Some Thoughts

I have been a little lazy lately about taking time to continue to write down some of my recent thoughts, sorry about that. I finished "Perelandra" by C. S. Lewis about a week and a half ago, but before I was finished it began building even more meandering hallways through my mind. Here is one idea I especially liked and another I very much appreciated Lewis for writing:

"'I know what he is thinking,' said the King, looking upon the Queen. 'He is thinking that you suffered and strove and I have a world for my reward.' Then he turned to Ransom and continued. 'You are right, ' he said, 'I know now what they say in your world about justice. And perhaps they say well, for in that world things always fall below justice. But Maleldil always goes above it. All is gift. I am Oyarsa not by His gift alone but by our foster mother's, not by hers alone but by yours, not by yours alone but my wife's -- nay, in some sort, by gift of the very beasts and birds. Through many hands, enriched with many different kinds of love and labor, the gift comes to me. It is the Law. The best fruits are plucked for each by some hand that is not his own.'"

Perelandra (Venus) is a world with many similarities to earth, only in this story Satan was unsuccessful in causing the "Eve" of Venus to sin. But what the story goes on to tell us, is that even in an uncorrupted world grace still plays a dominate role in all life. There are many implications that can be drawn from this idea, but my favorite is the thought that even if we could earn our salvation, the salvation we have in Christ Jesus will always be a much sweeter and a much greater salvation. This follows with the thought that as we live out Christian love in sacrificing our lives for others, we give our brothers and sisters this "better fruit", and as we are loved by our brothers and sisters we are able to partake of a "better fruit" than that which we could have gained on our own. Serve and be served.

The second passage I would like to write comes at the turning point of the book. Ransom has been trying to win a spiritual argument with "Satan" who has possessed a human body and is attempting to cause "Eve" to sin. Ransom is losing the argument miserably and losing faith in God's decision to send him to fight this battle. The book turns when Ransom realizes that it is not his job to have a spiritual argument with "Satan", but it is his job to physically kill "Satan", or at least die trying. Here is a passage that comes after this realization:

"It was fortunate that something so horrible should be so obviously out of the question. Almost, but not quite, Ransom decreed that whatever the Silence and the Darkness seemed to be saying about this, no such crude, materialistic struggle could possibly be what Maleldil really intended. Any suggestion to the contrary must be only his own morbid fancy. It would degrade the spiritual warfare to the condition of mere mythology. But here he got another check. Long since on Mars, and more strongly since he came to Perelandra, Ransom had been perceiving that the the triple distinction of truth from myth and of both from fact was purely terrestrial -- was part and parcel of that unhappy division between soul and body which resulted from the Fall. Even on earth the sacraments existed as a permanent reminder that the division was neither wholesome nor final. The Incarnation had been the beginning of its disappearance. In Perelandra it would have no meaning at all."

YES!!!!

(I would have just put a link to this post but I wanted to make sure everyone read it. This is a recent post from Douglas Wilson on his blog site. Charlie - taking from one of your previous comments, this is one area where I very much enjoy the synthesis along with the analysis. Enjoy!)

Below is a small piece I wrote for a Christ Church cookbook which, Lord wiling, will be out in the near future. Maybe by Trinity Fest. The name of the cookbook will be Hot Providence, and so stay tuned. In this short essay I advance the culinary argument for God's existence, which Thomas Acquinas somehow overlooked.

Think for a moment what God could have done with food. He could have designed a universe in which some sort of fuel was necessary, but where the (entirely superfluous) function of taste was missing. He could have provided us with abundant sources of nutrition, but which had the ethos of cold, shapeless oatmeal. No taste anywhere. Bleh.
Or He could have given us food that had slight variations or degrees of refinement, like gasoline. We could have had super premium oatmeal, which was more gruel-like, and then premium, like cream of wheat, and then regular, which would be like oatmeal, with the texture and everything. But still, nothing that had taste. No brown sugar.
What kind of God created taste? Not just the function of taste—because He could have done that and only provided one or two tastes—but the riot of tastes, the pandemonium of tastes, the bedlam of tastes that we actually have. Think for a moment what is actually going on out there. We have, just to take a small sampler, watermelon, orange, cinnamon, bacon, walnut, beans, make that 482 different kinds of beans, grapes, salmon, sharp cheese, honey, butter, and nutmeg. If we were to catalog all the tastes in the world, straight out of nature, we are no doubt surpassing tens of thousands of distinct, identifiable tastes. And God looked on the creation and said that it was very good, but He then wanted to expand on this good start. So in the creation mandate, He required that sons of Adam and daughters of Eve learn how to cook. This meant that they were to go out into the world, find all those tastes, and then start playing with them. What goes with what? And when you mix this with that, what happens? What happens if you mix a little more of this, but then set the whole thing on fire? Wait, I know. Let’s put it in a pan, melt some butter in the pan, and then put it on the fire. And by this means, the thousands of tastes became millions of tastes. Recognizable and distinct tastes. But what for?
Who was the first guy who figured out coffee beans? If we take these beans, cook them, grind them up, and then run really hot water through them, we get a comfort drink that tastes really nasty for the first six months. But if you persevere in the making and drinking of it, it gets to be really good. So God gave us the great concept of the acquired taste—strong coffee and dark beer and black licorice.
The omnivores among us may consequently be forgiven for thinking that everything is supposed to taste good, because it certainly looks that way initially. It appears that God has set the limits (and I think there are limits) so far out there that some might think there is no point in stopping. But I have grave personal doubts, for example, about Rocky Mountain oysters, soup made out of birds’ nests, and any food developed by someone in the grip of an idea having to do with healthy life style choices. That’s the kind of thing that gets us grape nuts, shredded wheat, and tofu. But still, the concept appears to be that God wants to enjoy all kinds of things. This is why I think there have to be limits, because if everything tastes great, then what’s the point? If everything is special, then nothing is. This is why we should be dubious about certain combinations—tangerines in milk, oreos and mustard, peaches and gravy, whiskey and ice cream. If failure in the kitchen is an impossibility, then genuine success is an impossibility. We need to measure the success of a dish with more questions than whether or not it is burned on the bottom.
So limits are important. Another place we might cross the line is when cooks get so into the idea of presentation that they start serving up what I call "art food." The food looks like it was arranged on the plate by someone who has a graduate degree in doing that kind of thing, but it tastes ghastly. Not because duck brains couldn’t taste good, but because the art cook kind of forgot what he was supposed to be doing. Taste first, and presentation to accompany that taste as a faithful servant.
So I return to the question. What kind of God would create a world in which literally millions of very different pleasures can occur in your mouth, and for no apparent functional reason? This is a God who loves pleasure, and is willing to throw those pleasures around His universe with wild abandon. He insisted on creating beings who are capable of enjoying all these sensations, and, because they have eternity in their hearts, they will pursue tinkering around with a foul tasting bean until they figure out how to get chocolate out of it. But in order to be a God like this, one who loves pleasure, He has to be a God who loves. More than that, He has to be a God who is love. But in order to be love, He must be triune. Before the world was created, before anything material came to be, God was every bit as prodigal and wasteful as He is now. What kind of God would do this?
For far too long, discussions about the mystery of the Holy Trinity have been assumed to be the province of theologians with fifty-pound heads. But there are two questions that all of us can ask, and we ought to ask them far more frequently—and in the presence of our food. Those questions are, "Who would do this?" and "What must He be like?" When should we ask these questions? The times will vary, but we ought to remember the questions every time we say grace, because this is why we are saying grace. When do we recall the questions? Whenever we eat a cookie, and then down a tall glass of cold milk. When the hot gravy goes on the cheese potatoes. When we are sitting on the lawn on a summer evening, spitting watermelon seeds. When the butter melts on the corn on the cob just right. When we pour lemonade and iced tea together, half and half. When the green beans are cooked together with pistachio nuts. Honey butter. Home made fudge sauce on store bought ice cream.
Who would do this? What must He be like?

Interesting Post @ Leithart.com

Here is an interesting post left by Peter Leithart on his blog site today. His biblical interpretation of this passage kept bringing to mind a picture of Homer's great war hero Odysseus: One of the mightiest, fiercest men to fight in the Trojan War, and still portrayed as one of the greatest husbands and fathers too.

Perpetual War
"According to Deuteronomy 20, any man who had built a house, planted a vineyard, or married a wife without enjoying their benefits and joys was excused from military service. While it was certainly possible for a 20-year-old Israelite to be unmarried and propertyless, it would seem that the military was largely made up of men who already had these benefits of peace. I base this on the supposition that men would be entering on an independent adulthood at 20, the same age they became eligible for military service. Also, I'm assuming that Israelite ages of marriage were comparable to other ancient civilizations; Roman girls, for instance, were considered marriageable at 12 and adults at 14, at which age men would begin to call them "domina." Thus, Israel's army would largely consist of men who already had some experience of the benefits of adult life in peacetime.
This has important effects on the makeup and psychology of the military. First, the men going to war had some sense of why they were fighting and what they were defending. Second, home, vineyard, and wife provided a triple anchor that kept an Israelite warrior from getting too attached to the battlefield. This was particularly important in the ancient world, when war was for some men was life, not an irritating interruption of life.
Nearly 99,000 of the total 281,000 members of the Air Force are single, and about 112,000 of the total number are under 25. (See www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/demographics/ReportSearch.asp.) What kind of incentives are we building into our military by sending twentysomethings with no life at home and nothing to lose into battle? "

Christian Education

The ever-rising topic of Christian education: This site has an interesting article that was published in World Magazine. (Click on the title.)

Here was part of a comment I liked that was written on a blog that had posted this article:

"Putting a fish on something does not make it Christian, just fishy.The modern evangelical paradigm embraces a theology that says that Christian children do not exist, only potential Christian children. We can't really know that they are Christians until they 'ask Jesus into their heart'. Raising them in a virtual guessing game mentality where parents have zero confidence in God's promises replicates the same. Why should they believe God, their parents do not."

Job Site

Hey! Here is a picture of my job site taken from my deck for any of you who haven't had the chance to see it yet. Talk about living close to your work. Here is a link that will hopefully take you to a set of sunset pictures (also taken from my deck) which I will try to update regularly: www.flickr.com/photos/76415271@N00/sets/557689/

"Quote of the . . . whatever"

It can really be amazing what a person finds when he finally moves everything he has ever owned out of his parent's house and into his home and begins going through it. (Maybe it's good I still have all my toys from when I was five years old, that way I won't have to buy my kids any.) In the process of sorting through some paperwork I did come across a beloved quote, and it just so happend to be another by C. S. Lewis (hope all of you aren't tired of him yet).

"If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth - only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with, and in the end, despair."

The Church Triumphant

Here is Charlie's "Post-Mill" pick that I told you all about. Andrea, thank you so much for helping me acomplish this! I look forward to seeing many more similiar horizons in future generations to come. (click on the picture to see a larger version)

The Way To A Man's Heart

In the last week, I have enjoyed a few well prepared, succulent meals. There seems to really be something special about food. To eat must be a design feature, as opposed to our typical thought of it being a means of survival. Maybe our need for food is a blessing from God forcing us together into community and driving our dependence to Him.

I wanted to add a little more detail to what I already agreed very much with in Charlie's comment on what "Home" is: I believe a home must be a place where meals are shared, and love is worked out between those at the table. In Communion, the grace of Jesus Christ comes to us, but in so many forms. We come to the table, if our theology is right, out of a means of survival and health; and God saves us in this feast and continues to prepare us for a true heavenly feast. But we see here that God also establishes Communion to bring us into community, to eat together, to drink together, to realize we are a corporate body, the bride of Christ, and to seek out forgiveness and love not only from God the Father but from each other as well.

I spent the 4th of July with my corporate body. I spent it feeding my face, sprinting as fast as possible while sharing a sack with another man's leg, dodging water balloons, throwing the football, and dodging misplaced fireworks with 30 other brothers and sisters. The evening was glorious! But I was also saddened to think that someone might have missed it all by spending the night seeking out a spiritual conversation while God danced with His children all around him.

Aileen also made her weekly trip to to visit her fiance (my roommate) this weekend and prepared the first, real, home-cooked meal in my new "home"; the dinner honestly felt like a "Christening" for my condo.

Last night I had dinner with the Bakers after my first voice lesson (little excited about that), another excellent meal that was whipped up in what seemed like minutes. I won't go so far as to say that a man must have a wife to have a "home", but I am definitely learning that filling the table with loved ones and food can be hard to do without one.

Pictures

Okay, if anyone can help me figure out how to put an actual picture in a post (Andrea?) that would be great. I got a "Post-mil" pick from Charlie yesterday that is amazing. (By the way Charlie, if you can get a print of that, I would pay you good money for it.) It has also been amazing to see some of Matthew's pictures from his trip to Europe; looks like he must be having a good time.

Here is a great picture site Nathan showed me last night; you can even order prints from here I believe: http://www.darknessandlight.co.uk/

Sorry for my absence in writing with any regularity lately; my weekend was full of celebrations, and I had little time for anything but playing, eating, and rejoicing.

P. S. I was glad to see that some other Christian blog sites shared my review of "Cinderella Man" and even expanded on it so much more thoroughly.