The Morning Star on Christmas
For years they’ve argued about whether the “Star in the East” the magi talked about in Matthew’s gospel actually was a bright celestial event, a supernova, or just some prophesy or what. I suppose the argument will continue but I caught a most interesting new development the other day that may well be the real answer.
In the northern hemisphere our earth’s axis points toward Polarus, or the North Star. And all around it are a sphere of stars. The sphere appears to rotate around the Polarus axis as if one were standing inside a globe imprinted with the stars. All the stars are fixed in orientation to one another as one might expect, except for moon and sun and seven visible planets. Since earth’s axis is tilted 23.5 degrees with respect to the planetary plane of movements, these “wandering stars” move around and slowly progress through a belt that is 47 degrees wide --the same belt where the sun and moon come up and progress across the sky. That is, they come up somewhere in the east and progress across the southern sky and then set in the west. If you go out about 9 o’clock this time of year and look south, you’ll see the constellation Aries. As the night progresses the dome of stars moves from east to west and Pisces, then Aquarius come into that dead south position. As the months go by, the dozen or so constellations, named by ancient astronomers for the star formations, will rotate through the dome of stars so that each month a new constellation will be dead south and so forth. The ancient astronomers named the months, not for the prominent constellations that are straight south in early evening but for the one that is rising in the east as the sun sets. So Leo, the southern constellation in April is the east-rising constellation in July and that is the month designated as Leo. There is a lot of spooky belief about astronomers and astrologers today, but the astrologers were just fledgling scientists. They labored under the mistaken belief that if one could predict the seasons and crops from the movement of the heavens, then surely one could predict more good stuff from really studying the stars. And what interested the astrologers was not the fixed dome of stars but the wanderers—planets and moon. What they really thought significant was the times when the wanderers came very close together or crossed paths in their march across the sky.
A historian was looking at some ancient coins a few years ago. One side of a coin usually has a “head” of an important ruler or god, while the other side is “tails” which often had a commemorated event such as an important victory. On one side of a Syrian-minted coin just a few years after the birth of Christ, was a “head” of the god Zeus, king of the gods, and on the other was a ram looking over his shoulder at a very large star. The Ram is the constellation Aries. Was there a significant event that took place in Aries some time around the birth of Jesus? Well, it turns out that there was a stunning astrological event. During the month of April, 4 BC, the constellation Aries would have been rising just before daybreak. And planet Jupiter (or 'Zeus' as it was known then) was in Aries. The moon, which moves back 50 minutes each night in it’s sky position, would have been very very near the planet Jupiter just before dawn on April 17. In fact the moon, when it comes up just before the sun is a thin sliver (since we face mainly the dark side of the moon). And at about 35 degrees north latitude you would see Jupiter, which looks like a very bright star, just on the edge of the moon as if connected. Just north of 35 degrees you wouldn’t see Jupiter at all since the moon would be eclipsing it. Astrologically this is big stuff. Jupiter was called Zeus by the Greco-Roman world—king of the gods. The moon-star event is seen “in the east” just before daybreak, “the morning star”. And the constellation Aries, the Ram, was identified with the tiny nation of Judea astrologically. So here was born a king among the Jews, king above all gods. Oh, and April 17 was just after Passover of the Jews that year.
“Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin…” begins the story in Luke 1:26ff. The Jewish calendar starts in March and months are lunar so they are only 29 days long. Since 12 months doesn’t add up to a year, there are some years that begin very early in March and last 13 months. At any rate the sixth month is late July or August. And nine months later is April. “some shepherds were abiding in the field laying watch over their flocks by night” says Luke 2. Those passages are the only two hints about the time of year when Jesus was born. But the only time shepherds and sheep would have been ‘in fields’ rather than out to pasture is in the winter rainy season, Dec. to March—or early April if the ground was wet. Oh, and 4 BC is significant since that is the well-chronicled year Herod the Great died. He’s the paranoid king in the story of the Magi. And it was during this 'abiding in the fields' wintering-over that ewes had lambs and were given shelter under outcrops or caves in the cliffs around Bethlehem and fed supplemental hay in mangers. So most scholars think Jesus was born in or around early April of 4 BC.
But who, among the astrologers would think to travel to Judea and scout for a king that was born? Who, outside of little Judea would have known? The Jews had been conquered by the Babylonians 500 years before and during this time the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah foretold of a coming M’shia (Messiah), or “anointed one”, that is, “a king” expected among the Jews. The Greeks and Romans wouldn’t have heard this. So the magi (that is,the Babylonian word for “astrologers”) came from what we call Iraq today, seeking a king born among the Jews that would become ruler of everyone, king of kings and Lord of Lords. What irony that the former conquerers and oppressors had now come to find a king among the Jews.
And as one Messianic Jew (believers in Jesus Christ) said, “wouldn’t it be just too good, too fitting, if Jesus was born on Passover 4 BC and died on Passover?”
Merry Christmas everyone.
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Who killed Jesus?
I watched History Channel's "Who Really Killed Jesus" again last night. Their historical critical study of Passion week sums up well the historical critic views on what really went on during Jesus's trial and execution. They seem to agree that Jesus was a real life character, that he was executed by the Romans, was tried by Pilate. All those things were often held as myths when I was in college years ago. But they concluded that the 4 gospels had embellished these facts with fiction about those involved. In other words, the dialog was made up.
That Jesus was real seems evidenced easily by the fact that so many people were willing to die as martyrs for believing in him, that his disciples spread his message far and wide. And the primary and original belief of these Christians was that Jesus had risen from the dead. People just don't behave that way unless they are inspired. But then the archeologists have found a structure called the Tiberium, some sort of shrine to the Emperor Tiberius at the time, that was built by the Roman Praefect Pontius Pilate. A Praefect is like a military governor. So there went all the arguments that there was no Pontius Pilate. In fact they now concede that he was the guy who ruled Palestine after 26 AD.
Then they argued that whereas Pilate ruled from Caesaria, he also had a residence in Jerusalem which he would occupy to keep order and that he no doubt went there to observe Passover and put his troops on alert. Living "up on the Hill" made him part of the neighborhood of the rich Sadducee Jews who ran the temple so no doubt he was the closest of buddies to them. Indeed they were in charge of bringing in the money and he was in charge of transmitting tribute to Rome. (I find this preposterous. People often live in the same neighborhood or have similar interests but have no affinity for each other.) Moreover, Pilate's name indicates he was from a southern Italian tribe that was a rogue province of Rome. Few from there achieved much authority and they were distrusted. Pilate may have been one of the most promoted of those people. And he got there by his probable service in Germany where the Romans conquered in some of the most brutal battles ever fought by Rome. Josephus writes that Pilate was violent, shrewd, and killed Jews for hardly any reason. But then Josephus was probably making an editorial point that Pilate had abused the Jews. Nonetheless, Palestine was a rebellious place that wouldn't pay the Roman tax, and Romans probably sent a harsh man to govern. Blood meant nothing to this guy.
Thus the assumption that Pilate killed Jesus and that the Jews have been hung with guilt by the Christian writers. And that all the dialog between Jesus and Pilate was probably trumped up. (May I make a point: the first gospels were written in the 60's AD when Christianity was just a sect of Jews, so there was not so much motive to skewer the Jews with guilt in Matthew and Mark at least.) And that Pilate was "not a wishy-washy man as portrayed in the gospels". By this time I'm amused. So where in the gospels is Pilate declared wishy-washy? I do seem to remember a woman who taught my second grade Sunday School class who thought he was that way, but if you closely look at the text, it portrays him as smart and shrewd character who seems to have his eyes squinted in disbelief at the Jewish motives. Those Jewish leaders, whose fathers ran an independent state, and who are prime suspects as hating the Roman presence, have brought a penniless holy man forward and charged him with bogus kingship. Yes, Pilate's first thought was probably "away with him," and his first question was to the point, "Are you the King of the Jews?" But he has to be thinking why the dickens did these powerful Jews feel so threatened by this Jesus guy? What the heck are they up to? As I read the text it seems that Pilate is gaming the Jews, trying to make them tell about their motivations. From his perspective, this is all about the head Jews, not Jesus.
Imagine you are a conservative and head of the CIA. All the guys who work under you are liberals however, former State Dept. guys who were transferred by Obama. One day the crew brings you a file on some elderly Arab-American grandmother who has lived in the United States for 60 years peacefully. They know that terrorism is a hot button issue with you and they claim she is a terrorist. They begin to describe her with racist vitriol against Arabs that they think might somehow resonate with you, since that is how they see conservatives. Would you be suspect of their motives? Would you wonder why such an unlikely terrorist was brought to your attention? That's how I see Pilate.
In the end, of course, Pilate games the Jewish leaders all the way to the point of washing his hands of the judgment and nailing a flagrant sign over Jesus "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews". He's testing them. And the Sadducees practically turn themselves inside out trying to prove their undying loyalty to Rome. (By the way, many Jews read the gospels and conclude that it is sad how people under submission will act toward their fellow man--as in the concentration camps where some snitches tried to curry Nazi favors)
Now here's the interesting thing about the historical critics. These otherwise smart folks hang their entire "disproof" on what they infer as a friendship between Pilate and Jewish leaders. (tenuous)They proudly pronounce that Pilate was portrayed as wishy-washy by the gospels, perhaps more a popular notion with some church-goers than a faithful reading of the text. And the whole theme is to exonerate the Jews.
Well, I have news. Pilate killed him, Romans killed him, Jews killed him, everyone who has ever committed a sin killed him. That's the gospel message. And that's who really killed Jesus.
That Jesus was real seems evidenced easily by the fact that so many people were willing to die as martyrs for believing in him, that his disciples spread his message far and wide. And the primary and original belief of these Christians was that Jesus had risen from the dead. People just don't behave that way unless they are inspired. But then the archeologists have found a structure called the Tiberium, some sort of shrine to the Emperor Tiberius at the time, that was built by the Roman Praefect Pontius Pilate. A Praefect is like a military governor. So there went all the arguments that there was no Pontius Pilate. In fact they now concede that he was the guy who ruled Palestine after 26 AD.
Then they argued that whereas Pilate ruled from Caesaria, he also had a residence in Jerusalem which he would occupy to keep order and that he no doubt went there to observe Passover and put his troops on alert. Living "up on the Hill" made him part of the neighborhood of the rich Sadducee Jews who ran the temple so no doubt he was the closest of buddies to them. Indeed they were in charge of bringing in the money and he was in charge of transmitting tribute to Rome. (I find this preposterous. People often live in the same neighborhood or have similar interests but have no affinity for each other.) Moreover, Pilate's name indicates he was from a southern Italian tribe that was a rogue province of Rome. Few from there achieved much authority and they were distrusted. Pilate may have been one of the most promoted of those people. And he got there by his probable service in Germany where the Romans conquered in some of the most brutal battles ever fought by Rome. Josephus writes that Pilate was violent, shrewd, and killed Jews for hardly any reason. But then Josephus was probably making an editorial point that Pilate had abused the Jews. Nonetheless, Palestine was a rebellious place that wouldn't pay the Roman tax, and Romans probably sent a harsh man to govern. Blood meant nothing to this guy.
Thus the assumption that Pilate killed Jesus and that the Jews have been hung with guilt by the Christian writers. And that all the dialog between Jesus and Pilate was probably trumped up. (May I make a point: the first gospels were written in the 60's AD when Christianity was just a sect of Jews, so there was not so much motive to skewer the Jews with guilt in Matthew and Mark at least.) And that Pilate was "not a wishy-washy man as portrayed in the gospels". By this time I'm amused. So where in the gospels is Pilate declared wishy-washy? I do seem to remember a woman who taught my second grade Sunday School class who thought he was that way, but if you closely look at the text, it portrays him as smart and shrewd character who seems to have his eyes squinted in disbelief at the Jewish motives. Those Jewish leaders, whose fathers ran an independent state, and who are prime suspects as hating the Roman presence, have brought a penniless holy man forward and charged him with bogus kingship. Yes, Pilate's first thought was probably "away with him," and his first question was to the point, "Are you the King of the Jews?" But he has to be thinking why the dickens did these powerful Jews feel so threatened by this Jesus guy? What the heck are they up to? As I read the text it seems that Pilate is gaming the Jews, trying to make them tell about their motivations. From his perspective, this is all about the head Jews, not Jesus.
Imagine you are a conservative and head of the CIA. All the guys who work under you are liberals however, former State Dept. guys who were transferred by Obama. One day the crew brings you a file on some elderly Arab-American grandmother who has lived in the United States for 60 years peacefully. They know that terrorism is a hot button issue with you and they claim she is a terrorist. They begin to describe her with racist vitriol against Arabs that they think might somehow resonate with you, since that is how they see conservatives. Would you be suspect of their motives? Would you wonder why such an unlikely terrorist was brought to your attention? That's how I see Pilate.
In the end, of course, Pilate games the Jewish leaders all the way to the point of washing his hands of the judgment and nailing a flagrant sign over Jesus "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews". He's testing them. And the Sadducees practically turn themselves inside out trying to prove their undying loyalty to Rome. (By the way, many Jews read the gospels and conclude that it is sad how people under submission will act toward their fellow man--as in the concentration camps where some snitches tried to curry Nazi favors)
Now here's the interesting thing about the historical critics. These otherwise smart folks hang their entire "disproof" on what they infer as a friendship between Pilate and Jewish leaders. (tenuous)They proudly pronounce that Pilate was portrayed as wishy-washy by the gospels, perhaps more a popular notion with some church-goers than a faithful reading of the text. And the whole theme is to exonerate the Jews.
Well, I have news. Pilate killed him, Romans killed him, Jews killed him, everyone who has ever committed a sin killed him. That's the gospel message. And that's who really killed Jesus.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Joke of the Year
Jim sent me a forward labelled Joke of the Year, but I heard a better one from my uncle.
A little boy wrote a letter to God. He explained that they were poor and needed $100 desperately. The post office saw the letter sent to "God, USA" and so they forwarded it to Obama. He read it and chuckled and thinking that a little boy wouldn't know much about money told his secretary to send the boy $5. When the little boy got it he sat down and immediately wrote a thank you note to God.
Dear God,
I want to thank you so much for sending me the money. But somehow your letter got routed through Washington, DC and those devils took 95% of it! Thanks anyway.
A little boy wrote a letter to God. He explained that they were poor and needed $100 desperately. The post office saw the letter sent to "God, USA" and so they forwarded it to Obama. He read it and chuckled and thinking that a little boy wouldn't know much about money told his secretary to send the boy $5. When the little boy got it he sat down and immediately wrote a thank you note to God.
Dear God,
I want to thank you so much for sending me the money. But somehow your letter got routed through Washington, DC and those devils took 95% of it! Thanks anyway.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Banking
Well, appparently a Huntington Bancshares employee happened to find an old box full of checks. The checks included the last known signature of Abraham Lincoln on a check dated April 13, 1865, the day before he died. There were checks by Aaron Burr, Thomas Jefferson, FDR, and many other famous people. They had been sitting in a vault of a former Union Commerce Bank which had been taken over by Huntington 30 years ago. Not to worry. The checks were put on microfische and we think we can read the copies before the checks were destroyed.
No, I'm kidding. But Huntington was going to sell the old checks off, like so much yard sale garbage. However, the employees put together a display and public outcry led the bank to cancel the sale. I suppose that is because the bank was mystified about the value of the signatures. They never check signatures anymore. Now I'm being sarcastic.
I still am sore about the way the banking industry went paperless. When I got my first set of copied check images, my accountant said, "Where's the backsides? I can't read the checks." There were 18 check images to a page. Was my CPA being picky? He said that in an IRS audit or a court challenge, the first concern is, Is a check available as proof? It must be legible. There is no proof of check-cashing unless the string of endorsers from the backsides are also known and provided as proof. My banker fussed around about how it costs more to put 8 images on a page and would double costs to provide backside images. We persisted. The next month we got a terse letter that said we could have 8 images, front and back for an steep fee. Eventually I wrote a number of letters and the bank compromised to their current 12 images per page.
What happens if you get into a donnybrook with IRS and the courts hold that the bank images are insufficient? I guess you can sue your bank. And the bank will have already concluded that the losses due to such things aren't large enough to sway their policies of destroying and copying checks in small scale. That is exactly what they told me concerning check forgery where they don't check signatures anymore. So it is caveat emptor, buyer beware. Make sure you check your check images. I am happy to report that a more recent check dispute wherein I had to have a better image of my check, the bank had it still stored electronically and could provide an improved copy.
But the attitude reminds me of some of the crazy characters in the oil industry over the years. "Oh heck, just dump that doggone tank battery into the river. It's cheaper to fight the Water Resources Board than to change the way we want to do things." Oh, by the way, FDR only wrote a check for $1.65. That must have been before he got his hands on government. I saw a vehicle that had a license plate on the front that announced, "I got my car from F.D.R." and then in fine print beneath said, "Ford Dealers Ranch". I gather it's a car dealship, but it makes Democrats nostalgic.
No, I'm kidding. But Huntington was going to sell the old checks off, like so much yard sale garbage. However, the employees put together a display and public outcry led the bank to cancel the sale. I suppose that is because the bank was mystified about the value of the signatures. They never check signatures anymore. Now I'm being sarcastic.
I still am sore about the way the banking industry went paperless. When I got my first set of copied check images, my accountant said, "Where's the backsides? I can't read the checks." There were 18 check images to a page. Was my CPA being picky? He said that in an IRS audit or a court challenge, the first concern is, Is a check available as proof? It must be legible. There is no proof of check-cashing unless the string of endorsers from the backsides are also known and provided as proof. My banker fussed around about how it costs more to put 8 images on a page and would double costs to provide backside images. We persisted. The next month we got a terse letter that said we could have 8 images, front and back for an steep fee. Eventually I wrote a number of letters and the bank compromised to their current 12 images per page.
What happens if you get into a donnybrook with IRS and the courts hold that the bank images are insufficient? I guess you can sue your bank. And the bank will have already concluded that the losses due to such things aren't large enough to sway their policies of destroying and copying checks in small scale. That is exactly what they told me concerning check forgery where they don't check signatures anymore. So it is caveat emptor, buyer beware. Make sure you check your check images. I am happy to report that a more recent check dispute wherein I had to have a better image of my check, the bank had it still stored electronically and could provide an improved copy.
But the attitude reminds me of some of the crazy characters in the oil industry over the years. "Oh heck, just dump that doggone tank battery into the river. It's cheaper to fight the Water Resources Board than to change the way we want to do things." Oh, by the way, FDR only wrote a check for $1.65. That must have been before he got his hands on government. I saw a vehicle that had a license plate on the front that announced, "I got my car from F.D.R." and then in fine print beneath said, "Ford Dealers Ranch". I gather it's a car dealship, but it makes Democrats nostalgic.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Olin and Dusty
One week, two friends died, hard to take this in.
I owe Olin Branstetter a favor. Several years ago I was designing elderhostel classes and noticed that nowhere in the 20,000 classes offered nationwide was there one in petroleum. Now wasn't that interesting. We all have viewpoints on the price of gasoline and heating fuel and all the derivative products from plastics to lipstick, but there were no courses on the subject. (well not surprising that academia doesn't do business) What's more, Graydon Brown and I had researched Marland's fabulous first oil find in the South Ponca field. So here was a chance to offer folks a chance to learn about oil and gas from the ground to the glamour, history and all.
And so with help from Conoco friends, I began to bone up. Brad and Bill Bridwell taught me about refining and safety. I knew the exploration and production side. But I still didn't know the story about independent oil guys who drive around in pickup trucks in our area fixing stripper well lifts (pumps) and drilling stepout wells and re-stimulating (often using pressure fracturing, that much-maligned technique that has been around for about 50 years and no environmentalist worried about it for the first 45) One day I mentioned this to Olin as he and Dusty came in to eat at our restaurant. He practiced the most romantic thing. He would take Dusty out to eat and then read her poetry as she finished her desert. It's the only time I have ever seen waitresses retreat to the kitchen to shed tears of joy over an old couple who were just too precious. Next day Olin came to my front desk and announced, "I need you to come with me and I am going to teach you all about the oil bid-ness." He had a bottle of crude and a core sample he gave me as class props and took me on a whirlwind tour of local production, explaining not only his own projects but that of other guys in the business as well. I came away armed with examples galore of how independents are squeezing the earth for more oil than the majors are interested in.
So we became friends. And I asked Olin if he and Dusty could teach something on aviation. What they produced were three women who, along with Dusty have set records in flight. I was so staggered by their expertise we taught this class in conjunction with the state's Pioneer Woman Museum. It was the untold story since Amelia Earhart. Then one day, Olin, former state senator, gave me a business card of a colonel at Vance Air Force Base. York was her name. I visited with her about doing some sort of a update class on the Air Force and she got excited about it but first we did a dry run on some retirees who were having a reunion a few weeks away. And so WW II vets met a modern base. Amid stories of baracks they lived in during the war, were tours of modern base housing. Discussions of tactics, jet plane mechanicals, all that paled in comparison to the flight simulator. P-38 pilots met the F-22 in that simulator and came out of there with eyes wide and grins they couldn't get off their faces. Clearly, Olin had pointed me to possibly the best senior education class Elderhostel International would ever offer.
But then it never came about. Days later was 9-11. People stopped traveling. Elderhostel, under enormous money scandals and problems, cut back on classes. The Air Force had to institute new policies that will never make bases so accessible for retired civilians. Northern Oklahoma College, under which I organized classes was cut from Elderhostel International. Excuse: No one will travel to Oklahoma. Ho hum. Things always change.
Oh, did I mention, that the day we held the dry run on all those Army Air Corps guys, Olin and Dusty were along for the fun and were the last two to enjoy the F-22 flight simulator?
I owe Olin Branstetter a favor. Several years ago I was designing elderhostel classes and noticed that nowhere in the 20,000 classes offered nationwide was there one in petroleum. Now wasn't that interesting. We all have viewpoints on the price of gasoline and heating fuel and all the derivative products from plastics to lipstick, but there were no courses on the subject. (well not surprising that academia doesn't do business) What's more, Graydon Brown and I had researched Marland's fabulous first oil find in the South Ponca field. So here was a chance to offer folks a chance to learn about oil and gas from the ground to the glamour, history and all.
And so with help from Conoco friends, I began to bone up. Brad and Bill Bridwell taught me about refining and safety. I knew the exploration and production side. But I still didn't know the story about independent oil guys who drive around in pickup trucks in our area fixing stripper well lifts (pumps) and drilling stepout wells and re-stimulating (often using pressure fracturing, that much-maligned technique that has been around for about 50 years and no environmentalist worried about it for the first 45) One day I mentioned this to Olin as he and Dusty came in to eat at our restaurant. He practiced the most romantic thing. He would take Dusty out to eat and then read her poetry as she finished her desert. It's the only time I have ever seen waitresses retreat to the kitchen to shed tears of joy over an old couple who were just too precious. Next day Olin came to my front desk and announced, "I need you to come with me and I am going to teach you all about the oil bid-ness." He had a bottle of crude and a core sample he gave me as class props and took me on a whirlwind tour of local production, explaining not only his own projects but that of other guys in the business as well. I came away armed with examples galore of how independents are squeezing the earth for more oil than the majors are interested in.
So we became friends. And I asked Olin if he and Dusty could teach something on aviation. What they produced were three women who, along with Dusty have set records in flight. I was so staggered by their expertise we taught this class in conjunction with the state's Pioneer Woman Museum. It was the untold story since Amelia Earhart. Then one day, Olin, former state senator, gave me a business card of a colonel at Vance Air Force Base. York was her name. I visited with her about doing some sort of a update class on the Air Force and she got excited about it but first we did a dry run on some retirees who were having a reunion a few weeks away. And so WW II vets met a modern base. Amid stories of baracks they lived in during the war, were tours of modern base housing. Discussions of tactics, jet plane mechanicals, all that paled in comparison to the flight simulator. P-38 pilots met the F-22 in that simulator and came out of there with eyes wide and grins they couldn't get off their faces. Clearly, Olin had pointed me to possibly the best senior education class Elderhostel International would ever offer.
But then it never came about. Days later was 9-11. People stopped traveling. Elderhostel, under enormous money scandals and problems, cut back on classes. The Air Force had to institute new policies that will never make bases so accessible for retired civilians. Northern Oklahoma College, under which I organized classes was cut from Elderhostel International. Excuse: No one will travel to Oklahoma. Ho hum. Things always change.
Oh, did I mention, that the day we held the dry run on all those Army Air Corps guys, Olin and Dusty were along for the fun and were the last two to enjoy the F-22 flight simulator?
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Reformation Day
Congratulations, Steve on a great fundraiser last night and thanks for Refro and Evans and all who hosted the event!
When I was a kid I loved Halloween as much as any of them. But I wish we'd remember the significance of the day. That is, Halloween, "Hallowed Eve" is the night before All Saints Day in which ghosts, goblins and demonic creatures were said to rise as a show of force before the blessed day. And it was on that evening in 1517 that Luther posted his 95 theses on the church door at Wittenberg as opinion points--which lit a fire of nationalistic protest and ecclesiastical protest, but also asked people to look personally at what they held dear in their lives of faith. And for that reason it is called Reformation Day.
The Reformation was sort of a perfect storm. Had it not been for a troubled monk who finally realized that his salvation came only by God's grace, had he not been a prolific writer (30 books published in 36 months), a German nobility that wanted to throw off the Italian papal dominance of the Holy Roman Empire, and a population that wrestled with life's meaning amid bubonic plague and newfound prosperity, the entire event would have taken a much different shape. When I look around at the melange of churches today, at how they cross-fertilize in ideas, Reformation Day makes me smile. My own church has significantly improved its mission because of this diversity of faith. And yet there is a tremendous unity in what is called orthodox Christianity that makes it easy for us to worship together. Luther's "Grace alone,Faith alone, Scripture alone" motto has in a rough way been affirmed by all of Christianity. His notion that there is a Natural Law of how God created men to be equal and free, yet hungering for a relationship with the Almighty and a responsible life, spawned Locke and Jefferson to re-write governance in what we now call 'republican democracy.' Luther's common sense writing begat a host of others to examine how faith could be reconciled with reasoning, science, art, business, and all the rest of life without capitulating to humanism, the creed that elevates egotism into making each person a little god with little regard for others. His vernacular church and Two Kingdoms humbled Europe's monarchs and set about forces that redrew the map of Europe into nations of common people. A few years ago, a very politically liberal group of historians voted on the Man of the Millenium. Jefferson narrowly defeated Luther but British Catholic historian Paul Johnson laughed and pointed out that outside the West, little European history is studied and only America is noted.
In some ways Reformation Day itself is a misnomer. Luther and Pope Leo exchanged letters and made amends from 1517 to 1518. It was only after the Dominicans skewered Reform ideas in 1519 that the real controversy began. After Luther's death in 1546 and that of Henry VIII of England, Charles V pounced on the Northern German principalities and defeated them. Then in a queer twist, having completely defeated Protestantism at a great cost of war, he inexplicably decided to grant universal freedom of faith. For 400 years historians could not understand what had happened--the reason for war had been overturned in the conquest. Then a few years ago, a lost series of letters was found. Charles' sister, married to a German prince at the time, was writing him almost daily, telling him the joys of her Christian faith. She was the biggest Protestant of them all. It seems that Charles reconsidered his victory on the battlefield and and laid down his arms in the battlefield of faith. Reformation Day still makes me smile.
When I was a kid I loved Halloween as much as any of them. But I wish we'd remember the significance of the day. That is, Halloween, "Hallowed Eve" is the night before All Saints Day in which ghosts, goblins and demonic creatures were said to rise as a show of force before the blessed day. And it was on that evening in 1517 that Luther posted his 95 theses on the church door at Wittenberg as opinion points--which lit a fire of nationalistic protest and ecclesiastical protest, but also asked people to look personally at what they held dear in their lives of faith. And for that reason it is called Reformation Day.
The Reformation was sort of a perfect storm. Had it not been for a troubled monk who finally realized that his salvation came only by God's grace, had he not been a prolific writer (30 books published in 36 months), a German nobility that wanted to throw off the Italian papal dominance of the Holy Roman Empire, and a population that wrestled with life's meaning amid bubonic plague and newfound prosperity, the entire event would have taken a much different shape. When I look around at the melange of churches today, at how they cross-fertilize in ideas, Reformation Day makes me smile. My own church has significantly improved its mission because of this diversity of faith. And yet there is a tremendous unity in what is called orthodox Christianity that makes it easy for us to worship together. Luther's "Grace alone,Faith alone, Scripture alone" motto has in a rough way been affirmed by all of Christianity. His notion that there is a Natural Law of how God created men to be equal and free, yet hungering for a relationship with the Almighty and a responsible life, spawned Locke and Jefferson to re-write governance in what we now call 'republican democracy.' Luther's common sense writing begat a host of others to examine how faith could be reconciled with reasoning, science, art, business, and all the rest of life without capitulating to humanism, the creed that elevates egotism into making each person a little god with little regard for others. His vernacular church and Two Kingdoms humbled Europe's monarchs and set about forces that redrew the map of Europe into nations of common people. A few years ago, a very politically liberal group of historians voted on the Man of the Millenium. Jefferson narrowly defeated Luther but British Catholic historian Paul Johnson laughed and pointed out that outside the West, little European history is studied and only America is noted.
In some ways Reformation Day itself is a misnomer. Luther and Pope Leo exchanged letters and made amends from 1517 to 1518. It was only after the Dominicans skewered Reform ideas in 1519 that the real controversy began. After Luther's death in 1546 and that of Henry VIII of England, Charles V pounced on the Northern German principalities and defeated them. Then in a queer twist, having completely defeated Protestantism at a great cost of war, he inexplicably decided to grant universal freedom of faith. For 400 years historians could not understand what had happened--the reason for war had been overturned in the conquest. Then a few years ago, a lost series of letters was found. Charles' sister, married to a German prince at the time, was writing him almost daily, telling him the joys of her Christian faith. She was the biggest Protestant of them all. It seems that Charles reconsidered his victory on the battlefield and and laid down his arms in the battlefield of faith. Reformation Day still makes me smile.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Cardinal Math
Like Math? Here's a number sequence and you tell me the next number. 26,30,31,34,42,43,44,46,64,67,68,81,82,85,87,4,6,?
Answer: 11. These are the years that the Cardinals have won the pennant.
We were sitting and watching the game last night when the fifth inning ended with the Cards ahead by 5 runs. Now the way I figure it, teams score an average of 4.5 runs per game or .5 runs per inning. So the probability of scoring a run in any given inning is 0.5. The probability of 2 runs is 0.25, etc. This approximately jives with my sense that if you go into the ninth with a 1 run lead, you have at least a 50% chance of winning --or better if your closer has an ERA much less than 4.50. So then you calculate what is the probability of the Brewers scoring 5 runs in 4 innings? It's over one in thirty. But of course, this isn't dynamic. It assumes the Redbirds won't score again. It assumes that in such a crucial game the Birds won't put in an outstanding pitcher or two with an ERA of about 2.
So I turned to her and said, "I think we got 'em." As it turned out, the Cardinals scored again and the Brewers chances got even worse. Redbirds win. Pennant #18.
I once read about the life of Branch Rickey, the genius general manager of the Cardinals in 1918 who put together the beginning of this very successful baseball team. He was listening-in as the manager dismissed a young man from spring training tryouts. He told the kid to get some muscle on his bones, because despite his fielding prowess, he just didn't have much power in his hitting. The following fall, the kid showed up at the team offices asking if he could try out in spring training again. He was 40 pounds heavier and all rock solid muscle. The manager remember him, young guy by the name of Roger Hornsby. "What have you been doing!!" Rog just shrugged and said he was working on the farm. Rickey was given pause. He thought about how fortunate the team was to run into this kid again. What if they would spend a little money to buy some small town minor league teams and have scouts fan out across the countryside to locate talent, offer a contract to play ball on the minor league outfit and put the young men through training. Call it the 'farm system', ala Hornsby. Since you could buy a minor league team for about $6-8000, about what you'd pay a very good player per year, Rickey thought that if each of about 4 teams could produce a good player from the hinterlands, the purchase would pay for itself in a year. And the rest, as they say is history.
Next, Rickey gave some thought to how to promote his team. St. Louis has another major league team and was somewhat distant to the other teams being the westernmost club. There was a new thing called radio but in 1918 no one understood very well how it could make money. One idea was to get people to listen so that a company could sell more radios. A better idea was to get programming from civic activities and have advertizing sponsors. So radio stations would play, say, an opera that was performing locally. Rickey thought the stuff being done was pitiful and thought baseball would be much better if you could locate a good person to tell the 'game story' as it was being played. And what a perfect way to get the word out, way out West, about the Cards. So while many teams signed-on 2 or 3 radio stations in the town where they played, Rickey assembled an empire of 108 stations throughout the West and South. The cost was so minor it provided a return of almost 200%. Pretty good math, eh? The rise of Cardinal baseball caused the early success of many radio stations beyond the eastern seaboard, made fans in Tennessee lust to go to St. Louis for a game, and made every kid in America seem to want to play for the Redbirds. And started a grand tradition of radio play-by-play announcers--Dizzy Dean, Harry Carey, Jack Buck, Mike Shannon. Oh, and then there was that aggressive beer company in St. Louis who delivered fresh beer quickly by teamsters who saw a perfect match for Anheiser-Busch and a baseball team.
As Rickey's math grew successful, so did the Cardinal's math. In 1903, the team had the lowest winning percentage, .314 in their history, but 1906 was even worse with the team finishing 63 games behind the pennant winners. But from '26 to '46, the Cards won 8 times.
My grandfather said it was a great escape when the country needed an escape. You could come home dehydrated and dirty, having watched the grasshoppers eat your crop. The kids could be fighting , your wife could chew you out and the dog could bite you--but if the Cards won, it was a net positive day. Good math.
Note from Oct. 28--tonight at end of inning 7 Cards were ahead by 4. So with two innings to play the probability is 1/2times1/2 times 1/2 times 1/2 =1/16 but then there are two innings so it is 2/16 or one chance in 8. Result was Cards won as predicted. Dotel and Motte pitched and each had an ERA for the Series of slightly over 1. Hence the Rangers were really cooked! The squirrel was spotted crawling around on the scoreboard getting ready to celebrate. Congratulations, Redbirds!
Answer: 11. These are the years that the Cardinals have won the pennant.
We were sitting and watching the game last night when the fifth inning ended with the Cards ahead by 5 runs. Now the way I figure it, teams score an average of 4.5 runs per game or .5 runs per inning. So the probability of scoring a run in any given inning is 0.5. The probability of 2 runs is 0.25, etc. This approximately jives with my sense that if you go into the ninth with a 1 run lead, you have at least a 50% chance of winning --or better if your closer has an ERA much less than 4.50. So then you calculate what is the probability of the Brewers scoring 5 runs in 4 innings? It's over one in thirty. But of course, this isn't dynamic. It assumes the Redbirds won't score again. It assumes that in such a crucial game the Birds won't put in an outstanding pitcher or two with an ERA of about 2.
So I turned to her and said, "I think we got 'em." As it turned out, the Cardinals scored again and the Brewers chances got even worse. Redbirds win. Pennant #18.
I once read about the life of Branch Rickey, the genius general manager of the Cardinals in 1918 who put together the beginning of this very successful baseball team. He was listening-in as the manager dismissed a young man from spring training tryouts. He told the kid to get some muscle on his bones, because despite his fielding prowess, he just didn't have much power in his hitting. The following fall, the kid showed up at the team offices asking if he could try out in spring training again. He was 40 pounds heavier and all rock solid muscle. The manager remember him, young guy by the name of Roger Hornsby. "What have you been doing!!" Rog just shrugged and said he was working on the farm. Rickey was given pause. He thought about how fortunate the team was to run into this kid again. What if they would spend a little money to buy some small town minor league teams and have scouts fan out across the countryside to locate talent, offer a contract to play ball on the minor league outfit and put the young men through training. Call it the 'farm system', ala Hornsby. Since you could buy a minor league team for about $6-8000, about what you'd pay a very good player per year, Rickey thought that if each of about 4 teams could produce a good player from the hinterlands, the purchase would pay for itself in a year. And the rest, as they say is history.
Next, Rickey gave some thought to how to promote his team. St. Louis has another major league team and was somewhat distant to the other teams being the westernmost club. There was a new thing called radio but in 1918 no one understood very well how it could make money. One idea was to get people to listen so that a company could sell more radios. A better idea was to get programming from civic activities and have advertizing sponsors. So radio stations would play, say, an opera that was performing locally. Rickey thought the stuff being done was pitiful and thought baseball would be much better if you could locate a good person to tell the 'game story' as it was being played. And what a perfect way to get the word out, way out West, about the Cards. So while many teams signed-on 2 or 3 radio stations in the town where they played, Rickey assembled an empire of 108 stations throughout the West and South. The cost was so minor it provided a return of almost 200%. Pretty good math, eh? The rise of Cardinal baseball caused the early success of many radio stations beyond the eastern seaboard, made fans in Tennessee lust to go to St. Louis for a game, and made every kid in America seem to want to play for the Redbirds. And started a grand tradition of radio play-by-play announcers--Dizzy Dean, Harry Carey, Jack Buck, Mike Shannon. Oh, and then there was that aggressive beer company in St. Louis who delivered fresh beer quickly by teamsters who saw a perfect match for Anheiser-Busch and a baseball team.
As Rickey's math grew successful, so did the Cardinal's math. In 1903, the team had the lowest winning percentage, .314 in their history, but 1906 was even worse with the team finishing 63 games behind the pennant winners. But from '26 to '46, the Cards won 8 times.
My grandfather said it was a great escape when the country needed an escape. You could come home dehydrated and dirty, having watched the grasshoppers eat your crop. The kids could be fighting , your wife could chew you out and the dog could bite you--but if the Cards won, it was a net positive day. Good math.
Note from Oct. 28--tonight at end of inning 7 Cards were ahead by 4. So with two innings to play the probability is 1/2times1/2 times 1/2 times 1/2 =1/16 but then there are two innings so it is 2/16 or one chance in 8. Result was Cards won as predicted. Dotel and Motte pitched and each had an ERA for the Series of slightly over 1. Hence the Rangers were really cooked! The squirrel was spotted crawling around on the scoreboard getting ready to celebrate. Congratulations, Redbirds!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)