Don't make me use my handbag!
Thursday, April 29, 2004
It seems like only yesterday...
... you can finish the sentence. It's like a game! You can probably guess I mean 'since I last blog'. What's with this new infrequent blogging mindset? When did it change? What's replacing my blogging? Perhaps socialising, to some extent... perhaps playing guitar (estoy tocando la guittara mucho!) - which I'm getting even better at, woo mama. Perhaps it's because of a general detached feeling I'm experiencing. Which is drawing me closer to God, mind, so it's all good. All of it.
So, back to the previous blogs and comments... there aren't heaps I want to mention. Let's start with Kirk's question about a biblical basis for seeing friends and family in heaven. Because I was hoping someone would ask that, I was kinda fishing for that question. For starters, I don't think there is any clear Scriptural basis for my statement. But backtrack, what're we talking about? It's either:
1. That my (unsaved) friends and family will be in heaven; or
2. That I'll be able to hang with/recognise/be with my friends from Earth in Heaven.
I think the question's most likely 2., but I'll mention 1. first. Basically, I have no idea where I stand on the question of praying for people to be saved. Obviously I pray quite often for my unsaved friends and family, but equally, I believe salvation is a question of the will, which God will not touch. So I don't think that I can have absolute faith that my prayers for person x will ensure their salvation - only that they'd have to be pretty darn stubborn not to accept it. Am I making sense? So it's not a faith thing, but a hope thing. Which is all I have to hold on to, and isn't always enough to stop me from freaking out about it at times.
Question 2., the eschatalogical question. First, I confess that the image of Heaven I currently have is heavily influenced by Rick Joyner's 'Final Quest', because it's the only description I've heard of it. Apart from the scraps we get in the Bible. I don't rely upon Rick's vision, though. I think we can piece together verses and images to come to the conclusion that my statement in 2 is more likely than not. For example, in heaven we'll be like Jesus when he was transformed - which means we'll still be recognisable as who we were on Earth. Plus we'll have a greater understanding of all things. The idea of the cloud of witnesses that watches all believers implies that those in heaven have an intimate understanding of what goes on in Earth. The model of Adam and Eve implies that being with God also requires an element of fellowship to be very good. The image of the church as a 'body', all interconnected, also adds the idea of an intimate knowledge of one another for one purpose. There are other points too (the parable of Lazarus and the rich man; ruling over cities; the Heavenly Feast...) Any thoughts?
Death Penalty - I was really hoping - and still am - for some input from our Texas friends on this one, for obivous reasons. The consensus here seems to be strongly against the penalty - but apparently for no real reason other than a feeling that it's wrong. Which most likely comes from our Kiwi upbringing. Since Jeremy mentioned the sanctity of life, I'd be very interested to know his views on abortion.
Also... I'd agree with Phyntosia that Bing's statement's are pretty incredible. He suggests that we have a right to... to grace? Which completely destroys the concept. Perhaps 'right' wasn't the best turn to use. If he meant that he believes in giving second chances, that's a different issue. And how many 'second chances' should we give? 77x7? What's your reasoning for that? And as for the state's right to make mistakes, I'd say that's completely back to front. They have a duty to NOT make mistakes. That's why we vote out bad governments in a democracy. Well, it's more complicated, obviously... I guess the idea was that capital punishment (C.P.) is irreversable and that shouldn't be the case when there's an element of uncertainty. Yeah, I guess that makes sense... but again, what if there's a certifiable, undeniable mass-murderer? Who, if he had the chance, would murder again? There's always risks in locking someone up.
My stance is that C.P. is distasteful to us in New Zealand because of our upbringing, rather than any logical reasoning. Jeremy came closest with his sanctity of human life statement - but how can you justify that, personally? As an agnostic, I mean. Not arguing here, just curious. And no-one has yet covered the idea of what a Christian ought to think about capital punishment. The story of Jesus and the adulterer seems quite clear-cut - or is it? It could be read in many different ways... Genesis 9:6 says that "Whoever sheds man's blood by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God, He made man." Romans 13 teaches that we are to obey the government that bears the sword...
Okay, enough teasing. In my opinion, the use of the Bible to promote capital punishment is too similar to how it was used to support slavery. It's a bit more ambiguous, though. I don't think it supports capital punishment, just recognises that it was in existence in that age. I'd suggest that the Spirit of Christ - containing love, goodness, kindness, patience etc... - and the concept of grace should be the lens we examine this through. There will be vengence for murder, but we all know to whom that vengence belongs. It's quite a challenging and hard line to draw. I also wanted to make the point that we need to know what we believe in, but just as importantly, we need to know why.
Enough of all that. From me, anyway. Keep discussing it, especially those I asked opinions of. So what's new? Very little. Man-camp this weekend, which I know is gonna rock, because cell groups are rocking, and it's gonna be a bigger version of that. I believe that the goals and the steps Cutting Edge is implementing are vital for our growth as an organisation... we just need the discipline to act on it!
I need to work out whether I'm going on a mission, and soon! Man!
Yeah, so, I'm having an interesting walk with God. It's hard to explain... you've probably picked up that I've been feeling quite directionless - on and off - this whole year. It's almost a feeling of 'I'm in the wrong place'. Which is basically the main reason I'm considering not returning. But I'm here for the year, and so I don't think it makes sense that I'm feeling this in April... because I'm not gonna spend the whole year feeling like this. I've decided to become more proactive about this, and get some wrestling done, rather than just living in expectant faith. I'm not too confident that it's the right or an effective way of approaching it, but I'm getting frustrated with God. Not really, but I will if this continues. I've waited enough - now I'm gonna Carpe Deum: seize God. And I'd feel stink about this slightly disrespectful attitude if I didn't have the strange but sure feeling that this is what He wants me to do. So, gloves are off. :-)
Writing it out makes it seem more extreme than it is. It's not. It's hardly worth writing about. But it's worth recording. The worst part of this feeling is when I look back at last semester and think - wow, that was such a cool semester. But I don't do that! I don't live like that, I live with increasing coolness, nor regretfully-comparatively-less coolness. I still believe that all over, this semester will be cooler than the last. Which was cooler than the last. Which was... yeah. Not for any rational reason, mind. It's just an attitude I like to have. Hehe.
Ah, I enjoy writing. And I'm not just blogging today because I know Thursday's a prime day for blog reading, according to the data found within the sitemeter below. Although that might have had a slight impact. Hahr.
Which isn't a huhr this time.
Oh, also worth mentioning. I've recently run through a couple of new web browsers. Mozilla Firefox, which was quite cool, but slow and very unstable. So I kicked that to the curb like the dog it is. Now I'm using MyIE2, which is purty cool. It has two functions I'm learning to love. Firstly, it has tab windows (i.e. you can open multiple web pages in the same browser, rather than different browsers, which saves mucho memory). Secondly, it has 'mouse gestures' - for example, if I hold the right mouse button and move the mouse slightly up and slightly right, it flicks to the next tab window. Or if I hold the right button and move the mouse down, the browser window scrolls down a page. Very handy once you've learned to use it!
I think that's about all for now. I'm looking forward to having 10 new comments, booyah! 10 hams, that'll be great.
One more thing - annoyingly, that weird fact of the day isn't changing. Which is like poo on a stick. Except less sticky.
As always, it's best to end on a song. Yeah, I'm a sheep. But this time I'm actually gonna sing it!
Here goes...
Na na na na na.
Na na na na na.
Na na na na na.
Na na na na na...
Monday, April 26, 2004
Leaping off a cliff onto a spike scares me.
Ah, that's not a lie, that. It also scares me that I'm blogging again. I must be in a bloggy mood. I've actually got some things I want to talk about. Like, this is a totally idle period at the moment. Nothing's happening. Apparently. Life as normal. Which means lots of thinking time. And theoretically praying time, but DANG I find it hard to pray as much as I want. It's so weird. Maybe it's partly a deep-rooted lack of faith in prayer, perhaps it's just human nature. Very annoying. Where was I?
The death penalty. I have no idea where I stand on it. It's weird, because it's totally a non-issue at the moment, but I've been thinking about it. I was brought up as a 'capital-punishment-is-an-extremist-American-idea', like most Kiwis. That it's barbaric How should I think, though? How should Christians think? I mean, there's a strong argument in favour of capital punishment, based on the Bible. There's also one against it, but I'm inclined to think it's not as strong. Or is it? I mean, thou shalt not killl, and all, but we're talking on a governmental level, which has God's authority to punish. It's just the extent of that punishment that I'm questioning. I believe in the value of human life... Man. It's hard to know where you stand on so many matters, but it's quite important. So let me know your thoughts.
Okay, I've also been thinking... dum de dum dum... about next year
Breathe.
But seriously, like, Abbey's leaving here in 7 months. Ish. And that's it. It's highly unlikely I'll see her again. And if I leave too, there're people like Dave and Brendan and Jeremy and... LOTS of people. Sure, we'll probably (probably?) be friends for life, but it's so... sad. Understatement alert. But like, Dave and Bing, my bros. I've so loved seeing them grow, and I see they've got so much potential... but I'll miss it, I'll miss their lives! Man, we need to live in a commune or something. :)
Okay, well, it's not quite as depressing as I make it out to be. But I wish there were some way to do something about it. Heck, maybe the rapture could come before next year, and then, no problem. Argh. But to be honest, this friend thing is one of the main reasons I want to stay in Dunedin next year. The fear of leaving is another. I mean, a Masters would be handy, sure. And the answer is, of course: 'What does God want for my life?' And man, I wish I knew. Thank heavens I don't have to decide yet. Which is also, probably, why I don't know.
Thankfully I haven't been getting stressed or emotional about these issues, cos that'd be bad. I've just been thinking, because there's spare time. And nothing happening. And idleness --> directionlessness. So yaaaah. In other news... erm. Huh. Man-Camp this Friday, that's gonna be exciting! Except Dave wants someone to lead worship, and I'm the default if I can't find anyone else. And I'm not terrible at worship-leading (well, at guitar-playing. I can't really lead worship and play at the same time, but, yeah), but I'm not confident. And I would need music. It'd help if someone counted me in, actually. There's a thought.
So yes, in one of those moods. BUT... otherwise I'm great! Hehe. Y'know, loving life, studies are going well, church is great, School of Leaders is exciting. Y'know what I want? I want to be making a movie. Or something creative, something enjoyable. I'm writing a script - well, I've almost written one. It's kinda, um, arty. And meaningless. And possibly not worth filming. But of course I'd think that. I've gotta keep working on this one. I reckon I'll go now. Hey, maybe I need to watch a movie... huhr.
Huhr? That's new...
Still... dark...
Yeah, I got up for my 9am. I'm quite surprised. It means I went to bed before 10:30. 'Course, I didn't get to sleep til after midnight, which, y'know, bit of a bummer. It's all good. But at Gus' repeated urgings, I thought I might as well mention the Risk discussion we had on Saturday night.
Now, it was a boys night in, playing Risk. If you don't know, it's a "World Domination!!!" board game. Great fun. In that game, you can (it's not in the rules, but, er, it's implied) make 'treaties' with other players not to attack them for x turns if they don't attack you for x turns etc. The issue arose as to the breaking of the treaties. More specifically, the breaking of treaties that one person has put a lot of trust into.
Now, ignoring the slightly more complicated reality of that game that night, what do you think? To me, partially as a law student, partially as me, a treaty is a fully binding promise that should be honoured however hard or self-sacrificing that may be. For example, marriage vows. The other point of view was that, well, it's a game; the object is to win, so you take what you can. It's a really petty point, and there are good arguments for both sides. But the question that was raised that got the most discussion was: is your choice a reflection of your real life morals to any extent? If not, does anyone have the right to be offended when a treaty is breached?
My view - although I see the other view's value - is that it is such a reflection. I didn't get much agreement from the group. Perhaps there is no reflection because we're all fallen, and we're all capable of such... betrayal. Dum dum DUM! Sorry, over-emotive word. It's not something that bugs me, really, just curious. To me, the furnace of competition is a classic arena for the revelation of one's character. Which would be poetic if it wasn't so pretentious. Which could be the name of my blog, actually. I'd better Von Trapp now, it's shower time. So long!
Sunday, April 25, 2004
Holy frijole!
Why did nobody tell me that I hadn't blogged since Tuesday? Mama mia! What is up with me? I didn't even notice... craziness. One would think it would be a good excuse if I were busy - but nuh-uh, not much really happened this week. It's been one of the most immemorable weeks in recent, er, memory. Two great cell/life groups, some good social times... but nothing extraordinary. Although, relatively, that is extraordinary. Seriously, it's been almost a nothing week. That's so odd. I thought Easter went by without being noticed, but... I'll tell you what, my flabber is well and truly ghasted. You can count on that. But don't cock a snook at me.
That's a slight downer, actually. An immemorable week means an irrelevant, unimportant week. But that shouldn't be the case. Actually, I don't think it was the case. I think I learned stuff this week, y'know, foundational stuff. It was just... immemorable. Should it be unmemorable? I don't know. I'm tired. Eek, that's never a good sign, blogging when I'm tired. I also feel guilty about considering skipping my 9am tomorrow morning. Partly because this is the one class I skip almost every week (I've never done that before, honest!), and partly because, y'know, skipping lectures is what slack people do.
Gah, what's happening to me? First I forget a week, then I plan to skip lectures... and I haven't blogged about anything for, like, years. I'm totally ignoring yesterday's blog for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who's not blind. I wonder if I didn't notice that I didn't blog because my life was going by without me, or if my life was going by without me because I didn't blog.
Dagnabbit, I'm stopping here. There's no point in blogging if you're not feeling like it. And I'm not feeling like it because I'm in an Ecclesiastes mood ("Nothing really matters - anyone can see - nothing really matters to me [any way the wind blows]). And I'm in an Ecclesiastes mood because I'm feeling distant from God. And I'm feeling distant from God for various reasons, which are completely unimportant in comparison to what I'm going to do about it. And that is 'hang with the Mac Daddy.'
No, the other one!
Hey, at least I got a blog outta it. :-)
Saturday, April 24, 2004
I felt like I should write this out...
From Streams In The Desert, a daily devotional:
"Faith is being... certain of what we do not see. (Hebrews 11:1)
Genuine faith puts its letter in the mailbox and lets go. Distrust, however, holds on to a corner of the envelope and then wonders why the answer never arrives. There are some letters on my desk that I wrote weeks ago, but I have yet to mail them because of my uncertainty over the address or the contents. Those letters have not done any good for me or anyone else at this point. And they never will accomplish anything until I let go of them, trusting them to the postal service.
It is the same with genuine faith. It hands its circumstance over to God, allowing Him to work. Psalm 37:5 is a great confirmation of this: "Commit your way to the LORD; trust in Him and He will do this." He will never work until we commit. Faith is receiving - or even more, actually appropriating - the gifts God offers us. We may believe in Him, come to Him, commit to Him, and rest in Him, but we will never fully realize all our blessings until we begin to receive from Him and come to Him having the spirit of abiding and appropriating.
Dr. Payson, while still a young man, once wrote to an elderly mother who was extremely worried and burdened over the condition of her son. He wrote,
You are worrying too much about him. Once you have prayed for him, as you have done, and committed him to God, you should not continue to be anxious. God's command, "Do not be anxious about anything" (Phil. 4:6), is unlimited, and so is the verse, "Cast all your anxiety on him" (1 Peter 5:7). If we truly have cast our burdens upon another, can they continue to pressure us? If we carry them with us from the throne of grace, it is obvious we have not left them there. In my own life I test my prayers this way: after committing something to God, if I can come away, like Hannah did, with no more sadness, pain, or anxiety in my heart, I see it as proof that I have prayed the prayer of faith. But if I pray and then still carry my burden, I conclude my faith was not exercised."
Thursday, April 22, 2004
FT.com / Industries / Drugs & healthcare
Men are useless. And this comes out right when the Civil Unions Bill is being debated... coincidence? :-)
Oh good. Glandular fever may lead to to MS. That's... great. :-)
Tuesday, April 20, 2004
... but maybe this is.
That title would make sense if you compared it to the title of my last blog. Or 'blog'. Do I ever start my 'proper blogs' with anything other than inane yammering? I wonder why, I just noticed that. Maybe that's a warm-up. So wow, that's the most blogging I've done without actually blogging. 12 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3+ 2 comments. Although some were mine. But yeah. Huh. Is there anything I need to reply to? Let me scan... I'm NOT commenting on you-know-what. And might I suggest that we don't bring it up again right away? Because 9/10ths of us are highly sick of it. I feel I've made my point, and I feel everyone else has too.
Blah blah blah, dumptidoo (I need to choose a way of spelling that, and stick to it). We're all Grammar God's, blah blah blah... Les Mis... I've watched about an hour of it, and it's good. Not as great as I feel it could be... reading the online novel made me want to make an honest adaptation of it. Don't get me wrong, the movie is very good. I just... y'know. I often wonder if it would be possible and financially feasible to make a shot-for-word adaptation of a book. Because that'd rock. I'd do Les Mis, and Crime and Punishment, and... well, the Bible, and... man. If there's a market for that, my film career would be SET! Hehe.
Rodney! Rodney Olsen! It's so rare for me to get strangers posting out of the blue. Hope you like my blog, I spent a bit of time on yours. Maybe you're not planning on staying, but that's cool. God Bless.
Okay, clean slate. Heh. Now I can BLOG. I don't know what's up with all the random caps-lock emphases, I think I've been reading too many of J's comments. So wassup? Well, for those who don't know (i.e., Rodney :-) ) we started Uni again yesterday. Which is a bit of a drag, actually, but that's fine. I'll work on that. I've got some (optional) assignments coming up in a month that I ought to work on. Plus some not-so-optional-yet-paradoxically-less-stressful tests and assignments soon. But nothing big. I've been looking into Bioethics in my spare time (well, not all of it... :-) )over Easter, and I'm liking the sound of it. I'm thinking about doing a 1 year (12-month) Bioethics Masters degree, plus my full-on-Professionals Course at the same time. I'm thinking about it. Another (another!) door that I've just seen open up are IEP's WorkCanada, WorkFrance, WorkAustralia, Workbasicallyanywhereyouwant(exceptpossiblyAfghanistan-althoughtheycouldprobablyswingit) working 'holiday' options. Which may be an option once I graduate. I don't mention WorkUSA, because it's only for 4 months and you need to be a student. Sad but true.
Cutting Edge... woo, yeah. As both Abbey and Bing (he blogged!) both mentioned, big planning meeting this evening. Which reminds, I should get some sleep. Nuts. Ah, I've started blogging. Anyway, the planning meeting was good - exciting - but strangely burdensome. Like, I'd just gotten somewhat comfortable with the amount of work I'm doing, and fitted (fat?) it in with all my Uni work and other commitments, when it seems that there's so much more work to be doing. Yet strangely, this is... good. It felt fulfilling. Carmi semi-delegated organising the next Combined Cell event to me - and I'm quite glad she did, in a way. One of my big weaknesses is my lack of motivation, especially in accepting responsibility. So I wouldn't volunteer for something like this (very especially not something mission-related, because I am absolutely not sure about that, but that's another blog). But when I'm committed to something, that's when I shine. That being said, I feel that people completely (mis- :-) )underestimate the amount of work/study/other commitments I do do. But that's no biggy, I don't expect people judge me for that. Or perhaps they do, I don't care. Their problem. Truth be told, yeah, I can be lazy. I really struggle with doing, especially for other people. I make no excuses.
Anyway, that was a side note. So yeah, I've got this new commitment, which'll probably lead to other commitments (like the missions fundraising board). I'm also glad I've got this because Carmi was seeming quite stressed out about it. We've got no idea where to go with it, we're trusting in God. Kinda like a mission trip. I hear.
So another thing... the planning meeting involved establishing concrete goals for our vision, and it gave me a hunger to do that with my cell group. I don't know how they'd take it. Like, I'm keen to challenge them to invite one new person to cell group every week. And to set up accountability partners within the cell and set aside some time to check on each other within the cell. And to delegate the task of organising something to do every week or two (out of cell), perhaps alternating a social time with an outreach/service task. And to set visions of our own, and set prayer visions, and missions visions, and all this jazz. I don't know how they'd take it... only one way to find out. It's going to be a last minute decision if we do it, and I've already delegated the teaching to Justin - would he feel ripped off if I asked him to cut it out so we can talk about this stuff? Something to pray on. Something I have limited time to pray one. Which is exciting, challenging, and often the schedule God shines by. Gah. :-)
And ANOTHER thing (hehe). Having some interesting God-times recently. Good ones. Been thinking a lot about Rich Mullins (see, I do this thing where I find a musician I like, buy all his [always a him, strangely] albums, play them to death... you know the drill. I've almost got all of David Bowie's CDs - 29 so far. I dreamt about him last night, that's right! Where was I...]. Anyways, RM was a big one for humility and living in complete openness to the world - that is, not only was he honest about his faults, he practically bore them as a badge of pride. But not pride. You know. And I find so much power and strength in that, so I'm looking into that. Because, let's face it, as Christians (as PEOPLE), especially in leadership, we're rarely honest about our faults. Even when we do confess them, it's only with our closest friends. Now, sure, there are some things you need to keep from all but your closest friends... but there seems to be a real, how do you say, a real power (in the spiritual sense) of confessing your sins publicly. It's hard to put into words, but I'm sure most of you can grasp what I mean (if not the depth I mean it in). This might be one of those really gradual revelations, something I'll look back on in a year and go, 'oh yeah, I'm doing that more often now.'
This is an odd blog, it wasn't meant to be like that. Honestly, this thing has a mind of its own at times. It's definately been a busy day. Not busy in the sense of things actually happening, but potential happenings. Like 1 o'clock prayer, we tried something new. And I can see that meeting just being so renewed as a result of various changes and emphases. And the study I'm looking at. At my future I'm looking at. And Cutting Edge. And Cell (Life!) Group. I'd be overwhelmed if I didn't know I didn't have to be. I tell you, it's hard to give all your 'issues' to God when there're so many big ones at once. Like it's hard to strain out a fly from chicken soup whilst holding your wet laundry and kicking a soccer-ball at a flatmate who's just returned back from Hastings and is about to pounce on you and lie on you until you say "I actually can't breathe!" Not that that's ever happened to me. Not all at once, anyways.
Sigh. Literally. I mean, I just sighed. I didn't even notice it. It was a definite sigh. It wasn't aan 'exhalation'. Definite sigh. This is a muddled blog. I feel muddled. But in a good, busy, productive way, rather than an emotional, confused, lost way. In a energised, thinking too much, probably can't sleep even though I've gotta get up in a few hours kinda way, rather than a cry myself to sleep, snotty pillow, wake up looking like a contortionist with a bad hair-day kinda way. You get me?
Whaddya mean, no?
Okay, normally I'd stop after such a pithy, beautifully comically timed - although seriously contrived - remark, but I can't. No, I won't. I want to write. I probably want to clear my thoughts. It's funny, I haven't thought about the big 'R' (yes, I mean a relationship, I just do that to be funny. FUNNY! GRAH!) since it came up in conversation on Saturday night. Okay, well, it feels longer than it sounds. I guess it's confirmation that it's just a hormonal thing.
Speaking of hormones...
Still here? I just thought I'd throw that in there. I'm not going to talk about hormones. In any way. Funny, actually, all this thinking about Bioethics. As in, if I did it, I'd be like a semi-Health-Sci guy. Which, y'know, totally not me. Totally everybody else. Totally. But isn't that weird? Sam doing something med-related? I think so.
I'd have thought that if I wrote longer blogs (not that I've thought of this until now), I'd regularly get more comments. But commenters seem to pick up on one thing and comment on that, so it doesn't happen like that. Me, I often find myself commenting with four or five points. Because it's like a conversation. Because I believe a blogs not just about the person writing it... or at least, the blogs I generally read aren't. They're an invitation to discuss. I'm just saying. :-)
Did I mention I'm reading Rick Joyner's highly controversial 'Final Quest'? Incredible book, I don't find it at all objectionable. I mean, a few things I'm grain-of-salterising, and some I'm even adding a touch of pepper. But it feels right. And it seems right. In a lot of parts. So, yeah.
Okay, back to Bioethics. Along with general Bioethic materials, I'm reading 'How now shall we live?' which contains various linkages to what I'm reading about. One thing that interests me is abortion. Not heaps, but somewhat. Because it's a pertinent issue. And it'd be good to know where I stand - and why. HNSWL led me to this pro-choice website. I hear it's disturbing, but compelling evidence - I'm talking about the ultrascan of an abortion taking place, here. Don't go there if you're squeamish. I'm downloading it now, and I'll watch it later. Maybe I shouldn't watch it before bed... oh well.
Okay, nothing else to report. See yas around!
Monday, April 19, 2004
I know this ain't *proper* blogging...
But I'll get to it. Besides, this is easier, and better than nothing, right? Right?This is a funny article about Kevin Spacey pretending he was mugged...
And here's one just for Dave (Pom.) Oh, and Abbey.
Enjoy!
Sunday, April 18, 2004
Blogs: Here to stay - with changes | csmonitor.com
Blogs: Here to stay - with changes. Just an interesting article about blogging. Nothing mind-blowing.
Saturday, April 17, 2004
Les Miserables, take 2...
So I was browsing the TV guide, and lo and behold, the 1998 movie version of Les Miserables is on TV 2 TONIGHT - at 11:40. I was so surprised I almost dropped my skateboard. So I know I'll be taping it! Y'all should too. Not only it is an incredible tale (although, being a movie, that had to chop the unnecessaries - e.g. Eponine [sob]), but it has a great cast, including Uma Thurman, Liam Neeson, Claire Danes, Geoffrey Rush and Hane Matheson (I don't know who he is, but chicks say he's really hot). So, high recommendation to everyone in Kiwiland (sorry, my Texas friends. Who are in Texas. Because there are some that aren't. Well, one) is to tape it/watch it.
You WON'T regret it.
Or if you do, it'll be because of some obscure reason, like you taped over your favourite movie.
True story.
Hah! And Phil Baker said it was hard. First time result:
You are a GRAMMAR GOD!
If your mission in life is not already to
preserve the English tongue, it should be.
Congratulations and thank you!
How grammatically sound are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
What, me proud?
Friday, April 16, 2004
Les Miserables (1998) - A Hollywood Jesus visual film review.
Awesome website, this. Take a look. Additionally, I just clicked recently that Les Mis is, as this website shows, a representation of the clash between the law and grace. I can't believe I've missed that for all these years ("This piece of paper in my hands, that makes me cursed throughout the lands; it is the law"). I always took it to mean the legal system, not the religious system. Incredible. Then it clicked a few days ago, and I searched for it just now and found the movie reviewed on this site.
I must read the book again, because it's an incredible story. Perhaps the most successful multi-media story (film, book, musical...?) in history? I've never known a story with so many levels. Kinda like "Crime and Punishment", which I'm reading at the moment. The classics, eh? Don't make them like that any more. Because, y'know, they'd be 'modern classics' then. Which is oxymoronical.
So if anyone *doesn't* know about Les Mis., ask me, and let me edumacate you. Best... musical... ever.
Thoughts thought while thinking thoughts (instead of sleeping)...
As transcribed the following morning - I mean, midday - while listening to Bing's Third Day: Offerings CD.
When was Hell made? Was it created at the fall of Satan, or the fall of man? Or did it always exist, for another purpose? Also, where are Adam and Eve - Heaven? Why? How about Cain and Abel?
I had a crazy dream. About an old class-mate that I didn't really know. David F. I was visiting a different old friend, when David invited me to stay at his place, where, funnily enough, my aunt and uncle were staying too. Turns out that David F. and his family were Christians (or at least, that's what his t-shirt said), and I wanted to mention that I was too, but I didn't get a chance. It was just... weird. I haven't seen this guy in almost 10 years, and we hardly ever spoke. Dreams are weird like that. On that note, I slept terribly. :-)
And on that note, I gave God free reign to try me again yesterday. I was feeling spiritually stunted and unproductive. As if I were stubbornly resisting growing. So I gave it up to God again. Doesn't mean He will send trials, just that I'm 'allowing' it.
With the lack of structure that Easter brings, my quiet times have gone downhill a little. Although I might add, they weren't ever far up that hill. It seems this is happening to a lot of us, and it kinda makes sense. Easter = sleep-in = minimal morning QTs. There's no need for a spiritual explanation this time. But I guess we need to be encouraging each other to get back into that habit... which is hard when all Easter gatherings/discussions seem pretty much social. I'm quite keen on having a prayer/praise session tonight, but I'll think on that a bit.
I'm gonna rip through these comments:
Thanks, J, for the encouraging words and the understanding. Good to know I'm human! :)
Same with Mel, it's so good when people understand your... neuroses. Or just your worries and thoughts. Ta.
As for Scott, I think only one person has occasioned the use of my handbag so far, and that was Abbey. I can't remember why (would I tell you if I did?), but it was definately a justified usage. And boy, was she chastened!
And Ruth, I see and know your point... there's something attractive about someone who's not looking for a relationship (that whole 'I want what I can't have' schtick, I guess). And, also, bringing God into the equation, it makes sense that He wouldn't give you a Relationship when you were hoping for it (because that would bring about dependancy). I can't believe I'm talking about this. :-)
Re: trying not to try, it follows logically, but not practically, that that would make you try harder. See, trying not to try hard - if done properly - would lead to not trying hard. So it works. Ahem.
Gussy - Yeah, I thought about the Google-bomb thing, but I don't wanna do that. No sir. Nope. Although I'm second on the list if you search for "use my handbag". Thanks for explaining trackback... am I right in thinking that only other trackbackers can use it? Thus making my trackbacks pointless?
And as for the Scott/Jeremy discussion... I don't want to go into it! But I will. Both made good points. Jeremy's first point was true, however I believe Scott's point was that empiricism has been mystified into a perfect science, which it clearly is not. And it's a symptom of this mysticism that draws people to conclusions like number 2... There is no good reason why the supernatural should exist, because it can't be measured? That makes the biggest assumptions of *any* belief system I can think of! That whole idea of 'can't see it, so it doesn't exist'... have you ever seen the wind? No, you've seen the effects of it, which you can measure. But how do you know that the so-called effects are caused by the wind? Assumption. Why can't you assume that apparently supernaturally-caused effects are so caused? Because of the assumptions of the empirical system. Which is circular and exclusionary.
As for the third point, yes, that's true. But then, the same can be said about a lot of things. Such as history - we have no reason to believe that Alexander the Great existed, except that it's documented. Which is fine, there seem to be enough sources to back up his existence to assume that it was so. The sad fact is that most people don't actually investigate whether there is similar circumstantial evidence for the Bible. And obviously my opinion is that there is. But because of a bias inherent in... what, postmodernism? Empiricism? Science? I dunno. Because of such a bias, evidence for the supernatural is overlooked.
Just had a looong chat with Scott, and he told me that there are now more comments to comment on! :-) He seems to have affirmed what I said above, that empiricism can tend to lead to absolute empiricism, which should not be the case. Side-note: Scott, you should consider getting your own blog. :-)
Oh, one more thing. Just re-read Jeremy's point 2: "There is NO GOOD REASON that the supernatural should exist. Other people's accounts thereof are just as bad as empiricist denials of the supernatural." Am I reading this right? Firstly you empirically deny the supernatural. Then you say that that's a bad argument (albeit only as bad as the argument from experience for the supernatural). Erm, that can't be what you mean... otherwise you're saying that you're a supernatural agnostic, but for no apparent reason, you're going to choose one side. I must be reading that wrong.
Oh, and if I seem to be picking on Jeremy's ideas more than Scott's, it's cos I agree with Scott's point of view. Because it's right. :-)
Okey-dokey, that's all done with. I'm feeling very unproductive. And the thought of 'Spanish Club' doesn't exactly make me think that the afternoon's gonna be productive. Although, having said that, SC is really very fun. Which leads to a good point... productive? Since WHEN do I care about productivity? Strange... I thought all that was vanity.
So, um, had a great time jamming with Rach last night... her bro's guitar is Super-Funky-Cool, with distortion, and a whammy bar, and three pick-ups, and it's purty, and... and... I want one. Not that I'm coveting. I never realised how much distortion covers up poor playing, but it does! :-) And when I think like this, I realise... I haven't got nearly as much use out of my video camera as my guitar. And suddenly I want to make a short film again. Maybe I oughta work on my script, which seems to show... potential. Maybe. That'd be productive-like.
Oh MAN! I still haven't had my morning quiet time! I'm off to do that RIGHT NOW!
Well, after a poo.
Wednesday, April 14, 2004
1 calorie not updatey enough!
Two things for this mini-update. Firstly, I just got another person reaching my blog searching for "Caviziel". Spelled like that, which is incorrect. Clearly looking for information about "The Passion of the Christ". Because Jim Caviezel played Jesus, the Christ, in it. So it would be shameful, surely, for me tor try and get more people searching for Jim Caviezel to come to read my blog, simply because the name "Jim Caviezel" appears on my blog quite often, along with "The Passion of the Christ." Shameful. Still, Jim Caviezel, he's a pretty good actor. A good actor, that Jim Caviezel.
Secondly, it may have been a little tough to pick up, but blogging did get me into a bit of a mood last night. I'm much more confident now that I've accomplished stuff this term, although I may not see what. It helped that I finished "The Power of Praise" and read a chapter of "Final Quest". And Ecclesiastes, which deals so succinctly with the problem of feeling worthless/fruitless. Perhaps I'm also feeling a little guilty because I'm not praying for refinement of character at the moment, because I'm taking a break. Which I still don't understand myself. But anyways, I'm in a pretty darn good place in general, so no worries there, hmm?
And I'm not even going to mention the relationship issue. Until next blog, when I respond to comments. :-)
PROPER BLOG. P.R.O.P.E.R. B.L.O.G.
That's to remind me. Hello, friends, old and new! To those I've met, and those I haven't! Humurously, at least two people have found my site through searching google (check the site-meter down the bottom). One was searching for "lusty aunty story", another was searching for "pants down doctor". So if you guys are still reading... er, hi! Hope you found what you're looking for... or not!
So yeah, proper blog. I think it's only fair, since Mel took up my challenge from last Thursday, that I would do the same. A:
Retrospective Analysis of the term-to-date
Okay. Am I in the mood to do this, or am I too tired after four games of laser-force? Nah, rock on, I've started.
Expectations - what'd I expect? Early blogs might have something to say... while that's loading, let's think. I expected to get more new friends. In the end, I got a few, but not like I thought. There're my cell groupies, who I kinda knew already, and there's Jane and Mel (yay!) who I'm going to get to know more and more (eh girls?). On the other side of that coin, however, God's definately emphasising the need to work on the friendships I've got more - and let's face it, there're quite a few of those. The guy friendships are deepening and strengthening greatly. The girl ones need conscious effort, which I'm, er, consciously, working on.
On that note... sigh. The first retro-blog I looked at was the embarassing "Big-R" blog. Which, funnily enough, I've been thinking about more over the last two days. Not the blog, the... thing. I don't know why it's coming up now. Still got no-one in mind. ;-)
Maaan it's hard to search early blogs. Okay, scrap that idea, what else. I expected a more-filmy year, but it's been surprisingly less-filmy than previously. Less making (okay, none) and less watching. And that's a me thing, that's not a 'I wish it would be more filmy' it's a 'I'm happy with it being this-filmy'. So, very interesting. For me. Probably not for you.
Okay, doing headings is just not gonna work. God. How's that going? Good. It was tough for a well - as well you know! - but I'm back to a good, stable place. I'm feeling stronger, for sure. And, as ever (well, almost), excited about life.
Studies... hmm. I'm not studying enough. It's strange - I know that by doing the amount of studying I'm doing I'll pass, and perhaps do relatively well, but it's gnawing at me this year. Like I should be doing more. So, I'll probably end up doing more. I don't know if it'll do me any good, but it might be... fulfilling.
Cutting Edge... well, I didn't really expect anything with this. I'm pretty sure I like where it's going. It's certainly challenging - at least, spiritually and mentally. I'm happy with leading my cell (very happy, actually), and I think I'm happy with my position in general. Hmm.
IWT - I think generally, it seems like it didn't make as big an impact as many of us had hoped. But then, we need to believe in faith that an impact was made, just not visible. And we need to be full of praise (there's that word again!) for the work that's gonna be done with those planted seeds.
This is tough. It'd be better if there were actual questions to answer. How about this: this term has been relationship focused. Relationship with God, relationship with friends. I had expected it to be more event/structurally focused, or something... but I can see that it's worked out much better this way. I hadn't expected that very shakey patch (a 'faith-quake'?) in the middle there, but I am glad for it.
Where are we going? - Ah, the bajillion dollar question. Well, in about four weeks, people are going to start to get BUSY. Relationships are going to get harder, so I can imagine that will be a focus again. There are few 'events' coming up in the next term. Except for Convergence. And School of Leaders, which should be quite impacting. Hopefully Cutting Edge (which, I can see, is a huge part of my life) will be expanding - not necessarily in numbers, but in impact and in personal growth.
As for me... well, obviously my big goal is to get closer to God. I don't feel like I'm on the 'next level' yet, which I really want to reach. I'd like more direction, with regards to Summer and next year... but honestly, I'm really not too bothered about that. Relationships are hopefully going to be strengthened. Sigh. I really don't know where I stand regarding a capital 'r' relationship. Maybe it's a cyclic thing, 'cos I'm usually quite comfortable with waiting for God's 'provision' in that matter. Maybe I should go on a Missions Trip, that seems to work. :-)
I know I'm going to go through some more rough times, spiritually - because I'm going to pray for them, once this break is up. I see myself becoming more stable, emotionally. My character also needs a lot of work. Financially.... ugh, I don't see anything happening there. Except that I can see myself becoming less and less dependent on the security of a bank balance. A mission trip will be a big test in that department!
Yeah, I dunno. I'm in one of those tired, uninspired, unexcited, apathetic moods I get in. Which I'd really like to change, actually. I'd love to be constantly motivated, and full of hope. I should think on that one. I won't, but I should. :-)
Heh, okay, short break right there. I wonder if Brendan's updated yet? Nope! Okay, so, what else. I've been writing for... well, about 45 minutes. I should be able to come up with something of value.
Ah yes. Speaking of Brendan, I really appreciate having him and Dave around. Don't get me wrong, J and Gus are cool, but us three have had some deep conversations and some incredible prayer times. I couldn't have asked for better guys to be friends/flatties/prayer-buddies (yeah BUDDY!) with. It's definately the highlight of my term, the times we spend together. Individually, it's cool, but when there's three of us, wowser! That's all I have to say about that.
Huh. Y'know, looking back over this term is rather... demoralising. I mean, it hasn't been bad. It's actually been good. But it's hard to see what I've got to show for it. Does anyone ever get that? Like, I feel like I've accomplished nothing - like I've been worthless. Even my selfish actions didn't get me anywhere. Strange that I should think this.
Dumpdedoo.
Y'know...
I reckon I need to pray. See ya!
Done. And done. And funnily enough, Ecclesiasties was on my reading guide for today. Funny because that's exactly what I felt like. I feel... okay, now. Yeah, okay. Reckon I am tired. So... I'm off to bed! S'long!
Tuesday, April 13, 2004
Saturday, April 10, 2004
Arh, another link-blog.
Ah, well. Found these all from howstuffworks.com:
I've always wondered if this happened...
Russians are freaky.
For Gus and Brendan...
Cell-phones on a molecular level... cancer!? Yes, head cancer. Cancer of the head. Head cancer??? Yes.
We try our best to avoid it, but boredom has its benefits. Today, it's a lost art form.
Boredom is a fascinating subject. I'm not really sure how I feel about it. Which is always a good place to start. I used to be quite a bored person, way back when. Then I decided that yeah, the bored is boring. I can do something about this. I unconsciously resolved (is that possible?) to use boredom - every time - as a motivating force to action. But perhaps, as this article mentioned in passing, it has a deeper use. Either that of enhancing creativity, or perhaps drawing us deeper into thought; or prayer. See, I've come to believe, recently, that the biological need to relieve onesself is God's way of humbling all of us to "be still" and then hopefully "know that He is God". Have I mentioned this? Hmm. But think about it, say from God's perspective. He knew that we'd be driving ourselves to do rather than to relate (to Him). So it makes sense that He'd force us to spend 5-10 minutes once or twice or more a day when there's not actually much we *can* do. I mean, I used to read, but nowadays I use it to meditate.
Wow, I can't believe I'm talking about this. Methinks last night's frivolaties (laughing with the girls upstairs and some others) may have encouraged this. If you'll excuse me, I've got some 'meditating' to do. ;-)
Thursday, April 08, 2004
Oka. Okaaaaaay.
Which is never a threat, no matter how many a's you put in it. True story. Ask any Red Dwarf fan. So, I'll get to the prophecy discussion in a second, but firstly, here's a call out to all you other bloggers in Dunedin. Now that it's Easter, I think it'd be cool if we did a retrospective analysis of the term-to-date. You know, were expectations fulfilled, what happened, what's God up to, where're we going? This is largely because, well, it all went by so fast, and if we don't examine where we're going, we won't get there. Or something. Anyway, do it if you want. I will, I reckon. Maybe next blog.
For now, let's get to this prophecy stuff. Now, I dunno about anyone else, but I'm getting a short attention span on this. It's a fascinating discussion, everyone's making good points, but yeah, let's wind it up. We're not gonna convince each other, I don't think, but it's good to consider all views. As such, this will be the bulk of what I have to say on this matter. I may mention a few points next time if I need, but yeah.
Kirk questioned the legitimacy of 'hearing from God' second-hand, when it could just as easily happen directly. This puzzled me at first. But the thing is, I believe that He does also talk to us personally and through, say, circumstances. And the reason for this is that, well, He's making a point, isn't He? :-) Each one of those routes (personally; through someone; through some circumstance(s)) has 'flaws' - ways that we can distort or miss that message. So, God uses them all, or uses the one(s) He knows we are individually more likely to listen to.
Reuben - My point about the threshold (sorry, legal term) was basically that, because you (and many people) automatically favour a natural answer, you'd require very strong evidence in order to believe a supernatural answer. As you said. Which is not logically sound, is it? Surely the scientifically sound answer would require evidence that shows a supernatural explanation is *slightly* more probable?
I mean, for example, take the Big Bang vs. Creationist theories (ugh, don't like this argument, but it fits). In my opinion, the Creationist theory (especially when backed up by the argument from design) is preferable. This is largely because of my 'religion', but also because it's logically and scientifically more sound. The probability of everything just happening as it did, from nothing, is just stupendously low. The most simple, and most likely answer, is that there was an intelligent creator (I won't say that it follows that the God I believe in was necessarily that creator, not here).
"The mainstream scientific community has in effect shown its attachment to the atheistic ideology of the random universe to be in some respects more powerful than its commitment to the scientific method itself." (Patrick Glynn, George Washington University).
That's my point, basically.
Jeremy - Okay, we'll move straight to the science vs. religion point. No moral imperative. I disagree - I think the conspicuous absence of morals is in itself a moral imperative - if a person is a scientist, they're expected (apart from ethical requirements) to be morally neutral. Although the person isn't. General agreement - I also disagree here. Christianity was once generally agreed upon. But okay, we can concede that it's a philosophy - I only really said it was a religion because I knew that most people don't think about it in that way. Either way, a belief system underlies a lot of science. Perhaps it is best to draw a line between 'hard sciences' and whatever else there is. Theories. Whatever. You're right, I'm not against science per se. I don't like how people think it is an objective, accurate, areligious, amoral entity. Perhaps. I think you get my drift.
And on that note, I strongly believe there's a LOT of evidence that directly contradicts evolutionary theories of pre-history. Although me saying that is mainly a reaction to your comment. :-)
Prophecy within a non-determinist framework... my point about an extratemporal God is that God sees the future, the present and the past from without - thus He sees what actually happens, and relates it to us in our present as prophecy. That's one possible explanation. I don't think multilinearity is appropriate nor necessary. I guess it is too hard to explain - doesn't necessarily mean it's "beyond conception". Think of a river running through a country - the Nile, say. God would be Egypt, the river would be time. God sees all time at once like the country/land experiences all the river flow. That fact doesn't change the way the river flows. The analogy kind of breaks down, but I hope it helps explain my point of view.
Can't validate/falsify prophetic fulfillment. No, that's right. That doesn't mean there's no purpose to arguing it. Same with arguing about most things philosophers argue about. 1. Some people could change their minds (a valuable commodity in the 'market-place of ideas'). 2. We could get stronger/weaker in our own convictions on this matter (also valuable, if it leads to the truth [whatever that is]). 3. The arguments could affect how we think about prophecy in the future. 4. Tbinking about both sides of the argument broadens our thinking... I could go on, but dinner's ready. :-)
See y'all!
Wednesday, April 07, 2004
Not an update, just a... rearrange
Cos I find this topic interesting. And important. So sue me. So here're the comments on my last blog. Well, the last proper blog.
Firstly (well, not really), Reuben said:
Right...
So not too sure what you mean by revealing, or what exactly you mean by the threshold. If you mean finding an answer more easily through the supernatural (or anything at all), I'd have to say there's a lot of worth in working a bit harder for an alternative. We'd not have gotten far just accepting the first answer we came across, whether religious or secular.
Reading what I said, I was possibly being a bit absolutist, which is unusual for me. Certainly *I'll* believe an explaination that I consider grounded in science, politics, and/or the physical realm in favour of a supernatural one. Or what I consider to be a romanticed account.
It's the historian in me. We're often presented with mythistories that might offer a compelling explaination based around a narrative that tells a good story, but the same events may have a (historically more responsible and viable) explaination in the political and physical explainations.
There's issues of verifiability and working from a situation that everyone can debate on equal footing. It's a work in progress as far as my own personal thought goes, so be kind.
Hope this clarifies my views a bit.
Secondly, Jeremy said:
Hmm... well, I guess I'll answer the things that you've answered.. that seems like as good a place as any to go:
1. In what way has my argument been based on the idea that there's only one explanation for anything? I'm not sure I see the problem here. I don't agree with your point of view and I find it highly implausible, but that doesn't mean I see it as invalid. I guess there's something fundamental in the way I go about denying other arguments which you could suggest means that I immediately discount a large number of arguments as false, however surely that's just my view
I'm not sure I get your point here, feel free to reply here or... even, actually explain to me in person. Also, I never said that science isn't closed minded, and I guess that science IS a belief system as such, however I think it diverges from a religious belief system in a number of ways.
a) It does not prescribe morals. I mean, I think this is one of the reasons it's so extensively accepted - no moral imperative.
b) While science IS a system of faith in a sense, VERY LARGE PARTS OF SCIENCE CAN BE AGREED UPON BY EVERYONE (would've been in italics if I could do that...). I'm not saying all sciences do this - particularly the social sciences (which are actually a misnomer in my opinion), but that physics in particular isn't something that you can just deny as belief. Sure, Darwinism is something that you can say "the only evidence we have is such and such", but this is definitely NOT true of the hard sciences.
Also, just quickly, there is a LOT of corroborating evidence to go with some evolutionary theory of pre-history - even if it isn't Darwin's.
This is the problem I have with arguments against the 'cover-all' science - because I believe is a huge lot to scientific method, falsifiability, and the hard sciences. I mean, biology has to have something right with genetics, medicine, etc, right? This the issue, I think you're arguing with something that isn't essential to science per-se, but tends to go along with it.
Can't be bothered talking about this any more.
Right, what's next?
Oh, right, Determinism. The problem is that my definition is a scientistic definition. It doesn't make provision for free will or otherwise. I suppose technically in a Deterministic system free will is irrelevant as it's a side effect of physical systems. So technically what I said IS pure hard-d
I guess if you mean determinism as 'fate' and the like, then sure, free will is still possible.
But yes, I think there's a real problem with nondeterminism and prophecy, because as soon as you know the future, you collase the possibilities to a linear path thus determining the future, right? Unless prophecy provides "what ifs" or things like that, I can't see a coherent argument for accurate prophecy within a physically nondeterminist framework. Of course, ironically here, I'm talking from a point of view that assumes micro-scale-physics as useful and accurate - something that is highly dubious. As soon as the supernatural enters the equation these definitions of pure determinism and nondeterminism break down and start to sort of mix. Also, just quickly, when you say "God is extratemporal" - you mean God is outside of time right?
I think the problem with talking about that is that there's no... linguistic way to talk about this properly. If there's nondeterminism then how can God look at any point in time without collapsing time to a linear stream? If God can see all possibilities then how does God know what's actually happened unless there's some true multilinearity, but that's a cheap workaround in my mind. I guess this comes back to the whole "beyond conception" point, right?
Oh yes, and one last point - surely the problem with arguing about prophetic fulfillment is that we can't validate or falsify either argument? It's like the "God Exists"/"No he doesn't" argument - there's no terribly useful argument for either side, and what you go for tends to depend on the assumptions you approach it with. Right? Or am I totally off track here.
Cheers.
That's it! That's my blog! Goodbye!
How the churches could become relevant again - Opinion - www.theage.com.au
How the churches could become relevant again - Opinion - www.theage.com.au That's a link for Reuben, or anyone else who's interested.
In other news, the Passion is now officially R15. Just in time for Easter.
Tuesday, April 06, 2004
I had a plan.
I had this all planned out. I was going to transfer the determinism/prophecy argument into a new blog, then blog properly later. I PLANNED it. But we all know that, me being either a mouse or a man, my best laid plans often go awry. It's true, because a Scotsman said it. Then a guy from Yemen quoted him. How can you fault that testimony?
So, why did it fail? I got interrupted whilst attempting phase one of my plan, and then I got bored of the whole determinism/prophecy argument. But I might still get into it, we'll see. You'll see. I've already seen. Or I will have by the time you're reading this. Unless someone interrupts me as I'm writing and checks what I'm doing. But they'd only do that to prove a point. So let's just skip all that fuss and say you're right and I'm wrong. About me seeing, that is.
Okay, well, 24 comments. Wowser. And not one from Kirk, I thought this would interest him. Maybe he doesn't read anymore. That's a shame. But, 24, so I'd better reply to them. At first I thought I could reply to one per hour. Then I woke up from my crazy dream. Speaking of, I dreamed that Helen Gwyn (youth pastor) was doing a group bar/bat mitzvah ceremony. And Brendan was there, I think one of the Jewish kids was his mate. And this airplane propellor had fallen off nearby, but it turned out to be only a computer monitor. So, weird. Where was I?
Comments
1. Don't know what happened to my Egypt friend. FYI, I found out that he/she read this blog through the Sitemeter (see down the very bottom of this blog). Which could be inaccurate, cos it relies on accurate timezone readings on one's computer.
2-6. Replied elsewhere
7. Phyntosia: That's certainly true. I don't think it really applies in this situation, although it adds some force, but yeah.
8/9. Kinda covered
Jeremy's 10 - 12. Okay, let's not argue from experience. I wasn't really trying to, it's just something that confirms it for me, personally. I was quite surprised when you said "I think it is astonishingly closed minded to suggest that ANYTHING can have only one explanation. All things can be seen from multiple angles." Because, with respect, it seems that that's what your argument has been based on more than mine. Also, and perhaps this is offensive, but I think it's also what a lot of science is based on. Okay, now, I'm not dissing science, but scientists (Christian as well as non-Christian) are generally rather closed-minded. My point is that if we can accept that science is a faith system as much as religion, then we can get into comparisons. Phillip Johnson once said, in a slightly different context, "As long as Darwinists control the definitions of key terms [such as science], their system is unbeatable, regardless of the evidence."
Regarding the second point, yeah, assuming an accurate supernaturally-gifted prophecy does not lead to the conclusion of the Christian God. I don't think that's really in issue at the moment... we've got a long way before we get to that assumption! That being said, it also doesn't rule out the idea of the Oracle of Delphi, or other prophecies (Nostradamus/Bible Code, anyone?) But I don't think we need to go down that path, especially if you're convinced that prophecies are impossible according to your own faith.
Mel's 13 and 14 - Heya! Looking forward to that fluffy neckwarmer after today! Mmmmm... and 83? Pah! Let's break 200! :-)
Kate's 15 - Yeah, you're probably right. I keep forgetting that about Dad. Hey, you seen Big Fish? :-)
Reuben (was the eldest of the Children of Israel... sorry, every time I hear that name, it reminds me of Joseph and the Amazing Technicoloured Youknowwhat I'mtalkingabout) - Ah, the argument from coincidence. Yes. Well, that's certainly a possibility (just not a probability. Hah! Geddit?!) I find the statement "without a personal spiritual experience a physical political explaination is always going to seem more valid" very revealing - that's an incredibly high threshold to reach, yeah? Interesting. I understand about the Bretheren thing to, that's common in a lot of traditional churches nowadays. And as for an ad:
"I'd like to ask a favour. As I'm studying NZ Religion and Society, I'd love to get a bit of information from you about your faith. i essentially want to know where you thing religion in general, and especially your own personal beliefs fit into society, and I'd be keen to hear about what influence you think religion *should* have on society at large. I promise repect to your views, and this is not so I can stand up in class and say 'I know these really stupid people...'
You can reach me at jacobmarshall@yahoo.com. I appreciate you time, everyone."
Jeremy/Phyntosia again - Determinism. Funny, my definition would have been a little different... does your (Jeremy's) version exclude the possibility of Free Will (Hard determinism)? Because I definately believe in free will - no secrets there. And if we used Phyntosia's logic, that makes free will supernatural? :-) That ain't right. But nondeterminism surely doesn't exclude the possibility of prophecy, does it? That is, if we assume God is extratemporal.
OKAY! That's IT! That's ENOUGH! No more comments! Nah, kidding. Let's beat that 23... double digits, spit! :-) But just in summary of the main argument (prophecy) - I'm not 100% sure that it's a true phenomenon, but I believe that it is. And since no-one else is, I'm a-gonna defend it! That's why I'm a law student!
Oh, right, and while I recognise that there are other non-supernatural explanations for prophetic fulfilment, I propose that given an accurate weighing of the evidence (heck, how about applying Okkam's Razor while we're at it?), it would be ILLOGICAL and UNSCIENTIFIC to automatically fall back on a coincidental/psychological explanation or likewise.
And yes, I did put those words in all-caps to annoy people. But that's me, a Cheeky Nasty Monkey Tart to the bone!
Okay, now that *I've* alienated a large part of my audience, what've the past few days been like? :-) Um, um... largely moot-oriented, but that's over, finished, done for EVER. I won and I passed and that's all good. No more stress about that. In fact, no more stress until after Easter, woo-yah! Parly cos, like, 4 more classes this term, and they're tomorrow. I reckon I should have re-heated this chicken for longer. Oh well! Live fast, die... like, I dunno. Later.
Anything else? Surely... surely... hmm. Trying to organise a road-trip with people over Easter, that may fall through due to lack of cars and limited (?) interest. Shame, too, I wanted to "steal some moments", renew some sagging friendships. Especially, and noticably, female friendships, which have become significantly less 'deep' and shorter in terms of time spent. Which is my own fault, to some extent. It's been like that ever since Cutting Edge went single-sex cells. Life groups, sorry. Which I still think is a good idea, it just means a bit more work on some friendships. Hence the road-trip. Ah well, I'll work something else out if that doesn't happen.
Otherwise... nothing's happening. I had a stressful weekend, what with IWT and mooting and other stuff, but I think that's on the rebound (although I *do* keep saying that... :-) ). Other people seem to be struggling, though. Also, our circle (Cutting Edge, I guess) seems a little... directionless, now that IWT is over. Post-show blues, we call it in show-biz. Like there was a focus, a climax... and then a vaccuum. Which is tough, but we will overcome.
I oughta get this posted. Wasn' there something else I needed to say? Hmm... just that I don't think loading my page, following a link and then returning counts as more than one visit. More than one *view*, certainly, but that's not what the numbers down the bottom are. *cough*, not that it matters. Hang on, nagging thought...
Argh! One new comment since I started this blog! Grah. Who's the cheeky monkey... Jeremy! Blah blah blah chaos... blah blah blah determinism... nothing I know anything about. Oh, I understand what he's saying, but arguing about it is another matter. Lucky it's not really in issue here, per se, or I'd have to research it. Maybe some other day. My apologetic system is in overload. I think I need to let out a bigger 'grah'.
Ahem.
.
.
.
GGGGGRRRRAAAAAAAHHHHHHH~!!!
Ooh, you got a tilde and a triple exclamation point this time, be PLEASED!
Be... pleased... be... pleased... be... pleased...
Anyone feeling pleased?
I'm sorry, I've suddenly digressed into Homo Sapiens Sapiweird. I'll just let myself trout.
Saturday, April 03, 2004
All right, all RIGHT! A proper blog!
But I ain’t matching the length of Monday’s, because I’m tired. Dear. See, it’s a quarter past tomorrow already. Now be good and listen up. I’m in an odd mood. Which is possibly for the best, because it’s been aaages since I’ve gotten down and dirty and done a down-right weeeeird stream-of-consciousness blog. I don’t know how weird this’ll be, cos I’m tired and thinking law. I almost hope I don’t do well at this moot so that I can suggest to myself that I don’t practice law. Okay, not quite. I don’t need to suggest that, anyway. But I’m seriously considering hanging around for another year (well, 12 months) and doing both Professionals and a something-or-other in Bioethics. Strange how quickly that thought caught on.
Speaking of years, as of Sunday it’s my number two… that’s right, midday on April the 4th, 2002, gave my life to me good mate JC. And, coincidentally (wait a second… no, it’s totally not coincidental, it’s… well, incidental!), it’s also the (approximate) second time I’ve read the whole Bible. Which I like. So, anyways, reckon I’ll head up and get a choc during family time, because it’s been… well, since June since I got one last, I reckon.
It’s been a while since I’ve replied to comments properly, and that’s always a good way to get some writing done. Let’s see… oh, hey, so, there’s been a lot of April Fool’s jokes on the web recently (well, kinda a one day only type thing though, y’know), but I wasn’t caught out by any of them… I reckon it’s because I put up my ‘joke’ before I read anyone else’s (yay timezones!), so I had that mindset. Normally they get me. I was a-ready for ‘em, like Rambo!
Sambo!
So, nose-picking… I can’t remember if I ever ate one of those lil’ nose goblins, or simply… y’know… planted them to grow a little snot society of their own. Glad you found that article insightful, Gail… or did you mean my blog? J Great to have you back, we’ve missed you! And a thanks to the docs for their second and third opinions… interesting theory you mentioned, Gusatron, but not good enough to get me interested in immunology, I’m afraid. Hehe. I’m a Cheeky Nasty Monkey Tart indeed. Oh yeah.
All right, the big 13-comment. Some of which, I seem to recall, were mine. But still, 13’s bigger than I’ve had for a while. I really appreciated what D-n-v (I don’t like sticking with one name, variety’s great) said about God paying attention. Beautiful thought there. And timely… but more on that later.
Kate… any luck with the article ideas? It’d rock to have you down here for a bit! Oh, and, side-note, because I know it’s caused a lot of confusion, and it’s not really surprising, is it, given the number of comments in this sentence… wait, that makes no sense. Where was I? Comment-commenting, that was it. No, I’m perfectly (perfectly!) happy with you guys commenting about comments, it’s just, like, kinda weird when I comment on my own blog. Especially about a comment. But you, youse, go ahead! Said.
Yah… Jeremy’s comment. Glad you commented about this. Fiiiirst up… have you ever offended me? I mean, really, can you think of a time? I’m pretty tough to offend (although admittedly, not invulnerable… but that’s usually in relation to something about myself I’m not happy with. A category that’s on the decrease, I might add. I think.) So yeah, say what you will! ‘Course, you could well have said that on behalf of others reading, so I can’t speak for them.
Wait a second, it’s my blog… say what you will! J Oh! Tangent… all those “J’s” in my blog recently? That’s when I’ve been doing “tongue-pokey-out-smiley” and it doesn’t translate it to a “tongue-pokey-out-smiley”. It’s not secret code.
Or IS it???
No, it’s not.
Anyway, back to what Jeremy said. Actually, it is a secret code, by the by. So Jeremy was talking about… no, no it’s not. It’s the smiley thing. Jeremy talked about prophecy, and he said that – actually, don’t tell anyone, but it’s really a code to two people who are reading this blog, and only they know what it means. ANYWAYS – Jeremy disagrees with prophecies. He doesn’t say why, but it’s probably not hard to infer (then again, you know what happens when you infer… you’ll be “in-fer” trouble! Oh dear. Gusluenza strikes again. Hehe). Speaking of things I just made up, that code thing? All lies.
In that sense, I must confess that Jeremy’s comment was completely unrevealing about what he thought. I’m not sure what he meant about the relationship between prayer and prophecy, but yeah, there’s surely one there. This all being said – hey, to those two people who know what I’m talking about, you know why I’m not doing the code this time, eh? – prophecy (in this sense) isn’t really a central part of my belief. Well, present-day prophecy, anyway. But then, when it’s accurate (with me, I’d estimate a good 80% of the time) it’s right on the mark. So that’s something that I’ll probably get a stronger opinion about as I grow.
Still keen to hear what you disagree with about it, Jeremy… is it a logical thing? A theological thing? A philosophical thing? A general feeling of ‘this is weird, it must be wrong’? A ‘this contradicts science’ thing? These are all things I’ve faced – I still do face at times. Supernatural stuff in general is still hard to accept, in many cases. Sam the sceptic. Kate the sceptic! I just remembered! Kate, remember when you got made an honourary member of the Sceptic Association? Or something like that… to do with that science fair project of yours. About the weather forecasting. Crazy.
Okay, confession. There IS NO secret code. It’s all just a ploy.
Oh yeah, so, IWT’s being going on. Went with Celia to Team Xtreme last night, didn’t go to Island Breeze tonight. Because today was a horrible day. I came home last night and prayed with the boys, slept in this morning and spent all day with my guitar and my computer. Apart from this evening. Totally feeling oppressed. I’m on top of it again, but man, I’ve never had it that bad! Like, it makes me so glad I had all that stuff before, because I seriously doubt I could have faced today without that foundation of suffering.
Yes, it does make me worried that I’ve been so unstable recently. Worried in the sense of “this isn’t how it’s supposed to be!” But I’m believing. I can’t think of any non-spiritual reason I felt terrible today, none at all. Sure, there could be some brain-chemical reason, but that’s… well, whatever. I haven’t had tears in my eyes since the Passion, and before then… who knows. Not since January. This was a Big Bad, and wowser did it have me so down. Literally, in the end, down on my face. Which is the only way to come back up, a lot of the time. Once again, praise and worship were strong points, and prayer – man, did I pray! And with such heart! See, there’s a blessing, there’s something I’ve been looking for! J
Ah… that’s about all that’s worth writing about, I think. Had some other thoughts recently, but we’ll need to see where they’re going. Tomorrow I study and shop. And call my counsellee who I couldn’t reach today. And go to IWT tomorrow night which – and let’s face it – is going to rock the socks off of Dunedin. Oh yes. I just pray I’ll be up for it!
Not literally, I mean, I don’t sleep that late. :-P
Friday, April 02, 2004
Trust me, one of these days I'll blog properly. This isn't just a diversionary tac-WHAT WAS THAT???
“If your Honor pleases, it is our submission that the learned Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias erred in concluding that there was not sufficient difference between the charges of manslaughter and dangerous driving causing death to allow these charges to be laid in the alternative due to a risk of jury confusion.
We contend this case on two grounds. Firstly, that the Chief Justice was, with respect, in error in relying on the judgment of The Queen against Seymour [1983] 2 AC at 493, and on an article by Cunningham, “The Reality of Vehicular Homicides: Convictions for Murder, Manslaughter and Causing Death by Dangerous Driving” [2001] Criminal Law Review at 67.
Secondly, it is our submission that the correct approach to this issue is to recognise a clear distinction between these two charges, and to allow them to be laid in the alternative, with an appropriate jury direction.”
I wrote that. It's part of what I've been working on for the last fortnight. What do you think?
Imagine me saying it with a wig on.
A lawyer's wig, you goofs! Pfft.
Thursday, April 01, 2004