Get a Clue

For our 15th anniversary, Sherry and I hosted a party at the Plummer House. That party's theme was a game of "Clue." But, rather than use the traditional rooms, we used the rooms in the Plummer House, replacing the usual suspects from the game were some of our guests, and in place of the typical weapons, we used some interesting variants. I thought I'd share a few of them today.

The Sword

The Crowbar

The Croquet Mallet

And, finally, my favorite:

The Steamroller

Please note, that this was all in fun, and that no children were harmed during the production of these photos.

In fact, they all had a blast!

[What inspired me to post these? Indie's site of "found" photos and the stories that go with them. Well, and thinking back on our anniversary party last year got me thinking of the earlier one. It was such fun!]

Originally published August 6, 2008.

The 7 Last Words -1: Why Have You Forsaken Me?

Matthew 27:46 (New International Version)

46About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

I have just finished listening to "Jesus Christ Superstar" again. Of the famous Seven Last Words, this one is used in the script as the second of three things Jesus says during the Crucifixion. (The JCS line is "My God, my God, why have you forgotten me?") As I heard it, I was reminded how my understanding and appreciation of this moment in Christ's life has changed and grown over time, and how Bible Study was such an important part of that growth.

When I was a teenager and first saw the film, it might well have been the first time I paid any attention to the Last Words. At that time, I took it as performed by Ted Neely - the frustrated lament of someone who truly believed he had been forgotten. Now, I see this "word" much differently, and that's because of studying that I've done and help from other knowledgeable people.

The fact that the verse itself contains the Aramaic helps us discover a few key points, and they are all related to a simple fact: Jesus is quoting the first verse of Psalm 22. Why does he do this? Is it because he is actually feeling forsaken? I don't think so; I think he's trying to point out a few things.

First, Psalm 22 is a psalm containing messianic prophecy. At our Maundy Thursday services at church, we always close the service by speaking this psalm as the paraments are removed from the altar and the pastor changes from normal vestments to all-black. We have learned, over the years, that this psalm teaches us what will happen to Jesus and what will happen because of him. The psalm tells us that the Messiah will be scorned (v.6) mocked and insulted (v.7). People will say that God should rescue him, since he trusted God so much (v.8 and fulfilled in Matthew 27:43). His hands and feet will be pierced (v.16). People will gamble to see who gets his clothing (v.18). And yet, the second half of the psalm tells of the joy that will come to God's people and the victory that will be won by the Savior He sends.

By speaking the first line of this psalm, Jesus is pointing out to those around him -- and to us today -- that the first part of the prophecy is being fulfilled, and by extension He is promising the second part is soon to come.

Second, Jesus continues to act in his role as "'Rabbi' (which means teacher)" (John 1:38) In order to instruct the young, rabbis would teach their students to memorize the scriptures, and to test their memory, he would speak the opening of a passage and expect them to recite the rest. And so, by speaking these first words, Jesus is a teacher to the end, as he provides comfort and enlightenment.

Third, what he wanted to teach is the importance of the entirety of the psalm, not merely the first part. And yet, Jesus did not speak the whole psalm - He started it. This is a key point. We are responsible for learning and understanding God's will and actions, and acting on them. We are to finish it. We are to learn its meaning. Then we are to accept the resulting grace.

Now, could Jesus have actually been feeling forsaken? I guess it depends on whether such a feeling would be sinful or not. As a human, he would certainly be "normal" if he felt alone as he neared his death. Somehow, I doubt it, because I'd interpret that as a loss of faith, and that is sin, and I believe Jesus was the "spotless Lamb" - without sin. Yet I could understand an interpretation that disagrees with me.

Whether he truly felt forsaken or not, the crucial lessons for us to learn from this "Last Word" are connected to the meaning of Psalm 22. Without Bible Study, I would have never known this, and so I am truly thankful to have been given that gift.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Originally posted April 17, 2008

Beliefs, Morals and Science

Today, Grand Theft Auto 4 is released. With it, we're going to hear and read more people using supposed "science" to support their beliefs that violent video games such as GTA are bad influences on people, especially the young.

The simple truth, according to this MPR blog entry, is that the scientific link does not exist. The entry cites research by the co-directors of the Harvard Medical School Center for Mental Health and Media, who, in this article, examine the claims made by the group "Save the Children" that "children are struggling to make friends at school because they spend too long playing computer games." The Harvard researchers also look at the same data used by "Save the Children" and others to support claims of the supposedly clear "cause and effect" relationship of violent video games and various negative situations, and this is what they (the Harvard researchers) say:

"The real puzzle is that anyone looking at the research evidence in this field could draw any conclusions about the pattern, let alone argue with such confidence and even passion that it demonstrates the harm of violence on television, in film and in video games."

My point today is not that these games are good for young people, or any people, in fact. I'm also not saying the games are bad for them. My point is that I'm troubled that people who oppose these games distort science and the data collected through scientific means in order to support what is really a moral argument.

The "hero" of the GTA games does things which, in the real world, are wrong. They are illegal. They are often violent. It may seem natural to assume that a person who likes playing this game would learn something from them and act in illegal or immoral or violent ways more readily than others, but the data does not show that.

If a person objects to filling one's mind with images that are wrong (immoral (sinful)) because one should try to focus on things that are right (moral (God-pleasing)) then that's understandable. But it's an expression of morality, and ultimately of faith.

Clergy of most any faith will espouse the view that your limited time on earth is better spent focused on Good than Not Good. But if a person is going to claim a causal relationship between Not Good images and Not Good behavior, then it is merely a belief unless it is backed up by scientific data. Distorting the data to claim support for a position is Lying, and Lying is Not Good.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

Originally posted April 29, 2008.

Shazam! The Innocence of Good and Evil

In my youth, I read comic books. There are certain issues that remain vivid in my memory. When I think of Superman, for example, I think of a particular story in which Superman faced an opponent who was a thinly-veiled copy of Captain Marvel, the one who said "Shazam!" long before Gomer Pyle ever did.

In those days, the DC Comics style centered on clearly defined good and evil. The issue was probably memorable because the ersatz Marvel was treated as a villain for most of the issue, but he was revealed to be a good guy at some point (though I think Kal-El and he still didn't like each other by the time) and that was quite unusual for a DC Comics story.

The clear cut nature of good and evil was less popular to the comic-buying public than the more complex and ambiguous plots of Marvel Comics, in which flawed heroes struggled against villains who often could blame sources in their environment for their troubles and their powers, gaining some level of sympathy from readers. I certainly found the "Marvel way" more consistently interesting, and I owned three times as many Marvel as DC books.

Yet, there was a beauty in the pure good vs. evil stories found in Superman and Batman and their cohorts. Today, I miss that simplicity. We hear news from around the world and there are so few clear answers. Saddam Hussein was a bad guy; there's little doubt. Yet, in the nascent democracy being nurtured in Iraq, there appear to be few "good guys." Sectarian distrust, prejudice and hate are putting peace at risk, and as much as the "regular people" in Iraq want peace, many cannot fathom how it will come about because of that distrust, prejudice and hate directed at the other "regular people" who have religious and/or cultural differences.

To me, the problem with Bush politics is the desire to characterize the complexity of the world in ways that make "black" and "white" the only answers. And, honestly, while I think of it as a Rove-inspired Republican problem, the Democrats seem to be picking up the same attitude. Nevertheless, it's Bush and his policies that have put us in this situation, and he still does not seem willing to admit that shades of good and evil exist, and that the "gray" includes some questionable decisions on the part of his team.

I'm finding it hard to fault every lawmaker who ever voted for this war. When I remember what was going on in post-9/11 America, as we searched (seemingly fruitlessly) for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, it was so tempting to believe that another leader in the Middle East was planning grave harm against us and our allies. And we knew where Saddam was! It was clear. We had to stop him. I never had the level of information that the senators did, so I hoped they were hearing the truth and doing their best to think clearly, but I can see being seduced by the simplicity, especially when the facts were so carefully prepared and presented.

Now, however, it's time to own up to the reality of the world; it's not simple. The "war" against Iraq was "won" but the peace cannot be won -- it must be managed. We need to move beyond military thinking to diplomacy. I want to hear the candidates talk about that. I want to stop hearing about time-lines for withdrawal from Obama and Clinton, and I want to stop hearing about how The Surge worked from McCain. What's next? How do we proceed? Why should I believe you can help peace have its best chance?

And don't think you can just pretend to be Superman. We might want a hero, but what we need is a real-world leader.


[Originally posted on March 24, 2008.]

Arlo & Janis

If you look along the side of my blog, you will see a set of links for Comic Strip sites. At the top of the list is the link to Jimmy Johnson's "Arlo & Janis" website.

I read a lot of comic strips. I'll give most anything a try. A&J is my favorite, among a decent-sized list of excellent current strips.

Why? Well, there are many reasons, but the one which prompted me to write today is this: the wonderful depiction of A&J's romantic life.

I know it's not unique among strips to show married couples who like each other. Hi & Lois, Blondie & Dagwood, Moose & Molly, Sally & Ted (Forth) -- clearly those couples get along well. But of those other strips, how many even hint at a "love life?" The Forths do, every once in a great while. Now and again, a few other strips will touch on it.

In A&J it's a recurring theme, though not an overpowering one. Arlo clearly finds Janis attractive, and shows it. Janis reciprocates. Since the primary interactions that drive the strip are those between this married couple, it's just so "honest" to see the "love life" aspect come up occasionally. And it's always in character with the fun, funny, intelligent, flawed, good-hearted people they are.

If you follow the link to the A&J page today, you can click on the strip to see part of a series in this vein. Every strip is funny, but every strip is real. (If you follow the link some other time, well, who knows what you'll get. Jimmy posts old strips on a regular basis.) Here's a link to the beginning of the short series, if you want it later (I hope it stays active, even after the imminent redesign of the site.)

(Originally posted on November 1, 2007.)