Obama's Health Care Plan!

In recent weeks the debate over government controlled health care has escalated.

I am amazed at how our society behaves. Currently, there are many people argueing, in political circles, that opposition to the new healthcare plan is rooted in racism. This is a ridiculous, malicious statement. How dare a group of people use such serious accusations, rooted in nothing more than manipulative behavior, to push their ideas. Racism is, and has been a serious problem in our society. It disgusts me that many, who are "so opposed" to racism and desire an end to it, continue to fuel its reality in order to further agendas.

Let me attest that what I say is not biased, because I support neither the right or the left. Both Republicans and Democrats alike, are in the pockets of the same people. These political parties divide society, fueling issues in order to gain support of one of those divided segments. Then, they play out their cleverly divised plan to make people feel as though they have that paticular group of people's best interest in mind. This is done in order fulfill a specific agenda. Its quite brilliant in that you make people feel like you are giving them what they want, or need, yet in the big picture the reality is to the contrary. Both roads, be it Republican or Democrat, lead to the same place along different paths (That would be a Globalized One World Government).

The reality is that any semi-educated person can see that the proposed healthcare plan is a bad plan. I will be the first to admit that we need healthcare reform in our nation. It's messed up, but replacing one mess with another mess is by no means a solution.

I encourage you all to read the plan carefuly, and then make a decision as to whether or not it is right for our nation. Do not allow yourself to be manipulated by the powers that be, Republican or Democrat, and their sick twisted tools of mind control!

When will America wake up and realize that Government from the Right, or the Left does not have the peoples best interest in mind. They just want you to believe they do in order to fulfill their agendas.

Albert Pujols

O.k. It could be said that I am a huge St. Louis Cardinal fan, and even bigger fan of the man known as "The Machine."

Over his career in major league baseball, it could be argued that Albert Pujols has been the most consistant player to ever put on a uniform. The guy's career numbers average out to a batting average over .330, 40 home runs, 100+ runs, and 120+ RBI per year. The amazing thing is that year in and year out these numbers are astonishingly similar.

This year is panning out to be no different than years past. The first half of the '09 season was probably his best to date.

This leads me to last nights game against the New York Mets. Albert came into the game in a pretty big slump that had all the experts talking. Well, it's the next day and they are quiet now! It appears the slump is over. Albert finished the night 4 for 5 with a double, 2 homeruns (one being an extra inning grand salami) and 5 RBI.

In an era clouded by the steroid scandal, Albert Pujols has given baseball back its honor. Not only is Albert quickly becoming one of the greatest of all time, he is a good man, and a disciple of Christ!

It's a pleasure to witness his accomplishments on the baseball field, and his bold profession of his faith.

Go Phat Albert!

Photography!

For most of my life I have had a huge appreciation and interest in the arts. From the time I was very young I have been exposed to many mediums through my own participation, and more important to my post, through my fathers great successes in gallery photography.

Although I have always admired his work and enjoyed others work through gallery displays, I never was involved myself, until just recently. I just aquired a nice camera several weeks ago as a result of my dads generosity.

I must admit that it has opened my eyes up to a whole new world! When you start puposefully looking at things from the perpective of a photographer, you appreciate the beauty of the simple things. A rusty pipe can become as beautiful as the prettiest of flowers.

I am so thankful that my father had such an appreciation all these years and passed it on to me!

Love ya Dad!

Calvinist vs. Arminian

These days there is much debate over these two lines of theological ideology. However, I'm just not sure that the two don't share more communication differences than theological differences.

The reality is that God is eternal. He exists outside mans concept of time. This means that God exists in the past, present, and future all at once. He does know which of us is going to heaven and which of us is going to hell before we are born. This gives credit to the calvinist line of theology. However, at the same time He has given us free will. Therefore, He is not choosing what our destination is, rather he allows us to choose on our own, following along with the arminian line of thought.

This is an extraordinary concept. Imagine you and your wife planning to have a baby, and knowing that the child you create will go to Hell, yet creating the child none the less. That's pain and suffering my friends. As much as He desires your love, He knows whether our not you will choose to give your love to Him. It must break His heart.

He does not damn us. We damn ourselves, and yet He gives us life anyway.

Then again, God can intervene if He chooses, can't He? What an amazing mystery it all is!

Whether you are a calvinist or an arminian we all worship the God of Isaac, Abraham, and Jacob. Sometimes our differences aren't so much differences, rather they are different explanations of the same thing. That "thing" is something we can't fully understand in the first place, because we are not God.

Two Covenants

Aside from Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul is the most important figure in the history of Christianity. Thirteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament are attributed to him. These thirteen books can be divided into three categories; undisputed, disputed, and pastoral epistles. Although Paul’s undisputed letters laid the foundation of Christianity, as we know it, most of the modern evangelical church has grossly misunderstood what Paul’s message really meant, particularly in regards to the righteousness of God. Paul’s writings, like the Gospels, had a specific genre, purpose, and occasion 2000 years ago. Paul’s letter to the Galatians is a perfect example. By analyzing a specific passage from Galatians, we gain a clear understanding of what Paul truly intended, when writing this particular text.

Galatians, along with Romans, is considered to be one of Paul’s most important letters. The misinterpretation of this letter, along with Romans, was largely responsible for the Protestant Reformation( this is not to say that the reformation was a bad thing). It’s Paul’s most angry letter. He is writing in response to the Church embracing the message of Judeazires (Christian Jews), who argued that Pagan Gentiles must be circumcised, and follow the Torah, in order to be “ justified,” or have membership in the covenant community of God. They claimed that because Paul’s message argued to the contrary, he was a “renegade” that had broken away from the true Church. Within Galatians, Paul delivers an ingenious response, using Abraham’s covenant with the Hebrew God, proving otherwise.

Within the context of Galatians 4: 21-31, we see a perfect example of this. One of the important terms in this particular section of the letter is the “The Law.” Modern Christians have grossly misunderstood this term, by not understanding its context. When Paul spoke of “The Law” he was referring to “Jewish Law” and the “Torah,” not modern day authority. He goes on, in this part of the letter, to describe Abraham’s two sons. He explains that the son born of his bondservant was born according to the flesh, or the world, where as the son born of Sarah, his wife, and free woman, was born according to the “Promise,” by faith. He does this to show that the two sons represented an earthly Jerusalem and a spiritual Jerusalem. He parallels Hagar’s son to the earthly Jerusalem and the “Torah,” which leads to bondage, and compares Sarah’s son to Gentile Pagan Converts, who are free from bondage of “The Law,” and members of the covenant community through acceptance of the resurrected Jesus. He describes this as two covenants. Whereas Hagar’s son, representing “The Law,” leads to a covenant in bondage, the son of Sarah leads to freedom in a Jerusalem above. This covenant is found in Jesus, who now sets on his throne in the heavenly realm, and leads to spiritual freedom. Paul develops this part of the letter in order to set the stage where he may prove that pagan gentile converts don’t receive justification through “The Law,” but through their acceptance of the resurrected Jesus. Therefore, by using scripture directly from the Torah, Paul proves that “The Law” itself describes how Pagan Gentiles are rightful members of the covenant community. In essence, they are not just members of God’s covenant community, but they have a better covenant through Christ, than Jews have in “The Law.”

In an attempt to keep order within the churches that he founded, Paul wrote his letters to specific churches and persons, desiring to address particular issues and problems. He never intended, nor imagined, that in the future, these letters would help to form the foundation of the New Testament Scriptures, as we know them today. As modern Christians, if we truly intend to grasp Paul’s message, as it relates to universal and timeless truth, we must understand who Paul was, who he was writing to, and why he was writing at the time his letters were created 2000 years ago.

Controversy

Americans love controversy! Whether it's an officer and his arrest of an older black man, or John and Kate, Americans are obsessed with taking sides and having opinions about circumstances that they in reality know nothing about.

The only source we use to make serious conclusions about such incidents are second hand accounts. These takes are filtered through news media and other persons who in reality are nothing more than distributers of hearsay. They weren't "there" to "witness" it, so why do we insist on developing strong stances and beliefs about people we don't know based on their information.

I fear that small incidents and the opinions we form surrounding those incidents could lead to a full fledged war someday if we are not careful.

Take this situation with the Cambridge professor and the officer who arrested him for example. Is it possible that in some sense neither of these people did anything wrong? Maybe due to the sad culural difference that have been created throughout our history between races puts the professor in a position in which he felt violated. At the same time is it possible that, because of how the situation developed, the officer was just doing his job?

The fact is that I don't know, and neither do any of you! The only people who have the answers are the two men involved in the situation. It's almost as if we just love for controversy to exist out of some twisted need for "drama!"

If you weren't there don't pretend or proclaim to know what happened. It's silly! Don't allow the media to make your opinions for you.

Miley Cyrus and Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club!

O.k. So I am watching television this morning ( that was my first mistake) and I saw a sixteen year old girl performing on stage dressed like she was 30-40 and trying her best to act like she was 30-40. What!!@@**????

This increasingly common practice of children trying to appear, and act like adults has become one of the most disturbing trends in American culture.

Even worse is that these sixteen year old children and their marketing is targeted at 3-10 year old children! What!!##*@@????

What is going on in our society? Have we lost all accountability and reason?

We plaster the man accused of child molestation all over the television and act like we can't believe what "he" or "she" did. However, after the "Dateline" special ends, and we have our weekly fillup of "Can you believe its," we march our children out the local clothing store to buy clothing that would be best suited on a street corner in the Red Light District.

And don't get me wrong with these "teen" stars. It's not just what they wear, it's how they carry themselves. We are trying our best to help children be "all grown up!"

That leads to the next point, which is that the grown ups are now trying to emulate the teen star also! These kids don't need to grow up too fast, but adults need to have a little more class. Come on ladies and gents. Don't hold on to some romantic sense of the younger generation. Embrace your own!

Parents...make sure that you encourage your children to be children, and adults... you aren't a kid. Stop acting like one!

PISTACHIO ALMOND ICE CREAM!

Life doesn't get any better than this!

Pistachio Almond ice cream and 15 channels of MLB to choose from makes a man feel at peace with the world.

Maybe I could become Obama's Pistachio Almond Ice Cream Czar!

Home Ownership and the American Dream!

If you buy a house with a mortgage... is it worth it?

Consider this. Most mortgages today are 30yrs.

The argument for buying is that your home builds equity right? After a $500-$700 yearly insurance cost, $1000.00 + in taxes yearly, and $1500+ in maintenance and upkeep per year over 30yrs you have payed in $90,000.00+ in add ons.

Where is the equity, and why not just rent if you can't pay cash?

Idol Worship!

I was listening to a podcast the other day about idol worship. Something was said that really strikes a nerve about idol worship.

A sure sign that you are idolizing something is that you demonize something else. For example, if you idolize you political party, then you demonize another political party. Wow! It seems we all have a great lesson to learn. We all idolize things in some shape, form, or fashion.

The question is... what do we do about it?

Michael Jackson

Here is the thing with MJ. Did he molest children?The fact is, we weren't present and therefore, we will never know. Does his behavior and accusations warrant the assumption by many that he was guilty? I would say yes.

However, although he was strange and erratic and it seems logical to assume he did molest children, more concrete evidence actually points to some money hungry individuals making false accusations.Like it or not, this is true. You see, the problem with boldly stating that he was guilty without proof is that you make these assumptions on emotion and circumstantial evidence. Not only is this my opinion, it's also a biblical priciple. The Bible tells us not to bear false witness. When we say someone is guilty of a crime we didn't see... we are bearing false witness.

Anytime someone is accused of this type of behavior we all tend to do the same thing. We assume that the accused is guilty because of the fact that the issue involves children. It's understandable. A child and it's innocence is a sacred thing that we all want to protect.

The problem is that the accusation of child molestation in our culture is slowly becoming the Salem Witch trial of the modern era. Just look at these Dateline Specials for example. We glorify child molestation. We are entertained by the thought of people being guilty of being a pedafile.

We must make sure that we set emotion aside and use logical thought when making judgements reguarding such accusations. We have to make sure that when we hear of someone being accused of such actions, to hope and pray they did not do that which they where accused of and then leave it in the hands of the law. I think that if we are honest with ourselves, more often than not, we find them guilty the moment we hear they are accused.

If we are not careful, we will find ourselves living in a world where we don't have a chance to defend our innocence against any charge.

Homosexuality

Homosexuality is a touchy subject in America, right?

As a Christian, I do have a Biblical perspective on the issue. However, my perspective is not the stereotypical perspective of the Western Church.

How many soap box preaching, bull horn toting, representatives of Christianity have you heard say, " The Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination unto God?"

Well, it does say that... but guess what? Proverbs 6:16-19 also states that a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness, and one who sews strife amongst his friends are all abominations unto God.

News flash! ... All sin is an abomination unto God. We are all guilty of one of these actions in some shape, form, or fashion. This means that when you gossip, or give into pride, you are just as guilty in God's eyes, as if you murder or involve yourself in homosexual activity.

This is why it is wrong to put one sin on a platform above another.

Next, it's important to understand what sin really is. The Apostle Paul gives a great explanation in his letter to the Romans. In Chapter 1:18-32 he explains that "sin" is the "symptom" of "pride" or "selfishness." We all, Christians and Non-Christians alike, struggle with ego or pride. Since we all struggle with our pride, we can never be truely free of sin.

It is hypocritical for us, as Christians, to put homosexuality on a pedastil. We should be putting the disease on a pedastil, and not the symptoms. By focusing on the disease we all have, which is pride, rather than it's symptoms, we have the potential to change the world and further His Kingdom.

Bottom line... I'm a sinner, you're a sinner, we're all sinners, and try as we may, and should I add, we always will be. We are being perfected, but cannot be perfect.

The question is, what do we do about our prideful nature? This must be our focus. Through God's grace and His Son's shed blood on the cross, our "sins" are forgiven. The aren't a problem, and will gradually fade away as long as our heart desires the Way, the Truth, and the Light!

I plead with my brothers and sisters in Christ! Put the bullhorn down, and cast judgement aside. Start loving and serving others unconditionally, as He would have you do. In doing so, you allow the Holy Spirit to change those things which we cannot.

Don't Be Offended!

I recently had someone explain to me that many, from my spiritual backgroud, felt as though several of my blogs where targeted at them.

I'm sorry if what I have said has led you to such an opinion, however the purpose of this blog is not to target anyone, but rather an attempt to explain my beliefs on theology.

This means that I will continue to convey my beliefs about what correct theology consists of. Some things I say will not be agreed upon by all. In fact, since we all must come to our own relationship and understanding of what things should look like in the Church, it is inevitable that we will disagree, sometimes with a stronger stance than at other times.

As brothers and sisters in Christ, we don't, and won't always agree. This is not to say that we should stop loving one another and working together to further the Kingdom of God.

I desire for all of us, as the Bride of Christ, to become that which our Father in heaven desires for us to be. I love all, but do not agree with all, and this should be o.k. I don't expect anything different from any of you.

May the Lord bless you and keep you,

Jasen

Rush Limbaugh is a dope!

How is it that so many Christian males in America have bought in to this guy. I mean seriously... as a follower of Jesus how can a true disciple see this man as a voice of reason. He is incredibley selfish, blatantly racist, and promotes extreme capitolism ( sorry to those of you who would argue otherwise, but Jesus would be a socialist in todays world, because he believed in spreading wealth. He also would be considered a liberal, although its absurd to label the Son of God based on politics).

As Christian males we must think more in terms of what Jesus would want as opposed to serving our own needs.

To argue that the Republican Party, or Democratic mind you, represents the voice of Jesus and his Church is absurd. It's like arguing that Wal-mart is the national representative and voice for your locally owned grocery store.

Rush Limbaugh is the poster child for domineering, testosterone filled, closet racist Americans who want everthing for themselves. These aren't Christ like principles. How have we become so misled?

Up is down, and down really is up these days. The end must be near if we have become this confused.

Language Barriers

I have been thinking a lot recently about how much language and culture barriers have hampered our abilities, as christians, to minister effectively to others. I have also recognized that within the Church itself, these same language barriers are largely responsible for most disagreements. We must make it a priority to think about good communication skills and respect cultural differences not only throughout the world but also in our own back yards.

To understand my point, think of men and women. The author of a popular christian book called "Love and Respect" described this relationship perfectly. Men see through blue glasses, while women see through pink glasses. Because of this, communication becomes a problem without proper listening skills. When the man and the woman describe what each see's when looking at the same picture they will use totally different language to describe that picture, yet they will argue that they aren't talking about the same picture.

 The same thing happens on the mission field and in the Church. Many times barriers are created because people will be saying the same thing in different ways and argue that they don't agree. This is ironic because in reality they are saying the same thing in a different way. 

Good communication skills along with a breakdown of cultural barriers are the keys to effective ministry and unity within the Church.

The Fourth Gospel

The Gospel of John, written in approximately 95 AD, is the fourth and final Gospel in the New Testament. Although it is considered one of the Gospels, it is very different in narrative and approach than the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. According to Stephen L. Harris in The New Testament, John’s general story is similar to the Synoptics, yet 90% of his Gospel is unique (107). Where as the Jesus described in the Synoptics speaks largely in parables or aphorisms about the “Kingdom of God,” John’s Jesus offers long philosophical discourses in which he refers to his own divinity and relationship to the Father (107). It is for this reason, along with its obvious Gnostic undertones that the Gospel of John was the last book accepted into the New Testament Canon.

The modern day Western Church must perceive the thematic differences in the John’s Gospel and develop a better understanding of the books actual author (or authors), along with the original occasion of the letter, in order to grasp its cultural relevance in today’s changing world.
The Gospel of John (also known as the Fourth Gospel distinguishing it from the Synoptic Gospels) has traditionally been attributed to the apostle John (216). This is due, in large part, to references within its text of an eyewitness and “Beloved Disciple.” However, the Apostle John is actually never mentioned, and therefore the work is anonymous. Some evidence has led scholars to conclude that the Gospel may be the work of multiple people within the Johannine Community, along with the help of an eyewitness account. The Johannine Community was a group of believers who had been expelled from the synagogue for worshiping and acknowledging a human, that being Jesus, as God. Scholars also note that the eyewitness very well may have been the Apostle John. There is more evidence to support the influence of an actual apostle in the Gospel of John than any other Gospel.

When analyzing the actual text of the Fourth Gospel, we find many clues as to the works original purpose, and occasion. It is quite clear that the author has many beliefs that where considered to be Gnostic in origin. However, it is also quite obvious that the author is arguing against many proto-gnostic principles. The author goes to great lengths in order to prove that Jesus was divine by referencing Him as God. Closely tied to the same point, is the author’s intent to prove that Jesus was God’s messenger, as opposed to the popular proto-gnostic belief that John the Baptist was actually the Messiah.

One of the best ways to understand some of these themes is to analyze part of the Gospel itself. A perfect example can be found in John 1:1-27. It is apparent from the onset in vs. 1-5 that the author is staking claim to the deity of Jesus. F.F. Bruce points out in his book The Gospel of John that it is not by accident that the same phrase opens the Gospel as in the book of Genesis (28). In the opening of Genesis “In the beginning” introduces the old creation where as in John it introduces the new creation (28). In both books the agent of creation is the “Word of God” (29).

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life and life was the light of men. And the light shined in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it. (John 1:1-5)

The Gospel of John, in accordance with the theme of any Ancient Greco-Roman biography, states the significance of the main character at the outset. Here it is clear, by the author’s use of words and connection to Genesis, that he is arguing the divinity of Jesus. We also see a connection within these verses to the Johannine community here. The Greek word for word is “logos.” This term was very familiar in some Greek philosophical schools and Gnostic circles (29). It is tied to the principle of reason and order in the universe, which imposes form on the world of the flesh and constitutes man’s soul (29). This made “logos” a bridge word by which people brought up in Greek philosophy found their path into the Johannine community (29). This use of language also furthers the argument that the letter was written by some within the Johanine Community.

As important within John 1:4-5, is the description of Jesus as “Light” in the darkness. This acts as a link to the author’s next argument against the proto-gnostic belief, which was the idea that John the Baptist was God’s messenger and not Jesus. Also, the use of the word “Light” is very Gnostic in nature, referring to the Gnostic principle of enlightenment and its relation to Christ.

There was a man sent from God whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not the Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which gives light to every man coming into the world. He was in the world, andthe world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to his own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor the will of the flesh, nor the will of man, but of God. (John 1:6-13)

Within this part of the letter we see two obvious arguments. One, being that John the Baptist was a witness of Jesus and not the messenger of God, as many Gnostics had promoted, while at the same time we also, again, see some basic Gnostic principles. The author alludes to the idea that we are divine spirits, as children of God, through acceptance of the “Light” thus being enlightened. This is closely tied, but not totally in accordance, with the Gnostic ideology that we are divine sparks and that flesh is bad. There is also a reference to the Jews not recognizing Jesus deity.

However, as we see in the next portion of scripture, the author goes against the proto-gnostic belief that Jesus only appeared to be human. This was very important in proving the relevance of Jesus death and resurrection.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

This is a clear statement of the human nature of Jesus as God, not only in spirit, but also in the flesh. The author states this because if Jesus were not born of the flesh then there would have been no death and resurrection negating His significance and sacrifice.

The remainder of this particular section of the text again is tied to the author’s argument that John the Baptist was a witness to Jesus divinity. The text reveals John announcing publicly that he is not the Christ.

He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” (John 1:20)

We again see the strong argument against the heretical gnostic teaching that John the Baptist was the Christ, as opposed to Jesus.

Next, John the Baptist introduces that the Messiah comes after him and that He is actually one among the Jews, and they do not know him. This seems to be a prophetic link to the Jewish peoples rejection of Jesus and a revelation of who John the Baptist truly is.

He said: “I am ‘The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Make straight the way of the LORD,’ as the prophet Isaiah said.” Now those who were sent were from the Pharisees. And they asked him, saying, “Why, then do you baptize if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” John answered them, saying, “I baptize with water, but there stands One among you whom you do not know.” It is He who, coming after me, is preferred before me, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose.” (John 1:23-27)

John seems to address those who would call him Gods messenger, saying in effect, “If you wish to find me foretold among the oracles of the prophets, you may identify me with the “voice” which calls for the preparation of the way for the Lord in the desert (48).

Understanding the significance of the Fourth Gospel’s Gnostic influence is very important to the modern Church. In recent years, a surviving form of Gnostic Christianity has re-emerged in the Western World, and also, had a significant impact on other various New Age religions. Without understanding Christianity’s relationship to Gnosticism 2000 years ago and acknowledging the few truths that exist within Gnostic teachings, the Church cannot expect reach people who have accepted these false religions. In order to make an argument against a person’s beliefs, it is important to understand where that person is coming from. One must know where the truth begins, within a belief system, and where the lies begin. Only when we fully understand the authors themes and purpose in the Gospel of John, as well as the Synoptic Gospels, can we fully understand how to activate the “Word of God,” in the way it was intended, within our world today. For this reason, we must always consider the genre, author, themes, and occasion of anything written in the Bible. Without understanding characteristics of its content we cannot unlock the full potential of the “Word of God.”

Abortion as Population Control

 How does Planned Parenthood get away with what it does? Anyone who actually does the research will find that the founder of Planned Parenthood was a huge admirer of Adolf Hitler and a proffessed advocate of eugenics.

 Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood and opened the first abortion clinic in America. She was deeply rooted in the eugenics philosophy. This is to say that she wanted to create a pure race. Her idea behind abortion was to rid the world of the weak and the poor by offering them a service by which they would literally weed themselves out over time. She was racist and the major group that she targeted was African Americans. 

Why doesn't anyone acknowledge this? The abortion agenda is rooted in population control. Somehow the people behind it have managed to convince those they wish to destroy to support their cause. When will we break out of our glass bubble and see the Enemy for what he is? ...a wolf in sheeps clothing. In the words of Al Pacino from The Devils Advocate, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

Biblical Perspective

In order to truly comprehend how and why the New Testament Course has influenced my perspective on the Bible in relation to that of the majority of modern day Christians, particularly in the Western world, one must understand not only the religious tradition I was raised in, but also, the more recent biblical influences on my life.

Also, one must understand the way in which I view and process information. I have always had a “Read Between the Lines” approach to the way I read, see, and hear. I strongly believe in getting all facts and understanding the context of a report on any given subject, including the Bible. This approach has had a significant impact on my opinions involving the Bible and how it relates to my walk with Jesus Christ.

By grasping the significance of my background, influences, and the way in which I view the world around me, it becomes apparent that this course has confirmed many of my beliefs about scripture and how Christians should approach, and use it. Most important and directly tied to my views, the course has given me the tools, and facts, that allow me to argue my understanding of scripture with other believers who don’t see the world through the same lens as I. From the time I was old enough to understand anything about the Bible this was difficult for me.
I was raised in a Christian home. I attended a small country church from the time I was four years old until I was old enough to make my own decisions. It was within the walls of that small peculiar building that I attained the basic foundation for a strong Protestant knowledge of the Bible.

Because I have always been what my father would refer to as a “Three Dimensional Thinker,” I began to have too many questions about the Bible without enough educated answers. When I sought answers to challenging questions, I would always be treated as though it was heresy to ask the question instead of getting a reasonable answer.

For this reason I chose, for the most part, to reject the Bible. Sadly, this was not because of the Bible, but because of the people who where teaching me about its significance. I began to feel as though Americans were “Westernizing” an Eastern religion all in the name of the “Good Ol’ Red, White and Blue.” This is to say that instead of trying to really live life according to the “ Way” of Jesus, I saw a trend amongst American Christians, by which they would take the Bible out of its true context. They would do this in order to justify material consumption, selfishness, pride, and unjust war. They felt that as Americans, they were part of a Christian nation, and that whatever they desired must have been what God desired. Therefore they “justified” there lives in accordance. Although you couldn’t tell by looking at your average Christian, it was quite clear that Jesus wasn’t a middle class white Republican, and since I couldn’t serve two Masters… I chose to serve none at all.

It wasn’t until about four years ago that I truly developed a relationship with Jesus. Around that time I was introduced to a group, of what could be described as Charismatic Evangelicals, who would change my life forever and lead me into a desire to really study the Bible. Although in the beginning I was completely sold on this version of Christianity, and I’m thankful that through them I found my faith, I have since parted ways. This is because as I grew and learned, I discovered that my theology and understanding of the Bible didn’t line up with their particular doctrine. They took a fundamentalist approach to the Scriptures and because of this, along with their obsession with the “Prosperity Gospel,” I realized that we were such polar opposites that it was not possible to co-exist.

At the same time I was growing apart from the Charismatic church movement, with which I was involved, I began to read and follow the teachings of Rob Bell. He’s the pastor of Mars Hill Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is on the front lines of the Emerging Church movement. Bell is not only a great teacher, but he is also a biblical scholar. It has been through his messages that I have found a Pastor who understands that in order to truly live a Christian life and to follow the Bible, you must know the original authors, audience, occasion, and purpose. He emphasizes Jewish influence, language, and the context in which the scriptures are written. Bell would argue that any take on scripture is interpretation. To read… is to interpret. This is why the context of scripture is so important. If we hope to have any accuracy in our interpretation the context is pivotal.

This history of my relationship with the Bible has led me to where I am now, close to the end of the semester of the New Testament course. Through Dr. Marc’s class, I am fairly confident that my beliefs about the Bible have been confirmed. This is contrary to the opinion of the majority of Evangelicals that I know. Until now, this has been very frustrating, because I have felt as though I couldn’t talk to many of my brothers and sisters in Christ about my beliefs. The education I have received in this class has helped to develop my communication skills. It has given me the facts that allow me to argue my points without offending my fellow believers, while at the same time opening their eyes to things that they may not have understood, because of their lack of contextual knowledge.

In learning about New Testament history, its authors, Jewish roots, and also its Hellenistic influence, I feel we find the keys to unlocking the Bible’s true relevance in today’s changing world. I find, particularly interesting, three very strong parallels between the New Testament scriptures in the world they were written, and the culture we live in today.

Rome played a vital role in the New Testament scriptures. We find this evident in the two-volume work of Luke and Acts, along with Paul’s letter to the Romans. As Egypt was “Empire” to the Jews, Rome was “Empire” to the early Christians. History has a way of repeating itself and I believe it has. We now have the United States of America. It is the Rome or “Empire” of the modern world. By understanding this, I believe that modern Christians can learn a lot about how we should treat our relationship to government and what that relationship means. First there was Egypt, then Rome, and now America. We, as Christians, must not compromise with the Pharaoh. I believe we are at a turning point in history. It is crucial, in furthering God’s kingdom that we must recognize, metaphorically speaking, the need to come out of “Egypt” in order to reach the Promise Land. All things American, in the name of diplomacy, economics, and democracy are not God’s will. Until we understand this, people from other nations and religions will continue to associate our beliefs with the American flag and “Empire,” as opposed to a just and true God.

Also, there is a clear parallel between Gnostic Christianity and the New Age religions within our own culture. Although most Gnostic ideologies are not correct, it is evident, as we have learned in this course, that several Gnostic principles have actually survived within the Church and even been canonized within Scripture. The Gospel of John is an example. By understanding the few threads of truth within these teachings and how the Church dealt with Gnosticism and mystery religions 2000 years ago, we can better understand how to approach the occult today. This is important because most occult teachings have derived from the Gnostic church that existed around 100 to 200 AD.

Most important of all, I feel is the strong similarity between the Western Church and not only the Pharisees, but also the Judaizers that Paul defends himself against in both Galatians and Romans. For example, we learn in the Gospels, and Paul’s letters that dogmatic adherence to scriptures, which at the time was the Torah, is not how we become justified in the eyes of God. The Gospels, particularly Matthew, clearly state that Jesus came to fulfill the “Law,” but Paul also makes the point in his undisputed works, by using Abrahams covenant with God as an example, that it is faith in Gods promise that justifies us, not the “Law.” I believe the actions of the Western Church parallel those of the Pharisees, and Judaizers that existed during the early Church. This is relevant today. The Bible, like the Torah, and dogmatic adherence to it does not justify or sanctify us in the eyes of God. The Bible is not our ultimate authority, God is! We must not waste time arguing over things in the Bible that are questionable, but use the Bible for what it is. It is scripture inspired by God, but written by men. It is truth, but it is not always 100% accurate. It is our guide in following the ways of God, but it is not God Himself. The Western Church has made the mistake of being like the Pharisees and Judaizers in the sense that sometimes it puts adherence to the Bible above God, when it is below Him.

Another important tool that has evolved for me out of this class is the further development of my critical thinking, my writing skills, and my reading skills. By learning how to correctly approach critical analysis of the Scriptures, along with repeated reading exercises in the class, and writing about what I have learned, I have grown in my understanding of literature and my ability to write outside of this class. For that I am grateful. It has not only allowed me to grow in my understanding of my faith, but it has also helped me to become more well rounded as a student, person, and husband.

In closing, I cannot deny the feeling that the majority of the Western Church has missed the boat in their understanding of how the different languages and cultures 2000 years ago must impact how we view the Word of God today. It is imperative that we understand the Hebrew and Greek translation of words when reading the Bible. It’s crucial that we comprehend Jewish custom in order to understand Jesus and his Church. We must not forget what the Roman Empire was, and how it affected Christianity in comparison to the American culture in relation to the Bible and Christianity. I look forward to taking this knowledge, and the skills that I have learned within the class into the world. I will use these skills, and the approach to the Scriptures that I have learned, to help strengthen my witness, and address social issues from a Biblical perspective, rooted in a real understanding of what the terms “Faith, Justification, and Truth,” really mean.
.

The Dumbing Down of America

In recent years, the American educational system has embraced a concept often referred to as “No Child Left Behind.” This is a result of our nations enculturation into the ethos of equality. The ideology has led to the creation of laws, within American states, that ensure our schools follow through with this policies implementation. I would argue that the enforcement of such philosophies has actually created the opposite effect of that which was originally intended. Rather than furthering the education of those less fortunate, the implementation of this concept, all in the name of equality and fairness, has in essence stunted the growth of more gifted students, who have the capacity to excel in the learning environment.

Although I completely respect the idea of equality, and I understand the popular opinion that all Americans deserve the opportunity to fulfill dreams, it is clear that several factors have contributed to the failure of such well-intended means.

Foremost is the fact that, with all political correctness aside, all people are not equal from an intellectual perspective. Again, I would be the first to argue that every man, woman, and child of every class and background deserve the same opportunities and rights as any other citizen. However, all people within a culture do not have the same learning capacity, and more important, all people do not learn at the same rate. By adhering to the “No Child Left Behind” laws, the educational system creates an environment in which the most gifted students are held back in an attempt to cater to the needs of those students who don’t learn as fast. This will have a lasting and dangerous impact on our culture as a whole in its efforts to keep up with the rest of the world. In the midst of our technological era we must rethink the “No Child Left Behind” concept if we have the intention of competing in the global marketplace. Without creating environments in which our most gifted students are able to expand their horizons we will become “A Nation Left Behind.”

Higher education has suffered more that any other as a result of the ideology. In creating the idea that everyone deserves to go to college, enrollment at these facilities is as high as it has ever been. I recently attended the graduation ceremony at a local high school. During the commencement a speaker pointed out that 80% of the graduating class was going on to college. He went on to say that this was the largest number of students in school history from a particular graduating class that would be attending college. At the same time, I didn’t hear anything about the class’s cumulative grade point average being the highest in school history. Higher learning is not for everyone. It was designed for those students who desire to further their education, and those who are willing to put forth effort toward that goal. Unfortunately, for every one gifted college student, there are now ten whose parents have been pressured, by our culture, into believing that their child must attend college, or that child is a failure. Nothing could be further from the truth. Also the government has made it so easy to get the money for college through loans and grants that many go to school just to get a free meal ticket. These students don’t go to class, and when they do they are so far behind that the professor is forced to cater to their needs. Professors end up having to cheapen curriculum, and they grade accordingly to keep from flunking too many students. This really hurts the student who yearns for more and will lead us into the next generation. It leaves the student who doesn’t care with a substantial amount of debt that he or she is stuck with regardless of their performance. This is unfortunate and unnecessary, not to mention the fact that it contributes to our Nation’s financial woes.

The fact is that “opportunity” does not translate to “entitlement.” A person fulfills opportunity as a result of performance. Colleges and Universities must start rewarding the opportunity to those who perform and show a real willingness to do the work. Although all in our Country deserve the “opportunity” to attend college, none are “entitled.” I would argue that our creation of an “entitlement” mentality is leading into an uncertain and unstable future. The “No Child Left Behind” educational system is an unfortunate result. The outcome of such well intended means will be the self-imposed destruction of educational infrastructure in the United States of America. If our nation continues on its current course, college degrees will become nothing more than glorified high school diplomas, and while other nations such as China, Japan, and India will continue to compete in the global job market, America will become “A Nation Left Behind.”

The Devil's Cauldron

Right now people are dying! At this very moment, while “Everybody’s All-American” sits at Starbucks sipping on his $5.00 latte, checking e-mail on his $1500.00 Mac notebook, and texting his friends on his $500.00 phone, women and children are being raped and mutilated! At this very moment, old men sit at Hardee’s drinking coffee, discussing whats going to happen to their retirement in this economy and arguing over whether the Cardinals, or Yankees, will contend this year, while an entire nation of people is starving! In a world of convenience and self serving desires, it seems that we in America are content to ignore the horror that exists in a world that seems far away enough that we can ignore it, and at least pretend it doesn’t exist. War and genocide have continued in the Democratic Republic of Congo for over 10 years. Unfortunately, there is no end in sight to the violence, rape, torture, and disease as long as the Western world chooses to ignore the situation. These people are weak and don’t have the resources, or a voice, to defend themselves. Their only hope is for us, in the western world, to start fighting for them. We must be a voice for the lost, and we must make Washington hear our cries. We are the hope of a nation where all hope seems lost! Without significant foreign intervention, it is apparent, that there is no foreseeable resolution to the ongoing conflict and genocide in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In order to understand the crisis that has existed and continues to develop in the Congo, it is important to have an informed historical account of the warring factions. Lydia Polgreen, the West African Bureau Chief of the New York Times, notes in her article “Resolving Crisis in Congo Hinges on Foreign Forces,” that the civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo is a tangled web of conflict that has drawn in neighboring Countries and led to the deaths of more than four million people (A.14). I t is quite clear that this atrocity is inextricably tied to the Rwandan genocide that occurred during the 1990’s. This Rwandan genocide resulted from racial tensions between Hutus and Tutsis within the region. These tensions led to the genocide of the Tutsi population, carried out by the Rwandan Hutu Militia. The Hutu militia and soldiers who carried out the genocide in Rwanda and Burundi fled into Zaire (the Congo) in 1994, after being dispersed when a Tutsi-led rebel force toppled the Rwandan government (A.14). Andrew Purvis, an award winning Canadian journalist and foreign correspondent for Time magazine, documents in his report “A Contagion of Genocide,” that this mass exodus included at least one million Rwandans (38). Members of the conquered Hutu Army, devastated by defeat at the hands of the Tutsis, then joined the Zairian Hutu and began raping, torturing and killing Zairian Tutsi (38). Observers believe that the Hutu’s goal was to develop a “Hutu Nation” on Zairian soil that would provide a safe place for refugees and a base for more armed attacks on Rwanda (38). The problems in Zaire illuminate the distrust and hatred that has evolved in the region. Neither the Tutsi minority, who where victimized by the genocide in 1994, nor the Hutu majority, who where ousted from their homeland as a result, have any desire to negotiate (39). This bitter race war between Hutus and Tutsis has been at the root of the crisis in the Congo ever since. In his essay “The Trouble With Congo; How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict” from Foreign Affairs, Severine Autesserre reveals that historical conflicts of this sort have also fueled fighting between manysmaller groups from different tribes, such as the Hemas and Lendus of Ituri in the province of Orientale , and the Bembes, the Holoholos, and the Kalangas in northern Katanga, impeding the return of displaced persons and refuges (95).

On paper the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo officially ended approximately six years ago, and in 2006 the first elected Congolese government in four decades took office according to Lydia Polgreen, in her New York Times article “Frustration With Charities and U.N. Grows in Congo.” However, the reality is that although the “war” may have ended, the “conflict” has not (1.35). Fighting in the region led to the diaspora of almost a half million people between 2006 and 2007 (1.35). This statistic doesn’t include the numbers since. Because of this chaos and dispersion of its people since the beginning of the war in Congo in 1996, hunger and disease have long been the main source of death (1.35). Many people crowd in with relatives in provincial towns to avoid refugee camps, making themselves more vulnerable to disease (1.35). A primary example of the disease infecting the region is Cholera (1.35). When people flock to the cities, they carry it with themselves (1.35). Cholera then spreads like wildfire due to crowded and unsanitary conditions (1.35). Another major issue, directly linked to displacement, is the question of how to get food to these refugees. A large number of these people are farmers, and displacement makes food sources an issue immediately (1.35). Because road conditions are horrible, it has made it virtually impossible to get food supplies into the area (1.35). Equally as troubling, when populations are able to return home they are unable to farm, because rebels and army soldiers rape the women who do leave their villages to farm. This makes these displaced people dependant on handouts that are few and far between (1.35).

While hunger and disease in the Congo have been a major contributor to the tragedy in the region since its civil war began, nothing compares to the horrible acts of genocide that continue in the region every day. The largest target of these atrocities has, by and large, been the female population. As fore mentioned, the war in the Congo officially ended around 2006 with the signing of an official “Peace Agreement.” Unfortunately, the “Peace Agreement” was not worth the paper it was documented on. It brought an end to the “war” but not the “violence.” Rae Gomes unveils in his article “What You Can Do About the War in Congo” from The Nation, that statistics show almost half of a million women have been raped in the past 10 years (8). This form of genocide, more properly coined femicide, is the planned and strategic destruction of the female population (8). The results of these brutal attacks are horrifying. Women are victims of mass rapes. Assaulted and violated with knives and guns, these women commonly suffer fistulas as a result of these unspeakable acts (8). As unbelievable and disgusting as it may sound, mothers have been forced to eat dead babies. HIV- infected soldiers are sent into villages to rape wives in front of there husbands, while daughters are violated as their fathers are forced to watch (8). This is a deliberate attempt to break down the family network as part of a much larger and complicated agenda, seeking to loosen the communities grip on its natural resources. These resources include not only diamonds and gold, but more important coltan, used to make laptops and cell phones (8).

Although disease, hunger and genocide are all horrible results of the ongoing war in the region known as the Congo, it is important to stress that, at the root of all that has transpired in the Congo, is the racial tension between tribes, and the conflict that has
evolved as a result. Severine Autesserre explains in his essay “The Trouble with Congo; How Local Disputes Fuel Regional Conflict,” that centuries-old antagonisms amongst different ethnic groups, clans, and families are fighting over competing claims (95). These ethnic groups include groups such as the Hundes, the Nandes, and the Nyangas (95). However, the fiercest dispute is an opposition to the Congolese of Rwandan decent (95).
Belgian colonial administrators relocated over 85,000 people, both Hutu and Tutsi, from overpopulated Rwanda to the sparse Kivu provinces in Congo, and in the 1960’s and 1970’s various waves of Tutsis fled there to escape pogroms in Rwanda. Today, Congolese of Rwandan descent, especially the Tutsis among them, own most of the land, but the Hundes and the Nyangas continue to claim it as their own on the grounds that it was never rightfully sold or given away. (95)The history of racial cleansing and dispersion as a result, is at the root of conflicts over land in the region, which is at the core of the fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo (95).

One of the major stumbling blocks in reaching a peaceful resolution to the continuing crisis in Congo is the problem with humanitarian efforts in the region. In recent years, while most of the world has been transfixed by the war in Iraq, genocide has continued in the Congo and left the United Nations desperate for help in its humanitarianefforts in the region, according to Robert Block and Alix M. Freedman, in their report “The U.N.: Searching for Relevance; U.N. Peacekeeping is a Troubled Art, Congo Mess Shows; Rich Nations No Longer Send Troops, and Sometimes There’s No Peace to Keep; Uraguayans in Devil’s Cauldron.” The U.N. has in recent times had to rely on poorly armed soldiers from small Countries, who end up watching war crimes unfold around them (A.1). Nations with the most capable armies like the U.S., Britain, and France, being fed up with U.N. peacekeeping bureaucracy, have, for all practical purposes, decided that taking part in U.N. peacekeeping operations is a lost cause (A.1). There is essentially too much red tape involved in the U.N. troop recruitment process (A.1). In her report for The Voice of America, Mona Ghuneim states that a former U.S. State Department official and a Harvard University health director both agree that it is imperative for the United States to take the lead in coming up with, and implementing solutions to the crisis in Congo (Ghuneim). One U.S. aid organization that works with victims of rape and slavery in the region argues that the situation continues to worsen and will mean even more sexual violence, displacement, and rejection of families without the United States taking a larger role (Ghuneim).
Harvard Medical School professor, Dr. Michael VanRooyen, has worked in international disaster relief and humanitarian aid. He said his recent work with focus groups of men and women who have suffered from the violence in eastern Congo has given him insight into what the people want, and need. He said women victims in particular would like to see the United States provide more practical assistance. (Ghuneim)
They desire access to medical services, psycho-social support and job training for independence and individual financial power (Ghuneim).

In a world where we as a nation, by and large, see ourselves in America as the “Voice of Reason” to the rest of the world, there is absolutely no reasoning in our lack, or willingness there of, to get more involved with the effort to bring peace to the dark and destitute region known as “The Devil’s Cauldron.” While we set at home, safe in the confines of our trivial existence, the voices of millions of men, women, and children are crying out from the Congo, and we must answer the call. Although, without the help of the American government and military as a whole, the situation seems somewhat hopeless, we as individuals can do things to make a difference. Several great ideas are duly noted by Rae Gomes in “What You Can Do About the War in Congo.” One purposeful approach is to write your elected officials and demand an increase in U.N. peacekeepers, including women, who are specifically trained in sexual violence (8). Every American, young, old, man, and woman, of every socio-economic background, has an opportunity to bring light to one of the darkest places in the world. We must educate others and ourselves about the history of Congo, its connection to Rwandan genocide, and the economic war that fuels the violence (8). We must demand President Obama and his administration to pressure Rwandan and Congolese leaders to set down at the negotiating table. We must encourage him and his administration to stop supporting Laurent Nkunda and the Democratic Forces for Liberation of Rwanda (8). Individuals can also provide monetary support and resources by donating to groups such as City of Joy, V-Day, and UNICEF (8).

Due to their economic status and lack of support, along with their unwillingness to compromise, it is quite clear. Without significant assistance from foreign nations,
primarily the United States and its free peoples, the Democratic Republic of Congo will continue on a path of war, disease, genocide, rape, and starvation. The call has been made. Who will answer?

Prodigal Son in the Key of F

Feeling footloose and frisky, a featherbrained fellow forced his fond father to fork over the farthings and flew to foreign fields and frittered his fortune, feasting fabulously with faint friends. Fleeced by his fellows in folly, and facing famine, he found himself a feed flinger in a filthy farmyard. Fairly famishing, he fain would have filled his frame with foraged food from fodder fragments.
"Fooey! My father's flunkies fare far finer, " the frazzled fugitive forlornly fumbled, frankly facing the facts. Frustrated by failure and filled with foreboding, he fled forthwith to his family. Falling at his father's feet, he forlornly fumbled, "Father, I've flunked and fruitlessly forfeited family favor."
The farsighted father, forestalling further flinching, frantically flagged the flunkies to fetch a fatling from the flock and fix a feast. The fugitive's fault-finding brother frowned on fickle forgiveness of former folderol. But the faithful father figured, "Filial fidelity is fine, but the fugitive is found! What forbids fervent festivity? Let flags be unfurled. Let fanfares flare." And the father's forgiveness formed the foundation for the former fugitive's future fortitude.

The Church is a Whore but She is Still My Mother!"

Unfortunately these words spoken by St. Augustine seem to echo in my heart when I percieve the Church these days. Here in the Western world it seems that many churches are looking for the next cool gimmick or cutting edge technology to sell themselves and be better than the church on the next corner. Instead of unifying the church we seem to be segregating ourselves!

Why? If we all serve the same master then why are we trying so hard to compete against one another like we are a football team in the NFL. We should be sharing ideas and plans and working together as one body to care for the needs of the poor, feed the hungry and share our relationship with Christ. It should be all about sharing and serving together yet it seems that the enemy has decieved us into believing that, " We are right and they are wrong or don't really know what they are doing. We do things better than they do!"

The Church is not a buisness it is the bride of Christ who has called for unity!

When was the last time you sold your mother out in the name of padding numbers and filling up the money bag? Our focus must be on unifying His church and discipleship. Cool music, and technolgy is a great tool but that is what they are...a tool. This is not a 12:00 kickoff on Sunday its CHURCH!

NEW WORLD ORDER!

Has it occured to anyone that what we are witnessing in the global economic crisis is clearly being manipulated by the World Bank and Federal Reserve in order to creat a global economy centered around one currency. Do not believe for a second that what we are witnessing is an accident or the result of mistakes.

Within 4-8 years the U.S., Canada and Mexico plan on developing one currency. This is what the powers that be want and will get. Americans will invite this with open arms because they will feel desperate enough for help out of the rapidly developing economic crisis. One would like to believe otherwise but the sad truth is we haven't begun to see how bad things will get!

We are witnessing history. The world is moving toward one economy and one governing body and it will happen in our lifetime!

Shame on the Acadamy!

I am a huge fan of the screen and cinema. I appreciate movies for the direction, acting, cinematography, production and artistic content. Therefore, I look forward every year to the Acadamy Awards. Every year I can't wait to see who will win. This is when the finest of a craft recognize what the best works where over the past year. That is exactly where it should end. Pushing agendas have no place in awarding art. Films, actors, and actresses should be awarded soley on quality of work. Unfortunately, the Acadamy has taken it upon itself to be the political platform for the homosexual agenda and should be ashamed!



I will start by clarifyng that they should be ashamed not because of whether homosexuality and gay marriage is right or wrong but because they are not politicians or spiritual leaders. They should be ashamed because they are artists. They give these awards to peole who work hard to master a craft. In all fairness, they deserve to be rewarded for their talents and efforts not for their beliefs or opinions.



The Acadamy Awards was not intended to be a platform for political or social agendas. Whether it is a conservitive or liberal agenda doesn't matter. Let art be art. Observe, anylize, critique and appreciate but leave your opinions about right or wrong out of it. People have worked long and hard for there shot to win an Oscar and it is a disgrace that one person or piece would be looked over because someone wants to push there point or "stick it" to a particular group of people within society.

Jesus' Rejection at Nazareth

In order to gain a clear vision as to what the Gospels of the New Testament mean in today’s changing world, we must see them from a historical and critical perspective. We must take into account the Gospel author’s genre, purpose, themes and occasion. In doing so, we find many similarities between each Gospel and yet we also find vast differences that define each author’s individual agenda. We can acknowledge these similarities and differences by comparing one Gospel’s account of a particular event to another Gospel’s account of the same story.

For argument’s sake, we can compare Mark’s account of Jesus’ rejection at Nazareth ( Mk. 6:1-6) to Matthew’s version of the same story( Matt. 13:53-58). Because it is widely believed that Mark’s Gospel was written first, we will compare Matthew to Mark. To the naked eye, both accounts seem very much the same. Both describe Jesus preaching in the synagogue at Nazareth and being rejected by his townspeople. It also addresses the idea that he didn’t or couldn’t perform many works because of issues with their belief. However, when examined closely, we see that just the slightest change in wording leads to very different undertones.

The first major difference we find is in Matthew Chapter 13 vs. 54. Like Mark’s account in Mark Chapter 6 vs. 2, Matthew describes Jesus teaching at the synagogue. However, Matthew edits Mark’s version by omitting Mark’s description of this happening on the Sabbath. This is a clue as to the different audience that each author is addressing. Mark’s audience consisted of ex-pagan gentile Christians. Therefore, the significance of the Sabbath carried much less weight that it did for Matthew’s audience, which consisted of Jewish Christians.

Second, in Matthew Chapter 13 vs. 55 the people refer to Jesus as the carpenter’s son, and then mention Mary as his mother. This is subtly different from Mark’s version in Chapter 6 vs. 3. In Mark the people refer to Jesus as the carpenter, son of Mary. There may have been a two-fold agenda here. First, Matthew is leaving no room for Jesus illegitimacy. Since one of Matthew’s purposes was to prove that Jesus fulfilled Jewish prophecy, as the Messiah, he also may have been using this acknowledgement of who Jesus father was, in order to make the clear connection to the House of David. Mark was again speaking to gentiles and therefore this lineage wasn’t as relevant. Finally in Matthew’s version (Chapter 13 vs. 58) Jesus did not do many miracles because of their unbelief as opposed to Mark’s version. In Mark Chapter 6 vs. 5-6, Jesus couldn’t do miracles except for the laying on of hands of a few sick people. This clearly follows Matthew’s depiction of Jesus as “higher”, as opposed to Mark’s more “human” description. Matthew’s Jesus chose not to do many miracles where Mark’s Jesus couldn’t because the people didn’t believe.

By analyzing the same short story from different Gospels we gain a great understanding of each author’s specific audience, purpose, and occasion. By grasping the context in which these scriptures where written 2000 years ago, we have a greater perspective as to what these scriptures mean to our culture today.

Steroids and Baseball

O.k. ladies and gentlemen, let's call it like it is. This whole steroid situation is becoming increasingly unfair to baseball players while ignoring the responsible party all together. Let's face it folks, the guilty party is the league itself and team ownership.

It seems as though an all out witch hunt has been imposed by the media on players while MLB its owners get off "scott free." Have we forgotten the great baseball strike of the eighties and it's affect on fan support? During that period, while baseball was in a state of hybernation, Michael Jordan was redefining sports as entertainment and football was emerging as the major money making sport in America. When baseball re-emerged it could not compete with its contending market without something to draw attention and fans back to the ballpark. Henceforth the "Steroid Era" took off! It really takes complete ignorance to not see the connection here. I'm not a rocket scientest but it seems pretty clear to me that the "Steroid Era" was instigated by baseball and it's owners. Homeruns are exciting and they draw fans to the stands. It's that simple.

Players like Alex Rodrigez, Barry Bonds and Miguel Tejada get payed to hit home runs and I can assure you that they have been encouraged, by their bosses, to make sure that they hit those home runs at any cost. If they don't hit those home runs then someone else, who does, will get their paycheck. Put yourself in their situation and then do the math. Since baseball came off strike MLB and its owners have encouraged it's players to use steroids. We all know it and we need to remember it before we start burning these guys at the stake.

Bud Selig and baseball? You need to stop passing the buck to your bread winners and start taking resposibility for the monster that "you" created!

Turn Off the Faucet!

On several occasions I have heard reputable pastors and theologians argue that there are levels of sin. Because of the law, I understand thinking in this context. In some sense, our culture must in order to keep peace, uphold the law, and avoid civil unrest. However, I would argue that God is so perfect, so pure, and so far removed from sin that all sin is the same to Him.

Time and time again you hear pastors put certain sin on a pedestal. For example, many have referred to the Bible calling homosexuality an abomination but fail to point out that Proverbs 6-16 states that a "proud look" is an abomination. All sin is an abomination to God. Its that simple. We must never look at sin as though, if we aren't guilty of a particular one, we are better than someone else in the worldly perspective. It simply isn't true. Sin is sin. We are all sinners saved by grace.

I say this to go a step further. Sin is the symptom not the source. If you read Romans 1:18 through 2:16 Paul clearly explains that God gave man over to sin as a result of self glorification. Therefore selfishness is man's problem, and sin is only the result of our sickness. I feel that by focusing on "sins" we are not dealing with the real problem.

Also, non believers are turned off because they can't understand the concept. They don't have a relationship with Jesus. All they can see is finger pointing. However, everyone understands selfishness, and although everyone is guilty of it no one likes it.

Picture a sink, if you will, and sin as the water running out of the faucet. If you keep trying to catch the water running out it just continues to run. The way to stop the water is to turn off the source it flows from. The source is selfishness! That is our sickness! Stop pointing fingers and start focusing on serving the will of the Father and the needs of others. TURN OFF THE FAUCET!

Prosperity is Justification for Americanization!

There is a popular trend in the American Evangelical movement to embrace this concept of a "Prosperity Gospel." It basically follows the idea that if you keep in right standing with God ( give 10% to your church and don't sin) you automatically qualify to have as much money and as many toys as you want. No matter how many people in the world might be starving at the expense of you having 3 cars, a 4500 sq ft home, your jet planes and your rolex watch, you are blessed and the starving person is cursed. This is heresy! It says that you are deserving of this so called blessing because of who you are and what you have sacrificed to God.

The fact is that this is not Christianity. This is an orthadox form of early Judaism. In the Old Covenant your relationship with God was all about whether or not you made the right sacrifices to God.

We as Christians live under a New Covenant. Under the New Covenant Jesus is the sacrifice. We, in reality, can never be in right standing with God without the shed blood of Jesus and he has paid our price on the cross. Although we strive not to, we are all sinners and giving money to the church isn't the key. We don't have to make sacrifices to please him.

This is not to say I don't believe in tithing. I just believe that under our Covenant you give joyfully because you want to be selfless, not because your getting something in return. After all that was Jesus' message. We live to serve not to be served. God is pleased when we sacrifice with no alterior motives. I believe in prosperity and the Bible talkes of it but it's spiritual prosperity not monetary! We live under Jesus' Covenant not Abrahams. Being poor is not a curse! It's a reality in a fallen world and we should all be willing to give the shirt off our back to a person in need.

PRO-LIFE VS. ANTI-ABORTION

After reading Richard Morin’s article “Political Ads and the Voters They Attract” I was reminded of the issue of abortion. The opinion of our general voter population on the subject of the right to life has become one of the strongest influences on the American political process. Unfortunately, most voter’s stance on the issue is more dependant on the emotions played upon by political ad campaigns than common sense or reason. This play on emotion is addressed by Morin in his article.

During election seasons political ads play on these emotions without challenging the viewer or reader to think about what is really being said. This, to me, seems particularly prevalent in Pro-Life campaign ads put out by the Republican Party. Playing on the emotions of the evangelical right, which I am a part of, these ads portray the Republican Party as the voice of moral purpose and the “Right to Life.” The problem is that this emotionally charged anti-abortion stance used in their platform is only one aspect of the “Right to Life.”

Consider, if you would, the war on terrorism. How many innocent lives have been taken from men, women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan due to American intervention in the name of freedom? Isn’t the mortality of people living in these nations just as deserving of a “Right to Life?” After all, the bible states clearly in the Book of Romans that Christians are called to love their enemies, to feed them and to give them drink when they are thirsty. Some Christians might argue that in the Old Testament God’s use of war is mentioned many times. They would be correct, however godly nations only went to war when called by their maker to do so. I did not once hear our commander-in chief, a Republican , acknowledge that God had led us there. Here arises a question for the evangelical right. Is the war on terrorism God’s desire or is it our desire? I don’t profess to have the answer but as our former president Abraham Lincoln, a Republican I might add, once said, “We must not concern ourselves with whether or not God is on our side but whether or not we are on his side.” If God did not have some divine reason for the death of all those people who have died as a result of our war then their “Right to Life” has been taken away and therefore no political party can establish itself as a representative of that right!

All this I say in making the point that to be Pro- Life is to be so across the board. Being Anti- Abortion, which I am, does not qualify a political party as Pro- Life. It simply means they are against taking the lives of babies in the womb. I believe that this trumps the validity of the Pro- Life platform of the Republican Party. If evangelicals truly take in the scope of what it means to be Pro- Life they will recognize that this platform is simply an emotionally charged manipulation of their beliefs and does not represent what they or the nation their forefathers envisioned stand for. I must add that I am a Christian and I do not believe in abortion, but I will never allow my stance on this issue to sway my vote in a political election in one direction or the other, because I also believe in the “Right to Life" and neither political party honestly represents the concept. We must never allow our emotions to overcome our ability to use reasoning when weighing out our options in a political election. In doing so we not only threaten our identity as individuals but also as a nation.

In closing I must add that I DO NOT SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY! I will only support leaders who desire the further His Kingdom because that is my desire. I am a member of the Constitution Party. You may view their platform at www.constitutionparty.com