C-C-R Blog

Quote for the Day

2010-10-25T09:54:00.001-05:00

Throughout the New Testament, the only kind of people with whom Jesus consistently took frightful exception were the very “teachers of the law and Pharisees” we see him dressing down in the passages above. One thing that often gets lost in our considerations of Jesus is the degree to which he is exactly the wrong person to piss off. And you don’t have to spend a lot of time in the New Testament before you understand that the only kind of people who seem to ever truly anger him are those who put religious dogma above what he most stood for, which was God’s compassionate will.

...

I’m not exactly sure how we came to so often consider Jesus-formerly-known-as-The-Carpenter as a kind of a soft, dreamy, namby-pamby sort. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that!) But it’s hard to believe it was from the accounts of Jesus we have in the Gospels. That’s just not the guy on those pages.

Jesus is scary when he’s riled. And the only people who rile him are those who, in His name, set themselves up as sanctimonious judgers of others.

John Shore, johnshore.com

Quote for Today

2010-10-22T08:54:00.001-05:00

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, God wants us to get to know him, too? Is it possible that God is more interested in us learning about who he really is than us memorizing a list of things to do and things to avoid doing? If we believe–and this is no small thing–that God really does love us, that he wants to be our only lover, don’t you think he wants us to get to know his personality, and not just his rules? Joe Spann said something to me several years ago that still rattles my cage to this day. “Following Jesus,” he said, “is a lot less like getting all the answers right on a quiz, and a lot more like having a wild affair with the teacher.” Well, that teacher is Jesus. He wants to have a fling with us that will last into eternity. And he wants us to know him as he truly is, not as we box him up in our narrow view from Scriptures to be.

Jeff Dunn at internetmonk.com

A Couple of Great Quotes for Today

2010-10-07T12:55:00.000-05:00

Let’s pray, most. Did God call us to preach without ceasing? Or teach without ceasing? Or have committee meetings without ceasing? Or sing without ceasing? No, but he did call us to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess. 5:17).

Did Jesus declare: My house shall be called a house of study? Fellowship? Music? A house of exposition? A house of activities? No, but he did say, “My house will be called a house of prayer” (Mark 11:17 NIV).

(Max Lucado, Outlive Your Life: You Were Made to Make a Difference)

It can hardly be a coincidence that no language on earth has ever produced the expression “As pretty as an airport.” Airports are ugly. Some are very ugly. Some attain a degree of ugliness that can only be the result of a special effort. This ugliness arises because airports are full of people who are tired, cross, and have just discovered that their luggage has landed in Murmansk (Murmansk airport is the only know exception to this otherwise infallible rule), and architects have on the whole tried to reflect this in their designs.

They have sought to highlight the tiredness and crossness motif with brutal shapes and nerve-jangling colors, to make effortless the business of separating the traveler forever from his or her luggage or loved ones, to confuse the traveler with arrows that appear to point a the windows, distant tie racks, or the current position of Ursa Minor in the night sky, and wherever possible to expose the plumbing on the grounds that it is functional, and conceal the location of the departure gates, presumably on the grounds that they are not.

(Douglas Adams, The Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul)

A Couple of Great Quotes Today!

2010-10-07T12:53:00.000-05:00

Let’s pray, most. Did God call us to preach without ceasing? Or teach without ceasing? Or have committee meetings without ceasing? Or sing without ceasing? No, but he did call us to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess. 5:17).

Did Jesus declare: My house shall be called a house of study? Fellowship? Music? A house of exposition? A house of activities? No, but he did say, “My house will be called a house of prayer” (Mark 11:17 NIV).

(Max Lucado, Outlive Your Life: You Were Made to Make a Difference)

It can hardly be a coincidence that no language on earth has ever produced the expression “As pretty as an airport.” Airports are ugly. Some are very ugly. Some attain a degree of ugliness that can only be the result of a special effort. This ugliness arises because airports are full of people who are tired, cross, and have just discovered that their luggage has landed in Murmansk (Murmansk airport is the only know exception to this otherwise infallible rule), and architects have on the whole tried to reflect this in their designs.

They have sought to highlight the tiredness and crossness motif with brutal shapes and nerve-jangling colors, to make effortless the business of separating the traveler forever from his or her luggage or loved ones, to confuse the traveler with arrows that appear to point a the windows, distant tie racks, or the current position of Ursa Minor in the night sky, and wherever possible to expose the plumbing on the grounds that it is functional, and conceal the location of the departure gates, presumably on the grounds that they are not.

(Douglas Adams, The Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul)

God is So Good!

2010-08-14T19:43:00.000-05:00

Funny thing just happened. I tried to type the title of this post, and mis-typed. Almost got "God is God." Of course, that is true, but not what I intended to say today!

We now resume our regularly schedule programming...

Today has been a very surprising day for me, and I give all the credit to God. I awoke on-time, and after a quick shower, I was feeling quite energized (after less sleep than I would have liked). I got the last blueberry muffin for breakfast at the coffee shop.

Then I started class. Today was all "devotional messages" by the students. Twelve talks, 10 minutes each, plus a review discussion of each. I was slotted to talk eleventh. The talks were incredible. And I was scared. While I was confident in the message I wanted to communicate, I was not confident in my presentation of it. It was primarily my own fault, most likely caused by insufficient preparation. But the time had arrived, so I went forward with little more than a prayer to support me.

My talk went very well, I thought. And my professor seemed to agree. Thank God!

I then had a very nice discussion after class with a few fellow students and my professor. The time of fellowship was very appreciated. Plus, I got some confirmation about my approach to a decision I am about to make. Such a blessing.

Finally, it was time to head to the airport. I was not worried about the travel, but a little disappointed that I would be getting home after my daughter went to bed. But I figured God could handle safe and expedient travel for me and a low-stress evening for my wife and daughter.

Then, on my first flight, I heard that there was an earlier flight to Houston that I might be able to take. I prayed that God's will be done with regards to getting me home, nothing more.

When I got to Charlotte and the gate for the earlier flight to Houston, the area was packed. There was also an ominous (for me) sign the said "No Seat Changes Available." Usually means a full flight. Something inside said to ask anyway.

I asked the gate agent if there was a chance of getting on the flight. He said, "Well, it's pretty full, but I might be able to get you on stand-by." When he punched in my information, the system automatically gave me a seat. We were both surprised!

So, it looks now like I will be able to get home tonight in time to tuck my daughter into bed. And I will get to spend some time with my wife before we go to sleep. And I had a good day in class. This has been a great day.

And I can only give the praise to God.

Yep, God if Good!

Ann Rice's definition of "Christian"

2010-08-02T11:33:00.004-05:00

Ann Rice says she can't be a Christian any longer.

Since everyone else is responding, I will also.

I don't care.

Good luck to you, Ann. If I ever meet you, I will be happy to talk to you about whatever you desire. And if you want to "follow Christ" without being a "Christian," well, good luck.

Me, I will try to be a "little Christ" (i. e. "Christian") regardless of what anyone else has to say about it.

A Time of Prayer

2010-06-26T12:16:00.001-05:00

It seems that the last week for me has had a recurring theme, and not a positive one. That theme is sickness.

I have been fine. However, I have family and friends who are not doing so well. This illness has taken its toll on me, and I have broken down in tears. What I can I do? I can pray.

Interestingly, when I sought something from Scripture to ease my pain and call peace upon my family and friends, I did not find the lamentation that I really wanted. See, I was looking for something to which I could point and say, “See, I am not the only one who feels this way! This person also called upon God to complain about illness!”

What I expected to find was the isolation, fear, and frustration at the beginning of Psalm 6. “Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am languishing;/ O Lord, heal me, for my bones are shaking with terror.// My soul also is struck with terror, while you, O Lord – how long?” (Psalm 6: 2-3, NRSV).

But how does the Psalmist continue? “Turn, O Lord, save my life;/ deliver me for the sake of your steadfast love.// For in death there is no remembrance of you;/ in Sheol who can give you praise?” (Ps. 6:4-5).

This isn’t about me or my friends and family who are sick. It is still about God! The psalmist wants to be saved so that his praise will not be interrupted!

That doesn’t mean that God won’t bless us. “Those who trust in the Lord are like Mount Zion,/ which cannot be moved, but abides forever.// As the mountains surround Jerusalem,/ so the Lord surrounds his people,/ from this time on and forevermore.//…// Do good, O Lord, to those who are good,/ and to those who are upright in their hearts.” (Ps. 125: 1-2, 4) That is a great promise!

I also found Psalm 97, which concludes, “The Lord loves those who hate evil;/ he guards the lives of his faithful;/ he rescues them from the hand of the wicked.// Light dawns for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart.// Rejoice in the Lord, O you righteous,/ and give thanks to his holy name!”

We are to rejoice in the Lord because he has promised us great things, even if we can’t see those things today. Or even tomorrow. Or even if we can’t understand what we do see. The Lord will keep his promises of blessing.

Our job is to praise and rejoice in His love, and trust Him to act in His way and His time.

Praise be to God!

Grace and Obedience

2010-06-18T16:36:00.003-05:00

I will be spending the summer in the gospel of Mark for school, and something struck me as I was reading a couple days ago. It is a recurring scene in Mark, but the best portrayal is Mark 7:36. Jesus heals a man who is deaf and mute. "Then Jesus ordered them to tell no one; but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it" (NRSV).

When Jesus heals people in Mark, he regularly asks that they not tell others how they came to be healed (obviously, public healings do not apply here). But every time he does this, the person he healed goes out and proclaims Jesus' power in public.

What do I take from this? Jesus heals people when they, or someone close to them, believes. In fact, Mark tells that when Jesus returns to his home town of Nazareth, "he could do no deed of power there.... And he was amazed at their unbelief" (6:5-6, NRSV).

So believers are healed. But then, in their joy at being healed, they immediately ignore Jesus' request to not talk about the healing.

What to make of this? I see that Jesus' healing for these people, and by corollary his grace for us, is not related to our ability to obey God. It is based upon our belief in God. We believe, and God offers the grace of salvation. He continues to forgive us our sins, even after we believe.

Note that I am not promoting "cheap grace" in this post, i. e. I am not suggesting believers should sin because they will be forgiven.

But when we do sin, isn't it nice to know that God will forgive us? Believers don't have to be perfect. God accepts our belief anyway!

Church Membership - Is Change Bad?

2010-06-01T16:12:00.001-05:00

So, I had an interesting thought the other day. I was considering the various churches that I have attended over the years. More specifically, I was thinking about the fact that I moved churches within the same denomination about four years ago.

Then it dawned on my: I am a spoiled Christian.

Admittedly, I am very lucky to have multiple churches, much less multiple churches in most denominations, from which to chose to attend. There are people in this world who have never had the opportunity to attend a church, but I can't begin to estimate the number of churches within 10 miles of my house. Probably more than 15. Could be considerably higher. There are lots of people trying to do God's work nearby me.

Within 10 miles of my house, there are probably 4 or 5 churches in my denomination. I have attended three and been a member of two.

But what struck me more about the fact that I left church one for another, is that the two churches at which I have been a member are very similar. I didn't make a change to find a theology that agrees with me - the differences in theology are so minor that I am not sure I could point out a single difference. The two senior pastors have similar backgrounds. At the time I changed my membership, both churches had one female pastor. Both churches were developing a "contemporary" worship time in addition to their two "traditional" worship services.

So, why did I swap churches? I didn't really feel connected at the first church, and I became quickly connected at the second. This is mostly due to finding a Sunday School class into which I found people like me. I never found that at the first church.

But was the first church bad? Was it hindering my growth as a Christian? Not really. The growth I have experienced since changing churches could have occurred anyway. Sure, I have been very blessed with the friendships and relationships I have developed at the new church. That was in no small part an influence in the current direction my life has taken.

But the church congregation is not responsible for my personal growth and development as a Christian. I am. And I should be able to do that at any committed, theologically sound church. But I didn't. I changed from one good church to another. All because I didn't "feel" the type of relationship I wanted. But relationships are two way streets, and I should be as much to blame as the rest of the church.

To be honest, I don't really know where I land on the idea of changing church congregations. Therefore, I pose the following question to any readers that stumble by here:

Should a committed Christian change churches in an effort to "feel" a better relationship with the rest of the church?

Thanks for any feedback!

Children are Rewards from God?!?

2010-05-24T17:21:00.000-05:00

OK, I am not normally one to pick on particular people in public. But something today really bothered me, and I can't help but bring it up.

The local Contemporary Christian radio station gets tuned in for my morning commute every day. I love the music, I love the personalities, and I usually love the little "info" bites that get stuck in between the songs. But this morning one of the "info" bites bit me a little.

The segment was "Real FamilyLife with Dennis Rainey." Mr. Rainey does a pretty good job with bringing life into focus. But today's topic is titled, "The Privilege of Parenting." Great topic! I couldn't agree more that those of us who are parents have been gifted by God. But the phrase that Mr. Rainey kept using was that "children are a reward from God."

At least in my case, if children are a reward, I would not have been given kids. That's not to say that I am a terrible person, but I certainly haven't been an outstanding model for life. And if children are a reward, the bar must be pretty low for earning that reward, at least based upon the news broadcasts every night.

Instead of saying children are a "reward from God," I would say that children are a gift from God. It's kind of like grace - you can never do enough to earn it as a reward, but God gives it freely anyway.

The relationships you have with your children may be a reward - a positive relationship does take work.

But the children themselves are definitely a gift!

Thankful for Car Payments

2010-02-05T10:24:00.000-06:00

So, as any readers will be aware, I had a car get totaled a couple weeks ago. I still do miss that car some, since it did serve me very well for the last four years. But since I was in need of transport, I have gotten a new car. With the consent of my wife, I have indulged some of my desires and gone back to a convertible. Thus far I am very happy with my decision. And I stayed within my budget, so I am pleased.

After getting the vehicle, I nearly posted on Facebook that I was disappointed about the prospect of starting a new car loan, even if the payments are affordable. After all, the thought of committing to 48 payments is a little sickening.

But I didn't make that comment on Facebook because something just didn't feel right about it. After a little while I started thinking about what it meant that I didn't like the comment. The initial thought struck me that complaining about car payments was awfully negative. But I realized it went even further.

I realized that I should be thankful for car payments.

Now that sounds like a strange comment, I know. But when I think about entering into a new car loan, I shouldn't be thinking about the fact that I have promised considerable money to someone else. I should be thinking about the fact that God has given me the ability to enter into such an agreement. And God has given me the resources to ensure that the agreement starts smoothly. And I am trusting that God will allow me to continue to honor such a commitment.

So I am thankful that I have a new car loan, just as I am thankful that I have a new (to me) car. And I praise God for all that he has given me and all that he has promised me. (And, no, I do not think that the Bible promises that I will smoothly make 48 car payments. But I do think that God has promised to take care of me - one way or the other. And that is a great promise!)

So, Thanks, God!

And I will see you, the reader, on the road!

Thought for the Day

2010-02-05T09:54:00.000-06:00

"A day's most important meetings may not be the ones we've put on our calendar."

The Upper Room, Friday, February 5, 2010

Saying Goodbye to a "Loved One"

2010-01-26T14:17:00.008-06:00

Well, I have received official word today that it is time to say goodbye to my car. For those that don't know (most, probably), I was involved in a traffic accident last Monday (the 18th). Details are still unclear, but I was going straight though a light that was changing to yellow when a vehicle turned left in front of me. The other driver claimed the turn arrow was on. I didn't think my light was red.

Let's just say that when a Chrysler Sebring t-bones a Range Rover, neither vehicle comes away real well. At least the occupants of both vehicles were fine. The Range Rover no doubt will be repaired.

My car, it turns out, not so much. The car was actually driveable after the accident, although I am not sure I would have wanted to try. That, and I am not entirely sure that the transaxle assembly is still in good condition. But either way, I will not be driving a 2004 White Chrysler Sebring anymore.

This is bringing a bigger sense of loss than I had expected. No, the Sebring was not a great car. But it was for the most part a dependable car. It gave me very few problems. And it drove well, had a decent sound system, and didn't go through too much gas.

I stil think that my best memory of the vehicle was the day I decided to mulch the flower bed. My wife had her own errands to run, and she left in the SUV. I happily puttered over to home improvement warehouse in my Sebring. I new what mulch I wanted (Midnight Black), how much I needed (22 bags), and I dutifully found a flat cart and loaded it with mulch. It wasn't until I got past the cashier and started into the parking lot that I realized I had no idea how I was going to get 22 bags of mulch in a sedan.

Amazingly it all fit. The trunk was full of mulch. The back seat was full of mulch. There was even mulch in the front passenger seat. Thankfully, I did not have to resort to holding any in my lap.

I am sure that I overloaded the car that day. But to the Sebrings benefit, it held up to the task admirably. Sure, acceleration wasn't as brisk, but I didn't expect that. I didn't get the suspension bottoming out that I had expected either, though. The only time I drug any part of the car at all was backing into my driveway. The tailpipe scraped (and actually flat-spotted slightly).

So now, all I am left with is my memories of the Sebring, I guess. I will go at some point soon and pull the satellite radio out of it - and maybe the adapter that allowed me to get the satellite radio music into sound system. I need to get the car seat. Other than that, there isn't personal much to be salvalged.

So, what is next for me in the automotive landscape? I haven't a clue. Of course there is a lot that I would like to have. But my eyes are definitely bigger than my wallet. I would love to go back to a convertible. But convetibles tend to be more expensive, and that wallet thing hits again! Plus, I am a little worried about trying to get my daughter in and out (she isn't really strong enough to buckle her carseat straps herself). For the simplicity of hauling the family, a four-door has real appeal.

Guess I will spend Saturday test driving cars now. Not what I had planned, but not the end of the world, either, I guess. Some of my options for vehicles are below. If you have suggestions, even if not included below, feel free to comment!

Someone has Grasped an Understanding of Society

2010-01-12T08:33:00.000-06:00

"Every time gas prices go back down, everybody starts buying big stuff again. Gas prices go up a buck, the big stuff is unsellable and everyone wants small cars. Go figure," he said. "It's like the collective memory is about three weeks long. We can't run a business that way."

Bob Lutz, Vice-Chairman of General Motors, as reported by CNNMoney.com.

Great Thought for Today

2010-01-12T08:28:00.001-06:00

"Instead of explaining all the reasons we don't deserve such a gift, let's just say 'thank you' by living for Christ. I feel certain that nothing could please God more."

1 Timothy 2:9-15; The Lopiccolo Translation

2009-11-22T06:10:00.002-06:00

9The women should dress themselves in a way as to not be a distraction to themselves, the rest of the church, or the community in general. Why worry about braiding your hair or what jewelry you are wearing. 10God is looking at your works, not your clothes, and all will be made beautiful in God's eyes when they follow His commands and do His will. 11Let the women and the uneducated learn in peace, without disturbing those around them. 12No woman or untrained person should teach or have primary instruction over the teaching of those who have already received proper training. 13For Adam was created first, like the men were educated first. Then Eve was made. 14Adam was not deceived first, but Eve was led astray due to her lack of experience and education; Eve then was able to lead Adam into sin. 15But Eve's salvation came through her work of raising her descendants (leading to Jesus), as the women can be saved through the labor of learning, provided the women continue in the ways of God: faith, love, and holiness, without worry of the things of this world.

Look out Eugene! I may have a competitor for you in the paraphrase market!

Charis and the Sermon on the Mount

2009-10-21T11:24:00.001-05:00

I had a preacher that taught, "justification by grace as shown in deeds." The deeds (or works) follow the salvation, and the salvation is not dependent on it.

The word "grace" in the New Testament is "charis" in the Greek. If you go back to the first century understanding of "charis," it applies not only to gifts and the giving of gifts, but to the appropriate response of the receiver. The Greeks pictured "charis" as a dance, the Greek "Graces" in a circle, hand in hand, dancing together. The symbolism is critical - if the giver, the gift, and the response move together, the dance continues. The minute any part of the chain is broken, so is the grace.

So what is the appropriate response? Josephus said that we should receive the gift, and then do everything in our power to repay the giver, even though we cannot repay in kind (lest it be a loan, not a gift). We repay by bestowing honor and praise to the giver. And I can think of no better way to repay a giver than to try and follow their instructions on how to live my life. Isn't that what the Sermon on the Mount is? So if I neglect Jesus' teachings (or try to use logic to get around them), I am not demonstrating my responsive grace because I am not honoring the giver. And the circle of grace is broken. But if I try to live life according to Jesus, just the effort is a form of honor and praise. Thus the circle continues.

To me, that is a wonderful illustration of what the Gospel really means. Yes, salvation if free. But if I really want to show my thankfulness to God, I need to at least make an effort to live out his teachings. To claim "grace alone" without expecting a response is really to say that my actions don't matter and God will forgive and still give grace. But that is the heresy of "cheap grace." It is an attractive earthly proposition ("Lie! Cheat! Steal! Fornicate! You are a believer and God will forgive!"). But it has no relation to the teachings of the Bible, Old Testament or New, Gospel or Epistle.

Therefore, I cannot claim that God does not want some response from me. Not that he wants the OT Law necessarily, but God is also not granting freedom from any of his guidance about how to live.

Economists vs. God

2009-04-08T10:43:00.001-05:00

As many of you may have heard, I was recently the victim of credit card fraud. Actually, it was my check card, not a credit card. And the perpetrators managed to get over $5000 before the bank turned the card off (because the account was overdrawn, not because they thought it was fraud). Thankfully, it appears that the bank is going to cover the loses, it just takes a little time to get everything straight.

Obviously, this was a disturbing occurrence to my wife and I. It also lead us to prayerfully reconsider our financial status and our daily life. But it has also led us to an interesting thought.

Since we started working, my wife and I have been contributing regularly to our 401k retirement plans. We already have a pretty nice amount of money saved in these plans (more than some people have to retire on in total). However, we also have debt. If you include my wife's student loans, we have a good bit of debt.

This leads to our current economic conundrum. Should we be carrying 401k's for retirement while also carrying debt. I think that most economists would say "Yes". The 401k is an important tool for preparing for the time when we (hopefully) get to stop working every day. We should reduce the debt, which we have been working on, but should still be trying to save some for the future.

But the Bible tells us not to worry about tomorrow, that God will take care of us, much as he takes care of the sparrow or the flowers in the field. And the Bible also tells us to eschew debt, as it enslaves us to something other than God's will.

So, we are prayerfully considering using our 401k's to reduce our debt instead of saving for the future. Not that we won't save ever. We will continue to try and save. However, by reducing our current debt load, we would be freeing ourselves to be more flexible and follow God more closely.

So, what do you think? Are we considering something that is wise, or something that is foolish. And if the answer is "foolish", is it foolish to the world, but exactly what God would have us do, since He warns us that God's ways appear foolish to those who do not know him?

As always, your feedback is welcome!

In God's Love,

JAy.

Grace for Contentment

2009-04-01T14:56:00.000-05:00

I have been thinking a lot recently about contentment. This is in no small part because I am not feeling particularly content right now. I know I should, but something is still missing.

The biggest issues around contentment for me currently are materialistic. I know that. I know the issues are petty and insignificant. But I also acknowledge that they are there.

My life is good. I have been blessed with a wonderful wife, a great daughter, a strong and supportive extended family, and jobs that provide plentifully for myself and my family.

But human nature makes me want more.

The biggest symptom of my discontent is that I want a new car. Not necessarily new off the manufacturing line, but new for me. And I want a convertible. I had a couple convertibles previously, and I have a deep urge to get another. I don't need one, and I shouldn't enter the expense of buying one. But I want one just the same.

But I am also thankful that God is looking out for me. It has been easy for me to overcome my discontent so far for a simple reason. God has opened my eyes to issues with every convertible car I have looked at. Not just issues with a particular vehicle, but design issues that would hinder the usefulness of each model of car for me.

One model, which I had owned in a previous generation, has lost room in the back seat in the latest redesign. I don't think that my daughter would be comfortable in the back seat (which is especially sad since she is three years old and in the 10th percentile for height and weight).

Another model has an awkward top mechanism that makes the trunk almost unusable when the top is down. I can't fathom not being able to fit my work bag, some exercise equipment, and groceries in the trunk while having the top down. I don't want a convertible if the car isn't also useful.

And while I like to looks of many of the two-seat models on the road, I am scared of putting my daughter in the front seat regularly. Further, I don't want the inconvenience of not being able to carry my wife, my daughter, and I to dinner, or church, or wherever, in my car. What if my wife's SUV can't be driven for some reason? Should one of us have to walk (and it would probably be me)?

So I still have my car. And I do appreciate my car. It has proven to be very reliable thus far (just crossed the 80,000 mile mark with no major maintenance). It contains all the features I need, and many more that just make it nice to drive.

But I haven't been able to get beyond my discontentment. I pray that God will change my mind and strengthen me to lead more with my heart.

And thus far, my heart hasn't given me any indication that it wants a convertible.

Science Education in Texas

2009-03-27T09:09:00.001-05:00

Recently, there has been a lot of talk in the state of Texas about revisions that are ongoing for the Texas Education Association Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) that provide the requirements for public school curriculum. At particular issue is the proposed removal of the so-called "strengths and weaknesses" clause in the science TEKS. This has turned into a debate around the theories of creationism and evolution.

However, in the current TEKS, the phrase "strengths and weaknesses" occurs in every science discipline under a "Scientific Processes" heading. The current language states that the student is expected to, "analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information." The new language states that the student is expected to, "analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing."

It sure sounds to me like the intent is the same, regardless of your personal opinion of the quality of the language. My personal explanation is that the TEA needed to save money on printing, and the fewer words, the better!

The changes to the section specific about the theory of biological evolution are far more dramatic, including being significantly lengthened. However, these are not under significant debate, at least as reported in the news. And if you want discussion in the classroom, note that the introduction to the section now states "The student knows evolutionary theory is a scientific explanation for the unity and diversity of life." (emphasis added)

This just goes to prove that if you mention the word "evolution" you are sure to get debate.

Why I stay in the United Methodist Church

2009-03-18T10:39:00.001-05:00

I saw a post on this topic from Guy Williams, one of my friends (and one of my pastors), who had followed up from a post from Jenny Smith. I thought that since this is my blog and I can basically do what I want, that I would also chime in on the topic. I hope to keep this positive, but I also will have to do some comparing and contrasting with my experiences with other denominations. It is not my intent to offend anyone with these ideas, but merely to present my opinions (and you know what they say about opinions...).

First, let me give you a little background on my faith. Unlike Guy, I do not have a family heritage regarding the United Methodist Church. I was raised Roman Catholic. During college, my beliefs became much more ecumenical, and I consider myself a Christian first, and a member of a church or denomination second. I am married to a woman who was raised Southern Baptist. After we got married, we went to many churches and covered basically all of the major Christian denominations (Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc.) as well as a couple non-denominational churches. We have finally found a warm home in the United Methodist Church and have committed ourselves to growing in Christ as members of the UMC family.

So, why UMC? Here goes:

The UMC theology is grounded in the Bible. The United Methodists have a history of basing their beliefs in scripture. Additionally, these beliefs are well documented and explained. In essence, the UMC's philosophy has a solid, scripture-based foundation.
The UMC practice is grounded in the Bible. United Methodists tend to try to model their lives, and therefore their church practices, in the Bible, particularly the New Testament. Nothing overly excessive is added, nothing is ignored. Church members are likewise encouraged and supported in modeling their personal lives in a likewise fashion.
The UMC thinks about itself and the world. Not to boast, but my wife and I are intelligent, well-educated individuals. We think about our beliefs and where we fit into the world. The UMC does likewise, and we therefore get along pretty well. (This also relates back to the previous point.)
The UMC is accepting of people. When you join a UMC church, membership is less dependent on where you have been then where you are going. Jesus called all people to him, regardless of their background. The UMC is a model of this openness and love. And transferring from another Christian denomination is fairly straight-forward, without superfluous initiation rights.
The UMC cares about the growth of its members. UMC churches in general tend to have better education and development programs than many of the churches I have attended in the past, especially for adults. Of course this is dependent upon the local church to implement, but I find it to be better than what I have previously experienced.
The UMC encourages the uniqueness of its members. Personal development in the church is encouraged by the UMC, and it is recognized that all people are not going to develop identically. From worship services, to personal ideology, to community outreach, the UMC doesn't try to "shoe-horn" people, or even local churches, into a single mold. The emphasis is following the teachings of Christ. How that evolves is left to the individual.
The UMC cares about the world around it. The UMC seems to have taken "Love thy neighbor" very seriously. The community outreach, beyond pure evangelism, is strong, frequently discussed, and strongly encouraged.

Now I know that a lot of people would say that none of the above points are unique to the United Methodist Church. And they would be correct. However, I have found a balance in the UMC that I always felt lacking in other churches. And do I think that the UMC is perfect? Of course not. We all, individuals and denominations, are on a journey towards perfection, a perfection that can only be achieved through complete communion with Christ. And none of us are yet perfect. But the UMC also seems committed to the journey, both individually and corporately.

How much has the UMC affected me? I have decided that I need to dedicate myself more fully to Christ, and I have chosen to do so by enrolling in seminary with the goal of ordination in the UMC. While I have felt the call of service before, I have never before found a place where I feel accepted and supported like I do in the UMC. And I look forward to being able to spread that love, acceptance, and support to others as an ordained UMC minister.

So what do others think? Keep the thoughts going! And don't limit yourself to the UMC denomination. If you feel strongly about your church, tell me why!

In God's Love,

JAy.

Let's Argue Constructively

2009-03-13T09:45:00.005-05:00

Richard Heyduck wrote a post to his Bandits No More blog about being Tired of the negative news and press that we are all so bombarded with daily. He also included the following:

In this light, I believe that talking people down - especially people at the top - beyond being disrespectful, is counter-productive. It hurts me and innocent bystanders as much as hit hurts my target. Most assuredly it guarantees that the person I’m talking down will never listen to me. And I want people to listen to me. While I don’t want to talk people down, I do think it is good to argue with them. Can you imagine that - Arguing in love! I take that as a variant of “Speak the truth in love.”

This reminded me a book study I participated in the other day. The individual leading the discussion mentioned that when he had been in business (20 years in the oil industry), he had frequently been involved in meetings that became day-long arguments. Being the oil industry, these sometimes devolved to the point of profanity.

However, at the end of the day, the meeting participants always left with handshakes, pats on the back, and regular social activities outside of work.

I think that this is a noble goal for us all. Let's argue, not necessarily argue more, but argue better. Argue constructively. If you and I don't like each other's ideas, let's tear them both to shreds. Maybe then we can weave the shreds of both ideas into one, better idea.

But let's leave personal issues aside. Let's not engage in personal insults or derogatory comments. Most importantly, let's try to argue so that at the end of the day we can still look each other in the eye with respect, and maybe even become better friends than we currently are.

And I hope that we can have this happen not only in our personal lives, but in the public as well. If we don't like ideas that politicians or business leaders are proposing, that is fine. But don't put down the people. Just discuss the ideas. Encourage people to work together for a better solution. Forget what state you are from, what color your skin may be, what your level of education is, or which side of the political spectrum you consider yourself.

Maybe then we can find a way to improve our situation, instead of just blaming it on someone else.

In God's Love,
JAy.

Quote for today

2009-03-08T22:13:00.000-05:00

"Every day is a gift
That you've been given
Make the most of the time
Every minute you're livin'"

Chris Rice, "Life Means so Much"

Thought for today

2009-03-05T09:57:00.000-06:00

One of the favorite stories from the New Testament has to be the story of the prodigal son. The son rejects his father and leaves, spending and squandering all that his father has given him.

The prodigal son decides to head home, and the father sees him from a long ways off and runs to meet him. The family is reunited.

This is used as a comparison to God. But there is a significant difference between God and the father in the story. The father watches the son leave and stays at the house hoping the son will return. God does not do that. Even if we reject God, He stays with us at all times.

We don't have to head back to God to be reunited. We simply have to realize that we need God and then open our eyes to see God there with us.

All the sinner needs is an epiphany!

I understand the reason the story is used. We have to have the familiarity of the father/son relationship to understand the concept that we are being taught in the story of the prodigal son. And we need the reality of the father staying at home to really relate to the story.

But it is also important to acknowledge the differences between a story and the reality of a loving God.

Just my thoughts from yesterday through this morning!

In God's Love,
JAy.

Two Prayers for Today

2009-02-17T12:35:00.003-06:00

Psalm 28:1-2,8-9

1To you, O Lord, I call;
my rock, do not refuse to hear me,
for if you are silent to me,
I shall be like those who go down to the pit
2Hear the voice of my supplication,
as I cry to you for help,
as I lift up my hands
toward your most holy sanctuary.
…
8The Lord is the strength of his people;
he is the saving refuge of his anointed.
9O save your people, and bless your heritage;
be their shepherd, and carry them forever.

Psalm 33:8-12

8Let all the earth fear the Lord;
let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
9For he spoke, and it came to be;
he commanded, and it stood firm.
10The Lord brings the counsel of the nations to nothing;
he frustrates the plans of the peoples.
11The counsel of the Lord stands forever,
the thoughts of his heart to all generations.
12Happy is the nation whose God is the Lord,
the people whom he has chosen as his heritage.

W. W. J. D. or Free to be Me?

2009-02-11T08:17:00.001-06:00

OK, so maybe I am a bit slow on the uptake sometimes. I admit it. Sometimes I guess it takes me a little while to piece things together.

A very good example is something I have been pondering for a while. A few weeks back I read the book The Shack by William P. Young. If you haven't read this book, I highly recommend it. It will definitely make you think about you relationship with God and the way God works in our lives. It may even change your life. I think it is that good.

But I digress. Back to my occasional dim-wittedness. There is a short discussion in The Shack where Papa and Mack are discussing what God's freedom in our lives means. Mack brings up the "W. W. J. D." craze that was popular a few years back and is still around in some circles. Papa tells Mack that while "W. W. J. D." is a nice thought, it misses the point of a free relationship with God. The book doesn't belabor this point, and I was admittedly left scratching my head.

This morning while on the drive to work I heard the song "Free" by Francesca Battistelli. I have probably heard this song ten times this week already. But suddenly this morning it dawned on me. The song includes the lines, "I'm free to be me / And you're free to be you." That is what The Shack was getting at, too.

In God, there is no universal right and wrong, at least according to The Shack (I think this could be debated, but that is another discussion). But God does not want us to all do the same thing. He wants us to do our thing for Him. While "W. W. J. D." may be a starting point for people, if God wanted nothing but imitators of Christ, he would have made us all like Christ. But we are all different with different talents, different approaches to problems, and different thought patterns.

By living in God's will, we are free to use our own unique talents in our own unique ways.

Jesus, as a perfect human and the Son of God, had his way of doing things. I, as an imperfect human and son of John, my father, will not do everything the same. But if I am focusing on God and working to expand other's knowledge of God and trying to develop God's kingdom here on earth, God will be with me and help me be successful.

And by all means, be free to be you, as well. Live for God, but use the talents God gave you. And use your mind, since God made you unique, and no one else will have exactly the same perspective as you do. That is what freedom in God really means.

God Bless,

Jay.

iPhone Nano Coming?

2008-12-15T11:46:00.006-06:00

Today, the web site MacRumors.com has a post reviving the rumors of an upcoming iPhone Nano from Apple. A lot of Apple followers have said that this is a bogus rumor, and that there is no chance of it happening.

I for one have been expecting this, and I hope it does happen. Personally, I appreciate the technical prowess demonstrated in the iPhone. I do not need one, though, and I am certainly not going to pay $200 up front in addition to a $70 or more per month phone plan. While I am sure that if I had an iPhone, I could do a lot with it, I do not need that much capability on my hip at all times. I currently carry a BlackBerry for work, but I do not have my personal e-mail attached to it. I don't need to. And the simple mobile-web browser installed in my BlackBerry or my old RAZR were sufficient for my mobile needs as well. I can check the stock market status, get headlines from CNN, CNNMoney, and ESPN, get local headlines from a nearby TV channel, and get real-time traffic information from Houston Transtar. I don't have to have a special cell phone plan for that, either.

But now imagine if Apple puts the same functionality of a common mobile phone (take a RAZR for example), and includes the media capabilities of an iPod. Suddenly you have a great potential there for sales. I know that I would finally consider switching to iPod from my mp3/WMA devices.

Many are questioning the reason that Apple would want to do this. I think that there is a huge upside in doing this. The retail price for the device could be on par with the current price of an iPod Nano, but the extra cost to manufacture the device would be covered by the carrier subsidies back to Apple. The MacRumor.com article is suggesting a touch-screen interface, which would be perfect since it could display a keypad for phone dialing and a scroll-wheel type of interface for iPod control. The processor in an iPod is probably powerful enough to handle the phone demands, so the only additional internals would be the actual radio chip.

There is also the question of profitability to Apple. However, several websites are suggesting the cost of building the current iPhone 3G is near $150. If Apple can save a little money on the iPhone Nano (smaller screen, less OS memory, slower processor, etc.), they may be able to get the cost down closer to $125. The retail price of the phone could be $150 (the same as a 8GB iPod Nano, but with a phone contract). The subsidy from the carrier could be Apple's profit! (I understand that the cash actually flows a little differently, but the point is the same.)

I have also read comments arguing against the idea of Apple development going backwards technologically. I think the answer here may be more like the case of Tesla Motors. They start with a product development that is high-end and expensive enough to (1) recoup development costs, and (2) limit the product to brand loyalists and early adopters who in reality are more forgiving of bugs and limitations (Tesla Roadster, iPhone). Once the technology is shaken out and the production costs come down due to economies of scale, you produce a more entry level product (future Tesla sedan, iPhone Nano). This dramatically opens the product to new consumers while also making sure that you don't alienate millions of more fickle consumers.

I think that this is a perfect fit for the Apple product line, too. They have the iPod line, culminating in the iPod Touch. They have the Touch equivalent in the iPhone, but nothing to match up with the iPod Nano.

So, will Apple produce the iPhone Nano? I don't know. Would I like it if they did? You bet! I am still not sure that I would get one (I don't need to carry two cell phones), but if I needed a phone, it would definitely be on my short list of options.

Well, only time shall tell!

Forgiveness - That'll Preach!

2008-10-16T16:32:00.001-05:00

I was watching the news the other night and saw a story of a man who had recently been sentenced to life in prison for having killed his fiancé.

Since I have been reading through the Old Testament recently, I thought about how this was different than what he would have experienced in the times of Joshua or David. In those days, a killer wouldn't have lasted more than a few days before he was killed. This man will not have to die as a result of his crime.

But then at the end of the story, the victim's mother was interviewed. She said, "I have forgiven him because I have to."

What a statement of her faith. She didn't want to forgive this man who took her daughter from her. She probably didn't enjoy the mental exercise of trying to forgive him. She is human. I understand this.

But because God forgave us by sending Jesus, we are to likewise forgive others. That is part of our "job description" if we are to be Christians.

We live in a vastly different world Moses and Joshua. And a large part of the reason is Jesus. He taught us a new way to live and gave us a new hope for our future. We have been forgiven, and that means that we can live without the past continuously beating us down. We can live for God and the future.

What a great joy for that woman to demonstrate her beliefs via a public medium like television. I only wish I could have heard more of what she had to say, instead of the 5 second blips we get on the evening news.

And what a joy for those of us who accept the forgiveness that Jesus has to give. God has forgiven us, and now we can really live.

God Bless,

JAy.

Hurricane Ike: God's Blessings Abound

2008-09-25T11:26:00.001-05:00

OK, so I haven't posted in a while. Hurricane Ike took its toll on Houston, and just before Ike arrived, my doctor took a roto-rooter (his words) to my sinus cavities. I am finally starting to get back to normal.

That said, I did want to post a praise regarding God's blessings before, during, and after Hurricane Ike hit. As I said, a few days before the storm, I had sinus surgery. Once the forecasters called for Ike to hit the Houston area, I started to get worried. Could I manage the efforts necessary in my post-surgery condition?

Well, as usual, God is great! I actually felt better immediately before the storm, three days after the surgery, than I do now, two weeks after surgery. I was able to help my wife clear all of our belongings out of the back yard before the storm hit. I had no problems due to my nose. Praise God!

During the storm, my family and my house were spared the worst. We came through with no family injuries. The only damage to the house was some lost shingles. Overall, we were very blessed.

And the weather after the storm was amazing. A cold front came through on Sunday, and life without electricity and air conditioning was actually quite pleasant for several days. As my Mother-in-Law said, "The hurricane took the power, but God handled the air conditioning."

But perhaps the most amazing aspect of the storm is the fact that we were able to keep a half-gallon of milk for my daughter from Thursday before the storm hit until Wednesday after the storm hit. We had no electricity from Saturday morning to Tuesday night, and we couldn't find ice until Monday morning. Yet the milk did not spoil, and my daughter didn't have to go without. I cannot explain logically how this happened. But God provided.

As most readers are aware, there are still many in Southeast Texas who are suffering due to Ike. Homes have been lost. Lives have been lost (although remarkably fewer that I expected). Hundreds of thousands of homes are still without power. Please continue to pray for all those who are still trying to get back into their lives and are in need of assistance. But we cannot forget to praise God for all he has done to bless the area, either.

Got Roof Flaps?

2008-09-04T21:36:00.002-05:00

I never know where my next radical truth may come from. The other day it was while I was driving. (I have a pretty long commute, so I do this a lot).

Anyway, there I was cruising along the freeway behind a Porsche Boxter (don't know if it was an S or not). I noticed, not for the first time, that it had a crude pop-up spoiler on the back.

If you are not accustomed to pop-up spoilers, they are what the auto industry is now calling "active aerodynamics". Aerodynamic devices, which in addition to improving traction, create additional drag. To maximize efficiency, active aerodynamics are only deployed when needed, such as at high speeds. In the case of the Porsche Boxter, above a certain speed (45, I think), a blade extends vertically out of the rear of the car to reduce the aerodynamic lift that would otherwise naturally occur at freeway (and greater) speeds.

I got to thinking about why some cars need active aerodynamic devices, and some, such as a Corvette, do not. Basically, it has to do with what drives the design of the body of the car - aesthetics or aerodynamics. In the case of the Corvette, the base model is designed to create downforce at high speeds, and this trait is increased as the models get more expensive.

So I was thinking that the higher-end a sports car is, the less likely it should be to require active aerodynamics.

Then I thought about me. Do I, as an individual, need something akin to active aerodynamics? Well, I think we all do, since no one is perfect in God's eyes. When we get going too fast or get into trouble, we need God's help, which He made available through Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

But then I thought that the analogy really wasn't perfectly accurate. Jesus came to earth to die for our sins, taking the punishment for our mistakes on Himself so that we could appear without blemish before God one day.

So I guess that the better analogy may be a NASCAR roof flap, a device that deploys on top of a stock car to keep it from become airborne should it spin and start traveling backwards. Jesus is kind of like that. When we make a mistake and lose control of our future, Jesus steps in, pushes back down a little bit, and gives us the chance to straighten our ways. Yes, we made a mistake, but because of Jesus, the mistake doesn't take us out of God's race.

Nice to know that you can have the ultimate active protection working for you, isn't it! And better yet, it is free, unlike cars with active aerodynamics.

God Bless,
JAy.

Should Christians be Apologetic about God?

2008-09-02T15:33:00.001-05:00

I am going to raise a dangerous topic here. I am going to touch upon the political correctness of God.

To start off with, let me give you an understanding of my personal mindset. I am a conservative person, including in my language. I believe that we should still write as indicated in "The Elements of Style" and "The Elements of Grammar", which, when I got my copies, both included instructions to utilize the masculine pronouns when referencing a non-specific individual. These days we have clouded the readability of our language with "he/she" and "his/her", or worse, switch gender willy-nilly in attempts to not offend anyone.

But here I am talking about how we reference God. Last time I looked, all of the references to God in the major Bible translations also utilize the masculine pronouns where needed. Further, God is described as "Father", another male reference.

I am not suggesting that this makes God purely male. But, for the simplicity of language (and conformity with language standards), God is referenced this way.

So, this came to a head in my mind when the Senior Pastor at my church gave a sermon on "God's Family" this week. He started with what came across to me as an apology for the fact that God is referred to as "Father". Then he repeated the apology. Then he got into what a relationship with God means in terms of a connection to God, the church, and the world, the real meat of his message.

Now, I do not intend to criticize my Pastor. I respect him greatly, and I understand that he has to be concerned about the receptivity of all those in attendance, not just my hard-headed, conservative, stick-in-the-mud self.

But do we as Christians need to be apologetic about the way that we refer to God, or worse, about the way the Bible refers to God? Personally I am not. I proudly refer to God as "Father" and reference Him with masculine pronouns. This has been the tradition of the church since ... well, forever as far as I can tell from my Bible. And both the Old and New Testaments refer to God as Father. Why shouldn't I?

As if I wasn't deep enough in my own mind about how we should refer to God after the sermon Sunday, we then proceeded to close the service with a hymn which I have always loved - "Let there be Peace on Earth". The traditional second verse of the hymn is:

With God as our Father

Brothers all are we

Let me walk with my brother

In perfect harmony

However, our hymnals had replaced this verse with what I have since learned is a common alternative. It reads:

With God our creator

Children all are we

Let us walk with each other

In perfect harmony

I was so taken by surprise, that I literally had to stop singing. I couldn't follow along after this.

I could maybe see removing the references to "brother", as this could make some of the congregants feel excluded. But changing the "Father"?

Do not get me wrong, I am sympathetic to those who have had difficult childhoods and who have not had the benefit of a loving earthly father. However, as a radio DJ (whom I deeply respect) here in Houston openly discusses, she looks at the opportunity to call God "Father" as the opportunity to fill in what was missing previously in her life. And to those who complain that some do not have the "Father" reference in their personal experience, she is quick to point out that everyone should have that reference, whether it is personal or not. And to those who do not have that personal experience, they should imagine the best father possible. Take that love, and multiply it infinitely. That is the love offered by our "Father" God.

So, should we hide references to Father? Should we change some to "Mother"? Should we never use any reference to God except just "God"? What is your opinion?

God Bless,

JAy.

The General's Big Reveals

2008-08-06T12:42:00.004-05:00

OK, so I have been out of touch for a while. Last week was a much enjoyed vacation. Prior to that, work was busy and I am a bit of a slacker, so attention went elsewhere from my blog.

But I wanted to post a "Cars" entry related to two big reveals from General Motors recently (actually, almost co-incident with each other).

The first reveal, and probably the most recognized if you are, like me, an American, was when Chevrolet pulled the wraps off of the production version of the 2010 Camaro. Intended to be reminiscent of the classic Camaro (not the mid-90's version, thankfully, though I loved them at the time - but I digress), it is an attractive vehicle, even if if does look like it could be a platform mate with the Dodge Challenger (note the similar hip-line bump over the rear wheel-well). I look forward to seeing one in person, even if I don't have any plans to ever own one.

The second reveal was the Opel Insignia. While this is a European car, I was interested due to the recent sharing of vehicles between Opel and Saturn. Being a thoroughly redesigned mid-size vehicle (including a new name and Opel insignia in Europe), there is credible talk of this also replacing the Saturn Aura within a few years. Let's hope so. While the Aura is a respectable vehicle with at least some visual appeal, the Insignia is gorgeous, looking like something that could rival the autos from BMW and Mercedes, at least in the looks department. This thing just looks like a high end performance sedan. Now we have to wait to see if if measures up in the actual performance category.

So, that is what I see as the big news in the GM camp last month. Here's to hoping that the seemingly increased emphasis in cars that people actually want to be seen driving will result in some positive cash for GM. Goodness knows that they could use the help financially!

God Bless,
JAy.

Powerful Worship!

2008-07-21T14:52:00.002-05:00

I had the opportunity to attend the baptism of a friend's daughter yesterday. The service was amazing.

It was essentially a regular Methodist service. But seeing three baptisms was powerful in and of itself.

To have Wayne Watson performing all the music for the service was even more amazing. (The church's choir was on retreat, and Wayne agreed to help out).

Only complaint: What is wrong with the traditional orders of service? So many churches, this one included, are neglecting the orders of worship for free-form. I thought the baptisms could have been more powerful if the traditional liturgy of the baptism had been used.

Oh well. Guess I am an old fogey long before my time!

The Vine and the Branches

2008-07-17T07:30:00.001-05:00

Most church-goers are familiar with the parable of the vine and the branches (John 15:1). If you have been attending church long, you have probably heard a sermon on this topic. If, like me, you grew up in the church, you have probably heard these verses discussed more times than you can remember.

However, in reading Paul Wesley Chilcote's Recapturing the Wesleys' Vision, he uses this passage in relation to mission, which I do not think I have ever heard before. Chilcote is reminding readers that the goal of the Christian is to inwardly cling to God and outwardly spread the word of God. No argument here.

But I don't think that I have ever heard anyone discuss John 15 with an emphasis on the fact that the branches have a role - to bear fruit. It is clearly stated in John 15 that this is the case, especially if you read past the first few verses of the chapter. But I don't think I have ever heard it called out with the vigor that Chilcote applied.

Amazing that you can still see new messages in the Bible after years of reading and being taught. Even in passages you know!

God Bless,

JAy.

Jehovah Jireh!

2008-07-08T07:41:00.001-05:00

A couple weeks back, I posted about hearing God's call. Since then, I have made some progress towards my goals, although I admittedly need to do more.

One of the fears I have looking into my future is wondering how God will provide for my needs during this journey. I have been looking at the direction I am to head, evaluating the costs, and trying to determine the earthly source of my needs.

This past week, our church continued its summer walk through Genesis with Genesis 22:1-19. I read the scripture during the week last week, and even thought about its meaning. But during the service Sunday, as one of our Pastors spoke, what really hit me was verse 14, "So Abraham called that place The LORD Will Provide." Looking into the notes at the bottom of the Bible I was holding, it referenced the Hebrew "Jehovah Jireh".

This struck me as important. I had heard the phrase before, but I never really knew where in the Bible it originated.

But even more importantly, this struck me as more than just the phrase, but as a personal promise as well. I suddenly felt that it didn't matter that I couldn't see how my future needs would be met. "Jehovah Jireh! God will provide!"

Now to keep moving on my path. I have to remember that if this is Lord's will for me, he will make it possible. I don't know how, but if I continue to trust in Him, I don't need to continue to carry these burdens with me. Just as Abraham trusted the Lord to provide for his descendents through Isaac, even while he was preparing to sacrifice Isaac as the Lord had requested, I will place my trust in He who can do more than I could ever imagine.

So as I continue on my journey forward, I pray for God's blessing upon myself, my family, those who will be journeying with me (even though I am yet to meet any of them!), and for all of you reading this from the other side of the internet.

God Bless,

JAy.

Keep Holy the Sabbath?

2008-07-07T13:08:00.001-05:00

For anyone who remembers the basics about Christianity or Judaism, the Ten Commandments require us to "Keep holy the Sabbath".

I wonder how best to implement this commandment, though.

There are sects, particularly of conservative Jews, that take this to the extreme, going so far as to not operate motor vehicles, shop, or do anything that would require someone else to work on the Sabbath. An acquaintance of mine went so far as to consult her rabbi as to the proper protocol to take should she go into labor on the Sabbath (to go to the hospital or not, how to get there, etc.). This is taking the Sabbath very seriously.

Most Christians take a relatively lighter look at this commandment, and feel that by attending church, they are doing fine. Of course there are others who take an approach between these two, such as doing no work (even chores) on the Sabbath.

The Gospels tell us how Jesus was confronted for performing a miracle on the Sabbath. He responded by saying that even the church elders looked after their livestock on the Sabbath. He was doing little different in looking after those who had placed their trust in Him.

This all comes spilling out of my mind as I look back on my day yesterday. It was quite busy, and I got a lot accomplished. I had to start the morning by saying goodbye to my father-in-law as he travelled back to his house in South Carolina. Then I spent some time around the house in the morning, including a little on-line shopping. Next up was getting myself and my family ready for church and then spending some time in fellowship, prayer, and praise. After church, I went out to lunch. Upon returning home, I made a shopping list and headed to my local home improvement store. My shopping complete, I returned home in time to take a couple items off my "honey-do" list and assist my mother-in-law with some paperwork at her new residence here in Texas. Then it was back home to do some more work around the house before spending some time in the evening with a late dinner and some additional prayer.

If we are to judge how well we keep the Sabbath holy by what we do, I didn't do real well. But if we take into consideration the attitude with which we approach what we do, I did better. I have not been feeling well for the past few weeks, and yesterday I was blessed with the energy and lack of discomfort to actually get some things done. Throughout my day and my chores, I frequently praised God for the healing I was feeling, as well as for my family, the beautiful day which He gave us, and the multitude of items He has entrusted me with here on earth. I was even joyful while fertilizing my lawn because I had both a lawn to fertilize and the ability to fertilize it.

Don't get me wrong, I am by no means saying I did well yesterday at keeping the Sabbath holy. Yes, I remembered it was the Sabbath, but I know that I can (and probably should) do better, even if all I do is to put more of my mental faculties into prayer and praise while my hands and feet do other things.

So, what do others think? Is keeping holy the Sabbath more about what you do or how you do it? Is focusing our mind on God and how what we do relates to Him what really matters, or should we keep from undergoing any activity that does not directly promote God in the world and ourselves?

I look forward to your feedback!

God Bless,

JAy.

Hearing God's Call

2008-06-23T06:36:00.004-05:00

I don't know if I am in the majority or minority of Christians, as this is a topic I find rarely discussed. Yesterday, I don't think I heard God's calling. I think I heard God's shouting, singing, yelling, and maybe even slapping me around a little (metaphorically, not physically). Of course, that is apparently what it took to get my attention, so I say, "Well done, God."

I have lived all my life attending church regularly. I never had a period where I went more than a couple weeks without attending a church service. But I don't know if I was ever really listening for God. So maybe he has been calling me and I just missed it.

I have always felt kind of like I have been living the song "Smell the Color Nine" by Chris Rice. (I highly recommend this song if you are unfamiliar with it. If you don't know it, it is well worth the 99 cents or whatever it would cost to download it from your favorite digital music seller.) The whole point of the song can be drilled down to the last three lines of the chorus:

But sometimes finding you
Is just like trying to
Smell the color nine

(If you still don't get it, listen to the song. Chris is nice enough to give the meaning in plain English at the end.)

But the line that always really hit me hard was this:

And I've never heard the calling
But somehow you've led me right here

I never thought I was that far from Christ. Looking back, there have been times I have strayed (pretty widely, if I am honest). And recently, I have been trying to live closer to God. So maybe it hasn't been God's lack of calling, but my lack of hearing.

I guess maybe I am having a bit of an early mid-life crisis. I am trying to figure out what my life is about and what am I really here to accomplish. And while I have a wonderful life and the best family I could dream of having, I wonder if this is all life really is. Or have I been missing a better experience, a fuller life, and a deeper meaning?

So while I have been considering some changes in my life, I still hadn't felt what I would say is a calling. Good ideas, noble thoughts, maybe even some self-sacrifice, certainly. But was it what God was telling me to do, or was it my own mind trying to paint a picture of something that I hoped would be better for me, but really wasn't God's intent, or even better for God?

Yesterday, though, I think I would have to claim deafness and stupidity to say that I didn't hear God calling to me. From the songs on the radio, to the Sunday School lesson (which wasn't about my calling), to the music during church, to the sermon (also not about my calling), everything seemed to be telling me to, "Get moving." And if that wasn't enough, we ended the church service with my favorite hymn, which actually is about responding to God's call.

So, it is time for me to commit to making some changes. I don't know how things will work. I don't even know if what I am cut out for some of what I am heading into. To say the least, there is fear and trepidation in my mind. My future is a question mark to me, a fog through which I cannot see. But I now have a definite heading, a compass point to follow.

God has shown me a path. And while I do not know exactly where it leads, I am going to start walking. I am going to take a couple of steps of faith. No, I don't know where I will end up, but I have faith in God to get me where he would have me be. And I trust God to give me and those who will be walking with me the strength and grace to work through whatever obstacles we encounter.

I pray God's peace upon this journey for myself and for my family and friends. For this is not a journey of one man, but a journey of a community. I cannot do this alone (and I wouldn't want to). May we all come out of this as better people and better servants.

I will give you all updates "from the road".

God Bless,
JAy.

Carbon Offsets vs. Fuel Efficiency

2008-06-17T14:33:00.001-05:00

A while back I posted a piece with my take on evaluating the cost of driving a highly fuel efficient car versus a normal car. For my evaluation, I utilized information for a Prius, a Ford Focus, and a Smart fortwo. I determined that, in my opinion, the Prius would not pay for itself in 3 years under normal driving costs and conditions. In fact, at $3.95/gallon gasoline and 20,000 miles per year of driving, the Focus proved to be almost $2000 dollars less expensive to own.

Today, I pulled up to a stoplight and saw a Prius in the lane next to me. I started thinking about whether or not the Prius was cost effective to own compared to my used, mid-sized sedan (probably not, since I only paid $13,300 for my car), when a thought hit me. The impact of owning the Prius is beyond the economic value. There is also an environmental impact in the reduced carbon-dioxide emissions. But, what if I decide to try and offset my carbon-dioxide emissions through the purchasing of credits? Would that make my car more expensive to own than the Prius?

First, I pulled up some information on what the emissions levels of cars are. Thanks to a handy-dandy spreadsheet calculator assembled for the Progressive Auto X-Prize contest (based on EPA GREET numbers), I determined that my car, at 25 miles per gallon, produces greenhouse gas equivalent to 101 pounds of CO2 per 100 miles driven. So, in a 20,000 mile year, I would produce approximately the equivalent of 20,200 pounds, or about 10.1 tons, of CO2.

Next, I went to Carbonfund.org to determine the cost of the necessary offsets to effectively neutralize my emissions. If you look at the auto calculator on their site, they sell carbon credits for $10 per ton of CO2. (Interestingly, they calculate emissions differently, so I would only have to offset 7.1 tons according to their calculator.)

So assuming my 10.1 tons of CO2 at $10 per ton, I would have to purchase $101 of offsets per year to completely neutralize my CO2 emissions from driving. A Prius would only reduce a little more than half of those emissions.

That makes my used 25 mpg car look like a great value!

Making Disciples and the Modern Church

2008-06-13T15:18:00.004-05:00

JD Walt's FARMStrong blog has an entry and request for discussion based upon a post on the Jesus Shaped Spirituality blog by Michael Spencer entitled "The Intentional Jesus Visits Your 40 Minute Worship Music Set". Mr. Spencer's intent was to make people think about worship music services as a form of discipleship in comparison to modeling our lives after Jesus.

I had a deep thought while pondering his post and my comment to JD's post. If we are to model our lives after Jesus, worship and praise are good things. Obviously we cannot claim to know Jesus's every inner thought, but we do have examples of him praying to God and quoting scripture praising God. I see no problem also using music as a method to express such praise.

However, if we are to follow the Great Commission to go and make disciples, and we want to pattern our works after Jesus, worship and praise music is not the correct form. Jesus made disciples by talking to and teaching people. Further, Jesus met people where they were, in the streets, on the shores, at dinner tables, etc. Yes, he taught in the temples at times, but that is not how he got his twelve disciples.

As I was thinking about "mega-church" styles of worship, my thought went even deeper. The massive Lakewood Church is across the street from my office (I can see it out my window). The church is known for modern, up-beat praise and worship music in its services. But I also realized that Joel Osteen's weekly television show places the emphasis on his teaching, not the music.

So Osteen has divided his ministry. He tends to his flock with worship music as a way to recharge their spirits. However, he makes new disciples through television with his words.

Regardless of what you think about his theology, in this light, Osteen's methodology seems quite appropriate.

Cars as Energy Sources?

2008-06-12T12:20:00.000-05:00

It seems recently that anytime anyone mentions the future of electric vehicles, or even plug-in hybrids, part of the discussion turns to using these vehicles to supply power to the electric grid.

The thought process goes like this:

Cars are plugged into the electric grid for charging
At night, when energy demand on the grid is low, the cars get charged
During peak energy demand, rather than starting up additional conventional power generation, the cars can offer the power back to the grid

Sounds great at the first pass. The cars batteries, though small individually, can reduce the cost of energy during peak hours by releasing en mass energy stored during off-peak demand. Everyone benefits - except the car owner.

Follow my logic here. If I purchase an electric car, and I plug my car in in the evening, by morning I expect my car to be fully charged. And it should be, as at night power is plentifully available.

So, in the morning, I unplug my car and drive to the office for a fun day at work. When I arrive, I plug my car back into the grid, so I can sell some power if needed. Peak demand roles around at 3:00 pm, and my car starts selling power for more that I paid to charge my batteries. Cash in my pocket. Woo-hoo!

Unfortunately, what happens when I leave work at 5:00 pm, and find that my car has sold all of its power to the grid and cannot drive me home? The logical solution would be that I have to program my car to maintain a reserve of power large enough for a one-way commute. The only problem is that if you ask the major auto manufacturers (Chevy, Toyota, etc.) about power capacity in their electric cars, they all say that battery technology can only get me 60-80 miles max on one charge. If I have driven to work, and I need a reserve to get back home, that leaves precious little energy (or little precious energy) to actually sell.

Plug-in hybrids hold a better solution, as they can at least drive me home on the engine if needed. Heck, in a real power crisis, they could even serve as stationary power generating systems plugged into the grid. But how expensive does power have to get for the driver to be willing to drive on gasoline instead of electricity? And either the car has to be smart enough to know what that price threshold is, or the driver has to be pretty smart himself. And that doesn't even take into account the production of green-house gases (cars are typically less efficient than stationary power generation). Seems like a complicated system that many would opt out of for fear of not really getting ahead in the end.

The Tesla electric vehicle company does have one proposed future solution. They are looking into the possibility of recycling electric car battery packs as - get this - battery packs. Their thought is that, while a drive needs a battery that can operate at or near full capacity to ensure a usage vehicle range, the electric company should be willing to take whatever they can get. When a car battery pack's performance drops so that it needs to be replaced in the car, it could still serve the energy industry soundly.

That, to me, sounds like someone who is actually thinking through a problem to find a real solution, not just propaganda!

The Updated Apple iPhone

2008-06-12T06:43:00.007-05:00

So far, I am sure that you have seen loads of information on the newly updated Apple iPhone. It will support new features such as 3G network speeds and GPS positioning. Plus, Apple is putting the final touches on a new application delivery system just for the iPhone so that individual developers can make tools for all the iPhone users. It seems pretty nice. Plus, Apple has reduced the pricing of the phone to make it more affordable (more later).

I wanted to include a couple of my thoughts on the iPhone.

Regarding the 3G network and the GPS positioning, these are things that should have been included in the first version of the phone. I am not sure why Apple left them out to start with. After all, neither of these are new technologies. So, yes, they are improvements in the iPhone, but they are really only getting the phone up to where it needs to be.

The new App Store, as Apple calls it, is a great idea. It looks like it will be similar to the stores that many cellular carriers have already, but looks as though Apple will be much more open regarding who can post and what can be posted. That should be nice. In the end, though, the real test will be how many useful applications actually are developed and how expensive they are. I know that I can download a lot of games and tools for my cell phone now, but I don't want to pay the $3 to $5 per month for something I rarely use. If Apple prices really are $5 to $10 one-time charges, that could be very nice.

The price drop is another interesting issue. In the US, the iPhone now starts at $199, but you are required to activate it at the point of purchase and sign a two year contract with AT&T (still the exclusive carrier). But the rate plan on AT&T also went up in price, so the savings is at best a wash, probably costing you a little more over the life of the contract.

In other parts of the world, I am not sure how the reduced pricing will work. It sounds like Apple has required all carriers to match the $199 price, but in Europe and Asia, most phones are sold without a long term contract. I do not know how these two opposing facts will co-exist. Guess we will wait and see.

Overall, I am still only moderately impressed with the iPhone. Yes, it has a slick interface. Yes, the Apple software is likely to be far more user-friendly than what most competitors can make available (at least currently). But realistically, the only distinguishing features are the touchscreen and the large amount (in phone terms) of memory. Of course, most people I know either have considerably less than 32 GB of music they regularly carry, or they want a hard-drive based player with 80+ GB.

In my opinion, I do not see myself buying the iPhone. Not because I think there is a better phone out there. I am not sure there is (now). But mainly because I do not use a cell phone enough to justify the cost. This device just does not make me want to jump up and run to the store. But I am sure that Apple will sell a ton of them, and that they will make a nice profit doing so.

Now if they just weren't losing a month of sales for some reason...

On Defining Worship

2008-06-11T10:40:00.000-05:00

JD Walt, the Vice President of Community Life and Dean of the Chapel at Asbury Theological Seminary, has been posting recently on his FARMStrong blog about the deeper meaning of Christian worship. I wanted to make a comment on his most recent post "Marcus Green weighs in on 'Defining Worship'," and it started to become too long, so I am posting my thoughts here instead. Check out his posts and the thought provoking comments to them all if you want to do your own deep thinking!

The question was originally posed as "what is the job description of a worship leader." Discussion soon moved to the defining worship, as common definitions frequently play on the idea of response and submission to God. But this was also set against the Trinity, and what role each part plays in a worship service. JD tagged onto a quote from James Torrance for this:

"Worship is the gift of participating by the power of the Spirit in the incarnate Son's communion with the Father."

This sparked further discussion as to the exact role of the spirit in worship, i. e. the Spirit as a medium to the Father (no pun intended) and the Spirit as God's indwelling in the worshipper.

I personally thought it was summed up nicely in another quote from Torrance:

"It is he [Jesus] who leads our worship, bears our sorrows on his heart and intercedes for us, presenting us to the Father in himself as God's dear children, and uniting us with himself in his life in the Spirit."

So, yesterday, JD further stirred the pot with the response from Marcus Green that took a different tack on defining worship, and that it defining worship as Jesus himself would have done. He discusses how to a First Century Jew, worship was deeply intertwined with the idea of sacrifice, and that this concept may be lacking in modern worship.

I am led to two thoughts on this sense of sacrifice in worship. First, is the fact that we have the ultimate sacrifice to celebrate in worship: Jesus. As Torrance said (continuing from the previous quotation):

"...God has already provided for us that response which alone is acceptable to him--the offering made for the whole human race in the life, obedience and passion of Jesus Christ."

I look at this sacrifice in similar fashion to the way I look at the Jewish Passover - Jesus came and gave us a new covenant, the covenant of his blood. We are freed from the old practices so that we can celebrate the new. So I see a paradigm shift required in the idea of sacrifice as worship. We no longer bring our finest animals and best grain to give to God. Jesus settled the debt we have with God. His was the ultimate sacrifice, anything additional we can physically give would be relatively meaningless.

The result of this, though, leads directly to my second thought on sacrifice in worship. I think it was best summed by Paul, "For I am crucified with Christ." If we are to truly worship God, we must accept the Holy Spirit into our lives. And that true acceptance means also acknowledging that we, as humans, do not know the plan or the future for the world (although we have an idea of the ultimate end result). We accept the Holy Spirit to guide us, trusting that regardless of what we encounter on the way, God will not lead us astray from His bigger picture. We give our lives to God and believe that, even if it costs us physically, God will reward our obedience. That is our sacrifice!

Where the previous discussion was centered around submission versus communion with the Holy Spirit, I propose that the correct answer is not the dichotomy of the two, but instead their union. We welcome the Holy Spirit to bring us to Jesus and the Father. To fully do so, we must submit to the Holy Spirit and thereby God.

To complete the circle, this leads me back to the job description of the worship leader. The job of the worship leader then has to include joyfully reminding and reinforcing that we, the worshippers, are the sacrifice to God. We come to worship to dedicating our entire being to God, not just for the hour or so we are in worship, but for all of our life. And our weekly church worship service is our rededication to that effort!

No that's not a big goal, is it?

Detroit Profitability

2008-06-04T07:33:00.004-05:00

Recently, I have seen several articles predicting the worst for Ford, GM, and Chrysler because of the swing away from trucks and SUV's. Analysts all fear that the Detroit automakers will lose sales due to a lack of product in the near future, while the longer term is just as bleak because Detroit has historically made all its profits on big vehicles.

I agree completely with the short term concerns. Ford has started to turn the corner with the new Focus. It seems to be getting very good reviews, and my impression is that it is leading the American compact car market (for what that is worth). GM has a good selection of mid-size sedans, although even their star, the Malibu, has some interesting quirks that would make me think seriously before buying one (the trunk opening being a big issue because it is not actually big). Chrysler is, unfortunately, at least one model generation away from competing seriously in the small and mid-sized car game.

But in the long term, I have less of a concern for automakers. Yes, recently these small cars have not been profitable for automakers, especially American automakers. However, I predict that the profitability of small cars is about to change.

The reason I make this statement is because the buyers of small cars are changing. In the past, no one in America wanted to buy a compact or mid-sized car if they could afford the big SUV. Truck and SUV sales went through the roof precisely because gas was relatively cheap. Now, quite suddenly, Americans are faced with decidedly more expensive gasoline.

These buyers, who had previously purchased $20k-30k SUV's, are now looking at smaller cars. If they can find a small car that helps insulate them from swings in the gas prices, they can still afford to spend the same $20k-30k for the vehicle. What would a $30k Ford Focus look like? No one knows. It tops out well under that mark.

But knowing that car buyers are looking at smaller cars, manufacturers can start to load on accessories and options that will raise the average sales price of the cars. And on these small cars, the options are where the profit is found.

That is why Detroit historically made little money on small cars. The cars were mediocre in what they did, and no one who could afford better bought one. The average sale was near the low end of the option list. Because these cars turned little profit, Detroit invested little in updating these cars. The cars continued to be mediocre, sales continued to suffer, no profit was made, and on, and on. Detroit helped perpetuate this cycle that brought the American small car to an "also-ran" status on dealer lots.

Now that the size of the car is an advantage in the buyer's mind, and as the base level cars are getting better, more people will consider buying the top level of these cars. Hence, the small car makes more profit for the automakers. Kudos to Ford, by the way, for having the fore-sight to offer a Focus with options such as leather seating. While the Focus doesn't give BMW or Lexus night-sweats, it is a big step in the right direction for Ford.

So, are Detroit automakers safe? Definitely not, and getting there won't be easy. Small cars are going to have to get good gas mileage, be fun to drive and still pamper the driver and passengers. But at least there is a light at the end of the small car tunnel. Who can make it that far, though, remains to be seen.

Singing in Church - Traditional vs. Contemporary

2008-05-29T13:33:00.001-05:00

I saw a post from Richard Heyduck on his Bandits No More blog entitled "Singing with all your heart." He is discussing how different attitudes taken while singing hymns affect the understanding of the hymn for both the singer and the listener.

This reminds me of something I once heard a woman say. She was a member of the traditional choir at a Methodist Church*. She was complaining about the music sung by her churches contemporary worship group. She then referred to the music as "7-11 songs: you sing the same seven words eleven times."

As Richard Heyduck points out in his post, Methodists tend to have incredible theology in their music. But I know that I miss a lot of that theology when I try to sing along with my church's traditional choir. I was not raised Methodist, and I regularly encounter hymns with which I am not accustomed. As I attempt to get the lyrics and music from the hymnal into my head fast enough to sing, my mind is no more processing the words for meaning than I am processing the hymnal for nutrition. Everything flows through so fast, I completely neglect any "understanding".

I see the attraction of those so called "7-11 songs." If I encounter a new song and I can either sing 77 words one time through or 7 words eleven times through, isn't it better to sing the 7 words repeatedly so that I can learn them, understand them, digest them, and then let my heart sing them before the end of the song?

Please understand that I am not trying to put down the wonderful theological hymns that are strong in the Methodist tradition. Charles Wesley was a genius when it came to song lyrics. But I find his music is best appreciated when studied prior to singing. Unfortunately, I have never been to a church that allows this to happen. The fact that people fail to understand what they are singing is a shame.

Perhaps it is not a surprise that many churches with contemporary worship styles are growing faster than traditional churches (of which many are seeing negative growth).

Now if I only knew how to solve this dilemma...

_______________________

* Not the church I currently attend, and I do not know who this woman was.

Car Comparison - What Really Matters!

2008-05-29T09:36:00.005-05:00

Today, CCNMoney.com has a car comparison entitled "Fuel-sipper smackdown" on their Autos page of their website. Edmunds.com conducted the test to compare the "real-world" fuel economy of four vehicles to see how each performed. The vehicles chosen were the Ford Focus (to represent the compact market), the Smart Fortwo (to represent ultra-compacts), the Jetta TDI (2005 model, to represent the diesels), and the Toyota Prius (to represent the hybrids). Each vehicle was driven 676 miles through varying traffic situations to test the over-all fuel efficiency.

They placed the Prius in first place at 47.7 mpg average, then the Jetta at 43.8 mpg, the ForTwo at 40.0 mpg, and the Focus last at 33.3 mpg.

But I wanted to know how the actual costs would compare over a typical vehicle life. And I wanted to include the purchase price of the vehicle, which Edmunds ignored. So I whipped out my trusty Excel spreadsheet and went to work. Note that I dropped the Jetta from the comparisons, since it (1) is not currently available, so pricing would be a guess; and (2) trying to include the cost of diesel would add another independent variable, making accurate comparisons extremely difficult.

I used the price-points provided by Edmunds as shown on the CNNMoney.com website, except for the Focus, which I increased the the higher price-point so that the equipment level would essentially match the more expensive Prius. I determined the price from the FordVehicles. com website and did not include available incentives. The prices ended up at:

For the comparisons, I also assumed that the average transaction price would be between these points, so I included an Average price that is just that, the average of the Low and High prices.

To start comparing, I used the current retail gas price ($3.95 national average) and assumed the theoretical average annual usage of 12,000 miles per year. Purchase price plus fuel price for 3 years of driving equated to:The ForTwo is the obvious winner across all price points. The Focus is a strong second.

Next, I tested what would happen if you averaged 20,000 miles per year for 3 years, again at $3.95 per gallon.

As expected, the ForTwo is still the least expensive to own. The Prius has closed the gap some with the Focus, but is still a good bit more expensive.

Finally, I decided to determine the "break-even" point between the high priced Focus and the high priced Prius (since the ForTwo is a considerably different vehicle). Again, based on three years of ownership, the break-even point with varying usage is graphed as:

So, the more you drive, the more cost effective the Prius becomes. Additionally, the higher the gas price, the more cost effective the Prius is. But, if you average 20,000 miles per year, the cost of gas would have to average $7.41 over the next three years for the ownership cost of the Prius and Focus to be the same.

If you assume 100,000 total miles driven, the break-even gas price is $4.44.

So, if you feel safe in the ForTwo and you only need two seats, go for it. The value is there! If you need four seats, though, carefully consider usage and what you think the future cost of gas is going to be (I am not getting into prognosticating now) before running out and getting the hybrid. The Focus may be the more cost-effective vehicle for you!

Can Car Makers get to 35 MPG Average?

2008-05-21T13:32:00.001-05:00

Most people are aware that Congress has mandated that the EPA increase Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements to 35 miles per gallon. This has caused great concern from car aficionados who are all predicting the end of fun behind the wheel of a car.

Most people look at 35 mpg and preach that the only way to get there is to make smaller, lighter, less powerful vehicles. I am starting to wonder if that is really the case. Take, for example, the Toyota Camry Hybrid. While it doesn't get 35 mpg average yet, it is getting relatively close. Future improvements could easily make this car get 35 mpg without significant changes.

Combine the Camry Hybrid with the Prius, a modified Corolla, and some more efficient trucks, and 35 mpg doesn't look that absurd. More expensive, perhaps, but that is a different topic.

Of course, few car companies are as close as Toyota to 35 mpg. But at least it shows that the technology is not entirely science fiction.

Now for the real humdinger to be thrown into the CAFE calculations - plug-in vehicles. I use the term "plug-in" because the issue is the same for plug-in hybrids as well as full electric vehicles. How do you calculate a "mpg" number for something that doesn't use the "g" part of it?

To show how this confusion is already happening, there are people who are claiming to get 200 mpg out of a modified Prius. What are they doing? They are increasing the battery storage capacity and charging the batteries at their house from the electric grid. They then can drive considerable distances without having the engine even start (as long as they stay under the maximum electric speed of the Prius). When the engine does finally start, they are almost back home. They have therefore generated a 200 mpg number.

But is it really 200 mpg? No. They aren't including the power used to charge the batteries in their calculations.

And if the car is entirely electric, you would get infinite miles per gallon. Just try to plug that into your CAFE average!

So, perhaps a more realistic calculation should be based upon CO2 per mile. Of course, the CO2 produced to generate a kW of electricity varies between regions of the country, so this number would have to be specified by the EPA. But at least we would not be trying to average apples and oranges!

Is Chrysler's Gas Price Cap Worth It?

2008-05-21T10:53:00.001-05:00

You have all probably seen by now the ads and marketing around Chrysler's newest promotion: Buy a car, and get a guaranteed maximum gas price of $2.99 for the next three years.

When you first hear it, it sounds pretty appealing. But is it really a good deal? As in all things, that depends.

If you are looking to buy a car, you could get a Chrysler 300. For the sake of argument, let's say you want the power and get the Hemi V-8. You would get a combined 17 miles per gallon according to Chrysler. The Chrysler program limits you to 12,000 miles per year, so you could purchase 2118 gallons at $2.99 under the deal.

Assuming that gas averages $4.00 per gallon over the three years, you would have saved $2139 dollars. Because the savings is spread over three years, you also need to determine what the savings is worth to you today. Assuming a 5% discount rate per year, the value of the savings is approximately $1990.

So, to decide if you are getting a good deal, you would first have to decide if the $1990 discount means that you are getting a good deal on the car. And that, my friends, is an entirely personal decision.

So, what do you think??

Is Apple a More Expensive Computer

2008-05-20T13:08:00.007-05:00

It always seems that there is a debate between those who like Apple computers and those who do not as to whether or not an Apple is more expensive that competitors Windows-based machines.

This week the debate was enraged again when an on-line report (blog) claimed that Apple has 66% of the "premium" computer market, which is supposed to mean $1000+ priced machines.

Today I decided to do some research and try to settle this, at least in my mind. In the interest of time, I limited myself to two Mac models, a Macbook and a Macbook Pro.

The data I present below is based upon what I was able to find on-line. I have referenced enough information that I think you could duplicate this research also.

The Macbook Data:

Brand	Apple	Gateway	HP	HP
Model	Macbook	_	dv2845e	dv2890nr
Processor	2.1 GHz (Intel)	2.0 GHz (AMD)	2.1 GHz (AMD)	1.83 GHz (Intel)
RAM	2 GB	3 GB	4 GB	3 GB
HD	120 GB	250 GB	250 GB	250 GB
Optical Drive	DVD-R/CD-RW	DVD-RW	DVD-RW	DVD-RW
Screen	13.3"	14.1"	14.1"	14.1"
USB Ports	2	3	3	2
Firewire	1	0	1	1
Price	$1099	$699	$899	$999
Source	Apple Store	Best Buy	Best Buy	Best Buy

To summarize, the Macbook has a better process and Bluetooth, but a smaller screen. Every other specification looks to be as good or better in the competition, including the availability of a memory card reader. The one exception may be the video card, as that data is a little harder to determine with what is quickly available on-line.

The Macbook Pro Data (step 1):

Brand	Apple	Dell	HP	Dell
Model	Macbook Pro	X1730B8124	HDX9010NR	XPS 1730
Processor	2.5 GHz (Intel)	2.2 GHz (AMD)	2.2 GHz (AMD)	2.4 GHz (Intel)
RAM	2 GB	2 GB	2 GB	4 GB
HD	250 GB	250 GB	240 GB	320 GB
Optical Drive	DVD-RW	DVD-RW	DVD-RW	DVD-RW
Screen	17"	17"	20.1"	17"
USB Ports	3	4	4	4
Firewire	1	1	1	1
Price	$2799	$2499	$2349	$2399
Source	Apple Store	Best Buy	Best Buy	Dell

This is the data from readily available "stock" systems. Still the Mac is the most expensive, but it also had the fastest processor (but not necessarily the biggest screen!). Again, I think that the Macbook Pro has the best video card from what I could tell.

To get closer, I went a step further.

The Macbook Pro Data (step 2):

Brand	Apple	Dell
Model	Macbook Pro	XPS 1730
Processor	2.5 GHz (Intel)	2.5 GHz (Intel)
RAM	2 GB	2 GB
HD	250 GB	250 GB
Optical Drive	DVD-RW	DVD-RW
Screen	17"	17"
USB Ports	3	4
Firewire	1	1
Price	$2799	$2674
Source	Apple Store	Dell

These are essentially identical machines except for three factors. First, the Dell has the higher screen resolution. Secondly, they have difference NVidia graphics cards, but the same memory on each. The Dell has the higher NVidia model number, for what it is worth. The third difference is that the Dell has a higher RPM hard drive (the only way to get 250 GB).

So, is the Mac more expensive? Looks that way to me!

Small Car Madness?

2008-05-13T14:56:00.001-05:00

By now I imagine most people have seen a Smart fortwo car. I know that I have seen several, both on the road and in parking lots and driveways. Not that they are taking over the world, by my estimation, but they are certainly visible.

And just about all the major manufacturers are looking to get into the compact/subcompact market. Of course BMW owns Mini. Nissan has already released the Versa and is preparing a box version called the Cube, similar to the Scion xB. Scion, for its part, has the aforementioned xB and the new xD, while parent Toyota is displaying the iQ, an even smaller car which I wouldn't be surprised to see marketed as a Scion if it comes to the US. Honda has the Fit. Ford and Chevy are both working on subcompacts to be sold in the US. Volkswagen is working on a new subcompact called the Up!, which will be smaller than the Rabbit and will be rear-engine, but it may not make it to the US. Even Audi is working on a subcompact called the A1 for Europe.

But I was wondering what others thought of the potential for the small car market in the US. I know that I had the pleasure this weekend of renting a Volkswagen Rabbit and thoroughly enjoyed driving it. It was comfortable, had plenty of power, and got at least 30 mpg by my estimation. But even that won't cut it with a government mandated 35 mpg manufacturer fleet average.

Of course the Rabbit also looks like a behemoth next to a fortwo, and I don't know that I want to go too much smaller than a Rabbit. And I want a backseat for my daughter, so the fortwo is out on that account as well.

So, how small would you, the reader, be willing to go? Leave a comment and let folks know!

JAy.

Exposed: 2009 Toyota Prius??

2008-05-07T12:11:00.003-05:00

Road and Track today has released what it claims are spy photos of the upcoming 2009 Toyota Prius. These would be the first such photos to hit the Internet, I think.

The accompanying article has some interesting information on the power train, but is a little vague on the exterior. But looking at the photos, I noticed a couple interesting things:

The front end is shown with projector headlights. Don't know if this is standard or an option, but it is definitely new.
The front end also has a lot of tape on it to disguise the car, but if you look at the resulting surface, it appears that there is a new grill under there. Looks to be similar to the new Camry. This is interesting because that would mean that there is additional open area for the grill, which typically hurts aerodynamics. Perhaps the top of the grill is a fake opening to make the Prius match the company form. Or, more outlandish of a guess, this is the first power adjusting grill to hit the market. This grill could essentially open and close to allow the required amount of air into the engine bay, but no more, thereby continuously optimizing the requirements for operation and aerodynamics.
The profile looks remarkably similar. Road and Track comments about a more steeply raked windshield. Not sure I see it in these photos.
The rear of the car is an interesting shot. The rear bumper cover appears to be riveted together. Possibly, this is to help hide a change in width of the car by splicing together bumper covers from the existing version. Road and Track states that the car will be longer, so maybe wider too?
The most interesting thing to me is the shot of the full rear. If you look above the rear window, it appears that Toyota has taped the roof. I see two possible explanations. First would be a glass roof to give passengers a look at the open sky. The other is solar cells. Several companies have talked about including solar cells on the roofs of cars to help power auxiliary devices and further save fuel. I know of one small car company that is ready to produce this idea. Maybe Toyota is too?

Finally, a little humor from the spy photos. Notice in the full front-end shot, there is a passenger in the front seat apparently taking a picture of the photographer taking pictures of the car! Guess that's the Toyota paparazzi!

Now to wait for the final version to be revealed later this year!

God Bless,
JAy.

Belief vs. Faith - A Wrap Up

2008-05-06T13:45:00.004-05:00

OK. So I spent some time in recent posts discussing the issues of belief vs. faith. As I mentioned, the reason that I started these was my current "call" from my own faith. I feel like I need to do more to serve God, and so I started writing down my own thoughts on the topic.

Basically, I argue that belief in God is not good enough for salvation. Faith goes beyond belief and carries the faithful into God's love.

As a way to wrap this up, I first want to reference a post on the Everyday Theology blog entitled "More Thoughts on Conversion". This post discusses the issues of stress leading to conversion, as well as following up the conversion with faith.

I believe that part of the reason we see people have "conversions" and then go back to the life the lived previously is because we, especially Americans, live in a society that celebrates the individual. For example, the companies Apple and Microsoft aren't seen as thousands of people toiling to bring a better computer product to the market. Instead, when people think of Apple and Microsoft, they see Steve Jobs and Bill Gates (even though Gates isn't involved in the day to day operation of Microsoft anymore).

People are told from the time they are children that they can do anything they want. My elementary school motto growing up was "Every child a winner." I guess they wanted to encourage each student to develop their full potential. But that won't make the child a winner, at least not all the children all of the time.

I have heard of schools doing away with levels in classes because they don't want students to think that they aren't smart enough or good enough. However, in doing so you end up with smarter students who are bored and uninterested in school and less intelligent students who still struggle to keep pace. In the end, no one really learns well.

I think that the application to a person's faith is encountered when we see people who only want to call on God when they are in trouble. It is in a time of weakness that we decide we want God to help, but once we get through the tough times, we are convinced that we can go it alone again.

But that is not what the Bible calls out for us, and it is not what God wants for our lives. God wants us to be continually dependent on Him. He wants us to ask for everything and remember that everything we have comes from Him. As for doing things for ourselves, if we consider that God made us, even the fruits of our labor are not our own, because God gave us the ability to labor.

So, if we want people to be strengthened in the faith, perhaps we first have show them their weakness. If we can show people that their lives can be better through God and that they can achieve real fulfillment through God, maybe we can get people past just believing.

Belief vs. Faith: Part 4 - Paul vs. James - Salvation, Grace, Faith, and Works

2008-05-01T19:54:00.001-05:00

As I continue my discussion of Faith and Belief (see the archive for previous posts), I today address what Faith means to Christians in our everyday life. To introduce the discussion, I will use two Bible texts, one by Paul and one by James. First Paul:

"Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." (Rom 5:1, NRSV)

And the James:

"What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? ... So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead." (James 2:14,17, NRSV)

We see here two seemingly divisive discussions regarding salvation and entry to heaven. The quote from Paul is the basis of the Reformation. Luther stressed "Faith alone" was required for salvation. James is the basis for the typically Roman Catholic belief in the importance of works.

Thankfully, this was an issue that I cleared in my mind many years ago. Ironically, the belief to which I was led is the typical Wesleyan/Methodist belief that Paul and James can exist very easily together. I say that this is ironic, because at the time I was attending a Lutheran church.

My preacher at that time described the co-existence of Paul and James as "Justification by Grace through Faith as shown in Works," thus combining the typical faith and works argument into one statement regarding salvation.

To break down, in case anyone is still a little lost, this philosophy does not take argument with Luther's "Faith Alone" ideals. We are saved by Grace when we accept Jesus in Faith. This salvation is not the work of our hands, and nothing we do on earth can grant us eternal salvation except for our faith. However, if we stop at the mental acceptance of Christ, have we gone far enough? Not according to James. Why? Because if we profess Faith, but do not love our neighbor as our selves, much less as Jesus loved us, do we have real faith? How can we profess to love God and Jesus and then turn and ignore Jesus' new commandment for us? We cannot.

James's point is not that our works grant us salvation, but that salvation grants us good works. True Faith makes us want to do good deeds. Accepting God's love makes us want to Love our neighbor.

But salvation is not based upon a scorecard. We cannot earn Heaven. We can only accept Heaven and allow the Spirit to work within us. However, doing so completely will make us change the way we live. The Spirit will lead us to love our neighbors. Thus our works show that our Faith is not dead as James warns.

Interestingly, this also leads to Paul's statement of being "crucified with Christ." But that is another topic. Perhaps I will cover it later!

God Bless,

JAy.

Belief vs. Faith: Part 3 - Faith: In God We Trust?

2008-04-28T11:56:00.004-05:00

The next installment of my series. The previous posts can be found in the archive (to the right).

*********************************

As I continue to ponder how my faith impacts my life, I would like to pose the following question:

If we have faith in God, how do we trust him?

This comes to my attention from several discussions and observations I have had recently. Two of these are related to health. In both cases, parents have a firm belief that God will heal their children of birth defects. That is their faith speaking.

But the Bible does not promise an earthly life without pain and difficulty, or even poor health. More realistically, God promises the strength to get through the tough times, provided we put our faith and trust in Him.

In a similar vain, I heard a radio host say, "Belief is knowing God can heal; Faith is knowing God will heal."

But, if we believe God will heal us, or our children, or do anything else we would like, I see two issues. The first is that we are told, "Do not test the Lord your God." Is it a test of God to pray for healing, and not accepting anything else as a possibility? Even if we do not pray explicitly that we trust God will change our situation or our faith will be weakened, is it implicit in the request?

Second, how does one reconcile the expectation of healing with allowing the will of God? I once heard the mnemonic "PRAY" for remembering how to pray. The "Y" stands for "Yield". It is to remind us that, as in the Lord's Prayer, "Thy will be done." We cannot force the will of God. We can only ask that our needs be considered and that His grace guide us through whatever is to come.

Likewise I read a pastor commenting that his church couldn't be truly evangelical because his attendance would drop to 1/3 and his funding would become too little to continue operations. But doesn't having Faith in God mean that we have to trust God to do the work he has laid before us, and let him take care of the rest? If we are to act our the Great Commission in our lives, shouldn't that take precedent over our concerns for our own well-being, or that of a church congregation? Now I agree that starting a new church, as I believe this Pastor was doing, is very difficult. And if his church is a member of a larger denomination, the denomination should step in to help this church get going. But that doesn't change that the Great Commission means we should be stepping out towards everyone, proclaiming the Good News whenever we have the chance.

Of course, I appear to have just laid out two opposing arguments on faith and trusting God. One says that we cannot expect God to do what is important to us, the other says that we have to trust God to do what we need. The difference in my mind is that of doing God's will. If we are lead by God to start a new church, we must do all that we can to be faithful to God, thereby doing God's will. Asking for healing is our request for God, not the other way around.

As a closing, I present an example of doing God's will and accepting what He places in front of us: the life of Horatio Spafford, the hymnist who penned "It is Well with My Soul." In the course of a few years, he lost considerable fortunes in the Great Chicago Fire, lost his son, and lost four daughters in a naval accident. He then wrote "It is Well with My Soul." He trusted God with his life, and things didn't always work as he would have wished. But he never lost his faith.

So, have I utterly over-simplified things? Am I weak in my faith, and therefore cannot see why others expect their prayers to be answered? Or am I misunderstanding, and these parents will accept the eternal healing which we are all promised upon being called to heaven?

Let me know your thoughts on this. I by no means profess to have the answers!

God Bless,
JAy.

Belief vs. Faith: Part 2 - Believer: The Christian Misnomer

2008-04-23T12:40:00.001-05:00

Continuing in my posts on Belief vs. Faith. Check out the previous ones (here and here) if you want to catch up!

*********************************

Most churches in this day and age use the term "Believer" in some fashion. It may be when referring to church members, the deceased, or even individuals who present themselves for membership. I agree that Christians need to be "Believers".

But I also think that Christians need to use considerable caution when using the term "believer". Believing in God and Christ does not make someone a Christian (see Part 1). There are plenty of agnostics in the world. Most of them have some level of belief. But are they true Christians? A believer is merely someone who accepts a hypothesis as truth. This does not, however, mean that the person attaches themselves to this belief in a concrete manner.

But I think that Christians would agree that we are explicitly called to connect to ourselves to Christ. The Bible uses the imagery of Christ knocking on our door. Our belief allows us to hear the knock. Faith makes us open the door and accept salvation. Once a person admits Christ and the Holy Spirit into their lives, they become a Christian in the truest sense.

Perhaps this distinction, or lack thereof, among Christians is what has led to a fairly common issue the church in general faces. I have heard reported that Gandhi was once asked if he believed in Christ, and his response was along the lines of, "I think that I would become a follow of Christ if not for the Christians."

Likewise, I recently heard an interview with Chris Sligh, a Christian recording artist and former American Idol contestant, where he recollected a conversation with Blake Lewis, a fellow American Idol contestant, where Lewis described Sligh as the first Christian he had met whom he respected.

Understand, I am not recommending that we start "testing" potential church members to prove they are Christians. We as Christians are not tasked with judging others' worthiness for salvation. That is God's task. We are merely instructed to "love one another as I [Christ] have loved you." (As if that is a "mere" task.)

But if we all take this task a little more seriously and commit ourselves to letting our faith shape our lives, perhaps we can let the world see that we aren't just "Believers," but we are actually people of faith.

God Bless,

JAy.

Belief vs. Faith: Part 1 - Believer Better than a Demon?

2008-04-21T12:51:00.004-05:00

I want to write a series of posts about some of the thoughts I have had recently as I consider "Belief" and "Faith". Hope you check them all out.

*********************************

So, as I have been thinking about Belief vs. Faith, I stumbled upon a radio show a couple weeks ago where the topic was this exact one. They were heading a little different direction, and I am not sure that I agree with everything that was said. However, they hit upon one thing that really struck home.

People like to say that they believe in Jesus. I do to. But does that make any of us saved? Making your belief known in public is regularly regarded as necessary for salvation (the "public profession"). But was does belief alone grant you?

It turns out, the answer to that is "Nothing". The demons are said to "quake" at the mere mention of Jesus' name. Why do the demons quake? Because they know the power that Jesus and God have over the entire universe. The fear because they believe in Jesus.

And further, all of creation knows the truth about God and Jesus. After all, the mountains will bow down before Him. And if humans fail to praise God, the rocks will cry out to fill the silence.

So, if you say that you believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, where do you stand with God? They are two independent questions.

Belief alone, after all, makes you no better than the demons!

Belief vs. Faith: The Introduction

2008-04-18T14:00:00.006-05:00

I want to write a series of posts about some of the thoughts I have had recently as I consider "Belief" and "Faith". Hope you check them all out.

*********************************

I have always considered myself a Christian. I have always believed the Apostles' Creed. God created the world and mankind. Christ was born of the Holy Spirit and died to pay the price for my sins. Christ was resurrected from the dead so that humans may not be bound to the finality of death. The Holy Spirit has been sent to help guide and support Christians in their lives here on earth. At God's appointed time, Christians will be called forth to join Christ in Heaven.

But I guess I started thinking about what my "belief" means when I encountered Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Life. In the introduction, he presents God's judgement as being asked two questions. They are (1) "Did you know Jesus?", and (2) "What did you do about it?"

The answer to the first question is relatively easy for pretty much anyone who attends church. We have been presented with Christ, and most of us would say that we know Him.

It is the second question, for me, that has all the thorns, so to speak. Simply put, knowing Jesus isn't enough. Believing the story of Jesus isn't going to get you, or me, into Heaven.

So here is the summary of my posts that I want to write in this series:

Believer: Better than a Demon?
Believer: The Christian Misnomer
Faith: In God We Trust?
Paul vs. James - Salvation, Grace, Faith, and Works

Hope that doesn't give it away too much of what is to come.

I would offer this as a summary for this post: I now consider "Belief" to be an intellectual activity; "Faith" is a physical activity.

Check back for more later!

National Cell Phone Emergency Alerts

2008-04-11T09:05:00.001-05:00

I read today that the FCC is close to making a formal proposal to cell phone carriers for a nation-wide emergency alert system using cellular phones. The system is reported to operate via the text message functionality of the phones. Alerts would be sent for events such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, child abductions/amber alerts, etc.

Apparently this concept was born from the September 11 terrorist attacks. So, we have an emergency situation. The FCC recognizes the need to communicate rapidly with citizens, and recognizes a tool to do so. Seven years later, we get steps towards implementation.

Comparatively, the Lonestar chapter of the National MS Society has offered text message updates for their MS150 bicycle rides for a couple years now. There are companies who have software that makes this type of system essentially automatic (just massive forwarding systems, like an e-mail list-serve for text messages). For that matter, the cell phone companies can work from e-mail to text message if the user signs up for it (I have already), so an e-mail list serve could be implemented as such.

But our government takes years to try and implement this, and the cost will most likely be tens-of-millions of dollars between the government and cell carriers. How does that speak to government efficiency?

One final interesting thought: some of the messages would be from the President. Ever heard a politician limited to 155 characters, as most text messages are? Yeah, that ought to be interesting.

Politics and Faith - How do they relate?

2008-04-04T13:11:00.000-05:00

A while back I wrote to discuss some of my thoughts regarding politics and how it was influencing my thoughts and opinions for the Presidential primaries.

Today, I read a quote from Tony Blair that I also thought was interesting:

"If you are someone of faith, there is no conceivable way that it wouldn't affect your politics."

I couldn't agree more!

Ford's New Taxi - An Interesting Foundation

2008-04-01T11:18:00.003-05:00

Some of you may have seen the new taxi cab shown by Ford at the New York Auto Show. It is an interesting concept - essentially a tall van that was designed to meet the particular needs of taxi service. It offers similar seating capacity to the Crown Victoria, a taxi cab standard, while also providing a cargo area in the back that is probably easier to use (lower lift-in height, more flexibility).

What was most surprising to me was that the vehicle platform modified for this service was actually the European Focus small car.

For years, critics and analysts have pondered why Ford has two Focus platforms, one for the US and one for Europe. Additionally, the European focus is generally considered to be a much better vehicle. But Ford has always said that the investment required to re-tool an American plant to produce the European Focus would be too substantial to be supported by the small car platform. Hence, every iteration of the American Focus is simply a derivative of the previous one.

But could this new Taxi be a sign of things to come? If Ford actually brings this vehicle to production (which everything I have read is pointing positively about), does that mean that we in the States might finally get the European Focus also? More vehicles off of one platform would spread the cost of implementing the manufacturing process. Plus, I would be surprised if the European production line, as it sits now, is capable of producing a vehicle as tall as the taxi concept.

All Americans who drive small cars (or are considering small cars thanks to the threat of $4 gas) should be excitedly watching the horizon. Perhaps an interesting small car is out there for us!

Weak Stomachs at NYTimes?

2008-03-24T08:33:00.001-05:00

I notice an article on CCNMoney this morning entitled, "PageSix.com shuts down". Apparently, the NY Times gossip website has been taken off-line a mere three months after it was started. The reason, according to the article, is that there was too much competition from other, more established sites such as TMZ.com.

It seems to me that if you are investing in a new website for which you know ahead of time that there is competition, you have to give more than a few months for your site to make some strides into the market. The only reason to close it this fast is because you were getting very few visitors (an advertising issue) and those that did come weren't staying (a content issue). "Competition" points to the first issue, unless those in charge were just being nice.

Even still, a website with 21 employees (according to CNNMoney's article) can't be that big a drain on the coffers of the New York Times. Seems like if you think that this site is worth investing in to start with, you could stick with it a little while. Only giving a site like this one quarter to win viewers and make some money just isn't worth the effort to start it up.

Celebrating Good Friday - Part 3

2008-03-21T12:16:00.005-05:00

OK, my first two post regarding how to approach the celebration of Good Friday (1 and 2) had covered where I thought I had reached a good position. My mind was calm.

Then I thought that I should look to see if there were any notes included in the choir score for our church's "Tenebrae" service. The notes include:

As the candles are extinguished, they symbolize the fading loyalty of the disciples and friends of Jesus. The gradual darkening of the church portrays the diminishing light of the world as Christ was departing from it.

Then I also decided to talk with my wife, a very knowledgeable and well-educated woman. She added that the sorrow often dedicated to Good Friday should include the fact that Jesus suffered greatly for us, and we should make an effort to understand and feel some of that suffering ourselves.

So I guess now I need to combine everything into one thought process for me to fully experience my celebration. To sum it up:

We should be sorrowful because mankind (and ourselves at times) turned on Jesus and made him suffer without merit.
We should try to relate to the feelings of abandonment that Jesus felt on the cross, even abandonment by God.
However, we should walk away hopeful at the same time, because we know that there is a celebration planned for Sunday. And we know that God didn't abandon Jesus (after all, the sky turned black and the earth trembled upon Jesus' death), and he won't abandon us either.

Still, these are conflicting emotions. I guess that the knowledge of Easter, though, gives us the luxury of taking a day to get in touch with the sorrow and suffering which we also deserve to feel. For, after all, "joy will come in the morning."

Hot New Hyundai!

2008-03-21T11:39:00.006-05:00

The New York Auto Show recently ended, and I thought I would post what looks to be the hottest vehicle to be debuted - the new Hyundai Genesis Coupe.

Photo from CNNMoney.com

The picture above is the first I saw of it, and I had only two thoughts when I saw it. "Sexy," and "I want one."

Searching some other web sites for more photos, the car almost looks a little "two-faced".

Photo from Automobile Magazine.

This photo looks a little too "Tiburon" for my taste - especially considering the near-halo status that it will be expected to maintain for Hyundai.

The engine selections also are a little surprising, but also promising for fuel efficiency. The base engine is a turbo-charged four-cylinder (220 hp), with an available V-6 (310 hp). Hopefully that means the four cylinder will get close to 30 mpg, with the V-6 in the mid-20's.
Guess the final verdict will have to come from an in-person viewing. But the future does look promising!

I will post some more of my New York opinions later.....

Celebrating Good Friday - Part 2

2008-03-20T14:19:00.002-05:00

I asked a friend (and minister) for his thoughts on the previous post, and, as I was hoping, he e-mailed me back with some comments that spurred me into thought again.

The first thing he said was, "I do think that the aim is less toward grieving and more towards feeling the weight of the death of the Son of God. "

Later in his comments he added:

But the victory really doesn't happen until the Sunday resurrection (or discovery of resurrection). Sunday is the day of "Christus Victor," the day of messianic indication, and the first day of new creation.

So, I think the answer might be to approach the service of darkness to feel the weight of the cross of Friday to a degree that allows one to burst forth to life on Sunday in a manner that is worthy of the day.

This made me think that perhaps I am approaching the intent of the celebration of Good Friday from the wrong angle. I have been thinking about what God did for me through Jesus' death. But perhaps the remembrance of Good Friday should be more about what Jesus' death means in how I live my life.

Paul wrote, "I have been crucified with Christ." Admittedly, this is something that took me many years to comprehend. But I think Paul meant that his old life was gone; the "old Paul" was dead. Christ's death meant that Paul had to redefine himself and become a new person.

So if I am to take Good Friday to "feel the weight of the cross" as suggested, I should feel that weight on me. The intent of a somber service is not necessarily to mourn the death of Jesus, but to put behind us the parts of our life that do not promote a Christian existence. I shouldn't be sad because I am trying to imitate what the disciples felt. I should be sad because I haven't lived up to what God expects of me. I should feel the weight of my cross as I prepare to go forth and profess Jesus to the world.

Then I can both honestly and genuinely commemorate the death of Jesus, while at the same time prepare myself for the awesome celebration that is to come on Sunday.

As an aside, this actually makes me miss the Catholic tradition in which I was raised where a large cross was held at the front of the sanctuary and members of the congregation approached it to genuflect and/or kiss the cross. It was a show of respect for what Jesus did for us, but also a chance to share the pain and death of the cross and leave a part of ourselves there on the cross (figuratively, of course).

How Should Christians Celebrate Good Friday?

2008-03-20T11:46:00.003-05:00

I have a thought that has been bouncing in my head the last couple days, and I wanted to write it out and hopefully get some feedback from others.

As Christians celebrate the Holy Week, it is easy to see Palm Sunday and celebrate Jesus' victorious entry into Jerusalem. Holy Thursday is a remembrance of the lessons Jesus taught surrounding the meal of the Last Supper. Easter is the celebration of the victory over death.

But what is the proper approach to celebrating Good Friday?

All the churches I have attended (admittedly mostly conservative and traditional) approach Good Friday as a period of mourning the death of Jesus. The church I currently attend (a pretty conservative United Methodist congregation) is celebrating Good Friday with a "Tenebrae" service, which is "A Service of Darkness". The idea is that as we remember the events up to and including the crucifixion and death of Jesus, we gradually extinguish candles and dim lights until the entire sanctuary goes dark upon Jesus' death.

I understand this approach to the remembrance of the crucifixion. Our first thoughts do make us sad. Just think of some of the reaction to the release of Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ".

But are we missing something bigger if we chose to only mourn the death of Jesus?

As the saying goes "in dying He destroyed our death; in rising He restored our life." This is GOOD news, not bad.

I agree that Good Friday is tied to Easter, and the two are meaningless without each other. Christmas is likewise connected to Christianity.

But it is called Good Friday. Should we mourn something good?

Tony Campolo's book "It's Friday, but Sunday's Coming" points towards what I am thinking here. Yes, the death of Jesus was traumatic to his disciples. Not yet fully understanding the meaning of it all, they were saddened and scared. But we know the whole story. Jesus returns! God is Victorious! We are promised a route to Heaven!

Had Jesus died of influenza or the plague and then returned to life, we would have a triumph of God over death. But Jesus isn't the only person in the Bible raised from the dead. The tomb being empty, in and of itself, doesn't impact our personal futures.

But it is in His manner of death, the sinless accepting the torture and death of a criminal and sinner, that is important to our salvation. Without this, we would not have the absolution of sin. Salvation would not have progressed.

So, as I said, I am a little torn. Yes, I am tempted to fast and approach the day with solemnity in respect for the day Christ died.

But I am likewise tempted to purchase Tree63's "Sunday" and play it as loud as I can all day, maybe even taking a few breaks in my work day to dance in my office.

After all, shouldn't I celebrate the fact that Jesus died for my sins? Or should I wait for the celebration until we celebrate the whole story - on Easter morning?

What is the Benefit of a Prius?

2008-03-19T12:32:00.000-05:00

Recently, there have been a couple articles on-line attacking the Toyota Prius's reign on fuel efficiency. The first was a CNNMoney discussion between a Prius and a concept Volkswagen Golf diesel hybrid. In "Better mileage than a Prius? Not so fast," CNNMoney did a very rough comparison of the vehicles. Essentially, Volkswagen is claiming a 26% increase in fuel efficiency compared to the Prius. CNNMoney is questioning the cost of the vehicle compared to the Prius, but completely misses the fact that in the states, diesel is typically more expensive than gasoline. Plus, the fuel mileage numbers are off a European test. But I have heard other talk that the test cycles in Europe unnaturally favor the Prius. Take a hybrid a little further, and the test look advantage could grow. So there is considerable real-world testing that needs to occur. (Maybe the lead-footed editors of Motor Trend can try it out. They get worst mileage in tests than anyone I have ever seen!)

The second article is one I saw today on TechnoRide. Entitled "BMW Beats Prius in Economy Run," the website discusses a test by some Sunday Times (London) staff to drive the Prius and a BMW 520d from London to Geneva to test mileage. The article mentions that the route was lengthened to get extra city driving in an effort to favor the Prius's hybrid system.

Unfortunately, this appears to be a very unscientific test of two very different vehicles. And while the mathematical numbers favor the BMW, no effort is made to equate costs of driving the cars. Don't get me wrong. I love BMW's. I like the looks, and they drive better than anything else I have ever been in. The problems that keep me from owning one are (1) the purchase price and (2) the high maintenance costs. Not to mention that the testers in London got only 0.9 mpg (U. K.) better performance from the BMW than the Prius. That wouldn't come anywhere close to covering the increased costs of operating the BMW, especially since it requires diesel, compared to gasoline for the Prius.

So, is the Prius still king? Looks like it for now. Maybe Volkswagen can actually compete if they bring the diesel hybrid to market.

Or maybe Tesla will fix their Roadster transmission and the era of electric vehicles can finally begin in earnest!

Is This a Recession: Part 2

2008-03-17T13:28:00.004-05:00

OK, so I posted this morning about whether or not we are technically in a recession.

Now I want to discuss what is being done and what can be done to help minimize the impact of the current economic situation.

CCNMoney.com has several articles on the economy today, by two in particular that I think merit additional discussion. The first is entitled "Why the Fed can't put out the fire". Despite the title of the article, the author seems to promote the need for the government to intercede. The article then says:

Gramley (former Fed governor and current economic analyst) and some other experts believe the solution to the current credit crisis will have to come from Congress, not the Fed, and that the federal government will have to take steps to bail out both Wall Street firms holding mortgage-backed securities as well as homeowners who have mortgages with balances greater than the value of their homes.

"I think the federal government is going to have to recognize taxpayer money will be involved and the sooner we get going on that, the better," Gramley said. "The longer it takes to do that, the more expensive the bailout will be."

I can't disagree with this statement more. Accepting that the current situation was predominantly caused by poor borrowing and lending practices, bailing out those involved will not correct the long-term health of the economy. We are in this predicament because people borrowed money to buy houses they couldn't afford, the banks and mortgage brokers agreed to lend the money, and then traders purchased the mortgages without bothering to check if what they were purchasing was really worth anything. How much of a bail-out do any of these parties deserve? Unfortunately, to minimize the impact on the general population, which didn't create this issue, some intervention is required. But by saving all people involved, the government is only teaching people to be more irresponsible than we already are.

CNNMoney's second article I noticed is entitled "Lehman rout tests Fed's resolve". This one is more agreeable to me. However, my interested was peaked by the following:

JPMorgan execs admitted as much on a conference call Sunday evening, when they characterized the $2-a-share price they're paying to take over Bear Stearns' assets and liabilities as a "cushion" for JPMorgan (JPM, Fortune 500) shareholders against future problems at the brokerage firm. An additional cushion comes from the Fed, which has agreed to provide a $30 billion loan to JPMorgan.

According to JPMorgan, Bear Stearns has $33 billion in so-called risk positions: $16 billion worth of commercial mortgage-backed securities, $15 billion in nonsubprime residential mortgages, and $2 billion in subprime assets. JPMorgan said it plans to use two-thirds of the Fed's loan to defray JPMorgan's exposure to those positions. Presumably it is holding the other $10 billion in reserve for problems that aren't yet on the horizon.

This looks to me like JPMorgan may be getting ready to make a killing off of Bear Stearns and possibly the Federal Government. Of Bear Stearns' $33 billion "risk positions", $31 billion is in non-subprime issues. Even if you assume that only half of these positions pan out, that means that JPMorgan walks away with a $16.5 billion portfolio for $236 million. If JPMorgan only recovers 3% on this half of the portfolio, they still get twice the value of the purchase price of the whole company.

Wish I could find an investment like that. Or I could get a loan valued at 12,700% of the net worth of my collateral. Doesn't seem like banks are lining up to offer me these kinds of deals.

Is This a Recession? Nope.

2008-03-17T09:22:00.000-05:00

OK, so the title of this post looks strange. Why do I say this isn't a recession? Because according to the methodology employed by the government, a recession effectively can only be declared after two consecutive quarters of recessionary activity. We ain't there yet.

Does this feel like a recession. Definitely.

Do I think that we will see the first half of this year called a recession eventually. Yes.

Does the Federal Reserve think this is a recession? Well, based upon emergency actions having been taken on a Sunday evening, I think that answer is pretty self-evident.

Will the economy survive the recession? Yes.

Will it affect the long-term stability of the stock market? No. Not even the Great Depression could do that.

Will it affect people's ability to retire on schedule? Sadly, for those very close to retirement, it may in fact cause a delay in these people's ability to retire. If you are under the age of 50 and think that this is affecting your retirement, you are either (1) overly pessimistic about the impact of this year, (2) overly optimistic about the performance of your investments, or (3) not properly diversified in your portfolio. Note that (3) includes real estate. If you live in one of the real estate boom areas and were planning on your house providing a significant portion of your retirement, you may be in trouble.

I hope that I haven't gotten you too depressed now. But I am trying to "keep it real."

Happy Monday!

Apple Seals the Deal?

2008-03-10T12:24:00.001-05:00

There is a report on arstechnica.com today that indicates Apple and Paul McCartney have finally reached an agreement to sell the Beatles library on iTunes. This is something that Apple has wanted for a long time, and would mark a significant event in the life of the Beatles library.

One of the comments to the article made an interesting connection, though.

This week, American Idol will have the top 12 singers performing works from the Beatles catalog. This year, American Idol and iTunes have joined together to allow fans to download contestant performances. If you can tie that up with an announcement during the show that the Beatles catalog is also on iTunes, that would be a huge marketing 1-2-3.

Now for the Beatles catalog to come pre-loaded on an iPod. But what color will the iPod be? White for the White album? (Although a white iTouch would be unique.)

Daylight Savings Time - What Does it Save?

2008-03-07T12:52:00.001-06:00

If you are like me and think about strange things sometimes, you have probably wondered about Daylight Savings Time. What exactly is the point? It was my understanding that the original concept had to do with giving families more daylight time together in the summer when they are likely to spend time outdoors. That makes some sense, although I am not sure that it wouldn't be better overall to just change the time, then, and give us the extra afternoon/evening hour of daylight year-round.

Yahoo! has an article today that claims that Daylight Savings Time doesn't save energy, as predicted.

When the decision was made to extend DST a couple years back, I heard the energy savings claim and was utterly confused by it. I could see no possible method to save energy by changing when the sun rises and sets. For most people, if you add daylight in the evenings, it just means that the lights in the house are on more in the mornings. Solar loading on the house causes air conditioning to run more in the evenings. If you have a standard thermostat, it doesn't know time, so DST won't change anything. If you have a programmable thermostat, you can let the temperature go up during the day (assuming the house is empty), but you want it cooled off before you get home. So getting me home while the sun is up only causes me to start running the A/C earlier in the solar day, trying to overcome more solar loading.

It apparently turns out that I was correct. DST doesn't do squat to help with energy usage.

And, as the Yahoo! article states in its tongue-in-cheek closing, "In related news, it was also revealed that Daylight Saving Time actually creates no additional daylight."

Happy DST, y'all!

Industry and Democracy

2008-03-05T12:24:00.003-06:00

Today, the Fortune website is running an article entitled "The Trouble with Steve Jobs". One quote in the article sent my mind reeling:

Says Palo Alto venture capitalist Jean-Louis Gasse, a former Apple executive who once worked with Jobs: "Democracies don't make great products. You need a competent tyrant."

Disregarding the topic of the article (Jobs), this in and of itself is a huge statement to me. And all the great products seem to just prove this point. A single great mind has to envision the great product. Yes, there is usually a team to implement this idea. But if the great mind isn't at least revered, if not downright feared, the details of his vision will not survive the birthing process. And the details make the product great.

Obviously there is Jobs at Apple. But how many great automobile designs were a democratic process? None. They all get credited to a single visionary, typically someone with the power to make the vision reality. Otherwise you get a 1999 Honda Accord. A great car, but not a design powerhouse.

Long live the industrial Tyrant!

An Example of Amazing Faith!

2008-02-22T08:59:00.003-06:00

This morning on the KSBJ Radio, I heard an interview with Chris Sligh, American Idol Season 6 Finalist. I knew that Chris was a Christian, even though he hadn't made it a big issue during the show. But his interview made me realize just how strong his faith is.

Chris was discussing the fact that prior to American Idol, he and his band had decided to try and get into mainstream "Pop" music, with the hope that the exposure would open new doors to their ability to proclaim their religion. When American Idol started, he thought that this was the opening of a huge door for him. During the American Idol season, Chris said that he started getting e-mails from multiple record companies. When he started to pray about how to make a decision, though, he felt led back to Christian music and away from mainstream.

In the end, Chris turned down a $250,000 signing bonus with a mainstream label to have the ability to record "music for the church".

That is an amazing show of faith. I am utterly impressed by his ability to perceive how God is leading and then completely shun what the world would look at as a blessing to be closer to God's will.

Chris, I wish you the best and look forward to hearing more of your music in the coming months.

(Note for his fans: His debut Album Running Back to You releases May 6, 2008 on Brash Records.)

The Mortgage Crisis - Where's My Help?

2008-02-12T12:24:00.000-06:00

Everywhere you look these days, the discussion of the county's mortgage crisis is a major headline. Today there is a post on CNNMoney.com stating that six mortgage lenders are freezing the foreclosure process for 90 days.

I understand that there are individuals who are in financial crisis and may lose their homes. Likewise, I understand that it is a benefit for the borrowers, lenders, and neighborhoods to not have these homes enter foreclosure. I understand that we all benefit.

But it seems to me like we are also working extra hard to save certain people while leaving others without any help. Originally, lenders said they would work with sub-prime borrowers to reconfigure mortgages. While there is the argument that borrowers should have entered into the loan with their eyes open wide (meaning by understanding the terms of the loan), there were many loans made that can only be considered predatory (e. g., introductory rates at prime, first reset at prime plus 10%). These people deserve at least some help.

Now lenders are working with all borrowers who are in the foreclosure process. Many people who will be helped now are simply people who have gotten in over their heads. Yes, I know that there are many cases where jobs have been lost, illness impacted income, etc. But some of these are people who wanted the nice house and the big SUV while they still worked retail jobs at the mall. Now they get the chance to reduce their payments so that they can stay in their homes (and probably their SUV's, too). I read an article that had one credit counselor saying that the mortgage seminars his organization was offering for those nearing foreclosure were often attended by people driving $40k+ vehicles.

But even arguing that these people need help, what about those of us that have not entered questionable loans, have not dramatically overextended ourselves, but still would like to see a little bit of the benefit everyone else is getting?

Take my example. I bought my house with an FHA fixed rate loan. Got a decent rate and have had good service from my mortgage company. Decided to add a swimming pool after a couple years, and got a construction loan. The rate was not so good (as is the case with many construction loans), but I figured I could always refinance the two loans into one after a few years. Now it turns out that I cannot refinance either loan while using my house as collateral. Why? Because in Texas, the laws say that you cannot refinance and get cash out if the total value of the refinance is more than 80% of the appraised house value. While I don't want cash, the value of the construction loan is considered cash, since it is not part of the original loan value. I am stuck.

Now, I am not in the dire condition that many people are. But I also am not a credit risk. I have shown as an adult that I can manage credit responsibly. I have had plenty of offers to refinance my primary loan, but the savings would probably be less than $100 per month. If I could refinance the two loans together, I could achieve $250 a month savings. But the laws of Texas "protect" me from saving money.

Maybe it is time that lawmakers start working for good, hard working, middle class people, a. k. a. the majority, as well as fighting the fires caused by a minority.

Will Generations Impact the Auto Industry?

2008-02-11T13:00:00.000-06:00

Recently I have read several articles touting how the generational divide will significantly impact the future of the automotive industry. CNNMoney even has an article discussing how the "Echo Boomers," also know as Gen Y, which encompasses births from '80 to '94 (pretty broad based) will want "affordable vehicles that are small and fuel efficient, and packed with electronics that can be linked with iPods and laptops."

While the second half of that statement may be true, it is not only the "Echo Boomers" that want to have new technology in their cars. I certainly do. And so do my friends. But I know very few people who actually fit into the "Echo Boomer" designation.

But do "Echo Boomers" want small cars only? Well, I can certainly see where a person who is currently in college will want a vehicle that is economical to own and operate. But the dynamic will change as this generation ages. It happens with all generations. Heck, when I was in school in the '90's, the issue with vehicles was cost and reliability. Since at the time gas was still less than $1 per gallon, we didn't worry as much about fuel economy, but we didn't blindly ignore it, either. I can guarantee that all of my friends knew what economy their vehicles could achieve, and they got concerned if that number changed.

Two examples: first, on a trip from the Carolinas to Virginia, my pick-up got significantly better gas mileage then normal (about 20%). I knew that something had changed, and sure enough I found a whole in my muffler. Second story: My roommate had a Jeep Wrangler. It was a great vehicle. And it got 16 miles per gallon. That included highway, rural roads, city driving, uphill, and "downhill with the engine turned off." OK, so we exaggerated sometimes. But we knew what to expect.

But now, almost all of my friends have at least one vehicle that seats no less than six people. And almost everyone else has at least one SUV or crossover.

So, will "Echo Boomers" buy small, fuel efficient cars forever? No. As they age and have children, the Chevy Cobalt will not meet their needs. They will still buy minivans, crossovers, and SUV's, because they will need to carry people and cargo, just like every generation.

And some of the "Echo Boomers" will never want small cars. Some will, like my roommate, want to have capabilities that a small car will not handle. There are individuals in every generation that have hobbies such as off-roading, mountain biking, or boating. And having certain abilities in a vehicle is, if not essential, very beneficial in each of these situations.

Yes, I hope that the auto industry can find a way to improve the fuel efficiency of every vehicle on the road without significantly impacting the purchase costs of those vehicles. But will the "Echo Boomers" bring the end to large, low economy vehicles? No. Every individual has unique needs and desires. And nearly everyone now considers fuel economy more seriously.

If auto prognosticators want to talk about what vehicle will sell to a generation tomorrow, or even in 5 years, maybe there is some truth to it. But lets try to let go of the "generational" discussions when forecasting the long-term future of the auto industry. The public's demand isn't going to change whole-scale.

Reading the Bible with Open Eyes

2008-02-11T09:33:00.001-06:00

My oft-referenced (in this blog) pastor at church (GMW) has a new post on his blog that discusses the importance of the Holy Spirit in reading the Bible. He is furthering his discussion of Joel Green's Seized by Truth.

To sum up Green's points as summarized by GMW, the Spirit impact our reading of the Bible by (1) forcing us to deny our autonomy, (2) shaping us in preparation for reading, (3) pointing us to Christ, and (4) forming us into a community centered about the Scripture.

Looking at this post, I see one issue implied in points 1 and 2, but not specifically discussed, but I think that it is important.

As the Scripture is Spirit-imbued, it is also in a way "living". No, the text doesn't change, but in approaching the Scripture from a Spirit-filled position (by removing autonomy, as in 1, and allowing the spirit to prepare us, as in 2) we open ourselves to different influences at different times. The Spirit can thus provide guidance appropriate to your current position in life and the world.

This is one issue that can arise from spending too much time in study guides and other's writings about scripture. By concentrating on finding meaning through outside texts, you are in essence putting on blinders. By inviting the Spirit to be with you as you read Scripture, you may find a new or deeper personal understanding of the Scriptures.

This is the reason I am so excited by the study that GMW is currently conducting at our church. The topic is "How to Read the Bible". So far in the material that GMW has written, he is including example texts for the participants to read, but he is not coaching or forcing the interpretation and meaning. Each lesson has included some concepts that can be applied to getting meaning and understanding from the Bible, but the actual interpretation is left solely to the participant. This means that in reading a section of Scripture alone, you are free to receive meaning. In reading in a group, the group can share multiple thoughts and responses. While these thoughts are obviously going to vary based on the people involved in the discussion, the meaning is still left to the participants. Thus, the Spirit is in no way hindered from affecting each group, or even each individual in a group, in unique and personally appropriate ways.

God Bless.

ANOTHER Toyota SUV/CUV?

2008-01-25T16:25:00.001-06:00

The biggest surprise from the Detroit Auto Show, in my opinion, was the unveiling of the new Toyota Vensa Cross-over. This cross-over is pitched as having a "car-like" appearance and handling with the higher seating position of a CUV. It seats five passengers.

My question is, "Does Toyota needs this?"

I just do not see the gap in Toyota's product line that this is filling. It has to fit between the Highlander and the Rav4, both of which are technically CUV's.

I didn't realize that there were customers on Toyota's lot asking for something bigger than a RAV4, but still smaller than the Highlander. And the 4Runner is still in this same overall size segment as well.

Just another answer to a question that no one asked!

Auto Auctions - Interesting Results

2008-01-25T16:20:00.001-06:00

I thought there were a couple of interesting results from the Barrett Jackson Auto Auction last week. First - the sales of "first" cars.

GM auctioned off the rights to purchase the first Corvette ZR1. Someone paid $1M for the rights to the first commercial production version. Pretty amazing.

Similarly, Chrysler sold the rights to the first Dodge Challenger for $400,000. Bid difference, until you realize that as a multiple of vehicle price, the two are similar (around 10).

Personally, I think that this is a little extreme. Of course, I am not a multi-millionaire, so the thought probably wouldn't ever cross my mind. Let's just hope that the owners of these cars don't get into accidents. The first car off the assembly line won't be worth a dime extra if the nose came out 10,000.

Ford also sold the rights to the first Ford Shelby GT500KR (a Mustang variant). This one went for $550,000, less than 10 times the cost of the car. However, this one is also special, as it will have a panoramic glass roof that will not be offered on any other GT500KR. That is pretty cool, and a good reason to pay extra for the car. (OK, $550k is still a lot of money, but at least the car is truly one-of-a-kind.)

On the good side, all of the proceeds of these auctions went to charity. At least someone really benefits from this $2M.

On the other hand, Jesse James auctioned off several of his Monster Garage creations. I have to say that I was somewhat disappointed in the results. His F-150 Nut Shaker (for shaking nuts off of trees and catching them) went for only $8,500. His Magnum locomotive did break into 5 digits, but only to $13,500. While I understand that these vehicles are highly impractical, I would have expected more. Perhaps an on-line auction would have done better. Of course, I can only imagine how tough it would be to screen the bidders to ensure that the winner actually paid afterwards.

Oh well. Guess some people really do look at vehicles as investments. And these people want future classics, not funny adaptations.

Should the Bible be Read Neutrally?

2008-01-21T12:41:00.001-06:00

A friend and fellow blogger is in his blog discussing how to read the Bible as scripture, using as reference a work by Joel Green. I thought that there was one very salient point in his recent post which I would like to expound upon.

The comment is made that people like to think scientifically, believing themselves to be a "neutral observer". It is discussed how true neutrality is impossible, but objectivity is realistic. In my opinion, either of these is damaging to one's ability to treat the Bible, or anything else, as scripture. I see two topics that delve into this idea further.

First, to apply a scientific reference to the myth of "neutral observer", Green is approaching the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle which states that it is possible to precisely know the position or momentum (movement) of an object, but not both (especially applicable to nanoparticles). Attempting to precisely measure one creates uncertainty in the other. Likewise, we cannot neutrally interpret scripture, because our presence impacts our interpretation. As is stated by Green, it is only possible to be objective, that is acknowledge our own impact in our thoughts and discussions, thereby admitting "uncertainty" in the resulting conclusions.

Now to the more critical comment - scripture by definition should not be neutrally or objectively interpreted. Religion is meant to be taken to the heart. Scripture, as the text that helps define a religion, therefore must also be taken to heart. Attempting to analyze scripture from a neutral point means that you are not taking it to the heart, and therefore you are not allowing it to define your religion, i. e., you are not treating it as scripture.

In "The Great Divorce" by C. S. Lewis, one of the characters is a Episcopal priest who is depicted as trying to be an "objective" thinker. He wants, even yearns for, intellectual discussions on theology. However, by treating scripture objectively, he completely neglects to treat scripture as the truth. In essence, he is treating what I as a Christian call scripture, i. e. the Bible, as merely text. By trying to remain objective, he ends up refusing Heaven entirely, preferring to dwell in Hell, where he has people with whom to debate.

Perhaps some would call me simpleminded, but I try not to approach scripture objectively. I read to find what scripture means to me. I make it personal. As a result, I do not wear myself out trying to find depth and sub-context, but instead I find peace and wisdom. By opening one's heart to the scripture, the answers, I believe, come more easily. I admit that I do not receive all of the details with a single reading. But, more importantly in my opinion, I let the words speak to me, thereby opening myself to hear what God wants me to hear. I may not hear exactly the same thing every time, but hopefully I am receiving that which is most important to my life at the time of each reading.

Now, I am not advising that people read only the text of the Bible and ignore other discussions or explanations of the text. Indeed, I read from a relatively thick Study Bible, and I read almost all of the comments that surround the actual text. There is wisdom to be gained by reading the thoughts and interpretations of others. However, the reader must remember that the Bible text is truth; the study guide is an assistant to finding the truth. If you find yourself reading the accompanying study material more than the Bible itself, there is the chance that you are being led astray from the truth. My preferred practice is to read the Bible text, read the corresponding material, and then re-read the Bible text. This leaves me with what I accept as the divinely inspired words, not the words of humans.

Of course, feel free to comment on my discussion here.

Peace to you and yours.

JAy.

Korean Karaoke = ?!???!?!

2008-01-15T03:02:00.001-06:00

I received an education last night.

Several of my friends here in Korea took us to dinner last night. The dinner was wonderful. Korean style barbeque. It tasted great, and the friends couldn't have been better.

Then they guys I was with decided to go sing karaoke after dinner. Korean karaoke was quite a bit different than what I expected. To start with, rather than being in a large room with hundreds of people, the seven of us were entered into a small personal karaoke room. No problem, I thought. We had a good time, just the seven of us, for a little while. Then some women joined us.

Had I been a little more on my toes, I might have noticed right off the bat that there were seven women. Coincidence? Not hardly.

Then the women started to sing and drink with us. That was OK. Nothing pushy, nothing too personal. Maybe more than a new "friend" in the states would have done, but nothing of which to be ashamed.

After a couple hours, the women got up to leave. I thought this was a fine end to the evening. Unfortunately, it was not nearly the end. I was soon informed that this may be my only chance to "know a Korea woman". I thought that was some "knowledge" that I didn't need, so I respectfully remained seated. After a couple minutes, the music restarted, and were having fun, just then men, again.

Then two of the women came back. Apparently I had either "sucker", "drunk", or "whore-monger" written on my forehead, as on of the women became closely attached to me. And she was wild. I cannot even imagine what would have happened had I actually be doing anything to encourage her activities.

Thankfully, it was my faith that got me through the evening. Now, I am not an overly zealous religious person. And I can hardly ever quote scripture (except for Luke 2, thanks to Linus and Charlie Brown). But whenever this woman started to get too "friendly", scripture would pop into my head. Nothing earthshaking or overtly relevant, but it was there. And it would keep me from losing control of myself to my hormones or the influences of this woman.

When I played dumb after she said "You give me money," she apparently realized finally that I was not there for anything more than the companionship of friends. Not that she really calmed down any, she just started to show some attention to the other men in the room. To say that I was not disappointed would be an understatement.

Eventually the night ended. I left with my dignity, and self-respect, in tact. The woman we left behind, well she may have had her self respect. I do not know if any of the men would consider her dignified. I do not think that I would.

So, apparently the karaoke bar which we attended is also a brothel. And apparently that is fairly common in Korea. Guess that is one point of Korean culture that I won't miss when I go home.

Safe travels, friends.

Snow! Snow! Snow! Snow!

2008-01-14T02:51:00.000-06:00

Well, as I mentioned in a previous post, I am currently in Korea. For those of you that do not know, Korea is higher latitude than the southern US, where I am from.

Yesterday, it snowed. To those of you from above the Mason-Dixon line, you don't care. For me, I was thrilled. I do not think that I have seen snow since 2000.

So I decided to stick a few photos here. The first are a few taken while touring some of the local sites.
The site-seeing was in a town about 35 km away, and at a considerably higher elevation (since my apartment is near sea level). Therefore, the snow was forecast to only be inland. Here is the view out of my apartment this morning.

So much for weather forecasting!

Thoughts on the Keys to Salvaltion

2008-01-13T02:10:00.000-06:00

As I am in Korea (South Korea for those of you in the western world) right now, I spent today on a sight-seeing tour of the province in which I am staying. Two of the stops were Buddhist Temples. While I have to admit that I am not fully versed in Buddhism, I did come across one interesting thing.

In the larger temple which we visited, there were multiple buildings. One of these was a lecture hall named "The No-Words Hall". The name did not mean that there were no words allowed inside the hall. Instead, it meant that, while the intent of the lectures and teachings inside were to lead on to the promised land, that no words a human could speak could actually teach someone how to achieve this.

It reminded me how fortunate I am to have found my faith and truth in Christianity. Christians likewise believe that it is impossible to teach man to live in a way that will make him worthy of Heaven. However, thanks to the sacrifice of Jesus, that does not make heaven unachievable. Believing in Jesus and placing your trust in Him is sort of a short-cut to Heaven. And since man cannot make the journey the long way, His is the only way.

Praise be to God for my Salvation!

2008-01-13T02:09:00.000-06:00

How Big is Your Bilge Pump?

2007-12-19T08:50:00.001-06:00

Man, my 6:00 am men's group at church comes up with some great expressions and thoughts (reference the "Boiling Your Frog" post previously). You wouldn't think that 6:00 am would be the most creative time in a person's day, but we seem to get great one-liners.

Today we were discussion the protection that is promised in the to believers. The primary intent of the discussion was to indicate that while God does not promise you will have no troubles in this world, He does promise that he will be with you. In essence, though your body is still vulnerable, with God's help, your soul is invulnerable.

There was a reference made to the metaphor that water can only sink a ship from the inside. Like the ship, if your soul is protected by God's strength, it cannot be "flooded".

So, instead of asking how big your god is, ask how big is your spiritual bilge pump.

I think my bilge pump is pretty darn big. Thanks, God.

Why does APPL attract so much Vehemence?

2007-12-18T11:16:00.001-06:00

Today I pose a question. Don't know if anyone can answer it, but I pose it just the same.

Why do discussions of APPL always result in hateful comments? It amazes me that a blogger can make discuss APPL, and the comment sections go nuts with volleys of hateful bashes. And if a blogger often casts a less than 100% pleasing glow of APPL, those that provide comments appear to read the blog only to be able to complain. There is one blogger in particular that continuously gets comments that disparage his intelligence because he doesn't think that APPL is the best company ever. He is typically very realistic in his attitude towards APPL. But the comments continuously berate him and accuse him of trying to "spin" APPL in a negative light. But every post attracts the same people making the same comments. If you know that you disagree with someone, why read the blog at all?!?

Not to say that the APPL "fan-boys" are the only ones that get aggressive with comments. APPL "haters" likewise will comment on anything APPL, praising the slightest negative, and bashing the slightest positive.

Let's face it. APPL has some great designers working for them. The new desktops are beautiful. And the iPhone interface is a marvel.

But does APPL really do anything that special? In the cell phone realm, there are smartphones that are at least nearly as functional as the iPhone. And there are MP3 players made by other manufacturers that have all the functionality of the iPod (excluding the Touch interface). With the iPod, APPL was the first big name on the scene, and they created a new, superior user interface. But the rest of the companies either are catching or have caught up. With the iPhone, I honestly think that the attraction is APPL itself. They have the name to get the press required to make a splash. Yes, the touch screen is cool. But is it really necessary?

As far as computers go, Mac is superior in the fact that the platform is more tightly controlled than Windows. These leads to a less buggy existence. But the flip side is that there are fewer applications available. Microsoft intentionally opened their platform to encourage third party developers. Mac has taken a different tack. For home users, a Mac may now be a useful alternative to Windows, largely in part to the increasing functionality of the web (this has not been the case for most of APPL's existence). But for business machines, the edge is still with Windows just because of the availability of applications and the ease of creating custom apps.

Mac chose in its early years to go after a few niches of the market where Microsoft was weak. In those niches it paid off beautifully, as they became the standard (especially in journalism and page layout). But APPL has since been fighting to infiltrate the home computer market.

Now, for those of you who read this and instantly want to bash me, I will provide full disclosure. I do not own APPL stock. I do not own an APPL product. I have not used a Mac in 15 years. However, I am considering a Mac for my next computer. I do not own an iPod for two reasons. One, you can get equivalent functionality for considerably less cost. Two, I do not like being locked into a file format supported by a single company, regardless of whether that format is better or worse (same logic behind why I wouldn't for years consider anything that used a Sony MemoryStick). Finally, I am not considering an iPhone because I do not need a phone with that many bells and whistles, and I have a contract with another carrier which I do not feel like breaking. Plus, I have never spent that much on a cell phone, and I do not plan to start now.

Any thoughtful comments are more than welcome. And any bashers comments (from either side) will be shown provided they remain polite.

More Supposition about Chrysler's Lineup

2007-12-18T09:59:00.001-06:00

Well, I have heard more guesses and rumors about what Chrysler LLC is going to do with their vehicle lineup. The most recent two I read are contradictory, so I will take them in the order in which they are written.

First, I read that Chrysler is planning to kill the Dodge Durango and Chrysler Aspen and replace them with new crossover vehicles built off the new mini-van platform, a la the upcoming Dodge Journey. Isn't this what Chrysler tried about 4 years ago when they released the Chrysler Pacifica, which is now also being killed? Admittedly, the Aspen is not the luxury SUV that Chrysler needs. The best I can tell, it was only created because the Pacifica, although a nice vehicle, was not selling to SUV and crossover buyers as Chrysler had hoped (it is after all more wagon than crossover). But why try to modify a mini-van into a crossover again?

Today, CCNMoney has a post that I hope is closer to the truth. This one says that the Durango and Aspen will be killed, but are more likely to be replaced by something off of the Jeep Grand Cherokee platform. Of course, first they need a Grand Cherokee that someone wants to buy. The current model's interior is so deep in cheap looking plastic that it feels like a 10 year old Korean vehicle. And the exterior has traded rugged looks for boring slabs of metal. But at least there is a chance of returning the Grand Cherokee to its former glory and making the new platform flexible enough to work a couple additional vehicles off of it.

This also jibes nicely with the rumor I heard that the Jeep Commander will disappear. Take the Commander to Dodge, and make a spiffed up version (with a different exterior feel) for Chrysler. Face it, the Commander is not a serious off-road vehicle in the first place.

Now if Chrysler can do all this and still move towards what are sure to be more stringent CAFE regulations...

Houston Taxis: Go Green or Don't Go!

2007-12-13T12:57:00.001-06:00

Houston City Council this week approved an ordinance to require that all taxis requesting new taxi permits as of January 1, 2008, must have either a four cylinder engine or be hybrid drive. Has the City Council lost their minds??

I understand that the city wants to be environmentally conscious. And I applaud that. This ordinance, however, makes little to no common sense.

Per the ordinance, taxi drivers will have two options, hybrid or four-cylinder. For sedans, both solutions essentially point to the Chevy Malibu (least expensive hybrid, largest 4 cylinder).

The base price for the Malibu Hybrid vehicle is $22,790 (per the Chevrolet website). Not outlandish, by any means. But the car is not very large, either. Most taxi drivers still want to offer large vehicles. The Ford Crown Victoria has remained for years a popular choice for taxi drivers. Why? It is reasonably priced, built like a tank, and large enough to haul six people and a lot of luggage. The Malibu, while a nice car, can only seat five, and the trunk is 28% smaller than the Crown Vic (21 cu ft vs. 15.1 cu ft). Further, Ford offered a Crown Vic specifically for taxi service that had a longer wheelbase and extra room in the back seat. Now the best legroom available will be "cramped". And watch out if your cab driver is pushing 6 feet tall. Every inch he moves the front seat back is less room for the passenger in the back.

And the while the Chevy Malibu is an efficient car in either 4 cylinder or hybrid form, the difference in economy is not that great. The EPA numbers are 22 city/30 highway for the four cylinder and 24 city/32 highway for the hybrid. Given the choice, how many hybrids will be on the streets as taxis?

Finally, Houston has one of the highest prices for taxis in the country. In fact, they get so expensive that for anything more than a short ride, a town car becomes cost competitive. Given the choice of a Chevy Malibu or a Lincoln Town Car, which would you pick for a ride to the airport? Personally, I would take the Town Car.

What are other cities doing? Well, if you look at New York City, there are several taxi regulations regarding fuel economy. However, none of the are as restrictive as this. And while the city does want all taxis to be hybrids, the implementation date is not until 2012. Hopefully by then the car manufacturers will be able to offer a large car in a hybrid (I have heard that Chrysler is working on a hybrid 300 already). But to require something like this now is extremely restrictive to the taxi industry.

Finally, I want to raise issue of limiting the technology to four cylinder or hybrid. If the intent is reduce emissions, shouldn't the regulation be economy based, not technology based? This is also the approach that NYC has taken. Of course, with a taxi, the city number is as critical as the highway number since taxis spend a lot of time in the city and/or at idle. But to say "four cylinder" is not realistic. What if a six cylinder car can get the same city mileage? Or what about multi-displacement engines that can turn off some of their cylinders when the power requirement is low? But this would not be allowed per the Houston ordinance.

But for now, it looks as though Houston will be stuck with a limited number of car models available as taxis.

Of course, I have taken two taxis in the six-plus years I have lived in Houston. Why do I really care?

Will the Fed Kill the Greenback?

2007-12-11T08:00:00.001-06:00

As most of you are probably aware, the Federal Reserve Board will announce today it's revised interest rate for short-term borrowing. Most experts assume that there will be at least a quarter percent reduction, with the possibility of a half percent reduction.

The reduction in the interest rate can hurt the value of the US Dollar and even lead to inflation, however. So, if the Fed continues cutting the Dollar, is the US economy doomed anyway?

It seem to me that the Fed is walking a very narrow tightrope. Don't cut the rate, the current concern over banking remains, investment drops, and the US could enter a recession. Cut the rate too much, the value of the Dollar continued to decline (it is down 8% this year), and the economy could enter into a cycle of inflation. It seems a no win situation.

Today, CNNMoney has an article saying that experts believe a quarter percent cut has already been factored into the US Dollar value. I hope that this is true, because I think that a cut is inevitable.

Let's just hope that the economy can remain recover some strength and stay solid.

Election 2008: Can Anyone Win?!?

2007-12-07T13:49:00.001-06:00

First, let me explain to you, the reader, why I am qualified to become a political pundit for a few hundred words. Simply put, it is my blog, so I am going to write.

I have been thinking recently about the upcoming presidential election. Not so much about for whom I would like to vote (I have never voted in a primary, and I don't know that that will change in '08, so I have time). I have been thinking more about who on each side has the best chance of winning the election.

I tend to have pretty conservative values, so I will start with the Democrats.

Let's face it, I think it is a two man, I mean person, race on the Democratic side. Of course the two front runners are Hillary and Obama. I am afraid, for better or worse, that John Kerry will be, so to speak, "always a bridesmaid".

Obama has one issue that will make it difficult for him to win the Democratic nomination. He has minimal experience in international politics. I heard a political analyst say recently that the experience issue is going away simply because Obama has been considered a front runner for so long now. To the thinking man, this does not fly. So maybe it doesn't matter after all in a general election. But let's move on.

Hillary, of course, is trying to be the face of the new Democratic party. That is fine. The problem is that she keeps talking. Of primary concern for electability is the fact that she keeps touting her "experience" in the White House. She has not ever learned that politicians, as well as the public, see the First Lady as a publicity role, not a political one. Do not get me wrong, the First Lady has power. However, the First Ladies that are admired, most recently Nancy Reagan and Barbara Bush, are loved because they understood that their influence was with the common person, not the politician. The First Lady influences government though the representative system, not directly through politics. Hillary did not understand this going in to the White House, and got slapped, so to speak, through her health care reform debacle. This experience is mostly valuable as a lesson to future First Ladies. It is only marginally applicable to the Presidency. I do not think that most of America remembers Hillary fondly as a First Lady, and this will not help her win a Presidential election.

On the Republican front, it is a dead heat of who-cares. The real problem is that the only candidate who has a chance for mass appeal has basically said that he doesn't want to be there. Of course I am talking about Fred Thompson. Apparently Fred did not learn the one valuable lesson from Ross Perot's 1996 campaign: You cannot act like a candidate, back out of the election, and then come back and receive votes. Had either man just stayed in the whole time, their support would be/have been much stronger. (This statement is backed up by polling numbers from Ross Perot's candidacy. I haven't researched Thompson's support trends.)

The remaining candidates all have problems that are going to keep conservatives from supporting them. Romney has religious issues, whether or not they actually affect his politics. Giuliani has personal issues and problems with his social stance. And no one knows who Mike Huckabee is. Did I even spell his name correctly? I honestly don't know. He is only in the running because conservatives don't have anyone else to support.

So, where does that leave us? I have recently heard a lot of talk about a Clinton/Obama ticket (or Obama/Clinton, I don't think it matters) for the Democrats. I think that there are too many problems here to win the moderate vote. And the best thing that the Republicans have going at this time is that the Democrats might actually field a Clinton/Obama (or Obama/Clinton) ticket. Perhaps Republicans can appeal to social moderates by including Giuliani on the ticket. But will that turn away the social conservatives. And will evangelical Christians, who actually hold a pretty strong voting block, vote for a Mormon?

The only logical conclusion I can reach at this time is: Where are the third-party candidates? This might be the election for a third party to actually get some votes in the electoral college.

Should Chrysler Eliminate Overlap in Its Brands?

2007-11-27T10:30:00.001-06:00

As you may have heard, Chrysler LLC is considering a plan to eliminate many vehicle nameplates to simplify their lineup. Basically, reports say that all cars would become Chryslers, all trucks would become Dodges, and Jeep would be pared down to its core vehicles. Essentially, no vehicle platform would be produced under two different brand names.

I understand that this logic could be appealing to some people. However, anyone who has paid attention to the auto industry will realize that there is considerable danger in this proposal. Or at least they should.

Alex Taylor III posted a column today for Fortune, available through the CCNMoney website here, where he agrees with this proposition. I couldn't disagree with him more. Yes, he does make some good points regarding the marketing, dealership, and inventory costs that could be saved. But he misses the bigger issue. Chrysler and Dodge have done a good job of eliminating "badge engineering", where essentially identical vehicles are sold under different brands. OK, so the Chrysler Aspen is a joke. And the Jeep Compass should be shot like a lame horse.

But consider the Chrysler Sebring and the Dodge Avenger. Yes, they are the same vehicle platform. However, I imagine that very few customers cross-shop these two vehicles. The Sebring has a more refined exterior that is attractive to someone who wants to blend in to society. It is a car that you could drive to a nice restaurant and fit in with the crowd. The Avenger has a much harder edge. It is the vehicle for the people who want to stand out and be different. A family man would like the Sebring. A tuner would like the Avenger. And the Chrysler 300 and the Dodge Charger are likewise well differentiated.

Is there currently a problem with the way Chrysler and Dodge are marketed? Yes. As Mr. Taylor points out, "To be sure, Chrysler is seen as a bit more upscale, but attempts to establish it as a true sub-luxury brand have failed, in part because its product offerings are not well-differentiated from Dodge." The solution is not to kill the overlap, but to improve the differentiation.

The same issues have plagued Cadillac in the past. And not just once, but several times. But GM has stuck with the Cadillac brand and turned it around. Admittedly, GM has a much larger stable of brands to share, and not share, engineering. Ford is currently reworking its Mercury brand quite well. Yes, there is still work to be done. But the working middle-class people I know definitely differentiate between Ford and Mercury. Ford's bigger problem may be moving Mercury upscale without encroaching upon Lincoln (do they really need a Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, and Lincoln MKZ?).

If Chrysler LLC moves the Chrysler logo upscale and keeps the Dodge vehicles targeted at the entry-level buyer, they will succeed. And Jeeps must remain just what they are supposed to be, not front-drive wagons that aspire to look like cross-overs. But killing the Dodge car line, or even calling them Chryslers, would only appeal to someone who doesn't understand the automotive marketplace.

Let's hope that Bob Nardelli is thinking like a car guy, not a hatchet man.

Investors Beware! The Gov wants to Sue You!

2007-11-16T08:07:00.001-06:00

Well, the Federal Government apparently wants to start suing investors. Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed a bill aimed at "protecting borrowers from abusive home loans". According to CNNMoney, the bill has three primary points. They are:

banning lenders from making loans that borrowers can't repay,
creating a nationwide licensing system for mortgage brokers
making Wall Street banks that package mortgage securities into investments liable for violations of lending laws.

Of course none of these points will help current mortgage borrowers, or the economy in general, get out of the current mess. The first point, depending on how it is written, could help protect future mortgage applicants, though. The second point makes some sense, but isn't necessarily a fix for anything.

It is the third point that is absolutely absurd. Making an investment bank responsible for the integrity of the people from which it purchases investments is ridiculous. Yes, to make sure that an investment is worthy of the banks money, perhaps the banks should have been doing more investigation into what they were purchasing. And the current loses the banks are suffering will make them more cautious in the future. But making them liable for potential lending law violations? Is that really practical?

OK, if you agree with making a bank liable for the actions of a lender it does not control, let's see what is next.

Should the owners of oil company stocks be liable for green-house gas emissions along with the oil companies? In a way, they already are, in so much as the stocks could go to zero if the companies do actually become liable for all CO2 emissions that they enable. But beyond their investments, they are not responsible for the oil companies actions.

When you call a bakery and order a cake, are you liable if one of the cooks gets burned taking your cake out of the oven? No. You asked for a cake. You didn't tell the bakery to take short-cuts in the cooking of the cake. In fact, you would prefer that the bakery NOT take short-cuts so that you get the best cake possible.

The same is true for these investment banks. They asked for investment-grade mortgages, and they wanted mortgages that would make good investments. Because the person they purchased the investment from was greedy and unlawful does not make the bank liable for his actions.

Well, guess I better go sell my energy stocks before someone tries to take my house because of global warming.

Don't Boil Your Frog!!

2007-11-14T13:09:00.001-06:00

Are smarter than the average frog?

This is essentially the question that came up during my church Men's Group meeting this morning. It wasn't supposed to be the topic for the discussion, but it came up. And it made everyone think.

So, what does it mean?

We were discussing how there were three things that will divert a person from a closer walk with God. These are the world, the flesh, and the devil. The first of these, the world, made us wonder if we are smarter than a frog.

I am sure you have heard that it is possible to boil a frog alive as long as the frog is put into the water when the water is cold. Because the frog is cold-blooded, it will not notice the increase in water temperature as long as the change is gradual. Theoretically, you can eventually get the water to boil with the frog still in it.

PLEASE, do not attempt to recreate this. I am not advocating animal cruelty. "Boiling a frog" is just a phrase which most people understand.

However, we were discussing how the world can treat people like a boiling frog. Odds are, when you were a child, you were instilled with certain values. These came from your parents, schools, religious organizations, scouting, etc. And odds are, you accepted these values without much questioning. After all, these were taught to you by people you appreciated and respected.

As you get into the world, though, you may see other people who do not live by the values you were taught. And, perhaps, you gradually get desensitized to the violation of previously accepted values. Allowed to proceed, you will eventually violate these values yourself. And bang - you just got boiled, figuratively speaking.

To figuratively be smarter than this poor frog, takes diligence and support. If you do not work to maintain your values, the world will erode them. And if you do not have people around you to support this effort, your view of the values erodes first so that you do not even notice when the values disappear completely.

Now, is it a little hot in here, or is just me?

It is Too Early for Christmas Music - Well Most of It!

2007-11-12T13:19:00.001-06:00

Christmas music should not be played before Thanksgiving!

Call me a rude traditionalist. I do not care. In my opinion, major holidays should be taken in order. That means that Christmas comes after Thanksgiving. Currently I am not complaining about Christmas decorations at the stores and malls. I don't like that either, but I really can't stand the music.

And yes, there are stores and malls near me that are already playing at least some Christmas music. If I don't REALLY need what is on my shopping list, I leave when I hear Christmas music before Thanksgiving. It bugs me that much.

But today I heard a song on the radio that merits bending that rule. It is called "Christmas with a Capital C" by Go Fish. They bill themselves as "Great music for kids that won't drive parents bonkers!" I can't attest to their music in general, as my wife and I have so far successfully shielded our 20 month old from kids' music. But I will check them out before too long.

But I digress. Back to "Christmas with a Capital C". This song had me really laughing. Plus, it tries to bring the Christmas back into the holidays. As in "Merry Christmas," not "Happy Holidays". That is an effort that I can definitely get behind! Plus, at the end of the song I wanted to shout in agreement. But I was still laughing! I loved it!

So, if you want to hear "Merry Christmas" this year, support Go Fish. If not, "get a helmet." (Just listen to the song - you will understand and laugh even more.) They advertise that at least some of their music is available on iTunes, although I no longer do iTunes business (it's personal). They do offer albums direct from their website, also. Finally, I heard that there is a video on YouTube, but due to internet restrictions at my current site, I cannot confirm that either.

And finally,

"MERRY CHRISTMAS!"

Honda in The Big Hurt

2007-11-08T18:19:00.001-06:00

Well, I don't normally get concerned for a car manufacturer's future by the release of a single car. Unfortunately, I think that Honda may have just shot themselves in the foot. How, you ask? By releasing the ugliest Accord the world has ever seen.

Don't get me wrong. I like to see car designs that are new and that stretch the limits some. However, I think that Honda should have been more careful with the new Accord. It is, after all, one of the top selling cars in the US. And it DIDN'T get there by having wild, outlandish body styling. Instead, it became the conservative car that was fun to drive (as opposed to Toyota's Camry, the conservative car that was uber-reliable). However, the Accord has gone so far past conservative with this body style, that even the car customizers are left scratching their heads.

Just exactly whom did Honda designers have in mind when they designed this car? The over-60 crowd? Nope. The under 30 crowd? Maybe, but shouldn't have. The 30-40's? Maybe. The 40-60 crowd? Doubtful. I just don't see anyone being drawn to the body styling of this car.

OK, you want to know what my gripes are? Well, here I go. The tail lights look like cheap aftermarket parts for a civic. The trunk lid is so vanilla, it is scary. The headlights bulge out of the side of the car like they are swollen. The hood creases are too aggressive. And I just can't explain the intent of the character lines on the side. They are grooved so deep through the doors that the only explanation I can reason is that some engineer figured out how to stamp the door crease, and Honda had to use it somewhere to justify his time.

BMW got slammed for some of its designs recently. But the cars were unique and unified in design. The Accord is just a patchwork of unique parts. I do not get it.

I will admit that I thought the Camry went too far with its new body style, especially for its target crowd. And it hasn't had the sales problems I expected. But the Honda appears to have gone farther.

My prediction: a redesign in two or three years.

Taking the Fear Out of Church Business

2007-11-07T14:31:00.000-06:00

In many churches around the country, it is the time of year most feared by everyone. From the occasional attendee, to the preacher, to the member that is there more frequently than the preacher, we all hate October and November. Why? Stewardship.

Yup. I said the "S" word. And I'll say it again. Stewardship.

Now, before you, the reader, run screaming from this entry, please be aware, I am not about to ask you for money. (I'd have to give you my address for that, and I don't want to be stalked or worse).

What I do want to say today is that I am currently undergoing the strangest stewardship campaign I have ever experienced. No the preacher isn't rapping his appeal (that would be strange, wouldn't it!). And the church members aren't shaking each other down like school bullies, even psychologically.

No the strange part of this campaign is that, not only am I not repulsed or scared, I am enjoying it.

I have even volunteered to help!

What is different this time? Well, I think the biggest thing is that I have seen a vision. I do not mean that I am seeing things that aren't there. I am seeing a plan for my church. Our leadership team has laid out a plan for both regular operations and a building expansion. And not only are the ideas clearly described, they are very appealing. I see how these goals will benefit my church, my community, and myself. And I am excited.

I went through a capital building campaign a couple years ago with a different church. It was not a good experience for me. I was not on board with the ideas of the building committee. Of course, I did not try to spoil the project, but I did not support it myself. I never even made a single contribution to the capital campaign.

But this campaign is very different. I have seen the future, and I like what I see. And I am prepared to make the largest commitment to a church that I have ever in my life. And I am planning on making my largest single donation to a church by a factor of at least two. And I can't wait.

I hope that this time of year in your church isn't driving you nuts. And I certainly hope that it does not drive you out of your church, even for the month or so that the campaign occurs.

Who knows, maybe if you pay attention an have an open mind, you, too, can be excited about the "S" word!

The Future of the Detroit Auto Makers

2007-11-01T12:59:00.001-05:00

The Detroit auto manufacturers are trying to improve their future positions. They are negotiating landmark labor contracts with the UAW that will help each of them return to profitability. It is not the end-all, be-all of making the manufacturer successful, but it is a step in the right direction.

Alex Taylor III today posted what may be the most negative (and least logical) prognosis for the Detroit Auto Makers. I have to disagree with almost every point he highlights, and this is my forum. So, here I go.

Mr. Taylor begins by stating that the Detroit Three, as he calls them, still have more issues than labor prices and desirable vehicles. I agree. However, when Mr. Taylor brings to light what he considers the biggest concerns, I think he is off base.

Mr. Taylor's first concern for the Detroit Three is that the franchise dealerships are holding back the companies' success. He states that it is hard to end a franchise agreement in most states (and he is right). He then states that this allows "bad dealers to stay in business almost indefinitely." Huh? The automakers do not support the dealers. If a dealer is "bad", then the consumer will make the decision to go elsewhere. When the dealership loses its business, the dealership either changes its act or closes. Either way is good for the automaker. Mr. Taylor then says that "automakers face great difficulties in moving dealers out of decaying urban areas, where some have been for half a century or more, and relocating them to areas of growing population in the suburbs." If an automaker is in a bad part of town and doesn't move to the suburbs, another dealer will step in and fill the open areas. Auto dealers who neither move nor expand will die if the neighborhood they are in does also. While this is not great for the manufacturer, it is not a huge drain, either.

To further expound on dealerships, these issues are also not unique to the Detroit companies. Nearly every brand has franchise dealers. If Toyota can manage to work with independent dealers, then the Detroit manufacturers can do likewise. Furthermore, those dealers in decaying neighborhoods are almost exclusively Detroit brands. This means that Detroit has the market cornered in that area. While it may not be a big market, there is potential there still. And if you get out of the cities, the dealerships become almost exclusively American brands. Advantage Detroit.

Next Mr. Taylor argues that, "Marketing vehicles with names like Buick, Pontiac, Lincoln, Mercury, Dodge, and Chrysler is a real challenge that all the savvy and spending in the world isn't going to solve." In my opinion, Ford and GM are proving that they can work older brands to their advantage, at least with regards to Lincoln and Cadillac. While Buick, Pontiac, Mercury, and Dodge may not be currently helping their owners as much as possible, a little brand management can work wonders. And a brand's image is effectively based on only the last 10 years or so. Ask most consumers, and they will say that Dodge is about being the tough, rugged vehicle. While quality has been a issue at times, it is getting better. No one compares the Dodge of today with the Hornet of yester-year. Continue to evolve a brand, and the consumer will respond. At least as long as you evolve it in an attractive direction.

Mr. Taylor also argues that the amazing growth in competition is a negative for the Detroit brands. This one he may have right. But I don't count the Detroit automakers out, either. Losing market share is not killing a company as long as the company is proactive in what market share is lost and what market share it fights to retain. The biggest drain on the Detroit Three may not be the fact that they are losing market share, but that they are fighting for market share that isn't profitable in the first place. And if there is new competition from China, it is likely to be on the lower end of the vehicle spectrum initially. That makes me more wary of Mitsubishi and the Korean brands, who have little diversity outside of these lower markets.

Finally, Mr. Taylor argues that the "lack of white space" is killing the Detroit Three, posing the question, "Where are the new product opportunities today?" That is for the Detroit Three to determine. The only market segment introduced by a foreign company is the hybrid technology, which Mr. Taylor admits "aren't likely to generate much in the way of returns." What is the next break-out vehicle segment? If I knew, I wouldn't tell you. I would go sell myself to a Detroit auto maker. But me, or Mr. Taylor, not being able to see the next big thing doesn't mean that the US can't lead that thing. As long as the Detroit Three keep creative people on their staffs (which I believe they are doing), the next big idea may just save one or more of them.

I agree with Mr. Taylor that Detroit Automaker turnarounds are not going to be automatic. And they are not going to be immediate. But I am not writing any of them off currently either. And I also do not agree that dealerships, brands, competition, and new concepts put the Detroit companies in any worse position than import brands. It will remain a competition for the survival of the fittest. And as I see it, the recent steps by the Detroit automakers only position them to be more fit.

UPDATE: Chrysler Announces Vehicle Cuts

2007-11-01T09:01:00.000-05:00

I heard an update this morning, and found it on the Detroit News site, that the Chrysler PT Cruiser is not being cut. Only the PT Cruiser Convertible.

Makes you wonder if the profits off the convertible ever paid off the modifications to the plant that were required to make it. The roll-over hoop on the convertible makes the car taller than the hatchback version, and the paint line at the factory in Mexico had to be modified to clear the taller chassis. I know that the reports I heard at the time were that the investment was so large that Chrysler almost never produced the convertible version. Hope they didn't lose money overall.

Also, I mentioned the Dodge "twin" to the Pacifica. Well, I found some information again. It is to be called the Journey, and it is still listed on the Dodge website as a 2009 model available early 2008. With that schedule, it must be too late to kill, as the plant has to already be tooling up and starting pre-production testing. Not sure why Chrysler would keep the Journey and kill the Pacifica, instead of making the Pacifica "near-luxury" version of the Journey.

Guess the guys (and gals) at Chrysler are smarter than me!

Chrysler Announces Vehicle Cuts

2007-10-31T13:25:00.001-05:00

Well, I am disappointed, though not surprised, by some new out of Detroit. The Detroit News website has announced that Chrysler is expected to kill four vehicles from its lineup (this is from a single paragraph, 1/3 of the way down the linked article).

The four vehicles are the Dodge Magnum and the Chrysler Pacifica, PT Cruiser, and Crossfire. My thoughts on each:

Dodge Magnum

This may be the most surprising of the cuts. I see a lot of these on the road, mostly modified versions with 20" wheels (or larger). They are quite sharp looking on the outside. The only reasoning I can figure is that the interiors in these cars are so bad that no one wants to buy them. This is something that a mid-cycle overhaul might be able to fix. Of course, the terrible gas mileage, even in the V6, doesn't help either. Chrysler claims 18/26 for city/highway mileage. The one I drove got about 20 highway. Don't know why the difference.

Chrysler Pacifica

This one is the biggest shame of the four. It has to be one of the most versatile cars on the market. Seating for six, good vehicle dynamics, and decent efficiency. And the new 4.0 liter V-6 makes it a blast to drive. It is also interesting because Dodge showed a pre-production car earlier this year that looked to be a cross-branding of the next generation Pacifica. If the Pacifica is getting the axe, will the new Dodge never make it to market?

Chrysler PT Cruiser

The current PT Cruiser needs to die. Let's face it, while the car started out selling like hot-cakes, years of neglect have relegated it to an also-ran for most car shoppers. This is the perfect example of the trap that vehicle manufacturers can fall into with "heritage" designs. The PT cruiser was so unique and retro-cool, that Chrysler couldn't figure out how to update it. Either the vehicle exterior changes and loses the cool factor, or the vehicle stays the same and stagnates (as it has). I hate to see this bit of styling flair disappear, but the time has come. Maybe Chrysler can replace it with some new cool car.

Chrysler Crossfire

This has been expected since it was announced that Chrysler was on the sales block. The Crossfire is essentially a Mercedes in American clothes. And Mercedes no longer makes this vehicle for itself, instead completely redesigning the SLK upon which the Crossfire is/was based. I do hate to see this go away, as it is a hot little car. But it has sold less than 10,000 this year so far and is probably not making money for Chrysler anymore.

Must We Regulate Common Sense?

2007-10-30T13:55:00.001-05:00

OK, this post isn't really on the "C-C-R" topics, but I found an article today on Yahoo! that describe a series of "awards" by Consumers International for the "world's worst products." While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I found some of there award "winners" to be interesting choices.

The first prize was for a sleeping pill targeted for children. Really, the product was not at issue, but instead an advertising campaign for the medicine. Of course, this sleeping pill is a prescription drug, so even if a child or parent wants to use it, they still have to consult with a doctor. So short of false advertising, which this was not, is this really one of the "worst products"?

What really made me frustrated was the next item discussed. The description was:

Another award went to drinks giant Coca-Cola for pushing marketing "into the realms of the ridiculous" in the United States and South America with its Dasani bottled water which is sourced from the same reservoirs as local tap water.

Now I like television. And I read magazines. I have seen Dasani ads. What about the advertising for Dasani is "ridiculous"? The adds for Dasani that I have seen indicate a fresh, clean water conveniently packaged and sold in many locations. The adds do not depict people living longer with Dasani. They also do not claim to be any fresher or more natural than any other source. Why is the ad "ridiculous"?

If I look at the label on a bottle of Dasani, it does not claim to be anything more or less than water. In fact, the Coca-Cola description of Dasani is "water - pure and essential."

For those of you that do not know, Dasani is fresh water. That means that Coca-Cola makes Dasani by finding a clean water source, performing additional purification, and then bottling it. If you are at all familiar with water purification, you are aware that the cost of purification is directly related to how much junk has to be taken out of the water. If you start with swamp water, the purification process can be expensive. Same is true for sea water, as salt is not easy to remove once dissolved. Therefore, before Coca-Cola starts a bottling operation for Dasani, just as PepsiCo does for Aquafina, the cleanest water source possible is found. This is typically a municipal water supply.

I have not seen either Coca-Cola or PepsiCo advertise that their fresh water product is any healthier than my (or your) tap water. In my particular case, it most likely is, as my municipality does little more than bring water out of the ground, strain it, inject fluoride, and send it to my house. Where I grew up, the case is different, as our water was very clean. In fact, it was a regional water source for PepsiCo's Aquafina.

When I have heard commentary on this type of issue from either Coca-Cola or PepsiCo, the company response is usually along the lines of, "Our product is intended to be clean water. The primary reason for bottling it is to give the consumer a consistently safe, clean, and tasty water that they can consume while on the go. If they choose to drink it in their house, that is the consumer's choice."

I guess Consumer International's complaint is with the fact that these companies intend for the consumer to make a logical, reasonable choice after gaining some knowledge.

Using that logic, I guess there is no place in society for common sense and personal responsibility. That's a shame.

Why Do Journalists Ignore the Little Guy?

2007-10-26T13:32:00.001-05:00

I am sick of seeing journalists write articles about alternative automotive technology on data gathered from the large auto manufacturers. There is almost never any credit given to the small, original thinkers that are trying to get new ideas and companies started.

Case in point today: CNNMoney has a "photo gallery" discussing the new GM Fuel Cell Equinox SUV that will soon be tested in several large cities ("GM Tests Fuel Cell Cars in Real World"). I applaud GM for testing a new vehicle technology without a government mandate to do so. This is a technology that has the potential to one day change the world. And that is good.

But in their gallery, CNNMoney also discusses the issues that are delaying the progress of alternative automotive technology. They repeat the GM line that batteries are the limit to purely electric or highly efficient pug-in hybrid vehicles (like the Chevy Volt). The website reports:

Allowing the vehicle to charge from a wall outlet would mean greater range. The downside is that a system like this requires battery technology that doesn't yet exist. The batteries would have store and release enough energy to drive a vehicle at full speed without assistance from an engine or fuel cell.

The batteries would also have to stay cool and last the life of the vehicle. GM is working with two battery companies to research possible solutions, but there is no guarantee the problems will be solved any time soon.

The article further quotes reports that, "Toyota has also said the battery technology required for viable plug-in vehicles will not be available soon."

While I understand that battery technology is causing headaches, I fail to see why an article like this neglects the fact that there is actually a car company currently pre-selling fully electric cars that not only have a realistic driving range but will outperform 90% of the cars on the road. This car company is Tesla Motors.

I admit that I have a certain affection for Tesla Motors. But the root of that affection is the fact that Tesla isn't talking about changing the future of the automobile. They are doing it. Tesla expects to deliver its first 125 mph Roadster in the first quarter of 2008 (actually 50 in the first quarter).

And the Tesla Roadster is not a car with a 40 mile range, like Chevy says the Volt can run on batteries alone. The Tesla has a 245 mile range under typical combined cycle driving. Most people could drive at least 4 days, if not a week, on that range.

And to matters more exciting, the Tesla Roadster accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in approximately 4 seconds. Talk about performance!

Are there caveats? Of course. The car is not inexpensive (around $100,000). And there is currently a waiting list of at least a year.

But why does a website like CNNMoney, or a magazine like MotorTrend, continually report on the big automobile company alternative efforts and neglect a company like Tesla that is close to producing the first drivable electric car available for purchase in the US? And worse, to state that the battery technology doesn't exist for purely electric cars when there is such a car undergoing (and passing) federal safety testing as I write this!

And CNNMoney and MotorTrend cannot claim ignorance. The have both published articles about Tesla previously. They just seem to have a short memory that is easily impressed by people with big sales volumes.

My final point. Some will choose to ignore a company like Tesla because they only expect to sell 600 cars in the 2008 model year. Do not forget that Henry Ford started by building one internal combustion engine in his basement. Look where Ford has been and will hopefully return. But those who bet against Henry Ford made a big mistake. So don't lightly bet against Tesla Motors either.

As Margaret Mead said, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."