Thursday, December 11, 2008

An Historic Event

On this day, a few minutes ago, I became the first human being on the Internet to string together the phrase, 'amniotic pudding'. You can witness this infamous deed in all its glory at the scene of the crime (Twitter). Perhaps I should explain. I received an e-mail from, which described the progress of my wife's pregnancy, which is currently in its 11th week. Last week, it described the size of the baby as that of a kumquat. This week, as that of a fig. On a side note, I think it's neat that they describe the size, not in terms of sterile, impersonal measurement units, but in terms of common, palpable, three-dimensional objects full of life, personality, and taste. I suppose it was an unfortunate word association: it being the Christmas season and my child being compared to a fig brought the word 'figgy' to my mind (from the song, "We Wish You a Merry Christmas")--it's not my fault, really. I was originally reaching for a scientific-sounding adjective, the better to display me geekiness, but the ghost of Christmas music past reared its ugly, overplayed head, and the genius of it irresistibly compelled me. The moment I decided on the word 'figgy', as you might imagine, I was instantly predisposed to think of 'pudding' when I went on to summarize a new and dynamic activity, and by extension the medium in which said activity was taking place. What father wouldn't gleefully announce to the world that his child was engaged in such elegant motion as to be compared with acrobatics and water ballet at such a tender age? It was only after I had typed it that I realized the magnitude of what I had created. A week ago, there were some unique two-word phrases posted to the blog on xkcd that turned up zero hits on Google. Surely this phrase was so grotesque, so uniquely bizarre and demented as to be worthy of inclusion. Indeed it was. The only hit on Google was a page full of random words that (1) was not human generated, and (2) did not in fact contain either word, even in the cached version of the page. I am thus justified in disqualifying that page and claiming the crown and glory for my own. I therefore firmly place my foot upon the top of this particular Everest and claim the due renown.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

O Tannenbaum

I (along with Elizabeth) just decorated my very first Christmas tree. (And I'm 27, so I beat beck.) Behold:

Thursday, December 04, 2008

Assorted Photos

Here are some random photos from the past few months. I've uploaded several sets to my server.
Captain Hammer and Penny Cliff's party Elizabeth's birthday celebration Eric's Birthday Party The Mr. Potato Head is from us. Cribbage They like olives Thanksgiving dinner

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

The Descent of Man

The most accepted atheistic evolutionary account of the origin of mankind is that there was a population of primates which slowly developed into modern human beings over time. In order to accept this account, however, it is necessary to completely disregard the Biblical account of man's creation as an accurate source of truth. If the human race is not all descended exclusively from Adam and Eve (as real people and the one-and-only set of original human ancestors), then there is no real reason why Christ's death and resurrection, or even his incarnation, were necessary or should be effective to restore us to a right relationship with God. (In fact, if any part of the Bible is not true, then God is a liar, and the Bible claims that he is absolutely the essence of truth, and lies are abhorrent to him, so not only would the Bible be telling "little white lies" about how the world began, it is also telling lies about who God is and what he is like: holy and true.) How Adam and Eve are essential to Christian theology is a worthy and interesting topic, but for now, I will limit myself to what the book of Genesis says regarding the creation of Man. Statements that no Christian can ignore if he believes that the Bible is the word of a God who cannot lie. Genesis 1:
25 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
Genesis 2:
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven.
7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8 The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.
15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." 18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." 19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
From Genesis 2:7 we learn the following things about Adam: 1. God formed Adam from the dust of the ground. 2. God breathed into Adam the "breath" (or "spirit"--same Hebrew word) of life. 3. This caused Adam to become a living "being" (or "soul"). From chapter 1, we learn that God wanted to create a special creature called "man" with these qualities that differentiated him from the other creatures: 1. Created in God's image. 2. Created according to God's likeness. 3. They would rule over the other creatures. 4. They were additionally given the authority to "fill the earth, and subdue it." Part of being made in God's image is having a three-part being: 1. The physical, biological part, corresponding to the Son of God 2. The mental, psychological part, corresponding God the Father 3. The spiritual, God-relating part, corresponding to the Spirit of God God's "likeness" means that man had authority (and responsibility to God) to rule over the earth and its creatures. Since the earth and its creatures were under man's authority when Adam and Eve broke their relationship with God, the earth and its creatures also fell out of their proper relationship to God. In understanding what might be meant by saying, "God formed ____ from the dust of the ground", at the very least, we know that: 1. God's design and intent was at work in "forming": God did not take a random, hands-off approach. He knew what he wanted, and produced it. 2. It was process: that is, they did not "pop" into existence from nothing in zero time. Existing raw materials were taken and "formed" into the desired creatures. 3. The chronology of when this takes place is not the focus of the story.
  • In chapter 1, the land animals are made, and then God decides to make man in order to rule over them (in addition to all the other (sea and air) creatures from previous days), as well as the earth itself. (v.26)
  • In chapter 2, we are only told that God formed the creatures out of the dust of the ground as they are being introduced to Adam, which is after he is alive. (v.19)
It seems to me as if the forming is going on off-stage, and is provided as background information that explains where these things came from: how they came to exist. My point is that it is not necessarily part of the chronological narrative (since this is the case at least with the animals in chapter 2), and could have taken place over long periods of time. Another possible interpretation is that in Genesis 2, new individuals are produced on the spot from dust so that Adam can give a name to their species, but this seems to me less likely than the above interpretation.
4. There is a completely different word used for "formed," which is used to describe the way in which God makes Adam (v.7) and the animals (v.19) from the dust of the ground, and "fashioned," (v.22) which is used to describe the way in which God makes Eve from Adam's rib.
  • The semantic difference between the two words is minimal. The word for 'fashioned' often means 'build' (by laying out layers of raw materials) and is related to the word for 'laying out' materials or 'spreading'.
    • The significance of the word choice might be merely a play on words with the way that a marriage bed is "spread" (see the link).
    • The significance of the word choice might also indicate a different kind of action.
      • Young-earth creationists (particularly the literal 6-day variety) would say that God made all living things in the same way as Eve was made: whole, fully adult formed, and without intermediary steps or great length of time.
      • I would not agree with the above description of Eve's fashioning, but I would argue that since a different word is used (in addition to the play on words), a different action is indicated, and Eve's fashioning was as unique an event as God breathing life into Adam.
In verse 20, it says, "The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him."
  • Therefore we know that Adam was a unique creature: there was no evolving population group of primates from which Adam might be able to choose a mate.
  • There are a couple of explanations to account for this:
    • There were no other humans because God had made Adam unique, directly from a pile dust.
    • The process of "forming" Adam was an extension of the process of God designing the other types of animals, but because Adam was the only creature into whom God had breathed his spirit of life, he was now separated from his ancestral breeding group, not biologically (or rather, not merely biologically, since God may have applied some unique genetic finishing touches), but spiritually and socially. This is the same reason that, even if it were possible to breed with a chimpanzee, a chimpanzee would not make a suitable spouse for a human being.
      • Since Adam identifies the fact that Eve is "bone of my bones / and flesh of my flesh" as qualifying her to be a suitable mate (v.23), this indicates that, indeed, Adam and Eve were not merely socially and spiritually distinct from all other creatures, but genetically distinct as well.
So, in summary, the Bible says that the human race did not "evolve" from other animals: it was produced by God's direct action by the forming of a single individual (however that was accomplished), accompanied by God bestowing on that individual his own image, likeness, and spirit of life. Later, after it was demonstrated that no possible mate existed for this individual, God directly intervened again, and, from a part of that one male individual, he fashioned a female of the same species.

Saturday, November 08, 2008

Of Home Improvement and Fathers

The day after our wedding, my dad fell from a hotel balcony onto his head. He fractured several vertebrae, and is now paralyzed below the chest. Elizabeth and I didn't find out until we got back from our honeymoon. Our families, after much deliberation and prayer, had decided to keep the news from us during our honeymoon, since the danger of him dying had at that time passed, and they didn't want our honeymoon to be cut short or tempered by worry. They took us off of all the church e-mail lists, which were abuzz with prayer requests and updates. We are very thankful for their decision. It was a hard one for them to make, but it was the right one. My dad's injury prevented him from traveling home to California for several months after the accident, and so during that time he and my mother stayed here in Washington. Elizabeth and I were able to see my parents, visiting them in the hospital, and later on the rehab facility as often as we could. Elizabeth and I were thankful to be able to spend so much time with my parents, despite the circumstances that had effected their proximity. My dad taught me everything I know about home improvement growing up. Not only did he show me how to work all the tools in the garage, he also showed me how to use the ones at work, since I worked under him for a few years in college. Our roof was leaking the other day. The water was coming through the ceiling in the living room and dripping all over the coffee table over night. In the morning, I put a bowl under it, and then headed off to work. Thankfully, it didn't rain much that day. That evening, I went up into the crawl space, but I couldn't see any obvious leaks. I called my in-laws, and my father-in-law went up there to have a look. Scott knows a lot more about leaky roofs than I do (we didn't get much moss on our roof in California). He and I went to the hardware store and got some roof patch (tar, basically) and after sweeping the moss and pine needles off of the area above the leak, we applied the patch. The next day while I was at work, he and my mother-in-law came over and swept the rest of the moss off of the whole roof! Without being asked! They're awesome. Today, thanks to Scott lending me some tools, I was able to get a few things done around the house that I've been meaning to do. We have two cats: Bow is a tuxedo cat who's been Elizabeth's, and Zoe, a grayish black kitten is the daughter of Elizabeth's sister Katherine's cat Sam. I installed two cat doors, one so that the cats can get from the kitchen into the garage, and the other so that they can get from the garage outside. This will enable us to put the litter box in the garage. I also installed a doorknob on our bedroom door. Zoe has a habit of clawing at doors, and without a doorknob, we've been having to wedge it shut with a hamper to keep her out (and even sometimes that doesn't work). I have a no-cats-in-the-bedroom policy (it's because I'm mean and I hate them). The third father I wish to mention is someone who is also helping to improve our home: our heavenly Father has given Elizabeth and me a child, due in June, which brings us to the fourth father of this post: me! I know that there will be challenges ahead that I am not prepared for. Thankfully, I have two sets of wise parents, and a heavenly Father who holds me in His hand. He knows how, He is able, and (wonder of wonders) He cares enough about me, his child, to help me grow into the husband and father that He designed me to be.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

On Profanity

Note: in my discussion of the concepts underlying profanity, I mention things that are profane. If you're a child, or you can't handle that, stop reading. A recent story at Ars Technica about the an appeal in a case of the FCC vs. foul-mouthed celebrities on television sparked a discussion of profanity and censorship, to which I contributed. The "rule" in question is the de facto prohibition on broadcasting the "seven deadly words"on the limited community resource known as the broadcast spectrum. The article critically mentions the solicitations of complaints, not only from those who witnessed the alleged profanity in question in its full context, but those who merely heard about it, and were members of the relevant community concerned about the use of the public resource. Again, here is the article, and my comments are below:
I can understand (and in part, support) those who complain even though they themselves did not witness the broadcast profanity. If the rule becomes subjective, then the subjectivity of the rule (in stead of the rule itself) will become the new line against which those who produce content and wish to call attention to said content will push. This includes celebrities, who are their own brand, calling attention to themselves for being 'uninhibited' (the kids these days think that's hip). The argument is that allowing some profanity and saying "that's OK" is a slippery slope to all profanity falling within that category. The reason profanity is profanity is that (with the original linguistic intent) it evokes an image that is intended to repulse the listener (i.e., it is profane). The word "fuck", for example, doesn't merely denote sex: it denotes sex of a most detestable kind: forced and devoid of love (and therefore by its very nature, an insult to the true intent of sexual love). The same can be said of "shit". Shit isn't just excrement, it's a forced confrontation with excrement: it's thrown into your face, or you are thrown into it. In other words, "shit" is an insult to human dignity (though admittedly, not as much so as "fuck", which associates marital bliss with sadistic rape). These words have, in some quarters of our collective culture (but certainly not all), undergone a change in meaning because of over-use. When a teenage girl says that she is "majorly depressed", she is likely to be merely sad, but she is using exaggerating language because she does not think that others will give her "anguish" the attention and respect that at the moment she feels it deserves unless she oversells it. Gradually, though more rapidly in communities that tend to over-express (such as the young and the marginalized) terms of extremity become watered down, until eventually they have no meaning at all, and new words must be invented to fill the voids of extremity. The process of the erosion of words so that they mean less than they did originally (or, equivalently, less to some than others) is an unfortunate aspect of the evolution of words because it makes language less reliable and less useful. There are other linguistic evolutionary processes that are beneficial (such as specialization and connotation), but the watering down of terms is not one of them, and I believe it should be resisted. If those who use the word "fuck" for shock value suddenly discovered that the term had become watered down to meaninglessness, the next logical place for them to reach would be to shout "sadistic rape!" every time they chipped a nail. I do not wish it to be necessary to explain the meaning of that term to my kindergartener.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Flikr Mosaic

Thanks, beck. The Rules: If you want to play too, type your answer to each of the questions below into a Flickr search. Using only the first page, choose your favorite image, then copy and paste each of the URL’s into the mosaic maker (3 columns, 4 rows). The questions: 1. What is your first name? 2. What is your favorite food? 3. What high school did you attend? 4. What is your favorite color? 5. Who is your celebrity crush? 6. Favorite drink? 7. Dream vacation? 8. Favorite dessert? 9. What do you want to be when you grow up? 10. What do you love most in life? 11. One word to describe you. 12. Your Flickr name. My mosaic: Note: I don't have a Flikr name, so I used what I would use if I had an account (with a space in it, because it didn't return any results the first time). Also, I don't really have a celebrity crush, so I got creative.

Monday, September 15, 2008

Wedding Pictures

Before the first look Black vs. white: it was a draw Daddy's girls Sisters Mini-me The party The Zwicker family The Harris family The wedding parties First kiss! Thirty-somethingth kiss Toast from Scott Blessing from Dave Josh's Best Man toast Cara's Maid of Honor toast: "I always beat Liz sparring, but she always beat me in wrestling. ...Good luck with that, Tim!" Swingin' Prayin' Moms We're so happy to be married to each other!

Monday, August 04, 2008