11.14.2006
Everything is Illuminated
A couple days ago P. and I watched Everything is Illuminated. Loved it. I think the wife wasn't so pleased on account of its heavy subject matter, but I thought it was rather profound--sad and hopeful at the same time. Anybody else seen this flick? If so, what did you think of it.
10.31.2006
Beware the Female
As part of one of my classes I'm currently reading the Apocrypha, which, except for 1/2 Maccabees, I've never dipped into. It's really enjoyable reading, I must say. Here's a great line from the book of Judith, enclosed within a celebratory song of praise recounting the deeds of Judith, whereby the people of Israel are delivered from the Assyrians.
(BTW: Judith seduced the Assyrian captain and, when he was drunk, cut off his head.)
"Her sandal ravished his eyes,
Her beauty captivated his mind,
and the sword severed his neck!"
Back when I was a little more cynical of the female species, I would have said that this utterance well summed up my thoughts.
(BTW: Judith seduced the Assyrian captain and, when he was drunk, cut off his head.)
"Her sandal ravished his eyes,
Her beauty captivated his mind,
and the sword severed his neck!"
Back when I was a little more cynical of the female species, I would have said that this utterance well summed up my thoughts.
10.23.2006
Oddities
So, I've noticed lately a number of odd things that I do. Perhaps this is due to old age. And if so, at least I can be appreciative that I'm aware of my descent into senility. Please chime in with your own odd behavior if you can determine that such exists (ask a friend, spouse, or family member if not; trust me, it's best to known). Here's just a couple of things I noticed last week:
1) I'm really beginning to talk to myself. Out loud. About random things. A lot.
2) I'm hording napkins like the world is ending. Not quite sure why, but any chance I get, I stuff my pockets with 'em. My pants pockets, my shorts, and even my jackets. Why?
1) I'm really beginning to talk to myself. Out loud. About random things. A lot.
2) I'm hording napkins like the world is ending. Not quite sure why, but any chance I get, I stuff my pockets with 'em. My pants pockets, my shorts, and even my jackets. Why?
10.06.2006
iGod on Pauline Chronology
Check out this hilarious chat b/w Mark Goodacre and iGod about Pauline chronology. Yes, I should be studying.
10.05.2006
Decisions
What does the future hold? In May, P. and I will have (theoretically) completed our respetive academic programs. (Much to my chagrin, she will be a "doctor" and I will be only, well, a "master"; actually, master sounds more important. Don't you think?) At that time we will have to make some decisions about the next few years and possibly beyond. I've never been good at making decisions, especially big ones. For being the big picture kind of guy I claim to be, I sure am pretty devoid of big plans.
My style of leadership in marriage is to make ad hoc decisions and then work feveriously to provide some sort of rationale that commands assent. A friend of mine graciously put a positive spin on this by noting that this is what makes us so flexible. (Thanks, Jas.) Unfortunately, I think this is really a reflection of my inability (unwillingness?) to sense God's will in matters. Long ago I latched onto the idea propounded by another friend that God's will is something worked out in our lives as we walk with him, and not a plan to that he always reveals to us. There is much truth to this--though my wife doesn't like this concept--but perhaps in my life this has become an excuse for doing what seems right to me.
And what seems right to me, or my desires, are part of my decision-making rationale. Because I am so much a prisoner of my own thoughts, I can't seem to access the mind of God, and thus am only able to fall back on dreams. These dreams I then deem to be desires that God has placed on my heart. You can see how this works; it's all very circular. (Yet another friend, upon hearing my doubts about my own "dreams theory," advised that I trust but verify--though scripture and prayer. Why can't I come up with such advice?)
All this is to say that I have a bad history when it comes to big decisions, and several are on the horizon. I (we) want our decision(s) to be grounded in God's will--whatever that means. The temptation is to be moved by practical concerns which, in my disillusionment with the way of illusion (idealism?), sounds like a safe and pretty nice way to make a decision at this point.
My style of leadership in marriage is to make ad hoc decisions and then work feveriously to provide some sort of rationale that commands assent. A friend of mine graciously put a positive spin on this by noting that this is what makes us so flexible. (Thanks, Jas.) Unfortunately, I think this is really a reflection of my inability (unwillingness?) to sense God's will in matters. Long ago I latched onto the idea propounded by another friend that God's will is something worked out in our lives as we walk with him, and not a plan to that he always reveals to us. There is much truth to this--though my wife doesn't like this concept--but perhaps in my life this has become an excuse for doing what seems right to me.
And what seems right to me, or my desires, are part of my decision-making rationale. Because I am so much a prisoner of my own thoughts, I can't seem to access the mind of God, and thus am only able to fall back on dreams. These dreams I then deem to be desires that God has placed on my heart. You can see how this works; it's all very circular. (Yet another friend, upon hearing my doubts about my own "dreams theory," advised that I trust but verify--though scripture and prayer. Why can't I come up with such advice?)
All this is to say that I have a bad history when it comes to big decisions, and several are on the horizon. I (we) want our decision(s) to be grounded in God's will--whatever that means. The temptation is to be moved by practical concerns which, in my disillusionment with the way of illusion (idealism?), sounds like a safe and pretty nice way to make a decision at this point.
9.28.2006
Ethiopian Super Natural
I'm off to class but before going I wanted to put in a good word for the coffee I had this morning. When I was in Peets Coffee the other day, shopping for my drug of choice, I noticed that a new bean was being featured--Ethiopian Super Natural--hailing from the Yirgacheffe region. I'm a big fan of Yirgacheffe beans in general, so I put up the extra cash ($18, I think) for this limited offering. This is terrific coffee. Very smooth with a slight cherry flavor. If you have access to a Peets Coffee and Tea store near you, I recommend you try this coffee.
9.27.2006
Birthday
Well, I've entered the third decade of my life. It's all downhill from here. As far as wisdom goes, there's nothing I can point to as having been acquired in the last year that makes 30 an important landmark. However, what I have gained, and what means the most to me, is friendship. That's why my wife's birthday gift was excedingly special and memorable. The opportunity to spend time with our closest Boston friends on Saturday and Sunday nights meant a lot to me and will always be remembered. Thanks, guys, for your friendship. May I be as good a friend as you all are to me.
9.23.2006
Beer Update
So, P. and I made our bi-monthly trip to Marty's Liquor and Fine Foods last night. As it was the eve of my b-day, the missus let me choose the beverage. She, of course, was hoping I'd opt for the Belgian Lefe that was on sale--a fine choice by any standards--but I had my eye on the Bavarian Dobbelbock from Ayinger called Celebrator. I had had a brew from Ayinger before (a lager, as I recall) at my favorite area beer bar, The Publick House, but I had never tried this offering. The slightly metallic taste that greeted my palate I choose to attribute to the beer's having sat on the store shelf for a lengthy period of time (the bottles were dusty). The finish, however, was terrific. And yes, I did keep the ram.

Lest anyone think that I'm a selfish ogre when it comes to beer selection, let me hasten to add that on a previous trip to Marty's, P. had chosen the beer, and in so doing had significantly bolstered her credibility. She chose a lager produced by Christian Moerlein, a brewery of which we were unaware until then. It turned out to be a diamond in the rough. Here I am enjoying a sip in my prized Dogfish Head (another fine outfit, IMO) mug.

Lest anyone think that I'm a selfish ogre when it comes to beer selection, let me hasten to add that on a previous trip to Marty's, P. had chosen the beer, and in so doing had significantly bolstered her credibility. She chose a lager produced by Christian Moerlein, a brewery of which we were unaware until then. It turned out to be a diamond in the rough. Here I am enjoying a sip in my prized Dogfish Head (another fine outfit, IMO) mug.
Of course, I had to get an old favorite of mine while I was there--Mackeson XXX Stout. Several reviewers at the Beer Advocate seem not to be impressed with this libation, but it holds a fond place in my (beer) gut. I was introduced to this brew while in college; it was featured as part of Old Chicago's Around the World Beer Tour. Here I am enjoying the dark substance in my Guinness beer mug via St. James Gate, Dublin.
9.14.2006
My Program
Wow, I cannot believe it has been almost a month since I've last posted. Since that time I have quit my job, cleaned my apartment (including designating books for reassignment, sniff), and registered for and begun classes. It's been busy around here. While I'm a little apprehensive about whether I can cut in the academic life, I'm excited about the subjects I'll be studying. Here's what I'll be taking (since all are dying to know):
I. Fall Semester:
A. Seminar in Biblical Theology (research in topics and methodology, G.C.)
B. First Images of Jesus Christ (early christian Jesus devotion, Har.)
C. Readings in Second Temple Jewish Literature (directed study, G.C.)
D. New Testament Textual Criticism (directed study, G.C.)--thanks to the bloggers at Evangelical Textual Criticism for their assistance.
II. Spring Semester (tentative):
A. Exegesis of Mark (G.C.)
B. Exegesis in the Minor Prophets (G.C.)
C. Pauline Theology Post New Perspective (directed study, G.C.)
D. The Septuagint (H.C.)
I. Fall Semester:
A. Seminar in Biblical Theology (research in topics and methodology, G.C.)
B. First Images of Jesus Christ (early christian Jesus devotion, Har.)
C. Readings in Second Temple Jewish Literature (directed study, G.C.)
D. New Testament Textual Criticism (directed study, G.C.)--thanks to the bloggers at Evangelical Textual Criticism for their assistance.
II. Spring Semester (tentative):
A. Exegesis of Mark (G.C.)
B. Exegesis in the Minor Prophets (G.C.)
C. Pauline Theology Post New Perspective (directed study, G.C.)
D. The Septuagint (H.C.)
8.18.2006
Effects of Wine
Young Adults and Church
There's a post up over at Out of Ur that questions why young adults are "not finding their places in their parents' churches." Along the same lines, Andy Rowell links to an interview with Sarah Cunningham, author of Dear Church: Letters from a Disillusioned Generation, over at Paradoxoloy.
8.17.2006
Teaching Sitting Down
Edward Cook at Ralph the Sacred River has an interesting post up about instruction in antiquity. Check it out here. (HT: Michael Gilleland).
8.16.2006
Dramatic Entrance
One thing that always strikes me when reading the first three chapters of Mark is the sense of something new that is happening--something startling, remarkable, life altering. Jesus Christ, the very Son of God!, has entered human history. The combined Isaiahic/Malachiac prophecy, the prophet's preparation, the descent of the Spirit and approval of the father, and the special trial of tempting in the wilderness--all bear witness that something extraordinary is occuring with Jesus' arrival on the stage of human(/divine) history. It should come as no surprise, then, that Jesus proclaims the "gospel of God" and announces that "the time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand." Everything has changed with the coming of this Jew from Nazareth. We see here the culmination of God's revelatory expressions of the past, yet also the beginning of a new chapter in his relationship with humankind.
"Repent and believe in the gospel," is the response urged by Jesus, and it is the only natural one given what we come to learn about Jesus' identity and purpose in Mark's Gospel. Do we feel the urgency and excitement that is required for such a response? Most of Jesus' contemporaries either didn't understand or were too obstinate or enthralled with the security that their positions of wealth and/or power afforded them to respond appropriately. Clearly some realized the import of Jesus' appearance, life, death, and resurrection; Mark writes to individuals and communities who came to faith as a result of those who responded appropriately to the Messiah.
How today can we recapture the the amazement--the sense of awe, wonder, and fear--that is fitting for those who understand the significance of the Son of God's presence and mission? I don't know the answer. I do know that I'm not where the disciples were, who "immediately left their nets and followed him."
"Repent and believe in the gospel," is the response urged by Jesus, and it is the only natural one given what we come to learn about Jesus' identity and purpose in Mark's Gospel. Do we feel the urgency and excitement that is required for such a response? Most of Jesus' contemporaries either didn't understand or were too obstinate or enthralled with the security that their positions of wealth and/or power afforded them to respond appropriately. Clearly some realized the import of Jesus' appearance, life, death, and resurrection; Mark writes to individuals and communities who came to faith as a result of those who responded appropriately to the Messiah.
How today can we recapture the the amazement--the sense of awe, wonder, and fear--that is fitting for those who understand the significance of the Son of God's presence and mission? I don't know the answer. I do know that I'm not where the disciples were, who "immediately left their nets and followed him."
9/11 Recordings
NYC just released audio and transcript files of Sept. 11 calls handled by emergency personnel. Most of the calls involve firefighters but several are of civilians trapped in the towers. I just finished listening to this one, which was used in the Moussaoui trial, and feel physically sick. Towards the middle of the recording (as with all the other recordings) the voice of the caller is bleeped out, but the caller's voice is retained in the first portion. As disturbing as it is to hear the horrors of the situation, it's worth listening to as a reminder of what so many people went through that day.
8.08.2006
Theology and Faith
Steven over at Theology and Biblical Studies gives an autobiographical post on the impact that studying theology had on his faith. Coming from bible country, I can relate to much of what he says, especially the part about Josh McDowell's book.
Return of the Imam
Ok, here's a very scary thought regarding Iran and the end times--but not in the way you think. Noted ME scholar Bernard Lewis suggests a sinister motive behind Ahmadinejad's August 22 deadline. Is the latter hoping to inaugurate the return of the Hidden Imam?
God and Prayer
Over at Faith and Theology Benjamin Myers poses the question whether prayer changes God. Then, quoting Barth, he suggests an answer while providing a helpful perspective from which to think about this issue.
8.02.2006
Hezbollah and Root Causes
I haven’t posted on the current Israeli/Hezbollah clash and the resultant destruction in Lebanon because the subject has depressed me. Truth is, I can sympathize with both points of view—with those who think Israeli is well within its right to strike back hard, fast, and thoroughly and with those who think Israel has gone too far and is actually strengthening Hezbollah politically.
One idea that surfaces constantly on the cable talk shows and has had currency in the academic world at least since Edward Said is the importance of root causes. Here’s how this is expressed. A pundit on the right will come on the show and outline the facts: Hezbollah started the conflict and Israel must press forward aggressively in order to ensure the nation’s safety vis-à-vis the northern border. When given a chance to respond, the expert on the left will usually grant the first argument—that Hezbollah was the initial aggressor—but will invariably suggest that the solution required is far from what the rightie is suggesting. To guarantee a long-lasting peace the parties at the table must deal with the heart of the matter: the Arab angst
stemming from "the Palestine" issue, meaning the Israeli occupation of key parts of Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. (Of course the angst hasn't receded even now that Israel has ceded most of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to the PA.)
[While some on the right have rejected the Root Causes theory as prevarication, others have have accepted it at some level but in doing so, have located the real cause of angst elsewhere, namely, in Arab/Muslim frustration at evident gap between expectations of supremacy-- suggested by their being God's true followers--and reality.]
Clearly, in dealing with individuals we can (and should) discuss root issues that underlie outward actions. See, for example, Jason's excellent post regarding this with respect to alcohol abuse and the SBC here. My question is, can we effectively engage with root causes when dealing with corporate bodies--groups of people, states, or even terrorist organizations (or "resistant movements"), like Hezbollah? Others have noted how there is structural and corporate sin in addition to individual sin. But is it possible to bring about healing at the structural and corporate level in a way that is not just superficial?
One idea that surfaces constantly on the cable talk shows and has had currency in the academic world at least since Edward Said is the importance of root causes. Here’s how this is expressed. A pundit on the right will come on the show and outline the facts: Hezbollah started the conflict and Israel must press forward aggressively in order to ensure the nation’s safety vis-à-vis the northern border. When given a chance to respond, the expert on the left will usually grant the first argument—that Hezbollah was the initial aggressor—but will invariably suggest that the solution required is far from what the rightie is suggesting. To guarantee a long-lasting peace the parties at the table must deal with the heart of the matter: the Arab angst
stemming from "the Palestine" issue, meaning the Israeli occupation of key parts of Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. (Of course the angst hasn't receded even now that Israel has ceded most of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to the PA.)
[While some on the right have rejected the Root Causes theory as prevarication, others have have accepted it at some level but in doing so, have located the real cause of angst elsewhere, namely, in Arab/Muslim frustration at evident gap between expectations of supremacy-- suggested by their being God's true followers--and reality.]
Clearly, in dealing with individuals we can (and should) discuss root issues that underlie outward actions. See, for example, Jason's excellent post regarding this with respect to alcohol abuse and the SBC here. My question is, can we effectively engage with root causes when dealing with corporate bodies--groups of people, states, or even terrorist organizations (or "resistant movements"), like Hezbollah? Others have noted how there is structural and corporate sin in addition to individual sin. But is it possible to bring about healing at the structural and corporate level in a way that is not just superficial?
8.01.2006
Spectacular Papi
Okay, the man is unbelievable. Since he’s already had so many clutch hits, I always think it’s asking too much for him to do it again. Think again. Last night David Ortiz showed why he is the franchise star—and MVP—by hammering yet another walk-off homerun. The title of Espn’s coverage says it all: “Old Habit.” No longer are such dramatic bombs an anomaly; they are expected--by the fans, by his teammates, and, claims the slugger, by himself. Keep it up big fella.
(NB: I’d like to thank Comcast for mistakenly giving us access to NESN, which made possible last night’s pleasurable viewing.)
UPDATE:
I neglected to mention Snyder's tremendous replacement outing for David Wells. It's to be hoped that he can maintain this level of pitching, especially as the Sox have fallen on hard times in this department.
(NB: I’d like to thank Comcast for mistakenly giving us access to NESN, which made possible last night’s pleasurable viewing.)
UPDATE:
I neglected to mention Snyder's tremendous replacement outing for David Wells. It's to be hoped that he can maintain this level of pitching, especially as the Sox have fallen on hard times in this department.
7.27.2006
Baptists and the Religious Right
Scot McKnight is blogging through Randall Balmer's book, Thy Kingdom Come, and most recently discussed chapter 2. This particular chapter deals with baptists and their denial of their heritage. Historically, baptists have embraced independence from the State, but Balmer maintains (apparently) that insofar as many baptists have joined (or comprise) the religious right, they have become entangled in politics.
More interesting than McKnight's post is the interaction found in the comments section, especially that b/w McKnight and Denny Burk. I'm certainly sympathetic to McKnight's point of view, if only because I tend to be a contrarian and reject my background, but I can also sympathize with Burk. It's too easy to suggest that those on the religious right (am I one of these?) want to establish some sort of Constantinian state because they try to legislate laws consistent with their moral beliefs. I personally feel that such attempts are often misguided and based on positions that lack nuance, but, nevertheless, they represent a desire to effect change using the political mechanics at hand. Any thoughts?
More interesting than McKnight's post is the interaction found in the comments section, especially that b/w McKnight and Denny Burk. I'm certainly sympathetic to McKnight's point of view, if only because I tend to be a contrarian and reject my background, but I can also sympathize with Burk. It's too easy to suggest that those on the religious right (am I one of these?) want to establish some sort of Constantinian state because they try to legislate laws consistent with their moral beliefs. I personally feel that such attempts are often misguided and based on positions that lack nuance, but, nevertheless, they represent a desire to effect change using the political mechanics at hand. Any thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


