matching tracksuits

fun in threes, sometimes fours

general

Predictions

Sunday 07 February 2021 | 0 Comments

Back on October 3, my favorite cult leader, David Pack, predicted a definitive date for the return of Jesus. It would happen before October 13. It's now February.

Oops.

Earlier this month, though, he set a new date. During last week's sermon, he made a few assertions:

  • It's a perfect picture…only the whole thing crashes if Christ doesn't come this Friday.
  • God streamed this concluding list through my mind without notes or the Bible.
  • It's a divine act, if all these prophecies are at stake, would God let me mess up? He had to just stream it into me!
  • Sabat 24, is this Friday night. May we now see Christ, the kingdom, all the New Testament saints, and all Israel [resurrected] in just over 4 days. If it's wrong then you now understand why I kinda thought I was on to something. (Banned by HWA)

Well, it's now Sunday. What do we make of that? Was Pack wrong? Of course not. He sent out a memo late Friday night:

We have received numerous emails from the field expressing your amazement and excitement about what is upon us. Brethren here at Headquarters are right there with you!

As we enter the Sabbath, understand there is a case for Christ coming this side of midnight (Headquarters time). But the case grows stronger after midnight. And the most powerful case of all, with literally dozens of reasons just reviewed by 15 ministers at Headquarters, indicates Christ comes late in the day on the Sabbath tomorrow. So strong is this case, it appears virtually impossible that anything happens tonight. But do not stop watching! It is important to Mr. Pack that all of you remain on the same page we are, hence this brief update.

Rest assured, Christ coming later on the Sabbath in no way violates the intricate mathematical relationships between the key dates we have studied in God’s Plan.

We look forward to seeing you very soon!

Banned by HWA

Notice his phrasing: "As we enter the Sabbath, understand there is a case for Christ coming this side of midnight (Headquarters time). But the case grows stronger after midnight." Using "the case grows" indicates that Pack is watching and praying, watching and reading the Bible, watching and meditating, and even now, at this last moment, things are becoming clearer: his timing might have been off by just a few hours. How do clear-headed, skeptical observers interpret this? "The day I predicted Jesus's return is drawing to a close and, holy shit! He's not here yet!"

He says, "Rest assured, Christ coming later on the Sabbath in no way violates the intricate mathematical relationships between the key dates we have studied in God’s Plan." What he wants his followers to hear is simple: "This is complicated stuff, brethren. It's taken my years to understand this! It's math!" What we skeptis hear: "Please don't leave my church and take your money with you when this turns out wrong! Please! I'm not qualified to do anything else. How will I make my money? How will I afford my enormous house?"

Of course, it's written as if Pack himself isn't saying this: "It is important to Mr. Pack..." But is there any doubt really?

Then, yesterday afternoon, they posted this:

While it is a discussion beyond the scope of a short update, bear in mind the Sabbath has not ended in the far west. The math and science do not break! In fact, many principles and verses show we must reach the far end of the Sabbath as it exists worldwide—all the way through the time zones of the western islands of the Pacific.

More than a dozen Headquarters ministers who just met discussed this again thoroughly and none can see a way out of tonight. Believe us when we say that we have tried! If there is more to see, God will certainly reveal it. Any details would be passed along in the coming days.

Again, keep watching. Our wait cannot be long!

And now it's Sunday. And what?

Why do people continue with him? It's simple -- the sunken cost fallacy. Once you've invested so much in an idea, it's all but impossible to give that idea up.

Snowfall 2021

Saturday 06 February 2021 | 0 Comments

When you live in South Carolina, every snowfall is an occasion, a rarified event that deserves a bit of awe and praise.

Sadly, K had already made it to bed when the snow started, and the forecast calls for an increase in temperature, which means it might all be gone in the morning.

Evening Walk

Friday 05 February 2021 | 0 Comments

And Repeat

Thursday 04 February 2021 | 0 Comments

Today, after some girls in homeroom were working on our door decoration for Black History Month (that’s Lisa on the far left), I went back to grading study guides. And I found four more in another class who were copying off a different paper. You’d think that, after all of the raging gossip about the incident yesterday, they would wonder if perhaps it wasn’t time to cut their losses and confess before getting caught — throw themselves on the mercy of the court and all that. But no. So I sent them to Mrs. D, and she ran them through the ringer, then sent them back to class. More gossip.

At the end of the day, when I went back to grading the final batch of study guides, and, well, you probably know what I discovered…

Reputation

Wednesday 03 February 2021 | 0 Comments

The last question for the act three study guide was to complete a paraphrase of lines 94-103. It was one of the few questions I actually check -- the rest of them, I skim and make sure they put something close to correct. This one I read.

One young lady (we'll call her Lisa) turned in the following:

I'm so upset about my cousin's death that I'll never be satisfied with Romeo until I see him dead. Mother, if you could find a man who sells poison, I would mix it myself so that Romeo would be dead. My heart hates hearing his name and not being able to go after him, not being able to avenge the love I had for my cousin.

The second part wasn't as simple: explain the paradoxical/ironic phrases in this passage.

This passage is ironic because Juliet has to pretend that she hates Romeo and wants to kill him even though in reality she loves him and wants to protect him. Juliet says that she will never be satisfied until she sees Romeo dead when in reality she won’t be satisfied until she sees Romeo and can hug him and be with him. Juliet tells her mother that she wants to mix up the poison to kill Romeo but she really wants to mix up the poison so she can protect Romeo and make sure that the poison doesn’t kill him. Also, Juliet hates to hear Romeo’s name and not go after him, but she says that she hates hearing Romeo’s names and not being able to avenge Tybalt’s death to cover-up that fact that she loves Romeo.

My comment: "Good work. A thorough examination of all the levels of irony." Lisa is, in all respects, a star student. She never gives less than 115%, and she absolutely hounds me to death for extra feedback and additional help. As a result, she finished the second quarter this year with an eye-popping grade of 100. She had a 99 without the extra credit for the quarter, but she did every possible bit of extra credit so I was more than happy to give that one point, though she didn't have to do everything to get that point. But she would have done it all even if I'd told her she didn't have to. "I just want to make sure," she'd likely say.

A couple of students later, I was skimming through the answers, thinking how much more complete these answers seem than what I'm used to receiving from the boy (we'll call him James). Then I get to the paradox question and read his answer:

This passage is ironic because Juliet has to pretend that she hates Romeo and wants to kill him even though in reality she loves him and wants to protect him. Juliet says that she will never be satisfied until she sees Romeo dead when in reality she won’t be satisfied until she sees Romeo and can hug him and be with him. Juliet tells her mother that she wants to mix up the poison to kill Romeo but she really wants to mix up the poison so she can protect Romeo and make sure that the poison doesn’t kill him. Also, Juliet hates to hear Romeo’s name and not go after him, but she says that she hates hearing Romeo’s names and not being able to avenge Tybalt’s death to cover-up that fact that she loves Romeo.

A few more students later, I read another boy's work. We'll call him Nate. Nate has been struggling with the class, but he's constantly saying he wants to do better. I read his paradox answer:

This passage is ironic because Juliet has to pretend that she hates Romeo and wants to kill him even though in reality she loves him and wants to protect him. Juliet says that she will never be satisfied until she sees Romeo dead when in reality she won’t be satisfied until she sees Romeo and can hug him and be with him. Juliet tells her mother that she wants to mix up the poison to kill Romeo but she really wants to mix up the poison so she can protect Romeo and make sure that the poison doesn’t kill him. Also, Juliet hates to hear Romeo’s name and not go after him, but she says that she hates hearing Romeo’s names and not being able to avenge Tybalt’s death to cover-up that fact that she loves Romeo.

At this point, there was only one thing to do: go back through all the other papers and check. Nothing else seemed suspect, but these Lisa's, James's, and Nate's study guides were, upon closer inspection, identical. Completely. Perfectly. A medieval scribe would be jealous of the letter accuracy.

I was puzzled, though. I couldn't get a single thought out of my mind: "This just does not seem like something Lisa would do." James and Nate -- maybe. Conceivably. But Lisa? Never.

I took the three papers to Mrs. D, the eighth-grade vice principal, and she sweated a couple of more names out of them. I got a call during my planning period asking if I'd print out Sam's and Jacob's paper. I did so, but they were identical to the other three. Mrs. D applied a little more pressure while I stood there: "You want to tell me what happened or should I immediately just start suspending people?" It turned out that both James and Nate had gotten the study guide from Jacob.

While they were providing details, I looked down at Lisa. Her brow was furrowed in confusion; her eyes glistened; her chest was heaving slightly. She was utterly terrified.

It wasn't difficult to understand why: here was a girl who'd probably never gotten in trouble at school. Ever. For anything. She's chatty because she's so very bright, and she just wants to share all the thoughts she has. (She puts Post-It notes on her article of the week in addition to all the marginal comments. "I just have a lot to say," she explained with shrug of the shoulders when I asked her why she was doing so much more than was required.)

I left the room to get ready for class -- their class. Students began filing in, and I heard the talk:

"Who else got called to the office?"

"Lisa's in there."

"Then it must be some star student thing or something."

"No, I think she's in trouble."

Just before class started, the vice principal came down to my room to tell me that Jacob had rather casually admitted that he'd swiped the study guide from Lisa. While she had gone to the restroom, he noticed the study guide was up and quickly jumped on her computer to send a copy to himself. He then shared it.

Poor Lisa, I thought.

I went back into the classroom and made sure everyone was working, then called Lisa outside.

"Are you okay?" I asked.

"Yes. Did Mrs. D tell you what happened?"

"Yes, and I'm glad it all came out. I'm sure you were quite confused."

"Very," she said, shaking her head vigorously.

"Well, this should serve as a lesson to you that's a little different than the lesson the boys are going to learn." I asked her if Mrs. D had told her what I'd said initially.

"No, not really."

"Well, I told her that it just didn't seem like you. That I doubted you'd just shared this. I didn't have any way to explain it, but I really didn't think you would do something like this." She smiled, and I continued, "So the lesson I hope you learn in a very real way is how valuable the reputation you've created for yourself is, how important it is to maintain such a reputation because it will serve you well in ways you probably didn't previously imagine."

She smiled again, and we went back inside and had a great class, making a decision tree of Juliet's concerns about taking Friar Lawrence's potion.

Farewell! God knows when we shall meet again.
I have a faint cold fear thrills through my veins,
That almost freezes up the heat of life:
I'll call them back again to comfort me:
Nurse! What should she do here?
My dismal scene I needs must act alone.
Come, vial.
What if this mixture do not work at all?
Shall I be married then to-morrow morning?
No, no: this shall forbid it: lie thou there.

Laying down her dagger

What if it be a poison, which the friar
Subtly hath minister'd to have me dead,
Lest in this marriage he should be dishonour'd,
Because he married me before to Romeo?
I fear it is: and yet, methinks, it should not,
For he hath still been tried a holy man.
How if, when I am laid into the tomb,
I wake before the time that Romeo
Come to redeem me? there's a fearful point!
Shall I not, then, be stifled in the vault,
To whose foul mouth no healthsome air breathes in,
And there die strangled ere my Romeo comes?
Or, if I live, is it not very like,
The horrible conceit of death and night,
Together with the terror of the place,--
As in a vault, an ancient receptacle,
Where, for these many hundred years, the bones
Of all my buried ancestors are packed:
Where bloody Tybalt, yet but green in earth,
Lies festering in his shroud; where, as they say,
At some hours in the night spirits resort;--
Alack, alack, is it not like that I,
So early waking, what with loathsome smells,
And shrieks like mandrakes' torn out of the earth,
That living mortals, hearing them, run mad:--
O, if I wake, shall I not be distraught,
Environed with all these hideous fears?
And madly play with my forefather's joints?
And pluck the mangled Tybalt from his shroud?
And, in this rage, with some great kinsman's bone,
As with a club, dash out my desperate brains?
O, look! methinks I see my cousin's ghost
Seeking out Romeo, that did spit his body
Upon a rapier's point: stay, Tybalt, stay!
Romeo, I come! this do I drink to thee.

I've always loved this lesson: the decision tree helps them literally see how increasingly irrational Juliet is becoming:

Lisa was classic Lisa: she took control of her group; she offered her ideas enthusiastically but humbly; she listened to others and helped everyone synthesize their thoughts. Back to normal. Classic Lisa. The Lisa everyone was thinking of, scratching their heads, wondering, "Lisa, in trouble?"

And the boys? Well, I didn't talk to them. After all, what could I say that Mrs. D hadn't already said?

The End of the Swimming Lesson

Tuesday 02 February 2021 | 0 Comments

Questioning

Monday 01 February 2021 | 0 Comments

At some point recently, K was reading to the Boy about Moses and the plagues, and as children are wont to do, he zeroed in the most shocking one: the death of the firstborn male. He was trying to figure out who in the family would be the firstborn male.

"Would it be Papa?" he asked.

How does one respond? How does one say the obvious: "No, it would be you"?

"But why would God do that? It's against the commandments."

This is the crux of the issue of me of late: how are we to incorporate all those horrible things the god of the Old Testament does with the notion that the Bible supposedly comes from the mind of an omnipotent, omniscient, all-beneficent being? (The story of the death of the firstborn is problematic both for God's beneficence and his omniscience: the Hebrews are to mark their doorway with the blood of a sacrificed lamb in order to indicate that the angel doing the killing is to pass over that house -- why wouldn't the angel know without that?)

Believers start with the premise that the Bible is from an omnipotent, omniscient, all-beneficent being, and then they work backward to try to explain these horrible passages. A skeptic like me starts with the premise that the Bible is supposedly from an omnipotent, omniscient, all-beneficent being and looks for evidence of that within the pages. The clear evil that the god of the Old Testament does, then, is clear and damning evidence against the supposition that the Bible reflects the mind of an omnipotent, omniscient, all-beneficent being. That god is petty and selfish, jealous and immature, narcissistic and self-absorbed, and above all, that being as portrayed in the Old Testament is evil, toying with some by demanding human sacrifice and then rescinding the order at the last minute (thinking of Issac here) and accepting human sacrifice in other situations (I'm thinking of Jephthah here). He is murderous and rampaging on both an enormous scale, commanding the Israelites to wipe out whole nations, men, women, and children, and a small scale, sending bears to maul children:

He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria. (2 Kings 2.23-25)

Believers have to become apologists for God, coming up with reasons why these horrible actions are perfectly reasonable and in fact good. (Here's an attempt to explain the bear mauling.) They resort to explaining what it means in that time and culture, failing to realize that they've just placed a limitation upon this supposedly-divinely inspired book that counts against their argument. They discuss the nuances of the original Hebrew, failing to realize that they've just placed a limitation upon this supposedly-divinely inspired book that counts against their argument. They produce wildly different interpretations and explanations, failing to realize that they've just placed a limitation upon this supposedly-divinely inspired book that counts against their argument.

For the skeptic, things are so much simpler. Occam's razor simple. We mark these passages in the "Against" column and move on. In the end, we look at how many marks are in the "For" column and how many are in the "Against" and make a summary judgment from that. And there are vastly more things in the "Against" column.

Play Date

Sunday 31 January 2021 | 0 Comments

The Girl has, for all intents and purposes, outgrown play dates. Her friends come over occasionally, and they sit on the bed and talk. Or play games on the Chromebook together. But they’re not play dates. But we call them that anyway.

L’s best friend N came over yesterday and one of the highlights for them was walking together down to the CVS near us to buy snacks. K told me that after L told her friends about doing that, all her friends want to come for a visit to walk down to the CVS.

What a change from the summer L experienced in Poland a couple of years ago. She met with her newly-made village friends for pizza, went shopping with them, met them for ice cream, walked to their houses for visits. So much independence for a then-twelve-year-old. So relatively incomprehensible for American children.

Pinewood Derby 2021

Saturday 30 January 2021 | 0 Comments

Timeline

Friday 29 January 2021 | 0 Comments

Yesterday and today, we covered one of my most favorite mini-lessons in the Shakespeare unit. It tags onto the end of one day’s work and requires a couple of minutes the next day to answer the question, “Just how much time has passed in this play?” For several scenes in the play, it’s a little unclear to a reader who is not looking for clues, but they’re there, scattered throughout, but it doesn’t become obvious until 3.4, when Paris comes to talk to Capulet again about Juliet’s hand, we know it’s late, for Capulet explains, “‘Tis very late, she’ll not come down to-night: / I promise you, but for your company, / I would have been a-bed an hour ago.” But late on what day? We get the answer shortly when Capulet, deciding when the wedding will be, asks what the day is: “Monday, my lord,” responds Paris.

Juliet won’t come down because she’s weeping for Tybalt, or so the Capulets think. In the scene before, she learns of Tybalt’s death, and while she’s initially upset with Romeo, she reconsiders: ” Shall I speak ill of him that is my husband? / Ah, poor my lord, what tongue shall smooth thy name, / When I, thy three-hours wife, have mangled it?” She explains that she’s only been his wife for three hours, so the wedding had to have taken place sometime after 12 but before the evening. We know that Romeo doesn’t fight Tybalt because he’s now related to him:

I do protest, I never injured thee,
But love thee better than thou canst devise,
Till thou shalt know the reason of my love:
And so, good Capulet,–which name I tender
As dearly as my own,–be satisfied.

This means that the fight between Romeo and Tybalt happens after twelve but before the evening, because Juliet says she’s only been Romeo’s wife for three hours. But how do we get the twelve I keep referring to? Simple: in 2.4, when Juliet is waiting for the nurse’s return, she complains that “from nine till twelve / Is three long hours, yet she is not come.” We know from the balcony scene in 2.2 that Romeo is supposed to meet with someone to arrange the wedding at nine the next morning.

But how do we know for certain that the balcony scene was the night before? Simple: when Friar Laurence makes his entrance in 2.3, it’s clearly dawn:

The grey-eyed morn smiles on the frowning night,
Chequering the eastern clouds with streaks of light,
And flecked darkness like a drunkard reels
From forth day’s path and Titan’s fiery wheels:
Now, ere the sun advance his burning eye,
The day to cheer and night’s dank dew to dry,
I must up-fill this osier cage of ours
With baleful weeds and precious-juiced flowers.

Shortly after that, he encounters Romeo at his door and pondering how it is that Romeo is up so early, he suggests “then here I hit it right, / Our Romeo hath not been in bed to-night.” Romeo confirms that he’s been with Juliet the night before and hasn’t gone to bed: “That last is true; the sweeter rest was mine.” This puts the balcony scene and the party on Sunday evening/night.

When Lady Capulet comes to speak initially to Juliet about Paris, she asks, “What say you? can you love the gentleman? This night you shall behold him at our feast.” This would put the scene in which it happens, 1.3, sometime in the late morning or early afternoon on Sunday.

In the scene before, Paris asks Capulet for Juliet’s hand. Capulet refuses the offer, insisting that they wait two more years. He then tries a deflationary tactic:

This night I hold an old accustom’d feast,
Whereto I have invited many a guest,
Such as I love; and you, among the store,
One more, most welcome, makes my number more.

This happens concurrently with Lady Capulet’s discussion with Juliet or just before it. We know that Capulet’s conversation with Paris is almost immediately after the opening fight scene because he explains, “But Montague is bound as well as I, / In penalty alike; and ’tis not hard, I think, / For men so old as we to keep the peace.” So the fight that opens the play must have happened Sunday morning.

Benvolio, in explaining to the Montagues in 1.1 why Romeo was fortunately not involved in the fray explains to Lady Montague,

Madam, an hour before the worshipp’d sun
Peer’d forth the golden window of the east,
A troubled mind drave me to walk abroad;
Where, underneath the grove of sycamore
That westward rooteth from the city’s side,
So early walking did I see your son:

With all this in mind, we returned today to 3.5 and examined the opening lines: “Wilt thou be gone? it is not yet near day: / It was the nightingale, and not the lark, That pierced the fearful hollow of thine ear.” Clearly, it’s morning, but just to make it clear, Shakespeare has Juliet later say ask, “Who is’t that calls? is it my lady mother? / Is she not down so late, or up so early?” So it’s early Tuesday morning.

They met Sunday evening.

“How many of you thought it was a matter of weeks that had passed?” I asked, as I do every year. Most hands go up. “It puts the whole thing in a new perspective, doesn’t it?”