everything that's on my mind
(as if there's not already enough people doing this)Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Acappella...well, it sounds good to me
My church heritage is Churches of Christ - specifically, the acappella-singing Churches of Christ you find an abundance of here in the southern United States. I grew up singing in church with no instrumental backup. It was all us. Our voices - good or bad - were all that would be heard in our gatherings. It was in church that I learned to sing, and learned that there were different parts to be sung. I started at a Christian high school in 9th grade, where I was in the school choir for all four years, singing bass. I learned much more about music and singing from my choir director and favorite high school teacher, Craig Jones. In recent years, I have also participated most Sunday mornings as a part of the worship team (generally 8 or so people) at my two previous churches, first here in Little Rock, and then in Huntsville, Alabama.
I mentioned a few months ago about our church search since we've been back in Little Rock. We'd hoped to have planted ourselves before now - actually well before now - but it hasn't happpened yet. This is due in part to it being more difficult than we expected, and also due to sickness of various family members in November and December, which kept us from attending all together as often during that time. So, the process has been slowed down a little recently. In my previous post, one of the things I mentioned is that there would be things we would miss about our tradition if we, in the end, choose a church family that is outside of it. One of those things would be acappella music.
This weekend I went to a basketball game at my alma mater, Harding University. The "pep band" was there, playing fight songs and other songs to get the crowd excited as the tip-off drew near. However, when it came time to sing the national anthem, the band stood silent. A lone voice began singing "Oh say can you see..." and then was joined by everyone else in the building (or so it seemed). The gym was full, and, at a school affiliated with Churches of Christ, there were a lot of folks there like me - people who'd been singing acappella all of their lives, and people who knew how to do it, and do it well. I've heard the anthem many times in 38 years, but not many times was it better than Saturday night. You could hear all of the parts being sung. It was really cool. We also attended the College Church of Christ Sunday morning, where the singing is also always good. They don't sing many of the same songs I've grown accustomed to singing over the last 10 years, but they sing many of the songs I grew up with, songs I sang there in college, and they sing them well.
It's sort of a strange feeling, quite honestly, because I've always looked forward to a day where I would be a part of worship that included both voices and instruments. I love music of all types, and I wanted to experience that on Sunday morning, too. There were those rare occasions where I visited an instrumental gathering, or a worship event of some type, and I longed to experience more of that. But the following Sunday I'd be back at my home church singing acappella again. And so I would wait with anticipation for the next opportunity.
We've visited only one acappella church since we've been back in Little Rock, and we haven't been there since mid-October. So, after three months of praise bands on Sunday mornings (and usually singing the melody), I opened my mouth to sing bass notes again on Sunday. As I sang the first line of the first song, I realized at that very moment that it had been three months since I'd done that. And I realized for the first time that I missed it, and more so than I would have thought.
If I had my choice, I'd attend a church where both instrumental and acappella music were available weekly. Either in separate gatherings, so that I could experience either one on a given week, or, ideally, a mix of both in the same gathering. However, I'm not aware of such a place in this area. (And even if there were, it might not be the best place for us anyway. There's far more to consider than musical styles.)
Now, worship gatherings are not all about me. I realize that. They are not designed and executed to please me. Hopefully, they're designed and executed to encourage one another and give glory to God. But, we all have preferences, and I'm not exempt from that. It's unlikely that there exists a place for any given person where all of their preferences for worship gatherings (or anything else, for that matter) are found. So, I know that whatever family we choose in the end will not be "perfect", so to speak, in that way. And that's probably a good thing. There will be something that I could have found somewhere else that I would have preferred (at the expense, of course, of some other preference.) And in the end, I'm not concerned about that because if it's only that - a preference - then it's not really that important.
Wherever we land, the music will be what it is. There will be singing, and there may or may not be accompanying instruments. I know that I will enjoy it either way, and, at the same time, long for the other on some days. I know that, at least for this coming Sunday, there'll be a band where we attend, and I won't be singing bass. There could be another long wait until it happens again, I don't know. But I know now that I appreciate both accappella and accompanied music on Sunday morning, and that they are both blessings in their own way. Above all, though, I pray that my heart is truly "making music" to God, music that only he will hear, regardless of the musical style heard by our human ears. I feel certain that's his preference.
I mentioned a few months ago about our church search since we've been back in Little Rock. We'd hoped to have planted ourselves before now - actually well before now - but it hasn't happpened yet. This is due in part to it being more difficult than we expected, and also due to sickness of various family members in November and December, which kept us from attending all together as often during that time. So, the process has been slowed down a little recently. In my previous post, one of the things I mentioned is that there would be things we would miss about our tradition if we, in the end, choose a church family that is outside of it. One of those things would be acappella music.
This weekend I went to a basketball game at my alma mater, Harding University. The "pep band" was there, playing fight songs and other songs to get the crowd excited as the tip-off drew near. However, when it came time to sing the national anthem, the band stood silent. A lone voice began singing "Oh say can you see..." and then was joined by everyone else in the building (or so it seemed). The gym was full, and, at a school affiliated with Churches of Christ, there were a lot of folks there like me - people who'd been singing acappella all of their lives, and people who knew how to do it, and do it well. I've heard the anthem many times in 38 years, but not many times was it better than Saturday night. You could hear all of the parts being sung. It was really cool. We also attended the College Church of Christ Sunday morning, where the singing is also always good. They don't sing many of the same songs I've grown accustomed to singing over the last 10 years, but they sing many of the songs I grew up with, songs I sang there in college, and they sing them well.
It's sort of a strange feeling, quite honestly, because I've always looked forward to a day where I would be a part of worship that included both voices and instruments. I love music of all types, and I wanted to experience that on Sunday morning, too. There were those rare occasions where I visited an instrumental gathering, or a worship event of some type, and I longed to experience more of that. But the following Sunday I'd be back at my home church singing acappella again. And so I would wait with anticipation for the next opportunity.
We've visited only one acappella church since we've been back in Little Rock, and we haven't been there since mid-October. So, after three months of praise bands on Sunday mornings (and usually singing the melody), I opened my mouth to sing bass notes again on Sunday. As I sang the first line of the first song, I realized at that very moment that it had been three months since I'd done that. And I realized for the first time that I missed it, and more so than I would have thought.
If I had my choice, I'd attend a church where both instrumental and acappella music were available weekly. Either in separate gatherings, so that I could experience either one on a given week, or, ideally, a mix of both in the same gathering. However, I'm not aware of such a place in this area. (And even if there were, it might not be the best place for us anyway. There's far more to consider than musical styles.)
Now, worship gatherings are not all about me. I realize that. They are not designed and executed to please me. Hopefully, they're designed and executed to encourage one another and give glory to God. But, we all have preferences, and I'm not exempt from that. It's unlikely that there exists a place for any given person where all of their preferences for worship gatherings (or anything else, for that matter) are found. So, I know that whatever family we choose in the end will not be "perfect", so to speak, in that way. And that's probably a good thing. There will be something that I could have found somewhere else that I would have preferred (at the expense, of course, of some other preference.) And in the end, I'm not concerned about that because if it's only that - a preference - then it's not really that important.
Wherever we land, the music will be what it is. There will be singing, and there may or may not be accompanying instruments. I know that I will enjoy it either way, and, at the same time, long for the other on some days. I know that, at least for this coming Sunday, there'll be a band where we attend, and I won't be singing bass. There could be another long wait until it happens again, I don't know. But I know now that I appreciate both accappella and accompanied music on Sunday morning, and that they are both blessings in their own way. Above all, though, I pray that my heart is truly "making music" to God, music that only he will hear, regardless of the musical style heard by our human ears. I feel certain that's his preference.
Monday, January 30, 2006
Redick and Morrison
Sportscenter finished up the recap of the Duke-Virginia game - highlighting J.J. Redick's 40 points - by saying "anything you can do, I can do better." This provided the segue to the Gonazaga-Portland recap, where they highlighted Adam Morrison's 42 point game.Now, I ment
ioned the race for player of the year in college basketball recently, and said I had an opinion but wouldn't comment until probably late February. However, Jay Bilas made a pretty good point this weekend, in my opinion, and I'm now inclined to echo his remarks. Commenting on the player of the year race, if you will, he said that he wouldn't choose either of these players - he'd choose them both. They're having great seasons and it's too hard - even ridiculous - to say one or the other is the player of the year. They both are.I think he's right, at least at this point in the season. I decided to look at a few stats (and could probably add more if I had the time or desire to do so.) Here's what I found:
Against ranked teams, Morrison is averaging 32.6 points per game. Redick is averaging 28.7. (Morrison had 43 against Michigan State, but it was 3OT game, so his average is down slightly if you factor in those extra 15 minutes. Redick has played in no OT games.)
Against those teams, Gonzaga is 3-4. Duke is 8-0.
Against "good teams" - which I would define as those ranked teams along with a few others that are in the top 40 or 50 (most likely), as well as common opponents, Morrison is averaging 30.7 points, and Redick 31.6 points.
Against those common opponents (Memphis, Maryland and Virginia), Morrison is averaging 28.6, and Redick 27.3.
Season averages are 29 points per game for Morrison, and 28 for Redick.
As for other stats:
As for other stats:
Rebounds per game: Morrison 5.9, Redick 1.9.
Assists per game: Morrison 1.7, Redick 2.4.
Turnovers per game: Morrison 2.4, Redick 2.2.
Steals per game: Morrison 1.1, Redick 1.2.
I could go on with other stats, but I think these say a lot about how close these guys are. Morrison is slightly ahead in most of the averages, but then again Redick has more wins, and more against top teams. One might argue in favor of Redick due to him playing in a tougher conference. While there's no question that this is true, during Gonzaga's pre-conference schedule, Morrison was getting it done against big-time opponents, too. In the end, he'll have fewer of those opponents on his resume then Redick will, but he's had enough already to prove his case.
So, who's the best? I don't know if it's possible to say. And it likely won't be at the end of the year, either. As I said before, I think Bilas has the right idea. They both will likely deserve it at the end of the year. And since there are multiple awards, they'll both likely get their share. I think it may make the most sense, however, to split them all between both of these guys. They're both too good to finish second.
I could go on with other stats, but I think these say a lot about how close these guys are. Morrison is slightly ahead in most of the averages, but then again Redick has more wins, and more against top teams. One might argue in favor of Redick due to him playing in a tougher conference. While there's no question that this is true, during Gonzaga's pre-conference schedule, Morrison was getting it done against big-time opponents, too. In the end, he'll have fewer of those opponents on his resume then Redick will, but he's had enough already to prove his case.
So, who's the best? I don't know if it's possible to say. And it likely won't be at the end of the year, either. As I said before, I think Bilas has the right idea. They both will likely deserve it at the end of the year. And since there are multiple awards, they'll both likely get their share. I think it may make the most sense, however, to split them all between both of these guys. They're both too good to finish second.
I stand corrected
I tuned in to the women's final at the Australian Open Friday night expecting a good match. I expected three sets, and the third set to go down to the wire. However, it didn't start that way, and it ended even worse. Amelie Mauresmo came out and blew Justine Henin-Hardenne off the court in the first set, and then, early in the second, Henin-Hardenne asked for a trainer. After returning to the court for a few more points, she then walked to the umpire and informed her she could not continue. So, she retired from match due to some sort of stomach illness, and Mauresmo won the match and the title.
Now, it's pretty rare to see someone retire in the second week of a grand slam, and evenmore so in a final. But Mauresmo only had to complete four matches in the tournament. Three times - that's right, THREE times - her opponent retired, including in both the semifinal and final. Not that she wouldn't have won those matches. She probably would have. But it's unfortunate that she didn't get to. And it's also unfortunate that tennis fans didn't get to see a little more tennis out of two of the last three women's matches.
Oh, and surprise, surprise - Roger Federer won the men's title. That's his seventh grand slam. As they said on Sportscenter, "maybe when he wins his tenth Americans will be able to recognize him on the street."
Friday, January 27, 2006
In the land down under
The average sports fan probably is unaware of this, but the 2006 Australian Open is almost over. Sure, some may have noticed it on ESPN2 late in the evenings as they scolled through the program guide. But for the most part, nobody in America really cares. The NFL playoffs are in progress, and the beginning of the conference season has begun in the college basketball world (not to mention the NBA and NHL - if anyone still cares), so there's plenty of other sporting events to watch besides tennis.
This is part of the reason I consider the Australian as "the grand slam that doesn't matter." Not that it doesn't matter to those participating, or to tennis fans (including myself), but to the everyday sports fan, it's not high on the list. Other grands slams come at more favorable times of the year. True, the French takes place during the NBA playoffs and it's usually a couple of South Americans or Spaniards playing in the men's final, which limits interest in America as well. But it still gets more attention than the Australian, probably because it's summer in the U.S. and people are playing more than they are in January. Nothing is really going on during Wimbledon except regular season baseball (zzz...) and golf (zzzzzzz...), plus it's got the whole tradition thing going for it. And the U.S. Open, while taking place early during football season, does happen here in America, and also plays at night, too, so it gets a lot of air time and press. Plus, the rowdy American crowd makes it more entertaining, too. But the Australian sometimes goes by without much notice.
American tennis fans often remember their top players success at other grand slams. People like Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi - you remember how many times they won Wimbledon or the U.S. Open. Usually you can remember how many times they won the French, too, but that's primarily because the number is usually zero or a number very close to zero (again, Europeans and South Americans tend to dominate there).
Even as a tennis fan, I didn't realize the Australian had started for a couple of days this year. Venus Williams was already out of the tournament, and Serena Williams and Andy Roddick would be gone shortly thereafter. I haven't watched that much of it, mainly because of being busy with various things the past two weeks and of course, college basketball.
I did see a little bit of a Martina Hingis match, I believe in the third or fourth round. It was nice to see her back. I always liked her and was glad to see her playing again, and doing quite well, also, reaching the quarterfinals. I watched some of Justine Henin-Hardenne and Maria Sharapova - the only match I've really watched more than a few games of so far.
I will likely watch the women's final tonight between Henin-Hardenne and Amelie Mauresmo. It should be a good match. The men's final I will likely not watch. Roger Federer - who may very well be the best player ever by the time he's done - is playing a guy I've never heard of. I'll probably keep an eye on it, and if it gets interesting, I'll stay with it. But I don't see that happening. I would expect Federer in no more than four sets.
This is part of the reason I consider the Australian as "the grand slam that doesn't matter." Not that it doesn't matter to those participating, or to tennis fans (including myself), but to the everyday sports fan, it's not high on the list. Other grands slams come at more favorable times of the year. True, the French takes place during the NBA playoffs and it's usually a couple of South Americans or Spaniards playing in the men's final, which limits interest in America as well. But it still gets more attention than the Australian, probably because it's summer in the U.S. and people are playing more than they are in January. Nothing is really going on during Wimbledon except regular season baseball (zzz...) and golf (zzzzzzz...), plus it's got the whole tradition thing going for it. And the U.S. Open, while taking place early during football season, does happen here in America, and also plays at night, too, so it gets a lot of air time and press. Plus, the rowdy American crowd makes it more entertaining, too. But the Australian sometimes goes by without much notice.
American tennis fans often remember their top players success at other grand slams. People like Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi - you remember how many times they won Wimbledon or the U.S. Open. Usually you can remember how many times they won the French, too, but that's primarily because the number is usually zero or a number very close to zero (again, Europeans and South Americans tend to dominate there).
Even as a tennis fan, I didn't realize the Australian had started for a couple of days this year. Venus Williams was already out of the tournament, and Serena Williams and Andy Roddick would be gone shortly thereafter. I haven't watched that much of it, mainly because of being busy with various things the past two weeks and of course, college basketball.
I did see a little bit of a Martina Hingis match, I believe in the third or fourth round. It was nice to see her back. I always liked her and was glad to see her playing again, and doing quite well, also, reaching the quarterfinals. I watched some of Justine Henin-Hardenne and Maria Sharapova - the only match I've really watched more than a few games of so far.
I will likely watch the women's final tonight between Henin-Hardenne and Amelie Mauresmo. It should be a good match. The men's final I will likely not watch. Roger Federer - who may very well be the best player ever by the time he's done - is playing a guy I've never heard of. I'll probably keep an eye on it, and if it gets interesting, I'll stay with it. But I don't see that happening. I would expect Federer in no more than four sets.
College basketball this week
I said a couple weeks ago that I wasn't sure how good Florida really was since they hadn't played anybody. After rising to #2 in the polls, they've now lost two in a row. First, at Tennessee, who appears to be having a good year and isn't necessarily a bad loss. Then a couple of days ago at unranked South Carolina, who I know less about than I do Florida, but that didn't look like a good loss. So, I think Florida is not likely a top 5 team - maybe not a top 10 team - but I'm still guessing a little. I'll have to try and watch them soon. They play Kentucky in a week or two, and I'm sure that will be on ESPN prime time, so I'll probably check them out then.
Speaking of Kentucky, guard Patrick Sparks made Gregg Doyel's least improved players list. Actually, he didn't just make the list - he was #1 on the list.
One quote from Insomiac's Lounge worth repeating:
The Big East is easily the strongest conference in the country this year. Although that isn't quite as impressive of a feat when you have 50 teams in your conference.
I took my daughter to basketball practice last night during the Duke-Virginia Tech game, which Duke won rather easily 80-67. I had recorded it, and so I watched the first half starting at about 10pm last night, but fell asleep early in the second half, so I didn't see the whole game. I understand I missed Lee Melchionni being kicked in the face by a Tech player (who was susequently ejected.)
It appeared Duke rebounded pretty rather well from the Georgetown loss, especially Shelden Williams, who ended the game with 24 points (shooting 64%) and 15 rebounds. J.J. also added 24 points, and the game saw the second return of DeMarcus Nelson, this time coming back after a bone bruise. If Nelson can remain healthy this time, Duke should be a better team in March than they have been so far - and they've been pretty good so far.
It appeared Duke rebounded pretty rather well from the Georgetown loss, especially Shelden Williams, who ended the game with 24 points (shooting 64%) and 15 rebounds. J.J. also added 24 points, and the game saw the second return of DeMarcus Nelson, this time coming back after a bone bruise. If Nelson can remain healthy this time, Duke should be a better team in March than they have been so far - and they've been pretty good so far.
Vinsanity
One of the things I love about America is the professional athletes we have to entertain us. No, no - not with their talents on the field or court. Rather, with their stupid comments. They're so ridiculous at times, it's impossible not to laugh at them.
Now, I've always thought Vince Carter was a moron. (After all, he played at UNC.) But this week he really reached another level with his comments about Kobe Bryant's 81-point game earlier in the week. Vince actually said:
"The only bad thing about it is that younger kids, whose minds are easily warped, are going to think, 'Ohhh! I am going to go out there and do it instead of (honoring) the team concept first. That is what is missing in the game, guys understanding how to play as a team."
Which I find ridiculous because:
Last season, Carter ranked just behind Bryant in shots attempted per game (Bryant took 20.1 shots per game, while Carter took 20.0). And Carter is still among the league leaders in that category this year at 19.0 shots per game, although he's well behind Bryant, who leads the NBA at 27.7 shots per contest.
Apparently Vince has become a team player when we weren't looking. Thanks for the laugh, Vince.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Beyond the gates
I've never read Elizabeth Elliot's book Through Gates Of Splendor, even though I intended to several times in years past. However, after having the DVD sitting around for several months now, I finally got around to watching the Beyond The Gates documentary last night. Like the book, it tells the story of the five American missionaries who were murdered by the Waodani Indians in Ecuador in the mid-1950's. The tribe was brutal and killed at will. The missionaries had attempted to befriend them, and did so for a while. However, due to what appears to be some misinformation, the Indians eventually turned on the missionaries and killed them.
A couple of years later, Mrs. Elliot (widow of missionary Jim Elliot) and Rachel Saint (sister of missionary Nate Saint) went to live with the Waodani, and continue the mission begun by these men. They taught the tribe about God, how he wanted them to live, and in the end the tribe put down their spears, stopped killing others (and each other), and began following the paths of God. It is truly a miraculous story. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it, and you should see it soon.
End of the Spear
Also released by the same company last week was the film End of the Spear, which is the movie version of this same story. Now, let me first say I have not seen the movie yet, and probably won't until it hits DVD, so I can't really comment on the movie itself. I've read some reviews - positive, negative and all points in between.
Some of the negative reviews are concerned about a "watered-down gospel presentation" in the movie. But many of them are focused primarily on the fact that the lead role is played by actor Chad Allen.
I'm usually suspect of movies done by "Christian film companies" from the start. They have produced some of the worst films ever made. (I think we all remember the Left Behind movies.) But from what I've heard, these guys at Every Tribe Entertainment were out to make a quality film, not a film that will go straight to Christian bookstore shelves and never be heard from again. They wanted, among other things, quality acting, and they chose Allen as one of those actors.
Now, I don't recall having ever seen Allen in anything. And as I said, I haven't seen the film, so I don't know how he is in it, either. But the fact remains he's an established actor and the folks at ETE thought he was the right man for the job.
Oh, there's just one more thing: Chad Allen is also gay. Not only that, he's a gay activist. Which, evidently, makes him even worse. People are concerned about this guy's lifestyle and activism, and that people watching the movie won't be able to separate the actor from his life, and therefore he won't be convincing as the character he's portraying in the movie. Perhaps this is a valid concern, or perhaps not.
When I started looking at who was in the film several weeks ago, I was checking out some of the actors on IMDB to see if I recognized them from another film or television show. It didn't take long to find out that Chad Allen was gay, and not much longer to find out about his activism. I admit I thought it was an odd choice, and I won't argue with those who have said that, at the least, perhaps the filmmakers made a bad choice simply due to the controversey that has surrounded the film.
But here's the thing - I suspect that many people would have remained unaware of this, but now know because various Christian groups and "pro-family" organizations are making this into a huge story. Without this, many people would not even know who he was and, most likely, wouldn't care. But now I guess many will have a problem with it (just google search on it - you'll see lots of discussion, mostly negative. I actually saw self-righteous musician Steve Camp say "Jim Elliot would be ashamed." Not sure how Camp knows that.) They'll be pressured by friends to boycott it. They'll be pressured by "pro-family" groups to take a stand against homosexuality (how not seeing the film is taking a stand, I can't quite understand.) And some people will miss what might be a very good film because of it.
Grant posted about this same story earlier this week, and I thought this comment was on target:
A couple of years later, Mrs. Elliot (widow of missionary Jim Elliot) and Rachel Saint (sister of missionary Nate Saint) went to live with the Waodani, and continue the mission begun by these men. They taught the tribe about God, how he wanted them to live, and in the end the tribe put down their spears, stopped killing others (and each other), and began following the paths of God. It is truly a miraculous story. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it, and you should see it soon.
End of the Spear
Also released by the same company last week was the film End of the Spear, which is the movie version of this same story. Now, let me first say I have not seen the movie yet, and probably won't until it hits DVD, so I can't really comment on the movie itself. I've read some reviews - positive, negative and all points in between.
Some of the negative reviews are concerned about a "watered-down gospel presentation" in the movie. But many of them are focused primarily on the fact that the lead role is played by actor Chad Allen.
I'm usually suspect of movies done by "Christian film companies" from the start. They have produced some of the worst films ever made. (I think we all remember the Left Behind movies.) But from what I've heard, these guys at Every Tribe Entertainment were out to make a quality film, not a film that will go straight to Christian bookstore shelves and never be heard from again. They wanted, among other things, quality acting, and they chose Allen as one of those actors.
Now, I don't recall having ever seen Allen in anything. And as I said, I haven't seen the film, so I don't know how he is in it, either. But the fact remains he's an established actor and the folks at ETE thought he was the right man for the job.
Oh, there's just one more thing: Chad Allen is also gay. Not only that, he's a gay activist. Which, evidently, makes him even worse. People are concerned about this guy's lifestyle and activism, and that people watching the movie won't be able to separate the actor from his life, and therefore he won't be convincing as the character he's portraying in the movie. Perhaps this is a valid concern, or perhaps not.
When I started looking at who was in the film several weeks ago, I was checking out some of the actors on IMDB to see if I recognized them from another film or television show. It didn't take long to find out that Chad Allen was gay, and not much longer to find out about his activism. I admit I thought it was an odd choice, and I won't argue with those who have said that, at the least, perhaps the filmmakers made a bad choice simply due to the controversey that has surrounded the film.
But here's the thing - I suspect that many people would have remained unaware of this, but now know because various Christian groups and "pro-family" organizations are making this into a huge story. Without this, many people would not even know who he was and, most likely, wouldn't care. But now I guess many will have a problem with it (just google search on it - you'll see lots of discussion, mostly negative. I actually saw self-righteous musician Steve Camp say "Jim Elliot would be ashamed." Not sure how Camp knows that.) They'll be pressured by friends to boycott it. They'll be pressured by "pro-family" groups to take a stand against homosexuality (how not seeing the film is taking a stand, I can't quite understand.) And some people will miss what might be a very good film because of it.
Grant posted about this same story earlier this week, and I thought this comment was on target:
I have a question concerning that reaction. Can we think of another reaction to things other than boycott? Is that as creative as we can get? How about...ummm, I don't know...dialogue, conversation, bridge building?
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
End of the road
I began listening to Audio Adrenaline when their first disc came out in the early 90's. I saw them in concert three times, I believe - once with Geoff Moore & the Distance, later with dc Talk, and finally with Steven Curtis Chapman. They always put on a good show. I met Mark Stuart and Will McGinness after the show with Geoff Moore in Hot Springs, AR, and I continued to listen to their music through the years (although I haven't heard their latest).
However, it appears that the end of the road is near. According to CMSpin, the band is soon calling it a day. Not surprisingly, Stuart's voice has had about all it can take, and that is at least part of the decision. I figure most bands have a small time frame for success, and then other bands move into the spotlight. I think Audio A's spotlight time has been over for a while anyway, and so it's not necessarily a bad thing to move on. But they put out some good stuff during their time and I'm glad they did. My favorite songs, I'd say, are probably "Memoir" (Bloom), "Some Kind of Zombie" (Some Kind of Zombie), and "My God" (Audio Adrenaline). They'll be putting out one final disc, Adios, later this year.
Duke women hammer Tennessee
I've made no secret about my dislike of Tennessee. Seeing their football team fail to make a bowl was the highlight of the college football season for me. I know that sounds harsh, but I think it started with a friend from Memphis in college who was a big time Vols fan. The Clint Stoerner incident in 98 didn't help.
It's also obvious of my love for Duke basketball. True, it's primarily the men's team, but I've become a big fan of Coach G and the women's team in recent years as well, as they have become a perennial top 10 team and been to several final fours.
So, I watched the much-hyped women's game last night between #1 Tennessee and #2 Duke on ESPN last night. The game was played at Cameron Indoor Stadium, and the short version is this - the Lady Devils embarrassed the Lady Vols. They led by 28 points at one point in the 2nd half, finishing with a 75-53 win. Duke outplayed Tennessee in pretty much every area of the game. Duke's women have had some good seasons over the last 7 years, but I think this might just be their year. Next up is a game at Clemson, and then a UNC team that beat them 3 times last year. Sunday, when they come to Cameron, I expect Duke to exact a little revenge for last season.
Speaking of the Vols...
After another failure to win a Super Bowl by former Vols quarterback Peyton Manning (or even get to a Super Bowl, for that matter), I heard it suggested last week - in jest, of course - that maybe the Colts should consider bringing in Tee Martin as quarterback. As you may recall, Martin was the Vols quarterback the year after Manning graduated. It was also that season that the Vols won the national championship. Bring in Tee Martin... that just cracks me up.
However, it appears that the end of the road is near. According to CMSpin, the band is soon calling it a day. Not surprisingly, Stuart's voice has had about all it can take, and that is at least part of the decision. I figure most bands have a small time frame for success, and then other bands move into the spotlight. I think Audio A's spotlight time has been over for a while anyway, and so it's not necessarily a bad thing to move on. But they put out some good stuff during their time and I'm glad they did. My favorite songs, I'd say, are probably "Memoir" (Bloom), "Some Kind of Zombie" (Some Kind of Zombie), and "My God" (Audio Adrenaline). They'll be putting out one final disc, Adios, later this year.
Duke women hammer Tennessee
I've made no secret about my dislike of Tennessee. Seeing their football team fail to make a bowl was the highlight of the college football season for me. I know that sounds harsh, but I think it started with a friend from Memphis in college who was a big time Vols fan. The Clint Stoerner incident in 98 didn't help.
It's also obvious of my love for Duke basketball. True, it's primarily the men's team, but I've become a big fan of Coach G and the women's team in recent years as well, as they have become a perennial top 10 team and been to several final fours.
So, I watched the much-hyped women's game last night between #1 Tennessee and #2 Duke on ESPN last night. The game was played at Cameron Indoor Stadium, and the short version is this - the Lady Devils embarrassed the Lady Vols. They led by 28 points at one point in the 2nd half, finishing with a 75-53 win. Duke outplayed Tennessee in pretty much every area of the game. Duke's women have had some good seasons over the last 7 years, but I think this might just be their year. Next up is a game at Clemson, and then a UNC team that beat them 3 times last year. Sunday, when they come to Cameron, I expect Duke to exact a little revenge for last season.
Speaking of the Vols...
After another failure to win a Super Bowl by former Vols quarterback Peyton Manning (or even get to a Super Bowl, for that matter), I heard it suggested last week - in jest, of course - that maybe the Colts should consider bringing in Tee Martin as quarterback. As you may recall, Martin was the Vols quarterback the year after Manning graduated. It was also that season that the Vols won the national championship. Bring in Tee Martin... that just cracks me up.
Monday, January 23, 2006
The two Jakes
It wasn't a good weekend to have a quarterback named Jake. Both Denver's Jake Plummer and Carolina's Jake Delhomme were ineffective as they lost in the championship games.
I did not watch the NFC game as closely because I just didn't care. I guess I wanted Carolina to win - although I'm not sure why. But it appeared that Seattle had little problem with Carolina's offense on their way to a 34-14 win.
The AFC game was the one I cared about. There's not really a team in the NFL that I consider "my team", so I usually pick a team each year that I hope wins the Super Bowl. I've sort of latched onto the Patriots the last few years - mainly because I always wanted them to beat Indianapolis, who I don't care for due to my dislike of Peyton Manning. So, this year it was Pittsburgh who took at Indianapolis, so I'm pretty much with them the rest of the way. I thought if one of the road teams was going to win, it might be Carlolina - based primarily on the talking heads saying they are the "hot team." But instead, it was the Steelers, who, just like last week against the Colts, jumped all over the Broncos early and then just maintained the lead for the rest of the game. Jake Plummer helped a little, too, with 4 turnovers.
So, I'll be looking forward to Super Bowl and seeing if Pittsburgh can keep it going.
The unbeatens
It was also not a good weekend to be undefeated in college basketball. Pitt lost early Saturday, followed by Duke, then later Florida.
I wasn't surprised by any of them, but if I would've picked one to remain unbeaten, it would've been - of course - Duke. I didn't know much about Georgetown, having not seen them play or heard much about them so far this year. They were unranked, probably due to a weak schedule and no quality wins (which, of course, has now changed).
However, I looked at their schedule before the game on Saturday, and while they hadn't really beaten anyone of consequence, they did have three "good losses" (if there's such a thing.) After an early season loss to Vanderbilt, they'd had three other losses - all on the road, all less than 10 points, and all against ranked opponents. They'd lost to West Virginia, and to two teams who've been in the top 10 most of the season - Illinois and Connecticut. That, coupled with the facts that they were playing at home and that most people give Duke their best shot (especially when they're still undefeated), led me to believe Duke could easily lose the game.
What surprised me, though, was how they lost. Basically, nobody except J.J. Redick showed up. The defense was horrible. They simply could not stop Georgetown from scoring. The Hoyas shot 67% in the first half, and 62% for the game, in the 87-84 win. Of course, that's easy to do when 4 out of every 5 shots is a layup. Duke actually shot 52% for the game. It's not very often that they'll shoot 52% and lose. That's practically unheard of. Shelden Williams was non-existent on offense (4 points), and Paulus had a couple of late turnovers - including one on the last play with Duke down three. Redick played great as usual, putting up 41 points for the second time this season (previously against Texas). But he had no help, and Duke was down 14 at the half and couldn't recover. Coach K made the following comments:
I did not watch the NFC game as closely because I just didn't care. I guess I wanted Carolina to win - although I'm not sure why. But it appeared that Seattle had little problem with Carolina's offense on their way to a 34-14 win.
The AFC game was the one I cared about. There's not really a team in the NFL that I consider "my team", so I usually pick a team each year that I hope wins the Super Bowl. I've sort of latched onto the Patriots the last few years - mainly because I always wanted them to beat Indianapolis, who I don't care for due to my dislike of Peyton Manning. So, this year it was Pittsburgh who took at Indianapolis, so I'm pretty much with them the rest of the way. I thought if one of the road teams was going to win, it might be Carlolina - based primarily on the talking heads saying they are the "hot team." But instead, it was the Steelers, who, just like last week against the Colts, jumped all over the Broncos early and then just maintained the lead for the rest of the game. Jake Plummer helped a little, too, with 4 turnovers.
So, I'll be looking forward to Super Bowl and seeing if Pittsburgh can keep it going.
The unbeatens
It was also not a good weekend to be undefeated in college basketball. Pitt lost early Saturday, followed by Duke, then later Florida.
I wasn't surprised by any of them, but if I would've picked one to remain unbeaten, it would've been - of course - Duke. I didn't know much about Georgetown, having not seen them play or heard much about them so far this year. They were unranked, probably due to a weak schedule and no quality wins (which, of course, has now changed).
However, I looked at their schedule before the game on Saturday, and while they hadn't really beaten anyone of consequence, they did have three "good losses" (if there's such a thing.) After an early season loss to Vanderbilt, they'd had three other losses - all on the road, all less than 10 points, and all against ranked opponents. They'd lost to West Virginia, and to two teams who've been in the top 10 most of the season - Illinois and Connecticut. That, coupled with the facts that they were playing at home and that most people give Duke their best shot (especially when they're still undefeated), led me to believe Duke could easily lose the game.
What surprised me, though, was how they lost. Basically, nobody except J.J. Redick showed up. The defense was horrible. They simply could not stop Georgetown from scoring. The Hoyas shot 67% in the first half, and 62% for the game, in the 87-84 win. Of course, that's easy to do when 4 out of every 5 shots is a layup. Duke actually shot 52% for the game. It's not very often that they'll shoot 52% and lose. That's practically unheard of. Shelden Williams was non-existent on offense (4 points), and Paulus had a couple of late turnovers - including one on the last play with Duke down three. Redick played great as usual, putting up 41 points for the second time this season (previously against Texas). But he had no help, and Duke was down 14 at the half and couldn't recover. Coach K made the following comments:
All of a sudden we do J.J. watching, where we're watching J.J. play. We might as well get tickets and sit behind the bench. And no one else is doing anything out there.With a little better defense, especially in the first half, they would be 18-0. Instead, now it's off to Virginia Tech, where they hope to avoid a second straight loss. And maybe now all of the idiot talking heads can stop talking about Duke or anyone else going undefeated. What did I say last week?
We were not worthy of our jerseys, our Duke jerseys, in the first half.
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Duke holds off State
The way N.C. State had been playing this year, I came to believe that if Duke was going to lose a game at home this year, it just might be last night's game with State. It was a huge game between what are probably the two best teams in the league (although Miami and Carolina might have something to say about who's #2). And it was particularly huge since, with the ACC expansion, Duke and State only play once a year.
Duke managed to pull away late and win what was a very close game throughout (despite the final score of 81-68). State went up 62-58 with about 6 minutes to go, then Duke finished the game on a 23-6 run to end it.
A key play (probably the key play) in the game was a "6-point play" late in the second half. With the score tied at 65, Sean Dockery made a 3-pointer and was fouled. He missed the free throw, but got his own rebound and kicked it out to Lee Melchionni, who dropped his own 3-pointer and suddenly Duke was up six, and never looked back.
State's big man Cedric Simmons had a great game, benefiting from Duke's defensive strategy of taking away the three-point shot. He scored 28 points, pulled 9 rebounds, and had 7 blocks. It reminded me of the Indiana game, where Duke also tried to take away the three-point shot and it helped Marco Killingsworth have a career game, too. However, Duke countered with the usual suspects - J.J. Redick (28 points, 6 assists) and Shelden Williams (21 points, 9 rebounds, 4 blocks, 5 steals).
I thought Duke took a lot of bad shots in the game, especially in the first half. Some of it may have been State's defense, but I thought they just rushed shots at times and took some long (and unnecessary) three's. I thought a little better shot selection would have helped maintain a lead, which they could never do for long. State also was shooting well - 53% in the first half, and 52% for the game (to Duke's 38% in the first half, and 45% for the game).
But a win is what matters, and now they're 17-0, tying the best start in school history (the 1992 team started 17-0 as well.) A win at Georgetown this weekend would give them the record. They won't remain undefeated - a difficult stretch of road games is on the horizon - but it would be nice to see them set the "best start" record.
Speaking of being undefeated, I've seen several articles this week where this possibility was discussed. The people saying it could happen have lost their minds. The age of a team finishing undefeated is over, in my opinion. It's just not going to happen anymore. Here's a quote from Coach K last night, speaking to that and to the Duke hype (which, as I've noted before, I don't like, either):
Intimidation
Along the same lines, a note about Mike Patrick - who I love as a play-by-play guy. However, I kept getting a little annoyed about him going on and on about how State was "not intimidated in the least" playing against Duke. The thing is this - this is ACC play. It's not like Duke is going to intimidate anyone in conference play. Maybe they intimidated Seton Hall or Bucknell, but not in conference play against teams that see them every year. And definitely not against a good team like State.
So, enough already with expecting teams to be intimidated by Duke. They won't be, and if they're a good team, they shouldn't be. In fact, in most cases, I think teams not only are not intimidated, but have greater motivation to play well and attempt the "upset" (which is a relative term anyway). Duke gets everyone's best shot. You can't do that if you're intimidated, so these guys need to stop being so astonished that a team plays well against Duke.
Duke managed to pull away late and win what was a very close game throughout (despite the final score of 81-68). State went up 62-58 with about 6 minutes to go, then Duke finished the game on a 23-6 run to end it.
A key play (probably the key play) in the game was a "6-point play" late in the second half. With the score tied at 65, Sean Dockery made a 3-pointer and was fouled. He missed the free throw, but got his own rebound and kicked it out to Lee Melchionni, who dropped his own 3-pointer and suddenly Duke was up six, and never looked back.
State's big man Cedric Simmons had a great game, benefiting from Duke's defensive strategy of taking away the three-point shot. He scored 28 points, pulled 9 rebounds, and had 7 blocks. It reminded me of the Indiana game, where Duke also tried to take away the three-point shot and it helped Marco Killingsworth have a career game, too. However, Duke countered with the usual suspects - J.J. Redick (28 points, 6 assists) and Shelden Williams (21 points, 9 rebounds, 4 blocks, 5 steals).
I thought Duke took a lot of bad shots in the game, especially in the first half. Some of it may have been State's defense, but I thought they just rushed shots at times and took some long (and unnecessary) three's. I thought a little better shot selection would have helped maintain a lead, which they could never do for long. State also was shooting well - 53% in the first half, and 52% for the game (to Duke's 38% in the first half, and 45% for the game).
But a win is what matters, and now they're 17-0, tying the best start in school history (the 1992 team started 17-0 as well.) A win at Georgetown this weekend would give them the record. They won't remain undefeated - a difficult stretch of road games is on the horizon - but it would be nice to see them set the "best start" record.
Speaking of being undefeated, I've seen several articles this week where this possibility was discussed. The people saying it could happen have lost their minds. The age of a team finishing undefeated is over, in my opinion. It's just not going to happen anymore. Here's a quote from Coach K last night, speaking to that and to the Duke hype (which, as I've noted before, I don't like, either):
Some of the things that are being written are just overdone about our team, and that's the world they live in. Are they going to go undefeated? Are they going to do this? We're starting Lee Melchionni and Sean Dockery. You didn't even say that when we had Bobby Hurley, Christian Laettner and Grant Hill, so it's just extreme. It doesn't represent who we are, but we deal with it. You write whatever you want, but I think sometimes our kids play to that. They didn't have good looks on their faces. There's a lot of pressure on them, so that's why I told them, 'Just have fun and play. The outcome of this game will be determined on how well we have fun in the second half.' And we did.
Intimidation
Along the same lines, a note about Mike Patrick - who I love as a play-by-play guy. However, I kept getting a little annoyed about him going on and on about how State was "not intimidated in the least" playing against Duke. The thing is this - this is ACC play. It's not like Duke is going to intimidate anyone in conference play. Maybe they intimidated Seton Hall or Bucknell, but not in conference play against teams that see them every year. And definitely not against a good team like State.
So, enough already with expecting teams to be intimidated by Duke. They won't be, and if they're a good team, they shouldn't be. In fact, in most cases, I think teams not only are not intimidated, but have greater motivation to play well and attempt the "upset" (which is a relative term anyway). Duke gets everyone's best shot. You can't do that if you're intimidated, so these guys need to stop being so astonished that a team plays well against Duke.
Monday, January 16, 2006
Bearing the cross
I've had a few books on my shelf that I've wanted to read over the last couple of years, but just haven't gotten to them. Actually, I've had shelves full of books I haven't gotten to yet. But these were the only books I had on a particular subject - the Civil Rights movement in America.
Two of the books were written by Taylor Branch. They are Parting The Waters : America in the King Years 1954-63 and Pillar of Fire : America in the King Years 1963-65, which are the first two of three books Branch has written on the Civil Rights movement. (The third, At Canaan's Edge : America in the King Years, 1965-68, was just published last week.) I actually started Parting the Waters once, but abandoned it for another book at the time and haven't gotten back to it. This is not uncommon, as I often start one book but switch instead to another.
Anyway, the third book on my shelf is the one that I've started reading today. I wanted to at least get to one of them this year, and it seemed appropriate to start today on the celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday. The book is Bearing the Cross : Martin Luther King, Jr., And The Southern Christian Leadership Conference by David Garrow. It's supposed to be the biography of King to read, so I am looking forward to it.
I will likely post here about it as I get into it, so I guess there will be more to come...
Two of the books were written by Taylor Branch. They are Parting The Waters : America in the King Years 1954-63 and Pillar of Fire : America in the King Years 1963-65, which are the first two of three books Branch has written on the Civil Rights movement. (The third, At Canaan's Edge : America in the King Years, 1965-68, was just published last week.) I actually started Parting the Waters once, but abandoned it for another book at the time and haven't gotten back to it. This is not uncommon, as I often start one book but switch instead to another.
Anyway, the third book on my shelf is the one that I've started reading today. I wanted to at least get to one of them this year, and it seemed appropriate to start today on the celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday. The book is Bearing the Cross : Martin Luther King, Jr., And The Southern Christian Leadership Conference by David Garrow. It's supposed to be the biography of King to read, so I am looking forward to it.
I will likely post here about it as I get into it, so I guess there will be more to come...
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Weekend
College Basketball
There are only 3 undefeated teams in college basketball, and they all remained so this weekend. Pitt just be Louisville, and yesterday Florida beat some worthless team from the SEC (it doesn't really matter - everyone's horrible except Florida - and they haven't really played anyone yet, so it's hard to tell how good they really are.)
Duke, the other undefeated team, beat Clemson on the road Saturday. Clemson managed to put on possibly the worst free throw shooting exhibition I've ever seen. They managed to make only 6 of 22 free throws in a 10-point loss. That's 27% from the line. At one point in the game, they were 3 of 14, I believe, when Mike Patrick said to Len Elmore, "I think you could drop-kick three in." It seemed to even rub off on J.J. Redick, who missed 4 free throws himself (12 of 16), and he usually goes a month or more without missing four. Four misses in one game is unheard of, and I believe a first for him at Duke.
How about this - on the same day (Saturday), Kansas, North Carolina and Kentucky all lost at home. This has to be an extremely rare occurence - first of all that all three of these teams lose on the same day, but also all three at home, that's even more amazing. Granted that all three teams are not quite what they usually are this year, but still it's somewhat shocking. Kansas lost to Kansas State for like the first time in 12 years, I think. North Carolina, also a young team, lost to a dangerous Miami team. And Kentucky continues their slide, losing their third in a row, this time to Alabama, who's missing their best player for the rest of the year. They were not great when they had him, and so a loss by Kentucky at home to an even lesser Alabama team says even more about the shape Kentucky is in at this point in time. And it doesn't look like it's going to get much better - that was their 2nd in a row at home, so they still have to go on the road, too.
NFL
As usual, I could care less about the NFL until the playoffs start (and really don't care significantly more even then, but watch nonetheless.) It seemed everybody was talking up the Patriots again, who had gotten hot again at the end of the regular season. However, they promptly lost to Denver with 5 turnovers Saturday night. The team most people seemed to be picking, though, was Indianapolis and Peyton "can't win the big one" Manning. Well, the nickname still holds true as the Steelers knocked off the Colts this afternoon. I actually feel bad for Tony Dungy and hated to see him lose, although I didn't mind the rest of the Colts losing at all. He seems like a good guy and has had a rough month or so, and you'd like to see him have successs.
Manning, however, I don't feel bad for, especially after his post game comments. He made a statement that he was "trying to be a good teammate, but let's just say we had some protection problems." In other words, it was the fault of my offensive line that we lost. Very classy. I guess that's why they never could beat New England when it mattered. And perhaps the offensive lines at Tennessee from 94 to 97 were equally bad, since he never could win the big one against Florida. Why didn't he go ahead and blame it on the kicker, too? And the defense? And the coaches? If only the rest of the team was perfect like Manning. You'd think after so much experience losing big games, he might have learned to be a more gracious loser. Instead, I guess he'll just have to settle for being a loser.
Jared
So I'm watching the NFL Today postgame after the Steelers-Colts game, and Greg Gumbel introduces Jared the Subway guy in the studio there. He has Subway sandwiches for all the NFL Today guys. I think the show was sponsored by Subway or something.
Here's the thing - enough already with Jared. Okay, so he was real big, ate a bunch of Subway sandwiches and lost a bunch of weight, and now he's thin. But didn't that happen like 10 years ago? Do I have to hear about it for the rest of my life? Is he ever going to go away?
There are only 3 undefeated teams in college basketball, and they all remained so this weekend. Pitt just be Louisville, and yesterday Florida beat some worthless team from the SEC (it doesn't really matter - everyone's horrible except Florida - and they haven't really played anyone yet, so it's hard to tell how good they really are.)
Duke, the other undefeated team, beat Clemson on the road Saturday. Clemson managed to put on possibly the worst free throw shooting exhibition I've ever seen. They managed to make only 6 of 22 free throws in a 10-point loss. That's 27% from the line. At one point in the game, they were 3 of 14, I believe, when Mike Patrick said to Len Elmore, "I think you could drop-kick three in." It seemed to even rub off on J.J. Redick, who missed 4 free throws himself (12 of 16), and he usually goes a month or more without missing four. Four misses in one game is unheard of, and I believe a first for him at Duke.
How about this - on the same day (Saturday), Kansas, North Carolina and Kentucky all lost at home. This has to be an extremely rare occurence - first of all that all three of these teams lose on the same day, but also all three at home, that's even more amazing. Granted that all three teams are not quite what they usually are this year, but still it's somewhat shocking. Kansas lost to Kansas State for like the first time in 12 years, I think. North Carolina, also a young team, lost to a dangerous Miami team. And Kentucky continues their slide, losing their third in a row, this time to Alabama, who's missing their best player for the rest of the year. They were not great when they had him, and so a loss by Kentucky at home to an even lesser Alabama team says even more about the shape Kentucky is in at this point in time. And it doesn't look like it's going to get much better - that was their 2nd in a row at home, so they still have to go on the road, too.
NFL
As usual, I could care less about the NFL until the playoffs start (and really don't care significantly more even then, but watch nonetheless.) It seemed everybody was talking up the Patriots again, who had gotten hot again at the end of the regular season. However, they promptly lost to Denver with 5 turnovers Saturday night. The team most people seemed to be picking, though, was Indianapolis and Peyton "can't win the big one" Manning. Well, the nickname still holds true as the Steelers knocked off the Colts this afternoon. I actually feel bad for Tony Dungy and hated to see him lose, although I didn't mind the rest of the Colts losing at all. He seems like a good guy and has had a rough month or so, and you'd like to see him have successs.
Manning, however, I don't feel bad for, especially after his post game comments. He made a statement that he was "trying to be a good teammate, but let's just say we had some protection problems." In other words, it was the fault of my offensive line that we lost. Very classy. I guess that's why they never could beat New England when it mattered. And perhaps the offensive lines at Tennessee from 94 to 97 were equally bad, since he never could win the big one against Florida. Why didn't he go ahead and blame it on the kicker, too? And the defense? And the coaches? If only the rest of the team was perfect like Manning. You'd think after so much experience losing big games, he might have learned to be a more gracious loser. Instead, I guess he'll just have to settle for being a loser.
Jared
So I'm watching the NFL Today postgame after the Steelers-Colts game, and Greg Gumbel introduces Jared the Subway guy in the studio there. He has Subway sandwiches for all the NFL Today guys. I think the show was sponsored by Subway or something.
Here's the thing - enough already with Jared. Okay, so he was real big, ate a bunch of Subway sandwiches and lost a bunch of weight, and now he's thin. But didn't that happen like 10 years ago? Do I have to hear about it for the rest of my life? Is he ever going to go away?
Friday, January 13, 2006
The Da Vinci Code movie
All of the media coverage and controversey that surrounded Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code will be resurrected before long when Ron Howard's movie based on the book is released in May. I thought the book was okay - though it seemed more like Dan Brown just wrote some lectures about what he believes and then created some characters to say what he wrote. Anyway, I will likely see the movie after it hits DVD, mainly because so many others will be seeing it and talking about it, and I'd like to be a part of the discussion.
On his blog a few days ago, John Alan Turner writes about the book, the movie and his own book being released this spring, which is a response to the theories espoused by Brown and others. In his post (which you can read here) he basically says that Christians get all jacked up about movies like Passion and Narnia, but what will we do about movies like The Da Vinci Code? Will we be as ready to have meaningful conversations with unbelievers about a movie like this as we were with the others?
I personally hope it's not one of these situations where people are boycotting the movie, picketing theaters, making stupid comments in the press, etc. In other words, I hope people will try to have something relevant to say instead of a bunch of finger-pointing and condemnation. (Think The Last Temptation of Christ.)
I think Christians often miss chances to encourage others to see important movies that have themes that could (and should) be discussed from a Christian worldview. Movies like Hotel Rwanda and Crash in recent years come to mind. Hopefully, we will not miss the opportunity to contribute something important to the Da Vinci Code discussion that will be reignited by this movie's release.
Duke Hating
College basketball fans everywhere love to hate Duke. As a Duke fan, this doesn't really bother me. I agree with many that certain media types (especially those named Vitale) spend too much time praising and hyping the Duke program. I wish they'd shutup, too.
So, it also doesn't bother me to see things like these. Actually, I think they're funny, too.
There was Maryland Nearly Kills Me, after the Duke-Maryland game Wednesday. I liked this one a lot. My favorite line:
And I saw the article More reason to hate Duke the other day. A few of the comments I thought were humorous:
On his blog a few days ago, John Alan Turner writes about the book, the movie and his own book being released this spring, which is a response to the theories espoused by Brown and others. In his post (which you can read here) he basically says that Christians get all jacked up about movies like Passion and Narnia, but what will we do about movies like The Da Vinci Code? Will we be as ready to have meaningful conversations with unbelievers about a movie like this as we were with the others?
I personally hope it's not one of these situations where people are boycotting the movie, picketing theaters, making stupid comments in the press, etc. In other words, I hope people will try to have something relevant to say instead of a bunch of finger-pointing and condemnation. (Think The Last Temptation of Christ.)
I think Christians often miss chances to encourage others to see important movies that have themes that could (and should) be discussed from a Christian worldview. Movies like Hotel Rwanda and Crash in recent years come to mind. Hopefully, we will not miss the opportunity to contribute something important to the Da Vinci Code discussion that will be reignited by this movie's release.
Duke Hating
College basketball fans everywhere love to hate Duke. As a Duke fan, this doesn't really bother me. I agree with many that certain media types (especially those named Vitale) spend too much time praising and hyping the Duke program. I wish they'd shutup, too.
So, it also doesn't bother me to see things like these. Actually, I think they're funny, too.
There was Maryland Nearly Kills Me, after the Duke-Maryland game Wednesday. I liked this one a lot. My favorite line:
9:43 - Vitale gets his excited voice on and screams, "That's why they're uno number one, baby!" three times in a row. I begin to contemplate suicide.
And I saw the article More reason to hate Duke the other day. A few of the comments I thought were humorous:
"Krzyzewski was channeling John Wooden now, and the conduit for his new self was Shane Battier, the consummate student-athlete, everybody's All-American, the anti-Laettner."In other Duke news, it appears DeMarcus Nelson has a bone bruise in his right ankle. So, it's not the same injury as before - which has healed - but he is listed as doubtful for this weekend's game with Clemson. How long he'll be out, I have not seen yet, but sounds like he might be back soon if he's "doubtful" for the weekend.
"They won a national title in 2001. Krzyzewski wrote books on leadership. It was enough to make everyone sick. A national Duke love-in nearly ensued. But hotter heads prevailed, and hate ruled the day."
"Then along came Redick, this 6-foot-4 shooter from Roanoke with an undying love for all things Duke. He's all heart and guts and clutch shots. He's like Chris Collins, only with talent."
Thursday, January 12, 2006
I am Maximus
I've seen numerous people posting their results from this quiz on their own blogs, so I figured it was time for me to take the test as well. I had an idea of how it would turn out, and I was correct. Although it did take a tiebreaker question (as you'll notice the top two scored the same).
You scored as Maximus. After his family was murdered by the evil emperor Commodus, the great Roman general Maximus went into hiding to avoid Commodus's assassins. He became a gladiator, hoping to dominate the colosseum in order to one day get the chance of killing Commodus. Maximus is valiant, courageous, and dedicated. He wants nothing more than the chance to avenge his family, but his temper often gets the better of him.
Which Action Hero Would You Be? v. 2.0
created with QuizFarm.com
Duke - Maryland
Well, if there were any fears that Maryland might win 4 in a row over Duke, those fears were proven to be unfounded even before the game started. Coach K had each of
the players and coaches sign the midcourt logo prior to the game as a statement that "this is our court and we will protect it." And protect it they did.
With the chants of "not our rival" still ringing in their ears, the Maryland Terrapins were overwhelmed early and often as Duke forced 18 first half turnovers on their way to a 45-22 halftime lead. Maryland ended the game shooting 30%, and their first player to hit double figures came with about 3 1/2 minutes left in the game. Duke played sloppy in the first 10 or 12 minutes of the 2nd half, or they may have won by 40 or more.
And speaking of action heroes, Shelden Williams had a monster game, ending with a triple double (19 points, 11 rebounds, and 10 blocks - yes, 10 blocks). He was practically unstoppable inside. J.J. Redick also had his usual game with 27 points, and even had a 2-hand dunk - the first dunk of his career at Duke, according to Patrick and Vitale. Greg Paulus and Josh McRoberts continue to improve. The only down note of the game was DeMarcus Nelson leaving in the first half and returning with a boot on his foot again. Whether it was a precaution or he has reinjured his ankle is still unknown.
Overall, great game (for Duke fans). I expected them to come to play and win easily. I only predicted 17, and it ended up 24, but I was being a little conservative in my pick, so I wasn't surprised. But I did think Maryland might put up a little more of a fight. As I said, it could've been much worse.
One other thing I noticed: Magic Johnson was there, and during one of the 37 times they showed him sitting in the crowd on the ESPN telecast, I noticed a girl sitting in front of him with a Kentucky hat on. Have things gotten so bad in Lexington that Kentucky fans are now having to go to Duke games to see good basketball?
You scored as Maximus. After his family was murdered by the evil emperor Commodus, the great Roman general Maximus went into hiding to avoid Commodus's assassins. He became a gladiator, hoping to dominate the colosseum in order to one day get the chance of killing Commodus. Maximus is valiant, courageous, and dedicated. He wants nothing more than the chance to avenge his family, but his temper often gets the better of him.
 |
|
created with QuizFarm.com
Duke - Maryland
Well, if there were any fears that Maryland might win 4 in a row over Duke, those fears were proven to be unfounded even before the game started. Coach K had each of
the players and coaches sign the midcourt logo prior to the game as a statement that "this is our court and we will protect it." And protect it they did.With the chants of "not our rival" still ringing in their ears, the Maryland Terrapins were overwhelmed early and often as Duke forced 18 first half turnovers on their way to a 45-22 halftime lead. Maryland ended the game shooting 30%, and their first player to hit double figures came with about 3 1/2 minutes left in the game. Duke played sloppy in the first 10 or 12 minutes of the 2nd half, or they may have won by 40 or more.
And speaking of action heroes, Shelden Williams had a monster game, ending with a triple double (19 points, 11 rebounds, and 10 blocks - yes, 10 blocks). He was practically unstoppable inside. J.J. Redick also had his usual game with 27 points, and even had a 2-hand dunk - the first dunk of his career at Duke, according to Patrick and Vitale. Greg Paulus and Josh McRoberts continue to improve. The only down note of the game was DeMarcus Nelson leaving in the first half and returning with a boot on his foot again. Whether it was a precaution or he has reinjured his ankle is still unknown.
Overall, great game (for Duke fans). I expected them to come to play and win easily. I only predicted 17, and it ended up 24, but I was being a little conservative in my pick, so I wasn't surprised. But I did think Maryland might put up a little more of a fight. As I said, it could've been much worse.
One other thing I noticed: Magic Johnson was there, and during one of the 37 times they showed him sitting in the crowd on the ESPN telecast, I noticed a girl sitting in front of him with a Kentucky hat on. Have things gotten so bad in Lexington that Kentucky fans are now having to go to Duke games to see good basketball?
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
God and country
I wanted to point to a few posts on rev-ed's blog. I don't know him, but came across these posts from somewhere else, and thought they were worth reading and sharing. It seems the subject of God/Christianity and America has come up a lot in recent years, and I'm not sure I care for a lot of it. Many of his comments reflect the way I've thought of this in the recent past as well. It doesn't really seem appropriate for American flags to be displayed prominately in church sanctuary's, and it seems even less appropriate to sing "patriotic songs" from the hymnbook. I also don't care to hear about an upcoming election on Sunday morning, even if it's just a reminder to vote, because it always seems there's something behind that - in other words, be sure and vote for the "approved" candidate.
Anyway, here's the links to three of his posts which I thought were worth reading (in chronological order):
The Star-Spangled Idol
Is American Culture Compatible With Christianity?
Separating God and Country
And the first post there also points to another blogger who writes about The One True Christian Nation, also worth reading.
TV Tonight
I'm excited about new episodes of Lost starting up again tonight. The last new episode was in November, I believe, so I'm anxious to get back to the island.
Also, Maryland at Duke is on EPSN at 8 PM (CST). My prediction: Duke 81, Maryland 65
Glory Road
I'm looking forward to seeing Glory Road, which is the story of the 1966 Texas Western basketball team and their national championship. I read Frank Fitzpatrick's book And The Walls Came Tumbling Down : Kentucky, Texas Western, And The Game That Changed American Sports a couple of years ago and definitely recommend it. I hope the movie is as good. Of course, I'll probably not see it until it hits DVD. I rarely go the theater to see a movie anyway, and I still haven't seen two others (Walk The Line and The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe) that I want to see, either.
Speaking of Kentucky, they continued driving further off the "glory road" last night, losing at home to Vanderbilt, 57-52. They only had 20 points at halftime. Maybe Morris isn't going to help after all.
Anyway, here's the links to three of his posts which I thought were worth reading (in chronological order):
And the first post there also points to another blogger who writes about The One True Christian Nation, also worth reading.
TV Tonight
I'm excited about new episodes of Lost starting up again tonight. The last new episode was in November, I believe, so I'm anxious to get back to the island.
Also, Maryland at Duke is on EPSN at 8 PM (CST). My prediction: Duke 81, Maryland 65
Glory Road
I'm looking forward to seeing Glory Road, which is the story of the 1966 Texas Western basketball team and their national championship. I read Frank Fitzpatrick's book And The Walls Came Tumbling Down : Kentucky, Texas Western, And The Game That Changed American Sports a couple of years ago and definitely recommend it. I hope the movie is as good. Of course, I'll probably not see it until it hits DVD. I rarely go the theater to see a movie anyway, and I still haven't seen two others (Walk The Line and The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe) that I want to see, either.
Speaking of Kentucky, they continued driving further off the "glory road" last night, losing at home to Vanderbilt, 57-52. They only had 20 points at halftime. Maybe Morris isn't going to help after all.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Counting the cost
One of my goals for 2006 is to get our finances in order. We started visiting The Church at Rock Creek this past Sunday and Mark Evans was just starting a series on Financial Freedom, which was good timing. One of the things I've become disgusted about is my desire for "stuff". I've spent up too much money on things I want but don't need. I realize the good I could be doing with that money instead of spending it on myself and I have to feel Jesus is probably even more disgusted. I think it's hard in this country to avoid the temptation to buy more "stuff" but just because the tempatation is there doesn't mean I must give in to it. Maybe it's time to watch Madame Blueberry again.
A few years ago we went through Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University. One of the things Dave recommends is paying cash for everything, even cars and homes. I was reminded of his advice when I read a story the other night. I'm reading Rob Bell's book Velvet Elvis : Repainting the Christian Faith right now, and he tells the following story.
More on College Basketball
Found this quote here and thought it was pretty funny.
Kentucky dropped out of the polls this week after the embarrassing loss to Kansas Saturday. Kentucky had been ranked for 88 consecutive weeks - the second longest streak behind Duke's 176 weeks - but now that's over. If they don't pick it up soon, they may be working on a streak of weeks unranked. I suspect Morris coming back will help. I don't think he can make them look worse than they did Saturday.
Duke and Maryland renew their rivalry tomorrow night in Cameron. Duke should be ashamed that they've lost 3 in a row to Maryland. They lost in the ACC tournament in 2004, then lost both regular season games last year. They should be ashamed because they were the better team both years - and by quite a bit. I suspect Maryland's streak will end tomorrow night and I expect Duke to win easily. I also believe they'll go to College Park next month and do it again.
Speaking of Duke, there's an article here on J.J. Redick and Gonzaga's Adam Morrison in regards to who will be the player of the year in college basketball. I have an opinion at this point, but there's more basketball to be played, so I'll wait and comment later in the year - maybe late February.
Bumper Sticker
A friend of mine was telling me about a bumper sticker he saw recently. He said he drove up behind a car and saw this:
A few years ago we went through Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University. One of the things Dave recommends is paying cash for everything, even cars and homes. I was reminded of his advice when I read a story the other night. I'm reading Rob Bell's book Velvet Elvis : Repainting the Christian Faith right now, and he tells the following story.
I was traveling in Turkey awhile back and kept noticing that a large number of the homes there seemed unfinished. Piles of wood and brick beside the house, half a foundation built construction equipment everywhere. It looked like a lot of homes had been started and then the workers went to lunch . . . for a year. I asked my friend, who has spent a lot of time in Turkey, about it. He said the reason is that the Muslim culture doesn't allow for financial debt, so people only build with cash. They work for a while, run out of money, save up, keep working, and eventually get the house done, which they own, debt-free. I was struck with how different Western culture would be if we had a similar aversion to debt. How many people do we know who are crippled with financial debt? Having less debt is a better way to live.I'm not sure leaving a house half-completed is a good idea - Jesus words in Luke 14 come to mind:
Is there anyone here who, planning to build a new house, doesn't first sit down and figure the cost so you'll know if you can complete it? (The Message)However, the idea of avoiding debt and only buying things you can pay for is obviously the ideal plan. It seems that sometimes those of other faiths do a better job living out some of the principals we find in scripture than Christians do. Sounds to me like this is one case where at least some Muslims may be doing a better job of financial management than most American Christians are.
More on College Basketball
Found this quote here and thought it was pretty funny.
Duke went to Wake Forest and routed the #23 Deacons. JJ Redick had 32 points for the Blue Devils, who are now one of only three remaining unbeaten teams. I'd like to hate on Duke, but I just can't since I have reassurances from Coach K and American Express that he's not just teaching the Dukies how to be better basketball players, but better people as well.UConn got back on the winning track last night, after having a rough week last week. I thought having the point guard back was supposed to make them better, but last week they went 1-1, and were one shot away from 0-2. Both against unranked teams, by the way. However, sometimes getting a player back after an absence disrupts for a few games before everyone gets used to it. Although Duke seemed to have no problem with DeMarcus Nelson back in their blowout of (ranked) Wake Forest Sunday night.
Kentucky dropped out of the polls this week after the embarrassing loss to Kansas Saturday. Kentucky had been ranked for 88 consecutive weeks - the second longest streak behind Duke's 176 weeks - but now that's over. If they don't pick it up soon, they may be working on a streak of weeks unranked. I suspect Morris coming back will help. I don't think he can make them look worse than they did Saturday.
Duke and Maryland renew their rivalry tomorrow night in Cameron. Duke should be ashamed that they've lost 3 in a row to Maryland. They lost in the ACC tournament in 2004, then lost both regular season games last year. They should be ashamed because they were the better team both years - and by quite a bit. I suspect Maryland's streak will end tomorrow night and I expect Duke to win easily. I also believe they'll go to College Park next month and do it again.
Speaking of Duke, there's an article here on J.J. Redick and Gonzaga's Adam Morrison in regards to who will be the player of the year in college basketball. I have an opinion at this point, but there's more basketball to be played, so I'll wait and comment later in the year - maybe late February.
Bumper Sticker
A friend of mine was telling me about a bumper sticker he saw recently. He said he drove up behind a car and saw this:
Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?Classic.
Sunday, January 08, 2006
I love this game
College basketball has started conference play this past week, and it's not really a surprise that there were a lot of ranked teams losing. However, it was a slight surprise to me that so many top 10 teams lost this first week. Only three top 10 teams - #8 Gonzaga, #5 Florida and #1 Duke - survived the week without a loss. Two of those - Florida and Duke - remain unbeaten.
The jury is still out for me on Florida, mainly because I haven't seen them play. They haven't really played much of a schedule yet, with perhaps their best win being over Wake Forest. But people seem to like them, and it appears that if they're half of what people think, they should run away with the SEC. They were actually unranked to start the season, with Kentucky, who was overrated as usual, and Alabama, who fell off the map long ago, the only ranked SEC teams. Speaking of Kentucky, they were blown away yesterday by an unranked Kansas team. They look to be getting worse. I'd say they'll make their exit from the top 25 this week. Arkanas had some expectations this year, but I'm not sure they'll make a great deal of noise, either. I say Florida runs away with the SEC.
Duke won a big one tonight, with the Duke seniors getting their first win in Winston-Salem over Wake Forest after having lost three in a row there. Despite foul trouble inside - with Josh McRoberts and Shelden Williams in foul trouble practically the whole game - Duke managed to win easily by 18 points. Redick was his usual self, scoring 32 on the Deacons. With the big men in foul trouble, Duke did it from long range, hitting 14 three's in the game (compared to Wake's 2 for 13). I expected this to be a much more difficult game - especially after Duke fell into early foul trouble - so it was great to see them still manage a win. Duke did slow the game late in the first half, and a number of times in the second to try to shorten the game, and it seemed to work.
A turning point seemed to be Trent Strickland's missed dunk early in the 2nd. Duke's lead would've been cut to three, but instead they rebounded the miss and Redick hit a 3, pushing the lead back to eight points. Wake didn't get it into Eric Williams as much as they needed to, especially with Williams and McRoberts in foul troulbe. Either they didn't look for him or Duke's defense didn't let them. Justin Gray, outside of a few shots late in the first half, didn't seem to have his typical game, either. We also saw the return of DeMarcus Nelson (who was one of several guarding Gray.) Duke will be even better after he gets a few more games under his belt. But the ACC will remain tough regardless.
As for the rest of the top 10, here's what happened:
#2 Connecticut was blown out by Marquette. (They also had a one-point home win vs unranked LSU on Saturday, in which LSU missed a shot as time expired that would have given the Huskies their 2nd loss in a week).
#3 Villanova lost a lead and the game to West Virginia
#4 Memphis lost to Texas (not a bad loss, considering Texas was #2 a few weeks ago)
#6 Illinois lost at Iowa (Illinois has looked pretty good so far - I thought they lost a lot from last year, but looks like they're doing okay)
#7 Michigan State lost twice - although both on the road at Illinois and at Wisconsin
#9 Louisville lost to Villanova (also not a bad loss since Villanova was #3, but I question if Louisville belongs in the top 10 to begin with - after all, they lost to Kentucky).
And #10 Washington lost at home to Washington State, which I have to think is a bad loss (even though I know little about the Pac 10 - and care even less).
So, the conference season starts and immediately things are shaken up quite a bit. I expect this will happen as often as it doesn't, though. Just another week in college basketball.
How can you not love this time of year??
As a Duke fan, I'm also a huge J.J. Redick fan. Here's a good article about him from SI.
The jury is still out for me on Florida, mainly because I haven't seen them play. They haven't really played much of a schedule yet, with perhaps their best win being over Wake Forest. But people seem to like them, and it appears that if they're half of what people think, they should run away with the SEC. They were actually unranked to start the season, with Kentucky, who was overrated as usual, and Alabama, who fell off the map long ago, the only ranked SEC teams. Speaking of Kentucky, they were blown away yesterday by an unranked Kansas team. They look to be getting worse. I'd say they'll make their exit from the top 25 this week. Arkanas had some expectations this year, but I'm not sure they'll make a great deal of noise, either. I say Florida runs away with the SEC.
Duke won a big one tonight, with the Duke seniors getting their first win in Winston-Salem over Wake Forest after having lost three in a row there. Despite foul trouble inside - with Josh McRoberts and Shelden Williams in foul trouble practically the whole game - Duke managed to win easily by 18 points. Redick was his usual self, scoring 32 on the Deacons. With the big men in foul trouble, Duke did it from long range, hitting 14 three's in the game (compared to Wake's 2 for 13). I expected this to be a much more difficult game - especially after Duke fell into early foul trouble - so it was great to see them still manage a win. Duke did slow the game late in the first half, and a number of times in the second to try to shorten the game, and it seemed to work.
A turning point seemed to be Trent Strickland's missed dunk early in the 2nd. Duke's lead would've been cut to three, but instead they rebounded the miss and Redick hit a 3, pushing the lead back to eight points. Wake didn't get it into Eric Williams as much as they needed to, especially with Williams and McRoberts in foul troulbe. Either they didn't look for him or Duke's defense didn't let them. Justin Gray, outside of a few shots late in the first half, didn't seem to have his typical game, either. We also saw the return of DeMarcus Nelson (who was one of several guarding Gray.) Duke will be even better after he gets a few more games under his belt. But the ACC will remain tough regardless.
As for the rest of the top 10, here's what happened:
So, the conference season starts and immediately things are shaken up quite a bit. I expect this will happen as often as it doesn't, though. Just another week in college basketball.
How can you not love this time of year??
As a Duke fan, I'm also a huge J.J. Redick fan. Here's a good article about him from SI.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Mockingbird, part 2
Last month I posted about the upcoming Derek Webb album Mockingbird. It was released on December 26 and I have listened to it several times now. I promised more comments once I'd heard it, so here's what I think about it.
One thing Webb has done on his first two solo albums is write lyrics that are sometimes controversial, but certainly make you think. It's not the typical cheerleader-for-Jesus songwriting that you hear from a lot of Christian music. He continues to do so on this his third solo disc, writing about issues of real life and, often, issues that other Christian artists seem unwilling (or unable) to discuss - issues like politics, war, poverty and the lifestyle of American Christians.
I read the following elsewhere (and now I've forgotten the source) where Webb discusses the album title:
In "A King and a Kingdom" he writes that confronts the blind patriotism that often seems prevalent among American Christians, or at least those who tend to vote Republican. America is not "God's country" or even a "Christian nation" as many often think. Webb declares his allegiance lies elsewhere first:
One way I would sum up his lyrics - on this album and his earlier works - is that they are asking questions about what it means to follow Jesus today, and attempting to prompt dialogue among those of us who claim to follow Christ. I highly recommend this album, along with his two previous ones as well.
One thing Webb has done on his first two solo albums is write lyrics that are sometimes controversial, but certainly make you think. It's not the typical cheerleader-for-Jesus songwriting that you hear from a lot of Christian music. He continues to do so on this his third solo disc, writing about issues of real life and, often, issues that other Christian artists seem unwilling (or unable) to discuss - issues like politics, war, poverty and the lifestyle of American Christians.
I read the following elsewhere (and now I've forgotten the source) where Webb discusses the album title:
"There's only one bird that doesn't have its' own song. That's the mockingbird. I don't want to have my own song. I want to mimic the songs of Christ. I want to speak only where He speaks and be silent where He is silent."The first song that stands out is "A New Law." From the point of view of someone who doesn't want to put forth the effort to think for themselves, instead following others without questioning them, Webb sings:
don't teach me about politics and governmentHe also touches on the theme of our attitudes towards so-called enemies, which comes up in later songs as well, with the line "don't teach me about loving my enemies". There are some things, he suggests, that Christians don't want to talk or hear about - in other words, we want to remain comfortable without being challenged. Webb, however, is talking about those very things.
just tell me who to vote for
don't teach me about truth and beauty
just label my music
i don't wanna know if the answers aren't easy
so just bring it down from the mountain to me
i want a new law
In "A King and a Kingdom" he writes that confronts the blind patriotism that often seems prevalent among American Christians, or at least those who tend to vote Republican. America is not "God's country" or even a "Christian nation" as many often think. Webb declares his allegiance lies elsewhere first:
There are two great lies that i've heard:And later, he suggests maybe our enemies are not who we think:
"the day you eat of the fruit of that tree you will not surely die"
and that Jesus Christ was a white, middle-class republican
and if you wanna be saved you have to learn to be like Him
my first allegiance is not to a flag, a country, or a man
my first allegiance is not to democracy or blood
it's to a king & a kingdom
but nothing unifies like a common enemy"Rich Young Ruler" is a hard one to listen to, as he sings about our own wealth, the poverty of others, and our response, pointing out that instead of responding like Jesus' would, we've instead removed ourselves from where the problem exists:
and we've got one, sure as hell
but he may be living in your house
he may be raising up your kids
he may be sleeping with your wife
oh no, he may not look like you think
poverty is so hard to seeHe suggests our version of following Jesus is more about rule-keeping, saying "we speak the language and keep all the rules, even a few we made up...i don't sleep around and i don't steal." Jesus, on the other hand, asks much more of us, yet seems to expect the same response from us that he got from the man in Mark 10:
when it's only on your tv
and twenty miles across town
where we're all living so good
that we moved out of Jesus' neighborhood
where he's hungry and not feeling so good
from going through our trash
come on and follow meIn "My Enemies Are Men Like Me" he takes on war and capital punishment:
but sell your house, sell your SUV
sell your stocks, sell your security
and give it to the poor
... i want the things you just can't give me
peace by way of war is like purity by way of fornicationAnd continues these themes in "Love Is Not Against The Law", and wondering if we'll be willing to love our enemies:
it's like telling someone murder is wrong
and then showing them by way of execution
how can i kill the ones i'm supposed to love
my enemies are men like me
are we defending lifeApparently unconcerned about what people might think of him, Webb continues to write pointed and controversial songs. Even if you don't agree with everything he says, they will likely make you think about issues that are largely absent in most lyrics that come from the Christian music industry - issues that need to be discussed by Christians, particularly American Christians, and not only from the standard, "white middle-class Republican" point of view.
when we just pick and choose
lives acceptable to lose
and which ones to defend
'cause you cannot choose your friends
but you choose your enemies
and what if they were one
one and the same
could you find a way
to love them both the same
to give them your name
One way I would sum up his lyrics - on this album and his earlier works - is that they are asking questions about what it means to follow Jesus today, and attempting to prompt dialogue among those of us who claim to follow Christ. I highly recommend this album, along with his two previous ones as well.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Texas
The hype started before the season did. Everyone was expecting USC and Texas to be playing in the Rose Bowl tonight, and that's what we got. Most seemed to think it would be a great, hard-fought, high-scoring (but close) game. They were right.
My prediction was USC by 9. I thought Texas - despite the talk of their defense - would not be able to stop USC enough times to win. I thought it would be high-scoring (and it was) and that USC would score a little more. When they went up by 12 in the 4th, I thought it was pretty much over, because Texas' defense had not stopped them yet in the 4th quarter. They'd scored 4 straight touchdowns since halftime, and didn't seem to be slowing down. But the much talked about Texas defense finally came through on the 5th USC possession in the second half, and stopped USC on 4th and 1 to set up a game-winning drive in which Vince Young - who was outstanding - ran for the winning score.
So, time to retire all of the "Mack Brown can't win the big one" comments and jokes. Mack finally did it. Well, maybe it's more likely that Vince did it, and Mack was just along for the ride. But Mack will still get some credit, too.
One of the things that stood out to me in the game was that there were several bonehead plays. The first was Mack Brown's decision to go for it on 4th and 1 in the first quarter around mid-field. What was he thinking? USC had just capitalized on a Texas fumble near mid-field to take a 7-0 lead, and now you risk giving it back to them around mid-field again? They were fortunate - after not making it - that USC stalled on their own 4th and 1 a few plays later around the Texas 20.
The last couple of bonehead plays belonged to USC. First was the decision again to go for it on 4th and 1 at the Texas 45, with 2:00+ remaining. I think I would've had to punt and make Texas go the length of the field if it was going to win the game, instead of only 55 yards. Sure, if they'd made it, they likely would've kept moving the ball and won the game (either by eventually running out the clock or scoring again.) But why risk it? The other bonehead play was using their last timeout prior to Texas' 2-point conversion - a timeout they could've used with only 19 seconds on the clock. Not sure what happened there, but that could've cost them an extra play at the end.
However, the bonehead play that wins the prize belongs to Reggie Bush in the first half when he tried to lateral the ball to a teammate after a long run. He was inside the Texas 20 and, in the midst of being tackled, he chose to lateral?? That play probably cost them a touchdown, or at least a field goal. And perhaps the game. I still can't figure out what he was thinking. I was reminded of George's comment in a Seinfeld episode: "I am Costanza - Lord of the Idiots." That was just a horrible, idiotic decision.
One thing I heard after the game: during Matt Leinart's on-field interview after the game, he made a comment something like "I still believe that we're the better team, but we just didn't make the plays." After watching the game, I'd say both teams could make the claim they're the better team, no matter who won. But that was a stupid comment. It makes you look like an ungracious loser. Be proud of what you've done, but accept the loss and give Texas some credit. Who does he think he is - Al Gore?
So, despite some questionable judgment by coaches and players, this was one of the best championship games I've ever seen. Lots of scoring and exciting to the end. I was hoping USC could pull off a miracle and get in field goal range and send it into overtime. I wanted it to keep going. Plus, I wanted USC to win, so there was that motivation, too. I'm not sure why - I don't care about either team - but maybe it was the 3-peat / history thing.
But regardless of which team won, I think there's no doubt that the game lived up to the hype. After 5 or 6 months of hype, the game was going to have to be something special. And I thought was.
Now, we can put all of this football nonsense behind us and focus on something that really matters - the Final Four. Let's go Duke!!
My prediction was USC by 9. I thought Texas - despite the talk of their defense - would not be able to stop USC enough times to win. I thought it would be high-scoring (and it was) and that USC would score a little more. When they went up by 12 in the 4th, I thought it was pretty much over, because Texas' defense had not stopped them yet in the 4th quarter. They'd scored 4 straight touchdowns since halftime, and didn't seem to be slowing down. But the much talked about Texas defense finally came through on the 5th USC possession in the second half, and stopped USC on 4th and 1 to set up a game-winning drive in which Vince Young - who was outstanding - ran for the winning score.
So, time to retire all of the "Mack Brown can't win the big one" comments and jokes. Mack finally did it. Well, maybe it's more likely that Vince did it, and Mack was just along for the ride. But Mack will still get some credit, too.
One of the things that stood out to me in the game was that there were several bonehead plays. The first was Mack Brown's decision to go for it on 4th and 1 in the first quarter around mid-field. What was he thinking? USC had just capitalized on a Texas fumble near mid-field to take a 7-0 lead, and now you risk giving it back to them around mid-field again? They were fortunate - after not making it - that USC stalled on their own 4th and 1 a few plays later around the Texas 20.
The last couple of bonehead plays belonged to USC. First was the decision again to go for it on 4th and 1 at the Texas 45, with 2:00+ remaining. I think I would've had to punt and make Texas go the length of the field if it was going to win the game, instead of only 55 yards. Sure, if they'd made it, they likely would've kept moving the ball and won the game (either by eventually running out the clock or scoring again.) But why risk it? The other bonehead play was using their last timeout prior to Texas' 2-point conversion - a timeout they could've used with only 19 seconds on the clock. Not sure what happened there, but that could've cost them an extra play at the end.
However, the bonehead play that wins the prize belongs to Reggie Bush in the first half when he tried to lateral the ball to a teammate after a long run. He was inside the Texas 20 and, in the midst of being tackled, he chose to lateral?? That play probably cost them a touchdown, or at least a field goal. And perhaps the game. I still can't figure out what he was thinking. I was reminded of George's comment in a Seinfeld episode: "I am Costanza - Lord of the Idiots." That was just a horrible, idiotic decision.
One thing I heard after the game: during Matt Leinart's on-field interview after the game, he made a comment something like "I still believe that we're the better team, but we just didn't make the plays." After watching the game, I'd say both teams could make the claim they're the better team, no matter who won. But that was a stupid comment. It makes you look like an ungracious loser. Be proud of what you've done, but accept the loss and give Texas some credit. Who does he think he is - Al Gore?
So, despite some questionable judgment by coaches and players, this was one of the best championship games I've ever seen. Lots of scoring and exciting to the end. I was hoping USC could pull off a miracle and get in field goal range and send it into overtime. I wanted it to keep going. Plus, I wanted USC to win, so there was that motivation, too. I'm not sure why - I don't care about either team - but maybe it was the 3-peat / history thing.
But regardless of which team won, I think there's no doubt that the game lived up to the hype. After 5 or 6 months of hype, the game was going to have to be something special. And I thought was.
Now, we can put all of this football nonsense behind us and focus on something that really matters - the Final Four. Let's go Duke!!
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Purpose-driven field
I like Lark News - there's usually something every month that makes me laugh. This month, though, I found one that is one of my favorites. Check it out:
Here are a few of my other favorite stories:
Warren to buy Saints, build Purpose-Driven Field
NEW ORLEANS - Pastor and author Rick Warren has signed a deal to purchase the New Orleans Saints football franchise for $320 million from current owner Tom Benson, and has pledged to pour his time and energy into helping the city and team rebuild.
"This is the start of the Saints' turnaround," a Warren spokesman said. "America is going to see what a purpose-driven team can accomplish."
more...
Here are a few of my other favorite stories:
VeggieTales Exclusive: Where are they now?
Friends not friends forever, even if the Lord's the Lord of them, former pals say
Trend: Youth groups forget meaning of names
Rapture Safety cards prepare parishioners, airline-style
Jack Chick buys popular comic strips
When he prophesies, it's in pirate
Unusual-looking man in choir sparks concern
Family's boycott extends to everything
Ten Commandments battle shifts to Ala. girl's bedroom
Archives
May 2004 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006
