The following is written by a beloved friend of Elisha’s Riddle – Barry Karasiewicz.
The Collins English Dictionary defines Half-Life as follows:
half-life
in American English
(ˈhæfˌlaif, ˈhɑːf-)
NOUN
Word forms: plural -lives (-ˌlaivz)
- Physics
the time required for one half the atoms of a given amount of a radioactive substance to disintegrate
- Pharmacology
the time required for the activity of a substance taken into the body to lose one half its initial effectiveness
- Informal
a brief period during which something flourishes before dying out
Some Background
There have been discussions on if Twinkies are radioactive, or if they are to be included in the halls of pharmacology thanks to evidence presented in the trial of Dan White for his murder of San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk, but that have no bearing on today’s topic, which is focused on the third definition Collins provided . . . the longevity of the Twinkie.
When I was a younger man ensconced on the banks of the Hudson River at Culinary School, we found many academically unconventional ways to pass our spare time with lesser scholarly efforts other than what was required in the curriculum. Among these endeavors were Dorm Bowling, where we studied the acoustics of recently liberated bowling balls rolling down the hallways and stairwells of the dormitory. These experiments were conducted late at night, as not to have the ambient noise of diurnal activity interfere with the project. On other occasions, we attempted to ascertain the terminal velocity of a watermelon by jettisoning said watermelon from a fourth story window of the main academic building. This experiment was likewise conducted late at night to ensure the safety of pedestrians, who don’t tend to gather at the academic facility after midnight.
These scholarly pursuits, and many like them, had taken place in the wee hours of the morning; however one significant study had taken place over many years, both in the light of the day, and under the cover of darkness. This was the study of The Half-Life of a Twinkie.
During the first week of my first semester at the culinary school, my newfound friends and I were engaged in a conversation about what constituted “food” and whether or not a Twinkie ought to be included in the category of “food.” Many arguments were made in favor and against, some well-reasoned, and some incoherent about the matter at hand. We eventually concluded that a Twinkie lasts forever, is indestructible when left to its own devices (of which there aren’t any), and therefore could not be metabolized and used as nutrition; hence the Twinkie is not “food.” We decided that this was the right time to invoke the Empirical Method of Observation, a.k.a. “The Scientific Method.”
At this point you may be asking “What is The Scientific Method”?
The Scientific Method, the Empirical Method of Observation is a methodical approach of determining the How and the Why of the things that happen. It is a multi-step process.
First you come up with a question, then gather some preliminary information and form a hypothesis. After this you perform some sort of test, an experiment, then analyze the resulting data to see if your hypothesis was correct or not. If the data supports your hypothesis, you publish the results so your peers can review your work, and confirm your results, or they can send you back to the drawing board with a new hypothesis. This cycle repeats itself until everyone is on the same page and we have “settled science”; that is until somebody comes along with a new hypothesis, data, conclusions, etc., and the whole thing starts over again.
That’s how we do science.
Well, that is how we used to do science. These days we just make up stuff as we go along and get our buddies to agree with us. If anybody disagrees, we simply call them names and shut them out of the conversation. This is why some of you may be unfamiliar with the Empirical Method of Observation.
But I digress…
This is a tale from back in the day, when men were men, and women were not men, and that’s how we did science back in the day. Now let us return to the Twinkie. (Remember the Twinkie? This is a story about the Twinkie.)
The Test
My buddies and I had reached a hypothesis that a Twinkie is not food because it exists from date of manufacture into eternity future, is immutable, is essentially indestructible, and would last forever; hence it could not be metabolized. But how, with our limited resources (after all, we were poor, dissolute, starving students at Culinary School) could we find a way to prove this?
Luckily for us, one of our cohorts was an entrepreneur who bought his triple beam scale to school, as digital scales were not fashionable or affordable at that time, and we would weigh the Twinkie to the 100th of a gram, and re-weigh at the end of a year, then extrapolate the Half-Life of a Twinkie.
We made our way to the vending machines, and with the help of a coat hanger and a rudimentary knowledge of mechanical engineering, we procured the subject of our investigation.
We removed the cellophane wrapping and weighed the Twinkie and recorded the weight. We again weighed the Twinkie, and again recorded the weight. We did this again a third time to ensure accuracy. We then placed the Twinkie on a shelf, atop some textbooks, where we knew it would not be disturbed for the rest of the year, and the experiment commenced. At the end of the year, we weighed the Twinkie three times, and compared the weight to the earlier records. We were unprepared for what we found.
The Twinkie had increased in weight.
It was time to form a new hypothesis
We examined the Twinkie and found that a layer of dust had formed on its surface. We also observed the “footprint” of the Twinkie on the dust that had settled on the textbooks where we stashed the Twinkie for safekeeping. We hypothesized that the dust accounted for the added weight. We put this new hypothesis to the test, blew off the dust, reweighed the Twinkie, and found no discernible difference in weight from when we started this experiment. From the available data, we determined that, indeed, it has no half-life. A Twinkie is forever.
But one vital question remained to be answered . . . was this thing still edible? Unable to find a willing subject, it was decided that we needed to take the route that every cheesy movie with a Mad Scientist inevitably takes – test it on yourself. We drew straws, and I was the lucky winner.
Despite being a bit dusty, the outer cake had the usual taste and texture of freshly extruded styrofoam and sugar while the “Soft Creamy Center” remained true to its unnatural form.
The Soft Creamy Center
That’s what I’ve been trying to get to. I haven’t been spending all this time writing this simply to waste your time. There is a point to be made here. It’s all about the “Soft Creamy Center.”
Many years ago, while attending a conference, there was a gentlemen named John Crowder, well-known to the self-appointed heresy hunters for having the sheer unmitigated audacity to publicly preach that God is Good (All the Time), and that He not only loves us unconditionally, but is actively seeking out the best for us continuously, despite any of our own efforts to the contrary.
“Heresy hunter.”
Did I say that? Yes, I did.
And what, you may be asking, is a heresy hunter?
A “heresy hunter” is someone who is under the delusion that they alone (and possibly some of their friends who agree with them) have exclusive understanding and the only correct interpretation of the immeasurable Logos of God. These folks have foisted it upon themselves to dedicate their time and energy correcting, admonishing, vilifying, condemning, attacking, and destroying anyone and everyone who does not share their opinions. (Kinda like the way folks “do science” these days.)
These folks seem to think that when all is said and done, they will be hearing something like this:
GOD: “Well done, my good and faithful servant. Your theology is perfect. It totally blows me away. But before you enter into the Joy of the Lord, we need to sit down and chat for a few millennia, and have Gabriel take notes so all of us here can be as enlightened as you.”
Unfortunately, what these folks do not realize is that their actions and exclusiveness of inclusion are divisive. Interestingly, the Greek root word behind “heretic” is also the word used for a person who is divisive. Thus, in their quest to root out heresy, they are, by definition, heretics.
Now don’t get me wrong. There are indeed heretics running around out there spewing out heresies. It’s a real thing. However, to devote all your time searching out “heretics” rather than searching out the indescribable depths of Christ’s love is, at best, poor decision-making; or, at worse, a delusion that pride is somehow a virtue. After all, is it not prideful that you (and your ilk) have sole exclusivity on the Creator of the Universe?
In the end, it’s a bummer to be a heresy hunter. If you ever run into one, be nice, bring them a nice slice of apple pie and ice cream, maybe a hot cocoa if it’s winter. They need some kindness in their lives.
But I digress…
To further compound this alleged “heresy,” this gentleman made it clear that not only is God unimaginably good, but that ALL the goodness of His Kingdom is freely available to us RIGHT NOW. This was described as “the Soft Creamy Center of Heaven’s Twinkie.” Nothing is required on our part to access to this creamy center . . . no religious works, no sacrificial offerings of fasting or ritualized prayer and supplication; no spiritual gymnastics. Jesus Christ has already done it all. The only thing we need to do is to simply accept and believe that Jesus Christ has done exactly what He said He would do.
Now, making matters worse, the heresy hunters also got bent out of shape when Mr. Crowder decreed that jumping through religious hoops is essentially a declaration that Jesus Christ was not “god enough” to provide for salvation. He also stated that Jesus’s enduring of the cross was only a half-measure, which really leaves it up to us to ensure our union with the Creator. This inevitably places us in the position of being “co-redeemers,” which elevates our own importance while simultaneously devaluing Jesus’s.
Needless to say, many of the heresy hunters had total full-tilt conniptions over these things. And when Jesus and the apostle Paul were repeatedly quoted (in context) to support these realities . . . well, you can imagine their reaction.
That was about a decade or so ago. Much of the backlash of the Gospel being preached by John Crowder has died down . . . mostly. There are still a few who are offended by the Goodness of God as clearly stated in Scripture. But there are many more who have taken a Half Gainer off the high board and done a deep dive into the Soft Creamy Center of the Gospel.
God changes not. Neither do Twinkies.
The Half-Life of a Twinkie is just shy of forever. Only God is forever. Take the deep dive into “the Soft Creamy Center” of the eternal Gospel
Thanks for letting me take up your time.