>> is disagreeing with you, and I'd like to have enough information to
>> decide which of you I agree with.
 
>>> Race conditions are undefined behaviour.
 
There are two different types of race conditions. Wrt the _standard_, my
code has no race conditions. Wrt the busted fetch-and-add
implementation, well, it just shows what can happen if a sync primitive
is not implemented correctly. My little program that shows this is okay
wrt the standard.
 
I inappropriately used the term race-condition to refer to the actual
busted fetch-and-add implementation used to generate "random" numbers.
Sorry about that.
 
 
>> atomic, ...". Could you explain what's wrong with the reasons that have
>> been given for believing that it doesn't apply?
 
> As I say, it looks like the code does not contain data races after all.
 
I totally agree with you. Thank you for taking the time to have a
"closer" look. :^)
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Oct 03 02:18PM -0700

On 10/2/2018 4:45 AM, Chris Vine wrote:
>>>> On 10/1/2018 10:07 PM, Öö Tiib wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 2 October 2018 02:15:56 UTC+3, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/1/2018 3:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[...]
> relationships, and the outcome will be indeterminate; but in C++
> standardeze that does not of itself generate a "data race" or undefined
> behaviour.
 
Completely agreed. Perhaps a name of "simulate_foobar_fetch_and_add" is
better than "racer"...
 
 
> sense: most people would say that any program which does not establish
> the correct "happens before" relationships is "racy". But that does not
> of itself give rise to undefined behaviour.
 
Completely agreed. The foobar fetch-and-add example is racy, however
there are no race-conditions wrt the standard. ;^)
 
 
> code further on the grounds of undefined behaviour. If your shared
> variable were a plain unsigned int it could do so. If is of type
> std::atomic<unsigned int> then not, as I read it.
 
Right. Those atomic loads and stores should not be messed around with.
If one of them is taken out, or rearranged, it will basically destroy
the algorithm.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Oct 03 02:40PM -0700

On 10/2/2018 12:28 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> [snip]
> Chris, I was thinking today ... the "boring" parts of a fractal,
> which don't spin into infinities.
 
Are you referring to the equipotential bands? They can look boring,
however and fwiw, there is a heck of a lot of data within. Here are some
example renderings:
 
https://plus.google.com/101799841244447089430/posts/DtLtBDqKwRB
 
https://plus.google.com/101799841244447089430/posts/Lfx8uBxVxnF
 
https://plus.google.com/101799841244447089430/posts/CstcFBor8kg
 
And are some quick animations:
 
https://youtu.be/HCOsivt9aAA
 
https://youtu.be/UpNDkOKdcjk
 
https://youtu.be/ZYQJRJEETv8
 
 
>  Have you ever examined the
> "smoothness" of their variation there in the flat areas?  To see
> if there isn't some unusual variations in the smoothness?
 
Just so we can get on the same page, can you give me a link to a
rendering that shows these "flat areas"? Are we talking about the
Mandelbrot set here? I am just trying to clarify.
 
 
> smooth thing.  You get down there on the ground and walk on it
> you see a lot more interesting detail.  It might even look like
> it has fingerprints depending on the winds and waves.
 
Agreed. Zooming in on a fractal is extraordinarily similar in nature.
 
 
> between those perturbations and the descent into fractals would
> yield some interesting things, kind of like how there are some
> constants encoded in fractals.  Perhaps there's more in there.
 
I know that we can actually load/store n-ary information from/into a
Julia set by using reverse iteration and mapping the roots of the
iterations to a symbol set. In a sense, it is an infinitely complex
n-ary tree structure. Here is some example code should how one can store
and load data:
 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.lang.c++/bB1wA4wvoFc/discussion
 
This uses limited precision, well, is uses double. However, we can store
a lot more information using arbitrary precision. Theoretically, we can
store infinite data using infinite precision to calculate the roots of a
Julia set.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 04:35PM -0400

On 10/3/2018 4:30 PM, bitrex wrote:
>> It's not quite that simple.
 
> You think too much, man. Very common problem with intelligent people. Hammer,
> nail. I try to avoid it hammer-nail when I can.
 
Things exist in fundamentals, bitrex. It's where Christians are
called to operate. We seek with great diligence the root, the
lower component which then when understood reveals naturally the
upper components.
 
All Christians must press in and seek the truth in this way, or
they'll be ill-effective servants of Christ in this world.
 
BTW, it's taken me over a decade to come to these realizations.
That's regular study, regular reading the Bible, regular list-
ening to sermons and Bible Study audio and video, etc.
 
It is something that's solidly in scripture, but you have to
get a solid foundation to be able to see and discern nuance
and subtlety in scripture.
 
But, I'm not the only one teaching these things. Look to the
greats in history. Charles Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, George
Whitefield, et al ... they teach the same things.
 
It's there with much study and a focus of that intelligence
upon the subject matter rightly, with a right pursuit of the
truth. Everyone will discover it if they press in properly.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 03 02:10PM -0400

Everything I post is about God doing one thing: Loving you enough
to overlook your sin, and to receive you unto Himself even though
you are guilty of sin.
 
/HE WANTS/ you to be with Him in Heaven. He's made everything all
ready to go for you. He did the hard work at the cross. All you
have to do is come to Him now, bowing down, in repentance, asking
forgiveness, and you shall receive it. You shall receive literal
eternal life, and the new spirit nature which will inhabit your
existence until you leave this world.
 
God wants you. He calls out to you personally. He calls out to
you through men and women like me who teach you about these things.
It is literally that kind of invitation ... Him to you.
 
Only a fool would pass up what He's offering ... which is a solid
testimony of how strong sin's grip is on people, that they still
choose to pass on God's free offer of salvation from eternal Hell-
fire and damnation, to be in His paradise free from labor or bur-
den forever, wrapped in joy, peace, love, communing with God in
new ways we can't even begin to imagine in this limited form of
existence here in this physical world.
 
Where do you want to spend eternity? Burning alive in Hellfire?
Or with God exploring the entirety of His universe and creation?
 
The choice is literally yours. Jesus is the gateway. All who
will be saved are saved /ONLY/ through Him, because only Jesus
can take away your sin, and it's exactly because of what He did
at the cross.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)