What Is Love?

Note: This was a paper that I wrote for my English class. I hated the class. The teacher was a feminist and all men were of the devil. However you'd never hear her say it exactly like that. However, I expected to get more than a C on the paper. However, I hadn't learned how Universities worked by then.

1 Corinthians 13, Amplified Version



IF I [can] speak in the tongues of men and [even] of angels, but have not love (that reasoning, intentional, spiritual devotion such as is inspired by God's love for and in us), I am only a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
And if I have prophetic powers (the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), and understand all the secret truths and mysteries and possess all knowledge, and if I have [sufficient] faith so that I can remove mountains, but have not love (God's love in me) I am nothing (a useless nobody).
Even if I dole out all that I have [to the poor in providing] food, and if I surrender my body to be burned or in order that I may glory, but have not love (God's love in me), I gain nothing.
Love endures long and is patient and kind; love never is envious nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does not display itself haughtily.
It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not rude (unmannerly) and does not act unbecomingly. Love (God's love in us) does not insist on its own rights or its own way, for it is not self-seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of the evil done to it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong].
It does not rejoice at injustice and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth prevail.
Love bears up under anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the best of every person, its hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures everything [without weakening].
Love never fails [never fades out or becomes obsolete or comes to an end]. As for prophecy (the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), it will be fulfilled and pass away; as for tongues, they will be destroyed and cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away [it will lose its value and be superseded by truth].
For our knowledge is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect), and our prophecy (our teaching) is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect).
But when the complete and perfect (total) comes, the incomplete and imperfect will vanish away (become antiquated, void, and superseded).
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; now that I have become a man, I am done with childish ways and have put them aside.
For now we are looking in a mirror that gives only a dim (blurred) reflection [of reality as in a riddle or enigma], but then [when perfection comes] we shall see in reality and face to face! Now I know in part (imperfectly), but then I shall know and understand fully and clearly, even in the same manner as I have been fully and clearly known and understood [by God].
And so faith, hope, love abide [faith--conviction and belief respecting man's relation to God and divine things; hope--joyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation; love--true affection for God and man, growing out of God's love for and in us], these three; but the greatest of these is love.




Krist Adams
Adv Comp
Miss Smith

What is Love: The Idea of Christian Love and the Love
As Seen From the Non-Christian


I sat in my Television Production class watching a documentary the other day. We were supposed to be watching for the techniques documentaries use, but as I watched my attention was directed to something else. The documentary we watched was called Paradise Lost: The West Memphis Child Murders. It was about three child murders that took place in West Memphis, Arkansas and three youths who were arrested and convicted for the murders. The twist, as if that wasn’t enough, was that the three youths said the murders were part of a satanic ritual. Throughout the documentary the parents of the murdered children were interviewed. Though all were interesting, one stood out tremendously. It was a stepfather of one of the boys. He quoted scriptures of the Holy Bible and talked about love, God, and Christian themes. But on the other hand he cursed the three youths and damned them to Hell. As a Christian, and more importantly a practicing one, this touched and bothered me very deeply. Though I sympathized with his pain and loss, I was also confounded about his beliefs. Here was a man that proclaimed to be a Christian, yet went against the deeply grounded principles of love. So I pondered the full meaning of “Christian Love.” What is the difference between “Christian Love” and the love that the rest of the world knows?
The definition of “Christian Love” was so eloquently written by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 13 (attached). So since we have the definition of “Christian Love,” what is the definition of love that the unbeliever knows? According to Dictionary.com (attached) love is as follows: a deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness, an intense desire, towards a treasured object, sexual passion.
Though I used the dictionary, this definition for love was not enough for me. I had to see what other people believed. I had to see what someone who wasn’t reading a dictionary thought. I then decided to question the people whom I live with at MTSU. This is their response: Love is friendship, companionship, trust, respect, honesty you hold within, understanding, someone who means a lot to you, and waking up next to the person you fell asleep next to. I also searched the Internet, surfing unto some college-based websites and checking out what they had to say about the subject. Under categories like “Love & Lifestyles” I found topics that were narrowed down to sexual love. This covered such things as finding a mate, better ways in bed, and what to do while alone. I do not limit the definition of love to just that of sexual desire but let us face the truth— The world (at least American culture) places a lot more emphasis on sex rather than love when it comes to relationships.
It was clear that the two definitions were different. Besides what has already been stated, what other differences are there between the two that will give a better understanding? As one reads the definition from the Internet or the answers people gave— love is friendship or companionship (two or more people), respect (from another person), recognition of attractive qualities (physically), sexual passion (because of someone), waking up next to the one you fell asleep next to (another person). With these answers it is evident that love from the non-Christian perspective requires another person or ‘to physically see or know.’ To put it in simple terms—Love from a Non-Christian, Love is conditional. On the other hand, Christian love is much different.
From the Christian point of view, meaning the Christian idea of love, love does not require another person, sight, or returned gesture to make it love. What does this mean? The Non-Christian idea of love must have someone return the gesture, must have a physical attractiveness, or must have it’s way. From a Non-Christian point-of –view, there must be a reason to love the person. That reason could be physically attractive, gratifying, a reward, or anything else—but a reason is needed. It is conditional.
A boyfriend loves his girlfriend because she loves him. He loves her because she gratifies him in some way—emotionally, physically, or sexually. Watch a bad break up and see how fast love turns to hate. Does the one wronged plot revenge? When revenge is taken on the person, the other rejoices and is so happy. How does one’s love act when that person sees the other cheating? It turns to jealousy, anger, rage, hate.
To further show the point, take this scenario and these questions for example. A guy might love a girl before they go out. How? He does not know the person and the way he is seeking love is through the relationship. They may have an even split and still say they “love each other.” How fast does each go out with another person? How long does it take before each are over the other? To what degree is the love measured? What do you have to do to get the person to love you? What do you have to do to get the person to not love you? Natural human love can turn to hate when it does not get it’s way.
In physical attractiveness, how nice must the object look before you love it? Being sentimental value is another example because it becomes conditional. You love it because it has belonged to someone or whatever the possibilities are.
On the other side Christian Love is not interested in what I can get, but what I can give. Love does not take account of the evil done to it. It is then asked, how do you deal with someone who has betrayed you? In 2Timothy 4:14-15 Paul the Apostle wrote : “Alexander the coppersmith did me great wrongs. The Lord will pay him back for his actions. Beware of him yourself, for he opposed and resisted our message very strongly and exceedingly. At my first trial no one acted in my defense [as my advocate] or took my part or [even] stood with me, but all forsook me. May it not be charged against them! (AMP)”
Through this one can see that forgiveness is a necessity, though forgetfulness is not. Forgive the person who has wronged you, but remember them for their actions not to be fooled again. And although they have wronged you, believe the best of them. The idea of Christian Love is love that is forgiving, craves justice and righteousness, self-sacrificing, kind, seeks the best in others, is not envious. The idea of Christian Love is non-conditional.
The King James Version of the Bible states: Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” This is Christian Love. But the strongest definition of love, the kind of love embodied in the idea of Christian love is found in Romans 5:10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.” While we were still enemies of God, he died for us. Could you do that? Would you do that? Would you die for Hitler? Would you die for Osama Bin Laden? Christ did. And that’s the same spirit and idea the Christian idea possesses.
That is the difference between the two ideas of love. Whereas the non-believer’s idea of love is conditional, the idea of Christian love is unconditional. This whole idea of unconditional love is so profound, how come it is not more prolific? In a world were love means waking up next to the same person you fell asleep with, where that kind of love is honored, paraded, and put on TV—no wonder the idea of Christian love is not seen more, or practiced more. The people who practice the Unbelieving kind of love are so wrapped up in what they can get, that they don’t stop thinking about themselves and think about others—no matter what they’ve done. It sounds so easy, but try it some time. It’s harder than it sounds.
















Works Cited



“Dictionary.com” 17 Mar 2003 www.dictionary.com
Amplified Bible. Grand Rapids: Lockman Foundation, 1954.
The Holy Bible. King James Version. Cleveland: World, n.d.
Peston, Kara. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2003
Michaels, David. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2003
Nichols, Sara. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2003
Stephens, Victoria. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2003
Cohen, Brad. Personal Interview. 22 Mar. 2003

The Corrupted Institution

Note: My first semester at MTSU found me living with 2 roomates that were the stereotypical college students. Towards the end of my first semester I had enough. My roomates had stolen and broken my property. They had brought in liquor and smoked in the room. They had brought in fireworks in our room and shot them off in the halls. All of which was against the rules. I told the people in student housing this, and asked to be moved. Their response: "Where would you like to move?" Needless to say, I was enraged at such an injustice and hypocrisy. This where this paper came from.


How engorged in a desire of greed and lust does the Tennessee, nay the American government and educational system have to be to overlook their own policies that they might claim another dollar from the tight pocketbooks of already financially strapped students at the expense of their emotions and well being? I ask you this. But yet as I ask, I hold before you the answer. The Tennessee educational system is as corrupt as the Chicago city government, as corrupt as the Iraqi government, and is as corrupt as the Queen of Hearts from Wonderland. Poor Alice would shed a tear for all of the children destroyed due to the lack of morality here in Tennessee.
This desire, this lust, this profound, agonizing loathing of the established powers that be grows from their own policies, corrupted by the all mighty dollar. Where as the child is sent to school to study, to grow, and to learn, how is it possible for that child to grow, to study, and to learn with the fullness of their ability when the gatekeepers of power keep them from their true potential? How do they do so? Policies ignored at the expense of one lost child, but not a lost dollar. Is it the object, the goal, and vision of that institution to create and mold fine, upstanding, productive members of society, or is it their goal to gain another pocket full of cash.
I lay my incident on the table for public display. Public Housing on college campuses—we all know what is possible and probable in the dorm life setting. Alcohol on an alcohol free campus, firearms and fireworks where they are illegal, government banned contraband being used fragrantly and publicly with no concern for it to be stopped, hauled, ceased, or delayed—all are elements of university life. And though a complaint is made, though a request is place before them, the powers that be appease the protester, leaving alone their own principles and morals. They say, “Here you go. Leave and be happy.” But do they care that their reputation is at stake? Do they care that although their teachings are accredited their morals are not? I say nay in the highest.
Will the wicked, the liars and crooks, the cheats and the wrongdoers, the guilty and shamefaced ever be punished? As likely as Leave It To Beaver being popular again on Prime Time Networks. It does not stop here. This is only the beginning. These actions taken, or lack of action taken by the institution are in direct opposition to what it ‘stands for’ and publicly ‘envisions.’ They teach that you must be truthful and hardworking, intelligent and faithful to succeed. Yet in the dark shadows of their closet they treat their problems in the least expensive way. Taking university legal actions cost money, but more importantly causes students to feel the need to leave. Then who will pay for that fat upgrade in their pocket book? Who will buy the new tires for the Dean’s convertible? I’ll tell you who—Satan. That’s right, the Father of Lies is going to buy them right after he shoves a pitchfork up their butts and makes them take a bribe from some pot smoking kid who just wants to stay in school for the cheap pot. It may sound funny, but guess what—it’s not far from the truth.
But what example is this showing to the students who portray such acts? It’s saying that this kind of thing is okay. It’s saying that this is the way they are aloud to act. Even though laws, policies, and instructions are set forth—they aren’t for them. Those are for the other people, but not for them. Well you know what happens when these thoughts are created. Do you know what kind of people are made when institutions favor the dollar over ethics and values. Those people created are called serial killers! Those kinds of people are mass murderers, bank robbers, and criminals of all sorts.
An old proverb says that discipline is out of love, that to discipline someone is to guide then and show them the errors of their way so they can change them for the better. In this case, discipline is less money. In this situation the discipline, the right thing, the ethical thing is the road less taken. And I'm afraid it is so rarely taken here that weeds have grown up all around it. So when the time does take to take that road, how will they find it?
Perhaps they will not turn into serial killers or to a life of crime, but they won't turn out good. They won't turn out to be the ethical kinds of people whom this world needs. They won't turn into the ethical kinds of people that this brave institution wants them to be. And why should they? Their role model for ethics was the institution that cared more about money than the excellence that they shall inherit after graduating from this corrupt institution.

Sex & Rock 'n' Roll

Note: Since I first wrote this, years ago, I have learned so much. So, I'm sure there's some things in here that I'd disagree with. Maybe one day I'll rewrite this. This is wrong around '04.

Since the inception of rock n’ roll in the 50’s sex has been associated with this fine institution of music. As the old adage goes—sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll, but what does that say about one of the coolest forms of music since aborigine drum beats. As some people may know Christina Aguellara released her new video this week. But it was the content of her video that drew attention to her, not her song. Yet it’s not the first time this cheap plow has been used to gather attention from fans, the media, and the rest of society who cares nothing about the artist’s music. This raises the question of not only shame and dignity, because it is clear that neither Christinia, Brittney, nor anyone else who employs methods such as these has no self pride and self worth.
It is clear that both Christinia and Brittney have great voices, though their skills in song writing and playing instruments is at an all time low. Yet the question is, “How much self-esteem do these two actually have?” Are their voices not enough that they must take off their clothes to keep an audience? Do they consider their voices and their talent to be so low that they must compensate by stripping in their videos, shows, cd covers, and every other public appearance they have?
As this week has shown, Christinia has gone way past ‘showing skin’ all the way to ‘being a skank.’ It is truly a sad state for the individual and especially the society we live in, for things just one step lower is considered the norm.
The argument could be made that the two are only giving the people what they want. But is this really true? Have they tried not giving the people what they supposedly want? I haven’t seen it and as a pun the entire world has seen it.
In a society that accepts such things as the norm can possibly tell us that it’s not only the two girls that are endangered, but also our society as well. I don’t know about the rest of society, but I find it degrading to turn the tv on and seeing half naked girls all the time. I’m not coming from a feminist point of view or some strange occultist point-of-view, but just a normal person. What if that same moment of having those half-clad women on, a child is watching TV? It’s against the law to abuse children physically, but what about emotionally, psychologically? That’s exactly what such a situation is.
Yes, scientific reports have stated that men think about women and sex so many times a day. But are these the same people that are holding their children in their lap watching TV? These are the same people corrupted by the society that has fed and planted the thoughts of sex and pornographic images in our mind.
That not sound convincing? Maybe not, but how about this situation: A man thinks about sex xx number of times a day. Is this man a father, a teenager, a rapist, a preacher, or an island native? I assure you that an island native whose society places no overbearing stress on sex thinks about it the same amount that the people in such test do. It all boils down to the society, the family, and the environment. This isn’t an article saying society is the sole contributor to people’s thoughts.
It is a fact though that everything you put in front of you affects you in one way or another. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad. Either way, it affects you in some manor. So if you see sex, sex, sex, and the sex—then guess what you’re going to think about? You guessed it. If this isn’t good enough for you, try this one: police shootings went up when the song ‘cop killer’ came out in the early 90’s. Was this a coincidence or maybe I’m right?
I for one am too busy with school, work, and life in general to be consumed by all the junk that MTV and every other brainless blond singer tries to throw at me because they think their singing isn’t good enough.


What do you think?

Napster and P2P Sharing

Note: This was one of the first things I seriously wrote when I moved to MTSU. As you can see, it's about Napster, so you know it's pretty old. I don't remember exactly what this said, but I'm sure I have some different feelings about the issue now, though maybe not much.


Note: The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the author or of any staff member of Rock Stars Anonymous. However the fact that Metallica sucks is a view held by any sane person.




With the coming of the new millenium came the state of the art programming that would lead many to defile the unset laws of America, challenge an Industry, and turn the music world upside down. This would be known as peer-to-peer file sharing, and the program would be Napster.
You know Napster—the little devil looking face that spurred a debate over musician copyrights. How great was Napster? Well actually it sucked. Sure, you could download files from other people (files at this point being only music), but if you got disconnected—you were screwed. There were no back ups or starting from where you left off, if you got disconnected, you lost the song.
But with Napster came inspiration for bigger and better file sharing. These would include things like Morpheus, Limewire (the Gnuella network in general), Audio Galaxy, and today’s leader—Kazaa. Though all were far better, some sharing even more media besides songs and the continuous download, they all their success and beginnings to Napster. But what went wrong with Napster? Why is it not today’s leader in p2p file sharing? Is it because it didn’t keep up with the trend and advance, as all technology must? No. Is it because the creators just didn’t care to carry it any farther? No. The reason Napster is not today’s leader in p2p file sharing boils down to own word—METALLICA!
What spawned the debate over the legal issues of file sharing was the greediness of the ‘Unforgiven’ band that ruled the 80’s and early nineties with chart topping singles and multiple platinum records. Though all members of Metallica are set for life, they devised that anyone ‘stealing’ their music were…well, a couple thousand names in a couple hundred languages that would upset most old ladies residing in a retirement home and many more mothers with small “virgin ear” bearing children. Many people were in agreement with Metallica’s views, but even more weren’t. Yet instead of taking their views to the public and telling the world of their anger towards all who would ‘steal’ their precious music, they decided to single out one certain target—Napster. Why is that? Simple, they were, at the time, the top dog, even more popular than Metallica. They were also an easy target. How were they going to go after thousands of people? They just decided to cut off the problem at the root. So the band decided to sue Napster and shut in down. If you’ve been living under a rock and don’t know, Metallica won and Napster was temporarily shut down, today they are somewhere in limbo always being a source of lawsuits and judicial proceedings.
Though Napster was taken away from the p2p community, others popped up and too it’s place. Like the old saying goes, ‘kill one and two will pop up in its place.’ This did indeed happen. The best and most frequently thought of is Audio Galaxy, in my opinion at least. Audio Galaxy was ‘the bomb.’ There has never been another like it and God willing there’ll be two in the next year. Though with legal proceedings always buzzing about the legality of file sharing, one can never tell what will happen next. Will the government be tapping your computers to see if you are downloading music from someone else? There’s already been made a ‘silent law’ against it by one of the crappiest Presidents in recent years (These views are based on morality vs. the legal dealings and character vs. representation of a Union, no political views were used in this basis). So this brings us to the big question—HOW MUCH DOES METALLICA SUCK?
Okay, their music was quite decent, if you prefer that type. But they were no Beatles, no Elvis, no Nirvana, no Guns n’ Roses (sorry Captain), no Third Day, no Alan Jackson, and no Springstein. These guys were the same as every other band from the eighties, except they got lucky and lasted longer. The drank between shoes, got high I’m sure, and had no cares until they found out they weren’t getting some money that they thought they should. This also goes back to views of record sales. Record sales are what drive bands, besides tours of course. That is why bootlegging was such a problem in the past with bands and concerts. Why buy the album when you can get it free? Bands see it this way. They look at file sharing and say, “They’ll get it here free and won’t buy it in the stores.” But what they don’t consider is true fans—those people who buy the album just for the cover, just for that nice shiny CD art. They leave out the people that go and sample the stuff on the net and then buy the CD. True there are people who record the entire CD and don’t think twice about buying them, but a large greater percent buy the album or just don’t care. Me for one, I download songs that I have no possible intention in the world or buying. I wouldn’t care if it was clearance, I still wouldn’t buy it—I just want that one song.
The questions remains, when you buy the CD, do you not have the right to do whatever you want to with it? The government says no. But isn’t this something that follows under the First Amendment and Freedom of speech? Some would argue no, it’s ‘stealing.’ Other would argue it is their right to do whatever they want with it. The problem isn’t file sharing. It’s that file sharing was taken to the masses. If a few people do it—no problem, but when everyone does, then there’s a problem.
Billy Corgan of the now disbanded Smashing Pumpkins once said he believed the future of music lay in technology and the Internet. He believed this so much that the follow-up to their February 2000 release Machina: The machines of God, Machina II: The friends and enemies of modern music (September 2000), was given a wide release to fan websites for free download.
Does file sharing hurt musicians? Perhaps, but to greedy people like Metallica—no. They have already staked their claim in history and made their fortune twice over. For people like Metallica, musicians who have made it and are rich forever, unless their drug habit increases a little more, file sharing is just annoying. For the up and coming bands, the new generation, file sharing has been embraced as a way to get their music out to the masses.
Record sales aren’t slumping, bands are still making money, and Metallica still sucks. So what does this all mean? P2P file sharing will continue until the government decides it is a cause worthy of their time. With war, the economy, and every other needful thing popping up, that day looks far away. File sharing will continue, will grow, will get better, and Metallica will still suck. They tried to destroy a dream, kill a hope, and rot away entertainment. I’m sorry but I don’t have sixteen bucks to spend on their lousy record, and now I “don’t” have the time to download it either.
In closing, feel free, download some music, and kick a Metallica fan in the butt. Thank you and good day.

Edify!!!

Note: A long time ago in my youth group, we started getting a little....mean to each other...in a loving way. Our youth pastor used to always tell us to edify. Thus I made this nice list.

Edify!

--You have nice shoes.
--If I’m scuba diving, I’m reassured that you wouldn’t plug my breathing snorkel…I hope.
--You give me such a warm filling inside when you cook chili.
--You’re eyes remind me of mine, they both have pupils.
--I’m relieved in my thoughts that Jesus will come back before you have an opportunity to reproduce---because this world is evil, and your kids deserve better.
--Your singing voice is beautiful. I think that’s you at least.
--You remind me of that guy from tv—yeah, that one.
--Just like candy-you’re sweet. (Yeah, that was lame enough)
--Your kidness reminds me of Mother Teressa—yep, old, shrewd kidness…like evil Catholic nuns.
--I love you more than Satan.
--I believe you can do anyhting you want to do—for the right price.
--Your playing is great. At least that what I think when I’m not there.
--You make some Joyful noise….yeah, that’s a good way to describe it.
--Jesus loves you.
--It’s always a pleasure to be in your company. You always make me laugh. (in one way or another)
--Loud speakers in your car are a good thing.
--It’s always a comfort to know that if my car broke down, I could count on you to give me a ride….for five bucks.
--I love to hear your pleasant voice-I gotta sleep sometime.
--You have a face made for the movies, you know which ones fit which movies.
--Your car has nice tires.
--You’re my friend—I gotta have soemone to blame who’ll still talk to me.
--You’re nicer than Hitler.
--You’re my Hero. I like to set my standards low so I feel better when I overcome them. But you’re still my hero.
--You remind me of someone cool…I think.
--I trust you more than Joseph Stalin(well, if he was alive).
--Ghandi was ‘cool’, but you’re more fun to have an eating contest with.
--I’m willing to turn my back on you while you have a knife in your hand.
--Jesus still loves you.
--God broke the mold when he made you. At least I hope so.
--I can tolerate you more than Curling(the Olympic sport).
--I love you more than nuclear waste.
--I like you more than Hell.

--I believe you’ll be famous one day. Well, after we use you as a scapegoat.
--You’re the best at what you do….whatever it is that you do. Do you do anything anyhow?

Religion & Culture Paper

Note: This nice piece of writing is taken from my time in Peru. If you didn't know I spent three months in Arequipa, Peru (beautiful country). While I was there I worked at the TV station as well in a Christian school teaching Science & Faith seminars as well as English. I decided to give an extra credit for the final test that I gave before leaving to come back to America. In this paper I not only tested on grammar usage, but also wanted to see about my student's reasoning. This is the paper I gave out for them to do. If you like it enough, feel free to write your response and send it to me as well.

Mr. Krist Adams

English

Extra Credit

 

             Directions: Read the fake article taken from the Magazine “Religion and Culture.” Be careful to look at what is said. Some of the statements made may not be true. You are to then write a response to the writer expressing your feelings towards his opinions. Remember that straight out criticism is not always the best way to go about a response. Pointing out the good traits is just as helpful as correcting the mistakes. Remember this is a FORMAL letter and to use language as such.

 

Christians: Masking Intolerance With Morality

By Falleen Sendel

(Taken from Religion and Culture magazine, August 2004)

 

 

              As Universities prepare for the flood of students returning from the ‘fun in the sun’ summer break, and just as many joining the collegiate ranks for the first time, it’s vital for us as a nation to expose the one thing that stands in offensive to the high virtues of tolerance and diversity that we must all hold to.

              For such a long time, there have been campus organizations parading their brand of morality and their virtues. Yet ‘their brand’ of morality is just a guise—one that hides the truth. Behind the propagation of their morality (as they call it) we will find the truth: intolerance of the highest level.

              You guessed it. I’m talking about Christians. Almost every day, if you look hard you will find these people walking around proclaiming ‘the truth’ that Jesus died on the cross for all of us and for all of our sins. I for one find it offensive that anyone would say that I even have sin. I’m a good person. I give to charities, help little ladies across the street, and even buy Girl Scout cookies when they stand outside shoving them in your face, even though they are some of the worst cookies I have ever personally tasted. I haven’t ever killed anyone, yet they presume that not just me, but all of us have sinned and need to get right with God.   

              Though they appear to care for people, using their morality as a justification, which is only a guise to hide their true attitude: INTOLERANCE. How dare they say that Jesus is the only way to Heaven. Do they even understand how offensive that statement is to Hindus, Muslims, Jews, and a slew of other religions, not to mention the millions who have never even heard who Jesus is? Yet they continue to prance around spouting out profanities like ‘homosexuality is a sin and wrong,’ ‘you must be born again,’ and other such degrading remarks. Jesus was a loving person. Wasn’t the Nazarene tolerant of all religious views? And how dare they twist His message to form their own intolerance and destroy the diverse culture that the Founding Fathers of America intended.

              How they can live with themselves while attacking the way people were born and calling it a ‘sin’ and an ‘abomination’ is beyond me. Yet the saddest part of all of this is that they disguise their intolerance with morality. How dare them tell me what is moral. I know what is moral. Just as the next man knows what is moral to him. Jesus may work for you—great. But that doesn’t mean He works for me. Morality is a personal thing, just as religion is. If it works for you—great. If not—try something else. But quite frankly I am tired of seeing Christians propagating their intolerance while masking it with morality and their supposed-caring nature. It was Christianity that brought us The Crusades. It is their brand of morality that makes our society what it is. It tries to change people from what they really are and “make them better” as the Christian proclaims. Yet all it does is destroy the diversity and tolerance that we all have worked so hard to create. And I for one am getting tired of it. Until next month. 

 

Graded on:

• Writing and Grammar: since you can take this home, it should be near perfect. NEAR.
• Arguments and opinions: How good your arguments are against/for what has been said. This is graded just so you don’t say stuff like “I think you’re wrong.” And “That’s stupid.” Give reasons.
• The use of Formal language and NOT informal language
• Length: The response must be at least one full page in length. How this is determined: typed-single spaced. Written-one full page, single spaced. This is not too important, yet I do not one three paragraphs. Minimum: 250 words. The article is 555 words, so at least half of that should do.

 

Mr. Krist Adams

English

Extra Credit Example

Name: Krist Adams

 

Response to “Christians: Masking Intolerance with Morality”

 

              Dear Mr. Sendel,

 

                      My name is Krist Adams and I am writing in response to your article in the August 2004 edition of Religion and Culture magazine. First off, let me commend you on some very well thought out opinions. However I must agree with most of it. Let me first assure you that it is not my intention to offend you, but just clarify some things that I personally see wrong. Let me just state some examples so you can see what I am talking about. First you say that Christians are intolerant. We must all first realize what the word “intolerant” and “tolerant” means. Tolerance is the acceptance of other lifestyles, beliefs, etc. As an example, Christians accept the lifestyles of homosexuals. That is easy to see because we don’t have millions of Christians going around and killing homosexuals. But what tolerance has come to mean in our culture is not just the acceptance of a lifestyle of belief, but also the approval of. The actual meaning of tolerance is not an approval. Yet today it has come to mean as such in our twisted society. That is why Christians are called intolerant, because they will not approve of certain things. In the same manner though, homosexuals are intolerant of accepting and approving of Christian lifestyle, and the same for Muslim, Hindu, etc, and vice versa.

              You must also realize that all religions are intolerant and closed off to one another. They all hold to certain truths that cannot mix with other religions. Yet this is rarely brought up in the marketplace of ideas. And alone Christians are mocked and ridiculed on this ground.

              You do have it right that Jesus was a loving person. He was also a merciful and graceful person, but as a man of justice and truth. However, unlike how you state, He was not tolerant of all religious beliefs. In fact, Jesus Christ was probably the most intolerant person to walk the Earth.

              Also, your point about the founding fathers desiring diversity and tolerance is also untrue, although the truth of the founding fathers has been kept in the dark for the past 60 years or so and changed into one like you have stated. For further reading on this matter, I suggest the book “American Mainstream Media Hates Christianity.”

              I also want to comment on your remark about truth and morality. You stated that both religion and morality were personal matters. It sounds like, if I am understanding you correctly, that you don’t believe in absolute truth: than one moral code may be good for one person, but not another. But isn’t murder wrong no matter where you go? Are you sure there is no such thing as absolute truth?

              Please answer this question because in this answer you find the truth: If you answer “Yes, I am sure there is no such thing as absolute truth” you have proven an absolute. Where as if you answer, “Yes, I am sure there is absolute truth” you agree there is and again prove an absolute.  

              You bring up the issue of The Crusades, yet Christians did not give us that, people posing as Christians did. It was a result of Christendom, not Christianity. There is a difference.

              Finally I wish to leave you with this: there is a reason that Christians are called intolerant, but aren’t. That is because tolerance is a false love that assumes the purpose of life is just to coincide with one another. Whereas Christians, holding to the principle of love your neighbor as thyself, believe that life is for much more than just coinciding. WE believe it has a greater purpose. While tolerance is a false love, we hold to the truth. The holding of these views herein set forth has already won for me the scorn, contempt and ridicule of some of my fellow man. But Truth is Truth and though all the world reject it and turn against me, I will cling to Truth still.

              Thank you for your time Mr. Sendel and I ask that you consider some of the thoughts I have offered.

 

    Sincerely,

      Mr. Krist Adams

 

Christian Films

Note: I wrote this way back when I was going to MTSU. This is actually a paper I had to submit for an independent project. Originally I was going to shoot a short film (around 20-30 minutes) that I was so excited about. I had shooting locations, actors, ideas, etc, etc. However, when it got down to it all my actors had one excuse or another. Thus I was left with a short film script that was developed with numerous rewrites, and still sits in a pile wondering if one day it will be made. However, I still have this paper, that from the last time I read it and remember it, detailed a nice look at Christian films (which from what I can tell are still horrible).

I. What I Feel is Wrong with Christian Films

The art form of making movies has been a long and tedious journey. The development of the motion picture has gone through many stages: soundless, black and white to color, the cheesy flicks of the 1950’s, the development special effects and technology. All have played a vital role in the evolution of the motion picture. Though the motion picture as a whole has developed into a glittering, glistening industry full of creative scripts, brilliant actors and actresses, and mind-blowing special effects, there is still a genre that lacks when compared to all other genres. That genre is the Christian genre.

The Christian genre is filled with select movie genres that would be found in the secular realm of film entertainment: comedy, drama, children, action and adventure. These kinds of movies are the majority of those you would see produced by Christian Production Companies. These are the genres that Christians feel can be used to entertain and preach their message.

These movies are filled with the basic components that are found in any movie of the like genre, the only difference is that the overtones of these movies are heavily rooted in Christian beliefs. The message that is told in the vast majority of these films is the simple message of redemption through Jesus Christ. The majority of these films are used as evangelism tools. It is only a small minority of films—motion picture, straight-to-video that is—that are for entertainment. The rest of these straight-to-video style films are for evangelism.

There are other videos put out that do not exactly fit into an evangelism genre. These are children’s videos that teach lessons to kids. The most famous of these is Veggie Tales—videos that teach kids moral values and lessons through biblical retellings starring vegetables. The biggest success of the Veggie Tales series came in 2001 with Jonah: A Veggie Tales movie. It grossed a pretty good purse at the box office for a Christian film. The reasoning behind this is quite evident. It is directed towards children and children don’t expect too much from their entertainment. As children grow up into teens and adults they expect more from their entertainment and Christian movies directed towards them just aren’t that good.

Big Idea Productions, the company that makes Veggie Tales, has a good idea how to make videos. They know their audience and they use a formula that works. They know what their audience expects and how to deliver. Christian production companies that target adults or teens just don’t understand how to get connected to their audience. Taking formulas used in the secular market, Christian companies try to produce top quality films that they believe will capture their intended audience. Lay It Down, a Christian style version of the movie The Fast and the Furious tried doing this. The Christian movie involved the same basic idea as the secular one—street racing.

Though some Christian movies use the basic concepts of secular ones it is the original ideas that sell better. And what can get more original than their own belief? Movies based on the Bible have been some of the best-produced films in the Christian genre. One reason for this may be the desire to stay true to the sacred text that commands such quality. A perfect example of this would be the Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. He went to great lengths to create a movie that stayed true to the scriptures and some have jumped him for that desire. He has had pastors and preachers from all over the country viewing it to see what they think. He had theologians and Bible scholars go over the script to make sure it was true to the scriptures. The biggest part he wished to remain true was the suffering that Jesus Christ went through from his arrest to his death. These movies based on the Bible not only have film critics looking at them, but also the entire Christian community. When making a film version of any Bible story it seems the whole world is looking at it and scrutinizing it. That too can push the production to be top quality. Whether straight-to-video or a theatrical release, any movie based on the Bible is going to have a pretty good production quality, script, and acting. Speaking of whether the movie is a theatrical release or straight-to-video, distribution plays a big role in the Christian film. This is another reason Christian films aren’t on the same level as those in the secular market.

Distribution for Christian films is far less widespread than secular films. Christian films for the most part are straight-to-video releases. When they are released to theatres, it is in select cities. Movies like The Omega Code, Megiddo, and The Gospel of John have opened in select cities and stayed that way. It is rare that a Christian film opens up nationwide. When the movies do go to video though, it becomes hard to find them at the local Blockbuster. The best place to find such videos is at Christian bookstores that rent them out. If you wish to purchase them though, the average selling price for any Christian film is $19.99. Where you can buy secular movies at stores from $7.99 to $19.99, there is usually only one price for Christian films--$19.99. But if there isn’t a Christian bookstore near you, there is always the Internet. Searching the web you can always find video sellers who offer a wide variety of titles for any specific reason—from evangelism for all ages to entertainment for all ages.

Though the distribution of these films may be limited it is not the reason why they are not favored or even put on the same level as many secular titles. One of the main reasons is simple: they are of poor quality. Christian movies made for television can be of decent and sometimes great quality, but it’s when they are for video or theatres they suddenly become very shabby. It’s not in one area that they are shabby. It is in quite a few areas where these movies tend to fall short.

The first part is the script. A Christian film created for evangelism purposes follows a pretty straight outline: Intro and setup, the Christian and non-Christian relationship, the Non-Christian seeing the light and getting saved. That is a basic evangelism film. An entertainment film is sometimes not much better. This is because many people believe that because they are Christians and making movies for Christians that it has to convey an atmosphere that is all neat and perfect. Sure, there are struggles and problems, there must be in such film for the power of the Lord to triumph and convey the Christian message. But Christians are set on high platforms as being these neat and perfect people who may say that they struggle, but it is not seen. They may talk about their imperfections, but those are not seen. This is a huge reason why I believe Christian films are not very good. They do not represent Christians as humans like everyone else.

Another reason is the acting. There are some great acting in many Christian films and sometimes the poor acting is a direct consequence of the script being bad. But then there are some films where things just don’t fit and the acting suffers because of the script. Basically, I believe that the reason the acting is bad in a majority of the films is because of the script, not necessarily the actors.

The next reason is finances. This branches off into the special effects in some movies. I have seen many Christian movies where the special effects have just made the movie very laughable. Some of these movies have had pretty good scripts too and it was the special effects that ruined it all. For instance, the movie Megiddo had a scene at the end with the devil being in his natural form. Though the movie was not great, it was pretty decent. That was until the devil was shown. The devil was a computer generated image—a very bad computer generated image. The end result of the animators was a CGI that looked like the first CGI’s when special effects started to get good. It wasn’t great, but it wasn’t that bad. It was still enough to make the film somewhat laughable. The poor quality of the CGI was a direct result that most Christian films do not have a large budget like many Hollywood secular films. The key thing to remember from such films is that if you can’t do it and make it look good—don’t do it. This lack of funds stretches into many other aspects of the film, just not special effects. This is yet another reason why Christian films are not on the same line as secular films.

The final reason why I believe Christian films are not on the same level as secular films is that many do not know their audience. Like I mentioned before, Big Ideas Productions knows their audience with their Veggie Tales product. They know what the audience wants and expects and they stay along those same lines improving time after time. I feel though that many people in the Christian film industry do not understand this. A great example of this is any film that is meant for evangelism but doesn’t appeal to anyone but a Christian. They must know their market.

II. My Film Strategy

From these observations I plan on creating a short Christian film that is mostly meant for Christians and for their entertainment but can also be used as an evangelism film. The sole purpose for my film is not evangelism. What I mean by this is that the film will leave questions in a viewers mind like “what is he talking about?” and if they really want to know more they can seek out more. Another example to relay this understanding if for a Christian person to take a non-Christian with them and in turn ask if they have any questions. This is what is meant by the evangelism part. This is the sole intent on the evangelism side.

As for the entertainment aspect of the film, I have seen the job that many Christian films have done in entertaining. Of all the ones I have seen—meant for someone other than children and for entertainment, only one has had a decent entertainment value. There is one film—To End All Wars that critics have given a great revue of, but is still in select cities. What I have read about it seems to fall into what I perceive as a good strategy for Christian films. The basic concept of this strategy is to make a secular film with Christians in it as the stars. I have held this belief as long as I can remember. After seeing my first Christian film and seeing how cheesy it was it suddenly hit me why they weren’t that good. This is the reason.

For Christian films to be on the same playing field as secular films they need to be secular films with Christians in it. Does that mean all the cussing and sex and everything else that fills secular movies—no. This means that the basic storyline of the film is not cheesy, is not loaded down with all these perfect Christians but is created by the real world that surrounds us and the stars are Christians.

II. My Film Concept

After looking at all this I have finally narrowed my film down to an idea that I can do. Though I have many more ideas that are probably better as well, the one key thing for me to remember is to make a film that I can actually do. This means no huge special effects or anything I don’t understand. Simply, do what I know. This leads me to a film idea I’ve had for nearly five years. I originally thought of this idea before I became a Christian. Then as I further understood my faith I tailored the idea to it. The best way to relate my film to someone is that it uses the same techniques in storytelling as do many of Kevin Smith’s movies. These would include Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy, Dogma, and Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. His idea in his early works was a basic film with no actual script—which is what Clerks seems to be. It just follows a day in the life of two employees at jobs they hate. The body of the work is simple dialogue. No action really takes place.

This is partially what my film will be like. Though mine has more of action like his later works, its content and heart fall directly on the dialogue. The dialogue will be filled with conversations between the characters that many can relate with as wisecracking and just plain conversational, though there are some conversations that step up and presents views and issues that everyone deals with, especially Christians.

The actual film will target teens and young adults who can relate to the characters, who are in their late teens to mid twenties. These characters are people like everyone else and it should be easy for everyone to relate to someone. The most important thing about these characters, who are all Christian, is that they are still human. They deal with issues that are seen on the screen; they mess up like everyone else. They have imperfections and those show through.

.