Godspell (an archaic spelling of the word gospel) is a 1970 musical by Stephen Schwartz and John-Michael Tebelak. It opened off Broadway on May 17, 1971, and has played in various touring companies and revivals many times since. Several cast albums have been released over the years and one of its songs, "Day By Day" from the original cast album, reached #13 on the Billboard pop singles chart in the summer of 1972.
The structure of the musical is that of a series of parables, based on the Gospel of Matthew (though considerable material, such as the parables of the prodigal son and of the rich man and Lazarus, comes exclusively from the Gospel of Luke). These are then interspersed with a variety of modern music set primarily to lyrics from traditional hymns, with the passion of Christ treated briefly near the end of performance. It started as a college project performed by students at Carnegie Mellon University and moved to La Mama in Greenwich Village. It was then re-scored for an off-Broadway production that was a long-running success, but most people are familiar with the film version or have seen a local high school production of the musical.[citation needed]
The musical opened a year after another religiously-themed successful rock musical, Jesus Christ Superstar.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
God in Heaven Made the Earth
Big thanks to Elizabeth who sent this in!
Have kids stand up for this song to do the motions -– pretend to surf, ski, make snowman, and hug.
God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the seas – isn’t God so good!With a big wave here, and a big wave there,Let’s go surfing on this wave!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the hills – isn’t God so good!with a big hill here and a big hill there,Let’s go skiing down this hill!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the snow – isn’t God so good!With a big pile here, and a big pile there,Let’s make a snowman from this pile!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!And on this earth he made the people – isn’t God so good!With a little boy here and little girl there,Here a mom, there a dad,Let’s hug the people that we love!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!
Have kids stand up for this song to do the motions -– pretend to surf, ski, make snowman, and hug.
God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the seas – isn’t God so good!With a big wave here, and a big wave there,Let’s go surfing on this wave!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the hills – isn’t God so good!with a big hill here and a big hill there,Let’s go skiing down this hill!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!and on the earth he made the snow – isn’t God so good!With a big pile here, and a big pile there,Let’s make a snowman from this pile!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!And on this earth he made the people – isn’t God so good!With a little boy here and little girl there,Here a mom, there a dad,Let’s hug the people that we love!God in heaven made the earth – isn’t God so good!
Sunday, May 24, 2009
The Gods Make Crazy
For a long time past, those with some idea which way is up have been pointing out correctly that the electoral process is a farce, and we'll revisit some of the reasons below; but this year there has come a fresh one to confirm it, in the shape of Osama Bin Ladin. To the shock and horror of every talking head and pompous Pol, this wily A-rab released a tape which, they fumed, sought to "influence the US Election." Oh, No! T-viewers were allowed to see only bits of what was translated from his speech, but I gather he wanted us to know that our safety was in our own hands; that if we want to live in peace with the Muslim world, we must stop electing governments that diss Muslims and support Israel. Sounds good to me; I said as much within a week of 9/11, and my words are still there.Instant analysts tried to figure whether this means he wanted Americans to vote for Bush or for Kerry, and (surprise!) they failed. On the one hand, the tape's release favors Kerry, by reminding voters that Bush still hasn't found OBL and put him away, but on the other hand, it favors Bush by reminding them that trivial matters like stolen ammunition and job losses and health care don't matter much if the "war on terror" isn't won. Who knows; the pollsters' final word anyway seems to be that it will all be a dead heat. More on that below.What struck me the most was that the key and central word "Israel" was mentioned only once, as if it had been read by Jim Carey in "Liar, Liar," or as if it had been forced through the announcers' lips as one of their industry's "seven dirty words" that ought never be spoken. Perhaps I can do the world a service by countering their reluctance here: 9/11 AND ALL ITS AFTERMATH TOOK PLACE PRIMARILY BECAUSE FOR 60 YEARS ALL US GOVERNMENTS HAVE FAVORED THE STATE OF ISRAEL. Go ahead, shout that from the rooftops!So now, the filters through whom we have to perceive what's going on have told us that this enemy is "interfering," but are suppressing an understanding of exactly how. Is that crazy, or what?This latest absurdity is, however, no more than icing on the cake of my theme. The entire electoral process in irrational from soup to nuts. Let's review a few of the asylum's foundations.1. The system falsely presumes that voters can delegate powers they do not have. You and I cannot morally (or even legally) confiscate property from our neighbor, yet the November 2nd shell game supposes that the government we elect, can. Crazy.2. It falsely presumes that even if we did, the resulting Collective could make decisions that would honor all those scores of millions of expressed wishes. Try making one for a family of just four, if you're snared in that delusion! The notion is absolutely crazy.3. It falsely presumes that government, once elected, can add something desirable to the mix of society instead of wasting and diverting its resources. However could it, possibly?! Crazy.4. It falsely presumes that "government" even exists, in reality. Try to track it down, to give me its address and phone number. Tricky, yes? What precisely is it? The best definition I've come across is Anthony Alexander's: it isn't so much something, as the absence of something, namely the market. Government is that mysterious emanation that prevents a free market functioning smoothly. Crazy.5. It falsely presumes that it is feasible in practice to count scores of millions of votes to any degree of accuracy that may be required. This is clearly nonsense; a computer can accurately count its on/off bits to perfection, but at several stages in any actual voting procedure, human beings take part, and humans are fallible--and occasionally malevolent. Yet the validity of the entire system rests on the assumption of human infallibility. Crazy!And now (6) - it falsely assumes that elections make a difference. In 2004 more than ever, that falsehood is being exposed before our very eyes. Months of massive hoopla and hundreds of millions of dollars of wasted are (according to the pollsters) about to produce, what?--a dead heat, as in 2000!Yet if we think about it, that result is exactly what we might expect, now that fighting elections has been reduced to a science with banks of computers instantly analysing interminable poll numbers, and candidates fine-tuning their appeal to T-viewers accordingly later the same day. All are necessarily bidding for the Undecided Middle above all, and as knowledge about the whims of that Middle are revealed, each refines his bidding for its favors; so what else might we expect but a dead heat? The old days of imperfect information and the uncertainties it brought are well-nigh over. The mechanical perfection of the electoral process has already produced a total farce once, and this year seems poised to produce one again. If not now, then next time; a dead heat to be resolved by the courts will become the norm; in all future elections, our rulers will be picked not by around 85 million voters but by nine elderly men and women. Crazy, crazy, crazy.All this is terrible news for the peddlers of democratic government, who have pretended for lo! these many decades that the process has some substance, dignity and value in the real world; but curiously, it's not all bad for the few of us who appreciate Points 1 through 5 above, and long for the abolition of the entire mess. The more obvious it becomes to the voting public that the whole thing is a farce, the fewer of them will continue to support it by voting and the sooner it will be tossed into history's ashcan. And then at long last, the market will be free to work its wonders, producing freedom and wealth we have hardly dreamed about.The Gods, if they existed, may well have planned to destroy us mortals by first making us crazy; but happily, they are as mythical as the government whose dissolution we seek. If we are patient a little longer in pointing out the increasingly obvious stupidity of the status quo, the madness may morph into sanity.
Who created God?
A number of skeptics ask this question. But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question Who created God? is illogical, just like To whom is the bachelor married?
So a more sophisticated questioner might ask: If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn't God need a cause? And if God doesn't need a cause, why should the universe need a cause? In reply, Christians should use the following reasoning:
Everything which has a beginning has a cause.1
The universe has a beginning.
Therefore the universe has a cause.
Its important to stress the words in bold type. The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn't need a cause. In addition, Einstein's general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time God is the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity (Isaiah 57:15). Therefore He doesn't have a cause.
In contrast, there is good evidence that the universe had a beginning. This can be shown from the Laws of Thermodynamics,the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences.
1st Law: The total amount of mass-energy in the universe isconstant.
2nd Law: The amount of energy available for work is running out, or entropy is increasing to a maximum.
If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy the heat death of the universe. For example, all radioactive atoms would have decayed, every part of the universe would be the same temperature, and no further work would be possible.
So the obvious corollary is that the universe began a finite time ago with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down.
Now, what if the questioner accepts that the universe had a beginning, but not that it needs a cause? But it is self-evident that things that begin have a cause no-one really denies it in his heart. All science and history would collapse if this law of cause and effect were denied. So would all law enforcement, if the police didn't think they needed to find a cause for a stabbed body or a burgled house.
Also, the universe cannot be self-caused nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity.
So a more sophisticated questioner might ask: If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn't God need a cause? And if God doesn't need a cause, why should the universe need a cause? In reply, Christians should use the following reasoning:
Everything which has a beginning has a cause.1
The universe has a beginning.
Therefore the universe has a cause.
Its important to stress the words in bold type. The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn't need a cause. In addition, Einstein's general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time God is the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity (Isaiah 57:15). Therefore He doesn't have a cause.
In contrast, there is good evidence that the universe had a beginning. This can be shown from the Laws of Thermodynamics,the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences.
1st Law: The total amount of mass-energy in the universe isconstant.
2nd Law: The amount of energy available for work is running out, or entropy is increasing to a maximum.
If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy the heat death of the universe. For example, all radioactive atoms would have decayed, every part of the universe would be the same temperature, and no further work would be possible.
So the obvious corollary is that the universe began a finite time ago with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down.
Now, what if the questioner accepts that the universe had a beginning, but not that it needs a cause? But it is self-evident that things that begin have a cause no-one really denies it in his heart. All science and history would collapse if this law of cause and effect were denied. So would all law enforcement, if the police didn't think they needed to find a cause for a stabbed body or a burgled house.
Also, the universe cannot be self-caused nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity.
If God made the world, then who made God?
Worldview with Sean McDowell
I remember lying in bed as a boy wondering about how God could have always existed. Maybe like me you have wondered, “If God made the world, then where did God come from?” This is actually a question that has been raised not only by kids, but also by some great philosophers and scientists. In his bestseller, A Brief History of Time, physicist Stephen Hawking asks the question about what started the universe, “Or does it need a creator, and if so, does he have any other effect on the universe? And who created him?”
1When we consider the nature of God and the origin of the universe such questions are perhaps less difficult to answer than first imagined. Such questions need not puzzle us and detract our ability to trust God wholeheartedly. Rather, they can point us to appreciate the power and majesty of God, much like the prophet Isaiah, “‘To whom will you liken me that I would be his equal?’ Says the Holy One. Lift up your eyes on high and see who has created these stars. The one who leads forth their host by number, He calls them by name because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power, not one of them is missing” (40:25-26).
The Beginning of the Universe
The Bible stands alone as an ancient writing that claims the universe had a beginning. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” In contrast to the biblical account past thinkers such as Aristotle and Plato as well as atheists agreed that the universe was eternal and needed no cause for its existence. Christians believed that the universe had a beginning and that God alone was eternal whereas atheists claimed that the universe was eternal. Scientifically speaking there was no way to adjudicate between the two. But this has all changed with recent scientific advancements proving that the universe in fact had a beginning.
The big bang theory states that the entire universe came into existence along time ago in the past. In other words, the universe is not eternal; rather, it had a beginning just like Genesis states! This leaves atheists in a dilemma: either accept a transcendent cause for the universe (namely God) or believe that something can come from nothing. But to believe that something can come from nothing defies a commonsense principle: “Out of nothing, nothing comes.” Some-thing simply can’t come from no-thing. Atheist professor Kai Nielsen admitted, “Suppose you hear a loud bang…and you ask me, ‘What made that bang?’ and I reply, ‘Nothing, it just happened.’ You would not accept that.”
2 If that is true of a little bang, then why not a big bang too?
So, Who Made God?
This brings us back to the question, “Who made God?” It is important to clarify that Christians do not believe everything that exists needs a cause. Rather, everything that begins to exist must have a cause. There are many things that exist that are uncaused such as mathematical truths and the laws of logic. Even if the world was not created it would still be true that 1+1=2. The universe had a beginning so it must have a cause. But God by definition does not need a cause, he is uncaused.
Philosopher William Lane Craig asks a penetrating question: “And this is not special pleading in the case of God. After all, atheists have long maintained that the universe doesn’t need a cause, because it’s eternal. How can they possibly maintain that the universe can be eternal and uncaused, yet God cannot be timeless and uncaused?”
3
Finally, asking the question “What caused God?” commits a logical fallacy, namely the categorical fallacy. Two examples of categorical fallacies are: “What does the color red taste like?” or “How much does love weigh?” Clear the categories of color and taste are distinct categories that do not overlap, as are love and weight. Similarly, to ask what caused God is to commit a category fallacy, for God is by definition uncaused. Paul Copan explains, “If we reframe the question ‘Who made God?’ to clarify our categories, we will find that the question answers itself. Let’s rephrase the question this way, ‘What caused the self-existent, uncaused Cause, who is by definition unmakeable, to exist?’ Any further questions?”
4As a young boy I often wondered how God could be eternal. I concluded that if the universe had a beginning then something must have existed prior to it to bring it into existence. This thought boggled my mind as a young boy, and it still does today! While the human mind may not be able to grasp how God has always existed, we do realize that something had to exist prior to the beginning of the universe. God, it seems to me, is the most reasonable explanation.
I remember lying in bed as a boy wondering about how God could have always existed. Maybe like me you have wondered, “If God made the world, then where did God come from?” This is actually a question that has been raised not only by kids, but also by some great philosophers and scientists. In his bestseller, A Brief History of Time, physicist Stephen Hawking asks the question about what started the universe, “Or does it need a creator, and if so, does he have any other effect on the universe? And who created him?”
1When we consider the nature of God and the origin of the universe such questions are perhaps less difficult to answer than first imagined. Such questions need not puzzle us and detract our ability to trust God wholeheartedly. Rather, they can point us to appreciate the power and majesty of God, much like the prophet Isaiah, “‘To whom will you liken me that I would be his equal?’ Says the Holy One. Lift up your eyes on high and see who has created these stars. The one who leads forth their host by number, He calls them by name because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power, not one of them is missing” (40:25-26).
The Beginning of the Universe
The Bible stands alone as an ancient writing that claims the universe had a beginning. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” In contrast to the biblical account past thinkers such as Aristotle and Plato as well as atheists agreed that the universe was eternal and needed no cause for its existence. Christians believed that the universe had a beginning and that God alone was eternal whereas atheists claimed that the universe was eternal. Scientifically speaking there was no way to adjudicate between the two. But this has all changed with recent scientific advancements proving that the universe in fact had a beginning.
The big bang theory states that the entire universe came into existence along time ago in the past. In other words, the universe is not eternal; rather, it had a beginning just like Genesis states! This leaves atheists in a dilemma: either accept a transcendent cause for the universe (namely God) or believe that something can come from nothing. But to believe that something can come from nothing defies a commonsense principle: “Out of nothing, nothing comes.” Some-thing simply can’t come from no-thing. Atheist professor Kai Nielsen admitted, “Suppose you hear a loud bang…and you ask me, ‘What made that bang?’ and I reply, ‘Nothing, it just happened.’ You would not accept that.”
2 If that is true of a little bang, then why not a big bang too?
So, Who Made God?
This brings us back to the question, “Who made God?” It is important to clarify that Christians do not believe everything that exists needs a cause. Rather, everything that begins to exist must have a cause. There are many things that exist that are uncaused such as mathematical truths and the laws of logic. Even if the world was not created it would still be true that 1+1=2. The universe had a beginning so it must have a cause. But God by definition does not need a cause, he is uncaused.
Philosopher William Lane Craig asks a penetrating question: “And this is not special pleading in the case of God. After all, atheists have long maintained that the universe doesn’t need a cause, because it’s eternal. How can they possibly maintain that the universe can be eternal and uncaused, yet God cannot be timeless and uncaused?”
3
Finally, asking the question “What caused God?” commits a logical fallacy, namely the categorical fallacy. Two examples of categorical fallacies are: “What does the color red taste like?” or “How much does love weigh?” Clear the categories of color and taste are distinct categories that do not overlap, as are love and weight. Similarly, to ask what caused God is to commit a category fallacy, for God is by definition uncaused. Paul Copan explains, “If we reframe the question ‘Who made God?’ to clarify our categories, we will find that the question answers itself. Let’s rephrase the question this way, ‘What caused the self-existent, uncaused Cause, who is by definition unmakeable, to exist?’ Any further questions?”
4As a young boy I often wondered how God could be eternal. I concluded that if the universe had a beginning then something must have existed prior to it to bring it into existence. This thought boggled my mind as a young boy, and it still does today! While the human mind may not be able to grasp how God has always existed, we do realize that something had to exist prior to the beginning of the universe. God, it seems to me, is the most reasonable explanation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
