Sports Notes

Should the Packers trade Brett Favre within the division? Absolutely. If they could get a high draft pick or perhaps two like the Dolphins received for Jason Taylor (a 2nd and a 5th) then you do it. You'll face Favre for one, maybe two years. He may burn you or he may melt down. Either way, you don't want him on your team so try to fleece the Bears or Vikings and reap the rewards of good draft picks. High risk, but I think it is very sorry to try to buy him off. They are offering him $2 mil a year for 10 years to stay retired. Get the draft picks, weather the storm and go on building your team.

The Yankees traded for Ivan Rodriguez yesterday (I won't call him "Pudge", that was Carlton Fisk's nickname first). He was traded straight up for Kyle Farnsworth. Good deal for both teams, the Tigers are having bullpen issues and Rodriguez was not happy in Detroit these days. My comment is on the prospects they traded in the last few weeks for Damaso Marte and Xavier Nady from the Pirates. Every year they trade prospects to some sad sack team and get a player of decent quality back. I wish I had access (and the desire) to look at all of the prospects that the Yankees have traded in the Brian Cashman era and see how many pan out. I can't recall very few. I may need to send an email to one of the best baseball writers (and bloggers) Joe Posnanski. If you like the Royals (yawn) or just love the game, Posnanski's blog is a must read.

I was extremely pleased with Chris Carpenter last night. Hasn't thrown a major league pitch since opening day of '07. Went 4 innings, struck out two, walked two, five hits, but only one run. You saw his competitiveness in that for the first three innings he was in trouble, but battled back and gave up only the single run. If you go back and look at the statistics, he very well may have been the best (or at least second best) pitcher in the major leagues for the '04-06 seasons. Welcome back! Nowif the Cards can get their other ace back (Wainwright)...

Some More on Timothy

Paul calls Timothy his son in several places in his letters (1 Cor. 4.17, Phil. 2.22, 1 Tim. 1.2). He calls Timothy his fellow worker (Rom. 16.21; 1 Thes. 3.2; 1 Cor. 16.10 [literally says that Timothy is carrying out the work of the Lord, just as Paul was]).

He was a frequent collaborator and was named as a co-sender of several of Paul’s letters: 1 and 2 Thessalonians; 2 Corinthians; Colossians; Philemon and Philippians.l

Here is what I find remarkable. Look at all of the assignments Paul gave Timothy. He sent Timothy to Thessalonica to strengthen and encourage the church there (1 Thes. 3.1-2). He sent him to Corinth to remind his church of his ways and to warn them from falling victim to false teaching (1 Cor. 4.16-17; 16.10). He sent him to Philippi to help with dissension and to give them a report of Paul’s well being (Phil 2.19-24). And of course he sent him to Ephesus to teach the true gospel in the face of the spread of false teaching (1 Tim. 1.3).

Basically, if Paul needed to be somewhere and couldn’t make it himself then he sent Timothy, his right hand man, his trusted collaborator, his fellow worker and his true son in the faith.

Timothy must have been a man of true courage, impeccable integrity and a man worthy of his calling an ambassador of Christ.

Timothy the Man

I have been doing a series on Sunday nights at my church on 1 Timothy. We began by looking at the background issues surrounding the letter, like authorship (Paul the Apostle), to whom it was written (Timothy) and where Timothy was when he received it (Ephesus).

I began to look at how Timothy began to travel with Paul. The account is found in Acts 16, when Paul came to a city in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) named Lystra. Timothy is described as a disciple who was half Jewish. The leaders of the church (that Paul founded) spoke well of him and Paul wanted to take him along, thus Timothy began a relationship with Paul that would prove fruitful to Paul and to several of the churches that Paul started. I wanted to back up and look at Paul’s first visit to Lystra to get a sense of what Timothy knew of Paul

Paul and Barnabas visited Lystra on Paul’s first missionary journey. They healed a man who had never walked and the people thought they were gods sent to earth. Paul showed great humility and deflected the praise and glory to his God. His success there prompted opposition from zealous Jews (like he had been). They stoned him and left him for dead outside of the city. It makes me wonder, what kind of impression did Paul leave on Timothy for him to leave with Paul? The last time he saw Paul, someone was trying to kill him and the next swing through town and Paul wants to take Timothy along. This passage speaks to me in two ways. One, what kind of impression did Paul leave on Timothy that he would want to follow him? All he knows is that to follow Paul may result in someone trying to assassinate me. Paul must have been seen as a type superhero for Timothy to follow him. Two, Timothy must have had incredible courage to follow Paul. He knew the potential danger and hardship that may accompany a trip with Paul.

It makes me wonder what kind of impression that I am leaving on those around me. As a leader, do I inspire people to take risks to follow me? Am I willing to do things that may result in hardship for me but will result in the glory of God? I will post again on some clues we can find about what kind of man Timothy of Lystra, true son of Paul in the faith, was.

Movie Review: The Dark Knight

I go to about one movie a year in the theater and this was it. I had to go by myself (wife out of town and I still don't have a lot of close friends yet in Columbia).

The Dark Knight is a stunning and disturbing film filled with moral dilemmas. Who would you kill in order for another person (or other persons) survive? What if those persons were immoral versus innocent? Who deserves to live and who deserves to die? If you had to turn a morally ambiguous person over to be killed in order for an innocent person to survive, would you? Those are the choices that Heath Ledger’s “The Joker” puts the people of Gotham City. He does this first with the hope of unmasking Batman, and then his goal shifts to turn a seemingly moral, upstanding and righteous man into a man of hatred and revenge.

The movie is not flawless and can get a little confusing with all of the action going on at times. Of course you have to suspend belief when you begin to think how the Joker was able to pull off a lot of the “stunts” he pulls. But the story line is entertaining with some unexpected twists and surprises.

All of the hype about Ledger’s “Joker” is well deserved. He made Jack Nicholson’s character seem like a buffoonish cartoon character. Ledger’s “Joker” is a psychopath. And yet you will find a few little nuances that make you chuckle without losing your fear of him. There should be no doubt that Ledger deserves a Supporting Oscar nomination.

Christian Bale gets the short end of the stick here as he is left to do little other than action scenes in his Bat suit. He really could have been anybody. In fact, at the end, I found his Batman voice to sound very similar to a professional wrestler’s.

There are some real twists and surprises that I won’t give up here. Aaron Eckhart was great as Harvey Dent, Gotham’s more conventional White Knight who initially does things the right way. I am glad that I am not as familiar with the Batman saga as other fans of the comic.

Gary Oldman’s Commissioner Gordon is allowed to be fleshed out here and gives his character great strength in the face of some serious moral dilemmas. His character is given a speech that sums up the dilemma those who fight crime in the conventional way have with the concept of the “Batman”:

Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...a dark knight.

Two Thought Provoking Articles

I am posting links to two very thought provoking online articles.

About the atrocities in Darfur - a truly disturbing and heartbreaking eyewitness account. Here

Michael Novak on the problem of evil and suffering and the existence of God. Here

Of Interest Perhaps Only To Me

I am looking forward to this site going on-line, but I am a geek about such things.
Codex Sinaiticus
The discovery of this Bible in the late 1800s is far more important than most Christians know. This is the oldest complete New Testament that we have. It is one of the reasons why there are differences in translations like the King James Version versus some of the more modern translations like the NIV or The NAS.

Here is a story on this Bible.

Worship as Liturgy?

Our term “liturgy” comes from the Greek term leitourgeo. In non-biblical Greek this term carries the connotation of that of service rendered toward the city as a good citizen or as service to the deity in religious contexts. In the Old Testament, it mostly refers to the activities of the priests in connection with service at the temple or in carrying out religious duties.

In the New Testament, it is used very similarly as referring to the priestly ministry of the OT. Paul even connects the immanent end of his life to “priestly” language in Phil. 2.17 – “But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service (leitourgia) coming from your faith…” There is also the sense of an act of service like giving to the collection for the saints (Rom. 15.25; 2 Cor. 9.12) as “service” (or the noun form of leitourgeo). There is a further movement toward internal spiritual acts as seen in Acts 13.2 – “While they were worshiping (participial form of leitourgeo) the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said…”

The infrequent use of the term in the NT is connected partly with the OT. The end of the OT religious system due to the work of Christ means that the terms connected with the priestly, “official” system are not relevant to the priesthood of all believers.

When comparing the "official" Christian ministry with that of the OT priests opens the door for a more specific use of the term connected to the ministry of overseers or bishops (see the writing of the Apostolic Father Clement, 1 Clement 40ff.) In this way the term finally came to be used of Christian religious practices, especially communion, as they were overseen by an “officiant”, giving us the common meaning of “liturgy.”