I’m now rounding the corner for the home stretch!  Both scripts are technically in a could-use-them-as-is-if-you-had-to state, but not really in the best of shape.  Too long and in need of additional polish and rethinking in places, this is where they enter the “Final Draft” stage.  I almost always do this stage the night or morning before the tapings, and this session is proving no exception.

My good friend in the TW editorial team has been kind enough to be in communication with me today concerning these scripts during what should be his “time off,” and it has been very helpful.  It’s one thing to take a piece of writing and to give it to your editor to have him shrink it to a more manageable length.  It’s another thing to have him both reduce the length and provide the kind of feedback that will greatly improve the quality.  The latter has been the case, here, and it is making my job much easier.  The “Final Draft” stage is normally one that makes me want to pull my hair out (what little I have left), but it looks as though the help I’ve received today will make a real difference.  Thanks, Mr. You-Know-Who-You-Are!  (My hairline thanks you, too!)

So, off to final edits for the shoot tomorrow afternoon, and then to bed!  Mr. King is shooting in the morning (sounds like a great topic, as well!), and I will be shooting after lunch.  For those of you who will read this before or during the tapings, prayers would be — as always — appreciated!

As part of my odd devotion to mentioning news items featuring actuaries, I could not help posting this link to yesterday’s Frazz:

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/frazz#id=/comics/091121/cx_frazz_umedia/20092111

My thanks to my Beautiful Wife for discovering it.  And if there are any teachers out there wanting an actuary (er, former actuary turned minister) to speak to their math class, just let me know!  Mortality tables rock!

(BTW: First of my two Tomorrow’s World scripts finally has a completed draft!  I am asking a kind soul to look it over today while I work on the second one for a while.  The draft is clearly about 5-10 minutes too long and needs a completel rewrite for the first 10 minutes’ worth, but it feels great to be at this point.  Taping is tomorrow!)

Someone recently sent this to me: “Société Générale tells clients how to prepare for potential ‘global collapse’”

For those who do not think that “doomsday scenarios” are realistic, articles like this should cause them to think again.  Global financial services companies like Société Générale, one of the oldest banks in France, do not waste time and money needlessly scaring their investors with information like this if they did not feel it was important to consider.

Habakkuk 2:6-8 describes the possible ultimate result of taking on too much national debt.  And while Habakkuk 2 does not necessarily prophesy directly of the U.S. and the U.K. (it was written concerning Babylon and the Chaldeans, not Israel or Judah), Deuteronomy 28:43-51 does.  For those who want details, our free booklet is a great place to start: The United States and Great Britain in Prophecy.

(Just a quick “hit and run” today — back to my scripts I go!)

Up this morning working on my scripts (or, as it currently appears, not working on them), and read an item in the Wall Street Journal online that caught my eye.

I can often be critical here of our politicians, particularly for the lack of godly leadership they exhibit.  However, if I come across something admirable, I want to point that out too.

I do not know Rep. Artur Davis from Alabama, and if I did his politics might excite me or repulse me — I cannot say.  But Davis, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, was the only CBC member to vote against the House’s recent “Health Care” bill.  I’m not a fan of many of the provisions of that bill, but I’m not writing this to discuss his political stance; I have no idea why he did not vote for it and it may have been out of sheer political calculation for all I know.

However, he was attacked recently by Jesse Jackson (note: I will never use the word “Reverend” before that man’s name) at a reception on Capitol Hill, where Jackson said, “We even have blacks voting against the health care bill… You can’t vote against health care and call yourself a black man.”

Rather than defend their colleague and uphold Martin Luther King Jr’s dream of a society where people are judged by their character rather than by the color of their skin, apparently some simply rolled over and excused Jackson’s shameful comment.

However, to Mr. Davis’ credit, he responded respectfully and deferentially, according to the WSJ:

For his part, Mr. Davis declined to get into a spitting contest. “One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” he said in a statement. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

Kudos to Mr. Davis.  I know from personal experience that heeding the admonition of Proverbs 20:3 and balancing the advice of Proverbs 26:4-5 is no small feat.  And I do not know all that has gone into Mr. Davis’ decision to respond as he did, but regardless of color I would say that the incident indicates which individual — Mr. Jackson or Mr. Davis — is truly able to call himself a man.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
[UPDATE: Apparently, I have mentioned Mr. Artur Davis in this blog, before: "Tip of the hat to Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama" on 10/7/2008.  If his actions are an indicator of his character as opposed to pure calculation, they are good signs.]

Quick note before going back to script work: Noticed the news today that Washington D.C. beat every state in the nation for the “honor” of having the highest rates of Syphilis, Chlamydia, and Gonorrhea, according to the CDC.  (Source: CNSNews.com.)  The city’s rates are even three times higher than those of its neighboring states, Virginia and Maryland.

Hearing the news, it was my wife’s suggestion that the “Sin City” label be moved from Las Vegas to Washington D.C.

Regardless, let’s hope that what happens in D.C. stays in D.C.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
(By the way, we have, indeed, made it here to Charlotte safe and sound!  There has been a bit of confusion on our hotel reservation, but my Beautiful Wife and our four kiddos are currently sleeping well, while I sit here in the breakfast area scriptizing. Thanks for your prayers!  I hope to tape two telecasts this coming Monday.)

Howdy, all!  Just a note to say that we are about to head out to Charlotte and I don’t know how much blogging I will be able to do over the next couple of weeks.  I have two scripts in the works, plus another project or two to work on while I am there.  The whole family is coming up this time, which will be a nice treat.

And since I am going to work on the telecast, I thought it might be fun to post the state a picture indicating the state of one of my scripts at the moment.  It’s for a telecast on the Antichrist, and things are still pretty rough.  But, this is how I frequently workout the organization of my scripts:

I can’t remember, but I think I mentioned “mind maps” or “webs” in the Behind the Work interview for this year’s Feast of Tabernacles.  Regardless, that’s what you see above.  The typed notes on the bottom represent some of the “raw material” I’ve assembled — not exactly at random, but without a forced order.  At that stage (which is still ongoing), I am simply trying to get thoughts collected onto paper, which I usually do sitting at my laptop.  The sheets above that are a “Q & A” answer from the Tomorrow’s World website on the topic of the Antichrist (actually, John’s comment about “many antichrists”).  In working with a topic, I like to review what the Church has already published or written on the topic.  Finally, on the top of the stack, the yellow notepad has the middle stage of my “mind map” for the script.  It’s a way for me to lay out the ideas and begin to add structure and design to the material’s presentation, as well as an aid to seeing how the points I want to make fit into (or don’t fit into) the larger theme of what I am trying to communicate.

OK, not the most exciting of posts, today, I know.

I may post over the next couple of weeks or so during the trip, but in the event that I don’t: have a great Thanksgiving!

If you’ve read this blog with any sort of frequency (not that I recommend it but, you know, it’s possible), you’ve noted that I have commented frequently on the leadership crisis in America.  On this topic, the Wall Street Journal has, over the last week, published two opinion pieces concerning America’s leadership crisis that I think are worth reading, both by Daniel Henninger.

The first was published after last week’s huge election victories by Republican candidates for governor.  Henninger says, essentially, that it would be a mistake for the Republicans to assume that this is because things are swinging their way, BUT not because things are still swinging the Democrats’ way, either.  His point is that Americans sense a leadership vacuum — they sense that there is no one really leading out there, and they are hungrily looking for leadership wherever they suspect it might be.  His article is here: “The Permanent Tea Party: Independent voters have become like a herd of cattle looking for political leadership.”

Here is a quote after Henninger denies the spin from both Democrats and the GOP, saying that they miss the deeper picture:

What was learned Tuesday is that the American voter is absolutely, totally, unremittingly disgusted with both political parties. More than anything, the American voter is desperate for political leadership.

That electorates in two politically significant states, led by the widening independent movement, could swing within one year from enthusiasm for electing Barack Obama to support for Virginia’s OK Republican Bob McDonnell and New Jersey’s lackluster Chris Christie is simply astonishing.

His conclusion:

So the Republicans “won” Tuesday. Now what?

Just as the Democrats in 2008 ran mainly against “Bush,” the Republican political model seems to be to let Democratic failure dump states like New Jersey and Virginia into their control. But I think most voters, no matter their party registration, know that in the past 12 months the stakes for them have suddenly become larger than political “control.”

Unless leadership emerges equal to the new world voters see they have fallen into, volatility in America’s election returns is going to be the norm for a long time.

The stakes are, indeed, larger.  But it will take more than new election cycles to change things, I’m afraid.

Then there is Henninger’s opinion piece showing up today in the online WSJ: “Why Fort Hood Really Happened: In war, uncertainty gets you killed. It just did.”

In today’s article, he points to the confusion and lack of leadership in the war on terror, discussing what he calls the “war over the war on terror” and the effects it has had on the ability of those asked to “make the call” to actually do their job and make the call.

I like his discussion of political correctness and how that is an oversimplification of the problems that happened concerning Nidal Malik Hasan, pointing out that it isn’t political correctness so much as it is the confusion that comes from lack of clear leadership.  Here’s that section:

The most-heard reason for the possible failure is political correctness. No doubt. But Sen. Lieberman’s committee should avoid making this its main line of inquiry, because that is a problem without a policy fix. It minimizes the real problem.

The problem is confusion. The combatants at each end of the spectrum in the war over the war on terror know exactly what they think about surveilling suspected terrorists. But if you are an intel officer or FBI agent tasked with providing the protection, what are you supposed to make of all this bitter public argument? What you make of it is that when you get a judgment call, like Maj. Hasan, you hesitate. You blink.

Now everyone thinks the call was obvious. But it wasn’t so obvious before the tragedy. Not if for years you have watched a country and its political class in rancorous confusion about the enemy, the legal standing of the enemy, or the legal status and scope of the methods it wants to use to fight the enemy.

In war, uncertainty gets you killed. It just did.

I think that is a great point: “Now everyone thinks the call was obvious. But it wasn’t so obvious before the tragedy.”

I’ve certainly thought that way: “How could they not catch this before it happened?”  Yet, to those commissioned with the task of “catching” such things before they happen, it wasn’t obvious.  Because they are stupid? Don’t care?  Of course not.  It’s because the lack of clear, commanding leadership has made the obvious not-obvious.  Leadership provides clarity.  A lack of it obfuscates and confuses.

Henninger’s right: the problem is confusion.  And therefore, the problem is a lack of leadership.

Need to go to bed, but wanted to pass on this cute occurrence from this morning.

All four boys and I were up and awake, and they were getting ready to play out in the backyard before breakfast and before they needed to begin getting ready for our trip to Sabbath services.  However, I had other plans, as I wanted to discuss something with them: civility.  As in, their lack of it concerning each other.

After gathering them together for Dad’s lesson and getting it going, I mentioned that they are at their weakest in displaying any civility toward each other when one of them believes that he has been wronged by one of the others, and that behaving in a civil manner is all the more crucial when you believe you’ve been wronged.

8-year-old Boy #3 asks, “What’s ‘wronged’?”

Immediately, 12-year-old Boy #1 slaps Boy #3 in the back of the head and says, “There — I’ve wronged you.”

OK… maybe one child hitting another isn’t exactly “cute.”  But it was funny.  Well, OK… Maybe one child hitting another isn’t “funny.”  Maybe it’s wrong.  Yeah, that’s it!  It’s wrong!

Ahhhhh, who am I kidding?  It was hilarious!  (You had to be there, of course.)  And after the sting wore off, Boy #3 laughed, too.  And he very likely returned the educational “favor” later in a quite uncivil manner once my back was turned.

Perhaps “Take 2″ on the civility lesson will go better.  If they’re tied up.  And in separate rooms.

I am sure some of you are asking, so let me say something here.  My brother-in-law who works at Fort Hood in Texas is absolutely fine.  (Those of you reading this on Facebook probably know all of this, already.)  His wife — my wife’s sister — was understandably rattled, and he was in lockdown for sometime, just like you’ve heard about on the news.  It is my understanding that his office was very near the shooting.  However, he is home and all is fine.

Our prayers go out to those whose loved ones did not come home yesterday.

Some brief thoughts on faith and the Work tonight before I hit the sack.

I’ve had Noah and Habakkuk on the brain, today, and some of the things they teach me about faith.

Noah was commanded by God to build an ark.  God told Noah that the world was full of violence, that He was going to destroy mankind with a flood, and that He was going to use him and his family to save eight people and representatives of all the living creatures in a giant boat that Noah was to build.

Most everyone is familiar with that story.  What people often overlook is that Noah was a preacher of righteousness during that time (2 Peter 2:5).  I can imagine what it was like to be Noah then, telling the men and women of the world at that time that their end was coming soon unless they repent.  Perhaps they jeered at him, “How soon, old man?”

And he didn’t have a very specific answer for that, as far as I could tell.  Only, “soon.”  That, and he could point to the work he was feverishly doing at God’s command — the ark he was building — that must be completed before the end came.

There is, of course, the obvious parallel.  We, too, have a work that God has commanded that we do (Matthew 28:18-19, Mark 16:15), and it, too, must be completed before the end comes (Matt. 24:14).  But also, like Noah, we cannot point to exactly when that end is coming.  Only that we know it is coming soon.

It took faith for Noah to continue day after day, preaching to the people, building the ark.  We have no assurance in Scripture that God spoke to Noah every day, encouraging him.  What faith he must have had.  I pray that we can have that sort of faith, too, continuing to do the Work and to preach the message that we’ve been given, not knowing the day or hour of our Master’s return, but knowing that it is coming soon.

Then there is Habakkuk.  It’s a little Old Testament book, and sometimes gets passed over.  But Habakkuk had to learn a lesson in faith, too, and I think it is a lesson for us, today, who “sigh and cry” over the state of modern Israel (Ezekiel 9:4) and its prophesied future.

Habakkuk lamented before God concerning the sinful state of Judah (Hab. 1:1-4), wondering how long God would put up with it — how long before He set things right.  God responds that He is bringing Babylon and the Chaldeans upon Judah (vv.5-11).

Habakkuk’s response to God’s answer is humorous, but I sympathize with it so much.  He is taken aback, and we see his confusion expressed in the rest of chapter 1 and verses 12-17.  He is essentially asking, “But the Chaldeans are even more sinful that Judah! Would God bring an end to the sinful by granting victory to the even more sinful?!? Is this Judah’s end?”

However, though he is confused, He trusts God, and in Hab. 2:1 he stands ready to hear God’s word on the matter.

God explains in the rest of chapter 2 that the Chaldeans will also face judgment — that though they will be a tool in his hands for the accomplishing of His purpose, their day of reckoning lies ahead (Hab. 2:8), and God’s plan will ultimately produce not just a righteous Judah, but a righteous Earth (Hab. 2:14).

Habakkuk responds with a beautiful song in the last chapter of his book, ending with a moving expression of faith:

Though the fig tree may not blossom,
Nor fruit be on the vines;
Though the labor of the olive may fail,
And the fields yield no food;
Though the flock may be cut off from the fold,
And there be no herd in the stalls–

Yet I will rejoice in the LORD,
I will joy in the God of my salvation.

The LORD God is my strength;
He will make my feet like deer’s feet,
And He will make me walk on my high hills.

Habakkuk 3:17-19

Habakkuk saw his country falling apart.  He then learned the details of the terrible fate that awaited it — a fate that, apparently, he would have never imagined and which did not make sense to him.  Yet he fully trusted in the God of heaven and in His purpose, and — in faith — committed himself to that purpose.  And as I see the things happening in my own country, and read in God’s word what lies ahead for my own nation, I find myself sympathizing with Habakkuk and looking to God to establish the same faith in me, the faith of Jesus Christ (Gal. 2:2) that says, “Your will be done” (Matt. 26:42).

So, while Noah and Habakkuk never had the chance to meet, in my mind today they have.  And, of course, one day they will.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
[Having mentioned Habakkuk, this seems as good a time as any to mention a "behind the scenes" tale from a recent Tomorrow's World telecast that some of you might enjoy in some way.  Someone interested in attending our church called me today and mentioned how much he appreciated the telecast I did that aired last month, "What Will Save America?" It's funny he should do that today when Habakkuk is on my mind, because I very briefly refer to Habakkuk in that telecast, but I did so in error.

There is a moment on the telecast where I am referring to America's horrific debt burden and I briefly refer to a few different verses, giving the references only without reading them aloud.  One of them, if I recall accurately, was Habakkuk 2:6-7 (or possibly just 6 or 7 singly).  The problem is that although this verse speaks of debt, and though, in principle, the danger expressed in the verse does apply to America's current situation, the prophesy is not directly spoken about the U.S. there.  It is being uttered concerning the Chaldeans and not even Judah directly, let alone Israel.

Actually, the reference was not in the final script that I created for that telecast, because Mr. Ames caught it in a draft I had sent to him and I consequently removed it from the final version, leaving the other, non-Habakkuk references.  I often try to get a copy of my script to Mr. Ames and his editorial assistant as early as I can, as I find their input and opinions to be absolutely invaluable.  Regrettably, for me "as early as I can" is often the day before filming, but I am improving, I think!

However, midway into filming this particular telecast I began to realize that I had somehow given the TV staff an earlier version of that script and not the final draft.  I continued anyway, thinking that this would simply mean that the TV crew would have more words to edit out for time constraints (sorry, TV crew!), since the normal reason I have so many drafts is due to their original, excessive length.  However, I forgot that this reference was in there, too, and in going through that part in front of the camera so quickly, it didn't even enter my mind.  (The camera is good at doing that!)

And it isn't the worst mistake in the world.  As I said, the situation -- in principle -- definitely applies to the U.S.  But the overly picky wordsmith-type person in me wishes that I could dive in and add a qualifying comment of some sort, like rearraging the mention of Habakkuk 2 so that it is at the end of the sentence and is prefaced by the words "and in principle."  It's probably, too, the old mathematician in me that sees an important subtlety that is not being communicated.  Like when my kids are learning about how all numbers can be put into ordered lists and I am biting my tongue so as not to say, "Of course, we are assuming here that our domain is restricted to the Reals and does not include the Complex numbers..."  I've already messed them up by explaining why the set of integers is just as big as the set of rational numbers, but that the set of irrational numbers is bigger than both even though all three sets are infinite.  I think Boy #2 was in tears over that one.

OK, what was I talking about again?]