Saved by a Pair of Slippers

Had a burned out bulb and was fishing around trying to adjust the fan while changing it and my wedding band must have touched an exposed wire. ZAP POW ZIP! Felt like a horse kicked my hand. Fortunately, I was wearing rubber soled slippers or it could have been a new hairstyle at best and a dirtnap at worst. Phew!

Only in America...

Okay, get this... Major League Baseball Player Milton Bradley (no, really, that's his name) throws his bat at the umpire for calling the third strike (really, in his direction, he didn't hit the ump). Ump holds a grudge and later "bates" Bradley into throwing his temper. Seems Big Bad Bradley has a well documented temper and the umpire uses profanity in a confrontation with Bradley. Bradley goes after the umpire, his manager holds him back and ends up dumping Bradley on the ground, tearing up his knee.

Do we have the broad strokes? Umpire says something mean and baseball guy goes nuts and hurts him's wittle knee.

And the umpire gets suspended for the rest of the season.

My mouth is open with astonishment. The ump said a discouraging word to someone who threw a BAT at him, and because the player has a temper tantrum and thereby hurts himself, the ump gets suspended.

There is no responsibility or accountability any more. None.

From the Eyes of Babes

I admit that little things amaze me. Aly said, "why is orange juice yellow?" She's right, of course, it is yellow, but because the name is "orange" juice I've never thought of it as yellow. In fact, when I looked at it, I had to convince myself that it WAS yellow and not a shade of orange. Amazing how compelling a misconception is; this small one didn't take much to overcome, but you can imagine how difficult big ones would be to overcome.

Speaking of Generation Gaps

Technically, blogging is one of those newfangled things that us old folks might not embrace in our dotter-hood. Maybe my natural opinionation overcomes the generation gap in this case. That, and I really do enjoy 'chatting' with the younger set (that would be Sherlock and Dami and the occassional Schwabbies... and we'll throw Malissa in with that younger set because she's so young at (anxious) heart.)

The Day and the Hour

Something came up as a tangent in home group last night (Malissa knew this was coming)...

I'll reserve the Biblical view until later...

Can we, as human beings, add OR SUBTRACT a single day from our lives? From a worldy perspective, of course the answer would be "yes" but from a Christian worldview, can God be frustrated? Will poor eating habits, extreme sports, or purposeful intent shorten our lives from that which God had ordained for us?

What say you?

The Tasered College Student

I watched the video; an obnoxious adult (not a kid) disrupts a lecture by John Kerry during QandA, taking over the mic and proving his idiocy, then resists removal by campus security. Screaming, kicking and yelling, under a pile of officers, some of them women, and gets tasered. He turns into a screaming puddle and the whole thing escalates.

Was he abused?

I don't think so, though I admit it's borderline.

1) It was on video, but we don't know if he was grabbing officers inappropriately, so we really don't know what they were responding to.

2) Idiocy has concequences and now the student knows that.

3) Tasing hurts like crazy, but it isn't permanent and it beats clubbing the guy in the head.

4) He also deserves it because he's probably not going to learn his lesson and he'll file a lawsuit. I hope the judge tasers him.

Was it necessary to tase him? It's hard to second guess officers in that kind of situation. They couldn't wrestle him out the door, they didn't want to club him... maybe the officer thought it would take the fight out of him. If so, it didn't, so maybe it was a poor choice. What should they have done? They're choices were: Tase him, Club him, let him go and if he didn't leave, you're left with the first two choices again. Tasing is the best of those options.

Jesus was tempted for 40 days in the desert and wilderness where he was tempted (or "temptated" as someone I know and love would say) by the devil.

SO...

What did that look like? Was it...

1) a physical confrontation where the devil bodily appeared and spoke out loud to Jesus?
2) a vision or set of visions that took place on a spiritual plane?
3) like we experience temptation in which the devil (or demon) is not heard or seen consciously but effects us subconsciously (but because Jesus could discern spirits, he would know what was really taking place, while we don't know if it's our own flesh or words whispered by demons - indeed, since Jesus had no sin nature, we can't look to this and say that we of the sin nature type are EVER tempted by demons; out flesh is plenty loud enough on it's own.)

Which do you think it was? Yes, I understand that how doesn't really matter, but since it DID actually happen, one of the options above is true.

I know I can count on Green Lantern answering this post, but please everyone else who reads this, post your comments.

I-Pod You Not

Maybe two of my readers are old enough to remember when the Walkman first came out. What joy, what heaven! Little tiny (by 80's standards) boxes you could play cassette tapes on and listen through wired headsets with cheap speakers. They were instantly banned at school, and since I practically lived there, I never used my walkman. Just as well, the box was small, but wear do you carry additional tapes?

Now we have iPods. I'm impressed by the bright little shuffles, smaller than a beltbuckle, holds hundreds of songs or dozens of sermons, even if searching is difficult. I do not like the ear buds, but I don't like headphones of any kind. Same problem as before, though. Where do I listen to it? I have a radio in my car and a stereo in my office and home. So when would I listen to it?

The answer is the problem. You would listen to it when you're away from those other players. Like when you're walking, shopping, going to church, or anywhere out in the world. You know, when you could be interacting with other people instead of listening to your own little world.

Raise your hand if you've ever talked to a child and discovered they couldn't hear you because they were Pod-ing? Don't iPods insulated us from others? Aren't they, in fact, a form of pride, telling all those around you "hey, you have nothing to contribute to my life!"? Aren't they a form of self-sufficiency?

Now, of course, there are ways to use them appropriately in the proper time and place. I'm just wondering how many times and places there actually are.

Are Blogs Prideful?

We had a great sermon on Pride this Sunday. I was like a greasy spot on the chair after being struck by lightening repeatedly. I'm extremely proud. Not because I think so highly of myself (I really don't), but because I think a lot about myself.

I enjoy attention. I like making people laugh or think or both. The stories I write are meant to engage my reader's thoughts and to explore important themes, which I think are a good thing.

But what about blogs? I don't keep a journal because I think things that are written should be read, hence this blog. But isn't it prideful to think that my opinions are of interest to others? In a story, the author is supposed to be invisible, but this post alone has more "I's" than a potato!

Now, my understanding of pride is that it is like Ayers Rock in Australia. Huge, monolithic and barren. Our efforts to whittle away pride is about as effective as an ant's filing away at Ayers; he can feel awfully proud of himself for the two inch mound of dust that he's chipped away, but Ayers is still undiminished, and probably bigger from added dirt.

It's like the sermon from the week before on judgmentalism, in which we should strive to be like the humble tax collector beating his breast instead of being like the haughty pharisee. Human nature wants to START at the tax collector and work our way to maybe the midpoint between the two, but the Bible says, no, you remain the tax collector while on this Earth. You don't get "better" you just are honest about what a wretch you are. With pride we are to live ever aware in the shadow of Ayers. We can't do much about it, but we can turn away from it every now and then, thumbing our nose at the mountain and squeaking out a little humility.

But probably not while blogging...

Okay, no traction on the post before (which was and is a serious question -- thanks, Scott, for your input).

I'm reading a novel, Pearl Harbor, by Newt Gingrich and some other guy. Good read, very detailed. In explaining who The Newt is to my wife, I said he was a presidential hopeful, but because he had an affair while trying to impeach Clinton on his affair, that he wouldn't have a decent shot at winning. Hypocrisy being a bad thing, after all.

She pointed out that it's a shame that we worship celebrities for doing the very things we vilify in politicians. It's amazing the incredible dissonance our culture indulgence in without shaking apart.

Guiliani, on the other hand, has not only had an affair, but has a soap opera personal life, but it's not slowing him down in the polls. Has he somehow managed to bridge the celebrity/politician gap, getting it both ways? Of course, if he runs against Hillary neither can go after the other's personal life without inviting a mutual attack... kind of an electoral MAD. By having so much mud on both sides, would this end up a clean fight?

May we not find out...

Theoretical Question

If you have cancer that has a chance at being successfully treated, but a small chance, is it wrong to not have that treatment? Is it sinful to let the cancer run it's terminal course?

This hypothetical person is 60ish, no wife, maybe but probably does not have any kids, and if he does they're adults.

Sin or not sin?

Ah, the Oblivion of Youth

I'm sitting at the breakfast table with Aly flipping through the pages of National Geographic and come to spread on Pakistan. I flip the page and there's a gun battle with terrified people ducking under a rain of bullets. In the background, past the cordite and horror is a white horse running at top speed.

Before I can react and turn the page so Aly won't see it, she points at the stallion and says brightly, "oooo, what a pretty horse!"

It's not in what you see, it's in what you're looking for...

Magnificent Obsession

I've been confusing two books in my mind and in a couple conversations. "The Magnificent Obsession" is not the story of Peter Marshall, the senate chaplain. His biography is "A Man Called Peter" which is a tremendous read.

"Magnificent Obsession" is about a Doctor who was transformed by the Bible. NOT by the God of the Bible, but by the Sermon on the Mount. He read the beatitudes and realized that they summed up "religion." He eschewed church, the singing of songs, and prayer, but believed the beatitudes were the key to life. This belief remade him; he became truly a great man (just not an eternally great man).

I understand his belief, though. I recently had one of the most moving times of devotion in my life. I'm reading only the red letter text; the words of Jesus, himself. God opened the doors of understanding as I read the Sermon on the Mount, and more specifically, the beatitudes. Jesus presents the formula of prayer later in the SotM, and the formula of living a Christian life in the beatitudes.

I do firmly believe that salvation is through acceptance of Christ crucified in my place, so unlike the doctor in the book, worship, thanksgiving and prayer are an outgrowth of faith and must be observed for the power of God to be released in your life, but take a fresh look at the "blessed are..." and see them for the keys to life they are. The rest of the SotM maps back to the beatitudes. It's an amazing devotional. Check it out.

The Concept of Hell

I bought a Christian book on Amazon the other day. A new feature on Amazon is to list discussion groups relevant to the book topic you've selected. One of the discussion threads was "Does Hell Really Exist?"

The discussion was one of vitriol on both sides, sadly. A poor writer broached the subject and atheists and self-proclaimed witches lambasted the guy for believing in Hell. He got defensive and left the Beatitudes in the dust to (badly) trample all over these guys, leaving a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Still more unsettling was the "logic" evinced in the con-arguments.

"The very concept of Hell is abhorrent!" Well, yes, I should hope so; it's a nasty place.

The logic to follow was that since it was such an abhorrent concept it couldn't be true. "Not that I believe in your God," they said, "but if He's so loving, there couldn't be a Hell."

Okay, so a misunderstanding of who God is contributed to the problem, but the real horror of the logic is that since the idea is so bad, it couldn't be true.

Seems kind of backwards. Rather than concern themselves what is true FIRST, they start with the idea of it and reason in reverse, and thereby get the conclusion wrong. See, they're saying 1) Horrible concept. 2) Therefore it's not real. 3) Therefore laugh at anyone who believes it.

Instead is should be: 1) Determine if it's true 2) Oh no! It's true! What do I do? 3) Repent and be saved.

The capper was a fellow who simply said, "I'm a Christian and I know there's no Hell." What kind of Christian are you when you believe most of what Jesus said was a lie? (This begs the question of those who say the Bible was written by men, not God, so it got some things wrong. Besides being logically a poor conclusion, the further illogic of following 'parts' of the man-made doctrine is ridiculous. As Lincoln said, "if it is not true, then tear it up! If then, we can't bring ourselves to destroy it, we must live by it then." He was referring to the Constitution, but it applies to the Bible as well.)

Jesus spoke mightily of grace, forgiveness and the Kingdom of God, but he spoke equally mightily of Hell. While I firmly believe that the courts of God must be that which urges us forward, it doesn't hurt to have the very real goad of Hell to lend some urgency.

The Spaced Out Astronaut

We get all sorts of bizarre behavior from Hollywood celebrities, most of it keyed to the excesses of their lifestyle.

I remember when news broke about Kim Nowak, the space shuttle astronaut who flew into Orlando and wore diapers on her drive to the Space Coast so she wouldn't have to make any stops (3 diapers, to be precises, she must have drunk a lot on the plane). Then she accosted her rival for the affections of another astronaut with pepper spray and abduction. I remember being as stunned at this whacked out behavior as everyone else.

But we shouldn't be.

Think about it; Navy officers have to be go-get-'em folks, and they're trained in combat. Astronauts wear diapers on their missions (urine in zero g would just be nasty). So as weird as Lady Kim's actions are to us, they are excessive extensions of her lifestyle. Criminal extensions, but in character nonetheless. We can look at them as way out of the norm, but for her they aren't that far outside the norm.

I've been struck how nonchalant she's been about the crime versus wearing the ankle bracelet. We think "let the punishment fit the crime" but to her she planned and executed a mission that didn't quite work. To her it is excessive punishment.

I mean, if Malissa was running around Orlando in diapers shooting people with pepper spray and roughing them up that would be way strange and we'd visit her in the nut house, but for a Navy Officer/Astronaut, maybe that's not soooo strange, but just a little strange.

Would a jury of her peers be other astronauts and navy personnel? If not, can she get a fair trial?

If a man falls asleep and makes a terrible racket with no one to hear it, does he still snore?

I had a splitting headache last night that Tylenol was not touching, so I took one of my sleeping pills for the first time since Lynette got home.

Apparently I snore loud enough to beat the walls down when I'm under the influence. Enough so that Lynette relocated to the couch (I've always been a snorer but this was beyond normal and she couldn't wake me up to shut me up). I found this to be tremendously funny, but Lynette didn't. Go figure...

Global Warming

A lot of conservatives deny it exists. I don't. Global warming is occurring. It's probably a part of a regular cycle, so I don't think it's cause for concern, since it will cycle back again at some point. I do think that humanity has a fractional role in global warming, but I don't know that it's the doom that so many people think it is.

Man has been effecting the planet in fantastic ways since we were created. Sometimes willingly (like the disastrous "ecological planning" of Yosemite, which almost destroyed it) but most often unwittingly, which often has positive effects.

Consider the earthworm, for example. Worms are not indigenous to the Americas. The native Americans didn't have any worms before 1750, and it was one reason the Indians didn't invent the wheel. The Americas were heavily forested, and without worms, the detritus on the forest ground was over two feet thick. Wet, dead leaves, logs and branches were piled high everywhere that wasn't cleared out for a village. Wheels were impractical.

The the Jamestown colony came and with it eventually came ships to pick up tobacco. Now, you can't bring an empty ship over and then fill it with cargo, you need ballast. So in France and Spain they filled the ships with dirt, and since they didn't bother to sift the dirt, they also shipped over earthworms. Once in America, they offloaded the dirt and reloaded with devil weed.

Within a year, the forests of New England and eventually all of America had naked floors. Earthworms processed the two to three feet drifts of detritus back into dirt, creating more usable land and the introduction of the wheel. Both Americas were transformed into a completely different environment within ten years.

All because of accidental worm distribution. And the impact of thoughtless humanity.

Further, there were less than a dozen indigenous animals in the Americas. Most of the critters Felicity so loves weren't here before Europeans came over.

Okay, read the post below, because this is follow-up.

I tend to live in my head (oooo, big surprise), and as a result I'm only observant when I want to be, which is almost never in the car.

On the way to church, over a road we've taken hundreds of times, Charli asked, "is that a junkyard?" Yes, it was. I'd never seen it before. I started to look at the buildings we were passing (I wasn't driving) and discovered several companies I'd never known about before.

Then, driving down my own street thinking about the previous post, I started looking at the oak trees that give my neighborhood it's name. These I have admired before, but this time the sight was on the edge of transcendent. Nature, any nature, can do that.

In fact, there is an ancient folktale about a boy who decided to destroy Hell, so he journeyed to that rather nasty place (a feat unto itself) and planted a small seed. A shoot emerged with just one leaf and one small flower.

All of Hell came to a stop. Demons came from the farthest reaches to see the little plant and to weep.

Just think what an oak tree could do...

I've been looking at the photos Lynette took in Washington. It's easy to forget how beautiful it is there, especially when the pictures are taken on clear, sunny days. I'm surprised that they don't make me want to go back (understand, I do want to visit, but for my family not the geography).

It does make me long for beauty, though. For the most part, I'm an indoor, climate-controled kind of person. I don't even go barefoot in house. Nonetheless, the awe-inspiring sight of nature unfettered is about the only way to truly lose oneself to the embrace of God.

Florida has it's sights. The beaches, the Everglades, many and huge lakes, but it's all from the same flat vantage point. I loved the different flora when I moved here, and still do (call me silly, but looking down at Bahama waters from the deck of a cruiseship is the best of both worlds), but the sight of and from mountains is hard to top. There is a brooding, contemplative nature to forested hills and snowtopped peaks that Southerners can't enjoy.

So why the South is the Bible Belt and the North is the most atheistic part of the country, if not the world, I'll never understand. Microsoft, Boeing, Warehouser are all surrounded by forests; the technical world cozy with the natural world (which is, I think, the supernatural world). Yet the wealthy of the Northwest encourages a man-centered lifeview. Incredible.

They're baaaack!

They're exhausted, my back's killing me, the dogs are ecstatic any they're still on Mountain Time.

I'm not taking the sleeping pill anymore but it's a long, ragged fall back to normal sleep. I didn't sleep much last night, so I should be tired enough to sleep tonight, provided the muscle spasm recedes.

Ben and Charli look taller, Lynette and Aly look shorter. It's kind of funny...