I have a question. It’s something that I’ve been pondering for quite a while now. (Notice how I quietly sidestep the fact that it’s been a couple months since I’ve updated my blog, now increasing the shock-factor on the faces of my 2-3 readers.)

Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done.
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung.
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game. It’s easy.
There’s nothing you can make that can’t be made.
No one you can save that can’t be saved.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you in time – It’s easy.

All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
There’s nothing you can know that isn’t known.
Nothing you can see that isn’t shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be.
It’s easy.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
All you need is love (all together now)
All you need is love (everybody)
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.

What do you think the point of that song is? We need love. I think that even without the invaluable influence of John Lennon, we have all at some point come to the conclusion that love is a pretty important thing to have.

It is obvious that humans were designed for relationships. Our trinitarian God has been in relationships since before time began. It is only natural that we, as humans, look to share relations with others. And we do. We have friends, who we come to cherish and rely upon, but it is not enough. Shouldn’t it be? It seems like having a trustworthy circle of friends, with whom we share interests, activities, and beliefs would be enough to content someone for life.

Yet somehow it is not. We spend our days searching for the one person we believe fit to forever share a special bond. Romance has been universally searched for since Genesis. One of the most popular Scripture passages in regards to marriage, which has been quoted several times throughout the Bible, is Genesis 2:24. “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”

When I have dwelt upon this issue, this was the first verse that came to mind. However, after just reading verse 24, we are still left asking “Why?” So, I looked at 2:23 and read “And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” After first reading this, I was inclined to think it meant that a man needs a woman because of his vanity. (“she is flesh of my flesh… she shall be called woman… Therefore a man shall leave his mother an father..” just saying.) However, after looking back at Genesis 2:18, it makes sense that Adam’s words are less of a remark upon himself and more upon what God had done for him: Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.”

“A suitable helper.” The OED’s definition of “suitable” is “right or appropriate for a particular person, purpose, or situation.” This means that for every man, for the purpose of having a loving companion, and in the situation of marriage, God has created a perfect woman (this obviously applies vice versa, as well). Aside from salvation through Christ, I am convinced this is the greatest gift God has given. I would say that is a treasure worth searching for.

Parents praise their children for one of four things:

1. Academic achievement

2. Athletic achievement 

3. Cultural achievement

4. Attractiveness 

It is fine to give praise for these things, but it would make an extreme difference in society if parents reserved their highest complements for acts of kindness.

~Rabbi Joseph Telushkin

The following has been copied and paste from a facebook note I recently wrote. I suppose it’s more of a personal post then I usually put on my blog, but hopefully you will enjoy reading it. 

I am now trudging through my sophomore year of high school. It’s been a pretty good run thus far… but sometimes I really miss (or at the very least, laugh at) my freshmen year. It was a year when we had hard, new classes, challenging, yet funny teachers, and awesome friends.

Ninth grade was my both first and last year having Mr Menikoff as a teacher. That man had such a honest personality accompanied by a very dry sense of humor. 

It was my first real year having Mr. Goad. I had him for half a year of logic and all of latin I. But neither of those could be considered really Goad classes as compared to last year’s history’s class. I will never forget (and unfortunately, I doubt any of my friends will either) when at the end of the year’s first test I walked out of the class room saying, “That really wasn’t that hard!” He made sure that no one ever said that again of his class.

I really miss Austin Hammonds. Last year was his second and last year at DSCS. If I could describe him in one word, it would be a listener. Sometimes I would call him and he would listen to me blather on forever about tests, teachers, girls, and whatever else. Then he would often answer me with something as profound as, “Man, you’re stupid” or some variation of that. But if I was really lucky, I would get one of his awesome analogies summarizing life and how simple it is and how I make it much too complicated. 

The last (but most definitely not least) thing that I miss is Mr. Bartlett and his awesome speech and debate class. It is probably my favorite class ever. Well, everyone did hate it hate the beginning of the year when we tried to prepare for a debate on the topic that every other school in the country was doing. That lasted for several weeks, until Mr. Bartlett realized we were no good at it. That’s when the fun began. We started having awesome theological debates every two weeks. 

The first was Angela and I against Austin and Alex. We debated wether or not a person could loose his or her faith. The right team won. If you ask the loosing team, they’ll spread propaganda saying that we cheated or something. We won. 

The next debate I remember was the one with Angel and I against Laurelen and Laura. The topic was whether or not baptism is necessary for a person’s salvation. This topic was decided before Christmas break so we would have around a month to prepare for it. However, I learned that my partner, Angel, was not coming back to DSCS after the break. Mr. Bartlett gave me the choice of either being given a new partner or going it alone. I, of course, decided to debate the girls by myself. I won. Now, they may try to tell you that it was a tie or something, but I won. 

I was also in a debate with Laurelen in which we argued a case for capitol punishment. Quite unfortunately, however, there were two things working against us. First of all, because of the number of students and the turns that we were taking, we somehow ended up going against the teacher. Mr. Bartlett was a master at that stuff …and let’s just say that we died. The second thing working against us was the fact that Laurelen was still emo and this somewhat hindered our preparation against a master debater.

The last debate of the year was on the topic of whether of not it would have been ethical for a Christian to fight against Britain in the American Revolution. I don’t remember many good moments from this one. Every student in the class was included since it was the last debate of the year. It was Alex, Angela, and I against Laura, Laurelen, and Austin. It was very entertaining to learn that Angela did not know what the American Revolution was (“I mean, I knew America was free, but…”).

There were many other random things that I won’t forget such as wether or not you eat the gristles on the chicken, what it really means to blow your nose, caramel, where the mud-vain is, how much I hate crawfish, where the point of actuality is, and much more. For better or for worse, ninth grade was quite a memorable year.

All budies of Dr. Mohler are awesome.

Nick is not a buddy of Dr. Mohler.

Therefore, Nick is not awesome.

~Laurelen Whitney

John Mayer is a musical artist who is very good at writing catchy songs with a good amount of depth. I did a post on another song of his for Erratic Thought #10. I have recently started listening to his sophomore album titled, “Heavier Things.” It has ten tracks that each come together to give the record a very unique sound. The final track is titled “Wheel.” The point of the song is to compare life to a wheel by saying that, for better or for worse, we can’t stop it from turning. We really can’t control control much of what happens. However, he gives the song hope by saying, just like a wheel, almost everything in life will come back around to a full circle.

He gives the example of relationships in a certain line: “And if you never stop when you wave goodbye, you just might find if you give it time you will wave hello again, you just might wave hello again.” The validity of this concept may be debated, but what really intrigues me is the last line of the song. He applies the concept to a different idea when he repeats this phrase several times, “I believe that my life’s gonna see the love I give return to me.” This is the kind of lyric that really makes me stop and think. When I first heard it I was sure that it was some pagan idea people love to believe just to make themselves feel good about themselves.

Is it? Is it OK to think that the love you show will be returned equally back to you? If you are a Christian, then God has promised He will reward you for such things in Heaven. But what about now on earth? The first thing that comes to mind is Job. He was a very obedient, God fearing man to whom God allowed horrible things to happen. His friends and family all left him or told him he was foolish for still being faithful to God. I am sure that God welcomed him into Heaven with open arms and many blessings, but while on earth I don’t think that the love Job gave was returned to him. Some would say that he was the one divine exception. The story of Job is also believed by many to be no more than a parable. A profound story- but still just a parable.

Whether or not Job is a good example to contradict this idea, I still think that to believe  you will receive a certain amount of love based on how much you give away is expecting a certain fairness from life that is just not real. As Christians, we should know better than anyone that life is not fair in the least. Christ came and died for every single dirty sinner in the world. There is not one of us who deserves to spend eternity with God. We need to realize it is because of His unusual and indeed unfair love for us that He has chosen to save us from Hell.

I’m not sure what the right answer is to this question. I know that the love I give in God’s name will be returned to me in Heaven, but I’m not sure how much of it I am garunteed to receive while on earth. I would definately love any comments.

Bob:
Why are you wishing for zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz?
I thought that’s what that meant.
Tom:
When the world falls on the tip of a nose, only the purple fire hydrant can see the panda bear smoke nicotine.
Bob:
Are you going to answer me?
Tom:
You know what I mean.
Bob:
How can a fire hydrant see anything?
Tom:
How can a dancing light run around a city forming a rainbow while jets take off in the distance?
Bob:
Are you going to answer my question?
Tom:
Are you going to answer to the fundamental truths of non-extensionalism?
Bob:
Not yet, no. I still need to know how a purple fire hydrant can see anything in the first place
Tom:
Then make sure the moon shines when it’s brightest and lament wood stores bits of poodle intestines.
OK?
Bob:
What will that accomplish?
And if the moon is already its brightest, then why should I have to make sure it’s shinning at all?
That really made no sense.
Tom:
To will ensure the domestic tranquility of sea gulls of the coast of San Fransico having pictures taken of them in black and white by Adobe employees everywhere.
Bob:
Why should I care about that?
Tom:
I remove your logic and substitute my own.
Bob:
All I want is to know how a purple fire hydrant is able to see anything.
Tom:
You should care because a fly without wings would be called a walk if Barney was still with us.
Bob:
Well, where is Barney now?
Tom:
Singing the Celtic song of life and love with fellow Canadians at the top of a renovated city in a mountain in the northern Netherlands.
Bob:
What the crap makes you think that ugly purple thing is Canadian?
Tom:
I never said that, because bacon is made from pigs that graze off the grass of south central China where rice farmers pillage each other’s towns for sushi to be sent over to the Japanese in exchange for hats of many colors- duh.
Keep up Bob.
Bob:
What did you never say?
Keep up what?
Tom:
If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?
Can you be a closet claustrophobic?
Bob:
Whose wages?
And yeah, of course you can.
Tom:
THE WAGES OF SIN
Bob:
Well, no of course you can’t garnish the wages of sin.
You can’t make death look beautiful!
Tom:
Unless garnish was a color that was a mix of purple and green that was used in the Bible as the holy color that cleans all.
Bob:
Um, no.
Tom:
I stare death in the face every morning, and I eat it with my yogurt while reading the paper and don’t think twice.
Bob:
Now, I just think you are part of a cult or something with this “holy color” thing.
Tom:
A cult is no more than a colt mixed with a cut from a knife dripping in the blood of a donkey.
So there.
Bob:
There what?
You really want to be known for being involved in that?
Tom:
There is where the hair grows fair and the mare takes care of the man who doesn’t know where to make his lair.
Bob:
You still have not answered my freaking question!
How can a purple fire hydrant see anything at all?
Tom:
So many questions… so little unRARs…

“I’ve killed two people since midnight.

I haven’t had any sleep for over twenty-four hours.

So maybe you should be a little more afraid of me than you are right now.”

- Jack Bauer (season one, 24)

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1576853,00.html?iid=perma_share

My favorite show on TV right now is without a doubt, House. However, that may change when 24 come back on air in a couple days. House has been called “The uncommon cure for the common medical drama.” The premise of the show is set as Dr. Gregory House is a arguably the country’s best diagnostician. He has little patience for anyone and seems to be incapable of giving a complement- much less showing any sort of love.
He has developed severe nerve damage in his right leg which causes him constant chronic pain. The viewer is indeed inclined to wonder if this pain is the cause of his intolerant personality or if he has always behaved as such.

In the first season, there is an episode title “Kids.” Throughout the storyline, House needs to complete interviews for a new doctor on his team. Dr. Roger Spain is the first to me interviewed. He is a long haired, rock star looking guy having just graduated med-school. Spain says to House, “I admire the way you don’t care what anyone thinks. You just do what you want, the way you want.” Seeming to ignore the comment, House makes a note of the fact that Spain is in a blues band and sarcastically remarks, “Ah dude, you are so hired.”

Spain asks what the problem is and House points out the Chinese tattoo on his forearm. Spain says, “Wow. I thought you’d be the last person to have a problem with nonconformity.” House replies, “Nonconformity, right. I can’t remember the last time I saw a twenty-something kid with a tattoo of an Asian letter on his wrist. You are one wicked free thinker. You want to be a rebel? Stop being cool. Wear a pocket protector like him (here he points to Wilson, a fellow doctor at the hospital) and get a haircut- like the Asian kids who don’t leave the library for twenty-hour stretches. They’re the ones who don’t care what you think. Sayonara.” The scene has a great conclusion as Dr. Spain leaves and House says to Wilson, ” “Actually, the Asian kids are probably just responding to parental pressure, but my point is still valid.”

House’s point is valid and a very interesting one. A rebel can be defined as some who goes against the normal movement of society. If this is the case, then a rock star twenty-something year old with a tattoo of a Chinese symbol really isn’t in the least bit rebellious. In fact, it is strange to think that at this point the rebellious thing would be to go study for hours at the library. If you want to be a “freethinker,” it seems that you shouldn’t try to stick out. In a culture that is growing increasingly narcissistic, the more you sick out, you actually seem to blend in more with the crowd. It does seem that to be a rebel today, you may need to “stop being cool.”

Hey everyone, I just wanted to notify you of the new page I made. It is on the very top of the column on the right. On it I have posted a creative story  thatI had to write for my literature class. Although it was assigned, it was an idea that I have had for a while. This not only gave me a chance to flush the idea out, but to get a grade for it too (one that I hope will come back good). I hope you check it out and I would love any feedback. Thanks.

Sin originally entered the world and has caused much evil.

We can assume that evil is one of the many results of sin.

Therefore, all evil is sin, but not all sin is evil.