Theo Verelst Diary Page

Tue 31 july 2001, 12:41 PM

I've decided after good example to write some diary pages with toughts and events.

Oh, in case anybody fails to understand, I'd like to remind them that these pages are copyrighted, and that everything found here may not be redistributed in any other way then over this direct link without my prior consent. That includes family, christianity, and other cheats. The simple reason is that it may well be that some people have been ill informed because they've spread illegal 'copies' of my materials even with modifications. Apart from my moral judgement, that is illegal, and will be treated as such by me. Make as many references to these pages as you like, make hardcopies, but only of the whole page, including the html-references, and without changing a iota or tittel...

And if not? I won't hesitate to use legal means to correct wrong that may be done otherwise. And I am serious. I usually am. I'm not sure I could get 'attempt to grave emotional assault' out of it, but infrigement on copyright rules is serious enough. And Jesus called upon us to respect the authorities of state, so christians would of course never do such a thing. Lying, imagine that.

Previous Diary Entries   |   List of Diary Pages   |   Home Page

Tue Jul 31 2001, 12:41 PM

I'm quite sure yesterday's subject isn't finished, and also that it won't be finished today.

Who knows a few programming examples to do some straightforward windows (95/98/NT) programming for a simple window with some lines? I know how to do it with java or tcl, but I thought I would redo the DOS synthesis program in windows form.

I could of course go over the tk or mesa or directx example code, but in good enough tradition I thought I'd take the lowest level stuff a bit, just the opening of a window and text and line drawing, and maybe some menus. I checked altavista, but didn't immedeately find the right stuff.

Not that it may be realy necessary, though it may be a good idea to have a working program to show, but in the sound as in the programming sense, not all may know I did the Atari 'Pulse' synth database program, and pretty well too.. That had a fully featured multi window interface, menus, dialog boxes, interactive and real time midi functions and more, programmed on the mac like atari gem/vdi/aes/tos libs, which differ much from windows, but the concepts not that much, at least not for someone who knows their machine and processor architecture, assembly language and os builtup.

Anyhow, a program to make both a working interface and a good sound application could even be commercial, and certainly good advertisement, for both. I listened to the what I though would be the Swaggert thing again, and it had a strong enough musical opening, but the son, donnie did the sermon. As it is I guess under leading, which appearently for some reason deemed it appropriate to make a major focus of the text I (again) quoted in last weeks diary page: 2 Peter 2:- . 'wells without water' was the title, probably because it sums up a situation or warning, but the whole text and some like it is quoted, and at least we are rightfully informed that there is much going on in religeous sense which has nothing to do with the true gospel, and which causes the partakers to be doomed. And in the sermon, if that is the appropriate word, the word 'accursed' or maybe better 'damned' is also though to be the right rendering of the greek. So my note to them was seen, or was it prayer, or vertical prayer? Who knows. Who knows what I should do? Who I should be in all this? I know for certain at least that I'm capable enough to be more that exceptional enough to have taken more notice of than there has in 20 years, and also I know what the world and natural man does with God and his words, even though they are exceptional beyond compare. My point is that already 15 years ago, when I left a christian circuit which without any question was bad, I had experienced without much possibility to miss it that apearently in christian sense, as far as that at all exists in an acceptable form in this world, no person had existed that I ever met except maybe a few, who would take it serious that an at that time young and not very knowledgeable about the practice person might need some more confirmation about his serious enough faith in Someone who must have prophesised and answered prayers to more than a few to make clear what Gods will would be for for instance me. I'm just talking simple things here, I was doing my electrical engineering studies at the highest rate there was, with success, and appearently the only interest I should raise in the area of a main interest of mine as well at the time, learning about who I believed in, was that a few treacherous school teachers would not altogether not praise me for my near 100% flawless answering of bible course questions.

Try to talk about serious other subjects, also with some students I thought were maybe worth my while because of similar interests usually led to the equivalent of the iron curtain being drawn, and the content would never have to be such that a measure of intelligence could be combined with some practical data of significance, because without question that would have put me also practically on top. What a misery that would have been, someone who is not childabuser at all, not at all unfriendly, proven capable enough manager and leading person (I did for years at school and later at university I had no problem being more than forward and known enough student assistant, early on), quite capable language persons, more then enough acqainted with normal and sane enough lasting human relations not based on oppression, social extorsion or all too unhealthy motivation, knowledgeable about most subjects in life, though maybe not at all about some filling in of possible christian and other sins, would be taken serious and taken at least somewhat for an authoritive person without such only being done behind his back by others. What a mess that would have been.

I'm sure there are people who don't take God for who He is, and take it that the head satanist are always more because they at least make human sacrifice (wrong: God lets everyone of them and youa nd I die, and some even twice), or because certain types of believers will always win because simply they are always willing to let evil take its place, wrong too: God lets evil build up and show itself for millenia and than still He decides on history and even saves and takes his own people serious in spite of it. And of course we should never put ourselves together in a way that makes sense, because the money game will always demand that God as the head of our souls will be corrupted anyway, and that would be worse of course, so lets keep the dishonour to ourselves and mess things up to begin with.

I read some David Wilkerson stuff the other day, there seems to be meeting in Rotterdam with him and Cruz and some other soon, or maybe past, I couldn't find it on the web, one from I thing 1981 spoke about boring churches. Another about rebellion being the sin of witchcraft according to the 2d book of Samuel. A little root of bitterness will take you there and to a lack of reverence for Christ. A sermon for the dutch focusses on the anger against God, and had an ending affirmative of the reverse of the line with what I read in this

General George Washington, 1776: "Under a full persuation of the justice of our cause, I cannot entertain an idea that it will finally sink, though it may remain for some time under a cloud"

as opposed to the dutch adagium 'luctor et emergo', 'I wrestle and surface', which is probably too optimistic a goal already for many in practice.

I understand he still has a church in new york, trying to at least line up with sensible doctrine and a life hopefully not all to unholy in the right sense of that word, though those are impressions more than statements made on solid observations. Wilkerson as I remember from the bestseller 'cross in the asphalt jungle' is the on who tells nicky cruz that Jesus loves him, making him free from gang and I think drug misery, and a convert who has since preached 'the' gospel.

Sunlife radio had a prerecorded 'discussion' between swaggart and some lesser known persons about the work of the Holy Spirit as opposed to religeous forms and natural persons having their own will and motivations ascribing them to God, and was quite revealing as to what makes christianity tick: the lust to control everything.

Enter christian circles and what do they want: arrange and control your life. Quotes would be good but I didn't type them down, and the realplayer station has no audio archives, at least this well known person made it very evidently clear what he thinks about the vast majority of christians, which makes it a bit easier to get things straight and for some and hopefully some young to get them straightened out. Schizofrenia has this conrol thing, too, I remember. What is the greek background for the 'di-psuche' word (double souled, double lived) starting of the epistle of James, or maybe the hebrew background, would it all come together that way? Then at least the spiritual authorities and the personal little buggers and the main errors leading to the sort of strange social constellations in this world are all in a clear picture from long ago, appearently starting with God telling people they'll receive nothing as a result of the condition He himself gives them over to when He wants to make clear He doesn't tolerate their sinfull ways.

On the natural side of things I was pleased and slightly honored to find my nano bio subjects for some part quite accurately brought forward in public in 'scientific american', as a few feature articles covering various things I've written about, mentioning the research in the field of cell simulation and the possible application in drug test research, to test drugs in a computer simulation, as a topic for recently projected research.

The amount of complexity to be covered is vast and nicely in line with quite some of the research I've been into and experienced with, and theoretically I should be more than fine, certainly too with my physics angle, so as it becoms possible and desirable to use my possibilities, those 1000 node pentium 7 beowulfs should be decent work horses to make some science with.

I'm sure I like to do more and more extensive instrument (sound) simulations, but the one is decoupled from the other, and as I knew long ago, a guitar enclosure can be nicely and mathematically effectively modeled with spines and a good graphical modeling knowledge never hurts in such context, to put it carefull. Now the money thing, and then find out life is about completely different importancies...

Recently I was talking with someone amoung quite other things about illuminati, and certain families wanting as one may put it world dominion, or simply power and money, or maybe the chance to be on top of the sin trading and capital punishment guilt exchange and whitewashing game, I don't quite know which comes first and how every branch of evil is put together. At least I think it is usefull to be aware of such forces in this world, and to be aware of the historical facts that at least serious blows were given in the past to such circles, as with the american and french and following revolution, official laws and their enforcement, world wars, partly sponsored by them not leading to total destruction or bondage or power of one party and the ever present witnesses of what God can do when He directly occupies Himself with people who do not end up all too unholy.

I listened to bbc 'world service' on am radio shortly in the evening, they had a short coverage of clinton visiting harlem (ny), and I could not escape thinking some background voices and whisperings were a bit too clear to miss, even if one would want to, and there was not just applause. I guess people who have to work for a living don't like certain natural tendencies of certain persons. Not to say that in general I would like Bush II better, I'm sure the better idea is to assume that such places are to be filled by capable enough persons who are reliable enough for what matters, and that their personal lives are maybe interesting or examplatory as a lucky coincidence, but that they over the whole of things are just as subject to human judgement and expectations as anyone else with intelligence and leading capabilities, or in the spotlight, or taking a certain stand.