No Laughing Matter

Neil Postman ends his book with a thought-provoking point. He bases this point off of Aldous Huxley's book Brave New World. The problem is not that we laugh at things rather than thinking about them. Not knowing why we laugh or why we stop thinking is the real problem. Many of the things on television and radio fill our minds with useless information yet entertain us for hours. Why? Because they do not provoke thought and there is no effort to care that no thinking is necessary. In today's standard, you don't have to understand something to be entertained. Simply laughing at "entertaining" shows and programs is the norm. Laughter without reason is what Huxley is warning the people of today about. Thinking is also a lost art because of the entertainment put out today. Rarely does a show on television cause us to truly think or philosiphy. This deadly combination, according to Postman, is what will determine how our society will grow or decline.

Silent Friday

Not being able to talk during the school day was frustrating. I could not convey what I was thinking to others through my drawings. The silence was irritating around friends. Many conversations I would have liked to join were passed up. Overall, speech is taken for granted by people everyday because of the use of computers and cell phones.

Dr. Postman's Parallels

Dr. Postman stated in the video that "humans will become pets of their computers." This statement eerily parallels today's society that glorifies social networking and an almost religious use of computers. Also, Postman describes in Amusing Ourselves to Death  how the invention of the clock controls what people do with their lives. The concept of time is created, wasted, or spent. Life is put into a perspective of time. Time dictates how and what is done by people. He also mentions how the alphabet breaks down speech and creates for itself new jobs and problems. Overall, Postman feels that the inventions of man eventually end up becoming the masters of their creators.

You Call Them Fightin' Words?

            Linda Chavez’s first six words, “Civility in public discourse is important,” are used to explain that in public speech words should not be radical and racist. Chavez uses the word “bellicose” to describe the metaphors because they demonstrate aggression and willingness to fight. She believes that words should be thought-provoking and have meaning to them. Chavez tries to persuade the readers of the column that being politically correct all the time takes away from the liberty of free speech and freedom of expression. The best example that she uses is the “handbook” used by the Los Angeles Times when using words referring to a race. She makes a strong point that “words themselves aren't the problem -- it's what is behind the words that matters.” I agree with Chavez because words are not the problem it’s the context in which certain words are used. Racial slurs and stereotypes shouldn’t be used, but disowning words that upset “touchy” subjects takes away from expressing views. Without expressing views, the art of speech will soon become a lost art.

Reusing What God Gave You

Mr. Semrau’s point in the article is that “Most of us have many things that we don’t or won’t use-things we no longer need.” He’s simply stating that the things that are leftover are hardly ever put to a good use again. The intent to withhold information from the reader during the article helps draw the reader into the story involuntarily. As Mr. Semrau is 75 years old, the reader is drawn into the discussion because it is odd to hear that a man of that age would have an interest in going to medical school when his working career was over. Then, as the story goes on, Semrau gives little hints about his medical interests and how it was a lost dream of his. The story about his hip arthroplasty and the storing of his femur in a jar helps show that he truly has a love for the medical field. I believe that writing strategy used by Semrau was effective because his interesting anecdotes about his younger days help the reader better understand exactly why he was going on about recycling. However, the whole recycling discussion was foreshadowing to the recycling of one’s own body for good use.

Christmas and Judgment Day: The Perfect Couple

Luther’s theme in the hymn “Savior of the Nations, Come” is praising God. He uses description to describe Judgment Day and how we as Christians can approach it. Christ is glorified in every verse in some sort of way. He thanks Christ for coming down to earth and being born in such a humble way and also for dying on the cross for our sins. Luther reassures Christians that on Judgment Day Christ will be exalted and the day will be one of happiness. Christ and His believers will all be victorious on this day. The birth of Christ is also alluded to and can be compared to His Second Coming. By describing both, Luther is able to show that both Christ’s birth and His Second Coming both are reasons to celebrate. Each of these events are to be seen as equally important. Even as we Christians celebrate Christmas, Christ’s First Coming, we can still have the hope of looking forward to the day that He takes us home to be in heaven with him. However, this is not to say that we should overlook Christmas Day. Both days have equal significance and both are to be celebrated with joy.

Are Sermons Really Christ-Centered?

1. Reverend Borghardt use the word "Christ" a total of 24 times. Some verbs uses to reveal what Christ does: makes holy, slain, took your sins, died for you, lives again, died, rose, makes us alive, does not push away, smiles, reigns on the throne, and lives with.

2.

The themes of Reverend Borghardt and Thomas Edwards’ sermons contrast heavily when compared. Bordhardt’s sermon had a slightly uneven balance of Law and Gospel, but the Gospel was preached primarily in his sermon. Edward’s sermon was almost completely law and mentioned Christ few times, leaving the listener with little to no hope. Borghardt was able to tell the congregation that they were sinful and could do nothing to follow the Law completely, but his heavy use of the Gospel gave the reassurance of Christ. Edwards, on the other hand, condemned his congregation and gave them almost no hope in Christ.