Jesse, Odd Man Out.

Finding it difficult to accept that he's no longer "the baby," Jesse drinks too much and passes out behind the recliner.

A Big Boy

Gideon Thomas Waybright
Born: January 28th 2006, @ 1633.

9 lbs, 12 oz. 22" long.

Momma and baby are sleeping.

Three things

First, behold the deadly Irukandji!

Only about the size of the finger nail on your little pinky finger, but touching it can lead to weeks of intense pain, coma, and even death! So, small. So deadly. Praise be to God!

Second, what in the world?

"Affectionate chimps nuzzle under the cheerful glow of the candle nestled in the palms overhead." My birthday's coming up next month.

Third, speaking of birthdays...

The contractions started last night, waking up my wife. She took a shower at about 0430, which usually makes the contractions stop when they're the Braxton-Hicks variety. They didn't stop. It's going on 0930, contractions are 5 minutes apart, and the midwife has been notified (that should read, we woke her up before she knew what day it is or who she was, and told her to high tail it over here!). Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I should go boil water and get some towels or something!

Still waiting...

It's almost a week ago now that Rachel had four straight hours of good contractions. They stopped after she took a shower. Well, a visit to the midwife confirms that those contractions did something. She's partially effaced and dialated, and we're just waiting for the moment that God in His Sovereignty has foreordained. Here's something to ponder... every moment has been foreordained by God in His Sovereignty! But I'm talking about the moment that God foreordained in which my newest child will make his entrance into the post-womb world. I'll keep you's posted. You's, that's what we say in Central PA. Western PA has "You'ens" or "Yuns," and of course Josh and his buddy's down in Texarkana say "Ya'll." We just say "you's," and why not? The Germans that settled here had a plural form of "you" distinct from the singular, why can't we?

In other news: Erica says she's working on a knitting project. Ooh! Let me guess...

Could it be? If so, can ya make one for me, too?

Ain't it the truth?

"It is easier to be sound and Orthodox, than to be Godly, Sathan in a manner soundly believes there is one God, Jam. 2.19. and that Christ is the Son of God, Luke 4:34. and so doeth the carnall Jew teach that it is not lawfull to steal, to commit adultery, Rom. 2.21,22." -- Samuel Rutherfurd. The Covenant of Life Opened, Part I, Ch. XII.

It is easier to be sound and orthodox than to be godly. Yes, yes it is.

May the Lord be gracious and merciful to His people, and cause His face to shine upon them. Amen.

Fairwell, virtual-bro.john!

Well, he finally went and did it. Bro. John has dropped out of the world wide web. And you know what? I can't say I blame him. I stop and think sometimes... If I didn't have "a web presence" (as John put it), I wouldn't get hate mail, I wouldn't get into nearly so many arguments with folks, and I believe I might be more peaceful in my mind. As I'm about to change some of my links (cuz some of them were to John's now kaput sites), I wonder how some people do it. Take one of my new favorite bloggers, Paul Manata, for example. He can be found at various times writing detailed and careful logical arguments and refutations against atheists, hyper-preterists, and all kinds of commenters on his blog. How does the man find the time to interact with all these people? I have emails that are months old that have fallen into the "I'll get to it when I have the time" file. But time is not the only issue. How 'bout the mental stress? I get stressed out arguing with every Jack Knowitall that comes across a blog entry or a post or whatever that I've written. It drives me nuts sometimes. Some people do it well, like I believe Paul M. does. Me? Oh, I don't know. I've not been on my best behavior on the web, for sure. And I'm not proud of that.

Then I get to thinking of all the friends, virtual and actual, virtually actual, and actually virtual, that I've come across by way of the World Wide Web. Oh, I've found some enemies too, sure. But man, the friends... I wouldn't give a one of them back. Thanks web-friends! 'Sup Josh! Hey Jason and Liz! Thinking about ya, DJ. What do ya say, Shawn! How can I forget Whiskeyfoxypoptart and sister Okiedokiesmokiejo! SusanandCrew meet Bander! I know I didn't name everyone, but I love ya anyway. Yeah, I guess it's worth it. I'll stick around a little while.

In other news: The new baby is due 1/28, that's not too far away. SO QUICK, GIVE US SOME NAMES FOR THIS CHILD!

Speaking of philosophy, I've been wanting to bone up on some good Christian philosophy. I've read, and listened to, some debates recently, including the Great Debate. I also just finished reading Gordon H. Clark's Three Types of Religious Philosophy, except for the last page, WHICH IS MISSING IN MY COPY! Someone send me the last page please. Now, before people jump on my case over the Van Til/Clark thing, just hold up. I don't know much about the whole thing, and I've not framed an opinion as of yet. I'm a noob, understand? At this point I just want some basic Christian Philosophy to read or listen too. Pointers?

Back to Bro. John. Now that he's left the virtual world, and is spending much more time in the real world, I suppose it's time for me to be a real friend to him. Someone once sang, "I've been one poor correspondent. I've been too too hard to find." Yep, that's me. It's high time I give him a call, and meet up with my ol' pal the good old fashioned way... in real life.

I was holding out like a champ...

Until today I barfed like a maniac. It was gross, you should've seen it. I think I hurt my neck.

Ugh, I don't feel good.

People, get ready... there's a blaaaaarrrrrgggg

It's hard to count how many barf sessions happened last night/early this morning. For a while there, it was every hour on the hour -- I'm counting three kids that have it now... Calle first, then Cole, now Elisabeth. My breakfast today consists of a cup of chai, and that's it, cuz I'm feeling funny now too. Poor Rachel... due to give birth this month, and feeling bad in her stomach (which is no longer located in the normal area on account of being so preggers). I'm planning on going to work, but I'm a bit frightened about that -- the vomitting that is happening thusfar in the household has been sudden, violent, with olympic-style distance involved. I'm envisioning....

ME: So what brings you in today? What can we help you with?

CLIENT: Well, I've been so depressed for the past few weeks, that I'm having thoughts of sui-- (interupted)

ME: BAAAAAAALLLLLLLAAAAAAAGGGGRRROOOOOOOOOOOOAAAA!!!! BUUUUUUUIIIIIIIICCCCKKKKK! RRRRRRAAAAALLLLLFFFFFF!!!! Oh, I'm so sorry. We'll get that cleaned up for you. Excuse me, I have to leave now.

Oh, may it not happen!

IN OTHER NEWS: I've been feeling pretty down lately, and having trouble sleeping too. It's been, like, maybe 5 nights now of not sleeping well. Seems like a lot of things I don't like thinking about are being brought up again, from several different sources, all at once.

"I haven't known peace and quiet for so long I can't remember what it's like."

That's right, Bob Dylan. I know what you're talking about. "Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth." Tell my about it, Bob. Tell me about it.

So, back to my chai, and off to work. Bound to be an adventurous day at home and abroad!

Christopher Love's quote (Louis' comment)

Remember this for your comfort: if you conscientiously make use of those means that the Lord has sanctified for the mortifying of your sins, then, even if, notwithstanding all, your sins prevail over and overcome you, in this case the Lord will hold you guiltless. I might urge that place to you which I quoted the Last Lord's Day concerning the law of God touching a damsel in Deuteronomy 22:25-27, which was that the adulterer should be put to death. But, God says, if the damsel was walking in the field and a man came to her and defiled her, if she strove against him and cried out, then the damsel shall be guiltless, but the man shall die the death.

When the devil spiritually rapes you, if your soul can bear you witness that you cried out to God for help, and struggled and strove against the corruption with all your might and strength to suppress and keep them under, and yet you could not prevail but the devil overmatched you, in this case know that God will count you guiltless.

-- Christopther Love. The Mortified Christian, Sermon 7.

Dutiful and honest reader Louis comments,

That sounds like something I've heard before... "The devil made me do it"?

1 Cor. 10:13 says, "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it."

Maybe I'm reading Love or the Scripture wrong, but don't those two disagree? I read one as saying God won't allow us to be tempted above our ability to resist, hence sin in man is his own fault; and I read Love as saying that sometimes Satan can overcome us with temptation and it's not OUR fault.

I think a more accurate example (again, if I understand these two correctly, which I very well may not) for Satan overpowering us would be the case of a woman being extremely tempted to fornicate, instead of being forced.

Good question, Louis. First, note that Mr. Love does not deny that the one overcome is sinning, as he affirms "notwithstanding all, your sins prevail over and overcome you." What he is saying, is that even though you've fallen into sin, if you have done so fighting against sin every inch of the way, and yet were still overcome due to the weakness of your flesh, and the strength of Satan, the Lord (says Love) will not hold you guilty. This is not the same thing as saying sin is not our fault. Second, these comments are made in the middle of a series of sermons on mortification. He brings up this comfortable doctrine towards those poor souls who might be despairing that they have no true mortification since they fell into such and such a sin. I say this lest anyone think that Love is simply excusing people's sins. He had just spent a good while telling people that think they are mortified that they were not mortified!

I take Love to be saying that there are times when a Christian can have a degree of mortification, and yet sometimes can fall into a sin against which he earnestly strove, but this is not evidence that he is not mortified, but only that there remains weakness in his flesh, for which the Lord pities, rather than condemns, the believer.

"The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" -- Matt. 26:41.

That he may not terrify and discourage his disciples, he gently reproves their slothfulness, and adds consolation and good ground of hope. And, first, he reminds them, that though they are earnestly desirous to do what is right, still they must contend with the weakness of the flesh, and, therefore, that prayer is never unnecessary. We see, then, that he gives them the praise of willingness, in order that their weakness may not throw them into despair, and yet urges them to prayer, because they are not sufficiently endued with the power of the Spirit. Wherefore, this admonition relates properly to believers, who, being regenerated by the Spirit of God, are desirous to do what is right, but still labor under the weakness of the flesh; for though the grace of the Spirit is vigorous in them, they are weak according to the flesh. And though the disciples alone have their weakness here pointed out to them, yet, since what Christ says of them applies equally to all, we ought to draw from it a general rule, that it is our duty to keep diligent watch by praying; for we do not yet possess the power of the Spirit in such a measure as not to fall frequently through the weakness of the flesh, unless the Lord grant his assistance to raise up and uphold us.

-- John Calvin, Harmony of the Gospels Vol. 3.

"For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." -- Rom. 7:15-17.

You must not understand that it was always the case with him, that he could not do good; but what he complains of is only this — that he could not perform what he wished, so that he pursued not what was good with that alacrity which was meet, because he was held in a manner bound, and that he also failed in what he wished to do, because he halted through the weakness of the flesh. Hence the pious mind performs not the good it desires to do, because it proceeds not with due activity, and doeth the evil which it would not; for while it desires to stand, it falls, or at least it staggers. But the expressions to will and not to will must be applied to the Spirit, which ought to hold the first place in all the faithful.

The flesh indeed has also its own will, but Paul calls that the will which is the chief desire of the heart; and that which militates with it he represents as being contrary to his will....

This is not the pleading of one excusing himself, as though he was blameless, as the case is with many triflers who think that they have a sufficient defense to cover all their wickedness, when they cast the blame on the flesh; but it is a declaration, by which he shows how very far he dissented from his own flesh in his spiritual feeling; for the faithful are carried along in their obedience to God with such fervour of spirit that they deny the flesh.

This passage also clearly shows, that Paul speaks here of none but of the godly, who have been already born again; for as long as man remains like himself, whatsoever he may be, he is justly deemed corrupt; but Paul here denies that he is wholly possessed by sin; nay, he declares himself to be exempt from its bondage, as though he had said, that sin only dwelt in some part of his soul, while with an earnest feeling of heart he strove for and aspired after the righteousness of God, and clearly proved that he had the law of God engraven within him.

-- John Calvin, Commentary on Romans 7:14-17.

Well, I hope that helps.

Thoughts on this are appreciated.

On Public Repentence

"Blow ye the trumpet in Zion,
and sound an alarm in my holy
mountain: let all the inhabitants
of the land tremble: for the day
of the LORD cometh, for it is
nigh at hand," (Joel 2:1).

"...[T]his passage shows that when any judgment of God is impending, and tokens of it appear, this remedy ought to be used, namely, that all must publicly assemble and confess themselves worthy of punishments and at the same time flee to the mercy of God. This, we know, was, as I have already said, formerly enjoined on the people; and this practice has not been abolished by the gospel. And it hence appears how much we have departed from the right and lawful order of things; for at this day it would be new and unusual to proclaim a fast. How so? Because the greater part are become hardened; and as they know not commonly what repentance is, so they understand
not what the profession of repentance means; for they understand not what sin is, what the wrath of God is, what grace is. It is then no wonder that they are so secure, and that when praying for pardon is mentioned, it is a thing wholly unknown at this day. But though people in general are thus stupid, it is yet our duty to learn from the Prophets what has always been the actual mode of proceeding among the people of God, and to labor as much as we can, that this may be known, so that when there shall come an occasion for a public repentance, even the most ignorant may understand that this practice has ever prevailed in the Church of God, and that it did not prevail through inconsiderate zeal of men, but through the will of God himself."

~~John Calvin, Commentary on the Prophet Joel, Lecture Forty-First (Joel 2:1-11).

Quick Update

To everyone who prayed, and who has been praying, for my father and for me, thank you so very very much.

My dad was released from the hospital today, and a friend picked him up and took him back home to the mountains of Virginia. Good news is he's stable enough to be discharged, bad news is... well, now he's alone in the mountains of Virginia. The plan is to arrange some in-home nursing for a while until he can get up and about on his own. For now, he's pretty much restricted to his bed, except for some treacherous ventures to the bathroom or other such short and brief trips (well, let's hope not "trips," as I can picture him falling and laying there for a long time, which would not be good).

Well, that's all I got right now.

In other news: A lady I talked to today, who was, oh, let's just say not quite in her right mind, made an odd comment to me. She said that Thomas Aquinas wrote that it was ok to commit fornication if the purpose was to keep you from freezing. She said Aquinas said that would be no sin. I never heard that... I'm only familiar with Augustin's comments on rape. Does anyone have a clue on this one?