Cynic

Hymns to this point: “Glorious things of thee are spoken” http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/g/l/glorious.htm “Christ is made the sure foundation” http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/c/m/cmadesur.htm “Silent night” http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/s/i/silntnit.htm “And can it be that I should gain” http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/a/c/acanitbe.htm

Yes. The hymn writer, as I figure you know, is Charles Wesley.

Thomas, This one should be far too easy for you. The second of the stanzas I have included became controversial after the rise of an identifiable kenotic Christology among some mid-19th century Lutheran figures who maintained the Son temporarily set aside his deity when he began his earthly tenure. Because of a line in the stanza that can be taken in a kenotic sense, there are some who consider the hymn to be, at best, borderline heretical, although I suspect the hymn writer merely got carried away with the emotional impression of those few words and did not adequately consider their implications. Considering the writer used many sound and wonderful words in glorifying the Son of God, it isn’t in me to consider his use of these few poor words any other way. The hymn writer lived and died before kenotic Christology arose. The old “blue” Trinity Hymnal apparently did not include the hymn at all, while the “red” Trinity Hymnal includes it, but replaces “emptied himself of all but love” with “humbled himself (so great His love!).” By the way, don’t take my pointing out that an identifiable kenotic Christology arose in some Lutheran circles personally. Presbyterian and other Reformed denominations have seen a number of heretics, apostates, and crackpots. Tune [for those unfamiliar with the hymn): “Sagina” http://cyberhymnal.org/mid/s/a/sagina.mid

Thomas, From a little I've read about Neale, I find him an intriguing figure. I would like to hear more of the old Latin hymns he translated (particularly some attributed to Ambrose of Milan), but my church uses the Trinity Hymnal, which has a few nice Psalter pieces, but does not seem to have great historical breadth in hymn selection. (I’m no musician or music critic, but if I had anything to do with editing a hymnal, I would probably include more early church pieces and cut out just about everything written in the last half of the 1800s.) As for your hymn, it is “Silent Night,” of course.

How nice, Excathedra! I figure getting her $100 back is a significant blessing to the young lady. Way to go! ***** But in order to teach her a further lesson about the downside of careless living, maybe you could send me door-to-door witnessing in her neighborhood.

Thomas, I have to disqualify myself, because I didn’t recognize the stanza you posted, and I pasted some of it a search engine. I am familiar with the hymn, but still wouldn’t come up with it from portions of it you have posted. I thought the thread was dead. After starting it, I wished I had titled it “Name the hymn,” rather that “Name that hymn,” since the latter seems trivializing. BTW, I was aware from what I’ve read at www.cyberhymnal.org (formerly a great site, which seems to have become entangled with religious images) that Haydn’s tune, “Austria,” which probably for many years had been used for John Newton’s hymn, also was made use of for a German anthem of which Nazis made use. IMO, the bastards neither get to confiscate it, nor send it into ruin. ***** From http://cyberhymnal.org/htm/g/l/glorious.htm I also found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Lied_der_Deutschen

WAG: Lewis Carroll

Arguing with them, at worst, would seem no worse than debating those true believers who have rejected the “dogma” of mainstream nutritional science to rally around the Atkins Diet.

WordWolf, If you spend much more time dawdling, there might be a petition going around to have a propeller cap placed on your icon for a full month.

Before and after stent placement:

I had a myocardial infarction (a heart attack) in April of last year, due to two arterial blockages (one 80% and one 99%). I had a heart attack coming to me, due to my having gained 55 pounds after quitting smoking, due to my not exercising, and due to my having untreated triglyceride levels that were far beyond being merely “high.” Fortunately, the heart attack occurred when I was at home, where I was less than 15 minutes from a hospital where a first class cardiologist extracted a blood clot, inserted two arterial stents, and dispatched me with minimal heart damage from the cath lab. Some comments on exercise: The cardiac rehab folks set a specific heart-rate workout range for me, and, after monitoring my heart data during exercise, increased the range in several increments over a period of weeks. Exercise at too slow a heart rate reportedly doesn’t get results, while exercise at too fast a rate yields a risk of falling into the abyss of cardiac arrest. Supposedly, even with minimal heart damage, parts of the heart can go into “hibernation” for some time after an MI. That might have something to do with the protocol of taking some time to bring up the pace and the endurance. IMO, a heart-rate monitor is nearly a must-have for exercise. The stopping-occasionally-and-checking-your-pulse-while-exercising routine is too occasional, too haphazard. The monitor I use is one by Polar. It has a transmitter unit that goes on as a strap around the chest, and a receiver that looks like a cheap wristwatch. Polar’s chest-strap transmitter also broadcasts to displays on some treadmills that are equipped to receive Polar signals. http://www.polarusa.com http://www.polarusa.com/Products/fseries/f...sp?cat=consumer

One of the things that inclined me towards Trinitarianism while I was still involved with TWI was coming to recognize what I later learned is referred to theologically as perichoresis, circumincessio (circumincession), or coinherence. In John’s gospel, Jesus Christ declares that he is in the Father and that the Father is in him. What is he saying? He is revealing that he and the Father mutually indwell one another. That the Father and the Son are distinct, yet they interpenetrate one another. That they are inseparable. Is it the Holy Spirit who comes and dwells in Christians? Is it Christ himself abiding in them? Is it God the Father who makes a habitation for himself in them? There are scriptural indications of each of these things, yet there seems to be in Scripture the particular indication of the Holy Spirit being sent by the Father and the Son to indwell Christian believers and glorify the Son who has glorified the Father. With one of the three divine persons, however, are the other two -- all three interpenetrating, dwelling with and in one another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perichoresis

Paul Tillich?

Unitarian is a broad term that can be used to refer to Ebionites, modalists, Arians, Socinians, Jews, Muslims, et al., and a term that is now probably used inappropriately (in the technical sense) where used to refer to UUs. “Jesus Only” folks (e.g. Oneness Pentecostals) also are Unitarian, though they enigmatically attempt to recognize Jesus as a unipersonal deity who is both Father and Son. Unitarianism, as a theological term, is characterized by the view that God is unipersonal, rather than characterized by a Christological view. Any Unitarian view of God is, nevertheless, necessarily based either upon abject ignorance concerning Christ or upon aberrant, false views about Christ.

Mark Clarke’s tagline about “dream[ing] of a better tomorrow where chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned” keeps reminding me of internet spoofs that suggest how various philosophers, authors, politicians, and other public figures might respond to the why-did-the-chicken-cross-the-road question. A number of such spoofs can be found by typing “why did the chicken cross the road” into a search engine. Two examples are http://nac.tamu.edu/x075bb/humor/chicken.txt and http://www.fun-with-english.co.uk/2008/06/...cross-road.html . (I particularly have enjoyed the responses given for Torquemada and Noam Chomsky.) It is time for a GSC edition that anticipates how various posters whofrequent a fictional ex-cult message board, “The Oil Spill Grill,” might respond to the why-did-the-chicken-cross-the-road question. I, of course, will start: Why did the chicken cross the road? jayjay: The chicken asserts that it crossed the road to spread special knowledge that will render chickens immune to salmonella. I have posted to my web site, however, a pathologist’s report that reveals the chicken is systemically infected with salmonella, along with photographic comparisons that establish that the chicken has stolen from other hens a large number of eggs that she has identified as her own products. Geriatricsguy: Why the concern about the chicken’s motive for crossing the road? The chicken provides me with eggs that I like, and that is what is important. It is irrelevant to my plate and my palate why the chicken crossed the road, whether the chicken has laid or stolen her eggs, or what the chicken does independently of her egg-providing with and/or to other chickens. Benito: Regardless of whether the chicken crossed the road legally or illegally, the chicken should not be subjected to contempt or de-legitimizing expressions. The chicken should be referred to in media reports simply as a “chicken.” The chicken should not have its chicken-ness diminished by phrases such as “illegal chicken,” nor should it undergo invalidation by being referred to as an “illegally-now-on-the-other-side-of-the-road chicken.” No chicken should experience “asphalt foot” or Bill O’Reilly. Rochiavelli: Since the chicken’s crossing of the road was mentioned on the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, it is mere opinion that the chicken crossed the road. Opinions are not facts, although political perceptions are reality. The chicken never crossed the road, wingnuts. The chicken’s crossing of the road might have some significant political implications, and I, being very political and a gatekeeper of perception/reality, hereby invalidate as non-fact all purported perceptions of the road, the sides of the road, the crossing, the observer, the motive, and the chicken. Jorge Eer: If the chicken is a hen, I don’t have a clue. If it’s a rooster, crossing the road is obviously connected to getting feather. Mutt USMC RET SEE ES’s new pamphlet, Twenty-Two Reasons why the Chicken Crossed the Road” leaves no stone unturned in debunking traditional explanations about the chicken and the road, and arrives at the chicken’s real motive.

First author: the first quote has an elitist air, and appears to be from a fellow who has been taken up into the narcissism and pomposity of the artistic caste. In the second quote, there are implications that the author’s speculative abilities can penetrate beyond recorded history and gather a metanarrative that explicates the development of art, science, and religion. I hope the author is not someone I like (e.g. Dostoevsky), unless the author is merely penning pomposity and presumption into a character. My guess: Sigmund Freud. The second author: The quote seems familiar, but, of course, its familarity could be due to something that reminds me of another author’s style. Here, I hope the author is not someone I dislike. My guess: I don’t know whether he gave lectures at American universities, but the snappy, confident, intelligent prose reads like it could be G. K. Chesterton’s.

Very good. Yes, it's Dostoevsky.

Not a bad guess, but no, it’s not Mark Twain -- or any other American cynic. Here’s another quote from the author, who is having the narcissistic, criminal protagonist of one of his most well-known works articulate his views about extraordinary personalities having a right to act outside of moral constraints:

From a literary figure who did not seem to have a rosy view of man:

Jefferson?

Happy Birthday, BB. Hope you're having a good one.

You're it.

There are some whole grain pastas out there: I typically buy Kroger brand, but a national brand is http://www.healthyharvestpasta.com/our_products.htm . I also eat whole grain brown rice, Smart Squeeze spread (no reported fat, at all), and remember from a nutrition course that sweet potatoes are reportedly nutritionally superior to white potatoes. Caveat: Some products that have the words "whole grain" on the label are not really whole grain. If you check the ingredients information on the package, and see "enriched" flour, the product , of course, is not whole grain, though it might contain some whole grain ingredients. Another tip: IIRC, a product's ingredients are by law supposed to be listed in descending order of prevalence. For example, if "whole wheat flour" is listed first on the package's ingredient list, whole wheat flour is supposed to make up a greater proportion of the product than any single subsequently listed ingredient (except in the case of a tie, I suppose).

Sudo, I don't know if your response is sound, but it does seem reasonable. I am provisionally inclined, however, to give the American Heart Association and what seems the prevalent position in nutritional education more credence than I give the Atkins advocates -- not that a consensus among dietary authorities ultimately settles the questions about the Atkins diet or other dietary approaches. Dentists! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-BA9VkiYy8

Sudo, I suppose you meant Atkins, rather than "Adkins," but, assuming you are avoiding milk due to milk's carb calories, do you happen to know how your bone density is holding up?