I’ve written a long-overdue answer to a question I occasionally get asked, either by email or in blog comments – why is this blog called “Hacking for Christ”? It might be useful reading for anyone who is bemused, intrigued or confused by any part of the title (even the word “for”).
Good post. I like the part where you note the dual meanings of words. And your last paragraph is inspiring.
You have issues… do not use the name in this context.
In your article you link to “Hacker naming controversy” at Wikipedia, but that’s a broken link. I think you want to link to “Hacker definition controversy” instead.
nice… i like it. thanks for the explanation
Oh, please! That was pathetic. Stick to hacking, not proselytizing…. Look forward to 220.127.116.11/18.104.22.168. Good work on the project.
Proselytizing? Proselytes? Then don’t tell glazou ;)
Well that’s exactly what I thought the explanation would be, and rather well-written too. You don’t cover why you believe forgiveness from sin is necessary, but I suspect that a full explanation of that would take up a great deal more space than a ‘why the title’ page would usually be expected to consume. That sort of explanation usually seems to.
Iori: I’m not quite sure what you mean. Could you elaborate?
Screwtape: thanks for the tip. I’ll fix the link when I get home tonight.
I provided a temporary fix to the link on the wikipedia by putting a redirect on the page.
Bravo! Keep it up :)
Well, I happen to agree more with Bertrand Russell than with you, but I respect your right to hold those beliefs. Those who said things like “Oh, please! That was pathetic. Stick to hacking, not proselytizing….” and “You have issues…” probably need to take a chill-pill (and perhaps they could read the Russell article you linked to if they want to know how to make a rational argument against Christianity).
your code reuse comment was abolutely brilliant!
about your comment on code reuse: it is good to see that others get the same impression. I once got that impression after I had read Douglas Hofstadter’s Metamagicum book. I’m also astonished when looking at something natural where the code is in fact at the same time in part its own decompressor.
Yes, and, presumably we could say that God has written “free” code? You probably have some more fitting techy phrases for the exact deal: like Sharware, or something?
Maybe there are issues about “hacking God’s code” too? e.g. genetic engineering. Are “all rights reserved”?
Don’t let the naysayers get you down. I think the comment about code reuse is amusing and thought-provoking. Just bear in mind that all creation *except* Man was spoken into existence (Gen. 1:24-25 vs. Gen. 1:26-27). Perhaps the Lord needed to “get His hands dirty” and hack the DNA to make us!
As a fellow believer in Christ I am always encouraged by bold expressions of Faith. Keep it up!
Reason some people may have a problem is that. A hacker is someone whom delves into new things. To have some sort of conservatism, resistance of new ideals or anything else is a degradation in the meaning of hacker. If you want some more info I suggest these sites http://www.nobeliefs.com, http://www.peacefire.org, or http://www.holysmoke.org. A hacker is more of the scientific sort not someone paranoid of superstition. Don’t you know every scientist in history has had some persecution for progressing human technology??? Galileo, Darwin, Christopher Columbus, early doctors. Look up their names http://www.wikipedia.org