Adverse affects of an online world

 

    I am not a fan of modern technology. So to express my feelings and reasonings towards a small portion of technology, I shall use the internet!
   Before I get ahead of myself, let me give an example: have you ever been walking up to, I dunno, say your car. You've had a pleasant enough time at the gym/grocery store/ doctor's office (okay, maybe not that last one) when you notice something on your windshield. It's white, folded gently in half, and placed tenderly beneath your windshield wipers. You, unlike most people, grab it and examine it. Your suspicions were correct, it is indeed a piece of paper. To your surprise, when the paper is unfolded you see a message scribbled on it. Not signed by anyone in particular, in flawless cursive, it reads,
"Hey buddy! Learn to park whydontcha? Because of you I had to park all the way on the other end of the parking lot! You have officially ruined my day, and I sure hope your*Grammatical error purposefully and realistically placed* satisfied! People like you should find a hole to crawl in an die!"
   Upon these wise words, you examine your car and find that you are well within the parking lines. And despite your efforts, and the apparent thoughtfulness with which this gentle soul solicited information to you, you are slightly unsettled.

   I don't know if any one of you has actually had this happen; but I personally know of three cases which happened to people very close to me within a few months.This is one of the more extreme, though not uncommon, ways people are manifesting their selfish need for making sure they are heard. Look at bumper stickers reading "Coexist" or "Go green" or "Make tacos, not war" or "has anyone seen my Constitutional Rights?" or "I fish, therefore I lie." Do you think these are really being used to solve a problem? To make people think about their actions and convince them of their shortcomings? Are you questioning whether that last one was a legitimate bumper sticker *answer is yes*?
     Personally, I think people are trying to END the conversation, as if their word is final. There is no controversy, I'm infallibly right because it is MY opinion. Kinda contradictory if you think about it.
    
     Something strange has begun to happen in the world today, unlike anything that has happened before: people in the world...are not always being nice *take this moment to breathe from the shock that is obviously taking place*
   More particularly, people are being cowardly, selfishly unkind.  How is it selfish? Well, are they necessarily waiting to see what might be said in return? Are they trying to solve a problem? Are they really trying to teach anyone by this kind of behavior? Or do you think they really just want to ruin someone's day because they are being sourpusses?
      Now personally, and I am something of a radical, I think the last scenario is most likely. First, people have become so wrapped up in their own lives, that they believe they are the only ones who can know truth.

     Now I don't know if bumper stickers are contributed to technological advances, but I think the first example is. Today, online, you can say whatever you want, and if you want, no one will even know it was you. People can be downright mean, tear someone up and down and all around, and never reveal who they are. Because of this, people think they can do the same thing in real life. They will write nasty letters, choose not to wait to discuss their problems in person, and leave. They don't want to solve the problem, they just want to hurt people. And I think technology has desensitized people towards humanity. You can make posts without thinking twice about who you're hurting, what their life is like (whether it be a living Hell, or they are a mother Teresa.)
   People have had a taste of what it's like to have their opinion heard, and not have to face consequences for the way it is presented. Nor do they have to waste time with the other side of the argument.


What is to be learned from this? I think several things 1) People are not always nice. 2) You should try to be nice. 3) Technology is not always good. 4) Lexi is somewhat incoherent and abruptly stops writing when she is tired and trying to create an article. 5)Don't let your day be ruined because someone will go to extreme extents to ruin it. 6) Jst Like w/ txt splling, witch has began 2 coz people 2 forgit how 2 spell, the internet haz rezalted in wot may b a other downside.

"You'll never be alone"

"I'm the street lights that guide you home
I'll be the GPS when you've lost your phone
I'll be the song that's rockin' in your headphones
I'll show you the signs to let you know
You'll never be alone"

This is the chorus from "Capital Kings"'s new song: "You'll Never Be Alone." I don't know if any of you have tuned into your local Christian radio stations lately, but you may have heard this song. I just thought I'd share some of my thoughts on it.

The first thing I noticed from this song was its fun, dance-like beat. Now, usually I prefer music under the genres of classical, showtune, opera, and orchestrated. This song uses a techno style. Meaning a very computer generated sound, which I'm am typically against for this reason: if everything in the world only uses autotuning, real talent will begin to be overlooked, and ultimately become unimportant in success. But setting that aside, I think they used it pretty well. It's pleasant enough to listen to, and it an all around fun sounding song.

The song's techno-style tune is also very fitting in regards to the content, which lists some common electronic devices that God can use to His advantage, showing you that He is always there. Now, I think it is important that people know God is there for them, and that He loves them (okay, important is a slight understatement, it is something He reflects on for numerous books in the Bible.) I also understand the concept of His using any and everything to His ultimate purposes. But, I think the way this song presents Him only captures half of the picture. It shows Him chasing after us, while we indulge in things that are very secular.

The Old Testament prophets, Psalms, and much of the New Testament often depict the Church and Christ as two entities: the Bride and the Bridegroom. It should be unargued that being with Christ is a relationship. If only the bride (or groom) shows interest in marriage, chasing after the groom (or bride) with no results, there can be no relationship. It takes both sides, actively loving, and manifesting this love, for there to be a relationship present. And not ignoring the fact that any relationship can hit "dry-spots," this song ignores the fact that we are also supposed to seek God in return for His reaching out to us. (Hebrews 11:6)

I want to make sure it is understood that I fully believe that God manifests Himself to us in everyday life; but in things like cell phones, iPods, computers, TV etc. I think it is a lot rarer. I think this way because I have watched things like facebook and phones, and at most, what I've seen are things that distract from God. We are very logical creatures, and if we seek to justify something we do, that our conscience tells us is wrong, (like spending too much time on facebook or searching things on the internet that are probably best left alone) we can easily find means to justify it. On top of that, the devil is VERY clever, (I simply cannot emphasize this enough) and if manipulating certain posts from your friends, or letting you research something about God for half a moment will keep you online and away from peace, and quiet time, taken aside for prayer and Bible, he is more that willing to accomodate. If you want to see God really at work, put down the electronics, step outside and take a deep breath. Notice the birds, the mountains (if you have them) or any other created thing. Take a moment to reflect on the way He has truly blessed you in life. THAT is where God manifests Himself daily, not so much in the secular things of the world.

Now, I have a tendency to look too into things. So I may be missing the entire point of this song, but from what I can see of it, it lacks depth. It depicts a world where God loves you so much that He will accommodate everything you take part in in the secular world, which certainly is not impossible. But in a world that is being overrun by technology, and ultimately distractions, I don't find it realistic. I think this song can also be dangerous, in an extreme way, that causes people to think: "Oh it's fine for me to go on facebook instead of reading my Bible, because God is in all things." I don't think this mindset is contributed only by this song, but I think it can contribute encouragement.

All-in-all, I don't think this is a bad song at all. It's fun to listen to, and it does represent a part of God. But it represents the part of God that most people, minus those who feel genuinely all alone in the world or atheists, choose to believe. Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, "Christians" who believe that pre-marital sex and/or homosexuality is perfectly acceptable (even celebrated,) and on and on, believe in these aspects of God.

I don't know. I guess this song just lacks depth. It doesn't really delve into deep truths, or much of God's character. At best, I would say this is a party song, like something you'd hear at a dance by Katy Perry, or anyone else who is momentarily popular.

It's something to dance to.

Something to be learned?

Before reading any further, if you have not seen this video, please watch it. If you choose not to watch it because it is 5 minutes and 30 seconds of your life you may never get back, you should best not read ahead or at all for that matter. If you have already seen it,  I give you fullest permission not to waste another 5 minutes and 30 seconds. Or if you like reading articles that make little to no sense because you don't know what they are pertaining to, feel free also to read through; and I hope that you find this as one of the better nonsensical pieces you have encountered. Finally, if you are choosing to pretend to read this article, while you are really skimming through hoping to gain some points here and there so you can leave a comment  feel free as well. (Hey, it's better to have people pretending to be interested in what you write than having no one at all;))

If you are reading my blog, you are probably thinking, "Wow, that's not biblical..." because most of you who read it agree with me. But if you are not, (welcome to the site by the way) and you disagree with me, and therefore cannot be closely associated with me (:P) you may be thinking, "Way to go Pastor J.! Tell them sinners to start acting the way God calls us to." After all, Jesus got what could be called "snippy" with the Pharisees on several occasions. Goodness, he even acted out in righteous anger calling the salesmen inside the temple thieves. Peter and Paul and many others are also seen actively rebuking people.

I would have to disagree in several areas,
1) Jesus is God, i.e. He kinda knows everything, including how to make every individual receptive to what He says.

2) He was very humble, and stated facts like "I am God." Not saying, "I am important, you all should be paying attention to me." He also rebuked this behavior passionately.

3) When He rebuked the Pharisees and such, He rebuked them as a group, not as individuals. And only in one case that I can recall (and I admit fully that I could easily be wrong, and ask that references would be provided for other such cases) did he rebuke an individual, Matt. 16:23, which was not directed at Peter to irk him, but as a means of literally rebuking Satan.

4) Mt 18:15-17 "Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." Which pretty explicitly tells us what we are supposed to do, not what Jesus in His infinite wisdom, or Paul and the other apostles with their face-to-face conversations with God, did.

And finally 5) When he took his swig of water and said, "That felt good." It reminded me of this scenario:

Which....did not make for a good impression on my part. But that probably just proved my bias.


So what can we say we've learned from this? Perhaps that as a pastor, one should do as Jesus tells us to do and not what you think He was doing. Perhaps that we should pray for our pastors as the Bible also commands us, so that the immense stress of their job, and the constant power Satan puts into causing these personifications of Christianity to stumble.

But one thing we all have hopefully learned, as a few of the wise youtube commentators speculated: All hail King of the Video Room!

The Short Person Chronicles

First off, my apologies for taking so long for another installment in my constantly entertaining and true experiences. Tales that are so terrifying, and unbelievable, that to anyone above 5'5" they must appear science-fiction. But believe me, all these tales are true, and my purpose in writing them is that you may grow to appreciate what we go through, in our constant struggle against chairs too high for our feet to reach the floor, and cupboards to high for our arms to reach.


Today, I want to talk about doing chores...from a five-foot-three viewpoint.

I'm must say, I am immensely blessed to have the wonderful chore of laundry. Sure it piles up quickly if you stop doing it, and sure there are some pretty nasty articles of clothing one has to touch in order to put it into the washing machine. True the cycle never seems to end but hey: at least it's not washing dishes.

My favorite part about laundry is folding. Taking an hour and a half to match every single sock, making sure not a single trait is skipped out on. We certainly don't want a slightly longer hem with a semi-shorter one of seemingly identical socks. And forbid that we mix a navy-blue sock with a black one. It's like a little detective game. "You thought you could trick me didn't you seemingly similar sock packages of 20 that no longer come with any more than one matching pair of socks."
Ah yes, I feel like a true Sherlock Holmes when doing laundry.

But there is one aspect of doing laundry, not exclusive to it, but for my case is prominently found in doing laundry, that is all but loathsome to me.

(<--Yup, I'm an artist too, and that speck there next to the drawn cupboard was not a mistake...it was actually an artfully placed, rogue fly, and if you don't understand the depth and significance of its presence, you must be in altitudes where the air is thinner)


That's right...the terrifying, and ominous too-high cupboard. Either tall people are completely thoughtless when it comes to cupboards twice the height of us Shirefolk, or whether they find it funny to see us struggle, this is a horrifying idea. Placed so intricately, that your fingertips can barely open it, but not in your wildest dreams could you grab anything out, or as in my case, put something in.

Though, unlike any other resourceful person, I wouldn't think of grabbing a chair to put things away. Why is this? Perhaps it is my constant desire to overcome the daily evils inflicted by those taller than me. Maybe it is the ever present hope to one day meet a cupboard that is actually placed within reach. It could be that I wish to see the big folk suffer the consequences of putting something out of reach. But most likely, it is because I am too lazy.

Either way, those towels have to get in there. And what better way to get them up there than to throw the towels up there and slam the cupboard doors shut before they all come tumbling on top of me.

I now only wish I would learn not to be the first one to grab a hand-towel. Then I could really laugh at all them unsuspecting tall people.

Until next time,
5'3"

Men

As the students began filing in from recess, Miss Sophia began writing a word onto the board.

 P-E-N-M-A-N-S-H-I-P

"Penmanship, this is a very important skill that you all need to...Uh, yes  Cales."

Miss California Aphron had shot her hand up very quickly. She was the only kindergartener who refused to play with the other kids on account of their childishness.

"Yes. Miss Sophia, I find the word you've chosen highly offensive. Penmanship excludes women, the correct term would be handwriting."

Without blinking, Miss Sophia responded, "Your are absolutely right Cales, and right after class I will tell you why I did not use it."

***

After class, California went straight up to Miss Sophia, and stared directly at her until all the other children had exited the classroom. 

Miss Sophia set down the papers she had been grading and said, "Now, you were concerned that by using the word 'penmanship' I might be offending people. And you are absolutely right in that we should be careful how we speak, because it might offend people. One wrong word can easily upset someone in an unnecessary and avoidable way. 

"But you see, I did not use your suggested term 'handwriting' because I did not also want to offend those without hands. It would be all too painful for them to be constantly reminded that they cannot write well, if at all. And this would be far more painful, I find, to be constantly reminded of a handicap, than a reminder of being a female."

"Yes, but Miss Sophia," California said, "we have no students here with handicaps. You must also keep in mind who your audience is."

Miss Sophia laughed, "Of course you're right. But children are very prone to repeat the things they hear. And if they went about. repeating such terminology around others, they are far more likely to bring about a painful reminder to some unsuspecting victim.

"Now it is possible for me to have used simply the term 'writing,' as that would have avoided offending many people, but then that could cause much confusion. In a world that is constantly advancing technologically, one could easily mistake 'writing' to mean, 'texting,' or 'typing up an e-mail.' So the term 'writing' didn't exactly fit either."

California looked down at her tennis shoes and sighed. "Ma'am, I can see what you are saying, and one cannot go very far before taking these offenses into account can become awkward. But you have become very sloppy in the way you speak. Perhaps becoming upset over this  specific word was the wrong time for me to try and prove my point, but there have been many other times I planned to say something and refrained from speaking, much to my later regret. For instance, the other day you used the word 'police man,' when you could have instead said 'Police officer.' Words like 'manage', 'mania', and 'manners', all of these words mean positive things, and exclude women as a part of it. You really must learn to take these things into account, being a worker of the state in a public school."

"Ahh yes, but you are forgetting words like 'maniac', 'demanding', and 'mandibles'. The first refers to a person of unsavory nature, the second referring to a character trait that no one wishes to be identified with, and the last ones are an unsightly growth on some animals. We are more likely the ones subjecting men to these harms, and yet we do not see them complaining. And do not forget as well, that in changing 'man' to 'woman' you still must incorporate the word 'man.'"

"But we must see fit that women, er, females get the respect they deserve. It is not so much what the word means that is the problem, it is the fact that females are excluded from it. Whether or not people will see it, women are discriminated against!" California said, raising her voice. "Have we ever had a woman president? Of course not! Despite the fact that they've given us the right to vote, and dress according to our wills, they still discriminate according to sexes!"

"Is that really the reason women are not being voted into presidency? African Americans were once considered lower than women, and yet we see today--"

"An African American man."

"--Does the fact that no woman has become president necessarily follow that it is because they are discriminated against? I'm sure with plenty of people like you in the world that is not the problem. Perhaps we have either 1) had unequipped women, excuse me, females," Miss Sophia said with a wink, "running for office, 2) they are, in comparison to other male candidates, a worse choice, 3) they are not Republican or Democratic, and are not being voted on by the majority of our country because the parties containing the most voters is not the one they identify with. 

"And are we to find a solution to this problem, if it is indeed a problem, through changing our many vocabulary words containing the term 'man'? I am certain when someone's house is burning down, no one's concern is whether or not they call firemen by their proper, unsexist names. Their only concern is likely to put the fire out.

"You see, people will always be offended, there are people in the world whose purposes are to search for why the world hates them. These people are called 'victims' (they should be happy to see that this word does not exclude any gender.)"

 California was upset, very clearly. She was obviously being picked on for her age, she was unequipped to debate someone more than several times her age. People pick on her, and it's because they don't like conflict. They want to remain shut up in their senseless little worlds without reason.

As she silently left, Miss Sophia's husband, Cosmo, entered the room. He noticed California and remained standing, holding the door open with a smile. California inwardly groaned, Typical, she thought, treating me as if I am unequipped to open a door. She stormed out, shaking her head, and with one last glance back, she saw Miss Sophia laughing as Cosmo shrugged his shoulders.

Phantastes by George Macdonald

      Have you ever picked up a book, read a couple of pages or chapters, then within that short amount of time been able to predict the entire plot and/or ending? I have. It sometimes feels like I've read many books before that I have in fact not. Sometimes it's nice to have a change of things, to pick something up to read, or watch something on TV for you "rent-the-movie-for-the-book-report" folks out there, and have everything that happens be entirely unpredictable. And right when you think, "HA! Nice try _________________ I have you now!" They throw something so unbelievably unpredictable you giggle

with excitement. That was EXACTLY (more or less) how I felt when I read George Macdonalds Phantastes.

       Truth be told I never had a single moment where I even tried to predict what would happen next. Anyone who has read Phantastes will know exactly why.

     Please excuse my overuse of examples, but here is one more: Have you ever had a dream? But not just any dream, one that stirred your emotions every which way and back again, and so much happened, but the moment you gained consciousness, despite extreme efforts to return to that place, you could not remember any bit of it, or if you did, it was only like a small handful of pictures. I have. That is as close to describing Phantastes as possibly I will ever get. 

     The story is considered a "Coming of Age" story for the main character named Anodos, but I really found very little of that when I read it. It was like literaturical (<--real made up word meaning: having to do with literature) symphony. The main character journeys from one dream like scenario to another, none of them seeming to really overlap. One thing that DOES remain consistent is his desire for his "white" or "stone" lady. This portion of the tale forms a kind of Pygmalion like story, he sung her into life, but try as he might, he cannot attain her. Just like in the dreams that you wake up from but cannot remember, there are certain parts that just struck you as so beautiful, you tried to find them again. You might even recall succeeding, but once you found it, something about it changed significantly, and you can never recall it being the same as it once was. 

     This story goes through several different levels of "dreams" which I shall list here:

Rational, meaning that quite a bit of it made sense and even seemed possible when you awake, such as a conversation with someone.

Trapped, meaning you suddenly find yourself in a place that you can't quite explain very well how you came from a place that was safe and even almost happy, to this place that is dark and desolate.

Consistent, which I have previously explained regarding the White Lady

 Picturesque, meaning it was just the site of beautiful things

Nightmare, the portion that has you running, though you don't know what from, you hide in the shadows only to discover that that is exactly where it is, or where the atmosphere is dark, cold, windy, and there is a seemingly never-ending pit right close to you, and against all your efforts, you fall in.

There are many, MANY more aspects to this book that I am just not literaturically (gonna use that in daily sentences from now on) capable of describing. 

Despite the fact that C.S. Lewis is significantly more renowned, MacDonald can possibly be attributed much of C.S. Lewis's inspiration for fantasy writing.

 This book is a fantastic read! I can not describe it to you well enough, but I suggest you pick up a copy (I believe there is a free edition available on Google books) as soon as you can. It is one of the most interesting reads I have ever encountered!

Video of the Appointed time

One thing I LOVE about old TV shows is that they are unedited. It so much more real and fun to watch for bloopers and how the actors fix their mistakes. Let's see if you can catch the blooper. Enter in the comments if you saw it. I'll give you a hint, it's after 2:45.

"WWJD?"?

   "Free Hugs" read the cardboard sign a shaggy haired, large teenage boy was holding up. You pass by skeptically, detecting that his intents are less than innocent. 

   "Come on," he says, "what would Jesus do?"

   Jesus, possibly, would have hugged, but more than likely he would lead him to Matthew chapter five and suggest he take a good hard look there. 

   

    I honestly am not a big fan of this statement, "What Would Jesus Do," or rather, I find it needs greater clarification. You are not Jesus. No one is Jesus except...well...Jesus.

  Isaiah 55: 8-9 says,  

"'For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
       neither are your ways my ways,'
    declares the Lord.

As the heavens are higher than the earth,
    so are my ways higher than your ways
    and my thoughts than your thoughts."

     This verse is not saying that God's wisdom is attainable by Christians. This verse says that we CAN NOT know what God is thinking, or why He does what He does. 

    Now, Jesus is God, part of the triune godhead consisting of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. "LORD" is another term for God. So this verse can also be applied to Christ. 

   "WWJD" means that we would know what Jesus would do, which this verse clearly proves we can't. Very few of us actually have faith enough to hear what God is saying directly to you at every moment of the day. In some parts of the Bible, Jesus will rebuke people at what seems like random. In reality, we simply lack His understanding. Another reason for this is because we can't see peoples' hearts, so we don't know an accurate time to rebuke people often rather than love them.

   I think a MUCH better abbreviation to put on the millions of bracelets in the world would be: "WWJHMD." Translated "What Would Jesus Have Me Do." I think if we look at situations from a "What would He have me do" perspective, a lot of situations will be easier to think through. 

   After all, the Bible tells us what we should do, it does not tell us too much about why He does what He does.

Suzianity

Suzy, a beautiful young woman, has been moved by the church after one moving sermon, and she has decided that she does not want eternal punishment for her wrongs (the few that they are) and has decided to pick up her Bible and start reading.
But where to begin? Well how about from the beginning? She opens the perfectly well kept book from her living room coffee table, wipes the few inches of dust from the top, sneezes a couple successive times, and opens it to the first page.

"Genesis 1:1, In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth."

Now wait a second...that can't be right, leading scientists have proven that the earth was formed by an accident. Aw well, she'll just brim over that. After all, God could have given the Big Bang a little nudge. She continues reading, and after a few more verses realizes how wrong this book is. It didn't take a handful of days to create the earth! It took millions of years...The Bible must have forgotten something! Clearly none of this can't be true! Monkeys weren't made on the sixth day and then man a day later! Everyone knows monkeys share 98% of their DNA with us.
Frustrated, she turns randomly to the end of the Bible, to the New Testament.

"1 Timothy 6:10; For the love of money is the root of all evil."
Now granted money can go to some peoples' heads, but money is good, it gives us food, and clean clothes, a warm house (and Comcar cable at the low price of  $29.99 a month.)

"Matt 5:21-22, You have heard that it was said to an older generation, ‘Do not murder,’ and ‘whoever murders will be subjected to judgment.’ But I say to you that anyone who is angry with a brother will be subjected to judgment. And whoever insults a brother will be brought before the council, and whoever says ‘Fool’ will be sent to fiery Hell"
That's a little harsh! Surely everyone gets mad. Goodness! Even Jesus got mad (somewhere) and he certainly didn't go to Hell. This Bible is clearly contradicting itself.

"Rom. 1:26-28; For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

What!? But Suzy best friend Johanna is a lesbian! God clearly cannot mean that it is wrong! The people who wrote this must not have really known who God is. Oh, but Suzy knows. God is tolerant.

Ah, this looks better: 2 Corinthians 9:8, "And God is able to bless you abundantly, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work."

THAT'S the God she knows.



So many things can be said about this situation, and though fictional (the girl's name was actually Sherly) it is far too near the truth for the age that we live in in America today. It could be argued very easily the things Suzy believed were wrong. But ultimately, I want to focus on one main thing from this: Suzianity.

Suzy has decided which parts of the Bible she agrees with and those she doesn't, by the time she has taken her doctrine, it is no longer the word of God, it is the word of Suzy. She is not following Christ and therefore not a Christian, she's a Suzianitan.

Take this statement for example on a critique for the 2012 Avengers movie, (it is an entirely made up criticism and reflects no true personal opinions by the author, it is merely for rhetorical purposes): "Iron man (Robert Downey Jr.) played what is possibly the most...amazingly unbelievable character of his career. Gwyneth Paltrow, on the other hand...played a remarkably...pretty...character."
The real text reads: "Iron man (Robert Downey Jr.) played what is possibly the most lackluster and amazingly unbelievable character of his career. Gwyneth Paltrow, on the other hand, when overlooking her atrocious outfits, played a remarkably small, but pretty faced character."

What happened here is that someone took out bits an pieces from the true text and turned it into something else entirely. Someone decided they disagreed with certain words in the description of Mr. Jr's character and made them "truth."

This is EXACTLY what MANY MANY Americans do today. They take bits and pieces of the Bible but disprove others. This turns it into something else that is no longer the Bible. You can no longer be called Christians if you do this because you do not believe the sword of the spirit, source for truth, God's word itself. Remember, narrow is the path to righteousness (Matt 7:14.) Do you think it's really that easy? You can just pick and choose which parts you believe in? That's what most people do! If you're doing what most people do, then you probably read the verse, "The path to righteousness...is wide." You would be mistaken.

Christians are certainly guilty of this as well. If not mostly. I once met a fellow believer who said to me, "Well I believe that when God created the earth in seven days, they were not literal, they were theoretical." *Buzzer sound* Wrong! If God said historically seven days, He clearly meant seven days. God can count! Saying such things like this open doors for others to say things like, "Moses didn't really part the Red Sea, obviously God provided them with a fleet of steamers that they didn't understand the mechanics of so they called it parting of the Red Sea."

When you read the Bible, you have to read it literally, not "God meant this," that insinuates that God doesn't know how to articulate Himself. Now I don't want to hear any, "How can we take Revelation or Daniel literally?" Those are a different category of Bible altogether. It would be considered prophetic, not historic or literal parts such as commandments.

I'm not saying that when other members of the Church disagree on certain things (for instance baptism) makes it unchristian. There is a difference between trying to discern something that is not clearly put in the word of God (or rather unspecified for a reason) and changing what is clearly meant.
In other words, choosing what you agree with in the Bible turns Christianity into
 ____________ianity. And _________ianity, does NOT get one to Heaven, and you become a servant
^Insert name                     ^Insert name
not of God, but of self, which is the absolute opposite of what God wants.


Oh, and by the way, the human DNA is also 55% to that of a bannana. So if we came from monkeys, and monkeys came from bananas....OH MY GOODNESS! We're cannibals!

The Primary Strongholds

             3, a number that is used far more often than you might care to know. For instance, is it a coincidence that Jesus Christ died when he was 33 and rose from the dead 3 days later? That he is part of the trinity? What about the primary colors? They come in three as well.  I have been greatly fascinated by the number for some undistinguishable reason, and I tend to notice it fairly often. I'm sure if anyone pays a certain amount of attention to something, they begin to notice patterns. Most everything random, when paid attention to long enough is realized to be perfectly routine.
    Well, regarding this number, I was reflecting on sins. Namely the spiritual warfare behind sins such as core strongholds etc. As well as the many sins that are in the world today, drunkeness, foolishness of the tongue, etc. And I noticed a trend, when traced entirely back to their orgins, all of these things appeared to root from 3 specific, and large, sins. They are:

               
       Now all of these things, as well as causing other sins, they can cause each other. Anger and fear can be caused by selfishness, fear and selfishness by anger etc.
     Think about it, Getting drunk? If you are not being mindful of how it will affect those around you you are being selfish, if you are being mindful but do it any way...you're in a lot of trouble and you're still being selfish. Coveting is selfish. Not moving forward in your walk with Christ it is a result of fear or anger.  
      I can't help but think of 1 Cor 13:13, where it tells us of 3 spiritual benefactors: "faith, hope and love," but goes on to explian that "the greatest of these is love."
    If anyone has seen the powerpuff girls, you might think of these counterparts:

    I love the powerpuff girls, and again, they come in 3;) The ones, on the left, the Rowdeyruff boys were in some of my favorite episodes.
    In return, it might be said, "There are three main strongholds that are anger, fear, and selfishness, but the greatest of these is selfishness."
    In giving freely, and not questioning things in the perspective of, "will this hinder my life?" You can follow Jesus's command to love your neighbor almost fully. I think, what to get out of this is, that when you are praying during the day, when praying against strongholds etc, you could pray against these three, and replace them, or ask in turn for faith, hope, and love.

This is not law, it was just one of the many things I was curious about and was reflecting on. If you notice anything flawed with this, or have something you might like to add, please write them in the comment box, I would love to hear what you have to say on this, and/or edit this (for lack of a better word) "philosophy."

A Problem with the Public schools?

      I know what you're thinking: WHAT!? How on earth could there possibly be something wrong with a governemnt run, created by communists (seriously, Howard Mann, a Marxist, issued required public school attendance. As well as Hitler and Benito Marcellini, a facist, who made them required in Italy,) system!
   First off, in case you can't tell already, I have been a diehard homeschool fan for many years for many philisophical and logical reasons. For instance, homeschoolers always take it to the next level: Pajama day? Nah, try wear street clothes day. School inside when it's nice out? Nah, we crazy ones like to get stuff done outside. Socialization? Who needs people!? People are the ones who started WWII, WWI, The Peloponesian War, and...well all the others too, except perhaps those in the Redwall series. Anyways, I can't help but be a little biased when I talk the comparisons of these, so keep that in mind.
          One thing that has been brought to my attention, is the public school's constant "Encouragement Policy." Kids must be told that every thing they do regarding school is going to be worth something someday. They will probably all become president too in fact. A good policy at first glance, after all, we need to be encouraged. But like everything government, or human for that matter (believe it or not, Obama is a sinner too,) it is taken a bit too far. Kids grow up without facing the harsh reality that they are in fact sinners. And as Christians, this is something we need to not hide from kids. It is a harsh reality, but a necessary one.
     Now I'm not saying you need to tell your child anything vaguely along the lines of:
Child: Look Mommy! I made a picture of you
Mom: I'm afraid that's a but out of proportion, you see I don't have sticks for arms, and my nose has a bit more of an oval shape rather than a triangle. I'm sorry dear, but I'm afraid you'll just never be good enough.

or:

Child: Look Mommy! Mrs. Dekker gave me a star on my picture!
Mother: *Sighs* That's nice, but what does it matter? Without Jesus you are going to Hell. What Mrs. Dekker thinks is good isn't really important now is it?

    If you have a normal 6th grade and under child, they will probably not respond with some philisophical, biblically based remark. They will most likely, either, stare blankly at you and then walk off. Or cry, realize nothing will ever be good enough for you, grow a complete and utter loathing for you and/or Christ and runaway at about 14. Not exactly what you want to happen.
     Instead, a better approach may be just to let your kid know, when they perhaps hurt someone, or show signs of rebellion, let them know they are not being nice in a gentler manner. Slowly introduce the fact that no one is perfect, and that Jesus will always love them.
    Because they do not do this in the public schools, where kids get most of their influence if they go, when they hit junior high and face the cruel realization that they aren't perfect and there are people better than they are at art etc, they don't handle it as well. They go into a bit of a shock and can begin to hate themselves, the not perfect versions.
   They only encouragement approach I have also seen in churches as well. I have only ever seen it result in conceited, better than you children.
   The Bible greatly emphasizes humility. Humility is really just the understanding that without Christ, you could never be good enough. That you killed an innocent man that you can go to Heaven. It's not condemnation either (there is a fine line between condemnation and conceit that marks humility.) Just letting kids (and even yourself) know that you make mistakes, but it doesn't matter, because Jesus loves you and forgives you.

    In the end then, the public schools try to emphasize something good, and in their attempts on keeping kids from becoming depressed and such, they really cause it. Because everyone comes to the realization (some better at ignoring it than others....some WAAY better) that they are "sinners." Or in some cases, not good enough.

Video of the Weekish

This one I just had to put as my video of the weekish, being a NIntendo fanatic and a (less talented less devoted) domino stacker myself. This had to have taken forever, so take the time to appreciate it:

Video of the Weekish

I say "Weekish" because I have a life that does not revolve only around blogging, (that way I have things to write about) so I may not always post it precisely one week later.

Anyways, this was extremely enjoyable. Especially if you know your directors. Pay close attention and you'll get it:
J.J. Abrams did Star Trek,
Michael Bay did Transformers. I figured this was relevant with all the Titanic rage going on as of late:

Check this out: Mech Mice

The Miller brothers have done it again. Another great book for all you Christian kids, pre-teens, and teens. Check out a free online version Here. I have had the opportunity  to meet the brothers, and they are truly inspiring Christian people. Help support them and check it out, if you like it, donate, or buy your own copy:D It really helps them. After all, it's free, so check it out, and reccomend it to as many people as you can.

Also, another great series that I have grown to love and is one of my top ten favorite book series ever is their "Codebearer's" series. It's pure adventure from beginning to end. I had to keep reminding myself that it was just a book and that the characters were going to be fine. It was truly intringuing and they expertly address many issues kids today struggle with with a Christian outlook on life.

Also, by them, you may find on iTunes a game called, "Bounder." It is also free, and it is extremely cute/sweet. Check these out! I'm sure you'll fall in love with them if you give it a chance. Ask me more about them if you like, I'd love to answer!

One last thing, check out www.codebearers.com by them as well. It's a fun, safe environment for Christian teenagers to hang out. I should know, I'm a moderator on the site. Everything by the brothers is great, you have to check it out!

That's Cliche

Ah, how many of you in your school years have heard your teacher critique one of your papers saying, "That's cliche"?
   "Apple of my eye, Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, Bringing home the bacon, wake up on the wrong side of the bed, The best of both worlds, Bite the bullet, Throw me a bone, Break a leg, Drinking the Kool-Aid, and quite frankly: Cut the Cheese. Yes, all these terms and more are considered cliche, and you will never hear the end of it if you so much as think of putting it in any form of assignment.
 But I have the solution! I have found the perfect response to such a thing. Has not, "That's cliche," become a cliche term itself?
  Cliche by merriam webster's dictionary means: something that has become overly familiar or commonplace. And I'm sure you hear "That's cliche" enough to where it is all too familiar. We must demand that these people stop this! The proletariat must overcome the bourgeoisie! Oh woops, wrong speech:/
   Anyways, if you are one who uses that term, say something that no one else uses, pull a Shakespeare and just make up a word that seems to make sense, "That's Flargeninen." But DON'T be cliche and say, "That's cliche."

The Short Person Chronicles: Costco edition

      That's me there on the right. Well, not literally, hmmm...has too boyish hair. And looks a bit too boyish. I know! Picture it female, and with long flowing locks like this:

    Ahhh, that's better.
  Anyways, that's me on the right, and my gorgeous, tall sister is on the left. Did I mention she was my YOUNGER SISTER!? I have to tell you, there is nothing that hurts a competetive older sibling's pride than the day when their youger siblings outgrow them. Then a whole bunch of issues begin to form, and people begin to give your right  to the title "oldest" to your younger sibling.
      Another thing that doesn't make sense, is that almost every older sibling is out-grown by their younger, and yet they always assume the shortest are younger. I'll be talking to someone and they'll be like, "And you're the youngest right?" And I'd reply with a sigh, "No, I am actually older." Then they would say, "Wow! I could have sworn you were younger," and with the same breath they'd continue, "Yeah, my younger sister is taller than me too." Has the world lost all of its deductive abilities!? If most every shorter sibling is older, than why on earth do they always assume they are younger? What is possibly worse, is how calmly your younger sibling will stand there letting them offend you like that.
    Anyways, my worst experience ever, happened when I was about thirteen years old. For any of you who don't know what Costco is, here's the gist: A wholesale store where things are sometimes cheaper, sometimes not. They give food samples like crazy, and as of lately, with all those people out there with allergies (thanks a lot) they have made it so that six year olds can't grab samples without their parent. As I was saying, I was about thirteen, and I decided those brownie samples looked mighty tasty. And me, being the patient being I am, fast walked (very fast,) to the stand. I reached out and took one, uttered a quick, "thank you," and then the lady basically ripped the sample out of my hand.
   Then she said, "Where's your mom?"
   I was utterly speachless, and apparently, when I'm speechless, I have a very convincing guilty look.
   The lady rolled her eyes and said, "Sorry," (she so was not sorry) "I can't give you a sample without your mom." As she said this, my eleven year old sister walked up, took one, and walked right back to my mom without so much as a glance from the Costco lady.
    First of all, I may have been young, but I'd think by age six I would know my allergies. I have a cousin who knew very well by the time she was three what she could and couldn't have. But I mean COME ON! THIRTEEN! Why do people always hate on the shorter folks? This is discrimination, and I want to seek justice. I'll bet that lady was shorter than her younger sister as well.
  And in the end, if I was a six year old, and I did have an allergic reaction, the only thing they'd have to worry about would be our suing them for half a gazillion dollars...

Lucretius: On the Nature of Things

     Who here loves Philosophical works? *crickets* No Aristotle fans in here? Weird. Okay then. who likes science? *a couple of hands halfway in the air, obviously these people don't know what they like* All right...Well then, who likes poetry? *about the same response* Okay then.  What could ever be better then, than combining them all into one Philosophical view of science written poetically? YAAAAY!
   Not yay. This was quite possibly the most boring book I've ever read. Lucretius was obviously one of those homeschool nerds, whose siblings were his only friends and whose mom locked him in a room his whole life. "Poetry is fun," Yeah, riiight.
   This is the kind of book you DON'T read, and let other people tell you their reviews on it, and you have faith and take their word for it. So, to save you the pain, I will give you the jest of it.
   Basically, it's the evolutionary theory. Have you ever heard and evolutionist say, "Lithen to these Creationisthts, they thound thooo old fathion." *attempt at nerd accent* Well, Dawinists, take a look back, like 2000 years back, and there's the REAL birth of your theory. 99 B.C. to be exact. (And don't even try to say, "It's B.C.E," otherwise I will hunt down, tranquilize you, and you will wake up in the Yak portion of a zoo.)
   It isn't until book IV where things start to get slightly amusing.
   Anyways, Lucretius was pretty off on a lot of what he said, but come to think of it, so are evolutionists. (If you want reasons why evolutionists are, you'll have to comment, then I'll give you answers:P) For one, he says things along the lines of, "Sight is just a pile of atoms, that disperse from the mother of the atoms (i.e. atoms from a couch) and they hit the films of your eyes at just the right time allowing you to see." "Your soul is actually composed of a bunch of atoms, so when you die, it dies as well because it is matter, it can in fact be killed."
  But, he does say there was this big storm of atoms at the beginning of time, which eventually collided and made stars, the sun, the moon, and eventually earth. Earth eventually managed to get in the perfect spot from everything and life forms began to be created. He says people without eyes were some of the first and some missing limbs, some that were half horse, and then, they eventually found fire and magically became normal humans. Sound familiar? Well yes, a half horse is a centaur, but I was more referring to his entire theory. Evolution! The only reason Darwin is credited with founding it is because Lucretius was considered a philosopher. He had no means of trying to find out if any of this was true. It was all speculation.
   One thing he does differ extremely from most philosophers of his day, is that he believes we really have no purpose in life. Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates all believed we were to be virtuous and seek out goodness. But Lucretius believes we got here on accident, we are just a bunch of atoms and chemical reactions, so we have no purpose.
   It's no wonder kids in school today are depressed! They are taught the have no purpose in school. Says principal to drug addicted student, "Oh yeah, you need to be good, but only because we said so, you don't get anything out of it or anything. Cops just don't like it and they're bigger than you and have guns so, you're out of luck."
   Seriously, why on earth do atheists and evolutions believe we need to do good?  Why not keep all your money for yourself? You earned it. Why give it to charities when you are going to disperse into nothingness in the end anyways?
   Next time one of these people tells you they're an evolutionist or atheist, you can say, "Oh, so you believe we don't have a purpose then?" They will try to argue, but you can just reply, "But according to your beliefs, we are just a bunch of chemical reactions. To quote along the lines of a very wise person 'thought and bowel movements have both the same meaning.'" See what they have to say. If they do have something to say, it's simply because they don't want to listen.
  Other than these few things, Lucretius offers very little. But remember: Next time you're doing your science homework and complaining, imagine having to do it in POETRY! Then maybe you'll be a little happier.

Fun with Poetry

Here's a game: Spell things out, like "Hi," while annotating the letter and using famous poetry. Start with the first letter and see which line has it, write it down. Your next line will contain the next letter/line etc. A letter equals a line, a word equals a stanza. NO backtracking! I find it makes less sense when you go backwards. Also, avoid using words that contain letters like, "X" or "Z." Also, short poems typically don't work, as they are too short to find anything. Try things like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight or the Iliad. See if it makes sense and/or sounds awesome! I will use something from Lucretius's On the Nature of Things for my example

How eld withdraws each object at the end,
Entangled and enmassed, whereby at once
Lest humankind should perish.  When they feign
Like drops of rain, through the unbottomed void;
Or through thin air, must quicken their descent.

How often to thy bosom flings his streangth
O'ermastered by the eternal wound of love--
With thought untroubled, nor mid such event.

A Greek it was who first opposing dared
Raise mortal eyes that terror to withstand
Each in the end when each is overthrown.

Yet Ennius too in everlasting verse
Old Homer's ghost to him and shed salt tears
Until we seem to mark and hear at hand


Doesn't that sound purely awesome? Anyways, I said, "Hello how are you?"  Feel free to put your own creative ones in the comment box:)

What is Beauty?

  
   A big problem amongst women is their complete misunderstanding of beauty. They look to others to define what beauty is. And that beauty is almost entirely unattainable. Now I typically try to avoid being cliche, but in cases like this, it is very hard not to be. So I will try to approach this from a semi-new perspective that is different from what the culture says about what makes you beautiful. Before giving the biblical reasons behind it, I want to start with an analysis of the culture.
    In the media, we are constantly bombarded with photos of beautiful women. Whether it's in line at the grocery store, surfing the web, or on TV, all of them appear unbelievably gorgeous. Now, not only is it true that the majority (if not all) of these are air brushed to look unbelievably gorgeous.But they have an advantage: they can afford the health foods without hormones, expensive trainers and such.
    Us everyday Janes, have trouble paying for regular food with tons of added hormones (weight gaining by the way) and sugars. These are cheaper, and we still have trouble paying for those things on top of bills. We also are not paid to work out. Think about it: people get in movies and are paid large sums of money to work out to look gorgeous in their close ups. So this in turn makes it significantly harder for us to stay skinny. My solution was going vegan, cutting out those hormones and cholesterol anyway. But for people whose parents are opposed to that, it can be very hard to make such decisions, especially if they make you the dinners and no one will do it with you.
  On top of it, movies like Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and Beauty and the Beast, both emphasize how important your individual "inner" beauty is, opposed to other people. But they do so using insanely gorgeous people, which in turn makes you feel worse. Because you are not half as beautiful as them, and they're worried, you're in big trouble.
   Let's Play a little game called: Spot the Differences:

 As you can see from the picture, Ms. Diaz appears TOO skinny, but yet...despite bone show, they manage to make her look even skinnier. Hey? Who needs that bone anyway? It just holds up your body. You can do the rest of the game by yourself.
   Now,we've all at least heard of Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love. Well, let's take a look at a piece of art that shows this most beautiful of women, shall we? Warning, censor zone.

Now, I'm not sure which is which, so just take a look at them all (this is by Peter Paul, made in about 1635-1637.)  Is this quite what you would expect from the goddess of beauty? Well, the time period from which it came, was a time of poverty and monarchs. Beauty, was actually considered woman who were the fattest amongst them. It meant they were wealthy enough to afford a lot of twinkies (yes believe it or not, they were expensive then.) They were also most beautiful with rotten teeth, because it meant they could have tons of sugar. When all their teeth fell out, and they realized how much harder it was to wolf down a steak, what better answer than to rip out the teeth of peasants and use for themselves?
   I have also heard from some people (I have not had time to double check this information, but I do trust the source) that there is (was?) a TV show that showed African women, being shipped off by their parents (in today's time) to go to fattening camps. They were fed high calorie foods explicitly to cause them to gain weight. In interviews, they would say, "Look at my beautiful stretch marks."
   Starting to notice a trend here? Well, if not, here it is: Culture defines what beauty is does it not? And what does that beauty seem to be? Whatever is the hardest to attain! Women in the 1600's had a hard time affording food of any kind and were always skinny. In Africa, people die from starvation regularly, and yet beautiful is the 400 lb woman. Today in America, it is the opposite. Impossibly skinny is beautiful. This causes woman (young and old.)
    Psalm 139:14 says, "I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well." It is also said in Genesis 9:6, "“Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man." 1 Corinthians 6:19 says, "Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?" So you can see from this, that you are made in the image of God, and God is kinda perfect in every way. When you look at your body and are filled with sadness because of it, God in turn is sad because you don't find HIM efficiently beautiful.
  It says that you are not your own as his temple and that you are His. So why on earth would you keep hurting yourself by making you lose weight? You damage the temple of GOD! The creator of the universe. Picture this okay: look at where you are and zoom out to the outside of the building you are in. Zoom out further to see the street, keep zooming until you see the area code. Keep going until you see the city, and then the state, and then the country, continent and then world. If that isn't enough zoom out further, past the moon and Mars and Saturn and past the dwarf planet Pluto. You are now towards the edge of the Milky Way (no, not the candy bar.) That is only one a a billion galxies! Now look at yourself from that spot. God has all of this in his hands, He's got the whole universe and beyooond in His hands. You seem pretty insignificant now huh? The fact that God gives a single ounce of recognition towards you is amazing. He goes beyond that! He not only recognizes, but loves you. And you are hurting His dwelling place every time you make an unheathy decision for your body. Whether it be eating too much junk food, or too little food in general.
  When you do this, you are spitting in the face of the man who died for your life. Saying He didn't do a good enough job so you don't care or you're going to fix perfection. He TELLS you explicitly that you are wonderful! That's amazing!
  All this is to say, the culture WANTS beauty to be unattainable. Doctors make millions every year just on anorexics. Make up lines, and clothing and work out commercials are getting exactly what they want out of you: money. It all relates back to selfishness in the end. You are being selfish for thinking you're not good enough, and the media makes millions off their beauty products and the next "Sure to get you to lose 30 lb" diets. And GOD is the always the one who gets hurt, and He never did anything to hurt you.
  What might I say is the cure to this? Be healthy! Don't be afraid to have your stomach show slightly when you where a tang-top. I cut out meat and dairy, because there is so much junk in all of it (organic or not) that it was just beyond ridiculous. It was hard yeah, I LOVE meat, but I wanted to live long and be healthy. I didn't lose weight, but my body looked healthier. I no longer have an acne "problem" (quotes because I still get a zit now and then, but not all over my face acne) and my body just felt and appeared healthier.
    So next time you think you're not good enough look wise, think about this: Is this what the culture wants me to think? Think about Aphrodite and how much prettier you are in comparison to her;) And also, remember that the only one you will ever be completely good enough for will appreciate your decision.

The Disney Princesses, part 1

By Disney Princesses, I mean the REAL ones, ones featured on the princess posters until the previous two years (so minus the Princess and the frog girl, and minus Rapunzel.)
Now, I reflect on stuff through most of the night, and one of those things happened to be the princesses Disney presents to us. Girls love them, and I'll admit, as I've gotten older, I've grown a bit more fond of them as well. I was always a Powerpuff girl...girl. My sister on the other hand had to have her princess Aurora dress pried from her fingers at the age of about eleven. So you might say we're fans. But is that even a good idea? Should children really imitate these people? Sure these princesses seem innocent enough, but when you look at what's really there, you'll be surprised what you might find.

1. Ariel (a.k.a The Little Mermaid)
    Though she is called the "little" mermaid, Ariel quite swiftly into the story reveals to her father that she is quite grown up and is capable of making her own decisions. After all, she is sixteen years old. She deserves to have a later curfew, and her daddy must llearn to trust her. *Buzzer noise* Wrong. While that may be an acceptable argument, (my mom was very resonable when I turned sixteen and asked for and 8:30 pm curfew over my more recent 7 pm) this is not what little, sixteen year old Ariel desires. No, she has fallen in love with a human being, and daddy is all but reluctant to let that go on.
    Though I do have to question Triton's parenting tecniques and resoning. Set aside that she's sixteen years old, she wants to marry into a different species, that alledgedly do bad things to them (never quite clear what.) I honestly know nothing of this *pours mermaid stew down garbage disposal* He also finds out that despite his yelling at her, which I think happens with a little less persuasion than is necessary, she is still secretly collecting human utensils. OH NO! Now they'll have perfectly and affectively combed hair! So he tears the place down and, you guessed it, yells at her (you'd think she's be used to it by now...)
   Well...looks like she's kind of out of luck, after all, you can tell respecting her parent's wishes are her #1 Highest priority. Guess she'll just have to marry one of the perfect, model mermen. Nope! What she really figures is, "what better to do than sell my soul to a demon? I'm sure I'll get what I want this way!"
   ...Is this going quite how you would expect a story that little girls imitate to go? First thing rebellion. Of course she had her reasons. If I fell in love with a goat and my father told me that wasn't happening, what better thing to do than resort to what "my heart tells me."
   Well, after she finds the prince (how old is he?), rescues him from the sea demon, and restores herself to normal, you'd expect her to go home and be locked up for a while. But no, daddy has other ideas. Now, I don't know whether it was being turned into seaweed that caused his mind to be a bit jumbled, or the fact that he was another species, but he somehow decided that "Hey, who cares if she almost caused the entire world to come into ruin for giving ultimate power to the devil? Look at the way she stalks that young man (seriously...like 30 years old?) she really does love him. You know what!? I have a great fatherly idea! I'll turn her into a human (we know how well that went last time) and she can be happy now!

   Morals in this story: Rebellion, even though there will be some rough spots, will in the end, get you exactly what you want. Age is of no consequence when you are in love. Crabs can sing really great song numbers.

   So what do you think? Is this acceptable for children to imitate? It's up to you, but don't let them wear those Ariel outfits  for Halloween if you're not going to want them to take it the whole nine yards:P

   Quick note: This was made entirely for jesting purposes, my sister turned out fine, and Sleeping Beauty was messed up too. If you want more, comment:) I can discuss them all:) I hope you liked this, and just an FYI, I looove these movies, so I bear no ill will