Islam Remembers What the West Forgot

At the beginning of the seventh century, the Mediterranean world was Christian. But, within fifty years of Muhammad’s flight to Medina in 622, the armies of Islam had swept over the southern coast of the Inland Sea. Early in the eighth century, Arabs and Berbers brushed aside weak Visigoth resistance, overran Spain, and crossed the Pyrenees into France, where on of the decisive battles of history was fought. At Tours, the “Hammer of the Franks,” Charles Martel defeated the Muslims, who withdrew back over the mountains. Except for the tiny kingdom of the Asturias, which would be the base camp of the Spanish Reconquista, Islam dominated the Iberian peninsula for centuries. Not until 1492 did Ferdinand and Isabella finally drive the Moors out of Spain.

Indicators everywhere suggest Islam is rising again. An Islamic secessionist movement is active in the Philippines. Muslim troops battle Christian secessionists in Indonesia. From Palestine to Pakistan, street mobs cheered the slaughter at the Pentagon and World Trade Center. For years, the Afghani Taliban gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist cells and dispatched holy warriors into the old Soviet republics of Central Asia and to assist Chechen rebels fighting in Russia. In March 2001, Taliban ruler Mullah Muhammad Omar ordered all religious statues smashed, including the seventh-century Great Buddhas of Bamiyan, declaring, “These idols have been gods of the infidels.”

In Turkey and Algeria, elections in the 1990s brought to power Islamic regimes, which were removed by methods other than democratic. In Egypt, Muslim militants have renewed the persecution of Christian Copts. Islamic law has now been imposed on ten northern states in Nigeria.

In Europe, Christian congregations are dying, churches are emptying out, and mosques are filling up. There are five million Muslims in France, and between twelve and fifteen million in the European Union. There are fifteen hundred mosques in German. Islam has replaced Judaism as the second religion of Europe. As the Christian tide goes out in Europe, and Islamic tide comes in. In 2000, for the first time there were more Muslims in the world than Catholics.

While the ideology of “Islamism” has failed in Afghanistan, Iran, and Sudan to create a modern state that can command the loyalty of its people and serve as a model for other Islamic nations, the religion of Islam has not failed. In science, technology, economics, industry, agriculture, armaments, and democratic rule, America, Europe, and Japan are generations ahead. But the Islamic world retains something the West has lost: a desire to have children and the will to carry on their civilization, cultures, families, and faith. Today, it is difficult to find a Western nation where the native population is not dying as it is to find an Islamic nation where the native population is not exploding. The West may have learned what Islam knows not, but Islam remembers what the West has forgotten: “There is no vision but by faith.”

How does one sever a people’s roots? Answer: Destroy its memory. Deny a people the knowledge of who they are and where they came from.

In the Middle Ages, Ottoman Turks imposed on Balkan Christians a blood tax—one boy out of every five. Taken from their parents, the boys were raised as strict Muslims to become the fanatic elite soldiers of the Sultan, the Janissaries, who were then sent back to occupy and oppress the peoples who had borne them. George Orwell in the party slogan of Big Brother gave the formula for erasing memory, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

As Christianity began to die in the West, something else occurred: Western peoples began to stop having children. The correlation between religious faith and large families is absolute. The more devout a people, whether Christian, Muslim, or Jewish, the higher its birth rate. In New Square, New York, in the first wholly Orthodox Jewish community in the United States, the average family has ten children. In Kostroma, Russia, Vladimir Alexseyev, father of a poster family of sixteen children, and his pregnant wife have a home full of icons. In the Baptist state of Texas, the birthrate among whites is higher than among white folks in sybarite California. Wherever secularism triumphs, populations begin to shrink and die.

Years ago, when the film The Prophet came out, in which the face of Muhammad was shown, an act of blasphemy to Islam, theaters refused to run it for fear of violent retaliation. When Salman Rushdie published Satanic Verses, a novel judged an obscene insult by Islam; he spent years hiding from the fatwa (Islamic religious decree)., a death sentence imposed by the Ayatollah Khomeini. While fatwas and fire bombings are not the American way, Americans must be prepared to live with them.

In 1900 world population was made up of 26.9% Christian and 12.4% Muslim. By 1980 Christians were 30.0% and Muslims 16.5%. When the year 2000 rolled around Christians had dropped to 29.9% while Muslims had increased to 19.2%. Projections are that by the year 2025 Christians will number 25% of the world population and the Muslims, 30%.

Estimates of the total number of Muslims in the world vary greatly:

• 0.700 billion or more, Barnes & Noble Encyclopedia 1993
• 0.817 billion, The Universal Almanac (1996)
• 0.951 billion, The Cambridge Factfinder (1993)
• 1.100 billion, The World Almanac (1997)
• 1.200 billion, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic relations) (1999)

At a level of 1.2 billion, [in1999] Muslims represent between 19.2% and 22% of the world's population. It has become the second largest religion in the world. Christianity has slightly less than 30%.

Islam is growing about 2.9% per year which is faster than the total world population which increases at about 2.3% annually. It is thus attracting a progressively larger percentage of the world's population.

The number of Muslims in North America is in dispute: estimates range from under 3 million to over 6 million. The main cause of the disagreement appears to be over how many Muslim immigrants have converted to Christianity since they arrived in the US.

Statistics Canada reports that 253,260 Canadians identified themselves as Muslims (0.9% of the total population) during the 1991 census. Some estimated that there were as many as 500,000 Muslims in Canada. Today (.2001) there are an estimated 650,000 Muslims in Canada.

Demographics

In the Northwestern Africa between 1965 and 1990, the population rose from 29.8 million to 59 million. During the same period, the number of Egyptians increased from 29.4 million to 52.4 million. In Central Asia, between 1970 and 1993, populations grew at an annual rate of 2.9 percent in Tajikistan, 2.6 percent in Uzbekistan, 2.5 percent in Turkmenistan, and 1.9 percent in Kyrgyzia. In the 1970s, the demographic balance in the Soviet Union shifted drastically, with Muslims increasing by 24 percent while Russians increased by only 6.5 percent.

In countries, such as Tanzania and Macedonia, the Muslims will become a majority within twenty years.

Largely through immigration, the Muslim population of the United States grew sixfold between 1972 and 1990.

Last year, seven percent of babies born in European Union countries were Muslims. In Brussels, the figure was 57 percent. Islam is the second religion of almost every European state - the only exceptions being those European countries such as Azerbaijan and Albania where it is the majority religion.

If current trends continue, then an overall ten percent of European nationals will be Muslim by the year 2020.

Conclusion

If the west's population is top-heavy, (i.e., the ratio of youth to elderly is low) that of Muslim populations is the opposite. For example, today more than half the population of Algeria is under the age of twenty and this situation is similar elsewhere. These young populations will reproduce and perpetuate the increase of Muslims on a percentage basis well into the next millennium.

North America and Europe have increasingly aging populations and one of the most disturbing social issues of the new millennium will concern a more efficient means of disposing of the elderly. (For example, witness the new euthanasia laws in the Netherlands, and the ongoing debate in many countries about this issue.) Medical advances can assure an average life span in the high seventies, although active life spans have not grown as fast. In the early 1900s, a westerner could expect to spend an average of the last two years of life as an invalid. Today, that figure is seven years. Studies have shown medicine prolongs life, but can not prolong mobility nearly as well. Aging populations with their increased healthcare costs are considered a more extensive socio- economic burden to society. The UK Department of Health recently announced that a new prescription drug for Alzheimer's Disease was available on the National Health Service - but its cost meant that it was only available to a small minority of patients. An aging population tends to be introspective and sluggish, whereas a young population is more likely to be vibrant and energetic. This may or may not bode well for many countries depending on whether their political structure is fragile or not.

Embryos and Stem Cell Research and Freezing

We hear a lot about stem cell research and how it requires the destruction of embryos. Some folks are convinced that "life" begins at conception which means at the embryo stage and that embryos are living human beings. Thus they believe destroying embryos is destroying "life". These same people consider it permissible to freeze these human beings and put them into limbo while they decide if they will permit them to join the ranks of the "born". Kind of a God decision isn’t it? These people believe that for embryos to be destroyed to provide raw materials for stem cell research is bad but that it is ok to freeze these same embryos even though there is a high probability some will be destroyed or is it die? Would they be willing to freeze the “born” members of their family with the possibility they would die from the experience?

When we talk about stem cell research and raw materials and embryos and “life” we need to define the type of life we are concerned about and for what reason. I am not in favor of abortion and have questions about stem cell research but there are a lot of inconsistencies in the arguments.

The same president who is unwilling to permit the sacrifice of embryos in an attempt to improve the lives of American citizens is willing to sacrifice the lives of American citizens, some against their will, in an attempt (futile as it is) to improve the lives of people who hate us and hate those being sacrificed. So far he has been willing to sacrifice over 1,800 lives of American citizens why not 1,800 embryos?

Regardless of when life begins who is willing to emotionally and financially care for the life once it is saved? We don’t hear from the “Pro Life” people when it comes to orphans and wars. Why don’t we? Isn’t a living breathing walking around life as important as life in a dish in a uterus? Why save an embryo just to sacrifice it later? Why save an embryo just to let it be sexually molested, killed by the mother’s boyfriend, left in a car during the summer heat and to be cooked to death, be starved, be passed through a school system without being educated, sent to a far away country to die for the greedy?

To discuss only killing embryos is an oversimplification of the problem and is just one of the issues to be considered.

It appears that pro-life is really just anti-abortion. And it appears pro-life people don’t want abortions to be done and they don’t want embryos destroyed unless they deem it necessary for their own purposes.

Our Leaders as Well as the Iraqi People Don't Appear To Understand How to Act In a War Zone

Does it ever boggle your mind when you hear or read reports concerning insurgent attacks on the United States Military or on Iraqi citizens how many times Americans are quoted as complaining about the insurgents not fighting fairly? The insurgents wait on the side of the road until one of our military trucks go by and then they detonate a bomb or shoot from behind a bombed out truck? Like we expect the insurgents to warn us before they ambush us.

I heard one of our military explain how he lost a leg. He was the driver of the second truck in a convoy and they came upon a group of men working on the road. The soldier explained how after the first truck made it past the work area he felt better but when he drove over the area it exploded. What are our leaders thinking, sending a convoy down a road that has not been secured?

Then there was the soldier killed when he drove his vehicle under a bridge and was shot and died. Since when do you drive under a bridge in a war zone that has not been secured?

It was reported today that four Iraqi policemen were killed while they were sleeping in their car. According to the news report they had been on duty all night and were waiting on their replacements. Their weapons were in the back of the vehicle. Excuse me!!! You are in a war zone your weapons are in your hands at all times. You do not sleep unless you have someone on guard. Never! Never!

Apparently neither our military or the citizens of Iraq know what it means to be in a war and have other people looking to kill you at all times. There is no place for Rest and Relaxation in war zone.

The United States is so far superior to any other military from any other country our leaders both civilian and military appear to believe we are invulnerable. Our military leadership are careless in their thinking and sloppy in their performance and as a result more people are dying than would be expected in similar situations.

Part of the blame falls on the citizens of the United States. We permit our leaders to use our military as pawns in useless situations while we, citizens, carry on as if nothing is happening. And then complain when one of our soldiers does something that we consider unacceptable although we were not there and have never faced similar situations. We, citizens of the United States, are more than willing to send an 18 or 19 year old boy to Iraq, arm him to the teeth, put him in a situation where he does not know who is on his side and who is the enemy, and then condemn him for trying to stay alive or for losing his temper or for being scared and acting scared or for acting like an 18 or 19 year old boy. Our Constitution allows our Federal Government to govern America, not the world. It is not our responsibility to determine how other folks govern themselves. One columnist wrote " One would have to be a moron or entirely ignorant of the Muslim world to expect that you could impose that system on Iraq at gunpoint." The term system refers to our installing our form of government which is a Republic not a Democracy on Iraq and Afghanistan.

I don't know about you but deliver me from "I'm from the Federal Government and I'm here to help."

Was It Just a Coincidence or Did Our FBI and CIA Overlook the Obvious?

If letter bombs were routinely delivered in yellow envelopes one would be wise to treat a yellow envelope received in the mail cautiously.

Bring anything to mind?

1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40.

At the 1972 Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

Not to mention what happened in New York on September 11, 2001.

Now how many 80 year old grandmothers do you suppose we will have to search before we discover a terrorist?

Government's Polices for Afghanistan and Iraq Are Doomed to Failure

The conflicts* in Afghanistan and Iraq are futile. When the United States puts troops on the ground in the Middle East we doom those troops to failure and death; wasting the lives of our Military for no good purpose. Anyone familiar with the Middle East will tell you that in the long run, the insurgents will be there and we will not and there will be a civil war and it will as if we had never been there.

We are too high-tech to win. The insurgents know that to fight a high-tech arem is with low-tech tactics and weapons. We proved that reasoning during our Revelutionary War and saw it succeed again in Viet Nam.

The United States has not experienced casualties of any meaningful numbers since WWII. Those who support the war in Iraq support the possibility of our military experiencing casualties. In Viet Nam we wasted about 200 lives a week and now people want to have diplomatic relations with the people who killed our soldiers. If 50 dead marines in a month is disturbing remember the Normandy invasion? War means casualties. Don't be concerned with dead marines but instead be concerned with the policies of our government that cannot succeed.

One of policies of our government prohibits the use of embryos in research designed to improve the lives of American citizens and at the same time sacrifices the lives of American citizens in the futile attempt to improve the lives of people who hate us? Now that is something that causes concern.





*Congress has not Declared War so according to the following article of our Constitution what is happening in the Middle East is unconstitutional.

Article I, section 8
The Congress shall have the Power...

To declare war, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than Two Years;

MLB Has No Credibility

Organizations such as MLB (owners and players) develop the mind set that they have control over public opinion and that the public will accept whatever they say and everything will be alright. They appear to believe by spouting their company policy that they can make everything OK. They cannot. On occasion you can force people to do what you want them to do but you can never force people to think the way you want them to think.That said, MLB's penalties show how disingenuous the MLB owners and players are. If and that is a big IF, they are serious about eliminating criminal behavior from their league and restoring some validity to their statistics, the penalties would be much stiffer. Instead of days the offenders would be penalized games. Instead of 4 chances there would be one. No matter what MLB claims the public knows they are posturing and if the media and congress were not on their back they would allow any behavior no matter how immoral, illegal, or unethical. As with all "stars" if the public knew them on a personal basis they wouldn't like them. MLB needs to understand the public believes MLB's owners and players are a joke and the statistics, considered by MLB as holy grail are meaningless. Their "best" players cannot compete without cheating. Why should anyone care what a league does where the management, owners, and the players admit to the world they don't have the ability to play the sport without cheating. This eliminates any credibility MLB may have had in the past. They need to get past "company policy" and clean up their league. To-date their efforts are too little too late.

The "positive" effects appreciated by steroid users remain long past the time steroids can appear in tests. Players who use steroids should be suspended for however long those "positive" effects are present.

Lou Holtz and South Carolina and 10 NCAA Violiations

The trend continues. As teams are willing to accept criminal and unethical behavior by their players and ESPN is no different. Lou Holtz left South Carolina to suffer because of his willingness to violate NCAA rules and ESPN hires him. ESPN tolerates unethical behavior the same as Universities and Professional teams. Great example! Congratulations. Sports and those associated with sports apparently are generally unethical, dishonest and willing to cheat and tolerate people who do.

Steroid Use Tolerated by MLB

MLB acts as if steroid abuse is a challenge and not illegal. Players who use steroids are telling the world they cannot make the grade. They are not as good as the other players unless they cheat. If any user of steroids is allowed into any Hall of Fame or is allowed to remain in any Hall of Fame it testifies to the meaninglessness of the respective Halls of Fame. Steroid use is not a challenge it is illegal just like murder, child abuse, DUI etc. Steroid users are criminals not stars. When MLB tolerates illegal behavior they are aiding and abetting criminals and are guilty after the fact.

IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT!!

Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely comprised of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand.

This idea of America, being a multi-cultural community, has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language! ENGLISH. "In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, and political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, of Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is and always will be part of our culture.

If the Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. Remember, "Delta is ready when you are and they can have you there by nightfall".

This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But, once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

To Aspartame or not to Aspartame

If politicians wonder why the electorate think of them as being lower than a snake's belly maybe the history of Aspartame will help them understand...

In 1985 Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle, the chemical company that held the patent to aspartame, the active ingredient in NutraSweet. Monsanto was apparently untroubled by aspartame's clouded past, including a 1980 FDA Board of Inquiry, comprised of three independent scientists, which confirmed that it "might induce brain tumors."


The FDA had actually banned aspartame based on this finding, only to have Searle Chairman Donald Rumsfeld (currently the Secretary of Defense) vow to "call in his markers," to get it approved.


On January 21, 1981, the day after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, Searle re-applied to the FDA for approval to use aspartame in food sweetener, and Reagan's new FDA commissioner, Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr., appointed a 5-person Scientific Commission to review the board of inquiry's decision.


It soon became clear that the panel would uphold the ban by a 3-2 decision, but Hull then installed a sixth member on the commission, and the vote became deadlocked. He then personally broke the tie in aspartame's favor. Hull later left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle. Since that time he has never spoken publicly about aspartame.

Pro-LIfe? What type of life? For what purpose?

Has it occurred to you that the same president who believes destroying embryos to obtain stem cells, in an attempt to improve the lives of citizens of the United States, is immoral, believes it is moral to donate the lives of over 1,800 United States citizens, some against their will and moral beliefs, in the futile attempt to improve the lives of people who hate us. Do you suppose his desire to avenge the attempts on his father's life supercedes his thoughts on morality? Do you suppose his concern for his friends in the oil industry supercedes his thoughts on morality?

When one says one is pro-life and defines the type of life one is pro and what type of life one finds expendable, others will better understand their decisions.

Original Intent About the Constitution

Largely overlooked is the personal sacrifices of the Founding Fathers. Those 50 Americans who, in July 1776, set their signatures to the Declaration of Independence knew full well they risked death by hanging. As John Adams, one of the signers, noted in a letter to his wife, Abigail, "The Declaration was, in fact, an act of treason, and if it were not made good, those who had signed it stood a good chance to incur the penalty meted out to traitors." In fact, John Adams, like John Hancock, another signer and revolutionary leader, already was under sentence of death if captured by the British.

The War of Independence was already underway when the signers of the Declaration of Independence gathered in Philadelphia. They were a diverse lot, those representatives from the 13 colonies who met to declare independence in a historic document that still inspires millions hungering for freedom around the world. Twenty-five were lawyers or jurists, eleven were merchants; nine were farmers or plantation owners, and there were also doctors and educators.

Although most of the signers paid a heavy price for their resolve, none wavered. Francis Lewis of New York had his home burned by the British, and his wife was seized and imprisoned for two years, dying soon after her release. Philip Livingston of New York saw his 150,000-acre estate confiscated by the British, but he continued to contribute his dwindling fortune to the war effort. The strain of the revolutionary struggle depleted his health and he died less than two years after signing. Lewis Morris' New York estate was ransacked by the British. His home was destroyed, his livestock butchered and his family forced to flee.

John Hart's New Jersey home was looted and burned, his grist mills destroyed. He eluded captured by taking refuge in caves and forests. During the ordeal, his ailing wife died and their 13 children were scattered. After signing the Declaration, Richard Stockton rushed home to Princeton, New Jersey, to rescue his family from advancing British troops. He was captured and thrown into prison, where he was repeatedly beaten and kept near starvation. He died an invalid in 1781. Robert Morris of Pennsylvania spent his entire fortune -- more than a million dollars -- to finance the war effort. Never reimbursed by his country, he served three years in debtor's prison and, in failing health, died soon after his release.

Carter Braxton of Virginia had virtually every merchant ship he owned either sunk or captured by the British. Although he lost his wealth and was forced to sell his remaining property, he continued to serve the cause of the revolution in the Virginia legislature. thomas Heyward, Jr., of South Carolina, served in the Revolutionary Army and was taken prisoner. The British raided his plantation and burned his buildings. His grief-stricken wife became ill and died before Heyward was freed at the war's end.

These were brave men who pledged their "lives their fortunes and sacred honor" in order to gain liberty for themselves and posterity.

TDOT attempts to destroy Gatlinburg via the Hwy 321 project

I can hardly wait for Jeff Foxworthy to hear about Tennessee Department of Transportation's (TDOT) plans. Where else than in Tennessee do people remove mountains, install concrete barriers to keep the mountains back and then paint the walls to look like they belong. There has got to be a joke in there somewhere. My neighbor told me a couple of years ago that our grandchildren will someday ask, "Mommy, what was a mountain?" By the looks of Sevier County he was on target.

TDOT is breaking new ground in the area of removing mountains and painting walls to look like the mountains. Gatlinburg and the TDOT can be proud of their breakthrough design strategies. The city can now do away with any building code requirements having to do with the outside of a structure. We can build a nice concrete block building and paint it to look like a nice mountain log cabin or governorsÂ’ mansion, or maybe even the Parthenon or how about a replica of the Mountain View Inn or whatever we like. That will reduce construction costs quite a bit as well as speed up development.

Gatlinburg will be the butt of jokes for years to come as tourists drive the concrete corridor and look in bewilderment at the concrete barrier walls painted to look like real rocks and the larger walls painted like treeless nothings and wonder why things were not left as they were since the paint is attempting to make things look like they used to be. The view should be picturesque as the tourists look out over the painted short barriers to see the mountains. As they take pictures and other people across the country view those pictures they too will be able to appreciate what Gatlinburg and the State of Tennessee have done and reputations of both should grow in leaps and bounds. Southern Living should be able to do at least a couple of stories on the subject of Tennessee landscaping techniques and maybe My South can tape a couple of episodes.

When, as expected, thousands and tens of thousands of cars use the concrete corridor has any thought been given to what they will do at light 3 in Gatlinburg? Do you suppose we can look forward to traffic backed up to City Hall or maybe even to Glades similar to the backup at the intersection of Rt 66 and Chapman/Dolly Parton highways?

As was said during the meeting, the Resource Team, made up of area citizens, has no authority. ThatÂ’s fair since no one has any responsibility for the debacle that is now attempting to be mitigated.

But that's just politics isn't it? No reason to cry over spilt milk. When the going gets tough, the tough gets going, cliche, cliche. It is too late for Gatlinburg and now is the time to just try to make things look as nice as possible, live with the jokes and the criticism, and take our experience and paintbrushes and go on to the next project.

The City of Gatlinburg had almost no input in this whole process. As a resident I resent the State of Tennessee destroying parts of the city in which I live and the City Leadership for failing to raise public awareness of what was going to be happening to our fair city. I thought at the very least the city was looking out for our welfare, wrong...........

California cannot/willnot convict celebrities!!

OJ Simpson, ?? Blaker (I forget his first name), and Michael Jackson are all free due to the inability or the unwillingness of Californians to convict celebrities. There was more evidence against each of the three than there was against Scott Peterson but of the four who was convicted and is now sitting in a cell on deathrow? Imagine two murderers and a child molestor walking the streets. Is it any wonder California is known as the land of fruits and nuts? We must recognize and make allowances for the reality that District Attorney offices are staffed with lawyers who cannot survive in private practice and that they are working under strict budget limitations that are more important than convicting criminals while celebrities have almost unlimited resources and are more than happy to show their appreciation to anyone who is willing to lie in court for them. In the Jackson trial the District Attorney is a joke and cannot be taken seriously let alone believed.

The jurors in the most recent case, that of Michael Jackson should keep their collective mouths shut because the more they talk the more we understand they voted against the mother and not on the evidence.

We all know that pretty girls/women and handsome boys/men do not commit crimes and always tell the truth while ugly or dirty appearing people will comnmit crimes of all sorts and would prefer to lie than to tell the truth. At least that is how we make judgments. The MJ case was a tossup between a conniving mother/ugly boy and a fruitcake defendant. If the mother had been pretty or the boy handsome Michael would be in prison today. Lucky for Michael he is attracted to and attracts the bottom feeders of society and prefers young but ugly boys. There is no way a jury will believe the people to whom Michael is attracted.

The big question is will Michael be able to restart his career so he can get on stage and massage his crotch, hump the air all the while gyrating among a group of young boys mostly poor, Hispanic or Black while young Hispanic or Black girls squeal at the top of their lungs and Michael shows no interest, wrong gender. Again, lucky for Michael he lives in state where he has an endless supply of Hispanic boys whose mothers will keep quiet so they will not be deported.

California leads the way as usual in degradation and is truly becoming a third-world state.

What You Won't Learn In School by Bill Gates

Life is not fair - get used to it!

The world won't care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.

You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won't be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.

If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.

Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your grandparents had a different word for burger flipping -- they called it opportunity.

If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault, so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.

Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you were. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent's generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.

Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools they have abolished failing grades and they'll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.

Life is not divided into semesters. You don't get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.

Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.

Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up work ing for one.

Pro-Life or Pro-Born or Pro Stem Cell

Researchers collect stem cells -- immature cells that can be coaxed into developing into any cell in the body -- from unused embryos remaining at fertility centers. But the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School chose to create its own embryos for two reasons.

1. "The consent of the donors to this process is very clear as opposed to asking someone who created IVF eggs if they would be okay with using them this way,"
2. "there is also the fact that these eggs are younger. Younger eggs are more viable eggs." /em>

Sperm donors received $50 for their semen and egg donors received $2,000 as compensation. Typically, the discarded embryos from in vitro fertilization centers come from people who have been trying to conceive for a long time.

Embryonic stem cells are preferable for research because of their immaturity and lack of development. While researchers can derive stem cells from umbilical cord blood, spinal fluid and adult organs, those cells are more specialized.

Unspecialized cells are preferable because stem cell tissue lines can become any type of body cell that can be used for therapeutic purposes.

And thus the discussion continues..............Sacrificing embryonic life for the betterment of mankind.

So far the United States goverment, under the direction of one of the more influential opponents of expanding the harvesting of the raw material required by Stem Cell research, has donated the lives of over 1,800 men and women for the betterment of mankind.

Are those people who label themselves "ProLife" really "Pro" all life or just specific kinds of life?

Things to Think About

If you have a lot of tension and you get a headache, do what it says on the aspirin bottle: "Take two aspirin" and "Keep away from children." --Author Unknown


"The problem with the designated driver program, it's not a desirable job, but if you ever get sucked into doing it, have fun with it. At the end of the night, drop them off at the wrong house." --Jeff Foxworthy


"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there is a man on base." --Dave Barry


"A study in the Washington Post says that women have better verbal skills than men. I just want to say to the authors of that study: "Duh." --Conan O'Brien


"Remember in elementary school, you were told that in case of fire you have to line up quietly in a single file line from smallest to tallest. What is the logic in that? What, do tall people burn slower?" --Warren Hutcherson


"Bigamy is having one wife/husband too many. Monogamy is the same." --Oscar Wilde


“Suppose you were an idiot ... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeat myself." --Mark Twain


"Our bombs are smarter than the average high school student. At least they can find Afghanistan." --A. Whitney Brown


"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog will give you a look that says, '...you're right! I never would've thought of that!'" --Dave Barry


Do you know why they call it "PMS"? Because "Mad Cow Disease" was taken. --Unknown, presumed deceased

Killer Applications

Killer applications have important first-order effects, but their second-order effects are even more far-reaching – as well as being unintended.

Examples of Killer Applications..........The arch, the pulley, the compass, eyeglasses, moveable type, the steam engine, the cotton gin, asphalt, the Model T, elevators structural steel, the atomic bomb: inventions whose impact has extended far beyond the activities for which their creators built them. The havoc they visited on social, political, and economic systems has outweighed the impact of their intended usage.

The Stirrup:

The stirrup was perhaps the most important of the medieval killers apps, which the Franks -- Germanic tribes who ruled central Europe after the fall of Rome -- adopted from an Asian design. The stirrup made it possible for a mounted fighter to strike with his lance without falling off his horse, greatly increasing the force what could be put behind such a blow. It proved decisive in the Frank's' efforts to turn back the marauding Saracens who invaded Western Europe in the eighth century, despite the superior numbers of the invaders.

Charles Martel, leader of the Franks, understood from his victory that the stirrup hadn't simply improved the effectiveness of his forces, as a new weapon or fighting formation might have done. Rather, it changed his entire military strategy. Stirrups made possible a mounted cavalry, a new element in the battle equation, and Charles Martel immediately made them a permanent feature.

Neither Charles Martel nor his descendants probably recognized the longer-term impact of their new technology. To support the specialized fighters of a cavalry, Charles Martel created a new class of landed gentry who had sufficient income from the land he gave them to provide men, horses, and expertise. To do this, he seized some of the vast holdings of the Catholic church, permanently altering relations between medieval church and state. He also created a social and political system in which farming peasants were answerable not only to the king but to the landlords, who became known as knights. In the end, the Pope crowned Charles Martel’s grandson Charlemagne the first Holy Roman Emperor, an acknowledgment of the new world order.

Thus the lowly stirrup played a singular role in rearranging the political, social, and economic structure of medieval Europe. The Holy Roman Empire, in some form, lasted until World War I. Feudalism, the social and economic system that emerged to support the mounted troops, at the time represented a sudden and violent break from tradition. It persisted for nearly a thousand years, long after the actual advantage of the stirrup in battle had been supplanted by numerous other developments. Few inventions have been so simple as the stirrup, but few had had so cataclysmic an influence on history.

Killer apps have important first-order effects, but their second-order effects are even more far-reaching – as well as being unintended.

The stirrup was perhaps the most important of the medieval killers apps, which the Franks -- Germanic tribes who ruled central Europe after the fall of Rome -- adopted from an Asian design. The stirrup made it possible for a mounted fighter to strike with his lance without falling off his horse, greatly increasing the force what could be put behind such a blow. It proved decisive in the Frank's' efforts to turn back the marauding Saracens who invaded Western Europe in the eighth century, despite the superior numbers of the invaders.

Charles Martel, leader of the Franks, understood from his victory that the stirrup hadn't simply improved the effectiveness of his forces, as a new weapon or fighting formation might have done. Rather, it changed his entire military strategy. Stirrups made possible a mounted cavalry, a new element in the battle equation, and Charles Martel immediately made them a permanent feature.

Neither Charles Martel nor his descendants probably recognized the longer-term impact of their new technology. To support the specialized fighters of a cavalry, Charles Martel created a new class of landed gentry who had sufficient income from the land he gave them to provide men, horses, and expertise. To do this, he seized some of the vast holdings of the Catholic church, permanently altering relations between medieval church and state. He also created a social and political system in which farming peasants were answerable not only to the king but to the landlords, who became known as knights. In the end, the Pope crowned Charles Martel’s grandson Charlemagne the first Holy Roman Emperor, an acknowledgment of the new world order.

Thus the lowly stirrup played a singular role in rearranging the political, social, and economic structure of medieval Europe. The Holy Roman Empire, in some form, lasted until World War I. Feudalism, the social and economic system that emerged to support the mounted troops, at the time represented a sudden and violent break from tradition. It persisted for nearly a thousand years, long after the actual advantage of the stirrup in battle had been supplanted by numerous other developments. Few inventions have been so simple as the stirrup, but few had had so cataclysmic an influence on history.


The Welsh Longbow:

From the thirteenth until the sixteenth century, the national weapon of the English army was the longbow. It was this weapon which conquered Wales and Scotland, gave the English their victories in the Hundred Years War, and permitted England to replace France as the foremost military power in Medieval Europe. The longbow was the machine gun of the Middle Ages: accurate, deadly, possessing a long-range and rapid rate of fire, the flight of its missiles was compared to a storm. Cheap and simple enough for the common person own and master, it made him superior to a knight on the field of battle.

An early 14th century English inquiry into the murder of Simon de Skeltington records the instrument of death as an arrow shot from a five foot seven inch bow. "The wound measured three inches long by two inches wide and six inches deep". This was the powerful weapon used in the Hundred Years War.

Authorities believe the weapon drew between 80 and 110 pounds.

A bow of that strength would project a war arrow a long distance although; no one is sure how far. Estimates range from the war arrow having an effective range of 180 yards to 200 yards to a useful range of 249 yards.

The longbow, because of its rapidity of fire, was a medieval machine gun. A bowman of the Hundred Years War period could shoot 10 to 12 arrows a minute. The closest weapon in range and strength to the longbow was the crossbow but even the Genoese composite crossbow - made of wood, horn, sinew and glue - was no match for the English weapon. After firearms were introduced into continental warfare "archers were able to discharge four or five arrows apiece before the harquebusies shall be ready to discharge one bullet..


Encyclopedia Britannica and how the CD-ROM changed its world:

In the early 1990s, Microsoft's Bill Gates approached Encyclopedia Britannica about creating a digital version of its leading encyclopedia, to be delivered on the increasingly cheap medium of CD-ROM. Britannica, concerned that licensing content would jeopardize the high margin market for their printed books, turned him down. So Gates created his own encyclopedia, Encarta, using content from Funk and Wagnalls and public domain audio and visuals. From the beginning Encarta was published exclusively in digital form. Not only is the multimedia product more engaging than the cold text, it is cheaper to produce and distribute ($1.50 to press the CD-ROM versus $250 to print the book), and easily updated as well.

Within eighteen months, Microsoft Encarta became the best selling encyclopedia in the world. Britannica saw its own market collapse. Britannica approached Gates about reconsidering his deal. The meeting ended when Gates informed the company that his market research showed that the Britannica brand name now had negative value in the new interactive encyclopedia market and that the company would need to pay him to use his product. Since then, Britannica has changed hands, several times, eliminated its direct sales force, and struggled to gain market share with a competing CD-ROM product, initially prices at $1,000.

They're People Too

Parents can make a child do what they want them to do. That's the easy part. The more difficult part for the parent is getting the child to think the way the parent wants them to think.

Most parents are satisfied when they have made the child do what they want them to do, such as doing their homework. attending church services and possibley Bible classes and forget that they, the parents, are the example for the child to think the way the parent wants them to think and that goes far beyond "telling" and "attending".

When a child rebels when they are 15 or 16 or so and the parents are shocked, the parents say, "I don't know what has gotten into him or her. They've never acted like that before." The truth is the parents never had the child they just thought they did. And, they had lost the battle a long time before the teen years. When you look at teens who are rebeling, while they may(?) love their parents they do not respect them or their advice. That loss of respect occurred years ago.

Parents should remember their children are little people. Sometimes parents get lost in parenthood. Parents, at the very least, should treat their children as friends. Sometimes when a child forgets to do something parents act as if it is the end of the world but if a friend had forgotten the same thing they would say "no problem" or give a friendly reminder. One of the hurdles to be conquered with "youth" is they are no more interested in activities such as school, church etc than their parents are interested.

Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice?

Do you suppose, in the argument over abortion, killing people who cannot fend for themselves, the point being missed is why do we believe abortion to be wrong? Why do we believe murder, incest, polygamous marriage, slavery, (I could go on) are all wrong? Why do we think anything is wrong and why do we think anything is right?

• Do you suppose the Bible has anything to do with it?
• Could it be faith in God and Jesus His son?
• Could it be the Bible?
• Could it be the affect God has on our lives by our obedience to Him?

Could prayer have anything to do with our experiences and beliefs and faith?

We want people:

• to think the way we think;
• to have the same convictions we have;
• to come to the same conclusions to which we have come.

without the same benefit we had in developing our thoughts and convictions and conclusions. Maybe we, the church, should try doing what the Bible says and bring them to Jesus and the apostles and prophets through studying the Bible with them and letting them come to the same conclusions as we have.

Lets let people think and develop faith by directing them to the One who can change their lives.

Abortion etc..

Maybe the point being missed is why do we believe abortion to be wrong? Why do we believe murder, incest, polygamous marriage, slavery, (I could go on) are all wrong? Why do we think anything is wrong and why do we think anything is right? Do you suppose the Bible has anything to do with it? Could it be our faith in God and Jesus His son? Could it be our experience of studying the Bible? Could it be the affect God has on our lives by our obedience to Him? Could prayer have anything to do with our experiences and beliefs and faith?

We want people to think the way we think, to have the same convictions we have, to come to the same conclusions to which we have come without the same benefit we had in developing our thoughts and convictions and conclusions. Maybe we, the church, should try doing what the Bible says and bring them to Jesus and the apostles and prophets through studying the Bible with them and letting them come to the same conclusions as we have.

Lets let people think and develop faith by directing them to the One who can change their lives.

In 1844 Karl Marx wrote.. “Religion is the opiate of the people!”

“Religion is the opiate of the people!” wrote Karl Marx in 1844. This famous declaration defined an emerging materialism in opposition to established religion. Marx, along with Charles Darwin and Sigmund Freud, defined a new way of looking at the world. Truth would no longer come from the church. It would now come from the free thinkers of the university. Other scholarly materialists had their own version of Marx’s statement: “Religion is a crutch for those who are too weak to face life alone.”

For nearly 150 years, Christian thinkers have responded to the materialists’ challenge, saying, “Christianity is no opiate – it is God’s healing truth!” “Christianity brings freedom, not oppression!” “There is more to life than bouncing atoms!”

However, the clearest indictment of Marx’s view came not from carefully crafted arguments, but from the collapse of the Soviet empire. The social order designed around the teachings of Karl Marx suddenly disintegrated, revealing a nation with unprecedented moral and spiritual bankruptcy. A society built on pure materialism proved to be an empty shell. All that has been left behind from that monstrous experiment is a deep hunger for meaning and truth.But it was well before the fall of the Berlin wall that Marx’s declaration lost its power. Somewhere along the way, religion again became fashionable. It seems that every time a football player scores a touchdown, he will find some way of giving credit to God. The vindication of faith and religion seems to be complete. Marx has been defeated. But before we celebrate, perhaps we should ask the question, “What kind of religion has the Western world embraced?”

• It is a religion that declares that there is meaning in “the circle of life”, but never bothers to define what that meaning is.
• It is a religion that allows me to feel good about who I am but never calls me to account for the corruption of my soul.
• It is a religion that can be called on as an ally whenever it is required but yet can be dropped when it is expedient.
• It is a warm drink on a cool night, a gentle, sentimental story with endless happy endings.
• It is a self-serving religion that is entirely invented by our own passion for self-fulfillment, with no more objective basis than the dreams of a child at Christmas time.

Why did Karl Marx call religion the opiate of the people? It was because he felt that through myths and empty promises, religion dulled people’s senses to their true condition. Once so dulled, the people could never take hold of the truth.

Life without God is meaningless, tragic and, in the end, desperately lonely. But who will ever seek the peace and joy offered by the Creator of the Universe as long as the senses are dulled by the opiate of our own imaginations?

Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life!” (John 14:6). Jesus is not an opiate. He does not offer comfortable meaningless answers. He offers us the truth about our condition and the future. He offers life, joy, peace, love – but only to those who will commit themselves to follow him.

Karl Marx was a German...
but his ideas changed Russian history. Marx was dismayed by the treatment of workers in Europe. Conditions in European factories were very harsh and unsafe. Marx argued that workers, rather than landlords, should control factories and farms. He urged the "workers of the world to unite" in a worldwide revolution.

Marx's ideas were known as Communism, a word formed for common. Workers would share wealth in a communist society. Marx wrote that wealth should be distributed "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

He was born a Jew, but his father converted the family to Christianity in order to get a job. Marx did not believe in God and thought workers were controlled by religion. He said, "religion is the opiate of the people." Opium is a drug.
Marx died in 1883, but his ideas formed the basis of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Mongolia became the second communist nation in 1921 and by the end of World War II, many governments were overthrown by communists.

The ideas of Marx were not used in the communist countries. Marx believed that workers would control government, but communist governments were strict and dictatorial. Workers were often forced to work on huge collective farms and factory workers often had to fulfill quotas. In most Communist nations, the press was censored. They were not allowed to print news stories that criticized the government. People who spoke out against the Soviet government were treated harshly.

Karl Marx is dead. His ideas about religion are probably different, now.

Is Your Organization's View of Reality Valid?

Strategic Misintent: Are you in danger of focusing on one principle or model to the neglect of all others? (The Magic Answer) Is it possible that you’re pursuing a strategy that isn’t attainable? (The Holy Grail) Could you be using an inappropriate barometer for success? (The Wrong Scoreboard) Negative Transfer Are you assuming that what’s worked in the past is what you still need today? (Yesterday’s Answer) Has your company moved into an area that requires a different approach that the one it used successfully elsewhere? (A Different Game) Is it possible that you have an inaccurate idea of your own competencies, relative to the competition? (A False Self-Image) Are you in danger of incorrectly attributing your past success or the success of your competitors? (The Film Producer Error) One-Track Mind (-Sets) Are your ideas of what your customer needs based on limited models or experience? (It’s a Small World) Are you trying to operate in a culture where you might not understand all the unspoken conventions? (Home Field Rules) Have you slipped into pursuing rapid expansion at the expense of real profitability? (Expansion Fever) Does Your Organization Have an Adequate Picture of What Could Change in the Future? Have you taken into account the possibility that several unlikely events could occur at once? (The Perfect-Storm Fallacy) Have you distinguished between projected innovations that require routine engineering and those that require new discoveries? (The Star Wars Error) Have you paid enough attention to the small-scale level at which large-scale changes must be implemented? (The Big-Picture Illusion) Are you focusing on the right competitors, especially newcomers? (The Wrong Competitors) Have you given enough consideration to the ways in which your entire industry could suddenly be transformed or become irrelevant? (A Static Business Model)

Nine Reasons the Church has struggled in the Midst of an Environment of Unprecedented Opportunity

1) Few Christians have a clear, measurable definition of “Spiritual Success”

The old adage warns us, “If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.” It has been assumed that if a church provides consistent events, biblical information, and appealing programs for people and the people consume those offerings, and then the users will grow. Rarely do we stop to figure out in practical terms what God expects from us, to assess how we measure up to those expectations, or to determine what we must do to improve our performance with respect to those desired outcomes.

We often settle for something less than the biblical standard and certainly less than what we are capable of becoming. If success is negotiable, why not include “comfortable and easily achievable growth” among the factors that make us successful.

What “spiritual success” is not specified and we do not feel compelled to work out a definition of such an end point or destination. As a result most believers have embraced a cheap facsimile of spiritual success and in many cases, without the realization that they have “dumbed down” Christianity.

2) We have defined “discipleship” as head knowledge rather than complete transformation

When we think of discipleship strategies we usually think about teaching events and programs such as Sunday school, small groups, Christian education classes, study groups, reading groups, and Vacation Bible School. While these are needed, it is not enough to fill people’s heads with Bible verses and principles. Read the Gospels and look for Jesus’ words to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The religious leaders of Jesus’ time had memorized more Scripture and religious content than most of us can imagine. As Jesus’ models of how not to live, they were all head and no heart.” They knew the data but ignored its application.

Faith that is not wholly integrated and consistently lived out is a charade. Bible knowledge and a righteous lifestyle must support each other.

We need biblical knowledge and we need to apply that knowledge in practical ways. Both the head and the heart need opportunity to grow and to make a difference in our lives and in the world.

3) We have chosen to teach people in random rather than systematic ways.

We provide people with biblical substance but not in a purposeful, systematic manner and as a result, believers are exposed to good information without context and lose that information because they have no way of making sense of it within the bigger picture of faith and life. Believers become well versed in knowing characters, stories, ideas, and verses from the Bible, but they remain clueless as to their importance.

Few churches intentionally guide people through a strategic learning and developmental process that have been customized for the student. We expect everyone to “get it” at the same time and in the same way as they simultaneously develop into mature believers.

4) There is virtually no accountability for what we say, think, do, or believe.

True growth demands accountability. We operate on the basis of feelings, assumptions, and hopes rather than tangible, measurable realities.

We tend to be most focused upon evaluating people’s knowledge; with only limited attempts to hold people accountable to grow beyond information acquisition and retention.

5) When it comes to discipleship, we promote programs rather than people.

Even though churches claim that they are devoted to developing people, the most effective developmental procedures are generally ignored because they are people-intensive processes.

Growing true disciples is not about maintaining tight control. It is about letting go to see what God, through His Holy Spirit, can do in the life of believers who truly want to mature in Christ. Jesus accomplished the maturing of His followers thorough a personal relationship focused on creating a particular kind of person.

6) The primary method on which churches rely for spiritual development – Small Groups – typically fails to provide comprehensive spiritual nurture.

Having small groups of people committed to helping one another grow can be effective but life transformation is not seen through small groups. The substance that is shared in the group settings is often plagued by superficiality, misrepresentation, or the absence of application. We recruit people for groups and fail to prepare people for developing within those groups.

7) Church leaders are not zealous about the spiritual development of people.

While most church leaders give verbal support to the idea of spiritual growth, they often are not personally devoted to strenuously advocating spiritual transformation. This is witnessed in several ways.

First, few congregants describe their church leaders as role models or as zealots for Christ. Most believers have no clue what the spiritual life of their church leaders is like and therefore have little cause to emulate them.
Second, few church leaders make discipleship a top priority. Prioritizing the church’s ministries is a tough juggling act. To some extent the church lacks real disciples because the spiritual leaders have inadequately prioritized that outcome.
Third, when church leaders describe “success” attendance, revenue, programs, and square footage frequently constitute the practical dimensions of success. Few church leaders indicate that success relates to the spiritual quality of the lives of their congregants. Often the quantity of people participating in a group event or activity is sited.

When church leaders downplay discipleship, the message comes though loud and clear: “It’s helpful, but optional.”

8) We invest our resources in adults rather than in children.

People tend to do what is most comfortable and natural for them. If we objectively assess where we will get the greatest return on the church’s money, we would pour our resources into ministries to children. Studies show that once children reach the age of twelve or so, the chances of changing adults are very slim.

This is not to insinuate that God cannot completely reform an adult, nor does it imply thatthe Bible is wrong when it says that believers become regenerated beings after they encounter Christ, it is simple recognition of human reality. People can change no matter how young or old they are, but positive change is much easier when people are young. When we focus our energy on resuscitating adults rather than nurturing children, we have more ground to cover because we have to undo much more that we would in working with children.

9) We divert our best leaders to ministries other than discipleship.

When you have an individual with good skills but little, if any, leadership ability, discipleship fails to get the motivational push it needs.

Without a true leader at the helm of the discipleship function, believers cannot be faulted for missing the point.

Good leaders motivate, mobilize, and direct people to fulfill a vision. Options are presented for personal growth and assumptions are made that the people will quickly embrace the possibilities and benefits. When they don’t, heads are shaken and the people’s lack of commitment is bemoaned – without realizing the people are committed -- to those things that fit within their vision of a meaningful life. Failure to place competent leaders in the disciple-making process enables the believers to completely misunderstand the opportunity presented to them.


Summary of advice from leaders in effective disciple making churches


Recognize that disciple making is a process, not a program.

• The process will not occur without leadership from church leaders.
• The church’s ministry focus must be streamlined to prioritize and support discipleship.
• The process is not likely to succeed unless there is a simple but intelligent plan for growth.
• The process will not generate true disciples unless it has a designated supervisor to facilitate progress, foster creative problem solving, and development, and strive for reasonable outcomes.
• In creating a process that works, adapt lessons learned by other effective disciple-making churches to your own unique ministry context.
• Be prepared for burnout and complacency to set in after two or three years of involvement in an intensive process.
• Carefully balance the competing interests of flexibility and structure.
  
  
  --From--
  Growing True Disciples
  George Barna
  WaterBrook Press
  

A Modern Parable -- Batsell Barrett Baxter

There was a farmer who owns a large field of grain. It is harvest time, and the wheat is already golden brown and needs to be cut. It must not be left in the field very long because the wind or the rain may destroy the crop. Early in the morning he goes into the small town and calls for helpers to come and harvest his crop. The immediate response is favorable and many respond to the invitation.

When they arrive at the field they see the golden harvest and are deeply impressed. They talk about what a wonderful privilege it is to get to harvest so big and bountiful a crop. But someone points out that the fence around this field is not very attractive. It is an old rock fence and in many places the stones have tumbled down. So the people set to building a new fence. They spend all morning getting stones from a nearby stream which they use to build a beautiful wall around the field.

When the fence is finished, someone suggests, “Let’s get to work.” Someone else responds, “Wait, if the sun gets any hotter, or if it should rain, we will need shelter.” They all agree, so over in one corner of the field they build a shelter for themselves. It is so beautifully done that they decide to put a plaque on it, with names inscribe, so that everybody who passes by in generations to come will know just who was thoughtful enough to build such a wonderful shelter.

Then someone says, “Now let’s get to the harvest.” But others say, “It is noon and we ought first to eat.” So they work diligently until quite a feast is prepared. It is in keeping with the beautiful wall and the fine shelter and is a wonderful feast indeed. After the dinner is finished, there is a period of rest, of course, and then someone says, “Now for the harvest.” But someone else replies, “ With such a great responsibility and with such a great challenge before us, do we not need to be better dressed than we are?” Immediately, each provides for himself better garments with which to do the harvesting. Then again they turn their thought to the golden grain and begin to sharpen the scythes with which to cut the grain. After a while they are razor sharp. But as they look at the grubby old handles they are not satisfied. They are unworthy instruments for so great a work. So they begin to carve those ugly handles into beautiful pieces, and some even add intricate filigree work of gold and silver. One man is even able to adorn his scythe with mother of pearl. It is truly a beautiful thing.

Now they are ready to go to the harvest. But suddenly someone says, “It is night, the sun is gone down.” It is then that they realize that only a few have cut any grain. So these wonderful people (like us) turn back sorrowing with guilty feelings to meet the man who owns the field. He comes to meet them, expecting shoulders laden with heavy bags of grain, but instead he finds only beautiful tools and a story of wonderful fences and fine clothes and a good dinner and a shelter to take care of those who work. He asks sadly, “But where is the harvest?” the people are speechless and ashamed.

Teens' rising spirituality features a worrisome side

Contrary to the negative images often portrayed in national media, local religious leaders say area teens seem to be on the brink of a spiritual reawakening. That local impression is shared by many of their colleagues across the nation who report similar anecdotal evidence of increased teen involvement and interest in the search for spiritual fulfillment.

"Some of the things I see that have changed are the levels of spiritual maturity. Today's teens take church as a whole more seriously," says Kyle Mott, youth minister of Northeast Church of Christ.

Across the state line, Associate Pastor Jeff DeBoard at First Baptist Church of Gate City, Va., gives a similarly upbeat assessment.

"I feel that young people today are searching for absolute truth that can only come through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ," he says. "I believe God is raising up a very conservative generation of youth who have a sincere desire to worship God and search his word for direction and understanding."

Reports by the Barna Research Group, the gold standard in data about the nation's religious life, do, indeed, show that young adults are searching for spiritual meaning in their lives. But beneath the general spike in spirituality Barna documents, there also lurks some rather disturbing findings.

While a majority of teens continue to profess faith, George Barna's research shows it is definitely not the faith of their fathers. Indeed, the majority of Christian teens hold many beliefs that stand in stark contrast to mainline Christian orthodoxy.

While approximately 60 percent of teens agree with the statement, "The Bible is totally accurate in all of its teachings," and 56 percent say their religious faith is "very important" to them, slightly more than half of all teens also report believing that Jesus committed sins while he was on Earth. A clear majority - approximately 60 percent - also agree with the statement that "good works will get me to heaven." Such a belief, of course, is antithetical to the central theme of justification by grace through faith that is the central connecting theological thread of all Protestant belief since the Reformation.

Fire and brimstone isn't popular with teens either. Approximately two-thirds of teens say that Satan is "symbolic, not real."

On an even more alarming practical level, Barna finds that only 6 percent of all teens believe there are moral absolutes. Even among self-identified, "born-again" t eens, only nine percent believe moral truth is absolute.

"When you ask even Christian kids, ‘How can you say A is true as well as B, which is the antithesis of A?' their typical response is, ‘I'm not sure how it works, but it works for me,' " says Barna, president of the Ventura, Calif.-based research company that bears his name. "It's personal, pragmatic and fairly superficial."

If adults wonder how so many Christian teens could possess these increasingly relativistic, even schizophrenic, spiritual values, they may want to look in the mirror.

George Barna also reports that the percentage of born-again Christians who have been divorced (27 percent) actually beats the national average by two percentage points. "While it may be alarming to discover that born-again Christians are more likely than others to experience a divorce, that pattern has been in place for quite some time."

The changing attitudes and conduct of the Christian community concerning divorce is but one example of the ripples of moral consequence affecting church membership and wider society. The acceptance or opposition to homosexual unions is another example of the moral dilemma facing more and more denominations.

It's encouraging to hear religious leaders praise teen interest in church activities. In a world where even fundamental values seem fleeting, a life dedicated to a purpose greater than ourselves can be an anchor against a rising tide of moral relativism. And, as Barna's research shows, the human temptation to drift with that tide, whether young or old, is enormous.

Copyright 2004 Kingsport Times-News.
All rights reserved. This material must be credited to the Times-News when redistributed or broadcast.

Pledge of Allegiance ...

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, for which it stands; one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all

September 8, 1892

" The Pledge of Allegiance" to the United States of America was written by a former Baptist preacher, Francis Bellamy (1855-1931). It only took Mr. Bellamy three hours to write the original 23 words in honor of the 400th anniversary of Columbus discovering America. . As published in Youth's Companion, the first version read, "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."


He was forced to leave his Boston church the previous year because of the socialist bent of his sermons. (He shared the political sentiments of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, who wrote two socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (2000 to 1887) and Equality.) Francis Bellamy was later hired by the The Youth's Companion, a popular family magazine at the time. His writings reflected a Christian Socialist vision of a government-managed economy with "political, social and economic equality for all."


While writing for the journal, he was also on the Massachusetts State Education Board and was charged with organizing the state's Columbus Day celebrations in 1892. He decided to craft a pledge that school children would say aloud in front of the flag -- a pledge that would reflect his socialist beliefs. Mr. Bellamy considered using the word "equality" as well, but was aware that several members of his education committee were firmly against equal rights for women and African Americans. The phrase "under God," which was added by President Eisenhower in 1954, would not have met with Mr. Bellamy's approval. In his later years, Mr. Bellamy stopped attending services, dismayed by the openly racist sentiments of his church.

The U. S. Constitution:It isn't about what people can do it's about what goverment can do

The right to privacy

The Constitution does not mention a right to privacy. However, Supreme Court decisions over the years have established that the right to privacy is a basic human right, and as such is protected by virtue of the 9th Amendment. The right to privacy has come to the public's attention via several controversial Supreme Court rulings, including several dealing with contraception (the Griswold and Eisenstadt cases), interracial marriage (the Loving case), and abortion (the well-known Roe v. Wade case). In addition, it is said that a right to privacy is inherent in many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the 3rd, the 4th's search and seizure limits, and the 5th's self- incrimination limit.

The separation of church and state

The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today). The phrase is commonly thought to mean that the government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion, though it is more accurate to say that the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a national religion, and protects the individual's right to worship, or not worship, however the individual sees fit.

Jury of Peers

There is no such right as a jury of my peers mentioned in the Constitution. The Constitution does take up the issue of juries, however. It is the nature of the jury which is not in the Constitution. In Article 3, Section 2, the Constitution requires that all criminal trials be heard by a jury. It also specifies that the trial will be heard in the state the crime was committed. The 6th Amendment narrows the definition of the jury by requiring it to be "impartial." Note that no-where is a jury "of peers" guaranteed. Strictly speaking, it could be prohibitively difficult to gather juries of peers - the definition of a "peer" would have to be worked out. Is a peer someone of the same age, sex, race, religion, class, standing, or profession? Fortunately, juries need only be impartial, and not of one's peers, else the jury system would be unworkable.

Marriage

A lot of controversy swirls around the topic of marriage as homosexual marriage entered the news, again. In 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court ordered that the state must make accommodations for gay unions, bringing the issue into the public eye. Vermont created civil unions as a result. In 2004, the Massachusetts Supreme Court went a step further, and ruled that the state must accommodate not just an institution equal to marriage, as civil union was designed to be, but that gay marriage itself must be offered in the state. Subsequently, mayors in New York and California BEGAN to offer gay marriage in their towns and cities, citing civil rights concerns. Those opposed to gay marriage began to urge that an amendment to the Constitution be created to define marriage as being between a man and a woman only. Opponents of the amendment pointed to the failed Prohibition Amendment as a reason why such social issues should stay out of the Constitution. In the absence of any such amendment, however, marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution at any point.

Judicial Review

We often hear about the Supreme Court striking down a law or a provision in a law, or, more often, reaffirming some law or provision. Take a look in the Constitution - judicial review, as this is known, is nowhere to be found. It seems like a perfectly normal action - after all, what kind of check does the Judicial Branch have on the other two branches if laws and orders cannot be declared unconstitutional. But judicial review is not specifically mentioned. So how did judicial review come to be? In the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall declared a federal law, the Judiciary Act of 1789, to be unconstitutional, and thus null and void. This was the first time a Supreme Court ruling overturned a law.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

Commonly attributed to the Constitution, it comes from the Declaration of Independence.

Of the people, by the people, for the people

Commonly attributed to the Constitution, it comes from the Gettysburg Address.

Immigrants, not Americans, must adapt!

Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely comprised of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand.

This idea of America, being a multi -cultural community, has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language! ENGLISH. "In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, and political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, of Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is and always will be part of our culture.

If the Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. Remember, "Delta is ready when you are and they can have you there by nightfall".

This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But, once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

Effectiveness of American Businesses

A series of studies on the overall effectiveness of American businesses have concluded that if a soccer team functioned as do most businesses only four of the eleven players on the field would know which goal is theirs. Only two of the eleven would care. Only two of the eleven would know what position they play and know exactly what they are supposed to do. And all but two players would in some way, be competing against their own team members rather than the opponent.

We hear CEOs testify in court that they have no idea what is happening within their companies.

It appears that the lowly employee is not the only ones who are not sure what they should be doing.

Isn't It Time?

Our Government has a tendency to use our Military to occupy other countries. We enter the country, with a noble purpose, with the consent of the rulers of that country, but when our noble purpose has been accomplished we don't leave. We leave a military presence. How would we like it if other countries did the same to us? Isn’t the United Nations a good example of foreign countries entering our borders and then never leaving? How do we like it?

On a world map the United States appears quite insignificant but we have the most intelligent population in the world. While there are examples of people other than Americans bettering mankind they could not have done so without the example and benefits offered by the United States. For just a minute think about how many people from Middle Eastern countries have ever benefited mankind? How about South America? How about the Far East with the exception of Japan? How about Eastern European countries? How about na-da, zip, zilch, zero? The people of the United States are the impetus behind change and improvements for civilization as well as the world. When people in other countries look at the us they see a country that will change their way of life. And we know how much people like change.

Isn’t it time to bring our military home from around the world?

Isn’t it time to stop allowing any U. S. company do business in other countries without the permission of the government of those countries? And at the same time citizens, of any country not permitting all U.S. companies free access to their markets, are not allowed to hold any interest in companies operating in any form within the borders of the United States.

Isn't it time to begin enforcing the hiring practices prohibiting the hiring of non-citizens not holding proper work permits? How about jail sentences and multi-million dollar fines for companies and people hiring those non-citizens? When a citizen of the United States works in France, no other member of that family is allowed to work in France. How about similar restrictions within the United States for all non-American citizens and jail terms for violators?

Isn't it time to evict the United Nations and all of the spies it brings with it?

Isn't it time to let the world know they do not need to like us but if they harm us in any way we will destroy their country? We have proven that killing civilians works. We did it. If you doubt, ask the Japanese. We have proven a small group of determined fighters can defeat the best army and navy in the world. If you do not believe, ask England. For the other side ask the people of Viet Nam about France and the United States. The United States is too large to fight small countries. Our weapons are too expensive to use and at the same time our soldiers are too precious to not protect them with those weapons.

Not everyone is cut out to live in a democracy and we should not require it to be a friend. Some countries function better under a dictatorship. Look at England they have a King or Queen and we had a war to get away from that. Remember Tito and Yugoslavia? Look what has been happening since Tito was killed.

We need to protect our borders and then live and let live.

Iraqi Elections

The elections in Iraq on January 30, 2005 continue to prove the insurgents are not crazy. They have a cause for which they are fighting and we, the people of the United States, are part of that cause. Can you imagine a more shocking picture than for one of the buildings, where Iraqi people living in the United States were voting, to explode, killing and injuring hundreds of people? I cannot!

Since no terrorist activity ocurred what conclusion can we draw? There can be only two alternatives. Either the enemy we fear so much are not able to carry out such a criminal act or they do not care to carry it out. Allowing that anyone with enough determination can destroy a building as long as they are willing to put forth the effort it must mean the "bad guys" have no interest in carrying out such acts within the borders of the United States.

A few years ago a survey was taken concerning why peoples of other countries hate us at a time we think they should love us. Some of the conclusions of that survey showed that those people did not like the influence the West has on their cultures, their children, their way of life etc. I imagine if the survey was given to Christians within the borders of the United States the results would be quite similar.

Look at the beginning of the Arab people.

Ishmael was Abraham's oldest son, by Hagar the concubine He was born at Mamre, when Abraham was eighty-six years of age. At the age of thirteen he was circumcised. (Wouldn’t that make you mad?) He grew up a child of the desert, wild and wayward. On the occasion of the weaning of Isaac his rude and wayward spirit broke out in expressions of insult and mockery and Sarah told Abraham to “Expel this slave and her son.” Abraham dismissed Hagar and her son with no more than a skin of water and some bread.

Ishmael settled in the land of Paran, a region lying between Canaan and the mountains of Sinai; and “God was with him, and he became a great archer”. He became a great desert chief, but of his history little is recorded. He was about ninety years of age when his father Abraham died. On this occasion the two brothers met after being long separated. Isaac with his hundreds of household slaves, Ishmael with his troops of wild retainers and half-savage allies, in all the state of a Bedouin prince, gathered before the cave of Machpelah, in the midst of the men of Heth, to pay the last duties to the 'father of the faithful,' ”. Of the later events of his life little is known. He died at the age of one hundred and thirty-seven years, but where and when are unknown. He had twelve sons, who became the founders of so many Arab tribes or colonies, the Ishmaelites, who spread over the wide desert spaces of Northern Arabia from the Red Sea to the Euphrates, “their hand against every man, and every man's hand against them.”

What has changed? Looks like history continues….

Privacy vs Security

With the Patriot Act permitting the collection of information at random looking for signs that indicate a potential troublemakers we are being asked -- told -- to give up more privacy.

Surveillance devices, ranging from lasers that can monitor members of a crowd for abnormal vital signs, to biometric scanners that pick out individual travelers at a distance and link them to databases containing their detailed personal information, are proliferating at an unprecedented rate.

Ways to spy on Internet chat rooms are being researched by our government. Black boxes in rental cars using global-positioning satellite technology to track and map a vehicle's travels, alerting the rental company if the driver speeds or crosses into Mexico in violation of the contract. National standards for drivers' license i.e. a de facto national ID card are being developed. The Patriot Act minimizes judicial oversight.

The government is evaluating a proposal for a universal database hold billions of pieces of information about ordinary citizens.

Current laws are inadequate to keep up with the technology.

How long before we delete that phrase from the national anthem....land of the free.....?


George Washington "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force ... Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master.”

Was He Ever Wrong!

On July 4, 1776, George III, king of England wrote in his diary, “Nothing happened today.” Because of the slow communications of his time, he did not realize our Declaration of Independence had been signed and that the British Empire would never be the same.

Always Thinking

An Oklahoma state senator hopes to revive cockfighting in his state by putting tiny boxing gloves on the roosters instead of razors.

The Oklahoma legislature outlawed the blood sport in 2002 because of its cruelty to the roosters, which are slashed and pecked to death while spectators bet on the outcome. But state Sen. Frank Shurden, a Democrat from Henryetta, Okla., and a longtime defender of cockfighting, said the ban had wiped out a $100 million business.

To try to revive it, he has proposed that roosters wear little boxing gloves attached to their spurs, as well as lightweight, chicken-sized vests configured with electronic sensors to record hits and help keep score.

"It's like the fencing that you see on the Olympics, you know, where they have little balls on the ends of the swords and the fencers wear vests," Shurden said. "That's the same application that would be applied to the roosters."

Is this a great country or what?

Demise of the American Business

One practice that will continue to have a major influence on the demise of American businesses is the continued practice of the Executives becoming millionaires while the people who trusted them and followed them become unemployed. Loyalty and trustworthiness must be allowed back into the American company.

Armored Hummers

The soldier who asked the infamous question of Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, was given the question by a reporter from Chattanooga who then contacted the soldier responsible for calling on the people to ask questions and persuaded him call on the soldier with the question. Has anyone considered a court martial for one or both of those soldiers? Who is running these news conferences the military or the reporters?

Iraqi Elections

You cannot give a nation democracy. If the people are not willing to fight for it and to die for it they will never be a democracy. As long as the common citizen allows the outsiders to bomb and to kill there is nothing anyone else can do for them. We need to have the elections in January, allow the people who want to vote, to vote, count the votes and leave. If the new government doesn't want help from other nations there is nothing that can be done for them. It is sad that so many of our young men and women have been maimed or have died for something the Iraqis are not willing to do the same. While I am at it, women do not belong in combat zones. If a man loses an arm he can eventually learn how to dress himself. A woman who loses an arm will never be able to put on clothes with closings in the back with only one hand. She will always need assistance with dressing herself and will ever be dependent upon other people. Women do not belong in combat zones.

Steroids and Sport

Why hasn't anyone hit these idiots in the ego? When a person uses steroids they are admitting they aren't "man" or "woman" enough to get the job done. They are not good enough. They are not macho enough. A class action should be filed for fraud. Not against the individuals but against the team or league. They are not producing the product for which they are charging.

Terrorism?

The fact that it is so easy to terrorize the United States and the "bad guys" have not since the 9/11 mistake means they don't want to even though the media keeps everyone nervous as does the Homeland Security debacle. Can you imagine an easier target and more impressive demonstration of terror than blowing up one of the major television news anchors on camera while in Iraq? I can not!