Iran

Here's an interesting article in the Times from yesterday about Iran's nuclear program. The country recently released photos of a nuclear development facility in Nantanz, giving analysts plenty to debate about: why, for example, is the Ahmidinejad regime showing its cards? what do such cards reveal? is uranium being enriched for peaceful purposes (note the "bottom bearing" mentioned in the article).

What America's approach toward Iran will, I hope, be an important issue in this year's presidential campaign. While I certainly don't find myself agreeing with President Bush on all foreign policy matters (e.g., Iraq), particularly when it comes to a devaluation of diplomacy, I also can't help thinking that the an "Obaman" approach might be equally dangerous. Ultimately, a president's foreign policy approach to different countries and different conflicts should be, well, different, even when there's an operative well thought-out policy.

From experience, we know that taking a country at its word, as the US did with North Korea during the Clinton years, can pose certain hazards when the avowed enemy is adept at using deception and diplomacy to achieve its nefarious purposes. Iran, I think, resembles North Korea in this respect, declaring, against all past evidence, that its aims are peaceful. It might not be the wisest thing merely to take the leadership at its word or to engage in toothless diplomacy that might allow them, as it did North Korea, to gain more time in developing nuclear weapons (which, by the way, are likely to be completed by 2010-2015 according to current projections).

All's Not Wright with Obama

Though I'm not an Obama supporter, I do admire him and, consequently, feel sorry for him as the Rev. Wright stuff has dominated the news of the last few days. Of course I do find it hard to understand how some of Wright's positions and statements could have come as a surprise to Obama--could this really be a completely different side of Wright than Obama has encountered over the last twenty years? Yet still, I can understand how Wright and Obama may share a common understanding of some of the problems occupying American (esp. black) while dividing over how to frame those issues and what solutions to offer.

Clearly Wright is taking a more divisive approach while Obama, whether because of temperment or ideology, wants to provide unification in moving forward toward solutions. It's possible that what came across in their past dealings was a mutual agreement that these problems do exist, but, either because Wright didn't listen or because Obama didn't offer (Wright, after all, was the superior in the context of their relationship), Obama's more measured policy solutions were not understood by Wright. This does not seem improbable to me. And I do not hold Obama responsible for Wright's rhetoric.

Philippians 1:27–30, Part 2

The remainder of this section (1:27b–30) expresses what it means to live in such a way as the apostle envisions. Paul employs a purpose clause ("in order that") merely as a means to spell out how the Christians in Philippi should be behaving: the important thing is not, of course, whether he "is able to come and see" or "hear" the following things about them, but that they are in fact conducting themselves as he proceeds to spell out.

What comprises conduct worthy of the gospel is, in part, unity. Later Paul discusses unity in contrast to conceited, self-interested behavior, whose opposite is seen in Christ's self-denying obedience (2.1-8); here, he describes it ("stand in one Spirit," [manner]) as a stance Christ-believers should assume as they [temporal] "strive together [again, manner] for [i.e., 'in the interest of'] the faith." (By "the faith," Paul means the gospel.)

Just because different people may be declaring and fighting for the same gospel does not mean that they are doing so in a way that truly embodies that gospel and models unity. We recall how earlier in the same chapter Paul speaks of those who preached Christ "from envy and rivalry" (1:15). While he concluded there, however, that ultimately what was important was that "Christ is proclaimed" (1:18), here (1:28) he emphasizes that it does in fact matter how those proclaiming Christ stand in relation to the rest of the family of believers.

Next Paul moves to what must have been a central concern to his recipients: opponents of the gospel. Even as [temporal, parallel with the preceding clause] the Philippians are to stand together as a united body in their defense of the gospel, they are, outwardly, to protect themselves against fear of those who oppose them and/or their message.

It's not clear to whom Paul is referring here, but one might suppose, based on 3:1-2, that such opponents urge a more strict adherence to certain behavioral precepts (the law? circumcision?). Regardless of their identity, Paul is clear that the Philippians should not be frightened "in anything [means, i.e., 'by'] by those standing against you." Interestingly, the apostle does not care to elaborate why the Philippians ought not to fear, but instead chooses to dwell on the significance/repercussions of such an attitude.

For the Love of the Plant

This week I was listening to the Herd, IMHO the best sports radio show out there, and heard about the book, It's Just a Plant. Colin talks about a lot of stuff other than just sports, so I wasn't too surprised he brought this up. Hearing about this, though, I didn't know whether to laugh or shake my head (I did both). This, from an editorial review on Amazon:

"Jackie wakes up late at night and finds her parents smoking pot. They give a simple explanation and promise to talk to her about it the next day, which happens to be Halloween."

The goal of this book, apparently, is to acclimate one's children to the proper use of marijuana. It is, after all, just a plant.

From Syria to Pike Place

Here's an interesting article in the Times about the survival (barely) of Aramaic in several Syrian villages. The article notes how The Passion of the Christ stirred some interest in Malula's (a Syrian village) Aramaic heritage. Like the citizens of the village and the prof. at UCLA mentioned in the story, I also had a hard time following the Aramaic dialogue in the movie, because of the "different dialects of Aramaic, and the actors’ pronunciation made it hard to understand anything." But only for those reasons. Heh.

Meanwhile, Brian at Climb Jacob's Ladder has an interesting post up about "Libertarian strains in US Christianity and its boundaries." He examines the intersection of Christianity with government and manages to touch on the philosophical roots of the US constitution.

Tim Ricchuiti has provided some final thoughts (along with session-by-session summaries) of the 2008 Grear-Heard Forum at New Orleans Baptist Seminary. This would have been an awesome event to attend.

Oh, and for the record, I hate Starbucks' Pike Place Roast! It's weak. Sorry, Jason.

Philippians 1.27-30, Part 1

Paul is sure that he is going to "remain" yet longer because of the benefit that the Philippians stand to gain from his coming to them. Not surprisingly, for Paul this gain is ultimately the whole-hearted fixation—in thought (1:9), proclamation (1:18), and identification (3:8)—on Jesus Christ. The apostle exemplifies this reality in his own life, and he hopes that by his visiting the Philippian church, they too will approach this ideal. Most importantly ("only"), though, the believers are to behave (or "conduct yourselves as citizens") in a manner that is "worthy of the gospel of Christ" (1.27), that is, the good news that is characterized by Christ.

The verb in this sentence, politeuomai, is related to "city" (polis) and "citizen" (politeis) but in common usage at this time probably carried the general idea of "live," "conduct one's ways," etc., though one can easily see how the concepts are related, since being a citizen carried with it certain obligations. And because of this connection, it's not outside of the realm of possibility that Paul does intend the idea "conduct yourselves as citizens" to be understood by his readers as they are, as Christians, ones who live with a certain expectation of "the day of Jesus Christ" (1:6) that will "bring to completion" the work wrought within them. In fact, this work confirms that they already enjoy—together with all Christ-believers—"citizenship . . . in heaven" (3:19). Thus, even now they are bound by an obligation to live in a manner that corresponds to the person who has guaranteed their citizenship.

The remainder of this section (1:27b–30) expresses what it means to live in such a way. Paul employs a purpose clause ("in order that") merely as a means to spell out how the Christians in Philippi should be behaving: the important thing is not, of course, whether he "is able to come and see" or "hear" the following things about them, but that they are in fact conducting themselves as he proceeds to spell out.

Patriots Day and Boston Sports

Boy, I wish I were in Boston for Patriots Day (or the day it is celebrated). Aside from the historical significance of this holiday, there is much to appreciate it from a sports perspective, especially this year. Of course the Boston Marathon is a huge draw. (Too bad I'm an old man with a gimpy knee, or else I would join the field.) It looks like there was a pretty close finish today.

The Sox, of course, come in a close second in terms of importance. Today in downing the Rangers they completed a sweep at home. Way to go, Buchholz! Up next, Beckett faces the Angels and SP Weaver.

The Celtics last night proved their regular season dominance was no fluke as they crushed the Atlanta Hawks. Who would have thought a year ago that the Celtics would be co-favorites--along with the Pistons--to make it to the finals?! Even more surreal is the fact that they stand a good chance of meeting the LA Lakers if they do. What is this, the 80s all over again? Should both of these storied franchises indeed meet again in the momentous finals, I will be hard-pressed, as a traditional Lakers fan with new Celtic sensibilities, to decide who I want to win. A nice problem to have, nonetheless.

Well, I guess that's it. Oh wait, could it be true, could the Bruins really be jealous enough for some of the limelight so as to do something about it? Perhaps. At least they've already done the improbable as an eight seed in the playoffs--coming from behind 3-1 to tie the series 3-3 and force the one-seeded Montreal Canadiens to the brink of elimination. While it's not likely they will in fact upend the dominant team north of the border, there's still hope. After all, it is Patriots Day (kinda).

The Fence Fell

Here's a very interesting poem by Erich Fried that we read in our German class:

Versuchung

In Nachbars Garten

wiegt sich der apfel am Stiel

"Still, Stiel!"

"Still stiehl!"

Ich hielt mich an

an dem Zaun

und der Zaun fil.

Viel fiel.

Ich hielt mich nicht mehr im Zaum.

Im Garten

baumt sich die Schlange

unter dem Baum.

A rough translation, rendered, of course, with the aid of our prof., reads like this:

Trial (or Testing)

In the neighbor's garden

the apple swayed on the stem.

"Silent, Stem!"

"Silently steal!"

I held myself

on the fence [i.e., in check]

and the fence fell.

Much fell.

I held myself in check no more.

In the garden

the serpent "treed himself"

under the tree.

The play on words in this poem is a central feature. There's the similarity at the beginning b/w Stiel ("stem") and stiehl ("steal," imperative); the comma in the 3rd line indicates an address to the stem, whereas the absence of one in the 4th line suggests, instead, a command given to a separate entity to "steal silently (adverb)."

Further on the poet playfully employs a common expression (apparently) in German "on the fence," which figurately means "hold oneself in check," in close proximity to "the fence fell," presumably to illustrate the inexorable consquences resulting from a breakdown in self-restraint. As the fence down, "much [else] did (Viel fiel)."

In the end, the snake "treed himself (baumt sich) [presumably an invented verb by Fried]" "under the tree (unter dem Baum)." Thus, what was the neighbor's garden at the beginning, seems now to be the serpent's. Perhaps?

Anyway, I find this poem at the same time fun and haunting and very worth pondering.

Man Who Grew Roots

I just saw this video of an Indonesian man "who grew roots." I can't imagine how difficult his life must have been. Happily, it seems that he may have a chance of recovery after doctors recently performed a series of operations on him. Here's a fuller story on the man and his disease. Apparently,

"Dede's problem was that he has an extremely rare immune system deficiency, leaving his body unable to contain the warts. The virus was therefore able to "hijack the cellular machinery of his skin cells", ordering them to produce massive amounts of the substance causing tree-like growths known as "cutaneous horns"."

Boston and Seafood

Our trip to Boston didn't exactly turn out the way we had planned. P. made two trips to the ER, was virtually confined to a room for the trip, and was forced to cancel her interviews. However, I am so thankful that we made it through a very trying time and am very grateful to our hosts R. and A., who were so kind to us in feeding us, giving us rides, and attending to all our needs. Their cute son provided much additional entertainment. He's quite an accomplished guitarist, as seen in the picture below. When he plays he taps his foot on the ground. It's hilarious.

Though our trip to Boston was nearly a wash, we did have a fun time the first few days. On Monday night we spent time with our awesome friends Keke and Jade in the North End. They introduced us to The Daily Catch, an unassuming restaurant with scrumptious seafood; they also have branch in Brookline.

Here Keke and Jade demonstrate the proper way to eat calamari.

P. had a cool dish: ground squid served over noodles died with squid ink. I like how it's served in the pan in which it's cooked.

My mussels weren't half bad either.

Bad and Good

Still bummed about this. But baseball season is in full swing and this cheers me up.