Happy New Year. Gold and Oil have moved in tandem to set new records in a convergent trend showing the instability of the Middle East -- and around the globe -- continues in the forefront of investor awareness. This has not changed.
In the meantime, the major indices in the U.S. Stock market show that we are taking a beating today. The DJIA is down over 200 points, and the Nasdaq off 40, while the S & P shows a loss of some 15 points.
Here is what the Associated Press has to say about the matter in print:
"NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices soared to $100 a barrel Wednesday for the first time ever, reaching that milestone amid an unshakeable view that global demand for oil and petroleum products will continue to outstrip supplies.
Surging economies in China and India fed by oil and gasoline have sent prices soaring over the past year, while tensions in oil producing nations like Nigeria and Iran have increasingly made investors nervous and invited speculators to drive prices even higher.
Violence in Nigeria helped give crude the final push over $100. Bands of armed men invaded Port Harcourt, the center of Nigeria's oil industry Tuesday, attacking two police stations and raiding the lobby of a major hotel."
You can read the full article here: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080102/oil_prices.html
Now you know I don't want to say I told you so, however, since I did .......
Gold just hit a new all time high, reaching over $855 just as Oil transcends the century mark. This is not accidental, but shows the skiddishness of investors who are running to more secure assets, and U.S. securities tumble. What does this mean? It means that the people who are selling their stocks are the ones buying oil and gold.
This is why the two more secure assets move in tandem and move opposite the U.S. exchanges.
Here is the article caption of choice on the gold rally:
"Gold price breaks 28-year record to hit new peak"
"Unrest in Pakistan, a faltering dollar and surging oil futures sent the price of gold soaring to a record high on Wednesday, beating its previous highest level set 28 years ago. The precious metal rose to 859.20 US dollars an ounce, smashing its peak of 850 US dollars reached on January 21, 1980. It later slipped back to 857.75 US dollars on profit-taking."
Read Full Article? http://news.smh.com.au/gold-price-breaks-28year-record-to-hit-new-peak/20080103-1jxx.html
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Does Your Education Fly?: A Personal Commentary On Education, Tubees and Ming
Most forms of math beyond the training of, say, the 8th grade (beyond pre-algebra) are perfectly useless to the vast majority of people; yet, the public education system inists on training people well in what they will never use, and when they could be spending their education dollars -- YOUR Dollars -- on something they might actually use later.
This excludes scientists and logicians, of course. But the average grocery shopper, once having mastered the infamous "word problem," can manage to balance the checkbook just fine -- if, that is, Americans were actually to do that. For the most part, they only save about 5% of their total income. It used to be 20%. We are going further into debt, and have (on balance) no savings at all in many cases -- even though the bank account says otherwise. This happens when your liabilities outweigh your total asset value.
401k's can -- we learned in 2000 -- easily compress into 201k's almost overnight -- okay, over year.
Bottom line: The excessive induction of students into the world of math like imaginary numbers does nothing to foster real education. It wastes time and money. Even if I believed in public education (an oxymoron for the most part) I would want the money spent better. Even medical doctors use very little math beyond passing their exams in med school. They just throw it at the labs, and let them figure out the math.
Little math is required to obey a "Speed limit 55" sign -- and Americans who can do math quite well pay no attention anyway. Let's be honest. If you drive, you know this. The New driving math is that "55 - police officer present + board meeting imminent = 75."
And that's on a slow day. In truth, the size of your car and gas prices figure into the equation, so that it's a little more -- but only a little -- more complicated than this. High school students taking calculus should be viewed as obviously excessive. Leibniz even had great trouble with calculus, which first recieved its formal (contemporary) shape at the hands of Sir Isaac Newton. See how fun the history of the sciences is already?
My argument is that math should be optional -- strictly taken as an elective -- by the choice of students after they have passed pre-algebra (which isn't necessary for most of them anyway either). Maybe after fractions and decimals, we should permit elective status to all math courses.
Students who enjoy it can continue; those who hate it can take more history instead, or skilled reading and writing courses. I have yet to meet a student who knows "too much history," while many suffer basic deficiencies in this area. If you still have to "explain" who Aristotle was to an eighth grader, someone has had way too much math when she should have been studying history.
Most adults probably cannot name one of the Holy Roman Emperors -- who influenced history at least as much as Christopher Columbus in many cases. Such men ruled over (by influence if not direct governance) all of Europe -- the world leader for the centuries covering the modern world. Here, "all" means simply the greater part.
In any case, the industrial revolution, Mercantile Capitalism, and many other aspect of western history having an extraordinary impact on our day-to-day lives receive cursory attention, while imaginary numbers (a phony math if ever there was one) -- what is the square root of a negative number anyway [this question amounts to a confusion of proper functions on my view, not a new math] -- recieve about as much attention as legal history of the U.S.
Brown v. board of Education and a few other high profile cases like the "Scopes Monkey Trial" make it into the history texts. These simply pepper the texts to help explain the cultural milieu -- if I can be so bold as to wax French -- of the time period under consideration, and nothing more. They are decorative, not investigative.
In any case, you get the point: less obscure and useless math training, and more history, especially history of technology (because it is anything but useless) and the sciences, legal history, and the history of the important ideas which shaped the Western World we live in, should occupy the space of high school texts.
Their reform is long overdue, and the pie-in-the-sky "let's have every kid be a scientist" Enlightenment view has got to go. Some will be, and most will not. Some will be lawyers, and some will not. The overemphasis upon the sciences is what lopsides public education in favor of specialized forms of math.
The operating assumption behind this -- scientific realism -- has long been falsified by the history and logic of the sciences themselves. We need to quit pretending. If students prefer music and the arts, they should be allowed to substitute courses in the history of art and music -- including listening to classical pieces or viewing many of the best paintings (classically understood -- someone has to set the standards), they should be permitted to follow their own skills, talents and interests.
No student should be allowed to escape high school without the practical knowledge of the local legal system, and how to get things done via legal means. For one, this would reduce the number of violent interactions from people who know no other way to accomplish the more unpleasant side of human interactions.
Litigation is not pretty, but neither is surgery. All students should know the PRACTICAL rudiments of: 1. The stock market (investing options) 2. wallet management 3. Ordering your life efficiently (time and resource management) 3. Basic math 4. Basic history of technology 5. at least one practical skill (auto-shop or electronics repair courses are examples). 6. CPR and what to do in various emergencies 7. Self-defense (crime rates are simply too high to ignore this) 7. Basic legal options (how to start your own business, prepare a will, and the like).
If this is starting to look like the "for Dummies" book series, that's only because "high school" ignores almost all this -- real world preparation courses -- instead living in an "enlightenment bubble" about 200 years out of date. This leaves high school students almost totally unprepared for the real world they will encounter when high school ends. Then what?
Then some go on to college and pick up some of these skills, others they learn on their own. By the time they finish college, they have the skills they could and should have had around 10th grade, and more knowledge in many areas than they'll ever use.
Some of the other popular myths common today are: 1. Older people know what they want from life [They just give up and settle for what seems "reasonable" given the ugly circumstances] 2. Most people are doing it right by the time they get older (most in America retire in relative poverty - about 96%) 3. The way the system is cannot be changed so you should just learn to get along with it and not try to change it (This is not stated but always assumed in your education). This is simply false, and more obviously so all the time. 5. History is relatively unimportant since it just deals with the past (old stuff). The truth is that no one area can better insulate one against lies and pop fads, and all manner of ideological mischief, except studying the Bible itself. This is because in history we see the way God orders life (providentially), and how nations rise and fall in direct relationship to how they handle -- accept or reject and in which ways -- God's law.
6. Logic classes are only for more advanced students, and should be left to colleges. [No, actually logic is inescapable and people argue from the time their are young. We are all doing logic LONG before college, we just need help doing it well, rather than poorly. Teenagers love to argue, and parents should take full advantage of this feature to teach them to practice well what they already enjoy. If you wait until college, chances are good they already believe so much nonsense, your job will have become unmanageable. Logic should replace math, with history, after 8th grade for most students. No one has ever been too logical, or handled history too well.
The Bible confirms both of these two last points. Josiah's rediscovery of Israel's past sparked the reformation of his time, and the apostles almost constantly reasoned from the Scriptures, proving that Jesus is the Christ. Apollos was over the top, and even his opponents knew it. A man well-schooled in the two topics only can learn with great insight any discipline, since every discipline has a history (developed over time to become what it now is) and has a set of logical basics and established ways of relating these basics one to another [rules of the game, so to speak].
These are the disciplines -- in addition to the basic listed above (which for the ladies might include home economics if their parents wish it -- everyone should know how to cook at least a few dishes) which the Bible affirms as most elemental to true education:
1. The Bible Itself. Every student should have a thorough understanding of HOW to read it properly; know what it is -- as a divine (transformative) international legal code which self-refers as the Gospel and Law of the Lord. Learning to read it well means learning the literary-canonical approach which will aid them in critical read of all historical documents.
Students should learn the literary hermeneutics appropriate to the Bible (given its genre), and the logic of the Bible's system of theology (Westminster Standards). Then they should learn the basic themes of each of the major books, and something about their contents.
2. History and Historiography (the philosophy of history and historical writing). This should emphasize studying the historical situation of the writings we have left to us from the ancient world (and medieval period), and how we learn what we know from them.
Then it should include elements of proper historical research, source usage, how to confirm or falsify evidentiary theories, critical reading of source documents, and cross-examination of sources in light of informal logic.
Students should also learn (over many years) the basic outline of the history of the West first, and electively later, of the other regions of the world.
3. Logic. This should include selected readings in systematic theology, emphasizing what was learned from informal logic studies. Specifically, students should learn to apply these principles to controversial topics of debate, with an eye to studying the Biblical viewpoint, and cross-examining would-be competitors.
Later, students should master an introduction to formal (propositional) logic, the biblical philosophy of logic, and the history of the development of logical systems in the West. This prepares students, together with their other courses, for the next academic discipline.
4. Rhetoric. This should introduce students to the elements of speech structure, preparation and delivery in light of the sermons of the Bible -- notably the rhetoric of Jesus and the apostles, but not excluding the prophets -- and several of the classic speeches of ancient pagan oratory. They should also have some introduction to the history of rhetoric as it developed in the West and its use in legal contexts today.
Legal rhetoric has particular uses in studying the sermons of the Bible, which is a legal or covenantal document. Practicing speech-making and delivery notoriously improves a student's personal confidence and ability to interact with others in a productive and discreet fashion.
5. The history and philosophy of the sciences should be studied separately when students are significantly advanced (late high school years). This would include many field trips to see, taste, touch and handle, as much of what they learn from their texts as possible. Science studies should not be done primarily in a lab, but observably in the environments native to the topic studied as much as possible or convenient.
Students should be encouraged to study the natural world (according to their current lessons in the history of this or that science), see gemstones in the rough, watch animals interact, flowers grow, bees pollinate, etc. This was what Solomon did. Lab work is not excluded; it is just more expensive. But an introduction to controlled experiments (of various kinds) should be part of this study. Making this as fun as possible is probably more important in the long run that what is actually learned. Enthusiasm is the best teacher.
Time would be the best teacher, except that it unfortunately kills all the students. Enthusiasm enlightens and "enlivens" them instead. Model rockets and propulsion rank high on my list. I can't get to excited about balancing equations no matter how hard I try. It isn't that difficult, but it's not much fun either. Now cutting an aluminum can in half and filing the rounded edge, that's SOMETHING because once you cut out the can's face after that (with a simple can opener applied to it's inside facial edge), you find out that these babies can FLYYYYYY.
That's right. It's Bernoulli's principle in a can, and basic aeronautics on a stick. And they really fly. All you need is an aluminum sprite can, or coke - whatever -- a saw which can cut metal -- a can opener and a student with a decent throwing arm and fast legs to chase it!! I call them "Tubees." There is no official name for this flying invention, and I am not sure who invented it first if it wasn't me. Caution: you may actually have to drink 12 ounces of a caramel-colored beverage known to eat a hole in the earth half way to China to begin this experiment.
Now THIS is science. No child should be without a flying coke can at some point in his academic career. Just watch out for the sharp edges. You can always wear gloves to toss them, which you can buy for $1.00 at the local dollar store. You need to put a football-like spiral spin on them upon the "finger release." This is what really sends them into a graceful and lengthy flight pattern. If they do not fly as well as you'd hoped, try shortening (filing down or sanding) the length of the body. It should be about 2/5 - 1/2 the length of the original can.
6. An overview of Legal history for comparative purposes with God's law should be part of the education of students in their later years of high school also. Comparing and contrasting should be required of students at every stage of education and all levels. This is the most basic way in which humans must reason to get along well in this world.
This amounts to studies in comparative legal systems and this history of how these systems developed.
7. History of economics. Students should learn the biblical view of free market capitalism, and its philosophical competitors, various forms of Socialism and Communism. This will necessarily overlap with legal history, with respect to property rights, landlord-tenant relations, estates and probate, wills and testaments, and the like.
This can be taught at a very introductory level when students are younger. This also can form the practicum on do-it-yourself legal forms. The students (with the teacher's assistance) could even start an incorporated business, limited liability company or some other project of like kind (depending on the laws in your state or country).
I have already posted articles and blog entries online to faciliate highly efficient reading, researching and writing to jumpstart your education. Do not forget to use the power of the net. Technology rules. Ming rules too. Do not forget the power of Ming (to outlive us all). He must be doing something right. Ming should be studied -- marine biology can form part of your history of the sciences curriculum. It's only a suggestion, but you could even start your own fan club -- with Ming Studies. If you do this with a straight face, you just might get a research grant from a nearby university, whose staff at once has an interest in sea life and has a fair sense of humor. In education, when in doubt, just Ming it.
Ming has the bling.
This excludes scientists and logicians, of course. But the average grocery shopper, once having mastered the infamous "word problem," can manage to balance the checkbook just fine -- if, that is, Americans were actually to do that. For the most part, they only save about 5% of their total income. It used to be 20%. We are going further into debt, and have (on balance) no savings at all in many cases -- even though the bank account says otherwise. This happens when your liabilities outweigh your total asset value.
401k's can -- we learned in 2000 -- easily compress into 201k's almost overnight -- okay, over year.
Bottom line: The excessive induction of students into the world of math like imaginary numbers does nothing to foster real education. It wastes time and money. Even if I believed in public education (an oxymoron for the most part) I would want the money spent better. Even medical doctors use very little math beyond passing their exams in med school. They just throw it at the labs, and let them figure out the math.
Little math is required to obey a "Speed limit 55" sign -- and Americans who can do math quite well pay no attention anyway. Let's be honest. If you drive, you know this. The New driving math is that "55 - police officer present + board meeting imminent = 75."
And that's on a slow day. In truth, the size of your car and gas prices figure into the equation, so that it's a little more -- but only a little -- more complicated than this. High school students taking calculus should be viewed as obviously excessive. Leibniz even had great trouble with calculus, which first recieved its formal (contemporary) shape at the hands of Sir Isaac Newton. See how fun the history of the sciences is already?
My argument is that math should be optional -- strictly taken as an elective -- by the choice of students after they have passed pre-algebra (which isn't necessary for most of them anyway either). Maybe after fractions and decimals, we should permit elective status to all math courses.
Students who enjoy it can continue; those who hate it can take more history instead, or skilled reading and writing courses. I have yet to meet a student who knows "too much history," while many suffer basic deficiencies in this area. If you still have to "explain" who Aristotle was to an eighth grader, someone has had way too much math when she should have been studying history.
Most adults probably cannot name one of the Holy Roman Emperors -- who influenced history at least as much as Christopher Columbus in many cases. Such men ruled over (by influence if not direct governance) all of Europe -- the world leader for the centuries covering the modern world. Here, "all" means simply the greater part.
In any case, the industrial revolution, Mercantile Capitalism, and many other aspect of western history having an extraordinary impact on our day-to-day lives receive cursory attention, while imaginary numbers (a phony math if ever there was one) -- what is the square root of a negative number anyway [this question amounts to a confusion of proper functions on my view, not a new math] -- recieve about as much attention as legal history of the U.S.
Brown v. board of Education and a few other high profile cases like the "Scopes Monkey Trial" make it into the history texts. These simply pepper the texts to help explain the cultural milieu -- if I can be so bold as to wax French -- of the time period under consideration, and nothing more. They are decorative, not investigative.
In any case, you get the point: less obscure and useless math training, and more history, especially history of technology (because it is anything but useless) and the sciences, legal history, and the history of the important ideas which shaped the Western World we live in, should occupy the space of high school texts.
Their reform is long overdue, and the pie-in-the-sky "let's have every kid be a scientist" Enlightenment view has got to go. Some will be, and most will not. Some will be lawyers, and some will not. The overemphasis upon the sciences is what lopsides public education in favor of specialized forms of math.
The operating assumption behind this -- scientific realism -- has long been falsified by the history and logic of the sciences themselves. We need to quit pretending. If students prefer music and the arts, they should be allowed to substitute courses in the history of art and music -- including listening to classical pieces or viewing many of the best paintings (classically understood -- someone has to set the standards), they should be permitted to follow their own skills, talents and interests.
No student should be allowed to escape high school without the practical knowledge of the local legal system, and how to get things done via legal means. For one, this would reduce the number of violent interactions from people who know no other way to accomplish the more unpleasant side of human interactions.
Litigation is not pretty, but neither is surgery. All students should know the PRACTICAL rudiments of: 1. The stock market (investing options) 2. wallet management 3. Ordering your life efficiently (time and resource management) 3. Basic math 4. Basic history of technology 5. at least one practical skill (auto-shop or electronics repair courses are examples). 6. CPR and what to do in various emergencies 7. Self-defense (crime rates are simply too high to ignore this) 7. Basic legal options (how to start your own business, prepare a will, and the like).
If this is starting to look like the "for Dummies" book series, that's only because "high school" ignores almost all this -- real world preparation courses -- instead living in an "enlightenment bubble" about 200 years out of date. This leaves high school students almost totally unprepared for the real world they will encounter when high school ends. Then what?
Then some go on to college and pick up some of these skills, others they learn on their own. By the time they finish college, they have the skills they could and should have had around 10th grade, and more knowledge in many areas than they'll ever use.
Some of the other popular myths common today are: 1. Older people know what they want from life [They just give up and settle for what seems "reasonable" given the ugly circumstances] 2. Most people are doing it right by the time they get older (most in America retire in relative poverty - about 96%) 3. The way the system is cannot be changed so you should just learn to get along with it and not try to change it (This is not stated but always assumed in your education). This is simply false, and more obviously so all the time. 5. History is relatively unimportant since it just deals with the past (old stuff). The truth is that no one area can better insulate one against lies and pop fads, and all manner of ideological mischief, except studying the Bible itself. This is because in history we see the way God orders life (providentially), and how nations rise and fall in direct relationship to how they handle -- accept or reject and in which ways -- God's law.
6. Logic classes are only for more advanced students, and should be left to colleges. [No, actually logic is inescapable and people argue from the time their are young. We are all doing logic LONG before college, we just need help doing it well, rather than poorly. Teenagers love to argue, and parents should take full advantage of this feature to teach them to practice well what they already enjoy. If you wait until college, chances are good they already believe so much nonsense, your job will have become unmanageable. Logic should replace math, with history, after 8th grade for most students. No one has ever been too logical, or handled history too well.
The Bible confirms both of these two last points. Josiah's rediscovery of Israel's past sparked the reformation of his time, and the apostles almost constantly reasoned from the Scriptures, proving that Jesus is the Christ. Apollos was over the top, and even his opponents knew it. A man well-schooled in the two topics only can learn with great insight any discipline, since every discipline has a history (developed over time to become what it now is) and has a set of logical basics and established ways of relating these basics one to another [rules of the game, so to speak].
These are the disciplines -- in addition to the basic listed above (which for the ladies might include home economics if their parents wish it -- everyone should know how to cook at least a few dishes) which the Bible affirms as most elemental to true education:
1. The Bible Itself. Every student should have a thorough understanding of HOW to read it properly; know what it is -- as a divine (transformative) international legal code which self-refers as the Gospel and Law of the Lord. Learning to read it well means learning the literary-canonical approach which will aid them in critical read of all historical documents.
Students should learn the literary hermeneutics appropriate to the Bible (given its genre), and the logic of the Bible's system of theology (Westminster Standards). Then they should learn the basic themes of each of the major books, and something about their contents.
2. History and Historiography (the philosophy of history and historical writing). This should emphasize studying the historical situation of the writings we have left to us from the ancient world (and medieval period), and how we learn what we know from them.
Then it should include elements of proper historical research, source usage, how to confirm or falsify evidentiary theories, critical reading of source documents, and cross-examination of sources in light of informal logic.
Students should also learn (over many years) the basic outline of the history of the West first, and electively later, of the other regions of the world.
3. Logic. This should include selected readings in systematic theology, emphasizing what was learned from informal logic studies. Specifically, students should learn to apply these principles to controversial topics of debate, with an eye to studying the Biblical viewpoint, and cross-examining would-be competitors.
Later, students should master an introduction to formal (propositional) logic, the biblical philosophy of logic, and the history of the development of logical systems in the West. This prepares students, together with their other courses, for the next academic discipline.
4. Rhetoric. This should introduce students to the elements of speech structure, preparation and delivery in light of the sermons of the Bible -- notably the rhetoric of Jesus and the apostles, but not excluding the prophets -- and several of the classic speeches of ancient pagan oratory. They should also have some introduction to the history of rhetoric as it developed in the West and its use in legal contexts today.
Legal rhetoric has particular uses in studying the sermons of the Bible, which is a legal or covenantal document. Practicing speech-making and delivery notoriously improves a student's personal confidence and ability to interact with others in a productive and discreet fashion.
5. The history and philosophy of the sciences should be studied separately when students are significantly advanced (late high school years). This would include many field trips to see, taste, touch and handle, as much of what they learn from their texts as possible. Science studies should not be done primarily in a lab, but observably in the environments native to the topic studied as much as possible or convenient.
Students should be encouraged to study the natural world (according to their current lessons in the history of this or that science), see gemstones in the rough, watch animals interact, flowers grow, bees pollinate, etc. This was what Solomon did. Lab work is not excluded; it is just more expensive. But an introduction to controlled experiments (of various kinds) should be part of this study. Making this as fun as possible is probably more important in the long run that what is actually learned. Enthusiasm is the best teacher.
Time would be the best teacher, except that it unfortunately kills all the students. Enthusiasm enlightens and "enlivens" them instead. Model rockets and propulsion rank high on my list. I can't get to excited about balancing equations no matter how hard I try. It isn't that difficult, but it's not much fun either. Now cutting an aluminum can in half and filing the rounded edge, that's SOMETHING because once you cut out the can's face after that (with a simple can opener applied to it's inside facial edge), you find out that these babies can FLYYYYYY.
That's right. It's Bernoulli's principle in a can, and basic aeronautics on a stick. And they really fly. All you need is an aluminum sprite can, or coke - whatever -- a saw which can cut metal -- a can opener and a student with a decent throwing arm and fast legs to chase it!! I call them "Tubees." There is no official name for this flying invention, and I am not sure who invented it first if it wasn't me. Caution: you may actually have to drink 12 ounces of a caramel-colored beverage known to eat a hole in the earth half way to China to begin this experiment.
Now THIS is science. No child should be without a flying coke can at some point in his academic career. Just watch out for the sharp edges. You can always wear gloves to toss them, which you can buy for $1.00 at the local dollar store. You need to put a football-like spiral spin on them upon the "finger release." This is what really sends them into a graceful and lengthy flight pattern. If they do not fly as well as you'd hoped, try shortening (filing down or sanding) the length of the body. It should be about 2/5 - 1/2 the length of the original can.
6. An overview of Legal history for comparative purposes with God's law should be part of the education of students in their later years of high school also. Comparing and contrasting should be required of students at every stage of education and all levels. This is the most basic way in which humans must reason to get along well in this world.
This amounts to studies in comparative legal systems and this history of how these systems developed.
7. History of economics. Students should learn the biblical view of free market capitalism, and its philosophical competitors, various forms of Socialism and Communism. This will necessarily overlap with legal history, with respect to property rights, landlord-tenant relations, estates and probate, wills and testaments, and the like.
This can be taught at a very introductory level when students are younger. This also can form the practicum on do-it-yourself legal forms. The students (with the teacher's assistance) could even start an incorporated business, limited liability company or some other project of like kind (depending on the laws in your state or country).
I have already posted articles and blog entries online to faciliate highly efficient reading, researching and writing to jumpstart your education. Do not forget to use the power of the net. Technology rules. Ming rules too. Do not forget the power of Ming (to outlive us all). He must be doing something right. Ming should be studied -- marine biology can form part of your history of the sciences curriculum. It's only a suggestion, but you could even start your own fan club -- with Ming Studies. If you do this with a straight face, you just might get a research grant from a nearby university, whose staff at once has an interest in sea life and has a fair sense of humor. In education, when in doubt, just Ming it.
Ming has the bling.
Monday, November 26, 2007
"By What Name Or Authority?" The Petrine Sermon of Acts 3 in Canonical Context
This represents a brief introduction to the meaning of Acts 3:11-26, and its consequent sermonette to the leaders of Israel at the time, Pharisees and Saduccees both, from Acts 4. Here, they act in the place of the Lord Jesus, filled with the Spirit of Jesus, and stand literally in the place of Solomon (Solomon's Porch). But they do miracles like Moses and Elijah. Everything they do and say, they do by the authority which Jesus gave them, and by His Holy Spirit. This summed up in Peter's response as he says it was not by our power or holiness - but One alien to us in both cases. It was from heaven, where Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father (Psalm 110).
Thus Luke presents Jesus as One greater than Moses, One greater than Elijah, One greater than Solomon, and One greater than King David.
And as the lame man [recall Mephibosheth who ate at the table of Solomon's father] which was healed held Peter and John, all the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomon's, greatly wondering.
[This is why the Bible calls them "signs and wonders," which were used of God to draw attention to the apostles to confirm their message (the Gospel) and do good among the people to teach them of the tender mercy of the One in whom Paul and Peter would call men to place their trust; the verb "wondering" is no accident].
And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people [standing in the place where Solomon used to preach also:],Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?
[What they heard: "Don't look at me, I don't have any supernatural power of my own; it's borrowed; this is from the power -- Name -- and Holiness of the Messiah, Jesus, the Holy and Just One"]
"The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he [Pilate] was determined [tried many times] to let him go.
[What they heard: "That wicked pagan Pontius Pilate was better than you," "You chose Barabbas instead of God's Son, favoring a serial killer and insurrectionist over Messiah, how godly are you?"]
1. Interestingly, Peter says they "denied Him," as also Peter had denied Jesus three times, and was forgiven; Peter's language, based on his own experience then anticipates the mercy they are to receive upon their repentance
2. Peter calls Jesus the Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, meaning that Jesus is both the Son of God and the promised Seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations would be BLESSED. Again, Peter's language anticipates mercy (blessing) even while he proceeds to hammer the Gospel home in very forceful and indicting terms.
3. In case you missed it. Peter is indicting his audience, calling them not sons of Abraham, but of the devil, murderers of the Messiah, the Son of God. But God raised Him up and glorified Jesus to vindicate Him and convict you. This is not a seeker-friendly prosecution.
4. Pilate had, Josephus tells us, many times in the past brought idols near the Temple vicinity. Once he brought in a big golden eagle to thrill the Jews with a sign of Roman power and idolatry. There were heavy losses in the ensuing riots. Pilate was a pagan and proud of it by his record. Yet he sought to release Jesus, while the Jews had him killed. This means that Peter is calling the Jews worse than the worst of unbelievers. First-century Jews -- esp the zealots -- were not Rome's biggest fan club.
This is what I mean by "not a seeker-friendly prosecution." It amounts to a "scum of the Empire" indictment.
Peter Adds:
"But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you"
[What they heard: "Does the name OJ Simpson ring a bell? Charles Manson? You people are Adolf wicked."]
1. By calling Jesus the Holy and Just One, Peter has identified Him as both the Messiah, and as the source of power and holiness by which this man was miraculously healed.
2. They had pressed for the release of Barabbas when they should have acquitted Jesus; Barabbas was what they had accused Jesus of falsely many times -- an insurrectionist, or today we say "insurgent," a terrorist. This probably means that Barabbas had taken up arms against the Roman empire in some bloody uprising, and was captured. He was probably a zealot. Jesus had not done anything against the empire, and went about healing its citizens and peasants (not all of whom were Jewish persons. Some were Syrian or Phoenician). The so-called "good thief" was scheduled for execution alonside barabbas, showing that he was neither good nor particularly a thief, but an insurrectionist of the "Barabbas party." But, he turned out to be one of the good guys in the end -- by the grace of God.
Strangely, his crucifixion fell on both the worst and best day of his life. This is not the best way to enter the kingdom of heaven, but it beats the alternative. God does truly work in mysterious ways.
Peter continues:
"And [You] killed the Prince of life, whom God hath [first, ahead of the others] raised from the dead; whereof we are eye-witnesses [sufficient to convict you before God].
"Archegos" [Prince, author, pioneer, Chief, etc] is really difficult to translate and I never feel good about my translation of it no matter how hard I try or how nuanced my efforts. Arche is first, primary or beginning (or beginner depending on context). The suffix -gos amounts to "one who." "One who begins" can refer to an architect, if what he begins is a construction project, it might be an engineer who drives a train of many cars in length -- he is in the lead car and so would be in Koine the train archegos. I can list many kinds of persons in today's world who would or might fit the bill:
In what sense one might feed on the risen Christ is not here made clear, but much more shocking and overt statements of this kind appear in John's Gospel. This most likely displays one way in which the Lord's Supper subsumes within itself all the sacrifices of the first Testament, here with specific reference to the Feast of the Firstfruits, which would have been the Pentecostal "Ingathering." Peter is preaching in light of the Jewish holiday calendar.
He might have simply said, "Jesus will gather in people to be his own from every nation, and these shall enter in as He did. He went first. Others will take up their cross and follow Him in resurrection unto life. He is the first and best part [Archegos].
2. Peter's point is deliberately ironic and reads somewhat like "You killed the Author of Life," which is (for irony) like stealing a Bible, only far worse in its effects and ethical implications.
3. God has raised up His Son, the Seed of Abraham, of whom it was promised would be for a blessing to all nations. The claim "God raised up Jesus" was not a mere fact to be publicized. It was an indictment of those who killed Him, and a vindication of Jesus in the sight of all that God had reversed the ungodly verdict, overruling the sentence. The Jews and Romans authorized representatives put to death the Lord Jesus. This amounted to the entire world, both Jew and Gentile in bibical (federal) thinking. [Peter is still indicting. He does not let up the whole time, until they repent].
Paul argues this openly in Romans, that the whole world is held guilty by God under the law, so that there can be no excuse on Judgment Day for failing to believe in the Messiah.
Peter adds:
"And his Name [authority, power] through [the healed man's] faith in his [Christ's] name [holiness, goodness] hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know:
[What they heard: You can't weasel your way out of this one, you know I am right]
"yea, the faith which is by him [faith from God] hath given him [healed guy] this perfect soundness in the presence of you all."
Comments: The "yea" means "indeed," "not only is this the case, but also." Here, Peter drives home the point that not only did Christ heal this man but He gave the man the faith which functioned as the instrument through which the healing came.
This puts Christ in the place of the Almighty, making Christ the source and goal of one's faith, a point which would not have been missed by his fiercely monotheistic audience.
A man is saved by grace, and that grace comes to him by faith in Jesus -- in his power and holiness -- meaning the saved man believes that Jesus CAN do it, and is righteous and just in so doing, and that His authority is from God.
This faith is not something you can conjure up if you "just imagine" hard enough, or click your heels together 3 times. God either grants one the faith to believe unto salvation or not. This is not popular among Arminians, but faith is not a work; it is a gift; and no man works for a gift (you cannot earn charity). Faith to believe in Jesus comes from God. Left to your own devices you would be -- well, left to your own devices -- faithless.
Thus Luke presents Jesus as One greater than Moses, One greater than Elijah, One greater than Solomon, and One greater than King David.
And as the lame man [recall Mephibosheth who ate at the table of Solomon's father] which was healed held Peter and John, all the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomon's, greatly wondering.
[This is why the Bible calls them "signs and wonders," which were used of God to draw attention to the apostles to confirm their message (the Gospel) and do good among the people to teach them of the tender mercy of the One in whom Paul and Peter would call men to place their trust; the verb "wondering" is no accident].
And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people [standing in the place where Solomon used to preach also:],Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?
[What they heard: "Don't look at me, I don't have any supernatural power of my own; it's borrowed; this is from the power -- Name -- and Holiness of the Messiah, Jesus, the Holy and Just One"]
"The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he [Pilate] was determined [tried many times] to let him go.
[What they heard: "That wicked pagan Pontius Pilate was better than you," "You chose Barabbas instead of God's Son, favoring a serial killer and insurrectionist over Messiah, how godly are you?"]
1. Interestingly, Peter says they "denied Him," as also Peter had denied Jesus three times, and was forgiven; Peter's language, based on his own experience then anticipates the mercy they are to receive upon their repentance
2. Peter calls Jesus the Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, meaning that Jesus is both the Son of God and the promised Seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations would be BLESSED. Again, Peter's language anticipates mercy (blessing) even while he proceeds to hammer the Gospel home in very forceful and indicting terms.
3. In case you missed it. Peter is indicting his audience, calling them not sons of Abraham, but of the devil, murderers of the Messiah, the Son of God. But God raised Him up and glorified Jesus to vindicate Him and convict you. This is not a seeker-friendly prosecution.
4. Pilate had, Josephus tells us, many times in the past brought idols near the Temple vicinity. Once he brought in a big golden eagle to thrill the Jews with a sign of Roman power and idolatry. There were heavy losses in the ensuing riots. Pilate was a pagan and proud of it by his record. Yet he sought to release Jesus, while the Jews had him killed. This means that Peter is calling the Jews worse than the worst of unbelievers. First-century Jews -- esp the zealots -- were not Rome's biggest fan club.
This is what I mean by "not a seeker-friendly prosecution." It amounts to a "scum of the Empire" indictment.
Peter Adds:
"But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you"
[What they heard: "Does the name OJ Simpson ring a bell? Charles Manson? You people are Adolf wicked."]
1. By calling Jesus the Holy and Just One, Peter has identified Him as both the Messiah, and as the source of power and holiness by which this man was miraculously healed.
2. They had pressed for the release of Barabbas when they should have acquitted Jesus; Barabbas was what they had accused Jesus of falsely many times -- an insurrectionist, or today we say "insurgent," a terrorist. This probably means that Barabbas had taken up arms against the Roman empire in some bloody uprising, and was captured. He was probably a zealot. Jesus had not done anything against the empire, and went about healing its citizens and peasants (not all of whom were Jewish persons. Some were Syrian or Phoenician). The so-called "good thief" was scheduled for execution alonside barabbas, showing that he was neither good nor particularly a thief, but an insurrectionist of the "Barabbas party." But, he turned out to be one of the good guys in the end -- by the grace of God.
Strangely, his crucifixion fell on both the worst and best day of his life. This is not the best way to enter the kingdom of heaven, but it beats the alternative. God does truly work in mysterious ways.
Peter continues:
"And [You] killed the Prince of life, whom God hath [first, ahead of the others] raised from the dead; whereof we are eye-witnesses [sufficient to convict you before God].
"Archegos" [Prince, author, pioneer, Chief, etc] is really difficult to translate and I never feel good about my translation of it no matter how hard I try or how nuanced my efforts. Arche is first, primary or beginning (or beginner depending on context). The suffix -gos amounts to "one who." "One who begins" can refer to an architect, if what he begins is a construction project, it might be an engineer who drives a train of many cars in length -- he is in the lead car and so would be in Koine the train archegos. I can list many kinds of persons in today's world who would or might fit the bill:
The head of a department at work; any military officer who leads his unit into battle; any company whose name or brand serves as a type of industry superstar -- McDonald's would likely be the archegos of the fast food industry, and Starbuck's for the whole new coffeeshop phenomenon (Peet's has better coffee, and Panama Bay Coffee Co. probably has the best beans of all).
The sense of "archegos" as used by Peter carries the Semitic flavor of the Feast of Firstfruits, as the tithe was to be the first part given (chronologically) and the best part of all you had. This teaches that we may only give God the very best. It should be perfect and from above, like the law of the Lord, and Spirit of the Lord, whenever possible.
Calling Jesus the archegos of life appears to be a play on the notion of firstfruits -- which would have been used to feed the poor.
The suffix "of life" indicates that Peter refers to the resurrection (eternal life) unto glory. Paul's use of like thought he expresses as "the firstfruits [i.e. tithe] of them that are raised from the dead." This is precisely what Peter means. But one sense is added, since it portrays the Lord implicitly (or by connotation at the least) as a kind of food, like the animals which would be sacrificed were for the priests.In what sense one might feed on the risen Christ is not here made clear, but much more shocking and overt statements of this kind appear in John's Gospel. This most likely displays one way in which the Lord's Supper subsumes within itself all the sacrifices of the first Testament, here with specific reference to the Feast of the Firstfruits, which would have been the Pentecostal "Ingathering." Peter is preaching in light of the Jewish holiday calendar.
He might have simply said, "Jesus will gather in people to be his own from every nation, and these shall enter in as He did. He went first. Others will take up their cross and follow Him in resurrection unto life. He is the first and best part [Archegos].
2. Peter's point is deliberately ironic and reads somewhat like "You killed the Author of Life," which is (for irony) like stealing a Bible, only far worse in its effects and ethical implications.
3. God has raised up His Son, the Seed of Abraham, of whom it was promised would be for a blessing to all nations. The claim "God raised up Jesus" was not a mere fact to be publicized. It was an indictment of those who killed Him, and a vindication of Jesus in the sight of all that God had reversed the ungodly verdict, overruling the sentence. The Jews and Romans authorized representatives put to death the Lord Jesus. This amounted to the entire world, both Jew and Gentile in bibical (federal) thinking. [Peter is still indicting. He does not let up the whole time, until they repent].
Paul argues this openly in Romans, that the whole world is held guilty by God under the law, so that there can be no excuse on Judgment Day for failing to believe in the Messiah.
Peter adds:
"And his Name [authority, power] through [the healed man's] faith in his [Christ's] name [holiness, goodness] hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know:
[What they heard: You can't weasel your way out of this one, you know I am right]
"yea, the faith which is by him [faith from God] hath given him [healed guy] this perfect soundness in the presence of you all."
Comments: The "yea" means "indeed," "not only is this the case, but also." Here, Peter drives home the point that not only did Christ heal this man but He gave the man the faith which functioned as the instrument through which the healing came.
This puts Christ in the place of the Almighty, making Christ the source and goal of one's faith, a point which would not have been missed by his fiercely monotheistic audience.
A man is saved by grace, and that grace comes to him by faith in Jesus -- in his power and holiness -- meaning the saved man believes that Jesus CAN do it, and is righteous and just in so doing, and that His authority is from God.
This faith is not something you can conjure up if you "just imagine" hard enough, or click your heels together 3 times. God either grants one the faith to believe unto salvation or not. This is not popular among Arminians, but faith is not a work; it is a gift; and no man works for a gift (you cannot earn charity). Faith to believe in Jesus comes from God. Left to your own devices you would be -- well, left to your own devices -- faithless.
Peter continues:
"And now, brethren, I know that ye did it [killed the author of life] in ignorance, as did also your [equally guilty] rulers. But those things, which God before[hand in the all the Holy Scriptures] had shewed [prophesied] by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, He hath so fulfilled [the propecies concerning Christ that you should kill Him, and He should rise again][in Jesus].
Repent ye therefore [because Christ is risen], and be converted [to Christ], that your sins [just named] may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the [returning] presence [i.e. parousia] of the Lord. And He [the Father] shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive [retain] until the times of restitution of all things [at the end of the millenium, when all His enemies will have been made a footstool for his feet], which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began [esp. from Psalm 110][ regarding the time when the world will end -- as we know it in the estate of sin and misery].
For Moses truly said unto the fathers,"A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, [a powerful miracle-working faithful prophet] like unto me [Moses]; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say [teach] unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people [this happened at the hands of the Romans in A.D. 70].
[One of those things Jesus commanded was, "when you see armies surrounding Jerusalem, then let those in Judea flee to the mountains." If they did not obey, they were indeed cut off completely. The Romans showed no mercy, as Romans are wont to do].
Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel [1050 B.C.] onward, as many as have spoken [in the Bible], have likewise foretold of these [last] days [of the Old Covenant era, and the beginning of the New].
Ye are the children of the prophets [so God expects you to know this stuff], and of the covenant which God made with our fathers [like Abraham] [so you, his decscendants are responsible for it by way of covenant with "you and your seed after you"], saying unto Abraham,"And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Unto you [Jews] first God, having raised up his Son Jesus[from the dead and seated Him in heaven at Gods' right hand], sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his [murderous] iniquities [for you killed the prophets and stoned those sent to you, like your fathers].
Comments: As Peter was saying this, it was in fact being fulfilled. Jesus had poured out His Holy Spirit from heaven, and Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, was just now delivering this message from the Spirit of Jesus. Peter was offering, in the name of the Lord Jesus, the blessing of the Abrahamic covenant to his audience. It could not have been delivered to them by Airborne Express on a more simple and elegant silver platter, right in front of them, there it was.
The blessing. This would be for Peter's audience, and Israel or Esua moment. Melchizedek was extending the bread and wine to the Men of Israel who had killed him, just as He had to Abraham many centuries before. All they had to do was repent and be baptized by the grace of God, having believed Peter's message, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Seed of Abraham and Firstfruits of them that are raised from dead.
Acts 4:7-12
And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, by what power, or by what name, have ye done this?
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost [this is mentioned because Christ promised that they were to take no thought in advance what to say, but that when they spoke before rulers and kings, the Holy Spirit would give them utterance; it hearkens back to Acts 2] said to them, Ye rulers of the people [chief priests], and elders of Israel, If we this day be examined of the good deed [miracle] done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel [This suggests that a crowd had gathered; Peter now raises his voice to let the crowd in on the conversation. Peter is not just answering now; he is preaching] that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead [showing that you murdered an innocent man], even by him doth this man stand here before you whole [which means you are REALLY in trouble with God].
This [man you killed] is the [prophesied corner-] stone [of the True Temple] which was set at nought of you [Sadducee] builders [who are known for boasting in the Temple], which is become the head of the corner[stone of the new Temple]. Neither is there salvation in any other [Name but Jesus]: for there is none other name under heaven given [by God] among men, whereby we must be saved.
What they heard: God only gave one Savior to all men. And you killed Him. But God raised him from the dead, as the foundation [similar to Archegos again] or cornerstone -- Peter's name means "Rock of foundation" according to Jesus in Matt 16 -- which Peter here calls the Lord Jesus citing Psalm 118.
Peter has declared to those who glory in the Temple that the One they killed was raised by God to be the basis of the New and better Temple of God. This probably primarily targets the Sadducees in the audience, though the Pharisees saw themselves as dependent upon it also, for there was only one priesthood and sacrificial system appointed by God. They did not sacrifice anything in the synagogues -- only in the Temple.
The phrase "neither is there salvation in any other name," begins with "neither." This links the passage to an earlier concept - that of the Temple. Salvation and Temple form two concepts with only one primary common denominator -- if you put the two concepts together in the Jewish mind, you get "sacrifice" as the logical consequent.
Salvation needed Temple sacrifice. This both Pharisee and Saduccee believed. Indeed, without the shedding of blood, there is no remission. so the phrase, "Salvation in any other name" means Christ "became" -- he doesn't say how -- the cornerstone of the New Temple by way of His once for all sacrifice which replaces all others.
In other words, in the act of killing Him, Peter's audience replaced their own temple with a New One, of which Jesus had become the basis by his death and [consequent] resurrection. But they did it in ignorance -- not on purpose. God did it on purpose. The Psalm Peter alludes to ends with "The Lord has done it and it is marvelous in our eyes."
Who -- did it? I though Peter said THEY did it? Doesn't Peter keep on saying this? But they did it "according to the counsel of God's foreknowledge and purpose." It was God's will to crush Him. Only when you crush a ripened grape does the wine -- new wine - begin to flow to the people. They did it in ignorance, but the Lord has done it to install Jesus as the Chief Cornerstone, heir of all things, and ruler of the nations. It was attended by miracles -- the temple curtain was rent in two, the earth shook violently, and the clouds darkened the sky from about the third hour.
It was - in the sense of marvel as miracle -- a marvelous event which installed Jesus as the Chief cornerstone. The miracles of the resurrection, and which Jesus performed after it, make it all the more marvelous.
"In our eyes." This phrase expresses the perspective of the apostles and prophets, the dominical foundation of the Church. In OUR eyes means they were chosen as EYE witnesses to the resurrection and ministry of Christ, from its beginning until his forty day teaching spree in Jerusalem. It is marvelous in our eyes for John said, "Many other wonderfull things Jesus said and did, but if I were to try to record them all the world could not contain the volumes."
John was an eyewitness to many marvels. So were the other apostles. Paul lists the 12 AND Peter as those to whom Jesus appeared in the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:3-8). You simply do not forget something like this. Peter had seen Jesus transformed in an instant to the sun's radiance, standing with Moses and Elijah.
These men killed Jesus, but God has done it by resurrection to install Christ as the New Temple's foundation by apostles and prophets He sent. They performed their miracles, Peter answered the Sadducees, in the Name of the Builder of the New Temple, of which this formerly lame man had just become a part.
Back then, they did not have the phrase, "In your face." But if they had, this would have been it. Peter and John had power from on High, from heaven which the Temple signified. By killing Jesus these men had established the New Temple half-way. God did the rest.
Jesus had said to his opponents: "Destroy this Temple and in three days will I raise it up." This translates: "Do your worst." But the Temple of which He spoke was His own body. Peter had said the same thing: by killing Jesus' body -- God's perfect sacrifice -- they had eliminated the need for the levitical priesthoods imperfect and now-useless sacrifices.
They had -- in the most important ways I can think of -- utterly refuted themselves, and their entire sacrificial system. Jesus was now in charge of the Temple and its absolute standard. The cornerstone's purpose was to set the architectural standard for the rest of the Building. Those who trust in His sacrifice enter the New Temple. Those who do not, are left in the court of the Gentiles as unclean. Jesus is now the standard for entry.
He became that cornerstone by their prophesied execution of Him, and God's prophesied resurrection of Him. God operated here strictly by lex talionis. The blessing of the Abrahamic covenant now rests with Jesus -- raised from the dead as Melchizedek the High Priest - to impose upon those of whom he declares it, every spiritual blessing in Christ.
This blessing was here associated with a formerly lame man, the offspring (after a fashion of Mephibosheth). Likewise, this man had been invited forever to eat at the Lord's table, very much like the table of Showbread in the Temple, from which only the priests could eat.
Mephibosheth was no longer lame, but he still ate at the table of David's Son. It was the name of Jesus of Nazareth that had made Him whole, Who is the Chief and Standard of the New Temple. The Levitical Priesthood was put to death in Christ's death. And He was raised - and all those in Him - to the life of a new priesthood. The Lord Jesus intended to bless them by turning them from their inqiuties, as was the duty of the priest to bless the people in the Name of the Lord.
This blessing comes by the preaching of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus. The Lord has done it, to this very day, by apostles, prophets, evangelists and ministers. And it is marvelous in our eyes.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Obama Inhaled: Let Me Be the First To Say -- "Who Cares?"
It would appear that certain morbid reporters are still asking the "inhaled question" of political candidates, as though voters actually care about what they did or did not do that was really stupid in high school. For some reason, the doorbell ditching question just doesn't make the list, which is odd because that's alot more fun than losing your memory temporarily. Whoopie cushion questions apparently are forbidden, and from my point, just as relevant.
Why does smoking top the list of dumb teenage exploits, and not say, DUI's, or any number of other sins of youth? Maybe older Americans who skipped the whole hippy-love-drug sixties are starting to feeling like the missed out. I dunno. What they missed out on was brain damage, and a variety of other self-destructive behaviors, put to really bad music.
Obama says he inhaled because "that was the point." At least he has follow-through. There is a verse from the Proverbs which says that the sluggard buries his hand in the dish, but will not bring it back again to his mouth." You are not supposed to bury your hand in the dish - this is an act of gluttonous grabbing -- me first. But if you do smoke, at least have the follow-through to inhale.
Otherwise, people remember that not only did you do what you should not have (you are never absolved by doing illegal things in a lazy manner), but that you didn't even have the basic know how to do the job right. It wasn't just illegal; it was incompetent too your honor! Can I go now?
I like Obama. He is not afraid of the question; he "just handled it" and told the truth in an age when it's the most you can do in many cases just to ask for your representatives to lie to you IN ENGLISH. 10 to 1 Obama knows exactly what "Is" really means. I don't think he will ever get elected to the Whitehouse. He's honest and intelligent. That's two strikes already. But you gotta admire his determination.
Here is the article caption of Obama handling the question right, and, here the rule applies well that no good deed will go unpunished.
"Obama: Yes, I inhaled—that was the point"
AUDUBON, Iowa (CNN) — Earlier this week in New Hampshire Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spoke candidly about his past experimentation with drugs and alcohol in high school, and on Saturday—after a question on medicinal marijuana—Obama was prodded a bit further and asked whether or not he had ever inhaled.
"I did," the senator from Illinois said to light applause. "It's not something I'm proud of. It was a mistake as a young man."
The question was a reference to a line made famous by former President Bill Clinton who, while admitting to trying marijuana, said he did not inhale. "I never understood that line," Obama continued. "The point was to inhale. That was the point."
On the campaign trail on Saturday, GOP White House hopeful Mitt Romney said Obama's earlier comments set a bad example for young people."
Read Article? http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Comments: Mit says it sets a bad example. Well, Mit, tell us about the history of Mormon polygamy and what kind of example that sets. Oh I know. In 1882, the Mormons quit practicing polygamy because they are "so godly," and obeyed the U.S. government's mandate to cease and desist, or get driven into Mexico. If Mit had been running for president in 1879, we might end up with two or three first ladies. They may have family values, but how extended that family is, is something of an open question. The complied because they had to, and after the practice got their founder killed.
This is not the best religion to join and speak of setting good examples. The false prophet (and looking-glass seer) -- he was fined for this -- Joseph Smith died in a shootout in a jail at Carthage, Illinois -- not too far from Barrack's hometown. Mit had better be careful because those jailhouse records still exist, and Obama could do some very interesting research, like the late Dr. Walter Martin did.
Dr. Martin was known as the foremost expert on pseudo-Christian cults in his day and carried the "Bible Answer Man" title to some fame in the Evangelical world. His title was well earned.
I think we'll just call Mit's comment a Carthaginian misfire and leave it at that, a simple case of "just blowing smoke." Does it even really matter?
Why does smoking top the list of dumb teenage exploits, and not say, DUI's, or any number of other sins of youth? Maybe older Americans who skipped the whole hippy-love-drug sixties are starting to feeling like the missed out. I dunno. What they missed out on was brain damage, and a variety of other self-destructive behaviors, put to really bad music.
Obama says he inhaled because "that was the point." At least he has follow-through. There is a verse from the Proverbs which says that the sluggard buries his hand in the dish, but will not bring it back again to his mouth." You are not supposed to bury your hand in the dish - this is an act of gluttonous grabbing -- me first. But if you do smoke, at least have the follow-through to inhale.
Otherwise, people remember that not only did you do what you should not have (you are never absolved by doing illegal things in a lazy manner), but that you didn't even have the basic know how to do the job right. It wasn't just illegal; it was incompetent too your honor! Can I go now?
I like Obama. He is not afraid of the question; he "just handled it" and told the truth in an age when it's the most you can do in many cases just to ask for your representatives to lie to you IN ENGLISH. 10 to 1 Obama knows exactly what "Is" really means. I don't think he will ever get elected to the Whitehouse. He's honest and intelligent. That's two strikes already. But you gotta admire his determination.
Here is the article caption of Obama handling the question right, and, here the rule applies well that no good deed will go unpunished.
"Obama: Yes, I inhaled—that was the point"
AUDUBON, Iowa (CNN) — Earlier this week in New Hampshire Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spoke candidly about his past experimentation with drugs and alcohol in high school, and on Saturday—after a question on medicinal marijuana—Obama was prodded a bit further and asked whether or not he had ever inhaled.
"I did," the senator from Illinois said to light applause. "It's not something I'm proud of. It was a mistake as a young man."
The question was a reference to a line made famous by former President Bill Clinton who, while admitting to trying marijuana, said he did not inhale. "I never understood that line," Obama continued. "The point was to inhale. That was the point."
On the campaign trail on Saturday, GOP White House hopeful Mitt Romney said Obama's earlier comments set a bad example for young people."
Read Article? http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Comments: Mit says it sets a bad example. Well, Mit, tell us about the history of Mormon polygamy and what kind of example that sets. Oh I know. In 1882, the Mormons quit practicing polygamy because they are "so godly," and obeyed the U.S. government's mandate to cease and desist, or get driven into Mexico. If Mit had been running for president in 1879, we might end up with two or three first ladies. They may have family values, but how extended that family is, is something of an open question. The complied because they had to, and after the practice got their founder killed.
This is not the best religion to join and speak of setting good examples. The false prophet (and looking-glass seer) -- he was fined for this -- Joseph Smith died in a shootout in a jail at Carthage, Illinois -- not too far from Barrack's hometown. Mit had better be careful because those jailhouse records still exist, and Obama could do some very interesting research, like the late Dr. Walter Martin did.
Dr. Martin was known as the foremost expert on pseudo-Christian cults in his day and carried the "Bible Answer Man" title to some fame in the Evangelical world. His title was well earned.
I think we'll just call Mit's comment a Carthaginian misfire and leave it at that, a simple case of "just blowing smoke." Does it even really matter?
Like Cheeseburgers? Let's Make It Hot
Now and again, this or that strain of the now infamous (and quite deadly) E. coli bacteria shows up in a beef shipment. Word on the street is you need to cook your burgers at above 160F to make the bacteria defunct if you happen to get a bad sample. I cannot think of any good reason NOT to do this in the first place. 160 is not really cooking something. The steamed milk at Starbuck's has to be this temperature. If you order your coffee -- which is not to be cooked -- extra hot, you get 180.
My take? Barbecue it over an open flame. It tastes far better, you get the burger actually COOKED (not just thawed at 160), and the whole backyard smells great. So it's Autumn. So what. Your barbecue can't tell time, and the lighter fluid can't even spell (which means it would vote Republikin if possible). Here is the article which commands you in the name of the E.Coli damage control medical team to cook your hamburgers, so they don't look red anymore. Okay, but it's your liver transplant. The Associated Press wants you to know that:
"A company voluntarily recalled nearly 96,000 pounds of ground beef products after two people were sickened, possibly by the E. coli bacteria, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service said Saturday.
The recalled ground beef products were distributed in seven states.
The beef products by American Foods Group include coarse and fine ground beef chuck, sirloin and chop beef. They were distributed to retailers and distributors in Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Virginia. The problem surfaced after an investigation by the Illinois Department of Health, which was looking into two reports of illnesses.
The bacteria is E. coli O157:H7. E. coli is harbored in the intestines of cattle. Improper butchering and processing can cause the E. coli to get onto meat. Thorough cooking, to at least 160 degrees internal temperature, can destroy the bacteria."
The whole article is found here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/25/beef.recall.ap/index.html
Comments: No, I don't work for Burger King or Wendy's, but charbroiling rules.
My take? Barbecue it over an open flame. It tastes far better, you get the burger actually COOKED (not just thawed at 160), and the whole backyard smells great. So it's Autumn. So what. Your barbecue can't tell time, and the lighter fluid can't even spell (which means it would vote Republikin if possible). Here is the article which commands you in the name of the E.Coli damage control medical team to cook your hamburgers, so they don't look red anymore. Okay, but it's your liver transplant. The Associated Press wants you to know that:
"A company voluntarily recalled nearly 96,000 pounds of ground beef products after two people were sickened, possibly by the E. coli bacteria, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service said Saturday.
The recalled ground beef products were distributed in seven states.
The beef products by American Foods Group include coarse and fine ground beef chuck, sirloin and chop beef. They were distributed to retailers and distributors in Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Virginia. The problem surfaced after an investigation by the Illinois Department of Health, which was looking into two reports of illnesses.
The bacteria is E. coli O157:H7. E. coli is harbored in the intestines of cattle. Improper butchering and processing can cause the E. coli to get onto meat. Thorough cooking, to at least 160 degrees internal temperature, can destroy the bacteria."
The whole article is found here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/25/beef.recall.ap/index.html
Comments: No, I don't work for Burger King or Wendy's, but charbroiling rules.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Of Chemistry And Way Cool Words To Know
Today's word is "amphoteric" (Say "am-fuh-TER -ik"]. This describes things like iron, metals or other substances, which react with other chemicals as either an acid or a base, depending on reactive conditions. Wiki examples include some kinds of zinc and aluminum.
An acid simply is something "acidic," which often means anything -- when dissolved in water or some other liquid -- with a pH balance lower than 7, and a base is higher than a 7. This makes 7 the "neutral" pH descriptor.
Pure water is a 7. And slurpees are pretty close. This means the further (in either direction) you get from a 7, the less likely you are to want to drink it.
Coca-cola is unrated because, should it receive a rating, we would find out that it is amphoteric, and can rank as either a 1 (like battery acid), or about a 12 (like ammonia or bleach) on the pH scale -- meaning, given enough time, it could eat a hole through the earth half way to China.
Black holes are places where astronauts spilled their cokes into an unsuspecting galaxy. Bad things happened to their inhabitants. Scientists will tell you that there are no inhabitants in black holes. Gee, I wonder why.
An acid simply is something "acidic," which often means anything -- when dissolved in water or some other liquid -- with a pH balance lower than 7, and a base is higher than a 7. This makes 7 the "neutral" pH descriptor.
Pure water is a 7. And slurpees are pretty close. This means the further (in either direction) you get from a 7, the less likely you are to want to drink it.
Coca-cola is unrated because, should it receive a rating, we would find out that it is amphoteric, and can rank as either a 1 (like battery acid), or about a 12 (like ammonia or bleach) on the pH scale -- meaning, given enough time, it could eat a hole through the earth half way to China.
Black holes are places where astronauts spilled their cokes into an unsuspecting galaxy. Bad things happened to their inhabitants. Scientists will tell you that there are no inhabitants in black holes. Gee, I wonder why.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Here It Comes: Ready Or Not -- $100 Oil
Last week's record high of $96.24/ barrel is expected to be overtaken soon as many are taking out positions -- call options -- with prices ("Strikes") well above 100.00. FT.com reports a run on call options used for hedging -- insurance call purchases -- of up to $250/ barrel.
This means people are beginning to panic. But they are panicking properly by buying insurance against that which they see coming. If the price drops, the most one can lose is the price of the contract. This unique feature makes options very safe. Some 75-80% of all options contracts expire worthless, but this does not mean that no one made money on them. Several owners can make money on a single contract changing hands before the final holder is left with no chair when the music stops (expiration transpires).
This means that only 20% of contract holders actually take delivery of the good underlying the contracts.
This rush on oil contracts will probably have a gold and silver counterpart, and this means the U.S. dollar will likely drop further against other major currencies, even though it has lost an astounding 34% of its total value since 2001. This means a loaf of bread costing $2.50 in 2001 now costs about $3.75, using your chopped up dollars.
This is really bad and shows the effects of U.S. involvement abroad for an extended period. I hate to say "I told you so," but ..... I am still telling you so. The Iraq war is bad for the world economy, bad for the Middle East, its bad for our European neighbors, and its bad for America. Meanwhile terrorist enrollment climbs to well over its pre-Iraq invasion levels.
Reality check: how's the program going? If even one person enables Jack Cafferty to find these statistics, he is going to have a field day with them (I am sure he has researchers).
When oil hits the 100 mark, it would be worthwhile to tune him in. He is sure to have a few great one-liners ready to launch.
Want to read about the mad dash on oil calls? http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d5a8517a-8bdd-11dc-af4d-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
This means people are beginning to panic. But they are panicking properly by buying insurance against that which they see coming. If the price drops, the most one can lose is the price of the contract. This unique feature makes options very safe. Some 75-80% of all options contracts expire worthless, but this does not mean that no one made money on them. Several owners can make money on a single contract changing hands before the final holder is left with no chair when the music stops (expiration transpires).
This means that only 20% of contract holders actually take delivery of the good underlying the contracts.
This rush on oil contracts will probably have a gold and silver counterpart, and this means the U.S. dollar will likely drop further against other major currencies, even though it has lost an astounding 34% of its total value since 2001. This means a loaf of bread costing $2.50 in 2001 now costs about $3.75, using your chopped up dollars.
This is really bad and shows the effects of U.S. involvement abroad for an extended period. I hate to say "I told you so," but ..... I am still telling you so. The Iraq war is bad for the world economy, bad for the Middle East, its bad for our European neighbors, and its bad for America. Meanwhile terrorist enrollment climbs to well over its pre-Iraq invasion levels.
Reality check: how's the program going? If even one person enables Jack Cafferty to find these statistics, he is going to have a field day with them (I am sure he has researchers).
When oil hits the 100 mark, it would be worthwhile to tune him in. He is sure to have a few great one-liners ready to launch.
Want to read about the mad dash on oil calls? http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d5a8517a-8bdd-11dc-af4d-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)