moving parts of the kasper clan

So, my beautiful bride and I had an opportunity the other night to spend the evening without two of our children, which left just the two of us and our beautiful daughter (we’ll call her Kiwi here). We enjoyed a few serene and peaceful hours at the local Borders, looking through whatever books we found to tickle our fancy. And then we came home, thinking that we could watch some movies with Kiwi, being that she’s getting older now and stuff.

And what movies we have to choose from, just let me tell you! Movies I love to watch with Lynn, like O Brother, Where Art Thou, The Transporter, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Mission Impossible, Undercover Blues, and many, many wonderful others. So, as we were looking through our collection and comparing each one up with the PluggedIn movie reviews, I was amazed, frustrated, and supremely irritated by the fact that out of all of these really enjoyable movies, NONE of them were free from profanity, and therefore were not, any of them, something that I’d want to sit my kids down in front of and encourage them to watch. And just a pre-emptive “ssh”… yeah, at some point, my kids will be exposed to profanity. They already have been. But, as Kiwi and I were just talking about the other day, everything you come in contact with (are exposed to) affects you. Everything. And I’ll be darned if I want to voluntarily bring things into my kids’ lives that are not good for them. ’nuff said.

“This supremely sucks”, said I, determined to fix the problem (that is, you know, what men do–they must fix things).

A good friend of mine had already found a solution, however, and had been enjoying these sorts of movies with his family. I had been resisting the outlay of $50 to be able to do this, however, but the afore-mentioned frustration drove me to it. I ordered and have received the wee beastie, and thus I present you with (and highly recommend) the TVGuardian Foul Language Filter, Model 301, available for you and you only for the low, low price of $49.86, plus S&H.

I look forward to being able to laugh along with my kids as we watch some of these otherwise-enjoyable movies and not have to cringe everytime someone opens their mouth on screen. Yay for technology, again! =:)

This is absolutely the coolest Open Source thing, by far, this month. In fact, it might be the coolest thing I’ve seen in a couple of months. Jon Lech Johansen (you might remember him as the guy who largely made it possible to watch those pesky little DVDs that you paid good money for on the Operating System you choose) has done it again.

Apparently, my head has been in the sand for the last several months, since SharpMusique is a (very nicely done!) C# port of the python-based PyMusique application. What is PyMusique (and subsequently SharpMusique), you ask? Why, nothing more than a free working Open Source interface to Apple’s iTunes store!!!

Does it work? Absolutely!! And well!! And thanks to Novell/Miguel/countless thousands of Mono developers, this C# port (SharpMusique) runs perfectly well on Linux!

What does all this mean? Well, I can tell you what it doesn’t mean. It doesn’t mean that Apple is getting robbed or anything. All this interface does is allow me to browse Apple’s iTunes store from Linux, log in, search for music, purchase and download songs, and… well, that’s it. And, as a matter of fact, I did purchase a $.99 song tonight–Kutless - Strong Tower - Take Me In, from Apple’s iTunes store, through the SharpMusique application, on Linux. And, I happen to think that this is how it should be. In fact, I’d be quite happy running Apple’s own iTunes application in Linux, if they’d just provide me one.

But they don’t.

And it’s satisfying that, for the time being, until Apple figures out how to get this to not work anymore, I can choose to browse their iTunes store from Linux, and even *gasp* purchase their music. If I choose to.

It’s nice having a choice. =:)

After talking with John from KKSM, I ordered and received Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. I read the preface thus far and underlined about half of it. It is SOOOOO good!! I absolutely love C.S. Lewis’s writing style. He is both precisely clear and creative at the same time. One example:

“It so happens that the impulse which makes men gamble has been left out of my make-up; and, no doubt, I pay for this by lacking some good impulse of which it is the excess or perversion.” — C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Preface page XII

Love it! And the section following that, where he talks about the meaning of the very word “Christian”… amazing!!! Ahh, and thank goodness for the Internet! I was actually considering typing this all in meself, but I found that another had done this very thing already, leaving me only to copying/pasting, whee! To quote the page, “I planned to trim it up - but there’s just no doing that to Lewis.”

Far deeper objections may be felt - and have been expressed -against my use of the word Christian to mean one who accepts the common doctrines of Christianity. People ask: ‘Who are you, to lay down who is, and who is not a Christian?’ : or ‘May not many a man who cannot believe these doctrines be far more truly a Christian, far closer to the spirit of Christ, than some who do?’ Now this objection is in one sense very right, very charitable, very spiritual, very sensitive. It has every available quality except that of being useful. We simply cannot, without disaster, use language as these objectors want us to use it. I will try to make this clear by the history of another, and very much less important, word.

The word gentleman originally meant something recognisable; one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone ‘a gentleman’ you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact. If you said he was not ‘a gentleman’ you were not insulting him, but giving information. There was no contradiction in saying that John was a liar and a gentleman; any more than there now is in saying that James is a fool and an M.A. But then there came people who said - so rightly, charitably, spiritually, sensitively, so anything but usefully - ‘Ah, but surely the important thing about a gentleman is not the coat of arms and the land, but the behaviour? Surely he is the true gentleman who behaves as a gentleman should? Surely in that sense Edward is far more truly a gentleman than John?’ They meant well. To be honourable and courteous and brave is of course a far better thing than to have a coat of arms. But it is not the same thing. Worse still, it is not a thing everyone will agree about. To call a man ‘a gentleman’ in this new, refined sense, becomes, in fact, not a way of giving information about him, but a way of praising him: to deny that he is ‘a gentleman’ becomes simply a way of insulting him. When a word ceases to be a term of description and becomes merely a term of praise, it no longer tells you facts about the object: it only tells you about the speaker’s attitude to that object. (A ‘nice’ meal only means a meal the speaker likes.) A gentleman - once it has been spiritualised and refined out of its old coarse, objective sense, means hardly more than a man whom the speaker likes. As a result, gentleman is now a useless word. We had lots of terms of approval already, so it was not needed for that use; on the other hand if anyone (say, in a historical work) wants to use it in its old sense, he cannot do so without explanations. It has been spoiled for that purpose.

Now if once we allow people to start spiritualising and refining, or as they might say ‘deepening’, the sense of the word Christian, it too will speedily become a useless word. In the first place, Christians themselves will never be able to apply it to anyone. It is not for us to say who, in the deepest sense, is or is not close to the spirit of Christ. We do not see into men’s hearts. We cannot judge, and are indeed forbidden to judge. It would be wicked arrogance for us to say that any man is, or is not, a Christian in this refined sense. And obviously a word which we can never apply is not going to be a very useful word. As for the unbelievers, they will no doubt cheerfully use the word in the refined sense. It will become in their mouths simply a term of praise. In calling anyone a Christian they will mean that they think him a good man. But that way of using the word will be no enrichment of the language, for we already have the word good. Meanwhile, the word Christian will have been spoiled for any really useful purpose it might have served.

We must therefore stick to the original, obvious meaning. The name Christians was first given at Antioch (Acts 11:26) to ‘the disciples’, to those who accepted the teaching of the apostles. There is no question of its being restricted to those who profited by that teaching as much as they should have. There is no question of its being extended to those who in some refined, spiritual, inward fashion were ‘far closer to the spirit of Christ’ than the less satisfactory of the disciples. The point is not a theological or moral one. It is only a question of using words so that we can all understand what is being said. When a man who accepts the Christian doctrine lives unworthily of it, it is much clearer to say he is a bad Christian than to say he is not a Christian.
from the preface to Mere Christianity - by C.S. Lewis

Brilliant!! I can’t wait to read more!

In other news, I spent 5 hours or so yesterday cleaning up KPilot’s home page, thanks to Adriaan enabling me to. =;) There’s not much visible change yet–it’s more back-end cleanups (converting ~ 10 static HTML pages to using PHP includes and magical code). Still, nonetheless, it felt good to do something for KPilot, since I’ve not had time as of late to help too much with bugs. =:/

It was another busy weekend, this, seeming to lack almost entirely of the deep rest I need. Although today, it was fun to have gathered at Pete’s lovely home with some of our project members and their families. I spent several hours there with my beautiful Lynn (Hi, darling–see, I do talk about you!) and wonderful kiddos. Pete is a marvelous host, has an incredibly manly grill, and is a good cook, to boot. =;) Thanks again, Pete!!

And now, to sleep, perchance to dream.

And whatever you do, Jason, don’t think about having to go back to work tomorrow… Doh!!

This turns my stomach.

So, my sister Jenny was reading The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown when she came out for her vacation and since she bought the bigger version (with pictures), she gave me her old one. And thus I got hooked. She had me read a couple of pages in the middle of the book, and my first reaction was a strong distaste. I mean, this is Jesus the story is meddling with. Jesus, the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, my Lord and Savior–you’ve heard of Him, surely.

I started reading, though, and was immediately caught into the story, and as is usual with good stories, I couldn’t put it down until I had read it all. Mr. Brown does an excellent job as a storyteller, and the story he tells is intriguing and captivating. I am a sucker for Grail stories, and love all things to do with Knights, secret societies, conspiracies, Renaissance art, history, and mostly everything else that comprises The Da Vinci Code.

And as Mr. Brown mentions, the underyling theme isn’t something that he made up. There have been conspiracy stories about the Bible, Jesus’s life, the Hebrew God of the Old Testament, and everything else that comprises The Da Vinci Code for many hundreds of years. In fact, I was exposed to these theories in college a few years back when I took a course that was titled “Poetry in the Old Testament” iirc, and was quite shocked (along with everyone else in the class) to discover that the intentionally mis-named course was really all about goddess/feminine theories with regard to the Old Testament and the very names of God (Jehovah and Yahweh). Interesting theories, to be sure, but I don’t claim to have researched the topic enough to debate it. What little I have read, however, refutes the theories popularized in The Da Vinci Code.

I also really appreciate the online resources Mr. Brown has provided to complement the book, such as the gallery, and his Frequently Asked Questions.

Which brings me to something that concerns me a little. In his FAQ, Mr. Brown is asked the question “ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN?” His answer leaves me unsure that he understands the question, and as I agree with him that it’s an important question, I wanted to point it out:

ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN?
Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as absolute historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious–that is, that we are all trying to decipher life’s big mysteries, and we’re each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.

See, the word Christian is a special word that was first used in the first-century city of Antioch, and it described Jesus’s followers (disciples) who were subsequently killed for their beliefs–namely, that Jesus is the Son of God who was crucified, died to pay the price for our sins, and was raised to life after 3 days. Webster’s dictionary defines “Christian” as:

1) One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2) One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

Unfortunately, the word Christian has been watered down through the years so that now, many people say they are Christians because they live in America, etc. The thing is… the word Christian itself shouldn’t be open to interpretation. It has a definite meaning. You either believe Jesus is the promised Christ (Messiah) or you don’t. You either live your life according to the teachings of Jesus or you don’t. And Jesus didn’t allow for wishy-washy interpretation of who He said he was or how we should live. You’ll recall that NONE of his contemporaries were able to refer to Jesus as a “good teacher” or “nice man.” To quote C.S. Lewis,

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, The MacMillan Company, 1960, pp. 40-41.)

As to Mr. Brown’s statement:

The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.

I pray that Mr. Brown will continue to earnestly seek the truth and that he will find it. Towards that end, I believe that The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict is an excellent resource for this. As for me, my curiosity is piqued about these theories. I’d like to learn more about them and be able to discuss them intelligently. I think I’ll take a look through the copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls I still have from the odd little college course I mistakenly took. Maybe I’ll investigate the Gnostic Gospels some too (I’ve not even heard of them up till now).

Here’s to God’s truth for both of us, Mr. Brown. =:)

I just had a good friend point this article from Ben Stein out to me. Wow. It is extremely well-done. I’ll paste a few excerpts from it…

Beyond that, a bigger change has happened. I no longer think Hollywood stars are terribly important. They are uniformly pleasant, friendly people, and they treat me better than I deserve to be treated. But a man or woman who makes a huge wage for memorizing lines and reciting them in front of a camera is no longer my idea of a shining star we should all look up to.

…

A real star is the soldier of the 4th Infantry Division who poked his head into a hole on a farm near Tikrit, Iraq. He could have been met by a bomb or a hail of AK-47 bullets. Instead, he faced an abject Saddam Hussein and the gratitude of all of the decent people of the world.

…

I am no longer comfortable being a part of the system that has such poor values, and I do not want to perpetuate those values by pretending that who is eating at Morton’s is a big subject.

…

We are not responsible for the operation of the universe, and what happens to us is not terribly important. God is real, not a fiction, and when we turn over our lives to Him, he takes far better care of us than we could ever do for ourselves.

In a word, we make ourselves sane when we fire ourselves as the directors of the movie of our lives and turn the power over to Him.

Wow. Well-put, Ben Stein. I wholeheartedly agree with his post. It’s even more interesting in that this was Ben Stein’s last column with E-Online.

Just finally got a chance to sit down at the laptop for half an hour and uploaded 50 pictures or so from the great time I had over the last couple of weeks. My sister (Hi Jenny!!) and her 2 youngins (Hi Nate and Elijah!) were out for 2 weeks. We had a blast, visiting Hershey, indoor swimming and diving, Lake Tobias, and other cool stuffies too.

My brother Josh Kasper got to come out to spend some time with us too! He was at a King of Kings Skateboard Ministry shindig in Syracuse, New York, and was hanging out with Team 2 until Creation, East. So we invited him and his team to stay with us for a few days. And I’m SO glad we did, since we had an absolutely hilarious and fun time with Mason, Zac, John, and Josh. I’m not sure Jenny got as much enjoyment out of it as I did, but Elijah and Jason Jr. spent I don’t know how many hours playing Halo 2 with Mason and the guys.

Anyway, I’ve posted a bunch of photos on my Flickr account, so go check ‘em out (I highly recommend the slideshow).