The best of the past

A faded remnant of past glory, but to misquote a lyric from the era: Wish I was there.

Ees so SillY!

I would never have thought two silly drunk Mexican crows would give me such joy.

He abla muchacho casa manana grande...

It's unmissable, in my book.

Merrie Melodies - Two Crows From Tacos
Uploaded by Necopodalex

The Beauty of Christ

Every time I read this it grips me. And I'm reading it over and over again. The Pearl of Great Price, explained like no other can.
I quote:

But Christ Jesus has true excellence and so great excellency, that when they come to see it they look no further, but the mind rests there. It sees a transcendent glory and an ineffable sweetness in him; it sees that till now it has been pursuing shadows, but that now it has found the substance; that before it had been seeking happiness in the stream, but that now it has found the ocean. The excellency of Christ is an object adequate to the natural cravings of the soul, and is sufficient to fill the capacity. It is infinite excellency, such a one as the mind desires, in which it can find no bounds: and the more the mind is used to it, the more excellent it appears. Every new discovery makes this beauty appear more ravishing, and the mind sees no end; here is room enough for the mind to go deeper and deeper, and never come to the bottom. The soul is exceedingly ravished when it first looks on this beauty, and it is never weary of it. The mind never has any satiety, but Christ’s excellency is always fresh and new, and tends as much to delight, after it has been seen a thousand or ten thousand years, as when it was seen the first moment…. The soul that comes to Christ, feeds upon this, and lives upon it; it is that bread which came down from heaven, of which he that eats shall not die: it is angels’ food, it is that wine and milk that is given without money, and without price. This is that fatness in which the believing soul delights itself; here the longing soul may be satisfied, and the hungry soul may be filled with goodness. The delight and contentment that is to be found here, passeth understanding, and is unspeakable and full of glory. It is impossible for those who have tasted of this fountain, and know the sweetness of it, ever to forsake it. The soul has found the river of water of life, and it desires no other drink; it has found the tree of life, and it desires no other fruit.

Jonathan Edwards

Oh. Experientially I'm at the fringes of what he's saying... but even from that point I still know that all this is infinitely true. You see, even just a taste of infinite gloriousness is infinitely satisfying.

What Apocrypha?

The Apocrypha refers to a group of 11 books commonly tagged on to the Old Testament by the Catholic Church, who claim these as Scripture. Why is it in there? There's a lot of reasons for and against, and I strongly believe it has no place in the Bible. But on what basis? I believe there's a strong argument why not, that's the reason for this post. But I need to set this up clearly. It's worth it, stay with me.

First, some historical background:
The Greek translation of the Old Testament (called the Septuagint or LXX - 'the 70'):

as handed down through Christians contains 14 (or 15 depending how they are grouped) additional books not found in the Hebrew Old Testament. These additional books are know by the Greek term apocrypha, meaning "hidden."
http://www.bibleteachings.org/apocrypha.html

The Catholic Bible contains 11 of these books. It is important to understand that the majority of these writings are certain to have been around during the life of Christ and certainly the Apostles were aware of them (we see their influence in the NT - see Jude for example. NOTE: quotation in scripture does not equal canonicity, Paul quoted from pagan poets.)

Second, regarding the Hebrew Old Testament:
What protestants call the "Old Testament" comes from the Hebrew "Tanakh". The same books occur as are in the Old Testament (sans Apocrypha). But that's not the issue. What is pertinent to our discussion is the order of the books in the Hebrew Tanakh: There are three divisions: The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. (Stay with me! it gets good.) In the Protestant Old Testament, The Order is Law, Writings, Prophets (the last being Malachi). However, in the Tanakh, it is Law, Prophets, Writings. Which means that The first book is Genesis, but the last book (contained in the writings) is Chronicles.(here for verification.)

Key here is that the Apocrypha was tagged on to the end of the OT.

Finally, lets tie it together:

Matthew 23:35-35
Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.

Jesus is speaking here about the of the historic rejection of the prophets. Then he makes a comprehensive statement - about the blood of all the righteous shed on the earth. And for this he refers to the Hebrew scriptures and starts with the first innocent who was murdered (Abel - from Genesis, the first book). The next name would be the last prophet, we assume. But who's this Zechariah fellow? He's not Zechariah the prophet of the eponymous book that's almost at the end of the OT. It's better than that. You know where I'm going, but you're not sure...

2 Chronicles 24:20-21
Then the Spirit of God clothed Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, and he stood above the people, and said to them, “Thus says God, ‘Why do you break the commandments of the Lord, so that you cannot prosper? Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has forsaken you.’” But they conspired against him, and by command of the king they stoned him with stones in the court of the house of the Lord.

A murdered prophet. To a modern day Bible reader the connection would not have been made. But hopefully it's clear now - Christ was referring to an incident from the last book of the Tanakh! With his sweeping statement, he was referring to all of scripture - from the beginning with Abel, to the end, with Zechariah. And there's no mention of that group of documents which rhymes with "Apocrypha". Seems pretty clear that he didn't consider them at all. So why should we?

[For even more clarity, See also: Luke 24:27,44 "law, prophets, writings". No Apocrypha.]

Remember: they existed in practically their full state at that time. It wasn't like the New Testament, which hadn't been written yet.

We're Despicable.

There's a parable in here, I'm sure of it.

Edit: This one too!

Bugs Bunny - Rabbit Rampage
Uploaded by Necopodalex

An Inkjet Made My Bladder

Oh my gosh dang it what the heck freaks me out. Yes, it's the kind of thing that makes me talk like a giddy high schooler.

The title is actually true (except for the "my" part - my bladder is original stock, thank you). They're regenerating organs in a petri dish! If this is not stunning enough, check out the video - the 'how' will floor you.

This is insane. But immensely immensely amazing.
Doctor Anthony Atala heads up this fascinating project.

A Relevant Message

Paul Washer is a man on fire. I was just introduced to him, but he's famous (or infamous) for a message delivered in 2002 at a Southern Baptist youth convention in Alabama. I recommend taking the time to watch. I don't believe he was invited back.)



He's a missionary as well. And I think the interview below summarizes his ministry well. The Church would benefit greatly from the ministry of more people like him. His sense of urgency is indicative of someone who gets the importance of the task at hand and how far we have drifted from it.



Relevance isn't about preaching what necessarily wants to be heard, but preaching what needs to be heard, even when its not in season.

Acceptable Worship

One of the great things about getting a theological education is exposure to writers that have been around for literally ages: It's like finding diamonds in the dust. Here's a quote about the role of emotions in worship:

That religion which God requires, and will accept, does not consist in weak, dull, and lifeless wishes, raising up but a little above a state of indifference: God, in His Word, greatly insists upon it, that we be in good earnest, "fervent in spirit," and our hearts vigorously engaged in religion, and our wills and inclinations be not strongly exercised, we are nothing. The things of religion are so great, that there can be no suitableness in the exercises of our hearts...unless they be lively and powerful! In nothing is vigour in the actings of our inclination so requisite as in religion; and in nothing is lukewarmness so odious.
Jonathan Edwards, The Religious Affections

So let's be vigorous. On any given Sunday, with the household of God - leaving the drudgery, the baggage of life behind, let us take our eyes off ourselves and look toward Him: he is the author and benefactor of our faith. In acknowledgment of his all-sufficiency specific to our lives, let us pour out our hearts. Let the response that we give to him in song, in public exaltation, be worthy in some measure, of praise befitting The King.

Watch, weep.

Some days it's hard to feel patriotic. There's not much to say after

This:



This:



And this:



[Unreported World - India Land of Missing Children]

The End is Here

There are many things that indicate the coming of the end of this current superpower - prophets of doom have pointed to the rise of the Spice Girls, Britney, and many such fearful cataclysms of the age.

However, I believe that when historians look back at our generation and attempt to pinpoint the one watershed event that started the fall of American Civilization, unanimously this will be it:



How can anyone miss it?

The Evolution of Language

This is interesting... to some. The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary just released its sixth edition.

Here are 10 of the new words, with their OED definitions:

1. Amp — To make (a person) very excited or energetic (as if) through the consumption of amphetamines or another stimulant. Frequently used with up

2. Beatboxing — The action or practice of imitating the sounds of an electronic drum machine with the voice.

3. Buzzkill — A person who, or thing which, dampens enthusiasm or enjoyment.

4. Chill Pill — An anti-depressant; anything intended to calm a person down (take a chill pill, calm down, relax).

5. Ghetto Fabulous — Pertaining to or favoring an ostentatious style of dress associated with the hip-hop subculture.

6. Monobrow — A pair of eyebrows that meet above the nose, giving the appearance of a single eyebrow; a person with such eyebrows, jocularly — a stupid person.

7. Pimpmobile — A large, flashy car, especially one used by a pimp.

8. Rockism — The theory that traditional rock music is a more authentic form of popular music than pop music.

9. Secret Sauce — A special feature or technique kept secret by an organization and regarded as being the chief factor in its success.

10. Splitsville — The termination of a relationship, especially a romantic one.

Welcome to the new world.

Show Off

What have I to show for all this time
that you have given me
unassembled pieces, shapeless, here and there
I lay it at your feet, complete
Self-satisfaction; I expect that I deserve
my reward, you have promised
see, they approve, they cheer me on
I must be in your favor

Take me by my hands
guide them to create
something useful, something good, shame me
seeing how I need your perfect skill
Then walk with me, so I grasp clearly
that I am not the cause of all this praise
you shine infinitely bright
You must be all they see

1 Corinthians 1:27-29,31

Auto Humor

We live in an age of automotive wonder. While it is true (as in most fields) that we're standing on the shoulders of visionary giants, some of them were midgets.

The 50 Worst Cars of All Time.

For world outreach, passion.

Jan Comenius was a missionary pioneer born in in Moravia in 1592, one of the first to begin developing a world scope for missions. The following is a quote from a short biography, which challenged me.

In 1461 Comenius visited England in the hope of gaining support for one of his more idealistic scheme, an encyclopaedic 'pansophic' college. This would embrace all knowledge, including scientific knowledge and biblical, and would teach the peoples of all nations the truth which would bring an end to war and discord! His optimism knew no bounds though we may feel he was rather naive in his expectations! The programme as he envisaged it would start with Christian nations and go from there to Muslims, pagans, and finally to the Jews, who, as the apostle Paul hoped in His Letter to the Romans, would come to faith in Christ through jealousy, when they saw the gentiles enjoying God's blessings. As he says in The Way of Light:

The result of that light which is promised is the conversion of all peoples to the Church, so that Jehovah shall be king over all the earth... Then the Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole circle of the world, for a witness to all the peoples, before the end shall come... Then the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of God as the sea is covered with waters... And then there will be universal peace over the whole world; hatred and causes of hatred will be done away, and all dissension between men. For there will be no ground for dissenting, when all men have the same Truths clearly presented to their eyes.

And he closes the book with the following paraphrase of the Lord's Prayer:

Our Father who art in heaven, may thy name be hallowed in the whole world! let Thy Kingdom come even now to the whole world! May Thy will be done even now in the whole earth as it is in whole Heaven! through the whole of Europe, of Asia, of Africa, of America, through the Magellanes [the southern parts of present-day Chile and Argentina], and through all the islands of the sea, may Thy kingdom come, may Thy will be done!... Raise up men to write Thy purpose in books, but books such as Thou Thyself mayest write in the hearts of men; make schools to be opened in all parts of the world to nurse Thy children! And do Thou raise up Thine own school in the hearts of all men in the whole world that they may ally themselves together for Thy praise; be Thou Thyself leader of the choir of Thine elect.

Whatever we may think about the viability of Comenius' hopes there is no doubt about his worldwide vision and missionary zeal.

From A Heart For Missions: Five Pioneer Thinkers
Ron Davies

Effective Punishment

Now this is one way to enforce rule of rules.

60 Years - Mahan? Pareshan? ...Jawan.

Close to our 60th Independence Day, It's a good time to be an Indian.

It makes more sense now. Sixty years after independence, India is beginning to deliver on its promise. Over the past few years the world's biggest and rowdiest democracy has matched its political freedoms with economic ones, unleashing a torrent of growth and wealth creation that is transforming the lives of millions. India's economic clout is beginning to make itself felt on the international stage, as the nation retakes the place it held as a global-trade giant long before colonial powers ever arrived there.

From A Young Giant Awakes.

Or this, an interesting perspective from William Dalrymple:

In hindsight, what is happening today with the rise of India and China is not some miraculous novelty — as it is usually depicted in the Western press — so much as a return to the traditional pattern of global trade in the medieval and ancient world, where gold drained from West to East in payment for silks and spices and all manner of luxuries undreamed of in the relatively primitive capitals of Europe.
...Extraordinary as it is, the rise of India and China is nothing more than a return to the ancient equilibrium of world trade, with Europeans no longer appearing as gun-toting, gunboat-riding colonial masters but instead reverting to their traditional role: that of eager consumers of the much celebrated manufactures, luxuries and services of the East.

From Why India's Rise is Business as Usual

I have a question that's been bugging me. Is economic prosperity necessarily directly related to God blessing a nation? It's the great claim of many Americans in our day. Or is it just something God allows for a season... like ancient Babylon or Egypt for example? I don't have an intelligent answer, but it doesn't seem to be simple linear "cause and effect".

...to live in Him as the fish lives in the sea...

If we do not see beyond the visible, if we cannot touch that which is intangible, if we cannot hear that which is inaudible, if we cannot know that which is beyond knowing, then I have serious doubts about the validity of our Christian experience. The Bible tells us:

"eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the hearts of men the things that God has laid up for them that love Him" [1 Cor 2:9]

That is why Paul goes on to remind us that God has revealed these mysteries to us by the Holy Spirit. If we would only stop trying to make the Holy Spirit our servant and begin to live in Him as the fish lives in the sea, we would enter into the riches of glory about which we know nothing now.

Too many want the Holy Spirit in order that they may have the gift of healing. Others want Him for the gift of tongues. Still others seek him so that their testimony may become effective. All of these things, I will grant, are a part of the total pattern of the New Testament. But it is impossible to make God our servant. Let us never pray that we may be filled with the Spirit of God for secondary purposes. God wants to fill us with the Holy Spirit in order that we should know Him first of all and be absorbed in Him. We should enter into the fullness of the Spirit so that God's son may be glorified in us.

A.W. Tozer
From "Faith Beyond Reason"

Sometimes you just need to emote.

And who better to help than Paco De Lucia.

It's a humbling thing, listening to him, because all I ultimately can do is get caught up in the emotion of the music, because to be honest I find that the subtleties of his style are hard to track with.

[for simple instance, what's with the clapping? it's like the singers prearranged it totally at a tangent from the music just to mess with my head.]

If you don't like it, well then, Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. Thpppppt!

God's Sovereignty - Not if, but How.

A friend and I were discussing the issue of whether the fact that God is sovereign over all things means that he actively orchestrates every single event in history, from the dropping of a piece of chalk to our acts of sin.

[We both reject Open Theism. This is just a discussion about the fact of God's sovereign control over all things and specifically HOW it works]

Briefly, these were the thoughts that emerged:

1. We are limited in our ability to understand the infinite. Therefore tread lightly.

2. God's sovereignty is not hands-off : free will is a loaded concept. Any will is always subsidiary and subject to God's purpose.

3. But (and Biblical examples are clear) God's sovereignty is not micro-management. He does allow sin. He does give Satan room to function (Job's case for example).

4. But does it need to be micromanagement? God is omnipotent... in that he has created laws and decrees, both Physical and Spiritual, which will come to pass whatever may try to interfere. Even in the micro, we CAN be out of his WILL (Sin) but never out of his sovereignly ordained PLAN. Can we disobey him? Obviously. But can we defeat his purpose for our lives? Consequently, just because we do something that goes against his command/will, it doesn't necessitate that we are also acting against his sovereignty.

Maybe the issue is that we need to separate the terms Sovereignty and Will. Does God do/force to happen everything he desires? ("he desires all men to be saved") No. But does God accomplish everything according to his purpose? (Eph 1) Clearly.

It boggles the mind. God's power is such that even when in the present all actions are turned against his will, ultimately looking back from a future date [nay, even in the rebellious now!], we can conclude that even though those actions may not have been according to his will; they were according to His intricately plotted out purpose.

Words of comfort to 'some of us' who are prone to wander.

[Now I realise this isn't an in depth study, so please feel free to use scripture to enhance /enlighten this discussion.]

Prayer

Let me be the evidence of what Your grace can do
To a generation struggling to find themselves in You
May they come to know the love of God,
May their eyes be made to see-
Give me the opportunity to share the truth
that sets them free
And may unity in all things
Be the banner of Your church,
And let revival's fire begin to burn:

This is my prayer,
Lifted to You
Knowing You care so much more than I do
This is my prayer,
In Jesus' name
Your will be done, I humbly pray.

[Bob Hartman - 1990]

Funny of the Day

Sometimes you just need to smile.

Who Do You Think You Are?

The beauty of YouTube: You may know of Stephen Fry, the British comedian. In a TV program on the BBC that goes by the title of this Blogpost, we are allowed a very personal glimpse into his journey to discover the story of his ancestry. It sounds boring, I know, but it turns into a very touching tale of hope, dreams, and the significance of every human life. And a reminder that there is a lot to be thankful for, even in a human sense.

If you have the time, it's worth a watch.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

I forgive you, but...

I've been thinking about forgiveness recently, and surprisingly there's a can of worms where I didn't imagine one to be: On whether forgiveness is conditional.

And so I did a little looking, and am going to make it a blogpost just because it's a place to have it for reference.

A few passages that relate:

Eph 4:32
"Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you."

Matt 18:21,22-
"Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.""

Luke 17:2-3
Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him, 4 and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”

Mark 11:25
And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
(look up verse 26, it's a killer)

Dealing with the passages:

Eph 4:32 is a good starting point. Some have used it to say that our forgiveness is modelled on Christ's. Which in a sense is true, but you can take it to far by saying "Christ forgave but on condition of our repentance." I disagree, because the verse seems to be more about the act of forgiveness rather than the method - "God in Christ has forgiven you! You now go and forgive". The passage is not saying "God in Christ forgave you, but it was conditional on your repentance. Therefore, now go and forgive everyone who is truly repentant".

There's more clarity available - Matt 18 and Luke 11 can be used to show that forgivness necessitates repentance. However, when we look at the passage in Mark 11:25, there we find a broader context. And putting the three verses together, this is how it looks:

1. We are to forgive all who sin against us unconditionally. (Mark 11:25). This is the broad circle, as it were.
2. We are therefore (now a smaller circle) required to forgive everyone who asks us for forgiveness. (Matt 18, Luke 17:2-3) The logic is obvious in light of Mark 11.

Some synonyms of words found in the Bible for forgive: "to show grace", "to release", "to deduct". In that light, when we forgive, we would be required to show grace (not hold onto a root of bitterness) to release (from debt) and to deduct (from any losses we might have incurred). That's Biblical forgiveness, and all these attitudes are possible unilaterally.

However, there is a place where a hands on approach is necessary, and Matt 18 and Luke 17:2-3 make that clear - there are times when the type of sin committed necessitates confrontation. Interestingly, the onus is not on the sinner but on the sinned against " If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault". The motive is not vindication but restoration. "If he listens to you, you have gained your brother."

Sometimes we run away from confrontation and "just forgive" but true love sometimes needs to do more to gain our brothers and sisters. And sometimes other people have to be broght into the picture (Matt 18), but that's about Church discipline.

This is therefore where I stand: Christian Forgiveness is unilateral and unconditional, but there are times when restoration is necessary even if forgiveness has been granted by the wronged party - again, a separate but related issue - love seeks the restoration of lost relationship and the repentance that accompanies restoration. Part of what you might need in the process of leaving bitterness behind is to address the issue with the person who has sinned against you.

Duh.

We live in an age of intensely high levels of wondrous intellectuality.

It took a study to show this.

One more pebble hits the wall.

TIME Magazine put out an article over the weekend which purports to prove that Jesus is still dead. Normally this kind of stuff I would just ignore, but then I started thinking - about how ironic it is that Christians are accused of intellectual suicide and grabbing at straws of "faith" (apparently faith meaning belief in the non-existent). The intellectual unfairness that takes place in such "findings" gives me the same feeling as having a root canal.

But because a celebrity is taking up this cause, it's going to be more mainstream than it would have been and have more intellectual clout (ironically) than it would have had. A movie review site I read said this about the whole thing-

"It’ll be interesting to see what he’s come up with, but it’ll be just as interesting to see the Christian response. Here’s the thing about the faithful: no matter how much proof you show them, they won’t believe what they don’t want to believe. We’re supposed to respect that sort of inane inflexibility."

How do you respond to statements like that? I don't think we really need to. Compare it to consiracy theories: That man never went into space or landed on the moon (google it, there's plenty of such sites) or that the holocaust never happened. And "proof" is supplied. At the heart of it is incredulity. How do you respond to such ideas? Normal people don't usually waste their time on researching a response.

Conspiracy theorists probably have similar words about their detractors as "inane inflexibility".

It is of note that the issue at stake is foundational: The resurrection of Jesus Christ, of which Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:17-19:

And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

He said it not from a standpoint of fear, like the world assumes, but of confidence. Where was his confidence? In his blind "faith"? Not likely. See what he says just prior to the verses above:

1 Cor 15:3-8
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. "

Why do we believe that James Cameron has no case? Well, because he's trying to rewrite the facts. That pebble is going to drop to the ground.

Edit: Cameron's Problems Begin
Edit: For Further Reference

Lost in Space

Spaceships with paying customers touring the far reaches of space... Space entrepreneurs... $20,000 to go on a spaceflight. I'm kind of a sci-fi fan and at first glance these ideas sounds like cheesy middle-of-the-road science fiction.

Except it's coming to a space station near you, say in another 15 years.

I'm not kidding

"Fifteen years from now, every kid will know he can go to orbit in his lifetime."

Cool. I was scared about the potential expenses of sending my kids to college. Now this.

Book your ticket here.

Three Lessons From Lewis, CS.

John Piper, talking about reading and books that have influenced him, stopped to mention the impact CS Lewis had on his life and his thinking. I thought it was worth mentioning. These are lessons worth thinking about and imbibing.

1) He has made me wary of chronological snobbery. That is, he has shown me that "newness" is no virtue and "oldness" is no fault. Truth and beauty and goodness are not determined by when they exist. Nothing is inferior for being old and nothing is valuable for being modern. This has freed me from the tyranny of novelty and opened for me the wisdom of the ages. He said one: every third book you read should be from outside your own (provincial) century.

2) He demonstrated for me and convinced me that rigorous, precise, penetrating logic is not inimical to deep, soul-stirring feeling and vivid, lively, even playful imagination. He was a "romantic rationalist." He combined what almost everybody today assumes are mutually exclusive: rationalism and poetry, cool logic and warm feeling, disciplined prose and free imagination. In shattering these old stereotypes for me, he freed me to think hard and to write poetry, to argue for the resurrection and compose hymns to Christ, to smash an argument and hug a friend, to demand a definition and use a metaphor.

3) Finally, Lewis has given (and continues to give) me an intense sense of the "realness" of things. This is hard to communicate. To wake up in the morning and to be aware of the firmness of the mattress, the warmth of the sun rays, the sound of the clock ticking, the sheer being of things (quidity as he calls it). He helped me become alive to life. He helped me to see what is there in the world--things which if we didn't have them, we would pay a million dollars to have, but having them, ignore. He convicts me of my insensitivity to beauty. He convicts me of my callous inability to enjoy God's daily gifts. He helps me to awaken my dazing soul so that the realities of life and of God and heaven and hell are seen and felt.

Piper later makes the point that it's not the reading of many books that is important. It is reading good books well... "Meditative reading, reading which stops and ponders, reading which sees deep into reality - that is the kind of reading which profits." With his life and mind as an example... he speaks words we would do well to heed.