Edward de Bono is a famous philosopher and thinker. He coined the phrase "lateral thinking" and teaches the importance of 'thinking about thinking'. I heard some feedback from one of his courses which taught a logical way of separating up a discussion into types of discussions so that the meeting could be fruitful rather than the usual messy argumentative style. He called these topics after coloured hats, one for creative thinking, one for negative aspects, one for positive, one for gut feel, one for information and one for the actual struture of the other coloured hats.
When we were talking about it, the person who was telling me this said that we should try a 'white hat' exercise which means we should list what we actually know about something, in this case Speed Cameras. Somebody said, "we know that they are there to raise money", at which point my friend questioned whether we actually knew that or whether we just thought that. After a similar process for other statements, we realised we only actually knew one thing about speed cameras and that is that they detect people travelling above a certain speed. I found this interesting because a lot of our discussions, arguments or techings are filled with statements that we either think are true or otherwise we are unsure but state them as fact anyway. This makes the discussion almost pointless. You can end up with two people arguing from two equally untrue positions rather than separating fact from opinion or belief.
A lot of what we say we know comes from what other people have told us and we have various reasons for believing it or otherwise but when we are talking about important issues, we shouldn't assume a trustworthy source is definitively correct and talk from that perspective.
I sometimes wonder whether discussions about evolution or Biblical interpretation etc would be much more beneficial if we only thought about what we actually know!
Thursday 18 September 2008
Under grace or under law
I was thinking the other day about being under grace and under law. Have you ever heard people say to Christians that you should forgive rather than punish because we are not under the law but under grace. The whole are is quite misused and mis-quoted by people.
1 Peter 2 tells us to submit ourselves to the authorities since they are delegated by God. We can therefore deduce that we come under the law of the land (whatever that is), so for instance, if we were caught speeding, we wouldn't be able to say that we shouldn't be punished because we are under grace not law!
We should really understand that law and grace for the Christian are related to our relationship with God rather than men. At work, our immediate boss might say that we are not allowed to take time off according to the rules whereas our managing director might allow us to because they are in charge of the rules. In the same way, God knows that we might be punished for breaking an incorrect human law even though with regard to our position before him, we might stand as a justified or innocent person.
So what impact should it have on our lives and our dealing with others? Personally if someone says they live under grace, i would expect them to be gracious. If they are not gracious then they prove that they do actually live under the law and should be treated as anybody else. Of course, in our times, some people want to treat others legalistically, with pride and arrogance, while being treated themselves graciously with forgiveness and humility!! Typical!
1 Peter 2 tells us to submit ourselves to the authorities since they are delegated by God. We can therefore deduce that we come under the law of the land (whatever that is), so for instance, if we were caught speeding, we wouldn't be able to say that we shouldn't be punished because we are under grace not law!
We should really understand that law and grace for the Christian are related to our relationship with God rather than men. At work, our immediate boss might say that we are not allowed to take time off according to the rules whereas our managing director might allow us to because they are in charge of the rules. In the same way, God knows that we might be punished for breaking an incorrect human law even though with regard to our position before him, we might stand as a justified or innocent person.
So what impact should it have on our lives and our dealing with others? Personally if someone says they live under grace, i would expect them to be gracious. If they are not gracious then they prove that they do actually live under the law and should be treated as anybody else. Of course, in our times, some people want to treat others legalistically, with pride and arrogance, while being treated themselves graciously with forgiveness and humility!! Typical!
Wednesday 10 September 2008
Eco-Friendly House DIY Style
I moved into a new house about 3 months ago. Well, it's not quite new, more like 70 years old but it's new to me. Because I have a bit of money, I wondered what to do in my new house. I came up with two things. I wanted it to be eco-friendly and I wanted it to be one of these automatic houses. More on the auto thing later but first eco-friendly is not a term I particularly like because it conjures up images of hippies and dirty people who would be more attractive if they washed and did their hair! I don't care for some of the so-called eco-lifestyle such as all sleeping in the same bed to share warmth and eating mouldy vegetables from the garden but there are good things about it too. Forget the fact that I would save umpteen tonnes of CO2 because I don't really know how much that is but saving CO2 also means saving money and this is also a good reason to make your house friendly to the environment.
Anyway, there are some things that make a big difference and some that don't. Search the web and there's loads of stuff about all things eco.
I want to share my investigations about insulation since it is the easiest thing to do to make your house use less fuel to heat it. Most people have heard about 'fibre-glass' loft insulation but there are some things you might not know. Currently the Building regulations recommend a minimum of 250mm of fibre-glass type loft insulation. That usually equates to 100mm between the ceiling joists and another wider strip of 150mm going across the first strips to add extra warmth and cover the gaps left between the joists and the 100mm insulation. Find out how much you have in your loft. If only a little bit is there, add some more or replace it. It might cost about £200 but it will not only feel warmer but will reduce your heating bill (as long as you have a thermostat in a useful place or thermostatic radiator valves (TRVs)). Whatever you do, don't open the windows to compensate for the extra warmth. Fit TRVs which will turn the radiator off when the room gets warm. If you are going to convert the loft into a usable room then keep 100 or 150mm insulation in the floor (to stop all the downstairs heat making its way to the loft) but you will also have to add insulation to the rafters. Unfortunately, the rafters are unlikely to be much taller than 100mm (4 inch) which is not deep enough for fibre-glass to provide good insulation so you will have to use rigid phenolic or similar insulation (often called Kingspan but available from other places too). This is quite expensive, about £35 for a 2.5 x 1.25 metre slab at 70mm but it is much higher spec for the size. It can be quite tricky to fit because every gap between the rafters will be a slightly different width and if there are gaps between the side of the slab and the rafters, then the insulation properties will be a bit rubbish. You need to measure each gap and I would suggest doing a section no longer than 1.25m/4 feet at a time otherwise it is a pain. You need to do something to ensure an air gap above the insulation to avoid damp problems unless you have breathable felt in which case you don't. Breathable felt is more like soft fabric whereas tar-type felts do not breathe.
Once your roof is insulated, if you picture the heat inside the house it will rise towards the top ceiling and then move sideways towards the walls. If the walls are not insulated then you could lose a great deal of heat, especially in the winter when prolonged cold causes the walls to absorb lots of heat from inside. If you have a cavity wall (most houses since the 1970s) then arrange to get it filled with insulation. Phone around for prices since some systems are very expensive. If it is already filled (most houses since the 90s) then you will not gain much by doing anything else but if, like me, your walls are solid brick or concrete then you would do well to insulate them. You can do it externally with a render type product (or rather somebody would do it for you) or you can go a much easier route and batten the inside of the walls with 2 x 1 inch wood and fill the gaps in between with 25mm solid insulation (about £10 per sheet) then cover the whole lot with plasterboard, screwed to the battens and tape/plaster it and hey presto - not bad wall insulation. If anything, it protects the cold surfaces of the walls directly touching your nice heated room and stealing all your heat. Since the inside surfaces of walls do not generally get really cold, the insulation will work just fine.
Now double-glazed windows are amazingly expensive, especially when you look at how quickly they are manufactured. For this reason, there is not much point in replacing your windows unless they are broken. It can take 25 or more years to re-coup the cost of the windows and they might not even last that long and that is compared with single glazing rather than existing double-glazing.
There is one reason why eco is good and that is because fuel costs go up and up all the time. In the future, suppose electricity costs a £1 per unit, having your lights on would cost enough let alone other utilities. A house that is very efficient will mean that you can afford to run it properly and comfortably. mmm Nice
Anyway, there are some things that make a big difference and some that don't. Search the web and there's loads of stuff about all things eco.
I want to share my investigations about insulation since it is the easiest thing to do to make your house use less fuel to heat it. Most people have heard about 'fibre-glass' loft insulation but there are some things you might not know. Currently the Building regulations recommend a minimum of 250mm of fibre-glass type loft insulation. That usually equates to 100mm between the ceiling joists and another wider strip of 150mm going across the first strips to add extra warmth and cover the gaps left between the joists and the 100mm insulation. Find out how much you have in your loft. If only a little bit is there, add some more or replace it. It might cost about £200 but it will not only feel warmer but will reduce your heating bill (as long as you have a thermostat in a useful place or thermostatic radiator valves (TRVs)). Whatever you do, don't open the windows to compensate for the extra warmth. Fit TRVs which will turn the radiator off when the room gets warm. If you are going to convert the loft into a usable room then keep 100 or 150mm insulation in the floor (to stop all the downstairs heat making its way to the loft) but you will also have to add insulation to the rafters. Unfortunately, the rafters are unlikely to be much taller than 100mm (4 inch) which is not deep enough for fibre-glass to provide good insulation so you will have to use rigid phenolic or similar insulation (often called Kingspan but available from other places too). This is quite expensive, about £35 for a 2.5 x 1.25 metre slab at 70mm but it is much higher spec for the size. It can be quite tricky to fit because every gap between the rafters will be a slightly different width and if there are gaps between the side of the slab and the rafters, then the insulation properties will be a bit rubbish. You need to measure each gap and I would suggest doing a section no longer than 1.25m/4 feet at a time otherwise it is a pain. You need to do something to ensure an air gap above the insulation to avoid damp problems unless you have breathable felt in which case you don't. Breathable felt is more like soft fabric whereas tar-type felts do not breathe.
Once your roof is insulated, if you picture the heat inside the house it will rise towards the top ceiling and then move sideways towards the walls. If the walls are not insulated then you could lose a great deal of heat, especially in the winter when prolonged cold causes the walls to absorb lots of heat from inside. If you have a cavity wall (most houses since the 1970s) then arrange to get it filled with insulation. Phone around for prices since some systems are very expensive. If it is already filled (most houses since the 90s) then you will not gain much by doing anything else but if, like me, your walls are solid brick or concrete then you would do well to insulate them. You can do it externally with a render type product (or rather somebody would do it for you) or you can go a much easier route and batten the inside of the walls with 2 x 1 inch wood and fill the gaps in between with 25mm solid insulation (about £10 per sheet) then cover the whole lot with plasterboard, screwed to the battens and tape/plaster it and hey presto - not bad wall insulation. If anything, it protects the cold surfaces of the walls directly touching your nice heated room and stealing all your heat. Since the inside surfaces of walls do not generally get really cold, the insulation will work just fine.
Now double-glazed windows are amazingly expensive, especially when you look at how quickly they are manufactured. For this reason, there is not much point in replacing your windows unless they are broken. It can take 25 or more years to re-coup the cost of the windows and they might not even last that long and that is compared with single glazing rather than existing double-glazing.
There is one reason why eco is good and that is because fuel costs go up and up all the time. In the future, suppose electricity costs a £1 per unit, having your lights on would cost enough let alone other utilities. A house that is very efficient will mean that you can afford to run it properly and comfortably. mmm Nice
Monday 8 September 2008
Going Out to Save the World?
I think I might have talked about this before but I was reminded again recently that lots of Christians are going out to save the world. Strangely, although our intentions might be good, we are often, I think, guilty of bypassing God's will and thinking we know best - exactly as sinners do all the time!! As somebody once said (origin unknown) "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
We only have one model for mission activity explicitly stated in the Bible in Acts 13:1-3: "In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off." (NIV)
It is clear from this model that 1) The people were sent FROM the church, not from their own ideas, 2) They were sent BY the Holy Spirit 3) The people who were sent had not decided to go anywhere before the Holy Spirit sent them. Whether the fasting was just a means to focus prayer or a requirement is for your own quiet times.
Sadly many people totally circumvent this. Without it being Spirit led, we are in danger of not hearing his voice but the voice of our own soulish intent to do good stuff for God. It should not be the case of deciding I want to go to such and such a country so I will approach the church and prayer for confirmation, it should be the normal and ongoing purpose of the church to prayer and be prepared for the Holy Spirit to send people. This avoids any egos being involved and also more importantly allows God to do things in his perfect timing rather than our rubbish timing.
Of course you could argue that just because this is the only model in scripture doesn't mean it is the only one to be used but as far as I can see, this is a good model and doesn't seem to have any shortcomings so why invent another model? Unless of course it is to suit a soulish intention!
We only have one model for mission activity explicitly stated in the Bible in Acts 13:1-3: "In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off." (NIV)
It is clear from this model that 1) The people were sent FROM the church, not from their own ideas, 2) They were sent BY the Holy Spirit 3) The people who were sent had not decided to go anywhere before the Holy Spirit sent them. Whether the fasting was just a means to focus prayer or a requirement is for your own quiet times.
Sadly many people totally circumvent this. Without it being Spirit led, we are in danger of not hearing his voice but the voice of our own soulish intent to do good stuff for God. It should not be the case of deciding I want to go to such and such a country so I will approach the church and prayer for confirmation, it should be the normal and ongoing purpose of the church to prayer and be prepared for the Holy Spirit to send people. This avoids any egos being involved and also more importantly allows God to do things in his perfect timing rather than our rubbish timing.
Of course you could argue that just because this is the only model in scripture doesn't mean it is the only one to be used but as far as I can see, this is a good model and doesn't seem to have any shortcomings so why invent another model? Unless of course it is to suit a soulish intention!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)