That has all changed.

I’ve been watching the Google Nexus One since January of this year. I saw 3G connectivity issues and a small Android market plague its initial release. I saw the Motorola Droid and was somewhat taken with it, but could not part with my beloved iPhone – there simply could be no comparison in my opinion. My world was a happy one with the iPhone.

My workplace gives us a cell phone, but the Samsung Blackjack they put in my possession hasn’t worked for nearly a year. I’ve been banging away at my company’s cell phone unit to send me something else to no avail. Frankly, I was tired of paying for phone service that was going toward doing my job when my company was perfectly willing to cover my business expenses using their phone, even though I was certainly happy that I could use my iPhone to effectively get my work done. So I took matters into my own hands when I saw that Google released a Nexus One handset with AT&T 3G capability (the company through which my corporate phone was issued). I bought one and moved my Blackjack’s SIM card to it – knowing I had 14 days to return it. I was going to see for myself if there was anything to the hype.

This is where my mobile world was rocked – the differences from the iPhone were huge, and immediately apparent. The graphics of the Nexus One are positively gorgeous, and the phone’s speed runs circles around the iPhone. The Nexus One is comfortable, the sound quality as good (if not better) and the call reliability excellent on the AT&T network. The Android operating system is quite easy to use, and after the initial adjustment of being away from the iPhone OS I soon found the multitasking of Android simply amazing.

But the game was about to change even more. The integration of this phone with the Google suite of products is simply staggering. I found myself pushing one button, speaking a type of retail store to the phone, and getting back a list of the closest matching businesses to me. I saw their distance, got directions, turn-by-turn navigation with spoken street names and a real-world view of the business. No typing was necessary – everything was simply presented to me on a silver platter. As one who travels for business, I was instantly mesmerized by this phone’s capabilities. The iPhone has never held a candle to this functionality.

Then the girlish giggles of delight kicked in when I started the Google Sky app. All I had to do was point my phone at the sky, and I saw the names of the stars and planets that I was looking at. I’d spin 180-degrees, and Google Sky spun with me. For kicks, I pointed my Nexus One at the ground. Google Sky showed me the stars as seen from Australia. More giggles ensued, and my wife began to stare strangely at me. Words like “insane” and “unbelievable” began to cross my lips, and the iPhone became a distant and foggy memory.

Ah, but what about the iPhone App Store you ask? It is indeed true that the Android Store has only about one-fifth the number of available apps. But let’s be realistic – we’re talking 30,000 apps (and growing VERY rapidly) in the Android Market! Apart from EA’s Monopoly game and a single Masonic app that is scheduled for future Android release, everything that I had on my iPhone is now on my Nexus One. “Only 30,000″ you say? Have you realistically tried to look at 30,000 apps? Mark my words, you’ll never even notice the difference between the App Store and the Android Market.

I also heard many people make hay out of the media player on the Android platform. The folks over at CNET criticized the Nexus One’s media player as sub-par compared to the iPhone’s. In my opinion and based upon extensive use, this is completely unfounded – Nexus One’s “Music” app is just as flexible and capable. While it brings nothing new to the table, to me “just as good” is just fine.

What of Apple’s innovative Visual Voicemail? Google’s Voice application one-ups it even further by providing an automatic transcript of the message. Like Apple’s Visual Voicemail I can listen to my messages in any order. But with Google Voice’s automatic transcript, I can simply choose to read them in a noisy environment. Wow.

The comparisons could go on all day. I could tell you about the fun of QR codes with my Nexus One, or the cool way it lets me send SMS text messages by just talking into the microphone. I could tell you about the amazing integration with my company’s Exchange server, where I can even do lookups in our Global Contact list. But here’s the proof that this phone is the one that is the best:

My company finally sent me a new phone. It was a cool new HTC Tilt2, the same manufacturer as Google’s Nexus One hardware. I dutifully moved my SIM card over to the Windows Mobile device, and called Google to return my Nexus One and get my hard-earned money back. The representatives took my call instantly, were extremely friendly, and transferred me seamlessly to HTC to arrange for return shipping. They were very friendly and seemed truly sorry that I wasn’t keeping my Nexus One.

The funny thing?

By the next day, I had moved my SIM card back to the Nexus One and called Google to cancel my return. Within a matter of days the Nexus One had become the only way I wanted to conduct my mobile life.

In closing, you might be inclined to ask what I miss about my iPhone, and I will admit that there are two things that I wish the Nexus One had. First of all, I still like the way the iPhone has a bar at the bottom of the screen that has the four “most-important” app buttons (in my case phone, browser, iPod and mail) visible regardless what virtual screen you’re on. The Nexus One either simply doesn’t do this, or I haven’t found the way to do it. The second and final thing I miss is Amazon’s Kindle Reader application. Please Amazon, Android is now the second largest OS based on browser stats – would you please release a Kindle Reader for Android?

Apart from that, the iPhone has fallen to second place in my book. Give the Nexus One a try, and I’m certain that this will be the case for you as well!

Check back soon for links and pics!

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. But to be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we ‘ought to have known better,’ is to be treated as a human person made in God’s image.”

Wow. Just wow.

Image courtesy of Wikipedia

The next time you’re traveling in Rome, take this little tidbit with you: an interesting article on the Sistene Chapel. Taken from the Aish HaTorah web site here. The author is Rabbi Benjamin Blech.

In the heart of the Vatican, the Sistine Chapel is the site of the conclave where every new pope is elected. It is without doubt the holiest chapel in the Christian world, and draws more than 4 million visitors per year. Most of the world knows it best for its magnificent frescoes painted by the great Renaissance artist Michelangelo Buonarroti. What has remained a little-known secret, however, is that within this citadel of Christianity lies perhaps the greatest subversive act in the history of art.

Almost none of the visitors who enter the Sistine realize that they are gazing upon secret messages embedded by Michelangelo in his artistic masterpiece. They would certainly be surprised to learn that, in the pope’s own chapel, Michelangelo employed these secret messages to advocate for a revolutionary change in Christianity’s relationship to Judaism, and that the code itself was rooted in the Jewish tradition.

Michelangelo became fascinated with Midrash and Kabbalah as a teenager, studying with private tutors provided by his patron, Lorenzo de’ Medici. Using his knowledge of Judaism and its mystical symbols, he later incorporated messages, via painted images, on the chapel’s walls dangerously contrary to the teachings of the Church. In this way, he criticized the corrupt spiritual leadership of the time, and condemned the Church’s failure to acknowledge its debt to Jewish origins.

Expressed 500 years before the more liberal contemporary theology of Pope John Paul II and “The Good Pope,” John XXIII, discovery of his secret code and heretical views might have cost Michelangelo his life.

When I first heard these claims from Roy Doliner, a Jewish docent and scholar of the humanities who has been leading tours of the Sistine Chapel for close to a decade, I assumed they were too incredible to be true. Only after he shared with me his diligent research (after which I performed a great deal of scholarly sleuthing on my own) did I became thoroughly convinced of their legitimacy.

I eventually co-authored a book with Roy, “The Sistine Secrets: Michelangelo’s Forbidden Messages in the Heart of the Vatican,” which was released earlier this year. To our great delight, the book is already beginning to alter the way scholars interpret the work of Michelangelo, sparking vigorous, and sometimes heated, debate.

“Just as the work of Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel changed forever the world of art, so will this book change forever the way to view and, above all, to understand the work of Michelangelo,” said Enrico Bruschini, official art historian for the U.S. Embassy in Rome and a leading expert on the art of Rome and the Vatican.

A true Renaissance man, Michelangelo was at home in philosophy as well as art; in Christian theology as well as Jewish mysticism. However, those who have studied his work in the past generally have not been conversant with the wide corpus of knowledge that forged him as an artist. Most Sistine Chapel scholars were not well-versed in Judaism and Kabbalah; it was impossible for them to fully grasp the artist’s allusions. By combining the scholarship of our respective fields, Roy and I, the docent and the Orthodox rabbi, were able to uncover secrets long buried in Michelangelo’s frescos.

From the start, Michelangelo had a personal agenda different from that of his patron. In 1508, we know that Pope Julius II ordered Michelangelo to re-plaster and paint the crumbling ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, a demeaning job at that time for any great artist, and especially for Michelangelo, who detested painting and lived only to sculpt. The pope gave him a simple design, a very standard and banal layout of Jesus and Mary at the two ends of the ceiling, surrounded by the Apostles and a common design of geometric shapes in the center. The artist refused, and fought with the pope who, sick and distracted, finally let him develop his own plan.

Imagine the surprise of the pope and the viewers when the completed project was unveiled four and a half years later: Ninety-five percent of the Chapel was adorned with heroes and heroines of the Jewish Bible. The rest was filled with pagan sibyls and naked boys.

In the 12,000 square feet of the world’s largest fresco, there was not a single Christian figure to be found. The only nod to the Gospels – and one of the ways Michelangelo managed to save both his life and the painting – was a barely-noticeable series of names of the Jewish ancestors of Jesus that do not even appear in chronological order. Why did Michelangelo disobey the pope in this way?

Michelangelo had a hidden agenda: to remind the Church that its roots were grounded in the Torah given to the Jewish people. This insight, which he inserted throughout his work, is only now beginning to receive attention in contemporary scholarship. It is also showing up in the popular media. Time magazine’s March 24 cover story, “10 Ideas That Are Changing the World,” singled out what scholars are now calling “Re-Judaizing Jesus” as the most powerful idea in the field of religion.

Michelangelo’s frescos emphasize the universality of God and the kinship of all mankind by beginning the pictorial narrative with the Creation story of Genesis, not with the birth of Jesus. To a Church that preached exclusionism and stressed Divine love for only a limited number of His children, Michelangelo emphasized tolerance of all faiths, even the despised Jews of his time.

One fresco exemplifying this idea is the portrait of Aminadab, father of Nachshon, which appears above the elevated area where the pope sat on his throne. Hebrew scholars know that Aminadab’s Hebrew name means, “from my people, a prince.” But the Church interprets a “prince of the Jews” to refer directly to Jesus. Michelangelo positioned Aminadab, “Prince of the Jews,” as surrogate for Jesus himself.

This is one of the extremely rare figures painted by Michelangelo sitting perfectly upright, looking forward, a signal by the artist that the figure is, indeed, noteworthy. Moreover, a bright yellow circle, a ring of cloth sewn onto a garment appears on Aminadab’s upper left arm. (This detail was not revealed for modern audiences until the frescoes were restored in 2001.) This patch displays the badge of shame forced on the Jews of Europe by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 and the Inquisition during the 15th Century. Here, directly over the head of the pope, the Vicar of Christ, Michelangelo was reminding the Church that Jesus was a Jew. He was condemning the Church for its shameful treatment of the Jews, from whom Jesus was born.

This was a courageous statement. His veiled messages were painted at a time when the Talmud and other Jewish sacred texts were being burned all over Europe, the Inquisition was operating at full strength and the Jewish people had just been expelled from Spain in 1492. Michelangelo had the courage to challenge the papal court, asking via the symbols of his painting, “Is this how you treat the very family of Our Lord?”

Michelangelo’s contempt for the Church’s treatment of Jews went further to insult the pope himself via an almost imperceptible gesture of Aminadab. Almost hidden in shadow, this surrogate for Jesus is subtly making “devil’s horns” with his fingers, which point downward toward the very spot where Pope Julius’ richly embroidered ceremonial canopy would have been, over the papal throne.

In somewhat similar manner, in another fresco placed over the original chapel portal through which Pope Julius entered, Michelangelo depicts the prophet Zechariah with the pope’s own face. Over his shoulder one can see a little angel with his fingers curled in a way to make an obscene gesture known in Italy as “giving the fig.”

In the symbolism of the Sistine Chapel frescoes, instead of shame and persecution, inclusiveness and acknowledgement of Divine Favor are the qualities Michelangelo advocates for the Church’s treatment of the Jews. We have an even more powerful indication of Michelangelo’s philo-Semitism in his later work, “The Last Judgment.”

In it, a golden-haired angel robed in red poses directly over Jesus’ head and points at two men within a group known as the “Righteous Souls,” a collection of figures who represent those privileged to spend eternity in a state of bliss with Jesus as reward for their deeds on earth. Michelangelo portrays both of these men as Jews, a potentially blasphemous act. One wears the two-pointed cap that the Church forced Jewish males to wear to reinforce the medieval prejudice that Jews, being spawned of the Devil, had horns. This figure is shown speaking to the other older Jew as he points one finger upward, indicating the One-ness of God. The other figure wears a yellow cap of shame; during the 13th century, the Church ordered Jewish men in Italy to wear such caps in public. In front of the two figures, a woman, her hair modestly covered, whispers in the ear of a nude youth before her. The youth resembles Michelangelo’s young tutor, Pico della Mirandola, who owned the largest Kabbalah library in the world at the time, and who taught the young artist secrets of Jewish mysticism as he infused within him a life-long respect for the Jewish people.

In granting Jews a place in heaven with Jesus, the 16th century Michelangelo took a then-blasphemous stand on an issue which still provokes heated debate among Christians in the 21st century. His depiction of those granted Divine Favor clearly contravened official Church doctrine, which maintained that Jews could never hope to have a Heavenly reward.

Michelangelo defined genius as “eternal patience.” This year, the 500th anniversary of Michelangelo starting his work on the Sistine ceiling, we have finally “cracked” his “code,” and his insights, ingeniously concealed in his work, can at last be heard.

Very interesting indeed!

Let us also not forget those who practically spit while uttering this “cursed” name. For many, Darwin represents the core of the ills of society and the detachment of souls from a higher purpose. Darwin has become synonymous with the devaluation of human life, and is blamed as the source of everything from a failing education system to abortion. Just give ‘em their “Old Time Religion” – it’s good enough for them.

To both groups, I offer the following extract from chapter 15 of “On the Origin of Species”. It is the last stanza from the last chapter of this work. Please, consider this if you will:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.

A “Creator” (with a capital ‘C’)?!? Oh yes. As well as “evolved”. The key is the word “forms”.

Sorry folks, Darwin was right in that he reported on his observations, and speculated based on those observations. It is the fault of those who twist his words to support their agendas that his name has become such a hot-button.

Now come on everyone – shake hands and make up.

Guess I’d better pull up the garden now. I’m thinking I’ll have to build an enclosed bio-environment, with my own seeds and my own pollinators.

Ridonkulous.

By the way, there’s hope to be found here. Please download the guide!

On the rear of this book, the author is called “archaeologist, historian, mythologist and linguist”. Her book however better reflects her as a librarian or researcher, as ponderous amount of the text consists of citations of other authors’ works. It is not with these cited authors that I can take issue, as I currently have no access to the original texts.

What I’ve noticed however is that in the passages where she “goes it on her own”, the inaccuracies fly from the page. I’ve come across many of these so far in my reading, having reached page 246 of this 400+ page book.

Last night I read page 238 of the book, where our author is trying to propose that the names of so-called “patriarchs” of the Hebrew Bible are merely borrowed from gods of the people with whom the ancient Hebrews had some association. The portion related to Noach and the Ark was being discussed by our author in relation to ancient Egypt. The passage that particularly resulted in this post was as follows (page 238 of “The Christ Conspiracy” by Acharya S):

“In Hebrew, the word for ‘ark’ is THB, as in Thebes, such that the Ark of Noah is equivalent to the Thebes of Menes, the legendary first king of the Egyptians, from whose ‘history’ the biblical account also borrowed.”

There are two problems here with Acharya S’s reasoning which go to the heart of my questioning her true credentials and motives:

First, the Hebrew word for “ark” is not “THB”. The word is “tevat” , or “TVT” (tav-vet-tav) as represented by Acharya S – often Hebrew words are represented only by their consonants since originally there were no vowels in written Hebrew. The word for “ark” is also rendered “TVH” as a definite article (ie. ‘the ark’) – see Genesis 6:14 where both ‘an ark’ (TVT) and ‘the ark’ (TVH) appear in the same passage. Even if we were to give Acharya S the benefit of the doubt of rendering the “vet” as “bet”, which is fair since without vowel marks they both look the same, we still must question why she changed the order of the the letters from “TBH” to “THB”.

Incidentally, Acharya S’s word “THB”, or “tav-he-bet” never appears in the Hebrew Bible. Anywhere.

The second issue is regarding the city of Thebes. Archarya S’s implication is that the “THB” word was borrowed by the Hebrew authors from “Thebes” in Egypt. The problem is that any archaeologist would know that Egyptians didn’t call the city “Thebes”, they called it “Waset”. At some point later the Egyptian people did begin to call Waset “Niwt-Imn” which means “City of Amun”, as is reflected in the Hebrew Bible as “No Amon” in the book of Nahum (3:8). The name of the city was not called “Thebes” until the Greek people named it “Thebai” much later.

Is this the scholarship of a ‘Linguist’, that messes up the letters of the Hebrew Bible when a listing of Hebrew consonants is readily available? Would an ‘Archaeologist’ base an argument on an anachronistic name for a city?

Come on folks, let’s have a little honesty when we argue polemics…

For references on Waset, see the Wikipedia page.

Update: originally I had cited Genesis 9:14 above, which was a typographical error. The correct passage has been updated as Genesis 6:14.

[Updated April 2009]

Ever walked through a wine section at the local store? Ever try to have a look around one of the “higher-end” purveyors of the fruit of the vine? The mere prospect of such an endeavor is enough to make you curl up in the fetal position, rock back-and-forth, and whimper for mommy. Perhaps you’ve decided to spare yourself the anguish and purchase a Wine Spectator or Wine Enthusiast publication to help you make a more informed decision. You choose the 90+ rated wine … and you hate it. What to do?

Enter Gary Vaynerchuk.

Gary hosts Wine Library TV (here). His style is second to none in wine tasting and analysis. To get a feel for how he has developed his palate to analyze wine, view Gary as a guest on Conan O’Brien’s show first:

Every time I go to my local Kosher wine store, I look specifically for those wines that Gary has tasted and rated. Even if they rate poorly, I’m always curious to compare my palate with Gary’s notes. Fortunately for those of us who drink only Kosher wine, what follows is a list of episodes that either feature or taste at least one Kosher wine.

Thank you so much Gary – you are TRULY changing the wine world, whether they like it or not!

Episodes featuring Kosher Wines

• The 200th Episode….Get Comfy – Episode #200
• Kosher Wine – Hey Seriously Watch it. – Episode #204
• Cheap Pinot Noir, Any Good Ones? – Episode #259
• Kosher Kings. Are Kosher Wines the Steals of this Era? – Episode #297
• The Fascinating Wine Show – Episode #299
• Kosher, South West France And Spanish Wine On This Monday – Episode #362
• A Kosher Wine Tasting – Episode #422
• Laid Back Friday With A Wine That Last Year Stole Gary’s Heart – Episode #428
• Kosher Wine With Matzah And Washington State Wine And More – Episode #452
• A Kosher Cabernet On A Laid Back Friday – Episode #480
• Kosher Wine Tasting for Passover – Episode #655

This is a particularly moving video, and should give serious pause as we consider the ultimate reason for our presence in this world.