Does this seem right to you?

January 27, 2010 under curios

profile

Nothing much here, this caught my eye while browsing and I had some questions. [For those who don't frequent BBSpot, Brian Briggs mocks a random personal ad on a daily basis - he's not at his best here, but that's beside the point.]

1)What does she think the difference between a cynic and a pragmatist is? Why ask for both?

2)Why would a pragmatist bother to vote?

3)How on earth could you expect a cynic to be charitable?

4)Does she really want what she’s asking for? MaybeNot.

5)If I listed all the things that I want, would they be any more consistent???

comments: 0 »

Treasures in Heaven

January 25, 2010 under theology

“But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” — Matthew 6:20 (NIV)

A long time ago I played a ‘Christian’ version of that old board game, the “Game of Life”. Yes, you know it, that awful, interminable slog across the board with the little cars that take the little blue and pink pegs. But this was the ‘Christian’ version, so it was worse.

It was smarmy and patronizing and had no edge whatsoever. I was going to find a link to it, but although my searches turned up pink terriers and life size stands of Hannah Montana, mercifully this game seems to be buried, even on the internet.

The key aspect to the Christian version was that when you died, you threw away all your money. Well, that’s not quite true. What you did was you kept two envelopes for your money. One was your money and the other was your ‘Treasures in Heaven (Heavenly Treasures? I can’t remember). Whether you won or lost depended on what you had in that second envelope.

But you couldn’t just stuff all your cash in there. Oh no. You had to hit special opportunities to give to the poor before you could transfer your cash to heavenly stuff. And then, only if you drew the card that told you your heart was right. Fun stuff.

So the game is, make as much money as you can, and try and stuff as much as you can into the second envelope, which means you win when you die. It becomes your ticket. Something is most definitely wrong with this model.

But I can understand why that model is in the game.

The interpretation of Matthew 6:20 that I accepted growing up was along the lines of,

“Do all sorts of good stuff that you will be rewarded for when you die. As you do good stuff, you build up treasures that you will get in the form of heaven – treasures that are waiting for you to receive them.”

That’s not an uncommon reading of the verse, I think, and it goes a long way towards explaining the awfulness of that board game.

And then… along comes Dallas Willard with a word of clarity for me…

Nothing – no human being or institution, no time, no space, no spirtiual being, no event – stands between God and those who trust and serve him. The heavens” are always there with you no matter what, and the “first heaven, in biblical terms, is precisely the atmosphere or air that surrounds your body. — The Divine Consipiracy, p.67

So to dicuss our treasures is really to discuss our treasurings. — p. 204

In short, building up treasures in heaven is not a spiritual savings account. The heavens (and the kingdom of heaven) are everpresent – God is always right next to me; in the air around me. Treasures in heaven are not distant, future rewards that I don’t get to have until I die.

They are things I have right now, in reality. They are the spiritual things that I choose to treasure. The verse now sounds like,

“Value  spiritual things of real worth that are indestructable and that no one can strip you of. This is the way to live, right now, in the kingdom of heaven.”

It makes sense – am I afraid of earthly treasures disappearing after I die? No, I’m afraid of moths, thieves and rust taking them away in my lifetime. In the same way, the persistence of heavenly treasures is of consequence in my lifetime. They’re the foundation necessary for building this life around.

I like this reading better ;-)

Danah Boyd says good things.

January 21, 2010 under technical

Like this:

People still care about privacy because they care about control. Sure, many teens repeatedly tell me “public by default, private when necessary” but this doesn’t suggest that privacy is declining; it suggests that publicity has value and, more importantly, that folks are very conscious about when something is private and want it to remain so. When the default is private, you have to think about making something public. When the default is public, you become very aware of privacy.”

Her full post is worthwhile.

It’s ironic that I moved from Facebook to a blog for privacy reasons. Whereas Facebook has privacy controls, a blog is fully public, and this keeps me on my toes.

The danger is not that we function in a private context or in a public context, but that we operate in one when we believe that we’re operating in the other. The danger of Facebook is that it feels private when it is really public.

This is not a new thing; we’ve always known the danger of disconnects. An open enemy is worse than a false friend, etc. etc.

But theologically, I’m forced to question the actual value of mass, shallow communication. I’m not sure what the real value of publicity is.

But then again, theologically, I’m forced to question most everything we humans hold dear.

comments: 3 » tags: ,

The most amazing thing on the internet

January 20, 2010 under curios

A discussion, among programmers, that references Christianity but which does not devolve into vitriol.

This speaks volumes about the quality of the hosting blog and of the community built up around it. If you don’t believe this, just lurk on slashdot for a while :-P

comments: 4 »

Bizarre.

January 19, 2010 under curios

I do not understand the mindset that would put a scripture reference on a rifle sight.

comments: 1 » tags: , ,

The auto-complete game

January 16, 2010 under curios

At various times I’ve thought about the best way to play the autocomplete game. You know – autocomplete – when you search for something on Google, it drops down a list of the most common searches matching what you’ve typed so far.

It’s how I found Yaco Monti.

(I was searching for ‘yacht rock’)

My thought was to post top results for various two letter combinations to get a glimpse into the public mind.

But check out the question these folks asked. It really is a marvelous game.

What do you want to ask the masses?

In case you missed it

January 15, 2010 under curios

Great article from the BBC a couple days back.

Lots of good stuff in there.

A lot of links recently – I’ve got some topics for posts kicking about but no time to write them.

comments: 2 » tags:

More Good Stuff from Chris Blattman

January 13, 2010 under curios

What’s the deal with trial by ordeal?

comments: 0 »

Wondermark #585

January 11, 2010 under tongueincheek

Good stuff.

comments: 2 » tags: ,

Don’t kid yourself

January 11, 2010 under curios

Man mauled to death by pet tiger – CBC

Shouldn’t that be:

Man mauled to death by not so pet tiger?

Mind you, this is the first time I’ve seen the CBC comment boards unified and free of bile. They all think keeping a captive tiger is a bad idea, too.

comments: 0 » tags: , ,