'Tis done!

When I decided, a few months into reading the Bible this past time, that I wanted to read through the whole thing in a year, I figured I'd get close.  Maybe get there, maybe not.  But, to my eternal surprise, I managed to read the Bible very quickly.  In fact, I finished reading the Bible today.  I can't do math very well, but I think August to April is nine months.  Which is cool.

Did I like it?  Yeah.  Would I have been able to do that my first time through?  Uh, no.  As I was flying through some portions of the Bible (I think I read all the minor prophets in a week) I realized that I was only able to do that because I've gone over these Books before, and studied them out.  Not just the minor prophets, either.  While I was reading through books like Hebrews and Revelation sometimes I would pause and think "if I hadn't heard this explained a hundred and seven times, I would have no idea what was going on."

But it worked.  Very well.  Even if I never attempt such a feat again, I'm totally going to read the early history books (Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, etc.) as close to the prophets as I can (especially Jeremiah and Isaiah).  I've always sort of been weirded out when people talk about reading the Bible "as a novel," but I think I finally understand what they're trying to say.  They're not comparing it to a novel, but rather treating its readability as a novel.  For my part, I usually forget all the history stuff by the time I've gotten to the prophets, thereby making it difficult to remember things like who Uzziah was or why Jotham was important.

And don't even get me started on all the different names of Jehoiachin/Jechoniah/Coniah.  If those are the proper names, anyhow.  But it's rather confusing to me.  But this time, thanks to the fact that there was only about a month between those two sections, I managed to remember most of what I'd read in the history books.  And it made the prophets so much more enjoyable!

Anyhow, truth be told, I'm not sure I'll ever have enough time to do this again.  The only reason I was able to do this was because I set a goal to read at least five chapters a day (there's that whole three-a-day and five-on-Lord's Day thing that I couldn't follow all the way because I started multiple months into my year, so I figured five a day might do it) but I started bringing my full-sized Bible to my nanny job (once I realized I could no longer read my small Bible, which was sorrowful) and usually sat around in the mornings and drank a cup of coffee and read the Bible for a while.  That was cool.  And at night times I would read my Bible before and after getting ready for bed.  Usually two or three chapters when I first went up to my room to get ready for bed, and two or three more right before I went to sleep.  That way I wasn't bogging myself down with a bunch of chapters, and I was always ready to pick up where I'd left off 45 minutes prior, or however long it might have been.

Anyhow, I'm not sure why I'm blathering on about this, but since I've long given up the days of excitedly telling my family when I finished the Bible each time, yet I still get that rush of hopefulness that tells me that each time I finish reading the Bible the Lord's coming is SO much closer, I always feel like blathering.  And now I have a place to do so!

Funny story.  The first time I finished reading through the Bible by myself I was maybe nine or ten, and I was SO excited, and I went out into the hallway that connected all the bedrooms, and a few of my sisters were standing around talking, and I told them that I'd finished the Bible for the first time ALL BY MYSELF!  At this point one of my sisters looked at me and said "So have we.  Many more times than you."  And that was the last time I celebrated that joyous event with my family.  But I still get excited, and the Lord and I throw a party.  Mostly because He did such an amazing job on the Bible.  Every time I read it, no matter how quickly I may go through it, I find so many cool and new things to think about and learn.  What an amazing book!

This brand is my brand

I don't usually think of myself as picky about brands. Usually.

However, the other night I was spending the night at my Grandma's house. It got to be like 10:00 and suddenly I realized that I was starving. I'd had a hot dog at about 4:00, and no food since then. So I figured I'd go down to the kitchen and find myself a snack. Looking forward to a nice bowl of cereal or something (other snack items at my grandma's house include things like prunes and joint wellness drinks, so cereal was about the top of the line), and then I realized something: I had already brushed my teeth, and I wasn't going through that again.

So I didn't eat. I laid awake for a while staring at the ceiling, my stomach rumbling a little bit.

Why was it such a big deal that I had already brushed my teeth? Usually if I've already brushed my teeth but something is worth eating (or I'm starving) I'll just eat and brush again. But that night at my grandma's, I'd forgotten a very important item. Toothpaste.

I don't usually forget important things like toothpaste, just so you know. But I'd forgotten that I'd finished up the tube in my purse, and I'd just expected to use that one. So when I got to my grandma's house, all there was to use was Procter&Gamble's (and I shudder to say the name, even) Crest.

Yeah, I dislike Crest toothpaste. A lot. I've never met a Crest flavor I like, for one thing. And it doesn't feel as effective as Colgate. Also, most importantly, it's not Colgate.

I am a huge Colgate fan. Have been for years. There's no real reason for it, all my dentist connections (and I have many) claim that there is no difference. But, alas, I find the chasm so wide between the two that I hesitate to even approach unto it. So, at my grandma's, I had just dealt with it like the adult I was and used the vile stuff. But doing that twice? So not happening.

So there we have it. Little ol' picky me, possessing cleanness of teeth (though not Amos 4:6 style) but willing to get it through only one brand. One day, Colgate should hire me to be a spokesperson. Because I'll tell you what: I surely do talk them up enough. I even get into arguments with my (very few, and very far between) friends who prefer Crest to the world's best.

Take that, Procter&Gamble. William Colgate was smarter than you.

Actually, Mr. Procter's first name was William as well. Haha, that's funny, I never thought of that before.

Earth, Earth, Earth...

...Hear the word of the Lord!

Oh, Earth Day. The day when people knowledge the Earth for being marvelous, but ignore the Creator. What a clever idea... or not.

In general, I have no problem with people taking care of the world we live in--it's called stewardship, people. But when people start setting that up as an idol in their life, I have a problem with that. And while I don't rally for eco-friendly whatevers people rally for, I do keep my electricity use to a minimum, don't litter, and try not to pull up moss from its natural habitat. But I just consider that to be common sense. The Earth-loving thing has pretty much become a religion these days, though, and I draw the line there.

Just for fun this morning, I looked up Nancy Pelosi's Earth Day spiel and noticed the absence of the charming verse (which may or may not be "from Isaiah") she used for last year's Earth Day celebration. How I miss the ignorance that caused that faux pas.

Confusion

When people get old, they get confused. It's pretty much a rule. But that doesn't make it any easier for those who have to see it happening. For instance, my grandma just turned 96 the other day, and, although she still lives alone and can do a lot of things herself, she does get confused. But like I said, it doesn't make it any easier to watch, even though I know that it's something everyone deals with.

The other day my sister was over at my grandma's house one morning, and told me that she (my grandma) had climbed the stairs herself and had been looking for something. That was odd, since she usually stays on the main floor and doesn't look for things.

So when I went to my grandma's house later that day, to spend a little time with her before bringing her back to our home for dinner, I was wholly unprepared for what ended up happening.

She had been puttering around, moving things from one counter to another in the kitchen, but that was nothing unusual. She was a very orderly housewife, and she often does cleaning sort of out of habit, even though her cleaning skills are less than stellar. Actually, a few weeks ago she kept on being worried about the kitchen floor. She kept on thinking it was dirty (it may have been, but not visibly so) and actually went so far as to get down on her hands and knees to feel on the floor and make sure it didn't have stuff on it. Thankfully we got her back up from her prayerful position, but it was just sort of an odd happening.

Anyhow, so she had been puttering, and finally I told her it was time to leave for dinner, and I help her put on her coat and she's standing sort of by the door, so I leave for about five seconds to go turn the lights off. I come back and she had taken off her coat. I tell her that it's time for supper and help her put her coat on again, which she promptly takes off.

"Can I get you anything, Grandma?"

"Well, yes," she said, slightly exasperated, "where are the children? I have to go and get the children."

At this point she starts trying to climb the stairs (so that's what had been going on!) and I'm pretty much half out of my mind with worry.

"The children? Grandma, do you mean A-- and O-- and S--? The ones who call you to sing to you?" (my nieces and nephews often called her to sing songs with her on the phone, and she routinely calls them children.)

"No. My children."

I rattled off the names of her own children, long since grown, and she told me that, yes, those were the children she was trying to find.

Like I said, I was basically sick with worry.

So we talk for a while about how her children have their own homes, and they're not upstairs, and finally I try to placate her by asking if she wants to call my mom and ask her about it. She basically charges to the couch (as quickly as one charges, using a walker) and I help her call my mom. I have no time to warn my mom about what's going on, obviously, so when my mom picked up the phone to hear her rather worried mother demanding to know where her children were, my mom was more than a little taken aback. But she rose to the occasion, asking what children she was looking for, and explained that indeed, all of her children had homes, and they were with their own families for supper.

My grandma finally understood, I think, and remembered that her children were indeed grown and married and not upstairs after all. I helped her put her coat back on, we went out the door with no further trouble, and by the time we got to my house for supper, she was completely back to her normal 96-year-old self.

But it frightened me, I'll admit. She does this sometimes, but it's never any easier to see her deteriorate like that. But I guess that's part of what love is--sorrow when one you love is suffering.

Which is just one of the many, many reasons I'm excited for the rapture. Heaven, besides having the Lord (which is the real reason I'm excited, obviously), is also a place of no more sorrow or tears. Won't that be amazing?

Known and read of all men--literally

It always totally weirds me out when people write books based on their own lives. I know that it’s totally their prerogative, but that whole write-what-you-know thing seems like it might not be best for your family, the way I see it. Not to mention any names, but doesn’t Ted Dekker’s daughter feel a little awkward knowing that the whole world (the whole Ted-reading world, anyhow) knows about her life mistakes? I personally haven’t read The BoneMan’s Daughter, but Ted wrote all over his blog about how the mistakes his daughter made caused him to write this book. Not only that, but I didn’t realize until I read his blog that his daughter’s name was Rachelle. Coincidence that one of his characters in the Circle Trilogy was named that? Uh, most likely not.

And I guess it’s not a trilogy now that he’s writing Green, but I never know what to call four books. A quartet? A square? Maybe just a plain ol’ series.

And that brings me to another good, but apparently unoriginal author. Karen Kingsbury. Has anyone else noticed that most of her books mirror her own life? Wasn’t it enough that her Redemption series features the Baxters, which is secretly code word for her own siblings and herself.  Four girls and a boy? Check. And then the Flanigans, featured in the series spin-offs, are her current family. Girl, boy, three adopted Haitian boys, and a younger, much loved, nearly-died at birth boy? Check, check, and check. And she named them so closely after her own children that I desperately hope (for her children’s sakes) that they (the children) got to at least choose their own alter-ego names. And then there was the “This Side of Heaven” book, which was pretty much about her brother.

And I’m sure there are many more times where her life and books juxtapose again. And this isn’t to say that she’s not a good author, because she is. I’ve read all of her books, and enjoyed almost all of them. And that’s saying a lot, because she has written a bevy of books.

It just makes me so thankful that my mom doesn’t write books about me. In fact, nobody writes books about me, and somehow? Well, somehow, I’m OK with that.

Christianity Today--November style

I believe I’ve mentioned before that I enjoy reading Christianity Today. It’s a good magazine, I would (usually) recommend it. But since I’m sort of poor, and frugal anyhow (though not a FCP, exactly—it’s in the urban dictionary, look it up), I get the subscription from the library, both to support the library, and also my money-saving habits.

Which means that by the time I’ve read the magazine, whatever it is saying is old news. Since it’s a magazine it’s technically sort of all old news, though, so I don’t feel too badly about it. Especially since most of the things in CT aren’t exactly time-sensitive anyhow. For instance, last month I finally read the November issue, and the cover story was on hunger, which is certainly a current issue (if you don’t believe me, read the article) but one that is just as current now as it was back in November.

Now, I usually really like to read this magazine. I usually go to the library on the second or third day of a month so that I can read last month’s issue once it has been shelved and is available. But for some reason, I could not STAND the November issue. I think I must have been having a bad day when I read it, or perhaps it was still too early in the morning (I’m not exactly a morning person), but whatever the cause, it was not a favorite of mine. A few reasons I disliked it follow.

1) Politics. Yes, okay, it was the November issue, elections were right around the corner (actually, elections pretty much were the corner that month) and it was historical and all that, but I was so tired of hearing about the elections, it wasn’t even funny. Not only that, but I’m one of those stodgy Earth-is-not-my-home Christians, and Christianity Today is decidedly not stodgy in that regard. In fact, they just ran an article about a year ago about how Heaven might be our home, but Earth is our stomping ground, and we should treat is as such, and do things like give it environmental makeovers and get into politics and the such. They were very convinced that Christians who didn’t join city council were in the wrong. Sorry, mister, I’m one of those ones.

2) Secondly (or maybe still firstly, because I’m still on a political kick here) they acted like they were all neutral in the elections, but they totally weren’t. You could see it all over the issue, that they were fervently hoping Obama would win. And I’m fine with that, because, well, I didn’t really care one way or the other. The Bible says that the basest of men are set up in government. Tru dat, Daniel. But really, if you’re going to have an opinion one way (which is what they had) then stop dancing around the bush. That’s what I say.

3) On that same subject, they reviewed a book called “Electing Not to Vote” and gave it a whopping one star. Just to give you a feel for how insane this is, I’ve seen them give morally inappropriate movies many more stars than that. Don’t quite remember how many stars (they base on a five-star system, so I don’t want to go too overboard with generalizations here) but whatever the case, they were not a fan of this book. I’ve never read the book in question, of course, but the author of the article says it’s the smuggest book he’s ever read. He compares the book’s ideology with that of a man being so against the government that he didn’t even get a driver’s license. Uh, last I checked, John Wilson, voting wasn’t a law. They do that in foreign countries, remember? They go so far as to “helpfully” fill out the ballot for the voters, so they still get to vote and the government still gets their person to win. That doesn’t sound very fun to me, sorry.

4) Two words. Ray Boltz. I almost threw up when I read that. What is the world coming to? And why do I expose myself to that sort of information? The magazine touches on that subject fairly often, but I just never learn. Honestly, I think that was what made me dislike the issue so much, now that I think of it.

5) This isn’t a dislike but an amused like. I have several friends who like Dave Ramsey, and I was amused to see him in the magazine. But I loved his point about living on less than you make. Amen, brother!

6) Oh, and Google finally let religious folk advertise stuff about abortion. I knew they were liberal, but I always pretend they secretly aren’t that liberal. Ah, the fake world I construct in my head.

7) I tried to figure out where Christianity Today stood on all that egalitarian stuff, but I can’t figure it out. Personally, I refer to Paul. Women should keep silence in the churches? Okey-dokey. Do women have an integral part in the body of Christ? Uh, yeah. Sounds fairly clear cut to me, fellows.

8) By this point in the magazine I skipped through a bunch of stuff. I skimmed the stuff about the KKK and Timothy McVeigh being Christian, pausing only to wonder if perhaps anyone had stopped to realize that it takes a personal relationship with Christ to qualify as “Christian.” It seems to make sense intuitively that to be a Christian you have to actually be a “Christ One” but I guess if you’re Timothy McVeigh and you say you’re a Christian, then you’re in the club. Sadly, I’m sure there were members of the KKK who were legitimately Christian, but delusional. Which should be a lesson to us: just because we claim we do things in the name of Christ doesn’t mean we can’t be simultaneously delusional.

9) I am so sick of Christianity Today’s movie and book reviews. I’ve already touched on their review of the Election book, but it’s a constant battle for me to not take a black marker to their reviews. They review movies based on talent and such, which is very important (and yes, they love art above all in their movie-reviewing cubicles) but the magazine is called Christianity Today, for crying out loud! Can’t we at least have thoughts on the moral content and the social implications of the movie? And I fall short: I watch some movies with questionable content, but in general, I’d prefer to stick to family-friendly Disney and Hallmark movies and let the Oscars keep their R-rated movies.

10) I like Switchfoot, I really do. I don’t know all their music, but what I have heard, I enjoy. But when Mark Moring (who wrote an article on Switchfoot, though he usually does movie reviews, I’m not a fan of his reviews, but I’m sure he’s a very nice person) referenced “JPMs” I very nearly hit the roof. Although Mark Moring didn’t straight-out say that having lots of “Jesuses Per Minute” was a bad thing, exactly, he did imply such. It made me feel like an inferior person for enjoying music that has a lot of JPMs. The truth of the matter is, as long as the music is clean (and I am insistent on this point, as my friends can attest to) I’m usually fine with it. But I enjoy decidedly Christian music, because, well, I am a Christian. It’s like shampoo. I’m a female, and there’s no rule about me needing to use “special girl shampoo” as opposed the regular stuff, but it smells good, is better for my hair, and since the shampoo is specially formulated for the health of my hair, and I have scads of hair, why not use the special kind? Well I’m a Christian the same way I am a female. Christian music talks about (sings about?) the things I want to be hearing, and it’s better for me than listening to Brad Paisley or Rihanna or whomever else there might be out there. Is there a moral problem with their music? Well, I have no idea, since I don’t really listen to them (though I have heard Brad Paisley songs I am not fond of, and I think I’ve heard a Rihanna song—something about umbrellas?), but providing there isn’t a moral dilemma, I’m sure there’s nothing innately wrong with listening to their music. But I’d just prefer to listen to the Christian stuff, since it usually helps lift up rather than maintain the same status or sink lower. Honestly, it’s like math: it’s not that complicated.

11) And finally, a word to Philip Yancey. He wrote the “Back Page” article in the issue, and discussed some church hopping he and his wife recently did. That’s fine, I mean, it sure did work for the characters in Ray Blackston’s Flabbergasted books, but I have just one question for him. In one of the most liberal churches he went to (complete with a PC Lord’s Prayer, as if the Lord’s goal was really to be PC) he found the most “energy.” I understand that you were looking for aliveness and all that, but if you had wanted to just find energy, try a rock concert, Mr. Yancey. Or maybe just a Switchfoot concert. I hear they have lots of energy, and almost no JPMs. Maybe that’s what you’re looking for.

Anyhow, after writing this entire list of things, I have to sit back and think: why do I read this magazine? I feel like with this issue, especially, I found a bevy of things I disliked, and not so many things I did. For now, I think I’ll continue to read the magazine (yeah, I’m a slow learner), but keep an eye out for further craziness. They don’t say anything overtly wrong (…) but the truth of the matter is, they say a lot of things I could do without.

Mega magazine pressures

I enjoy reading magazines, because of their ability to have current-type articles without the pressure of the constant updates of newspapers (which usually make you play hide-and-seek with their articles anyhow, what does that even mean, “continued on C4,” anyhow?) and internet resources. But magazines are very difficult for me to read, which means that I’m very picky about what magazines I read.

Words are basically amazing, as I’ve said before. I appreciate that words have a direct effect on me, and recognize their sway over me. So what’s the deal with magazines? Well, it’s like this.

When I read, I like to concentrate on what I’m reading. I like to start at point A and read all the way until the conclusion of the piece, presumably point Z. But in a magazine, there are little pictures, sidebars, timelines, sometimes they make you switch to entirely different pages to finish reading what you’ve started (sometimes it upsets me that they make you pay to read something that makes you play hide-and-seek with pieces of their magazine), and often they have corresponding inset boxes, just in case you need little extras on what you’re reading.

When I read magazines I have to either read straight through the entire article and go back to read the extras later (which is difficult, because my word radar knows I’m skipping over sections and yells at me), or I can look through the article first, read all the extra things, study the pictures, and then flip back and start the main text of the article once I’m finished reading all the bells and whistles. But when I do that, most of the time I have no idea what the side boxes are even talking about, seeing as I generally haven’t read the main article first, which usually directly relate to the extras.

It’s a tough call, which is usually why I have to skip magazines altogether. I make an exception for kid’s magazines (like Highlights, Cricket, Muse, or Ranger Rick) and Christianity Today and Reader’s Digest. Sometimes, if I have time and feel like proofreading, I’ll read Time.

Wow, that basically killed my whole point. That’s kind of a lot of magazines, more than I thought I read. Goes to show how little I realize about myself.

Actually, I know a lot of people who read a lot more magazines than that, if you’d believe it. But hey, if you don’t have time to read a book, and feel comfortable having to mentally skip all over pages like that, then magazines are as good as the next thing.

Till I get old and forgetful, however, I think my disdain for skipping around from box to box will insure many a tense magazine-reading sessions. I hope I'm a very happy old person, that's all I can say.

Judging errors

OK, who among us understands the story of Jephthah? And I’m not talking about the vow situation and the thing with his daughter, but I’m talking about how he got to where he did. Namely, a judge.

So his brothers hated him because his mom was a disreputable woman. That’s fairly understandable, if you want my personal opinion. So Jephthah, after being thrust out from the familial roof, runs away, gets to be buddy buddy with some vain guys, and that’s all we hear for a while. We have no idea if he had been married before his brothers kicked him out, or maybe after, we have no idea.

What we do know, is that once Ammon starts attacking the brothers back home, all of a sudden they’re like, “Oh hey, remember that clever Jephthah fellow? Let’s invite him back to fight for us!”

How did they know that he was the right one to pick? I mean, they’d most likely ousted him years and years prior to the Ammon debacle, and he was the best they could come up with? Even if he’d been a great sling-shotter back in the day, or maybe he could use his spear like none else, how did they know that he’d still keep those skills? And how could they know that he wouldn’t backstab them in payment of those good old days when they’d ill-treated him? I just don’t understand how they thought it was a smart thing to do, calling Jephthah to help them.

No wonder things were so crazy in Israel in those days. I mean, that is just not a smart thing to do. If this is what’s classified as “right in their own eyes” then I seriously question the judgment of any of those fellows.

No wonder they thought they needed a king!

Though some glasses darkly

Back in the day, when I was just a youngster (well fine, I'm still sort of a youngster, I just don't readily admit it like I used to), I used to wear glasses. Not cute I-deserve-to-be-on-the-Hallmark-channel glasses, but I-deserve-to-be-in-the-60's glasses. Charming, or not.

But one day I decided that I could see well enough, thank you, and moved on. That was years ago by now, and I thought I was doing well, I mean, yes, my eyesight was marginal at best, but I was managing. Or so I thought.

Now, I've always kept a little Bible in my purse. Because you never know when you'll have to look up verses, show someone the way of salvation, or just read because you're stuck in a traffic jam or airport for hours. And it was great to have, I used it at least once a week. But a few weeks ago, I took it out of my purse to read... and couldn't. No joke, I just couldn't read it any longer. Which was depressing, and I've since taken it out of my purse (which worked because I sort of had downsized my purse anyhow and either my wallet or Bible had to go and I couldn't decide which one to ditch, but this solved my problems for me) and now I'm finally admitting to myself that I have bad eyesight.

Which I sort of knew. For the past few months I've actually been using an old pair of my mom's reading glasses to read my Bible (though this Bible is regularly-sized), which has been working fairly well for me. Not that I'm to the stage of wearing glasses in public (uh, especially the reading glasses I currently use, which aren't really very attractive, truth be told) but at least I'm doing something about my poor eyes.

All this makes me feel old. And like the groaning creation I am part of. Sigh.