theodicy

Losing their religion...

2009-05-06T17:12:00.004-05:00

From ABC News...

Young Americans Losing Their Religion
New Research Finds Number Who Claim No Church Has Risen Sharply

SOURCE: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7513343&page=1

<>< TM

The End of Wall Street - Part 3

2009-01-08T21:56:00.001-06:00

The End of Wall Street - Part 2

2009-01-08T21:46:00.000-06:00

The End of Wall Street - Part 1

2009-01-08T00:20:00.001-06:00

tulip in solitude

2008-04-26T13:18:00.004-05:00

tulip in solitude, originally uploaded by thomas.merton.

"In solitude, we can slowly unmask the illusion of our possessiveness and discover in the center of our own self that we are not what we can conquer, but what is given to us. In solitude we can listen to the voice of him who spoke to us before we could speak a word, who healed us before we could make any gesture to help, who set us free long before we could free others, and who loved us long before we could give love to anyone. It is in this solitude that we discover that being is more important than having, and that we are worth more than the result of our efforts. In solitude we discover that our life is not a possession to be defended, but a gift to be shared. It's there we recognize that the healing words we speak ar not just our own, but are given to us; that the love we can expres is part of a greater love; and that the new life we bring forth is not a property to cling to, but a gift to be received."

"In solitude we become aware that our worth is not the same as our usefulness"

-- Henri J.M. Nouwen

<>< TM

explaining the universe

2008-04-26T12:54:00.003-05:00

Mr. Flower, originally uploaded by thomas.merton.

"To the majority of those who have reflected deeply and written about the origin and nature of the universe, it has seemed that it points beyond itself to a source which is non-physical and of great intelligence and power. Almost all of the great classical philosophers--certainly Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Locke, Berkeley--saw the origin of the universe as lying in a transcendent reality. They had different specific ideas of this reality, and different ways of approaching it; but that the universe is not self-explanitory, and that it requires some explanation beyond itself, was something they accepted as fairly obvious"
-- Keith Ward

<>< TM

Joanne shares about Johnnie

2007-10-08T19:02:00.000-05:00

Joanne Cash shares a bit about her famous brother Johnnie:

<>< TM

"Feelings? Yes, Feelings..."

2007-08-30T22:11:00.000-05:00

From the excellent "Catholic Analysis" blog:

In the felt experience wherein the soul finds the certitude that God is within it, the soul is given the grace of wanting God so perfectly that everything in it is in true and not false harmony. False harmony exists when the soul says that it wants God but does not really mean it, because its desire for God is not true in everything, in every way, or in every respect. Its desire for God is true when all the members of the body are in harmony with the soul, and the soul in turn is in such harmony with the heart and with the entire body that it becomes one with them and responds as one for all of them. Then the soul truly wants God, and this desire is granted to it through grace.

a theology of salvation

2007-06-21T06:40:00.000-05:00

Note: the following was prepared for a teaching I gave one week ago on an overview of the New Testament epistles 1 & 2 Thessalonians.

A Protestant Christian living in 21st century America has a theology based on the teachings and understandings of 500 years worth of theological debates, teachings and systems, beginning with Marin Luther. Every possible angle and argument 'for this' / 'against that' has been examined, judged and noted. However, the question remains: has Protestant systematic theology helped to clarify what it means when the Bible talks about salvation, or has it made it into something that wouldn't be recognizable by Jesus, Paul, Peter and the early church? I'm afraid the later point may be the case.

But rather than giving a critical analysis of the various systems of Protestant theological thought in the 21st century, I think it better and wise to examine what salvation meant, and how it is obtained by taking an inductive look at the entire canon of New Testament writings, especially those authored by Paul.

But first, the most important issue: what is salvation? How is it defined? Salvation is first of all, and most importantly for us, the God given ability to be removed from the actions and attitudes in this life that are ultimately destructive in nature. These activities are quite varied, and include the usual list of vices like drunkenness, laziness, lying, cheating and so on. In the salvation experience, God delivers us from those destructive tendencies which had previously controlled our lives. If you aren't a slave to God, chances are you are a slave to something else, and something no where near as redeeming.

Secondly, salvation has to do with the fact that God greatly desires to be in relationship with man, and is willing to do whatever he can to enable and encourage this relationship, like the above mentioned deliverance from destructive activities, i.e. "sin". However, it is God's desire to continue this relationship for all eternity, and hence those who accept the God's invitation to salvation, can ultimately look forward to eternal life with God, through the resurrection of the dead. This is the great hope of every single Christian believer. [see JOHN, chapter 3]

Sadly, the concept and the teachings about salvation have been somewhat distorted by popular Christian teachers on TV and radio, as well as by other Christian celebrities who are far more interested in building large organizations than in correct theology. The main difference between a Biblical understanding of salvation and the way it is generally defined in pop-Christian culture is that in popular understanding salvation is an event, while in the Bible, salvation is defined as a process.

Some blame for this can be laid at the feet of divinity schools themselves, especially more conservative ones. But mostly the problem rests in the philosophical mindset that dominates Western culture, and application to Biblical texts, that philosophy being the rational, analytical mindset that tends to see things as component pieces rather than complete systems. While this mindset can be quite useful for scientific and technological pursuits, it can get in the way when it comes to large scale, long time period processes that involve multiple variables and inputs. The Western mindset has a tendency to avoid this sort of complexity, in favor of very simple, practical concepts that can be easily understood. However, a life of a man is not something that can be lived nor understood by simply applying the scientific method; rather, it is more like a story or novel, where various problems and people must be engaged and overcome. To understand the Biblical texts is to understand a story, not a single event, that story being God's relationship with man.

In the New Testament, you will often find texts that would lead you to believe that salvation is an event, especially in the book of Acts. However, reading the New Testament in a more inductive, synthetic fashion demonstrates clearly that salvation is not just a point in time where you turned to God and turned away from a destructive life style, but it is an ongoing process that begins the day you decide to follow after God, and is ultimately rewarded on the Day of Judgment, when Christians and non-Christians alike stand before the throne of God to be judged for their actions (not theological knowledge!), and rewarded or punished depending on that judgment.

The following is a general outline of how the process of salvation works in the life of a believer:

1. A person discovers that God is real, and that God desires relationship with man, as made clear through the teachings and life of Jesus, the son of God. This discovery is always a direct result of God's intention, not man's! In other words, God is the one who seeks us out, and initiates relationship, and we respond accordingly.

[ see LUKE 19-1:11; JOHN 6:25-71; JOHN 10 ]

2. A decision is made to intentionally ask God to help facilitate that relationship, which is commonly known as "the sinner's prayer," where as a person will ask God to help them put an end to any destructive attitudes or actions that they have engaged in, and then commit to live a constructive, ethical life based upon the ethics and morals as described in the Bible, but which are often well known to the human heart as well.

[ see EPHESIANS 2; LUKE 15; LUKE 18:9-14; LUKE 19:1-11; 2 CORINTHIANS 5 ]

3. In order to get the ability to live a changed life, a person will ask God to be "baptized" by the Holy Spirit, which is simply asking God to live within you! Sometimes God will provide the Holy Spirit even without it being asked for directly, due to his merciful response to those who are struggling to overcome difficulty in their lives. Asking God to live within you gives you the spiritual energy and wisdom you need to overcome evil in your life, and the lives of others. It is literally the power and energy of God given to man. It is the single most important gift God gives man, and when a person learns to live by the power of the Holy Spirit, there is no limit in terms of the good that they can do.

[ see JOHN 3; JOHN 14 through 17; ACTS -the entire book ]

4. Often times a person will ask for and receive water baptism as an outward sign of their commitment to live a new life guided by the power of the Holy Spirit, and the well known ethics and moral of Christianity.

[ see MATTHEW 3; JOHN 3; ACTS 2; ACTS 8 ]

5. Once the decision to follow God has been made, and the baptisms of water and the Holy Spirit are received, a person will then begin the process of spiritual, emotional, psychological, and sometimes physical healing, as enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit. These healings can take place almost instantly, or in other cases quite a while, depending upon the person, their background, and their resolve to be healed.

[ see MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, JOHN, ACTS -the entire books ]

6. In order to maintain the momentum of the initial decision to live an upright and constructive life, a person will then begin to engage in outward disciplines designed to help them move forward towards the ultimate goal of eternal life, especially the meeting together with other Christians, Bible study, prayer, and devotional reading.

[ see ACTS 2; 1 CORINTHIANS 11 through 14; ROMANS 12; 1 PETER 4:7-11 ]

7. But the most important discipline of all, is learning to live by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit gives direction, purpose and motivation to a person's life. By living by the power of the Holy Spirit, a person will be enabled to live the very moral and ethical life that is required by God.

[ see ROMANS 8; GALATIANS 5:16-26; ACTS -the entire book ]

8. Once a person makes the decision to follow after Jesus, they will be tested with a variety of trails, tribulations and problems that will need to be overcome. In some cases, these trials may begin almost as soon as a person makes the commitment. Yet no matter the person or their circumstance, testing of their faith is guaranteed. The testing comes mainly in two general forms: external and internal. External testing is usually opposition, either active or passive, from other people who are opposed to your decision; whether they be friends, family or co-workers. The internal opposition comes from destructive habits and thoughts that still have a foothold in our lives. Often both forms of testing come about through the work of evil spirits, who are opposed to God, and to anyone who would follow after Him. These demonic spirits use other people they have influence over, plus your own weaknesses and woundedness in an attempt to halt the process of salvation.

[ see LUKE 21; JOHN 8; HEBREWS 12; 1 THESSALONIANS 3 ]

9. The testing of a person's commitment through the trials and tribulations of life results in an even deeper understanding of the Trinity, and greater reliance on the Holy Spirit for guidance and power.

[ see 2 CORINTHIANS 11:1-12:10; JAMES 1, 1 PETER -the entire book]

10. As a person matures in their salvation, they become increasingly effective in pursuing and implementing various positive, constructive habits and behaviors that not only increases the joy and happiness of the one so transformed, but also those around them. However, it should be noted that for this to be fully successful, it relies on a person's ability to live by the power and wisdom of the Holy Spirit. Hence, it is not just a person's good intentions and will power that are at work, but the enabling power of God working through a person. There is a very real and literal partnership between a Christian and God, that results in one of the often overlooked activities of salvation: brining heaven to earth. A Christian becomes a partner with God to bring about justice, compassion, peace and well being here on earth. This activity is a critical component of salvation.

[ see 1 CORINTHIANS 2, GALATIANS 5 through 6, JAMES -the entire book ]

11. Having lived a set number of days on earth, pursuing a relationship with God through trails and troubles, and working with God to bring about justice and compassion, a believer stands before the judgment seat of God, to be evaluated as to their commitment to salvation, and their activities regarding salvation. A Christian who has lived his life in accordance with the leadings and guidance of the Holy Spirit will have nothing to fear on this day.

[ see MATTHEW 25, REVELATION 20 ]

12. Having been approved by God for the life lived on earth, a Christian enters into eternal life, where trials, troubles and tribulations cease, and now the Christian becomes a co-ruler with God. The very least, most humble person on this earth, who has lived his life in accordance with the leadings and guidance of the Holy Spirit to the best of his ability, may become one of the greatest kings in the heavenly realm of God. And yes, for those who've persevered until the end of their days, they will inherit far greater wealth, luxury and happiness than the greatest kings here on earth, without any of the troubles and problems that earthly kings face. As far as opportunities go, is this the greatest opportunity that a man can have in this life, well worth any price or pain endured in it's acquisition.

[ see 1 CORINTHIANS 15; MATTHEW 19:16-30; MATTHEW 25; REVELATION 21 through 22 ]

It needs to be noted that there are three key points about the process of salvation that are critical to it's successful conclusion. These are three activities/attitudes that every single Christian is called to participate in, no matter their background or their circumstances:

1. A Christian must learn to live and yield to the power of the Holy Spirit within them, and continually work to develop the relationship with the Spirit. The Spirit does not come into a person to take over, but only to offer guidance and motivation. However, it is up to the Christian to seek out and consider the Spirit's help, and to follow it's leadings. Just like a human source of guidance, the Holy Spirit can be ignored or disregarded, often at one's peril.

[ see 1 CORINTHIANS 2; ROMANS 8; HEBREWS 12 ]

2. All Christians are called to play an active role in God's redemptive work. The activity required involves works of compassion, charity, generosity, and various other types of constructive, positive activities. Specific details of how these virtues are to be appropriated and managed are given by the Holy Spirit.

[ see MATTHEW 5 through 7; EPHESIANS 4 through 5; JAMES -the entire book ]

3. The single most important resolution a Christian must make is to never, ever give up the pursuit of a righteous, compassionate life, no matter the consequences. Even if threatened with persecution unto death, a Christian must determine to never compromise on his beliefs and his lifestyle. A partially lived, or incompletely lived Christian life is not going to impress God, nor is it going to be adequate for eternal life. Only a life lived in complete dedication to God, from the moment of salvation to the end, is a life deemed one worthy of the reward of eternal life.

[ see MATTHEW 10, ROMANS 2, HEBREWS - the entire book]

Now, it is important to note that the process of salvation is NOT one of perfectionism and legalism. It is not about following a code of conduct perfectly, or even at all. Nor is it about the avoidance of making mistakes. As a matter of fact, one will make plenty of mistakes, for a variety of reasons, as they pursue the straight and narrow path of salvation. However, the only mistake that will only ultimately count against you is a refusal to persevere in your pursuit of God and a righteous life. In other words, the only real sin that is disqualifying towards eternal life is the sin of giving up.

Next time: perils in the path of the process of salvation.

Denomination vs. Local Church

2007-06-17T19:13:00.000-05:00

A great article/commentary on the Internet Monk blog about local church vs. denominations. Here is a little extract:

The local Church that you belong to is not the local denominational congregation that you attend, important though that congregation is. Biblically speaking, the local Church that you belong to is defined more by geographical than denominational or confessional lines. The local denominational congregation that you attend might be more closely analogous to a Gentile Christian group in Antioch in the first century. Such a group is part of the local Church, but it is not the local Church. The local Church includes Jews and Greeks, male and female, slave and free. In our situations, the local Church will probably include Catholics and Protestants, Presbyterians and Baptists, Methodists and Pentecostals.

In light of this, we should beware of giving too much loyalty to denominations. The work of God in our areas far exceeds the work that He is doing through our particular denomination. We need to become more concerned about the progress of this larger work than we are about the progress of the cause of our denominations. We need to become more committed to the larger cause of God in our area than we are to preserving our particular denomination’s identity.

SOURCE: Internet Monk: Riffs: 06:16:07: Alastair Roberts on “The Denominational Church”: 16 JUNE 2007

Read the entire article, it's worth it.

<>< TM

If God is dead, then why are they still trying to kill him?

2007-06-13T21:55:00.000-05:00

The following is an excerpt of a review of the book "God is Not Great" by Christopher Hitchens. The review was written by an atheist:

By the time I finished Christopher Hitchens’ new book about his life-long struggle with the various Gods in his life, “God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything,” I was sick of it. God, religion, the book, and mostly Hitchens himself. It is the book of a smart ass, an enfant terrible, a book of a man who has been everywhere and found no resting place.

It is made up of junk history, junk scholarship and finally turns out to be junk apostasy. The subtitle gives the essential clue to the book (and probably to Hitchens himself). The book is too personal and the poison is in the eye of the beholder. It is a pitiless screed that is unrelenting and eventually tiresome.

It is difficult to understand why he wrote the book since there is nothing in it that hasn’t been written before in the long history of atheism. All of his criticisms are well known and obvious—organized religion has encouraged killing of millions in wars; it has fostered ignorance and superstition which results in unhealthy practices; it has fought reason, science, and modern thought; it is full of inconsistencies, errors, impossibilities and irrational assertions all in the service of superstition. Others have written about all these issues more thoughtfully and in more depth. Hitchens’ main contribution is that he wants to destroy all religions and the idea of God altogether.

Click on the source link to read the whole thing:

SOURCE: Horsefeathers; SCORECARD: GOD 1---HITCHENS 0; 11 June 2007

<>< TM

A Prairie Home Gettysburg Address

2007-06-02T22:04:00.000-05:00

One radio show I really enjoy is Garrison Keillor's Prairie Home Companion. And, like most listeners, the part I like best is his little 15 minute monologue about his fictional home town: Lake Wobegon.

This past Saturday's broadcast featured a very nice Memorial Day tribute, with Garrison Keillor reciting the entire Gettysburg Address by memory, a fitting speech for Memorial Day, as it was given originally by Abraham Lincoln as a memorial for the soldiers who died during the battle of Gettysburg.

I you have iTunes, you can subscribe to the "Lake Wobegon" portion of the Prairie Home Companion broadcast, as a podcast, by clicking here and following the instructions. Those of you who don't want iTunes on your computer can use the free "Juice" podcast software instead. I use both.

<>< TM

Remembering those who served

2007-05-28T22:16:00.000-05:00

Remembering those who've served, and who paid the ultimate price. They are the true heroes.

<>< TM

Gettysburg

2007-05-26T16:07:00.000-05:00

An excellent little site about the Civil War battle of Gettysburg can be found on Military.com's web site. There's a few interesting articles, including one on Joshua L. Chamberlain, the hero of Gettysburg.

Also there is a descion-tree game that allows you to play an alternate strategy of attack from the Confederate point-of-view. Very interesting little simulation.

<>< TM

Praise for our soldiers

2007-05-23T21:24:00.000-05:00

What do journalists from other countries think about our American soldiers after an experience embedding with them in Iraq? Well, here's the opinion of a Spanish journalist that appeared in today's Wall Street Journal:

While I was at the Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad on my recent trip to Iraq, a pair of Spanish journalists--a newspaper reporter and a photojournalist--walked in, fresh from their embed with the 1-4 Cavalry of the First Infantry Division (the unit with which I embedded only days later). They had spent two weeks amongst the troops there, living and going on missions with them, including house-to-house searches and seizures, and their impressions of these soldiers were extremely clear.

"Absolutely amazing," said David Beriain, the reporter (and the one who spoke English), said of the young Cavalry troops. "In Spain, it is embarrassing--our soldiers are ashamed to be in the army. These young men--and they seem so young!--are so proud of what they do, and do it so well, even though it is dangerous and they could very easily be killed." Mr. Beriain explained that the company he had been embedded with had lost three men in the span of six days while he was there--one to a sniper and two to improvised explosive devices, both of which had blown armored Humvees into the air and flipped them onto their roofs. Despite this, he said, and despite some of the things they might have said in the heat of the moment after seeing another comrade die, the soldiers' resolve and morale was unshaken in the long term, and they remained committed to carrying out their mission to the best of their ability for the duration of their tours in Iraq.

It was in the process of performing that mission, of coping with the loss of loved ones, and of just being themselves as American soldiers that these young men were able to win over the admiration and affection of more than one journalist who had arrived in their midst harboring a less-than-positive opinion of the Iraq war, and of those who were tasked with prosecuting it.

"I love those guys," Mr. Beriain said, looking wistfully out the window of the media cloister in the Green Zone that is the Combined Press Information Center. "From the first time you go kick a door with them, they accept you--you're one of them. I've even got a 'family photo' with them" to remember them by. "I really hated to leave."

SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal: 23 MAY 2007: 'I Love Those Guys'

HAT TIP: PajamasMedia

<>< TM

atheism is dead.

2007-05-15T23:02:00.000-05:00

Joe Hinman at the Metacrock blog has posted an excellent piece on the Last Days of Outmoded Atheism. His point: atheism is not a viable world view because it's sole purpose is to undermine and eliminate theistic world views. It has no viable purpose or goal other than that. The problem with such a negative goal is self evident: nature abhors a vacuum, especially a vacuum of ideas.

Here is a long excerpt from his article:

Atheism can't accept a place in the spectrum alongside other ideas because it has to destroy religion. It has to be base itself upon the outmoded concept that one idea is true and its contrary is false. Now Christianity believe this too. As I say, it's both good and bad for Christianity. But Christianity can survive in a version that liberalizes itself enough to be part of the mix. It has its' special qualities that others don't have and that's its appeal but it can also allow others to have their views. Atheism can't allow any idea but one, hate religion. Atheism depends upon the myth of a golden progress into the shining Godless future where science has prevailed and destroyed religion, leaving it behind as a failed adaptation. That myth is over. That myth is the myth of modernism and has been left behind in the dust.

Of course fundamentalism will have to go. That may be on the rise now the new atheist fundamentalists are an attempt to join the ranks of the postmodern fundies, but it wont succeed because it's major myth is opposed to the paradigm of the world today. Atheism has to destroy religion, it has to dissolve it, it has to undermine it or it can't exist. The existence of atheism as anything other just a lack of belief, which is far from all it is, is predicated upon hatred of religion and the need to demonstrate one's superiority over religious people. This is not an age for that. This is the age of tolerance, diversity, of equality among all ideas. The Irish gave up their passion for a nationalistic Northern Ireland because they realized they would rather go shopping than blow things up. A liberalized Christianity can fit into the diversified mixture of a postmodern social construct, but atheism can't by its nature and its definition.

<>< TM

Consciousness: Mind, Spirit, Brain.

2007-05-13T22:42:00.000-05:00

At the DOXA website, there is an excellent (and extremely technical) article about mind/body dualism entitled "Consciousness: Mind, Spirit, Brain."

So what's the big deal about mind/body dualism? Athiests insist that the distinction between our bodies (matter) and our minds (spirit) is false, that our minds and bodies are one in the same, and there is no such things as a "mind" or "spirit" that is distinct from our body.

However, science has been unable to prove that they are one and the same, and most interestingly, all evidence points to the FACT that there is a true distinction between body and mind.

The article is very technical, and there are some spelling and grammar mistakes that makes it even more difficult, but it makes for a fascinating read.

<>< TM

God, the Vatican, and the Internet

2007-05-10T17:10:00.000-05:00

Very interesting (and long) interview with Sister Judith Zoebelein, who is in charge of the Vatican's web site. Very interesting interview.

From time to time, I will be posting some things this summer, but just short, quick blurbs. For the most part, they will be posts of things I wish to keep track of for later reference and research.

<>< TM

CPU Benchmarks

2007-05-03T19:08:00.000-05:00

If you're like me, it's very, very easy to get lost in the maze of PC CPU performance, and how one type of processor compares to another.

Well, I finally found a chart that benchmarks each and every CPU made by AMD and Intel for the PC and server markets. It's CPU Benchmarks available at PassMark software.

<>< TM

new blog: fish wars

2007-04-30T21:07:00.000-05:00

Wendee Holtcamp, a Christian bohemian evolutionist and author has a new blog worth checking out: The Fish Wars. It is a commentary on Christian faith and and science.

I've always been fascinated by the debate between science and religion, and have done some interesting research on it, as well as looking at the debate from a philosophical perspective. Let me state a few facts about this debate for the record:

1. Christianity has done far more to help foster science and research than it has to thwart it. While there are those who love to hold up examples like the persecution of Galileo, it should be noted that when major paradigms of thought are overthrown, there is often a backlash. This is not just a science vs. religion issue, but even within the scientific community, perhaps especially within the scientific community, there can be tremendous resistance to new, revolutionary ideas and theories. (Those who have done a bit of research into the history of science know what I'm talking about.) No where on earth has science and technology flourished more bountifully than in Protestant Christian nations, especially those of the former British empire. The reason for this is that freedom of speech and thought, long supported by Protestant Christians, have allowed paradigm shifting ideas to develop without too much fear of retribution. (Though that fear can never be completely eliminated, nor should it...)

2. The modern debate between science and religion is really just a one-horse buggy: that buggy being evolution. Christians, especially conservative Christians, are very suspicious of evolution, not because it thwarts the creation account of Genesis, but because it's biggest proponents have been militant atheists, starting with Thomas Huxley, a.k.a. "Darwin's Bulldog." (Note: early atheists like Huxley and famous lawyer Clarence Darrow used the term "agnostic" rather than "atheists" mostly for public relations purposes. Upon close examination of both men's thoughts and world views, they were both militant atheists in all but name.)

3. With the exception of evolution, Christians, even very conservative ones, have no problems with other scientific disciplines. For example, there is no backlash against chemistry or physics, or even most aspects of biology. It is evolution alone, and those who promote it that raises the suspicions of many Christians, let alone people of other faiths. Even young earth creationists often resort to scientific explanations for their beliefs!

4. This may surprise many of you, but evolution is far from a proven fact. There are still a lot of biological problems that evolution does a poor job explaining. You will not find much about this on the web, but such issues are discussed and studied in academic circles. One of the problems that has has a bit of public exposure is the problem of stasis. The fossil record, surprisingly, has little if any truly transitional forms. Often the earliest instance of a creature will change very little from it's last instance, even when hundreds of millions of years are involved. Also, almost all of the animals that exist on earth today have very close, if not identical ancestors that go back to the days of the dinosaurs. If evolution is true, why is there so much evidence of stasis in the fossil record, and so little evidence of transitional forms? An attempt to solve this problem is the theory of "punctuated equalibrium" put forth buy Stephen J. Gould.

5. Evolution is not a repudiation of the Genesis creation account, nor is the Genesis account a repudiation of evolution. Genesis functions more like a parable than a journalistic account of what exactly happened at the moment of creation. Nor does evolution does not do way with the need for a creator, as there is still a need to explain origins of life and the universe. Evolution can give us a "how" but not a "why" answer to life itself.

6. The denial of evolution as an explanatory means for the origin of the species is not just a religious issue, there atheists who have problems with it as well, even atheistic scientists. Just like there are Christians who are in complete agreement with evolution.

7. While evolution is not a proven fact of history, it's negative impact on humanity certainly is, especially when you realize its philosophical and theological implications. The most evil regimes of the past 100 years, including Nazi Germany and various communist regimes were all completely in favor of evolution and it's implications, while usually being entirely opposed to religion in any form. However, even here in America, the science of eugenics (now mostly ignored) was a direct response to the ideas of evolution. Looking at history since the publication of Origin of the Species, one can be very hard pressed to find any beneficial effects it's ideas have had on humanity.

<>< TM

if you think you have problems...

2007-04-30T19:52:00.000-05:00

There are some amazing people on this earth, who more than make up for those of us who are merely mediocre. Two such people are Rolland and Heidi Baker of Iris Ministries; a trans-denominational Christian ministry with a charismatic flavor. They have dedicated their lives to helping the poorest of the poor: the citizens of Mozambique, Africa. As just one part of their ministry, they run an orphanage caring for 6,000 children!!!

I'm going to reprint an e-mail newsletter that Rolland sent out this past March, to give you an idea of the work they do in Africa in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a ministry of ultimate suffering, and tremendous miracles. If you would like to know the lastest about Roland and Heidi, I highly recommend their blog.

I also highly recommend supporting this ministry any way you can. Many people I know have gone on short-term mission trips to Mozambique, and they all come back testifying to the reality of the miracles, and the amazing work that Iris Ministries does on a daily basis.

Here's the March e-mail from Rolland:

--------------------------------

Floods of revival
Rolland and Heidi Baker
Iris Ministries, Inc.
Pemba, Mozambique
6 March 2007

Photo gallery/refugee camp photos: http://www.irismin.org/march2007.htm

Morrumbala, Saturday, 3 March 2007

Heidi and I have one more day in the flood zone before we fly our Cessna back to Pemba. So we are up early at the World Vision compound in Morrumbala, loading our Land Rovers and big trucks for a trip to more refugee camps. We would especially like to get to the flooded Shire River and paddle our way in dugout canoes to people stranded on isolated islands.

Our little convoy heads east on a dirt road through the pristine African bush. The mountains and skies are in their full glory, wild, clear and beautiful. Brilliant cumulus clouds perfectly accent the deep blue heavens overhead, hiding a dark fury that has been unleashed on this land for two months. Heavy rains and cyclones have pounded southeast Africa until now over 300,000 people in this area have been forced from their houses and have lost everything.

A thousand feet above the flood plain, the countryside around Morrumbala is poor, but lush, green and relatively dry. We are racing and swerving over the rutted, winding road to make time. We raise clouds of dust, climb hills, dip into valleys, wave to children in villages, and press on to the infamous river.

But suddenly we encounter a camp we didn't expect. It is huge. We can't just drive by, so we pull off the road and stop, surrounded by a desperate crowd. They find out who we are, and they are thrilled. Many of them are already in our churches, and so we start singing and worshiping even as we discuss the situation with their leaders.

These people haven't eaten in weeks. The rising waters forced them from their houses along the river plain, and they slogged on foot through muddy swamps until they reached high ground and gathered in huge camps. When they arrived they had nothing but the ragged clothes on their backs. The people literally sat on the ground in pouring rain, thunder and lightning with no shelter, food, or visible hope. Children were sick, crying and screaming. Some ran naked like animals. The desperate tried to eat nasty roots and worms out of the ground. Skin and eye infections, intestinal disorders, malaria and an array of other health problems began to spread.

After some days the people began building primitive little huts out of nearby sticks and grass, and now there is a sea of these huts for the six thousand refugees in this one camp (see photos!). But still the people sit and sleep on the dirt with absolutely nothing -- no flashlights, toilets, CD players, sleeping bags, cots, Coleman lanterns, tea kettles, bug spray, fans, water bottles or hot dogs. They just wait
-- tired, hot, dirty, hungry and sick. Our visiting doctor, Koos Le Roux from near Cape Town, begins to treat cases, and says he's never seen such a needy medical situation.

While some of us discuss food logistics, we preach too, and pray for the sick. Terry Inman and Rodney Hogue, pastors from the San Francisco Bay Area, flew immediately here to help us minister, and they passionately pour their hearts out with Heidi and me. No one resists the Gospel. Everyone is eagerly listening to every word, responding to every call, wanting prayer for everything. Many already know Jesus, as we have probably several thousand churches in this one province, but now they understand all the more how much they need Him.

We brought tons of rice, beans, blankets, plastic tarp and other supplies, but not enough for the whole camp at once. Organizers are afraid if we feed only part of the camp, there will be rioting and bloodshed. But no other supplies have come to this camp yet, and we just can't take the food away. We are assured other organizations will bring additional food immediately.

Meanwhile, in the hot sun and under trees all around, Jesus is saving and healing. Four deaf people hear this morning. Our own Mozambican pastors are praying throughout the crowd. We always have good news, we tell the people. Jesus knows your suffering. Through all of this we will seek Him more, and He will reveal Himself more than we ever thought He would.

We have to go, but will be back with much more. We only made it to the edge of the actual flood waters, and never got to an island, but Jesus knew what we had to do.

Two days later in Pemba

Three hours' flight to the north, we are preparing more teams to drive south and help in the relief effort. The poor of our own church in Pemba pour their hearts out in generosity, some giving up months of salaries and their humble but most valuable possessions. As our first sketchy reports get out, churches and friends are responding from around the world. As a relief organization, Iris Ministries is just a little child with a lunch to give, but we are so pleased to give it and see what Jesus can do.

We learn that there are more than thirteen refugee camps near Morrumbala along the Shire River, which flows into the Zambezi from Malawi. Many more camps of refugees have formed along the Zambezi and other rivers that have also flooded. These camps are remote and very difficult to access by road, and some can only be reached by helicopter. Two thousand people a day are pouring into them.

We were persuaded by disaster relief personnel that we should take complete care of one camp of nearly three thousand, instead of trying to help many camps in some smaller way, dividing and confusing the work of different aid agencies. However, we have received news that no further food and supplies were delivered by anyone else to the camp we last visited, and that in fact many other camps are not expected to receive any aid at all from anyone unless Iris can respond. Now we are being told that many thousands of lives are dependent on Iris supplying the necessary relief and filling the aid vacuum in the months to come.

In the big picture, 100,000 acres of crops have been destroyed at the height of the growing season, and this follows last year's major crop failure due to severe drought. And still this is only the beginning of March, and weather forecasters are warning of more flooding until the rainy season is over.

At the moment, the Zambezi River has subsided, but is still past the flood stage. The discharge of water from the Cahora Bassa dam on the river has been reduced to one-third of the 8,000 cubic meters per second that it was releasing at one point when it was in danger of structural failure. When Heidi and I arrived in our plane several weeks after the initial emergency, the flood waters had receded some, but the land left behind was still soggy, swampy and unusable.

Following the Good Shepherd's example, we have always tried to set a pattern of going to most remote and forgotten areas we can, and now in this crisis the result is that our people are looking to God and to us for help that is not forthcoming from other directions. A wave of humanity in Mozambique is again left without any hope but Jesus. And again we are in a position to participate in the building of the Kingdom in the most unlikely places, and to see another level of revival that we could not have predicted or imagined. We don't know yet all that God will do in this country among our Mozambican people, but He surprises us every day. Reports of miracles are flowing in from the camps. Four blind people saw and two deaf people heard today. Our pastors and visitors are being filled with new energy. The gifts of the Spirit are being stirred up. More revival than ever is brewing. The word is getting out, and the church is coming together. May we see His glory in the faces of the redeemed in the Zambezi Valley. As one eleven-year-old in America prophesied, "I have to tell you what the Lord told me. He said that the rains will cease, but the flood has just begun. Mozambique is a community cup, and all who drink from there will be saved!"

Logistics

We thank with all our hearts everyone who has responded so far, including churches and ministries who have already taken amazing offerings. May Jesus multiply all that you give in an unprecedented way, and return to you vastly more than you anticipate!

As always, donations can be sent to our U.S. support address, P.O. Box 493995, Redding, CA 96049-3995, USA, or to our offices in Canada and the U.K. as listed at the end of this newsletter. Additional inquiries concerning involvement with our relief effort can be sent by email to Mary Chico at , or you can telephone her at our Redding office, 1-530-255-2048 (cell: 1-530-921-0253).

In Mozambique you will be directed to our coordinator, Angela Olson, at , tel: +258-82-552-2944, or Teisa Miller at , tel: +258-82-916-9280. Their assistant Janiko is at
+258-82-420-2825. If necessary regarding transportation and other
details they will refer you to Betty Johnson at ,
tel: +258-82-886-4700. In the Morrumbala area of Zambezia Province our relief coordinator is Herbert Barbutti at ,
tel: +258-82-708-7885, and our Mozambican staff member Carlos at
+258-82-025-8650. South of the Zambezi our relief coordinator is Claudia
Bernhardt in Dondo near Beira, at , tel:
+258-82-595-9157.

All inquiries regarding shipments to Mozambique can be directed to Gordon Haggerty at , tel: +258-82-568-4183.

May you all be hugely encouraged by the power, wisdom, love and joy of the Lord!

In Jesus, Rolland
--

From Heidi:

Thank you for praying for us during this difficult time of flooding and cyclones. We are feeding many thousands of people each day in various camps in Caia and Zambezia. We are also rebuilding churches in Cabo Delgado that were washed away in the floods.

I just finished interviews with several journalists from the Mozambique national radio station. As I shared with them about the needs and our desire to help, they were visibly touched. Please pray the Lord will use these interviews in mighty ways!

We are overwhelmed with gratitude for people who have been helping us "for such a time as this." The Lord spoke to me from John 6 that Iris Ministries is an example of the boy with his bread and fish. We have handed Jesus our lunch and He is multiplying it for the multitudes. Tens of thousands of people have given their hearts to Jesus in these last weeks! The deaf have heard, the blind have seen and the poor have heard the Good News. I don't think I have ever seen such suffering and hunger as I encountered in the camps in Zambezia. We thank God every day for your love and concern for the poor.

Please pray for the favor we need with the government of Mozambique as we are having a difficult time receiving the containers duty free. We have just received a phone call today telling us that we passed the first phase of approval from the government's emergency coordination commission, and we are awaiting the national director's approval now.

Much love in Jesus,
Heidi Baker
--

Rolland and Heidi Baker
Iris Ministries, Inc.
PO Box 275
Pemba, Mozambique

U.S. office for mail, support and information:
Iris Ministries, Inc.
PO Box 493995
Redding, CA 96049-3995, USA
Email: info@irismin.org
Voicemail: 1-213-330-0293

Iris Ministries Canada
3092 Shannon Crescent
Oakville, ON L6L 6B4
CANADA
(905) 847-7749; fax (905) 847-7931
www.irismin.ca
info@irismin.ca
Contact Janis Chevreau, Trustee

Iris Ministries (UK) Ltd
PO Box 351
Tonbridge, Kent TN9 1WQ
UNITED KINGDOM
info@irisministries.co.uk
www.irisministries.co.uk

Internet:
Rolland@irismin.org
info@irismin.org
irismin.org (newsletters, photos, Rolland and Heidi's blog, etc.)
irismin.com (admin, travel schedule, support info, missions school, applications, products, etc.)

------------------------------

<>< TM

peggy noonan sounds in over our increasingly crass culture

2007-04-29T23:34:00.000-05:00

Those who have read my "sympathy for the devil" article knows that I do not like the negative influence that mass media, especially televsion, is having on the American culture. For the one or two programs that might be held up as shining examples of all that's good and right in the USA, there's a hundred that make you wonder why anyone would waste there time with TV.

Now, Peggy Noonan sounds in with the same concern I have, and that is the fear factor that television is bringing to the lives of children (let alone adults!). Here's an excerpt from here recent column in the Wall Street Journal (do yourself a favor and subscribe--best journalism in the USA is in the pages of the Journal.)

For 50 years in America, whenever the subject has turned to what our culture presents, the bright response has been, "You don't like it? Change the channel." But there is no other channel to change to, no safe place to click to. Our culture is national. The terrorizing of children is all over.

Click. Smug and menacing rappers.

Click. "This is Bauer. He's got a nuke and he's going to take out Los Angeles."

Click. Rosie grabs her crotch. "Eat this."

Click. "Every day 2,000 children are reported missing . . ."

Click. Don Imus's face.

Click. "Eyewitnesses say the shooter then lined the students up . . ."

Click. An antismoking campaign on local New York television. A man growls out how he felt when they found his cancer. He removes a bib and shows us the rough red hole in his throat. He holds a microphone to it to deliver his message.

Don't smoke, he says.

This is what TV will be like in Purgatory.

It's not only roughness and frightening things in our mass media, it's politics too. Daily alarms on global warming with constant videotape of glaciers melting and crashing into the sea. Anchors constantly asking, "Is there still time to save the Earth? Scientists warn we must move now." And international terrorism. "Is the Port of Newark safe, or a potential landing point for deadly biological weapons?"

I would hate to be a child now.

SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal: 27 APRIL 2007: We're Scaring Our Children to Death

So would I. We live in a culture of violence and fear that is 99% the creation of our mass media. It doesn't have to be that way, but sensationalism sells, and fear mongering is the best sort of sensationalism.

HAT TIP: Relapsed Catholic

<>< TM

sympathy for the devil

2007-04-26T23:29:00.000-05:00

Well, it's been a little while since that fateful day when a young and very angry Korean resident alien shot-up Virginia Tech, firing something on the order of 170+ rounds of ammunition during a romp through Norris hall, unleashing death and destruction like some sort of devil incarnate.

Let me state for the record that this I deplore and condemn the actions of Cho Seung-Hui, and find it to be a work of despicable evil. His actions cannot be justified, nor admired by any reasonable human being. But then again, this was not the act of a reasonable human being, at least not from my perspective.

My interest is the Virginia Tech shooting is simple: I don't want to ever see this happen again, and one of the best ways to understand how to prevent this is to understand what caused the killer to do what he did.

While everyone and his brother are throwing the "psychopath" label at Cho, I hesitate to do so for a very simple reason: it does not really explain anything.

While it has been discovered that Cho was diagnosed as being mentally ill, there does not seem to be any information as to what he was diagnosed with. According to information that I've seen, it seems that Cho was extremely depressed and suicidal. Also, it seems that he was diagnosed with autism when he was a child, which is something that does not go away when one gets older.

Autism often has other psychological disorders that go along with it. Hence, Cho was probably dealing with more than just autism. But please don't mistake autism for being retarded: children and adults with autism can be very intelligent, and many, with proper help, can lead fairly normal lives. But getting proper help is the key.

I have a feeling that Cho Seung-Hui never got the help and support that those who suffer with autism need, especially when they are young. It is also a fact that Cho was regularly on the wrong end of quite a bit of bullying and name calling when he was young, which is not unusual at all for those who suffer from mental illness. Take from a parent: children can be rather evil and demonic when it comes to bullying and mistreating other kids, especially those who are weaker or a bit strange. Children are not born civilized, they are not nice people.

Bullying and name-calling is difficult to handle when you are mentally sound, but when you are under the burden of something like autism, it can be very, very difficult to deal with. Autistic people, frustrated with their inability to fit in or even have the control of their bodies and minds like normal people do, can easily get worked up into a rage, and they can hurt others. This is nothing new. They simply do not have the self-control nor the ability to deal with conflict like the rest of us, anyone who has worked with autistic people/children can testify to that.

I'm one of the few people who was glad to hear that Cho left a manifesto, small portions of which MSNBC has made public. (I'm also probably the only person who would like to examine the entire manifesto, and not just snippets that MSNBC feels we should be allowed to see.)

When Cho expresses himself in his own words, there are three things that are very obvious: he was very angry, he was very depressed, and he had a difficult time expressing himself verbally. It is also evident that he was an intelligent person, proven by his choice of firearms (Glock & Walther), his use of technology, and the way he was able to plan his mission of vengeance. He even made time to go to the post office and overnight a package to MSNBC, in between killing people.

For Cho, the killings were not an act of terrorism or the mad ravings of a lunatic, rather he believed that he was avenging himself, along with all others in this life that end up on the wrong end of bullies and snobs. He mentions the persecution and bullying he was subject to, and explains quite clearly that he is now going to be doing a bit of bullying himself.

I myself can clearly remember a time when some little pipsqueak wanted to have some fun at my expense. At first I just tried to ignore the person, but that just seemed to encourage him all the more. I said nothing and did nothing in my defense, but he just continued to carry on. Then something in me just had enough, and I grabbed the little squirt by the neck, and proceeded to choke him, which had the immediate effect of stopping his increasingly insulting monologue. While I did not break his neck, nor choke him to death, I very easily could have, and was very much tempted to do so. Needless to say, after I put the fear of God into him, he never felt felt impressed to ridicule me again.

I bring that up to say this: people can be ridiculed and insulted into violence, even if they themselves are not violent by nature. Do this to someone who is having a hard enough time dealing with mental illness and flush with hormones, and you have the makings of one very angry, vengeful person, who will think nothing of killing his fellow man, and himself.

It was obvious that Cho was not just "picked on," but it is clear from the news reports and Cho's own writings that he was subject to constant ridicule and abuse, and was getting quite tired of it. He does not mention who is tormentors are by name, at least not in the information we have, but that many not be relevant.

What is relevant is that we live in a society and culture that glorifies those who kill for vengeance. We glorify all sorts of bad behavior, foul language, and rebellious attitudes. Then we all act very shocked and dismayed when someone actually acts out this behavior in public. Well, what did we expect? We reap what we sow, and Cho is just some of the first fruits of what is looking like a bumber crop.

Friedrich Nietzsche, no matter what you think of the man, was quite prophetic in his forsight in terms of seeing that the 20th century was going to be one of the most violent ever, thanks mainly to the increasing acceptance of a atheistic, nihilistic world view. After the past 100 years, you would think that such a world view would be tossed in the ash heap of history, but instead it has grown even stronger, even more bold, and it's already looking like the 21st century will make the 20th look like picnic in the park by comparison; especially since nuclear, chemical and biological weapons are within easy reach of even the lowiliest thug.

Cho, and those like him are a product of a culture than has grown increasingly narcissistic. It doesn't matter how poorly or badly we made Cho feel, it only matters that we made ourselves better by ridiculing him. Even in death, he cannot escape our collective ridicule and disdain.

Yes, I do condemn Cho's actions on that fateful April day at Virgina Tech, but I refrain from condemning Cho himself. Rather, I feel great sadness, both for him and those who were the object of his wrath.

But for those who were guilty of the systematic bullying of Cho, for them I have no sympathy at all. The earth would be a much better place without them.

May God have mercy on Cho's soul.

"Not by wrath does one kill, but by laughter."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

<><

lawyers, guns, money

2007-04-23T21:33:00.000-05:00

A new blog I found while looking for other things is Lawyers, Guns and Money. I especially enjoyed the Sunday battleship posts, but lots of interesting articles for the intrepid blog reader.

<>< TM

"Before Deadly Rage, a Life Consumed by a Troubling Silence"

2007-04-22T16:15:00.000-05:00

Posting for later research and comment:

The NY Times has a very well written, descriptive account of the Virginia Tech massacre from the killer's point of view. It goes back to his early childhood. Very interesting piece: New York Times: 22 APRIL 2007: Before Deadly Rage, a Life Consumed by a Troubling Silence.

HAT TIP: Drudge Report

<>< TM

"What We Know"

2007-04-21T20:11:00.000-05:00

Posting for later research and comment:

MSNBC has an entire web site, devoid of banner ads, that is an information warehouse on the Virginia Tech shootings.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18188852/

<>< TM

Va. Tech shooter did not talk much as a child, relatives say

2007-04-20T22:11:00.000-05:00

for later research and comment...

Cho left South Korea with his family in 1992 to seek a better life in the United States, Kim said. The family never visited their homeland, and Kim said he did not recognize his nephew when his picture appeared on television as the shooter.

"I am devastated," he said between heavy sighs. "I don't know what I can tell the victims' families and the U.S. citizens. I sincerely apologize ... as a family member."

Cho's parents have receiving official protection since the shooting, South Korea's ambassador to Washington said today.

"We've confirmed that the parents are being safely protected by U.S. investigative authorities," Ambassador Lee Tae-sik told MBC Radio.

Lee said U.S. authorities declined to say where the parents were "because they move from place to place everyday."

The parents had been working at a dry cleaners in suburban Washington.

In South Korea, they ran a small book store in Seoul, Kim said. The family lived in a two-room apartment no larger than 430 square feet.

"They had trouble making ends meet in Korea. The book store they had didn't turn much profit," the uncle said.

SOURCE: Chron.com: 20 APRIL 2007: Va. Tech shooter did not talk much as a child, relatives say

I highly encourage everyone to read the full article. Very interesting.

<>< TM

"Va. Gunman's Family Feels Hopeless, Lost"

2007-04-20T20:12:00.000-05:00

Posting for later research and comment:

BLACKSBURG, Va. (AP) - The family of Virginia Tech gunman Seung-Hui Cho told The Associated Press on Friday that they feel "hopeless, helpless and lost," and "never could have envisioned that he was capable of so much violence." "He has made the world weep. We are living a nightmare," said a statement issued by Cho's sister, Sun-Kyung Cho, on the family's behalf.

It was the Chos' first public comment since the 23-year-old student killed 32 people and committed suicide Monday in the deadliest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history.

Raleigh, N.C., lawyer Wade Smith provided the statement to the AP after the Cho family reached out to him. Smith said the family would not answer any questions, and neither would he.

"Our family is so very sorry for my brother's unspeakable actions. It is a terrible tragedy for all of us," said Sun-Kyung Cho, a 2004 Princeton University graduate who works as a contractor for a State Department office that oversees American aid for Iraq.

"We pray for their families and loved ones who are experiencing so much excruciating grief. And we pray for those who were injured and for those whose lives are changed forever because of what they witnessed and experienced," she said. "Each of these people had so much love, talent and gifts to offer, and their lives were cut short by a horrible and senseless act."

SOURCE: Breitbart.com: 20 APRIL 2007: Va. Gunman's Family Feels Hopeless, Lost

HAT TIP: Drudge Report

<>< TM

picked on, pushed around and laughed at

2007-04-19T17:35:00.000-05:00

Posted for later research and commentary....

BLACKSBURG, Va. (AP) - Long before he snapped, Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui was picked on, pushed around and laughed at over his shyness and the strange way he talked when he was a schoolboy in the Washington suburbs, former classmates say.

Chris Davids, a Virginia Tech senior who graduated from Westfield High School in Chantilly, Va., with Cho in 2003, recalled that the South Korean immigrant almost never opened his mouth and would ignore attempts to strike up a conversation.

Once, in English class, the teacher had the students read aloud, and when it was Cho's turn, he just looked down in silence, Davids recalled. Finally, after the teacher threatened him with an F for participation, Cho started to read in a strange, deep voice that sounded "like he had something in his mouth," Davids said.

"As soon as he started reading, the whole class started laughing and pointing and saying, `Go back to China,'" Davids said.

The high school classmates' accounts add to the psychological portrait that is beginning to take shape, and could shed light on Cho's state of mind in the video rant he mailed to NBC in the middle of his rampage Monday at Virginia Tech.

He shot 32 people to death and committed suicide in the deadliest one- man shooting rampage in modern U.S. history.

SOURCE: Breitbart.com: 19 APRIL 2007: Va. Tech Shooter Was Laughed At

HAT TIP: Drudge Report

<>< TM

Cho and "Oldboy"

2007-04-18T23:21:00.000-05:00

Another post for later research and comment:

The inspiration for perhaps the most inexplicable image in the set that Cho Seung-Hui mailed to NBC news on Monday may be a movie from South Korea that won the Gran Prix prize at Cannes Film Festival in 2004.

The poses in the two images are similar, and the plot of the movie, “Oldboy,” seems dark enough to merit at least some further study. Following is The Times’s plot summary:

The film centers on a seemingly ordinary businessman, Dae-su (the terrific Choi Min-sik), who, after being mysteriously imprisoned, goes on an extensive, exhausting rampage, seeking answers and all manner of bloody revenge.

SOURCE: NEW YORK TIMES: THE LEDE: 18 APRIL 2007: Updates on Virginia Tech

<>< TM

"Gunman sent package to NBC News"

2007-04-18T18:37:00.000-05:00

I'm not surprised...this post is for later comment and reference....

MSNBC
Updated: 7 minutes ago

Sometime after he killed two people in a Virginia university dormitory but before he slaughtered 30 more in a classroom building Monday morning, Cho Seung-Hui mailed NBC News a large package, including photographs and videos, boasting that “when the time came, I did it. I had to.”

SOURCE: MSNBC: 18 APRIL 2007: Gunman sent package to NBC News

UPDATE (6:45 PM CDT):

A vulgar, but interesting comment from the Little Green Footballs blog:

#33 Pawn of the Oppressor 4/18/2007 2:27:44 pm PDT9 JammieWearingFool

Did he ask for Olbermann?

Bwahaha!

Seriously, this is fascinating. Suicide massacreists now distributing "multimedia manifestos" directly to the press, a la Osama, almost in real time as they commit their murders? Think about that for a second. This kid killed, took a minute to make a statement, and then left his dorm to kill again. About the only way this could get any crazier is if he had taken a streaming webcam with him, or posted cell phone videos of his handiwork to Youtube while he was reloading.

This is the blood-drinking Drive-By Media's wet dream.

SOURCE: Little Green Footballs: 18 APRIL 2007: VT Killer Contacted NBC News (Comment #33)
<>< TM

...not so evil Knievel

2007-04-18T17:26:00.000-05:00

I'm old enough to remember the glory years of Evel Knievel, an extremely famous motor cycle stunt man who jumped over trucks, cars and buses with his motorcycle, back in the late 60's and early 70's. His most famous stunt, however, was an attempt to jump over Idaho's Snake River Canyon in a rocket powered "motorcycle". (Looked more like a rocket than a motorcycle!) After the failure, and stupidity of that stunt, Evel's star started to set, and most of us forgot about him.

Well, Evel is back in the news, but for a stunt I would not have predicted in a billion years: he led several hundred people to Christ while giving the testimony of his conversion at the famous Crystal Cathedral in California. It was a small scale, but very real REVIVAL meeting!

Here's an excerpt from an article on the Christianity Today website:

On Palm Sunday, hundreds responded to Robert "Evel" Knievel's testimony by asking to be baptized on the spot at Crystal Cathedral. Speaking alongside the Rev. Robert H. Schuller, Knievel told the congregation in Orange County, California, how he had refused for 68 years to accept Jesus Christ as Lord. He believed in God, but he couldn't walk away from the gold and the gambling and the booze and the women.

"I don't know why I fought it so hard," he said. "I just did."

But Knievel knew people were praying for him, including his daughter's church, his ex-wife's church, and the hundreds of people who wrote letters urging him to believe. And then something indescribable happened during Daytona Bike Week this March.

"I don't know what in the world happened. I don't know if it was the power of the prayer or God himself, but it just reached out, either while I was driving or walking down the sidewalk or sleeping, and it just—the power of God in Jesus just grabbed me. … All of a sudden, I just believed in Jesus Christ. I did, I believed in him! … I rose up in bed and, I was by myself, and I said, 'Devil, Devil, you bastard you, get away from me. I cast you out of my life.' … I just got on my knees and prayed that God would put his arms around me and never, ever, ever let me go."

SOURCE: Christianity Today: 13 APRIL 2007: Evel Overcome With Good

HAT TIP: Maurice Smith @ The Parousia Network

<>< TM

theodicy quote of the week

2007-04-18T17:00:00.000-05:00

"When a prophet is accepted and deified, his message is lost. The prophet is only useful so long as he is stoned as a public nuisance calling us to repentance, disturbing our comfortable routines, breaking our respectable idols, shattering our sacred conventions" (A. G. Gardiner as quoted by Arthur Wallis, "In The Day of Thy Power").

HAT TIP: Maurice Smith @ The Parousia Network

<>< TM

"Richard McBeef"

2007-04-17T22:26:00.000-05:00

Again, posted for later research and comment: the alleged plays of Cho Seung-Hui: Richard McBeef and Mr. Brownstone.

A note from the person who provided the copies of these plays:

AOL News has obtained two plays a classmate says were written by Cho Seung-Hui. Ian MacFarlane, the former classmate and current AOL employee, provided us with the plays. A note from Mr. MacFarlane and links to the works appear below.

What happened yesterday:

When I first heard about the multiple shootings at Virginia Tech yesterday, my first thought was about my friends, and my second thought was "I bet it was Seung Cho."

Cho was in my playwriting class last fall, and nobody seemed to think much of him at first. He would sit by himself whenever possible, and didn't like talking to anyone. I don't think I've ever actually heard his voice before. He was just so quiet and kept to himself. Looking back, he fit the exact stereotype of what one would typically think of as a "school shooter" – a loner, obsessed with violence, and serious personal problems. Some of us in class tried to talk to him to be nice and get him out of his shell, but he refused talking to anyone. It was like he didn't want to be friends with anybody. One friend of mine tried to offer him some Halloween candy that she still had, but he slowly shook his head, refusing it. He just came to class every day and submitted his work on time, as I understand it.

A major part of the playwriting class was peer reviews. We would write one-act plays and submit them to an online repository called Blackboard for everyone in the class to read and comment about in class the next day. Typically, the students give their opinions about the plays and suggest ways to make it better, the professor gives his insights, then asks the author to comment about the play in class.

When we read Cho's plays, it was like something out of a nightmare. The plays had really twisted, macabre violence that used weapons I wouldn't have even thought of. Before Cho got to class that day, we students were talking to each other with serious worry about whether he could be a school shooter. I was even thinking of scenarios of what I would do in case he did come in with a gun, I was that freaked out about him. When the students gave reviews of his play in class, we were very careful with our words in case he decided to snap. Even the professor didn't pressure him to give closing comments.

After hearing about the mass shootings, I sent one of my friends a Facebook message asking him if he knew anything about Seung Cho and if he could have been involved. He replied: "dude that's EXACTLY what I was thinking! No, I haven't heard anything, but seriously, that was the first thing I thought when I heard he was Asian."

While I "knew" Cho, I always wished there was something I could do for him, but I couldn't think of anything. As far as notifying authorities, there isn't (to my knowledge) any system set up that lets people say "Hey! This guy has some issues! Maybe you should look into this guy!" If there were, I definitely would have tried to get the kid some help. I think that could have had a good chance of averting yesterday's tragedy more than anything.

While I was hesitant at first to release these plays (because I didn't know if there are laws against it), I had to put myself in the shoes of the average person researching this situation. I'd want to know everything I could about the killer to figure out what could drive a person to do something like this and hopefully prevent it in the future. Also, I hope this might help people start caring about others more no matter how weird they might seem, because if this was some kind of cry for attention, then he should have gotten it a long time ago.

As far as the victims go, as I was heading to bed last night, I heard that my good friend Stack (Ryan Clark) was one of the first confirmed dead. I didn't want to believe that I'd never get to talk to him again, and all I could think about was how much I could tell him how much his friendship meant to me. During my junior year, Ryan, another friend and I used to get breakfast on Tuesdays and Thursdays at Shultz Dining Hall, one of the cafeterias on campus, and it was always the highlight of my day. He could talk forever it seemed and always made us laugh. He was a good friend, not just to me, but to a lot of people, and I'll miss him a lot.

SOURCE: A0L News Bloggers: 17 APRIL 2007: Cho Seung-Hui's Plays

<>< TM

Cho Seung-Hui

2007-04-17T22:09:00.000-05:00

From the Chicago Tribune, posted for later research and commentary:

The suspected gunman in the Virginia Tech shooting rampage, Cho Seung-Hui, was a troubled 23-year-old senior from South Korea who investigators believe left an invective-filled note in his dorm room, sources say.

.....

Cho had shown recent signs of violent, aberrant behavior, according to an investigative source, including setting a fire in a dorm room and allegedly stalking some women.

A note believed to have been written by Cho was found in his dorm room that railed against "rich kids," "debauchery" and "deceitful charlatans" on campus.

Cho was an English major whose creative writing was so disturbing that he was referred to the school's counseling service, the Associated Press reported.

Professor Carolyn Rude, chairwoman of the university's English department, said she did not personally know the gunman. But she said she spoke with Lucinda Roy, the department's director of creative writing, who had Cho in one of her classes and described him as "troubled."

"There was some concern about him," Rude said. "Sometimes, in creative writing, people reveal things and you never know if it's creative or if they're describing things, if they're imagining things or just how real it might be. But we're all alert to not ignore things like this."

She said Cho was referred to the counseling service, but she said she did not know when, or what the outcome was.

Cho, from Centreville, Va., a rapidly growing suburb of Washington, D.C., came to the United States in 1992, an investigative source said. He was a legal permanent resident.

His family runs a dry cleaning business and he has a sister who attended Princeton University, according to the source.

Investigators believe Cho at some point had been taking medication for depression. They are examining Cho's computer for more evidence.

SOURCE: Chicago Tribune: 17 APRIL 2007: Sources: Virginia Tech gunman left note

HAT TIP: Drudge Report

<>< TM

e-mail from an eye-witness sent to a blogger

2007-04-16T22:19:00.000-05:00

I've been following the news about the massacre at Virginia Tech using both the standard main stream media web sites and the blogging world.

Here's an interesting bit about the shootings you won't see on CNN: a student sent blogger Michelle Malkin an e-mail giving his eye-witness account of incident:

Dear Michelle,

I was in Norris Hall today when the shootings took place. I thought I'd give you my account in case you wanted more information.

It was just a regular day in class; the door was open and we heard a pop-pop-popping noise. Sounded like some kind of construction but it was getting disruptive so we went to close the door, and one of the girls stepped out in the hallway to see what it was. She saw the gun and ran back inside the room and slammed the door shut and we all got down on the floor.

We heard pretty much continuous shooting for the next minute or so, and I said, "Shouldn't we barricade the door," because we were sitting ducks with no way out inside that room if he opened the door. A couple more people floated the idea that "We need to barricade the door, NOW." But I was too scared to even move, much less move the teacher's desk.

Finally one of the guys in the front of the classroom was brave enough to get up and move the desk in front of the door to prevent outside entry. About twenty seconds later, the shooter rattled the doorknob trying to get in. When he couldn't get in he fired two shots through the door (single solid piece of wood) and left. We heard him go in to 206 (the room across the hall) and shoot the people in that room. If we hadn't put the barricade up when we did, I and all my classmates would be dead.

When the police arrived five minutes later we heard them call for him to surrender his weapon and some more, irregular shots. Another five minutes later the police knocked and yelled "Police!" and we yelled "How do we know?" and when a second voice confirmed that it was in fact police, we opened the door. An officer came in and told us to line up single file, take nothing with us (I grabbed my coat) and run out the door single file while another officer escorted us.

We entered the hallway. Blood, bullet casings, and empty pistol clips were everywhere; this was definitely the most horrifying sight of my entire life. We ran past quickly. A door to the stairwell had been opened and there was a massive trail of blood; we found out later that a class had tried to escape only to find that the monster had chained the doors shut before starting his rampage. They were all killed.

We all ran to a nearby building and stayed there until we could be processed, and that was the end of it. Thank you all for your concerns and prayers, but please mostly pray for those who were seriously injured or hurt today.

Also, let me say that the response from the campus, local, and state police was exemplary. Within five minutes of the first shots, police were gathering outside. In another ten minutes, the threat had been neutralized and the building was secure. My heartfelt gratitude goes out to the brave men and women who kept us safe today.

--Jacob Simmons
junior, Computer Engineering, Virginia Tech

SOURCE: Michelle Malkin: 16 APRIL 2007: Carnage at Virginia Tech; Readers point to campus ban on self-defense;
More video, plus student e-mail

<>< TM

"Abortion crisis as doctors refuse to perform surgery"

2007-04-16T21:43:00.000-05:00

This is so bizarre I just had to post it--the UK paper "Independent" is reporting that there is an abortion "crisis" because many doctors are refusing to perform abortions due to ethical reasons!

One of the sad ironies of the legalization of abortion in the United States is that the legalization did not automatically make the procedure either ethical or moral. It is one of many things in life--like telemarketers--that are legal, but who's ethical and moral bearing are certainly negative.

Abortion is both unethical and immoral in the vast majority of the cases in which it's performed, where a perfectly healthy female simply decides that having a baby would be just too inconvenient. In other words, most abortions are nothing more than radical attempts at birth control, after the fact of conception.

Here an excerpt from the article:

Britain is facing an abortion crisis because an unprecedented number of doctors are refusing to be involved in carrying out the procedure. The exodus of doctors prepared to perform the task is a nationwide phenomenon that threatens to plunge the abortion service into chaos, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) has warned.

More than 190,000 abortions are carried out each year in England and Wales and the NHS is already struggling to cope. Four out of five abortions are paid for by the NHS but almost half of those are carried out in the private sector, paid for by the NHS.

The reluctance of NHS staff, both doctors and nurses, to be involved has led to a doubling of abortions paid for by the NHS, which are carried out in the private or charitable sector, from 20 per cent of the total in 1997 to almost 40 per cent.

SOURCE: The Indpendent: 16 APRIL 2007: Abortion crisis as doctors refuse to perform surgery

HAT TIP: Michelle Malkin

<>< TM

Now 33 people reported dead...

2007-04-16T20:32:00.000-05:00

The deadliest mass shooting in American history took place today in Virginia. The death toll is now at 33 people, including the gunmen. Here is the latest from MSNBC:

BLACKSBURG, Va. - Thirty-three people, including the gunman, were killed on a Virginia university campus Monday in the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history. At least 15 other people were injured, some of them as they leapt to safety from the windows of a classroom building.

The shootings, which took place in two locations at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, came just four days before the eighth anniversary of the Columbine High School bloodbath near Littleton, Colo. They created panic and confusion at the college, where students and employees angrily asked why the first e-mail warning did not go out to them until the gunman had struck a second time.

Nearly 50 victims

Federal law enforcement officials said the gunman killed himself after he shot dozens of people at the college in southwest Virginia. Thirty-two people were confirmed dead, in addition to the gunman.

At least 15 other people were treated for gunshot wounds or other injuries, some of whom had jumped from Norris Hall, an engineering classroom building where the second wave of shootings took place. Their conditions were not reported.

SOURCE: MSNBC: 16 APRIL 2007: At least 33 dead in rampage on Virginia campus

At this time there is no motive given or known for the mass slayings. Obviously, this was done by one angry person. It does not appear to be an act of terrorism, but rather the work of one very deranged individual.

Again, my deepest condolences and sympathy to the friends and family of the victims. May God grant you peace and comfort at this time.

<>< TM

"22 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting"

2007-04-16T11:42:00.000-05:00

Horrible news to wake up to: 22 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting.

No one knows the motive for the shooting at this time, but here is some key poinits to keep in mind:

The students and faculty were barricading themselves in their classrooms after what one person described as an Asian student wearing a vest opened fire.

The shooter was "wearing a vest covered in clips was just unloading on their door, going from classroom to classroom … they said it never seemed like it was going to stop and there was just blood all over," Harrison said.

Source: FoxNews: 16 APRIL 2007: Police: 22 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting

An "Asian" student wearing a "vest covered in clips" -- definately a pre-meditated attack, where the killer was going for maximum casualties.

It will be interesting to find out who this gunmen was, and his background...

In the meantime, my sincere condelences and sympathy to those family and friends of the victims.

<>< TM

Einstein on God, atheism, science and religion

2007-04-13T01:30:00.000-05:00

While speaking on the topic of atheism...

Here are some excellent quotes from Albert Einstein about God, religion, science and atheism from the soon to be released book Einstein: His Life and Universe by Walter Isaacson. © 2007 by Walter Isaacson. (To be published by Simon & Schuster, Inc.)

Shortly after his 50th birthday, Einstein also gave a remarkable interview in which he was more revealing than he had ever been about his religious sensibility. It was with George Sylvester Viereck, who had been born in Germany, moved to America as a child and then spent his life writing gaudily erotic poetry, interviewing great men and expressing his complex love for his fatherland. Einstein assumed Viereck was Jewish. In fact, Viereck proudly traced his lineage to the family of the Kaiser, and he would later become a Nazi sympathizer who was jailed in America during World War II for being a German propagandist.

Viereck began by asking Einstein whether he considered himself a German or a Jew. "It's possible to be both," replied Einstein. "Nationalism is an infantile disease, the measles of mankind."

Should Jews try to assimilate? "We Jews have been too eager to sacrifice our idiosyncrasies in order to conform."

To what extent are you influenced by Christianity? "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."

You accept the historical existence of Jesus? "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."

Do you believe in God? "I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

Is this a Jewish concept of God? "I am a determinist. I do not believe in free will. Jews believe in free will. They believe that man shapes his own life. I reject that doctrine. In that respect I am not a Jew."

Is this Spinoza's God? "I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but I admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things."

Do you believe in immortality? "No. And one life is enough for me."

Einstein tried to express these feelings clearly, both for himself and all of those who wanted a simple answer from him about his faith. So in the summer of 1930, amid his sailing and ruminations in Caputh, he composed a credo, "What I Believe," that he recorded for a human-rights group and later published. It concluded with an explanation of what he meant when he called himself religious: "The most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I am a devoutly religious man."

.....

But throughout his life, Einstein was consistent in rejecting the charge that he was an atheist. "There are people who say there is no God," he told a friend. "But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views." And unlike Sigmund Freud or Bertrand Russell or George Bernard Shaw, Einstein never felt the urge to denigrate those who believed in God; instead, he tended to denigrate atheists. "What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos," he explained.

In fact, Einstein tended to be more critical of debunkers, who seemed to lack humility or a sense of awe, than of the faithful. "The fanatical atheists," he wrote in a letter, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."

Einstein later explained his view of the relationship between science and religion at a conference at the Union Theological Seminary in New York. The realm of science, he said, was to ascertain what was the case, but not evaluate human thoughts and actions about what should be the case. Religion had the reverse mandate. Yet the endeavors worked together at times. "Science can be created only by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding," he said. "This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion." The talk got front-page news coverage, and his pithy conclusion became famous. "The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

SOURCE: Time: 5 APRIL 2007: Einstein and Faith

HAT TIP: Get Religion

<>< TM

Atheist Evangelism

2007-04-13T00:53:00.000-05:00

In my article "Why Be a Christian?" I make a reference to the increasingly nasty rhetoric coming from militant atheist fundamentalists. Well, I'm not the only one who's been noticing, not by a long shot...

In Thursday's Wall Street Journal (where else?) there was a very long, interesting article (though not very well written) about the increasing militancy of the atheists of Europe, who seem to be in a war of rhetoric with their none too tolerant counterparts: Islam. However, it's not just Islam that's on the rise in Europe, as Europeans get fed-up with the emptiness and nihilism of their socialist utopias, they are turning back to Christianity, though it's only in small numbers. Still, it seems as if secular humanism has bottomed out, and the non-faith of atheism is taking note.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and so does the human spirit; you can only fill it with so much booze, drugs and sex, then it either becomes numb or angry. The meaning of life is not the pleasure principle; only a fool would be convinced that the meaning of life is maximized pleasure by any means possible, which seems to be the only positive message that the atheists have at their disposal. It's easy to criticize religion, I do it all the time, but it's much, much more difficult to come up with a creditable alternative, and man being the measure of all things simply doesn't measure up.

So here is a nice, long excerpt from the WSJ article:

THE NEW CRUSADERS
As Religious Strife Grows,
Europe's Atheists Seize Pulpit

Islam's Rise Gives Boost
To Militant Unbelievers;

The Celebrity Hedonist

By ANDREW HIGGINS
April 12, 2007; Page A1

CAEN, France -- With 40 minutes to go before show time, the 500-seat Alexis de Tocqueville auditorium was already packed. A fan set up a video camera in the front row. A sound engineer checked the microphones.

The star: Michel Onfray, celebrity philosopher and France's high priest of militant atheism. Dressed entirely in black, he strode onto the stage and looked out at the reverential audience for his weekly two-hour lecture series, "Hedonist Philosophy," which is broadcast on a state radio station. "I could found a religion," he said.

Mr. Onfray, 48 years old and author of 32 books, stands in the vanguard of a curious and increasingly potent phenomenon in Europe: zealous disbelief in God.

Passive indifference to faith has left Europe's churches mostly empty. But debate over religion is more intense and strident than it has been in many decades. Religion is re-emerging as a big issue in part because of anxiety over Europe's growing and restive Muslim populations and a fear that faith is reasserting itself in politics and public policy. That is all adding up to a growing momentum for a combative brand of atheism, one that confronts rather than merely ignores religion.

Karen Armstrong, a former Catholic nun and prominent British author on religion, calls the trend "missionary secularism." She says it mimics the ardor of Christianity, Islam and Marxism, all of which have at their core an urge to convert nonbelievers to their worldview.

Mr. Onfray argues that atheism faces a "final battle" against "theological hocus-pocus" and must rally its troops. "We can no longer tolerate neutrality and benevolence," he writes in "Traité d'athéologie," or Atheist Manifesto, a best seller in France, Italy and Spain. "The turbulent time we live in suggests that change is at hand and the time has come for a new order."
[Michel Onfray]

As with many fights involving faith, Europe's struggle between belief and nonbelief is also a proxy for other, concrete issues that go far beyond the supernatural. In this case, they involve a battle to define the identity of a continent.

Half a century after the 1957 Treaty of Rome laid the foundations for the now 27-nation European Union, Europe has secured peace and prosperity. But it is deeply uncertain about what binds the bloc together beyond mere economic self-interest. Says Ms. Armstrong: "There is a big fight going on to define European civilization."

In London last month, leading British atheists squared off with defenders of faith in a public debate on the motion, "We'd be better off without religion." Tickets cost nearly $40 but so many people wanted to attend that the event was moved to a bigger venue with over 2,000 seats. It still sold out. The audience declared the atheists the victors, by a margin of 1,205 to 778, with a few score abstentions.

In Germany, a wealthy furniture manufacturer is funding a "think tank of Enlightenment," a group of scientists and others committed to debunking religion. It is named after Giordano Bruno, a 16th-century philosopher and cosmologist who was burnt at the stake as a heretic. In Italy, one fervent nonbeliever has gone to the European Court of Human Rights with a claim that the Roman Catholic Church is guilty of fraud: Jesus, he says, never existed.

Prime Catalyst

Alarm over Islam has acted as the prime catalyst for much of the polemic. Europe's Muslim populace, estimated at between 15 million and 20 million people, is growing more numerous, more vocal and, in some cases, more religious. The clash also feeds on a deeper confrontation that dates back to Europe's Enlightenment, the 18th-century intellectual movement that asserted the primacy of reason over superstition.

"The battle over religion is restarting. It is going to be a difficult one," says Terry Sanderson, president of Britain's National Secular Society, an organization that was founded in the 19th century but has now gained a new vibrancy. Membership has doubled in the past four years, to around 7,000, says Mr. Sanderson. For converts from Christianity, the society provides a certificate of "de-baptism." "Make it official!" urges the society's Web site, www.secularism.org.uk2.

The atheist cause won a big-name endorsement late last year when pop star Elton John, in an interview, said organized religion turned people into "hateful lemmings" and should be banned.

The backlash against religiosity has even seeped into Europe's Muslim community. In February, Mina Ahadi, an Iranian-born woman in Cologne, Germany, set up the Continent's first Muslim atheist group: the National Council of Ex-Muslims. She immediately started getting death threats and was put under police protection.

"Our main message is: 'We don't believe,' " says Ms. Ahadi, talking in a coffee shop next to Cologne Cathedral, a towering tribute to faith that took 600 years to complete. A police guard hovered nearby.

Atheism, Ms. Ahadi says, must confront religion head-on -- and adopt its methods. Her group started with just 30 members in February and a month later had more than 400. It is lobbying European Union officials for restrictions on the veil and organizing a public meeting at which ex-Muslims will explain why they quit. "If you want to work against Muslim movements, you have to be like them," she says. "We have to go outside and say what we're fighting for."

Europe's atheist campaigners have also made a splash in America. "The God Delusion," a book by Oxford Professor Richard Dawkins, has been on the New York Times hardcover nonfiction best-seller list for 28 weeks. Another British atheist, U.S.-based writer Christopher Hitchens, has written his own antireligious treatise, "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything," due out in May.

Christianity, once the bedrock of Europe's identity, has been losing worshipers on the Continent for at least half a century, though some opinion polls suggest the downward trend has bottomed out. Around three-quarters of Europeans still describe themselves as Christians. But only a small minority go to church. In Western Europe, according to polls, fewer than 20% do.

The number of atheists is hard to pin down. Some surveys put the figure at under 3%, but others say it is much higher.

...

Religious leaders are pushing back against the assertive unbelievers. The Church of England's Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, complained in a December statement about "illiberal atheists who have joined forces with aggressive secularists." He was responding to demands that Jesus be removed from nativity plays and that Christmas parties be called "winter festival" gatherings.

Mr. Onfray's atheist tract, recently translated into English, has prompted three book-length rebuttals by angry Christians and a flood of articles. To counter Prof. Dawkins's "God Delusion," an Oxford theology professor wrote his own book, "The Dawkins Delusion."

Both atheists and their foes agree on one thing: God -- declared dead over a century ago by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche -- is making a comeback, at least as a focus of controversy. "Faith is on the public agenda in a way that is unprecedented in recent times," proclaimed the founding manifesto of Theos, a new British-based Christian think tank.

Europe's atheist movement has no Vatican-like central command and springs from many different sources. Some adherents have personal grievance. Mr. Onfray spent part of his youth in a home run by Catholic priests, who he says mistreated him and abused others. Ms. Ahadi, head of the German ex-Muslims group, says her first husband was executed by Islamic revolutionaries in Iran.

....

Pierre Andrieu, a 63-year-old former executive with BNP-Paribas, a French bank, travels up to Caen each week from Paris for the lecture show. He makes the trip, he says, because he shares Mr. Onfray's take on faith--and fears that religion is making a comeback. "It is far more present than before," he says. "This need for religion is very, very strong. Religion is like magic. It is all about tricks."

SOURCE: Wall Street Journal: 12 APRIL 2007: THE NEW CRUSADERS: As Religious Strife Grows, Europe's Atheists Seize Pulpit

<>< TM

doctors and faith

2007-04-11T00:46:00.000-05:00

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Doctors and Faith

April 10, 2007

BY JIM RITTER Health Reporter jritter@suntimes.com

A majority of American doctors believe God or another supernatural being intervenes in patients' health, a study has found.

And nearly two in five doctors believe religion and spirituality can help prevent bad outcomes such as heart attacks, infections and even death, according to the University of Chicago nationwide survey of 2,000 physicians.

"Most physicians apply medical science while maintaining a belief that God intervenes in patients' health," Dr. Farr Curlin and colleagues wrote in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Cures 'that don't make sense'

Religious doctors were more likely than nonreligious doctors to believe this -- and to report that patients bring up religious issues.

Dr. Wayne Detmer, an internist at Lawndale Christian Health Center, said all doctors have seen cures of patients "that don't make sense based on our current understanding of physiology or medicine."

Detmer recalls one patient, disabled by a neurological condition, who was able to walk again after praying. A pastor, diagnosed with terminal lymphoma, is still alive after 13 years. And a suicidal patient has regained the willingness to live after prayer.

Detmer said he can't prove God made these patients better. But he notes the Bible says Jesus healed people. "It's not so much of a stretch to believe He can still do it."

Read the rest here.
<>< TM

the Quiznos Coyote

2007-04-10T22:24:00.000-05:00

This is a MUST SEE...

Last week (when it was still WARM!) a wild COYOTE walked into a Quiznos sandwich shop in DOWNTOWN CHICAGO, and sat down inside the beverage cooler!

Check it out here: Chicago Tribune: Coyote Visits Loop Restaurant but doesn't eat

<>< TM

blogging for jobs

2007-04-09T21:48:00.000-05:00

Well, I must admit I wasn't expecting to see an article like this...but it's good news for those of you who WANT people to know the real person behind the blog.

From the Wall Street Journal (where else?):

How Blogging
Can Help You
Get a New Job
By SARAH E. NEEDLEMAN
April 10, 2007

Corporate recruiters have long surfed the Web to vet potential hires, but now they are also surfing blogs to unearth job candidates, expanding their talent pool and gaining insights they say they can't get from résumés and interviews.

Ryan Loken, a Wal-Mart Stores Inc. recruitment manager, says he spends one to two hours a week searching through blogs for new talent or additional information about the candidates he has interviewed. "Blogs are a tool in the tool kit," he says. Since he joined the Bentonville, Ark., retail giant three years ago, Mr. Logen estimates that Web journals have helped him fill 125 corporate jobs. Most of the recruits were referred to him by bloggers and blog contributors, and some were the writers themselves.

In addition to blogs that focus on their industry or field of interest, recruiters say they check candidates' blogs about noncareer-related topics for evidence of writing skills and clues to how well rounded they are.

Most blog-related recruits are professionals in technology and media because jobs in these fields often require knowledge of the blogosphere, says Kirsten Dixson, a founding partner at Brandego LLC, a career-management firm in Exeter, N.H., that specializes in personal branding.

In June, Brian Balfour's blog, SocialDegree.com, inspired an unsolicited offer for a product-manager job from an executive at Zoom Information Inc. "I was impressed by the points Brian was making and the way he was making them," says Russell Glass, vice president of products and marketing at the Waltham, Mass., technology company. The blog also offered details about Mr. Balfour's work history and education. "It was a no-brainer to give him a call and see if he'd be interested," Mr. Glass says.

Mr. Balfour says he was intrigued when he heard about the opportunity. "It came at a time that was pretty right for me because I was just coming off selling a business and looking for where I would head next," he says. Three months later, Mr. Balfour, who is 24 years old, got the job.

Greg Sterling, a strategy consultant for Internet companies and a blogger in Oakland, Calif., describes job offers as "a natural byproduct of the exposure you get from blogging." He says he gets about 15 inquiries a month from companies and search-firm recruiters seeking to fill consulting gigs and full-time jobs. "My blog is a vehicle that keeps me exposed to people on a daily basis," he notes.

SOURCE: Wall Street Journal: 10 APRIL 2007: How Blogging Can Help You Get a New Job

Gee, maybe I should start using my real name...and post my resume too...like this girl has...(and you can see her blog here.)

<>< TM

Over Achiever: Alexander Creswell

2007-04-09T17:57:00.000-05:00

The above picture is New York's Queensboro bridge...done in WATERCOLOR. That's right, just watercolor. The artist, Alexander Creswell, has got to be one of the most talented artists I've come across in recent days. His watercolors rival oil paintings in their richness and detail.

Check out a New York Times article about him and his work here.

I highly encourage you to check out his web site, and view the slideshow of his works. This artist is worthy of our attention; which is not something I say very often in the world of contemporary art.

(hat tip: New Criterion blog)

<>< TM

why be a christian?

2007-04-06T01:17:00.000-05:00

Though you wouldn't know it by the lack of commercialism, it is Easter, not Christmas that is the most significant Christian holiday of the year. In films and movies, the importance of one of the events of the Easter season, the paradoxically named "Good Friday" which features the bloody torture and crucifixion of Jesus, has become, sadly, the main focus of Easter. Instead of highlighting that theme, I wish to re-emphasize the importance of the most significant event of Jesus' life and the event which causes the greatest controversy for non-Christians: Jesus' resurrection from the dead, which traditionally takes place on Easter Sunday. While a whole lot of film and theology focuses on his crucifixion to the exclusion of all else, it is the resurrection that is the culmination and exclamation point of all Jesus' life and ministry. Without the resurrection, we have just another bold teacher, a revolutionary even, who like Socrates before him, is put to death by the hands of his own people, his main offense being the speaking of the plain truth.

But Jesus did more than just speak truth, he WAS the truth...the literal TRUTH, in bodily form. In other words, Jesus was, and still is, God in the flesh. He didn't come just to re-emphasize the great moral teachings of the Bible and Jewish teaching, rather he came to DO, not just to teach. And his single greatest act was to demonstrate for us all that death is not the end of life, but rather the beginning.

But I don't wish to de-emphasize the importance of the torture and crucifixion of Jesus, well demonstrated by such movies as Mel Gibson's "The Passion", as it too holds an important moral lesson for us, as well as theological; a truth can be best summed up by the short, but accurate saying: "You have to go through hell to get to heaven."

Perhaps for you, the dear reader of this blog, life is just one wonderful event after the other, rich in possibilities and opportunities. But for me, pseudo Thomas Merton, life is just one, long, slow trip through Hades, with an occasional rest stop. Life has been very hard and difficult, and much too often the problems and pains of life on earth have overwhelmed me, well beyond my ability to handle them. By all rights and means, I should be, at least, on heavy duty psychiatric drugs, if not locked up in the real-world equivalent of the Arkham Asylum.

Yet here I am, drug free and asylum free, and the only reason I am, is due to the love and goodness of God. Nothing that science or society has ever offered me has been of any use in my deepest problems, but that which is freely offered by God through Jesus, is better than the best the world has to offer.

CHRISTIANITY: THREE MAIN TYPES.

In the realm of Christianity, there are divisions like protestant vs. Catholic, evangelical vs. mainstream, liberal vs conservative, and so on. But rather than focus on these obvious external divisions, I'd like to point out what I've believe are the three main types of Christianity as practiced in the United States.

1. SOCIAL CHRISTIANITY -- this is for those who go to church, and claim the title as Christian, because they like the social atmosphere of church, believe in God, and feel good that they belong to an organization devoted to such an interesting guy like Jesus. Beyond that, they don't really allow their lives to be affected by the TEACHINGS of Jesus or the prophets, rather they're just in it for their own selfish purposes.

2. RELIGIOUS CHRISTIANITY -- these are the Christians who go to church every Sunday morning, or in the case of some churches, every Sunday morning, and every Sunday morning Bible class, and Sunday evening service, and anything else that happens during the week. For Catholics, a truly religious person might go to mass every day of the week. These are the people who are very wrapped up in the ritual and culture of Christianity: they take God and theology very seriously, but for all their zeal, don't really understand any of it. Yet the religious observances makes them feel good, (and rather "righteous" besides, if you know what I mean...) and often these religious Christians are thought to be the true believers and imitators of Christ.

3. SPIRITUAL CHRISTIANS -- This is a rather small subset of Christianity, and they are they least visible and the least understood. Spiritual Christians are not content just to be one outwardly, by attending church services and carrying a big Bible and so on, but they are far more interested in being a Christian inwardly. They understand that Jesus was not trying to create a new religious institution, but was rather conveying truths and insights that can literally transform a person from the inside out. Spiritual Christians are not interested in having huge churches, or being on TV and radio, or becoming household names, rather they are perfectly content to live in obscurity, sometimes even actively seeking it out. They know the great secret of the teachings of Jesus, Paul and Peter: that Christianity is about transformation of oneself through the power of God. Sure, there are rules and regulations that are important to follow, but they are only important if you follow them to where they LEAD, which is the very real existence of God himself. Often spiritual Christians are not too concerned about denominations and other divisions, but will actively support any church that preaches the truth about Jesus.

Of course these three main types are not three exclusive sets, but there is overlap, and a person can sometimes be both outwardly religious, and inwardly quite spiritual. Or a person can be a social Christian, but be quite rapped up in Christian culture and so forth. The three types are really just three points along the continuum that is Christianity, the social Christian being the lowest point on the continuum, the spiritual Christian being the pinnacle.

I've been everywhere along that continuum, but there is no reason one has to be. For the record, the Christianity that I'm advocating in this post is that of the third type, the pinnacle: Spiritual Christianity.

THE HEART OF CHRISTIANITY

Christianity can be, and has been, systematized into a bunch of neat little doctrines and dogmas that one must believe if they are to be truly regarded as "Christian." I guess that sort of thing is important and has it place, but please listen to what I'm about to tell you.

Christianity is NOT a system. It is not a bunch of rules and regulations one follows in order to be worthy, or to be a better person, or to be rich and famous. While all those things are certainly possible, and have been exploited by various personalities within Christianity throughout the ages, there is something far more important at stake.

If Christianity is NOT a system of beliefs, then what is it? Quite simply, Christianity is all about relationships. And there is one relationship in particular which is paramount, the one between you and God himself.

Christianity is unique amongst all the world's religions, even unique among the "big three:" Islam, Judaism, and itself; in that the very core of the faith is the idea and the reality that you can come to know God in a very personal, subjective fashion. He's not some all powerful being that is "out there" some where in outer space or beyond (like Islam and Judaism), but rather God is so close as to be literally inside of you. But no Christian goes so far as to say that because God is inside of you, then you ARE God. That is a point made by the New Agers, but Christians understand that there is quite a bit of difference between ourselves and the Ultimate Power of the Universe. Nor do we equate God and the Universe (matter, really) like many New Agers and pagans do. Again, God is a separate, complete BEING in and of himself, and while he transcends everything, even matter, he is not matter (or "pure engergy"), nor is he us, but he is himself. "I AM WHO I AM" is the ultimate expression of unique individuality, as well as existence.

Hence, God is a being just as were are beings, and he is a being who one can come to know in an intimate way.

INTIMACY WITH GOD

The modern American understanding of "intimacy" is often used as a code word for sexual intercourse. However, that really cheapens our understanding of the term, as well as its importance. Intimacy is not about sexual union, it is about absolute trust and being able to trust another being with out fear, without pain and without suffering. Yet sadly, for an overwhelming majority of us, there is no one on this earth we can trust with the absolute assurance they will not harm us in any way. Hence, we hold back, even when we think we aren't. It's not that we don't want intimacy with another person, it's just that it seems like an ideal which is simply not possible in this life.

But what if I told you that absolute intimacy, absolute trust, can be found? What if I said there was a person who loved you far beyond any love you are capable of, and who will only ask that you try to love them in return? What if I told you this person will never, ever hold your past against you, but rather is more than willing to help you overcome all that garbage and misery in your past? Would you be interested in such a person?

Well, that person is Jesus; or you can call him God, which is just as appropriate. His greatest desire is not to make everyone into little moral robots who never do wrong, but rather his greatest priority is entering into an intimate, personal relationship with each and everyone of us. And through this intimate relationship, we learn a powerful truth that no scientist will ever be able to get a hold of through empirical methods: God is REAL, God is LOVE, and God wants the very best for us. But be warned: what we might consider the best and what God considers the best can be two very different realities.

So what is God's idea of the best for us? Simple: that we become beings that literally embody all of his qualities, and live a life that not only brings us great joy and peace, but live a life that brings forth these qualities in others. Amongst household names, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II would be the best examples of this in the Catholic realm, Billy Graham perhaps the best example amongst the Protestants.

Often we humans look for happiness and peace in all the usual places: relationships with other humans, money, fame, success, health and so on. But what if you could have all the peace and happiness those things bring, without all the work, bother and evil side-effects? Would that be something that interests you?

Why do people want money, fame and success anyway? The answer is very simple: because it FEELS good; it makes one "happy." But what if you could have the "happiness" without having to have the stuff that is normally associated with it? What if this happiness were so deep-seated, so powerful, that you wouldn't even want all the other stuff because it would diminish your happiness? Such a state of inner bliss is possible, and in one of those strange paradoxes that can only be experienced to be understood, it comes most easily to those who don't have or bother with all that other stuff.

A relationship with God is like the greatest romance you could ever imagine, times a thousand. It has all the feelings and goose bumps of earthly love and companionship, but none of the evil side-effects: jealously, betrayal, anger, and so on...well, at least not from God's side of the equation! God can do and be many things, but one thing he is not is dishonest or deceptive. He is what he is.

Once you realize that God is real, and that he wants to have a relationship with YOU, you run-of-the-mill human being, not much else in life really matters so much. Imagine someone who is ALWAYS glad to see you, always wants to spend time with you, is always willing to discuss any topic you like, and someone you can absolutely trust with your deepest darkest, secrets and needs, without fear you will be betrayed. Sadly, there is no human on this earth who can fulfill those desires, but there is one in Heaven who can.

Even more, what wouldn't you give for someone who's main desire is your own personal growth and development as a human being? Someone who can enable within you those virtues and qualities that seem so impossible? How would you like someone is completely and totally for your best interests, all the time, and will not ever enable your deep, dark failings?

Again, such a person exists, and only exists, in the person of Jesus.

While it may be somewhat confusing as to why Christians have "three gods," let me shine a little light on that topic: the Christian God is one being, but who's being is expressed in three distinct persons: the Father in Heaven, the son Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Why these three? Simple: it is the way we need to have and understand God. God the Father is the ultimate transcendent being, who is beyond our human understanding and reason. God the son Jesus is the God you can talk with, joke with, and put your arm around; he is just like us! And God the Holy Spirit is that "divine spark" within: it is God within us, in our hearts, at the very core of our being. Pretty cool, isn't it? But all three are in complete unity and harmony, hence their "oneness." They don't fight, they don't argue, they never, ever have disagreements. They are always and forever in agreement and all pursue the exact same goal: relationship with mankind.

God wants the best for us, but to get us to see and appreciate the best, he needs to knock down and cart away all those other ideas and concepts of what we think the best is, and this can be a rather painful and inconvenient process. For there is nothing more shocking and incomprehensible to a person than the truth, especially the truth about themselves. There is no more destructive force in all of mankind; but, conversely, there is no more powerful force for healing and wholeness. Hence the healing ministry of Jesus: it was not just a means to show off his divine power, it with a demonstration of the power of ultimate Truth.

And that idea, the idea of there being ultimate, absolute TRUTH is perhaps the most shocking thing of all in the realm of Christianity. Truth, by it's very nature, is exclusive, unique, and discriminating. In Christianity, there is always a BEST answer. Truth is, by it's very definition, narrow, tiny, and rigid. Hence truth throughout the ages has always gotten a bum rap, but never so much so as right now in our own times. How often have you heard the phrase "everything is relative." That is the same as saying there is no absolute truth, it just depends on who you are and where you came from. But the problem with the relativity concept is self-evident: conflict. If one thinks killing people who are Jewish because they are Jewish is a good idea, and another person thinks killing Jewish people because they are Jewish is a bad idea, then you have conflict. Hence, the idea that truth is relative is the greatest enabler of conflict you could possibly have, for conflicting idea are just that: instigators of conflict.

One thing a person learns who pursues a relationship with God is that truth is ultimately absolute and unique. There may be some things on this earth that are "relative" to one's perspective, but there are many things which are universally true for everyone, whether or not someone wants to notice. Truth, like facts, is a stubborn thing.

TO SEE CLEARLY

The ultimate benefit of Christianity is often said to be going to Heaven after you die, and to spend all eternity enjoying the peace, love and happiness that we are denied in our life here on Earth. But there is another very important benefit to Christianity that comes into play while we are still very much alive: the ability to see clearly.

I'm not speaking of glasses or optics when I speak of seeing clearly, rather I'm referring to the ability to know and understand truth. To be able to see into men's hearts, to see beyond the words written on a page, to see beyond the speech given by the politician or school teacher into the very core of their "agenda" if you will.

Jesus if often referred to as a prophet, and in a very real sense, he was a prophet. Often, both in Christian and secular circles, one likes to think of prophets as being those people who can foresee the future, which is certainly one element of being a prophet. But more in accord with Biblical and Jewish tradition, a prophet is not one who can accurately predict the future, but rather a person who can see the truth of a situation in the hear & now, and call a spade a spade.

To be more blunt: a prophet is a person who sees past the pomp and circumstance, into the secret places of a man's heart. When you are in the presence of a real prophet, you feel rather uneasy, especially if you have something to hide, because you literally feel like they can see right through you, right into your very thoughts: and they can.

But even more so than the ability to see what is covered up, a prophet is the most unpopular person in a society for a very significant reason: they take a stand for the truth. Truth, love and goodness are all complimentary concepts, just as lies, hate and evil are complimentary. But in the hierarchy of concepts, truth is arguably the most important, for without truth, you cannot have love nor goodness.

Hence prophets stand for what is true, and expose lies in order that all other virtues; like love, goodness and peace; can flourish. But there is an obvious problem with such a stand: it hurts people's feelings; it crushes their pride and self-sufficiency; and makes them feel "unclean." Hence true prophets are almost always persecuted unto death, just like Jesus and Socrates. Of the twelve apostles that followed Jesus, it is known that all except for John the Apostle (and Judas Iscariot) were martyred, along with many thousands of Christians who came after them. People just don't put themselves in a position to be killed by others if they know what they are proclaiming is itself a lie, a fabrication. People don't die for lies.

Now to be clear: being a prophet has NOTHING to do with self-righteousness and all that sort of garbage; rather a true prophet EXPOSES the lie of self-righteousness, for no one is truly righteous anyway, and a prophet more so than anyone else knows this very, very well. Hence the greatest enemies of the prophets are often the self-righteous, religious fanatics that are evident in every faith and non-faith. Even atheists, who of all people should know better, have their squad of militant fundamentalists who proclaim the non-faith of atheism with all the rigor and energy of a Billy Graham. Their names are very well known to those of us who are interested in science and religion: Steven Pinker, Daniel C. Dennet, Richard Dawkins, Stephen J. Gould, Sam Harris, David Mills, and back in Darwin's day, Thomas Huxley; a.k.a. "Darwin's Bulldog." They are much more like the self-righteous Christians they attack than they are different, as if Christianity and other religions are the only ideologies that are capable of self-righteousness! A self-righteous atheist is just as ugly as a self-righteous religious nut, there really is no difference.

Yet despite the danger, a stand for truth must be taken. It does no good if you are a prophet, and seeing evil, you keep your mouth shut and say nothing. In order for evil to be eradicated, it must be exposed, and only a prophet has the ability to take a stand regardless of the consequences.

Perhaps that's why I like movies like "They Live" and "The Matrix" -- one of the main plot points in both films is that the protagonist is suddenly given the ability to "see" the actual reality around him, rather than the construct he is given. And so it is with Christians, spiritual Christians anyway. Through a relationship with God, you are given the ability to see that which is "hidden." I've put scare quotes around the term "hidden" for a reason: evil never really hides, it is brazen and it is bold and it loves lots of public attention and adulation. You don't discover a bizarre complex of conspiracies (Knights Templar, Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, etc.) when you are given the power to see, rather you find that the conspiracies are there to throw one off the scent of what the real problem is: man's near universal contempt for the truth. It's much easier for us to believe that there is a small group of men manipulating everyone and everything than it is for us to realize that we ourselves are living a lie, let alone contributing to it! Hence a true prophet is never a popular person.

Are spiritual Christians the equivalent of the Old Testaments prophets? In a word, yes, that's what we are called to be. However, too many Christians get the wrong idea, and think that being a prophet is getting in someone's face and shouting Bible verses at him. But in reality, the prophets were almost ALWAYS sent to those who were, supposedly, believers and worshipper in God! In other words, prophets were sent to the hypocrites--you can imagine how this could cause problems, for there is nothing worst than a hypocrite who has convinced himself of his righteousness, regardless of his faith or non-faith. Hence, most prophets end up getting killed; not a line of work for the feint-of-heart. Note that prophets are not killed because they are obnoxious and rude, but because they take a stand for what is true and right and refuse to compromise. When a group or movement of any type starts to resort to violence or obnoxious behavior to get it's point across, you can almost always rest assured that what they stand for is a lie, even if you know nothing about their ideology.

SO WHY BE A CHRISTIAN???

A TRUE CHRISTIAN stands for what is right and just, without being obnoxious. They do not jump on the band-wagon for the feel-good cause-of-the-day, whether it be global warming, baby seals, or consumerism. Rather a true, spiritual Christian will go after the greatest crisis of them all: the evil that lurks in every human heart, especially our own.

And once we have dealt with the evil in our own heart, we can begin helping those who wish to escape the darkness, much like Morpheus helping Neo in The Matrix film. And just as Morpheus and Neo realized, there are those who will simply prefer to live in the darkness, and will destroy anyone who attempts to lift the veil.

But a true Christian knows that life on earth is short, and it is better to live a just, good life and be killed for it, than it is to live a mediocre, half-hearted existence and live to grow old. For death is certain, and certain as anything can be certain, and whether or not you grow old is immaterial, as is the question of living your life in such a way that you are a benefit to others, and not a stumbling block.

And Christians know that this life on earth is just a testing ground, a place to try and forge the hearts of men. We do not look forward to a long life here, but an eternal life in a much, much better place than this.

And Christians know that it is not God who chooses whether or not a person goes to Heaven or Hell, but they know it is the person them self who makes the choice; they choose by the way they live their life here on Earth. If they live a life that is a lie, and a life that glorifies in lies, then they will be allowed to live in the darkness of hell for all eternity, and will never have to put up with the light of Heaven. But for those who are much more interested in living a life that is honest, humble, and simple; they have made their choice, and it will be continued in the after-life. What you do, say and think in the here & now has consequences that are truly, literally, eternal.

To be a Christian, a true Christian, is to know God, to know the truth, to know true love and true goodness, and to enjoy them to the fullest. I know of know other "system" on this earth that can deliver on these things, not one.

So if these things are of interest to you, you are more than welcome to join. All that is required is a deep, unrelenting quest to know what is true, and the belief that the truth can be known.

<>< TM

baby's got book

2007-04-05T16:59:00.000-05:00

Just in time for Easter: "Baby's got BOOK."

"I like big bibles, and I cannot lie..."

(hat tip: my sister.)

<>< TM

leaving europe

2007-04-03T23:04:00.000-05:00

The Dutch, who live in THE MOST LIBERALLY PROGRESSIVE country on planet Earth bar none, are leaving their left-wing Eutopia and heading--for the New World.

Here's an excerpt from an article that appeared on today's PajamasMedia web site:

Setting up a farm in New Zealand? Start up a business in Tasmania or do you like to cash in on British Columbia’s construction boom?

All these options were presented at a real ‘Emigration Fair’ in Amsterdam earlier this month which drew record crowds. Whatever pessimism there is in and about Europe and no matter how commentators try to figure out if this exodus is real, the market has smelled the opportunity and knows how to respond.

As opposed to “Give me your tired, your poor” many jurisdictions in the new world have discovered that the disgruntled Dutch are anything but tired and poor. They’re young, affluent, well-educated, entrepreneurial, fluent in English and smart enough to have figured that the time has come to get out as the future can no longer be found at home.

The numbers corroborate this trend. In the first nine months of last year a record number of Dutch packed their bags with some 100,000 leaving the country, an increase of 12% on the previous year. For this year another increase is expected and, according to some research bureaus the overall attitudes about leaving are changing as well.

This year some 32% are seriously considering a move as opposed to 26% last year according to the ‘Emigration Monitor’. What is even more revealing is that the 20 to 30 age group constitutes the largest group of leavers, a trend that got further momentum when one polling group figured out that about half of the nation’s adolescents would, given the chance, prefer to pack up and go. Last year’s number confirm that the Dutch are experiencing the largest net outflow of people since the post-war emigration boom of the 1950s and the remarkable attitude shifts will ensure that this trend will persist in the years to come.

Read the rest of the article here: Time to Get Out

<>< TM

the trouble with islam

2007-04-03T22:47:00.000-05:00

Lot of awesome stuff in today's Wall Street Journal...I wish I could post the entire newspaper on my blog. But for the sake of brevity I'll just post the best thing I read in today's WSJ, and probably one of the best articles I've read in anywhere in recent days. It is an OpEd simply entitled "The Trouble With Islam," written by--I kid you not--a former terrorist!!!

Here is one long, juicy excerpt from the piece, but I high encourage you to read the whole thing yourself. I bold-faced key statements for those who don't have time to read it all.

The Trouble With Islam
Sadly, mainstream Muslim teaching accepts and promotes violence.

BY TAWFIK HAMID
Tuesday, April 3, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Not many years ago the brilliant Orientalist, Bernard Lewis, published a short history of the Islamic world's decline, entitled "What Went Wrong?" Astonishingly, there was, among many Western "progressives," a vocal dislike for the title. It is a false premise, these critics protested. They ignored Mr. Lewis's implicit statement that things have been, or could be, right.

But indeed, there is much that is clearly wrong with the Islamic world. Women are stoned to death and undergo clitorectomies. Gays hang from the gallows under the approving eyes of the proponents of Shariah, the legal code of Islam. Sunni and Shia massacre each other daily in Iraq. Palestinian mothers teach 3-year-old boys and girls the ideal of martyrdom. One would expect the orthodox Islamic establishment to evade or dismiss these complaints, but less happily, the non-Muslim priests of enlightenment in the West have come, actively and passively, to the Islamists' defense.

These "progressives" frequently cite the need to examine "root causes." In this they are correct: Terrorism is only the manifestation of a disease and not the disease itself. But the root-causes are quite different from what they think. As a former member of Jemaah Islamiya, a group led by al Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, I know firsthand that the inhumane teaching in Islamist ideology can transform a young, benevolent mind into that of a terrorist. Without confronting the ideological roots of radical Islam it will be impossible to combat it. While there are many ideological "rootlets" of Islamism, the main tap root has a name--Salafism, or Salafi Islam, a violent, ultra-conservative version of the religion.

It is vital to grasp that traditional and even mainstream Islamic teaching accepts and promotes violence. Shariah, for example, allows apostates to be killed, permits beating women to discipline them, seeks to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam as dhimmis and justifies declaring war to do so. It exhorts good Muslims to exterminate the Jews before the "end of days." The near deafening silence of the Muslim majority against these barbaric practices is evidence enough that there is something fundamentally wrong.

The grave predicament we face in the Islamic world is the virtual lack of approved, theologically rigorous interpretations of Islam that clearly challenge the abusive aspects of Shariah. Unlike Salafism, more liberal branches of Islam, such as Sufism, typically do not provide the essential theological base to nullify the cruel proclamations of their Salafist counterparts. And so, for more than 20 years I have been developing and working to establish a theologically-rigorous Islam that teaches peace.

Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals--who unceasingly claim to support human rights--have become obstacles to reforming Islam. Political correctness among Westerners obstructs unambiguous criticism of Shariah's inhumanity. They find socioeconomic or political excuses for Islamist terrorism such as poverty, colonialism, discrimination or the existence of Israel. What incentive is there for Muslims to demand reform when Western "progressives" pave the way for Islamist barbarity? Indeed, if the problem is not one of religious beliefs, it leaves one to wonder why Christians who live among Muslims under identical circumstances refrain from contributing to wide-scale, systematic campaigns of terror.

<>< TM

How my eyes were opened to the barbarity of Islam

2007-03-30T00:29:00.000-05:00

A "must read" article from the TIMES ONLINE: How my eyes were opened to the barbarity of Islam

Excerpt:

Once I was held captive in Kabul. I was the bride of a charming, seductive and Westernised Afghan Muslim whom I met at an American college. The purdah I experienced was relatively posh but the sequestered all-female life was not my cup of chai — nor was the male hostility to veiled, partly veiled and unveiled women in public.

When we landed in Kabul, an airport official smoothly confiscated my US passport. “Don’t worry, it’s just a formality,” my husband assured me. I never saw that passport again. I later learnt that this was routinely done to foreign wives — perhaps to make it impossible for them to leave. Overnight, my husband became a stranger. The man with whom I had discussed Camus, Dostoevsky, Tennessee Williams and the Italian cinema became a stranger. He treated me the same way his father and elder brother treated their wives: distantly, with a hint of disdain and embarrassment.

Read the whole article here.

Hat tip: Breath of the Beast

<>< TM

This is one way to get rid of evangelicals...

2007-03-29T20:58:00.000-05:00

Here's one way to deal with those pesky, evangelical Christians: Ethiopian Evangelist Beaten to Death by Militant Muslims: Militant Wahabbi Islamists Drag Christian Evangelist into Mosque and Beat Him to Death - Christian Newswire

Excerpt:

"WASHINGTON, Mar. 29 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Washington-DC based human rights group, International Christian Concern (ICC) has just learned that an Ethiopian evangelist named Tedase was beaten to death by militant Muslims on Monday, March 26th, as he and two young women were on a street evangelism assignment in Jimma, Ethiopia. This marks the second time in six months that Christians residing in Southeast Ethiopia have been attacked and killed by extremist (Wahabbi) Muslims.

On Monday afternoon Tedase and two female coworkers were conducting street evangelism on Merkato Street in Jimma, Southern Ethiopia. Merkato Street runs by a Wahabbi Mosque. As the team was walking by the Mosque, a group of Muslims exited the Mosque and began to run after them to confront them. Tedase's female coworkers ran away from the mob but Tedase continued on. The Muslims caught up with Tedase, pulled him into the mosque, and savagely beat him to death. Sources from Jimma reported that Tedase was beaten with a calculated intention to kill him. This was no accident or case of mob frenzy getting out of control. His body was later taken to the hospital for an autopsy and he was buried Tuesday, March 27.

Our sources also reveal that Jimma Christians were conducting an evangelism campaign, and news of the outreach was spreading among Jimma residents as well as militant Muslim groups in the area. The Muslims that belonged to the Wahabbi sect purposefully beat Tedase to death as a message to Christians that they are ready to combat evangelism.

If Islam is not intolerance personified, then there is no such thing as intolerance.

(hat tip: Little Green Footballs)
<>< TM

Nintendo's Wii Becoming Big Hit in Nursing Homes Nationwide

2007-03-25T16:25:00.000-05:00

A very interesting news story seen on the Fox News web site: "Nintendo's Wii Becoming Big Hit in Nursing Homes Nationwide"

Here's an excerpt:

LOS ANGELES — Until two weeks ago, Ruth Ebert never had the slightest interest in the video games favored by her one and only granddaughter.

"I'm 82 years old, so I missed that part of our culture. Soap operas, yes. Video games, no," chirped Ebert, who recently started playing a tennis game on Nintendo Co. Ltd.'s new Wii video game console at the Virginia retirement community she calls home.

"It was funny, because normally I would not be someone who would do that," said Ebert, who picked up the console's motion-sensing Wiimote and challenged the machine to a match.

"I played tennis, if you can call it that, as a high school student. I had such fun doing it," she said.

Ebert swung the Wiimote just like a tennis racquet and said playing the game reminded her of the feeling she had all those years ago.

While she took the early on-court lead, the Wii beat her in the end.

While Microsoft and Playstation have been chasing the small but intense "extreme gamer" market, Nintendo has quietly been pursuing a strategy to make video games accessible to everyone else, and it seems they have exceeded beyend their wildest expectations with the introduction of the Wii. I've already informed my household--which already owns two Nintendo DS's and a Gamecube--that the next, and ONLY game console that will be allowed in the house is the Wii. The fact that it's backward compatible with the Gamecube, (and even Nintendo64!!!) makes the choice a no-brainer. Plus the fact that most everyone is reporting that it's a lot of FUN to play, even more so than the X-Box and the PS3, makes it even more of a no-brainer. And the asking price of a mere $250 is the icing on the cake.

To be honest, the reason I want a Wii is simple: to be able to play those old Nintendo64 games that I miss since we sold our 64 to buy more games for the Cube. Bad decision, as some of those old games have no equivalent on the newer systems.

<>< TM

"We want this baby polar bear dead"

2007-03-19T20:54:00.000-05:00

You just can't make this stuff up...

An animal "rights" group in Germany is calling for the DEATH of a baby polar bear that was rejected by his mother. What horrible sin did said baby bear commit to warent the death sentence? He was raised by HUMANS!!!! (I kid you not...)

Here is an excerpt from the Daily Mail:

Tiny, fluffy and adorable, Knut the baby polar bear became an animal superstar after he was abandoned by his mother.

He rapidly became the symbol of Berlin Zoo, whose staff bottle-fed him and handed out cuddles in between

At three months old, however, the playful 19lb bundle of fur is at the centre of an impassioned debate over whether he should live or die.

Animal rights activists argue that he should be given a lethal injection rather than brought up suffering the humiliation of being treated as a domestic pet.

Read the whole sorry article here: 'We want this baby polar bear dead' say animal rights lobby

Video of Knut the polar bear cub (commentary in German):

<>< TM

school in hell

2007-03-10T13:18:00.000-06:00

The following is a Christian parable illustrating a profound truth: if you wish to overcome evil you must behold Him who is good.

"School In Hell"
by Hollie Moody
April 27, 2000

As I was praying (on April 25th, 2000; Tuesday), I began to see in my mind a picture of the LORD. He was sitting on a rock and groups of people of all ages were gathered around Him. They all seemed to be laughing and talking together. I felt joy and peace and happiness as I viewed this scene. At times, the Lord would reach down and bring a child onto His lap. Or, He would reach out and a baby would be placed into His arms. He would then gaze down into the face of the baby and speak softly and tenderly. At other times, someone would draw close to His side, and He would place His arm around them, and draw them closer.

An angel approached the Lord. From the way this angel was dressed, I sensed immediately that this was a warrior angel. The crowd before the Lord parted to allow the angel to draw near. A silence fell over the laughing, joyous crowd as the angel stopped before the Lord and began to speak. I heard the angel's voice, and heard frustration and perplexity in his voice.

"There is work to be done," the angel said to the Lord. "Why do You and the people only sit here idly? These are dangerous times. The people should be doing battle in prayer and in the spirit. Instead, they sit here at Your feet, laughing. They are completely unaware of what is even now transpiring in the courts of hell. Why are You allowing this?"

The Lord gazed with love at the angel before Him.

"Before I answer your questions," the Lord replied, "take this child of Mine and show her what is being planned by the enemy."

Both the angel and the Lord then turned their heads and stared at me.

"This will be too much for her," the angel protested.

"Take her, and show her," the Lord repeated.

I began to back nervously away as the angel approached me.

"Where are you taking me?" I asked the angel.

"To the enemy's camp," the angel replied.

"Go with him," the Lord instructed me.

I felt very nervous and afraid, but allowed the angel to touch me. As soon as the angel touched me, we were in darkness. I felt fear engulf me.

"Fear not," the angel said to me, and instantly, the fear vanished.

The darkness seemed to dissipate, and I discovered that the angel and I were in what appeared to be a great court. A man was sitting on a large throne, and before him were gathered all types of creatures and men.

"Who is that man on the throne?" I asked the angel. "And who are the creatures and men gathered before him?"

"That is the accuser of the brethren and his armies," the angel replied.

I then realized that I was in the presence of Satan.

Satan was speaking, and I heard him say, "This will be our strategy."

He then got up from his throne and went to stand in front of a large map on the wall behind him. As I stared at the map, I became aware that it was a map of the entire world. Satan began to divide the world up into sections. Then, he called out some names. I saw the creatures and the men gathered before Satan part, and very large and strong looking angelic beings approached Satan. I could sense the power of these beings, and sensed the evil and wickedness of that power. A hush had fallen over the crowd.

"Who are these beings?" I whispered to the angel who I was with.

The angel I was with seemed concerned. "They are Satan's princes."

Satan began speaking again, and he was assigning sections of the world to each of these "princes."

"You will need your armies," Satan said to them. "Choose whoever you will. All is at your disposal."

The large beings then began to pick and choose who would be in their particular army. When they were finished, they all turned back to Satan and stared at him.

"Each prince will teach you our strategy to deceive and to destroy and to slay mankind," Satan said. "Go with them."

The prince's and their armies began to exit from the presence of Satan. The angel and I began to follow one of the groups. They went into what appeared to be a school room. The prince went to the front of the room and began to instruct his army on how to deceive, destroy and slay the people in their particular section of the world that had been allocated to them. The angel and I then went to each "classroom." The same plans and strategies were being "taught" in each "classroom."

Suddenly, the "classes" began to leave the rooms. The angel and I followed them. They congregated back in front of Satan.

"Report," Satan said. "How will we deceive, destroy and slay mankind?"

One of the princes came forward and began to outline the plans and strategies.

"The people want signs, wonders and miracles from their religious leaders," the prince said. "We know that our enemy will be--and has begun already--to grant this unto his children. We will slip in with a counterfeit movement, and deceive many. We have taught our armies how to mimic worship, praise, and looking and acting like a true believer. We will give unto our armies the ability to work signs, wonders and even miracles. But while all become focused upon these outward manifestations, others of us will begin behind the scenes to dilute the message of the gospel. We will accomplish this partly through speaking to the people about God's 'true' nature. We will allow the people to create God into what and who they want Him to be."

"Good," Satan said. "Very good."

The prince began to speak once again. "When the people have created their own version of God, then, we will give them OUR god."

The crowd before Satan began to cheer wildly.

"We must depart!" the angel urged me.

Suddenly, we were back before the Lord. He was still in the midst of His children; laughing with them, talking to them, touching them. A silence fell over the group once again as the angel I was with once more approached the Lord. The angel reported to the Lord all we had heard and seen in hell.

"So why are You just sitting here with the people?" the angel asked the Lord. "Send them away to begin to do battle. How will they be able to discern this coming great deception if they aren't even aware that one is coming?"

The Lord became grave. His face as He looked at His children was alight with His great love for them. I noticed tears in His eyes. Then, He turned His head and looked at the angel speaking with Him.

"My children will know the false, by knowing the true," the Lord said. "The longer they spend in My presence, the more they will know My voice when they hear it. A voice of a stranger, they will not follow."

"But the enemy has those who have been taught to speak just as You do," the angel protested. "They sound almost just like You."

"Almost," the Lord replied gently. "Almost they sound like Me. Only My sheep who have lingered long in My presence will know the voice of their true Shepherd. And this is why I spend so much time with My children. I spend as much time with them as they allow Me to. I know very well what the enemy is planning. My plans are plans of love and fellowship."

The angel and the Lord both fell silent as they gazed at the crowd before the Lord.

"Love them well," the angel replied.

"Yes, a battle is coming," the Lord sighed, and I saw tears in His eyes.

"Great wickedness and persecution upon My children; My true children who know My voice. A time of wickedness and persecution such as has never been seen or experienced. Yet in the midst of it all, I will move, I will bless, I will speak, I will love. I will win. There are those of My children who sense much of this. They are the ones who will never stop praying and interceding; not even in times of seeming peace."

"What about me, Lord?" I asked.

The angel and the Lord looked at me. "Pray," the Lord replied. "Tell the prayer warriors to strengthen themselves and their brothers and sisters in the times of peace. I will be pouring out of My Spirit upon all nations and peoples. It will spread to even the most unlikely of places: television, magazines, newspapers, radios, even the Internet. And it will be here that the battle will truly begin, and the deception begin."

The Lord stood up.

"It is time?" the angel asked Him.

"It is time," the Lord replied.

Then, I was no longer with the Lord or the angel, but praying once again.

John 10 is in my mind; especially verse 14: "I am the good shepherd, and I know my sheep, and am known of mine."

Hollie l. Moody

-------------------

<>< TM

the problem of evil: part 3: what God has done about it

2007-03-05T21:36:00.000-06:00

Part 1: The problem of evil
Part 2: The problem of evil: how do we know what is good or evil?

I'm sorry it's taken so long to publish the third and final installment of the problem of evil series. February had been a very, very busy month for yours truly, and it looks like March will be even worse. However, here it is: the last installment of the series. Next, I hope to post an article about the advantages of being a Christian. <>< TM

If you've been around for a while, and if you have an interest in God and theology, one of the arguments you hear time and time again cited as evidence against the existence of God is that the world is full of evil, and God doesn't lift a finger to do anything about it. No God who wants to be known as "good" would ever do such a thing, therefore, God cannot exist because evil does.

Yet no where in the Bible or the writings of Christians or Jews does it state that because God exists, there will be no evil. As a matter of fact, Christian and Jewish texts state quite clearly and emphatically that because God exists, and because he created human beings to have free will, then there is going to be a whole lot of evil. In a bizarre, but very real way, evil proves--not disproves--the existence of a good, loving and holy God.

God loves us so much that he allows us the choice to be either good or evil, and we choose accordingly. You cannot call a person good who forces you, against your will, to be a good, moral person. That is coercion and tyranny, not love and goodness. So while we cannot blame God for being evil, we can blame him for allowing the possibility of evil, a possibility that too often manifests itself in this life. And God very willingly, and very appropriately, takes full responsibility for this. If there is no evil, there cannot be any good. You simply can't have one without the other.

But for those who desire to choose goodness, God is very willing to lend you a helping hand.

GOD AS JESUS

At the core of the Christian religion is a person named Jesus. While Jesus was a man just like the rest of us, he was also, quite literally, God himself. While theologians might cringe at me for saying this, God came to earth as a man to show us a way to conquer evil. Of course, God is no fool, and the means he provides to conquer evil fully take into consideration the root source of all evil on earth: the human heart. Unless you conquer the evil and hate in your own heart, there is no way you can overcome it in its various manifestations as war, murder, rape, theft, vandalism, and so on. The cure for evil begins in the heart of every single human being.

For those of you who take things a little too literally, I'm not talking about the physical heart that is located in your chest and pumps blood throughout your body, rather I'm referring to a metaphysical heart that represents the very core of our being. Depending on your own ideas and background, synonyms for the type of heart I'm talking about would be mind, spirit, soul or consciousness.

Unless we conquer the evil that's within our own being, we cannot do or say anything about the evil so prevalent in the world. It's very easy to denounce this person and that person for their evil acts, it's another thing to provide a solution for evil.

God is very respectful of the gift of free will that he has given us, to the point where we can use it and abuse it to our detriment. And so the solution for evil is presented as gift, rather than forced upon us unwillingly. Those who are desperate for such a remedy accept the gift quickly with little protest, while those of us who think we're OK have little need of it, so we don't value it, if we even bother to acknowledge it's existence at all.

ETERNAL LIFE

The gift I'm referring to is eternal life. More specifically, it is the knowledge that when we die, there will be an opportunity to be resurrected from the dead, a resurrection that is permanent and that promises a new life, better than the one we knew previously, much better in fact.

Proof of life after death was provided in the God/man Jesus, who suffered just like we do, and suffered evil in the same way we do: from other men. Due to his popularity and his denouncements and criticisms of the current religious system then dominant in first century Israel: Phariseeism, he was crucified by the Romans due to the insistent urgings of the religious-political Pharisee party. There was no such thing as the separation of church in state in those days.

After Jesus was crucified and died on a Roman cross, he was buried in a tomb of a rich man, then left for dead..because he was dead. But, unbeknown to even his own disciples, Jesus had a little surprise in store: he came back from death, to life, and will never, ever die again.

He showed himself to his disciples and to various others, and then his disciples, armed with the amazing revelation that death is not final, spread the word of Jesus and his good news throughout the rest of the world, a message which is still going strong nearly 2,000 years later.

Of course eternal life is not something that is the right and privilege of everyone, but it is a gift given only to those only who believe. By believe I mean that a person must believe in the idea of eternal life, believe in the person of Jesus and his message, and be willing to live the kind of live that Jesus advocated. In other words, this gift is conditional; it's not given out to just anyone, but only to those who show themselves worthy of it by accepting the "strings" attached.

It is this gift, and the attached strings, that is God's solution for the problem of evil. So how does this gift nullify evil? Simple: the conditions for obtaining and keeping the gift of eternal life is living the teachings and writings of the apostles and prophets as recorded in the Bible. But you don't need to memorize the entire Old and New Testaments in an attempt to live by all the rules and regulations, and in fact you wouldn't be able to keep them even if you wanted to, because they apply to a time and place that is no longer relevant to our modern life style.

THE GOLDEN RULE

But there is one, very simple rule, that if applied, can help reduce the amount of the evil in the world rather significantly. It is commonly known as the Golden Rule: don't do things to other people that you wouldn't want them to do to you.

Don't want people to lie to you? Then don't lie to other people.

Don't want other people to criticize you and put you down? Then don't criticize other people and put them down.

Don't want other people to beat you up? Then don't go around beating up others.

Now one quickly realizes that this does not guarantee that you are going to be treated well by others, for the obvious reason that not everyone is going to want to accept the conditions of the agreement for eternal life. There will be those who really don't care or think much about how others should be treated, and there lack of concern will ultimately end up in their own eternal destruction.

However, those who do follow this one simple rule, and do so consistently, will at least be reducing the amount of evil so prevalent in our society, if not securing their place in the kingdom of Heaven.

But there is a positive corollary to this rule as well, and that is that you need to treat other people just like you would want yourself to be treated. It can be summed up in the old bromide "what goes around comes around."

Do you want other people to treat you with respect? Then you need to treat other people with respect.

Do you want people to speak well of you? Then you need to speak well of others.

Do you want other to help you in a time of need? Then you need to help others in a time of need.

See how simple this is? Nothing to it. Apply this one rule to your life, and you will do more to eradicate evil from this world than all the political promises of all the political parties of the world combined. It is not social programs that eliminate evil, it is the right actions of individuals that do it.

THE HOLY SPIRIT

And since it can sometimes be rather difficult for us to be motivated to do good, God provides us a very special resource to help us in this quest: his Holy Spirit. Jesus is the incarnation of God who you can walk up to and have a conversation with, or you can beat the crap out of him then have him executed. But the Holy Spirit is an incarnation of God that goes one step further, it is God living inside of you.

Now when we think of other beings living inside of us, our minds may quickly flash to visions of the Exorcist, or those many different sci-fi flicks where aliens overtake people's bodies and minds, like the famous film Invasion of the Body Snatchers. But inviting the Holy Spirit of God to take up residence in you is nothing like those nightmares of sci-fi and horror movies. Instead of taking over, he simply acts in an advisory role, only offering his assistance when asked--kind of like a consultant. If you want to ignore him, you can, there will be no evil consequences for doing so, other than what your own foolish actions deserve.

So God not only provides a wonderful incentive for living a good, upright life: eternal life; but also the means of doing so: the Holy Spirit.

And that, in a nutshell, is God's plan for dealing with evil. There's just one problem of course: getting people to "buy in" to this plan, which is becoming increasingly more difficult to do. Hence, the world is on a long, slow downward spiral, as immediate gratification of selfish desires becomes more important than living for a future goal that is difficult to comprehend, let alone believe.

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT

Of course there is a corresponding stick to the carrot of eternal life: and that would be eternal punishment, better known as eternal damnation. This is reserved for those who knowing good and evil, prefer to choose the evil. Now this does not mean that you are a psychotic killer or abuse small children and animals; rather all it takes to be evil is to ignore the needs and suffering of others. Yes, God is a good, loving father, but he's not going to allow those who have chosen a life of selfishness and rebelliousness to be rewarded with eternal life. If a person has no regard for those living all around him, why should God then reward that person for their selfish behavior? Since a selfish person is rapt up in their own little world, they will be sent to a place where they won't ever have to bother with another soul again--an eternal solitary confinement.

But don't blame God for damning those people who have chosen a self-centered life; more often than not they are conscious of the choice they are making, and in their own perverted way, are willing to pay with their lives for the little bit of power, wealth and comfort that they get in the here & now by their abrasive behavior.

So the resurrection of Jesus not only demonstrates the reward of eternal life, the way he lived his life here on earth is also very much a demonstration of how he expects us to act. And for those who think that following Jesus' example is a waste of time, Jesus lets us know in no uncertain terms that their eternal punishment is well deserved:

"Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, 'My master is staying away a long time,' and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 24:45-51

Whether or not you think God deals properly with evil here in this life, know for sure that it will be dealt with most severely in the next. Jesus had a bit of "bad news" to go along with his good news: those who persist in doing evil will be rewarded with eternal pain and suffering.

While one may think an eternity of pain and suffering is a harsh penalty for temporal evil, do keep in mind that those who choose to do good are rewarded with an eternity of joy and pleasure. Both reward and punishment are extreme in comparison to a temporal life on earth. This only goes to show that our lives are far, far more valuable than many of us realize: our actions and beliefs truly have an eternal significance.

FOLLOW JESUS' EXAMPLE

Christians have done a poor job of communicating the essential truths of Jesus' message, let alone living according to his teachings. For that, I am deeply ashamed and embarrassed. And yet, I still very much believe that the simple message of Jesus is a worth living for, and I will continue in my own quest to live a life worthy of eternal life, even if no one else sees the value in it.

But I would encourage the dear reader of this blog to follow after me, if only for the reason that such a path will do a lot to bring about a great deal of good on this earth, and will help to minimize evil. Whether or not you think God exists or that eternal life is a possibility, you must admit that the simple logic of the rule "don't do things to other people that you don't want done to you" is a very effective way to live one's life.

<>< TM

wal-mart gets a strategy

2007-03-05T19:00:00.000-06:00

As if by magic, soon after I posted my "in praise of wal-mart" article (the next day in fact), an article appeared on the business page of the New York Times about Wal-Mart's new merchandising strategy.

Wal-Mart has identified three target "customers" who shop at their stores. To no one's surprise, there are many upper-middle class people coming into to shop for deals, and so Wal-Mart, seeing an opportunity to serve a slightly larger base than those at the very bottom of the economic spectrum, is in the process of trying to find ways to make their store appeal to a broader base of consumers.

Here's an excerpt:

In their first interviews since a management shuffle last month, John Fleming, the new chief merchandising officer, and Stephen Quinn, the new chief marketing officer, said that after a year of intense research, the discount giant is seeing its 200 million customers as belonging to three groups.

There are “brand aspirationals” (people with low incomes who are obsessed with names like KitchenAid), “price-sensitive affluents” (wealthier shoppers who love deals), and “value-price shoppers” (who like low prices and cannot afford much more).

The new categories are significant because for the first time, Wal-Mart thinks it finally understands not just how people shop at its stores, but why they shop the way they do.

This strategy of identifying three target groups of customers is nothing new in retail, as a matter of fact Wal-Mart is a late adapter, as Best Buy, Sears and others have been employing this type of strategy for years.

But having a strategy, and executing a strategy are two different things. It will be interesting to see if Wal-Mart can drive up comparable same store sales with their target groups now clearly in focus. But at least they've remembered their original target shopper: those with little money to spend.

<>< TM

in praise of wal-mart

2007-03-01T18:02:00.000-06:00

I've been reading a very interesting book called The One Thing You Need to Know by Marcus Buckingham. It is a business management book, but has great insights into what it takes to run a successful business, or even to succeed at life in general.

While reading a chapter about great leading, I found this interesting blurb about Wal-Mart:

Last year at the Consumer Healthcare Products Association convention, speaking before a group of executives, I followed Doug Degn onto the podium. Doug heads up all food merchandising for Wal-Mart, and, by any measure, he has had a tremendously successful last fifteen years. Fifteen years ago he sold no food. Now he sells more food than anyone else in the world. In his speech he revealed himself to be a straight-talking, hard-working executive who was suspicious of anyone who over analyzes an issue. Here's a typical comment from Doug: "We had one store that was selling far more fishing equipment than our projections suggested it should. Our analysts back in Bentonville were perplexed. But in the end the answer turned out to be common sense." He paused to set up the punch line. "This particular store was located very close to a large lake." Much laughter from the audience.

Despite his no-nonsense persona, he did have one little device that he sued to engage the audience. toward the end of his speech, he asked us to raise our hands if we lived paycheck to paycheck. Very few of us raised our hands. At which, he stopped his pacing, stood square on, leveled his gaze, and said: "look, you are all welcome in our stores. Please, come into our stores. You will be treated well. But know that our stores are not designed for you. Our stores, every one of them, are designed for people who live paycheck to paycheck. Yes you can come into our stores and find a nice gourmet pizza for six dollars and fifty cents, but I guarantee you that you will also find the best, the highest quality seventy-seven-cent pizza in the neighborhood. Everything we do, everything we buy is designed to served those of us who live paycheck to paycheck."

Why did Wal-Mart land on this notion that they serve customers who live from one paycheck to the next? Yes, their data suggests that the lower-income customers represents the majority of their shoppers--fully 20 percent of Wal-Mart shoppers do not even have a checking account. However, Wal-Mart's history tells us that they seek to serve this customer less because their data indicate the wisdom of doing so than because Sam Walton, their founder, simply decided that this is who he wanted his company to serve."

<>< TM

heavy wood

2007-02-26T22:01:00.000-06:00

Yes, I think it's safe to say that Don Ross can play guitar:

He makes me want to play guitar...and I'm allergic to musical instruments...

(Hat tip: Little Green Footballs)

<>< TM

el paso

2007-02-26T19:40:00.000-06:00

Here is the "western" part of Country and Western: Marty Robbins singing one of the greatest American songs ever written: El Paso.

Notice how Marty and the boys do this song justice, using nothing but their awesome voices. This was from back in the day when someone's musical talents were appreciated far beyond their stage antics.

<>< TM

dean's world: left vs right discussions

2007-02-21T19:30:00.000-06:00

Interesting article from the Dean's World blog:

There is a reflexive, reactionary dislike of America that's become deeply ingrained in a lot of people on the left, and that tends to show especially strongly in wartime. There's a strong streak of contempt for America on the right as well (see The America Sucks Right), but it tends to be very muted when the country's at war.

I'd say those all add up to a left that acts more surly, nasty, and childish than the right these days. But it also tells me it's not likely to be that way forever.

All of this is why I try hard not to call anyone a liberal or a conservative anymore. Especially when I'm talking to, or about, individuals. It's why I try to talk about ideas rather than ideology. It's no secret that I lean Republican these days, but I'll vote for the right Democrat in a heartbeat. So to me, here's where you can tell the difference between a reasonable person and a jerk:

"You only say Z because you voted for X or you secretly believe Y." People who level such accusations don't want a discussion, they want a fight. They are looking for hidden motivations and conducting cheap armchair psychoanalysis, seeking to dismiss you and your positions thereby.

"You think Z? So that's why you voted for X or said Y? Hmm. I can't say I agree, but..." This is a person who wants to talk. They may be coming from the left, or the right, but more likely, it's from somewhere that doesn't fit that silly spectrum.

<>< TM

marrying your cousin could lead to terrorism

2007-02-16T00:33:00.000-06:00

One of the most thought provoking articles I've come across this week is this one by Stanley Kurtz on National Review Online: Marriage and the Terror War: Better learn up on your anthropology if you want to understand the war.

Here is an excerpt:

The distinguished historian Bernard Lewis and political scientist Samuel Huntington have together popularized the notion that Muslims are scapegoating the West because of an underlying incompatibility between Islamic society and modernity. Lewis roots this incompatibility in the Muslim seclusion of women and also in the failure of Islam to separate church and state. Yet, in “Root Causes,” I show that the Muslim seclusion of women, and even characteristically Muslim church-state relations, are part and parcel of a distinctive kinship structure built around a preference for the marriage of cousins.

Well that explains a lot, doesn't it?

<>< TM

happy st. valentine's day, chicago style...

2007-02-14T20:11:00.000-06:00

The St. Valentine's Day Massacre

No Valentine's Day would be complete without a reference to one of the most notorious crimes of the century: the 1929 St. Valentine's Day Massacre that took place in a warehouse/garage on the north side of Chicago. A good summary of it can be found here.

A good movie for celebrating this notorious holiday with your significant other would be this one:

Some Like It Hot is one of the greatest commedies in the history of American cinema, thanks to the three principle actors: Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis, and Marilyn Monroe. Plenty of romance for the romantic types, and lots of commedy for those not too concerned about the romance. And the first "day" of this movie is Valentine's Day!

But the reason I picked this film is due to the opening sequence where Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon accidentally witness one of the most notorious crimes of the century: the 1929 St. Valentine's Day Massacre.

<>< TM

a book I need to read

2007-02-14T17:13:00.000-06:00

A book I would like to read sometime in the future: The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence on Nazi Ideology by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke

Sadly, the occult influence on Nazism is little known or understood by most people, but it played a HUGE role in the philosophy and goals of the movement, including the extermination of the Jews.

<>< TM

Butterfinger has a better idea

2007-02-10T17:16:00.000-06:00

While shopping at the new Super Wal-Mart today, I happened to find a package of Butterfinger "Stixx" at the check-out counter. Needing a bit of an engergy boost after the marathon that is Super Wal-Mart, I bought a two-pack, though I normally don't buy Butterfingers, or any candy bars for that matter.

But these "Stixx" type of Butterfingers are really good! In a stick that is about the size and shape of the traditional pretzel stick, Nestle has instead given us a Butterfinger bar, sans the bar. The resulting treat is light, crispy, and I think much better than a traditional Butterfinger.

In today's world, it seems that it isn't enough to have a food item in just one form, there has to be 10,000 different variations on a theme. A good example of this is what Nabisco has been done to the Oreo Cookie.

But the Butterfinger Stixx is not just another mindless variation on a theme, but, in my humble opinion, an actual improvement over the traditional Butterfinger bar. Kudos to Nestle for an idea that's actually well executed.

You can find out more about the "Stixx" here: Official Site of Nestle Stixx®

<>< TM

on being good

2007-02-09T22:36:00.000-06:00

In an interesting comments discussion I had with TK of the Uncooked Meat blog, TK stated the following:

"Sure, I probably drink too much, and swear too much, but other than that, I'd like to think I'm a good person. And I suppose it's important that others, regardless of beliefs or lack thereof, to think that of me to. "

This comment made me realize that before I write any more articles about evil or Christianity, I need to cover the concept of goodness as it relates to human beings. The reason why this is important is that in order to have a conversation with anyone about belief systems, you must first establish what it is that they believe about goodness. One person's belief system might specify that it is "good" to avoid doing harm to anyone for any reason. Another person's belief system might specify that it is good to harm, and even kill, those who do not share your belief system, or at least pretend to share it. Hence, defining what is good must be paramount before going off into any other direction. I attempted to provide a very simplistic definition of goodness in the first part of my "the problem of evil" series on this blog. Eventually I will elaborate on the definition at some point in the not-too-distant future.

But for now, I want to concentrate on a related matter, and that would be the debate as to whether or not human beings are intrinsically good or evil. By intrinsically, I mean whether or not someone is born "good" or "evil." What you believe concerning intrinsic goodness or evil will shape quite a bit of the rest of your worldview, as I will soon demonstrate.

But first: are we born good, evil, or something in between? An interesting case could be made for any of the three, but I personally think it is quite obvious, when you give it a bit of thought, that we are born evil, but have the potential for goodness. In Christianity this can be expressed as the doctrine of Original Sin, where we are unable to be good, since we are born of a couple of rebellious young sinners: Adam and Eve. From birth, we share in their rebellious heritage, whether we want to or not.

But even avoiding Christian theology entirely, a case can still be made that we are born intrinsically evil, not good. All that one hast to do is read the newspapers, watch TV, observe life in an as objective fashion as possible, and see what the source of all our problems and difficulties are.

Often I've seen militant atheists blame all the troubles of the world on religion, and they honestly believe that if we were to do away with religion, everything would be just fine. Of course that's absolute nonsense, as most positive religions, like Christianity and Buddhism, have very high and challenging moral and ethical codes as a part of their systems, codes which when followed have brought forth a tremendous amount of blessings and advances, of which no other system can even come close. Just from Christianity has been born modern science, hospitals, orphanages, hospices, public education, universities, and various other institutions which we take for granted, or assume are the products of corporations or the government. History shows clearly that many of the great ideas in Western Civilization were born out of Christians applying their beliefs to the problems of society.

So where does evil really come from, if not religion? Simple: it comes from the selfishness and the self-righteousness that can be found in any human's heart. We are greedy, selfish people at our core, caring mostly about one thing: our self preservation and self-promotion, all else is a distant second place. All you need to do to prove this to your own satisfaction is have children.

Perhaps somewhere in history there was a child born who has always done the right thing, and has never had to be disciplined, but I'm not personally aware of any alive at this moment. Children, more so than anything else, can drive perfectly normal adults into full blown insanity, depression, and rages of anger that would never be seen except for the presence of children. Yes, even toddlers (especially toddlers!) can drive the most calm, collected, rational adult into a nervous babbling wreck within minutes.

God, in his infinite wisdom, gave us parents to beat, smack, and curse us into being good. Sadly, some have taken this job either too seriously, or there have been others who have not taken it seriously enough; causing their offspring to lead a life of evil rather than good. The children seemed to have picked up on the wrong lesson. This is part of the fun and danger of being a human being with free will: you can use it for either good or evil, depending on your state of mind.

So how can one's state of mind be foundational in a person's trek through life? Let me answer that by saying that though I think it's totally obvious that men are born evil, and spend a life time trying to overcome it, it is also obvious that there are many people with selective vision, who think that because we have the potential for goodness, then we are, in fact, good. Amazingly, one of the most striking paradoxes is that those who realize the evil in men's hearts are those who will most likely be virtuous; and those who take for granted that men are good will most likely turn out to be selfish, greedy pigs.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, and any other "evil" figure you can think of had absolutely no illusions about themselves: they all thought of themselves as ultimate goodness, and by their power they were going to bring about some sort of utopia here on earth. If it just weren't for those poor, deceived folks who could not see their grand vision, and who had to be "taken care of" one way or another.

Those who think people are basically good (or at least believe themselves to be basically good!) will normally have little use for religion, and find their ultimate expression of goodness in government power and government programs designed to wipe away every evil from the face of society. After all, it's not that people are bad or evil, it's just that they've been poorly educated, or are too poor, or are just somewhat deceived as to how good we all are, and especially how good are those in political power over the rest of us are. These types want all sorts of education, social programs, and other government sponsored programs to bring about heaven here on earth, all the while blind to the realization that they are only making a more fertile atmosphere for evil to take hold.

Those who understand that people are basically evil, and understand themselves to be the most evil of all, don't look to the government to do anything but protect us from those who have chosen a life of evil. Hence a strong justice system and a powerful national defense are high priorities, for they know what can happen when evil triumphs. These people are very much religious, knowing that redemption can only come from a higher power, not from any man made institution. They are also very suspicious of government, in a healthy way, knowing that governments are only a good as the men who are in positions of power, and they know how quickly the nature of government can change just by a simple change of leadership. They have little use for social welfare systems, knowing that evil is not some circumstance of society, but resides in the heart of men. But they have great love and admiration for churches, religions, schools and charitable societies that do their best to encourage and even push men along the path of their potential goodness, something no government can do. And most importantly, they understand that the boring, old-fashioned traditional family; mom, dad and a handful of kids, is the greatest force for good on this planet, and needs to be protected and nurtured. That's not to say that families can't also be a force of great evil, just that in most circumstances, a strong family can be the best social welfare system a person can have.

Hence how you view human beings, either as being intrinsically good or evil (including yourself!) can have severe repercussions on all else that you are willing to accept as true. It could even be argued that your stand on this issue is foundational to all else in your life, including your religion and politics.

As for me, you already know that I do not view any human being as being intrinsically good, not even myself. The evil in my own heart has always been very obvious to me, and never, ever have I thought myself a good person, not for a single day. And yet, I know I do have the potential for goodness, that it can be developed and nurtured, and that this darkness in my heart can be ultimately overcome. But it's not going to come via education, work, government, nor any other man-made institution: it will only come about through a Devine transformation through the power of God.

But more on that in a future posting...

<>< TM

"you say sunni, I say shiite, let's just call the whole thing off"

2007-02-05T18:31:00.000-06:00

An excellent article from the Get Religion blog that sheds a bit of light on the doctrinal differences between Shiite and Sunni Muslims: Meanwhile, back at the ranch (Yeah, it's a stupid title, but still a good post.)

It is CRITICAL for one to understand the Muslim religion in order to understand the motives of those who pursue terrorism. About 99% of the justification for terrorism comes from a very conservative reading of the Koran. The other 1% is disgust over Brad Pitt leaving Jennifer Aniston for Angelina Jolie. Really, what the heck was he thinking?

<>< TM

no surprise really...

2007-02-05T16:04:00.000-06:00

According to an article in today's Sun-Times, McDonald's java tops Starbucks.

Consumer Reports performed a taste-test between leading fast-food coffee giants McDonalds, Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, and Starbucks. The winner for the best tasting coffee: why McDonald's of course.

The reason I take pleasure in this is that I've ALWAYS much preferred the coffee at McD's to that of Starbucks, or anywhere else. I don't like their new "dark roast" as much, but it's still better than the coffee they serve elsewhere.

Though I normally don't pay much attention to Consumer Reports, I do feel some sort of metaphysical justification from this finding. Though I must say Starbucks does make a mean Toffee Nut Latte...yummy!

One chain not reported on, but both my sister and I think it the best coffee place, is Caribou Coffee...a Starbucks wannabe. They have some really good coffee, but the lack of a Big Mac or Egg McMuffin type sandwich to go with that cup of joe still gives McD's the edge.

<>< TM

we agnostics

2007-02-05T14:45:00.000-06:00

The following was written by a former atheist and alcoholic in 1939:

This world of our has made more material progress in the last century than in all the millenniums which went before. Almost everyone knows the reason. Students of ancient history tell us that the intellect of men in those days was equal to the best of today. Yet in ancient times material progress was painfully slow. The spirit of modern scientific inquiry, research and invention was almost unknown. In the realm of the material, men's minds were fettered by superstition, tradition, and all sorts of fixed ideas. Some of the contemporaries of Columbus thought a round earth preposterous. Others came near putting Galileo to death for his astronomical heresies.

We asked ourselves this: Are not some of us just as biased and unreasonable about the realm of the spirit as were the ancients about the realm of the material? Even in the present century, American newspapers were afraid to print an account of the Wright brothers' first successful flight at Kitty Hawk. Had not all efforts at flight failed before? Did not Professor Langley's flying machine go to the bottom of the Potomac River? Was it not true that the best mathematical minds had proved man could never fly? Had not people said God had reserved this privilege to the birds? Only thirty years later the conquest of the air was almost an old story and airplane travel was in full swing.

But in most fields our generation has witnessed complete liberation of our thinking. Show any longshoreman a Sunday supplement describing a proposal to explore the moon by means of a rocket and he will say, "I bet they do it--maybe not so long either." Is not our age characterized by the ease with which we discard old ideas for new, by the complete readiness with which we throw away the theory or gadget which does not work for something new which does?

We had to ask ourselves why we shouldn't apply to our human problems this same readiness to change our point of view. We were having trouble with personal relationships, we couldn't control our emotional natures, we were a prey to misery and depression, we couldn't make a living, we had a feeling of uselessness, we were full of fear, we were unhappy, we couldn't see to be of real help to other people--was not a basic solution of these bedevilments more important than whether we should see newsreels of lunar flight? Of course it was.

When we saw others solve their problems by a simple reliance upon the Spirit of the Universe, we had to stop doubting the power of God. Our ideas did not work. But the God idea did.

The Wright brothers' almost childish faith that they could build a machine which would fly was the mainspring of their accomplishment. Without that, nothing could have happened. We agnostics and atheists were sticking to the idea that self-sufficiency would solve our problems. When others showed us that "God-sufficiency" worked with them, we began to feel like those who had insisted the Wrights would never fly.

Logic is great stuff. We liked it. We still like it. It is not by chance we were given the power to reason, to examine the evidence of our senses, and to draw conclusions. This is one of man's magnificent attributes. We agnostically inclined would not feel satisfied with a proposal which does not lend itself to reasonable approach and interpretation. Hence we are at pains to tell why we think our present faith is reasonable, why we think it more sane and logical to believe than not to believe, why we say our former thinking was soft and mushy when we threw up our hands in doubt and said, "We don't know."

When we became alcoholics, crushed by a self-imposed crisis we could not postpone or evade, we had to fearlessly face the proposition that either God is everything or else He is nothing. God either is, or He isn't. What was our choice to be?

Arrived at this point, we were squarely confronted with the question of faith. We couldn't duck the issue. Some of us had already walked far over the Bridge of Reason toward the desired shore of faith. The outlines and the promise of the New Land Had brought luster to tired eyes and fresh courage to flagging spirits. Friendly hands had stretched out in welcome. We were grateful that Reason had brought us so far. But somehow, we couldn't quite step ashore. Perhaps we had been leaning too heavily on Reason that last mile and we did not like to lose our support.

That was natural, but let us think a little more closely. Without knowing it, had we not been brought to where we stood by a certain kind of faith? For did we not believe in our won reasoning? Did we not have confidence in our ability to think? What was that but a sort of faith? Yes, we had been faithful, abjectly faithful to the God of Reason. So, in one way or another, we discovered that faith has been involved all the time!

We found, too, that we had been worshipers. What a state of mental goose-flesh that used to bring on! Had we not variously worshiped people, sentiment, things, money, and ourselves? And then, with a better motive, had we not worshipfully beheld the sunset, the sea, or a flower? Who of us had not loved something or somebody? How much did these feelings, these loves, these worships, have to do with pure reason? Little or nothing, we saw at last. Were not these things the tissue out of which our lives were constructed?" Did no these feelings, after all, determine the course of our existences? It was impossible to say we had no capacity for faith, or love, or worship. In one form or another we had been living by faith and little else.

Imagine life without faith! Were nothing left but pure reason, it wouldn't be life. But we believed in life--of course we did. We could not prove life in the sense that you can prove a straight line is the shortest distance between two points, yet, there it was. Could we still say that whole thing was nothing but a mass of electrons, created out of nothing, meaning nothing, whirling on to a destiny of nothingness? Of course we couldn't. The electrons themselves seemed more intelligent than that. At least, so the chemist said.

Hence we saw that reason isn't everything. Neither is reason, as most of us use it, entirely dependable, though it emanate from our best minds. What about people who proved that man could never fly?

Yet we had been seeing another kind of flight, a spiritual liberation from this world, people who rose above their problems. They said God made these things possible, and we only smiled. We had seen spiritual release, but like to tell ourselves it wasn't true.

Actually we were fooling ourselves, for deep down in every man, woman, and child, is the fundamental idea of God. It may be obscured by calamity, by pomp, by worship of others things, but in some form or other it is there. For faith in a Power greater than ourselves, and miraculous demonstrations of that power in human lives, are facts as old as man himself.

We finally saw that faith in some kind of God was a part of our make-up, just as much as the feeling we have for a friend. Sometimes we had to search fearlessly, but He was there. He was as much a fact as we were. We found the Great Reality deep down within us. In the last analysis it is only there that He may be found. It was so with us.

Source:
The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous, 4th edition
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.
New York City, 2001, p 51-55

<>< TM

go read this...

2007-02-03T01:15:00.000-06:00

OK...stop reading this and go over to Chez's "Deus Ex Malcontent" blog and read the following article all the way to the end: The Part that Never Comes Home.

Excerpt:

It would be somewhere around two years later that I would lie face-down on my bed, clutching a pillow, crying in a way I never thought possible -- feeling more pain, anger and helplessness than I believed my young life had the capacity to contain. I'd try to grasp what it's like to go to sleep one night and wake up to find that everything you love, everything you are, has been utterly obliterated. I'd want to know why a young girl who deserved a lifetime of happiness instead awoke one morning to a frightening, alien existence -- a treacherous shadow world, spawned by a few hours of infinite madness and violence. I'd want to know how someone finds a way back to the light -- back to life. To this day, many of those questions remain unanswered.

<>< TM

happy groundhog day!

2007-02-02T22:13:00.000-06:00

To all the readers of the THEODICY blog, a hearty happy Groundhog Day!

I know of no better way of celebrating than watching the famous movie by the same name. Groundhog Day is one of the greatest films in American cinema, and has developed an especially strong following amongst religious leaders and theologians of various stripes, especially those of a Christian, Jewish, Buhddist or Hindu background.

What is it about the film Groundhog Day that rings so true with many positive religions? It is a story of transformation and redemption, and the greatest secret in life: the source of happiness is a life of generosity and love for others, even if they don't deserve it!

Go watch Groundhog Day, you won't regret it.

<>< TM

quote of the week

2007-01-31T23:22:00.000-06:00

Quote of the week:

"Maybe if more people were making love, making music or praying, things wouldn’t be so damned ugly, everywhere"

Source: The Anchoress: "It's all ugly and that's easy. Let us pray"

Amen to that.

<>< TM

the problem of evil: part 2: how do we know what's good or evil?

2007-01-30T11:10:00.000-06:00

Read Part 1, The Problem of Evil, here.

In my previous posting on the problem of evil, I left off with the promise to discuss the origin of our knowledge of good and evil. It is the ability to discern good and evil that sets us apart from every other animal and plant on earth, and makes us utterly distinct from all other living things.

But where did this knowledge come from, and why do we have it? Here is where those holding to a naturalistic, evolutionary ideology with no room for a supreme being run into deep doo-doo, as there is no way to logically justify the need for a creature to have this ability, from an evolutionary standpoint. All the animal and plants of earth testify that a knowledge of good and evil is not necessary to exist, to live. The humble amoeba leads a perfectly wonderful existence without have to discern if it's right or wrong to cheat the government out of it's tax revenue. No, a creature does not need to have this knowledge to exist and prosper on planet Earth. Of course militant atheists have their "theories" as to how we developed ethics based on a pure evolutionary paradigm, but these "theories" have no foundations in empirical science. In other words, we cannot observe nor measure our evolution as human beings, as that history has been completely lost to us, if it even has ever existed. We are left playing guessing games as to our origins, and then labeling it "science." (Mainly because those who play these guessing games call themselves scientists...and label their guesses as theories so as to remove any criticism.)

Those of us who believe we are here by intention, not by chance, and believe in a Supreme Being, also believe that the knowledge of good and evil was a direct result of our interactions with God. More specifically, we believe that we came to this knowledge by theft. We took it, though it didn't belong to us! The story of this theft occurs in the early chapters of the book of Genesis:

"The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." " (Genesis 2:15-17 NIV)

Adam and Eve, having only one rule to follow, quickly prove their humanness by breaking the only rule that God gave to them! Whether or not you believe that Adam and Eve and their fall from grace is an actual true story, the point is still relevant: man first learned of good and evil when he disobeyed God.

Now what's interesting is that God clearly gives man the ability to choose to obey his command or not. It is implied in the statement "you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". In other words, man was not a robot, programmed to always do the right thing. There was some randomness, an ability to choose, that was given to him from the first day.

Think about that for a minute: God could have simply programmed us to always do the right thing, always the best thing, without even having to THINK!!!! Wouldn't that be grand? Well, if you think being a tree is a grand thing, then that's the life for you. But the ability to choose, to choose to disobey God, allows us some autonomy and some responsibility. We can do what we want...we are not vegetables, we are not dumb animals; we can choose to do that which will bring harm, or bring blessing. But along with that responsibility comes a terrible price: "for when you eat of it you will surely die."

So Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, and they died...eventually. They died an almost immediate "death" in that they were banned from the Garden of Eden, and were told to go work the earth...the first farmer and rancher. And then they eventually died a real death: they ceased to exist here on Earth. So God's warning was fulfilled; along with the knowledge of good and evil came death as the penalty.

Before Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree, they led a happy, care-free life. They literally never knew evil! Imagine never knowing what evil is...how wonderful that would be! But thanks to a very wily serpent, Adam and Eve eat that which they shouldn't, and for the very first time, they know what evil is--disobeying the direct command of God. They knew they disobeyed, and they acted accordingly--they hid their nakedness and hid from the eyes of God:

"When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden." (Genesis 3:6-8 NIV)

The knowledge of their nakedness is a metaphor, and speaks to the shame one has once they realize they've done something wrong...whether or not it has even been found out! You and I both know this feeling very, very well, and the metaphor of nakedness is an apt way of describing the guilt that we feel. Truly, we are "naked" before God, and we know it. Of course "fig leaves" is also a metaphor for the lying and rationalizing we do to mitigate against our guilt and shame. We do not want our own nakedness to be discovered, so we pretend to be fully clothed.

For the very first time man knows what it is to be evil, and just as the serpent said, he is "just like God." Man now knows that he can disobey God, and that he has a free-will. But what was the "sin" that Adam and Eve committed? Was it just eating from a stupid tree? Isn't that a rather arbitrary rule? If God did want them to eat from the dumb tree, then why did he plant it in the Garden of Eden to begin with? He could have just put the tree in another garden somewhere else, or not created it altogether. So why have the forbidden tree in the Garden of Eden? What purpose did it serve other than to curse Adam and Eve?

God put the tree in the garden as proof of man's ability to choose: it's a demonstration that man has free will, that he can obey or disobey at his own prerogative. Hence the tree, though seemingly arbitrary, has a very, very important role to play: proof of the autonomy of man; to show that man is not a robot, but a creature who can choose his own path.

The "sin" that Adam and Eve committed was not the eating of the fruit; their real sin was their belief that God was lying to them. What did God say to Adam and Eve? He said "you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." But what did the serpent say to Eve to convince her to eat from the tree? He said ""You will not surely die," For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

At that point, Eve had a choice to make: either God was telling her the truth when he told them they would die, or he was lying, and the serpent was telling her the truth. Eve decided that God must be holding out on her, and believed the serpent was telling her the truth. So it wasn't the eating of the fruit that was so bad, it was the belief that God was holding out on them, that He was lying to them! The root of Adam and Eve's sin is their belief that God was a liar.

Now God obviously did not lie, and our own mortality is proof enough of that. So why would Adam and Eve, who knew God in a very personal way, think that he was lying to them about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Well, the serpent certainly has to take a big share of the blame for that. So why did God allow this serpent access to the Garden of Eden; what was his purpose? He was there to test Adam and Eve's obedience, a test they failed. It is easy to be obedient if you never have the opportunity to choose to disobey! Again, the serpent's purpose was to demonstrate Adam and Eve's autonomy: their freedom to choose. But in order to choose, you must be given a choice; hence the serpent presented them with a choice, and the humans chose accordingly. While the serpent was obviously allowed to lie to them, he could not force them to eat the fruit, that the two humans had to choose to do on their own.

Again, it does not matter whether you believe this event actually happened or not, the point here is to demonstrate that sin which is at the root of all evil: that sin being the choice of whether or not God is lying to us.

Well, the serpent was right about one thing: "you will be like God, knowing good and evil." As soon as humans made the decision to disobey God, they experienced evil, and through that experience, came into the knowledge of what is good, and what is evil. Before that, the distinction could not be made, since evil had not been experienced. Adam and Eve lived in a world that was absolutely good, but they were ignorant of how good they had it, as they did not know of any other reality. They did not know there was a land east of Eden, where things were going to be much more difficult. The punishment they endured happened to them simply because they thought God was lying.

Yet the choice of Adam and Eve is also our choice, a choice we must make on a daily basis: that choice being whether or not God is lying to us. Everything else we do or believe is founded on that very decision, whether or not we are conscious of it. But now, through the reading this article, I have have helped you to become conscious of this very important decision we all make.

And so I ask you: is God lying? Is God himself a lie? Is the entire Judeo-Christian system of belief just a fancy little fairy-tale told to keep people in-line? Or is there something more to it than that?

Obviously, I cannot answer these questions to your satisfaction. You, the dear reader of this blog, must determine whether or not God is a lie, and if not a lie, whether or not he lies to us. As for myself, I believe that God is true, and that his words are true, and that he is not capable of lying. (Though some of his creation is certainly is capable of it!)

I encourage you to find out for yourself whether or not God is a liar. Seek out what you can, and do everything you can to make sure of your answer, for your answer to this question is foundational to how you are going to live out the rest of your life, and after this life is over, your life in eternity.

Next time: what God has done to correct the evil brought on by Adam and Eve's fateful choice.

<>< TM

faith and football

2007-01-29T21:23:00.000-06:00

The following is an excerpt from the "In the Lead" column which appears in the Marketplace section of the Wall Street Journal. The subject of the column are two NFL head coaches: Lovie Smith of the Chicago Bears, and Tony Dungy of the the Indianapolis Colts.

IN THE LEAD
By CAROL HYMOWITZ

Two Football Coaches
Have a Lot to Teach
Screaming Managers

January 29, 2007; Page B1

The Super Bowl should be required viewing for managers who think screaming at employees is the best way to motivate them -- or simply their prerogative as bosses.

They won't see that kind of behavior Sunday, as the Indianapolis Colts play the Chicago Bears for football's highest trophy. The Colts' head coach, Tony Dungy, and the Bears' Lovie Smith don't curse or sarcastically chew out players, which makes them stand out in the National Football League's scream-and-holler culture.

The two men -- the first African-Americans to lead Super Bowl teams -- became close friends when Mr. Dungy, formerly head coach for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, hired Mr. Smith as an assistant. Both believe they can get their teams to compete more fiercely and score more touchdowns by giving directives calmly and treating players with respect.

This doesn't mean they aren't demanding or don't push hard. Mr. Dungy has a grading system that counts players' "loafs." If someone isn't running at full speed, or eases up or fails to hit an opponent when he could have, those are loafs, and it's hard to get through a game without getting at least one.

When Mr. Smith, who uses the same system, became the Bears' head coach three years ago, he told players to lift more weights and eat better because he wanted a slimmer, faster team. When he gets mad, he stares straight ahead in silence. His players call it "the Lovie Look" and say it's more frightening -- and more of a warning to play better -- than a torrent of angry words.

....

For some managers and athletic coaches, screaming is a way to show they are in charge -- and behavior that may be expected by their bosses. The Colts' Mr. Dungy says he didn't get some jobs earlier in his career because he was considered too laid-back and polite and didn't believe being a great coach required him to sacrifice his family or faith.

On one interview, when an owner asked if he would make the team the most important thing in his life, he said no. "I figured I probably wouldn't get that job, and I didn't," he said at a press conference last week. "I think your faith is more important than your job, family is more important than your job. We all know that's the way it should be, but we're kind of afraid to say that sometimes."

Lovie Smith and he "aren't afraid to say it," and both run their teams in the same way, Mr. Dungy said. The Colts and Bears play "tough, disciplined football even though there's not a lot of profanity from the coaches, there's none of the win-at-all-costs atmosphere. I think for two guys to show you can win that way is important for the country to see."

<>< TM

the essence of Christianity

2007-01-23T23:33:00.000-06:00

In a Jewish book I'm reading, written by the wife of a great rabbi, I came across the following story which illustrates the essence of Christianity, or Judaism, or even that of any spiritual system that values human life:

Some years ago, I read a brief news item in The New York Times about an Olympics for Special Children in Seattle, Washington. It was a small blurb, innocuously placed, an I would probably have missed it had my daughter not pointed it out to me. The story was about disabled children who competed in a race. When the whistle sounded, they started to run. Suddenly, one of the young boys fell, skinned his knee, and began to cry. When the others heard his cry, they stopped in their tracks, turned around, and went to his aid. One little girl, who had Down Syndrome, bent down, kissed his knee and said, "here, this will make it feel better." The children helped the boy to his feet, linked hands, and ever so slowly, they all walked as one to the finish line.*

*Jungries, Esther. Life Is A Test. Brooklyn: Shaar Press, 2006. 15

Why is this the essence of Christianity or Judaism? Or any other religious systems that place a high value on human life? Because it shows that "winning" is a hollow achievement, if we ignore the pain and suffering that surround each and everyone of us. An excellent example of this is the recent Pixar movie Cars, where a bright red young NASCAR stock car, "Lightning McQueen," learns the same sort of lesson.

It's not what you achieve, it's who you help that counts.

<>< TM

P.S. According to my research, the event told by Jungries actually happened in Spokane, not Seattle, and only one or two athletes helped the guy who fell, not everyone. (source: http://www.snopes.com/glurge/special.htm) However, even if it were only one person who helped the fallen athlete, the point is still valid.

P.S.S. Cool video Clip of Rascal Flat's performing "Life is a Highway" as featured in the movie "Cars" here.
.

how evil originated...

2007-01-22T01:20:00.000-06:00

Wow! They have EVERYTHING on YouTube! Here is ACTUAL video footage of how evil, in all of its various forms, came into creation. Amazing!

<>< TM

the problem of evil

2007-01-17T23:18:00.000-06:00

The name of this blog is Theodicy (thee-ODD-i-see). The term theodicy was coined by the philosopher/diplomat Leibniz, and is one of his most famous works, other than the invention of calculus and binary numbers (minor trifles by comparison).

Theodicy is simply the philosophical/theological desire to absolve God of any wrong doing. What type of wrong doing is God guilty of? All the evil that happens all over the world on a daily basis. After all, if he's a supreme being, he should easily be able to put a stop to it, shouldn't he?

Another way of phrasing the problem of theodicy is the age old question "Why do bad things happen to good people?" Or the famous question of college dorms "why does an allegedly good God allow evil on earth?" Of course these questions assume that we know what we are talking about when we use the terms "God" "good" and "evil." But it's always a good idea to define terms, so allow me to offer my own very simplistic, broad definitions:

GOD = The supreme being who created everything we can see and know. Specifically, the supreme being cited throughout the Bible of Christians and Jews.

GOOD = That which causes a person happiness, or at least alleviates their suffering.

EVIL = That which causes a person pain, or increases their suffering.

Now, just to be clear, when I talk about increasing or decreasing suffering, I'm talking in net terms--ultimate good or ultimate evil. It can be very painful to go to a dentist or surgeon to have things removed from your body, especially if cutting or drilling is required. However, the process is ultimately good if it results in the net alleviation of pain, suffering or death.

Likewise, something can be ultimately evil even if that which leads up to it is rather pleasurable. For instance, having sex with someone is often the ultimate in pleasure and happiness, but if that union should result in a person be contaminated with the AIDS virus, we can honestly say that ultimately a great evil has been done, given that the sexual partner knew that they were HIV positive.

So why is there evil? Well, the surprising truth is you cannot ask that question without also asking another: why is there good? And even a THIRD question: How do we know the difference between good and evil? In other words, you can't have one without the other. Why not? Well, how could you know one, without knowing the other? Of course there are beings on this earth who really don't know the difference: the entire animal and plant worlds for instance. No, not even the hallowed dolphin nor the noble gorilla can put forth opinions or observations on what is good or evil--that is the sole domain of men.

There are those who argue that good and evil are two sides of the same coin, and therefore there's just one coin. In other words, good and evil do not really exist, they are just convenient figments of our imagination.. Of course the intellectuals who makes these sort of pronouncements are almost always fully tenured members of esteemed institutions of higher education who are paid by the word to make silly proclamations in order to prove their intellectual superiority. Because of that, we can--of course--dismiss these sort of pronouncements out of hand.

Both you and I know exactly what good and evil are, and we know that they do--in fact--exist. How do we know? Because when something truly evil happens to us, we are sad, downcast, angry and/or depressed. When something truly good happens to us, we are happy, joyful, at ease and sometimes even grateful. And because most of us reading this blog are in the set of humans beings, we know what these concepts mean when they are used in a sentence.

Now, I do not consider the various extremes of nature as being good nor evil...in my system, they are simply acts of nature. While you may certainly consider it evil if a shark bites your leg off while swimming in the warm waters of Florida, in my system all that's happened is a hungry shark eating. He can't help being a hungry shark any more than you can help being a tasty snack. But you can choose to be, or not to be, in the ocean. Our friend the hungry shark simply does not have that option. He can no more walk out of the ocean on his tail fin and order a #2 at McDonald's than you can go swimming in the Atlantic, deep diving for tasty giant squid that live 5,000 feet below the ocean's surface. Yet we humans can take a submersible down to 5,000 feet, and live down there for quite some time; which illustrates another difference between us and the exciting but stupid world of animals: we make some really cool stuff. When gorillas begin to start designing jet airliners on advanced CAD/CAM systems, then you can start boasting to me about how human-like they are.

Same for weather: hot or cold, earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and snow storms are just that: weather. They do not act with evil intent, nor are they particularly good nor evil, they just are. No more than a rock laying on the ground can be said to be good or evil.

The sets of all that is good vs. evil requires an agent who can determine what is good or evil, and act on either...whether willingly or under coercion. In other words, good and evil are really just adjectives that describe the actions and attitudes of our fellow human beings, or of ourselves. Good actions and attitudes cause us to feel happy, and evil actions and attitudes cause us to feel pain, anger, and sadness.

While I do not deny that things which occur in the natural world cause us to be happy or sad, I do not believe things in the natural world are working from a a motive of good or evil. It might be a good, beautiful thing to watch a morning sunrise, and it might be a bad, awful thing to be attacked by a swarm of killer bees, but the sun and the bees are only doing what they do because of what they are. The sun cannot choose to rise or set, the bees cannot choose to swarm and sting, they do it because that is their nature.

But humans--and humans alone--act by choice, even if the choice is made only unconsciously or by default.

So, to sum up, we can assign acts of nature to the good or evil category if we want to, in terms of how it makes us feel, but my point is that the good and evil judgments we make are actually the product of the hearts, minds and will of men, not nature. We have choices to make, the natural world does not.

In general, we assign murder, rape, violence, pillaging, and taxes to the category of "evil" Notice how all these things can be verbs and adjectives--actions and descriptions--not things. And yes, you certainly can--and are--being taxed.

Likewise, charity, love, generosity, gentleness, and giving are normally assigned to the category of "good" Again notice that these are verbs and adjectives, actions and descriptions, not things.

The point of all this? Things in themselves are neither good nor evil, it is the intent and will and actions of men that are truly either good or evil.

(Note to feminists reading this blog: I'm intentionally using the third person pronon "men" in the sense of it being inclusive of all human beings, because it's a much more poetic term than "human beings". And besides, I don't subscribe to feminist ideology anyway...)

Men can certainly choose to act in an evil or good manner; there is really little to stop you either way. Not so the rock, the shark, or the sun.

If I may, I think a better and more accurate question we need to ask is the following: "Why do men do evil things, and why doesn't God stop them?" But then again, there is a converse question also implied: "Why do men do good things, and why doesn't Satan stop them?" One cannot discuss evil, without it's converse: good. Why is it that no one wonders why there is good on earth? Why does evil take such an unfair share of our attention?

Theologians say that God is ultimate good, therefore he should not allow people to do evil things. And if He were really, really good, it would always be sunny and 72 degrees outside, with only the most gentle of breezes...and the sun would rise promptly at 6 am, and go down promptly at 9 pm. Shoot, if we want him to be good, we might as well get specific.

Well, for reasons that are rather simple to understand, God has deemed man, above and beyond all the animals, to have the knowledge of good and evil, along with the ability to act in either fashion. This is His gift to us, and it is a GOOD gift. It is that which separates us from the brute beasts and plant life.

NEXT TIME: How we got the gift of the knowledge of good and evil (Hint: we stoled it.)

<>< TM

there's something fishy in San Francisco...

2007-01-14T20:40:00.000-06:00

...and I don't mean Fisherman's Wharf...

It's only been a few days since the Democrats took 0ver in the House of Representatives, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has already demonstrated greater stupidity, crassness, and corruption than the entire Bush administration has since taking office in 2001.

First, there was the "I'm the most powerful woman in the world" tirade the day she took office.

Now, it turns out that a piece of legistlation she rammed through the House faster than you can say "StarKist" has exempted the entire territory of American Samoa in the minimum wage-hike bill. Why is this significant? American Samoa is the site of a tuna packing plant owned by a company in her San Francisco congressional district: Del Monte Corp. It seems that Samoans packing tuna can get by on less, so a HUGE GIANT BLOOD SUCKING corporation in SAN FRANCISCO can make more money.

Not that I'm saying Democrats are hypocrites when it comes to their diatribes against corporate American....well, I guess I'm saying it...

Read all about it here: Pelosi Snared in Wage-Hike Tuna Net

The shame, the shame...

UPDATE (1/17/07): The greatest living writer on earth, Mark Steyn, has weighed in on Mrs. Pelosi in a column in the Chicago Sun-Times, and finds her wanting. Note this column was written before the tuna scandal: Pelosi a rare example of a woman who 'has it all'. Highly recommended.

<>< TM

leaving islam...for real

2007-01-14T16:57:00.000-06:00

Check out Isaac Schrodinger's (pseudonym) blog for a real life account of the difficulty involved in leaving Islam when you are a former Muslim: Isaac Schrödinger: The Marathon of My Life

Also note how many in the blogosphere helped him to leave!

(hat tip: Pierre Legrand)

<>< TM

just a note...

2007-01-14T16:38:00.000-06:00

Just a note that I've been updating my blog roll, and you might see some changes. No one is being deleted, but there will be a few new additions, especially in the mil blogs section. I feel it is very important to keep tabs on what our military is doing around the world, and I've been finding that a few good blogs do a far better job than the mainstream media when it comes to nitty-gritty details of combat and life in a war zone.

Two new mil-blogs just added: BlackFive and Fourth Rail.

Enjoy!

<>< TM

so....how do the Iraqis feel about W's plans for Iraq?

2007-01-14T16:16:00.000-06:00

The following is an interesting article that recently appeared in the New York Post about how the Iraqi's feel concerning President Bush's plan for increased military effort to put-down the Iraqi insurgency. I'm reprinting it in my blog in full for archiving purposes. Please feel free to check out the original article at the New York Post web site.

---------------------

HOW IRAQIS SEE W'S NEW PLAN
GREAT RELIEF - AND SOME CONCERNS
Maliki: Fresh resolve to secure Baghdad.

January 12, 2007 -- 'A SIGH of relief!"

So one resident of Haifa Street, in the heart of Baghdad's badlands, reacted to the new plan to secure the Iraqi capital with the help of thousands of additional American troops.

"Maybe the Americans aren't running away after all," said the resident, a Sunni Arab, over the phone moments after President Bush unveiled his new plan. "The message seems to be that the United States will remain committed as long as Bush is in the White House."

Some 70 percent of Baghdad's violence is concentrated in five neighborhoods, where both Shiites and Sunnis have been the targets of rival death squads for months. Other Baghdadis say the population of those areas will greet the American troops with sweets and flowers.

The fear that the United States, bedeviled by internecine feuds, might cut and run has been at the root of the violence since Iraq's liberation in 2003.

Jihadists have fought not because they hope to win on the battlefield, but to strengthen the antiwar lobbies in the United States and Britain. Some in the new political elite have become fence sitters because they regard the United States as a fickle power that could suddenly change course. Others have created or expanded militias, in case the United States abandons Iraq before it can defend itself against internal foes and predatory neighbors.

The new Bush plan has raised Iraqi morale to levels not known for a year. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who had been dropping hints he might resign because of sheer fatigue, now says he is committed to restoring Baghdad's sobriquet of Dar al-Salaam (The Abode of Peace) by clearing it of al Qaeda and Saddamite terrorists, militias and death squads.

"The plan that President Bush has announced is based on our plan," says Ali al-Dabbagh, al-Maliki's spokesman. "We presented it to him during the summit in Amman last month, and he promised to study it. The result is a joint Iraqi-American plan to defeat the terrorists."

As if to underline that claim, the Iraqi army, backed by a U.S. helicopter gunship, launched a major operation in Baghdad two days before Bush's announcement of the new plan. Over 50 jihadists were killed, and an unknown number captured.

The operation signaled that the Iraqi army, backed by American firepower, was on the offensive. Which brings us to one of the paradoxes of Iraq during the last two years: There has been a great deal of killing, but little fighting. The terrorists, who mainly operate in less than 5 percent of Iraqi territory, have been allowed to strike whenever they wish without being chased by the Iraqi army or the multinational force. The multinational force has been mostly in "self-defense" mode. In 2006, the U.S. forces initiated only 11 operations against the jihadists; the British and the Danes, another three.

The new plan will see more fighting - and so force the jihadists to spend more resources on protecting themselves, and fewer on attacking soft civilian targets.

Iraqis that I've talked to are especially pleased that Bush did not take up the Iraq Study Group's idea of involving Iran in the future of Iraq. The idea of a secret U.S. plan to hand over Iraq to the Iranians (in the context of a grand bargain with the mullahs) has been one of the themes of Sunni jihadist propaganda. The claim has been echoed by some of Washington's allies, including Jordan's King Abdullah II.

Instead, Bush promised to "seek and destroy" networks of support for terrorists, set up by Iran and Syria. That is a sign he understands the broader regional aspects of this struggle. It is impossible to eradicate terrorism in Iraq without eliminating sources of support that lie beyond Iraqi frontiers.

Iraqis also welcome Bush's reasserted commitment to Iraq's integrity and see it as a rejection of ideas to carve the country into three mini-states.

Despite their almost unanimous welcome of the new plan, however, some Iraqis do express a number of concerns.

The first is that Bush might not achieve sufficient unity, both within his own administration and in the broader American political arena, to drive home the message that the jihadists will be hunted down and destroyed.

To address that concern, the president must become "explainer-in-chief," briefing the American people on what is at stake, and showing that the victory that the United States has won in Iraq, by destroying one of the most vicious anti-American regimes on earth, is worth fighting to preserve.

The second concern is that, as on several occasions, the hunt-and-destroy strategy against jihadists may be aborted by political considerations. Iraqis remember how operations in Fallujah, Najaf, Samarrah and Sadr City were called off after U.S. proconsul Paul Bremer, and the Iraqi prime ministers who succeeded him, intervened in response to political pressure.

The third concern is that the so-called room-service mentality of a portion of the Iraqi leadership may come into effect - will they sit back and let the Americans do the dirty work? This would be especially dangerous if the United States is dragged into the war of the sectarians on one side or another. It is important that the United States be, and is perceived to be, a friend and protector of all Iraqis, regardless of sect.

Some of the units used in the pacification of Baghdad are Kurdish; pan-Arabists may exploit that fact to foment chauvinism. It is, therefore, important to also deploy mainly Arab Sunni units both in Baghdad and in al-Anbar, the only one of Iraq's 18 provinces where the central government's presence is thin on the ground.

A fourth concern is that the new plan might be used as an excuse to freeze the democratic process. Local elections, postponed on spurious grounds, must be held as soon as possible to revive local administrations and speed the disbanding of various unofficial bodies, often backed by militias.

Finally, there is concern that plans to hand over control of all provinces to the Iraqi government may be put on hold. Today, Iraqis have full control of five provinces, and were slated to assume control of two more by the end of 2006. The hand-over plan must be completed before the next general election in 2009. This would release U.S. and allied troops of such routine duties as patrolling and asset and personnel protection.

That, in turn, would allow the bulk of the GIs and allied forces to start withdrawal by the end of this year, leaving behind training missions and special units to help destroy the terrorists.

Amir Taheri is an Iranian-born journalist and author based in Europe.

------------------------

<>< TM

...and how do the American soldiers feel?

2007-01-14T15:48:00.000-06:00

So how do the American troops in Iraq feel concerning their own situation, in light of President Bush's speech to increase the number of troops and step up offensive operations? Bill Roggio of The Fourth Rail blog has some insight. I'm reprinting his article in full on my blog, for my own archiving purposes. If you have any comments you'd like to leave about this article, I encourage you to put them on his blog.

---------------------

Iraq: The greatest enemy is the time

How do the American soldiers see the situation in the Iraq? Our reporter went in the heart of the Sunni resistance, Anbar province. A report from the front:

As President Bush unveiled his new vision to move forward on Iraq, the political debate in the United States has continuously degenerated into a simple, binary choice of withdrawal to prevent further American casualties, or surge more troops to attempt to restore order in Baghdad. After spending two months out of the last 12 in the land between the two rivers, one thing I've learned is nothing is simple about Iraq, and there are no easy solutions to the vast array of problems. But despite the constant media portrayal of Iraq as a hopelessly violent nation, Iraq is not a nation without hope.

The average life of an insurgency is about nine years. In Iraq, the insurgents and al-Qaeda hope to wear down the will of the American government and people, and precipitate a premature withdrawal. When I talk to American troops about Iraq, their greatest concern isn't for their safety, but they are worried the American public has given up on the war before they can complete their mission. They watch the news - CNN, MSNBC and FOX News are beamed into the mess halls, some even possess satellite dishes with access to BBC World, Al Jazeera and hundreds of programs at their fingertips. Internet is readily available in many areas. I surfed the web in the center of Fallujah on wireless Internet.

American troops watch the news and follow the debate in real time. They will tell you the war they see on television isn't the war they are fighting. To the troops, the war as portrayed on television is oversimplified and digested into sound bites. The soldiers are portrayed as victims and the violence is grossly exaggerated.

From my own experiences with two months in Iraq out of a year, I had not personally witnessed an ambush, a roadside bombing or other attack. The closest action I saw were some poorly aimed mortar attacks in Fallujah, or a near by patrol getting hit (the bullets and RPGs never made contact). And this is in Anbar province, the most dangerous region in Iraq. I make it a point to accompany the troops on foot and mounted patrols on daily basis. This is not to say attacks do not occur on a daily basis in Anbar – they do,and Anbar is a dangerous place, but just not to every soldier at every minute on every day in every city and town.

The nature of the insurgency in Iraq is complex, and cannot be simply framed as a sectarian war or a war against "U.S. occupation." The insurgency is designed to destroy any semblance of a democratically elected Iraqi government, and is directed at the developing Iraqi security forces, the Iraqi government and institutions, U.S. and Coalition forces, and against sectarian targets.

The real secret about Iraq is the nature of the conflict you will encounter really depends on where you are geographically. In the regions where Sunni, Shia and other ethnic groups live together, such as Baghdad and the surrounding areas, the violence is largely sectarian in nature. Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunnah, along with some other Sunni insurgent groups purposefully attack Shia civilians to stir the sectarian violence and foment a civil war. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the deceased leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, admitted a civil war was his goal in a letter to Osama bin Laden in late 2003. Muqtada al-Sadr's radical Shia Mahdi Army roams Sunni neighborhoods in and around Baghdad to execute Sunnis and incite Sunni reprisals, helping to stoke the fires of a Sunni-Shia war.

In the Shia dominated south, a power struggle is occurring between rival political organizations for control over government institutions and oil revenue. North of Baghdad, Ansar al-Sunnah, a violent terrorist organization that espouses the beliefs of Osama bin Laden, along with the Islamic Army in Iraq focus their attacks largely on U.S. forces and the Iraqi government.

In Anbar province, where I embedded in the city of Fallujah last December, sectarian violence is virtually non-existent. In fact, Sunni tribes have rallied to protect their Shia neighbors numerous times in the past and drove of al-Qaeda attempts to 'cleanse' the region of Shia. Al-Qaeda blood ran in the streets the few times they tried to purge the Shia from Ramadi.

In Fallujah, Ramadi and greater Anbar province, Al-Qaeda in Iraq the most dominant insurgent organization. Al-Qaeda focuses its attacks on Iraqi government security forces, government institutions, as well as U.S. Army and Marine units operating in the region. Their ability to fund the insurgency in the impoverished province is their greatest weapon. Unemployed Sunnis are a paid well (as much of $1,000 according to a military intelligence source) to attack Iraqi and Coalition forces. While there is a large volume of insurgent attacks, the large majority of attacks fail. The fact is an overwhelming majority of roadside bombs are discovered and detonated by Iraqi or Coalition forces.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq is attempting to unite the fractious insurgent groups in the western and northern Sunni majority provinces, and has created an umbrella political organization called the Islamic State of Iraq. Some smaller Sunni insurgent groups, along with some leaders of Iraqi tribes and have been rolled under the banner of the Islamic State of Iraq, along with al-Qaeda in Iraq's Mujahideen Shura Council.

To counter al-Qaeda's attempt to 'Iraqify' the jihad, the U.S. and Iraqi government are working to institute political, economic and military solutions. While I was in Fallujah, I witnessed two of the three pillars in action: the military and political efforts.

In the political sphere, I attended several meetings, including the Anbar province mayor's meeting, hosted by the governor of Fallujah, and the Fallujah city council meeting. Security dominates the discussions, as do reconstruction projects. The political leaders clashed with the Army representatives over certain security policies. The politicians were encouraged to assist with the recruitment of local police, and to work with the tribal leaders to meet the goals. In a recent police recruitment drive at the end of December, the city of Fallujah recruited 80 new candidates. The goal was 60. In Anbar province, 1,115 recruits joined the police.

In the military sphere, the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police are beginning to work together to tamp down the insurgency in the city. The Iraqi Army has a brigade (about 2,000 soldiers) inside the city, and has completely taken ownership of the battle space. The Iraqi Police number about 700, and are beginning to assert themselves despite being targeted by al-Qaeda. The Iraqi Police in Fallujah have even developed a 30 man Special Missions Group force which trained to enter building and detain insurgents.

Inside Fallujah, there is no U.S. Marine or Army presence, save the members of the Police and Military Transition Teams – small, 15 to 20 man teams that are embedded within the police and Army units. I embedded as a reporter with both the Police and Military Transition Teams in Fallujah. The Marines in these teams take great risk in dong their daily job. They live, eat and sleep with their Iraqi counterparts, and are wholly dependent on them for security. Their American backup is stationed outside the city limits.

As brave as the American Marines are, their Iraqi counterparts outshine them. The police, who are local to the city, are specifically targeted by insurgents. Since the late sumer, 21 Iraqi police were murdered by insurgents. Their families are regularly threatened with violence. Several police officers told me how that while they were home they would sit with their backs to the door, AK-47 in hand, as they feared their homes would be stormed and their families would be killed.

The Iraqi Army lives inside the city in forward operating bases, without heavy weapons of their own. They depend on American air, artillery and mortars to bail them out when needed. The Iraqi soldiers, or jundi, patrol the streets on foot up to four times a day. Despite the fact that they, as Iraqis, are viewed as 'occupiers' by many residents of Fallujah, the soldiers have built their own intelligence networks. While on foot patrols in Fallujah, I watched as Iraqi soldiers were called into courtyards by residents who wanted to provide information on insurgent activity. The Fallujans, while terrified of the insurgents, are tired of the violence and wish to move on.

The police and soldiers do their jobs with very little resources. Some haven't been paid in a year. Supplies and equipment such as helmets, bullet proof vests, uniforms and batteries are in high demand demand, as the Iraqi Army logistical system is broken. The police just received armor Humvees to patrol the city, and have been up-armoring their pickup trucks with scrap armor kits. Despite these problems, morale and fighting spirit are not an issue. In fact, the police and Army believe that, if given the right equipment, they can defeat the insurgents without U.S. help.

While embedded with an Iraqi Army infantry unit in Fallujah, I watched a program called al-Zawraa. The jundi call this channel 'Muj TV' (for mujahideen television), as it broadcasts violent insurgent, al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sunnah videos, as well as calls for violence against the Shia “Persians.” Al-Zawraa is run by a Mishan al-Jabouri, a former Sunni member of parliament who is now wanted by the government and living in Syria.

The Iraqi soldiers watch al-Zawraa to get to know their enemy, to motivate them to fight the insurgents and for amusement. The videos are replayed in a near loop, and the soldiers recognize the locations of the attacks as many of them served throughout Iraq. When asked if they feared al-Qaeda and the insurgents, the answer was emphatically “No, just give us guns like you have, tanks like you have and we'll take care of them.”

Nationwide, the Iraqi Army and Police clearly are not ready to fight the insurgents and militias on their own. Baghdad and Ramadi are clearly two cities where the police and Army would collapse without U.S. backing. But the police and soldiers in Fallujah believe they can. Pride, courage and fighting spirit are certainly traits these soldiers do not lack. They will need time to develop the capacity to fight on their own, and time is the one commodity the West seems to be short of.

------------------

<>< TM

"jews face mass extermination"

2007-01-12T21:21:00.000-06:00

From Israel National News (INN):

LONDON MOSQUE DVD:
JEWS FACE MASS EXTERMINATION

A leading mosque in London is selling DVDs that proclaim the coming mass extermination of Jews around the world on a 'day of judgment.' It also attacks Christian groups and the United Nations.

The London Central Mosque, also known as Regent's Park Mosque, is 'the spiritual focal point for Muslims' throughout Great Britain, the European Jewish Press reported. It is also home to the Islamic Cultural Center, which educates Muslim children.

The report said that a British television station will air on Monday a documentary on Muslim extremism in Britain, and will report the selling of the DVD.

Forgive me if my priorities seem misplaced, but I believe there may be some more urgent and serious global problems facing us at this time that may be a tad more important than global warming...

(hat tip: Atlas Shrugs)

<>< TM

philosophy vs poetry

2007-01-11T23:52:00.000-06:00

Thanks to Plato, there has been a rather silly but very interesting controversy as to philosophy vs poetry. Plato started it by demeaning poets, especially Homer, for telling so many tall tales that had little to do with understanding and living in the "real" world. For Plato, wisdom could only be found through the pursuit of philosophy, not listening to the epic adventures of Achilles and Ulysses. Homer was for Plato what pop culture is for us today: a lot of fluff and goofiness to keep us entertained, nothing more. A kind of "opiate for the people" so to speak.

(For an interesting discussion of this topic, check out Harold Bloom's book "Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?")

Yet Plato's disciple Aristotle certainly didn't seem to view poetry as a bad thing, not even the epic poet Homer. Aristotle even went so far as to lay down some ground rules as to what a really good poem should be like, but there is no suggestion from Aristotle that poetry had anything to do with the pursuit of wisdom. To him, it was just a neat little art form, not much more.

But here's the question: what is the best possible source of wisdom, poetry or philosophy? Is it right for philosophers to ignore or even despise poetry, or is the wisdom they are seeking right there in Homer, Shakespeare and Whitman?

For me personally, I think it is rather obvious that the best practical wisdom and insight comes from poetry, not Plato and Aristotle. If you ever have a hard time getting to sleep, just pick up "the complete works of Aristotle" sometime and wade through that. You'll be asleep within four pages, guaranteed.

But if you want something with a bit of action to it, get Robert Fagle's translation of Homer's Iliad. Yeah, the Iliad has it's dry spots, but starts out with a bang, and there is a deep wisdom to Homer that Socrates, Plato and many others simply do not appreciate.

Why is poetry a better source of wisdom than philosophic texts? Because ever since Plato and Aristotle, philosophy has limited itself to that which can be understood through reason alone, like math, logic, and those sort of things. Lately, a rational empiricist approach to science has left us even more alienated, along with the rise of militant atheism in the 19th century. There was never much interest in emotions or feelings, rather emotions were thought to be the antithesis of good philosophy (perhaps with the exception of "love" --but love can be an attitude as well as a feeling). The culmination of this sort of "dissing" of emotions can be found in the fictional person of Mr. Spock of Star Trek fame.

Homer, on the other hand, begins his huge epic poem Iliad with the 'rage of Achilles'. It is emotional from the very first words, and cares little about finding out the secrets of the physical world, and is much more interested in delving into the secrets and the darkness in men's hearts.

The same can be said for the great epic poem of the Indian/Hindu tradition, the Bhagavad Gita, where prince Arjuna in goaded into action by Lord Krishna (the avatar of God). The focus of the Gita is not on the secrets of the physical world, but the secrets of existence itself, and our relation to our own existence. It is much closer to the Iliad than it is to Plato's dialogs, and takes emotions and feelings quite seriously, if only so that one can transcend them, into a higher realm of being.

But those texts that are the most honest and the most "down-to-earth" when it comes to emotions, are the books of the Christian/Hebrew Bible. Unlike Plato and even the Gita, emotions are never downplayed or made to be irrelevant, but are celebrated, commended, and even condemned. The most emotional character of them all, especially in the Hebrew writings, is that of God himself! While he's mostly (and inaccurately) remembered for his anger, it must be contrasted with his love and concern for his people, and those of other nations as well. He is a loving God who gets angry when is love is spurned, not an angry God who demands to be loved. When God gets the most angry, it is often due when the Israelites get caught up in the typical concerns of life: getting rich, getting along with others, making a name for yourself, meaningless religious rituals, and that sort of stuff, and by doing so, they begin mistreating the poor, the widows, the homeless orphans. That's the behavior that God gets most angry with: selfishness. Just read the first chapter of the book of Isaiah to get a taste of it.

Many of the great biblical books and biblical passages are poetry. The exception is the first five books of Moses, which can sometimes be as dry and boring as reading a meatloaf recipe, but some of the greatest stories and insights come from those first five books as well, and there are parts which certainly seem much more poetic than narrative. I would go so far as to say that the first chapters of Genesis are more of a poem, and an epic poem at that, than a literal creation account given my an impartial observer. Those first few chapters of Genesis are also a source of deep wisdom, for those who can contemplate it's depths.

I have come to the conclusion (and in complete agreement with Harold Bloom) that in order for one to be truly wise, to really have understanding, one must know and understand poetry. You can get by without reading Aristotle, Aquinas, and Kant, but you will not be wise without knowing the Iliad, King Lear, and Leaves of Grass. But more importantly, you must come to know the great poetry of the Bible, especially Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon. These biblical poems are not always that easy to read, nor understand, but still they sit at the very crux of western civilization, even more so than Homer or Virgil. (I know there are classics professors who would scoff at this, but it is my humble opinion anyways.) Homer and Virgil you can do without, (just rent "Troy" instead) but those three books of the Hebrew cannot, not if wisdom is your desire. After that, then read the Greeks, Romans, and Indians. Or better yet: Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel and Ezekiel. And then Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and James.

Biblical poems are not the end of wisdom, but they are a great beginning.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of Wisdom..."
(Psalm 111:10)

<>< TM

the wise one speaks!

2007-01-11T23:39:00.000-06:00

they did the same thing to Jesus and Socrates...

(hat tip: Get Religion)

<>< TM

doomsday thoughts

2007-01-11T23:26:00.000-06:00

As if we didn't have enough to be terrified about, Pamela at the Atlas Shrugs blog has posted a PSA for a group called the Lifeboat Foundation. Here's the post: Atlas Shrugs: Doomsday Thoughts

The cause: we need to take a stance against the "religion of science" ideology, and they are right to fear this.

It would be easy to laugh this off as some sort of crackpot lunatic fringe movement, but I can tell you from my own experiences and reading that this problem is not being exaggerated. The doomsday scenario is not unrealistic in the least, though somewhat improbable.

Compared to the non-existant threat of global warming, the 'religion of science' ideology is something to be truly concerned about.

File this one away for later reference. I encourage you to do your own research on this subject...

Science threw ethics out the window some time ago, and now it's all about fame, money and power. Michael Chrichton, in his various books, has been warning us about this for many decades. The result: as helpful as science has been to us, it is about to turn a very dark and menacing corner that will effect us in negative ways that most of us cannot even comprehend.

Be afraid...be very afraid. I know I am.

<>< TM

don't mess with the bunny

2007-01-10T00:00:00.000-06:00

...we need to send this dude to Iraq...

tigger attacks!!!

2007-01-09T22:49:00.000-06:00

Tigger Punching/hitting Kid at Disney World

Get 'em Tigger!!! That little Jerry Jr. has PUNK written all over him...

<>< TM

2006 Department 56 Christmas Display

2007-01-07T19:14:00.000-06:00

The careful observer might notice some of the gifts I asked Santa for make an appearance in this video...watch carefully!

<>< TM

theodicy's poetry corner

2007-01-07T18:31:00.000-06:00

Haven't had a poetry corner in a while, so it's time, once again, to bring high literature to the readers of the THEODICY blog.

For today's guest poet, we have that great bard from the Land of Lincoln: Carl Sandburg.

Fog

The fog comes
on little cat feet.

It sits looking
over harbor and city
on silent haunches
then moves on.

<>< TM

a theodicy for natural evil

2007-01-07T18:23:00.000-06:00

Any an excellent article about the problem of evil from the Weblog of a Christian philosophy student

"There are three facts about the world that I think we, as Christians and/or philosophers can be fairly sure about, and that these facts combined together, when understood properly mean that the problem of evil is not a significant one. The problem of evil, by the way, being understood essentially in this way:

1. If God is all loving, he would desire to prevent evil.
2. If God is all powerful, he would be able to prevent evil.
3. If God is all knowing, he would know how to prevent evil.
4. Evil exists.
5. God does not exist (by modus tollens.)

Although at a glance this argument seems to be a strong one, it is not deductively valid."

Read the entire article here.

(hat tip: metacrock's blog)

<>< TM

this is tom jones...

2007-01-07T02:03:00.000-06:00

Thanks to the Anchoress I've spent too many late nights having all sorts of fun over at YouTube checking out their collection of Tom Jones videos.

Tom Jones was a HUGELY popular singer/performer from the mid 60's to the early 70's. He's still with us and still performing, but not quite as well known as other pop stars from that era. But when he was big, he was REALLY big, including his own TV show: "This is Tom Jones." (1969-1971)

Many of the Tom Jones clips are not able to be embedded into a blog like so many other YouTube videos, so I'm providing the dear readers of this blog a list of the best Tom Jones videos. If you can only watch one, check out What I'd Say as performed on his TV show. Be advised that the videos listed here span a time frame of over 30 years of his career!

Tom Jones: What I'd Say
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV17kdJOCqI

Tom Jones: Soul Man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqQGD_1YSEA

Tom Jones: RESPECT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5aAnHyIRtQ

Tom Jones: She's a Lady (one of his own hit songs)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ME8Hw3Tg-U

Tom Jones: Long Tall Sally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqs10uMNVag

Tom Jones: KISS (Yes, this is the song made famous by PRINCE!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUpfAFAafio

Tom Jones: Moma Told Me Not To Come
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zre_Bf1B_xE

Tom Jones: Take Me to the River
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm4eB44tcvw

Tom Jones: Resurrection Shuffle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayL2QI2UnxU

Tom Jones: It's Not Unusual (This is Tom Jones' greatest hit)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2t-A6Euxro

And a couple of bonus videos from the Fresh Prince of Bel Aire TV show that feature Carlton dancing to Tom Jones' 'It's Not Unusual.'

Fresh Prince: The Carlton Dance I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS1cLOIxsQ8

Fresh Prince: The Carlton Dance II
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7hHKZeoL0U

<>< TM

P. J. O'Rourke on why they fight

2007-01-07T01:40:00.000-06:00

Another excellent piece from the pages of the Wall Street Journal, this time a quote from journalist P.J. O'Rourke. The context is the problem of the ongoing war in Iraq:

"I have no idea if some societies, anthropologically speaking, aren't really suited for democracy. I don't think that's true. But there certainly are societies that just love to fight. Northern Ireland, for instance. You couldn't stop that problem because they were having fun--they were really, really enjoying themselves. It would still be going on full-force today if the sons of bitches hadn't accidentally gotten rich. What happened was, more and more people started getting cars, and television sets, and got some vacation time down in Spain, and it wasn't that they wanted to stop fighting and killing each other and being lunatics, but they got busy and forgot.

"So our job," he says, "is to make the Iraqis get busy and forget. 'You know, I meant to kill all those other people but, well, jeez, I had to get the kids off to school, the car was filthy and I had to take it down to the car wash, the dog got sick on the rug. Killing all those Shiites is still on my to-do list . . .' " Mr. O'Rourke argues we are well on our way to creating "Weimar Iraq"--a grave phrase--and concludes, mordantly, "I'm so glad the problem is above my pay-grade."

He's right...we are creating a Weimar Iraq. That's not a happy thought.

Read the entire interview with P.J. O'Rourke.

<>< TM

honey, they shrunk the Wall Street Journal...

2007-01-05T21:08:00.000-06:00

One of the most amazing experiences I've had already this new year, is the new Wall Street Journal print edition: they made it smaller.

It's about three inches narrower -- enough to eliminate one of the traditional columns.

But they have not shrunk the quality, as a matter of fact, the paper is just as informative as it ever has been, perhaps even more so.

Some interesting articles about the new WSJ:

Dow Jones: press release about the changes
Advertising Age: Why the new 'Wall Street Journal' works
Huntington News: Small Street Journal
Sun-Times / AP: Wall Street Journal unveils new, narrower design

<>< TM

...speaking of the Wall Street Journal....

2007-01-05T20:53:00.000-06:00

There have been some excellent op-eds in the Wall Street Journal lately. Often these go unnoticed by many, so as a service to the readers of this blog, I have highlighted a few that have appeared within the past week to give you an idea as to the range of ideas expressed in the Journal's editorial pages.

No subscription or login is necessary for these articles, they are provided "free of charge" by the WSJ to the public at large.

DYNAMIC IDEAS FOR IRAQ
Some excellent and pragmatic ideas for helping Iraq avoid a total meltdown.

WITHOUT GOD, GALL IS PERMITTED
"Modern atheists have no new arguments, and they lack their forebears' charm."

REVIVING JUDAISM
Taking a page out of modern consulting to increase the ranks of the faithful

WHAT THE CONGRESS CAN DO FOR AMERICA
"Let them say of these next two years: We used our time well."
Yes, even President Bush writes op-ed's for the Journal...

SO, SADDAM IS DEAD...
But the way of the world remains Saddam's.
An excellent piece from Mark Bowden, author of Blackhawk Down, on what to expect in Iraq, and how it effects our ability to bring peace and saftey to that country.

LESSONS OF VIETNAM
How to avoid a repeat, and why it's crucial to do so.
Amazingly, the Democrats actually want the Iraq war to be another "Vietnam" Here's an editorial that gives some advice as to how that can be prevented.

GENTLEMEN, START YOUR PLUG-INS
How does 500 miles a gallon sound to you?
Excellent, practical ideas about how American can obtain energy independence in a relatively quick fashion.

See what you have been missing?

<>< TM

The Journey is the Destination II: Chicago to New York

2007-01-05T01:57:00.000-06:00

Having done this trip, this YouTube video brought back memories...

not a good beginning...

2007-01-04T21:44:00.000-06:00

From today's Washington Times: Pelosi ready to make history as new speaker

"After calling herself 'the most powerful woman in America,' Mrs. Pelosi flexed her right muscle like a weight lifter to much applause at an event yesterday titled a 'women's tea.'

'All right, let's hear it for the power,' she screamed as the jubilant applause continued.

When Mrs. Pelosi tried leaving the podium, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Connecticut Democrat, asked her to stay.

'There is so much love and warmth that's in this room today and that's because of the new speaker,' Mrs. DeLauro said. 'And that tells you about what the future is all about in the House of Representatives.' "

Oh yes, it certainly does tell us the future of the House in the hands of Pelosi: it's been handed over to a power hungry wench. I can't even imagine the previous most powerful woman in America, Condi Rice, doing anything that stupid. But then the Democratic leadership has never been accused of being intelligent nor tactful.

Lord have mercy; God have mercy...

(hat tip: Atlas Shrugs)

<>< TM

the end of many births

2007-01-04T01:12:00.000-06:00

"It is only at the end of many births, the man of wisdom surrenders to Me, realizing that Vasudeva is all. But it is very rare to come across such great souls."
[Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 7 Verse 19]

This is a quote from the famous Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita.

"Vasudeva" is the father of Krishna, the avatar of God.

"many births" refers to reincarnation.

"end of many births" refers to the eventual realization of the knowledge of the presence of God, hence a person no longer has to go through the cycles of reincarnation. (i.e. "enlightenment")

For later reference....

<>< TM

we're all gonna die!

2007-01-03T22:17:00.000-06:00

...well, of course we are, but not from global warming.

There was an interesting news blurb about the newly threatened polar bear, and how the horrendously evil GLOBAL WARMING conspiracy of Karl Rove and George Bush will wipe all the cute, cuddly arctic bears off the face of the earth.

The only problem is that the polar bear population has been rapidly expanding during the past forty years, and the population, as far as can be determined, is at an all-time historic high. (source: 1/3/07 Wall Street Journal) Also check out this report from Fox News.

Other sources estimate that the polar bear population has stablized at approximately 25,000 worldwide. There has been no noticeable decrease in the worldwide polar bear population. (source: animalinfo.org) While the bear population in an around the Hudson Bay area of Canada is decreasing, the population of bears nearer the Arctic Ocean shows every sign of increasing. Remember that the Hudson Bay bears are in the extreme southern range of the polar bear.

This polar bear scare is yet another example highlighting the irrational exuberance of the global warming religious, and how they completely ignore the science that they claim as their savior, in favor of the junk science that props up their religious beliefs.

The issue here is not the polar bear, it is global warming. The idea behind the "threatened" existence of the polar bear is that they are ALL GOING TO DIE because the Arctic sea ice is currently at a lower level than in the recent past. Of course this does not mean that there is no sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, just that there is less than "normal." (i.e. the past 30 or 40 years or so...) As usual, El Nino gets the blame for this, combined with a recent warming trend in general.

Well, doesn't the reduction in sea ice prove that GLOBAL WARMING is true? Well, no. It proves that there has been a general worldwide warming trend, caused by known, non-human caused natural phenomena, but there is nothing to suggest that this warming trend will continue ad infinitum as the Al Gores of this world firmly believe. The best scientific evidence demonstrates that the earth goes through 1,500 year cycles of cooling and heating, and most scientists agree that we may be in one of those warming trends. (check this out too.)

It is well known by scientists that the earth has been a far, far warmer place than it is now, so warm that in fact there were forests and plant life spread throughout Antarctica. This is long, long before the first Chevy Suburban showed up. It is also believed that the default condition of the earth's climate is actually at an average global temperature much warmer than anything we are currently experiencing. In other words, we are still coming out of an ice age...hence global warming is true to a certain extent, but not due to American's driving SUV's. For a period of a mere 220 MILLION YEARS the average global temperature was much warmer than it is now--all the way from the Triassic to the Pliocene. It is simply the natural state of the earth's climate to be warm, from a geological perspective. (And no, dinosaurs do not count as prehistoric SUV's.)

But there is no scientific data to suggest that the reduction in sea ice has impacted the polar bears negatively, if at all. Polar bears only need sea ice for denning purposes, not hunting or feeding. Those who have monitored and studied polar bear activity show conclusively that bears prefer the boundary area between the pack ice and the open sea, as they need access to open water in order to survive, and normally stay away from areas that are completely iced over.

It is also known that polar bears will den on land as well as pack ice, hence even if the pack ice should completely disappear, polar bears certainly will not...at least not any time soon...

So feel free to keep driving that Suburban in peace...you're not responsible for melting the polar ice caps and killing all the polar bears after all.

<>< TM

in praise of: metacrock's blog

2007-01-03T21:30:00.000-06:00

In my quest to find excellent resources of theological and philosophical discourse here in cyberspace, I happened upon an excellent little site entitled metacrock's blog (a pun on metacritic perhaps?) hosted by J.L. Hinman. It is an excellent resource for those interested in apologetics: the defense of the Christian faith.

Hinman's superbly written articles are sure to supply much needed cranial stimulation, especially the most recent: "brain chemistry and the presence of God". J.L. evens writes about THEODICY ...for example:

"Now atheists hate the repair to mystery, they see it as a cop out. Ordinarily I have to agree with them. As a former atheist that is one thing that drove me up the wall when I would argue with Christians, every time you get them in a corner they try to get out by repairing to mystery; no one knows the mind of God. I don't think what I'm saying here is that, because I'm not saying we can use this mystery to close down any sort of questioning about theodicy. I'm just saying that the true reasons for it are not something we can ever really know in words; although perhaps we can know it in mystical union with God."

from the article: Waiting for Godot on the Silentest Night of the Year

If you wish to sharpen your apologetic skills, visit metacrock's blog immediately...you wont' be sorry.

<>< TM

the children of hollywood’s deformed imagination

2007-01-03T21:27:00.000-06:00

Want to go see the new film entitled "Children of Men?" Read Thomas Hibb's review first.

Philosophers make great film reviewers.

<>< TM