Thoughts on the Wii

Its been quite a while since I posted on this blog. I’ve been busy with school and most of my posts go to http://www.thefloppyhat.com — but I do feel the need to rant about something from time to time. The rant that I’m about to embark on was spurred by this post and the comments appertaining thereto (I’m not entirely sure I used that word correctly, but it was kind of fun).

Now, don’t get me wrong. I love RMC over at GoNintendo. The guy is amazing, he’s loves gaming, and specifically loves Nintendo, and he runs a great site. My issue really isn’t even with the commenters per se. No, rather my issue is that somehow many Nintendo fans simply don’t understand why “core gamers” (whatever that phrase means) have issues with Nintendo. Let me try to explain.

Most of those who comment on GoNintendo, as far as I can tell, stuck with Nintendo through the (admittedly) sparse N64 and GameCube days. Now, the N64 was a great system. My brothers and I spent hours playing Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. Ocarina of Time is still, quite possibly, my favorite Zelda (though, to be fair, I haven’t played Twilight Princess yet). These fans had other systems as well, and they enjoyed those systems, but they stuck with Nintendo. They were loyal. Kudos to them. Their loyalty is now being rewarded. Nintendo’s star is on the rise. They have recently received a new Smash Bros. game that is awesome. Not too long ago new Mario and Zelda games that were equally great. Pikmin is supposedly in the works, as are many other games (Mario and Zelda teams working, etc, etc).

But, I think these fans have forgotten something important: people like me. I was never particularly loyal to Nintendo. Partially because my parents didn’t want me owning three consoles at a time, and partially because my favorite Genre has always been RPGs. The NES and SNES were great for RPGs. The N64 not so much, and although the GameCube had a few gems, it paled in comparison to the PS2…I’d probably say it pulled up about even, when speaking of RPGs with the original Xbox. So, what did I do during the decade before the Wii? It’s simple really, I went where the games that I wanted to play were, and that was on the PlayStation and PS2.

My story is not unique. So, what does this have to do with Nintendo currently? Those of us who jumped ship were treated to a plethora of AAA titles. FF7, FF8, FF9 released very quickly. No seven year wait for us. No sir. Add in to that various Tales games, as well as the Suikoden series, and several other great titles, and we were up to our ears in great games–and that was only in one genre! Once we start throwing in Action/Adventure games, and other genres we didn’t know what to do with ourselves.

Now, those of us who jumped ship have no returned to Nintendo. Most of us have other systems as well, but we also got a Wii. Maybe we were taken in by the motion stuff. Maybe we decided to bet on Nintendo being the leader, and so getting a ton of third party support. Maybe we just decided that Sony had gone crazy, and Microsoft was still the Evil Empire. Whatever the reason, we picked up the Wii. We are the ones who are saying to Nintendo…”uhh…it’s been two years, can we have another Zelda–please?” Many of us are just waiting for Arc Rise Fantasia, which looks like the first attempt at a full-blown RPG for the Wii. Yeah, Opoona had some neat ideas and Tales of Symphonia 2 was fun, but none of them were quite what we were looking for. I spent the first year just catching up on GameCube RPGs, so I didn’t have any complaints there. After that the Virtual Console interested me, and I had fun there. But now, where are my RPGs?

Yeah, I know that RPGs take time. I know its not Nintendo’s fault that third parties seemingly can’t manage to make a good game on the RPG (though, to be fair, there are some great ones…Zack and Wiki come to mind, and the Conduit looks like it’ll be fun, and I heard BoomBlox was awesome). But we were treated to multiple RPGs a year! A year! A three or four year wait between good games really isn’t acceptable to us. Maybe we’re wrong. Maybe we’re impatient. But three years is really our upper limit. A capable team can make a great game in three years. An awesome team, like the ones at Ninty, can make a phenomenal game in three years.

So, for you Nintendo fans out there who just can’t understand why some of us still aren’t happy with Nintendo, try to understand…we’re not used to the long wait. We got used to regular releases of great games within one genre. That’s not to say there weren’t famines from time to time, but they were only a year long. Now, over the course of the next year, there are some promising RPGs scheduled for release on the Wii, I admit that–but they aren’t here yet. For now, we sit a wait for games we want to play. Don’t get me wrong, there are some great games on the Wii. For some of us they’re not interesting, they don’t fall within our fairly limited genre preferences. For others, even those good games are too few and far between.

One final, only slightly related, thought. I’ve always found it interesting that the “winner” of each generation has been the console with the best/most RPGs. NES had some great ones, SNES had even more (though Sega did get a few gems), Playstation hands down, PS2 hands down…now who will it be? I think its still too early to tell, but I’d say its currently pretty close on the RPG front. Nintendo may be way ahead in consoles sold, and that does make for a difficult to surmount lead–my hope is that lead will cause third party publishers to start throwing money at the Wii.

It’s not that we hate Nintendo. We just want some of the games that we want on the system. That’s all.

A Message to Christians

Normally I don’t post about politics on even this, my personal blog. However, after seeing some of the reactions from my conservative acquaintances and friends over the past 9-10 hours, I’m simply appalled. To those of you who disagree with me, I still wanna be friends ( ). This is a chance for me to vent some frustration, so take it all in stride.

Barack Obama is the President-Elect of the United States of America. He has a job I would never want. Many Christians are up in arms over his election. “How could America do this?” or “See! Americans just want money, they don’t care about killing babies!” or any other number of things. So, first a disclaimer, then my thoughts. I voted for Barack Obama in this election. Not because I agree with every policy he has ever laid down, but because I agreed with more of what he said than I agreed with John Mccain’s view (the situation would have been completely reversed had Ron Paul won the Republican primaries).

1. Christians, who claim to read and believe the Bible is the Word of God, ought to remember that A) God decides who the “kings” are and B) Our citizenship isn’t here anyway. Nothing that John Mccain would have done, and nothing that Barack Obama will do will prevent us from carrying out the Jesus Creed–Love God, and Love Others (including Barack Obama and those who voted for him–and, conversely, John McCain and those who voted for him).

2. For those calling for God’s mercy–I agree, sorta. I hope he has mercy for all the truly horrible things America has done throughout the years as Bush has been in office, or Clinton before him, or any American President. Or that he has mercy on us for being greedy. Or that he has mercy on America for the far more gut-wrenching issue of our inaction regarding Darfur.

3. Ultimately, I understand that there is a lot of frustration and disappointment out there among John McCain supporters. That is fair and expected. However, Christians shouldn’t be making John Mccain vs. Barack Obama into an issue of morals, of us (the “true” Christians) vs. them (those evil pagans or liberal Christians).

At the end of the day, one guy won. It doesn’t make America better or worse, it makes it much the same as it always was. It doesn’t mean Christians need to point fingers with the rest of America. What we need to do is move through out disappointment (or excitement, as the case may be) and get on with loving God, loving others and doing our best to serve him.

Converting to Orthodoxy

I’m not!

However, one of the students in my youth ministry is. I find the whole thing quite interesting. As long-time readers will remember, I took a class in the History of Liturgy last Fall, and it was an absolutely wonderful experience. I learned a ton, and it was basically all new information. One of the books we were required to read was For the Life of the World by Alexander Schmemann.

What I find rather interesting as I watch this young man walk through the process of joining the Orthodox Church is that he is owning his faith in new ways. It’s probably one of the most important steps in life when you begin to own your own faith/belief system/values/worldview. For me, this took the form of learning more about the Bible, learning Biblical languages, and eventually becoming what my family would term more “theologically liberal,” (the fact that I’m excited for this young man’s decision to convert to Orthodoxy rather than condemning it is a prime example). However, this is doubly interesting for me because at this point I’m watching someone own their faith, but that ownership is taking an extremely different path from my own. It’s a learning experience for me, as much as for him as he begins this journey.

Announcing The Floppy Hat!

Confused? Well, perhaps so.

Mandy and I have decided to open a joint blog appropriately named, The Floppy Hat. You can read all about our reasons here. I’ll only rehash one thing here:

- This blog (Random Bloggings) will continue, but I’ll primarily be posting on personal topics (video games, youth ministry, fantasy literature, that kind of thing). Most of my “academic” topics (Hebrew Bible, Biblical languages, etc) will go to the Floppy Hat.

Enjoy!

Wow…

I’m honestly not sure what to say about this. Perhaps this is more evidence of me being a moderate evangelical. Check out the video at the link about.

I think that Shane (final guy to talk), brings up some excellent points. On the other hand, Chuck’s assertion in the last minute that Christians really aren’t homophobic is just…wow. I’m not sure how he can say that. Obviously, I think he’s wrong. But that he could say that, in all seriousness, is just beyond me. I’m still reeling.

Younger Evangelicals and Orthodoxy

Although I despise labels, the best one for me might well be “younger evangelical,” depending on how one defines that phrase. There is a very interesting post over at Jesus Creed that Scot has posted from one of his readers. Although the entire post is worth reading, one bit in particular struck me as exceptionally helpful:

I was a little distracted, though, by the continued use in Finding Faith, Losing Faith of the qualifier “orthodox” for “Christianity.” In my own case, I find that I’m moving towards a Christian “orthodoxy” that is more “generous” to borrow a perhaps worn-out phrase. So I can’t really use the word “inerrancy” easily anymore, I’m not sure what parts of the Bible’s protohistory are simply “historical,” and I’m not willing to opine with any certainty about exactly how or exactly whom God will save in Christ (though “in Christ” remains central). Yet I’ll happily confess the Apostles’ Creed. I think there are many, many folks like me, many of whom stay in evangelical churches and try to adopt an “emerging” or “missional” attitude, others who end up in ELCA, PCUSA, Episcopal, and other “mainline” churches — and many I gather who teach at “moderate” evangelical seminaries like Fuller and Regent College.

I could have written that paragraph. To be fair, I haven’t read that particular book of Scot’s yet (how can one, when one is knee deep in Sivan’s Ugaritic grammar?), but the sentiments remain the same. What constitutes “evangelical Christianity?” In my background, if you didn’t vote Republican and believe in a pre-millennial, pre-tribulational rapture you most certainly weren’t headed for heaven (which is, in and of itself, a misunderstanding of Salvation in my opinion). I obviously don’t agree with those sentiments anyway. I can, as the reader quoted above, fully affirm the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds. But words such as “inerrancy” make me a bit nervous. Trying to read the Bible as a history or science textbook, instead of as Holy Scripture makes me even more nervous.

On the other hand, I still fully affirm those statements of faith that the broader Christian community affirms. I also have opinions on other, more minute points of doctrine–though I don’t think they are worth separating from other Christians over. At the end of the day, I wonder where exactly it is that “moderate” (?) evangelicals such as myself end up. Life I suppose, will be an adventure.

Resources for Hebrew Students

Well, in keeping with the spirit of a new school year starting that permeates the biblioblogosphere at this time of year (I’m not even going to attempt to link to a sampling of posts), I thought I’d add a comment on Stephen Cook’s list of books for 2nd year Hebrew students (HT: Charles Halton).

First, I think Dr. Cook’s list is really excellent for students who are just getting out of first year Hebrew. He covers all the important bases. I’d also heartily echo his declaration that An Index to Brown, Driver, and Briggs as well as The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon ought to be used only as a last resort. In fact, I’d recommend not using them at all and instead going to a friend who has studied more Hebrew than you and who is also willing to walk you through things a time or two.

I’m also happy to see he included the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (DCH). I fell in love with the approach that DCH takes as I was working on a project over the summer. I heartily recommend it, my only regret is that it is not yet complete.

As far as guides go, I’d personally recommend Bill Arnold’s over Williams’ Hebrew Syntax. Arnold’s has more pleasing dimensions (it fits nicely in your hand), and is, in my opinion, overall the better help for intermediate students. Even the update to Williams’ by Beckman, while making it far less cumbersome, doesn’t do all it could to make Williams’ as useful as Arnold.

I also have to agree with Charles Halton’s comments (linked above) regarding the Waltke-O’Connor grammar. I only wish that a better grammar could be laid out in a more aesthetically pleasing way, as I find most Hebrew Grammars to lack a certain aesthetic appeal.

Regardless of my own preferences, if you’re a second year Hebrew student this year (or even if you’ve simply completed first year Hebrew without any intent of further study), taking a look at Stephen Cook’s list of resources is certainly worth five minutes of your time.

Fall 2008 Classes

Well, Mandy has posted her classes for this semester, I guess that means it’s my turn. So, here are my Fall 2008 classes at Gordon-Conwell (and Harvard), along with some thoughts that I have going in to each of them.

Interpreting the New Testament, S. McDonough – This is actually a requirement for my degree. Often times degree requirements at a seminary can seem like a waste of time. However, I’m rather looking forward to this class. It’s basically a hermeneutics/intro to criticism/intro to exegesis course for New Testament studies. At least a class that includes N.T. Wright and Vanhoozer can’t be all bad. I know N.T. Wright is worth reading, and I’ve heard good things about Vanhoozer.

Ugaritic, M. Kline – What could possibly be better than learning a new semitic language? I’m sure I don’t know. The texts for the course are Schniedewind’s primer and Sivan’s grammar. I haven’t been too impressed as I’ve flipped through Sivan, but Schniedewind looks like a really excellent introduction to Ugaritic. I’m quite excited about this class.

Independent Reading in the Hebrew Bible, T. Petter – This is a directed study that I’m doing with Dr. Petter. He and I discussed my desire for a challenging Hebrew language course over the summer. As a result, I’m reading (translating) all of Qohelet, in addition to Proverbs 1-9 and the first cycle in Job (3-14). There’ll be a mid-term and a final. I also have just shy of 1000 pages of reading to do (in English) on Hebrew poetry. I’m really looking forward to sinking my teeth into these books and reading them in Hebrew. It should be a blast.

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Seminar, R. Saley (Harvard) – By far this is the class I’m most looking forward to. It starts a week later than my GCTS classes, so I have a while yet to continue my anxious anticipation. Textual Criticism is one area in which I’m interested and would like to experiment. This class should, hopefully, provide plenty of opportunity for learning the ropes.

So, all the GCTS classes start the week of the 7th, while Harvard doesn’t start until the week of the 14th. Here’s to an exciting semester!

P. Kyle McCarter’s Textual Criticism: Recovering the Text of the Hebrew Bible

I fully realize that this book is from 1986, so it may seem a bit late to be writing a review. However, you’ll have to forgive me since I was only 2 when the book originally appeared. This is one of the required texts for my Textual Criticism seminar at Harvard this semester. I’m looking forward to the seminar, and this book was short so I decided to go ahead and review it before the semester gets underway. I should also point out the fact that I am hardly an expert when it comes to textual criticism. Keep in mind that this review is very much from a student’s perspective.

The first thing that deserves comment is the size of the book; less than 100 pages, including appendices. As a student I’m extremely thankful. The book is good, it says what needs to be said and then moves on. McCarter excels at being concise in his statements. These are all things that hit the mark, as far as a student is concerned. At the same time, it means that McCarter’s book will never be the only text in a graduate seminar on textual criticism. This is fine though, since it serves well as an introduction (which is really all its supposed to do).

Something else that jumped out at me in the book is that McCarter is quite witty. Having an author who is easily able to inject wit into a textbook always makes for a more enjoyable read. In Textual Criticism this is done with style. I lost track of the number of places I chuckled as I read through the book. A question for any of you Johns Hopkins students, is McCarter this witty in class?

I should also mention the appendices. These short addendums are quite helpful. A glossary is the first to appear, and defines some of the basic vocabulary of text criticism (witness, codex, haplography, homoioarkton, etc). The second appendix is a bibliography of primary sources. For someone who has not done much in depth work with textual criticism, this is a gold mine of information. If this information wasn’t already available on the Internet, its inclusion alone would justify the purchase. Even so, it is still convenient to have the information in one easily accessible place. The final appendix deals with the textual characteristics of each book, or section of books, in the Hebrew Bible. This is another extremely helpful resource for beginning students, and one I’m sure I’ll consult often this semester.

In my opinion, the negatives of Textual Criticism are few. Obviously, because of its brevity, it doesn’t touch on every issue imaginable in textual criticism. It is, after all, more of an introduction than a monograph. You’ll have to move on to Emanuel Tov’s Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible for a more thorough treatment of the various issues. The only other negative is one that I’m not entirely sure I’m educated enough to give at present. However, with that disclaimer, I’ll go ahead; McCarter appears to be quite in love with LXX, and often makes very little mention of the DSS. Conversely, Tov mentions the Qumran materials often and even accuses McCarter’s Textual Criticism of adopting “the approach of the period before the discovery of the new data [ie, the DSS]” (Tov, Textual Criticism, 14).

Those caveats aside, I think McCarter’s Textual Criticism is a helpful introductory textbook. It certainly doesn’t offer the depth of Tov, but it provides a way to quickly get oneself up to speed on the necessary material. It’s worth reading, especially for those who only desire an introduction.

ESV and NLT Study Bible Comparison at Biblia Hebraica

With the release of the ESV Study Bible just around the corner, Doug Mangum is comparing the NLT Study Bible and the ESV Study Bible in a series of posts. You can catch the first two parts here and here. I’m looking forward to the third part myself.