Our Problem

Below is a quote from an interview with Luis Palau, a South American Evangelist, who is now a missionary to the USA.

"When I was in Chicago doing launch rallies for 'Say Yes Chicago,' a taxi driver took me to a press conference at Grant Park. The driver was a Muslim from Sudan, very talkative and eager to make me a Muslim. He was trying to convert me in the course of a ten-minute drive. I told him I was a Christian, which began a quick discussion about Jesus Christ. After a few minutes, he said, 'Islam is going to win in America. And we're going to win in the world. You Christians do not really believe Jesus Christ is the only answer and the only One.'

"I said, 'Of course we believe that.' He said, 'No, you don't. I've been here for six years, and I've hardly met a single American that believes Jesus is the only One and the only way and the only answer.'

"I was amazed, moved, rebuked, and ashamed. Here was a foreigner in America unashamedly trying to convert me in ten minutes. And meanwhile, we Christians beat around the bush. We are not convinced that people without Christ are truly, truly lost forever. If we did, we wouldn't be able to rest. We would jump at the chance to be part of a citywide crusade. If we believed that people were irrevocably lost without Christ, we would take advantage of every chance to preach the gospel."

That's a frightening thought, isn't it? That's all I have to say, since it's getting late and I need to sleep. By the way, I hope you had a happy Leap Day. As far as I'm concerned, it's definitely the best of all the holidays. Thanksgiving doesn't hold a candle to it.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Ten Commandments Minus One

It was my intention to talk some more about faith today. But instead, I'm going to talk about something else. As I mentioned very briefly, faith without works is dead. So what are works? This is important to determine before we can decide anything else.

Works means two things. The first is doing what God wants us to do, such as telling others about Jesus and such. The second is simply not sinning. So here's where ther question comes up: what does it mean to sin?

Sin is determined by the Law. The Law states what is sin, and the most commonly known part of the law is the Ten Commandments. Here's a list of the Ten Commandments (found in Exodus 20)

1 You will have no gods before The God

2 You will not have any idols (i.e. things that you place before God)

3 You will not misuse the name of God

4 Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy

5 Honor your parents

6 Don't murder

7 Don't adulterate

8 Don't steal

9 Don't lie

10 Don't covet

Which one is hardest to keep? I would say number 2. It's hard to focus more on God than on anything else. Which one is kept the least often? This one, interestingly enough, is also the easiest to keep. It's number 4.

What is the Sabbath? The Sabbath is the seventh day of the week (Saturday), which is intended by God to be a holy day. On the Sabbath, we are supposed to do no unnecessary work and spend our time worshipping God. How often do we do this? The not working part is easy--plenty of people manage to just do nothing on Saturday. However, we don't do the keeping-holy part of it.

The Law shows us what sin is and isn't (I'm not even talking about the complexities of sacrifice and the Feasts--just the Ten Commandents). If the Law says to do something, then not doing it is a sin, and vice-versa. The Law says to keep the Sabbath. So why don't we?

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Note: I have a new label for my posts. Important. This is for things that simply need to be said, regardless of their depth.

Faith

Last night, I watched a movie. In this movie, one of the characters was a Catholic priest (who actually mentioned God a total of zero times), and at one point he was talking about faith. He defined faith as a belief in a thing larger than yourself. I have also heard it defined as a belief in an unseen thing. This means that faith is a specific kind of belief--I believe in the sun, but I don't have faith in it because I can see it.

However, that isn't what faith is. Hebrews chapter 11 is all about faith, and the first verse says something important about it: "faith is the evidence of things unseen." If faith is the evidence in things unseen, it can't be merely a belief in it. Evidence is proof. A belief is not proof of anything.

If I tell you that I believe that I am the best writer in the world, would that convince you? I strongly doubt it. I would have to show you a sample of every single writer in the world, and then demonstrate my own writing. That would be evidence, either for or against me.

So if faith is evidence, then that means it has to be more than belief. However, faith is belief. Hebrews 11 describes faith later on as being belief. So was the writer of Hebrews completely wrong? I don't think so--I think that we are lacking something when we define faith as belief in the unseen.

Here is my definition: faith is a belief in the unseen inspired by the unseen thing. This means that faith is a belief in God that is created in us by God. So how about this one: if faith without works is dead, then do the works justify the faith, or does the faith create the works? But that's a question for tomorrow.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Language Reform

The idea of grammar is interesting to me. Who came up with it? And spelling. When did spelling become standardized? Did someone decide one day that our language needed to work like this, and not like that? If so, he didn't do it very well. I'll admit that grammar usually works well, but spelling does not.

Look at words like "eight" and "bomb." They don't sound like they look at all (and why do we have to have words for numbers? Why not just write it 8?) Standardized spelling is good, but why not make it a little more sensical. English, supposedly, is written phonetically. Wouldn't it be great if that were true? "Facade" should be written "fussad," and the letter K should be eliminated, since it's redundant to C. As for letters:

G should no longer share a sound with J.

C should cease to share with S.

X, Q and K should be removed from the alphabet.

The sounds Sh, Th and Ch should be replaced by, respectively, Q, K and X.

And those are my thoughts for the day.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Reply

The other day I wrote down a very brief thought concerning sacrifice and Jesus. Today, I will finish the thought.


The sacrifice by Jesus was not human sacrifice. I made an error in my logic. If I made anyone worry and fret and lose sleep (I probably didn't), then you can be at rest once again. The human sacrifice mentioned in the Old Testament is entirely different than the one performed by Jesus. The main thing is that the Old Testament human sacrifices were not voluntary.


One of the more popular false religions in the time of Moses and the Judges was the worship of Molech. One of the central parts of Molech worship concerned human sacrifice--more specifically, the sacrifice of infants. When the various Prophets decried Israel for "allowing your children to be passed through the fire," this is what they were talking about.


Jesus was very different. His sacrifice was entirely voluntary. What Jesus did was sort of like a soldier stepping in the way of a bullet to save a friend. This is sacrifice, in a technical sense, but who would say that it's a bad thing?

What Jesus did was a glorious and heroic thing; involuntary human sacrifice is a disgusting and pathetic thing. Rest easy: His sacrifice is still entirely valid, and there is nothing anyone can do to make it less so.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Sacrifice

It's been a few days since I've said anything, which is rare for me. However, even though it was my small and rather sad goal of having a post for every day of this month, I have so far come much closer to attaining the goal than I did in January. I imagine that the month that I actually attain the goal, someone in an office somewhere will shut it down and kick me off the internet.

I don't have much to say today. I have simply been reflecting upon this two-part thought:

1. God forbid human sacrifice in the Old Testament.

2. Jesus is the sacrifice for our sins (He also happened to be human).

What does this mean? If He was the sacrifice for our sins, He was a human sacrifice, which is sin in itself. I'm going to have to study this a little more, because I don't have an answer.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Unreality

As anyone who's heard me knows, I am an exceedingly good guitarist. I am, if I do say so myself, one of the best to ever live. Although there are many who would disagree, they're probably just jealous.

There is a game that is popular among many people called Guitar Hero. It's basically a simulation of playing guitar. The controller is a small plastic guitar with five buttons on the neck. On the body, where a real guitarist would strum, there is a small plastic piece on a hinge. This simulates the strum.

I can't play Guitar Hero. I am the worst Guitar Heroist ever. However, I am an awesome guitarist. Guitar Hero has a fraction of the complexity of guitar, so the ability to play guitar should make Guitar Hero exponentially easier.

There's actually more to it than that, but for now let's stick with what I've just laid out (I'd rather not bring up how bad I am at sight-reading). Reality is easier than the simulation, which, based on casual observance, is backwards.

Looking back, this isn't a very good way of getting my point across. So before I fall deeper into my mistake, I'll just state my purpose.

It's a lot easier to maintain the truth than to keep up a lie. There are two reasons for this, neither of which really have anything to do with guitars. The first is memory, the second is backup.

Lies are easier to forget than the truth. A lie is made up entirely of words, and words can be easily forgotten. The truth is made up of actual events.

Other people can also easily and inadvertently cause your lie yto be disproved. Sometimes a casual comment that doesn't match up with a false story can destroy the false story.

Don't worry, this worthlessness I just spent all this time writing will not recur with too much frequency. My inspiration is only slowly returning, but it's coming. Maybe I'll say something worth saying tomorrow.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Another Day

I still have inspiration deficiency. However, I also still want to have a post for every day in the month, and so I am writing.

That's all. I'll probably have something real to say tomorrow.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Help Wanted

I can think of nothing good to talk about. I wish that I did. So here's what I want you, the valiant reader, to do for me. You've been sitting there reading my hard work for all this time. It's time for you to do your part. Here are your instructions.

1. Click below where it says "comments."

2. Write something in the box contained therein. This something can be whatever you think could be relevant and helpful. This could be a Bible verse, a theological statement, a non-theological statement, or the beginnings of the trace of an idea of something.

3. Post the comment.

This really isn't just a ploy to show how many people are reading my blog. If that's what it was, I know that I would be horribly disappointed. I just have run low on inspiration.

I hope to hear from you shortly,
Mitchell

A Step Closer to 29

To understand the reason behind the above title, read the post from ten minutes ago.

To understand something more interesting, continue reading.

There is a doctrine concerning God that is generally accepted by most Christians. This doctrine is referred to as the Trinity. Basically, here's how it works: God consists of three beings--Father, Son and Holy Spirit. These three beings are one being, yet they are simultaneously seperate. This is not understood by most people, myself included. However, that is the belief.

A lot of people do not believe in this, however. These people are wrong. I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about that particular subject though, because that isn't what interests me at the moment. I am more interested in the Trinity itself.

I have tried to think of something on earth that can compare to the Trinity, but can think of nothing. A well-known illustration was given by St. Patrick of Ireland, referring to a clover. He said the the clover was similar to the Trinity: The clover has three leaves, but is still one plant. This, like all analogies, is flawed.

If you tear a leaf off of a clover, it can still survive. It doesn't matter that much if there are seperated. God cannot be seperated. It isn't that we don't know how to do it--the three parts of God are so inseperable that they are essentially one.

C. S. Lewis (yes, him again) mentioned the Trinity in Mere Christianity. I'm going to borrow (and never return) his idea on the Trinity.

God the Father is the source of God the Son. The Son is constantly brought forth by the Father. This doesn't mean that the Father existed first. They both have existed in this relationship since forever. They are so closely connected though, that their relationship creates a third being--the Holy Spirit. Again, this doesn't mean that He came after the Father and Son. They have all three existed since time began.

For a much less concise and more complex explanation, read Mere Christianity. C. S. Lewis can state his thoughts much better than I can. I have nothing new to say, but I hope this was as interesting to you as it was to me.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

29 - 1 = Incompletion

I have ruined everything. It was my goal to have post everyday in the month of February. But I missed yesterday, and now all hope is lost. I can do two posts in one day, which will bring the total for the month to 29 (since it's a leap year), but I can never fill the gap that will be left.

There is now a hole in Controlled Disorder. Please, watch your step and don't fall through it.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Part 2

Yesterday I was talking about a big question that comes up due to John 1:1-5. Why, if we must die to ourselves to enter Christ, would anyone want to enter Christ? If everyone in the world were to become Christ, that would be the end of individuality, right?

Well, not really. The question is somewhat flawed, as I will explain. First of all, let's be consistent. Let's continue to refer to Jesus as the light, and us as the darkness. When He illuminates us, we cease to exist. This is how the question came up in first place, but I have to admit that the premise is all because of a mistake.

I said that we are the darkness. This isn't quite true. We are in the darkness. For my initial purpose, this didn't matter. However, because this question came about, I must correct myself. Regardless, the question still remains from other sources. When God looks at us, for example, what He sees is Jesus.

To explain why th question is flawed, I will use a simile. Imagine that there is a world with an atmosphere so thick with clouds that only the tiniest amount of light can enter. The people on this world can only barely see, and so of course no one can clearly see what other people look like. They have never seen a bright light, however, and so they don't know how poorly they can see.

Then, one day, a hole breaks through the clouds, and full sunlight shines down. One curious darkness-dweller steps into this beam of brightness. Several others follow behind him. When they look at each other, they are shocked to find that they all look nearly identical. They quickly return to the darkness, where they have their own faces again. The light, they decide, just makes everyone look the same.

They thought they all looked the same, but this is because their eyes had not adjusted to the light. If they had stayed for a little longer, they would have discovered that the light clarified their features. Jesus, in the same way, clarifies our lives. When I entered into Christ, I became more myself than I was before.

But we have been living in the darkness of the world. We believe that individuality is acting unlike other people, and Christianity seems to destroy that by forcing everyone to live by a single code of laws. What we don't realize is that it gives us boundaries in which to create ourselves. God's laws are like the structure of a building. We have a sturdy, well-tested frame, but beyond that, the architecture is up to us.

That's all I have to say.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

John 1

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made. In Him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it."

This is the first five verses of the first chapter of the gospel of John. There's a lot of fascinating stuff in these verses, but I want to talk about the last verse (The lights shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it). Other versions say that the darkness "has not put [the light] out."

The light shines in the darkness. The light is Jesus. The Word mentioned earlier in the first two verses is also Jesus. These verses describe Him as being the Word, the Light and the Creator of life. These are all important attributes. Because He is the Word, He is entirely truthful. Because He is the Creator, well. . .He created us.

Because He is the light, he shows us the way we need to go. In Psalm 119, it states that God is a light to our path. The darkness is the world--us, the people that He gives light to. The darkness us the world, and it is an undeniable fact that we are humans, and therefore a part of this world.

Darkness is the absence of light. The world, therefore, being darkness, is the absence of God. God is absent from us.

Here I will make an assumption. Most of you currently reading this are Christians, because otherwise the repeated mention of "God" and "Jesus" would probably have sent you running to a less theological page. So, from this point forward I am going to be speaking to those who are Christians, and have been "saved," to use church-words.

For a person to be saved, Jesus has to enter him. This means that the Light is coming into the darkness. If darkness is the absence of light, and light enters it, what is the darkness? Nothing. The darkness is destroyed. In the same way, we are destroyed the moment Jesus enters into us. Darkness cannot fathom light, because the moment it conceives of the idea, it's gone. To glimpse light would be suicidal to darkness.

When Paul said that anyone in Christ is a new creation, he was being very literal. The moment Jesus comes into us, we cease to exist.

This is a somewhat frightening thought. We either cease to exist, or we go to hell when we die. Those are our options. We will still exist, yes, but not as ourselves. So why would anyone ever want to be brought into the light with Jesus?

That question will be answered either tomorrow or later today. I'm going to go eat something. I hope that something is food.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

The Tortoise and the Hare

Long ago, in a land far away (from my current location, anyway), there was a man named Aesop. He told a lot of stories that had nothing to do with reality, and included a less than subtle message about how people should be good. These stories were called fables.

One of the most famous of these is called the Tortoise and the Hare. I'm going to retell it (not, of course, that I wish to show myself a better storyteller than Aesop. This is not my intention, nor is it my intention to prove myself wiser. This might be the results anyway, but if so it is not my fault.)

Long ago, in a land far away, there was a tortoise. This tortoise was named Tortoise. He was the slowest and weakest of all the animals in the world. A hare, who happened to be named Hare, was constantly making fun of Tortoise's slowness. You see, Hare was the fastest.

One day, Tortoise got sick of this. "I'm sick of this," he said to Hare. "I challenge you to a race."

After the laughs died down, everyone realized that Tortoise was serious. An awkward silence settled over those present. Hare stared at Tortoise with a confused grin. "Well, okay," he said.

So everyone immediately placed all their money on the victory of Hare, except for one wise old man. This wise old man slowly sized up the odds, then quietly muttered something to himself. "Slow and steady wins the race." He was nearly drowning in wisdom.

Tortoise and Hare lined up at a large, imposing baobob tree. Tortoise suggested that their destination be another tree about a hundred yards away. "No, how about that one?" Hare said, pointing to one on the distant horizon.

"Okay," Tortoise said with a shrug. The possum named Possum shouted "Go!" The race was off.

Tortoise began to slowly plod along the path. Hare watched him go for a few seconds, then scratched his armpit and started running. Hare, as the fastest of all creatures, rapidly passed by Tortoise. He then preceded just as rapidly to reach the baobob tree on the distant horizon. Everyone cheered as he burst across the finish line.

Everyone was happy, except for the Tortoise and one wise old man.

Moral: Aesop was a little out of touch.

I think this story more adequately describes life as we know it. The losers lose and the winners win. God, however, tells a different story. He says that the first place champions will be nothing, and the losers will rule the world. He, however, is not out of touch with life. Aesop was eventually thrown off a cliff. God is still running the universe, and will continue in this infinitely.

So here's how the world works: everyone gets about seventy to eighty years to show his colors. Then, when that time is up, God decides whether that person has bright enough colors to make it into the ruling class. (Arrogance and apathy towards the lowly, by the way, are not the kind of thing He wants.)

I hope you enjoyed this new revision of The Tortoise and the Hare.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell the depressing (but not depressed) writer

The Flood

It is commonly believed among Christian communities that, at some point in history, God caused a flood to cover the entire world. Everyone on earth was killed--with the exception of a man named Noah--because they were evil. Noah, Noah's wife, and his three sons survived because they built an enormous boat.

I'm going to add a little to that story. First of all, the flood came because of water pouring from the sky in the form of rain. This is commonly accepted by those who believe in the flood in the first place. But this has deeper meaning. Preceding the day of the flood, it had never rained before. Noah had never seen rain before. Also, at this time, the world consisted of a single, massive continent which is referred to as "Pangea." The flood broke this apart into the continents as we now know them. Noah lived in about the center of this continent.

So Noah had never seen rain before. He'd also never seen an expanse of standing water. Water came up from the ground in a fine mist, which gave life to the plants. So maybe, at the best, he had seen a puddle.

I would speculate that Noah rarely even looked at the sky. Because the globe was surrounded by a giant ice canopy (which compressed the atmosphere to create the enormous plants and insects found fossilized today), and so the light of the sun would be dispersed such that it wouldn't seem to be a single ball of light. If Noah ever looked up, he probably saw nothing of interest.

So when God said "Build an ark, it's going to rain," that's the equivalent of Him saying today "build a jugrin, it's going to bezhrull."

Noah had no clue what was going to happen, but he did what God told him. That's the first point.

Here's the second: As most people know, God left a symbol that He would never flood the earth again. This is what we now call a rainbow. But He also left another symbol, which is not actually one He mentioned but one which is there just the same.

The rain is a symbol, just like the rainbow. Whenever you see a rainbow, remember that God will never flood the world again. When it rains, remember that He can.

God is going to keep His promise. But He doesn't have to. He can destroy us all, if He wants to. He can flood the world again, and the best we could do is tread water as long as we can. He can destroy every human being on the planet with a thought.

But He doesn't. He continues to be patient--infinitely so. So next time you think that God is being unfair, or just allowing evil to run rampant, remember the flood and the mercy he has shown us by not doing it again.

God is love, and love is merciful. He will give grace to anyone who asks--and this will be needed by all, because the world will be destroyed again. But this time it will be by fire, instead. I hope these dark thoughts have brightened your day.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Color

Color is light. Light is not color. In fact, even though color is light, the two things have opposite purposes. While light assists vision tremendously (without it there would even be vision), color can hinder it just as easily. The whole purpose of paint is to hinder vision. If a wall has a big stain on it, just paint over the stain and it vanishes. Though the stain is still there, it can't be seen. The color hinders sight.

Color is much like religion. Light is like Jesus. Religion is an aspect of Christianity, much like color is an aspect of light. Religion will logically follow from Christianity, like color comes with light. The problem is that sometimes people try to make religion the whole thing. Religion without Jesus is like color without light--which is the same as darkness.

Jesus can't jut be integrated into religion. He has to be more than the sculpted figure on the cross or the man on the poster holding a lamb/child/little dog. He is everything. So when we attempt to do anything in any church, no matter how good it may sound, but Jesus is not behind it, the result will be inevitable. It will end with a fight and a division.

So church leaders: keep Jesus central. For all of you who are not church leadership: keep Jesus central. For those who don't even know who Jesus is: find out.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell.

Today

Today is the only day that can be changed. Yesterday is permanent, and tomorrow doesn't really exists. Because it hasn't happened yet, tomorrow is just a figment of the imagination. So the great Today is the only thing that matters.

However, Today is strongly influenced by yesterday. Most of the things done Today are because of what happened yesterday. The rest are in preparation for Tomorrow. This doesn't make sense. Why does it work that way? I can't answer, because I live completely in the moment. But for one of you living in a moment that isn't this one, please tell me. Why are you worried about what you can't change? By worrying, you can't change a single hair on your head.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

Prayer

Yesterday I mentioned (briefly) the miracle of prayer. I believe I devoted the second half of a sentence to it. Today, things are different. Today, I’m going to spend a whole post talking about it.

Prayer is a thing that we think very little about. Most Christians pray on occasion, usually when they want something, but don’t think about what it actually is. In an earlier post, I devoted a lot of words to praying, but I never said what exactly it is.

Prayer is a form of communication. It’s the spiritual equivalent of the phone, except that you can only call one person using prayer. That person (God) is always listening, and you don’t need any kind of phone to talk to him. It’s as simple to use as vocal cords, with one principal difference. Prayer is anything but natural, entirely unlike talking.

God is infinitely patient, and will listen to anything you have to say. Again, this is completely unlike the phone. To prove my point, let’s do an experiment.

Go pick up the phone, and dial the number of someone you know well. It doesn’t matter who—just call someone. Begin the conversation like you normally would, and then ask for some money. Or ask for something else. Whatever it is that you want. Now, come back and report your findings.

Most likely, the discussion did not go well from there. God is not like that. God will keep on listening to whatever you have to say to Him. That’s part of the miracle.

The other part of the miracle is that we can talk to Him at all. We humans are obsessed with our senses. We rarely rise above them to grasp at our potential. God doesn’t have any potential—He could be no greater than He already is. That’s why we capitalize the word “He” in reference to God.

Prayer is an incredible miracle. Prayer is the natural talking to the supernatural, and not even bringing the dead to life could be so amazing.

So, do more miracles more often. It’s good for you.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

The Bible, part 2

Yesterday I showed (sort of) that that Bible must be God-inspired, meaning that it is correct. I'd like to add one point to that: our observations back up that statement. The historical parts of the Bible are repeatedly proved to be correct, based on every reliable historical source that can be found.

So we know the Bible is true, but is it complete? This is debated by various theologians, and there is a large range of opinions concerning the truth. The debate, essentially, is this: does God convey messages outside of the Bible?

We know the Bible is the truth and nothing but the truth, but is it the whole truth? I would say that it most definitely is not.

Anything that is good comes from God. The truth is good. So all truth comes from God. If the Bible is the complete word of God (the complete truth), then there can be no truth outside of the Bible. That means that right now I could not say "I'm wearing a shirt that says 'I SEE DUMB PEOPLE' in red letters on the front. I couldn't say this because it's true, and it's outside of the Bible.

So the Bible isn't the complete word of God. It is the true word of God, but it can't be complete. But now you're wondering, "what does this have to do with anything?" The Bible isn't complete, because to be complete it would have to be so vast a book that no one could ever possibly read it in a million trillion years. But that does not mean that it's worthless.

The Bible acts as a sort of test to determine what is true and what isn't. If someone makes a claim that is contrary to the Bible, it's not true. If someone makes a claim that goes closely with something in the Bible, it's true. If it's somewhere in between--it doesn't go against the Bible, but isn't necessarily mentioned therein--then something more is required. This something more is God.

God is still fully capable of revealing to us what is true and what is not. So if a question comes up that can't be answered by the Bible, perform a miracle: communicate with a being with a mind more vast than you could fathom.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

A Well-Known Book

A long time ago, some people wrote down words on paper. These people were exceedingly diverse--one was a farmer, another was the richest king in the world. The writings of this diverse group was compiled into a single work: the Bible. The Bible is the best-selling book, and has been since before anyone thought of the idea of recording best-sellers.

The Bible has more authors than any other book. It also has less inconsistencies than any other book. This is inconceivable, by any earthly standards. All these people have nothing in common but their religion. How could so many people from so many walks of life all believe exactly the same thing about God?

Unless, of course, their belief is not internal, but external. Here's a definition of those terms:

By "internal," I mean that the believer created this belief in his own mind, using his own logic. By "external," I mean that the believer's belief comes from some other source. This could be simply that this is what the believer has been told his whole life, or it could be God-inspired.

It had to be an external belief that inspired the Bible. But external belief is more broad: it could be God-inspired, but it also might be human-inspired.

The human-inspired idea could easily destroy the accuracy of the Bible, if the ideas mentioned therein line up only because of what other people said. But this isn't a problem, because that really isn't possible.

The doctrines taken from the Bible were thought of after the Bible was written. The authors of the Bible were the first to say the things that they said. They were not just writing about the things they were told their whole lives. This is what I'm doing at the moment--I'm discussing ideas that I've known about as long as I can remember. The Biblical authors are the ones who created those ideas.

But, because their agreement with each other is humanly impossible, their beliefs still must be external. They still have to come from somewhere else. This means God. If they did not think of their own ideas, and no one gave them the ideas, then it had to be God.

So the Bible was God-inspired. Some would argue that this is impossible because God doesn't exist, but there's a problem with that statement now.

The Bible can only exist in its present state if there is a God. Since it does exist, and cannot exist any other way, there has to be a God.

This means that the Bible is accurate, coming from the inventor of life, the universe and everything; it also means that there is an inventor. I hope some of this makes sense to someone other than me. If not, I don't know that I can explain much better. Sorry.

Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

The Winner

For your information. . .

The New York Giants just won the Super-Bowl. I hope they're happy.

Football

Today, as far as the majority of Americans are concerned, is a major holiday, along the lines of Thanksgiving and Independence Day. It's Super-Bowl Sunday.

To be honest, I couldn't care less. Football bores me, as does every other sport. I'm not really sure what's so boring about them, but I can't get interested. In fact, I care so little that I didn't even know who was playing until the game started. (For those of you like me: it's the New York Giants and the New England Patriots. But I might not have the right cities with the right teams.)

I find football pretty much pointless. In fact, I consider all sports pretty much pointless. If you, the reader, disagree with me and enjoy sports, then good for you. It gives you something to do in your free time. But since it bores me, I'm going to try to come up with new ways of making it more interesting.

Imagine if the Super-Bowl were open to everyone. What if anyone, no matter how bad at football, could go play in the biggest game in the entire world. Well, the Super-Bowl would be boring and no one would watch anymore. This won't work.

Well, what if the teams shared the ball. All the players most likely tell their children to share toys and such, so maybe they should start practicing what they preach. But again, this would be boring, wouldn't it?

Okay, so what if one team just forgave the other? If they just worked around their differences, maybe they wouldn't have to have a giant fight over a small leather ball. Oh, but then there wouldn't be a game at all.

Do you realize that football, in all the three areas I just mentioned (nondiscrimination, sharing and forgiveness), comepletely undermines all the values taught to small children? Maybe it should be rated something higher. PG, at least. Preferably PG-13, or even R. That way all the little kids all over the world could be taught these values with more sucess.

Please, join me in my campaign to censor the Super-Bowl. Contact your local TV stations and complain. Together, we can defeat this international killer of morals.

Don't worry, football fans. I'm not serious.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell

T-shirts and the Esteeming of Oneself

I have a T-shirt that I wear frequently. It's black, and has 14 red letters across the chest. These letters spell out the phrase "I SEE DUMB PEOPLE." I wear it a lot, because it's one of only three shirts in my possession. Other people comment on it frequently, and last night someone commented in a most unusual way.
He said, "you should put black tape over the word 'dumb' and write 'smart' instead." His point was that people would then walk away from me with a happy, warm feeling instead of mild to strong irritation.
This is a really good point, and I wish I'd thought of this idea first. Think about how cool that would be: T-shirts that don't say "you're stupid," but that encourage.
Okay, the truth is that it wouldn't be cool at all. It would be pathetic and completely un-funny. This country has come up with an idea for its public schools: let's teach everyone how special they are! Let's focus more on self-esteem than the two R's (who needs arithmetic?). Wouldn't this be a great idea? Then the younger generations will grow up feeling good about themselves.
This could be a good idea, but it isn't.
Here's what it's done: it's created a society of people who have no self-esteem, no confidence, and don't feel good about themselves at all.
You may be wondering about now how I made the leap from insulting but funny T-shirts to teaching self-esteem. Well, I think that the latter is the cause of the former. This is not because I think that everyone is too arrogant now. In fact, I think it's the opposite. This is demonstrated by the other kind of T-shirt in the world.
There's the kind of shirt saying "you're stupid/lazy/boring etc," and there's the kind saying "I'm stupid/lazy/boring etc." They both come from the same place. The first one is enjoyed by teenagers everywhere because it makes them feel good because someone else is stupid (the shirt says so!). The second one comes from their true feelings.
So this begs the question "how does self-esteem being taught in school give people lower self-esteems?"
Very easily. The problem is that self-esteem is taught apart from its source. Self-esteem, which I will call pride because it's quicker to say, comes from actions. I have pride in the fact that I taught myself to play guitar. While this is not the most amazing of all feats, it's something that I have done.
In school, kids are told that they are special. But what is it that makes them special? If one child does an exceptionally good job can't be told how well he did, because then those who didn't do so well will feel bad. So the one who does well sees that he is treated no better than the one who failed.
This could be easily fixed. We should recognize that, though everyone may be created equal, everyone is not the same. Some people have mental, physical or emotional handicaps, and these people can't be treated the same as everyone else.
How this can be implemented, I don't know. But it should be done somehow, because that is how to really build self-esteem.
And by the way: if anyone happens to find a place where T-shirts with messages containing complements can be bought, please let me know.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell