Ken Sande's The Peace Maker Essay

Without peacemakers to sustain harmony, the world would be in constant turmoil. Peace isn’t just maintained automatically, it takes the qualities of peacemakers for the establishment of a unified society. It would be difficult to do life without that influence. If an argument broke out, it would be extremely hard to settle the tension. It takes a peacemaker to calm a dispute. So if no peacemakers existed there would be massive fights and arguments could be dangerous to a friendship. A tranquil countenance leads to concord and peace; whereas, an irrational attitude and disagreeable outlook cultivate constant conflict.

I have examined the book and my objections to it are these: It deals with a series of adventures of a very low grade of morality; it is couched in the language of a rough, ignorant dialect, and all through its pages there is a systematic use of bad grammar and an employment of rough, coarse, inelegant expressions. It is also very irreverent.

A chapter that I found myself spacing out was chapter three, in comparison to the other chapters that I highlighted things in, chapter three was the least highlighted chapter. I would add more details to this chapter for readers to find it more interesting and do not lose interest to continue reading the book. One thing that I would see taken out of the book would be the diction that Larson uses because at times I would have liked some events to sound less formal and more comprehendible. Readers like myself that are not too familiar with reading political books, are not used too some words that are used to describe certain things in political field. Due to the diction that was used, every so often I would become bored because I would not comprehend things one hundred

My thoughts have not changed after reading the first chapter of the book. Actually, I feel like they are now stronger than ever. The study of philosophy is essential for those who, like me, want to have a deeper view of what life is. Something that is in constant motion, ever changing, and always a wonderful

In 1Corinthians, Paul appeals to the lowest denominator in the group and abjures wisdom. “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, the intelligence of the intelligent will I frustrate.” 1Cor18. He deals with incest, lawsuits, sexual immorality, and married life, food sacrificed to idols – matter which one readily answered by the Torah and the law. Yet Paul does no research and uses no knowledge he might have learned in his years as a practicing Jew. He relies only on his own intuition, and his personal revelation of Jesus’ death, resurrection and the imminence of his second coming. Unfortunately, this off-the-cuff memo of dealing with real life issues is open to prejudices, rationalizations, projections and a variety of defense mechanisms.

opinion and to me the point is very clear. Reading this book would be beneficial to

To my surprise, I did really like this book but mainly the first half. I thought a lot of the points he made were serious problems that most people don’t think twice about. As I said earlier, my favorite example was the one where he related marriage to cars and cars to kids and I think that’s a statement that everyone should think about and live by.

Here we see the art of effective communication. Paul began his discourse where the people were by referring to their altar dedicated to the unknown god. He used the altar to build a bridge to reach the intellectual unbelievers. In other words, it became his launching pad to present his argument for the monotheistic God. There were many altars in the city dedicated to different gods and for fear of offending some deity of whom they were unaware, the Athenians erected an altar to this unknown god. The fact that they established an altar to an unknown god, proved their ignorance. Paul said to them, what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. Here, Paul took the opportunity to present the One and

The literary genre of writing the Galatians by letter, was used by Paul to respond to a situational crisis that was a threat to the “Gospel” (1:6). “Although the Galatians had accepted Paul’s preaching, they have lapsed and was accepting a ‘different’ gospel, as false teaching had sprang up. Paul in an emotional and passionate tone responds to his concern of the intrusion of others who had perverted the gospel of Christ (1:7).”

The authors Kenneth Boa and William Kruidenier states, "the apostle Paul lived to please no one except the Lord, who confronted, confounded, and converted him. His letter to the Romans was to continue to please his Master and carry out the commission he was given." (2) Paul, who convoy with Barnabas, he taught the Jews in their synagogue and stirred up a commotion in the city because of what he learned about taking the gospel to the Gentiles. The good news Boa and Kruidenier states, "God had invited them to enter a relationship with him on the basis of the death and resurrection of Christ." (12) According to Boa and Kruidenier, Paul never lost sight of his goal and pursued but he allowed God to direct his path."(5) In spite of the threats upon

In Paul’s longest letter, written most likely in the mid-to late 50s, Paul wanted to formally introduce himself to the Roman church, and to address several problems faced by the Roman church during this time. The church, which was most likely a mix of Jews and Gentile Christians, was a thriving Christian community amidst the immoral city of Rome. In his letter Paul wanted to remind these Roman believers of some of the fundamental truths of the gospel in fulfilment of his duty of proclaiming the gospel to the Gentiles. In this paper I will investigate Romans 1-8, and will state how Romans 1-8 sheds light on the natural world, human identity, human relationships, and culture. I will also address how these topics affect my worldview.

Paul tells Philemon of the conversion of Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds. He acknowledge to Philemon that Onesimus was an unprofitable slave , but now as a believer – Onesimus was a profitable minister to Paul and is able to be so to Philemon as well. Such is the transforming power of the grace of God (I Cor. 15:9-10). I do admire the way Paul presents his letter, correcting in love and not out of command. Is a request in the same vein as the lord enjoins all His people to receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God (Romans. 15:7). Paul tells Philemon that if Onesimus has wronged him in any way concerning any unpaid debt, he should put that to his account. It is a marvelous demonstration of the very essence of the gospel concerning what Christ assumed for sinners (II Cor. 5:20-21). As believers, we are exhorted to be followers of God by walking in love as Christ hath loved us, that is sacrificially (Ephesians 5:1-2). There is no greater debt than the sharing of the gospel for it alone offers the gift of eternal life to all who have sinned and come short of the glory of

This argument does not, however, decisively remove the possible use of ‘conversion’ for Paul, as Stendahl’s view that conversion must mean abandonment of a previous religious system is certainly not a necessary condition. In addition to this, to remove the language of ‘conversion’ from Paul’s experience is to remove its decisiveness; its absolute alteration of Paul’s thinking and being that can be seen in Gal 1:12-14. In these passages we see Paul speak of the risen Christ, who gave him his teaching and drew him away from his life in the Law, and as a Pharisee, in which he excelled (Gal 1:14) and which had led him to persecute the Church (Gal 1:13). When this Christocentric language is placed against his former understanding, which had caused him to persecute the Church, one cannot simply speak of a ‘call’, but rather must move to language of radical turning, of ‘conversion’. As this shows, while Stendahl’s argument that Paul should not be considered a ‘convert’ is not strong enough to warrant abandonment of the term, his exposition of Paul as ‘called’ should not be ignored, as, from a missional point of view, he certainly was. This leads us to the conception of Paul’s experience as encapsulating both ‘call’ and a ‘conversion’ dynamic, more fully expressing the reports he and others gave of this time.

In order to adequately understand this passage, we must discuss it from the perspective of the author and original audience – the apostle Paul and the church in Ephesus. We will investigate the civic, social, and religious landscape of the time and region, bringing the

2. In this section, Paul emphasized on “true apostleship” which the Corinthians misunderstood. He treated it as the absolute fundamental. And his crucial question on “true apostleship” will be answered in the next units of the letter; (1) to serve a new covenant (vv. 3:7-4:6), (2) to remain confident despite adversity (vv. 4:7-5.10) and (3) to proclaim the word of reconciliation (vv. 5:11-19) (Furnish, 186).