At long last I've been tagged on one of those tag things that do the rounds of blogs every now and then. Usually these pass me by, almost like no one cares what I think. But, high-5 to Jools for including me in the list of people of whom he wants lists of five books that have changed how you read Scripture, and how you think theologically.
So. Hmm. Let me think. I assume we're not allowed to say the Bible, like in those nights on a CU weekend where someone says 'What one person, living or dead, would you like to have lunch with?' and everyone says 'Jesus', because it sounds spiritual, even though they're really thinking 'David Beckham' or 'Zippy'.
Anyway. Here goes*:
Five books which have changed how I read Scripture:
1. The Contemporary Christian, by John Stott. Before I read this, I didn't really read the Bible as such, just sort of scanned it for interesting bits.
2. The Teenage Survival Kit by Pete Gilbert. Before I read this, I didn't even scan the Bible for interesting bits.
3. Can We Believe Genesis Today? by Ernest Lucas. OK, so it's only about Genesis. But it made me read Genesis differently, which made me read other bits of the Bible differently as well.
4. Streams Of Living Water by Richard Foster. It has bits about lots of different people and traditions, which gave a different perspective on the Bible and helped me to have a bigger view of it.
5. Excellence In Leadership by John White (I think). Looks at Nehemiah and applies the book to leadership issues today - one of those books that made me see how relevant the Bible still is.
Five books that have changed how I think theologically:
1. The Last Battle by CS Lewis, or really anything by CS Lewis. I like how that Calormene bloke (?) gets let in.
2. From Fear To Freedom by Rose Marie Miller. An excellent book about what it means to be a child of God.
3. Prayer by Philip Yancey (and, as a subcategory, What's So Amazing About Grace, also by Philip Yancey). By the end of page 1, I was excited about praying again.
4. Seasons Of The Heart by Janette Oke. Made me realise that not all Christian literature is good.
5. The Cross Of Christ by John Stott. The first book I read that made theology accessible.
So, now I tag:
Footnotes:
* The usual caveats apply: these lists are not exhaustive, have not been extensively thought through and opinions expressed by the author of this blog are not necessarily her own.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Monday, 22 June 2009
The Six Ways Of Atheism
Now this is good. Atheists have at long last found the answer to "Answers In Genesis" (that group of out-on-the-edge crazy people that makes all vaguely religious people hide under the table at mention of their name). In the form of a chap called Geoffrey Berg (no relation to Ice, heh heh heh), who has come up with "Six Improved Arguments For Atheism" - "New Logical Disproofs Of The Existence Of God".
Now, at first glance, this all looks like a Hitchkins-type production: 'God does not exist', 'I went to Cambridge' etc., and one might indeed be impressed by the thought of not one, but SIX simple arguments which have been unknown to philosophers everywhere for millenia and yet have revealed themselves to Mr (Dr? Prof?) Berg all in one fell swoop. But then you read them, and realise they're crap. So crap, in fact, that I'm going to assume that atheists everywhere are hiding under the table with their fingers in their ears every time the man's name is mentioned, and not blame them in any way at all.
Before we look at the arguments, it is important to note that Mr Berg has published the book himself, and sent copies to libraries. As he points out on his website, one of the libraries even wrote back and said thank you, which (as we shall deduce from the quality of arguments 1-6) almost constitutes a 7th argument.
We turn now to the 6 arguments which prove that God does not exist.
1. The Aggregate of Qualities Argument
In order to be God, you'd have to be really, really good at everything, right? Like, you'd have to be good at being good, and at making worlds and zebras and stuff, and good at football, and spellings, and good at knowing everything. What are the chances of that? How many people do you know who are good at everything? There are arty people, and there are science people, and there are sporty people and chatty people. But you don't really get anyone who's really, really good at absolutely everything. Like how many spelling bee winners go on to Olyympic Gold? So God can't exist.
2. The Man And God Comprehension Gulf Argument
We're dead small and God would have to be really big, like infinite. So if God existed, Geoffrey just, like, wouldn't get it, like, at all, so God doesn't exist.
3. The 'God Has No Explanatory Value' Argument
There are all these dead big questions, and the answer to all of them should be 'God'. Like, how the feck did this man ever get a degree from Cambridge? Since the answer to these questions is not God (and we know it isn't, because Geoffrey said it isn't), God doesn't need to exist, so it's probably best to assume He doesn't. A similar case can be made for George W Bush.
4. The 'This Is Not The Best Possible World' Argument
I actually heard him talking about this one with William Crawley on Sunday, and laughed out loud. The argument is thus: if God made the world really really good (which He had to, if He was God), then how come we made it better by inventing lip balm and Big Brother and Sky+ and that? Also, people in the future might invent even better things, so it's not fair because we won't have those things. So God can't exist.
5. The Universal Uncertainty Argument
This one was also discussed with William Crawley, and was presumably only half-concocted when Mr Berg was distracted by something bright and shiny at the other side of the room. Unfortunately he'd already committed to six arguments, so it had to stay in anyway. It is summarised as 'God can't exist because if He did He would have to know He was God, but since He can't know He is God, He can't exist'.
6. The 'Some Of God's Defining Qualities Cannot Exist' Argument
If God existed, my life would have purpose and meaning. However, on reading this book I have lost the will to live. Therefore God cannot exist.
Discuss.
Now, at first glance, this all looks like a Hitchkins-type production: 'God does not exist', 'I went to Cambridge' etc., and one might indeed be impressed by the thought of not one, but SIX simple arguments which have been unknown to philosophers everywhere for millenia and yet have revealed themselves to Mr (Dr? Prof?) Berg all in one fell swoop. But then you read them, and realise they're crap. So crap, in fact, that I'm going to assume that atheists everywhere are hiding under the table with their fingers in their ears every time the man's name is mentioned, and not blame them in any way at all.
Before we look at the arguments, it is important to note that Mr Berg has published the book himself, and sent copies to libraries. As he points out on his website, one of the libraries even wrote back and said thank you, which (as we shall deduce from the quality of arguments 1-6) almost constitutes a 7th argument.
We turn now to the 6 arguments which prove that God does not exist.
1. The Aggregate of Qualities Argument
In order to be God, you'd have to be really, really good at everything, right? Like, you'd have to be good at being good, and at making worlds and zebras and stuff, and good at football, and spellings, and good at knowing everything. What are the chances of that? How many people do you know who are good at everything? There are arty people, and there are science people, and there are sporty people and chatty people. But you don't really get anyone who's really, really good at absolutely everything. Like how many spelling bee winners go on to Olyympic Gold? So God can't exist.
2. The Man And God Comprehension Gulf Argument
We're dead small and God would have to be really big, like infinite. So if God existed, Geoffrey just, like, wouldn't get it, like, at all, so God doesn't exist.
3. The 'God Has No Explanatory Value' Argument
There are all these dead big questions, and the answer to all of them should be 'God'. Like, how the feck did this man ever get a degree from Cambridge? Since the answer to these questions is not God (and we know it isn't, because Geoffrey said it isn't), God doesn't need to exist, so it's probably best to assume He doesn't. A similar case can be made for George W Bush.
4. The 'This Is Not The Best Possible World' Argument
I actually heard him talking about this one with William Crawley on Sunday, and laughed out loud. The argument is thus: if God made the world really really good (which He had to, if He was God), then how come we made it better by inventing lip balm and Big Brother and Sky+ and that? Also, people in the future might invent even better things, so it's not fair because we won't have those things. So God can't exist.
5. The Universal Uncertainty Argument
This one was also discussed with William Crawley, and was presumably only half-concocted when Mr Berg was distracted by something bright and shiny at the other side of the room. Unfortunately he'd already committed to six arguments, so it had to stay in anyway. It is summarised as 'God can't exist because if He did He would have to know He was God, but since He can't know He is God, He can't exist'.
6. The 'Some Of God's Defining Qualities Cannot Exist' Argument
If God existed, my life would have purpose and meaning. However, on reading this book I have lost the will to live. Therefore God cannot exist.
Discuss.
Happy Birthday To Us
As some of you will be aware, last week was WhyNotSmile's birthday, and I tell you this: I partied like it was 1999. Specifically, that part of 1999 during which I had a bad flu. I had a lazy day on the sofa, read some books, and ate chocolate. If I throw in a visit from Dozavtra, I've pretty much done the day justice.
WhyNotSmile's birthday is quickly followed by Mama Smile's birthday and Fathers' Day (unless WhyNotSmile's birthday is on Fathers' Day, which happens from time to time), and this happy collision of events inevitably warrants a Smile Family Barbecue (Sister Smile has her birthday a little earlier in the month, and gets a sort of honorary mention).
This is Father Smile cooking the barbecue:
The large quantity of smoke is coming from raindrops falling on the barbecue; please note that the grill itself is not your ordinary every day sort of barbecue, but a 'Grillmore', as designed and made by Uncle Smile.
Here are Mama Smile and Sister Smile sheltering from the rain:
I have to say, I thought the addition of a table cloth to the plastic garden table was a little unneccessary, what with the rain and all. But who am I to argue?
So we sat around the table, drinking rapidly diluting Shloer, trying to eat the cheese before it went all weird and mushy, the way cheese does if you add water, and agreeing that it was the most fun we'd had in ages. Rain and wind always remind us of that other Smile Family favourite, camping trips, and I was thinking I must tell you about some of those some time (Sister Smile is trying to convince her boyfriend that they should go camping; so far he seemswise unwilling; I am not fully convinced that Sister Smile would still think it was such a good idea once she got there).
Anyway, then my aunt came and laughed at us for barbecuing in the rain, and we all went inside.
WhyNotSmile's birthday is quickly followed by Mama Smile's birthday and Fathers' Day (unless WhyNotSmile's birthday is on Fathers' Day, which happens from time to time), and this happy collision of events inevitably warrants a Smile Family Barbecue (Sister Smile has her birthday a little earlier in the month, and gets a sort of honorary mention).
This is Father Smile cooking the barbecue:
The large quantity of smoke is coming from raindrops falling on the barbecue; please note that the grill itself is not your ordinary every day sort of barbecue, but a 'Grillmore', as designed and made by Uncle Smile.Here are Mama Smile and Sister Smile sheltering from the rain:
I have to say, I thought the addition of a table cloth to the plastic garden table was a little unneccessary, what with the rain and all. But who am I to argue?So we sat around the table, drinking rapidly diluting Shloer, trying to eat the cheese before it went all weird and mushy, the way cheese does if you add water, and agreeing that it was the most fun we'd had in ages. Rain and wind always remind us of that other Smile Family favourite, camping trips, and I was thinking I must tell you about some of those some time (Sister Smile is trying to convince her boyfriend that they should go camping; so far he seems
Anyway, then my aunt came and laughed at us for barbecuing in the rain, and we all went inside.
Sunday, 21 June 2009
On Things You'd Rather Not Have Known
When you have a web page of any description, you are naturally curious as to who's visiting it, and why. One tool which helps with this is Google Analytics, and it is this which graces the pages of WhyNotSmile. Now, the advantage of Google Analytics, and other similar things, is that you can go and have a look, at any time, and find out how many people have viewed your site, where they live (like, roughly, i.e. which country, not their street and the colour of their front door or anything), and our topic for today, how they found you.
How they found you is split into various sections, including referring sites (the sites which have links to yours) and 'keywords', which are 'what they typed into Google and which led them to you'.
Referring sites are sometimes interesting, because you find links from all sorts of random things (at one point our church site was being linked to from a porn site), but keywords are even more fascinating.
The top one is usually the name of your site, and then the next couple are variations thereof: for instance, my top 3 keywords (well, phrases) are (1) "why not smile", (2) "why not smile blog" and (3) "whynotsmile". So far so good. Further down the list are things like "why not msile" and so on.
Number (4), however, is, rather unexpectedly, "Important anniversaries in 2009". I have no idea why, but it is true that if you type this phrase into Google (without quotes), WhyNotSmile is your top result. Furthermore, there are at least 6 further variations on this theme as you go down the list, and no less than a dozen people have been led to these pages in such a way.
The statistics also show that by far the most popular search terms (when you lump the variations together) leading to WhyNotSmile lately have been variations on The Apprentice, including "Lorraine fancies Ben The Apprentice", "Yasmina + Debra holding hands" and "Yasmina Debra relationship". Did I miss something? If I did, I'm not honestly sure I regret it.
However, my absolute favourite is at number (5) on the list: no less than 3 people have found WhyNotSmile by powering up Google and entering the immortal phrase "gay sex omeath".
I kid you not.
How they found you is split into various sections, including referring sites (the sites which have links to yours) and 'keywords', which are 'what they typed into Google and which led them to you'.
Referring sites are sometimes interesting, because you find links from all sorts of random things (at one point our church site was being linked to from a porn site), but keywords are even more fascinating.
The top one is usually the name of your site, and then the next couple are variations thereof: for instance, my top 3 keywords (well, phrases) are (1) "why not smile", (2) "why not smile blog" and (3) "whynotsmile". So far so good. Further down the list are things like "why not msile" and so on.
Number (4), however, is, rather unexpectedly, "Important anniversaries in 2009". I have no idea why, but it is true that if you type this phrase into Google (without quotes), WhyNotSmile is your top result. Furthermore, there are at least 6 further variations on this theme as you go down the list, and no less than a dozen people have been led to these pages in such a way.
The statistics also show that by far the most popular search terms (when you lump the variations together) leading to WhyNotSmile lately have been variations on The Apprentice, including "Lorraine fancies Ben The Apprentice", "Yasmina + Debra holding hands" and "Yasmina Debra relationship". Did I miss something? If I did, I'm not honestly sure I regret it.
However, my absolute favourite is at number (5) on the list: no less than 3 people have found WhyNotSmile by powering up Google and entering the immortal phrase "gay sex omeath".
I kid you not.
Monday, 15 June 2009
Things That Really Feck Me Off: #1, Hiccups
To the outside world, I am a placid and tranquil person, who does not get unduly upset over those minor irritants that drive the more manic to drink and drugs.
But this is all a front. Inside, I am a seething mass of anger, ready to explode at the merest provocation and eat the offending parties if they don't move fast. I just hide it well.
Anyway, I thought I would introduce you to some of the things which could potentially provoke such a reaction, just so you know.
Number one on my list: hiccups. Hiccups in general, but more specifically, people who laugh at me when I have hiccups. Some time ago, we charted 'discomfort' vs 'sympathy' for a range of afflictions; had hiccups been added to this chart, they would have been moderate-high on discomfort, and negative for sympathy, because, and I have no idea why this should be, hiccups make people laugh at you.
The first problem with hiccups is that they are really quite sore. You forget this, when you don't have them. They hurt, albeit only a little bit, but repeatedly, and seemingly without end. It's not even the kind of pain that is included in such pithy witicisms as 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger', because hiccups are of no discernable benefit whatsoever. Where pain in the knee, for instance, alerts you to the problem in your knee, hiccups are a sign of nothing except that your body has given up and turned against you.
The second problem is that this makes people laugh at you. Hiccups are funny, as long as they are inhabiting someone else. They also happen over and over and over, so people laugh over and over and over. But you can never sound properly angry when you have hiccups: any threat issued while hiccuping just makes the whole thing even funnier for spectators.
Thirdly, and finally, hiccups strike without warning. It's like that norovirus thing, where the first you know about it is when last night's dinner lands on your lap. Hiccups are no respecter of situations, and can strike in the most solemn of business meetings, funerals or solicitor interviews.
And this is why I hate hiccups.
But this is all a front. Inside, I am a seething mass of anger, ready to explode at the merest provocation and eat the offending parties if they don't move fast. I just hide it well.
Anyway, I thought I would introduce you to some of the things which could potentially provoke such a reaction, just so you know.
Number one on my list: hiccups. Hiccups in general, but more specifically, people who laugh at me when I have hiccups. Some time ago, we charted 'discomfort' vs 'sympathy' for a range of afflictions; had hiccups been added to this chart, they would have been moderate-high on discomfort, and negative for sympathy, because, and I have no idea why this should be, hiccups make people laugh at you.
The first problem with hiccups is that they are really quite sore. You forget this, when you don't have them. They hurt, albeit only a little bit, but repeatedly, and seemingly without end. It's not even the kind of pain that is included in such pithy witicisms as 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger', because hiccups are of no discernable benefit whatsoever. Where pain in the knee, for instance, alerts you to the problem in your knee, hiccups are a sign of nothing except that your body has given up and turned against you.
The second problem is that this makes people laugh at you. Hiccups are funny, as long as they are inhabiting someone else. They also happen over and over and over, so people laugh over and over and over. But you can never sound properly angry when you have hiccups: any threat issued while hiccuping just makes the whole thing even funnier for spectators.
Thirdly, and finally, hiccups strike without warning. It's like that norovirus thing, where the first you know about it is when last night's dinner lands on your lap. Hiccups are no respecter of situations, and can strike in the most solemn of business meetings, funerals or solicitor interviews.
And this is why I hate hiccups.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)