To all the years I've loved before...
that have traveled in and out my door...
I dedicate this song...
To all the goods and wrongs...
In all the years I've loved before.
2009 was not so good.
It really tested all my brood.
But despite all the calamity,
we managed to live free
in the land of amazing brotherhood.
2010 should be great.
Throughout the world and in our state.
We hope for peace and prosperity,
For all the world and you and me,
Let God's love be our fate.
To all the years I've loved before...
The years that carried hopes of more...
I dedicate my life...
in the hope of ending strife...
In all the world forevermore!
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Avatar - meh? 2 out of 5 stars.
Some stories should never be written. This is the one truth that Hollywood can never seem to grasp. They keep doing remakes and retellings of stories that didn't need to be remade or retold. Is it creative bankruptcy? Some sort of Hollywood formula? Or simple blindness amongst producers and writers? I don't think there is an easy answer.
When I started my novel, I knew the time was finally ripe for telling a story that had been rambling around in my brain for fifteen years. I wrote and wrote and wrote. After five years I gave up for two reasons - first, the story had a structural problem. But second, and more importantly, I realized that my story had outlived its useful life. The world had changed too much for my story to ever work... which brings me to AVATAR.
Now before I go any further, I want to say that there may be spoilers ahead. Although the biggest problem with AVATAR is the story's lack of originality, I still think you should see it spoiler free and enjoy it for what the producer and writer intended. So if you haven't seen the movie, turn away now... Go ahead, we'll wait...
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1...
This film achieves heights of visual accomplishment not seen in a long time. The environment is just that crisp. When you add the layers of wildlife and the imaginative takes on animals and geography, it all adds up to one of the most astonishing film looks since The Lord of the Rings pilfered New Zealand and turned it into Middle Earth. However, a film begins, middles and ends with story - and that is where this film dies on the vine.
As compelling as the visuals were, if the story had really been churning out at an equal rate, the visuals would have been even more spectacular. For example, in the films best sequence where Jake has to bond with his first flying dragon thingy, the story and the visuals are equal, creating a fantastic sequence that almost seemed like a completely different movie. As these characters had to climb up to the floating sky islands and then bond with one of the dragons before plunging to near certain death made for the most compelling moments of film this year - both visually and creatively entertaining, with story and image in sync. If the rest of the film was as interesting as these few minutes, I would have been thrilled.
The problems with the story begin right away. There are logic problems with the set up. Our hero is a wounded marine who agrees to work for a space corporation to replace his dead brother in the Avatar project. He goes to Pandora where this corporation is mining a miracle substance called unobtanium (I'm not making that up) that does something or other - its never explained with the implication being that its not important as to what it does. At one point, Jake illustrates this point by saying something to the effect that, "They have something we want, so we take it." Upon arriving at Pandora, Jake is immediately cast as the middle ground between mindless automaton Scientists and mindless automaton Soldiers, both being played against each other by the evil Corporation. The xenophobic soldiers don't see the aliens as the indigenous peoples on the planet, but as stupid savages in the way of progress. The scientists, on the other hand, see them as some sort of enlightened culture that could bring humanity back to us if we could just learn from them. Jake is just happy to run in his giant blue Avatar. The problems, of course, are that the film is set up as an analogy. We are not presented with real human beings or real aliens. We are presented with stereotypical view points (good guys = scientists, bad guys = soldiers) and we aren't ever given any contradictory evidence. All scientists are good, all soldiers are bad. And the Navi are a god fearing alien race that lives in peace and harmony with everything. So, of course, we hate them. Because we're greedy.
The whole world that Cameron created doesn't make any sense from that point of view. Quick, write a prequel in your mind. How did humans find this planet? How did we determine there was this mineral on the planet? How did we manage to set up a giant base there? Did the Navi not realize that we humans were there? Did we humans not realize that we would have to wipe out the Navi in order to rape their planet? Its stated right at the beginning that the Navi want to kill all the humans and yet they seem to tolerate these obvious Avatar's in their midst? Why? None of this made any sense... and from that point forward, the stupidity begins to pile more on top of a story that is already built on a pretty shaky base.
The Navi had been at war until they were brought together at the beginning of the time of sorrow (presumably when the humans arrived, though never clearly stated). Why didn't they try to kill the humans then? When the humans first attack (about half way through the movie), the Navi try to kill them with bows and arrows - with the arrows just bouncing off the ships. Have they never fought humans before? Haven't they been killing humans for years before this? So why don't they know their arrows are ineffective? Shouldn't they already know how to kill humans? And isn't this environment supposed to be extremely hostile to humans? And yet these space marines are constantly wiping the floor with their primitive counterparts without doing anything more strenuous than pulling a trigger. Heck, they march in a straight line and fire their guns and the Navi charge right at them like Pickett at Gettysburg with the same result. And if the Navi are supposedly so peaceful and harmonious, why have a warrior clan or warrior mentality at all? If they are one with nature, why learn how to kill others? Why have that become the basis for your entire culture and your entire manhood ritual?
I could go on and on and on. But the gist of the problem is this, in trying to borrow the story of Dances with Wolves, they took all the parts of the story that they liked and left the rest behind. The Navi were so much like Native Americans that even the space horses looked like they'd just been hijacked off the wall of a Native American petroglyph. And yet, the Navi had none of the associated history attached - no trail of tears, no Little Big Horn, no Plains Indians and counting coups and Buffalo Hunts... nothing like that - like some sanitized version of American Indians, like a really fuzzy shadow of them. And the marines weren't much better - dumb grunts that go off to fight because, of course, they're blood thirsty savages who follow orders because they're marines. Fire on innocent men, women and children - okay. Do it for some dumb corporation - might as well. There was no motivation for them, as they too were scrubbed clean of all the massacres they'd been privy to, all the civil war fighting, all the fear of being scalped. As a writer, if you simplify your analogy too much, it ceases to have meaning. And it really becomes problemsome when you have such a clear cut analogy that has been stripped of most of its meaning. What we're left with is a message that says, human beings bad, native creatures good. Or more simply, Greed is bad. At nearly three hours, to be left with a message like that makes the whole affair seem rather pretentious.
I'd like to be able to say that I liked the movie while I was watching it but formed all these opinions after the fact, but the truth is that these problems were so glaring, I was bothered by them throughout. In the battle scene at the end where the aliens fight back by flying in from above on their flying dragons and shooting arrows through the windshields of the helicopters, my only thought was... "When did they figure out how to do that? Or is it just that somehow the windshields are now more brittle and arrows can pass through them?" I'm thinking this as I'm watching the movie, which is never a good sign. But I did have one revelation after the movie that is the basis of my argument here.
Years ago, right after Titanic came out and Cameron was talking up his new 3-D technology idea, he suggested that his next project would be a TV series about a real life mission to Mars. When I got home last night and my eyes were still caressing the incredible visuals of Avatar while my brain spewed hatred on the story, it occurred to me that if Cameron had decided to use this technology with a story about going to Mars, the film would have been completely incredible. So compelling were the visuals that had they been slaved together with a story worthy of them, Cameron really would have changed film making forever. And that was when I realized that the end result of all my bitching about the story came down to the fact that the film LOOKED great, but the story was a complete waste of time. It should never have been written. There was no reason to even tell the story. It was a story we'd all heard before and it had been told better by someone else.
So overall, I'd have to give the movie a C- at best. It was visually stunning, but the story was so weak that my brain protested while I was watching the movie. It was like biting into a nice juicy steak only to discover that it was actually a plastic dog toy that goes squeak. You still have a nice dog toy, but the meal you were promised is only a distant memory.
When I started my novel, I knew the time was finally ripe for telling a story that had been rambling around in my brain for fifteen years. I wrote and wrote and wrote. After five years I gave up for two reasons - first, the story had a structural problem. But second, and more importantly, I realized that my story had outlived its useful life. The world had changed too much for my story to ever work... which brings me to AVATAR.
Now before I go any further, I want to say that there may be spoilers ahead. Although the biggest problem with AVATAR is the story's lack of originality, I still think you should see it spoiler free and enjoy it for what the producer and writer intended. So if you haven't seen the movie, turn away now... Go ahead, we'll wait...
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1...
This film achieves heights of visual accomplishment not seen in a long time. The environment is just that crisp. When you add the layers of wildlife and the imaginative takes on animals and geography, it all adds up to one of the most astonishing film looks since The Lord of the Rings pilfered New Zealand and turned it into Middle Earth. However, a film begins, middles and ends with story - and that is where this film dies on the vine.
As compelling as the visuals were, if the story had really been churning out at an equal rate, the visuals would have been even more spectacular. For example, in the films best sequence where Jake has to bond with his first flying dragon thingy, the story and the visuals are equal, creating a fantastic sequence that almost seemed like a completely different movie. As these characters had to climb up to the floating sky islands and then bond with one of the dragons before plunging to near certain death made for the most compelling moments of film this year - both visually and creatively entertaining, with story and image in sync. If the rest of the film was as interesting as these few minutes, I would have been thrilled.
The problems with the story begin right away. There are logic problems with the set up. Our hero is a wounded marine who agrees to work for a space corporation to replace his dead brother in the Avatar project. He goes to Pandora where this corporation is mining a miracle substance called unobtanium (I'm not making that up) that does something or other - its never explained with the implication being that its not important as to what it does. At one point, Jake illustrates this point by saying something to the effect that, "They have something we want, so we take it." Upon arriving at Pandora, Jake is immediately cast as the middle ground between mindless automaton Scientists and mindless automaton Soldiers, both being played against each other by the evil Corporation. The xenophobic soldiers don't see the aliens as the indigenous peoples on the planet, but as stupid savages in the way of progress. The scientists, on the other hand, see them as some sort of enlightened culture that could bring humanity back to us if we could just learn from them. Jake is just happy to run in his giant blue Avatar. The problems, of course, are that the film is set up as an analogy. We are not presented with real human beings or real aliens. We are presented with stereotypical view points (good guys = scientists, bad guys = soldiers) and we aren't ever given any contradictory evidence. All scientists are good, all soldiers are bad. And the Navi are a god fearing alien race that lives in peace and harmony with everything. So, of course, we hate them. Because we're greedy.
The whole world that Cameron created doesn't make any sense from that point of view. Quick, write a prequel in your mind. How did humans find this planet? How did we determine there was this mineral on the planet? How did we manage to set up a giant base there? Did the Navi not realize that we humans were there? Did we humans not realize that we would have to wipe out the Navi in order to rape their planet? Its stated right at the beginning that the Navi want to kill all the humans and yet they seem to tolerate these obvious Avatar's in their midst? Why? None of this made any sense... and from that point forward, the stupidity begins to pile more on top of a story that is already built on a pretty shaky base.
The Navi had been at war until they were brought together at the beginning of the time of sorrow (presumably when the humans arrived, though never clearly stated). Why didn't they try to kill the humans then? When the humans first attack (about half way through the movie), the Navi try to kill them with bows and arrows - with the arrows just bouncing off the ships. Have they never fought humans before? Haven't they been killing humans for years before this? So why don't they know their arrows are ineffective? Shouldn't they already know how to kill humans? And isn't this environment supposed to be extremely hostile to humans? And yet these space marines are constantly wiping the floor with their primitive counterparts without doing anything more strenuous than pulling a trigger. Heck, they march in a straight line and fire their guns and the Navi charge right at them like Pickett at Gettysburg with the same result. And if the Navi are supposedly so peaceful and harmonious, why have a warrior clan or warrior mentality at all? If they are one with nature, why learn how to kill others? Why have that become the basis for your entire culture and your entire manhood ritual?
I could go on and on and on. But the gist of the problem is this, in trying to borrow the story of Dances with Wolves, they took all the parts of the story that they liked and left the rest behind. The Navi were so much like Native Americans that even the space horses looked like they'd just been hijacked off the wall of a Native American petroglyph. And yet, the Navi had none of the associated history attached - no trail of tears, no Little Big Horn, no Plains Indians and counting coups and Buffalo Hunts... nothing like that - like some sanitized version of American Indians, like a really fuzzy shadow of them. And the marines weren't much better - dumb grunts that go off to fight because, of course, they're blood thirsty savages who follow orders because they're marines. Fire on innocent men, women and children - okay. Do it for some dumb corporation - might as well. There was no motivation for them, as they too were scrubbed clean of all the massacres they'd been privy to, all the civil war fighting, all the fear of being scalped. As a writer, if you simplify your analogy too much, it ceases to have meaning. And it really becomes problemsome when you have such a clear cut analogy that has been stripped of most of its meaning. What we're left with is a message that says, human beings bad, native creatures good. Or more simply, Greed is bad. At nearly three hours, to be left with a message like that makes the whole affair seem rather pretentious.
I'd like to be able to say that I liked the movie while I was watching it but formed all these opinions after the fact, but the truth is that these problems were so glaring, I was bothered by them throughout. In the battle scene at the end where the aliens fight back by flying in from above on their flying dragons and shooting arrows through the windshields of the helicopters, my only thought was... "When did they figure out how to do that? Or is it just that somehow the windshields are now more brittle and arrows can pass through them?" I'm thinking this as I'm watching the movie, which is never a good sign. But I did have one revelation after the movie that is the basis of my argument here.
Years ago, right after Titanic came out and Cameron was talking up his new 3-D technology idea, he suggested that his next project would be a TV series about a real life mission to Mars. When I got home last night and my eyes were still caressing the incredible visuals of Avatar while my brain spewed hatred on the story, it occurred to me that if Cameron had decided to use this technology with a story about going to Mars, the film would have been completely incredible. So compelling were the visuals that had they been slaved together with a story worthy of them, Cameron really would have changed film making forever. And that was when I realized that the end result of all my bitching about the story came down to the fact that the film LOOKED great, but the story was a complete waste of time. It should never have been written. There was no reason to even tell the story. It was a story we'd all heard before and it had been told better by someone else.
So overall, I'd have to give the movie a C- at best. It was visually stunning, but the story was so weak that my brain protested while I was watching the movie. It was like biting into a nice juicy steak only to discover that it was actually a plastic dog toy that goes squeak. You still have a nice dog toy, but the meal you were promised is only a distant memory.
Friday, December 18, 2009
I'm too tired to think of anything clever...
I hate GAP. I hate their smug little "holiday" commercial. I hate any song that makes light of this season. I hate the atheists who are trying to hijack my Christmas by making it seem as if I'm an ogre for reminding people that there wouldn't be a Christmas without Christ. There's no hope without Christ either, but I'm not going to harp on that.
I like egg nog and Santa and Christmas shopping and all the commercial aspects of Christmas, but I adore advent calendars and wreaths and children dressed up like angels and all of those wonderfully glorious Christmas hymns. I don't mind if people of other faiths and beliefs (or lack thereof) want to enjoy Christmas too. But don't try and take my holiday from me because I happen to take it seriously. For you this might be all fun and games and football and food and cheap TV's under a fake plastic tree. For me this is a holy season that is supposed to bring out the best in humanity - peace, love, joy, and hope. You can have all of these things too at no extra charge, but I'm afraid you will have to embrace a bigger picture of Christmas than some Saturday evening holiday special can give you on a cable channel.
So to those who are trying to destroy Christmas in order to preserve their holiday, I say back off. You don't have to believe that Jesus is the reason for the season, but don't try to ruin it for the rest of us... or so help me, I'll make it my mission to go to every public school in the country and tell all the kids that there's no such thing as Santa Claus. ;)
I like egg nog and Santa and Christmas shopping and all the commercial aspects of Christmas, but I adore advent calendars and wreaths and children dressed up like angels and all of those wonderfully glorious Christmas hymns. I don't mind if people of other faiths and beliefs (or lack thereof) want to enjoy Christmas too. But don't try and take my holiday from me because I happen to take it seriously. For you this might be all fun and games and football and food and cheap TV's under a fake plastic tree. For me this is a holy season that is supposed to bring out the best in humanity - peace, love, joy, and hope. You can have all of these things too at no extra charge, but I'm afraid you will have to embrace a bigger picture of Christmas than some Saturday evening holiday special can give you on a cable channel.
So to those who are trying to destroy Christmas in order to preserve their holiday, I say back off. You don't have to believe that Jesus is the reason for the season, but don't try to ruin it for the rest of us... or so help me, I'll make it my mission to go to every public school in the country and tell all the kids that there's no such thing as Santa Claus. ;)
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Ninety Days without Ninety Days In The Bible - Day One
For approximately the last 90 days or so (give or take a week or two), my good friend, brother from another mother, and blog buddy, Andy at A Mile From The Beach has been writing about his journey through the Bible - reading it as part of a church program called The Bible in 90 Days. He has literally read the entire Bible in 90 Days. It took me 150 days to get through Psalms (one book of the Bible for those that don't know) so count me already impressed. But what impressed me more is the fact that he wrote a blog posting for every single day of his journey about his journey through the Bible. Now that he's finished reading the Bible, I find myself going into withdrawl. I had really gotten used to coming and visiting his blog post every day and advancing through the Bible with him (in leaps and bounds).
Of course, I shall have to endure without Andy's journey. So, in order to make it up to myself and to others that might be experiencing similar withdrawl symptoms, I have once again peaked ahead to 90 Days in the future to see what life will be like after 90 days without 90 Days In The Bible. Instead of pre-printing 90 Days worth of blogs, however, I have summarized the important blog titles for the next 90 days of Andy's blog.
Day One - Something about Andy's continual denial of certain events at the Grand Canyon. I think this is available for reading now.
Day Nine - A Christmas wish for everyone.
Day Fifteen - Andy reveals his New Year's resolution surprise.
Day Thirty One - Andy's first day at his online seminary.
Day Fifty - Andy's blog is a tribute to his good friend Will who is leaving for Kenya.
Day Fifty Five - Andy is deemed to advanced for regular seminary and is skipped a few years
Day Sixty - Andy reports Will's sad news that he's decided not to return to the USA.
Day Sixty Five - Andy graduates from Seminary.
Day Seventy Five - Andy is called as a new pastor at First Church of Recreationalism in Alamosa, CO.
Day Ninety - Andy launches new Bible in 90 Days at his new church.
Wow... quite a busy 90 day period. The only question, dear Spirit, is whether this a vision of things to come, or things that Might Yet come. Only time will tell...
Of course, I shall have to endure without Andy's journey. So, in order to make it up to myself and to others that might be experiencing similar withdrawl symptoms, I have once again peaked ahead to 90 Days in the future to see what life will be like after 90 days without 90 Days In The Bible. Instead of pre-printing 90 Days worth of blogs, however, I have summarized the important blog titles for the next 90 days of Andy's blog.
Day One - Something about Andy's continual denial of certain events at the Grand Canyon. I think this is available for reading now.
Day Nine - A Christmas wish for everyone.
Day Fifteen - Andy reveals his New Year's resolution surprise.
Day Thirty One - Andy's first day at his online seminary.
Day Fifty - Andy's blog is a tribute to his good friend Will who is leaving for Kenya.
Day Fifty Five - Andy is deemed to advanced for regular seminary and is skipped a few years
Day Sixty - Andy reports Will's sad news that he's decided not to return to the USA.
Day Sixty Five - Andy graduates from Seminary.
Day Seventy Five - Andy is called as a new pastor at First Church of Recreationalism in Alamosa, CO.
Day Ninety - Andy launches new Bible in 90 Days at his new church.
Wow... quite a busy 90 day period. The only question, dear Spirit, is whether this a vision of things to come, or things that Might Yet come. Only time will tell...
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Reformed and always reforming... part two
You'd think that after 700 blog posts (this being 701) I'd have figured out some of the basics of theology and Christianity. Not even close. In fact, I still struggle with what is, on one level, an argument about gays and lesbians in the church, but at another level is a fundamental question about scripture, faith, and love - and which takes precedence.
I have been moved to revive this argument because of a response to the previous blog in this article by Underground Pewster. If you haven't read the original blog post (Reformed and always reforming) I suggest you do so at this time, because I'm not going to review it again. U.P. wrote that in that case a NO vote would have also been a loving vote. Randall joined in with U.P. to note that often times telling someone no is the best thing for them and does not mean that you love them even less. Not to be too argumentative, but I had figured that angle out on my own. And to counter that, I could simply state the obvious cliche that one can say No for good reasons and out of love and still be wrong (like in all those movies where a parent wants what's best for a child and refuses to see that they are stifling his/her creativity).
What none of these previous posts have done is address the fundamental question - and perhaps that's why I'm still struggling with the subject - what should the role of scripture be in our daily lives as opposed to love and faith (and as part of love and faith as well). I don't wish to throw these various things in contrast to each other. I strongly suspect that in leading perfect God Oriented lives that all of these things fit together seamlessly so that to follow scripture is to love and is to be faithful. But there are stark contrasts to what the Bible shows and contradictions in the Biblical story as well.
Nevermind the fact that most Christians ignore a good 90% or more of Leviticus. We all know that Jesus broke the veil and freed us from the law. And yet, He also said that He didn't come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. If that's the case, and the law still applies to us, why don't we follow Leviticus anymore? Or, perhaps more poignantly, why do we only follow certain aspects of it?
I am also cognizant of the story of Peter's vision in Acts where he interpreted that the eating of any kind of food was now allowed. This also led to the removal of circumcision as a requirement of being a Christian. None of these things was ever addressed by word from Jesus, and yet they are accepted practice in Christianity today.
While He was alive, Jesus did make note that the law had its limits. He reminded the Pharisees that if a man fell down a well on the sabbath, it would not be against the law to rescue him even if that particular task seemed to break the holy sabbath (nor would it be against the law to feed hungry men as in the case of David). In all cases where Jesus disturbed the law keepers of the day, the litmus test seemed to be that He was showing His love to others - feeding the hungry, saving the dying, protecting people from stoning, etc... So, by His own acts, it would appear that Love triumphed over Law any day of the week.
That idea has been poking around in my head for a while now. I've also been thinking about something Jesus told his disciples - From now on whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you condemn on earth will be condemned in Heaven.
The problem with laws is that they don't have the flexibility to deal with people. They are always black and white. This is right. This is wrong. There can be no grey area. But real life isn't black and white. Therefore law needs to be tempered with something else to avoid it being too out of touch with reality. That something else is love in all its component forms - wisdom, compassion, and mercy. That laws sometimes outgrow reality is obvious. The world changes and laws need to change with it.
But also people change and the laws need to change with people. Perhaps that's what Jesus was trying to tell his disciples. The law is important and always will be, but my kingdom isn't static. It will grow with time and you will need to be its advocates. As the world changes, you will change with it. But one thing will never change - my love for my church. Therefore, if you ask me to change my law, it will be changed.
I think the church is being tested. Are we going to exclude certain people because of scripture in the same way that the Pharisees did in Jesus's time? Or are we going to embrace everyone because Jesus's love is great enough to overcome all sin - whether it be pork, or divorce, or working on the sabbath, or homosexuality? What kind of church are we? And where do we draw the line?
Randall made an excellent point in his very first response to the previous blog post - going away from scripture is the path to madness. But can you disagree with scripture and still be cognizant of what it says? I've read Leviticus a bunch of times, but it doesn't make me harken to those rules and regulations (though I think owning willing slaves for six years, so long as I release them on the 7th year might be kind of cool ;) Yet, I am still aware of what the law says.
As a last point, I think this issue is more relevant in other parts of the world than in the United States. I know that the Vatican has recently said that any homosexuality is a terrible sin - thus throwing all of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters under the proverbial bus. And in Uganda, they are about to enforce criminalization of homosexuality to the point of death in some cases. In contrast to these more serious issues, the calling of a pastor seems almost unimportant. And yet, the arguments are the same in all cases - Holy Scripture vs. Real People. We are no doubt getting it wrong no matter which side we fall upon. But I think I'd rather err on the side of love and inclusion than hate and exclusion - and then sort it out later when I'm much wiser.
I have been moved to revive this argument because of a response to the previous blog in this article by Underground Pewster. If you haven't read the original blog post (Reformed and always reforming) I suggest you do so at this time, because I'm not going to review it again. U.P. wrote that in that case a NO vote would have also been a loving vote. Randall joined in with U.P. to note that often times telling someone no is the best thing for them and does not mean that you love them even less. Not to be too argumentative, but I had figured that angle out on my own. And to counter that, I could simply state the obvious cliche that one can say No for good reasons and out of love and still be wrong (like in all those movies where a parent wants what's best for a child and refuses to see that they are stifling his/her creativity).
What none of these previous posts have done is address the fundamental question - and perhaps that's why I'm still struggling with the subject - what should the role of scripture be in our daily lives as opposed to love and faith (and as part of love and faith as well). I don't wish to throw these various things in contrast to each other. I strongly suspect that in leading perfect God Oriented lives that all of these things fit together seamlessly so that to follow scripture is to love and is to be faithful. But there are stark contrasts to what the Bible shows and contradictions in the Biblical story as well.
Nevermind the fact that most Christians ignore a good 90% or more of Leviticus. We all know that Jesus broke the veil and freed us from the law. And yet, He also said that He didn't come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. If that's the case, and the law still applies to us, why don't we follow Leviticus anymore? Or, perhaps more poignantly, why do we only follow certain aspects of it?
I am also cognizant of the story of Peter's vision in Acts where he interpreted that the eating of any kind of food was now allowed. This also led to the removal of circumcision as a requirement of being a Christian. None of these things was ever addressed by word from Jesus, and yet they are accepted practice in Christianity today.
While He was alive, Jesus did make note that the law had its limits. He reminded the Pharisees that if a man fell down a well on the sabbath, it would not be against the law to rescue him even if that particular task seemed to break the holy sabbath (nor would it be against the law to feed hungry men as in the case of David). In all cases where Jesus disturbed the law keepers of the day, the litmus test seemed to be that He was showing His love to others - feeding the hungry, saving the dying, protecting people from stoning, etc... So, by His own acts, it would appear that Love triumphed over Law any day of the week.
That idea has been poking around in my head for a while now. I've also been thinking about something Jesus told his disciples - From now on whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you condemn on earth will be condemned in Heaven.
The problem with laws is that they don't have the flexibility to deal with people. They are always black and white. This is right. This is wrong. There can be no grey area. But real life isn't black and white. Therefore law needs to be tempered with something else to avoid it being too out of touch with reality. That something else is love in all its component forms - wisdom, compassion, and mercy. That laws sometimes outgrow reality is obvious. The world changes and laws need to change with it.
But also people change and the laws need to change with people. Perhaps that's what Jesus was trying to tell his disciples. The law is important and always will be, but my kingdom isn't static. It will grow with time and you will need to be its advocates. As the world changes, you will change with it. But one thing will never change - my love for my church. Therefore, if you ask me to change my law, it will be changed.
I think the church is being tested. Are we going to exclude certain people because of scripture in the same way that the Pharisees did in Jesus's time? Or are we going to embrace everyone because Jesus's love is great enough to overcome all sin - whether it be pork, or divorce, or working on the sabbath, or homosexuality? What kind of church are we? And where do we draw the line?
Randall made an excellent point in his very first response to the previous blog post - going away from scripture is the path to madness. But can you disagree with scripture and still be cognizant of what it says? I've read Leviticus a bunch of times, but it doesn't make me harken to those rules and regulations (though I think owning willing slaves for six years, so long as I release them on the 7th year might be kind of cool ;) Yet, I am still aware of what the law says.
As a last point, I think this issue is more relevant in other parts of the world than in the United States. I know that the Vatican has recently said that any homosexuality is a terrible sin - thus throwing all of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters under the proverbial bus. And in Uganda, they are about to enforce criminalization of homosexuality to the point of death in some cases. In contrast to these more serious issues, the calling of a pastor seems almost unimportant. And yet, the arguments are the same in all cases - Holy Scripture vs. Real People. We are no doubt getting it wrong no matter which side we fall upon. But I think I'd rather err on the side of love and inclusion than hate and exclusion - and then sort it out later when I'm much wiser.
Monday, December 07, 2009
The Book of Will - Chapter One
Chapter One
The Parable of the Beloved King
Once there was a kingdom that knew peace and a king that was beloved by his people. Everywhere the king went, the people of the land would praise him and shower him with adoration.
Whatever the king wanted, the people would provide. When he was in need of a new palace, they didn't hesitate to build it for him. When he wanted to travel to other countries, the people sent him gladly and awaited his return with open arms. When he needed funds for any project, the people taxed themselves to pay for it. When he asked for any sort of support, the people were always generous with their response.
However, the king was aware of the love being shown to kings in other lands. Other kings has nicer palaces and their people generated even more tax money for bigger projects. The king began to wonder how much his people loved him. He started to ask for even more money and was pleased to see that the people responded without reservation. He knew that the people loved and respected him because of all that they eagerly provided to him.
One day, however, in the midst of a famine, the people asked the king if they might decrease their tax burden for the year since many of the people were struggling to feed their families. The king felt affronted. He wondered why the people no longer respected him. He felt that any less money in his coffers was a clear indication of the people's disrespect. He made it very clear to his people that no only would he not decrease their burden, but he expected it to be increased as a sign of their love to him. Any less and he threatened to leave their kingdom and go where he was truly respected.
The king was overthrown and the people rejoiced. And the land once again had peace.
Woe to any king that puts respect before honor.
The Parable of the Beloved King
Once there was a kingdom that knew peace and a king that was beloved by his people. Everywhere the king went, the people of the land would praise him and shower him with adoration.
Whatever the king wanted, the people would provide. When he was in need of a new palace, they didn't hesitate to build it for him. When he wanted to travel to other countries, the people sent him gladly and awaited his return with open arms. When he needed funds for any project, the people taxed themselves to pay for it. When he asked for any sort of support, the people were always generous with their response.
However, the king was aware of the love being shown to kings in other lands. Other kings has nicer palaces and their people generated even more tax money for bigger projects. The king began to wonder how much his people loved him. He started to ask for even more money and was pleased to see that the people responded without reservation. He knew that the people loved and respected him because of all that they eagerly provided to him.
One day, however, in the midst of a famine, the people asked the king if they might decrease their tax burden for the year since many of the people were struggling to feed their families. The king felt affronted. He wondered why the people no longer respected him. He felt that any less money in his coffers was a clear indication of the people's disrespect. He made it very clear to his people that no only would he not decrease their burden, but he expected it to be increased as a sign of their love to him. Any less and he threatened to leave their kingdom and go where he was truly respected.
The king was overthrown and the people rejoiced. And the land once again had peace.
Woe to any king that puts respect before honor.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Bizarre Thought For The Week
You know that intense joy you get when you really scratch some place that itches. Its primal. Animal. A pleasure reserved for the lizard brain inside of your higher mind. Its also the reason the Matrix would never work.
Humans are way more complex creatures than car batteries, but at a biological level we don't need to be. Growing up without any form of visual, social, or other stimuli, we would simply be electricity producing car batteries - just like the machines need us to be. So, quite frankly, there would be absolutely no reason for the Matrix to exist.
Think about it. When you are born, you are quite content to simply exist. You eat, poop, drink, poop, and breathe. Period. And that makes you happy. Take a machine that mines human bodies for the parts necessary to farm human beings, incubates them in giant tubes, and then grows them on the vine. The minds inside these giant car batteries would need no outside stimulation to exist. They wouldn't need a Matrix. They would be rudimentary, at best. Lizard brain would the highest unstimulated cognizance necessary.
Further, if some human culture survived outside of the Matrix, it would presumably continue to evolve. Its language would change. Its culture would change. Everything about it would be remarkably different than what would exist in a Matrix world that was tied to one period of human existence of several hundred years before. If humans popped out of the Matrix suddenly, as they did in the movie, they would be hopelessly unable to communicate with the human beings of Zion. It would be like a Shakespearian character suddenly being awakened in 21st Century America. Not only would they have a hard time simply grasping the language, but everything else would seem bizarre and magical as well.
My mind has been drawn to these bizarre thoughts more and more lately because of the potentially complex world in which I set my newest novel. On the one hand, the world could be infinitely more dense and complex than anything in the Matrix. On the other hand, nobody would ever want to read any of that - so who cares? Giant robot arms plucking baby pods out of long fields of incubator vines is pretty cool visually and helps sell tickets, even if it doesn't make any damn sense. The Matrix is, after all, a story and sometimes even true stories don't really many any damn sense - like Peruvian gangsters killing fat people for their fatty tissues to sell to cosmetic firms which sounds like a hybrid Stephen King, Robin Cook, and Lionsgate Film. Besides I have a way around it... I just make my hero less intelligent than his author - so he never questions anything that I choose to tell him. He can't tell you how his world works, because he doesn't know. And isn't that a trait that we all share?
Humans are way more complex creatures than car batteries, but at a biological level we don't need to be. Growing up without any form of visual, social, or other stimuli, we would simply be electricity producing car batteries - just like the machines need us to be. So, quite frankly, there would be absolutely no reason for the Matrix to exist.
Think about it. When you are born, you are quite content to simply exist. You eat, poop, drink, poop, and breathe. Period. And that makes you happy. Take a machine that mines human bodies for the parts necessary to farm human beings, incubates them in giant tubes, and then grows them on the vine. The minds inside these giant car batteries would need no outside stimulation to exist. They wouldn't need a Matrix. They would be rudimentary, at best. Lizard brain would the highest unstimulated cognizance necessary.
Further, if some human culture survived outside of the Matrix, it would presumably continue to evolve. Its language would change. Its culture would change. Everything about it would be remarkably different than what would exist in a Matrix world that was tied to one period of human existence of several hundred years before. If humans popped out of the Matrix suddenly, as they did in the movie, they would be hopelessly unable to communicate with the human beings of Zion. It would be like a Shakespearian character suddenly being awakened in 21st Century America. Not only would they have a hard time simply grasping the language, but everything else would seem bizarre and magical as well.
My mind has been drawn to these bizarre thoughts more and more lately because of the potentially complex world in which I set my newest novel. On the one hand, the world could be infinitely more dense and complex than anything in the Matrix. On the other hand, nobody would ever want to read any of that - so who cares? Giant robot arms plucking baby pods out of long fields of incubator vines is pretty cool visually and helps sell tickets, even if it doesn't make any damn sense. The Matrix is, after all, a story and sometimes even true stories don't really many any damn sense - like Peruvian gangsters killing fat people for their fatty tissues to sell to cosmetic firms which sounds like a hybrid Stephen King, Robin Cook, and Lionsgate Film. Besides I have a way around it... I just make my hero less intelligent than his author - so he never questions anything that I choose to tell him. He can't tell you how his world works, because he doesn't know. And isn't that a trait that we all share?
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Moderately Bi-Polar
This is not to take away anything from people that suffer from this horrible mental illness. I've known some people with this disease and its a very serious thing.
That being said, I can sympathize in a very mundane kind of way. Everytime I start work on a new project I can go through these wild mood swings. One day I'm high as a kite, the next day the entire world's out to get me. Intellectually I try to maintain a level in between, but emotions are powerful forces in our lives.
The reasons I think have to do with the sort of super concentration required to get a writing project off the ground. On any journey the first steps are always the hardest, and even though you try to ease into it, starting to write something can be like physically smashing your head against a wall. Until you develop a thick cranial ridge to absorb the blows, you tend to get messed up a bit at first.
As it turns out, this is precisely controlled by my emotions. If I write well, I'm flying. The world is myoyster double deluxe bacon cheeseburger. I'm ready to accept my Nobel Prize for Literature. If I don't write well, or if I don't write period, then I feel as if my writing skills are diminished and I have failed and will not go Into The West with the other elves. My light has gone out in the world. I am but a shadow of my former self. I do not know what I am doing here. I am utterly lost and alone and... well, you get the idea.
Of course, what makes it worse is that starting to write is like dropping a giant rock in the pond. It creates these back and forth waves where the highs are tied to my points of high energy and the lows are tied to the depths of my fatigue. The result of this is that I can write a great three pages at night and feel so exhilarated that I'm literally bouncing off the walls like someone dripped espresso intravenously into my brain while I was writing. I can't get to sleep... until about two hours later when I crash. Then, no matter how well I wrote the night before, I wake up feeling despondent and depressed and suddenly the CRAP that I wrote the night before comes back to haunt me reminding in mocking tones that I am just a hack.
Eventually, I will get into a rhythm. The highs and the lows will moderate and the writing will just become a chore to be done. And then all the drama will be gone and I will just be Will... although a bit more tired than normal.
I can't imagine what this sort of life might be like on a continual basis. I say some pretty stupid stuff when I'm depressed, and I'm too damned cheery when I'm not. I can only guess how much worse it must be to have this stuff hit you out of the clear blue. I know people who have had the disease and who have done some horrendous things while under its control. Compared to that, a few undeserved shout outs and a little unnecessary pouting are but minor quibbles.
That being said, I can sympathize in a very mundane kind of way. Everytime I start work on a new project I can go through these wild mood swings. One day I'm high as a kite, the next day the entire world's out to get me. Intellectually I try to maintain a level in between, but emotions are powerful forces in our lives.
The reasons I think have to do with the sort of super concentration required to get a writing project off the ground. On any journey the first steps are always the hardest, and even though you try to ease into it, starting to write something can be like physically smashing your head against a wall. Until you develop a thick cranial ridge to absorb the blows, you tend to get messed up a bit at first.
As it turns out, this is precisely controlled by my emotions. If I write well, I'm flying. The world is my
Of course, what makes it worse is that starting to write is like dropping a giant rock in the pond. It creates these back and forth waves where the highs are tied to my points of high energy and the lows are tied to the depths of my fatigue. The result of this is that I can write a great three pages at night and feel so exhilarated that I'm literally bouncing off the walls like someone dripped espresso intravenously into my brain while I was writing. I can't get to sleep... until about two hours later when I crash. Then, no matter how well I wrote the night before, I wake up feeling despondent and depressed and suddenly the CRAP that I wrote the night before comes back to haunt me reminding in mocking tones that I am just a hack.
Eventually, I will get into a rhythm. The highs and the lows will moderate and the writing will just become a chore to be done. And then all the drama will be gone and I will just be Will... although a bit more tired than normal.
I can't imagine what this sort of life might be like on a continual basis. I say some pretty stupid stuff when I'm depressed, and I'm too damned cheery when I'm not. I can only guess how much worse it must be to have this stuff hit you out of the clear blue. I know people who have had the disease and who have done some horrendous things while under its control. Compared to that, a few undeserved shout outs and a little unnecessary pouting are but minor quibbles.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Some things I hate to admit...
1) Babe Ruth's homerun record is supreme. Hank Aaron broke his in a different era. So too did Barry Bonds. Oh's record, while superior to all, was done in Japan. Likewise I think anyone that set a homerun record at Coor's Field would be questionable. Of course, the whole idea of records from one era to the next is kind of sketchy. I imagine the "world's fastest man" would probably have been outstripped by a Inuit of 35kya trying to outrun a saber-toothed tiger.
2) OJ was probably guilty. So was Barry Bonds. Problem is, I don't think I'll ever truly know since a) OJ's case was botched by a bad prosecution and b) Barry will likely never get his day in court. Thus I am forced to make my conclusions based upon speculation. Of course, that kind of conclusion while it might seem correct in these two cases is also what gives up a large group of people that also believe that Obama was born in Kenya and that the government blew up the WTC in order to go to war with Iraq. So speculation is never ideal.
3) Abortion is wrong. I know where I stand on this politically. And I know where I stand on this based upon my upbringing. But I find it hard to fathom how killing potential life can be right under any circumstance. I also realize that I will never have to make such an impossible decision for myself and, as such, I find myself horribly conflicted in choosing between the lesser of two evils.
4) Obama has been rather mediocre thus far. I'm not one of these guys that says let's tar and feather the communist and run him out of town. Quite the contrary. In fact, I'd say that no President before and hopefully no President after this, shall have had such a deficit of things to overcome just to get back to square one. Even FDR taking over from Hoover had more to work with. However, that doesn't change the fact that so far lots has been done and the only change I can see in my own life is that I still have a job - barely. Treading water during a tsunami may keep you going for a short time but eventually you're still going to drown. We all need a life preserver... not just big banks.
5) I hate being poor. Too often I look with envy on those people who make double what I make (or even more) and wish that I had what they have. Even just not having to worry about things like spending money would make me happier, I tell myself. Of course, I know that its all a trap - that the more that you have, the more that you spend, and the more immune you become to the suffering of others. Even now, I make more money than some third world villages do in an entire year, and yet I am not happy. So, its probably a good thing that I remain "poor", since I would not know what to do with more money anyway.
6) I am getting burnt out. I have spent my entire life being creative. It is all I know. It is part of who I am. Yet, lately, I find that I'm much happier letting others be creative for me. I would rather vegitate in front of the TVand be entertained than do any entertaining myself. *sigh* I am finally becoming like everyone else - only without as much money ;)
2) OJ was probably guilty. So was Barry Bonds. Problem is, I don't think I'll ever truly know since a) OJ's case was botched by a bad prosecution and b) Barry will likely never get his day in court. Thus I am forced to make my conclusions based upon speculation. Of course, that kind of conclusion while it might seem correct in these two cases is also what gives up a large group of people that also believe that Obama was born in Kenya and that the government blew up the WTC in order to go to war with Iraq. So speculation is never ideal.
3) Abortion is wrong. I know where I stand on this politically. And I know where I stand on this based upon my upbringing. But I find it hard to fathom how killing potential life can be right under any circumstance. I also realize that I will never have to make such an impossible decision for myself and, as such, I find myself horribly conflicted in choosing between the lesser of two evils.
4) Obama has been rather mediocre thus far. I'm not one of these guys that says let's tar and feather the communist and run him out of town. Quite the contrary. In fact, I'd say that no President before and hopefully no President after this, shall have had such a deficit of things to overcome just to get back to square one. Even FDR taking over from Hoover had more to work with. However, that doesn't change the fact that so far lots has been done and the only change I can see in my own life is that I still have a job - barely. Treading water during a tsunami may keep you going for a short time but eventually you're still going to drown. We all need a life preserver... not just big banks.
5) I hate being poor. Too often I look with envy on those people who make double what I make (or even more) and wish that I had what they have. Even just not having to worry about things like spending money would make me happier, I tell myself. Of course, I know that its all a trap - that the more that you have, the more that you spend, and the more immune you become to the suffering of others. Even now, I make more money than some third world villages do in an entire year, and yet I am not happy. So, its probably a good thing that I remain "poor", since I would not know what to do with more money anyway.
6) I am getting burnt out. I have spent my entire life being creative. It is all I know. It is part of who I am. Yet, lately, I find that I'm much happier letting others be creative for me. I would rather vegitate in front of the TVand be entertained than do any entertaining myself. *sigh* I am finally becoming like everyone else - only without as much money ;)
Friday, November 20, 2009
WTF?!
'Fat for cosmetics' murder suspects arrested in Peru
 Some of the suspects were carrying bottles of fat when arrested |
Four people have been arrested in Peru on suspicion of killing dozens of people in order to sell their fat and tissue for cosmetic uses in Europe.
At least five other suspects, including two Italian nationals, remain at large.
Police said the gang could be behind the disappearances of up to 60 people in Peru's Huanuco and Pasco regions.
One of those arrested told police the ringleader had been killing people for their fat for more than three decades.
The gang has been referred to as the Pishtacos, after an ancient Peruvian legend of killers who attack people on lonely roads and murder them for their fat.
Human tissue
At a news conference in the capital, police showed reporters two bottles containing human body fat and images of one of the alleged victims.
One of the alleged killings is reported to have taken place in mid-September, with the person's body tissue removed for sale.
Cmdr Angel Toledo told Reuters news agency some of the suspects had "declared and stated how they murdered people with the aim being to extract their fat in rudimentary labs and sell it".
Police said they suspect the fat was sold to cosmetics and pharmaceutical companies in Europe, but have not confirmed any such connection.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Sleeping On An Empty Stomach
As part of my new fangled effort to lose weight, my doctor suggested counting calories. So I've been very diligently counting calories for a little more than a week now - keeping an average count of between 2000 and 3000 calories a day. As I understand it, you should have approximately 10 calories for each pound of weight you want to achieve. So, if you weigh 250lbs, for instance, and you want to get to 200lbs, you should eat only 2000 calories. Since I'm still dialing in a total that I can live with, my number fluctuates wildly.
On Monday, I only managed a little more than 2000 calories and my stomach growled when I went to bed. But it was simply annoying. However, by the end of last night, due to a combination of eating right and being rushed, I only managed a whopping 1400 calories - less than half of what my body would consider normal. I went to bed last night feeling really rather weak and starving.
As I tossed uncomfortably in bed trying not to think about food, I had a sudden divine smack upside the head - Hey Stupid, there are kids all over the world that do this every night. There are kids for whom 1400 calories would be a feast. That is why you're trying to help them, remember.
I was able to get up this morning and have a larger than usual breakfast (still probably under my normal calories though). The kids I'm trying to help in Africa probably got up for another day of scrounging for food and survival. Talk about putting things in perspective.
I may go hungry again before I head off to Africa, but I doubt that I'll ever complain about it.
On Monday, I only managed a little more than 2000 calories and my stomach growled when I went to bed. But it was simply annoying. However, by the end of last night, due to a combination of eating right and being rushed, I only managed a whopping 1400 calories - less than half of what my body would consider normal. I went to bed last night feeling really rather weak and starving.
As I tossed uncomfortably in bed trying not to think about food, I had a sudden divine smack upside the head - Hey Stupid, there are kids all over the world that do this every night. There are kids for whom 1400 calories would be a feast. That is why you're trying to help them, remember.
I was able to get up this morning and have a larger than usual breakfast (still probably under my normal calories though). The kids I'm trying to help in Africa probably got up for another day of scrounging for food and survival. Talk about putting things in perspective.
I may go hungry again before I head off to Africa, but I doubt that I'll ever complain about it.
Friday, November 13, 2009
The Lighter Side - The Greatest Movie Ever Made Opens Today!
2012 will be a magnum opus of destruction! It is the visceral filmed version of that game we all played as a kid - build something and then destroy it. Why? Because there is a guilty pleasure that strikes at the core of our being to watch stuff get destroyed, blowed up, and otherwise mangled. SimCity creators knew this - they added disasters that you could call down upon the unsuspecting sims. Irwin Allen knew this back in the 70's with Earthquake, The Poseidon Adventure, and The Towering Inferno. Hollywood briefly rediscovered it in the 90's with ID4, Twister, and, current champion and claimant to the title of greatest movie ever made, Volcano (This summer, the Coast is Toast! - that's all you needed to know!)
When I was a kid, one of my most favorite story pitches was an idea that my friend Eric and I played around with. Here's the gist: After a series of severe and freak natural disasters, Scientists discover that the world is coming to an end. First, all the monsters from Monster Island get loose. This causes a natural strain on society and so, World War Three breaks out. And then, just when things can't possibly get any worse, Armageddon happens and there's a final battle between Heaven and Hell, USSR and USA, Monsters and People while the entire earth convulses and dies. At the very end, our hero Scientist admits his love for the beautiful female Scientist; they kiss, and then they're swallowed by lava.
For a third grader, this was the greatest possible story ever told. No other disaster story could ever match it. You had total carnage and total chaos mixed with a G rated love story. Pure brilliance, never to be topped.
Roland Emmerich must have had similar ideas. He has let loose his Epic 3rd Grade self and paid a whole bunch of CGI artists to imagine his own version of the end of the world.
Warning: Do Not Confuse This With Shakespeare... though you might be tempted because of how cool it is. If you do, you will be disappointed.
In short, 2012 is the New Benchmark for Total Film Destruction and after watching a giant tsunami wave crest the Himilayas, I'm not sure it'll be beaten anytime soon. Then again, there's always my own third grade dream. But until that becomes filmed reality, we'll have to settle for 2012.
Buy lots of popcorn and prepare to laugh your head off in sheer destructive glee!
When I was a kid, one of my most favorite story pitches was an idea that my friend Eric and I played around with. Here's the gist: After a series of severe and freak natural disasters, Scientists discover that the world is coming to an end. First, all the monsters from Monster Island get loose. This causes a natural strain on society and so, World War Three breaks out. And then, just when things can't possibly get any worse, Armageddon happens and there's a final battle between Heaven and Hell, USSR and USA, Monsters and People while the entire earth convulses and dies. At the very end, our hero Scientist admits his love for the beautiful female Scientist; they kiss, and then they're swallowed by lava.
For a third grader, this was the greatest possible story ever told. No other disaster story could ever match it. You had total carnage and total chaos mixed with a G rated love story. Pure brilliance, never to be topped.
Roland Emmerich must have had similar ideas. He has let loose his Epic 3rd Grade self and paid a whole bunch of CGI artists to imagine his own version of the end of the world.
Warning: Do Not Confuse This With Shakespeare... though you might be tempted because of how cool it is. If you do, you will be disappointed.
In short, 2012 is the New Benchmark for Total Film Destruction and after watching a giant tsunami wave crest the Himilayas, I'm not sure it'll be beaten anytime soon. Then again, there's always my own third grade dream. But until that becomes filmed reality, we'll have to settle for 2012.
Buy lots of popcorn and prepare to laugh your head off in sheer destructive glee!
Thursday, November 12, 2009
A General Shout Out!
To all who have responded to my blog posts this week, thank you. This place is far more interesting when I get to hear what you think than when I write what I think. Community is all about other people, not myself.
Shove me in the shallow water...
... before I get too deep. Too late!
Before I completely abandon this deep line of thinking that I've been swimming through the last couple of days, I had a truly bizarre philosophical notion yesterday. It sounds more like pseudo-philosophy to me - the kind you find in only the best science fiction stories. So hear me out because I want to see what anyone else thinks of this.
My initial thought was this, "Mathematics points to God." This is probably nothing new in terms of thinking. Lots of people would point to the neatly ordered world and explain that there must be a higher power at work here to bring order out of chaos. But my mind is never content at stopping at the superficial statements. It delved deeper.
Mathematics is the language of science. All things is science are generally explained using mathematics. Even a social science like Anthropology uses a great deal of mathematics to help explain its theories (statistical analysis of bone densities, for instance). So, positing that mathematics is the language of science, I decided to try a thought experiment about the origins of math.
Its generally believed that the origin of human languages comes from an attempt to communicate between two people (as opposed to language simply appearing in situ). Like animals cry out in danger or amorous advancements, so too would there need to be a way to communicate more subtle concepts - boundaries, emotions, etc... Applying this notion of the development of language to mathematics leads one to posit that the first number of any mathematical system would have to be one.
One would be the first number because we would always point to ourselves first. We are the origin. We are the source of mathematics. First there is me, then there are others. I know me - and me knows others. So, one is the source, the primary concept. All mathematics flows from this. If I add to myself, there are two (or three, etc...), but no matter how large the number, the source always remains the same. The One is always there and never goes away.
But, of course, even if we were the proverbial Adam, we would not actually be the Source. The entire world is controlled by mathematics. Science believes that at its source, mathematics can explain everything. The laws of the universe are written in mathematics. Therefore, everything has mathematics as its source. Math, then becomes the universal language. And Math has, at its source, the One. (I hope you're still with me... cause quite frankly, even I'm just barely hanging on to this thin thread... ;)
So if Mathematics points to a single source, then that source must be something that existed first. We can go backwards and discover that, indeed, there is a single source for all things in the Big Bang - which was a singularity (a single point in spacetime) that exploded and created the entire universe. But what caused the singularity to come into existence? A single creator.
(Okay, that last part requires a stretch of the logic. Realistically, my philosophy can actually only trace back mathematics to the Big Bang singularity. From a religious point of view, this brings up an interesting thought that perhaps the God we worship is the singularity - or the entirety of the universe. I'm insufficiently wise to ponder whether that is a good thing or blasphemy. God's being is something that I shall never fully grasp - like the thought of something existing outside of existence.)
Anyway, I said it was a slippery concept. And now I'm ready to ponder more shallow thoughts.
Go 49ers! (See, I'm feeling better already!)
Before I completely abandon this deep line of thinking that I've been swimming through the last couple of days, I had a truly bizarre philosophical notion yesterday. It sounds more like pseudo-philosophy to me - the kind you find in only the best science fiction stories. So hear me out because I want to see what anyone else thinks of this.
My initial thought was this, "Mathematics points to God." This is probably nothing new in terms of thinking. Lots of people would point to the neatly ordered world and explain that there must be a higher power at work here to bring order out of chaos. But my mind is never content at stopping at the superficial statements. It delved deeper.
Mathematics is the language of science. All things is science are generally explained using mathematics. Even a social science like Anthropology uses a great deal of mathematics to help explain its theories (statistical analysis of bone densities, for instance). So, positing that mathematics is the language of science, I decided to try a thought experiment about the origins of math.
Its generally believed that the origin of human languages comes from an attempt to communicate between two people (as opposed to language simply appearing in situ). Like animals cry out in danger or amorous advancements, so too would there need to be a way to communicate more subtle concepts - boundaries, emotions, etc... Applying this notion of the development of language to mathematics leads one to posit that the first number of any mathematical system would have to be one.
One would be the first number because we would always point to ourselves first. We are the origin. We are the source of mathematics. First there is me, then there are others. I know me - and me knows others. So, one is the source, the primary concept. All mathematics flows from this. If I add to myself, there are two (or three, etc...), but no matter how large the number, the source always remains the same. The One is always there and never goes away.
But, of course, even if we were the proverbial Adam, we would not actually be the Source. The entire world is controlled by mathematics. Science believes that at its source, mathematics can explain everything. The laws of the universe are written in mathematics. Therefore, everything has mathematics as its source. Math, then becomes the universal language. And Math has, at its source, the One. (I hope you're still with me... cause quite frankly, even I'm just barely hanging on to this thin thread... ;)
So if Mathematics points to a single source, then that source must be something that existed first. We can go backwards and discover that, indeed, there is a single source for all things in the Big Bang - which was a singularity (a single point in spacetime) that exploded and created the entire universe. But what caused the singularity to come into existence? A single creator.
(Okay, that last part requires a stretch of the logic. Realistically, my philosophy can actually only trace back mathematics to the Big Bang singularity. From a religious point of view, this brings up an interesting thought that perhaps the God we worship is the singularity - or the entirety of the universe. I'm insufficiently wise to ponder whether that is a good thing or blasphemy. God's being is something that I shall never fully grasp - like the thought of something existing outside of existence.)
Anyway, I said it was a slippery concept. And now I'm ready to ponder more shallow thoughts.
Go 49ers! (See, I'm feeling better already!)
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Reformed and always reforming...
My mind tumbled, whirled, and stumbled over itself all last night. At approximately 11:00pm, the Presbytery of San Francisco voted to call an openly lesbian woman to become a minister of word and sacrament. I was there. And I voted in favor of the call.
That this woman was eminently qualified to be a minister, I have no doubt. Aside from the one obvious issue, she has been a good and faithful servant of Christ her whole life and in the brief time we got to examine her I was able to see that she was quite capable of talking the talk as well. She looked and sounded Pastoral. And as for her faith, that I certainly have no doubt. Though she has been rejected again and again and again, she was finally officially called for the first time in 23 years. How many of us have tried to answer God's call for 23 years?
But, alas, there is that one sticking point upon which all of the questions and most of the debates were centered. The Bible clearly lists homosexuality as an aberation. I won't belittle the discussion by mentioning the other things that God lists as aberations that we now take for granted, except to note that there is a precedent in the church for us to change our minds over time. Perhaps that is what is taking place. Perhaps not. I heard many arguments on both sides of the issue - all of them passionate and well spoken (with the exception of one that was really just kind of pointless, but I nitpick). And I knew, before a full speaking session had gone by, that this was ultimately going to not be decided by debate, but by discernment.
We've heard all the arguments, but in a nutshell they come down to a question of belief. Are we tied to Holy Scripture to the point of excluding our Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender brothers and sisters from God's grace so long as they refuse to repent of this sin? Or can we, as the Church, decide that love and forgiveness is more important than scripture?
I'll be honest with you. I don't know the answer. In one of the most poignant exchanges of the evening when this question was posed to the candidate for ministry, she replied, "If I knew the answer to that, we wouldn't be here right now having this debate." I concur. Though we might have our opinion one way or the other, neither side has a definitive answer.
I voted yes, however, on the basis of one bit of Jesus's teachings which I'll paraphrase. When asked by the Pharisees which was the most important commandment, Jesus replied, "To love God with all your heart, mind and soul. And the second is like it, to love your neighbor as you love yourself. Upon this is the Law and all the Prophets." In Jesus's mind, the most important issue was to love God, then to love your neighbor, and based upon those two things, everything else would flow. So as a sort of litmus test to my decision, I asked myself which decision seemed most in keeping with these two important commandments. You know my answer.
All I can do is pray that I made the right decision. A little more than half of us felt led by God one way, and a little less than half felt led by God the other way. If we all felt lead by God, which of us was wrong?
(P.S. As an addendum to the above story, I need to make a point. I was not supposed to be there last night. I was called in at the last minute to replace another elder of my church that could not make it. I was not given instruction on how to vote, but was told that the vote was important. Despite the historical precedent of the vote, or perhaps because of it, I did not wish to attend the meeting. I have been in many rancorous meetings in the past in my own church and my heart has never quite healed from these bitter debates - watching former friends and colleagues tear each other down in order to prove their point is to me the equivalent of watching a Roman soldier take a catonine tails to the bare back of Jesus. This meeting, however, while every bit as intense was conducted with decorum and peace, if not exactly dignity. I am very happy to be back on the sidelines of history now.)
That this woman was eminently qualified to be a minister, I have no doubt. Aside from the one obvious issue, she has been a good and faithful servant of Christ her whole life and in the brief time we got to examine her I was able to see that she was quite capable of talking the talk as well. She looked and sounded Pastoral. And as for her faith, that I certainly have no doubt. Though she has been rejected again and again and again, she was finally officially called for the first time in 23 years. How many of us have tried to answer God's call for 23 years?
But, alas, there is that one sticking point upon which all of the questions and most of the debates were centered. The Bible clearly lists homosexuality as an aberation. I won't belittle the discussion by mentioning the other things that God lists as aberations that we now take for granted, except to note that there is a precedent in the church for us to change our minds over time. Perhaps that is what is taking place. Perhaps not. I heard many arguments on both sides of the issue - all of them passionate and well spoken (with the exception of one that was really just kind of pointless, but I nitpick). And I knew, before a full speaking session had gone by, that this was ultimately going to not be decided by debate, but by discernment.
We've heard all the arguments, but in a nutshell they come down to a question of belief. Are we tied to Holy Scripture to the point of excluding our Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender brothers and sisters from God's grace so long as they refuse to repent of this sin? Or can we, as the Church, decide that love and forgiveness is more important than scripture?
I'll be honest with you. I don't know the answer. In one of the most poignant exchanges of the evening when this question was posed to the candidate for ministry, she replied, "If I knew the answer to that, we wouldn't be here right now having this debate." I concur. Though we might have our opinion one way or the other, neither side has a definitive answer.
I voted yes, however, on the basis of one bit of Jesus's teachings which I'll paraphrase. When asked by the Pharisees which was the most important commandment, Jesus replied, "To love God with all your heart, mind and soul. And the second is like it, to love your neighbor as you love yourself. Upon this is the Law and all the Prophets." In Jesus's mind, the most important issue was to love God, then to love your neighbor, and based upon those two things, everything else would flow. So as a sort of litmus test to my decision, I asked myself which decision seemed most in keeping with these two important commandments. You know my answer.
All I can do is pray that I made the right decision. A little more than half of us felt led by God one way, and a little less than half felt led by God the other way. If we all felt lead by God, which of us was wrong?
(P.S. As an addendum to the above story, I need to make a point. I was not supposed to be there last night. I was called in at the last minute to replace another elder of my church that could not make it. I was not given instruction on how to vote, but was told that the vote was important. Despite the historical precedent of the vote, or perhaps because of it, I did not wish to attend the meeting. I have been in many rancorous meetings in the past in my own church and my heart has never quite healed from these bitter debates - watching former friends and colleagues tear each other down in order to prove their point is to me the equivalent of watching a Roman soldier take a catonine tails to the bare back of Jesus. This meeting, however, while every bit as intense was conducted with decorum and peace, if not exactly dignity. I am very happy to be back on the sidelines of history now.)
Monday, November 09, 2009
Christmas, Christmas Time Is Here...
Yesterday, we had a wonderful Alternative Christmas Faire at my church. Our Kenya Children's Mission Group raised enough money to build almost five full houses for grandparents taking care of orphaned children, or school fees and uniforms for hundreds of students, or food for an entire village. Combined with other funds, we are leaning towards finishing a new Well project for an organization that wants to be able to have sustainable farming in order to feed its orpanhed infants, abused girls, and AIDS patients.
WAAAYYYY Better than a new I-Phone... or ten new IPhones, for that matter.
I've always been a member of the working poor - but like most kids raised in America post-Great Depression 1, I was an avid believer in the Receive part of Christmas. When Christmas time rolled around, my siblings and I would sit in our living room consuming the toy catalogs and circling all the amazing toys that we wanted Santa to bring us for Christmas. We wanted everything. Two or three items on each page demanded our purchase. Of course, being part of the working poor, we usually got about three toys and an assortment of clothes. We loved all the toys we got, but, of course, joy was tempered with a bit of disappointment because often times the flashy thing that we most wanted was also the most expensive.
Still, we made do - playing with our new toys all day long and for the entire rest of the winter break, and then getting to enjoy the new items anew when we got back to school and got to share them with our friends who also had new toys to play with. Christmas was a communal affair.
As I got older, my Christmas's fell into three distinct phases. First, I was in the Navy and I didn't get to experience Christmas with my family or friends. Opening the presents that Christmas was the joyless equivalent of finding buried treasure while trapped on a desert island. At first, I chalked it up to the heat and the palm trees and said, "Hawaii is no place to enjoy Christmas." But though I missed the central tenet of my problem, I also made sure it was the last Christmas I spent alone.
The second phase occurred after I got out of the Navy and found steady employment. Suddenly burdened with a paycheck, the Christmas season exploded for me. I discovered that I could afford to buy the flashy things that I had always wanted when I was a kid but could never afford. My Sister and I went hog-wild when it came time to go Christmas shopping. We spent and spent and spent and for about five to ten years there (especially the first couple of years with my Sister's kids) we had overflow parking for all the loot that "Santa" placed under the tree. It literally took us hours and hours to open everything and at a pace that would have made a drill sergeant proud. But this smorgasbord of Christmas excess always ended later than night when I went to find new places for all my new loot and realized that so much of it was... well... it was crap - the useless stuff that you would bypass 11 months out of the year was now cluttering my house. It was well intentioned and joyously received crap, but it was still crap nonetheless.
A few years ago, I realized that something needed to change. It wasn't just the bills that were getting outrageous, it was the lack of space for all the junk I had been accumulating - junk that I just didn't need. I began by asking myself whether Christmas was still important and whether it would make sense to just cancel it. And that was when I entered my latest, and hopefully, last phase of Christmas.
You see, I realized that what was important to me about Christmas was not the getting or the giving. It wasn't about the holiday songs or the Christmas tree or what type of food was on the dining room table. It wasn't about the Christmas Eve service or mass consumerism or even the Peanut's Christmas Special. What made Christmas my favorite holiday of them all was the ability to spend time with my family and friends for no other reason than just to be with them.
Looking through the catalogs at Christmas was a time I spent with my siblings where we weren't trying to kill each other. Spending time at my Grandparents house was all about being in my pajamas in front of the heating vent with my grandparent's dog watching people open presents and having toast and jam with my grandpa. Christmas dinner was about seeing my extended family, catching up with all my relatives that I only saw once or twice a year, and being stuck in the kid's room with my larger sibling base. The same sorts of things that I see now in large families on a weekly basis, were the things that I enjoyed most about Christmas. Togetherness. Family. Ohana.
Oh sure, the Christmas presents are nice, but they're not the point. The dinner is delicious, but its not what feeds us. Doing Christmas is more than just following some checklist of activities that must be performed every year. Christmas is family and friends and joy and laughter and maybe even a few tears.
So this year, as you prepare to start the holiday marathon, pause first to consider what really makes the holiday important and what real joy is out there to find. Yes, Jesus is the reason for the season - but stacking a Baby Jesus on top of a pile of consumer goods misses the point. Jesus can best be celebrated in peace, joy, and togetherness.
WAAAYYYY Better than a new I-Phone... or ten new IPhones, for that matter.
I've always been a member of the working poor - but like most kids raised in America post-Great Depression 1, I was an avid believer in the Receive part of Christmas. When Christmas time rolled around, my siblings and I would sit in our living room consuming the toy catalogs and circling all the amazing toys that we wanted Santa to bring us for Christmas. We wanted everything. Two or three items on each page demanded our purchase. Of course, being part of the working poor, we usually got about three toys and an assortment of clothes. We loved all the toys we got, but, of course, joy was tempered with a bit of disappointment because often times the flashy thing that we most wanted was also the most expensive.
Still, we made do - playing with our new toys all day long and for the entire rest of the winter break, and then getting to enjoy the new items anew when we got back to school and got to share them with our friends who also had new toys to play with. Christmas was a communal affair.
As I got older, my Christmas's fell into three distinct phases. First, I was in the Navy and I didn't get to experience Christmas with my family or friends. Opening the presents that Christmas was the joyless equivalent of finding buried treasure while trapped on a desert island. At first, I chalked it up to the heat and the palm trees and said, "Hawaii is no place to enjoy Christmas." But though I missed the central tenet of my problem, I also made sure it was the last Christmas I spent alone.
The second phase occurred after I got out of the Navy and found steady employment. Suddenly burdened with a paycheck, the Christmas season exploded for me. I discovered that I could afford to buy the flashy things that I had always wanted when I was a kid but could never afford. My Sister and I went hog-wild when it came time to go Christmas shopping. We spent and spent and spent and for about five to ten years there (especially the first couple of years with my Sister's kids) we had overflow parking for all the loot that "Santa" placed under the tree. It literally took us hours and hours to open everything and at a pace that would have made a drill sergeant proud. But this smorgasbord of Christmas excess always ended later than night when I went to find new places for all my new loot and realized that so much of it was... well... it was crap - the useless stuff that you would bypass 11 months out of the year was now cluttering my house. It was well intentioned and joyously received crap, but it was still crap nonetheless.
A few years ago, I realized that something needed to change. It wasn't just the bills that were getting outrageous, it was the lack of space for all the junk I had been accumulating - junk that I just didn't need. I began by asking myself whether Christmas was still important and whether it would make sense to just cancel it. And that was when I entered my latest, and hopefully, last phase of Christmas.
You see, I realized that what was important to me about Christmas was not the getting or the giving. It wasn't about the holiday songs or the Christmas tree or what type of food was on the dining room table. It wasn't about the Christmas Eve service or mass consumerism or even the Peanut's Christmas Special. What made Christmas my favorite holiday of them all was the ability to spend time with my family and friends for no other reason than just to be with them.
Looking through the catalogs at Christmas was a time I spent with my siblings where we weren't trying to kill each other. Spending time at my Grandparents house was all about being in my pajamas in front of the heating vent with my grandparent's dog watching people open presents and having toast and jam with my grandpa. Christmas dinner was about seeing my extended family, catching up with all my relatives that I only saw once or twice a year, and being stuck in the kid's room with my larger sibling base. The same sorts of things that I see now in large families on a weekly basis, were the things that I enjoyed most about Christmas. Togetherness. Family. Ohana.
Oh sure, the Christmas presents are nice, but they're not the point. The dinner is delicious, but its not what feeds us. Doing Christmas is more than just following some checklist of activities that must be performed every year. Christmas is family and friends and joy and laughter and maybe even a few tears.
So this year, as you prepare to start the holiday marathon, pause first to consider what really makes the holiday important and what real joy is out there to find. Yes, Jesus is the reason for the season - but stacking a Baby Jesus on top of a pile of consumer goods misses the point. Jesus can best be celebrated in peace, joy, and togetherness.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Just like riding a bicycle...
On Sunday, I decided to take my bad old self out for a metaphorical spin. I climbed behind the wheel of my keyboard and started writing my novel. As the aches and pains quickly added up, I remembered that I hadn't written a darn thing in so long, I'd forgotten the last time I'd actually tried to write a story.
You see, for most of my life, me and the keyboard have been bosum buddies. In High School, I'd think nothing of writing for four or five hours a night. It was fun and silly and I loved it. Of course, I'd go through stretches where I didn't write for all sorts of reasons. But normally, I felt some anxiety at not being able to get behind the keyboard and write something. It got to the point where if I didn't write for a stretch of time, I'd start getting moody and depressed. Writing was my therapy.
That changed after I started writing The Novel (henceforth refered to Novel #1). For five years I more or less lived in front of my keyboard to no avail. The Novel was hopelessly flawed at its conceptual base. I could write and write and write and it would never get any better. It was the literal equivalent of quicksand. When I finally came to the conclusion that I was wasting my time trying to improve it, I walked away from my computer and started looking into film.
To be sure, I've been writing scripts for the past couple of years - but writing scripts is much more technical than it is creative. Same result, different process. But until I sat down on Sunday and started tapping away, I hadn't realized how much different it really was.
Suddenly, I discovered that I was a stranger in the land of English and sentence construction. I pounded my head against the wall a few times, but nothing came loose. I persevered and managed to rack up about two full pages - all of which, I quickly surmised, was garbage.
Writing can be one of the most frustrating exercises in the world. There are times its like swimming in molasses. And then there was last night.
I went home from work not feeling so hot - pretty tired actually. But by the time V stopped scrawling on my TV screen, I was feeling a bit more energetic. Since Sunday, I had figured out how to start my new novel in a more constructive fashion. I sat down at my computer, turned on my Itunes, and before I knew it an hour and a half had disappeared and five wonderful pages had magically appeared on my computer screen.
I was exhausted, of course, and quickly fell asleep. But when I woke up this morning I was refreshed and excited and ready to go again. I haven't had this much spring in my step since... well, its been a while.
So, the new Novel (officially Novel #2 - or N2 for short) is underway and off to a good start. Today, it's good to be me.
You see, for most of my life, me and the keyboard have been bosum buddies. In High School, I'd think nothing of writing for four or five hours a night. It was fun and silly and I loved it. Of course, I'd go through stretches where I didn't write for all sorts of reasons. But normally, I felt some anxiety at not being able to get behind the keyboard and write something. It got to the point where if I didn't write for a stretch of time, I'd start getting moody and depressed. Writing was my therapy.
That changed after I started writing The Novel (henceforth refered to Novel #1). For five years I more or less lived in front of my keyboard to no avail. The Novel was hopelessly flawed at its conceptual base. I could write and write and write and it would never get any better. It was the literal equivalent of quicksand. When I finally came to the conclusion that I was wasting my time trying to improve it, I walked away from my computer and started looking into film.
To be sure, I've been writing scripts for the past couple of years - but writing scripts is much more technical than it is creative. Same result, different process. But until I sat down on Sunday and started tapping away, I hadn't realized how much different it really was.
Suddenly, I discovered that I was a stranger in the land of English and sentence construction. I pounded my head against the wall a few times, but nothing came loose. I persevered and managed to rack up about two full pages - all of which, I quickly surmised, was garbage.
Writing can be one of the most frustrating exercises in the world. There are times its like swimming in molasses. And then there was last night.
I went home from work not feeling so hot - pretty tired actually. But by the time V stopped scrawling on my TV screen, I was feeling a bit more energetic. Since Sunday, I had figured out how to start my new novel in a more constructive fashion. I sat down at my computer, turned on my Itunes, and before I knew it an hour and a half had disappeared and five wonderful pages had magically appeared on my computer screen.
I was exhausted, of course, and quickly fell asleep. But when I woke up this morning I was refreshed and excited and ready to go again. I haven't had this much spring in my step since... well, its been a while.
So, the new Novel (officially Novel #2 - or N2 for short) is underway and off to a good start. Today, it's good to be me.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
TWO HOURS IN SEARCH OF A STORY - AMELIA EDITION
OR
HOW I BLATANTLY RIPPED OFF MUSINGS FROM THE HINTERLANDS STYLE SHEET BECAUSE THIS MOVIE DIDN'T DIDN'T DESERVE ANY MORE ORIGINALITY THAN IT SHOWED IN ITS ENTIRE TWO HOURS - LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, USING A CALIFORNIA GOLF COURSE AS THE SETTING FOR A TROPICAL AIRFIELD, OR HAVING ENTIRE CHARACTERS DISAPPEAR WITH NO EXPLANATION, OR MAKING THE MOST INTERESTING FLIGHT OF AMELIA'S CAREER BE THE ONE FLIGHT WHERE SHE'S A PASSENGER, OR THE FACT THAT NORMALLY WOODEN ACTOR RICHARD GERE IS THE ONLY ACTOR IN THE ENTIRE MOVIE (EXCEPTION BEING HILLARY SWANK WHO IS RATHER GOOD) THAT SEEMS ANIMATED, AND THEN ONLY IN THE WAY THAT PINOCCHIO SEEMS ANIMATED BEFORE THE BLUE FAIRY ARRIVES IN THE STORY, WHICH LEAVES ONE WONDERING WHAT WAS IN THE TWO BOOKS THE SCRIPT WAS ALLEGEDLY BASED UPON SINCE THERE'S MORE FACTUAL INFORMATION ON WIKIPEDIA ABOUT AMELIA EARHART THAN THERE WAS IN THE ENTIRE TWO HOUR MOVIE.
P.S. I didn't like it, and it wasn't even very good research for my novel - and how the hell do you make Christoper Eccleston boring?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Mississippi Relief Trip from February
I have no idea if this is going to work. Its not that I'm a technophobe. Its more that I'm a Bellsnwhistlesaphobe. I like technology. I'm not a fan of gadgets. So my lack of photos online is a direct correlation to my lack of willingness to get photos, digitize them, scan them, and upload them to various different programs all over the web. But these photos were too good to pass up.
So, now, if all goes according to plan, here are five photos from my mission trip to Mississippi earlier this year:
Here I am actually working. Not too many photos of this since I was mostly the support crew. In this photo, I think I'm holding something in place while the ladies are on the roof hammering it down. I worked on the ground and hence, took a lot of the photos.
Here I am holding a board which is being handed up to the ladies on the roof. In the distance you can see one of the ladies in conversation with the house's owner, Lee. For a point of comparison, most of that tree in the background was underwater during the Katrina storm surge.
At night, we surrounded the campfire - some for good times and conversation, but mostly to stay warm. It dropped below 20 degrees at night while we were there. In fact, it was colder in Mississippi that week than in Alaska (In February!) The only things we had to keep us warm was the campfire and our on again/off again heating blowers that blew warm smoky air into our cabins at night. But hey, it was too cold for mosquitoes.
Did I mention it was cold? On this particular morning, it didn't reach 20 degrees until about 10am. I think I had every layer covered with two or three things. But since most of the roof was finished (as you can see in the bottom of the photo) there wasn't a whole lot for me to do to stay warm. Where I'm standing used to be the backyard den of this house. It floated away during the flood.
Evidence of the infamous Sugar Fight at the Cafe Du Mond! On our last day in the area, we went to church in New Orleans and then got to explore the city for about two hours. We had beignets at the famous Cafe Du Mond which quickly erupted into a giant powder sugar fight. Nobody was left unscathed. After that, I had to find a Po Boy so that I could complete my New Orleans menu (we'd already done the Cajun gumbo and seafood boil the day before).
In all, it was a great experience. Not only did I get to meet some great new people, but I also got to live out my faith for an entire week (and I was well fed also... catfish and fried chicken and... ;) The fact of the matter is, this one week of work for me was more fulfilling than the remaining 51 weeks at any other job. If you get the chance this year to do something with your time off, I totally recommend serving others. You can't better the experience, no matter how much money you spend.
So, now, if all goes according to plan, here are five photos from my mission trip to Mississippi earlier this year:
Here I am actually working. Not too many photos of this since I was mostly the support crew. In this photo, I think I'm holding something in place while the ladies are on the roof hammering it down. I worked on the ground and hence, took a lot of the photos.
Here I am holding a board which is being handed up to the ladies on the roof. In the distance you can see one of the ladies in conversation with the house's owner, Lee. For a point of comparison, most of that tree in the background was underwater during the Katrina storm surge.
At night, we surrounded the campfire - some for good times and conversation, but mostly to stay warm. It dropped below 20 degrees at night while we were there. In fact, it was colder in Mississippi that week than in Alaska (In February!) The only things we had to keep us warm was the campfire and our on again/off again heating blowers that blew warm smoky air into our cabins at night. But hey, it was too cold for mosquitoes.
Did I mention it was cold? On this particular morning, it didn't reach 20 degrees until about 10am. I think I had every layer covered with two or three things. But since most of the roof was finished (as you can see in the bottom of the photo) there wasn't a whole lot for me to do to stay warm. Where I'm standing used to be the backyard den of this house. It floated away during the flood.
Evidence of the infamous Sugar Fight at the Cafe Du Mond! On our last day in the area, we went to church in New Orleans and then got to explore the city for about two hours. We had beignets at the famous Cafe Du Mond which quickly erupted into a giant powder sugar fight. Nobody was left unscathed. After that, I had to find a Po Boy so that I could complete my New Orleans menu (we'd already done the Cajun gumbo and seafood boil the day before).
In all, it was a great experience. Not only did I get to meet some great new people, but I also got to live out my faith for an entire week (and I was well fed also... catfish and fried chicken and... ;) The fact of the matter is, this one week of work for me was more fulfilling than the remaining 51 weeks at any other job. If you get the chance this year to do something with your time off, I totally recommend serving others. You can't better the experience, no matter how much money you spend.
Friday, October 23, 2009
"From the Archives" Friday
This is probably the best response I can think of to the excellent six part documentary of Monty Python airing this week on IFC. As inspiring as the best of Monty Python is now, it was even more inspirational when I was younger - arriving at a time of comical development in my life. I immediately embraced its sense of anarchy, insanity, and utter silliness. This had a profound effect on my writing. Up until I was wrapped up under this Pythonesque spell, I was mostly a very serious Space Opera type sci-fi writer. Combined with these Python type urges, my writing style was utterly transformed. I became a Space Opera type sci-fi writer with some very strange concepts of humor.
As a result, although I spent the first six years of my writing career trying to write the Great American novel (in the Under 12 category) and failing miserably, as soon as I embraced the sillier side of my writing embrace, it was only a mere 18 months before I was writing my first novel length story (with some friends who have asked to remain anonymous).
Anyway, my thought this week was to start selecting some of the funnier bits out of these old writings. Humor, of course, being subjective (I found this stuff hilarious in High School ;) you might differ in your opinion of what is funny. So that's why I've decided to spare you by only printing small chunks and only on Fridays.
So here is the first of my new From The Archives selections:
As a result, although I spent the first six years of my writing career trying to write the Great American novel (in the Under 12 category) and failing miserably, as soon as I embraced the sillier side of my writing embrace, it was only a mere 18 months before I was writing my first novel length story (with some friends who have asked to remain anonymous).
Anyway, my thought this week was to start selecting some of the funnier bits out of these old writings. Humor, of course, being subjective (I found this stuff hilarious in High School ;) you might differ in your opinion of what is funny. So that's why I've decided to spare you by only printing small chunks and only on Fridays.
So here is the first of my new From The Archives selections:
We interrupt this program for an editorial statement from a concerned reader...
To whom it may concern... It has come to my attention that recently students at campuses such as UC Berkeley and Stanford have been staging riots and protests. Now there is nothing wrong with that, its the way they're doing it.
The other day I walked over to a local college and saw a guy walking in a circle, by himself, carrying a Gucci picket sign with the words, "Make Love; Not Dr. Pepper," written on it. What sort of protest is this anyway? Aren't our American youth protesting in peaceful ways? Is this what America has been reduced to, a nation of peaceniks? Why John Wayne would spit in his grave! I say the only way to a commie terrorist apartheid person's heart is through his guts. So let's drop those picket signs and grab picket axes and let's show the world what American protesters are made of.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Reader
The views expressed are not necessarily the views of management. But that doesn't mean that they ain't...
And now back to our regularly scheduled program...
Fritz Jordan and The Martian Papers
Chapter Seven: Too Close
(1985)
William Robison
Come back next week for yet more silliness... and have a good weekend.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Promoting What exactly?
I just read an article about a group of atheists and secular humanists getting together to put billboards in subway stations in New York. Now, I don't really have a problem with this, but what exactly are they promoting? I mean religion is an organized belief system shared in common with a large group of people. So, in essence, if they are trying to put a group of people together with an organized belief that there is No God, aren't these people in essence organizing a religion? Otherwise, what is the point?
I don't believe in Santa Claus, but that doesn't mean I have to put ads in subways looking for others that don't believe in Santa Claus - honestly, I could care less whether you do or don't. So what exactly are these people hoping to gain by organizing a group of people that don't believe in something? It seems like an awful lot of money to be spent to just say hi to others that share your disbelief.
I believe in a pendulum theory of human history. If the pendulum swings too far one direction, eventually it will swing back the other way equally as far. You go from a relatively staid 1950's, for instance, to the radical and turmoilific period of the late 60's and early 70's. I think this rise in secular humanism and atheism is a direct result of the oft-putting Moral Majority movement of the last ten years or so. As conservative Christians organized to take over school boards and elections in order to cram their religious beliefs down everyone's throats, there was bound to be an equal and opposite backlash at some point. This kind of excess has never been good for anyone. And while I don't expect a Spanish Inquisition (looking over my shoulder for Michael Palin now...) I think we haven't seen the last of the likes of Christopher Hutchins or his ilk any time soon. Considering how long the Falwell's and Robertson's of this world lasted, I suspect the atheists are here to stay for a while.
But to be honest, they've got a long way to go before they're ready to be subversive and subtle.
I don't believe in Santa Claus, but that doesn't mean I have to put ads in subways looking for others that don't believe in Santa Claus - honestly, I could care less whether you do or don't. So what exactly are these people hoping to gain by organizing a group of people that don't believe in something? It seems like an awful lot of money to be spent to just say hi to others that share your disbelief.
I believe in a pendulum theory of human history. If the pendulum swings too far one direction, eventually it will swing back the other way equally as far. You go from a relatively staid 1950's, for instance, to the radical and turmoilific period of the late 60's and early 70's. I think this rise in secular humanism and atheism is a direct result of the oft-putting Moral Majority movement of the last ten years or so. As conservative Christians organized to take over school boards and elections in order to cram their religious beliefs down everyone's throats, there was bound to be an equal and opposite backlash at some point. This kind of excess has never been good for anyone. And while I don't expect a Spanish Inquisition (looking over my shoulder for Michael Palin now...) I think we haven't seen the last of the likes of Christopher Hutchins or his ilk any time soon. Considering how long the Falwell's and Robertson's of this world lasted, I suspect the atheists are here to stay for a while.
But to be honest, they've got a long way to go before they're ready to be subversive and subtle.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Things on my mind
Lots of things on my mind - my quiet here at the ol' blogging place not withstanding. I find that very few of them come up to the level of things that I wish to blog about. I guess right now I'm just doing a lot of thinking - mostly about what comes next. But there are a few things I wished to let you all know about...
1) If you're in the market for some fantastic items from Africa for extrememly cheap prices, our Kenya Group will have about four tables full of stuff from Kenyan artists for sale at the Alternate Christmas Faire at Lakeside Presbyterian Church in San Francisco on November 8th, 2009. Karl Morthole who has been our main leader in Kenya for years needed to fill up the rest of a 20' container full of coffee that he was selling here in the U.S.. So he asked his partner in Kenya to buy up a bunch of local crafts and art from Kenyan people and to ship this with the coffee. Well, about a third of the 20' container is still left. That means fresh Kenyan coffee and about four tables of authentic Kenyan crafts and art for sale at cost with 100% of the proceeds going to help the people of Kenya. How cheap you ask? We're probably going to have a $1 table, a $5 table, a $20 table, and a Bid Table (for things like wood carved Giraffes bigger than you are ;) I believe we're also selling 5 pound bags of Kenyan Coffee beans for $30 (I hear that's a good deal, but I really wouldn't know). Of course, some of the other things available at the faire are quite wonderful as well - a chance to donate an animal to the Heifer Project, or help with orphans in Bali, or buy a dinner/show ticket for an authentic Kenyan meal, and much, much, more... If you need more info, let me know.
2) If you're looking for something to get your boss or pastor for Christmas, my company (Yasutomo and Company - www.yasutomo.com) is having a sale on our popular Quad Pen's from Japan. These pens normally sell for $50 to $60 each. Right now, you can get them on our website for $29.95 - and there may be other deals coming down the pike before the end of the year. I'd check them out if you're looking for something a little on the fancy side for a cheap price.
3) If all goes well tonight, I should also be posting a new video to Youtube and on the Yasutomo website for a cool little project using origami and tealights - to make very wonderful decorations. Its something simple enough for kids to do and they really look good at any time of the year. I simply have to get the editing done and posted.
4) Just as an aside - did you know that there are Mandarin Immersion classes in San Francisco public schools? These programs are designed to take kids starting in Kindergarten and teach them for all but one hour a day in Mandarin. I guess the idea is that the students would become bi-lingual, but I'm not quite sure how that's going to work. Anyway, private schools do not offer these classes, so (mostly rich) parents are eagerly trying to get these programs expanded so that their kids can be enrolled in these prestigious classes. As I understand it now, there is so much pressure on the SFUSD to get these classes that in two years, SFUSD is planning to add the classes in every single school. In order to make this work, they will be converting one third of all classes (in the lowest grades, half in the higher grades) into language immersion courses. As a result of the expected lack of teachers capable of teaching only in the immersion language, they will be forced to hire teachers from foreign countries to fill the suddenly available teaching spots. This will no doubt lead to layoffs of qualified English speaking teachers. Quite frankly, I'm not sure I understand how you can teach a student ONLY in another language in an English speaking country and call them properly educated. How the heck are they supposed to pass the various tests if the tests they're given are in English? I'm not against the idea of bilingual teaching, but the only place I know of where immersion language classes are necessary are for situations where someone is about to be sent to a foreign country and needs to know the language. Anyway, chalk up another bizarre idea for San Francisco.
That's it for now... as usual, I danced around the real things on my mind, but I haven't yet decided whether I want to talk about those yet... someday soon perhaps.
Will, Out!
1) If you're in the market for some fantastic items from Africa for extrememly cheap prices, our Kenya Group will have about four tables full of stuff from Kenyan artists for sale at the Alternate Christmas Faire at Lakeside Presbyterian Church in San Francisco on November 8th, 2009. Karl Morthole who has been our main leader in Kenya for years needed to fill up the rest of a 20' container full of coffee that he was selling here in the U.S.. So he asked his partner in Kenya to buy up a bunch of local crafts and art from Kenyan people and to ship this with the coffee. Well, about a third of the 20' container is still left. That means fresh Kenyan coffee and about four tables of authentic Kenyan crafts and art for sale at cost with 100% of the proceeds going to help the people of Kenya. How cheap you ask? We're probably going to have a $1 table, a $5 table, a $20 table, and a Bid Table (for things like wood carved Giraffes bigger than you are ;) I believe we're also selling 5 pound bags of Kenyan Coffee beans for $30 (I hear that's a good deal, but I really wouldn't know). Of course, some of the other things available at the faire are quite wonderful as well - a chance to donate an animal to the Heifer Project, or help with orphans in Bali, or buy a dinner/show ticket for an authentic Kenyan meal, and much, much, more... If you need more info, let me know.
2) If you're looking for something to get your boss or pastor for Christmas, my company (Yasutomo and Company - www.yasutomo.com) is having a sale on our popular Quad Pen's from Japan. These pens normally sell for $50 to $60 each. Right now, you can get them on our website for $29.95 - and there may be other deals coming down the pike before the end of the year. I'd check them out if you're looking for something a little on the fancy side for a cheap price.
3) If all goes well tonight, I should also be posting a new video to Youtube and on the Yasutomo website for a cool little project using origami and tealights - to make very wonderful decorations. Its something simple enough for kids to do and they really look good at any time of the year. I simply have to get the editing done and posted.
4) Just as an aside - did you know that there are Mandarin Immersion classes in San Francisco public schools? These programs are designed to take kids starting in Kindergarten and teach them for all but one hour a day in Mandarin. I guess the idea is that the students would become bi-lingual, but I'm not quite sure how that's going to work. Anyway, private schools do not offer these classes, so (mostly rich) parents are eagerly trying to get these programs expanded so that their kids can be enrolled in these prestigious classes. As I understand it now, there is so much pressure on the SFUSD to get these classes that in two years, SFUSD is planning to add the classes in every single school. In order to make this work, they will be converting one third of all classes (in the lowest grades, half in the higher grades) into language immersion courses. As a result of the expected lack of teachers capable of teaching only in the immersion language, they will be forced to hire teachers from foreign countries to fill the suddenly available teaching spots. This will no doubt lead to layoffs of qualified English speaking teachers. Quite frankly, I'm not sure I understand how you can teach a student ONLY in another language in an English speaking country and call them properly educated. How the heck are they supposed to pass the various tests if the tests they're given are in English? I'm not against the idea of bilingual teaching, but the only place I know of where immersion language classes are necessary are for situations where someone is about to be sent to a foreign country and needs to know the language. Anyway, chalk up another bizarre idea for San Francisco.
That's it for now... as usual, I danced around the real things on my mind, but I haven't yet decided whether I want to talk about those yet... someday soon perhaps.
Will, Out!
Thursday, October 08, 2009
God's Comment on My Blog
God left me a comment on my blog post of yesterday in His usual way... scripture. Here I am trying to decide what His will for me is and whether I have heard Him correctly (or at all) and I open my Bible last night and read:
One of the things that boggles my mind about non-believers is how they can keep their eyes shut to the vast number of "coincidences" that occur in our lifetimes. You JUST happened to be in the right place at the right time... but it doesn't mean anything, right? Your whole life becomes one long string of meaningless coincidences that when you look back on it (if you look back on it) JUST happens to form a convenient pattern that brought you to this place and this time with just the right skills to do the things that you have an opportunity to do. Law of averages or chemicals in your mind playing tricks on you to make you think there is significance in random chance... anything, but God.
My faith was not tested by these thoughts that I've been having. I think I was simply pausing in order to contemplate my path up until this point and wondering if I'd managed to arrive here by happy coincidence or by revelation. My answer to that - a direct and completely obvious answer from scripture - could not have been more clear. God influenced my path in just such a way that I happened to read that passage last night right after writing that blog post. If God can communicate to me in that way, why not through a daydream?
I agree with what Pastor Dave Lamb said in his comment about people seeing signs and portents in too many things and using those as excuses to do the most horrible things (though I'm not entirely sure they DIDN'T hear God, just that maybe they didn't understand Him). I use the words and actions of Jesus as a litmus test for all that God has told me to do. And so far, I can honestly say that I've never "heard" anything from Him that failed the test. I don't always understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, but so far I've never had a reason to doubt that what I did helped further His kingdom. But its easy to look at people who claim that God told them to torture other people and see that they're delusional. It's much harder to dispute people who claim that God told them to serve the poor or feed the homeless - though sometimes these people might do even more damage in their attempts to do "God's Will". In the end, I like what Randall Sherman suggested - that I should do what I think God is telling me to do and have faith that He'll knock me upside the head with a holy 2x4 if I start going down the wrong path. In my experience, this is probably the most accurate statement of God's plan that I've ever read - and I've got the 2x4 marks to prove it. ;)
Anyway, I've got my answer. Now to get back to work on Kenya.
Isaiah 48:
15 I, even I, have spoken;
yes, I have called him.
I will bring him,
and he will succeed in his mission.
16 "Come near me and listen to this:
"From the first announcement I have not spoken in secret;
at the time it happens, I am there."
And now the Sovereign LORD has sent me,
with his Spirit.
17 This is what the LORD says—
your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel:
"I am the LORD your God,
who teaches you what is best for you,
who directs you in the way you should go.
18 If only you had paid attention to my commands,
your peace would have been like a river,
your righteousness like the waves of the sea.
19 Your descendants would have been like the sand,
your children like its numberless grains;
their name would never be cut off
nor destroyed from before me."
One of the things that boggles my mind about non-believers is how they can keep their eyes shut to the vast number of "coincidences" that occur in our lifetimes. You JUST happened to be in the right place at the right time... but it doesn't mean anything, right? Your whole life becomes one long string of meaningless coincidences that when you look back on it (if you look back on it) JUST happens to form a convenient pattern that brought you to this place and this time with just the right skills to do the things that you have an opportunity to do. Law of averages or chemicals in your mind playing tricks on you to make you think there is significance in random chance... anything, but God.
My faith was not tested by these thoughts that I've been having. I think I was simply pausing in order to contemplate my path up until this point and wondering if I'd managed to arrive here by happy coincidence or by revelation. My answer to that - a direct and completely obvious answer from scripture - could not have been more clear. God influenced my path in just such a way that I happened to read that passage last night right after writing that blog post. If God can communicate to me in that way, why not through a daydream?
I agree with what Pastor Dave Lamb said in his comment about people seeing signs and portents in too many things and using those as excuses to do the most horrible things (though I'm not entirely sure they DIDN'T hear God, just that maybe they didn't understand Him). I use the words and actions of Jesus as a litmus test for all that God has told me to do. And so far, I can honestly say that I've never "heard" anything from Him that failed the test. I don't always understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, but so far I've never had a reason to doubt that what I did helped further His kingdom. But its easy to look at people who claim that God told them to torture other people and see that they're delusional. It's much harder to dispute people who claim that God told them to serve the poor or feed the homeless - though sometimes these people might do even more damage in their attempts to do "God's Will". In the end, I like what Randall Sherman suggested - that I should do what I think God is telling me to do and have faith that He'll knock me upside the head with a holy 2x4 if I start going down the wrong path. In my experience, this is probably the most accurate statement of God's plan that I've ever read - and I've got the 2x4 marks to prove it. ;)
Anyway, I've got my answer. Now to get back to work on Kenya.
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
My very name means Ego
God's Will. My Will. I'm Will. I don't know where my will ends, His will begins and Will exists. That is the quandry I find myself in and I can't wrap my brain around it. So forgive me if this comes across as a little random. I shall do my best to make coherent logical statements about incoherent thoughts and feelings - which is, in essence, the problem in a nutshell.
For the first time that I can remember, I have completely given over to His will. Kenya was not my idea. My first knowledge of Kenya was as a location for a book that I wanted to adapt (someday) into a movie - a true story about some Italian POW's who climbed Mt. Kenya. A few months later, I heard about this mission group looking into doing some sort of mission project in Kenya. I went to their meeting. I was not overly impressed, but I kept the idea in the back of my mind. Finally, after going to Mississippi earlier this year, I decided to see what I could do to help the Kenya mission. I figured that I was good to lend a hand on a fundraiser or something. Then something happened. I was sitting in church, minding my own business, and, well, the next thing I knew I could clearly SEE myself in Kenya, walking down a dusty road. When I found myself back in church a moment later, I KNEW that God wanted me to go to Kenya. And so, I'm going. Not of my own choice, but because HE wanted me to go.
This has created a bit of a dilemma in my head. If I choose to go to Disneyworld, for instance, I know where I'm going, why I'm going, and what I'm going to do when I get there. Kenya wasn't my choice. God told me to go. I have my plane ticket. But beyond that, I'm completely in the dark. This is a very strange place to be. And its made me contemplate the question, "How do I KNOW that God wanted me to go to Kenya?" I'm not doubting the feeling, I'm just wondering what it was about the experience that made me so certain.
If for 99% of my life, I've been making decisions entirely based upon some part of my conscious will - even if only to justify some unjustifiable act after the fact - the sudden handing over the reins of my life to some non-physical, non-verifiable, mystic entity is a little bit disconcerting. I can't exactly call God on my cell phone and say, "Did I hear you right? You want me to go to Kenya?" I can't go visit him at a coffee house. To be fair, I can't even really say that He exists. I certainly couldn't prove it. And no court in the world would except the following answer, "Because God told me to," to any question about motivation. So, where does this certainty come from? And why should I decide to obey a daydream for such a momentous decision?
I am conscious of this question for a second reason. Someone I know is contemplating a major life changing decision based upon what they believe God is telling them to do. I don't doubt the signs or their significance. I have told my friend much the same thing that he is coming to believe, and so have others. But does that constitute a message for God? Is that really how God works?
Its no wonder that skeptics abound. From the outside looking in, Christians make life altering decisions based upon feelings and whims and then call it the Will of God. To be honest, from the inside looking out, it feels much the same way.
In the end, I must have faith that what I perceived as God's Will really was His will and not some deep seeded quirk of my own ego telling me to do something completely random. In the past, God's call has taken me to some interesting places - but I always went because I wanted to go and because I thought I was doing the right thing. This time, I'm going to Kenya and I don't know why or for what reason. I sometimes even wonder if I can do anything of value there. But then I remember God's call and I put the thought out of my mind. Whatever I do in Kenya is what God wants me to do. Beyond that, I'm just going to enjoy the trip, take lots of pictures, and wait for some sort of divine revelation. I have faith that my reason for taking this trip will be made clear.
For the first time that I can remember, I have completely given over to His will. Kenya was not my idea. My first knowledge of Kenya was as a location for a book that I wanted to adapt (someday) into a movie - a true story about some Italian POW's who climbed Mt. Kenya. A few months later, I heard about this mission group looking into doing some sort of mission project in Kenya. I went to their meeting. I was not overly impressed, but I kept the idea in the back of my mind. Finally, after going to Mississippi earlier this year, I decided to see what I could do to help the Kenya mission. I figured that I was good to lend a hand on a fundraiser or something. Then something happened. I was sitting in church, minding my own business, and, well, the next thing I knew I could clearly SEE myself in Kenya, walking down a dusty road. When I found myself back in church a moment later, I KNEW that God wanted me to go to Kenya. And so, I'm going. Not of my own choice, but because HE wanted me to go.
This has created a bit of a dilemma in my head. If I choose to go to Disneyworld, for instance, I know where I'm going, why I'm going, and what I'm going to do when I get there. Kenya wasn't my choice. God told me to go. I have my plane ticket. But beyond that, I'm completely in the dark. This is a very strange place to be. And its made me contemplate the question, "How do I KNOW that God wanted me to go to Kenya?" I'm not doubting the feeling, I'm just wondering what it was about the experience that made me so certain.
If for 99% of my life, I've been making decisions entirely based upon some part of my conscious will - even if only to justify some unjustifiable act after the fact - the sudden handing over the reins of my life to some non-physical, non-verifiable, mystic entity is a little bit disconcerting. I can't exactly call God on my cell phone and say, "Did I hear you right? You want me to go to Kenya?" I can't go visit him at a coffee house. To be fair, I can't even really say that He exists. I certainly couldn't prove it. And no court in the world would except the following answer, "Because God told me to," to any question about motivation. So, where does this certainty come from? And why should I decide to obey a daydream for such a momentous decision?
I am conscious of this question for a second reason. Someone I know is contemplating a major life changing decision based upon what they believe God is telling them to do. I don't doubt the signs or their significance. I have told my friend much the same thing that he is coming to believe, and so have others. But does that constitute a message for God? Is that really how God works?
Its no wonder that skeptics abound. From the outside looking in, Christians make life altering decisions based upon feelings and whims and then call it the Will of God. To be honest, from the inside looking out, it feels much the same way.
In the end, I must have faith that what I perceived as God's Will really was His will and not some deep seeded quirk of my own ego telling me to do something completely random. In the past, God's call has taken me to some interesting places - but I always went because I wanted to go and because I thought I was doing the right thing. This time, I'm going to Kenya and I don't know why or for what reason. I sometimes even wonder if I can do anything of value there. But then I remember God's call and I put the thought out of my mind. Whatever I do in Kenya is what God wants me to do. Beyond that, I'm just going to enjoy the trip, take lots of pictures, and wait for some sort of divine revelation. I have faith that my reason for taking this trip will be made clear.
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
The FTC made me do it...
In case you were all wondering, no, I don't always pick up books completely out of the blue, read them, and write a very professional looking review just for kicks and giggles. Occassionally, Multonomah Press sends me e-mails asking if I'd like to read their latest book and write a review about it. In exchange for this courtesy, they send me every book I request. I admit that I haven't read every book they've sent me. Some look better in press releases than in real life. But the books themselves aren't bad, they're just not my cup of tea. I could review them and say, "You'll like, but I don't," but I can't guarantee that you'll like these books even if I do.
Reviews are strange animals. Blogs are about free press. I'm supposed to be allowed to say anything I want about anything I want. The fact is, I sometimes get into free movies. But its not because I have a blog - its just cause I know people. Does this fact change my opinion of the movie? Anyone who worked with me for 8 years in a movie theater would know that free movies do not change my opinion of them. So, I'm not quite sure what the FTC is playing at. Honestly, if you buy stuff just because someone tells you its good, then you deserve whatever you get.
Make an informed decision. Don't let the FTC nor I make it for you.
Reviews are strange animals. Blogs are about free press. I'm supposed to be allowed to say anything I want about anything I want. The fact is, I sometimes get into free movies. But its not because I have a blog - its just cause I know people. Does this fact change my opinion of the movie? Anyone who worked with me for 8 years in a movie theater would know that free movies do not change my opinion of them. So, I'm not quite sure what the FTC is playing at. Honestly, if you buy stuff just because someone tells you its good, then you deserve whatever you get.
Make an informed decision. Don't let the FTC nor I make it for you.
Friday, October 02, 2009
No Win Situation
Japan had an environmental bid - cleanest Olympic Games ever!
Madrid had Juan Antonio Samaranch - the greatest IOC President ever - in failing health making a personal appeal to the IOC to award the games to Madrid.
Rio had Pele and the Copacabana and the fact that the IOC had never awarded the games to South America before.
Chicago had...
And so, the President was doomed from the start. If he's smart and stays out of the Olympic bid, and they lose to one of the better cities, Chicago and the US blames the President for not representing the country. If he goes, like he did, and the bid fails (as it was bound to do), he is seen as ineffectual and tarnished. If nothing else, he's taken the onus off all future Presidents to have to represent their countries bids at the IOC.
Still... last place? How badly have we p-ed off the IOC in the last 8 years? Maybe they secretly wanted the opportunity to vote for San Francisco in 2012 and 2016 and the USOC screwed it up? Well, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. So the rest of the USOC will just have to imagine my tongue sticking out at them. Shame on you for not letting SF represent!
Madrid had Juan Antonio Samaranch - the greatest IOC President ever - in failing health making a personal appeal to the IOC to award the games to Madrid.
Rio had Pele and the Copacabana and the fact that the IOC had never awarded the games to South America before.
Chicago had...
And so, the President was doomed from the start. If he's smart and stays out of the Olympic bid, and they lose to one of the better cities, Chicago and the US blames the President for not representing the country. If he goes, like he did, and the bid fails (as it was bound to do), he is seen as ineffectual and tarnished. If nothing else, he's taken the onus off all future Presidents to have to represent their countries bids at the IOC.
Still... last place? How badly have we p-ed off the IOC in the last 8 years? Maybe they secretly wanted the opportunity to vote for San Francisco in 2012 and 2016 and the USOC screwed it up? Well, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. So the rest of the USOC will just have to imagine my tongue sticking out at them. Shame on you for not letting SF represent!
Friday, September 25, 2009
If God Is Good... by Randy Alcorn
If God is Good, is an excellent straightforward book of apologetics told by way of answering the question, if God is good why does evil exist? Written by Randy Alcorn, the book weighs in at a hefty 500+ pages, and yet I never found it dragging. I highly recommend this book to all with a Christian belief or for those who just want to know the answer to that question.
When I was at Idaho State University, I was required to take a Philosophy 101 course that was a survey of all the Philosophers and their philosophies. The course followed a pattern that basically summed up my disdain for philosophy. It would introduce the philosopher. Then it would summarize his or her philosophy. Then it would explain why that philosophy was ultimately discredited. It was basically an eight week course in mental thumb twiddling. “Hey, I know how the world works! Oh, no wait… never mind.” I asked the professor at the end of the course, “If all the philosophers have been proven to be wrong, why do we need to learn their philosophies? I mean, let’s be realistic, in any other area of study when you reach a point where you realize that you have gone down the wrong path, you don’t revel in it and teach it to future generations.” Needless to say, I was not asked back to the Philosophy Department.
I was already starting to realize that if you take a modicum of Christian belief, or even an open mind, you would learn that the Bible answers all philosophical questions about the meaning of life in ways that no other religion or philosophy does. It’s the only major religion where God appears to humanity, claims to be God, and does so in a historical context (not off in some desert, or in a pre-historic era, but at the crossroads of history during the height of the Roman World). There are faith elements involved, to be sure. But Christianity is the only religion that I know of that not only poses the tough questions, but answers them as well in a way that is consistent and irrefutable. It flies in the face of all other religions and philosophies because its not based on wishful thinking or bribery. And because its not based on human intellect, but divine wisdom, it is something easier to FEEL than it is to reason. We know it to be right, even if we don’t understand why.
There have been several books trying to explain why that is. These books of Apologetics have been written by some of the biggest Christian writers and philosophers ever known. St. Augustine, C.S. Lewis, and many others have all tried to write Apologetics to help non-believers come to Christ by explaining to them what the Bible means.
I’ve never liked books of apologetics because I thought they were trying to explain something to me that I knew infinitely better from having read the Bible myself. There was very little new revealed in these books – most books of apologetics are about as welcome to me as a summary clip show on my favorite sit-com. But If God Is Good… tackled apologetics from a different point of view and I felt sucked in to its premise long before I realized that it was still a book of apologetics. After I realized what it was, I kept reading because in answering its thesis question, it turned the Gospel on its head for me and explained Christ’s role as a victim of and a defeater of sin. The best thing you can tell a writer of non-fiction is that it allowed the reader to see things in a new light. It opened my eyes.
One of my favorite images painted by Randy Alcorn is of Christ on the cross absorbing the sins of the world. Sin, as most Christian theologians will tell you, causes the separation of the sinner from God. They can not experience God while they are under the punishment of sin. The theological implications of Christ on the cross then are that the very human Christ, who is also God, was separated from God by absorbing sin. He became apart from Himself so that He could die and thus defeat death. God became Not God in order to satisfy His own requirements for sin – while at the same time never really stopping to be God. Talk about truly mind-boggling. This image is one of many in this book that allowed me to see the Gospel in a whole new light.
Now, I don’t know that Randy Alcorn and I share too many of the same views on Christianity. He seems a little more evangelical than I’m used to. But after reading this book, I’ve begun to question some of my views. We all need books that push us off those pedestals of pre-conceived notions so that we can grow and learn and think. I don’t know that my views will change as a result of reading this book, but my views will definitely be examined a little more thoroughly than before.
Book: If God Is Good
Author: Randy Alcorn
Summary: Every one of us will experience suffering. Many of us are experiencing it now. As we have seen in recent years, evil is real in our world, present and close to each one of us.
In such difficult times, suffering and evil beg questions about God--Why would an all-good and all-powerful God create a world full of evil and suffering? And then, how can there be a God if suffering and evil exist?
These are ancient questions, but also modern ones as well. Atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and even former believers like Bart Ehrman answer the question simply: The existence of suffering and evil proves there is no God.
In this captivating new book, best-selling author Randy Alcorn challenges the logic of disbelief, and brings a fresh, realistic, and thoroughly biblical insight to the issues these important questions raise.
Alcorn offers insights from his conversations with men and women whose lives have been torn apart by suffering, and yet whose faith in God burns brighter than ever. He reveals the big picture of who God is and what God is doing in the world–now and forever. And he equips you to share your faith more clearly and genuinely in this world of pain and fear.
As he did in his best-selling book, Heaven, Randy Alcorn delves deep into a profound subject, and through compelling stories, provocative questions and answers, and keen biblical understanding, he brings assurance and hope to all.
Author Bio:
Randy Alcorn is the founder and director of Eternal Perspectives Ministries and a bestselling author. His novels include Deadline, Dominion, Edge of Eternity, Lord Foulgrin’s Letters, The Ishbane Conspiracy, and the Gold Medallion winner, Safely Home. He has written eighteen nonfiction books as well, including Heaven, The Treasure Principle, The Purity Principle, and The Grace and Truth Paradox. Randy and his wife, Nanci, live in Oregon and have two married daughters and four grandsons.
When I was at Idaho State University, I was required to take a Philosophy 101 course that was a survey of all the Philosophers and their philosophies. The course followed a pattern that basically summed up my disdain for philosophy. It would introduce the philosopher. Then it would summarize his or her philosophy. Then it would explain why that philosophy was ultimately discredited. It was basically an eight week course in mental thumb twiddling. “Hey, I know how the world works! Oh, no wait… never mind.” I asked the professor at the end of the course, “If all the philosophers have been proven to be wrong, why do we need to learn their philosophies? I mean, let’s be realistic, in any other area of study when you reach a point where you realize that you have gone down the wrong path, you don’t revel in it and teach it to future generations.” Needless to say, I was not asked back to the Philosophy Department.
I was already starting to realize that if you take a modicum of Christian belief, or even an open mind, you would learn that the Bible answers all philosophical questions about the meaning of life in ways that no other religion or philosophy does. It’s the only major religion where God appears to humanity, claims to be God, and does so in a historical context (not off in some desert, or in a pre-historic era, but at the crossroads of history during the height of the Roman World). There are faith elements involved, to be sure. But Christianity is the only religion that I know of that not only poses the tough questions, but answers them as well in a way that is consistent and irrefutable. It flies in the face of all other religions and philosophies because its not based on wishful thinking or bribery. And because its not based on human intellect, but divine wisdom, it is something easier to FEEL than it is to reason. We know it to be right, even if we don’t understand why.
There have been several books trying to explain why that is. These books of Apologetics have been written by some of the biggest Christian writers and philosophers ever known. St. Augustine, C.S. Lewis, and many others have all tried to write Apologetics to help non-believers come to Christ by explaining to them what the Bible means.
I’ve never liked books of apologetics because I thought they were trying to explain something to me that I knew infinitely better from having read the Bible myself. There was very little new revealed in these books – most books of apologetics are about as welcome to me as a summary clip show on my favorite sit-com. But If God Is Good… tackled apologetics from a different point of view and I felt sucked in to its premise long before I realized that it was still a book of apologetics. After I realized what it was, I kept reading because in answering its thesis question, it turned the Gospel on its head for me and explained Christ’s role as a victim of and a defeater of sin. The best thing you can tell a writer of non-fiction is that it allowed the reader to see things in a new light. It opened my eyes.
One of my favorite images painted by Randy Alcorn is of Christ on the cross absorbing the sins of the world. Sin, as most Christian theologians will tell you, causes the separation of the sinner from God. They can not experience God while they are under the punishment of sin. The theological implications of Christ on the cross then are that the very human Christ, who is also God, was separated from God by absorbing sin. He became apart from Himself so that He could die and thus defeat death. God became Not God in order to satisfy His own requirements for sin – while at the same time never really stopping to be God. Talk about truly mind-boggling. This image is one of many in this book that allowed me to see the Gospel in a whole new light.
Now, I don’t know that Randy Alcorn and I share too many of the same views on Christianity. He seems a little more evangelical than I’m used to. But after reading this book, I’ve begun to question some of my views. We all need books that push us off those pedestals of pre-conceived notions so that we can grow and learn and think. I don’t know that my views will change as a result of reading this book, but my views will definitely be examined a little more thoroughly than before.
Book: If God Is Good
Author: Randy Alcorn
Summary: Every one of us will experience suffering. Many of us are experiencing it now. As we have seen in recent years, evil is real in our world, present and close to each one of us.
In such difficult times, suffering and evil beg questions about God--Why would an all-good and all-powerful God create a world full of evil and suffering? And then, how can there be a God if suffering and evil exist?
These are ancient questions, but also modern ones as well. Atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and even former believers like Bart Ehrman answer the question simply: The existence of suffering and evil proves there is no God.
In this captivating new book, best-selling author Randy Alcorn challenges the logic of disbelief, and brings a fresh, realistic, and thoroughly biblical insight to the issues these important questions raise.
Alcorn offers insights from his conversations with men and women whose lives have been torn apart by suffering, and yet whose faith in God burns brighter than ever. He reveals the big picture of who God is and what God is doing in the world–now and forever. And he equips you to share your faith more clearly and genuinely in this world of pain and fear.
As he did in his best-selling book, Heaven, Randy Alcorn delves deep into a profound subject, and through compelling stories, provocative questions and answers, and keen biblical understanding, he brings assurance and hope to all.
Author Bio:
Randy Alcorn is the founder and director of Eternal Perspectives Ministries and a bestselling author. His novels include Deadline, Dominion, Edge of Eternity, Lord Foulgrin’s Letters, The Ishbane Conspiracy, and the Gold Medallion winner, Safely Home. He has written eighteen nonfiction books as well, including Heaven, The Treasure Principle, The Purity Principle, and The Grace and Truth Paradox. Randy and his wife, Nanci, live in Oregon and have two married daughters and four grandsons.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Devolutionary Thought - making order out of chaos
When I was in college, I wrote my senior paper on the idea of Devolution in Anthropological thinking. This did not go over well with my professors who did not agree with my central tenet that those of us in the West tend to think that our culture is the "highest" on the evolutionary rung. They thought that my paper implied a very Darwinian sort of evolution model to anthropological research, and that there was no right or wrong way to look at culture. I mention this not to debate the merits of my paper, especially since the paper was little more than an outline of an idea, but to say that this idea has stuck with me for years and its implications have shaped my life.
The basic theory goes something like this. If you buy into the idea that the Western World is the culture that works best, then you buy into all the cultural things associated with that. That THIS (look around you) is the norm. And that people wandering like nomads in Africa or living in what we would consider squalor in Borneo is not the norm, or not desirable. I further suggested that the world has been going downhill ever since we left the forests and hunting grounds of our nomadic forebears for the cities and supermarkets of today. Like I said, it was more of a sketch than anything else.
I was reminded of this thought last night while watching the first half of the incredible documentary, "God Grew Tired Of Us." This documentary follows the lives of three Sudanese Lost Boys from the time they had to flee Sudan, their ten years in a refugee camp in Kenya, and finally their acceptance into the United States of America in order to work and make a living. I found myself in tears at the description of their horrible young lives, and also in tears as the boys first encountered the United States and its complex culture. It wasn't condemning in any way, but certainly an incredible way to throw up a mirror on our society and to allow us to see this country through the eyes of others.
And again, this morning, I was reminded of this thought in relation to some news I received. I know people are going through hard times right now. I know people who've lost jobs and are, for all intents and purposes, completely broke - literally weeks away from homelessness. There are those that would argue, and maybe rightly so, that these problems were of their own doing. But what does it say of our HIGH culture that we can allow so many people to fall through the cracks and be destroyed by the very thing that's supposed to make us the envy of the world. Would these people really have been better off had they been living in mud huts, raising cattle, or hunting and gathering their food?
Yet, I think there are lessons in all this - things that I constantly remind myself.
All this is temporary. It's here today, it's gone tomorrow and we should never get used to our status. Ultimately, we are all one incident away from returning to our wandering nomad ways. The sooner we embrace the concept that the only thing tying us to a place is the fact that leaving it means changing the life we are currently living, the sooner we are able to embrace change as not only a natural part of life, but as an opportunity to start over.
Starting over means starting from the beginning again - not trying to jump from the top of one pile to the top of the next without all the intervening steps. If we lose a million dollar home, we shouldn't expect another one to fall in our lap as a replacement. We should expect that maybe we have to start with an apartment again. If we lose our 6 figure salary, maybe it means that our next job is only 5 figure, or 4 figure and that we have to adjust to that new lifestyle. If we're eating steak today, maybe it means we eat chicken tomorrow.
Some control of a crappy life is better than no control at all. Even if you go from a million dollar home, a fancy job, a car, and all the trimmings, down to a one bedroom apartment in a crappy neighborhood, a crappy job, mass transit, and food stamps - at least you're doing something. To try and hang on to the fancy life when you can't possibly hang on anymore, only means that you will freefall all the way to the bottom - and maybe never recover - because you will never grasp that life isn't status.
And most importantly, belief in something other than ourselves is a must. We are not infallible. Therefore belief in our abilities is a fallacy. We will fail. You can believe that. If you want to survive, I would suggest turning to God for guidance and support. He made the world and He made you. He is the ultimate safety net.
Sometimes the hardest thing to do in a crisis is to step outside your life and view it with new eyes. By challenging the notion that my culture is right, I've been able to keep American Culture in perspective. This wonderful film has only reinforced that notion in ways that were profoundly moving. Yet, I believe that being able to see my life with outside eyes, being able to distance myself from my own world, has allowed me to focus on the things that are truly important and not the often self-serving goals of my culture. I am not guaranteed to come through these trying times without a scratch. But I am also not worried about it if I do. I already know what to do if bad times should befall me. And I know that no matter what my economic status, God will walk with me.
The basic theory goes something like this. If you buy into the idea that the Western World is the culture that works best, then you buy into all the cultural things associated with that. That THIS (look around you) is the norm. And that people wandering like nomads in Africa or living in what we would consider squalor in Borneo is not the norm, or not desirable. I further suggested that the world has been going downhill ever since we left the forests and hunting grounds of our nomadic forebears for the cities and supermarkets of today. Like I said, it was more of a sketch than anything else.
I was reminded of this thought last night while watching the first half of the incredible documentary, "God Grew Tired Of Us." This documentary follows the lives of three Sudanese Lost Boys from the time they had to flee Sudan, their ten years in a refugee camp in Kenya, and finally their acceptance into the United States of America in order to work and make a living. I found myself in tears at the description of their horrible young lives, and also in tears as the boys first encountered the United States and its complex culture. It wasn't condemning in any way, but certainly an incredible way to throw up a mirror on our society and to allow us to see this country through the eyes of others.
And again, this morning, I was reminded of this thought in relation to some news I received. I know people are going through hard times right now. I know people who've lost jobs and are, for all intents and purposes, completely broke - literally weeks away from homelessness. There are those that would argue, and maybe rightly so, that these problems were of their own doing. But what does it say of our HIGH culture that we can allow so many people to fall through the cracks and be destroyed by the very thing that's supposed to make us the envy of the world. Would these people really have been better off had they been living in mud huts, raising cattle, or hunting and gathering their food?
Yet, I think there are lessons in all this - things that I constantly remind myself.
All this is temporary. It's here today, it's gone tomorrow and we should never get used to our status. Ultimately, we are all one incident away from returning to our wandering nomad ways. The sooner we embrace the concept that the only thing tying us to a place is the fact that leaving it means changing the life we are currently living, the sooner we are able to embrace change as not only a natural part of life, but as an opportunity to start over.
Starting over means starting from the beginning again - not trying to jump from the top of one pile to the top of the next without all the intervening steps. If we lose a million dollar home, we shouldn't expect another one to fall in our lap as a replacement. We should expect that maybe we have to start with an apartment again. If we lose our 6 figure salary, maybe it means that our next job is only 5 figure, or 4 figure and that we have to adjust to that new lifestyle. If we're eating steak today, maybe it means we eat chicken tomorrow.
Some control of a crappy life is better than no control at all. Even if you go from a million dollar home, a fancy job, a car, and all the trimmings, down to a one bedroom apartment in a crappy neighborhood, a crappy job, mass transit, and food stamps - at least you're doing something. To try and hang on to the fancy life when you can't possibly hang on anymore, only means that you will freefall all the way to the bottom - and maybe never recover - because you will never grasp that life isn't status.
And most importantly, belief in something other than ourselves is a must. We are not infallible. Therefore belief in our abilities is a fallacy. We will fail. You can believe that. If you want to survive, I would suggest turning to God for guidance and support. He made the world and He made you. He is the ultimate safety net.
Sometimes the hardest thing to do in a crisis is to step outside your life and view it with new eyes. By challenging the notion that my culture is right, I've been able to keep American Culture in perspective. This wonderful film has only reinforced that notion in ways that were profoundly moving. Yet, I believe that being able to see my life with outside eyes, being able to distance myself from my own world, has allowed me to focus on the things that are truly important and not the often self-serving goals of my culture. I am not guaranteed to come through these trying times without a scratch. But I am also not worried about it if I do. I already know what to do if bad times should befall me. And I know that no matter what my economic status, God will walk with me.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Kenya Education - Mosquito Nets
Coming from an area that has very few mosquitoes, nets are not something I'm used to. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever had bug spray before - even when I went to Mississippi last year (20 degrees outside tend to make mosquitoes very inactive). However, mosquitoes are a huge problem in Kenya. Every year, more than a million people die worldwide from mosquito born malaria.
One of the biggest issues that our partners in Kenya noted was that their children could really use mosquito nets for their beds. You would think that this would have been a problem long ago taken care of, but as this article below points out, nets need to be replaced or treated with anti-mosquito treatments once a year. When you're depending on the kindness of strangers just to eat, something like mosquito nets can often be overlooked. Yet, money spent to take care of children struck with malaria is far greater than the cost of nets. For just 50 Ksh (about 69 cents) a new mosquito net can be bought. It seems like a literal ounce of prevention.
MOSQUITO NETS
Mosquito nets are a very useful and practical way to prevent insect bites. There are a number of things to keep in mind when buying a mosquito net.
The mesh size should be large enough for air circulation but as small as possible to keep out the mosquitoes. A mesh size of 1.2 mm x 1.2 mm is the most common and recommended. For effective malaria protection, the mesh size that is recommended is 120-200 holes per square per inch.
Mosquito nets of polyester or polyamide are usually lightweight, long-lasting nets, and are available in different mesh sizes and thread thickness. On the other hand, cotton is susceptible to dampness, and weighs more when wet.
As for the shape of the net, it should obviously be wide enough to cover the person sleeping, without touching them. Rectangular nets offer more room around the person as opposed to the slanted sides of a tent or pyramid shaped net. Either way, the net should be tucked under the mattress. You can use screws, tacks, pins, or hooks to attach the upper point of the net above the bed. Pillows or blankets can be used to build a makeshift wall around the body to avoid touching the net. It is much more efficient to purchase a net that has already been dipped or sprayed with a high quality insecticide such as permethrin. The nets are pre-treated at the netting manufacturing plant and can last up to a year depending on the amount of exposure to sun and rain.
One of the biggest issues that our partners in Kenya noted was that their children could really use mosquito nets for their beds. You would think that this would have been a problem long ago taken care of, but as this article below points out, nets need to be replaced or treated with anti-mosquito treatments once a year. When you're depending on the kindness of strangers just to eat, something like mosquito nets can often be overlooked. Yet, money spent to take care of children struck with malaria is far greater than the cost of nets. For just 50 Ksh (about 69 cents) a new mosquito net can be bought. It seems like a literal ounce of prevention.
MOSQUITO NETS
Mosquito nets are a very useful and practical way to prevent insect bites. There are a number of things to keep in mind when buying a mosquito net.
The mesh size should be large enough for air circulation but as small as possible to keep out the mosquitoes. A mesh size of 1.2 mm x 1.2 mm is the most common and recommended. For effective malaria protection, the mesh size that is recommended is 120-200 holes per square per inch. Mosquito nets of polyester or polyamide are usually lightweight, long-lasting nets, and are available in different mesh sizes and thread thickness. On the other hand, cotton is susceptible to dampness, and weighs more when wet.
As for the shape of the net, it should obviously be wide enough to cover the person sleeping, without touching them. Rectangular nets offer more room around the person as opposed to the slanted sides of a tent or pyramid shaped net. Either way, the net should be tucked under the mattress. You can use screws, tacks, pins, or hooks to attach the upper point of the net above the bed. Pillows or blankets can be used to build a makeshift wall around the body to avoid touching the net. It is much more efficient to purchase a net that has already been dipped or sprayed with a high quality insecticide such as permethrin. The nets are pre-treated at the netting manufacturing plant and can last up to a year depending on the amount of exposure to sun and rain.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Bread and Circuses
I'm not entirely sure that I'll end up changing my mind on anything after reading Randy Alcorn's, "If God Is Good..." Some of what Dave Lamb suggests is true - some of what Mr. Alcorn writes is opinion parading as fact. I don't wish to live in a Post Modern world where good and evil are decried as a result of situational ethics, but I strongly suspect that when education, religion, and science are prone to the meddling of politics, the TRUTH is no longer knowable. There is at least a relaxing comfort in having someone say, "This is it. It's right here in the Bible in black and white. Don't take my word for it... YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE!" Of course, much of what they're saying is their interpretation of what the Bible says, but their convinced of that interpretations veracity and their conviction is refreshing.
The other day I wrote on my Facebook update about the cost of food in Kenya - five meals for $1. One of the comments that befuddled me was someone who said, "Yeah, but the meals aren't nutritious." In America, a meal that costs 20 cents is very likely not nutritious. In fact, pretty much any meal under about $5 is probably not nutritious. But in a foreign country where most of the food is grown on farms, raised in nearby ranchlands, or picked from nearby trees - their food is probably MORE nutritious than most food bought here.
After all, how much does it cost to grow grain? You plow a field, drop in seed, water and wait. Plowing (other than the initial cost for equipment) only costs hard work. Water and sun are a free gift from God. Seed can't be that expensive - especially not versus the yield of such seed. The expense, it would seem, would come from things needed to sell such food (not consume it) - like packaging and fertilizer and preservatives and refrigeration and granary costs and delivery costs, etc... To grow food on your land to feed your own people, I can see a cost of about 20 cents a meal.
Do I think this person responded ignorantly? Were they just trying to cover up the fact that they don't want to give money to poor Kenyans? No, I don't think so. I don't think it was a question of race or indifference. I think it was mostly a question of perception. To their mind, sending a dollar to Kenya was only exacerbating the problem because these poor kids would be given bad food and poor nutrition wasn't something they wanted to pay for. Therefore, since they didn't trust the outcome of their benevolence, since they didn't trust that their money would be spent wisely to ease the suffering of the poor, they didn't want to waste their money at all.
This sort of attitude is unfortunately becoming widespread in this country. When there is no one person of authority that you can trust, then every proclamation is subject to suspicion and derision. If a scientist says that the world is getting warmer, you look outside and say, "Feels the same to me." Global warming is a lie. If a neighbor tells you that the bad economy is causing them to default on their mortgage, you say, "They never should have taken the mortgage in the first place if they couldn't afford to pay it back." If a new plan to fund health care for all people seems too expensive for the country, you say, "I've got my insurance and I don't want anything to screw that up." And on the flip side of those issues are others saying, "The World Is Going To Flood!" or "The Government Should Buy My House!" or "Free Health Care Is A Constitutional Right!" It's gotten to the point where nobody knows who's right or who's wrong, but we strongly suspect that we're right and they're wrong. And we strongly suspect anyone who disagrees with us of soft thinking or other moral deficiencies.
All of this is part of Alcorn's book and this part he gets right, because the one thing he returns to over and over again is C.S. Lewis's notion that deep down there are absolute goods and absolute evils that we don't want to admit to ourselves, but that we know. We can justify it anyway we want, but deep down we know that it would be GOOD to feed the poor, take care of the sick, and not kick people out of their homes. Very few people would ever disagree with these things. We all know that Greed and Murder are EVIL. But to have to confront these issues, to have to face the possibility that we've been complicit in them, even if we didn't do them directly, is not something we want to do.
No matter how much we complain, we want our bread and circuses a little too much - because the alternative means admitting that we're wrong.
The other day I wrote on my Facebook update about the cost of food in Kenya - five meals for $1. One of the comments that befuddled me was someone who said, "Yeah, but the meals aren't nutritious." In America, a meal that costs 20 cents is very likely not nutritious. In fact, pretty much any meal under about $5 is probably not nutritious. But in a foreign country where most of the food is grown on farms, raised in nearby ranchlands, or picked from nearby trees - their food is probably MORE nutritious than most food bought here.
After all, how much does it cost to grow grain? You plow a field, drop in seed, water and wait. Plowing (other than the initial cost for equipment) only costs hard work. Water and sun are a free gift from God. Seed can't be that expensive - especially not versus the yield of such seed. The expense, it would seem, would come from things needed to sell such food (not consume it) - like packaging and fertilizer and preservatives and refrigeration and granary costs and delivery costs, etc... To grow food on your land to feed your own people, I can see a cost of about 20 cents a meal.
Do I think this person responded ignorantly? Were they just trying to cover up the fact that they don't want to give money to poor Kenyans? No, I don't think so. I don't think it was a question of race or indifference. I think it was mostly a question of perception. To their mind, sending a dollar to Kenya was only exacerbating the problem because these poor kids would be given bad food and poor nutrition wasn't something they wanted to pay for. Therefore, since they didn't trust the outcome of their benevolence, since they didn't trust that their money would be spent wisely to ease the suffering of the poor, they didn't want to waste their money at all.
This sort of attitude is unfortunately becoming widespread in this country. When there is no one person of authority that you can trust, then every proclamation is subject to suspicion and derision. If a scientist says that the world is getting warmer, you look outside and say, "Feels the same to me." Global warming is a lie. If a neighbor tells you that the bad economy is causing them to default on their mortgage, you say, "They never should have taken the mortgage in the first place if they couldn't afford to pay it back." If a new plan to fund health care for all people seems too expensive for the country, you say, "I've got my insurance and I don't want anything to screw that up." And on the flip side of those issues are others saying, "The World Is Going To Flood!" or "The Government Should Buy My House!" or "Free Health Care Is A Constitutional Right!" It's gotten to the point where nobody knows who's right or who's wrong, but we strongly suspect that we're right and they're wrong. And we strongly suspect anyone who disagrees with us of soft thinking or other moral deficiencies.
All of this is part of Alcorn's book and this part he gets right, because the one thing he returns to over and over again is C.S. Lewis's notion that deep down there are absolute goods and absolute evils that we don't want to admit to ourselves, but that we know. We can justify it anyway we want, but deep down we know that it would be GOOD to feed the poor, take care of the sick, and not kick people out of their homes. Very few people would ever disagree with these things. We all know that Greed and Murder are EVIL. But to have to confront these issues, to have to face the possibility that we've been complicit in them, even if we didn't do them directly, is not something we want to do.
No matter how much we complain, we want our bread and circuses a little too much - because the alternative means admitting that we're wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)