The Morality of Esther

This is a paper I wrote for my historical literature class... not my best work, but not terrible. The prompt was "Write a paper discussing the moral character of Esther." Enjoy.

Introduction

The book of Esther, one of the two eponymously feminine books of the bible, details the story of a young woman who’s moral character is tested by being made queen and then forced to make a choice either personal harm for her own nations sake or personal safety at the cost of her nation. Her story will be summarized more fully later in this paper. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate her moral character in making this decision. The cultural, historical, and personal levels of her situation will be most principally evaluated in an attempt to determine Esther’s moral character. Of course, moral character is such a loose term that it will also be more accurately defined later in this paper. Overall, this paper will attempt to paint a picture of Esther in a culturally and historically accurate context and determine whether or not she displayed good biblical moral character or bad biblical moral character. It will then attempt to isolate which traits of Esther can and should be emulated and which traits should be disregarded.

Halloween Hate

A recent incident occurred on Halloween. A woman dressed up in a tasteless Halloween costume depicting a bloodied Boston Marathon runner. 

This is a link to the article reviewing the incident, which I have seen posted all over facebook. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/03/boston-marathon-victim-costume_n_4208720.html

I had someone ask me my thoughts on this incident, so I'll share. 3 main points come to mind.

(1) First of all, obviously it was incredibly stupid for her to do this. That is pretty much universally agreed upon. She even admits that. It was disgusting, and insensitive and downright cruel to the people who suffered... BUT...

(2) Did she have a right to do this? Yes. In America we have the right to make whatever statements we want, in as poor of taste as we want, without legal action being taken as long as that expression does not violate some other law (such as public nudity, murder, rape, etc…). To my mind this right was best solidified in the Supreme Court case Texas v. Johnson when the right to burn American flags as an expression of free speech was upheld. It's appalling, and disgusting, and in incredibly poor taste to do so, but it is a right that we have as Americans.

Why Pray?

There’s an age-old question in Christianity. It goes like this: “Why do we pray?” It’s a fair one to ask.

To the casual observer outside of Christianity it makes absolutely no sense, because they have absolutely no sense… of the God to whom we are praying. For the non-Christian this question is really asking, “why do you pray to no one?” For the Christian, however, the question is just as valid and is more layered. Assuming that the Christian understands that you’re not just talking to thin air when you pray, the question they are asking is usually the more verbose, “Why do we pray if God is all powerful and all knowing? Doesn’t he know what we’re going to pray for/about before we pray for/about it? What’s the point then? Aren’t we wasting his time?” I firmly believe that every Christian comes to this question at some point in their walk, and hopefully the following will give you some sort of perspective on the problem, if not resolve it outright.

False Teachers in 2 Peter and Jude

Introduction

When discussing the false teachers mentioned in the books of 2 Peter and Jude a few essential questions must be answered prior to drawing any applications about them. We need to discuss their teachings, their methods— or tactics, and also their spiritual standing—or trusts. All of this will form a picture for us to look at while ascertaining fundamental truths, and thus applications and reactions to false teachers we can have in today’s world. The first three sections of this paper will cover those attributes, and the final section will discuss biblical responses to false teachers, both in the first century when these letters were written, and today when these letters are read.

Just How Was the Bible Written?

Introduction

Determining one’s belief on how the Bible was written is a foundational step in doing theology. With that in mind, the following will attempt to explain and evaluate all of the most prominent views and theories about how the Bible was written, and then construct a logical argument for why verbal plenary inspiration is the correct view of inspiration. Each view of inspiration will be defined and explained and then evaluated.

An Analysis of the Doctrines of Election and Free Will

I've decided to start posting the papers that I write for school, since that's where all my time is currently going. Feel free to comment, agree, disagree, or ask questions about anything I write.

Introduction

The attempt to build a case as to the complete certainty of a single side in the debate of free will verses election seems to me to be emotional, and intellectual suicide. The plain fact is that, based on a plain normal, literal, grammatical, historical interpretation of biblical text, no one “side” is completely, exclusively “correct” and no one “side” is completely, exclusively “incorrect.” A wild, speculative, and probably nonsensical attempt to reconcile these two views and build a case for somewhere in the middle will be made at the end of this paper, but I would like to make it clear up front that there really is no entirely conclusive answer to this question on this side of heaven. Nevertheless, we have been asked to take a stab at it, so a stab has been taken. Before reaching the point of defining a new “third view” on the issue, a separate attempt will be made to outline the basics of the two prominent views as they are, and show the biblical support for each. Only after these views— free will and election— have been thoroughly defined will conclusions be drawn, or at least attempted to be drawn. As Geisler puts it, “The mystery of the relationship between divine sovereignty and human free will has challenged the greatest Christian thinkers down through the centuries.”[1] I don’t expect to dive into uncharted waters with my conclusions, merely ride the waves of the wake left by so many others, where no true resolutions on the issue have been made. So without further ado, I present “the sides” as I see them.

The Hospital Love Letter

The Bible: Not Just a Love Letter. The Church: Not Just a Hospital.

There are two phrases present in the church today that I really get annoyed by. Admittedly, they are for incredibly picky reasons, but that doesn’t stop me from getting annoyed. Honestly, they probably wouldn’t aggravate me so much if people didn’t often try to build doctrine on them. The two phrases are these:

1.     The Bible is God’s love letter to mankind
2.     The Church is a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints.

You’re probably thinking right now, “How could you not like those two sayings? They are so meaningful and revolutionary!” If you haven’t heard either of them, then you will think I’m being way over sensitive, but I’ve heard them both too many times in the last month to continue withholding my opinion.

You also might think I’m being too harsh when you finish reading this paper. Let me be clear up front: I don’t see anything doctrinally incorrect about either of these phrases, BUT their long term effect has had a negative impact on the culture of the church that I think everyone should be aware of, which is why I’m writing this post.