Shannon's SuperScrip

"My Love" (Poem)

2012-01-11T14:19:00.000-08:00

"My Love"

By: Shannon Yáñez

07/24/1994

You have captured my heart

And fulfilled my dreams

The love that I have

Is much more than it seems

I love you as my man

I love you in all ways

A person possibly can

I hope these feelings are mutual

For if they fail to be

I will try to make them true

For all of eternity

I give to you my heart, my soul

My mind and body, too

In hoes that we’ll stay together

And be forever true

A past is a past

Not more than a memory

Now let’s focus on the future

That’s between you and me

Just one more thing

That I know is true

I really, truly do love you!

“My Friend?” (Poem)

2012-01-11T14:17:00.000-08:00

“My Friend?”

By: Shannon Yáñez

07/18/1994

“Peach fuzz” and

Sideburns-

Is all that’s for hair.

The longest of

Eyelashes-

To help that deep stare.

Only but a heartbeat

Away-

Is as far as it seems.

For someone this

Good-

Appears only in dreams.

My horoscope

Said-

This month is of men.

But I think I found my

One-

Without going through ten.

His psychology, my

Medicine-

Blend greatly together.

For never have I gotten

Along-

With anyone better.

I hope he’ll stay

Around-

At least as my friend.

I sure do want

More-

And hopefully without end!

“It’s Love” (Poem)

2012-01-11T14:11:00.000-08:00

“It’s Love”

By: Shannon Yáñez

02/31/00

Love can make you hurt

And love can make you cry,

Love can make you wonder

And want to know the why.

Love can be so happy

And love can be so blind,

Love can control

And make you lose your mind.

Love can be completely ignored

Or the center part of life,

Love can also be so intense

That I’d want to be your wife.

It’s love that drew me

Close to you,

It’s love that pulled

You and me apart,

It’s love that let’s me speak to you

Directly from the heart…

And say:

“I Love You!”

2012-01-11T14:07:00.001-08:00

"Worth Dying For"

By: Shannon Yáñez

December 1991

For the children

Trapped by drugs and war,

For the mother who wept

Until life was no more.

To change the system

That keeps us poor,

To uplift all people

Who were down before.

To be free in mind

And burned no more,

My life is dedicated—

It’s worth dying for!

“New Door” (Poem)

2012-01-11T14:02:00.000-08:00

“New Door”

By: Shannon Yáñez

10/30/98

I walked by this door

Just the other day

That seemed so familiar to me,

So I stopped and walked in

And then I saw

Something so clear and easy to see.

The path was so straight

And so free of debris,

Is all this for real?

All this joy is for me?

It made me happier

And stronger than could be,

And wanting to share it

And tell everybody.

Yell out to the world,

“I’m free, I’m free!”

For I’ve again found God

And he’s so happy with me!

“Is It My Fault?” (Poem)

2012-01-11T14:00:00.000-08:00

“Is It My Fault?”

By: Shannon Yáñez

03/23/97

Why do you get mad at me

Or think that I’m unfair?

Why do you ridicule me

Those poems are how I share.

Why do you go to sleep

When you’re the one fed up?

Why can’t I be acknowledged

For all the times I stay up?

Why can’t I treat you

The way you treat me?

The good things are you

The bad things are me.

I always get up

For whatever you need

Why am I the one you say

Has so much greed?

Why am I the dunce?

Why am I stupid?

Nothing I ever do

Is enough for what you did.

Why do you give

And always must receive?

For the same reason

I believe you will leave.

Why is it when I assert myself

I’m the one not right?

Why is something of your loss

Will always cause a fight?

Why do I write these stupid poems?

Because from me you turned away

And now asleep is how you stay.

“I Need A Little You” (Poem)

2012-01-11T13:58:00.000-08:00

“I Need A Little You”

By: Shannon Yáñez

I need a little you

To share my company,

I need a little you

To need a bit of me.

I need a little you

So that I can squeeze you,

I need a little you

So that I can please you.

I need a little you

To have someone to adore,

I need a little you

To love you much, much more.

“The Happiest” (Poem)

2012-01-11T13:56:00.000-08:00

“The Happiest”

By: Shannon Yáñez

I am the happiest

There could ever be,

Since July fifteenth

At a certain party.

Where I met

The love of my life,

To whom I’ll soon

Be his wife.

The love I have for him

Overpowers my heart,

And I know that we’ll

Never be apart.

He’s the best there is to offer

This I know,

Every moment together

Encourages my heart to grow.

The size of it now

I could not conceive,

But it will grow more

This I believe.

I really love this man

More than anyone could love,

We are perfect for each other

Just like a hand in a glove.

"Leave Me Alone" (Poem)

2012-01-11T13:46:00.000-08:00

"Leave Me Alone"

By: Shannon Yáñez

Having someone control you so

Come home each night never letting you go

You lose your strength, your self-esteem

You're no longer who you seem

Feeling anger in his stare

Knowing your needs, you dare not share

But just tell him what he wants to hear

If he had a bad day, he'll make it clear

I don't deserve to live like this

Where can I get the love I miss?

There is a way, I have been told

To get control, get out of his hold

To live for me and not for him

I'm important too, though I see him grin

Help me someone, don't let him come home

Help me tell him to leave me alone.

Essay - Designating English as the official language of the United States

2010-10-23T00:36:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my English Composition II class and submitted October 22, 2010.

Designating English as the official language of the United States

Currently, and surprisingly, there is no official language designated for the United States of America. Should English be that official language for our nation? The United States is usually thought of an English speaking country and the Official Language needs to be representative of the same for many reasons. The voting public is extremely divided; with some stating that the United States should remain language-less, others claim it should be Spanish, while another viewpoint is to choose multilingualism, and even some claim an unrecognized language of “American” should become the new official language. There are many views on this topic, heated debates, and political upheavals by both citizens and illegal immigrants of various backgrounds, not only the English and non-English speaking. This topic is extremely controversial among many groups; both political and non-political. The underlying ramifications of a decision; or lack thereof, many may not realize but will be presented thoroughly in addition to the mere implications of a decision finally being made on the topic on a nationwide basis and statewide level, will be weighed against each other. The results of the research efforts shall present several aspects concerning English as the official language of the United States including, but not limited to; language choices aside from English that are being presented as the official language, the financial ramifications between having and not having an official language, a brief history on the nature of English as the official language of the nation, a brief overview of the legal actions related to the same; and any incidental information that is deemed relevant pursuant to the nature of the research intentions.

In the advocacy against the proponents of having English as the official language of the United States, some have suggested bilingualism (two official languages), remaining without an unofficial language, and even an unrecognized language called ‘American’ as evidenced when “in 1923, Illinois officially declared that English would no longer be the official language of Illinois - but American would be. Many of Illinois' statutes refer to "the American language," (example: 225 ILCS 705/27. 01) though the official language of the state is now English (5 ILCS 460/20). ” (USConstitution.net, 2001a, para. 10). The proposition of bilingualism will not work because it still requires the financial strain and government accommodations regarding printed materials and translation services that failing to have a designated language is causing now; albeit on a smaller scale, but still an unnecessary scale. Remaining without an official language entirely is completely ludicrous simply for the reason that the people should be able and need to come to a common ground on the topic. Failure to agree only kills the fiscal state of economy more and more each day and creates unnecessary work and requirements that need to be complied with. Accepting an entirely new language, “American,” is not practical because of all the legislation this would result in both immediately and in the long-term. Details of the language would seemingly need to be clarified, enacted and made “official” in many ways before simply becoming the Nation’s language.

“The number of persons in the United States over the age of five who speak English less than very well soared from 14 million in 1992 to 24.5 million in 2007,' a whopping 175 percent increase. Although Spanish is the non-English language spoken most frequently at home, there are more than 300 single languages or "language families" used in the United States,” as stated by Steven M Kahaner (2009, para 1). As a result, everything including, but not limited to, “the costs of hiring bilingual teachers, printing bilingual textbooks, translating every government website into multiple languages, requiring every agency and department throughout the entire United States to hire translators and/or print materials to ensure that any person, speaking any language, can receive government services in their language of choice” (English First, 2009a, para. 1) are costs that burden all the taxpayers in the nation. The actual amount that these services results in, but it is estimated to be enormous! Consider this number is also reflective of “motor vehicle office’s, police stations, post offices, courtrooms, welfare offices, social security offices, perhaps, even prisons, and all those other places where a non-English speaking person might receive services provided in his or her language of choice.” (English First, 2009a, para. 5) “In the federal courts alone, interpreted events (defined as one interpreter, one case number, one date) have been increasing steadily over the past decade, from approximately 100,000 in 1996, to 232,457 in 113 different languages in the 12 months ending September 30, 2007,” as stated by Steven M Kahaner, quote ( 2009, para 1). A bill was introduced by Congresswoman Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, H.R. 1414 known as the Multilingual Services Accounting Act, that “requires every federal agency's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to start including detailed accounting information for all of its multilingual services in their mandatory annual reports to the Directors of each federal agency AND to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).” (English First, 2009a, para. 9)

“Declaring English the official language means that official government business at all levels must be conducted solely in English. This includes all public documents, records, legislation and regulations, as well as hearings, official ceremonies and public meetings. ” (U. S. English, Inc., 2010a, para. 1) Failure to declare the English language as the official language of the United States has had an enormous fiscal impact on the economy resulting from the financial drain that the same decision forces through the necessity of multilingual communication accommodations within all levels of government both locally and nationwide , as previously evidenced. Aside from financial implications, the resulting solidarity that would be established by the determination of such an official language is pivotal in the unification of the people as a nation, which is an important national temperament that is beneficial to all interested parties. As stated on USConstitution.net (2001a, para. 10) “English-only proponents…counter that English-only laws generally have exceptions for public safety and health needs. They note that English-only laws help governments save money by allowing publication of official documents in a single language, saving on translation and printing costs, and that English-only laws promote the learning of English by non-English speakers.” Jam Salter shares that, “Lawmakers recognized English as the "common" language in 1998 [in Missouri]” and “that [the] law carries no stipulations or requirements.” (Salter, 2008, para. 3) A “common” language means nothing, which is why there is carries no weight and why there needs to be a legislative delegation making English the “official” language!

It was found, upon researching the history of the topic, that Louisiana was the first state in the nation to designate English as their states official language back in 1812. The second state to follow suit was over 100 years later in 1920 and was Nebraska. Since then, 28 more states have designated English as their official language, however only 28 still have the laws in effect as the initiatives in Alaska and Massachusetts were ultimately overturned according to English First (2009b). Organizations and groups fight this battle as a whole such as “U.S. English, Inc. [which] is the nation’s oldest and largest non-partisan citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. [It was] founded in 1983 by the late Sen. S.I. Hayakawa of California.” (Business Wire, 2007, para. 5) which “…enacted official English legislation in 1986,” as stated on U. S. English, Inc. (2010c, para. 1) While “English-only proposals in the U.S. Congress have gone nowhere,” states Oren Dorrell (2006) , legislation is still being actively pursued on both a federal and state level by supporters “because the public, including Hispanics, is frustrated that illegal immigration continues to be a problem and they want the federal government to take action,” which Jose Esparza, vice chairman of the Arizona Latino Republican Association, explains. (As cited by Dorrell, 2006, para. 17)

In an explanation on US Constitution.net, “almost every session of Congress, an amendment to the Constitution is proposed in Congress to adopt English as the official language of the United States. Other efforts have attempted to take the easier route of changing the U.S. Code to make English the official language.” (2001a, para. 3) Additionally, “in 1996, U.S. English was instrumental in passing H.R. 123, ‘The Bill Emerson English Language Empowerment Act of 1996.’ That bill, making English the official language of the U.S. government, passed in the House of Representatives with a bipartisan vote of 259-169. Unfortunately, the Senate did not act on the bill before the end of the session. Currently, U.S. English is working with Rep. Steve King of Iowa to help pass an official English bill in the 110th Congress. H.R. 997 is pending in the U.S. House of Representatives.” (U.S. English, Inc., 2010a, para. 3) Currently, on a federal level, there are nine initiatives in 111th Congress: H.R. 997 - The English Language Unity Act of 2009, H.R. 764 - The American Elections Act, H.R. 1414 - The Multilingual Services Accounting Act, H.R. 1588 - Protecting Employers with English in the Workplace Policies, H.R. 3249 - Legislation to improve English literacy and encourage citizenship and immigrant integration, H.R. 1228 - A Bill to Repeal Executive Order 13166, H.R. 1229 - The National Language Act of 2009, S. 992 - The National Language Act of 2009, and S. 991 - The English Language Unity Act of 2009. (U.S. English, Inc., 2010b) “Since 1981, over 50 bills have been introduced supporting English as the official language of the United States... sponsors, eight have exceeded 100, including H.R. 997 in the 109th Congress. Five of the measures have passed one chamber of the U.S. Congress, by margins of 78-21, 76-18, 259-169, by unanimous vote, and most recently 62-35 in the U.S. Senate in May 2006.” (U.S. English, Inc., 2010f, para. 1, 3) On a state level for California, “there is no legislation pending in the 2010 session of the legislature that would strengthen the existing measure” when “[it] enacted official English legislation in 1986.” (U. S. English, Inc., 2010c, para. 1) An interesting tidbit, as stated by Salter is that “U.S. English says the Missouri ballot issue [back in 2008] marks the ninth time that voters in a state have been asked to make English the official language.” (2008, para. 18)

Interestingly enough, in spite of the lack of a decisive answer being made with regards to the official language either way, “a new survey this week from Rasmussen Reports finds that 87 percent of Americans favor making English the official language of the United States. This is a 3 percent increase over a similar survey Rasmussen Reports conducted in May 2009.” (U.S. English, 2010d, para. 1) Furthermore, “the same survey showed that 83 percent of respondents believe that companies should be allowed to require their employees to speak English in the workplace. This support is backed by 95 percent of public sector employees and nearly seventy percent of government workers.” (U.S. English, 2010d, para.2) The researcher has concluded that history continues to be evidentiary in determining the popularity and increasing support of this controversy and the sway of the people as a whole towards English as the country’s official language which as shown by “polls over the last 20 years [finding] overwhelming support for making English the official language of the United States.” (U.S. English, 2010d, para. 4)

Consequently, findings dictate that complacency is not the answer and the people need to answer a call for action by deciding on an official language for the nation. As stated by Haar, “English is in a sorry state in America...Legislators and citizens fiddle; meanwhile, a language languishes and vanishes.” (2009) It is obvious that by a popular vote of the people determining an official language of the United States, the financial strain alone that is caused by lack thereof could dramatically affect the economic status of the nation, for the better. The ensuing government employee wages and tangible costs incurred (associated with printing, translation services, and more) as a result of complying with a multilingualist nation, by default not choice, forces on the taxpayers and economy a far worse state than a decision on the same could ever invoke. As U.S. English, Inc. states, “Official English legislation contains common-sense exceptions permitting the use of languages other than English for such things as public health and safety services, judicial proceedings, foreign language instruction and the promotion of tourism.” (2010a, para. 2)

As stated by U. S. English, Inc., “Official English promotes unity…Official English empowers immigrants…Official English is common sense government.” (2010e, para 2, 3, 4) Ultimately, it is only a “lose-lose” situation to not have an official language in the United States. The “Official English legislation recognizes the need for common sense exceptions permitting the use of other languages for emergency, safety and health services; judicial proceedings; foreign language instruction and tourism promotion. Of course, because official English is only a limitation on government, it does not affect the languages spoken in private businesses, religious services or private conversations.” (U. S. English, Inc., 2010e, para 5) The effects that the general population are concerned will not really change, but merely save the country millions of valuable dollars in compliance funds that could be designated to areas that have a more prevalent need. It is unreasonable for the people to not agree and vote for English as the official language of the United States! “America has a long tradition of immigrants learning English and it has always been our cultural bond. It’s time for politicians in Washington to finally listen to the eighty-seven percent of Americans who want this and vote to make English our official language.” (U.S. English, 2010d, para. 3)

References

Constitutional Topic: Official Language (2001a). USConstitution.net. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_lang.html

Dorell, Oren. (2006, November 17). English as official language gains support at local levels ; Backers say laws help immigrants to communicate, avoid self- segregation :[FINAL Edition]. USA TODAY ,p. A.4. Retrieved October 21, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1164217921).

Georgia Voters Indicate Strong Support for Official English Amendment. (2007, 15 August). Business Wire. Retrieved October 21, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1320847301).

How Much Does America Spend On Multilingual Programs? (2009a). English First. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://englishfirst.org/congressc/how-much-does-america-spend-on-mulitlingual-programs.html

Kahaner, S.. (2009). The administration of justice in a multilingual society-open to interpretation or lost in translation? Judicature, 92(5), 224-231. Retrieved October 21, 2010, from Research Library. (Document ID: 1731361091).

Legislation. (2010b). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/310

Legislative History (2010f). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 21, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/27

News & Media, Support for English as official language grows three percent in one year. (2010d). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/774

Official English States. (2009b). English First. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://englishfirst.org/englishstates/

Salter, Jim. (2008, October 5). Amendment would require English. St. Louis Post - Dispatch,p. E.2. Retrieved October 21, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1567755781).

Sanford-Haar, Cathleen. (2007, March 19). English the official language? Not in America :[Third Edition]. St. Louis Post - Dispatch, p. B.7. Retrieved October 21, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1237740991).

State Legislation – California. (2010c). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/364?state=CA

What is Official English? (2010a). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/9

Why is Official English Necessary? (2010e). U.S. English, Inc. Retrieved on October 4, 2010 from http://www.us-english.org/view/10

________________________________

2010 Copyright by Shannon Peace

Research Proposal: Designating English as the official language of the United States

2010-09-27T22:45:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my English Composition I class and submitted August 23, 2010.

Research Proposal: Designating English as the official language of the United States

The subject matter of this research will be the varying perspectives surrounding designating English as the official language of the United States. Information will be presented as a result of research within this topic and the alternatives regarding the same. This topic is extremely controversial among many groups; both political and non-political. The underlying ramifications of a decision; or lack thereof, many may not realize, but will be presented thoroughly. The mere implications of a decision finally being made on the topic on a nationwide basis, as well as a statewide level, will be weighed against each other.

Currently, and surprisingly, there is no official language designated for the United States of America. Should English be that official language for our nation? The voting public is very divided; with some stating that the United States should remain language-less, others claim it should be Spanish, while another viewpoint is to choose multilingualism, and even some claim an unrecognized language of “American” should become the new official language. There are many views on this topic, heated debates, and political upheavals by both citizens and illegal immigrants of various backgrounds, not only the English and non-English speaking.

This research effort shall present several aspects concerning English as the official language of the United States including, but not limited to; language choices aside from English that are being presented as the official language, the financial ramifications between having and not having an official language, a brief history on the nature of English as the official language of the nation, a brief overview of the legal actions related to the same; and any incidental information that is deemed relevant pursuant to the nature of the research intentions.

The entirety of the data collection for this research project will be done online through the utilization of various web-based resources. There are many websites that have adequate information, both biased and unbiased, to sort through during the research process. The researcher intends on making use of online search databases for the primary source of information such as Google Scholar, ProQuest, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), the World Book Online, Bing, and additional resources not yet determined that are available by means of the Ashford Library; all of which will serve as resources in locating secondary topic specific articles. The researcher intends to employ sites such as www.USConstitution.net, www.EnglishFirst.org, www.StrictlySpanish.com, and U.S. English, Inc for information available representing varied viewpoints, historical data, legal actions, and more; which will provide the necessary resources specific to this topic, however with some bias to filter through.

Preliminary findings show that complacency is not the answer and the people need to answer a call for action by deciding on an official language for the nation. The researcher has initially concluded that by a popular vote of the people determining an official language of the United States, the financial strain alone that is caused by lack thereof could dramatically affect the economic status of the nation, for the better. The ensuing government employee wages and tangible costs incurred (associated with printing, translation services, and more) as a result of complying with a multilingualist nation, by default not choice, forces on the taxpayers and economy a far worse state than a decision on the same could ever invoke.

Declaration of the English language as the official language of the United States has an enormous fiscal impact on the economy resulting from the financial drain that failing to decide on the same forces through the necessity of multilingual communication accommodations within all levels of government both locally and nationwide. Aside from financial implications, the resulting solidarity that would be established by the determination of such an official language is pivotal in the unification of the people as a nation, which is an important national temperament that is beneficial to all interested parties.

___________________________

2010 Copyright by Shannon Peace

It’s Never too Late to go Back to School! (Essay)

2010-09-12T21:31:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my English Composition I class and submitted August 23, 2010.

It’s Never too Late to go Back to School!

After high school graduation I delayed my college plans to raise my child and continue working knowing that I would return to school one day. Sixteen years later, life has changed dramatically enough to necessitate a change as well as provide the opportunity for me to start working towards that dream. Over the years, I have always told my children (and promised to myself) that I would go to college no matter how old I was since I loved and excelled in school, wanted my children to learn that the importance of an education and to work towards goals.

I was a very driven student, especially in high school, by belonging to almost every campus group that existed, including being Vice President of the Writer’s Club and President of the Art Club, along with the academic groups I earned the right to be in. I maintained 8 classes a day, AP classes, and any involvement that I could for the enjoyment and the “college resume” it would create when the time came. Beginning in my freshman year, I was published in national anthologies for poetry and during my junior year I was nominated and inducted into the “Who’s Who of American High School Students.” I was on the path to make my goal a reality but my plan was interrupted when I found out I was pregnant when I was 15 years old, which was November of my Junior year.

I found out a few weeks before turning 16 that I was pregnant, planned to have an abortion but it was determined that I was 8 months along! At that point, delivery was my only choice and at the same time adoption was not since I am not prone to giving in or giving up when faced with a challenge. So, 3 weeks after turning 16 years old I delivered a healthy baby girl, even with almost no prenatal care. Early in my senior year I was accepted in to the University of Redlands, with scholarships, into their Medical degree program with the plans of becoming a General Practitioner. However, with the realization of the logistics of the college location, costs I would still have to cover and having a child to provide for, I declined to attend. That was the first decision to delay my college career that I made. It was then that a personal motto of “It’s never too late to go back to school” began carrying me through my life decisions that included marriages, more children, and focusing on furthering the stability of my employment as it presented itself. I am now on my 3rd marriage, have 4 biological children, and 1 step-daughter who have all heard me recite my motto many times over the years.

I ended up working in Real Estate, specifically Title and Escrow, for the last 12 years making a decent amount of money considering there is no degree for the area I work in. In 2009 I was diagnosed with Osteo Arthritis, Spinal Stenosis and 2 bulged disks in my lumbar spine. The demands of my work had exacerbated my back issues due to the recent booming Real Estate market. After the birth of my last child, I returned to work and my back pain became so debilitating that I was calling into work “immobile” all too often and was put on disability for the 3rd time. Following months of physical therapy and a back procedure that had minimal impact on my pain, my Doctor suggested that I look into changing careers to better accommodate the demands of my medical issues, which have no cure and will only get progressively worse. That’s when Doctor’s orders triggered my looking into school.

Finally, I am showing my children, by example, how driven I am academically and how study habits reap the results that I have spent years encouraging them to achieve. My grades and eagerness to do homework are also being evidenced by my grades, which they are both shocked and proud of. With 3 of my 5 children in high school now, the family “joke” is that I still started college before they did, if only by a year! I can proudly proclaim that I am finally living up to that I have always said, “It’s never too late to go back to school”.

___________________________

2010 Copyright by Shannon Peace

Personal Progression (Essay)

2010-09-12T20:21:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Adult Development and Life Assessment class and submitted July 18, 2010.

Personal Progression

Our childhood and genetic predispositions usually determine how most of us will end up as an adult and the direction each of our lives will take. Most would also agree that we are a product of the culmination of both influences with a victim mentality and a result of the effects of the same. Similarly, Bob Cave, an Eclectic Theorist, takes on the idea that “if a child knows that they are loved and accepted unconditionally by the parents, they will be able to endure almost any difficult circumstance.” (Cave, n.d.) However, I have always embraced the mentality that we are survivors and can consciously change many things in our life, both internally and externally, through personal intention or indirect modeling of behaviors and mindsets that can be learned. My personal progression through life against familial challenges and modeled behaviors in addition to desires and future goals all start with where I came from.

On December 17, 1976, I was born into the world as the child of an unwed single mother who was barely 21 years old with no education past high school and who had no desire for a child. I was a “love child”, as they say, the result of an affair by my father who had already had a wife and eventually 4 daughters by his wife, with his oldest less than 6 months older than me. I am an only child and my mother never married during all these years. I never had a father figure growing up and my biological father never outwardly claimed me or supported us over the years, either. Little to no family direction and even less resources available combined with the personal desire for attention and a sense of self-worth lead me to be creative with ways to occupy my time which resulted in shaping my behavior to the desired end result of accolades and acceptance, as suggested in Burrhus Frederic Skinner’s theory of operant conditioning. (WGBH Educational Foundation, 1998)

Growing up I was very involved in social activities where achievements and the ability to excel individually were easier, accepted and expected to a degree. Aside from academic merit, extra-curricular activities with the school and community became a staple in my childhood. Expertise in baton twirling and rhythmic ribbons along with the parades and competitions they led to were a commonplace activity for me during the elementary school years. I also started with the Daisies, quickly progressing into the Brownies and Girl Scouts as I got into Junior High School. In numerous areas I excelled with awards, trophies and recognition of all kinds. Junior high school started my school choir career as a Soprano Section leader with regular solos and an operatic voice to carry me through 11th grade. In high school, I became certified as a Peer P.A.L.S. counselor and was regularly counseling students in need during my time in high school, with my primary client being a suicidal freshman. When considering how I succeeded academically and in extra-curricular activities, you can safely conclude that this was an active defense mechanism called “compensation” as Freud referred to in his Psychoanalytic theory. (Witt and Mossler, 2010)

The feelings that I experienced growing up whenever I excelled have definitely flowed over into my adulthood and I have made many conscious choices to continue on the path of positive distinction. In junior high I decided I wanted to become a Doctor, more specifically a General Practitioner. Once I reached Biology class in high school I changed over to Entomology. This was not surprising since I always collected bugs, studied animals and nature and loved dissecting bugs throughout childhood. More recently, as the Forensics area has developed through technology advancement has my desire to add Forensics to my Entomology career grown. Not to long ago I realized that my dream of the combination of the two fields is an actual area of study and work, which is when I made the final determination of what I wanted to be “when I grew up”, a Forensic Entomologist. As I fine tuned my career direction over time, I engaged a process of “formal operational thought” as suggested in Piaget’s cognitive development theory. (Witt and Mossler, 2010)

In 1993, when I was a junior in high school and had been 16 for only 3 weeks, I gave birth to my first child. I was not married to her father and saw the path my mother took repeating itself. I made a point to try and stop the cycle, so to speak, so I stayed in school and graduated high school in 1994 with honors and a 4.3 GPA. I was accepted into the University of Redlands with a scholarship into their Medicine program, but chose not to attend due to logistics and I told myself that I could always go back to school, but I could not raise my child again. As researched in Héfer Bembenutty’s Expectancy-Value theory, the competing intentions of a family and academic achievement led to the delay of my academic gratification because the alternatives to my academic goals were more important, which were my children. (Bembenutty, 2007) I had my second child in 1995 and married his father in 1996, but separated in 1998 and was divorced in 1999. In 2002 I married my second husband, had my third child in 2005, became separated in 2006 and legally divorced in 2008. I married my third husband in 2008 and became a step-mother to his child that he had from a previous spouse and had my fourth child in 2009. Now, I have a huge extended family including parents, brothers and sisters-in-law with my husbands’ family. An immediate and extended family such as this is something I have wanted all these years, but is unchartered territory for me, not to mention the acceptable dynamic between siblings that I am unfamiliar with as an only child.

Everyone has personal, professional and academic goals to some measure, whether far-reaching or none, they are all goals. Family balance is an important personal goal for me. The different ages, genders, parental dynamics with different parent sets and the desired cohesiveness of everyone and each individual situation is a lot of work, but very important to create a happy family. Professionally, I would like to be able to work but cannot do so without my back issues resolved. Whether that is a strict regimen of medication and physical therapy or surgery, something tangible has to happen to allow me to re-enter the workforce. I would absolutely love to work within the field I am going to school for, however at this point my prior field would suffice. Completion of my 4 year degree in Social and Criminal Justice is my short term academic goal. I would eventually like a Doctorate and to specialize in Forensic Entomology, or Medicocriminal Entomology, which is the science of using insect evidence to uncover circumstances of interest to the law, often related to a crime. (Merritt, n.d.)

References

Bembenutty, Héfer. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.heferbembenutty.com/index.html

Cave, Bob. (n.d.). The eclectic theory of personality. Retrieved from www.family-university.org/archive/eclectic_personality_theory.html

Merritt, Richard. (n.d.). American Board of Forensic Entomology. Retrieved from http://www.forensicentomologist.org/index.html

WGBH Educational Foundation. (1998). People and discoveries .Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/bhskin.html

Witt, G.A., & Mossler, R.A. (2010). Adult development and life assessment. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/AUPSY202.10.1

___________________________

2010 Copyright by Shannon Peace

Can you plagiarize yourself?

2010-09-09T22:56:00.000-07:00

Background: This topic was a result of my English Composition I class. A peer, Jeffrey O'Connell, posted the following on 08/31/2010:

"Plagiarism is using someone else's ideas and material that isn't common knowledge, without giving credit to that person and citing them. Changing words around and paraphrasing in your own words is also considered plagiarism. The most important concept that I learned about plagiarism was that you can actually be found guilty of plagiarizing yourself. This was something I was completely unaware of. However, I don't agree with it. Think about it. Plagiarism, according to the tutorial, is theft. Well if it's considered theft you have to ask yourself, "how does one steal from oneself?" You can't be found guilty of stealing your own car, you can't be found guilty of stealing your own money, so how can you possibly steal your own ideas. I understand that if you wrote a paper last semester on a specific topic and used that very same paper, word-for-word, for a class this semester, to be considered plagiarism. That I get, but if you changed the words around but kept on the same topic, it should not be considered plagiarism, because once again, how can you be guilty of stealing from yourself. It was your ideas to begin with. My post may sound a little confusing, I admit, but hopefully someone out there understands what I'm getting at and agrees with me. Let me know everybody."

Here was my response, posted on 09/01/2010:

"Plagiarism of yourself is an interesting concept, I agree. I think a primary point of citing sources, aside from the simple idea of using someone else's ideas, is to give credit to something not "new" that you are referring to. Think of the definition again and consider these questions:

Is it common knowledge that you did a paper on the same topic last semester?
Is paraphrasing of someone else plagiarism? Why not yourself, if you are the source?
Is "re-wording" still not an indirect form of paraphrasing?
Why would you discount yourself to not consider yourself worthy of citation?

Take this as another explanation:

"6. Never plagiarize yourself. You can refer to papers you have previously written or published. You can even quote yourself. But never copy/paste previous writing and present it as if it’s new. To do so is to deceive your instructors." (2009 Cengage Learning, Inc.) They have a whole section on plagiarism, that is quite interesting, by the way that you can check out.

Dr. Lance River's perspective from Lake Superior State University is, "...Plagiarism is the use of someone else’s words or ideas as your own without giving appropriate credit or without the person’s consent to use his or her words or ideas without acknowledgment. This can be somewhat confusing, because at its core, plagiarism isn’t just about stealing someone else’s words or ideas, but also about claiming to have done work you actually haven’t. Thus, many professors, me included, would see using a paper or research you have done for one course in fulfillment of an assignment in another as plagiarism, even though you are the paper’s author. You can plagiarize yourself!" (Adapted from Lunsford and Connors, The St. Martin's Handbook (3d ed. NY: St. Martin's, 1995); the SIUC Department of Computer Science Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism; the SIUC Department of English Policy on Plagiarism; Homewood-Flossmoor (IL) High School Policy; Fowler, The Little, Brown Handbook (2d ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1983); and the SIUC Student Conduct Code)

I think for all intensive purposes you can plagiarize yourself, however obscure the idea may seem, when you consider the technical definition of the term. Stating simply that is it "theft", is too washed down, in my opinion. When working with papers and citations, by default we are dealing with technicalities (i.e. APA formatting), so the definitions and the requirements they demand must me considered with the same respect. Just food for thought.

Keep in mind, there are MANY sites that teachers probably use to verify originality these days to verify originality. You don't want to "fail" because of improper citation, right?"

My instructor respond to my posting, on 09/06/2010, with the following:

"You are amazing, Shannon, thank you for this. Mrs. Smith"

Needlss to say, I think my instructor agreed with my position. What do you think?

The ‘Modern’ Christian (Essay)

2010-09-03T19:21:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Christians and Culture class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted May 13, 2000.

The ‘Modern’ Christian

The word “Christian” these days in many ways is very stereotypical. So many people rally for us to understand them better; more Women’s rights (or should I say Womyn’s rights?), African American’s rights, Disabled person’s rights all just and in some ways deserving and necessary. I, as a Christian, want to be understood better! The stereotype that generally creates a mental image in one’s mind is so detailed that it makes it almost impossible for anyone to be Christian and needs to be broken. Using age, skin color, ethnicity, physical appearance, hobbies, music preferences, that persons’ life before being a believer, and even down to education for some people, to, in a sense, discriminate against the Body of Christ. There is also tradition, and cultural comforts that impress expectations that “Christians” should and should not do. Sadly, almost all of the above-mentioned items merely turn people away from joining, understanding, and growing in the Body of Christ! This is not to say that all things are acceptable, but I think that this way of thinking usually hurts rather than helps evangelism and all its’ possible positive results.

First, what does the term Christian or Christianity mean and encompass? The word Christian does not refer to an object, rather it is “a person who believes in Jesus Christ; an adherent of Christianity.” This definition alone should destroy half the battle in society, as you can only refer to a person as Christian not a movie, or a book, or a song. Take into account a tattoo. Is a tattoo wrong? Is it more “Christian” if it is of a cross? A tattoo is a choice you make, irrelevant of what it is, the tattoo is not Christian…the question should be whether the person bearing it is. Then again, you cannot fairly say that someone is any less Christian than the next because of a tattoo. This is where tradition and society come into play and create stereotypes and make determinations as to what is and is not accepted as being Christian. Remember, however, the only thing that is Christian is a Christ believing person.

So, with that in mind, why is it so hard for some people to believe? There are too many preconceived ideas and non-biblically based requirements from a lot of churches when it comes to salvation and beliefs. This also applies to those who are already believers; just on a path of faith grounded in tradition and cultural bias rather than biblically supported ideas. Our focus, generally, is to the non-believer and “as the non-Christian contemplates the vast puzzle of Christianity, he visualizes a lot more pieces in it than Christ on the Cross.” Some of these ideas, as Joseph C. Aldrich states, are profound yet essential in eliminating for the breaking down boundaries, created by the world, in order to more effectively reach the surrounding community. One being, “to become a Christian, I must give up everything I enjoy.” This could be true depending on what you enjoy; but the Bible says, most strongly in Ephesians 4:22-24, “That ye put off concerning that former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on a new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” So, with a newfound belief system of Christianity comes a new man, created in the image and likeness of God; and a new definition of what ‘fun’ is to some extent of the word. As a new believer, studying the Bible and learning to grow in, with, and by it is necessary. With that, “proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” (Eph 5:10-11) It must be understood that sacrifices are made with all changes in life, but that life does not get worse once you are a Christian. Another idea presented is that “to become a Christian, I must go to church and get involved in lots of meetings.” This idea is still perpetuated and taken in a negative manner. The bible says in Eph 2:8-9 that “for by grace you are saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” So faith is the key here. How do we get faith? Romans 10:8,17 says, “…The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach…So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” By being able to clarify these ideas to a non-believer one should be able to reach a lot of people.

Having these ideas understood by the community and those currently in the church is a key to having a more ‘community correct’ church. Breaking down preconceived ideas about Christians, their beliefs, and what is necessary to be a believer is the hardest thing to do. Another issue in getting out to the community is the physical aspect. Literally, the world is very fast paced, busy, and, for the most part, lacking the morals and values that would normally drive people towards a more positive environment such as church. So, a church must know what avenue to use to effectively reach the community in order to discuss the aforementioned preconceptions. Some may have more frequent services, or evening services. Others might invite the local high school choir to perform one Sunday, drawing in families of the performers, sending out mailers about the church, or physically walking through town with the church’s information. There are also group meetings aimed towards certain people, such as Youth groups, Men and Woman’s bible study, and many more. Ways of attracting the community are endless with one of the most vital being word of mouth. On that note, it is important to know that a church cannot solely focus on bringing people into church, but also keeping them there, and happily, and a biblically based faith, rather than a traditional or culturally biased church and belief system. “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh…Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exaltheth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” (II Cor. 10:3,5)

So many things can affect how much diversity a church has in its local body. Personally I agree with, as the old saying goes, “Quality over quantity.” I would rather be part of a numerically smaller yet biblically based and spiritually stronger church any day. The overwhelming fulfillment by the Spirit will allow one “to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints that is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God. Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, Unto him be glory in the church by Jesus Christ throughout all ages, world without end.” (Eph 3:16-21) So, with that in mind, go as it says in Ephesians 4:17,29 and “testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, …Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.” The Lord does not discriminate, does not take into consideration the cultural differences, or location. So, why as a believer would we? Or why would we allow for people to use such traditions and culture comforts to negatively affect out walk in faith and spreading the word? Let’s not allow it; let’s make a new cultural comfort out of Christianity. It is cool to be Christian!

4 - Refer to footnote 3, Emphasis his.

5 - Refer to footnote 3, Emphasis his.

6 - Refer to footnote 3, Emphasis his.

7 - Refer to footnote 3, Emphasis his.

__________________________________________

The Fall of Man (Essay)

2010-09-03T19:01:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Theology Essentials I class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted March 19, 2001.

The Fall of Man

The fall of man is the descent from innocence to guilt after Eve, then Adam ate of the fruit in Genesis 3: 6, “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”

There are different views concerning the validity of the fall that can be classified into three categories. First being that it is a legend and none of the facts are true. Second are those that believe it as truth, without accepting its historical worth. Thirdly, and more rationally, are those that take it to be a factual and historical truth. Being that the latter is what I agree with, I will use this to discuss the consequences of the fall. There are temporal and spiritual consequences in addition to two specific penalties resulting from the fall, and the reason that we needed Jesus to die on the cross.

There are two ramifications in addition to specific penalties to man . One being that all sin affects others. Eve’s sin to Adam and Adam’s sin to the entire race, even to us now, as without a doubt we are all born into sin as a result of the original sin. No one can sin privately, without having an effect on any single person as all that we do, or fail to do, will have some bearing with another person’s heart. The second penalty is that once committed, sin can never be undone. Forgiveness can occur, along with healing and fellowship to restore a person to who they were before, but the sin will always have happened. For example, the kingdom being taken away form Saul and his descendants in 1 Samuel 13:13-14, “Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which he commanded thee: …But now thy kingdom shall not continue.” Also, Esau in Hebrews 12:16, “ Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance.”

There are more specific penalties incurred due to the fall in the temporal sense, or relating to time in the sense of being the opposite of eternity; plainly meaning our lack of an eternal and easy life. It starts when man is driven from paradise in Genesis 3:23, “Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” There were also penalties that were gender specific. Direct punishment for the man, was “…because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Punishment for the woman, “… he said, I [he] will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” (Gen 3:16-19) The worst of all, though, being death, “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive”(1 Cor 15:21-22) and “… we have been planted together in the likeness of his death.” (Romans 6:5) None of these are pleasures in life, but would you rather have a physical penalty, or a spiritual one?

There are numerous spiritual consequences as a result of the original sin. Separation from God and “having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But ye have not so learned Christ;” (Eph 4:18-20) Being born in sin, or receiving the inherited sin, as “… in sin did my mother conceive me,” (Psa 51:5)

and thoughts of the heart that are evil, “for out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.” (Matt 15:19). We are in bondage to sin as Romans 6:17 says, “… that ye were the servants of sin,” and to Satan, “…that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” (Heb 2:14b-15) Also, “being dead in your [our] sins” (Col 2:13), having “blindness of [in] their [our] heart” (Eph 4:18b) and depraved of all purity, as “…unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.” (Titus 1:15). Lastly, we must know that the biggest penalty was the issue of our salvation being lost, but not to worry “for God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16)

So, with all this punishment and loss as a result of the fall, where does that leave us, The Body of Christ? Simply, there was a promise of redemption. Genesis 3:15 says, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” This is a ‘protevangelium’, or the first announcement of gospel in Scripture. Christ would render Satan powerless, enabling man to be forever restored to fellowship with God, making possible man’s ultimate rule. (Heb 2:14, Col 2:4-15) Although, Adam and Eve sinned, God moved to resolve man’s

dilemma by pointing to a future Savior who would eliminate death, restore man to fellowship with God, and consummate history with Messiah’s reign on earth to restore all that Adam has lost. In addition, a few things should be noted during this time about God himself. God revealed himself as omnipotent and sovereign in the creation on the universe and the world. God is holy, demanding obedience for fellowship with himself, yet also a God of grace, with an example of through the promise of a Savior. Man is a responsible creature and a constituted sinner through the inherited sin, the sin of Adam.

What more would be necessary from a God, graciousness and one who will deliver us who are “in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.” (Heb 4:15b-16)

Knowing and believing that the “Fall of Man” was an actual occurrence that cost us our salvation, is something that one must understand before, I believe, you can minutely grasp the enormity of what Jesus did for all of us on the cross. We were all lost and dead to the world, literally. Then, came Jesus to save the world that wanted to be saved. Why would you not want to tell the rest of the people about the only one that can give everlasting life by calling on his name? “That whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered” (Joel 2:32) and “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8) Have you accepted your undeserved gift yet?

__________________________________________

God’s Attributes: Actual or Condescending? (Essay)

2010-09-03T18:41:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Advanced Theology class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted October 3, 2001.

God’s Attributes: Actual or Condescending?

There are certain things in the Bible that trigger huge debates, such as the topic of the literal (as opposed to figurative) application of humanlike attributes to God, in the cases as they are actually stated in the Bible. Many believe that repentance by God, in addition to many other similar emotions, is ‘our’ (fallible, small-minded humans) attributing to God human feelings and actions to the Deity. This ‘application’ is also known by the more commonly used term, anthropomorphisms. This topic has puzzled me, depending on whom I am discussing it with. Some think that God is ‘talking down’ to us in order for us to understand his point. I have heard that the word was mistranslated and, “We do not really know what He was trying to say.” Others assert that, “Yes, in fact God did experience that feeling.” I personally can accept the fact that these attributes (material and immaterial) applied to God were written the way He wanted them to be. There was nothing lost in translation and we can take them as literal. This however, is not an exhaustive explanation for me, as there are still verses to discuss with respect to different attributes in order to come to a complete conclusion.

Can God repent? Genesis 6:6-7 says, “And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.” This seems to clearly mean that He can repent, and this is only one verse of many that are considered anthropomorphisms. So where is the problem? First off, the word ‘repent’ means “to feel regret…change one’s mind” So, the question becomes: Can God change His mind? Since, God is moving in time with us now and does not know what will happen tomorrow, then He can. Change His mind. If he does and did not predestine me to do anything as an individual, then He logically could not have predestined His own thoughts and feelings, right? Therefore, it is only logical to think that God in his infinite power can literally do whatever He wants, whether or not He would choose to, including changing His mind. However, Scofield says, “When applied to God the word is used phenomenally according to the O.T. custom. God seems to change His mind. The phenomena are such as, in the case of a man, would indicate a change of man.”” Scofield is in a roundabout way saying that God in fact does not change His mind; we just think He does because He seems to. This logic is illogic to me to be honest. The thoughts behind most who sway this way started with the foundation that Plato created. Plato once said, “The perfect does not change. God is perfect. God does not change.” On the other hand, this sounds completely logical also, does it not? God is in fact perfect, which I believe we would all agree on. However, God is not imperfect for changing His mind. That, to me, makes Him an even more awesome and more powerful God since He is actually dealing with us on an interactive and immediate level. Wouldn’t it be much easier to predestinate everything and then sit back and watch it all happen? We, as humans, can barely handle our own finite lives with the amount of people we deal with. Imagine having to deal with all the people from all time and at all times. This is a definite demonstration of what my God can do. As humans, we cannot fathom that idea, so some choose to say it isn’t so by following the seemingly logical thoughts of Plato, which in the long run I feel minimizes God’s overall abilities with our (Him and us) interactions.

Depending on what you feel is the more rational way to view God and his interactions with man that will determine how you view the necessity and purpose of any verses containing anthropomorphisms. I believe that the verses are not used in a condescending manner as E.W. Bullinger says, nor an exaggeration of the truth to make a point to the readers as I have heard others say. The Holy Spirit will work in us to make the point; we do not need for God to exaggerate one word in a verse. In the cases of the use of the parables, that is an obviously more clear purpose of getting a point across to the readers, but what would the use of the word “repent” in a verse do? I do not see any other purpose but to take those instances literally and to try to understand the complexity that our God works in to the point that He can repent because he is able to when we, as free will agents, have not done what we are supposed to have done. With that in mind look to Exodus 32:14, “And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” This is when Moses changed God’s mind to not “wax hot against them [Israel].” (Ex. 32:10) In this instance, God did literally change His mind (repent), as he did not put His wrath upon the people. Another example of God’s ability to repent is in 1Samuel 15:11 and 35, “It repenteth me [God] that I have set Saul to be king…” and “…the Lord repented that He had made Saul king over Israel.” An interesting verse is 1Samuel 15:29, ”And also the Strength of Israel [God] will not lie nor repent for he is not a man, that he should repent.” Here, most Calvinists have argued that this plainly states that God cannot repent, so the other verses must be exaggerations or ones of condescension. I urge you, however, to re-read the passage. It does say that God ‘should’ not repent; it does not say that he cannot, will not or does not. I feel this verse is saying that God should not have to repent, the same way that I should not have to tell my children more than once to clean their room, because they know what they need to and should be doing it. This does not mean that I will not tell them more than once, and that God will not repent.

Our understanding of God can be hindered by the use of these anthropomorphisms, if our foundation for understanding is not on stable ground to begin with. If one does not understand that God has not predestined the world and its events before time, then the idea of God is as preposterous to them as it would be to me to say the God could not change His mind. The topic of anthropomorphisms is so translucently clear if the foundation is the right one. God is not seeing yesterday and tomorrow right now as he watches me type. He only can see what I have done once I do it and my heart. He does not know if I will ever turn in this writing to fulfill my assignment. He does however; conclude based on my past actions and my oh-so-obvious human predictability as to whether or not I will. With that in mind, it is not the anthropomorphism that will hinder my understanding of God, but rather my understanding of God that may hinder the purpose or meaning of the anthropomorphism.

Many times I have come to notice that people read the Bible and put culture or presuppositions into it. We need to pull from the text and apply it to our lives, not add into it to make it fit our lifestyle. People often do this with God. They want to put our limited understanding onto what He can do. It should be the opposite. God can do all things, and we cannot. So, for God to be able to rejoice (Isa. 62:5), have sorrow and grief (Judges. 10:16), to love (Prov. 3:12), to repent (2Sam. 24:16), have anger and vengeance (Nah. 1:2), be comforted (Ezek. 5:13), have jealousy (Ex. 20:5) and many more immaterial feelings are very seemingly possible. We have them, so why can’t God? Has He put limits on Himself? What about the idea that we are made in His image? What if we have our feelings because we got them from His image, just like everything else? We must sway away from putting our limitations onto God. He has no limitations of this sort.

With those that say an anthropomorphism is just a word that was mistranslated and, “We do not really know what He was trying to say” take away from the whole point of inspiration in the Bible, which is a huge and vital part of it. There are many random thoughts on this topic, but I do not believe (nor understand) such random theology. I believe only in grounded, logical and biblically correct concepts. For that reason, the anthropomorphism is not a ‘problem’ for me as it would be to others. On the contrary, it is the epitome of the awesomeness of what my God can do. If I were to discount the verses in question, what would that do to the quality and validity of the rest of the Bible?

The Practical Application to Christians (Essay)

2010-09-03T18:36:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Titus: Digging Deeper class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted October 17, 2001.

The Practical Application to Christians

I have a book that I usually reference when attempting to argue a point, which is called the “Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties.” To my surprise, it actually covers seemingly difficult things, an “FAQ” of sorts, throughout 52 books of the Bible. Titus is not one of them that is discussed! Not only did this make my study harder to promote, it made me think in a simpler manner. Titus is not as ‘difficult’ as I am trying to make it.

I feel a strong thread throughout the whole book of Titus is the, or our, actions as Christians. (Quote Titus Commentary book: pg. 69) Paul makes it even easier for Titus, and now us as readers, with what do to if we have a certain role in the church, also. As soon as Paul finishes with his “credentials”, he immediately focuses on Elders. Why? I believe elders are the “human foundation” for the church when they have their roots in Christ. Paul wants to make sure Titus understands that the elders, older women and men (aka- the people who are looked up upon as wiser) show themselves good before the younger more impressionable ones in the hopes to have them follow their lead. No matter what our current role now, we will or have been considered a ‘wise one’ to someone. The mention of the slaves also seems to stir up conversation, which I will offer a light on this towards the end.

First, Paul breaks it down into groups of people and also addresses people as a whole. I found the condensing of a lot of information into a few verses interesting also.

• In only 3 verses, 15 items are mentioned for Elders

a) 1&2 Timothy and Titus book-pg 280

• In only 2 verses, 5 items are mentioned for Older Men

• In only 2 verses, 5 items are mentioned for Older Women

• In only 2 verses, 7 items are mentioned for Younger Women

• In only 2 verses, 4 items are mentioned for Slaves

a) 1&2 Timothy and Titus book-pg 281

• In only 3 verses, 12 items are mentioned for All People

The way we live and what is projected from us is a huge factor in our lives’ as Christians. With that in mind… (Quote: Titus Commentary book: pg. 71).

Now, most of us live by our faith. The faith that we live in is also what we walk in. (Quote 1&2 Timothy and Titus book: pg.278, 282, 284, Pg 286)

Closing: pg. 287-288

__________________________________________

Titus Outline - The book of “Do’s and Don’ts”

2010-09-03T18:28:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Titus: Digging Deeper class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted September 23, 2001.

Titus Outline - The book of “Do’s and Don’ts”

(This outline is not exhaustive)

I. Rules for Titus

a. Do’s

i. Complete work and appoint elders as instructed (1:5)

ii. Rebuke [those who rebel against right teaching] (1:13)

iii. Promote living that reflects right teaching (2:1)

iv. Teach older men (2:2)

v. Teach older women (2:3)

vi. Encourage young men (2:6)

vii. Be an example to the young men (2:7)

viii. Reflect integrity and seriousness of his teaching (2:7)

ix. Correct teaching so as to not be able to be criticized (2:8)

x. Remind the people to submit to the government (3:1)

xi. Give a 1st and 2nd warning to those causing divisions (3:10)

xii. Meet Paul at Nicopolus as soon as possible (3:12)

xiii. Help Zenas the lawyer and Apollos (3:13)

b. Don’ts

i. Let anyone ignore or disregard what he [Titus] says (2:15)

ii. Get involved in foolish discussions (3:9)

iii. Get into fights about obedience to Jewish laws (3:9)

iv. Have anything to do with persons after the 2nd warning if they are causing divisions (3:10)

II. Rules for Others

a. Elders

i. Do’s

1. Well thought of (1:6)

2. Faithful to his wife (1:6)

3. Have well mannered, obedient children (1:6)

4. Live a blameless life (1:7)

5. Enjoy having guests in his house (1:8)
6. Love all that is good (1:8)

7. Live wisely (1:8)

8. Be fair (1:8)

9. Live a devout and disciplined life (1:8)

10. Have a strong and steadfast belief in the message he was taught (1:9)

ii. Don’ts

1. Not arrogant (1:7)

2. Not quick-tempered (1:7)

3. Not a heavy drinker (1:7)

4. Not violent (1:7)

5. Not greedy for money (1:7)

b. Older Men

i. Do’s

1. Exercise self-control (2:2)

2. Be worthy of respect (2:2)

3. Live wisely (2:2)

4. Have a strong faith (2:3)

5. Be filled with love and patience (2:3)

ii. Don’ts

1. None mentioned

c. Older Women

i. Do’s
1. Live in an appropriate way (2:3)

2. Teach others what is good (2:3)

3. Train younger women (2:4)

ii. Don’ts

1. Go and speak evil of others (2:3)

2. Be heavy drinkers (2:3)

d. Young Men

i. Do’s

1. Live wisely in all they do (2:6)

ii. Don’ts

1. None mentioned

e. Younger Women

i. Do’s

1. Love their husbands and children (2:4)

2. Live wisely (2:5)

3. Be pure (2:5)

4. Take care of their homes (2:5)

5. Do good (2:5)

6. Be submissive to their husband (2:5)

ii. Don’ts

1. Bring shame on the Word of God (2:5)

f. Slaves

i. Do’s

1. Obey their masters (2:9)

2. Show themselves trustworthy and good (2:10)

ii. Don’ts

1. Talk back (2:9)

2. Steal (2:10)

III. Rules for all People

a. Do’s

i. Turn from godless living (2:12)

ii. Turn from sinful pleasures (2:12)

iii. Live with self-control (2:12)

iv. Live with right conduct (2:12)

v. Live with devotion to God (2:12)

vi. Submit to the government and it’s officers (3:1)

vii. Be obedient (3:1)

viii. Always be ready to do what is good (3:1)

ix. Be gentle (3:2)

x. Show true humility (3:2)

b. Don’ts

i. Speak of evil (3:1)

ii. Quarrel (3:1)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Question:

Why did Paul write this letter?

Answer:

I believe that a main purpose of this epistle was to ‘check in’ with Titus. Paul says Titus is his “true child in the faith” (1:4) that he “left on the island of Crete.” (1:5) Wouldn’t a father want to check in with his son that he left all alone? Also, it is to follow up with him on what he needs to do (what he was sent there for) and to remind him that he has to instill the “Do’s and Don’ts” in the people. Thirdly, it serves as both a motivation and a warning (i.e., 1:13 and 3:9). Lastly, it is simply informational as Paul tells Titus where to meet him next and why at that location and who to help. (3:12-14) In addition it is the constant reminding of what God has done for us and what we were before we accepted Christ. To me, all of these factors give the impression of a parent or friend checking up on someone they love who is away and in charge of a large task.

__________________________________________

Thirteenth Apostle? (Essay)

2010-09-03T17:01:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Theology Essentials class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted February 1, 2000.

Thirteenth Apostle?

All of us would agree that Paul was an apostle. However, we would not all agree on whether he was the 13th apostle or one who stood on his own to deliver a separate message. When reading the Bible, we must decide how we, as members of the Body of Christ, choose to interpret it. There are two hermeneutical (Greek for interpretation) options. The first one is the more literal of the two interpretations, eliminating any symbolic meanings, and is actually the more commonly chosen view. The second one has a much more symbolic, or nonliteral, definition to it. This latter is also the view that creates the majority doubt in the Word, I believe, as all objectivity is removed adding a further discussion as to who decides what the “correct” symbolic meaning really is. This directly affects my aforementioned question: “Is Paul the 13th apostle or an apostle with a separate message?” The first view, a literal hermeneutic, also results in a person who recognizes and agrees with the dispensationalist view of the Bible. By holding to dispensationalism, you will also find it very clear that Paul was definitely an apostle for a separate message, and program. The separate message refers to our current dispensation; the program is either the Prophetic or the Mystery, the latter being our current program.

“Our God is a God of division.” (Paul M. Sadler, ‘Exploring the Unsearchable riches of Christ’) He divided the waters (Gen1: 7), the oceans and land (Gen1: 9,10), the day from the night (Gen1: 14), and the Heavens and the Earth (Gen1: 1). The Heavens and the Earth also help us relate to the two programs he created. The Earthly program is also known as the Prophecy and the Heavenly program is defined as the Mystery. A few of the differences are that the Prophecy requires the fulfillment of the Old Testament through the law, faith and works, and also has time frame used with regards to it. The Mystery does not require the fulfillment of the Old Testament, as it is not prophesied (Eph3: 5), the law or works (Gal3: 11-12), and it is also free from any mention of time, as it is the Mystery and unknown. The Prophecy is very clearly the program for the 12 Apostles; which are also clearly named one by one in Matthew 10:2-5; in which Paul is not named. The Prophetic program gives a different message and also is directed to Israel solely, different than the people in the Mystery Program, the Gentiles. Therefore, if Paul is not included in Matthew 10:2-5 as one of the twelve to speaks to the Jews, then who is he for? His purpose was to provide the Word to the Gentiles during the Mystery, our current program. Thus, so far proving that he was indeed not a 13th apostle, but rather an Apostle to the Gentiles for the Mystery Program, juxtapositional with the Dispensation of Grace.

A dispensation simply defined is: “a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God.” There are many dispensations in the Bible; the actual amount is also a disputed point. However, it is seemingly agreed that there is only one dispensation that coincides directly and exclusively with the Mystery Program, which is the Dispensation of Grace, our current dispensation. Each dispensation, also known as administration or oikonomia (Greek), changes whenever there is change in the way God deals with us. For example, the first administration was “The dispensation of Innocence” which ended when God had to change the way he was dealing with Adam and Eve when they ate the forbidden fruit; thus, changing to the next dispensation. Remember though that all of the dispensations, excluding the current one, fall under the Prophetic Program. Meaning that each oikonomia had a set of rules and/or works to live with, other than the Ten Commandments, which will always apply, under that program; but as we are under the Mystery, or Musterion (Greek), program the only rule we have is to believe that Jesus died for all of us and rose again. So how do we know that Paul is the Apostle to this program? As said in Eph 3:2 by Paul, “ If you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward,” and it is obvious that Paul has the message that we as the members of the Body of Christ need to listen to.

There are many differences when comparing the 12 Apostles and Paul. Looking at the Twelve Apostles first we should note that there was a necessary participation in the fulfillment of the Prophecy (Acts2: 14-20), that the justification was only through faith and works (James2: 14,20), and the hope was that of an Earthly one (Mat5: 5). Also, baptism was through water (Acts22: 16) and spirit (1Peter3: 21), salvation was conditional (2Peter1: 4-10), the eschatology (Greek word is eschatos for last or farthest; in relation to the final events of the world within the various Christian Doctrines) was the second coming, and since their hope was earthly, their final place would be on Earth-a ‘new’ Earth (Isa65: 17, Rev22: 2) for those of Israel. Israel was the only focus of the 12 Apostles (Mat10: 5-6), as it was given the name “the Bride of Christ.”(Rev22: 17). In contrast to that, Paul delivers the message of Grace, under the Mystery (Eph3: 3), which does not require participation or fulfillment of any prophecy. Justification is solely through faith, irrelevant of works (Eph2: 8-9); there is a heavenly hope (Phil3: 20), baptism is acquired through spirit only (Eph4: 5), and salvation is unconditional (Eph1: 13). The eschatological view is also that of the Rapture, which is heavenly (1Thes4: 16-17) for all. The focus for Paul and his message of God’s grace is for the Jews and the Gentiles and all those in between equally (Gal3: 28) as we are the Church (Eph1: 22-23) which is “The Body of Christ” (1Cor12: 27) rather than the “Bride of Christ.” Another point to mention is that there seems to be a numerical similarity between the Twelve Apostles and Paul. The Prophesy mentions 12 in many areas, the number of the governmental authority stamped on the house of Israel, 12 sons of Israel, 12 tribes, 12 portions of land, 12 princes, 12 thrones, 12 foundations in the New Jerusalem (Rev21: 14) and 12 Apostles. The Mystery is consistent with the number one. One Body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one Faith, one baptism, one Father, and one Apostle (Eph4: 4-6).

Paul’s message began when the Prophetic program was put on hold when Jesus died for our sins and allowed for us to be saved purely by faith through the grace of God. The abolition of the law occurred the day that Christ died (Col2: 14), with exception to the 10 Commandments. No longer being under the law, not needing works to be saved there is only faith left, which is included Paul’s message of grace. Grace is not easily understood nor easily definable, as we will never fully comprehend it until we are Heaven. What God says through Paul in the Bible about grace should be enough of a motivation to live with faith in him. I believe that once you believe that we are indeed under the Dispensation of Grace, whether or not the concept is fully grasped, it should be obvious that it will all come down to your relationship with God. We as humans will never repay what God has done for us as stated in Heb2: 9 “that he (Jesus) by the grace of God should taste death for every man.” All Paul wants to do is help us understand that this immeasurable gift from God is not hindered by sins, nor attained by works, and is paired with truth. Do we as members of the Body of Christ need all of the writings Paul has given us to see how easy it is to life and enjoy this gift? Maybe so, but don’t let this gift of grace go dusty on your shelves at home. Use it, feed it, share it and it will grow and become a cyclical part of your life, as the more you use it and feed it-the more you can share it and allow it to grow. Colossians 1:3-6 says “We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus…whereof you heard of the truth of the gospel; Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; …since the day you heard of it, and knew of the grace of God in truth.” We know of the grace which God through which Paul tells us about in his messages and it is all we needed to compliment our faith in the Trinity. Are we being active or passive Christians? I challenge you to follow Christ’s message to Paul. Or as a final thought, of William A. Ward from James1: 22; “It is not enough to own a Bible; we must read it. It is not enough to read it; we must let it speak to us. It is not enough to let it speak to us; we must believe it. It is not enough to believe it; we must live it.”

__________________________________________

When did Jesus 'Come in Glory'? (Essay)

2010-09-03T16:30:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Discussing the Undiscussable class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted June 11, 2001.

When did Jesus 'Come in Glory'?

“For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and them he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” (Matt. 16:27-28) This is when God will come in His glory, but when does this occur? Or has it not yet happened? In “Last Days Madness” by Cary DeMar there are a few viewpoints presented. In the following, I will present the authors view and my own to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the author is misinterpreting the Scripture.

The author, DeMar, believes that Matthew 16:27-28 is referring to and fulfilled through the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. He states, “If we maintain that the event Jesus is describing is still in our future, then how should we interpret His statement that some of those with whom He was speaking would still be alive when He did in fact ‘come in the glory of His Father with His angels?’…we must look for an event that was far enough in the future where most of Jesus’ hearers would be dead, but not so far in the future where they all would dead. Is there such an event? Yes! The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Romans” He correctly links it to a parallel passage in Luke 9:27, but still with the wrong application of the verse. He supports most of his view; it appears to me, through the commentaries of others such as S. Greijdanus:

“Then this coming of God’s dominion cannot refer to out Lord’s resurrection, not to the gift of the Holy Spirit which were to be realized within the year…Nor can it refer to our Lord’s coming in judgment which is even now in abeyance…Nor can the powerful spread of the gospel be meant, for this already came about within comparatively few years…We shall have to think of the destruction of Jerusalem…In it God revealed his kingly dominion in his judgment, a precursor of his judgment on the last day.”

The best argument (which is still not good) the author can seem to present with a verse reference is to that of the book of Revelation. DeMar states, “A similar pattern is found in Revelation 2:5: ‘Remember therefore from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you m and will remove your lamp stand out of its place—unless you repent.’ Similar ‘coming’ language is used in Revelation 2:16, neither of which refer to Christ’s second coming.”

In my opinion, I believe that this is clearly talking about the second coming. Which, at that time would have been 40 days and 7 years away from the time frame the verses were said by Jesus. So, to anyone who is not a dispensationalist, this verse would make no sense, but to those who can rightly divide the Word of God we can see how this is one of the prophecies not yet fulfilled in the Bible due to the insertion of the Dispensation of Grace. If you break up each verse into phrases it becomes easier to decipher and link to the second coming as a whole. Starting with Matthew 16:27, the first part, “For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels” coincides also with Matthew 25:31, which is talking about the second coming. Secondly, “and them he shall reward every man” can be supported by mark 9:41. The balance of the chapter of Matthew 25 (verses 31-46) describes how the people of Israel will be judged “according to his works”. Rewards are a ‘given’ to happen during the second coming along with judgment. Now, to verse 28, “Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste death.” Jesus is talking to the 12 Apostles here, and one of them will not be there for much longer, Judas. Not to forget that there was 40 days until Calvary and then 7 years for the fulfillment of the 490-year prophecy of Daniel, without the interruption of the Grace dispensation. This timeframe and statement was not illogical at that time (nor is it now), and Jesus did know what he was talking about. The last part of the verse is “…till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” The word ‘till’ in the Greek is “an” and is a conditional form, meaning that “it was conditional on the repentance of the nation…their continuing to live was certain, but the fulfillment of the condition was uncertain.” Being that it was a conditional term supports even more the idea of a dispensation cutting in before it would or would not happen. To keep with my biblical support of my viewpoint, 1 Corinthians 15:24 shows “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father…”

In conclusion, this author says, “First we want to be accurate in our understanding of Scripture since it is God’s only Word to us, the expression of His will, To misinterpret Scripture is to misinterpret God’s will. Second, the integrity of the Bible is at stake.” How right one can be, but too bad he is the one putting the Bible at stake. DeMar fails to support how most of these two verses could be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, with the exception of 2 words: some and coming. There are over 50 words between the two that are not mentioned. I wonder why? With the fact that I found a typographical error in the book, it clarifies how erred the actual content of the words are also. There is no ‘reward’, no ‘judgment’ and no ‘Son of Man coming in his kingdom’ during the destruction of Jerusalem. There is simply no biblical support for this view. Not only does that author twist the words of the verse to read from “some” to “most”, which is a topic in and of itself, but the lack of rightly dividing the Word is a sad thing for someone who could be great if he were in the right path of truth.

2 - See Note 1, pg. 43, 44-45

3 - See note 1, pg. 45

4 - See note 1, pg. 49

6 - See note 1, pg. 46

__________________________________________

God’s Approval Of Polygamy with King David? (Essay)

2010-09-03T15:34:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Advanced Bible - Old Testament class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted June 1, 2001.

God’s Approval Of Polygamy with King David?

The seventh commandment says, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” (Exod. 20:14) What about King David, who lived four centuries later? It appears as though God is condoning polygamy when “Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah…” (2Sam. 12:7b-8a) However, God later appears to contradict his own words by saying, “And I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife…and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” (Matt. 19:9) Is this just another example of contradiction in the Bible, as some would say? Or, is this the perfect point to “study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth”? (2Tim. 2:15)

One viewpoint on this topic in general is that of Norman Geisler who says:

“There is ample evidence, even within the Old Testament, that polygamy was not God’s ideal for man. That monogamy was His ideal for man is obvious from several perspectives.

1) God made only one wide for Adam, thus settling the ideal precedent for the race.

2) Polygamy is first mentioned as part of the wicked Cainite civilization. (Gen. 4:23)

3) God clearly forbade the kings of Israel (leaders were the persons who became polygamists) saying, “And he shall not multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away again.” (Deut. 17:17)

4) The saints who became polygamists paid for their sins. 1 Kings 11:1,3 says, Now King Solomon loved many foreign women…and his wives turned away his heart…”

5) Polygamy is usually situated on the context of sin in the O.T. Abraham’s marriage of Hagar was clearly a canal act of unbelief. (Gen. 16:1f) David was not at a spiritual peak when he added Abigail and Ahinoam as his wives (1Sam. 25:42-43), nor was Jacob when he married Leah and Rachel. (Gen. 29:23,28)

6) The polygamous relation was less than ideal. It was one of jealousy among the wives. Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah. (Gen. 29:31) Elkanah’s one wife was considered a “rival“ or adversary by the other, who “used to provoke her sorely, to irritate her…” (1Sam. 1:6)

7) When polygamy is referred to, the conditional, not the imperative, is used. “If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.” (Exod. 21:10) Polygamy is not the moral ideal, but the polygamist must be moral.

Though this touches on people other than King David, the concepts can still apply on God’s approval of polygamy with David specifically.

Another viewpoint, supporting the idea that polygamy is “Christian” for lack of a better term, and in fact supported by the Word of God.

“Frequently…very first humans found in the Scriptures, Adam and Eve, who are often cited and referenced as a supposed "proof" that polygamy is somehow "not as God intended". That is, Adam's and Eve's APPARENT (but not definitively proven) "monogamous" marriage is cited as the presupposition that that somehow "proves" that "God's Original Plan for Marriage" was only one wife per husband. Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve. This tirelessly-cited presupposition declares, QUOTE, "Because it was only Adam and Eve, it was God's Original Plan that a man only marry one wife." UNQUOTE.

But for Spirit-walking, Scripture believing, intellectually honest Christians, is that a legitimate and sound presupposition for us to conclude? Is it objective reasoning out of the Scriptures for us Christians to pre-suppose, just because the Scriptures only reference Eve as Adam's wife (i.e., in referring to no other wives by name or specific reference), that that somehow means that God therefore opposes any man having more than one wife?

It is that very presupposition on which many Christians rely (and of course outright anti-polygynists rely upon this too) in their resistance (if not outright opposition) to the truth that Christian Polygamy and that the recent modern-day advance thereof among so many Scripture-believing Christians is of God. And they rely upon this presupposition without even considering whether the presupposition has any foundation with which to even begin. …After all, beyond the obvious evidences of all the holy men of God in the Scriptures (e.g., Abraham, Israel, Moses, Gideon, David, etc.) who were openly and visibly polygamous, it is indeed at least reasonable and even important for us to re-consider the presupposition because there ARE reasons that even specifically give cause for questioning the presupposition.

Namely, specifically, that presupposition unwittingly neglects (or fails) to realize some additional very important factors that also applies. These other factors are certainly real and significant enough that they surely warrant our making a deeper investigation into the soundness of that presupposition with regards to whether or not it should or can be legitimately held as a matter of doctrine for us Christians.

For one factor, the entire book of Genesis (and hence, the entire story of Adam and Eve) was ALL written by Moses, a spirit-filled (Num. 11:17) polygamist (Exod. 2:21 &15:1-6, and Num 12:1). Yet, if one follows the presupposition about "God's Original Plan" as it was in the "beginning", then surely Moses, the very mortal author of that story itself, would have known "the Original Plan" too! And with that realized, yet we also see that Moses had two wives.

Another factor is about all the questions pertaining to wondering who were the parents of the wives which Adam's and Eve's sons married, of which we do not have a definitive answer in any regard. Yet, if one follows that presupposition about "God's Original Plan", then that presupposition would therefore likewise be mandating incestuous relationships in one way or another, as well, it would appear.

So, clearly, as these two factors immediately demonstrate, there is at least some reasonableness in now questioning the legitimacy of any of us Christians relying upon that presupposition (about supposedly following "God's Original Plan For Marriage" as being defined by the perceived example of Adam and Eve as at the "beginning") as a matter of doctrine for us Christians to follow even unto today.

That is to say, at least, these two factors do provide us at least some reasonableness to question the validity and soundness of that presupposition about "God's Original Plan for Marriage". And with such reasonableness thus established, we Christians then surely have warrant to investigate and analyze the issue more deeply, to see if we Christians should indeed be following a different presupposition, instead, regarding this matter.

Man is made in the image of God, while the woman is the glory of the man. And so, just as Christ so selflessly and lovingly gave of Himself for the Churches in His love for all of us in the Churches, so likewise are men to so profoundly love their wives. That is the Christian Marriage Model of Ephesians 5:22-25…

"And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [i.e., Christ] was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit THAT WAS NOT FIRST THAT WHICH IS SPIRITUAL, but [instead it was] that which is natural [i.e., of nature, earth, flesh]; and [then came ] AFTERWARD THAT WHICH IS SPIRITUAL. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven." (1Cor 15:45-47)

"And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." (1Cor. 15:49)

And that is God's Plan for us Christians NOW, without any regard for any inaccurately 'perceived' presupposition of God's supposed "original" plan for marriage.“

There is a lot more on from this person, but this excerpt catches the mindset and lack of any real biblical proof as support for the doctrine.

I believe, that while it was wrong in the eyes of God, it was tolerated like many other sins in life, but man has a free will that God will not interfere with. It also makes sense to conclude that polygamy died out as a result of a better understanding of God’s word. There is no reference of polygamy from the time of the return from Babylonian exile forward throughout the Old Testament. Romans 8 sums it up very well for me, “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit…” (Vs. 3-5) We are those “which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God,” (John 1:13) yet we too still choose to sin. It is in our flesh, as polygamy was for the reasons of sexual desire, need for a power trip or right to brag, or to go along with the culture irrelevant of our beliefs. The instance of King David is slightly different, therefore leaving me still stumped at the reasoning behind the event, but not the intent.

The very first reference to polygamy in the Bible is in Genesis with Lamech (Gen. 4:23-24), and is portrayed as a boasting by him. There is no mention again of plural marriages until the time on Abraham. It appears that King David was “given” these wives by God along with a lot of other things. In this case, it was not his sin that put him in this situation, but God. Why did God do this? I do not think that we ever will have an answer to that, but the point is to follow the written word, the Bible. God gave it to us, we need to use it, rely on it, take it to be 100% truthful (in light of seemingly contradictory passages) and put our faith in Him and His Word. We should not give into the flesh, or the cultures of the world that we live in to satisfy the wrong needs. Remember, when you stand to be judged, your culture won’t be there to back up your wrong doings. Ephesians 5:23 states, “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church…” The implication here is that there is one church, the Body of Christ, which God is the Head of. Just like the husband is the head over the ‘body’ of marriage between a man and woman. How can a man be the head over more bodies, i.e. more women? Verses such as these create the need for each of us to be a Berean and find out what God has to say through his word to you!

1 - All Bible verse references from: The Scofield Study Bible Most current Copyright  1945 by Oxford University Press, Inc. previously published as The Scofield Reference Bible

4 - See note 2, pg. 123

5 - See note 2, pg. 122

__________________________________________

The Date of Abraham (Essay)

2010-09-03T15:25:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Advanced Bible - Old Testament class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted May 11, 2001.

The Date of Abraham

Both biblical and extra-biblical data bear on the date of Abraham. There is a huge difference in the evaluation of materials among scholars. Here I will present the views of the liberal and conservative scholars along with my own opinion of the dating of Abraham. The dating depends on mainly three sets of dates. Those three being, the date of Israel’s Exodus, or flight, from Egypt; the duration of Israel’s stay in Egypt; and the length of time between Abraham’s birth date and Jacob’s descent into Egypt with his family. All three of the dates cause a full debate within themselves, but I will only present a brief example of the two sides.

Liberal scholars’ dating conclusions vary from the latter half of the fifteenth century to the twentieth. I found a view that puts the birth at 2166 based off of the information as follows:

“Abram born in Ur of the Chaldeas, marries Sarai and migrates to Haran with his cousin Lot and Father Terah. Terah dies in Haran (Gen. 11)… Scripture is silent about the details of Abraham’s life before he entered Canaan. Genesis 11:28 states that he was born in Ur of the Chaldeans, an important Sumerian city. The reference to “Chaldeans” is probably anachronistic as the Chaldeans did not arrive in Assyria until about 1 000 BC (Wenhan, 1987: 272). From Ur Terah led his family North to Haran (11:31) were they settled for a time. Although only Terah, Abram, Sarai and Lot are mentioned in the text it appears that Nahor and Milcah also moved North, probably at the same time (cf. 22:20-24; 24:10). Haran was an important caravan center for the Amorite migrations. There is no evidence in the biblical text to tell us whether Terah and his family settled inside either of these cities in houses or outside in tents, but it seems that the former is the more probable. Elsewhere in Genesis Rebekah’s family are said to reside in a city (24:10) and live in houses (24:23) as opposed to the tents in which Abraham’s family now lived (24:67). The journey from Haran to Canaan no doubt involved a great change in lifestyle for Abram and his family.”

As you can see, the dating argument is based on the reference to “Chaldeans”, not much sustenance here.

“Conservative scholars generally favor an earlier date, usually placing the actual birth of Abraham during the middle of the twenty-second century.” I have come across someone who believes that the birth date of Abraham is between 2310 and 2305 B.C., a very early model of time. His views are as follows:

“I will claim that the reason why nothing has ever been found, is that the Patriarchs are wrongly placed in time. By moving them nearly 150 years backwards in time, the incidents of the Bible fit extraordinarily well into the frame of history. Except from this necessary "adjustment", no extreme artifice is needed to make the Patriarch stories fit into history…

"Now these are the descendants of Terah. Terah was the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran was the father of Lot. Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his birth, in Ur of the Chalde'ans."

In the Bible it is nowhere said that Abraham was contemporary to king Nimrod. But it certainly leaves this possibility open. Neither from the Koran does this emerge. But both the Jewish and the Islamic tradition leave no doubt. They moreover see Abraham and Nimrod as enemies towards each other. Traditions and legends however should be taken very carefully. They use to exalt the main people to a hero-status with an almost divine appearance. Exactly as heroic legends from other cultures … besides these obvious extremes, it is possible that there are historical realities behind at least some of the legends. In Ginzberg's: The Legends of the Jews, is told that Nimrod is elevating himself to be a god. According to the historical sources, Sargon never did that. Neither did his two sons. But his grandchild Naram-Sin and his son did. As will be seen later, the legends did obviously mix all five important kings of the Akkadian dynasty.

So I assume that Abraham was born during the first part of Sargons reign.” To be honest, I do not see much a debate here with reference to biblical verses and data, but I think it proved my point.

My opinion will always be biblically based, therefore not really my opinion, but rather a reiteration of God’s word. On this topic, however, I have not come to a conclusion on a date. I rather have come to conclude that of what importance is it to base debates and create division among the body of Christ all on the issue of dating the Bible? I think that if the dates were really that vital, God would have made it clearer to us. Also, should we follow the Word more or less because it was written 200 years earlier than what you thought? I would only hope not. Let’s not also forget that the calendar as we know it was created for man’s purposes to measure time, not God’s, so does God really care about the date? God is here with us now and he wants to enjoy it with us now, not see us arguing over the dates of the past, I believe. So, “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” (Joshua 24:15)

As you can see in the opinions stated, especially the early model seems very far out with no “real” biblical support. The verses seem to be added to or read to be more than they are. The dating of the Bible and its events are important, but not nearly as important as the words contained in it. As it says in 2 Timothy 2:15, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

3 - See Note 1, pg 18-19

__________________________________________

The Book of Galatians (Essay)

2010-09-03T14:13:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Bible Essentials class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted April 1, 2001.

The Book of Galatians

The Apostle Paul wrote the book of Galatians during his third visit to Corinth. This actual date is debated, like most dates are in the Bible, from being written anywhere from 49-60 AD, also possibly making it one of his earliest letters. The need for this book arose when other teachers came along and tried to convince the new believer that, to be truly saved, they had to keep the Law. Apparently, the infectious disease of legalism had spread throughout the northern tier of churches. Consequently, Paul the Apostle prescribes his anecdote for these incorrect teachings by showing convincingly that salvation is by God’s grace through faith, apart from works of the Law. One main purpose of the writing of the book was to vindicate Paul’s apostleship and message, both of which were questioned by the Judaizers. Another purpose was to show that God’s righteousness could be received by faith alone apart from the Law. Also, to discuss the meaning of Christian liberty and show that it does not mean freedom to sin.

The letter is addressed to “all the brethren, which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia.” (Gal 1:2) Galatia was referred to as 2 places in his day, with reference to geographic location and politics. “Geographically, it referred to a northerly region Paul visited on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:6). Politically, it referred to a Roman province that, in addition to geographical Galatia, took in more southerly regions including Iconium, Lystra, and Debre, which Paul visited on his first journey (Acts 13:14-14:24) and revisited on his second (Acts 16:1-6) and third journeys (Acts 18:23).”

There are three main themes to the book. Paul’s defense covers the first two chapters. Chapter 1:1-10 is the salutation and introduction to the what he is going to address, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (vs.6) Then, he tells them “that the gospel which was preached of me [Paul] is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” (vs.11b-12) In chapters 1:13-2:21, he speaks of how he set out to prove his claim in the early years of persecution. First, how they had “heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God.” (vs.13) Verses 15-24 in Chapter 1 discusses all the places he visited after his conversion. Then, circumcision (2:1-5), blessings on the Gentile mission (2:6-10), and closing with how nothing can be allowed to dilute the word, “for if righteousness come by the Law, then Christ is dead in vain.” (vs. 21b)

The second and third chapters are about Faith and Law. Paul starts out by insulting the Gentile Galatians and asking them, ” Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?”(3:3) In these two chapters he mainly compares the Law with the principle of faith, “…that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, the just shall live by faith. And the Law is not of faith: but, the man that doeth them shall live in them.” (3:11) The Law with the plea for faith, “I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you. Tell me, ye that desire to be under the Law, do ye not hear the Law?” (4:20-21) And the Law with the picture of faith, “ … he of the freewoman was by promise… Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise… So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.” (4:22,28,31) Christian liberty ends the book with chapters five and six. Paul spoke of Liberty and not Law, “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” (5:1) He then tells of the sins of the flesh and “that [they] are Christ's [and] have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.”(5:24)

Also, of the fruits of the Spirit “if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit” (5:25) and “if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.“ (5:18) The main point, though, is to “love thy neighbour as thyself” (5:14b) and “by love serve one another,” (5:13b)

The practical application of this book begins with the first letter and ends with the last. I personally think this book is very explanatory in the ways we should be living. We, as Gentiles, often get caught up in most of what this book speaks about. Although it is not written to us directly (as we are not the church of Galatia), there is a lot to take from the epistle as habitual creatures of legalism. The proclaiming of the need for faith and the indwelt Spirit proves (in addition to the rest of the Bible) that the doctrine behind the dispensation of Grace is completely biblically based, helping to disprove any other religious denominational attempts. The doctrine of justification by faith is stated more emphatically in Galatians than in any other of Paul’s letters. Due to the severity of Paul’s writing there is no room for question as to what gospel he is teaching and was inspired or given by God. Some of the most striking contrasts are what make this a must read (and pay attention to) book of the Bible for today’s Christian. For example, faith versus law, circumcision and the new creation, the World vs. the Cross, and flesh and works against the Spirit and his fruit. It talks to me in such a way that I feel Paul is my friend trying to sarcastically show me out of my sin, which we all need a little of sometime.

With all that said, I end with a poem by P.P. Bliss:

“Free from the law. O happy condition,

Jesus hath bled, and there is remission;

Cursed by the law and bruised by the fall,

Grace hath redeemed us once and for all.

Now we are free—there’s no condemnation,

Jesus provides a perfect salvation;

Come unto Me, O hear His sweet call,

Come, and He saves us once and for all.

Children of God, O glorious calling,

Surely His grace will keep us from falling;

Passing from death to life at His call,

Blessed salvation once and for all.

Once for all, I sinner, receive it,

Once for all, O brother, believe it;

Cling to the cross, the burden will fall,

Christ hath redeemed us once and for all.”

__________________________________________

Discipleship Summary Report (Essay)

2010-09-03T14:08:00.000-07:00

Preface: This was written for my Nouthetic Counseling class when I was a student of Bible & Ministry and submitted February 1, 2000.

Discipleship Summary Report

A little background on the word ‘discipleship’ shows that as the teaching role one would be setting out to do is the act of making a disciple. A disciple is translated from the Greek word ‘Mathetes’, meaning learner or follower. The Gospels and the book of Acts are the only place that you actually find this word, as the balance of the New Testament is to people who already knew the topics at hand and were not “learners,” per se. I thought this would help my attempts, but it didn’t.

How do you start a discipleship process? Who do you know is the one to choose? How can I disciple someone when I don’t know enough about the Bible to talk to someone else about it? These are a few of the many questions that burdened me for weeks. Then, I thought, I cannot do any of this alone. I have to be able, ready and willing and God will “show” me who it is. Next, I thought, “Does God “show” me where I will get my next job without any effort on my part?” That’s when I realized that maybe I need to make myself available to my peers, so that they would know I could and would be there for them, because God already knew this, and I was not going to be in a discipleship role with God after all. I invited people over to my house, to church to lunch bible studies, and even down to short discussions in the hall in the hopes that I would trigger someone’s heart enough to want to make it more than it was. I couldn’t just tell someone, “I want to start a discipleship process with you,” or better yet, “Umm, for school I have to do this project …and I wanted you to be it.” I was convinced that this had to be “the work of God.” How do you make God make it work, though? That was my problem. It then came to me. I was dealing with people, not God. People are lazy, tempted by flesh with a huge influence from the Devil to go with that lust (whatever it may be), and that I was trying to pick out the “best” one to disciple. What the “best” meant I don’t know, but I was being picking with the people I was planting seeds with. “How could I be so blind after all the classes I have taken and people I have talked to!” My favorite quote by Theologian Charles Ryrie says it all, ”If you want to hear God laugh, tell him your plans.” I bet God was rolling on the clouds up there in Heaven. How could I think I could pick and choose? This isn’t about making dinner, this is about God’s will.

Now, I thought I had it all together for sure this time. A few more invites to church and the like, with just as many let downs. I can say that I was planting seeds everywhere I went in the hopes of fulfilling my own need, not realizing what greater purpose I was fulfilling of spreading the word. I see now, in retrospect that God had me working for him in a very sneaky way, just as Jesus did with Judas. Whether or not he would have wanted it that way, it ended up being to his glory as I sparked up so many conversations and thoughts with people that I even became amazed at my evangelical abilities above all. I had to remember though, I shouldn’t be trying to “save” people, but rather build them up more than they already were in the Body. So, this made me pull back my attempts. If this project wasn’t the biggest roller coaster, I don’t know what was. I did have one night that I thought it was a shoe in. A friend of mine agreed to go out casually. I saw my opportunity to move in, which I did. She also took it in, but her boyfriend wasn’t too keen on the idea of having a “Christian” girlfriend. He shared his horror story with us all, and said he wouldn’t go with her to church. We discussed it, and she ended up siding with the boyfriend, obviously. Lust kicked in and beat me that time.

Regretfully, many epiphanies and a few months later, I still have not started any kind of discipleship. I am saddened by not having yet experienced this challenge, for both “the chosen” and myself I know it will happen one day when I least expect it, as God always works in mysterious ways. I feel I have failed the project at hand. I balance that out with the justification that the couple of months that I worked on this, I grew in ways that I probably wouldn’t have had I not done this. I have also come to realize that I cannot “make” something happen, it has to be the will of God. I learned not to doubt my abilities, or my knowledge about the Body of Christ. I came to the conclusion also, that Satan is always sitting right next to me ready to jump in at any moment. It is also very hard to keep on top of him when trying to succeed with the work of God. People live and die with lust and sin, generally. I was fighting human nature, that in most of the people I was talking to was very strong. Perseverance is a good lesson learned here also. I am not quite sure whether to take this experience (and lack thereof) as a loss or a gain, but I can only say that instead of discipling someone, I think I was secretly being discipled.

__________________________________________