Posts from — January 2004

Did you know….

The crust of bread is formed when the the sugars in the dough caramelize.

You might wonder where I received such impressive knowledge. But, no. I’m not going to tell you.

Well, blogout is no more. I suppose I will finally give in and go with sensus plenior (which I reall should have done from the start). When I’ve got functioning comments again, I’ll make my announcement. Any guesses?

Until then, you can spend your time being bitter about the fact that I haven’t had to go to work the past two days because of snow and ice. Haha! I wonder if I’ll have to go in tomorrow… I figure it likely, since roads are pretty clear and we’ve already missed two days. But you never know… people around here can’t handle the cold!

I’m taking off friday as we travel to Ohio to see family and allow family to see the cutest kids in the world.

and also to get some furniture from family. Unfortunately, we won’t have time to visit Barb like we’ve wanted to do for so long. This is going to be a quick visit. Just one night. And, since Megan’s family is moving, we won’t be going back up there. So, no more chances to hang out. That stinkowitz.

By the way… If anyone really wants to make a comment, the email to the left really does work.

I just realized that my comments don’t actually allow anyone to comment. So… if anyone has tried to comment, and then couldn’t… I apologize. I suppose that’s what you get when you don’t pay anything, right?

What is a good book on Mormonism?

I think a lot of people have a problem with “Federal Visionism” because they refuse to understand the teachings in the context of the church, where, generally, people really do believe God. Instead, they look at everything as individuals (individualism?), and then things get all screwy.

Well, I was just going to same some things about the James White ruckus, but I don’t want to get into that mess, and if I posted what I had typed up, I’d be a hippocrite.

Instead, I will talk about a movie I saw recently: An Ideal Husband.

I haven’t yet gone through and really thought about it, and made an attempt to discern what I was being fed in watching it. I haven’t typed up my page about the movie, giving the pros and cons, and a critical analysis from a Christian worldview (something I recently decided would be a good idea to do for each film I see). So I can only give some initial reactions to the film.

I liked it. I enjoyed watching it, and was on the edge of my seat (so to speak) during the climax of the film. I enjoyed the characters, an thought that they were well presented. The moral of the story is to repent, and also to forgive. Of course, other, more minor elements are throughout, but I think that’s the biggie. Or, to put it even more bluntly, everyone’s a screw up, so don’t pretend like you aren’t. But don’t settle for being a screw up, either. “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more”.

so anyhow.

What was I thinking in not reading Tim Enloe’s blog on a regular basis?

“I am a nice shark, not a mindless eating machine. If I am to change this image, I must first change myself. Fish are friends, not food.”

“Except stinkin’ dolphins.”

“Dolphins! Yeah, they think they’re sooo cute! ‘Hey, look at me. I’m a flippin’ little dolphin! Let me flip for ‘ya! Ain’t I a somethin’!

In reading Face To Face, I’m reminded that good Christian friends confront one another with their sin. And that it sometimes hurts to do it (and receive it), but it needs to be done. And it doesn’t always need to be done with harsh words, but sometimes it does.

And that thought then reminds me of this passage from Jane Austen’s Emma:

While waiting for the carriage, she found Mr. Knightley by her side. He looked around, as if to see that no one were near, and then said, “Emma, I must once more speak to you as I have been used to do: a privilege rather endured than allowed, perhaps, but I must still use it. I cannot see you acting wrong, without a remonstrance. How could you be so unfeeling to Miss Bates? How could you be so insolent in your wit to a woman of her character, age, and situation? – Emma, I had not thought it possible.”

Emma recollected, blushed, was sorry, but tried to laugh it off. “Nay, how could I help saying what I did? – Nobody could have helped it. It was not so very bad. I dare say she did not understand me.”

“I assure you she did. She felt your full meaning. She has talked of it since. I wish you could have heard how she talked of it – with what candour and generosity. I wish you could have heard her honouring your forbearance, in being able to pay her such attentions, as she was for ever receiving from yourself and your father, when her society must be so irksome.”

“Oh!” cried Emma, “I know there is not a better creature in the world: but you must allow, that what is good and what is ridiculous are most unfortunately blended in her.”

“They are blended,” said he, “I acknowledge; and, were she prosperous, I could allow much for the occasional prevalence of the ridiculous over the good. Were she a woman of fortune, I would leave every harmless absurdity to take its chance, I would not quarrel with you for any liberties of manner. Were she your equal in situation – but, Emma, consider how far this is from being the case. She is poor; she has sunk from the comforts she was born to; and, if she live to old age, must probably sink more. Her situation should secure your compassion. It was badly done, indeed! You, whom she had known from an infant, whom she had seen grow up from a period when her notice was an honour, to have you now, in thoughtless spirits, and the pride of the moment, laugh at her, humble her – and before her niece, too – and before others, many of whom (certainly some,) would be entirely guided by your treatment of her. – This is not pleasant to you, Emma – and it is very far from pleasant to me; but I must, I will, – I will tell you truths while I can; satisfied with proving myself your friend by very faithful counsel, and trusting that you will some time or other do me greater justice than you can do now.”

And some people say reading fiction is a waste of time!

Have I mentioned that I am looking forward to Peter Leithart’s book on Jane Austen’s novels?

The State of the Union Address
(a summary by moi.)

The President: blah blah blah blahblah blah blahblahblah blah.

Congress and All Those in Attendance: clap, clap, clap & cheer cheer – Standing ovation and all that rot.

repeat, ad nauseum.

Christianity has fought, still fights, and will continue to fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing.

-G. Richard Bozarth, “The Meaning of Evolution”, American Atheist, p. 30, 20 September 1979.

They know it…. so why don’t we?