Monday, December 25, 2006

Merry Christmas

I was thinking about Philippians and things good and high today, being the celebrated day of my Saviors birth. Back a while I worked for an atheist and still do a bit here and there, when home, for some getting by money; he wished me a Merry Christmas when we finished looking at a job yesterday. I was considering afterwards, where would this world be without thoughts as good and as high as Christ born for men to at least wrestle with, even if they want to continue in unbelief.

I was reading Milton on this morn;

That glorious Form, that Light unsufferale,
And that far-beaming blaze of Majesty,
Wherewith he wont at Heav'n's high Council-Table,
To sit the midst of Trinal Unity,
He laid aside; and here with us to be,
Forsook the Courts of everlasting Day,
And chose with us a darksome House of mortal Clay.

It does my soul well to remember a childlike faith on the Day the Savior twas born.

Sunday, December 10, 2006


Cast the dye, I’ll take my lot,
Among the working men this way,
Not for bread or a chalet.
For, today I’ve made the Day.
Far from great I sit this date,
Victory, not, in heights and lights,
But over my simple delights.
Passion conquered, treaded down.
Victory! With battle axe I do resound,
For what are danger, death, and toil,
I bring my battle axe to soil,
What ever comes across my path.
For, I weld the Battle Axe.

O sharpened steel, O glistening blade,
With you who can draw the shade?
Wallow not in yellow mire,
Burn will I in fiercest fire.
Let me stand with men of old,
Slay the dragons, take the gold.
Or point my mighty stag,
Toward home. For here I stand,
I’ll take the day.
For wit have I, and blood to pay.

- C. R. Honsinger

Thursday, November 30, 2006

Christians on Mars

“Pride cometh before the Fall”

Now I have heard preached not long ago that the teachings of the apostle Paul as to eternal rewards were not to be taken as such. Or if one was to push after a crown in heaven he would, upon reaching the holy city of God, fall down and lay those crowns at the feet of Christ Jesus. Therefore the giving of rewards is a sort of dog treat to get us to come upon which we will realize the glory of God in full. Thus the real spiritual truth is not one of striving for ourselves but for Jesus. Now, certainly we are not about ourselves or should live for our self enjoyment but for our risen Lord. However to then nullify the just and promised rewards that Christ has offered is a rash conclusion. Further this very nearly calls into every man’s heart (excuse the christianesse) a most hideous temptress. She who knocks at the core of our desires to go and taste the delights of dominion, house, fields, manors, vineyards, palaces; she who calls us to take a position. For what has a man to pride himself in, but position, within this soiled world? Position means all, but all is vanity.

Nothing you know or do will remain, all of your toil with which you labored under the sun will given to another. The place that you make will come to nothing and you shall die. And so what has that royal philosopher to offer us as young men but to, “walk in the ways of your heart and the sight of your eyes” and to “know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment”. It follows that we then find our toil that meets our desires and, if wise, avoid the pits of folly. The fear of God keeps our path strait, our toil joyous, and the step of our gait light. But for the Christian is this it, is that all? Reading Ephesians, with Saint Paul exhorting you to put on the armor and, if you are a man, a deep Norse cry fills your silent tongue followed by a swinging battle axe and rallying grunts exclaiming that now is the time for all demon head. When those thoughts fill the lofty regions of our cerebral tubing, it makes you consider. How does the correspondence work between the two; Christ and working Joe, Paul and Solomon, for it just doesn’t seem to come together.

Now let us consider Paul’s appraisal of himself. He certainly thought something of himself. How else would Christians want to imitate him as he imitated Christ if he did not have something of substance? He thought himself worthy of praise, but he did not value himself by the worlds standards, he was a pilgrim, and prided himself according to heaven. He prided himself according to the standing of his heart. As he wanted to be known to the Corinthians conscience’s so he was commending himself, giving “you cause to be proud of us, so that you may be able to answer those who pride themselves on a man’s position and not on his heart” (2 Cor. 12). We should therefore not hold to our futile worldly positions but seek placement of our heart under Christ in eternity so that we may live out our days with peace here on earth. For we are now in the glorious time when a Savior rules all and we will either be dealt the iron rod or a gracious circumcision of heart. What then should a man do but enjoy himself on the few days he has here on earth? Live, Live that which is found in Christ.

Saturday, October 14, 2006

Bohemian Service

Shall I do service here today
Here a thought to thus express,
'My life is such a littering mess',
But here today meet I again

Miltonic form in humble rags
Starry heaven framed this gaze
Moved with fear to till thee grain
Strait eternal graced to mortal,

If love I not; tis I be humbled.

Friday, July 07, 2006

Yea mystic mountains
What dost one say
When all is poetray

Friday, April 14, 2006

Revelation: Water shall grow ye crops

I visited an oracle the other day. Years of awkwardness need not be more, he seemed to say. Gain understanding ye dim wit. Thus too has art and cadence and thought. Society, a complicated affair, I thought and left. Can this too be know how, simple as that?

Saturday, April 08, 2006

The Potion

For a change of tone from the mouthy jumble of the last post; I attended an Opera tonight. The Elixir of Love surpassed my expectations for a college production. As might be reasoned from the title the plot line followed a boy overcome with a girl, Adina, and unable to win her as she falls for a smooth commanding officer. At this point the “doctor” with the love elixir comes in. He downs the elixir and, believing that all women will fall for him, takes the engaged Adina from the officer, and in an embrace of love the Opera ends. Now, our man is the typical Stu (the man who lacks all the basic knowledge of how to win a women and in his impropriety displays this passionate simplicity disastrously), and this Stu like most is turned away. Thus the Stu turns to the elixir and is saved. In the act of taking the elixir however he gains confidence. It is in this confidence that he takes her heart. For as soon as she finds he doesn’t need her, finds him desireless, she is pulled to him. I want it to be made known thitherto that when crumbling at the feet of that beauty: I will remember the elixir and with confidence—she shall come to me.

Thursday, February 16, 2006


The current notion of tolerance originated or at least was advanced into a broadly held idea by the enlightenment thinkers, the philosophes. Voltaire, for one, reasoned that given that our knowledge is limited we can never claim an absolute truth but need to rather have a degree of “tolerance” where we admit we know nothing. It was from this that the phases we are likely familiar with originated; arguments such as, “How can you be so narrow minded” or “How can your religion be the right one?” These arguments are making the presupposition that this knowledge can never be understood.

However, Voltaire, made the argument that one could know the boundaries of the unknown or as a modern man put it, "we are certain about what we cannot know in subatomic physics, and can even measure precisely the "tolerance" within which our knowledge is bounded." Henceforth, following this reasoning, our sensual knowledge can only go so far after which we must concede our uncertainty of the deeper matter. Thus, it follows, that we can never have “absolute” knowledge, but that the knowledge that we do have should account for uncertainty with a degree of tolerance. Now this idea which originated among the philosophes should not be accepted as reasonable.

For if I am certain that my boundaries for this 'zone of uncertainty' are correct, then I am claiming that the "thinking" within my head is able to know a correct notion about something. For my mind to be able to have this knowledge of 'something' it must be real, be true, even if this 'something' contains aspects that I can not understand.

When I grant that my observations about the boundaries which set up 'a zone of uncertainty' are correct then it follows that my thinking that made correlated these observations is true. For what is not true, cannot be correct, what is correct is true. The vagueness that liberalism sets around the idea of truth fades when dealing with things material.

If truth exists and can be understood by the mind I cannot rule out the possibility of a truth which holds all other truths absolutely together. If our minds simply took in information and organized the material the truth would not have to originate anywhere. However the ability to reason through observations, to proceed to understanding these observations; leaves open the question of source. Strait forward life could have evolved from nothing theoretically (not with our world, which evidently displays design). However the only way a scientist could ever claim life did not come from the divine would be though reason. Do you see the fallacy here? If a man claims to be correct by observation he is claiming that there is such a thing as being correct and that he can obtain the knowledge of the correct. Where did this ability to be correct come from then? It could not have evolved because this reason steps out side of the created and criticizes observations. Something evolved could never step outside of the evolved, be able to weigh what it stepped outside of, and come up with a correct notion.

Reason therefore had to have a source. As I said before the idea of some thing being correct or true is one in the same. Reason and its ability to decipher the truth then came from somewhere. How could this source of reason not be ultimate, or the absolute truth?

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Testing, Testing, Dashboard D's

Mmmm, so is this how it starts?