Like it or not, our generation has grown up with a soundtrack of various and diverse music. Have you ever watched a bit on television, heard something in a conversation, read something in the newspaper and thought. "Hey!, that reminds me of (insert song of choice here)"? For example, while reading the "Bridge To Nowhere" thread, I automatically thought about the Talking Heads song Road To Nowhere. Not just the similarity in titles, but, the similarity in concepts. I feel pretty safe in assuming that the Talking Heads weren't making any sort of reference to The Way in this song. Still, in my mind, I could draw similarities and parallels. Someone involved with a decaying business venture or a sports team having a losing season might read an entirely different slant into it. So, this brings up a question about scripture. How can we be so sure we know what the original, intended message was? Maybe, like the aforementioned song, it was meant to include intentional ambiguity. Food for thought.
-----and that would make it impossible to "know that you know that you know" beyond the realm of your own private understanding.
So, this brings up a question about scripture. How can we be so sure we know what the original, intended message was? Maybe, like the aforementioned song, it was meant to include intentional ambiguity. Food for thought.
-----and that would make it impossible to "know that you know that you know" beyond the realm of your own private understanding.
i think this is the most profound thinking a person can reach after being in such a black and white fundamentalist legalistic cult as the way international. i also think it follows with a vast majority of the writings of any holy book that in the end say what the bible says and that is to work out your own salvation because it is all between you and your maker in the end. i like this discussion a lot!
As far as the bible being "perfect"...how can it be? Taking music as an example, a musical piece may be perfect when represented on paper with musical notes. Is every performance of the song perfect? Not any more "perfect" than the men and women who perform it. Is any performance of it ever "perfect" in a mathematical sense? I don't think so (but there is beauty in that imperfection!).
The problem with the "fits like a hand in a glove" approach is that hands can vary greatly. Blues guitarist Hound Dog Taylor, for example, had six fingers on his left hand. What sort of glove fit his hand? Jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt played all his solos with only two fingers due to a serious injury sustained in a fire. And then there was Jeff Healey who put the guitar flat on his lap and used his hands in a manner you might expect to visually associate with a piano player.
But, that's only the mechanical aspect. I'm also thinking about the lyrical content. Songs from the 1920s through 1950s were notorious for hidden meanings, double and triple entendre. Songs like Fishing Blues. Who knows how differently these songs might be interpreted a century from now?
Thought provoking topic. DYI has some assorted thoughts that cover a wide range HERE>
I think the comparison works but in a limited way. Musical expression takes different forms - scores are meant to reflect exact performance. The sound will always vary performance to performance but the notes, etc. are to be played as written.
Music is what it is, written. Performance varies, of course. Having the musical score provides the performer with the material to understand what to play and how to play it.
For awhile I studied Paganini's music. Itzhak Perhlman performed his "24 Caprices", and they're recorded. His is arguably considered the best/one of the best renderings. This is credited to his profound grasp of his instrument. "Effortless" describes his performance of them, and they're considered the bench mark, a bench mark certainly, for a violinist's achievement of the music, the instrument and technique. The musical content isn't ambiguous. It's very clear. Interesting to note I think is that the music itself is understandable when performed and heard. The score isn't the end result, the performance is.
Looking back in time we don't have recordings of actual performances of a lot of music that has become popular today. Yet if the music is written we do know very close to what the original intent was. All of the historical study around the composer, the history of the instruments, etc. - it's possible to know to a large degree what it should "sound like".
A classic example in modern American music would be indeed any one of the well known blues artists. Jimmy Reed comes to mind immediately - written out his music wouldn't communicate at all the way it actually sounded. That requires performance and in his case, JR himself to a great degree.
Banjo music also comes to mind. Written out it's ridiculous - the ultimate "black page" of notes. : ) All of the rolls and picking patterns look crazy on a page - played and seen they're easier to understand.
The bible isn't a "score" - it's more of a history and collection of writings considered to have significance to the history that's being told. I don't think most of it is difficult to understand in terms of what was intended or meant. F'rinstance "administrations" and their significance is often debated but given that the bible covers a huge range of history - from "in the beginning" to events yet to occur - it only makes sense that there would be change and transition in the history. I doubt anyone in the "Old Testament" could envision me sitting here typing this about what they wrote. God may not change but the realms of His creation do, quite clearly. So I don't see difficulty getting stuck in what was written 100's of years ago not sounding directly applicable to me today. Some things would, something wouldn't. It just takes reading and studying to work through it. There's no way to understand history without, hmmm...reading up on it.
In that way music leans more towards the "exacting precision" we heard VPW present IMO. Knowing the music, as best as it can be known, is essential to producing an exacting performance and exacting performance is what compositions intend. There are variances of course but overall music is performed "off the sheet" as written.
Is the bible the same? Across the board there are similarites - It has to be sussed out as it were. As a musician would read through a piece, listen to it if possible and get a feel for the overall composition and then dive in a reader of the bible must do the same I believe. When I listen to a song, modern pop, I can hear the harmonic structure pretty quickly and know what's coming up. Doesn't take long to understand "the changes" and relationship of the various parts. Can we do the same with the bible?
This brings up a simple fundamental fact though that can't be denied once we focus on it - no two performances are ever the "same" and no single performance is ever definitive as an end in itself. I suppose on some level musicians will hear a rendering that's so perfectly executed they'll sigh and say "Well, that's as good as it gets!" and appreciate it for what it is. Then turn around the next day and go right back to work. Faced with the highest levels of achievement we can be inspired, not defeated. Encouraged, not dismayed. :)
edited to add a bunch of crap that might still not make sense.
personally I now believe scripture is of private interpretation and is deliberately obscure and ambigourous. To take the music example, I have 6 different CD/DVD recordings on How Great Thou Art(blues, C&W, pop, rock, straight as in European, rap). Ithink we wrongly translated 2nd Timothy 2:15/3:16-17 and 2nd Peter 1:20. Besides that refered to the Tanak/Old Testament and was never applicable to New Testament.
personally I now believe scripture is of private interpretation and is deliberately obscure and ambigourous. To take the music example, I have 6 different CD/DVD recordings on How Great Thou Art(blues, C&W, pop, rock, straight as in European, rap). Ithink we wrongly translated 2nd Timothy 2:15/3:16-17 and 2nd Peter 1:20. Besides that refered to the Tanak/Old Testament and was never applicable to New Testament.
as ive mentioned around here before...christians, muslims, and jews sung and harped them for the ill, dying and grieving in europe's first hospital/hospice system.
each psalm contains a vital corresponding mood.
also, some christians, muslims and jews consider their scripture to have a full "staff" of interpretations possible.
as ive mentioned around here before...christians, muslims, and jews sung and harped them for the ill, dying and grieving in europe's first hospital/hospice system.
each psalm contains a vital corresponding mood.
also, some christians, muslims and jews consider their scripture to have a full "staff" of interpretations possible.
The psalms were intended to be sung. Recent Lutheran, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Reformed hymnals have simple musical tones for singing them and canticles(Old and New Testaments).
I think everything is scripture but I also think everything is music but I also think everything is poem but I also think everything is story but I also think everything is nothing
The reality of music, art and perhaps even the scriptures is that it's a two edged sword.
There's the rendering...the actual arrangement of the musical notes and the way they are played...
and the listener's perception of it.
I contend that two different people can listen to the same thing and perceive it differently.
...according to that person's own "being"...their collective experiences and who they are genetically.
personally I think that one of the foundations of good art, or good music is that there is no one final definitive perception that is "right" in every circumstance...They require active participation, imagination and input on the part of the listener or observer to become whatever they are in any particular moment....Ambiguity or *mystery* within the structure is healthy to me in that it can and does activate the creative impulses of the listener. There can be, and are, multiple layers of meaning within music and art as Groucho said "according to what the persons being" brings to the experience.
I dont know if Im explaining this very well...
I know that I felt much better about scripture when I could get to the point that it didnt have to mean exactly one thing all of the time, and there were multiple, maybe infinite, ways to view it. I honestly have to say that the mystery inherent within them now raises more questions for me, than it does provide 'answers'--but I like it much more that way, the questions themselves are good enough :)
Thinking further I'll try to articulate a little clearer - I can't see that "scripture" is deliberately ambiguous or that the "Bible" as a whole meant to be interpreted by each reader.
Parts of it are simply records, stories and recounts of events. How can the intention of the retelling of a series of events be deliberately ambiguous, with the intention that the reader come to their own conclusions about what's stated? It doesn't make sense to me.
Interpretation has to be assumed as part of the intake process - reading and understanding what's read. Some form of interpretation has to occur, however the idea that each person can have a different conclusion in every instance doesn't stand to reason IMO. Or put another way, each person can have a different interpretation and possibly will, but not all interpretations can be correct.
If I assume the "bible" as a whole is meant to allow me to come to my own conclusions it would also assume that all of the records, written at different times by different people in different cultures, all had the same intentions and that one was to allow the reader to have their own interpretation.
It would be easier to assume that if there was a single author with that intention. That could be the case. Who would that be?
If I say "it's 75 degrees today":
One person might say "I feel warm".
Another person might say "it's cool, I need a sweater".
Are both right? Yes. But it's still 75 degrees.
Music can stack a chord thusly: C - F - G
Context can determine the chord differently - a C major, an F9, etc.
Are all correct? Yes - and this is where I see the ambiguity but only when viewed singley. Based on context a correct "interpretation" of the chord becomes obvious.
Disagreement on the conclusion in that sense is ridiculous - there is no disagreement other than on an intellectual level. A chord can be interpreted different ways but based on context there will be one that is correct based on the harmonic flow and movement of all the notes before and after......
So, this brings up a question about scripture. How can we be so sure we know what the original, intended message was?
-----and that would make it impossible to "know that you know that you know" beyond the realm of your own private understanding.
Exactly. I don't think anyone can claim without a "shadow of a doubt" to know the original intended message. We have some good educated guesses from scholars, but those come only after YEARS of study in the history of the text, languages of the texts, etc. This subject raises a lot of issues for me, but suffice it to say, this point was one of many that caused me to finally resign from the Research Team in 1986 and leave TWI.
BTW - Some say the poetic language of some parts of scripture, i.e. Pslams, is very musical...music and poetry have a long history together. Good writing often correlates to the rhythms of music.
one of my favorite subjects is art interpretation, which applies to music and literature, as well as anything else in the universe, including scriptural ARTifacts.
asking "what is scripture?" is somewhat like asking "what is art?" ...or "what does art mean?" ...and the different ways the art question has been answered may shed light on the different ways the scripture question is answered.
...
some argue that art means what the artist intended.
some argue that art is the result of the unconscious desires of the artist.
some argue that art is the result of the cultural and historic background through which the artist came to be in the world.
some argue that art is the act of making art...the skill and behavior involved in producing the artifact.
some argue that art is the art...the arrangement and composition of the materials.
some argue that art is what the viewers say the art is...the critics and society's response.
some argue that art continually unfolds in history, adding layers upon layers of meaning and context.
some argue that everything is art, and art is just a word in language.
some, like myself, argue that art is all of the above.
It's amazing the sources you find a little bit of truth..
*A Parable*
"Imagine a society in which the citizens are encouraged, indeed compelled up to a certain age to read(and sometimes write) musical scores. All quite admirable,. However this society also has a very curious law-few remember how it all started- and the disturbing law: Music must never be listened to or performed!"
This was from Tristan Needham in his preface to Visual Complex Analysis, regarding mathematics..
isn't this what we've had for one century after another..
Written music is not a recipe so much as it's an analysis.
Recipe type scenario:
I decide I want to bake a "killah" cake so I sit down with pen and paper. What should I put in it? Let's see. Usual flour, eggs, water etc.----1/2 cup of walnuts, 1/8 tsp of cherry extract, 1/8 tsp of anise, 1/4 tsp of eye of newt ----and so on. Next, I bake it and scrutinize the results.
Analysis type scenario:
I decide I want to bake a "killah" cake so I start throwing ingredients together as I'm inspired. A little of this, a scootch of that, a pinch of something else, etc. When it's finished, I reflect on what I put in it and commit that memory to paper.
Written music can be either or both. I think, for the most part, though, that most written music is, in essence, more of an analysis of "what was" than a recipe of "what shall be".
Recommended Posts
Broken Arrow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hweXcgF1DRI
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
i think this is the most profound thinking a person can reach after being in such a black and white fundamentalist legalistic cult as the way international. i also think it follows with a vast majority of the writings of any holy book that in the end say what the bible says and that is to work out your own salvation because it is all between you and your maker in the end. i like this discussion a lot!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
I think music is also like scripture in that it is not perfect or "inerrant."
I wrote this in another thread...
As far as the bible being "perfect"...how can it be? Taking music as an example, a musical piece may be perfect when represented on paper with musical notes. Is every performance of the song perfect? Not any more "perfect" than the men and women who perform it. Is any performance of it ever "perfect" in a mathematical sense? I don't think so (but there is beauty in that imperfection!).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
The problem with the "fits like a hand in a glove" approach is that hands can vary greatly. Blues guitarist Hound Dog Taylor, for example, had six fingers on his left hand. What sort of glove fit his hand? Jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt played all his solos with only two fingers due to a serious injury sustained in a fire. And then there was Jeff Healey who put the guitar flat on his lap and used his hands in a manner you might expect to visually associate with a piano player.
But, that's only the mechanical aspect. I'm also thinking about the lyrical content. Songs from the 1920s through 1950s were notorious for hidden meanings, double and triple entendre. Songs like Fishing Blues. Who knows how differently these songs might be interpreted a century from now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thought provoking topic. DYI has some assorted thoughts that cover a wide range HERE>
I think the comparison works but in a limited way. Musical expression takes different forms - scores are meant to reflect exact performance. The sound will always vary performance to performance but the notes, etc. are to be played as written.
Music is what it is, written. Performance varies, of course. Having the musical score provides the performer with the material to understand what to play and how to play it.
For awhile I studied Paganini's music. Itzhak Perhlman performed his "24 Caprices", and they're recorded. His is arguably considered the best/one of the best renderings. This is credited to his profound grasp of his instrument. "Effortless" describes his performance of them, and they're considered the bench mark, a bench mark certainly, for a violinist's achievement of the music, the instrument and technique. The musical content isn't ambiguous. It's very clear. Interesting to note I think is that the music itself is understandable when performed and heard. The score isn't the end result, the performance is.
Looking back in time we don't have recordings of actual performances of a lot of music that has become popular today. Yet if the music is written we do know very close to what the original intent was. All of the historical study around the composer, the history of the instruments, etc. - it's possible to know to a large degree what it should "sound like".
A classic example in modern American music would be indeed any one of the well known blues artists. Jimmy Reed comes to mind immediately - written out his music wouldn't communicate at all the way it actually sounded. That requires performance and in his case, JR himself to a great degree.
Banjo music also comes to mind. Written out it's ridiculous - the ultimate "black page" of notes. : ) All of the rolls and picking patterns look crazy on a page - played and seen they're easier to understand.
The bible isn't a "score" - it's more of a history and collection of writings considered to have significance to the history that's being told. I don't think most of it is difficult to understand in terms of what was intended or meant. F'rinstance "administrations" and their significance is often debated but given that the bible covers a huge range of history - from "in the beginning" to events yet to occur - it only makes sense that there would be change and transition in the history. I doubt anyone in the "Old Testament" could envision me sitting here typing this about what they wrote. God may not change but the realms of His creation do, quite clearly. So I don't see difficulty getting stuck in what was written 100's of years ago not sounding directly applicable to me today. Some things would, something wouldn't. It just takes reading and studying to work through it. There's no way to understand history without, hmmm...reading up on it.
In that way music leans more towards the "exacting precision" we heard VPW present IMO. Knowing the music, as best as it can be known, is essential to producing an exacting performance and exacting performance is what compositions intend. There are variances of course but overall music is performed "off the sheet" as written.
Is the bible the same? Across the board there are similarites - It has to be sussed out as it were. As a musician would read through a piece, listen to it if possible and get a feel for the overall composition and then dive in a reader of the bible must do the same I believe. When I listen to a song, modern pop, I can hear the harmonic structure pretty quickly and know what's coming up. Doesn't take long to understand "the changes" and relationship of the various parts. Can we do the same with the bible?
This brings up a simple fundamental fact though that can't be denied once we focus on it - no two performances are ever the "same" and no single performance is ever definitive as an end in itself. I suppose on some level musicians will hear a rendering that's so perfectly executed they'll sigh and say "Well, that's as good as it gets!" and appreciate it for what it is. Then turn around the next day and go right back to work. Faced with the highest levels of achievement we can be inspired, not defeated. Encouraged, not dismayed. :)
edited to add a bunch of crap that might still not make sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
personally I now believe scripture is of private interpretation and is deliberately obscure and ambigourous. To take the music example, I have 6 different CD/DVD recordings on How Great Thou Art(blues, C&W, pop, rock, straight as in European, rap). Ithink we wrongly translated 2nd Timothy 2:15/3:16-17 and 2nd Peter 1:20. Besides that refered to the Tanak/Old Testament and was never applicable to New Testament.
Edited by Thomas Loy BumgarnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Thank you, Thomas.
You said it much better than I could.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
fwiw...to some, the psalms are music.
as ive mentioned around here before...christians, muslims, and jews sung and harped them for the ill, dying and grieving in europe's first hospital/hospice system.
each psalm contains a vital corresponding mood.
also, some christians, muslims and jews consider their scripture to have a full "staff" of interpretations possible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
You know. I wasn't quite sure how this topic would be received. I must say, though, that all the responses have been great.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
The psalms were intended to be sung. Recent Lutheran, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Reformed hymnals have simple musical tones for singing them and canticles(Old and New Testaments).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
scriptures as music
will its inspired
it read and sung
it can be called a poem
it can be called a story
I think everything is scripture but I also think everything is music but I also think everything is poem but I also think everything is story but I also think everything is nothing
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
A very interesting topic indeed...
The reality of music, art and perhaps even the scriptures is that it's a two edged sword.
There's the rendering...the actual arrangement of the musical notes and the way they are played...
and the listener's perception of it.
I contend that two different people can listen to the same thing and perceive it differently.
...according to that person's own "being"...their collective experiences and who they are genetically.
Much of the bible is written to the individual...not the collective.
I believe that truth is truth...but that we all experience it differently.
Edited by GrouchoMarxJrLink to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
personally I think that one of the foundations of good art, or good music is that there is no one final definitive perception that is "right" in every circumstance...They require active participation, imagination and input on the part of the listener or observer to become whatever they are in any particular moment....Ambiguity or *mystery* within the structure is healthy to me in that it can and does activate the creative impulses of the listener. There can be, and are, multiple layers of meaning within music and art as Groucho said "according to what the persons being" brings to the experience.
I dont know if Im explaining this very well...
I know that I felt much better about scripture when I could get to the point that it didnt have to mean exactly one thing all of the time, and there were multiple, maybe infinite, ways to view it. I honestly have to say that the mystery inherent within them now raises more questions for me, than it does provide 'answers'--but I like it much more that way, the questions themselves are good enough :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Broken Arrow
that a good example of scripture, music, poem, story, and nothing
thanks
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cheranne
I hear ya Waysider,I thought that was PTSD,as for musci I think those who are musically inclined think automatically of songs
remember that show name that tune?
You had to name the song like on 2 or 3 notes. It just brought back that to memory,however in The Way memories were not
always so good. so you at first get that scripture according to THE WAY(and all there classes) I really had to work on erasing
and rewinding the scripture from twisted to real.
That took a while but that is what I had to do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thinking further I'll try to articulate a little clearer - I can't see that "scripture" is deliberately ambiguous or that the "Bible" as a whole meant to be interpreted by each reader.
Parts of it are simply records, stories and recounts of events. How can the intention of the retelling of a series of events be deliberately ambiguous, with the intention that the reader come to their own conclusions about what's stated? It doesn't make sense to me.
Interpretation has to be assumed as part of the intake process - reading and understanding what's read. Some form of interpretation has to occur, however the idea that each person can have a different conclusion in every instance doesn't stand to reason IMO. Or put another way, each person can have a different interpretation and possibly will, but not all interpretations can be correct.
If I assume the "bible" as a whole is meant to allow me to come to my own conclusions it would also assume that all of the records, written at different times by different people in different cultures, all had the same intentions and that one was to allow the reader to have their own interpretation.
It would be easier to assume that if there was a single author with that intention. That could be the case. Who would that be?
If I say "it's 75 degrees today":
One person might say "I feel warm".
Another person might say "it's cool, I need a sweater".
Are both right? Yes. But it's still 75 degrees.
Music can stack a chord thusly: C - F - G
Context can determine the chord differently - a C major, an F9, etc.
Are all correct? Yes - and this is where I see the ambiguity but only when viewed singley. Based on context a correct "interpretation" of the chord becomes obvious.
Disagreement on the conclusion in that sense is ridiculous - there is no disagreement other than on an intellectual level. A chord can be interpreted different ways but based on context there will be one that is correct based on the harmonic flow and movement of all the notes before and after......
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Exactly. I don't think anyone can claim without a "shadow of a doubt" to know the original intended message. We have some good educated guesses from scholars, but those come only after YEARS of study in the history of the text, languages of the texts, etc. This subject raises a lot of issues for me, but suffice it to say, this point was one of many that caused me to finally resign from the Research Team in 1986 and leave TWI.
BTW - Some say the poetic language of some parts of scripture, i.e. Pslams, is very musical...music and poetry have a long history together. Good writing often correlates to the rhythms of music.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
been pondering this thread some more...
one of my favorite subjects is art interpretation, which applies to music and literature, as well as anything else in the universe, including scriptural ARTifacts.
asking "what is scripture?" is somewhat like asking "what is art?" ...or "what does art mean?" ...and the different ways the art question has been answered may shed light on the different ways the scripture question is answered.
...
some argue that art means what the artist intended.
some argue that art is the result of the unconscious desires of the artist.
some argue that art is the result of the cultural and historic background through which the artist came to be in the world.
some argue that art is the act of making art...the skill and behavior involved in producing the artifact.
some argue that art is the art...the arrangement and composition of the materials.
some argue that art is what the viewers say the art is...the critics and society's response.
some argue that art continually unfolds in history, adding layers upon layers of meaning and context.
some argue that everything is art, and art is just a word in language.
some, like myself, argue that art is all of the above.
same with scripture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
It's amazing the sources you find a little bit of truth..
*A Parable*
"Imagine a society in which the citizens are encouraged, indeed compelled up to a certain age to read(and sometimes write) musical scores. All quite admirable,. However this society also has a very curious law-few remember how it all started- and the disturbing law: Music must never be listened to or performed!"
This was from Tristan Needham in his preface to Visual Complex Analysis, regarding mathematics..
isn't this what we've had for one century after another..
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Written music is not a recipe so much as it's an analysis.
Recipe type scenario:
I decide I want to bake a "killah" cake so I sit down with pen and paper. What should I put in it? Let's see. Usual flour, eggs, water etc.----1/2 cup of walnuts, 1/8 tsp of cherry extract, 1/8 tsp of anise, 1/4 tsp of eye of newt ----and so on. Next, I bake it and scrutinize the results.
Analysis type scenario:
I decide I want to bake a "killah" cake so I start throwing ingredients together as I'm inspired. A little of this, a scootch of that, a pinch of something else, etc. When it's finished, I reflect on what I put in it and commit that memory to paper.
Written music can be either or both. I think, for the most part, though, that most written music is, in essence, more of an analysis of "what was" than a recipe of "what shall be".
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
yeah.. but the unwritten rule in the last several centuries, among *some* bibleticians..
scripture is to be read, composed about.. never played.. it never seems to interface with reality..
in terms of the "mathematical exactness" and all..
yep. "rightly divided"..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well, it's the cake you design on paper, using precisely measured ingredients, but never actually bake. (or eat)
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
perhaps that's the whole point..
I know a few.. who on the other end of this existence will be kicking themselves in their own rear..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.