Crashing Through the Songs

AND NOW, in the spirit of the holiday season, I giveth to thee, a random post...eth. Yes it is a word. ..Yes, IT IS. Shut up! You are gonna spoil the moment!

I noticed that a lot of people not only sing Christmas songs, but they parody Christmas songs. Jingle bells for instance, has about five billion parodies. Ranging from batman to Pokemon, crashing to monkeys, there are tons of them! Likewise, the twelve days of Christmas and here we go a caroling are also often parodied. With so many Christmas songs about the holiday, God, and any number of things, why do we feel the need to parody these songs? My theory is that it makes it something special. It makes it more personal and fun. Especially if you make your own version to immortalize memories or events. It makes it something that only the singers share or understand, or something that anyone in that situation can relate to. This is the kind of thing I can really get into. And in fact, I do actually make a lot of these parodies with a friend. However, I sadly can not post them here because very few of them would actually make sense to you. BUT, never fear! As I clearly can not make a post like this and have no original parody of my own, I will make a (cough really horrible cough) new one up just for you guys! Yes, yes, I know. I'm amazing. So, in spirit of the holidays, I present to my fellow Kennedy students: Dismissal Bells!

Dashing through the hall,

The foyer's like a brawl,

It's the end of the day,

the crowds are in the way!

MOVE MOVE MOVE!

You people standing round,

and blocking the front door,

if you don't want us to push past

don't stay there anymore!

OH

Dismissal Bells,

Hear the yells,

Why are you still here?

The reprieve has finally started,

we wont see you till next year!

HEY!

Dismissal Bells,

Hear the yells,

It's all been worth the wait,

everyone's been counting

and it's time for Christmas break!

See you all next year, and Merry Christmas!

(and seriously, stop standing in front of the door you loiterers!)

-BlackFox

(371)

...No. Just...NO.

http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/

...No.
No.
No.

No.

just... just no.

Seriously guys.

Just.

No.

I mean wow.

This is a blog my dad frequently comments on, and we talk a lot about some of the subjects that come up. Today, we discussed this... monstrosity. I really admire my dad and his opinions, and I actually thought he made some really good points. So I will share with you, his comments, as well as mine.

Ok, two things wrong with this picture that my dad pointed out.

One, Jesus is portrayed as typical Anglo-Saxon. Jesus was Jewish, and therefore should be portrayed as such. He is not some fill-in-the-blank concept for us to use according to our needs. There is not a Japanese Jesus. Or an African Jesus. Or a British Jesus. Or an American Jesus. There is one Jesus and he should be portrayed correctly. He is not something to be molded and shaped to our own preferences. He was a real person.

Two, Dolls are a large part of the imaginary. You associate them with a child playing pretend. By making Jesus into a doll, you create a shift from historical to fantasy. The incarnation of God as a man becomes make believe or fiction, as opposed to historical reality.

My own personal observation.

I am aware that this is an attempt by the church to either A, comment on consumerism. Or B, spark debates about it. That does not make it right or effective. Because the idea is so ridiculous and childish, it does not really give a punch to the viewer. There is no impact or moment of realization. It fails to bring up that challenge in the reader because the concept is so ridiculous. You look at it and immediately think, really? “GodBaby”? Are you people serious? When I first saw it, it took me a minute to realize it was commentary and not legitimate, earnest, or designed to insult Christianity. All it does is generate the opinion of the ad being dumb and kind of offensive. The focus then shifts from the idea of “look how consumerist we are!” to “...someone actually had to green light this thing. Did a church really make this?” You begin to question the church as opposed to your own conduct this holiday season. That is why I say it is ineffective. When the commentary is so blatant, poorly thought out, or followed through, people stop caring about the message and start focusing on the failures.

-BlackFox

(420)

What Matters.

So, seeing as Christmas is just around the corner, I feel like it is proper to comment on the actual point of the holiday. Christmas, as you may or may not know, originally had nothing to do with Santa. There was no naughty or nice list. No happy elves or magic (and slightly judgmental) reindeer. No sleigh or presents or cookies left out near the chimney. Christmas is a time of remembrance.

Christmas is a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. It is a remembrance of the day he made himself flesh and blood. He choose to put aside his deity to become human like you and I. To experience our suffering and feel our needs and hardships. He was not God smushed into the body of a man, he was an actual man. A living breathing human being, who had to live and learn like we do. The only difference between us and him, was that Jesus was without sin. He came as the perfect sacrifice. He became flesh solely to die on the cross for our sins. He came solely to bear our suffering to create a way for us. We celebrate Christmas to remember the day he was born. We celebrate it to remember the miracle and the majesty of Jesus Christ. It was not created as a day to get a ton of presents or to see everyone in the family.

How many of us pull out a nativity set and call it good? How many of us stopped telling the story of the birth of Jesus when the kids outgrew those books? How many of us go to the Christmas service and spend the entire time waiting for it to end? Many of us, myself included, can be guilty of this on Christmas day. We get so wrapped up in the holiday that we forget its purpose. We forget what it is that we are really celebrating. We forget what Christmas is really about. And no, I don't mean the holiday specials that say family and being together are all that matters, or that it's the thought that counts. Those things are true, but they are not the main focus. Now, I am not saying that nothing else is important during the holidays. I am not saying that Christmas is not a time to be with the ones you love. I am not saying you should abandon your traditions and stop giving gifts. I am saying that there is more to the holiday than these things. That there is more to Christmas than being with your family and giving presents. That it is a day to remember what God has done for us.

-BlackFox

(450)

Removed From It All

You will remember that I, in the first of my three weekly posts, mentioned reading the Divine Comedy as part of a school project. It involves analyzing an author and his methods with your own little specific group. Mine is centered around Dante. Now, when we first started to discuss the book, I was very clear and adamant on my own beliefs and how I viewed the bankrupt theology within the pages. It was something I was extremely unmovable on. So one of my group mates made a point of telling me to leave my own beliefs out of these discussions. And my question to you, is why should I?


Why should I abandon my beliefs? To be more objective when analyzing the essay? During such analysis using your own experiences and knowledge is expected. Different points of view and interpretations are supposedly wanted and create a “deeper” discussion. Also, if it focuses mainly on religion, then discussing how the religious imagery goes against normal doctrine is important in terms of the style and substance of the writer. Wherefore should I deny my group mates the benefit of another view? In terms of being more “open minded” there is something specific I would like to point out about that. If you open your mind to one way of thinking, inevitably it is closed to another. For instance, opening your mind to the concept of truth being what you make it and unknowable, closes your mind to all claims of objective truth. It is simply a fact. This is why most people want to discuss with many others who hold different beliefs, so it prevents a bias forming according to the collectively open and closed perceptions. So again I say, who am I, to deny my group the benefit of another point of view?


And finally, I am not going to ignore my beliefs. I am not going to sweep them under a rug. I am going to stand up for them and question that which contradicts them. Truth is more important than analyzing a 13^th century author with a removed eye. I am not going to leave it behind for the sake of removing myself from such a debate as this. When I go into discussion, I'm taking truth with me.


-BlackFox

(384)

Hell and Demons

Continuing my posts inspired by the Divine Comedy (more specifically the Inferno at present.) I will once again give the warning of a spoiler.


Another thing Dante has set up for hell, is the concept of demons ruling over it. This idea is actually pretty popular. Often seen as Satan and his minions controlling the suffering of the lost souls of the dammed. However, this is actually not so. Hell is not a place where demons reign. They are sinful and evil and just as guilty of punishment as men are. They will not be ruling hell, they will be suffering in hell. God has no interest in rewarding their wickedness with power and entertainment. Demons have one goal, they wish to turn men away from God. In the Bible, such action is specifically condemned, saying one who causes another to stumble is worse than he who falls. When the time of judgment comes, they will be cast into the lake of fire to burn for eternity. Also, demons have no connection to God. At one point in the Inferno, a soul suffering in hell curses and insults the name of the Lord, and is immediately set upon by a demon watching over that level of hell, demanding to know the location of the “insolent blasphemer”. Demons do not condemn or punish such a thing, in fact they actively try to cause it. There is an instance in the Bible, where Christ confronts a group of demons. They ask him, “What have you to do with us? Have you come to punish us before our time?” Here we see they are sinful and oppositional to God. They do not support him, and even allude to the fact they too will suffer. And probably most important, Satan is a bitter enemy of God. There is absolutely no reason why God would not pronounce judgment on the prince of darkness, and no way for Satan to prevent that judgment from falling upon himself. He is powerless before the might of the Lord, and so will suffer like the rest.


Another implication of this system is that either demons are outside of God's power, or that they are his agents. A demon seat of power in hell allows for no alternative. Because a demon is an evil creature of sin, they are subject to the righteous fury of God, and no salvation is allowed -or from the demons perspective even wanted- for them. This means that if they do not suffer in hell, something must prevent God from exacting retribution. The first option is that demons are beyond the reach of God to punish, that he has no power over hell and merely casts down sinners into it. The reason the demons are allowed free reign is simply that God has not the power to punish them. This is obviously ludicrous. God created everything, heaven, hell, and demons alike. Nothing is beyond his power. A creator may do with his creation as he pleases. Now, the other options is that the demons escape punishment because they were created by God for the purpose of tormenting souls in hell, that they were created to be sinful and evil and corrupt for this purpose. This also is not viable. God cannot endure sin, hence the need to inflict justice upon it. He will not allow it to roam unimpeded for all eternity. In any case, He has no need of their services. God does not need a helper to punish sin, he is quite capable of doing this himself. He certainly does not require the enlistment of sinful, evil beings for the task. Ergo, there is no reason for a demon to be spared the fires of hell.


-BlackFox

(627)

Inferno

So, recently I have begun reading the Divine Comedy by Dante for a school project. What I had originally thought of as an interesting concept has turned into a painful, painful, experience. For those who do not know, the Divine Comedy follows the author through a literal journey into hell, purgatory, and paradise. The theology in this book is extremely painful, and will thus influence the next few posts, and possibly more in the future. (warning: there will be some spoilers.)

First of all, let's talk about Dante's concept of the nine circles of hell. He basically assigns each sin it's own torment to suffer for eternity. The lower you go, the worse the sin and therefore the worse the punishment. However, while this might sound interesting at first, it is poorly handled. Many of the punishments are not exactly all that bad...at all. Seriously, some of them are minor annoyances. And whats even worse, some of the upper sufferings are greater than the lower sufferings. Take for instance, a level where you are torn and flayed limb from limb if you dare to rise above boiling pitch, against the level beneath it: wearing a really heavy cloak for eternity. Adultery for instance, is only the second circle. Justified in this spot as being the sin “closest to love”. The punishment for breaking the seventh commandment? To be blown about in a harsh windstorm for all eternity. How exactly is that suffering? How does the soul feel the wrath of God in such a manner? Wherein lies the pain and the wailing and the anger and sorrow? Adultery is not a minor thing. It is not a sin that God feels little anger towards. Hell is a terrible, horrible place. The suffering endured there is beyond any mortal comprehension. It is not a place for such a minor inconvenience. Even worse, is the level above it, or Limbo.

Here, the light of human reason shines. This is supposedly where people who are unbaptized, alive before the time of Christ, or a... “virtuous” pagan.... will reside. Their punishment is that, as their only crime was not accepting salvation, they must live forever with the longing to be near God. Now firstly, baptism is neither a necessity nor a guarantee of acceptance to heaven. The death of the Lamb covers all sins. Baptism is a symbol of rebirth in Christ, but it does not make you righteous or holy or cleansed, only the blood of Christ can do that. The same principle goes for those alive before Christ's death on the cross. Some people look forward to the cross, and some people look back, but all those chosen are saved. There is nothing very special about someone who is baptized compared to someone who is not. The symbol is important yes, but it does not make you a better or more righteous Christian. ...Lastly... the third denizens of Limbo are offensive to the Christian beliefs. If someone is pagan. If they do not believe in God. If they do not believe in death and resurrection, then they have sinned grievously. This is not a minor thing, it is one of the worst sins that can be committed. Their presence is justified here as, thanks to human reason, they sought truth and goodness but simply lacked the means or knowledge to find God. They are depicted as shining with a great light of said human reason, though not as great a light as that of God. However, human reason does not have a light. It is clouded in sin and darkness. It is wrong. It is evil. It is not going to get you close to heaven. These men will suffer for all eternity. They are not going to be put up on a pedestal to glorify the might of human reason. Human reason is what leads man astray. It takes him away from the light of God into hell. It lies and rejects God and seeks to glorify itself. It can not seek goodness in the absence of God, all it can find is sin and death.

We can not even imagine the torments of hell, but we do know one thing, the sinners there are tormented. They suffer, they cry, they scream, they hate God with all their heart and curse his name. There is no longing to be with him. There is no repentance. There is no reprieve or end. There is no place of honor for a pagan who denounces God and blasphemes against him. In this case, our poet friend has grievously misrepresented the fires of hell.

-BlackFox

(772)

No One

No one was beside me,

No one cared to see.

Not one listened to me,

Not one let me be.

No one bid me wait for them,

No one called me friend.

No one stood beside me,

in that cold and lonely end.

Not one gave me pity.

Not one lent out a hand.

Not one choose to cheer me,

when once I tried to stand.

No one there would aid me.

Not one would set me free.

No one else but you Lord,

You were enough for me.

-BlackFox (with another short filler post because she is really lazy.)

(100)

Concerning Little Ones

Many people consider a child to be a sort of perfect innocent creature. They feel like, because the child has not really known the difference between right and wrong yet, they are not guilty of sin. But unfortunately, this is not so. Man is born in sin, and is predestined by God for heaven or hell. It does not matter how old he or she is. Children are naturally just as evil as the rest of us. They only think about their own needs and wants, and do not care about how they get them.

Consider this: how often does a parent have to teach a child to be selfish? How often do they have to teach a child to be violent or bad or mean? The answer of course is never. The purpose of a parent is to bring up their child in faith, and also to teach them right from wrong. The child already knows how to sin. He already knows how to hurt and be mean. What he does not know is that he can not simply do whatever he wants. He does not know that his desires are not the standard by which he judges actions. You have to teach him to put others first. You have to teach him not to hit and not to insult. You have to teach generosity and kindness and selflessness. Imagine a child without any parents. If left to his own devices, the child will simply disregard any sense of morality towards others. He will care only about himself. He wont decide to share on his own, suffer for the sake of another, or put the needs of those around him ahead of his own. He will grow up naturally a selfish person who only cares about himself. Of course, some might claim he would at least get some semblance of experience from interacting with other people, so lets go a step further. Imagine an adult male, incredibly large and strong, with the mind of a small child. This image is very intimidating, but we often fail to consider exactly why that is. The reason of course is because he would be dangerous. He would use his power and strength to get what he wanted, because that is all he would know. He would have no reason to put anyone first, why would he? What would he gain from suffering or limited happiness? Someone for instance might tell him that he can not take something desirable from a store without paying. Maybe they even try to take it from him, or lead him away. He then reacts badly and throws a temper tantrum, lashes out and hits them like a child, injuring and possibly killing the person. A child is only not dangerous because he is weak. He can not overpower an adult. Children are not saintly creatures. They are not a perfect light of innocence in the world. They need guidance and support and teaching and discipline. This is why parents, or at a least a parent figure, are so important to a child.

-BlackFox

(517)

By Any Other Name

I have previously stated on this blog that I am a Calvinist. But, I do realize that many people might not know exactly what a Calvinist is beyond being a christian. Luckily, there exist the five points of Calvinism (or T.U.L.I.P.) to help me explain my beliefs to you.

Total Depravity: This refers to the total depravity of man. In short, all men, (yes even children) are slaves to sin from birth. Man is born fundamentally in sin and is born fundamentally evil. Because of this, man cannot turn to God with his own power. He is unable to come to God and be saved without divine intervention. He hates God and turns away from him, he can do nothing else but reject salvation. God then, must assist man through His grace and call him to faith. In other words, man is unable to accept the gift of eternal life in the absence of God.

Unconditional Election: This refers to God's unconditional election of man for salvation. It is based entirely on God's plan and own standards. It has absolutely nothing to do with the actions or supposed righteousness of man. He saves man out of mercy and love, not based on how well they behaved on earth. Man is flawed and sinful, hence he cannot do good in God's absence. Therefore, salvation must come from unconditional mercy. Predestination is also a large part of this, meaning that from the beginning, God choose whom he would save (the elect) and who would face justice in the lake of fire.

Limited Atonement: This refers to the death of Christ on the cross, and that his death was intended only for the elect. In other words, Christ died for some but not all. Christ died for the sins of those who were intended to be saved. However, not all will receive salvation and not everyone is going to go to heaven. Not everyone is going to come to faith, and will persist in their hatred and defiance towards God. And these people will face the righteous justice of God. Predestination is also a large part of this doctrine.

Irresistible Grace: This refers to the overwhelming power of the grace of God. If God wishes to save someone, they will be saved. It is literally impossible for Him to fail to reach someone. Nothing is beyond the power of God, therefore no one can resist his hand. The power of grace is completely irresistible and overpowers the sin nature of man to defy God. It illustrates God's faithfulness in delivering man from sin, since without intervention salvation is impossible.

Perseverance of the Saints: This refers to the permanence of salvation. Once you are saved, you are always saved. God is not going to change his mind and cast you out. You will not lose your way and be lost after having come to faith. Those who God chooses to save will be saved, and will not be lost to him. There is nothing that can sever this bond between man and God.

There is also one last point, that is sometimes added with the others. Forming TULIPS or STULIP (listed first because of the importance of the doctrine.)

(S)overeignty of Grace: This is extremely important. The doctrine states that God is sovereign. His authority and judgment and power are absolute. He is not flawed, or mortal, or within the bounds of time like man is. He is our creator, and we have no right to question his choices. For those of you who may feel this to be a bit unfair, consider this. God does not have to save anyone. If he were actually just and fair, he would send every soul to hell because of sin. God is also not a grandfather. He displays righteous anger as well as mercy and love. His will and word are sovereign and righteous, and that is an objective truth.

I know many of you will not agree with my beliefs, and may possibly be offended by them. I merely created this post to outline exactly what an average Calvinist, and I myself, believes in. I am very convicted in my beliefs. However, if you do wish to challenge or pose a question, I ask only that you be respectful.

-BlackFox

(715)

Goats and Sheep

A popular view of God is that he just wants everyone to be basically good. That your views and beliefs do not really matter. Some even go so far as to say that everyone is forgiven and saved, and that none will face the pit of fire.

But not everyone is called. Not everyone is going to heaven when they die. There is a reason that God talked about separating the goats from the sheep. There is a reason He will say “Depart from me, I never knew you.” If you do not believe in God, and fundamental aspects of scripture, then you will not be saved. It does matter what you believe. It does matter what you do and think and what path you follow. God does not want you to be basically good. He wants you to be perfect and righteous. You may not be as bad as a serial killer, but that does not make you holy by any means. It certainly does not pay your passage to heaven. You will not be saved from the lake of fire just by being basically good. No one is basically good. Everyone is, in fact, basically evil in the absence of God.

Christ died for those He intends to save. He died for his children. He created a path because we could not hope to make one on our own. Those He calls will always come to Him, and will never be lost. But, He has not called everyone to Him. This is not unfair, or wrong, or unjust. If God were to be just then all of us would burn in hell for eternity. He does not have to endure our sin and wretchedness. He chooses to for our sake. He did not have to save anyone. He did not have to die and suffer and bear our burden. His will is greater than ours. It knows that which we do not know. It sees that which we do not see. And it is as righteous and clear as ours is clouded with sin. We may not understand God's plan, but we must trust in it. And we must beware of counting on our own deeds.

-BlackFox

(355)

A Literal Truth.

One thing often stated about the Bible is that it is taken too literally. That much of what is said is in hubris or emphasis or some other writing style on behalf of the writer. Because of this, they often take the Bible to be open to interpretation. That God does not literally mean condemnation for specific acts or groups, or that the world was created in seven days. Even miracles are put into doubt.

But the Bible is not open to every single interpretation under the sun. Quite frankly, many of the present ones are very wrong. The Bible is not being facetious when it says the world was created with a word, or that Jesus rose from the dead. It is taken literally because the events described are literal. They display the glory and power of God through the story of creation and the miracles that follow. The plagues on Egypt were not of fancy. The impossible victories were, in fact, won. Yes man can not reproduce these things, yes he can not explain them in a lab. God is not a man. God has the power and splendor to perform these feats. It only serves to further illustrate the difference between creator and creation, as well as the glory of the creator. Perhaps most important, the message of the Bible comes from taking certain things literally.

God is not exaggerating about hell and sin. He is not exaggerating when he says that man is hopeless and evil and that there are things we must not do. Those rules are real and definitive. They are not simply colored by the morals of that time. By taking away the literal message of God's word, you also take away the impact and importance of the Message therein. There is power in the act of the Son of Man's death on the cross. There is power in his sacrifice and suffering, and his resurrection from the dead. It was not figurative suffering. It was not an ideal, or a concept for Christians. Christ literally died. He literally bore our punishment and sins. He was literally cut off from God. And he certainly rose from death in victory. Scripture states a fundamental message about the glory and righteousness of God, the depravity of man, and the Messiah. It states explicitly many things that would have no meaning if they were merely a story. There are things that are not to be discounted in this world. Things that are constant and objective and absolute. You can not change that by denying them.

-BlackFox

(430)

Tinfoil and Vodka

Hallo reader! How art thou? I have returned from my Thanksgiving break for another term of blogging! Yes, yes, I can hear your adoring screams of horror delight at my return. I missed you all as well! And to celebrate this reunion, I will submit to you a game I created with my father.

Behold: … THE ANCIENT ALIENS DRINKING GAME

Yes folks it’s random post time again, consider it a short reprieve from the usual topic. For those of you that don’t know, Ancient Aliens is a relatively new show on the history channel. That’s right. A show with that title is on the history channel. It basically follows some “Ancient Astronaut Theorists” as they try to prove the existence of aliens via “evidence” from older civilizations. For instance, a sculpture of a bird is interpreted as a spaceship design. Dad and I love to watch these things. They can quickly become so ridiculous that hilarity ensues for the enjoyment of a humble cynic. One night, we started making fun of the many patterns that appear in the show, and eventually developed it into a drinking game. Basically, when any of the following happens, take a shot! (Note to our inevitable underage viewers, substitute pop instead. Trust us; you’ll live longer than anyone actually drinking.)

Take a shot……

Every time they use the phrase “Ancient astronaut theorists’ _____”.

You will not believe how often they use this phrase. You can honestly fill in the blank with anything: believe, argue, theorize, think, etc. Our theory is this is an attempt to gain credibility and make their ideas sound scientific and credible. Either way, when you hear this 30 times within five minutes, it gets pretty silly.

Every time they reference primitive man and/or a technology gap.

The two usually go hand in hand. The show often likes to state that people were so primitive in the past, that they clearly could not accomplish anything that we ourselves cannot do today. They leave absolutely no room for the concept of some innovative idea or method lost to time. Creativity and human ingenuity unknown to us? Psssh! It’s clearly aliens.

Every time they highlight/ superimpose an image over a statue, carving, painting, etc.

This is also a neat little trick. “Hey guys! This statue kind of looks like an alien. It could just be a cultural way of creating faces that doesn’t necessarily match with our own ideals, but I’m, pretty sure it’s an alien. what? You don’t see it? Here, let me superimpose and alien over it! SEE? Alien! I'll even highlight the differences!” This is very similar to paranormal investigation shows. Ever notice how static sounds like static until they caption it to say “Get Out”?

Every time they visually reproduce aliens, spaceships, or anything else with CGI.

Nothing says science like CGI folks! Can’t visualize it even WITH the superimposed alien head? Well here is a 3D model! See? It’s all mysterious and shiny and fits with our theory! I especially love how sometimes it has absolutely nothing to do with anything. They just randomly insert a ship flying through space no matter what they are actually talking about. Feel free to add making physical models of things onto this as well.

Every time they state multiple questions in a row, or use them as arguments.

Honestly this is almost as common as the phrase ancient astronaut theorists. They will state the same same question in five different ways. “could it be that these are depictions of aliens? Could it be that this is proof of alien contact with primitive man? Is it possible that aliens have been in contact for centuries?” all of these can be answered with no. no it is not possible. Better still sometimes they use them as an argument. How could this happen without alien intervention? CLEARY since we don't have an answer, it can't.

Every time they compare unrelated things

This is especially for civilizations. They will often say “look! Civilization A and civilization B have similar artwork! This is obviously proof that the same aliens visited them! I mean sure, they could have just developed similar philosophy, or we could just be misinterpreting what they created, but the most reasonable answer is alien intervention."

Last but not least, DRAMATIC ZOOOOOOM!

Every time they use a dramatic zoom, filter, or other photo shop transition. They do this so much, as if to say “Ooooooh! This is deep and mysterious and shocking! Ooooooh!” these transitions have no real point, and often come one right after another, causing any dramatic effect to be lost in the ridiculous amount of effects. Do we really need a fade, time lapse, filter, and freeze frame right after another?

Remember this is all in fun, you can add or subtract other rules, such as definitive statements, religious references, etc. at your discretion. Please drink responsibly and try not to die of alcohol poisoning.

-BlackFox

(833) 

Miracles Big And Small

I have never “spoken” to God and had him answer me. I have never had a moment where I was overcome with the glory of God or anything like that. And I really do not have a “the day I became a Christian” story because I have always been one. But there are ways that I have seen God act in my life, subtle and insignificant as they may be.

There are of course the little things that everyone experiences. A sudden urge to check your planner leads you to discover an assignment due tomorrow. Waking up even though your alarm does not go off. A canceled appointment when you feel overwhelmed by your busy life. The snow day that gives you one more day to finish that paper. The bus that is even later getting to the stop than you. Even something as simple as all the lights turning green when you are in a hurry. Yeah some of it might be coincidence. But, as someone who does not believe in the concept of luck, I like to think that sometimes God has your back. That sometimes he says “you know what? This might be a small thing, but I am going to help you out anyway.” It really does help sometimes to know you are not alone.

Of course it is not all little things. I myself credit the discovery of my best friend to the hand of God. We traced back the chain of events that led to our meeting to almost years in the making. The odds of us actually meeting were completely astronomical. Yes we faced a lot of hardship during that time, but it ended up being worth it in the end. And it really means a lot to me, that God would care enough to bring us together when we felt alone. Our friendship has probably made the biggest positive impact on my life than any other event in it. And it has shown me that God cares enough to do these things. That he cares enough to listen to your prayers. That he has not and will not forsake or abandon you, and hardship can sometimes lead to joy.

-BlackFox

(371)

King Of Kings

 Every country has a definite method of rule. Kings, socialism, democracy, etc. etc. etc. Now from a biblical standpoint, which one is best? Which method of rule is the most desirable, regardless of the feelings of man?

The answer would be, of course, a righteous king. What? What did you say? No I did not misspell “democracy”. In the Bible, God often compares himself to a king. The concept of the relationship between a king and his subjects is an analogy for the relationship between God and ourselves. A king punishes the wicked, yet also shows mercy and compassion. A king sets down the law because he has the right and authority to do so. A king protects his own subjects and never forsakes them. He is mindful of the needs of his people. Note, however, that I said a righteous king. A king who becomes corrupted with power and glory, to the point of neglecting his people or becoming a tyrant, perverts this image and analogy. And unfortunately, as men are flawed, this occurrence has not been an uncommon event in history.

So what is wrong with the other methods? Well, as I have already discussed the problems with a socialist type community in a previous post, I will not talk about it here. However, I will talk about democracy. Democracy has a very major flaw in it. It can exist only so long as the population is moral. There is a reason that the government controlled the law and civilians in the past. It was created to control people because they would not control themselves. It inflicted upon people restrictions because human nature is inherently flawed, and leans people towards sin. It was made to prevent people from behaving immorally and devolving into bloodshed and violence. In a democracy, the people have the power. Which is nice as long as people are willing to restrict their own behavior. But eventually people stop being willing to do that. They want to do what they want to do, and they want to be able to do it without running into johnny law. Politicians and other leaders stop caring about the greater good and morals because they need to be agreeable to the public. No one is going to vote for a man that holds views contrary to theirs. Everything devolves into what people want the law and government to be like, as opposed to what it needs to be. This is how you get into situations where congress cannot make tough choices that need to be made, for fear of public reaction. This is how you get laws rewritten to allow for things like divorce. This is why taxes and other unpleasant yet probably necessary things do not get put into place. Democracy is effective only so long as the population is willing to impose undesirable conditions on themselves. And very few are willing to do this for long.

-BlackFox

(491)

All In A Name

 Random post time again guys! I promise it is not about politics or a PSA this time! ...No, really. It actually has a chance to be mildly interesting to you guys! Sorta... maybe... in a certain context...

ok fine it probably wont be, but I think I will delude myself into thinking otherwise. Some of you may or may not be wondering about my name and what the heck it means and/or has to do with religion. If you are in the first category, congratulations! This post is just for you guys! For those of you who could care less.... Fine! Be that way! See if I care! *sniffs*

I am going to go ahead and answer that second question first. My name and the name of this blog have nothing to do with religion at all. Both of them mean exactly the same thing, black fox. They are really only different for variety. Black fox is simply a pseudo name I am fond of using for reasons I will get to. It has absolutely nothing to do with religion, it is merely a default user name. So, you may be asking, why the heck is my blog about religion? Well, simply put, I wanted a consistent topic, and I can do that most of the time with religion. In other words, I am too lazy to think of an appropriate topic to fit the title or vice versa. Honesty is fun!

Now why the name black fox at all? Well the name comes from a story of old....

Once upon a time, a group of huntsmen went out into the forest. They had been out there for hours and had seen no game. The men were dejected and depressed. The master of chase spoke out in anger. He yelled to the forest that his men would give the devil himself the chase of his life. Then suddenly, a black fox sprang out of its hole. Its eyes burned and its coat was black as night. The huntsmen chased it over hills and dales, through forests and valleys and eventually came to a river. The fox jumped into the water and swam to the other side. The fox then let out a laugh that shook the forest and he cried out to the huntsman that should they ever be in need of game, he would always oblige their call. The men looked on in horror as the fox took the form of a demon and fled back to town. And right behind them ran the laughing black fox.

This story is the reason I use the name black fox. I have always loved the concept of the one who appears and vanishes with the sole motivation of fun and entertainment. I love the mentality and character of the black fox. The name also has the advantage of fitting with a persona I am fond of using. Because of this, the name has grown on me and become my default whenever I require anonymity.

-BlackFox

 P.S. If you want to hear an awesome musical version of the story, go here \/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDqLvt4LRVs

(520)

Footsteps

He walked along throughout the snow,

on that cold, dark winter night.

And he demanded that he know,

why he was in this plight.

For while he talked, and mumbled,

to himself and to the stone.

About his world that crumbled,

and how he was alone.

He said “I simply do not see,

you here God, in my life.”

“I think you have forsaken me,

and left me to this strife.”

Then he turned and viewed the street,

where he had not tread on the stone.

And there a sight his eyes did greet,

which told him he was not alone.

For in that deep and darkest night,

his feelings had turned tide.

Right there upon the cold and white,

were footprints, side by side.

-BlackFox (who needed yet another short post.)

(134)

Ally Week

With the conclusion of “ally week” I feel I must make a post. For those who do not know, ally week is basically an entire week devoted to supporting the lifestyles of the lesbian and gay community. In a nut shell, it is meant as a way for people to publicly pledge support. So where does this leave Christians?

It is not a secret that Christians view homosexuality as a sin. We know from the Bible and our teachings that this lifestyle is wrong and against God. As such, we cannot in good conscience support the lifestyle. The problem is that this is no longer politically correct. It is literally impossible to give any view, radical or no, against homosexuality without being labeled as prejudiced or homophobic. There is a large pressure right now to simply conform and support the community. (Why there is such a big push is a post for another day.) So where do Christians fit in during this week? Well, one of two things happens. Either they compromise scripture to accept the politically correct claim, and thus free themselves up to support this lifestyle, or they stick to their principles and choose not to participate. And I must question, why is the latter so terrible? Why are Christians not allowed to hold their beliefs without being insulted or generating hostility? Many people today call for tolerance and acceptance. Yet Christian beliefs are often not tolerated and rejected by these same people. Not supporting the lifestyle is not the same thing as bigotry. I can respect someone as part of God's creation. I can attribute value to them because they are the image of God and because the Bible tells us to love our neighbors. I can meet someone who is gay and find them a perfectly awesome or at least normal person. Being a homosexual does not mean that they are automatically denounced as heathens. However, I do not have to agree with how they have chosen to live. I can respect someone without agreeing with them on everything. It is perfectly legitimate to support the man and not the lifestyle. In other words, if they choose to live that way, that is their decision. I have no right to govern another persons life. But that does not mean that I will validate their choice as acceptable when I know that it is wrong. I have a right to my beliefs just the same as they have a right to theirs. And I should not be expected to compromise mine for the sake of another's.

God did not promise us that being a Christian would be easy. He made it very clear that our beliefs will clash with the norm. But that does not mean we should surrender. That does not mean that we stretch scripture to fit the idea of the masses. Our job is to preach the truth even when it gets hard. Even when it gets difficult or lonely. Sometimes our views will clash and cause conflict. And quite frankly, that is ok. We should not be ashamed to stand up in the name of God. We should not be ashamed to go against the norm. We should not spend our days striving to be in the good graces of our peers at the cost of our faith. We should be able to stand up and say “no, I didn't participate, and I don't intend to. I can love the man without supporting the sin.” Even if it means people getting angry. Our priority should not be other men. because in the end, it is not the opinion of other men that matters.

-BlackFox

(613)

Parables of Meaning

Currently, I am taking a class over literary analysis. One of the things we discuss is different ways to read texts. During one of our periods, we were given an example showing different perspectives that a reader might have while reading. The example they used was the Prodigal Son, a parable from the Bible.

For those who are not familiar with the story, allow me to enlighten you. A man had two sons. One was devoted completely to his work and home, while the younger was rash and impetuous. One day, the youngest son went to his father and demanded his share of the inheritance early for purposes of travel. The father reluctantly gives his son the money and they part. The young man is incredibly popular at first, for he spends his money freely and without caution. However, the money soon runs out and his newfound ‘comrades’ abandon him to poverty. In despair, he goes from place to place begging for work. Eventually, he finds a place as a pig boy on a farm. He is to feed the pigs and is given to eat only what they leave behind. The young man bitterly repents his folly and the mistake he made in leaving his father’s house. He comes to the conclusion that, as his father cared for his servants and they always had enough to eat, it would be better for him to beg for a place there and work for his father. Ashamedly, the young man begins the long trek home, afraid of the reunion and the reactions of his father. As he neared the gate however, the father runs to meet him on the path and embraces him. He rejoices in the return of his son and organizes a feast to be held in celebration. The older more dutiful son complains bitterly. Stating that his brother did not deserve such a feast, when he, the loyal son, had gotten nothing of the kind for his devotion to his father.  The father explains that the older son has always been there, and so was not lost; but the younger brother was like one dead and is alive again. And that there is more rejoicing over the one that is lost and then found, than over many who are never lost at all.

Now, when Christians read this parable Biblically, we talk about the message of God. We explain how God will rejoice in our salvation as one who is lost and then found. We show how it tells us that no matter how far we stray or what sins we commit, God is always there to rejoice in our return. And, as quoted in scripture, there is more rejoicing in the kingdom of heaven over one soul who repents than ninety nine just persons who have no need to.  However, this was not how the parable was read in my class. They focused on how people would identify with the characters. The straight and narrow being sympathetic to the older son, those with a more checkered past siding with the younger, and parents who may believe the actions of the father were foolish or wise. But the point of the parable is not about this. It is not about whether you think the father should have punished the boy. It is not about whether you think that the older boy was a better son or that the younger simply made a mistake. The point of the parable is to show that regardless of mistakes, the lost will always be accepted back. It also serves to explain why this is. By making it about what the reader feels should have happened or multiple viewpoints and meanings you lose that. Sometimes there is really only one way a story is meant to be read. It is all fine and dandy to say that the story symbolizes favoritism and the injustices of siblinghood, but that defeats the purpose the story is trying to tell. When authors create a story or meaning, they have a specific thing in mind. You might be able to come up with another meaning, but that does not negate the original intent. Analysis is fine, as long as the original purpose is kept intact and in mind. The moral of the story is not a fill-in-the-blank slate.

-BlackFox

(726)

Favors

Thank you God for listening,

when I ramble and complain.

Thank you God for putting up,

with all my little pains.

Thank you God for granting,

those simple tasks of mine.

Thank you God for accepting,

my mortal selfish mind.

Thank you God for loving me,

when love I don't deserve.

Thank you God for keeping,

my salvation in reserve.

Thank you God for forgiving,

all my large and little sins.

Thank you God for rejoicing,

in all my little wins.

Thank you God for staying there,

when you I cannot see.

To you, it was all little things,

but they mattered much to me.

-BlackFox (who needed a short post.)

(111)

Unalienable Rights

Going off topic here from religion, let us talk a bit about rights. We all know the unalienable rights listed in our constitution. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are the rights that people claim to absolute. Rights that are said to be constant no matter the situation. Yet, in reality, people do not actually have any inherit rights. We have only the rights that the government allows us to have. Man does not automatically deserve anything. It is not a given that he is living or free or happy. There is no real basis of this claim. By what authority does man decide he deserves these things? The past certainly does not lend it to him. Slavery, murder, and despair are quite common in its archives. Even now, man has the right to only that which he can enforce. And even then, these unalienable rights are restricted. If you have not ceased reading this in irritation and/or anger at my previous comments, I thank you and invite you to look with me at each separate claim.

First off, the right to life. Obviously we are not entirely too keen on murder. We proclaim that every man has the right to live no matter what. This belief however is not entirely consistent. The court decides whether or not someone may live or die, and the government enforces it. If all men have the right to life, where does that leave capital punishment? Does that make the execution of a serial killer unjust? Now some of you are waiting on baited breath to jump and say “BUT, but, but, but, it is completely different! You see Ms. Fox, they forfeited that right when they took another life!” To which I ask you to consider two things. 1) Unalienable means inseparable. You can not remove one from the other. By saying that killing another justifies the death of the perpetrator, you are in essence saying that it is not unalienable. That it can in fact be taken away and can in fact not apply. Intentionally or not, you admit that this right comes (and is withdrawn) solely by the law, and in fact not bestowed by nature. If the latter were true, nothing would ever justify capital punishment. 2) Consider also, if the right to life is removed by murder, then what fate awaits the man who kills the murderer of his wife? Is he simply fulfilling this eye for an eye principle? Or does he also, deserve death?

Next we consider the right of freedom. Similar to the first, we again must look at the law. I am quite sure that a few of you took the side against capital punishment while reading the above. Taking the mindset of “well, yeah! It is not ok at all! That is why we should do away with the death sentence.” To which I respond with two things. The first being a segue (Pronounced 'seg-way'.Yes that is how you actually spell it. The English language everyone!) into the right of freedom. If we were to do away with capital punishment on these grounds, than incarceration must also be eliminated from our justice system. For why would the right to remain unimprisoned be any different than the right to life? Does one unalienable or inseparable right have more weight than another? If we have no right to execute a man than by the same token we can not lock him up. Therefore, we can not send a man to prison for murder. By doing so, we again admit that this right is a privilege set in place by the law. One that can be removed or granted at anytime. The second thing I will respond with refers to both a fore mentioned rights. It is foolish to attempt to change the law to conform to the rights it has set in place. If we do not allow it to punish those who have broken these rights, then the rights themselves are pointless. It is all well and good to say that man has a right to life and freedom. But when one man kidnaps another and murders him, thus violating them both, the law must be able to act. It must be able to enforce meaning and value to its claims. It must be able to prove that there are consequences to taking a life, rather than simply stating that the right to live exists. If it fails to enforce the privileges it sets in place, then they may as well not exist.

Lastly, we have arguably the most selfish of rights, the pursuit of happiness. Oh this one... it really is quite odd when you think about it. The entire point of rules and society is to restrict people from doing what they want to do. To prevent people from doing things that cause harm to others. Yet this rule states that people have the right to do what everything else says they can not. What if, to pursue happiness, a man kidnaps a woman he has fallen in love with? In this case, who has a greater right? The one who seeks happiness or the one who seeks freedom? The pursuit of happiness is one of the most selfish aspects of the nature of man. They will disregard all others in order to accomplish it. And again we must consider the law in this matter. If a man destroys the lives of others through dishonesty and deceit in the purpose of finding happiness, does the law have a right to stop him? In the end, it contains the same flaws as the previous two. And, like the others, it is revealed to be a privilege and not a natural right.

-BlackFox

(965)

Unseen Light

Often times people will pose the question: If God is just, why does he allow bad things to happen to good people?” I could write a post talking about the differences between the standards of God and men. I could explain in detail about how all things work together for good. I could talk about the difference between what we see and what God sees. Yet, I do not think that would be effective. It is very easy for me to explain that all things work together for good. The problem comes from the fact we can not always see how. I can tell you that losing your job was part of God's plan and that there was a reason for it, but that does not lend much comfort when the reason can not be seen. So instead of what basically would amount to a lecture, I have here a tale that I think better puts things into perspective.

One day, a man left his wife and home and went out to spend a day at sea. The ocean was a deep wide blue, and light danced upon it like glass. He went far beyond the shore, to the point where it was just barely in view. His small boat sat calmly on the still water. He began to relax and enjoy the moment. For a while, the sea was very peaceful.

However, a great storm was gathering that day. As the sun began to set, it hit the area in full force. The man noticed too late that the previously stagnant water was becoming rough and wavy. The boat continuously rose and fell on the enormous waves, and strong winds threatened to push it out to the deep sea. Because of the wind and the rain and the growing darkness, the man was unable to see the shoreline. He became worried. The man knew that if he did not make for shore soon, he would be lost to the depths of the ocean.

Suddenly, he noticed a bright orange light shining out from the shoreline. It was almost blinding against the backdrop of the dark sky. Grateful, the man rushed towards it as fast as the storm would allow. Silently promising to repay the creator of this makeshift lighthouse. Following the beacon, the man reached shore with his life, and survived the terrible storm.

The man rushed home with joy, eager to share his story with his wife. When he arrived however, he found her in tears. Their home had caught fire she said, gesturing to the hollow charred frame of a house. The fire had gone out of control and lit the entire place ablaze. She dissolved once again into tears and awaited his reaction.

The man looked at the broken house, and then back to his wife. He was silent for a moment, and then began to laugh loudly. Incredulous, the wife began to demand how he could be laughing at a time like this. He looked over at her with a half smile and explained to her his ordeal at sea. Not understanding, she asked why on earth that gave him cause to laugh. The man replied, “Do you not understand my love? The bright beacon I saw, the one that saved my life and guided me back to you, was the light of our burning house!”

-BlackFox

(563)

Politically Correct Christians

Looking at politics today, there are many issues that are debated which involve religion. Certain views that were once held by society as true, are being changed to hold false. As such, certain beliefs are expected to change as well.

People expect you to hold true to the politically correct view that divorce is acceptable. That it should be allowed in all circumstances and that people have the right to break the bonds they grow unhappy with. They expect you to agree that woman should have the right to kill their unborn child because of the circumstances or because it is their right to do so. People expect you to accept gay marriage and lifestyles as moral or at least acceptable and support their choices. They expect these and many other things from you. So what about the religions like Christianity that view all these as a sin? Sadly, often times they become modified to suit the new majority belief. Take pastors for instance, they are preaching to a congregation that is most likely divided on these issues. They then choose to sweep these important issues under the nearest rug. Sometimes even an entire church changes the doctrine to fit these new ideals. They choose to reach for an interpretation of the Word that suits their needs. Or perhaps, they may even say the Bible is old and was made for a different world. Many Christians are beginning to lose their convictions. The faith they hold becomes fluid with the demands of man. The message of the Bible is altered for the sake of conformity.

The Bible is not a parenting book. It is not something that applied only in its own time and therefore is no longer valid in this one. There has not been some new and better method that makes the old one obsolete. The Bible is the word of God. It is not simply something that conveniently changes with the views of man. A line simply has to be drawn. A line that says I will not change my views and beliefs and teachings just because I am expected to. I line that stands strong, and puts you on the side of the righteous. Men have flawed morals and values. They turn their back on God and righteousness. The choices of man that determines his laws are not necessarily correct ones. It is important to stand with the truth even when it is painful or hard. Even when it means going against the current and your friends. Yes it will be hard, the Bible does not say it will be easy. God did not promise us an easy happy life on earth, he promised us a reward in heaven. 

-BlackFox

(454)

On The Borderline

When you read the Bible, there are two messages about ones faith. It talks about the importance of evangelism (spreading the word of God and bringing others to Christ.) And how it is our duty to show the glory of God through how we live out our lives. But it also talks about how we need to be careful in the ways we show our faith. To not do so just to be recognized by our neighbors, or abide by laws created by man and not God (i.e. woman must wear a dress to church.) So where is the line that separates the two? How can you tell which is which?

Really it comes down to motive. Why do we do what we do? The Pharisees chose to fast and pray in public. They walked the streets and screamed in the synagogs. And they did this because other people were watching. Because what was important was being called wise, and pious and a righteous man. They were thinking about the adoration of their fellow human beings.Therein lies the problem, they wanted the approval of man, not God. The approval we seek should not be that of man. It should not matter to us what our neighbors think of our Christianly status. We should not be doing these things so that men will look up in awe at us. We should be doing these things so that men look up in awe of God. So that they will see his splendor and majesty. So that they will read the word and what it teaches and marvel at what it says. People did not practice their faith in secret so that their neighbors can say “oh what great men those are!” they did not seek their name to be placed in a history book as a man who fought the law that oppressed him. They are fully aware that doing such a thing must be anonymous and remain that way. That history will never remember them. They do not care that history will not remember them. Because what matters to them is that they show their devotion to God. That they do not lose sight of their faith or abandon him. That is the kind of Christian we should be like.

But this does not mean that we forgo showing our faith and evangelizing. We do not refuse to do anything in public for fear of becoming a show off. All that it means is we have to look at the reasons why, not simply the how. In the end, the how is not important. What if the man who practices in private does so to say to himself “I am truly righteous”? Or the man in public is truly devoted to God? In the end, all that matters is why you do what you do. The border is not one of action, but of motive.

-BlackFox

(488)

CSI Religion

 My father and I love watching British cop shows. Recently, we have run into a trend that pops up occasionally in TV. It is what we like to call, CSI Religion. CSI Religion refers to how religious people are portrayed in the media. Especially prevalent in shows like Law and Order and its British equivalent programs. Annoying and slightly offensive, this can make or break an episode for us.

For those of you that watch CSI, try and remember if you have ever seen a normal religious person on the show. Most of the time they are either A) a completely insane person who rambles religiously and performs weird actions. B) A manipulative ass who is using religion to gain power, women, protection, or some other gain. C) Someone who is preachy or self-righteous and either hinders the police or harasses people based on some moral issue. Or, D) That person who is “deeply devoted” and is not quite completely insane, but spends the entire episode showing off how religious they are. And none of them, I repeat, not one of them, actually sounds or acts like a Christian. Seriously. We do not go around saying that the dead woman who got an abortion died because “a life for a life”. We do not go around saying that the murder victim needs to be punished for her sin. We do not sit in interrogation rooms and declare that “God allows the righteous to suffer at the hands of their enemies” and then devolve into prayer for six hours. We do not quote scripture every five minutes. We just do not sound like that. We are normal people. We go to school, work, the shopping market, the same as you do. I do not know any Christian that has ever acted this way. It becomes incredibly aggravating to see yourself always portrayed in this light. The religious person is ALWAYS a crazy, overly devoted, or jerk of a person. And they almost always end up as the killer or at least helping the bad guys some way. The only saving grace is that occasionally a main character is religious, but that is normally used to either act as a plot point or a foil. And on top of that, they are usually hesitant or uninformed about their faith. Religion itself is almost always an engine to get across some political agenda like abortion, or the “horrible affects of strict religious rules” such as Cindy being driven to crime by her parents restrictions. Restrictions, by the by, that most Christians do not actually live by.

CSI Religion is not depicting religion. It is depicting how people THINK religion looks. The dialogue is written by people who do not actually know any Christians, and are therefore going off of what they think a Christian would say. They think to themselves, “You know what would go great here? Some wack job religious people! That would totally get across my point about how people do not respect gay rights!” Of course, they just kinda assume how a Christian would act. The problem is they read the stories on the internet and media of people who stand around with picket signs, or who scream at random employees. Then they use that as a basis for their religious character. Most of us do not do that though. Yeah there are some crazy people, but we are not all like this. The average Christian is defiantly not going to act like that. It would be really nice for once, if there was a show that portrayed us as normal people, because it really can make the episode unpleasant and difficult to watch. It feels like they just take a negative stereotype to prove a point and do not even bother trying to give a real representation of a Christian. With all the resources at their disposal, would it really be that hard?

-BlackFox

(660)

Is It Still Fun If It's Lame?

 Can I hear a whoot, whoot, for random post number two! …..At all? ...No? ….Fine. I see how it is. That is totally fine guys. See if I care.You guys are no fun anyways. I will just get posting now. In the empty silence. About owning up to all those stupid things you do when no one is watching. *dejectedly reaches for keyboard*

So everyone has something they do for fun that they do not share with other people. Be it a stupid show, game, abstract pastime, dance, genetic experiment, you get the idea. They hide it because it seems childish or silly and they want to save face. But in all honesty, who cares if it is stupid? It is for fun people! Fun does not necessarily have to be cool fun. So what if you a play a game at 16 that was created for 5 year olds back in the day. So what if you make stupid crossovers or watch T.V. shows that should probably be banned for lowering the I.Q. of the viewer. It does not matter. The people who call this kind of thing stupid or dumb are really missing out. Take the expansion in World of Warcraft for instance. A lot of people have stopped playing the MMO because they felt it was more childish now. Yes ok it has Kung-Foo Panda rip offs now. But do they ever consider that maybe that was to appeal to more eastern audiences and NOT simply to pander to kids? And that maybe this new culture and area is interesting and well done? And yes ok they added what was basically a Pokemon engine for critter pets in the game. Yeah, that is kinda silly, but that does not make it not fun. I have had some pretty memorable battles with people that reminded me of the days when people just played Pokemon for fun. When it was not so much about building the god team that required the greatest stats ever and specific choices, and more about just fighting with your favorite non-godly Pokemon. It might be silly but it still creates memories and great stories. Finding stupid glitches, like having a stag ride a motorcycle while a bat winged warlock in a meteor rides it, (no I am not making that up.) is completely pointless yet totally rewarding. Who else can say they have done that? Who else can share the non-sensible stories you get when you and a friend try to top each other in a story? Who else can say they run from some all powerful enemy whenever they go jogging? Fun is a completely separate entity from everything else. It does not matter if it is cool, or lame, or “oh my god why did I do that on camera kill me now.” Fun is fun. And no one can take it away from you.

The point is you do not need to hide this stuff. Yeah some people might make fun of you, but you know what? It does not matter. Eventually they will get bored and forget about your awesome fun thing, and just go back to doing whatever it is they don't want you to know about. Because I can almost guarantee they have something too. Now, if you will excuse me, I am going to take my Kung-Foo Panda ripoff and her tiny magical winged rabbit off into the greatest battle of their lives against a sentient carnivorous box.

-BlackFox

(585)

Those Who Believe

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who do not believe, no proof is sufficient.” -Stuart Chase

I considered this quote when thinking about what to blog. And it led me think about that all too famous argument of “Well if God is real, then let him raise this table up in front of me. And then I will believe.” and when of course, nothing happens, they sit there and say “Yeah, I didn't think so.” Which got me to thinking.

IF the table actually did raise up, what would this person do? Would they drop to their knees and proclaim God's majesty? Would they convert on the spot? More than likely they would just have a brief reaction, such as surprise or fear, and then immediately try to figure how you did that. They would assume you used a machine or another person or something to lift that table. That entire room would be torn apart in the hope of finding out the secret. Failing that, you yourself would probably be interrogated. They would be completely focused on this. I mean clearly there is a non-God related reason, on account that God does not exist....right? The fulfillment of their demands would be pointless. It would change absolutely nothing. They would still not believe in God. Although, they would probably be impressed with your apparent ingenuity. It literally would not even cross their mind that God did that at all. Even if someone could scientifically produce a being as God, it would likely be considered a hoax. There is simply no way around it. People will demand evidence and then refuse to accept it when produced.

Christians on the other hand, do not need proof to believe in God. The Bible is our proof, and that is enough for us. We do not need a scientist to make a model of God in a lab or some reporter to conduct an interview. Faith is exactly that, faith. God does not need to perform parlor tricks. He does not need to come down and high five someone to prove he is real. That which he has revealed is enough for us. We do not need to test him, or demand more. Of course, to some this is naive, or foolish, or suspiciously close to people who believe in aliens. They look as us in the same way we look back. With a sense of “How can you really not see this?” And there will always be a chasm there to separate the two groups. Now this obviously is not to say evangelism is pointless, not by any means. Spreading the word of God is our duty after all. It is merely something to consider the next time you join in with a debate.

-BlackFox

(451)

Poles And People

 You may have heard of “See you at the pole.” It is basically a day for people to meet at their local High School flag pole and publicly pray. You would think that this would be a good thing yeah? Christians getting together out in the open professing their faith, it seems the perfect way to make a faith statement. Yet, is it really something so great?

“See you at the pole” looks great on paper, but in practice it does have some problems. I view it similarly to Youth Group in this manner. People do not go to the flag pole because they want to glorify God. People do not go there because of their faith. People go there so they can say “Look at me world! Look at what a great Christian I am!” They will stand and pray and be “good” Christians for the duration of the meet, and then go home and go on with their lives. There are people there who will proclaim their deep devotion and then live as if they didn't believe in God. They are too much like the Pharisees who pray and fast in public. They want the recognition and admiration of the viewer. That is why they choose to pray so strongly publicly, but not privately. It is not about God it is about them. Another thing they consider is if a friend is going to be there. It then becomes less of a worship demonstration and becomes a social gathering. A place to have fun with your friends and not really have to do anything much. That is why you can see groups of people who are clearly together there. It is not one big group of Christians, it is a bunch of little groups pushed together and yet still separated somehow. The focus very quickly becomes lost. I am sure there are people there who really do believe in God and want to worship him, but I also know that many people there are thinking of other things than just God at that meet. 

“See you at the pole” is not about having fun with friends. It is not about bragging rights. Or at the very least, it is not supposed to (nor should it) be about these things. The purpose of the event is to glorify God and to focus on him. Not about how great a Christian you are, but how great a God we serve. Not about who is gonna be there or what you are going to talk about, because quite frankly you should not go just because Cindy will be there and “Oh my gawd she just HAS to tell you about her new church!” But sadly it does end up being about these things. And it takes away from the congregational feel. It takes away from the purpose of worshiping God. And in the end, it just ends up sounding vapid and empty. I am a Christian myself, and have no problems sharing my views and faith. But when I heard the advertisement for this event it just sounded ridiculous. It sounded to me like a bunch of people going out there just to say they went. I even remember hoping people did not get the impression that we were all fake like that. A random listener would probably consider it to be some group thing that does not really mean anything. And obviously it is a lot more for some people, I am not saying everyone feels and acts this way. But sadly the above mentioned are the majority.

I do want to stress here that I am not bashing everyone who goes to this. There are some people that do go for the right reasons and more power to them. But they should be aware that this image is something they will have to deal with. “See you at the pole” could be a great thing. It could be meaningful and admirable and honestly encouraging. But as is, it is still an empty group of people standing there to build up themselves instead of God. So it stands and so it remains.

-BlackFox

(700)

A King's Pardon

People will ask the same thing over and over: “What do I have to do to get into heaven?” They want a neat little plan. Do x, y, and z, not a, b, and c. They want definitive answers as to what will get them onto that list of righteous people. Those specific actions that if they avoid or perform will gain them that little stamp that says “approved” when they stand at the pearly gates. Unfortunately for these people, no such list has ever existed or will ever exist.

People are sinful creatures. There is no way to get around this fact. Everything we do apart from God is selfish and tainted in sin. Even one sin, thought, act or otherwise, is enough to keep you from heaven. There is no balance sheet that says you did two more good deeds than bad ones, so in you go. God does not say “Well ok, I guess you did help the orphanage once. I can forget that little scuffle with your brother.” The gates of heaven open only for the righteous. A righteous man has never sinned, not even once. He does not say “Well, compared to THAT guy I am ok. I mean I never killed anyone or stole or something like that.” because he knows that we are judged by God's standard and not that of man. We are not judged based on our righteousness relative to other men. We are judged based on our righteousness compared to God. A test that everyone fails. There is no good deed that can be performed. No profession of faith that can be proclaimed. No action or thought that can rid us of sin and make us righteous again. Our debt of sin is immense and heavy. An impossible burden we cannot hope to even begin to pay. For what could we offer God in exchange for our souls? We are running on a treadmill and God is on the other side. On our own, we have no way to reach Him. No matter how hard or fast we run, our power is not enough.

But all is not lost. God will not abandon his beloved children. He stands at the other end of his child running on that conveyor and reaches out to them. He grabs their hand and pulls them to the other side. God forgives us our sin. He pardons our debt and lifts the weight from our shoulders. He makes us righteous again where we cannot. Out of love He sent His own son to live and die for us. To bear the pain and suffering in the lake of fire that should have been ours. To be rejected and cast down in our place, and then to rise again in victory over death. God did not leave us to our fate. He did not turn His back on us and reject us. He will not fail to reach one He chooses to save. To those whom He reaches out, He always holds close. And He will never cast down one once lifted. We may not be able to pay our debts. We may not be strong enough to vanquish the enemy. But God is stronger than any man, and He will pardon us our sin.

-BlackFox

(554)

"Real" Christians

On occasion, I will hear people say they are either not currently, or cannot become a "real" Christian because they do not have some deep mysterious relationship with God. They say that they have never had an amazing spiritual experience or a connection. They feel like they have no hope of measuring up to the "real" Christian who professes to hear God's voice, or speaks of some significant experience of salvation.

But this is not what Christianity is. It is not about having deep spiritual experiences that you can share with other people. It is about faith and commitment to God. Many Christians, such as myself, do not have a profound moment of conversion we can share. Not all of us suddenly had a moment where we just fell on our knees with the most amazing feeling ever. You do not have to be the woman in church who says she feels God with her everyday. Everyone has their own way of worshiping and connecting with God. Some people do feel like they have had an enlightening experience, and they want to share it. And that's ok. Some people simply believe because that is how they were taught. And that's ok. Others simply have come to believe on their own through Christ. And that's ok. It is ok that not everyone has an amazing faith statement. It is ok that you simply believe for your own reasons. You do not have to feel an amazing connection to be connected with God. God works in different ways for different people. Just because you do not see him with you does not mean he is not there. You are not a bad Christian just because you do not feel the need to drop to your knees every five seconds. In fact, doing so for the wrong reasons can actually be a bad thing, but that is another story.

You are a real Christian if you believe in the trinity and the resurrection. You are a real Christian if you believe in the Bible and what it teaches. You are a real Christian even if you do not have an amazing story for your moment of faith. That is not what matters. What matters is that you have faith in God. What matters is that you have commitment to the Word and the Church. That is what concerns God. He will not reject you because you do not feel some mysterious connection. He will not consider you a bad Christian because you fail to have an overwhelming sense of connection. What God wants is for you to have faith and to glorify him, and there are certainly many ways to accomplish this. Raising your children in faith is glorifying him. Following the commandments is glorifying him. Professing your faith is glorifying him. And I do not mean shouting it out loud in overwhelming emotion. (Though if that works for you then go for it!) It is good if you can scream it out to the masses, but simply sharing it with a co-worker or a friend would be just as well and certainly just as important. So relax, breathe, and know that God is always with you even if you do not feel him.

-BlackFox

(542)