I’ve replaced the header images both on this blog and on my [Foundation] blog. I had to finagle a half-transparent box just to make the text readable on both sites, but I don’t think it looks half bad (note that I haven’t looked at it in IE yet). One down side is it breaks when you increase or decrease your text size. I’d love to rip this all down and start over, but I don’t have the time, and I think this small change will keep me satisfied with this layout for a few months more.

The image here is a picture I took yesterday from my office window on the eighth floor. It is the wasatch mountains on the East side of the Salt Lake Valley (specifically, Mount Olympus just left of center and Twin Peaks off to the right). You can find the original photo here. The image on my Foundation blog is the inner workings of a Burlington Bulldog railroad watch. I went looking for photos of pocket watches ((Why a pocket watch? For the connection, see the Teleological argument for the existence of God.)) and found this one in Kevin Trotman’s Flickr photo stream. It’s licensed under a Creative Commons license and I’ve given Kevin proper attribution in my blog footer, so I am using it with permission. You can find the original photo here.

In case you haven’t heard, Pat Robertson recently made some rather idiotic comments on Ariel Sharon’s recent medical crisis. In a nutshell, Robertson is claiming Sharon’s health problems are God’s punishment for “dividing the land of Israel.”

In answer to Robertson, there’s a well-written and insightful open letter popping up on several of the Evangelical blogs I read. The letter wasn’t written in direct response to Robertson’s recent statement — in fact, it was written in 2002 — but it’s contents are surprisingly relevant. I’ve read it a few times and agree with it whole-heartedly.

It should go without saying that Robertson doesn’t speak for all Christians when he makes these kind of comments, but this letter really explains what the position of Christians should be with regard to events in Israel. It also states clearly why Robertson and those who agree with him are wrong in their thinking and stand in oposition to the clear statements of the Bible with regard to this issue.

[Hat tip to Between Two Worlds and Theologica.]

I just upgraded to WordPress 2.0. A few things are broken right now, so bear with me until I get things patched up.

I think everything is working again. Let me know if you see any weirdness. Thanks.

My wife and I had a lovely first wedding anniversary this past weekend. We spent a few days at the Anniversary Inn in Logan, Utah. It’s a very romantic place and we’d recommend it to any couple.

As an anniversary gift, Janene bought me a new Bible. I have a couple of study Bibles, but this time around I was looking for something lightweight with less distractions. Those study Bibles get pretty bulky and I’m starting to think study notes (and even cross-references) distract too much from the actual text of scripture. I’m excited about studying the Bible by itself and not relying on those “crutches”.

I also wanted a new translation. As I’ve mentioned here before, I really appreciate the diversity that currently exists in Bible translations. I try not to get attached to any one translation for too long, and lately I’ve been really intrigued by the English Standard Version.

The ESV is not a complete re-translation of the Bible like the NIV. Instead, the ESV translators used the RSV (1971) as a starting point. The RSV text in turn owes its existence to the ASV (1901; from which the NASB also comes), the RV (1885), and ultimately the KJV (1611). Since the ESV is a direct descendant of the KJV, it retains, according to its preface, “the same depth of meaning and enduring language that have made their indelible mark on the English-speaking world and have defined the life and doctrine of the church over the last four centuries.” To see how similar the ESV is to the KJV, compare both translations of Romans 8 side-by-side.

As similar to the KJV as it is, the ESV is also as up-to-date as possible, yielding one of the most accurate translations available today. It’s an “essentially literal” translation and I like it for many of the same reasons I like the NASB. That said, I think it pulls ahead of the NASB in being slightly more readable. It just seems to flow better to me.

Anyway, I haven’t really had the time to break my new Bible in yet, so I think I’ll go read it now. 🙂

Some of you may know Janene and I have been involved with a mid-week Bible study group for the past two or three years. The lady who originally organized and led the group moved to Georgia over a year ago, and in the absense of leadership our group has been meeting very sporadically since then. In order to kick-start things, the group has asked me to begin leading the studies.

As a group we’ve decided to start a study of the book of Hebrews, and I’ve consequently been studying the book as often as I get the chance. I taught the first part of the first study, Hebrews Overview, a few weeks ago. For those interested in reading them, I’ll be posting them on JoeyDay.net (see Bible Studies) and probably here as well.