Too funny not to pass on!
Friday, November 20, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
NASCAR Is Losing Me
This is a lark post. A chance for me to vent about a hobby, to deburr my saddle blanket, as it were. Nothing spiritual here, although really, everything is in one fashion or another. I'll leave it to you to guess as to how this might be. ;-)
I'm fed up with NASCAR, and will probably neither watch nor follow it as I have in the past. Why? It would be easy enough to say, "Chad Knaus and Jimmie Johnson," but I'm persuaded of better things of myself (ha!). I think I have some legitimate complaints about a sport that's lost its history and severed itself from its identity.
My beefs:
1) The Stupid Chase for the Championship. NASCAR crowns a winner every race. It's lucrative, it's difficult to achieve, and it's not a dismissable glory for the winners to burn rubber and then spray beverage all over victory lane. Every driver and team longs for the experience and dreams of achieving that singular success. Short term success has historically always been adequately rewarded by NASCAR-- until the Chase. Now they've doubled down on that aspect, and thrown the historic rewarding of long term success out the window.
The Championship was historically a means of recognizing the driver with the best average finish over an entire season. The winner couldn't burn rubber or spray beverage at the Waldorf, but consistency and perserverance over a whole season was duly noted, and properly rewarded. Since initiating the Chase, the actual champion on a historic basis has been awarded the championship a paltry one time out of five.
This year, it is still quite possible that Tony Stewart will be cheated out of what would have been his third championship (if he outscores JJ by 13 in the last race). I don't even like Stewart, but it's a travesty that he isn't even in the running at this point. Under the old system, even Jeff Gordon would still be in the running: by outscoring JJ by 56 and Stewart by 43 Gordon would pick up what would have been his eighth crown. If Johnson outscores Stewart and Gordon at Homestead he will be awarded the first championship he actually earned, but the fourth he received. How does one compare that to the feats of Petty, Pearson, Yarborough, Waltrip, Earnhardt and Gordon?
2) The Car of Tomorrow: historically, NASCAR was not about building high-tech race machines, but about souping up and revamping cars that came off the production line. What was raced on the track on Sundays was, basically, something you could drive down the streets on Monday. When Detroit went to front wheel drive for those types of models back in the early 80's, NASCAR had to adapt and began building cars for racing for which only the skins were supplied by Detroit. That's was the seed of the problem.
Current NASCAR owner, Brian France, had a fascination with IROC in his younger days. That type of racing was boring beyond belief and just stupid in concept (driver style requires different car preparation) and, thankfully, had joined the dust heap of history, or so we thought. Brian France scooped into those ashes, once he took over from dad, and presto-- now we have a combination of 12 drivers in cookie cutter cars racing for a championship over ten races in NASCAR (or should we say IROC II?)!
For the good of the sport, I think Brian France should relinquish control of all competition issues to the drivers, car owners, and track operators and become more like a commissioner in other sports. Stupid decisions like the Chase and the COT could have been avoided if he had done so and the sport would not stand on the edge of ruin as it does now.
I would have liked to continue to be a NASCAR fan, but the sport doesn't exist any more. I never liked IROC, and that's what NASCAR has become. So, until and unless there's a change, I'll settle for off road truck racing blowing chunks and splattering mud over the remnants of my former fascination with stock cars.
I'm fed up with NASCAR, and will probably neither watch nor follow it as I have in the past. Why? It would be easy enough to say, "Chad Knaus and Jimmie Johnson," but I'm persuaded of better things of myself (ha!). I think I have some legitimate complaints about a sport that's lost its history and severed itself from its identity.
My beefs:
1) The Stupid Chase for the Championship. NASCAR crowns a winner every race. It's lucrative, it's difficult to achieve, and it's not a dismissable glory for the winners to burn rubber and then spray beverage all over victory lane. Every driver and team longs for the experience and dreams of achieving that singular success. Short term success has historically always been adequately rewarded by NASCAR-- until the Chase. Now they've doubled down on that aspect, and thrown the historic rewarding of long term success out the window.
The Championship was historically a means of recognizing the driver with the best average finish over an entire season. The winner couldn't burn rubber or spray beverage at the Waldorf, but consistency and perserverance over a whole season was duly noted, and properly rewarded. Since initiating the Chase, the actual champion on a historic basis has been awarded the championship a paltry one time out of five.
This year, it is still quite possible that Tony Stewart will be cheated out of what would have been his third championship (if he outscores JJ by 13 in the last race). I don't even like Stewart, but it's a travesty that he isn't even in the running at this point. Under the old system, even Jeff Gordon would still be in the running: by outscoring JJ by 56 and Stewart by 43 Gordon would pick up what would have been his eighth crown. If Johnson outscores Stewart and Gordon at Homestead he will be awarded the first championship he actually earned, but the fourth he received. How does one compare that to the feats of Petty, Pearson, Yarborough, Waltrip, Earnhardt and Gordon?
2) The Car of Tomorrow: historically, NASCAR was not about building high-tech race machines, but about souping up and revamping cars that came off the production line. What was raced on the track on Sundays was, basically, something you could drive down the streets on Monday. When Detroit went to front wheel drive for those types of models back in the early 80's, NASCAR had to adapt and began building cars for racing for which only the skins were supplied by Detroit. That's was the seed of the problem.
Current NASCAR owner, Brian France, had a fascination with IROC in his younger days. That type of racing was boring beyond belief and just stupid in concept (driver style requires different car preparation) and, thankfully, had joined the dust heap of history, or so we thought. Brian France scooped into those ashes, once he took over from dad, and presto-- now we have a combination of 12 drivers in cookie cutter cars racing for a championship over ten races in NASCAR (or should we say IROC II?)!
For the good of the sport, I think Brian France should relinquish control of all competition issues to the drivers, car owners, and track operators and become more like a commissioner in other sports. Stupid decisions like the Chase and the COT could have been avoided if he had done so and the sport would not stand on the edge of ruin as it does now.
I would have liked to continue to be a NASCAR fan, but the sport doesn't exist any more. I never liked IROC, and that's what NASCAR has become. So, until and unless there's a change, I'll settle for off road truck racing blowing chunks and splattering mud over the remnants of my former fascination with stock cars.
Monday, November 16, 2009
The Manna of Faith
Grace is the joyful kindness which fills the heart of God. It is his pleasure to redeem the estranged and to rescue the lost. It should be noted, however, that if he were a just a big fluffy pushover, we wouldn't have been estranged in the first place! God hates sin, fundamentally, that will never change and never cease to be true of him. It means his reaction to sin will always be thorough and inescapable. Certainly, that's something to think about!
Faith is the means that this kind and severe God has established by which his grace is brought to bear upon the condition of the estranged. We are saved by grace through faith. Humans who express such faith get saved, those who won't, don't. A statement like that is likely to bend some Calvinists into a pretzel, probably a salty one, but it reflects the Bible on the subject, what can be wrong with that? Faith has always been, and always will be the issue with human beings in regard to their relationship with God.
Faith is not a static thing, however, it has a shelf life, a relatively short one, it seems to me. To envision faith as if it was like a switch--once turned on it stays on, without thought-- is a mistake in my view. Faith is a dynamic conviction, a motivating understading that has power while its active, but diminishes when its not. Faith has ebb and flow, it does not exist in the static universe, but only in the realm of action. Try to put it on a shelf, like oil in a lamp, unused, untended, and inactive, it evaporates and won't be there to bear light when needed. It not only has to be engaged to function, it has to function to exist.
Can we learn a lesson from the traveling Israelites, whose sustenance, like ours, was dependent upon God's grace? Faith is like manna, it's good for today, but does not project to tomorrow. Even the pot collected to serve as a communal memorial has long since turned to dust and blown away. Faith is a working thing, and a present thing. Manna could never serve as a knick-knack, neither can faith.
Faith is the means that this kind and severe God has established by which his grace is brought to bear upon the condition of the estranged. We are saved by grace through faith. Humans who express such faith get saved, those who won't, don't. A statement like that is likely to bend some Calvinists into a pretzel, probably a salty one, but it reflects the Bible on the subject, what can be wrong with that? Faith has always been, and always will be the issue with human beings in regard to their relationship with God.
Faith is not a static thing, however, it has a shelf life, a relatively short one, it seems to me. To envision faith as if it was like a switch--once turned on it stays on, without thought-- is a mistake in my view. Faith is a dynamic conviction, a motivating understading that has power while its active, but diminishes when its not. Faith has ebb and flow, it does not exist in the static universe, but only in the realm of action. Try to put it on a shelf, like oil in a lamp, unused, untended, and inactive, it evaporates and won't be there to bear light when needed. It not only has to be engaged to function, it has to function to exist.
Can we learn a lesson from the traveling Israelites, whose sustenance, like ours, was dependent upon God's grace? Faith is like manna, it's good for today, but does not project to tomorrow. Even the pot collected to serve as a communal memorial has long since turned to dust and blown away. Faith is a working thing, and a present thing. Manna could never serve as a knick-knack, neither can faith.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Turkey Is Always Interesting This Time of Year (Updated)
Zoiks! I know I've taught this for what seems like forever with conviction and near certitude, but seeing things shaping up as they are makes the hairs on the back of the neck stand up. As I've said before, the Bible teaches that the Antichrist will rise in Turkey and control two other nations (likely adjacent) in his climb to worldwide dominion. Dr. Michael Davis published this astonishing article yesterday. YOU'VE GOT TO READ IT!!!! Thanks Dr D for the heads up, and thanks Wikipedia for the pic.
And then there was this a few weeks ago. Hmmm, what is it that Turkey is positioning itself for? Don't tell me better relations with and economic opportunities in Europe. Something more is afoot, trust me! This is the end game, and yes, I know folk have been convinced of that before, and yet here we still are. But the totality of things prophesied have never come together so completely before. I hope you're wearing your flying shoes. Thanks Heanous for the heads up.
Friday, November 6, 2009
A. C.U.R.E.
The famous (or infamous, depending on your view) theological acronym TULIP has served the church community well in summarizing the basic tenets of Calvinistic soteriology for centuries. It arose from the disputations the Arminian school of thought offered back in the 1600's. The Calvinists walked away from the debate with TULIP and carried the day, the Arminians walked away ridiculed with nothing but the truth.
There have been some good offerings for a similar acronym for Arminian soteriology (like FACTS), but I have never found them satisfactory, because I didn't feel they were clearly descriptive. So, for the ailment of inexactitude, I'd like to offer a cure, or literally, A CURE.
A.= Absolute Depravity: mankind is so stricken by sin and the fall, that none are able to turn themselves to God apart from his gracious enablements.
C.= Conditional Election: God has chosen to save all who place faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
U.= Unlimited Atonement: the blood of Christ was shed for the sins of the entire world, and anyone who will can avail themselves of its effects through faith.
R.= Resistable Grace: God's efforts at bringing his gracious enablements to the sinner can be resisted by the sinner.
E.= Extinguishable Faith: the faith that God's grace made possible can be lost or shipwrecked by the person who had believed at one time.
I think this is a little more clearly descriptive than the FACTS acronym (and it doesn't have to be shared with a toy convention). Hopefully, some of my Arminian readers will weigh in with their thoughts. It would be nice to have something as communicative as TULIP among those of us who actually got our soteriology right! ;-)
There have been some good offerings for a similar acronym for Arminian soteriology (like FACTS), but I have never found them satisfactory, because I didn't feel they were clearly descriptive. So, for the ailment of inexactitude, I'd like to offer a cure, or literally, A CURE.
A.= Absolute Depravity: mankind is so stricken by sin and the fall, that none are able to turn themselves to God apart from his gracious enablements.
C.= Conditional Election: God has chosen to save all who place faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
U.= Unlimited Atonement: the blood of Christ was shed for the sins of the entire world, and anyone who will can avail themselves of its effects through faith.
R.= Resistable Grace: God's efforts at bringing his gracious enablements to the sinner can be resisted by the sinner.
E.= Extinguishable Faith: the faith that God's grace made possible can be lost or shipwrecked by the person who had believed at one time.
I think this is a little more clearly descriptive than the FACTS acronym (and it doesn't have to be shared with a toy convention). Hopefully, some of my Arminian readers will weigh in with their thoughts. It would be nice to have something as communicative as TULIP among those of us who actually got our soteriology right! ;-)
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Our Abortion Battle
This story is absolutely amazing! What does it say about Crisis Pregnancy Centers shift to an ultrasound strategy for combating abortion? Whereas the scriptures say one can only believe in what is not seen, the people we're trying to persuade say seeing is believing. Regardless, God has a way of making his enemies friends! A strange way to fight a battle, I know, but apparently it's very effective, at least the early church would say so.
It is frustrating trying to know how to approach the abortion battle in America. The religious foes of abortion, particularly Evangelicals, have been waging political warfare for 30 years, with precious little to show for it. Even with pro-life majorities in both houses of Congress and a pro-life President (from 2002 to 2006) nothing, really, got done. Innocent blood continues to pay the price for American hedonism.
As a result (I hope) some have taken to more violent measures in their frustrations. I think, however, violence is likely to beget only more violence, fire is likely to be met with fire, without actually stopping the evil battled against in the first place. The devil doesn't let loose of his grasp on those that are his through unbelief. His claws are only broken by the light of faith.
Murder is worth being against in any venue. It is a justice and mercy issue. The early church was opposed to abortion within the Roman Empire, but did not have the opportunity nor the political power to do anything legislatively about it. They fought their battle passively by getting adults saved and actively by rescuing the exposed (adoption). Abortion never became illegal within their realm, even after the days of Constantine, but it all but ceased due to the power of conversion and persuasion-- a lesson for us, perhaps?
It is frustrating trying to know how to approach the abortion battle in America. The religious foes of abortion, particularly Evangelicals, have been waging political warfare for 30 years, with precious little to show for it. Even with pro-life majorities in both houses of Congress and a pro-life President (from 2002 to 2006) nothing, really, got done. Innocent blood continues to pay the price for American hedonism.
As a result (I hope) some have taken to more violent measures in their frustrations. I think, however, violence is likely to beget only more violence, fire is likely to be met with fire, without actually stopping the evil battled against in the first place. The devil doesn't let loose of his grasp on those that are his through unbelief. His claws are only broken by the light of faith.
Murder is worth being against in any venue. It is a justice and mercy issue. The early church was opposed to abortion within the Roman Empire, but did not have the opportunity nor the political power to do anything legislatively about it. They fought their battle passively by getting adults saved and actively by rescuing the exposed (adoption). Abortion never became illegal within their realm, even after the days of Constantine, but it all but ceased due to the power of conversion and persuasion-- a lesson for us, perhaps?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
