"A Broken Clock is Right Twice a Day"

There have a been a number of occasions in which someone has responded to me, "even a broken clock is right twice a day." I've had the comment directed to me personally and I've also had it directed toward Luther.  While the statement may appear to be logical, it's drenched in negative sentiment, and meant to be an insult.  It's tantamount to saying to someone, "I think you're a fool, but you got _____ correct. There are a few of reasons why I personally do not use this statement.

1."Even a broken clock is right twice a day" has the inference that someone is correct about something by luck or by chance. When used against me, it often infers that the conclusion I've reached on a topic is not the result of research and hard work. As my blog entries demonstrate, a lot of work goes into something before it's posted. 

2. "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" has the inference that someone is usually wrong on everything, but in a rare instance got something correct. I think this is just an expression of the ad hominem fallacy, of insulting someone personally even if one agrees with their point or conclusion. Rome's defenders have hurled this insult at me particularly when I present historical facts they've gotten wrong. They mention I'm correct and they're wrong but then proceed to insult me. 

3. I've seen "even a broken clock is right twice a day" applied to Luther after I point out that a defender of Rome trashes Martin Luther but then appeals to him positively. This is the same method of insult as described above.  My usual response is to turn the tables by showing that Rome's defenders are still using Luther as an authority.

For instance, I interacted with a defender of Rome that repeatedly uses this Luther quote: "In like manner He says, in Matthew xvi, to the one man Peter, who stands as the representative of the one and only Church" (A brief explanation of the Creed; Works of Martin Luther vol. 2 - p.373). This quote is meant to demonstrate that Luther ultimately believed Jesus established the pope / papacy in Matthew 16. Rome's defender ignored the fact that this writing was from 1520: a transitional year that ended with Luther being threatened with excommunication from the papacy and being officially excommunicated in January 1521. 

It is also rather odd since Luther went on to trash the pope and papacy numerous (if not countless!) times, demonstrated throughout his writings throughout the majority of his life. For instance, note these statements from Luther incorporated into The Book of Concord: 

[T]he pope is the real Antichrist who has raised himself over and set himself against Christ... [Tappert, T. G., ed. (1959). The Book of Concord the confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. (p. 300). Mühlenberg Press].

Accordingly, just as we cannot adore the devil himself as our lord or God, so we cannot suffer his apostle, the pope or Antichrist, to govern us as our head or lord, for deception, murder, and the eternal destruction of body and soul are characteristic of his papal government, as I have demonstrated in many books [Tappert, T. G., ed. (1959). The Book of Concord the confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. (p. 301). Mühlenberg Press].

Rome's defender rejected these statements and clung to his sole prooftext. At that point I simply continued to praise him for accepting Luther as an authority! 

Beggars All: 20th Anniversary!

Somewhere recently I heard the comment, "2006 called, and they want their blog back." It was 20 years ago in late December 2005 / early January 2006 I joined the blogger trend. Now, blogs are primarily extinct dinosaurs; social media is trending as the popular means of human interaction. While I don't update this blog as frequently as I did in earlier years, I still maintain it regularly as an enjoyable hobby. I happily exist among other blogger dinosaurs: we are the 8-track tapes of social media.   

Words cannot express the depth of gratitude I have for the millions of people that have visited Beggars All over the past 20 years. This blog has always been a hobby... a selfish hobby. That others have visited here and have benefitted from my hobby has brought me joy and a profound humbling gratitude: feelings I cannot fully express in words.

It is through this blog that I have met amazing people... some well-known, some that should be well known! This blog has given me long lasting cyber friendships with people that I have never met in person but feel like close friends. Technology often rightly gets a bad rap, but yet... thank God for the technology that has given me invaluable cyber-friends! 

This blog has also given me a number of amazing opportunities: writing articles for well-known websites, YouTube interviews, doing research for other authors, and even mentions in published books. These opportunities sometimes feel to me like I'm a theological Chauncey Gardner, Being There. For those of you that have asked me countless times over the years: why haven't you written a book? Yes, there is a book written. I'm not sure when it will be released by the publisher.   

What is the future of Beggars All? I don't know. I'm surprised the blogger platform still exists. I expect to open up my browser one day and discover Blogger has been retired or changed to some sort of pop-up nightmare of advertisements. I've also yet to work through the most recent changes in technology, that being artificial intelligence. I've interacted with a number of people on social media that are using it as a primary source. For instance, I asked more than a few people about reading a quote in context, and I was provided with AI screenshot overviews as proof. In one bizarre instance, AI created a fake Luther quote. I spent hours looking for it, only to be told by a defender of Rome it was generated by AI. Then there's ChatGPT: I've never used it, and I abhor it. I will not use it on this blog. My writing warts will be visible to all.   

Again: to all my friends (and yes, even my cyber-enemies) ... thank you for 20 years of cyber interaction!   

   

Martin Luther Was Evil and I Need to Tell Everyone

This blog had an open unmoderated comment policy for quite a while, then spammers and some nefarious people became a nuisance, so moderation was turned on. 

I've gotten a number of comments recently all basically saying the same thing: Luther was an awful person, with some comments going further, by extension inferring, James Swan is also an awful person. 

Frankly, I don't have time to interact with comments like that. If you don't like Martin Luther or John Calvin, or the Reformation period of history,  that's fine. You are entitled to your opinion. There are things about Luther, Calvin, and the Reformation that I don't like either.

So, here's what I propose: I'm not going to allow the "Luther was an awful person" stuff on my previous entries. Generally, I've noticed those types of comments don't actually engage the material I'm putting forth. 

However: this entry will be moderated but left open for the "Luther was an awful person" comments. Feel free to post away and express yourself about how terrible you think Luther was.  I'll publish them all, unless they are crude or trouble my tender heart in some way.  

Happy New Year

Another year of blogging has come to end. Do people still read blogs?

If you stop by regularly, thank you! I started this little experiment back in December 2005. Here it is, 2019, and the Reformation is the topic that keeps on giving. This past year I've tried to post one entry per week.  This upcoming year, I'm not sure what I'll be doing, but I'm not ready to pack it in yet. I'm still a small blip on the Lutheran radar. I guess once they become aware I'm not a Lutheran, I must get flagged... or something. Then of course, those in my own camp, the Reformed, well, I'm usually not writing about anything that they're all that interested in. Ah well. My Roman Catholic readers know that I'm not Roman Catholic and that this blog is a nuisance, so at least I'm on the same page with them.

I'm not entirely sure how many people visit here. Then again, it's never been about traffic. I write what I do because I like doing it. I don't advertise, I don't sell stuff. Of course, I am grateful for readership. According to Blogger's statistics feature I've had close to three millions hits. This feature doesn't provide a lot of precise information, but it does list which of my entries are being read, and which sites some of the traffic comes from.

Here's where it gets a little weird. Over this past year, I've noticed traffic from a website entitled, "PlagScan." This website specializes in checking for plagiarism. I wish I knew which of my entries were being checked; that would be interesting to know. It would also be interesting in finding out who was doing it. I suppose that if it's an online polemicist of some sort, I'll find out soon enough if something is found! I've never purposefully plagiarized anything, though I will say that as the years progressed here on this blog, I have become even more precise in documentation. I've been going back through my archives and revamping some of my oldest entries to fix some of the documentation, typically to make it more precise. This year some of my older entries will be revamped and re-posted. Because I'm such a nitpicker on documentation, it would not surprise me at all to find someone actively trying to catch something here on this blog, as a sort of revenge.

Here's where it gets even weirder, and this is something that appears to be troublesome to all of us who use Blogger. I noticed via Blogger's stats page that I was getting traffic from some strange websites, which turned out to be, porn sites.  The first question I wondered about is why would a porn site link to this blog?  True, I do have some entries about Luther's views on polygamy... but... people that visit porn sites... I find it unfathomable that any such person cares about anything other than decadence. I searched around and found this over on Blogger's Help Forum: How do I stop porn sites from sending fake referrals and views to my blog? The person who posed this question stated, "I have a Christian blog and I find this extremely distressing!" The answer thus far? There is no answer. Blogger has no way to stop porn sites from linking to blogs. It appears that the reason these porn sites are linking to blogs is that they're trying to get those of us checking Blogger's traffic stats to inadvertently click on their link to see whose linking to our blogs! Wow, what desperation. I suspect the porn sites are using some sort of blogger list and have some sort of code or algorithm that automatically creates a hit and a link back to their sites. If anyone has any solution or tips to stop this, please let me know.  The only solution I've come up with is: when checking Blogger stats, do not click on anything that sounds weird.

Thank You For Visiting!

Sometime today, this blog will have had over two million page views. I do realize there are other blogs and websites that have easily surpassed this milestone in a much quicker time.  Considering though what the subject matter here typically is, this statistic is amazing. Considering that blogs have been replaced by Facebook and Twitter, this statistic is amazing. Considering that I've never really advertised and I don't sell anything,  this statistic is amazing.

I've appreciated meeting so many of you over the years, and I'm grateful that folks stop by to read the posts.

James

Beggars All: 10 Years Old

I've taken some time off from blogging these last few months, but I'm still actively engaged in the topics covered here. I do the same thing with my other hobbies as well.  

Back during the blogger-craze days, I started this back in mid-December 2005 as a place where I could keep track of some of the subjects I was interested in.  My scope of interest is typically narrow: Reformation related research. Since December 2005, I've had over a million hits  (which isn't much in comparison to many other theological blogs). But, I've never really advertised, I don't sell anything, and I typically write what I do because they are my own selfish interests, not to gain readership.

I've appreciated meeting so many of you over the years, and I'm grateful that folks stop by here to read my posts.

James

Announcement: I have crossed the Tiber

 I crossed the Tiber, first by Taxi, then on foot.

Reason #789 Why to Use Comment Moderatiom

Here's a sample of why comment moderation is turned on." Simply click on the image below for a closer look.

The Beggars All Insultapalooza Post

I meant to put this up for Valentines Day: I've ignored a lot of negative comments over the past few years. Here were some recent love notes from Rome's defenders.

"Swan is an obsessive-compulsive pest situated somewhere on the autistic spectrum whose mania is to the search the Internet for poorly understood religious odds and ends that, he imagines, bolster his idiosyncratic Fundamentalist delusions. He periodically does data dumps on his blog. No one needs Swan. We all have search engines of our own."

"I realize that you write for James White, and must at all times keep the name of Lord Luther, the Second Coming of Christ, out of the mud - more like out of toilet but we won't quibble ..."

"James Swine dumped me overboard last week end."

"Swanny, Why not do a write up on Luther and his obsession with poop? I will be lurking to see how you explain it. Art Sippo does a masterful job of revealing Luther's sick mind in his video, "Martin Luther and the death of Charity". PS, get a wife or girlfriend. A prissy, fuddy duddy, single man and his cat looks bad."

"James Swan Bolsters His Reputation as a Dense Amateur Church Historian and Hypocritical Nitpicker Yet Again."

"[Luther] was a nasty pig of a man. Your infatuation with Luther goes beyond any Lutheran minister I have ever known."

"Last week it was some guy named Shoebat. Before that Devin Rose. now this piece of nothingness. You split hairs over an i not being dotted or a T crossed. Pathetic. Your nonstop white washing of Luther and insistence on Catholics quoting only primary sources is so corny."

"What a waste of a life. Why not read up on something that will save your soul?"

"So let Swan play his games and spend his time on trifles and stupid stuff."

"But a raving anti-Catholic like Swan has no such interest in unity and finding common ground. He can''t even figure out that Catholics are fellow Christians."

"I think this guy is too filled with church hate. Let him act crazy to the point he gets himself committed to an asylum."

"I just meant let him be. He's clearly not open to seeking the full truth of the Catholic Church in his state, so why not go Biblical and shake the dust off our sandals and move on and let him stew and he'll behave how he wants within reason and civil/criminal law"

"Occasionally I expose him for what he is: an inveterate liar when it comes to Catholicism and Catholic apologists"

"I still interact with him and his on occasion because the misrepresentations of what the Church teaches are read by others and cause real spiritual harm to those who do not yet have the acuity and theological formation to test the accuracy of their assertions against our faith. The Church is a bulwark against Satan only if her soldiers are willing to man the walls and defend it."

"Since being 'anonymous' is a bad thing in your estimation, let's be sure that everyone knows that you, TertiumQuid, are James Swan, host of the Beggars All blog - one of the...um...less Catholic-friendly sites on the web. In your recent posting there, you mention that you have been banned from posting on Catholic websites by Patrick Madrid and the Coming Home Network in the past (you probably consider that a badge of honor), but now you have decided to discontinue the comments on your blog. Does that account for your re-appearance here? Are you looking for some folks to talk with now that you are no longer chatting with folks on your own blog?"

"I'm sure he is looking to convert to Catholicism soon and is seeking answers on CAF. Some of our best witnesses to the Faith are converts that were "once upon a time" not so Catholic friendly."


Addendum
... and Rome's support keeps coming in:

"James, you must be in hog heaven (swine heaven) with all these sycophants telling you how great you are. 100% positive feedback. How do you manage to get such high ratings? One would get the impression you screen out non worshipers."

" Swan does not regard us as Christians, and regularly lies about us personally and about our belief system. That calls for some necessary firmness and harshness in reply (this is the background), just as Jesus did with the Pharisees and Paul did with various errors and those who promulgated them, and with liars and those with wild tongues."

The Beggars All Banned List

Have you ever been banned off a website? I've been booted off two. I was kicked off Patrick Madrid's Envoy forums after I noted the unstated fact that Madrid had his forum set up to block any hyperlinks to aomin.org.  You can read about it here. I was also banned from the Coming Home Network's discussion forums before I even made one post. You can read about that here. Other than these two times, I don't recall ever being banned. Of course, I've been chastised by the Catholic Answers moderators a few times. You can read about it here and here. I've learned at Catholic Answers not to use the alert system when someone insults me. The alert system at C.A. does not work for Protestants.

Comments left here on this blog have been helpful and hurtful, kind and rude. I've met some wonderful folks over the years that have stopped by and left a comment. I've also come across some folks that have a difficult time expressing themselves without being offensive or ridiculous. I do enjoy getting comments here on the blog, but I don't live for them. I usually don't post an entry in order to get attention or feedback (I mean, simply look at some of my posts). I post what I post because the blog helps me keep a record of my own theological journey, and it gives me a chance to write about what I like to write about. I've seen many blogs from Christians who say their motives in blogging are "ministry." Well, maybe in some cases it is, but I think most people with blogs have them for selfish reasons. We are all idolaters on some level: the most cherished idol is yourself. I don't think of this blog as "ministry," but from a Reformed perspective, everything we do should be done to the glory of God- whether it's taking out the trash, going to our jobs, or enjoying the hobby of having a blog. If someone searching the Internet benefits from a blog post I put up, that's great, but I wrote it because primarily I enjoyed writing it, not because I was hoping someone out there would benefit from it and thus pat me on the back  and think of me as a blogging superstar.

Up until recently I've kept the comments here open and mostly un-moderated.  Those days appear to be over. My apologies to those of you who respectfully leave comments (both Protestant and Roman Catholic). As is the case with most things, it takes only a few people to make a mess of an otherwise good thing. I don't sit glued to a computer monitor during the day, so if you leave a comment, it may take awhile for it to post.

Yes, there was a "banned" list as part of this post, but most of the folks on it were anonymous. so it really didn't matter.

2014, Beggars All in Review

I began this blog back in December 2005. It's hard to believe that it's almost 2015, and I'm still going at it.

I wanted to take the opportunity to express my gratitude for those of you visit. While I don't post entries in order to attract visitors and comments (I mean, take a look at some of the topics posted here!), I really do appreciate that people take the time to visit, and some of you visit everyday.

I'd like to give a special thanks to Ken for all his insightful posts throughout the year, as well as his gracious spirit, and commitment to the Gospel. It always pleases me to fire up the computer and find Ken's insights, particularly his work on Islam. Ken also has his own blog, Apologetics and Agape, which really does describe him. I'm honored he takes the time to post here as well and so consistently follows up on comments left for him. He certainly has far more patience, compassion,  and stamina than I do.

I'd also like to thank my cyber-mentors and friends that often have a role behind the scenes in directing me towards sources, answering questions, and also inspiring me to keep blogging: Dr. James White, Steve Hays, TurretinFan, John Bugay, Algo, the French translation work of Rhology, and even though I don't have contact with him much anymore, Pastor David King (his is still the best contemporary book on sola scriptura and I still use it regularly).

As I look over my years of blogging, there are cyber-folks I miss as well. First and foremost is Carrie who will always have an open invitation to post whatever she wants here on the blog. Her life these days is probably far removed from the pettiness of online battles. Miss you Carrie, and you are in my prayers! Also I've not heard from Matthew Schultz in a while. He's a bright young man that's probably far removed from blogging these days.  I also haven't heard from my favorite Lutheran Brigitte lately. There are others who visited for a time, and then disappeared into the depths of cyber-space. It's unfortunate that often I don't know what's happened to some of these people- whether they've moved on to other things, or whether they've passed on.

I'd also like to thank the Roman Catholic visitors who stop by. There are some of you who are friendly and respectful like Peter Holter and Scott Windsor. You guys should set up a training blog for your fellow defenders of Rome. There are others of you, that, well, let's just say I am thankful you do read what I write, but you remind me how little sanctification I actually have. All in all the defenders of Rome, both the polite and the nasty, have been an excellent source for learning about defending and understanding the church. If you really want to know what you believe and why you believe it, simply interact with those who think you're wrong on almost everything.

I just finished reading a negative treatment of the the Internet by philosopher Hubert Dreyfus. Dreyfus makes some insightful points on the dangers of the Internet. He casts doubt on the notion that true community can exist in cyberspace. In regard to all the people I mentioned above, there is only one of you I've actually met in-person. For all the others, I think you're real! Despite what Dreyfus says, you're people that I've grown to know and enjoy interacting with. Sure, cyber-relationships do not equal physical relationships, but they are special nonetheless, and I'm grateful to have virtually met you.

1 Cor. 16:23
The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you (in 2015).

James

How to Read a Blog Entry and Make a Comment

For the last few months an anonymous person has been leaving an excessive amount of comments on this blog. More often than not, the comments are tangential to what was originally blogged. Then comes the typical, "Why aren't you responding to my comments, James?" question.  Here's why: online interactions with anonymous people do not take priority. When I do take the time to interact with anonymous comments, they should at least be directly and meaningfully related to the content of the blog entry. I typically abhor rabbit trails.

With this in mind, here are some quick guidelines to help anonymous people read blog entries and post comments. For detailed instructions, see this link and this link.

1. Read the entire entry.

2. Ask these critical questions:

A. What is the overall point of the blog entry? Be prepared to possibly make a short outline if the blog post is lengthy. do not make criticisms until you understand the major points of the entry. Be prepared to prove you understand what the major point of the entry is before criticizing the entry.

B. Do you disagree with the major point, or are there supporting points that are not agreeable? Be prepared to understand the points of agreement before attacking the points of disagreement. If it's a supporting fact that is disagreeable, consider that an in-depth discussion may be tangential.

C. Do the facts presented support the basic point? Are there unstated presuppositions that determine the meaning of the facts? Do your presuppositions direct the facts to a different conclusion?

3. Be prepared to actually look at the sources being utilized in the blog entry and determine if the sources are being used in context or out of context.

4. Try not to respond line by line. Often it's possible to miss the major points of the blog entry, or it's possible to quibble over something that's later explained in the entry.

5. If you respond with factual data, be prepared to back up your claims with references.

6. Do not expect someone to do the work for you. If you make a counter-claim, it's up to you to present evidence to support the claim.

7. Always ask yourself if the criticism you're making refutes your own position as well.

8. If you just want to add an insulting or mocking comment, please find another blog to post on.

9. If you put forth a standard by which you say you abide by (like say, Hebrews 12:14), be prepared to be held to that standard.

10. If you say that you will no longer post on this blog, and then you continue to post on this blog, do not be surprised if your comments are deleted.


Addendum
Comments on older blog entries will not appear immediately, or they may not appear at all.

Your Comment is Awaiting Moderation

My apologies to those of you kind enough to leave comments. At times the comments may not appear immediately on the blog. I have trouble with trolls and stalkers from time to time.

There are only a few people who are permanently banned from commenting here. It takes a long time to reach the line that says, "Cross this and you'll be on permanent ignore."

Now with Facebook and Twitter, blog discussions aren't as popular as they once were. I still prefer blogs and discussion forums. I do maintain a Facebook page for this blog, and post to it from time to time. I simply don't have the time or desire to maintain it regularly. And besides, I've never really pursued being an Internet-apologist rock star. I don't sell anything, and more often than not, I blog the stuff I do out of purely selfish reasons rather than to gain a following. I expect no one to comment, and then I'm amazed people actually do.

Thanks for the comments.  

"Need ASAP help on Luther Info"

"Need ASAP help on Luther Info" is the title of a discussion I recently came across on the Catholic Answers Non-Christian Religions forum. A participant asked for "an unbiased, historically accurate web-site account of the Reformation." I was pleasantly surprised to find the following two responses:

"I think James Swan does a good job as far as the historical Luther goes."

"He's certainly a great resource for rooting out unfair catholic biases and myths about Luther. But I'd not remotely call him unbiased. He's polite and tries to be fair, but he's as biased against the catholic viewpoint on Luther issues as the catholic apologists he critiques.
In the end, there ARE no unbiased humans. It's part of being fallen. If you read Swan's stuff, be sure to read some catholic stuff to offset his bias. Belloc's "How the Reformation Happened" is far from 'unbiased' but still does a great job of revealing some the big picture cultural issues that made Luther and Calvin's peculiar ideas resonate when they would otherwise probably have been ignored by most of history. Belloc is at least as biased as Swan. Perhaps less polite, but about the same amount of hubris!"

It's certainly true that each of us has "bias." The way though that I would put is that each of us has a worldview as the result of our presuppositions. It's the template we use to make sense of the world. It's my contention that Roman Catholic presuppositions that inform a Roman Catholic worldview do not make sense of the basic facts of reality.

This is why, for instance, when a Roman Catholic says something like, "Luther added a word to Romans 3:28 and invented sola fide" my response to this charge has been so popular. There I demonstrated that the basic historical facts as interpreted popularly by Roman Catholicism don't describe reality accurately.  On another level than the basic historical facts, one comes face to face with an even deeper question: a Roman Catholic may say Luther simply was an innovator and invented sola fide to soothe his delicate conscience. But, who is the real innovator? Luther said it was Rome that had added unbiblical elements to the Christian faith. If one accepts Rome's development of doctrine, one has a ready explanation for Rome's alleged innovations. Then we're off discussing whether Rome's version of development corresponds to reality. Ultimately, it will come down to the issue of authority: a Roman Catholic begins with a presupposition that Rome is the true church (and has the power of infallibility), and a Protestant denies this. Bias? No, it's basic presuppositions and worldview at play.

Addendum 7/21/13
My reign of terror over at Catholic Answers continues:

As to the mention of Mr. Swan - he is perhaps one of the more charitable bloggers that has problems with Catholic theology. He does visit here from time to time as well. However, I would caution accepting anything he says about Luther too, based on some of what I have read of his--what comes to mind is an encounter on Luther and Purgatory he, I, CatholicDude, and some others had a while back (see posts 29 and following; my major post is 54). Swan posts as Tertum Quid. That being said, I've found some useful source material from his blog now and then anyway.

If I recall that "encounter", I was basically expected to do all the work and research in order for others to comment and critique. I stand by the bulk of my comments, particularly #68 and #69, and #74. The discussion reiterated to me a valuable lesson- that, if a fruitful historical discussion is to happen in a forum like Catholic Answers, one person should not be expected to do hours of research for everyone else.

See also my blog post here.

Using Zombie Movies for Apologetics

No, I have not seen World War Z, though there's probably a good chance I will at some point (the notion of Brad Pitt in a zombie movie is intriguing). A good friend of mine has two teenage boys that were telling me about this upcoming movie for last few months.  They went to see it at... a drive in theater (I actually saw the first Star Wars movie this way). Anyway, here were a couple of quick comments I thought I might share with these young guys. They probably have been stated much more eloquently with much greater thought by someone else, I'm sure. Feel free to riff (not "rip") of any of these, and add your own:

1) The mass of humanity is the living dead, the spiritually dead, and at every moment defy their creator. Like the driven anger(?) of the zombies, the hatred towards a Holy God is so strong the spiritually dead would kill this Holy God if they could.

2) The idea of "living dead" could be used as an example of an innate human belief in immortality and a cheap imitation of the final and holy resurrection of the dead.

3) The living dead, feed off the living, in the same way many live people typically suck the life out of other people. In other words, a zombie represents human selfishness to a superlative degree.

4) Zombie movies represent an innate fear within humanity. We are wired in such a way that we know we're eternal (at least in the future direction), but a strong fear is losing our "selves" or our individuality. For those worldviews that believe that matter is eternal and the soul is not (humanism, atheism), zombie movies are like, their worst nightmare- that their bodies live on while their souls (or personality, consciousness, etc.) do not. Matter is eternal... while consciousness is not?

Fat, Sick & Nearly Dead

I recently watched the 2010 documentary, Fat, sick and Nearly Dead (the entire film is linked below). I have not tried this sort of diet, but it certainly looks intriguing to try for 10 days. I may give it a shot.

I don't have weight or health problems now, but this little film might be of interest to those of you who do.  Back in 2011, a routine  physical revealed I may have had diabetes. Upon further tests, it was determined that I did not, but that I was indeed approaching the pre-diabetic stage. What did I do? I eliminated sugar, as much as possible from my diet. I maintained an attempted sugarless diet for about 3 months. The results? I dropped 30 pounds by simply eliminating sugar (this included pasta, bread, and alcohol... anything with sugar). I did have plenty of meat, but not a lot of carbohydrates. My sugar level went way down (no more threat of diabetes), my cholesterol and blood pressure was perfect. My frequent sinus headaches disappeared.  The doctor who rechecked me after three month diet said something like, "Normally when we tell people to change their diet, they don't, and rather end up taking pills." Talk about a good feeling... when I walked out of that doctor's office I was invigorated.

Keep in mind as well, I did exercise, but nothing outrageous. And, I really didn't need to lose 30 pounds. Half of that would've been enough.  Dieting for 3 months was hard for me, but not nearly as hard as maintaining a healthy life style after the goal is achieved. I have introduced sugar back into my diet, but nearly as much as I had previously.    

Spam Comments

Just a quick question here...

Is there anyone besides me that gets assaulted daily with spam comments from posters with Middle Eastern / Islamic names?

I don't want to turn on the blogger feature of scrutinizing comments before they're published, but it looks like I may have to.

This blog Does Not Have Malware

Recently, Google Chrome stopped people from visiting this blog saying there is malware present. The picture below is what they put up to warn people when they attempted to visit Beggars All. Well, there isn't Malware. What appears to have happened is that any links I posted to the CARM discussion boards caused Google Chrome to think I have malware. So, I've deleted all links to the CARM boards from the main page. Perhaps someone who knows Matt Slick should let him know about this.

Update from CARM:

Auto Response to many email questions: Forums are partially down, you may be able to view old links with error messages. Forums on and off for maintenance. Thank you for your patience. Apparently there are reports of "malware" that techs are working on, security reveals no "malware" on the forums but an error message related to attacks on our forum website.

Info from Google: 

"Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?

    Over the past 90 days, forums.carm.org/vbb did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites.

Has this site hosted malware?

    No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days.

How did this happen?

    In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message."

E-Books vs. Art

Recently I watched a short video clip of the author Joyce Carol Oates explain why the tactile sensation of holding an actual book and reading it is a far better experience than reading the same book on a small gizmo or computer screen (go to about 5 minutes in the clip). She made some of the same sort of arguments vinyl purists make about CD's (like, the artwork! Albums were works of art!).  Over the years I've slowly gotten used to the e-book format. I've gone from, "This is an awful experience" to "I can learn to deal with this." For instance, I have a large collection of Logos books. These are on my home PC and laptop. Reading them is fine if I'm sitting in front of my PC or I have my laptop on a desk, but otherwise, they're cumbersome. I don't have a Kindle but I do have an IPad. The Logos app is still improving, but I can almost get comfortable sitting back and reading a book. Yes, I still have my records as well. I could care less if I break a CD case, but dropping an album, why that's dropping a work of art. And, of course, dropping the IPad... I don't want to do that either.

Two More Minutes of Personal Fame: Table Talk With Martin Luther: A Modern Catholic's Conversations With the founder of Protestantism

I can't be the only narcissist that every so often, types their own name into Google to see what comes up.   The results don't always flatter, that 's for sure. For instance, this link, James Swan Chokes Mom, Smashes Head Through Wall, in Argument Over World of Warcraft, certainly besmirches those named "James Swan."

Here's something quite odd I discovered on Google Books searching my name: Table Talk With Martin Luther: A Modern Catholic's Conversations With the founder of Protestantism (2005) By Edward P Hahnenberg, Edward J. Hahnenberg. I admit, I haven't read this book, nor have I've heard of the authors, nor do I think I've ever come across it before. The subject matter certainly intrigues me: Roman Catholic opinions and interpretations of Luther and the Reformation. I've spent quite a few years now involved with this topic. Google has a limited preview of the book, and this is what I found:

That's all the text available from Google for preview of these pages. They're citing my old NTRmin article, The Roman Catholic Perspective of Martin Luther (Part One). I put this article together after dealing with a number of online Roman Catholics citing Luther via 100+ year-old Roman Catholic historians. Not only did I discover that online Roman apologists hadn't actually read Luther in context, but that those historians they were citing were, for the most part, not even taken seriously by later Roman Catholic historians.

Had these men alerted me of their book back in 2005, I certainly would have obtained it and reviewed it. Perhaps I still will. On the other hand, I've not said anything in the above quote that hasn't been said by historians actually worthy of citing. I'm merely parroting back what's been said and documented for a long time.