Forget vitamin C! Albert Szent-Gyorgyi lived with spies, lies. - CSMonitor.com

Forget vitamin C! Albert Szent-Gyorgyi lived with spies, lies. - CSMonitor.com:

'via Blog this'

Hope and aid for the Persecuted Church | Persecuted Christians : URGENT: Stricken Pakistani Christians need help as the waters rise

Hope and aid for the Persecuted Church | Persecuted Christians : URGENT: Stricken Pakistani Christians need help as the waters rise:

'via Blog this'

The Shield of Abraham [Study from Deilitsch's Commentary on Genesis ch 15 v 1-6]

Gen 15:1-6
The words of Jehovah run thus: “Fear not, Abram: I am a shield to thee, thy reward very much.” הַרְבֵּה an inf. absol., generally used adverbially, but here as an adjective, equivalent to “thy very great reward.” The divine promise to be a shield to him, that is to say, a protection against all enemies, and a reward, i.e., richly to reward his confidence, his ready obedience, stands here, as the opening words “after these things” indicate, in close connection with the previous guidance of Abram. Whilst the protection of his wife in Egypt was a practical pledge of the possibility of his having a posterity, and the separation of Lot, followed by the conquest of the kings of the East, was also a pledge of the possibility of his one day possessing the promised land, there was as yet no prospect whatever of the promise being realized, that he should become a great nation, and possess an innumerable posterity. In these circumstances, anxiety about the future might naturally arise in his mind. To meet this, the word of the Lord came to him with the comforting assurance, “Fear not, I am thy shield.” But when the Lord added, “and thy very great reward,” Abram could only reply, as he thought of his childless condition: “Lord Jehovah, what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go childless?” Of what avail are all my possessions, wealth, and power, since I have no child, and the heir of my house is Eliezer the Damascene? מֶשֶׁק, synonymous with מִמְשָׁק (Zep_2:9), possession, or the seizure of possession, is chosen on account of its assonance with דַּמֶּשֶׂק. בֶּן־מֶשֶׁק, son of the seizing of possession = seizer of possession, or heir. Eliezer of Damascus (lit., Damascus viz., Eliezer): Eliezer is an explanatory apposition to Damascus, in the sense of the Damascene Eliezer; though דַּמֶּשֶׂק, on account of its position before אליעזר, cannot be taken grammatically as equivalent to דַּמַּשְׂקִי.
(Note: The legend of Abram having been king in Damascus appears to have originated in this, though the passage before us does not so much as show that Abram obtained possession of Eliezer on his way through Damascus.)
To give still more distinct utterance to his grief, Abram adds (Gen_15:3): “Behold, to me Thou hast given no seed; and lo, an inmate of my house (בֶּן־בֵּיתִי in distinction from יְלִיד־בַּיִת, home-born, Gen_14:14) will be my heir.” The word of the Lord then came to him: “Not he, but one who shall come forth from thy body, he will be thine heir.” God then took him into the open air, told him to look up to heaven, and promised him a posterity as numerous as the innumerable host of stars (cf. Gen_22:17; Gen_24:4; Exo_32:13, etc.). Whether Abram at this time was “in the body or out of the body,” is a matter of no moment. The reality of the occurrence is the same in either case. This is evident from the remark made by Moses (the historian) as to the conduct of Abram in relation to the promise of God: “And he believed in Jehovah, and He counted it to him for righteousness.” In the strictly objective character of the account in Genesis, in accordance with which the simple facts are related throughout without any introduction of subjective opinions, this remark appears so striking, that the question naturally arises, What led Moses to introduce it? In what way did Abram make known his faith in Jehovah? And in what way did Jehovah count it to him as righteousness? The reply to both questions must not be sought in the New Testament, but must be given or indicated in the context. What reply did Abram make on receiving the promise, or what did he do in consequence? When God, to confirm the promise, declared Himself to be Jehovah, who brought him out of Ur of the Chaldees to give him that land as a possession, Abram replied, “Lord, whereby shall I know that I shall possess it?” God then directed him to “fetch a heifer of three years old,” etc.; and Abram fetched the animals required, and arranged them (as we may certainly suppose, thought it is not expressly stated) as God had commanded him. By this readiness to perform what God commanded him, Abram gave a practical proof that he believed Jehovah; and what God did with the animals so arranged was a practical declaration on the part of Jehovah, that He reckoned this faith to Abram as righteousness.
The significance of the divine act is, finally, summed up in Gen_15:18, in the words, “On that day Jehovah made a covenant with Abram.” Consequently Jehovah reckoned Abram's faith to him as righteousness, by making a covenant with him, by taking Abram into covenant fellowship with Himself. הֶאֱמִין, from אָמַן to continue and the preserve, to be firm and to confirm, in Hiphil to trust, believe (πιστεύσιν), expresses “that state of mind which is sure of its object, and relies firmly upon it;” and as denoting conduct towards God, as “a firm, inward, personal, self-surrendering reliance upon a personal being, especially upon the source of all being,” it is construed sometimes with לִ (e.g., Deu_9:23), but more frequently with בְּ (Num_14:11; Num_20:12; Deu_1:32), “to believe the Lord,” and “to believe on the Lord,” to trust in Him, - πιστεύειν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν, as the apostle has more correctly rendered the ἐπίστευσεν τῷ Θεῷ of the lxx (vid., Rom_4:5). Faith therefore is not merely assensus, but fiducia also, unconditional trust in the Lord and His word, even where the natural course of events furnishes no ground for hope or expectation. This faith Abram manifested, as the apostle has shown in Rom 4; and this faith God reckoned to him as righteousness by the actual conclusion of a covenant with him. צְדָקָה, righteousness, as a human characteristic, is correspondence to the will of God both in character and conduct, or a state answering to the divine purpose of a man's being. This was the state in which man was first created in the image of God; but it was lost by sin, through which he placed himself in opposition to the will of God and to his own divinely appointed destiny, and could only be restored by God. When the human race had universally corrupted its way, Noah alone was found righteous before God (Gen_7:1), because he was blameless and walked with God (Gen_6:9). This righteousness Abram acquired through his unconditional trust in the Lord, his undoubting faith in His promise, and his ready obedience to His word. This state of mind, which is expressed in the words בַּיהֹוָה הֶאֱמִין, was reckoned to him as righteousness, so that God treated him as a righteous man, and formed such a relationship with him, that he was placed in living fellowship with God. The foundation of this relationship was laid in the manner described in Gen_15:7-11.

Full text of "A Doctor S Casebook In The Light Of The Bible"

Full text of "A Doctor S Casebook In The Light Of The Bible":

'via Blog this'

A Portsmouth church

The World's First Business Computer

Lyons built and operated the world's first business computer which they called LEO (Lyons Electronic Office). This came into use months before any other computer. Initially intended for in-house use only, the machine caused such a stir that a company was started to build the machines for other UK organisations. Computers were exported to Australia, South Africa and Czechoslovakia when this was still behind the 'Iron Curtain'.Among all the technological achievements developed by J. Lyons Co. in their quest for efficiency, the development of their LEO (Lyons Electronic Office) computer in the early 1950s must rank as one of the most innovative. Single-handedly, and with advice given by Cambridge University, J. Lyons & Co. embarked upon one of the most ambitious DIY projects of the century; the building of an electronic, stored program computer designed specifically to undertake any clerical task. The upward trend in office costs following the end of the Second World War made Lyons realise that some form of automation was essential if these costs were to be brought under control. For many years their office procedures had been honed and adapted and many novel ideas had been introduced (micro film for example). In the pre-war years Lyons had developed an enviable reputation not only factory efficiency, but also for office procedures and job classification. Since it had been the policy for Lyons to control their own service departments (legal, transport, laundries, box making, central buying, works department, architects, food laboratory, tea estates, wine cellars, etc.) it was not such a big deal for them to embark on the building of an electronic computer, even though they had no history of electronics or electro-mechanical engineering. There was nothing available to them at this time which met their needs and so with their usual self-assurance they set about designing and building one themselves. The catalyst came in 1947, following a trip to America by Thomas Thompson and Oliver Standingford, two managers with wide experience of clerical procedures. On their return they produced a report for the Lyons board which basically said that electronic computers hold the key to office efficiency and for £100,000 Lyons could build one themselves which would show a saving in office expenditure of £50,000 per year. At this time Cambridge University were involved in their own computer project, EDSAC. This was designed for academic calculations and quite inappropriate for office work but Lyons did see the potential in the new technology. However, they did not want to play a passive role merely keeping in touch and in due course acquiring machines as they came available from manufacturers. In this way they could not influence machine design and this they felt was essential if the problem of commercial clerical automation was to be sold successfully. Instead Lyons donated £3,000 to Cambridge, to help in their EDSAC project, on the understanding that Cambridge would give them advice when needed. Maurice Wilkes, who headed the Cambridge team, thought Lyons had taken leave of their senses but was happy to go along with the idea. Lyons seconded a man to the Cambridge team for a year during which time he learned a great deal about electronics. Meanwhile Lyons advertised for an electronic engineer in the scientific journal Nature and it was answered by John Pinkerton. He had recently obtain his Phd at Cambridge and through Wilkes, had learned of this extraordinary project which Lyons had planned. The interview was a formality and Pinkerton started work on 17 January 1949. Several other team members were recruited for both hardware and software design although this terminology was not yet in use. During the next three years this inexperienced team, designed and built a working model which was dubbed LEO. A large area at head office was vacated and the computer gradually assembled piece by piece until the whole came together as a working machine three years later. During the process carpenters, plumbers, sheet metal and engineers staff toiled on the huge assembly of valves, switches, wires, ducting, resistors and power supplies in a well organised undertaking. Many, many difficulties had to be overcome. This had never been done before and so there was no experience to draw on; the operating system even had to be designed and written. Magnetic tape was introduced and discarded because it was not reliable. It was later introduced again. Engineers worked in close co-operation with the software team to design 'actions' relevant to the work which was to be performed. Every failure was logged and recorded to provide an audit trail. Application design was fully flow-charted and bench tested long before it even got to a computer program. In those days machine time was far more expensive that programmers time. Mercury delay lines were used for storage, 64 tubes in total, with a limited capacity of 2,048 orders or short numbers. The complete machine used over 5,000 thermionic valves. The first operational run of the computer took place on 5 September 1951 when an application known as Bakeries Valuations was performed. It was nursed through a pretty unreliable machine but from then on it was run each week as improvements were made. It was a resounding success. However, payroll automation had been one of the main objectives of John Simmons, the Lyons Controller who was responsible for the whole LEO project. Between 1951 and 1953 the project team began to overcome many of the machine's unreliable quirks so that by December 1953 it was felt reliable enough to undertake payroll, a task which had to be performed to time because staff had to be paid and in those days this meant weekly pay. This milestone came on 24 December 1953. The results were astounding. The task of calculating a employees pay, until now, took an experienced clerk 8 minutes. LEO had done the job in 1.5 seconds. It was a watershed, a quiet revolution. News of this fantastic 'electronic brain' circulated through industry and many famous companies commissioned Lyons to undertake a range of tasks on their computer; tasks which had been almost impossible to conduct previously because of the complex calculations needed. Hence a bureau service started which continued for many years. Lyons also set up a manufacturing facility to build computers for other companies. Until the American computers began to have an impact on the UK the LEO computers sold moderately well and the models were improved on LEO II and LEO III. Lyons also built mark-reading machines to improve data input and dispensed with punch card and paper tape. Complimenting these devices was a fast output printer using optical and computer generated images which were projected on to a light sensitive selenium drum. A large laser printer. They were incredibly expensive and could only be justified in businesses with large printed output such as insurance companies and government departments. By the 1960s the Americans had captured much of the UK computer market. Their machines were better engineered, more reliable and above all less expensive. With other British computer manufacturers suffering from the same American onslaught the British government supported the merger of British interests to counteract the imports. LEO merged with English-Electric and they in turn merged with other famous companies such as Marconi. In time British computer manufacture faded away.

Sir Isaac Newton and the State of Israel

Sir Isaac Newton is universally recognised as an influential scientist [as well as the co-founder of Calculus], however, his destiny was interwoven with my home town. It was the Earl of Portsmouth who obtained all his papers and journals and they remained a part of his estate for 259 years.Then in 1936, the then Earl of Portsmouth sold all this material to two academics: the economist John Maynard Keynes and the Jewish Oriental Studies scholar Abraham Shalom Yahuda. Keynes donated his share to Cambridge University and Yahuda left his share to the nation of Israel.The question is why would a Penteteuch scholar [Yahuda] be the least bit interested in the works of Isaac Newton? Newton was not only a physicist and mathematician, he was also a bible scholar and creationist.In particular, he held to the view that the Jewish people were destined to return to the Holy Land, which of course they have done so in increasing numbers since the [re]creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

University Courses [Free]

http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/about/about/index.htm

MIT Open Course Ware.

Forensic Computing Course [Free]

https://www.vte.cert.org/vteweb/Library/Library.aspx

Thank you to Carnegie-Mellon University for making this world class course available online and completely free.

Television Production Course [Free]

http://www.internetcampus.org/index.htm

With a special thank you to the generous professor who made his course available online and completely free.

Fred Sanger - Britain's double Nobel Prize laureate

Fred Sanger

Like John Bardeen, Fred Sanger also won 2 Nobel Prizes.Whilst Bardeen changed the whole world with his invention, Sanger changed the whole world of biomedicine and biomolecular science.

Sanger's first award was for decoding the amino acid sequence of insulin.His second prize was awarded for creating the Sanger nucleotide sequencing method.

John Bardeen - double Nobel Prize laureate

John Bardeen

So who was the most influential scientist of the twentieth century? My choice would definitely be John Bardeen - the American double Nobel Laureate. Together with Jack Kilby he changed everybody's life.