I'm in the middle of reading a Christian book - Rick Warren's 'Purpose Driven Life', and aside from the fact that it's overtly American (irritating, but copeable with) there is one thing that is driving me absolutely crackers about it.
He insists on using about 20 different Bible translations throughout the book, and changes from one quote to the next completely indiscriminately. According to him, the reason is that 'reading the bible in an unfamiliar version can cause us to re-consider and reappraise otherwise overly familiar words'. Well, maybe. This aim would still be acheived by just having one version throughout that is less familiar to most people than the ubiquitous NIV.
The major problem that I have with the way he uses different versions throughout is that it gives the appearance of picking the version that makes the point you want to make. Rather than genuinely getting to grips with (a faithful translation of) the original text. Consider it this way - if a non-christian friend of mine came to me, having picked 20 different bible verses from 20 different versions that showed the Bible to be inconsistent, full of lies, and not how I try to portray it - I'd just laugh at him and tell him not to be so daft. In fairness, none of my non-christian friends would even consider doing that as it would be daft to take so many verses and versions out of context. So if we wouldn't do it when trying to engage other people with our faith, why is it ok to do it when discipling to each other?
Thursday, 29 March 2007
Monday, 5 March 2007
An enjoyable afternoon and evening...
...was most certainly had yesterday. Ostensibly to celebrate Baron Scarpia's (and Simon's) Birthday, but generally just a good excuse to get a bunch of Uni mates out together to catch up.
As far as the Beer and pubs went - we started in the White Lion, Covent Garden (generally an easy place to meet) which is a perfectly reasonable central London pub (one of Nicholson's) which was serving Timothy Taylor Landlord and Spitfire when I got there. I had a pint of both, and both were being perfectly reasonably kept although nothing special - personally I prefer the Landlord - a distinct hoppy edge that takes away from the initial bitterness.
After waiting for a variety of people to turn up, and after a deviation to PizzaExpress for some carbohydrate intake, we went to the Lowlander, somewhere I've trying to get to for a while. They eventually cleared enough space for the 10 of us and we sat down to start on some interesting continental beers. Personally, I went for the Bellevue Kriek, reasonably common, but served on draught here and absolutely beautiful. My missus went for the Frulli Strawberry (rather predictable, she's not really a beer drinker) which was as sickly sweet as always. One of us went for the Russian Imperial Stout, but I didn't notice which Breweries offering it was - very tasty though, and a type I'll keep an increasing eye out for. However, tempting though it was to stay for more than one, the presence of a couple of students amongst us, along with those keeping a close eye on there wallets meant I was encouraged to find 'a nice cheap local with decent real ale' instead.
Well, given a task like that, the only solution I knew of in reasonably close proximity was going to be one of Sam Smith's London pubs - so off we wandered down to the Lyceum Tavern at the corner of Aldwych and the Strand. Great little boozer this, typical Sam Smiths offerings - I had the Old Brewery Bitter on draught, a tasty but fairly straight-forward session bitter being all I was up for at that stage in the evening. The wife went for the white lager - far superior to Hoogaarden in my opinion - a great example of the art. Particularly useful at the (getting increasingly) inebriated stage of the evening - a free dart board and a pub not sufficiently crowded to render it unusable - so 6 of us started a game of 'Killer' with increasingly hilarious (and eventually predictable) consequences.
All in all - a great afternoon and evening, really good to catch up with friends I hadn't seen in ages, and a couple of good pubs to be reminded of in the West End. Happy Drinking. ;-)
As far as the Beer and pubs went - we started in the White Lion, Covent Garden (generally an easy place to meet) which is a perfectly reasonable central London pub (one of Nicholson's) which was serving Timothy Taylor Landlord and Spitfire when I got there. I had a pint of both, and both were being perfectly reasonably kept although nothing special - personally I prefer the Landlord - a distinct hoppy edge that takes away from the initial bitterness.
After waiting for a variety of people to turn up, and after a deviation to PizzaExpress for some carbohydrate intake, we went to the Lowlander, somewhere I've trying to get to for a while. They eventually cleared enough space for the 10 of us and we sat down to start on some interesting continental beers. Personally, I went for the Bellevue Kriek, reasonably common, but served on draught here and absolutely beautiful. My missus went for the Frulli Strawberry (rather predictable, she's not really a beer drinker) which was as sickly sweet as always. One of us went for the Russian Imperial Stout, but I didn't notice which Breweries offering it was - very tasty though, and a type I'll keep an increasing eye out for. However, tempting though it was to stay for more than one, the presence of a couple of students amongst us, along with those keeping a close eye on there wallets meant I was encouraged to find 'a nice cheap local with decent real ale' instead.
Well, given a task like that, the only solution I knew of in reasonably close proximity was going to be one of Sam Smith's London pubs - so off we wandered down to the Lyceum Tavern at the corner of Aldwych and the Strand. Great little boozer this, typical Sam Smiths offerings - I had the Old Brewery Bitter on draught, a tasty but fairly straight-forward session bitter being all I was up for at that stage in the evening. The wife went for the white lager - far superior to Hoogaarden in my opinion - a great example of the art. Particularly useful at the (getting increasingly) inebriated stage of the evening - a free dart board and a pub not sufficiently crowded to render it unusable - so 6 of us started a game of 'Killer' with increasingly hilarious (and eventually predictable) consequences.
All in all - a great afternoon and evening, really good to catch up with friends I hadn't seen in ages, and a couple of good pubs to be reminded of in the West End. Happy Drinking. ;-)
Friday, 2 March 2007
Venice - A couple of thoughts
The wife and I have just got back from 4 days in Venice. (Celebrating our 1st Wedding Anniversary as it happens). For those of you who know her and are really bored, the photos are on the wife's Facebook entry.
Venice got me thinking about a couple of things though - conservation of ancient things (why, how, should we, in what manner), and more generally what a city exists for.
We went just after 'Carnevale' had finished, and before the main summer tourist season, and so it was supposedly 'low' season for the tourists. Despite that, they appeared to be in the majority, certainly around the San Marco area, which seemed to me to be worse than Cambridge's King Street in Summer. Wandering around the city, and trying to get lost in various places I was astonished by the types of buildings we walked past. Every third retail space was either a restaurant or a hotel. At least every other third was a tourist shop of some kind (Carnevale masks, Glass retailer, etc.) Of the remaining third, I would estimate almost all are services to the existing population and tourists that would not be required if the city didn't exist (ie Banks, Post Office, Bars, Fashion shops, Hospital etc.)
So why does the city of Venice exist? If there was no city there, you certainly wouldn't consider building one in its location - but then that is true of a great many of the worlds great cities. The native population of the historic centre (the bit thought of as Venice proper) is a staggeringly small 62,000 - less than Stevenage, Gosport, Wellingborough, Barrow-in-Furness or Bolsover. (And incidentally, about a fifth of the population of New Orleans forced to leave due to Katrina that has relocated elsewhere on a permanent basis). Of those 62,000 a huge proportion would be out of work with no tourists. I came to the view that the city exists almost solely for the tourist trade that exists with it. Maybe a city can exist solely for the things that it has done in the past, for the architecture, geography, and history that caused it to be - but have since passed it by - but it feels, to me at least, very false. Beautiful undoubtedly, and fascinating geographically, with a host of artistic treasures to be admired and commended, but ultimately, above all the rest, false.
Venice got me thinking about a couple of things though - conservation of ancient things (why, how, should we, in what manner), and more generally what a city exists for.
We went just after 'Carnevale' had finished, and before the main summer tourist season, and so it was supposedly 'low' season for the tourists. Despite that, they appeared to be in the majority, certainly around the San Marco area, which seemed to me to be worse than Cambridge's King Street in Summer. Wandering around the city, and trying to get lost in various places I was astonished by the types of buildings we walked past. Every third retail space was either a restaurant or a hotel. At least every other third was a tourist shop of some kind (Carnevale masks, Glass retailer, etc.) Of the remaining third, I would estimate almost all are services to the existing population and tourists that would not be required if the city didn't exist (ie Banks, Post Office, Bars, Fashion shops, Hospital etc.)
So why does the city of Venice exist? If there was no city there, you certainly wouldn't consider building one in its location - but then that is true of a great many of the worlds great cities. The native population of the historic centre (the bit thought of as Venice proper) is a staggeringly small 62,000 - less than Stevenage, Gosport, Wellingborough, Barrow-in-Furness or Bolsover. (And incidentally, about a fifth of the population of New Orleans forced to leave due to Katrina that has relocated elsewhere on a permanent basis). Of those 62,000 a huge proportion would be out of work with no tourists. I came to the view that the city exists almost solely for the tourist trade that exists with it. Maybe a city can exist solely for the things that it has done in the past, for the architecture, geography, and history that caused it to be - but have since passed it by - but it feels, to me at least, very false. Beautiful undoubtedly, and fascinating geographically, with a host of artistic treasures to be admired and commended, but ultimately, above all the rest, false.
Friday, 16 February 2007
Apologies for the lack of service...
...I've been kinda focused on other things (such as looking at houses, mortgage applications, trying to sell our flat etc. etc. etc.)
Normal service may be resumed at some point... but maybe not for a while. (If we get the house we have put an offer in on, I may spend a fair bit of my spare time re-decorating instead ;-) )
Normal service may be resumed at some point... but maybe not for a while. (If we get the house we have put an offer in on, I may spend a fair bit of my spare time re-decorating instead ;-) )
Monday, 5 February 2007
Environmental Taxes
Spegasaur has been having an interesting discussion about environmental taxes; basically "Should an environmental tax discourage behaviour, or should it pay for behaviour?"
As far as I see it, as long as an environmental tax does one of the 2, it is doing its job - the problem is when it does neither. Ideally it should do both - that is, it should discourage certain unenvironmental behaviour by some people, and the revenues from those that continue to indulge should be ring-fenced into things that cancel the behaviour. What should not happen is that a 'nominal' environmental tax is chucked on something, not in proportion to the environmental damage, and the revenues simply added to the Chancellors coffers.
As far as I see it, as long as an environmental tax does one of the 2, it is doing its job - the problem is when it does neither. Ideally it should do both - that is, it should discourage certain unenvironmental behaviour by some people, and the revenues from those that continue to indulge should be ring-fenced into things that cancel the behaviour. What should not happen is that a 'nominal' environmental tax is chucked on something, not in proportion to the environmental damage, and the revenues simply added to the Chancellors coffers.
Monday, 29 January 2007
Scottish Politics...
For those of you wanting to do some analysis and seat calculations for the Scottish Parliament elections there is now a website that does all this for you - Scotland Votes
Given the absence of reliable (or in fact any) opinion polls to enter in I'm not quite sure how useful it is, but as Peter Snow always says - "It's just a bit of fun"
Given the absence of reliable (or in fact any) opinion polls to enter in I'm not quite sure how useful it is, but as Peter Snow always says - "It's just a bit of fun"
Geographically Illiterate BBC...
From the BBC Sports Page describing the 5th Round Cup Draw...
"Preston will host neighbours Manchester City,..."
Just how far away can somewhere be whilst still being classed as a neighbour! :roll:
"Preston will host neighbours Manchester City,..."
Just how far away can somewhere be whilst still being classed as a neighbour! :roll:
Thursday, 25 January 2007
Tony Blair Dramatised... 2 different ways
Have had the slightly dubious honour of watching "The Trial of Tony Blair" on Friday evening, and then "The Queen" on Saturday evening.
Note: Spoilers start here...
Whilst "The Trial of Tony Blair" is set in the future (just before the 2010 General Election) and "The Queen" is set in the recent history of 1997, it is fascinating to see the two different portrayals of Blair. In the one he is shown as truly of the people, someone who really had a grasp of the mood of the nation, and who could do no wrong. In the other, he has lost his grip of reality, shown as failing to understand where it all went wrong and how 'his people' no longer seem to need him to lead them.
Both actors have clearly studied their muse, and the familiar gestures and facial inflections are there to help you believe that it is Blair despite the facial features being not particularly familiar. I have issues with 'Trial of Tony Blair' in that the Blair shown appears to lack intelligence and understanding, which, however much I dislike him, I don't think is a fair failing to attribute.
As for 'The Queen' - the only problem with the Blair here is that he is totally and utterly overshadowed by Helen Mirren's Queen Liz. (Well, that and Cherie is made more catty than even I can believe she really is, which unnecessarily enhances your sympathy for Blair)
In conclusion - I much preferred The Queen as a film, and Mirren really should get the Oscar predicted, but for satirical 'if-only's 'The Trial of Tony Blair' was much watch television.
Note: Spoilers start here...
Whilst "The Trial of Tony Blair" is set in the future (just before the 2010 General Election) and "The Queen" is set in the recent history of 1997, it is fascinating to see the two different portrayals of Blair. In the one he is shown as truly of the people, someone who really had a grasp of the mood of the nation, and who could do no wrong. In the other, he has lost his grip of reality, shown as failing to understand where it all went wrong and how 'his people' no longer seem to need him to lead them.
Both actors have clearly studied their muse, and the familiar gestures and facial inflections are there to help you believe that it is Blair despite the facial features being not particularly familiar. I have issues with 'Trial of Tony Blair' in that the Blair shown appears to lack intelligence and understanding, which, however much I dislike him, I don't think is a fair failing to attribute.
As for 'The Queen' - the only problem with the Blair here is that he is totally and utterly overshadowed by Helen Mirren's Queen Liz. (Well, that and Cherie is made more catty than even I can believe she really is, which unnecessarily enhances your sympathy for Blair)
In conclusion - I much preferred The Queen as a film, and Mirren really should get the Oscar predicted, but for satirical 'if-only's 'The Trial of Tony Blair' was much watch television.
Saturday, 20 January 2007
Random Updates on my life...
Running away...
Have just been persuaded to sign up to the Reading half-marathon in March. I've done the Nike 10K in London for the last couple of years, but I reckon a half marathon must be about 20K so I might need to do some exercise and preparation for this one. Oops.
Beer is a better alternative...
Have just found a new blog that I will be adding to the list in future if it keeps up at the same high quality. Stonch (a previously known poster on politicalbetting.com) has set up a beer (real ale) recommendations site here
Have just been persuaded to sign up to the Reading half-marathon in March. I've done the Nike 10K in London for the last couple of years, but I reckon a half marathon must be about 20K so I might need to do some exercise and preparation for this one. Oops.
Beer is a better alternative...
Have just found a new blog that I will be adding to the list in future if it keeps up at the same high quality. Stonch (a previously known poster on politicalbetting.com) has set up a beer (real ale) recommendations site here
Newcastle 1 - 5 Birmingham City (FA Cup 3rd Round Replay)
That was very painful to write... and as I do so, Newcastle are currently 0-2 down at home to West Ham. So what's going on? Well, we have been doing better than we really should have been in recent weeks, particularly with the 3-2 win over Spurs. The problem at home seems to be that it's really difficult for the crowd to get behind the team, and that transmits itself to the really young players on the pitch who are much more sensitive to such ill-feeling from your own supporters.
Update: We managed to claw back to a 2-2 draw with the most offside goal seen this century... and there was I thinking we'd used up all our luck against Spurs last week ;-)
Sigh... maybe I'll have to make a long pilgrimage up to Toon in a couple of weeks time to try and get a better idea of what's actually going on. Anyone fancy joining me?
Update: We managed to claw back to a 2-2 draw with the most offside goal seen this century... and there was I thinking we'd used up all our luck against Spurs last week ;-)
Sigh... maybe I'll have to make a long pilgrimage up to Toon in a couple of weeks time to try and get a better idea of what's actually going on. Anyone fancy joining me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)