Logocentric (adj).Regarding words and language as a fundamental expression of an external reality (especially applied as a negative term to traditional Western thought by postmodernist critics).
Sometimes I just write whatever I feel like. Other times I respond to prompts, many taken from the following places:
I have always enjoyed the longer distance running and skiing. The Marathon in Summer Olympics and the 50km Mass Start in the Winter. My wife can't understand how I can watch the same race for several hours. But they are fascinating to me. I like the Downhill Slalom, Bobsled and Luge sports. Attending a Winter Olympics remains on my bucket list.
My favorite sporting events in the Winter Olympics are the Luge, Bobsled, Figure Skating and curling. Initially, I thought I would be bored with curling but I'm not. It's fascinating how they determine each glide's angle and potential score.
When my children were younger we built them a luge course, they loved it. We were lucky that winter to have lots of snow to build up the walls and with some help with pallets that we covered with snow, it kept them and the neighborhood kids busy until it warmed up and melted. I was a lot more at ease with the luge course than I was when they decided to try arial jumps off our house roof. Never a dull moment when you live in Maine.
I am reading ESV through the Bible this time. Like you, I've explored a bunch of translations. My church uses NIV but my women's Bible study group (part of the same church) varies based on what Bible study we're doing.
Hope you enjoy the Olympics! I agree that the every four year thing makes them feel more special.
I read the New American Bible, which is a Catholic Bible. (NABRE) They include Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, which generally aren't included in other versions of the Bible. I would be curious to read an orthodox bible or the Ethiopian Bible as I hear they have differences as well.
As for the Olympics, I love the Winter Olympics. I'm just crossing my fingers I have time to watch!
In terms of the original texts the NASB has the best reputation among conservative scholars. It looks at more translations, has a sensible hierarchy of text selection and the best principles for approaching the translation task. It favors original texts when possible. The ESV and NKJV are on a similar level. The Net Bible gives the best overview of the discussions in its commentary. The NIV renders the original text to make it more readable. It is a more functional text which is why many churches use it but it is also less precise. Greek or Russian orthodox are more Septuagint orientated and there is a considerable amount of ethical or emotional rendering to the text.The disadvantage of the NASB is that it loses much of the Hebrew poetical style in its effort to be precise as this does not translate into the English
I'm very fortunate to have met some practicing and humble Christians. Truly humble people seek to serve, not attain power and influence. The actions of many Christians make me run the opposite way... as fast as I can.
In his book, Sit, Walk, Stand, Watchman Nee states: "Nothing has done greater damage to our Christian testimony than our trying to be right and demanding right of others. We become preoccupied with what is and what is not right. We ask ourselves,' Have we been justly or unjustly treated?' and we think thus to vindicate our actions. But that is not our standard. The whole question for us is one of crossbearing".
Jeff, this is an excellent book. Perhaps one for your reading list?
I'm not going to pretend like I'm any kind of an expert on physics and Einstein's theory of relativity... evidenced by the fact that the title of this article caught my interest and then my eyes immediately glazed over as I started reading about the details of what exactly they were studying and how it did or didn't apply to Einstein's general theory of blah blah blah.
The reason this article caught my interest is because I think it's really cool when older science holds up. Science is a field where there are constantly new developments disproving old theories and practices. The earth is flat... oh wait, nope, no it's not! The earth is the center of the universe... hold up, no, we were wrong about that too! Lobotomies and electroshock therapy to treat mental illness... oops? With all the stuff out there being superseded by our better more advanced understanding of science years or decades later, I think it's fascinating when someone was so prescient in their own time that they were able to propose a theory or a process that still holds up after all this time.
My favorite part of this piece was the Ohio State University astrophysicist who said that they were hoping to find a crack in Einstein's theory, but that this latest event just reaffirming what he theorized "feels like [they're] beating a dead horse" trying to find a flaw in Einstein's work. It must be so frustrating to be a scientist who's all like, "Aha! I'm going to prove this old theory wrong!" and then later is like, "Uh, yeah, that old theory is pretty legit."
This article definitely gives me a newfound respect for Einstein. There are very few scientists who can claim theories that have endured for long periods of time. Einstein, in the span of human history, hasn't been around for all that long; his theory of relativity is only about a hundred years old. But a hundred years is also a very long time in terms of scientific discovery... so I wonder if his theory will eventually be disproven when we have the technology or other knowledge to better understand the universe, or if he'll join the ranks of Isaac Newton or Galileo Galilei who have had their theories proven correct for hundreds of years, to the point where they're accepted constants. I guess only time will tell whether Einstein continues to own all these young upstarts, or if one of them will unseat him at some point in the future with a better theory.
Comment 
