Fundamentals

Before I even start this I can tell it will be a bit of rambling. My mentor once said as the world gets darker the lights will only shine brighter. lol. Miss him. My continued involvement on this earth sharpens the "other than" difference between normal people and those possessing real Christian faith. aka Conviction of things unseen. The extraordinary thing about my experience is that things seem simpler and simpler as life moves on. I used to struggle to see any distinction between myself and how others think and now it hits me over the head like a ten pin bowling ball on a daily basis. Also, it comes down to some very simple bottom line thought lines which spread like oak trees throughout my thought patterns. I thought I'd toss out the ones that come to mind. I'm sure I'll miss a few; they're all intertwined; since the God of Christianity is the perpetrator of all of them.

1. Creation: Already spoke to this in  a previous post. There is a daily onslaught of subtle and not so subtle opining that all things evolution are true and good while anything smelling of creation is naive, stupid and hateful. I don't mean any type of watered down view that thinks the first day might be millions of years. I mean the 6-24 days variety right off the pages. Ya gotta remember Jesus quoted from this historical tomb when it was in it's completed stage. The spirit of the Antichrist is so apparent in this sphere. No worries about the environment, God's going to create a new heaven and new earth. Mr. molecular management.

2. Man is sinful: Meaning man is fundamentally evil. It's not your upbringing, it really is genetic. Well not really genetic but the fact that you are human brings it upon you. The sins are visited from previous generations but only in type. Whoever raises you will shape the way it's expressed. If you were born on a desert island you'd be a sinner. This view is also anathema to virtually every educational discipline. That's what's psychiatry is for, make you better. Listen to Oprah, Dr. Phil, Hollywood, yadda, yadda. Go to therapy. Now all the problems are genetic. Everything and anything except the real source. And God doesn't blame you for Adam's fateful detour, he gave up his son for you to get fixed.

(sidebar: I believe my favorite movie is "Ordinary People". Perhaps because it so accurately portrays the nature of relationships in a family. At one point the main character says he doesn't believe in God. Nevertheless the fundamental theme is his ability to forgive himself. He finds a true friend who leads him there. The irony of this is not lost on me. A movie offering the answers to all our problems denying the existence of he who is the only way. Nevertheless, I appreciate the honesty of the godless reality and the state of mankind without him. A place I am familiar with but no longer frequent)

3. Immortality of the Soul: Sorry, no nice warm bed to spend your afterlife in. Not even a darkened eternal bliss without consciousness. Scary enough. Nope, all souls live eternally. Would you expect anything less from a creator. It's just a question of in what state of mind you'll be in and where that will be. Yep, good old fashioned heaven and hell. I'm shuffled off to the loony bin at this point. The current intelligentsia deals with this in countless ways with endless movies, books, shows to calm any fears. Holding out the heroes and aspirations of money, sex and power on this earth as Satan did to our Lord. Still can't get around it though; it really is a matter of time. No one's ever gone and come back, save one.

4. Jesus Christ being the only means to Salvation: A salvation not required if the first three are rejected. I guess I'm beginning to realize why this would ramble. It's like being in a forest and trying describe each tree and how it intertwines with the others. Basically everything of the "world" is at war with everything in the kingdom. The three I've already mentioned do spread far and wide through a broad range of disciplines. Then I get to number four which is of course what the world is doing everything it can to deny by utilizing lies about the first three. Every day it just becomes more apparent. Especially in a country that was founded by men who believed all of this and embedded those thoughts in a framework to build the greatest country on earth. On every front and by the boldest of steps that is being dismantled as quickly as possible. I believe all in preparation for the end of this aeon. 

Aeon Doodle

I generated a lengthy diary during a pivotal time period in my pilgrims progress. I think it was simply a spill over from not having a necessary third reference point to balance the mental chair. While this is meager by comparison, rereading what I thought a week or month ago still provided a reference point.

At some time I hope to dictate it’s contents into a software tool and limitedly publish those words to those who might find them relative to their experience - an exceptionally small audience by any measure. Nevertheless, this diary was a very useful and necessary venting of some critical issues that eventually came to full resolution.

In the diary I infrequently took to doodling. The primary artifacts were to summarize modes of thinking, and in this case only those of Charles Malik and Anders Nygren. I studied both of their views extensively and found I could render their universe in a fairly simple sketch. I was then able to layout my own thinking in contrast to theirs. This visual method significantly clarified the differences, albeit only to myself.

I wanted to pass along my “History of the Universe” chart at left. I began this blog with a detailed biblical time line from creation to current day based on details passed on from the Old and New Testaments. This drawing has a slightly different theme than that. It is meant to contrast the light with the dark or the Godly with the ungodly. The time bound earth is enclosed; everything within it’s borders is subject to the conditions of the fall. God’s presence through man, up to the time of Christ, is gray as it’s under the old aeon. The arrival of the Son on the scene is white as are all the expressions of him since that time. Also, since that time, the Spirit of the anti-Christ began and continues to grow. The re-expansion of the white bubble is the reformation. I consider Luther, and others likeminded, a reiteration of the original gospel (freedom from the law) as a temporary correction of the ever darkening closure of the spirit of the antichrist. The end of the age is where the time bubble ceases and those who are part of the white are reunited with the eternal word encapsulating this creation.

Hurt Locker vs Avatar

Having endured Kathryn Bigelow’s Hurt Locker, I sat motionless in my semi-recliner musing  over connected feelings from the close of “Eyes Wide Shut” and/or “The English Patient”. From inside I could hear the voice of Elaine, “Oh. No. I can’t do this anymore. I can’t. It’s too long. Quit telling your stupid story, about the stupid desert, and just die already! Die!!”.

My mind wandered onto thoughts of the incredulity that accompanied the Avatar experience. Cameron’s stunning movie pedigree, the concept development coming to fruition 15 yrs later and the pioneering 3D work come as a sharp contrast to what appears as a thrown together, amateurish war commentary vehicle. It wasn’t so much that I preferred the other nominees that I’d seen (District 9, Blind Side, Up in the Air) but that but I didn’t really even grasp the redeeming value or purpose of The Hurt Locker. A pure documentary would have been far more appreciable and applicable to the topic.

We really have some cowboy, with little regard for the safety of his fellow soldiers at the helm of a disarmament crew?  And he’s deactivated 853 situations without a problem. It seems like a rambling piecemeal video reminding us for the billionth time that some people in Hollywood would rather pretend war is avoidable than face the evil that exists. If anyone of them were President in 41, they would have surrendered after Pearl Harbor and we’d all be speaking German or Japanese.

And speaking of Pearl Harbor, any of the 6 episodes I’ve seen so far of “Pacific” are embarrassingly superior to any section or all of THL. So my disturbance is not so much from type as it is from degree. Supporting some twisted, mindless thought pattern through the use of the movie medium is nothing new and even Avatar, from my view, follows this familiar road. It’s the immeasurable variance between the two enjoyment factors that shows as a blue whale on my radar.

Hollywood would like the fact that they entertain us (Avatar) to be replaced with the thought that they are some type of courageous heroes. (THL) In fact the word courage seems to be in every other sentence that drivels out of their mouths. As another contrast, the real heroes’ in “Pacific” don’t like to be described as such because they were “just doing their jobs”; or simply prefer not to talk about it because the degree of the trauma is indigestible. (Continued discussion becomes chewing on regurgitated emotional vomit) Interestingly, the so called courageous actors, directors, producers never show either of these symptoms.

Hollywood talks about and makes movies of topics that they self determine to be counter culture, when in fact they are totally consistent with their culture. This pretence at risk is necessary to cultivate their ‘courage’ on the other end. This make belief world is well beyond the fantasy of Avatar even though they frown on movies of this genre. Of course they think their courage is real, they champion causes no one else will, they stand for right in a world of wrong, they risk everything for conscience and principle. As in Orwell’s 1984, the Ministry of Love is actually hate and those having real courage are maligned and destroyed by those who are motivated by cowardice. More than a reminder that this pretense continues, the Oscar result shows the degree is ever deepening.

Haiti

Read an article in the Telegraph regarding the situation in Haiti. It read, “Max Beauvoir, Haiti's "supreme master" of voodoo, alleged his faith's opponents had deliberately prevented much-needed help from reaching followers of the religion, which blends the traditional beliefs of West African slaves with Roman Catholicism.” It goes on to say that the Christians were getting the bulk of the aid coming to Haiti because they were controlling the airport. He then commented on Pat Robertson’s suggestion that ‘Haiti had made a pact with the devil 200 years ago’ saying “I don't know much about him (Pat) and I don't think I'm losing much, Voodoo has been discriminated against for 200 years…It was developed by our ancestors, it is a way of life. To ask us to stop would be like asking an American to stop eating hamburgers." Mr. Beauvoir is a Sorbonne-educated biochemist. (University of Paris founded in 1253) 


Later in the same article it goes on to say that ceremonies were halted in Mr. Beauvoir’s grand house, which seconds as  a voodoo temple, but they were still going on in the countryside. They reported that the temples are “where followers dance around a totem pole in the grounds to the sound of drums. Bonfires are lighted to attract spirits and the blood of animals, including goats and chickens, is drained and used to heal the sick” and the “elaborate ceremonies include secret languages, people dancing after being possessed by spirits and talismans including dried animal heads.” Apparently in rural areas “people practice the ‘darker’ side of voodoo, summoning evil spirits." 


While many in Hollywood are livid over Mr. Robertson’s comments (esp. Whoopi Goldberg) according to Kompe Filo a believer and Haitian TV/Radio personality “voodoo predicted the earthquake six months ago.” Since that’s the case I would assume preparations were made to deal with the disaster and minimize it’s impact? Another voodoo believer, Monique Henri, wore a cross around her neck while waiting for food to arrive. She said, “The earthquake happened because people were sinners so God was angry, because people did wrong.” I guess Pat is not alone.

Assassination of the assassination

I watched a show a few days ago that I'd saved for about a month on my PVR. I taped it because the visual snippets were impressive but hadn't watched it because the dialogue associated with those brief images was annoying. The show is called "Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination - Beyond Conspiracy" (2003). Since I have no method of transferring the show to my hardrive (which I did in my old setup; previous home) I decided to clear it off my PVR. I watched the show from front to back but was unable to prevent some serious responses being shouted at the screen.

This piece by Jennings (Senior Editor) was inundated with gross distortions and skillfully missing information. Ironically, this was the very thing that they vehemently accused everyone else of doing. What I love about the assassination is that it's a lightning rod for illuminating evil from good, truth from lies, openness from deceit so that one might understand the state of the world. Not dissimilar from Christ’s resurrection in terms of the degree of the war over the actual events which transpired. Reflecting on this I surmise that this is the case for all incidents, amplified to the degree of what is at stake. With Kennedy’s assassination the stakes are exceedingly high as the machinations of evil can be seen in broad daylight. It is the likes of Jennings who hopes we close our eyes.

The only good I can say about the two hour show is that there were two items that additional light was shed on that were of significance. Oswald was a better shot than I had previously been informed. They actually showed the Marine shooting records with his scores from rapid fire shooting at 200 yards. This was impressive until they decided to weaken their argument by extending the implications beyond their capacity. The repeatedly mentioned that Kennedy was 75yds from Oswald when he was shot at. This is supposed to impress us how close he was relative to 200yds?! They failed to mention at any point that it was a moving vehicle (target) so there would be necessarily 3 distances at which shots were fired. (from their count). The results on a driving range with a stationary target would be quite different than on a moving target with trees in obscuring your view. This kind of attempt to extend the import of the facts makes me question the whole scenario as simply a means to push their desired viewpoint.

The other item of interest was the death of Office J.D. Tippet. I knew it was pretty solid that Oswald shot him but there was more evidence to confirm that in the show. So while I don't think Oswald took the fatal shot, he's still a murderer. I never really thought much about Oswald’s participation because it became irrelevant due to other overwhelming evidence. It’s fairly obvious to me now, and already had been, that someone took some shots from the area of the Depository, to at least set Oswald up or it may have been Oswald himself.

These items represent about 4 minutes of the 120 minutes of viewing. The rest was simply a blatant and subtle attempt to continue the brainwashing of the viewers to Jennings desired result. Three particular points make this abundantly clear to me.

One is the total lack of refutation of evidence provided by the witnesses who said the shots came from the grassy knoll. Of the 104 people who were in ear shot of the assassination, 35 (minimum) said they heard them coming from the knoll area. (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm) Like the Warren commission report they were not really included in the discussion! I don’t see how the choice to leave this unanswered means anything less than a severe prejudice. The report simply focuses on the shots from the depository and leaves it at that.

A second item was the death of Danny Ferry who had supposedly been part of a meeting between Clay Shaw and Oswald. In the dialogue Jennings says his death was through “natural causes”. This was over a picture of Ferry with the newpaper article in the background. If you freeze the screen and read the article (HD) his death was an “apparent suicide” and the cause was “brain hemorrhage”. So from Jennings perspective, a natural cause of death is blowing your brains out or having someone blow them out for you?! So while Ferry’s manner of death was never part of my consciousness up to this point, the asinine and clumsy attempt by Jennings to bury the facts will forever imbed it in my memory. And of course the entire line of discussion is meant to discredit Jim Garrison, or better put, Oliver Stone’s representation of Garrison.

The final item, before I summarize, was the mention of the autopsy reports which de facto makes Oliver Stone a liar. The dialogue runs that the x-rays and autopsy ‘prove’ that the shots came from behind. In the least, this is a gross misrepresentation of the readily available details of the autopsy(s) and surrounding events. There are enormous questions raised by the variances in the presentation of the President’s body from the time he died on the table at Parkland Memorial to the autopsy slab at Bethesda Naval Hospital. An entire book was written by the resident physician at Parkland memorial providing direct evidence to contradict Hume’s conclusions. David Lifton’s phone call interview of the attending Physician, Malcolm Perry, where he described the maximum length of the tracheotomy as being significantly less than the opening encountered by Hume’s at Bethesda. Or the absurd fact that the autopsy photos had been ‘flipped’ in a number of cases and the right side description being applied to the left side of his head. (thank god for Kennedy’s nose scar) Anyway, the lack of any depth of investigation into these issues ends any idea that Jennings was remotely objective.

(for proof that there is more to the autopsy than Jennings one line acceptance of Hume’s pre-burned notes - http://www.jfkresearch.com/JFKSecondAutopsy.pdf - 125 pages that show the complexity and deceit at work)

What was particularly insidious was their vicious raping of Oliver Stone’s film JFK. And it wasn’t just Jennings. Jack Valente and a host of other respected individuals popped up one after another to denounce Stone’s treatment of the subject. They took a single snippet from a Stone interview where he said he used ‘dramatic license’ in the film and proceeded to lynch him with it. Then they bemoaned and lamented over the fact that this type of movie ends up being imbedded in the thoughts of the American people instead of the truth of what happened. This piece of subtle propaganda was an amazing thing to behold.

From where I sit, Stone used about 10% of the license that Jennings used in making this report. (documentary?) At least Stone is honest about it. Jennings continues to operate under the shroud of journalistic objectivity all the while making a ‘movie’ of his own. The reason Stone’s film is in the minds of the American people is because it was already there. Evidence available from the day the assassination occurred has never been fully explained. The bullet fragments absolutely never added up. The motorcade vehicle being washed before any serious forensics could be completed. A mysterious pristine bullet found on a stretcher that supposedly rammed into Connelly’s wrist after passing through the President, all the ‘grassy knoll’ information etc. ad infinitum. So while Jennings and his team lament the American public’s ‘brainwashing’ by Stone’s film (28 yrs after the fact) , I am hopeful the same public will discard Jennings’s tripe as the real attempt to control their minds.

Jennings audience is to those who don’t want to know what happened or those who prefer his comforting, assured persuasions as opposed to the harsh reality of the facts. Anyone who has even done a surface investigation into this incident would have problems with the presentations in this “report”. I’m not sure of his motivations, but Jennings has a serious stake in convincing as many as he can that Oswald acted alone. There’s a Titanic sized load of evidence that simply doesn’t add up to that conclusion. I still think the search for the truth is fairly simple - present all the facts then attempt to put some plausible scenario together that explains everything you know. It is patently obvious that Jennings doesn’t even know what that is.

Thought Map - 1st Draft

I collected a list of pivotal readings and tried to organize them into some type of logical, chronological format. I'm not really happy with this chart and have some definite ideas to improve it. But I thought I'd throw it up here or perhaps I never will. There's a program called CMap, which is a far better tool at rendering a progression of thought. I prefer it to this Visio diagram of key books I've frequented. So I hope to post something in the future that better reflects the transformation of my mind. In the end, everything points to Jesus... of course.

Two Slit cont'd

Here's a few more pics of the double slit experiment. At left is what was expected to occur. Single photons contacting the rear plate in and around the ajacent openings. At right is what actually occurred. The resulting pattern requires contact between mulitple photon particles which was impossible since only a single photon at a time was propelled through the slits. As more and more particles contacted the light sensitive back plate, the interference waves began to emerge. Doh!

Einstein (Jesus=e=mc2)

I stumbled across this blog http://decartes-einstein.blogspot.com/ while looking for information on a book I bought and read called Einstein’s Moon. The book was pivotal in shaping my thinking (layman) about quantum physics specifically and science in general. It provided the context for Einstein’s oft-quoted statement that ‘God doesn’t role dice with the universe’. The numerous additional Einstein quotes utilized in the blog, opened a Pandora’s Box of thought connections especially when he refers to Plato/Aristotle. I anticipate it will require a few posts to close the thought loops opened by his references.

A book review on Amazon describes the fundamental discovery resulting in what is now known as Bell’s Theorem. Although little know or publicized it is seen by many as one of the most important discoveries of this century. I will pull from a review of the book on Amazon which describes the results of shooting single photons through two openings and the unexpected result:

“The Quantum Double Slit paradox: Quantum theory teaches that light is ultimately made up of finite and indivisible quanta called photons. Common sense dictates that since a photon is indivisible, a single photon can only pass through one slit at a time. Therefore, the photon must pass through slit A or B and then hit the photographic particle screen. If one blocks slit B and measures the results of the photon passing through slit A, the result should match commonsense and since the photon can only pass through one slit the interference pattern can not form; however, when the results of a very large number of these individual events are collected, the familiar interference pattern appears, as if the photon also passed through slit B. This is where the quantum world departs with logic and common sense. The photon acts like it can be at two places at once. It seems light and electrons can behave both like a particle and wave.”

So there’s really a three step comparison thing going on.

When you fire light through a single opening slit you will observe a pattern on the receiving wall which will be a bright bar opposite the opening slit that will fade as you move away from the source. Basically the majority of the light particles (photons) travel straight to the wall through the slit while lesser amounts come in at an angle through the slit and hit the wall farther from the center.


The next part of this is to add another slit, a little farther from the first one and shine the same light through the two slits. As expected you receive quite a different pattern. As the light passes through the two slits some particles/waves interfere with those arriving through the other slit which creates an interference pattern on the receiving wall. So the light will be prominent directly opposite the two slits but will fade in ‘waves’ as you move away from the sources. To this point all is well and good in the physics universe. Things are behaving as expected.

Here’s the quantum rub: The next step is to reduce the flow of light and try it again with the two slit options. The flow needs to be reduced to a single photon at a time. (which can and has been done) The purpose of this is to eliminate the possibility of interference between the light coming through both of the slits. Since only one photon is going through either slit at a single moment, it cannot run into another one on it’s journey to the other side. What you’d expect is basically the single slit result only side by side. (See schematic at right) Light can pass through either slit so it will converge across from the two openings and fade elsewhere. Since no other particles interfere, each photon has a direct journey to the other side pretty much around the openings. Is this what you get? Uh nope. You get the same interference pattern when you’re flooding the two slits with light!! Yeah. This inexplicable result basically split the world of Physics. Einstein made his famous God/dice statement and Neils Bohr responded “Quit telling God what to do”. Until I began this brief investigation I’d never heard Bohr’s quote and that in itself is something I take seriously. There are reasons we hear what we hear and don't hear what we don't hear. Einstein's has a nice ring to it but the reason I think we hear it is that it's underlying attitude is a desired indoctrination for the masses. It worked well.

David Harrison from the Department of Physics at the University of Toronto states the obvious that, “As you probably already know, Einstein never did accept Quantum Mechanics.” He continued to believe in some type of undiscovered local phenomena (‘hidden variable’) that would explain why the dice rolled the way they did. Bell’s theorem basically proves that not to be the case. The behavior observed is the real deal. This particular double-slit result is explained as “Although each electron arrives at the target at a single place and time, it seems that each has passed through – or somehow felt the presence of both slits at once”. http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory/DoubleSlit.shtml

This confirms something I have been thinking in the background for a while now. While Einstein comes across as a stauch believer in God and a champion against atheism, the God he envisions is not one that I recognize. When he meets face to face with the ‘personal side’ of the behaviour of particles he is so shocked he rejects the reality. Why be so surprised? God created the universe so it should be no surprise that it behaves in a 'being-like' way rather than a robotic automaton. Einstein states:

“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.”

This is a very high sounding and earnest quest to know God. Really? Uh how about Genesis? Uh, how about the New Testament if you'd like to really know what God thinks. When something shows up in the discipline he's spent his life studying, that points directly to God’s hand in the behaviour of every particle, he rejects it out of hand. God said, and matter came into being. God is all and in all etc. And scientists discover at the quantum level that particles behave with a type of intelligence. You’d expect an unhindered welcome at the landslide of corroborating evidence for God creating the universe . . . not. This is the filter I put upon Einstein's supposed quest to know God. He doesn’t even recognize him when he’s staring him in the face

From other Einsteinian quotes I have a pretty good idea of his image of God. I did a detailed review of a book written by Charles Malik, former President of the United Nations General Assembly which is only one of his many accolades. Like Einstein, regardless of his stature in the world, I found his constant bleating regarding Jesus Christ simply a front for a full fledged denial of who he really was/is. Like Einstein's supposed God quest, when you actually take a look under the hood, you see the squirrels are pretty much tuckered out. Alas, reserved for another post.

Coop and Whoop

Was watching Anderson Cooper and some correspondant making fun of Star Jones on the View the other day. Another attempt to discredit creation and propel the belief in evolution. It's funny, after 100+ years you'd think if they had the facts on their side they'd give it a rest. But that's just it, they don't, so they have to rely on constant propaganda.

The new host, Whoopi Goldberg, responded to her creation belief statement by asking if she thought the earth was flat. Something I considered a lame attempt to discredit her by calling her an idiot. Well to my surprise she was and is. Her answer was she simply hadn't spent the time investigating that question. ?? Instead of taking a perfect opportunity to enlighten Whoopi on how the facts for the earth being flat are exactly the same mental processes for her basis in acknowledging creation as an accurate view of how we came to be here, she proves Whoopi correct in her assumption of stupidity. Anderson added on the follow up that Star later admitted that of course she thought the world was round. Perhaps because it looks round from the moon?!

It's sickening to watch this moronic representation of Christianity. It would have been far better if Star had treated Whoopi's statement as it was really intended and lay her out on the floor for the gross insult to her intelligence. Shit, isn't she a lawyer? Nope, they're all playing the same "who looks best" game and Star doesn't realize that's the enemies arena and you can never win in that arena. That's where Jesus' answers to the devil are so cool. The devil is trying to bring the discussion to his terms, and Jesus doesn't/can't/won't. Star could learn something from his replies.

We're called to give a reason for the hope that's within us. Whoopi and friends make it look like the belief in creation is a bigger stretch than we came from single cell organisms. They don't believe in evolution because it has more evidence, because it flat out doesn't. They believe in evolution because it dethrones God as Satan intended it to do. That fit's like a glove with their Hollywood "we are God's" and "can do what we like" mentality. Star's response just feeds into their abuse of the gospel.

There will come a day....

"Georgia, My Sweet Georgia"

Long time no post and even this is just a short note. Haven't got my computer hooked up so I'm writing this on a laptop using a borrowed connection. We've made the trek to Georgia and now I'm sitting in my living room typing this blog. The most powerful thing about the move is the disconnect from my family. Relatively nothing else even registers. Even with my wife here, not having Brit or Dan around, or even my mother or brothers resounds in my soul. I'm thinking every soul you have a relationship affirms you in some way or another. My thinking was that a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country. I haven't seen the validity of that come to life as of yet. Of course it's too early. For God, probably insanely early. But people I grew up with did validate some of what I know myself to be. And now I have less of that than ever. When I think back over my life, I'm looking to make a difference for Jesus. Something difficult to measure as you impact many people in ways you don't know. In the end you just have to trust and pray and keep walking without losing faith. I often think that is what my journey is all about. It's a walk in the desert for me to learn to live depending only on him. Sometimes I second guess my call to come down here. But I remember back how it was and it was the type of still, small voice I've heard before. It runs counter to the natural but somehow finds fullfillment within me. I hope and trust that this seed comes to fruition. Of course, being a work of God it will have no choice.

One another note about our home. It has some characteristics of opulence. Although some would call my last home by the same name I did not think it so. Each room had a practical purpose and was almost the minimum size for that function. It was large because it had to house seven people but there was nothing extravagant about it. This house has many areas that are large simply for the sake of being large. It made me uncomfortable at first and I think for good reason. Once I faced the reality of it I'm beginning to acclimatize. Paul says he was content in plenty and in want. Well this is in plenty so I should be content regardless.

The neighbour across the street just came over with some brownies. A family of 5 with 3 young children. Everyone seems more friendly down here. It's like Christianity is the norm. On the way to church this morning we must have passed 10 others. They're every .5 mile or so. This is the second time we've been there. The minister is entertaining, as is the choir and orchestra and solos. I can't help but think that's what it's all about. I remember arguing with Jeremy about my relative pessimism as to a lack of global spirituality. I would extrapolate based on a bundle of interlocking information. Jeremy's logic was how could I know since I haven't been everywhere. I understand both points of view. I wasn't saying I couldn't find a spark somewhere, but the evidence points to the unlikeliness of it. Well this church is legalistic in a very nice way. They preach the Bible but it's the way I'd heard it my whole life until I met Dave. The law is the toughest nut. That is probably why I'm not expecting to run into spiritual Christians, because I know how difficult it was to get there, and of all the people I've ever met there were only a handful that had enough conviction just to hold on. I think we're going to another church next Sunday just to see what it's like. I know God has a purpose for everything I'm doing, even if it's simply to bring me closer to him. As the minister said today, "He is Lord of Lord and King of Kings", and my best buddy.