Dungy Thanks Nation for Support
Colts Head Coach Tony Dungy briefly addressed the media Tuesday afternoon following services in Lutz, Fla., honoring his son, James Dungy:
"I'll start out by saying, 'Thank You,' for the love, the prayers and the support that we've received from the people of Tampa, the people of Indianapolis and the people all over the country. They've been very, very great and gracious to us in a time of grief for our family.
"We loved our son very much. He loved us. And we miss him terribly. But we also understand that we have some tremendous promises from God. God promises to be with us. He's with us in the great times. He's with us in the tough times. Our family will stand strong. The strength that we have in the Lord will allow us to get through this just as we get through times of victory.
"Our grief is great, but from our family, we just say, `Thank You' to everyone. We appreciate everybody who has touched his life, everybody who has been part of him growing up. James - was a good young man with a compassionate heart and we were glad to have him for 18 years.
"We're also glad that he accepted Christ as his savior so that God has him now for the rest of eternity.
Thank You."
Can anything be more painful than losing a child, especially in such a tragic manner. Mr. Dungy, head coach of the Indianapolis Colts, was able to affirm his on and offer thanks to God and the nation for support. This was a class act by a fine man in deep grief.
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Are Liberal Scholars Really Objective?
A friend, Bob Vincent, www.rbvincent.com recently sent me some materials from Anne Rice, the famous historical novelist. An atheist she came back to faith while researching the life of Jesus. "Author's Note,"Christ the Lord out of Egypt, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005, p. 320.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As I sat on the floor of my office surrounded by books about Sumer, Egypt, Rome, etc., and some skeptical material about Jesus that had come into my hands, I couldn't understand how these people had endured as the great people who they were. It was this mystery that drew me back to God. It set into motion the idea that there may in fact be God. And when that happened there grew in me for whatever reason an immense desire to return to the banquet table. In 1998 I went back to the Catholic Church.
But even then I had not closed in on the question of Jesus Christ and Christianity. I did read the Bible in a state of utter amazement at its variety, its poetry, its startling portraits of women, its inclusion of bizarre and often bloody and violent details. "When I was depressed, which was often, someone read the Bible to me, often literary translations of the New Testament--that is, translations by Richmond Lattimore that are wondrously literal and beautiful and revealing and that open the text anew.
In 2002 I put aside everything else and decided to focus entirely on answering the questions that had dogged me all my life. The decision came in July of that year. I had been reading the Bible constantly, reading parts of it out loud to my sister, and poring over the Tanach (Old Testament), and I decided that I would give myself utterly to the task of trying to understand Jesus himself and how Christianity emerged.
I wanted to write the life of Jesus Christ. I had known that years ago. But now I was ready. I was ready to do violence to my career. I wanted to write the book in the first person. Nothing else mattered. I consecrated the book to Christ.
I consecrated myself and my work to Christ. I didn't know exactly how I was going to do it.
Even then I did not know what my character of Jesus would be like.
I had taken in a lot of fashionable notions about Jesus that he'd been oversold, that the Gospels were "late" documents, that we really didn't know anything about him, that violence and quarreling marked the movement of Christianity from its start. I'd acquired many books on Jesus, and they filled the shelves of my office.
I have studied the New Testament period, and I continue to study. I read constantly, night and day. I have covered an enormous amount of skeptical criticism, violent arguments, and I have read voraciously in the primary sources of Philo and Josephus which I deeply enjoy.
Having started with the skeptical critics, those who take their cue from the earliest skeptical New Testament scholars of the Enlightenment, I expected to discover that their arguments would be frighteningly strong, and that Christianity was, at heart, a kind of fraud. I'd have to end up compartmentalizing my mind with faith in one part of it, and truth in another. And what would I write about my Jesus? I had no idea. But the prospects were interesting. Surely he was a liberal, married, had children, was a homosexual, and who knew what? But I must do my research before I wrote one word.
These skeptical scholars seemed so very sure of themselves. They built their books on certain assertions without even examining these assertions. How could they be wrong? The Jewish scholars presented their case with such care. Certainly Jesus was simply an observant Jew or a Hasid who got crucified. End of story.
I read and I read and I read. Sometimes I thought I was walking through the valley of the shadow of Death, as I read. But I went on, ready to risk everything. I had to know who Jesus was--that is, if anyone knew, I had to know what that person knew.
Now, I couldn't read the ancient languages, but as a scholar I can certainly follow the logic of an argument; I can check the footnotes, and the bibliographical references; I can go to the biblical text in English. I can check all the translations...
What gradually came clear to me was that many of the skeptical arguments--arguments that insisted most of the Gospels were suspect, for instance, or written too late to be eyewitness accounts--lacked coherence. They were not elegant. Arguments about Jesus himself were full of conjecture. Some books were no more than assumptions piled upon assumptions. Absurd conclusions were reached on the basis of little or no data at all.
In sum, the whole case for the nondivine Jesus who stumbled into Jerusalem and somehow got crucified by nobody and had nothing to do with the founding of Christianity and would be horrified by it if he knew about it--that whole picture which had floated in the liberal circles I frequented as an atheist for thirty years--that case was not made. Not only was it not made, I discovered in this field some of the worst and most biased scholarship I'd ever read.
I saw almost no skeptical scholarship that was convincing, and the Gospels, shredded by critics, lost all intensity when reconstructed by various theorists. They were in no way compelling when treated as composites and records of later "communities."
I was unconvinced by the wild postulations of those who claimed to be children of the Enlightenment. And I had also sensed something else. Many of these scholars, scholars who apparently devoted their life to New Testament scholarship, disliked Jesus Christ. Some pitied him as a hopeless failure. Others sneered at him, and some felt an outright contempt. This came between the lines of the books. This emerged in the personality of the texts.. I'd never come across this kind of emotion in any other field of research, at least not to this extent. It was puzzling.
The people who go into Elizabethan studies don't set out to prove that Queen Elizabeth I was a fool. They don't personally dislike her. They don't make snickering remarks about her, or spend their careers trying to pick apart her historical reputation.
They approach her in other ways. They don't even apply this sort of dislike or suspicion or contempt to other Elizabethan figures. If they do, the person is usually not the focus of the study. Occasionally a scholar studies a villain, yes. But even then, the author generally ends up arguing for the good points of a villain or for his or her place in history, or for some mitigating circumstance, that redeems the study itself People studying disasters in history may be highly critical of the rulers or the milieu at the time, yes. But in general scholars don't spend their lives in the company of historical figures whom they openly despise.
But there are New Testament scholars who detest and despise Jesus Christ. Of course, we all benefit from freedom in the academic community; we benefit from the enormous size of biblical studies today and the great range of contributions that are being made. I'm not arguing for censorship. But maybe I'm arguing for sensitivity--on the part of those who read these books. Maybe I'm arguing for a little wariness when it comes to the field in general. What looks like solid ground might not be solid ground at all.
Another point bothered me a great deal. All these skeptics insisted that the Gospels were late documents, that the prophesies in them had been written after the Fall of Jerusalem. But the more I read about the Fall of Jerusalem, the more I couldn't understand this. The Fall of Jerusalem was horrific, and involved an enormous and cataclysmic war, a war that went on and on for years in Palestine, followed by other revolts and persecutions, and punitive laws. As I read about this in the pages of S. G. F. Brandon, and in Josephus, I found myself amazed by the details of this appalling disaster in which the greatest Temple of the ancient world was forever destroyed.
I had never truly confronted these events before, never tried to comprehend them. And now I found it absolutely impossible that the Gospel writers could not have included the Fall of the Temple in their work had they written after it as critics insist. It simply didn't and doesn't make sense.
These Gospel writers were in a Judeo-Christian cult. That's what Christianity was. And the core story of Judaism has to do with redemption from Egypt, and redemption from Babylon. And before redemption from Babylon there was a Fall of Jerusalem in which the Jews were taken to Babylon. And here we have this horrible war. Would Christian writers not have written about it had they seen it? Would they not have seen in the Fall of Jerusalem some echo of the Babylonian conquest? Of course they would have. They were writing for Jews and Gentiles.
The way the skeptics put this issue aside, they simply assumed the Gospels were late documents because of these prophesies in the Gospels. This does not begin to convince.
Narnia is Here
Karen and I saw The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe this week and I enjoyed it a lot. You can go to Christianity Today Daily Newsletter [ctdirect-html@lists.christianitytoday.com] and get a Bible study on the film as well as read several reviews.
Beware of Free Credit Report.com Fraud
Last year I heard the false and misleading ads of Free Credit Report.com and filled out an e mail application for a free 30 day trial subscription. After discovering that the only thing free about this scam was the name I called and cancelled my subscription.
Despite an advertised money back guarantee, they refused to refund the $79.95 they had illegally taken from my credit card.
Just today I received a notice saying that the FTC had charged them with fraud and is requiring them to send my money back. I called and they said I would be reimbursed "In a few weeks."
Never, ever do business with this company.
Karen and I saw The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe this week and I enjoyed it a lot. You can go to Christianity Today Daily Newsletter [ctdirect-html@lists.christianitytoday.com] and get a Bible study on the film as well as read several reviews.
Beware of Free Credit Report.com Fraud
Last year I heard the false and misleading ads of Free Credit Report.com and filled out an e mail application for a free 30 day trial subscription. After discovering that the only thing free about this scam was the name I called and cancelled my subscription.
Despite an advertised money back guarantee, they refused to refund the $79.95 they had illegally taken from my credit card.
Just today I received a notice saying that the FTC had charged them with fraud and is requiring them to send my money back. I called and they said I would be reimbursed "In a few weeks."
Never, ever do business with this company.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
Our Family at Christmas 2005
The Matriarch, Hazel Guriel mother of Karen Sweeten (red coat) and Toni Smith (blue sweater) with David Knispel (left back) and Julia (front blue shirt) Jacob (red shirt) Tim (back white shirt) and Shelley Sweeten with Jack. Gary Sweeten far right.
Lily Knispel was sick and unavailable.
The Matriarch, Hazel Guriel mother of Karen Sweeten (red coat) and Toni Smith (blue sweater) with David Knispel (left back) and Julia (front blue shirt) Jacob (red shirt) Tim (back white shirt) and Shelley Sweeten with Jack. Gary Sweeten far right.
Lily Knispel was sick and unavailable.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Miracles do happen
By John JohnstonEnquirer staff writer
A petite woman sits on a bench, anxiously awaiting the arrival of a bus at the Greyhound terminal, downtown.
After 26 years of wishing for this Christmas, her wait is almost over.
She has green eyes and short blond hair. Her name is Joan Murrell. She is 55 and lives in Colerain Township.
She was Joan Murin when she went into labor on Christmas night, 1979.
She was 29 years old, unmarried, alone. She became pregnant, she says, when she was taken advantage of during a vulnerable time in her life.
For months she prayed about what to do with the baby. At first, she planned to keep it. Eventually, though, she felt God pointing her in a different direction. She wanted the child to be raised by two parents, not a single mother working two jobs. Placing the child for adoption, she decided, was the right thing to do.
It was not easy.
After an emergency C-section, mother and child remained in the hospital for several days. A doctor allowed her to hold and feed her baby. The infant would never remember those moments, but Joan wanted her to know she was loved.
On the day the private adoption was to be finalized, Joan nearly dissolved in tears. A nurse told her she could still change her mind. But she was wheeled outside the hospital doors, into the cold, to meet representatives of the adoptive parents.
The baby was wrapped in a blanket. She kissed her, again and again.
Then she handed her over.
Joan left the hospital with a macramé tree ornament. In the center was a small photo of her newborn daughter.
She has hung it on her Christmas tree each of the past 25 years.
Three years later, Joan met Fletcher Murrell. They have been married for 22 years.
They tried to start a family. Joan wanted two or three children. For eight years they tried. Fletcher checked out OK, but a doctor told Joan that she would need surgery to conceive. Even then, there were no guarantees.
They left it in God's hands.
Eventually, Murrell came to realize she would never have another child.
But she thought often of the one she had placed for adoption.
"I hoped and prayed that she had loving parents," she says.
Christmas and Mother's Day always were especially painful. As the years passed, Murrell thought of the milestones she was missing - her child riding a bike, celebrating birthdays, going on a first date. She wondered whether her daughter would ever try to find her.
"I hoped that I could see her one time before I died," she says.
Murrell didn't know it, but she could have bumped into her daughter in a grocery store. The girl and her adoptive parents lived only 10 minutes away until she was 11 years old.
Kristen Stiner moved from Cincinnati to Florida and then to Pennsylvania. She now lives in Meadville, Pa., and is studying to become a medical assistant. She began searching for her birth mother six years ago, when she was 19.
She had a great childhood and loving parents, she says. But she always felt "a huge void" - the result of not knowing where, and especially who, she had come from.
She posted her story on the Internet. She worked with databases that help adoptees locate birth parents. She even wrote to TV talk shows, hoping they'd have her on as a guest.
"Always a dead end," she says.
Last February, she called the Hamilton County Courthouse. Someone offered a tip: Try calling the attorney who represented the adoptive parents.
The attorney still practices law. He remembered the case. He gave Stiner the names of her birth parents.
Stiner couldn't find her birth mother, who by now had a different last name. But she found a phone number for her birth father, who'd had no contact with Joan for 25 years. He knew the name of the church Joan had attended back then. It's the same one she attends today: College Hill Presbyterian.
Murrell, a nurse's aide, had just come home last Feb. 22 when the receptionist from her church called. "I think you better sit down," the woman said. "I just had a young lady on the phone claiming to be your daughter."
Within minutes, Murrell was talking with Stiner. Both were in tears.
"She called me 'Mom.' I just never thought I would hear that word," Murrell says.
Or this one: Grandmother. Stiner, who is separated from her husband, has a daughter, Kara, age 5.
Since that day, Murrell and Stiner have talked frequently, asking and answering hundreds of questions. Murrell had worried that her daughter might be angry with her, but that has not been the case.
Stiner and her daughter came to Cincinnati for a two-week visit in July. Then they began looking forward to Christmas.
Tuesday afternoon at the bus terminal, Murrell is waiting at the wrong gate when a voice calls out. "Mom!"
Murrell turns, sees her daughter, and they embrace tightly. Then she hugs her red-haired granddaughter, who never stops smiling.
She can't wait to take them home. For 25 years, she wished and prayed and placed on her Christmas tree a macramé ornament with a photo of her newborn child.
The miracle, she says, is that her daughter is finally here to see it.
E-mail jjohnston@enquirer.com
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Miracles do happen
By John JohnstonEnquirer staff writer
A petite woman sits on a bench, anxiously awaiting the arrival of a bus at the Greyhound terminal, downtown.
After 26 years of wishing for this Christmas, her wait is almost over.
She has green eyes and short blond hair. Her name is Joan Murrell. She is 55 and lives in Colerain Township.
She was Joan Murin when she went into labor on Christmas night, 1979.
She was 29 years old, unmarried, alone. She became pregnant, she says, when she was taken advantage of during a vulnerable time in her life.
For months she prayed about what to do with the baby. At first, she planned to keep it. Eventually, though, she felt God pointing her in a different direction. She wanted the child to be raised by two parents, not a single mother working two jobs. Placing the child for adoption, she decided, was the right thing to do.
It was not easy.
After an emergency C-section, mother and child remained in the hospital for several days. A doctor allowed her to hold and feed her baby. The infant would never remember those moments, but Joan wanted her to know she was loved.
On the day the private adoption was to be finalized, Joan nearly dissolved in tears. A nurse told her she could still change her mind. But she was wheeled outside the hospital doors, into the cold, to meet representatives of the adoptive parents.
The baby was wrapped in a blanket. She kissed her, again and again.
Then she handed her over.
Joan left the hospital with a macramé tree ornament. In the center was a small photo of her newborn daughter.
She has hung it on her Christmas tree each of the past 25 years.
Three years later, Joan met Fletcher Murrell. They have been married for 22 years.
They tried to start a family. Joan wanted two or three children. For eight years they tried. Fletcher checked out OK, but a doctor told Joan that she would need surgery to conceive. Even then, there were no guarantees.
They left it in God's hands.
Eventually, Murrell came to realize she would never have another child.
But she thought often of the one she had placed for adoption.
"I hoped and prayed that she had loving parents," she says.
Christmas and Mother's Day always were especially painful. As the years passed, Murrell thought of the milestones she was missing - her child riding a bike, celebrating birthdays, going on a first date. She wondered whether her daughter would ever try to find her.
"I hoped that I could see her one time before I died," she says.
Murrell didn't know it, but she could have bumped into her daughter in a grocery store. The girl and her adoptive parents lived only 10 minutes away until she was 11 years old.
Kristen Stiner moved from Cincinnati to Florida and then to Pennsylvania. She now lives in Meadville, Pa., and is studying to become a medical assistant. She began searching for her birth mother six years ago, when she was 19.
She had a great childhood and loving parents, she says. But she always felt "a huge void" - the result of not knowing where, and especially who, she had come from.
She posted her story on the Internet. She worked with databases that help adoptees locate birth parents. She even wrote to TV talk shows, hoping they'd have her on as a guest.
"Always a dead end," she says.
Last February, she called the Hamilton County Courthouse. Someone offered a tip: Try calling the attorney who represented the adoptive parents.
The attorney still practices law. He remembered the case. He gave Stiner the names of her birth parents.
Stiner couldn't find her birth mother, who by now had a different last name. But she found a phone number for her birth father, who'd had no contact with Joan for 25 years. He knew the name of the church Joan had attended back then. It's the same one she attends today: College Hill Presbyterian.
Murrell, a nurse's aide, had just come home last Feb. 22 when the receptionist from her church called. "I think you better sit down," the woman said. "I just had a young lady on the phone claiming to be your daughter."
Within minutes, Murrell was talking with Stiner. Both were in tears.
"She called me 'Mom.' I just never thought I would hear that word," Murrell says.
Or this one: Grandmother. Stiner, who is separated from her husband, has a daughter, Kara, age 5.
Since that day, Murrell and Stiner have talked frequently, asking and answering hundreds of questions. Murrell had worried that her daughter might be angry with her, but that has not been the case.
Stiner and her daughter came to Cincinnati for a two-week visit in July. Then they began looking forward to Christmas.
Tuesday afternoon at the bus terminal, Murrell is waiting at the wrong gate when a voice calls out. "Mom!"
Murrell turns, sees her daughter, and they embrace tightly. Then she hugs her red-haired granddaughter, who never stops smiling.
She can't wait to take them home. For 25 years, she wished and prayed and placed on her Christmas tree a macramé ornament with a photo of her newborn child.
The miracle, she says, is that her daughter is finally here to see it.
E-mail jjohnston@enquirer.com
The Miracle of Birth and Re-Birth
After countless nights of sleeplessness and days of sorrow Joan and Kristin were finally reunited. Kristin had been looking for her mom for six years and finally traced her to the church that helped save her life almost 25 years ago.
This life is why we are pro-life. We are pro-Kristin and pro-Joan and pro-future.
We are pro-grand kids and pro marriage and pro-family.
After countless nights of sleeplessness and days of sorrow Joan and Kristin were finally reunited. Kristin had been looking for her mom for six years and finally traced her to the church that helped save her life almost 25 years ago.
This life is why we are pro-life. We are pro-Kristin and pro-Joan and pro-future.
We are pro-grand kids and pro marriage and pro-family.
Joan With New Grand Daughter Kara Stiner
Not only did Joan find her daughter, she also gained a beautiful new grand daughter.
When she decided to keep her baby despite emotional stresses, financial pressures and social embarrassments, Joan allowed a whole new generation of family to come into the world.
Not only did Joan find her daughter, she also gained a beautiful new grand daughter.
When she decided to keep her baby despite emotional stresses, financial pressures and social embarrassments, Joan allowed a whole new generation of family to come into the world.
Finally, We Meet Kristin and Kara
Karen and Gary, on the left, with Joan Murrel, her long lost daughter Kristin and daughter Kara.
Sometimes it takes a long time before we see the fruit of helping people in need. As the Bible says, Do not get weary while you are doing good things for people.
Because Joan decided to allow her pregnancy to go full term 25 years ago Kristin and Kara are alive and bringing joy into the world at Christmas.
Karen and Gary, on the left, with Joan Murrel, her long lost daughter Kristin and daughter Kara.
Sometimes it takes a long time before we see the fruit of helping people in need. As the Bible says, Do not get weary while you are doing good things for people.
Because Joan decided to allow her pregnancy to go full term 25 years ago Kristin and Kara are alive and bringing joy into the world at Christmas.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
A Christmas Miracle
Make sure you get a copy of the Cincinnati Enquirer this Sunday, December 25, Christmas Day. One of our dearest friends, Joan Murrel, has been selected to represent the best of God’s grace and miracle-working power at Christmas. I will not spoil your surprise by letting the cat out of the bag now but I do want you to buy a paper and read the story before you thank the Lord for His great works.
For all those on my Life Way Friends’ list who live overseas or out of state go to the web site of the Enquirer and read the story online.
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Make sure you get a copy of the Cincinnati Enquirer this Sunday, December 25, Christmas Day. One of our dearest friends, Joan Murrel, has been selected to represent the best of God’s grace and miracle-working power at Christmas. I will not spoil your surprise by letting the cat out of the bag now but I do want you to buy a paper and read the story before you thank the Lord for His great works.
For all those on my Life Way Friends’ list who live overseas or out of state go to the web site of the Enquirer and read the story online.
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
Monday, December 19, 2005
A Mother's Story
Each December, I vowed to make Christmas a calm and peaceful experience. I had cut back on nonessential obligations - extensive card writing, endless baking, decorating and even overspending. Yet, still, I found myself exhausted, unable to appreciate the precious family moments and of course, the true meaning of Christmas.
My son, Nicholas, was in kindergarten that year. It was an exciting season for a six year old. For weeks, he'd been memorizing songs for his school's Winter Pageant. I didn't have the heart to tell him I'd be working the night of the production. Unwilling to miss his shining moment, I spoke withhis teacher. She assured me there'd be a dress rehearsal the morning of the presentation. All Parents unable to attend that evening were welcome to come then. Fortunately, Nicholas seemed happy with the compromise.
So, the morning of the dress rehearsal, I filed in ten minutes early, found a spot on the cafeteria floor and sat down. Around the room, I saw several other parents quietly scampering to their seats. As I waited, the students were led into the room. Each class,accompanied by their teacher, sat cross-legged on the floor. Then, each group, oneby one, rose to perform their song.Because the public school system had long stoppedreferring to the holiday as Christmas, I didn't expect anything other than fun commercial entertainment - songs of reindeer, Santa Claus, snowflakes and good cheer.So, when my son's class rose to sing, Christmas Love, I was slightly taken aback by its bold title.
Nicholas was aglow, as were all of his classmates, adorned in fuzzy mittens, red sweaters and bright snowcaps upon their heads. Those in the front row - center stage -held up large letters, one by one, to spell out the title of the song. As the class would sing C is for Christmas, a child would hold up the letter C. Then, H is for Happy, and on and on, until eachchild holding up his portion had presented the complete message, Christmas Love.
The performance was going smoothly, until suddenly,we noticed a small, quiet girl in the front row holding the letter M upside down - totally unaware her letter M appeared as a W. The audienceof the 1st through 6th graders snickered at this little one's mistake, but she had no idea they were laughing at her, so she stood tall, proudly holding her W.
Although many teachers tried to shush the children, the laughter continued until the last letter was raised, and we all saw it together. A hush can over the audience and eyes began to widen. In an instant, we understood the reason we were there, why we celebrated the holiday in the first place, why even in the chaos, there was a purpose for our festivities
For when the last letter was held high, the messageread loud and clear:
C H R I S T W A S L O V E
And I believe, he still is. Amazed in His presence...humbled by His Love...
Blessing for this Christmas time and for the New Year to Come!
Make His love shine this Christmas
Each December, I vowed to make Christmas a calm and peaceful experience. I had cut back on nonessential obligations - extensive card writing, endless baking, decorating and even overspending. Yet, still, I found myself exhausted, unable to appreciate the precious family moments and of course, the true meaning of Christmas.
My son, Nicholas, was in kindergarten that year. It was an exciting season for a six year old. For weeks, he'd been memorizing songs for his school's Winter Pageant. I didn't have the heart to tell him I'd be working the night of the production. Unwilling to miss his shining moment, I spoke withhis teacher. She assured me there'd be a dress rehearsal the morning of the presentation. All Parents unable to attend that evening were welcome to come then. Fortunately, Nicholas seemed happy with the compromise.
So, the morning of the dress rehearsal, I filed in ten minutes early, found a spot on the cafeteria floor and sat down. Around the room, I saw several other parents quietly scampering to their seats. As I waited, the students were led into the room. Each class,accompanied by their teacher, sat cross-legged on the floor. Then, each group, oneby one, rose to perform their song.Because the public school system had long stoppedreferring to the holiday as Christmas, I didn't expect anything other than fun commercial entertainment - songs of reindeer, Santa Claus, snowflakes and good cheer.So, when my son's class rose to sing, Christmas Love, I was slightly taken aback by its bold title.
Nicholas was aglow, as were all of his classmates, adorned in fuzzy mittens, red sweaters and bright snowcaps upon their heads. Those in the front row - center stage -held up large letters, one by one, to spell out the title of the song. As the class would sing C is for Christmas, a child would hold up the letter C. Then, H is for Happy, and on and on, until eachchild holding up his portion had presented the complete message, Christmas Love.
The performance was going smoothly, until suddenly,we noticed a small, quiet girl in the front row holding the letter M upside down - totally unaware her letter M appeared as a W. The audienceof the 1st through 6th graders snickered at this little one's mistake, but she had no idea they were laughing at her, so she stood tall, proudly holding her W.
Although many teachers tried to shush the children, the laughter continued until the last letter was raised, and we all saw it together. A hush can over the audience and eyes began to widen. In an instant, we understood the reason we were there, why we celebrated the holiday in the first place, why even in the chaos, there was a purpose for our festivities
For when the last letter was held high, the messageread loud and clear:
C H R I S T W A S L O V E
And I believe, he still is. Amazed in His presence...humbled by His Love...
Blessing for this Christmas time and for the New Year to Come!
Make His love shine this Christmas
1 Corinthian 13 Christmas
If I decorate my house perfectly with plaid bows, Strands of twinkling lights and shiny balls, but do not show love to my family, I'm just another decorator.
If I slave away in the kitchen, baking dozens of Christmas cookies, preparing gourmet meals and arranging a beautifully adorned table at mealtime, but do not show love to my family, I'm just another cook.
If I work at the soup kitchen, carol in the nursing home And give all that I have to charity,But do not show love to my family, It profits me nothing.
If I trim the spruce with shimmering angels and crocheted snowflakes, attend a myriad of holiday parties and sing in the choir's cantata, but do not focus on Christ, I have missed the point.
Love stops the cooking to hug the child.
Love sets aside the decorating to kiss the husband.
Love is kind, though harried and tired.
Love doesn't envy another's home that has coordinated Christmas china and table linens. Love doesn't yell at the kids to get out of the way, but thanks God they are in the way.
Love doesn't give only to those who give in return, but rejoices in giving to those who can't.
Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never fails.
Video games will break, pearl necklaces will be lost, golf clubs will rust...but the gift of love will endure.
You can give without loving, but you cannot love without giving
If I decorate my house perfectly with plaid bows, Strands of twinkling lights and shiny balls, but do not show love to my family, I'm just another decorator.
If I slave away in the kitchen, baking dozens of Christmas cookies, preparing gourmet meals and arranging a beautifully adorned table at mealtime, but do not show love to my family, I'm just another cook.
If I work at the soup kitchen, carol in the nursing home And give all that I have to charity,But do not show love to my family, It profits me nothing.
If I trim the spruce with shimmering angels and crocheted snowflakes, attend a myriad of holiday parties and sing in the choir's cantata, but do not focus on Christ, I have missed the point.
Love stops the cooking to hug the child.
Love sets aside the decorating to kiss the husband.
Love is kind, though harried and tired.
Love doesn't envy another's home that has coordinated Christmas china and table linens. Love doesn't yell at the kids to get out of the way, but thanks God they are in the way.
Love doesn't give only to those who give in return, but rejoices in giving to those who can't.
Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never fails.
Video games will break, pearl necklaces will be lost, golf clubs will rust...but the gift of love will endure.
You can give without loving, but you cannot love without giving
The Psychological Profile of Radical Liberals
Some people say that there has been little research done on the traits of liberals--but they must have overlooked this article in Clio Psych's Journal from 2003. Here is an excerpt from the article that mentioned research on liberals from 1982.
In the 1970s, Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter administered Thematic Apperception Tests to a large sample of "new left" radicals (Roots of Radicalism, 1982). They found that activists were characterized by weakened self-esteem, injured narcissism and paranoid tendencies. They were preoccupied with power and attracted to radical ideologies that offered clear and unambiguous answers to their questions. All of these traits can be found in the work of Chomsky and other anti-imperialist intellectuals.And if you ever wondered why some liberals seem wishy-washy at times--this paragraph from the same article might explain things:
The unwillingness to offer alternatives reveals a lack of self-confidence and self-esteem. If they offered their own policy ideas they would be vulnerable to criticism. They would run the risk that their ideas would fail, or would not seem persuasive to others. This is especially difficult for anti-capitalists after the fall of the Soviet Union. It has also been difficult in the war against terrorism because Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are such unsympathetic figures. Psychologically, it is easier to blame America for not finding a solution than it is to put one's own ideas on the line.
Is this why the Left Wing is so critical of the United States yet they have no positive vision for our future?
Some people say that there has been little research done on the traits of liberals--but they must have overlooked this article in Clio Psych's Journal from 2003. Here is an excerpt from the article that mentioned research on liberals from 1982.
In the 1970s, Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter administered Thematic Apperception Tests to a large sample of "new left" radicals (Roots of Radicalism, 1982). They found that activists were characterized by weakened self-esteem, injured narcissism and paranoid tendencies. They were preoccupied with power and attracted to radical ideologies that offered clear and unambiguous answers to their questions. All of these traits can be found in the work of Chomsky and other anti-imperialist intellectuals.And if you ever wondered why some liberals seem wishy-washy at times--this paragraph from the same article might explain things:
The unwillingness to offer alternatives reveals a lack of self-confidence and self-esteem. If they offered their own policy ideas they would be vulnerable to criticism. They would run the risk that their ideas would fail, or would not seem persuasive to others. This is especially difficult for anti-capitalists after the fall of the Soviet Union. It has also been difficult in the war against terrorism because Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are such unsympathetic figures. Psychologically, it is easier to blame America for not finding a solution than it is to put one's own ideas on the line.
Is this why the Left Wing is so critical of the United States yet they have no positive vision for our future?
The Irony of Gods Grace
I came sneaking into trusting God instead of my works camp with heels dug in and mind closed. I was reared to think that I was pretty much responsible for my health and welfare as well as that of my friends and family. I lived in a chronic state of anxiety, fearful that I might screw up and miss Gods will. I was later relieved to discover that it is much harder to miss God's will than I had always thought.
I seemed to have concluded as a young man that I could thwart God's plan about anytime I wanted. I could rebelliously choose the wrong woman to marry and produce a bunch of pagans, refuse to witness and send all kinds of people to hell, take a drink of beer and offend people so badly that they lost their salvation, forget to pray and cause a disaster, and; you get the picture. As a result I became sad, depressive, nervous and tried to be SERIOUS about Christianity.
The sermons I heard all pointed toward being very religious because that was the Kind of man God chooses.Then I started to read, really read the Bible. For example, the Christmas story in Matthew stunned me. The genealogy of Jesus was a mess. All those people who fouled up the lineage of the Messiah could and should have kept God from accomplishing His will.
For example, there are four very unusual women in a male line up. How can that be when we know that God only chooses and uses men. I always heard it was special men, holy men, strong men, fighting men who never sinned that God uses.
And, those women were not very pure and holy. Tamar seduced her father-in-law. Yuck! That has to be worse than pornography and we all know that once you pick up a Playboy you are ruined for God's service forever. God wanted you to someday go to Asia as a missionary but now you are damaged goods and He will have to reject you forever. The kind of man or woman God uses God uses is always sexually pure.
Then there is a gal named Rahab. Wow! She was a madam and lived in the red light district of the town. What a loser. What was God doing choosing her to hide the spies and liberate the Holy Land? Then, God wrote it all down and flaunted it in the Bible. Did He not realize what kind of message He was sending to the community? But here she is, listed as one of the ancestors of Jesus, the Messiah of the world.
The third woman may even be worse than these two. The infamous Bathsheba wantonly seduced David who was a real good guy until then. He was solely after God's heart before she came into the picture. Then that devil with a blue dress on-or off- got hold of him and made him fall. Then she made him murder her husband, one of his greatest friends and supporters, Uriah.
If I were to continue to believe those past sermons she could have stopped God dead in His tracks because the Messiah was to be a Son of David.What was I to conclude? Maybe I was wrong and God could accomplish His purposes through fallen, frail, broken, fleshly men and women? All these women were not only serial sinners they were Gentiles. God continually warned the Hebrew children not to get involved with Gentile women yet these women are all non Jewish. Why not mention Sarah, Rebecca and Samuels mother if He wanted to honor Jewish female heroes?
But these women are not even racially pure let alone sexually pure. How could God have allowed those good Hebrew men to get together with Gentiles and pollute the gene pool and spiritual DNA? Surely the Messiah could not arrive out of such a sinful genealogy.
Even in the Christmas story God decided to use an old woman, Elizabeth and her doubting, elderly husband to bring John the Baptist into the Doesn't. Doesnt God not know that old people donÂ?t make very good parents? They are usually out of touch with the contemporary times and have kids that reject them. The boy John The Baptist might end up with ADHD or something worse. As a matter of fact John did develop a confrontational personality and go around telling people to repent.
And how about the old priest, Zechariah? He had been praying for years for a baby but it is obvious why God did not answer his prayers. He had no faith. Anyone tlistenedr listend to Copeland knows that. Our faith must be pure and unwavering to get an answer. He even argued with the angel sent to him. But then God went on anyway and told him to keep trying because he and Elizabeth would produce one even if it required a miracle. But old Zechariah still was a doubter and the Angel had to strike him dumb to teach him a lesson. What kind of inspiration is that for us holy non-doubters?
Then take a look at Mary. She was just a kid. We have a lot of statistics today about the problems of babies having babies. And she was not married. That is not really very good for the Messiahs reputation.
To top it all off, Joseph, not Mary, was the son of David. So the Messiahs Davidic lineage came though his adoptive father not through the bloodline. An adopted Messiah? Adoption was not looked upon with great favor back then. What was God thinking?
What kind of men and women did God choose to bring the Messiah to the world? I was struck by how many weak and irresponsible people God chose to bring the Messiah to earth. A small light began to come on in my head. I now see that my own sinful condition was a tunnel not a cave. It is not a dead end. There is light at the end of the tunnel. There is hope even for me and for sinners like me. There is even hope for you guys!
I am not in charge of God's will. I cannot thwart it at anytime I want. I am somehow part of that humongous plan of His even when I do not know it or know how it works. Gods plan marches on with sovereign surety and hope for the world. God is in charge. My imperfection and sin has already been taken into account and He will certainly accomplish His goal despite my stumbling and failures.
I came to a new conclusion: It is not the KIND OF MAN THAT GOD CHOOSES that is so important but THE KIND OF GOD THAT MAN CHOOSES.
Now I believe in a big God, a sovereign God and a gracious God. When I believed in a small God whose will was only accomplished when I cooperated and went along with Him, it was all about me. Then I got full of pride and self-importance. Unfortunately, that led me to sadness, false guilt, depression and anxiety.
Back then I was consumed with what ifs and if onlys. What if I somehow unknowingly failed to follow through? What if I fail to teach my kids right? Or Forget to evangelize? Or not say Yes to God, etc. I was exhausted. Being in charge of the Messiahs mission is hard work. MY PERFECTIONISM WAS IMPERFECT.
I read books about "Finding God's Will" and anxiously tried to be "In the center of God's will" but that made anxious anxious.Then it hit me. Missing God's will is hard, it may be impossible.
Recognizing that God even uses my weaknesses, my folly, my failures and my fears brings me joy and humility. It may take a few hundred years but the lord of the Universe is also Lord of my life and He will make all things work out according to His will. Now Romans 8 makes sense. All things do work together for good.
God's sovereign plan is like riding in the waters of a huge, white-water river whose force keeps pushing me toward His end goal. I may thrash around and fight the water and pull myself toward one shore or another and think how great and powerful I am to be in control of my swimming. But from God's perspective I am always flowing in the ultimate deternaln of His eteranl plan. I am sure He is trying to say, Just rest in me, Gary. The members of A. A. say it this way: Let go and let God.
I still get have occasional anger that I am so needy and weak. That I still stumble and fall. That God has to rescue me from myself again and again. I am 67 and have been a Christian since age 10. After 57 years I should be holier and better. But I am not.
So, I just try to walk in the Holy Spirit, apply God's truth and set myself aside with God's Spirit so I can love God and fully enjoy Him forever. This, I think, is the basis of FREEDOM.
Sometimes I regress back into works righteousness and get legalistic or words righteousness and get perfectionist about how I speak and the names I give to the Trinity or get back into name it and claim it, blab it and grab it. Then I can once again feel the pride and satisfaction of thinking I am really in charge of the universe. Unfortunately, I just do not have the constitution for it. I wear out too easily. I admire my Grandmother who kept holiness alive for 90 years. Now that woman had a strong constitution. But me, I am weak and have to believe that God is in charge so I can rest in Him.
So, Let the river flow! It is never too late to turn our life over to His care and control.
Ps I Gary R. Sweeten, do hereby resign from being lord of the Universe and hereafter promise to allow God to rule. (At least most of the time.)
I came sneaking into trusting God instead of my works camp with heels dug in and mind closed. I was reared to think that I was pretty much responsible for my health and welfare as well as that of my friends and family. I lived in a chronic state of anxiety, fearful that I might screw up and miss Gods will. I was later relieved to discover that it is much harder to miss God's will than I had always thought.
I seemed to have concluded as a young man that I could thwart God's plan about anytime I wanted. I could rebelliously choose the wrong woman to marry and produce a bunch of pagans, refuse to witness and send all kinds of people to hell, take a drink of beer and offend people so badly that they lost their salvation, forget to pray and cause a disaster, and; you get the picture. As a result I became sad, depressive, nervous and tried to be SERIOUS about Christianity.
The sermons I heard all pointed toward being very religious because that was the Kind of man God chooses.Then I started to read, really read the Bible. For example, the Christmas story in Matthew stunned me. The genealogy of Jesus was a mess. All those people who fouled up the lineage of the Messiah could and should have kept God from accomplishing His will.
For example, there are four very unusual women in a male line up. How can that be when we know that God only chooses and uses men. I always heard it was special men, holy men, strong men, fighting men who never sinned that God uses.
And, those women were not very pure and holy. Tamar seduced her father-in-law. Yuck! That has to be worse than pornography and we all know that once you pick up a Playboy you are ruined for God's service forever. God wanted you to someday go to Asia as a missionary but now you are damaged goods and He will have to reject you forever. The kind of man or woman God uses God uses is always sexually pure.
Then there is a gal named Rahab. Wow! She was a madam and lived in the red light district of the town. What a loser. What was God doing choosing her to hide the spies and liberate the Holy Land? Then, God wrote it all down and flaunted it in the Bible. Did He not realize what kind of message He was sending to the community? But here she is, listed as one of the ancestors of Jesus, the Messiah of the world.
The third woman may even be worse than these two. The infamous Bathsheba wantonly seduced David who was a real good guy until then. He was solely after God's heart before she came into the picture. Then that devil with a blue dress on-or off- got hold of him and made him fall. Then she made him murder her husband, one of his greatest friends and supporters, Uriah.
If I were to continue to believe those past sermons she could have stopped God dead in His tracks because the Messiah was to be a Son of David.What was I to conclude? Maybe I was wrong and God could accomplish His purposes through fallen, frail, broken, fleshly men and women? All these women were not only serial sinners they were Gentiles. God continually warned the Hebrew children not to get involved with Gentile women yet these women are all non Jewish. Why not mention Sarah, Rebecca and Samuels mother if He wanted to honor Jewish female heroes?
But these women are not even racially pure let alone sexually pure. How could God have allowed those good Hebrew men to get together with Gentiles and pollute the gene pool and spiritual DNA? Surely the Messiah could not arrive out of such a sinful genealogy.
Even in the Christmas story God decided to use an old woman, Elizabeth and her doubting, elderly husband to bring John the Baptist into the Doesn't. Doesnt God not know that old people donÂ?t make very good parents? They are usually out of touch with the contemporary times and have kids that reject them. The boy John The Baptist might end up with ADHD or something worse. As a matter of fact John did develop a confrontational personality and go around telling people to repent.
And how about the old priest, Zechariah? He had been praying for years for a baby but it is obvious why God did not answer his prayers. He had no faith. Anyone tlistenedr listend to Copeland knows that. Our faith must be pure and unwavering to get an answer. He even argued with the angel sent to him. But then God went on anyway and told him to keep trying because he and Elizabeth would produce one even if it required a miracle. But old Zechariah still was a doubter and the Angel had to strike him dumb to teach him a lesson. What kind of inspiration is that for us holy non-doubters?
Then take a look at Mary. She was just a kid. We have a lot of statistics today about the problems of babies having babies. And she was not married. That is not really very good for the Messiahs reputation.
To top it all off, Joseph, not Mary, was the son of David. So the Messiahs Davidic lineage came though his adoptive father not through the bloodline. An adopted Messiah? Adoption was not looked upon with great favor back then. What was God thinking?
What kind of men and women did God choose to bring the Messiah to the world? I was struck by how many weak and irresponsible people God chose to bring the Messiah to earth. A small light began to come on in my head. I now see that my own sinful condition was a tunnel not a cave. It is not a dead end. There is light at the end of the tunnel. There is hope even for me and for sinners like me. There is even hope for you guys!
I am not in charge of God's will. I cannot thwart it at anytime I want. I am somehow part of that humongous plan of His even when I do not know it or know how it works. Gods plan marches on with sovereign surety and hope for the world. God is in charge. My imperfection and sin has already been taken into account and He will certainly accomplish His goal despite my stumbling and failures.
I came to a new conclusion: It is not the KIND OF MAN THAT GOD CHOOSES that is so important but THE KIND OF GOD THAT MAN CHOOSES.
Now I believe in a big God, a sovereign God and a gracious God. When I believed in a small God whose will was only accomplished when I cooperated and went along with Him, it was all about me. Then I got full of pride and self-importance. Unfortunately, that led me to sadness, false guilt, depression and anxiety.
Back then I was consumed with what ifs and if onlys. What if I somehow unknowingly failed to follow through? What if I fail to teach my kids right? Or Forget to evangelize? Or not say Yes to God, etc. I was exhausted. Being in charge of the Messiahs mission is hard work. MY PERFECTIONISM WAS IMPERFECT.
I read books about "Finding God's Will" and anxiously tried to be "In the center of God's will" but that made anxious anxious.Then it hit me. Missing God's will is hard, it may be impossible.
Recognizing that God even uses my weaknesses, my folly, my failures and my fears brings me joy and humility. It may take a few hundred years but the lord of the Universe is also Lord of my life and He will make all things work out according to His will. Now Romans 8 makes sense. All things do work together for good.
God's sovereign plan is like riding in the waters of a huge, white-water river whose force keeps pushing me toward His end goal. I may thrash around and fight the water and pull myself toward one shore or another and think how great and powerful I am to be in control of my swimming. But from God's perspective I am always flowing in the ultimate deternaln of His eteranl plan. I am sure He is trying to say, Just rest in me, Gary. The members of A. A. say it this way: Let go and let God.
I still get have occasional anger that I am so needy and weak. That I still stumble and fall. That God has to rescue me from myself again and again. I am 67 and have been a Christian since age 10. After 57 years I should be holier and better. But I am not.
So, I just try to walk in the Holy Spirit, apply God's truth and set myself aside with God's Spirit so I can love God and fully enjoy Him forever. This, I think, is the basis of FREEDOM.
Sometimes I regress back into works righteousness and get legalistic or words righteousness and get perfectionist about how I speak and the names I give to the Trinity or get back into name it and claim it, blab it and grab it. Then I can once again feel the pride and satisfaction of thinking I am really in charge of the universe. Unfortunately, I just do not have the constitution for it. I wear out too easily. I admire my Grandmother who kept holiness alive for 90 years. Now that woman had a strong constitution. But me, I am weak and have to believe that God is in charge so I can rest in Him.
So, Let the river flow! It is never too late to turn our life over to His care and control.
Ps I Gary R. Sweeten, do hereby resign from being lord of the Universe and hereafter promise to allow God to rule. (At least most of the time.)
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Why So Much Alcoholism and Drug Abuse in Russia?
The stats about alcohol consumption in the USSR and now Russia are so astounding that most people do not believe them. Whole towns and villages in rural Russia are abandoned as "Ghost Towns" because the people died as a result of alcohol. Hundreds of people, especially males, drown each year as a result of falling drunk into the ponds, lakes and rivers while fishing.
The situation is especially bad for males. In some regions almost every single boy and man is drunk almost daily. When I took my daily walks around the small Moscow lakes last August almost every couple, both young and old, carried half quart bottles of beer with them as they pushed baby buggies and sat in the grass listening to portable radios. The appearance of MP 3 Players is just beginning.
But why is alcohol abuse so prevalent there? I have several theories but three stand out. First, the move away from God toward Communism has resulted in a chronic intergenerational law of generations that produces bitterness, anger, resentment and a loss of hope. (Read Isiah 28) The only cure is for a massive revival and confession of their sin by the Russian people.
Secondly, family life in Russia disentegrated as a result of the atheistic, paranoia of the Bolsheviks and father turned against children and children agaisnt parents. The state became supreme and massive numbers of people failed to keep the Commandment that says: "Honor your father and mother." The rates of premature deaths in Russia prove the consequences of failing to follow God's laws.
Third, and perhaps most directly related to male alcohol abuse, mothers tried to protect their sons from the brutality of the Communist state. The surest way for a male to lose his freedom and even his life was to be assertive and self-assured. Little boys are, by nature and by the development of testosterone, more hyperactive, assertive and agressive. THIS IS GOOD!!
Under Stalin and the other brutal dictators of the Socialist Republic any kind of masculine assertive indpendence was seen as a threat and severely punished by sending the men to prison or into one of the astoundingly brutal armed forces to "break his spirit". This led mothers to be naturally overprotective of their sons and they reacted strongly to any and all "Boyishness" such as fighting, rough housing and having fun.
Almost every male in Russia has a wounded spirit. In Colossians Three St. Paul wisely says, "Fathers do not exasperate your children and cause them to lose heart." When a boy has lost heart and has a wounded spirit he needs to be healed by interacting with older men who can help heal and restore hope. Without hope men and boys turn to alcohol to deaden their pain.
Here in America we are also seeing a war against boys. About 40% of all children are being reared in fatherless homes. About 75% of the time mothers get custody of the children in a divorce. Boys are flunking out of female oriented schools that discriminate against hyperactive boys. The feminanization of Christianity has led to 75% of church attendees being female.
The stats about alcohol consumption in the USSR and now Russia are so astounding that most people do not believe them. Whole towns and villages in rural Russia are abandoned as "Ghost Towns" because the people died as a result of alcohol. Hundreds of people, especially males, drown each year as a result of falling drunk into the ponds, lakes and rivers while fishing.
The situation is especially bad for males. In some regions almost every single boy and man is drunk almost daily. When I took my daily walks around the small Moscow lakes last August almost every couple, both young and old, carried half quart bottles of beer with them as they pushed baby buggies and sat in the grass listening to portable radios. The appearance of MP 3 Players is just beginning.
But why is alcohol abuse so prevalent there? I have several theories but three stand out. First, the move away from God toward Communism has resulted in a chronic intergenerational law of generations that produces bitterness, anger, resentment and a loss of hope. (Read Isiah 28) The only cure is for a massive revival and confession of their sin by the Russian people.
Secondly, family life in Russia disentegrated as a result of the atheistic, paranoia of the Bolsheviks and father turned against children and children agaisnt parents. The state became supreme and massive numbers of people failed to keep the Commandment that says: "Honor your father and mother." The rates of premature deaths in Russia prove the consequences of failing to follow God's laws.
Third, and perhaps most directly related to male alcohol abuse, mothers tried to protect their sons from the brutality of the Communist state. The surest way for a male to lose his freedom and even his life was to be assertive and self-assured. Little boys are, by nature and by the development of testosterone, more hyperactive, assertive and agressive. THIS IS GOOD!!
Under Stalin and the other brutal dictators of the Socialist Republic any kind of masculine assertive indpendence was seen as a threat and severely punished by sending the men to prison or into one of the astoundingly brutal armed forces to "break his spirit". This led mothers to be naturally overprotective of their sons and they reacted strongly to any and all "Boyishness" such as fighting, rough housing and having fun.
Almost every male in Russia has a wounded spirit. In Colossians Three St. Paul wisely says, "Fathers do not exasperate your children and cause them to lose heart." When a boy has lost heart and has a wounded spirit he needs to be healed by interacting with older men who can help heal and restore hope. Without hope men and boys turn to alcohol to deaden their pain.
Here in America we are also seeing a war against boys. About 40% of all children are being reared in fatherless homes. About 75% of the time mothers get custody of the children in a divorce. Boys are flunking out of female oriented schools that discriminate against hyperactive boys. The feminanization of Christianity has led to 75% of church attendees being female.
A War on Males?
Why does every section of society from the school room to the court room bristle with angry attacks on men while funding women's programs and women's health issues at an astounding rate? A great article in the Saturday, December 17 Wall Street Journal about the rampant discrimination against males in America brings the crisis strongly to our attention.
The author, Lionel Tiger, notes that 90% of the victims of Ritalin and similar drugs prescribed for schoolkids are boys; but even drugged they perform less well than girls. A 2005 study at Yale found nationally that even in prekindergarten boys are nearly five times more likely to be expelled than girls.
When it comes to health status, the disparity in favor of women is enhanced by such patterns as seven times more Federal expenditure on breast cancer than on the prostate variety. And no one is provoked into action because vaunted male patriarchs commit suicide between four and 10 times more frequently than oppressed and brainwashed women.
He suggests we all read a report by the New Hampshire Commission on the Status of Men (www.nh.gov/csm).
Mr. Tiger is author of "The Decline of Males" (St. Martin's, 1999).
Parents, schools and churches must address this issue and fast. Too many boys and men are ending up as alcoholics, victims of suicide and separated from their kids. I suggest that you also read Soft Patriarchs, New Men by Bradford Wilcox
Why does every section of society from the school room to the court room bristle with angry attacks on men while funding women's programs and women's health issues at an astounding rate? A great article in the Saturday, December 17 Wall Street Journal about the rampant discrimination against males in America brings the crisis strongly to our attention.
The author, Lionel Tiger, notes that 90% of the victims of Ritalin and similar drugs prescribed for schoolkids are boys; but even drugged they perform less well than girls. A 2005 study at Yale found nationally that even in prekindergarten boys are nearly five times more likely to be expelled than girls.
When it comes to health status, the disparity in favor of women is enhanced by such patterns as seven times more Federal expenditure on breast cancer than on the prostate variety. And no one is provoked into action because vaunted male patriarchs commit suicide between four and 10 times more frequently than oppressed and brainwashed women.
He suggests we all read a report by the New Hampshire Commission on the Status of Men (www.nh.gov/csm).
Mr. Tiger is author of "The Decline of Males" (St. Martin's, 1999).
Parents, schools and churches must address this issue and fast. Too many boys and men are ending up as alcoholics, victims of suicide and separated from their kids. I suggest that you also read Soft Patriarchs, New Men by Bradford Wilcox
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Prayers Being Answered???
Moscow Today reports that president Putin is considering how to reduce the restrictions on Non-Governmental Organizations, NGO's. He gave in to pressure from U.S. Secretary of State Condi Rice and other world leaders.
If the Russian government were to restrict the ability of NGO's to receive money from abroad it would severely restrict our ability to support evangelism, healing and equipping the saints in the former USSR. Billions of dollars are sent annually to help support pastors, Bible schools, alcohol and drug treatment, churches, orphanages and evangelists.
We do not wish to make anyone dependent upon western finances but it is necessary to help support them as they get started and on their feet. The locals cannot fully support all these ministries---YET. However, in a few years they shall be fully operational and on their feet.
These NGO's are the hope of the future for Russia. Democracy cannot thrive without thousands of churches, small grous, neighborhood associations, etc.
Keep praying for the Lord to touch Mr. Putin's heart so he will take his hands off non-political NGO's and affirm our right to take them spiritual and financial support.
Moscow Today reports that president Putin is considering how to reduce the restrictions on Non-Governmental Organizations, NGO's. He gave in to pressure from U.S. Secretary of State Condi Rice and other world leaders.
If the Russian government were to restrict the ability of NGO's to receive money from abroad it would severely restrict our ability to support evangelism, healing and equipping the saints in the former USSR. Billions of dollars are sent annually to help support pastors, Bible schools, alcohol and drug treatment, churches, orphanages and evangelists.
We do not wish to make anyone dependent upon western finances but it is necessary to help support them as they get started and on their feet. The locals cannot fully support all these ministries---YET. However, in a few years they shall be fully operational and on their feet.
These NGO's are the hope of the future for Russia. Democracy cannot thrive without thousands of churches, small grous, neighborhood associations, etc.
Keep praying for the Lord to touch Mr. Putin's heart so he will take his hands off non-political NGO's and affirm our right to take them spiritual and financial support.
Sunday, December 11, 2005
Forbidden Again? Pray for Our Russian Friends
I learned to sincerely despise the Communist ways after listening to so many who were persecuted personally or came from families that were persecuted by Stalin, et al. The USSR hated God, hated Christmas, hated the church and hated anyone who had personal faith.
As a result, small church and home groups were outlawed as were Christmas celebrations, Christian marriages ceremonies and religious traditions. Putin is trying to return to those "Bad Old Days" by passing new laws banning Non-Governmental Groups. PRAY!
I learned to sincerely despise the Communist ways after listening to so many who were persecuted personally or came from families that were persecuted by Stalin, et al. The USSR hated God, hated Christmas, hated the church and hated anyone who had personal faith.
As a result, small church and home groups were outlawed as were Christmas celebrations, Christian marriages ceremonies and religious traditions. Putin is trying to return to those "Bad Old Days" by passing new laws banning Non-Governmental Groups. PRAY!
The Only Hope for Russia and the World
Several years ago a book entitled, Bowling Alone was published that struck a chord among lay and professionals alike. It said that the key to a healthy democracy was small groups of people who freely associate with each other around common topics of interest.
This group of men and women come together regularly to discuss how to spread that message to the struggling folks of the former USSR. They teach, train and encourage Christ centered groups in churches, prisons, homes, etc.
Several years ago a book entitled, Bowling Alone was published that struck a chord among lay and professionals alike. It said that the key to a healthy democracy was small groups of people who freely associate with each other around common topics of interest.
This group of men and women come together regularly to discuss how to spread that message to the struggling folks of the former USSR. They teach, train and encourage Christ centered groups in churches, prisons, homes, etc.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Tallying Compassion
Everybody knows congregations do good work. Ram Cnaan tells us what it's worth.Interview by Agnieszka Tennant posted 02/11/2003
If the average North American congregation were to bill its community for the social services it provides, the tab would run about $184,000 per year. We've known that congregations help the needy. Now—thanks to a groundbreaking social-science study—we know just how much they do.
The source of this and other surprising findings is a study spearheaded by Ram A. Cnaan, published in his book The Invisible Caring Hand: American Congregations and the Provision of Welfare (New York University Press, 2002). Cnaan is an Israeli-born secular Jew who is professor of social work and founding director of the Program for the Study of Organized Religion and Social Work at the University of Pennsylvania. He talked with ct associate editor Agnieszka Tennant.
Did your study of congregations confirm the widely accepted notion that liberal churches provide more social services than do conservative churches?
No. When it comes to caring for the needy, groups with different core theologies—mainline or conservative—basically deal the same with people. They spend an equal amount of resources to serve the needy.
Were you surprised by that?
At first I was. And then I found that I'm not the only one. Christian Smith at Duke University also found similar things—that volunteers and volunteerism among mainline liberals and evangelical groups are the same. So I'm not totally off. When you get a finding that doesn't agree with the common convention, you assume that you are wrong. But I was delighted to find out that there are other people who find similar things.
What other discoveries stand out to you?
The biggest surprise is that it's really a norm for a congregation in America to provide social services. It took me awhile to find out how pervasive this norm is. The respondents said, "Of course, we're a congregation, so we [care for the needy]." No one even questions it. Sometimes they apologized to me. "You know, we're just a young congregation. We just started. We don't do much. We should have done more." Half the time they would ask me, "Can you tell me how we can do more of what we are doing?" And I would look at them and I would think, "You are asking me?" Nobody told me, "No, we cannot do it" or "It's not our job."
It's a major power for our society. We don't know exactly how many congregations there are nationwide, but even if you take a conservative number of 300,000, then there are 300,000 groups that assume that it's their responsibility to help people.
Not many congregations think of themselves as significant suppliers of social welfare. Why is that?
In talking with them, I found that things that they thought are not social programs really are social programs.
In the congregations' minds, social services were some big projects at least in collaboration with the government. For us, a social program or social service is something that they do in a consistent manner to help the needy. Sometimes they're offended if you call something a social program. Say I see a soup kitchen, and ask them, "So you have a food distribution program?" But they say, "No, that's not a program, that's only the men's group activity."
So the language is very important. When we meet with them, we give them a list of activities, asking if they're involved in them. After they see the list of activities that qualify as social services, they say, "Oh, that's what you mean. Yes, then we do have social programs."
Your research affirmed the efforts of clergy. In fact, you dedicate your book to them. Why?
Everybody expects clergy to be good people. So when they do the good thing, it's not being reported anywhere. When they do something bad, it's always reported. I followed The Philadelphia Inquirer's reporting on clergy. In the last two years, they made the front page only three times, and always in something negative.
But I see that hundreds of them are doing a wonderful job. Not every one of them is perfect. But on average, clergy give way more to society than they get from society. We don't appreciate them enough.
What kind of help do they need the most?
Among other things, there is a need for intermediaries—nonprofits that could give clergy training in the know-how that they don't learn in seminaries but are often expected to know, such as accounting and management.
Besides studying 251 American congregations, you also looked at 46 in Canada. What differences did you spot?
Canada doesn't have the diversity that we have. We have many more denominations and religions. The level of religion in Canada is about half of that in the United States. The behavior of congregations that we studied there was slightly mimicking that of the United States, but they did not have the impact that congregations are having here.
I travel a lot to Toronto, and on every corner there I see a donut shop. In Philadelphia, at every corner there is a congregation. We have in Philadelphia, a city of one million residents, 2,100 places of worship. It's way more, proportionately, than in any other country. We practice religion more and, don't forget, we pay for everything that is religious. In Europe, a lot of the money that goes to the churches comes from the state, directly or indirectly. In Canada, like in the U.S., the government doesn't pay for congregations. But Catholic schools, for example, are financed by the government. So the separation of church and state as we have is uniquely American.
Is evangelism one of the major reasons that churches provide services?
Not really—not even for the more evangelical-minded congregations. I was expecting them to be providing social services in order to persuade people to change their religion and become members. I can't tell you that this motivation doesn't exist. They really believe that transformation is the way to health. But they know that transformation is not something that you see immediately.
When you ask them, "What is your number one hope for the people you serve?" they'll tell you, "We want them to find Jesus in their lives." But I asked them, "Would you stop the service if they don't?" "Oh, no," they say, "this is what we'd like. But it's not a mandatory part." An overwhelming majority of congregations do it because to provide social services is for them to actualize their faith—to be good Christian people, good Muslims, good Jews.
What makes local religious communities particularly able to provide social services?
The proximity to the needs of people. They always tell me, "We know the people who are coming by name. We know when they're serious and what their specific needs are. If we think that's what they need, we can give them these services. If we think they need something else, we'll give them something else."
Government is limited. Government programs don't have the flexibility. A congregation can decide to give you one service and give me another service, and it's legal, and it's understood, and nobody can challenge it. The government has to give the same service to every citizen if the person is assumed to have the same eligibility.
It's major power when you can change the service you give based on the specific need of the person and match the response to the real need. Plus, congregations are significantly more trusted than government.
What is the government's strength in supplying such services?
Money—and the ability to tax or use other resources congregations don't have. It can make general policies that affect people on a large scale. Congregations are limited in their means and their awareness or research.
How would you like to see your findings used?
I was surprised by how little people know about the wonderful work that congregations are doing. I was hoping that by making this a public story, congregations would be more acceptable to foundations and other funders. There is a reluctance by many foundations to work with congregations. I find it almost criminal. I'd like to see religion and social services reconnected in terms of education—in seminaries and other higher institutions. For too many years, the two were separated, and there's a lot that the two can do together.
What's the message you hope your study will send to congregations?
Clergy and congregants should learn to be proud of what they are providing for others. No one else does it so happily and so on their own.
Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.February 2003, Vol. 47, No. 2, Page 56
The truth about congregational leadership and service needs to get out to educate people about true Christian values.
Everybody knows congregations do good work. Ram Cnaan tells us what it's worth.Interview by Agnieszka Tennant posted 02/11/2003
If the average North American congregation were to bill its community for the social services it provides, the tab would run about $184,000 per year. We've known that congregations help the needy. Now—thanks to a groundbreaking social-science study—we know just how much they do.
The source of this and other surprising findings is a study spearheaded by Ram A. Cnaan, published in his book The Invisible Caring Hand: American Congregations and the Provision of Welfare (New York University Press, 2002). Cnaan is an Israeli-born secular Jew who is professor of social work and founding director of the Program for the Study of Organized Religion and Social Work at the University of Pennsylvania. He talked with ct associate editor Agnieszka Tennant.
Did your study of congregations confirm the widely accepted notion that liberal churches provide more social services than do conservative churches?
No. When it comes to caring for the needy, groups with different core theologies—mainline or conservative—basically deal the same with people. They spend an equal amount of resources to serve the needy.
Were you surprised by that?
At first I was. And then I found that I'm not the only one. Christian Smith at Duke University also found similar things—that volunteers and volunteerism among mainline liberals and evangelical groups are the same. So I'm not totally off. When you get a finding that doesn't agree with the common convention, you assume that you are wrong. But I was delighted to find out that there are other people who find similar things.
What other discoveries stand out to you?
The biggest surprise is that it's really a norm for a congregation in America to provide social services. It took me awhile to find out how pervasive this norm is. The respondents said, "Of course, we're a congregation, so we [care for the needy]." No one even questions it. Sometimes they apologized to me. "You know, we're just a young congregation. We just started. We don't do much. We should have done more." Half the time they would ask me, "Can you tell me how we can do more of what we are doing?" And I would look at them and I would think, "You are asking me?" Nobody told me, "No, we cannot do it" or "It's not our job."
It's a major power for our society. We don't know exactly how many congregations there are nationwide, but even if you take a conservative number of 300,000, then there are 300,000 groups that assume that it's their responsibility to help people.
Not many congregations think of themselves as significant suppliers of social welfare. Why is that?
In talking with them, I found that things that they thought are not social programs really are social programs.
In the congregations' minds, social services were some big projects at least in collaboration with the government. For us, a social program or social service is something that they do in a consistent manner to help the needy. Sometimes they're offended if you call something a social program. Say I see a soup kitchen, and ask them, "So you have a food distribution program?" But they say, "No, that's not a program, that's only the men's group activity."
So the language is very important. When we meet with them, we give them a list of activities, asking if they're involved in them. After they see the list of activities that qualify as social services, they say, "Oh, that's what you mean. Yes, then we do have social programs."
Your research affirmed the efforts of clergy. In fact, you dedicate your book to them. Why?
Everybody expects clergy to be good people. So when they do the good thing, it's not being reported anywhere. When they do something bad, it's always reported. I followed The Philadelphia Inquirer's reporting on clergy. In the last two years, they made the front page only three times, and always in something negative.
But I see that hundreds of them are doing a wonderful job. Not every one of them is perfect. But on average, clergy give way more to society than they get from society. We don't appreciate them enough.
What kind of help do they need the most?
Among other things, there is a need for intermediaries—nonprofits that could give clergy training in the know-how that they don't learn in seminaries but are often expected to know, such as accounting and management.
Besides studying 251 American congregations, you also looked at 46 in Canada. What differences did you spot?
Canada doesn't have the diversity that we have. We have many more denominations and religions. The level of religion in Canada is about half of that in the United States. The behavior of congregations that we studied there was slightly mimicking that of the United States, but they did not have the impact that congregations are having here.
I travel a lot to Toronto, and on every corner there I see a donut shop. In Philadelphia, at every corner there is a congregation. We have in Philadelphia, a city of one million residents, 2,100 places of worship. It's way more, proportionately, than in any other country. We practice religion more and, don't forget, we pay for everything that is religious. In Europe, a lot of the money that goes to the churches comes from the state, directly or indirectly. In Canada, like in the U.S., the government doesn't pay for congregations. But Catholic schools, for example, are financed by the government. So the separation of church and state as we have is uniquely American.
Is evangelism one of the major reasons that churches provide services?
Not really—not even for the more evangelical-minded congregations. I was expecting them to be providing social services in order to persuade people to change their religion and become members. I can't tell you that this motivation doesn't exist. They really believe that transformation is the way to health. But they know that transformation is not something that you see immediately.
When you ask them, "What is your number one hope for the people you serve?" they'll tell you, "We want them to find Jesus in their lives." But I asked them, "Would you stop the service if they don't?" "Oh, no," they say, "this is what we'd like. But it's not a mandatory part." An overwhelming majority of congregations do it because to provide social services is for them to actualize their faith—to be good Christian people, good Muslims, good Jews.
What makes local religious communities particularly able to provide social services?
The proximity to the needs of people. They always tell me, "We know the people who are coming by name. We know when they're serious and what their specific needs are. If we think that's what they need, we can give them these services. If we think they need something else, we'll give them something else."
Government is limited. Government programs don't have the flexibility. A congregation can decide to give you one service and give me another service, and it's legal, and it's understood, and nobody can challenge it. The government has to give the same service to every citizen if the person is assumed to have the same eligibility.
It's major power when you can change the service you give based on the specific need of the person and match the response to the real need. Plus, congregations are significantly more trusted than government.
What is the government's strength in supplying such services?
Money—and the ability to tax or use other resources congregations don't have. It can make general policies that affect people on a large scale. Congregations are limited in their means and their awareness or research.
How would you like to see your findings used?
I was surprised by how little people know about the wonderful work that congregations are doing. I was hoping that by making this a public story, congregations would be more acceptable to foundations and other funders. There is a reluctance by many foundations to work with congregations. I find it almost criminal. I'd like to see religion and social services reconnected in terms of education—in seminaries and other higher institutions. For too many years, the two were separated, and there's a lot that the two can do together.
What's the message you hope your study will send to congregations?
Clergy and congregants should learn to be proud of what they are providing for others. No one else does it so happily and so on their own.
Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.February 2003, Vol. 47, No. 2, Page 56
The truth about congregational leadership and service needs to get out to educate people about true Christian values.
Friday, December 09, 2005
The differences in charity between secular and religious people are dramatic
Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent).
And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions.
Socioeconomically, the religious and secular groups are similar in some ways and different in others. For example, there is little difference between the groups in income (both have average household incomes around $49,000) or education level (20 percent of each group holds a college degree). On the other hand, the secular group is disproportionately male (49 percent to 32 percent), unmarried (58 percent to 40 percent), and young (42 to 49 years old, on average).
In addition, the sccbs data show that religion and secularism break down on ideological lines: Religious people are 38 percentage points more likely to say they are conservative than to say they are liberal (57 percent to 19 percent). In contrast, secular people are 13 points more likely to say they are liberal than to say they are conservative (42 percent to 29 percent).
Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent).
And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions.
Socioeconomically, the religious and secular groups are similar in some ways and different in others. For example, there is little difference between the groups in income (both have average household incomes around $49,000) or education level (20 percent of each group holds a college degree). On the other hand, the secular group is disproportionately male (49 percent to 32 percent), unmarried (58 percent to 40 percent), and young (42 to 49 years old, on average).
In addition, the sccbs data show that religion and secularism break down on ideological lines: Religious people are 38 percentage points more likely to say they are conservative than to say they are liberal (57 percent to 19 percent). In contrast, secular people are 13 points more likely to say they are liberal than to say they are conservative (42 percent to 29 percent).
Secularists Talk the Walk but do not Walk the Talk
The data show that if two people — one religious and the other secular — are identical in every other way, the secular person is 23 percentage points less likely to give than the religious person and 26 points less likely to volunteer.
Religious liberals are 19 points more likely than secular liberals to give to charity
Religious conservatives are 28 points more likely than secular conservatives
In other words, religious conservatives (who give and volunteer at rates of 91 percent and 67 percent) appear to differ from secular liberals (who give and volunteer at rates of 72 percent and 52 percent) more due to religion
The data show that if two people — one religious and the other secular — are identical in every other way, the secular person is 23 percentage points less likely to give than the religious person and 26 points less likely to volunteer.
Religious liberals are 19 points more likely than secular liberals to give to charity
Religious conservatives are 28 points more likely than secular conservatives
In other words, religious conservatives (who give and volunteer at rates of 91 percent and 67 percent) appear to differ from secular liberals (who give and volunteer at rates of 72 percent and 52 percent) more due to religion
Secular versus Religious Involvement in Charity and Volunteering
Charity differences between religious and secular people persist if we look at the actual amounts of donations and volunteering. Indeed, measures of the dollars given and occasions volunteered per year produce a yawning gap between the groups.
The average annual giving among the religious is $2,210 and $642 among the secular.
Similarly, religious people volunteer an average of 12 times per year,
secular people volunteer an average of 5.8 times.
Religious people are 33 percent of the population but make 52 percent of donations and 45 percent of times volunteered.
Secular people are 26 percent of the population but contribute 13 percent of the dollars and 17 percent of the times volunteered.
Charity differences between religious and secular people persist if we look at the actual amounts of donations and volunteering. Indeed, measures of the dollars given and occasions volunteered per year produce a yawning gap between the groups.
The average annual giving among the religious is $2,210 and $642 among the secular.
Similarly, religious people volunteer an average of 12 times per year,
secular people volunteer an average of 5.8 times.
Religious people are 33 percent of the population but make 52 percent of donations and 45 percent of times volunteered.
Secular people are 26 percent of the population but contribute 13 percent of the dollars and 17 percent of the times volunteered.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Give and it Shall be Given Back to You
Go to the Wall Street Journal and read this entire article. It can be gotten free of charge online.
The evidence is unambiguous that donating money (and time) is one of the best ways to buy happiness. People who donate to charity are 40% more likely to say they are "very happy" than non-donors.
Psychologists have even tested whether charity makes people happy using randomized, controlled experiments -- the same procedure used for testing pharmaceuticals, except that, instead of administering a drug to one group and a placebo to the other, researchers randomly assign one group to act charitably toward another.
The results are clear: Givers of charity earn substantial mental and physical health rewards, even more than do the recipients of charity -- empirical evidence that it is indeed more blessed to give than to receive.
The bottom line is that the old axiom about money and happiness, properly understood, is quite wrong. So if you are so fortunate, enjoy the blessings of your abundance this holiday season -- and be sure to buy yourself a little extra joy via your favorite charity.
Mr. Brooks is an associate professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs.
URL for this article:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113400764335517001.html
Go to the Wall Street Journal and read this entire article. It can be gotten free of charge online.
The evidence is unambiguous that donating money (and time) is one of the best ways to buy happiness. People who donate to charity are 40% more likely to say they are "very happy" than non-donors.
Psychologists have even tested whether charity makes people happy using randomized, controlled experiments -- the same procedure used for testing pharmaceuticals, except that, instead of administering a drug to one group and a placebo to the other, researchers randomly assign one group to act charitably toward another.
The results are clear: Givers of charity earn substantial mental and physical health rewards, even more than do the recipients of charity -- empirical evidence that it is indeed more blessed to give than to receive.
The bottom line is that the old axiom about money and happiness, properly understood, is quite wrong. So if you are so fortunate, enjoy the blessings of your abundance this holiday season -- and be sure to buy yourself a little extra joy via your favorite charity.
Mr. Brooks is an associate professor at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Public Affairs.
URL for this article:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113400764335517001.html
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Rick Warren on Leaders' Failures
Over the years, I have observed at least 14 different characteristics that seem to be the tipping points for these leaders in their decision to do wrong. All of us have these basic tendencies;
however some develop them to a point where they go over the edge.
Over the years, I have observed at least 14 different characteristics that seem to be the tipping points for these leaders in their decision to do wrong. All of us have these basic tendencies;
however some develop them to a point where they go over the edge.
Ask these questions as you build a protective fence around your life
Do I feel a sense of entitlement? – "I deserve this because of who I am or what I do."
Am I a gifted entrepreneur, but my life is out of balance?
Do I have the ability to compartmentalize my moral choices? Can I do something wrong and then mentally put it aside while I do something right?
Do I expect my employees and peers to keep quiet when I do questionable things?
Am I a "high risk" man who loves the adrenaline rush of danger or compromise?
Am I a magnet for women? Do they love my power, money, influence, and personality?
Is my integrity in check?
Am I surrounded with "yes men" with very little accountability?
Do I compromise my conscience?
Who is my mentor? Who am I a mentor to?
Do I play by my own rules? Do I have an ethical code?
Do I handle stress in a healthy way?
What do I do with my money? Integrity includes both my physical and my financial self.
Are my moods under control?
Have I found a balance with money, sex, and power?
Remember that men who are stronger than you and me have made very bad decisions. Men who are weaker have made good decisions. The gift of choice can be the greatest blessing you have, and it can be the choice that severely damages you.
But remember that the temptations that come into your life are no different from what others experience. And God is faithful. When you are tempted, he will show you a way out so that you will not give in to it. (1 Cor. 10:13 NLT)
Adapted from Wayde Goodall's book Why Great Men Fall
This is why I am so involved with key leaders. Having a mentor/coach offer counsel, compassion and critical insights can prevent a huge fall.
Please Just Listen to Me
Ray Houghton, M.D.
Teen Times, Nov/Dec 1979
please, just listen
when I ask you to listen to me and you start giving advice,
you have not done what I asked
when I ask you to listen and you begin to tell me
why I shouldn’t feel that way,
you are trampling on my feelings
when I ask you to listen to me and you feel you have to do
something to solve my problems,
you have failed me, strange as that may seem
listen! All I ask you to do is listen
not talk, or do…just hear
advice is cheap; twenty five cents will get you both
dear abby and billy graham in the same newspaper
and I can do that myself. I’m not helpless
maybe discouraged and faltering but not helpless
when you do something for me that I can and need to do
for myself, you contribute to my fear and inadequacy
but when you accept, as a simple fact, that I do feel
no matter how irrational, then I can quit trying to
convince you and get back about the business of
understanding what’s behind this irrational feeling
and when that’s clear, the answers are obvious and I don’t
need advice. Irrational feelings make sense when we
understand what’s behind them
please listen and just hear me, and if you want to talk wait
a minute for your turn and I’ll listen to you
Ray Houghton, M.D.
Teen Times, Nov/Dec 1979
please, just listen
when I ask you to listen to me and you start giving advice,
you have not done what I asked
when I ask you to listen and you begin to tell me
why I shouldn’t feel that way,
you are trampling on my feelings
when I ask you to listen to me and you feel you have to do
something to solve my problems,
you have failed me, strange as that may seem
listen! All I ask you to do is listen
not talk, or do…just hear
advice is cheap; twenty five cents will get you both
dear abby and billy graham in the same newspaper
and I can do that myself. I’m not helpless
maybe discouraged and faltering but not helpless
when you do something for me that I can and need to do
for myself, you contribute to my fear and inadequacy
but when you accept, as a simple fact, that I do feel
no matter how irrational, then I can quit trying to
convince you and get back about the business of
understanding what’s behind this irrational feeling
and when that’s clear, the answers are obvious and I don’t
need advice. Irrational feelings make sense when we
understand what’s behind them
please listen and just hear me, and if you want to talk wait
a minute for your turn and I’ll listen to you
More P.C. Madness
By and large we agree with those who prefer to call Christmas "Christmas," rather than those who insist on the generic "holiday," which is supposedly more palatable to Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, Unitarians, Zoroastrians, Taoists, Sikhs, deists, pantheists, atheists, agnostics and adherents of the Baha'i faith, even though we fall into one of those 14 categories. But the effort to be sensitive to non-Christians can lead to some very funny results.
This is from the Web site of the Houston Symphony:
Handel's Messiah By Conductor Christopher Seaman
Both an awe-inspiring holiday tradition and a memorable religious experience, Handel's Messiah returns this holiday season. Guest conductor Christopher Seaman leads Houston's premier performance of Handel's choral masterwork, which includes the timeless Hallelujah Chorus.
If they really want to be sensitive to those who can't stomach "Christmas," shouldn't they change the name of the work to, say, Handel's "Dude"?
From the OpinionJournal [OpinionJournal@wsj.com]
Surely Political Correctness has reached its demented zenith with this uproariously funny contradiction. Calling Handle's very famous story of the Messiah, Jesus the Christ, as a "holiday tradition" must have put the publicist into a pretzel of contradictions. The very term, Messiah, means, Anointed One, and the entire musical is about the birth, life and triumph of Jesus Christ.
This is just one more reason to like classical music.
But, it also shows the ridiculuous lengths to which current PC zealots will go to expunge the word Christmas from our daily life. "Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned."
By and large we agree with those who prefer to call Christmas "Christmas," rather than those who insist on the generic "holiday," which is supposedly more palatable to Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, Unitarians, Zoroastrians, Taoists, Sikhs, deists, pantheists, atheists, agnostics and adherents of the Baha'i faith, even though we fall into one of those 14 categories. But the effort to be sensitive to non-Christians can lead to some very funny results.
This is from the Web site of the Houston Symphony:
Handel's Messiah By Conductor Christopher Seaman
Both an awe-inspiring holiday tradition and a memorable religious experience, Handel's Messiah returns this holiday season. Guest conductor Christopher Seaman leads Houston's premier performance of Handel's choral masterwork, which includes the timeless Hallelujah Chorus.
If they really want to be sensitive to those who can't stomach "Christmas," shouldn't they change the name of the work to, say, Handel's "Dude"?
From the OpinionJournal [OpinionJournal@wsj.com]
Surely Political Correctness has reached its demented zenith with this uproariously funny contradiction. Calling Handle's very famous story of the Messiah, Jesus the Christ, as a "holiday tradition" must have put the publicist into a pretzel of contradictions. The very term, Messiah, means, Anointed One, and the entire musical is about the birth, life and triumph of Jesus Christ.
This is just one more reason to like classical music.
But, it also shows the ridiculuous lengths to which current PC zealots will go to expunge the word Christmas from our daily life. "Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned."
Saturday, December 03, 2005
THE NEW SCHOOL PRAYER
Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.
If Scriptures now the class recites,
It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.
Our hair can be purple, orange or green
That's no offense; it's a freedom scene.
The law is specific,
The law is precise,
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.
For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all.
In silence alone must we meditate
God's name is prohibited by the state.
We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the `unwed daddy' Senior King.
It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgements' do not belong.
We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed.
Following them might make us proud.
It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns, the school's a mess
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot, my soul please take!
Amen
Author unknown
Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.
If Scriptures now the class recites,
It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.
Our hair can be purple, orange or green
That's no offense; it's a freedom scene.
The law is specific,
The law is precise,
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.
For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all.
In silence alone must we meditate
God's name is prohibited by the state.
We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the `unwed daddy' Senior King.
It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgements' do not belong.
We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed.
Following them might make us proud.
It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns, the school's a mess
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot, my soul please take!
Amen
Author unknown
July 27, 2005 For Immediate Release For More Information
JEWS AGAINST ANTI-CHRISTIAN DEFAMATION APPLAUDS SAN DIEGO VOTE TO SAVE MT. SOLEDAD CROSS
San Diego voters, who overwhelmingly approved the transfer of land to the federal government - to save the Mt. Soledad Cross -- are to be applauded," said JAACD President Don Feder. "The transfer is the only way to preserve a 29-foot cross at the center of a war memorial, which has stood at the summit of Mt. Soledad for 51 years," Feder disclosed.
In a city-wide referendum yesterday, 75% approved giving the land with the cross to the federal government to be maintained as a National War Memorial. The controversy started in 1989, when a local atheist sued the city, claiming the cross on municipal land violates the First Amendment Establishment Clause. Naturally, activist judges agreed.
In 1998, the City tried to sell the site to private parties who wanted to preserve the cross. The sale was invalidated by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The latest move will also be opposed. The ACLU - which claims the cross is the equivalent of a state church – has announced that it intends to challenge the referendum, which "doesn’t mean a damn thing," according to an ACLU lawyer.
"This is what we’ve come to," Feder commented. "The secularist jihad, led by ACLU mullahs, will stop at nothing to expunge this nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage, and to prevent the government from paying tribute to the Christians who died defending America."
"What next," Feder asked? "What about all of those crosses on federal land in veterans cemeteries, here and abroad? Doesn’t this constitute government endorsement of religion as well? Compare the number of Christians who died fighting for America to the number of ACLU lawyers who were killed in their country’s service. No comparison," Feder observed.
Like the two-thirds of San Diego voters who cast their ballots to save the Mt. Soledad cross, most Americans are fed-up with the left’s efforts to forcibly secularize a nation whose currency bears the motto, "In God We Trust" and whose founding document speaks of individuals being "endowed by their Creator" with inalienable rights.
http://www.jews4fairness.org/
JEWS AGAINST ANTI-CHRISTIAN DEFAMATION APPLAUDS SAN DIEGO VOTE TO SAVE MT. SOLEDAD CROSS
San Diego voters, who overwhelmingly approved the transfer of land to the federal government - to save the Mt. Soledad Cross -- are to be applauded," said JAACD President Don Feder. "The transfer is the only way to preserve a 29-foot cross at the center of a war memorial, which has stood at the summit of Mt. Soledad for 51 years," Feder disclosed.
In a city-wide referendum yesterday, 75% approved giving the land with the cross to the federal government to be maintained as a National War Memorial. The controversy started in 1989, when a local atheist sued the city, claiming the cross on municipal land violates the First Amendment Establishment Clause. Naturally, activist judges agreed.
In 1998, the City tried to sell the site to private parties who wanted to preserve the cross. The sale was invalidated by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The latest move will also be opposed. The ACLU - which claims the cross is the equivalent of a state church – has announced that it intends to challenge the referendum, which "doesn’t mean a damn thing," according to an ACLU lawyer.
"This is what we’ve come to," Feder commented. "The secularist jihad, led by ACLU mullahs, will stop at nothing to expunge this nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage, and to prevent the government from paying tribute to the Christians who died defending America."
"What next," Feder asked? "What about all of those crosses on federal land in veterans cemeteries, here and abroad? Doesn’t this constitute government endorsement of religion as well? Compare the number of Christians who died fighting for America to the number of ACLU lawyers who were killed in their country’s service. No comparison," Feder observed.
Like the two-thirds of San Diego voters who cast their ballots to save the Mt. Soledad cross, most Americans are fed-up with the left’s efforts to forcibly secularize a nation whose currency bears the motto, "In God We Trust" and whose founding document speaks of individuals being "endowed by their Creator" with inalienable rights.
http://www.jews4fairness.org/
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Lily Has Empathy for Grandma
Lily came to her mother this week and indicated she was very worried about her Grandma. She said, "I think Grandma needs to have another baby so she will not be so loney when I am not at her house."
Julie tried to tell Lily that she and Uncle Tim were Grandma's babies and she would not have any more. Lily did not seem to understand that reasoning at all.
It is wonderful when the grandkids realize we are lonely without them.
Lily came to her mother this week and indicated she was very worried about her Grandma. She said, "I think Grandma needs to have another baby so she will not be so loney when I am not at her house."Julie tried to tell Lily that she and Uncle Tim were Grandma's babies and she would not have any more. Lily did not seem to understand that reasoning at all.
It is wonderful when the grandkids realize we are lonely without them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)