Anyone Speak Carpenter Bee?

If so, I'd like to tell the bees digging in the fascia board on my front porch that the University of Kentucky Entomology Department doesn't think they should be doing that. The entomologists say:

Carpenter bees prefer to attack wood which is bare, weathered and unpainted. Therefore, the best way to deter the bees is to paint all exposed wood surfaces, especially those which have a history of being attacked.

Hmmmm. I haven't noticed the carpenter bees I've seen to have much regard for such entomological assertions. I wonder if entomologists actually study insects anymore, or do they just read books written by other entomologists who may or may not have studied insects? So far this year I have eliminated 11 bees that apparently shouldn't even be there with my trusty Dunlop tennis racket. But every time I get one, two more seem to show up. I wouldn't care, but they're right at the front door! Oh well. If anyone could talk to them for me, please let me know.

Ideas Have Consequences

I just listened to the extended interview with Brian Godawa at St. Annes Pub (you'll have to scroll down to 23 - 26 in the list on the right side to hear the interview, otherwise you can listen to 1 - 22 first; it's all good stuff). Brian is a writer and producer in Hollywood. His writing credits include To End All Wars and The Visitation.

Brian is a bright spot in Hollywood and I am very excited about a couple of his upcoming works: Monkey Trial and Cruel Logic. He is the writer on Monkey Trial, which is about the infamous 1925 Scopes case in Dayton, TN. We all know of it from that embarassment of a production, Inherit the Wind, which in typical Hollywood fashion is a "true" story decidedly lacking in truth. Monkey Trial hopes to tell a more accurate version of the trial (I believe it is adapted from Larson's excellent book Summer for the Gods) and hopefully future generations will know of the Scopes case from this film instead. Believe me; the truth is far more interesting than the made up Inherit the Wind version. Look for it later this year or early next.

I am also very intrigued by Cruel Logic. It has already been produced as a (very) short film, which you can see here. The tag line is "No absolutes. No guilt. No remorse." It is the story of an escaped serial killer who kidnaps college professors and engages them in high stakes debates over whether he should kill them or not. He uses their own academic arguments (that there are no absolutes, no God, only chance) against them to prove he is perfectly free to kill them. Now this is great! You can also take a look at a chapter of the graphic novel (that's a fancy word for "comic book") by clicking here. (Another neat touch is that the detective in Cruel Logic is named Cornelius Van Til; if you don't get it, I can't explain it here.) CL should also be out later this year or early next.

The point of much of Brian's work is that, as his serial killer character says, ideas have consequences. Hopefully his movies will have a consequential impact on our culture.

Technorati Tags: godawa, film, cruel logic

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means, at the point of highest reality. A chastity or honesty or mercy, which yields to danger, will be chaste or honest or merciful only on conditions. Pilate was merciful until it became risky.-C.S. Lewis

technorati tags:quotes, c.s.lewis, courage

We'll sing the first, third, and fifth

Marian and I were discussing the phenomenon of skipping verses when singing hymns. I realize that if your church has a big screen in front of the "sanctuary" (gym) then the notion of a hymnal is probably alien to you, but it's a book that contains a bunch of old songs that have been sung by the church for (if its a good hymnal) centuries. It includes all of these funny little marks, called musical notation, which tell the musicians what notes to play and the congregation what notes to sing. (There are even different lines of notes for different kinds of voices--usually soprano, alto, tenor and bass. All these different parts combine to produce one glorious sound. There's something trinitarian about it. Weird, huh?)

Well, most of these hymns have maybe 3-5 verses, but there are many times that only the "first and last" or "first and second" or "first, third, and fifth" verses are sung. This is what Marian and I were discussing. Why does this happen? We thought of two reasons: theology and time. "Theology" would be if there is a genuine disagreement with a verse's meaning or teaching. Now, I have to say, as one who has led a fair share of hymns in my day, that I have never known this to be the reason for verse-skipping. In my experience it has always been the "time" reason.

The problem is that the time reason is pretty pathetic if you examine it. Most verses of most hymns take about 30 seconds to sing. The quicker common meter hymns (like "How Sweet the Name of Jesus Sounds") are about 15 seconds per verse. So, most hymns are no more than 2.5 to 3 minutes. WOW!!!!! No wonder everyone is skipping all those verses! Who's got three more minutes to sing a song to God when the line's getting crowded at Golden Corral?!?!?!

“Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear.”
- Ambrose Redmoon

Al was right about one thing . . .

. . . in his "testimony" the other day. He said, "I promise you a day will come when our children and grandchildren will look back and ask...What in God's name were they doing?"

Exactly! I can hear them now . . .

Why were they worried about 45,000 polar bears when 5 million children were dying of malnutrition each year? Why did they spend hundreds of billions of dollars to comply with Kyoto rather than put that money into combating malaria and dirty water which, unlike "global warming," actually killed millions each year? Why did they listen to that idiot Al Gore, who couldn't decide from decade to decade whether it was getting colder or hotter? Didn't they notice all the communists hiding behind those "Love Your Mother" buttons and "Equal Rights For All Species" t-shirts? What were they doing????

Good questions, kids.

Practical politics consists of ignoring facts.

— Benjamin Disraeli

Chapter 2-The Battle Won: Colossians

Continuing with a serial look at NT Wright's Following Jesus: Biblical Reflections on Discipleship . . .

At the foot of Mount Cadmus near the river Lycus a startling declaration would have first been read aloud to the small congregation of Christians in the ancient city of Colosse:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.-Colossians 1:15-20

With those words Paul declared that the great battle had already been won. A battle? Victory? Over whom? The ancients gave them personal names like Mars, Aphrodite, or Zeus, etc. We tend call them by the impersonal titles such as "economic forces" or "political climate." The ancients thought they could be assuaged, even bribed, in various ways. We tend to think one most hope for the best and chalk it up to fate. They are those intangible powers that chew us up and spit us out. One need look no further than any days headlines to see these powers working. The point is that we need the message of this letter today just as much as the Colossians themselves needed it, for we too need to hear of the defeat of the powers and the victory of Jesus.

Paul has three things to say about these powers. First, as in the above passage, all things were made in Christ, through Christ, and for Christ; this includes the powers. These seemingly uncontrollable powers were intended to be part of God's ordered, structured world. The problem is that we have handed power over, through sin, to the powers. When we abuse sex, we have given power to Aphrodite, and she will gladly take control. When we are irresponsible with money, we have given power to Mammon, and he will take control. And so on. When the powers take over, we get crushed.

The second point comes in chapter 2. Jesus confronted the powers. They said to live for money. Jesus said you cannot serve both God and Mammon. They said Israel would be freed through the sword. Jesus said he who lives by the sword will die by it. They said that Caesar was Lord of the world. Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of his Father. At first glance it seems obvious what happened at the cross: the powers killed him. That is what they do to those who challenge them. They stripped him naked and publicly humiliated him. They nailed the charge against him over his head: King of the Jews, indeed. They celebrated their triumph over him, another challenger snuffed out.

But Paul stands all of this on its head in verses 13-15 of chapter 2:

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

The apparent defeat of Christ at the hands of the powers is in fact the defeat of the powers at the bleeding hands of Christ.

The third point is very important. These defeated powers are not annihilated; rather they have been reconciled to God through Christ. As stated above (1:20), "For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." So, not to worship Aphrodite does not mean that we become sexless. Not to serve both God and Mammon does not mean that we boycott all currency. God intends for the powers to serve him, and to serve and sustain his creatures as well.

This is why thanksgiving is such a theme of the letter. As Wright says:

He wants them so to understand what the true God has achieved for them in Christ that they will praise him from the bottom of their hearts (1:12-23). He wants them so to understand that they are in Christ, and that therefore no other philosophy or system has any claim on them, that they will celebrate their having died to the old world and come alive to the new (2:6-3:4). He wants them so to grasp the truth of this new way of being human that they will live their lives on the basis of that gratitude, and so be able to put to death all the bits and pieces of the old way of life, and to discover the joy of the new way (3:5-17). In the third chapter of the letter Paul sets out a bracing ethical programme of living in Christ, of following Jesus: no sexual immorality; no anger and violence. But that program does not stand by itself. If you try to live that way without recognizing the defeat of the powers, you will fail. The ethical programme stand four-square on the victory of the cross. The powers of lust, that tell you you can't resist them; the powers of fear, suspicion, and greed, that tell you you must get angry and use violence--these powers were defeated on the cross. They have no rights over you.

As free subjects of the true king we owe nothing at all to the powers. The battle has been won.

All that remains is to celebrate and put into practice this victory. How can that be done? It is surprisingly simple. Every time we gather as God's people we are saying Jesus is Lord and the powers aren't. When we say grace before a meal we are saying Jesus is Lord and the powers aren't. Perhaps uniquely we do this in celebrating the Eucharist, which after all means "thanksgiving." Giving thanks for the work of Christ is the most powerful thing we can ever do. Even if we don't grasp it's significance, the powers surely do. So let's continue on our way with gratitude. The battle has been won; let's celebrate it by following the Lord who won it.

Technorati Tags: NT Wright, Colossians

I liked him better as George

I found this on a blog at Townhall.com by Dean Barnett. He's commenting on seeing Jason Alexander (George from "Seinfeld") criticizing Gen. Peter Pace on Bill Maher's "idiotfest" and then seeing the movie 300. He ties it all together rather neatly:

While Alexander and Maher were discussing Pace’s comments, their condescension and hostility for the military were evident. Their whole conversation rested on the unstated premise that guys like Pace are cretins, and sadly lacking in the enlightenment so ubiquitous in Hollywood. It was also clear that they have absolutely no clue that guys like Peter Pace protect the freedom that they so enjoy and that has made them such rich men.

IT WAS WITH THIS CONVERSATION IN mind that I saw “300” yesterday. First, I must confess that I greatly enjoyed the film. And please note that I consider comic books a waste of time and computer-generated graphics a nuisance.

What made “300” such a delight was the way the film unapologetically and unsubtly embraced such outmoded concepts as loyalty, valor, courage and sacrifice. This was no film for moral relativists. If you’re seeking a nuanced portrayal of war, look elsewhere. Lord knows you won’t lack for options.

The reason the public has embraced “300” is because it was desperate for a film that would depict a battle of good versus evil without expressing sympathy for the devil. There was a purity and a simplicity to “300” – these characteristics had the crowd applauding when the final credits rolled.

SO WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH PETER PACE AND Jason Alexander? Pace, like most career military men, has dedicated his life to a military code that dates back to the Battle of Thermopylae that “300” depicts. His dedication, and that of men and women like him, is what keeps the rest of us free.

Week In Review

Here are some "need to reads" for the week:

• General Pace, whom I admire and have mentioned before, gave homosexuality a less than glowing review this week, which means he must be Satan himself. Greg Koukl writes about the Myth of Moral Neutrality, a principal weapon in the moral relativist armory. Here's a snippet:
  

It’s important to have an informed and civil public dialogue about public policy, and homosexual rights is a delicate subject made more difficult when only one side is accused of moral judgment. Both sides are making moral judgments; it’s the nature of the issue. The question we should be discussing is which moral judgment makes the best public policy? It’s not possible to be morally neutral so it would be much more productive if everyone owned up to their moral values.

• A study which is supposed to attest that homosexuals would make great adoptive parents doesn't really indicate that at all, which is no surprise to Peter Sprigg.
• On the "We'll get Rove or Cheney, yet !!!" front, Washington and the (so aptly dubbed by the Godfather) drive-by media have managed once again to scandalize the exercise of executive power. This U.S. Attorneys story is so lacking in substance it's maddening. Imagine . . . Hillary and Schumer the chief finger waggers! (There's so much on Schumer; here's another one.)
  
• Oh, have you hugged your robot today?
  
• And in the clash of civilizations, the West continues to preemptively surrender. Three Little Puppies?!?!
• For St. Patrick's Day here's a good listen.

Cartoon of the Week: How Earth Mother types imagine the Fall?
And lastly, Al Gore: The Early Years (before he invented the internet)

Immunize Yourself Against the Great Global Warming Swindle

This is the UK documentary that's upsetting all the worshipers of the Earth Mother. Most interesting to me (since I already don't buy the "science" of global warming) was learning of Margaret Thatcher's role in getting the whole man-made global warming movement going. Thatcher wanted to make the UK energy-independent through nuclear power – she didn’t like her country’s reliance on coal, which politically empowered the coal miner unions, or oil, which empowered Middle Eastern states. So Thatcher latched onto the notion that man-made emissions of carbon dioxide warmed the planet in a harmful way, thereby providing the perfect political cover for advancing her nuclear power agenda without having to fight coal miner unions or Arab oil states. She empowered the U.K. Meteorological Office to begin global climate change research. And of course, any government bureaucracy is going to find exactly what it was created to find, whether it exists or not. Her move eventually led to the 1988 creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations’ group that has come to be the “official” international agency for global warming alarmism. Now you know.

Watch this film (which is a far more "documented" documentary than the winner of the Emmy for the best so-called "documentary"). Don't be swindled.

Atlas Shrugged – 50 Years Later

There is much to commend, and much to condemn, in "Atlas Shrugged." Its object – to restore man to his rightful place in a free society – is wholesome. But its ethical basis – an inversion of the Christian values that predicate authentic capitalism – poisons its teachings.

I agree. This is why I'm not a libertarian (at least not of the Randian sort). Read more of Mark Skousen's opinion, with which I pretty much concur, here.

March Madness Live On Your Computer

If you don't like the game you're stuck watching in the Big Dance, you may watch any of the other games (live or played earlier) on your computer without paying a penny. You have to register, but it's no biggie--just opt out of all the "Send me third party e-mails" offers. Try it by clicking here, and Go Jackets!

Chapter 1-The Final Sacrifice: Hebrews (Part II)

Continuing with N.T. Wright's Following Jesus . . .

Secondly, Hebrews gives us a new reading of the Old Testament. Even where the Old Testament is more familiar to us, how the writer of Hebrews is reading it can at first seem odd. The point to grasp here is that Hebrews presents the Old Testament as an unfinished story in need of a final chapter. It requires Jesus and his sacrifice, with which he brings in the new covenant, as its final chapter. The Old Testament continually points beyond itself to a reality, a final dealing with sin, that it itself does not contain. This new reading unfolds in five steps.

First (chapter 1), the Old Testament speaks of angels serving someone greater than themselves. This can only be the Messiah, the Son of God. Second (chapter 2), the Old Testament says the entire creation is subject to human rule, which can only be true in the enthronement of the man Jesus. Third (chapters 3-4), the Old Testament speaks of a time of rest which occurs long after the Jews already dwell in Canaan; there must be a more permanent rest to come. Fourth (chapters of 5-7), the Old Testament speaks of a king who is also a priest. In Jewish categories this is an impossibility; yet, it is true of Jesus. And lastly (chapters 8-10), the Old Testament speaks of a new covenant which, unlike the system of animal sacrifice, will once and for all deal with sin. In each case, only Jesus is the fulfillment. This should show us that what God did in Jesus Christ was not an odd, isolated invasion into the world, but rather the climax of his long plan. Our faith rests upon the rock-solid plan of the Lord of history.

Third and last, Hebrews tells us of Jesus the Final Sacrifice. There is deep seated within human awareness the understanding of guilt and the need for atonement. Things which are wrong must be put right somehow. But the blood of bulls and goats, as Hebrews says, can't take away sins; those sacrifices pointed forward to the one sacrifice of Jesus himself that can and does purify us and make atonement. Look at what the Bible tells us about priests and the need for Jesus' sacrifice becomes clear: God created man to be the priests of all his creation, offering creation's worship and bringing order to it. Man sinned, so God chose Israel as a priestly nation to offer up worship and bring a solution to the problem of human sin. But Israel herself was sinful, so God chose a family of priests (Aaron's sons) for the sinful nation of priests. But these priests, too, were sinful; so God sent his own Son to be the sinless Priest and Sacrifice. Jesus' sacrifice is the point when humanity, in the person of a single man, offers itself fully to the creator. At last consciences can be truly washed clean, and human life is truly possible.

Next time: The Battle Won: Colossians


Technorati Tags: NT Wright, Hebrews

“It’s a big book, full of big stories with big characters. They have big ideas (not least about themselves) and make big mistakes. It’s about God and greed and grace; about life, lust, laughter, and loneliness. It’s about birth, beginnings, and betrayal; about siblings, squabbles, and sex; about power and prayer and prison and passion. And that’s only Genesis.”–N.T. Wright

Chapter 1-The Final Sacrifice: Hebrews (Part I)

"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need."-Hebrews 4:15-16

Hebrews is a difficult book. One way of looking at it, Wright says, would summarize it this way: a complex discussion of angels, followed by a treatment of what Psalm 95 means by 'entering God's rest,' moving on to Melchizedek and a listing of the tabernacle furniture, and ending with an exhortation to 'go outside the camp.' Hmmm. Sure there are a few high points along the way, like the great chapter on faith, but then there's all that stuff about sacrifice which we don't understand very well and are just glad we don't have to do!

Wright suggests there is a better way to approach Hebrews that does help us understand the life of following Jesus. First, it offers a compelling portrait of Jesus, the human high priest, and his cross. The opening passage above needs to be set within the sweep of Hebrews. Here it goes. In chapter 1, Jesus is not merely a special sort of angel. He is in fact superior to them; he is the Son of God. But before you start to get the wrong idea, chapter 2 emphasizes that he is also totally and truly human. This is very important. Jesus has not 'gone back to being just God again.' No, the same Jesus who lived our life and died our death has been exalted and glorified precisely as a human being. In chapter 3 and 4 Jesus is the true Joshua. In fact these are the same name; Joshua is Hebrew and Jesus is Greek. The point is that Jesus is the true Joshua who leads his people into their true promised land. In chapters 5, 6, and 7, Jesus is the true high priest. He is not a temporary priest from the house of Levi, but a priest forever, as Psalm 110 says, of the order of Melchizedek, whose call does not depend upon ancestry, but upon the call of God alone. Chapters 8-10 speak of Jesus' sacrifice and the new covenant. We will return to this theme in the final section.

Chapter 11, the well-known faith chapter, is significant because the important position in such Jewish listings is at the end. And who occupies that position? Jesus, of course. (My comment: The listing doesn't conclude until chapter 12, when Jesus is mentioned. Yet another reason to ignore chapter and verse divisions!) He is the ultimate hero of faith:

"Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted."-Hebrews 12:1-3

At this point I simply have to quote Wright, because he is summarizing, and I can't summarize his summary any better than he!

"The themes we have already looked at come to a head in this passage. Take them in reverse order: Jesus, the high priest, coming at the end of the great list of heroes. Jesus, the one who leads us into our promised land, the pioneer, the one who goes ahead to blaze the trail. Jesus, the truly human being, who has travelled the road of human suffering ahead of us. Jesus, now enthroned as Son of God. Jesus, therefore-as the final chapter 13 puts it-the same yesterday, today, and forever; Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, the one brought again from the dead. That is the picture of Jesus which Hebrews offers us; it is the Jesus who will guide us through life, the Jesus who meets us today as we feast at his table, the Jesus who summons us gently but clearly to follow him. And at the heart of this picture, we find the cross: the cross which Jesus endured on our behalf, which was the climax of his life of suffering and rejection, which was, as we shall see, the final sacrifice."

Technorati Tags: NT Wright, Hebrews

Alternative Browser Alliance

I think I can explain how I got on this bandwagon . . . I finally got the boys' computer an adapter so they can access our wireless internet at home. Their computer is running Windows Millenium Edition (ME) which is still a piece of garbage after all these years. Rather than use Internet Explorer (which is full of it's own problems) I installed Mozilla Firefox, which I have used myself for over a year now. Well, it had problems running on ME, and I couldn't get them solved. I also tried a flash-based browser for kids, but it REALLY bogged down their computer.

I checked around for some other browsers and found Opera as I told you last week. I loved it. It worked great on the boys' computer; it worked great on my laptop. Then I found this Alternative Browsers Alliance site and saw all the choices available and decided to start trying different ones. I now have K-meleon on the boys' computer (which I am using to post this), and I have settled on Opera for myself. I was also intrigued with Flock because it has some interesting blogging features, but I didn't like it overall.

So, what difference does all of this make? I think the boys over at the ABA are right when they say:

Competition keeps innovation going. If several products have to fight for market share, they have to continually one-up each other. End result: all browsers improve, everyone wins.

It hardly seems a coincidence that Microsoft stopped developing Internet Explorer when they trounced Netscape, then started again as soon as Firefox started making gains.

Security may be easier to manage when you only have one place to look, but it's also easier for the bad guys to crack. Right now, they can get 90% of the web just by targeting Internet Explorer on Windows. Now imagine that 90% spread out among IE, Firefox, Opera and Safari on Windows, PowerPC Macs, Intel Macs, and Linux. They'd have to settle for 10% or try to crack every combination they could. Web developers, on the other hand, designing for the common language of the web, would have no more trouble than they do today.

And who knows? You just might find yourself liking another browser better than you thought!

That's what happened to me!

Week in Review

• The State Department has belatedly learned that there are a large number of Muslims in Europe, and they have a plan.  Joseph Farah has a better plan.  (This is a MUST read, folks.)

• A Massachusetts Democrat and Michigan Republican led the charge for our early daylight savings that starts tonight.  They predict the change "will save consumers $4.4 billion and eliminate the need for three coal plants by the year 2020."  That really sounds made up!  But I have to say I love the change.  I wish we stayed on daylight savings year round!
  

• The idea of anarchists organizing themselves is always funny to me.

• A great mystery solved and clearly explained.  (It's visual; you have to click on it.)
  

• Ignorant media? Impossible.  We know they are all geniuses.
  

• Don't let yourself be ignorant.  Read "75 New Reasons to Reconsider the Alleged Need for Stem Cell Research that Destroys Human Embryos."  The document is only about half again as long as the title!
  

• This is two years old, but it is new to me and I'm sure it will be new to most of you.  It's an amazing song of regret.  Cry if necessary.
  

"Read the Scriptures, not as an attorney may read a will, merely to know the sense, but as the heir reads it, as a description and proof of his interest."
-John Newton

FJ-Preface

Well, Wright says some good stuff in his preface so I feel the need to mention that before we get to Hebrews in chapter 1. He begins with a call for us to look at the real Jesus, the one who challenges us and bids us do something about the plight of the world. FJ is about the So What? that follows from looking at the real, historical Jesus. We aren't to simply admire from a distance or, worse, to  tame him so he is easier handle.  He calls us to take action and follow him; what does that mean in today's world?

Wright argues that reading whole books (or at least large chunks) of the Bible at a time ought to be our primary activity rather than daily reading plans which fail to give one the "full flavor and thrust" of Scripture. For example, (here's a challenge to you) he says that Colossians can be read through in about 12 minutes and Hebrews in about an hour. This is how they were originally received, and reading them in such a way really is an aid to understanding what they say.  It is in this expostion of whole books that Wright really excels, as you will see in the first 6 chapters of Following Jesus.  Next up, The Final Sacrifice: Hebrews.