Colorado Adventure, Part 2

Monday morning began in Fort Morgan. Grocery shopping was our immediate task. To our already grossly overloaded car, we added about two weeks of groceries, and continued west. I do believe that if we get snowed in, it will be Christmas before we need more food. Never, never go to the grocery store when you're hungry.

Never, never ride with me in a car in Colorado if I am driving. The last thing I'm looking at is the road. God protects fools, consequently I am not writing this blog post posthumously (which would be quite a trick).

First stop was part of our Henry Marshall tour. Here is the fateful Starbucks frequented by Tim Hardy. South Table Mountain is visible in the background.

Busy Jackson street is where Aries and Viper attempt to eliminate some more evidence, much to Hardy’s dismay. It is a little different than it appears on Google Earth. I mistook the bicycle lane for a third lane of traffic. Across the street you can see 1600 Jackson, Marshall’s campaign headquarters.

We grabbed coffee at Starbucks (without getting run over) and headed down US 285. After attaining Kenosha Pass, we stopped at the same overlook where Marshall paused.

This gorgeous view of South Park has been indelibly stamped on my brain since I first saw it in the 70’s—and little has changed (except the speed limit, which is now 65 mph, not bad for a two-lane road). South Park is huge: the scale of this high valley between mountain ranges is hard to comprehend. Take a gander at this panorama. You can click it (or any of the pictures) for a larger view.

In Fairplay we stopped to get a picture of the District Ranger Office, where Ranger Randall fired up the Snow Cat for a rescue attempt.

 Above Buena Vista we paused to get a picture of the picnic table where Jackson and Trujillo had their secret meeting.

The road into Buena Vista is visible from the edge of the overlook.

And last we stopped at the Roastery, where Marshall explains the impact federal money has on college tuition rates. Right now Dor and I are sitting in the Roastery doing online things (like this blog, etc). I'm enjoying a cup of coffee and a MASSIVE peanut butter cookie. Dor is enjoying a bottle of something called Izze. Don't ask. Haven't the foggiest.

On Monday night, we finally arrived at the cabin, grateful to the Lord for safe travel and beautiful scenery.

Stay tuned for Part 3 . . . 

Colorado Adventure, Part 1

You know you're a Cobb (at least the Chris Cobb edition of the Cobb clan) if you're always packing too much stuff. There is an exception to this rule, and that's when the Cobbs go backpacking. If you have to carry everything on your back, you tend to be a lot more careful about what you bring. Well, we weren't going backpacking.

Can you tell?


 This is the view from the driver's seat. Forget the rear view mirror, this baby is packed to the rafters. If we get into an accident we're going to be crushed by 900 pounds of luggage. But I should be optimistic: at least the impact will be cushioned--we'll be gently crushed to death. Okay, that's enough optimism for now.


You also know you're a Cobb, a son of Lewis Milner Cobb, if no matter how much you bring you can still make it all fit.

I did.

We're probably down ten degrees at the stern. I am convinced that we brought everything in triplicate. Doris tries to console me, telling me that we've got so much stuff because we're going to be cooking our meals at the cabin. I convince myself that she's right, lower the hatch, brace my feet against the back of the garage, and squeeze the silly thing shut. I am positive I heard the car groan.


We're off like a herd of turtles. On Saturday night we stopped at Iowa--twin  Diane's--and managed to disgorge a few items. Now there's actually room for Doris. Yay!

As we headed west early Sunday, we read half a dozen Psalms together, and a chapter of Isaiah. It was a good time of worship (at 75 mph). Needless to say, we didn't close our eyes during our prayer time.

Sunday was a long, long, long drive. Especially since we had to listen to the Broncos lose. Made it even longer. But finally there was a ray of hope: the Lord gave us a sign.

<sigh> What a wonderful sign!

And then more beautiful rays of hope!

 Sunday came to an end at Fort Morgan, Colorado. Tomorrow we would begin a Henry Marshall tour (seeing up close and personal the various locations I included in The Candidate) and end our day at the Mount Elbert Lodge in Rinker Cabin.

Stay tuned for Part 2. . .

An interesting trajectory

I am reading through the New Testament in my personal quiet time, and was arrested by the first sentence of Mark—which then made me think of the first sentence of Matthew, and then of the rest of the Gospels. More on this in a moment.

Now as I understand it, it is the content of the canon—not necessarily the arrangement of it—that is inspired. Such things as the chapter and verse divisions are not inspired, having been added well after the canon was complete as an aid to study. Nonetheless, the arrangement and items like the chapter and verse divisions often provide interesting observations (though not authoritative in the sense that the content is authoritative).

For instance, the number of books in the English version of the canon is sixty-six. Don’t get too carried away with this, because the Jews considered Samuel to be one book, not two (because it is a long book, it had to be divided into two scrolls, hence “First” and “Second” Samuel). Same with Kings and Chronicles. So the number sixty-six is an artifact of the Christian version of the canon. But even as such, there are some interesting bits of trivia to think about—like the arrangement of Isaiah, for instance.

The English version of the canon has sixty-six books, thirty-nine Old Testament books, twenty-seven New Testament books. Isaiah has sixty-six chapters. Contrast the major emphasis of the first thirty-nine chapters with that of the last twenty-seven. Check out how chapter forty (the first chapter of the final twenty-seven) begins—compare it with Matthew 3. Think about what the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah focuses upon. Neat, huh. [I would love to give credit—or blame!!—where credit is due, but I don’t remember how I happened upon this. Someone probably mentioned it in seminary, but I don’t remember.]

So back to the first lines of the Gospels. There’s a trajectory there that is interesting to me. Matthew 1:1 begins by identifying Jesus as the son of David and the son of Abraham—which means He is the heir of the promises to David and Abraham. Then Mark 1:1 identifies Jesus as the Son of God, which more explicitly links Jesus to the promise in 2 Samuel 7:14. But the statement is not necessarily radical, because there’s evidence that the Old Testament Israelites considered their kings to be sons of God—not in the divine sense, mind you—but in the sense that they were the theocratic representatives of the God of Israel.

But the first sentence of Luke is as though the reader is tracking with the trajectory and is getting a sense for where it is going, and is not quite ready for it. The reader steps back and asks the incredulous question, “Wait a minute! Did this stuff really happen in history? Is it for real?” which Luke then proceeds to answer in the affirmative.

And finally, the first sentence of John hits the target to which the other first-sentences were leading. It identifies Jesus as God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

Anyway, it’s not profound, but it is an interesting trajectory.

Review of Sinclair Ferguson's The Pundit's Folly

This is an outstanding little book based on Ecclesiastes. Pundit’s Folly is not a commentary on Ecclesiastes, rather, it’s an expository application of it. Ferguson writes as a pastor-theologian, and you get the best of both worlds in Pundit’s Folly.

Ecclesiastes is the consummate book for the post-modernist lost in the foggy swamp of a meaningless life. Ferguson gently takes the reader down the road of futility traveled by Qoheleth (the “Pundit”), as Qoheleth searches vainly for something that would fill the emptiness of his life. When all the canyons and byways have been revealed as dead ends, Ferguson directs the reader’s attention to the poor wise man of Ecclesiastes 9:13-15, and applies the text to Christ, the wisdom of God who became poor that we might be rich. In the final chapter, using a wealth of resources from the Scriptures, Ferguson invites the reader to discover the proper fear of God (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

Never does Ferguson get into the weeds regarding who the Pundit is (Solomon? someone else?), or when it was written, or any textual issues or technical details of the Hebrew language. He takes the English text of the NIV and interacts with it as it is. He writes with the warmth and sensitivity of a modern-day C. S. Lewis, eschewing off-putting, academic jargon. The book is penned for the common man.

The result is a well-written, pastoral, sympathetic, eighty-eight page gospel tract that will be particularly helpful to people of the current generation. Read it yourself, and give it to a friend who is beginning to discover that life under the sun promises much more than it delivers. Five stars, highly recommended.

Memorial Day Time Travel

So, what’s the last half of your month of May been like? Rainy weather, a few days kind of chilly, maybe fighting traffic on the way to work?

What say we do a little time travel on this Memorial Day weekend, to the pitching flight deck of the USS Belleau Wood, CVL-24, in the last part of May, 1945, as the war in the Pacific closed in on Japan. You’re in the “Fighting Thirty,” with Ensign Lewis M. Cobb. It was mostly an unremarkable time for VF-30, sandwiched in between much hotter fighting and a horrific typhoon that occurred in early June.

Since the F6F Grumman Hellcat is a single-seater, you’ll have to be content with looking over Lou’s shoulder. . .

-------------------------

Monday, May 14, 1945 At Sea

One of the roughest days of my life. Off at 0445 for two fields on the northern tip of Kyushu, had to fly up the inland sea and across 30 miles of mainland to hit them. AA was terrific saw 7 Jap fighters airborne but they didn't attack nor did we because we were low on gas. AA was very heavy. We were shot at during our whole retirement, for over 30 miles. Every second was living hell. Because of a crash we had to land on the Bennington. We were on the deck 30 minutes when we were launched again, this time to Shikoku. We hit two fields, straffing & bombing, AA fairly heavy. Carried 1 ton of bombs total and damaged two planes on the ground was in my plane from 0425 till 1400 except for 30 min. 8 hrs. flight time, am I tired?

Tuesday, May 15, 1945 At Sea

Refueled today. Weather was bad so all CAPS cancelled. I was so tired that I slept all day long without cracking the sack except to eat lunch. No mail, no "hot skinny."

Wednesday, May 16, 1945 At Sea

Still with logistic support group. Big meeting of squadron commanders over on the Hornet. Skipper brought back lots of news. We are supposed to lay around Okinawa for about 2 weeks and then we go to Leyte where Admiral Halsey will probably relieve Admiral Mitscher. All the Task Group commanders will be relieved also. There is a possibility that we will be relieved at Leyte though a air group shuffle isn't expected. Many air groups that came out at the same time we did have already gone back. We are now the senior CVL air group out here. If we aren't relieved at Leyte we are stuck with a long cruise because Halsey is expected to go on a rampage. Flew a 4 hr. CAP today.

Thursday, May 17, 1945 At Sea

Flew another 4 hr. CAP today, guess it will more of same for next 10 days. Sure wish we'd get some mail. Like to know how my honey is! I'm not counting too heavily on getting back on good time now.

Friday, May 18, 1945 At Sea

Flew a 3 3/4 hr. Rap CAP today. All quiet, nothing doing.

Saturday, May 19, 1945 At Sea

Was scheduled for two hops today, because of weather only got one 3 3/4 hr. CAP in. Flew at least an hour on instruments. Let down from 20,000 to 200 ft on instruments. Had heavy ice on our wings and wind shield. Ran through thick snow flurries. My radio went out but still had YE, came in on that. Was really a rugged hop. Two teams went on a strike to Tokuno but they did not find anything.

We refuel tomorrow, sure hope we get some mail.

Sunday, May 20, 1945 At Sea

Spent a peaceful Sunday. Did not have to fly, I spent the day playing cards, reading and this PM had some beer up in Jakes room. Just before chow we got plenty of mail I got 6 letters and some snapshots from Helen. Letters from everyone so I'm really happy.

Monday, May 21, 1945 At Sea

Lousy weather today but I flew two hops regardless. Had a 3 3/4 hr. I CAP around Amami this AM. Weather was very bad 1-200 ft ceiling & rain. Went on a strike against Tokuno this PM. Weather was zero-zero. To avoid my crew crashing into the mountains, I got my team separated from the skipper's and was unable to find him again, we returned. As bad a weather as I ever flown in.

Tuesday, May 22, 1945 At Sea

Led two divisions on a 3 3/4 I CAP today. Sturdy was shot down on a preceding hop against Koniya seaplane base, we stood by him until he was picked up by a PBM. Made one run on some warehouses and two runs on a radio station on Amami. Weather lousy.

Wednesday, May 23, 1945 At Sea

Day of rest for me and mine. Refueled today - weather very bad. Scuttlebutt is running rampant as to whether or not we will be relieved at Leyte. We are due in Leyte either on the 27^th or 28^th. Gosh how I'm hoping. have the 4 AM hop which means that I'm up at 0215 guess I'll hit the sack.

Thursday, May 24, 1945 At Sea

Weather bad today but I still got in two hops. We didn't take off as early as scheduled though because of weather. Got in a total of 8 hrs. both ICAP's. No business, tired rear end.

Friday, May 25, 1945 At Sea

Didn't fly today because of weather, only 4 teams flew. Pixton shot down a Frank and Skipper got a betty. The expected air attack took place today but because of weather it didn't bother us much. I think many Jap planes were shot down around Okinawa.

Saturday, May 26, 1945 At Sea

Off the deck at 5 AM for one of the most harrowing hops I've ever had. It was black and rainy with ceiling from 0-100 ft. Before we were launched the Hornet squadron commander, who was airborne, told them not to launch anymore planes because of terrible weather. We were launched on instruments and climbed to 4,000 ft before breaking out. Soon after the order came to land and we let down and landed. There were 2 mid air collisions and 2 planes that spun in. Upwards of 150 planes jettisoned bombs and rockets in the drink, what a farce!

Sunday, May 27, 1945 At Sea

Refueled today, did not have to fly. Rec'd 15 letters, 4 of them from Helen. I'm afraid she will be in for a disappointment because I don't see relief in sight for us yet. Guess its back to Okinawa for more support missions tomorrow. A jap plane landed wheels up on Yontan and 21 japs jumped out and blew up many planes and aviation gas before they were shot. Guess thats the reason we aren't going to Leyte on schedule.

Monday, May 28, 1945 At Sea

Did not fly today because of weather. One hop got up. As of midnight last night we became the 3^rd fleet. Halsey has taken over though the change in command is not complete yet. Believe we will go into port for that. We are now Task Group 38.1. That really will ream us if we don't get relieved before he runs amuk.

Tuesday, May 29, 1945 At Sea

Flew a 4 hr TCAP this AM over Okinawa, weather was better but no business.

Wednesday, May 30, 1945 At Sea

Bad weather, no flights today. Refuel tomorrow.

Thursday, May 31, 1945 At Sea

Refueled today so I spent a peaceful day in the sack. Was surprised to get 4 letters, didn't expect any today. Weather pretty bad.

------------------------------

Whew! We survived! But for a little perspective, what were you doing when you were twenty-two years old? You’re probably like me—very grateful for those who showed up to fight when the call came.

To all those who gave the last full-measure of devotion, and to all those who risked everything but came home alive: THANK YOU!

Tell me again why I should vote for Trump?

This little screed is addressed to the Trump Voter:

That the GOP party leaders are telling us to unite around Trump tells us something about the politics of the GOP leaders. You see, the GOP used to stand for something that was distinct from the Democratic Party: individual responsibility, small government, fiscal responsibility, and a strong defense. But when the leaders of the GOP can unite around a man who advocates at best—at best—only one of those positions, it tells me that the GOP leadership (and therefore the Party, for all practical purposes) has cast off its moorings and is adrift in the same post-modern soup occupied by the Democrats.

By what rational reason would I vote for a man who opposes everything I stand for? Let’s say I vote for him and he wins. Exactly what has the country gained? I’ll tell you: a liberal Democrat with an R after his name. If you trans-gender Hillary, you get something close to Trump.

Ahh, you say, but the judges! the Supreme Court! Don’t forget the Supreme Court! If Hillary gets in she will load the Court with libs that will do permanent damage, irreversible damage to the country.

Yes, she will. But maybe you should have thought about that a little earlier? Perhaps instead of bandwagoning with one of the most reprehensible characters to come down the pike since Machiavelli you should have been voting in the primaries for one of the people who had the character, the chops, the experience, the guts, worldview, the intelligence to actually uphold conservative Republican values. There were, after all, plenty of them.

Instead of indulging in Trump’s anger and triumphal bombast, why didn’t you take a close look at the man? It’s too late now. You’ve already jumped off the cliff, and dragged us along with you.

So, you think Trump will appoint better judges than Hillary? Why?

• Is it because of the keen understanding he displays of the judiciary when he speaks of “judges signing bills?”
• Is it because of his commitment to the Republican Party, as illustrated by his history of support of Democrats?
• Is it because of his desire to protect the helpless, such as he has illustrated in his use of Eminent Domain?
• Is it because of his commitment to stop special interests from buying politicians, as he illustrated in his contributions to Hillery, et al?
• Is it because of his concern for the rule of law, as illustrated by his command of the US military to ignore the Geneva Convention?
• Is it because of his concern for jobs for Americans, as illustrated by his properties, hotels, and other concerns importing foreign labor?
• Is it because of his remarkable integrity and honesty, as illustrated by Trump University, and the myriad class-action lawsuits brought by people have been cheated?
• Is it because of his incisive understanding of business and finance, as illustrated by his companies’ multiple bankruptcies?
• Is it because of the consistency of his pro-life position, as illustrated by his support of Planned Parenthood?
• Is it because of his consistent positions on small government, as illustrated by his ideas on healthcare?
• Is it because of his great respect for women, as illustrated by his multiple marriages, shameless and open affairs, and so on?
• And we could go on and on, but it shouldn’t be necessary if you are paying attention.

So, remind me again: on what grounds do you believe he will do better than Hillary? Or is it because he says he’s going to do “amazing things,” and “you’ll really be amazed” at all the “amazing things” he will do? Yes. I suspect you will be quite “amazed.” But perhaps not in a good way.

#NeverTrump

#NeverHillary

#NeverBernie

Book Review: Reasons we believe, by Nathan Busenitz

Reasons We Believe: 50 Lines of evidence that confirm the Christian faith, by Nathan Busenitz.

I am a little conflicted about how to describe this book. Busenitz' volume is primarily a small encyclopedia of internal evidence: in other words, it recounts what the Bible itself says about the fifty lines of evidence. It's a great book for answering a question in the form of, "does the Bible really teach that?"

If someone asks you, "does the Bible really teach that it is the Word of God?" or "does the Bible really teach that Jesus is God?" Busenitz provides, in compact form, a precis with many biblical references providing the ammunition you need to answer the question. Not all, but nearly all the evidence Busenitz provides comes from within the covers of the Bible itself--and his reasoning from the biblical text is very solid.

However, his use of external evidence is a little uneven--sometimes he uses it, sometimes not. When he does, it's invariably excellent.

If you are looking for a work on apologetics, I would recommend Busenitz plus. In other words, get Busenitz because of his excellent, faithful use of internal evidence. Add to it something like I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist by Geisler and Turek, which is stronger on external evidences. Between the two you'll get a more complete accounting of God's supernatural works in a material world.

Book Review: At the Altar of Sexual Idolatry

One of the more intractable problems the biblical counselor faces is helping men conquer sexual sin.

Gallagher's book At the Altar of Sexual Idolatry is a great resource, for both the counselor and the addict. He casts the problem as it should be presented: a matter of idolatry, and offers excellent practical solutions and directions. His use of Scripture is for the most part very solid, and Gallagher does a good job at digging down to the roots of the problem, rather than simply giving instructions for moralistic fruit-clipping.

The book is sufficiently graphic in its description of the spiral of degradation that a man can read it and identify with it, but not so graphic that it becomes a problem for a man already wrestling with sexual fantasy. Some reviewers have felt otherwise, so you'll want to read the book before you use it and form your own opinion.

I recommend working through this book chapter by chapter with a counselee. Don't be in a hurry--they need to digest what is being said. In my counseling I have them reading through this and Jerry Bridges' Pursuit of Holiness at the same time, to provide a more complete "put-off put-on" emphasis.

There's also a workbook available that my counselees have found useful.

I highly recommend this book.

Test Post

Test Post

Trying to force Facebook to show the proper picture with this post.

The Federalist Papers: A Sad Irony

In 1777 the Second Continental Congress circulated among the thirteen states a constitution by which the several states in loose union would be governed. It was called the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, often referred to as the Articles of Confederation. The states ratified the compact by 1781.

It was a document created during our war of independence and, quite naturally, among its chief concerns were to provide a central government possessing the authority to wage war, conclude treaties, and provide for international trade.

Article one formally gave to our new nation its name, The United States of America. The second article addressed a fear near to the heart of every eighteenth century patriot: having just broken away from a monarch they did not want to permit the establishment of a central government possessing absolute authority. Consequently the Articles granted to the confederation government only such powers as expressly delegated in the document, all other powers being explicitly reserved to the sovereign states.

The Articles granted Congress the exclusive authority to wage war, exchange ambassadors, enter into treaties, set the terms for commerce with other nations, establish weights and measures, including coinage, as well as several other powers. However, no enforcement mechanisms were provided.

By 1783 the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation were becoming obvious. For instance, the Treaty of Paris ending the war with Britain was drafted in November of 1782 and signed in September a year later. However it was not ratified by Congress until January of 1784. Part of the delay was caused by members of Congress failing to show up—and the confederation government had been given no tools to enforce attendance. Similar problems were experienced as the young nation tried to pay its large war debt. When the states failed to cough up their allotted portion, the central government had no means to force them to do so.

It was apparent that the Articles were inadequate to the task of governing the nation, so a constitutional convention was convened. By late 1787 the new constitution was submitted to the states for ratification. It was vigorously opposed by some who feared that the creation of a strong federal government would overwhelm the sovereignty of the states and eventually lead to tyranny.

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay thus wrote a series of articles published in New York under the pseudonym Publius that sought to counter the arguments of the anti-federalists. The collection of eighty-five essays is now known as The Federalist Papers and set forth the benefits of a strong federal government.

The shocking and sad irony we find at this moment in our nation’s history is this: the modern federal government has become so intrusive and has so egregiously usurped the powers reserved to the states that the arguments in The Federalist Papers can now be used to contend for a large-scale dismantling of the federal leviathan.

In Federalist #27, Hamilton argues that: “It merits particular attention in this place, that the laws of the Confederacy, as to the ENUMERATED and LEGITIMATE objects of its jurisdiction, will become the SUPREME LAW of the land; . . . Thus the legislatures, courts, and magistrates, of the respective [states], will be incorporated into the operations of the national government AS FAR AS ITS JUST AND CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY EXTENDS; and will be rendered auxiliary to the enforcement of its laws.” The all-caps emphasis, my friends, was original, it was his. Notice that he limited the national government to “the enumerated and legitimate objects of its jurisdiction” and “its just and constitutional authority.” He’s limiting the Feds to what the constitution specifically enumerates as federal powers—all else is reserved to the states. 
There is nothing wrong with our federalist constitution. The problem is that neither the courts nor the legislature nor the executive have restrained the reach of the federal government to those powers granted it by the constitution.

Citing examples of federal tyranny is all too easy. For a simple project, research the amount of land in the western states owned by or controlled by the federal government. Find in the constitution a provision allowing the federal government the power of determining whether West Virginia shall burn coal to produce electricity, or Alaska drill for oil, or how many miles per gallon an automobile must attain to be manufactured in Detroit, or how much corn a farmer in Iowa is allowed to plant. Study how the commerce clause (Article I, Section 8) has been wholly twisted by the courts and legislature to give the Feds unprecedented power over the economy.

If we are to reclaim our nation, we must restore sovereignty to the states and wholly eliminate—not improve, but eliminate—entire departments of the federal government.