1. Bouncing around on a mat.
2. Humility and transformation.
3. Outrage? Well, yes, because it wouldn’t be true.
4. A little word play.
5. On campaign finance, the regulations do the reverse of the intent, which is not an unusual situation I’d offer, e.g., affirmative action.
6. Key matchups for Sunday.
7. A questioned asked, namely “Is it true that the Inquisition was actually less likely to use torture than some secular courts of the time?” which if the answer is yes or “the same” would puncture a lot of preconceptions and stock arguments.
8. Well, I looked but didn’t see either (a) the “filthy and inappropriate” implied joke or to be hones (b) any joke/humor at all.
9. Huh? Again, I don’t get it.
10. Maybe this offers a hint as to why.
11. If Google were government owned …
12. Flowers at the feet of the Virgin.
13. Looking (back) at the Obama/Alito kerfuffle.

1. Advice for prayer.
2. The seen and unseen.
3. Fiscal policy in a nutshell.
4. I hadn’t parsed this quote … but prompted to take a second look, why didn’t his head explode (or at least the audience break into laughter).
5. Labor relations nominee.
6. Well, at least somebody still has a fine sense of humor. I wonder what search terms find stuff like that.
7. Cap and trade … one of those broken campaign promises (that would be not raising taxes on the middle and lower classes)?
8. Speaking of taxes “fighting for jobs” by forcing companies out? Don’t worry, “blame corporate greed” will resurface soon.
9. The elder and the pornographer.
10. The left wing points to democrat intransigence on the healthcare matter.
11. AIG bailout broke laws?
12. A question on economic policy.

Well, I didn’t get up early enough to write (or post links) and slept in a bit. So … links with comments this morning.

1. Mr Greenwald asks a question of the left. This might be were one would put a hope/change sort of dig … but I won’t go there (oops). This item will be referred to below, btw.
2. The left takes on “corporatism” here and here, and ignores the elephant in the room. That’s right when you compare the power and ability of corporations to do ill with that of government clearly corporations are the greater evil … if of course you are severely brain damaged. How one can escape the 20th century and not realize that Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and the Khmer Rouge were not all leaders of mega-corps unleashing their corporate stooges but … wait for it … government leaders using government forces. The answer to counter corporate malfeasance is not increased government power and oversight (see item #1 above). It takes something more like, well, this. Tea parties (the original more than the latter) come to mind.
3. A chart, which in turn demonstrates the gullibility of Democrats (and political junkies) who believe the results of about any damn poll. More seriously instead of reading tea leaves for your opinion of the other side, try getting to know some.
4. An interesting painting.
5. Two useful criteria when defining religion.
6. Mr Obama does something which makes the right applaud.  Now we will have to wait for the left to figure out that means that its those evil corporations are pushing into space. Of course the right isn’t universally happy about everything Mr Obama does. But that goes without saying. Here’s something else to applaud (on the right), and it doesn’t hurt that in doing so he breaks a campaign promise.
7. TARP and incentives. Oops. And other ways in which the administration sneaks government growth under the radar.
8. Mr O’Keefe (consider the Ukraine link above in #2 above).
9. On that film Avatar. Heh.
10. 1984 and Mr Obama.
11. A DADT compromise suggested. Comments?
12. An Orthodox hymn.
13. Watching economists dicker.

Recently there was a discussion over Scripture at Evangel over whether it was infallible or inerrant and what that might mean. But this discussion I offer, in an important way is missing the point. When pointing at whether or not Scripture is or is not in-whatever verses within Scripture which offer it as inspired by the Spirit of God are used to defend that point of view. Scripture is a primary tool used to understand the divine mysteries. Tradition in turn is the millennia of men and women and their progress into understanding and experiencing these mysteries.

Mystery itself is a widely misunderstood term. When we speak of mystery fiction, such as stories of the famous detectives like Ms Marple, Mr Holmes, and so on the mystery is primarily about unknown answer to the puzzle. The canonical ‘butler’ did it is not the answer to the mystery. The mystery is the experience, the unfolding and walking through toward and understanding of the occurrence in question. Telling someone that that butler “did it” does not move one towards a greater understanding of what occurred without the missing details, the context, the narrative, and the other details like means, method, and motive. These things can only be understood … and are what those protagonists strive to understand by exploring and understanding the fundamental kernel of mystery. To understand and uncover a mystery is an experiential phenomena.

Quantum mechanics is said to be a modern scientific mystery. It is one which cannot, by and large, be understood by hearing stories and words which, like ‘the butler did it’ try to describe the denouement of this 20th century physics discovery. It is understood though the experience gained by working through the mathematical details and mechanics until like the unfolding of the narrative of mystery fiction the kernel of the mystery is understood. Quantum mechanics, like those mysteries of God revealed as through a glass darkly in Scripture, is a mystery for which the core of which is ineffable.

Ineffability is not a rare thing. Most things in life in fact are ineffable. Your feelings for your wife, how to ride a bicycle, most of science (see for example Personal Knowledge), and in fact much of life is at its core ineffable. These things at their core contain central facets which are not expressible in words. They cannot be reduced fragments of language, but must be understood through the doing, or in the context of the above, are a mystery.

The arguments about fallibility vs inerrancy is one which sets aside the mystery at the core of Scripture. It is based, in part, on an assumption that reason can be utilized to unpack and expose the ineffable mystery lying behind and within the core of the key facets which Scripture contains. Trinity, duality, and creed are tools for used by our reason in seeking to understand these mystery, which in turn can only be experienced and understood not by reason alone but what in late antiquity was called our nous, which is our whole mind … including those emotive and intuitive parts of which reason is just one facet.

Liturgy and Tradition contain the wisdom of the Christian millennia of men and women who did understand the mystery trying to uncover and demonstrate for the rest of us ways to deepen our understand the mysteries within our faith. The lives of Saints, heroes of our Church, should be (and are) recounted because in their lives these men and women who did indeed understand the mysteries in ways more profound than is ordinary can be utilized as examples for us to sink into those same mysteries. Scripture gives us a fabric, a background and Tradition gives us hermeneutic, methods, and examples.

1. The President and the e-Church phenomena.
2. Nepal and the Maoists.
3. Memory and narrative.
4. That deficit.
5. Democracy and Islam.
6. Big ring.
7. Our dying democracy.
8. Discussing the “political hit” and healthcare.
9. Looking at strategic elements.
10. A dam … in danger.
11. Global warming death.
12. Metal foam, coming to a car near you … when?
13. Demographics and India.
14. Hacking.

The “approximate” text of my homily for my OT final is below the fold. I say “approximate” because it was an oral final and unlike the rest of the class, I didn’t read from the text but used it as a rough outline and just tried to talk. The attempt at levity at the start with the Elihu/Elious quote at the beginning worked a lot better “off the cuff” than on paper.

I should also note that I didn’t quite get the service right, that is I had prepared this thinking that this reading accompanies the Bridegroom Matins service with the stories of the Harlot and Judas contrasted … it is instead in the Vespers service on the same day. In the morning before class I attempted to make that correction, which I also explained prior to my talk.

Job. Much like the book of Revelations in the New Testament, Job is the book that gives pause to the reader before diving into its complexities. Yet, here we find this book read on more than one evening Matins, ahem, in Holy Week. Yet here I will essay to speak, remembering Elious:

“I am rather young in age, but you are older; so I held my peace, being reticent to declare my learnings to you. [ … ] It is not the long lived that are wise, nor do the aged know discernment.”

Ahem. So much for Scripture being inerrant. It has likely been a long day for all of us so I’m going to try to restrict this little talk to try to answer a few simple questions about the verses we just heard (or read).

First, Why this reading? Why is this reading, taken from the whole of Scripture selected to be read on this night? For that matter, to amplify, why are three (four?) passages from Job read in Holy Week?

Second and perhaps a way to approach the prior question, we might usefully look at examining in what context can or should consider this reading? More explicitly, how does this reading fit in the book of Job, into the Old Testament, into Lent and Holy Week and more specifically at this day in Holy Week?

Third, what are some of the lessons we can derive from this and how can we apply it today to our lives?

And finally, what can we take from a larger theological perspective, how does it figure in or rather how can it advance our understanding of the relationships between God, Man and the His creation?

Before we get too far into this, I’d like to point out that the reading given in the lectionary notes is not derived from the LXX. Specifically an extended paragraph with a conversation between Job and his wife is skipped. Let me read that section for you, starting with verse 9.

Then after a long time had passed, his wife said to him, “How long will you persist and say, ‘Look I will hang on a little longer, while I wait for the hope of my deliverance’ for look, your sons and daughters, my womb’s birth pangs and labors, for whom I wearied myself with hardships in vain. And you? You sit in the refuse of worms as you spend the night in the open air. As for me, I am one that wanders about and a hired servant — from place to place and house to house, waiting for when the sun will set, so I can rest from the distresses and griefs that now beset me. Now say some word to the Lord and die!” But Iob look up and said to her, “You have spoken like one of the foolish women. If we received the good things from the Lord’s hand, shall we not bear the bad?” In all these things that happened to him Iob did not sin at all with his lips before God.”

So, what is this book of Job. Where does our reading fit in, besides being a chapter number “2” putting it at the beginning. Job starts off in the first two chapters with a conversation between God and Satan. God points out Job as an excellent example of a good and Godly man. Satan offers that he’s only that way because his life has been blessed. So, God offers to Satan that he might put Job to the test. First Satan removes in a stroke Job’s accomplishments, namely his wealth and his children. After that, in the reading we heard (or read), he removes his health and we find Job sitting on a rubbish heap using a piece of broken pottery to scrape pus from sores which cover his body. After all this Job still is “did not sin with his lips before God.”

Three friends visit Job. These friends are princes and kings, peers and companions of Job prior to his losing his possessions. And they begin a conversation about why this has happened and what it might mean. His friends think the fault is because he has sinned or failed to worship God rightly. Job denies this, he has been faithful to God, charitable to the poor and needy, and is blameless. Yet still this has transpired.

There is a young man, unheralded in the prior conversations who buts in and begins, with the quote with which I began. One of the points he makes is that God punishes more severely and for smaller infractions those to whom he has given much. So perhaps Job’s sin was minute, but because he was so well rewarded now he is so severely punished.

Finally, God speaks in answer to Jobs inquiries and to their conversation. God’s answer, like much of Scripture is a puzzle. God doesn’t answer Job’s question and plea for an answer directly. God says basically, much like he did to Moses, “I am. I am creator of the Universe. I created” And this in a succinct epilogue ends the book, God restores Job’s “stuff” and pronounces that “he will rise again with those the Lord raises up.”

The Fathers teach us that Job was a type of Christ. Typology is a biblical hermenuetic which was practiced avidly in the centuries following Jesus. (A hermenuetic by the way is a big word that means “a way of extracting meaning from text”) After the midpoint of the first century and for more than a few centuries to follow, Christian scholars, teachers, and preachers searched Scripture and Nature, but especially the Old Testament, for reflections of Jesus, the Resurrection, and other elements or events of Jesus’ life. Job is in fact seen as a type of Christ. This is seen in that Job, like Jesus was an innocent condemned to suffer. I might also suggest, although I have not seen it written elsewhere, that perhaps Job’s wife is a type of Eve. Perhaps Job’s wife, especially as given in the extended LXX translation, and her little speech was prompted by Satan just as Eve was tempted in the garden tempted Adam, here his wife tries to draw Job astray. Yet, Job is unwavering in his faith in God and will not condemn God for withdrawing his blessings from his life. Jesus with his death and Resurrection has redeemed Adam from death … and perhaps this foreshadows that, where this man as a type of Christ rejects by typological proxy Eve’s temptation.

Of the service in which this reading/lection is placed, one might ask what are highlights, on what does this service focus? The matins service sung previously highlights two figures, the harlot anointing Jesus hair with expensive perfumes and Judas betraying Jesus for the price of a potters field, 30 pieces of silver. I suggest we can make clear connections with that and Job and more specifically chapter 2?

In the kindergarten and beyond there is a common notion about the righteousness that is predominant. Tit for a tat, so to speak is a natural notion of ethical behavior. If you do good, you are rightly rewarded. If you do evil, you should be punished. This natural notion is found in the context of God and his relationship with Israel throughout the Old Testament. Following the people through the desert with Moses to the decline of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah after David to the exile. Moses and the prophets repeatedly show how when the people fail to cleave to God the consequence is that bad things happen. David takes Bathsheba and kills her husband … and therefore God takes that firstborn son of that union. Good things -> reward. Bad -> punishment.

This kindergarten balance, this natural ethical algebra if you will, is confounded and rejected in Job. Job was righteous, yet he suffers greatly despite that. This idea of reversing the natural ethical algebra is one we find repeated more than once. I suggest this reversal is one of the key reasons that this lection is read in this place. This story, recounted by Job and his friends has some key parallels in the context of this natural ethical algebra and its reversal in this service in Holy week, in other stories tied to the Lenten/Paschal cycle like the Publican and Pharisee, and as well in Jesus teaching and life taken as a whole.

How can the Harlot and Judas be seen to be refutations of the normal ethical balance? Let’s compare the two. Judas was a man of means, he handled the financial aspects of the ministry of Jesus. Harlotry in first century Israel on the other hand was almost certainly not position sought for either wealth or status but one to which one was likely driven by circumstance. Spiritually speaking Judas was one of Jesus’ disciples, the harlot … likely not even permitted to worship. So by our ethical equation then, Judas should by rights be the better person, for he has been received much more. Yet this is not the case.

There is another parallel, which takes us a little past our lection which was read today, but Job was rewarded ultimately for “Iob did not sin at all with his lips before God” and furthermore what evidence we have is that his heart and mind were truly given to God. Likewise we venerate the actions and memory of the Harlot in contrast to Judas because of their attitude (and actions) toward things of God and specifically Jesus.

Jesus in fact quite regularly inverts the natural/normal status of our expectations regarding the ethical algebra/equation during his teaching and his life.

There is a word used in connection quite often to the book of Job, namely theodicy. Theodicy is a 68 cent word which is defined as an attempted answer to the problem of evil or the branch of theology that defends God’s goodness and justice in the face of the existence of evil. How can a good God permit evil in the world. Job’s wife states the crux of the problem, asking why as you are blameless can you not fault God for your innocent sufferings, or the memory of those whose birth pangs for which she labored in vain for those children who are now dead. How can a good powerful God permit evil in the world, or more specifically permit Satan, on a lark as it were, to test Job and thereby kill his children?

While I will not presume to pose a simple answer to this question, I will put forward a question about that which may be useful for reflection. Jesus and his life and teaching, Judas and the Harlot, Job and his story offer a twist on the natural ethical algebra. A large part of the accusatory argument against God laid to His feet by the theodicy question depend crucially on the normal ethical algebra. If you take that assumption away, and reverse or confuse this algebra in fundamental ways, you need to re-examine how you view God and His actions.

Virtually all of the theodicy discussions from a Christian source do (or should) bring into their discussion a reconciliation of their explanation with the discourse and teachings found in Job. And one might add that the young whippersnappers (being a poor reference to my opening quote) who designed and set up our lectionary who put this lection in the contextual neighborhood of Holy Week, the Resurrection, the Harlot/Judas comparison all shmushed together.

Modern events such as the earthquakes at Haiti and Armenia, the tsunami in Indonesia, and even the Katrina hurricane and New Orleans all raise for us questions of theodicy. Why did God allow this to happen. But when we consider such questions it might be good to turn that around and consider the relationship between these lessons learned from Job, the Harlot, and Holy Week.

One thing to consider in relation to our lives here in America. We are very much in possession of a well blessed life. We, like Job, living in comfort and luxury. We have many cattle and fine possessions … and so on. Satan has not yesterday had conversed with God over our particular situation. But we might ask, would God offer you or me as a paragon of righteousness? Recall the toparion from the start of Lent:

My soul, my soul, arise!
Why are you sleeping?
The end is drawing near,
and you will be confounded.
Awake, then, and be watchful,
that Christ our God may spare you,
Who is everywhere present and fills all things.

Allow me then to recap.

• Why this reading? Because Job is a type of Christ and his suffering on the Cross has resonance with the remembrances we practice in Holy Week and because the ethical twist present in Job is paralleled by Christ and the primary story in this service.

• We answered the question of why this reading was read by looking at it in the context of the narrative of Job and as well in the context of the service in which it is placed and finally how that fits into Holy Week and Lent in general.

• And a primary lesson we can take from this week and this lection in particular is to emphasize how we should not expect or live by the standard kindergarten or natural ethical equation. By being conscious of how this tit/tat natural ethic is rejected over and over by Jesus (and foreshadowed here by the book of Job) we may then find ways to “do the right thing.”

• And finally from a theological perspective, specifically Theodicy, we have perhaps located a track for understanding a piece of the puzzle of the existence and place that evil has in the world.

1. An old heresy.
2. An icon made of … wooden eggs.
3. Boundaries and life … and a wedding.
4. Violating the principle of separation of state and church, err, sport.
5. Regarding that show trial and Mr Holder’s due diligence.
6. Of Obama and message (a problem in the same).
7. Fox News derangement syndrome.
8. I have to say I found an underlying assumption here repugnant, i.e., that every human activity should and can be taxed.
9. Two pictures.
10. Violence by Islamic adherents in Germany against … Polish blondes.
11. Obama on nuclear power … words don’t match deeds. The times notes “has more support among Republicans than Democrats.” Ya think?
12. Pro-life and pro-choice in San Francisco … as reported by a pro-choice left-leaning photo-journalist.
13. Two questions.
14. Polikinghorne on theodicy.
15. Opposition to Obama … now unpatriotic.
16. It’s cold in China.

1. As Lent approaches … a fast practised by the Chaldean/Assyrian, Ethiopian, and Coptic churches that I’d not known about … the Ninevite fast.
2. After all that … Russia is indifferent.
3. An economics paper noted.
4. A econ question.
5. A book noted … another here.
6. How to teach and study ethics.
7. The hard left and militant Islam … a match not made in heaven.
8. The SOTU address discussed. A valid point on that here.
9. Foolish zeal and St. Ephrem.
10. All that spending … did what? A fat lot of nothing.
11. Well, all the kerfuffle about Obama/Alito tells me only that people need thicker skins. Heck guns have been discharged in the halls before. Now, people apparently care about “mouthing ‘no'”. Geesh. And alas, Mr Obama had it wrong factually … not that it matters. Some more remarks from the center, which oddly enough is being ignored by the left. One more from Ms McArdle.
12. A list which the left wants us to slip further down.

1. Of Kazahkstan and Belorus … and Russia.
2. Weirdness in the courts.
3. Pro-life.
4. This has been linked all over. Econ rap.
5. Remarks on the “freeze.” Links here.
6. Mr Easterly pumping what I saw as a primary thesis of Mr Collier’s Bottom Billion book, i.e., it’s complicated and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.
7. A pun.
8. Rhetorical gap and policy gap.
9. Dostoevsky.
10. Rock the voters … should applaud the recent SCOTUS reversing (?) finally McCain/Feingold.
11. A prediction (last sentence) … fulfilled (on blogs at least).
12. The man with the big ego … is afraid of kids?
13. Predictions for the SOTU.
14. Spending and the beltway.
15. Our economy at work.
16. Maths thinking (use an auto translater).
17. Is outrage.

At Evangel, the Rev Paul T. McCain noted that he was somewhat unfamiliar with the details and differences of and between the Eastern Orthodox and the Western (liturgical) calendars. So, with that in mind, I thought I’d attempt to fill in what’s happening and up and coming for the liturgical year at this point. There is a personal reason for writing this, and likely I’ll bring it up again in the next few weeks, which I will get to in a bit. But first, where are we in our respective liturgical calendars?

In the West, liturgically these are the numbered weeks of Epiphany waiting for Ash Wednesday and the start of Lent. Lent in East and West is a time when the services become more somber and reflective. It is a time set aside, preparing for the great feast of Pascha/Easter. In this time fasting, prayer, more frequent liturgical services, charity, and introspection are emphasized. It is a time to sharpen and hone our attention to our spiritual state and life. We are asked to abstain from meat products (anything invertebrate products), dairy, wine, and oil (although wine and oil are permitted on weekends). At the same time, we should eat less often (no snacking) and push away from the table just a little hungry. That is to say this is fasting both by restricting variety and quantity. For the monastic (or the very devout) practice a complete fast for the first three days of Lent is observed … and during the rest of Lent then only eat in the evening.

There is a small matter of dates. For the West, Lent begins on the morning of Ash Wednesday (after the Shrove/Fat Tuesday emptying of the larder). Lent is 40 days (not counting Sundays) and ends on Easter. For the East, Lent begins on Monday, counts the Sundays but Holy week (Palm Sunday) ends Lent. Even though Lent is finished, the fast is not ended until Pascha.

What follows is a brief description highlighting some of the features of the Sundays approaching Lent for the Eastern tradition.

The three weeks leading up to Lent and the four Sundays associated with those dates are special liturgical events. Each Sunday has special significance with a knickname, and a particular gospel lesson which assist the countdown to Lent.  Last Sunday was the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee and thus this is now the “week” of the Publican and the Pharisee. The gospel reading on Sunday, obviously, was Luke 18:10-14, being the story of the Publican and the Pharisee. Next Sunday will be the Sunday of the Prodigal Son (the gospel reading being Luke 15:11-32). Following that will be the Sunday of the Last Judgement (gospel Matthew 25:31-46). Finally the last Sunday before the beginning of Lent, is the Sunday of Forgiveness (the gospel read is Matthew 6:14-21). This pattern is followed every year and these Sundays start beating the drum heralding the approaching Great Lent.

The Lenten fasting is stringent and accordingly the fasting which is proscribed in the three weeks are designed to prepare one for the fast. Normally in “ordinary” weeks one is instructed to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays in the same manner as one fasts during Lent. The Week of the Publican and Pharisee (this week) is fast free (cheers). Next week is an ordinary week regarding fasting, i.e., fast only on Wednesday and Friday. The Sunday of the Last Judgement is also known as Meatfare because the following week is meat free, but dairy, oil, and wine are still permitted thus that will be the last meat eaten until Pascha. Then after Forgiveness Sunday is over, which is also known as Cheesefare, and dairy is removed as well from the diet. Thus in this way one is introduced over a three week period to adjust to the fast as it approaches.

On the evening of Forgiveness Sunday there is a Vespers service (Forgiveness Vespers) which some jokingly describe as “Orthodox callisthenics.” At the conclusion of this service each person in attendance, in turn, prostrates himself before the each other kisses him (or her) three times and humbly begs their forgiveness for all the many sins we have committed against the other. This entails quite a bit of dropping to ones knees, pressing ones face to the floor, and then standing up to kiss, hence the “callisthenics” remarks.

Here is where the personal request comes in. On the first four days of Lent, starting with Monday in the evening many Orthodox churches hold a service in which the four parts of the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete is performed. I find this service almost overwhelming. In impact, from my point of view, it compares with even with the Pascha celebration. I have, for myself, not seen any liturgical reflection on or of repentance that comes near to matching this in its impact, its cathartic content, or its depth. From a personal perspective I am really interested in a non-Orthodox impression or remarks on this service. I wonder how much of the impact this service has on me is because I’m an Orthodox convert and how much is due to the impact of service itself. Frank Turk in a post earlier this year dropped his (in)famous remark that some Catholics and fewer Orthodox are saved and based this in part because he felt that non-protestants fail to “a sense of repentance.” Well, Mr Turk, attend one or more of the Canon services and see if you can still say that the Orthodox aren’t repentant enough, that they don’t “know” what it means. This service in many ways defines repentance. More seriously, this year Western Easter and Eastern Pascha are on the same date. Which means … on Monday prior to Ash Wednesday a Protestant might be able to attend a service in which this Canon is performed, there should be no liturgical conflict at any rate. So, if anyone non-Orthodox who might read this and takes up this request to witnesses the canon and is willing to report, please contact me by email (or drop a comment on the blog) and let me know what you thought. I’d be grateful.

My soul, my soul, arise!
Why are you sleeping?
The end is drawing near,
and you will be confounded.
Awake, then, and be watchful,
that Christ our God may spare you,
Who is everywhere present and fills all things.

The above is a short hymn sung three times slowly in the middle of the service.

1. Considering Vampires, an interview.
2. Pretty.
3. Reflections on marriage.
4. A return to Canae.
5. A resource for Lent.
6. On the Conan/Leno thing.
7. The crescent in the EU.
8. Ice biking.
9. Hmm.
10. My first thought on that was that why just freeze (or cut) such a small portion of the budget. Doesn’t he realize that won’t really have much effect? This piece says that more fluently than I. It also occurred to me they could halt (and terminate) any further “stimulus” expenditures that remain to be allocated.
11. More divisive than that other guy.
12. A question.
13. A beating, racially motivated?

Well, as promised I’m going to try to talk about my upcoming oral final exam, an Old Testament homily for my late-vocations class that I’m taking. We were given the task of selecting a OT lection (reading section from the liturgical rubrics) and give an approximately 10 minute homily on that topic. I’ve selected to give a homily on Job 2:1-10, and I might note that being Orthodox we’re using the Septuagint (for that is their Scriptural canon) and the book of Job differs considerably (it’s 400 lines shorter but is longer in some places). The Job 2:1-10 reading is significantly extended in the Septuagint. Many of the changes are not very consequential. However, the final chapter differs in some surprising ways, which indeed might affect one’s interpretations of the story. Read the rest of this entry

1. This is a really interesting piece, nominally on chess, but likely having lots of interesting wider implications.
2. Adults and YA fiction.
3. Hmm.
4. Internet and freedom.
5. NASCAR and minority crap, err, lawsuits … not what you’d expect. But in retrospect, exactly what you’d expect from the racism implicit in the progressive movement.
6. Politics and Mr Obama’s “going after the financial sector.”
7. Trying to buy votes.
8. Moving words around.
9. PC speech crap.
10. A book highly recommended.
11. Handling Mr Stewart (and how).
12. Perhaps bloggers have to fill the gap.

1. Hamas and Hegel.
2. Hmm, looking (especially at the final paragraphs) at this, I think author believes that … and I don’t think it’s correct, for example I don’t think there was any possibility of “market friendly” reforms and the bill that was passed was anything but “moderate and bipartisan in everything but name.” How does someone come around to thinking that way? (a reply here)
3. Unhappy about free speech. Here’s the salient question those M/F backers won’t answer. More here.
4. Orwell as setting the political goals of the left.
5. Killin’s too good for him.
6. Hummus, although not in preparation for the upcoming Lenten fast.
7. Giving Mr Obama his due.
8. Germany (apparently) takes parenting seriously … even if the blogger noting it does not.
9. Nubrella.
10. Well, that’s very very cute.
11. Just wrong.
12. Prester John.
13. Words to inspire.
14. Post election satire.
15. Pseudo-science.
16. While I was originally going to try a hope/change sarcastic remark in response to this, I think this is better. If you (unlike me) assume Mr Obama is intelligent, earnest, and of high moral quality and he thinks this is the right (and ethical) thing to do … how do you figure he comes by that conclusion?

1. Scotland, the Buckfast scourge (?), and monks.
2. Islam and Christian relations in the 19th century (one example).
3. I’ve been in the Huxley “camp” for some time, how about you?
4. Waiting for NSS, which one expects will be more fruitful than Godot (in that it will eventually come).
5. Tax on tax.
6. Ant-walking alligators … a ghastly notion.
7. Weep.
8. Standards for girls.
9. Sueussian rhyme.
10. Min wage and employment (and some remarks on UI too).
11. On a need for statemen, I think right now however left and right have a very different idea of what an ideal statesmen might be, the left looking more for a super-policy-wonk and the right for a Lincoln or Washington (a person with integrity and vision).
12. I’ve a question for anyone who thinks this is problematic … what would be your reaction to a secular (say FSM) “Easter egg” in a similar situation.