“Why, anybody can have a brain. That's a very mediocre commodity. Every pusillanimous creature that crawls on the Earth or slinks through slimy seas has a brain. Back where I come from, we have universities, seats of great learning, where men go to become great thinkers. And when they come out, they think deep thoughts and with no more brains than you have. But they have one thing you haven't got: a diploma.”

--The Wizard of Oz to the Scarecrow


"I know I chatter on far too much...but if you only knew how many things I want to say and don't. Give me SOME credit." --Anne Shirley, Anne of Green Gables, PBS, 1985

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Introducing...Our Blog

Today I am excited to introduce our new blog, Is That What You Think? As someone who thinks entirely too much myself, which can be counterproductive at times (meaning one can tend to isolate oneself, frown a lot, scowl, appear antisocial…) and observing that the Internet is now a forum for thinkers to discuss a multitude of topics ad nauseam, I was encouraged to start a blog. The difficulty in starting the project has been questions (which I have thought about ad nauseam) like: “What would make this blog different from a million other blogs?” or “Who would care anyway?”

The final decision, I decided, is that since everyone is leaving it up to me, the answer is that it doesn’t really matter as long as we have fun and don’t take ourselves too seriously—which I must have been doing up until this point. I need to take a lesson from Bob Newhart and just “Stop It!” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE).

What will make our blog different, is that those of us who write the fascinating articles for it (and trust me, they will be fascinating!) will have no fancy credentials, no college letters behind our names. We are in pleasant company! As one who has struggled with my lack of credentials, I started to investigate some well-known people that I was aware did not finish college, and stumbled upon a wealth of information about people too numerous to mention here. I will list a few of the most shocking. Let me say first, however, that I highly value education, and learning of any kind. A variety of life decisions and directions and values about money and debt plus risk versus reward can affect choices about further education. I make no judgments about anyone’s decisions, as long as they stewarded what they were given to the best of their ability with the information they had at the time. That’s about all any of us can do.

Nine of our Presidents did not receive college degrees. George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, Grover Cleveland, and Harry S. Truman all have this commonality. Harrison attended college and Truman attended law school, but neither received a degree.

Some of the wealthiest people in our country’s history never received a college degree. John D. Rockefeller, Sr. dropped out of high school but went on to take some business school classes, and J. Paul Getty dropped out of three universities including Oxford. Bill Gates and Michael Dell both dropped out of college in favor of the entrepreneurial dream. Thanks, guys...I think…

Benjamin Franklin, who is credited with discovering electricity, was also a writer and a political activist. Thomas Edison could not have invented the light bulb without the innovation of Franklin, and I daresay we could not enjoy our music as much as we do today without his creativity and perseverance with the phonograph.

In the entertainment field, neither James Cameron nor Steven Spielberg, both multi-
billion dollar directors, ever finished college and neither, in fact, did Walt Disney. Love them or hate them, neither Michael Moore nor Rush Limbaugh finished college, yet each is multi-talented and highly influential in his own political entertainment spectrum. Walter Cronkite and Peter Jennings brought us the news for years, yet neither of them carried a degree from an institution of higher learning. One of my favorite entertainers, and a man of all-around talents, Steve Martin, does not possess a college degree. Not only does he act, but he is also a stand-up comic, a musician (one of the few to win a Grammy for both comedy and music), and an author, both of adult and children’s books. George Carlin, another of my favorite comedians, did not finish college, yet is widely quoted as a cultural expert. One of the most shocking to me was Kitty Carlisle, the highly polished matron always wearing a ball gown on the panel of the game show To Tell the Truth. I pictured her as one of the most cultured and educated women on television at the time because of the quality of her questions and the persona she carried, which most likely stemmed from her upbringing in private schools in Europe.

So we informal learners, rabid readers, combers of the Internet, magazines, and newspapers, news watchers, Bible students, world observers, stewards of our earth, seekers of justice, lovers of mercy, fun lovers, humble worshippers of our God in heaven who will be writing here understand that we are but specks in this great universe, and we invite you to joins us as we think through some of the random thoughts that flow through our paltry brains, such as:

• Do you think people buy vehicles of a certain color to match their Hokie stickers?
• How can I use less plastic?
• Will there ever be term limits?
• Whatever happened to Bobby Sherman?

and other life altering questions for the ponderer.

‘Til next time…

15 comments:

  1. Just another tidbit from the mind of minutia - Steve Martin is also known for his paintings!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought so, too, but when I looked it up I was pretty sure it was another Steve Martin, so I was afraid to give him credit...but he IS brilliant!

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting question, Emily. There may be several ways to think about this. The first thing that comes to mind is that I'm not sure the death of the Messiah is anything like a "human sacrifice" in the same sense that the death of animals in Israel was an "animal sacrifice." In fact, that's the point the author of Hebrews makes. Animal sacrifices could never take away sin. That's why when the Messiah was murdered by the Jews/Romans his death was qualitatively different.

    To put the death of the Messiah in the same category as an animal sacrifice is, I think, to confuse the two.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Emily, apparently I must not be communicating very clearly, so let me try again.

    Jesus was not a sacrifice in the "animal/human sacrifice" sense. It's not as if God said, "In order for me to forgive you, you must sacrifice a human!" When Jesus offered himself as a "sacrifice" it was not in an appeasement kind of way. That's what the sacrifices were under Torah. They were there to appease God's wrath temporarily. And you're correct that they were a symbol of the penitent heart of the one offering the sacrifice. Nevertheless, they were an appeasing kind of sacrifice.

    However, when Jesus offered himself, it was not a temporary appeasement, but rather a fulfillment of what those animal sacrifices had pictured. He took on himself the sin of his people in a way that was very different from those animal sacrifices. This is how the writer to the Hebrews (chapter 10) put it:

    1 Since the law has only a shadow of the good things to come, and not the actual form of those realities, it can never perfect the worshipers by the same sacrifices they continually offer year after year. 2 Otherwise, wouldn't they have stopped being offered, since the worshipers, once purified, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? 3 But in the sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

    5 Therefore, as He was coming into the world, He said:

    You did not want sacrifice and offering,

    but You prepared a body for Me.

    6 You did not delight

    in whole burnt offerings and sin offerings.

    7 Then I said, "See, I have come—

    it is written about Me

    in the volume of the scroll—

    to do Your will, O God!"

    8 After He says above, You did not desire or delight in sacrifices and offerings, whole burnt offerings and sin offerings, (which are offered according to the law ), 9 He then says, See, I have come to do Your will. He takes away the first to establish the second. 10 By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all.

    The point is that there is something qualitatively different about the kind of sacrifice that Jesus the Messiah was from the kind of sacrifices that the animals were under Torah.

    Emily, you don't have to agree with that or even be satisfied with it, but that is the explanation. He is not a human sacrifice in the way you're using the term because his sacrifice is qualitatively different. I'm very sorry if I'm not explaining it well. Maybe you could ask the question differently to help me understand where you're coming from.

    Also, let me offer a clarification. To say that the sacrifice of the Messiah "forgives all mankind" is to say something that Christianity does not say. Faith has always been a prerequisite for forgiveness. And you are absolutely correct to say that if there is no repentance then there is no forgiveness. The kind of faith that appropriates the work of Messiah's death and resurrection is a faith that is evidenced in a renewed life. No renewed life, no real faith.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For lively debate's sake...explain "neither Avraham nor Isaac were afraid because..." I went back and read the passage in several translations, and I don't get that inference from any of them. I only see obedience. I see Abraham telling Isaac that God would provide, but that is no different than any parent would tell a child when it is unclear what God's purpose is in the process. So...?

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The topic of Avraham and Isaac is common Jewish history that we weren't given. If I'm not mistaken, it's mentioned in the Talmud, but I can check to make sure. Anyway, this is too tough for folks and I don't want to turn it into something blasphemous, so I'm going to let it be.

    How do we post a new thread? On the same page as this one?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm still working on the in's and out's of Blogger...Let's try this: Send me your new question and I will post it on a discussion page. We'll start a new discussion topic.

    What makes you think this is tough, by the way? Definitely, people are interested...I have the authority to remove anything blasphemous!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'll email you tomorrow and then you can decide if we should leave the topic up. Okedoke??? :D

    ReplyDelete