 |
| Five Islands Nova Scotia |
 |
| Five Islands,Nova Scotia |
 |
| Drysdale Falls,Nova Scotia |
 |
| River Phillip,Nova Scotia |
 |
| Mill at Balmoral,Nova Scotia |
 |
| Calligwood,Nova Scotia |
 |
| Sugar camp,Fenwick,Nova Scotia. |
 |
| Tantramar Marsh,New Brunswick |
 | ||||
| bass river,nova scotia |
Sunday, 5 August 2012
photo essay/places part 1/east
Friday, 3 August 2012
The Old Testament.
Why is it that we misunderstand the Old Testament?Why is this a problem?This is one of the questions raised by Paul Copan in his book"Is God A Moral Monster-Making sense Of The Old Testament God."
As a way of answering this question,let me just point to my own Christian experience.Nearly every time I go to church,or bible study,the message,or study topic seems to be from the New Testament.Now I'm not saying that this is bad.After all we do live in an age of New Testament grace.The central truth of the Bible is contained in New Testament Gospel.Much of Paul's teachings to first century Christians were directed at pointing out how we are to live out the ideals of the Christian religion.And so,it seems natural,perhaps that most teaching and preaching in our day would be from the New Testament.
But I really wonder if we haven't developed a bias against teaching from the Old Testament.And this would be a problem,as the Old Testament and the New Testament really must be understood in the light of each other.For instance,without a firm understanding of Old Testament prophesy,we have no basis to identify the Jesus of the New Testament as our Messiah.That is to say,the Old Testament points the way,while the New Testament fulfills the prophesy.
Many people,in fact I would venture many Christians, are challenged by Old Testament narratives,such as the story of Abraham's sacrifice of his son Isaac.The ancient world was a far different one than the one we find ourselves in,or,in fact,the one that first century Christians find themselves in.Yet,it's only by examining Old Testament stories with a close and critical eye that we can discover that the bibles truths are eternal-as relevant today as they ever were.Through Abraham we discover the power of faith,while looking ahead in history to the time of Christ and ultimately to his second coming.We see enough of God's plan to trust in it's ultimate fulfillment and to be thankful that He walks with us through the whole of history.
There is a wonderful story in the Book Of Joel,for instance that tells of a war,in which nearly all is destroyed,using the symbolism of locusts.Modern Christians can look to this story and see,in their everyday lives the truth of a Savior who "restores what the locusts have taken"Yet most often,you will not hear this story in church.you will need to find it by yourself through reading scripture.That is all fine and good for those who read faithfully,but how many do not?
Again,it is hard to over stress that both parts of the Bible belong together.One explains the other more fully.So,what we really need is more Old Testament teaching,if my experience applies to most Christian congregations
As a way of answering this question,let me just point to my own Christian experience.Nearly every time I go to church,or bible study,the message,or study topic seems to be from the New Testament.Now I'm not saying that this is bad.After all we do live in an age of New Testament grace.The central truth of the Bible is contained in New Testament Gospel.Much of Paul's teachings to first century Christians were directed at pointing out how we are to live out the ideals of the Christian religion.And so,it seems natural,perhaps that most teaching and preaching in our day would be from the New Testament.
But I really wonder if we haven't developed a bias against teaching from the Old Testament.And this would be a problem,as the Old Testament and the New Testament really must be understood in the light of each other.For instance,without a firm understanding of Old Testament prophesy,we have no basis to identify the Jesus of the New Testament as our Messiah.That is to say,the Old Testament points the way,while the New Testament fulfills the prophesy.
Many people,in fact I would venture many Christians, are challenged by Old Testament narratives,such as the story of Abraham's sacrifice of his son Isaac.The ancient world was a far different one than the one we find ourselves in,or,in fact,the one that first century Christians find themselves in.Yet,it's only by examining Old Testament stories with a close and critical eye that we can discover that the bibles truths are eternal-as relevant today as they ever were.Through Abraham we discover the power of faith,while looking ahead in history to the time of Christ and ultimately to his second coming.We see enough of God's plan to trust in it's ultimate fulfillment and to be thankful that He walks with us through the whole of history.
There is a wonderful story in the Book Of Joel,for instance that tells of a war,in which nearly all is destroyed,using the symbolism of locusts.Modern Christians can look to this story and see,in their everyday lives the truth of a Savior who "restores what the locusts have taken"Yet most often,you will not hear this story in church.you will need to find it by yourself through reading scripture.That is all fine and good for those who read faithfully,but how many do not?
Again,it is hard to over stress that both parts of the Bible belong together.One explains the other more fully.So,what we really need is more Old Testament teaching,if my experience applies to most Christian congregations
Book Review-"Is God a Moral Monster?-Making Sense Of The Old Testament God"
Paul Copan would have to be described as a Christian apologist,and in fact,as a full reading of his book"Is God A Moral Monster?"reveals,he is quite accomplished at his work.In this book,Copan takes on the issues raised by what he calls the "New Atheists"when they present their objections to belief in God,especially the God revealed in the Old Testament.If we are to believe people like Christopher Hitchens,Daniel Dennett or Richard Dawkins,the Old Testament God is a brutal,misogynistic,racist war monger.In short,He is not a God worthy of worship,but instead a monster who delights in human suffering.
As Copan makes clear,the observations of the New Atheists are really based on misunderstandings of the Old Testament and the culture of the ancient Middle East and our insistence in judging God by our contemporary western moral standards.One by one,Copan takes on objections to issues like slavery,as portrayed in Old Testament times,misogyny,as it is alleged to be supported under Mosaic Law,and God's insistence on ethnic cleansing of the Canaanites.As is made clear by the end of the book,the actual facts are a far cry from those suppositions put forward by the new Atheists.Copan notes that Mosaic Law was not perfect,but instead was intended to take people from the cultural conditions of their time and allow for the continued development of a moral society.In so doing,despite the outward appearance of inflexible brutality,God's law was a vast improvement over legal traditions elsewhere in the ancient world.
Copan's book is eye opening and drives home the point that the problem with religious fundamentalism of all kinds is that it most often resists fundamental interpretations-hence the need for authors adept at the art of apologetics.And Copan certainly is that.His assertions,while they may seem novel to some are supported by scriptural reference at every turn.Thus he makes a very strong case against some of the assertions put forth by the likes of Dawkins and Hitchens,when they attempt to hold God to account for alleged crimes against humanity.Likewise,Copan clearly demonstrates the need to read and understand scripture at a deep level,which is,after all,the whole point of Apologetics.The book concludes with a chapter entitled "Discussion/Study questions,that serves as a great stimulus for further discussion,and perhaps even the basis for a self contained Bible study.
Highly recommended.
As Copan makes clear,the observations of the New Atheists are really based on misunderstandings of the Old Testament and the culture of the ancient Middle East and our insistence in judging God by our contemporary western moral standards.One by one,Copan takes on objections to issues like slavery,as portrayed in Old Testament times,misogyny,as it is alleged to be supported under Mosaic Law,and God's insistence on ethnic cleansing of the Canaanites.As is made clear by the end of the book,the actual facts are a far cry from those suppositions put forward by the new Atheists.Copan notes that Mosaic Law was not perfect,but instead was intended to take people from the cultural conditions of their time and allow for the continued development of a moral society.In so doing,despite the outward appearance of inflexible brutality,God's law was a vast improvement over legal traditions elsewhere in the ancient world.
Copan's book is eye opening and drives home the point that the problem with religious fundamentalism of all kinds is that it most often resists fundamental interpretations-hence the need for authors adept at the art of apologetics.And Copan certainly is that.His assertions,while they may seem novel to some are supported by scriptural reference at every turn.Thus he makes a very strong case against some of the assertions put forth by the likes of Dawkins and Hitchens,when they attempt to hold God to account for alleged crimes against humanity.Likewise,Copan clearly demonstrates the need to read and understand scripture at a deep level,which is,after all,the whole point of Apologetics.The book concludes with a chapter entitled "Discussion/Study questions,that serves as a great stimulus for further discussion,and perhaps even the basis for a self contained Bible study.
Highly recommended.
Monday, 30 July 2012
Op/Ed/Charles McGillivary.
It's been nearly a full year since the death of a disabled man in Toronto.On the evening of August 1st,2011,Charles McGillivary was walking with his mother in the area of Bloor And Christie streets.Charles McGillivary was a disabled man,unable to speak as the result of a childhood accident.On that night he was out for pizza,a favorite activity.By all accounts,Charles McGillivary was well known and well liked in his neighborhood.At the vigil I attended a week later many described him as gentle and kind.
Unknown to Charles or his mother,a short distance away,police were attending a call about a disruptive tenant.Shortly after they received that complaint,they confronted a man they believed to be the person of interest.That man turned out to be Charles McGillivary.Officers called him by the name of their suspect and received no answer,so they exited their patrol car and a further confrontation occured,during which Charles McGillivary was wrestled to the ground.Keep in mind that,being non-verbal,he had no means of answering police inquiries.I can well imagine that he must have felt terror as well,as he was taken to the ground,something which no doubt caused him to continue to struggle.In the end,Charles McGillivary ended up dead,a tragic case of mistaken identity.
The usual inquiry took place,with what seemed like the usual outcome.I should note that the announcement that Ontario's Special Investigations Unit(SIU), had cleared the officers involved of any criminal wrong doing came this spring.Had I not been listening carefully for their ruling I would have missed it,as there were a couple of high profile murders in the news at the time?Coincidence?Perhaps.
But i'll cut right to the main point.Do we simply have to accept a "no harm,no foul"explanation for these events.Have we learned anything at all from this mans death.Or was it just another case of police just doing their jobs.The Coroner ruled cause of death inconclusive,but suggested that Heart failure as the result of a struggle was likely.I'm not saying that the coroner is wrong,but the inconclusive tag does cause me some concern.it seems an appeal to the stereotype that disabled persons are somehow in suspect health and that that was the real cause of death,as opposed to the incident itself.I'm concerned that enough people will buy into that thought and stop asking questions that need to be answered.And,that as a result,Charles McGillivary becomes just another disabled ma who died,but,somehow just doesn't count quite as much as other citizens,who would have the verbal and intellectual abilities to defend themselves.As long as that is the case,there is just something unacceptably lacking in the way this whole thing was handled.
Some things I'm still unclear on:Who comprises the SIU.How many of them are former cops.Is there any provisions for the SIU to access special consultants from outside their ranks when the situation calls for it?Specifically,could they access the services of anyone with expertise as to how disability may have affected the outcome of this particular case?And most importantly,who speaks for Charles MCGillivary?
Unknown to Charles or his mother,a short distance away,police were attending a call about a disruptive tenant.Shortly after they received that complaint,they confronted a man they believed to be the person of interest.That man turned out to be Charles McGillivary.Officers called him by the name of their suspect and received no answer,so they exited their patrol car and a further confrontation occured,during which Charles McGillivary was wrestled to the ground.Keep in mind that,being non-verbal,he had no means of answering police inquiries.I can well imagine that he must have felt terror as well,as he was taken to the ground,something which no doubt caused him to continue to struggle.In the end,Charles McGillivary ended up dead,a tragic case of mistaken identity.
The usual inquiry took place,with what seemed like the usual outcome.I should note that the announcement that Ontario's Special Investigations Unit(SIU), had cleared the officers involved of any criminal wrong doing came this spring.Had I not been listening carefully for their ruling I would have missed it,as there were a couple of high profile murders in the news at the time?Coincidence?Perhaps.
But i'll cut right to the main point.Do we simply have to accept a "no harm,no foul"explanation for these events.Have we learned anything at all from this mans death.Or was it just another case of police just doing their jobs.The Coroner ruled cause of death inconclusive,but suggested that Heart failure as the result of a struggle was likely.I'm not saying that the coroner is wrong,but the inconclusive tag does cause me some concern.it seems an appeal to the stereotype that disabled persons are somehow in suspect health and that that was the real cause of death,as opposed to the incident itself.I'm concerned that enough people will buy into that thought and stop asking questions that need to be answered.And,that as a result,Charles McGillivary becomes just another disabled ma who died,but,somehow just doesn't count quite as much as other citizens,who would have the verbal and intellectual abilities to defend themselves.As long as that is the case,there is just something unacceptably lacking in the way this whole thing was handled.
Some things I'm still unclear on:Who comprises the SIU.How many of them are former cops.Is there any provisions for the SIU to access special consultants from outside their ranks when the situation calls for it?Specifically,could they access the services of anyone with expertise as to how disability may have affected the outcome of this particular case?And most importantly,who speaks for Charles MCGillivary?
Saturday, 28 July 2012
Photo essay
 |
| Morning |
 |
| Mountain Strings |
 |
| Old and Blue |
 |
| Ruins |
 |
 |
| Along The Tracks |
memoir writers homework/wilderness/wildlife
I've always enjoyed wilderness and wildlife,believing that a benevolent creator put both here for us to see and reflect upon.I've never been able to deny,when I see a hawk or a whale or some other creature that it points the way to a power much larger than myself,and that He furnished all these things that He might be recognized.
In fact,it's not really necessary to seek out wild and remote places to enjoy God's creatures.Just the other day I witnessed two hawks circling high above the banks of the Bow River,looking for prey.And it was amazing that we could hear them screeching as they rode the wind currents while we looked up from constructing a building on the ground.And all the more amazing is that they have eyes that allow them to locate something as small as a gopher or a mouse hundreds of feet below.
In Calgary,where I live now,there is an abundance of wildlife very close to downtown.Coyotes are commonly sighted,even on busy streets,especially at night.In 2001,I had a coyote follow me to work for about a two week stretch.As I would walk down a set of railway tracks,I would turn off to my left,and she,following a hundred or so feet behind would veer off to the left.It turned out she had a den full of pups inside an old 45 gallon drum just off the tracks.So,I would come to work a half hour early so as to have the opportunity to take a few minutes to stop and watch them at play.It seemed a sort of respect developed between myself and the mother.She would always follow me each morning,maintaining exactly the same distance.I did not feel as though I was being stalked and it never occurred to me to be afraid of her,as much as people around here say coyotes are dangerous.I don't believe it.I think this particular coyote came to the conclusion,eventually that I was no threat to her or her family.She stopped following me,but remained in her den and would allow me to watch the young ones each morning.
In fact,it's not really necessary to seek out wild and remote places to enjoy God's creatures.Just the other day I witnessed two hawks circling high above the banks of the Bow River,looking for prey.And it was amazing that we could hear them screeching as they rode the wind currents while we looked up from constructing a building on the ground.And all the more amazing is that they have eyes that allow them to locate something as small as a gopher or a mouse hundreds of feet below.
In Calgary,where I live now,there is an abundance of wildlife very close to downtown.Coyotes are commonly sighted,even on busy streets,especially at night.In 2001,I had a coyote follow me to work for about a two week stretch.As I would walk down a set of railway tracks,I would turn off to my left,and she,following a hundred or so feet behind would veer off to the left.It turned out she had a den full of pups inside an old 45 gallon drum just off the tracks.So,I would come to work a half hour early so as to have the opportunity to take a few minutes to stop and watch them at play.It seemed a sort of respect developed between myself and the mother.She would always follow me each morning,maintaining exactly the same distance.I did not feel as though I was being stalked and it never occurred to me to be afraid of her,as much as people around here say coyotes are dangerous.I don't believe it.I think this particular coyote came to the conclusion,eventually that I was no threat to her or her family.She stopped following me,but remained in her den and would allow me to watch the young ones each morning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)