Boy am I Tired

I’m tired, and discouraged, and lonely. But we’ll succeed, God and I. I guess, when it comes right down to it, He’s all you need! Well, a little human interaction would be nice, in due time, if He wills it, but in the mean time, “Trust and obey…”

Happy Turkey Day

Happy Thanksgiving to all my friends, relatives and enemies on Thursday, November the twenty-second, [in the year of our Lord] Two Thousand Seven!

P.S. Happy Birthday to me! ;-} (same day)

For Valerie

Valerie, if you are reading this, I will give you my phone number, only to be used if you need to contact me and cannot use email. Below are three rows of ten letters. The first two provide clues to the code. The third row is my phone number.

qscfthnjik

cnhjsqtifk

qqscthjjik

Update: If you can’t figure this out, send me an email or comment on this post. But you must sign in first so I will know it’s you. If you don’t, too bad.

Hint: the first three digits are NOT 800.

I dreamed this morning.

Yes, a lot of my dreaming takes place in the morning, before I get up. This morning I had a dream about Valerie: I dreamed I called her on the phone. This is very odd, because I no longer have a number that works for her, and even if I did, I wouldn’t attempt to use it. In the dream, the conversation went something like this:

“Hello?”

“Hi.”

“Who is this?”

“It’s me—Brian.”

“What do you want?!”

“I just wanted to hear your voice again.”

“OK. You heard my voice. Now beat it.”

“good bye”

“Good BYE.”

Oh, what a nightmare!

Strange

I got a “snail mail” delivered to my home yesterday. I opened it this morning. The return address block read simply, “90210.” That’s the zip code for Beverly Hills, CA, but the envelope was mailed from Dulles, VA. The envelope was hand-addressed in a beautiful feminine handwriting. The only contents were a printout of “The Brian Diaries.” Handwritten in the upper left-hand corner of the first page were the omenous words, “And you still love her!”

I know Valerie’s handwriting; this is not hers. So who mailed this? Are they acting on her behalf, or alone? Val, if you’re married, just say so!

And Valerie, if you should be so inclined to remove said article from your webpage, perhaps you can try "imzadi" or some variant.

Love is unconditional.

If you could stop loving someone on the basis of a change in circumstances or information, it must not be unconditional love. So many of us have been hurt in the persuit of unconditional love. If you are one of them, you're in my prayers.

“.eirelaV,uoygnivolpotsrevenll’I?titeguoyt’noD”

I’m in denial.

The title of this post says it all. If you’re part of the situation to which I’m alluding, then you know what I mean; if not, don’t worry about it.

tcepsusIlliwsyawladnaeirelaVuoyevolllitsI

Contrary vs. Rebellious

Although a young child being contrary and a person being rebellious may look similar and might have similar results, I think there’s an important difference between them. One is a youngster trying to find his or her identity in disagreement, simply for its own sake. The other is someone having already made up his or her mind as to what he or she wants and resenting authority because that authority blocks them from achieving their stated goal. We may chuckle at the first, which is merely a game kids play; but the second is much more serious. Unfortunately, we have many in our culture who are making their own rules today. They tend to associate with those who agree with them, in many cases to their own peril and destruction. I the first case, it's fairly easy to set the child straight. Correction in the second case, however, is much more difficult.

A Thought on Love

Throughout the Bible, the concept of love is expressed as an action, not feeling. It is a matter of character, not blind luck. Does not the will enter into this? Cannot a man or woman or child make a conscious choice? Is not love a willful behavior? Matters of character are up to the individual, but love is often referred to in our culture as something where we “can’t help ourselves.” Why is this? Would it not be better to listen to the Word of God and note all of the commandments to love?

O Lord,

Please grant me the grace to continue with your will, even as it relates to chatting.

In Jesus’ Name, Amen.

Well, Well, Well

So I’m sitting in the computer lab, thinking about my “dearest,” and checking my Yahoo! mail, and, lo and behold, there she is on my online list! Scared about trying to chat I am though, because I know where I stand. I’m still her ex-Brian and until that changes on her part, I dare not intrude into her world. Ironic, Isn’t it? I mean I love her enough to leave her alone, even if I don’t like it, because I realize that she wants it. Still I struggle with the feeling. Is she thinking about me, too?

“eirelavuoyevoli”

Update

Well, it’s been a while since I wrote a post on this blog. Since my accident, I got another car, a burgondy 2005 Ford Taurus. I also enrolled in seminary for the fall term. And for all of you IE7 users out there, today I fixed the bug that prevented the drop capital from showing up. I call it the Double Colon Bug because when you use the CSS double colon (::) syntax, IE7 ignores the selector as invalid. I think someone should speak to Microsoft about that...

Owwwwwch!

So I got a 2003 Dodge Neon back at the end of January, and have been driving it ever since—well, not quite. Until Saturday, April 14, that is. I must be very dumb, stupid even. I turned into the path of an oncoming midsize car, and, well? my Neon was toast. So was the food I was about to deliver. And I’m so sore that I have to take pain medicine. But I’ll be OK, I guess. And cars are replaceable. So I guess the blessing is I’m not dead or seriously hurt. But what was I thinking? I usually check the other direction before making a left turn…

Hmm...

This should be the part where I just shut up an go away... um...

Welcome to IE7!

And welcome to a new set of bugs! All of you should see a drop capital on the first letter of each post. All of you except those viewing with Internet Explorer 7. Alas, my schedule is full, and I have no time to investigate the problem. Oh, well!

Which Greek NT?

On the question of which Greek New Testament text should be used for serious Bible study, there is much debate. On the one hand, there are those who hold that the oldest available manuscipts alone, which happen to be of the Alexandrian textform, are to be trusted. This selection was made by Westcott and Hort, who favored Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus almost exclusively. On the other, there’s the “King James Only, ergo Textus Receptus all the way” camp, which appears to favor the Byzantine textform in most cases but occasionally favors the Western textform when such is the only available source for some traditional passages. There are also those who claim that the original text of the NT has been lost forever, and it is up to them, out of scattered readings found across the various manuscripts from the Alexandrian, Caesarean, Western and Byzantine forms, to assemble a reasonable facsimile. This is known as modern eclecticism, and forms the basis of Nestle-Aland and UBS texts, which are at best a stab in the dark.

Somewhere in the middle, the Byzantine textform has gone largely unnoticed and ignored, due to its reputation for being a "late" form, in spite of manuscripts that date as early as the 4^th century AD. To complicate matters further, Byzantine manuscripts bear about 80% of the total textual witness, and most Byzantine manuscripts are in more agreement with each other than can be said of those from any other texform, even the precious Alexandrian. But despite this weighty evidence, the Byzantine-Priority position has fallen by the wayside in favor of other forms of textual criticism. Why, when such a choice is so obvious? Why not check out The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005 and decide for yourself? It’s edited by Maurice Robinson and William Pierpont. Happy studying!

On Relationships and Fire

I think if I had another chance to love someone, I would do things differently than I have previously. When it comes to loving and bonding with another human being, I think it is somewhat like fire:

1. Fire provides warmth and comfort and meets legitimate needs in the right context, but if it’s not kept in its proper setting, it can cause damage.
2. Fire that is tempered serves a useful purpose, but if it gets out of control, it destroys people and possessions alike.
3. A roaring bonfire is sometimes necessary, and sometimes a smaller fire is called for. Timing and setting are important.
4. A blazing fire will consume more fuel and die out quicker.
5. If you play with fire, you are certain to get burned.

So it is with relationships, togetherness, passion, etc. If you don’t watch a relationship closely, things could get out of control. If you don’t feed it, it could die. If a relationship is started and/or maintained in the wrong context, it will cause great damage and destruction. Well, that’s my thought on life for the day. I hope I have given you a little something to take with you and use.

Selfishness?

Have you noticed that the letter that begins the last five posts is the letter I?

Confessions of an Occasional Bible Reader

I’m starting to get worried. I haven’t read my Bible for more than maybe one chapter a week in the last 2 months. This isn’t like me. And it explains a lot about my attitude. I’m beginning to question my own sincerity and to feel that I’ve let my master down. Well, we never survive on last month’s food. I know what I must do. I need to disperse the haze and fog that I’ve created for my own soul, by looking intently into the perfect law of liberty and continuing therein, not being a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work. Matter of fact, I’ll do so right now...

The trouble with Hezbollah

In the wake of recent mispronunciation of Hezbollah (HEZ bo LAH), I got to thinking: All the Israelis are doing, really, is eradicating the Hezbola virus from the middle east! Heh, heh. (A little terrorism-as-a-disease humor there. And terrorism can be just as deadly, you know.)