Dear Paige,

Dear Paige,

I was born in Renton, Washington. Even after I am dead two thousand years, the fact never changes: I was born in Renton, Washington. If someone were to tell you I was born in Kansas, you would simply need to check my birth certificate to discover the truth that I was in fact born in Renton, Washington.

            So you’re probably wondering, what this has to do with history, but let me explain. History has to at least sometimes be accurate because people have lived and people have recorded it. If I write in my journal “4:16 PM on Monday, May 2, 2011 I am typing on my computer.” That is a fact! Regardless of what others say that fact never changes. Yes, it is true people have different perspectives, such as, witnesses dealing with a car accident. But there is an absolute truth and often times different pieces of different people’s story fit together in order to make the most complete truth. This is not to show that history is inaccurate, but rather that you must check your sources and research information.

            Do you believe the Holocaust took place? That most certainly was not only recorded by “the winners.” But if you compare many different people’s stories and talk to witnesses and view photographs it is extremely evident it did in fact occur—both from interviews with Nazis as well as Jews.

            It can be hard to always believe what happened in the past since we cannot directly talk to people, but comparing documents and researching discoveries, the truth is going to prevail. Look at the Bible. Four different men with very different occupations recorded the life of Christ: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Though each of their ways of describing things is different, the facts all match up! How can you possibly deny four eye witnesses accounts? In our courts, it sometimes only takes one eye witness account to charge a person as guilty! Also in the Bible, Daniel, who was taken captive and his country overtaken by Babylon wrote historical happenings. He was by no means a winner, yet a lot of information from that book has been confirmed with archaeological findings, such as, the confirmation of kings in existence he spoke of. Does this not prove his authenticity?

            While people’s biases are going to sometimes color history, the facts remain. Who won the war? Who was born when? Facts such as these cannot be “interpreted.” If you are genuinely concerned with what you’re being taught, do research! Look into archaeological discoveries, biographies, autobiographies, figure out if what you’re reading from is a reliable source. Before I read a book, I after do background on the author to discover what point of view he is coming from, and you can do the same. At least I know historically wise, the Bible has never been proven inaccurate, so that is a GREAT reliable historically accurate text, you can compare things to. Now good luck studying for your history final! Remember, the grade you get is the grade you get—it does not change from what your teacher gives you, no matter how much you want it to. Your grade is a fact, like much of history.

Love,

Christina

Economics #2

By definition, socialism is “a political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” While this sounds ideal, it could not work in our fallen world.

            Man by nature is sinful. He desires to be the best and is full of pride and selfishness. So while “everyone sharing” sounds nice written down, in reality, it would not work. And the government is made up of me; men who struggle with greed, too. So how can a group of a few individuals be responsible to EVENLY distribute the wealth? Obviously, selfishness will at some point get in the way, and corruption will occur. Also, how does the GOVERNMENT distributing everything promote a sharing attitude? People will no doubt be suspicious of the government keeping more for themselves or demand more even if there is not more to gain. Man always desires more.

            Further, socialism is unfair. It’s not fair to say everyone deserves a “C.” Some people work harder and deserve A’s and some people slack off and deserve D’s. It also discourages a work effort. If a teacher says no matter what every student gets a C, would anyone actually try? Likewise, if the government says everyone will get the same amount of money, wouldn’t everyone disregard their responsibilities and follow their fleshly desires and just “have fun”? Socialism would not work in our society. In fact, our society would fall apart. People would stop working therefore eventually causing the world to fall into utter chaos. While socialism may sound “nice,” so Ted Bundy apparently looked “nice.” This just goes to show how appearances are deceiving.

Global Secular Government?

Having a global secular government sounds appealing to many initially but when looking at the ramifications it could entail, it obviously is a very dangerous idea. Ideally, having a universal government eliminates misunderstandings and language barriers. Everyone would understand each other, enabling easier traveling and “world peace.” While this may be the goal of a “global” government, there is no possible way it will be achieved. For starters, people are innately selfish and sinful. Therefore, if it is not a Biblically- based government, those in leadership are bound to get greedy and this “global” government could end up worse than ever. At least now when dictators, such as, Hitler, take over, other countries, such as the U.S. and England were able to step in and stop him. However, if everyone was understand the same “global” government, what country would be able to stop him? None!

            The very fact that government is secular reveals that they will NOT have a biblical based opinion on things. They may not value human life or privacy. Perhaps the global government will declare gay marriage is the only kind of marriage and killing for all is “okay.” This may sound ridiculous, but man is born sinful and evil. Therefore, if he does not have God working in Him, there is not telling what horrors he may promote. If the Holy Spirit is not in a man, there is nothing stopping a demon from taking over. And if a demon possessed man “globally” rules the world, it is safe to say, the world is headed for complete and utter destruction.

            A global secular government is a very dangerous idea and unrealistic. It is idealistic to think that all would abide by the same law, or a “just” ruler would govern the land, and it would be a perfect fairytale. HA. We live in a world were babies are murdered everyday under the name of “abortion,” we have airplanes flying into buildings and killing hundreds of thousands, and people committing mass genocides over racial prejudices. In our fallen world, a global secular government would never work. And if it was attempted, the outcome would no doubt be catastrophic.

Abortion

Teenagers who become mothers do have a grim future. They are most likely not going to finish school, give their children proper care, they will rely upon public help, and usually end up getting divorced or not even married in the first place. I fail to see how this even relates to the argument. I mean, so what? First of all, this is NOT always the case. In fact, 7 out of 10 teenage mothers finish high school or earn a G.E.D. which makes it a 70% chance, which is considered passing. But this still does not address the issue.

The public victimizes the teenage girl, but what they fail to address that is was the girl’s choice to have sex! Granted, she may not have “wanted” to get pregnant, but when having sex, she made the choice that it was a risk she willing to take. And consequently, if she was willing to have sex in the first place, she should willingly accept the result of her decision. This is the reason Americans are so lazy is because they deny responsibility for their actions! Every action has a reaction. If someone kills your wife, do you not expect them to be put in jail or get some form of punishment? Likewise, if a teenage chooses to be sexually promiscuous before they are married, they are risking their future, as well as the care of their child. But does that make it right to allow them to kill a child in order to have a “better future?” If I think killing the president will help me have a “better future,” is that “okay?” Absolutely not! Abortionists fail to address the real issue. They make claims which are occasionally legitimate, but in no way relate to whether abortion should be legal or not! In addition, this information only proves that teenagers and people should wait to have sex until marriage because studies do show that children raised in a loving marriage relationship tend to do better, and then there is no risk for the girl not to be able to finish school.

The other argument is that perhaps it was not the girl’s decision, and she was raped. While this is tragic, it is a result of our fallen world. But do two wrongs make a right? Does killing a child correct the sin committed through rape? Absolutely not! Also, statists show that rape abortions are as few as 1 in 1,000 (Alcorn) making this not even a huge factor. What about the other 999 teenagers who chose to commit their sexual actions?

While these issues stated are very real for teenage mothers, this in no way legitimizes abortion. It truly reveals that teenagers are not mature enough to raise children and are not in the right position to. If a girl is not ready to have a child and all the responsibilities that come with it, she is not ready to have sex!

JUSTICE

Within the Critical Legal Studies, “justice” and “equality” are essentially interchangeable—they only seek to further their agenda. In fact, “The legal system, according to CLS, supports the status quo.” Therefore, rather than there being absolute standards, the CLS believes that the law is simply based on “certain peoples’ beliefs.” Due to this theory, they desire to undermine the law as it is used to “suppress” people. In Deuteronomy 10:17, equality is seen as “no partiality” such as between poverty stricken people or the rich. While justice in Jeremiah 22:3 is seen as “doing what is right” or “the act of being just.” The distinction between the words is significant in interpreting the Bible and for living in this world. The CLS attempts to legalize abortion or gay marriage by proclaiming this is displaying “true equality.” However, equality is showing no partiality. By desiring give homosexuals “special” privileges, does this not show partiality? The law promotes equality because it expects the same standards of living for all. By trying to limit the law, the CLS is actually promoting “favoritism” which is blatantly seen in their promotion of Feminism. Feminism is ALL about women. By bending over to all their “needs,” does this not display favoritism and promote women to a higher status than men? It’s ironic that in the article they discuss that is “justice” to have women be able to win rape cases easier. However, what about if it is a male rape case? Should just be able to say “I’ve been raped” and automatically win the case as they suggest is should be for women? This is not promotion justice or equality, merely the CLS’ agenda.

Christians are called to live justly. In Micah 6:8, it says, “And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy.” James 1:27 further displays how to place to into practice by revealing one should “look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” Obviously, by showing kindness to those in need and helping others, Christians are displaying justice. However, the second part of James is truly critical in understanding God’s plan for our lives—“Keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” It is easy to succumb to the world’s agenda, such as, the CLS because we are constantly bombarded with the messages of “justice for all” means “gay marriage is legal.” In fact, just this past week I had a discussion with a Christian individual about this! As Christians, we know that God is Just. And our Just God tells us that gay marriage is NOT okay. So obviously, gay marriage is NOT just. It should be very simple. If we deduct who God’s character tells us who He is to be, and then follow His word, we should recognize the lies of society. It’s when we take our eyes off God and forget who He is, that we fall into Satan’s traps and end up believing foolish lies such as “abortion is justice.” Since justice can be defined as doing what is right, is not upholding The Righteous God’s law the correct thing to do? Further, we know God does not show partiality (Deut. 10:17). Therefore, it is evident people are not born homosexuals because that would mean He is showing partiality to heterosexuals. As Christians, this should be enough evidence to disprove any “scientific evidence” which may try to convince otherwise. God is not asking homosexuals anything different than he is asking of all mankind. In fact, he is trying to protect them from the harmful effects of homosexual relationships, such as AIDS and emotional dissatisfaction. It’s important for Christians to be in the word of God to live justly because ultimate justice is found in who God is. As for equality, God warns not to be kinder to the wealthy than the poor. He reminds us that all human beings are made in His image, and we called to treat them all with love. However, in my opinion, if you truly love someone you will tell them the truth. While you should love homosexuals because they are human beings, love does not mean promoting what is wrong, but rather sharing them the truth of Jesus Christ and setting them free from captivity. If you truly love someone you would not leave them ignorant to what could save them. If someone you knew was dying of cancer, would you withhold the cure?

Muslim V. Christian views

Law is a direct outflow from a worldview's theology. Therefore, at the very core, Christian and Muslim's view of law is going to be completely different from start. Muslims believe people are innately good, while Christian's know that each person is born sinful. This opposing views of mankind greatly influence the importance of law. In addition, the view of God is polar opposites. As the God of Christianity is loving and merciful, Allah is seen as the "absolute authority" though he is unreliable and unknown. He is seen as harsh, waiting to condemn people. Just looking at these aspects of each worldview it's evident that theirs laws cannot be similiar.
The Christian law stems from WHO God is--it is a natural law. His laws agree with His character. For example, He is a God of justice and therefore calls people not to steal. Also, he created laws because He LOVES us. In the end, God judges man in accordance with His law. He knows this and therefore lovingly gave us the law, in written form, in the Bible, too--its like a teacher giving all the answers to test! And no matter how many times we fail in following His law, He still forgives us limitlessly. Further, God gave us the law to protect us! He knows our sinful instincts and gave us laws so that we may enjoy life to its fullest. If someone murders another peron, God knows this will haunt the murderer, too, and wreck his life--not to mention the person he has killed and that man's family's.
On the other hand, the Shari'a law is based off of the Hadith and Qu'ran. It is vague and does not answer many of the issues prevailent today, and it is not based off of Allah's character. Therefore, it has no basis. It is merely men trying to please their "God" however is really has nothing to do with who their God is. The law is more like something to be condemned by and earn points with, rather than the laws the God of Christianity has placed in love. While failing to abide by Allah's law condemns one to Hell, Christians can be saved through the person of Christ, and therefore do not have to live in a constant state of fear.
Further, back to the issue of who man is--since Muslims' do not see man as naturally bad, they do not see man having absolute power as an issue. Their faulty view of man can easily be seen in the government's falling apart all over the Middle East. Rather than respecting authority, people make bold claims that they are following "Allah's will" in attacking the government or flying into buildings. Because of Allah is "unknown", Muslims' can essentially make up any law under the pretense that is "his will," displaying their lack of stability and solid law. On the contrary, the Christian law is based on God who is unchanging, and therefore a solid rock through all of eternity.

Are legal standards to be determined by the individual?

Legal standards are not limited to the determination and interpretation of each individual. In fact, that very statement is absurd. Humans are fallen beings so their interpretations of laws are bound to be faulty, as well. For example, many people today are claiming that under the First Amendment, abortion and gay marriage should be legal. However, as Christians, these two “rights” go against God’s word and His superior laws. Further, two individuals can see the same thing and interpret it very differently. Like two people who see the very same car accident often give diverse reports. How then can any individual’s interpretation of a specific law be held the determination for legal standards?

Even our government has a checks and balance system in order to keep from one individual’s ideas to become the legal standards. Also, everyone is accountable to a higher law. For example, a man may claim the first amendment gives him right to rape children for “his religion.” Thank goodness this is not the case! There are absolute rules despite how people try to demolish this idea of “absolute.” In addition, all people universally agree on certain stand points. If a person’s child was kidnapped, he would claim this is “unfair” or “wrong.” It does not matter if the kidnapper as an individual determined it was “okay,” what he did was wrong. This leads to the conclusion that ultimately every individual is held accountable to a SUPREME law that could only be created by a Supreme Being.