Problem to Solve-- Dealing with ELs

**paper written for early childhood internship based on experience. very passionate topic.**

Sometimes the most important problem to solve is not where the funds will come from for new manipulatives, but maybe the more important question is how an individual child will be reached at all. More and more in the educational system today, students are coming in to preschool with a lacking English language background. Bronwyn Coltrane, Center for Applied Linguistics, claims “Teachers in preschool and primary education programs all over the country may have English language learners in their classrooms” (Coltrane). These students are coming from homes where little to no English is being spoken. They come to the school systems to get a valuable education, but have no foundation in the language of the teacher to be able to make it very far. Research Consultant Karen Ford claims, “Early childhood education can play an essential role in preparing young English language learners (ELLs) for later success in school” (Ford). It can, but why is it not? These students may be highly intelligent, but the language barrier or the defiance created by over attention in the wrong area is causing these students to seem otherwise. It is a problem not of inability, but of lack of understanding. This lack of understanding is not just of the student in the language, but in the teacher’s lack of knowledge in how to deal with the student. All students are important and special. They all need to be reached in the best way possible. Sometimes new methods are needed in reaching these students.
There are several avenues that can be utilized in preparing as a teacher to deal with ELs (English Learners) or just dealing with the students in general. One suggestion is that the teacher needs to understand with what she is dealing. Having ELs in preschool is a very special problem. Some could argue that it is easier to fix at this stage than others because of the following fact, while others may argue that this fact makes the teacher’s job more strenuous. The fact is that the child is still learning to speak. “For children younger than 5, many aspects of their first language have not yet fully developed,” states CAL (Coltrane). Coltrane’s article shows that while Elementary ELs have some foundation to work from, preschool age ELs have to learn two languages at once (Coltrane). “Educators must keep in mind that young children do not have a fully developed native language on which to base the learning of a second. Children may not know certain vocabulary words, grammatical structures, or other language features in their native language before they learn them in English, in which case merely translating a word or phrase may be of little help to them” (Coltrane). Ford says, “Essential to any preschool program for ELLs is effective instruction in language development” (Ford). One way to help ELs is by understanding the fact of continuing development and providing instruction in developing vocabulary (in both English and their native language).
The English vocabulary could be easily developed in the classroom with some special one on one time with the student, but it can be wondered how to impact the other language development. The solution is easy. It is a solution that more and more teachers should be using for other problems or to prevent problems—parental involvement. “Because parents are their children’s primary teachers, it is essential for programs that serve young ELLs to build collaboration between parents and teachers,” argues Coltrane. Encourage the parents of the EL student to work with the student in their home language. “Encourage parents to talk and read to their children in their home language as a way of strengthening children's L1 [primary] language skills,” suggests Ford (Ford). The parent does not need to be just informed that they need to help, but encouraged. Encouraged does not mean just suggested to help over and over, but supplied with tools in which to use. Researching websites, recorded programs, and books to help in developing a child’s vocabulary is a great idea. Do not just recommend the parent do so, but research them as the teacher. Merely suggesting speaking to the child in their native language is great, but reading to the child is even better. This avenue also helps in literacy development. Again, do not just suggest it, but provide books for the parents to use. Using books that have been read to the student in class but changing the language can be a great conversation starter and connector for the child. For example, if the student appears to enjoy bits and pieces of “Are you my mother?” when read to him in English, try purchasing a Spanish version. Perhaps going along with the present topic and giving it to the parent to read. Ford says, “This makes L1 [primary language] text available to parents, and it lets them know that the teacher considers reading to children in the home language to be important” (Ford).
A third way to help support ELs could be the environment. An EL student usually comes in the school as a minority. Having posters in their language could be a help. Preschoolers normally cannot read in any language, but the poster could catch the parent’s eye. This can be a great calming factor for the parent and the child may sense that effect. It could also help if the parent feels led to share what they see with their child. “By valuing young English language learners’ native languages and ensuring that learning English is an additive process—not one that results in the loss of the native language—programs can provide a nurturing, supportive environment for children, which can lead to improved self-esteem and help foster positive relationships with parents and communities,” suggests Coltrane. Also Ford suggests- “Arrange the classroom in a way that supports each type of instructional activity that will take place, and then keep changes to the physical environment to a minimum” (Ford). This minimum could be because of the idea that this place is different and uneasy for them as a minority and constant change is unsettling.
Other ideas that could be utilized, in further research of effectiveness, could be proper discipline, language-rich communication, and group involvement. Proper discipline could be that ELs get enough attention being the minority. While they should not be allowed to roam free, a teacher should choose when to best pick their battles. There are other students and defiance can be created with constant over discipline. Language-rich communication is an idea that Ford pointed out about making sure full-sentences rich in vocabulary are used when communicating with the student or when encouraging student-to-student communication (Ford). Lastly, an EL will feel an outcast. They do not need to be made to feel more outcast. They need to be actively involved and encouraged to do so. Ford suggests partnering the EL with a child who speaks English very well (Ford).
ELs provide an extra stress onto English speaking teachers. The teachers may feel confused and ill-prepared. Any good teacher by reading Coltrane’s and Ford’s articles should be able to see things they already are doing, but also suggestions to improve their help. Although it would be great to have a bilingual teacher in the student’s language, they are at short supply. Therefore, English speaking teachers get the challenge of working with ELs. It is not an impossible task. Teachers can use these steps of understanding language development, encouraging parental involvement, and building an inviting and comfortable environment. They can also research other ideas discipline, communication, and group involvement in trying to better prepare them. Sometimes money is not the main problem, reaching the child is more important.


Works Cited
Coltrane, Bronwyn. "Working With Young English Language Learners: Some Considerations." May 2003. Center for Applied Linguistics. Digest. 29 March 2012.
Ford, Karen. 8 Strategies for Preschool ELLs' Language and Literacy Development. 2010. Web. 29 March 2012. .


Outline
I. Introduction to dealing with ELs
II. Suggested Solutions
A. Understanding of Development
B. Parental Involvement
C. Helpful Environment
D. Other Simple Suggestions
III. Conclusion


Price Helps
*Posters and bulletin boards can range from $10 and up. (Education Express)
*Books can be purchased new and used for less than $1 and up. (amazon.com)
*Flashcards can range from $3 and up. (Education Express)
*A bilingual carpet in Spanish/English can be purchased from $274.95-$464.95 (Education Express)
*Charts ranging from $4 and up. (Teacherstorehouse.com)
*Spanish stickers from $2 and up. (Teacherstorehouse.com)
*Classroom labels in Spanish can be purchased for $12. (kaplanco.com)

If I Could Go Back

"If I could change my past, I would have not ignored my instincts." Wouldn't it be nice if we could go back and change the decisions we made. How different would our lives be if we could redo at least one moment? I sometimes think about the mistakes I made. I sometimes try to presume how my life would be if I didn't choose the path I did. I was just thinking yesterday how different my life would be if I really had not had to pay the $6,000 I paid myself for the first two years of college. Would I still be driving my mother's Taurus. Would I have my own place? Or be rooming with friends? What size pants could I be wearing if I didn't go through that period of depression? Or handled the depression considering my weight gain? Would I still be alive if those guys wouldn't have run out of the restaurant to get us out of the car? If I hadn't been too scared to sing in front of those people, would I be pursuing teaching still? Would me and Matthew be together if I would've told that one guy I liked him too? Sometimes I think it'd be nice to go back and change something. I would love to change the fact that I always ignore when I had a "feeling" about someone. Maybe, I could have escaped the heartache of backstabbers and lies. Thing is, what all would have changed? Would it really be worth the chance to go back? If some how I ever have the opportunity to change my past, I don't think I'll take it. I mean I could change sins committed, but the lessons I learned would be lost. I could change the choices in friends, but I could also lose the experiences guiding my path. I could change my shyness, but I could lose the best thing in the world. Even though it may seem like a good idea to change things, if I could go back-- I don't think I would. The experiences of the past, shaped who I am today. I may not be the best person, but I can change with the knowledge I've gained.

History of the English Bible before the KJV

**this paper was written freshman year as well...**



Many people often overlook the importance of the early Bible translators. Many assume that if it was not translated then, it would have been translated later. Although this may be true, it is not what happened. There is great importance in the history of the Bible’s translation. One must remember the fact that when the Bible was being translated there was great persecution. Therefore the importance lies in the fact that it was by God’s power that the translations survived. Although the Bible could have been later translated into English and other languages, God had a purpose in the events and the desires of these times. He showed his great power in provision over these men and their work to lead up to what now can be enjoyed today. This paper is designed to give a brief history of each of the English translations up to the King James version of 1611. In each description, the persecution and protection of God can be seen.
Most of these translations were done before and during the reformation, where persection was indeed very rampant. The reformation was said to have been started with Wycliffe’s translation of the Bible in 1382. Catholicism was rampant during this time and Wycliffe and others started to see the fallacies in their doctrines. The more they learned the more persecution broke out. Luther was a great tool in this. He sparked the reformation in Germany. People began to see the truth and fought (“Reformation”). Many were persecuted but by God’s provision the ideas and the work did not die.
The first Bible ever translated to English was completed by John Wycliffe, “the morning star of the Reformation” (“Wycliffe” and “John Wycliffe”). He translated the Bible using the Latin vulgate and most of the errors in that translation were transferred over to the English version he completed. The New Testament was completed in 1380 and the Old Testament was completed in 1382. It was later revised by John Purvey who before Wycliffe’s death was his follower. Purvey was imprisoned for his faith. This edition was the most widely distributed of the Wycliffe version (“Wycliffe”). Wycliffe was expelled from the Catholic church for what he was teaching. He died two years after his work was completed. Forty-four years after his death the Pope ordered his bones to be burned (“Wycliffe” and “John Wycliffe”). Although the scriptures were forbidden in the English language at this time, as were for many other cultures, God stretched his hand and allowed his word to spread. Wycliffe was constantly hounded by the Roman authorities and was later cut off completely, but his work prevailed only by God’s hand. Purvey was imprisoned, tortured, and eventually killed for his faith. His work lived on thanks to the Lord’s power (“Wycliffe”).
The Tyndale New Testament was the published in 1525. It was translated from the Greek original by William Tyndale (“History”). Tyndale went to school at both Oxford and Cambridge University and was a strong supporter of reform of the Catholic Church (“William Tyndale”). He was executed by the Catholic Church in 1536 and was not able to complete the Old Testament before his death. His translation was finished by several different men into several different editions- the Coverdale Bible, the Matthew’s Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Bishops Bible, and eventually the King James Bible of 1611 (“History”). Although Tyndale was persecuted and executed for his faith his work lived on and was able to be completed in many different ways. All this is due the great provision of God.
The Coverdale Bible of 1535 was the work of Miles Coverdale. Miles Coverdale was a graduate of Cambridge University who was converted from Catholicism by reading the scriptures. He worked with Tyndale up to his death on the Tyndale translation. It was first printed in 1535 and shipped to England to be distributed. This edition contained Tyndale’s original New Testament and the portion of the Old Testament Tyndale was able to complete before his death. The rest of the translation was done by Coverdale using the German translation and the Latin original. He dedicated this Bible to King Henry VIII and Queen Anne Boleyn, “his dearest just wife, and most vertuous pryncesse, QUEEN ANNE.” When Anne was executed in May 1536, the dedication became the reason the distribution of this version was stunted. Some copies were changed. Coverdale had to flee from persecution, but was later able to have his work shipped to England to be distributed (“History”). This has to be the work of the hand of God.
The Matthew’s Bible of 1537 was translated by John Rogers under the pen name of “Thomas Matthew”. Rogers was also a student of Cambridge University. It was said that Tyndale himself was the driving force behind Rogers conversion from the Catholic faith. Like, Coverdale, Rogers used the Tyndale translation to compile his own translation of the Bible, but instead of using the German and Latin to complete his edition- he used the Hebrew. It is rumored that he just revised the Coverdale Bible to complete his edition. He received the Tyndale manuscripts from Tyndale himself while he was imprisoned by the Roman Catholic church. Roger’s had intended his Bible to be an intense study Bible. He included a summary of Bible doctrine from by Lefevre’s French translation of 1535 and an alphabetic concordance from Olivetan’s French translation of 1535. In 1555, Rogers was also executed for his faith. He left behind a wife and ten children. He was not allowed to say goodbye (“History”). His translation lived on thanks again to the Lord.
The Great Bible of 1539 was an edition of the Matthew’s Study Bible. Coverdale also oversaw the completion of the first edition of the Great Bible, but there were also other editions done by other authors. The Great Bible went under great persecution. It was burned and torn and some of the pages were sold as scrap paper. Coverdale and his partner Grifton fled persecution and were later allowed to return to France to recover quite a bit of the original printings of this edition of the English Bible. The Great Bible was finally finished printing in 1539 and was dubbed “The Great Bible” because of its substantial size. It was printed in six 16.5 X 11 inch volumes. It was also known as the Chained Bible because copies were at one time chained to reading desks in the church to discourage theft. Cromwell, the current king of England, ordered for copies of the Great Bible to be placed in all the English churches (“History”). Surely, God had his hand in this miraculous printing of this translation of His word.
The Geneva Bible of 1560 was published by English refugees who fled persecution of Queen Mary settling in Geneva. There were many translations of the Bible printed in Geneva- the French, the Spanish, and an edition of the Greek. The English Geneva Bible was translated by William Whittingham. Whittingham married John Calvin’s sister, Catharine Chauvin. He graduated from Oxford and traveled all over England. He fled persecution to Geneva in 1555 and became a pastor of a small English church. The translation work was afforded by the wealthier members of Whittingham’s congregation. He completed the revision of the Tyndale Bible in 1560 with the help of two other refugees, Anthony Golby and Thomas Samson. Golby was an Oxford graduate with skills in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. Samson was a Cambridge graduate who later was a Dean of Christ Church in Oxford. He was considered one of the greatest linguist in England. He was arrested for non-conformity by Queen Elizabeth in 1564. Shortly after publication, Whittingham returned to England. The New Testament was published in 1557, and the whole Bible in 1560. It was commonly printed in travel sized and was the first Bible to have verse divisions throughout the whole Bible. It contained explanatory notes condemning the Roman Catholic Church. It was printed until 1617 and remained popular until the King James Version of 1615 took over (“History”). Despite the incriminating notes and the persecution all around, this work was also allowed to remain in existence.
The Bishop’s Bible of 1568 was published under the reign of Queen Elizabeth 1 who established the Church of England under Protestant views. There was a desire for a new Bible that surpassed the popularity of the Geneva Bible and could replace the Great Bible by Coverdale. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Matthew Parker, was in charge of this translation. Those called to help in the actual translation were bishops of the Anglican Church influencing the naming of this edition. These men were also persecuted for their faith. This translation was never as popular as the Geneva Bible. There were only twenty publications of this Bible (“History”). Although not as popular, the men behind this work were also persecuted and yet the scriptures lived on.
These men risked their lives for what they believed. Yet many ignore the importance of these men and what God did by his power of protection. He graciously gave us the Bible to reveal to us all he is, all he has done, and all he will do. He then miraculously allowed his word to work through tribulation and persecution of his saints and what he stands for so what exists now can be enjoyed. It is possible that the Bible could have been translated later and it would still exist in the English language and in the many other languages today, but why should that hinder the reflection of God’s power? Thank the Lord for what he has done and will do.


Works Cited
“History of the English Bible between Tyndale and KJV.” Way of Life Literature, wayoflife.org. Way of Life Literature, 2008. Web. 22 March 2010. historyofenglishbible.html>
“History of the English Bible-Wycliffe.” Way of Life Literature, wayoflife.org. Way of Life Literature, 19 March 2008. Web. 28 March 2010. 66a42a95913af24cdf20cda57b2a3579-37.html>
“John Wycliffe.” Wycliffe, wycliffe.org. Wycliffe Bible Translators, 2006. Web. 28 March 2010.
“The Reformation.” History World, history-world.org. History World International. Web. 29 March 2010.
“William Tyndale.” Christian Biography Resources, wholesomewords.org. Wholesome Words, 2010. Web. 26 Mar. 2010.

Hebrews 11

**This paper was typed freshman year in NT survey..**

Hebrews 11 is a loved passage of scripture. Many refer to it as the great Hall of Faith because of its listing of some of the great fathers of the faith. Many, though, just consider the passage as just that- the Hall of Faith. Few consider the actual context and history of the chapter. This paper is designed to quickly observe the history of this great chapter and discuss all the ideals mentioned in the chapter.
To study a book of the Bible or even just the chapter, the context needs to be discovered. This will give a greater understanding of the ideals. The case of Hebrews 11 is no different. First, there is great discussion on who is the author of Hebrews. Nobody really knows. Some assert that the author is Paul, but others will greatly disagree because of the difference in this book from Paul’s other writings (Geisler 253). What is known about the author is shown in Norman Geisler’s, renowned author and co-founder of Southern Evangelical Seminary, A Popular Survey of the New Testament. He shows these things about the author of the book of Hebrews- “he was not one of the twelve apostles, he wrote before the destruction of Jerusalem, he was well versed in the Old Testament, he wrote in a more technical Greek than the other New Testament writers, he was familiar with the Platonic thought, he emphasized Jesus’s (sic) earthly ministry and high priestly ministry, he was associated with Timothy, he was in Italy when he wrote, and he was known well enough to be accepted by the readers without mentioning his name” (253). Although Geisler shows that much is known about the author of Hebrews, no one can agree on the identity of this person. Secondly, the recipients of this book need to be identified. The recipients of the book of Hebrews are identified as Hebrew Christians (254). Lastly, to know why Hebrews 11 exists the actual purpose of the whole book needs to be shown. Geisler divides the purpose into three ideas- showing the sacrificial system was fulfilled by Christ’s death, warning about the risk involved in returning to the former ideas of Judaism, and encouraging the believers in their faith (255). So, in the end the purpose of chapter eleven can be seen in the latter parts of Geislers division- the encouragement of their faith. This is surmised because in reading of the previous chapters the first two divisions are seen and then the whole topic of chapter eleven is faith including it in the third division.
Now that the history of the book and chapter has been shown the discussion of the actual contents of the chapter can be discussed. The author begins his encouragement by defining the idea of faith. He says, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Heb. 11:1-3). Faith is defined by Webster’s online dictionary, “America's foremost publisher of language-related reference works,” as allegiance to a duty or person or complete trust (“Faith”). R.E.O White, principal of Baptist Theological College of Scotland, divides faith into a three part definition. He says, “"...Christian faith always contains a mental content, a moral power and a personal relationship with God" (White 11). He also refers to Jesus as the “Pioneer and Perfecter (sic) of faith” (119). Dr. David Jeremiah, a pastor who also has his own radio and television broadcast, says that the promises of God are the basis of faith (Jeremiah 10). He also divides the definition of faith into three categories but uses verse six of chapter eleven to develop them. He says, “Faith is pleasing to God, believing that God is, and seeking God” (12-14). C.E. Colton, who was pastor of a church in Texas, also develops a definition of faith in his The Faithfulness of Faith. He says, “Faith deals with that which is to be and that which is present but unseen” (Colton 8). He also says, “Faith is both active and passive…we need both” (96). Whereas these authors give further definitions of faith, a definition is given in this very chapter in the first verse. “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). Jeremiah expounds on this fact telling that "'Substance' means faith grasps God's promises and brings them right into the present moment of our experience" (Jeremiah 10). He also shows on the second part of evidence that "Faith sees what the physical eye cannot see" (12). Therefore, faith is grasping the promises of God and believing what cannot be seen.
After defining faith the author decides to encourage these Hebrew Christians by giving them examples of the past to follow. The first example he gives is of Abel- “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh” (Heb. 11:4). This verse shows the idea that Abel gave his sacrifice in Genesis out of faith and not his own works, whereas his brother did his own thing and thought works was more acceptable than a blood sacrifice. Jeremiah says, “One came in faith, the other didn’t” (Jeremiah 23). The story goes, “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord. And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell” (Gen. 4:1-5). Most know the outcome of the story as Cain killing Abel. This verse is showing that although Able was murdered his story and example of faith lives on. The next example given is the example of Enoch- “By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God” (Heb. 11:5). The story of Enoch is found in Genesis 5. He is known as one of the men of the Bible that never died which is what this verse illustrates. It can be assumed that because of his faith he was not destined to die but to be taken up to the Lord. Jeremiah points out that Enoch did not always walk with God. He says, “The text says ‘after he begot Methuselah [at age 65], Enoch walked with God.’ Apparently for the first 65 years of his life Enoch didn’t walk with God” (Jeremiah 34). He also asserts that Enoch lived so close with God in a time that no one else did so for Jeremiah shows his readers that “so closely did Enoch walk with God that God revealed to him the judgment that was coming upon the earth” (36-37). The judgment Jeremiah refers to is the flood of Noah. He shows that Enoch was told that the judgment would come after him and his son, Methuselah, was gone. The math Jeremiah does in his book, Heroes of the Faith, shows that the same year Methuselah died the flood came. The next example shown is Noah- “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith” (Heb. 11:7). Noah had faith in God enough to build an ark in a place where there was no rain. He believe that what God said what he would do would really happen. Noah also lived where no one walked with God as Jeremiah points out- “everything man did was infected by sin and wickedness” (47). Abraham is the next example pointed out. He is actually shown twice in this chapter. The first is referring to when he went out of his land according to God’s command to go wherever the Lord would lead- “By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went” (Heb. 11:8). Even though he did not know where he was going or when he would get there, he went. The second mention is when he was told to sacrifice Isaac- “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure” (Heb. 11:17-19). Sara is also mentioned in this text- “Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised” (Heb. 11:11). Jeremiah compares Sara's laughter to that of a Christian doubting. Although she doubted at one point she still had faith in God in the end (Jeremiah 77). Isaac and Jacob are the next two mentioned. Their cases are similar- “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff” (Heb. 11:20-21). Both of these men had great faith in their God that they passed on to the next generations. The next mentioned is Joseph. He is mentioned for having faith enough that God would keep his promise in giving Israel a land that he ordered his bones not buried in Egypt but taken with Israel to the Promised Land. Moses is the next mentioned. He is mentioned for choosing to suffer with his people even though he had great position and eventually leading them out of Egypt and around the Wilderness. Joshua is the next mentioned for his feat of Jericho. He had faith enough in God to pursue taking over the city and in an interesting way. Although the way he conquered the city seems unorthodox, it was how God commanded so he did it because of his faith in God. Next, Rahab is mentioned- By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace” (Heb. 11:31). Jeremiah shows that Rahab was one who did not know much about God but “she stepped out in faith on the little she knew” (Jeremiah 118). Although she had no previous knowledge she believed that the God of the Israelites was the true God and helped them in their conquest. Lastly, it is important to not that these names mentioned are not the only people with faith. The author includes an inclusion portion in his closing of this chapter. He says, “And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions. Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.”
Hopefully, through this quick study this chapter and the reasoning behind it can be better understood. Faith is a very important factor in the Christian life for “without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him” (Heb. 11:6). Whether referred to as the “Hall of Faith” or just a great portion of scripture it is one of great encouragement. It is truly a great chapter of encouragement for the Hebrew Believer and now the Believer in general.


Works Cited
Colton, C. E. The Faithfulness of Faith. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1985. Print.
"Faith." 1a and 2b 2. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Merriam-Webster Online, 2010. Web. 24 April 2010.
Geisler, Norman L. A Popular Survey of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007. Print.
Jeremiah, Dr. David. Heroes of the Faith. San Diego: Turning Point for God, 2001. Print.
KJV Reference Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994. Print.
White, R.E.O. The Exploration of Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969. Print.


Outline
Target Audience—Any with an interest in discovering more about Hebrews 11.

Thesis— This paper is designed to quickly observe the history of this great chapter and discuss all the ideals mentioned in the chapter.


I. Introduction of Topic (Hebrews 11)
II. Context of Chapter
A. Author
B. The Recipients
C. Purpose of Book of Hebrews
D. Reason for Chapter 11
III. Introduction of the Idea of Faith
A. Define Faith by Outside Sources
B. Define Faith by the Scripture Studying
IV. The “Dubbed” Hall of Faith
A. Able
B. Enoch
C. Noah
D. Abraham
1. First mention
2. Second mention
E. Sarah
F. Isaac
G. Jacob
H. Joseph
I. Moses
J. Joshua
K. Rahab
L. Others
V. Conclusion (Summary)

Francis Bacon

***I did this short 2 part essay on Francis Bacon for extra credit in Philosophy of Christian Education at PBC Sophomore Year.***

Francis Bacon is the father of a system of philosophy based entirely on science (Simpson). He was born in 1561 to London residing parents Sir Nicholas and Lady Ann (Simpson). Sir Nicholas was Lord of the Seal, while Ann was the daughter of a knight. Research shows that Lady Ann was also very educated (Simpson). Bacon was “homeschooled” until the age of twelve when he entered college at Cambridge (Simpson). He eventually studied law and after an interesting string of events he became a lawyer (Simpson). His career was setback with a tax cut instituted by Queen Elizabeth who later despite her original offence with Bacon appointed him to Extraordinary Council (Simpson). He was later knighted by King John (Simpson). After another setback, he focused on science and reforming ideals of man (Simpson). He died in 1626 of supposed pneumonia (Simpson).
Francis Bacon, opposed to tradition, strove to create a new philosophy to improve the knowledge and fortunes of man (Simpson). Bacon believed in improving the mind because it is a “crooked mirror” (Klein). He held to an ideal of idols that men have that pervert the mind (Klein). He expresses a need for experimentation and research to discover truths (Klein). He implies the idea of progressing the human mind and species (Simpson). Is it possible Bacon shows early ideals of progressivism in his opposition of tradition and desire for human progression? He mostly associated with the school of science. The reasoning behind this is because of his insistence of science as the way to progression.

Works Cited
Klein, Juergen. “Francis Bacon.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, plato.stanford.edu. 29 December 2003. Web. 8 December 2010.
Simpson, David. "Bacon, Francis." The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu. 15 July 2005. Web. 8 December 2010.

Arguing the Origin of Man

***A couple weeks ago I successfully completed my first one week summer module at PBC. It was Survey of Physical Science. For this class, I had to complete a 7 pg paper on the creation/evolution issue. It was due the third day of class- how neat!? I was successful and received an A on the paper. I decided to post it below. This is Summer Semmester 2011.***

When it comes to the evolution and creation issue, one topic of great discussion is the origin of man. A one-time professor at the University of Illinois, A.E. Wilder, states- “From earliest times man has been interested in the question of his origin and this interest is still showing no signs of flagging” (Smith 31). “The question of origins becomes most critical of all as it deals with the problem of the origin of man,” claims Henry Morris, president of the Institution for Creation Research (171). Russian biologist and evolution supporter, Mikhail Nesturkh, states “The problem of the origin of the human race is one that has been awaiting a solution for thousands of years” (5). The two models, creation and evolution, both give ideas for this widely debated topic. W.W. Otey, author of many books on the subjects of Creation and Evolution, points out that all ideas of evolution and creation point back to this fundamental question- “How did life first appear on the earth?” (Otey 50). So, how exactly did life first appear? How did man come into being?
Most private institutions and Christian organized organizations argue that the creation model is most accurate in its ideas of the origin of life and man. The creation model is most predominantly based on scripture. The basic rundown of creation is in Genesis 1 where it states “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (KJV). God’s record of man’s creation is given in Genesis 2 as illustrated by John Whitcomb, creationist orator and author (Mankind). The Bible is thought to be inerrant and infallible. II Timothy 3:16 states, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (KJV). John 17:17 shows that the scriptures are truth- “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (KJV). Further proof of the truth of this inspired by God work is found in Titus 1:2- “…God, that cannot lie…” (KJV). Creationists, therefore, have no problem with using the Bible to back up their ideas; however, the Bible is not the only source of proof for the creationists. The creation model simply holds to the idea that God created life by supernatural processes.
The creation model holds to the fact that life and man were created by a miracle (Otey 40). Genesis 1 repeatedly says “and God said” giving the idea that God spoke life into existence (KJV). Genesis 2 says, “And God made man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul” (KJV). Mankind was created “specially” (Smith 31). Henry Morris states, “The entire world was designed for man and he was appointed by God to exercise dominion over it, as God’s steward” (Morris 211). Genesis 1:28 states, “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth” (KJV). Unlike evolution, creationist hold that “human life is far more than animal activity” (Otey 42). W.W. Otey shows that as a creationist man is the greatest of all living beings (Otey 19). Man was not a “mere machine” as Morris claims but man was given free will and a mind (212). Whitcomb says that man was the “crown of God’s creation” (Mankind). He shows in his lecture that Adam was perfect when created but “bad news for us” we have come far downhill (Mankind). Smith shows that creationism believes that God created earth, he created it in seven days, he formed all beings into kinds, he gave the kinds the ability to reproduce itself, and woman was made from man’s side (Smith 35-42). To put it simply, “Creationist affirm that the first man was created as he now is, and transmitted all these attributes to his posterity down to the living” (Otey 53).
In order to state a theory or idea or model is true, there has to be proof. Creationists, as mentioned above, mostly use scripture. Proof of inspiration and truthfulness usually will come first followed by the actual creation accounts. Genesis 1 is most widely thought of as the basic creation run-down. It gives that man was made in God’s image, man was to dominate the world, and man (as well as other beings) were vegetarians (Mankind). Genesis 2 is given as the how, when, where, and test of mankind (Mankind). How were humans created? When were humans created? Where were humans created? What test did humans go through and did they pass? Although widely used and familiar, scripture is not the only proof given by creationist. One other idea used greatly by creationist is the fact that evolution is so hard to prove. Otey illustrates this greatly by showing how difficult to imagine life coming from a single celled organism (Otey 57). He discusses the difficulties behind the idea of the organism knowing the need and creating the power in itself to obtain a head, eyes, feet, legs, and two different sex organs (Otey 57). Thirdly, the fossil record is the biggest material ideal used to support creation, although sometimes used to supposedly prove evolution. Duane Gish, vice president for the Institute for Creation Research, shows that the fossil record does not prove evolution (Man). He shows that most fossils appear abruptly in full form like creationist would expect (Man). Although the Bible is widely used in proving creation, other ideas are used as well.
Although these proofs listed above may be accurate and may strongly point towards the creation model, a student must understand that neither model of origins can be completely proven (Morris 4). Morris states, “It is impossible to prove scientifically any particular concept of origins to be true” (Morris 4). This is simply because no one was there to witness and it is not going on today (Morris 4). Otey also holds to this idea. He says neither creation nor evolution “can be proved by actual demonstration” (Otey 40). The main problem, if any, with the creation model is that it rest purely on belief. A person has to have faith that the creation model did really occur. The evidences and proofs listed above can help, but faith is the fundamental idea behind the creation idea. Creationist may have the Bible, errors in evolution, and the fossil record as support for their idea, but unless someone could observe creation now there is not complete scientific proof. Creation must, therefore, be accepted on faith. Another problem is the accusation that the creation model is mainly religious. Stephen Meyer, PhD from Cambridge University, mentions in the video Icons of Evolution states, “[creation versus evolution] is not a war of science versus religion, but science versus science” (Icons). The video goes on to show that evolution is also associated with religion (Icons). In the end, creation has one major problem- it takes faith to believe in this model.
The second model is that of evolution. Icons of Evolution is a great source to use in showing the rampant idea of evolution. Put forth by Focus on the Family, Icons of Evolution shows that evolution is widely taught and ruled that no one can speak against it (Icons). It is the predominant idea being held in the world today, despite its problems. Evolution is held to by atheist, scientist, and many others that believe creation to be a too extraordinary event to believe. For some reason, chance is easier to believe than God. Evolution is mainly supported by supposed proofs of genetic variation, mutation, and survival of the fittest. The idea that life comes from non-living is very predominate in the culture of today.
The basic idea of evolution is that man came to be what it is through changes over time according to Dr. Randall Bretz, producer of John Whitcomb’s video lecture on the origin of mankind (Mankind). W.W. Otey agrees by showing that evolution is believed to occur through natural law (Otey 40). It is stated that “life came from some source and by some process” (Otey 40). The source, though, by the evolutionist is assumed to be a blob. Otey shows that from this blob, a tiny single cell organism, that 636,000 different forms of life had to be formed (Otey 51). He says, “[evolutionist assume] natural law quickened dead matter into life” (Otey 50). Smith also shows that evolutionist hold to man coming from lower life (Smith 31). Smith goes on to say that evolution believes all rose from a simple cell originally, there is a continual change occurring, there is a struggle for existence among creatures, and there is a need for millions of years for evolution to take effect (Smith 33-35). The main idea given by Nesturkh, evolutionist, in the formation of main is in four parts supplied by Darwin- mutation, struggle for existence, natural and sexual selection, and environmental influencers (Nesturkh 105). Nesturkh also shows the idea that man comes directly from apes (Nesturkh 6). Evolution, therefore, believes that life came from a blob which in turn produced monkeys which later produced men.
Not only does creation require proof, but so does evolution. Evolution presents many ideas to “prove” the ideas it presents. There are the simple ideas of mutations, adaptation, and survival of the fittest. One idea is similarity. Smith states, “Darwin postulates that similarties in living organisms predict common ancestry” (Smith 52). He gives the concept of the octopus’ eye is similar in structure to the human eye (Smith 53). He goes on to show similarities of other animals to each other- mice and bear (Smith 53). Smith shows the main idea of similarity of apes and man (52). Whitcomb shows the idea that speech is one supposed similarity between monkeys and man because some monkeys can supposedly pick up sign language (Mankind). Gish points out that both man and ape have opposable thumbs, poor smell, a brain, and keen eyesight and hearing (Man). Nesturkh also points out that gill slits and embryology is a proof of evolution (Nesturkh 22). Icons of Evolution gives many “proofs” of evolution- finches, four-winged fruit fly, bacteria, and the tree of life (Icons). One widely disputed idea in dealing specifically with the origin of man is fossil finds of supposed sub-humans. Gish shows the results of findings- the Rhamapithecus, Australopithecus, Homo Erectus, Homo Sapien, Piltdown Man, and Nebraska Man (Man). Morris also shows the Rhamapithecus as a fossil found in 1932 located in India (Morris 172). It was a tooth and a jaw (Morris 172). The Australopithecus is also mentioned by Morris (Morris 173). It is said it was found in Africa and deemed the “southern ape” (Morris 173). Homo erectus, according to Morris, is the Java Man, the Peking Man, Heidelberg Man, and the Meganthropus (Morris 174). Lastly, Morris mentions the Neanderthal Man which is the “most famous” (Morris 175). In the end, evolution uses mutations, adaptation, survival of the fittest, similarity, embryology, finches, four-winged fruit fly, bacteria, the tree of life, and fossils of subhuman creatures to prove its model of the origin of life and man.
These proofs, however, do not eliminate doubt in this model. There are many problems. Some of the problems come from these proofs. One problem with the proofs is that of similarity. Smith brings up the question and fact that “resemblance or similarity” does not always “require genetic relationship” (qtd Smith 52). One other problem, in general, is the fossil record- both fossil and living forms of the same animal exist (Otey 77). Also, the idea of missing links creates a problem (Otey 94). If evolution is true, it would be expected that changes of species to larger animals could be seen in fossils. This idea is not proven. There are no links. Otey points out that there is not one missing link, but many missing links (Otey 94). There is problem within the fossilized sub-humans. One is that the Piltdown man was a hoax. Smith really shows the history of the Piltdown man conspiracy (Smith 131-133). Piltdown was found fifty years ago by two British geologists (Smith 131). There were actually two finds- one was of a skull, jawbone, and tooth; the other was just a skull and jawbone (Smith 131). Later, x-ray photos showed the results of filing on the tooth and treatment of the skull to give an old appearance (Smith 132). Smith goes on to say in the end that not all finds of sub-humans are hoaxes (Smith 133). They are still errors. Gish shows the errors in his research (Man). Rhamapithecus was discovered to be strictly ape, Australopithecus was discovered to be strictly ape, Homo erectus was discovered to be strictly human, Homo sapien was discovered to be strictly human, and Nebraska man was discovered to be a pig (Man). Neanderthal Man is actually a human with arthritis or rickets according to Morris (Morris 175). The biggest problem with evolution is that they are still looking for substantial proof (Smith 88). Like stated before though- evolution must also be accepted through faith like creation (Morris 16).
In conclusion, it is important to remember that these two models are only truly accepted by faith. Neither model can be completely proven scientifically. There are good evidences, but no real substantial proof. Creationist are satisfied while evolutionist are still looking. Man, according to Morris, needs to have “a sense of his own identity and personal goals” (Morris 2). This is why it is so important that a person does research and discover which idea matches with what they believe. Did life come from God? Did life come from a blob? Each person needs to decide. Otey shows that these two theories are two different to combine (Otey 168). A person will need to choose. Icons of Evolution would argue that teenagers in high school even need to decide for themselves so they should be able to study both ideas (Icons). So, where did life come from- God or a blob. It is time to decide which model of the two is the most believable for each individual.




Works Cited
Icons of Evolution. Dir. Jim Fitzgerald and Bryan Boorujy. Focus on the Family, 2002. DVD.
KJV Scofield Sudy Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 1945. Print.
Morris, Henry. Scientific Creationism. El Cajon: Master Books, 1974. Print.
Nesturkh, Mikhail. The Origin of Man. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1967. Print.
The Origin of Mankind. Dir. Randall Bretz. Perf. John Whitcomb. Sound Words. DVD.
The Origin of Man. Dir. Dan Huntsinger. Prod. Pat Matrisciana. Perf. Duane Gish. Institute for Creation Research. DVD.
Otey, W. W. The Origin and Destiny of Man. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1938. Print.
Smith, A.E. Wilder. Man’s Origin, Man’s Destiny. Wheaton: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1968. Print.





Outline
I. Introduction—The Study of Man’s Origin
II. The Creation Model
A. The Model
B. The Ideas
C. The Proof
D. The Problems
III. The Evolutionary Model
A. The Model
B. The Ideas
C. The Proof
D. The Problems
IV. Conclusion—What now?

I'm Out!

So, just because I want to release frustrations I am typing this blog. I am moving. Yea, I know, why? Because I want a change, I'm sick of crap, I want to get to know my dad, I can be closer to Matt, I can get more help paying for school, and I can just simply get away! Why it's hard to leave? It is a change. I have to give some things up, mainly sleep because school is now farther. Most importantly, I have to leave my little brother behind whom I love despite each others stupidity at times (notice I said each others). Now, I've already begun the process. I transferred jobs, I start Sunday. Also, last night I moved furniture. You know, the stupid weather people kept saying, rain rain rain! I don't see any rain! You see, I at the last minute planned to move furniture last night. I did this because of rain. I thought it was a great idea. That way all I had to worry about tonight was packing the last few things and unpacking. I am tired. Also, my gpa was needed after all and he really wanted to go to the Grad at UG tonight. So, called my dad and called my gpa and decided my mom should know. Well, apparently the idea wasn't a great idea to all. We still moved my stuff but now, unfortunately, I don't think this move is going to go smoothly any more. I was hoping there would be no anger, just saddness. Screw that idea. My frustration...all that crap for nothing. It's not raining!!! I'll be glad when tonight comes and I'm chilling with the parrot! I'm hoping Austin can still come up. I really wanted to do this for him so he could see where I'll be. It doesn't make up for me leaving but at least he can know he's welcome and I'll be ok. Right now, I'm just really pissed. I was trying to do a good thing for myself for once. I really should give up but I'm more than 1/2 way there! Come tonight my address will not longer be Lexington.