Saturday, June 26, 2004
In keeping with the rhetorical style of Mark Shea, who is normally a very good commentator, perhaps I should start a category titled "The Roman Communion: Laboring to Make the World Safe for Pedophilia." It certainly rings just as true. After all, the things that the Episcopal Church USA, Church of England, and Anglican Church of Canada do are obviously representative of global Anglicanism, though apparently what the Roman Catholic dioceses in America do isn't representative of global Romanism, despite Bishop Wojtyla knowing what was happening.
While I disagree with it, I defend Roman Catholicism. The actions of an arrogant and hypocritical minority of them, however, are making this harder to do.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Anyone think the site'll be renamed TSgt. Stryker?
I've mentioned before that I really like the anime Trigun, and have it on DVD. It's mostly PG, with a few forays into PG-13 (and perhaps R if you really think about it and are really paranoid). I'd been told that Cowboy Bebop was a good and similar series. Not being a huge fan of most anime but liking Trigun, this sounded good to me and so I went and got it on DVD as well. Um...let's just say that it's significantly more than PG. Whereas Trigun had some cleavage shots, a few suggestive scenes (Vash is in a room with several prostitutes but fakes sleep to get them to leave; in another scene, it's obvious that two of the characters slept together the night before; one character commits rape that isn't shown), and and the occasional bit of profanity, Cowboy Bebop is way past that. Every episode has some heavy-duty cussing, most of the young girls are wearing extremely little, there's occasional heavy drug use, and, in one scene, we see two naked guys in the act and covered only by a sheet. So let's just call this a warning. Trigun is really good, though perhaps a bit offensive to some. If you were even slightly offended by it, though, steer far clear of Cowboy Bebop.
UPDATE: Yes, HokiePundit is a sucker and inadvertantly bought bootleg copies of the two series by the Fx company. I should've known that $30 apiece was far too low of a price, but I was thinking that perhaps what turned out to be the legitimate versions were just overpriced collector's editions. So, I'm going to slowly piece together the Trigun series. Once I have the originals, there's no reason why I can't wear out the bootleg discs and leave the originals in peace. Drat.
According to a FoxNews piece (which was likely written simply to stir controversy),
"Virginia may be trending in Kerry's direction, but the Yankee senator still has an uphill battle to win the state that was the heart of the Confederacy, some analysts say."
Pardon me? The "heart of the Confederacy?" Perhaps it was simply a slip of the tongue, and the author meant "friend-who-reluctantly-enters-fight-after-loudmouth-friend-gets-in-trouble of the Confederacy." That would probably make more sense. Even "capital of the Confederacy" would be accurate. Virginia may have contributed the best Confederate generals, the famed Army of Northern Virginia, the capital, the only major ironworks, the ports in Hampton Roads, and perhaps an air of legitimacy, but it certainly was not the cause or even an especially ardent supporter of the Confederacy.
That's okay, though. Most people who read that piece aren't from Virginia and probably don't know their Civil War history.
That said, Mark Warner is probably the smartest pick for Kerry. He's a Southern (*cough*yeahright*cough*) Democrat, he's a Governor rather than another Senator, and he's good with the media. Unlike Edwards, he probably won't steal the limelight. So, if the Democrats are smart, they'll ask Warner. More likely, though, they'll ask someone like New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson or Hillary Clinton (depending on how the polls are looking). We'll see. Of course, my fervent hope is that they ask Howard Dean or Al Sharpton, but I guess that's not going to happen...
Go check out his latest Spanning the Globe!
(just kidding, incidentally...)
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
Okay, so I've got a couple GMail invites. If you want one, contact me at hokiepundit -at- gmail-dot-com.
(#2 for me was Blank Verse)
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
I can't seem to get to bed at a decent hour anymore. I went to bed around midnight tonight, and yet I'm still up. If I'm lucky, I'll fall asleep around 4AM. I did yardwork and ran 4 1/2 miles today; I'm tired, but I can't get to sleep. I'm pretty sure it's because I've been thinking about something lately, and unfortunately it's something about which I can do very little at present, so I'm left to just examine it over and over. I think that what will ultimately be necessary is for me to pull an all-nighter (which I haven't done since Sophomore year) and then go to bed at a reasonable hour tomorrow evening; possibly with the help of a sleeping pill. I've been like this all summer, and I need to get into some sort of 11-7 sleep pattern before my internship begins next week. Prayers would be appreciated, that I could manage to get some sleep and that I could figure out the problem.
Monday, June 21, 2004
That's how many of the 100 top-grossing films of all-time I've seen. The ones I haven't are:
20. The Sixth Sense
26. How the Grinch Stole Christmas (assuming it's not the cartoon)
62. Dances With Wolves
63. Batman Forever
65. Ocean's Eleven
77. There's Something About Mary
78. Ice Age (I started this, but it was awful)
83. Rain Man
89. Chicago (I've seen the stage version)
95. Big Daddy
98. A Bug's Life
(via Dean Esmay)
Sunday, June 20, 2004
I happened to pick up several ska CDs for a dollar apiece today, with mixed results. One of the one to turn out well was a "best of" album called "One Way Ticket to Skaville" by a Dutch band called Mr. Review. Now, I only found one listing for Mr. Review online, at Amazon.com, so I figured I'd look up the lead singer, "Dr. Rude," in case that would help. In doing so, I came across this. Wow.
Friday, June 18, 2004
I don't like running from problems. Sitting and analyzing something to death while letting the opportunity slip away or the problem go by me I can do pretty well, but actively running doesn't work very well. Whenever I try, I end up turning around and going back around, either out of interest or a sense of determination/pride.
Despite acting like it sometimes (often?), I don't know everything. Some blogs take the approach of linking to other stories and opinions which they find interesting. Others write treatises on issues which are important to them. While I do some of each, the main way I use this blog is to work through my thoughts and expose them to light, hoping that people will point out things with which they disagree or tell me why they agree with things I've said. There hasn't been nearly as much of that as I'd hoped, but then, this isn't a huge blog, either. If you check my counter, I get something like fifty views per day, and at least a third of them are random search engine hits for things like "sexy naked Syrians" (those pictures were removed due to bandwidth restrictions...).
So, I was a little put out that I was saying things which were important to me but which apparently were not considered to be such by others. I wouldn't exactly say that I was airing my dirty laundry, but I was revealing some things about myself and my thoughts which would be hard for me to even tell to people who know me well. Given that some of those people read this blog, some of the contents of certain posts could even be embarrassing to me (though I've sometimes tried to either hide or distort identifying details so people won't recognize them). So, my thinking was that if I'm going to do that and not even hear if something I've said was right-on, despicable, or whatever, then there was no reason why I should open myself up to ridicule or even harm, and that the better move would be to simply blog anonymously.
Several people asked me for the URL of my new blog, which would kind-of defeat the point, I think. But, it did get me thinking. It would be a pain for me to disguise my style of writing, which is fairly distinctive (for one instance, there's way to much use of the singular first-person and of parenthetical remarks), especially given that I'd likely link to things from other blogs I read and they might come look and identify me. I also have to admit that I don't really like the concept of blogging anonymously. Given that about half of the people who've permalinked me have done so under my real name, I'm pretty sure that people know my true identity.
So, what now? Well, I'm not sure. Tearing down the blog because I'm afraid of what people may find out doesn't strike me as having been a very good idea. There are and will be people in my life from whom I can't hide things, as much as I might like. Also, and perhaps more importantly, I don't think that enough people are open. There are some topics that will never be discussed here, but there are plenty that should be. I've been helped numerous times by people sharing their thoughts on an issue or telling about things they'd done, learning what helped them succeed, figuring out why they failed, or simply realizing that I wasn't the only one who believed a certain way or had done or wanted to do something. And, I think we have something of a duty to share things we've learned with others, even if it may embarrass us. I mean, it may be icky to clean up after babies or those who are sick, but someone has to do it. For the longest time, I was embarrassed to think that people might not find out that I'd never gone on a date. I now have, but it took me a lot longer than many people I knew, and I've also learned that plenty of smart, attractive people my age or older still haven't. But, what I've figured out is that people who are worth listening to don't care whether or not I've kissed a girl, done drugs, or walked up the wrong side of an escalator (I've not done any of those).
My point? I like thinking, and I like blogging. I'd like to have more feedback, but that's up to you. The more I learn, the more able I am to post my thoughts. Especially in July, this blog will probably be nearly dead, but I may have two or three lengthy posts if something comes to mind. I'm not going to say that I'm "back," but I don't want to go out with just saying "buh-bye!" So, if I do close up shop, it'll be with a bang, whether that be ten days or ten years from now. I do appreciate the kind words from those who've already commented on the message I had up; we'll see what's next.
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Why do people often clap after the praise band has played? Why don't you clap after the sermon?
On the other hand, I'd be pretty impressed by a standing ovation after the serving of the Eucharist.
This site is really crude, but it's something I think all girls ought to read. The Ladder Theory doesn't pertain to all, or perhaps even most (I haven't exactly conducted a survey) guys, but I would say that at least a very mild form of it is present in the thinking of all straight men. I could, and perhaps might later, write a long essay on this, but I'll limit myself to a few comments for now. If you replace "sleep with" with "date/court/marry," it's not as offensive. Also, recognize that being "unattractive" shouldn't be construed as a synonym for "wolf ugly" (though, let's be honest, the possibility exists). Quite simply, it may be that a guy thinks that he and a girl would not be a very good match. This could be for any number of reasons, including religious conflicts, personality clashes (two very dominant personalities, for example), or more shallow things like looks or money. The guy may, of course, still find the girl very attractive, but will suppress that feeling because he knows that there are other girls out there whom he finds more attractive. A scenario might help.
Andrew is a strongly committed Christian who prefers to take a leadership role in his relationships. He is friends with Becky, Carrie, and Denise. Andrew thinks that Becky, Carrie, and Denise are very pretty and intelligent, and feels that marrying any one of them would not exactly be the end of the world for him. Becky is a Buddhist, and so Andrew demotes her on his "ladder." Carrie, while a Christian, is very dominant, and so she too is demoted. Denise is a Christian and slightly shy, and so she gets the highest position of the three girls on Andrew's ladder. Andrew could expect to be happy with any of these girls. However, he chooses not to pursue Becky and Carrie because he is interested in Denise. This doesn't mean that he isn't tempted to ask the first two girls out, or might not end up seeing one of them if Denise rejects him or he can't work up the courage to ask out Denise.
But, back to the original theory. As Josh notes, nearly all guys recognize it as being valid, at least in essence, while most girls will reject it out of hand. My guess is that girls simply can't bear the thought that guys they know and trust might think of them that way. And, to some extent, the girls are right. If we're truly your friends (whether we're "interested" in you or not), we do our best not to think of you like that, and certainly not to act on that. But, as sinful creatures, the temptation is present.
What do you think? Girls especially are invited to comment, and you can feel free to not use your names.
We've hit the summer doldrums, I think. Look for posts to be poorly thought-out or superficial for the foreseeable future. If I start talking about beer again, then your best bet is probably to run and not come back until January.
Though at our summer retreat in Alexandria, HokiePundit nonetheless retains affiliates in Blacksburg, one of whom bring us this amusing tale of the summer events in a college town. My friend is awesome.
Today was clean-up day in the Land O' Links. Sadly, several blogs have gone the way of the dodo, and are now listed under the RIP Blogs heading. Both Mark Butterworth and Matthew Edgar have returned from that status in the past, so it's not as though the situation is hopeless. Still, they will be missed. I've also cleaned up one or two cases where the page had moved or I'd mis-typed the URL (I don't usually use my own links, so it's rare that I find out that they're broken). I figure that with the recent retirements, I may have room for links to up to four more blogs, though I may take my time in adding them.
UPDATE: Protein Wisdom had been gone for so long that it wasn't even under the previous "Blogs On Hiatus" heading, though I'd been reading it since its reappearance. It's now resumed its rightful place on the Team Pants label.
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
This site is #4 on Yahoo! for Ben Domenech is arrogant. I don't think that he is, but remember: he's a lot smarter than you are.
I can't sleep. And, when I can't sleep, I get to thinking. And when I get to thinking, I get to talking (or writing), and have a hard time shutting up until I've said what's on my mind. That's sometimes a little awkward, given that I know that several people I see on a routine basis (or at least will, once the Fall semester begins) read what I write. The desire, therefore, to hide a lot of things is pretty strong, as I obviously don't want to reveal my weaknesses. After all, no one wants the notion in their head that whenever certain friends see them, they think "Man, HokiePundit thinks whatever about something! He's a sicko, compared to my other friends, whom I presume do not think the way he does!" But, on the other hand, if you don't share what's on your mind, you can hardly expect other people to do the same. Sometimes it does take one person to clear the air to talk about subjects. I don't mean that I think whenever I write about myself that I'm being bold and opening doors, but I do think that it's still a worthwhile thing to do.
Anyway, I was thinking about temptation. I tend to be fairly cautious, and so with me temptation often takes the form of "everyone else has done it, why shouldn't you?" My cautiousness usually wins out, and while I've done some things that I've regretted, I've been lucky and blessed enough not do have done anything "permanent." I've never done drugs. I've gotten drunk, but never passed out or forgotten what I've done. I've never had sex; heck, I've never even kissed a girl! I don't have a criminal record, nor have I done anything where I ought to have one. So that's good.
However, some of those things only happened because of things outside of my control. The clearest example was in my Freshman year of college, when I was feeling really down at one point. I'd gone over to a party, and had made up my mind that, contrary to my decision not to drink until I was legal, I was going to have something that night. One friend opened up the fridge and asked me if I wanted some alcohol. Just as I was about to say "yes," another friend staggered over drunkenly and said "you know he doesn't drink!" That gave me just enough pause to decide against it.
Part of being tempted is when I realize all the things that I could've done. I could easily have gotten drunk as soon as I came to college. In England, it would've been incredibly easy to get marijuana; I seemed to be the only one in my house who wasn't smoking up daily. I've actually been propositioned before. There are plenty of times where I could've gotten away with minor or even not-so-minor crimes because there were no authorities present. I'm not bragging and saying how great I am not to have done these things. My point is that when I'm tempted, it's these things which come to mind. "Do you remember so-and-so? Man, you could've scored with her if you'd tried! I sure hope this Christianity thing is worth it, because you'll seriously have gotten screwed over if you're wrong about it..."
Personally, I think God has protected me from these things because He has a purpose for me. Not necessarily some purpose like becoming the catalyst for a mass revival or finding a cure for cancer, but perhaps just something like being a good husband, father, and man. To take the example of kissing, I think it's a pretty nifty gift that I'll be able to give my future wife (as always, assuming that's the road God wants me to travel) that she'll be the first and only girl I've ever kissed.
Part of it is realizing that I can't work on my own schedule or rely on my own skills and talents. God has to be there. Just because I may have found the perfect girl doesn't mean that now is the proper time. Likewise, I'm pretty sure that I should be a teacher, at least for a few years, but I need to make sure that the place I go and the way I teach are in accordance with God's will. It's very tempting for me, as one who often struggles with patience, to rush in, grab the full value of everything that I can based on whatever my looks, education, or anything else of mine can get me. Could I get a relatively decent job, a wife, and a nice enough house right now and without God? Probably. But with God, we get what He gives and not what we've earned, and that's the thing. What He gives is worth far more and lasts so much longer. He's the one who knows what's really best for me, and by trusting in Him to provide for me, my needs are met far better than if I just look at myself and get what I think I need.
Sunday, June 13, 2004
I really dislike having to criticize things in Christianity, but I think some things need to be said.
Maybe because I'm fairly Catholic (once more, Catholicism isn't limited to the Roman Communion) in my theology and Mainline in my upbringing, I'm not really very comfortable in Evangelical megachurches. The music is usually trite, the service is very formulaic (have you ever had a college-oriented preacher who wasn't semi-weepy and who seemed almost apologetic that he sharing what he called the Good News?). There may or not be a collection, but there will almost certainly be attempts to get you to attend events, generally with names like "MISSION: INCONTROVERTIBLE," "THE FELLOWSHIP," or something Greek. The number of songs shall be no less than three, and they shall take no less than twenty minutes to perform. Songs with only one verse and a chorus may extend for over ten minutes. There will be PowerPoint, and there will be much attempted hip-ness.
The problem isn't that they're lacking zeal or belief. It's that they're simply not getting the job done. There's too much evangelism. When all, or nearly all, of the people are already believers, you need something else. It's like taking your grade-school children to a restaurant and giving them each a bottle of Similac. They're being seeker-friendly at the cost of feeding the sheep they already have. And, to be honest, few seekers I've met are really interested in a church that has a rock-climbing wall. I can see having a cafeteria, a preschool, or even a parking deck. When you've got your own IT staff, though, I think that a line, somewhere, has been crossed.
Part of what I dislike is the attitude of "look what X has done/is doing! Let's all chip in for their new CD/mission trip/whatever!" If the album is good, it doesn't need to be advertised as a tool for evangelism (Hallelujah! We finally have some Christian music, after all these centuries!). With mission trips, I almost want to ask why they're going. Is it because they've had a certain place/group on their mind for a long time, and are finally hoping to be able to minister to them, or is it because they've never been to Costa Rica/Malaysia/Hungary/Kenya before and think it would be cool? Again, it's not that I doubt the devotion, but rather the wisdom of it all.
Put simply, one problem the Evangelical movement faces is that it's turned inward for so long that it's not very well connected to the rest of the culture. Attempts at evangelism come across as heavy-handed, and so they're left to preach their message to the converted, who've already heard and accepted it and now need something more. Evangelicalism can provide that, but not if it doesn't realize it.
Saturday, June 12, 2004
This, from my sister Ch-
"I can picture in my mind a world without war, and a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
I have clever siblings.
UPDATE: It's actually a Jack Handy-ism, from SNL. Still, full marks for Ch- for liking it.
Friday, June 11, 2004
I find myself strangely unmoved by this.
I hit the big 22 today. As my sister A- said to me, "now you're old enough to drink!"
Wednesday, June 09, 2004
Maybe because i's obscenely early righ now, but I jus had a mischievous idea. Given he sensiviy of some on the Lef, wha do you hink would happen if we were to begin spreading a rumor saying he leer "" was actually a represenaion of he cross? Can you imagine he resul? Would hey design a replacemen? Would hey assign some devian meaning? Wha do you hink?
Monday, June 07, 2004
As often as we hear Canadians complain about the US, they don't seem to realize their PR problem South of the Border. There are an awful lot of people out there who are happy that Tampa Bay won the Stanley Cup tonight, simply because they're not Canadian. I watched the game, but probably wouldn't have if both teams had been from either Canada or America. Just as there are some countries whom I'm always glad to see win (except against us), such as Australia and Poland, there is an increasing number of countries for whom I simply have disdain. It's nothing against individual Canadians, but the way their government has acted towards us lately is, in my opinion, shameful, and so I'd prefer that things like sports victories don't go to countries who've slighted us. Again, it's a PR problem, and one that's not going to be fixed by trying to blame Americans.
Incidentally, my order of team preference goes something like this:
1. Teams with which I'm affiliated (Virginia Tech, USA)
2. Teams where parents are alumni (Richmond, VMI, William & Mary)
3. DC area teams (Redskins, Capitals, Wizards, United, Senators)
4. Teams with some remarkable miracle story
6. Teams from the South/international allies
After that, it basically gets down to things like "Rivaldo so faked that injury. I hope Brazil loses this game." and "You know what? I just don't like Montreal/LSU/Portugal all that much."
Of course, rivals (UVA, Dallas, Canada) should usually be rooted against, but exceptions can be made. For instance, France and WVU should always lose. Not enough sports have the potential for scoreless ties. I have a feeling that any girls reading this are rolling their eyes, while most guys are probably thinking to themselves something like "hmm...put local teams behind underdogs, and that's about where I stand, too."
Saturday, June 05, 2004
I went bowling this evening with my parents at Ft. Belvoir, where it was Cosmic Bowling. Now, I'm not all that great, and I tend to bowl somewhere around 110 per game. I think my high score is about 150. Anyway, we had a problem. The lane was pretty okay, though my mom and I both think there was a very slight trench in the middle near the end. The problem was the music. If I'm bowling, I'd like either soft/nonexistent music or loud, hard stuff that gets your adrenaline flowing. What they had was the worst of both worlds: loud music that was, well, not good (the lights were also pretty half-hearted, though I know they've got the ability to go all-out). There was something of a mix of disco and Latin music going on. Gack. Even my parents were a little miffed. Now, there were some little kids there, and so I could see refraining from songs like "Dragula" and "Smack My ***** Up," but the most exciting songs they played were "Macarena" and "Superfreak." Oh, they did play "Who Let the Dogs Out?" at the very end, but by then it was far too late. We left fairly early; perhaps "Bad Touch" made an appearance later. Anyway, my scores were 119, 86, 138, and 100. Not terrible, but I have a tendency to synchronize my steps somewhat with the music (my friends joke that I step off, just like in marching band), and it just wasn't happening. Oh well.
Incidentally, curves are for guys who can't throw straight. I just thought that Drau and K+ should know that.
How come Fox News hardly has anything about girls? I mean, come on!
Unless the theologically conservative Episcopalian parishes break ties with the Episcopal Church, USA, as of September 1st I will no longer consider myself an Episcopalian. They'll have had over a year, and will still be exactly where they were before. If they're serious, they'll leave. If not, then I don't want anything to do with a church that isn't serious. To The Falls Church, Truro, Church of the Good Shepherd (Rosemont), Church of the Good Samaritan (Paoli), +Duncan, +Iker, and all others who lay claim to orthodoxy, I say Leave now! Shake the dust from your feet and leave this inhospitable place! Do not stay and be counted among the heretics by the world.
Friday, June 04, 2004
But I think I've offered enough defense of Roman Catholicism in the past to be able to offer criticism without being deemed some unhinged Fundamentalist. The Bystander is right. He may be a very holy man, but the Pope is also a hypocrite. I obviously don't believe that the head of the Roman church is capable of speaking infallibly, and so I have no trouble believing that he can act fallibly as well.
It is not right that a man who knew and tolerated such widespread abuse over so many decades should lecture Americans over an isolated incident. Roman Catholicism owes the United States of America an apology. Bush should keep the Medal of Freedom for someone more worthy. And Bishop Wojtyla should keep his mouth shut unless he's willing to say Hail Marys and Our Fathers for the next few centuries. To Roman Catholics, I say that I regret that you have such a man as your leader. I had really thought him better than this.
I need a longer attention span. Either that, or I need to blog more often. I keep wondering about things, thinking long and hard about them, and then resolving them with a simple solution. That doesn't make for great reading.
One thing I'd been thinking about before was the subject of girls. The solution I came up with was that when I'm ready, things will start falling into place. If I force the issue before I've made sure I'm right with the Lord and that dating isn't just an idol I'm placing before God, then only harm will come of it, and I could very well alienate good friends. While I do know that I tend to be very oblivious, and probably wouldn't really know if I was being hit upon even if some girl started rubbing against me, that may be a bit of a blessing. Again, I figure that once I've made sure that my heart, mind, body, and spirit are dedicated to God, then things will work out the way He wants.
I was also thinking about race and the ghetto. Having volunteered in Chester, PA, I've seen some (not much) of the environment. I've also started reading "Code of the Street" by Elijah Anderson, which has been enlightening.
And, I was watching a rerun of ER this morning, and race was an issue constantly cropping up. At the end, one of the black nurses or receptionists (I don't watch enough to have that sorted out yet) was asked by a white doctor if she thought he had been racist in treating a badly wounded white gunshot victim first over a less-badly-wounded black gunshot victim (who later died). She told him that some white people don't see race in anything, but that black people see it in everything. I don't know how far that goes, but I've seen that statement ring true before. I have a very low tolerance for things that sound like political correctness or people making victims out of themselves, but when my friend BH, who is black, mentioned how one problem of the inner city was "institutional racism," it made me consider if there weren't more to this than just unfounded complaints. I think, in a way, it reminds me of the boy who called wolf. Imagine you're with a group of eighty people, and you suddenly have ten people run in and say that a wolf is terrorizing their flock. What would your immediate response be? Whatever this says about me, I think my first thought would be "There can't possibly be ten wolves terrorizing these flocks at the same time. Heck, I'd be surprised if there were ten wolves even in the area." My hunch is that a lot of white people think the same way. Now, it could be that there actually are ten wolves. It could also be that it's one wolf that's attacking all the flocks. And, it's possible that some of the people are either lying or overreacting ("That bush moved! There must be a wolf there waiting!"). I really don't know which is the case, which is why I'm trying to learn more.
At the Navigators Mid-Atlantic Spring Conference this Spring, the main thing that I remember (besides finger puppets and the Quiet Time story) was the speaker's point that some things only have to be given up once, while for other things we may have to pray to God for help every single day for the rest of our lives. I don't know a lot about them, but from my reading of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, I do believe in the idea of guardian angels, and that the whole hosts of Heaven and Hell are watching us to see what we do. So, one thing I've found effective is to ask God to send one of His angels to watch over you. However it works, temptations seem to be a lot weaker when I've done this. I don't pretend to actually understand how this works; all I can think is that the angel is wrestling with whatever demons may seek to harm me instead of me having to do it myself. I could, of course, be way off with this thought, but it seems to make sense right now.
I've also been reminded that deciding to walk with God is often like wading out into a strong current. If you try to stand still or don't move fast enough, you're going to get swept back. While you're on the shore, it's pretty peaceful, but you're not actually going anywhere. I'd noticed before that whenever I make a decision to do something that I know will be very hard for me, temptations to do what I'm trying to reject come flying fast and hard. Even, things that never would've been opportunities before "magically" open up. Satan knows when we're stepping out, and hates it. So, I think that these new temptations are a good sign that I'm heading on the right path and that Satan knows it, and hates it.
Wednesday, June 02, 2004
Go here, click on the link for "Animusic," and save the file. Enjoy!