Hymn of the Week: Jesus Shall Reign

With the political conventions and the "machinations of power" in full gear now, it is prudent to remember that whoever gets elected this November is only a temporary leader. It is Jesus Christ Who will reign forever and ever!

This Isaac Watts hymn, like several others, had far more stanzas (14) than I realized. But they are all worthy of being read, so I include them here.

Jesus Shall Reign

Jesus shall reign where’er the sun
Does his successive journeys run;
His kingdom stretch from shore to shore,
Till moons shall wax and wane no more.

Behold the islands with their kings,
And Europe her best tribute brings;
From north to south the princes meet,
To pay their homage at His feet.

There Persia, glorious to behold,
There India shines in eastern gold;
And barb’rous nations at His word
Submit, and bow, and own their Lord.

To Him shall endless prayer be made,
And praises throng to crown His head;
His Name like sweet perfume shall rise
With every morning sacrifice.

People and realms of every tongue
Dwell on His love with sweetest song;
And infant voices shall proclaim
Their early blessings on His Name.

Blessings abound wherever He reigns;
The prisoner leaps to lose his chains;
The weary find eternal rest,
And all the sons of want are blessed.

Where He displays His healing power,
Death and the curse are known no more:
In Him the tribes of Adam boast
More blessings than their father lost.

Let every creature rise and bring
Peculiar honors to our King;
Angels descend with songs again,
And earth repeat the loud amen!

Great God, whose universal sway
The known and unknown worlds obey,
Now give the kingdom to Thy Son,
Extend His power, exalt His throne.

The scepter well becomes His hands;
All Heav’n submits to His commands;
His justice shall avenge the poor,
And pride and rage prevail no more.

With power He vindicates the just,
And treads th’oppressor in the dust:
His worship and His fear shall last
Till hours, and years, and time be past.

As rain on meadows newly mown,
So shall He send his influence down:
His grace on fainting souls distills,
Like heav’nly dew on thirsty hills.

The heathen lands, that lie beneath
The shades of overspreading death,
Revive at His first dawning light;
And deserts blossom at the sight.

The saints shall flourish in His days,
Dressed in the robes of joy and praise;
Peace, like a river, from His throne
Shall flow to nations yet unknown.

Nuggets From the Greek: Run the Fight!

Hebrews 12:1: Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
2 Timothy 4:7: I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
1 Timothy 6:12: Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.

I noted with interest the other day, when the first two verses were both presented on the same Sunday (and having my Greek N.T. with me), that the boldprint words are in fact identical in the Greek!

Upon checking a couple lexicons, the noun (pronounced ag-one [long "o" sound]) is used only six times in the N.T.; the other three are translated conflict (Phil. 1:30; Col. 2:1) or contention (1 Thess. 2:2). The meaning of the word is rendered struggle, fight, opposition; it has a general meaning of a struggle or contest for a prize at the Greek games.

The verbs in 1 Tim. 6:12 and 2 Tim. 4:7 are each the "verb form" of this noun, and mean "to strive" or "to fight." The "run" in Heb. 12:2 also carries a connotation of competition.

What these words do not imply is that the Christian walk is, well, just a "walk." It is a struggle, with earthly and heavenly rewards and consequences. It is active, not passive; it requires initiative, and not mere reaction. Let us "run" this "race" and "fight" this "fight" in a way that would please the Lord!

Classic DNC Quotes: Bill Clinton, 1996

I watched it. I saw him say it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears. Bill Clinton, upon accepting his party's nomination for president at the 1996 Democratic Convention in Chicago, said this:

"But we must demand excellence at every level of education. We must insist that our students learn the old basics we learned and the new basics they have to know for the next century. Tonight let us set a clear national goal: All children should be able to read on their own by the third grade. When 40 percent of our 8-year-olds cannot read as well as they should, we have to do something. I want to send 30,000 reading specialists and national service corps members to mobilize a voluntary army of one million reading tutors for third graders all across America. They will teach our young children to read.

"Let me say to our parents: You have to lead the way. Every tired night you spend reading a book to your child will be worth it many times over. I know that Hillary and I still talk about the books we read to Chelsea when we were so tired we could hardly stay awake. We still remember them, and more important, so does she. But we're going to help the parents of this country make every child able to read for himself or herself by the age of 8, by the third grade." [Emphases mine]

This is the Democrats' idea of education? Third grade?? I have a child entering Kindergarten next week who can already sound out some short words! If this is true, why do they also want to take our kids and put them in government-funded preschools when they are 3 and 4 years old...what are they going to do for all that time, before they learn to read? If a child isn't reading by the start of 1st grade, then that child is already behind schedule!

Furthermore, who does the former president intend to do this teaching? While the parents "have to lead the way" (and this is, of course, true), it is the government and its minions which do the rest. If our nation slips to the point where we need government just to help our children read...our nation is in trouble.

The entire transcript of the speech is here. And does anyone want to wager how many times Bill and Hillary read to their daughter when they "were so tired [they] could hardly stay awake?"

McCain-Palin: Wow!

I didn't think McCain would choose Romney, Huckabee, Ridge, or Lieberman—mainly because each of them would bring (real or perceived) negatives to the ticket—but politically speaking, he made a daring yet shrewd choice by choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Her resume looks good; she seems to favor all the conservative causes. And although I despise mindless voting, many will vote for her simply because she has two X chromosomes. But here's my observation: This lady gives a great speech! I have never been a fan of Obama's speechmaking ability, which although above average, isn't on a caliber with great orators; but she could out-speechify Obama with ease!

This already makes the campaign much more interesting! (And now I can relax, knowing it's not going to be Romney, Ridge, or Lieberman!)

The Michigan Merit Curriculum: A Math Teacher's View

About a year ago, the Michigan legislature passed and the governor signed into law a bill creating statewide graduation requirements (previously, each district set its own requirements; only civics was a statewide graduation mandate). Among other things, this "Michigan Merit Curriculum" (MMC) requires the incoming Class of 2011 to have seventeen required credits to graduate (plus electives), and of these, four are in math: Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, and a fourth class of the student's choice.

Like the equally well-intentioned yet equally unwise federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001), the legislation represents an attempt by legislators to dictate to local school districts what is best for those districts. Herein lies the first problem: Legislators know less about what schools and students need than the superintendents, school boards, principals, and especially the teachers in those schools. I have a hard enough time believing that my own state representative could keep track of what all the school districts in her own elected area need—much less what a big-city district like Detroit, or a far-off rural district in the U.P. needs. And I certainly know that members of the U.S. Congress can't keep track of individual district needs!

The corollary to the first problem is this: Not every district in the state should have the same graduation requirements. There is nothing wrong with this. Currently, not every district offers the same array of courses/electives. That's fine, too. If anything, people moving to an area would be encouraged to learn more about each district's course offerings and graduation requirements (and test scores) before buying a home and settling in to a school district. Some districts could justify a four-math-credit requirement; others most certainly cannot. Competition among districts and efforts to distinguish a district from its neighbors would likely thrive. These are good things.

But the Biggest Problems lie here: The inevitable outcome of the MMC policy will be a combination of the following things:

• The dropout rates will soar. Already, it has been reported that 20-30% of freshmen students failed Algebra I last year—statewide. These students, plus many more who came close to failing, are already discouraged from taking Algebra II (not to mention the other newly-required courses) and will be more likely to choose dropping out than frustration. Dropout rates that were released this week are already dismal enough.
  
• The course known as Algebra II will be watered down...a lot. In order for many to pass, teachers and administrators will feel the pressure to make the class easier so that more kids will pass. This pressure will come from nearly every corner...and it will be effective in most places. Note: The "curriculum standards" will not change, just their application in the classroom. The test scores, on the other hand, will change.
  
• Social promotion will return with a vengeance. Yes, students will be passed along by teachers who, quite frankly, don't want them (and perhaps their ill-mannered, complaining parents) in their classrooms next year. It's already going on in public schools without the newly added pressure. Some teachers will face administrators administering that pressure.
• The disgraceful irony of this will be that the teachers/education system will be blamed. Teachers and schools who hold the line on not watering down the math courses and who do not practice social promotion will take heat for no other reason than a larger number of failing students—when they ought to be commended for encouraging quality work. Admittedly, there are teachers who aren't doing the job as well as they should (but is this not true in every vocation?). Yet I think that ignorant legislators, ambivalent parents, and apathetic students will all be getting less of the blame that will inevitably come when this MMC is shown to be unsuccessful.

In sum, I think the MMC is a bad idea. As a math teacher, I want every student to take as many math courses as they can. I want students to enjoy them and be successful—this is my passion. But not every student is capable of being equally successful, and it may be that other coursework is more appropriate for some students or more conducive to their long-term success. The MMC does not allow much liberty in this regard.

This will eventually become another example of a well-intentioned, poorly-thought-out, dictated-from-the-capital government policy that has the unintended consequence of failure. Significant decisions like these belong in the hands of local school leadership.

Thoughts on The Olympic Games: Suggested Changes

The Olympics, I thought, went pretty well—particularly since they were held in a communistic country. The Americans won a lot of medals, and NBC had the good sense to broadcast the national anthem a little more frequently this time, and gymnastics a little less.

I have said for some time now that the number of "sports" in the Summer Olympics is too high. Certain ones should be trimmed out. Here are some rules I would suggest the IOC follow:

• All competitions that require the use of judges to determine scores and winners should be eliminated as official events. All competitions should be subject to objective measurement of time and/or length and/or scoring (or in the case of weightlifting, mass). It is understood that referees and other officials must make pronouncements on the legality of certain elements of competition, but judges who "award" medals are far too subject to subjective and even (gasp!) biased determinations. Eliminates: Gymnastics (unless, for example, they can change dismounts to a distance sport), diving, trampoline
• All competitions that are "sports" practiced in only a small percentage of the world's countries or by only a trivial number of people should be eliminated. Eliminates: Rhythmic gymnastics, synchronized swimming, trampoline; Sailing, badminton, team handball, field hockey, and beach volleyball are brought into question
• Barbaric competitions, competitions that are little more than "sports-related pornography," and competitions that are performed on motorbikes should be eliminated. Eliminates, respectively: Boxing, beach volleyball (think about it: Why was this on TV so much??), BMX (perhaps the most ridiculous Olympic event ever)
• All track and field events should be kept. All events which have a historic significance or were part of the original Greek games should be kept. Keeps: All track and field events, archery, fencing, pentathlon, decathlon, etc.
  
• Events involving personal protection/self-defense should be kept. Keeps: Shooting, judo, taekwondo, wrestling. Boxing does not qualify here.
• Team sports with world-wide appeal should be kept. Keeps: Baseball, softball, basketball, tennis, regular volleyball (the kind with teams of six). Not sure if water polo, table tennis, and field hockey belong here....

Similar considerations should be given for the Winter Olympics, too.

Hymn of the Week: Teach Me Thy Way, O Lord

This hymn seems like an appropriate choice, given the imminent start of school (past, for some). Taken from Psalm 27:11 and 86:11, the title expresses well the attitude we must have toward the things of God: Teachableness.

It is a well-established fact of education that the student who has no desire to learn generally...doesn't. And nearly all of us know someone who, though lacking the "above-average" endowment of school-related ability, through hard work and desire, was successful in the end. I've seen both types of examples in bunches through my years of teaching.

Each of us must have the attitude toward God of "Teach Me." No matter our circumstances, our maturity in Christ, our position, or anything else—we can all be taught, and we all must learn!

Teach Me Thy Way, O Lord (words by Benjamin Ramsey)

Teach me Thy way, O Lord, teach me Thy way!
Thy guiding grace afford, teach me Thy way!
Help me to walk aright, more by faith, less by sight;
Lead me with heav’nly light, teach me Thy way!

When I am sad at heart, teach me Thy way!
When earthly joys depart, teach me Thy way!
In hours of loneliness, in times of dire distress,
In failure or success, teach me Thy way!

When doubts and fears arise, teach me Thy way!
When storms o’erspread the skies, teach me Thy way!
Shine through the cloud and rain, through sorrow, toil and pain;
Make Thou my pathway plain, teach me Thy way!

Long as my life shall last, teach me Thy way!
Where’er my lot be cast, teach me Thy way!
Until the race is run, until the journey’s done,
Until the crown is won, teach me Thy way!

The Michigan GOP State Convention: Part 2

A couple of great photos from a great day...

Here we have Jack Hoogendyk, who has already won the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat now held by the liberal Carl Levin. As always, he did a great job today.


And here we have four very happy children with some of their plunder, including the free hats (promoting a candidate for Wayne State University Board of Governors):

The Michigan GOP State Convention: Part 1

Today was the day of the Michigan state GOP Convention, held in Novi, near Detroit. My wife and I were both delegates, so we took along the four kids—and had a great time!

The primary business of the day (besides choosing electors to the electoral college, should McCain win our state; this was pretty much pro forma) was nominating people to the following positions to appear on the November ballot:

• Justice of the Supreme Court. Clifford Taylor, the current chief justice, is up for election this year and will be viciously attacked by the other party; conservative justices hold a 4-3 majority on this bench and he is the majority's leader. Michigan Republicans adore him. Every state should have supreme court justices like this man.
• Two positions on the state board of education. Three folks were running.
• Two positions on the MSU Board of Trustees. Scott Romney, elder brother of Mitt, is an incumbent; he and one other woman were the only ones in the running.
• Two positions on the Wayne State University Board of Governors. Only two folks were actively seeking this position.
• Two positions on the University of Michigan Board of Regents. There were three people actively running hard for these two spots.

The observant will notice that only two of these five listed positions were truly contested. But in every case (not to mention candidates for other offices that have already been chosen in primaries two weeks ago, such as soon-to-be-senator Jack Hoogendyk), stickers, signs, leaflets, and other goodies—including free doughnuts courtesy of Lisa Bouchard, who was the other candidate for MSU Trustee—were being handed out in a manner that even "generously" cannot properly describe. If you like the game-day-face-to-face-meet-and-greet nobody-knows-the-outcome-until-it's-over version of politics, you'd have loved to observe this! My children haven't gotten so much free stuff since Christmas.

As delegates, my wife and I were among those voting for the contested nominations. It is also a great time to meet folks, especially from your own district, who share your political views. I was especially proud of our county's largest delegation to a state convention in some time.

It was also a great opportunity to pick up materials to promote John McCain and others who are running for various offices; to purchase buttons, neckties, and other "stuff" that promotes the GOP; and to get a lot of talking points to share with your friends about "why you should vote for so-and-so for a board of governors on the other side of the state."

But I still left with one question on my mind: Why do we have three colleges with boards of trustees, governors, and regents? Why are they all differently named, yet chosen in the same manner?