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 divided on how I feel about this issue of the New York City Council putting a freeze on any new Uber or Lyft drivers while they study the effects of ride-sharing services on traffic congestion in the city. On the one hand, I know these ride-sharing services are most certainly adding to the traffic in congested areas like Manhattan, and in many cases the excessive competition results in driving down wages for everyone. There was a time when you could make a decent living as a taxi driver, but a lot of studies have shown that there are simply so many drivers on the road in big cities these days, that many of them spend an awful lot of time driving around looking for rides, which is time and mileage they're not getting compensated for. So in those respects, I'm actually for New York studying the issue to see if there's an ongoing concern.
On the other side of the coin, however, ride sharing services are an enormous new industry for people who would otherwise be unemployed. There are a ton of Uber and Lyft drivers out there who lost old jobs and need to make ends meet in the meantime. The old medallion system used for driving yellow cabs in New York meant that someone couldn't just decide to drive a taxi and make a few extra bucks to help out their family. The economy is becoming more and more freelance, and preventing ride-sharing services like these (even with their problems) is curbing a potential source of revenue for people who need work and/or a job with flexible hours they can set themselves. Additionally, there have been specific studies in New York that show Uber and Lyft are addressing a specific need in the outer boroughs and low-income or high-crime neighborhoods where yellow cabs don't bother to cruise around looking for people to flag them down. So limiting the number of people who can drive for ride-sharing services might have an adverse effect on people on the outskirts of the city or in bad areas who rely on the ability to summon a driver if they're not near public transit or in an area where yellow cabs regularly cruise around. So in those respects, I'm against this legislation.
The tiebreaker for me, then, is the way this is being implemented. You don't actually need to freeze ride-sharing services to study traffic patterns. How many new drivers are on the road this year is irrelevant to a scientific study, which would most likely take the hard data from all of last year (rather than making estimates about the future of this year), and compare it to years before Uber and Lyft were in existence. There have also been rumors that this legislation was motivated, at least in part, by the recent suicides of half a dozen taxi drivers who blamed financial hardship as the reason for their distress, and lobbying on behalf of the cab companies.
Ultimately, I think studying the effects of ride-sharing services on local economies is important work. I think it needs to be done so we can fully understand the impact on our communities. But I also believe in a more or less free market, and in the freedom of people to find and work jobs that fit their needs and lifestyles. So I can't say that I'm a big fan of this legislation at a time where they haven't even determined what detrimental effects there are. If this legislation were in response to a valid study that found, yes, ride-sharing services are ultimately bad for local economies, then fine... let's put this legislation in place. But to pass this legislation before that evidence is there... well, that sounds an awful lot like they're hurting one industry and advantaging another before they even know if that's the right course of action.