A couple of days ago I wrote a post about politics, so today I'm going to write about the other forbidden subject...religion. It's not going to be a long post because I haven't thought a lot about it, but the following thoughts came to be today as I was drying my hair, of all things.
My family, meaning Bill, myself, and my children, are all different religions. Bill is a Baptist, my children and their children are Pentecostals, and I'm a Quaker. Now Pentecostals and Quakers are on each end of the spectrum, about as far apart as you can get, as far as style of worship goes. Baptists kind of fall in the middle of the two but is closer to Quaker than Pentecostals. Since there are no Quaker meetings where we live, I attend a Baptist church with Bill. We have also attended the Assembly of God church that my children attend on occasion.
Yet, we all worship the same God, we all read the same Bible, we all believe that you must accept Jesus as your personal Savior to be saved. The main difference is the Quakers don't believe you must have a water baptism for the salvation to "take".
This isn't to say that I don't approve of baptisms, far from it. I have seen 2 grandchildren and my son baptized and cried with the rest of them. I've seen people baptized at our church, and felt very blessed. I know that this act means something to each of the ones baptized and I wouldn't take that away from them for anything.
I had a very dear friend who was very concerned that I wasn't baptized. She asked me one day if I would do it for the members of the church. I told her that to me that would be very hypocritical. Yes, the other members of the church would be happy, but why should I do something that meant absolutely nothing to me. That seemed like it would take away the meaning for those who did believe in baptism.
Each denomination has a different style of worship. Some of them are not based biblically and I don't believe that it could be a true religion. But, as long as it is a true Bible based church, with true believers in Jesus as their personal savior, I say let people worship how they want. What is more important, salvation and eternal life or church membership and following the ordinances of a church? To me, I'll take salvation and eternal life every time!
Made this longer than I had planned, but the words just started to flow.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Monday, January 26, 2015
Politics
Politics...that forbidden topic of conversation. The mid-term elections are barely over, the new congress has only been in session for about 3 weeks and already the candidates are lining up for 2016.
As I watched the news and saw who was at the republican event in Iowa, I told my husband that most of the names scared me. I also said I was going to have to do some research on some of them, because I wasn't really familiar with them. Maybe it's going to take the full 2 years to figure out who is who and what they stand for. Hopefully, both parties will have learned something from the last 2 elections, but I'm doubtful.
The democrats don't seem to be lining up as much as the republicans. I think they are all waiting to see if Hillary Clinton will run. To watch the news, it's a done deal and she's the democratic candidate. I think it would be a mistake for her to run. I think they country is tired of the Clintons. At the same time, even though I have liked Jeb Bush, I think the country is also tired of the Bushes. I think it would be a mistake for Mitt Romney to run again. Contrary to many, I don't think he connects with "normal" people. He's been too elite for too long and hasn't experienced many of the hardships many in the middle class have.
Sarah Palin really scares me. I don't know why anyone would vote for her. She couldn't even finish one term as governor and I remember her saying that she was resigning because there were other things she wanted to do. Seems like all she's done is travel the country, bringing in big speaking fees, and bad-mouthing the president and all democrats. I guess she wasn't taught that if you can't say something nice you shouldn't say anything at all.
Those are just a few of my thoughts as this election season gears up. Like I said, I'm going to have to do some research on the hopefuls before I can make a really informed decision. If anyone is reading this and wants to chime in, feel free.
As I watched the news and saw who was at the republican event in Iowa, I told my husband that most of the names scared me. I also said I was going to have to do some research on some of them, because I wasn't really familiar with them. Maybe it's going to take the full 2 years to figure out who is who and what they stand for. Hopefully, both parties will have learned something from the last 2 elections, but I'm doubtful.
The democrats don't seem to be lining up as much as the republicans. I think they are all waiting to see if Hillary Clinton will run. To watch the news, it's a done deal and she's the democratic candidate. I think it would be a mistake for her to run. I think they country is tired of the Clintons. At the same time, even though I have liked Jeb Bush, I think the country is also tired of the Bushes. I think it would be a mistake for Mitt Romney to run again. Contrary to many, I don't think he connects with "normal" people. He's been too elite for too long and hasn't experienced many of the hardships many in the middle class have.
Sarah Palin really scares me. I don't know why anyone would vote for her. She couldn't even finish one term as governor and I remember her saying that she was resigning because there were other things she wanted to do. Seems like all she's done is travel the country, bringing in big speaking fees, and bad-mouthing the president and all democrats. I guess she wasn't taught that if you can't say something nice you shouldn't say anything at all.
Those are just a few of my thoughts as this election season gears up. Like I said, I'm going to have to do some research on the hopefuls before I can make a really informed decision. If anyone is reading this and wants to chime in, feel free.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Living in No-Man's Land
I live in Northeast Arkansas, 5 miles south of the Missouri state line, 9 miles inland from the Mississippi River, 70 miles north of Memphis, Tennessee. Our town is rather small, 15,000 people, maybe. We don't have a TV station here. The closest ones are in Memphis (70 miles away) or Jonesboro, Arkansas (50 miles west).
We have DirectTV for our provider and our local stations are the stations from Memphis. We get them all so there is a variety. However, we get mostly Tennessee or Mississippi news and weather. The only Arkansas news we get is if something happens in West Memphis which, as the name implies, is directly across the river from Memphis.
I asked DirectTV if we could get the local Jonesboro station so that we could get local news and weather. The reply I got was that the Nielson company decided the viewing areas. Nielson apparently can't be contacted unless I'm a business that would like to use their service for marketing. I also remember many years ago the Jonesboro station saying that our area was considered the Memphis area.
But, the local cable company, Ritter Communications, does carry the Jonesboro station, IN ADDITION to the Memphis stations. So, if the cable company can offer the Jonesboro station, why can't the satellite company?
It's gotten so the Memphis stations barely cover north of Memphis for weather. There was 1 weatherman who stated during a tornadic event that the Jonesboro station would take care of the "most northern parts of the viewing area". Yeah, right, only if you have cable and not satellite. And since we live in a basically rural area, there are more satellite viewers than cable.
So, we are in No-Man's Land. The Memphis stations don't seem to want to cover our area, nor does Jonesboro, unless we use certain providers. Maybe I'll just move to a cave where there is no coverage at all and just stick my head out to check the weather, won't vote because I won't know who the candidates are, and won't have to see another murder taking place in Memphis.
OK, rant over. If anyone knows how this can be changed, aside from switching to cable, let me know.
We have DirectTV for our provider and our local stations are the stations from Memphis. We get them all so there is a variety. However, we get mostly Tennessee or Mississippi news and weather. The only Arkansas news we get is if something happens in West Memphis which, as the name implies, is directly across the river from Memphis.
I asked DirectTV if we could get the local Jonesboro station so that we could get local news and weather. The reply I got was that the Nielson company decided the viewing areas. Nielson apparently can't be contacted unless I'm a business that would like to use their service for marketing. I also remember many years ago the Jonesboro station saying that our area was considered the Memphis area.
But, the local cable company, Ritter Communications, does carry the Jonesboro station, IN ADDITION to the Memphis stations. So, if the cable company can offer the Jonesboro station, why can't the satellite company?
It's gotten so the Memphis stations barely cover north of Memphis for weather. There was 1 weatherman who stated during a tornadic event that the Jonesboro station would take care of the "most northern parts of the viewing area". Yeah, right, only if you have cable and not satellite. And since we live in a basically rural area, there are more satellite viewers than cable.
So, we are in No-Man's Land. The Memphis stations don't seem to want to cover our area, nor does Jonesboro, unless we use certain providers. Maybe I'll just move to a cave where there is no coverage at all and just stick my head out to check the weather, won't vote because I won't know who the candidates are, and won't have to see another murder taking place in Memphis.
OK, rant over. If anyone knows how this can be changed, aside from switching to cable, let me know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)