Long Awaited Update

I'm a failure at blogging these days, I admit. So what I'm going to do now is try to keep this place updated by posting short-assignment, completion style assignments here on my blog. My first post will be on the "2nd Account of Creation" as seen in Genesis 2 and 3, specifically in regards to the relationship between men and women.

* * *

The first thing that I am struck by in this passage is how vastly different it is from the creation story in Genesis 1, however, that is not really part of our discussion, though it brings up several interesting questions.

Adam is created and he names the animals. This is Adams's first job. I think the most important aspect about this is that, despite the Garden of Eden being considered “perfect” Adam was given work. My mother loves to talk about how “work” is a Biblical concept and this ideal life with no “work” is actually against human nature. We want work, it is just so often we hate the work we must do to provide for our families.

In regards to the relationship that humankind has amongst itself, especially in regards to the genders, this chapter has a lot to say. First of all, Adam is created alone, yet it seems to me that it was God's intention to add women to the mix all along. I say this in the context of Genesis 1, which says “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” I say this also with the realization that the vast majority of “complicated” creatures, that is, most plants and animals, have two sexes. The idea of having a single sex human race does not seem to fit with common trends in biology. However, if we assume that God intended to create a second sex, the question that follows then is that why did God create Adam first, and then later Eve?

I think the wrong answer is to say to show that women are under men, as many would think. Eve is “bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh,” she is not the weaker, less powerful, less intelligent, less important, part of humanity, she is an equal member of the newly created human race.

The correct answer is more subtle, and perhaps more brilliant. Women is part of humanity, but more important, Adam is incomplete without Eve. “So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found,” reads chapter two. So God creates a helper from the very same substance of Adam. The perfect model for relationship between men and women seems to be, thus, marriage, the union of these two beings created from the same substances. I find it interesting to note that such a statement reminds me of the Trinity as taught to me in Basic Christian Questions. I forget the exact definition, but I believe it was something along the lines of three separate beings of the same substance.

This story ends with the Fall and the curses that humanity receives as a result. These curses are interesting because I really believe that many people forget them and how vital they are for understanding the issues that plague not only male-female relationships in general, but especially marriages. I remember once when I heard a sermon/teaching by Landa Cope, a theologian I respect very much, she providing interesting insight into this situation using New Testament references. These verses, in as much, say that men will toil for the rest of their life, corrupting the idea of “work” as we see it before the fall, while women will be ruled by men. I think this is something that so many people do not understand about the Bible. It says, in the Bible, that women will be subservient to men, yes, but because of the Fall. The Fall, man's own sin, created this system, not God.

Goals for This Next Year

A friend asked me what my goals for the year are, I responded, “Goals? Yeah, those are good things.”

I admit I'm often rather abstract about my goals and about how I do things. “DO THAT!” But no actual written down “goals.” So, what are my goals? What do I really want? Where do I want to be in a year?

Well, this time next year I'll be starting my Junior Year of College. Scary thought. What do I want to do?

1. Good Grades. I had okay grades this year, not great. This year it'll be the year where I can see whether or not I can really get “good” grades. Honestly, I don't care about my grades, I just care about learning. I did a lot of that last year, but I also wasted a lot of time. See: College Algebra (didn't learn anything and got a bad grade) and Issues of Social Justice (95% sure that my Professor didn't read my final paper, you know, the most important document created that entire class. I was so angry about that class. Such a waste of time. I don't care about the money, I care about the fact that we spent hours basically just saying what we felt and not really backing it up with anything, stupid). Maybe if I have better classes I can get better grades. I dunno. We'll see. This is an important goal, yet I don't feel so drawn to it. I'm not sure if that's a bad thing or a good thing.

2. Go to Church more. I didn't go to Church much last semester. I'm going to try to go to Mass a little more. I feel... drawn to that Church. I realized today that I enjoy going with my grandparents to the “traditional” service at their church more than the “contemporary” one because I don't have to deal with “bad” music as much. The music at more traditional services is so different than what I'm used to that I don't have to worry about that. The music at the contemporary service today was terrible. The drummer was just bad, they had silly songs, and they messed up Breathe. I had to fight with that in additional to standard spiritual warfare (ugh... spiritual warfare is so annoying and stupid. More time wasting. Thank you Satan?). I might have to actually go to a Protestant service at some point, but... I don't want to do that. And I feel drawn to that Church on Campus somehow. Don't ask why.

3. Get better at Video Games. This is actually important for me. Don't ask why. I take my hobbies very seriously. I want to get Gold/Platinum rating in Starcraft II (Gold is easy, Platinum will take effort) and I want to win some major events in LoL. That means lots of practice. This is third cuz yeah, video games shouldn't be that important. On this note I need to be able to go full troll one day and only respond with Internet comments. “Real dumb.” “Real terror.” “dat x.” “ok.” “full retard.” Etc. It'll be fun. ^_^

4. Read my Bible More. I know this is important. But I feel that between Religious Studies Classes and attempting to go to Church more, this is actually less important than it seems. I've always operated better, spiritually, while in groups, so I'd like to continue to do that more. But Church is so... bleh. I hate Church. >_> I just need to find a prayer group or something. Why don't people pray more? Its so much easier than listening to sermons, so much more productive.

5. On that note: Pray more. I pray some, I pray a lot maybe. I don't pray enough. I need to pray without ceasing, I don't do that. I need to be constantly talking to God on a daily basis, and I'm sure there are days when I don't talk to God. That's... bad. That's not something I should be doing. I should be constantly asking for spiritual guidance in every waking moment. There are plenty of times when I shut down my spiritual center and just go and “have fun.” This is real dumb.

6. Grow more awesome facial hair/longer hair. I look pretty awesome right now, but I could look awesomer. Hippy/Metal/Fantasy Warrior look is nearly complete. Once thats done only thing left to do is get some awesome Facepaint, braid my hair and go to a Folk Metal concert. /m\

Those actually are rather reasonable goals. Hmm... this is good, I guess. This is a really rough post, but I'm tired and have stuff to do before I sleep. So, good night I guess.

Team Comps in League of Legends

This post is really for my benefit more than anything else. I need a place to write this down. If its outta your league, then so be it. I like League of Legends.

In league of legends, LoL, there are 4 “lanes.” Top Solo, Mid Solo, Bot Duo and Jungle. Every team needs a AP Carry, a Support, an AD Carry and then initiation of some sort: Ashe Arrow, Sona Ult, Annie Stunbear, Amumu Ult, etc.

Current heroes that appear viable:

Jungle: Gangplank, Amumu, Warwick, Nunu, Nocturne, Trundle and Jarvan. Of these heroes, Warwick, Amumu and Nunu are the best. Warwick works in every team comp, Nunu has the strongest early game, and Amumu is the best “tank” in the current meta. Gangplank is a new addition and is really OP, but I'm not sure how he fits into the meta. Probably as another kind of Jarvan/Irelia tankyDPS type. Jarvan Jungles when you want a top solo that is not Jarvan, but want Jarvan. See: EU Double AP style meta.

Top Solo: Top Solo is weird. Basically, anything that can afk farm effectively is a good top solo. Heroes like Singed, Teemo, Irelia, Warwick, Corki, Tristana, Jarvan, heck, even Garen are viable top solos. Basically this lane is the lane that tries to make anyone work. Best top solos are either beefy enough to avoid getting Burst in a gank or have natural escapes like Tristana and Corki. There is never a reason to send Ashe top because she has very bad escapes and will just be ganked really hard.

Mid Solo: Mid Solo, in the current meta, is often a mage. Swain, Vlad, Annie and Brand appear to be popular mages in the current meta. I favor Oriana for her insane AoE follow up to melee initiation such as Irelia, Jarvan, Amumu and Jax, other heroes are viable. Ashe is a viable mid.

Bot Duo: Bot Duo is mega weird because its is the most flexible lane. Bot has 2 heroes instead of 1 and thus has lots of options. The standard setup right now is support+carry bot lane. However, my team has protested at this for several reasons, our backup support player doesn't like Passive Lanes (yet she plays support. Then again, she really likes Janna, the most aggressive of all supports) and our Carry Player likes soloing Irelia and Corki. As a result, I've been considering other laning options such as Blitz+Alistair or Jarvan+Support (Jarvan+Sona seems really strong). Garen+Taric/Sona seems good as well. As far as support+Carry goes, Soraka+Caitlyn or Sona+Caitlyn works well, Sona+Tristana is very strong. Taric+Ashe or Sona+Ashe should work okay. I dunno where Corki fits into the bot lane meta, but he does somewhere. Vayne is amazing, but my team has very little experience with Vayne. I would assume Sona and Taric work great with her. I wouldn't use Soraka expect with Caitlyn, but I'm not a fan of soraka outside of Lane. Oh, and Support Alistair is amazing when laning with whoever. I need to learn alistair.

So as a result we have a lot of options for picks. Standard Draft mode only allows for bans and thus standard banning for my team usually goes like this:

Fight over gangplank cuz he's OP right now, then ban Twisted Fate because he's OP. Other ban is either Rumble, who is stupid OP right now or Vayne who none of us play and is very strong.

If we get 3 bans things are better. This usually means we're in a tournament game and we can look at a few things. Priotity bans tend to be TF and Gangplank. But banning Nunu and picking Amumu first seems pretty good as well. Another strong ban is Annie because she's really OP right now. In fact, if I was in charge of bans against a standard American Comp I'd probably ban Nunu, TF, and Annie every game, first picking Amumu. If we ban Vayne instead of Annie Annie becomes priority pick. Annie is too strong.

I really favor Jarvan for Top Solo. But I need to see how he works in a duo lane. I also want to experiment with serious Morde and Garen comps. Morde requires a double mage comp and probably Ashe to be 100% effective. Maybe just pick Alistair for support and you can get away with Corki+Alistair bot lane. Garen works if he can farm, I think Garen is very underestimated, because a garen with Ghostblade+Hexdrinker does a lot of damage.

Mid, for our team should be Brand, Orianna, Malzahar or Annie. Period. There is no reason for us to pick any other hero.

Top is a weird lane. Right now I think we should be running Corki top lane a lot. But it doesn't really matter too me. I want to see if Morde and Midwick really work. I don't see a comp where Warwick does not work well because his kit is so brilliant. I think I should convince Yocham or Arb to start playing Midwick more.

Jungle is simple: Pick one of the top three. If the enemy picks Nunu pick Warwick, if the enemy picks Amumu pick Nunu, if the enemy has banned nunu and picked amumu, consider picking Trundle or Nocturne. Nocturne works very well as a tanky DPS, fitting in nicely with the Double Mage+Support/Carry bot lane meta, though is more DPS than Tank in comparision to Warwick. Trundle has problems, but operates as an effective anti-carry, especially against tank heavy teams, like those that run Alistair+Jarvan. Jungle Jarvan: I don't really see the point right now, not with the way our team works.

Bot Lane: I have no clue. I need to see what our team comes up with.

Yeah, this is really random. But it helped my thoughts. Maybe you found it useful, maybe you didn't.

Good Games make good Communities? Sadly not

Watch This Video first

So video has 2 guys doing a PAX East “mini-panel” on gaming communities and what makes them bad and what makes them good.

They used several examples. The first one was Heroes of Newerth, which is basically a DotA clone played straight, with the same stats and the denying mechanic which allows you to kill your own soldiers and structures in order to “deny” the enemy the rewards inherent in gaining this kills. In addition, a public rating system makes players highly competitive as they play to increase their rating and not to have fun. This is a good observation. Good players don't want to be teamed with bad players who don't understand confusing game mechanics and cause them to lose the game.

They also pulled out a game called Natural Selection, a Half-Life Mod with a small community of only a few hundred players. This game was quoted as being a good example of a community because of the way the game worked. The first reason they quoted was that teams had to work together, so players would teach noobs how to play. The second thing was obvious and logical mechanics, unlike denying. Finally, a pre and post match common room where players would put trance music to their mics and have impromptu raves made the game have a very positive community.

Now, I have not played Heroes of Newerth much, I played DotA amongst Friends and did not experience the horrible community that surrounds DotA. I have played League of Legends, a similar game, however.

League of Legends tries to be obvious in its gameplay mechanics. There is no denying. They recently removed Ward Blocking, where players could drop a ward right in front of certain spells and block the spell, or use use some spells to jump to wards and escape. There is a public Rating for players who chose to play “Ranked” games, and there is a lot of mean and annoying players who play these ranked games. However, unranked “normal” games are just as bad, in my experience. Its just not as frustrating because you don't lose rating when your team is bad and frustratingly abusive to each other.

Now, these guys claim that Natural Selection is good because it has sen sable gameplay mechanics. So does League of Legends. They claim that because teams require players to work together, new players are taught what to do and the sensible gameplay mechanics are then easily reinforced. They claim that the post game lobby where players can enjoy themselves after a good game encourages community-building.

League of Legends is a game that requires teams to work together and new players have this knowledge reinforced by sensible gameplay mechanics. League of Legends also has a post-game lobby where players can view stats and discuss the game amongst themselves. League of Legends has a horrible community, even disregarding Ranked Games. These guys are not entirely correct. They have a good thesis, one I want to believe, but its not entirely correct.

A couple of things come to mind here, as to why these guys might be wrong. First of all, Natural Selection only has a few hundred players. If we assume that 10% of the population of the internet are a bunch of horrible trolls that live to make our lives miserable (and that might be a rather conservative estimate) that means that a game with an active population of 500 players has 50 trolls. Thats a lot in terms of percentage, but its a small number that is manageable in terms of flat numbers. Good admins can block these trolls and keep an active blacklist going so as to prevent these players from mic-spamming and the like. A small community, like it or not, makes for a community that is easy to manage, where trolls can be hunted down and banned easily. League of Legends has had to fight severely to create useful and effective report and ban functions, and even these have not been 100% effective in removing trolls. It has helped, I admit, though. But these methods have taken a very long time to create, test, and implement in effective fashion. When you have a userbase in the hundreds of thousands, a blacklist of trolls is not that easy to create, especially when you don't have private servers and most players randomly queue with the entire active playerbase instead of a group of well-trusted friends. This is perhaps the least important problem with the theory proposed in this video. I think its fair to say given an infinite number players there will be an infinite number of obnoxious people. Smaller playerbases are easier to manage period.

However, there are other, more severe, problems with this thesis. League of Legends is a team game. That means a team needs to work together to win. That means players need to compromise. For instance, League of Legends teams benefit from having a jungle, a carry, a mage, a support and then either another carry or another mage. However, in many games the last player to pick will pick what he or she wants to play instead of a hero to compliment the team. If the first three guys picked guys that deal physical damage it makes sense to get a guy that does magic damage, but sometimes you just want to play what you want to play. That's what happens when you play with random internet people. Meanwhile the enemy team gets a balanced comp and simply outpicks you because players on your team refuse (for good or bad reasons) to pick heroes that create a better team comp. BOOM, you lose.

Then these guys say that you need to work together and that this can be accomplished by saying stuff like, “hey, try to last hit, try not to push, build an Infinity edge first on Ashe.” This is all good advice. However, it has been my experience that there is about a 50% chance that my allies will say “fuck off,” when I offer them advice. Pardon my language, but you have no idea how many times people flat out tell me to “shut the fuck up, noob, I know what im doing,” and then proceed to die and again and again. In other words, they're rude and mean and they don't take my advice.

Finally, the idea of an end-game lounge where players can converse with each other and look at stats and talk about awesome moments. This is a good idea. However, this doesn't happen too often. Most of the time the end-game lounge is a place for players to rant about how horrible their team was, or for players to conintue their shouting match they have been having all game long. Only very rarely have I, in my 1000+ games played in League of Legends seen the lounge used in such a method.

I want to believe these guys with their thesis that a good game creates a good community. I want to believe that Heroes of Newerth has a bad community because it has bad game mechanics. But I can't believe this given my observations in League of Legends. People can say that you can remove stats like creep kills and hero kills and deaths and assists, but this isn't fair since these are ways to observe how good or poorly your team is doing against the enemy team. You need those sometimes.

I think its better to say that small communities are more likely to be better, and that some games, while they can attempt to make things “fun” and “noob friendly” are not going to succeed if the majority of the players want to be jerks or don't feel they should be teaching other players. I understand this. I really don't have the patience to explain to players I've played with why Clarity is a bad summoner spell, and why Malphite doesn't need it, or farm for that matter. I've done it, and when the player rejected everything I said with “well you don't play malphite,” I had to end the debate. I was nice enough to say, “Okay, you're right, I don't play malphite,” instead of “real malphite player. Takes clarity. Fuck noob shit,” like a real LoL troll. There are a lot of players who simply do that, “don't take clarity, it sucks,” “I think its good,” “gg. Noob malphite. No way we can win.” That's the attitude players have in this game, and its independent of skill or game mechanics. It doesn't help that there are some heroes, items, and abilities, that are not the best, but this is the same in every video game. So, I have to, sadly, reject this belief that its the game, not the community, that determines the community. Unless we're talking about a very small, close-knit community that can heavily monitor its members, I don't really believe these guys have a good thesis.

State of "Balance" in League of Legends

Originally posted on the LoL boards. But I might as well post this here.

This is just a thought about how Riot does some of its Balance Changes. This isn't an angry rant or anything, I want to be thoughtful and hopefully interesting, I am however, frustrated with some things that Riot does.

Recently, I read that Phreak or another one of the other Red Posters on these boards said that Nunu was getting nerfed. Thinking about it, this makes 100% sense and I will not complain if Nunu gets nerfed, despite being a jungler and having greatly enjoyed Nunu.

However, let's think about this. Last year at WCG was when I realized that Jungling was really important. During the NA semi-finals Epik Gaming ran jungle Nunu and I was surprised because I thought Nunu sucked. Now, EG lost that series and no one really jungled with Nunu for a long time because “nunu sucks.” (I think one of the Asian teams, China hero, IIRC, did run Jungle Nunu at WCG proper, but nobody really took notice). It took a while, until counter-jungling became popular and properly understood, for Nunu to really gain dominance. Before that, Warwick, Trundle, Olaf and Amumu were all higher priority picks in the jungle. But then suddenly, TSM started playing him and people began to actually BAN nunu against this team. Sure, at the time TSM wasn't nearly as good as they are now, but I remember several games where Nunu was banned just as TSM began their journey to being what they are now, probably the best team in North America (and let's be honest: the odd one is probably the best jungler in the game). However, nobody really cared. They just let Nunu be strong and went on with it.

However, at the Dreamhack qualifiers and now at Dreamhack proper, as far as I can tell, there have only been five jungling champions: Warwick, Jarvan, Amumu, Nunu and Nocturne. Nocturne has already been nerfed heavily, Warwick is balanced for certain, Jarvan has been constantly declared OP since his release and really does need to be nerfed in some regards, Amumu, while strong, has his weaknesses in the jungle, primarily due to him getting very low and being countered easily enough by strong junglers. However, this isn't about them, this is about Nunu.

Riot has finally decided that Nunu, now that he is, apparently, the #1 contested jungle pick in the game, that he is too strong of a jungler. I understand. His slow is insane, his ability to counterjungle is unrivaled. Sure, he sucks late game and basically turns into a buff/aura bot like most supports, but his early game is unrivaled.

Now, in the meantime, Riot has buffed Alistair then nerfed him. This is despite the fact that he recently reentered the game as a 100% viable support/tank. Meanwhile, riot created the monster that is currently Annie. Meanwhile Riot released Jarvan and the entire community pretty much said, “Wtf was riot smoking?!” (Not that I'm complaining about Jarvan, because, hey, I like having OP champions on my team :D). No offense to Riot, but it seems to me that often times you guys don't balance your champions properly and then let a select few champions such as Vlad and Nunu remain in the game at what is apparently an “OP” stage for much longer than they should. Vlad is OP and everyone knows it. Vlad has been OP since his release despite being nerfed to hell, and his story is rather different than Nunu. But nonetheless, Nunu is similar in that his has been essentially unchanged in role and power since his release, yet, suddenly, a shift in meta and a shift in picking priority makes him “OP.”

I think what I'm trying to say is that I'm frustrated with Riot's Design team and their efforts at balancing this game. I LOVE League of Legends. I love this game so much you wouldn't believe. But I am constantly frustrated at Riot's heavy-handed and seemingly stupid approach to balance. Often times balance changes are made that do little to change the game (Vayne's recent nerfs, Alistairs nerfs after his remake). Often times attempts to “balance” champions instead make them completely useless (Galio, Twitch), turning them from fun, interesting picks into heroes that no one seriously plays. I wish that Riot would try harder to balance their champions. I love the new champions that they're releasing and I think Riot has done a great job at creating innovative and interesting champions, the ninjas with energy, morde with his shield, Rumble with Heat, Orianna with her ball, Jarvan's ult is a very well thought of ability, if extremely powerful, but I'm frustrated that these champions often end up being stupidly strong and that Riot compensates by nerfing them to hell and back; how many nerfs did Shen receive? He went from “OP must pick” to “never picked again, ever.” The same with Kennen, the same with Twitch, the same with numerous champions.

I don't know what exactly I want from Riot except maybe for them to think harder about how they design their champions. I'd like a response from Morello (in fact I'd be honored if Morello read this thread and posted), but I don't know exactly what I want. A commitment to quality? An answer as to why Nunu is being nerfed but no one has mentioned Annie or Alistair (who are just as contested picks at high elo right now)? I don't know. I'd like answers.

Final note: yeah, I know, I'm unranked and I suck, but I feel like I can at least observe the meta and understand what's going on. I'm just frustrated, like a lot of player, low, mid and high elo are, at the way that Riot seems to fumble around and say, “lets nerf him!” only to screw things up more, while leaving obviously over powered champions in their stupid states for far too long.

Competative Video Games

http://archive.gamespy.com/top10/april03/progaming/index.shtml

Hmm so interesting article here. Basically its a list of “problems” with Professional Video Games as a spectator event. I just thought I'd go through this article and discuss/defend Professional Video Games. The article has some good points, but some of them are beyond stupid, so I thought I really should respond to this.

Point #10: Professional is not a Sport.
No. Its not. Video games are not sports, don't call them that. They are competative activities, yes, like Billiards. Did you know that Snooker and Pool are on ESPN all the time? At least, they are in Bangladesh. How is this event relevant? There are “fishing” competitions all over the world, why can't we have Video Game ones as well?

Point #9: Its no fun to watch.
I just feel the need to call bull on this. Sure, its no fun to watch the faces of two nerdy 20-something year olds as they gaze at a screen and constantly press the same 10 buttons over and over again. But then again, no one watches Wayne Rooney's face when he plays soccer, they watch him as he moves across the field of play. Video game players control virtual characters, you should be watching those virtual characters. Its extremely exciting (for me) to watch Starcraft II and League of Legends Games, and I know very little about Starcraft II. But I don't watch the players, I watch the field of play and what the players do on that field. If the camera is on the players for more than a few seconds before and after the game, then yeah, something is wrong.

Point #8: The Games Keep Changing
This is really valid. Its also kinda invalid. I'm sure its frustrating for casual gamers to watch '90s Quake and then 20 years later watch people play Halo, Call of Duty, and whatever newest Unreal Tournament game is out there. However, the truth is, these games have a lot similarities. Pretty much every shooter has a shotgun, a sniper, a automatic rifle, a pistol, etc. There are some differences, but these are not so huge as to make them incomparable. Sure, at the very highest levels of play, they make a difference, and this IS an issue, but casual gamers won't notice this, especially if the commentators are doing their job and properly explaining the nuances of strategy that are going on. This is a problem, its not one that is huge though.

Point #7: Online Leagues Don't Work
Meh. Maybe. I dunno. They have problems, especially in 1 v 1 games where its pretty easy to login under someone else's name. But in my experience, especially with the way the internet works today, online leagues work pretty well and we should continue to make them better.

Point #6: Pro Gamers have no personality
This guy obviously has not watched enough gamer streams or been around a community of high level gamers. I know that HotShotGG, a professional league of legends player has a lot of personality. So does Reginald, and so does Guardsmanbob (all pro gamers in LoL). To be honest, I know HotShotGG, in terms of personality, a lot more than I know, say, Chase Utely, who plays for my Baseball team, the Phillies. I'm not sure where the idea that video game players are devoid of personality comes from, at all.

Point #5: There is no mainstream appeal
Obviously. That's why we support and promote gaming? There is no mainstream appeal for Baseball outside of a few select countries. Baseball players and owners of Baseball teams haven't given up and said, “we have a good fanbase. Europe only wants to watch Soccer anyways.” They're constantly trying to grow the sport into something bigger and more popular.

Additionally: “Besides, professional gaming leagues just look plain childish to the outside, uneducated observer. Who in their right mind is going to be intrigued by the likes of "-=[dAffY]=-d00k!" or "ClAn gH3tT0 bR0z?" You can’t even say the names of the majority of the players without damaging your larynx.”

Lies. All of them. Who are the top League of Legends Teams in North America? Counter Logic Gaming (CLG), Team Solomid (TSM), Epik Gaming (EG), Defy All Odds (DaO), Rock Solid, Oh God Bears (OGB), etc. These are not stupid or hard names to learn. Sure they are sometimes stylized in a more internet friendly way, but, let's be honest, your average 20 year old is probably going to realize that if your team is Eff0rtl3ss Victory, that the 0 and 3 stand for o and e respectively. Besides, everyone will call you EV anyways. The “team” I'm on is “The Cool Kids Table” (so CKT? I guess haha). We don't come up with stupid names like ghetto broz anyways.

Okay, I guess some of the screennames people use are annoying sometimes, but I honestly haven't seen it. And personally I'm a fan of screennames, because they let players title themselves much easier. Tiger Woods will always be Tiger Woods, but me, Isaac Johnson, I'm Lord Toasty or toastymow when I'm playing video games, and I like it that way.

Point #4: The Rules are Inconsistent:
This is valid. Take Super Smash Bros. Brawl and its apparently obvious that there are needs for serious rule changing from the standard setup to this game work in a hardcore setting. Realizing that an FPS game can be Capture the Flag, Team Deathmatch, or some sort of Siege Mode does make the game confusing. But the truth is that these are easily fixed. Look at Cricket, for instance, there are literally 3 types of games: Test Matches, ODIs, and Twenty20. Cricket is stupid popular in South Asia. There are other differences as well in other sports, these don't make a difference. Obviously, heavily modifying a video game to make it “work” in hardcore setting is going to bring about some problems, but that's why Counter Strike and Starcraft are so popular, because they've been designed to accommodate hardcore players. That's why the MBL and the NBA have different rules than High School Baseball or Basketball teams (at least, I'm assuming they do), because they're more serious. You can take an FPS game and made it hardcore or casual. It just takes planning.

Point #3: Too Many Leagues:
This isn't really an argument against video games as much as it is stating the obvious. Watching people play video games is incredibly niche and as a result, there hasn't been a big strong company to come out and organize these video games into regular leagues. Furthermore, because the games change so fast, and because most players can't really make a living off of video games, its hard to have leagues that last. This should change if more hardcore games with standard setups can evolve. Look at Starcraft and what it did in Korea. Starcraft has been out for over 10 years now, and it took several patches to bring it to where it is today, and now its there. Sadly, Blizzard wants to makea profit and they released a sequel, which will likely make it much harder to bring stability to that area of professional video games.

Anyways, this really isn't an argument against video games, its just a fact: there are not good leagues. The problem isn't that there aren't good leagues, its several other issues.

Point #2: Pro Gaming is to “serious.”
Okay, this is badly worded. What this means is that if me, as someone new to video games, asks a stupid question like, “why does XYZ player use a shotgun more? I like shotguns.” Someone will probably say: fking n00b, gtfo and l2p (that is to say, fking noob, get the fk out of here and learn to play). You don't get that in a sports bar when you ask why the Eagles rushed instead of passed. This is a valid point, and its an issue, its a huge issue. The main problem is though, often times the people asking these questions are indeed noobs and they play in your games and they ruin your experience. No one in a sports bar has to worry about the guy next to them throwing the ball to the wrong person. When I play LoL I often get players who do the equivalent in my games and I hate it.

Point #1:Games Are Supposed to Be Fun!

This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Do you think that if you want to play in the NFL that you're gonna have fun the entire time? Do you think that Tiger Woods plays Golf for “fun”? What about Kobe Bryant and Basketball? Now, I do not doubt for a second that professional sports players ENJOY their jobs, but I don't think a coach is gonna say, “Kobe, take a break, this is supposed to be fun.” Video games may be just “fun” for you, but for me and for a lot of other people these are serious events to be taken seriously. Call me an idiot or a loser or whatever you want, but when I play with my clan and we say, “This is a serious game,” I turn into a beast of strategy and cunning and my entire focus is on winning the game and destroying the enemy Its tough and it takes a great deal of focus and energy, but that's the same with any sort of serious event. If you don't want to play video games seriously, DO NOT DO SO. But don't tell me that I'm supposed to calm down and have fun and that competing for money in a serious event isn't a good idea. Its a brilliant idea, it gives me a reason to be intense and aggressive and scream and shout in joy and rage as much as I feel like.

So in conclusion a lot of these arguments were really... bad. Video Games have issues that are preventing Video Games from becoming mainstream, and I don't see them becoming mainstream any time soon, but many of these issues are hardly the reason why.

Symphony X, Blackguard and Powerglove Concert

So last night I went to a metal show. 5 acts, 7:30-like midnight (I left before the assumed encore of the final act). I payed twenty something dollars Good show, all-in-all.

The first two acts where local bands. Which means they were not that good. The first act, Immortal Guardian, seemed like a good band. Like, generic, but good. That's kinda the problem with small bands like that, I suppose. The second act was kinda lame. Their vocalist came on stage making the love sign instead of the metal sign (subtle, but key difference) and he didn't have a very good voice in my mind. Finally blackguard took the stage. Now, Blackguard is not by any means a special band in terms of sound. They have a good sound, but its generic. However, they have an amazing stage presence. They got on the stage and I instantly could tell the difference in their performance and even the quality of their music. Its generic, but its not super generic. They also managed to do something that I find very difficult: sound pretty much exactly the same as they do in the studio. They had a short set, like 30 minutes. However, it was a good set. I feel like they did their thing and gave us a show and it was over.

Next band was Powerglove. I knew very little about this band except that they were an instrumental band that sang music based off of 80s video games and TV shows. They come on stage dressed up as characters out of Mario, their drummer has flags attached to his back (more like Banners, honestly) and they start jamming away in the most metal fashion ever. I didn't think it was possible to Mosh to a Mario song, now I know it is. So amazing. I think these guys were the best act of the night, in all honesty. Its probably because I'm a bit biased towards silly music and the like, but a band that doesn't take itself seriously like that is my favorite. Their guitarist told me after the show that he “revels in the absurdity” of their style and I think he has the right mindset. Play your solos and riffs seriously, but play the silliest solos and riffs you can think of!

Symphony X was next and to be honest, I was a little disappointed. Metal is really loud, that's half the fun. But Symphony X is too technical to really have that enhance their music. You can fix that by making your bass and drums and low end sounds not so dominant, or you can ignore this problem and just hope the crowd doesn't mind. They chose the later and in my opinion they concert suffered as a result. Symphony X, unlike Blackguard, which is just a band you're supposed to headbang and mosh to, I feel are more of a “watch the performance” band. They had a good performance (props to their frontman for grabbing a inflatable sword left over from Powerguard and shadow fencing on stage), but I couldn't hear the details of their music, and that's what Prog metal is, in my mind, all about. If I could have heard their vocals and guitar solos 100% of the time, or even 80% of the time, really, I would have been happy. I felt like it was more like 75% or 60%, really. I mean, I guess their live sound works for them, after 8 albums and years of touring. But I wasn't a fan of it.

So Symphony X was a bit of the bummer, but the rest of the bands I think were respectable. Power Glove is amazing and everyone should go get their music, and Blackguard played a solid show just like I expected.

End of the Year Summary

A flood of memories. How has this only been one year? Yikes!

Yes. I finished my first year of college. I'm on track to graduate in four years. I still don't have a driver's license, I still don't have any real work experience to my name, and I still don't have even very definite plans for my summer vacation happening right now, but I know that I'm done with college for at least three months.

In all honesty, right now, I wish I didn't have to deal with summer. Last summer was glorious because I was kept busy. I had my family with me and we did a lot of stuff. Summers before that, especially the ones in Bangladesh were amazing because it meant that I was home with friends, especially friends that went to Boarding school or Universities overseas. I probably won't see a single one of my college friends till August. Which... meh, its not too fun.

The year in hindsight though. I have to say, Spring Semester was harder than Fall. People tell me this is always the case, which I find funny. Having said that, I did fine. Grades are still coming in, but I'm confident to say that I have just over a 3.5 this semester (an increase of about .1 in my overall GPA. So I'm happy?). The honors program requires that I keep a 3.5 GPA, and I'm confident I can keep that, at least at this point. Its not easy, but its possible. I just need to find out what is expected of me quicker and quicker. So I guess that's academics.

Socially: I did great. I think, in the end, the Honors Living Learning Community was kinda a bust. Ultimately I'm not even sure if I technically “completed” the program as I didn't attend the final LLC dinner or complete any sort of community service that semester. I could care less. I joined the LLC in an attempt to make sure I got to know some of the smarter people on campus (yes, I had a fear that I would be surrounded by idiots who didn't know how to work. This was of course proven completely wrong, as even my non-honors friends are at least competent) and well... I dunno, I was like “why not?” It wasn't a bad idea, but it might have been unnecessary. The best thing thatcame out of it was a few decent friends and the fact that I got garunteed a room from day one in what is probably the best Dorm on Campus (Hunt is expensive and not fun socially. Nothing ever happens at BMH, Teresa and East are old and smell funny). Sure, I'm biased, but meh... a lot of awesome stuff happened at Dujarie these two years, I gotta say.

My biggest social issue was my roommate. I've held back ranting about him because I wanted to respect him because... he's my roommate. But the bottom line was, by the end of the semester, it just go to the point where it was not worth talking to him. He started talking, I felt the need to tell him to Shut Up and go away. Like, okay, there were some points where saying hi, talking a little about your day, that was okay. But when I was packing to leave, for instance, I didn't want to talk to him and he had pull me over to watch silly videos of guys shooting paint-ball guns. Like I care?

It wasn't just that, it was also his constant “trolling” as he called it. He once explained it to another guy, saying he likes to pull pranks on people and stuff, and he thinks its especially funny if they don't realize he's just messing with him. That's just being a jerk, my friend said, and I agree. The first time someone tells you that listening to Metal means that you listened to * insert generic deathcore here * that sings about killing babies and blowing up innocent civilians in times of war its annoying, but meh, he's messing with me. The second time is just annoying. The third time its down-right rude. I pretty much hated about 95% of the music Mohammad played. ESPECIALLY that stupid Black and Yellow song he seemed to really like. I told him, but I wasn't rude about it. Mohammad never once directly told me he didn't like my music, he just made fun of it or lied about it, calling it stuff that it wasn't. For the record I don't listen to Deathcore and I don't, knowingly, listen to music about baby-murderers.

The other thing that bothered me about him was just... how much he lied in general. It took me about the entire first semester to realize this. At first I thought he was just being lazy and had figured out how to get eighteen hours into his schedule and that involved what, for lack of a better word (and pardon my language) “bullshitting” on his papers and perhaps in class discussion. However, it eventually became apparent to me and, I think to others, that this was his entire attitude. He'd pretend to think whatever you're saying is interesting or really important, then he'd turn around and say its stupid or silly or something. He told our professor that his week Volunteering in NYC with some other St. Eds kids was “life changing” which I know for a fact was not the words he would have ever described it to me. I forget what he said to me though.

I could go on, but I think I'll end it there. I think the bottom line was that I didn't have a good roommate. Now, I'll be honest, it could have been worse. I didn't have a guy who demanded I leave every 2nd or 3rd Weekend so he could sleep with his girlfriend (the main issue here being I suddenly have to find somewhere else to sleep). I didn't have a roommate who kept hard drugs in his room. (I don't agree with hard drugs like Coke or Heroin, that's why. Keep all the alcohol you want in my room, whatever. Just keep it out of site and/or in a locked box) Those two would have been worse, I feel like.

Academically: Ah yes, it was mostly good. I had a few messups and a few “oh.... they actually care about this,” moments. Fall Semester my Algebra Class was stupid and had several issues. Additionally I didn't put the time into it necessary to get an A. I messed up my Midterm in Political Controversies and got a B in the class instead of an A. This semester I had a hard time in Text and Discourse Analysis, but that's okay because I'm going to get a B I think, barely a B, but a B. I wanted a 4.0 this semester, but it didn't happen, (that class being a major reason why, honestly). For the most part I did good.

Last semester I think there were clear accomplishments. I survived the first semester of College. I came in and I didn't fail anything, I succeeded and did just about as good as expected. I saw a marked improvement in my writing, in the sense that I was able to transition into the University style of writing easily. This semester, I don't think I learned much more than a little bit more in terms of writing and staying focused and doing more grammar stuff. I know grammar, I just need to remember to use it. I was challenged to improve my writing, and I saw an improvement, but that was really just 1 class. My other four classes? Not much actually learned in terms of information. I got a big picture of the Religious Studies Program, which is my current major, and I think that will help me. Not much else though, really.

Hmm... what else? I dunno. I played a lot of League of Legends, I formed an actual team and I've started working in a team with 2 other people (we need 2 more regulars, but we're working on it). Right now I'm happy to say that I think I have 2 good friends (as much as you can be friends on the internet) and I'm enjoying myself. Now I just need to regularly play at 1400 elo instead of 1300 and I'll be somewhat more satisfied.

What makes a good league of legends player?

So I was talking to a friend about League of Legends today and she asked me to come up with a list of the best players in the very loose and informal “clan” that we have (its basically just a rag-tag group of people, honestly). Now, this brought out a general discussion of what exactly makes a good player well... a good player. And honestly I realized a few interesting things.

First of all, skill alone really isn't enough if you ask me. For instance, there is one player in particular who I really despise because he's so freaking arrogant about his skill. He's honestly good, I checked his profile and he is right on 1600, which is about the point where there is a really clear difference between “good” and “average” players. Yet he has always been “I'm so good, you're not. I'm carrying team. Look at me! I'm carrying the team!” In comparison a few days ago I played with a guy who is ranked 100 points higher and was much more... humble. He did pretty much carry all our games, but he was nice about it. He wasn't like “I am an awesome carry!” he was, “hmm... I think this hero should be rated higher than most people do.” It makes a difference. In fact, it makes a huge difference. I don't care how good you are, if you're going to be a jerk to me, I'm not going to play with you. Its silly, why be rude? I admit, I'm serious about this game, and I want to win, but I don't get condescending or rude when people are worse than me, I only do that when they aren't trying or are being silly on purpose.

In fact, that's another thing that kinda bothers me. I know players who are bad. That's okay. Be bad. I don't care. However, don't revel in it! Don't use your lack of skill as an excuse to go ultimate bravery. A few nights ago I played with people who knew they were no good, but instead of spending their time to improve their game (as I did when I began playing DotA years ago), they used it as an excuse to play purposely bad builds and do silly stuff so that they cannot do good at all.

There is a time to have silly games. I love teemoball,a game that is basically just... pure stupidity. However, when I played teemo ball I attempted to play seriously and take what was meant to be a silly game seriously. It was still a silly game. But it was a silly game that had serious strategy behind it. There is a difference between giving up because you're no good and accepting your skill level and attempting to improve. I remember my first League of Legends game, I was clueless. I didn't know what to buy, I didn't understand items. Now, I'm getting there. I'm slowly understanding this game, and its a complex one so that is okay! Of course, it I does depress me when I realize Wickd, a pro EU player is about 16 and he's on what might be the 2nd best EU team. I'm 19 and I'm nobody.

Additionally, there is another player I know who is quite good. He manages to do rather well as a carry player with heroes like corki and nocturne. I remember when Sona was OP he had an AP sona build that was rather good at dishing out damage. However, I don't think I've seen him do anything but play carries, ever. In comparison, I have another friend who while he prefers to play supports and is a VERY good Janna player, he can and will switch to Ashe when the time is right. His Ashe is perhaps slightly worse than mine (I'm not sure, honestly, I trust him to carry me enough to let him play Ashe), but it is not a “Good” Ashe, its a “fair” Ashe. Furthermore, he doesn't really play any other carries (that's fine because Ashe is good 50% of the time, haha). Additionally he can play different tanks. Versatility is a really needed thing in this game, and attempting to make every hero you play a carry isn't a good idea. Phantom Dancer Chogath and Udyr is funny, AP Sona is cool, but Tank Chogath and Tanky DPS Udyr and Support Sona are the better builds, leave carrying to Corki, Ashe, Nocturne and those heroes. Learn to play Chogath as he was intended: a beefy caster that tanks really, really well.

Finally, there is an element of the game that a lot of people don't understand, and that's strategy and map awareness. Its supremely frustrating for me to not know where the enemy is. SUPREMRELY frustrating. I feel helpless, especially when they start stealing map objectives and I don't know because I can't see what they are doing because we don't have map control. A lot of players I know do very well with a select group or type of heroes. However, they don't understand strategy much. What does that mean? Well, team comp is about 50% of the game, at least. Having a team that has tanky, sustained damage, burst damage, and CC in good amounts is important. You can't just throw together a bunch of heroes, even if they technically all fufill roles. I've played plenty of games where we lost and my teammate was like “yep, we had horrible team comp.” Right now my team is working on running a “default” team comp that we can run back to no matter what. But to be honest, forming a team comp is really hard, its something that I struggle with, almost more so than playing the game. I feel that if we can manage a good team comp, then my team will win most of the time, and its because we have a good comp.

So yeah, what does it take to win League of Legends? To be a good LoL player? Skill is important, learn the basics like last hitting (it amazes me how few people know how to last hit well! It also amazes me how good the pros are. Learn to last hit like Chauster and you'll be a pro carry in no time), learn map awareness, how important wards are, the importance of Baron and Dragon. Learn to be versatile, playing more than 5 different types of carries or tanks. Learn the strategies of this game. A poor strategist can win with the help of a good one, but you'll be more successful if you're a good strategist too. If you're good, don't rub it in too much. An arrogant jerk who's really good isn't going to make many friends, a humble pro will. Also, and most importantly, don't take your lack of skill as a reason to play bad on purpose! This is a fun game, but its more fun to win and to win you have to be good. Saying I won because I had fun is... its cheapening the system. Yes, you should do that. But being a tryhard isn't so much about winning as it is about taking the game seriously and understanding that you need to improve. I've improved so much in this game, to the point where I know I was a noob all those years ago. I'm really interested in getting better, but to do that I have to suffer humiliating defeats. Its a learning process, and its hard.

Thought of the Day

So Saturday night I was talking to one of my friends who is also a Religious (technically Catholic) studies major. She's transferring to another school and I asked why. Basically its because the program here for Catholic Studies isn't … very mainline? I'm not sure what exactly she was getting at. But the thing is, “she likes being Catholic.” And, like, she said it in an annoyed “please be quiet Isaac,” way, but I was like... wait... you mean there are people that really really like their denomination? Probably a good shock for me.

See, my grandfather on my mom's side left the Catholic Church. My parents joined a non-denominational organization, I've been surrounded by people with slightly different theological views and my question has always been “what does the Bible say?” I mean like, I'm not sure to learn doctrine, I'm hear to figure out what I believe. One of the things this person mentioned was the word “career” and, actually, that's not a bad point, I realized in hindsight. But the thing is... I'm not concerned about my career? Maybe this is a bad thing, but I know people that ran off to South Asia with little education and just faith that they were there because God told them to go. Doctrines, Creeds, Denominations, they are really meaningless to me. I respect the Catholic Church for what it has done, I also do not think I will ever be able to join the Catholic Church. I might go in for mass every so-often, because... I mean, why not? But that's it.

Anyways, its just funny how people are loyal to a particular creed or denomination. I have nothing against that, but I've been taught to find my own faith, grounded in the Bible, of course, but my own faith. And furthermore, I don't like being in a position where someone says “Didn't the Pope/Religious Leader say...” and me having to defend that belief when I might not agree with it. Judge me based on my own actions and my own beliefs, not on the actions or beliefs of others. Sure, if its my pastor, or a spiritual father of mine, question me, however, that is a different dynamic. Why? Because those people, I know them, personally. Like, I know my Pastor back home as well as I possibly could. I know my grandparents, I know my parents, I know my current mentor, and if you question me on their beliefs or actions, that's different. Even if I was Catholic, and by some miracle, I managed to meet the Pope, I don't think I'd ever “know” the Pope. I'd never have that dynamic relationship that is so amazing and personal.

Last night I called the guy who I currently would probably end up calling my pastor or spiritual mentor, even though he's thousands of miles away and we don't talk that often. He told me that I should be “honing” my faith, not just learning new information. And that's something I want to be doing. Right now, I'm finding that I need to ask a lot of questions about my beliefs and different issues that I never had in Bangladesh just because of how things worked. Its been good and its been encouraging. To link that back to what I've been saying,that's what I want to keep as my goal these next three years. I want to remember that I need to hone my faith, not just get new information, but understand how that information will help me be the best servant of Christ I can possibly be.

So that's what I'm working towards right now, making sure that I'm learning what I'm supposed to be doing. I think this summer should hopefully be a good time for me to reflect on what I've done this semester and last and see where I went wrong and where I went right. There is that fine line of being in the world but not being off the world, and I need to walk it... its harder than I thought it would be, so we'll see how things go.

Sucker Punch

So its been a while now but I really think I need to write this little rant.

A while ago I watched Sucker Punch. Its a great movie, everyone should see it. At least, anyone who understands or wants to understand Geek Culture needs to see this movie. The thing is, its been a commercial and critical failure. Now, when I saw it, I went for the special effects, and I got those. Sucker Punch is the most brilliantly imagined visual experience ever. Or at least, its the best I've seen, I haven't seen Avatar, so that movie might be really good. I dunno.

Critics don't like because it doesn't seem to be a very good movie, by their standards. First of all, most people don't like the plot. Second of all, they don't like the depiction of women in the film (they're all wearing revealing outfits the entire time; despite their being rather obvious plot/genre reasons for this) and in general most people have written it off as a horrible film designed to enthrall 13 year-old loser geeks.

First of all, I have to say the general view that a lot of people have about the geek audience is highly offensive. I'm a geek, I love being a geek and I love geek culture. We're not a bunch of fat, neck-bearded 30 year old virgins. Nor are we all a bunch of 13 year-old kids who have no life and play too many video games. These groups exist, I am not denying that. I'm part of neither demographic and even amongst the college kids I hang out with, the “geeks” are a bunch of really cool dudes. We're not hopeless dorks who will never be good at anything but either math or RPGs, or whatever. Sucker Punch IS a move that, on the surface appeals to this audience and its a good example of what that audience wants on the surface: lots of awesome visual effects and scantily clad women (say what you will about this, but I'm really offended that people bring that up in this film, yet the dozens of raunchy sex films that come out seem to never get this kind of critism. Furthermore, I didn't see nearly as much sex as one could easily expect from this kind of film. Serious dramas often have more explicit sexual overtones than Sucker Punch, which had very, very, mild ones, in my opinion).

Second of all, I find that most people, critics and the general audience alike, missed out on what exactly was going on here. Synder is a smart director and he is actually pretty aware. He uses the movie's characters to speak directly to the audience about this film (meta talks, breaking the 4th wall, whatever) in a very subtle fashion. Its really an interesting thing, looking back at it. I admit I missed most of this, and I really should watch this movie again 2-3 times, but I don't have the time and money right now.

Its just that I feel this is a really smart, really well-crafted movie, and yet no one liked it except a few geeks. I watched for the visuals alone because I'm a geek and I would watch it for the visuals alone again. I would watch 12 variations on this movie just for those visuals. But the actual movie itself is actually pretty good, not just some sort of geek's wet dream, which is what people have made it out to be.

Changing my Major

So today I changed my major. That horrible curse of college has effected me too! Don't worry, it won't be changing again, I don't think, though my minor might, possibly, at least. I dunno. It depends. Anyways I went from English Writing and Rhetoric to Religious and Theological Studies.

Of course, the question is why? I just traded an awesome, useful degree for a “useless” one that won't get me a job. I'm obviously an idiot now, right? Well... only sort of.

See, part of the problem is the culture I grew up in. I'm not talking about Bangladesh, I'm talking about my parent's organization. Some of my parent's coworkers moved to India when they were my age, nothing but a high school education and the knowledge that they needed to be in India to better serve God. Now, the thing is, all of these people eventually had kids who have, as of yet, pretty much universally (disregarding a few) all spent a long time waiting till they can get old enough to join the same organization themselves and follow in their parent's footsteps. 3 of my friends now are working for my parent’s organization, just like their parents did. 2 of them appear to be in it for the long term, one is still deciding. Everyone assumed I would do the same.

Now, here is the thing. While my parents have never pressured me, I think the culture of their organization (combined with Bangladesh, possibly) has. I had this very long discussion with my parents last year about how I didn't want to end up being “[My father's] son” I wanted to be me, Isaac, a person unique and different from my parents.

So I ran off to college, avoiding Christian Universities (Catholic doesn't exactly count; plus Austin is notoriously liberal and the school shows that). I majored in English Writing and Rhetoric and took a class I loved. I then realized I could minor in something, so I went ahead and did that, I picked a minor in Religious Studies cuz I figured I might as well do some theology, its fun, after all.

2 Things happened between then and now. First of all, I came to the conclusion that I would be joining my parent's organization, if not for the long term, than at least for the short term. Three years ago I was anointed as a nation builder and I've been trying to work out what that means since. I've also realized that I don't enjoy writing, I enjoy thinking, and writing is a medium for thinking, for me, because I spend so much time on the computer. It seems to me every time I'm talking to my mother I'm talking about Philosophical things, not English Writing. In fact, I'm kinda dissatisfied with my English Writing class this semester. Its... okay. Its hard, and I realize that has kind of soured my taste. But the thing is, this is still a class thats fundamentally interesting to me. I don't think Revising and Editing is going to be like that, etc. I looked through the list of classes an English Writing Major has to take and I felt, more and more, how I just don't like the idea of studying these things.

Sure, the question now is “what are you going to do with that degree?” And that's a question I cannot yet answer. My response is that I'll figure that out later. My second response is that I didn't know what I was going to do with my English Writing Degree anyways. My current plan is something like this: Complete College in 4 years. Between then and now I need to spend a summer Interning at a NGO in India or Bangladesh (I'd intern with my parent's organization if I could, but I think that would be … complicated). Study Abroad in Europe (Germany/UK are #1 choices) and... I dunno. Then go to Europe and Study Theology stuff.

Corpus Christi

I got this message in an email from a member of my family yesterday:

“Going beyond disrespect
Abraham asked the Lord to spare 50 righteous people. God responded to Abraham's plea "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all .....Genesis 18:16-33

The movie " Corpus Christi " is due to be released this June to August. A disgusting film set to appear in America later this year depicts Jesus and his disciples as homosexuals! As a play, this has already been in theatres for a while. It's called " Corpus Christi " which means "The Body of Christ". It's revolting mockery of our Lord. But we can make a difference.

That's why I am sending this e-mail to you. If you do send this around, we just might be able to prevent this film from showing in America . Let's stand for what we believe in and stop the mockery of Jesus Christ our Savior. Where do we stand as Christians? At the risk of a bit of inconvenience, I'm forwarding this to all I think would appreciate it, too. Please help us prevent such offenses against our Lord. There is no petition to sign, no time limit, or minimum number of people to send this to.. It will take you less than 2 minutes!

If you are not interested and do not have the 2 minutes it will take to do this, please don't complain when God does not have time for you because He is far busier than we are. Hey it's worth a shot! Apparently, some regions in Europe have already banned the film. All we need is a lot of prayer and a lot of e-mails.

JUST GET THE WORD OUT

....will God be able to find at least 50 righteous people who are willing to express their concern and voice their opinion against this act of blasphemy”

For now, I'm going to ignore the chain-message nature of this email (bleh, people really have to do that?) and just instead comment on a few things. First of all the email calls the play and soon-to-be movie “Corpus Christi” “[A] revolting mockery of our Lord.” Which is kinda hilarious.

See here's the thing: Maybe it is, after a fashion, mocking God. Homosexuality pretty much the opposite of Christianity (much in the way murder is. Yes, I just did that, no, I don't hate homosexuals. I don't hate murderers, either, btw, but that's not the point here... moving on). I find the idea of a homosexual Jesus more hilarious than anything else. Jesus was a Jew. Jews hated homosexuality, and even those who support homosexuality now agree that the verses in the Bible that condemn homosexuality are derived from Jewish hatred of homosexuality. Furthermore, if a person so strongly desires to “mock” God as to create a play that is so far away from reality that it really can't be considered anything but some sort of (perverted) fantasy, then so be it. I would argue that, after a fashion, the idea that Jesus married a woman and had a family to be ten times more realistic than the idea that Jesus was the head of a gang of Jewish homosexuals and was betrayed because he spurned Judas' love (yes, that's the plot, no, I didn't say it was a good plot). I find it hard to see this sort of story as an assault on Christianity because I find it hard to take it seriously.

Of course, I'm a believer and I'm pretty firm in my beliefs. I've read the Bible enough that I know some good verses to pull out when I need them. I have a good, strong, theology based on the Bible. Specifically the OT Law, the Teachings of Christ, and the Teachings of Paul (obviously there are other bits, but those are the most important). I'm sure there are lots of unbelievers who don't know how “homophobic” ancient Judaism (I can't comment on modern Judaism, I don't know any modern Jews) actually was. So I suppose this film could do some damage.

However, the tone of this email is still inappropriate. When I see a movie like this, my response is “oh, some unredeemed sinners made a movie that is a pack of lies,” I'm not shocked or angered by the horrible unredeemed state of the world, its been this bad since Adam and Eve ate the fruit. It didn't get any better or worse, it's been the same. Sinners sin, and, in this case, I can't see that sin doing much damage to the world. Furthermore, we should be pretty active explaining the Biblical response to homosexuality anyways, so I mean... what's the big deal here?

What this email is asking people to do is to fight Satan at his own game, I feel like. That's a mistake, obviously. Satan is the King of Lies, we don't need to fight lies with lies, we don't need to suppress the enemy, because there's not to hide. He's an evil, no-good, bad-guy, and he's out to get us. If someone asked me what I thought of this movie, I'd tell them. Its a stupid movie, not because it has a bad acting or anything, but because the plot is laughable. Jesus was a respected Jewish Rabbi. Jews, as a rule, are against homosexuality. In the time of Jesus, no Rabbi would have gotten as much popularity as Jesus did while living a life so obviously contrary to the rules of Judaism. Even Paul, a Christian that came later, after Christ, condemned Homosexuality. Why would he do that when Jesus himself was a homosexual? Preach the Truth. Don't suppress lies. Lies are lies. They are false. Eventually, lies are revealed as lies and liars then condemned for well, lying. No one should be condemned for preaching the truth. “For you will no the truth and the truth will set you free,” Jesus said.

Another thing, condemnation. Paul wrote that there is no condemnation in Christ. Why are we condemning this movie? What does this movie do that is so special it must be condemned and banned and never spoken of except in disgust? It has done nothing other than support the idea that we live in a fallen world and sinners will sin. That's nothing special or unique. That's just the nature of the world.

So anyways, don't go see the movie. Or go see the movie. What you do is up to you and, as far as I can tell, this movie isn't somehow weakening our world or making it a worse place (in the way a murderer or thief does), I don't care and I think anyone who cares enough to actively attempt to ban this movie is silly. Protest the movie. Say, “I don't think this movie is a good idea; Jesus wasn't a homosexual, and we shouldn't be spreading lies.” Challenge the idea. Why do homosexuals want a homosexual Jesus when clearly there is no logical way for him to be homosexual. Use this movie as an opportunity to open a dialogue about homosexuality and the Bible. But banning it just gives homosexuals and their allies yet a another (well deserved) reason for labeling the Church “homophobic.”
Also: Song of the day:

Quick Post

Really quick post before I go to bed.

Thought of the Week: How can we make the gospel relevant? Why has the gospel not reached people in nations like the United States (well, it did, but the United States is hardly a Christian nation) or Japan, where people are free to believe what they chose? Its because the Gospel has not yet been relevant to the majority of people in those nations. What can we do to make the Gospel more relevant?

Song of the Day:


This is a really hilarious change for me, but yes, I do enjoy my silly pop music. I just downloaded the Veronicas because I can. I'll listen to the first song and then fall asleep.

20 Year Plan? What? I need one?!

So my roommate is doing a bunch of interviews for Colleges/Academic Programs etc. He's been asked some interesting questions, most of which involved him making up stuff that sounds smart because he didn't have a good answer, but that's life, eh? Anywas, the scariest question he got asked was this, “Twenty years in the future, what do you see yourself doing? Every five years how will you be one step closer to reaching that goal?” My first thought was literally, “that's not fair. I don't know.” But it got me thinking. Colleges like to get students who have goals. These are the ones that get into elite programs and are their top students who get that college's name out. The guys who sit around changing their major 3 times and then graduate after 6 years because they couldn't make up their mind are NOT the guys people want at a University.

Now, I'm not a “graduate after forever cuz I didn't get my act together” guy. I'm currently an English Writing Major Religious Studies Minor and even if that changes a bit I'll find a way to make it so that I don't graduate late. I'm graduating in 4 years, or I'm going to die trying. I'm also going to stick with the Honors Program even if its GPA requirements are not the easiest. I'm arrogant enough to believe I can do it. Brian, you are rubbing off on me, I think.

But... what will I do after that? 20 years from now I'll be 39, about 10 years younger than my parents, give or take. In other words, my kids, if I got married around the same time they did, which is reasonable, will be about 5-12 or something. My eldest would be like 11ish. So... I'm now a responsible adult with lots of important decisions to make about my family. Can't have my kids to grow up into half-starved heathen idiots, can I?

Well here's the complicated thing. Every time someone asks me, “What are you going to do with that degree,” I work it so they answer their own question. In other words, I'm not actually answering the question. In other words, I have no good answer. This isn't a “problem” per se, but its not a good thing. I need to get some solid plans down, I feel. If a college asks me, “Where do you see yourself” 20 years from now, I need to be able to say something besides, “I see myself married and … doing something cool.”

Do I have an answer? Well that’s a good question. First of all, I sorta do. I'm going to Graduate. I'm going to graduate in 4 years. Then I'm going to go do a DTS somewhere in Europe likely. A lot of DTS' are special DTS' now, Photo DTS, Arts DTS, Worship DTS. Do I want one of those? Well I love music, and I love worshiping God and such, obviously, but I'm no good with instruments, so a Worship/Music DTS is likely out. I can't sing either, before you ask. I wish I could, but I can't. So likely I'd just go do a Standard DTS. Oh, I might do a DTS in India... India or Germany seem the most likely locations. India might not be a good idea though, cuz a lot of people will know my Parents. But that might be a good thing, so who knows...

But after that... what? Work? YWAM? School? I wish I knew. I don't like the idea of working. It sounds... mundane. School might be nice, but I have a feeling I'll be pretty bored of school. YWAM could be cool, but its also a kinda scary thought. What would I DO in YWAM? What … skills do I have? I'll have an English Writing Degree. Great. I can write a paper. Great. … What now? That's what I get the feeling, its something I'll have to work out between me, God, and my Professors. We'll see how that goes.

School. I like School. I'll go back to school. Most of my family has a Master's Degree, if not higher. A lot of my friends are highly intelligent and will get PhDs at some time in the future; or at least as high of a degree as is needed in their line of work. Do I want a PhD? Haha. I can't say that now. I'm... open to the idea. It hit me, that if I really do end up pursuing Philosophy/Theology more than English Writing (not to say that I won't get an English Writing Degree. Philosophy is basically just writing papers, so why not get an English Writing Degree?!) I might end up getting a PhD in... something that involves sitting around thinking about stuff most people don't really care about but is actually of grave importanance. I've learned the pratical applications of Philosophy and I know Theology is useful, so I'd be willing to do it.

What about Work? It sounds... horrible. But I'd be up for it if it was the right thing to do for a time.

Anyways... that was a lot of well... nothing, but I guess it got some thoughts out. Bottom line: I need a 20 year plan. Suggestions?

Finally: Song of the Day



Quick note: This band is amazing and you should buy this album. It is one of the best purchases I have made in a while. The rest of the album is pretty awesome except maybe like 1-2 songs that are not very good.

Just an Update

So much work! I feel like I'm buried in papers today, I have 4 classes which have been assigned papers, and one class where about 50% of the midterm was short answer/essay questions. I'm glad I'm an English Writing Major, because otherwise I'd probably just about die.

Despite the papers, I'm having a good school year. Busy, but I like it that way. Working on continuing to do good in school. I feel like I still have a good shot at a 4.0. I know I can get a an A in my COSC class, I should manage an A in Honors and in RELS class, not to mention my Rhet and Comp class. That leaves just my ENGW class, which is still in some doubt; that will be my hardest class this year, but that's good! My teacher is amazing, I spent 40 minutes talking to her today about my last paper and why I didn't do so good and my next paper and what I need to do in it to do better. I feel she was very encouraging and helped me understand exactly what I need to do and why I am here to become a better writer.

Of course, this doesn't help because, while I love writing and I know I need to become a better writer, I'm not really interested in Writing as a career. I'm interested in Thinking as a career. A year ago I considered Law School, and its still an option, but its not nearly as much of an option as I thought it was. I'm not going to take any pre-law classes. I'm not going directly to Grad school. I'm going to graduate from college and run off to Europe for a while and do stuff with my Parent's organization; be a volunteer and get some training in Theology and … whatever else I decide to do.

Anyways... I need to get to bed. Its late and I have homework tomorrow. Luckily, Tomorrow is THURSDAY! Which means 1 class, and then, FRIDAY! Friday means... four classes, ugh, plus RELS homework. But at least I get a weekend...

Song of the Day? My brother's latest composition: Nusrat's Shattered Mirror

A Dream I Had

Strangest dream I had last nigh. Me and this other person... it might not have even been me, it was the protagonist. We were in a boat in an underground river/sewer system that had long been forgotten on a dangerous quest. It was like a kinda sci-fi setting, maybe cyberpunk. Our boat had some sort of machine that kept having problems (involving cement of all things) every time I/the protagonist went to sleep. The machine, I felt like, was a water pump.

The story finally ended when we came to this strange series of like computers. If you think about it this entire thing could have been really scary if it was a movie and not a dream, a movie that didn't have to make sense, but was just really creepy; like the beginning of a strange off-beat indie horror/sci-fi/fantasy flick. It wasn't so much computers as it was a bunch of OLD computers and calculators all on and beeping/flashing and such. Creepy, yes? Imagine a dark long, narrowish tunnel with two people in a strange boat suddenly coming to a dead end filled with flashing, archaic computers.

The dream ended with a modern computer and a cellphone appearing, and the cellphone started to ring and it turned out to be MY cellphone telling me its time to wake up (I'm glad it did, because my roommate didn't get up at all today, he didn't show up in class today).

Just thought I'd share that with you. Nothing really important. I thought the picture my dream painted was really, really interesting.

3 Thoughts I wanted to Share

A few random thoughts for you guys

First of all, I felt something really interesting when reading about the protests in Bahrain. These protests that are going on in North Africa/the Middle East, they are not a random occurrence, they are not a strange twist of luck. There is a reason that people are rising up now. Obviously, I can't confirm anything, but many of these nations are Islamic and have a fundamentally flawed set of laws (Islam) at their root. These governments are oppressive by nature, many are monarchies or dictatorships that appeal to a oppressive system of governance (Islam), and people are just sick of that. I can't do anything but look at pictures and videos and read articles in the news, but I want to say that I think God is moving in the Middle East in a way that maybe no one has expected before.

Second of all, Homosexuality. The homosexual lifestyle is wrong, regardless of what DNA/Science says about it being “determined at birth” or whatever. Alcoholism is hereditary (somewhat), its also a sin/bad, yes? I love homosexuals, God does too. Jesus forgave the prostitute the pharisees wanted to stone. Jesus loved the woman at the well who was sleeping around a LOT even by today's lax standards (well... its more accurate to say that everyone today would know she was easy, whether or not people would like her or hate her for it is of course another matter). Jesuse didn't agree with their lifestyles, he told the Prostitute to “Sin no more” but he didn't kill her, he didn't condemn her. Homosexuals are hurting people, and to think for a moment that any of them have more problems that me or anyone I know is the greatest lie I've heard in a while. I'm no worse, I'd dare to say, but I'm no better either. Mainstream media and Mainstream thought seems to find my position untenable. How can you love a homosexual yet still condemn their lifestyle? I'm not sure why the idea is so radical. Drug addicts are loved, but people hate their lifestyle, for instance (no I'm not saying Homosexuality is akin to an addiction, I don't what exactly goes into making a person a homosexual. I don't care). Finally, there is simply no good secular answer to Homosexuality. Only a society with a firm foundation in Biblical values (and given the way in which homosexuality has been dealt with in various societies, it seems that none exist, to my knowledge, at least) will succeed in reconciling the “issue” of homosexuality.

Finally, the Trinity. I came across a really amazing thought on Monday. The trinity is this weird thing because it really doesn’t make a lot of sense if we think of it from a human perspective. Why not 1 god? Why not 3? Why the whole messy 3-in-1 stuff? One of the students in my class really didn’t' like the Trinity, and I felt for a time that it was also kind silly, but then I realized something (or God spoke to me, whatever you want to say, it was probably a combination of both). There are 3 divine beings that exist, but they are incomplete when separate. They are linked in a way that is beyond human understanding, they operate as one, but they are distinct. They cannot be separated, and if they were, they would be come less divine, somehow. I don't claim to understand much, but I know there is a Trinity, and I'm glad I can say that with some authority.

Thank you for your time. Now I need to go get Pizza before the Cafeteria shuts down. I also have 3 papers to write before I got to bed and Midterms begin so soon. I think College has this strange perverse pleasure in destroying your social life 3 weeks into school, it pretends you're allowed to have one, then takes it all away.

Oh, and because its fun to do I'm going to try and start doing what one of my friends do, Song of the Day (SOTD). Basically, I'll post a random song I listened to today that I really like. So here is the first one:

EU III

Well here we go, I'm finally gonna blog about Europa Univeralis III (EUIII), a game I bought a while ago and have played a decent bit since then. I still don't think I've played enough to really get the full picture, but the game is so freaking huge I'm not sure if that's entirely possible.

EUIII is a game much in the vein of the Civilization or Total War series of games, except rather different. Like both of these games, you rule are placed in charge of a real-life nation and given little to no firm objectives except “rule the world.” Unlike both, its real time, but with an emphasis on empire management. Battles are more like Civilization, taking into account stats like your general's ranks and your soldiers morale and ability to complete certain kinds of attacks. Unlike Civilization it uses a real-world map for its basis and starts at around 1399, playing up until 1821 when the game ends.

However, unlike Total War, the scope of this game is huge, bigger than even Empire Total War, which only had North America, Europe and the Middle East/South Asia covered. This game literally has the entire world, maybe not Australia, but that's about it (honestly I haven't checked to see if Australia is on the map, I bet it is). Because of its open ended nature you can chose to pretty much do anything. You can play as Japan and launch a full-scale invasion of China by the year 1420. Or you can play as the Golden Horde and finish what the Mongols never really managed to do: conquer Europe. Or you can play Castille (a Spanish nation) and attempt to do what I have found myself doing: a combination of defeating the muslim and African nations south of me as well as conquering the New World.

I started in 1399 and began with a conquest of Granada, with nothing else to do and my alliances with the other Iberian nations too strong to risk war, I proceeded to conquer much of Northern African and eventually send my troops down into Western Africa where I am currently involved in conquering Mali, I believe, Mali or Ghana. In the meantime I've sent out a few colonists to some Islands near the New World and I sent a 6000 man force to battle the Aztecs when I realized my ally Portugal has already conquered about half of what became the United States in “real” history.

The game is addicting. I played it for hours yesterday, finding it really entertaining. My war with Ghana got me involved with the rather powerful Malmaluks who rule the bits of Northern Africa I don't. At first, I hoped to ignore them until I had conquered Ghana … Or Mali or whoever they are... completely, but then I realized just how much of a threat they were and scrambled to hire enough soldiers just to hold my own lands, let alone conquer some of theirs! This was rather surprising for me since it was the first challenging war I faced since the beginning of the game. Essentially, I've been praying on poorer and less equipped nations, Castille is in a very good position to do this, and facing Malmaluks was something I expect, but it was really a good battle and forced me to declare an early peace with Ghana so I could actually have a chance of getting a decent deal out of the Malmaluks.

Anyways, I've played through just over 100 years now and still have 300 more to go. The Reformation is going on strong and a few of my provinces have been hit, I haven't decided if I want to actually change to Prodestanism just yet, mainly because it will likely involve my powerful neighbors claiming my throne and a bloody war in the Iberian Peninsula. It could probably end my favor, if I'm careful and I make sure to preemptively build up a huge army and claim several of their provinces quickly, but then I risk getting all of Europe involved in the War. The last thing I need is a French army or English navy hitting my borders.

And, mind you, these experiences come from the first 100 of what is basically a 400 year full-fledged playthrough as one of many, many, many nations. I could attempt to conquer India as one of the many princedoms that existed in 1399, or I could be silly and play as the Aztecs, anything could happen, and its a really well designed game.

Insane College Night

Yesterday was amazing. I woke up at like 7AM (after going to sleep at 1AM) with a text message: “Snow day. Classes are canceled.” I had 4 classes yesterday, so I'm very happy about this. So I sleep till 11AM, get some breakfast (coffee shop was closed. No Bagel... :( I had a hamburger at the Dinning Hall instead). Then I spend the rest of the afternoon playing video games and just messing around in general. At 7 I left for my Aunt's house where we had dinner and talked and stuff till about 10PM. I bought my ticket to see Times of Grace and War of Ages (plus two random bands that I don't care about) tonight and I'm really excited about this. For those of you that don't know Times of Grace is a side project featuring Adam D. and Jesse Leach of Killswitch Engage fame. In brief, Adam D. got together some music and decided to recruit former Killswitch vocalist Jesse Leach to help him out lyrically as well as provide some rocking vocals (since Adam doesn't think he has the strongest voice out there, which I'm not sure I agree with, but whatever, Jesse is a great musician). Their album, “Hymn of a Broken Man” is really, really freaking good. First of all, Adam D. is one of the best metal guitarists from the US I've heard. He's a metalcore guy, you can tell, but he's got a good style, a real music education (went to Berklee School of Music, so yeah, he's one of those “educated” musicians). Jesse, I like Jesse because as far as I know, he's a believer and you can tell in his lyrics. Alive or Just Breathing, the Killswitch album that he helped create, has some really strong lyrics. They are not outright Christian, much less obvious than say, Demon Hunter or Thousand Foot Krutch, but he's got Christian morals down and that's always refreshing when it seems most bands really fail in the “good lyrics” department. Anyways, so I'm gonna see Times of Grace and War of Ages tonight.

Last night though, oh it was awesome. I got back and I hung out in the lounge with the people that didn't go out partying, we watched Anchorman, which was one of those... hilarious movies. It wasn't really slapsticky or over the top either, it was just darn funny. Best character was probably Steve Carrell's, he just had some amazingly well delivered lines. All of the cameos were great as well, Jack Black had the greatest cameo ever. After that it was about 3:30 and we were about to watch Collateral when someone said, “hey, IHOP anybody?” And we were all like, “IHOP at 4AM? YES!” We went and had an early breakfast of pancakes and eggs, talked about Rednecks, Hicks and Hillbilies, then went back to the dorms hung out a bit and I went to sleep at 6AM. I was awake for about 18 hours straight. So much win.

Anyways, I think, after just over a semester, I'm starting to make some real good friends here. Its take a while, but I'm getting there.

Anyways... I'm going to do something else... like... start on my reading for Monday I guess. I'll write more later, maybe when I get the chance I'll actually write up about Europa Univeralis III.

Biblical Socialism?

So two interesting things happened today. First of all, in my Honor's Class (Issues of Social Justice; a class that looks at current Social Issues from both a Secular and a Spiritual viewpoint) a guy working for some organization that hire top tier College Graduates to teach in low-income and low success level school districts all over the United States for 2 or more years. Initial thoughts: Nope, not gonna do it. Thoughts at the end of the program: Great idea. I can't do it. Why? First of all, I'm not going to effectively be able to work in Public Schools. I don't know how anyone of my faith could. There is such oppression of spirituality in some Public Schools, often especially Christian Spirituality it makes me sick. The Founding Fathers didn't want a Godless nation, they wanted a Secular Government, there is a difference. Second of all, they pay way too much. I'd feel guilty working with that kind of salary right out of University. I mean, yeah, I'd probably enjoy having the money, I'd probably use it to pay off debt from the student loans I think I'll likely end up receiving, but... I don't think I should be earning that kind of money and using it on myself. I'd feel... guilty, knowing that its significantly more than my parents have lived off of (as a family of 5!) in Bangladesh. Yeah, yeah, different standards of living etc, but you know what? Right off the bat I'm thinking: that's a lot of money to hand a new college-graduate.

I think the main thing was of course I couldn't stand to teach kids, especially anyone below the High School level, especially kids who are likely really badly educated (functional illiterates in 8th grade? Breaks my heart, I'll be honest, but I couldn't stand to teach someone like that. I need to be around people who think on my level, the level of a rather intelligent University Student). I'd be a bad teacher, combine that with students who are really far behind in their education? Yeah, I'd probably go insane.

But... on that note, I want to bring up a related idea. One of my friends mentioned how she couldn't watch the State of the Union (where the US president speaks to the members of Congress about what he wants to do that year) because Obama is such a Socialist. She claimed that “spreading the wealth” and “socialism” where not American.

Now, in all honesty, I don't give two hoots about what is or isn't American. I grew up in freaking Bangladesh and in my opinion a lot of the Gung-Ho Patriotism that Americans have is somewhat over-rated. A lot of Americanisms are unnecessary. Some of them (The American Dream?) are really cool and I like them, but at the same time, I don't really care if an idea is or isn't American, so much as is or isn't it Biblical.

So, here's a thought? What does the Bible say about caring for the Poor and Needy? What did Jesus do for the Poor? What did God command the Israelites to do for their fellows found in need? What did the early Church do in regards to their less fortunate brethern? A whole friggin' lot!

Jesus healed the sick and the poor. He show love to the desperate: the blind and lame beggars, the women sick for twelve years. He went out of his way to touch people, to love people, to heal people. He showed compassion on the forgotten.

The Old Testament has a large amount of laws regarding the Poor. If you read the story of Ruth you know that Ruth survived by “gleaning” the grain from the fields of the rich landowners. God's laws allowed people in her situation to do this and, hopefully, get enough food to survive even if one didn't have gainful employment or your own land to farm. The Bible has rules and laws that help the desperate remedy their situation, mostly involving forced labor and temporary enslavement, but the point was that someone desperate enough to steal for a living or sell all their land to eat a loaf of bread could gain some respect or skill or more land if they were willing to pay for their mistakes of financial mismanagement, or if they were willing to accept that sometimes people have hard times. God's system of Government provided for the Poor and Needy.

Finally, what did the Early Church do? Well, they did the same! In Acts we read stories of men and women who gave all they had to the poor. The literally sold everything they owned and put it as the disciples feet. The disciples then used this money to provide for the Orphans and Widows amongst them. The Church cared for the Poor and Needy just as their God commanded them.

So, with that in mind? What's our response? Is this idea of redistributing the wealth Biblical? Is the idea of making sure that we don't have a population in a chronic state of poverty? It seems to me that we have a responsibility, as followers of Christ, to walk in his footsteps. It seems to me, as scholars of the Bible, that we have a need to follow the commands of our holy text. It seems to me, that as members of the Church, we have a command to do as the early church did.

Socialism isn't American? Well possibly not. But it seems to me at some form of socialism is very much Biblical.