Blog & Resources
Looking for my thoughts on everything from bioethics to movies? You came to the right place. And while you’re here, check out my free downloadable resources.
Sign up to be notified when new posts release.
Austria bans donor gametes in IVF
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld Austria's ban on the use of donor sperm and eggs during in vitro fertilization procedures. You can read more here. Earlier the same court ruled against destroying human embryos for scientific research.
Christmas in Cali
After our Aussie friends promised to bring the homemade "crackers" for Christmas Eve dinner in Mesquite, I phoned to find out if crackers were appetizers or with-dinner fare. I learned they're neither--they're noisemakers...part of why I love having international students around!
The pilot was apparently eager to get us to our destination, because he shaved fifty minutes off our flight time. We arrived at Dick and Bernice's in Stockton just in time for (Pacific time) Christmas brunch and "socks." D&B had created a sock/stocking for each of us with fun stuff inside. Following a big dinner late in the afternoon, we worked a puzzle and rediscovered the art of conversation. Oh, and our girl developed some serious muscles sword fighting on the Wii.
I had a fab birthday on the 26th. Our family and my sis's made the gorgeous two-hour drive over to Lake Tahoe. There we had superb weather and enjoyed a lakeside picnic followed by a walk in fresh, mountain air. On our way back to Stockton, we watched the sunset and the moonrise over silhouetted fir trees. And Dick made me a birthday cake complete with a sparkler-fire crazy candle that opened and played "Happy Birthday."
On the 27th my sis, nieces, and husband drove up to Sutter Creek for more beauty and meandering through fun little shops. That night our little family slid into the hot tub and enjoyed watching the moon and stars through fir branches as steam rose from our bodies.
Yesterday morning Dick made us sourdough waffles (my dad always made those on Sundays for us when Mary and I were little). I picked oranges and a lemon from front-yard trees and squeezed a pitcher full of tart juice out of them. Yum.
Our family departed yesterday, but while en route to the airport, we received notification from American Airlines that we had a two-hour flight delay. Perfect. The airport is right on the way to Santa Cruz, so we headed straight for the coast. Dazzling weather. A beautiful drive through more fir trees. And surfer-watching. Our daughter loves all things surfing, and a couple of kind wave-cutters accommodated her request for a photo opp.
Last night at Les Mis
We have a Christmas tradition of catching a show as a family. So last night we saw the 25th Anniversary production of Les Miserables. Our friends Kelley and John Mathews joined us for a double date. Fantastico!
Papa Murphy's - Finally!
Our town, Mesquite, has long needed a bake-your-own pizza place. And finally we have one. Papa Murphy's has arrived, and it fits the bill.
Top Ten from 2011
The New York Times has announced their top ten most notable books for 2011. Their list includes four first novels, along with Stephen King’s fifty-second book. The Art of Fielding, by Chad Harbach 11/22/63, by Stephen King Swamplandia! by Karen Russell Ten Thousand Saints, by Eleanor Henderson The Tiger’s Wife, by Téa Obreht Arguably, by the newly late Christopher Hitchen The Boy in the Moon, by Ian Brown Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention, by Manning Marable Thinking: Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman A World on Fire, by Amanda Foreman
A Bit of an Update
My parents arrived last night from Oregon. My niece graduates tomorrow from Texas A&M, so over the next few days we plan to celebrate an early Christmas with everyone together. What a blessing!
A Bit of an Update
My parents arrived last night from Oregon. My niece graduates tomorrow from Texas A&M, so over the next few days we plan to celebrate an early Christmas with everyone together. What a blessing!
Benefit Charity While You Shop
Just a gentle reminder--if you order stuff on Amazon for Christmas (or anytime!), please swing by here and use the Amazon link box in the right column of this blog. A percentage of your purchase--at no extra cost to you--will benefit our work in East Africa. Right now one of our national co-workers has requested a digital camera, so he can photograph kids needing sponsors. Gary plans to see him in February, which would be a great time to make a camera delivery.
On October 1, 2011, an unprecedented historic event occurred—one that all biblical scholars and professors need to be aware of. Dr. Bart D. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary and Executive Director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, debated the reliability of the text of the New Testament before nearly 1,500 individuals at the McFarlin Memorial Auditorium on the campus of Southern Methodist University. The debate was moderated by Dr. Mark Chancey, the Religious Studies department chair at SMU, who earned his PhD under Ehrman’s tutelage.
Ehrman and Wallace were seeking to answer the question, Can we trust the reliability of the New Testament? Dr. Ehrman throughout the debate constantly argued that the text of the New Testament was corrupted beyond repair. Dr. Wallace countered by stating that much evidence exists that affirms the reliability of the text—including from the first 200 years. This was the largest debate over the text of the New Testament in history. A professional film crew recorded the debate, which is now available for sale. In this exciting and historic dialogue you have the opportunity to listen to two leading scholars talk about this issue from opposing viewpoints—and they do it in terms that non-specialists and students can understand. You can purchase the DVD by clicking on this link— www.csntm.org. The DVD is priced at only $15.50 plus shipping and handling. It is available in both U.S. (NTSC) and international (PAL) versions.
Christmas, According to Paul
Often when we read biblical accounts of the first Advent, we go to the Gospels especially Luke 2 (“And there were shepherds abiding in their fields…”), which is great. These accounts provide the point of view of the nativity events from earth’s perspective.
did not regard equality with God
as something to be grasped,
2:7 but emptied himself
by taking on the form of a slave,
by looking like other men,
and by sharing in human nature.
2:8 He humbled himself,
by becoming obedient to the point of death
– even death on a cross!
2:9 As a result God exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every name,
2:10 so that at the name of Jesus
every knee will bow
– in heaven and on earth and under the earth –
2:11 and every tongue confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord
to the glory of God the Father.Did you notice that little phrase, “he existed in the form of God” (2:6)? The Son of God existed before his own birth! That’s why we say of Christ that he was “begotten not created” (the very phrase that appears in “O Come, All Ye Faithful”). God created you and me from egg and sperm, but Christ was not created. “In the beginning the Word was with God and the Word was God” (John 1:1). He was and is and is to come.The Second Person of the Trinity, fully God, demonstrated His humility in “not clinging to equality,” but emptying Himself. In doing so he, who had never known what was to obey, learned to do so by submitting his will to the Father’s. He took on the form of a slave and did for humanity what we could not do for ourselves.What does it mean when it says that Jesus existed in the form of God? The word “form” inPhil. 2:6 is translated from "morphe," from which we get the word “metamorphosis.” Though sometimes in English we use “form” to mean the outward shape of something—as in, “The cake has a round form”—that’s not how Paul uses it. He’s speaking of Christ’s essential nature or actual substance rather than only His outward appearance. Paul was saying that in Jesus’ nature, He was God. Yet Jesus took on the form, or essential nature, of a servant.Bear in mind the point Paul is making here in the broader context—that of the absolute humility of the Son and how we are to share the same attitude. The Son was God, yet He humbled himself. And how far his humility bent him low!The nature of Jesus Christ has been the subject of past councils, and orthodox theologians have written volumes on it. Heretics have said Jesus was fully human but not fully God; that He was fully God but not fully human; that he was half-human and half-God; that he had a human body, but a divine mind and spirit; that he had two separate persons, one divine and one human; that he had only one nature, the human absorbed into the divine; and that He is below the Father in a hierarchy. All such ideas are erroneous. The Chalcedonian Council was convened in A.D. 451 to articulate orthodox theology, and together the world’s top Christian theologians, after searching the scriptures rigorously, wrote the Chalcedonian Creed:We, then, following the holy Father, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man; of a reasonable/rational soul and body; consubstantial (having the same nature or substance) with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of the natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God, the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has been handed down to us.The one who is “very God of very God” left heaven to become human. He was rich, yet He became poor for us. O come, let us adore Him!(Excerpted and adapted from Frappé with Philippians (AMG), by Sandra Glahn.)
Christmastime in the PNW
Two Hearts, One Flesh: Rx for Marital Cardiac Asynchrony
by William Cutrer, M.D
Dx: Diagnosis
“Oh, my. I can see that your marriages are in trouble.” I shook my head as I scanned the group of physicians, dentists, and spouses gathered to attend my Medical Marriage workshop at the CMDS National Conference. I explained, “How do I know? Because you married a sinner . . . and so did your spouse.”
The fact is, we are all selfish human beings who, without supernatural grace and forgiveness, will follow a natural course to disharmony, disappointment, and disaster. And ultimately for some, this will spell divorce—emotional, if not legal.
The very qualities that make someone a good doctor may make him or her a less-than-ideal spouse: hard working, perfectionistic, conscientious. At the office, you exercise control, give orders and speak with authority. But if you do so at home, your marriage will suffer.
What are the symptoms that raise concern? Relational difficulties reflected in disagreements over how time and money are spent. Expressions of physical love (or lack thereof) mirror the level of intimacy in these other areas.
Often medical couples marry with one partner looking for intimacy and securityCthe soul oneness that marriage is supposed to fosterCwhile the other wants independence, a lucrative private practice, and a prestigious reputation. After years together, the former has settled for and developed proficiency in independence while the latter, having gained “worldly success,” seeks companionship.
Diagnosis: Cardiac Asynchrony—two hearts out of rhythm. Without supernatural intervention, the outlook is grim.
Rx: Prescription
The first step toward marital unity and true intimacy is appreciating God=s authorship of marriage and His plan that “two become one.” This involves more than moments of physical intimacy. It’s a life picture of unity. Couples begin by making their relationship with God a priority. He created us and He ordained marriage. He wrote the “manual,” and our relationships will self-destruct unless we use His map around the land mines. In Ephesians 5 and 1 Peter 3, we read that husbands are to love sacrificially; wives are to demonstrate self-sacrifice as well. This is possible only through the enablement of the Holy Spirit.
Commit yourself to living as Paul instructs in 1 Corinthians 13. ALove does not seek its own way,@ we read in verse 5. That=s a great exhortation, especially if you=re always expecting your spouse to Apick up the slack@ for your busy schedule. Later in the same verse we read that love keeps no record of wrongs. That includes nights when your spouse misses dinner because her pager went off or he shows up after your child=s ball game is over because he had an emergency. On the contrary, we read that ALove is patient and kind@ (1 Cor 13:4). C.S. Lewis wrote that sometimes we do not so much need to be taught as to be reminded. Return to these time-tested verses and commit yourself to living them by God=s grace.
A second step to marital unity is recognizing that God made men and women differently, and the genders apparently assign differing priorities to certain felt needs.
When 1,500 mall shoppers were asked what they wished for most when they blow out their birthday candles, men and women gave vastly different answers. The number one wish of women was “more time with my spouse.” Men ranked that wish at 27th on the list. And what did guys wish for most often? A lower golf score.
Meanwhile, 54 percent of men say they think about sex every day or several times a day. Other studies suggest that men think about sex even more—at least seventeen times per day. By contrast, 67 percent of the women say they think about it only a few times a week or a few times a month.
How can we bring hearts beating to such different rhythms into harmony?
First, ask yourself: “What makes my heart beat?” Then ask, “What are my spouse’s top desires?” In surveys taken at my marriage workshops, most men readily ranked Asex@ as the number one essential. Most women ranked affection first. Yet when I asked them to define affection, they described it as Abeing listened to, non-sexual cuddling, and respect.@ Some husbands were surprised to hear that Aaffection@ in their wives= minds did not mean Aforeplay.
Practically speaking, then, rank these according to your own personal priorities: Affection, recreational companionship, conversation, sex, receiving support around the house, admiration, having an attractive spouse, communication, financial security and family commitment. What would your spouse’s list look like?
Your husband or wife may not be “just like” the average person. If what he wants more than anything is recreational companionship, learn the lingo of his favorite sport and join him there. No, you may not spend that time conversing (perhaps one of your top needs), but he appreciates your presence. If she=s the one who lists companionship first, go with her to the symphony or ride bikes to the lake together—whatever it is that=s most important to her. And know that if you cancel that time together for something that’s “emergent” to you but which seems unnecessary to her, you may inflict a lot of pain.
The average couple spends fewer than seven minutes engaged in meaningful conversation each day. So set aside 15 minutes to discuss these issues. If you have not done so already, begin by taking the simple step of joining hands and offering a short prayer thanking God aloud for your spouse. Next, each of you make your list of “my top three desires.” And be amazed if your lists even remotely resemble each other’s. Ask for practical suggestions from each other: AHow can I do a better job of meeting this need for you?@ Commit yourself to doing what your spouse really wants.
Next consider how differently you and your spouse may view the world. Do you tend to concentrate on only one thing at a time, giving it your full attention? For example, when the television is on, do you become so absorbed in what you’re watching that you wouldn’t notice the tornado removing your roof? If so, you are “particular” in your focus. If you give the person or situation at hand your undivided attention, but you can later Afile it@ and focus on something else, you have “particular” focus.
Or do you view the world more “panoramically”? Often, but not always, these viewpoints fall into rather gender-specific categories, with women tending to be more panoramic and men more particular in focus or compartmentalized. If you view the world panoramically, you will more naturally see the entire bouquet of flowers instead of focusing on one rose. When the television is on, you are still quite aware of your other surroundings.
Understanding how you and your spouse “process” your worlds is also a key to understanding each other. We err when we perceive these differences as superior/inferior.
One physician argued that panoramic thinking proved detrimental to medical practice because personal issues such as marital strife, family upheaval or malpractice couldn’t be put aside. The wife of a physician overhearing this statement countered that such compartmental thinking had allowed her spouse to engage in an extramarital affair while “acting” as a devoted husband at home.
Each perspective has strengths and weakness, not only in marriage but in medicine. A physician with particular focus might so concentrate on the laceration that he or she misses the cry for help from an attempted suicide. A physician with a panoramic view might be so caught up with counseling the abused wife and finding her a safe haven that the spotting, elevated hCG and RLQ pain go unnoticed.
When you play Monopoly, which is more important to you: winning (particular focus) or socializing (panoramic)? Can you be enthused in your physical relationship even when relational issues remain unresolved (particular)? Does your spouse frequently ask you to “get to the point@? (Then you probably think panoramically.)
Once you=ve determined how you normally Aview@ the world, talk about how this impacts the way you relate to each other. Proverbs tells us, ATo get wisdom, get understanding.@ So learn each other’s perspectives, appreciate each one’s strengths and weakness, and enjoy the fact that God has made one strong where another is weak. If you have particular focus, seek to appreciate the panoramic point-of-view. If you are panoramic, work at seeing more focused parts of the world when communicating with your spouse.
Px: Prognosis
The prognosis for couples seeking to sacrificially meet each others= needs and understand
each other in this way, not out of duty but out of desire—even delight—is excellent. As we move toward appreciating how our counterparts think, the relational distance diminishes and intimacy develops. Time together takes on an eternal quality of joyful fellowship and our marriages reflect harmony, intimacy, and God=s one-flesh ideal. Cardiac asynchrony, their two hearts out of synch, become two hearts beating together as one.
This article first appeared in Today’s Christian Doctor.
My Top 5 Christmas Movies
In order of preference:
Holiday Inn
White Christmas
It's a Wonderful Life
Charlie Brown Christmas
Elf
Got a fave that's not on my list?
From Mt. Sinai to Dallas
| Born in El Paso into a Baptist home, Father Justin discovered the world of Greek Orthodoxy in college at the University of Texas. After serving twenty years at a monastery in Brookline, Massachusetts, he became the first non-Greek to live in St. Catherine’s Monastery. Now, many years later, he has been appointed to the position of librarian there. Father Justin’s duties include photographing the 1,200 manuscripts discovered in 1975 in a hidden compartment at the monastery. This number increased St. Catherine’s holdings to 3,300, making its collection of ancient manuscripts the second largest in the world, second only to the Vatican. According to CSNTM, "Among the 3,300 manuscripts housed at St. Catherine’s Monastery, the most important and well known is Codex Sinaiticus—the oldest complete New Testament in existence. The history of this manuscript is wrought with mystery, politics, and perhaps even some deception as the bulk of it was taken from the monastery in the mid-1800s. With this codex, along with the thousands of others, it becomes difficult to overestimate the value of St. Catherine’s Monastery to textual research." As Father Justin's role and CSNTM's goal overlap, CSNTM hopes to continue partnering with Father Justin and St. Catherine’s in the work of digitally preserving the text of the New Testament. |
African Cuisine
Gary’s nephew and his new bride, Almaz, were in town yesterday on their way to San Angelo. And since Almaz is Ethiopian and the happy couple have purchased a one-way ticket back in January, we took them out for Ethiopian food last night. After reading some reviews, we opted for a restaurant called “Ibex” (I found a great discount for Ibex from restaurant.com—check it out). Following dinner we made a drive-through of Dallas’ über-rich Highland Park with its amazing Christmas lights.
The restaurant sits on the ground floor of what looks like a plain office building on Greenville, barely north of Forest Lane. But inside we found a nice atmosphere with pleasant Ethiopian music playing loud enough for Almaz to understand the lyrics but low enough that we could talk without feeling like we had to talk over anything.
Fortunately we had Almaz to order for us, but that also means I’m not totally sure of all the choices on our combo dish for five. I can say only that it came with compartments of sauces, salads, and beef tips (everyone’s fave) along with a perfectly cooked chicken thigh. It also contained the traditional hard-boiled egg in red wot. Everything lay on a base of injera, the spongy-bread staple of the Horn of Africa. Carefully rolled and laying atop the smorgasbord were eight rolled-up injera pancakes so we could each tear off pieces to sop and scoop our food. The less experienced of us required two hands. Apparently the pro’s do it all with their right hand only—which Rob and his bride proceeded to do. I wiped my messy mitts frequently on napkins; they had the self-control to wait till they’d finished eating to clean up.
We had our choice of the usual square restaurant table or the beautiful Ethiopian Messob table, which is weaved and where traditional meals in Ethiopia are served. Of course we opted for the full experience. The top lid was removed and our waitress brought our large, round tray of food and placed it in the middle so we could sit around and eat “family style.” This setup is much more conducive to intimate conversation. But then, Ethiopian food, with its oversized platters, is made for socializing.
The service was excellent till we needed our bill. Then it took four requests and two get-up-and-asks before we could depart. So I recommend it, but if you go, make sure you have nothing else on your agenda for the night.
Ibex Dallas
1255 Greenville Ave. Dallas
Women's History: The Pendulum Swings
Recently in my Role of Women class we had guest speaker Dr. Barry Jones, who teaches at DTS and serves on the preaching team at Irving Bible Church. He shared with our group the process of how his church moved toward a stronger affirmation of women’s public ministry and what they learned—pro and con—in the process.As part of our discussion, he provided some historical information from Women, Ministry, and The Gospel, by Tim Larson at Wheaton. He showed how at the time of first-wave feminism, the church was more committed to gender equality than the culture at large. People such as John Wesley, George Whitfield, D. L. Moody, A. J. Gordon [Gordon College/Gordon-Conwell], A. B. Simpson and John Roach Stranton all affirmed women’s public teaching ministries. Even the wife of conservative W. A. Criswell, architect of the conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Church, spent years of Sundays teaching a mixed-gender Sunday school class for several hundred people. (I remember a time when I could hear her teaching that class on the radio.)So, what happened? Why did the pendulum swing back toward limiting women’s public speaking in the church? Dr. Jones offered three reasons:. Men returned from war. Post-WWII, men displaced women as they returned from combat and wanted their factory jobs back. The culture at large saw the need to re-establish the role of men, and part of the accompanying dogma was that a women’s “place” is in the home. I would add to this the influence of Sigmund Freud. The concept of “penis envy” was applied to women who liked their jobs and wanted to keep them. Such women were told that they were not fully sexualized, and their desire to work demonstrated something amiss in their sexual development.. Second-wave feminism. Once women gained the right to vote, the movement had splintered, as people differed on what to do next about injustices to women. Should they fight for literacy? Go after equal pay? Some in the movement saw reproductive rights as the next step. The church reacted, and we see this reflected in more conservative translations of the Bible (compare the KJV’s 1611 translation of 1 Tim 2 with later translations), and with a push toward more of a one-size-fits-all view of masculinity and femininity.. Twentieth-century Pentecostalism. Pentecostalism, born as a movement in 1901, had made great gains worldwide, and conservatives reacted. The result was a marked difference in how scholars viewed various forms of the word “prophesy.” Since some of the “woman” texts in the New Testament contain this word, a more conservative view meant less freedom for women to impart content in public settings.