CalvinDude.com

When all life’s tragedies unfold
Upon the face of past glory
Perhaps then the story may be told
Of better things than history
But all these things may never be
Because indifference just can’t see.

If all my life was counterfit
Perhaps then this would make some sense
But alas I fear what lies have knit
May obscure all from whence
They came; to stumble on the fact
Sometimes it’s better just to act.

They say Fortune favors the bold
But unless I am mistaken now
The bold habitually never grow old
Because they all expire somehow.
And many years will pass them by
Before the world knows that they die.

They try to get Triumph in their grasp
But it’s Defeat they feel inside
When shuddering with last breath they gasp
“Perhaps it’s time I do confide
That what my life was worth before
I see now never mattered more

Than when I gave it all away
And felt the loss through to my soul
And even now I fear the day
When God will judge me by the whole
Of what actions I never did
And those deeds I wish were hid.”

Perhaps “mercy” cannot explain
The fullness of what Blood has wrought
To cleanse life with a crimson stain
So the flesh can be forgot
Without a spot, standing pure;
To finally know that you’re secure.

For quite some time, I have said that the Gospel of John is my favorite book of the Bible. This is still true now that I have read it yet again :-) There were some things that I caught this time around that I really didn’t “get” previously to this reading. Part of it is due to the classes I am taking in Seminary (Dr. Louis Hill is the BOMB!). However, check out these little observations.

First, I have often thought that when Jesus declared that Judas was the one who would betray Him that He said this to all the disciples. However, this time when I read John 13:21-30, I came to the conclusion that Jesus only told John that it would be Judas who would betray Him. Consider the following (in the ESV, since that is the only Bible I currently have access to):

One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved [ie. John], was reclining at the table close to Jesus, so Simon Peter motioned to him to ask Jesus of whom he was speaking. So that disciple, leaning back against Jesus, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly.” Now no one at the table knew why he had said this to him.

As I read this now, it seems obvious to me that Jesus only spoke to John when He said, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” Firstly because Peter motioned for John to ask Jesus rather than asking himself; secondly because John reclined close to Jesus to ask the question; and thirdly because of the final verse: “Now no one at the table knew why he had said this to him.”

Another thing that I discovered thanks to the classes I’m taking is that John, whoever else he was, was well known to the high priest. After all, it is only because of John that Peter was able to get into the courtyard where he denied Jesus three times: “Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest, but Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door, and brought Peter in.” (John 18:15-16) Since the high priest was Caiaphas, then we can conclude that John (who at this time was probably just a teen) was personally known by Caiaphas.

I wonder with this bit of information just what was going through John’s mind at the crucifixion. He and his family (it is presumed) were known by the high priest, and yet that high priest had had Jesus put to death. John was the disciple whom Jesus loved, and at the cross Jesus gave His mother into John’s protection. Obviously the relationship that they had was great, but what was the relationship between John and Caiaphas? Perhaps it was nothing more than simple name recognition, but that seems unlikely to me given the ease in which John was able to enter into the court of the high priest.

Obviously I wouldn’t want to push anything further than Scripture warrants, but it is still an interesting thought, and a great way to end reading John again :-D

…but when I saw this headline:

Study Says There Is More Sex on TV…

I thought, Wouldn’t that be uncomfortable? And then I thought, Why can’t I ever get paid to do a pointless study with results that everyone already knows?

I just got this from my dad:

Bultmann reads Mother Goose

I — A Hey diddle diddle,
I — B The cat and the fiddle,
II — A The cow jumped over the moon.
II — B The little dog laughed to see such sport,
III – And the dish ran away with the spoon.

1. Authorship and date. Internal evidence rejects the view that we have here an original composition by Mary (Mother) Goose of Boston (1686-1743). The phrasing of I-A is definitely late eighteenth century, since the Goose Period would have rendered it “diddley-diddley” (and thus ”fiddley” in I-B). Furthermore, the sequence “cat-cow-dog-dish” represents an obvious redaction and is a compilation of at least four accounts. Thus, the author of the piece is unknown, and its date set between 1780 and 1820. The Sitz im Leben of the Depression of 1815 may be reflected in III.

2. Text. The received text is very corrupt. The mythological element in II-A is typical of many other interpolations, as is the anthropomorphism in II-B. However, I-A may be original, excluding, of course, the “hey.”

3. Interpretation. Stripped of its thought forms, the piece tells us of something revolutionary as existentially encountered by three animals, two cooking implements, and one musical instrument. Perhaps an eclipse of the moon?

I’m writing this for the first time away from work. That’s right, I’ve actually got access to a dial up connection, which amazingly enough is better than no connection at all. Go figure. (Yes, you may file this one under the Captain Obvious file.)

Anyway, I’m still working on getting the main site integrated into this new blog software so that I can destroy more spammers! I have to say that spam is the most evil creation ever outside of Vonage commercials which, for some reason, my little nephew really, really likes (then again, he’s only one year old so who can blame him?).

Yes, perhaps this means I’m blogging with no particular purpose. That means I’m just like everyone else now. Mommy, can I have my Captain Obvious decal yet???

From Reuters:

A Chinese court on Tuesday sentenced a Protestant minister, his wife and her brother to prison terms of up to three years for illegally printing Bibles and other Christian publications, one of their lawyers said.

…

In atheist China, printing of Bibles and other religious publications need special approval from the State Bureau of Religious Affairs. Bibles cannot be openly bought at bookshops in a country long criticized overseas for intolerance of religion.

…

The prosecutor, in the bill of indictment, accused the defendants of illegally printing 200,000 copies of the Bible which were found in Cai’s warehouse but the verdict did not mention a figure.

In July, Hong Kong’s Beijing-funded Ta Kung Pao newspaper quoted Ye Xiaowen, director of the State Bureau of Religious Affairs, as saying Cai illegally printed 40 million copies of the Bible and other Christian publications.

Ye accused Cai of illegally selling over two million copies of the Bible instead of giving them away for free, the newspaper said, adding that Ye insisted the case had nothing to do with religious persecution.

Don’t worry, San Francisco and the 9th Circus will soon join forces with China so you won’t feel left out.

Some things that happen can’t be otherwise. If they were, the minor events that reflect from them would alter everything beyond repair.

Maybe everything is inevitable. Can there be anything without a cause? If not, then all causes are linked in an eternal chain. A->B->C->etc.

Ignorance is not a denial of inevitability. Not knowing doesn’t alter anything…but knowing is part of the system itself. Thus, self-reference is inevitable because it has happened.

If all is inevitable, then all will be. Que sera sera. There are no coincidencees then. All things affect all things, and the absense of one changes all. It’s the Butterfly Effect.

Could you change if you had the ability? Not without destroying the ability to. It would become like a time-travel paradox.

If I was half as alone would I be twice as complete?

In an effort to kill off some spammers, and also because I tend to get bored and like changing stuff at random moments, I’m moving everything from my old blog to this one. It should help with the spam because you won’t be able to post comments unless you’re a member. If members spam, members get their IP BANNED!

So enjoy the new blog. Or else.