Okay...one more entry...

This entry is in response to Adam's blog on the e-journaling assignments. I agree and disagree with you Mr. Thane, allow me to explain my ideas here. Okay, so this is the second class that I have taken with MS where e-journaling was a major part of the course grade. My first semester, I HATED the online journal, because I, like a majority of students, am paying for my own education and working my derrier off to get through school...basically I don't have the money to purchase a computer of my very own, so I am left to fight the other 10,000 students for one at the library. This makes completing the assignments mildly difficult at times. However, my appreciation for the online journaling process is much more advanced this semester, as I have found it fun to "dink" around other's online blog sites to see what they are really thinking. Also, I can see how it would benefit MS in accessing his students, as a majority of the class doesn't talk, and he probably has about a zillion students to try and grade. This online journal allows him to see what we are really thinking and to see how we engage our brains with the course work. So I have gained an appreciation for this online journal, as I have some mild "test anxiety" and I do not feel that testing is an adequate form of evaulation, as we have covered SO much in this semester that it is difficult to access the quality of a student's success by rote memorization alone. Testing, in my opinion, is basically scholastic vomit...where we, as students, shove as much information as we can down our throats, and regurgitate it all over our desks for the exam. Online journaling is like lots of mini-papers, where we can really engage the material and become better scholars by thinking critically. So, in conclusion, I respectfully disagree with you Adam, as I enjoy the journals...much more so than the tests... ;)

Finale Blog Entry

To all who I learned with, from, and through...

I thank you for a fabulous class,
my time here was pure merriment.
I met super people,
and learned about the Bible,
at great thanks to the storytellers hands.
My faith was challenged,
my mind enlightened,
with my 'people skills' enhanced.
I found out first hand about the frustrating antics
of Bible-thumping maniacs.
Those 'know it alls' are less than delightful,
but the "Claire's" of the world make me laugh
and I owe my new wealth of knowledge
to the "Michael Sexson's" of the world
and their every enlightening, joyful class.
I knew nothing about the Classical world,
and I still feel mildly uninformed;
however, my outlook on such things has become unabashed,
and I appreciated them for that which they are.
I thank you, great class, for our wonderful times,
and for all I have learned from your minds.
Michael Sexson you rock,
and I'll never forget
Mick's attempt to create sex on a blog.

Have a fabulous Holiday season...and I hope to see all of you really soon!

The Bible in Narnia...

One of the purposes of this class was to see how the Biblical and Classical traditions have shaped our understandings as a society. Last night, my boyfriend Joshua and I watched the movie "The Chronicles of Narnia" which was adapted from a book by C.S. Lewis. For anyone who has not yet seen the movie, I highly recommend it...as it was fabulous. However, we both noticed the striking Biblical parallels present in this Disney movie. It almost felt as if we were watching a Bible story from our youth. Here are some of the things we noticed:
1.) First the movie is, in is most simple form, the battle between good and evil.
2.) The Lion, who is the King of Narnia, is ruler over everything and his only foe is the White Witch. Similarly, God rules over the world, and His only adversary is Satan.
3.) Everyone bows before the Lion (as in Isaiah 45:23, Romans 14:11, and Philippians 2:10 which all state, "`As surely as I live,' says the Lord, `every knee will bow to me and every tongue will confess allegiance to God.' ")
4.) Jesus is described as the "Lion of the tribe of Judah" in Revelation. In the movie, the ruler is a Lion.
5.) The Lion gave his life in place of Edmund when the White Witch demanded a blood sacrifice, just as Jesus gave his life for the sins of man, He died so we can live.
6.) After the Lion repremanded Edmund for following his own sinful passions, he says to Edmunds family not to speak of the past as it no longer matters. This is like God's forgiveness of our sins and once we've repented, he remembers them no more.
7.) When the White Witch took the Lion's life, she first humiliated him by cutting his hair and then said "You thought you could save the human by sacrificing yourself, but now you will die and they will also." This displays Jesus' ultimate sacrifice of His death and humiliation on the cross for our life.
8.) The Lion rose again and when he did is showed the stone on which he was killed was split in half. In the Bible, after Jesus died it says in Matthew 27:51, "Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split."
9.) When the Lion was reviving those killed by the White Witch, he breathed on them and they became alive. In Genesis 2:7 it states, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."
10.) In the battle between good and evil towards the end of the movie, the Lion kills the White Witch and exclaims "It is finished." In John 19:30 it states, "He said, “It is finished!” And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit."
11.) At the end of the movie, the four children were given crowns and thrones, and in the Bible talks about the so

ns of God ruling with Him for one thousand years, and recieving crowns of glory.
12.) The children in the movie are called "Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve," this is a very blatant correlation between the movie and the Bible.

So, basically, my purpose for comparing the movie "The Chronicles of Narnia" to the Bible is to show that our society is still influenced by the Biblical tradition, which is a direct reflection of our class.

Resturants and Vampires...

One day after class, Mick, Sunny Rae and I were discussing Mick's interpretations of vampires in the Orestia and somehow we got on the subject of restaurants. Mick made an ever-valid point that anyone who ever has or ever will work in a restaurant can identify with...he said "the restaurant business is full of vampires." Like his interpretation of the Orestia, he recognized that those vicious, selfish, money-hungry, fellow co-workers are really vampires in disguise...I thought it was a rather interesting notion, and was obviously blog-worthy. Thank-you, Mick, you make me laugh! ;)

Gas Prices...

I thought this was really funny....hope you enjoy it!!! For anyone who doesn't know what these acronyms stand for...you should! ;)

Familiar Proverbs...

In class, we discussed some familiar proverbs...here are some that I found:

*A watched pot never boils.
*Birds of a feather flock together.
*Birds of a feather flock together.
*A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
*Curiosity killed the cat.
*All's fair in love and war.
*You can't squeeze blood from a turnip.
*You only miss the water when the well runs dry.
*It's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil.
*The cat's out of the bag.
*An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
*Its raining 'cats and dogs'.

Those that I heard growing up are:
*Those who fail to plan are really planning to fail.
*If don't stand for something you'll fall for anything.
*Its easier for a friend to pull you down, than for you to pull them up.
And the most commonly repeated proverb in my family was:
*Believe only half of what you see and none of what you hear.

These are just a few that I have heard, also my old roomate's brother used to say "A boob in the mouth is worth two in the hand". His modern displacement is disgustingly funny...

Uncommon Parable

Early one morning 'bout 12 midnight
Two dead boys got up to fight
Back to back they faced each other
Drew their swords
And shot each other
A deaf policeman heard the noise
And went to kill them two dead boys
If you don't believe this story's true
Just ask the blind man
He saw it too...

This may not look familiar, but it is similar to the way Jesus spoke to His followers, in parables. He would then explain the meanings of these parables to His disciples, so they would be enlightened to His teachings. (I got this little ditty from my boyfriend...he heard it growing up.)

Ordinary People...

The idea of ordinary people doing extraordinary thing in the Bible is very interesting to me. Think of David (King David) who killed a giant and found favor in the eyes of God. Or Jonah who defied God, got swallowed by a whale, and then submitted becoming an extraordinary servant for God. Or Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednedgo who's only crime was their unwaivering faith...these were all ordinary people who God used for extraordinary things. This makes me thankful that I am just an ordinary girl...from Montana...maybe God will use me in an extraordinary way, simply because I am ordinary. :) Oh, I do hope so!!!

Moses' Bush...

In class MS was discussing Moses and the burning bush, and he mentioned that he did not look at the bush because the process of listening was very important to the Hebrews. However, I have a different interpretation of why Moses didn't look into the bush. First of all, he was ashamed because he was refusing the call of God to be a leader for the Israelite people and take them out of Eqypt into the Promised Land. And second, God showed himself to Moses in the form of a burning bush and in Exodus 33: 17-23 it talks about Moses wanting to see the face of God and He replies, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.” So, I think that not only was listening important as MS suggested, but Moses was ashamed, and he knew that if he looked at the burning bush, which was the Lord, he would die.

The Axis Mundi and Jack's Stalk...

When we were discussing Frye's theory dealing with the "axis mundi" and the metaphors of ascent and descent...I couldn't help but remember the childhood story of 'Jack and the Beanstalk'. The idea of ascending a tall structure in an attempt to become closer to the gods is not only the Biblical story of the "Tower of Babel" but also that of Jack climbing the beanstalk and finding upon his ascent, the very scary giant who could kill him at will...powers similar to those of the gods in Greek mythology.

My Final Paper....

~I am a little nervous about this paper, as I feel mildly exposed.~



“Faith is more than belief that God exists, or that Jesus is the Messiah. It is belief in Him. To believe in someone is to trust Him, to entrust something of value to Him, and even to entrust ones very self to Him” (D’Ambrosio). Throughout the course of this semester, I was given the opportunity to see the Bible of my childhood as a beautiful work of Literature. I was exposed to stories and parts of stories that were deleted from my Sunday school lessons, for obvious reasons, and gained an appreciative awareness for the necessity of my faith.

I want to be like the Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in Daniel. For those unfamiliar with the story, it is one of the most ardent displays of true faith and trust in God in the Hebrew Bible, as three men defy their king and do not bow before the temple gods. They are then sentenced to death via burning as he “ordered the furnace heated seven times more than it was to be heated, and he ordered certain mighty men of his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to cast them into the burning fiery furnace. Then these men were bound in their mantles, their tunics, their hats, and their other garments and they were cast into the burning fiery furnace. Because the king's order was strict and the furnace very hot, the flame of the fire slew those men who took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. And these three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell bound into the burning fiery furnace. Then King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished and rose up in haste. He said to his counselors, "Did we not cast three men bound into the fire?" They answered the king, "True, O king." He answered, "But I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods” (Three Hebrews).

This class has given me amazing insight into my faith in God. I was exposed to the ideas and skepticisms of my fellow classmates, and felt compelled to defend that which I believe, similar to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. The ‘fiery furnace’ of disbelief, caused by doubt and fear, is as genuine and intimidating as King Nebuchadnezzar. Additionally, the uncertainty of others, the defense of my faith, and the study of the Bible as Literature has helped me to understand the logic behind trusting in an unseen God.

Throughout this class, I have learned many literary and personally relevant ideas. I have truly begun to understand my mother’s teachings, discovered that I am really uninformed about many of the Biblical parables and I have gained an appreciation of being versed in the faith-shaping Literature in which I believe. This course has sparked an educational and spiritual flame within me, as I have become very interested in exploring the parables in the Bible as not merely tales, but as faith-building stepping stones.

I have learned that I want my faith to be like that of Job (when everything he owned and loved was destroyed), Daniel (when he was in the Lions Den), David (when he faced Goliath), and the Hebrew trio in the fiery furnace, continually trusting in God, even when the “rays of my faith’s sun" fade. I want to let my light for Jesus shine so brightly that everyone who sees me will know that I am a child of the King.

This class has given me non-church views of the Bible as Literature yet has caused me see its devout spiritual significance. I can see Bible stories displaced into everyday life, and have begun to truly love my childhood Bible stories. In my opinion, this course shows non-believers the true beauty of the Bible, and will possibly ignite the flame of eternal life.

In closing, I want to thank Michael Sexson for conducting a very fun and engaging class that has the possibility of forever changing the lives of his students, by impressing the truth on their hearts and possibly aiding in the addition of their names in the Lamb’s Book of Life. I will forever try to believe as strongly as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and trust the Lord with my life as I want a faith that can move mountains, and a “little light” that perpetually shines.

This little light of mine,
I'm gonna let it shine.
This little light of mine,
I'm gonna let it shine.
This little light of mine,
I'm gonna let it shine
Let it shine,
Let it shine,
Let it shine.

The Hebrew Bible...

This information is in the front of my New King James Version Bible, and I thought it was kinda interesting. :)

"The Hebrew Bible has come down to us through the scrupulous care of ancient scribes who copied the original text in successive generations. By the sixth century A.D. the scribes were succeeded by a group known as the Masoretes, who continued to preserve the sacred Scriptures for another five hundred years in a form known as the Masoretic Text. Babylonia, Palestine, and Tiberias were the main centers of Masoretic activity; but by the tenth century A.D. the Masoretes of Tiberias, led by the family of ben Asher, gained the ascendancy..."

Rack, Shack, and Benny

The story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego is beautifully displaced in the Veggie Tales movie "Rack, Shack, and Benny". This story of three boys believing so strongly in their God that they are thrown into a furnace by Nebuchadnezzar for refusing to denounce their faith is the springboard for my term paper. I will explain it more fully in class, and post my paper on my blogger a little later...but this story is out of Daniel from the Hebrew Bible...and it rocks!!!

My Mom's Reply...

I got an e-mail from my mother yesterday, and she had just browsed my online jounal...here is her response!!! ;)

"Hey! What's this "favorite" thing???????? You are all my favorite!!!! Make that clear....Make that understood....Make it known on your journal-thingy.....YOU ARE ALL MY FAVORITE....Period~ :)

Mom :)"

**Hee Hee....she was responding to my "favorite entry" about my sister being like Joseph (the favorite)...gotta love moms, they make me laugh! **

Something from Nothing???

I posted this already on my Fye'd Lightbulbs entry....but I thought I should post it again...it was a story told by Creation Scientist Kent Hovind...and I think it is great! It shows the absurdity of creation without a divine creator...enjoy!

"Okay, now sit down now, boys and girls - it's story time! Shhhh.... Once upon a time, billions of years ago, there was nothing. Suddenly, magically, the nothing exploded into something. That something is called hydrogen. Can you say "hydrogen?" I knew you could. This hydrogen eventually cooled down enough to condense into solid rock. It was magic rock. Inert and lifeless, but still magical. And then, magically, water formed in the sky above the rock. The waters rained on the rock for, oh, let's say billions of years. Some of the rock broke down into minerals, and these minerals washed into a pool of water.Then one day some of these minerals magically formed into a kind of goo in the pool of water. Can you say "goo?" I knew you could. Well do you know what happened then? That's right! The goo magically became ALIVE. So anyway, this bit of magic goo magically found something to eat. Then, magically, it found another bit of magic goo to marry, and they had a whole bunch of magical little goos. Eventually - millions of years later - some of this goo grew up into all the plants and animals in the world around us. If it's alive, it came from that first bit of magic goo! Well, more time went on. Finally some of this goo magically evolved - can you say "evolved?" I knew you could - some of this goo magically evolved upwards and upwards, growing ever more advanced, bigger, stronger, smarter, until it became a kind of magical hairless ape with thumbs.And do you know who those apes are? That's right! They're YOU and ME! We are the magic rock apes! And you know what else? Someday we'll evolve enough that we'll become the God we all know doesn't exist. Now take a nap. "

Lot, Ruth, and King David...

Here is the displacement from group 2....Abdul, Claire, Acadia, Eric, Maggi, and myself....I don't have the King David one....but I'll get it and post it so our displacement will be complete!!! ;)


It was so and it was not so in a land 2500 miles away in the dirty south. Two Yankees got lost deep in the city of New Orleans, looking for the nearest chick-fil-A. They stopped to ask for directions and were warned by a local blues artist, Leon; of the dangers wandering the streets at night for New Orleans was an evil city full of homosexuals and girls gone wild. Leon invited them to stay the night since he had just purchased several extra cots from the neighborhood salvation army. The Yankees accepted and followed Leon to his place in the ghetto but were spotted by 2 cross dressing confederates. An hour after they arrived at Leon shanty (by the bayou) the walls began to shake from the
persistent poundings and shouts from the sexually ambiguous gang that had convened outside. They could hear the voices yelling.

“And they called to Leon ‘where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them.’ Leon went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Look, I have two young daughters who have not known a man: Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please: only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” (Genesis 19.5-9)

“ThisYankees Aren’t welcome here” the gang responded “send them out or we will deal worse with you than with them.

“But then the men inside reached out their hands and brought Leon into the house with them, and shut the door. And they struck the gang with mace and blinded all the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they could no longer find the door.” (Genesis 19. 10-12)

Then the yanks said to Leone they read in the National Enquirer that the city would be destroyed by atomic Fireballs from heaven, and that he needed to gather his family and flee. The article, they told him, also placed great emphasis on the risk associated with looking back at the cataclysmic event of biblical proportions. As Leon and his wife and 2 daughters fled the sinful city, his Indian wife “no name” turned remembering her favorite pot was left burning on the stove. As she looked back she was immediately turned into a pot of salty grits.

5 days later Leon and his two daughters realized no name was no where to be found. They found her tunic next to their momma’s favorite dish. Salty cheese grits. The girls panicked and came up with a plan.

“And the firstborn said to the younger “our father is old and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the world, come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him that we may preserve the lineage of our father. So they make their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and lay with her fathers, and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose. It happened on the next day that the firstborn said to the younger, “indeed I lay with my father last night; let us make him drink wine tonight also. And the younger arose and lay with him, and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose. Thus both the daughters of Lot were with child by their father. The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab; he is the father of the Moabites to this day. And the younger, she also bore a son and called his name Ben-Ammi; he is the father of the people Ammon to this day.

Now Moab took a road trip and settled his tribe in Wisconsin, as cheese was his favorite food. Among the Moab people, one woman named Nayhomely (Nay – homely) became very famous among the tribe as her husband died from their very long trip to the land of cheese and honey’s. After that, she and her two sons continued to live in the land of the Moabs and eventually each found a “honey” to marry. One to a woman named Roma, and the other to a woman named Oprah.

They all lived together in Wisconsin for ten years. Eventually, both men died, leaving Nayhomely, Roma, and Oprah as widows. Nayhomely then decided to go back to Georgia, as she was a woman who liked to eat and was excited when she heard it was being blessed with lots of food. Nahomely took both Roma and Oprah with her. Halfway through Illinois, she sent both Roma and Oprah away, as she wanted all the food for herself.

Roma and Oprah both said, "We will go with you." And Nayhomely again asked them: "Please go to your own homes, and may God bless you. Do I have more sons that you can marry?" Then she cried out, "Please go and find another house and another husband. I am old, and cannot remarry, but you are young, so go!" With all of Nayhomely’s pleading, Oprah finally listened. She slapped her mother-in-law and left weeping, but Roma still refused to leave.

Nayhomely then said to Roma, "Your sister-in-law has gone back to her home. Please leave me as I am selfish and want to die of gluttony." Roma replied, "Please do not ask me to leave! Wherever you go, I will follow, and where you stay, I will stay, and your people will be my people, and your God will be my God." And she added, "Where you die of overindulgence, I will die, and that is where I will be buried. May God let us be together until we both endure death by food."

When Nayhomely realized that Roma would not change her mind, she accepted, and they both traveled to the hot Georgia peanut fields together. When they arrived, Nayhomely and Roma stayed in the city only a while before they headed back towards Wisconsin. On the way back, they stopped to eat near the home of a man named Billy Joe.

Billy Joe needed some plantation help, so each day, Roma went out to the peanut fields and became a “peanut picker” for Billy Joe’s field. In his kindness, Billy Joe saw Roma shelling peanuts one evening, he told his workers, "When you pick the good nuts, let some of it fall to the ground for the poor to eat." He also asked them, "Who is that honey? What do you think my chances with her are?” The reapers answered, "She is foreign, and she came here with Nayhomely to eat."

One day soon after that, he met her in the fields and said to her, "Don't go to another field today, because I want you to till my fields." Roma fainted in aghast, and when she woke she asked, "You don’t even know me, you just want me for my body; you pig!!!" He replied, "No baby, I think you are a honey, but I am only attracted to you because you look like you can pull a plow." She smiled in relief as Billy Joe didn’t only want to know her so she went home with him to drink wine, and eat supper. Thoroughly tipsy, she returned to the peanut fields and began picking as Billy Joe demanded. She returned to Nayhomely and shared the food from Billy Joe’s farm and they both thanked their respective gods for their blessings.

The next day, Billy Joe declared his undying love for Roma, married her, knew her, and conceived a son with her. They named the souvenir of their peanut-field love, Owen, who eventually became the father of Jester, who was the father of the future (King David).

Merry Christmas...

In the rush of early morning,
When the red burns through the gray,
And the wintry world lies waiting
For the glory of the day,
Then we hear a fitful rustling
Just without upon the stair,
See two small white phantoms coming,
Catch the gleam of sunny hair.

Are they Christmas fairies stealing
Rows of little socks to fill?
Are they angels floating hither
With their message of good-will?
What sweet spell are these elves weaving,
As like larks they chirp and sing?
Are these palms of peace from heaven
That these lovely spirits bring?

Rosy feet upon the threshold,
Eager faces peeping through,
With the first red ray of sunshine,
Chanting cherubs come in view:
Mistletoe and gleaming holly,
Symbols of a blessed day,
In their chubby hands they carry,
Streaming all along the way.

Well we know them, never weary
Of this innocent surprise;
Waiting, watching, listening always
With full hearts and tender eyes,
While our little household angels,
White and golden in the sun,
Greet us with the sweet old welcome,--
"Merry Christmas, every one!"

-- Louisa May Alcott, 1876

A Lawyer, A Bowl, and A Wedding...

When Lynda Sexson was our guest speaker and we wrote an event, a person, and an object on a notecard and were instructed to pass them systematically around the room, I ended up with a lawer, a bowl, and a wedding. My proverb, though not very good nor profound is this. "Most people would like to donate a bowl of common sense to a lawyer, however; her lover, at their wedding, sees only her wisdom and understanding." So basically, everyone else in the world sees the stupidity of some lawyers, but to ones significant other, faults are unnoticable. Anyways, I thought that it would be fun if everyone shared the proverb with the class...so here is mine, dumb as it is...it is a good thing that I wasn't the one writing the book of Proverbs....eek!

I Hate Cats...

Sunny Rae, your Jaws story was really cute, however I really hate cats. The crazy lady who lives above me finds it necessary to have 3 of them. Not only do I detest them, I am extremely alergic to them, so I have to buy special filters for EVERY bloody vent in the house, and a heppa one for the heater so I don't die. However, the story was very funny, and it made me extremely thankful that I am so alergic to the crazy felines. Thanks for the post, it made me chuckle! ;)

I found this on the internet, and laughed so hard that I snorted...enjoy!

What happens when you have...
1) nothing to do
2) a sharp knife
3) a large lime
4) a patient cat
5) too much tequila
6) and it's football season?

The Separation Myth...

In class MS mentioned the phrase "Separation of Church and State" when he was talking about theocracy which is a word used to describe a form of government in which a religion or faith plays a dominant role. This statement made me realize that a lot of people are not informed as to what this phrase really means. There is no law separating the church from the state, but rather one that protects the church from state interference...there is so much misunderstanding about this idea that I found it necessary to post from a website entitled "The Myth of Separation of Church and State".


"Anytime religion is mentioned within the confines of government today people cry, "Separation of Church and State". Many people think this statement appears in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and therefore must be strictly enforced. However, the words: "separation", "church", and "state" do not even appear in the first amendment. The first amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The statement about a wall of separation between church and state was made in a letter on January 1, 1802, by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut. The congregation heard a widespread rumor that the Congregationalists, another denomination, were to become the national religion. This was very alarming to people who knew about religious persecution in England by the state established church. Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God.

Jefferson's letter from which the phrase "separation of church and state" was taken affirmed first amendment rights. Jefferson wrote: I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. The reason Jefferson choose the expression "separation of church and state" was because he was addressing a Baptist congregation; a denomination of which he was not a member. Jefferson wanted to remove all fears that the state would make dictates to the church. He was establishing common ground with the Baptists by borrowing the words of Roger Williams, one of the Baptist's own prominent preachers. Williams had said: When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that there fore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world...

The "wall" was understood as one-directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values. The American people knew what would happen if the State established the Church like in England. Even though it was not recent history to them, they knew that England went so far as forbidding worship in private homes and sponsoring all church activities and keeping people under strict dictates. They were forced to go to the state established church and do things that were contrary to their conscience. No other churches were allowed, and mandatory attendance of the established church was compelled under the Conventicle Act of 1665. Failure to comply would result in imprisonment and torture. The people did not want freedom from religion, but freedom of religion.

The only real reason to separate the church from the state would be to instill a new morality and establish a new system of beliefs. Our founding fathers were God-fearing men who understood that for a country to stand it must have a solid foundation; the Bible was the source of this foundation. They believed that God's ways were much higher than Man's ways and held firmly that the Bible was the absolute standard of truth and used the Bible as a source to form our government.

There is no such thing as a pluralistic society. There will always be one dominant view, otherwise it will be in transition from one belief system to another. Therefore, to say Biblical principles should not be allowed in government and school is to either be ignorant of the historic intent of the founding fathers, or blatantly bigoted against Christianity. Each form of government has a guiding principle: monarchy in which the guiding principle is honor; aristocracy in which the guiding principle is moderation; republican democracy in which the guiding principle is virtue; despotism in which the guiding principle is fear. Without people of the United States upholding good moral conduct, society soon degenerates into a corrupt system where people misuse the authority of government to obtain what they want at the expense of others. The U.S. Constitution is the form of our government, but the power is in the virtue of the people. The virtue desired of the people is shown in the Bible. This is why Biblical morality was taught in public schools until the early 1960's. Government officials were required to declare their belief in God even to be allowed to hold a public office until a case in the U.S. Supreme Court called Torcaso v. Watkins (Oct. 1960).

God was seen as the author of natural law and morality. If one did not believe in God one could not operate from a proper moral base. And by not having a foundation from which to work, one would destroy the community. The two primary places where morality is taught are the family and the church. The church was allowed to influence the government in righteousness an d justice so that virtue would be upheld. Not allowing the church to influence the state is detrimental to the country and destroys our foundation of righteousness and justice. It is absolutely necessary for the church to influence the state in virtue because without virtue our government will crumble -- the representatives will look after their own good instead of the country's.

Government was never meant to be our master as in a ruthless monarchy or dictatorship. Instead, it was to be our servant. The founding fathers believed that the people have full power to govern themselves and that people chose to give up some of their rights for the general good and the protection of rights. Each person should be self-governed and this is why virtue is so important. Government was meant to serve the people by protecting their liberty and rights, not serve by an enormous amount of social programs. The authors of the Constitution wanted the government to have as little power as possible so that if authority was misused it would not cause as much damage. Yet they wanted government to have enough authority to protect the rights of the people. The worldview at the time of the founding of our government was a view held by the Bible: that Man's heart is corrupt and if the opportunity to advance oneself at the expense of another arose, more often than not, we would choose to do so. They firmly believed this and that's why an enormous effort to set up checks and balances took place. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. They wanted to make certain that no man could take away rights given by God. They also did not set up the government as a true democracy, because they believed, as mentioned earlier, Man tends towards wickedness. Just because the majority wants something does not mean that it should be granted, because the majority could easily err. Government was not to be run by whatever the majority wanted but instead by principle, specifically the principles of the Bible.

Our U.S. Constitution was founded on Biblical principles and it was the intention of the authors for this to be a Christian nation. The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians. We can go back in history and look at what the founding fathers wrote to know where they were getting their ideas. This is exactly what two professors did. Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman reviewed an estimated 15,000 items with explicit political content printed between 1760 and 1805 and from these items they identified 3,154 references to other sources. The source they most often quoted was the Bible, accounting for 34% of all citations. Sixty percent of all quotes came from men who used the Bible to form their conclusions. That means that 94% of all quotes by the founding fathers were based on the Bible. The founding fathers took ideas from the Bible and incorporated them into our government. If it was their intention to separate the state and church they would never have taken principles from the Bible and put them into our government. An example of an idea taken from the Bible and then incorporated into our government is found in Isaiah 33:22 which says, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers took this scripture and made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive. As mentioned earlier, the founding fathers strongly believed that Man was by nature corrupt and therefore it was necessary to separate the powers of the government.

For instance, the President has the power to execute laws but not make them, and Congress has the power to make laws but not to judge the people. The simple principle of checks and balances came from the Bible to protect people from tyranny. The President of the United States is free to influence Congress, although he can not exercise authority over it because they are separated. Since this is true, why should the church not be allowed to influence the state? People have read too much into the phrase "separation of church and state", which is to be a separation of civil authority from ecclesiastical authority, not moral values. Congress has passed laws that it is illegal to murder and steal, which is the legislation of morality. These standards of morality are found in the Bible. Should we remove them from law because the church should be separated from the state?

Our founding fathers who formed the government also formed the educational system of the day. John Witherspoon did not attend the Constitutional Convention although he was President of New Jersey College in 1768 (known as Princeton since 1896) and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His influence on the Constitution was far ranging in that he taught nine of fifty-five original delegates. He fought firmly for religious freedom and said, "God grant that in America true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable and that unjust attempts to destroy the one may in the issue tend to the support and establishment of both." In October 1961 the Supreme Court of the United States removed prayer from schools in a case called Engel v. Vitale. The case said that because the U.S. Constitution prohibits any law respecting an establishment of religion officials of public schools may not compose public prayer even if the prayer is denominationally neutral, and that pupils may choose to remain silent or be excused while the prayer is being recited.

For 185 years prayer was allowed in public and the Constitutional Convention itself was opened with prayer. If the founding fathers didn't want prayer in government why did they pray publicly in official meetings? It is sometimes said that it is permissible to pray in school as long as it is silent. Although, "In Omaha, Nebraska, 10-year old James Gierke was prohibited from reading his Bible silently during free time... the boy was forbidden by his teacher to open his Bible at school and was told doing so was against the law." The U.S. Supreme Court with no precedent in any court history said prayer will be removed from school. Yet the Supreme Court in January, 1844 in a case named Vidal v. Girard's Executors, a school was to be built in which no ecclesiastic, missionary, or minister of any sect whatsoever was to be allowed to even step on the property of the school. They argued over whether a layman could teach or not, but they agreed that, "...there is an obligation to teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality." This has been the precedent throughout 185 years. Although this case is from 1844, it illustrates the point. The prayer in question was not even lengthy or denominationally geared. It was this: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country." What price have we paid by removing this simple acknowledgment of God's protecting hand in our lives? Birth rates for unwed girls from 15-19; sexually transmitted diseases among 10-14 year olds; pre-marital sex increased; violent crime; adolescent homicide have all gone up considerably from 1961 to the 1990's -- even after taking into account population growth. The Bible, before 1961, was used extensively in curriculum. After the Bible was removed, scholastic aptitude test scores dropped considerably.

There is no such thing as a pluralistic society; there will always be one dominant view. Someone's morality is going to be taught -- but whose? Secular Humanism is a religion that teaches that through Man's ability we will reach universal peace and unity and make heaven on earth. They promote a way of life that systematically excludes God and all religion in the traditional sense. That Man is the highest point to which nature has evolved, and he can rely on only himself and that the universe was not created, but instead is self-existing. They believe that Man has the potential to be good in and of himself. All of this of course is in direct conflict with not only the teachings of the Bible but even the lessons of history. In June 1961 in a case called Torcaso v. Watkins, the U.S. Supreme Court stated, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others." The Supreme Court declared Secular Humanism to be a religion. The American Humanist Association certifies counselors who enjoy the same legal status as ordained ministers. Since the Supreme Court has said that Secular Humanism is a religion, why is it being allowed to be taught in schools? The removal of public prayer of those who wish to participate is, in effect, establishing the religion of Humanism over Christianity. This is exactly what our founding fathers tried to stop from happening with the first amendment."

http://www.noapathy.org/tracts/mythofseparation.html