tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-87063552024-03-23T14:26:52.015-04:00The matthew never knewmatthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.comBlogger1776125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-42380521035759642092024-02-05T11:38:00.000-05:002024-02-05T11:38:07.644-05:00TSB VIII<p> TSB VIII was played on 2/4/24 from about 1:00 until about 5pm.</p><p>There were 11 participants. We made the computer a 12th team to give us 3 divisions of 4. For each division, the lowest seeded team chose their preference for an NFL direction (NESW) which meant they could choose to play their games from any of 8 teams (For example, if one picked the EAST, one could pick from the teams in the AFC or NFC east). The highest seeded team was left to pick the last remaining NFL direction. Teams played everyone in their division. The 3 division winners plus 1 wild card team (point-differential) made the playoffs. The highest seeded playoff participant was allowed to pick any NFL division to choose teams from. Throughout the tournament, you could only be a team once per NFL draft.<br /><br />The divisions/results were as follows<br /><br />Division 1: Matthew, Aiden, Jeff S, David K</p><p>Matt (2-1, +45)* S<br />Defeated David 28-14<br />Defeated Jeff 46-13<br />Lost to Aiden 23-21</p><p>Jeff (2-1, -20) N<br />Defeated Aiden 30-20<br />Lost to Matt 13-46<br />Defeated David 24-21</p><p>David (1-2, -4) E<br />Lost to Matt 14-28<br />Beat Aiden 34-21<br />Lost to Jeff 21-24</p><p>Aiden (1-2, -21) W<br />Lost to Jeff 20-30<br />Lost to David 21-34<br />Defeated Matt 23-21</p><p><br />Division 2: Jordan, Nathan, Steve, Computer</p><p><br />Jordan (3-0, +28)* S<br />Defeated Computer 42-38<br />Defeated Nathan 17-7<br />Defeated Steve 35-21</p><p><br />Steve (2-1, -6) E<br />Defeated Computer 35-30<br />Defeated Nathan 17-14<br />Lost to Jordan 21-35</p><p>Nathan (1-2, +15) N<br />Defeated Computer 35-7<br />Lost to Steve 14-17<br />Lost to Jordan 7-17</p><p>Computer (0-3, -37) W<br />Lost to Jordan 38-42<br />Lost to Nathan 7-35<br />Lost to Steve 30-35</p><p><br />Division 3: Joe, Nick, Jon W, Leo<br /><br />Joe (3-0, +67)* S<br />Defeated Jon 44-0<br />Defeated Leo 30-14<br />Defeated Nick 28-21<br /><br />Nick (2-1, +33)*WC N<br />Defeated Leo 39-13<br />Defeated Jon 28-14<br />Lost to Joe 21-28<br /><br />Jon (1-2, -34) E<br />Lost to Joe 0-44<br />Lost to Nick 14-28<br />Defeated Leo 48-24<br /><br />Leo (0-3, -66) W<br />Lost to Nick 13-39<br />Lost to Joe 14-30<br />Lost to Jon 24-48</p><p>Playoff Results<br />#1 Joe picked NFC West<br />#2 Jordan picked AFC North<br />#3 Matthew picked NFC East<br />#4 Nick picked AFC East<br /><br />Round 1<br />Jordan (Cincy) defeated Matthew (Dallas) 42-14<br />Joe (LAR) defeated Nick (Miami) 30-10<br /><br />3rd Place game<br />Matthew (Philly) defeated Nick (Buffalo) 35-21<br /><br />Championship Game<br />Jordan (Baltimore) defeated Joe (SF) 24-17</p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-69636349932633915562024-02-03T21:29:00.001-05:002024-02-03T21:29:39.943-05:00TSB VIII RULES<p> TSB VIII RULES</p><p>We are using Wii systems with updated rosters</p><p>You may use a Time Out to change 1 play in playbook or change 1 position player</p><p>If 4 players show up then each player drafts an NFL division. The first pick in the draft will be the person with the lowest winning % in past tournaments and then next lowest until all players have selected. Ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old drafts sooner). Each player plays every other player once (3 games) using none of the teams in their division more than once. Playoff seeding will then be ranked 1 through 4 with head to head and then point differential being the tie breakers. The bottom 2 teams will play against each other for the right to play the #2 seed. Then those 2 teams will play each other for the right to play the #1 seed in the championship game. During the playoffs, once again, you can only use each team from your division once.</p><p>If 5 players show up then each player drafts an NFL division. The first pick in the draft will be the person with the lowest winning % in past tournaments and then next lowest until all players have selected. Ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old drafts sooner). Each player plays every other player once (4 games) using none of the teams in their division more than once. Playoff seeding will then be ranked 1 through 5 with head to head and then point differential being the tie breakers. The bottom 2 teams will play against each other for the right to play the #3 seed. Then those 2 teams will play each other for the right to play the #2 seed. Then those 2 teams will play each other for the right to play the #1 seed in the championship game. During the playoffs, once again, you can only use each team from your division once.</p><p>If 6 players show up then each player drafts an NFL division. The first pick in the draft will be the person with the lowest winning % in past tournaments and then next lowest until all players have selected. Ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old drafts sooner). Each player plays every other player once (5 games) using only 1 of the teams in their division more than once. Playoff seeding will then be ranked 1 through 4 with head to head and then point differential being the tie breakers. Seed #1 will play Seed #4 and Seed #2 will play Seed #3. The winners will meet in the championship game. During the playoffs, once again, you can only use each team from your division once.</p><p>If 7 players show up then each player drafts an NFL division. The first pick in the draft will be the person with the lowest winning % in past tournaments and then next lowest until all players have selected. Ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old drafts sooner). Each player plays every other player once (6 games) using only 2 of the teams in their division more than once. In this setup, there are no playoffs. The champion is the team with the best record at the end of the schedule. Should 2 teams be tied and the same team won both the head to head AND the point differential, then that team is the champion. If the team that lost the head to head had a better overall point differential, then a rematch will be played using the preferred team from their NFL division.</p><p>If 8 players show up then each player drafts and NFL division. The first pick in the draft will be the person with the lowest winning % in past tournaments and then next lowest until all players have selected. Ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old drafts sooner). Players will be placed in 2 (4 team) divisions based on draft order (1-2-2-2-1). Each player plays every other player once (3 games) using none of the teams in their division more than once. The top 2 teams in each division will qualify for the playoffs with head to head and then point differential being the tie breakers. Seed #1 will play Seed #4. Seed #2 will play Seed #3. The winners will play for the championship. During the playoffs, once again, you can only use each team from your division once.</p><p>If 9 players show up then the 'computer' is added to the tournament as a 10th player. The 10 teams are then placed into 2 divisions (5 teams each). The computer is the #10 ranked team by default. Division one will include seeds 1, 4, 5, 8, and 9. Division 2 will include seeds 2, 3, 6, 7, 10. This seeding is based on past tournament winning % and ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old being the 'lower' seed. The 5 teams in each division will then draft an NFL division (starting with the lowest seed and working up to the highest). Obviously, the 2 divisions can/will draft some of the same NFL divisions. Every player will then play every other team in their division without using any of the NFL teams in their drafted division twice (4 games). The division runner ups will play for 3rd place. The division winners will play for the championship. Tie breakers are determined by head-to-head first and point differential second. In this scenario, the computer team draft and team decisions are determined by tournament organizer. <br /><br />If 10 players show up then the 10 teams are placed into 2 divisions (5 teams each). Division one will include seeds 1, 4, 5, 8, and 9. Division 2 will include seeds 2, 3, 6, 7, 10. This seeding is based on past tournament winning % and ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old being the 'lower' seed). The 5 teams in each division will then draft an NFL division (starting with the lowest seed and working up to the highest). Obviously, the 2 divisions can/will draft some of the same NFL divisions. Every player will then play every other team in their division without using any of the NFL teams in their drafted division twice (4 games). The division runner ups will play for 3rd place. The division winners will play for the championship. Tie breakers are determined by head-to-head first and point differential second. </p><p>If 11 players show up then the 'computer' will be added to the tournament as a 12th player. The computer is the #12 ranked team by default. The 12 teams are then placed in 3 divisions of 4. Division one will include seeds 1, 6, 7 and 12. Division two will include seeds 2, 5, 8 and 11. Division three will include seeds 3, 4, 9 and 10. This seeding is based on past tournament winning % and ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old being the 'lower' seed. The 4 teams in each division will then draft an NFL direction (North, East, South, West, starting with the lowest seed and working up to the highest). To clarify, drafting an NFL 'direction' means you get the corresponding AFC & NFC divisions related to that direction. Obviously, the 3 divisions can/will draft the same NFL divisions. Every player will then play every other team in their division without using any of the NFL teams in their drafted divisions twice (3 games). The 3 division winners and 1 wild card team will qualify for the playoffs and re-draft 1 NFL division each, but this time with top seed picking first and the lowest qualifying team picking last. Tie breakers are determined by head to head and then overall point differential. Seed #1 will play Seed #4. Seed #2 will play Seed #3. Losers play for 3rd place. Winners play for championship. During the playoffs, players may NOT use a team from their new NFL division twice. In this scenario, the computer team draft and team decisions are determined by tournament organizer. </p><p>If 12 players show up then players will be placed in 3 divisions of 4. Division one will include seeds 1, 6, 7 and 12. Division two will include seeds 2, 5, 8 and 11. Division three will include seeds 3, 4, 9 and 10. This seeding is based on past tournament winning % and ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old being the 'lower' seed). The 4 teams in each division will then draft an NFL direction (North, East, South, West, starting with the lowest seed and working up to the highest). To clarify, drafting an NFL 'direction' means you get the corresponding AFC & NFC divisions related to that direction. Obviously, the 3 divisions can/will draft the same NFL divisions. Every player will then play every other team in their division without using any of the NFL teams in their drafted divisions twice (3 games). The 3 division winners and 1 wild card team will qualify for the playoffs and re-draft 1 NFL division each, but this time with the top seed picking first and the lowest qualifying team picking last. Tie breakers are determined by head to head and then overall point differential. Seed #1 will play Seed #4. Seed #2 will play Seed #3. Losers play for 3rd place. Winners play for championship. During the playoffs, players may NOT use a team from their new NFL division twice. </p><p>If 13, 14, 15, or 16 players show up, there will be 4 divisions of 4 (with up to 3 computer controlled team being added to each division as necessary to make 16). Division 1 will include seeds 1, 8, 9 and16. Division 2 will include seeds 2, 7, 10 and 15. Division 3 will include seeds 3, 6, 11 and 14. Division 4 will include seeds 4, 5, 12 and 13. This seeding is based on past tournament winning % and ties are determined by age (player furthest away from 42 years old being the 'lower' seed). The 4 teams in each division will then draft an NFL direction (North, East, South, West, starting with the lowest seed and working up to the highest). To clarify, drafting an NFL 'direction' means you get the corresponding AFC & NFC divisions related to that direction. Obviously, the 4 divisions can/will draft the same NFL divisions. Every player will then play every other team in their division without using any of the NFL teams in their drafted divisions twice (3 games). The 4 division winners will qualify for the playoffs and re-draft 1 NFL division each, but this time with the top seed picking first and the lowest qualifying team picking last. Tie breakers are determined by head to head and then overall point differential. Seed #1 will play Seed #4. Seed #2 will play Seed #3. Losers play for 3rd place. Winners play for championship. During the playoffs, players may NOT use a team from their new NFL division twice. </p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-26982422594772923442024-02-02T13:43:00.001-05:002024-02-02T13:43:07.641-05:00Bill MurrayBill Murray<br /><br />Great<br />Groundhog Day<br />What About Bob?<br /><br />Good<br />Space Jam<br /><br /><div>Average<br />Lost in Translation <br />Scrooged<br />Ghostbusters<br /><br />Bad<br /><br />Current Total: 7 points<br /><br /><p><br /></p></div>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-26305640400917877632023-02-06T09:15:00.000-05:002023-02-06T09:15:05.178-05:00TSB VII<p> TSB VII was held Sunday afternoon, February 5th, 2023<br /><br />There were 8 participants. We created a 16 team playoff bracket with one side made up of AFC teams and the other side made up of NFC teams. Each participant was in control of 4 total teams (2 from each conference). Teams were drafted youngest to oldest in a snake draft. <br /><br />Participants: Matthew, Joe, Nathan, Steve, Jordan, Aiden, Owen, Cayvon</p><p>AFC Results<br /><br /></p><p>1st Round</p><p><br />Steve (Miami) defeated Cayvon (Houston) 37-0</p><p>Nathan (Vegas) defeated Owen (Pittsburgh) 27-0</p><p>Joe (Jacksonville) defeated Aiden (Tennessee) 60-0</p><p>Matthew (Cleveland) defeated Jordan (Baltimore) 28-0</p><p><br />2nd Round</p><p>Nathan (Denver) defeated Steve (NYJ) 21-7<br /><br />Matthew (Cincinnati) defeated Joe (LAC) 14-7<br /><br /><br />AFC Championship<br /><br />Matthew (Cincinnati) defeated Nathan (Denver) 31-6<br /><br /><br />NFC Results<br /><br />1st Round</p><p>Jordan (Arizona) defeated Steve (NYG) 35-0<br /><br />Joe (SF) defeated Owen (NO) 42-6</p><p>Aiden (Minnesota) defeated Nathan (GB) 43-35<br /><br />Matthew (Seattle) defeated Cayvon (Detroit) 63-7<br /><br /><br />2nd Round<br /><br />Joe (Dallas) defeated Jordan (Chicago) 37-7<br /><br />Matthew (Philadelphia) defeated Aiden (Atlanta) 42-14<br /><br /><br />NFC Championship</p><p>Joe (Dallas) defeated Matthew (Philadelphia) 21-17<br /><br /><br />Championship<br /><br />Matthew (Cincinnati) defeated Joe (San Francisco) 21-6<br /><br /><br />INDIVIDUAL RECORDS</p><p>Matthew 6-1 (220-57, +163) GOLD<br />Joe 4-2 (173-65, +108) SILVER<br />Nathan 2-2 (89-81, +8) BRONZE<br />Jordan 1-2 (42-65, -23)<br />Steve 1-2 (44-56, -12)<br />Aiden 1-2 (57-137, -80)<br />Owen 0-2 (6-69, -63)<br />Cayvon 0-2 (7-100, -93)</p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-86874837499849546812023-01-23T08:30:00.004-05:002023-01-28T13:31:55.910-05:00Medical Log<p>Documenting my covid case for posterity<br /><br />I finally tested positive for covid-19 in late January 2023. </p><p>Below is my timeline and notes:</p><p><br /></p><p>FRIDAY, January 20th</p><p>I did not feel 'sick' until late Friday night</p><p>My symptoms included general body ache and dizziness</p><p><br /></p><p>SATURDAY, January 21st</p><p>I experienced a little bit of deliriousness over night</p><p>I felt a good bit better in morning and was preparing to return to normal activities</p><p>But since I had a service to do in evening, the result was a quick/thick line for positive</p><p>A bad cough developed accompanied soon thereafter by a sore throat</p><p>Still, I slept reasonably well<br /><br /><br /></p><p>SUNDAY, January 22nd</p><p>The cough didn't seem quite as bad</p><p>Body aches very mild now</p><p>Mild headache, still congested</p><p>General tiredness/boredom<br /><br /><br />MONDAY, January 23rd<br /><br />Minor cough (worse at night)<br /><br />Mild headache, still congested<br /><br />Energy levels returning to normal<br /><br /><br />TUESDAY, January 24th<br /><br />Minor cough (worse at night)<br /><br />Still congested<br /><br /><br />WEDNESDAY, January 25th<br /><br />Cough wasn't quite as bad overnight<br /><br />Less congested<br /><br /><br />THURSDAY, January 26th</p><p>Same as Wednesday<br /><br /><br /></p><p>FRIDAY, January 27th</p><p>Throat a little bit more sore</p><p>Cough a little worse again</p><p><br /></p><p>SATURDAY, January 28th<br /><br />Didn't cough over night at all<br /><br />Tested Negative in AM<br /><br /><br />Thus concludes this medical log</p><p><br /><br /></p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-11312281254599095412022-04-04T11:30:00.005-04:002022-04-04T11:33:29.323-04:00Rick JeanneretMatthew Hall of Fame Inductee: Rick Jeanneret<br /><br /><br />When I was a kid, I wanted to be the next Rick Jeanneret.<br /><br /><br />I’m glad I didn’t wait. <br /><br /><br />Jeanneret was already about 50 years old when I started really getting into sports. At the time, 50 seemed old! I would never have guessed that he’d still be announcing Sabre games when I was 40 and he was on the brink of turning 80. For 30 years of my life, RJ has been announcing, and sometimes creating, my favorite moments as a fan of the Buffalo Sabres.<br /><br /><br />I remember all the same calls that many of you remember. He scooooores! May Day, May Day! Tis the season, FaLalalalaLalaFontaine! Alexander the Great! Who says this guys’ afraid to fly… he left a vapor trail! Top shelf where momma hides the cookies! Are you ready Legion of Doom? Holy mackerel role the highlight film! Now do you believe? These guys are good… scary good! Hasek with a miraculous save… we are not worthy! Call the cops, he robbed him blind!<br /><br /><br />In a time when many announcers try to call a nice, balanced, unbiased game, Rick Jeanneret was an un-apologetic homer. He was a fan like us. He was a fan for us. He said things in a way we wished we could. By attaching audio to our visual memories, he burned amazing hits, fights, saves and goals into our hearts and minds forever.<br /><br /><br />TV? Radio? Wherever I needed to go to listen to Rick, that’s where I wanted to go. From puck drop to quadruple overtime if need be (I remember listening almost all night to that game), Sabre fans found their representative voice in RJ.<br /><br /><br />I’m so glad I had opportunity to go to RJ night on April Fools’ Day, 2022. Only a fool would fail to realize he’s been as big a part of Sabres’ hockey as anyone. His name now rightfully hangs from the rafters with some of the names he helped become legends of the game. <br /><br /><br />Additionally, I’d be a fool not to put Jeanneret in my personal Hall of Fame. From wanting his job when I grew up, to being glad he still had it when I did, Rick Jeanneret did something the team he cheered on never could… he reached the pinnacle of his profession.<br /><br /><br />HOF Category: Sports<br />HOF Object: Banner from RJ Nightmatthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-91611189837566742812022-03-05T16:46:00.003-05:002022-04-04T11:34:39.972-04:00The Matthew Hall of FameI have decided to create a personal HALL OF FAME. My Hall of Fame will consist of people, places, and things that have played a significant part in my life. However, I'm banning from my HOF people that I actually know (that would get messy).<div><div><br />Beyond that, there is no set criteria to make my HOF. With each new inductee, I will try to share an entertaining post explaining the rationale for the induction and how the inductee has played a role in my life. I will also try to acquire (if necessary) something to represent the inductee on a shelf in my office.<br /><br /></div><div>I plan for my HOF to be very picky (no easy entry). I will proceed in the coming weeks/months in no particular order. Links to each inductee will be found below.<div class="cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql o9v6fnle ii04i59q" style="animation-name: none; background-color: white; color: #050505; font-family: "Segoe UI Historic", "Segoe UI", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; margin: 0.5em 0px 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; transition-property: none; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div dir="auto" style="animation-name: none; font-family: inherit; transition-property: none;">
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2022/04/rick-jeanneret.html">Rick Jeanneret</a></div></div></div></div>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-6040512619926367032022-02-05T15:05:00.005-05:002022-02-08T09:32:01.625-05:00TSB VI<p>TSB VI was held Sunday afternoon, February 6th, 2022. </p><p>There were 9 participants. Our goal was to create a 16 team playoff bracket with one side made up of AFC teams and the other side being made up of NFC teams. Each participant was to control one team on each side of the bracket. Since we had 9, we did a PLAY-IN game on each side of the bracket. The 4 most inexperienced participants participated in the play-in game, but everyone was guaranteed at least 1 team in the bracket tournament. We drafted NFL teams using a snake draft (AFC --> NFC). <br /></p><p><br /></p><p>AFC SIDE</p><p>Play-in: Jordan beat Nate (26-10)</p><p><br /></p><p>1st Round</p><p>Jordan beat Joe 17-14</p><p>Nathan beat Steve 21-14</p><p>Nick beat Jeff S. 35-14</p><p>Matt beat Cameron F. 37-7</p><p><br /></p><p>2nd Round</p><p>Nathan beat Jordan 17-14</p><p>Matt beat Nick 13-7<br /><br /></p><p>AFC Championship</p><p>Matt beat Nathan 31-0</p><p><br /></p><p>NFC Side</p><p>Play-in: Jeff S. beat Cameron F. 28-7</p><p><br /></p><p>1st Round</p><p>Joe beat Jeff S. 58-21</p><p>Jordan beat Steve 49-7</p><p>Nick beat Nathan 37-17</p><p>Matt beat Nate 38-0</p><p><br /></p><p>2nd Round</p><p>Jordan beat Joe 17-14</p><p>Matt beat Nick 10-7</p><p><br /></p><p>NFC Championship</p><p>Matt beat Jordan 17-13<br /><br /><br /></p><p>SUPER BOWL</p><p>*Not applicable since Matt won both brackets</p><p><br /></p><p>Silver Medal Game: Jordan beat Nathan 21-20</p><p><br /></p><p>Participant Profiles</p><p><br /></p><p>Matthew 6-0 (146-34 +112)<br />*Arizona & Cincy</p><p>Beat Cam 37-7</p><p>Beat Nate 38-0</p><p>Beat Nick 10-7</p><p>Beat Nick 13-7</p><p>Beat Nathan 31-0</p><p>Beat Jordan 17-13</p><p><br /></p><p>Jordan 5-2 (157-99 +58)</p><p>*Minn & Buffalo</p><p>Beat Nate 26-10</p><p>Beat Joe 17-14</p><p>Beat Steve 49-7</p><p>Beat Joe 17-14</p><p>Lost to Nathan 14-17</p><p>Lost to Matt 13-17</p><p>Beat Nathan 21-20 (Silver)</p><p><br /></p><p>Nathan 2-3 (75-117 -42)</p><p>*GB & Cleveland</p><p>Lost to Nick 17-37</p><p>Beat Steve 21-14</p><p>Beat Jordan 17-14</p><p>Lost to Matt 0-31</p><p>Lost to Jordan 20-21</p><p><br /></p><p>Joe 1-2 (86-55 +31)</p><p>*SF & LAC</p><p>Beat Jeff S. 58-21</p><p>Lost to Jordan 14-17</p><p>Lost to Jordan 14-17</p><p><br /></p><p>Nick 2-2 (86-54 +32)</p><p>*TB & Baltimore</p><p>Beat Nathan 37-17</p><p>Beat Jeff S 35-14</p><p>Lost to Matt 7-13</p><p>Lost to Matt 7-10</p><p><br /></p><p>Jeff S 1-2 (63-100 -37)</p><p>*NYG & Indy</p><p>Beat Cam F 28-7</p><p>Lost to Joe 21-58</p><p>Lost to Nick 14-35</p><p><br /></p><p>Steve 0-2 (21-70 -49)<br />*Dallas & Tenn</p><p>Lost to Jordan 7-49</p><p>Lost to Nathan 14-21</p><p><br /></p><p>Cameron F 0-2 (14-65 -51)</p><p>*KC</p><p>Lost to Jeff S 7-28</p><p>Lost to Matt 7-37</p><p><br /></p><p>Nate W 0-2 (10-64 -54)<br />*LAR</p><p>Lost to Jordan 10-26</p><p>Lost to Matt 0-38</p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-21063645114623699342021-08-23T18:55:00.007-04:002021-08-23T18:55:46.172-04:00Hess Road Pickle Ball Tournament<p> I wanted to log the information for our first church pickle ball tournament. For this tournament we did a semi-random partnering of all participants. We had 20 participants, so we played 2 play-in games and then a 16-bracket tournament. Here are the results:<br /><br />Play in games: (to 15)<br /><br />Mary-Lou & Ben K advanced over Steve C & Aiden P</p><p>Tommy H. & Serena H advanced over Nathan M & Preston T</p><p><br />Tournament games Round 1:<br /><br />Ted A & Adam K advanced over John S & Ruth S</p><p>Mary-Lou & Ben K advanced against Sheila H & Owen H</p><p>Matthew R & Tom K advanced over Tommy H & Serena H</p><p>Kelly K & Betsy C advanced over Cheryl D & Katie R</p><p><br /></p><p>Tournament games Round 2:</p><p>Ted A & Adam K advanced over Mary-Lou & Ben K</p><p>Matthew R & Tom K advanced over Kelly K & Betsy C</p><p><br /></p><p>Championship result (best of 3 to 11)<br /><br />Ted A & Adam K advanced over Matthew R & Tom K</p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-40444639511130785612021-03-25T10:54:00.003-04:002021-03-25T10:54:33.357-04:00NHL 95 Sega Tournament<p> 6 guys got together for an NHL 95 Sega Tournament. The only rule was that you couldn't use the same NHL team twice during the tournament.</p><p>This post exists for the historical record</p><p>Standings after round-robin stage:<br />Nathan 4-1-0<br />Joe 3-0-2<br />Matthew 3-2<br />Steve 1-3-1<br />Jeff 1-3-1<br />Aiden 0-3-2</p><p>Playoff Results:<br />Aiden defeated Jeff 1-0<br />Aiden defeated Steve 3-2<br />Matthew defeated Aiden 8-0<br />Matthew defeated Joe 2-0<br />Nathan defeated Matthew 1-0<br /><br />Gold: Nathan<br />Silver: Matthew<br />Bronze: Joe</p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-3351472408589416382020-12-03T00:30:00.003-05:002020-12-03T00:30:12.312-05:005 Points on the Pandemic<p><span style="font-size: 16pt;">I’m going to share 5
big-picture points regarding the pandemic. I share these points NOT because I
think they are especially insightful (unlike most of you, I’m not an epidemiologist!),
but because I think my future self (with 20/20 hindsight, of course) will be
interested to know my 2020 thinking (thanks Facebook memories!).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt;">POINT #1</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Life is fragile. Of course,
we knew this already (I told you these points wouldn’t be especially insightful!).
On the other hand, we have tried REALLY hard to avoid facing the fact that life
is fragile. In the modern world, we’ve been socially distancing ourselves from
death for decades, but 2020 has forced us to take the blinders off. The media’s
obsession with Covid-19 death tolls is maddening mostly for the inconsistency
of its sounding of the alarm. About 60,000 people die every week in the United
States. The pandemic certainly did produce an excess of deaths. This virus was
and is real. But we’ve been infected with a deadly disease all along insofar as
we are mortal. The fact of our fragility should, in my opinion, cause us to
urgently ask the big questions about life, death, and the possibility of life
after death. One of the tragedies of our times is our willingness to live our
lives without asking those questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt;">POINT #2</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Our immune systems are
amazing! What if I told you that there existed, way back in March, a universally
free survival kit for covid that was about 98% effective? That’s exactly what
we’ve got! For those under 60 years old, the case fatality rate for this viral
infection is less than 1%. The ‘infection’ fatality rate is even lower. How is
this possible without a vaccine? Well, the answer is, of course, that our
bodies already have built-in systems to fight off stuff like this. Perhaps a
majority of people infected with this virus haven’t even realized it! The
pandemic has given us the opportunity to learn more about our innate (I’d say
God-given) ability to fight off disease and what we’ve learned has been astounding.
Sometimes we lose our sense of wonder at the fact that we can be significantly wounded,
and yet, within weeks, the evidence is sometimes gone without treatment. This
sort of self-healing happens internally all the time. We take it for granted.
We shouldn’t.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt;">POINT #3</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Numbers can be manipulated
and used to manipulate. There have been plenty of different opinions about
covid-19. At one end of the spectrum we’ve had people saying the whole thing is
a hoax. At the other end of the spectrum we’ve had people predicting incredible
death totals which proved to be more panic-provoking than prophetic. But here’s
the thing: Both ends of the spectrum had numbers to back up their claims. Numbers
were EVERYWHERE and they all looked neat and tidy (and they were all declared to
be ‘the science’). One thing we should be learning through this pandemic is the
importance of understanding CONTEXT for the numbers we’re being shown. Too
often we’ve allowed narratives to be driven by a small number of people
choosing which numbers to show us and when. They place the arrow where they
want it, draw a bullseye around it, and then draw our attention. I strongly
recommend that everyone figure out a few key data points to pay attention to,
and then pay attention to it no matter what the politicians and/or media choose
to focus on during a given news cycle.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt;">POINT #4</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">A virus is going to do what a
virus is going to do. With this point, I don’t mean to come across as if I’m
saying that there’s absolutely nothing we can do in response to a global
pandemic. But I also think we have severely over-estimated our ability to stop
a virus (at least a virus like this one). I’ve spent hours and hours looking at
charts and statistics. Country by country. State by state. Each entity having
its own set of mitigation procedures. Some locked down. Some stayed open. Some
mandated masks. Some didn’t. You know what? I simply haven’t seen a ton of
difference. The viral waves rise and fall despite our defenses. The bottom line
is, we’re in the ocean of this virus and we’re all going to get wet. Some of us
will get knocked off our feet for a while. Some of us will drown. It’s the
nature of this beast. It might feel better to blame someone or something, but almost
certainly that someone or that something couldn’t have stopped the virus from
doing what this virus was going to do.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16pt;">POINT #5 </span><span style="font-size: 16pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Flowing directly from my
previous point, I’ll share one more. We’re addicted to something that we can’t
possibly possess. And that is CONTROL. Since we can’t actually possess it, we’re
just addicted to the feeling of being in control. This is true of governors who
insist that their policies slowed the spread of the virus (and then blame
increasing spread on the failure of the people to abide by their policies).
This is also true of the conspiracy theorists who insist that you have to
follow their connecting-of-the-dots to truly understand (and take back control)
of what’s going on. Here’s the thing: We are NOT in control. This world is full
of surprises and many of them are bigger than our ability to manage them. Lacking
control, we need to learn to adapt. We must be flexible. We must grieve our
losses. We also must celebrate our victories. Our lives should not consist of an
endless pursuit of control, but an endless pursuit of love amidst the chaos. In
other words, we are better off praying the serenity prayer than grasping at the
wind. <o:p></o:p></span></p>matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-58433843612960801342020-02-01T12:04:00.002-05:002020-02-01T12:04:30.982-05:00TSB VTSB V was held on 1/31/20<br />
<br />
There were 5 participants<br />
Matthew R<br />
Nathan M<br />
Steve C<br />
Jeff S<br />
Jeff G<br />
<br />
We used the updated 2020 rosters. Each participant chose 6 'helmets' randomly from a bag and were allowed to use each of those teams once during the tournament at their discretion.<br />
<br />
Here are the round-robin & playoff results<br />
<br />
Matthew<br />
defeated Nathan 14-3<br />
defeated Steve 21-3<br />
defeated Jeff S 51-7<br />
defeated Jeff G 28-10<br />
defeated Nathan in semifinals 47-0<br />
defeated Jeff G in final 35-0<br />
<br />
Nathan<br />
lost to Matt 3-14<br />
lost to Steve 7-16<br />
lost to Jeff G 9-17<br />
defeated Jeff S 14-10<br />
defeated Jeff S in wild card 35-28<br />
lost to Matt in semifinals 0-47<br />
<br />
Steve<br />
defeated Jeff S 35-7<br />
defeated Nathan 16-7<br />
lost to Matt 3-21<br />
lost to Jeff G 7-10<br />
lost to Jeff G in semifinals 0-6 (had to leave/forfeit)<br />
<br />
Jeff S<br />
lost to Steve 7-35<br />
defeated Jeff G 21-0<br />
lost to Matt 51-10<br />
lost to Nathan 10-14<br />
lost to Nathan in wild card 28-35<br />
<br />
Jeff G<br />
lost to Jeff S 0-21<br />
defeated Nathan 17-9<br />
defeated Steve 10-7<br />
lost to Matt 10-28<br />
defeated Steve in semifinals 6-0 (Steve had to forfeit)<br />
lost to Matt in final 0-35matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-37832683303659967162019-04-19T20:57:00.001-04:002019-04-19T20:57:32.437-04:00Poem from Jerry Walls<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px;">
TO BORROW A TOMB<br />A tomb is not the sort<br />Of thing you borrow<br />Unless you have power<br />To banish its sorrow.</div>
<div class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px;">
No, a tomb is never<br />Merely to borrow<br />Unless you descend<br />Into hell to harrow.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
So take, Lord, this tomb<br />You need only borrow<br />And return it empty<br />Day after tomorrow.<br />--JLW</div>
</div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-47893519197124101072019-02-11T12:07:00.001-05:002019-02-11T12:07:30.901-05:00Sam Walter FossMy favorite 3 poems by Sam Walter Foss<br />
<br />
The Calf Path<br />
The Prayer of Cyrus Brown<br />
Odium Theologicummatthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-53424041822327465202019-01-08T23:48:00.001-05:002019-01-26T09:37:58.294-05:00PodcastsHere are some podcasts I've been interested in<br />
<br />
<a href="https://askntwrightanything.podbean.com/">Ask NT Wright Anything</a><br />
<a href="https://thebiblefornormalpeople.podbean.com/">The Bible for Normal People</a><br />
Top Episodes so far...<br />
Episode 2 (Richard Rohr)<br />
Episode 10 (Peter Enns)<br />
Episode 11 (Benjamin Sommer)<br />
<a href="https://sinnergistspod.com/">The Sinnergists</a><br />
<a href="https://almostheretical.com/episodes/">Almost Heretical</a><br />
<a href="https://onscript.study/">OnScript</a><br />
Top Episodes so far...<br />John Barclay (Paul and the Gift)<br />
Thomas Jay Oord (The Uncontrolling Love of God)<br />matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-10141497417598494162018-12-28T14:45:00.000-05:002019-01-08T23:50:49.735-05:00God Can'tA Review of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/God-Cant-Believe-after-Tragedy-ebook/dp/B07MP93F1W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1547009369&sr=8-1&keywords=God+can%27t">God Can't</a><br />
by Thomas Jay Oord<br />
<img alt="God Can't: How to Believe in God and Love after Tragedy, Abuse, and Other Evils by [Oord, Thomas]" src="https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41UhltD0qVL.jpg" /><br />
I remember singing these lyrics as a youngster at church: “God can do anything… anything… anything… God can do anything, but fail.” I don't know if, at the time, I picked up on the fact that the very song proclaiming "God can do anything" was also admitting that there was something God couldn't do (fail). Of course, that line was more humorous that theologically disturbing. I came away thinking the only thing God couldn't do was fail to be able to do anything.<br />
<br />
The title of Thomas Jay Oord’s latest book is purposefully provocative: God Can’t. God can’t? It sounds wrong. But once the book has been read, the reader realizes that “God can” is just as (if not more) theologically disturbing given the reality that God often doesn’t.<br />
<br />
What are we talking about here? This book is a bold attempt to solve the problem of pain. Why doesn’t God prevent suffering? Oord’s answer, in a nutshell, is captured in his title. This is clearly a different answer than is usually given in typical Christian theodicy. But Oord claims the usual clichés have failed. It’s time for a new proposal. He believes the proposed inability of God to prevent suffering flows from the most beautiful truth about God. God is love. And for Oord, Love is uncontrolling (see his book The Uncontrolling Love of God). It is simply not in God’s nature to control the world. This central truth provokes five aspects (and five chapters) of Oord’s theodicy.<br />
<br />
Rather than summarize the work (just read it yourself, it’s not a long or difficult book to read even though it is challenging in its content), let me offer a few of my own thoughts/reactions. <br />
<br />
First, I want to say that I thoroughly appreciated the bold approach. The book offers a theodicy that truly does feel fresh. Oord writes with short/direct statements that don’t leave the reader guessing as to Oords well-reasoned opinions. <br />
<br />
Second, I’d like to say that I’m in complete agreement with Oord’s clearly communicated decision to make ‘God is love’ central to his overall theological project. Having become familiar with his work over the years, this is not at all surprising… but it is refreshing to see an author attempting to take his views to their logical conclusions. <br />
<br />
Finally, while I confess that I’m not (yet?) in total agreement with Oord’s conclusions (I’m still struggling with how his view fits with some of the biblical miracle accounts and I’m still enamored by a more self-limiting view of God), I will also confess that I hope his view becomes somewhat mainstream. I’d much prefer that the ‘debate’ in theology be between variations of kenotic theology rather than the classic debates between Calvinism and Arminianism.<br />
<br />
The ultimate position of the book is that we don’t need to choose between an all controlling God and a weak God. We can, instead, believe in an all-loving God and believe that love is powerful. This love is uncontrolling, but beautifully active to bring about good in and through the world. matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-62612779231351391732018-03-23T09:43:00.001-04:002018-03-23T09:43:56.598-04:00On the Problem of PainA Journey through Time with the Problem of Pain<br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px;">
A journey through time with the problem of pain...</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Is pain part of God's plan? I hesitate to answer with absolute boldness. Most of us would agree that some pain is beneficial. "No pain, no gain". Few Olympic athletes would regret the pain of their training once they're holding their gold. In fact, their sweat makes their victory that much sweeter. What I can say with confidence is that the "problem" of pain isn't part of God's plan. It was never God's plan for creation to become subject to sin, sickness, disaster, disease, and death.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
So how comes evil into the world? It is important to understand that while God is absolutely in charge, God is not in absolute control. What do I mean by this? God had a reason for creating the heavens and the earth. God wanted to invite creation into the experience of trinitarian love. Before anything else, love existed between the Father, Son, and Spirit. Since Love is other-oriented, God decided to create. The purpose for creation was loving-partnership.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Both of those words (‘loving’ and ‘partnership’) are important here. Love involves freedom. It must be freely chosen. So God decided to create creatures with freedom (the ability to choose between options). Partnership involves the granting of authority. Partners are given authority (some level of control). They are invited to use their genuine freedom to make a genuine difference in creation.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Now think about what it means that God gave created beings freedom and authority. It means that God took a risk. Freedom creates options. Some of those options are good and some are bad. Free creatures get to choose. And authority means that those choices will have real results in the world. This freedom and authority was given in the heavens to angels and on the earth to man and woman. It means that, presently, angels and humans, while not in charge, have a large degree of control.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
How have angels and humans used their freedom, authority, and control? The results are very mixed. There’s plenty of good caused by creatures and plenty of evil. Both of these realities actually point to God’s existence. There is no good without God and there is no evil without good. Evil exists only as a result of creatures using their God-given freedom and authority in ways that go against God’s purposes.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Our present reality, insofar as it is problematic, is the result of Powers that have departed from the Giver of those powers. God is not the cause of sin, sickness, disaster, disease, or death. These things are not part of God’s plan. They are, in fact, departures from God’s plan. They were, from the beginning, potentialities of creation. But they only came to fruition because of the abuse of power given by God to creatures.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Of course, one might object on numerous grounds to what I’ve said thus far. One might suggest that it was wrong or foolish for God to create a world with the potential for such evils as we presently see in the world. My main reply to this objection would simply be: What alternative world would you prefer? Would you rather God NOT create a world at all? Would you prefer a world in which there are no free creatures? Would you prefer a God who does not share power with creatures? I highly doubt most would prefer such alternatives.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Someone else might object that God should just stop the really bad things from happening. Well, there is a lot I’d want to say in response to such an argument, but I’ll stick to two things. First of all, we don’t know what God prevents from happening. For all we know, the world could be far worse off than it is (actually, it's not that hard to imagine it being worse). Second, intervention of this kind would be sort of like rescinding the gifts of freedom and authority that have been given. What kind of gift-giver takes back a gift because they don’t like the way it is being used?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
All of what I’ve said so far would be, in my opinion, unbearable if present levels of pain and suffering were to be our unending reality. If reality, from here on out, was going to continue to be this struggle between good and evil, despair would be understandable. But that is not the message of Christianity. Christianity includes the belief that the triune God is working in the midst of this fallen world to bring about what was originally intended.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
There will be a Day of Judgment in which all abuse (and continuing abusers) of God-given freedom and authority will be dealt with once and for all. Broken and disease-ridden bodies will be restored to health. The earth itself will be restored. Tears will be wiped away. Joy will be full. Eden won’t so much be restored as it will be expanded and improved. And, as Mother Theresa (not someone unfamiliar with suffering) once said, in the light of this reality, the darkness of this world’s suffering “will be seen to be no more serious than one night in an inconvenient hotel.” I don’t quote her to dismiss the horrors of our present reality (they’re real), but to emphasize the goodness and beauty of what is to come.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Now the typical objection toward this appeal to the future is that Christians have no basis for such projections. But that’s exactly where the strength of Christian evidence does, in fact, exist. In Jesus Christ, God has brought a powerful glimpse of the future into the present order. Jesus Christ lived the sort of life God originally intended. It was a life of freedom and authority. It was a life in which the power of love was on display. And it was a life that did not end with death, but included resurrection and exaltation. Humans are invited into Christ’s life. This is not a blind wish. It is a substantial faith.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
In a very real sense, Jesus’ earthly life was a microcosm of our journey through time with the problem of pain. He lived as Adam could and should have lived. He entered into the present pain, even to the point of death on the cross. He rose from the dead to guarantee our promised future.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
The problem of pain is a problem. God agrees. God, far more than anyone, has reason to hate this problem… for it goes against the expressed purpose for which The Trinity extended its love into creation. And God, more than anyone, has entered into it… for the Son of God has become flesh, dwelt among us, and been crucified by us. And God, and God alone, is the answer to the problem of pain… for God raised Jesus from the dead by the Spirit.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
If I’m being completely honest, I’ve always wondered why the ‘problem of pain’ is considered more of an argument against God than an argument for God. After all, if there is no God, then there is no good. And if there is no good, there is no evil. And if there is no evil, there is no problem. But the problem of pain is a problem few deny. The problem of pain is a problem because, deep down, we know that the world was created by God to be so much better. The problem of pain points to The Answer.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-top: 6px;">
Our struggle, in the midst of pain, is not to avoid healthy expressions of anger and grief (which make sense—God is angry and grieving too), but to direct our anger to the proper places (Satan, Sin, Systems) and grieve with the hope that we have in Jesus Christ.</div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-83489020047128645852018-03-02T22:14:00.000-05:002018-03-02T22:14:42.323-05:00Powers Trilogy (Wink)Below I will share my notes from Walter Wink's 3-volume work on the Powers<br />
<br />
Volume 1: Naming the Powers<br />
<br />
Introduction<br />
1. Modern people have a hard time believing in the 'powers' talked about in the New Testament. It feels like believing in dragons, elves, or a flat world (4)<br />
2. But while "It is a virtue to disbelieve what does not exist. It is dangerous to disbelieve what exists outside our current limited categories." (4)<br />
3. This trilogy is the result of Wink coming to the conclusion that the 'powers' couldn't be 'dymythologized' into modern categories. He now believes that while the powers can be understood as institutions, social systems, and political structures... there is something more going on-- "something invisible, immaterial, spiritual, and very, very real." (5)<br />
4. But Wink only seems to believe that the demonic 'inner component' begins to exist when the 'outer component' becomes idolatrous. "Both come into existence together and cease to exist together." (5)<br />
5. The language of power thoroughly pervades the New Testament<br />
<br />
The Powers<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-69739204485474382692018-01-30T17:20:00.000-05:002018-01-30T17:20:00.233-05:00Crooked<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Crooked<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">I’ve got crooked teeth<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">But only on the bottom<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">With a stiff lower lip<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">You’d hardly know I got em<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">I’ve got a stiff upper lip<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">About my blackest whites<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">I’m able to survive the day<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">And not cry through the night<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Now I can keep on covering<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Or I can cast the blame<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">I can claim pure motives<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">But still the fact remains<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">I could compare with others<br />
Convince myself I’m fine<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">But no matter how I read
myself<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">There’s still a bottom line<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt;"><br />
I’m crooked<o:p></o:p></span></div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-32470104121781026362017-12-07T15:55:00.001-05:002017-12-07T15:55:21.653-05:00Athanasius (On the Incarnation)<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">ON THE INCARNATION
(Athanasius)<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">The Word of the Father is Himself divine.
This was established in my earlier writings. We must now go 1 step further. The
Word has been made flesh. This truth makes the blood of the unbelieving Jew
boil (even though the birth, death, and resurrection of the Messiah was
prophesied in their own Scriptures). It causes the unbelieving Gentiles to roll
their eyes and laugh (even though incarnation is a reasonable rescue plan). But
the incarnation is the heart and soul of Christianity.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">The Word became flesh out of love to save us.
Humanity was in desperate need of saving. Our world was not a chance creation
(as the Epicureans suggest). Nor had matter always existed (as Plato suggests).
Furthermore, there was no ‘other’ or lesser god who mistakenly created the world
(as Gnostics suggest). God created a good world. We were made in the Likeness of
God, but became corrupt through sin. This corruption provoked and necessitated
the incarnation.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">God’s Word, in order to rescue humanity from
corruption while simultaneously taking the curse of death seriously, entered
the world created through Him. He was born to die (death was otherwise
impossible for Him). But through His union with us, re-union with God became
possible. Because of His identity as God-man, the law of death was broken and resurrection
became reality.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">We were made for union with God. We were made
like God (in God’s image) so that we could love God. But the image was stained
by our sin. What was God to do? The only hope was the coming of the Image
Himself! Only the perfect Image of the Father (Jesus) could renew the Image in
humanity. Jesus got down on our level to raise us up to His level. In doing so,
though, He did not cease to be divine. His body was not a limitation, but an
instrument used to save us.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">The events surrounding Jesus’ death speak to
its importance. The sun went dark. The earth shook. The people were in awe. He
publicly died at the hands of His enemies (human and demonic) so that the
message of His resurrection would be unmistakable. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">What’s more, the continuance of His life is
unmistakable. Jesus is alive and active in the world! Think how large the body
of believers has grown, each one responding to a living Lord. Think how small
the attendance at pagan temples has become. Jesus is proving victorious more
and more each day. In light of this, does it make any sense whatsoever to call
Jesus dead? It makes more sense to call death dead. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Cambria, serif; font-size: 16pt;">Jesus put on a body so that in the body He
might find death and overpower it. And He did overpower death and more. The
world has changed drastically since His victory. The gods have been dethroned.
Magic has disappeared. Worldly wisdom is now recognized as foolish. Lives are
being changed and enemies are becoming friends. It is clearly Christ who is
accomplishing these things. By lowering Himself He has raised the whole world
up!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-70173018813778371912017-12-01T09:37:00.002-05:002017-12-01T09:37:20.102-05:00Where is our hope?<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Where Should we Place our Hope?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
(A non-rhyming poetic answer)</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
In America, many people put their hope in politics<br />"If MY SIDE of the aisle were in power...<br />Things would be better"</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
But that hope is fading<br />Both sides have been in power<br />And many things have gotten worse</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
More and more, people are seeing<br />We can't put our hope in the elephants<br />We can't put our hope in the donkeys<br />They vote yes to themselves</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
They only see sin on the other side<br />They don't see the sin in their own seats</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
So what?<br />Do we turn back to religion?<br />Our old saviors?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
But we left them for a reason<br />We left because of their own violence<br />Their own scandals. Their own greed.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
We left them not only for a reason<br />But for reason</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Should we turn back to that?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Science can't let us down? Can it?<br />1+1=2. I can trust that.<br />But can I HOPE in that?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Should we place our hope in numbers?<br />Meaningless numbers? Without interpretation?<br />In science, which gives both balm and bomb?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Truth is, we abandoned science with WWI<br />Because as we won our hope in it was lost<br />We realized its winning was our failing</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
So we grow hard<br />We trust no other<br />We turn to self</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
I can trust myself... right?<br />No! I know myself too well<br />To trust myself too much</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Where is our hope?<br />If not politics or religion?<br />If not science or self?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Until we are hopeless<br />We are hopeless</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Let go of your allegiances<br />Lose your religion<br />Let numbers be numbers<br />Look yourself in the mirror</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Look up to the heavens<br />Look down at the manger<br />Look long at the cross</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
See Pilate & Herod<br />See Caiaphas<br />See the science of torture<br />See yourself among the scoffers</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Lose all hope</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Look into the tomb<br />Last place you'd expect to find hope<br />And see it empty</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
Find the King of kings<br />Find the end of all sacrifices<br />Search the evidence<br />See for yourself</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-top: 6px;">
Hope springs eternal<br />In the God-man's breast</div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-38092016256571499232017-09-05T13:01:00.004-04:002017-09-05T13:11:30.479-04:00What is the Trinity?Here is a summary and some thoughts on <i>What is the Trinity?</i> by Dale Tuggy...<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4dApmrEf9Z7tS2fsut7xFa3gfPS8TmcQDm1Rufxzq-byovY-p26WGlMD7bhagM9ZHyxXnRZzS1df8FLbUG0NLRmWxKFsL20UeCadSQDaUfF4z3ybfXZWBVV4pCoyNkiM1br5_/s1600/WIN_20170905_131024.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4dApmrEf9Z7tS2fsut7xFa3gfPS8TmcQDm1Rufxzq-byovY-p26WGlMD7bhagM9ZHyxXnRZzS1df8FLbUG0NLRmWxKFsL20UeCadSQDaUfF4z3ybfXZWBVV4pCoyNkiM1br5_/s320/WIN_20170905_131024.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
Dale Tuggy is Professor of Philosophy at a State University close to where I live. I have interacted with him a time or two on facebook and visited his website. When I saw he had published a short little book on the trinity, I decided to give it a try.<br />
<br />
Introduction<br />
Tuggy believes that most Christians claim to believe in the Trinity, but don't really understand (or understand in contradictory ways) just what it is they claim to believe. In this book, he aims to help us think through the issues by "sticking with the foundational, understandable, and indisputable points."<br />
<br />
Chapter 1: Don't be afraid to think about God<br />
Tuggy bemoans that fact that even many serious/mature Christians devote little time to thinking on this subject. He suspects this is due to fear or laziness, but encourages us to dive in. God doesn't want to stay in the dark.<br />
<br />
Chapter 2: Formulas vs. Interpretations<br />
The creedal statements, according to Tuggy, are ambiguous and are more question-raising than answer-providing. Since it is unclear what many of the key statements mean, we can't proceed in thinking until they are clarified. It's not enough to just parrot the statement if we don't even truly understand it.<br />
<br />
Chapter 3: Trinity vs. trinity<br />
Tuggy believes much confusion would be eliminated (and false-confidence deflated) if we were careful to distinguish between trinity (lower-case, referring to the plural) and Trinity (upper-case, referring to a singular God who simply IS Trinity). He states that, in the 1st three centuries of the church, there was a belief in a triad (trinity), but nothing much like 'God in three Persons' belief in The Trinity.<br />
<br />
Chapter 4: The deity of Christ vs. the Trinity<br />
Tuggy says that the deity of Christ need not suggest Jesus is equal to the Father. It is not a building block that necessarily ends in a belief in the Trinity. "The Trinity implies the deity of Christ, but the deity of Christ doesn't imply the Trinity."<br />
<br />
Chapter 5: Get a Date<br />
It is not true, says Tuggy, that Christians have always believed in the Trinity. While they have always recognized the trinity (lower-case), the doctrine of the Trinity (upper-case) developed gradually. The term 'God' was generally reserved for the Father. It wasn't until the 4th century that mainstream Christians started talking in Trinitarian terms. And even then, Tuggy says, the consensus was acquired largely by political pressure.<br />
<br />
Chapter 6: Persons<br />
Tuggy confesses that it is impossible to ignore the distinction, in Scripture, between Father, Son and Spirit. But we should be careful about any tritheistic conclusions (he's not a fan of social-trinity models) or any model that gives a vague definition of the term 'Person'.<br />
<br />
Chapter 7: Substance Abuse<br />
In 325, the Christian council declared that the Father and Son share the same 'ousia' (substance), but what this means was not made clear. The word had at least 9 possible meanings. Tuggy goes through each definition and, basically, concludes that the authors of the creed left things somewhat confused and vague. By 381, belief in The Trinity was more confidently stated (to the chagrin of Tuggy).<br />
<br />
Chapter 8: Mystery Mountain<br />
It is common to appeal to 'mystery' when talking about the Trinity. By this many things are meant, but it should never be used as a way to derail conversation about what we actually believe. Tuggy suggests that believers in the Trinity doctrine have worded themselves into a philosophical corner that they can't get out of without admitting they've made a mistake.<br />
<br />
Chapter 9: What's a God?<br />
Tuggy presents various ways in which the term 'God' is used. He argues that, biblically speaking, God is one (the Father). There are other deities (in a sense) but the one true God is the Father. Tuggy believes his unitarian position actually has older support from the church and is more biblical.<br />
<br />
Chapter 10: Says Who?<br />
Tuggy again expresses concern for why the Trinity doctrine took so long to develop. He suggests that scholars generally won't make the sort of arguments for the Trinity that are often made by apologists and lay-people. We should question their authority and go back to the Scriptures.<br />
<br />
Epilogue<br />
Tuggy does believe the correct understanding of the trinity is discoverable. He has concluded that unitarianism is the correct view. Jesus is more accurately (and biblically) described as God's messiah, the Son of Man, and the unique Son of God. In any case, there's a lot of disagreement about the Trinity/trinity. We should run toward those disagreements because doing so helps us to find the truth.<br />
<br />
Reaction<br />
<br />
I liked this book. I think Tuggy did a good job of clarifying the points of tension in our thinking about the Trinity/trinity. Many of his distinctions may prove helpful for those who read his book and continue to think through these doctrines. I personally found it helpful.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, there are a few areas I would want to push-back on...<br />
<br />
First, it seems to bother Tuggy that the doctrine of the Trinity took so long to develop. One gets the impression that this is a point against its accuracy. But I'm not sure why that need be the case. If God is patient and has promised to lead the church into all truth, it should not surprise (or aggravate us) that clarity sometimes arises over time.<br />
<br />
Second, throughout the book, Tuggy is critical of apologists for the Trinity. But I wonder if, by the closing chapters, his book couldn't be counted as an apology for the unitarian position. His critique of Trinitarian apologists is that they present a tidier version of their view that fits with reality, but Tuggy's book (by its nature) avoids talking about the nuts and bolts (and apparent weaknesses) of the unitarian position.<br />
<br />
Third, in the final statement of the book, Tuggy says that we should begin by asking 'who is the one God?' and then figure out how Jesus relates to him (for Tuggy, the Father alone). However, I think it should be admitted that, biblically, we know the Father best/most through the Son. If we were to start with the Father, we'd have to be doing so largely via philosophy. We must actually start with Jesus to learn best what the Father is like. Starting our theology with Jesus need not demand that we end up with the doctrine of the Trinity, but it is the best way to do theology.<br />
<br />
These critiques aside, I really did enjoy (and was helped by) Tuggy's book. I'm personally more inclined toward a 'social-trinity' model, but this book will help me to dig in deeper to think through what I actually mean by that (and what I don't mean). And if I continue to do that... Tuggy has accomplished his goal.matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-74004163645894636462017-08-30T15:08:00.002-04:002017-08-30T15:19:14.555-04:00Review of Zahnd's BookThis won't be a typical review. <i>Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God</i>, by Brian Zahnd, is a book asking the most important question: What is the truth about God? So my review will take the form of competing truth claims. From Zahnd's perspective, notions about God (famously popularized by <i>Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God</i>, a sermon by Jonathan Edwards) being filled with wrath and capable of violence are false and could only be called <i>bad news</i>. The <i>good news</i>... that God is love... has been revealed by Jesus Christ. My review will simply summarize the contrast between the bad news and the good news as Zahnd sees it before sharing my personal reaction.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiexguYFGNqdhIFfbeF-G0S_gcgi8U6d-775IYU-Su9i-Yce0574-X6JzQb6pY9z2121gYHAYVN00y7ALHcOFnvRUjcWI9Nvu-S7R1JeiCKCbCMAhT-jPENjLTH3xcBhMhjKP6C/s1600/WIN_20170830_150547.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiexguYFGNqdhIFfbeF-G0S_gcgi8U6d-775IYU-Su9i-Yce0574-X6JzQb6pY9z2121gYHAYVN00y7ALHcOFnvRUjcWI9Nvu-S7R1JeiCKCbCMAhT-jPENjLTH3xcBhMhjKP6C/s320/WIN_20170830_150547.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Summary<br />
<br />
Bad news Evangelism<br />
Evangelism by terrorism. We should threaten people with the wrath/violence of God in order to get them to say the <i>Sinner's Prayer</i>. We must traumatize people with thoughts of the Father (bad-cop) before we introduce Jesus (good-cop) who will save us from the Father's wrath.<br />
<br />
Good news Evangelism<br />
Evangelism is about sharing the good news that God is love! "God is like Jesus. God has always been like Jesus. There has never been a time when God was not like Jesus; we haven't always known this, but now we do." God is good/beautiful... and beauty will save the world.<br />
<br />
Bad news Hermeneutic<br />
There are strands in the Bible that can be used to paint the picture of a monster God. Since the Bible is our primary revelation from God... and since all parts of the Bible are equally revelatory... the 'monster-god' interpretation is legitimate. God did, indeed, command much violence in the Old Testament. We must balance our theology with both Old and New Testament depictions of God. The truth is thoroughly biblical.<br />
<br />
Good news Hermeneutic<br />
Jesus is the best possible revelation of God. Everything in Scripture must be interpreted in the light of Christ. The Bible contains a chorus of voices that aren't always in harmony with Jesus, but all of them point us to the person of Christ. The ancient Israelites assumed God commanded violence when, in fact, He didn't. Christ is the key to interpreting the Old Testament. The truth is thoroughly Christlike.<br />
<br />
Bad news Atonement<br />
God has always demanded blood. The events of the crucifixion were orchestrated by God. The Father was angry and needing to be appeased. He demanded a payment for sin. Jesus volunteered His blood as that payment. The Father vented His wrath on His Son. And because the price was paid, God is now willing to forgive us.<br />
<br />
Good news Atonement<br />
God never demanded blood. The events of the crucifixion were orchestrated by the principalities and powers. But because Jesus (representing God) offered forgiveness amidst hateful violence, the cross reveals the true character of God. "Jesus did not shed his blood to buy God's forgiveness; Jesus shed his blood to embody God's forgiveness!"<br />
<br />
Bad news Hell<br />
Hell is where all non-Christians go to experience the torturous wrath of God forever. God's character toward those in hell is only wrathful. There will be no escape. Hell is the wrath of God justly received.<br />
<br />
Good news Hell<br />
We must be humble about hell because not much has been revealed to us. But we can be certain that hell is not God's torture chamber! Hell is for the wicked (and not all 'non-Christians' are wicked). God is always willing to be merciful toward those in hell, should they desire mercy. Only those who refuse to love will end up lonely/tormented souls. Hell is the love of God wrongly received.<br />
<br />
Bad news Revelation<br />
The Book of Revelation is like a coded newspaper which foretold events playing out in our day. World history will inevitably trend toward violence, which will culminate in Jesus' 2nd Coming when he comes, as a lion, to violently destroy all who oppose Him.<br />
<br />
Good news Revelation<br />
The Book of Revelation is a symbolic book. It symbolizes the war that is constantly going on between beastly Empire and the Kingdom of God. It's a highly political and relevant book, but not in the ways popularly believed. It reveals that Jesus does and will conquer, but not as a lion. He conquers as a sacrificial lamb. If we embrace the way of The Lamb, we get New Jerusalem. If we embrace the beastly way of Empire, we get Armegeddon.<br />
<br />
Reaction<br />
<br />
I believe Brian Zahnd when he says that he didn't arrive at this 'good news' because of a liberal agenda. He arrived at it by focusing on Jesus, via prayer, and by taking the Bible seriously when it says God is love. I believe this because that has been my experience as well.<br />
<br />
I agree with Zahnd that we must move on from the depiction of God contained in this famous sermon of Jonathan Edwards. We must move on from evangelism by terrorism. We must move on from allowing the lesser lights of the Old Testament to blind us from seeing the clarity that is Christ. We must stop seeing the events of the cross as a Father vs. Son fiasco. We must stop imagining that God would torture human enemies (or that God thinks of humans as enemies in the first place). We must unlearn a reading of Revelation that says much about our lack of faith in the way of Christ. We must learn that the good news is scandalously good.<br />
<br />
I may not agree with everyone Brian Zahnd said in this book... but I concur with the focus and the direction of his approach, for it is an approach centered on the revelation that is Jesus Christ.matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-46885184922941545032017-08-25T16:45:00.002-04:002017-08-30T12:47:23.893-04:00Zahnd's BookChapter 1<br />
<div>
Brian Zahnd used to cherish Jonathan Edward's sermon 'Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God' for utilitarian reasons. It worked. People make decisions out of fear. But since then, Zahnd has concluded that Edward's depiction of God (an an angry God needing appeasement) was inaccurate. God is actually like Jesus (a loving God offering forgiveness). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Bible can be used to provide support for belief in a monstrous God. But it shouldn't be used like that. The Bible exists to get us to Jesus. And Jesus, being the fullest revelation of God possible, changes the way we read and interpret the Bible. We must learn to recognize the progressive nature of the revelation. Israel often misunderstood (and misrepresented) God. Wrath, while it may be attributed to God because it has to do with out relationship to God, is actually what we experience when we run away from God's loving embrace... not what we experience in His hands.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Chapter 2</div>
<div>
When we consider some of the violent depictions of God in the Old Testament, we are left with only a few options (other than trying to ignore them). We can question God's morality (maybe God IS a monster), God's immutability (maybe God USED to be a monster, but has since changed), or how we read Scripture. Zahnd chooses the latter option. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We must recognize that the Old Testament is a 'lesser light' than Christ. It's an "inspired telling of the story of Israel coming to know their God." It contains false assumptions about God. But ultimately, it does point us to Jesus. And Jesus helps us to weed out those false assumptions. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Chapter 3</div>
<div>
In this chapter, Zahnd uses the story of Jesus' Transfiguration to further prove his point about Jesus being the center of both our theology and our hermeneutic. "Jesus saves the Bible from itself! Jesus shows us how to read the Bible and not be harmed by it." Christians aim to be Christlike, not necessarily biblical (since many contradictory things can be considered biblical). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Zahnd is not dismissive of the Old Testament. "I'm a million miles from the second-century heresy of Marcion", he claims. But clearly the Old Testament is not the perfect revelation of God. Jesus is. This is not a low view of Scripture, but a high view of Christ.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Chapter 4</div>
<div>
What is God like? How do we know? These are the questions Zahnd tackles in this chapter. And, as should be obvious by now, he's going to turn to Jesus as the answer. Seeing Jesus IS seeing God. And the cross of Christ is the most precise revelation of God. But to understand this revelation, we may have to un-learn some of the 'atonement theories' we have been taught because some of them pit God the Father against Jesus the Son. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Zahnd speaks passionately against this sort of Penal Substitution Atonement view. The cross is not a transaction to appease God's anger, but a revelation to reveal God's (loving) character. The cross is actually the ultimate death of the monster god mentality (which, Zahnd claims, is a major source of atheism). We need not fear God (in the sense of being afraid of Him). Perfect love casts out fear. In saying this, Zahnd is not driven by liberal humanism, but the revelation of God crucified.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Chapter 5<br />
Continuing his discussion of the cross, Zahnd ask the question 'who killed Jesus?'. His answer is clear: "God did not kill Jesus. Jesus was killed by the principalities and powers". God didn't need to kill Jesus in order to forgive humans. God can just forgive! God never demanded payment for forgiveness (even though Ancient Jews assumed He did). Jesus death embodied, rather than purchased God's forgiveness. Jesus sacrificed His life to show the love of God. He sacrificed himself to end all sacrifices.<br />
<br />
Chapter 6<br />
In what may be the most provocative chapter, Zahnd tackles the topic of Hell. For starters, Zahnd focuses on how hell, in an important sense, is experienced here on earth by many people. But he does believe in postmortem hell. That being said, he believes postmortem hell will be experienced only by the wicked (and he differentiates 'the wicked' from 'non-Christians'). And Zahnd believes the wicked, if they were to cry out for the mercy of God from hell, would receive it.<br />
<br />
In the end, Zahnd simply believes that we should be more humble about our opinions about hell and who goes there. He's only certain that hell isn't a place where all non-Christians are tortured forever because that thought, according to Zahnd, does not come from Christ.<br />
<br />
Chapter 7<br />
The rest of Zahnd's book is about the book of Revelation. As most conservative Christians in America, he started out as a Dispensationalist. He now believes that is the worst possible interpretatio of the book since it rejects the peaceful way of Christ in favor of divine violence. Nowadays, Zahnd sees Revelation as an incredibly important book for modern Americans... not in the sense of newspaper eschatology, but in the sense of its counter-cultural critique of Empire.<br />
<br />
Zahnd believes the entire book needs to be read symbolically. The symbols target the Roman Empire. The solution to the problem of Empire is not the 'lion', but the slaughtered lamb. The sacrificial Jesus is The Way.<br />
<br />
Chapter 8<br />
In this chapter Zahnd talks about 2 ways. The way of Armegeddon and the Way of the New Jerusalem. If we embrace the way of violence, we get Armegeddon. If we embrace the way of Christ/peace, we get New Jerusalem. Zahnd continues to reject dispensational interpretations of Revelation by showing how each symbol is carefully chosen by the author to show that Christ is a completely different kind of conqueror.<br />
<br />
Chapter 9<br />
Zahnd focuses on the New Jerusalem here. It's a place with gates that are always open in his view.<br />
<br />
Chapter 10<br />
Zahnd summarizes his work by emphasizing love. Jesus reveals the fullest truth about God. He hasn't changed his views because he went 'liberal'... he changed his views because he encountered Christ in prayer. He calls us to leave behind the terribly violent ideas about God, like that in Edwards' sermon, and cling to the beautifully good news of Christ.</div>
matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8706355.post-34863577920311099102017-08-19T20:05:00.000-04:002017-08-18T13:13:37.958-04:00Crucifixion of the Warrior God<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYB9MgqB404sd9TD0NxSF8tdN7wesP-_whdcVteriQtX2XdRHZf2W_V0Jcu7myqlWlM4qzSiPtC2F69Sw0iVzSXPEW8YlkrJMbvvNgAAZ1xXbWGqDW6Jzlz9jdAMlQIfrmrIyG/s1600/greg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYB9MgqB404sd9TD0NxSF8tdN7wesP-_whdcVteriQtX2XdRHZf2W_V0Jcu7myqlWlM4qzSiPtC2F69Sw0iVzSXPEW8YlkrJMbvvNgAAZ1xXbWGqDW6Jzlz9jdAMlQIfrmrIyG/s320/greg.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-crucifixion-of-warrior-god.html">Introduction to volume 1</a><br />
<br />
Part 1: The Centrality of the Crucified Christ<br />
Jesus is the center of the Christian faith. And the cross is the center of Jesus' ministry (and revelation of God). Therefore, we must view violent portraits of God (in the Old Testament) through a Jesus lens with a cross focus.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-1.html">Chapter 1: The Faith of Jacob</a><br />
It's OK to wrestle with Scripture as Scripture<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-2.html">Chapter 2: The True Face of God</a><br />
Jesus is the revelation of God<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-3.html">Chapter 3: Finding Jesus in the OT</a><br />
Christians read the OT through the lens of Christ<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-4.html">Chapter 4: The Cruciform Center 1</a><br />
God is love. Love is defined by the cross.<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-5.html">Chapter 5: The Cruciform Center 2</a><br />
The New Testament is thoroughly Cruciform<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-6.html">Chapter 6: Is [The Thesis so far] Defensible</a><br />
The Cruciform Thesis stands up to scrutiny<br />
<br />
Part 2: The Problem of Divine Violence<br />
The problem of divine violence (especially in the Old Testament) is real. We can't simply dismiss God-breathed texts that we don't like (there are too many of them!). Nor can we make them fit with the revelation of Jesus (they are contradictory!). While both of these attempts are well motivated (and demonstrate healthy 'wrestling' with Scripture), they are ultimately unsuccessful insofar as they fail to show how these texts point to Jesus.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-7.html">Chapter 7: The Dark Side of the Bible</a><br />
The Old Testament is filled with ugly depictions of God<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-8.html">Chapter 8: Wrestling with Yahweh's Violence 1</a><br />
It won't do to simply dismiss these texts as non-revelatory<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-9.html">Chapter 9: Wrestling with Yahweh's Violence 2</a><br />
It won't do to try to synthesize the violence with Jesus<br />
<br />
Part 3: The Cruciform Hermeneutic<br />
The Cruciform Hermeneutic equips us to see how all of Scripture (even the violent texts of the Old Testament) points us to Jesus. When we interpret such texts with this method, we are able to remove the veil and see the Jesus-like beauty contained deep within.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-10.html">Chapter 10: A Meaning Worthy of God</a><br />
Origen was on the right track... there's a deeper meaning!<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-11.html">Chapter 11: Through the Lens of the Cross</a><br />
This hermeneutic removes the veil and find the beauty<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/05/cwg-chapter-12.html">Chapter 12: Interpreting Scripture as God's Word</a><br />
Let's read all passages as passageways to Christ<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/introduction-volume-2.html">Introduction to Volume 2</a><br />
<br />
Part 4: The Principle of Cruciform Accommodation<br />
When God breathed Scripture to the covenant people, the revelation was given gently and with much stooping on God's part. Like a good doctor, God was able to administer the medicine that would lead to future healing, but was willing to give it to the people in a flavor they could handle (even if that 'flavor' was in otherwise bad for them... a reflection of their corrupt taste-buds, if you will).<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-13.html"><br /></a>
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-13.html">Chapter 13: The Masks of a Humble God</a><br />
God accommodates us even to divine detriment<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-14.html">Chapter 14: The Heavenly Missionary</a><br />
A good tutor teaches at the pace the students can handle<br />
<br />
Part 5: The Principle of Redemptive Withdrawal<br />
God judges sin, defeats evil, and works for the redemption of creation by withdrawing his protective presence, thereby allowing evil to run its self-destructive course and ultimately self-destruct. This is exactly what happened in Canaan and would later happen to Israel itself.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-15.html">Chapter 15: Divine Aikido</a><br />
God's wrath is non-violent withdrawal aimed at redemption<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-16.html">Chapter 16: Crime and Punishment</a><br />
Scripture is filled with examples of wrath equaling withdrawal<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-17.html">Chapter 17: Doing and Allowing</a><br />
God is sovereign, but doesn't actively engage in violence<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/06/cwg-chapter-18.html">Chapter 18: The Question of Divine Culpability</a><br />
This principle stands up to scrutiny<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/07/cwg-chapter-19.html">Chapter 19: Defending Divine Genocide</a><br />
Copan's defenses fall short in multiple ways<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/07/cwg-chapter-20.html">Chapter 20: When God's Nonviolent Plans Fail</a><br />
God's original plan for Canaan got distorted by violence<br />
<br />
Part 6: The Principle of Cosmic Conflict<br />
There are powerful creatures of chaos in the cosmic realm. When God withdraws from a given context, these chaos producers have opportunity to wreak havoc. God is capable of accomplishing 'judgment' simply by withdrawing and allowing these cosmic forces to do what they do (as in natural disaster judgments).<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/07/cwr-chapter-21.html">Chapter 21: The Battle of the Gods</a><br />
Powerful wanna-be God's exist<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/07/cwg-chapter-22.html">Chapter 22: Caught in the Cross Fire</a><br />
God's secret plan is what wins w/o a fight<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/08/cwg-chapter-23.html">Chapter 23: When All Hell Breaks Loose</a><br />
God did no violence to Job or those Outside the Ark<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/08/cwg-chapter-24.html">Chapter 24: The Dragon-Swallowing Dragon</a><br />
God did no violence to Korah, Egypt, or Sodom/Gomorrah<br />
<br />
Part 7: The Principle of Semiautonomous Power<br />
Authority and power, once gifted by God, is not controlled by God. Therefore, even some of the 'heroes' of the Old Testament occasionally abused their spiritual power by using it violently.<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/08/cwg-chapter-25.html"><br /></a>
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/08/cwg-chapter-25.html">Chapter 25: Mauling Bears and a Lethal Palladium</a><br />
When God grants power, it is sometimes abused/misused<br />
<br />
<a href="http://matthew94.blogspot.com/2017/08/cwg-postscript.html">Postscript</a><br />
<br />
Appendeces<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01053050572052804795noreply@blogger.com0