Friday, June 30

How was the covenant of grace administered under the Old Testament?

The covenant of grace was administered under the Old Testament, by promises,[1] prophecies, [2] sacrifices,[3] circumcision,[4] the passover,[5] and other types and ordinances, which did all foresignify Christ then to come, and were for that time sufficient to build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah,[6] by whom they then had full remission of sin, and eternal salvation.[7]
  1. Rom. 15:8
    For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God's truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs...

  2.  Acts 3:20, 24
    ...that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus...

    And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed these days.

  3.  Heb. 10:1
    For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.

  4.  Rom. 4:11
    He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well...

  5. I Cor. 5:7
    Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

  6. Heb. ch. 8, 9,10; 11:13
    These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.
     
  7. Gal. 3:7-9
    Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
    Gal. 3:14.
    ..so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.
Question 34, Westminster Larger Catechism.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

Thursday, June 29

Round the Sphere Again

Christian Carnival

The Bible
Theology
Impossible to Categorize, but Important to Read
Home and Garden
Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,
|

Wednesday, June 28

Book Review: Women's Ministry in the Local Church

by J. Ligon Duncan and Susan Hunt

This is a book about women's ministry--why a church needs it and how it ought to work. Just now I perused the blurbs at the start of this book, and most of them praise Women's Ministry in the Local Church for being so practical. It is practical, and practical is good, but it isn't the book's practicality that I appreciated most. The best thing about this book, as I see it, is the theological defense it makes for the existence women's ministry.

Let me say right up front that women and women's ministry is not one of my favorite subjects. For one thing, groups of women scare me just a little. I'm not all that interested in many of the things most women tend to be interested in, and making conversation in a group of women can sometimes be a real chore for me. The reason I'm telling you this is to help explain why the theological defense of women's ministry was so important to me. Wanting to join in a ministry specifically for women doesn't come naturally to me (In fact, naturally, it's something I'd rather avoid.), so I need to understand the reasons why it's needed.

This book comes from a complementarian view on gender issues, which means it is grounded in the idea that women and men have different roles in the family and in the church, and it is this uniqueness of women's roles in the family and church that undergirds a specific women's ministry. What better reason for a women's ministry than helping women fulfill their God-given roles in God honoring ways, and who better to help women do that than other women?

If I have one criticism of Women's Ministry in the Local Church it's in its organization. There were places where it didn't seem clear to me exactly how the material all fit together. It may be that a looser structure comes naturally in a book authored by two people. In the same vein, each chapter ends with a little piece written on the subject of women's ministry by someone other than the two authors of the book, including, for instance, a piece by George Grant on the mission of James and Mina Stewart in South Africa. While each of these pieces is interesting to read, I'm not sure they add enough to the substance of the book to make up for adding to it's disjointedness. Perhaps they would have been better included at the end of the book in another appendix.

Despite this small problem I had with this book, I found it to be a good blue print for a lively, fulfilling, purposeful ministry by women for women in the church, and if you are in any way involved in women's ministry--either in oversight or leadership--Women's Ministry in the Local Church is a must-read book for you. Or maybe you're a woman like me, and the subject of women's ministry is one you'd rather avoid if possible. If so, I'd recommend this book as a reminder to you that women's ministry really is important, and why you should be interested in it.

For another review of this book, see this one at Discerning Reader.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

Tuesday, June 27

Pretty in Pink

After the blue wildflowers come the pinks--the wild roses and the fireweed. The fireweed isn't blooming enough for good photos yet (although I did see some just starting to bloom during my dog walk last Thursday), but the wild roses are in full bloom.


They're pretty and pink, but if you've ever walked along a wild rose lined trail, you know the very best thing is their perfume. I'm betting many of you have smelled them, since they grow all across the northern hemisphere in the boreal forest, and as far south as New Mexico in North America.

Another good thing about wild roses is that they're edible. For grouse, hares and small rodents, they're an important food source, and some of the bigger guys, like deer and moose, enjoy nibbling on the tender plants as well. The rose hips (or berries) are consumed by bears, rabbits and beavers, and they provide food for the birds in the winter when many other food sources are gone.

Have you ever eaten a rose hip? They taste like a very seedy little apple. You can pick them after the first frost--a touch of frost brings out the sweetness--and use them to make rose hip jelly, which is surprisingly tasty, especially with a little added lemon juice for tartness. And it'll be the prettiest jelly in your pantry, I promise.

The wild rose is also known as the prickly rose, but not by me. Why concentrate on their one negative attribute when they have so many lovely ones?

Previous related posts:
Photo by oldest son. Click on it for a bigger view.

Other recent wildflower posts: A Sparrow's Home has a display of PEI's wild lupines, which come in both blue and pink.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Labels:

|

Christian Carnival Reminder

If you haven't yet checked out last week's Christian Carnival, you'll find it  here at The Bible Archive.

Remember, too, that today is the deadline for this week's Christian Carnival entries. Entries are due by tonight (June 27) at midnight EST. Submit your entry to ChristianCarnival [ATT] gmail [DOTT] com. Include
  • The name of your blog
  • The URL of your blog
  • The title of your post
  • The URL of your post
  • A short description of the post
  • The trackback link if you have one
Then look for your entry in tomorrow's (June 28) carnival at Cadmusings.

You'll find more complete information on the Christian Carnival here.

Tags: ,
|

Monday, June 26

My Yukon Garden: June 26


In the interest of honesty, I'm showing it in all its weedy glory, which you can see in even more detail by clicking on the photo. The garden really needs some work with a hoe to get rid of the chickweed carpet and some volunteer spinach you see sprinkled around in the right center, and I've only just started hoeing in the bottom left corner.

Since last week, there are 40+ potato plants, with 20 or so left to come up. The far right row of peas has a grand total of 3 pea plants, up by 2 since last week, but the peas that have sprouted are growing nicely. You can see quite a bit of new growth in the greens at the bottom of the photo, too, and the cabbage/cauliflower, etc. plants at the upper right center.

Previous photos:
  1. June 5
  2. June 12
  3. June 19

Labels:

|

On Justification

From Leon Morris:
Justification reminds us that there is a legal aspect to our salvation. In the last resort the law of God is not swept aside a though it did not matter. It mattered so much that Jesus died to bring salvation in a way that is right (Rom. 3:26). This needs emphasis in a day like ours when many people have lost touch with the moral values we see in the Bible and deny that there are moral absolutes. If all morality is relative, then righteousness has little to do with salvation, and sinners are not really blameworthy. 'To understand all is to forgive all' is the kind of maxim that appeals to our generation.
But it does not square with the New Testament. To understand and to make due allowance is important, but it does not make right what is wrong. The Bible is clear that some things are right and some things are wrong. Those who do not reach God's standards are sinners and deserving of punishment. The Christian way does not become meaningful to us until we see this and recognize ourselves for what we are - sinners who have not attained God's standards, sinners who are 'without hope and without God in the world' (Eph. 2:12). We are in trouble because God really means us to live up to the highest and best we know, not simply to find good excuses for not making it.

But when all the evidence goes to provide a verdict of 'Guilty' on Judgment Day, God intervened. This way of looking at salvation makes the cross indispensable, for it was there that the claims of God's law were fully discharged. God's salvation accords with right. God is just in the means whereby salvation is accomplished.
---From The Atonement: Its Meaning and Significance, pp. 201-202.

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Sunday, June 25

Sunday's Hymn: Jesus Christ

From Charles Wesley, a hymn that reminds us of the eternal and unchanging nature of Christ and his sacrifice.
O Thou, Before the World Began

O Thou, before the world began,
Ordained a sacrifice for man,
And by th’eternal Spirit made
An Offering for the sinner’s stead;
Our everlasting Priest art Thou,
Pleading Thy death for sinners now.

Thy offering still continues new
Before the righteous Father’s view;
Thyself the Lamb for ever slain,
Thy priesthood doth unchanged remain;
Thy years, O God, can never fail,
Nor Thy blest work within the veil.

O that our faith may never move,
But stand unshaken as Thy love!
Sure evidence of things unseen,
Now let it pass the years between,
And view Thee bleeding on the tree,
My Lord, my God, Who dies for me.
---Sung to Carrey's Surrey. (Listen.)
Other hymns, worship songs, etc. posted this Sunday:
Have you posted a hymn or worship song this Sunday? Let me know in the comments and I'll add your post to the list, too.

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Saturday, June 24

Rhubarb Crunch

This is a crisp-like dessert, but it stays in firm squares better than crisps do, and it's really yummy. The recipe came from my mother, who got it from her sister.

Topping:
  • 1 cup flour
  • 3/4 cup oats (uncooked)
  • 1 cup packed brown sugar
  • 1/2 cup melted butter
  • 1 teaspoon cinnamon
Fruit:
  • 4 cups fresh rhubarb sliced in one-inch pieces
  • 1 cup sugar
  • 2 tablespoons cornstarch
  • 1 cup water
  • 1 teaspoon vanilla
1. Preheat oven to 350F.

2. Mix topping ingredients until crumbly. Press half of mixture flat in the bottom of a 9-inch square baking pan. Cover evenly with the rhubarb pieces.

3. Combine sugar, cornstarch, water. Cook until thick and clear; remove from heat and stir in vanilla. Pour over rhubarb.

4. Sprinkle the remainingg crumb mixture evenly over the top of the fruit.

5. Bake at 350F for one hour. Cut in squares and serve warm with whipped cream or ice cream. Makes 9 servings.

Notes: This can be doubled and baked in a 9x13 inch pan as in the photo. It also works well with various whole flours, like as rye or buckwheat. I usually thicken the fruit with quick cooking tapioca instead of cornstarch, since I'm allergic to corn. I let the tapioca (2 tablespoons, just like the cornstarch), water and sugar sit for 5 minutes, and then cook the mixture until thickened, then remove it from the heat and add vanilla.
Other rhubarb recipes:
Do you have a favorite rhubarb recipe?

Technorati Tags: , ,
|

Friday, June 23

Was the covenant of grace always adminstered after one and the same manner?

The covenant of grace was not always administered after the same manner, but the administrations of it under the Old Testament were different from those under the New.[1]
  1. II Cor. 3:6-9
....who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses' face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.
Question 33, Westminster Larger Catechism.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

Solstice Stories

Some Yukoners share their solstice stories:
Me? I'm officially an old fogey. I blogged about the solstice, watered the garden, and went to bed.

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Thursday, June 22

A Little Word Play

  • Can you spell? Test yourself with the Spelling Bee. Hat tip to Cindy for this one.

  • Need a good word for hang man? Try filling the blank on this: __eny. My ninth grade English teacher tried this one on the class. Since then, whenever I play hang man with someone new, I start off with this word. Works every time.

  • What's the most often used noun in the English language? I've used it once already in this post. Find the answer here.

  • What words do you like? Here's the cooperative list of favorite words done a year ago on this blog.
Technorati Tags: ,
|

Wednesday, June 21

It's All Downhill From Here



It's the longest day of the year in the northern hemisphere. The sun rises here at 4:27AM and sets at 11:36PM, giving us 19 hours and 9 minutes of daylight today. Sort of. The length of our visible daylight is 24 hours, which means that today there is visible light round the clock.

The official time of the solstice was 5:26 AM, so last night was the shortest night. Tomorrow we have 11 seconds less daylight, but once again I need to qualify that. There is still 24 hours of visible light, and there will be 24 hours of visible light until June 28, when we begin having a few minutes with no visible light.

(Photo of sunset on Atlin Lake by oldest son. Check out his photo gallery for more northern scenery.)

Technorati Tags: , ,
|

Changing the Words to Hymns

I don't like it much. Hymns are poetry, and poets usually choose their words carefully. It isn't nice to monkey with their chosen wording. If I had my druthers, we'd treat hymns like other forms of literature or historical documents, and if the meaning is obscure to us, we'd do the work to understand what it meant in its historical setting; because every time you fiddle with the author selected wording, you lose something.

If we disagree with the theology presented in a hymn, that's a little different; but even then I'd prefer an explanation of what's wrong with the theology over changing the words unless the theology presented is horrendous. A month or so ago I wrote about a change made to the hymn At the Cross in the hymnal my church uses. I believe this particular change was made for theological reasons. I agree with the theology of the original wording and the image in that wording, so I prefer continuing to use the original words. Nevertheless, I can understand why people feel this sort of change is important. If someone disagrees strongly with the theology presented in a hymn, they may have trouble getting the offending words out of their mouths.

If the hymn is translated from another language, then the words are not the specific words chosen by the author anyway, so variations in wording are not much of an issue. Sometimes you'll find quite different translations of the same hymn, and I'd expect that. That comes with trying to translate poetry from another language, keeping it true to the meaning of the original poem while giving the words poetic meter and rhyme at the same time.

The sort of change that sticks in my craw is merely updating or simplifying the original language. You don't update or simplify poetry! If the change is only to make the historical wording easier to understand for people who know present-day English, 'taint worth it. We may get easily understood wording, but we're losing the carefully chosen wording and images of the original author, and the pay-off isn't big enough. If a word here and there in a hymn is obsolete or obscure, it usually isn't hard to find out what it means.

How difficult is it to explain that people used to refer to God as Thou instead of you, and that at some point that form of reference became a sign of reverance, for instance?* Updating thou and thee, by the way, isn't as uncomplicated a change as one might think, since those words often come at the end of a rhyming line, and if they're changed to you, then words must also be changed in at least one other line in order to keep the rhyming scheme, and before you know it, whole ideas are changed. Moreover, using the original forms of address for God in an older hymn benefits us by reminding us that there were believers who lived before us, who wrote hymns from their hearts in their customary language, addressing God with thee and thou because they held him in great reverence. Singing their words, and doing the legwork to understand their words, values their contributions to the communion of the saints. Updating thee and thou is one of those changes that has not much benefit, and costs us more than we might think.**

Here are a couple of other examples of updating or simplifying the language that have annoyed me recently. The first one I wrote about earlier in the series answering questions about hymns. It's a change often made in the hymn Come Thou Fount: Removing the obscure word ebenezer and replacing it with wording that explains what it means.

Two examples of ways this change can be made are given in the comments to the linked post. Both changes, however, lose something--the allusion that the word ebenezer makes to an Old Testament story. Samuel placed a large stone as a monument to God's help, and he called the stone Ebenezer, which means "stone of help." When we sing the word ebenezer in the hymn, it is a reminder that not only is God our help, but he has a long history of helping his people, and it's that last bit that we lose when we change the wording to something less obscure. What we gain in surface clarity, we lose in depth of meaning.

That's what poetry is all about, isn't it? Isn't it about depth of meaning of carefully chosen words? We should expect to look below the surface, to have allusions to things we might not understand at first glance. Of course, if we were more biblically literate, we'd understand ebenezer to be an allusion to the Old Testament story right off the bat.

A second updating of words I'm going to use as an example is one I noticed a couple of weeks ago as we sang Blessed Be the Name in church. The original words of the second and third line of the first verse are these:
Who gave his Son for man to die,
That he might man redeem!
The problem with these words, as the editors to our hymn book see it, is the word man. Apparently it's not gender inclusive enough as commonly understood. So here's the change they've made:
Who sent his Son to earth to die,
All sinners to redeem.
If you're theologically astute, you'll notice right away that this wording defines the scope of the atonement in a way that the original wording doesn't. The first set of words work well enough for people on either side of the particular/universal redemption debate, but the second set doesn't. The changed wording gives the purpose of Christ's redemptive work as the salvation of all sinners, which, incidentally, even most unlimited atonement proponents would deny, affirming instead that Christ came in order to save all sinners who believe, rather than all sinners.

But, believe it or not, that isn't what annoys me most. What annoys me most is that the representative nature of Christ's work, an idea that is included in the original words, is lost in the updated ones. Christ came to die on behalf of human beings in order to redeem human beings. Yes, he came to earth to redeem sinners, but that statement has less specific meaning than the older one. Something of the original meaning is lost in the updated wording, and all that's gained is the removal of a reference to humankind, both male and female, as "man"--a usage of the word man that isn't common now, but isn't that hard to explain, either.

Why don't we view obscure or obsolete wording in hymns as an opportunity to learn something about the allusions made or the language of our forebears? Why not take more interest in the hymns we sing by taking the time to understand them with their original layers of meaning? Why not value the work of the saints who wrote them by learning why they chose the specific words they did?
Previous post on words to hymns:Tim Challies posted on another common hymn wording problem: Skipping verses.
*That their reasoning for using Thou and Thee might be flawed is irrelevant. It still was customary to do so.

**And while we're on the subject, how come my church's hymnal changes the Thees and Thous in the really old hymns, but leaves them in more recent ones, like
Thou Art Worthy?

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Tuesday, June 20

Christian Carnival Deadline Reminder

Yep, it's that time of the week--the time with the looming deadline for Christian Carnival entries. Entries are due by tonight (June 20) at midnight EST. Submit your entry to ChristianCarnival [ATT] gmail [DOTT] com. Include
  • The name of your blog
  • The URL of your blog
  • The title of your post
  • The URL of your post
  • A short description of the post
  • The trackback link if you have one
Then look for your entry in tomorrow's (June 21) carnival at The Bible Archive. Make sure you enter something so that Rey stays busy.

You'll find more complete information on the Christian Carnival here.

Tags: ,
|

Round the Sphere Again

It's been a while since I've done one of these recommended reading posts, so you might find some of the links less than fresh, and I'm sorry about that. I'll try to stay more current as the summer rolls on, but I can't promise.

Theology
Ecclesiology
Church History
Geography
Defining Moments
Lists
Books
|

Monday, June 19

My Yukon Garden: June 19

You can click on the photo for a larger view. This time I think you can see the changes since last week.

The two rows running vertically on the right are peas. The far right row still hasn't sprouted--except for one lonely little plant--and I'm guessing that it won't. Something must have been wrong with that one package of pea seeds. The other row is coming quite nicely except for a sparse section right at the back of the garden.

Next to the peas are four rows of brassica plants running vertically as well. They've really taken off this week, and are looking nice and healthy.

Along the front are horizontal rows of three varieties of lettuce, along with spinach, beets, carrots, onions, radishes. All of those are up, but the three rows of carrots are still in the tiny grass-like stage, so the photo doesn't show anything yet.

There are a few romaine plants and a couple of brussell sprout seedlings planted in a backwards L shape around the one rhubarb plant. The rhubarb, by the way, has been picked twice, but not made into anything yet.

At the top/back left is the compost pile. Right now it's full of grass clippings because youngest son mowed the yard today. (I hope to get the weed wacking done tomorrow!) At the front/right is a container of raspberry plants. They are greening up, too, and have a few blossoms.

The rest of the garden is planted in potatoes, and those aren't up yet. By next week, however, I'd expect to see some little potato plants.

Previous garden photos:
  1. June 5
  2. June 12

Violet is posting pictures of her garden, too. This week the dianthus is in bloom.

Updates: Island Sparrow has a composite picture of gardens and flowers in this post. Click for the larger version. The plants in the upper right are her husband's potatoes.

And see Candy in Sierras' garden, too!

Here are Kim of Hireath's recent garden photos.

Have you posted photos of your garden? Let me know and I'll link to your garden photo, too, and we'll have a garden party.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

How is the grace of God manifested in the second covenant?

The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely provideth and offereth to sinners a Mediator,[1] and life and salvation by him;[2] and requiring faith as the condition to interest them in him[3], promiseth and giveth his Holy Spirit [4] to all his elect, to work in them that faith,[5] with all other saving graces;[6] and to enable them unto all holy obedience,[7] as the evidence of the truth of their faith [8] and thankfulness to God,[9] and as the way which he hath appointed them to salvation.[10]
  1. Gen. 3:15
    I will put enmity between you and the woman,
    and between your offspring and her offspring;
    he shall bruise your head,
    and you shall bruise his heel

    Isa. 42:6
    I am the Lord ; I have called you in righteousness;
    I will take you by the hand and keep you;
    I will give you as a covenant for the people,
    a light for the nations...

    John 6:27
    Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.

  2. I John 5:11-12
    And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.

  3. John 1:12
    But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God...

    John 3:16
    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

  4. Prov. 1:23
    If you turn at my reproof,
    behold, I will pour out my spirit to you;
    I will make my words known to you.

  5. II Cor. 4:13
    Since we have the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, “I believed, and so I spoke,” we also believe, and so we also speak...

  6. Gal. 5:22-23
    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

  7. Ezek. 36:27
    And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

  8. James 2:18, 22
    But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

    You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works...

  9. II Cor. 5:14-15
    For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.

  10. Eph. 2:18
    For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.
Question 32, Westminster Larger Catechism.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

Sunday, June 18

Sunday's Hymn: Jesus Christ

Today's featured hymn focuses on Christ's work: saving sinners through his death on the cross. I wrote something previously about word changes sometimes made in this hymn, and why I don't like those changes. Today, I'll just post the words as they were written by Isaac Watts, with a refrain written later by Ralph Hudson.
Alas! and Did My Savior Bleed?

(sometimes titled At the Cross when the refrain is included.)

Alas! and did my Savior bleed
And did my Sovereign die?
Would He devote that sacred head
For such worm as I?

Refrain
At the cross, at the cross where I first saw the light,
And the burden of my heart rolled away,
It was there by faith I received my sight,
And now I am happy all the day!

Thy body slain, sweet Jesus, Thine—
And bathed in its own blood—
While the firm mark of wrath divine,
His Soul in anguish stood.

Was it for crimes that I had done
He groaned upon the tree?
Amazing pity! grace unknown!
And love beyond degree!

Well might the sun in darkness hide
And shut his glories in,
When Christ, the mighty Maker died,
For man the creature’s sin.

Thus might I hide my blushing face
While His dear cross appears,
Dissolve my heart in thankfulness,
And melt my eyes to tears.

But drops of grief can ne’er repay
The debt of love I owe:
Here, Lord, I give my self away
’Tis all that I can do.

---Listen:

Other hymns, worship songs, etc. posted this Sunday:
Have you posted a hymn or worship song this Sunday? Let me know in the comments and I'll add your post to the list, too. For the remainder of the summer, you should expect the Sunday's Hymn feature to be posted later in the day. My church service is now an hour earlier, so I'll most often post after church rather than before.

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Saturday, June 17

The Blue Belles


As promised, here's a photo of the other blue wildflower that's blooming right now. Yesterday I called it tall lungwort, but that's just one of it's names--the one that makes it sound most like a deadly disease. I prefer to call them languid ladies, because they look like Victorian southern belles in ball gowns, don't they? Yesterday as I tried to get this photo, they were not languid at all, but were energetically dancing in the wind. Perhaps there was a ball I was not invited to.

The tall lungwort are also known as northern bluebells or chiming bells. I like the name languid ladies best, since I grew up calling harebells by the bluebell name, and I'm not about to stop now. Harebells grow here, too, but I haven't seen any yet this year. They bloom, I think, a little later in the season.

If you like eating wild plants, you'll be happy to know that as a member of the borage family, these girls are edible. You can add the little ladies to salads, and, no, they don't taste like chicken! They taste like fish. The leaves can be steeped for a delicately fishy tasting tea, as well. At one time, the tea was thought to be useful for treating lung diseases. And now you know where the lungwort name cames from.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Labels:

|

Friday, June 16

Into the Wild Blue

The lavender of the crocuses is gone, and we're now in the blue period of the seasonal wildflower show.

The flowers on the right are wild lupines. Texans call their wild lupines bluebonnets, which sounds so much more descriptive and interesting, doesn't it? They've given these beauties the honor of being their state flower, too.

Lupines are legumes, which means they are related to peas and beans and peanuts. Each one of those little blooms on the stock grows into a pea pod like seed packet. You don't want to eat the seeds of these legume pods, however, since they contain a bitter poison.

Another blue wildflower blooming now is Jacob's ladder (below), named for their ladder-like leaves. There are places on my regular dog-walking trail around the subdivision where entire hillsides are blue with a low carpet of blooming Jacob's ladder.

I have yet another blue wildflower blooming in the yard--tall lungwort (Don't worry, it has much better names than that, too!)--but I don't have photos yet, so I'll post photos and a little description of it some other day.

What comes after the blue period? Next up is the pinks, which I would expect to begin blooming within a couple of weeks.

Previous related posts:
Both photos are by oldest son.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Labels:

|

Thursday, June 15

Catching up with David Brainerd

Today I finally got up to date with the entries in David Brainerd's blog. David is ill with tuberculosis, and he's worried about his life at present being a useless one.
...[I] found, that in proportion to the prospect I had of being restored to a state of usefulness, so I desired the continuance of life; but death appeared inconceivable more desirable to me than a useless life; yet blessed be God, I found my heart, at time, fully resigned and reconciled to this greatest of afflictions, if God saw fit thus to deal with me.
Yet here we are, going on three hundred years later, and people are still reading his journal entries, and being encouraged by them. Like Kim from Hireath, who just commented on the previous post:
Reading this today made me thankful yet again that David Brainerd kept a journal. One of the most precious things, to me, about his journal entries is the way he records the specific experiences he had in his devotional time with God...
Ironic, isn't it?
|

Wednesday, June 14

Who Done It?

God the Father delivered Christ up as an exact expression of justice.
Yesterday I mentioned that I might tackle the Did God Kill Jesus? question. Since I wrote that, there have been several more posts added to the mix, and what I wanted to say has mostly been said, and said well, which means my post will be shorter than I'd intended.

First off, let me point out one of the pieces that Jeremy Pierce linked in the comments to yesterday's post, a post Jeremy wrote a couple of years ago called Who Killed Jesus? In this post, Jeremy points out something he learned from an elder in his church: That the same biblical language--delivered up--is used for the roles of several different parties in the crucifixion of Jesus--Judas, the Jewish leaders, Pilate, our sins, God the Father, and Jesus himself. So there is a real sense in which every single one of these parties--and that includes you and me, since he was delivered up for our sins--killed Jesus. It isn't only Isaiah 53, which is the passage some are quibbling over, that says it.

One more post I want to highlight, since it's one that really lays things out for us, is from Dan Phillips of Pyromaniacs: God, evil, and the Cross. You might want to read that before you read any more of this post, since that one came first, and it says most of what I wanted to say, and says it better than I would have, too. And make sure you read yesterday's post here, too, since that post is another one that will undergird my comments.

I hope by now you'll agree that there is indeed some sense in which it is right to say that God the Father killed Jesus. Did he have exactly the same role that the others had? No, of course not, but if scripture uses the language it does (like delivering him up, or crushing him) for the Father's role in bringing about the death of his Son, there's no need for us to back away from it. There is truth that God wants to express to us and to the world by using that strong language to explain his own role in the death of Christ. Sure, it may need explanation, and it can be a little confusing; but doesn't real truth tend to be that way?

Let's use our noggins and think this thing through. What exactly was God the Father's role in the death of Christ? Well, for one, he planned for it to happen. It was part of his will. Actually, I think I'd say that Christ's death is the center point of God's plan for history. Everything hinges on that event in God's plan coming to fruition.

But if we think that God plans or wills something, and then just sits back and waits for that plan to happen, we'd be wrong. Ephesians 1:11 says, speaking in the context of redemption, that God works everything according to the counsel of his will, so he not only wills something, but he actively works to bring that will to pass, and that includes the plan for Christ to be crucified.

That doesn't mean that the Holy Spirit was the energizer of the people who actually did the physical work of crucifying Christ. Pilate wasn't working under the inner influence of the Spirit, nor were the Jewish leaders, or Judas, or the Roman soldiers. But nonetheless, God was working his plan, by arranging circumstances, perhaps by unrestraining previously restrained evil, by purposefully choosing when to allow men to act on their desires, and when to prevent them from acting on their desires, so that his plan would with certainty come about as he planned for it to happen.

Now some might object that this is not a role for which the word killed can rightly be used, since God is not the one who actually physically nailed Christ to the cross, nor was the Holy Spirit the active agent in those who did. But let's not forget the previously mentioned strong language that scripture uses for God's role in Christ's death. Christ's death, according to scripture, was accomplished by God. And as Bugblaster points out in a comment on Adrian Warnock's blog, scripture says that David killed Uzziah when David was not the one who physically killed him, but simply the one who set things up so that Uzziah would be put in a position where he would undoubtedly be killed. David was held responsible for Uzziah's death, and while it's an iffy thing to use the words "held responsible" in relationship to God (Who is God going to be held responsible to? What is the standard, except for his own character, with which he always acts in accordance, by which his acts can be judged?), there is also a sense in which God is accountable for Christ's death, although in God's case, being accountable for this event rightfully results in praise rather than censure.

Why the difference between God and David, when their roles are similar? Because, although David, as king and judge, had the right to order someone's death as an expression of justice, in this case, justice wasn't David's motive. Rather, his motive was an unjust desire to get himself out of a pickle of his own making.

God, in Christ's death, stands in direct contrast to David. God delivered Christ up as an exact expression of justice. And this, it seems, is another place where some people get hung up, because they can't imagine how Christ's death can be called "justice." Yet that is exactly what scripture tells us it is.
...God put [Christ] forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:25, 26 ESV)
One of the purposes of Christ's death is so that God "might be just."

Whoa there! Christ hadn't done anything wrong! How could it be just for him to die? If it was unjust for David to send Uzziah, who was the innocent party, to be killed, why would it be just for the Father to send the Son, who is also an innocent party, to be killed?

The answer is right there in those two verses quoted: Because in God's forebearance he had passed over former sins. Not Christ's former sins, of course, but the sins of people who had lived before Christ. God had withheld his rightful judgment of the sins of people in the olden days, but he couldn't do that willy-nilly without grounds upon which that could be done rightfully.

But hey! Can't God just do anything he wants? After all, he's God isn't he? What he says, goes, right? Can't he just choose to ignore sin? Why does he need grounds for passing over sin?

The objection is partly right. God is God, and as God he's free to express himself. But who he is is a God who is just, and when he expresses himself, it is always going to be according to his just nature.

It is nothing other than God's just character itself that requires grounds for passing over sins, since justice requires that sin receive exactly what it deserves, and, as we've all read from that other famous verse in Romans 3, the just deserts of sin is death. So God, being true to his just nature, always makes sure that sin gets what it deserves, and that is nothing less than death. He can't pass over sin without ensuring that that sin, somewhere, somehow, receives the justice due.

Okay, so what does that have to do with Christ? What does he have to do with the sins of people who lived during the olden days? How could Christ's death be just grounds for God passing over their former sins?

The answer is that Christ has everything to do with the sins of people who lived during the olden days.
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:21 ESV)
Christ, who knew no sin was made sin for us, and the us includes those guys from the olden days. It includes me, too, for it includes everyone--past, present, and future--who "has faith in Jesus." Christ wasn't actually sinful--he knew no sin--but he was counted as sinful for us. His death accomplishes something for us, because his death was counted as our death (2 Corinthians 5:14), and he had our sin counted as his. He took our sin and stood in our place on the cross. Our sins received their just deserts when Christ died on the cross, and in that way, his death is the just grounds for God passing over the former sins, and for him justifying every single one of us who has faith in Jesus.

So in a real sense, God killed Jesus. If he-who-is-always-just planned to save people, it was required by his just nature that Christ die. God planned, then, for Christ to die, and he worked to bring that plan to pass. He gave sin its justice due in the death of Christ. In that way, Christ's death is an expression of God's righteousness (or justice). God the Father deserves praise for Christ's death because he brought it to pass and he accomplished righteous ends through it.

The other players in Christ's death? Some of them certainly planned Christ's death. Some of them actively worked to bring it to pass. But their roles in his death were an expression of injustice rather than justice. And they knew it. Why else would we have the "I'm washing my hands" business, if Pilate didn't know how unjust (and blameworthy) his action was? So the rest, intending unrighteous ends by their actions, are completely blameworthy for their roles, even though in the scheme of things, they were tools our just and merciful God used to accomplish his just and merciful plan to spare us the just deserts for our sins.



Other posts, besides the two linked above, that I've collected on this subject:
|

Tuesday, June 13

Laura VanRyn and Whitney Cerak

A couple of weeks ago I linked to a blog by Laura VanRyn's family.  (You'll find the back story here.)  Today someone sent me an email telling me that Laura's family has chosen to delete the blog, but that Whitney Cerak's family has started one to continue chronicling Whitney's progress as she recovers from her injuries in the car accident that killed Laura.  Read and be blessed by the  faith of Whitney and her family.

Technorati Tags: ,
|

Isaiah 10 and Reconciling Friends

This is an old post from November of 2004, but I'm reposting it today because the same principles that apply to the event in Isaiah 10 apply to Christ's crucifixion and the question of who killed Jesus. Maybe tomorrow I'll flesh out my thoughts on the specifics of Christ's death, using this post as background. If you have posted on the subject of whether or not it can rightly be said that God put Jesus to death, why don't you leave your link in the comments and I'll put a collection of links at the bottom of tomorrow's post?



We may have a hard time understanding how God's sovereignty and human reponsibility can coexist, but here they are, side by side...
There seems to be quite a bit of discussion round the sphere about free will and God's sovereignty--what they are and if and how they can (or do) coexist. I was trying to resist commenting, but by now you probably know that these are the sorts of discussions that I just can't stay away from. So I've decided to have a little look at Isaiah 10 and see what it can teach us about the coexistence of God's sovereignty and human responsibility.

Here's the passage from Isaiah 10 that I want to look at:
Ah, Assyria, the rod of my anger;
the staff in their hands is my fury!
Against a godless nation I send him,
and against the people of my wrath I command him,
to take spoil and seize plunder,
and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.

But he does not so intend,
and his heart does not so think;
but it is in his heart to destroy,
and to cut off nations not a few;
for he says:

"Are not my commanders all kings?
Is not Calno like Carchemish?
Is not Hamath like Arpad?
Is not Samaria like Damascus?
As my hand has reached to the kingdoms of the idols,
whose carved images were greater than those of Jerusalem and Samaria,
shall I not do to Jerusalem and her idols
as I have done to Samaria and her images?"

When the Lord has finished all his work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, he will punish the speech of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the boastful look in his eyes. For he says:

"By the strength of my hand I have done it,
and by my wisdom, for I have understanding;
I remove the boundaries of peoples,
and plunder their treasures;
like a bull I bring down those who sit on thrones.
My hand has found like a nest
the wealth of the peoples;
and as one gathers eggs that have been forsaken,
so I have gathered all the earth;
and there was none that moved a wing
or opened the mouth or chirped."

Shall the axe boast over him who hews with it,
or the saw magnify itself against him who wields it?
As if a rod should wield him who lifts it,
or as if a staff should lift him who is not wood!
Therefore the Lord God of hosts
will send wasting sickness among his stout warriors,
and under his glory a burning will be kindled,
like the burning of fire. (5-16, ESV)
This is a prophetic passage, telling Isaiah's hearers what is going to happen. God is going to send Assyria up against Israel in judgment of Israel for her godlessness. Assyria is going to be an instrument in God's hands--the "rod of my anger". And when God is finished using them for his judgmental purposes, he is going to punish the king and the kingdom of Assyria for what they have done. The NET puts is this way:
But when the sovereign master finishes judging Mount Zion and Jerusalem, then I will punish the king of Assyria for what he has proudly planned and for the arrogant attitude he displays (verse 12).
Whatever means he uses, they can correctly be called sending and commanding...
God is going to be sovereign in all that is done, for the king of Assyria will be doing what God is planning for him to do; and yet, the king and kingdom of Assyria will be held responsible for their acts. In this passage, the coexistence of God's absolute sovereignty and human responsibility is clearly displayed for us. We may have a hard time understanding how they can coexist, but here they are, side by side in the same passage of scripture, and side by side in regards to one single event. As Spurgeon put it in his famous quote, the two are "friends".

If scripture tells us that they are both true in regards to a single event, then we must come at the problem of how they might fit together with the assumption that they are compatible. We must assume that even if we cannot develop a theory that fits them neatly together, they still mesh perfectly. I don't think it's necessarily wrong to seek ways to bring the two together in our system of thinking, but what we can't do is take away from the full strength of either side in order to get rid of the tension between them.

We can't reconcile them by saying that God isn't really going to direct the activities of the Assyrian nation of the Assyrian king. The text uses the words "send" and "command" and the metaphors of a rod being wielded, an axe being used to hew, a saw being used to cut, and a staff being used to lift. The picture we get of God's involvement in what will take place is that his role will be a large and powerful one; in fact, that he will be the one who controls all of what will occur. To be sure, much of the language is metaphorical, but the particular images chosen are chosen because they express truth about the situation to us. If the images make it seem that God will be the one doing the job, and Assyria and the Assyrian king are merely tools he will use to accomplish his work, this is probably the right way to think about this act. We can't back away from the strength of this statement in order to fit the sovereignty of God and true human responsibility together in our minds.

Secondly, we can't square things by saying that Assyria can't be rightly be held responsible since God will be the one directing what happens. If God will punish the King of Assyria, there will be right and just grounds upon which to do so, because we can be assured that God always acts justly. This may seem obvious, but I've known people who have argued that God can do as he pleases--which is true enough--so it doesn't really matter whether there are specific grounds on which a particular punishment rests. God can simply punish because he feels like punishing. God, however, is a just God, and he only desires to punish where punishment is rightfully warranted. Even if we don't understand fully what the grounds for punishment are, we can know that since God is going to punish the king and his country, those just grounds will certainly be there alongside God's control of the events.

...we need to be careful that we don't diminish either one of the two friends in order to fit them together...
We do get some clues from the text as to what the grounds for the punishment of Assyria will be. It seems that even though God will be in complete control of what is happening, the king of Assyria will act from the true attitude of his own heart and from his own sinful motives. He is boastful and arrogant, and his intent is to be as destructive as possible in order to prove how powerful he is. He is desiring to show that he is more powerful than the gods of the nations he conquers, so in going up against Jerusalem he is planning to establish himself as more powerful than Israel's God. Although God will be using him to perform the righteous judgment of God, the king will not be intending to do what God wants. He will not be obedient to God; but rather, he will be thumbing his nose in God's face. And when it's all over, he's going to boast that he accomplished it all by his own strength and smarts, when in reality, his ability to carry out his plans will come only because he is being used by God to accomplish God's own purpose. So the king's destructive act will be punished justly, even though it is part of God's intentional plan.

What the passage doesn't tells us is the exact means by which God accomplishes his sending of Assyria. Whatever means he uses, they can correctly be called sending and commanding, and yet at the same time they must allow for the king's sinful attitudes and motives to remain intact, so that the king is a free agent acting out his own plans. It may be (and here I am wandering over into the realm of speculation, so take this with a grain of salt) that God brings this about by unrestraining previously restrained evil. Perhaps the Assyrian king had been plotting to destroy Jerusalem, but circumstances (controlled by God) had prevented him until God's appointed timing. I can't really know for sure how God works this out, but I can be sure that he does.

Friends they are--human responsibility and God's sovereignty. We don't have to know exactly how they get along; we just have to understand that they do. Of course, those of us who like pondering these things can't help but try to find ways to put them together, but when we do, we need to be careful that we don't diminish either one of the two friends in order to fit them together in a way that suits us. It's important to continue to hold onto both points, accepting their compatibility even if we can't reconcile them in our minds.

Does this passage tell us anything about free will and whether human beings have it or not? I think it does. I believe it tells us that we either have it or not depending on how you define it. If by free will you mean that human beings have the ability to choose and act free of external influence, then we don't have free will. Our choices and actions are influenced by circumstances and forces beyond us. If by free will you mean that we have the ability to make choices and act based upon our own motives and in hopes of accomplishing our own goals, then we have free will.
|

Monday, June 12

My Yukon Garden: June 12


It doesn't look much different than last week's photo, except that the rhubarb's bigger. But it is different! Even though you can't see them in the photo, most of the greens, the beets, the radishes and one row of peas are up. What isn't up is the potatoes (I wouldn't expect them yet), the carrots (wouldn't expect them either), and that pesky row of peas. I haven't figured out what's happening with the peas. I bought both packages of peas at the same time at the same place, but one package of peas has sprouted and the other hasn't.

I also lost one more broccoli plant and a cabbage plant. Once again, it's the dog's fault. She likes to sit in that section of the garden, and if there's a cute little green plant beneath her, so much the better.

With this heat wave, I've had to water many times a day, since the germinating seeds need to be kept moist at all times. I'm doing my watering by hand. It works better that way. The sprinkler waters everywhere, but not as deeply. I prefer the precision and depth of the hand dousing. So if you wonder where I am and why I haven't been blogging much, there's your answer.

Oh! And the tumbler tomatoes in pots on the deck have blossoms.

Technorati Tags: , , ,
|

Sunday's Hymn on Monday: Jesus Christ

I'm going to post a hymn we sang in church yesterday, one written by German Jesuits in the 17th century.
Fairest Lord Jesus

Fairest Lord Jesus, Ruler of all nature,
O Thou of God and man the Son,
Thee will I cherish, Thee will I honor,
Thou, my soul’s glory, joy and crown.

Fair are the meadows, fairer still the woodlands,
Robed in the blooming garb of spring;
Jesus is fairer, Jesus is purer,
Who makes the woeful heart to sing.

Fair is the sunshine, fairer still the moonlight,
And all the twinkling starry host;
Jesus shines brighter, Jesus shines purer
Than all the angels heaven can boast.

All fairest beauty, heavenly and earthly,
Wondrously, Jesus, is found in Thee;
None can be nearer, fairer or dearer,
Than Thou, my Savior, art to me.

Beautiful Savior! Lord of all the nations!
Son of God and Son of Man!
Glory and honor, praise, adoration,
Now and forever more be Thine.
Listen: version 1, version 2

During the week, Leo of Adding My Views to the Mix posted a hymn that relates to this theme. His hymn is from the Believer's Hymn Book, a hymn book used by some Plymouth Brethren Assemblies. Go read Glory to TheeThou Son of God Most High.
Other hymns, worship songs, etc. posted this Sunday:
Technorati Tags: ,
|

Yippee! Internet Again

I had no internet connection yesterday, and it seems my service provider doesn't fix with that sort of stuff on Sunday. It all turned out quite nicely for me, because yesterday was another gorgeous day.

But I couldn't post the Sunday Hymn, so I think I'll do that today, since I had started lining things up for it.

It's the day I ought to be posting a picture of the garden, too, so I'll try to get that in as well. We'll see. As long as it's nice out, the blog will be on summer mode, which means I post when I feel like it.

And when I peeked in the fridge this morning, there were two trout I need to do something with.
|

Saturday, June 10

The May Day Tree

is now blossoming.


It's my favorite time of the year in the front yard. For the next week, several time a day, you'll find me with my coffee on the front deck, sitting in my adirondack chair, admiring this tree.

It's one of the prettiest May Day trees in Whitehorse, and there are lots of them, since it's one of the few blossoming trees that is a snap to grow here. I can't take any credit for it's loveliness, though, since it was here when we moved in, and I've done nothing to it but mow around it and trim the branches now and then.

Last year some of the branches were dragging on the ground (You can see how the bottom branches curve down.), but it got a good pruning after the blossoms were gone so that mowing under it would be easier.

I looked up May Day trees and read that they grow to twenty feet or so, but mine is much taller than that. Youngest son says it's forty feet tall, but my guess is thirty. (You can click on the photo for the big view.)

Did I mention that the weather is absolutely perfect here right now? Are you jealous yet?

Technorati Tags:
|

Friday, June 9

Except for the Memory

That's what I'd planned to call the little story I told on Wednesday. It's a line from Jim Croce's song Time in a Bottle, but I wasn't sure of the exact words, and I needed to look them up, so I was composing the post under the working title Dust to Dust. Then when it came time to publish, I forgot to change the title. I noticed my mistake immediately--and a few other errors in the post, too--but by then Blogger was on the blitz, so the title remained Dust to Dust for a couple of hours. By the time it could be changed, the post had already been linked under that name, and since Blogger permalinks are title driven, it was too late to change things.

Indulge me though, and let me tell you why I wanted the other title. The phrase "dust to dust" points to our mortality, and the story is about mortality--about the brevity of life. But it's about something much more than that, although we do indeed need to be reminded constantly of our mortality. Nope, the real story is about the significance--the meaning--of even the shortest life.

The lines from Time in a Bottle are these:
The box would be empty
Except for the memory
In this case, the box wasn't even there--only pieces of it--but the woman had known and loved that little one, and he had significance to her, even though all that remained of him materially at the time of the story were a few pieces of the box he'd been buried in. She had carried him and held him, and she knew and she loved and she remembered.

And that little one has significance to several other people, too. Judy, in the comments, was reminded of her Uncle Clifford who died as an infant, and I'm betting that this baby's nieces and nephews know of him, too. But beyond his own relatives, this baby's life has significance to Steve, the one who moved him, and to the people Steve told his story to--my own husband being one of them. I heard my husband tell this story many times, to0, so that all I had to say to my children was that I'd posted Steve's story about the baby and they knew exactly what I meant. That baby's life has meaning to my children, who have only the tiniest thread of connection to him, and are removed from his life by at least eighty years, but in some fleeting way, they know that baby through the story.

Of course, what meaning he has to us is almost nothing compared to the meaning he had to his very own mother. And standing behind his mother's knowing and loving, is God himself, who knitted that baby together in his mother's womb, and who knew and valued him when he was "unformed substance," when "the days that were formed for" him--and there weren't many of them--were not yet.

Even without the significance given to a life through a mother's memory and love, or through little stories that move us--which, while they'll certainly last longer than any material evidence of that life, will all die out eventually--every life has significance because God wrote and God formed and God knitted. And God knew, and God knows, and God remembers.

For you formed my inward parts;
you knitted me together in my mother's womb.
I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
my soul knows it very well.
My frame was not hidden from you,
when I was being made in secret,
intricately woven in the depths of the earth.
Your eyes saw my unformed substance;
in your book were written, every one of them,
the days that were formed for me,
when as yet there were none of them.
(Psalm 139:13-16 ESV)
|

Thursday, June 8

I Don't Do Memes

in exactly the same way that I don't do those little quizzes.

I was not tagged for this one by my son, who was tagged by Kim (the Hireath one!). He was not faithful (that's an understatement) to the original, and--no offense to the original meme's author--I like his version better.

Seven Things Whut I (Rebecca) Like

Seven Things Whut I Don't Get
  • How do we know that a stitch in time doesn't save eight? or ten?
  • Why do I never stink?
  • Why some tourists prefer camping in a concrete Walmart parking lot to camping in a country R.V. park.
  • If you lead a dead horse to water, can you kick it to make it drink?
  • Fondue. I've mentioned that before, but I think it bears repeating. Right?
  • The lesser yellowlegs. That's why I like them so much.
  • How people can lose track of time.

Seven Ways Whut I Don't Address My Dog
  • Golden Taffeta Princess (her official name)
  • She-who-never-stinks
  • Fang.
  • Stairmeister
  • Lesser Yellowlegs Princess (I'm not sure why not, because she has yellow legs, too, and they're shorter than mine.)
  • Your Royal Highness
  • the missuz
Seven Things Whut I Like More Than I Should
  • the TV show Dog the Bounty Hunter
  • creepy crawly things, like snakes and spiders and such-like
  • Cheez Whiz
  • Pippi Longstocking
  • stupid little blog quizzes
  • the lesser yellowlegs, in a never-before-seen-on-this-blog photo
  • puppy breath

Seven Words Whut Can Be Pronounced in Funny Ways
  • spectacles
  • cute (Yes, it looks simple enough, doesn't it? They why do so many people say queue-ette?)
  • aluminum
  • tomato.
  • wash
  • lesser yellowlegs (Just ask my kids.)
  • sudoku
Seven Books Whut I Started and Didn't Finish
  • Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan. Please don't shoot me.
  • The God Who Risks by John Sanders.
  • The Deerslayer by James Fenimore Cooper.
  • The Shipping News by Annie Proulx.
  • Paul, an Outline of His Theology by Herman Ridderbos. Someday I will finish this.
  • A History of the Ostrogoths by Thomas Burns.
  • The Standard Math Tables.
Want to participate?

Technorati Tags: , ,
|