-
Visual Book Review:. American Patriot Bible
-
Review: A Year of Biblical Womanhood
I recently read and listened to on audio a book called “A Year of Biblical Womanhood” by Rachel Held Evans. Mrs. Held Evans is a young, married woman with no children who describes herself as an Evangelical Christian and modern woman. She lived for a year under Old Testament law. The book was interesting if you want to learn more about the subject matter. “A Year of Biblical Womanhood” is well researched and informative.
Rachel’s experiment was interesting. She discussed submitting to her husband, focusing on domestic duties, covering her head and not cutting her hair for the year among other thing. I don’t feel like she came to any profound conclusions at the end of the year. She didn’t reveal anything that I found to be particularly enlightening. Rachel seemed glad the year was over. The book is a fine way to pass time and I learned a bit but it wasn’t very meaningful and memorable to me.
-
Watch “Common Biblical Misconceptions” on YouTube
-
Watch “The Characteristics of Biblical Patriarchs , Hebrews 11” on YouTube
-
Untitled
Popular dystopian novels typically take place in the future. But the plot lines of dystopian novels have already happened in America’s past and it usually happened to Black people.
Fahrenheit 451 was about the government denying information to the population. Government inspectors called firemen inspect private homes and if they find books they burn them. There was a time in America’s past where books were contraband if they were in the position of Black people.
Fahrenheit 451 Ray Bradbury
The Hunger Games was about a government organized fight to the death. The link tells the tale of Black men fighting for the amusement of White audiences at carnivals. Prior to the Civil War slaves fought to entertain Whites on plantations. White slave owners would pit their slaves against one another in fighting contests.
https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/question/2014/may.htm
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27919283
Hunger Games Suzanne Collins
Enslaved Black people were bred like livestock. The fact that Black people were slaves denied them consent to sex. They had no control over their destiny and had to receive permission to marry from their owners. The marriage could also be nullified by land owners. Black sexuality prior to the Emancipation Proclamation was largely systematic rape for profit.
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/reproductive-rights-and-long-hand-slave-breeding/
Handmaid’s Tale Margaret Atwood
Segregation was the law in America until the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. Black people were severely limited in their opportunities and how they could move throughout society.
https://www.history.com/topics/civil-rights-movement/civil-rights-movement-timeline
https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/segregation-united-states
Divergent Veronica Roth
Dystopian novels that take place in the future were inspired by the past. All of the authors I mentioned are from North America. All are American except Margaret Atwood who is Canadian. Their famous stories are undoubtedly inspired by dystopian America which is Black American history.
-
Untitled
Social media loves to harp on Black women that aren’t so sweet or come off as self serving. They will fixate on it for days. If a Black woman is snarky, mean, puts herself first or isn’t cheerleadery the public takes great offense to this and hopes for her downfall.
Black women are human and sometimes humans aren’t nice. All humans are different. If a Black woman isn’t super nice to you get over it. She doesn’t owe you anything anyway. People that you don’t know don’t owe you nice.
Men (all) are left to rape, steal, pillage and destroy. Some support their actions and make excuses for them. Non Black women often remain unscathed regardless of their words or actions because they are great at deflecting the matter or someone will stand up for them.
People insist that Black women be nurturing, supportive and sappily sweet at all times without fail. That expectation is exhausting. Who is doing all that for Black women? No one. The main people complaining about the women pictured above are other Black women. We all have that sweet and nurturing side to us. It’s reserved for who we want to share it with. It’s not for public consumption.
Black women aren’t being allowed a full range of personality traits the way others are. Black women aren’t being allowed to be human. It’s as if Black women can only exist within a very narrow range. Give people space space to be who they are. If you don’t like them give them enough space that you don’t see or hear from them. It’s that simple.
I’m not advocating being mean, haughty or arrogant. I’m just bringing attention to a double standard. All of these men have made careers by being blunt, direct, rude, mean, selfish and greedy. They are admired for it and their nastiness or gruff personality alone is what made them successful. Trump was elected president for being “politically incorrect” in other words rude.
Ironically, social media pundits that are critical of snarky Black women absolutely love Black women who are mean violent and clown themselves on reality TV and fight videos. They eat it up with a spoon. But if a Black woman in a position of authority or leadership acts like she’s in charge she’s seen as problematic.
I’m not advocating being a nasty person with poor manners. I have taken issue with Tyra and Wendy. Aretha was clearly a diva. Anyone speaking from a pulpit needs to choose their words carefully. But stop thinking every Black woman owes you nice all the time. It’s as if people want Black women to earn acceptance that they would freely give others. Black women are human and humans are not always likeable and nice but be fair.
-
Summer Movie Review: American Gospel
I watched the film “American Gospel” over the weekend. I would recommend the film but wouldn’t describe it as good or enjoyable. The film is sad and disappointing but it is informative and eye opening. “American Gospel” is worth the watch.
“American Gospel” does a good job of presenting the gospel. Then it goes into the way the gospel is shared by well known American pastors. There are sharp differences. America’s most well known pastors are sharing a false gospel and their message gets shared around the world.
This movie shows clips from celebrity preacher sermons. The sermons can be described as blasphemous. They can also be described as scams. There are testimonials from people that have followed the teachings of mega church pastors and their regrets. A nephew of so called faith healer, Benny Hinn, who worked in his uncle’s ministry also tells his story in hindsight.
I don’t follow the ministries of celebrity pastors but for the most part I’ve given them the benefit of the doubt and hope that some good comes from their ministry. The exception is Benny Hinn who is obviously a long time charlatan. The revelations by his nephew are worse than I imagined. They are heart breaking.
There were people in “American Gospel” who shared their experiences following mega church teachings. One woman ruined her career and financial standing. I don’t think she worked for the church but she followed the teachings of a popular preacher and quit her job believing she would be miraculously provided for. She wasn’t.
The bottom line of the film is that the popular American Gospel isn’t following scripture at all. They preach a message that is designed to sell books, get clicks and views and garnish donations, not teach the Bible and save souls.
The film also includes the testimony of a family where the wife is terminally ill and their faith and studies of the Bible. Their story isn’t miraculous and wouldn’t make anyone feel like a special snow flake. But they share what God’s word did for them and their family.
I would recommend watching “American Gospel”. It’s well researched and presented. I think it is fair. I think that viewers can learn a lot about the gospel and the difference between what the Bible says and the message being shared by popular preachers.
-
Summer Movie Review: Spencer
COURTESY SPOILER ALERT
One of my rules for spoiler are that if a book or film is based on a historical event there is no spoiler. This is a courtesy spoiler alert if you don’t want your expectations of “Spencer” influenced by my opinion.
“Spencer” is the 2021 film about Diana (Spencer), Princess of Wales. The film takes place during Christmas season 1991. The film illustrates the burden Diana carried as the wife and mother of the future kings of England. The movie takes some patience but I enjoyed it overall.
Spencer was a bit slow moving in parts. It used symbolism which I don’t enjoy in books and movies. The musical score was also very dramatic and kind of loud. It was a symphony and it was overbearing in some scenes. The director was very artsy fartsy and indulgent at times. It made the story move like molasses.
You will be rewarded if you stick with it. The story comes together and begins to make sense midway through. “Spencer” is filmed like it’s a psychological thriller. The look is similar to that of “The Shining”, “Get Out” or even the “Friday the 13th Series”. It’s dark and hazy.
The film makes the claim that Diana was on the verge of or perhaps already having a nervous breakdown in late 1991. She had been in her royal position for over a decade. She was lonely and isolated. Diana was constantly surveilled and controlled.
At thirty years old all of her choices were made for her including where she lived and her clothes. She had little control over parenting her boys. Diana was treated well and respectfully but it was a matter of protocol. Everyone around her was loyal to tradition, patriotism and The Crown. There wasn’t much interest in Diana as a person.
Her only genuine interactions were with her sons. The scenes with the young mother and her two boys were charming and gave the film warmth. Her older son William was also loyal to royal protocol and tried to keep his mother on the straight and narrow. The boys were protective and seemed to see their mom as mentally fragile.
Diana’s relationship with her husband Charles was a matter of royal business. In one scene Charles justified his affair with Camilla by saying he needed two women because there were two of him; one public and one private. Charles was basically Diana’s boss and she was his employee.
The people around her including the queen played subtle psychological tricks on her. The queen made decisions to quietly let Diana know she was in charge and Diana was a political prisoner of sorts. Diana was the focus of intense media attention and she was not protected or sympathized with by her husband or anyone else except her sons. They were the only people who saw her humanity. It’s easy to believe that someone would lose their mind in that situation.
Kristen Stewart did a nice job as the princess. The casting was great and all the actors performed well. The 80s and 90s costumes were great. Diana was known for her short hairdo so the wig Kristen wore could have been better. It didn’t look bad but I could tell it was a wig. The stylist probably should have tried a weave cut into a short style so the hair would have more movement.
Overall, I recommend the movie despite it moving slowly in some parts. I don’t know if the movies claims are verifiable but they are believable. I like that the film maker was on Diana’s side and told her story.
-
Untitled
As a resident of the state of Missouri I feel completely degraded by the actions of my state government over the last two weeks. The Supreme Court of the United States decided last week that states should decide on abortion laws. Roe vs. Wade was overturned in a 6-3 vote.
The state where I reside had a so called trigger law on the books which made abortion illegal almost immediately after the Highest Court made it’s decision. Missouri was the first state in the country to ban abortions and the puppet politicians were quite proud of it.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/06/29/1108682251/kansas-city-plan-b
I think having to choose to have an abortion is very unfortunate. Personally, I lean towards the Pro Life position but that is a decision a woman needs to make based on her life circumstances and in private. Regardless of why a woman may consider an abortion it needs to be her choice because it’s her life and she’s the one that will have a child to care for. It’s not a matter for public debate.
The new abortion laws were not well written and created confusion in the medical community. Missouri hospitals were unsure about the legality of emergency contraception. Missouri state politicians made statements about medical care and what can be administered by hospital staff. As a woman in Missouri it is humiliating to have such a personal matter that involves me discussed and decided by men who I don’t even favor politically let alone sexually.
I pay taxes to the state of Missouri yet they feel that they have the right to regulate my body and medical procedures. The Missouri Legislature is a pimp squad. They take hard earned money from women and tell them what to do with their bodies. There is a penalty for non compliance. It’s hard to escape their authority. That sounds like a pimp to me. My personal opinions on abortion are irrelevant. I’m a woman and my thoughts and life circumstances are irrelevant. Choices have been made for me by men I didn’t even vote for like or respect.
This is what pimps look like in Missouri.
-
Watch “2 Timothy 3:16-17 Read the Bible” on YouTube
Thoughts, Observations, Impressions
[
[
[
]
]
]
Shannon's Life in the Midwest 