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?
But of course they did. Qatar is the same country that's been accused of bribing FIFA officials to win the bid for the 2022 World Cup in the first place, even amid rampant rumors of human rights abuses and exploitation of their labor force (both local Qatari and migrant workers), astronomically and suspiciously high costs ($220B USD, compared to the $3.5B USD spent by South Africa in 2010, $15B spent by Brazil in 2014, and $14B spent by Russia in 2018), and lack of infrastructure to support an event of this size (they are proposing literally building cities, airports, and roads around the stadiums from scratch), and inhospitable temperatures (summer in Qatar averages about 122 degrees Fahrenheit) which resulted in them actually changing the schedule of the tournament to take place in the winter rather than the summer (which causes potential scheduling conflicts with other soccer leagues who play during the winter). Ultimately, even Sepp Blatter, the disgraced FIFA executive who was removed from office following criminal corruption proceedings admitted that awarding the tournament to Qatar was a mistake.
So color me unsurprised that on top of all that, Qatar also apparently hired a specialty PR firm and ex-spies to smear its rivals.
I suppose this is what happens when a greedy, opportunistic, and very wealthy country meets a greedy, opportunistic, and historically corrupt professional sports organization. What's really sad to me, though, (other than the human rights problems, of course) is that data has repeatedly shown that investment in large scale sporting events like the World Cup, Olympics, etc. is a economic net negative rather than an economic net positive, particularly for countries that don't currently have the facilities to support the event. It's been shown that - time and time again - countries are better served by investing that money in wiser and more advantageous infrastructure projects. Case in point, just one year after the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, over half of the twelve new stadiums constructed specifically for the event aren't even in use anymore. One of them is a little more than a big parking lot for broken down buses and other vehicles!
Studies show that when a country already has the infrastructure in place (the 2026 World Cup is being jointly hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, for example, which have plenty of existing stadiums that can be used), large-scale sporting events can be an economic boon because they bring tourism to those areas and the investment that would otherwise be made in costly new construction can instead be made to revamp existing infrastructure. Instead of building a new city, for example, that money can go toward improving the existing airport, roads, etc.
So when I see a country like Qatar saying, "Hey, we're going to spend $220B to build new stadiums and cities and airports and whatnot!" I can't help but wonder what else Qatar could be spending $220B on. That could be a massive investment in other infrastructure projects or economic stimulus that would truly improve things in their country... and instead it's being spend on a one-time event that the Qatari government is hoping will spike tourism rates and pay for itself, even though history shows that's typically not true, especially at that price tag. South Africa got it right; tourism increased by something like 7% after their World Cup, and by only spending $3.5B on their event, the investment paid for itself quickly. Qatar is going to have to see a massive and sustained spike in tourism to pay off a $220B price tag.
Anyway, yeah, not surprised that Qatar tried to sabotage their rivals. Not surprised that FIFA let it happen. Not surprised that another developing country would rather drop $220B on a one-time sporting event than investing that cash more intelligently (albeit in a not as flashy way). I really hope that, in the future, FIFA takes the bidding process more seriously. There are just too many reasons why Qatar was a terrible idea for a World Cup host; they really should have put the wellbeing of the event and the country above their own greed, even if Qatar wasn't willing to do the same.
What's really sad to me, though, (other than the human rights problems, of course) is that data has repeatedly shown that investment in large scale sporting events like the World Cup, Olympics, etc. is a economic net negative rather than an economic net positive, particularly for countries that don't currently have the facilities to support the event. It's been shown that - time and time again - countries are better served by investing that money in wiser and more advantageous infrastructure projects. Case in point, just one year after the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, over half of the twelve new stadiums constructed specifically for the event aren't even in use anymore. One of them is a little more than a big parking lot for broken down buses and other vehicles! 
Comment 
