The situation was as follows: I was already slightly late for a plane out of Porto’s Francisco Sá Carneiro Airport on the return from part of the Camino de Santiago (more on this in future posts), and had planned on taking the metro out to the airport, since I was told this was the most convenient way. Problem was, I had just before spent the remainder of my cash, planning to pay my metro-ticket by card.

I get to the metro, use the machine, 2 euros for a ticket to the airport – so far so good. This is where my troubles start. First, the machine would not take payment from my Visa-card. Figuring it was a glitch with the machine, I went to the ticket office, only to be told that the Porto metro does not have an arrangement with any international card companies, so I would have to either use a Portuguese card or pay in cash. Had I known this earlier, I would have had no trouble having 2 euros on me at that point for various reasons, but again, I had planned to use my cards to pay for that ticket. I felt rather frustrated that I had to take out cash again – paying a 5-euro fee – only to pay a 2-euro ticket, not to mention the time-crunch.

I look at the time, and it’s getting dangerously late past the time I had planned to leave for the airport. Granted, I always have more safety margin than most, but then again, I was in a town I did not know at all, with a language I did not speak at all, and having spent some time earlier on getting into the town centre, which was not a trivial thing.

I walk out, start looking for an ATM, and see none. I see two people who look to be likely to speak some English – a man and a woman, probably mid-thirties, who seem rather urban in their appearance.

I approach the couple – I assumed they were a couple first, though later I got the feeling they weren’t – and ask the man if he speaks English. He confirms, is quite friendly, and I ask him where I can find an ATM. He thinks a bit then points to a couple of streets down. I think at that point the whole time-thing had got me so panicked, plus the ridicule of taking out a 10-euro note – with fees – to pay for that ticket, that I ask the man: ‘I’m really sorry to ask this of you, but I only need 2 euros for a ticket to the airport’. I don’t remember exactly what line followed after, but it was probably something along the lines if he could possibly spare that.

The man looks at me – sunglasses and suddenly a rather startled look on his face – in disbelief. He seems very surprised, and almost displays a suppressed outrage. He answers something along the lines of ‘well … that’s not my … I don’t have 2 euros’. He then starts telling me that there are like 10 banks down the street if I only go a few streets down. It’s not overt, but it seems rather clear he doesn’t buy my story, and that he just wants to point me to the nearest ATM asap and get rid of me – quite possibly to continue his conversation with the woman. Though I’m not quite fixed with the cronology, I think I added at this point that the train company would only take Portuguese cards.

At this point I’m pretty sure the hopelessness of the situation is emanating from my face, and I mutter something along the lines of ok, thanks, and start turning to find a bank.

Then the woman starts talking. She asks if I have time to reach my plane then. I don’t think I even register it consciously at that point, but in retrospect, it was such a breath of fresh air to have someone who actually takes my story at face value break into the conversation. I don’t remember what I answered, but I think I displayed frustration again over only needing 2 euros and having to find ATM’s and go through that whole thing. This could have been the time I told them about the cards as well. The woman thinks only briefly, and then says she has a metro-card that should have enough credit on it to get me to the airport.

The guy did not seem to appreciate this turn of events, and started looking decidedly frustrated. Thinking they were a couple, I took the cue and said it didn’t matter, I’d just find an ATM. She insisted, however, it was no trouble, in fact, she had 2 euros that I could have as well as the card. That way, the ticket would be cheaper – 1,5 euros – since an extra 0,5 euros is paid for the chip-card. So the woman gives me the travel-card – and the 2 euros, in spite of my objections due to not wanting to displease the guy. I take it, not knowing what else to do. And frankly, it solved a big problem for me. So there I am, from having nothing and having little time to get to the airport, to suddenly having all I needed to get there, due to the trust and kindness of a complete stranger.

I called this post ‘from the other side’, since I am rather more used to being on the side of the road where I’m asked for money as I pass by people. Do we believe people who have a good story to tell and wants money for a ticket? I certainly had my doubts a few months ago when I paid a not too expensive train ticket for a couple of girls at 2am on a train station, where they claimed their Visa-card had suddenly stopped working. Are we generous enough to meet their needs anyways? I have an inkling feeling that even if she hadn’t bought my story, that woman might have still given me those 2 euros, and that guy may not have, even if he did believe I was in that fix. Of course, those 2 euros were ultimately my responsibility, but that’s not the point. The point is that I had a real need for them, and due to the kindness of a stranger, I was saved from a lot of hassle, and possibly – or at least so it seemed at the time – a missed plane.

The experience also left me feeling a bit weird as I sat on the train. I almost had the feel and posture of a beggar accepting money as I took the 2 euros and thanked the woman. It definitely did something to my pride to have to ask someone for that. I am not sure that’s a bad thing, under the circumstances. I most certainly did not want to go back when I found out that I did not need the travelcard she gave me after all, but it seemed like the right thing to do. It seemed strange approaching those two people again, expecting one to await me coming to up the take, while the other to openly await what I had to say.

The ironic part of the story is that as I’m sitting at the airport writing this, I just found out Portugal runs on GMT, as opposed to Spain where I traveled from this morning, so I was altogether an hour too early in the first place.. In any case, the story and its content at the time is no less real.

I will keep that ticket as a reminder. To the stranger, whoever you are, I thank you. This made my day!

However, when I got to the security line, I started to get the feeling something was different here. Big posters sporting full-body scanners were put up, saying something to the effect that at this particular airport, enhanced security measures were in effect.

Being slightly concerned about the radiation effect of said full-body scanners, I thought to myself that I can always opt out, as is possible in the states, believing this to be an option in the UK too. Sure, an enhanced search is not altogether pleasant, but better than receiving an unnecessary dose of radiation.

However, while I was in the queue – a long queue – I looked up some info on my phone. It turns out that if you refuse a full-body scan in a UK airport, travel will be declined. And that, while the airport maintains that the scanners are completely safe (stating that the amount of radiation received is equivalent to that of 5 minutes of background radiation), highly competent researchers have posed serious questions with regards to the potentially cancer-inducing effects of these scans.

As I walked through the queue, I considered my options, should I be selected for a body-scan. Having some time to reflect, I came to the conclusion I had none. If I resisted the body-scan, I would not be allowed to travel. £100 out the window, and no way to get back to Denmark. If I went through the scanner, potential long-term health-effects. I looked with envy on the business-class travellers, and the aforementioned couple with the kids and the pram, who somehow got onto the fast-track security line, which, besides providing a vastly more expeditious security process, was completely devoid of these scanners.

I was not selected for the body-scan. Unlike many of my fellow travellers. The worst thing about the experience was that I did not have a choice. Had I been been selected, I would have been compelled to go through with the scan.

On reflection, this is probably the first time government agencies have resorted to imposing potentially health-damaging security checks on its population, let alone the vastly upgraded privacy intrusions. Sure, the liquid restrictions were annoying, but they did not impose any harm on me, other than having to throw out the occasional face-wash that I forgot to take out of the hand luggage Nor are the metal-detectors or the x-ray machines harmful to us in any way. Enter the body-scanners. Radiation-exposure is now mandatory in order to fly.

The reality is that there is some debate on the health effects of the scanners. In addition to the mentioned expert comments, there is a recent case of scanners in the US having emitted much higher radiation than they should, or at the very least being measured incorrectly. And there are the comments of scientists in this wired article, not exactly inspiring calm. As the icing on the cake, Bruce Schneier, a well-renowned security expert and cryptographer, makes some interesting comments on the effectiveness of these new security measures (though he admittedly elsewhere believes them to be safe health-wise).

Bottom-line, I am sceptical towards new technology that is being rushed in, proclaimed safe, and put to mass-use in the name of security. Mass x-ray scans of vast amounts of people is certainly not something to be undertaken lightly.

For now, I have noted the public services available, having been at the library tonight.

For one, I now no longer need any sort of DVD-rental stores, since the public libraries lets you check out loads of mainstream movies – for free. I even got a bag for carrying them in.

While I was there, I noted a poster saying something along the lines of ‘Divorce – something you’ll do 0,4 times’. I thought great, perhaps finally a campaign to bring down divorce stats, but alas, the punchline was that now you can do all the paperwork online through ‘NemID’. (the latter being a topic in itself)

I walked away noting I get all sorts of things from the government here that I really don’t feel every Danish taxpayer should be providing..

In any case, it was great being here again for the celebration. Happy May 17!

I’ll tend to run in the park. For some reason – and I was really happy about that – Café Church decided to give me a t-shirt a while back; I often wear it when I run. That is, when I don’t forget I’m wearing it. And suddenly remember after sending some too-smoking people a disapproved look, or looking too long where I probably would be better off taking Job’s advise and averting my eyes.

This is what’s been hitting me more and more recently: No matter if we want it or not, we are, as Christians, walking billboards for what we profess. In a very real flesh-and-blood kind of way. Which is really great – the message of Jesus incarnate; when we display Him.

I’m not advocating flawless Christianity, or that we should ‘get our act together’ (nor that there are not extremely kind, loving and good people out there who are not Christian). I just find it interesting, that in the middle of the hype of ‘transparency’ in so many Christian circles, transparency suddenly hits us right between the eyes where we expect it the least.

First thought: It was nice. For various reasons, it’s been a couple of weeks since I last had the opportunity to worship with other believers, and that was really nice. Raafat Kamal – known better to some of us as Nat’s dad – gave a very forceful talk about the mission of the church, especially touching on the way we deal with people. Spot on.

Second thought (why am I putting this in bullet-point fashion?): It seems to me – it may not be so though, cf. a conversation I had in the car on the way back, but still, it seems to me – that often we can classify people in our church as belonging to two groups: Those that have their focus on the here and now and those that have their clear focus on his second coming. Within the Adventist Church, with our background and tradition, the latter translates to having a heavy focus on our being in the end time, the coming trials, the call to come out of her (interpretations of Rev 18.4), historical prophecies, and the signs of the times. The latter group seems to be more ‘mainstream’ in their Christian thinking, and generally (i) focus less on these things, while (ii) focusing more on the difference God can make in their lives here and now, the walk with God, the kingdom of God being at hand, and so on (if this group speak of the second coming, it is usually in quite general, more mainline, terms, and not as a focus-point; it’s just part of the bagage). Many times when people step up to the platform to sing a song, contribute with their thoughts, or take part in a debate, I get the feelings they are likely to belong to one of these groupings. I also get the feeling that the directions in which these groups are heading are not the same.

It would be nice to see a synthesis, or a direction that would maintain both, of these two foci – the here and now and the second coming / eternal life – if nothing else, because it seems that both Jesus and Paul managed to have them coexist in their thinking and doing and life. True, this picture is stylised, and I also see a more healthy middle ground in the church, but this seems a minority. I don’t have the answer on how to do it – my theology is probably flawed as well – but I recognise the need within our church for some sort of integration. Much of what has seemed integration up to this point to me does not seem so, since there is often still a lack of focus on the kingdom of God among us, as especially laid out by Jesus in the Gospel of Mark (forgive me if my labelings are not entirely consistent or my thinking not crystal-clear; I hope it still makes sense on some plane of thought). The music program did a good job of trying to integrate though. That was quite good.

Third thought: I have been able to be near – in different settings during the day – a small number of ‘core families’ that seemed to be working very well. It’s funny how you can usually tell when you come into the presence of such a family – the way they interact, the way they treat each other, the implicit respect the parents enjoy from, while not commanding of, the children. Simply a good solid family. Yes, solid is the word. Not coming from such a family myself, I may be more prone to picking up the difference. Whenever I meet people my age who has grown up in a solid family like this, our whole instinctive feeling about marriage seem to be completely opposite. For me, it has been interesting to note that for some people, it would be a strange and foreign thought to worry about the ‘what if”s and the potential problems (true, some of it may be personality-related, but still I see a pattern). They simply assume, by instinct or experience, that things will work out fine.

Fourth thought: Norway is a really beautiful country. Driving up to Tyrifjord is simply amazing.

“The king asks Archimedes to determine if a present he’s received is actually solid gold. Unsolved problem at the time. It tortures the great Greek mathematician for weeks – insomnia haunts him and he twists and turns in his bed for nights on end. Finally, his equally exhausted wife – she’s forced to share a bed with this genius – convinces him to take a bath to relax. While he’s entering the tub, Archimedes notices the bath water rise. Displacement, a way to determine volume, and that’s a way to determine density – weight over volume. And thus, Archimedes solves the problem. He screams ‘Eureka’ and he is so overwhelmed he runs dripping naked through the streets to the king’s palace to report his discovery.” (Sol’s point is that Max needs to ‘take a bath’ to solve his problem, but this quote spurred my interest, apparently)

Not remembering the quote exactly, I seemed to remember something about weight, and claims being made that the amount of water displaced were somehow related to the weight of the object, but I couldn’t get it to make sense that anything but the volume of the object would determine how much water it would displace. Enter google: Search archimedes gold displacement.

It seems reasonable to go from the top, and this site is on a .gov domain, carries the emblem of the US department of energy, so it seams at a 10-second glance to have some reliability. While, when reading it again, the scientists answering do not appear to give any outright wrong information, they don’t at all seem to convey the essence of the story. And when initially reading it, I strongly got the sense that some of them were arguing for a heavier object displacing more water than a lighter object (of the same volume).

Right, let’s try link 2: Now, suddenly, the crown under inspection could be partly silver instead of iron (as claimed by the first site), and this site is more or less about posing a critique against the method anyways, ending up suggesting a setup with scales, reminding me of the epic scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail where Sir Bevedere goes ‘we shall use my largest scales’.

Browsing through the google-list once again, my eye caught (after having discarded link three as relatively unuseful for my purposes) a debate at ‘Science forums’. This debate again reminded me of the debate preceding the use of Sir Bedevere’s largest scales in the forementioned movie. A guy called Vexer seems determined not to get it, and during a full 2-page discussion seems to hold that the water displaced has to do with weight and not volume.

While scrolling down the list further, my eyes catch something most welcome: What looks like an authoritative source indeed – the Encyclopædia Britannica in it’s very person (the linked page was followed through a couple of additional links). However, my rejoicing is short, since you can read about 5 seconds off that page, before a nag screen pops up asking you to register. So I took a screenshot of the info and read it at my leasure. It seems that indeed, the volume of water (or any fluid for that matter) displaced by a fully immersed object is – dam dam dam – the volume of that object; irrespectable of its weight I might add (while it is of course true that the upward force has to do with the weight of the object, and so becomes relevant for determining to what degree the object will be immersed). Which incidently is the same conclusion found (albeit in even more understandable terms) at Wikipedia. Which adds another point to the trustworthiness of Wikipedia.

So I’m happy; I got confirmed what I initially thought to be true (which raises again another set of questions on the biasedness of my inquiry). However, what’s the point of writing it here, or, as one of my lecturers like to reiterate, ‘so what?’

I had a chat with my dad yesterday evening about postmodernism and the pluralistic society in which we live. He thought much of it had come from technology (perhaps somewhat like Lyotard). And I was reluctant to accept that (there must be more). However, as this little exercise confirms, on any given topic – even the ones we consider to be very established and universally true – we can find a host of both confusing, opposing, and confirming information, since anyone with a keyboard and Internet access can contribute even further to the confusion (you and me both).

I think my dad said something about how it used to be simpler. I agree. Maybe I’m missing a bit of that simplicity, even though I’ve never experienced it, or rather, I’ve probably experienced it growing up, since as a child, you tend to trust your authorities much more. I don’t think I’d like to go back though.

And even further, within especially religious communities, there tend to be those groups who view everything as being very simple. I am envious. However, I find it difficult to go back. And yet I agree. It is very simple. But perhaps simplicity is about choice, and that choice starts out with examination. And entails inspection. And then perhaps in the process, we learn which voices to ignore and which to include.

During Christmas, me and my sister walked past the saddest looking dog. The owners lurked behind it and had exactly the same sad expression on their faces.

Funny how dogs and owners often look equally dull or interesting.

P.S. Me and my sister also met some other people with a quite nice dog, so if they should be reading this, don’t be mistaken

Went to bed a bit late last night after having been to Laura’s ‘studenterfest’ (a party you throw when you’ve graduated from high school), but was fortunate enough to be able to sleep late today. Had the opportunity to see Bobby’s (our Café church minister) 1-minute Facebook video-intro to his sermon today on the topic of ‘real rest’.

So I got a little over eight hours of sleep before I was awoken by a phone call from a good friend, whom I was very glad to hear from, so this made a perfect start of the day. Afterwards, I had the opportunity to reflect a little, write in my journal, and read through Paul’s letter to Titus, which was the place to which I had come in the Scriptures, this morning. Especially Titus 3:9 made me pause a little: “But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.” (NRSV)

Soon after, I was out running. It was nice to feel that I’m getting a bit in shape, so I can actually run for most of the 25 minutes – on the route that used to take 30 – without having to stop for air. To add to the excitement, I ran into one of my cat friends I think I’ve met her before – I think it was a her – this black-brownish cat who looked very happy to see me in the rain, and came running towards me from the distance. So I took a few minutes to say hi and went on running. When I settle down sometime, I would definitely like a cat.

Afterwards, I made myself a nice brunch; I could post pictures, but you can just look down a couple of posts from last Saturday’s brunch to the picture of the baguettes with tomato, mozzarella, fresh basil, olive oil, salt and pepper, to see what I had This was enjoyed with freshly squeezed – that is, before they put it onto a box in the supermarket, but at least it was not diluted concentrate – orange juice and further conversation with the before-mentioned good friend.

After a tiny bit of reflection, I turned to Isaiah 58 and read most of it before walking out the door. It’s one of my favorite passages. I was out the door quite early, and thought I might just get out of the Metro one station early (Nørreport, that is), and walk to church along the lakes of central Copenhagen. While going to church, I had a very relaxed feeling. Just feeling good. I got out of the train at Kongens Nytorv, but got back onto the train right away, as I had the feeling I should go to Nørreport instead. So, I did. As I got out from the station and up to street-level, I wanted to cross over to one side of the street I was to walk up, but there was a red light to my left. Strangely, there was still 5 seconds of green light to my right. So, I went that way (it made no difference to my route, as it only determined I was walking upwards on the left side of the street, instead of the right). When I had crossed the footpath over the street to the right, I saw a woman sitting, holding out a cup, needing money. I felt impressed to give her some money, so I did. And besides, it was very fitting with the passage I’d read before going out the door. It all fit so well together, I couldn’t help but wonder if God had sent me past her today, for her benefit as well as for mine (the amount I gave her couldn’t have made a huge difference, but I hope it got her on the way to meeting just a small amount of her real material needs). I remembered one of my teachers at Newbold who said something like this in a tutorial session: “The main theme of the Old Testament is not even God’s love. It is His justice. He is the God who cares about the underdog. Who provides justice for those who have been mistreated.”

The topic of Bobby’s sermon today was ‘real rest’, taking his point of origin in 1 Kings 1:1-4. Just a couple of highlights (as I remember them):

‘You can’t explain about rest unless you’ve experienced it’
‘These servants knew that the King needed help. Needed help to do what he couldn’t do, to get warm.’
‘Why does it say that David did not have sex with her? Remember the story in 2 Samuel? This shows us that David has grown.’
‘If there is no warmth in your thinking, God isn’t there’
‘Real rest is getting close to God’
(and there was another, brilliant, statement, but I just can’t remember it, which is driving me just a tiny bit crazy. No, not really, but still )

I think one of the main things I brought along is that the things we cannot do for ourselves, God can help us with. And that God can provide real rest for us. That He is the one who will provide it. And that nothing but God will provide us with real rest. None of the shorter-term things that we think will make us happy. But it’s hard to convey; these are just fragments. I hope they will get the recording of the sermons sorted soon, so they can be podcast (now also as a verb ).

The worship after the sermon in particular, was awesome, in the truest sense of the word. Just a couple of quite quiet songs, not intimidating in any way, and with quite a few a cappella-sections, God felt very present.

Afterwards, I went out with 4 friends and had a very nice meal at Jensens Bøfhus. Food, as always, was great. And the fact that the service wasn’t up to par was okay, since it provided us with free desserts

Sitting back in the apartment of the friend who’s been nice enough to have me staying for the summer, but who isn’t here at the moment, I am left with the feeling that today, I have experienced real rest. It’s not something tangible, but it’s still something I know I’ve experienced, and something I certainly know I would not be able to provide myself with these days. And I just want to acknowledge God for this.