Difference between Czechs and Hungarians.

9 files changed, 567 insertions, 113 deletions

diff --git a/computer/assertRaisesRegex.rst b/computer/assertRaisesRegex.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..78f4ee2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/computer/assertRaisesRegex.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+assertRaisesRegex on the external function is not a good idea
+=============================================================
+
+:date: 2014-04-03T12:00:00
+:category: computer
+:tags: culture, faith, politics, privacy
+
+
diff --git a/faith/authenticity.rst b/faith/authenticity.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..34fa01b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/faith/authenticity.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+Authenticity and Fear of God
+############################
+ 
+:date: 2022-09-03T11:12:14
+:status: draft
+:category: faith
+:tags: tags
+
+
+.. Bázeň před Hospodinem
+   - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_God
+   - https://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6045-fear-of-god
+   - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_responsibility
+   - The Hebrew words יִרְאַ֣ת (yir’aṯ, H3374) and פחד (p̄aḥaḏ, H6343)
+     are most commonly used to describe fear of God/El/Yahweh
+   - https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00035z4 whole development
+     lead to existentialism and to the dead end (I believe),
+     because they were missing that love and “fear of sin” from
+     Saint Augustine (it was quoted as the early expression of
+     authenticity). Heidegger was Nazi and Sartre 50ies
+     French pro-Communist Marxist.
+     Without the fear of God, authenticity leads to moral disaster.
+   - Relationship between Authenticity/existentialism and the
+     third level of the spiritual development by M. Scott Peck.
+     Existentialism is great in destruction of the shallow blind
+     rule following (“I haven’t lived yet, I was lived.”), but it
+     never achieved the mystical synthesis.
+
+Saint Augustin writes in his letter to Anastasius [#]_ this:
+ 
+    He, then, is an enemy to righteousness who refrains from sin
+    only through fear of punishment; but he will become the friend of
+    righteousness if through love of it he sin not, for then he will
+    be really afraid to sin. For the man who only fears the flames of
+    hell is afraid not of sinning, but of being burned; but the man
+    who hates sin as much as he hates hell is afraid to sin. This is
+    the “fear of the Lord,” which “is pure, enduring for ever.” [#]_
+    For the fear of punishment has torment, and is not in love;
+    and love, when it is perfect, casts it out. [#]_
+
+This paragraph can be start to multi-volume deep inquiry into
+nature of our relation with God, oneself, universe, but I would
+limit myself to just one part of it. The author here equates love
+and the Fear of God. That sounds seriously strange. What is even
+more strange, that what one would consider the conventional
+interpretation of the term “Fear of God”, that is the fear of
+God’s punishing us for our sins, is qualified as a sign of
+enemies of righteousness. It doesn’t make sense whatsoever!
+What’s going on?
+
+.. strict definition of the Fear of God
+
+.. [#] https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.vii.1.CXLV.html#vii.1.CXLV-p20
+
+.. [#] Ps. xix. 9.
+
+.. [#] 1 John iv. 18.
diff --git a/faith/breakfast_in_new_york_02.rst b/faith/breakfast_in_new_york_02.rst
index 781dc0f..3648172 100644
--- a/faith/breakfast_in_new_york_02.rst
+++ b/faith/breakfast_in_new_york_02.rst
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ than the Eros Syndrome.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tootsie
 
 .. _`Breakfast at Tiffany’s`:
-   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakfast_at_Tiffany%27s_(film)
+   https://youtu.be/YnOfomPgETs
 
 .. _`the Quiverfull marriage`:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull
diff --git a/faith/difference-from-Hungary.rst b/faith/difference-from-Hungary.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b4a0fd8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/faith/difference-from-Hungary.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+Difference between Hungary and Czechia vis-à-vis Russia
+#######################################################
+ 
+:date: 2022-10-08T11:13:08
+:category: faith
+:tags: review, blogComment, Czechoslovakia, Communism,
+       Normalization, justice, politics, sociology, EU,
+       convervatism
+ 
+Comment on the Reddit thread “`Jana Černochová, Minister of
+Defence of the Czech Republic, makes a statement`_”
+and answer to the question by rocygapb_)
+
+    Why is Hungarys suffering a case of amnesia? What is
+    different between these countries that suffered soviet
+    occupation and violence?
+
+There were so many differences (I am a Czech growing up in the
+Communist Czechoslovakia of 1980s):
+
+After the 1956 invasion the leaders of the regime (mostly the
+Party members) were severely crushed, but after that the regime
+was extremely lenient. Basically “don’t bother us and we won’t
+bother you” kind of regime. There were small private enterprises
+all over the country, contact with the West (e.g., Coke ads on
+billboards in the middle of Budapest … I have never seen those in
+Prague), not that difficult travelling regime (again, if you were
+not a problem for the regime).
+
+After 1968 the official name for the new policy was
+Normalization_ which was less brutal (relatively smaller number
+of people were imprisoned and there were almost no political
+capital punishments here since 1950s) but much more
+comprehensive.
+
+Comparing to Hungary (and Poland) almost 100 % of all industry
+and everything was state owned, so everybody could be controlled
+through employment. EVERYBODY had to come in front of the
+“control committee” (prověrková komise), which were in every
+company, every theater, school, everywhere and you were asked
+what you did during “the critical period” (i.e., the relative
+freedom of the Prague Spring) and if it was something the
+committee didn’t like you were fired, also EVERYBODY was asked
+one critical question “What do you think about the brotherly help
+from other socialist countries in August 1968?” … if you didn’t
+approve (on record) the occupation, you were fired and became
+almost unemployable. Remember, everybody has their file going
+from employer to another employer, and if you were once
+recognized as “enemy of socialism” (yes, there was a list, and
+yes, my father was on it … fortunately, not of the highest rank,
+but still) there was no way to get any decent job, your children
+wouldn’t get into decent school, you driver’s license suddenly
+expired, your passport couldn’t be published, etc. etc. The main
+purpose of this was not to crush the opposition, but to `break
+everybody’s conscience`_.
+
+I remember meeting (still under the Communist times) with some
+guy from Argentina (or Brazil … one of those South American
+countries which were under the military junta regime) and he was
+in awe how sophisticated and efficient this terror was. We had
+almost perfectly locked borders, so the Communist here could be
+must more sophisticated and less violent than in those military
+dictatorships. So, there was no silent understanding in
+Czechoslovakia … you were either them or us (however, vague the
+definition was) and “us” hated “them” with a passion.
+
+Also, the country was under visible and obvious Russian
+occupation (there were always some 75,000 Soviet soldiers
+stationed in Czechoslovakia). It happened regularly when driving
+in the countryside that you met some Russian military convoy and
+then you made sure to get out of their way, because they didn’t
+slow and they didn’t care much about Czech cars. The hatred
+towards Russians was much stronger here (and still is).
+
+After the 1989 the regime change in Czechoslovakia (and now
+Czechia and Slovakia) was much more thorough. Hungary spent a lot
+of time trying some kind of “third way” between socialism and
+capitalism resulting that most originally state-owned large
+enterprises where half-stolen by their original Communist
+managers and various other apparatchiks (now the pillars of the
+Orbán’s regime), and Hungarian finances were thoroughly ruined.
+There were many things done poorly during the transformation of
+Czechoslovakia (and Czechia/Slovakia) in 1990s, but it is true
+that the basic motto was “We want to be normal again!” (meaning
+like in the Western Europe), there was never any attempt to
+pretend that the Communist regime was anything else than horrible
+mistake and crime.
+
+Contrary to Czechoslovakia, in Hungary (and Poland) there was
+never (although here it was rather controversial and quite
+problematic) `clean sweep`_ of the state apparat from all former
+Communists and Secret Police agents with results that plenty of
+Hungarian (and Polish) politicians and government officials have
+quite problematic history. It is getting worse even in Czechia
+now (e.g., the former prime minister Babiš was among his other
+sins also well-known Secret Police agent), but still I believe
+that at least temporary clean separation improved situation here
+a lot.
+
+.. _`Jana Černochová, Minister of Defence of the Czech Republic, makes a statement`:
+   https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xybpzl/jana_černochová_minister_of_defence_of_the_czech/
+
+.. _rocygapb:
+   https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xybpzl/comment/irgfrw7/
+
+.. _Normalization:
+   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalization_(Czechoslovakia)
+
+.. _`clean sweep`:
+    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lustration#In_Czechoslovakia_and_the_Czech_Republic
+
+.. _`break everybody’s conscience`:
+   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_the_Powerless
diff --git a/faith/kazani_na_joba_biblicky_styl.rst b/faith/kazani_na_joba_biblicky_styl.rst
index 0235525..ee3dd52 100644
--- a/faith/kazani_na_joba_biblicky_styl.rst
+++ b/faith/kazani_na_joba_biblicky_styl.rst
@@ -14,19 +14,6 @@ O literárních stylech biblických knih aneb Job
 .. _sboru:
     http://branik.evangnet.cz/
 
-Textem dnešního kázání je v podstatě celá kniha Job a větší část
-Starého zákona, ale abych měl alespoň nějaký konkrétní text před
-kázáním, vybral jsem Job 42:1-6:
-
-  Job na to Hospodinu řekl: // „Uznávám, že jsi všemocný a že nic
-  nepřekazí tvé úmysly. // Ptal ses: ‚Kdo to zastírá mé záměry,
-  a přitom nemá poznání?‘ Ano, mluvil jsem, o čem jsem neměl
-  ponětí, o tajemstvích, jež jsou nad mé chápání. // Řekl jsi:
-  ‚Poslouchej a já promluvím, budu se tě ptát a ty mě poučíš.‘ //
-  Dosud jsem o tobě jen slýchal pověsti, teď tě však na vlastní
-  oči spatřuji. // Proto se pokořuji – v prachu a popelu činím
-  pokání!“
-
 Druhé helvétské vyznání, které Českobratrská církev evangelická
 přijímá i za svoje vyznání víry, celé začíná ustanovením našeho
 postoje k Písmu svatému:
@@ -165,9 +152,10 @@ studuje (nevím proč se vždycky jedná o dívku), se jí snaží
 přesvědčit, že se partikulární zákazy musí vysvětlovat,
 a helvétská konfese s nimi souhlasí, takovým výkladem, „jenž se
 shoduje s pravidlem víry a lásky a slouží výborně k slávě Boží
-a spáse lidí.“, ale dívka většinou s takovým vysvětlením není
+a spáse lidí“, ale hrdinka většinou s takovým vysvětlením není
 úplně spokojená, protože si nechce z Písma Svatého dělat trhací
-kalendář a odhazovat části jenom proto, že jí nevyhovují.
+kalendář a odhazovat některé jeho části jenom proto, že jí
+nevyhovují.
 
 Proč tohle vyprávím v evangelickém mudlovském kostele je, že jsem
 konečně našel jeden příběh, který vzal celý problém podle mého za
@@ -246,15 +234,15 @@ dvacátém století změnila na biblický fundamentalismus. Jejich
 reakce by se v zásadě dala shrnout do toho, že tedy když po nás
 chcete vědu, tak my vám předvedeme vědu. My, křesťané, jsme se
 dopracovali k něčemu co, když poprchává, padá tma a mlha, a ono
-to támhle stojí a vy se támhle koukáte, tak můžete mít pocit,
-že támhle je věda <tři různé strany>, tedy něčemu takovéhlemu
-jsme se věnovali od druhého století po Kristu, když všechna Vaše
-vědecká metoda ani nevěděla, že nějaké houby existují, na kterých
-by mohla být.  Systematickou diskusi, budování jedné teorie na
+to támhle stojí a vy se támhle koukáte, tak můžete mít pocit, že
+támhle je věda <tři různé strany>. Něčemu takovéhlemu jsme se
+věnovali od druhého století po Kristu, když všechna Vaše vědecká
+metoda ani nevěděla, že nějaké houby existují, na kterých by
+mohla být.  Systematickou diskusi, budování jedné teorie na
 druhé, dialog mezi vědci, v moderní době Science Citation Index,
 to všechno teologie dokáže, ale co každá věda potřebuje, jsou
-data, na kterých se může stavět. Přírodní vědy měly přírodu,
-na které mohly činit pokusy a pozorování a získávat data, nad
+data, na kterých se může stavět. Přírodní vědy měly přírodu, na
+které mohly činit pokusy a pozorování a získávat data, nad
 kterými mohly jejich příznivci diskutovat. Později vzniklé
 společenské vědy měly sice data trochu podezřelejší, protože
 často byla velice obtížně kvantifikovatelná, ale v zásadě model
@@ -310,19 +298,20 @@ zejména Starý zákon) není kniha ale hned celá knihovna. Jedná se
 o soubor přes osmdesát knih všech možných autorů, věků, a právě
 i literárních stylů. Tak třeba máme
 
-* *Knihy Letopisů* na straně jedně. V zásadě historické kroniky
-  vypadají jako ideální materiál pro jednoduchý výklad a vědecké
-  studium. Problém je v tom, že každý historik ví, že jednou
-  z dalších změn, které přineslo osvícenství je zásadní změna
-  role a formy kronik. Moderní snaha o doslovné zaznamenání jenom
-  a pouze a co nejpřesněji „jak se to doopravdy odehrávalo“ je
-  něco co do té doby v podstatě neexistovalo. Historie pro
-  historii samotnou, snaha o maximální objektivitu, je poměrně
-  luxusní záležitost, kterou si mohlo dovolit až mnohem bohatší
-  univerzitní prostředí průmyslové doby. Do té doby bylo hlavním
-  cílem většiny historických prací něco jiného: být zábavným
-  čtením, mravoučnou literaturou nebo jako se domnívám v případě
-  těchto knih státem placenou oslavou historie národa.
+* *Knihy Letopisů* a mnoho dalších podobných na straně jedné.
+  V zásadě historické kroniky vypadají jako ideální materiál pro
+  jednoduchý výklad a vědecké studium. Problém je v tom, že každý
+  historik ví, že jednou z dalších změn, které přineslo
+  osvícenství je zásadní změna role a formy kronik. Moderní snaha
+  o doslovné zaznamenání jenom a pouze a co nejpřesněji „jak se
+  to doopravdy odehrávalo“ je něco co do té doby v podstatě
+  neexistovalo. Historie pro historii samotnou, snaha o maximální
+  objektivitu, je poměrně luxusní záležitost, kterou si mohlo
+  dovolit až mnohem bohatší univerzitní prostředí průmyslové
+  doby. Do té doby bylo hlavním cílem většiny historických prací
+  něco jiného: být zábavným čtením, mravoučnou literaturou nebo
+  jako se domnívám v případě těchto knih státem placenou oslavou
+  historie národa.
 
 * *Kniha Rut* Opět historická kniha, ale výrazně odlišná: na
   rozdíl od oficiálních kronik (Knihy Samuelovy, Královské
@@ -362,9 +351,10 @@ a konečně
   nemá. Skutečně doslova a do písmene Job a jeho přátelé řekli
   přesně to, co je v knize zapsáno? Opravdu se na konci děje
   knihy zjevil Hospodin v bouři a promluvil slyšitelně a osobně
-  k Jobovi? Popravdě řečeno si nemyslím, že by nám chtěla
-  odpovědět na tyto otázky a rozhodně si nemyslím, že by tyto
-  otázky jakkoli přispívali k lepšímu pochopení zvěsti knihy.
+  k Jobovi? Popravdě řečeno si nemyslím, že by nám kniha Job
+  chtěla na tyto otázky odpovědět a rozhodně si nemyslím, že by
+  tyto otázky jakkoli přispívali k lepšímu pochopení zvěsti
+  knihy.
 
 ----
 
@@ -374,25 +364,26 @@ Myslím si totiž, že základem celé knihy Job, je zpracování otázky
 knihami Královskými nebo pozoruhodnými kapitolami 27 a 28 knihy
 Deuteronomium) vidí situaci jasně: pokud se budeme držet Božích
 příkazů, bude nám Pán Bůh žehnat, vojska zbožných králů vítězí
-nad nepřáteli zatímco bezbožníci dojdou zkázy. Toto je jednoduché
-logické poselství, které navíc nabádá k morálnímu jednání: jednej
-správně a budeš se mít dobře. Je to jednoduché a lidé to rádi
-slyší. Dodnes třeba všechna Theologie Prosperity je na této
-myšlence založena a jak je populární.
-
-Bible a i už Starý zákon ale ví, že situace není vždycky tak
-jednoduchá. Tím se právě dostáváme k žalmu, který jsme četli
-a zpívali na začátku těchto bohoslužeb, žalmu 73. To je velice
-zvláštní žalm. Na začátku velice přesně popisuje právě situaci,
-kdy jednoduché „Pán Bůh žehná dobrým lidem“ zjevně nefunguje.
-Nejenom, že autor písně se má zle, ale ještě více ho trápí, že
-kolem sebe vidí svévolníky, kterým Pán Bůh zjevně žehná (jak říká
-náš žalm: „Nuže takto se mají ničemní <dlouhá pomlka> — ve stálém
-pohodlí kupí bohatství!“ To je přece přesně co jsme od Písma
-Svatého očekávali, ne?). Je naplněn hořkostí a zlostí nad touto
-zjevnou nespravedlností.
-
-Pozoruhodný přechod do stavu, kdy žalmista intenzivně chválí
+nad nepřáteli, zatímco bezbožníci dojdou zkázy. Toto je
+jednoduché logické poselství, které navíc nabádá k morálnímu
+jednání: jednej správně a budeš se mít dobře. Je to jednoduché
+a lidé to rádi slyší. Dodnes třeba všechna Teologie prosperity je
+na této myšlence založena a jak je populární.
+
+A ačkoli v žádném případě toto jednoduché poselství nechci
+zpochybnit, Bible a i už Starý zákon ale také ví, že situace není
+vždycky tak jednoduchá. Tím se právě dostáváme k žalmu, který
+jsme četli a zpívali na začátku těchto bohoslužeb, žalmu 73. To
+je velice zvláštní žalm. Na začátku velice přesně popisuje právě
+situaci, kdy jednoduché „Pán Bůh žehná dobrým lidem“ zjevně
+nefunguje. Nejenom, že autor písně se má zle, ale ještě více ho
+trápí, že kolem sebe vidí svévolníky, kterým Pán Bůh zjevně žehná
+(jak říká náš žalm: „Nuže takto se mají ničemní <dlouhá pomlka>
+— ve stálém pohodlí kupí bohatství!“ To je přece přesně co jsme
+od Písma Svatého očekávali, ne?). Žalmista je naplněn hořkostí
+a zlostí nad touto zjevnou nespravedlností.
+
+Pozoruhodný je přechod do stavu, kdy žalmista intenzivně chválí
 Hospodina a zcela proti logice začátku žalmu Hospodina chválí
 přesně za to, čím si byl předtím nejistý a co ho trápilo. Přechod
 je tak rychlý, že ho je jednoduché přehlédnout, protože se jedná
@@ -403,16 +394,29 @@ v té svatyni Hospodin řekl, jaká je vlastně odpověď na jeho
 otázky, jak je to s tím požehnaným svévolníkem. Ale zjevně
 žalmista svojí odpověď dostal.
 
-A stejně podobně nejasný je vyústění knihy Job. Job je zcela
+Čímžto se dostáváme na konci kázání k tomu, co je vlastně veršem,
+který v něm vykládám. Skutečným textem dnešního kázání je
+v podstatě celá kniha Job a větší část Starého zákona, ale abych
+měl alespoň nějaký konkrétní text před kázáním, vybral jsem Job
+42:1-6:
+
+  Job na to Hospodinu řekl: // „Uznávám, že jsi všemocný a že nic
+  nepřekazí tvé úmysly. // Ptal ses: ‚Kdo to zastírá mé záměry,
+  a přitom nemá poznání?‘ Ano, mluvil jsem, o čem jsem neměl
+  ponětí, o tajemstvích, jež jsou nad mé chápání. // Řekl jsi:
+  ‚Poslouchej a já promluvím, budu se tě ptát a ty mě poučíš.‘ //
+  Dosud jsem o tobě jen slýchal pověsti, teď tě však na vlastní
+  oči spatřuji. // Proto se pokořuji – v prachu a popelu činím
+  pokání!“
+
+To je ale vlastně dost zvláštní vyústění celé knihy. Job je zcela
 zjevně představen jako zcela dokonalý prototyp člověka, který by
 podle logiky Teologie Prosperity měl být velice požehnaný. Chová
 se zcela dokonale a příkladně, až možná přehnaně (pálení
 kajícných obětí za děti, pokud se náhodou neprovinili proti
 Hospodinu, mi připadne jako trochu moc). Načež už v polovině
 druhé kapitoly skončí na smetišti zasažený nepochopitelnou nemocí
-a jeho děti jsou mrtvé. A zde se dostáváme k titulu té knihy
-„Proč se dobrým lidem dějí zlé věci?“ a k vlastnímu tématu celé
-knihy Job.
+a jeho děti jsou mrtvé.
 
 Následuje značně vysilujících a zdlouhavých třicet (!!!) kapitol,
 kde spolu zápasí jeho přátelé s jeho situací (ale nepřeskakujte
@@ -422,17 +426,18 @@ smířlivěji (Pán Bůh je prostě větší nežli naše spravedlnost), ale
 ani jedni nedosáhnou nijak přesvědčivých výsledků. Nakonec se na
 scéně objeví sám Hospodin a dlouhým monologem v podstatě s Jobem
 „zamete“: jak si to představuješ mi, jedinému vládci všehomíra,
-číst nějaké levity? Silné okřiknutí Joba mi nepřipadne moc dobrý
-nápad, když Job celou dobu zápasil o jistotu, že Hospodin je
-opravdu spravedlivý a jenom ho nepřeválcuje. Ale i když Hospodin
-jedná přesně podle jeho nejčernějších očekávání, Job to najednou
-tak vůbec nevidí. Joba se v tomto setkání s Hospodinem něco
-dotklo a najednou vidí zcela jasně odpověď na svoje řešení.
-Nevíme úplně přesně co to je, ale je zcela zjevné, že najednou
-odpověď na svoji otázku našel („Dosud jsem o tobě jen slýchal
-pověsti, teď tě však na vlastní oči spatřuji.“ Job 42:5). A tím
-v podstatě kniha končí, poslední kapitoly jsou pak už zase částí
-rámcového příběhu a uklízí poslední nezodpovědné otázky.
+číst nějaké levity? Silné okřiknutí Joba by nám z pastorálního
+hlediska nemuselo připadat jako moc dobrý nápad, když Job celou
+dobu zápasil o jistotu, že Hospodin je opravdu spravedlivý
+a jenom ho nepřeválcuje. Ale i když Hospodin jedná přesně podle
+jeho nejčernějších očekávání, Job to najednou tak vůbec nevidí.
+Joba se v tomto setkání s Hospodinem něco dotklo a najednou vidí
+zcela jasně odpověď na svoje řešení. Nevíme úplně přesně co to
+je, ale je zcela zjevné, že najednou odpověď na svoji otázku
+našel („Dosud jsem o tobě jen slýchal pověsti, teď tě však na
+vlastní oči spatřuji.“). A tím v podstatě kniha končí, poslední
+kapitoly jsou pak už zase částí rámcového příběhu a uklízí
+poslední nezodpovědné otázky.
 
 Můžeme se trápit tím, že vlastně jsme nedostali odpověď na otázku
 proč se zlé věci dějí dobrým lidem, ale dostali jsme mocné
@@ -445,6 +450,6 @@ co to je, ale řešení existuje.
 Amen
 
 .. [#] Ann Jeffers: Magic and Divination in Ancient Palestine and
-   Syria, Brill, Leiden, NY, 1996.
+   Syria, Brill, Leiden, NY, 1996. Hezkých 278 stran textu.
 
 .. vim: spelllang=cs
diff --git a/faith/letter-from-minerva-to-father.rst b/faith/letter-from-minerva-to-father.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1988df9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/faith/letter-from-minerva-to-father.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,265 @@
+Letter from Minerva McGonagall to her father, Reverend Robert McGonagall
+########################################################################
+ 
+:date: 2022-09-06T16:54:29
+:status: draft
+:category: faith
+:tags: review, harryPotter, blogComment
+ 
+(from the conversation on `the HPfanfiction subreddit post`_ with
+some questions from other readers of the thread).
+
+While reading “`When the Roses Bloom Again`_” by
+TheBlack'sResurgence I have been again hit by the nonsense of the
+Biblical verse “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” (Exodus
+22:17). I don’t want to bother you with details (tiny part of it
+is in “`Thou Shalt Not Suffer`_” by TheWizardsHarry), but a good
+biblical argument can be made that this verse in the Hebrew
+original doesn’t mean what the English (and almost any other)
+translation seems to indicate it means (hint: what do we know
+about the magical terminology of the Ancient Israel 1500 BC?
+Nothing, absolutely nothing), meaning it is not universal
+renunciation of all magical activity (and this is Harry Potter
+related post, so let us not deal with the question whether magic
+is real or not).
+
+I still hope to see in the course of the story a letter written
+by (quite scholarly and intellectual, and trained by him in the
+Biblical exegesis) Minerva McGonagall to her father explaining,
+that he really doesn’t have to live with a bad conscience from
+protecting his sinful anti-Christian or anti-God daughter.
+
+.. _`the HPfanfiction subreddit post`:
+   https://www.reddit.com/r/HPfanfiction/comments/x58xm2/letter_from_minerva_mcgonagall_to_her_father/
+
+.. _`When the Roses Bloom Again`:
+   https://www.fanfiction.net/s/13954844
+
+.. _`Thou Shalt Not Suffer`:
+   https://www.fanfiction.net/s/5176787
+
+The second group is Leviticus 19:26, 20:27, and Deuteronomy
+18:10-11. All of them have the same problem IMHO: using highly
+technical terminology we know absolutely nothing about (and on
+the top of that half of the words are *hapax legomenon*, words
+found only once in the whole Bible).
+
+    There are examples in the Bible of actual witches IIRC,
+    Saul(?) goes to one and asks her to summon the spirit of
+    Samuel. We also know from other descriptions vaguely the kind
+    of things they do, commune with the dead and curse people.
+
+    Of course, if you’re writing a HP story you kinda have to
+    assume Christianity is false (or at least WILDLY
+    misunderstood), so it’s description of a witch shouldn’t need
+    to line up with HP-verse anyway
+
+Yes, and I am not saying that any magic is perfectly OK (it is
+obvious that Necromancy and most of the divination are not), but
+that negative doesn’t apply either: most of magic which would be
+OK under the UK laws (by mostly for the other reasons than it
+being magic … murder, enslavement, etc.) would be OK for actual
+true wizards and witches of the HP world.
+
+I am quite forcefully saying that most of Muggle occult (i.e.,
+when Muggles try to make magic without being given the gift of
+magic) is quite definitively NOT OK. I guess, Biblically one of
+the most suspicious things in the whole HP series is Mr Filch’s
+Kwikspell.
+
+And to witch-hunts: I am a Protestant, so I am quite able to
+distinguish between the church doing something wrong (have you
+ever read the book “Biblical Foundation of Slavery” from 1810 or
+so? I did) and what is actual Biblical teaching on the matter.
+That is what were talking about here.
+
+I think witch-hunts were completely wrong for many reasons (and
+which were mostly driven by non-holy reasons … see any Muggle
+history book on the topic), but it doesn't have to mean that the
+Church or the Christianity would be against Hermione Granger
+personally.
+
+----
+
+    I (also Protestant) agree completely. My point is that in the
+    Harry Potter world, Christianity as we know it cannot be true
+    (at least it would be VERY difficult to mesh the two in any
+    way that’s even slightly philosophically consistent). So,
+    when I’m writing/reading Harry Potter fanfic, I have my
+    characters operate on the nearest moral system I could come
+    up with that has at least an incline of reason behind it.
+    🤷🏻‍♂️
+
+I really do not understand. Why?
+
+I don’t think you tell me that your faith depends on Jesus’
+changing water in wine is the sign of his Divinity. And yes,
+wizards and witches can be probably do more than His
+contemporaries, but heck, we can do more than them.
+
+So, what’s the problem?
+
+----
+
+    My first objection would be that, while Christ’s miracles were
+    not the foundation for his divinity, they were supposed to be
+    proof of it (John 10:37-38, 20:30-31). If there was whole
+    societies going around doing what Jesus did (and according to HP
+    they were doing that kind of thing then because it’s pre-secrecy)
+    then they’re not really proof of anything.
+
+Couple of comments on your verses, each one of them would deserve
+full-size treatise though:
+
+1. John 10:37f … I truly don’t believe that “works of my Father”
+   have to mean miracles here (and if NLT translates it so, it is
+   one more reason why not use that translation … sometimes they
+   are really inserting something which isn’t there). Second,
+   I don’t think that this is primarily about the Jesus’
+   divinity. I mean, I am a Trinitarian, I do believe in the
+   teaching of first ecumenical councils and all that good stuff,
+   but I see something much more important there. “The Father is
+   in Me, and I am in the Father” really doesn’t feel to me here
+   as an evidentiary proof of the Jesus’ divinity, but it seems
+   to me talking much more about the deep father/son relationship
+   between Father and Jesus, which is in my opinion one of the
+   most important themes in gospels (and especially in the Gospel
+   of Saint John), and which is the relationship which we should
+   try to emulate in our life as our path to holiness.
+
+2. John 20:30f … obviously this verse means that whole gospel is
+   using something to prove something else. The question is what
+   these somethings are. The goal of the gospel is in my opinion
+   something more than just accepting the divinity of Jesus. The
+   goal of a gospel is in my opinion our conversion, accepting
+   Jesus as our Lord and Saviour, accepting his sacrifice on The
+   Cross as healing of our sin, etc. etc. (I could continue for
+   a long time). To this end one doesn’t get however just by
+   reading a book (fill-in complete missiology and theory of
+   evangelization). Any book could serve only as “a sign”. “Sign”
+   (σημεῖα (sēmeia), Strong's G4592) is defined as “neuter of
+   a presumed derivative of the base of semaino; an indication,
+   especially ceremonially or supernaturally”. It seems to me
+   that a sign here is really just a sign: something like
+   a traffic sign telling to a driver “Slow down! Put down your
+   foot from the gas pedal! There is something really important
+   going on here, which you should really not miss.” Miracles are
+   for me only one type of such signs, and not even the most
+   important ones. I am acutely aware that many of those healings
+   or releases from demonization could be probably explained by
+   the current medicine as some kind of natural disease, that
+   quality of scientific reporting in the first century AD
+   certainly doesn’t satisfy our current requirements, and that
+   the transfer of the information from the first century to us
+   doesn’t help either. If some of these miracles could be
+   explained by the science, my attitude towards Jesus would not
+   change at all. And the same goes for the real magic. If some
+   of these miracles could be explained by magic, my attitude
+   towards Jesus would not change either. Miracles are just signs
+   which should turn our focus to Jesus and who he is. Besides,
+   for me much more persuasive sign than healing of the possessed
+   in Gerase is Jesus sitting next to the adulterous woman
+   telling her and saying “Go and sin no more” or “[…] you have
+   had five husbands, and the man you are living with[as] now is
+   not your husband”. That’s for me like the stop sign: “Get out
+   of the car and don’t do anything else until you discover who
+   this guy is”.
+
+    Witches and Wizards are in direct violation of God’s decree in
+    Genesis 6:3.
+
+Next you mention Genesis 6:3. “Then the LORD said, ‘My Spirit
+shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall
+be 120 years.’” WHAT? I don’t get it.
+
+   I think it’s very clear in the Bible that any power that can
+   manipulate realty like magic does is either the Holy Spirit,
+   or demonic.
+
+That isn’t correct even in our Muggle world. There are many
+natural powers that can manipulate reality, like any powers at
+all, and they are just that, natural powers. We are changing
+reality every day, every second, and most of the time there is
+nothing super-Spiritual or demonic about it. It is just our
+ordinary life. You want to limit those powers to ones “that are
+like magic”, but that is a bad, circular, definition. Magic is
+whatever is magical, and vice versa.
+
+What I think is needed is to redefine “miracle” and “supernatural
+event”. I think these terms are unfortunate, because they seem to
+suggest that they are somehow breaking the God given natural
+order of things. I don’t think they do. They are just working
+outside of what we understand. I think the foundation of any
+Christian epistemology must be that sum of everything we know
+(both as individuals and as total of humanity) is always less
+than the God’s creation. So, all those “supernatural events” are
+actually natural, except they are outside of our knowledge.
+
+So, yes there are powers outside of human (any human) control,
+which can be driven by the Holy Spirit or evil. However, the
+hypothetical Harry Potter-type magic could be very much neither
+of these: it is just natural gift which is given just to some
+small group of humans, like the perfect pitch. Somebody just got
+it, somebody didn’t, but it doesn’t have to mean anything
+spiritually.
+
+----
+
+    As far as I know, the exact meaning of witchcraft is specified if
+    you read through various parts of the bible. Off the top of my
+    head, anyone who communicates with the dead, uses any mystical
+    means to find information, and anyone who unnaturally changes
+    a person's perception or emotional state is performing
+    witchcraft. So the killing curse would be murder, but not
+    witchcraft. The cheering charm would be witchcraft.
+
+Chapter and verse, please?
+
+    I had a look and I cannot for the life of me find the source
+    I read originally that explained it, so I'm going to assume
+    I'm remembering incorrectly.
+
+    Instead, I looked it up again and compared the source words
+    used in the original languages, which in the Old Testament
+    mostly came down to necromancers (people who spoke with the
+    dead) and diviners (people who used magic to obtain
+    information either current or future.)
+
+    In the New Testament there is also an instance of the word
+    that the modern 'pharmacist' comes from is used, but the
+    context is different there where it means to condemn drugging
+    and/or poisoning people rather than just making all
+    potioneers out to be witches.
+
+    A large problem, as I understand it, is that the ancient
+    Hebrews simply used the word witch because 'everyone knows
+    what is meant by it' and everyone then did, but these days we
+    don't understand the context, so we have to try looking at
+    other sources to build a better point of view. That leads to
+    reading sources from nearby peoples like the Babylonians and
+    such. While this gives a vague idea of it all, it's not
+    really a precise way of assigning a definite definition to
+    a word. TL;DR I couldn't find my original source and was
+    probably remembering wrong, witchcraft will basically only
+    include divination, legillimency, and necromancy.
+
+That’s exactly what I was trying to say. Whether magic actually
+exists or not is immaterial for this, but there was certainly
+a community of people who were dealing with activities described
+in those verses (be they true magicals, or Muggle magicians doing
+just some show, or doing something completely else, like dealing
+with herbal remedies), and they had their own jargon. Bible was
+most likely written and transferred to us mostly by people
+outside of this community (just pure probability: number of
+practitioners of the art divided by number of population) and so
+it was probably transferred poorly. And then we got to actually
+translating from Hebrew to current languages (including the
+modern Hebrew) and there the situation was certainly much worse.
+
+I am not saying that Bible as such is unreliable or it is not
+possible understand it. Mostly its message is quite clear, but
+there are parts where we really need to tread lightly. We may
+never understand correctly what was really going on in these
+verses, we may never know what was actually The Noe’s Arch made
+from (“Gopher wood” is a true Hapax legomenon), and others;
+fortunately at least with these I can live pretty well.
diff --git a/faith/soul-bonds-arranged-marriage.rst b/faith/soul-bonds-arranged-marriage.rst
index 75deec2..c698673 100644
--- a/faith/soul-bonds-arranged-marriage.rst
+++ b/faith/soul-bonds-arranged-marriage.rst
@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ Soul bonds and arranged marriages
 Comment on the Reddit thread “`Soul bonding fics with depth?`_”
 by ZappyFence discussing “`Error of Soul`_” by Materia-Blade)
 
-> Can you elaborate? As someone who read it, I'm still not sure
-> what people mean when they say this.
+    Can you elaborate? As someone who read it, I'm still not sure
+    what people mean when they say this.
 
 In the end every soul-bond fanfiction story is a story of
 imposed/unintended relationship.
@@ -60,9 +60,9 @@ I have been married for over quarter of century, and I still
 don’t know the answer to this question.
 
 Could Harry and Hermione in this situation just sit down and
-decide, that they didn’t want to be together, but now when they
-have to be, could they make their marriage work? Could they be
-happy together nevertheless?
+decide, that even though they didn’t want to be together
+originally, now when they have to be, they could make their
+marriage work? Could they be happy together nevertheless?
 
 I think it would make a great story, but I am not able to write
 it and I would prefer if it was written by somebody from
diff --git a/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst b/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
index eb2af64..d49020c 100644
--- a/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
+++ b/faith/thou_shalt_not_suffer_witch_live.rst
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
 :category: faith
 :tags: sermon, english, Bible
 
-There are some verses which are usually very important for every
+There are some verses which are usually important for every
 Christian. Everyone of us has one verses like John 3:16 NET (“For
 this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only
 Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but
@@ -26,24 +26,24 @@ shalt not suffer a witch to live.”) is up there in those most
 important Biblical verses of your life.
 
 However, I think that even for us, Muggles, this verse can bring
-a very important lesson, and this is not the one I hear usually
-when it comes to be the subject of a Christian talk.
+an important lesson, and this is not the one I hear usually when
+it comes to be the subject of a Christian talk.
 
 First of all, let me add here disclaimer: whatever I say in the
 following paragraphs should not be understood as approval of
 occult in any shape or form. Even if I claim this verse to be
 more complicated and less useful that it usually is thought to
-be, I still fully believe that Bible stands very clearly against
-any form of occult, divination or wiccan practices. Not only they
-are usually sin against the First Commandment, but they are quite
+be, I still fully believe that Bible stands clearly against any
+form of occult, divination or wiccan practices. Not only they are
+usually sin against the First Commandment, but they are quite
 certainly always a sin against the Eleventh One (“Thou shall not
 be stupid.”). Discussion of occult is not subject of this
 article.
 
 Let me start with a short historian’s exercise. Czech polymath,
 universal artist, overall genius, and gynaecologist amateur, Jára
-Cimrman, very sternly urged great men of history to consider the
-day when they accomplish their great achievement and think about
+Cimrman, sternly urged great men of history to consider the day
+when they accomplish their great achievement and think about
 future students who will have to learn about it in their history
 classes. We can commend the Czech king and German emperor
 Charles IV. for founding the Prague university now named after
@@ -56,11 +56,11 @@ should really appreciate action of the pope Leo III who made
 Charlemagne the first Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire on the
 Christmas Day of year 800.
 
-Year 800 AD is very good interesting point in the history for
-couple of reasons. First of all, what do you know about that year
-in the history (of course, you know that Holy Roman Empire was
-founded, but something else). What happened here in the are of
-the current Czechia?
+Year 800 AD is good interesting point in the history for couple
+of reasons. First of all, what do you know about that year in the
+history (of course, you know that Holy Roman Empire was founded,
+but something else). What happened here in the area of the
+current Czechia?
 
 No, Saint Wenceslaus lived hundred years later (died most likely
 in year 935). And no, Great Moravia and Saint Cyril and Methodius
@@ -73,13 +73,17 @@ exists, and there are some rumours about Charlemagne going
 through Bohemia around 805, but that’s basically all we know
 about this place in that time.
 
-Let me put here few notes about year 800 AD. First one is really
-brief: when we think what happened eight hundred years ago
-(1220), we considered such event to happen really long time ago,
-so long time ago, that anything is hardly known about it. Well,
-Christianity was that old in that year. Because it was long time
-ago from our point of view, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t long time
-from the beginning of the Church as well.
+The only point I want to illustrate by these paragraphs is that
+year 800 AD is long time ago. Really long time ago.
+
+When we have established this point, we can start to work with
+year 800 AD. First idea is really brief: when we think what
+happened eight hundred years ago (1220), we considered such event
+to happen really long time ago, so long time ago, that anything
+is hardly known about it. Well, Christianity was that old in that
+year. Because it was long time ago from our point of view, it
+doesn’t mean it wasn’t long time from the beginning of the Church
+as well.
 
 Next comment is by Chesterton: we have tendency to always
 view history as something which happened in past, and we are the
@@ -132,7 +136,8 @@ about our understanding of the Biblical text from those times.
 Let us return back to witches in the Old Testament. There are
 surprisingly few verses explicitly dealing with witchcraft. Most
 important are four verses (Exodus 22:18, Leviticus 19:26, 20:27,
-and Deuteronomy 18:10-11). Let us start with the last one (YLT):
+and Deuteronomy 18:10-11). Let us start with the last one (YLT
+with Hebrew words used for the key terms in the verse):
 
     There is not found in thee one causing his son and his
     daughter to \`abar ba-'esh (H5674, H784), a user of
@@ -163,9 +168,9 @@ that this is some kind of list of technical terms. Whole
 interpretation of these two verses stands and falls with the
 exact translation of these terms.
 
-Let me add here one very hypothetical example. Let us imagine,
-that after this verse about magic, there is another one, which
-reads:
+Let me add here one completely hypothetical example. Let us
+imagine, that after this verse about magic, there is another one,
+which reads:
 
     You shall not permit bunja’h to live.
 
@@ -202,7 +207,7 @@ fully understand it. And just to make it clear, there are over
 so we really don’t know what the Noah’s ark was really made from
 (the idea it was cypress which is a common translation is just
 because it was the wood ships were usually made from, but there
-is no evidence it was really so; what is the biblical author
+is no evidence it was really so; what if the biblical author
 wanted to emphasize something by Noah building a ship from some
 unusual wood?).
 
@@ -227,13 +232,13 @@ diviner who predicts future from observing various omens and
 signs. However, it is obvious it is some kind of divination,
 although we are not completely certain how exactly it was done.
 
-*menakhesh* has very complicated meaning. According to some it is
-just a generic term for any divination by observing signs and
-omens (Strong’s Dictionary). According to other (Czech Bible
-commentary and Wikipedia) this word derives from the word for snake,
-and as a verb it literally translates to hissing. It could mean
-either some kind of whispering or murmuring incantation, or it
-may signifies a snake charmer.
+*menakhesh* has complicated meaning. According to some it is just
+a generic term for any divination by observing signs and omens
+(Strong’s Dictionary). According to other (Czech Bible commentary
+and Wikipedia) this word derives from the word for snake, and as
+a verb it literally translates to hissing. It could mean either
+some kind of whispering or murmuring incantation, or it may
+signifies a snake charmer.
 
 *yidde'oni* means “consults a medium or familiar spirit”, and
 these mean just what the literal translation suggests.
@@ -259,7 +264,8 @@ shape of clouds), which is documented from the late ancient Rome
 ancient Babylonian priests. Given how accessible clouds usually
 are, I have no problems to imagine that some kind of divination
 from them could exist, but it is certainly not something which
-was very widespread. On the other hand, NET Bible commentary
+was widespread, there are really just few mentions of it in whole
+Ancient literature. On the other hand, NET Bible commentary
 explains that it is not about clouds, but about conjuring spirits
 and apparitions. Rashi’s commentary mentions, that The Sages
 said, that this referred to those who “catch the eyes” [i.e.,
@@ -270,7 +276,7 @@ from certain and obvious. (khashef and khesh come from the same
 root, which means snake)
 
 *châbar cheber* means literally “join joinings”, which is not
-very clear. Rashi means that this is “One who collects snakes,
+clear at all. Rashi means that this is “One who collects snakes,
 scorpions or other creatures into one place.” The second word
 means either spells and charms, or something collected together,
 association, shared household, company of priests. Czech
diff --git a/images/roman-chaliy-ukraine.jpeg b/images/roman-chaliy-ukraine.jpeg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c1144cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/images/roman-chaliy-ukraine.jpeg