The first topic I wish to discuss in my Da Vinci Code series deals with a statement made at the beginning of the novel itself. Page 1 of Dan Brown's book reads as follows: "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." With a little research (mostly cited from Josh McDowell's research) one will find, however, that this is not the case. For starters, there are not 666 panes of glass in the Louvre pyramid as Brown says on page 21, but rather there are 673. On page 131 of the novel, Brown says that "Madonna of the Rocks" is a 5 foot tall canvas painting. In reality, it is 6.5 feet tall and is painted on wood. Now, at this point, most of you have probably lost interest in this all together because there is no point in bitterly arguing about little details such as the height of a painting or the number of glass panes in the Louvre. Normally, I would agree with you, but this is actually an issue of importance. The problem arises because Brown uses these pieces of incorrect information to support his theory and storyline. It would not be a problem if he would not have included the "fact page" at the beginning of the book, but he did. He sells these untruths as fact and then uses them as actual, "historical" proof for his flawed viewpoints. Any respectable historian in the art world would also tell you that Da Vinci did not go by "Da Vinci," but rather his name Leonardo. Vinci is the town Leonardo lived in, "Da Vinci" literally means "of Vinci." No art historian or museum curator would ever refer to him as Da Vinci. It is basically the equivalent of referring to me as "of Albuquerque." That's just splitting hairs, however. An interesting aside. Check back soon for more updates about the artwork the book is centered around as well as some organizations that make an appearance in the novel.
~Tribal~
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Da Vinci Madness
We all knew it was coming; we all knew -- okay, maybe just those of you who read this blog with some regularity (all 2 or 3 of you not on the writing staff) -- that I would eventually write a post about The Da Vinci Code spouting off my radical, intolerant, racist, biased, sexist, unfeeling, cruel, pompous, fundamentalist viewpoints on this holy work of fiction that no one can DARE to question. So, I'm gonna pull a one up on all of you. Rather than do just one post about this excellent, infallible, sacred, GOD INSPIRED novel by Dan Brown, I will take the pleasure of mercilessly ripping it to shreds in (hopefully) daily segments! This series, however, will most likely not begin until early next week, so make sure you check back then for some updates.
As for this post, I would like to explain the purpose behind why I am doing this, as well as inject my own thoughts about the work and Dan Brown himself. To start, I recognize that The Da Vinci Code is indeed a work of fiction. I am not one who is going to go lead marches down the streets of D.C. to get the book banned, because I know that our soldiers die to protect our freedom of speech -- no matter how false, slanderous, inaccurate, historically flawed, or RETARDED that speech may be, I know that if I expect people to not silence and ban my works, then I should not do the same to them. It's a matter of freedom as well as simple politeness. So, to get on with it, why would a recognized work of literary fiction be such a hot topic of debate anyway? Up until recently, I was under the impression that the author himself only professed it to be fiction. After reading several quotes from Brown's website, however, I am now under the very evident impression that he does believe in his theory, and he does claim that the theory "may hold merit." In addition to this, he makes a statement at the beginning of the text saying that all information about art, architecture, and the like is indeed fact. After a little research, that proves to be incorrect as well, and he uses these "facts" as evidence to his theory.
The problem with The Da Vinci Code starts when uninformed, unchurched, or unschooled people pick up the novel and begin to read it. It goes from "Wow, what a page turner!" to "Whoa! I never knew that about Jesus and Christianity!" People do not realize that in addition to being bad philosophy and bad theology, it is just horrible history. Hardly anything in the novel proves to be true besides maybe the occasional "Leonardo painted the Mona Lisa." People read this book and then suddenly absorb the inaccuracies with it, thinking that an overnight success author knows all the secrets to the universe. Now before I go further, I will admit that I have not read the book. Our family has a copy, however, and I intend to read it at my earliest opportunity. In addition, I will be going to see the film sometime in the near future. However, I have read very much about the book, and fact remains fact if I read the story part or not. I specifically know of claims the book makes (in the form of actual quotations from the book) and in what context it makes them. I can comment and research the correctness of these claims without having to have read the book itself, and not having read the book makes me no less of an "expert" than if I had read it. So check back often for updates on this issue. At the most, I have about 24 posts planned out, but I may end up condensing a great deal of those for time's sake. I will also turn on the comment feature of this site so you may leave me your love letters, hate mail, and anything in between. Feel free to leave us a message if you wish. Everything you say is welcomed here, even if you are an off the deep end liberal. We will still listen to what you have to say before we laugh. So, check back often and please leave comments! I hope this subject will prove to be a valuable weapon for those who know the truth.
~Tribal~
As for this post, I would like to explain the purpose behind why I am doing this, as well as inject my own thoughts about the work and Dan Brown himself. To start, I recognize that The Da Vinci Code is indeed a work of fiction. I am not one who is going to go lead marches down the streets of D.C. to get the book banned, because I know that our soldiers die to protect our freedom of speech -- no matter how false, slanderous, inaccurate, historically flawed, or RETARDED that speech may be, I know that if I expect people to not silence and ban my works, then I should not do the same to them. It's a matter of freedom as well as simple politeness. So, to get on with it, why would a recognized work of literary fiction be such a hot topic of debate anyway? Up until recently, I was under the impression that the author himself only professed it to be fiction. After reading several quotes from Brown's website, however, I am now under the very evident impression that he does believe in his theory, and he does claim that the theory "may hold merit." In addition to this, he makes a statement at the beginning of the text saying that all information about art, architecture, and the like is indeed fact. After a little research, that proves to be incorrect as well, and he uses these "facts" as evidence to his theory.
The problem with The Da Vinci Code starts when uninformed, unchurched, or unschooled people pick up the novel and begin to read it. It goes from "Wow, what a page turner!" to "Whoa! I never knew that about Jesus and Christianity!" People do not realize that in addition to being bad philosophy and bad theology, it is just horrible history. Hardly anything in the novel proves to be true besides maybe the occasional "Leonardo painted the Mona Lisa." People read this book and then suddenly absorb the inaccuracies with it, thinking that an overnight success author knows all the secrets to the universe. Now before I go further, I will admit that I have not read the book. Our family has a copy, however, and I intend to read it at my earliest opportunity. In addition, I will be going to see the film sometime in the near future. However, I have read very much about the book, and fact remains fact if I read the story part or not. I specifically know of claims the book makes (in the form of actual quotations from the book) and in what context it makes them. I can comment and research the correctness of these claims without having to have read the book itself, and not having read the book makes me no less of an "expert" than if I had read it. So check back often for updates on this issue. At the most, I have about 24 posts planned out, but I may end up condensing a great deal of those for time's sake. I will also turn on the comment feature of this site so you may leave me your love letters, hate mail, and anything in between. Feel free to leave us a message if you wish. Everything you say is welcomed here, even if you are an off the deep end liberal. We will still listen to what you have to say before we laugh. So, check back often and please leave comments! I hope this subject will prove to be a valuable weapon for those who know the truth.
~Tribal~
Thursday, May 11, 2006
"Ethical Decision Making"
A few Fridays back, the junior class at the Dallastown Area High School embarked on what is known to be Ethical Decision Making day at the Penn State York campus. Now, when I first heard of this, I thought it might actually be something to look into, and it might actually be something good. Then I began to think...what is a public high school doing teaching young people about morality? These are the same public high schools that banned the longstanding tradition of morning prayer and rejected the scientific validity of intelligent design. These schools are trying to push God and religion out the back door while at the same time trying to keep a hand on the values that coexist with such belief. Well, their efforts are definentaly in vain. Rather than hearing what IS right or IS wrong, we were enlightened with the "truth" that the ethical code of conduct varies with every job or career. Kind of amazing what some of these "educators" can come up with.
~Tribal~
~Tribal~
Monday, May 08, 2006
Conservative Insanity
Tonight marked the premier of Glenn Beck's nightly television show. It runs every weeknight at 7, 9, and 12 ET on CNN (though make sure you have the right CNN, there are multiple CNN channels -- with Suscom cable the one should be channel 40). The TV show works basically like his radio show. It's a "fusion of entertainment and enlightenment" -- very commical and entertaining while retaining its informational nature. You should all watch it...TONIGHT.
~Tribal~
~Tribal~
Friday, May 05, 2006
Well, You Don't Look Christian To Me...
I would like to start this entry by saying that I am sorry if I come across has edgy or aggressive with this post. This is something that has been pent up inside of me for a long time. It all started when the P.O.D. promo team (of which I am a member) sent me a free copy of Risen magazine. This issue happened to have a picture of Sonny (P.O.D.'s singer) on the front cover, in all of his dreadlocked/tattooed glory. Well to get on with it, the first thing I heard when I pulled the magazine out of the box of promo materials was, "That does not look like a Christian man." This is actually a very old subject of tension between me and several elder members of my church, but this incident just happened to revive the fight. I deal with this kind of thinking on a regular basis. I am also criticized by many for "having friends that look like bums" and for even "dressing like a bum off the street" myself. Christians (and it is often the older generations) tend to have a problem with how people look, which is ironic if you ask me. We as teens are always taught by our pastors and parents to not be caught up in the aesthetic and shallow things in life. Yet at the same time, these same people often condemn others merely for looking a certain way.
Now let me continue here with some very relevant ancient history. You know, the funny thing about history is that it always contains a lesson for future generations. Well, enough rambling, I will get on with my point. In New Testament times, was Jesus wearing a tie and a suit? Well maybe that's a bit overdoing the question because ties and suits did not exist back then, but did Jesus wear the best of the best in clothing? Did he own several sets of "synagogue clothes" for His Saturday morning excursions to temple? Why, the answer to that question is a more than resounding NO. Did Jesus "hang" with the well dressed, "well groomed," clean shaven and fair faced people? Well, okay He hung with everybody, but if you look, He spent most of His time with those considered unclean and godless by the standards of the time. Did they have several sets of Saturday clothes? No. Now the interesting part is if you look at the ones who did insist on dressing well and being well groomed and keeping good hygiene. I'll give you a hint, they're the ones who wanted to crucify Jesus. Yes I'm talking about the Pharisees. They were too shallow to see through people's appearances and into who each person really was. Jesus, on the other hand, cared about the people, not how they looked or dressed.
The Bible says that God will not judge by how one looks, so why should we? If Christ does not judge by one's clothing or one's tattoos or hair, then what makes us think we have a right to do so? Do we honestly think we are that much better than God, that we know how to judge and He doesn't? As Montgomery Gentry sings in one of perhaps the coolest country songs ever, "you do your thing and I'll do mine...who are you to judge me? My Judge is going to judge us all one day." Did you hear that? MY JUDGE IS GOING TO JUDGE US ALL ONE DAY. Not Pastor so and so, not Deacon him, and not our parents. Someone with tattoos and dreadlocks can very much be a Christian man. There is no such thing as "looking Christian." That is such a shallow, plastic form of Christianity that I can't believe it.
While I am on the issue, I would like to comment on some similar issues. People have this concept that when you go to church you must wear a dress shirt and tie and nice dress pants and shoes. HEAVEN FORBID that you even think about wearing shorts or jeans. That is a cardinal sin that will condemn you to hell forever. Okay, well this is the part where I tell you that what I just said was completely sarcastic in case you could not pick up on it. So, the main argument for dressing up for church happens to be that is shows respect for God (although I also hear a lot that it's just not good to show up looking like a bum...gee wonder what Montgomery Gentry would say to that). So, this would imply that not dressing up would be disrespecting God's holiness. As the father of a friend of mine has said, "Does that mean when I'm sitting at home in an undershirt and shorts that God doesn't like me praying or doesn't hear my prayers?" This man holds a high position in our church might I add. Anyway, his point is 100% correct. Does God care what you look like in church or does God care about what your heart looks like in church. "Come just as you are."
If any of these people that condemn for looking "unChristian" actually spent time with people on the street, they would realize that their actions actually drive people away from the church. I have prayed with numerous people on street corners in York city who tell me they go to very casual churches. Most of these people do not even have enough money to buy their food for the next week, so how in Christ's name are they to buy an overpriced, made in Indonesia, piece of fabric suit? I have had people tell me that people all decked out in suits with slicked back hair scare them away. No lie. They honestly feel not welcomed by churches because of HOW THEY DRESS. I have also held conversations with a very steadfast atheist who almost turned Christian at one point. This girl would be described by many as a "goth," and she said that the first time she walked into a church, they all kept away from her and cast very askance glances at her. So, for this reason she will probably forever see Christians as an exclusive group of people haters that are so blinded and narrow minded by their ignorance that they stop caring about people. Please tell me this is not Christ's church, because I feel it is. PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE PUSHED AWAY FOR THE SOLE REASON OF THE WAY THEY LOOK. If by the end of this post anything looks "unChristian," it should be those who are too set in their ways to see Christ's love. Wake up, people.
~Tribal~
Now let me continue here with some very relevant ancient history. You know, the funny thing about history is that it always contains a lesson for future generations. Well, enough rambling, I will get on with my point. In New Testament times, was Jesus wearing a tie and a suit? Well maybe that's a bit overdoing the question because ties and suits did not exist back then, but did Jesus wear the best of the best in clothing? Did he own several sets of "synagogue clothes" for His Saturday morning excursions to temple? Why, the answer to that question is a more than resounding NO. Did Jesus "hang" with the well dressed, "well groomed," clean shaven and fair faced people? Well, okay He hung with everybody, but if you look, He spent most of His time with those considered unclean and godless by the standards of the time. Did they have several sets of Saturday clothes? No. Now the interesting part is if you look at the ones who did insist on dressing well and being well groomed and keeping good hygiene. I'll give you a hint, they're the ones who wanted to crucify Jesus. Yes I'm talking about the Pharisees. They were too shallow to see through people's appearances and into who each person really was. Jesus, on the other hand, cared about the people, not how they looked or dressed.
The Bible says that God will not judge by how one looks, so why should we? If Christ does not judge by one's clothing or one's tattoos or hair, then what makes us think we have a right to do so? Do we honestly think we are that much better than God, that we know how to judge and He doesn't? As Montgomery Gentry sings in one of perhaps the coolest country songs ever, "you do your thing and I'll do mine...who are you to judge me? My Judge is going to judge us all one day." Did you hear that? MY JUDGE IS GOING TO JUDGE US ALL ONE DAY. Not Pastor so and so, not Deacon him, and not our parents. Someone with tattoos and dreadlocks can very much be a Christian man. There is no such thing as "looking Christian." That is such a shallow, plastic form of Christianity that I can't believe it.
While I am on the issue, I would like to comment on some similar issues. People have this concept that when you go to church you must wear a dress shirt and tie and nice dress pants and shoes. HEAVEN FORBID that you even think about wearing shorts or jeans. That is a cardinal sin that will condemn you to hell forever. Okay, well this is the part where I tell you that what I just said was completely sarcastic in case you could not pick up on it. So, the main argument for dressing up for church happens to be that is shows respect for God (although I also hear a lot that it's just not good to show up looking like a bum...gee wonder what Montgomery Gentry would say to that). So, this would imply that not dressing up would be disrespecting God's holiness. As the father of a friend of mine has said, "Does that mean when I'm sitting at home in an undershirt and shorts that God doesn't like me praying or doesn't hear my prayers?" This man holds a high position in our church might I add. Anyway, his point is 100% correct. Does God care what you look like in church or does God care about what your heart looks like in church. "Come just as you are."
If any of these people that condemn for looking "unChristian" actually spent time with people on the street, they would realize that their actions actually drive people away from the church. I have prayed with numerous people on street corners in York city who tell me they go to very casual churches. Most of these people do not even have enough money to buy their food for the next week, so how in Christ's name are they to buy an overpriced, made in Indonesia, piece of fabric suit? I have had people tell me that people all decked out in suits with slicked back hair scare them away. No lie. They honestly feel not welcomed by churches because of HOW THEY DRESS. I have also held conversations with a very steadfast atheist who almost turned Christian at one point. This girl would be described by many as a "goth," and she said that the first time she walked into a church, they all kept away from her and cast very askance glances at her. So, for this reason she will probably forever see Christians as an exclusive group of people haters that are so blinded and narrow minded by their ignorance that they stop caring about people. Please tell me this is not Christ's church, because I feel it is. PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE PUSHED AWAY FOR THE SOLE REASON OF THE WAY THEY LOOK. If by the end of this post anything looks "unChristian," it should be those who are too set in their ways to see Christ's love. Wake up, people.
~Tribal~
Thursday, May 04, 2006
The Mighty Face of Terror
American troops have recently recovered some new tapes that al Zarqawi was trying to film for propaganda purposes. The only problem, however, is that in the video, Zarqawi has trouble being able to correctly operate the machine gun he is using. He fires a few times, and it jams. An underling minion must fix it for the great warrior, though, because Zarqawi himself apparently appears too incompetent to understand the firearm he is using. To make matters worse, one of the terrorists who grabs the gun manages to land his hand right on the barrel...which is of course searing hot after Zarqawi's play time. As if that is not enough of a comedy, Zarqawi is wearing New Balance tennis shoes -- made by an American company. Hmm, I thought he was part of that little coterie that hated America. Here's the link where you should be able to access some of the video. You can't make this stuff up.
~Tribal~
~Tribal~
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Nuclear Jihad
A disturbing article pointed out by Glenn Beck on his website:
"A terrorism symposium featuring leading experts will begin with presentation of 'tangible proof' al-Qaida not only has developed an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons but also has begun to deploy them for use in its jihad against the United States and Israel. "
You can access the entire article from the above link, and I highly recommend reading it. This is a terrifying situation if indeed al-Qaida has obtained such weapons. I will definentaly update on this scenario as more news becomes available.
~Tribal~
"A terrorism symposium featuring leading experts will begin with presentation of 'tangible proof' al-Qaida not only has developed an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons but also has begun to deploy them for use in its jihad against the United States and Israel. "
You can access the entire article from the above link, and I highly recommend reading it. This is a terrifying situation if indeed al-Qaida has obtained such weapons. I will definentaly update on this scenario as more news becomes available.
~Tribal~
Sunday, April 16, 2006
Happy Easter Everyone!
The Lord is Risen! The Lord is Risen Indeed!!!! Ok, so Jesus has been in a cosntant state or risennesss for close to 2000 years, but it's still wonderfully exciting to celebrate and remember that wonderful first Easter morning when the angels proclaimed the news that He was not in tomb but was risen! It makes me super excited and to smile loudly just thinking about it. Man oh man. This is my favorite day of the year...I'm just so happy and excited. Anywho, just wanted to wish all of you a happy and wonderful Easter, and may the Lord and Savior of us all bless you and keep you and bring a loud toothy smile to your face!
~AndyJams~
~AndyJams~
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
The Gospel of Deception
Being initially informed of the current "gospel of Judas" quagmire while at Liberty, I decided I should write a post regarding the issue. I did some research, and found it to be more beneficial to the reader to just post exactly what I found. Got Questions has the best explanation that I have thus far found. Here is the entire article about the false book.
"Sometime in the 1970's, in a cave in Egypt, a copy of the 'gospel of Judas' was discovered. The circumstances of the discovery have been described as shady, with those who possessed the copy asking for exorbitant amounts of money for the codex. For decades, no institution was willing to pay for the purchase due to its dubious origins. Eventually the codex of the gospel of Judas was purchased by a foundation in Switzerland. The existence of the gospel of Judas codex was made public in 2004, but the actual release of the content of the codex has been repeatedly delayed, with the now expected release date of April, 2006. The dating of the gospel of Judas codex is likely the 5th century A.D. Up to one-third of the codex is missing or illegible.
Prior to this discovery, the only reference to the gospel of Judas was in the writings of a 2nd century Christian named Irenaeus. Irenaeus essentially wrote that the gospel of Judas was the 'invented history' of a long line of heretics and rebels against God. The essential message of the gospel of Judas is that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him because it was necessary to fulfill Jesus' plan. If it was Jesus' plan for Judas to betray Him, why would Jesus label Judas the 'son of perdition' (John 17:12), and state that it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Matthew 26:24). If Judas was simply following Jesus' instructions, why would he commit suicide once he saw that Jesus was condemned (Matthew 27:5)?
The gospel of Judas is a Gnostic gospel, espousing a Gnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The gospel of Judas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Mary, and the gospel of Philip. Just as Judas Iscariot rejected Jesus and betrayed Him with a kiss, the gospel of Judas rejects the true Gospel and truth of God with a fraudulent appearance of validity."
Honestly, would God really allow His church to continue on for two thousand years with an incomplete instruction book? A respectable manufacturer would include the entire manual with his product -- at least everything that a consumer would need to operate that product. Certainly God is more than a "respectable manufacturer" when it comes to creating humans, so would it not follow that a truly loving God would not lead us astray by allowing a book of the Bible to be excluded from the cannon of scripture for so long? The gospel of Judas is a lie, and Christians need to keep a closed enough mind that our brains don't fall out in matters of such importance.
~Tribal~
"Sometime in the 1970's, in a cave in Egypt, a copy of the 'gospel of Judas' was discovered. The circumstances of the discovery have been described as shady, with those who possessed the copy asking for exorbitant amounts of money for the codex. For decades, no institution was willing to pay for the purchase due to its dubious origins. Eventually the codex of the gospel of Judas was purchased by a foundation in Switzerland. The existence of the gospel of Judas codex was made public in 2004, but the actual release of the content of the codex has been repeatedly delayed, with the now expected release date of April, 2006. The dating of the gospel of Judas codex is likely the 5th century A.D. Up to one-third of the codex is missing or illegible.
Prior to this discovery, the only reference to the gospel of Judas was in the writings of a 2nd century Christian named Irenaeus. Irenaeus essentially wrote that the gospel of Judas was the 'invented history' of a long line of heretics and rebels against God. The essential message of the gospel of Judas is that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him because it was necessary to fulfill Jesus' plan. If it was Jesus' plan for Judas to betray Him, why would Jesus label Judas the 'son of perdition' (John 17:12), and state that it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Matthew 26:24). If Judas was simply following Jesus' instructions, why would he commit suicide once he saw that Jesus was condemned (Matthew 27:5)?
The gospel of Judas is a Gnostic gospel, espousing a Gnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The gospel of Judas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Mary, and the gospel of Philip. Just as Judas Iscariot rejected Jesus and betrayed Him with a kiss, the gospel of Judas rejects the true Gospel and truth of God with a fraudulent appearance of validity."
Honestly, would God really allow His church to continue on for two thousand years with an incomplete instruction book? A respectable manufacturer would include the entire manual with his product -- at least everything that a consumer would need to operate that product. Certainly God is more than a "respectable manufacturer" when it comes to creating humans, so would it not follow that a truly loving God would not lead us astray by allowing a book of the Bible to be excluded from the cannon of scripture for so long? The gospel of Judas is a lie, and Christians need to keep a closed enough mind that our brains don't fall out in matters of such importance.
~Tribal~
Monday, April 10, 2006
Politically Incorrect Since 1971
Well, I have returned from my long awaited College For A Weekend (CFAW) visit to Liberty University, and I must say I am quite impressed with what I have seen. I was able to get a very comical t-shirt with the title of this post written underneath LIBERTY. We also saw a car with a bumper sticker reading "Totalitarians for Bush" -- funny stuff. On a deeper level, everything on that campus really is for the spiritual edification of the students and the glory of God.
The first class I sat in on was the honors section of the philosophy department. We walked in and I expected a harsh, cold professor who did not care for individual students and their wellbeing, but rather merely for their academic qualifications; I was very gladly proven wrong. The first matter of business was PRAYER. The professor even asked if any students had specific prayer requests before he began. I knew Liberty was one of the nation's most outstanding Christian higher education centers, but I seriously was not expecting this. I later learned from a student that they actually pray before every single class, and that the teachers care for the wellbeing of students even if it does not involve the class! A guy like me could get used to a place like that.
Despite some shortcomings in the content of the philosophy class (although perhaps it is not appropriate to judge by only one class period), everything else I involved myself in this past weekend was highly enjoyable, informational, and uplifting. Each hall in the dorms has a sort of prayer/devotional time Thursday nights where students go into someone's room to talk, pray, read scripture, and just share what's on everyone's heart. The other class I shadowed while at Liberty was Terrorism. It sounded very interesting and proved to be highly intriguing. The class analyzes reasons for terrorism, forms of terrorism, and the history/current events of terrorist groups in the world.
The highlight of the entire weekend though had to be the time spent with friends, the Casting Crowns concert, and surprisingly enough, the campus church service in the Vines Center. There was lots of singing! And people weren't complaining! And people were actually into worshipping!!! Including myself, might I add, and I learned volumes about myself and my life from the pastor. I really felt conviction this weekend, and I felt God's presence on campus. The whole University was just amazing (despite a few less than kind students, but everyone has a bad day). I highly recommend a visit to this school if you or someone you know is about to enter college. Their website can be found here, but the campus is so much better than anything on the website could show you. I hope Liberty is able to continue its tradition of excellence in areas of academics and spirituality, and I hope to possibly one day add to that atmosphere by attending myself.
~Tribal~
The first class I sat in on was the honors section of the philosophy department. We walked in and I expected a harsh, cold professor who did not care for individual students and their wellbeing, but rather merely for their academic qualifications; I was very gladly proven wrong. The first matter of business was PRAYER. The professor even asked if any students had specific prayer requests before he began. I knew Liberty was one of the nation's most outstanding Christian higher education centers, but I seriously was not expecting this. I later learned from a student that they actually pray before every single class, and that the teachers care for the wellbeing of students even if it does not involve the class! A guy like me could get used to a place like that.
Despite some shortcomings in the content of the philosophy class (although perhaps it is not appropriate to judge by only one class period), everything else I involved myself in this past weekend was highly enjoyable, informational, and uplifting. Each hall in the dorms has a sort of prayer/devotional time Thursday nights where students go into someone's room to talk, pray, read scripture, and just share what's on everyone's heart. The other class I shadowed while at Liberty was Terrorism. It sounded very interesting and proved to be highly intriguing. The class analyzes reasons for terrorism, forms of terrorism, and the history/current events of terrorist groups in the world.
The highlight of the entire weekend though had to be the time spent with friends, the Casting Crowns concert, and surprisingly enough, the campus church service in the Vines Center. There was lots of singing! And people weren't complaining! And people were actually into worshipping!!! Including myself, might I add, and I learned volumes about myself and my life from the pastor. I really felt conviction this weekend, and I felt God's presence on campus. The whole University was just amazing (despite a few less than kind students, but everyone has a bad day). I highly recommend a visit to this school if you or someone you know is about to enter college. Their website can be found here, but the campus is so much better than anything on the website could show you. I hope Liberty is able to continue its tradition of excellence in areas of academics and spirituality, and I hope to possibly one day add to that atmosphere by attending myself.
~Tribal~
Monday, March 27, 2006
"Movie Star Jesus" on a Hillside
What I’m about to discuss is neither controversial nor terribly exciting in nature, so be warned. So I’m taking this History of the Catholic Church class…strange for a Protestant I know, but the subject fascinates me and for the first 1500 years or so the history of the Protestant church is that of the Western Catholic church, so it’s relevant, and hey, we’re all Christians, right? So anyway, each week in class we talk about a different aspect of Catholicism. It’s cool because the class is really a course in Catholic theology with a little bit of history thrown in here and there. A few weeks ago a guest speaker from
A large question was inspired by a picture that the speaker had set up on the screen to act as “eye candy” in case we got bored with his speaking. It was a gorgeous picture of Jesus sitting on a hillside with the sunset in the background. Everything was glowing, everything was beautiful, looking very much like the way I would be sitting and how I would look reflecting upon creation sitting at a summit on the Appalachian trial. It makes me wonder....when Jesus sat and looked at creation, His creation, did he think, “Wow, Creation is beautiful and wonderful!” or did he think, “Wow, this is beautiful…I’m goooood!”
Just something to think about…
~AndyJams~
Sunday, March 26, 2006
Final Afghan Convert Update (Hopefully)
Once again, from Fox News:
"Afghan Court Dismisses Case vs. Alleged Christian Convert
KABUL, Afghanistan -- An Afghan court on Sunday dismissed a case against a man who converted from Islam to Christianity because of a lack of evidence and he will be released soon, officials said.
The announcement came as U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai faced mounting foreign pressure to free Abdul Rahman, a move that risked angering Muslim clerics here who have called for him to be killed."
You can also read some of Rahman's comments on his situation before he knew he would be released here -- brave and inspiring words.
~Tribal~
"Afghan Court Dismisses Case vs. Alleged Christian Convert
KABUL, Afghanistan -- An Afghan court on Sunday dismissed a case against a man who converted from Islam to Christianity because of a lack of evidence and he will be released soon, officials said.
The announcement came as U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai faced mounting foreign pressure to free Abdul Rahman, a move that risked angering Muslim clerics here who have called for him to be killed."
You can also read some of Rahman's comments on his situation before he knew he would be released here -- brave and inspiring words.
~Tribal~
Friday, March 24, 2006
Seussical the Musical
Just in case any of you do not know about the current Dallastown High School musical, we are doing Seussical this year. It really is a very good show and I highly reccomend everyone to come see it. The showtimes that are left are tomorrow (Saturday) at 7 and Sunday at 3.
~Tribal~
~Tribal~
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Afghan Convert Update
New article at Fox News:
"WASHINGTON -- Concerned about the fate of a Christian convert in Afghanistan on trial for his life, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Thursday seeking a 'favorable resolution' of the case.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack reported that Rice underlined to Karzai the 'fact that the United States stands forthrightly for principles of freedom of worship, freedom of expression, and that these are bedrock principles of democracy around the world, these are principles that are enshrined in the Afghan constitution and they're principles that are enshrined in the U.N. Universal Declaration on Human Rights,' he said."
Attaining the support of the U.S. government is a big stepping stone in resolving this situation. Still keep this man in your prayers however, as there is much that still must be done.
~Tribal~
"WASHINGTON -- Concerned about the fate of a Christian convert in Afghanistan on trial for his life, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Thursday seeking a 'favorable resolution' of the case.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack reported that Rice underlined to Karzai the 'fact that the United States stands forthrightly for principles of freedom of worship, freedom of expression, and that these are bedrock principles of democracy around the world, these are principles that are enshrined in the Afghan constitution and they're principles that are enshrined in the U.N. Universal Declaration on Human Rights,' he said."
Attaining the support of the U.S. government is a big stepping stone in resolving this situation. Still keep this man in your prayers however, as there is much that still must be done.
~Tribal~
Sunday, March 19, 2006
Present Day Martyrdom
From Fox News:
"KABUL, Afghanistan -- An Afghan man who allegedly converted from Islam to Christianity is being prosecuted in a Kabul court and could be sentenced to death, a judge said Sunday.
The defendant, Abdul Rahman, was arrested last month after his family went to the police and accused him of becoming a Christian, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada told the Associated Press in an interview. Such a conversion would violate the country's Islamic laws."
Please keep this man in your prayers. This situation is a sad reminder that Christians are still martyred today just as they were 2,000 years ago. If I hear anymore about this case, I will share what information I have.
~Tribal~
"KABUL, Afghanistan -- An Afghan man who allegedly converted from Islam to Christianity is being prosecuted in a Kabul court and could be sentenced to death, a judge said Sunday.
The defendant, Abdul Rahman, was arrested last month after his family went to the police and accused him of becoming a Christian, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada told the Associated Press in an interview. Such a conversion would violate the country's Islamic laws."
Please keep this man in your prayers. This situation is a sad reminder that Christians are still martyred today just as they were 2,000 years ago. If I hear anymore about this case, I will share what information I have.
~Tribal~
Friday, March 10, 2006
National Security
I am very sick of having to listen to the whole UAE port deal issue. What annoys me the most, though, is that those who support the president's take call those who oppose it racist. As far as my stance on the issue, I wonder why anyone even allowed foreign countries to control such valuable access onto our soil. Specifically when it comes down to the UAE, I guess I would have to side with the Republicans opposing Bush. Europeans did not attack us on 9/11; Europeans are not fighting us in Iraq; Europeans are not seeking to violate United Nations resolutions in pursuit of nuclear proliferation; Middle Eastern Muslims are.
Now before you label me a racist in the typical democrat campaign fashion, I do not hate Muslims, I do not hate Arabs, and I willingly recognize that not all Muslims are terrorists. I also recongize that there have been white, western, caucasian men who have committed terrorist acts in the past. The point is, however, that the biggest threat to freedom lies in the middle east, the "Axis of Evil." In World War II, what ethnic group was sent to prison camps for fear of internal attack? Mexicans? Of course not, the Japanese were. Our enemies in today's world have a unique identifying factor that stands out as well...they are Middle Eastern and they are Muslim. How easy would it be for terrorists to get a job working at one of these U.S. ports controlled by other friendly UAE members? What if this terrorist has shown no past signs of militant involvement? What if the only talk of jihad he has uttered has been in the privacy of those he supports? Such a man would be absolutely unidentifiable in a working group of innocent Arabs.
I am in no way promoting racism and I am in no way supporting concentration camps with this post, but I believe the United States needs to strictly control all routes of possible access into our country. We need to get all of our ports back into our hands and we need to better patrol the Mexican border before we find ourselves with a smuggled suitcase bomb killing our people in our cities. If we are to make the world a safer place to live, we absolutely must start at home.
~Tribal~
Now before you label me a racist in the typical democrat campaign fashion, I do not hate Muslims, I do not hate Arabs, and I willingly recognize that not all Muslims are terrorists. I also recongize that there have been white, western, caucasian men who have committed terrorist acts in the past. The point is, however, that the biggest threat to freedom lies in the middle east, the "Axis of Evil." In World War II, what ethnic group was sent to prison camps for fear of internal attack? Mexicans? Of course not, the Japanese were. Our enemies in today's world have a unique identifying factor that stands out as well...they are Middle Eastern and they are Muslim. How easy would it be for terrorists to get a job working at one of these U.S. ports controlled by other friendly UAE members? What if this terrorist has shown no past signs of militant involvement? What if the only talk of jihad he has uttered has been in the privacy of those he supports? Such a man would be absolutely unidentifiable in a working group of innocent Arabs.
I am in no way promoting racism and I am in no way supporting concentration camps with this post, but I believe the United States needs to strictly control all routes of possible access into our country. We need to get all of our ports back into our hands and we need to better patrol the Mexican border before we find ourselves with a smuggled suitcase bomb killing our people in our cities. If we are to make the world a safer place to live, we absolutely must start at home.
~Tribal~
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Announcement
Sometime this evening, our fellow writer and friend Steve (Fiat volvntas tua) will be leaving for basic training. He made the final decision to join the Army just a couple of weeks ago. He hopes to be able to pass airborne training and ranger school as well, and we hope that he succeeds in all that he sets out to do. Please keep him in your daily prayers as we are. Godspeed Steve.
~Tribal~
~Tribal~
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Let's Play Dominos
Once again, from Fox News:
"JACKSON, Miss. -- A state House committee voted to ban most abortions in Mississippi, which already has some of the strictest abortion laws in the nation.
The bill approved by the House Public Health Committee on Tuesday would allow abortion only to save the pregnant woman's life. It would make no exception in cases of rape or incest. The bill now goes to the full House, which could vote next week, and then to the Senate."
We as Christians need to be praying earnestly for this state to take a prolife stance as well. Obviously, Planned Parenthood will protest this too and take it to court, but taking it to the Supreme Court might be a blessing in disguise for us. While the courts in the recent decades have been of questionable wisdom in their decision making, Bush's new appointees may make a difference. If this case would wait a few years to roll around, Bush might even have another opportunity to appoint judges if some retire or pass away. An America that appreciates the value of infant life may be just around the corner. We need to keep working to get this done.
~Tribal~
"JACKSON, Miss. -- A state House committee voted to ban most abortions in Mississippi, which already has some of the strictest abortion laws in the nation.
The bill approved by the House Public Health Committee on Tuesday would allow abortion only to save the pregnant woman's life. It would make no exception in cases of rape or incest. The bill now goes to the full House, which could vote next week, and then to the Senate."
We as Christians need to be praying earnestly for this state to take a prolife stance as well. Obviously, Planned Parenthood will protest this too and take it to court, but taking it to the Supreme Court might be a blessing in disguise for us. While the courts in the recent decades have been of questionable wisdom in their decision making, Bush's new appointees may make a difference. If this case would wait a few years to roll around, Bush might even have another opportunity to appoint judges if some retire or pass away. An America that appreciates the value of infant life may be just around the corner. We need to keep working to get this done.
~Tribal~
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Worldviews III
Welcome to our next installment of the much anticipated worldviews series. I hope you have all had time to ponder over the things we discussed in the previous two segments, and I hope you take them to heart. Today we will discuss a worldview that is dominant in America today, especially among scientists and philosophers. Of course I am talking about modernism. Let's begin with a little history. During the Enlightenment Era, people began to tire of the constant religious warring between Catholics and protestants (much as we here at Insense are today). This conflict between the two different sects caused many people to believe that if Christianity had so many internal struggles, how could it possibly solve the world's problems? This kind of thinking gave rise to an age of science where materialism ruled.
The first belief that the modern worldview holds is called naturalism. Naturalism basically says that everything in the universe can be explained in terms of physical processes. As a result, modernists tend not to believe in a soul or life after death. They also do not believe in God in the sense that premodernists believe in God.
The second part of modernity holds that there should be a "sacred/secular dichotomy" (as Mr. Rojahn puts it). Sacred is viewed as everything faith and values based. Secular is obviously viewed then as everything "factual" and scientific. Modernists believe that the two should never mix. The premodernists believed that everything should be centered around and contained within God in one's life, whereas the modernists believe that religion should only occupy one small area of one's life...if one so chooses.
Since the modern worldview believes in naturalism, it is only logical that it also states that truth, morals, and meaning in life are grounded in human reason. This is best exemplified in the works of Kant (Deontological Ethics) and Mills (Utilitarianism). As Protagorus said, "Man is the measure of all things."
The fourth point under modernism is positivism. Positivism is the belief that through reason, science, and technology the world can be made a better place for those who live in it. Modernists believe that through secular means, man can be relieved of his misery and suffering and brought into a state of utopia.
Individualism is the last point that the modern worldview emphasizes. Individualism is pretty much an excuse to be self centered. It says "I have rights, I think of the world in terms of me, my happiness, my goals, my desires, etc" (straight from Mr. Rojahn's notes).
There are obvious problems with this worldview. To begin with, it brushes off the existence of God as merely imaginary. It states that truth, morals, and meaning are all based around human reason, but human reason cannot account for truth, morality, and the like. C.S. Lewis writes about this topic extensively in The Abolition of Man and the beginnings of Mere Christianity (we highly recommend both). If there is no God and no ultimate judgment, then what makes an action wrong? Suppose I was on a desert island in the middle of the ocean, why would it be wrong for me to lie or kill someone with me if no one will ever find out? Another problem is encountered in relation to positivism. The world has taken a turn for the worse since modernism came in full force. We have been through two world wars, a nuclear arms race, a present day terrorist situation, the Vietnam war, the Korean war -- all stemming from the belief that the answer lies in science and technology. Advance in technology is what allowed the Nazi army to roll across Europe and raze it to pieces. I am not condemning technology, but technology, science, and reason in exclusion from God can lead, and has led, us down dark paths. Modernism is not the key. It reduces humans to merely graphable data; it says you are nothing more than a few cells clumped together by random chance. The next worldview we will discuss is postmodernism, and that is even scarier than modernism. Check back often for more updates and for Worldviews IV.
~Tribal~
The first belief that the modern worldview holds is called naturalism. Naturalism basically says that everything in the universe can be explained in terms of physical processes. As a result, modernists tend not to believe in a soul or life after death. They also do not believe in God in the sense that premodernists believe in God.
The second part of modernity holds that there should be a "sacred/secular dichotomy" (as Mr. Rojahn puts it). Sacred is viewed as everything faith and values based. Secular is obviously viewed then as everything "factual" and scientific. Modernists believe that the two should never mix. The premodernists believed that everything should be centered around and contained within God in one's life, whereas the modernists believe that religion should only occupy one small area of one's life...if one so chooses.
Since the modern worldview believes in naturalism, it is only logical that it also states that truth, morals, and meaning in life are grounded in human reason. This is best exemplified in the works of Kant (Deontological Ethics) and Mills (Utilitarianism). As Protagorus said, "Man is the measure of all things."
The fourth point under modernism is positivism. Positivism is the belief that through reason, science, and technology the world can be made a better place for those who live in it. Modernists believe that through secular means, man can be relieved of his misery and suffering and brought into a state of utopia.
Individualism is the last point that the modern worldview emphasizes. Individualism is pretty much an excuse to be self centered. It says "I have rights, I think of the world in terms of me, my happiness, my goals, my desires, etc" (straight from Mr. Rojahn's notes).
There are obvious problems with this worldview. To begin with, it brushes off the existence of God as merely imaginary. It states that truth, morals, and meaning are all based around human reason, but human reason cannot account for truth, morality, and the like. C.S. Lewis writes about this topic extensively in The Abolition of Man and the beginnings of Mere Christianity (we highly recommend both). If there is no God and no ultimate judgment, then what makes an action wrong? Suppose I was on a desert island in the middle of the ocean, why would it be wrong for me to lie or kill someone with me if no one will ever find out? Another problem is encountered in relation to positivism. The world has taken a turn for the worse since modernism came in full force. We have been through two world wars, a nuclear arms race, a present day terrorist situation, the Vietnam war, the Korean war -- all stemming from the belief that the answer lies in science and technology. Advance in technology is what allowed the Nazi army to roll across Europe and raze it to pieces. I am not condemning technology, but technology, science, and reason in exclusion from God can lead, and has led, us down dark paths. Modernism is not the key. It reduces humans to merely graphable data; it says you are nothing more than a few cells clumped together by random chance. The next worldview we will discuss is postmodernism, and that is even scarier than modernism. Check back often for more updates and for Worldviews IV.
~Tribal~
Friday, February 24, 2006
A Call for Prayer
Woot for South Dakoda! I recommend some celebration for the result of this battle. I do implore that each of you continue to pray for our representatives and court justices. Planned Parenthood has pledged to challenge this decision and so it has a very real posibility of going into the national spotlight if it is eventually brought before the Supreme Court. This is positive because it will force our often wishy woshy politicians to finally face such a controversial issue that they have often been more than glad to ignore. This is also positive because it can very possibly cause the eventual adoption of similar laws in more states and in the federal government. The possible negative outcome is that this new law is in danger of getting shot down in the courts. Please pray for wisdom for our politicians and court justices. Pray for their guidance towards what God wants for our nation. In the meantime, celebration!!
~AndyJams~
~AndyJams~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)