I've gone and done it.
I've started a Tumblr.
Which means I will post on here much less.
Wah-wah-waaahhh.
But feel free to start following over there:
http://ofeverythingelse.tumblr.com/
And don't be upset if you see some reposts from here over there.
There was some good stuff on here. I'd like to share it more.
Thanks for reading!
Oh Kim Jong-il...
Why didn't you sell your talent to online dating services?
Millions of people's dating profiles could have been so much more interesting.
And those Match.com commercials would need a lot more props.
Kurt Cobain's Suicide Note
There's so much to think about from this.
To read the full letter, click here.
One line stood out to me:
"I don't have the passion anymore, and so remember, it's better to burn out than to fade away."
A man who admits several times in this letter that he has an amazing life is driven to suicide by this line.
By losing passion.
By losing feeling.
I've heard several Christians talk about walking away from Christ because they "don't feel him anymore" or because it "doesn't seem real". And I've seen Christians never get serious with God because they never find that point where they can actually feel Him for the first time.
I think often we forget the value of feeling our God. Or feeling life in general. Pain. Joy. Sorrow. We forget the value of things actually being real to us.
Sometimes as Christians, we downplay our current feelings. We downplay not feeling God "at the moment" in worship or in prayer by telling people to "praise through" those empty feelings. We have wives who put their goals and dreams aside indefinitely in order to be the good Christian wives they are supposed to be. We rarely call each other on the carpet for our sins, so we never feel condescending and never make other people feel guilty. And there's a hundred other examples, all of which causes us to ignore what we currently feel by putting on a mask of what we should be feeling.
And in a way, I think that disconnects us from reality.
We live as we are expected to live, slowly numbing our own feelings altogether.
And we wonder why we have passionless Christians.
At the end of the day, I'd be pretty apathetic about a God who never felt real either. I wouldn't care what He had to say, and I certainly wouldn't bother following it.
But maybe He doesn't feel real because we don't let Him feel real? Maybe since we are constantly acting inside the masks we create instead of showing our true feelings, God can't address those feelings directly. If we can't stop lying to ourselves about how we feel, how can God help us with those situations?
Maybe we are boxing God up and limiting Him without even knowing it.
Which makes sense.
God would feel less real if I constantly shield myself from feeling him.
From feeling anything.
I can see how a bullet looks pretty good through that haze of numbness.
Fairy Tales
"Fairy Tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist,
but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
- G.K. Chesterton
but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
- G.K. Chesterton
There's something fantastic about fairy tales.
About stories and fiction in general.
Something Godly in them.
I'm not sure what it is yet, or at least how to word it, but when I do you'll be the first to know.
Some Christians...
Do it right.
And they might pay for it.
And they might pay for it.
The above picture is a little odd to run into, but read the signs below them and figure out a little of what's happening here.
This is a Christian group that has gone to a gay-pride parade, holding signs that apologize for how the church has treated gay people.
Now the question that's above everything else I have to say, is this: what was your reaction to that statement? What did you think of those Christians?
Because that reaction speaks volumes.
I understand the controversy of what they are doing. In their eyes, those Christians are showing love to people who have been hurt. To hardline evangelicals, they are condoning an act of sin. The world would say Christians are finally being more accepting, and the church would say that's exactly the problem. I understand the tension here.
I understand there's tension in any potent act of Christian ethics, from the traditional acts of giving food to the homeless to the more controversial ideas of Nuns handing out clean needles to drug addicts. We as Christians wrestle with what constitutes loving our neighbor and approving their actions. Often we wrestle with this to the point of inaction, scared to make any move lest it's the wrong one. But let me take a different angle on this, and possibly show us something new.
The picture above was taken from a large image sharing site called Imgur. Traditionally this is a site that shares a lot with Reddit, with both having a large Atheist community. So the question is: what reaction did the frequenters of the site, that sort of community, have to this? Here's some responses:
As you can tell, they loved it. On top of that, this site is meant for people to load pictures that they quickly want to share with their friends. It's almost a throw away picture site. Yet this image and a reposting of it are ranked in it's top hits of all time. That means not only are people sharing this, but people keep coming back to see it.
At the very least, I think we as Christians can accept that this action, and boundary pushing actions like it, open up conversation. It lets us interact with a world that's hungry for love. More importantly, it lets us interact with the world in a way that the world can understand. This is a way to show God's love to people who have no other way of seeing it.
In my opinion, when it comes to communication, the quality of the content of your message matters much less than your ability to have people hear it. You could have the most information imaginable inside your brain, but if you can't communicate it to anyone in a way they will understand, then it means nothing. So I translate that principle here: it matters so much more that we communicate the base idea of Christianity, that God loves people, than where we place that fine line of accepting homosexual behavior. Going to a gay pride parade and telling people they are loved is a way to do that. Sure, people can mistake what that means of God's thoughts on their sin, and people did in the comment section of that website, but that shouldn't stop us from starting the conversation in the first place.
To use Reddit language:
This is a Christian group that has gone to a gay-pride parade, holding signs that apologize for how the church has treated gay people.
Now the question that's above everything else I have to say, is this: what was your reaction to that statement? What did you think of those Christians?
Because that reaction speaks volumes.
I understand the controversy of what they are doing. In their eyes, those Christians are showing love to people who have been hurt. To hardline evangelicals, they are condoning an act of sin. The world would say Christians are finally being more accepting, and the church would say that's exactly the problem. I understand the tension here.
I understand there's tension in any potent act of Christian ethics, from the traditional acts of giving food to the homeless to the more controversial ideas of Nuns handing out clean needles to drug addicts. We as Christians wrestle with what constitutes loving our neighbor and approving their actions. Often we wrestle with this to the point of inaction, scared to make any move lest it's the wrong one. But let me take a different angle on this, and possibly show us something new.
The picture above was taken from a large image sharing site called Imgur. Traditionally this is a site that shares a lot with Reddit, with both having a large Atheist community. So the question is: what reaction did the frequenters of the site, that sort of community, have to this? Here's some responses:
As you can tell, they loved it. On top of that, this site is meant for people to load pictures that they quickly want to share with their friends. It's almost a throw away picture site. Yet this image and a reposting of it are ranked in it's top hits of all time. That means not only are people sharing this, but people keep coming back to see it.
At the very least, I think we as Christians can accept that this action, and boundary pushing actions like it, open up conversation. It lets us interact with a world that's hungry for love. More importantly, it lets us interact with the world in a way that the world can understand. This is a way to show God's love to people who have no other way of seeing it.
In my opinion, when it comes to communication, the quality of the content of your message matters much less than your ability to have people hear it. You could have the most information imaginable inside your brain, but if you can't communicate it to anyone in a way they will understand, then it means nothing. So I translate that principle here: it matters so much more that we communicate the base idea of Christianity, that God loves people, than where we place that fine line of accepting homosexual behavior. Going to a gay pride parade and telling people they are loved is a way to do that. Sure, people can mistake what that means of God's thoughts on their sin, and people did in the comment section of that website, but that shouldn't stop us from starting the conversation in the first place.
To use Reddit language:
tl; dr: Saw this pic on Imgur, wish I was holding a sign with them.
I know, I know...
It's been too long since I've posted. I have a valid excuse, but I'll share that in a day or two. Instead, let me make it up to you. How about some incredible One Republic violin playing?
No? Not forgiving me yet? How about a trailer for Abraham Lincoln Vampire Slayer?
Sure, I don't know what's happening there either, but it's by Tim Burton. That counts for something right? ..Maybe? ... maybe not.
Ok, running out of things to appease you people. Last thing up my sleeve here. Luckily, it works every time:
How about the Puppy Cam? (Sorry, you need to click the link to watch)
Doesn't that make you feel warm and happy?
See, now there's no need to be all grumpy. I promise to be a better blogger. Now run along and check back here again, I promise there'll be something worth seeing. ;)
Ok, running out of things to appease you people. Last thing up my sleeve here. Luckily, it works every time:
How about the Puppy Cam? (Sorry, you need to click the link to watch)
Doesn't that make you feel warm and happy?
See, now there's no need to be all grumpy. I promise to be a better blogger. Now run along and check back here again, I promise there'll be something worth seeing. ;)
Question with Boldness
Quotes always seem important, don't they?
For some reason, they feel more important than the words I say. If I came up with an idea, it could be really good, creative, and useful, but it just doesn't seem as powerful as if I had quoted some old dead guy saying it.
That's why, even though I had this idea myself, I'm going to quote Thomas Jefferson saying it. (Oh yes, I understand the added bonus points I get for quoting a Founding Father; I'm going for big money on this one). In a letter to his nephew who was coming of age, ready to step out into the world, he wrote:
I don't believe this is a new trend in Christian thinking or that this is so far off base that it causes a Catholic Priest to start a rap battle, because I don't think I'm saying anything outlandish. I'm not saying in Christianity there's no point where we need to take leaps of faith, where we don't know God's plan but trust him anyway. Faith exercises are good. What I'm saying is more of an extension of "Always be prepared to give a reason for the hope that you have inside you" (1 Peter 3:15). That maybe God came to earth so that we no longer just obey him out of fear, but that instead we start trying to understand why he does what he does.
At the heart of it, I'm talking about an intellectual approach to Christianity. Think about it Christians: if what we believe is the truth of the universe, the truth behind everything, then if people seek the absolute truth, they will find Christ. Honest, open, and objective questioning can lead people to God, or secure their faith in God. This isn't to say the Devil isn't a factor, because our hearts and minds can be deceived. But if people are honest with themselves and objective as possible with their search, they will find the truth, which is God.
Yet too often Christians are the ones to stop discussion on important issues because we feel threatened or don't know the answers. We stop conversations we can't control and quell questions from curious outsiders. We ask people to accept our ideas of life and faith without being willing to hear their's out first.
So 1st, I want to challenge Christians who are scared of this. It's ok if you don't know the answers to the origin of the universe or why there's so much pain in the world, be honest with yourself if you don't know those answers. Hear the points of objection and reconcile that with your faith. In the end, you will grow from it. No one is saying you have to drop your faith right then and there if you're asked a question you can't answer. Just be open to the discussion.
2nd, to everyone, Christians and Non-Christians alike: help create an honest atmosphere of discussion. The only way a place like this can be created is if there are people who start acting as if it's there. Being open with your personal questions, asking other people, and being tolerant of answers that you don't agree with.
The level of religious conversation in today's world has devolved to the point of bigoted shouting matches. We, as people, are better than that. We, as Christians, should be leading the way. That's what spreading light into the darkness should look like.
For some reason, they feel more important than the words I say. If I came up with an idea, it could be really good, creative, and useful, but it just doesn't seem as powerful as if I had quoted some old dead guy saying it.
That's why, even though I had this idea myself, I'm going to quote Thomas Jefferson saying it. (Oh yes, I understand the added bonus points I get for quoting a Founding Father; I'm going for big money on this one). In a letter to his nephew who was coming of age, ready to step out into the world, he wrote:
"Fix Reason firmly in her seat, and question with boldness even the very existence of God; because if there is one, surely he must more appreciate the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."What he's telling us to do is to question everything with our reason, because God would rather that then us acting and believing things based on fear alone. What he's saying is God would rather we think.
I don't believe this is a new trend in Christian thinking or that this is so far off base that it causes a Catholic Priest to start a rap battle, because I don't think I'm saying anything outlandish. I'm not saying in Christianity there's no point where we need to take leaps of faith, where we don't know God's plan but trust him anyway. Faith exercises are good. What I'm saying is more of an extension of "Always be prepared to give a reason for the hope that you have inside you" (1 Peter 3:15). That maybe God came to earth so that we no longer just obey him out of fear, but that instead we start trying to understand why he does what he does.
At the heart of it, I'm talking about an intellectual approach to Christianity. Think about it Christians: if what we believe is the truth of the universe, the truth behind everything, then if people seek the absolute truth, they will find Christ. Honest, open, and objective questioning can lead people to God, or secure their faith in God. This isn't to say the Devil isn't a factor, because our hearts and minds can be deceived. But if people are honest with themselves and objective as possible with their search, they will find the truth, which is God.
Yet too often Christians are the ones to stop discussion on important issues because we feel threatened or don't know the answers. We stop conversations we can't control and quell questions from curious outsiders. We ask people to accept our ideas of life and faith without being willing to hear their's out first.
So 1st, I want to challenge Christians who are scared of this. It's ok if you don't know the answers to the origin of the universe or why there's so much pain in the world, be honest with yourself if you don't know those answers. Hear the points of objection and reconcile that with your faith. In the end, you will grow from it. No one is saying you have to drop your faith right then and there if you're asked a question you can't answer. Just be open to the discussion.
2nd, to everyone, Christians and Non-Christians alike: help create an honest atmosphere of discussion. The only way a place like this can be created is if there are people who start acting as if it's there. Being open with your personal questions, asking other people, and being tolerant of answers that you don't agree with.
The level of religious conversation in today's world has devolved to the point of bigoted shouting matches. We, as people, are better than that. We, as Christians, should be leading the way. That's what spreading light into the darkness should look like.
PIPA Blackout
Google has censored itself.
Several websites across the internet, Wikipedia, Wordpress, Reddit, and Mozilla included, will shut down for 12 hours today in protest.
In protest of what you ask?
This:
The PROTECT IP Act.
If you're looking for a more detailed read, try here.
(And for the bills themselves, here and here.)
If the video is too long or confusing, here's the summary:
Congress wants the power to stop you from being able to type in "www.facebook.com" to go to Facebook if there is anyone on Facebook who posts any copyrighted material. Meaning if your friend posts a video of themselves dancing to a copyrighted song (read: any song) or if they Photoshop their face into a True Blood poster, then Facebook would be blocked to everyone until Facebook removes the infringing material. So no Facebook for anyone as long as there's 1 piece of questionable material on there.
The best part though?
The people who get to make the call: "Qualifying Plaintiffs"
Which is anyone whose material you've copyrighted.
If I'm understanding this right, we are giving the power to shut down competitor's websites to the companies that are deciding if a site has committed copyright abuse.
It's like making the prosecutor in a court the judge as well.
Basically, they will change the Internet completely.
And it needs to be stopped.
So how can you help?
Call or Email your local Senators. It's not hard.
Here's a contact list for every Senator. (If you don't know their names, look for the State abbreviation by their name.)
For my fellow Floridians, I made it a little easier:
Several websites across the internet, Wikipedia, Wordpress, Reddit, and Mozilla included, will shut down for 12 hours today in protest.
In protest of what you ask?
This:
The PROTECT IP Act.
If you're looking for a more detailed read, try here.
(And for the bills themselves, here and here.)
If the video is too long or confusing, here's the summary:
Congress wants the power to stop you from being able to type in "www.facebook.com" to go to Facebook if there is anyone on Facebook who posts any copyrighted material. Meaning if your friend posts a video of themselves dancing to a copyrighted song (read: any song) or if they Photoshop their face into a True Blood poster, then Facebook would be blocked to everyone until Facebook removes the infringing material. So no Facebook for anyone as long as there's 1 piece of questionable material on there.
The best part though?
The people who get to make the call: "Qualifying Plaintiffs"
Which is anyone whose material you've copyrighted.
If I'm understanding this right, we are giving the power to shut down competitor's websites to the companies that are deciding if a site has committed copyright abuse.
It's like making the prosecutor in a court the judge as well.
Basically, they will change the Internet completely.
And it needs to be stopped.
So how can you help?
Call or Email your local Senators. It's not hard.
Here's a contact list for every Senator. (If you don't know their names, look for the State abbreviation by their name.)
For my fellow Floridians, I made it a little easier:
Tell them you oppose PIPA (PROTECT IP's shortened name) and have them tell the Senator where you stand. It can be a 2 minute phone call, but help flood their offices with responses so they know where people stand. If that's too much for you, then at least send this email.
Most of us rarely get involved in politics. We vote, but once we elect someone we allow them free reign in their office, completely unchecked until the next election cycle. You can do more than just being involved in your government once every 2 or 4 years. Let your voice be heard today.
Most of us rarely get involved in politics. We vote, but once we elect someone we allow them free reign in their office, completely unchecked until the next election cycle. You can do more than just being involved in your government once every 2 or 4 years. Let your voice be heard today.
Christian Spoofs
We Christians are particularly good at a few different things.
Namely side hugs, Jesus Jukes, and making Sunday at lunchtime the worst time to eat out all week.
But in all honesty, we, as a subculture, are good at a lot of things. We can be excellent craftsmen, laborers, CEOs, accountants, programmers, teachers, athletes, leaders, followers, etc. We handle a plethora of jobs and activities well.
But something stands out to me when I watch this video:
Mainly the question: "... Why?"
But besides that, I look at that in contrast to this:
And I'm frustrated.
Yes, the second one is amazing.
Yes, he makes great points.
Yes, the video work, which is just subtle enough, brings it all together.
And all of that rightfully earns this video almost 14 million views in less than a week.
And Yes, these videos are on 2 completely different levels.
But besides that, what stands out about this video the most?
It's original.
We, as Christians, made that.
I know it's the work of one artist, but we as a subculture made that.
We created that.
We didn't create the SuperBass video.
We ripped that off and poorly remixed it.
I'm not knocking the church or people that made it, it's an amateur video and they did a good job for what they wanted.
But for a long time those sort of videos were accepted as good Christian Art.
That was our standard of good material.
We would clap when we would see that SuperBass video or videos like it in services, or we would fall in love with Facing the Giants.
Which aren't bad for what they are, but they aren't great works of Art or outstanding entertainment either.
I guess what I'm saying is that we as a group are great at a lot of things... but Art isn't one of them.
Or at least we haven't been.
Which is sad since we pretty much dominated it for most of the Middle Ages.
How did we come to a place where just parodying popular art was accepted as good quality art for our subculture?
All we've done for the past 30 years or so is mimic the standard culture of our day with a few phrases turned around. Instead of influencing the culture around us, we are basically copying current trends but with a 3 year delay. Can anyone else explain why the band Plus 1 had any success at all?
(Maybe the delay is so we can figure out how to turn lyrics about having sex with your boyfriend into a metaphor for God loving the Church. These things take time.)
Forgive my frustration, I know I'm coming across jaded.
But I think all I'm thinking boils down to one question:
We have a message that transforms lives... so why are we satisfied with just substituting lyrics?
Some people are trying to make something more, but most of us are just satisfied.
We can do better than that people.
Our creativity can change the world.
And I think this latest Youtube sensation might have proved that.
Namely side hugs, Jesus Jukes, and making Sunday at lunchtime the worst time to eat out all week.
But in all honesty, we, as a subculture, are good at a lot of things. We can be excellent craftsmen, laborers, CEOs, accountants, programmers, teachers, athletes, leaders, followers, etc. We handle a plethora of jobs and activities well.
But something stands out to me when I watch this video:
But besides that, I look at that in contrast to this:
Yes, the second one is amazing.
Yes, he makes great points.
Yes, the video work, which is just subtle enough, brings it all together.
And all of that rightfully earns this video almost 14 million views in less than a week.
And Yes, these videos are on 2 completely different levels.
But besides that, what stands out about this video the most?
It's original.
We, as Christians, made that.
I know it's the work of one artist, but we as a subculture made that.
We created that.
We didn't create the SuperBass video.
We ripped that off and poorly remixed it.
I'm not knocking the church or people that made it, it's an amateur video and they did a good job for what they wanted.
But for a long time those sort of videos were accepted as good Christian Art.
That was our standard of good material.
We would clap when we would see that SuperBass video or videos like it in services, or we would fall in love with Facing the Giants.
Which aren't bad for what they are, but they aren't great works of Art or outstanding entertainment either.
I guess what I'm saying is that we as a group are great at a lot of things... but Art isn't one of them.
Or at least we haven't been.
Which is sad since we pretty much dominated it for most of the Middle Ages.
How did we come to a place where just parodying popular art was accepted as good quality art for our subculture?
All we've done for the past 30 years or so is mimic the standard culture of our day with a few phrases turned around. Instead of influencing the culture around us, we are basically copying current trends but with a 3 year delay. Can anyone else explain why the band Plus 1 had any success at all?
(Maybe the delay is so we can figure out how to turn lyrics about having sex with your boyfriend into a metaphor for God loving the Church. These things take time.)
Forgive my frustration, I know I'm coming across jaded.
But I think all I'm thinking boils down to one question:
We have a message that transforms lives... so why are we satisfied with just substituting lyrics?
Some people are trying to make something more, but most of us are just satisfied.
We can do better than that people.
Our creativity can change the world.
And I think this latest Youtube sensation might have proved that.
Coach Carter
I own the movie Coach Carter.
But I'm not sure why I do.
If you're not aware of this 2005 movie, it stars Samuel L. Jackson, Ashanti, the guy from Cousin Skeeter, and some excellent rap music. The movie's story is of a successful businessman who becomes a high school basketball coach to help a struggling inner-city team not only start winning some games, but for the boys of the team to learn to become men. Which sounds great, right? And it even has a good Remember the Titans feel to it; except, you know, without all the racism.
So it's a pretty good movie.
But, and I'm not knocking it when I say this, it's not a great movie.
I mean, it's good, but it's no Dark Knight.
To me, it's a TBS quality movie.
Meaning a movie the channel TBS will play all the time since it's entertaining and family friendly enough. TBS takes several of these B+ movies and replays them until you can almost quote them. For example, I haven't had cable for 5 years, but I'm fairly certain that if I turned on TBS, A Knight's Tale would come on within 48 hours.
And again, this isn't really a knock against A Knight's Tale or TBS either, because I used to spend a ridiculous amount of time watching those movies over and over again. Which is partly my fault and partly TBS's fault too, because who can resist watching this (skip to 0:43) every time it comes on?
Anyway, this question was bugging me because usually I don't own a movie unless it's either:
1) Flat out amazing so I can watch it again and again (Can I bring up the Dark Knight again?)
or
2) it really impressed me in some way.
Well, there is a possible 3rd option: where I found a going out of business sale at Blockbuster and decided to be "compassionate" to the owners by taking some of their stock off their hands. But normally I really think about what movies I buy because I think it says a little something about the person.
So last night I decided to watch it again and see why I bought this movie. As I'm watching, I'm going through a small checklist in my mind of reasons why I might have bought it:
Q - Hmmm... Looking at the film, it's basically geared for BET... and I mainly had black friends growing up... was I... maybe trying to fit in? I guess?
A - No, it's not like any of us quoted this movie or anything.
Q - There's lots of basketball... (see question #1)
A - No, I'm not that pathetic. Stop thinking in stereotypes.
Q - Did I find Ashanti that attractive?
A - Not exceptionally.
Q - Was I trying to essentially be like Channing Tatum?
A - No, I hadn't even seen him dance when this came out, so he wasn't slightly idolized to me yet. And why is he ruining his handsome face with that rap-industry-standard beard?
Q - Did I identify well with the characters?
A - Not really. We didn't have many inner-city problems at Grace Christian School (my high school).
So why did I own this movie? Just as I was settling into the fact that maybe I wasn't as selective with my movie purchases back in 2005, this scene came up; where a student finally answers a question the coach constantly asked him throughout the movie: "What is your deepest fear?" (skip to 0:50)
And I realized that I grabbed this movie for that one line.
That one long line.
Which turns out to be a quote from the book A Return To Love by Marianne Williamson.
Which is a line I needed to hear again.
I constantly hid how well I can do things so I don't stand out in a crowd.
So I don't have to have others see what I can really do.
And in essence, all I'm really doing is crushing my own potential for the favor of an invisible crowd.
*sigh* I hate it when God breaks me over silly things, like movies I'm watching as I'm falling asleep.
On the bright side though, it's good to know my 2005 self's taste in movies wasn't half bad.
But I'm not sure why I do.
If you're not aware of this 2005 movie, it stars Samuel L. Jackson, Ashanti, the guy from Cousin Skeeter, and some excellent rap music. The movie's story is of a successful businessman who becomes a high school basketball coach to help a struggling inner-city team not only start winning some games, but for the boys of the team to learn to become men. Which sounds great, right? And it even has a good Remember the Titans feel to it; except, you know, without all the racism.
So it's a pretty good movie.
But, and I'm not knocking it when I say this, it's not a great movie.
I mean, it's good, but it's no Dark Knight.
To me, it's a TBS quality movie.
Meaning a movie the channel TBS will play all the time since it's entertaining and family friendly enough. TBS takes several of these B+ movies and replays them until you can almost quote them. For example, I haven't had cable for 5 years, but I'm fairly certain that if I turned on TBS, A Knight's Tale would come on within 48 hours.
And again, this isn't really a knock against A Knight's Tale or TBS either, because I used to spend a ridiculous amount of time watching those movies over and over again. Which is partly my fault and partly TBS's fault too, because who can resist watching this (skip to 0:43) every time it comes on?
Anyway, this question was bugging me because usually I don't own a movie unless it's either:
1) Flat out amazing so I can watch it again and again (Can I bring up the Dark Knight again?)
or
2) it really impressed me in some way.
Well, there is a possible 3rd option: where I found a going out of business sale at Blockbuster and decided to be "compassionate" to the owners by taking some of their stock off their hands. But normally I really think about what movies I buy because I think it says a little something about the person.
So last night I decided to watch it again and see why I bought this movie. As I'm watching, I'm going through a small checklist in my mind of reasons why I might have bought it:
Q - Hmmm... Looking at the film, it's basically geared for BET... and I mainly had black friends growing up... was I... maybe trying to fit in? I guess?
A - No, it's not like any of us quoted this movie or anything.
Q - There's lots of basketball... (see question #1)
A - No, I'm not that pathetic. Stop thinking in stereotypes.
Q - Did I find Ashanti that attractive?
A - Not exceptionally.
Q - Was I trying to essentially be like Channing Tatum?
A - No, I hadn't even seen him dance when this came out, so he wasn't slightly idolized to me yet. And why is he ruining his handsome face with that rap-industry-standard beard?
Q - Did I identify well with the characters?
A - Not really. We didn't have many inner-city problems at Grace Christian School (my high school).
So why did I own this movie? Just as I was settling into the fact that maybe I wasn't as selective with my movie purchases back in 2005, this scene came up; where a student finally answers a question the coach constantly asked him throughout the movie: "What is your deepest fear?" (skip to 0:50)
That one long line.
Which turns out to be a quote from the book A Return To Love by Marianne Williamson.
Which is a line I needed to hear again.
I constantly hid how well I can do things so I don't stand out in a crowd.
So I don't have to have others see what I can really do.
And in essence, all I'm really doing is crushing my own potential for the favor of an invisible crowd.
*sigh* I hate it when God breaks me over silly things, like movies I'm watching as I'm falling asleep.
On the bright side though, it's good to know my 2005 self's taste in movies wasn't half bad.
Introducing Fotoshop by Adobé
The new beauty product Fotoshop, able to hide anything:
Got to love a crack at the modern beauty industry.
And nothing summarizes this better than the creator Jesse Rosten's comment on the video:
"This commercial isn't real, neither are society's standards of beauty."
While this points out a major flaw with the beauty industry and the media in general that several people have noticed for some time, it does still leave a question though: as consumers of this media, what does it say about us? And as a Photoshop user whose done this sort of editing before, what role do designers play in all of this?
I know it's easy to blame culture in general, since it's so impersonal and it can't actually defend itself, but we need to remember who causes, shapes, and creates culture in the first place: the people of a society.
*sigh* ... I hate those times when a quick laugh makes me critically introspective...
On Happiness
My devotional today, from Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.
It spoke to me, and I might just be posting this so I have it saved somewhere, but I hope it speaks to you.
____________________
Is happiness really attainable? It is a question many have sought to answer. It has been debated in philosophy halls, whispered about at slumber parties, promised in innumerable marketing campaigns—particularly at the turn of a new year. Our countless approaches to pursuing happiness are as diverse as our many definitions of the word. But what if the attainability of happiness is intimately connected to our answer to another question? Namely, what is the source of your greatest enjoyment in life? In other words, could there be a connection between your worldview and your capacity to experience happiness?
In a fascinating study, Armand Nicholi, professor of clinical psychiatry at Harvard University, compared the life and work of Sigmund Freud to that of C.S. Lewis.(1) Each cultural giant was recognized for the remarkable accuracy with which he observed human emotion and experience. And yet, each man defined and experienced happiness in strikingly different manners, through radically different worldviews.
Freud's experience and understanding of happiness emerged as fundamental to his materialist understanding of the world. He observed happiness to be "a problem of satisfying a person's instinctual wishes."(2) Consequently, the possibility of attaining happiness was met with pessimism. Freud recognized that the human appetite is never fully satisfied. His observation is not without merit. Happiness, defined in such terms, is problematic, if at the same time, the goal is to achieve a lasting happiness. Money may be able to achieve one instinctual wish, and yet instinctual wishes ebb and flow with perpetually changing appetites. The average U.S. citizen's buying power has doubled during the last four decades, yet studies report that the average American is not any happier, but in fact, less happy than reported in studies conducted forty years earlier. Sadly, Freud's life itself reflected his definition of happiness. His letters were increasingly filled with pessimism and depression, even mentioning drug use as the only effective mood-lifter he could find.
What makes C.S. Lewis a fascinating point of comparison is that like Freud, he too, was intensely pessimistic about the possibilities of happiness early in life. And yet as emphasized by many biographers and close friends, his life was profoundly transformed in his early thirties, following a dramatic shift in worldview. Through a worldview far different than one of materialism, Lewis reasoned, "What does not satisfy when we find it, must not be the thing we were desiring."(3) Happiness, for Lewis, could not ultimately be met in the material. As he found himself approaching a worldview shaped by something beyond the material, Lewis first thought he was coming to a place, an idea, and found instead that he came to a Person, one within the material world and also beyond and behind it. In fact, it was the surprise of finding a person that first redefined the notion of happiness for him—happiness from within this source of joy that marked his life even during times of pain and loss.
In this new year of potential promise, our ultimate sources of happiness may be as worth considering as each possible option or hopeful resolution. The psalmist writes of a creator as a source within and beyond the material, "You have made known to me the path of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand." There may well be a connection between our capacity for happiness and our understanding of life. In the Christian view, there is a person who stands and calls you nearer, that your joy may be transformed by a present and enduring love.
Jill Carattini is managing editor of A Slice of Infinity at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in Atlanta, Georgia.
It spoke to me, and I might just be posting this so I have it saved somewhere, but I hope it speaks to you.
____________________
Is happiness really attainable? It is a question many have sought to answer. It has been debated in philosophy halls, whispered about at slumber parties, promised in innumerable marketing campaigns—particularly at the turn of a new year. Our countless approaches to pursuing happiness are as diverse as our many definitions of the word. But what if the attainability of happiness is intimately connected to our answer to another question? Namely, what is the source of your greatest enjoyment in life? In other words, could there be a connection between your worldview and your capacity to experience happiness?
In a fascinating study, Armand Nicholi, professor of clinical psychiatry at Harvard University, compared the life and work of Sigmund Freud to that of C.S. Lewis.(1) Each cultural giant was recognized for the remarkable accuracy with which he observed human emotion and experience. And yet, each man defined and experienced happiness in strikingly different manners, through radically different worldviews.
Freud's experience and understanding of happiness emerged as fundamental to his materialist understanding of the world. He observed happiness to be "a problem of satisfying a person's instinctual wishes."(2) Consequently, the possibility of attaining happiness was met with pessimism. Freud recognized that the human appetite is never fully satisfied. His observation is not without merit. Happiness, defined in such terms, is problematic, if at the same time, the goal is to achieve a lasting happiness. Money may be able to achieve one instinctual wish, and yet instinctual wishes ebb and flow with perpetually changing appetites. The average U.S. citizen's buying power has doubled during the last four decades, yet studies report that the average American is not any happier, but in fact, less happy than reported in studies conducted forty years earlier. Sadly, Freud's life itself reflected his definition of happiness. His letters were increasingly filled with pessimism and depression, even mentioning drug use as the only effective mood-lifter he could find.
What makes C.S. Lewis a fascinating point of comparison is that like Freud, he too, was intensely pessimistic about the possibilities of happiness early in life. And yet as emphasized by many biographers and close friends, his life was profoundly transformed in his early thirties, following a dramatic shift in worldview. Through a worldview far different than one of materialism, Lewis reasoned, "What does not satisfy when we find it, must not be the thing we were desiring."(3) Happiness, for Lewis, could not ultimately be met in the material. As he found himself approaching a worldview shaped by something beyond the material, Lewis first thought he was coming to a place, an idea, and found instead that he came to a Person, one within the material world and also beyond and behind it. In fact, it was the surprise of finding a person that first redefined the notion of happiness for him—happiness from within this source of joy that marked his life even during times of pain and loss.
In this new year of potential promise, our ultimate sources of happiness may be as worth considering as each possible option or hopeful resolution. The psalmist writes of a creator as a source within and beyond the material, "You have made known to me the path of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand." There may well be a connection between our capacity for happiness and our understanding of life. In the Christian view, there is a person who stands and calls you nearer, that your joy may be transformed by a present and enduring love.
Jill Carattini is managing editor of A Slice of Infinity at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in Atlanta, Georgia.
Mad Props, Honda Civic.
If you know me at all, then you know already that that's not because of anything car-related, since I'm as familiar with cars as the French are with finishing a fight (Ba-zing!!). Instead, I'm giving Honda kudos for their incredible new advertising campaign.
Ridiculously awesome. Then again, that's brought to us by the same people who did the original Old Spice "The Man Your Man Could Smell Like", and this little beauty right here:
Geniuses. But their latest is pushing the boundaries of what advertising can even do. It's phenomenal, I'm actually going to run back through it again here in a minute. And now I can't wait to see what else people can create with that sort of idea.
If you haven't done it yet, check it out now. You won't regret it.
Btw, check out their whole portfolio if you've got time to kill, it's all pretty fantastic.
If you haven't done it yet, check it out now. You won't regret it.
Btw, check out their whole portfolio if you've got time to kill, it's all pretty fantastic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)