partsofspeaking

I am extremely opposed to dualism, or at least the extremes of it that are so prevalent in both the secular and spiritual world.  It's a big subject, but just a few points: 1.  Jesus took on flesh.  That's enough to sanctify the body. 2.  We will get new bodies, not new spirits, at the end. 3.  The body is not the same as "the flesh" in Romans.  The body can be the vehicle of good or bad. So I was pleased to read this prayer this morning in The Valley of Vision. I bless thee for the soul thou hast created, for adorning it, sanctifying it, though it is fixed in barren soil; for the body thou has given me, for preserving its strength and vigor, for providing sense to enjoy delights, for the ease and freedom of my limbs, for hands, eyes, ears that do thy bidding; for thy royal bounty providng my daily support, for a full table and overflowing cup, for appetite, taste, sweetness, for social joys of relatives and friends, for ability to serve ...

As I have said before, I watch only two things on TV:  Turner Classic Movies, for which I forgive Ted Turner all, and the news.  Oh, occasionally I'll sit and watch Pawn Stars , a car repair reality show, Barrett Jackson car auctions, or even Duck Dynasty (which really is quite funny), if my husband has them on, but that's it.  On TCM one gets to see all the greats, although there are a couple they have never shown ( Laura being one), and I have found that my favorites are film noir.  This might seem strange coming from a middle-aged Southern Baptist lay Bible teacher in redneckville, but I like to surprise people who think they have me figured out from my outward looks and my job as an English teacher.  Why do I like them?  Let me count the ways (no, I won't break out into iambic pentameter; it mystifies me how poets do that!) 1.  They are in black and white.  A film noir in color makes absolutely no sense.  Technicolor overloads my se...

I am deeply drinking from and enjoying The Valley of Vision .  Today's reading is from "God Honoured." O God, Praise waiteth for thee, and to render it is my noblest exercise; This is thy due from all thy creatures, for all thy works display thy attributes and fulfill thy designs; The sea, dry land, winter cold, summer heat morning light, evening shade are full of thee and thou givest me them richly to enjoy. Enjoy is a word we do not study or live.  The enjoyments of life should be simple.  A sunset is better than a Hollywood spectacle; a ripe strawberry better than processed foods; a walk than almost anything.  We do not enjoy because our "wanner" is broken, because our enjoyment calibration is off.

I went to GALILEO today (it's the database for the UGA libraries) to see if there was anything on Kallmann's in later life--50 and above.  I haven't found it, and of course most of the articles were far too technical for my eyes.  My knowledge of genetics is not even rudimentary.  So maybe I'm throwing this out:  Does anything know anything about the lives of Kallmann's patients in the second half of life?  I do not define myself by Kallmann's. 

Our church was going to have a baptism service at the lake a few weeks back, but it was pouring rain so the service was moved to the family life center.  We watched video this morning of the 43 people who were baptized, in short snippets of people being "dunked" (a term I have never been comfortable with) over and over. Of course, these were full immersions, and the pastor wore a t-shirt and basketball shorts, as did most of the baptizees. It was neat to watch so many people go through this rite, and I realized four things about the typical Baptist version of baptism. It is total.  These people came up wet from head to foot, cold, sputtering, wiping eyes, dripping.  They needed towels as they came up out of the water and walked over another trail of towels to the bathroom.  No sprinkling here.   The top of the head was not the only wet part.  The participants have said, I am all in.  It was public and communal.  The whole church watch...

If someone comes to scripture with a Calvinistic mindset that God’s purposes are eternal, the answer to the question above would be, “No, of course not.”   The Old Testament alludes to places where God repented, relented, or changed his mind.   I think the differences is this.   God’s purpose does not change, nor does his character, but the plan (and how it is executed) is.   It has to be, otherwise prayer is meaningless.   I know we are given all these clichés about “Prayer changes you” and “Prayer is getting your will in line with God’s” but prayer is not necessary for either of those to happen.   Prayer is meant to change the reality, or at least the appearance, of the circumstances.    It seems to me that we talk about God sometimes, even in church circles, as if he has evolved, or grown and developed.  We think we know more about God than people in the past did (because we have more research, more archaeology, more Bible versions)...

In my Bible class at church we are listening to tapes of a well known speaker.   This speaker was saying that she asks God all the time “why me?” in the sense of why she was given the ministry she was. In discussing it with a classmate, I said I think it is because she is so transparent.   She tells everything, and women feel they can relate to that.   In this age of being mad if our privacy is violated but getting online and telling everything, someone who is so honest and open about his/her struggles, needs, defeats, victories is a desirable person. While I understand the value of transparency, is that necessary for ministry?   Are we prizing this looking at our inner selves through clear glass more than anything?   Transparency is never just about yourself.   If I say I was abused as a child (I wasn’t), am I talking about myself or my parents who allowed it or were clueless to it?   If I tell stories about my husband on this blog, am I ...