Yorkie Events

Date Night

2010-10-11T15:30:00.001+01:00

My wife and I have finally signed up to Lovefilm, following a 2 month trial as a wedding gift. The first film to come through our letterbox was Date Night, in which Steve Carrell and Tina Fey play the Fosters, a boring married couple and wanting to change this. They go on their weekly date night to the city for a romantic meal at a top restaurant. Since there are no tables, they steal someone elses reservations, not knowing that the 'Triplehorns' are in a bit of trouble with some people you don't want to be in trouble with. What follows is farcical at times, and genuinly very amusing to watch as this mistaken identity leads down paths and adventures the Fosters would never have dreamt of.
The one thing that stayed with both of us was that it was so nice to see a film in which marriage was being worked at. So often we see films and TV about break ups, divorce, casual relationships, and marriage is rarely shown in a positive light, but Date Night shows some of the realities of marriage, and how important it is.
If you haven't seen it, you can view the trailer here. Enjoy!

Invictus

2010-09-28T08:30:00.005+01:00

Finally got around to watching Invictus last night - it is the story of the 1995 South African win at the Rugby World Cup and stars Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela. It is a brilliant film which reminds us of the horrors of apartheid and the struggle to overcome such deepn seated prejudice. It shows the struggles and tensions in post-Apartheid South Africa and reveals the deep sin in the human heart.

It is a brilliant film and one I'd recommen watching even if you don't like rugby.

South Africa 2010

2010-07-13T08:32:00.002+01:00

Well what are your thoughts now its over. I'm quite relieved there were very few classics, few of the worlds best players shone - who would have bet on Forlan getting player of the tournament above Messi, Ronaldo, Iniesta, Xavi, Torres, Rooney et al... I guess it sums up in many ways the tournament for me. Too much defensive play and games so often strangled by tactics.

But what a great show for South Africa to put on I hope to here lots about its legacy not from the media but from the churches there those on the ground will be able to best judge its impact.

England v Germany

2010-06-28T16:50:00.003+01:00

Well at least it wasn't an emotionally roller coaster, usually when we go out of a tournament it is a two hour emotionally sapping marathon of agony, but yesterdays exit wasn't. The German's were the better team, had the better players and played the better football. That doesn't make the pain of exit any less, though I fear it may make the recriminations last longer.

Already phone ins have been swamped by cries to sack Capello, get rid of John Terry, get rid of everyone over 30, look in the championship, revamp the Premier League, sack the FA and so on. It is going to be an interesting summer.

Who to support now? Spain - great football, Brazil - traditional favourites, Argentina - no I just can't bring myself to do it. I think it might have to be Ghana!

Confidence

2010-06-24T11:56:00.003+01:00

Wow! I actually enjoyed watching an England game yesterday afternoon, but in teh cold light of day this morning there are still questions to be answered before we face the Germans (and lose on penalties again!) on Sunday.

Is John Terry going to keep passing it out badly from the back?
Will Carragher come back into the team? (Surely not after yesterday)
Will Rooney be fit and find some more form?
Will Defoe start against Germany? He has a poor record against top teams in the league let alone internationally.

World Cup disappointment

2010-06-22T16:03:00.003+01:00

OK its not been good so far has it, so what changes would you make? Who would you play in tomorrows crunch game with Slovenia?

Here's my choice:

Gk - Joe Hart (Might as well give him some experience)

RB - Glen Johnson (we need to score - can bomb on if Barry holds)
CB - Michael Dawson (The man in form)
CB - John Terry (sadly his silly comments aren't enough to oust him because Upson is so poor)
LB - Ashley Cole (the only player who hasn't disgraced himself - can bomb on if Barry holds)

DM - Gareth Barry (holding role in front of back 4, plus play maker role)
MD - Frank Lampard (Poor tournament so far but can score and we need goals)
MD - James Milner (Over his illness apparently - again has goals and energy)

RF - Jole Cole (creativity gets him in)
LF - Stephen Gerrard (energy and goal scoring ability)
CF - Wayne Rooney (He can't be as bad as he has been - if he is Crouch on after 45mins)

I would deliberately go for an attacking formation, if Barry holds Cole and Johnson can attack and give us width - effectively when attacking it becomes 3-4-3, but when we are defending 4-3-3 with Cole and Gerrard occupying the full backs.

We need a win so I'd rather go out trying to win than failing again to score and being eliminated by a poor draw.

2010-06-02T14:32:00.003+01:00

We sat and watched Next last night with Nicolas Cage and Jessica Biel its a fascinating film. In it
Cage plays a Las Vegas showroom magician Cris Johnson, he looks like any other 2 bit magician except he has a secret which torments him: he can see a few minutes into the future. Sick of the examinations he underwent as a child and the interest of the government and medical establishment in his power, he hides in plain sight under an assumed name, performing cheap tricks and living off small-time gambling "winnings."

Normally he can only see 2 minutes into the future and only events connected directly to him. Except in the case of Liz (Biel) who he has visions of at a diner at a set time but without knowing the day. He visits everyday just so he doesn't miss her.

However, when a terrorist group threatens to detonate a nuclear device in Los Angeles, government agent Callie Ferris must use all her wiles to capture Cris and convince him to help her stop the cataclysm.

This is one of those films that went under the radar, I only put it on my rental list to fill it out but we both really enjoyed its mix of action and intrigue. It also poses that interesting question what would you do if you could see two minutes into your own future, how would that affect the present?

The difference between men and women

2010-05-12T16:34:00.003+01:00

This is brilliantly funny about the difference between men's brains and women's brains.

The World Cup squad

2010-05-12T15:58:00.005+01:00

Well what do you think of the squad? England's 30-man provisional squad for the World Cup finals is as follows:

Goalkeepers: Joe Hart, David James, Rob Green.

Defenders: Leighton Baines, Jamie Carragher, Ashley Cole, Michael Dawson, Rio Ferdinand, Glen Johnson, Ledley King, John Terry, Matthew Upson, Stephen Warnock.

Midfielders: Gareth Barry, Michael Carrick, Joe Cole, Steven Gerrard, Tom Huddlestone, Adam Johnson, Frank Lampard, Aaron Lennon, James Milner, Scott Parker, Theo Walcott, Shaun Wright-Phillips.

Forwards: Darren Bent, Peter Crouch, Jermain Defoe, Emile Heskey, Wayne Rooney.

7 players will be omitted from the final squad of 23. Who are your favourites to go out?

I always think 3 keepers is a bit of a waste so I'd leave Rob Green at home and take an extra outfield player, though Capello will take 3 keepers. In defence, King, Ferdinand, Terry and Cole are certainties. I can't see Leighton Baines or Warnock going, I also wouldn't take Matthew Upson as I think he is an accident waiting to happen - he hasn't exactly been the rock West Ham needed this season. This would leave Carragher as emergency cover for right back with Milner who can play left back better than Baines or Warnock, and Dawson as additional cover for the injury prone center backs we have.

I think in midfield Milner, Lampard, Gerrard, Lennon are certainties, a lot depends on Barry's recovery from injury - if he doesn't recover I'd take Carrick. I think Huddlestone has done enough this season to be included. I don't think Parker is good enough or Wright Phillips. I think its either Joe Cole or Theo Walcott though neither has had a great return from injury, pace seems to frighten defenders so Walcott would get my nod. With Adam Johnson facing a friendly make or break audition for a world cup place.

Heskey and Rooney are certainties. Of the others I think Crouch will go. Defoe has had a poor end of season, and doesn't seem to score against the big teams, though I would take him and Capello seems to like him. I'd also take Darren Bent as his scoring record in the Premier League is amazing when you consider where he has played. I know he hasn't set the international world alight - but in his defence he needs to play with the first choice 10 - only with their supply will you see what he can do (the same for all the others playing off for places).

Al's guess at Capello's squad:
GK: James, Hart, Green.
Def: Carragher, Cole, Dawson, Ferdinand, Johnson, King, Terry.
Mid: Gerrard, Huddlestone, Johnson, Lampard, Lennon, Milner, Barry (or Carrick if not Barry fit), Walcott.
For: Bent, Crouch, Defoe, Heskey, Rooney.

What do you think? Why not put together your own Capello 23 man squad and we'll see who gets closest to the real thing.

Textual issues on Biblical Reliability

2010-02-15T15:26:00.007Z

When it comes to ancient documents there are a number of ways of testing their reliability. Are there a significant number of copies, the more copies the more likely they are to be reliable. Are those copies accurate when compared to each other, the more similar they are the more likely they are to be genuine. What is the interval between the original and the surviving copies? The smaller the gap the more reliable the documents.

The best way to see how reliable the New Testament is is by comparing and contrasting it with other ancient documents.

But can we trust what we find there, surely it will be full of errors and disputed passages and the like. Surely the Text can't be reliable

Even then none of those lines concern any major doctrine or teaching of the Christian faith.

So the Bible is reliable as a source document, furthermore those who wrote it were either eyewitnesses; John and Matthew were disciples of Jesus, Mark is thought to be Peter's account and Luke tells us he interviewed those who were eyewitnesses. But what about bias? Surely I can't trust what they say about Jesus? Well the gospels are not exact copies of each other, they are separate accounts with subtle differences but they testify together about who Jesus is and do not contradict one another. They also are warts and all accounts of the lives of those who would go on to set up the church, recounting their doubts, fears and failings.

But what about corroborating evidence? Is the Bible reliable? Can I trust what I find there or is it propaganda? Is there any outside proof, any corroborating evidence? Yes is the answer and it comes from those who were hostile to Christianity. Josephus, a Jewish historian, Tacitus and Pliny the younger all write about Jesus or about what his followers believed and their willingness to die for those beliefs. Jewish literature of the day also records events from Jesus life.

From these accounts, without even looking at a gospel, you can learn that:

1. Jesus was a Jewish teacher
2. Many believed he performed healings and exorcisms.
3. Some believed he was the Messiah.
4. He was rejected by the Jewish leaders.
5. He was crucified by Pilate during Tiberius reign.
6. Despite crucifixion his followers believed he was alive.
7. Belief was widespread both geographically and socially.

These things have led leading scholars to make the following conclusions:"The New Testament [is] unrivalled among ancient writings in the purity of its text as actually transmitted and kept in use."B Warfield, Introduction to Textual criticism of the New Testament.

Of the New Testament Clifford Wilson, a prominent archaeologist said: "Those who know the facts now recognise that the New Testament must be accepted as a remarkably accurate source book."

Now if its accurate and you can trust it the question is what will you do with what you find out there?

The Bible and Da Vinci

2010-02-15T15:15:00.005Z

The Da Vinci Code has become a world wide phenomenon, it sold over 7 million copies in hard back alone, millions more since its release in paperback. It was released as a big budget film adaptation of the book. Chances are if you haven't read it you know someone who has and it has caused quite a stir, not least because some have been hailing it as a serious re-examination of Christianity. The central pillar of the plot is that a secret society of which Leonardo Da Vinci was a member has proof that the Bible is untrue and that the church knows it and is covering it up. The characters trot out various facts and figures to back up such a statement.

"What happens if persuasive scientific evidence comes out that the church's version of the Christ story is inaccurate, and the greatest story ever told is, in fact, the greatest story ever sold"

The Da Vinci Code

One of the statements is based around how we come to have our New Testament. Brown in the Da Vinci Code says that in fact the Bible we have is the result of the Roman Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicea meeting and picking and editing books to give an impression of Jesus that they wanted to give. We're just going to look at three questions the Da Vinci Code raises:

Did Constantine collate the Bible in the 4th Century?
Did Constantine alter the Bible?
Did Constantine commission a new Bible that omitted gospels that spoke of human traits?

1. Did Constantine collate the New Testament in the 4th Century?

Actually Constantine had nothing to do collating the NT, it was done much earlier. For example the Apostle Peter recognises Pauls' writing as scripture when he writes his second letter in AD 65-8. And there are records of early church leaders quoting from the gospels we have in the early second century.

One of the most important, historically speaking, documents on the New Testament is from 170AD and is called the Muratorian fragment. It lists as recognised scripture (the Bible) all 39 Books in the Old Testament and 22 out of the 27 in the New, including the 4 gospels, a century before Constantine was born let alone called the Council at Nicea. Yes the canon of scripture - the final books - was finalised in the 4th Century, in fact 30 years after Constantine's death. But by the time of Constantine's reign there were only a few debated books, and they were not altered, in fact what made it in or out of the Bible was based on agreement with the books that had been accepted for a century or more.

2. Did Constantine alter the Bible?

"To rewrite the history books, Constantine knew he would need a bold stroke. From this sprang the most profound moment in Christian history...Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made him God like."
The Da Vinci Code

No he didn't, in fact the burden of historical fact backs up the New Testament as the most reliable historical record we have: Documents from 100BC show that nothing significant has been done to alter or edit the Old Testament. And documents predating Constantine by more than a century show that the large portions of John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter and Jude they contain are similar to our books. There are thousands of very early (pre-Constantine) manuscripts in museums and libraries around the world which prove that the New Testament documents we have, have been reliable passed on.

"The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed." Frederic Kenyon, former director of the British Museum and a leading expert on ancient manuscripts.

3. Did Constantine commission a new Bible that omitted gospels that spoke of human traits?
"Until [the time of Constantine], Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet...a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal, not the Son of God...Jesus' establishment as the Son of God was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicea"
The Da Vinci Code

No! The gospels record Jesus human ancestry (Matt 1), that he grew hungry (Luke 4:2), that he felt tired and slept (Mark 4:38), and most significantly that he died (John 19:28-30). No! Ancient secular historians record Jesus earliest follower's belief that he was divine and rose from the dead long before Constantine lived. The charge of blasphemy that led to the crucifixion was based on the fact that he was making himself out to be like God though he appeared to be a mere man.

Did the Council of Nicea vote on Jesus divinity in 325AD?
These beliefs were held by the church long before the Council of Nicea in 325AD. In fact belief that Jesus was divine and that Christians should worship no other was what led to conflict with Rome over emperor worship. At Nicea the bishops simply upheld a 3 century old conviction that Jesus was divine in the face of a heresy to the contrary.

The Da Vinci Code is a gripping read - but that is what it is - it is not a serious re-examination of Christianity. It is a fictional novel. Its claims about the Bible are false and easily disproved. The Bible and Luke's gospel that we are looking at are the most reliable documents we have. So what will they tell us about who Jesus is and will we listen?

Men's Breakfast

2010-02-04T12:45:00.002Z

Hi all here's the details of the next men's breakfast.

Men’s Breakfast
Saturday 20th Feb @Cheswold’s

8.45am for 9am start

Christian Vision for Men

2010-01-29T11:43:00.001Z

This is a great website it deals with loads of issues and has helpful stuff on a wide range of blokes issues. http://www.cvmen.org.uk/

Sunday - How could a God of love allow the earthquake in Haiti?

2010-01-29T11:40:00.001Z

It is surely impossible that you haven't heard about the recent earthquakes in Haiti. Such a horrific situation. At Church this Sunday, we'll be looking at the question of 'How can a God of love allow natural disasters' and in particular focusing on Haiti. If you're around Sunday morning, do join us: 10.45am (refreshments from 10.15) at Hatchell Wood Primary School.

Christmas

2009-12-07T15:13:00.002Z

What a draw!

2009-12-07T11:48:00.003Z

Inevitably it has happened, apparently bookmakers have slashed the odds on England winning the world cup after Fridays draw from 6/1 to 5/1. And the papers have started talking up England's chances as if we will just brush aside the USA, Algeria and Slovenia. Then we face a second round against probably Australia or Ghana, then France. Amazingly the media seem to think we can win each of these games without too much stress, the only potential blip apparently is Brazil in the Semis.

Just reflecting on past experiences of watching England at World Cups stress has always been part of the experience. Every time we qualify the cry goes up is this the time to end ___ years of hurt.

Keep your eyes open, hopefully we'll be doing something for each of the games, here are the dates of Englands first round games to put in your diary:

Saturday, June 12 England v United States (Rustenburg, 7.30pm)

Friday, June 18 England v Algeria (Cape Town, 7.30pm)

Wednesday, June 23 Slovenia v England (Port Elizabeth, 3pm)

Eagle Eye

2009-10-19T10:36:00.003+01:00

Every so often I like to rent a DVD which I haven't heard a great deal about and which hasn't really caught the media's attention, so on Friday night we sat down to watch Eagle Eye.

It was a good film, it has elements of conspiracy, car chases, and action. The basic plot is that ordinary Americans are blackmailed or forced into committing acts of terrorism as part of an elaborate plot to wipe out the President and most of his cabinet (operation guillotine). The story focuses on two of these Jerry Shaw (Shia LaBeouf) and Rachel Holloman (Michelle Monaghan) and their part in this elaborate plot. Both are forced to act against their will, Rachel by the threat that otherwise her sons train will be derailed. Both are contacted by a mysterious woman who is able to track them where ever they go, even using the cell phones of strangers sat next to them on the train, and give them instructions via any electronic device going.

I don't want to give anymore of the plot away, but it is a good film which explores the notions of justice, judgement and accountability. Do those being targeted deserve to die for a mistake they made?

Stress v Rest

2009-10-14T08:45:00.003+01:00

How many weeks holiday do you get a year? The British average is 28 days including bank holidays, do you get more or less? Do you take all your holiday? Do you ever find yourself working longer hours than you are contracted to without being paid for it? A recent survey discovered that the average British worker does eight weeks unpaid overtime a year, that’s like working January and February for free.

Do you answer work emails at home at the weekends or in the evenings? Do you take your mobile phone or laptop on holiday with you – just in case something comes up?

What is your philosophy when it comes to work and rest? Do you work to enable you to rest? Do you live for the next holiday? Or do you rest in order to be able to work? Do you take a lunch break of any sort, let alone an hour?

I was in London last year for a conference and outside one of the big financial institutions in the heart of the city was an enormous banner which said this “3 days until the weekend”. Every morning I went to this conference someone had been there before I arrived and altered the count down, I was half expecting it on Friday to count down the number of hours.

Charles Dickens in 1857 wrote Little Dorrit, in it one of the characters says this:
“What else do you suppose I think I am made for? Nothing, rattle me out of bed early, set me going, give me as short a time as you like to bolt my meals in, and keep me at it. Keep me always at it, and I’ll keep you always at it. There you are with the whole duty of man in the commercial country.”

That was written 150 years ago and it hasn’t changed, if anything its gotten worse. And it isn’t just in the work place is it? Those same pressures are on to fit in leisure time and being actively involved with our families.

Just think about advertising for a minute. What’s the slogan for Pepsi-max? Live life to the max. What are the selling points that are emphasized of remedies for the common cold or flu? Their ability to get you back up and at them, to help you avoid having to rest. Cram every second full of activity or you are missing out is the message. When was the last time your saw an advert that sold their product on its ability to help you rest? Rest is for wimps! is the message we hear all the time.

But is it? There are a number of reasons why we are so driven to work and whereas we may assume most of them are external forces beyond our control actually it may be more about me driving myself than I'd like to think.

I'm driven to prove my value to others.
I'm driven to prove my value to myself.
Being able to provide for my family means I am a good dad/husband.
Attaining status symbols proves my value and that I am good at my job.

But the Bible says we were made to rest. Actually when you are content in and of yourself - when you are at rest with yourself then you aren't driven by the sense of a fear of failure or a sense of expectation.

The Bible makes clear that we will only know such contentment, when we get our view of life right, which means examining our maker - God - and ourselves.

Yorkie Events

2009-10-12T14:39:00.000+01:00

What are Yorkie Events? It is events geared up for men. Fried Breakfasts, Paintballing, 20/20 Cricket, Curry Nights and so on. It is a chance for men to be men and to think about issues we face and what the Bible has to say about them.