The Book of Mormon vs The Bible, Part 1 of an indepth study of Latter Day Saints Archeology
The Book of Mormon verses The Bible, Part 1 of an indepth study
With the great vast amounts of evidence we find in the Bible through archeology, why is there no evidence for anything writte in the Book of Mormon?
Tags: church false mormon christian bible book of mormon joseph smith cult LDS latter day saints archeology
__________________________________________
From time to time you will read articles in the Arkansas press by such writers as John Brummett, Max Brantley and Gene Lyons that poke fun at those that actually believe the Bible is historically accurate when in fact the Bible is backed up by many archaeological facts. The Book of Mormon is blindly accepted even though archaeology has disproven many of the facts that are claimed by it. For instance, wheels and chariots did not exist in North America when they said they did.
The Book of Mormon claims to be a record of the inhabitants of the Americas during the period from 2000 B.C. to 400 A.D. It makes many claims about the history and anthropology of pre-Columbian American cultures. Unfortunately, the author of the book, Joseph Smith, had little or no knowledge of pre-Columbian American civilizations. Borrowing and adapting many stories from the Old and New Testaments, Joseph Smith was unaware that the earlier Native American peoples were part of stone-age civilizations that were significantly less advanced than Hebrew and other Middle Eastern cultures of biblical times.
Weapons of war
The Book of Mormon describes the presence of chariots in the New World.However, archeologists have found neither evidence of chariots or even evidence of wheeled vehicle usage during the period described in the Book of Mormon. Scimitar (“cimiter”) – not found in the New World Scimitars (spelled “cimeters” by Joseph Smith), were Old-World weapons of war that were mentioned throughout the Book of Mormon.However, they have not been found to have existed in the New World. LDS apologists cite the Mesoamerican maccuahuitl as a possible “cimiter”.However, the maccuahuitl was a hardwood club with obsidian blades, which is quite different from the heavy, two-handed curved steel blade of the “cimeter.” The Book of Mormon expressly states that the American peoples of the period used weapons of war made of metals,although none of these weapons have ever been found. The Hill Cumorah in New York is described as the location of two major wars that involved the deaths of millions of people. However, no remains or even weapons of war have been found there.
The Old and New Testaments present a rich description of biblical peoples, places and cultures. Archeology of the Middle East has revealed the cities, weapons, crops, animals, coins, writings, and references to biblical characters found in the Bible. However, none of the cities mentioned in the Book of Mormon have ever been identified by qualified archeologists. In addition, many Book of Mormon references to metals, weapons, crops, animals, articles of clothing are known to have not been present in the Americas during the time period claimed in the Book of Mormon.
There is very little doubt in anyone’s mind about the reality of so many of the Old and New Testament cities mentioned in the Bible. Therefore, it is hardly necessary to document their existence. Nevertheless, following is a partial list of some of the cities mentioned in the Bible that have been found and excavated by archaeologists. This is simply more evidence that the Bible describes actual locations that can be verified. This means that at the very least, the Bible accurately reflects the locations and cities of ancient times.
Remember, this is only a partial list. There are hundreds of biblical cities that have been verified in archaeological digs.
Chorazin
Matt. 11:21, “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”
“Excavations of the now deserted town indicate that it once covered an area of twelve acres and was built on a series of terraces with the basalt stone local to this mountainous region.”6
Dan
Judges 18:29, “And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father who was born in Israel; however, the name of the city formerly was Laish.”
“The excavation of Dan began in 1966 under the direction fo Avraham Biran.”7
“Formerly called Laish, it is mentioned in the execration texts, the eighteenth-century b.c. Mari tablets, and the records of the Egyptian pharaoh Thutmose III. It is identified with Tel Dan (modern Tell el-Qadi) covering about 50 acres in the center of a fertile valley near one of the principal springs feeding the Jordan River…Tel Dan has been excavated by A. Biran since 1966. The earliest occupation, probably the full extent of the tell, goes back to about the middle of the third millennium B.C.”8
Ephesus
Eph. 1:1, “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and who are faithful in Christ Jesus.”
“Austrian archaeologists in this century [2oth] have excavated the 24,000-seat theater and the commercial agora, as well as many other public buildings and streets of the first and second centuries a.d., so that the modern visitor can gain some impression of the city as known by Paul.9
On Wednesday, Right Wing Watch flagged a recent interview Barton gave with an evangelcial talk show, in which he argues that the Founding Fathers had explicitly rejected Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Yes, that Darwin. The one whose seminal work, On the Origin of Species, wasn’t even published until 1859. Barton declared, “As far as the Founding Fathers were concerned, they’d already had the entire debate over creation and evolution, and you get Thomas Paine, who is the least religious Founding Father, saying you’ve got to teach Creation science in the classroom. Scientific method demands that!” Paine died in 1809, the same year Darwin was born.
While uninformed laymen erroneously believe the theory of evolution to be a product of Charles Darwin in his first major work of 1859 (The Origin of Species), the historical records are exceedingly clear that the evolution-creation-intelligent design debate was largely formulated well before the birth of Christ. Numerous famous writings have appeared on the topic for almost two thousand years; in fact, our Founding Fathers were well-acquainted with these writings and therefore the principle theories and teachings of evolution – as well as the science and philosophy both for and against that thesis – well before Darwin synthesized those centuries-old teachings in his writings.
Nobel-Prize winner Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) explains: “The general idea of evolution is very old; it is already to be found in Anaximander (sixth century B.C.). . . . [and] Descartes [1596-1650], Kant [1724-1804], and Laplace [1749-1827] had advocated a gradual origin for the solar system in place of sudden creation.” 1 ( Bertrand Russell, Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1948), pp. 33-34.)…
…
John Dewey, an ardent 20th century proponent of Darwinism, explained why the intelligent design position – scientifically speaking – was reasonable:
The marvelous adaptation of organisms to their environment, of organs to the organism, of unlike parts of a complex organ (like the eye) to the organ itself; the foreshadowing by lower forms of the higher; the preparation in earlier stages of growth for organs that only later had their functioning – these things are increasingly recognized with the progress of botany, zoology, paleontology, and embryology. Together, they added such prestige to the design argument that by the later eighteenth century it was, as approved by the sciences of organic life, the central point of theistic and idealistic philosophy.9
(This position of intelligent design, also called the anthropic or teleological view, is now embraced by an increasing number of contemporary distinguished scientists, non-religious though many of them claim to be.10 )
The second camp within the theistic approach is theistic evolution, which was first propounded by Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). Other prominent expositors of this view included Gregory of Nyssa (331-396 A.D.), Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.), St. Gregory the First (540-604 A.D.), St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Leibnitz (1646-1716), Swedenborg (1688-1772), Bonnet (1720-1793), and numerous contemporary scientists. In fact, many of Darwin’s contemporaries embraced this view, believing that “natural selection could be the means by which God has chosen to make man.” 11
As confirmed by Dr. James Rachels, professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham: Mivart [1827-1900, a professor in Belgium] became the leader of a group of dissident evolutionists who held that although man’s body might have evolved by natural selection, his rational and spiritual soul did not. At some point God had interrupted the course of human history to implant man’s soul in him, making him something more than merely a former ape. . . . Wallace [1823-1913, who advocated natural selection prior to Darwin] took a view very similar to that of Mivart: he held that the theory of natural selection applies to humans, but only up to a point. Our bodies can be explained in this way, but not our brains. Our brains, he said, have powers that far outstrip anything that could have been produced by natural selection. Thus he concluded that God had intervened in the course of human history to give man the “extra push” that would enable him to reach the pinnacle on which he now stands. . . . Natural selection, while it explained much, could not explain everything; in the end God must be brought in to complete the picture. 12
In fact, Clarence Darrow himself (the lead attorney during the famous Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925 13 ), admitted during the trial that this was a prominent position of many in that day; 14 and Dudley Malone, Darrow’s co-counsel, even declared:
We shall show by the testimony of men learned in science and theology that there are millions of people who believe in evolution and in the stories of creation as set forth in the Bible and who find no conflict between the two. 15
Interestingly, writers who chronicle the centuries-long history of the evolution debate16 confirm that there have always been numerous evolutionists in both the theistic and the non-theistic camps, and much of the proceedings in the Scopes trial reaffirmed that a belief in evolution was not incompatible with teaching theistic origins and a belief in a divine creator.
The third camp, special (or literal) creation, was championed by Francisco Suarez (1548-1617) and later by Pasteur (1822-1895) as well as by subsequent contemporary scientists.1. Bertrand Russell, Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1948), pp. 33-34.(Return)
2. Henry Fairfield Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1924), p. 1. (Return)
3. Henry Fairfield Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1924), p. 6. (Return)
4. Edward Clodd, Pioneers of Evolution From Thales to Huxley (New York: Books for Libraries Press), p. 3.(Return)
5. Henry Fairfield Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1924), pp. 10-11. (Return)
6. Henry Fairfield Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1924), p. 11. (Return)
7. James Rachels, Created From Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 10. (Return)
8. Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882, Nora Barlow, editor (London: Collins, 1958), pp. 92-93. (Return)
9. John Dewey, The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy, and Other Essays on Contemporary Thought (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1910), p. 11. (Return)
10. Some of the contemporary academics and researchers embracing this position include Dr. Mike Behe of Lehigh University, Dr. Walter Bradley of Texas A & M, Dr. Sigrid Hartwig-Scherer of Ludwig-Maximilian University in Munich, Phillip Johnson and Dr. Jonathan Wells of the University of California at Berkeley, Dr. Robert Kaita of Princeton, Dr. Steven Meyer of Whitworth, Dr. Heinz Oberhummer of Vienna University, Dr. Siegfried Scherer of the Technical University of Munich, Dr. Jeff Schloss of Westmont, etc. There are numerous others that, to varying degrees, embrace the anthropic position, including Dr. Brandon Carter of Cambridge, Dr. Frank Tipler of Tulane, Dr. Peter Berticci of Michigan State, Dr. George Gale of University of Missouri Kansas City, Dr. John Barrow of Sussux University, Dr. John Leslie of the University of Guelph, Dr. Heinz Pagels of Rockefeller University, Dr. John Earman of University of Pittsburgh, and many others. (Return)
11. James Rachels, Created From Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 3. (Return)
12. James Rachels, Created From Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), pp. 57-58. (Return)
13. Scopes v. State, 289 S. W. 363 (1927). (Return)
14. The World’s Most Famous Court Trial: Tennessee Evolution Case; A Word for Word Report of the Famous Court Test of the Tennessee Anti-Evolution Act, at Dayton, July 10 to 21, 1925 . . . (Cincinnati: National Book Company, 1925), pp. 83-84, Clarence Darrow, July 13, 1925. (Return)
15. The World’s Most Famous Court Trial: Tennessee Evolution Case; A Word for Word Report of the Famous Court Test of the Tennessee Anti-Evolution Act, at Dayton, July 10 to 21, 1925 . . . (Cincinnati: National Book Company, 1925), p. 113, Dudley Malone, July 15, 1925.(Return)
16. See Henry Fairfield Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1924); see also Peter J. Bowler, Evolution: The History of an Idea (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984); see also Edward Clodd, Pioneers of Evolution From Thales to Huxley (New York: Books for Libraries Press); see also Robert Clark,Darwin: Before and After, and Examination and Assessment (London: The Paternoster Press, 1958),(Return)
Here are some other posts about David Barton’s word on the unconfirmed quotes that have been attributed to the Founding Father and Barton’s effort to stop the Righteous Right for using these quotes in the future:
HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 6 David Barton:Were the Founding Fathers Deists? In 1988 only 25% of Christians voted but that doubled in 1994. Christians are the salt of the world. The last few days I have been looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding Fathers actually said and the historical evidence […]
HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 5 David Barton: Were the Founding Fathers Deists? First Bible printed in USA was printed by our founding fathers for use in the public schools. 20,000 Bibles. 10 commandments hanging in our courthouses. The last few days I have been looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding […]
HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 4 David Barton: Were Founding Fathers Deists? Only 5% of the original 250 founding fathers were not Christians (Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr, Thomas Paine, Ethan Allen, Joe Barlow, Charles Lee, Henry Dearborn, ect) In the next few weeks I will be looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think […]
HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 3 David Barton: Were Founding Fathers Deists? American Bible Society filled with Founding Fathers Here is another in the series of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding Fathers actually said and the historical evidence concerning them. David Barton has collected these quotes and tried to confirm them over the last 20 […]
HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 2 David Barton on Founding Fathers were they deists? Not James Wilson and William Samuel Johnson In the next few weeks I will be looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding Fathers actually said and the historical evidence concerning them. David Barton has collected these quotes and […]
HALT: HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Part 1 David Barton: Were the Founding Fathers Deists? Religious holidays, Court cases, punishing kids in school for praying in Jesus name In the next few weeks I will be looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding Fathers actually said and the historical evidence concerning them. David […]
Halting Arkansas Liberals with Truth David Barton goes through American History and looks at some of the obscure names in our history and how prayer and Bible Study affected some of our founding fathers In the next few weeks I will be looking at this issue of unconfirmed quotes that people think that the Founding […]
HALT: Halting Arkansas Liberals with Truth ___ I wanted to thank Gene Lyons for bringing this issue of fake quotes of the Founding Fathers to our attention because it should be addressed. In April 8, 2010 article “Facts Drowning in Disinformation,” he rightly notes that Thomas Jefferson never said, “The democracy will cease to [
Royal Wedding: William and Kate’s First Kiss, Too Short for Buckingham Palace Balcony
Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge leave Clarence House for Buckingham Palace on April 29, 2011 in London, England. (Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)
Prince William and Kate moved in together about a year ago. In this clip above the commentator suggested that maybe Prince Charles and Princess Diana would not have divorced if they had lived together before marriage. Actually Diana was a virgin, and it was Charles’ uncle (Louis Mountbatten) that gave him the advice that he should seek to marry a virgin.
I really do wish Kate and William success in their marriage. I hope they truly are committed to each other, and if they are then the result will be a marriage that lasts their whole lifetime. Nevertheless, I do not think it is best to live together before marriage like they did, and I writing this series to help couples see how best to prepare for marriage.
The fact that many couples live together without the legal commitment of marriage surprises few in our morally dysfunctional society. What is surprising is the number of professing Christians who choose to live together without the benefit of marriage.
Churches and families are increasingly faced with the question of how to respond to these individuals who believe their personal commitments to one another are morally equivalent to legal marriage.
Every moral issue is fundamentally a biblical issue. Genesis 2:18-25 describes marriage as a divine institution. God presented Adam with Eve and established the first marriage.
Genesis 2:24 is the basis for all future marriages: “This is why a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife, and they become one flesh.” When Jesus was asked about grounds for divorce, He quoted this verse with regard to a legal, binding marriage relationship (Matt. 19:5).
When God revealed the law to Moses on Mount Sinai, there were many regulations regarding marriage. A man who seduced a virgin and had sexual relations with her before marriage was required to pay the father of the girl and was required to marry her if the father permitted (Ex. 22:16). Sexual relations with a virgin betrothed to another resulted in death by stoning of both parties (Deut. 22:23-24). These laws revealed the importance of marriage and the sin of premarital sex.
Malachi 2:13-16 speaks against the abandonment of wives by husbands. They are accused of breaking faith and abandoning their marriage covenants (v. 14). God’s intention was that sexual relationships between a man and a woman should occur only after a legal covenant was established. The covenant was to provide security and a formal obligation that could not be easily abandoned. Governmental regulation of marriage recognizes the importance of protecting the rights of marriage partners and children.
The New Testament also forbids sexual relations outside marriage. Hebrews 13:4 commands everyone to honor the institution of marriage. In 1 Timothy 4:3, Paul warned that a sign of the end times would be an abandonment of the divine institution of marriage.
Despite the arguments of some, the odds of a successful marriage do not increase because a couple lives together before marriage. In fact, studies reveal the opposite is true.
Where do professing Christian couples find justification for living together without marriage? Their own desires and an immoral culture provide support, but God’s Word is neither vague nor confusing on this point: A personal commitment between a man and woman is not the moral equivalent of a biblical marriage.
Weekend to Remember-Family Life…Fireproof your marriage
Today we are discussing the 7th most controversial game.
Everette Hatcher’s choice: I have chosen this game partly because it was a game that the USA won. Sadly Escobar was killed in a bar back in Columbia when he got home. Two of my sons were learning soccer at the time and they were 7 and 6 years old and I was teaching them the rules. I did comment on the fact that Escobar had knocked the ball in the wrong goal and he was later killed and my sons did not want to play any more. They thought I was saying that the rule was if you put the ball in the wrong goal then you will be killed. I had to straighten that misconception out so they would continue to play!!!!!
Andrés Escobar Own Goal (1994)
In the 1994 World Cup Colombia vs USA match, Colombian defender Escobar unluckily deflected the ball into his own net. Thus, Colombia lost 2-1 to the USA.
Andrés Escobar Own Goal
Wilson picks:
England vs Argentina (1998)
Argentina knocked out England on penalties. Beckham kicked out at the Argentinean midfielder getting himself sent off. He received death threats by fans.
Beckham kicked out at the Argentinean midfielder getting himself sent off
West Germany vs Austria (1982) West Germany vs Austria in 1982 FIFA World Cup game is widely believed to have changed the rules of future World Cup tournaments. A win by one or two goals would be enough to send both teams through. The games was seen as being fixed, both teams had an unspoken agreement. West Germany continued to knock the ball around for the rest of the game.
Maradona’s Goal Celebration (1994)
Argentinean team’s Maradona in the 1994 tournament raced towards the nearest video camera with a psychotic look upon his face. Then a urine sample was asked for, showing that he had taken a banned substance in ephedrine.
Maradona’s Goal Celebration
England vs Argentina (1998)
Argentina knocked out England on penalties. Beckham kicked out at the Argentinean midfielder getting himself sent off. He received death threats by fans.
Beckham kicked out at the Argentinean midfielder getting himself sent off
Andrés Escobar Own Goal (1994) In the 1994 World Cup Colombia vs USA match, Colombian defender Escobar unluckily deflected the ball into his own net. Thus, Colombia lost 2-1 to the USA.
Andrés Escobar Own Goal
Zidane’s Headbutt (2006)
Zinedine Zidane got himself sent off in the final of the 2006 tournament. He apologized for his headbutt on Italian defender Marco Materazzi.
Zidane’s Headbutt
Kuwait vs France (1982)
In the 1982 FIFA World Cup, a controversial incident happened in the match Kuwait vs France. The French team scored the 4th goal while Kuwaiti players thought that they had heard the referee blow the whistle before the goal scored, thus they stopped playing.
England vs Argentina (1986)
In England vs Argentina match in the 1986 World Cup, Diego Maradona scored one of the best goals ever seen in a World Cup. This goal was overshadowed by his Shilton into the back of the net. This goal was considered to be Hand of God.
Obama was in the air en route the British Isles when the deadliest tornado in U.S. history struck Joplin, Missouri. Rather than return, he continued on, for days of celebrations with the British Royals.
Springfield MA tornado aftermath A smashed car sits next to the South End Community Center, which lost most of its roof in a tornado that touched down in Springfield, Mass., Wednesday, June 1, 2011. (/AP Courtesy Marque Tortoriello An apparent tornado has caused damage in Springfield, Mass. Twister: This photo, taken through a window, shows […]
Springfield, Mass. Tornado – Multiple Views – June 1, 2011 (lots of cursing) ___________________________________ Raw Video: Tornado Strikes Springfield, Mass. An apparent tornado struck the downtown of one of Massachusetts’ largest cities Wednesday afternoon, scattering debris, toppling trees, and frightening workers and residents. _________________________________ Tornado touches down Springfield, MA _____________________________________
Steeple of First Church of Monson lays The steeple of The First Church of Monson lays in rubble on the ground after a tornado swept through the downtown area of Monson, Mass., Wednesday, June 1, 2011.… Read more » The Associated Press reported this morning: SPRINGFIELD, Mass. – The Rev. Bob Marrone was pained […]
Destructive Joplin Missouri Torando On May 22, 2011 a destructive and sadly a deadly tornado tore through the town of Joplin, MO. Here is video of the tornado entering the southwest side of town. Filmed by TornadoVideos.net Basehunters Colt Forney, Isaac Pato, Kevin Rolfs, and Scott Peake. Good Morning America: Joplin, Missouri Tornado Video: Storm […]
Destroyed helicopter lies on its side A destroyed helicopter lies on its side in the parking lot of the Joplin Regional Medical Center in Joplin, Mo., Sunday, May 22, 2011. A large tornadomoved through much of the city, damaging the hospital and hundreds of homes and businesses Emergency personnel walk Emergency personnel walk through […]
The last video listed does not have very good pictures but you hear when the tornado hits a building where people inside are filming. The sounds are just horrible and a cold feeling went through my body just listening to it. Joplin, Missouri tornado damage from the air Tornado damage of Joplin, Missouri. Aerial coverage […]
Volunteer firefighters William Jackson Volunteer firefighters William Jackson, left, and Ashley Martin, center, from Oklahoma, and Johnny Ward of Joplin look through the wreckage of a home whereit was feared a pregnant woman as feared to be trapped following a tornado in Joplin, Mo., Sunday, May 22, 2011. A large tornado moved through […]
Fox News reported today: Rescue crews dug through piles of splintered houses and crushed cars Monday in a search for victims of a half-mile-wide tornado that blasted much of this Missouri town off the map and slammed straight into its hospital. At least 116 people died, making it the nation’s deadliest single tornado in nearly […]
Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:
Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.
On May 11, 2011, I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:
Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner. I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.
Therefore, I went to the website and sent this email below:
Reducing Federal Travel: Saves $7.5 billion Since the implementation of the requirement that all federal employees use travel charge cards to pay for the expenses of official government travel, the dollar volume of travel card transaction has increased from $4.39 billion in FY1999 to $8.93 billion in FY2009. Audits have found significant weaknesses in internal controls over travel card use, which costs the government millions this year. Examples of card misuse by federal employees include unauthorized trips with premium seating, reimbursements for airline tickets that were never purchased and even laser eye surgery. Auditors have also determined some federal agencies have not collected reimbursements for millions of dollars’ worth of unused airline tickets. With rapid and continuing improvements in communications technology, the need for face-to-face meetings is no longer necessary.
I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” was so good that I will be doing a series on it. My favorite Woody Allen movie is Crimes and Misdemeanors and I will provide links to my earlier posts on that great movie.
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS is the latest Woody Allen comedy. As such, it contains some of the fantasy elements of some of his older movies, like THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO, where a man from a 1930s movie steps out of the frame and enters the life of a woman neglected and emotionally abused by her husband.
The movie stars Owen Wilson as Gil, a successful yet unfulfilled screenwriter who hopes to become an acclaimed literary novelist. He and his fiancée Inez (Rachel McAdams) are visiting Paris with her parents, a city Gil finds fascinating because of its rich history from the 1920s literary scene of Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Picasso, and other acclaimed writers and artists. Gil is uncomfortable with the modern-day changes in Paris, and dislikes a couple who are friends with Inez, so he opts to walk alone late one night through the city while Inez and her friends go dancing.
At the stroke of midnight, a luxurious 1920s-era car pulls up and tells him to climb inside. Once he does, he finds himself surrounded by people like Hemingway and Fitzgerald and his wife. They take him to a series of parties that seem real, but when he leaves each morning, the neighborhood around him transforms into modern-day drabness and he can’t find the car and the party the next night when he tries to prove what happened to Inez.
As Inez starts to thinks he’s crazy and starts spending more time alone with the male from her friend, Gil keeps going out at midnight and getting drawn further into a delight-filled social circle of the greatest writers and artists of the 20th Century. He also gets emotionally drawn to a woman named Adriana (Marion Cotillard), who bounces from relationship to relationship among the artists and starts winning Gil’s heart. [SPOILERS FOLLOW] Eventually, he has to confess he no longer feels Inez and he have anything in common, and she reveals she’s had an affair the whole trip with her male friend. Gil and Inez split up, with Gil staying in the city of his dreams but with a new romance brewing with a modern-day bookseller who loves the past as much as he does.
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS is a refreshing soufflé of a comedy that will appeal mainly to older bohemians, rather than mass audiences and younger viewers. It has fun with famous literary and artistic figures. Even the few sexual innuendos and references in the movie are relatively innocent, especially compared to other movies in the same genre, but the storyline does involve some promiscuity that is condoned. With only brief foul language, all the actors involved have a blast with their roles, especially the ones playing famous figures. The frequent casual drinking and smoking fit the setting of the 1920s era.
There are, however, a couple jokes made against “right-wing Republicans” and the Tea Party, but they are met with funny reactions in return by the Republican characters. MIDNIGHT IN PARIS has a Romantic worldview that features brief foul language, innuendo, promiscuity, and plenty of social drinking.
_________________________
I have decided to start a series of posts on the characters referenced in the movie “Midnight in Paris.” Right now I have plans to look at William Faulkner,Cole Porter, Fitzgerald, Heminingway, Juan Belmonte,Gertrude Stein, Gauguin, Lautrec, Geores Brague, Dali, Rodin,Coco Chanel, Modigliani, Matisse, Luis Bunuel, Josephine Baker, Van Gogh, Picasso, Man Ray, T.S. Elliot and several more.
In an earlier post I went into great detail about this. Today I am only going to show that the atheist and humanist has no intellectual basis for saying that one group of humans versus another group should survive at all. Of course, Christians have the Bible which teaches that all are created in God’s […]
The Associated Press reported today: The signature under the typewritten words on yellowing sheets of nearly century-old paper is unmistakable: Adolf Hitler, with the last few scribbled letters drooping downward. The date is 1919 and, decades before the Holocaust, the 30-year-old German soldier — born in Austria — penned what are believed to be […]
Here is an article I wrote a couple of years ago: Solomon, Woody Allen, Coldplay and Kansas What does King Solomon, the movie director Woody Allen and the modern rock bands Coldplay and Kansas have in common? All four took on the issues surrounding death, the meaning of life and a possible afterlife, although they all came up with their own conclusions on […]
Coldplay seeks to corner the market on earnest and expressive rock music that currently appeals to wide audiences Here is an article I wrote a couple of years ago about Chris Martin’s view of hell. He says he does not believe in it but for some reason he writes a song that teaches that it […]
Below is a post from the Arkansas Times Blog that I am responding to: Who is a better person? The one who helps their fellow man and does what is right because they it’s the right thing to do, or one who treats people well only because they are threatened with an eternal punishment? Posted […]
Crimes & Misdemeanors (pictured is Judah and his criminal brother, ultimately his brother hires a hitman to take out Judah’s girlfriend who threatens to turn Judah over to the cops) Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 9/13 Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 4 crimes & misdemeanors Best scene of the movie!!!! _________________________________ John Brummett in […]
Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 7/13 Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 3 Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 8/13 John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say: Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is in hell where he has official […]
Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 2 Jason Tolbert provided this recent video from Mike Huckabee: John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say: Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is […]
Governor Schwarzenegger goes to cast his vote on election day with his wife Maria Shriver and their daughters Christina and Katherine (her first time voting), at the Kenter Canyon elementary school in Brentwood.
Schwarzenegger fathers a love child
Maria Shriver Asks – How Do You Handle Transitions in Your Life?
Arnold Schwarzenegger admitted to his wife several months ago that he had fathered a child about 10 years ago with a member of their household staff. Maria moved out, but has not filed for divorce. In the you tube clip above she comments:
“Like a lot of you I’m in transition: people come up to me all the time, asking, what are you doing next?” she said, adding: “It’s so stressful to not know what you are doing next when people ask what you are doing and they can’t believe you don’t know what you are doing.”
“I’d like to hear from other people who are in transition,” she said. “How did you find your transition: Personal, professional, emotional, spiritual, financial? How did you get through it?”
Mrs. Shriver has asked for spiritual input and I personally think that unless she gets the spiritual help that she needs then she will end up in the divorce court. I am starting a series on how a marriage can survive an infidelity. My first suggestion would be to attend a “Weekend to Remember” put on by the organization “Family Life” out of Little Rock, Arkansas. I actually posted this as a response to Mrs. Shriver’s request on you tube
Should I Confess My Unfaithfulness to My Wife, Even If Telling Her About It May Hurt Her More Than Keeping It a Secret Would?
There is no doubt that in some cases confessing a sin may cause as much hurt as the offense itself. Nonetheless, I believe that in all cases the unfaithful party in a marriage relationship broken by adultery should confess the sin to his or her spouse.
Why? For one thing, it takes two people to commit adultery. The other party in the sin already knows about the offense. It compounds your unfaithfulness to share a secret with your cohort in sin but keep your spouse in the dark. The lack of total openness–the need to hide things and keep secrets–will continue to be a barrier to the proper unity of the marriage. Something as serious as a breach in the marital union cannot be repaired if the truth must be kept from your marriage partner. Failure to confess simply compounds lying and cover-ups. That sort of thing will eventually destroy the relationship, whether or not theadultery is repeated.
As difficult as it may be for both you and your spouse, you must deal honestly with a sin like this. If the offended spouse discovers the sin through other means, the hurt that is then caused will be drastically increased. You owe it to him or her to confess.
Weekend to Remember Story – Dennis Rainey
Chip Ingram – Two Biblical Requirements to Resolve Conflict (pt 4)
To resolve conflict effectively and Biblically there are two absolutes that both parties must agree on – do you know what they are? Without this framework, you can try all kinds of things to avoid or resolve conflict in your marriage and relationships, but you probably won’t be successful. Listen and discover the common ground that can literally transform even the most challenging points of conflict. Want to learn more? Download the full message from guest speaker Tim Lundy for free at: http://www.venturechristian.org/files/sermons2/t032011.mp3
The measure cut all income tax rates by twenty-five percent, with a 5 percent cut coming that October, the next 10 percent in July 1982, and the final 10 percent in July 1983. The law also reduced the top income tax rate from 70 percent to 50 percent, indexed tax rates to offset the impact of inflation, and increased the tax exemption on estates and gifts. Conservatives have consistently argued that ERTA was a prime factor in the economic growth that prevailed throughout the 1980s.
There followed sixty straight months of economic growth, the longest uninterrupted period of expansion since the government began keeping such statistics in 1854. Nearly fifteen million new jobs were created — a total of eighteen million by the time Reagan left office. Just under $20 trillion worth of goods and services, measured in actual dollars, were produced from 1982 to 1987. To give some notion of how much that is, by the end of 1987 America was producing about seven and a one-half times more every year than it produced in John Kennedy’s last year as president.[viii]
The expansion was felt everywhere, as conservative economists had predicted, including in the government’s own income. Total federal receipts in 1982 were $618 billion. Five years later, federal receipts were just over $1 trillion, an increase of $398 billion. More than enough, one would have thought, to satisfy all but the most eager advocate of the welfare state.
And as Reagan had promised, the military benefited the most from the economic growth. In President Carter’s last budget, America spent just under $160 billion on national defense. In 1987, the Reagan administration spent $282 billion, more than twice as much on the military. During Reagan’s first seven years, he was able to expend over $1.5 trillion on national defense, “a staggering amount by anyone’s standards.”[ix]
Today we are discussing the 8th most controversial game.
Everette Hatcher picks the Germany v. USA game in 2002.
2002 World Cup Quarter Finals: Germany vs United States
Close call on hand-ball: In the 49th minute of Friday’s Germany-United States World Cup quarterfinal, a shot by American Gregg Berhalter bounced off German goalkeeper Oliver Kahn and hit the left arm of German defender Torsten Frings, who was standing on the goal line.
Scottish referee Hugh Dallas did not call a hand-ball on Frings. While Dallas might not have seen Frings touch the ball, even if the referee had, he would not be obligated to issue the United States a penalty kick.
According to Law 12 of the International Football Association Board’s Laws of the Game, the rulebook for soccer:
“A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player … handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area). … A penalty kick is awarded if the above offense is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.”
However, if in the referee’s opinion the ball hit Frings’ arm inadvertently, then he need not make a call, as a later note explains:
“If the ball strikes the defender accidentally, no offense is committed.”
Wilson picks the West Germany v Austria in 1982. Here is some info off the internet below.
West Germany 1 Austria 0 (1982)
West Germany had lost to Algeria (England beware) but needed just a 1-0 win to go through at the Africans’ expense along with Austria. A 2-0 win would see Austria go home.
So happened the Nichtangriffspakt von Gijón (non-aggression pact of Gijon)…Horst Hrubesch put Germany 1-0 after ten minutes and after this neither side even tried to score a goal, resulting in 80 minutes of ‘after you’ football.
Tears were shed by Algeria and FIFA ruled after this that all final group matches must always be played at the same time to avoid a repeat.
Video: Even the Germans were unimpressed
__________________________________
1 Geoff Hurst’s third goal in World Cup final (1966)
Of course it crossed the line. End of debate. Apart from the bits of the ball that might not have done.Possibly. When I met Geoff Hurst he told me the ball WAS over the line. When I met Franz Beckenbauer he told me it wasn’t. I know who I believe. A clear case of getting it right – well done lino…
Video: The whole ball enters the designated net area with malice aforethought
Bonus feature: how Brian Moore described it on the radio
2 Diego Maradona’s Hand of God (1986)
The fact the referee’s suspicions were not aroused by the fact that 5ft 2in Maradona was able to outjump man mountain Peter Shilton says more about him than the Argentinian wizard. He got away with it. Big time.
Cheating on a biblical scale will never be condoned anyone in this country – unless of course, Wayne Rooney does if for England this year to win the final.
Video: ‘Major controversy…’
3 Harald Schumacher v Patrick Battiston (1982)
We all adopted the French after England bowed out without losing a game in Spain. Their semi-final against West Germany was one of the best World Cup matches ever.
France let a 3-1 extra time lead slip before losing on penalties but the only talking point was how German keeper Harald Schumacher managed to avoid a booking/red card/prison sentence for his disgraceful charge into the clean-though Battiston who lost teeth, consciousness and broke ribs and spinal bones having shot wide. France didn’t even get a free-kick.
Video: Ooh la-la! C’est GBH ou ABH…
4 Kuwait v France (1982)
There was a whistle in the crowd just before Alain Giresse scored for France.
So incensed were the players that the goal was allowed to stand they complained. Then the head of the Kuwaiti FA took his players off in protest until the goal was wiped out. Which it was. Incredibly. But France still won 4-1.
Video: Referee rules out goal under Giresse
5 Argentina 6 Peru 0 (1978)
Argentina had to win by four goals to make the World Cup final in front of their own fans at the expense of bitter rivals Brazil. Peru missed a couple of early sitters. Cue another stunning evening. Accusations about this match have been rife since it finished but nothing has been proven.
Video: Noise, noise, goals and tickertape…
6 Zidane headbutt on Materazzi (2006)
Zinedine Zidane’s last-ever match ended in shame when he head-butted poor old Marco during the World Cup Final itself, the Italian left to rue that snide comment he made about the Leaning Tower of Pisa being far than Eiffel’s rubbish effort.
Video: Come here and say that…
7 Clive Thomas disallowing Brazil goal v Sweden (1978)
Clive always did it by the book and allowed just eight seconds of injury time during which time Nelinho’s corner was headed home by Zico. However, just a nanosecond before Zico’s curls made ball contact Thomas blew for full time, waving away protesting Brazilians with a flourish of his watch.
Don’t think Mr Thomas will ever be welcome in the bars of Rio but he’s a big hero in Stockholm.
Video: Who says referees don’t have a sense of humour?
8 Willie Johnston/Diego Maradona sent home for drugs
After Scotland lurched to a 3-1 defeat to Peru in 1978, the team were rocked by scandal when West Brom’s Willie Johnston failed a drugs test and was sent home, never to play for his country again.
If his alleged drugs taking had had a de-enhancing effect, the ones Diego Maradona took at the 1994 Finals were the complete opposite.
The Argentinian legend scored against Greece then ran bug-eyed and screaming at the camera. He failed a drugs test soon afterwards and was sent home.
Video: What big eyes you’ve got Diego…
9. The Battle of Santiago (1962)
When 1962 hosts Chile took on the shrinking violets Italy, the BBC’s David Coleman described what happened as ‘the most stupid, appalling, disgusting and disgraceful exhibition of football, possibly in the history of the game.’
For the record, Chile won 2-0 but here’s a breakdown of events:-
In the lead-up to the match, two Italian journalists were misquoted to whip up Chilean fervour in a country still reeling from a massive earthquake two years. The journos had to leave the country for their own safety.
The first foul came after 12 seconds.
English referee Ken Aston sent off Italy’s Giorgio Ferrini after 12 minutes for a foul on Honorino Landa.
Ferrini refused to leave pitch and had to be dragged off by police
Ferrini was then punched by Landa but not sent off.
Chile’s Leonel Sanchez then punched Mario David but was not dismissed.
David got his own back by booting Sanchez in the head and getting sent off. Sanchez struck David again as he walked off but was not sent off.
In the resulting melee, 11 Chileans attempted to lay waste to nine Italians. Sanchez broke Humberto Maschio’s with a neat left hook but again was not sent off.
Police had to come and separate players who were by spitting at each other as well as punching and shoving.
Police were forced to break up fighting players two more times before the end.
Video: Seconds out, round one – complete with outraged Coleman
10 West Germany 1 Austria 0 (1982)
West Germany had lost to Algeria (England beware) but needed just a 1-0 win to go through at the Africans’ expense along with Austria. A 2-0 win would see Austria go home.
So happened the Nichtangriffspakt von Gijón (non-aggression pact of Gijon)…Horst Hrubesch put Germany 1-0 after ten minutes and after this neither side even tried to score a goal, resulting in 80 minutes of ‘after you’ football.
Tears were shed by Algeria and FIFA ruled after this that all final group matches must always be played at the same time to avoid a repeat.
