Collateral Bloggage

One of the hilarious thing about traveling to Asia (and Japan in particular) is the enjoyment of the many poor English translations on display.  And it’s not just in places you’d expect, like maps and menus.  It’s also on shirts and mugs and various other products.

For examples of the hilarity, I give you Engrish.com

Nice, eh?  Wouldn’t want the other person’s feelings to be bad.  How about a menu?

I have no idea what “Piling match of cheese” is, but I’m quite sure I don’t want the French flies.  When we were in Japan, we encountered “Scent of garlic extinction” on a menu.  Decided not to order it.

And then there’s just the confusing…

Men’s Retreat?

Not to harp on the Japanese (actually not all these are from Japan) too much, because I’ve always wondered if about half the kanji tattoos you see on shoulders actually say, “I’m a smelly barbarian.”

Anyhow, hopefully I’ve caused you to lose some time browsing the hilarity.  It’s my gift to you.

WARNING: Restroom Fixation Disorder symptoms forthcoming.

I’ve known for some time that I’m blessed with a less demanding bladder than many of my peers.  I’ve left exactly one movie for a trip to the bathroom (and it was The World is Not Enough, which didn’t require much attention) in my adult life.  I use the restroom during plane travel just to break up the monotony.  At work, I pretty much go when the restroom intersects a path I was already taking.

I generally characterize myself as having a “Five-hour bladder,” but I’ve never actually studied it.  Should I decide to, I know what I’ll call my data-collection: a Jourinal.  When I came up with that name, I actually LOLed, so I just had to blog it.

————————

Ethan and I went to see Star Wars: Clone Wars with our neighbors, and it was a lot of fun.  It’s not exactly The Shawshank Redemption, of course, but it was still cool to see with my son.

Really it wasn’t even a movie, but more like an extended pilot.  By that measure, it succeeded really well.  It also maintained much of the typical Star Wars feel.  You know, cool fight scenes, bad dialogue…

The really cool thing about this series (and the former one), is that animation allows the Jedi to really be shown as superhuman.  The movies did a decent job of showing glimpses of their skills and powers, but I’m excited to see what they do in an all-CG universe.

————————

Somehow, with my torrid reading practices, I’ve only managed to finish one book in August.  Since July, I’ve started to read eight different books.  I suppose it’s natural that I’d only finish one of them by now (I finished five others during the month of July).  The library just keeps sending me new books before I can finish the old ones.  My policy is, when I get a new book, I read the first chapter or so to see if it’s more interesting than one I’m currently reading.  It usually is.  Hence, I start reading the new one until I get a newer one.  I’ll need to double-back to catch up on some of my partial reads, and I’ll have to cut the cord on a couple of them.

The “newer” book I just finished is Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution.  I know.  I’m going to hell just for reading such a book.  But I like to keep an open mind on such things and read all around the issues.  I’ve read several Young Earth Creationist books, and a couple Old Earth Creationist books, and now I’m reading some Evolutionist books.  This wasn’t a very good one.

Actually, as a concise history of the Creation/Evolution debate, it was really good.  Very readable and well balanced.  But it failed to deliver on the promise of the title.  In the introduction to the book, the author mentioned that he’d had to reinterpret the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve, and Original Sin.  He then failed to elaborate on his reinterpretations.  He never got back to it.

Basically, the book was about how wrong-headed the Creation/Evolution debate has gotten.  Granted.  But I was really hoping he’d actually discuss the theological implications of his belief in evolution.  The closest he came to it was this paragraph in his concluding chapter, titled “Pilgrim’s Progress”:

God’s creative activity must not be confined to a six-day period “in the beginning” or the occasional intervention along the evolutionary path.  God’s role in creation must be more individual - so universal that it cannot be circumscribed by the contours of individual phenomena or events.  We must resist the temptation to make God into a “superengineer” or “master craftsman” or “grand artist.”  God may indeed have all these attributes, but we ought not to suppose that any of them capture more than the tiniest intuition about God’s role in creation.  It seems to me a more hopeful perspective to step back as far as we can and examine the biggest possible picture in the hopes of getting a glimpse of what it means to say that God created the world.

Nice thoughts, but it still doesn’t really help in anything but the most broad theological terms.

————————

That’ll do for today.

Chinese Life Expectancy Increased by 25%

BEIJING, CHINA - The World Health Organization (WHO) has upgraded the life expectancy of the Chinese from 72.9 to 97.2 years.  This comes in response to the apparent lack of a normal rate of aging, particularly in the Chinese Ladies’ Gymnastics team.

“The rationale here is simple,” said C. Redulous, a representative of the WHO, “we’ve got a bunch of fifteen-year-olds on the Gymnastic squad who look like ten- or twelve-year-olds.  What conclusion can be drawn, other than that the Chinese are now aging at a slower rate than the rest of us?”

There has been considerable controversy over the apparently underage athletes at the Beijing Games.  But the case has been closed and all the athletes’ ages verified through a rigorous course of asking the Chinese Olympic Committee to be “really, really serious and honest and stuff” with the world.  Thus assured, the only conclusion is that the Chinese are simply not aging as quickly as the rest of the world.

It has been estimated that the Chinese are aging at a rate 25% slower than the rest of the world.  Thus, the 25% increase in life expectancy.  It has been noted, however, that the increase in life expectancy may only apply to females, since the male athletes appear to be aging at normal rates.

In other news, several top American actresses have announced plans to move to China.

Source: O. Handwasher

Sunday, Barb Feil taught from 2 Corinthians, and she showed us one of the more enigmatic passages from Paul’s writings.

Barb didn’t dwell on the “Third Heaven.” In fact, she specifically told us she wouldn’t go into it. So, I’ve taken it upon myself to provide some input on it. I don’t have any particular authority here; I’ll just share what I’ve come to understand about it. It’s not much.

First, I have to say I’m a bit perturbed that Paul would even bring this up. It’s like someone saying to a single person who desperately wants to find a mate, “I found the perfect person for you!” and then walking away and never elaborating. Don’t you want to know what Paul saw and heard? I feel the same way when John experiences the Seven Thunders in Revelation 10, but is told not to write about what he learned.

Anyhow, Paul obviously expected his readers to understand what he was talking about, and since there’s no apparent mention of Three Heavens elsewhere in Scripture (although the Rabbis found no shortage of different Heavens, as I’ll mention later), I figure it’s a Greek concept, or at least something that was generally accepted in the time and culture.

First, let’s examine a nice clue we have in the passage itself. Paul uses very similar phrasing in verses 2 and 4, speaking of a man who was “caught up” into “the third heaven” and “paradise,” respectively. Given the tendency in Hebrew writing to use parallelism, isn’t it likely the two phrases are just different ways of saying the same thing? That’s what I’m inclined to believe. NETBible seems to agree, given their footnote:

The reference here in 2 Cor 12:4 is probably to be translated as parallel to the mention of the “third heaven” in v. 2.

The footnote goes on to show the punchline of what all this about multiple heavens is about:

Assuming that the “first heaven” would be atmospheric heaven (the sky) and “second heaven” the more distant stars and planets, “third heaven” would refer to the place where God dwells.

This is what I’ve read and heard, and it makes sense to me. Interestingly, as I mentioned before, the Rabbis seemed to feel the need to define a different “heaven” every time it seemed like one was implied. To that end, they distilled this list (stopping at seven probably less because they ran out of need for definitions, but more because seven is just a really cool number </cynicism>):

Vilon - the dark, night sky (removed at daybreak like a curtain)
Rakia - where the sun, moon, and stars are set
Shechakim - the source of manna (seriously)
Zebul - where the Heavenly Jerusalem sits
Maon - the angels sing from here in the night (but are silent during the day to give us a chance to sing)
Machon - the storehouse of snow, hail, and harmful weather
Araboth - the conventional conception of heaven (God, angels, the righteous dead)

BTW, I got this information from a terrific book, Everyman’s Talmud: The Major Teachings of the Rabbinic Sages by Abraham Cohen. If you’ve ever been curious about what the Talmud is or what it contains, but don’t really think you’re interested in reading tens of thousands of pages, this book is a terrific resource. It distills the essential teachings down into a fairly readable format. I say fairly because it’s not exactly popcorn. I’ve been working my way through the 350+ pages for the past two years.

One last note.  In the same passage (but further down), Paul speaks of his “thorn.”  As Barb also noted, there’s a lot of speculation about what exactly the thorn was.  I’ve read and heard some interesting theories, and I think maybe next week I’ll bust them out and write about the one I think is correct.  It’s always nice to have a topic lined up a week early…

This week, I’m putting in a recommendation - guarded tho it be - for JibJab.com.  Particularly during election years, they produce some really funny stuff.  Back in ‘04, they had the hilarious if off-color “This Land.”  This time around, it’s “Time for Some Campaignin’.”  There are a few words I wouldn’t use, but nothing you wouldn’t find in Primetime.  Take that advisory for what it is.

I’ve previously posted about Jossy Farms and their terrific U-Pick Peaches operation.  Well, the Red Havens are in!!!  I’m going to relieve them of a few at lunch today.

I had to do this as an addendum, because the permalink for my Monday Morning Musings was already hilariously long:

http://seth.heasley.net/blog/2008/08/tv/mmm-food-detectives-patriots-techno-olympic-memory-got-a-horn-stinkumference/

I was afraid I’d break the internet if I added anything else to it.

I really, really wanted to like Food Detectives.  I figured it’d be a nice combination of two of my favorite shows, Good Eats and Mythbusters.  Alas, it just doesn’t make it for me.

The problem?  The host. I expected Ted Allen to be a much more natural host (I like it when he’s a judge on Iron Chef America), but he was just awkward and stiff, and looked as if he wasn’t sure if the camera was rolling.  Did you ever have a substitute in like sixth grade who obviously was used to teaching Kindergarten?  That’s kind of the way Ted seemed.

With Mythbusters, you’ve got a voiceover narrator who carries much of the, well, narrative load.  The actual Mythbusters don’t even really interact with the camera much.  They’re mostly there to interact with each other, and the camera just happens to be rolling.  It’s quite informal.

On the other hand, on Good Eats, Alton brown does the narration and the hosting, but he pulls it off with a quirky, geeky and-yet-somehow-cool flair.

Oh well.  It’s not like I needed to add another Food Network show to my list.

———————-

Ethan and I attended the last couple of hours of the Oregon Air Show yesterday.  I principally wanted to attend in order to see a new air-demonstration team.  Growing up near an Air Force Base (Elmendorf), I’ve seen the Blue Angels several times (I remember when they flew A-4s), the Thunderbirds, and even the Snow Birds (Canadian team).  So I was delighted to break in a new team.

This time, it was a civilian team, the U.S. Patriots.  They did not disappoint.  Although it’s a civilian team, that just means that the pilots are not currently active members of the military.  But the makeup of the team is still top-notch, with one of the pilots being a former member of the U.S. Air Force Thunderbirds.

The aircraft they fly, the L-39, is not as high-performing as the Thunderbirds’ F-16 or the Blue Angels’ F-18, but there was a nice side-effect of this:  They aren’t quite so loud.

We still got a nice mix of group maneuvers and close fly-bys.  Very good show.

———————-

Yesterday, during the 9am service at which I sang, most of the musicians were in the greenroom.  There, we were treated to a delightful example of videos which may come under subpoena during the inevitable trial, The United States v. White Men With Video Cameras.  I speak of Tyler’s Techno dancing video.  I particularly like the part where Tyler collapses to the couch, then starts doing an arm-only dance, then pops back up with an unexpected burst of energy.

I toyed with the idea of posting this for Too Funny Tuesday, but couldn’t wait.

(video embedded)

———————-

I’ve got a great memory.  It’s a gift and, sometimes, a curse.  Like when I read the “quotes” page on IMDB and think, “Those quotes are wrong.”  My son seems to be blessed with the same affliction.  It’s not just movie quotes.   I also remember basically everything I learned in Survey of Art and Concepts of Lifetime Fitness, in spite of my desire to lose some of those memories.  I found out on Friday that I also have a pretty good Olympic Memory.  As the torch relay was concluding, I mused (aloud) to The Fair Elaine (paraphrased), “I wonder if that gymnast from the L.A. Games will get in here.  What was his name?  Li Ning, right?”  Ding!  I have no idea where I pulled the name out of, but five seconds later they handed the torch off to him, and he proceeded to go all Neo on the Bird’s Nest.  That was cool.

———————-

This morning, on my way to work, I approached the traffic light at 10th and Oak.  A green light.  Were cars moving?  Not the left lane.  The right lane was attempting to move, but the truck over there came to a screeching halt, too.  Ambulance?  Police?  Family of geese?  Nope.

It was a moron.  Specifically, a teenaged girl, strolling across the street against the light.  Nice.  Well, I hope she learned her lesson from all those big, nasty cars sitting there, watching her illegally and dangerously crossing the road.  Um, folks in those cars, got a horn? Seriously, this is exactly the kind of situation in which some actual teaching should be going on.  And by teaching, I mean thoughts along this line: “Sorry about blowing your eardrums out, but you could be getting killed right now, so I think you’ll understand and maybe not do this kind of stupid stuff again, like ever.”

Problem is, people are afraid to use the horn.  We don’t want to be thought of as (gasp) aggressive drivers!!!  (visualize - with your ears - a blood-curdling scream).  So, the road is ruled by idiots who either drive dangerously or like 110-year-old women (BTW, I’m criticizing those who drive like old ladies, not the ladies themselves).  I’m not sure what the solution is here.  There’s no acceptable way for people who actually want, you know, to do 45 (or even 48) in a 45-zone, to communicate to the lady doing her makeup while driving 32-ish that we’d really like to go just a bit faster.  Can’t tailgate (not that it stops me), can’t flash our lights (see previous), because that’d be like mean and stuff.

One day I’m going to write a lengthy, 200-word essay titled “In Defense of Tailgating.”  It’ll be my magnum opus.

———————-

Last minute addition…a new word for the Heasley lexicon.

stinkumference - the radial expression of body odor centered around a smelly person.  Decreases with increased distance.  Alternately, a measure of a person’s level of B.O.  (Example: “Wow, Tim has a serious stinkumference going today.”)

I’ve been thinking about coming up with a word for this for some time.  This morning, on my way back to my cubicle from the lab, I ventured dangerously close to the event horizon of such a phenomenon.  Dude…

Scrabble Club President Facing Impeachment For Playing ‘Irregardless’

NERDY, US - The President of the local Scrabble Club is being impeached after allegedly playing the word ‘irregardless’ in a recent pickup game.  As many are aware, the word does appear in many dictionaries, but the definition is simply ‘regardless,’ rendering the word redundant (and, some say, pernicious).

Will Beecha, president of the Club since late 2006, seemed shocked, saying, “I don’t know what I was thinking.  I mean, somebody played ‘regard’ early on, and then ‘less’ got added to it.  I was down to having just an ‘i’ and an ‘r’ in my rack, and I just choked by playing that word.  It’s not in the official dictionary, and probably shouldn’t be in any dictionary.  Is this something worthy of impeachment?  I mean, supposably there’s a precedent for it, but can’t I get a little leniency?”

This comment sparked yet another scandal due to Beecha’s use of the non-word “supposably” (properly “supposedly”).

Faced with the additional scandal, Mr. Beecha was apologetic and talked of resigning before the impeachment could take place.

“You know, when you run on a platform of Grammar Snobbery, and you barely make the grade as a Word Nerd, well, you just have to take the consequences.  I think we did a lot of good, though.  I just hope you all can leave me alone and let me deal with this privately.  This is really between me, my family, and our God.  Oh, and by God, I mean William Safire.”

Source: O. Handwasher

As I mentioned in my Monday Morning Musings this week, I’ve long suspected that exclaiming “Oh, my God!” does not constitute a violation of the 3rd Commandment, which states (in the NASB):

You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

If not for the corpus of built-up interpretation that equates “OMG” with “taking the name in vain,” how might we view this?  By the way, check out the Message on this:

No using the name of GOD, your God, in curses or silly banter; GOD won’t put up with the irreverent use of his name.

Is this rendering even close to the real meaning?  I don’t really think so (not that I’m surprised…it is The Message, after all).  But, I didn’t want to be hasty, so I looked up the word translated “take” in Strong’s (courtesy NETBible).  Here’s what I got:

1) to lift, bear up, carry, take
1a1) to lift, lift up
1a2) to bear, carry, support, sustain, endure

So, take is in there. But in the context of the other definitions, it seems to mean more “take up” than “use.” So what’s it mean? Dennis Prager, a radio talk show host who also teaches Old Testament, has said on many occasions that it means, “committing evil while acting religious.”

Which justifies the thought I had back in the 80s, when David Duke (former-KKK-white-supremecist-pond-scum, the last adjective of which is totally redundant) said on national television, “I claim Jesus Christ as my personal savior,” that he was taking the name of Christ in vain.  Likewise for any who do evil in Christ’s name (Fred “God hates fags” Phelps, you there?) or in God’s name (Al Quaeda?).

All that to say that I don’t believe “misusing” God’s name is a specific violation of the 3rd Commandment.  But is it okay?  I personally flinch whenever I hear anything approaching “OMG,” which includes “Gosh”.  I once heard Ethan’s Sunday School teacher use it while doing the Bible Story of the day.  I wanted to throw something at her.  I don’t want my son using such language.  Am I overreacting?

And yet, you’ll catch me saying “Geez!”  What?  How about, “Oh, my word!” or “My goodness!”?  Aren’t they all derivatives?  How about “Crikey!” and “Cripes!” and “For Pete’s Sake!”?  How far do I take this?

Here’s another angle.  How about if you put your husband/wife into the position of God in the statement.  What would people think if you said, “Oh my wife, it’s hot out here?”  Isn’t it a bit silly?  Does using her in that kind of speech lift her up or cheapen her?  Not sure you could argue the former.

What about darn, dang, and drat?  Why not just go with damn?  Aren’t they the same?  While researching the various varieties of variations, I discovered the term “minced oaths” from Wikipedia, the locus of all knowledge we take other people’s word for (BTW, that link contains some naughty language).

I guess, for me, even though I don’t think many of these are specifically forbidden for Christian folks to do, they’re not a good thing.  Any of them.  Specifically, the uses of “OMG” and it’s forms.  They’ve been so long associated with “taking the name in vain” - even in popular (secular) culture - that they now rise to that level.  As Christians, we should try to move as far from that as possible.  As for some of the minced oaths, I can see it two ways.  To be completely consistent, we’d have to nix all of them.  On the other hand, it shows a certain innocence to stay away from the more crass terms and use something “nicer” (even if it really isn’t nicer).  That alone could be the thing someone notices, which causes them to ask you what makes you different.

I’m curious about others’ opinions on this.  If you use OMG (or OMGosh), is it just habit?  Do you think it’s good/bad/indifferent?  Now you have a topic.  Discuss…

If you’ve done basically any word-processing, you’ll probably get a kick out of this.  It’s “The Font Conference,” from College Humor.