How Awful Goodness Is

From a sermon on Biblical Ethics:

He that stands beneath the Cross and understands the scene dares not sin; not because there is a hell beneath him or an angry God above him, but because Holiness is felt to reign there—the ground on which he treads is sacred, the glory of the Lord encircles him, and, like Moses, he must remove the shoes from his feet. The Cross is a venerable spot. I love to linger around it, not merely that I may read my title to everlasting life, but that I may study the greatness of God. I use the term advisedly. God never appears to be so truly great, so intensely holy, as when, from the pure energy of principle, He gives Himself, in the person of His Son, to die, rather than that His character should be impugned. Who dares prevaricate with moral distinctions and talk of death as a greater evil than dishonour, when God, the mighty Maker, died rather than that truth or justice should be compromised? Who, at the foot of Calvary, can pronounce sin to be a slight matter? Here, then, lies the most impressive sanction of revelation. Not content to promulgate the law with absolute certainty, to put under tribute the whole resources of the invisible world, to lay its hand upon eternity and make heaven and hell its ministers, it rises yet higher and seeks to impress us with a subduing sense of the sacredness of right—to make us feel how awful goodness is; it reveals its inherent greatness, unveils its ineffable glory. It does not describe it, but shows it; and we return from the Cross with emotions similar to those of Moses when the name of the Lord was proclaimed, and the goodness of the Lord passed before him in the cleft of the rock. It is the scheme of redemption which crowns the ethical teachings of the Bible. The lesson is sealed at the Cross; there, and there only, do we shudder at sin for its own sake, and reverence right for itself.

-James H. Thornwell

For those of you who are praying types...

I've got a major decision coming down the pike in the next couple of days--pretty sure I've made up my mind, actually, but if I'm heading in an utterly foolish direction, a divine 2x4 upside my head would be quite handy...

WBC: Canada vs. USA

Can I defect now? I can say "eh," I know Bob and Doug McKenzie, I own a couple of tuques, I like Candian singers (Bryan Adams, Alanis, Avril...), they just elected a conservative....

8-6 fer cryin' out loud!!! Thank you, Jason Varitek for saving us from being obliterated.

(who ever thought they'd see me thanking Varitek for anything??)

Logging "The Wedding Singer" as Legal Research

MARCH 6--In what is surely a first for the federal judiciary, a Texas bankruptcy judge has quoted from the Adam Sandler film canon in a recent opinion. Dismissing a motion due to "incomprehensibility," Judge Leif Clark cited a scene from "Billy Madison," Sandler's 1995 comedy, in a footnote to a February 21 court order.

Read the rest here.

Best line in the whole movie...well worth being cited again and again :)

It's Funny Because It's True (or it could be anyway)

This story is almost certainly satire (given it comes from a satire site), but you never can be sure: Jobless Rate for Christian Satirists Skyrockets as Churches Beomce Parodies on Their Own

A twenty year veteran of the Christian humor business, Carmichael was at the height of his game when suddenly the line between satire and reality began to blur this last year. The pivotal moment came when Carmichael mocked up a fake "Biblezine for Girls" and everyone thought it was real. Said Carmichael, "It had Britney Spear’s photo on the cover with the headline: 'Hit Me, Jesus, One More Time: Finding God’s Truth in Pop Song Lyrics'. I knew I was in trouble when Christianity Today thought I was submitting an ad from Family Christian bookstore. Worse yet, Zondervan wanted to sue me for stealing the cover idea for their upcoming 'Hey, Girlfriend!' Bible. How was I supposed to know?"

Notes on the Dad Front

First things first: The Kidney Kid shall henceforth be called Arnold. Just doesn't seem right to tag him with a nickname based solely on his disability. Okay, so naming him for a precocious child-actor who came to fame because of his jowliness and his impaired grown due to kidney disease pretty much does the same, but hey...he was funny. Next goal: teaching The Kidne...er, Arnold a catchphrase or two.

Secondly, Arnold turned two yesterday! Have paused to meditate on God's grace throughout those two years a lot over the last few days. When he was 2 weeks old we expected to go in for a major surgery about this time. Mercifully, it's not now (tho' that would give me an excuse for being so far behind in school...ah well, can't have everything, eh?)--sure, it's looming out there somewhere. But when he's older, can be talked to about what's going on, when he's stronger. (For newer readers who have no idea what I'm talking about, scanning this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and (finally!) this, --in order--should help [thank you, Technocrati for finding those for me!]) But he's walking' working on talking' he's got a great personality, a fierce temper that's a walking monument to his father's depravity; he idolizes Frodo, loves the Princess and Samwise; and other than the whole only having .25 kidney thing is very healthy. We had too many dark nights in the beginning, but for the most part now never think of the kidney nonsense and just enjoy him. Truly an act of providence (and God restraining our hearts from panic and paranoia).

Not much to say on the Princess front. She's adorable, she can only speak in giggles (or so it seems), has her Daddy pretty much wrapped around her finger, and is bursting at the seams to try her hand at reading, writing, 'rithmatic, and particle physics.

Samwise is..., well, Samwise. He's addicted as ever to videogames, a little slow on the thinking through things part, loyal to a fault, normally cheerful as all get out, frequently off in his own little world, and a voracious reader.

I actually pulled out the old "if everyone jumped off a cliff, would you want to?" line on Frodo yesterday. He laughed. He thought it was hilarious. Oh my, I have so much work to do with this one. Don't know where to begin :)

Fun with Broadband

A few things to watch for fun/thought (I'll leave it to you to decide which category each fits in):

• Dog Jokes
• McPassion
• Sleepless in Seattle As a Horror Flick
• Thank You For Smoking trailer
• A Scanner Darkly trailer 2
• In Your Eyes Live
• and you just can't get enough of this one...

Christianity Not a New Religion

(yeah, yeah, another post not by me...soon)

It is a great mistake to say that Christianity, as over against the old dispensation, was a "new religion"; indeed, it is a mistake to say that Christianity is a religion at all, among other religions. On the contrary, there is just one revealed religion, and the revelation that is at the basis of it is recorded in both the Old and New Testament. The Old Testament saints were saved in just the same way as that in which the New Testament saints are saved--namely, by the death of Christ--and the mans by which the Spirit of God applied to them the benefits of Christ's death was exactly the same as the means by which the same Spirit applies those benefits to Christians today--namely, faith. The Old Testament saints, like Christians today, received the gospel of the grace of God; and, like the New Testament saints, they received it by faith. The only difference is that the gospel was proclaimed to the Old Testament saints by way of promise, while to us it is proclaimed by way of narrative of what has already been done. Immediately after the Fall of man, the plan of God for salvation began to be executed--with the promise contained in Gen 3:15--and the men who are saved in accordance with that plan are not adherents of "a religion" among other religions; they are not men who have built upon a common human fund of "religion" certain special religions known as "Judaism" and "Christianity," but they are men to whom God has supernaturally revealed and supernaturally applied His saving work. That one revealed "religion" does not differ form the religions of mankind merely in degree; its supremacy does not consist even in being the one perfect religion as over against the imperfect ones; but it is different from the religions of mankind because, while they represent man's efforts to find God, this "religion" is built upon the sovereign and gracious and entirely unique act by which God found man and saved him from the guilt and power of sin.

--J. Gresham Machen

History of Religion

The Scribbler was so struck by this observation by Terry Johnson she read to me today:

The whole history of religion is a history of idolatry: God conceived of falsely and worshipped wrongly. It does not encourage us to think highly of our ability to get things right.

Hopefully she'll comment a little on it--and not just because she really needs to post something--I find it quite profound

Good reminder

Nothing new here, but needs to be said again:

But only the shallowest reading of the Epistles can possibly lead a man to think that the Apostle’s appeal to the Old Testament was merely an argumentative device--useful in defeating the Judaizers but not valuable in the Apostle’s own mind. Nothing could be further form the fact. As a matter of fact, to Paul as well as to our Lord Jesus Himself, the written Word of God was decisive in all controversy. People who make "the teachings of Christ" instead of the whole Bible the seat of authority in religion are doing despite to the teachings of Christ themselves; and people who make what they wrongly call "the living Spirit," in opposition to the written Word, an independent source of our knowledge of God are dong despite to that blessed Holy Spirit by whose gracious ministration the written Word has been given unto men. Let it never be forgotten that the real source of life for the Church is the holy Book; when the Church seeks life apart from the Book, as it is doing today, then it always faces, as it faces today, a terrible loss of power. If the Bible were rediscovered, as it was rediscovered at the time of the Reformation, we should have in the church today the same new life as that which then set the world aflame.

--J. Gresham Machen

Shall I Call It?

Not dead yet. Just very, very busy. Have many things to say. Just no time.

Hopefully next week. Stay tuned for some fun, some theology, some baptism, and who knows what?

This reminds me of a scene from one of my favorite movies, can't resist posting the dialogue (thanks to google, don't have to type it):
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
[a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: What?
Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
The Dead Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round?
The Dead Collector: Thursday.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk.
Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy. I feel happy.
[the Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club]
Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much.
The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
Large Man with Dead Body: Right.

A Momentary Burst of Enlightenment

Kim Riddlebarger has long been my favorite White Horse Inn host (despite his eschatological writings), but I could never put my finger on exactly why.

Now I can.

annoyed...

I want to say something about last night's episode of Bones, which might lead to a discussion of character development in fiction (esp. if the literary type lurkers would speak out). But after what happened last week, I just don't feel comfortable doing that.

rats.

Coming sooner...

New York Yankees Reporting Dates:
Pitchers & Catchers: Tomorrow. And Jorge's already at it--who da man?
First Workout: Feb. 17
Position Players: Feb. 21
First full workout: Feb. 22 -- Oh, to be in Tampa next week!

Meanwhile, over at SI, Tom Verducci makes a compelling case to make Jeter the lead-off man, not Damon. Easily the most thought provoking article I've read all week (says a lot about my week--tho' I expect rusty to fix that later on today).

Last, but not least, this from the "Are they Trying to Give me a Coronary?" Department:

Other teams, possibly including the Yankees, are watching to see what happens with Sammy Sosa and the Nationals.

10 yrs ago today

(about to the minute, iirc. Right after Final Jeopardy) The Scribbler told me she had nothing better to do for the next 60-70 years then to hang out with me.

Quite possibly the happiest moment of my life.

Then the M*A*S*H theme song started playing in the background. Good thing I don't believe in omens, 'cuz that title...(I don't believe in omens, do I?)

Love ya, honey.

Not Pro-Life Enough

Huckleberries Online pointed me to this article on the Idaho Statesman's website (for now, I'll pass up remarking on the strangeness of depending on a Spokane, WA based newspaper blog to keep me abreast of local politics).

A Canyon County anti-abortion activist and father of 16 says he's more than a month into a hunger strike that will end either with his death or the state adopting a law saying that human life begins with conception.

Is this man so addled that he doesn't see the utter hypocrisy of this?

[He and his wife have] attended a number of churches--Baptist, Nazarene, Assembly of God and others--— but their study of the Bible directs their daily lives. She drives him to appointments, brings him things he can't find because of his weakened eyesight, helps him up when he falls. She supports him in the hunger strike--even if it leads to his death.

"Whatever he has to do to serve the Lord, he has to do," she said. "I hate to give him up, but he has to serve the Lord."

How is this serving the Lord? Somebody tell me...where has God commanded that we kill ourselves as a type of extortion/blackmail? Am pretty sure the command reads:

You shall not murder (Exodus 20:13).

And that includes murder of self. You cannot take a stand for righteousness by sinning.

May God have mercy on this man, and wake him from this folly and rebellion.

Coming soon....

Pitchers and Catchers report next week. The rest of the roster soon after that.

April 3--Opening Day.

My goal is to have at least 2 of the three paper/essay/etc. that I have due this term done by than. (and maybe, mayyyybe, the 4 longer posts I've been working on for the last week, to)

Ed: the Next Generation

A few weeks ago, TV Guide's Matt Roush wrote:

No one dies in the pilot episode of the mid-season charmer Love Monkey..., and that has me worried. Can CBS and its audience embrace an hourlong show that dares to exist outside the world of the crime-drama procedural?

I laughed when I read that, and then I realized he's probably right. But, hang it all, I don't care. I'm going to enjoy this burst of creativity and diversity over on the Eye as long as it lasts.

Here's the set-up. Show centers around Tom Farrell--who's basically Ed Stevens--everyone's favorite bowling alley lawyer (and I'm not just saying that because Tom Cavanaugh plays him...but it helps)--except his job is less plausible, he's a record executive with an ear for talent.

Actually, I'm kidding a bit there. This show is a lot more plausible then Ed ever could've--or should've--been. The supporting characters (ex-NFL player sportscaster pal; token hip and black bud; plastic surgeon friend/brother-in-law; cute and platonic gal pal; sister) are just as quirky and witty, but not as strange. Not totally sold on all the supporting characters/cast, but I like them. Jason Priestly's plastic surgeon Mike Freed character is Judy Greer's Brandy are the exceptions there. Bang up job there. I can't believe I just said that about a 90210 alum. Gotta go take a shower...

Having Tom work in the music industry provides: a reason for a great soundtrack, some good characters--both for one-shot and longer stories--and some great cameos (LeAnn Rimes, Aimee Mann, and Ben Folds--ya!).

So far the one constant in the music industry is Tom's new find, Wayne, played by Teddy Geiger. Wayne's very, um, John Mayer-esque. But, unlike Mayer, I like to listen to him. Dunno how much of Geiger there is in Wayne. But if the real new artist's record sounds like the fictional artists...I'm all over it.

So, Love Monkey. Tuesdays on CBS before CSI:*.* No blood, no cool camera effects, no cops. Just nice people.

Two-Pronged Christianity, pt. 1

"Christianity," wrote J. Gresham Machen, "begins with a triumphant indicative." Christianity begins with an announcement, a proclamation—and not a proclamation to convince, to persuade or motivate. But a simple statement of facts: "that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures," (1 Corinthians 15:3-4).

For Machen, this was the first mark that separated the religion of Biblical Christianity from the religion of Liberalism, which began with a series of tasks—exhortations to make the listener a better person. Machen saw that for what it truly is, a non-Christian religion.

No, Christianity begins in the indicative. It begins with news—and not just any news—but good news. "Good news," the phrase is at once a victim of both overuse and disregard. We hear the term so much it’s about as meaningful as ordering Small Diet Coke to go with your Bacon Ultimate Cheeseburger. From time to time we must force ourselves to go back and think about what it is that makes this news so good.

That the thrice holy God, out of His won good pleasure and free grace sent His only Son into this sin-darkened and sin-loving world. That He delivered His Son into the power of men so that they might murder Him. That this shed blood would be a propitiation for the sins of those that God had known, loved and chosen before the foundation of the world. That God’s only Son, freely and willingly gave up the glory He possessed to come into this world, to be found in appearance as a man. To be despised, scorned, conspired against, persecuted, to teach those who wouldn’t understand, to teach those who would reject his instruction. To then lay down His life as a sacrifice for many, enduring the humiliation and pain of the Roman cross, and to die—reconciling us to God in His death. That three days later, he rose from the dead, ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. That from His Father’s side, he sent the Holy Spirit to apply this redemption he accomplished to haters of God. That those to whom the Spirit applies this redemption, He gives faith and repentance unto life. That those chosen by the Father are called, justified, adopted and sanctified, and at the resurrection be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoying of God to all eternity.

This is the beginning. This is the foundation. Without this you have some system of moralism with Jesus Christ as chief exemplar. Without constant reference to this news in our preaching, teaching, thinking and meditation we will not be able to function as believers. We might be nice people, good neighbors, fine citizens…but we will not be Christians.

One of those days...

Slow day around the house today, but have to get plugging away at various projects and can't get to the blog. Yesterday, was supposed to be a major homework and blogging kind of day--have 3 longer posts in the works...and, well, obviously nothing happened.

But I needed a little break from final preparation on my Sunday School lessons on the Muslim doctrine of God (what? I hear you all saying, tear yourself away from that?!?), so figured I'd give you a little insight into me. I'm often asked why I call this White Noise, instead of something more sanctified, or Latin. 1. Because I really like the novel quoted above. (sorry, bluewoad) 2. Because well, it describes my brain.

Eh? Howz that? You ask. Maybe the following two lists will give you some insight. If not, oh well, it gave me soemthing to do.

Current playlist:

1. Short Skirt/Long Jacket - Cake
2. It's the End of the World as we Know It - REM
3. Take Me Away - Eowyn
4. (Can't Get My) head Around You - The Offspring
5. Took My Place - Third Day
6. Right Now - Van Halen
7. Mexico - Lost Dogs
8. My Happy Ending - Avril Lavigne
9. One Angry Dwarf and 200 Solemn Faces - Ben Folds Five
10. Adding to the Noise - Switchfoot
11. Firefly Main Title
12. California - Hawk Nelson
13. Weather Girl - The Choir
14. Taylor - Jack Johnson
15. Superman's Song - Crash Test Dummies
16. All Because - Tree 64
17. Eight Easy Steps - Alanis Morissette
18. About Love - The Choir
19. Battlestar Galactica Main Title

Books that arrived on my doorstep within the last 24 hours:

• Yahweh, Jehovah, or Allah--Which is God's Real name? - Shabir Ally
• 101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible - Shabir Ally
• The Qur'an - Translated by Abdullah Yusaf Ali
• Wages of Spin - Carl A. Trueman
• The Baptism of Disciples Alone - Fred Malone
• Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace - Paul Jewett

Geeking Out OPC-style

Just received the latest publication from the good people over at Solid Ground Christian Books--Notes on Galatians by J. Gresham Machen.

As always, nice publication. Good quality paperback, nicely formatted. And pretty darn cheap. Something that my formerly favorite reprint company could learn from (with all due respect to Mr. Kistler).

The bulk of the book are exegetical notes on Galatians 1:1 - 3:14, with some translation notes by the master, and misc. other things. This is gonna be a fun read :)

Beyond Paedo

When my then fiancé and I first started attending the church we now belong to, we were warned by a well-intentioned relative that, "they baptize babies, you know." Well, yes, we did know that. We also knew this church would baptize teens, thirtysomethings, and octogenarians if opportunity presented itself. However hazy on the details, that warning does point to the general perception of the Presbyterian/Reformed view of the sacrament-—that we’re only focused on baptizing infants.

And, we must admit, all too often, we perpetuate the stereotype. Our conferences, books, tracts and other teaching materials focus all too often on words like "infant" or "paedo-" and feature cute pictures of smiling newborns and pastel colors. Of course, the name for our position, "paedobaptism" does not help either. I’m not sure when that label was first applied, but it was a mistake to let it stick. (I half-way expect polymathis to hit me with an answer to this in the comments).

Let’s take a quick look at the Reformed Confessional Standards. How much emphasis do they place on infant baptism?

• It’s about ¼ of the Belgic Confession’s Article 24, "Holy Baptism"
• The Heidelberg Catechism has 6 questions on Baptism, only 1 of which mentions infants
• The Second Helvetic Confession devotes 1 of its 6 paragraphs on Baptism to the subject (in passing, I’d note that paragraph is against the Anabaptist position, not a positive teaching on the doctrine)
• Our Larger Catechism mentions it in 1 of 3 questions
• Our Confession gives one of its seven paragraphs on Baptism to the idea (with a passing reference in another)

It is also interesting to note that on the whole, the topic of infants is the last thing mentioned by the Reformation-era standards.

What’s the point of this survey? As Lyle Bierma wrote recently,

The proportion of space is significant. It suggests that from the perspective of the confessions, there is no such thing as a separate doctrine of infant baptism, only a doctrine of baptism—a baptism of which adults and infants alike are the legitimate recipients. Whether one is an adult being baptized after conversion or an infant being baptized before conversion, the situation is basically the same…Both are called to embrace those promises [of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit] by faith, the adult immediately, and the infant as he or she grows older. Both are saved, not by their baptism, but by God’s grace as they live in faith and obedience as members of the covenant community. The confessions speak of only one doctrine of baptism, therefore, because there is only one covenant, one people of God, one promise, one set of conditions, and one covenantal sing—for adults and children alike.

What really separates us from our baptistic brethren is not that they withhold baptism from their children; it is our doctrine of baptism. Who we consider to be the objects of baptism comes out of that, it does not determine it.

Some Rules (well, one) on Baptism Posts

Okay, I'm going to try something reckless here...I'm going to start an occasional series of posts on baptism. Now, I know a number of my readers are going to disagree with me on this stuff--not that there's anything wrong with that ("nothing at all," echoes George from across the table).

Here's the catch--we're not going to be having any extended baptism debates here. While I'm eager for them, I just don't have the time/energy for them right now. I'm tempted to not allow comments on them, but will keep them open to allow questions/clarifications/feedback. As soon as things get heated, I will delete comments. Maybe this summer I'll be up to it and will post some inflammatory words to get a debate going with those in the deep end of the pool.

New Journal

Jeff Downs has released first edition of the Countercult Apologetics Journal. Head on over and have a read--looks like some interesting stuff! Jeff was kind enough to ask me to do a review of that Robret Millet book I was live-blogging last summer before I got sick (and I don't think the two were related, but ya never know).

Speaking of Millet, he and Greg Johnson will be doing their thing again in Boise. Rodney King theology at its finest. At least this year I know about it weeks in advance, rather than months after the fact or too late to get it off work.

Cleaning up the Current Stuff

Okay, I know it's silly, but just about every blog has to have a "what am I reading/listening to/watching right now" section--it's a rule somewhere. And, as the conformist that I am, I've got it over there in the middle column, looking all pretty. Sadly, the books part hasn't changed much in months. Well, I'm throwing in the towel..I'm just never going to finish The Last Disciple by Hannegraaff and Brouwer or Tongues Aflame: Learning to Preach from the Apostles by Roger Wagner (well, not in the foreseeable future anyway). No disrespect to Wagner, pretty good book, but I can't seem to stay focused on it. And I just cannot force myself to finish the last 100 pages of Disicple. Horrible, horrible book. And I wanted to like it--the eschatology seems right (wow...what a concept), but the writing, the characters, the plots...I'd rather watch the last couple of seasons of ER or Reba.

As for music...not addicted to anything at the moment...any suggestions?

Oh, and I'd be remiss if I didn't add, that I'd like to put The Two-Minute Rule by Robert Crais and Sea Change by Robert B. Parker in that column. If you'd like to help keep things changing around here... :)

there's something wrong with me...

I'm behind schedule on...well, pretty much everything...so why is it that I'm prepared to spend good time doing this?

The T-Shirt Says It All

Finally saw Serenity tonight. Gorgeous film. I loved the series, but this...wow. They really brought their A game. The dialogue didn't crackle the way that Whedon's usually does--but he was going for a slightly broader audience this time (I never had doubts about his Wonder Woman flick, but I have less now)

There was a rawness, a humanity to this that no Star Trek movie, and most of the Star Wars films didn't touch (maybe bits of Empire). The deaths (and there were some) meant something; the sacrifices, the nobility--they were real. Can't say that for many things on TV or in the theaters today.

River rocked. Still would give a limb for Kaylee. Would like to be half the Shepherd that Book was. Wash and Mal still make me laugh.

Not going to attempt a real review, or even what passes for one 'round these parts. Can't do the film justice. It made me laugh, made me jump, made me angry, inspired and left a smile on my face. Can't ask for much more out of a cowboy in space movie.

Too many good lines to recount, but one'll stick with me for awhile: "If you can't do something smart, do something right." I should get that on a pillow or something.

Malkin's blogging too much lately

Can't keep up with her...but man, I feel compelled to (thankfully still waiting for a couple textbooks to arrive, so it's not like I'm deliberately ignoring homework). One stop shopping for blog-reading.

• We have this bit of insightful commentary:

  Meanwhile, potty-training my son is like dealing with post-9/11 liberals. No matter how much patient educating and explaining you do to convince them to take responsibility for their actions and prevent future disasters, the end result is always the same: soiled pants.

• This interesting post on the WMD.
• Some tech-culture commentary on the Google-China deal
• And we darenot forget what Michelle does best: exposing our weaknesses on the southern border. If "The War at the Border" and "The War at the Border: Escalation" don't cost you some sleep, you aren't reading closely.
• And then hits the cultural high-brow note here (a note I should aspire to).
• and much, much more...why are you wasting time with my blather? Just read Malkin!

100th Episode

Smallville reaches the magic 100 mark tonight. (not sure why it's magic anymore, used to be the point at which shows went into syndication, iirc, it's not that anymore)

Anyway, this is the show we've all been anticipating/dreading since the season opener. To satisfy Jor-El returning Clark's powers to him (a la Superman II), someone close to him will die (unlike Superman II). Who will this person be? Someone standing close to Clark? or someone truly close to him? Well, someone from the opening credits. Maybe more than one someone. Supposedly no one on the cast saw it coming 'til they got the script (gotta be a sucky way to find out you're unemployed).

Anyway, will be at work with someone meets their doom. Hope my VCR (how much of a throwback am I? Video cassette?) does its job tonight. Won't be going online 'til I've had the chance to watch it, as a good chunk of the internet will be talking about this. If my VCR doesn't do its job, well, let's just say you won't be seeing me update the blog or check my email for a few months :)

My greatest fear is that it will be Chloe. Scribbler and I aren't sure if we're coming back for a Chloe-less Smallville (we will, we'll just gripe for a couple weeks). Lois is safe, ditto for Lex. I bet Ma is, too. Jonathan...hmm..tough call. But he's almost too obvious w/the long-term heart condition, hate-hate relationship with Jor-El. Lionel? Ha. Not close to clark at all. That leaves Lana. Oh my, I hope it's Lana. She's a drag on the show, the Clark-Lana relationship hasn't had zip for awhile. And we all know the relationship is doomed (see Lois). We'll know in a couple hours how much I think like a TV writer (there's part of me that opes I don't think much like one)

Things that made me LOL today

in no particular order:

• The latest from Purgatorio (h/t The Riddleblog)
  
• That is not my blog--in particular this and this and this (h/t Petty Athanasius)

That quote...

Okay, okay, okay...you can stop harassing me. A few days ago (well, a couple of weeks and change) I put a quotation up, with the promise of revealing the author soon. And then silence ensued--part of that was due to the fact that I was busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest. Another part of it was due to the fact that I was intending on using it in the sermon I had to preach for class on 1/13, and I was reserving comment on it 'til I was done with that. (and another part is shear laziness, I'm sure).

Sorry Rusty, it was not Princess Di who wrote that. Nor was it little ol' me. And maybe using a Bible Code-type hermeneutic you could find a chicken curry recipe there, but I'm not sure. And as for Internet Lutherans...well, I'm sure the original author would deal with them in such a way as to make Steve Hays look like kitty cat. It was by the stalwart Robert L. Dabney, from the book Sacred Rhetoric. Currently published under the title Evangelical Eloquence by the Banner of Truth.

Here's the quotation w/a little context--Dabney is discussing the subjects of sermons--the type of sermon to be preached. Should they all be doctrinal? Should they all be practical? Dabney says no to both. Part of his argument for a balance between the two in preaching included that quotation. Here it is with the rest of the paragraph:

The practical definition of Christianity has been fully accepted by us. Its end and aim is holy living [author's footnote: "Eph. i.4; Titus ii.14, et passim"]. Of this holy life, the law of God is the rule. The believer justified in Christ does not, indeed, look to the law for his redeeming merit; but he receives it as his guide to the obedience of faith and love, as fully as though he were still under a covenant of works. He therefore needs practical instruction, as really as the unbeliever. It must stimulate and direct him in the Christian race, and make him a "peculiar person, zealous of good works." The exclusive preaching of doctrine to professed Christians tends to cultivate an Antinomian Spirit. The exclusive inculcation of duties fosters self-righteousness. The edification of the Church, then, demands the diligent intermixture of both kinds. This precept may be confirmed by the remark, that, as the motives and obligations of all duties are rooted in the doctrines, so the best illustrations of the doctrines are by their application to the duties. The two are inseparably connected as grounds and conclusions, as means and end; and their systematic separation in your instructions would leave your hearers incapable of a correct understanding of either.

The part that struck me is of course the part that struck the commenters: "...but he receives it as his guide to the obedience of faith and love, as fully as though he were still under a covenant of works." The words are jarring to our ears (and, I'm willing to bet Dabney's original audience). We instinctively recoil, "'Covenant of works? Oh, no, no, no. Even if you accept the outdated notion of a Covenant of Works, we know that under the New Covenant we have nothing to do with such a thing." Well, yeah, I do accept the covenant of works, and I'm not arguing that we should consider ourselves under it--nor does Dabney. I want to emphasize, Dabney is by no means arguing for moralism, if you didn't catch that in the above quotation. He later stresses, "It is only the morality of the Cross which the Christian pastor should teach."

But think of it this way: let's say, we were under a Covenant where our performance did decide our eternal state. Where our understanding, our adherence to a code of morality or a list of duties was the sole determining factor in whether we had life everlasting, or perpetual punishment. Now, given those conditions: how fully would we receive and embrace that code/list as our guide to obedience?

But, thank God, that is not the condition we are in. "The believer justified in Christ does not, indeed, look to the law for his redeeming merit" (or any other kind of merit). By God's free grace, we have been called, justified, adopted, and more. But in love we are to obey that same Lord, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments" (John 14:15); "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. Whoever does not love me does not keep my words" (John 14:23,24). If we love Him, would we not therefore embrace this same code with more ardor, more fervor than we would out of fear of punishment/hope of reward? Especially when we remember, that "this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:3)

Okay, there are (some) of my thoughts on the quotation. Feel free to throw some back at me.

P. S. Before I forget, while I'm talking about Dabney's book on preaching. His comments on political preaching were worth the price of the book. Should probably get it printed in pamphlet form and mail copies to everyone who attends one of those "Justice Sunday" events. If someone kindly reminds me in a few days, I'll post parts of it.

Thought for the Day - 1/11/06

God is glorified in the work of redemption in this, that there appears in it so absolute and universal a dependence of the redeemed on him. - Jonathan Edwards

The absolute sovereignty of God is a corollary of the absolute dependence of man. Similarly, the corollary of a partial dependence is a partial sovereignty and a partial sovereignty is ultimately no sovereignty at all.

Not doin' it on our own...

But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift. Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men." He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. Ephesians 4:7-16

Of the many great gifts that our gracious Lord and Savior has given us, perhaps the most overlooked are those mentioned in v. 11 "the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers." Why are they given? The Apostle tells us, "to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God…"

It doesn’t take an ecclesiastical genius to see that the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son have not been reached (much less the rest of the list). So it’s easy to see that we still need those gifts. Now we have the apostles and prophets work preserved for us in the Scriptures—and most Christians have little problem remembering to be thankful for them.

But what about the rest? What about the evangelists, the pastors and teachers? What about those working to equip the saints for the work of ministry? Those who throw themselves into building up the body of Christ? How often do we think of them as gifts from the risen and ascended Christ? How often are we thankful for them?

Not just those that we see and hear week after week (hopefully), but all those who from the time of the apostles and prophets have labored to build up Christ’s body to the measure and fullness of Christ?

While in class today, listening to a godly professor cull the accumulated wisdom and teachings of many throughout the centuries to equip we future ministers (D.V.) to equip others. How little I’ve thought of that treasure lately. My fellow elders, my friends in the ministry, my professors, and all those giants on whose shoulders we stand (and a few midgets, too, it must be admitted). How gracious and generous our Lord is!

How pathetic, how shortsighted—how unappreciative, how ungrateful are those who disdain them. Lone Ranger Christians despising the gifts that Christ gave and gives now that he is on high.

May God save me—and his church—from this spirit, and help us to embrace and to utilize their work.

New Blog

Natalie Teeger's blogging--yay! Okay, I'd have rather read Sharona's blog, but this is close enough. (and I have to admit Natalie's really growing on me)

Discuss amongst yourselves

I'm going to leave the author and my take on this out of it for the moment, want to hear some chatter from my readers (even you who don't comment that often--especially you!), read this quote yesterday and I've been chewing on it since.

[Christianity's] end and aim is holy living [author's footnote: "Eph. i.4; Titus ii.14, et passim"]. Of this holy life, the law of God is the rule. The believer justified in Christ does not, indeed, look to the law for his redeeming merit; but he receives it as his guide to the obedience of faith and love , as fully as though he were still under a covenant of works.

Stranger in a Strange Land

If you took all the OPCs in Utah and Idaho, put them on a plane and brought them to the meeting room of the PCA church I attended tonight here in SC, there'd still be room for visitors. It was hard on my system (in a good way). On the other hand, the PCA church I attended this morning was smaller in attendance than my own. And both of them (and a few other PCA's in the area) have their own buildings.

Just can't imagine that embarrassment of riches in the Pacific Northwest....

How's this for a Resolution?

As I'm reading a commentary in preparation for a paper, I read the following: "James carries forward some of the central aspects of Jesus' message and teaching...This continuity with Jesus' teaching is relatively rare within the New Testament."

I showed kletois this line and he replied, "Are they reading the same leather bound book we read??" And you really have to wonder sometimes what book is being read by some of these guys. Although there is a bevy of evidence that they're reading something—and that's certainly commendable.

Thankfully, while I was writing that paper, I was able to read (and utilize) several other writers who were reading the same book. And more than that they handled the book correctly—which is of vital importance.

Chrysostom, Augustine, Calvin, Owen, Watson, Manton, Boston, Hodge, Thornwell, Ryle, Machen, Moo, Morris—for all the differences that exist between those people, there is one common bond—they're men of the Book. Men who read and handle the Word of God with reverence, respect, and understanding.

We're awash in a culture that hates that Book, and hates those who follow it. That hatred is becoming more and more apparent everyday. Even those who are supposedly on the side of the Church are showing more and more how they're not on our side. It seems every time you turn around another wolf is spotted behind a pulpit, hawking "Christian" wares, deceiving the sheep.

There's precisely one way to eliminate the influence of the wolves. One way to survive the hatred—in all the current and upcoming manifestations. Become people of the Book.

We need to read the Book, study the Book, hear the Book preached responsibly every chance we have. We need to spend time with other people of the Book as models and guides—whether we can only know them in print, or if they're across town.

We have to get into the Book and get the Book into us.

A Year with My Children in the Bible

The clan just finished going through this survey of the Bible--sure, it's a day early, but we did double duty so I could be around for the end. Not the greatest survery of the Bible around, I'm sure--but it's pretty good. Spends too little time on some things, too much on others, in my not so humble opinion. But on the whole, sound, balanced, age appropriate (even good for the 'rents). Got my kids thinking about somethings for sure--things I wouldn't have bothered with (but am glad Cromarty did). I know my quiver liked it--they howled like banshees when we discovered a few days were missing in October (I asked Evangelical Press for the text of those days, knowing that was a long shot--that very day they sent a replacement copy, free--that's customer service).

We ended today with the following reading. Great way to finish off.

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away." And he who was seated on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." Also he said, "Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true." And he said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. Revelation 21:1-7

Notes from the Sick Ward

Had really planned on a blog-splosion while I was on break. But got fairly distracted by several things around the house, reading for the Winter Term, and now a cold from h-e-double hockey-stick--which has taken out the whole household (tired would probably insert a covenant-head joke here, but it started with the Princess and then moved on to the Kidney Kid, which is a shame, because his joke would be funny).

Took the Kidney Kid in today, got a steroid shot to help his croup. Seems to be working. He's actually sleeping tonight, as is mommy. That's a major plus.

Have gotten some intersting reading done--many books started, none finished yet. Depending how tomorrow goes, I could have a few knocked off. Have got more sleep in the last few days than I have in the last few months. Very strange experience.

Hopefully will have a few things to say in the next couple of days. And next week--since I will have gobs and gobs of stuff to do, expect me to blog about a bazillion words a day.

Sounds & a Sight of the Weekend

Things over heard that brought (and still bring) a smile to my face:
Frodo, yesterday morning, "After breakfast, let's play Mario Baseball." He's very excited about the new videogame. Samwise (poster child for video game addiction). "No, I want to play with my Narnia toys." He would only stop playing with those to open packages and eat. The latter was generally forced.

Scribbler to Princess, "Come here and bring Lalanie [Cabbage Patch Doll]. You need to take the adoption oath. Repeat after me...I promise [something, something]..." Princess just stares at her. Scribbler to Lalanie, "Oh, it's okay, Lalanie, I'll love you." Princess giggles, "Mommy, it's just a doll."

Frodo, thanking everybody, making sure his siblings did, too.

The Kidney Kid, giggling. A lot. And then some more.

Image of the day:
I get a blanket from the inlaws, use it for a minute as a pillow as we're watching something on TV.

Here's the catch--it's still in the original packaging as I do that.

The results? here.

The Application of Christ to the Soul

Of all these great doctrinal things, there still remains one lesson to be learned—-how to apply Christ rightly to your soul. Learn that and you have everything. If you have learned this well, you are a great theologian. For the right application of Christ to the sick soul, to the wounded conscience, and the diseased heart, is the fountain of all our felicity, and the well-spring of all our joy., In order to understand how this application operates (provided that you want Christ in your soul), think of what the presence of your soul within you does to this earthly body, to this lump of clay. It is by the presence of the soul that it lives, moves, and feels. As the soul gives to the body, life, movement, and sensation, so Christ does the very same thing to your soul. Have you ever grasped and applied Him to yourself? As the soul quickens the body, so He quickens the soul, not with an earthly or temporal life, but with the life which He lives in heaven. He makes you live the same life which the angels live in heaven. He makes you move, not with worldly motion, but with heavenly, spiritual and celestial motions. Again, He inspires I you not outward senses, but heavenly senses. He works within you a spiritual feeling, that in your own heart and conscience you may find the effect of His Word. Thus by the conjunction of Christ with my soul, I get a thousand times a greater benefit than the body does by the soul, for the body by the presence of the soul gets only an earthly and temporal life, subject to continual misery, but by the presence of Christ in my soul, I see a blessed life, I feel a blessed life, and that life daily increases in me more and more. Therefore the ground of all our perfection and blessedness consists in this conjunction and so even if you lived as long as Methuselah, and spent your whole life seeking, yet if in the last hour you were to get this conjunction, you would think your labour well worth it, for you would have gained enough. If you have gained Christ, you have gained everything with Him. Thus the applying of Christ to your soul is the fountain of all your joy and felicity.

Now let us see how we get this conjunction. This is a spiritual conjunction, hard and difficult to be acquired or procured. How then is it brought about? What are the means God uses in this conjunction, and what are the means man uses in it in order to get Christ, to put Christ Jesus in our soul, and to make Christ Jesus one with us? There is one means employed on God’s part-—God helps us to get Christ; and another means employed on our part. On the part of God, there is the Holy Spirit, who offers the Body and Blood of Christ to us. On our part there must also be a means employed, or else when He offers, we will not be able to receive. Therefore there be faith to our souls to receive what the Holy Spirit offers, to receive the heavenly food of the Body and Blood of Christ. Thus faith and the Holy Spirit are the two means employed in this spiritual and heavenly conjunction. By these two means, by faith and the Holy Spirit, I receive the Body of Christ--The Body of Christ is mine, and He is given to my soul.

--Robert Bruce
"The Lord's Supper in Particular"

Amen!

Preach it, Brother Frazz!

What the ... ?

When I got in this morning I had an email waiting for me from my wife, subject line simply saying, "WHAT?" And then there was some nonsense about Johnny Damon signing with the Yankees. I was unusually tired, so I didn't bother to go to snopes.com and show she'd fallen for some Internet hoax. Puh-leez. The guy's on record (May of this year, in fact).

But no. Johnny Damon is...(oh this is hard to type)...a...a...(be strong, you can say this) a Yankee.

The man has no arm. How is this an improvement over Bernie? Better at offense. We don't need offense...we need defense! You know, getting the ball from the outfield to the men on base quickly...that kind of thing.

This is a bad move. This is a stupid move. Sure, there's a little "in your face" action for the RS Nation (how'd they become a nation anyway? 1 lousy championship in decades and they're a nation??? Oh wait...the Yankees have an Empire. Never mind) This is all about George, his ego and his checkbook. Sorry Joe, sorry Cash. I know, I just know you weren't behind this. I trust you can pick make some lemonade from this lemon.

Okay, okay, he's a great lead-off hitter. Jeter's great at moving guys over a base. So that's going to make things interesting at the top of the order. Good 1-2 combo. I will not complain about that. But fielding...you gotta be kidding me!

First response at a Yankee messageboard I read from time to time, "Dear *** Noooooo" followed shortly by "It's better than a five year deal" (only four). My favorite response, "instead of 'We're just a bunch of idiots.' he will have to say 'We are just a bunch of consummate professionals.'"

And it's not just Yankee fans saying this, Joy of Sox says:

New York is paying for what Damon was, not what he will be. There can be no doubt that his four years in Boston will turn out to be far more productive than his four in the Bronx.

Damon's the original Idiot, the hirsute anti-Yankee who drilled the grand slam to ice Game 7. Yankee fans hate this guy. Now they have to pretend to like him, just like they're doing with Randy Johnson.

Red Sox Chick opines:

He's a great lead-off hitter. No argument there. But that is pretty much it. Everything else is either bad or annoying and yet the Red Sox fans embraced him. I have a feeling the same won't happen in New York.... Not the team. I mean it's a little lousy for the team...but I'm not worried in that regard. They'll find a centerfielder who can actually throw the ball to the infield.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I got the links to these blogs from my wife's blog. I do not consult these on a regular basis.

Here's what bugs me the most, a few quotes from the new acquisition:

They were coming after me aggressively. We know George Steinbrenner's reputation. [Yeah, heard you say that back in May when discussing your pending Free Agent status. You said you knew they'd come hard and with money and you essentially said "doesn't matter, never gonna happen"]He always wants to have the best players. He showed that tonight. [You arrogant punk!]He and Brian Cashman came after me hard. Now I'm part of the Yankees and that great lineup. We're going to be tough to beat.["We"? "We"? Slow down, kemo sabe. Not sure it's "we" yet. You know how long it took Roger to earn his 'stripes? Took A-Rod longer (some say he hasn't earned 'em yet!) You have no fans in NY. Watch the pronouns, cowboy]

and

Our policy with the Yankees is to go out and win, and we're going to try to bring another championship to them. They haven't had a championship since Chuck Knoblauch was there when they had a great leadoff hitter so I think the leadoff role has been underappreciated. A good leadoff hitter is tough to find and I think New York just found the best leadoff hitter in the game.[Nice bit of analysis re: Knobby--you probably had to pay someone for it, or Cashman told you that little fact. But that kind of pride and aggrandizement belongs in the WWF, not in Yankee stadium. You're a pretty good player amongst some great ones--and in the shadow of greater. Shut up and go tend to your hair-do, caveman]

Ah well, at least I got to read this in a Boston Globe column this morning.

So now your Boston Red Sox have no center fielder, no shortstop, and no first baseman to go along with no Theo Epstein and no clue. It's fair to say this is becoming a winter of discontent in Red Sox Nation. Ben and Jed and Craig and Larry and Tom and John and Crosby, Stills & Nash can spin this anyway they want, but Sox fans can't escape the conclusion that there's chaos at the top. The Josh Beckett trade bought some goodwill and glad tidings, but losing Damon to the Yankees is a devastating blow to the foundation of the Nation.

The Sox won't recover from this one easily. In an already dismal offseason, they've now lost their center fielder and their leadoff hitter. They've also lost a local icon, a rare favorite of teenage girls and fanboy bloggers. Losing Damon hurts them on the field and in the arena of popular opinion. And losing Damon to the Yankees compounds the damage. When Alex Rodriguez got away a couple of years ago, Sox fans were fairly quick to scorn A-Rod and move forward.

Losing Damon won't draw the same reaction. The Idiot center fielder is Johnny Angel with Sox fans and his production in pinstripes will be a personal affront to Red Sox fans around the world.

Schadenfreude may not be nice, but it can be fun.

Prediction: We will get 1-2 good years out of him, and then we'll be right back where we were with Bernie in '04 and '05. The A-Rod deal was over the top (and so far, not really that effective). The Johnson deal was dumb (see this post-season and June-July). This deal was wrong.

A Few Comic Strips for your Perusal

Not sure how many of you read Boondocks, but it's frequently hilarious (and fairly thought provoking). Incidentally, Cartoon Network's new animted show based on the strip is pretty good, too. Anyway, last week's story arch was fantastic: great job showing the unusual mix between Santa and Christ that happens all too easily in our culture: Monday's is a must read; Tuesday's starts to take it in a different direction; Wednesday's is freakishly perceptive--how many kids have this understanding?; Thursday's and Friday's get a bet pedantic; and Saturday's brings us back to Tues. ending the story perfectly.


Partially Clips ("a web comic for grownups")--is usually worth a read, but Ordering Soda is a classic.

And if you haven't stumbled across The Pet Professional yet...give it a look, probably best to start at the beginning.

Big News

Haven't had much to say the last few days, not sure why. But hopefully that'll change over the next few.

When I got home from work tonight (technically, this morning) I had waiting for me some big news. I'm a commissioner to this year's General Assembly of the OPC. [gulp] Downside: another week away from wife and kids. Upside: get to see presbyterianism in action at the broadest level, and get to play my small part. :)

2005 in Review

Back in college I picked up a book by James Lileks, Notes of a Nervous Man or something. Struck me as sort of a poor man's Dave Barry (my estimation at the time). Don't get me wrong, I liked it. A shadow of Barry is still better than just about anything. Anyhow, mostly lost track of him right after that.

Stumbled on to him a time or two since online, but didn't seem to be as funny as that book. But thankfully, Not So Fast pointed me to his year in review for 2005: A 2005 Rollick. Couple of highlights:

Pope John Paul II dies. To the horror of many, his successor turns out to be Catholic.

John Bolton is nominated to be U.S. ambassador to the U.N., despite his moustache.

The 1,587th death in Iraq provokes no major display of eye-catching graphics in the Western media, as it is not a round number.

Harriet Miers is nominated for the Fairfax school board. No, wait—the Supreme Court. ...Miers’s nomination is withdrawn after it is revealed she was actually a cyborg, sent from the future by Karl Rove’s son to revitalize the conservative base. She is disassembled and put in storage.

Just a couple, the rest is well worth reading....

Isn't it Ironic, Don't Ya Think?

McDonald's too tempting for WTO protesters

McDonald's, the very symbol of globalisation, is used to having its windows broken during violent protests at World Trade Organisation (WTO) summits, but not in Hong Kong where one group met for breakfast on Thursday.

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

Finished with my Hermeneutics final about an hour ago. Am free to hang out with the family and read what I want 'til Jan. 3 (minus a couple days with the family for travel, etc.).

This term was a lot more draining for me than the last couple--odd, because my responsibilities at church were lessened, my work hours were a little shorter. Oh well. It's over, praise the Lord. Now I can prepare for what's coming.

Will try to blog something more, um, material tomorrow. Sorry cent, know you hate these "this is where I am" posts.

Must Read

A Healthy Church: How the congregation becomes--and stays--healthy. An interview with Mark Dever, who despite being a baptist, is always worth listening to.

h/t: Reformation21's Blog. Speaking of Reformation21, I'm very glad to read Carl Trueman whenever he talks about Camille Paglia as he did yesterday. I became a Paglia fan (well, not really fan, but that'll do for now) back in college, and had always felt guilty about it. But I figure if a TR guy like Trueman can like her (for most of the reasons I do--esp. share his last), hey a little less guilt in my life today. :)

Housekeeping Tip of the Day

When making coffee, it's a good idea to put the carafe in its place before turning on the machine and heading off to sort through laundry. Failure to do so will result in a large, hot mess.

And you'll waste a cup or two of coffee.

Now, I really don't think I can be held morally culpable here...I hadn't had my first cup of the day yet.

Death du Jour

Just to get my brain working again after being spent on my term paper and a series of exhortation in which I covered the major portions Philippians (pretty much anyway, one or two more and I'd be completely satisfied), I needed to read a novel. Preferably mystery. Inspired by Bones to try out Kathy Reichs' mystery novels I wanted to go back to the beginning, Déjá Dead--I hate jumping into a novel series mid-stream. I will do it, but I'll hate it. Of course, the local library's copy was out last week, so I settled with book two, Death du Jour--close enough to the beginning.

First thing that hit me--the Temperance Brennan of Reichs' novels is not Bones' Temperance Brennan aside from the name and occupation. That fact kept hitting me over the head for the first 200 +/- pages. And not like RBP's Spenser isn't Spenser: For Hire. This woman is older (well, duh, Fox isn't going to center a new show around a middle-aged woman)--but this woman has a kid in college, not only gets pop culture references, she makes them. The character as a whole is different. (and don't get me started on Andrew Ryan vs. Seeley Booth)

I was finally able to get that out of my mind (which is part of the reason I'm cutting that previous paragraph short, I had a pretty good list going there). It took me awhile, but I came to sorta like this version of Tempe (from here on out, on the Noise book Brennan=Tempe, TV Brennan=Bones, assuming I remember that, and assuming I ever read another one). Not so sure I liked Tempe's family (too cliché), her attachment to her cat (makes me yearn for something stable, like Susan Silverman's attachment to Pearl), the way that everything she did during the course of the novel was directly associated with everything else (sorry, slight spoiler). Her fans might celebrate that as complexity, I call it laziness.

Now, I'm not against writers having similar themes going on in what appear to be unrelated storylines. But if apparently unrelated storylines turn out to be all one huge convoluted storyline--you'd better make me believe it was possible. More coincidences in this book than most Dickens novels. So in Canada we have: the nun that was doing some documentary help on a consultation case, a arson-murder Tempe helps on, a professor she talks to about the first case (oh, and the prof happens to have the nun's niece working for her). In Texas Tempe's sister Harry takes some seminar at a junior college. In South Carolina Tempe's old buddy Sam who runs a wildlife refuge (of sorts) that she takes her daughter to for a paper the kid has to write is in the same county as some others tied into the arson-murder, and some bodies end up being found at the refuge. And every single one of these things is related to every single other in one huge, nation-wide plot.

Thankfully there's this forensic anthropologist that can put it all together--after fixating on a few red-herrings. But thankfully she has a dream that helps out.

Oh please.

The writing was at times clever, at times it felt like she was trying to hard. Gerald So said that the little of Reichs he'd sampled struck him as "common slightly overwritten thriller." Slightly overwritten pretty much nails it. The sex-scene, or almost sex-scene was filled with much too much detail. Not writing as a prude, just someone who doesn't need that much filled out. Robert B. Parker can do more in 3 brief paragraphs on that topic than she did in her 2-3 very detailed pages.

That level of detail was also there in describing the bodies, in describing what insects do to cadavers (this is why I'm glad Gideon Oliver's bodies are usually skeletons--no insects), etc. Sometimes felt over the top, a little gratuitous. But hey, she's a scientist (a "squint" as Booth would say), let her strut her stuff.

On the whole, it was a good read--a little longer than I figured it'd take. I'm not rushing out to get number 3 (or number 1 if it happens to be in), definitely not adding her to my "to buy" list. But, satisfying read.

Fighting the lesser angels of my nature

Tomorrow morning's exhortation is on Phil 3:12-21 (or maybe just 16, still not sure). Anyhow, in one of those last second bursts of inspiration, I accidentally typed something that made me think of Cake's "The Distance." So now, as I work away on my notes about Paul's single minded pursuit of his goal, I keep thinking of using lines like

He's racing and pacing and plotting the course,
He's fighting and biting and riding on his horse.
He's going the distance.
He's going for speed.

or

The green light flashes, the flags go up.
Churning and burning, they yearn for the cup.
They deftly maneuver and muscle for rank,
Fuel burning fast on an empty tank.
Reckless and wild, they pour through the turns.
Their prowess is potent and secretly stearn.

I know I shouldn't, on so many levels, I'm fully aware I need to avoid it.

The question is, will I?

In the doghouse

Well took the niece, the Mrs., and Frodo, Sam and the Princess to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe last night (review to come). Left the Kidney Kid home with my sister.

I don't think he's forgiven me for that. He likes his auntie well enough in a group, but solo...he's not so sure about.

Well, apparently, his little brain has decided that this was my plan. It was all my doing. So all morning long, he's put extra effort into showing affection to everyone else, and is doing his best to ignore me (and his best is pretty good). I know there are Christian parents out there who are horrified--and will be more horrified when I say I'm doing absolutely nothing to correct him. Giving him a few opportunities to come say hi, etc. But I know this is the only way he can express himself, so I'm letting him do so.

LOL. Just as I'm about to post this he comes over to show me a picture he colored. I asked for a hug and he took two steps toward me, and then stopped and turned his back. Oh yeah, there's a grudge there.

Great Moments in Science

Coke to launch coffee-infused Coke Blak

Coca-Cola Co. (NYSE:KO - news), the world's No. 1 soft drink company, on Wednesday said it will launch a coffee-infused soft drink called Coca-Cola Blak in various markets around the world in 2006.

The new drink, a combination of Coca-Cola Classic and coffee extracts...

Call to the Cross

Nothing is so incongruous in a Christian, and foreign to his character, as to seek ease and rest; and to be engrossed with the present life is foreign to our profession and enlistment. Thy Master was crucified, and dost thou seek ease? Thy Master was pierced with nails, and dost thou live delicately? Do these things become a noble soldier? Wherefore Paul saith, "Many walk, of whom I told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ." Since there were some who made a pretense of Christianity, yet lived in ease and luxury, and this is contrary to the Cross: therefore he thus spoke. For the cross belongs to a soul at its post for the fight, longing to die, seeking nothing like ease, whilst their conduct is of the contrary sort. So that even if they say, they are Christ’s, still they are as it were enemies of the Cross. For did they love the Cross, they would strive to live the crucified life. Was not thy Master hung upon the tree? Do thou otherwise imitate Him. Crucify thyself, though no one crucify thee. Crucify thyself, not that thou mayest slay thyself, God forbid, for that is a wicked thing, but as Paul said, "The world hath been crucified unto me and I unto the world." (Gal. vi. 14.) If thou lovest thy Master, die His death. Learn how great is the power of the Cross; how many good things it hath achieved, and doth still: how it is the safety of our life. Through it all things are done. Baptism is through the Cross, for we must receive that seal. The laying on of hands is through the Cross. If we are on journeys, if we are at home, wherever we are, the Cross is a great good, the armor of salvation, a shield which cannot be beaten down, a weapon to oppose the devil; thou bearest the Cross when thou art at enmity with him, not simply when thou sealest thyself by it, but when thou sufferest the things belonging to the Cross. Christ thought fit to call our sufferings by the name of the Cross. As when he saith, "Except a man take up his cross and follow Me" (Matt. xvi. 24.), i.e. except he be prepared to die. -- John Chrysostom, Homily on Philippians iii. 18–21. Emphasis mine.

Our faith is built upon

On my way to look at something else today, I skimmed through a part of a sermon by John Owen called "The Testimony of the Church is not the Only nor the Chief Reason of our Believing the Scripture to be the Word of God." (try fitting that on a readerboard today!) Couple of paragraphs struck me as worth repeating (well, all of it did, but these particularly.

Our faith is built upon no worse a bottom than the infinite veracity of Him who is the truth itself, revealing himself to us in the Scripture of truth, and not on the sandy foundation of any human testimony: — it leans upon God, not upon men; upon "Thus saith the LORD," not, "Thus saith the church." Though we despise not the true church, but pay reverence to all that authority wherewith God hath vested it, yet we dare not set it up in God’s place. We are willing it should be a help to our faith, but not the foundation of it; and so should do its own office, but not invade God’s seat, nor take his work out of his hands: that would neither be for his glory nor our own security. Our faith is a better than such an one would be: we receive it not from churches, from popes, from councils; but from God himself, that cannot lie to us, and will not deceive us. If we are beholden to men, parents, ministers, etc., for putting the Bible into our hands, and directing us to the Scripture; yet when we read it, hear it opened, and are enlightened by it, and see what a spirit there is in it; when the word enters into us, as the sunbeams into a dark room, and gives us light, Psalm 119:130; when we see its excellency, are ravished with its beauty, taste its sweetness, feel its power, admire its majesty; when we find it to be such a word as searcheth our hearts, judgeth our thoughts, tells us all that is within us, all that ever we did in our lives, John 4:29, awakens our consciences, commands the most inward spiritual obedience, sets before us the noblest ends, and offers us the most glorious reward, — an unseen one, — an eternal one; — then we come to acknowledge that of a truth God is in it, — no mere creature could be the author of it. And so we believe it, not because men have ministerially led us to the knowledge of it, or have persuaded or commanded us to receive it, or told us it is of God; but because we ourselves have heard and felt him speaking in it. The Spirit shines into our minds by the light of this word, and speaks loudly to our hearts by the power of it, and plainly tells whose word it is; and so makes us yield to God’s authority. Take a Christian whose faith is thus bottomed, and overturn it, if you can: — you must first beat him out of his senses, — persuade him he hath no eyes, no taste, no feeling, no understanding, no affections, no reflection upon himself, no knowledge of what is done in his own soul, and so, indeed, that he is not a man, but a brute or a stock, — ere ever you can persuade him that the Scripture is not the word of God.

and

Our faith being built upon the truth of God himself, and our comfort upon our faith, so long as our foundation remains immovable, we need not fear our superstructure. If our faith have good footing, our hopes and comforts will keep their standing. Faith in the promises is that from whence all the comfort of our hearts, and our "rejoicing in hope of the glory of God," doth proceed, Romans 5:2. A Christian’s joy, "is joy in believing;" and his peace, "the peace of God," Philippians 4:7; and his comforts, the comforts of the Holy Ghost: but this can never be, if our faith be founded immediately on the testimony of men, and not of God; or if we believe the promises of the word to be made by God, because men tell us he made them. So long as we hold to the "sure word," 2 Peter 1:19, we have sure hopes and sure comforts, and no longer.

The Gathering Forsaken

Mega-Churches like Willow Creek Community Church, Mars Hill Bible Church, Fellowship Church near Dallas, are canceling their worship services on December 25th. And many of those who aren't canceling, are "scaling back" their services. I read this on World's Blog this morning and was floored. Which shifted quickly into, "of course, what did I expect." I've wavered between anger and mourning the rest of the day when I think about it.

It's not just the big nasty evangsell-outs thinking this way. Had one member of my church speak to me in shock and awe that we're going to have our two regular services that day. I did restrain myself and spared that person a tongue lashing--growth in sanctification on my part. (incidentally, our pastor won't be doing one of the two typical Reformed Christmas Sermons: something about the birth of Christ or something about 'what place has Christ with Belial?'--we'll be getting whatever passage is next in his series in Luke and 1 Samuel. YAY)

I realize I'm way behind the curve, as the Jollyblogger pointed out--the blogosphere is full of denunciations of this. But I wanted to vent a little myself. BTW, before I forget, I share ol' Jolly's recommendation of: Public Worship to Be Preferred Before Private by David Clarkson and had considered keeping a handful of copies on my person to hand out to anyone else at church who are in the same boat with the previously mentioned congregant.

I remember a few years ago when I said something to a fellow church member about seeing him on that Lord's Day (happened to be Easter) and he said, "Probably not, going to mother-in-law's to see her church's Easter cantata--it's a day to be with family." Now, as one who sees each and every Lord's Day as THE day to celebrate the incarnation, life, death and resurrection of our Lord, I didn't care for this at all. But even if I was one of those (IMHO) misguided and superstitious ones who put a mystical and/or religious significance to Easter/Christmas, I think I would realize that those are the days you should be with your spiritual family celebrating in the presence of the One Whom the "holiday" is supposedly about! That was bad enough to leave a nasty taste in my mouth for about 7 years (really don't hold anything against this person, just his thinking). But what we have here is a totally different animal.

As Dennis Miller used to day, I don't want to get off on a rant here, but this is worse. What we have here is a denial of the means of grace on the part of behalf those are entrusted to.

This is sin. This is a wide-spread case of shepherds deserting their flock (in effect)--albeit for "one week only." Sure, we read that Christians are to "not [neglect] to meet together, as is the habit of some." But apparently, these ordained servants of God, leaders of the church, think that it's okay to deny the brethren the meeting! And for a silly, fluffy excuse that "people need to be with their families" or "It's more than being family-friendly. It's being lifestyle-friendly for people who are just very, very busy." (this from Willow Creek spokeswoman Cally Parkinson). Sin almost seems like too kind a word for this skubalon.

All over this world, there are Christians who gather for worship, wondering if today's the day that the machine gun-toting soldiers come marching in to take them away. But they gather. They sing. They pray. They hear preaching.

But here, in this "blessed land" we'll call off services--not so that members don't have to worry about being killed, imprisoned, raped or sold into slavery. But so they can sit around a tree in their pj's, sipping hot cocoa with their family to a Bing Crosby soundtrack.


God have mercy on us all.

Wasted Money -- Sky High

Rented Sky High Friday night. Kids really enjoyed it. Frodo loved it. Has asked to watch it again. If I let him, he'd squeeze in 3 more times (at least) before I return it tomorrow. Which means I'm going to have to buy the thing--which I almost did Friday before opting to "save money" and rent. So now I'm out purchase price and rental fee.

Russel was good, Mrs. Travolta (don't care enough to look up the name) was good, kids were pretty good for kid, Campbell went out and did is thing well, Lynda Carter was almost as good as she could've been, Foley was great, as was fellow Kid in the Hall ol' whathisname. Plot was predictable but good, some really funny moments. Good family fun, well done...it's not The Incredibles, but it ain't FF either.

handful of things to read

• Republicanism in decline - by the hero of today, Tony Snow

  When Democrats gibber about Republicans' writhing in a culture of corruption, they're on to something -- but not what they think. The Republican Party in Washington is in trouble not because it's overrun by crooks, but because it's packed with cowards -- and has degenerated into a caricature of the party that swept to power 11 years ago promising to take on the federal bureaucracy and liberate the creative genius of American society.

• Don't Bend The Wire
• Machen's Judicial Philosophy

If we want to restore respect for human laws, we shall have to get rid of this notion that judges and juries exist only for the utilitarian purpose of the protection of society, and shall have to restore the notion that they exist for the purposes of justice.

• for a few days I've been wanting to write a summary, response, and hip-hip-hooray for Carl Trueman's Review of Is the Reformation Over? I've decided to go quicker: whoo-hoo! go read this!
• Of Diapers and the Pleasure of God: A Christian View of Parenting
  
• Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen: ten years after
It's been ten years???

Dr. Bahnsen's life was like a large rock splashing in a quiet mill pond. Although the splash was over only too quickly, the rippling waves of good will wrought by him living his life and ministry, shall continue to make their way toward the hopeful shore.
[snip]
"while he was one of the keenest minds in the world of Christian apologetics, he had a gentle heart and always stressed love in 'the battle.' His Legacy is in the spirit of the Bereans."
[snip]
Dr. Bahnsen was among a special breed of men whose very heartbeat seemed destined to motivate and inspire others. I am not myself of that gracious calling, but I know that sort of leadership when I see it, and can't help but to cleave to and reverence it.

Creed IV

For those of you in the sloughs of despond that you won't be able to hear a fourth album from Creed given their break up. What would things sound like following Weathered?

I've got a pretty good idea: The Great Divide. I honestly feared it would be: a. 12 songs in the vein of "With Arms Wide Open" or whatever that pablum was Stapp offered to The Passsion album b. an attempt to go pop. Thankfully, it was neither. There are a couple of tracks that just didn't work, and I trust the collaborative process involved in a band would've kept him from trying a couple things (not going to list examples, because I left the CD in the van). And I'm honestly not sure if he was just this guy coming to a record company w/o his sales record he'd have gotten a deal.

But this isn't supposed to be a slam--having listened 3-4 times through, there are a copule tracks I can sing a long to--some catchy stuff. On the whole, I like the album, and if he gets to make Creed V and develop things on his own a bit, I'll be there.

Haaaaave you met Ted?

Why did I feel like Doogie Howser after hitting "publish" on that last post?



Speaking of Neil Patrick Harris, love what he's doing as Barney on How I Met Your Mother. It's legen...wait for it...and I hope you're not lactose-intolerant 'cause the second half of that word is...dairy!

You ever have one of those days...

This day did not get off to an auspicious start. Limped (literally) back into the house about 2:45--shift went long, first night w/o my ankle splint (not the right night to try that)...tired after a week of constant writing.* As kletois and my wife who had to deal with my ranting about the piss-poor management currently running things at the store can testify, I was a little ticked off.

With little time left, I try to wrap up my notes for the Sunday School class on the histories of the OT and NT texts, as well as a much needed edit on my sermon (pastor's still on vacation). Run out of gass quickly and crash hard.

Handful of minor crisis (some significant) await me on the other side of consciousness, so my still-foul mood has turned to something worse. And sure, at this point there's no reason for my mood to be foul, but it is.

And then...

Sunday School went better than I expected. The sermon, honestly not sure what others thought, but I liked it. Was far less dependent upon my notes than I normally am (part of that is due to the fact I hadn't, y'know, actually written any notes for part of it other than "say something about X" before I'd fallen asleep). So by the end of the service, I'd managed to take my eyes off myself and put them back where they were supposed to be.

And then...
A couple of older ladies stayed longer than they normally would 'til I got done fussing with this and that to clean up, just so they could tell me how much I've improved in my preaching. That floored me. These women aren't exactly effusive in their compliments--you get a "that was good" from them, and want to buy a round for everyone in the bar (y'know, if you were in one). I'll be honest with ya, all the mental exhaustion, remnants of the bad attitude, all that...gone. kaput. vanished.

It's really amazing what a kind word can do. I hope I expressed myself well enough when I thanked them for their encouragement--they made my month.


*oh, okay, it was more like constant staring at a screen, sometimes interrupted by brief bursts of typing