What you need is a little lubricant. I know everyone has tons and tons of extra time on their hands this summer. (hehe… yes, I know… me too.) BUT without lubrication, your speaking skills will get rusty, so I recommend you devote a little time over your summer to make sure you’ve still got it. So, here are some of my tips:

1) Read Made to Stick

My Debate Club has officially decided to make Dan and Chip Heath’s Made to Stick required curriculum for next year. I’d recommend using your summer to get a head start. Here’s the website: http://heathbrothers.com/madetostick Complete with the first chapter (for free) and a link to buy the book (not for free).
Made to Stick has to have been the most useful book to me in my entire debate career, and that includes books like Introduction to Argumentation and Debate, so it comes highly recommended.

2) Be your own judge

Sometimes, it’s had to get into your audience’s shoes and see your speeches from the judge’s perspective. Here’s my tip: grab an old video of you from last year’s competition, print off a ballot from http://ncfca.org and fill it out on your speech. Yes, you heard me right. Judge yourself.
This works especially for speeches, but you might also do it on one of your debate rounds.

3) Do Some Russian Reading

There may not be any assignments or any pressing cases, but you should still do a little reading over the summer. Specifically, you should focus on big picture information. Read up on Russia’s history or international relations philosophy. You probably shouldn’t bother cutting blocks or briefing just yet; work on having a strong foundational understanding.
For starters, head over to Wikipedia’s Russia article or go see what the Department of State has to say about Russia.

Oh, and if you learn how to say “please vote affirmative, judge” in Russian, you will get double coolness points from me.

4) Drills

Here are three great drills you should do before every tournament. Summer may be the perfect time to get in the habit!

Warm up your face: sometimes in the morning, my face looks like its been botoxed. You want your face to look natural, so a few overdone facial gestures may be good. Grab a mirror and see what creative facial expressions you’re capable of.

Smooth Impromptu: It’s really hard to speak smooth as an ice cream sundae. Sometimes you want a thoughtful pause or a rephrase or two, but you want to be were you don’t HAVE to use any verbal crutches. Get a totally random topic and instead of focusing on content or structure, just focus on speaking smoothly. Every time you make a verbal slip (a stutter, an um, a “like”, etc.) start over from the beginning.

Practice Reading: Debate involves a very different type of reading. You need to read out loud with precision and interest. The single most important ingredient is to develop a “reading buffer,” so that you’re read words and comprehend meanings before you actually speak them. The best way to practice the “buffer” is to read something you’ve never read aloud as fast as possible.
Need something to read? Head over to wikipedia’s main page and read about something random like Leviathan Melvillei or Hugh Capet. Reading about stuff you don’t care about and can’t pronounce is great practice for debate!

One last note: If you were preparing for football season, your coach might have you do push-ups. Why? You’re never going to do that in a game, right? Even so, a player who doesn’t do his push-up won’t be in shape for the season. Similarly, I want to encourage y’all to work up your debate “strength,” so to speak, even if it doesn’t seem like you’ll use these drills in a tournament.

Let me know if you try this out and what summer drills work well for you.

Well, NCFCA Nationals is coming up, so I figured it was my duty to give every bit of advice I can to those moving on to this higher level of competition. Anyway… here’s the case that won finals at last year’s Region IV tournament.

A super extra lot of credit goes to my super awesome former debate partner Toni Maisano. Maybe she’ll share some of her wisdom with you on why this case worked as well as it did.

This was a long time in the making. If you’re interested, you can read an earlier version here. Maybe I’ll post a little later on why we made the changes we did. Three specific things I think were done well in this case (and made it interesting):
a) support: evidence; not solid quotes.
b) SHORT taglines.
c) stories.

Feel free to ask questions and let me know what you think.

Aff1.1 – FA006
Maisano/Morgan

Imagine that there’s a poor man on the side of the road. He informs you that he can’t feed his children and desperately needs money. You’re feeling generous, so you give him a hundred dollars, telling him to use it wisely. He assures you that he will, turns around, and takes off his brand new Porsche.

After investigating this strange character, you learn that only 5 out of the 100 dollars you gave him actually went to feeding his family. You also, to your dismay, discover that he owns shares in the mortgage on your home. Now, knowing just how apparently irresponsible your last decision was, I have to pose the question: The next time you go past his corner, will you give him another 100 dollars? Or will you take that money and use it toward paying that mortgage you owe that strange “poor” man?

The way our government hands out aid to India is very similar to this analogy, and it is why we must affirm: That the United States Federal Government should significantly change its policy toward India. Today we will be showing you the similarities, and presenting a plan to phase out our irresponsible program to aid India.

But before we can do this, we need to make sure we’re on the same page in:

1) Definitions

Sources and further definitions are available upon request. Here are a couple to get us started:

United States-”country North America bordering on Atlantic, Pacific, & Arctic oceans; a federal republic”

(“United States of America.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2008. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/United States of America )

Significantly-”Having or likely to have a major effect; important”

(American Heritage Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/significantly)

Change-”to undergo a modification of ”

(Merriam-Webster Online Dict. 2008, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/change)

Policy-As foreign policy consists of ‘decisions and actions which involve to some appreciable extent relations between one state and others’, it can be defined as ‘the actions of a state toward the external environment and the conditions under which these actions formulated’.

(Prof. Mustafa Aydin (professor of International Relations at the Faculty of Political Science, Ankara University, Turkey; as well as at the National Security Academy, Ankara, Turkey; was Research Fellow at the Center for Political Studies, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor) 2006, “Turkish Foreign Policy at the End of the Cold War; Roots and Dynamics”, Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, www.politics.ankara.edu.tr/dosyalar/MMTY/36 /1_mustafa_aydin.pdf)

Toward-”With regard to; in relation to”

(American Heritage Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/toward)

India-”A country of southern Asia covering most of the Indian subcontinent.”

(The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/India)

Foreign Aid-”assistance (as economic aid) provided by one nation to another”

(Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foreign%20aid)

In this case, we will be focusing on one goal. That’s the second point we want to make:

2) Goal: Responsibility

So, in this round, we would encourage you to look at our policy on foreign aid and see if it is truly responsible. We want to start by showing you two reasons that foreign aid is not a responsible policy in:

3) Harms

This case specifically addressed economic aid, both in cash and in kind. According to the Congressional Research Service, we are sending India $74.1 Million annually.

How is this money being uses irresponsibly? Our two harms are debt and waste.

Thomas Lum (Specialist in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division). “U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients.” October 8, 2008. Congressional Research Service, RL31362. http://opencrs.com/document/RL31362

a) Debt

Interestingly enough, the Department of the treasury reported that while giving India foreign aid, we also owed them about $38.2 Billion in Treasury Securities.

Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board. May 15, 2009. “Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities” http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

In other words, we’re donating to our creditor. Our children are the ones who will have to pay for it. This is anything but a responsible policy, especially when you consider that much of our foreign aid has been wasted in India’s system.

b) Waste

A team of three Indian researchers decided to see what kind of effect foreign aid had on their government. They used a computer generated model to predict government spending with and without aid, comparing it to real data. Their conclusion was published in the:

Vinaya Swaroop (Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India), Shikha Jha (Ph.D. in economics, Development Research Group, World Bank), and Andrew Sunil Rajkumar (Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India).
September 2000.
“Fiscal effects of foreign aid in a federal system of governance The case of India.” Journal of Public Economics 77.3 (2000): 307-330. Accessed via ScienceDirect.

Concluding:
“This paper models fiscal effects of foreign aid in a federal system of governance. Our main innovation is to incorporate the inter-governmental fiscal link in examining economic fungibility of foreign aid. The model is applied to the expenditure decisions of the central government of India. The two main findings are: (i) Foreign aid merely substitutes for spending that the government would have undertaken anyway; funds freed by aid are spent on non-development activities, and (ii) In passing earmarked external assistance to states, the central government makes a reduction in its transfers to states. These findings indicate that the central government’s expenditure choices are unaffected by external assistance. The implication for donors is that even though their development projects may be associated with very high rates of economic return, they could be assisting the central government in financing something very different at the margin. For the state governments, the finding indicates that they may not be reaping the full benefits of externally procured assistance.”

Non-development activities. So, major studies have shown that foreign aid doesn’t help India build roads or feed the poor; those projects have been done anyway. In fact,

The Financial Times.
January 23 2008.
“Western donors wrestle with the contradictions of rising India.” By Jo Johnson (B.A., M.B.A., Financial Times’ South Asia bureau chief). http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3470229c-c9db-11dc-b5dc-000077b07658.html

“India does little to solicit aid and, sometimes, much to deter it. Ahead of Mr Brown’s visit, Rahul Gandhi, a senior Congress party politician, hinted at the extent of corruption, claiming that only 5 per cent of development funds reached their intended recipients, down from 15 per cent when his father was prime minister.
“His warning coincided with the release by the World Bank of a report that found “systemic fraud and corruption” in a flagship health programme and “suggested that other projects had been similarly compromised”. The bank in the year to June 2007 provided $3.7bn in new loans to India, its largest borrower.”

95 percent of aid somehow gets sidetracked. It gets spent on “non-development:” activities that are nice, but don’t actually help people. Well, like what? For example, while millions are going hungry, India is working on a two billion dollar space program.

The Guardian.
22 October 2008.
“Over-reaching for the stars” by Randeep Ramesh (the Guardian’s south Asia correspondent). http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/22/india-spaceexploration

Summarized it well:
“But with precocity can come a hubris that is hard to shake off in later life. Perhaps the country would do well to direct some of its remarkable talents to the more obvious, acute problems it faces on earth, rather than inventing reasons to reach for the stars.”

Our funding allows them to gloss over their people and keep their head in the clouds.

That man with a Porsche can feed his children, he’d just rather let others do it. India is the same way. A very similar analogy is used by

Professor Deepak Lal (D.Phil., M.A., B.A., Professor of International Development Studies, University of California, LA, Professor Emeritus of Political Economy, University College London, former consultant to the Indian Planning Commission, Economic Advisor and Research Administrator to the World Bank, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute).
April 6, 2006.
“Reply to Easterly: There is No Fix for Aid.” CATO Unbound. http://www.cato-unbound.org/2006/04/06/deepak-lal/there-is-no-fix-for-aid/

He adds: “[Professor William] Easterly clearly thinks that there might still be some form of escape from what will appear to the world’s great and the good as a defeatist and gloomy conclusion. But the very example he cites—the role played by accountability and evaluation in the Mexican Progressa education program as a prototype for future aid projects—shows up why foreign aid is unnecessary for such programs. This was a Mexican program not funded by foreign aid. In fact in all the currently fashionable “soft” areas—health, education, democracy, gender etc.—favored by aid donors, there is no need for foreign money. Countries which subscribe to the worthy objectives of the aid donors do not need foreign money to do the right thing; they today have enough domestic money for these purposes. It is the ineffectiveness of this expenditure in meeting these objectives that leads to the observed dismal outcomes. Thus India spends a fair amount on public education but as official report after report has documented, this expenditure is wasted as the teachers do not turn up to teach, the school buildings are not built, and there are no books for which expenditure has been sanctioned. It is the will to do the right thing that remains in question in achieving even these modest objectives favored by Easterly. Foreign aid will make no difference, for as the adage has it: “You can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink”.”

As Lal advocates, we will next propose a plan that will address these two harms by phasing out this wasteful program and using the money to pay off our debt.

4) Plan

Our plan is really pretty simple. Here’s the specifics:

the Agency and Enforcement: of this plan is the Federal Government of the United States. There are two mandates that this agency will implement:

Mandate 1: Phase Out. Current government non-military aid sent to the India will be phased out. Discretionary funds shall be terminated, contracts shall not be renewed, and no new commitments shall be made. According to the US Agency for International Development (USAID) service, this currently includes CSH (Child Survival and Health), DA (Development Assistance), and P.L. 480 Title II Grants (In-kind food aid).

Mandate 2: Funds Redirected. Funds freed shall be redirected to pay off Indian Securities.

Next, the Timeline: This plan will be phased in as possible over the next two fiscal years.

Finally, we reserve the right to clarify this plan as needed.

The fifth and final observation of this case is how this plan pays off and restores responsibility:

5) Advantages

a) Exponential Savings

See debt doesn’t just increase at a constant rate. It is also accumulating interest, so it grows exponentially, a lot like cancer. Consequently, we are able to save exponentially by paying it off. So, starting with just $ 74.1 Million,
-In 10 years, we will not save $ 741 Million, we’ll save almost a billion dollars.
-And in 20 years, we won’t save $ 1.4 Billion, with interest we’ll save 2.5 Billion.
Formula Used:
A_t=(A_t-1+P)e^^r
Where A is the amount after t years, P is the principle (74.1 Million), r is the interest rate (estimated to be 5% for the purposes of this calculation), and e is an irrational mathematical constant approximately equal to 2.71828…

The longer we save, the more we save. So now is the time to start making this long term investment. But there is anther reason to adopt this plan.

b) Responsibility

This policy is not only frugal on our part, but also promotes responsible policy on all sides. Let’s look at history to illustrate this point. In 1998, India tested nuclear weapons and, in response, the United States cut off foreign aid. So, did people die? Was the Indian economy thrown into turmoil? Interestedly enough, the exact opposite happened. At the time, an article was published in:

The Lancet (Leading Medical Journal, established 1828, currently ranked number two in general medicine).
June 13, 1998.
[Was entitled] “India to raise health spending to counteract foreign aid sanctions.” by Sanjay Kumar. The Lancet, Vol 351 (1998): p 1794. Accessed via ScienceDirect.

“Defying the sanctions placed on the Indian economy in the wake of nuclear test explosions, the BJP[Hindu nationalist]-led government has proposed large budget increases for health care, education, and public welfare. The central health and family welfare budget for 1998–99, now being debated in parliament, is proposed to increase by 34% above last year’s allocation. The education spending would rise by 50% and welfare by 91%.”

So, when we stopped funding irresponsible politics, India released that they really did have money for healthcare. Looking back, the CATO Institute points out that this historical president shows that:

CATO Institute.
Cato Handbook for Policymakers. 7th Edition (2009). Ch 63. “Foreign Aid and Economic Development.” pg 660. http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb111/hb111-63.pdf

“Far more effective at promoting market reforms is the suspension or elimination of aid. Although USAID lists South Korea and Taiwan as success stories of U.S. economic assistance, those countries began to take off economically only after massive U.S. aid was cut off. As even the World Bank has conceded, ‘‘Reform is more likely to be preceded by a decline in aid than an increase in aid.’’ When India faced Western sanctions in 1998 in response to nuclear tests there, the International Herald Tribune reported that ‘‘India approved at least 50 foreign-investment projects to compensate for the loss of aid from Japan and the United States’’ and that it would take additional measures to attract capital. In the end, the countries that have done the most to reform economically have made changes despite foreign aid, not because of it.”

To recap this case, you could just use one sentence. We don’t have the money for a wasteful program when there are valid alternatives to it. History shows that when we stop propping up their irresponsibility, India will rise to the challenge. Similarly, Americans can donate to worthy causes through effective charities, who aren’t in the same financial predicament as our government. It is the time to do the responsible thing.

So we urge you to vote affirmative. Thank you.

If you look at the speech, they’re against debt and believe in balanced budgets. If you look at their plan, they’re spend-a-holics who get sober just in time for election. There is, unfortunately, a growing gap between the words and the actions of the GOP. Especially when it comes to the deficit.

GOP.gov is the website for Republicans in Congress. It outlines their plan on debt like this:

Under the President’s [Obama] budget the national debt exceeds 100% of GDP in 2030. By contrast, the Republican plan gains control of the debt, by never exceeding 75% of GDP over the next 75 years.

The way one of my friends put it after I said this was: Sooo… do you want to be killed by four bullets or three? Your choice. Whether you choose the donkey’s or the elephant’s plan, your children have to pay for our mistakes. And that is just wrong.

Wordy bill syndrome? Republicans got it, too!

Many complained about the great length of the Health Care Reform bill that passed recently, and with good reason. I would contend that bills with such volume are the main reason we’re in debt right now. They’re just so much space to slip in a little money here and there. It’s death by a thousand cuts.

In fact, the House’s version of health care rationing is the longest bill ever heard (or not heard) in congress. There’s definitely a veil to keep the bill’s actual action obscure. The problem is that the Republicans can’t remove the veil while standing on it. Open Congress’ report on “How Long is Long?” speaks the truth.

Over the last 10 years, half of the top ten longest bills were proposed by Republicans. Simplicity: out the door!

Tea Party Response

Independents and loyal Republicans can turn around the status quo both by working loyally and by turning on their precious party.

In a rare moment, I got a bit of insight from a report in the Huffington Post. The point made in this article by Bill Lucey is how the tea party has made a major impact on the party by defeating incumbents. Both republican and democrat, that is.

While many people credit independently-minded tea partiers with Scott Brown’s victory, they can also take credit for Bob Bennett, R-Ut. He would have been on his fourth term, but seniority means nothing to principle-first voters. This block kicked out this TARP and Obamacare loving RINO. May his political career R. I. P.

Unless we want to face our children and tell them that they’ll have to pay for our mistakes, we need to vote on principles before party.

Hayek vs. Keynes

This is one of the best videos on this economic debate. It also happens to be a pretty good rap.

F.A. Hayek was one of the pioneers in the Austrian school of economics, a school of thought that held the government is not knowledgeable or motivated enough to try to steer the economy in the right direction. He received the Nobel prize for his work. It believed in total economic liberation and that the only legitimate use of government was to protect people from violence. Mises called it “liberalism”; today, we might say it’s “libertarian.”

John Maynard Keynes was an English economist who completely changed the profession of economics with his ideas about how government could put the economy on the right track. His ideas included spending money you didn’t have through debt, discouraging saving, and legal plunder. All of this so that money would continue to cycle and get stuff done. He is the founder of modern economics, and provided the economic theory for the stimulus package.

Liberty or Regulation?

What about that video? Now, how ’bout the ideas behind it? Should the government spur the economy?

See this video for a little more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXqc-yyoVKg
Hayek doesn’t even trust government to have a monopoly on the money supply. He believes there should be competing currencies. Do you agree the government should have so little to do with the economy? Would the free market have avoided the crash?

Now time for Milton Friedman quotes! Another liberty-leaning school of economics was the Chicago school of economics, the most famous member was probably Friedman, also a Nobel Laureate. He said:

“The market gives people what the people want instead of what other people think they ought to want.”

“‘Fair’ is in the eye of the beholder; free is the verdict of the market.”

So, what do you think?

This time, I thought there was a free music deal too good to not share with y’all, my small but important blog following.

Born Again

(Also on YouTube)

The Newsboys has none of the boys that they had at the beginning, but over years of change, they’ve been producing good music since 1985. The addition of Michael Tait, former member of DC Talk, hasn’t hurt their style either, in my opinion. In fact, I really enjoy DC Talk, and like the new sound he’s given the Newsboys.

At any rate, you’re probably wondering about FREE MUSIC, right? Well, turns out this song is available for free now, so act quick! iTickets is giving away “Born Again” song for this week only, so click the link:

iTickets: Free Music Download

In other news…

(pun intended)

Some of you might have heard about that the problems Toyota has been having. Bad engineering. But with all the bad news comes some good. Toyota is doing damage control and now you can now get a song of your choice from AmazonMP3 FREE.

Freebies 4 Mom: Free Amazon MP3…

This one requires a Facebook, and that you (at least pretend to) like Toyota.

Shout Out!

Special thanks goes to the Free Christian Music Blog and CCMSingles (on Twitter).

Did you find this helpful? Got an opinion? Let me know what you think about these offers or the new Newsboy’s sound in the comments section.

Here’s a look at a graph I’ve been looking at for a while for my Homework in Calculus. Created using Graphing Calculator 3D, free edition.

This is the graph of z = e^(1/(x-y)). Sure, there’s worse, but I thought this one was interesting enough to post.

Hey everyone. I cast my vote in the primary runoff election yesterday, voting for Rick Green and Brian Russell. I’m writing this quick post to encourage all you voting-eligible folks to take a couple minutes and vote at your polling station. For all of you who aren’t voting age, encourage all your friends who CAN vote to not overlook the run-off elections.

Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/miscellanea/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Your last vote didn’t count

At this point, it doesn’t matter what the votes were cast in the last election. I applaud you for voting in the general primaries election, but you will not get to decide who represents you in Texas unless you go and vote again. This is when your vote will actually make a difference. Think of your last ballot as practice for the real thing.

Why it’s more important now

Unfortunately, most people only think of the general election as the “real thing” and don’t bother to show up for the run-off. If you go and vote this week, your minute or two will be more important than ever.

The way it works for party elections is that the candidate that wins must have a majority – meaning over 50%. If they don’t get that in the general election, then the top two candidates go into a run-off race. In these cases, your vote only got to decide the semi-finals, not who actually represented you.

What’s at stake

I could talk a lot to you about what’s at stake in these various Texas election, but instead let me just give you some good links on the candidates I recommend.

Rick Green for Texas Supreme Court

Rick Green’s official website

Green’s opponent, Debra Lehrmann’s liberal endorsements are enough to make me vote for Rick Green by themselves. You might also want to check out the Liberty Institute Voter’s Guide. Here’s were Lehrmann not only refuses to answer important questions, but she also states another endorsement missing form the above list – Hillary Clinton’s “Children’s Defense Fund.”

So, it’s Green, endorse by the Texas Homeschool Coalition, Texas Alliance for Life (oh, and Chuck Norris) versus a more experienced candidate endorsed by cooperate law firms, the liberal Statesman, and Clinton’s “Children’s Defense Fund.” So, Green’s election is very important. He’s the kind of man we need on the bench.

Other Picks

The other guy I voted for was Brian Russell, A principled Homeschool Dad for State Board of Education.

And a couple more good articles that overviews good candidates for your vote:

• Hastings Haven | 1 + 1 = Anticipation
• Texas Homeschool Coalition’s Tim Lambert on the TXSC and SBOE

When?

Early voting is NOW. Go do it. You have ’till Friday. If you vote during early voting week, you can go anywhere. The actual election will occur on April 13th. Check out the Secretary of State’s Website for more info.

I hope to see you making your voice heard at the polls this election.

Background: There’s a lot of debate around the “charismatic gifts.” Some argue that these spiritual gifts are extinct (“kata-rgeō” as it’s stated in 1 Cor 13). The other side argues that they’re an integral part of interacting with God.

I’m not going to answer that question here, but I do what to share a revelation God has given me: there isn’t an easy answer, and there’s no middle ground. There’s just truth.

Photo Credit: Incompetech.com

Claim: Sure, some people can prophesy, see visions, and speak in tongues. That’s cool. But it’s not for me. Those gifts aren’t for everyone. We’re all different.

This is the easy answer. It avoids the awkwardness of saying strange things you have no control over while not completely alienating charismatics. And on face value, it seems Biblical. Romans 12:4-8:

⁴For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function,⁵so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

⁶Since we have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, each of us is to exercise them accordingly: if prophecy, according to the proportion of his faith…

The Problem: Imagine that you are a mouth and you say something like this:

“I’m really glad God made me a mouth. He has a very important purpose for me and that’s why he made me so good at talking. I need to work really hard on what I’m good at and let the other body parts do their jobs. So I’m going to focus on my gift and stop eating.”

The body would die, wouldn’t it? See, nowhere does it say that you only get one gift or that once you’ve gotten a gift you should be content just with that. In fact, Paul tells the exact opposite to another church.

“Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.”
-#conc/1">1 Cor 14:1

The moderate philosophy on prophesy stands in sinking sand; not on the rock. It’s just like those who say they’re “Christians inside” but “just
don’t like to talk about it.”

Let’s look at a little greek. That word “eagerly” could be translated “jealousy.” This translation of “za-loō” is actually a little weak. It’s the same kind of jealousy God has for our love (2 Cor 11:2).

The Corinthians were commanded to zealously seek prophesy, and if we can prophesy today, we should do the same.

The Conclusion: So, what do I take from this quick study? You can’t have it both ways. Either prophesy is an extinct gift OR I am commanded to seek prophesy with a jealousy.

So, those are your two choices. There is no Biblical middle ground. Taking the easy answer doesn’t mean I’m not saved, just that I’ve missed out on one of God’s commands.

When God gives me conviction on whether or not I can prophesy, I’ll post my reasons. In the mean time, I’m interested in your opinions. What do you think? I hope you have also been convicted to not seek easy answers to the question, but seek the Truth.

Sometimes, I can get more truth from atheist Richard Dawkins than from my christian brothers. Recently, a specific “christian” group was brought to my attention.

The Lie: SoJourners

This “christian” group tries to tackling tough political issues like Gay Rights, War, or Social Inequality. As usual, I decided to do a little research, and found this simple question:

What is your position on #gays_lesbians">gay marriage and same-sex relationships in general? They began all their answers by quoting scripture. Good. I thought this was a simple enough to answer straight from Paul. Here’s a great verse to answer this question:

“…Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

Homosexuality is a straightforward issue for me. But SoJourners didn’t choose my verse. Hummm… well, they at least got the same book.

“As it is, there are many members, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you,’ nor can the head say to the feet, ‘I have no need of you.’”–1 Corinthians 12:20-21

Somehow, this was the best verse to talk about homosexuality. (Maybe I missed it – where does 1 Cor 12 mention gays?) Based on this strong scriptural evidence (this is the only verse he quotes), Jim Willis, the head of SoJourners, concludes we should:

• “Pass anti-hate-crime legislation that prosecutes attacks on gays and lesbians
• “Ensure that long-term gay and lesbian partnerships are afforded legitimate legal protections…”

You have got to be kidding me! Is it just me, or is skipping 1 Cor 6 (which talks about homosexuality) and instead referencing 1 Cor 12 (which talks about spiritual gifts) a Scriptural misinterpretation? No… it’s a perversion!

This is, at worse, awful hermeneutics; and, at best, a complete perversion. This is not the only time they put words in God’s mouth. Go read the entire FAQ if you are still in doubt.

Reverend Jim Willis

Willis is the GEO of SoJourners. He’s “a bestselling author, public theologian, speaker, and international commentator on ethics and public life.” But the best way to paint his ministry is by where he lives – Washington D.C. He may be a Christian, and may even have a relationship with Jesus Christ, but he is so soaked by Washington that the Truth of Scriptures apparently has little meaning for him.

I hope you are now informed enough to be ware. He is a wolf is sheep’s clothing. His view of Scriptures? It’s basically just like the Sunday funnies: cut it to pieces so you can hang it on your wall.

The Christian Response

Willis is obviously wrong. But we should not treat him like an unbeliever. He isn’t the enemy. We should love him like a brother. An immoral enemy, you should love on and try to save (Matthew 5:44); a immoral brother, you should abandon and even excommunicate (Romans 16:17). Yes, you heard that right. We shouldn’t even associate with him.

This is why I found this blog from Donald Miller completely on the wrong track. Miller takes the other side of the coin: that Glen Beck was being un-Christian by attacking his friend, Jim Willis. His posted on Pastor Wallis’ response; to “turn the other cheek.” He is wrong. We should love our enemies when they wrong us, but that is not the right response to a believer who does not accept the truth (2 John 1:10).

You would literally be better to spend your time listening to Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” than supporting the ministry of Jim Willis. I know this is counter-intuitive. If this stuff was natural, we wouldn’t need Jesus. So, get used to it.

Scripture: Remove the Evil!

Excommunication is mentioned several times, but let me just quote this one passage to remove any doubt that this is the Biblical response:

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (NASB)

⁹I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people;

¹⁰I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world.

¹¹But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler–not even to eat with such a one.

¹²For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?

¹³But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.