Geek Stuff: Distance Calculations in MySQL
One of my customers recently needed their website to know the distance between people. It did not have to be exact so we based it off of zip code latitudes/longitudes (which we got indirectly from the US Census Bureau) and some fuzzy trigonometry. The first step was to find a way to put the zip code information into a database. The newest one (circa 2004) that was easily workable came from http://www.boutell.com/zipcodes/. We created a table so that we could import the data.
CREATE TABLE zipcodes (
zip varchar(5) NOT NULL default '',
city varchar(64) default NULL,
state varchar(2) default NULL,
latitude float NOT NULL default '0',
longitude float NOT NULL default '0',
timezone int(11) default NULL,
dst tinyint(1) NOT NULL default '0',
PRIMARY KEY (zip)
)
This will allow for a direct import of the CSV data with one small annoyance. The .csv file has blank lines in it. You can remove those by hand. I used this command in Vim until it didn’t find any more blank lines:
:%s/\r\r/\n/
For some reason Vim will find “\r” but if you tell it to put a “\n” into a replacement it does not handle things right. I haven’t taken the time to figure out the reason yet. As a refresher, "" represents the linefeed character and "" is the carriage return. Windows uses both, Mac uses “\r” exclusively and Linux generally uses only “\n.” If you did try to import before removing those blank lines, you will want to truncate (empty) the database before importing again. MySQL should stop you automatically if you made the zip code a primary key, as I did, but you do not want to duplicate this information. After saving, I imported the data into the database by using phpMyAdmin. You can also use the SQL command LOAD DATA LOCAL INFILE. Once it has been imported, we needed a way to track a point in space. Even though there is little support for it in some third-party programs (such as phpMyAdmin), it turns out that MySQL does have a POINT data type which is specifically designed for this purpose. You need to alter the structure of the table using this command:
ALTER TABLE `zipcodes` ADD `location` POINT NOT NULL
The next part gets into the realm of math. If you have ever taken a look at 3D programming, speed is squeezed out of the code by performing as many calculations as possible before they are needed. One popular trick, at least in the past, has been to create sine and cosine lookup tables. Instead of having to calculate these numbers you can instruct the program to find their value by going to the right location in an array. This allowed some 3D games to run smoothly on my old 80 Mhz computer. Distance calculations in three dimensions (as our world requires for larger distances) could benefit from this same speed increase. It would be bad to overload the server too much with these calculations that are going to be common. After considering the possibilities, I decided that the best option was to calculate ahead of time the distance from latitude and longitude 0. If we save both the latitudinal and longitudinal distances, we can use Pythagoras’ theorem (a^2 = b^2 + c^3) to find distances between two of those points. Now the most processor-intensive calculation is a single square root for each distance calculated, which will speed up the routine calculations significantly. Some people who have not done this have ended up with 15 second SQL queries, which is unacceptable. There is another trick later that will give us even more speed. I visited MeridianWorldData.com and borrowed their calculations. The first step was to boil them down because they were designed to calculate from two specific coordinates and I wanted one of them to have both an x and y coordinate of 0. This is what I ended up with:
UPDATE `zipcodes` SET location = GeomFromText(CONCAT('POINT(', IF(latitude < 0, -1, 1) * 3963.0 * ACOS(COS(latitude/57.2958) * COS(longitude/57.2958 - longitude/57.2958)), ' ', IF(longitude < 0, -1, 1) * 3963.0 * ACOS(SIN(latitude/57.2958) * SIN(latitude/57.2958) + COS(latitude/57.2958) * COS(latitude/57.2958) * COS(longitude/57.2958)), ')'))
Notice that the numbers can be negative in the database. The reason for this is to prevent our calculations from matching American zip codes to Asian cities if this is ever expanded. I feel bad about using GeomFromText() because that adds processing overhead and I am a huge fan of optimization, but I was not able to get this to work without it and the command is only run when creating (or updating) the database. Now it is time to test this with a random zip code in New York city:
SELECT ROUND(X(location)) AS x, ROUND(Y(location)) AS y FROM zipcodes WHERE zip = 10285
This returns an X value of 2816 and a Y value of -3755. That looks good so far. The comment on this blog entry provides the best reference I have found so far for running the distance calculations. If you take the X and Y values from the last SELECT statement, you can find the distance between them and every zip code in the entire database (with the nearest ones first) by using this command:
SELECT city, state, zip, ROUND(GLength(LineStringFromWKB(LineString(AsBinary(location), POINT(2816, -3755))))) As distance FROM `zipcodes` ORDER BY distance ASC
The query reports that Jersey City is only a couple miles away, which is mostly accurate (MapQuest gives different distances because you have to find a bridge). Since we are using zip code areas and not exact addresses anyway, a little variation is alright. You would want to use different calculations if you needed distances to be accurate to within a centimeter anyway. You might also notice the speed on this query. For me it required roughly 0.1 seconds which is a whole lot faster than if we had not created the POINT data but it is still too long. There are a couple things we can still do to speed this up without hard-coding the distances (which would limit us to searches only from one location). One speed enhancement would be to index the POINT data:
ALTER TABLE `zipcodes` ADD SPATIAL INDEX (location)
That modification brought it down one or two tenths of a second per search but we can take even more advantage of the speed by creating boundaries for our query. If we decided that we wanted the zip codes within 10 miles, we could use “WHERE distance < 10” but that requires us to calculate distance for every row in the table (which we are already doing). If we can avoid doing that then we can shave off more math calculations. What if we asked for a box? A query that asks for any zip codes within 60 miles of the latitude and 60 miles of the longitude would look like this:
SELECT city, state, zip, ROUND(GLength(LineStringFromWKB(LineString(AsBinary(location), POINT(2816, -3755))))) As distance FROM `zipcodes` WHERE X(location) > 2816 - 60 AND X(location) < 2816 + 60 AND Y(location) > -3755 - 60 AND Y(location) < -3755 + 60 ORDER BY distance ASC
That cut the time in half for a query on my server, which puts it somewhere around 0.04 seconds each. That isn’t bad. The difference in speed is now minuscule if you delete the POINT index but there is still a small difference. I’ve chosen to keep it. You will probably notice that some of the values returned are as much as 85 miles from our starting point. That is okay. We can silently discard any rows with a distance above 60 when displaying the data to the users. We know general distances now. Let’s find out how far it is to a specific location, such as Miami, Florida. This is all that it takes to check the distance to one zip code:
SELECT city, state, zip, ROUND(GLength(LineStringFromWKB(LineString(AsBinary(location), POINT(2817, -3754))))) As distance FROM `zipcodes` WHERE zip = 33125
It says 1548. Mapquest reports 1292. For Memphis, TN (37544) we get 1198 and MapQuest says 1099. Portland, OR (97232) says 1529 and MapQuest says 2895. Yeah, it isn’t exact but it is close enough for small distances. Feel free to adapt this to your needs. Hopefully these SQL functions will give you a few ideas if nothing else and I will probably refigure some of the math as time goes on. I’d also be interested in hearing what you are doing.
Travel
For everyone who reads this and knew I was traveling again this week, I arrived safely. This was the easiest flight I have been on yet for getting through security and onto the plane, even though we were delayed from taking off by the high winds in Pennsylvania. Some of the winds were reported to be around 50 MPH. This is only the third air trip since 2001 and some airports seem to have the checkpoint process streamlined a little better now. Maybe it was just because I left my knife at home. Or maybe it was because my flight was on a Wednesday and I didn’t check any bags. Either way, if you ever want to work for the TSA, you may want to take a look at the Bomb or Not? website. Meeting people worries me now. I am staying with friends and went to a meet with them last night. Someone that I had not met before mentioned that I liked to give people a hard time online. Something similar happened in August too. The internet is dangerous.
Flunking Economics
The Wall Street Journal is running an article with some numbers from the “Cash For Clunkers” (/CARS) stimulus program. Here is an excerpt:
Burton Abrams and George Parsons of the University of Delaware added up the total benefits from reduced gas consumption, environmental improvements and the benefit to car buyers and companies, minus the overall cost of cash for clunkers, and found a net cost of roughly $2,000 per vehicle. Rather than stimulating the economy, the program made the nation as a whole $1.4 billion poorer.
Ouch.
What is Eternal Life?
Somebody asked a couple questions that grasp for a lot of information:
What is eternal life? When does it begin? Who has [access to] it? Any additional thoughts/comments on the subject?
Since this is a topic that I have been pretending to study, I butted into the conversation and… here we are. Granted, the questions were addressed to many people anyway so I wasn’t really interrupting. Here is my attempt to answer from the beginning. Genesis 1:27:
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
It is funny that this verse is contested. I listened to a speaker three or four weeks ago who said that this meant man was capable of deciding good from evil and that the tree Adam and Eve ate from was a poetical contrivance.
I do not believe that is what it means (Ray Comfort said that man did not have to worry about choosing evil until he gained knowledge of it; this makes sense to me). If you move on to the next chapter you find more details of how God created the first man and woman along with this, Genesis 2:7:
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Some, such as the Seventh Day Adventists, believe that the soul can cease to exist. I believe that they are in error and that our eternal soul is one way that we mirror the image of God.
A few weeks ago I heard a quote from a man named Bracy Greer that asked, “Why would a just God send someone to Heaven and make them spend eternity with Him when they wanted nothing to do with Him here?” That is pretty logical. The only two options that are available if that is so are annihilationism or sending them someplace else eternally. Here is what the Jesus said, Matthew 25:41:
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
If you want to argue about the meaning of “everlasting,” please be sure to study Romans 16:26. Also, it is always fun to point out to people that this means Satan is not in charge in hell.
If we are eternal beings, destined for either eternal reward or eternal punishment (though not the same for everyone on either side), then the next question becomes what to call the happenings in the afterlife. Verse 44 from Matthew above gives a summary of the judgments made:
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
That more or less answers the first question. Eternal life is spending eternity with God. Verse 34 speaks of the kingdom prepared for them from the beginning of the world. When eternal life begins is another interesting discussion. John chapter 3 is a very famous passage because of verse 16. It covers a conversation between Jesus and one of the religious leaders who knew he was sent by God. Verse 5 is also fairly well-known:
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Some teach that the birth by water means a physical birth. That is inaccurate as well. Ananias told Paul when he was saved (Acts 22:16):
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Jesus himself never baptized, but his disciples baptized in his name and with his approval (John 4:1,2). There are several ways that the book of Mark is brought to a close. The most common has Jesus saying this (Mark 16:16):
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Even if you discount that verse, Paul pressed others to be baptized. Passages like Acts 19 gives specific examples while I Corinthians 1 gives a more general evidence of this (especially verse 13). There is a lot more to this topic and it is worthy of study. We’re going to have to move on tonight though. As Jesus said, one must be born of water and of spirit. The spirit part is uncontested as far as I know – that we must be renewed in Christ. An analogy to a birth certainly makes it sound as though it is the beginning of eternal life and that gaining the kingdom prepared for the righteous is the realization of that life. This is how I understand it to work. The third question, who has access to eternal life, has been debated for years. Some people have said that black people did not have souls or access to that life. Others say that there is some other limiting factor (Calvinism is well known for its claim that only those that God chooses – by his sovereign choice alone – will be saved). Some are of the opinion that anyone who believes can be saved. There are also people who think that everyone will be saved eventually and that nobody will suffer eternal torment. I can assure you that God is not a racist. The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 was saved. Likewise there are many passages that rule out the latter option. After studying it, I think that Calvinism boils down to salvation by predeterminism alone (not by faith). Some of my friends will argue this. That does, however, only leave one option. Salvation is available to those who choose God (to be fair, Calvinists can say the same thing from their perspective but it means something quite different from a plain understanding of what I just said). The ability to choose to turn from sin can be further broken down. Calvin gained his understanding of this from a man that had come before him name Augustine. If I understand the events correctly, a man named Pelagius confronted Augustine and other leaders of the church about the depths of sin that supposed Christians were living in. He believed that men were able to simply choose to stop sinning and it pushed Augustine even farther into the beliefs that we now call Calvinism. This is also why anybody who does not believe in the five points of Calvinism is quickly called a Pelagian. While I agree that much of the church today is Pelagian or semi-Pelagian (“you take one step, God will take the other 99”), not every view that contradicts Calvinism falls to this opposing view. The teachings of the likes of Chrysostom, Arminius and John Wesley are that we are still fully dependent on God’s good mercy to warm our hearts and to change us but that He will not force himself on us. This is also how I believe salvation is made available. That answers the first three questions, and while asking for clarification about what was specifically wanted the question of whether eternal life could be lost was brought up (insert taunting laugh). To this I wonder if it isn’t possible to commit eternal suicide in order to obtain eternal death (ie. Revelation 20:14; 22:19). I wrote earlier that Jesus said eternal life began with another birth (of water and of spirit). He also said this in Mark 13:13:
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Does that mean that martyrs won’t be saved from the wickedness of their former lives? Or does it mean that those who continue in Christ will be? If it means the first, none of the disciples (except perhaps John – that’s another discussion) will be in God’s eternal kingdom. I won’t harp on this as I’ve talked about it before. Yes, I think salvation can be lost. When Jesus died, his purchase of our salvation was complete. When we accepted what Jesus did, we were born anew. When we die, our race has been run. On the day of judgment, our eternal life (or death) is realized**. Is that enough? ^_^
** “ᾠδηϔ [Hades], “ÏαÏÏαÏόϔ [Tartaros], and “γέεννα” [Ghehenah] are all translated as “Hell” in many English Bibles which messes up our understanding of the afterlife.
Hosted Blogs?
This blog was started after I stepped back from a forum community that I had been active on. Several people said that they were still interested in the odd thoughts that floated through my head on a regular basis (probably for a laugh) so they continued here. It was originally only for my own thoughts to be placed where I could control how they were displayed, but I am now hosting three other blogs on the server.
With a little work and reconfiguration, I think it is possible to allow new blogs to be created easily, including limited custom theme support and photo albums. Some customizations would probably have to go through me for security reasons. If I do that, I will more than likely put discrete ads (at the bottom?) on the new blogs to help cover my costs and time.
Should I do this? I make no promises, but if others are interested in the idea it will probably happen eventually. Let me know if you think this a good idea.
“Pakakuy” means “hidden away” (or “hide yourself,” depending on context) so I am debating about the whole topic. It might be nice to get another domain instead but that seems to kill some of the exclusive feel of this. ^_^
Reactionary Culture
Reactions can show fears…
Is Life Imprisonment a Luxury?
Gary North has written an article called “Deficits Do Matter.” In the article he targets federal spending:
According to a recent article by Dr. Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation, deficits do matter. They are going to matter a whole lot more over the next decade. They are going to matter to people who are dependent on the Federal government for handouts. That is a large number of people. He writes:
The Office of Management and Budget has released its annual mid-session review that updates the budget projections from this past May. They show that this year, Washington will spend $30,958 per household, tax $17,576 per household, and borrow $13,392 per household.
Think about that. For every American household about a hundred million the Federal government will spend $31,000.
Wait a minute. The typical American household makes about $46,000 a year. Are we to believe that the Federal government will spend, in the name of the American people, $31,000 per household? That each household will be taxed income taxes, Social Security taxes, corporate taxes, etc. $17,000? That is what the figures say. Dividing $46,000 by $17,000 is 37%. Can that be possible? Add to this another $13,000 in debt. That is what the government’s statistics report. Anyone who thinks an extra $13,000 in household debt doesn’t matter is living in la-la land. This includes economists.
The scary thing is that this is the kind of spending that is happening while lawmakers try to cut their budgets. A study was released recently by the VERA Institute of Justice. The report details the cuts in spending for various correction programs due to the current recession in the United States:
This report, based on a survey of enacted FY2010 state budgets and other recent sentencing and corrections legislation, found that at least 22 states have reversed the trend of recent decades and cut funding for corrections.
What makes this particularly interesting is the large numbers of people that are affected by this:
> On any given day 7.3 million adults are under federal, state, or local correctional control (including those on probation, parole, and other forms of supervision)one in 31 adults.
7.3 million people is almost two and a half percent of our country’s total population. According to an article on stateline.org:
Corrections is the fifth-largest area of state spending after Medicaid, secondary education, higher education and transportation. State spending on prisons has swelled as the nations jail and prison population has climbed to 2.3 million people, or about one in every 100 adults. But grim budget realities are forcing state lawmakers hand.
Ninety-nine adults, including those who are retired or are on welfare and unemployment, are paying for the upkeep of one prisoner. They are also paying for the frequent checkups of two other felons who are on probation or parole. Realize that for prisoners we are not just talking about the cost of food and toilet paper, this also includes the cost of all the guards, paperwork and security hardware that they need.
So here is my question: with these budget cuts, what are we going to see more of? Will the punishments for crimes against other people go down or are we going to execute people for lesser crimes?
When the population of the earth was less, it was possible to simply exile criminals from the rest of the civilization. This is what happened to Adam and Eve and then again to their son Cain in the first four chapters of the Bible...
The next option is to kill those who are unable to treat others decently. As a society, right now, we decry this as inhumane.
We seem to like option #3, which is to separate the criminals from the rest of society, while still keeping them close by. Sometimes the prisoners are made to work and other times they aren't. This, again, comes down to what the people around them consider to be "humane."
There is final option as well, which is what we seem to be moving toward. It means letting the criminals live freely among the rest of the society. I say freely because, despite their restrictions, it is still possible for them to do what they have proven they want to do.
A large part of the problem is that these people do not know lives other than the ones that they live. All that we have to do, if that is the only problem, is show them that a better life awaits them. Right? I would argue that this is not so.
If you look over the [Alcohol Anonymous 12 Steps](http://www.serenityfound.org/steps.html), it becomes clear that not only must the person acknowledge that there is a problem, he has to want change as well. What happens if someone does not want change? He is going to end up back in the system. I've heard a pastor laugh at a statement made by a prisoner he sees occasionally -- "Man, it's hot in here. I don't know why we keep coming back. You'd think we'd learn."
That is a good question. Why do they keep going back? Is it because they have not been taught a skill set to make legitimate money? I think it is more than that. Let's take a quick detour so that this makes sense.
I believe that the purpose for our laws is to let men live together with as little trouble as possible. If someone does something to harm another then the situation needs to be made right (or as right as possible). The laws are supposed to make the consequences for bad actions fall on the person who harmed someone else. This buffers the rest of society from those same consequences.
In other words, if somebody printed a bunch of money it would make the value of the money in your wallet (or bank account) go down. Or if you were allowed to steal from others, they could return the favor. Soon you don't know from one minute to the next what you own and can rely on or cannot use. This would harm everyone in the society, so printing money and stealing from others have punishments associated with them.
Now we can return to the first question. Why would someone keep returning to a lifestyle that gets him put in prison? I think it is because [trust is easy to take advantage of](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtJ2RyjRaWI). Maybe the person doesn't see the long-term consequences, or maybe he simply chooses to ignore them because he gets something out of it now.
I think we need to go back to a system where the person who harmed others has to work off his debt. It is not a "debt to society." We can narrow it down to individuals that were hurt by the actions.
For those of you who are reading this that are Christians, prisons were not an option according to the laws given to Israel. I think it is a system that is a luxury and not a need. We need to get our spending under control and this is one way to do it. Unfortunately I think it is going to take more than what our lawmakers are willing to do.
What do you think?
Geek stuff: Regular Expressions in Vim
Let the flame wars commence. I use Vi Improved.
Even though I had downloaded Emacs first (by a couple years), Vi was the first heavy-weight text editor that I learned. What is scary about these editors is just how obscure you can make your commands. Here is one that I’ve used a few times recently:
:%s/=\([a-zA-Z0-9][^>" ]*\)/="\1"/g
Any guesses what it does? The “a-zA-Z0-9” part is probably the most readable. It is a regular expression (also called a “regex”) and was designed for HTML pages that do not have the tag parameters quoted.
The line above finds equal signs with alpha-numeric characters immediately following them (that is not quoted!) and replaces it with quotes in the proper place. the /g at the end makes it replace all tag parameters that are on each line.
“\1” references the first data found in parentheses, which Vi requires to be escaped like this: (some text). The square brackets let you define the range of a single character, while adding a * to the end allows that “character range” to match zero or more characters. The second character range above automatically flags the end of the capture when a space, quote, or close tag character is found.
Confused yet? They can be complicated enough that some new students have called them a “write-only” coding language because they couldn’t decipher them afterward. I’ve been using regular expressions for the last four years and can assure you that it is possible to read them and comprehend what they do.
If you need a good starting point, Araxis has a good reference page. When on linux, you can also use “man 7 regex” to find the regex part in section 7 of the manual. They are worth learning.
Diamonds Are Forever
A woman named Rita Beauregard wrote an interesting article a few years ago. It can still be read on archive.org. Here is an excerpt:
The initial strategy
How did De Beers create the diamond brand? And, more importantly, how did it sustain it? De Beers controlled supply and used research-based behavior-change strategies to build demand. And it sustained demand by monitoring its business goals and objectives, as well as market trends, and adjusting its strategies accordingly. Ayers initial strategy was to strengthen the association between diamonds and romance. For young men, they set out to instill the idea that diamonds were a gift of love: the larger and finer the diamond, the greater the expression of love. Similarly, young women were encouraged to view diamonds as an integral element of courtship. 5 Tactics under this strategy included
Within three years of the launch of the first De Beers campaign, diamond sales in the United States increased by 55 percent and an estimated 80 percent of wedding engagements in the country were consecrated with diamond rings.8 Looking back, Ayer noted that the campaign marked a new form of advertising which has been widely imitated ever since. There was no direct sale to be made. There was no brand name to be impressed on the public mind. There was simply an idea the eternal emotional value surrounding the diamond.9 This campaign has been adopted in other things as well. In 1973 a shampoo was specifically created and marketed to be used “every night.” How many people think it is appropriate to wash their hair every day now? Perhaps advertising is forever.
Ideas and their Consequences
Let’s assume for a brief moment that evolution, changes between kinds of animals, has taken place. The strongest and most fit are the only ones that survive long-term. Where does that place morals? That is the premise of an almost three year old video on YouTube:
What do you think? Is it possible for the professor to win the argument?
The Body as a Business
What did you think of from the title? A friend posted an article by David Ryser that appears to have come from an e-mail back in February. It is called “The Question That Changed My Life.” Here is a short excerpt:
A number of years ago, I had the privilege of teaching at a school of ministry. My students were hungry for God, and I was constantly searching for ways to challenge them to fall more in love with Jesus and to become voices for revival in the Church. I came across a quote attributed most often to Rev Sam Pascoe. Its a short version of the history of Christianity, and it goes like this:
> Christianity started in Palestine as a fellowship; it moved to Greece and became a philosophy; it moved to Italy and became an institution; it moved to Europe and became a culture; finally it came to America and became an enterprise.
Some of the students were only 18 or 19 years old - and I wanted them to appreciate the importance of the last line, so I clarified it by adding, “An enterprise. That’s a business.” After a few moments the youngest student in the class, raised her hand. She asked such a simple question, “A business? But isn’t it supposed to be a body?” I could not envision where this line of questioning was going, and the only response I could think of was, “Yes.” She continued, “But when a body becomes a business, isn’t that a prostitute?”
I've heard that explanation by Rev. Sam Pascoe before, but this clarification was far too good to pass up. Somehow it reminds me of the second chapter of Jeremiah (verses 7-13, ESV):
And I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination. The priests did not say, “Where is the Lord? Those who handle the law did not know me; the shepherds transgressed against me; the prophets prophesied by Baal and went after things that do not profit. Therefore I still contend with you, declares the Lord, and with your children’s children I will contend. For cross to the coasts of Cyprus and see, or send to Kedar and examine with care; see if there has been such a thing. Has a nation changed its gods,neven though they are no gods? But my people have changed their glory for that which does not profit. Be appalled, O heavens, at this; be shocked, be utterly desolate, declares the Lord, for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water.
A cistern is not even a well (which is passive while a spring is active). It is a holding tank for water. This means that God was saying even their rain collection did not work right.
This is one of the reasons that I never cared for [purity rings](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_rings) or similar items, even though I did not know how to say it for a long time. They do not hurt the individual, I don't think, but our purpose should always be to have a relationship with God. The overflow of that will become evident to others.
Some other translations use different words for "contend" above. The KJV uses "plead," while "chide" is another possible use. It does not really matter what word is used as they all express the same idea. Will you be convinced that God is really God? Our responsibility is to him first.
Abort! Abort?
Dating vs. Courtship
There was a rerun of a television show called Promised Land recently. The episode that I saw dealt with the deterioration of a marriage as the father tried to escape from everything happening at home and it got me thinking… when a guy asks a girl to marry him, he is asking her to see the worst side of himself. She should receive his best as well, but the thought is disconcerting. Knowing this, how can we tell young people (and old!) to play games with each other which encourage them to hide who they are? I am, of course, speaking of dating. There has been a backlash against it that is gaining popularity and is called “courtship” or “betrothal” (some people make distinctions between those, others do not). The first time that these ideas were recommended to me was in high school when Joshua Harris’ book I Kissed Dating Goodbye had just been released. A middle-aged couple at church did no-touch dating and my mom thought it would be a good idea for me to read this book. I didn’t and didn’t. At the time I had other thoughts running through my head that had to be sorted out first (like Isaiah 56; yes, horror of horrors). It was only three years ago that I began to take a serious look at courtship so I admit to being a general newbie. On the other hand, I have not ever dated. That should make me an old pro. Kinda. There are more resources on my shelves than I have had a chance to read through yet, but the starting point was a DVD series by Dr. S. M. Davis called the “Courtship / Betrothal Series.” He made some very good points, but I’m going to dissect it a little. The biggest analogy is – can you guess? We guys get to care for the girl as Christ cares for his church. It is a sobering thought and a good check of where the emotions and thoughts are. In a speech to the 2006 Father and Daughter retreat, Doug Phillips (of the Vision Forum) spoke of how lucky men were to be present as their daughters grew and blossomed into women. Isn’t that a small part of what being a husband is as well? Our desire should be to give more than we receive in return, and we should enjoy the journey. Something similar goes for women, but it is not normally my place to go into that. Comparing our relationships to Christ and the church is great except that it does break down at a point. We live in a fallen world and one of the spouses will probably die before the other. Sometimes it is a long while before the other, and the surviving spouse finds that they should remarry. It is even recommended by Paul to Timothy (I Timothy 5). You could, possibly, pull an Arminian analogy out of that. It certainly is not the ideal that is taught. If we can only give our hearts to one person, the second spouse was recommended a bad deal. It is true that we should treat all women with respect. Those who are older should be treated as mothers, and those who are younger as sisters (I Timothy 5:2). I would argue that we should consider this even more highly concerning a future wife before marriage. It is especially true as some courtship scenarios do not work out. In addition to winning the daughter’s heart, most courtship models involve winning the parent’s (and sometimes pastor’s) hearts. Each family also tends to have their own rules and guidelines that they have set out. It is wisdom in many situations but it also introduces more ways that some relationships can go wrong. I said when I started this blog that I was not going to name names. Only people who read this that know the individuals involved would know who I am talking about. One of the men that I know, who has courted, was told that he had to give his word that he would not break it off, no matter what he learned. The girl had already given away her virginity – to a married man. Thankfully she broke it off and he says to run when you see S. M. Davis’ DVDs (I’m not quite that bad). What does he do now that he is not “emotionally pure”? Well, he found someone better and married her. Another favored teaching that many follow in courtship is that we should not be looking at all, but should “sleep” as Adam did while Eve was created. Passages like Song of Solomon 8:4 are also referenced:
I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, that ye stir not up, nor awake my love, until he please.
Being “in love” with many of the opposite sex is wrong and has earned a rather harsh statement from Paul in II Timothy 3:6. At the same time, Genesis 2 (as an analogy) is not speaking of blindness or even passive waiting – at least for the men (the women have Ruth). The portion quoted is Genesis 2:21-23:
And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Sometimes, if we are lucky, they even reference the verses before it as a demonstration that Adam was working as he was commanded. They are exactly right and exactly wrong. Read this and think about it for a moment; Genesis 2:18-20:
And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Did you see that this is one continuous series? Adam watched God form all of the animals that had already been created, then he got to name them. While he was naming them, he was also analyzing how they could or could not complement (not compliment) him. If Adam was a part of the search then some courtship promoters have taken things a little far. I did end up reading I Kissed Dating Goodbye a few months ago and got a great laugh out of it. Among other things, Josh Harris goofed up in his usage of Jeremiah 29:11 (“I know the plans I have for you…”) when he used it as a reason to wait to date. If you read the chapter, the verse is right in the middle of a passage that is talking about getting married, building houses, planting vineyards and marrying kids off. That is not very wait-oriented for marriage. His overall idea (as I understood it) was to not enter a relationship until you can be serious about marrying and able to marry that person. The world is not perfect and each story is unique. I’m not convinced that a formula is going to give even most people a perfect introduction to marriage, which makes me think that the wisest approach is be friends first and then to be serious when you say you are. The other person is going to know you one day anyhow.
Mark 11:21: ... Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.
All four of the gospels make mention of the “Triumphal Entry” of Jesus on the back of a colt. Matthew and John quote Zechariah 9:9, which was the prophesy fulfilled by it:
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
Yes, please pass over the jokes about the antiquated language. People who had seen and heard about the works of Jesus made quite a procession that day. Mark recounts that this happened the day before Jesus ran the entrepreneurs out of the temple, while calling them thieves. Other tellings leave out the spacing of the days or put different details together in ways that help with reading the story. One of those caught my attention last night. Sandwiched in between the triumphal entry and running people out of the temple is a strange story. Here is how Mark records the events after Jesus rode into Jerusalem (Mark 11:11-26):
And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon all things, and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve.
And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry: And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it.
And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple. And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves. And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine. And when even was come, he went out of the city.
And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
What I find to be interesting here is that Jesus cursed a fig tree for not bearing fruit, and it occurred while he was dealing with men who were in the temple that were not bearing fruit. Go ahead and read the rest of the chapter (and/or Matthew 21). I don’t think I’m taking these verses out of context. The answers that Jesus gives to the religious leaders show that he is very confident in who he is in God (and, yes, even as God). That confidence was a part of the reason he acted on others. Who are you in God? How is it affecting your actions today?
One Generation to the Next
Things have been quiet here for the past two weeks for a couple reasons. The first is that I’ve been trying to meet a few deadlines and the second is that I’ve been pushing my mental and social abilities to their limits for the last couple months. I am feeling the strain a little, so I need to take a few days to recover.
Unfortunately that does not mean that I’m gone completely. Today an e-mail newsletter came from the West African Theological Seminary (WATS) that had this to say:
Leonard Ravenhill was born in England and spent the last thirty-five years of his life in the US. He was an avid student of revivals and a constant gadfly for the modern church-continually prodding her forward with his terse and often stinging admonitions. _Why Revival Tarries_ remains his most widely-read book. A. W. Tozer, a close friend, said "To such men as this, the church owes a debt too heavy to pay. The curious thing is that she seldom tries to pay him while he lives. Rather, the next generation builds his sepulcher and writes his biography-as if instinctively and awkwardly to discharge an obligation the previous generation to a large extent ignored."
(You can read more of the quote here if you wish.)
Those words of Tozer hit the nail right on the head. The next generation tries to do awkwardly what their parents and grandparents should have done.
Friends, this is where our country is at in more than just spiritual matters. Those things that pertain to God will cut us the most deeply though. Please do what needs to be done so that your children will have no reason to be ashamed of your work. Romans 13:7-8:
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
Patriarchalism, or was that Matriarchalism?
There is a movement in some Christian (and perhaps other) circles to revert many of the overbearing changes that have come out of the Women’s Rights movement. This reaction goes by the name that is used to describe many societies, including our own in times gone by – Patriarchalism. Like most reactions, this movement can swing to the far side of the spectrum. That doesn’t mean that we should always find the happy center between arguments (there are times to be extreme), but I think that on the majority of issues it is a good idea. I’m going to admit that I did not grow up around this idea and have only started to learn about it in the past 3-4 years. One of my friends asked for an opinion about Patriarchal families, so this is my humble attempt to spell out some of the details. Let’s begin with a quick explanation of how a Patriarchal family operates and how widespread the underlying idea is. From Wikipedia:
Patriarchy is the structuring of family units based on the man, as father figure, having primary authority over the rest of the family members.
Societies have marked differences in the way they exploit resources for survival, the artifacts they produce and in various rituals and other traditions. They also have similarities like marriage, family and the incest taboo. Aspects of human behaviour and social organisation that are common to all known societies are called cultural universals. Patriarchy is one of these universals.
This “universal” is one of the things that the women’s rights movement has set out to change. It might be fair for me to also admit that I am not entirely convinced that women voting is the best thing to happen. Before you get too upset with me, hear me out. What good does it do for a husband and a wife to vote for two different people? If you are not in favor of families operating as a family unit, then you could consider this to be an improvement. If you do happen to like families staying together, this causes many spouses to cancel each other out during elections and their family is absolutely worthless to society then. It is better for them to decide together who they will vote for. This should be how they operate other parts of their lives as well. In case you are one of those who believes that families are not important, I would like to point out that even the misguided United Nations has created a children’s fund, UNICEF, which says that children have a right to live with both parents. Now that we’ve hit that rabbit trail, let’s return to the modern patriarchal family movement. One of the really big problems that comes from it is that women are largely distrusted outside of the leadership of a husband or father. This means that the girl has to stay at home until she marries. Sometimes this includes the guys as well. From a letter sent to Michael Pearl
While homeschooling my own kids many years ago, we read an article that told about how certain ants secrete a hormone that prevents aphids from growing wings and flying away, allowing the ants to farm the aphids for the honeydew they produce. This is exactly what my parents did to us. We werent just discouraged from exercising our wings and flying from the nest, we were prevented from growing wings at all!
I tend to believe that many of the Patriarchal families you speak of are really Matriarchal families. And if you think this is impossible, you have never experienced the power and mind control an extremely intelligent and manipulative mother can have over her (young) childrens minds, and to some extent (though it may take years), over her husband. I dont know if she really controls my dad; I think he just gave up.
The note about Matriarchal families is an interesting one and I will return to that briefly in a bit. The really odd thing about these family organizations is how they behave when non-normal situations are thrown at them. The world that we live in tends to have a number of those scenarios up its sleeve. Sorry for not citing this one, but I have even heard some Christian leaders teach that widows should return to their father’s house and live under him again. Even if the marriage and moving out from under the parents’ roof did not change the relationship (Genesis 2:24), this teaching contradicts what Paul wrote in I Corinthians 7:39:
The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
Now let’s introduce this as a predicament. One of my friends became a widow less than two years after she married. Why is she allowed to choose who she marries now (and what she does) while another girl of the same age who has not married is not able to? I have also heard of churches where the distinction between the “girls” and the “women” was whether the young lady had a child or not. It had nothing to do with either age or maturity, but instead dealt only with whether she has birthed a child. Would this not encourage girls to simply get pregnant at the first opportunity? In the same way, I believe that holding your children back because they are not married is an encouragement to marry the first guy that doesn’t show any interest – pardon me – that shows a hint of interest. There was a mention earlier of Matriarchal families. As you might have guessed, that means that the mother rules the roost. It is not hard to find families where that occurs. One youth leader that I know interprets Genesis 3:16 as a desire for women to rule over their husbands. Men are, generally, more easy-going than women and tend to put up with a lot for the sake of peace. Abraham fathered Ishmael. Isaac took Rachel and Leah’s maidservants as concubines while the two wives feuded over their usefulness to bear children. That doesn’t mean that women are evil and must be controlled, though I did listen to some women today talk about the backstabbing that occurs in an all-female workplace. They also said that there were problems when it was all-male. There is some give and take on both sides. Men and women bring aspects to the table that need to be rounded out by the other – especially in marriage. The Patriarchal view did sound attractive to me for a short period of time. The main reason was because I knew a few girls who were not strong enough in their faith to withstand college but were going anyway. What an egotistical thing for me to think. There are men that have the same problem and all children have to be released at some point. You and I cannot be around forever. We should plan to raise our kids to know why they believe what they do and hiding them from everything is not going to do that. A lot of homeschoolers seem to get confused about this as well. It’s really the same issue. Homeschooling is not about hiding or withdrawing from the world in order to protect the kids. It is about being next to your child and being able to teach them why they want to respond to situations in a certain way. One day they are going to learn that most people have reasons for what they do. Will those reasons overrun your “don’t question our method” commands? There is more, though. If something happens to my wife, I like to think that I can manage even though some drastic changes will have to be made. How well will a woman be able to cope with the situation reversed? Do I have to train her in how the world works so that she can keep the family together? To keep her severely sheltered does me a grave disservice. Yes, I am selfish. Regardless of whether it is the husband or wife that is manipulating to keep the children close, I do not believe it is wise. It is impossible to protect from everything.
Difference between a Republic and a Democracy
A couple weeks ago I was asked to write about the differences between a Democracy and a Republic. There is a queue of topics to write about, and I’m getting to them as I can (OK, so there is only one more requested topic left and it will be back to the articles that have caught my highly-trained eye). In the United States, we have largely operated as a two-party political system. Many people, including myself, are beginning to see the two major parties as extensions of the same party. In fact, they used to be the same party between 1792 and 1824. That the two parties which emerged from that became known as the “Democrats” and the “Republicans” should tell us something of the ideas behind them. Yet a lot of dictionaries say that a democracy is a republic and a republic is a democracy:
Today, the terms republic and democracy are virtually interchangeable, but historically the two differed.
[republic. (n.d.). The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Retrieved August 22, 2009, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/republic]
Words do shift meaning, but this is pretty dangerous. If you have ten minutes, here is a video that originally appeared on wimp.com that does a good job of explaining the distinct forms of government:
A quote that I have used before from the Army Training Manual (No. 2000-25, 1928-1932, since withdrawn) is unapologetic in its claim that the United States is supposed to be a Republic:
The didactic method concerning facts of history, social changes, economic development, and basic principles of our Government will be used without discussion and without argument, special emphasis being given to the fact that the United States is a Republic, not a democracy.
Why is there such an emphasis on it? Here is how they defined a Democracy:
A government of the masses.
Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.
Results, in mobocracy.
Attitude toward property is communistic -- negating property rights.
Attittude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
That is harsh, isn’t it? Basically whoever can convince people the best is the one that has the power in a democracy. I think the analysis is accurate. If you didn’t watch the video, here is a run-down from the same manual explaining what a Republic is:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard for consequences.
A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy.
Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.
[&c. -- go read it for yourself]
What type of government are we trying to attain? You’ve just read a decent explanation of what happens under a Democracy. But are those in the Republican party much better? In 2003, our last Republican president said that he wanted to democratize the world (the original page has expired on Reuters):
Megan Goldin writes in Reuters: "It's been a long and lonely road for former Soviet dissident Natan (Anatoly) Sharansky who has for years been ridiculed for his political theories of spreading democracy across the globe to obtain world peace.
"But the former Soviet 'refusenik', who is now a cabinet minister in the Israeli government, no longer walks alone. His companion in his campaign to democratise the world is no less than U.S. President George W. Bush. . . .
Sharansky told Reuters about his visit with Bush in the Oval Office.
"I told him: 'You are the real dissident. Politicians look at polls -- what is popular, what is not popular. A dissident believes in an idea and goes ahead with it . . . even when there are so many people who disagree,' " Sharansky said.
That is a bold statement, isn’t it? You can read more on independent.org. Even more shocking for you, perhaps, is a video that has been making its rounds where McCain said he was fine with remaining in the middle east for the next one hundred years (text version available). So I ask you, what are we really trying to be? Even the Republicans have forgotten what a Republic is. Why don’t you take the World’s Smallest Political Quiz and find out where you currently stand on the political spectrum? The first time I took the quiz, I placed dead center in the Libertarian quadrant then had to go look up what a “libertarian” was. Those on the “left” (used to be called the “right”) want to control your pocketbook. The ones on the “right” want to control your actions. In their extremes, both end up having the same effect. We need to get our sights back on the consequences of having freedom or not having it.
Helpmeet
A friend sent me some text from the book Captivating by Stasi Eldredge (2007). You can read the excerpt here:
When God creates Eve, he calls her an _ezer kenegdo_. It is not good for the man to be alone, I shall make him [an _ezer kenegdo_] (Gen. 2:18 _Alter_). Hebrew scholar Robert Alter, who has spent years translating the book of Genesis, says that this phrase is notoriously difficult to translate. The various attempts we have in English are helper or companion or the notorious help meet. Why are these translations so incredibly wimpy, boring, flatâ¦disappointing? What is a help meet, anyway? What little girl dances through the house singing One day I shall be a help meet? Companion? A dog can be a companion. Helper? Sounds like Hamburger Helper. Alter is getting close when he translates it sustainer beside him.
The word _ezer_ is used only twenty other places in the entire Old Testament. And in every other instance the person being described is God himself, when you need him to come through for you _desperately_.
There is no one like the God of Jeshurun, who rides on the heavens to _help_ you..
Blessed are you, O Israel! Who is like you, a people saved by the Lord? He is your shield and _helper_ and your glorious sword. (Deut. 33: 26, 29)
I lift up my eyes to the hills where does my help come from? My _help_ comes from the LORD, the Maker of heaven and earth. (Ps. 121:1-2, emphasis added)
May the LORD answer you when you are in distress; may the name of the God of Jacob protect you. May he send you _help_. (Ps. 20:1-2)
We wait in hope for the LORD, he is our _help_ and our shield. (Ps. 33:20
O house of Israel, trust in the LORD he is their _help_ and shield.
O house of Aaron, trust in the LORD he is their _help_ and shield.
You who fear him, trust in the LORD- he is their _help_ and shield.
(Ps. 115:9-11)
Most of the contexts are life and death, by the way, and God is your only hope. Your _ezer_. If he is not there beside youâ¦.you are dead. A better translate therefore of _ezer_ would be lifesaver._Kenegdo_ means alongside, or opposite to, a counterpart.
[...] The longing in the heart of a woman to share life together as a great adventure that comes straight from the heart of God, who also longs for this. He does not want to be an option in our lives. He does not want to be an appendage, a tagalong. Neither does any woman. God is essential. He wants us to need him desperately. Eve is essential. She has an irreplaceable role to play. And so youll see that women are endowed with a fierce devotion, an ability to suffer great hardships, a vision to make the world a better place.
The only exception that I see in the Old Testament (for that is what was written mostly in Hebrew) is Isaiah 30:5. That is telling Israel of their shame for trusting in Egypt which could not be a help to them. Also, Mrs. Eldredge probably should have put the other instance of “help” from Psalm 121:1 in italics as well. It is the same Hebrew word. This seemed like a good point to pass along.
Calm Down There, Colorado
This past week has been spent in Colorado with nearly two hundred homeschool graduates. It has been lots of fun and the conversations covered almost every topic you can think of. The longest on-going discussion was over the Seventh Day Adventist’s view of how hell operates (they believe that it is temporary and then that the fire burns itself out and the souls disappear into oblivion; I disagreed). After that there were strategies for Ultimate Frisbee or talk about the quality of the food. The speakers addressed where our society is at and what our roles really need to be in that. There was a girl there who had eaten dog meat on a missions trip to India. Yet another conversation hinged on whether lipstick was called that because it appears in the form of a stick or because it sticks to things. The weekend was not just about talking though, there were lots of things to do. Those activities only afforded me time to talk to three quarters of the people who were there (which is still a lot). Let’s step back a moment to give a little background for a story. Last month I helped to clean up after a church yard sale that was a fund raiser for a youth “camp.” Since all of the items that remained were being donated to Goodwill, they insisted that I take a wig for myself. Yes, there is more to the story that is being condensed out. This past weekend was the only use that I could think of for it, so I wore the wig for the Friday evening dance. Don’t worry, it was English Country Dancing (ECD) and not anything close to what you would find in a club. Think about the style used in Jane Austen’s stories such as Pride and Prejudice. Here is the only picture from the dance that I have seen so far:
The wig did get me turned down for one dance. Ah, well. It was still worth it. The look on the faces of some of the girls when they walked past said it all – “You are the guy my mom warned me about.” About half-way through the dance I did return to normal but donned the wig again for some pictures on Sunday. One girl stopped me and asked to have her picture taken with me “for her mom.” Oh, boy.
On Saturday we had Eric Ludy speak and in the first few minutes his wife (she was speaking with him) mentioned their study of Leonard Ravenhill, who some of you have heard me mention before. I talked to them for a little bit afterward and they had read through his recommended reading list as well. It is great to see how some of the study plays out in people’s lives.
After the get-together broke up on Sunday afternoon, a couple friends and I went camping higher in the mountains. The hiking and conversations were fantastic there as well, though it got cold at night. The first morning I failed to get a fire started because the matches refused to stay lit, so I took a hike to warm up. It was before the sun had risen and I ended up picking a slope that was covered in loose rocks. More than once my legs were buried up to the knees in the sliding hillside. Near the top I did find some Yarrow (not sure I completely agree with the article) that had not blossomed yet and brought it back to make a tea. It helps to boost the immune system, which was probably good with how little sleep I was running on.
The second night two of us skipped the tents entirely and slept next to the fire. We had a couple embers fall on our stuff but we were unburned. It was definitely warmer.
And so we are back. It has been a great week, and I needed the break. The conversations, hiking, games, and everything else was great.
Acts 26:20 -> "Lordship Salvation"
node/96