Spring recital

Time for some new vids and pics.
Verbose, aren't I? What more can I say, tho? :)

Easter



Recital (4/25/08)


End of Haydn "Surprise" Symphony No. 94

Mariah's song "Phases of Matter" (yes, she wrote it--didn't quite get to composing a new tune for it, though)
A solid keeps its shape. Its parts do not escape. Look at me, I'm plain to see, a solid keeps its shape.
A liquid fills a cup. A liquid fills it up. Look at me, I'm liquidy, a liquid fills a cup.
Gases fill the air. They fill it here and there. Look at me, I'm hard to see, gasses fill the air.
Solid, liquid, gas: each of them have mass. Look there's 3, it's plain to see: solid, liquid, gas.

Pets

Note how Honey keeps her distance from the cats! Bob is on the left (you can see his nub tail if you look closely). He and Stormy obviously get along well. Actually, Honey gets along pretty well with them both, but Bob is boss, unless Stormy decides to put him in his place.

Neandertals and Gene Wilder

I just can't resist. A recent news article on New Scientist presents (and they're serious) a "reproduction" of how a Neandertal would pronounce "e." Click here to hear it and not have to read their article. :)

Now, I can't help but notice a distinct parallel to this and an arguably hilarious clip from a famous Mel Brooks movie, Young Frankenstein. Indulge me and watch this clip, mentally substituting "Neandertal" for "creature. " Perhaps we have a new animatronic paleoanthropology exhibit in the making? Enjoy.

Weariness, repetition, and revelation

As I cleaned part of the bathroom for the thousandth time (I rarely do it all at once), I looked at the rest of the bathroom, knowing that it was coming due for needing cleaning--showing its yuck--and I felt momentarily overwhelmed. Vacuuming, laundry, taxes all still needed to be done. The yard will begin to need maintenance very soon. Pet things needed tending. It's endless. Even doing bits at a time. On a bad day, this could get very depressing. I remember thinking, I just wish this were like other things I like to do--things that are done when they're done and you never have to do them again. Like a puzzle, logic problem, or sudoku. Even a video game. But no, that toilet is going to need to be scrubbed again in a few days, but I'll probably let it go a week or so. As I pondered my "plight," the Lord spoke to me. No, I didn't hear a voice, but like so many other times, a thought was planted.

What must it be like for the Lord to forgive us? Over and over we do the same thing--sometimes not even asking for forgiveness or being oblivious. Yet--and this is the really cool part--He doesn't get weary! He knows our frame, and He pities us as His children. And there's another cool part to this. God is done. In our temporal prison, we don't see the end, but He does. He's done! Christ said on the Cross, "It is finished!" And what He accomplished there was so much more important than any of the most-fulfilling tasks I have been able to say that about.

This led me to yet another thought. How awesome is it that He lets us have any idea of what it's like to be Him? To be able to experience love, fulfillment, completion, beauty--even music and art. He Who is the Great Musician and Who gave us these abilities created us in His image to be able to experience these albeit temporary, imperfect pleasures. What a foretaste of Glory Divine! In the most mundane things, we can see things of God. My yucky bathroom: a reminder of our fallen world--a sinful state of never being perfect. Yet God is done. He has already given John a vision of the New Heavens and New Earth--restored and perfect!

As I continued to clean my bathroom, I thanked God for His gift that moment in sharing these thoughts with me--and then for his tireless patience with me. I remembered that whatever I do, I should do it heartily as unto Him--even if it's cleaning a bathroom. I thought that cleaning the bathroom gave a comfortable place to my family whom I love--in a way, I was loving and blessing them by cleaning the bathroom (although I'm sure they'll probably never see it that way--but that's ok). And I was most happy with the thought that I can look forward to a time of rest--a completion--and the continual decay will be forever put away, leaving only the blessings and wonderful things to enjoy forever. Unfathomable. But ... He has blessed us with an inkling, and I'm grateful for it.

License to be silly

Not that I restrict myself to silliness on 4/1, but it's fun to have a day when others cut loose too in this often–unnecessarily serious life. After all, laughter is the best medicine so they say. So, with no further ado, here are some samples of silliness for your amusement:

http://improveverywhere.com/2008/03/09/food-court-musical/

A medicine man prescribed a long, thin strip of rawhide to his patient. The instructions were to eat one measure of it daily. After a few weeks, the patient returned to say he was done with the treatment. When asked how things were going, the patient replied, "The thong is ended, but the malady lingers on."

Three construction workers ate their lunch on a high I-beam. The Chinese one, sick of rice, complained: "If I have rice for lunch tomorrow, I'm going to jump." The Mexican one, sick of tortillas, chimed in: "If I have tortillas again, I'll jump too." The American one, thoroughly displeased with his bologna sandwich said, "If I have another bologna sandwich, I'll jump as well."
The following day, the Chinese worker opened his lunch, let out a disgusted grunt, and jumped. The Mexican worker, opening his lunch, sighed and jumped. The American opened his lunch, threw the sandwich and leaped off in fury.
At the funeral, the Mexican and Chinese worker's wives were crying softly into their tissues. Surprised, they noticed the American wife was chuckling. Appalled, they asked her how she could laugh at such a tragedy, to which the American woman replied, "He packed his own lunch."

'Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.' - Ronald Reagan

Last, and least:
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world.
I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it." -- Barack Obama

Got any funnies to share? :)

Blizzard in March

Yep, that's right. And it's all thanks to Global Warming. No, really. You see, global warming is responsible for erratic weather, so whether it's hot or cold, rainy or dry, normal or unusual, it's all global warming. Genius, eh? Reminds me of some other scientific theories.

Anyhoo, the main reason for this post is not to fulminate. I've been doing a lot of that, so I'll take a break. Rather, here are some pics (one of Ri's new bunk beds), and a movie of the blizzard of 2008 (note that the "graininess" is actually snowfall--and this was taken only about 1.5 hour after it started). Enjoy!

Politicians just need to grow up ...

... seriously folks—and so do many Americans. So it's primary day in Ohio. I've been offered rides to the voting polls (by Obama's "people"), called, mailed, harassed for days. It's over, thankfully, but I still have the clamor in my head. And it reached fever pitch today, so I just have to fulminate a bit to purge. On the way to the polls this morning, I heard an ad for Hillary where a woman was saying that Hillary understood the "plight" of such-and-such major demographic (parents I think). WHAT IS SHE TALKING ABOUT??! There is no major demographic in the United States in plight. I think, arguably, there is no person in the United States truly in plight--at least the kind a government entity can fix. We have it so good. We really do. It's just ridiculous to think of using the word "plight" to describe the common, everyday situation of Americans.

In other news, some ignorant people in VT did this ludicrous thing:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0454699420080305
Hmm. As an American, I'm torn between patriotism and buying maple syrup only from Canada now. Not really. I'm headin' north, eh?

Then there's the weird thing about Barack Hussein Obama. His frenzied following and apparent distaste for his own middle name ... and a wife that is ashamed to be American. My mom, who has lived through a few wars, just had a birthday (I won't say how old, but something I'm going to publish for her here will give you a clue), and was, well, "outraged" at her comments. She put it into words and I helped her send it to some appropriate places. Hmm, and I always thought I took more after Dad. Well, she can fulminate with the best of us--maybe I'm rubbing off on her?

Upon hearing Michelle Obama speak the other night, I couldn't sleep until I wrote this down and sent it to her at her husband's campaign website. I thought you might agree with my thoughts and be willing to pass them on. Let's get the word out before the primaries are over!

--------------------------
Outrage

Outrage is not pithy! After being bombarded by the press, by millions of "Americans," by commentators extolling the rare qualities of Obama's speeches, what I've heard is "we ought to be ashamed of ourselves for liberating a people whose leader was a horrible tyrant! Let us just mind our own business and cower in our huge corner of the world."

Democracy is not for the faint of heart.

Outrage is for those of us who have seen a proud, God-fearing nation fall to its knees and quaver at the thought of protecting the weak and hopeless. Who said you're not your brother's keeper??

And as long as we were the keeper, all was well with America. I know. Yes, we had hardships; we had our men bloodied & killed. And we, the families, endured, trusted, sacrificed, and prayed. Mrs. Obama, do you know what the word sacrifice means?

Have you ever cut out cardboard to put into your shoes to walk to school? Have you ever eaten hollihocks, roses, clover, and hullapples because you were so hungry?
Born between '35 & '40 to parents who had 9 children; the 4th of four girls with four younger brothers and a baby sister, I know something of sacrifice. But I never, ever wanted to be in another country. This is my country, and I'm proud of it. But I was not proud when I heard you speak and even worse, when the people of this country cheered!

That, Mrs. Obama, is outrage--that no one stood up. Outrage that it was swept under the closest carpet you could find. And with outrage and deep, deep sadness that MY nation has come to this pitiful, stooped, quavering state. Where would you and your husband be today if we had not rallied when FDR gave the call to WAR? I was in 1st grade and all our teachers were crying and sent us home.

Even then, we knew something dreadful had happened--our world had changed. We didn't just have higher prices on gas--we were rationed! On food, sugar, chocolate, shoes--without a stamp, you couldn't buy. Yet instead of marching and denouncing our leaders, we put cardboard in our shoes, we walked, and we prayed. I don't want to see someone in the "people's White House" that wasn't proud to be an American, with all that this country had given to you and your husband. And if you are only proud when you are being given everything from this country, that is an outrage.

BTW, Happy Birthday, Mom! Love ya!
Since you know I don't "do" cards, will this do? :D

A fair comparison?

Continuing from last blog, let's look at Genesis 4:6-7:

6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Remember as I said in my last blog post that this is many times compared to Gen. 3:16, which I'll quote again here:

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Granted, there's a similarity. Let's look at it more closely:
Gen. 3: "and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
אל־האשה אמר הרבה ארבה עצבונך והרנך בעצב תלדי בנים ואל־אישך תשוקתך והוא ימשל־בך׃ ס
Gen. 4: "And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."
הלוא אם־תיטיב שאת ואם לא תיטיב לפתח חטאת רבץ ואליך תשוקתו ואתה תמשל־בו׃

Looking at the lexicon for the Hebrew for Gen 3:
and thy desire
תְּשׁוּקָה tshuwqah (tesh-oo-kaw')
a longing -- desire.

---

and he shall rule
מָשַׁל mashal (maw-shal')
to rule -- (have, make to have) dominion, governor, indeed, reign, (bear, cause to, have) rule(-ing, -r), have power.

And for chapter 4
And unto thee shall be his desire
tshuwqah

---

and thou shalt rule
mashal

But reading the English, they really are not all that similar. The subject and objects are reversed, and it appears that the thing being subordinated is a "him," not an "it," which sin would be.

Note Wesley's commentary on the passage:

Unto thee shall be his desire - He shall continue in respect to thee as an elder brother, and thou, as the first - born, shall rule over him as much as ever. God's acceptance of Abel's offering did not transfer the birth - right to him ...

Note that the meaning of the word sin can also mean sacrifice (again from the lexicon below).

sin
chatta'ah (khat-taw-aw')
an offence (sometimes habitual sinfulness), and its penalty, occasion, sacrifice, or expiation; also (concretely) an offender

---

Scoffield:

Or, sin-offering. In Hebrew the same word is used for "sin," and "sin- offering," thus emphasizing in a remarkable way the complete identification of the believer's sin with his sin offering (cf) Jn 3:14 2Cor 5:21.

Here both meanings are brought together. "Sin lieth at the door," but Song also "a sin-offering croucheth at the [tent] door." It is "where sin abounded" that "grace did much more abound" Rom 5:20.

Abel's offering implies a previous instruction (cf) Gen 3:21 for it was "by faith" Heb 11:4 and faith is taking God at His word; Song that Cain's unbloody offering was a refusal of the divine way. But Jehovah made a last appeal to Cain Gen 4:7 even yet to bring the required offering.

Matthew Henry matches this thought about the sin referring to sacrifice:

The Lord reasoned with this rebellious man; if he came in the right way, he should be accepted. Some understand this as an intimation of mercy. If thou doest not well, sin, that is, the sin-offering, lies at the door, and thou mayest take the benefit of it. The same word signifies sin, and a sacrifice for sin. Though thou hast not done well, yet do not despair; the remedy is at hand. Christ, the great sin-offering, is said to stand at the door, Re 3:20. And those well deserve to perish in their sins, that will not go to the door to ask for the benefit of this sin-offering. God's acceptance of Abel's offering did not change the birthright, and make it his; why then should Cain be so angry?

Really, again, we don't even need the commentaries. A straightforward reading does not indicate that it's sin that desires to rule him and he will have mastery over it. It really makes no sense to refer to sin as being his and him. Sin is referred to elsewhere in the Scripture as an "it" (e.g., Jer. 17:1; 1 Cor. 15:56).

Yes, there's some parallelism, but that doesn't mean that the passages should be compared so directly--especially when there are notable differences. A reversal of subject and object is pretty significant. And the the fact that it doesn't make sense to refer the his and him to sin is another pretty big obstacle. In reading other commentaries, however, it is essential to twist this meaning to bolster the Gen. 3:16 "battle of the sexes" argument. Note this comment on Gen. 3:16 from Bible.NET: The Bible Studies Foundation (and I've seen this elsewhere):

Many interpreters conclude that it refers to sexual desire here, because the subject of the passage is the relationship between a wife and her husband, and because the word is used in a romantic sense in Song 7:11 HT (7:10 ET). However, this interpretation makes little sense in Gen 3:16. First, it does not fit well with the assertion “he will dominate you.”[Ed note: their translation--this is certainly not the standard translation of Gen. 3:16] Second, it implies that sexual desire was not part of the original creation, even though the man and the woman were told to multiply. And third, it ignores the usage of the word in Gen 4:7 where it refers to sin’s desire to control and dominate Cain.

Is it just me, or are we seeing circular reasoning? At least it's called an interpretation here, though! I've not seen the "second" reason before--but if you take my interpretation from last week's blog about desire not being entirely sexual, per se, then we're good (although, I think this argument is patently silly). ;)

And I just have to mention the sexism, again, of this sort of harmful interpretation. Woman is being directly equated to sin! I'm a sinner, no doubt, but that's a little harsh. And another harsh implication is revealed in the lexicon about sin "lieth" at the door:

lieth
rabats (raw-bats')
to crouch (on all four legs folded, like a recumbent animal); be implication, to recline, repose, brood, lurk, imbed

Note my emphasis on the word "lurk." If you look at my post on Gen. 3:16, you'll see that I threw in some "catty" imagery:

Does a husband who's been taught this from the pulpit see his wife as eager to usurp him: prowling for the first chance to pounce upon any opportunity to rule?

No kidding, having read these commentaries for so long and "brooding" about them (since that apparently is my curse ;)), the "lieth at the door" supposed link to Gen 4:7 had laid that imagery in even my head. Lying in wait--ready to pounce. Yeah, that's a healthy way for a man to think of his wife.

I just have to say, to cover myself, that anyone reading this that thinks I am some feminist trying to get out from being ruled by "the man" just doesn't know me. I'm not a doormat by any means, but I know that the Lord has given me a role to play--and it's a privilege! In being submissive to my husband, I am imaging the Church in beautiful white marriage clothes, being readied for the marriage feast of the Lamb--betrothed to Christ Himself!

God has placed on us (women in particular) some limitations. He's our Creator. I'm OK with that. To honor them is the least I can do--after all, he died to purchase me. The Scriptures are pretty clear that God doesn't want women to pursue becoming pastors or church leaders, so I won't. Doesn't mean I can't (as in women are inherently not capable); it means I shouldn't. It's an obedience issue--and it glorifies God when we honor His requests. And in the bigger picture, it glorifies Him and it symbolizes the wonderful culmination of our very purpose and existence. To be forever with Him as His collective betrothed where there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither male nor female. In a place He's specially prepared, where there will be no more death, and where God Himself will wipe away every tear from our eyes. Now THAT's a perfect marriage!