I abhor running and despise the taste of beer--two characteristics that are almost incompatible with being a Marine. Yet in the late 1990's, while stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, I decided to join the San Diego chapter of the Hash House Harriers, a running club which has as one of its stated goals, "To acquire a good thirst and to satisfy it in beer."

I had first encountered the infamous international group of "drinkers with a running problem" in Okinawa. Despite the running and the drinking I had enjoyed the camaraderie and so thought it might be an opportunity to meet new people in California.

On my first San Diego run we were on a long hash through the city when an old man jogged by, easily outpacing me and another thirty-something Marine. We chuckled at first, but as his balding grey head faded into the distance we realized that we didn't have the stamina to catch him. When I caught up to him at the finish line I expressed my shame at getting beat by a geezer. He laughed and boasted that as a retired Army Lt. Colonel he had been running longer than I had been alive.

Instantly charmed, I was eager to learn more about the life of Dave Connors. He told me about his kids, his grandkids, and how he had divorced after two decades of marriage. Dave also told me about what he considered his most noteworthy distinction: he was the world's oldest working pornographic-film star.

Over the next year I ran the hash nearly every week, logging over a hundred miles and a dozen conversations with the avuncular Vietnam Vet. We'd talk during the runs and after each event a gaggle of hashers would typically end up at a pub or restaurant to chat some more. Dave, needing always to be the center of attention, would steer every conversation toward the topic of sex--the raunchier and more twisted the better. He savored his pseudo-celebrity status and was eager to share with us the gory details about his on-camera exploits.

Being only slightly less moralistic than I am now, I was naturally disturbed and disgusted by Dave's repugnant vocation. Yet I truly wanted to be his friend. He was warm and amiable and, like many of us, completely messed up. For his age, he was physically vibrant and healthy. But it also seemed as if he suffered from a form of moral leprosy, as if his soul was slowly rotting.

Looking back, I realize I should have set aside my disdain for his work and my fear that he was contagious and simply showed him the love of Christ. But I didn't know how. I still don't.

[Note: A version of this article was originally posted in March 2006.]

The American linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf once argued that language is used not only to express our thoughts but to shape them as well. In linguistics, this explanation for the way that language relates to thought is known as a "mould theory" since it represents language as a mould in terms of which thought categories are cast. As Sapir wrote in The Status of Linguistics as a Science, "The fact of the matter is that the 'real world' is to a large extent unconsciously built upon the language habits of the group."
(Quote via Daniel Chandler)*

If the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is correct, then it would be wise to become as conscious of our "language habits" as possible. By doing so we might be able to recognize when our thoughts are being misshapen by language and to discard such words from our vocabulary. An example is the term "supernatural," a word that inadvertently causes muddled thinking and confusion.

The connotations implicit in the word supernatural differ based on the subject in which it occurs. When used in the natural sciences the term has a deistic flavor, while in a theological context it has a polytheistic quality. Consider, for example, the way our culture--including most Christians--have come to view the angelic realm. Although scripture is clear that they angels are created by Jesus (Col.1:16), we tend to consider them "supernatural" beings, existing not only outside of nature but outside of creation itself.

The fact that the denotative understanding occurs primarily on a subconscious level only adds to the confusion. By using the term supernatural to refer to such beings we are implying that they belong on the same plane or realm of existence as God.

God
Angels
Satan/demons___________

Man Nature (i.e., plants, animals, minerals)

One of the reasons we make such errors is because we buy into the modernist notion that all of creation is physical and that angelic beings must necessarily exists on a "supernatural" (i.e., nonphysical) plane separate and distinct from the material cosmos. Essentially, this leads us to concede a point to the physicalist worldview.

1. Jennifer Roback Morse on Feminism: An attack on the human body

...[F]eminists don't view gender differentiation as a biological reality to which sensible people must adapt. Sex differences are a cosmic injustice. No demand for social change is too extreme in the service of wiping out these differences. This is great if you happen to be a radical, intent on justifying revolutionary social changes. But if you are a normal person, living in a normal body, this ideology is more than a nuisance. We have painted ourselves into a corner. Under feminist tutelage, we have insisted that women change their fertility in order to accommodate the labor market. We have insisted on the right to raise our children alone, and to spend larger and larger portions of our lives alone.

2. Harvard research reveals the prejudices of babies

One area into which Spelke's team would like to delve deeper is the origins of bigotry in human beings. In the case of skin colour, newborns respond to individuals of all races equally. By three months, however, a baby from a Caucasian household will prefer to gaze at a white face, and a black baby at an African American face. By the age of two or three, they are drawn to their own gender, too. 'There are some very intriguing parallels between the patterns of social preference we find in infants and what seems to go on in adults,' Spelke says.

(HT: kottke.org)

3. Ilkka Kokkarinen on obesity and the laws of physics

There are quite a few of fat people out there who claim, in all apparent seriousness, that food consumption has no causal relationship to their weight and that they maintain their bulk by eating maybe only 1,500 kcal/day. However, none of these people has ever been able to do this under controlled conditions where they can't sneak in snacks, such as this prison unfortunately seems to be compared to the outside world that is abundant with food. And of course doing so would be an instant Nobel prize in both physics and medicine (and Randi prize, and what else) for establishing that a human body is able to generate energy out of thin air, so I'm pretty confident to be that none of these guys will ever do it. Physics is not everything, but it does set absolute constraints and lower bounds to everything else.

(HT: The Buck Stops Here)

4. NYT: Appeasing the Gods, With Insurance

We buy insurance not just for peace of mind or to protect ourselves financially, but because we share the ancient Greeks' instinct for appeasing the gods.

We may not slaughter animals anymore to ward off a plague, but we think buying health insurance will keep us from getting sick. Our brains may understand meteorology, but in our guts we still think that not carrying an umbrella will make it rain, a belief that was demonstrated in experiments by Jane Risen of the University of Chicago and Thomas Gilovich of Cornell.

(HT: EconLog)

5. Reality TV's Most Memorable Christians (HT: Christ and Pop Culture)

6. Future Fireman

My new favorite commercial.

7. "I See Dead People's Books," a catalogue of the libraries of 33 deceased luminaries, including Marie Antoinette, Thomas Jefferson, Ezra Pound, Theodore Dreiser, and Tupac Shakur. (HT: VSL)

8. Pew Survey: Religion Ranks Above Wealth

Who says Americans worship at the feet of the almighty dollar? Not the American public. Only 13% of adults say it's "very important" for them to be wealthy, ranking this personal priority far behind six others measured in a new survey by the Pew Research Center Social & Demographic Trends project.

But don't get Americans wrong - a majority certainly wouldn't mind being rich. According to the survey, another 43% of adults say being wealthy is "somewhat important" to them, while about the same proportion say it's "not too important" (33%) or "not important at all" (10%).

9. Making Meaning in a Meaningless World: Five Ways that Won't Work

10. Religious Bias and Church/State Separation -- An extract from Roger Trigg's 'Religion in Public Life: Must Faith Be Privatized?'

Congratulations to the winners of the EO/Wheatstone Academy blog symposium.  Thank you to all of you who submitted your wonderful essays--it was a very close race. The following posts earned their authors one of five fantastic prizes:

      First Place: Mark Fedeli at A Deo Lumen

      Second Place: Jordan J. Ballor at The Acton Institute Power Blog

      Third Place: Mark Stanley at Digital Reason

      Fourth Place: Jeff Nuding at Dadmanly

      Fifth Place: Letitia Wong at Talitha Koum

These lucky authors have their choice of one of the following:

(1) A full tuition scholarship for a Christian high school student of the winner's choice to Wheatstone Academy. [A $950 value]

(2) The 'Quintessentials' from Stand to Reason, including the Ambassador Basic Curriculum, Tactics in Defending the Faith DVD, Decision Making and the Will of God CD set, and a signed copy of Greg Koukl's new book Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air. [A $150 value]

(3) A full-tuition scholarship to the upcoming GodBlogCon (September 2008). [A $150 value]

(4) A two-year subscription to Touchstone Magazine. [A $59.95 value]

(5) A year subscription to Townhall magazine. [A $34.95 value]

The first place winner will have their choice of items with the second place deciding between the remaining items, etc. The fifth place winner will automatically receive the unselected item.

Donnell Duncan at The Cracked Door earned an honorable mention.  A $200 donation to Compassion International will be made in his name. 

Many thanks to all who made this symposium a success, especially our distinguished judges--James Kushiner from Touchstone magazine's Mere Comments, Melinda Penner from Stand to Reason, Matt Lewis from Townhall.com, and Matthew Anderson from Mere Orthodoxy. 

Thanks to all who helped spread the word about this symposium.  As promised, we put all your names together in a hat--literally!  The following three blogs were drawn, and each will receive a copy of The New Media Frontier, forthcoming from Crossway Books:

Ogre's Politics and Views

True Grit

Unbridled Warhorse

Thank you also to the generous sponsors who donated our exciting array of prizes, especially Wheatstone Academy.

Yesterday a document was released at the National Press Club entitled An Evangelical Manifesto: A Declaration of Evangelical Identity and Public Commitment, spearheaded by Os Guinness and signed by over 80 evangelical leaders. I would encourage anyone interested in evangelicalism to give it a careful reading, or at the very least, to read Justin Taylor's excellent summation.

Other than the Bible, there are few documents that I agree with word-for-word (and that includes most things that I have written). Still, I found enough to agree with in the manifesto to add my name as one of the additional signatories.

I hope to have more to say about it in the future but for now here are three initial thoughts:

Iron Man {movie} - The world of comics books is dominated by two publishing houses--DC and Marvel--each with its own unique universe of superheroes. But while they rarely converge, the DC and Marvel universes often mirror one another. Take, for example, two of the most intriguing characters.

In the DC universe there is Bruce Wayne, a brilliant, emotionally damaged billionaire industrialist and playboy who uses his resources and genius to transform into the crime-fighting hero Batman. In the Marvel universe there is Tony Stark, a brilliant, emotionally damaged billionaire industrialist and playboy who uses his resources and genius to transform into the terrorism-fighting hero Iron Man. While they share many key similarities, they also have traits that make them polar opposites. For example, Wayne is a brooding introvert, while Stark is a gregarious extrovert. But in both cases it is the man under the mask (or titanium helmet) that fascinates us.

Unfortunately, movies based on comics often forget this point. Because they focus on the costume they often fail in the critical component of casting. A prime example is the Batman film series which suffered through three disastrous casting choices (Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, and George Clooney) before director Christopher Nolan found Christian Bale. Luckily, Iron Man director Jon Favreau found the perfect lead in Robert Downey Jr. (At first Downey seems to be a strange choice for a superhero. Then when you consider that the character of Stark is a charming, womanizing, alcoholic it seems almost as if the actor was typecast.)

The casting of the other characters is also unexpectedly spot-on. As an actress, Gwyneth Paltrow is usually a bit twee, a bit precious. But in Iron Man she transforms the role of Pepper Potts from a pre-feminist Girl Friday into an admirable servant-leader sidekick. Likewise, Jeff Bridges--bald and bearded--adds layers of nuance to the two-dimensional character of Obadiah Stane.

While the characters and performances are memorable, the plot is standard fare. Indeed, the story is so basic that to describe it would give too much away. Suffice to say that like in most superhero movies the "origins" section is the most interesting (Iron Man has two origins sections, the second being the best part of the film).

Many critics and moviegoers have also tried to discern the politics of the movie. For those so inclined here is all you need to know: Tony Stark loves the American military and acts accordingly in every situation. Whether this makes the movie liberal or conservative is debatable; the fact that such speculation is tedious and boring, however, is beyond dispute.

Just as The Dark Knight claimed the title of Greatest Superhero Movie Ever (DC universe), Iron Man can claim the title of Greatest Superhero Movie Ever (Marvel universe). If there is any justice in the (Marvel) universe we will be seeing Iron Man sequels for several summers to come. Rating: A

Darius Rucker, "Don't Think I Don't Think About It" {music} -- Hootie's gone country? Yep. Darius Rucker, former lead singer of the iconic 90's band Hootie and the Blowfish, will soon be releasing his debut country solo album on Capitol Records Nashville. His first single, "Don't Think I Don't Think About It", debuted at #51 on Billboard's Hot Country Songs.

The inevitable question that comes to mind when hearing the single is, "Does it sound country?" After hearing the song most people will conclude, "No, not really." But this isn't surprising. Rucker also made a decent solo R&B album that didn't particularly sound like R&B. And he didn't sound much like a frat rock singer either, even while heading up the greatest frat rock band of his era. Rucker has a distinctive voice that can handle almost every style of popular music without quite fitting into any specific genre. "Don't Think" may not be a great country song, but it's a good Darius Rucker song. And for Hootie fans, that's quite enough. Rating: B-

Sara Bareilles, "Love Song" {music} - "Love Song" debuted in June 2007 on the Billboard charts at #100, rose to #4, and since dropped back down to the #8 slot. After hearing the song in commercials (Rhapsody), trailers for chick-flicks (Made to Honor), and on the radio for the past 26 weeks, it's understandable if you've grown tired of the song. But there's a reason why people can't stop playing it: Bareilles has created a perfectly crafted pop song.

With McCartneyite skill, Bareilles mixes a bouncy piano line, an incessantly catchy melody, and subtle, superb phrasing to create an aural masterpiece. Close your eyes, listen again, and try to hear with fresh ears the technical mastery of one of the best pop songs of the decade. Rating: A+