I came across these on one of my blogs. They are awesome cheap plastic ware for kids that are BPA free and a great alternative to traditional plastic forks. Just warn your kids not to read what's printed on them. English much?

A dear friend recently wrote a post on Facebook explaining why she was no longer a Christian, and I answered (on Facebook) with a post of my own.

But one of the questions she asked spurred me to write this blog, as a tangent off of my original answer but also as a theological topic of it's own.

Her question involved Jesus and the Casual Party Trick (btw, I am so gonna write a children's book with that title. No stealing it!) Why would He do miracles (some seemingly pretty silly) then, but nothing now? For my full answer to that question, you can look on Facebook. This blog is about a particular "casual party trick" that Jesus performed - in fact, His first miracle. I am hoping to examine it and explain why it is not a casual party trick at all.

As most of you know, Jesus' first miracle was turning water into wine at a wedding. This looks to be the very definition of a casual party trick, especially when compared to his other miracles. Jesus healed the blind and deaf, restored withered hands, proclaimed prostitutes forgiven and raised men and children from their graves. In light of all this, I would like to make this statement: Outside of His resurrection, turning water into wine was Jesus' greatest miracle.

You've got to understand what He did here. In all His other miracles, He was helping a single person in something very much of this world. Blindness? Temporary and physical. Lameness? Temporary and physical. Epilepsy? Temporary and physical. Death? You get the point. But water into wine was significant of a far greater, eternal, and spiritual change.

Jesus didn't take water and make it taste like wine. He didn't add color and flavoring and a bit of alcohol for good measure. He didn't give it the appearance of wine. He turned it into wine. He changed it's very molecular structure so that it was no longer water, but a completely different thing. He changed what it was.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

He was very intentional with that first miracle. It would mirror His last greatest miracle - His saving death on the cross. The two are parallel, one a physical representation of the other's spiritual power. When Jesus saves us, He doesn't make us look redeemed. He doesn't give us the appearance of Holiness. He changes the very core of who we are. He reconstructs the very fabric of our being so that we are absolutely no longer who we were, but completely new creations.

I remember the day I was saved by God's redeeming grace. I was a couple of weeks shy of my 19th birthday. Those of you who have known me a while may be shocked by this sentiment. I grew up in the church. And while I believe that I was technically "saved" before this encounter, I really only looked pure. I looked holy. I wasn't a hypocrite. I was just...still me. But after this radical encounter with God during the summer between my freshman and sophomore years of college, I became a new person. So much so that when I look back on my life I have a hard time remembering that really was me before then. Because, really, it wasn't. I am not a fixed up version of Amber. I am a completely different person. Because that's what Jesus died for. To change me, at the core of my being.

And that's why He turned the water into wine. His very first miracle was to turn water into something bold. Dangerous. Powerful. New. Exotic. Rare. Holy. He turned water into wine that day...then, three and a half years later, the work began that would make us Holy. Make us redeemed. The imagery is breathtaking. And that's why I believe that outside His death and resurrection, this was His greatest miracle.

So is anyone else on twitter? I can't decide if it would be freaking awesome or a total waste of time. Thoughts?

Spotted at Target

So what do you think? Spoiling imagination? Or sparking it?

http://www.hasbro.com/playskool/kota/

I'm writing this blog because I love you. I love you and your kids and want them to be smart. And because I might win a million dollars. But mostly because I love you and your kids. And mostly because of the million dollars. Which is actually a set of DVDs. Worth a million dollars. Or $160. Whatever.

I've been torn for a while, between letting Ari watch educational television and all the experts saying that if my kid stares at a TV for more than five seconds before she's two then by the time she's 20 her brain will have imploded. Or she'll eat hairbrushes. Oh wait she already does that.

So I've made a decision. Looking at a TV can't be any more harmful than eating dog fluff off the floor. (Have I mentioned our vacuum sucks? Or doesn't...wait...which would be worse?) It can't be too bad, especially if I'm interacting with her (one of the concerns with TV) and she's not watching it too much so her eyes will be focusing more on 3D objects than a screen (the other major concern). I've chosen, as my debut educational TV for me and Ari to watch together, Signing Time, a flippin' awesome set of videos I was introduced to my friend R. Right now our budget won't allow us to actually PURCHASE the set (we hope to be remedying that soon) so we are stuck to watching the 1 minute previews on YouTube and looping them.

If you have kids, I would recommend doing the research for yourself about TV but if you do decide to give it a go I would highly recommend Baby Signing Time for infants. Don't do it too often a day and I would definitely watch the DVD with your kid (so you can learn the signs and interact, they will learn faster and more efficiently that way anyway), but I hope it will help Ari learn signs faster if she's seeing the object on the TV and watching BABIES do the sign (instead of boring old mom. See? I'm embarrassing her again...)

Anyway, here's a preview of the next two Baby Signing Time DVDs (which I'm totally stoked about, I was bummed at first because there were only two baby ones and dozens of regular ones, but Ari (as witnessed by my awesome and totally clinically accurate YouTube experiment) seems to like the Baby ones better.)

Enjoy!

If I were the news people, I would not have been able to keep it this together.

Don't read this if you're offended by curse words. ;)

http://xkcd.com/437/

Read this article.

And then notice the last line.

"DURING THE NEXT TWELVE MONTHS?!"  Wait...you're ONLY allowed to not force children to maul themselves during the next twelve months?!

What is happening?!

Are you ready? Sure? Cause...cause I don't think you're ready.

Alternate post title: Why I will never be a landlord.

Alternate post title: Ways to feel better about yourself.

Alternate post title: WTF?!

http://www.houston-imports.com/forums/showthread.php?s=520558c4c7db2caae55ec3cae2620388&p=8841971#post8841971

I found this site.

The poem Ozymandius was written by Percy Shelley for a writing contest in 1817, refering to the fall of the Egyptian empire and specifically to the reign of Rameses II (Ozymandius).  It was inspired by a broken Egyptian statue near the Nile.  The poem is awesome.  Look what these people do to it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/14/17917/1298

It really makes me sick.  Why do we feel the need to blame people for things that are not in their control?  Stop blaming the president, good or bad, for the economy.  They have really very little to do with it.  Stop blaming Bush for Katrina.  The Federal Government is not responsible for fixing our problems.  Great if they help, no blame if they don't.  Stop blaming everyone else for things that aren't their fault.  THE FACT THAT IT ISN'T YOUR FAULT DOESN'T BY DEFAULT MAKE IT THEIRS.

Wow.

Just...wow.

If you're brave enough, watch all the way through. But go to the bathroom first. You might lose it laughing too hard. ;)

ZAP!


viewed on Beside the Point

I have a question for all those out there who read this blog and who are pro choice.  This is not a trick question, meant to trap anyone.  Nor is it said in a spirit of beligerence.  I am genuinely asking, with all reverence and respect.  I have many, many questions, but I'll start with this one.

A woman gets pregnant.  She's very young - only 17 - and has no family.  She's already working hard to care for herself and is barely making ends meet as it is.  The thought of providing for another mouth is terrifying to her.  She has much life left to live and sees that she will lose out on much if she has this child.  So she decides, for her comfort and convenience, to stop her daughter's heart.  She contacts a local Planned Parenthood and has an abortion.

A woman has a child. She's very young - only 17 - and has no family.  She works hard to care for her child, but one job after another just can't keep up with the financial demands of even a small family.  She comes home exhausted and is unable to really provide for her child physically or emotionally.  After only a year, she realizes everything she's lost. The fun she can't have, the way her whole life now is tied down by this being.  So she decides, for her comfort and convenience, to stop her daughter's heart.  So, as gently as possible one night while her 10 month old sleeps, she smothers her with a pillow.

Why is one right and other wrong?

If you're easily offended, I probably wouldn't read this post.  Because I'm talking about people who are easily offended.  And it will probably offend you.  ;)

I was reading this article and found out that I am already doing everything that they mention you can do to save money for your baby because I'm painfully cheap and my poor daughter is going to grow up learning the alphabet by drawing it in the sand because paper just went up fifteen cents a ream.  Though the authors gave a quick and compulsory slight nod to cloth diapers, they did mention breastfeeding, making your own baby food, buying used toys and clothes, and letting your child play with household items instead of buying toys.  (Right now Ari has a magnetic clip from the fridge and a metal box.  Aaaand she just started banging her baby monitor against the door.  Awesome.  ;)  They even encourage parents to wash clothes instead of throwing them away - who throws away dirty clothes instead of washing them?!!

But one of the things on the list really shocked me.  They mention that daycare averages $1000 a month and encourage parents to get savings accounts, trade off with friends, etc.  But with commuting and buying lunch every day at work, you're spending almost $16,000 just to have a job.  How much are you really making? They don't even MENTION the option of staying home and raising your own children.  Is it really worth $10 an hour to miss out on most of the waking hours of your child's most formative years?  I used to nanny for a family, and I spent WAY more time with their kids than the parents did - and they were as involved as you could possibly be!  Everything was always stressed and rushed, there was never peace in the house until the parents had gone and there wasn't peace again once they came home.

I realize it's a personal decision and that you might genuinely desperately need that money, though you probably don't need it as badly as you think you do, but Baby Center didn't even mention that option!  They didn't even say "reevaluate your situation to see if you could be staying home with your kids."  As if we are afraid to even suggest that parents should be raising their own children.  I'm not even talking about "should be" but "COULD be."  We don't even want to say that!  We don't want to suggest that it should be an option!  We get so offended in this country if anyone questions the way we're raising our children, especially when it comes to the topics of breastfeeding and daycare, that we get all up in a tizzy if anyone suggests we do things differently than we're doing them.  I remember one article that was talking about some celebrity couple or something and they had decided to use formula with their children.  The couple said, "We've just decided that this is the best choice for our babies."  WHAT?!  No!  Say "This is the best fit for our family," or "This is the best I can do," or whatever, but formula is never the best choice for the baby.  I think sometimes we feel we have a right to justify our selfishness instead of being able to admit that a situation isn't ideal but is the best we can do.  And that's okay!  That's absolutely okay, but there is a serious problem when we start calling "acceptable" the "best," because then everyone's standards get lowered.

Seriously. Leave the man alone. He's not a Muslim. Jumping on one out of context slip of the tongue is just making us all look bad.

I would understand if he had been talking about Christianity and mentioned being a Muslim. But he wasn't. He was talking about how people think he's a Muslim. It wasn't a Freudian slip. It was just a slip. Stop harping on stupid things that aren't real, like a garbled word, and harp instead on things that matter. Like the fact that he is a fascist marxist socialist commie.

Someone posted a comment on a blog of mine a while back saying that it's okay to be concerned for the environment as long as you aren't worshiping it.

Well. Here you go.

I have to say, it was a tough decision. I'm not even sure if I've fully made it yet. But with both candidates' energy issues out of the way (as in, I agree with both policies on energy), I turned to other matters. This won't be a long post. But if my information below is wrong, tell me! If you have a source more reliable than mine with contradicting information, I would love to know. I certainly don't want to cast my vote because of erroneous information. But if all of this is true, I simply can't put Obama on my ticket. Here's why, in no particular order:

1) Obama doesn't support homeschooling. That's right. Though Chapter 6 of his book makes mention of allowing kids to remain at home, he has supported legislation to require all children to attend a school taught by certified teachers. This would rule out homeschooling (unless you want an expensive and time consuming certification process for parents) and most private schools as well. If homeschooling is outlawed, I'm moving to Australia. I'm not kidding. This is opposed to McCain's plan, which says that "parents should be empowered with school choice to send their children to the school that can best educate them just as many members of Congress do with their own children. [McCain] finds it beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to choose their child's school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe."

2) McCain and Palin are pro life. This is a huge, huge, huge deal on my ticket. Probably the next issue to the energy crisis, if not more important. Plus, I like Palin.

3) Obama mud slings. And speaks with flowery, emotional, meaningless words. And it's annoying. He's turning into Hillary. And she annoyed me.

4) McCain was in a war defending this country. I know, it's overstated and getting on everyone's (including my) nerves. But seriously. The guy has been in a war.

5) Obama supports socialist political agendas I simply can't back. Like free health care. See my post here. I like McCain's policy much better.

6) McCain is kind of an independent. 10% of his voting record is against his own party. Some might say, hey, it's only 10% - but how far can he go before he's no longer "republican" and becomes a democrat or independent? 20? 25? Republicans do stupid, stupid things sometimes, and McCain isn't afraid to be like, hey, you're doing a stupid, stupid thing.

7) McCain has supported legislation in favor of autism education and prevention.

8) McCain has a freaking awesome immigration policy. While I don't agree with every word (they should NOT be required to pay back taxes, in my opinion, that will just be impossible for many of them), it's fantastic overall.

9) The man believes in the second ammendment.

10) It seems that Obama genuinely believes that diplomacy can solve everything. That sitting down and talking with terrorists will make them go away. How long has he been here? On earth?!

11) Obama wants to start kids at school as infants. INFANTS. The zero to five plan wants education to start at birth. Paid for by yours truly. SERIOUSLY? And, Obama, if that's not what you meant, you really need to elaborate more. Because that's freaking retarded.

12) Did I mention PALIN?!?! The woman has an 80% approval rate in Alaska. Why isn't SHE running for president?!

I don't hate everything about Obama. In fact, I like a lot of it. His NCLB reform proposal is fantastic. But on a few key issues that are very important to me, the McCain-Palin team takes the cake. We'll see how things shape up in the next few months because anything can happen, but the democratic candidates have simply failed to capture my heartstrings.

Okay, maybe not...MOVE over. Maybe just...scooch a bit.

Can you have two favorite artists? Both in first place?

I just found this CD by Andy Gullahorn on NoiseTrade. I listened to the first few seconds of a few of the songs (the samples available), told three friends, and downloaded the album. I didn't even know he was a Christian artist. I didn't care. The songs could have all been about peanut butter sandwiches and I would have been thrilled; the music and artistry in the songwriting was so incredible, the guitar so gorgeous, I had to have it.

Turns out his lyrics are better than even his music.

He is artful and sly, witty and challenging and emotional. In the same CD, he writes both a song about his love affair with his wife and his love affair with his hat, both a tear jerking memoir to a couple who lost a child and a subtly humorous memoir to a friend who got in a fight with a lawn mower and lost his toe.

I don't know how I've never heard of this guy before. I love the folky acoustic feel and the down to earth lyrics. It's refreshing and charming, intimate and understated. So if you haven't, go to Derek Webb's NoiseTrade, tell three friends, and download the entire album for free ("for a very limited time only!" Andy claims) or, better yet, "pay what you want."

I hate free stuff. At least, free stuff that's stolen from people who worked hard to earn it and handed to people who didn't. Yes, I believe in fair wages and making sure people are treated fairly - but the idea that compassion is the government's job (and not the job of, say, the church, as it has been traditionally) is socialism. And that's fine if you believe that, if you believe in free health care for everybody, in robin hooding your way past poverty, but don't call it "progressive" or "liberal" - it's an idea that's been around for much longer than that. Call it what it is - socialism.

A buddy of mine posted this on his blog and it's so freaking awesome I had to share.

"Two Kids: One gets all A's. The other gets all D's.
If the kid with the A's gives the kid with the D's some of their A's, then both will have all C's.
Nevermind the fact that the A student worked hard to earn their grades.
Just consider the fact that the D student wants what the A student has.
Eventually, the A student will have no incentive to work hard, and the D student will never have to."

This is exactly what's happening. This is political socialism at it's best. This is why Russia is still a poor country - because they spent decades and decades teaching the hard workers it's pointless and the lazy they can get whatever they want just by breathing.

It was NOT BUSH'S JOB to fix Katrina. ::shock and horror!!:: Well, it's wasn't. It has NEVER BEEN the job of the federal government to FIX US. The very idea is COUNTER to what this country was founded on.

I've been on welfare. ::shock and horror!!:: Yes, that's right. For about 6 months while I was pregnant I was on welfare. And then I GOT OFF IT. Justin found a job (not nearly as hard as they would have you believe - McDonald's is ALWAYS HIRING) and we got off benefits. I probably used more of the government's money in my application process than in actual benefits. This, I really believe, is fine, and exactly the way welfare was supposed to work. It was supposed to be a quick fix for someone in between jobs - it was NEVER supposed to be a way of life, and it certainly was NEVER meant to rob from the rich and give to the poor.

Economists have long said that 5% of the world controls 95% of the wealth. Wow! Why don't we split that up and make it even?! The same people have also always said this: "If you took all the money in all the world and split it evenly between all people, in 10 years, 5% of the world would control 95% of the wealth." It's a mental thing. If all the money you get just gets spent and you have nothing to show for it but a freaking awesome stereo that will be obsolete in 2 years, you have gained nothing. And that is simply what 95% of the world would do with all that new found cash.

Everyone in America has the chance to provide for their families. Some have to work harder than others. But even "overnight success" stories spent years working toward said success. Rich people have the right to be rich and poor people have the right to become rich - but NOT by forcing the rich people to give them their money.

I'm liberal on a lot of issues. I absolutely believe in saving the environment and don't believe in the death penalty. But I simply can't buy into this socialist taxation policy. It will ruin our country.