With sincere apologies.

Created by OnePlusYou – Free Online Dating

Had a comment on the post about the article by Ross Douthat which turned out to be a trackback from Positive Infinity. Website with thoughtful and interesting posts from someone with an interesting story. Been there many times over the last couple years. A fellow non-Anglican (formerly Anglican) who follows Anglicanism. So stop by say “hi” and give some love to Positive Infinity.

Thanks to my good friend Chris Brady who is dean of Schreyer Honors College at Penn State University. His recent post “I write like lots of folks (and reflections on biblical scholarship)” in which he runs a few samples of his own writing through I Write Like and shares the result. He writes like several different people – depending on what he is writing.

• A couple paragraphs from my blog post about America and Africa? I write like Stephen King. Kewl.
• A couple paragraphs from my sermon yesterday on Genesis 18? I write like Cory Doctorow. (Not a clue.)
• A couple paragraphs from my article on Israelian Hebrew and its possible influence on Late Biblical Hebrew? I write like Isaac Asimov. Hey.
• It gets better(?). Different paragraphs from the same article? I write like Dan Brown.

Well there is a certain perverse consistency here. Stephen King and Isaac Asimov. Yay! But Dan Brown? Ugh.

I thought this was just brilliant.

It helps to know this is a remix of a rather good song “Empire State of Mind” by Jay-Z with Alicia Keys. Which itself incorporates an original song “Empire State of Mind” by only Alicia Keys.

H/T Ace of Spaces HQ.

This may cross a line.

There is a man I love and respect – whom I regard as a better man/husband/father/minister than I am – whose social-political views are often very different from mine. We are “friends” on Facebook. He often posts opinions that are pretty strong – very critical toward conservatives and Republicans. Which is fine. Normally I ignore them because (a) not always in the mood for a debate and (b) we have day jobs.

He posted something that did not require a response but the chain of comments got interesting.

Someone #1: if you die of crime or terrorism you can blame the criminal or terrorist. :/
i agree with a___…somebody needs to take joe lieberman into the senate cloak room and beat him with a sock full of pennies

Friend: [Link to Daily Kos article: "F--k you Senator Lieberman!" I will not link to it.]

Someone #2: Tell him to sue those bitches when you guys die.

With me so far? So I took the risk of chiming in.

Rick: Hmm – disagree with a person (say Lieberman) even strongly. But “f–k you”? Not feeling the love or the warm liberal fuzziness here. Can one say “you are wrong” without saying “you are stupid and evil and should suffer”? Does such rhetoric persuade the opposition? Normally content not to chime in but this was a bit much.

The reactions were interesting.

Someone #2: We Democrats learned such tricks from the Republicans.

Someone #3: Richard – Hate to burst your bubble…but just cause everyone assumes that liberals are all tye-dye wearing, pot smoking and free loving…it is not so…and we are, at times, not so warm and fuzzy. [emphasis added]

And that boys and girls is why I normally avoid these exchanges.

What struck me about this was:

1) My complete and utter failure to communicate successfully. Which is “wait a second – you characterize conservatives as evil and stupid and even worthy of violence. Can I assume you think of yourself as a liberal? Can I also assume you regard yourself as being more caring compassionate loving tolerant and open-minded than conservatives? Maybe you do not – but I think that is a safe assumption. So why can you not just say ‘Lieberman is dead wrong and this is why‘? Why do you say ‘f–k you!’ and fantasize about beating him with a sock full of pennies? Do you think that conveys the impression – perhaps we should ask is that consistent with your assumption that you are caring compassionate loving tolerant and open-minded?”

2) The effort to redirect attention onto the person asking the question. “Everyone assumes that liberals are all tye-dye wearing, pot smoking and free loving” – speaking of assumptions.

3) Yeah yeah I know conservatives say it a million times each day but might as well say it again. How would self-described liberals respond if I said “Frak you Senator Reid! Someone should take you into a cloakroom and beat you with a sock full of pennies. You want hundreds of thousands of Americans to be enslaved to the government”?

For the record the issue here is not “liberals bad – conservatives good”. In fact the title of this post is problematic. “Liberals”? What kind of a gross generalization is that?

The primary prayer of the Christian is “Lord have mercy on me” not “Lord have mercy on that heartless scumbucket over there”.

The conservative websites I visit do sometimes exhibit (a) profanity and (b) hateful rhetoric (mainly in the comments – much harder to control). Conservatives are not immune to “you are not merely wrong – you are evil and stupid”.

Perhaps I should lay off asking liberals to remove the motes in their eyes and continue to work on the beams in my own. That sounds like a good plan.

Been strange but good this year. Enjoyed the time with my friend Chris Brady and chance to meet some of his friends and colleagues and fellow bibliobloggers. Lunch at Bacco’s was excellent and only $15. Dinner at Ralph and Kacoo’s pricey and not so good and service was weak. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge on Sunday morning for Sunday morning Bible study and worship. Dinner by myself in hotel restaurant was my first Kobe beef hamburger very good and cooked perfectly. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge again today for memorial service for Lois Draayer. Lunch at Middle East restaurant in French Quarter was decent. Right now waiting to meet Eric Mason for dinner.

I have not been to many sessions and papers largely because of the back-and-forth and how tired this has left me. Been focusing on sessions on Psalms – did not have enough energy for session on Sabbath this evening. Creation imagery and theology in the Psalms. And more insight into the formation of the Psalter. Caught end of a talk last evening by Shalom Paul on Late Biblical Hebrew in Isaiah 40-66 – was disappointed he made no reference at all to my work which does briefly touch on the issue and points toward a future article.

I have noticed that some biblical scholars use cliches and buzz phrases without(?) quite realizing what they are saying. In the Psalms sessions several references to “global warming” – I care very much about the environment but believe there is legitimate cause for questioning Anthropogenic Global Warming dogma. Many references to how Katrina “exposed injustice and inequalities in our community” along with some gratuitous and ill-informed Bush-bashing – but do people who throw that around really know what they are talking about? Plenty of middle and upper class New Orleans residents suffered and lost everything. It was in the recovery process that one sees more of the disparity. And although the Federal government responded poorly one should not overlook the colossal ineptitude of Louisiana authorities.

If some scholars engage in casual Bush-bashing and Global Warming kvetching during their talks – why do other scholars not engage in casual Obama-bashing and in digs against Anthropogenic Global Warming?

For years we have noted the abundance of facial hair. And how much biblical scholars dress in black. Biblical scholars male and female are a surprisingly good looking bunch.

Appreciate Andrew Das saying hi when I was waiting for valet to bring down my car.

I do feel a little out of place largely because I have fallen behind and not been involved much in my field. Wonder what it would take for me to get “back in academic shape” so as to produce new research and writing that would stand up and receive respect at this gathering. But I can no longer beat myself up so harshly for not ever having secured a position at a college or seminary. The competition in biblical studies is astonishing. About ten (10) open positions this year. For just one position at Judson College (my friend Eric is in charge of the search) they have sixty (60) people who are interested.

In other words you can be smart and good – and never get a teaching position.

The exhibitors’ hall is overwhelming. Booth after booth full of books and publications – which are worth buying? which are worth reading? And I wonder if all of them are necessary. To what extent do people write books because they need to in order to get a position or get tenure? That is a risky thing to say and perhaps I do not understand. Often congregants comment that my Bible studies are very “academic” rather than “practical” – to which I try to explain that good application will grow out of good academic(?) analysis. How many people thought Einstein’s theories were too academic? And yet they yield results that are deadly practical.

I do wonder sometimes why I spent so many dang years working on that PhD and that dissertation given what I do now. But I trust that God led me in that direction for a reason. That is what I have been struggling with. Given my gifts and education – what exactly am I supposed to be doing right now?

Update (11/24/09): Had excellent time with Eric Mason last evening. We hiked over to the Gumbo Shop and each of us got the 4-course “Creole dinner” special. Best meal I have had here so far. Main entree was Chicken St Peters which was outstanding. I have always liked Eric but was especially impressed to realize just how strong and productive he is in his field – focusing particularly on Hebrews and 2nd temple/Qumran. He is well involved in scholarly circles and produces an amazing number of articles papers and books each year. Toward the end of dinner a few large groups started to come in and Ralph Klein of Lutheran Theological Seminary in Chicago famous for his work on Chronicles (and Ezra-Nehemiah) came over to say hi. (Wonder if I should try to snag some Hermeneia volumes before leaving.) Grateful to God that I know Eric – he demonstrates you can be an excellent scholar and a great guy at the same time.

I make a little extra income taking care of the computers and network at the church where I serve. We also have *cough several cough* computers at home – most of them old and seldom used. How often has a member of the staff buzzed me to say “my computer’s not working right” (which really tells me a lot /sarcasm) and the quick and dirty solution is “have you rebooted yet?”

H/T Targuman.

H/T Opinionated Catholic.

I discovered (that is came to appreciate and enjoy deeply) opera about 1 1/2 years ago. My daughter and I attended a simulcast of the Metropolitan Opera’s performance of “La Cenerentola” by Rossini last year and we both loved it. She could not get enough of the famous sextet “Siete voi?” and could not wait for me to borrow a recording and play it repeatedly in the car. We call it the “oompa loompa” song. It is the “oh poop” moment of shocking revelation in the opera.

Opinionated Catholic points us to What Does the Prayer Really Say? which in turn cites Patrick Madrid. Who heard on the radio that the Met has added to “Tosca” a scene where Baron Scarpia simulates a sexual act with a statue of the Virgin Mary (aka Our most glorious and blessed lady Theotokos aka Mary mother of Jesus).

I am willing to believe this is true. And if so would represent a deeply disturbing and offensive act on the part of the producer(s) of this performance. Probably – because what is the point of this alleged addition? Blasphemy? Or to show what a scumsucking carrion eater the Baron is? (Although one would still wish they had chosen a different way to get the point across.)

But increasingly I want to track this back for confirmation. Do we have specific information that comes from the Met that yes this is something they will do? Where did this come from?

And I may still jolly well attend. I mean heck we are talking about “Tosca”. By Puccini.

Update: Either my customary dyslexia kicked in or Patrick Madrid quickly added a specific reference to the Laura Ingraham show talking with Raymond Arroyo. My guess is I somehow brilliantly missed that. Need to check that out.

Second update: Well blankety bleep. I gotta pay money to listen to Laura Ingraham?!? No way. Searching for “Patrick Arroyo Tosca” yields nothing concrete. Only references to him but not what this fellow has to say himself. Houston – we have a dead end.

And not just because he reads Live the Trinity and sometimes links here.

What I appreciate about Opinionated Catholic (who lives somewhere in rural southeast[?] Louisiana) is how “fair minded” he is. He tries to understand the “other side” (not that he necessarily thinks there is my side and their side on every issue). And to be gracious and generous whenever possible.

I like that. A lot.

I also – as someone who once was an “evangelical Catholic” (confirmed by then Auxiliary Bishop of Boston Alfred Hughes) and lately has been studying Orthodoxy – appreciate what an informed and intelligent Catholic Christian has to say.

And if you are interested in college football or Louisiana State University sports you categorically must add Opinionated Catholic to your RSS reader.

Perhaps my favorite book in the series I was looking forward greatly to “Harry Pottery and the Half Blood Prince”. There were times during the movie I wanted to take a short nap – and not just because I was coming down with something. But at other times I was alternately thrilled entranced and moved.

Does does one start with the negative or the positive? (You may be interested to know a few weeks back we had an English Conversation lesson that centered on movie reviews. Turns out that our Chinese friends almost never go see a movie at the theater. Very expensive in China and movie theaters are dying out. We took a delightful teenager from Church of the Nations who had never been to the movies and had never had popcorn.

Oh right. Movie reviews. Apparently nearly all movie reviews follow a certain pattern and structure – sort of like a Pauline letter or a lament Psalm.)

There are at least two strong primary criticisms. First – the movie departs considerably from the book and often in ways that make for a weaker story. We are not surprised when we find out how Draco Malfoy enables… uh… people to get in… at the end of the film. (Trying hard not to give anything away.) In the book we are surprised. “Oh – so that is what he had been doing”. The budding relationships are resolved rather early and again not in the sudden “oh my!” moment one finds in the book. Surprise and unexpected moments of glory and delight are far more interesting.

Second – and this relates to the first – the movie is astonishingly slow. Boring even. More specifically large sections in the middle (not the beginning or the end). And for some reason tries to focus heavily on all the romantic developments and entanglements. To the point that the movie is almost more about “Harry and friends snog and get snogged” than it is about the growing threat of Voldemort and the efforts by Harry and Dumbledore to defeat him. My wife thought they were trying to borrow a page from “Twilight”. As they say in the film “excuse me – I have to go vomit”. The cutesy attempts at humor often fall flat. There is cheese in this film.

Now granted perhaps some of the above was unfortunate consequences of having to take a long and very well developed story (with multiple layers) and sending it through that meat grinder also known as “producing a screenplay somewhere between two and three hours”.

The whole anti-relationship between Potter and Snape is left out entirely. Which is a shame because Alan Rickman steals nearly every scene in which he briefly appears. Watch Rickman’s face toward the beginning during and after the “unbreakable vow”. The man is a master of the craft and further evidence that the British understand drama and acting far more than the Americans. (Sorry if that offends some people.) Rickman (with the script) also takes Snape “down a notch” – less harsh and more difficult to despise. (As if foreshadowing the next/last book.)

The movie opens well. A bloodied and shattered Potter being mobbed by the press. Potter reading in a train station cafe. The attack on London. The scenes evoke well the sense of tension and growing menace.

The quidditch match – utterly delightful. Although you gotta admit… is anyone else struck by how um… odd… male players look on those broomsticks? especially as they are vying for female attention? (Think about it.) (They can take out the whole “Potter in detention” subplot but not the stupid puberty love theme?*)

*(If you do not know that is a reference to the classic “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes”.)

The scene in the cavern… I felt like an invisible hand was squeezing my chest the whole time. Chilling and frightening. One person in the theater actually cried out loud when… And to see Dumbledore “unleashed”. For a brief shining moment we see just how powerful he is. (Let us come back to that.) Extremely well done.

One change from the book that is positive is how the movie focuses much more on Draco Malfoy. By the end of the movie we cannot hate him. We pity him. And during the film we are permitted to see the emotional turmoil and anguish Malfoy experiences as he tries to carry out (most half-heartedly) his dreadful mission. He is… a different kind of Judas?

There are some “theological” themes I could get into. Many suggest that Harry is a kind of “Christ” figure especially in the final film. (This is not to suggest Rowling was engaging in cheap allegory.) But in this film… there is much about obedience and trust. Not blind obedience – but obedience to someone that one knows from experience one can trust.

“Are you going to ask me why we are here Harry?”

“No sir. At this point I just sort of go with it”.

Precisely.

If Harry is the “son” who obeys his surrogate “Father” – what of the scene where the “Father” is the one who must drink the cup that cannot be taken away? where the “Father” sacrifices himself in order to help defeat the enemy? But this fits my personal view (literary theory?) that characters can move from archetypal role to archetypal role all within the same story or film. (Consider Max in “Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome”. The rogue/scoundrel becomes the Savior/Liberator. Go figure.)

There is more we can explore – but perhaps that is enough for now.

Anyways – do see it. But I so wish they left out all that silly teenage “romance” rubbish.

Addendum:

There are two reviews at Big Hollywood – one more positive and one more negative – that seem to make many of the same points that I do. But they write so much better than I.

John Nolte, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” (more negative)

Andrew Leigh, “‘Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince’: An Alternate View” (more positive)