In.te.gra.tion

Happy Birthday Grandma

2011-12-09T08:16:00.001-08:00

I miss you very much.

Post Season Fantasy

2011-11-14T17:09:00.001-08:00

Ok, with the Niners at 8-1 I can engage in some post-season day dreaming. My dream Niner playoff scenario :

1st Round: Niners over Cowboys
2nd Round/ NFC Championship: Niners over GB
SB: Niners over Pittsburgh

Niners banish playoff ghosts of the past by defeating The 'Boys and GB, and emerge as the winningest team in SB by defeating Pitssburgh.

Beating the Raiders in the SB would be a close second. :)

Fathers

2011-09-28T19:42:00.001-07:00

I think the weight of a father's presence and discipline develops a weightiness and density of soul. I missed that growing up.

Weeds and Dreams

2011-09-25T12:29:00.000-07:00

I have a childhood memory, perhaps apocryphal, of an instance when I was helping my grandma garden. I was probably four, and had been helping my grandma weed a flowerbed when she asked me to pull out a certain weed. Now this 'weed' seemed to me to be a perfectly good plant. I didn't want to pull it. In my opinion, it was as legitimate a plant as any of the others she had in her bed. I let her know that I thought this plant should stay, and in the process of reasserting that it had to go she let me know that weeds were simply plants that were out of place and whose presence choked out the growth of the desired plants. It's the gardeners prerogative to determine what stays and what goes, she maintained, and he makes these decisions based on his desire to see certain plants flourish.

This morning it occurred to me that this is an analogy for life. Our life is a flower bed. God is the gardener, and we are his helper. Our activities and dreams are the plants in the flowerbed. There are some things in our lives which we hold dear that God wants to remove because they will choke out what he's trying to cultivate. Our job as his helper is to know his desire, watch him in action, and follow his lead as we assist him in his work.

(This analogy also helps clarify who's life it is to begin with - God's, not ours).

Jeff's Crotchety Comment of the Day

2011-01-27T11:49:00.000-08:00

I realize how INCREDIBLY important and busy you are, dear sender of email, but unless we've been sending several emails back and forth in the span of a few minutes, please use an Opening containing my name and a Closing containing yours when corresponding via email. FB, Twitter, and text messaging are available for those messages that don't require complete sentences, but let's try to preserve some semblance of courtesy when we correspond with each other.

Two Questions:

2011-01-04T09:12:00.000-08:00

1. Think this won't happen here?
2. If/when it does, would you refuse to receive government support that was funded by these means?

A Good Question

2010-12-22T10:34:00.000-08:00

A friend from church posed the following question on his Facebook Wall:

If the love of God is unconditional, why is there a hell?

Here's my slightly abridged reply:

(...)

Regarding God's love, it's unconditional because it's not dependent on anything we do. We shouldn't confuse God's sovereignty in loving who he pleases with the quality of that love. What's more, there's no place in scripture where we're instructed to share a "negative gospel" - i.e. explicate to unbelievers that a set number of them will never be redeemed. The names on the roll of the redeemed is God's business, not ours. The following Spurgeon quote says it better than I can:
" I remember Rowland Hill’s reply, when somebody said that he ought to preach only to the elect. “Very well,” he said, “next Sunday morning, chalk them all on the back and when you have done that, I will preach to them.” But the chalking of them on the back is the difficulty—we cannot do that and, as we cannot do that, the best way is for us to leave our God to carry out the purposes of His distinguishing Grace in His own effectual way and not attempt to do what we certainly can never accomplish! There, scatter a handful of Seed “by the wayside.” Even if the birds of the air devour it, there is plenty more where that came from and it would be a pity for us to leave any portion unsown because we were miserly and stingy with our Master’s Seed!" - Charles Spurgeon Sermon# 2843, The Seed by the Wayside, Luke 8:5

A Thought On Social 'Security'

2010-12-17T09:28:00.001-08:00

The problem with Social Security (SS) is the American people lack the will to fix the funding problem. As a result here's what will happen in the next 5-15 years: As the insolvency of SS becomes more and more obvious to even the most oblivious among us, political opportunists will step forward with 'solutions' which are paid for with our liberties. It's that simple.
The 75 year pattern of the exchanging of liberty for security will continue until we find a leader who can rally us to make the sacrifices necessary to preserve our freedom, including changing SS back to a disability insurance fund.

One can only hope this is a hoax

2010-09-20T11:40:00.001-07:00

Yeah, but where will the equipment receiving the tax credit be manufactured?

2010-09-14T19:50:00.000-07:00

Something tells me China's economy will get a bigger boost from this than ours will.

But Hey, Our EPS are up 33% Y/Y!

2010-08-18T09:17:00.001-07:00

Offshored Manufacturing - More than Just "out dated" Wrench Turning Jobs at Stake

2010-08-17T20:27:00.000-07:00

Hat tip to Andy K. for this link. My 2 cents: 1) Clearly, Andy Grove's been reading my blog. LOL... 2) The risks of lost institutional manufacturing knowledge are well known, but Grove makes an excellent point re: the link between manufacturing and innovation.

Hat Tip to The Lone Conservative: And interesting lecture on motivation...

2010-08-15T18:48:00.000-07:00

Well, duh...

2010-08-10T17:37:00.000-07:00

Legal Outsourcing

2010-08-05T09:25:00.000-07:00

Yet another blow to the middle class in America...

Tough Customers...

2010-07-21T13:58:00.000-07:00

...and unreasonable customers can be difficult to distinguish. The way to tell them apart is by their reaction to your best efforts. Tough customers will find a degree of satisfaction in your having done the best to solve their problem. Unreasonable customers will not.

Thankful

2010-06-25T11:53:00.001-07:00

Just feeling thankful for two men who taught me to think openly and critically: Emmett Lierly and CS Lewis.

Archie's Aphorisms of the Day

2010-05-06T09:13:00.001-07:00

Even a perfectly good pair of shoes will have at least two holes in them.

Knowledge tempers zeal as heat tempers steel.

Rando Thought of the Day

2010-04-08T10:25:00.000-07:00

Any institution, be it political, religious, or economic, that does not take into account the true nature of humanity is doomed to fail, fail catastrophically, and cause much suffering in the process.

A Thought on Pragmatic Politics

2010-03-23T15:20:00.001-07:00

The beautifully insidious thing about taking a pragmatic approach to politics is that you can justify your decisions based on postulation rather than principle.

True resolve is usually silent...

2010-03-17T22:27:00.001-07:00

Robert Rules!

2010-03-09T09:58:00.000-08:00

QOTD from Henry M. Robert:

Where there is no law, but every man
does what is right in his own eyes,
there is the least of real liberty.

File under "I" for "I Told You So"

2010-02-15T18:22:00.001-08:00

More than one way to be wrong

2010-02-13T13:27:00.001-08:00

I find it incredibly frustrating that many conservative Christians feel justified in stomping on the feelings of others in their zeal for moral justice while many liberal Christians feel justified in stomping on the feelings of others in their zeal for social justice. Isn't kindness a moral virtue? Can we ever expect human beings to treat each other justly if those who are supposedly leading the way can't even be decent to each other?

A person won't change because a self-righteous person condemned his or her behavior. They will change, however, if they are lovingly led to a knowledge of the truth - that morality matters, that justice matters, that people matter. Loving God and loving our neighbor aren't nice sentiments that we should try to hang on to as we "do the real work of building God's kingdom" (pompous tone intended). They are the only means by which we can serve God and through which we can foster a moral and just society.

Patently Obvious Thoughts for the Day

2010-02-04T08:16:00.000-08:00

You can't guide others where you haven't been and you can't lead them where you aren't willing to go.

Two implications of this:

1. If I want to be the spiritual leader of my family, I can't just point the way. "Hey, you kids go on up out of Egypt to the promised land. Pop's gonna stay here and hang out". I have to go on ahead, away from the safety of being in the group, and face the risks of loneliness and isolation that come with breaking new ground and being misunderstood.

2. I can't be so arrogant as to think that a) I will be the "expert" in everything, since my wife will be ahead of me in some regards as will my kids as they reach an age where they begin to have experiences I never did, or b)God hasn't already been there. He is the true Leader, and my job is to follow and help my family do the same.

iPad 2010 = Newton 1993

2010-02-03T17:33:00.001-08:00

'Nuff said.

Climate Change?

2010-01-21T20:43:00.000-08:00

Why am I not surprised by this?

Bill Gates' Silhouette in Outlook 2010?

2009-12-15T11:19:00.000-08:00

Dorky Observation of the Day: I think the default silhouette in the Outlook 2010 people pane is based on Bill Gates mug shot from the 70's. Where do I collect my prize for being the first one to notice this?

Stupid Career Tricks

2009-12-02T16:46:00.000-08:00

So I had a job interview the other day. I felt like it went well, but I didn't hear anything within 5 business days, so I called to leave a message with the hiring manager. Problem is, I apparently didn't get his name right during the interview. Somehow, I managed to come away thinking he was "Bill Jones".

So I call and ask to leave a message with "Bill Jones" (who, apparently is an employee with said company) and was put through to his voice mail. I leave a nice VM thanking him for the interview and expressing interest in moving forward in the process. Then today, I get an email from the HR person who lets me know that she'll be meeting with "Bob" later this week to determine next steps. Nice way to shoot yourself in the foot, huh?

Very Interesting Interview with the Author of The Political Gene

2009-11-25T06:11:00.000-08:00

Turn so many phrases they call me the Lathe

2009-11-18T17:34:00.001-08:00

Dehumanization

2009-11-17T16:28:00.000-08:00

I just read the abstract for an upcoming talk at work. One line spoke of the "vision of establishing and running a virtual business, a business in which most or all of its business functions are outsourced to online services". Wow! The complete commoditization and abstraction of human labor is at hand. Isn't that grand!

Others at my place of employment are working on everything from building nanoscale sensors that can be deployed anywhere and everywhere on the planet to the data extraction and analytics algorithms that will be necessary to process and act on - in realtime the terabyte streams of data those trillions of sensors will produce. I'm sure they'll put those to use in good, non-surveillance-type applications!

Maybe my "John Henry and the Steam Hammer" allusions are too much, and maybe "1984" had more impact on my thinking than it should have, but I can't help feel that I'm witnessing - and in my own small way, contributing to - the undoing of civilization, if not humanity.

How did I get so damn vested in such a system? How do I break free without becoming some dirt-eating hippie?

Man, Was I Feeling Emo When I Wrote This, or What?

2009-11-13T16:11:00.001-08:00

I wrote this a little over 5 years ago:

A big aching crater
A bunker of despair

To know that it's my own
for no one else to share

A bleeding ulceration
A gash through soul and flesh

To know that it's my own
And is forever fresh

Everyone is hurting
as they twist the knife

Everyone is grasping
for a slice of life

It's my own creation
indeed of my design

To know that it's my own
this cancer of the mind

Deep and dank and lonely
The demon lurks within

To know that its my own
the consequence of sin

Everyone is hurting
as they twist the knife

Everyone is grasping
for a slice of life

Next Wave

2009-11-13T10:52:00.000-08:00

Global labor arbitrage - finding ever cheaper sources of labor - has made a tremendous impact on the bottom lines of Fortune 500 companies, US workers, and workers in emerging markets with benefits coming to the first and last largely at the expense of the middle. (I know, Americans got cheap stuff to buy at Walmart as a result, but hey, when you factor in that they were mortgaging their homes to buy that crap, it doesn't look like such a great deal, huh?).

Anyway, the cigar chompers are running out of cheap (or rather, cheaper) labor sources, so what's the next stop in the drive to eliminate labor? (And don't kid yourself by thinking a) senior executives don't want to do just that or b) I'm 'white collar', not ~shudder!~ labor. They do and you are - unless you've got a 'nut' that wouldn't be exhausted by you or your children, even if you never worked another day in your life). The next stop is Automation. Why pay Indians or Bulgarians or Costa Ricans to run your data center when you can have the systems run themselves? Why pay analysts in the EU and the US to munge business processes and design improved systems when you can automatically capture and analyse user interactions with business apps and programatically generate design improvements? And once you know enough to improve a process and its supporting systems *automatically*, you can certainly begin to reduce the number of people it takes to actually *run* those processes while simultaneously improving output.

I'm talking about a John Henry and the Steam Hammer scenario here, but on a global scale. Only this time it will be massive declines in the demand for 'skilled' labor (though I wouldn't have told John Henry to his face that he was "unskilled"). And not just in the US, but globally. Factor in that a large percentage of the people who are displaced by either labor arbitrage or automation will no longer be "good consumers", and the pressure to improve the bottom line as the top line falls only increases.

All of this is going to have a tremendous impact on social and political stability, around the globe. Unemployed people are restless people. Are fearful people. And are often all-to-malleable in their thoughts and consequent actions.

Just sayin'.

More Learnings...

2009-11-11T13:31:00.000-08:00

As I reflect on my last position, here are some things I would do differently:

Don't let a desire for perfection kill your project schedules. Most of the time 80% is good enough, at least for a first release.
Make sure service standards exceed expectations, but not by much. Pouring effort into providing a level of service that is unappreciated keeps you from aggressively pursuing new opportunities.
Remember that fear is a poor long-term business driver. Said another way, being overly afraid of layoffs or budget cuts is a sure way to incur both.
You can only do what you can do.

Are you kidding me?

2009-10-27T12:07:00.000-07:00

This is an absolute nightmare. Think about it. The Chinese gov't holds something like $1T in US treasuries. Once inflation sets in and they begin dumping US $, do we really want them to be able to exchange their $ for a fast track to US citizenship? $1T would buy 2 Million EB-5 visas! Moreover, I saw nothing in this that would prevent the EB-5 visa holder from employing H1B Visa holders to meet the employment criteria. Not hard to imagine several hundred thousand new citizens being created through this process.

Madden said winning is the best deodorant, but clearly it's money. This stinks to high heaven, but will undoubtedly be defended as "good for the economy". Since when did money become the sole arbiter of all we value? Frightening.

Casting Down Idols

2009-10-14T11:00:00.000-07:00

Things that are hindering my walk with God:

Love of comfort
Love of pleasure
Love of others' esteem
Pride

Noli nothi permittere te terere

2009-10-07T14:39:00.001-07:00

'Nuff said.

More lessons being learned...

2009-10-02T16:49:00.000-07:00

3. Genuine praise is a priceless motivation tool.

My QOTD

2009-09-30T17:55:00.000-07:00

Google'd this and couldn't find it, so I hereby lay claim to coining the following phrase:

"Successful organizations start with people, and end with management."

Pun *intended*. :)

Things I Think God is Teaching Me Right Now

2009-09-30T17:34:00.000-07:00

He can be trusted to provide for me and my loved ones; I cannot.
He is the source of joy and peace; my circumstances are not.

Christian Pole Positions

2009-09-17T12:06:00.000-07:00

1. Cloaking a judgemental spirit in the guise of concern for God's holiness.
2. Turning a blind eye to sin for the purpose of being loving.

In my experience, almost all Christians will naturally fall into one of the two above camps. But the two greatest commandments help us in our battle against these nature tendencies.

Loving our neighbor restrains our judgemental attitudes and creates a desire to extend grace, while love of God reminds us how he has loved and forgiven us.

Likewise, if we love our neighbor, we will certainly not, by our silence, implicitly call the evil they are doing "good" and thereby encourage them to incur more judgement from God (and yeah, God is gonna judge you - even those of us who he won't ultimately condemn). And of course, loving God creates a humble zeal for his holiness.

Authenticity

2009-09-15T19:48:00.000-07:00

Authenticity is touted greatly these days, even (or especially) in Christian circles. I wonder if the folks doing the touting know of this word's history within existentialist thought? I also wonder if Christians are confused about the meaning of the term and just simply think of it as a synonym for sincerity, which *is* a Christian virtue?

Random House defines sincere as "free of deceit, hypocrisy, or falseness; earnest". But authenticity is defined as "not false or copied; genuine; real". While the absence of falseness is common to the meaning of both words, I think there's a subtle but important difference between the two. Sincerity implies moral conformity, e.g. "I am sincere in making this statement". Authenticity connotes "I am what I am portraying."

To which I say, "What if you're an authentic Jerk?"

Happiness and Joy

2009-09-15T10:28:00.000-07:00

I could be wrong, but it occurs to me that happiness is the intersection of positive expectation and actual experience, while joy is the submission of all expectation to Ultimate reality.

Thoughts Shared with Market Research Firm

2009-09-11T14:53:00.000-07:00

One of the market research firms that covers the information industry (OK, the only one that does) sent out a pricing survey today and, among other things, asked for what an ideal content license/contract might look like. Here were some of my thoughts:

1) Content clearly priced per unit (e.g. per full text document) for easy comparison to other vendors and providers.

2) Volume discounts increasing in logical increments until "enterprise" access - i.e. unlimited across an organization - is reached.

3) No "evergreen" contracts designed to "trick" customers into renewing.

4) Clear, yet unobtrusive watermarking of every fulltext download with the following information:

"'Vendor/Platform Name' Content Provided by 'Sponsoring Library's Name'. Licensed for use by 'User Name' of 'Org Name' on 'Date'. Distribution to non-licensed individuals prohibited by law. Your colleagues may access a licensed copy of this document at 'OpenURL Link to Document'.

This would a) Help eliminate copyright and licensing violations related to electronic subscriptions, b) Remind executive sponsors and consumers of content that it isn't 'free', c) Reduce the need for vendors to hedge their positions by baking-in 'X' amount of unauthorized usage into their pricing models, d) Eliminate the need for expensive DRM schemes which frustrate sponsors and content consumers.

Certainly not an exhaustive list, but I think these changes would make a big difference...

Coining a Phrase: WOflation

2009-08-10T15:11:00.000-07:00

I think I'm the first to coin this phrase: WOflation. The hyper-inflation brought about by the economic policies of Bush - "W" - and Obama -"O". It hasn't hit, but it will.

Profoundly Sad - The Rev. Katherine Ragsdale's "Abortion is a Blessing" Speech

2009-04-29T15:13:00.000-07:00

It seems that the Episcopal Church's leadership, among others, do not want Katherine Hancock Ragsdale's view on abortion to be widely known now that they have unanimously appointed her to the presidency of Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass. Most of the links to her sermon to a group in Alabama have been pulled, so I've included the following links, in case the main link of this post gets axed.

From Ms. Ragsdale's blog: http://katherineragsdale.blogspot.com/2009/04/about-time.html.

From a site promoting traditional Anglicanism in America: http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/21537

I won't comment on the sermon itself; David J. Sanders does a nice job:
http://arkansasnews.com/2009/04/08/episcopal-official-abortionists-%e2%80%98saints%e2%80%99

Getting Old

2009-04-27T16:21:00.000-07:00

I don't like it. Just kidding. It's fine. But sometimes I just feel old and rusty...

Really? Duh!

2009-02-18T10:17:00.000-08:00

:Begin Rant

The only thing that's more upsetting than the fact that it took all of us as American citizens so long to figure this out, is that our leaders still haven't. (Or they have and they simply don't care.)
Our enemies (and they don't have nuclear weapons and armies because they think those things are neat) are into us for $13 Trillion. And that's not counting commercial paper and consumer debt.

End Rant:

Couldn't have said it better myself

2009-01-30T08:33:00.000-08:00

The link is to an excellent flickr post. I don't think the author is anti-Obama, but he is pro free-thought.

I want to say that I am truly happy that America can elect the son of an immigrant to be President. And a black immigrant no less. Prejudice has been a blight on mankind and on this nation, and I am hopeful that Obama's election marks a true milestone in the healing of racial divides in this country.

And I am praying for our new President. Literally. But I'm also a bit fearful.

Fearful of the blindly fervent support Obama has received and the free pass he's been given by the press.

Fearful that just as in the days following September 11, when we allowed our leaders to rush through the Patriot Act, which had far reaching implications on our political rights - and was subject to little to no debate - we are allowing our leaders to rush through an 'economic stimulus' package that will have far reaching implications on our economic rights.

Fearful that the citizens of America literally see Obama as a savior and as such are unwilling to think critically about his policies.

Fearful that we as a people are so addicted to personal comfort and retaining a sense of "security" - physical, emotional, financial - at all costs that we're willing to believe whatever lies we're fed as long as they contain the promise of security and comfort.

Fearful that we are so divorced from virtue as a concept that pleasure is our only modis operandi; that we have become little more than animals seeking instant gratification of our base impulses.

I knew I didn't like this guy's econimic positions...

2007-12-21T09:46:00.000-08:00

As you may know, I’ve never been a Warren Buffet fan (no, not Jimmy Buffet – pay attention, Steve). Than, last week, my honey gave me the low-down on why Mr. B is in favor of the death-tax: he’s built his fortune on it. I did some research and found this blog post http://reachupward.blogspot.com/2007/11/why-warren-buffett-loves-death-tax.html. Read it and the supporting articles for an eye opener.

I started disliking Buffet's economics when he pushed for corporations to expense their employee stock options (he also lost my affection when he encouraged Schwarzenneger to hike CA property taxes). His position was obviously motivated by the desire to keep “the little” guy from owning stock in corporations. I believe his motivations are twofold.

First, issuing stock to employees dilutes the value of each remaining share and thereby dilutes the control that any one investor – particularly a major stockholder - has over a corporation. Ever wonder why Berkshire Hathaway stock has never split? It’s so that Buffet’s hold on the company is never diluted. Checkout the current trading price to get an idea of what this means in the real world: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=BRKA&d=t. Probably not adding any BKRA to the old 401(k) in the near future, eh?

The second reason I believe Buffet opposes stock in the hands of the little guy is a corollary of the first: if the common man, on average, held stock in corporations, he could band together with other ‘common men’ to influence corporate policies. Here’s what I mean: Corporations can ride out a protest by consumers who oppose the company’s policy on a particular issue (pick your issue: promotion of homosexuality, funding of planned parenthood, hiring illegal immigrants, etc…). They just crank up the marketing machine, do some damage control PR, lower prices, etc… until the flap-up subsides. What they can’t ride out as easily, is a shareholder protest. Shareholders can literally cost executives their jobs. You might be familiar with what CalPERS is able to do in boardrooms across the country with their massive holdings and influence (the CEO of my old company, EDS, was ousted largely due to pressure from CalPERS). Well, imagine a large group of shareholders who held strong opinions about certain social and political issues; who collectively owned a good chunk of a company and who weren’t willing to compromise their convictions to save their portfolio. They might do something crazy like demand the company *really* verify the legal status of their immigrant workers, or even worse – make decisions based on the long term best interest of the whole company rather than what would drive the share price up as fast as possible this quarter.

Warren Buffet is probably a great guy. I understand he's a big fan of bridge, which seems like a pretty down-to-earth activity. I jsut don't agree with his economic positions and think there's more to them than a desire to keep his kids from becoming billionaire wastrels...

First Haircut

2007-11-18T09:17:00.000-08:00

I was thinking about how hard it is to patiently endure life's circumstances, while waiting on God and resting in His promises. As a Christian I know it will all work out in the end. I know I'll end up in eternity with God, enjoying never-ending and ever-increasing bliss and blessing. So, relatively speaking, how important is my job? How important is my health? How important are the material blessings in my life? Not very.

If God can take care of the eternal bliss part, he can take care of the job-health-stuff part, right? I may not have the job-health-stuff ratio that I'm looking for at a given moment, but he'll do what's necessary between now and eternity to make sure I get there. Even if I don't like the process.

All this makes me think of the first haircut I got. Grandpa did it on the back porch. He had clippers, scissors, combs and even one of those plastic cloaks to keep the hair from getting all over your clothes. He sat me down on a stool, put the cloak on me, and started in. I did not like it one bit.

First off, I didn't trust Grandpa enough. I was positive those clippers would cut my ears off. If it could cut hair, surely it could cut my skin, right? And what if he accidentally poked me in the eye? I mean, those things were SHARP! Then there was the fact that the clippers tickled when he cut my neck hairs and above and around my ears. So, I squirmed and fidgeted and slumped and whined, repeatedly asking "Are you done yet?". I was miserable. And I bet Grandpa was too; we went to the barber shop for my haircuts after that.

The thing is, Grandpa was just trying to do something good for me: cut my hair so that I didn't look like Shirley Temple (As a toddler/preschooler I had curly blond hair). He had no intention of hurting me. Likewise, God is just trying to do something good for me (and for his glory): conform me to the image of his Son. But I fidget and whine and complain. I keep asking "When is this going to be over?". I spend my time worrying about the future, worrying that God is going to let me down or finally let me have it for all the bad things I've done. Many times, I just simply don't trust God to get me home safely.

Interestingly, I really enjoyed the results of my first haircut. I had "big boy" hair and could comb and part it, just like Grandpa. Fortunately I have the memory, and while the memory is far more enjoyable than the experience was, I wonder how much more enjoyable the memory would be if I'd spent that time in the chair talking to Grandpa instead of fighting against him? If I'd listened and obeyed his instructions to "sit still"? I wonder.

Verse of the Day...

2007-11-13T19:00:00.000-08:00

Actually, I'm not a big fan of the phrase "of the day". It can make things seem more ephemeral than they are. (BTW - Ephemeral is the word of the day).

Anyway, my brother in Christ, Lou, sent me this verse to encourage me as I struggle against bad attitudes and such:

Hebrews 4:16
Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

How a Brazilian supermodel may crack U.S. 'greed conspiracy' - MarketWatch

2007-11-13T18:27:00.000-08:00

How a Brazilian supermodel may crack U.S. 'greed conspiracy' - MarketWatch

Am I Nitpicking?

2007-10-19T16:30:00.000-07:00

A friend forwarded this to me.

First off, I agree with the overall thrust of what Chandler is saying – that belief without works isn’t enough. But...

In the article he says things like
“It seems like every generation thinks of ways to make the faith real and authentic in their time.”,
which I find troubling. The faith was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3), so it seems that the faith changes me, not vice versa.

He then says
“In fact, the very first Christians were not called Christians at all; they were called "The Way" (Acts 9:2).”
This seems to be a misreading of Acts 9:2, which reads: ‘...so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.’ I read “The Way” as referring to Christ, or the Christian faith, not Christians themselves. (We belong to Christ, not each other, right?). It’s not a major theological error, I suppose, but nonetheless it doesn’t seem to be an accurate reading.

In the end, I’m left with the feeling that he’s trying to de-emphasize doctrine more than he’s trying to re-emphasize the importance of godly living. It’s not an either/or choice: doctrine or right living. It’s a both/and command.

Well, those are my 2 cents.

Can't we all just get along?

2007-09-19T14:12:00.000-07:00

Not always, but we could do alot better. A thoughtful post on the subject of Christian in-fighting over at the Jolly Blogger...

Tag - You're It

2007-09-18T12:22:00.000-07:00

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=240878

A few thoughts on the subject of RFID implants:

a) I just can't help but think being permanently tagged by an authority (my employer, the government, etc...) is a bad idea.

b) Such tagging seems to be historically linked to slavery or worse (think Nazis).

c) Revelation was written 1900 years ago, at a time when it was technologically unfeasible to mark *all* people and require said mark as a precondition to participating in economic activity. People in the intervening centuries have indeed scoffed - ha! - at the notion. ("What sort of raving lunatic would come up with such a 'vision' of the future!"). But now the technology to both mark humans and effectively restrict their economic activities based on certain preconditions (i.e. not having the mark) exists.

Is it just me, or does that all add up to a whole lot of creepiness?

Tricky Dick and the Internet

2007-09-14T15:45:00.000-07:00

I remember reading a book called The Book of Lists #2, edited by David Wallechinsky, in my Freshman year of HS. In it Mr. Wallenchinsky refers to a nefarious plan by Nixon to - shudder - connect every home in America via cable!!!!

Here's the quote from page 483:

"In his book The Shadow Presidents, author Michael Medved relates the extreme disappointment of H.R. Haldeman over his failure to implement his plan to link up all the homes in America by coaxial cable. In Haldeman's words, "There would be two-way communication. Through computer, you could use your television set to order up whatever you wanted. The morning paper, entertainment services, shopping services, coverage of sporting events and public events. Just as Eisenhower linked up the nation's cities by highways so that you could get there, the Nixon legacy would have linked them by cable communications so you wouldn't have to go there". One can almost see the dreamy eyes of Nixon and Haldeman as they sat around discussing a plan that would eliminate the need for newspapers, seemingly oblivious to its Big Brother aspects. Fortunately, the Watergate scandal intervened, and Nixon was forced to resign before "the Wired Nation" could be hooked up."

Hmm... and I thought Al Gore invented the internet!!!

Abstinence-only programs do not reduce HIV risk - Yahoo! News

2007-08-03T16:42:00.000-07:00

First thought:

Last time I checked, if you don't have sex, use IV drugs, or get a blood transfusion your risk of getting HIV is pretty much nil (HIV babies notwithstanding). So regardless of all the studies in the world, the reality is that abstinence until marriage by both spouses lowers one's risk for HIV to just about one in a million. I'm not trying to moralize, it's just a fact.

Second thought:

Duh! Abstinence apart from a larger moral framework and worldview is untenable. Think about it. Just going around telling people not to have sex isn't going to work, because , as you may have noticed, the human urge for sex is pretty strong. Only food and water rate higher in most people's books.

Abstinence and other virtues are heart issues and programs don't change hearts. Programs might get us whipped up, the way we feel patriotic during the national anthem at the ball game, but unless there's genuine moral fiber - character and a heart attitude that is predisposed towards a given virtue - we'll give in to the draw of instant gratification. (I speak from copious experience/failure on this one...).

Abstinence-only programs do not reduce HIV risk - Yahoo! News

'Amateur' charge infuriates blogosphere - CNN.com

2007-06-22T14:04:00.000-07:00

Makes me think:

We are definitely moving towards a mob society, where fast communication is more valued than deep thinking.
It's so much easier (and quicker) to get a group of people to "feel" the same thing than to "think" the same thing.

Trust us, this is really how it works...

2007-06-22T08:41:00.000-07:00

So all this 'junk' in our genetic code turns out to not be junk! Makes me feel like ranting :) :

Questions:

So how much of our 'junk' matches the 'junk' of Chimps? Are we as closely 'related' as once thought?

Are geneticists 'really, really' sure they have a correct view of out genes now?

Is it possible - just possible - that scientists in other fields may have incorrect understandings of things such as, say, climate change? And if so, might it not make sense to take a cautious approach to addressing issues like humanity's impact on the environment?

I have no problem with science. It's just irritating when people try to build an accurate world view based solely on current scientific theory (and it's all theory). Case in point: a scientific theory that was embraced by most 'educated' and 'thinking' people in the first half of the 20th century:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/11/09/ING9C2QSKB1.DTL

The Carnegie Foundation and The President of Stanford University - supporters of eugenics?

The 'science' of eugenics even seduced part of the Jewish people, millions of whom would ultimately suffer at the hands of eugenicists:

http://galton.org/essays/1900-1911/galton-1910-jewish-chronicle-eugenics.pdf

Science? Again, I have no problem with it. Let's just not confuse it with morality, nor make it the basis for our morality. Morality is foundational and must inform our science and philosophy, not the other way round.

FT.com / Comment & analysis / Comment - Freedom, not climate, is at risk

2007-06-14T22:42:00.000-07:00

Well said, Mr. President...

FT.com / Comment & analysis / Comment - Freedom, not climate, is at risk:

Survivorship Bias

2007-06-07T13:50:00.000-07:00

Good explanation of a phenomenon that affects:

-Financial Reports
-News Stories (ever notice that there seem to be 'rashes' of certain events, that then go away?)
-Scientific Studies

Stifling Debate

2007-06-03T17:48:00.000-07:00

What truly frightens me about the global warming debate? That there isn’t one.
“Everyone knows it is happening, and that humanity is to blame.” is the pat answer to any heretic who dares question the ‘conventional wisdom’ on this subject. Ellen Goodman says deniers of global warming are on a par with deniers of the Holocaust (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/09/no_change_in_political_climate/).

Is humanity spoiling the Earth? No doubt. Do steps need to be taken to stop and reverse the damage we’ve done? Absolutely. Are there incredibly rich individuals whose fortunes (read: power) have been built through activities which damage the environment, and whose self-interest leads them to pooh-pooh any talk that suggests human activity harms the environment? Definitely.

The problem is, there are equally powerful people who wish to exploit the specter of global warming for their own purposes. Do you think life-long politicians are interested in what’s best for their constituents or in consolidating as much power in their hands as possible? Isn’t it nice to have some awful crisis looming for the purpose of rallying people to your cause (read: expanding your powerbase)? Global warming is the left’s “War on Terror”: an amorphous and indefinable enemy who must be fought no matter what the cost to life or liberty.

It’s also a great lever for shouting down anyone who opposes you. Again the parallels with the 'war on terror' are striking: Do you question whether the US’s policy in the Middle East has contributed to the rise of global terrorism? Then the terrorists have already won! Do you question whether other factors such as solar activity or ancient climatological cycles which humanity does not possess the data to assess may be a significant cause of global warming? Why, then you’re the equivalent of a Holocaust denier. One might stand a better chance arguing for religious liberty in 17th century Salem, MA.

I think part of the problem lies in the fact that the powerful stand to gain very little from real solutions. Real solutions require individuals to change their attitudes and actions. Political solutions involve moving vast amounts of wealth from point A (the pockets of those unable to protect their interests – i.e. the average tax payer) to point B (the pockets of those whose livelihoods or fortunes are built on such redistributions), with very little consideration given to the ‘purpose’ of such activities. Is your government or nonprofit project/program failing miserably? Well, you’re surely underfunded then!

Another part of the problem lies in our unwillingness to think - to sort through competing and conflicting sets of ‘facts’ to find the truth. That takes too much time, so we just go with whatever Al Gore or Rush Limbaugh has to say. Is it possible to not buy into Global Warming hook, line, and sinker yet still believe emission and efficiency standards for cars in the U.S. should be doubled?

This brings a couple of Alexis de Tocqueville quotes to mind:

"I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America."

"In America the majority raises formidable barriers around the liberty of opinion; within these barriers an author may write what he pleases, but woe to him if he goes beyond them."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/alexis_de_tocqueville.html

More thoughts on this later…

Favorite Books of All Time

2007-05-21T12:11:00.000-07:00

I'm always describing books as being in my "Top Ten", which in reality is probably closer to a top 30 at this point. So, here're my favorites, in no particular order:

Humility, by CJ Mahaney

Mere Christianity, by CS Lewis

Miracles, by CS Lewis

The Abolition of Man, by CS Lewis

Lord of the Rings (three volumes, six books, but I'll count it as one for purposes of this list), by JRR Tolkien

The Hobbit, by JRR Tolkien

Voyage of the Dawn Treader, by CS Lewis

The Last Battle, by CS Lewis

Out of the Silent Plant, by CS Lewis

The Brothers Karamazov, by Fyodor Dostoevsky

The Discipline of Grace, by Jerry Bridges

Holiness by Grace, by Brian Chapell

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, by JK Rowling

Hmmm...that's 13, so I'm not really abusing the term "top ten" all that much.

Battle of the Network Christians

2007-05-19T20:31:00.001-07:00

Don't know why I chose that title for this post, perhaps I'm still a bit jet-lagged.

So, I met with my friend Brian yesterday (it was supposed to be our mentoring session, but we ended up taking the time to just catch up) and one of the things he mentioned was that some lady had apparently attended our church and then went out and flamed the pastoral staff in a post to CRN (http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=1455). In the process of searching for the comment (OK, that may be my gossipy-ness coming through...) I found the following blog thread: http://christianresearchnetwork.info/2007/04/19/its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-ingrid-again/. (Side comment: It's interesting that these sites both have the same hostname. I wonder who 'stole' the hostname to host on the other domain?).

After reading through these I was thoroughly irked and posted the following item (to the.info site):

I know I’m late to the discussion - I was literally out of the country the past few weeks – but as a member of Bridgeway, I wanted to share some of my thoughts on this thread.

My first thought: Has anyone gone through this thread with the eye of an outsider? Is this the church of Christ? Is calling names - either from the “free-will” or “sovereign grace” camp acceptable? I mean, haven’t we all read 1 Corinthians? “I am of Appollos”, “I am of Cephas”, “I am of Christ”. It’s interesting that Paul didn’t say “Oh, you guys who are claiming to be ‘of Christ’ are the right faction”. No, his point was that we need to be united by our love for Christ, not divided into camps. I would add that our love for Christ, as well as a hefty dose of humility, should shine through in the way we defend the truth.

This leads to my second thought: If someone is concerned that my spikey-haired pastor (and sorry Russ you’re really not the spikey-haired one. That would be Lance. And I think Jeremy may also have you beat in the hair gel department, but I’m not sure) is leading Christ’s church astray, or has some other concern about something someone who names the name of Christ is doing, then why not use a Biblical model for addressing the perceived problem:
Step 1. Go to the one who is supposedly offending and bring the problem to their attention, with the loving intent of restoring them.
Step 2. If they don’t respond, bring in a couple of other brothers in the Lord as witnesses. Again, the motive has to be love: love of both God and your brother or sister in the Lord.
Step 3. If Steps 1 & 2 don’t work, THEN you bring the issue before the whole church. AGAIN, the motive is to restore, not “make an example”, of the offender. (Though one would hope examples for others to follow and/or avoid would come out of the process).

My third thought: You know, I don’t like *everything* about my home church, Bridgeway. But I don’t like everything about America, my wife, my kids, New Coke (I still haven’t let that one go yet), the second Becky on Roseanne, or even the 49ers (may they ever reign over the NFL). Seriously though, Bridgeway is a church full of - gasp! - people. Sinful people, no less. But, as I think Russ was saying (I could be misinterpreting him, we haven’t consulted on this), it’s better for us to be honest about who we are in Christ at this moment and then move forward towards more Christ-likeness in the power of the Spirit than to try to “keep the image clean” (apologies to Steve Camp).

Please note: I am *NOT* contending that we should sit around saying “I’m OK – You’re OK” while playing kumbayah, or advocating an approach of “Can’t we all just get along” at the expense of defending the truth. But we have to defend the *WHOLE* truth, including the truth that we’re called to love each other.

This brings me to my fourth thought: Why is it that we feel free to smack each other around in the name of “defending the truth”? It’s like we think: “Don’t worry Lord, I realize you are incapable of defending yourself and the truth, and given that you have given me an infallible understanding of every jot and title in your Word, I’ll just jump in and take a verbal battle axe to those who oppose us. (There’s room in the Trinity for one more, right?)”. It’s like we call “olly-olly-auction-free” and then just beat the tar out of each other and think that’s supposed to be OK. We can’t wait until people wander into error – or what we perceive to be error – so we can lop their little “heretical” heads off with apparent impunity.

If we love the truth, we’ll do what it calls us to do: speak the *truth* in *love*. We must realize that to compromise one is to compromise both.

Thank you for Charles Spurgeon

2007-04-23T21:31:00.000-07:00

I've been going through a rough time lately. Very rough. I go through these bouts of depression and anxiety every now and again, and sometimes they're blacker than others. This recent trough as been particularly bleak.

Then I 'happened' to read today's 'Morning' entry on my PC (its in my startup folder and I've posted it below). And there's Charles Spurgeon, pointing me back to the One who can cover my sins and make me whole. His love of and confidence in Christ is contagious. I've been struggling with the sin of unbelief, and CHS's words have reminded me that the answer to this sin as well as my struggles in general is Christ. My default position is self-reliance. How foolish I am.

Thank you, Lord, for your patience, for your Word, and for saints like Charles Spurgeon who point the way to you - even 100 years after they're gone.

MORNING
“Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.”
- Romans 8:37
We go to Christ for forgiveness, and then too often look to the law for power to fight our sins. Paul thus rebukes us, “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” Take your sins to Christ’s cross, for the old man can only be crucified there: we are crucified with him. The only weapon to fight sin with is the spear which pierced the side of Jesus. To give an illustration-you want to overcome an angry temper, how do you go to work? It is very possible you have never tried the right way of going to Jesus with it. How did I get salvation? I came to Jesus just as I was, and I trusted him to save me. I must kill my angry temper in the same way? It is the only way in which I can ever kill it. I must go to the cross with it, and say to Jesus, “Lord, I trust thee to deliver me from it.” This is the only way to give it a death-blow. Are you covetous? Do you feel the world entangle you? You may struggle against this evil so long as you please, but if it be your besetting sin, you will never be delivered from it in any way but by the blood of Jesus. Take it to Christ. Tell him, “Lord, I have trusted thee, and thy name is Jesus, for thou dost save thy people from their sins; Lord, this is one of my sins; save me from it!” Ordinances are nothing without Christ as a means of mortification. Your prayers, and your repentances, and your tears-the whole of them put together-are worth nothing apart from him. “None but Jesus can do helpless sinners good;” or helpless saints either. You must be conquerors through him who hath loved you, if conquerors at all. Our laurels must grow among his olives in Gethsemane.

My Friend Jim

2007-04-10T13:43:00.000-07:00

My friend Jim passed away this morning at 6am.

When we started going to WRBC, Jim latched onto us and made us feel welcome, like we could be the messed up people we are and still be accepted. Jim went out of his way to get me to go to Promise Keepers and then offered to disciple me. For a margin-dweller like me, Jim was just what the doctor ordered. I took him up on his offer, and it started a process that changed my life.

Me being me and Jim being Jim, we had many a heated debate. Through it I saw a man who was very much like me: a prideful guy who liked to hear himself talk. But I could also see the Lord at work in him, pushing and empowering him to fight his natural tendencies, and it gave me hope that Christ could do the same thing in me. Jim helped me identify some serious sin in my life and connected me with some other guys with similar struggles. He was also very frank about mistakes he had made as a husband and father. I truly believe God used Jim to heal my marriage and family.

Jim certainly wasn't perfect. He was stubborn, prideful, gossipy, and was an expert at button pushing. But he is one of the most generous, gregarious, and friendly people I’ve ever met. I already miss him.

My State of Mind..

2007-03-28T15:14:00.000-07:00

is such that I find this quite amusing:

YouTube - library ninja episode 1

Something I Hate

2007-03-19T17:51:00.000-07:00

First off, Aunt Martha always told me I shouldn't use the word "Hate". This was one of her favorite mini-lectures, right up there with the evils of sugar *and* artificial sweeteners (no sweets for the wicked?). That said, I've looked up the word hate, and it means "extreme dislike", and as I won't be applying the term to individuals, but rather to things, I think I'm on pretty solid moral ground with this post (uh, wait, was I just being arrogant?). Anyway....

I hate...Glossy Christianity: I think the production quality of Jesus' ministry was nil. Can you see Jesus scouting out a locale, saying to Himself "Yeah, I think with the dramatic backdrop of this historic place, a few lepers to heal, and a couple of numbskull scribes to throw me some lame questions which I will summarily knock out of the park, I should be able to really do a great work for the Father!"

Yet production quality seems to be the rallying cry of Evangelical Christianity in America. How much energy goes into 'producing' a worship service? Into 'producing' successful (i.e. lots of people in attendance) church programs?

Of course, being thoughtful and deliberate are important, and God wants us to use our minds. Still, there is a thin yet critical line between being thoughtful and considerate and being contriving and manipulative. In the former instance we leave the results to God and seek to honor Him with the means while in the latter we don't trust God with the results and as a result feel licensed to play with the means in order to achieve the "good" results we're after (aka the end justifies the means).

I'm not saying churches shouldn't use modern technology or modern music, I'm just saying I think we've all gone a bit overboard trying to be 'hip' (that means 'dope' for all you millenials) and impressive. I know the generation under 40 is very 'visual' and that they are impressed by high-quality multi-sensory presentations. But as impressive as our powerpoints and videos may be, they will never have the power or impact of God's truth and love, and if we spend too much time tweaking dials to produce a desired effect we might miss the chance to do great things for God.

Interesting Quotes

2007-03-19T16:28:00.000-07:00

“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.” Albert Einstein - 20th Century

“One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much." Jesus Christ - 1st Century

Claims swirl around 'tomb of Jesus' | csmonitor.com

2007-03-02T08:54:00.000-08:00

Now that my faith has been utterly destroyed by Linda Hamilton's ex, I suppose I will have to choose between a life of existentialist hedonism or Wicca (free Stevie Nicks solo album for the next 1000 new converts).

The frightening thing is how poor the science and reasoning behind this particular claim is. I find the position that states "I just don't believe this Jesus guy came back from the dead, if he existed at all" much more reasonable than this cockamamie conglomeration of half-evidence. But then again, we Christians are a fool-hardy group of ninnies, and maybe the scathing condescension of Richard Dawkins and intriguing voice-overs of the latest Discovery Channel special will be what it takes to finally stop the insanity of believing God exists and that He came to earth 2000 years ago to reconcile us to Himself.

Scottish, Irish, Steel Cut, or Quaker...

2007-01-26T09:57:00.001-08:00

I love OATMEAL!!!

There, I fell better now.

Office 2007 Now Includes an Option to Directly Post to Your Blog…

2006-12-18T16:07:00.000-08:00

For a WYSIWYG guy like me, this could be a boon! Perhaps I'll actually start blogging regularly.

This optimism, of course, ignores the following realities:

I really don't have time to blog
Others don't have the time or inclination to read my blog
I don't want to put too much out there for The Man™ to read;I'd like Big Brother to learn about me the old fashioned way – you know, eavesdropping, reading my email, and the like.

Traveling Mercies

2006-09-16T12:19:00.000-07:00

I'm about halfway through this book by Anne Lamott. It has been challenging. I find myself cringing a lot: cringing at some of the things Anne says, then cringing at my own reaction to it, if that make sense. Discerning truth from error while not judging someone is difficult - it takes wisdom, and lot more of it than I presently have.

Anyway, Anne's book has been good for me to read, despite our differing views on just about everything. She's a gifted writer and at certain points I believe she is being totally transparent and honest.

Still, much of it appears false and contrived, as if she's taken on the mantle of "Christian" only to drop an f-bomb so she can seem hip in comparison to stodgy-types who wouldn't use "such language". It has the vibe of someone who claims to be something so they can disavow it to impress others - like the Dixie Chicks lead singer "apologizing" for America's Texan president to an audience in England. "Yeah, I'm a Christian, but I'm not like *those* Christians....".

Again, I haven't finished the book and can't judge Anne's heart (nor should I). I'm just commenting on my impressions thus far.

Muslims express fury over Pope's remarks - Yahoo! News

2006-09-15T08:12:00.000-07:00

Muslims express fury over pope's remarks - Yahoo! News

This is ridiculous. The guy was quoting something somebody said 6 hundred years ago.

And the question is never asked: "Does Islam condone spreading "the faith" by the sword?". No - the Pope, whom I disagree with on all sorts of theological issues (5 solas come to mind immediately) - is simply castigated for merely repeating a statement that is viewed as politically incorrect. The veracity, or truthfulness, of what he's saying is never brought into the discussion. Any question is simply squelched by the steamroller of Political Correctness.

The suppression of honest inquiry is the hallmark of tyranny, whether secular or religious in nature. If Islam doesn't teach what this 16th century emperor says it does, then Muslims should respond by simply saying "That's not the case". When they take to the streets in mobs they give credence to the very notion they so vehemently disagree with.

Jews believe one thing, Christians another, Buddhists another, and Muslims yet another. And in believing different things, they're bound to come into conflict. One test of the worth of a religion, then, is how it responds to those who disagree with it. Christ said to bless those who curse you, so we who are Christians have been given our marching orders and anyone who kills another human in Christ's name is doing something other than what Christ commanded.

So the question remains, when Muslims take to the streets in fits of rage to burn flags and scream threats and spew hatred are they acting in accordance with, or against the teachings of their faith?

From the New Attitude Blog

2006-09-14T21:51:00.000-07:00

Na: "This concept of humble orthodoxy grew out of our experience as believers in local church communities. It made such a difference in our own lives that we wanted to share it. Our hearts constantly tend to redefine truth to suit our own purposes or to remake them in our own image. But we don't think our role should be to show up and change truth, we should let truth change us. "

I think this is what the folks meandering through the emergent church movement are trying to get at. Yet instead of submitting to the truth, they wring their hands and say they're "not sure" what the truth is. Frustrating and sad.

Gene Veith Hits it on the Head

2006-03-03T11:53:00.000-08:00

From his article in WORLD Magazine, Silent Witnesses:

"Some evangelicals stop referring to Jesus because they think they do not need Him anymore. Jesus was involved in their conversion, long ago, but now they have to concentrate on living the Christian life. They have forgotten that the gospel is for every day of the Christian's life. And that no one can live the Christian life without Christ, who says, 'apart from Me you can do nothing' (John 15:5). "

That's the hardest thing to remember, that it's all about the Gospel. Our fallen state as humans and our redemption; God's wrath and justice right right alongside his mercy and grace; God's holiness and love displayed to the ultimate degree: it's all wrapped up in the Gospel.

Oh, how we want to ram God's wrath down people's throat in an attempt to cause them to "fear the Lord" when it's his grace that leads to proper respect for (and repentance 'unto') him. And oh, how we want to camp on God's love without mentioning that in his love for mankind the Father had his only Son crucified as an atonement for our sins. We find it easy to gravitate to the left or right, to be "liberal" or "conservative" but find it hard to be "...perfect [whole, complete], lacking nothing...".

Why? Because: "...apart from me you can do nothing".

On Calvinism vs. Arminianism

2006-03-01T13:45:00.000-08:00

From a post I made in a thread on John Piper's prostate cancer over at Christ and Culture. My thinking was a little muddled towards the beginning of the post, but I think I made my point by the end ( i.e. no one's got God and his decrees 'pinned down' or defined entirely):

"I may be hairsplitting and trying to draw middle ground where there is none, but...

The "hard-line' Calvinist view seems to be (or at least is interpreted to be): God directly acts to cause suffering. God directly forms the cancer in John Piper's prostate for some unknown purpose.

The "hard line' Arminian view (which I believe logically leads to open-theism) appears to be: God doesn't have anything to do with suffering, whatsoever, other than to attempt to comfort us in it. It's as if God says to the cancer patient "Gee, I wish I could help you, but...".

When I recall the stories of Job and of Joseph, I see a different picture. One where God is not the agent of sin or suffering, but who is the Almighty God who *allows* sin to occur and uses even that which is intended to disgrace him (sin) for his glory. Now of course, God does smite sinful humanity at times. It's his prerogative.

Why do I include suffering along with sin? Because both are subsequent to the Fall, both are harmful to man, and yet both are used by God for his glory.

Another comment: I see a tendency on the part of Calvinists (I'd consider myself to be one, as long as one doesn't equate it with being "mean") to overthink things to the dishonor of God and a tendency on the part of Arminians to underthink things to the dishonor of God.

Many Calvinists seem to think they actually have the doctrines of grace (DOG) pinned down and thoroughly defined, and as a result can speak with a frightening degree of certainty about incredibly complex, doctrines. We can NEVER completely grasp the reality of the DOG anymore than we can fully understand the Hypostatic Union or the Trinity. To think we can is to sully the glory of Christ.

As for the Arminian postion, I think many simply reject Biblical truth because it is initially difficult to accept - it often doesn't appeal to our emotions, but instead requires thoughtful and prayerful consideration. So rather than "thinking biblically", they rely on philosophy or raw emotion to reach the theological conclusion that suits their tastes.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, infinite, and without sin. And he created a universe into which sin and suffering entered. And he did it with the full knowledge (omniscience) that they would enter in. He wasn't taken aback by the Fall ("Oh my, what do I do now!!"), his plan and purpose have remained the same from before the foundation of the world, and "In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will". "

OK, not so Angry Calvinists.

2006-02-24T10:17:00.000-08:00

:) See the link above for Steve Camp's reply to my post.

Angry Calvinists?

2006-02-24T09:04:00.000-08:00

Here're a couple of posts I made to Steve Camp's blog re: an email exchange between Dr. Ergun Caner and Dr. James White. I agree down the line with the doctrines of grace, and am constantly baffled by how mean-spirited the debate is on both sides. I'm particularly saddened to see the "side" that has a firmer grasp on biblical truth constantly resorting to shrill and oftern personal attacks. Why can't we state the truth, pray to God to speak it as we should (in boldness and love) and firmly and lovingly plead with people (especially those who are our brothers and sisters in Christ) to agree with it? Where is the humility (e.g. "I know this is a hard truth, I have struggled with it myself, but it is nevertheless the truth of God's word...").

Anyway, enough of my whining, here're the posts:



Jeff said...: Carla stated:
"candleman, you stated:

"It seems to me Dr. White comes across as do most Calvinists on the web, as in your face, arrogant, condescending, know-it-alls."

You know, I sure get tired of hearing that from folks. Especially folks who haven't bothered to take the time to make any effort to understand why why those who hold to the sovereignty of God, are so certain of it in the first place. It's not arrogance, it's conviction! It's not condescencion, it's TRUTH. It's not "in your face" it's a passion for proclaiming the doctrines according to the Scriptures as opposed to the fluffy-happy-purpose-pomo-driven "spirituality" so many confuse with Biblical Christianity.

If this also makes me "arrogant" in your eyes, then so be it I guess.

SOLI DEO GLORIA...
Carla"

Carla, I don't think candleman was questioning the points Dr. White was making, but rather the tone with which he was making them.

The reason you hear this so frequently is that many Calvinists come across as unloving and ungracious. I'm a full-on 5-pointer, but as Spurgeon once said, Calvanists tend to "pluck those 5 strings" of doctrine to the exclusion of all others. Is there not a doctrine of love? Of compassion towards fellow believers? Or if one feels that those who aren't 5-pointers down the line aren't actually saved, is there no desire to win them to Christ by speaking the truth in love?; February 24, 2006 10:34 AM
Jeff said...: Steve Said: "Candleman Deflection is the oldest trick in the book. If you can't make an argument according to biblical truth, then divert to finding fault with tone--it's all you can do. If you invest in some serious study time in the Word of God ...
Here is an excellent place on where to begin your research; read the book of Romans (especially chapters 1-16)."

Steve, come on man. Is this the way we win our brothers? Through condescension? As I mentioned to Carla above, I think candleman was commenting on the tone, not the substance, of Dr. White's email debate with Dr. Caner. (Whether message/medium can be separated is a different discussion). And despite the tone of candleman's post, I think he has a point. So responding by recommending he read Romans 1-16 (a cheeky way of saying read the whole book!) does nothing to elevate the discussion beyond the casting of aspersion. What is the witness we provide when we speak to eachother in such shrill tones? Please, understand, I know your passion and heart for the Lord and am in agreement with you on the doctrines of grace. I'm just pleading for uss all to be demonstrators of grace.; February 24, 2006 10:51 AM

Integrity

2006-02-16T23:47:00.000-08:00

Integrity. There's a word that's either disused or misused. I've heard many a sermon about integrity. And they've all focused on maintaining rather than obtaining it. What am I talking about?

Disuse? Just turn on the TV and listen. Wait until you find someone talking about integrity (and commercials don't count!). You'll be waiting awhile, trust me.

Misuse? Well, I'll start with Noah. Not the Biblical Noah (though he certainly did have integrity.). No, I mean Noah Webster, the lexicographer. According to the 1983 edition of Webster's New 20th Century Dictionary, the primary definition of integrity is "the quality or state of being complete; wholeness; entireness; unbroken state.", and the second is "the entire unimpaired state or quality of anything; perfect condition; soundness". Not until the third use of the word do we find "the quality or state of being of sound moral principle; uprightness, honesty, and sincerity."

The first two definitions describe something that cannot be said of any human being who's ever lived except for Adam & Eve (pre-Fall, of course) and Jesus Christ. It would take an ego the size of Wilde's (who stated "Nothing but my genius" when asked by US Customs if he had anything to declare when entering the country) to lay claim to the type of integrity that is put forth in the first two definitions. When one speaks of having integrity, when sermons are preached on "integrity", the third definition is assumed. When people say "He was a man of integrity..." They don't mean he was perfect; they mean he was a generally/mostly upright and honest man. And in recent years, this definition has become the dominant one.

So what am I getting at? I remember one particular sermon, by a very popular radio preacher(and one of my favorites) , where he talked about integrity. And through the course of the sermon, the message appeared to be: "Hold on to your integrity, because once you've lost it, that's it!". Well, anyone that's spent 5 minutes with me knows I've lost whatever integrity this preacher claims I should've had. So the net result was: "Hey, I may as well give up, because I've lost whatever integrity I ever had".

But alas, God doesn't answer to radio preachers (or bloggers for that matter). He does as he sees fit. And one of the things he saw fit to do was communicate to humanity through the Bible. Have you read it? Man, those folks - with very few and highly notable exceptions - were totally screwed up. Take Moses. He's a murderer. Oh, and he tried to hide it too. Then there's David. Another murderer (by proxy), with an accompanying cover-up attempt. There are other examples like Judah who helped sell his brother into slavery and slept with a prostitute (oh wait, it wasn't a prostitute, it was his daughter-in-law!) Ewwww.

Then there's Peter. "You're the Christ the son of the living God" he says one minute, then the very next he's rebuking Christ ("That will never happen to you...") and Jesus refers to him as Satan. Nice move Peter. Then he's all "on-fire" at Pentecost: 3000 believers come to faith after hearing his preaching. He is so "in line"with God that cripples are healed and Dorcas/Tabitha is raised from the dead! But then fast forward to Galatians. Paul is chewing Peter out for being a hypocrite and for disobeying the very truth that was relayed to him on Simon the Tanner's roof: the gospel is for gentiles too, and don't go calling "unclean" what the LORD has made clean. I believe, aside from Peter's epistles, that's the last we hear of him. Getting read the riot act by Paul.

Sooo....All this is to say, anyone who has any illusions of "maintaining" their integrity, is indeed striving to maintain something alright: an illusion. Hey you, reading my blog when you should be working/caring for your family/doing something more productive. Do you honestly think you have integrity, as defined by Webster's first two definitions? Didn't think so. Welcome to Despairville.

But you know what? You were already living there! Waking up to an ugly truth doesn't make the situation worse - rather it makes it possible to resolve the problem. Once one realizes he has no integrity (in the first two senses of the word), he can begin pursuing it. "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."(Matt 5:48). Jesus is calling us to integrity here. And just in case we're confused about the source of this integrity: "I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing." (John 15:5).

So all my rambling is to say this: Integrity is what I'm seeking to obtain in Christ, not maintain on my own. And I won't reach 100% until I die. This blog is part of my attempt to integrate, to be come whole and one. A whole man and one with Christ.

(A quick post-posting note: I'm drawing a distinction between relative integrity, such as the integrity of Job (Job 2:3, 9) and David (Psalm 7:8), and absolute integrity - completeness, perfectedness, wholeness. So, yes we can both compromise our relative integrity and hinder the development of our absolute integrity in Christ. Just thought I'd clarify, lest I leave anyone with the impression that I'm advocating "letting go and letting God" or not advocating the working out of ones salvation).

In.te.gra.tion

Happy Birthday Grandma

Post Season Fantasy

Fathers

Weeds and Dreams

Jeff's Crotchety Comment of the Day

Two Questions:

A Good Question

A Thought On Social 'Security'

One can only hope this is a hoax

Yeah, but where will the equipment receiving the tax credit be manufactured?

But Hey, Our EPS are up 33% Y/Y!

Offshored Manufacturing - More than Just "out dated" Wrench Turning Jobs at Stake

Hat Tip to The Lone Conservative: And interesting lecture on motivation...

Well, duh...

Legal Outsourcing

Tough Customers...

Thankful

Archie's Aphorisms of the Day

Rando Thought of the Day

A Thought on Pragmatic Politics

True resolve is usually silent...

Robert Rules!

File under "I" for "I Told You So"

More than one way to be wrong

Patently Obvious Thoughts for the Day

iPad 2010 = Newton 1993

Climate Change?

Bill Gates' Silhouette in Outlook 2010?

Stupid Career Tricks

Very Interesting Interview with the Author of The Political Gene

Turn so many phrases they call me the Lathe

Dehumanization

Man, Was I Feeling Emo When I Wrote This, or What?

Next Wave

More Learnings...

Are you kidding me?

Casting Down Idols

Noli nothi permittere te terere

More lessons being learned...

My QOTD

Things I Think God is Teaching Me Right Now

Christian Pole Positions

Authenticity

Happiness and Joy

Thoughts Shared with Market Research Firm

Coining a Phrase: WOflation

Profoundly Sad - The Rev. Katherine Ragsdale's "Abortion is a Blessing" Speech

Getting Old

Really? Duh!

Couldn't have said it better myself

I knew I didn't like this guy's econimic positions...

First Haircut

Verse of the Day...

How a Brazilian supermodel may crack U.S. 'greed conspiracy' - MarketWatch

Am I Nitpicking?

Can't we all just get along?

Tag - You're It

Tricky Dick and the Internet

Abstinence-only programs do not reduce HIV risk - Yahoo! News

'Amateur' charge infuriates blogosphere - CNN.com

Trust us, this is *really* how it works...

FT.com / Comment & analysis / Comment - Freedom, not climate, is at risk

Survivorship Bias

Stifling Debate

Favorite Books of All Time

Battle of the Network Christians

Thank you for Charles Spurgeon

My Friend Jim

My State of Mind..

Something I Hate

Interesting Quotes

Claims swirl around 'tomb of Jesus' | csmonitor.com

Scottish, Irish, Steel Cut, or Quaker...

Office 2007 Now Includes an Option to Directly Post to Your Blog…

Traveling Mercies

Muslims express fury over Pope's remarks - Yahoo! News

From the New Attitude Blog

Gene Veith Hits it on the Head

On Calvinism vs. Arminianism

Trust us, this is really how it works...