1 March 2004
"The Passion of The Christ" explains the mystery of Christianity.
What’s all this stuff about forgiveness of sins, ask skeptics.
God landed on earth in order to die cruelly, taking on the punishment for all of our sins.
We sin a lot – which needed huge punishment. Sin is another name for evil in the world.
The punishment was simply awful – a fact that this film focuses on.
If His death had been painless, there would have been no reason to come – and no Christianity.
It is amazing that the creator of the universe was prepared to suffer for us so much
- a definition of love.
For those who don’t understanding these matters, Christianity is just another religion.
Gibson makes us understand them through images that will stay with us till we die.
I’d recommend people don’t wait till then before they realise the Truth.
This film may jolt many to figure out that a relationship with God (through Jesus)
is essential to all of us. It took the thief on the cross to paradise.
More than anything the film made me love God more, for what he did for me, my
sins in the past, and those I will commit in the future.
1 February 2004
I was showering the other day (where my best ideas come) and I realised that the project I had been working on for a couple of weeks would bear no fruit if I carried out my intention to write a proposal and send it to client. By then I knew the information the client needed. Writing a report would take four or five hours. He lives two hour's drive away, so if instead I visit him and present my findings face to face, I actually save time.
So I called him and he has agreed that we will meet for that purpose, even though he had earlier asked for a proposal. In the past I have sometimes been less logical, and sent comprehensive proposals that took me days to write. They have never resulted in a decision to act by the client. Proposals never do. In fact they are more likely to give the client reasons not to act (often because they don't get round to reading the proposal).
In government, endless studies are done and reports forwarded with never a change to the status quo as a result. It's the same phenomenon.
The missing ingredient in each case is salesmanship. In my experience, very few people act without being sold. Recently my secretary Lynn decided of her own free will to apply for Long Term Care insurance, but she is a very unusual lady. I have rarely experienced situations where people ask for financial (planning) products; they must be sold.
I suspect it is true in most other fields.
1 January 2004
I hate to criticize my fatherland, but after a splendid 2-weeks holiday there with family, I am left with some thoughts that confirm my pleasure in living in Canada. The first group of thoughts are easy to articulate, and are based on invasions of daily living by the authorities that I found oppressive. The widespread use of speed bumps that are unnecessarily large and quite capable of wrecking a car’s suspension was an immediate turn-off (though I suspect they were at the request of local residents). The plethora of cameras photographing cars driving on bus lanes, and other infractions, means that we are in danger of receiving summonses as a result of our week’s driving. The rules of “Congestion Charges London” are however the most anti-social and threatening of civil liberties.
I think the basic idea of tolls for drivers in central London is good, and it allowed us to drive in the West End with ease I had never before experienced. However, when I got on the Net the next morning I found that our £5 charge should have been paid by 10:00 pm on the day of our visit, and the penalty for us was now £40! I had assumed that, since we were not asked for money on entering the protected area, we would receive a bill in the mail. The City of London assumes that the population, including tourists, knows that the fee should be pre-paid. None of our friends or relatives did, and our car rental company had never mentioned it. Since we already had a parking charge of £40 for overstaying a pay and display lot, this was painful.
The explanation for the draconian policy and extortionate fines may be explained by the extreme attitude of Ken Livingston, the Lord Mayor of London, who stated years ago that he hated cars and would do everything in his power to fight them. As an arch socialist he probably sees them as toys of the upper and middle classes. The additional information from our taxi-driver on our ride to the airport that traffic lights in London are now a-synchronized (so that a succession of green lights never occurs) hammers the point home.
My second thoughts are an impression that the animals have started to run the farm; that decisions are being made by people more interested in making political points than improving the environment for living. I heard that a town council prevented a church from advertising Christmas services on a council notice board. In the past I always had the impression that the folk making the infrastructure decisions were on our side and would generally improve the situation by their decisions. Now I’m not so sure. In Canada we are less tight for space so have an advantage, but I do feel that the government is still basically on our side. Hopefully we won’t be following in the UK’s footsteps any time soon.
1 December 2003
Quote from Canadian Technology and Business magazine, 12.2003/01.2004, (no page numbering):
Wouldn't you prefer to receive that e-mail from anywhere in the office, or find that file even in an airport longe? Or maybe to sit out on the deck at home, surfing the Web or dealing with those e-mails that won't wait until Monday morning, while enjoying warm breezes and a cold beer?
Frankly, no.
1 November 2003
Who has my cellphone number? Answer, my wife and my secretary.
Don't ask for it; the answer is "no."
1 October 2003
Am I interested in owning a cellphone which takes pictures?
No, I'm not.
1 September 2003
I gave a talk about Alpha to a congregation in a small town where we had taken out a half-page ad for local Alpha courses. Very few in the audience had
seen the ad, even though the newspaper is free and delivered to their doors. If I had asked them who had read David Warren in the Ottawa Citizen, or gone to WorshipFest, or had tickets for the David Bowie film the next day, or knew who Phil Ochs was, or many topical activities, none would have known what I was talking about.
If I had questioned them on the exploits in a daytime soap opera, they probably would have fought to have their opinions heard. How have we come to this - lives untouched by matters that can shape society, yet riddled with trivia.
There are so many things in my own life that fill me with emotion and wonder, yet seem unknown to my friends and acquaintances, and I have a longing to share such pleasures. I think what I'll do is start listing some of those things so that I at least can savour them.
Now, I am aware that there are subjects that excite others that I prefer to lat pass me by. One is North American sport. Because I didn't grow up with the games, or develop a relationship with them, I consciously exclude them from my radar, thereby saving quite a lot of time for other activity, such as the Internet.
By the same token, why should I expect friends not to do the same, consciously excluding certain activities (eg rock concerts) from their spread of activities. Tit for tat. Nevertheless, I will indulge myself and make that list of items that I can't understand why others don't get as much of a kick out of them as I do.
1 August 2003
At the Toronto Alpha Conference (today and tomorrow) Sandy Millar said something that has made a profound impression of my understanding of the way
some other people think (by the way the conference was the largest yet with 2000 delegates, and a truly wonderful experience). In a discussion on the distinctions between appreciation of Chistianity by the head and by the heart, Sandy mentioned that he had heard from a lady who was demonstrably strong in her faith and said she didn't care whether Chistianity was true or not, she still
wished to follow it because it was such a meaningful and profound philosophy (at least that is the gist of her comment). I believe her other interests we in new age areas.
This was an eye-opener to me and may explain why some folk are committed to Earth, to nature, to Wicca, to Budha, and to Islam and indeed all other religions. David Warren is reported in this month's Christian Current as stating that he believes Islam's weakness is that it is false - "but it is splendidly false." For me, if I did not believe in the truth of Christianity, including all the great miracles, the resurrection and the virgin birth, I wouldn't waste a further thought on it.
1 July 2003
On 11 June 2003 The court of appeal challenged the federal government by instantly legalizing homosexual marriage, and the government has accepted this decision from an unelected body created at least in part by patronage. Apparently they applied the logic of the Charter of Rights, which says that all groups should be treated equally and fairly, so homosexuals should be treated in the same way as heterosexuals.
During my childhood I discovered (with some fascination) that I was not equal to girls, and later in life I have noticed that God had a good reason for the ways he designed us - male and female - who would marry and have children. Suggesting that homosexuals be encouraged to marry breaks the fundamental rules of that design. To treat the group in equality with heterosexuals is as flawed as it would be to insist that males and females visit each others' public toilets or that men and women should all wear unisex clothes. "Vive le difference" say the French.
The theory of evolution suggests that nature supports the survival of the fittest and those who can be beneficial to the species. It has appropriately arranged that there would be no progeny from homosexuals. You may ask why God would create homosexuals. The sins of the forefathers are visited on future generations; to the 10th generation in this case.
The Netherlands and Belgium have led the way in recognizing homosexual marriage and Canada wants to follow. I foresee Canada's becoming the gay wedding destination for America (and they can smoke pot legally when they get here). Is this the image we seek for our beloved country? We have protected the rights of pedophiles so the prognosis is not good. While I don't want the government in my bedroom, neither do I promote heterosexuality, so I don't want to listen to homosexuals promoting their lifestyles in gay parades. I particularly don't want to see men kissing men or women kissing women on TV - it makes me nauseous.
The US will not enact similar legislation because George Bush in particular is guided by God's laws (none of us are perfect followers) and makes no secret of the fact, and the US population as a whole still knows what the Bible says, and are rightly less concerned about the sensibilities of non-Christians. Canada's politicians seem to believe that speaking out for God's rules is politically incorrect. They have fostered an atmosphere where promoting religion or religious values is not vote-catching. They are forgetting that the whole of our civilization is based on the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount.
The motivation of homosexuals to marry is at least partly influenced by the gaining of pension and other financial rights by a survivor. As a taxpayer I have a problem with that.
Should homosexuals marry? 67% said "no" in a June 17, 2003 National Post poll.
1 June 2003
Another G8 summit, this time starting in St. Petersburg, and moving to Evian, France. President Putin hosted the St.Petersburg leg - this just a week after he hosted
Paul McCartney on a tour of the Kremlin and Paul sang to 20,000 in Red Square May 24. This is hatred crumbling before our eyes. "Peace will
never come until we have changed human nature, until people begin loving each other instead of hating each other" (reading for November 13 in 'Day by day with Billy Graham').
Some believe that McCartney and the band had a hand in bringing down the iron curtain. See link.
Yet there are many today that oppose closer communication by world leaders. They appear to want to prevent
the kind of relationship-building and cooperation implied by gatherings such as the G8 summits, and they oppose increased global trade. While power wielded by international corporations should be subject to national and international law, I say this is no reason for sometimes violent protest. I'm equally unhappy with heavy-handed response by
security forces (including in Canada) in riot gear forcibly restraining peaceful marchers for any cause.
1 May 2003
Re the current debate about filtering pornography from children on library internet terminals (in Ottawa).
Let's make an assumption that we have the technology to filter out porn sites accurately (we haven't).
I cannot comprehend why any sane person would want pornography accessible in libraries to anyone, children or adult, and the matter should never have ever reached public debate. The chief librarians should have just installed the filters. Anyone who feels otherwise is simply wrong or a pervert.
It is incomprehensible to me that a year has been spent discussing this matter. Why would we want to do anything on behalf of anyone wanting to watch pornography on a public library terminal? These are the same people who bombard our e-mail inboxes with disgusting spam.
If the Civil Liberties Association says otherwise, then surely they will lose sympathy from all good people.
Is it possible I am the only person who feels this way? Has the world gone quite mad? My local library has had to put up screens so that people wanting to look at porn will not upset passers by. Having said all of the above, the ONLY argument that supports the status quo is that if we can't yet accurately filter out porn sites we might filter out some sites that are legitimate, and we might fail to filter some porn sites.
1 April 2003
War - and Canada polarized over PM Chretien's decision not to support the action of USA and Britain and about 40 other nations
to attack Iraq without UN sanction. The battle for Baghdad will start soon. Saddam's militia is firing on his own people preventing them fleeing
from Basra where they were unwilling human shields. This fact alone is enough to illustrate the evil in the situation,
an evil which in my view the Americans and British were absolutely right to challenge with force, and alone had the guts to act. My prayer and those of millions is that they will succeed before many more are
killed on both sides. Isn't it interesting how there is no animosity towards Iraqis, only to Saddam. With James somewhere in the war area, I have a
very personal concern for these events, unfolding in graphic detail on our screens.
There seem to be two types of political leaders: those who do what they judge the majority of their constituents want them to do, and those who do what is right even when the people
they lead are against it - because they don't know all the facts. Only the second type are really leaders. The first seem to rule by opinion poll from behind.
I believe opinion polls are worse than useless. I'm sure Churchill never let them influence his decisions.
My take on the reason for the war is this. Iraq is geographically strategic, bordering on many middle east countries that are sometimes opposed to US foreign policy. Iraq itself is a huge oil producer. In the continuing War Against Terrorism, triggered by the events of September 11, 2001 when the USA was attacked on its own soil,
the USA will take both tactical and strategic steps to smoke out terrorists and countries that harbour terrorists and violently oppose US foreign policy.
Saddam made a grave mistake provoking the US to attack Iraq by failing to comply with UN resolution 1441. Had he kept his head down
he could have quietly continued his dictatorship for years. Instead USA now had an excuse to attack, and pursue the War Against Terrorism, and as a huge bonus, take control of one of the most strategic areas in the world.