Escaping Reality

Today, I really had this brilliant idea. I decided I wanted to escape reality. While there are the worldy answers of smoking, drinking, and all those other teen problems, I wanted to find something that wasn't detrimental to my health. I don't know what to do, but for so much of the time it seems like I'm fighting to find a solution for whatever is wrong.



I've figured out that there really is no way to escape reality. Every single way can harm you in some way. Please comment if you know a way to "safely" escape reality because I don't. Now, this isn't to scare you or think that I'm a druggie or something, because that is as far from the truth as you can get. I am a strong Christian and wish to find someway to deal with the issues of teen-dom. I probably sound like I'm trying to get everyone to feel sorry for me, and that isn't the thing either.



I just want to warn everyone that escaping reality is not an option! You might think "oh it would be just once" but every one of us knows that isn't true, or each and every one of us would probably have tried. If we are talking about how to find a "high", then I could say there are ways to get high without anything bad. Like climbing high trees, riding rollercoasters etc. Unfortunately sometimes these good highs aren't enough. Well I guess I'm headed back to real life, and out of cyber life. Stay with God, and don't stray. Straying causes these problems.



Rhiannon

Music/Video Pirating

It's something that happens a lot today. But I'm not gonna lie - I'm not completely innocent myself. I used to use programs like Limewire and Bittorrent to download files off the P2P and Gnutella networks that I didn't own. But I deleted these, not just because of the law, but because of Christianity.

And that is a major factor of Christianity that many people tend not to recognize - it raises people beyond a legal standard to a moral one. And only if everyone followed that standard perfectly! But it was because we are never up to the proper standards that Jesus Christ died on the cross for us. And why is this even illegal or immoral, you're just getting it for free, "sharing"?

Well, you see, when you buy a CD, or a record, or a DVD or WHATEVER, you are buying one (1) ONE, that's right only uno, copy of certain rights towards that music. That's why music artists sell multiple CDs, because if music rights are being used at more than place then that is in violation of the law. You can put the music on your computer, or make a back up copy and store it away somewhere, as long as:

1) The music is not in possession of another individual.

2) The music is not being played simultaneously at multiple locations.

So, if it's illegal, if it's taking music from artists, and taking their art and making copies and giving them away, isn't that stealing their profits? The internet has DESTROYED the music industry! It's like what's happening to the auto industry and the huge problems in Detroit, Michigan right now. There is unfair competition from foreign countries with pricing and cutting wages is not what our country needs right now. The internet is the music industry's unfair competition, and when you download that .torrent file, you are helping destroy the artist's livelihood.

So, why aren't the programs and files illegal? THERE ARE LEGAL PURPOSES ... these programs were founded upon the basis of legal usage, like sharing a video without the viewing platform of YouTube. But that doesn't mean artist's work should be completely removed from P2P programs. If you have a tape, or a record, and there isn't exactly a way to put it on the computer (it won't run in your CD drive, even if you manage to stuff it in there), since you own the rights needed, you can download the music onto your computer with one of these programs. But remember, you should always keep the original vinyl/tape or whatever as proof of your rights.

Got Limewire? Cool. It's not illegal or immoral. But you can use it as that. So delete all your pirated, stolen files, and go out and buy the CD or the record. I usually prefer the record album because it has the best audio quality possible, but that's another discussion. And remember: people's livelihood is on the line. And as Jesus Christ looks upon you, as always, with love, let you show no sin in God's eyes,

Sincerely,

Ezra

24) On Purgatory

Purgatory is a rather (in my opinion) convenient concept, accepted by the Catholic church as a crucible of sorts before heaven is entered. The idea is that because nothing impure can enter heaven (Rev. 21:27) man must be first cleansed of his sinful nature. Purgatory is not recognized as an actual place, but rather a spiritual cleansing. The convenience of this notion is that it allows for an impure life followed by a cleansing outside of this life. Now, I am not saying that it is an absolutely terrible notion, and I hope that no one's faith would fundamentally change based on the existence of Purgatory. However, I am saying that it is a purely human notion and is not divinely revealed through the Bible. This leads to a further question of whether it should or should not be considered. If not accepted as absolute fact, I believe that it is an interesting enough notion to merit study. However, let us not allow the idea to overshadow other Christian ideas. The question of purgatory is open, but should not be overanalyzed.

23) On Suicide

“For to me, to live is Christ, but to die is gain... I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far. But it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body. (Philippians 1:21, 23b, 24 NIV) This notion, that dying is gain, is important to the Christian. Note also how Paul notes that suicide is inherently selfish. “It is more necessary for you” makes this point clear. However, I disagree with those Christians who say that suicide is an absolutely damning sin. I believe that in most cases those who choose to kill themselves are risking something terrible. However, I believe that it is the motive that God judges, rather than the sin. Therefore, in my opinion, a heroic sacrifice as in a war movie will not necessarily bring hell upon you, but an overdose after absolutely rejecting the Christ idea will. This is not a recommendation to commit suicide, but rather a simple questioning of the presuppositions involved. I would also like to point out that Christ himself could easily have avoided the cross (Due to his Roman citizenship), making his death rather close to suicide without him sinning.

22) On War and Peace

I always found the idea of peace interesting, to say the least. On its own, it is a perfectly good idea. However, when it spawns rebels and popular slogans, its value to the Christian ought to be questioned. “Give peace a chance!” Scream posters, remnants of the hippie movement. This idea of no war is not a bad one, but due to mans fallenness, war is necessary. Peace is fine, but the goal to be pursued is the life eternal of man, not life temporal. Even the Bible never attacks the notion of war and destruction. The Israelites waged several holy wars against surrounding tribes, and they were led by God. Even the phrase “love your enemies” does not say that one ought not to have enemies. As Christians, our enemies are those who would suppose that Christ never rose again. This does not mean that we should never speak to those who suppose this. Peace is biblical, as is war. What matters the most, though, are the spiritual battles for the souls of men.

21) On Church Involvement in Politics

Another source of disunity within the Church is found when Churches become worldly entities. One example of this was the Thomas Road Church in North Carolina. Its former pastor, Jerry Falwell, was well known for being a right wing mouthpiece. It is perfectly acceptable to be interested in politics, even as a Christian. It is our duty as citizens to care about our political system. However, it is not the job of Christianity to become the mouthpiece of any political ideal. When Christianity does become a religion that is concerned overly with this world, then it loses all value as a religion and the Church ought to be rejected. I feel a certain duty to mention that it is not simply the right wing that extolls its values through the Church. The LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered)movement also has churches that support the LGBT cause. Likewise also the Black power movement with Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The point is not what the church is supporting, but rather that it is supporting modern immorality and worrldly (rather than heavenly) ideas.

20) On Church Politics

The church has often faced internal conflict. From the first great schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches, to the Protestant reformation and even to today, the church has been divided in many ways. Many modern churches are even split over such minor “problems” as music! What has made the religion of love so disunified? The Evangelical Presbyterian Church has a logo that states, “In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love.” All I want to know is this: Why can't the Church practice this? I understand that there are doctrinal disagreements between different sects. The problem that I see is that churches take it beyond doctrine, and won't even come together with those of the same accord. The church must agree internally if it is to show the world the love of Christ. The finer points of the religion matter not, if there is no love. I personally believe that all Christians need to believe only one thing. “That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved (Rom. 10:9, NIV)

Live, Laugh, Love....LOVE

Love was the best thing in the world; before we started taking advantage of it. We have become out of touch with the meaning of love, and have definately taken God's love for granted. He sent His son to Earth to die so that we may be forgiven of our sins. Jesus paid the ultimate price, giving us the ultimate gift. But what do we do? Take it for granted, take advantage of it, and play around with it as if a new birthday gift. Love is not a bad thing, it never has been. But when you expect to love, things get bad-FAST. So many people think that love is the best thing ever, and it is. That is exactly why we need to treat it for what it's worth. Don't treat love like a teddy bear, that you can throw and it will still be fine. But rather treat it like glass, breakable.
For those of you "in love", I only have a few words. First, give him/her your all. Don't ever take the love you have for granted. If you do, you will let him/her slip through your fingers before you know what is going on. Love is like sand, when extremely careful you can hold it in your hands. But if you aren't paying attention it will slip through your hands. You can take that sand and wet it (compassion, care), making it hard and easier to hold onto. But eventually you will have to wet it again. So many people just do the bare minimum, thinking that is "all they need" and "he/she won't ever leave me". But that's where they go wrong. Just because we don't want to leave, or think that our life would be chaos without you, doesn't mean we are 110% happy with you. I honestly wish everyone would stop taking love for granted. What happened to the "love your neighbor as yourself, love your enemies" theology? How about your parents telling you that boys/girls had cooties? Quite honestly, they still do. Things never changed. Now, those "cooties" are STDs, pain, heartbreak, and things of the sort.

I miss the age when all we worried about was whether we were having Chocolate icecream or Vanilla and when getting in trouble meant eating a cookie out of the cookie jar!

The Holy Influence

“It seems that this all started when our government, in its infinite wisdom, took God out of our schools that taught us not to kill, not to hate, not to harm but to be kind, courteous and respectful.” –Robert Chmela of Elgin.As Robert Chmela said, after God was taken out of schools everything went downhill. According to heartofwisdom.com, after prayer removed in 1962, SAT scores dropped from the 970s to as low as 890, STDs more than doubled, and premarital sex raised from 0-25% in teens to 25-70%. American schools need the positive influence of God and Christianity.

God and religion are essential to school life for a variety of reasons-those of which include (but are not limited to) history, student behavior and expectations, and science.

“The definition of science shows that something is scientific only if it can be observed and verified. All must admit that it is impossible to prove scientifically any particular concept of origins, creationism or evolution. No human being was there in the beginning to observe and verify how matter and life came into existence.” – Pastor Kerwin Thiessen of Newton, Kansas.
No one knows what really happened when humans, the Earth, and the Universe were created. Therefore no one can prove these theories. The incapability to prove scientific theories such as evolution and the Big Bang Theory make them religion, not science due to the fact that religion is something that has to be believed without any real evidence. If schools teach these “religious ideas” then creationism should be taught! Many teachers make a conscious effort to not bias students’ opinions. But by not teaching creationism, teachers are biasing the students into believing in the evolution and the Big Bang Theory.

Hand-in-hand with science is history. In numerous instances, textbooks and historians have slighted history by leaving out the religion. From Jesus being born in that little stable in Bethlehem to not including President Roosevelt’s last four words after the attack on Pearl Harbor- so help us God-, people have been “changing history” and history classes to make it what Americans consider “politically correct”. Jesus walking the Earth has a big impact on history, and not one history teacher bothers to say a word about it. Even Buddhists acknowledge that Jesus walked the Earth, so who would it be offending anyways? Almost everyone accepts that Jesus walked Earth even if he/she isn’t Christian or Catholic. Jesus has taught people to love and accept each other as brothers and sisters. Where has that lesson gone? This world is in chaos and learning this one lesson and really taking it to heart would change the world for the better.

Students shouldn’t be allowed to take the Lord’s name in vain. It should be counted as swearing because it is against the Second Commandment and is usually used in a derogatory way. Also, purity codes should be taught in reproductive health because many students could do with that little warning about having sex outside of marriage. There are ways to teach reproductive health, going through what has to be gone through while weaving in God’s messages about sexual immorality and making sure your body is a holy temple for God. So many students don’t get that lesson at home-the lesson of keeping your body holy and not abusing it. Students might not get to know the true love and grace of God. Whether divorced parents, abuse, excessive moving, disease, or other situations, parents can overlook God’s simple promise of love, grace, and forgiveness. Students need to know God’s unconditional love.

On the other hand, public schools are for teaching the real-world definitions, theories and history; not religion and beliefs that may, or may not, be true. The separation of church and state is there for a reason. If someone wants to be taught creationism, go join a private school! Nothing is trying to stop students from praying on their own, or eliminate/change their beliefs.
“Contrary to the claims of opponents of church-state separation, public school students enjoy very broad rights to act in accordance with their religious values and to practice their religious beliefs while at school. From words of grace whispered quietly before a meal in a cafeteria to prayer groups gathering before school at the flagpole, every day all over the country, students engage in constitutionally protected religious expression on public school grounds.” –A writer for ADL.
America is a free country and Buddhists, Muslims, Jewish, and any other students should be able to go to a public school without the pressure to become Christian due to peers, teachers, and class curriculums. No one likes bullying or peer pressure and adding a religion to school would just add to the bullying. If a child refused to believe what the teacher was teaching, if they fought back about a point of discussion, or if they imposed their own beliefs to other students, they would get heckled, harassed, and/or verbally/physically harmed by students for being “different”. This happens in today’s schools already-for some it’s a pretty large issue- so why add more?

But Jesus walking Earth is part of history, no one is getting forced to participate in anything religious, and the economy is really bad right now. Due to the economical state of the country, it is not possible in many cases for a mass quantity of Christians in public schools to join private schools. While it is true that having all the Christian students go to Christian schools would remove a large amount of the problem, the money just isn’t there to support that type of mass moving of students. 83% of American citizens claim that they are Christian, so what is the big problem? If so many people are Christian there shouldn’t be this uproar about God not being allowed in schools, and that it is unconstitutional. No one can say that the other 16%-a minute minority- is overpowering the millions of Christians. Besides, it’s not like students are being forced to do anything-so there goes another reason to fight the issue. The option would just be there to take Christian classes and pray at the beginning and end of the day. Teaching about Jesus walking the Earth and creationism isn’t much different than teaching Hitler or evolution because both Hitler and Jesus are known to be real. There are more written accounts that Jesus walked the Earth than that George Washington was president, yet no one ever doubted George Washington. Creationism and evolution are both religious not scientific due to the fact that no evidence is available to support either theory; no one was alive when humans were made so no one knows for sure what happened.

"A Congress that allows God to be banned from our schools while our schools can teach about cults, Hitler and even devil worship is wrong, out of touch, and needs some common sense." Rep. James Traficant, (D-OH) 1999-APR-27.Rep. Traficant has the right idea when he says schools teach about cults but not about God. School systems say they are for equality, non-biased environments, and curriculum accuracy. Well how can a school be unbiased when it doesn’t let God permeate history, yet it teaches its students about cults, slavery, Hitler, and war? Equality doesn’t come from showing only the bad. American society has become as pessimistic as to not show the good in history anymore. What about Noah’s Ark? Jesus’ birth? There are so many great times in history that schools don’t even bother with. Instead they go for the bad, the ugly, and the brutal. No wonder kids these days are so violent. Parents are blaming it all on the video games and television shows but they also need to be looking towards the schools for blame too. No way in the world can satanic worship be ok to teach if they can’t even spare 30 seconds for voluntary prayer!

For the health and well-being of the generation coming up right now, God and religion needs to permeate the school life once again. How do parents feel when their son/daughter comes home saying she is pregnant/he got his girlfriend pregnant? Unfortunately, in today’s world this is a pretty common conversation in a typical teen household. But when God was still present in schools, to come home and say that would be taken extremely harsh and potentially get you disowned for being a disgrace to the family name. All the rising teen pregnancies, STDs, divorces, unmarried couples living under the same roof, alcoholics, and many of today’s problems can be traced back to the same thing-taking God out of schools. If you were that parent, would you want to be living now or back when God was in schools?


Bibliography
http://heartofwisdom.com/blog/when-prayer-was-taken-out-of-school. When Prayer Was Taken Out Of Schools, January 13, 2009. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00E2D8143DF934A15751C0A9639C8B63. The Nation: The Faith Factor; Putting God Back Into American History, February 27, 2005.http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADH472.pdf. Family Life Education: Teaching Youth about Reproductive Health and HIV/AIDS, 2006. Thiessen, Kerwin. “Forum: Should Creationism Be Taught In Public Schools? Yes.” Direction Journal (online). Vol. 11 No. 4 (October 1982) http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/separation_cs_primer_schools.asp. Public Schools: Teaching Democracy Not Dogma, 1999. Knowles, William R. “Separation of Church and State.” Highland’s Today (online) (December 2007). Ingersoll, Robert. Colonel. 19th Century. Chmela, Robert. Elgin Graduate. February 28, 2008.Traficant, James. Representative. April 27, 2009.

Notes to Come

Here is a tenative list on notes to come. Please give feedback!
20) On Church Politics
21) On Church Involvement in Politics
22) On War and Peace
23) On Suicide
24) On Purgatory
25) On Catholicism
26) On Social Justice
27) On Social Darwinism
28) On Self Denial Without Gnosticism
29) On Philosophy in General
30) On the Symptoms of a Godless Culture
31) On Martyrs
32) On Life and Death
33) On Legalism
34) On Relevant Fundamentalism
35) On Charity
36) On Calvinism
37) On Armenianism
38) On Democracy
39) On Communism
40) On Presuppositional Thought

19) On Faith and Science

Ever since the scientific revolution of the 1700s, faith and science have been at odds. The latter has claimed truth based on empirical reasoning, the church claiming truth on grounds of divine revelation. I propose that, although science will never wholeheartedly come to the church's aid, the church use scientific method to grant credibility to the Christian faith. Soren Kierkegaard did make an interesting point though, “One must choose to believe in God passionately and personally, not as a mere intellectual exercise.” Perhaps, in light of this, the church ought to slow rationalistic proofs of a divine creator, but instead should turn to the aspects of love in God, presupposing that he he is true. Whatever the church does choose to do, it must be kept releventally fundamental.

18) On Apathy

The second, and worse trap for a man to fall into is apathy. This evil is especially prevalent in theoretical existentialism. If man is without meaning, why ought he to do anything at all? Man cannot handle this idea for the most part, and those that truly did “get it” all committed suicide. Those who claim to “get it” are liars by mere fact of there life. But I digress. The problem with practical apathy is that it removes interest from a man's life. If there is nothing to do that is “interesting,” then man sits bored. I must say that is, in many ways, what brought about the idea of the social-networking websites. One apathy is worse than all others combined. That is, apathy towards God. This apathy is often evident, even in those who claim Christianity. Men don't care either because they are already saved or because there is no God. Apathy in the first is acceptable, as the man is simply lost. However, the second form of apathy is a heresy that is far too simple to fall into. This relates directly to 1 Corinthians 5, as the apathy shown creates an apostasy and immorality within the church.

17) On Extremism

There are two major problems that man can face in day to day living. These are apathy and extremism. They are opposites, but neither is healthy, just as a drug cannot work correctly in too large or too small a quantity. The problem in the extreme end is one that is rather difficult to foresee, namely an alienation of those who do not obsess also over the same idea. Although God warrants out absolute attention, taking it to the point that extremist Muslims do in their worship is problematic. I will confess that I know very few people who are extremist Christians. I should mention that extremism is not wrong in and of itself. However, as mentioned before, it places a barrier between a man and society. Therefore, we must moderate our views and be temperate in everything. There is at time for everything under the sun (See Ecclesiastes 3).

16) On Reality

Reality is an odd concept that has been discussed by philosophers from the beginning of time. Some believe in absolute reality, while others argue that perception is all that is. One philosopher, George Berkeley, said that “To be is to be perceived,” meaning that existence comes about as a result of being noticed. The theologian ought to admire his next conclusion, that God perceives all, giving all things being. It is an interesting notion that Berkeley brings to the idea of reality. It is especially convenient (for the Christian) as it allows for some form of secular philosophy as well as an absolute reality. For the Christian, absolute reality is an important idea, especially if God sets the standard on the reality of objects. The Christian now has an advantage over secular men when reality is questioned. The argument Berkeley uses allows for absolutes, as does a normal man's argument for absolutism outside of God. Thanks to Berkeley, the Christian can breathe easily in a discussion of the reality of something.

15) On God's Love and Justice

Many people outside (and even some inside) the church wonder how God can be both loving and just. Several point out that God punished most sins within the Old Testament with some form of eternal death. Others point out that “God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son...” Either way, very few will talk of a simultaneously loving and just God. However, God's immutability (unchangeingness) is perfect. Some have suggested that He is above justice, and his character is to love. I cannot really disagree with this, but the secular man will argue then the necessity of a hell. The point is a good one, forcing a return to God's sense of justice. Let us change our argument, by making Justice a character trait of God. If justice is a character trait of God, how can he love without violating this sense of justice? The answer is readily found in his son. C.S. Lewis brings up God's love in Mere Christianity as something that results from loving his son. Sacrifice one love for another, so that both may be loved... The how for this process is easily debatable within the church, but for now, an understanding that it does work is all that is necessary.

14) On the Sexuality of this Generation

Sexuality is clearly a problem for this generation. The pornography business has exploded with the advent of the internet. The problem, man's natural lust, has existed since the beginning of time. However, the problem seems to be more evident in our time, most likely due to the rapid transfer of information. The problem with the new sexuality created by the technological propagation of sexual materials, is that it is a very false sexuality. Romans one says that “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie” (NIV). In much the same way, the true sexuality has been perverted into a very evil thing. True sexuality (within marriage) is meant to be a beautiful thing, pleasing to God. Instead, men behave as animals, freely giving only physical (as opposed to emotional, spiritual, and mental) sexuality. This leads to a detachment of sex from sexuality, which in turn leads to a carnal man. This carnal man is a problem to the Christian, as it returns to the existentialist idea of one life, and later to hedonism. This may suffice for the outside world, but if the carnal man also claims to be a Christian, than he must be expelled from the Church (see 1 Corinthians 5). The best way to summarize this is that carnal man wants to corrupt the church also, or at least the individual Christian. The Church must do all that it can to prevent man's decline into such a state as this.

13) On Existentialism, Pessimism, and Nihilism

In my sixth note, I only mentioned three “base” philosophies. However, it is possible to go further philosophically than I have. The three philosophies mentioned all have a root of sorts within the ideas of existentialism, nihilism, and pessimism. All three of these are essentially the same, and will be treated as such (for our purposes). The best way to quickly define these ideas is to say that they result in realization of meaninglessness. “We're born, we live, we die” is the essential truth of these philosophies. This is fair enough, and true if there is no God. This purposelessness is exactly the reason I am not an existentialist. It amounts to nothing (see the book of Ecclesiastes for a biblical perspective on this), no matter how hard humans try. My note on Nietzsche discusses his ideas further, but whoever is an existentialist will surely have much explaining to do to his Creator in the divine judgment seat.

12) On the Ecclesiastical Idea

In reading the book of Ecclesiastes, written by King Solomon, I have come to see, with history as my guide, that his idea of meaninglessness is true. This is most notable in existentialist thought. The meaninglessness of everything is clear in both Ecclesiastical thought and the existentialism of such thinkers as Nietzsche and Sartre. The idea of the book is best summed up as meaninglessness in everything but God. The best phrase within the 12 chapters is “Under the sun,” referring to everything temporal (God being over or transcending the sun). With this in mind, Ecclesiastes is essentially (in my opinion) the most optimistic existentialism possible, stating that all temporal things are worthless unless they are enjoyed in light of God's existence. Therefore, the eternal makes the temporal more beautiful and worthwhile, rather than diminishing it. This is an interesting notion, this “realism within God,” that allows us to believe in a most wondrous heaven and still enjoy this earth.

11) On the Problem of a Basically Good Man

This philosophical idea of a basically good man was addressed in my ninth note as a misconception. It was suggested that I elaborate on that problem. The biggest part of the idea is the reason why basically good man is a problem. This idea is a problem for mostly theological reasons, but also shows itself within practical reasoning, also. Biblically speaking, man is not good because of original sin. Adam ate of the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In doing so, he violated God's law. “In fact, sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4, NIV). This statement means that by breaking any law, especially that of God, we sin. Everyone has violated some law of God, thereby sinning (Jesus even discusses sin in thinking). Another theological conflict arises in the sacrifice of Christ. If man were good, why would God need to send a perfect man (Christ) to die so that heaven (which nothing imperfect can enter, see Rev. 21:27) may be accessible to all? The result of looking at the problem in this way is either 1) Man is good and can enter heaven of his own accord or 2) Man is basically evil and needs the redemption in the blood of Christ to enter heaven or 3) There is no ultimate good, evil, or God, thereby eliminating the need to pass judgment on man. All three have some merit and a following, but the best support for my argument against the first conclusion is man's actual behavior. Man acts against the social morality, therefore sinning and becoming evil. This idea could be further exemplified, but I believe that the reader can search for more himself, if he is so inclined.

Logic in Love?

Such an interesting word. Why would they indicate such a complex pattern of physiology with a four-letter term while simple understandings are demonstrated through words such as 'electroencephalograph'? It is quite a wonder. Maybe people don't understand what they are talking about when they say this word.

Quite often it is said, "hate is a strong word." But I ask you, have you ever heard anyone say that love is a strong word? They are opposites on the spectrum, so they must be of equal value from the 'middle', or not hating, not loving. So what does this really mean, how can we grasp logically the understanding of love?

The common definition of love is the liking of two bodies. But it is through such that real effects take place. It somehow changes the way people look and think about things, through chemical reactions of some sort. Such a four-lettered word can easily change, for benefit or for destruction, the sensibility of an individual.

Without, does sensibility yet still differ? Doesn't the mind crave for this chemical reaction through the process of released hormones? And doesn't that affect the ways we feel, think, and react?

From a logical standpoint, love makes no sense. Emotions are not logical. But they are what make us human. As Spock points out in Star Trek, "Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans." Love, although can be explained through logic, can not be understood by logic. And if we do not learn to accept this part of ourselves, it will be to our ultimate demise.

Love, as itself, cannot harm anything, but make it better only; however, when it charges at negative things, like hate or dislike, it is not always for the betterment of people. It can be destructive if it is unwanted by an individual and hated by another, but it could be ecstasy and a ceremony of great joining if accepted.

So then, if we want a world of love and no regret for loving, maybe we aught to stop hating love and people who love, and embrace them as our own. But when we have become deceased, all of us, will it really matter? Will people five hundred years after our expiration date really care if we hated someone or loved them to death? No. So then, what is the point of love?

Love has a single point. The pleasure that it gives to two individuals. And if two are in love, who is anyone to say it is wrong! It is their lives, their decisions! And those who mock will probably go back to their hate filled lives with their eyes closed not really getting this. What a bowl of nonsense it is, hating love! If there was no hate to counter love, there would be no negativeness through showing the emotion, just pure joy throughout the world. In the words of John Lennon, "Imagine all the people, living life in peace ... you may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope someday you will join us, and the world will be as one." And, if only we could all love and be as one with each other.

Love? It's just a word. But in that word is a dream. A dream of a perfect society. And I hope that one day we could all be as one benefit under that name.

10) On Love

Love is a rather abstract concept, and is defined by everyone differently. Therefore, I must define love for the reader. Love is the willful act of putting someone else's interests before one's own. Therefore, one can love without liking, or vice versa. Love is, most importantly, NOT a feeling. The risk in my defining of love is that the Bible uses the word frequently. My definition ought not to be assumed as the biblical definition. The reason love is important though, is obvious by a quick glane at the gospels. We are called to love others and God. God loves us enough to send his son. This love is, I believe, agape. Agape is the Greek word for love in the devotional sense, which I am trying to describe. Christian love can also be called charity, according to C. S. Lewis, but that is an even more confusing words than love.

9) On the Problems of "Social Morality" and the Hippie Movement

I owe my basis for the following thoughts to C.S. Lewis, in his book Mere Christianity. The problem with placing trust in society is the assumption that man is basically good. Man, being evil, cannot truly desire to help others. He is always out for him self, in some way or another. The hippie movement of the '60s and '70s did not realize this, and believed that the key was love and peace. The Christian realizes this problem, and sees the solution to society in God. No matter how wonderful society is, individuals will bring that down. Conversely, the individual can be destroyed by culture. The problem with humanity is the belief that everything is okay, and that man is basically good. There is a problem with this world, and it is sin.

8) On Man's Progression Into a Non-Christian World

I owe most of the content of this next note to Jerry Bangert and Beulah Beach. Society was relatively Christian up until the 1700's, when the scientific revolution took place. This led to Darwinian thought, and eventually the atheism of today. This problem began (credit to Schaeffer) with philosophy, then progressed through art, music, and general culture into the church. This philosophy, when it reaches the church, leads to an apostasy of sorts, and brings the general culture into the end times. This is mostly speculation on my part, but some things are quantitative. Most notably, fewer people claim to be Christian, as compared to the past. An uptick in atheists is notable, and this, despite its corresponding problems, offers a larger mission field for the Christian.

7) On the Consequences of "God is Dead"

Nietzsche was a crazed man, but he did reword several different ideas. Among these was his redefining of sin as "the will to power." But, as described in the last note, his boldest and most dangerous proclamation was that "God is Dead." This statement returns to the idea of my previously mentioned "Christian atheism." I ought to define this term so that a serious discussion of it can take place. A Christian atheist titles themself Christian, while acting no different from a total atheist. Those who go to church on Sundays, and then don't give a second thought to God for the rest of the week could most likely be called by this title. This atheism is more terrible than "full" atheism because it gives true Christians an undeserved reputation as no different from the average non-Christian. This is a dangerous road that eventually leads to a very distinctly non-Christian world. The actual progression from a Christian world to one that was not so will be the topic of my next note.

6) On Nietzschean Philosophy

For most readers, this note will hold little value. However, it is an important part of my thinking, so I saw fit to include it. Nietzsche was a rather odd Prussian man who lived in the late nineteenth century. He went insane, but before that, he proposed a rather interesting philosophy. His idea was that man ought to find purpose in destruction. His ideas absolutely denied God, and were very hedonistic in concept. Man's purpose was (according to the Christian term) sin. Thankfully, very few have adopted this ideal. There is no eternal hope, thus freeing man and unleashing hm on the temporal. This is a terrible thing, but also a look into sinful man's mind. Nietzsche did make one proclamation that ought to be fundamentally disturbing to Christians. "God is dead." Three words, but ultimately true in respect to the Christian atheistic philosophy. This idea is the ultimate sin, but has very subtle consequences, which I will discuss in my next note.

5) On Worldly Philosophies

The world contains many philosophies, but they all really have only two or three root philosophies. These ideas are Hedonism, Christian atheism, and Social Morality. Hedonism is an idea that, above all else, pleasure is to be seeked. It results in what is, frankly, a quite selfish philosophy. It literally is "whatever makes you feel good." Christian atheism is probably the most common (in the USA). It is the knowing that God is there, but the denial of him in practice. This is common among teenagers and adults, and due to not being in the spiritual world or the temporal, is quite honestly the most hopeless. The third, social morality, basically attempts to live a good life, and values society, or the "common good," above all else. This is a decent idea, but does not lead to real spiritual peace. However, for the non- Christian, it is the most reasonable, as it allows pleasure, but requires decency. Most people follow (whether they try to or not) the latter two philosophies. The real problem with both, however, is the lack of true purpose, which an independent man truly desires.

4) On Man's Inability to be a True Shadow of God

Man is clearly unable to be God. Man cannot even handle nuclear weapons well, let alone absolute power. It is clear in the rest of the universe that God has much more Love and Self Control than man, and, despite His self interest, is far less selfish. The Bible gives a rather clear illustration to the cause of this. "The Fall of Man" rather clearly displays that man's independence seperates him from a perfect God. Because God is the creator and sustainer, man is within God's power. When man defies this power, he sins. "In fact, sin is lawlessness," according to John the Apostle. Before man broke God's law, he was perfect, if not wholly God. Afterward, man was neither perfect nor whole. God offers to restore man's perfection through Christ, but this is rather inconvenient, leading to man accepting alternate philosophiew. I will discuss these ideas in my next note.

3) On the Personal God as the Christian God

I feel rather unqualified to write this. Many better men before me have attempted to show that the greatest force in the universe is the Christian God, but most of their proofs are rather long. Strobel wrote several books, C.S. Lewis spent several dialogues on it, and I know for a fact that more have tried this. However, I will try to keep this proof rather short. Man, created by a personal force, displays characteristics of this force, just as an artist's works makes the man behind it evident, in some way. Among these characteristics are: Independence, Love, and Self preservation, among others. God is far less mannish than man, but man is a shadow of God. To look at man is to look at God as "Through a glass, darkly." Therefore, mans personality is only a slight reflection of God's person, but it is as good a proof of the Christian God as any. The reasons for this reflection, a the implications, will be discussed in my next notes.

2) On God and Existence

As discussed in my last note, man clearly exists. Existence must have a source, according to observable science. I would like to note that the scientific non-spontaneous generation idea is a law of this univese, nothing larger( as far as we can tell). This is important to remember, because there is an ultimate, self creating force, but it is as large or larger than or univese. It could be our universe, or a larger force. Whatever it is, though, its existence affects us (we are the "final product" of this entity,if you will). Now, to borrow from Francis Schaeffer's ideas, it makes sense to say that man is a pesonal (social, individual, etc.) being. Nature is impersonal. Impersonality does not spawn personality, so two conclusions are left to man. We are either impersonal machines, or personal beings created by a personal force. This personal force is a god, as no other idea has yet been offered up. The force is necessarily the Christian God, but my next note will discuss this matter.

1) On Existence

A thought has recently come to my mind, that our universe is subject to laws. Humans follow a set of laws also, but the two that most trouble me are as follows: 1: The philosophical "Cogito ergo sum," the Greco-Roman "I think, therefore I am" and 2: The scientific "Something cannot come from nothing." Both cannot be simaltaneously true, as the first assumes existence, the other (when extrapolated), nonexistence. Now, as true science bases itself on observable phenomena, the first idea must be the true one. This state of existence must have a source however, which I will discuss in my next note.