Why TV Doesn't Work

I

Would you normally imagine yourself walking into your living room and sitting down for two to four hours and not doing anything? Would that kind of rest help you be more productive in your day? Would it be good for your body to be idle for four hours each day? What might happen?
While many of us could probably benefit from an occasional self-induced time out for a couple hours and while there is solid scientific evidence that regardless of the religious component, a daily time of meditation is good for our health, the truth is our culture is an active one. We would be bored stiff sitting in a quiet room for four hours. Many of us would fall asleep for a good part of it. But most would simply get up, leave the room and go do something, seeing the time as a total waste. If that be the case, then we can firmly establish that when we daily take to the family room to sit around the TV for four hours, we are not doing it for the rest.

The component that is different is the media.  Brain wave studies have shown that our brains do not perceive everything going on around us. Instead, we take a snapshot of the sights, sounds, smells and react to the changes compared to that snapshot. It explains the whole idea of change blindness. Ernst Weber threw some math at this explaining that the change in our perception is equal to the change in the stimulus we receive divided by the instantaneous stimulus. An over simplified equation would be dp=ds/s   where where dp is the differential change in perception, dS is the differential increase in the stimulus, and S is the instantaneous stimulus. The actual equation uses some statistical comparison as

. But that is not important right now.


As an extreme example to explain this, if you are just sitting at your desk working, aurally, you are somewhat oblivious to the clacking of the keyboard, the click of the mouse, and the whir of the air conditioner and so on. The tiny changes in sound do not attract your attention given that your instantaneous stimulus is the sum of these inputs with little change or consequence. However, if the smoke alarm goes off, you are startled and begin running a litany of questions through your mind assessing the situation. The sound of the smoke alarm or phone ringing has a much higher consequence value than the air conditioner. So our brain assigns it a higher value and gives it more notice.
The same thing happens with our visual environment. As we stare at a beautiful painting, we can muse over it, how the artist was feeling, why he chose color combinations, what the statement might be and so on. But the picture doesn't change and shortly, we really aren't looking at the painting, just staring and thinking. However, when we are watching TV, something very different happens thanks to a filming technique started by the British in 1928 just after sound was added. Filmmakers started using multiple cameras to capture the action at multiple angles. Then, the shots were edited to use the angle that best depicted the action. Body movements were shown with the full cover shot. Dialogue by actor A was shown with the close-up from the right camera and actor B's response was shown by the close-up of camera C and so on. The result is that when we watch TV the S in the equation above keeps changing.
By constantly changing then entire field of our vision every few seconds, it would be like driving down the highway and every time you blinked, you found yourself in a completely different geography. You start out driving down I-77 in downtown Charlotte. In a blink, you are on a two lane road, still in Charlotte but on Sardis road. Another blink and you find yourself on Trade Street uptown. Blink, I-85 at Concord Mills. Blink, the street your house is on. With each blink, you brain would have to process the entire image in your field of vision, compare it to past images and extract known information to give you a sense of your environment. That would certainly make the commute much more exciting in a Secret-Life-of-Walter-Mitty kind of way.
Actually, a more accurate comparison to watching TV would be driving down the road. After a blink, you are seeing the road from the left lane looking over at you. Blink, you are seeing your passenger seat from the perspective of the right lane. Blink, an angle from above the car. Blink, back in your seat.
Very early on, the film industry figured out that the multi-camera shot kept people interested. I don’t know if they got hold of Weber and Fechner’s work or just counted the sleeping patrons at the theater. But the point is that the reason we never land on a camera angle and stay there is so we don’t become disinterested. It also explains other camera effects.
The Blair Witch Project took the camera off the dolly for the entire film and shook it during filming to mimic a home movie. As a result, viewers struggled the whole movie to reach a sense of calm, an effect the filmmaker was looking for in their horror film.
Fight scenes are typically shown with extremely short shots for each angle again increasing the viewers discomfort during the fight scene.

II

All this filmmaking science combines to have a unique effect on our brain. Our brain activity can be measured using thee wavelengths, alpha, beta and gamma. Without getting too far into the science of it, alpha waves are most active during REM sleep and when your eyes are closed in a wakeful state and during meditation. Alpha waves tend to suppress beta waves. Beta waves are associated with normal consciousness. Gamma waves are credited with bringing harmony to our perceptions, like a conductor in a symphony. When we watch a scene change on TV, it creates an orienting response in our brain reducing the gamma and the alpha waves during TV watching. They both struggle as the beta waves make sense of the sensory input change. The alpha waves return rather quickly whereas the gamma waves take longer to normalize. The result is that your brain is constantly switching from relaxed to alert and back again.
As a crass comparison, watching TV to rest at the end of a long day is like plugging your brain in to recharge and then flicking the power switch on and off every three seconds for four hours. Twenty minutes in the living room in silence with your eyes closed praying or meditating is far more valuable to your body than four hours of rest in front of the TV.
So right now, you are thinking that I really haven’t told you anything new, that TV is bad. So why do we watch so much TV. I took a moment to do some inventory.
1. It allows me to be doing something and nothing at the same time, thus avoiding doing the things I need to do. It is a tremendous tool in the procrastinator’s arsenal.
2. Occasionally it is entertaining (rarely)
3. I keep hoping I will find something that amazes me. On the contrary, I keep finding the formula the scriptwriter uses for their show and it completely ruins any chance of there being a surprise.
4. It is a surrogate for emotional input. By watching the hero struggle and prevail, to a small degree, we live vicariously through them and feel a little of that emotion. For example, watch Seven Pounds. I dare anyone to keep a dry eye. Like pornography, the attachment to the TV grows diminishing the real life relationships increasing the need for the surrogate. The surrogate concept is a paradox akin to an addiction.
5. It is the least expensive form of leisure available.

III

Four times 365= 1460 hours per year or 91.25 extra waking days. If I did all the things I needed to do, would I have any of the 91.25 waking days left to do something interesting? Absolutely!
I think it is ok to be entertained once in a while. Just not 91.25 days per year. How about 1 day or 2 hours per month?
GO out and find amazing things beyond the edge of the screen. 91.25 more days of activity will give you a healthier body to enjoy the 91.25 days.
Take that 91.25 days and build real relationships.
If that isn’t enough, one third of the broadcast television experience is commercials. Imagine the absolute pandemonium and chaos that would ensue if the government or your church told you that you had to contribute 30 days each year to community service making our country better. Yet we submissively watch 30 waking days of tv commercials every year. That’s like blocking out the entire month of September to not go to work or school or shop or church or anything but wake up and watch commercials! That’s 6.5 years of your life, just for the commercials.
Here’s something even more staggering. There are six people in my house. That’s 8,760 hours per year, 547 waking days per year, 182.5 of them watching commercials.

The truth is, my children will never blame me later in life because they couldn't watch a TV show. It will all be on demand for them later in life anyway. But they will lament a misspent youth. And several years from now, near the end of my time here, I will look back and weep over the lost opportunities spent in front of the TV.

New Year, New Ideas

Have you ever been sick and tired of being sick and tired?  I'm labeling this year my 3/4 life crisis.  Since 2008, life has been somewhat of a challenge.  I have still been blessed beyond measure.  But being unemployed for almost 3 years and working to complete a master's degree has left me a little out of sorts.  In order to cope and compensate for daily stresses I eat too much, I eat the wrong food.  I am too tired to exercise.  I watch TV as a numbing device and have gotten all around lazy beyond the things that must be done.  Frankly, I don't really like who I am.

One problem I have with myself is that I am miserable at doing things incrementally.  I'm not good at easing into things.  I remember swimming in Minnesota in the Summer.  Summer in Hackensack only lasts for about a week, so the lake water is frigid in June.  Some people would slowly wade into the water acclimating their bodies.  I found that whenever I did that, right about the time it go to my balls, I would say forget it and get back out.  But if I dove in, I was exhilarated and ready to go.  Its the same way for me with change.  I can't decide to ease into an exercise regimen by walking one day a week for a month, then two, then three and so on.  I have to have a plan with specific goals and get to it.

So this year, I have decided to do some major house cleaning.  well, that started as a metaphor but keeping the house clean is actually on the list so let me clarify.  I sat down and identified 52 things to improve this year.  So with as much shock and awe as I can muster, I would like to jump into one new habit every week.  Some of these things are kind of redundant and many are almost trite.  But as I took stock of the things that keep me from being at peace and creative and joyful, good or bad, this is the list I came up with.

1.  Break the sugar addiction- I know my pancreas is begging for a break and I am going to provide it.  I eat way too much sugar.  The part that aggravates me is that I know that the bacteria that crave sugar and starch are secreting chemicals that cause me to crave them.  So I am going to wipe those little suckers out by starving them into submission.  You will likely be reading some tear stained posts as I suffer the withdrawal symptoms.  
2. reach a goal weight of 155-  all the BMI charts and my doctor figures I should be anywhere from 140-155.  So I am going to shoot for the top of that range.  I haven't weighed 155 since high school.  But I haven't gotten any taller since high school either.  the first ten pounds will be effortless.  The last ten will be hell.
3. have a consistent quiet time- It's funny that I know how important this is but don't do it regularly.  
4. have endurance-  One marathon is on my bucket list.  Right now, I get winded walking upstairs to bed.  So I hope t meet somewhere in the middle.  I'm not sure I have the knees left for the marathon.  But I would like to have enough mitochondria built up that I can exert some effort without falling apart.
5. be prepared for Sunday school.  there are two levels of Sunday School readiness.  The first is to have the lesson prepared which I do.  the second is to have prepared an amazing lesson.  I would like to do the latter more often to honor God and the role he has trusted me with.
6. drink more water-  To all you hydraters out there, there really is something to this.  I don't go along with the two three gallon a day deal.  But I am on board with 12 glasses which is 11 to 12 more glasses than I am getting right now.  
7. tell my wife I love her everyday-  After 20 years of marriage, we are pretty comfortable.  But I think we are too comfortable.  I have taken it for granted that she is my princess and she deserves to know it.  I once heard Bill McCartney lament that his wife's countenance reflected how much or little he had treated her like the love of his life.  He said when he looked at her one day he realized he had dropped the ball.  I have dropped the ball.
8. call my wife for no reason- Another relationship habit.  Other than calling to go over logistics, we never call each other just because.  I miss that.
9. create a budget- we have been in survival mode for so long, fear has prevented me from looking under the hood.  We have go to turn this monetary thing around.
10. pray- sounds simple.  There can never be enough
11. give up TV- I have read numerous blogs on this and not one regretted giving up TV.  I will post another right after this with my justification for this endeavor.  
12. go on a mission trip- my greatest spiritual growth has always come from the mission field.  School has interrupted that.  It is time to get back.
13. buy a real tree- we switched to artificial to save money.  But there are only a few yeares left to make memories.
14. Listen-  I suck at this.  maybe I will take a class.  Seriously, this is the hardest change to make.  I zone out when people bore me.  
15. pay bills on time- duh
16. clean up my credit- remember the thing about being unemployed for 3 years.  I forgot to mention a couple trips to the ER and the collections that followed.  Gotta get that under control.
17. be strong- physically.  I have always been much stronger than I look.  At 5'6", I am unimposing.  But I used to be able to lift a refrigerator.  Now I just lift the milk jug.  I need to get some strength back.  there have been a few lifting, pulling, pushing occasions where I have been extremely dissapointed and afraid of injury.
18. prepare my own food- A lot of these next ones are about diet.  I believe America is screwed If you don't believe that our diet is being jacked with check this power point from the CDC out link.  Not only do I need to cut the food budget.  But I need to know what the heck I am eating.
19. no processed food- too many chemicals
20. no bread- unless I make it- too many empty calories.  Plus I subscribe tho the ill health effects of eating so much bio engineered wheat.  
21. save- we need to rebuild the emergency and retirement fund.
22. go deer hunting- rather, go deer hunting with my daughters.  Its a right of passage thing.
23. go pheasant hunting this is for me and me alone.  There is nothing like the startling sound of a pheasant taking off and then knocking it out of the sky.  Eating it that night for dinner is pretty awesome too.  Sorry PETA folks.  I'm not real thrilled with cramming a million chickens into one barn to wallow in their own feces their whole dusty lives.  But you'll never get me to shed a tear over hunting for food.  Let's agree to disagree.  
24. go camping- with the fam.  We haven't done this for a couple years.
25. call the parents and Susan 1 each week- I suh at calling people.  I am hoping without the distraction of studies and TV, I will be able to rejoin society.
26. hunter safety course- another right of passage with my kids.
27. concealed carry course- so I don't have to worry about carrying the gun back and forth to the range.  Don't worry.  I have no desire to walk around with a gun in my shoe.
28. plan a big birthday for my wife- I hate parties.  She loves parties See #7
29. celebrate our anniversary- see #7
30. keep my bathroom clean- Sorry to say it, we all suck at house cleaning.  There is just something about getting ready in a pristine bathroom that makes you feel like a millionaire.  What a great way to start your day.  
31. keep my bedroom clean- again with the self-esteem, millionaire thing.  
32. be flexible- physically.  50 years has made me quite rigid.  I would like to get out of a chair without grunting.  Besides, I love yoga.  
33. help my children with their homework- we're not talking every day.  But now that I am not immersed in my own homework, I need to coach them to better grades.
34. contact someone every week- OK for the rest of society, this may sound stupid.  But I am a homebody and an introvert.  So basically, I am lonesome proof.  But life is a social experiment and I need to own up to it by reaching out to others instead of always waiting for them to reach out to me.
35. keep the laundry done- another self esteem thing I owe myself.
36. Keep the kitchen clean- This is perhaps the hardest thing on my list.  Guys.  Guess what.  Women are pigs.  where we freely admit we are pigs.  Women are pigs when no one is looking and they complain about the mess as soon as they get around other people.  It is rather confusing.  But the point is I live with five women who would rather have a root canal than do dishes.  So since I am cooking my own food and since I can't stand cooking in a dirty kitchen, my expectation must be that almost all of the kitchen cleaning will be mine.
37. plan and begin saving for a vacation- I mean a real one with hotels and things to do.  Not visiting relatives.  We have never had one of those other than camping which is pretty much working double shifts for dad.
38. process mail the day it arrives-  this is another one of those things that only makes sense to me.  I have been afraid of what is in the mailbox for so long what with being broke and all that I haven't really had a set plan for mail.  the kids would get it and leave it wherever.  That publishers Clearing house check could be anywhere.  So I am going to make a point of getting the mail, chucking the junk and putting the ones with the little windows in a place where they can get paid.
39. send a thank you note- this may cause a few heart attacks since today's folk don't even know who dear Abby is.  But I would like to reinvoke this custom on some good Crane paper just as a social experiment.
40. prepare things for the missions auction early.  We have a silent auction each year at church to raise money for missions.  And we always run around the week before trying to come up with things to sell to raise money.  well this year i sat back and sized up my customer.  I made a list of like fifteen things that should actually generate some money.  Most of these I can make relatively inexpensively.  
41. run a marathon- just finish  Its on the bucket list.  
42. garden every day in the spring summer and fall.  I have always been so busy.  This year, I would like to put in about fifteen minutes of mental health vacation each day in the yard making it more beautiful
43. clean out the attic-  we've got shit in there from when we moved in 14 years ago.
44. clean out the closet- again, the millionaire thing.  I love going into an organized closet.
45. clean out the vanity- I can knock this out in fifteen minutes.  This hardly qualifies as a resolution.
46. clean out the office.  I need to transition it from a homework room to a man cave.  Arrrgh!
47. clean out the garage- this has to happen bi annually
48. clean out the loft- this definateley needs to happen in the spring.  We need to weed out some of the stuff in this house one stash at a time.
49. clean out the crawlspace- more junk
50. sell things on E bay frequently- we have a lot of things that can generate income that are just gathering dust.  So I would like to get good at selling and maybe parlay that knowledge into a second revenue source.
51. learn names better- this goes right along with the listening thing.  I suck at it.l
52. shoot more often- whether it be guns or bows, there is just something zen about target shooting.

  That's it.  No nobel peace prize.  But if I could accomplish this in one year, I might just take up French and the guitar next year.  Wish me luck

1 Kings 4-6

As I read this passage, I am awed by the grandiose plans Solomon has fo rthe temple of God. Not that God is not worthy, it is just the magnitude of his effort that is astounding in comparison the the size if Israel and the level of technology at the time. To have that many people working on the temple meant that all the others had to pay such a higher tax to pay for the workers sustenance. Yet Solomon was so confident. It made me wonder how big my temple plans were metaphorically. What exactly is the size of my efforts to please and serve God? As I reflect on this, it appears that it is quite small. I wonder what the average Israelite was feeling during the building of the temple. Were they feeling joy at the emerging of such an edifice, even if it was in a far off city? Were they feeling burdened under the thumb of the tax collector? Did God prosper the work in their fields to make up for the tax?

When discussing the deign of the doors, there is some confusion over whether the doors are one-fifth of the wall or whether the jambs have five sides. The Hebrew version I looked up clearly used the word for five not fifth. It probably has no importance. But I tend to get hung up on wierd things. So here is a design of a five sided jamb.









As you can see, this design offers incredible strength against outside force. All of the force wedges the bifold tighter into the jamb. Also, by creating a three-piece union between the panels, you get the same effect. The force on the hinges is on the sheer strength of the screws rather than the much weaker pullout strength. It's actually a fascinating design. Although it makes no difference regarding the majesty of God.

The symbolism mustn't be overlooked at such a structure. It is said that he windows were narrow on the outside and wide on the inside symbolizing the need to be more intrspective than judgemental or does it mean that our greater focus should be on the things of God than the things of the world. You decide.I just know it would be awe inspiring to see such a building covered in gold on the inside.

So what is my temple coated with? Hmmm. Back to the drawing board.

Bank of America is Stealing my Home

3/2/2010

I would start by saying "You're not going to believe this" but sadly, this tale is all too believable. In July of 2009, Bank of America Fedexed me this package inviting me to participate in the "Making Homes Affordable" program. At the time I was unemployed but making my mortgage payments on time. After reading the package, I was dubious. It sounded creepy from the start. If I participated, I would make payments that were roughly 2/3 of my normal payment for three months while they process my loan modification. I had 2 main concerns:

1. What would happen to my credit?
   
2. How did they intend to collect the difference between my "probationary " payment and my normal one?
   

I called the phone number on the package on two different days and spoke to two different agents and the response went something like this: "If you make the probationary payment for three months, your regular payments will be short according to the terms of your original agreement. We will report those as partial payments to the credit reporting agencies. At the end of the three months, we will add the balance to the principal of the mortgage."

So I asked, "What if I make the whole mortgage payment during the three months."

The agent said "If you make the whole payment, you will be proving that you can, and we will deny your loan modification application."

So the final analysis was if I wanted to cut my mortgage payment through this program, I was going to have to live with 3 partial payments on my credit report for two years. Considering I was unemployed this was a foregone conclusion. So reluctantly we signed the papers, printed all the backup paperwork and sent it in.

Then we waited…………and…waited.

November! I get a call from a guy claiming to be from B of A needing additional information. Well actually, he just needed me to resend the same information. This call was creepy because the agent reluctantly gave me his last name and couldn't give me his direct line or email. In fact, the email address he gave me was in another state. He admitted that he had no way of confirming receipt and acceptance of the documents. I felt like I was working with the KGB on my Russian Visa.

On November 15, I got a letter stating that my trial period is up and I have failed to send in all my documentation. But by their grace, they would give me ten days to come up with the documentation. When I called and got agent X, she said that she had all the information. It was just waiting to be reviewed.

Between 11/11 and 12/2 I got three more calls, each from an agent in another corner of the country, each refusing to give last names or direct numbers, each admitting they couldn't verify receipt. Finally on 12/2, I marched into a local B of A mortgage department and demanded action. The agent there was cool and rehearsed "I'm sorry, we don't have anything to do with loan modification. There's nothing we can do to help." So I demanded that every page of my application and backup paperwork (33 pages by now) were to be faxed from a B of A fax machine to the loan office fax machine and that I receive a transmission receipt verifying that every page went through. After three tries she was successful. Kind of makes you wonder how many others assumed their documents went through on the first try.

Then we waited… and … waited…and continued to make our "probationary" payments further damaging our credit. Interestingly the documents claimed "time is of the essence". One time an agent called me at 4:40 and demanded paperwork by 5:00. I suspect he was angling for an excuse to reject the modification because the borrower refused to cooperate.

January 25^th. We are now well beyond our three months. Customer service called out of the blue to see if I wanted to pay them more money. When I explained that I was applying for the loan modification program, the agent dug a little deeper. She found that the loan processor had everything she needed but it takes three to four months to process!!! So I am supposed to sit around wondering for 4 more months wrecking my credit?

A week later, I get this cryptic letter stating that I "may not be eligible". The reason was that my loan payment was less than 31% of my income. Here's the hysterical part, according to the letter, my income was verified at $1760/month. Now I am not a banker so I ran the math several times to try to figure out how an $1100 mortgage payment was less than 31% of $1760 income. Thankfully they included an 800 number for those confused people out there. So I called.

I called on 2/2 and left a message

I called on 2/3 looking for an explanation and the agent said a "new package" was in the mail. She had no clue what was in the new package but it was coming Fedex. She also refused to comment on their fuzzy math.

2/16 still no mystery package. However I did receive a Notice of Intent to Accelerate. For the laymen out there, when you sign a mortgage, all that paperwork basically says that if you are ever late, you are in default and they can demand the whole note at once. Well this escalates things a bit doesn't it? They wanted $4200 by March 18^th or the whole note is due. So much for the terms of the loan modification agreement. But on the brighter side, I got another letter the same day stating that they are still processing my loan modification request.

Naturally, this got me on the phone ASAP. I called the number on the form and waited 40 minutes. Terrence said I need to call another number. Another 40 minutes and Winston said I need to call another number. Thirty minutes on hold and Brandon said I needed to call another number. Thirty five minutes later and Greg told me they were now sending a notice of foreclosure and that my loan modification had failed underwriting. But he didn't know why. I had to call the processor who was now being referred to as the "negotiator". He gave me her number. When I called, they originally told me to called the first number I called that morning. When I refused stating my morning's events, they told me they couldn't connect me, they wouldn't give me her email and that they would email her and request she call but they wouldn't copy me on the email.

So I carpet bombed the executives at B of A. Ken Scheller (ken.scheller@bankofamerica.com) did email me back and say that he had assigned my case to the "escalation team". That agent called on 2/17 and promised to get back to me the week of 2/21. But so far, no call, no email. I called and left messages Monday and Tuesday, still no answer.

I got an email form Steven Nielson on behalf of Joe Price claiming he was forwarded my email and that "attempts to contact me had failed. Let's see, were those attempts to call the cell phone that is attached to my hip or the email that comes straight to my Blackberry. I wonder if I can try that with my next mortgage payment. Probably not.

So in the final analysis, I went from good credit and a current mortgage to destroyed credit and a potential foreclosure by following the directions of the Making Home Affordable agreement to the letter. Thank you Mr. Obama. Thank you Bank of America for developing such a cunning scheme to steal back America one home at a time. My advice is whatever you do, vote to keep Govco out of your life. There is no program that they can conceive that they can utterly make a shambles of. And second, do business with the little local guy. BofA is so big, they don't know if they are coming or going. Too bad they didn't take some time to learn how Countrywide treated their customers before they fired everybody. They might have learned something.

A point by point commentary on the presidents health care plan

 

Point 1- Ends discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions.

Insurance companies are in business to make money. They have spent decades creating actuary tables that set rates based on the physical condition of a person. In companies with fewer than twenty five employees, employee rates and acceptability are determined by pre-existing conditions. Companies with more than 25 employees pay the same rate but are subject to the exclusion of a pre-existing condition if the employee has had a lapse in coverage. What this means is if someone worked for company A and health insurance through the company and they had a condition, say breast cancer, when they leave the company, if they do not get health insurance outside the company for a specific period of time (generally more than 90 days), the insurance company at company B where she starts her new job can opt to exclude the costs of breast cancer treatment. If she keeps health insurance coverage between employers, the new insurance company will cover it.

So here's the easy solution, if you lose your job and have a pre-existing condition, or for that matter even if you don't, continue your insurance either on an individual policy or through COBRA until you begin the new job. "Ending discrimination" is just wordplay saying if the employee screws up, it's okay, GOVCO is here to make those mean insurance companies cover you.

What this will mean is insurance companies are going to limit their clients to larger companies where they can spread the risk. It is too easy for them to lose money on small firms. In essence, this Obamacare point serves to penalize the small business man who desired to provide healthcare insurance for his employees. The result, thousands more uninsured employees.

Point 2- Prevents insurance companies from dropping coverage when people are sick and need it most.

Unless the insurance company can clearly demonstrate that:, 1. the condition was pre-existing, 2. The insured was aware of the condition, 3. The employ intentionally refused to make the insurance company ware when applying, few people would argue in favor of the insurance companies on this one. However, there needs to be a method of recourse for the insurance company if the above conditions exist. Otherwise, an applicant can say anything they want to get the insurance and then the insurance company is stuck with the bill.

Point 3- Caps out-of pocket expenses so people don't go broke when they get sick. 

The bottom line is that employers determine how the money works when they take bids for coverage. The employer chooses the employee's copay and deductible from a myriad of options in order to fit their budget. The higher the deductible, the less expensive the insurance. If the employer is footing the bill for most of the cost, a higher deductible can make the difference between being able to offer insurance or not. By putting a ceiling on deductibles, two things will happen. First, employers will immediately switch to policies with much higher copays. In other words instead of one employee being stuck paying $10,000 deductible the year of their heart surgery, every family is out hundreds more per year in copays. The hardest hit is families.

Second, there will be some small business employers who will choose not to offer insurance due the prohibitive cost. SO once again, GOVCO trying to do good is uninsuring thousands with this action.

Point 4- Eliminates extra charges for preventive care like mammograms, flu shots and diabetes tests to improve health and save money.

First of all, according to the CDC, flu shots range in effectiveness from "unmeasurable" to 90% depending on the year and how well they guess the formula. So the question begs to be asked, if we demand that insurers provide preventative treatment with a high level of success uncertainty for the flu, should we demand them to provide any preventative treatment as long as it falls within the same level of efficacy. For instance, the efficacy of Gardasil lies somewhere between 14-50%. Should insurers be required to administer this vaccine free as well. If so, where do you draw the line, acupuncture, hypnosis. If a product is proven to reduce costly illness, the insurance company is going to pay for it anyway to reduce the cure costs. If they aren't already paying for it, one must question the efficacy. Also, if those tests are disclosed as being an additional charge prior to the client signing up, that's part of the contract. If you don't like it, get your insurance somewhere else.

On another note, has anyone considered that by having clients pay for some preventative care insurance companies are keeping costs down. Rolling these costs into the policy will only raise the premium. Once again, this rate hike will result in small business cancelling their health insurance.

Ironically, medicaid only provides preventative services in 36 states. It is not a federal requirement. I guess the really poor don't need flu shots.

Point 5- Protects Medicare for seniors

Here's what the president says he will do "The President's plan will extend new protections for Medicare beneficiaries that improve quality, coordinate care and reduce beneficiary and program costs.  These protections will extend the life of the Medicare Trust Fund to pay for care for future generations."

Here's what that means: The current government run health care system provides low quality care at high cost. In addition, the future of funding for medicare is uncertain. So we are going to fix it. By fixing the quality issue, we will ocntinue to be able to afford to provide it…maybe.

Don't gloss over this one. Here is government run health care admitting it is doing a poor job at providing health care while simultaneously claiming they are the best at providing health care. You have to be a rube to miss the irony.

Point 6- Creates a new insurance marketplace – the Exchange – that allows people without insurance and small businesses to compare plans and buy insurance at competitive prices

There is already a market out there for individual insurance policies. You can even purchase "gap" insurance to cover you between jobs . Maybe they haven't looked around much but "The exchange" sounds a lot like ehealthinsurance. But that is a company. I'm sure the government is much better at running a website. Just check one of theirs out. Better yet, call them and see how long you are on hold.

Point 6-Provides new tax credits to help people buy insurance

What a bureaucratic mess! I'm assuming that this sliding scale is going to be some algorithm written by an MIT graduate taking into account the taxpayer's family status, cost of living index, salary, and living expenses. Tax credits sound nice. But remember, that is another way of saying government give away. And we all know where the government gets the money to give away. I'm not saying this idea doesn't have a utopian side to it. Imagine all those single mothers with limited wages working for companies that don't provide health insurance. Parade a few in front of congress and there won't be a dry eye, especially if little Timmy tells his story. But for every legitimate story, there are a dozen stories of abuses of the system. Maybe point 6A should be to establish an audit department. But that will never happen. After all, what politician wants to be a part of denying coverage to anyone for any reason once pandoras box is open.

Also, am I the only one that sees this as an extension of medicaid? Of course, medicaid wants you to liquidate everything before you can be covered. I'm sure that the tax credit will be available to all those Mercedes driving poor folks solely based on income. And let's face it, no one ever fudges that number.

Point 7- Offers a public health insurance option to provide the uninsured and those who can't find affordable coverage with a real choice.

"The President believes the public option must operate like any private insurance company – it must be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects." This statement implies government efficiency. Remember the earlier point about improving the quality of medicare. Show me one efficiently run government program. The same people that believe the public "option" will be self-sufficient are the ones who vote in the "education" lottery based on the promise that all the lottery money will go toward improving education. How's that working out for you. I know in our district, 25% of the teachers were laid off and not one administrator. Thank goodness for the lottery.

You simply can't have an insurance company operate at break even if they must accept preexisting conditions and not charge a premium. Here's what is going to happen. As all these small employers with high risk employees stop offering insurance, they are the ones who will use the govco insurance. There is no way enough healthy people will be paying in the premiums to offset their cost. This department CANNOT break even. Remember, the goal is to provide insurance for those who can't afford insurance. Therefore, GOVCO rates must be lower than market. SO they are going to insure to sickest individuals and charge the lowest rates and give away preventative maintenance. People, they can't break even.

Point 8- Immediately offers new, low-cost coverage through a national "high risk" pool to protect people with preexisting conditions from financial ruin until the new Exchange is created. 

What this translates to is forcing existing companies to accept clients with pre-existing conditions on a rotating basis just like auto insurance. The result…you guessed it, higher premiums all around to compensate and more small business cancelling insurance.

Point 9- Won't add a dime to the deficit and is paid for upfront

The plan fully pays for this investment through health system savings and new revenue including a fee on insurance companies that sell very expensive plans. Let's read between the lines. If you don't increase the deficit and insurance costs a bucket of money, how do you pay for it. Raise taxes! First they are going to charge companies that have expensive plans. Well that's kind of vague isn't it. The fee does nothing but raise the cost of the policy even more!!! Add in a little supply and demand and those companies write even fewer policies generating less revenue for the system. Sooner or later, either the department will run at deficit, or our taxes go up to pay for it. Please don't be so ignorant and think you won't pay for it.

Point 10- Implements a number of delivery system reforms that begin to rein in health care costs and align incentives for hospitals, physicians, and others to improve quality

I'm sorry, did I just read some companies mission statement. What the hell does this mean. "Delivery system reform" I guess that means how you get your medical care. I don't know where you get yours, but my doctors and hospitals are the most service oriented, quality controlled organizations I have run into outside the Hilton. The only thing that needs reform is the amount of freeloading Medicaid cases taking up space in the ER because they don't want to go to Walgreens next door and buy an aspirin. Did I mention they are carrying a Gucci bag and driving an Escalade. My personal favorite is the Medicaid patient who called 911 from CVS to get a ride to the ER because she didn't want to pay for chapstick. Because of government delivery system reforms, the ambulance was required to take her to the ER. The ER was required to admit her. And we are required to pay for it. This is the kind of efficiency I can't wait for more of.

Also, I love how the government's incentives have amped up the quality of education. Now students spend the whole school year practicing to take a test instead of learning because quality is measured on pass rate for the test. By Govco, determining the metric for quality, the patient is no longer the stakeholder. Bad idea bro.

Point 11-
Creates an independent commission of doctors and medical experts to identify waste, fraud and abuse in the health care system

This commission is focused on the lack of quality in Medicare! Don't get me wrong, I'm all for this. I appreciate the government admitting it doesn't have a clue what is wrong with there system, especially when they are about to enlarge it so much.

Point 12- Orders immediate medical malpractice reform projects that could help doctors focus on putting their patients first, not on practicing defensive medicine.

Another way of saying this in English is that malpractice claims will be capped. Gee, do you think the insurance companies insuring all those doctors had anything to do with this one. Maybe the $27 million in campaign donations was well spent. What does this mean to Joe the plumber. First, his doctor can now buy a bigger house because he has to pay much less for insurance. Next when they amputate his arm instead of remove his kidney stone, GOVCO will have already determined the payout for that and he can take his ten grand and be on his way. But the good news is when his doctor adds a guest house, he can do the plumbing, or not.

Point 13- Requires large employers to cover their employees and individuals who can afford it to buy insurance so everyone shares in the responsibility of reform

First of all, the first point is pretty minimal. 98% of large employers are already offering insurance. So legislating the other 2% into insuring only means a few more bankruptcies. Think about it, the only companies not investing in their employees are the ones on the brink of bankruptcy. What you are going to find is companies breaking onto smaller companies so they can ditch the rule.

The second part is just the ribbon on the package. Who can't afford it. If there is Medicaid for the indigent, Govco insurance for the low income, tax credits for the somewhat low income, and "the magic exchange for everyone else" shouldn't this just say everyone must be insured. Folks mark this as one of many freedoms that will disappear in the Obama administration. Think about it. The government is mandating that you spend your money yet again. If you want to ride the bus, you don't have to carry auto insurance. If you want to live with family, you don't have to pay property taxes , a mortgage, or even rent. In addition to taxes, you are now REQUIRED to part with your money.

So what is the fine going to be. If you walk into the ER without insurance, are they going to tack a parking ticket onto your bill. So now a guy who can't really afford health insurance, even though the geek at govco says he can if he sells everything he has, has to spend more money on fines making insurance farther out of reach. Now that's what I call reform, or in other words, sticking it to the little man.

Is it Clearly a Bible Teaching 06/19/09

As an introduction, my family has felt the prompting of the Holy Spirit to witness to someone in need of the truth of the gospel. She came to us tring to share her message from the Watchtower Society. Since last October, we have been meeting searching for truth. Out of respect for her existing beliefs, we use only the Watchtower publications and those they have allowed their members to read to help her and her companions see the truth of the gospel. At this time, I would like to post some of those notes hoping they may be of value to other seekers or other Society members brave enough to search for truth.

To bring you up to speed, We began working through their "What does the Bible Really Teach" publication. For several chapters, we showed where the New World Translation has either retranslated God's word, or added to it in order to create a plausible case for their beliefs. However, they have always been insistent on discovering the truth of the trinity together. SO we started studying "Should you Believe in the Trinity" three weeks ago. So far, there has been some enlightening moments.

When I pointed out that most of their quotes contained elipses and that the text within the elipses negated the claim they were making, they dismissed this by stating" the author was just trying to make the point that different people have different opinions. However, I think it is always important to express someone's opinion as they stated it. When I pointed out that most of the "scholars" they were using to refute the trinity also refuted many of the central beliefs of the Society, they also stated that they were sure that was isolated to only possible one or two of the authors. However, a simple exploration of almost all of the scholars will reveal that they are anti-Christian. Below is a summary thus far.

Should you believe in it?

This first section basically poses the question, "If there are two systems of belief which one should you choose. " It quotes anti-Christian authors as stating that the trinity isn't correct. However, that is like asking an evolutionist for his view on creationism. The results are predictable.

 
 

The statement is made that if the trinity were genuine, there should be no question. This implies that all truths create no question to anyone. The logic is ludicrous. Gravity is fairly straightforward, yet thousands fall to their death each year.

 
 

The challenge is made that "our entire future hinges on our true nature of God." This is at the heart of why we are seeking TRUTH.

 
 

Next they create this blasphemy paradox that if you believe in trinity, you blaspheme God and if you don't you blaspheme God.

 
 

As an introduction, this section is just that, a teaser. No real evidence is given

 
 

 
 

How is the Trinity Explained

There is a short explanation of the trinity from the catholic church and the Greek orthodox church

 
 

Beyond the grasp of Human Reason

Continuing in their pursuit of quoting authors out of context, they attempt to back their confusion claim with the Encyclopedia Americana supports the argument. This out of context claim is an embarrassment for the Society when the encyclopedia passage is read in context.

 
 

The article goes on to identify several people who either state or believe the trinity is a "mystery" It is important to note that no scripture is used at this point. The general statement being projected is that all believers in the trinity don't even know what it is, setting the reader up for the next section.

 
 

Not a God of Confusion

This section puts forth the argument that because 1 Cor. 14:33 read out of context states "God is not a God of confusion" and since the trinity is confusing, therefore, the trinity cannot be correct. Of course, we all know that there are numerous doctrines in the Bible that are confusing. By reading the 1 Cor 14 account, we can clearly see that the scripture is in reference to multiple christians speaking in another language at the same time without an interpreter. Hardly a case for "no confusion allowed.

 
 

For example, when I asked to be shown where the 144,000 Society members that will go to heaven is in the bible, I immediately got a response that it was so confusing that it would require several bible studies to understand. So much for the confusion argument.

 
 

The closing argument is that God makes things so simple, a fisherman could understand it. Then they cite numerous verses that attempt to support this dubious claim. Unfortunately, they do not cite the scriptures where the "fishermen couldn't reason out the simplest concepts Jesus was teaching or the times Jesus got angry at their stupidity.

I Love It.

The headline reads "Obama Orders Cabinet to cut $100 million in spending." That's hysterical. After blowing 1.5 TRILLION dollars his first month in office, now he wants to sound frugal. That's about like you and me going out and buying a house worth 1.5 million dollars and telling our kids to cut out electric bill by 30¢ by turning off the bathroom light. Now that's "change we can believe in."

 

Just remember, my friend, you voted for him.

 

Curiosity

2/7/09

I'm just wondering, should a company in financial trouble abandon their contracts? The legal answer is no. The strategic answer is that they should try to renegotiate them. Either way, they have a legal obligation to complete those contracts regardless of whether they make money on them. That is what drives capitalism. Risk. Every time a company enters into an agreement, there is a level of risk on either side that they will come out of the contract unsatisfied. To minimize risks, companies hire teams of lawyers to fashion contracts that attempt to forsee the likely events that would result in a loss. Companies insure against the risk they can't contract away.

When a contract is complete, the company experiences one of two outcomes. First they emerge with more than they entered with. This can be monetary or otherwise. It is called profit. Second, they can emerge with less than they entered with. This is called loss.

This logic is also true of the company's contacts with their employees. The company agrees to exchange a formula of salary benefits and sometimes bonus in exchange for the employee's performance. Sometimes that employee performs far above the expected standard. The company profits. Sometimes the employee's performance is lackluster. The company suffers a loss. But either way, the company is contractually bound to pay the employee their wages. In most states, they, of course, have the right to cancel their contract and fire the employee if they consistently underperform. In like manner, they may also promote a superior employee. But there is little case for paying employees after the work is done whatever the company sees fit to pay them. Unless. Unless there is a preexisting contract as in the case of profit sharing whereby the employee receives a bonus measured on the company's performance. Also in the case of commissions, where the employee is paid in proportion to their performance. But these features are negotiated at the point of hire, not after the work is complete.

Having said all that, why would an ailing company refuse to pay a top management official their contract. Of course, if their stock option or bonus is tied to performance and the company doesn't perform, there is nothing to talk about. But what about the management contract that states that after the first year the employee will be paid a bonus without conditions. If that employee works for the year and is not fired, they have met their obligation in good faith. Failure to pay them is a breach of contract.

I'll be the first middle-class person to jump up and down and cry that it isn't fair that these elite few make so much money. But I also know that if I ever became one of those elite few, I would see things quite differently. I am as confused as to how a baseball player is worth $25 million a year or a CEO worth $55 million a year. But according to the laws of supply and demand, if someone is willing to pay the price, that's all that is necessary.

In the corporate view, when a CEO is appointed and they receive a hefty package, the corporation posts it in an 8-K for all stockholders to see. The stockholders then have the opportunity to vote with their wallet by selling their stock if they believe the investment was a poor one. Likewise, those purchasing the stock going forward have the ability to weigh the asking price against the top management's packages and choose not to invest.

Here’s your “Change” you can believe in.

You voted for him. Now good luck. Keep your obama bumper sticker on your car so I know who fell for the "change" bullshit line and who to blame for the mess my grandkids will have to pay for.

 

"I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less..."

-- Denver

Barak Obama AUGUST 28, 2008

 

"I'll pay for every part of this job-creation agenda by ending this war in Iraq that's costing us billions, closing tax loopholes for corporations, putting a price on carbon pollution, and ending George Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans."

-- Lorain, Ohio

FEBRUARY 24, 2008

 

"Barack Obama is committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994."

-- Obama's "The Change We Need In Washington"

 

"Obama will reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budget rules, so that new spending or tax cuts are paid for by spending cuts or new revenue elsewhere."

-- Obama's Blueprint for Change

 

"I will always be a strong advocate for a market that is free and open."

-- New York City

SEPTEMBER 17, 2007

 

"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."

 

$1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years

$50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts

$400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects

$650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons

mass transit ($6 billion) When the spending spree is over, municipalities will be saddled with subsidizing the future budget shortfalls through increased taxes. No public transportation system has ever had a balanced budget.

$600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. I guess those 12-20000 car sales will stimulate the automakers economy. But if that is economic stimulus, That banks have a few houses you can have for a song Mr. Obama.

The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million.

There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. Please tell me how this encourages Americans to go back to work.

$54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits. These include the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the 10 federal job training programs, and many more.

education, which would get $66 billion more. That's more than the entire Education Department spent a mere 10 years ago

Our New President is Already Hard at Work…

…Promoting the massacre of countless babies on a global scale. There has been a stipulation since Reagan that nongovernment agencies receiving government money can't conduct or promote abortions. Every democrat has repealed the order and every republican has reenacted it saving thousands of lives. You can read the entire order form your commander in chief below:

MEMORANDUM FOR

THE SECRETARY OF STATE THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

SUBJECT: Mexico City Policy and Assistance for Voluntary Population Planning

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b(f)(1)), prohibits nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that receive Federal funds from using those funds "to pay for the performance of abortions as a method of family planning, or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions."  The August 1984 announcement by President Reagan of what has become known as the "Mexico City Policy" directed the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to expand this limitation and withhold USAID funds from NGOs that use non-USAID funds to engage in a wide range of activities, including providing advice, counseling, or information regarding abortion, or lobbying a foreign government to legalize or make abortion available.  The Mexico City Policy was in effect from 1985 until 1993, when it was rescinded by President Clinton.  President George W. Bush reinstated the policy in 2001, implementing it through conditions in USAID grant awards, and subsequently extended the policy to "voluntary population planning" assistance provided by the Department of State.

These excessively broad conditions on grants and assistance awards are unwarranted.  Moreover, they have undermined efforts to promote safe and effective voluntary family planning programs in foreign nations.  Accordingly, I hereby revoke the Presidential memorandum of January 22, 2001, for the Administrator of USAID (Restoration of the Mexico City Policy), the Presidential memorandum of March 28, 2001, for the Administrator of USAID (Restoration of the Mexico City Policy), and the Presidential memorandum of August 29, 2003, for the Secretary of State (Assistance for Voluntary Population Planning).  In addition, I direct the Secretary of State and the Administrator of USAID to take the following actions with respect to conditions in voluntary population planning assistance and USAID grants that were imposed pursuant to either the 2001 or 2003 memoranda and that are not required by the Foreign Assistance Act or any other law:  (1) immediately waive such conditions in any current grants, and (2) notify current grantees, as soon as possible, that these conditions have been waived.  I further direct that the Department of State and USAID immediately cease imposing these conditions in any future grants.

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE, January 23, 2009.

Worshipping Christ

1/4/2009

In recent discussions with a Jehovah's Witness, the subject of the deity of Christ has continued to be the focus. JWs are careful not to admit to worshipping Jesus. In their belief system, Jesus was the first creation of God, not God himself. According to them, as God's creation, he is not to be worshipped. Of course, I and most of the conscious Christian community emphatically disagree. What follows is my proof texts. In an effort to avoid a circular argument of semantics, I have chosen not to use any of the over 200 references to Christ as Lord unless they are confirmed by OT accounts. This way we don't get entangled in the interpretation of the word Lord. But when it comes to worship, there can be no dispute. God is very clear in Exodus when He says " Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;" Therefore, if Jesus is not God, but is in heaven above and we bow down to him, we have clearly broken this command. However, if Jesus is God, then worshipping Him should be part of our natural expression of belief.

SO the logic goes like this. If the Bible tells us to worship Jesus

    And if the Bible is the Word of God

        Then Jesus must be God

Otherwise, we are left with two choices. Either God's word is flawed in which case God is flawed. The Bible is the biggest hoax in the history of man and it never was God's Word and therefore is null and void. Or finally, Jesus is God and meant to be worshipped.

1. Matthew 2:2 the Magi came to worship Jesus when he was born. While this hardly proof that Christ is God, it is the beginning of a series of passages that display man worshipping Jesus in God's inspired Word (2Tim. 3:16) without any indication that this practice is improper. In fact, they clearly brought gifts in an act of worship Mat. 2:11.
   
2. Herod's deception- In Matthew 2, Herod attempts to deceive the Magi into reporting to him the location of Jesus so that he may kill the newborn. In his deception he told the Magi that he wanted to worship Christ. No king would risk being accused of blasphemy if worship of the Christ wasn't acceptable.
   
3. Jesus says in John 5 that "He who does not honor the Son, does not honor the father." That reference in verse 23 doesn't use the word worship. But if God "the father" is the only God, why would he permit honoring anyone but himself unless he is both the father and the son. What other passage can be found in God's word where man is asked to honor an angel?
   
4. Jesus is not an angel- Perhaps the most compelling argument comes at the beginning of the letter to the Hebrews which in itself is significant. Because the Jews would be the first ones to cry "foul" if someone tried to alter the accepted order of worship, what it said to them directly falls under extraordinary scrutiny. It is one thing to preach the good news to a Corinthian pagan and far another to preach Jesus to the Jews. But look at all of chapter one. Clearly, God's Word does not declare that Jesus is the first angel.
   
   1. v.3 "the son is the radiance of God's glory."
      
   2. V. 5 "for to which of the angels did God ever say, you are my son; today I have become your father. This is a rhetorical statement.
      
   3. V. 6b. Let all God's angels worship him. " Here we have angels worshipping Jesus. Why would God allow worship to anything that was not God?
      
   4. V.8 "But about the Son, he says, "Your throne, oh God, will last for ever and ever,…" The JW version has been altered to "But with reference to the Son: "God is your throne forever and ever," How would God be a throne. The throne is subject to the ruler.
      
   5. V. 10 "In the beginning, Oh Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands." This is God referring to Jesus using a reference to Psalm 102:24,25 "I said, O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days: thy years [are] throughout all generations. Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens [are] the work of thy hands. One says the Lord laid the foundations of the earth, the other God. The only way to reconcile this is that they are one and the same. Unless you take the long road by trying to explain that God is taking credit for Jesus work in the Psalms. Why would he do that? Here's the JW versions
      

      v. 10 NWT And: "You at [the] beginning, O Lord, laid the foundations of the earth itself, and the heavens are [the] works of your hands
      

   PSA 102:24.25 NWT I proceeded to say: "O my God, Do not take me off at the half of my days; Your years are throughout all generations.
   25
   Long ago you laid the foundations of the earth itself,
   And the heavens are the work of your hands. Even the JW version declares that Jesus is God. I'm sure this will be corrected in future versions.
   

   1. Any attempt to misinterpret v. 9 "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory…" to mean that Jesus was created misses the point that. This verse is clearly indicating that Jesus left the glory of heaven to put on flesh to pay the price for our sins. In doing so, He humbled himself on our behalf.
      
   2. A glimpse of heaven- In Revelation chapter 4 we see John getting the lay of the land of heaven. In it, there is a throne with a figure seated on it. Around it are 24 other thrones (elders), four living creatures also were around the throne. These creatures worship the figure on the throne without ceasing (v. 8,9). The elders also worship the figure. Next in chapter five there is a scroll that cannot be opened. And then we see the Lamb of God "in the midst" ) of the throne and He is the only one who can open the scroll. Not only that but this lamb had seven horns (the number of completion) representing the seven spirits of God. Now in verse 8 after the Lamb had taken the scroll from the right hand of God, the elders and creatures worshipped the Lamb. Why would God allow worship to anything that wasn't God? Right after that countless angels worshipped Christ v.11. If there is any doubt look at the praise they say in v. 13 "to him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb. Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, [be] unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. Clearly, John was meant to understand that the elders and creatures were worshipping and giving praise to God and the lamb!
      
   3. Rev. ch 7 verse nine has the "great multitude worshipping the one on the throne and the Lamb.
      
   4. Rev. 14:7 an angel commands those who live on the earth"…worship him wh made the heavens and the earth, the sea and the springs of water.
      
   5. Rev. 20:6 claims that those who are resurrected in the first resurrection will be priests of God and of Christ. Either Christ is a second god or he is God.
      
   6. Rev. 21:22 describes the millennial city as having no temple. God and the Lamb are its temple. Again, Jesus is either a god or God.
      
   7. Rev. 21:23 the light of the city is from God AND the Lamb. How can that be unless they are one.
      
   8. Rev. 22:1 the river of the water of life flows from the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the entire book of Revelation, the throne is only discussed in two contexts: the throne of God and the twenty four thrones of the elders surrounding the throne of God. Jesus has to be on God's throne.
      
   9. Rev. 22:3 and 4 Look at the wording of this verse: And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name [shall be] in their foreheads. God and the Lamb are referred to in the singular. In the beginning of Genesis, God refers to himself as we indicating his triune state. At the other end in revelation, John refers to God and Jesus as the personal pronoun he indicating exactly who makes up the Godhead.
      
   10. Rev. 22:12-16 is the spoken word of Jesus. He tells us so in verse 16. He calls himself the Alpha and the Omega. If there is any argument left as to whether Jesus sits on the throne, look back at 21:5,6. Notice the first person there when the speaker says "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." SO we have Jesus calling himself the Alpha and Omega and the one sitting on the throne calling himself the Alpha and Omega. Either Jesus is committing the same sin as Satan by proclaiming to be first or he is God.
       
   11. Matthew 28:9 the women grabbed Jesus feet and worshipped him. Jesus made no mention not to. He only told them not to be afraid.
       
   12. Matthew 28:17 when the disciples saw Jesus, they worshipped him. Jesus did not stop them. JW trades the word worship for obesience whenever they don't want to discuss Jesus being worshipped. This word obesience (worship) comes from the greek word prŏscuněō(Strong's 4352). The word is used 59 times. When it is used to describe worshiping God or something other than Jesus (idols, the beast, satan), the JW Bible translates the word "Worship"
       

Mat. 4:9	1Cor. 14:25	Rev. 14:7	John 4:22	Rev. 9:20	Rev. 19:4	Acts 8:27
Mat. 4:10	Hebrews 11:21	Rev. 14:9	John 4:23	Rev. 11:1	Rev. 19:10	Acts 24:11
Luke 4:8	Rev. 4:10	Rev. 14:11	John 4:24	Rev. 11:16	Rev. 19:20	Rev. 13:12
John 4:20	Rev. 5:14	Rev. 15:4	John 12:20	Rev. 13:4	Rev. 20:4	Rev. 13:15
John 4:21	Rev. 7:11	Rev. 16:2	Acts 7:43	Rev. 13:8	Rev. 22:8	Rev. 22:9

 

Curiously, EVERY TIME the exact same Greek word is used to describe worshiping Jesus, the JW Bible translates the word "do obesience".

Mat. 2:2	Mat. 20:20	Mat. 9:18	Mark 15:19
Mat. 2:8	Mat. 28:9	Mat. 14:33	Luke 24:52
Mat. 2:11	Mat. 28:17	Mat. 15:25	John 9:38
Mat. 8:2	Mark 5:6	Mat. 18:26	Acts 10:25
		Rev. 3:9	Hebrews 1:6

This cannot possibly be determined to be a matter of grammatical interpretation. This is a systematic rewriting of the scriptures not for the sake of accuracy. If it were, we would see worship to God sometimes being translated "obesience" and worship to Jesus sometimes translated "worship."

Thanks

Dear Lord:

I want to take a minute to praise you for all that I am blessed with. First, my wife and my best friend. Thank you for her caring heart. For her gentle touch. Thank you that you have given me someone who supports me, and loves me even though I am as unlovely as can be. Life without her is unimaginable. She personifies many great things about you. She is forgiving. She is patient, She is kind.

Thank you for my oldest daughter. It honors me that she wants to be like me. It is perhaps the most uplifting compliment I could receive. She is funny. She is fruity. She is beautiful and smart. She is caring and gentle and kind to others when they may not even notice. She harbors no malice.

Thank you for my second born. Her beauty is in her bliss. Teach me, Lord through her bliss how to unplug and just be. She befriends anyone.

Thank you for my third born. She is feisty and full of life. She is energetic, passionate and a treasure to be with, even when she is angry. I pray that you would open her eyes to more of the veauty in life and less of the injustice.

Thank you for my youngest girl. She is so overflowing with love she is like a new puppy bouncing around ready to love on anyone who will make eye contact. She brings vibrancy to this home.

Thank you for the opportunity to finish school. I have learned so much even though I don't want to admit it.

Thank you for each new day and my less than perfect heart as a reminder that each one is a gift.