Saturday, November 22, 2025
Hypoluxo December 17, 2017
So I heard about a man climbing a ladder to hang a Christmas wreath in his church and he is now in a coma.
I saw some kids dressed up as magi, shepherds and angels- and one of the magi's turban slipped, giving him what to me seemed like one-eye symbolism.
We talked about Matthew 2 and the Magi as pssible
We went to a Peruvian restaurant after, which was really good. I definitely recommend the passionfruit pie from Victoria's Peruvian restaurant in Lantana.
I saw some kids dressed up as magi, shepherds and angels- and one of the magi's turban slipped, giving him what to me seemed like one-eye symbolism.
We talked about Matthew 2 and the Magi as pssible
We went to a Peruvian restaurant after, which was really good. I definitely recommend the passionfruit pie from Victoria's Peruvian restaurant in Lantana.
Wednesday, November 19, 2025
Jesus and Arnold Ehret
Jesus said to pay attention to what comes out of the mouth, but nutrition seems to be focused on what to put in. Self-help seems to be focused on what thoughts to think. Sociology seems to focused on what messages to see and hear. What would the world be like if we focused on what comes out.
Words have power. A
Matthew 15:11 and Mark 7:15
Breathe in and out- 1 day through nose out mouth with menthol produced mucus
Words have power. A
Matthew 15:11 and Mark 7:15
Breathe in and out- 1 day through nose out mouth with menthol produced mucus
Tuesday, November 18, 2025
Racist Space Dudes and Cavemen
At the beginning of 2001: A Space Odyssey there is a famous section without dialogue called The Dawn Of Man. There are a lot of pictures of dawn, and it's quite pretty scenery, and then the film moves in on characters that are supposed to be our ancestors, or us, metaphorically. Prehistory ends when it's demonstrated that what separates man from beast is the use of a tool.
I suppose many self-deprecating humans feel that animals are quite wonderful and awe-inspiring, while men are tools or at least have one they came with, and some that they've made.
In Quest For Fire, a lot more ground is covered.
What separates man from animal?
The answer depends upon whatever criteria the questioner wants to consider.
I remember in third grade being told that man had opposable thumbs, and made tools and went to war. The teacher said that we weren't the only ones with opposable thumbs and not the only ones that could use tools, but we were different, and we were human, because we actually made tools. In her definition, she was including the idea that we're close to apes and chimps. In body structure this is obvious, and should probably be mentioned to third graders. However, it seems to me that a definition of a thing shouldn't include information about what is close to it. If you can't draw the line; in my book, you don't have a definition. Whoever made up that definition was trying to prove that people and chimps and apes are related, rather than actually answering the question.
Then I found out that chimps do go to war and they do make tools.
So much for that definition.
Milestones touted on the road to manhood include the use and/or control of fire, language and laughter; and then of course ideas of self-awareness, music and religion, and as displayed in Quest For Fire, sex while looking each other in the eye.
There is a different way that animals look at one another. But they do it. I have no idea how to define it. When a puppy looks in a mirror, he sees something that he doesn't know is himself. But so does a baby.
In 2001, tapirs are contrasted with whatever ape/humanoid/chimp creatures those other things are supposed to be. The youths are actual chimps and the adults are people in hairy suits. It's easy to tell who's a tapir and who's more like a person, but it's still impossible for me, looking at The Dawn Of Man, to draw the line between people and animals. I see tapirs and other animals, kind of like us.
In Quest For Fire, there are people in hairy suits also, but then there are people without hairy suits. In the length of a movie we survey a probable 10 thousand years of innovation as if it took place among one group of our ancestors. It's a good narrative but, it's once again not clear where the line is.
The point of these two movies is probably the same as whoever came up with the hypothesis my third grade teacher shared. They're all trying to get us to see a sliding scale rather than a definition. Everybody wants to point out how like animals we are.
I look at the animals at the beginning of 2001 and see them as animals. I look at the main characters in Quest For Fire and see them as people. The other creatures I see as less than human. In Luc Besson's Lucy, I see one as a person and one as not.
According to Toynbee's A Study of History, edited by Somervell, p. 52, I am a xanthotrichous glaucopian dolichocephalic leucodermaticus some what do I know? I'm going to resist the urge to see if I typed all those words right, but let me clear up the confusion by stating that whether or not the music I play is funky, I am a white boy.
I hate when people say that someone can't talk about something because they're not that thing. So black people can talk about racism. Duh. Of course they can. But so can anyone else. The only requirement for talking about anything is the ability to speak.
Is that what separates us from every other animal? The assignment of audible symbols to objects isn't only human. And many humans can speak without using their vocal cords. But the difference between our voices and animal voices is huge.
In 2001: A Space Odyssey, the languages in main use have been narrowed down to include white languages with Italian for a little spice and Japanese. The whole world, presumably, understands either English, Dutch, French, Italian, Russian, or Japanese. Apparently the cold war was on and Russia seemed formidable with Germany divided, and nobody wanted to mention the Chinese. Why Spanish is missing I have no idea.
In 1969's Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun, the main European players include Bonn, and of course, the United States has to come to the rescue.
I suppose the way one imagines the future is extremely attached to how one views oneself in the present.
I suppose many self-deprecating humans feel that animals are quite wonderful and awe-inspiring, while men are tools or at least have one they came with, and some that they've made.
In Quest For Fire, a lot more ground is covered.
What separates man from animal?
The answer depends upon whatever criteria the questioner wants to consider.
I remember in third grade being told that man had opposable thumbs, and made tools and went to war. The teacher said that we weren't the only ones with opposable thumbs and not the only ones that could use tools, but we were different, and we were human, because we actually made tools. In her definition, she was including the idea that we're close to apes and chimps. In body structure this is obvious, and should probably be mentioned to third graders. However, it seems to me that a definition of a thing shouldn't include information about what is close to it. If you can't draw the line; in my book, you don't have a definition. Whoever made up that definition was trying to prove that people and chimps and apes are related, rather than actually answering the question.
Then I found out that chimps do go to war and they do make tools.
So much for that definition.
Milestones touted on the road to manhood include the use and/or control of fire, language and laughter; and then of course ideas of self-awareness, music and religion, and as displayed in Quest For Fire, sex while looking each other in the eye.
There is a different way that animals look at one another. But they do it. I have no idea how to define it. When a puppy looks in a mirror, he sees something that he doesn't know is himself. But so does a baby.
In 2001, tapirs are contrasted with whatever ape/humanoid/chimp creatures those other things are supposed to be. The youths are actual chimps and the adults are people in hairy suits. It's easy to tell who's a tapir and who's more like a person, but it's still impossible for me, looking at The Dawn Of Man, to draw the line between people and animals. I see tapirs and other animals, kind of like us.
In Quest For Fire, there are people in hairy suits also, but then there are people without hairy suits. In the length of a movie we survey a probable 10 thousand years of innovation as if it took place among one group of our ancestors. It's a good narrative but, it's once again not clear where the line is.
The point of these two movies is probably the same as whoever came up with the hypothesis my third grade teacher shared. They're all trying to get us to see a sliding scale rather than a definition. Everybody wants to point out how like animals we are.
I look at the animals at the beginning of 2001 and see them as animals. I look at the main characters in Quest For Fire and see them as people. The other creatures I see as less than human. In Luc Besson's Lucy, I see one as a person and one as not.
According to Toynbee's A Study of History, edited by Somervell, p. 52, I am a xanthotrichous glaucopian dolichocephalic leucodermaticus some what do I know? I'm going to resist the urge to see if I typed all those words right, but let me clear up the confusion by stating that whether or not the music I play is funky, I am a white boy.
I hate when people say that someone can't talk about something because they're not that thing. So black people can talk about racism. Duh. Of course they can. But so can anyone else. The only requirement for talking about anything is the ability to speak.
Is that what separates us from every other animal? The assignment of audible symbols to objects isn't only human. And many humans can speak without using their vocal cords. But the difference between our voices and animal voices is huge.
In 2001: A Space Odyssey, the languages in main use have been narrowed down to include white languages with Italian for a little spice and Japanese. The whole world, presumably, understands either English, Dutch, French, Italian, Russian, or Japanese. Apparently the cold war was on and Russia seemed formidable with Germany divided, and nobody wanted to mention the Chinese. Why Spanish is missing I have no idea.
In 1969's Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun, the main European players include Bonn, and of course, the United States has to come to the rescue.
I suppose the way one imagines the future is extremely attached to how one views oneself in the present.
Love is patient
Looking back,
Blah blah
I couldn't love you more.
Love is patient.
Love is kind.
Love forgives time after time.
When you've done
You know I'll still believe in you.
And ('cuz) you know, I couldn't love you more.
Blah blah
I couldn't love you more.
Love is patient.
Love is kind.
Love forgives time after time.
When you've done
All you can do .
You know I'll still believe in you.
And ('cuz) you know, I couldn't love you more.
Simple Snarky Summary - Cat On a Hot Tin Roof (1958)
Simple Snarky Summary - Cat On a Hot Tin Roof (1958)
She's got 108 minutes to get Paul Newman into bed. What do you think? Can the sexiest woman in the last two thousand years in the United States, Britain and Egypt manage this feat?
Why, the suspense is just killing me, it is so palpable.
Let's see. There are so many factors here to consider.
1. There's a big brass bed with crisp white sheets, that figures prominently in most scenes.
2. Neither the main man or the main woman have much to do but hang around the house, enjoy their drinks and recuperate from family drama that would settle itself if only they had a child to fix the misfortunes of generations.
3. They could argue with the rest of the family members; the ones they like- who want them to go to bed, and the ones they dislike, who want them to stay out of it... I wonder what they'll do?
Monday, November 17, 2025
well they did it
Right now, Deck the Halls with King Cole is playing and I realize what has happened. Rehearsals of Xmas music, a little retro session with some unfamiliar and rare choices, last night the idiosyncratic WCNO eased in a Christmas instrumental and one of those vague Christmas songs and now I am ready for it. As it is said, "It's Time."
Saturday, November 15, 2025
not yet but it's time
Mot counting YT and FB, have not heard XMas music yet, from
Gene Autry
Beatles, either one
David Bowie
Michael Bublé
Mariah Carey
Amy Grant
Josh Groban
Faith Hill
Whitney Houston
Burl Ives
Cindy Lauper
Johnny Mathis
Vanessa Williams
Grinch
Little Drummer Boy
Friday, November 14, 2025
first Xmas music
Some on YT, but first, in public
McD's Beach Boys? Frosty
Boys to Men? Merry Little
Belafonte 12 Days
June Christy Seven Shades of Snow
Never remember hearing this song in my life
Andy Williams O Come All Ye Faithful
Nice, especially ending
Ella's Santa Claus is Coming to Town
Darlene L8ve Baby Please ComecHome (Christmas?) Dumb name
Diana with Supremes not Diana yet
Happy Holidays
50s style Choir, Another 12 Days
Roy Orbison Pretty Paper
Hippo for Christmas
Fabulous Ella's again so soon, It Came Upon
Oh my the mist beautiful melody and voice I have ever heard even though the album is tedious because all is the same. I think this is random songs, not really a Playlist
Modern Choir, trying to sound old, Hark the Herald then jazzy, then gospel. Actually just a few people? Pentatonix
Bing Merry Little Christmas
B Helms Jingle Bell Rock
Dean I've got my live to keep me warm
So easy of course
Perry Como No place like home for the holidays a little slow, then a little fast when the Choir comes in, then too slow again
C looney? Google didn't know C is for the Christchild
Frank Mistletoe and Holly
My favorite version, male voice at least, Bing Do you hear whatbi hear
Della Reese Merry Christmas Baby.sho did treat me nice Nope Etta James
Bing again? Random? Christmas in Hawsii nicevtrumpet,
Lee Greenwood? Merry Little Christmas , another R and B version
Beach Boys? starting over? Frosty
Barely Manilow A Gift of Love with someone as good as Diana, ONJ? What? When? She got better? She is alivevsomewhere?
First Karen Carpenter, No Place Like Home For the Holidays
First King Cole, God Rest Ye Merry
Speaking of repetitive, Cole Chestnuts
Cain and Abel - Envy in the Church
Thru the Bible with Dr. J. Vernon McGee
1 John 3:10-17
The Bible Bus - 66 Books in Five Years - TTB.org
Our speaker provides some background on the epistle of 1 John. John the apostle, who lived with Jesus, and knows the subject well, expounds here upon the two natures of people, which live side by side, wrestling inside the believer. To make the difference obvious, the contrast is made between the first man born on earth and the second. Note that the murderer was born first. It's natural. There's nothing unnatural about murder.
In the gospel of John, Jesus made it clear that there are two natures; flesh and spirit. Building upon the idea already expressed by the Greeks, John writes, in Greek, words that will influence the West and the world for the next two millenia.
We don't like this idea today as the age of Hellenization comes to an end. But the dichotomy is a powerful one and I think we misunderstand it.
The church I know doesn't do enough wrestling. We know there are two natures, but we don't want to talk about it. We find the good in the world and use the word spiritual to mean any belief. But what is John saying when he contrasts the flesh and the spirit? He's not saying the body is bad and thoughts are good. The spirit isn't something everyone has, it's God within and either God is within someone or not.
The problem is that the people God is in, just act like everybody else; knowing full well that we're not. This is uncomfortable, unprofitable and wrong. It's also confusing. If you mix two things together, what do you have? Jars of clay, with what inside?
"You can do a lot with the flesh. You can train it. You can discipline it. You can send it to school. You can educate it." Like a pig, we can dress it up and take it out of the pigpen, but it's still a pig.
But the spirit nature is something else. And by spirit nature, he means the good stuff and not just anything that's invisible. (1 Corinthians 2:9) Eye has not seen and ear has not heard these things. Those organs are made of flesh, and they can't see the good; not really, but God reveals the truth by spirit. Your regular old eyes can't see it. The Spirit is our teacher. You are of your father, and that could be the devil, or God. Spirit doesn't mean thought. It means the right spirit; the right thought or God. Here Mr. McGee make one of his beliefs clear that people don't like. I don't like it. I like the idea of universal brotherhood, but it's not in the Bible. A universal hope is. A universal opportunity is there. But not everybody accepts it. Sure, we're all capable of being God's children
Children take after their father.
Jealousy includes suspicion. You can love and be jealous. It implies that there is concern for the other person. and
Envy - which characterizes Cain; the first murderer. "Discontent or uneasiness at the sight of another's excellence or good fortune, accompanied wiht some degree of hatred and a desire to possess equal advantages."
Envy and jealousy hurt the Church more than anything else. Of course the world won't accept the teachings of Christ. But the Church hasn't either! Jesus said "John 15:18 You know the world hated Jesus, so of course the World hates the truth. The world loves its own. If we're too loved, we're not different enough. Matt 5:21 Whoever is angry without a cause Danger of hatred - murderer.
1 John 3:10-17
The Bible Bus - 66 Books in Five Years - TTB.org
Our speaker provides some background on the epistle of 1 John. John the apostle, who lived with Jesus, and knows the subject well, expounds here upon the two natures of people, which live side by side, wrestling inside the believer. To make the difference obvious, the contrast is made between the first man born on earth and the second. Note that the murderer was born first. It's natural. There's nothing unnatural about murder.
In the gospel of John, Jesus made it clear that there are two natures; flesh and spirit. Building upon the idea already expressed by the Greeks, John writes, in Greek, words that will influence the West and the world for the next two millenia.
We don't like this idea today as the age of Hellenization comes to an end. But the dichotomy is a powerful one and I think we misunderstand it.
The church I know doesn't do enough wrestling. We know there are two natures, but we don't want to talk about it. We find the good in the world and use the word spiritual to mean any belief. But what is John saying when he contrasts the flesh and the spirit? He's not saying the body is bad and thoughts are good. The spirit isn't something everyone has, it's God within and either God is within someone or not.
The problem is that the people God is in, just act like everybody else; knowing full well that we're not. This is uncomfortable, unprofitable and wrong. It's also confusing. If you mix two things together, what do you have? Jars of clay, with what inside?
"You can do a lot with the flesh. You can train it. You can discipline it. You can send it to school. You can educate it." Like a pig, we can dress it up and take it out of the pigpen, but it's still a pig.
But the spirit nature is something else. And by spirit nature, he means the good stuff and not just anything that's invisible. (1 Corinthians 2:9) Eye has not seen and ear has not heard these things. Those organs are made of flesh, and they can't see the good; not really, but God reveals the truth by spirit. Your regular old eyes can't see it. The Spirit is our teacher. You are of your father, and that could be the devil, or God. Spirit doesn't mean thought. It means the right spirit; the right thought or God. Here Mr. McGee make one of his beliefs clear that people don't like. I don't like it. I like the idea of universal brotherhood, but it's not in the Bible. A universal hope is. A universal opportunity is there. But not everybody accepts it. Sure, we're all capable of being God's children
Children take after their father.
Jealousy includes suspicion. You can love and be jealous. It implies that there is concern for the other person. and
Envy - which characterizes Cain; the first murderer. "Discontent or uneasiness at the sight of another's excellence or good fortune, accompanied wiht some degree of hatred and a desire to possess equal advantages."
Envy and jealousy hurt the Church more than anything else. Of course the world won't accept the teachings of Christ. But the Church hasn't either! Jesus said "John 15:18 You know the world hated Jesus, so of course the World hates the truth. The world loves its own. If we're too loved, we're not different enough. Matt 5:21 Whoever is angry without a cause Danger of hatred - murderer.
Monday, November 10, 2025
Tuesday, November 4, 2025
Thursday, October 30, 2025
Tuesday, October 28, 2025
Saturday, October 25, 2025
Thursday, October 23, 2025
Tuesday, October 21, 2025
Monday, October 20, 2025
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)