Granddaddy, why do we have to warm up chicken mcnuggets?

“Granddaddy, why do we have to warm up chicken mcnuggets? And why do cold drinks get warm?” Great question. I love such inquisitiveness.

I launched into an explanation of the second law of thermodynamics: “over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and chemical potential equilibrate in an isolated physical system.” Right. He’s 9, so I paraphrased it. Ha! I need it paraphrased. Anyway, I said that warm things (like chicken mcnuggets) lose their heat until they reach the outside temperature and cold things lose their cold until they too reach room temperature. So, food needs to be heated and drinks need to be cooled.

Often this second law is presented as the law of decay, as in ‘this is why everything tends to fall apart.’ While this is true, I think this is essentially a matter of energy – without an outside supply, everything loses energy. This loss of energy is really a transfer of energy as everything has a tendency to balance.

Later on that night I thought more about this. Does the 2nd law of thermodynamics apply to the spiritual life? Does hanging out with lethargic, apathetic, skeptical people affect you? Will hanging out with joyful, excited, active, believing people have an impact on you? I believe the answer is self evident. If you hang out with apathetic or skeptical people there is a tendency to become like them. If you are already skeptical, you most likely will not rise above them. If you hang out with excited, believing people there is a tendency to be lifted above your complacency. On the other hand, since we are people and not chicken nuggets, such people may repulse us. We may decide we don’t like the people we are around and choose another environment. Free will sure messes with the 2nd law!

Personally, is there a tendency for me to lose energy? Is this also not self evident? We are prone to think that one spiritual encounter is good for the rest of our lives. But do we not need fresh infusions of love, joy, faith, the Holy Spirit? Left to ourselves we run down, run out. This physical law seems to apply to the spiritual realm as well.

Jesus said, I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Here, cold and hot are both good things, and both require an outside source of energy to maintain. Without that energy we become lukewarm, the same temperature as everyone around us. And lukewarm doesn’t seem to impress Jesus. The good news is, God has not left us to ourselves, he warms up our chicken nuggets and cools down our Wild Cherry Pepsi!

The question then is, How does God do this? What are His means of grace to supply new infusions of energy? I know what they are and I need to avail myself of them lest I become lukewarm and spewable.

I talked to my Grandson about Halloween

The other day my Grandson asked me about Halloween. “Granddaddy, why don’t you do Halloween?”

What a tricky spot! I know there are those who would consider this a good time for a tirade against the evils of Halloween, but he’s 9. And his family does Halloween.

Instantly my mind was filled with all kinds of thoughts. The history of Halloween and all of our reasons for not participating.

Halloween began as a Celtic celebration, Samhain. November 1 marked the beginning of the new year for the Celts (especially of Ireland) and this was a period of “no time” for them, with the climax on October 31 (their days began with evening, so the night of October 31 was for them the beginning of November 1). This was a time when the spirits of the dead would roam the country side. The people would light bonfires so they could see. They would also have lanterns made from pumpkins and other gourds. Offerings (treats) would also be left out for these spirits so that they would not do mischief (tricks) etc.

The Catholic Church (this is not an attack on Catholics, they were the only church in the area at the time!), in an attempt to aid the full conversion of the Irish and English, offered the first alternative. They moved All Saints Day to November 1st. In those days All Saints Day was known as All Hallows Day, hallow being the Old English word for holy. Since for both the Celts and Anglo-Saxons the day begins the night before, that made October 31 All Hallows Evening, shortened to All Hallows e’en. I mean, if you are going to remember the dead, why not dead saints, right? This idea obviously did not really work.

All this went through my head. How much of this will he understand? How do I answer his question and honor his parents who allow him to participate in Halloween?

Finally, I said, “Well, since you asked . . .” I simply explained that Halloween emphasizes death and witches and spirits and we didn’t want to do that so we didn’t take part. “Didn’t you go trick or treating when you were a kid?” “Yes, we did.” I didn’t tell him that we did a lot of tricking too.

After my brief explanation he replied, “I don’t do any of the witches and spirits. I’m just having fun.” I said I knew that and tried to emphasize that we weren’t saying we were better than anybody or that people were bad because they did Halloween, that was simply the way we tried to honor the Lord. This led into another discussion about the original Santa Claus, St. Nicholas. We’ve talked about Nicholas a lot lately.

I also told him that we used to offer an alternative and called it Fall Festival. He had only heard about Trunk or Treat and asked about that. He probably knows more about that than I do. I told him that we used to have a big party at church: we would have games and candy, a big fire, cook hot dogs and make s’mores, and have a hay ride. Those were a lot of fun. (I know there are people who are so opposed to Halloween that they oppose the Fall Festival as well. And that’s fine. We just need to walk in love toward one another.)

Anyway, I tried to answer his question and explain why we didn’t do Halloween without making him feel bad or his parents look bad. He asked me if I was working on Halloween and I told him, “I work every Halloween.” Then I found out Tuesday night that I am off! Yeah! I hate working Halloween, one of the three biggest drinking nights in Rock Hill. When I called to tell him I was off, he asked me to go trick or treating with him! How do I get myself into these spots??

Labels

When I was in Bible College I had to take a class on personal evangelism. We did a lot of door-to-door witnessing. Every Catholic I encountered told me the same thing, “I was born Catholic, raised Catholic, I hope I die Catholic.” As a result I determined that I just wanted to be known as a Christian. I wasn’t opposed to denominations as such, I simply didn’t want that label to become my identity. At the time I was a part of a group known as the Christian & Missionary Alliance (more about them later). Just before graduating I attended my first District and Prayer Conference in the Southern District. The first night of Conference, a brother stood up to share (he was pastor of one of the churches in Birmingham). He said, “I was born in the Alliance, raised in the Alliance, and I hope to die in the Alliance.” I wondered, What am I getting into? Labels!

When I began this blog someone asked me if I was Reformed. I answered, "I have a lot of respect for the Reformation and the reformers, but I am not Reformed." I have since suspected they no longer read my blog (that would have to be the reason since my posts are well written and incredibly interesting!). I’ve read a good bit of Calvin and Luther and Zwingli. And I searched diligently for Zwingli because he is the forgotten one. After reading his stuff I know why! I enjoy Calvin’s commentaries and his Institutes of the Christian Religion gave me a love for the Church. But I really enjoy Luther’s sermons the most. What a heart he had for the people – you can feel it in his sermons. Yet I am not a Lutheran and I’m not a Calvinist.

Just the other day I was called an Arminian. Which I think is funny because I have only read one work of Jacobus Arminius, and I have to confess, I couldn’t follow it – very scholarly. Oh, I know the “points” set forth by the Remonstrants and that most people today are not aware of them and that modern “Arminianism” bears little resemblance to them. Truth is, most of contemporary Arminianism is a lot more like Pelagianism. Another label! While someone may find Arminian leanings in me, they definitely will not find any Pelagianism.

I always preached and taught from the Bible. Nevertheless, a local Presbyterian once called me a “liberal.” Why would he do that? We had women deacons (deaconesses). Never mind that it was a result of a literal reading of the Bible that led us to that conclusion! What really is a liberal and conservative anyway? “Liberal” occurs in the Bible and means generous and is a good thing. “Conservative” doesn't occur at all. Oh, I know how they are used. Most people would call me stupid and out of date and stubborn before calling me liberal! I like how Adam Hall (better known as Rabbi) described liberal, “A liberal is anybody to the left of you.”

Another label applied to our church was “charismatic.” Probably because we went to a “contemporary” worship service way before it was the in thing. That is, we had a praise team and an overhead projector, and encouraged people to sing and clap and raise their hands. We just wanted people to worship God in Spirit and in truth. We sang choruses and hymns, read Scripture and had prayer time, and allowed people to testify. We were indeed open to whatever God wanted to do and if that included manifestations of the Spirit, then that was great! I was in York for 20 years and we never had a public manifestation of tongues. But we were charismatic! Someone from the District office visited me one day and when he saw our drums and guitars on the platform he commented, “You certainly look like a Full-Gospel church.” I asked him, “What’s the alternative, Half-Gospel?” Labels!

I believe in the sovereignty of God, am I Reformed? I believe man has a choice, am I Arminian? I believe in the baptism with the Spirit, am I Pentecostal? I believe the gifts are still for today, am I charismatic? I believe in baptism by immersion for those who are able to confess their faith, am I Baptist? I believe the history of God’s dealings with mankind is marked by different covenants, am I Covenant? I believe there is a difference between the Old and New Testaments and that we are no longer under the law, am I Dispensational? I believe the Bible is the Word of God, am I a Fundamentalist? I believe the Catholic and Orthodox Churches really can trace their roots back to the New Testament, does that make me Catholic? Orhtodox? I’ve read a lot of John Wesley’s sermons and like Charles’ hymns, am I Methodist? Read more A.B. Simpson, am I . . . wait, he has no following. Oh yeah, the Christian & Missionary Alliance. Am I Alliance? Can’t be, they kicked me out. So many labels. Reminds me of the time in Bible College when we were discussing the millennial positions, you know: pre-mill, post-mill, a-mill. One brother said, “I’m wind-mill. I believe it’s all gonna blow over!” I’m classical pre-mill (how’s that for a label?) but that’s still funny!

My main problem is all this reminds me of the situation in Corinth, “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.” And what was it the Holy Spirit said about that? “while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I of Apollos; are ye not carnal?” I just want to be Christian. Apostolic. Holding to what they wrote (the Scriptures) and the faith they deposited in the Church (Apostle’s and Nicene creeds). None of these other labels are found in the Bible.

Now, I don’t want to pretend to be more spiritual than anyone else. When I am looking for a church I check out their statement of faith, just like everyone else. There are things I look for and notice, that I am drawn to and tend to avoid. And I know that I am reading the label just like everyone else. I just wish more folks would emphasize the “Christian” first and their distinctives second. Like Wildwood Calvary Chapel in Yucaipa, CA. They have a great statement of faith. It begins, “We believe in what is termed "The Apostles' Creed" as embodying all the fundamental doctrines of orthodox evangelical Christianity.” They then go on to spell out what they emphasize. Great! I was so impressed that we attended while we were out there. Wonderful service. There were three reasons I was drawn to the Christian & Missionary Alliance: their distinctive - the Four Fold Gospel, their missions emphasis, and their big tent approach. There was a lot of diversity within the Alliance. Fellowship was not based on agreement on every detail, but on Jesus who is bigger than our differences. I liked that. That seems so Christian, so apostolic to me.

So, I am simply a Christian. Oh, I have distinctive beliefs, but I will read a wide variety of authors: Calvin and Luther and Wesley and Simpson and Chrysostom and listen to an even wider spectrum of speakers and fellowship with everyone who believes in Jesus, because the Holy Spirit says, “Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;  Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.” To that I say, Amen.

Early Church on The Image of God

My last post consisted of my understanding of what the Bible says about man being created in the image of God. In this post I simply present a few selections from Irenaeus and Tertullian. I found them to be insightful and thought-provoking.

Irenaeus
130 AD – 202 AD, Bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul (now Lyon, France). He was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John
And then, again, this Word was manifested when the Word of God was made man, assimilating Himself to man, and man to Himself, so that by means of his resemblance to the Son, man might become precious to the Father. For in times long past, it was said that man was created after the image of God, but it was not actually shown; for the Word was as yet invisible, after whose image man was created, Wherefore also he did easily lose the similitude. When, however, the Word of God became flesh, He confirmed both these: for He both showed forth the image truly, since He became Himself what was His image; and He re-established the similitude after a sure manner, by assimilating man to the invisible Father through means of the visible Word.

<><    <><    <><

Now God shall be glorified in His handiwork, fitting it so as to be conformable to, and modeled after, His own Son. For by the hands of the Father, that is, by the Son and the Holy Spirit, man, and not merely a part of man, was made in the likeness of God. Now the soul and the spirit are certainly a part of the man, but certainly not the man; for the perfect man consists in the commingling and the union of the soul receiving the spirit of the Father, and the admixture of that fleshly nature which was molded after the image of God. For this reason does the apostle declare, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect,” terming those persons “perfect” who have received the Spirit of God, and who through the Spirit of God do speak in all languages, as he used Himself also to speak. In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God, whom also the apostle terms “spiritual,” they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit, and not because their flesh has been stripped off and taken away. For if any one take away the substance of flesh, that is, of the handiwork [of God], and understand that which is purely spiritual, such then would not be a spiritual man but would be the spirit of a man. But when the spirit here blended with the soul is united to [God’s] handiwork, the man is rendered spiritual and perfect because of the outpouring of the Spirit, and this is he who was made in the image and likeness of God. But if the Spirit be wanting to the soul, he who is such is indeed of an animal nature, and being left carnal, shall be an imperfect being, possessing indeed the image [of God] in his formation, but not receiving the similitude through the Spirit; and thus is this being imperfect. Thus also, if any one take away the image and set aside the handiwork, he cannot then understand this as being a man, but as either some part of a man, as I have already said, or as something else than a man. For that flesh which has been molded is not a perfect man in itself, but the body of a man, and part of a man. Neither is the soul itself, considered apart by itself, the man; but it is the soul of a man, and part of a man. Neither is the spirit a man, for it is called the spirit, and not a man; but the commingling and union of all these constitutes the perfect man.

Tertullian
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicised as Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 220 AD), was a prolific early Christian author from Carthage in the Roman province of Africa. He is the first Christian author to write extensively in Latin.
In this respect will the image be less than the reality in that, while it possesses beyond doubt the true lineaments of divinity, such as an immortal soul, freedom and its own mastery over itself, reasonableness, capacity of understanding and knowledge, it is even in these respects an image still, and never amounts to the actual power of Deity, nor to absolute exemption from fault, — a property which is only conceded to God, that is, to the reality, and which is simply incompatible with an image.

<><    <><    <><

How then do you suppose that in God there is anything human, and not that all is divine? Him whom you do not deny to be God, you confess to be not human; because, when you confess Him to be God, you have, in fact, already determined that He is undoubtedly diverse from every sort of human conditions. Furthermore, although you allow, with others, that man was inbreathed by God into a living soul, not God by man, it is yet palpably absurd of you to be placing human characteristics in God rather than divine ones in man, and clothing God in the likeness of man, instead of man in the image of God. And this, therefore, is to be deemed the likeness of God in man, that the human soul has the same emotions and sensations as God, although they are not of the same kind; differing as they do both in their conditions and their issues according to their nature. I mean meekness, patience, mercy, and the very parent of them all, goodness, — why do you form your opinion of the divine displays of these (from the human qualities)? For we indeed do not possess them in perfection, because it is God alone who is perfect. So also in regard to anger and irritation. We are not affected by them in so happy a manner, because God alone is truly happy, by reason of His property of incorruptibility. Angry He will possibly be, but not irritated; anger because of the wicked, and indignation because of the ungrateful, mercy on account of the erring, and patience on account of the impenitent…

<><    <><    <><

If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, “Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;” whereas He ought to have said, “Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness,” as being a unique and singular Being? He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, “Let us make;” and, “in our image.” In the following text also He distinguishes among the Persons: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God created He him.” Why say “image of God?” Why not “His own image” merely, if He was only one who was the Maker, and if there was not also One in whose image He made man? But there was One in whose image God was making man, that is to say, Christ’s image, who, being one day about to become Man (more surely and more truly so), had already caused the man to be called His image, who was then going to be formed of clay — the image and similitude of the true and perfect Man.

So God created man in his own image

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.  So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:26-27

Lately I’ve been contemplating man being created in the image of God. At first I was thinking in terms of what a friend of mine called “personality traits” and how they / if they reflect the image of God. For example, some people are very organized and orderly, some people have a very established routine for everything, others are creative etc. I began by wondering if these traits are a reflection of God in some way and how they might have been corrupted by sin.

As I thought about this I realized anew how foundational this is for a proper understanding of the Bible and how sad it is that you don’t hear much about this these days. I know you can’t preach on this every week and I’m aware that while I taught this I probably didn’t emphasize it as I should have, but I believe there are other reasons this is not mentioned much today. One is there is not really much teaching of the Bible these days. Oh, there is preaching every week and they often use the Bible, but there is not much depth to it. Another is that so many evangelicals are now proponents of evolution. They deny the literalness and historicity of Genesis. How can they declare verses 1-25 are purely symbolic and have no or very little relation to reality and then stop at this verse and say this is literally true? By accepting evolution they are saying we are really the image and likeness of a monkey and only secondarily the image of God. Such people have an ongoing problem with the Bible because Paul reflects a literal and historical Genesis in his epistles! But I digress.

As I meditated on this I settled on three questions about the image of God in man:
    What is the image of God?
    Was it effaced in any way by the fall?
    Does the Gospel address this and offer a remedy?

So I searched for “image” in the Bible and then I researched both Jewish thought and early Christian thought on the image of God. I discovered some neat things. But first, the Bible. And what I offer is just a summary of the teaching on the image of God.

What is the image of God?
There is a tension throughout the Scriptures between physical and spiritual image. I mean, the very word image is physical and is often used for the images the heathen made of their gods. The Jews were often tempted to make an image of God. Then in the New Testament, Jesus is said to be “the image of the invisible God.” That is, you cannot see God so he became visible to us in Jesus Christ. But surely there more to the image of God than some physical resemblance. And that is also evident in Jesus who said, If ye have seen me ye have seen the Father.” But that being said, there is no clear cut answer provided by the Scriptures, “the image of God in man is…” I don’t think it is that hard to define, but then, there has been a lot of disagreement over the years! Even so, there is something about man that reflects God. My friend suggested that this is only true of mankind considered as a whole. But I believe he is wrong. Each man bears the image of Adam who was made in the image of God. But what is it about man that reflects God? His intelligence, his free will, his ability to determine his own course, his awareness of himself, his being spiritual, his creativity, his emotions, his ability to do right and to know God, his dominion. Isn’t this cool? All of creation is God’s handiwork, but mankind is the capstone of it all. We are a part of creation, yet we are unique. We are not simply upright, hairless monkeys, fortunate accidents of time and chance. No, we were created by God in his image and after his likeness.

Was the image effaced in any way by the fall?
As in the case of creation, the church is often not teaching the fall of man. Adam was a special creation of God. But then Adam and Eve succumbed to temptation and sinned. This had a deleterious effect on mankind, yea on nature itself. “In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” What did this do to the image of God in man? Some have suggested that the image of God was completely lost by the fall. Genesis 9:6 seems to answer this for us. After the flood, when God commanded Noah and his sons to repopulate the earth, He instituted capital punishment (government) with these words, “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” Even though the act of creation is past tense (made man), the image seems to essentially still be there. So, it has not been completely effaced or removed, but sin has had a significant impact. There is no doubt about this. Read the Bible. Watch the news. Work with me one night and meet some of the people I see every night! Something was lost. Something new was introduced. There is a corruption in man. The reflection of God is marred.

Does the Gospel address this and offer a remedy?
Yes. The Gospel restores the broken image of God in man. While the Old Testament mentions this image of God only in Genesis 1 and 9, the New Testament mentions it several times. And there is a new emphasis: Christ is the image of God. Here again we find the tension between the physical and spiritual. Christ is “the image of the invisible God” and “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” This is the incarnation. We are also told that the Son is the express image of his person. As far as the image of God in us, conversion is described as “ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” (The old and new man are so often misunderstood: The old man is what we were in Adam, the old Adamic race; the new man is the new creation, the new race in Christ, all that we are in Christ.) And the the new man “is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him.” And “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” Salvation is a restoration of the image of God, yet this is renewed and deepened. Finally, there is the promise, “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.”

Isn’t this amazing – the gospel is so much more than “Get saved and go to church.” There are depths to plumb, nuggets to discover. Such life! Such abundance! Such riches!

My next post will be excerpts from Irenaeus and Tertullian concerning the image of God.

We went to Augusta on Monday

This week I was scheduled to be off on Sunday and Wednesday. Split days off are bad enough when you work 3rd shift but we had planned to go down and see Mary K on Monday – before Deuce is born. I don’t like to do this but I called the guy who works for me on my days off and arranged it so that I could indeed be off Sunday and Monday. That helped me and him, it turns out. So Mary fixed her schedule and it was set, we were going to Augusta on Monday. All we had to do now was call Mary K and see if it would fit into her plans! Since it did, our plans were set.

Monday morning dawned and I found out that Mary had not been able to sleep the night before. She stayed up and worked on her schooling and put a Boston Butt in the crockpot to make some BBQ. But, because she had to sleep some time, we left a little later than we had planned.

I guess we got there about 1:30. Just a few minutes after Mary K had laid Lucca k down for her nap :-( So we ate some BBQ. It was really good, even though I was distressed to learn that Mary K now applies mustard sauce to her BBQ! So we visited for a while and when I went out to check on Mary K’s tomato and pepper plants – they are huge and very fruitful! – I must have let the screen door bounce because the next thing I know, they are holding Lucca, saying the door had awakened her. It really was an accident, but one that had a happy ending!

We played with Lucca, see the video on fb and then went outside and walked around the yard and neighborhood with her while Mary took a “power nap.” We went back inside and woke Mary up and went for a ride to a nearby park but it was really too wet. We went back to the house and Mary wanted to see Lucca watch Tangled. I confess, I fell asleep during the movie. Ask Tiernan, that happens a lot!

Since it was now suppertime we decided to go to Pantera Bread. I was still rather full from the BBQ (I also had a slice of home made bread that Mary K had made) so I took pictures while they ate. Lucca K wasn’t really hungry either and after a while she started asking to go outside. It was so cute, she asked her mom and got nowhere so she looked at me with a look that said, “I know you will not let me down – Outside?” And I didn’t let her down! I’ve been doing this with the grandchildren since Aimee was born. I picked her up and out we went.

We were at a strip mall, and there was another one across the street. Anyway, we walked to the end of the sidewalk to a graveled break between where we were and yet another strip mall. There was a fence and a sign that said, St. Andrew Presbyterian Church. Since it was a driveway and an open gate, in we went. Ask my girls and grandchildren, this is not at all unusual. And we discovered a little oasis. This church has a really  nice building and grounds, it is designed like a sanctuary in the midst of the commercial madness around it. We wandered around, tried a door or two, and discovered a little playground. And then after a while we returned to the restaurant.

What a great day and visit. But now it was time to come back to Rock Hill. I thought about driving home but told Mary, “With it being both night AND raining, you probably better drive.” I realize this was a wise decision since my night vision is not very good anymore and in the rain it is near terrible, but can you fathom how bad this makes you feel? I told Mary that and then asked her if she could just put a blanket across my lap!

A good day and great visit. You can see a few pictures on my fb here  Next time down will probably be to see Deuce.

Wyoming

I’m reading a book on the history of Wyoming. (T. A. Larson. History of Wyoming. Dr. Larson was the foremost authority on Wyoming history). Actually, I have probably read all I’m going to read – I was mainly interested in the early white contact and entrance. Interestingly, this book has very little information on the pre-contact Indians, dismissing them thus, “Not much is known about the natives of the area before a.d. 1800. From what is known, however, it can be said with some confidence that . . . there were probably no more than 10,000 nomadic Indians when the white man came.”

What an interesting picture we have of early Wyoming. Apparently, the fur traders or mountain men were the first white men in the area: “Not a hole or corner in the vast wilderness of the ‘Far West’ but has been ransacked by these hardy men . . . and these alone are the hardy pioneers who have paved the way for the settlement of the western country.” (F. Ruxton, 1847). A truly hardy and intrepid bunch of men.

“The mountain men established an image of the free roaming individual who lived in the wilderness, unhampered by the restraints of civilization. The image sometimes outran the reality – mountain men were out to make money, after all, and they depended on civilized society for many of their needs, including guns and liquor. Nevertheless, more than the cowboy, the pioneer settler, or any other frontiersman, the mountain men achieved an independence from civilization. Here he is as depicted by one writer:

‘The mountain man was almost Indian-colored from exposure to the sun. His hair hung upon his shoulders. He was bearded. Next to his skin he wore a red flannel loincloth. His outer clothes were of buckskin, fringed at all the seams. The jacket sometimes reached to the knee over tight, wrinkled leggings. His feet were covered by moccasins made of deer or buffalo leather. Around his waist was a leather belt into which he thrust his flintlock pistols, his knife for skinning or scalping, and his shingling hatchet . . . Peering vividly out from under his low crowned hat of rough wool, he was an American original as hard as the hardest thing that could happen to him.’” I like that last sentence!

But then, when the rest of the white men came “Wyoming was a thoroughfare rather than a destination.”

“Wyoming proved more attractive as a thoroughfare than a destination. No one wanted to live in Wyoming – they just wanted to pass over the ground because it led somewhere else. Settlers looked at bare Nebraska and saw future cornfields and feedlots. They looked at a Texas terrain of flat, bare plains and envisioned enormous herds of cattle. They even saw promise in the sterile slopes of the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. But Wyoming – why, a fine place for a road to Oregon.” I love this last sentence as well!

“The great thoroughfare through central Wyoming has been known by several names besides ‘Platte River Road’ since the 1840s – Oregon Trail, California Trail, and the Mormon Trail. Somewhere between 350,000 and 400,000 emigrants, most of them men, moved west between 1841 and 1868 along this thoroughfare...” (55,000 in 1850 and 50,000 in 1852 alone)

This is an incredible number! Every time I read this and think about it I picture it as a tsunami of white people. Rock Hill has a population of 70,000. In one year almost the entire city of Rock Hill passed through Wyoming! And then again the next year and the next!! That boggles my mind. I had never really thought about it, but the West advertised, “The settlers on the West Coast were aware that the country  would really develop only with increased numbers of Americans to join them. They waged a campaign not only to attract more settlers, but to ensure that Oregon and California became states.”

“Travel along the Oregon Trail, at least in Wyoming, was not so much dangerous as it was monotonous.” As one traveler, T.S. Kenderline, put it in 1858, Wyoming is ‘A gloomy, God-forsaken country.’

“Desert countries are notoriously cold at night; so it should surprise no one that Matthew Field on the Green River on August 16, 1843, wrote, ‘Cold as January! ice at 6 and mosquitos at 8 a.m.’ ”

What confusion existed as ‘civilization’ came to this wilderness! This is how Margaret Carrington described the Ft. Laramie store, “the long counter . . . was a scene of confusion . . . Indians dressed and half dressed and undressed . . . mingled with the soldiers, teamsters, emigrants, speculators, half-breeds, and interpreters. Here cups of rice, sugar, coffee, or flour were being emptied into the looped-up skirts or blankets of a squaw; and there some tall warrior grimacing delightfully as he grasped and sucked his long sticks of peppermint candy... The room was redolent of cheese and herring…and smoke… To all…Mr. Bullock…gave kind and patient attention, and his clerks seemed equally ready and capable, talking Sioux, Cheyenne or English, just as each case came to hand.” What a scene! Some trading posts were not so friendly to Indians. But you get the picture.

I am impressed with the mobility of the people in a day when there were no cars or planes and even before trains. First, that people would walk from the east coast to the west coast! And then, once in Wyoming, they thought nothing of going to California or Oregon, then returning, or going back east for a visit, then returning. On foot or horseback! Such travel seems to have been common, no big deal. To me, driving 4 hours to Edisto is a big deal!

And what is also amazing, with so few people in such a big territory, they constantly bumped into each other! I know people who live here in Rock Hill that I never see!

Just a few thoughts from my reading about Wyoming. I am fascinated with the West, the Indians, and the earliest forays of whites into this “wilderness.”  I won’t keep you in suspense and force you to seek and read the book – Wyoming finally became a state :-)

Observations from behind the counter

Just a few incidences from my exciting life working 3rd shift . . .

One night, around 4:30 am, a man came in. It was clear he had just been released from the hospital. (I see a lot of the recently released - you can tell them apart by their white wrist band.) The truck was still there and I was checking it in. This man was acting really strange – just standing at the counter, looking around nervously etc. So strangely that the truck driver said to me, “You need to be careful. He is acting weird.” I talked with the fellow a little. He tried to buy some snuff but couldn’t find his money and made a big deal about that. Told me his girl friend had dropped him off and was coming back, that he was a pastor etc. Then he asked when McDonalds across the street opened. I told him 5 am and he asked if he could hang around until then. I told him No, because I had a lot of things to do before 5. He was kind of shocked but said he understood and assured me several times he had no intention of robbing me. And went no where! He was even more shocked when a few minutes later I told him he had to leave the store because I had to go into the cooler to get the doughnuts etc. I told him this again and he finally went outside, and hung around out there. I was concerned because he had begun talking to customers and I thought he was panhandling. One man came in and asked if everything was alright because the fellow outside was upset – I assume at me since I ran him off. Finally, around 5:20 he went to McDonalds. I was glad and thought it was over.
The next night, or morning for non-third shift folk, a woman came in who works at the hospital. She comes in nearly every night and we talk about this and that. She asked me if a white guy had come in the night before, “bald and wearing a blue shirt.” I said yes and she told me he had been at the hospital the night before, had been kicked out by his wife because he was high, and needed a ride so she offered him one. But he had begun to act strange, popping pills and trying to take her car. She said she felt bad about it but dropped him off at the store. You should have seen her face when I told her he had referred to her as “his girl friend”!


On Saturday night a Latino man came in, who I have seen before. He had his son with him, some where between 3 and 5 years old. I like children so I started talking to the little guy. He handed me what he wanted, I scanned it and gave it back. His Dad made a point of making him say Thank you. Then as they left he made the little boy say Thank you again and Good-bye and Have a nice night. It was cool to see someone teaching manners to the next generation.

This man came in last night who I usually see on Saturday night. He comes in with his kids after skate night. Nice people. But he came in last night (Tuesday). Said he had just gotten off work. He is some kind of engineer. He was in around 1 or 1:30 but said he should already be in bed. Then, as he was trying to explain what had happened at work he simply said, “There is an abundance of ignorance.”

It is funny but people think I am their friend because they see me so often. And they do tell me things. One night a couple of years ago while I was training someone a woman came in. I made small talk with her and then she told me she was staking out her estranged husband’s trailer, ‘cause if she could catch him cheating it would help her divorce. After she left, the trainee said, Man, they tell you everything!


I like to banter with people. I often tell them, “I’ve got to be up all night, might as well have fun.” But some people are just not nice people. They don’t talk, they don’t smile. I try but they never smile. Some I have cracked, some just think I am cracked.


I’m a good worker but a bad salesman. I have a hard time cramming all our high priced stuff down their throats. Especially cigarettes. They want us to push our 3 pack deal of cigarettes. I won’t do it. I will sell them and give the best prices, but I’m not pushing cigarettes. One guy came in and asked me about our cheapest cigarettes and then asked, “What do you recommend?” I said, “Honestly?” He said, “Yeah.” So I said, “Don’t smoke.” He kind of laughed, said I was right, then bought a pack of cigarettes!


I hate it when people come in and start calling me “Boss.”


I am amazed at what people wear out in public. Some people have obviously been out to a club and have very little clothing on or so tight I have no idea how they can sit down. I have seen women in super small & tight shorts and high heels. Or sometimes a really short skirt and clunky boots. And I wonder if they have mirrors at home or if someone really told them that looked good! And I am constantly amazed at the number of people, men and women, who come to the store in their pajamas. And one woman last night was in her pajamas and going back to the hospital waiting room!


Finally, one night I was mopping and this fella comes in. Right away he starts talking to me about the end of the world. He says, “Now listen, if I could prove to you that the world was about to end and that I had this ship that would take you to another safe planet, would you pay to get on it?” I said, “No. I mean, I believe the world is going to end but I have believed in Jesus.” He said, “You can’t beat that ship!” No, you can’t.