WELCOME

  FAITH

menu

Jersey Shore - Odeum - Journal - Gallery

NEVER FORGET

 

Commandments In Schools

 A win for civil liberties groups, but state attorney general says she will appeal ruling to the Supreme Court if necessary

A panel of three federal appellate judges has ruled that a Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in each of the state’s public school classrooms is unconstitutional.

The ruling on Friday marked a major win for civil liberties groups who say the mandate violates the separation of church and state – and that the poster-sized displays would isolate students, especially those who are not Christian.

The mandate has been touted by Republicans, including Donald Trump, and marks one of the latest pushes by conservatives to incorporate religion into classrooms. Backers of the law argue the Ten Commandments belong in classrooms because they are historical and part of the foundation of US law.

Heather L Weaver, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said Friday’s ruling “held Louisiana accountable to a core constitutional promise: public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith”.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys and Louisiana disagreed on whether the appeals court’s decision applied to every public school district in the state or only the districts party to the lawsuit.

“All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution,” said Liz Hayes, a spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which served as co-counsel for the plaintiffs.

The appeals court’s rulings “interpret the law for all of Louisiana”, Hayes added. “Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms.”

Louisiana’s attorney general, Liz Murrill, said she disagreed and believed the ruling only applied to school districts in the five parishes that were party to the lawsuit. Murrill added that she would appeal the ruling, including taking it to the U.S. Supreme court if necessary.

The panel of judges reviewing the case was unusually liberal for the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals. In a court with more than twice as many Republican-appointed judges, two of the three judges involved in the ruling were appointed by Democratic presidents.

The court’s ruling stems from a lawsuit filed last year by parents of Louisiana schoolchildren from various religious backgrounds, who said the law violates language in the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guaranteeing religious liberty and forbidding government establishment of religion.

The ruling also backs an order issued last fall by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles, who declared the mandate unconstitutional and ordered state education officials not to enforce it and to notify all local school boards in the state of his decision.

The state’s Republican governor, Jeff Landry, signed the mandate into law last June.

Landry said in a statement on Friday that he supported the attorney general’s plans to appeal.

“The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our laws – serving both an educational and historical purpose in our classrooms,” Landry said.

Law experts have long said they expect the Louisiana case to make its way to the U.S. Supreme court, testing the court on the issue of religion and government.

Similar laws have been challenged in court.

A group of Arkansas families filed a federal lawsuit recently challenging a near-identical law passed in their state. And comparable legislation in Texas currently awaits Governor Greg Abbott’s signature.

In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that a Kentucky law violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says Congress can “make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. The court found that the law had no secular purpose but served a plainly religious purpose.

And in 2005, the Supreme Court held that such displays in a pair of Kentucky courthouses violated the U.S. Constitution. At the same time, the court upheld a Ten Commandments marker on the grounds of the Texas state capitol in Austin. -The Guardian

Ten Commandments

 By Asma Uddim

The Ten Commandments and the First Amendment often come up together in discussions about American public life. This is because they represent two important but sometimes conflicting ideas: the role of religion in America’s history, and the rule that government and religion should be kept separate. Many people disagree about how to balance these ideas. To understand the bigger picture of how religion fits into American society and government, it’s important to understand how the Ten Commandments and the First Amendment relate to each other.

What are the Ten Commandments?

The Ten Commandments are a set of religious rules that are important in Judaism and Christianity. They come from the Bible and are believed to be rules given by God. Some of the commandments include ideas such as “You shall not steal” and “Honor your father and mother,” though the exact wording may vary between different religious traditions.

What is the First Amendment?

The First Amendment is part of the United States Constitution. It protects freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the government. For this article, we’ll focus on the part about religion. The First Amendment says the government can’t make laws about setting up a religion, and it can’t stop people from practicing their religion.

How the Ten Commandments and the First Amendment relate

Sometimes, people want to use or display the Ten Commandments in public places or in government activities. This often causes problems with the First Amendment. Some people think using the Ten Commandments in public life goes against the First Amendment because it might look like the government is supporting one religion over others. This violates the establishment clause, the part of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from establishing an official religion. Other people think it’s OK because the Ten Commandments are an important part of history and law.

These different ideas have led to many court cases and arguments. Let’s look at some examples of when this comes up.

Making laws based on the Ten Commandments

Some people think laws should be based on the Ten Commandments. For example, they might say stealing should be against the law because the Ten Commandments say, “You shall not steal.”

When it comes to the First Amendment, things get tricky. The government can make laws that happen to match some of the Ten Commandments, like laws against stealing or killing. But the reason for the law can’t be just because it’s in the Ten Commandments. To follow the First Amendment, laws need to have a main purpose that isn’t religious, even if they happen to agree with religious rules. For instance, laws against stealing and killing are primarily designed to protect people’s lives and property, which is a key role of the government.

Displaying the Ten Commandments in public places

Sometimes, people want to put up displays of the Ten Commandments in public places like parks, courthouses or other government buildings.

The First Amendment makes this a complicated issue. Courts have said that whether it’s allowed depends on the specific situation. If the display looks like the government is promoting religion, it might violate the First Amendment’s prohibition on establishment of religion. But if the Ten Commandments are shown as part of a larger display about the history of law, it might be OK.

In McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court said that putting framed copies of the Ten Commandments in two Kentucky courthouses was not allowed. It decided this because the main purpose seemed to be promoting religion, which goes against the First Amendment’s rule that the government can’t establish an official religion. The court also said that showing the Ten Commandments is usually seen as religious unless there’s a clear nonreligious reason for it.

That same year, in Van Orden v. Perry, the court allowed a Ten Commandments monument to stay on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol. It decided differently here because the monument had been there for a long time and was part of a larger display about the history of law. This context made it less about promoting religion and more about showing history.

Displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools

Some people have wanted to put up Ten Commandments displays in public school classrooms or hallways. For example, in 2024, Louisiana passed a law requiring Ten Commandments displays in classrooms, sparking renewed debate and legal challenges.

From a constitutional standpoint, this is usually not allowed. Courts have generally ruled against putting up Ten Commandments displays in public schools. The reason ties back to the First Amendment: Young students might think the school is telling them to follow these religious rules. The First Amendment requires schools to be especially careful about not promoting any particular religion.

Kentucky tried something similar back in 1978. It passed a law that required every public school classroom to display the Ten Commandments. The displays were to be paid for by private donations, not public money. To try to make this law acceptable, Kentucky said each display had to include this note: “The secular application of the Ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common Law of the United States.” It was hoped this would show that the purpose wasn’t religious but about teaching history and law.

The Supreme Court struck down the Kentucky law in Stone v. Graham (1980). The court’s decision essentially stated that simply calling something nonreligious doesn’t make it so. The court found that the purpose of posting the Ten Commandments was plainly religious and not related to any educational mission. The fact that the displays were privately funded didn’t matter because the state was still requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted.

On Nov. 12, 2024, a federal judge ruled that Louisiana’s law requiring the Ten Commandments in classrooms violates the First Amendment and blocked its enforcement.

• Teaching about the Ten Commandments in schools

• There’s a difference between teaching students about the Ten Commandments as part of history or literature and teaching students that they should follow the Ten Commandments.

The First Amendment draws a clear line here. It’s usually OK for schools to teach about the Ten Commandments as part of a class on history, literature or world religions. This is considered teaching “about” religion. However, the Constitution doesn’t allow schools to teach that students should follow the Ten Commandments or that they are the true rules to live by. This would be seen as schools promoting religion, which goes against the First Amendment. For example, a history teacher could discuss how the Ten Commandments have influenced some laws in different societies. But a teacher couldn’t tell students they should follow the Ten Commandments in their own lives or that the Ten Commandments are the best rules to live by.

In 2024, Oklahoma’s superintendent of public instruction ordered that the Ten Commandments and the Bible be taught in all public schools for grades five to 12. This order could challenge or support the distinction between teaching about religion and promoting it. The superintendent said this was necessary because the Bible is important to understanding American history and values. However, the order faced opposition. Some school districts refused to follow it after the state’s attorney general said it would break state law. A group of parents and teachers also sued, claiming the order goes against the First Amendment. The case is pending in the courts.

The ongoing constitutional dialogue around the Ten Commandments and the First Amendment

People are still talking and sometimes disagreeing about the role of the Ten Commandments in public life. Courts sometimes must make decisions about new situations involving the Ten Commandments and the First Amendment.

Some people think that the Ten Commandments are an important part of America’s history and should be more visible in public life. They might say that the Ten Commandments helped shape some of our ideas about right and wrong.

Other people worry that giving the Ten Commandments a special place in government or public schools might make people who follow different religions, or no religion, feel left out. They think it’s important to keep a clear separation between government and religion.

These discussions are part of a bigger conversation about the role of religion in public life in the United States. People often have different ideas about what the First Amendment means and how it should be applied to new situations.

Finding our way through tricky legal issues

The relationship between the Ten Commandments and the First Amendment is complex. Courts have made different decisions depending on the specific details of each situation. In general:

The government can’t make laws just because they’re in the Ten Commandments, but laws can agree with the Ten Commandments if they have a main nonreligious purpose.

Displaying the Ten Commandments on government property might be OK if it’s part of a larger, nonreligious display, but it depends on the situation.

Public schools usually can’t display the Ten Commandments, but they can teach about them as part of history or literature classes.

As society changes, people will likely continue to discuss and sometimes disagree about these issues. The goal is to find a balance that respects both religious freedom and the separation of church and state, as protected by the First Amendment. -Freedom Forum

Unconstitutional Or Not

 By Josh Dernoff

A new Louisiana law demands that school classrooms and state-funded universities display the biblical Ten Commandments on a poster-sized display in a “large, easily readable font” in every classroom by next year.

Is this a violation of the Constitution? And more interestingly, do the Ten Commandments reflect values we want to uphold as Americans?

Of course it’s unconstitutional

The very first words of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution are “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Case law has clearly extended this to apply to state laws as well. While there is plenty of room for argument about the meaning of clauses in the First Amendment, the “establishment clause” is pretty clear. Government is not supposed to mandate religious activity.

There’s plenty of precedent. The Supreme court declared a similar law in Kentucky unconstitutional in 1980. A federal judge ordered the removal of a monument featuring the Ten Commandments from an Alabama courthouse in 2003. And the Supreme Court ordered the removal of the Ten Commandments from Kentucky courthouses in 2005.

This law seems intended to generate a highly visible political and legal conflict, not to actually change what appears in schoolrooms. It gives advocates of religion in schools a fight to talk about.

Are the Ten Commandments in line with American values?

As it turns out, there are actually multiple versions of the Ten Commandments. They appear in the Bible in Exodus 34:28, Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4. Jews, Catholics, and Protestants use slightly different versions and numbering. (By favoring one version over another, the Louisiana law not only establishes religion, but indicates which religion is to be considered most fundamental to American history.)

For the purposes of this discussion, let’s stick to the version listed in the Louisiana law, and see how each commandment aligns with values we’d like our children to admire as Americans. What follows includes scriptural interpretation, which is far outside my expertise; feel free to chime in with your own scriptural interpretations if you have some.

I AM the LORD thy God. 

Not a commandment, but still mandated to be included by law.

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

The founding fathers considered the entanglement of religion and the state to be one of the fundamental weaknesses of systems of government in places like Britain. Many colonists came her to escape religious persecution. It’s no coincidence the law prohibiting an establishment of religion is the first sentence in the Bill of Rights. The First Commandment is in direct conflict with the First Amendment, since it would prohibit polytheistic religions like Hinduism. So this commandment isn’t in line with the founding fathers’ values, or the values of a modern secular America.

2. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven images. 

The biblical context is essential to understanding this commandment. After all, many Christian churches include images of the crucifixion, which is clearly a graven image of a heavenly figure. But the loophole is that it’s okay to make such images so long as you don’t worship the idols, but the actual God they represent. There’s not much idol worshipping going on in 21st century America, unless you count people worshipping sports mascots or golden Trump statues. So I’d call this one borderline irrelevant.

3. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain. 

This appears to be about swearing, but apparently, it’s not. It’s about using the name of the Lord to justify secular, non-religious activities. That’s pretty common these days (you might even say that the Louisiana law is an example). Taking the Lord’s name in vain is therefore the most commonplace of American values.

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 

There are a bunch of activities that are biblically prohibited on the Sabbath, especially work. Orthodox Jews, for example, refrain from using switches that control electrical equipment, kindling fires, driving, and so on, on their Sabbath, which runs from Friday evening through Saturday evening. The idea of refraining from work on Sunday (or whatever day is sacred for your religion) is for the most part contradictory to American practice today. Otherwise, every admired Christian NFL player is violating this Commandment.

5. Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. 

Sounds great. Honoring your father and mother is certainly in line with American values.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

Most modern translations render this as “You should not murder.” But the Louisiana law doesn’t say that: it mandates the commandment “thou shalt not kill.” Our military and police have to kill people all the time, as do gun owners acting in self-defense. Killing with justification is an American value contrary to this commandment.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Probably a good and admired idea, at least in theory. There are not many people publicly in favor of adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

Stealing is absolutely against American values.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. 

Lying is also against our common values.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house. 

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his cattle, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.

The entire capitalist practice of marketing and advertising, which is American as you can get, is based on the idea of coveting things. You are supposed to want what other people have and you don’t, whether that’s a house, a car, a smartphone, or a Hawaiian vacation. So this commandment is pretty far out of line with the way America sees itself.

Let’s tote up the score

• 5 commandments are at odds with American values (1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 10th)

• 1 commandment is currently irrelevant to American values (2nd)

• 4 commandments are in line with American values: (5th, 7th, 8th, and 9th)

So we’re pretty far from a society acting in line with the Ten Commandments, and in truth, we don’t want to be. It would be outright unAmerican to outlaw polytheism, citing God to justify things, working on the Sabbath, killing, and coveting.

In my opinion, it would be a great exercise for classes in history, civics, ethics, law, philosophy, and economics to discuss the relationship between the Ten Commandments and the founding principles and current values in practice in our nation.

But I don’t think that’s what the authors of the law in Louisiana had in mind.

What do you think? -bernoff

Titan’s Magic Islands Appear And Disappear In Liquid Seas

 By Paul Scott Anderson

In radar images from NASA’s Cassini spacecraft, the lakes and seas on the surface of Saturn’s large moon Titan do resemble bodies of water on Earth. But in Titan’s extreme cold (-290 degrees Fahrenheit or -179 degrees Celsius), the seas consist of hydrocarbons, liquid methane and ethane. The Cassini mission also spotted bright areas – like islands – that appeared to be floating on the seas and then disappearing. Scientists dubbed them Titan’s magic islands. On January 4, 2024, a team of U.S. researchers said the islands are likely floating chunks of porous (honeycombed), frozen organic solids.

How do Titan’s ‘magic islands’ form?

Cassini, which ended its mission in 2017, noticed the new features in the sea appear in 2013. They seemed ephemeral, lasting anywhere from hours to a few weeks before disappearing. Scientists came up with various theories to explain them. Were they actual islands made of solid material? Or might they be a phantom phenomenon caused by waves? If real, researchers theorized they could be suspended solids, floating solids or bubbles of nitrogen gas. If they were solids, then they must evaporate or dissolve over time.

Whatever they were, they seemed to be unique to Titan.

Floating organics?

Xinting Yu is a planetary scientist at the University of Texas San Antonio and lead author of the new study. She wondered if the islands could be composed of organic material. She stated:

I wanted to investigate whether the magic islands could actually be organics floating on the surface, like pumice that can float on water here on Earth before finally sinking.

The idea wasn’t implausible, since Titan is covered in organic material. Its atmosphere is filled with hydrocarbon “smog” and it snows organic molecules (as well as methane rains).

Float or sink?

The organic molecules in Titan’s atmosphere clump together and fall to the surface, reminiscent of snow on Earth. What would happen when those clumps landed on a lake or sea? Would they float or sink? The researchers said they could indeed float, but only if they are porous. The paper said:

We find that most molecules would land as solids. We also looked at what happens when these solids land on Titan’s hydrocarbon lakes. Imagine a sponge, full of holes; if the solids are like this, with 25%–60% of their volume being empty space, they can float.

The research team also wanted to know if the clumps would simply dissolve in the liquid. They came to the conclusion that they wouldn’t, since the lakes and seas are already saturated with other organic particles. The clumps of organic snow would simply float, although not for greatly extended periods of time. Yu said:

For us to see the magic islands, they can’t just float for a second and then sink. They have to float for some time, but not for forever, either.

Titan’s ‘magic islands’ must be porous

There’s a catch, though. Just like water, Titan’s liquids have surface tension. But it is weak, meaning that it is hard for solid material, even organics, to float. In fact, the study found that most of the frozen solids would be too dense to float. But how then do the islands form? They must be porous, like a honeycomb kind of structure or Swiss cheese. The clumps would need to be large enough and have the right ratio of holes and hollow tubes in them.

But it would work. In that scenario, the liquid methane and ethane would seep into the material slowly. As a result, the islands could stay suspended in the liquid and linger around long enough for Cassini to see them.

Also, single clumps likely couldn’t float, not for long anyway. But if they coalesced together to become larger, along the shorelines, then they could indeed float. The islands themselves may form in a process similar to calving on Earth, where pieces of glaciers break off and float away. On Titan, those separated chunks become the magic islands.

Smoothness of Titan’s seas and lakes

In addition, the findings help to explain another Titan mystery. Why are its lakes and seas so smooth, with little or no waves? If there is also a thin layer of the organic solids on top of the liquid, that frozen coating could explain why the lakes and seas look so smooth in radar images. As the paper explained:

Among all the hypotheses that have been proposed to explain the smoothness of the lakes and the observed radar-bright transient features on Titan, two hypotheses can explain both observations simultaneously: the absence/presence of waves or floating solids. The lack of wind-generated waves might account for the general smoothness of the lakes, while occasional waves could give rise to transient radar-right “magic island” phenomena. Likewise, a uniformly thin layer of floating solids could also explain the overall smoothness, with large clusters of floating solids potentially visible as “magic islands.”

Titan’s lakes and seas will be exciting targets of exploration in the future. NASA’s Dragonfly, a car-sized rotorcraft drone, will be able to take a closer look as it travels to various locations on the frigid moon. Will it see any magic islands? Dragonfly is now scheduled to launch in 2028.

Bottom line: How do Titan’s ‘magic islands’ form in its hydrocarbon seas? A new study says they are likely porous, similar to a honeycomb, and composed of organic material. -Earth Sky

Paul At The Finish Line

 “Do thy diligence to come before winter. Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren. The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen.” (2 Timothy 4:21-22)

These are the final words of the apostle Paul, written shortly before he was beheaded. Despite his faithfulness and fruitfulness in the Lord’s service, he was now penniless, lonely, and cold. Yet he was not complaining. “I am now ready to be offered. . . . I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (vv. 6-7).

 

He did yearn to see Timothy, his beloved son in the faith, before he died. “Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me” (v. 9). “Without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day; Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy” (1:3-4).

 

Paul made one especially touching request of Timothy. “The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments” (v. 13). Paul didn’t even have a coat in the cold prison, and winter was approaching. Yet, even under such miserable circumstances, he still desired to keep reading and studying, preparing himself better for any future service the Lord might still have for him.

 

What a contrast there would be between his present circumstances—abused by his enemies and forsaken even by most of his friends—and the glorious reception awaiting him in the near future! “Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day” (v. 8).

 

Paul has left us a worthy example. He had kept the faith, had gladly suffered the loss of all things for Christ (Philippians 3:8), and was still studying, witnessing, teaching, encouraging, and exhorting, even to the day of his death. HMM/ICR

8 Greek Words For Love …

That Will Make Your Heart Soar

What is love? People have had a hard time answering that question for a lot longer than you might think. In Ancient Greece, love was a concept pondered over by some of history’s most famous philosophers, including Plato and Aristotle. Greek philosophers attempted to explain love rationally and often categorized the different kinds of love people could feel. Because we love them so much, we brought together some Greek words—and a Latin one, for good measure—for the different kinds of love you might find out there.

Eros Original Greek: ἔρως (érōs) Eros is physical love or sexual desire. Eros is the type of love that involves passion, lust, and/or romance. Examples of eros would be the love felt between, well, lovers. Eros is the sensual love between people who are sexually attracted to each other. In the Bible, eros was synonymous with “marital love” because husbands and wives were supposed to be the only people having sex. Eros was also the name of a love god in Greek mythology—better known by his Roman name, Cupid—and was the guy responsible for shooting magic arrows at people to make them fall in love. The word eros is still used in psychology today to refer to sexual desire or the libido. The words erotic and erogenous, which both have to do with sexual desire or arousal, are derived from eros. Philia Original Greek: ϕιλία (philía) Philia is affectionate love. Philia is the type of love that involves friendship. Philia is the kind of love that strong friends feel toward each other. However, it doesn’t stop there. The Greek philosopher Plato thought that philia was an even greater love than eros and that the strongest loving relationships were ones where philia led to eros: a “friends become lovers” situation. Our concept of platonic love—love that isn’t based on physical attraction—comes from this Platonic philosophy. The word philia is related to the word philosophy through the combining form philo-. Philia itself is the source of the combining forms -philia, -phile, and -phily, all three of which are used to indicate a figurative love or affinity for something. Agape Original Greek: ἀγάπη (agápē) Agape is often defined as unconditional, sacrificial love. Agape is the kind of love that is felt by a person willing to do anything for another, including sacrificing themselves, without expecting anything in return. Philosophically, agape has also been defined as the selfless love that a person feels for strangers and humanity as a whole. Agape is the love that allows heroic people to sacrifice themselves to save strangers they have never met. ❤️Did you know ... ? Agape is a major term in the Christian Bible, which is why it is often defined as “Christian love.” In the New Testament, agape is the word used to describe the love that God has for humanity and the love humanity has for God. Agape was also the love that Jesus Christ felt for humanity, which explains why he was willing to sacrifice himself. Storge Original Greek: στοργή (storgé) Storge is familial love. Storge is the natural love that family members have for one another. Of all of the types of love, storge might be the easiest to understand. It is the type of love that parents feel toward their children and vice versa. Storge also describes the love that siblings feel towards each other, and the love felt by even more distant kin relationships, such as a grandparent for a grandchild or an uncle toward a niece. Mania Original Greek: μανία (manía) Mania is obsessive love. Mania is the kind of “love” that a stalker feels toward their victim. As a type of love, mania is not good, and the Greeks knew this as well as we do. Mania is excessive love that reaches the point of obsession or madness. Mania describes what a jilted lover feels when they are extremely jealous of a rival or the unhealthy obsession that can result from mental illness. The Greek mania is the source of the English word mania and similar words like maniac and manic. It is also the source of the combining form -mania, which is often used in words that refer to obsessive behavior such as pyromania and egomania. Ludus Original Latin: Bucking the trend, the word ludus comes from Latin rather than Greek. In Latin, lūdus means “game” or “play,” which fits with the type of love it refers to. One possible Greek equivalent is the word ερωτοτροπία, meaning “courtship.” Ludus is playful, noncommittal love. Ludus covers things like flirting, seduction, and casual sex. Ludus means “play” or “game” in Latin, and that pretty much explains what ludus is: love as a game. When it comes to ludus, a person is not looking for a committed relationship. People who are after ludus are just looking to have fun or view sex as a prize to be won. A “friends with benefits” situation would be an example of a relationship built on ludus: neither partner is interested in commitment. Of course, ludus may eventually result in eros—and hopefully not mania—if feelings of passion or romance emerge during the relationship. The Latin lūdus is related to the playful words ludic and ludicrous. Pragma Original Greek: πράγμα (prágma) Pragma is practical love. Pragma is love based on duty, obligation, or logic. Pragma is the unsexy love that you might find in the political, arranged marriages throughout history. This businesslike love is seen in relationships where practicality takes precedence over sex and romance. For example, two people may be in a relationship because of financial reasons or because they have more to lose by breaking up than staying together. Pragma may even involve a person tolerating or ignoring their partner’s infidelity, as was common in politically motivated royal marriages in much of world history. Pragma may not sound all that great to many, but it is possible for pragma to coexist alongside other types of love, such as ludus or even eros. As you might have guessed, pragma is related to pragmatic, a word that is all about practicality. What’s the difference between pragmatic and dogmatic? Philautia Original Greek: ϕιλαυτία (philautía) Philautia is self-love. No, not that kind. Philautia refers to how a person views themselves and how they feel about their own body and mind. The modern equivalent of philautia would be something like self-esteem (good) or hubris (bad). People with high self-esteem, pride in themselves, or a positive body image practice a healthy version of philautia. Of course, philautia has a dark side, too. Egomaniacal narcissists who think they are better than everybody else are also an example of philautia, but not in a healthy way. The duality of philautia just goes to show that love, even self-love, can often get pretty complicated. - Dictionary (https://www.dictionary.com/e/greek-words-for-love/) -09 Even When It Hurts <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hrSJwO5dJXg?si=qqfo07_wV95L6wGg&amp;controls=0" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe> -08 Improve Your Health by Stopping Negativity and Embracing Optimism By Albert Stumm Prince Bhojwani never thought of himself as a negative person, until three trips to the hospital in one month forced him to reconsider. Before May 2018, he was a healthy but chronically worried start-up founder who regularly did 20-mile (32-kilometer) bike rides. When he suddenly became barely able to walk, with blurry vision and spiking blood pressure, emergency room doctors suspected a stroke, but couldn’t pinpoint the cause of his illness. A close friend, however — “one of the most optimistic people I know,” he said — pointed out Bhojwani often lacked faith that things would work out, and suggested that had pushed him to burn out. “I started looking at the world very differently, literally the next day,” said Bhojwani, who lives in New York City. He started meditating and taking a moment every morning to feel grateful to be alive. He also found purpose by co-founding a nonprofit, Asana Voices, a South Asian advocacy organization. In the years since, he hasn’t had any similar health crises, despite working longer hours. He credits his newfound positive outlook. “After there was a life-changing event, it kind of forced me to become optimistic,” he said. “I can’t even imagine living life the way I did back then.” -AP (https://apnews.com/article/optimism-health-positive-thinking-39fb842af1cf9c08fe5c0bfa0ac368ec) -07 Evangelicals Promoted, Then Abandoned Environmental Stewardship By Steve Rabey Rising temperatures made 2023 earth’s hottest year on record. Climate scientists say human activity increases heat-trapping gasses that contribute to weather-related disasters, which in 2022 forced more than 3 million Americans from their homes and cost the world $360 billion in damages. But most evangelical Christians largely reject this scientific consensus, making their tribe the least likely to see climate change as a problem, according to Pew and PRRI. Many evangelical leaders use their influence to oppose climate-friendly legislation. Historians of “evangelical environmentalism” wanted to know: Why are evangelicals firm climate change denialists? Has that always been the case? They were shocked by what they found. Evangelicals largely supported “environmental stewardship” during the 1970s and 1980s, arguing that Christians who love God should also love and take care of God’s creation. Southern Baptist pastors were among those who preached pro-environmental sermons, their mission agencies reduced energy consumption and members proclaimed their commitment to caring for God’s green earth. As late as 1991, Richard Land and the SBC’s Christian Life Commission acknowledged that “humans are changing the earth” and causing temperatures to rise. Land urged fellow Baptists to get on board going beyond environmental concern to environmental action. But within a few years, Land and the SBC would reverse course, joining their evangelical brethren in dismissing claims of global warming, condemning environmentalism as a pagan cult, and using their influence to oppose climate-friendly legislation. Merger with the pro-business Republican Party In the 1990s, evangelical leaders merged the Religious Right with the Republican Party and baptized its big business worldview. They used their broadcasting and publishing platforms to amplify the fossil fuel lobby’s strategy: “Reposition global warming as a theory rather than fact,” following a model tobacco companies used to battle evidence that nicotine causes cancer. Neall Pogue spent years visiting dusty archives to document the rapid reversal he describes in his book, The Nature of the Religious Right: The Struggle Between Conservative Evangelicals and the Environmental Movement. “One of the most effective arguments accused secular environmentalists of being earth worshipping extremists and participants in a conspiracy to promote New Age religions and a one world government that would destroy American capitalism,” he wrote. Illustrations help tell the story. In 1986, conservative homeschooling publisher Abeka released an elementary school reader that featured a story praising naturalist and Sierra Club founder John Muir, accompanied by art showing a young John hugging a tree: “More than any other man of his time, John Muir battled for the preservation of our forests and the development of national parks. His attempt to have the government set aside beautiful areas has saved, for all of us to enjoy, some of the loveliest places in America. Because of John Muir, millions of Americans have been able to see the beauty God gave to our country.” By 1993, Muir was out and anti-environmental messages were in Abeka’s curriculum: “There has been no global warming” “Studies indicate that acid rain has existed for 350 years” “Scientists generally agree that a rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide would result in a substantial increase in plant productivity” Abeka reinforced the point with a poem: Roses are red, violets are blue They both go better with more CO2. Likewise, Robin Globus Veldman’s The Gospel of Climate Skepticism shows how “leaders in the politicized arm of the evangelical tradition” fell in line with the “climate denial machine” and used their platforms to convince believers that anti-environmentalism is the natural, normal and Christian view. More reversals This shift to climate denialism was a major reversal from evangelicalism’s earlier support of creation stewardship. Francis Schaeffer encouraged evangelicals to fight abortion in his 1979 book and film, Whatever Happened to the Human Race? That was long after he challenged evangelicals to practice a biblically based environmentalism in Pollution and the Death of Man, published in January 1970, three months before the first Earth Day. Schaeffer said he said he loved ants and trees for the same reasons he fought for unborn babies. “I do not do it for the practical or pragmatic results; I do it because it is right and because God is the Maker,” he wrote. Schaeffer said Christians should be more committed to creation care than people unaware of the natural world’s divine origins: “Christians, of all people, should not be the destroyers. … We should treat nature with an overwhelming respect. … Man was given dominion over creation. But since the Fall man has exercised this dominion wrongly due to his ‘greed and haste.’” “We are living in and practicing a sub-Christianity,” he wrote, and the church is passing up an opportunity to evangelize people who care about the environment. “They have seen that most Christians simply do not care about nature as such.” When the first Earth Day arrived on April 22, 1970, many evangelical Christian leaders already were on board with protecting God’s creation. Three days later, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association’s “Hour of Decision” radio show featured a sermon by Leighton Ford titled, “Good Earth or Polluted Planet?” The choir sang the hymn “For the Beauty of the Earth.” Graham’s Decision magazine echoed Ford’s sermon with “The Defilement of the Earth,” an editorial by Sherwood E. Wirt. Evangelism is still job No. 1, he wrote. “Let’s not foul the environment while we do it.” The National Association of Evangelicals was an early and ardent supporter of environmental care. At its 1971 convention NAE passed resolutions condemning homosexuality and abortion along with another resolution pledging to protect the environment. Twenty years after the first Earth Day, NAE dedicated an issue of its magazine, United Evangelical Action, to environmental stewardship. NAE would continue to support the cause into the 1990s, even as some of its more politically active members began promoting their new anti-environmental gospel. Harold Lindsell, an editor at Christianity Today from 1968 to 1976, represented two strains of evangelical environmentalism. First, he acknowledged humans had degraded their God-given home: “We have exploited and raped nature (and) if we continue at the rate we are going, the planet will shortly be uninhabitable.” Second, he was a pioneer in describing parts of the environmental movement as an earth worshipping pantheistic cult, which CT warned against in a 1970 editorial titled “Ecologism: A New Paganism.” In the 1990s, conservative Christian groups used claims about a pagan environmental cult (and its heretical Christian supporters) as part of a strategy to line up voters behind the GOP’s pro-business, anti-environmental agenda. Both Pogue and Veldman document the ways conservative evangelical leaders — Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Chuck Colson, Tony Perkins of Family Research Council, and the CBN network — promoted their gospel of climate skepticism. “These conspiracy theories were delivered with a strong dose of ridicule aimed at belittling anyone expressing sympathy for the natural world,” Pogue wrote. “Such a strategy indirectly vilified Christian environmental stewardship through guilt by association.” Some Baptists abandoned environmentalism early. In 1973, future SBC President Adrian Rogers preached a sermon at Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis on “Theology of Ecology.” But by 1984, Rogers was aligned with the Reconstructionist group Coalition for Revival, which issued a resolution, “The Christian World View of Economics,” that placed financial issues above environmental concerns. Other Southern Baptists held on to their pro-environmental views a while longer before abandoning and eventually repudiating them. Three-and-a-half years after the first Earth Day, America was in its first energy crisis. Arab nations halted shipments of oil to the U.S. over America’s support for Israel, leading to gas shortages that overnight made conservation essential. W.A. Criswell’s First Baptist Church in Dallas implemented energy-saving policies in its buildings and encouraged members to carpool to services to save gas. Jerry Falwell’s Thomas Road Baptist Church reduced social outings and youth group trips and reduced its bus ministry. Even fundamentalist First Baptist Church of Hammond, Ind., reduced its fleet of buses. The SBC Home Mission Board launched a recycling program that saved nearly 150 trees and 2,000 gallons of fuel in months. Colleges got involved, too. Missouri Baptist University organized a cleanup event on campus. Students at Houston Baptist University worked with city officials to combat litter and pollution. Texas Baptists said energy conservation was more than an economic issue, it was “a moral and spiritual matter.” Baptists in North Carolina said wasting energy was not only poor stewardship but also a sin. In 1971, the first anniversary of Earth Day, the SBC conducted a poll of 312 pastors and 375 Sunday school teachers to gauge their eco-friendliness: 82% of pastors and 76% of Sunday school teachers agreed that “a local Southern Baptist church should ‘lead church members to involve themselves and cooperate actively with authorities’ in attempts to solve air and water pollution problems.” Southern Baptists followed the rest of the evangelical world in the great reversal, however. In 2007, Pew surveyed Southern Baptist church members, finding 35% agreed with the statement, “Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.” By 2014, 50% of Southern Baptists agreed that environmental regulations hurt more than they help. As Southern Baptists and other evangelicals changed their tune, they disabled the movement toward creation care. “Anti-environmentalist positions from political conservatives eventually crushed calls for environmental action,” Pogue explained. Richard Land as a case study In the 1990s, as conservatives gained full control of the SBC and its institutions, Richard Land held great national influence as head of the Christian Life Commission (now known as the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission). In 1991, Land organized a CLC event designed to spur Baptists to embrace a more active environmental response to global warming. He was inspired, in part, by Francis Schaeffer, who called evangelicals to practice a biblically based environmentalism in Pollution and the Death of Man, published in January 1970. Land lined up an impressive roster of SBC leaders to speak at the CLC event, including SBC President Morris Chapman, Russell Bush of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Gary Leaser of the Home Mission Board, and Prestonwood Baptist Church Pastor Jack Graham. Land created a fact sheet for the event titled “Endangered Earth” that made things crystal clear: “HUMANS ARE CHANGING THE EARTH.” The fact sheet acknowledged the scientific consensus — that temperatures are rising because human activities are increasing carbon dioxide, methane and other gasses — and cited articles from Scientific American, Time magazine, the Washington Post and other secular sources. But within a few years, Land reversed himself, denying that humans are causing global warming. “Conservative evangelicals including Land abandoned Christian environmental stewardship out of fear they would be associated with a variety of conspiracy theories combined with the potential threat of being ridiculed by fellow evangelicals,” Pogue wrote. “By 2000, it was apparent that he had bowed to Christian climate change deniers and stepped in line with his politically conservative peers.” Soon, Southern Baptist leaders quit promoting a biblical understanding of Christian environmentalism and began teaching that environmentalism is inherently anti-Christian and that environmental legislation is silly, harmful and costly. Jerry Falwell — who at this point was warming to the SBC and ready to abandon his independent Baptist heritage — preached about “THE MYTH OF GLOBAL WARMING” at Thomas Road Baptist Church, where Associate Pastor Elmer Towns told members he hoped a winter snowstorm would clobber the Northeast, home to those elitists who still believed in global warming.

When Pogue interviewed Land about this shift in 2017, Land blamed it on pagan environmentalists, saying things could have gone down “a very different path had environmentalists not gone completely wacko …, which they did.” -Baptist News

GIF

 

God, I'm Trying