(Helpful) advice welcome

I just deleted a post I had made in which I had image-sourced pictures from two other sites (which might not have been ethical anyway), because I thought they might have been related to a problem - I received two anonymous comments, within one minute of each other, one which said "this site has a virus", and the other said, "this is a lame site". So I looked at the site itself, and had trouble downloading it properly. I decided to try deleting the post (it was a silly one anyway), and sure enough, now this site loads correctly again, at least for me.

As to viruses, if any of you are experienced bloggers and can tell me what happened, feel free to drop a comment. Was it indeed through one of the images?

As to the content of my site, I've never had any such vain imaginings as that it would appeal to everybody, or even to more than a few, but I certainly hope to keep on making it better and better. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go to some other part of the vast internet. But if you feel compelled to expend your valuable finger energy offering criticism of my little blog, please do me a favor and at least make it constructive criticism by offering some helpful suggestions as to what would make it better.

A momentous day

A rare confluence of notable days in one day today:

Good Friday
The Feast of the Annunciation
Purim
The casting of the Ring into the Crack of Doom

Re: the latter, & in honor of all, here's a word picture of the triumph of good over evil, from the Christian imagination of JRR Tolkien, in The Return of the King:

And even as he spoke the earth rocked beneath their feet. Then rising swiftly up, far above the Towers of the Black Gate, high above the mountains, a vast soaring darkness sprang into the sky, flickering with fire. The earth groaned and quaked. The Towers of the Teeth swayed, tottered, and fell down; the mighty rampart crumbled; the Black Gate was hurled in ruin; and from far away, now dim, now growing, now mounting to the clouds, there came a drumming rumble, a roar, a long echoing roll of ruinous noise.

"The realm of Sauron is ended!" said Gandalf. "The Ring-bearer has fulfilled his Quest."

Holding Pattern

If I'm going to get my essays done on time for the course I'm taking in "Jewish Theology", and fulfill my callings as a husband, pastor, etc. too, I'm going to have to taper down my ambitious blogging pace for awhile - so entries will probably become sparse for the next few weeks. If you're looking for something to chew on, click this text to read the essays I wrote for the course on "The Religion of Biblical Israel." I'm pleased with how well they turned out, and the grades were better than I expected. I hope, of course, to do as well in the course I'm taking now. Pray for me, as the fact is, the first course was more interesting to me than this one, simply because I'm ultimately more interested in the Bible than in the teachings of a religion other than my own Christian faith. Yet the LORD has given me the opportunity to take this program, and ultimately I hope to focus on my special interest of the Post-exilic period (536 BC - AD 100). But there are hoops to jump through first, such as this present course. And there are things to learn from it.

Though it's still Holy Week for most Christians, and Eastern Christians are still in the early part of Lent, let me pass this eternal truth on:

CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!
CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!
CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!

100 "Top"(?) Movies - which ones have you seen?

I discovered a new blogging game while visiting A conservative blog for peace, in which you divulge which of AFI's Top 100 movies of all time you've seen. Here's the list, with an asterisk (*) by the ones I've seen in their entirety, and a plus sign (+) by the ones I've seen in part:

1. CITIZEN KANE (1941) +
2. CASABLANCA (1942) *
3. THE GODFATHER (1972)
4. GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) +
5. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)
6. THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939) *
7. THE GRADUATE (1967)
8. ON THE WATERFRONT (1954) +
9. SCHINDLER'S LIST (1993) *
10. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN (1952) *
11. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946) *
12. SUNSET BOULEVARD (1950)
13. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1957) *
14. SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959)
15. STAR WARS (1977) *
16. ALL ABOUT EVE (1950)
17. THE AFRICAN QUEEN (1951) +
18. PSYCHO (1960) *
19. CHINATOWN (1974)
20. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST (1975) *
21. THE GRAPES OF WRATH (1940) +
22. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) *
23. THE MALTESE FALCON (1941) *
24. RAGING BULL (1980)
25. E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (1982) *
26. DR. STRANGELOVE (1964) *
27. BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967)
28. APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)
29. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON (1939)
30. THE TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE (1948)
31. ANNIE HALL (1977)
32. THE GODFATHER PART II (1974)
33. HIGH NOON (1952) *
34. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD (1962)
35. IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (1934) *
36. MIDNIGHT COWBOY (1969)
37. THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES (1946)
38. DOUBLE INDEMNITY (1944)
39. DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (1965) +
40. NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959) *
41. WEST SIDE STORY (1961) *
42. REAR WINDOW (1954) *
43. KING KONG (1933)
44. THE BIRTH OF A NATION (1915)
45. A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE (1951)
46. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (1971)
47. TAXI DRIVER (1976)
48. JAWS (1975)
49. SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS (1937) *
50. BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID (1969) *
51. THE PHILADELPHIA STORY (1940)
52. FROM HERE TO ETERNITY (1953)
53. AMADEUS (1984) *
54. ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (1930)
55. THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965) *
56. M*A*S*H (1970)
57. THE THIRD MAN (1949)
58. FANTASIA (1940) *
59. REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE (1955)
60. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981) *
61. VERTIGO (1958) *
62. TOOTSIE (1982)
63. STAGECOACH (1939)
64. CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (1977) *
65. THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (1991) +
66. NETWORK (1976)
67. THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962)
68. AN AMERICAN IN PARIS (1951)
69. SHANE (1953) *
70. THE FRENCH CONNECTION (1971) *
71. FORREST GUMP (1994)
72. BEN-HUR (1959) *
73. WUTHERING HEIGHTS (1939)
74. THE GOLD RUSH (1925)
75. DANCES WITH WOLVES (1990) *
76. CITY LIGHTS (1931)
77. AMERICAN GRAFFITI (1973)
78. ROCKY (1976)
79. THE DEER HUNTER (1978)
80. THE WILD BUNCH (1969)
81. MODERN TIMES (1936)
82. GIANT (1956)
83. PLATOON (1986)
84. FARGO (1996) *
85. DUCK SOUP (1933) *
86. MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY (1935)
87. FRANKENSTEIN (1931)
88. EASY RIDER (1969)
89. PATTON (1970)
90. THE JAZZ SINGER (1927)
91. MY FAIR LADY (1964) +
92. A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951)
93. THE APARTMENT (1960)
94. GOODFELLAS (1990)
95. PULP FICTION (1994)
96. THE SEARCHERS (1956)
97. BRINGING UP BABY (1938)
98. UNFORGIVEN (1992) +
99. GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER (1967) +
100. YANKEE DOODLE DANDY (1942)




One may dispute this exact "top 100" selection, of course. For example, I think "The Empire Strikes Back" deserves to be in there if "Star Wars" is, and "Mary Poppins" is a work of pure genius. I have a great respect for Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" films, and there are others. Which ones have you seen? Which ones do you think belong in the list?

Schwarzenegger and the moral decorum of office

Something's bothered me for awhile, so I thought I'd mention it since I thought of it this morning.

If I were a Californian, it's perhaps likely that I would be voting for Schwarzenegger in the upcoming election, barring the arrival of a better candidate. It's my impression that he has really taken the bull by the horns to address many of California's economic woes. I'm disappointed in the stands he takes on "moral issues" such as abortion, but as I said, it's still possible that if I were a voter in his state that I'd find him the best candidate running.

Having said that, it seems to me a sign of the times that with all the issues that have been brought up in connection with him, grope-gate and what have you, nobody has ever said "boo" about the fact that he has appeared nude in films. Californians, all you have to do to see what your governor looks like in the buff is to head down to Blockbuster and rent the original "Terminator" film.

I'm not saying that such a thing should bar someone from office, though I personally think a public disavowal or repentance would be in order. It just seems to me that not so long ago, even within my own short lifetime, that this would be an issue, if not a scandal of public decorum. But to my knowledge, nobody on either the right or the left has said anything about it at all, and that just seems strange to me (call me a prude if you want). Is there no sense of embarrassment anymore?

"Athens & Jerusalem" or, "Blue state & Red State Christians"

Here's an interesting paragraph from one of my very favorite books, The Discarded Image by C.S. Lewis (you'll want your own copy - if you buy one from Amazon via the link on my sidebar, you'll make a small contribution to my Amazon Associates fund at no extra charge to you, helping me to expand my already-too-big library, not to twist your arm or anything...):

The present study, however, is interested not in the short-lived impact of the new religion [i.e. Christianity] on the old [i.e. Paganism] but with the enduring effect of the old upon the new. The last, and neo-Platonic, wave of Paganism which had gathered up into itself much from the preceding waves, Aristotelian, Platonic, Stoic, and what not, came far inland and made brackish lakes which have, perhaps, never been drained. Not all Christians at all times have detected them or admitted their existence: and among those who have done so there have always been two attitudes. There was then, and is still, a Christian 'left', eager to detect and anxious to banish every Pagan element; but also a Christian 'right' who, like St. Augustine, could find the doctrine of the Trinity foreshadowed in the Platonici,, or could claim triumphantly, like Justin Martyr, 'Whatever things have been well said by all men belong to us Christians'. (Pp. 48-49)

So, faithful readers (and I know there must be at least four or five of you), what do you think? Should we be on the Christian right or the Christian left, or somewhere in the middle? I guess I'm mostly leaning to the right, but not without some influences toward the left, which interestingly is much like my politics, which are overall "red state", albeit a noticeably purplish red.

Ad fontes! To the sources!

Another issue that Fred's comments have me thinking about is, how do we understand the "Little Apocalypse" in Matt. 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 (must be important, if all three synoptics have it)? Is it about future events, or was it fulfilled in the First Century AD, such as in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? The latter view is current among a number of people of the "preterist" persuasion (don't confuse all preterists with the "full preterist" heresy which puts the return of Christ & everything back at AD 70, which leaves me wondering, "how did Christ return without anyone at the time noticing?").

I also had an interesting chat about the end times recently with my new Seventh-Day Adventist pastor friend (they, of course have some rather distinctive & strong views about the end times), who had never heard such an idea as Mt. 24 being fulfilled, even partially, in AD 70, and wondered where anyone got that idea. On the other hand, the Adventists (a distinctive form of "historicism/futurism" in prophecy) are definitely agreed with the preterists that there are no future prophecies to be fulfilled in connection with Israel, other than Jewish people coming to faith in Jesus Christ.

Anyway, rather than pondering this on my own, I decided I'd better do what my prof said and go "to the sources". There's nothing like primary sources, and I believe Chesterton said something about tradition being "giving the dead a vote", so I wondered, "when did early Christians believe Mt. 24 would be (or was) fulfilled?" The Didache, chapter 16, contains an apocalyptic section very similar to Mt. 24, Mk 13, and Lk 21:

16:1 Watch concerning your life; let not your lamps be quenched or your loins be loosed, but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour at which our Lord cometh.
(cf. Mk 13:35,37; Mt. 24:42,44; Lk 12:35,40)
16:2 But be ye gathered together frequently, seeking what is suitable for your souls; for the whole time of your faith shall profit you not, unless ye be found perfect in the last time.

16:3 For in the last days false prophets and seducers shall be multiplied, and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall be turned into hate;

16:4 and because iniquity aboundeth they shall hate each other, and persecute each other, and deliver each other up; and then shall the Deceiver of the world appear as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands; and he shall do unlawful things, such as have never happened since the beginning of the world. (cf. Mt 24:10-12, Mk 13:22)

16:5 Then shall the creation of man come to the fiery trial of proof, and many shall be offended and shall perish; but they who remain in their faith shall be saved by the rock of offence itself. (Mt. 24:10,13)

16:6 And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first the sign of the appearance in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead (Mt. 24:30

16:7 -- not of all, but as it has been said, The Lord shall come and all his saints with him; (Mt. 24:31; I Cor. 15:52; I Thess. 4:12; Zech. 14:5; I Thess. 3:13)

16:8 then shall the world behold the Lord coming on the clouds of heaven.
(cf. Mt. 24:30)

According to Holmes (on my sidebar), pp. 247-248, dates from AD 50 to the third century have been proposed for the Didache, though the UBS Greek NT & the Nestle-Aland list it as a second century work. So it's likely that Christians after AD 70 were viewing these apocalyptic events as future events, though the uncertainties in dating the Didache mean that it isn't absolutely proven.

Another thing about the Didache - note that Chapter 1 quotes the "Sermon on the Mount" (Mt. 5ff) as if it is indeed a guide for present-day Christians (that present day being when the Didache was composed, probably in the second century). That means that the early Christians were not dispensationalists! At least not the kind that say that the Sermon on the Mount is not intended for the Church Age, but for the future Millennium (some dispensationalists divvy up the Bible in astonishing ways, listing in great detail which parts of the Bible are for our time, and which aren't).

Fun with geography

Thanks to David Holford, I've just discovered a fun site on which you can make a map of which states (or Canadian provinces, or foreign countries) you've been to. Here's my USA map. I've also been to the provinces of Manitoba and Sasketchewan, and I've walked about 10 blocks into Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, and also went on a trip to England 16 years ago.



Create your own personalized map of the USA

Update: While we're at it, here are the states where I've lived:

I'm a skier again!

After 22 years ... And I didn't break anything! I only fell four times ... then there was the time I kinda had to kneel to catch myself ... and the time I had to fall on purpose to avoid hitting anything at the bottom of the slope ... but that doesn't count, does it? Now I'm ready for the big multi-church ski extravaganza this coming Sunday! (Pray for me)



(Actually that's not me in the picture)