Facebook Loosely Defined Acquaintances?

Facebook Loosely Defined Acquaintances?

The new URL for my other blog, my original blog. The URL now more closely matched to blog title.

Blogger offers no redirect function, sadly.

drrnm.blogspot.com

Business Insider January 28 2016

Cited

'In the early '90s, anthropologist Robin Dunbar proposed that a human being has the capacity to have up to 150 meaningful relationships. Recently, Dunbar did a study of human interaction on Facebook and found that number to be much lower. We only have 4 real friends, and 14 that care at all. 

Produced by Joe Avella'

End Citations

Philosophically, I have viewed online work and contacts as a means to an end and not an end.

My various Blogger, Google+ and Facebook sites exist primarily for career, ministry and personal reasons, but if I was to make a significant contact online, there would be a significant mutual interest to possibly have offline contact if circumstances allowed.

In other words, hypothetically at least, someone online would be worth potentially contacting offline.

Online social networking for the sake of online social networking in itself has very limited value for myself.

I, of course use online blogging as a media to publicly present my academic work, which includes the potential of public critique.

Social networking sites also provide entertainment and have some educational value.

Via one of my You Tube subscriptions, I was recently watching a very professional online female relationship coach from Europe that stated (paraphrased) home-produced 'selfie' profile photos made a man look like he sits at home all the time with no social life.

She noted that it was better to use a profile photo from a social setting.

On one hand, I can see this reasonable psychology.

My Conwy, Castle photograph with my English friend, Simon, is a very good profile photo for me to use on Facebook, as even though it is a few years old it shows me in a social setting.

And I basically look pretty much the same...thankfully. Slightly older with a little more muscle mass.

On the other hand, frankly, as I have stated in different articles on this site, I am not interested in sharing my social life online in great detail.

I have been to a combination of Europe and the British Isles approximately eight times, including living in England for almost two years, but I have chosen to share very few of my actual photographs.

I have visited the United States several times.

Instead, I share professional photos from sites such as Facebook, Google+ and Trekearth.

Many of these are of Europe.

Intellectually, it should not be concluded I have no interest in visiting Europe or that I have no interest in world travel because I do not share many of my own photos.

In the same way, it should not be concluded that I do not like to attend parties because I do not share many party photos online.

Should I use social events to promote myself for 'loosely defined acquaintances' that are on the fence on whether to contact me in faith, and perhaps get to know me better?

Since most of our online contacts are 'loosely defined acquaintances' there is very little commitment to being a Facebook 'Friend' or Google+ "Friend'.

If someone wants to find out more about me, there are many social media options available as opposed to making deductions about me from the sort of profile photos presented!

I think what can be deduced from social media and my profile photos is that I work a lot and share the occasional 'selfie' taken while I am online.

I listen to sermons from SearchLight Ministries and Pastor Jon Courson, online, and a true thing he states (paraphrased) is that social media sites such as Facebook do not present reality but often show people trying to make their lives look better and more exciting than they are in reality.

They are as phoney as my bodybuilder friend Bobby Buff in the 1990s, as he denied at the time he was showing off his muscles to the women at Columbia Bible College, wearing his angelic white muscle shirts.

Only to finally admit that this was the truth, decades later.

As I have noted theologically, persons are finite and sinful (Ephesians, Romans as examples).

Placing too much trust in limited knowledge, social deductions from social media is a danger of the present times.

Within modern psychology in the context of career job facilitators and corporate headhunters, they stress the need to make personal offline social contacts in all areas of life.

It is acceptable that these offline contacts originate as online ones.

I heard it stated recently (paraphrased) that no matter how good your intellectual arguments are you will not convince someone until you get to their emotions.

There is much truth to that in many cases (although in an academic context less so) and that is a reason for in-person intellectual and emotional, offline contacts in the contexts of career, ministry and personal.

Google+/Facebook

Christian Cologne?

Cologne Cathedral:Walldotalphacodersdotcom

Cited

'Published on Jul 25, 2012 10 Dating Tips For The Christian Man was based off of some tips online from the 60s, modified for our purposes.'

End Cited

I will preface my statements by writing that I am not on the attack against anyone in this article.

Not my style on my sites.

Rather, I am attempting to examine this issue reasonably, but it will not be exhaustive.

---

I will admit I have mixed views on the video and that it was enjoyable as a work of satirical art. I found it amusing at points. I viewed it more than once in order to reasonably understand it.

I enjoy these documentary type videos from the 1960s as an art form and it was well-done by the producer, although modified.

Is the video mocking Christianity?

The producer of the video may or may not have a good, reasonable, intellectual understanding of Christianity and Christian worldview within an academic Religious Studies and Philosophy context.

I would deduce the producer has significant knowledge of Christian culture.

Some conservative and very conservative Christians may find the video offensive.

Some in these groups may find it offensive that a moderate conservative Christian such as myself would enjoy the video as an art form and find some of it amusing.

But, I find the Christian, conservative, 'humour police', sometimes just are not very realistic when it comes to humour and art.

I do not think a forced type of 'Puritan' approach to humour is very intellectually honest.

This video is obviously satirical.

And perhaps mocking Christianity, in the romantic, dating context.

However, intellectually and philosophically, there is room to consider negative critiques.

The Christian cologne example does portray how Christian culture/Evangelical Christian culture can 'Christianize' things where there is no need for that to take place.

It could be concluded from the video that Christians should not be socially inept with culture.

To reach the world, yet not be part of the world system, requires a reasonably good social understanding of the world and not social ineptness.

In regard to praying before a date, I reason it is not an action worthy of satire...

1 Thessalonians 5:16-18

English Standard Version (ESV)

16 Rejoice always, 17 pray without ceasing, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.

From a Biblical, Christian perspective, anything important is worth praying about, consistently.

I grew up in a primarily secular household in secular Canada and as well earned four degrees in Religious Studies and Philosophy; in Christian and secular contexts, North American and British/European contexts.

I will once again state on my site (s) that the secular Western world with its predominant lack of Biblical, Religious Studies and Philosophical education and knowledge, has a majority of citizens that are in no reasonable intellectual position to significantly opine on or judge the Christian worldview, any religious worldview, or any philosophical worldview, period.

Most persons in the Western world do not have a significant intellectual grasp of any worldview.

There are some professors, including secular ones and some within the intellectual elite that do have a reasonable, significant understanding of Religious Studies, Christianity, Philosophy and worldviews, but they are a minority in society.

The majority in Western society, and any society are largely following cultural and social norms, without significant education in Religious Studies and Philosophy.

The statement:

'People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'...comes to mind.

In the same way that I am intellectually average in many areas such as fashion and landscaping and my critiques of those involved would not hold much intellectual weight!

Crimes That Get One Executed In Saudi Arabia

Arabian Desert from the Daily Galaxy

Vocativ: June 18, 2015 by James King

Source

Cornell Law School: Death Penalty Worldwide

Vocativ Cited

'At least 16 “crimes” can result in a death sentence in Saudi Arabia—and more than a third wouldn’t even get you jail time in the U.S. On that list: sorcery and witchcraft. Of the 100 people executed this year, 47 were convicted of non-violent drug crimes, according to Human Rights Watch. Only 57 were Saudi citizens.'

Cited continued

'In many countries, there are established minimum and maximum sentences for different crimes—or a penal code. In Saudi Arabia, that is virtually non-existent. Only a handful of crimes, including murder, adultery and “consensual sexual relations between adults of the same sex,” carry specific punishments, and in each of those cases, it’s death, according to Death Penalty Worldwide.

Critics say this lack of a penal code gives judges broad discretion over the sentences they hand down, which allows them to impose death sentences, typically carried out by beheading, somewhat arbitrarily.'

Vocativ

The Wikipedia article on Saudi Arabia calls it a ‘Unitary, Islamic, Absolute, Monarchy’.

It may be considered by some observers, a theocracy.

The subject of debate.

As I noted on previous posts, I am personally philosophically opposed to a theocracy, or religious rule.

I would be opposed to theonomy, at least when corporately controlled, in this present realm. It is one thing to be self-directed by religious rule within a religious community, such as a church and the Church, it is another to be forced to follow religious rules by the State.

I do not hold to Islam as a worldview, but follow a Biblical Christian faith, philosophy and theology.

Theocracy

N.H.G Robinson states that just as democracy signifies a type of government ruled by the people by elected representatives, theocracy represents government rule by God and his representatives. Ancient Israel is a primary example. Robinson (1999: 564).

M.J. Wyngaarden explains that word is derived from the Greek words for God, theos, and from kratein to rule. This represents the rule of God. and is traced back to the Old Testament concept and may have been coined by Josephus. Wyngaarden (1996: 1083).

All human beings are presently sinful, by nature and significant free choice, not being forced or coerced to commit thoughts and actions for which they are significantly morally accountable. If one is forced or coerced to commit thoughts or actions, he or she is not morally accountable, in my view,

I do not support any primarily human attempt at establishing theocracy. Or religious rule.

I do not assume divine origins as sanctioning attempts at theocracy or religious rule.

A primarily human attempt at theocracy or religious rule does not guarantee Biblically based rule through the guidance of the true God.

Serious religious error can develop within a theocracy as political power can influence theology. 

Persons with views differing from the theocratic rule can be persecuted and even killed, as people committing treason.

Human rights and freedoms can be violated.

Therefore, In the present age, I favour democracy over theocracy.

Even as democracy is of course too tainted by sin.

God and Christ are stated in Revelation, Chapters 21-22 to eventually establish the supernaturally culminated Kingdom of God.

Human beings that are at all involved in ruling will be resurrected and sinless. (1 Corinthians 15 and Revelation).

True divine rule will feature the infinite goodness and knowledge of God and the ability to reasonably and fairly rule as a theocracy. Although Christ will be King, there will likely exist some democracy, as in human beings having some self-rule in Christ.

Theonomy

N.H.G. Robinson and D.W.D. Shaw note that theonomy is an interpretation of a person’s life when ultimate ethical authority is found in the divine will. Autonomy would be self-imposed authority. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567).

They reference Paul Tillich and note that he states that theonomy is a law or principle which brings together the law of people with the ground and source of all being. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567).

For some autonomy and theonomy may be understood as the immanent and transcendent aspects of the ethics of theism. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567).

These seem like reasonable definitions, although Tillich’s does not read as particularly Christian. God would be more than the ground and source of all being, but a personal God that has revealed himself and laws that reflect his nature and will for humanity.

ROBINSON, N.H.G (1999) 'Theocracy' in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

ROBINSON, N.H.G. AND SHAW D.W.D. (1999) ‘Theonomy’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

WYNGAARDEN, M.J. (1996) ‘Theocracy’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

A Bomb v H Bomb v Neutron Bomb

Today on a business walk, not in North Korea...thankfully

I have never 'worried' about the threat of nuclear war. It is a reasonable philosophical possibility, in my opinion,

It may happen one day, it may not. It may be an aspect of God's eschatology, and it may not.

As my friend Darren and I have discussed since our days back in the 1990s at Columbia Bible College in Abbotsford; we both support nuclear disarmament, and support the existence of less nuclear weapons, but not unilateral disarmament by the Western powers.

However, as the nuclear technology exists after nuclear disarmament, even in the context of conventional war, nuclear weapons can once again can be created and mass created.

Therefore, even with nuclear disarmament, a threat of nuclear war remains.

With a rogue nuclear state such as North Korea in existence, nuclear disarmament is quite unlikely, indeed...

CNN January 8 2016

Cited

'Pyongyang, North Korea (CNN) At the Korean demilitarized zone, speakers are blasting propaganda and troops are massing, but in the heart of Pyongyang, talk is only of the purported success of North Korea's first hydrogen bomb test.'

Cited

'Another visitor to the center, 22-year-old medical student Lee Jue Sung, said that the nuclear program "is for national defense, to protect our country from our enemy."

"U.S. imperialists always want to invade our country, they are so aggressive," he said.'

Cited

'The purported H-bomb test, as well as previous nuclear tests, "cements (Kim's) authority domestically and his clout internationally," said Mike Chinoy, former CNN International correspondent and the author of "Meltdown: The inside story of the North Korean nuclear crisis." 

"By developing the nuclear capability, Kim will be able to cut the budget of the conventional military and bring them to heel."

Later this year, Kim will helm the Worker's Party Congress, the first time such a gathering has been held in 35 years, and may represent a realignment of political power away from the military.'

CNN: North Korea-Science and Technology Center

CBC News January 7 2016

Cited

'North Korea wants an H-bomb but experts doubt it tested one'

'Building H-bombs much more complex than A-bombs'

Cited

'North Korea's government bragged Wednesday that it had tested "a smaller H-bomb," calling it the "H-bomb of justice."

White House spokesman Josh Earnest, however, counters that initial analysis "is not consistent with the North Korean claims of a successful hydrogen-bomb test."

Earnest did describe the blast as a nuclear test, making the one this week North Korea's fourth. And Melissa Hanham, a Canadian expert on North Korea with the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, Calif., told CBC News that it was "pretty much universally acknowledged it was a nuclear test, but there's a lot of skepticism about whether it was an H-bomb test."

The South Korean military also doubts it was an H-bomb test, according the South Korea's Yonhap news agency.'

Cited

'Hanham says when, and if, radionuclide data from the explosion becomes available, experts should have a pretty good idea of just what kind of explosion it was. That could take anywhere from two weeks to two months.'

Cited

'A-bombs versus H-bombs

There are some key differences between atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs.

In basic terms:

An A-bomb relies on fission, the splitting of atoms.

An H-bomb relies on fusion, which produces energy through combining light atoms to make heavier ones.

A fission bomb uses an ordinary explosion to bring together enough uranium or plutonium to create a critical mass, which causes a much, much bigger explosion.

A fusion bomb uses a fission explosion to compress hydrogen, making it very dense and hot, so that the hydrogen atoms fuse rather than fly apart, also causing a much larger explosion.'

Cited

'Assessing North Korea's test claims are complicated by the fact that while a fully developed H-bomb is more complex than a basic atomic bomb, there are variations of atomic bombs that incorporate hydrogen.'

Cited

'North Korea's statement describes its H-bomb test as a "spectacular success" but ​Hanham says she doubts Wednesday's blast in North Korea could have been a full H-bomb test.

Melissa Hanham, an expert on North Korea with the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, says, 'Almost no one thinks North Korea is at a point in their development where they could do an H-bomb test.' (Middlebury Institute of International Studies)

The explosion wasn't big enough, according to the seismic data. A good thing, too, she says, since the Punggye-ri test site couldn't have contained the explosion if it was a real H-bomb, nor is she aware of evidence the country had prepared the site for such a test.'

Cited

'Hanham hypothesizes that the country definitely wants to have an H-bomb, but it is probably experimenting with some kind of boosted nuclear device. However, she does note the slight possibility that it was a failed test in which only the fission reaction went off, without initiating the fusion reaction.'

The Oxford Dictionary of Science documents that nuclear weapons are caused by nuclear fission, nuclear fusion or a combination of both. (572).

With the fission bomb, the atomic bomb, 'two subcritical masses' of fissile material (uranium-235 or plutonium-239) are brought together by a chemical explosion to produce one supercritical mass. (572).

The resulting explosion is typically in the 'kiloton range with temperatures of the order of 108 K being reached'. (572).

K=Kelvin:Thermodynamic temperature (893).

In contrast the fusion bomb, the thermonuclear weapon, the hydrogen bomb, relies on nuclear-fusion reaction. (572).

This becomes self-sustaining at a temperature of about 35 x 106  K. (572).

The text states the process can take place as two phase fission-fusion devices, where in the inner fusion bomb is surrounded by outer hydrogenous material or the more powerful three phase fission-fusion-fission process and device. (572).

A hydrogen bomb has not yet been used in warfare. (572).

It is noted a special type of fission-fusion bomb is the neutron bomb which releases high energy neutrons. The neutron radiation destroys people but provides less shock wave and less property damage.

This could be known as the corporate bomb perhaps?

Oxford Dictionary of Science, (2010), Sixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.