Saturday, January 31, 2009
michelle is the best. and God is even better.
thank you jesus...
Friday, January 30, 2009
walking.
i love being a girl.
sunny days duh.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
inspiration day 1
my dads helpful email.
Good questions. The first thing I'll say is that being on an archeological
dig hardly qualifies one for making assertions about Canon formation, since
the Canon is not an archeologically determined object, but the assessment of
the Church regarding its Scriptures. No one just dug up the Canon.
I would assume he is misunderstanding his teacher because nobody would say
something like that. The formation of the Canon happened gradually over
several hundred years. When he says at Constantinople, what is that
supposed to mean? Is he suggesting that the emperor picked what would go
into the canon? That would be absurd. The Canon was largely settled by
that time.
That said, the gospels and letters of Paul were excepted very early, perhaps
by 130. But the final list was later, the earliest actual list of the same
books we accept is not until 367 by Athanasius.
But the canon was not really "closed" in the sense that someone gave a list
with finality until the Reformation. It was the Reformers who rejected the
Apocrypha, but then the Catholics in a backlash excepted them. This all
happened in the 1400-1550 time frame.
The Apocrypha are not consider on equal footing with Scripture by
Protestants but are by Catholics. Even though disputed though, they are
ancient books with a venerable history, accepted by some and not other
Christians. You can read them without worrying about your soul, and who
knows, perhaps the Spirit will speak to you through them. If the Spirit can
speak through contemporary music perhaps through an ancient book is possible
too :) I have no issue with reading them, but I just wouldn't quote it as
scripture.
Here is an excerpt on Canon Criteria from my e-library:
3.3. Criteria of Canonicity. Beyond the historical forces that were at work
in the formation of the canon, certain theoretical considerations were also
adduced, especially in the fourth and fifth centuries, by way of judging the
suitability of writings for inclusion in the canon, most especially of
writings about which there was some uncertainty. These so-called criteria of
canonicity were mainly traditional use, apostolicity, catholicity and
orthodoxy (Ohlig).
3.3.1. Traditional Use. As previously indicated, the primary basis for the
inclusion of any document in the canon of the NT was its longstanding,
widespread and well-established use among Christian communities. Such
traditional usage was a matter of fact before the church began to reflect on
its historic practice and made it an explicit criterion for canonical
standing. Certain writings, including the Gospels and Paul's letters, had
been used so widely and so long that there could be no question about their
place in the canon. But if customary use was a clear prerequisite, it was
not in every case sufficient by itself. Some documents that adequately met
this standard were not finally included in the canon (e.g., Shepherd of
Hermas, Didache and 1 Clement). Other criteria were of a more theoretical
sort.
3.3.2. Apostolicity. From an early time Christians considered their
Scriptures to be apostolic. This did not necessarily mean that authoritative
documents must have been written by apostles, though from an early time
apostolic authorship was valued. This is shown not only by the general
authority that quickly accrued to Paul's letters but also by the development
of traditions attributing certain anonymous Gospels (Matthew and John) to
apostolic authors or at least to apostolic sources (Mark and Luke) by the
use of apostolic pseudonymity (e.g., 2 Peter, the Pastoral Epistles,
Barnabas), and by the disuse that affected some writings by reason of doubts
raised about their apostolic authorship (Revelation, Hebrews). Yet some
documents explicitly claiming apostolic authorship either failed to gain
canonical standing (e.g., Didache, Barnabas, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of
Peter) or gained it only with difficulty (e.g., 2 Peter, Jude). Thus the
criterion of apostolicity in the narrow sense of authorship was hardly
decisive. In fact, the conception of apostolicity was elastic and might
refer, beyond direct authorship, to indirect authorship, derivation from the
apostolic period or conformity of content with what was generally understood
as apostolic teaching.
3.3.3. Catholicity. Catholicity was another consideration: in order to be
authoritative a document had to be relevant to the church as a whole and
even intended to be so by its author. Writings addressed to only small
groups or having a narrow purpose were accordingly devalued. Most of the
writings that became canonical were originally intended for limited
constituencies, and some even for individuals. Hence they failed to meet
this criterion, but this was not so obvious to the ancient church or was
counterbalanced by other factors. What is at work in the ideal of
catholicity is a preference for broad accessibility and general usefulness,
as against private, idiosyncratic or esoteric resources.
3.3.4. Orthodoxy. It was a largely tacit judgment that for a writing to be
authoritative, let alone canonical, it must be orthodox; that is, its
content had to correspond with the faith and practice of the church as that
was generally understood. Such a judgment presupposes that what the church
took to be its proper teaching was somehow available independently of
Scripture, namely, in the rule of faith (regula fidei), a terse, traditional
summary statement of principal convictions (cf. Irenaeus Haer. 3.4.1-2;
Tertullian De Praescr. 8-12). Since the rule of faith was itself understood
to be a summary of apostolic teaching derived through apostolic tradition,
there could scarcely be discord between it and Scriptures that were also
taken to be apostolic.
These criteria were variously applied in the history of the canon, but
rarely with systematic rigor. The Gospel of Peter was removed from use in
Rhossus by Serapion, bishop of Antioch, because of doubts about its
orthodoxy (Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 6.12.2-6), in spite of its putative
apostolic origins. The Shepherd of Hermas, though catholic, orthodox and
widely used, suffered because it did not derive from the time of the
apostles (Muratorian Canon, ll. 73-80). The epistle to the Hebrews was
ultimately accepted as canonical in the West in spite of persistent
uncertainty about its authorship. Once established in general use, the
catholic status of Paul's letters was taken for granted in spite of their
particularity.
Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans, Dictionary of New Testament Background
: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship, electronic ed. (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
feeling attacked.
annoying but cool?
Monday, January 26, 2009
thrilled.
crafts.
that sleepy sparrow girl is in guatamala.. this is what she looks out her door at...
Sunday, January 25, 2009
birthday wish list for my mother.
all the boys.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
perspective.
Friday, January 23, 2009
hannah is very sick.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
interesting talks.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
art and faith class.
haggai on day 2
movies.
Monday, January 19, 2009
cathy..
this day God made for me.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
sorting out thoughts.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
i love my hall.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
midweek thinker
John 13:34
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
LUKE
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
watching.
new semester day uno
Be Thou my Vision, O Lord of my heart;
Naught be all else to me, save that Thou art.
Thou my best Thought, by day or by night,
Waking or sleeping, Thy presence my light.
Be Thou my Wisdom, and Thou my true Word;
I ever with Thee and Thou with me, Lord;
Thou my great Father, I Thy true son;
Thou in me dwelling, and I with Thee one.
Riches I heed not, nor man’s empty praise,
Thou mine Inheritance, now and always:
Thou and Thou only, first in my heart,
High King of Heaven, my Treasure Thou art.
High King of Heaven, my victory won,
May I reach Heaven’s joys, O bright Heaven’s Sun!
Heart of my own heart, whatever befall,
Still be my Vision, O Ruler of all.
Then Terry Franson spoke and it was good... but a little disorganized... AND he forgot the name of the like... first woman president of a college or whatever who was there today visiting ... and it was sooo amazing.
He went to introduce her and said all that then said... "and i'm drawing a blank... !" and everyone went "HUHHHH!!!!!!"
booked it to my 3d class... OH MY WORD I LOVE THIS CLASS.
so for my first project that has to have 50 sculptures... i'm taking wire and making circles. all different sizes. Then I'm going to hang them with fishingline from 2 dowels. Theyll all be at different heigths and spiral and twirl and spin. BEST MOBILE EVER... because... wait for it .. wait for it... i'm going to cover them all in feathers!
don't have to get a book... SHARIN.
then.... i had luke acts with Duzik so of course it was amazing.
I just signed up for Childrens Literature in between them... which will be AMAZING. i'm sooo excited.
Tomorrow my first class is at 1:05 and its Art/Faith and we meet in the coffee shop with Catling and just discuss all of that stuff... i'm soooo thrilled!
Then I have 2d.
honestly... all my classes are like... applicable to life.
MY LIFE.
and i'm excited!
Sunday, January 11, 2009
TOdo.
apu day 1
Friday, January 9, 2009
Sex.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
beautiful.
painting.
before i leave:
painful.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Galations
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE COOL NOW
BORGES
Monday, January 5, 2009
Diana Sudyka
remember:
smell.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
ruddy cheeks.
classes.... hmmmm
0005 ART 130 02 Two-Dimensional Design T R 04:20-07:20P Azusa AZARTC8 Suzuki, Macha 3.0 0
0070 ART 135 02 Three-Dimensional Design M W 10:40-01:30M Azusa AZDUKE301 Catling, Wm. 3.0 1248 PE 240 02
1520 UBBL230 12 Luke/Acts M W 04:20-05:45P Azusa AZHILL236 Duzik, Mark 3.0
Saturday, January 3, 2009
OXFORD
Bless the Lord, Oh my soul, Bless the Lord.
Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe...
Friday, January 2, 2009
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Ruth
dismal and glorious rain.
Oh Lord Make Us One
Make Us One
Written By Zach Hall/Jay Hall/Jason Morant
D
May Your will be done in us
Bm
In Your arms we learn to trust
A/C# D
You are our strength, our strength oh God
D
May Your name be glorified
Bm
By our lips and by our lives
A/C# Bm
Lord have Your way, have Your way in us
A G D
As we cry out to You, oh Lord make us one
A G D
Let the whole earth see through us what You’ve done
A G/B A/C# G
May our hands find reach for what our words can’t preach
D – Bm – A/C#
Oh Lord, make us one
D
Though Your charity survives
Bm
All our stumbling, all our lies
A/C# Bm
Jesus we pray, have Your way through us
As we cry out to You, oh Lord make us one
Let the whole earth see through us what You’ve done
May our hands find reach for what our words can’t preach
Oh Lord make us one
Solo Section (A G D - A G D - A/C# G/B D/F# G)