Happy New Year everybody. Enjoy the parties and bowl games.

My beloved Spartans have finally made it to a bowl game. They have a tough match up against Boston College (especially when they have 5 players missing). There are some good articles there is one here.

I don't like to have a mediocre attitude, but already MSU has surpassed my expectations for the year. Coach Dantonio has done a wonderful job and I hope they win. The good news is that Spartan fans were faithful and there will be a great turnout. Time is getting short for predictions, but here is mine.

MSU 41 BC 35

Matthew 1:21-23 "'And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.' So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: 'Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son and they shall call His name Immanuel' which is translated, 'God with us.'"

This will be my last post until after Christmas. I wish you all a joyous time celebrating our savior's birth.

-Craig

Like most kids I grew up believing in Santa Claus until I was in first or second grade. I am wondering if this is the best way to go when I become a future parent. On one hand I think that it might be confusing for children to tell them someone exists, tell them to be good and have them find out that it was all a hoax. What will happen when I tell them about God and Jesus? Will they become skeptical? . I don't know of any circumstance which that happened, but why lie to your children?

The main reason I can come up with to support the Santa Claus lie is that kids are not as innocent as they once were. They don't use their imagination like they once had to. Granted they can if forced to, but are we forcing children to mature more faster with the entertainment (cartoons, toys, etc) that they are exposed to? Today young children want cell phones and ipods.

I can see both sides in the situation and am glad that I have a long time before I have to make a decision. What approach do you take? Is this an innocent act to liven up the holidays? Or is it a method to dupe your children for personal reasons? Note that in this question I am not implying that you are replacing Santa with the real meaning of Christmas, just adding.

Okay, this may a harsh title, but I am wondering who you find as a respectable theologian. Who do view as credible and trust their opinion? Who do you avoid and not recommend?

I am not saying that you copy people's opinions or not intelligent enough to form your own conclusions, but if your like me you use resources and will usually not use one that your are not familiar with the author or organization.

The purpose of this is because I tend to limit myself to only a few select people and organizations because I simply don't have the time to look into random people every time I am looking at resources. At Timm's blog there was much comment on someone I have never heard of and thought it would be interesting to find out about other people (not necessarily controversial ones) I could look into.

I myself am very fond of John MacArthur. I also like Norman Geisler. I don't really care for Max Lucado because it seems that he writes a book every month. I think Charles Stanlely is right on when it comes to doctrine, but question him about his divorce and still being a pastor. Someone who I avoid is R.C. Sproul. I disagree with many things he teaches.

This will also give a GENERAL guide to what people believe. I don't want to stereotype, but obviously if someone likes Tim LaHaye, then they most likely support the pre-tribulation position.

I happened to accidentally come across this site that gives a list of celebrities who publicly admitted they are atheists. Some I either knew or figured they were such as Lance Armstrong, Warren Buffett, Ron Reagan Jr and Andy Rooney. However there were some I were surprised at like Bill Gates, Billy Joel, Jodie Foster and Barry Manilow. Of these the most surprising to me was David Horowitz who is an agnostic. For those who don't know him, he is a conservative author. I have met him before and enjoy his work.

The purpose of this is basically for your personal interest. I don't know if you will view people differently knowing their religious beliefs or not, but I found it interesting.

Here is the link to view the complete list.

"For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."

The question is what is the biggest cause for moral destruction in America? I usually don't do this, but six people answered other. Here is a chance to specifically name the cause and explain your reasoning.

Mitt Romney is scheduled to make a speech concerning his Mormon faith Thursday December 6, 2007 (article). Many are questioning the idea if it will benefit his chances at winning the republican nomination. Mike Huckabee’s strong surge is mainly credited to evangelical Christians.

"This speech is an opportunity for Governor Romney to share his views on religious liberty, the grand tradition religious tolerance has played in the progress of our nation and how the governor's own faith would inform his presidency if he were elected," Kevin Madden, a campaign spokesman, said in a statement. "Governor Romney understands that faith is an important issue to many Americans, and he personally feels this moment is the right moment for him to share his views with the nation."

“There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church’s beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance.”

Christianity does not receive the same respect as other religions. Sure there are stereotypes about them all, but it seems Christians get the bulk of it. Some may say that the Bible warns of persecution and Jesus forewarned us. While I agree, I think a lot of it has to do with a one sided view of Jesus’ humbleness and humility. This one sidedness is making Christians weak.

Before anyone responds that I am implying that Jesus is not loving, humble and so on. I know He has those characteristics He says it Himself that He is meek (Mathew 11:29). But was He this way towards everything? Absolutely not, He was not meek towards man’s will, but rather to His Father’s will. Yes He did show compassion, but not submissive like He was towards God the Father.

We know this from the two incidents of cleansing the temple. I say two because as I read it I see Matthew 21:12 and John 2:14-16 as separate events because of the description. Jesus stood firm when it came to the issue of worship. In addition, think of the multitudes He spoke to. Can you picture Jesus speaking to a multitude in a timid voice?

Furthermore, Jesus’ words indicate that we should not be weak. Matthew 10:16 “Behold I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.” This means we should not be taken advantage of, yet not sin either. It is also interesting how many times bold, boldly or boldness appears in the Bible in reference to how we are suppose to present the Gospel.

Lastly, I would like to mention the analogies of Christians to soldiers. For instance, the armor of God in Ephesians 6:10-20. Also the apostle Paul writes in 2 Timothy 2:3-4 “You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No one engaged in warfare entangles himself with the affairs of this life that he may please him who enlisted him as a soldier.” You may say this is describing the persecution as I mention earlier, but I would ask what soldier does not fight back?

I purposely did not cite from Revelation because I believe that Jesus’ first coming served a different purpose than His second coming. This subject was prompted by the increase of oversensitivity I see Christians having recently.

Every year we see stores advertising Christmas or holiday. Many Christian organization such as the American Family Association urges stores to not shy away from Christmas. Some people are passionate about emphasizing Christmas so much that they boycott stores that avoid Christmas and use Happy Holidays. Governments have been affected as well by calling state Christmas trees "holiday tree".

What are your thoughts about this matter? Do you specifically shop at stores that use Merry Christmas? Do you respond to store associates with Merry Christmas? Do make sure your Christmas cards say Merry Christmas? Or does it even matter to you?

The National Football League has been overly strict this season. This is ironic for me to stand up for a non-disciplinary attitude in an industry of sports that has had some problems in recent months. For example, the NBA had a referee gambling on games he officiated and everyone is aware of the drug use in baseball.

It started this season with the New England Patriots and what is now known as spygate. You may find the article here, where the Patriots videotaped the N.Y. Jets defensive signals. While the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell acknowledged that it had no effect on the end result of the game, he still gave an heavy handed fine to the organization and coach in addition to taking away a first round draft pick. Now the Patriots are out to prove themselves and are getting criticized for running up the score on opponents.

Secondly, the NFL sent a letter to all 32 teams telling them not to let their cheerleaders warm-up in front of the visiting team before the game (article). Is it that big of problem that football players are not able to control themselves? What about the mental toughness that all of the sports media pundits talk about?

Lastly, is something more recent. The Green Bay Packers are being investigated about violating the bounty rule. Supposedly the defensive backs have offered the defensive linemen $500 each for accomplishing defensive goals. My response “WHO CARES?!!!”. Honestly these players make millions and we are worried that other teammates trying to motivate them financially with an extra few hundred bucks.

Every commentator that has NFL experience said all of these are common in the NFL. Everyone is looking for any edge they can get. I understand videotaping compared to just using memory, but the punishment was excessive. The cheerleader rule is just stupid and what the Packers are doing is working. The organization is not paying them additional money and they are not trying to intentionally hurt another player. If anything this shows team unity. The last thing fans want is an overregulated sport.

I grew up in Michigan, but for a few years lived in Virginia. One of the hardest changes I faced was finding a new church, especially when I was familiar to a formal and stoic style. My experience in Virginia was completely different. People were more friendly and by far more enthusiastic and passionate.

The southern hospitality is something I cherished and try to emulate, but I could never get use to the vibrant worship style. I think this was purely a cultural issue and do not see one better than the other. However, I think that no one will be able to be stoic or enthusiastic when they encounter God’s holiness.

Here are a few examples:

Isaiah 6:5
“So I said:
‘Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, The LORD of hosts.’”

Job 42:6
“Therefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes.”

Luke 5:8
“Depart from me, for I am a sinful man O Lord!”

And we know at one point everyone will give proper reverence to God.

Philippians 2:10-11
“that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

There is an attempt to change Santa's famous "ho ho ho" to "ha ha ha" (article). This was brought on in fear that children would think of prostitution. I think this is a sign of not only radical political correctness and feminism, but a perverse society the world is in.

I singled out feminism because they stated the phrase could "be derogatory to women". I can guarantee children are not thinking of slang terms if they are believing Santa is bringing them toys. The only thing is on their minds are toys.

UPDATE: Lloyd Carr Retires Monday November 19th 10AM

This Saturday has some interesting games, at least for Big Ten fans. There are some old rivalries and just important games to make it to a bowl game.

1) MSU vs Penn St.
This is a good game because MSU really needs this win to make it 7 for the season and secure a bowl bid. It is always a good game when your going against Joe Paterno, who by the way is 80 years old and has no desire to retire yet. I predict that MSU wins this one 21 to 17. A close game, but the home field advantage helps MSU win.

2) UofM vs Ohio State
This is a good game and would have been better if they both didn't lose last week. The Buckeyes will travel to the Big House, but I don't think Michigan can pull it off. Jim Tressel has owned Michigan the last several years. In addition, I think UofM is distracted with all of the rumors that Lloyd Carr is going to retire at the end of the season. My prediction is UofM 21 OSU 27

What are your predictions and feel free to give your input on the new look.

It has been brought to my attention that billionaire and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban financially supported a movie titled 'Redacted'. This movie is about American soldiers raping a 14 year old girl. Why would anyone want to be associated with this? Regardless of your view of the war. Here is an article if interested.

A Marine who has become famous from a poem/rap that he made to explain why he defends America has been offered a record deal, but turned it down and plans on reenlisting. Here is the article

Happy Veterans Day

I came across this article that gave the viewpoint of non-Christians on Christians. At first I thought "who cares" they are blinded and don't understand. Isn't this how it is suppose to be? Yet as I read, I realized that these were views that were legit arguments. For instance, the author mentioned this question "what if they are reacting – not to our righteous lifestyles – but to our self-righteousness?".

The results were a very negative view. There was no favoritism according to styles either. "They conclude that Christianity is old-fashioned, boring and unintelligent, and that Christians are insincere and too focused on getting converts.".

Most non-Christian people have had interaction with church or at least Christians. They claimed that Christians turned them off, in some cases because Christians tend to focus more on one sin than another (i.e. homosexuality). I like the list of characteristics it gives because I can relate an encounter with people that match them.

I think the problem for the most part is not that we are self-righteous, but that we try to balance upholding God's commandments and laws and we still sin. From my experience, proclaiming to be a Christian puts me under a microscope and promptly notified from nonbelievers when I make mistakes.

Disclaimer: The material cited does not reflect that of my Christian principles.

In a class I am taking we are reading a book titled “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals” by Immanuel Kant. One of the claims he makes is that morals are not a result of actions, but rather the intent of the action. For example, if someone does a good deed with a motive of being recognized, that is not considered moral.

“for we like to flatter ourselves by falsely attributing to ourselves a nobler motive, whereas in fact we can never, even by the most strenuous self-examination, get entirely behind our covert incentives, since, when moral worth is at issue, what counts is not actions, which one sees, but those inner principles of actions that one does not see.”

He later says that most of our actions come from a duty. “From love of humankind I am willing to admit that even most of our actions are in conformity with duty.”

I found the next part extremely interesting. “pure sincerity in friendship can be no less required of everyone even if up to now there may never have been a sincere friend, because this duty – as duty in general – lies, prior to all experience, in the idea of a reason determining the will by means of a priori grounds.”

As we know, friendship requires a duty on both sides. Are certain actions required or expected? As we get older friends change. Do you think that self greed is a result of actions in a friendship? How do we measure friendship if we cannot ultimately know ones motive or soul to determine whether their action was genuine? These are a few questions I pondered, as I thought of my few friends of many I consider to be sincere friendships.

What are your thoughts about this bumper sticker?

What is your prediction of UofM vs MSU football game this Saturday?

HERE IS A GAME TO PLAY

On a recent discussion the issue of the trinity and Christ's deity came up. Someone was questioning if Christ was man, God or both. My answer is that He was both, fully God and fully man. I also tried along with others to explain the trinity metaphorically.

The question I bring forth is similar to Lordship Salvation. Is it necessary to understand Christ's deity and/or the concept of the trinity to receive salvation. Some would say no because it is confusing. I would point out that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). I would also argue that if you don't know who Christ is, how do you have a relationship with Him?

The scientists are at it again. Trying to undermine core principles of Christianity. I found an article in the New York Times that is claiming that morals evolved from our genes. Natural selection now permits morals.

Previously on another blog, the discussion was about separation of church and state. I was stressing the importance of recognizing America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and how it correlates to morals. This article tries to support its claim by comparing different cultures morals. My thought is further separation from God will create a more perverse version of morals. For instance, a passage from the article:

“Imagine visiting a town where people wear no clothes, never bathe, have sex ‘doggie style’ in public, and eat raw meat by biting off pieces from the carcass.”… “Educated liberals are the only group to say, ‘I find that disgusting but that doesn’t make it wrong’ Dr. Haidt said.”

You see it all the time, at award shows, interviews and during sporting events. People are always giving recognition to God. I am glad for this, but at the same time can’t help to wonder if this has become a cliché of standard practice.

For example, people give credit to God for their talent, but at the same time demand or hold out for an unreasonable amount of money. This seems very hypocritical to me.

Likewise, after the terrorist attacks on 9/11 people were displaying signs and stickers everywhere saying “God bless America”. Was there a revival? Where are those signs and stickers now?

Of course you have people that openly express their faith like coach Tony Dungy and coach Lovie Smith who were the coaches in last year’s super bowl. The media emphasized two African American coaches in the super bowl. However, both coaches emphasized that they were Christians. (Article).

Anytime God is recognized in a positive way is a good thing, however produce good fruit like these two Christian coaches. I am not saying that people should stop the cliché actions, but a pseudo Christian act could be considered worse.

1) The New England Patriots have been found guilty of cheating. Last week against the New York Jets they had a camera focused on the defensive coaches recording their signals. Other teams such as the Green Bay Packers have said they have witnessed them do this in the past. Everyone is questioning their success in the last few years. I think it is most probable last year. They had nobody on offense yet they made it very far in the playoffs.

2) Nortre Dame visits Ann Arbor to play Michigan Saturday at 3:30. The funny thing is, both teams are 0-2. I delight in this because I am a Spartan fan and those two schools I consider my biggest rivals. I would think UofM would win since ND has –8 rushing yards in 2 games and has yet to score an offensive touchdown.

3) MSU vs Pitt. From what I have read, Pitt has many injured players and is very young. I think MSU will dominate them and go on to beat ND. After that the schedule will become more difficult. But hey, I will be ecstatic if MSU starts 4-0.

What do you think about the situations going on in the football realm?

This is an interesting model that uses rational thinking to aid in the decision to believe in God or not. If you do not know the history of Pascal’s Wager I suggest you google it. It gives two options: to believe or not. It lists the separate scenarios that are plausible. There is a formula to determine which outcome has the greatest value. Pascal’s answer was to believe in God, but I still have problems by his model. First, the only factor he weighs is the value. Is the only factor a church or a person have to pursue is giving a more valuable presentation for Christianity? I am not speaking of people such as Joel Osteen either. I am wondering if someone’s desire for a reward (eternal life) or someone’s fear (Hell) is sufficient for salvation?

Governor Granholm signed a law today that makes Michigan’s primary January 15th. This was a bipartisan success. The reason behind this is to make presidential candidates focus on problems that are plaguing Michigan. The funny thing is, All the major democrat candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards) have pledged not to campaign in Michigan since they broke the DNC rules (Article). The republicans broke the rules of the RNC as well, however as of yet, no candidate has eliminated Michigan from their campaign trail.

Well, the Spartans are 1-0 and face Bowling Green this Saturday. Bowling Green beat Minnesota last Saturday. I was happy with the performance of this MSU football team. As I said before the season started, I wasn’t expecting much. That has changed with the historic loss UofM had against Appalachian State. As many have said, “MSU had two victories on Saturday”. I was impressed by MSU’s running game, even though I knew that was their strength. Even Hoyer was impressive. There were few penalties and though it was UAB, many good things came out of it. In addition to UofM’s loss, Nortre Dame lost badly to Georgia Tech. I now expect MSU to not lose games they should win and also pick up a win were they are expected to lose.

What are your thoughts on MSU’s football team and UofM’s loss to Appalachian State?

*UPDATE* UofM IS NOW UNRANKED !!!

It started with philosophy. Man’s determination to explain everything. Philosophy attempted to diminish religion with rationalization and logic. Philosophy still exists, but so does religion, it was a failed attempt. When I speak of religion I am usually referring to Christianity. With the Enlightenment came science and that became the authority for truth.

Science is the authority for truth in the secular world and more specifically the academia. People seem to think that it is the be all end all of answers, yet it is constantly changing. In addition, there is as much faith put into science as Christianity. There is a reason evolution is called a theory, because it cannot be proven.

Some Christians want to merge their faith with science. There are numerous ones I am sure you have heard of some. While claims in the Bible have not been proven incorrect by science thus far, I would caution people to not conform to this practice. There are a few reasons why I believe this: (1) If you are matching claims of the Bible to science, you are giving science the authority and ultimately questioning the Biblical claim. (2) As I said before, science is changing. Some things that were thought before are not viewed the same way. If we give into comparing science they might claim to discredit the Biblical claim and that scientific claim could be changed years later. (3) This could also be reversed. A Christian might think they have a scientific reason for a Biblical claim. We do not know if it was simply divine intervention. That answer could be disproved and bring discredit to the Bible. (4) Evidence is not required for belief in God and anyone who focuses on evidence shows lack of faith.

I am not against science. I hold the Bible as the ultimate authority. I am not going to subject God’s infinite wisdom with our finite knowledge. My suggestion is that if science is making a claim against the Bible, use science against science. For example, the big bang theory goes against the law of circular momentum. All the planets rotate the same way except for one. Things like this help remind people that science requires just as much faith as Christianity. There are extremists on both sides. Some that say there is a logical scientific reason for all events and then there are others that will say natural disasters are a result of God’s anger. We should all continue to be educated, but realize that we will never in this lifetime understand everything.

The following was posted by my friend Kyle on his blog Spartan Spectator. I found it interesting because I have attended some Libertarian events recently and found myself disagreeing with them on most issues. I am not sure if I agree 100%, but he did bring up some interesting points. One in particular is something I noticed when I visited the Libertarian website. It is their view on religion. Before I say too much I will let you read it and post your own opinions.

"Many Republicans argue that libertarians and conservatives should join forces so that they can defeat the collectivist liberals of the Democratic Party. This should be highly discouraged; libertarianism is contradictory to conservatism.

A fallacy that is believed by people on both the Left and the Right is that the political spectrum is divided by totalitarianism on the Left (communists, Nazis, collectivists, socialists, and statists) and liberty on the Right. This is not the case. I firmly believe that on one end of the political spectrum is the philosophy of believing in a moral order established by experience, and on the other side is the belief that the nature of humans is devoted to work. While conservatives believe in traditionalism and an ordered society based on history, libertarians and Marxists believe in atheistic materialism. In this example, libertarians have more in common with Marxists than they do with conservatives.

Conservatives believe that order is needed in society. If liberty and justice are permitted to exist in a country, order must be maintained. As economist Wilhelm Röpke argued, liberty is only permissible within the constraints of societal order. While libertarians believe in freedom (liberty without constraints, which is referred to as anarchy), conservatives believe in true freedom (liberty within societal constraints). Both Marxists and libertarian ideologies are similar in that they both share a hatred of true freedom.

Conservatives understand that societal order is needed to achieve maximum liberty. A common culture, common history, common language, understanding of right verses wrong (which is not relative, it is absolute, but in today’s world, cultures are dissimilar, because they have different taboos) and sense of community are needed to forge society. Libertarians have distaste for society; they feel that societal limits absolute liberty. Instead of trying to preserve society, libertarians seek to destroy it by advocating for the elimination of community. To the libertarian, the individual is supreme; Man should be worshipped instead of God. Again, materialism is at the root of this. Libertarians and Marxists are similar in this example as well.

Libertarians are ideologues who have set out to create Utopia on earth (a different form of Utopia than what the Marxists advocate for, but Utopia nevertheless) while conservatives understand that all human beings are imperfect and that Utopia is impossible.

Libertarians hate government, because they feel that government restrains their liberties; conservatives want limited government, because they understand that liberties need to be restrained. It has been said that if all men were angles that government would not be needed. That is untrue, because even angles would need laws to maintain societal order (how would one drive to a store of there were no stoplights maintained by the government to prevent car accidents?). In order for true freedom to exist, societal constraints are needed.

A very good reason as to why libertarianism is a failed doctrine is because it cannot work, because it does not take into account human nature. Humans try to best one another; societal order is needed to prevent this vulgar Machiavellianism from destroying civilization (and true freedom).

Libertarians do not understand the difference between liberty and rights. A liberty is when one is granted permission to do something; a right is when one does not need permission to do something. For example, I have a right to my property. I do not need to ask permission to walk across it. If I wanted to walk across my neighbor’s lawn, I would need to ask permission to do so. Because libertarians believe that they have a right to liberty, they do not understand how this would compromise society as we know it.

Something the atheistic libertarians should reflect upon is that if God does not exist, then God-given rights do not exist. If that is the case, then rights were created by Man and therefore, can be taken away by Man. Marxists and Libertarians both ignore God’s Law, which is exactly what rights are and what rights are not. Libertarians, trying to remove God from society, tend to refer to God’s Law as “natural law,” but the libertarians neglect to explain what nature exactly is or how it came into existence. The libertarian who has blind devotion to atheism is not unlike the Marxist who has blind devotion to the state.

Instead of worshipping the state like Marxists, libertarians worship Man and Ayn Rand. Instead of joining forces with libertarians to oppose the collectivist state, conservatives should distance themselves from them. Libertarians are no more conservative than Marxists."

After reading and replying to many posts dealing with predestination and losing salvation, I have thought more and more on the topic of lordship salvation. Do not be confused, this is not saying works is apart of salvation. Submitting Christ as Lord of you life is in connection to trusting Him to be saved. “and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again”. 2 Corinthians 5:15

Jesus’ earthly ministry did not have people make a decision or say a prayer. His message was one of discipleship. Jesus described two ways, narrow and broad (Matthew 7:13-14). The narrow will have few and the broad will have many. Mathew 7:21-23 is a verse that should make every evangelical make sure they are spreading the gospel message correctly. Jesus said that many will call upon his name and he will say “I never knew you”. Those are frightening words to me.

We do not know what is in everyone’s heart, but the Bible does tell us what happens after salvation. For one, there is a change. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new” 2 Corinthians 5:17. Furthermore, when Jesus was answering the disciples question about prayer He said “Your will be done” not the individual (Mathew 6:10).

In addition, the book of James mentions works numerous times. Like I said before, I do not believe this is saying salvation is by works. What I think James is talking about when he talks about works in James 2:14-26 is that salvation will bring forth fruit of good works (Mathew 7:18-20)

Unlike predestination and losing salvation this topic does depend on one’s salvation. I think that easy believism is dangerous and giving many false hope.

With this cold rainy weather we have it is feeling more and more like football season. Not to mention my recent activities of fantasy football drafts and purchasing my season tickets for MSU football. I got season tickets last year and while the team was disappointing, it was still a fun time. I love the atmosphere, especially in the student section because there is nothing worse than having some uptight people around you wanting it quiet or don’t cheer; it’s a FOOTBALL game!

I am excited about coach Dantonio’s new era. I do not think he is an instant savior for the football program, but from what I have read it seems he is pushing the program in the right direction. I am not expecting too much, but its all worthwhile when you are not a bandwagon fan and those few big wins happen it means more when you have been there at the bottom.

Many predictions I have read have them going 4-8, I predict they will go 5-7. What are your thoughts about coach Dantonio or the upcoming season in general? In anticipation I have added a countdown in the upper right corner.

Well my blog got a facelift. It will probably change some more. Feel free to comment what you think of the change.

I am not sure if anyone has heard this story before, but it is worth repeating. The words to this hymn were written after two major traumas in Spafford's life. The first was the Great Chicago Fire of October 1871, which ruined him financially. Shortly after, while crossing the Atlantic, all four of Spafford's daughters died in a collision with another ship. Spafford's wife Anna survived and sent him the now famous telegram: "SAVED ALONE." Several weeks later, as Spafford's own ship passed near the spot where his daughters died, he was inspired to write these words.

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou has taught me to say,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blessed assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

My sin, oh, the bliss of this glorious thought!
My sin, not in part but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more,
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

And Lord, haste the day when my faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll;
The trump shall resound, and the Lord shall descend,
Even so, it is well with my soul.
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

Romans 8: 28

“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.”

I am sure most people are familiar with this verse. I refer to it often and use it often, usually in times of trial, struggle or confusion. As I was reading a book on Romans it pointed out something that I never noticed. “To those” is used twice in this verse and they are different expressions.

One is from God to man and the other is from man to God. This is a two way street. It is also something that I have trouble explaining, which is the balance of election and freewill. The amazing part is that it is in the same verse.

Examples

(1) God’s promise to Abram (Abraham) in Genesis 12:
God’s side was to tell Abram to go and Abram’s side was going.

(2) God tells Moses to go to Egypt in Exodus 3:11-12:
God tells Moses to go to Pharaoh and says He will be there with him and Moses goes.

(3) Saul’s conversion Acts 9:15:
God selects Paul to stand before gentiles and kings and Saul (Paul) excepts.


There are many more examples. This is not a topic to start debating predestination. I believe in sovereign election, but there are responsibilities also with man, for example, repentance and trusting Christ as Lord and Savior. These three examples showed trust in God.

How do you define success? Obviously it depends on a specified area. For your career, is it a dollar figure, something you like, or something that is above a certain level of stature? This is more difficult to say for a church or a believer. What is a successful church? Do you measure success by growth by numbers, individual growth, or works?

I don’t think you can measure success by growth in numbers alone. To measure success of a church, it is necessary to know the purpose of the church. I believe the purpose of the church is to (1) Glorify God (Ephesians 3:21), (2) Build itself up in faith by instruction of the word and using spiritual gifts (2 Timothy 2:2,15), (3) Fellowship and keeping the ordinances (1 John 1:3; Acts 2:41-42), (4) To spread the gospel (Mathew 28:19).

I think success is measured with a combination of these. Most churches will emphasize one of these as more important. Usually it is evangelizing. They are so consumed by growth in numbers that they don’t build the congregation up. On the other hand, the church does have to grow. I prefer not to measure by numbers because other means other than the word of God can be the reason for attendance.

As for the individual, these same principles apply. A believer is to glorify God, study the word, use their spiritual gifts, fellowship and evangelize. Now if a believer measures their success by how many people accepted Christ when they witness it might not be that good. Does that mean that they are unsuccessful or presenting it wrong? Absolutely not. I found out three years after witnessing to someone who was an atheist that they now have accepted Christ. Results are not always immediate. I think the humanistic version of success has flooded over to the Christians’ view.

Here are some Spartan basketball tests to measure your knowledge. I got this off the green and white blog.

Quiz 1 : Important Games

Quiz 2: Top Players

Quiz 3: Top Teams

Quiz 4: Exciting Games

This is extremely rare that I post something about entertainers, however Bob Barker is an exception. Barker recently endorsed Rosie O'Donnell to be his successor for 'The Price is Right' (article). I think Rosie would be a horrible host. For one, she is too controversal. Everybody liked Bob Barker. I had an interesting discussion at work about who would be a good replacement. Some names that were tossed around were Wayne Brady, Regis Philbin and Ellen DeGeneres. Who do you think would be the best replacement?

Happy Fathers Day to all the fathers out there. Most everyone knows the fifth commandment "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you." (Exodus 20:12). Well what if someone grew up in a home that the father was not a good example. Today most psychologists would blame someone's problems on their parents. The Bible gives a different answer. Ezekiel 18: 2-4 says "What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children's teeth are set on edge'? "As I live," says the Lord God, "you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are Mine; The soul of the father As well the soul of the son is Mine; The soul who sins shall die. " This statement about eating sour grapes is saying their forefathers sinned and they inherited it. God explains that He rejects this blame shifting and emphasizes individual accountability. The death mentioned is physical death, we know this from Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." People are not stuck in a bad cycle, they can overcome and break it. I would encourage everyone to read the rest of Ezekiel chapter 18 for further information on overcoming such a problem.

The Detroit Pistons have traded Carlos Delfino to the Raptors (article) for two second round draft picks. One in 2009 and the other in 2010. This is another waisted draft. Just like Darko Milicic. Who I may remind you was drafted before Carmelo Anthony, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh. I like Joe Dumars for what he has done as a player and what he has done as president of basketball operations, but drafting is not going well. Are the Detroit Pistons turning into the New York Jets of draft picks?

This is a holiday that I think people don't give as much attention to as they should. Most people don't know proper flag etiquette. One person specifically is Governor Granholm. In 2003 Granholm issued a proclamation to lower the American flag statewide to half-staff when a Michigan soldier dies. The flag code does grant governors to order the lowering of flags for government officials, but not soldiers. This practice is an oxymoron. Isn't the reason people die for their country is so the flag can be raised? I personally think that this is a political anti war protest. As someone who has served in the military I strongly oppose this practice. There is an article by the wall street journal addressing this very issue. I am aware that I found it on a military families against the war website, however it does list both viewpoints. I don't think everyone who supports this practice is anti war, but they may be ignorant on flag etiquette. Regardless of your viewpoint on the war, what is your opinion on this matter?

Do you think government should cap oil prices or profits? I personally do not support that idea. I hold a laissez faire type of view. The question then moves on to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska. I am all for that. Another alternative was mentioned by Congressman Walberg. A co-worker of mine forwarded me this article about Congressman Walberg's suggestion of drilling in the Great Lakes. I personally think there is no way drilling in Alaska or the Great Lakes will happen while there is a democrat controlled U.S. House of Representatives. However, everyone is complaining about gas prices and I don't see many people giving up their cars for bikes and public transportation. What plans do you support in regards to our oil dependency?

There are many proposals that people are trying to get onto the 2008 ballot. Some have a chance and others are a long shot. Here are a few with my opinion.

- Part-Time Legislature (Has momentum since people are frustrated. I like the idea if they tie in a pay decrease and extend term limits.)

- Fair Tax (Long shot, but I like the idea)

- Right to Work (Longer shot in this union state, but I really like the idea)

- Graduated Income Tax (Long shot, people voting to support giving their money to government... I don't think so.)

- Medical Marijuana (No way. These stupid hippies try the medical angle every year so they can smoke pot legally.)

What are your thoughts? Or is there one I did not mention.

Justin Verlander threw a no-hitter against the Milwaukee Brewers (article). What was even more amazing is that he was still throwing over 100 mph in the ninth inning. He also added 12 strike outs. This makes it harder for me to answer that question "Who's your Tiger?". Since I like them all I would have to atleast give my top three. (1.) Curtis Granderson (2.) Justin Verlander (3.) Carlos Guillen. So who is your Tiger(s)?

As you have probably heard (article) guard Maurice Josesph transferred to Vermont. Joseph averaged 5.9 points and 16.8 minutes a game last season. Obviously with three high caliber recruits coming in, Joseph knew his playing time would be reduced even more. I don't think this hurts MSU at all. Joseph's offense was hit or miss and his defense was below average. Vermont is excited about his arrival. This just goes to show the quality of MSU basketball when another school is excited about getting one of your bench players. What are your thoughts about MOJO's departure? Happy, sad or care less?