I like my blog. I like its pinkness and the flowers and the general way it organises itself.

But it is quite limited in what it can do. Can't put widgets in the sidebar. Doesn't tell me who's looking or how they got here. Can't muck around with how it looks.

So, I was having a look at wordpress earlier. They seem to promise a lot of freedom but I wonder how much they really deliver? I'm not a huge fan of the way blogger blogs look, but they seem fairly customisable? Or is it the case with all these providers that you only get the fun stuff if you pay (which I don't really want to do)? I have a LiveJournal whose appearance is limited only by my skill and imagination. But LJ isn't really designed for this kind of blogging, I don't think.

What blog provider do you use? Would you recommend it and why/why not? Bear in mind, I am the person who just bought a new laptop because it had flowers on it, without really knowing what any of the numbers meant. I am, however, quite capable at technical stuff if I have to be and can use both html and basic CSS at a pinch.

I've temporarily abandoned the long, dull books on Graeco-Roman religion in favour of N. T. Wright's, 'The New Testament and the People of God', which is a lot more fun and I wish I had time to read it properly.

This is Wright on meaning in history:

At its basic level, the 'meaning' of history may be held to lie in the intentionalities of the characters concerned (whether or not they realize their ambitions and achieve their aims). Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon 'meant' that he intended to set himself up above the law of the Republic. At another level, 'meaning' may be held to lie in the contemporary relevance or consequence of the events. Those who farmed on the Italian side of the Rubicon would have said that Caesar's crossing 'meant' certain things in terms of the subsequent state of their land. Again, the fact that we have uncovered a certain set of human motivations may suggest parallels in other historical events, including those contemporary with ourselves, where a similar set of intentionalities may be present, and from which we may deduce a 'meaning' in terms of our own world. Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon 'means' that would-be tyrants are to be watched carefully when they make vital symbolic moves. At yet another level, 'meaning' may be attributed to events on the grounds that they reveal the divine intention, and thus speak powerfully, whether to the ancient or the modern world, pagan as well as Jewish or Christian, of the nature and/or purposes of 'God', or a god. Caesar's eventual fate 'means' that his hubris did not go unnoticed, or unpunished, by divine vengeance.

Meaning of events, just as much as meaning of texts, is a slippery concept.

At Cresheim Valley, we're having a series of Sunday School sessions on the qualifications for eldership at the moment. It's been very helpful and thought-provoking. Last time we ended with the tantalising question suggested by 1 Timothy 3:4-5. I'm looking forward to hearing what Seth has to say about it, but in the meantime, David Field has an interesting way of looking at it here.

is a blog I occasionally read. Usually it has long thoughtful theological reflections on difficult issues. Rarely, however, does it have good knitting links. But here's one I enjoyed - you have to scroll down and then click on 'Knit Graffiti'. While you're there, why not click on the link in the same post to an interview with Andrew Sach and Steve Jeffery, two of the authors of Pierced for our Transgressions?