Jerry Nixon @home

Remember the Four Loves and their Unexpected Risks

2023-01-10T00:44:00.004-07:00

C.S. Lewis, in his book "The Four Loves," describes four different Greek words for love that are present in the New Testament, each with their own distinct characteristics. The four Greek words are:

Eros: This is a passionate love, often associated with romantic love. It is rooted in Greek mythology, where Eros is the god of love and desire. It is characterized by a strong emotional attachment and a longing for physical intimacy. Examples of this kind of love are romantic relationships, infatuation, or sexual attraction.
Storge: This is a love of familiarity, often associated with familial love. This kind of love is characterized by the feeling of comfort and safety that comes from being around someone who is familiar and known. Examples of this kind of love are parents and children, siblings, or close friends.
Philia: This is a love of friendship. It is characterized by mutual respect, loyalty, and a willingness to put the well-being of the other person above one's own. Examples of this kind of love are friendships, camaraderie, or comradeship.
Agape: This is a love that is characterized by selflessness, devotion, and an unconditional love. Agape is often associated with divine love and is often used to describe God's love for humanity. Examples of this kind of love are selfless love, altruism, or devotion.

It is important to mention that these four kinds of love aren't mutually exclusive and can overlap with one another. For example, romantic relationships can have elements of both Eros and Philia.

Risks

It is also worth noting that each of these forms of love have their own risks. For example, Eros can lead to unhealthy attachment or an obsessive need to possess the other person, Storge can lead to complacency and stagnation, Philia can lead to betrayal or unbalanced relationship, and Agape can lead to neglecting self-care or codependency.

Analogies to Explain the Trinity

2023-01-10T00:22:00.002-07:00

The Trinity is one of the central doctrines of Christianity, and it describes the belief that God is one in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It can be a difficult concept to understand and explain, so many analogies have been used over the years to help explain it.

Here are five common analogies and the problems with each:

An egg analogy - The egg analogy compares the Trinity to an egg, with the shell representing the Father, the yolk representing the Son, and the white representing the Holy Spirit. This analogy has the problem of implying that the three persons of the Trinity are separate and distinct, when in fact they are considered to be one in essence and being.
A water analogy - The water analogy compares the Trinity to water, which can exist in three states: solid, liquid, and gas. The solid state represents the Father, the liquid state represents the Son, and the gas state represents the Holy Spirit. The problem with this analogy is that it is implying that the three persons are different forms or modes of the same substance, rather than distinct persons in unity.
A clover analogy - The clover analogy compares the Trinity to a clover, with each leaf representing one of the three persons. The problem with this analogy is that it's implying that the three persons of the Trinity are distinct entities that come together to make one whole, whereas the doctrine of the Trinity holds that the three persons are distinct but not separate.
A shamrock analogy - Similar to clover, the shamrock analogy compares the Trinity to a shamrock, with each leaf representing one of the three persons. The problem with this analogy is that it is implying that the three persons are distinct entities that come together to make one whole.
A mind, body, and spirit analogy - This analogy compares the Trinity to a person, with the mind representing the Father, the body representing the Son, and the spirit representing the Holy Spirit. The problem with this analogy is that it implies that the persons of the Trinity are three different aspects of one being, rather than distinct persons who share the same essence and being.

In general, it's important to understand that the Trinity is a mystery of faith and can't be fully comprehended by human reason. Analogies can be helpful in providing a way to begin to understand the concept, but they also have their limits in fully explaining it. However, there are several verses in the Bible that speak to the three persons of the Godhead and their unity. Here are a few examples:

Matthew 28:19: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." This verse is often referred to as the Great Commission, and it speaks to the unity of the three persons of the Trinity in one name.
John 14:26: "But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." This verse speaks to the distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and their unity in purpose.
John 15:26: "When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me." This verse speaks to the unity and distinction of the three persons of the Trinity and their role in revealing truth about Jesus.
2 Corinthians 13:14: "May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." This verse speaks to the unity and co-equal roles of the three persons of the Trinity in granting grace, love, and fellowship.
1 Peter 1:2: "To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: May grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord." This verse speaks to the unity of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit in salvation and the granting of grace and peace.

These are just a few examples of Bible verses that speak to the doctrine of the Trinity. Other verses that also touch on the doctrine of the Trinity include Isaiah 48:16, Isaiah 63:9-10, and Revelation 1:4-5. Additionally, throughout the New Testament, several verses speak to the person and work of the Father, the person and work of the Son, and the person and work of the Holy Spirit, which together provide the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity.

It is important to understand that the doctrine of the Trinity is rooted in the entire Bible, not just in a few specific verses. The doctrine of the Trinity can be inferred through a comprehensive reading and understanding of the Bible as a whole, which teaches that God is one in being, yet distinct in persons, and it's a belief that has been traditionally held by Christianity since the early days of the church, and based on the biblical testimony of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being distinct persons but also one in essence and being.

Looking into the Year Jesus was Born using Herod's timeline.

2023-01-10T00:13:00.002-07:00

Dionysius Exiguus, a 6th century monk, is credited with calculating the birth year of Jesus and introducing the use of the Anno Domini (AD) era. He believed that Jesus was born in the year 753 AUC (Ab Urbe Condita, or "From the Founding of the City," meaning Rome) which he converted to the date of 1 AD. However, Dionysius made an error in his calculation by not taking into account that there was no year "0" between the years 1 BC and 1 AD.

Recent discoveries and historical research suggest that Jesus was likely born several years earlier than 1 AD. One key piece of evidence is the reference in the Gospel of Luke to a census that was conducted "while Quirinius was governor of Syria" (Luke 2:2). This census is believed by many scholars to have been conducted in 6 AD and it would mean that Jesus was born before that date. It's also worth noting that although the Bible doesn't provide a reason for the travel, the traditional understanding of the biblical account is that the journey to Bethlehem, and Jesus's birth there, fulfill the Old Testament prophecy in Micah 5:2 which speaks of a ruler coming from Bethlehem.

Additionally, the death of King Herod the Great, who is said to have ordered the Massacre of the Innocents, is said to have occurred in 4 BC.

Furthermore, many scholars today, based on the historical and scriptural evidence, believe that Jesus was likely born between 6-4 BC. The exact date, however, is difficult to pin down and it's likely that the gospel authors were more focused on the theological and spiritual significance of Jesus' birth rather than providing an exact date.

Herod the Great, the Roman-appointed King of Judaea, is said to have died in 4 BC. The exact date of his death is uncertain, but it is thought to have occurred around the end of March or beginning of April of that year.

The cause of Herod's death is also not well-documented in contemporary historical records. However, the ancient historian Flavius Josephus, in his "Antiquities of the Jews," describes Herod's death as a slow and painful one. According to Josephus, Herod suffered from a severe case of chronic kidney and bladder disease, and other symptoms such as a fever, severe itching, and a severe abdominal pain. Josephus also states that Herod's physicians were unable to cure him, and that his suffering continued for five days.

Herod's death was also a political event, as it triggered a succession crisis, with his sons fighting for the throne. The events following his death would be connected with the reign of his sons and family, with them also fighting for the power, and also lead to the Roman involvement in the region.

It's important to note that some of the details of Herod's death and illness, as reported by Josephus, have been considered by some scholars as being likely embellished or exaggerated, and the exact circumstances of his death remain uncertain.

As for the date of Jesus' death, it is traditionally held to be around AD 30. It is commonly accepted that Jesus died under the governorship of Pontius Pilate, which is historically dated to the years 26-36 AD. The gospels accounts also give hints that Jesus died during the Jewish Passover and in some years that would fall on AD 30. However, without solid historical documentation it is difficult to specify the exact year.

Overall, while the traditional date of Jesus' birth is celebrated on December 25, it is now widely accepted by scholars that Jesus was likely born several years earlier than the commonly accepted date of 1 AD. Despite the historical and scriptural evidence pointing to a date in the range of 6-4 BC and historians providing the date of death around AD 30, the exact date of Jesus' birth and death remains uncertain due to lack of concrete historical documentation and the focus of the gospel authors on the spiritual and theological significance rather than exact historical dating.

Suggesting Jesus was born in December by considering Levitical Shepherds

2023-01-09T23:57:00.006-07:00

The argument for Levitical shepherds being in the fields all year round is based on the fact that, according to the Law of Moses, the priests of the Israelites were required to offer animal sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem on a regular basis. These sacrifices included burnt offerings, grain offerings, and sin offerings, as well as the offering of lambs as peace offerings.

It is believed that Levitical shepherds, who were responsible for providing the animals for these sacrifices, would have been in the fields all year round, raising the lambs that were to be offered at the Temple. These lambs were considered to be sacred, and they were to be raised in a clean and pure manner, according to the requirements of the Law.

Therefore, some people argue that it is possible that Levitical shepherds could have been in the fields at the time of Jesus' birth, even if it was during the winter months, because they would have been raising sacrificial lambs all year round. According to this view, the shepherds mentioned in the Christmas story in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 2:8-20) could have been Levitical shepherds, rather than ordinary shepherds who were only in the fields during the warmer months.

It's important to note that the Bible does not specify the occupation or status of the shepherds mentioned in the Christmas story, and different interpretations of the text have been offered by scholars over the years. The argument for Levitical shepherds being in the fields all year round is one interpretation, but it is not the only one.

Comparing Lent to Advent

2023-01-09T23:54:00.000-07:00

Lent and Advent are two liturgical seasons observed by many Christian churches. Lent is a period of fasting, repentance, and spiritual discipline in the run-up to Easter, while Advent is a time of preparation and expectation leading up to Christmas.

Mardi Gras, also known as "Fat Tuesday," is a carnival celebration that takes place the Tuesday before Ash Wednesday, marking the beginning of the Lenten season. Mardi Gras is often associated with excess and indulgence and is seen as a way to "use up" rich foods and other indulgences before the period of fasting and self-denial that begins on Ash Wednesday. Mardi Gras is particularly associated with the city of New Orleans, where it is celebrated with parades, music, and other festivities.

Lent begins on Ash Wednesday and lasts for 40 days, not counting Sundays, which are considered "mini-Easters" and are not included in the count. The 40 days of Lent are meant to be a time of reflection and spiritual discipline, and to symbolize the 40 days that Jesus spent in the wilderness fasting and being tempted by Satan.

One of the most notable traditions of Ash Wednesday is the practice of marking believers' foreheads with ashes in the shape of a cross. The ashes are typically made by burning palm branches from the previous year's Palm Sunday celebrations, which commemorates Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem.

The use of ashes as a sign of repentance and humility has a long history in the Bible. In the Old Testament, ashes were often used as a symbol of mourning, repentance, and humility. For example, in the book of Job, it says "I put on sackcloth and covered myself with ashes" (Job 42:6). In the New Testament, Jesus tells his followers to "repent and believe the good news" (Mark 1:15), and the use of ashes on Ash Wednesday is seen as a tangible way for believers to express their repentance and willingness to turn from their sin and follow Jesus.

The imposition of ashes on the forehead is typically accompanied by the words "Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return" or "Repent and believe in the Gospel." These words serve as a reminder of our human frailty and mortality, and of the need to turn away from sin and turn towards God.

The purpose of Lent is to prepare Christians for Easter, the celebration of the resurrection of Jesus. It is a time to focus on spiritual growth, self-examination, and repentance. Many Christians observe Lent by fasting, praying, and giving up certain pleasures or indulgences as a way to draw closer to God.

Advent, on the other hand, begins on the fourth Sunday before Christmas and lasts for four weeks. It is a time of preparation and expectation, as Christians await the celebration of the birth of Jesus. During Advent, many people use an Advent calendar, which is a calendar with small doors that are opened each day in the run-up to Christmas, with a small treat or activity inside. Some Advent calendars also include candles, with one being lit each week. The four candles represent the four weeks of Advent, and are often associated with the themes of hope, love, joy, and peace.

The purpose of Advent is to prepare for the celebration of the birth of Jesus. It is a time to reflect on the significance of the Incarnation, the belief that Jesus, the Son of God, became human and was born in the form of a baby. Advent is also a time to focus on the coming of Jesus as the King and Judge, and to prepare for his second coming at the end of time. Many Christians observe Advent by lighting candles, praying, and engaging in acts of service and charitable giving.

The origins of Lent and Advent can be traced back to the early centuries of Christianity. Lent has its roots in the ancient practice of preparing new believers for baptism through a period of fasting, prayer, and instruction. Advent, on the other hand, developed as a way to mark the period of waiting and preparation leading up to the celebration of Christmas. Both Lent and Advent were formalized as liturgical seasons in the 5th century.

The two liturgical seasons are observed by many Christian churches. Lent is a period of 40 days of fasting, repentance, and spiritual discipline in the run-up to Easter, while Advent is a time of preparation and expectation leading up to Christmas. Mardi Gras, also known as "Fat Tuesday," is a carnival celebration that takes place the Tuesday before Ash Wednesday, marking the beginning of the Lenten season. Advent is marked by the use of an Advent calendar, with one candle being lit each week, representing the themes of hope, love, joy, and peace. The purpose of Lent is to prepare Christians for Easter, while the purpose of Advent is to prepare for the celebration of the birth of Jesus.

The 12 Days of Christmas from December 25 to January 6

2023-01-09T23:41:00.000-07:00

Christmas is typically celebrated on December 25 by most Christian churches worldwide, including Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches. This date was chosen in the 4th century by the church to coincide with the Roman festival of Saturnalia, which was a popular pagan festival celebrated around the same time of the year. By co-opting the date of a well-established pagan festival, the church hoped to make it easier for people to adopt the Christian celebration of Christmas.

However, some churches, particularly Eastern Orthodox churches, continue to follow the Julian calendar, which is currently 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar used by most of the Western world. According to the Julian calendar, December 25 corresponds to January 7 in the Gregorian calendar. As a result, Eastern Orthodox churches, such as the Greek Orthodox Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Coptic Orthodox Church, celebrate Christmas on January 7 instead of December 25.

Additionally, the 12 Days of Christmas are the period that in Christian theology marks the span between the birth of Christ and the coming of the Magi, the three wise men. They begin on December 25th and end on January 5th, the eve of the Epiphany. The song 'The 12 Days of Christmas' is a popular English Christmas carol that enumerates a series of increasingly grand gifts given on each of the twelve days of Christmas, starting on December 25th, with the final day being January 5th. The song is not religious in nature but it was used by the Church as a way of remembering and celebrating the 12 days of Christmas and what each day represents.

In summary, most churches celebrate Christmas on December 25th, but some Eastern Orthodox churches follow the Julian calendar and celebrate it on January 7th. The 12 Days of Christmas are also known as the "Twelve Days of Yuletide" and they are the period of celebrating Christmas, starting on December 25th and ending on January 5th.

Calculating Jesus' birthday using the story of Zacharias

2023-01-09T23:33:00.001-07:00

The story of Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, is found in the first chapter of the Gospel of Luke. According to this story, an angel appeared to Zacharias while he was serving as a priest in the Temple in Jerusalem and announced that his wife, Elizabeth, would bear a son who would become the forerunner of the Messiah.

The birth of John the Baptist is not explicitly dated in the Bible, but scholars have attempted to determine the approximate time of his birth based on historical and scriptural information. One argument that some people use to suggest that the birth of Jesus was in December or January is based on the timing of the Jewish calendar and Zacharias' service in the Temple.

The Bible states that Zacharias was a member of the division of Abijah, and that his service in the Temple was in accordance with the custom of the priesthood. According to the Mishnah, a Jewish oral law, the division of Abijah served in the Temple during the week of the festival of Sukkot, which typically falls in September or October.

From this information, some scholars have suggested that the birth of John the Baptist took place around six months before the birth of Jesus, which would place Jesus' birth in the spring, around March or April. However, some use the verse in Luke 1:5-8 which mentions, "in the days of Herod king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah." argue that the verse is referring to the days of King Herod's rule, during his lifetime there were multiple priests, who would've served at different times, so the scripture does not necessarily to refer to specific time of the year.

Therefore, there is no clear reference in the Bible that pinpoints the month of Jesus' birth, and the argument that it took place in December or January is not a biblical one. The biblical narrative does not provide a date of Jesus' birth and it is not a central point in the New Testament's account of Jesus.

Happiness versus Joy

2014-07-10T10:31:00.001-06:00

Happiness is unsustainable – but we know that because it never lasts. Happiness is illusive – but we know that because the more we chase it the less we get, or unwind what we have. Adrenaline junkies hunt the next big thing because the last big thing is over. Yet that work, cost, and sacrifice to reach what’s next depletes its pleasure.

Life is like a kitchen and a hard circumstance is like the hot griddle in front of us. To salve our displeasure we add water – but that water is vaporized before it is enjoyed, and that steam seems to burn us more. We rinse and repeat, but we can never overcome the omnipotence of the heat.

Over in the breakfast nook God is enjoying his tea and looking at us. He tilts is head curiously, watching us put water on the griddle. The griddle is hot. We’re wearing a chef’s hat. And, while we are wanting to turn down the heat, God wants us to start cooking.

Joy, lexically similar to happiness, is nothing like happiness. In our story joy is a cool breeze from the nearby window; it helps us bear the heat. Nobody expects a chef to change the weather. But nobody stops him from enjoying its coolness and beauty. The griddle gets hotter, the weather is unchanged.

Joy is sustainable – it endures irrespective of what is going on because they are not connected. Joy is not illusive – when we seek it, we find it to be omnipresent. And like an aged woman in a You Tube video, we can see joy is common, and blooms even in the presence of sorrow, paucity, and ill health.

There are three pillars to joy: gratitude, contentment, and faith (or hope). These buttresses of joy are knotty things that unveil the work of God in and around us, repeal our disinhibiting hubris, and imbue us with (of all things) happiness – perhaps a better word is gladness.

Oxymoronically, gladness doesn’t always come with a smile; sometimes it makes us cry. And, yes, sometimes it makes us smile – even if it is through tears.

Joy - the culmination of gratitude (past), contentment (present), and faith (future) - isn't kindred to our circumstance. It doesn't have anything to do with this moment; it isn't tied to it; and, it isn't impacted by it. Rather, it influences who we are, which resultantly influences this moment.

Perhaps the better circle of life is where we allow the goodness in the panoply of our life to influence individual moments to be better in that bigger and more meaningful context – and not to allow individual circumstance(s) to conclude whether or not life itself is good, and cripple us.

Coming from a life of pain and trial, it would be easy to be bitter and worn down. Yet, María's words speak of trust, change, and hope. Be inspired by the faith of this woman who has seen God's redemption firsthand.

If what's legal is not immoral, then is it immoral to do what's illegal?

2010-02-04T10:22:00.001-07:00

My, oh, my, how skilled I am at justifying what I want to do. But this time, I hit a wall. This time, the Bible wins.

First there’s this:

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. – Romans 13:1

This makes one point: Christians cannot ignore the law. It says that if an action is illegal, Christians have a moral obligation to obey it as if in obedience to God. However, this is not the whole story. There is the case when the Earthly law contradicts God’s Transcendent instruction.

So, there’s this:

Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this Name,' he said. 'Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood.' Peter and the other apostles replied: ‘We must obey God rather than men!' – Acts 5:29

This makes another point: Christians are not subject to man’s law when man’s law contradicts God’s instruction. And so, to know which laws are to be obeyed we must identify those laws which contradict God.

We should categorize laws into two camps.

First, Moral laws that corresponds to God’s law or contradicts God’s instruction. An example of these would be Abortion laws, Capital Punishment laws, some laws regarding Religion, Marriage, and Military Service.

For this first group of laws, many will be in harmony with the teachings of the Scriptures. Some will be in stark contrast, while other are fuzzy – their relationship to God’s law is not obviously in accord or against it.

Second, Cultural laws (sometimes called Ceremonial laws) generally have more to do with contemporary, practical matters. An example of these would be zoning laws, speeding laws, and tax and immigration laws.

For the second group of laws, some may have some tangential reference to God’s instructions, but generally have more to do with a majority’s will in a society. Few would martyr for a zoning law.

But, you might ask, what if a Cultural law seems like it should be elevated to a Moral law? An example might be immigration. What if you feel the immigration law, as it stands, seems immoral?

First, remember that God has placed over us Authorities. And we are responsible, and have a duty to, humble ourselves before these Authorities – operating inside our society as Christ’s ambassadors, not combatants.

Second, remember that issues are complex. Most people who are “religious” about issues abstract the matter away from the realities of it, to a simpler, less complex, more convenient moral dilemma. Resist this.

Third, remember God has spoken clearly about some moral issues, but other moral issues he has only alluded a greater principal. The application of these secondary issues requires an interpretation. And you could be wrong.

Forth, like me, most people misuse their God-given intellect to scour the details around us in search of loop holes and justifications for the actions and issues we prefer. It is very difficult to recognize when this is happening.

Finally, God has given us counsel in 5 ways, and as a matter of general guidance in our lives, these counsels should generally agree with us. To that point, let me lay out the 5 counsels of God:

The Holy Scripture. It is imperative that your perspective not be in contradiction to the Bible. However, there are issues that the Bible does not speak to directly. The key here is to avoid contradiction.
Christian Witnesses. One of the purposes of the local church is to place around us a cloud of Christian witnesses to help hold us accountable. Your issue should rightly resonate in the ears of these Christian counselors.
Prayer and Revelation. A real way God speaks is visions, quickening the mind, and giving understanding. God may speak directly to you as a counsel, but even this needs to be weighed against your own mind’s tricks.
Signs and Miracles. Sometimes God speaks through the miraculous. These are often overlooked unless our mind is open to see them. Should we allow skepticism to dominate our mind, we may miss these confirmations.
Practicality. Although I know God transcends this material world, I also know his truth is consistent.I also know that, generally speaking, what is truly good is not just ethereally, but practically good.

Using these as a guide, you can weigh the convictions you have against them. Assuming that a majority are in concert with you and none are diametrically opposed, you can feel confirmed in your conviction.

Should you find yourself at odds with these five helpers, it does not mean (necessarily) that your issue is unjust, and that you are incorrect. What it does mean is that your confirmation is not as easy.

Should you find yourself in harmony with these five helpers, conversely, you must also review the circumstances and be assured you are not allowing the circumstances and your own intellect construct the desired answer.

Nonetheless, God has given us these counsels. And although we may abuse them, and although we may prevail for a season of wrong, they are what we have been given to guide us when the answer is not clear.

When you feel the need to elevate a Cultural law to a Moral issue, be sure, first, that you are rightly align with the scripture (the foremost of God’s counsels) and then with the remaining. Should you find yourself outside this counsel, don’t give up, but certainly do not charge in as if justified.

He has showed you, O man, what is good.
       And what does the LORD require of you?
       To act justly and to love mercy
       and to walk humbly with your God. – Micah 6:8

To tailor back to previous posts, God’s Justice is a matter of moral consequence. But remember, speeding (as an example) may be a Cultural law, but your duty to obedience is a Moral responsibility.

Then there is one more question.

What if this Cultural law exists, but the Authorities do not enforce the law? Should then our Moral duty to obedience apply when the law only exists as a vestige of bureaucratic delay?

I don’t have an answer to this one. Not yet.

Two of a Kind

2010-02-02T19:30:00.000-07:00

We were noticing that Anna Laura and Jeri Anna's hair color looked almost identical. Then we put them side-by-side and wow! They really are close!

Anna Laura's hair is super stright while Jeri Anna's has little curls; but that could grow out with age like Alexandria's curls have. But for color, it's a near-perfect match.

It's like they are related.

To have Sex or not to have Sex

2010-02-01T19:53:00.001-07:00

Oprah is so dangerous. But why are people not smarter?

Recently, Oprah interviewed Sarah Palin; Sarah was starting her new career on Fox and her daughter/teenage mother (while holding her bastard son) was promoting abstinence.

Oprah questioned the daughter like this: “You are promoting abstinence but statistics show more than a third of teens have premarital sex by 18. Is abstinence realistic?”

Now, why does the daughter say abstain? Because experience taught abstaining from premarital sex is not just a moral, but a practical matter. But how did she respond to Oprah?

Oprah represents and legitimates mainstream, quasi-spiritual America. What she was asking is what everyone wonders when they talk about sexual abstinence.

The daughter responded (actually Sarah jumped in to save her) that “Abstinence is what is right for me, but other girls need to choose what is right for them.” Oh, brother.

Why is this “what is true for me isn’t true for everyone” talk tolerated? Safe sex advocates don’t say that – they want safe sex for everyone. Alas, the Palins are just more secular fodder.

You know what I would have said? You know what I would have wanted my daughters to have said? Man, if I could have only been the one Oprah was interviewing. Seriously.

I would say, “The US Department of Education estimates that 25% of all black high school students will drop out. Did you hear that? 25%! It’s not realistic to tell kids to stay in school anymore. We’ve already lost. We need to teach them how to thrive in poverty. We can’t call people to a higher standard, Oprah.”

I would like to see her apply her own logic there. Of course, she never would. It’s demonstrates how ridiculous it really is. But unmarried Oprah would have to answer some hard questions.

The double standard is pretty pathetic. Everyone knows that 75% of people misuse or make up statistics to prove their own opinions. The other half just don’t know how to count.

Why not rank movies by Tickets?

2010-01-25T17:08:00.001-07:00

Is Avatar (such a weak movie) really the “King of the World”? Not so much. Gone with the Wind sold an estimated 202M tickets. Avatar’s nearly $2B revenue is misleading because of inflation and higher 3D ticket sales.

Rank	Title	Est. Tickets	Year^
1	Gone with the Wind	202,044,600	1939^
2	Star Wars	178,119,600	1977^
3	The Sound of Music	142,415,400	1965
4	E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial	141,854,300	1982^
5	The Ten Commandments	131,000,000	1956
6	Titanic	128,345,900	1997
7	Jaws	128,078,800	1975
26	Avatar	75,980,500	2009

I think it’s okay to ask, “How many people saw the movie?” I saw Avatar and walked away impressed with the effects, but not the shallow plot, the weak metaphysics (Oprah-esque), or that the leading lady was partially nude (computer generated breasts are still breasts) in almost every scene.

Data Source…

Something on Problem of Evil

2010-01-24T22:05:00.002-07:00

In a problem of Evil discussion (the problem of Evil is: where did Evil come from?) someone asked an interesting question. I wanted to talk through this question.

He asked: If Man was created perfectly (as God does all things so) and if Man was created as perfect (or innocent – that is, without sin) how could Evil be tempting?

The point is simple: Man was new; God created him. Man was presented with sin’s temptation; if sin was tempting then Man must have desired it – or desired Evil.

My initial thought was that temptation is spontaneous.

I may not want an ice cream sundae. However, after entering and smelling the ice cream parlor, something inside of me can begin to desire something that previously it did not.

I may not lust after a woman I have never met. However, after meeting the woman, something inside me can begin to desire or lust after something that previously it did not.

My point would be that we can be tempted to something we have never been tempted to before. And, ultimately, I would suggest even Evil in a pre-Fall state.

I suppose, it begs the question: why did God make us capable of the sin in the first place. That’s a significantly different question. I’m going to move past it for now.

Then I got a little “pushback”.

What if our nature is axiomatic (which means self-evidently true). I started to think – is it possible man’s sinful nature existed before the Fall (the first sin)? Is it our original design or because of the Fall?

I will not flesh this out sufficiently, I know that. But I will hint at a theology suggesting our sinful nature was introduced from the Fall – it was not a “preexisting condition”.

Before I do, I want to say that if God originally designed a sinful nature desiring us to resist it, he would not be logically responsible for sin – as long as he gave us the tools and freedom to resist it.

So, we go to man’s disqualification. We have fallen and we can’t get up. Since the first sin we have been disqualified to enter God’s perfect presence. One infraction has poisoned all our perfection.

This is a fantastic perspective, very different of most.

It is not our sin that disqualifies us. Yes we all have sinned. But even still, our sin is the result of our sinful nature. An alcoholic is not an alcoholic because he drinks. He is an alcoholic because he is an alcoholic. We are not sinners because we sin. We are sinners because we are sinners.

Our disqualification is fundamental to us. Our actions do not disqualify us – our very nature has disqualified us from the moment of conception (or whenever you believe life begins).

As a result, our actions cannot redeem us. Our nature must be unwound. We are capable of changing our behavior (behavior modification). But we cannot change who we are, or what we are.

If our sinful nature disqualifies us from the perfect presence of God, then it could not have existed before the Fall, because our pre-Fall status was “qualified” – the Fall was tragic.

We haven’t concluded much here. But, I know God was not taken by surprise by Man’s Fall. At least, I don’t think he was. If he wasn’t, then perhaps that alone is one of the hardest things to make sense of – at least, for me.

A Real Christmas Tree

2009-12-18T15:45:00.001-07:00

This year we managed to get the best, real Christmas tree ever. A nice, full fern brightens our living room even now. It hardly reminding us of the –6 (that negative 6 Fahrenheit, ouch!) weather we faced to get it.

In the photo above, Anna Laura, Alexandria, and Jeri Anna wait patiently, and warm, in the car while Kyndall and I tie down the tree on top of our car. After 9 years of fun with the forest service, we have a nice routine in place.

This year we invited our church’s new pastor. He and his family (from California) came a tad unprepared and left just before frost bite. Our normal campfire kept everyone tolerably warm, but we didn’t wait for hot chocolate.

In the photo above, Pastor Jeff’s family tries to melt their tennis shoes, moist and cold from the tundra’s trudge to find their own Charlie Brown-rival. They’ll need to add show boots to this year’s Christmas list.

The Simple Pleasures

2009-12-18T15:07:00.001-07:00

Few pleasures in life rival the joy of going to the garage to get the electric screw driver and finding it plugged in and fully charged – opposed to just laying there, not charged. It gives one pause to appreciate forward-thinking to be ready when a need would arise. Just lovely.

Not that I have experienced that pleasure. I’m lucky to even find my stupid screw driver – let alone find it partly charged. My work bench is more like a rat’s nest this time of year; but, it’s something to strive for, I suppose.

I’m sure I am the *only* one.

Do the rocks cry out?

2009-10-14T21:04:00.003-06:00

Pocahontas is a cute Disney princess. She paints with the colors of the wind. I'm not bothered by pantheistic delusions, but my daughters haven't developed discernment. The other night I asked, "Do trees really have spirits?"

They both answer "no" like good Sunday School students. I can tolerate rote replies while the girls are young. But then Anna Laura speaks up: "Dad, do the rocks cry out?"

"I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out." - Luke 19: 40

I smiled at the opportunity to explain a simple truth. I said, "And the Bible even says the heavens declare God's glory, and the stars sing." How confusing are these characterizations of inanimate things.

"While the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" - Job 38: 7

I asked, "Does this mean rocks and stars are alive?" They didn't know what to say. After all, the Bible says they cry and sing. I understood their hesitation.

So, as they lay in bed, I forewent a bedtime story for a 2 minute theology lesson.

Something like this:

Once there was a man. He could not speak. One day he walked into an art studio. Nobody knew him. They just watched as he picked up a paintbrush and began to paint.

Everyone was amazed because, as he painted, the canvas began to come alive. He had a wonderful way with shapes and colors. The painting was emotive and wonderful.

Now what do we know about this man? We know a lot – we know he is a painter. We know he is a talented painter. And we know he has a style and a way with colors.

But how do we know this? He is mute. He did not tell us. It is because the painting told us. Indeed, the painting "cried out" that this is an artist! But did the painting really talk?

What if I asked you to create a rock? I don't mean from dirt and clay. I mean from nothing at all. I wanted you to CREATE a rock. Could you do it? Of course not.

But God created a rock. He made it have shape, color, and texture. He gave it mass, and molecules, and created an entire subatomic physic to hold it together. Wow.

So, does the rock say something about God? Is like the painting and the painter? Yes. Painting is impressive, but CREATING something? It declares God's glory just because it is there.

And so do the heavens, the stars, and everything else. God created everything. And everything was created by Him. And if you and I don't proclaim his glory, all of creation will (and does).

I asked them again if the painting really talked. And I asked if rocks really talked. With confidence, they answered "no". Ah, the confidence of understanding.

I praised them; and with a kiss I tucked them in bed.

Nobody wants justice

2009-10-06T20:41:00.001-06:00

Everyone wants justice. And everyone dislikes injustice. Even a child understands those fundamentals. But most of us struggle to articulate exactly what justice is. Even great thinkers struggle…

“Equitable distribution…”
- Plato, The Republic

“Rectificatory through retribution…”
- Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics

“Blind, social fairness…”
-John Rawls, A Theory of Justice

Justice is not "you get what you deserve". Justice like that is a human convention. And because humans are broken to the core, what we mean is "you get what I think you deserve". Human justice is not just at all. Human justice is revenge.

It turns out that nobody wants really justice – at least for themselves. What we want is justice "for" others. We want others to get what's coming to them – and rarely do we mean a pat on the back. We mean retaliation.

What do we want for ourselves? We want mercy. We want a reprieve of justice. We want to NOT get what we deserve. We don't truly believe we are innocent. And we don't truly believe we don't deserve retributive justice. We just want a break – warranted or not.

Because it seems impossible, we typically don't desire grace. We don't deserve to get something we don't deserve – although mercy itself is a kind of grace. Grace, selfless grace, isn't on the menu. From a human perspective, it's ridiculous.

Consider you are a student in school. Someone pushes your books out of your hands. Justice is swift; you turn around and punch the offender square in the face. He gets what is coming to him. That's human justice. That's revenge.

What if you turned and forgave the offender? That's mercy. But what if you turned and, out of selflessness, you offered to carry his books. Is that justice? It is so different from the human sense of justice it's almost injustice. That's grace.

Justice is easy for humans, and mercy is harder. Grace is nearly impossible. Because of that we see the pattern: first justice, then mercy, and rarely grace.

Nothing is difficult to an all powerful being. Nothing is difficult to God. So, the (justice -> mercy -> grace) pattern isn't necessary. He can start where he wants. He can start wherever is best. And selfless grace, the most beautiful of the three, the most divine of the three is God's starting point. God starts with grace.

Where (justice -> mercy -> grace) is the human pattern, (grace -> mercy -> justice) is God's. And as mercy is a kind of grace, so we ultimately see selfless grace as a fulfillment of perfect justice. God's justice is grace. He doesn't need to differentiate, because his end game for either is identical.

So, we need only consider the ENDS of justice's MEANS. And what are the means of justice? The means are punishment. Justice begets punishment. But why would God punish us at all? Why not just forgive through grace? He does forgive through grace. But his goal is not JUST for us to be forgiven.

Consider, for a moment, yourself as a young adult. Your mother is in the kitchen preparing your favorite meal. You walk right up to your mother and with all your might you punch her in the face. She staggers to the floor, and you retreat to your room. There is a silence in the house and a dagger in your heart. No one honors the son who hits his mother. Universally, you have a violation counting against you.

Now imagine something big happens in your life. You need counsel. You need a shoulder. You need a friend. Do you feel like you can go to your mom? No. You just punched her, and your violation of her trust in you has damaged the relationship between you. You cannot go to her.

Now imagine your mom approaches you shortly after you hit her. She is stern. She is serious. And she explains the punishment you are to receive. What you really want to ask her is to hit you back, but you know she would never do it. She loves you too much to hurt you. Instead, you can't do this for two weeks. You can do that for a month. And on and on come the punishments. You nod, accepting the punishments she gives and then you genuinely apologize. Your heart is recovering.

Now imagine something big happens in your life. You need counsel. You need a shoulder. You need a friend. Do you feel like you can go to your mom? Of course you can. She is your mom. And because your punishment was not to make you suffer; it was for reconciliation. Because you have paid the price for what you did, your relationship is restored. She did not hurt you back or make you pay, she brought you back.

Why did your mom punish you? It was because she wanted to restore the relationship. Why does God punish you? It's because without proper payment for sin, the relationship is damaged, the fellowship is damaged, and the friendship is damaged. God's justice is not revenge. God's justice is reconciliation.

Consider how, prior to knowing God, your life was full of sin – fundamental to the core of your being. Punishment for your sin you always scorned, and apology for your sin you never gave. So deep was your violation that the dept you owed was too great for you to pay. How could your relationship be restored? The punishment was too severe. You could not survive it. You could never pay it. But it must be paid.

So God agreed, through Grace, to wipe the slate clean. He would pay the price. It's your father who pays for the replacement stained glass window after your stray little league foul. Not because you don't owe the debt. It's because you could never pay it. And, it's because it must be paid. When you have no currency, he makes good on your debt.

She carries a pearl in perfect condition
What once was hurt; what once was friction
What left a mark; no longer stings
Because grace makes beauty
Out of ugly things
- U2, Grace

You may still be punished, but you are punished only on the scale you are able to actually pay. The punishment does not fit the crime. In fact, the payment is paid in full no matter what. Your personal part of the punishment is balanced by your father's willingness and ability to share your burden.

Unfortunately, we often misunderstand the value of punishment as a means to reconcile our relationships. Consider how The Shack characterizes God’s punishment:

“I don’t need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring people from the inside. It’s not my purpose to punish it; it’s my joy to cure it”
- God’s character to Mack in “The Shack“

The author may have been making a great point. I grant him that. I enjoyed the book. But this short snippet can be a teaching moment. We see the human desire to erase punishment; we fear it. It’s not fun. We won’t enjoy it; nobody is punished for their pleasure. But we can anticipate the purpose.

In the end, God applies justice how he wants. And, what God wants is reconciliation. He pays the debt you can't pay and prepares a new punishment suited for you – temporal, limited, and bearable. It's a punishment for reconciliation. And, he requires an apology – a repentance.

This brings up an interesting aside. In my house, with three daughters, we have rules. Rule three is that apologies never include the word "sorry", and always include the word "forgive". It takes little reflection to see this truth. What God desires from us is a true apology. Not an "I'm sorry". That's just lame.

Regardless if we want justice; God does – by way of grace.

An apple and two smiles

2009-09-14T23:20:00.000-06:00

My daughters are, in a word, beautiful.

Go Rockies

2009-09-09T00:45:00.000-06:00

My little Colorado Rockies fan

Battlestar Galactica

2009-06-08T18:04:00.001-06:00

"Fleeing from the Cylon Tyrany, the last Battlestar, Galactica, leads a rag-tag fugitive fleet on a lonely quest for a shining planet called, Earth."

Yes, I realize we are a little late to the party, but Kyndall and I have started working through the now-over Battlestar Galactica series on Netflix.

Except for all the stuff I liked about the old series that is now missing, I totally dig it. The new Cylons are totally more scary. We don’t have the Sci Fi channel, so I’ve been waiting for BSG end and then this season’s various shows to wrap so we would have a slot to invest in the show.

Any good series on DVD is dangerous because you always say, “we have time, let’s just watch one more.” And there goes the night.

Joy and Victory

2009-06-02T17:11:00.001-06:00

Joy is an interesting concept. As a believer we understand joy to be a supercedant of fleeting pleasures like happiness. Joy is a deep, warm recognition of harmonies around universal truths and their parts in your life. It is as simple as a baby’s coo and as complicated as purpose in sacrifice.

Nonetheless, joy is the greatest and most durable of qualities; it dichotomously motivates us while inherently cannot be pursued. Like compulsory love, pursued joy is unattainable. It cannot be purchased, earned, or retrieved. Joy can only be discovered once it is already present.

It is an interesting discussion to consider if joy itself is a spiritual emotion. We know that physical emotions like agony, elation, and even happiness are tied to current conditions. Joy, on the other hand, is not subject to the current condition. Is that because it is a spiritual matter?

Some non-believers experience joy. I believe this. I think joy is a gift endowed by God. I think God gives to all people some measure of pleasure. But is joy a condition through which all spirits naturally pass? I believe it may be tied to our physical alignment with universal intentions.

I talk about that more in my past blog on destiny.

Someone once said humor’s vice is that there is always a victim. I can’t argue with that, but I disagree with the conclusion if the conclusion is to disparage humor. Similarly, joy reflects this unattractive trade-off and would not be discounted as a valuable and desirable quality.

An example is: a friend of mine leading an Alexandria, Virginia church. He and his family felt called to move to a new congregation in Newport. Every sign confirmed them. As they proceeded through the process it became even clearer. This was what they were supposed to do.

The receiving congregation became enjoyed by the anticipation of his coming. But their joy, as one congregation member pointed out, “rested on the backs of his current congregation’s pain” as they will bear the realities of his leaving. It was a painful, real trade-off of one’s joy for another’s.

So, is it consequentially invalid?

To that end, I think joy may have a built-in natural trade-off for to accomplish it. As humor may require a “victim” to formulaically deliver, so joy may have a contrarian “sorrow” necessary for it to be fully transmitted. Is there a yin to the yang of joy?

When I teach my girls about winning, we talk about how great it is. But the most important part of winning is the honor of losing – especially the precarious position of second place. The first may be last in God’s collation, but the volunteer loser enables a winner.

I worked at Kanakuk. Every term had a race where the entire camp would race around the property and return to a glorious finish line of cheering counselors. Every single camper, the fast runners, and the fat slow runners. Turning this race, “winning” was a variable term.

One term I worked had hundreds of kids pouring out from the race’s start. We received them back rather quickly. Except for our faster runner who was noticeably missing – he was the director’s son. We soon found him at the end of the peloton, jogging next to the fattest camper huffing and puffing.

He came in dead last, letting the fat camper take whatever glory remained. The campers and counselors witnessing this marvel cheered like the Olympic Village after a host country’s gold. And at that moment the first came in last, and the last became first. There was honor and joy in that loss.

DotA

2009-05-23T14:56:00.001-06:00

Jag talar inte svenska och jag inte spelar DotA, men jag fullkomligt njuta eurodance musik, och jag verkligen gillar den här låten. Om du inte har hört den än, Google det.

Okay, here are the lyrics:

Det är det enda ni gör på dagarna. Ni sitter där i Ventrilo och spelar DotA. Vi sitter här i venten och spelar lite DotA å pushar på å smeker, med motståndet vi leker. Vi sitter här i venten och spelar lite DotA å springer runt å creepar, och motståndet vi sleepar.

What is Fate?

2009-05-21T22:43:00.001-06:00

[draft]

Before we start, let's make this clear: fate and destiny are pawns to God's will. On the issue of sovereignty, there is no question. Indeed, as we struggle to understand the nature of things, nebulous constructs like fate, destiny, purpose, super intention, and providence are useful.

Fate has a varied definition. Does it mean the consequence of our choices, like "sealing your fate" after untoward acts? Or does it mean an outside hand, like "fate dealt that hand" to explain why circumstances occur? Or does it mean the ultimate destination, from the shared root of destiny, like "you must accept your fate". Just saying "fate" doesn't really say anything at all.

Insofar as fate as a consequence, there is no issue. Consequences do follow decisions. In this context, none of the other terms really share this definition. I like to consider fate in this singular way.

Now, there's the concept of the outside hand. This is most like super intention or providence. Is it God, the devil, nature, or gremlins? Something somewhere is influencing things. I think providence is the best term here. It best sums the concept of an active observer, and squashes basic deistic premises God as an inactive observer. He's been clearly involved in the past and hasn't indicated he plans to step away.

Turning to fate as a destination, this is the ugliest use of the term. In no small part purpose and destiny are best transposed here. And of those two, destiny best indicates the destination. Knowing your destination does not preclude your destination, I might add. Those ascribing to predestination would not agree. However, the logic simply does not follow that destiny must be absolute.

There's this contrast with purpose. In no small part destiny seems to indicate the "where" or "what" of a journey's end. Your destiny is your destination. However, purpose seems to better reflect the "why" of such a journey. It addresses the reason and sometimes the intrinsic value of the journey.

Let's briefly dance with the mother of all terms, super intention. Super intention is the will of God, typically. It is what God wants or intends for our lives. The problem is not that God desires something. The question that has plagued man for centuries is if we are capable of accomplishing less, more, or just different than that intention. Is God's sovereignty compromised if God's intentions are not realized?

The issue falls back to free will. We know free will exists for God's pleasure to be volitionally loved. We know that free will is important so God's control over our actions does not result in God's preordainment of sinful acts. Free will seems important to make the world go 'round.

Many contrarians here would tell me that free will is illusive because it is a necessary idea for man in light of the ultimate consequences of God's ultimate sovereignty. That is, we don't really choose anything because God decided long ago.

I have an opinion on the issue of predestination. But to this particular discussion the only question required is, "Can God allow free will?" The answer to that tricky question opens windows of possibilities. And possibilities, the root of all evil, bring about a potential liberty in Christ.

And as we describe the complex tapestry of how God orchestrates all of nature, time, and the cosmos, it is terms like fate, destiny, super intention, purpose, and providence that we use like tools. We are attempting to say a number equivalent to infinity. Of course it comes up short. However, imperfect terms are at least terms. And with terms there is discussion. And with discussion, growth.

Carl Friedrich Gauss

2009-04-06T08:32:00.001-06:00

There is a story about the 7-year-old, German, mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss. He responded to his teacher, Büttner's, request to sum the first 100 counting numbers (1 to 100). While his classmates toiled, Carl wrote a single number and handed it in. He was correct.

Gauss on the old Deutsche Mark

When asked how he did it, he explained that there were 50 pairs of numbers adding to 101. So, the sum must be 50 x 101 = 5050.

Here's he formula: (n*(n+1))/2

That version requires an even quantity and the first integer is 1.

For example: start easy and ask yourself:

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 = ?

Here's Gauss applied:

[1 + 10 = 11]
[2 + 9 = 11]
[3 + 8 = 11]
[4 + 7 = 11]
[5 + 6 = 11]

So, it's 11 five times; that's 55, right? Check a calculator.

This simple formula has saved me lots of time.

Is Satan Omnipresent?

2009-03-27T11:45:00.001-06:00

You know that question: how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? That question has two problems: 1) the answer is not important, and 2) it asks how many spiritual creatures can exist in a physical space – which is also meaningless because there is no direct correlation.

So what is omnipresent? It means all places at one time. But if you have no physical boundaries, can you effectively be in all PHYSICAL places at one time? Honestly, it’s not clear, and it’s defiantly not addressed in the Bible. But it’s like asking if the wind can be in more than one state at one time… or even more than one country… or even all places.

But since omnipresent is one of the three core attributes of God, many believers feel compelled to NOT prescribe it to Satan. They say, “Satan is not omnipresent, only God is omnipresent.” I don’t think they can base this on anything but their gut and weak reasoning. Is there a scripture I am missing? However, they could be right. I recognize that.

Okay, let’s assume that Satan is NOT omnipresent.

Here’s my next questions: is Satan multi-present? Don’t we assume Satan is either flawlessly efficient or multi-present? Consider how everyone feels Satan is working against them in their lives. How could this be true with 6 billion people on the planet? I mean, seriously. Is he tirelessly working or does he have something special to help him?

I will admit there is a possibility that Satan only tempts a few and the rest of us, our sinful nature tempts us. Maybe.

Now, you might answer, that’s why Satan has demons. They do his work. If this were true, we would not call Satan the father of lies and the great tempter (both referenced in the Bible) but instead we would consider him the foreman of liars and the coordinator of tempters. But, we don’t. He seems to be the perpetrator.

There’s another option. And it’s not unreasonable. Perhaps Satan is outside of time. Perhaps, indeed, all spiritual creatures are outside physical time. It sure sounds reasonable. And it would allow for a kind of multi-presence without having to be anything but one place at one “time”. But again, this is conjecture, not scripture.

But then we see the timeline. Satan doesn’t seem to understand the endgame. How could he not – AND be outside of time? The arrival of the messiah, salvation through Jesus’ crucifixion. Surely Satan would have tried to prevent Jesus’ death if he could have seen what it meant next. Maybe he did try, I don’t know, but nothing eludes to that in the Bible.

So, I think we have four choices:

1. Satan is omnipresent or multi-present

2. Satan is outside of physical time

3. Satan is tirelessly efficient almost to perfection

4. Satan is spiritual so he can be in all physical places at once

None of these really rest very well with me. They all seem to go against the Sunday School answers I have heard. But nothing else seems to make sense.

Any ideas?