Theologous

I dislike the term "Religious." Religion refers to the practices and the ceremonies, which are all secondary and imagery for the main point. For instance, I would consider baptism religion and by extension not totally necessary but salvation a definite requirement. Praying before a meal-religion, thankfulness and humility before an Almighty God, necessary.

So what word is there that means what I want to mean when I say religious? I don't know, there's some general terms like "faithful", "believers", "lovers of God" but I want one that can just directly replace. So here it is, theologous. I would consider my self a theologian, I have a distinct theology, the pope and the Vatican is theocratic, and I like to talk about God but not have to be talking about practices when I do it so I am theologous.

The other purpose of the distinction is I would like to define my theologous ideas as things that I am for, as opposed to religious practices which are often defined in the negative (don't eat this, don't touch that, don't don't don't don't). And note that I am taking a stand merely against words, not against organized religion or Christianity as a whole, just the terms I use to define these things as they apply directly to my life.

Twitter Hate

So Twitter has become this thing, this unstoppable beast of a thing, where thoughts go before your brain filters them. Apparently, they are now newsworthy.

Think of the repercussions of that, every single person with a smart phone or computer addiction is an author of current-history. There are several aggregating websites and trend sites that make Twitter information as accessible as it is vast and vapid.

So now, we have all of these unfiltered, un-spell-checked thoughts being sorted and used for online and offline news stories. Not to mention it's like facebook but even more of a waste of time.

Scary stuff, scary stuff.

Image Bearing

So here's a little piece of theology: God created man in his own image.

Here's a little piece of heresy: that means that we should be full of ourselves. We look like god, we know good and evil like god, yeah?

No. If anything, it's a weighty responsibility, not a liberating license to self-worship. Just like children to our earthly fathers, we have the option of being obedient and bringing joy to our father's heart, or bucking authority and hurting the one who loves us the most.

Here's one that combines this idea of image-bearing with the idea of sanctification (through the work of the Holy Spirit becoming more Christ-like, loving others, seeking purity):

First we're children of our fathers (both parents, but fathers for the sake of this analogy)

Then we're adults

Then we're a married couple

Then we're fathers of our own children and the cycle begins again

As children, we learn what it is to submit to a father (or step-father, or father figure, or mother who has to take up the paternal role for whatever reason).

Hopefully by single adulthood we've matured and learned from our adolescence, and we are then vessels of the Holy Spirit (assuming you're a believer). As Christians (a word which means little Christs) we are all extolled to emulate Christ and allow the Holy Spirit to work through us.

Marriage is a picture of how Christ loves the church (in this case church means the universal church). Wives submit to your husbands (the church submits to the authority of Christ), but I would say the part that gets overlooked, not said enough, and sometimes even ignored is that husbands are to be Christ to their wives. Going back to my first point, does that mean treat your wife like a slave and just accept her submission? NO, absolutely not. What'd Christ do for the church? Gave his life and even still loves, serves, and comforts. That's what husbands are supposed to be. In a sense husbands are to be image-bearers of Christ.

Now the last one is more obvious, fatherhood. God disciplined his children (Israel in the old testament), but never stopped loving them and working for them, even when they were disobedient, riotous, and self-destructive. Men, you either are or will one day become fathers, and you aren't supposed to give your kids a bad example so they know what God their Father is not, but you are to bear the image of God for your kids to know "God loves me unconditionally like a father, like my father."

In other words, by the time you reach fatherhood you are to be vessels and tools of the Holy Spirit, Christ to your wife, and a good father to your children.

When I hear the phrase "God created man in his own image" I don't think that God's form is limited to a human-esque appearance, or that I'm some how more important because I'm in God's image, I think that it's a statement outlining the lives we are to live, the stature with which we are to hold ourselves, and the responsibilities and commands God has given us.

The BenzenBurris Uncertainty Principle

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states by precise inequalities that certain pairs of physical properties, such as position and momentum, cannot be simultaneously known to arbitrarily high precision (Thanks Wikipedia.)

What that means is according to Heisenberg, the more sure you are of one element in an equation, the less you have to be of another (in these certain pairs of physical properties, like the where and when of an electron).

In the BenzenBurris Uncertainty Principle, the more on top of your junk that you are in one class, the less you are in all other classes. ie: once you're passing one, you start to realize you have no idea what's going on with the others.

This is not to be confused with my Conservation of Motivation theorem, that motivation cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. Like I had a lot of motivation to do all my homework tonight for the rest of the week and relax, but instead I got all OCD on my cleaning and my room looks great but my homework does not :-<. Motivation also naturally transfers from Schoolwork (a very high potential for failure, the opposing force of motivation) to video games (which has a very low potential failure).

This is how science works.

Clemson Football:New Recruits

So, a lot of people know that I'm not very good at sports. Nor am I knowledgeable of sports. Nor do I understand most of the rules, skills, gameplay, or appeal. I digress.

Thanks to the internet, even with my minimal knowledge of the event, I can understand means of improvement. So, it's time to announce my suggestions for mid-season recruits

that will help Clemson's F-Ball game go from a concussion to a minimal discomfort.

First up on the new roster:

Davy Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean.

Is he a tormented soul with a tentacle face? Yes. Does

he have the hands necessary to catch a ball? He certainly oughtta. Plus think of the intimidation factor on the field when the octo-beard is threatening to carry your soul on a boat for life and turn you into a coral-thing. Unfortunately he's been redshirted, plus he can't actually tread on land, so, that sucks.

recruit number 2: The Tar-Monster from Scooby Doo

People put sticky black crap on their hands to cheat all the time in football movies (my main source of athletic knowledge) so why not get a monster made entirely of tar? If you pass to him from any direction it sticks to him, he makes his way down the field dragging anyone who tries to tackle him. The ball "breaks the plane" and we get touchdown after sticky sticky touchdown.

And then... oh wait, crap. nix that too. Apparently some kids unmasked the tar-monster and it's just old man Stoner scaring off workers for a crack at some ancient treasure. Not making up the last name.

Okay, so I'm "oh and two" as they say (thank you Google) but I think my last recruit is a real winner. Someone we can all relate to, someone that will confuse and shock the other team. Someone with a lot of heart and the tools to catch the ball better than our current receivers.

Recruit 3: 10 year old with a sticky hand

Mr. Swinney, I am willing to be paid 14 thousand dollars for this advice.