Dear Mr. Edwards, Is God that angry?

      In "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," Edwards paints a picture of a cruel and ruthless god. But what is god really like? I don't know. No one really knows but we all have our established beliefs. Some believe that God is peaceful and kind while others, like Edwards, believe that God is harsh and angry.
        To begin with, we don't really know if god exists and how involved he is. Some believe that God does exist while atheists don't. On another hand, Deists believe that God created the world but is no longer involved.
        Looking past this first conflict opens up another conflict. God has divided people all throughout human history causing conflicts from the Crusades to the conflict of modern day terrorists and extremists. This is due to our different interpretations of God. Most of us can agree on the fact that God is omniscient, and all powerful but we try to describe God through personification when that doesn't quite fit. We can't really describe God and a theory that expresses this viewpoint is the Apophatic theology or Negative theology. This theory basically expresses that we can only describe what god is not. For example going back to the question of God's existence, we can't proof whether or not god exists so we can only say that God is not non-existent.
        Religions are not endorsed by God and so we can't really assert whether one is more right than another. People often use God to support their own agenda like Edwards using an Angry God to frighten people into being religious, but really cannot prove if their interpretation is any good.  

                                        

Perspective

        Sherman Alexie and N. Scott Momaday provided me with a new perspective on American Literature. When I think of American Literature, I think of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer, but not of the true Americans. What makes Alexie and Momaday's work unique is that they are a modern take on the culture of Native Americans. Most of the stories written about Native Americans take place during the early 1800s when Native American tribes were scattered to accommodate the colonists belief of manifest destiny but after that time not much has been written about Native Americans.
         In Momaday's story, we can the end of the Kiowa and see that period of history from a more modern point of view.  More than other cultures, the Native American culture has really aged. No longer is man satisfied with living with nature and wants to control it which makes it difficult for Native Americans to live as their ancestors did. Momaday's story illustrates this period of time where the rest of the world forced the native americans to change and his grandmother emphasizes their reluctance to let go of their heritage.
            I really enjoyed Alexie's stories. Not only because of their wit but because I could relate to it. Alexie is torn between his Native American Culture and the American way just as I kind of fit in to the American Culture and the Indian Culture. It is interesting to see Native Americans in that kind of light and Alexie made it so that I could relate to them. Sherman Alexie also makes it really funny to read and is able to provide both an insider and outsider perspective on the modern state of Native Americans. Americans see Sherman Alexie as Native American while Native Americans see him as more Native American and Alexie uses this to his advantage. He is able to comment on the stereotype of Native Americans as alcoholics(which he shows is kind of true.) but is also able to make fun of those that discriminate against the Native Americans such as the 7-11 clerk.
          These stories provide interesting views on Native Americans as Momaday and the stories of his grandmother provide the viewpoint of a Native American looking out on the world and Alexie conveys the tone of a Native American torn between cultures which allows me to see the situation in a new way rather than that of an outsider looking in.

Is it in my power or is it not? That is the Question.

       Teachers always tell students that they can do anything. Whether it be my second grade teacher reading "The Little Engine that Could" to the class or my Spanish teacher hanging a poster of Rosie the Riveter, teachers always try to encourage students. However, I don't believe they are telling the full story. I believe that individuals wield enough power to change the world but need some form of support.

        In The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Jim is able to earn his freedom with some help from Huck. Without Huck's warning, Jim would have been captured on Jackson's Island by Mr. Loftus and Company. Without Huck's help, Jim would never have been able to evade the robbers. Without Huck, Jim would never have escaped from the Phelps's home. Jim had the power to earn his freedom, but without the support of Huck, he wouldn't have been able to overcome the obstacles in his way. And vice versa, Huck wouldn't have been able to avoid being sent back to his father without Jim's help.

       This weekend, I had the pleasure of seeing a modern adaptation of The Merchant of Venice at the Stratford Festival. There is a lot of Anti-Semitism in the play and this is further emphasized by the fact that it takes place during the Holocaust. This got me thinking about how Hitler has changed the world and the support he received. Hitler was only able to carry out his plan with the help of others. Similar to how the Venetians hated Shylock, a Jew, in The Merchant of Venice; People hated Jews with a passion during this time and with their support, Hitler was able to commit his heinous crimes. If Hitler had not received any support, he would not have been able to carry out his plan and six million Jews would have been saved.

      Individuals have a lot of power but are still dependent on our support. We have to think about this when we make our decisions. When we support anyone, whether it be a government official or a CEO, what are we enabling them to do?