Cadavers (ewww...)

1.      Semrau’s main point: “Quite simply, use what you have until it can no longer function. Then it’s time to recycle.”

2.      I think that by intentionally keeping information from readers Semrau actually helps the intent of his essay, which is to show people the importance of reusing, more specifically our bodies. If Semrau had been blunt and stated that he was going to be donating his body to the study of science after he died and wanted others to join him, I think many people would have felt very uncomfortable and would have stopped reading. Being a cadaver for a med school just isn’t something people typically do so I think it was better for him to make the reader curious as to why he liked the idea of reusing. Semrau seems to think that we should use our bodies for as long as we possibly can and then when we no longer need them, we should let others make use of them. He makes a good point: “Most of us have many things that we don’t or won’t use – things we no longer need. Whatever it is, if it has some function then someone can make use of it.” Basically, our bodies can still be useful to others, even when they’re no longer useful to us. This statement from Semrau makes a lot of sense and I think people can relate to it – I mean, everyone has reused something in their life. Conserving, reusing and recycling are now more important than ever in our world as our resources are slowly depleting. This could help people understand the importance Semrau feels about reusing our bodies. People generally reuse objects through garage sales, donations and gifts. Semrau asks: why not through science?

Savior of the Nations Come

The theme of Luther’s hymn, Savior of the Nations Come, is the glory displayed by Jesus Christ’s birth, death and resurrection. Verse two does an exceptional job of presenting the glory of Christ’s birth. It says: “Not by human flesh and blood, by the Spirit of our God, was the Word of God made flesh – Woman’s offspring, pure and fresh.” Even though Christ was fully man, “Woman’s offspring,” He was also fully God, “the Word of God made flesh.” Luther goes on to add in verse three, “Wondrous birth! O wondrous Child!” Christ’s birth was remarkable because He didn’t have to come to earth as a lowly baby or at all. But His love for us is unconditional and immutable and so He sacrificed his position in Heaven to redeem the lost. “Marvel now, O heaven and earth, that the Lord chose such a birth,” as stated in verse one reveals that Christ had the power and authority to come as a powerful king yet He chose the most humble state possible, a helpless baby. Above all, Christ’s glory was shown through His death and resurrection. Verse four says: “From the Father forth He came and returneth to the same, captive leading death and hell – High the song of triumph swell!” This verse shows that Christ triumphantly defeated sin and death through His own death and that He rose victoriously to return to His glorified position in Heaven. I think that to an extent every hymn has pathos, and Luther’s hymn is no exception. As Christians, we should be overjoyed listening to this hymn, telling us of all the marvelous works Christ has done for us. We should be excited to hear that Christ chose to live among us, offered Himself in our place, died our death, defeated sin and the devil, and that because of Him we will be in Heaven one day.   

Borghardt vs. Edwards

1.      Times Christ is mentioned: 34

2.      Verbs where Christ is the subject: Makes us holy, took on our sin and death, died for us on the cross, was slain, lives again, died our death, rose and reigns, makes us alive, doesn’t push Heaven and holiness far away from us, came and made this place a place of blessing, make blessings even more, can’t stand to be without us anymore, calling us home, reigns on the throne with the Father

3.      The theme of Rev. Borghardt’s sermon is the complete opposite if the theme of Jonathan Edwards’s Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. Rev. Borghardt’s sermon centered on what Christ has done for us and how we will receive God’s riches – salvation and eternal life – at the expense of Christ’s death on the cross. He spoke hope to the listeners and of the perfection and absolute blissfulness of Heaven and how it will be beyond anything we have ever experienced. On the other hand, Edwards focused on God’s condemnation of us and His wrath toward us if we do not repent of our sins and how God is ready to throw us in the fiery pits of hell when our time on earth is at an end. He spoke of how God is repulsed by our sinful state and regards us as if we were some loathsome creatures. In a major contrast to Rev. Borghardt’s hope inspiring sermon, Edwards strikes fear into the hearts of those listening by telling them of the torture and agony they will experience in hell.

No more fuzzy dice

1.      Briefly, this article is explaining Michigan’s ban on hanging items from your rearview mirror and that the state government is considering lessening the ban so that smaller items may be hung but not items that obstruct a driver’s view.

2.      My favorite quote from the article is this one addressing the issue of fuzzy dice: “Fuzzy dice might not be included, though, because they could block views of the road.” I liked this quote just because I found it interesting that the writer would menion it. I don’t know how many people he sees with dice hanging from their rearview mirror, but I certainly don’t see any fuzzy dice dangling from mirrors whenever I’m on the road. And how is it possible that they obstruct a driver’s view anyway? I would think that would only be true if you hung your rearview mirror right in front of the steering wheel. This just seemed like a very random thought that the writer just decided to toss in at the end like an oh by the way . . . you probably won't be allowed to hang fuzzy dice ever again – sorry to all you 60s fans.

3.      Honestly, I think the state of Michigan has more important matters to deal with than the size of objects hanging from a rearview mirror. It’s one of those laws where you’re just like really? Is that absolutely necessary? Don’t you guys have anything better to do? I never even knew that hanging objects from your mirror was illegal until I read this article. No one even follows this rule anyway. Not even the police – which is really saying something. As I said before, how do these objects obstruct your view anyway? I mean seriously, an air freshener isn’t even that big! I’m sure people can see around it just fine. And does the government even have proof that these objects are obstructive? The answer is probably not. It’s just another reason to fine people and make more money. Bottom line: this ban is a complete waste of time.

Mitch Albom Column: It's not race, LeBron James, but it might be you

After reading this column about LeBron James, Albom’s point for writing was practically written in size 72 font, bold faced and underlined about 20 times. As in Lebron’s case, his decline in popularity, the same question rears its ugly head: “It is because of his race?” And then the confirmation. Yes, of course. That must be the answer because there is no other plausible explanation to this problem they are facing. Race is a “parachute [of] safety” as Albom so logically puts it. When people don’t want to admit the truth, that’s the poor excuse they adopt repeatedly. LeBron’s popularity is dropping – oh no! That must mean white people are no longer cheering for him because he’s black. Of course no one wants to acknowledge that the real issue could be his monster ego that is actually driving away his fans. I for one agree with Albom one hundred percent. Race is the perpetual defense used when something doesn’t happen to be going their way and they want the sympathy vote. Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes their accusations are accurate. But for all the other times when they pull the race card for selfish reasons, it’s just irritating. Let’s face the facts! Instead of dancing around the tangible problem and tossing in some typical excuse to justify LeBron’s behavior, just outright say that it is precisely his ego that’s the problem, not his race! Albom says, “But Lebron didn’t become internationally famous with only black fans liking him, and he didn’t reach this sudden infamy with only white fans bailing out.” This statement immediately sent a flag up in my mind. This is definitely Albom’s most effective point of his column. It makes perfect sense. Lebron had loads of supporters, both black and white, and now he’s lost some supporters, both black and white. It’s as simple as that. This clearly proves that this whole controversy has absolutely no relationship whatsoever with his race. If white people have supported him throughout his career up until his “major decision,” they aren’t bailing now because they experienced some life-altering event that’s caused them to become extremely racist. His race didn’t bother them at the beginning and still doesn’t bother them at this point. That would be his overly confident, jerky attitude: aka an enormous ego!