G.I. Jane Essays - Films, G.I. Jane, Women In The United States Navy

G.I. Jane G.I. Jane The film G.I. Jane takes place in the 1990's and shows discrimination of a women in the United States Navy. Lieutenant Jordan O' Neal played by Demi Moore, is a naval intelligence officer who has ambitions of moving beyond her military desk job, to become a member of the Navy Seal. Thanks to the political maneuvering of a female senator, O' Neal becomes the first female candidate for the Navy Seals. The Seal's are the military's elite Special Forces team. O' Neal becomes the guinea pig of senator Lillian DeHaven in this film. DeHaven bullies the Navy into taking O'Neal as a Seal recruit in order to become the first female member of the Navy Seal. O'Neal is put through a series of tests and her main obstacle is Master Chief John Urayle, a man so menacing that the music slows down each time he enters a scene. 60% percent of all male recruits quit or do not make the cut, O' Neal must overcome this statistic and others to become a part of Navy Seals. The most memorable scenes in the entire film are two extended music sequences in which Demi shaves off all her lovely locks, and does one-armed push-ups in a tight tank top. Her struggle is about survival of the fittest. This is made plain by three words spoken by O'Neals words that become sort of the mantra for the movie "Suck my - - - -". What these words means is that O' Neal has become fully assimilated, she has transformed into a lean mean fighting machine. What DeHaven and O'Neal's superiors and peers did not realize was that she dose not just try but she succeeds. She makes it through the horrifying grueling rigors of multilevel training despite the distrust and animosity of some of the men and without gender-based aids. She encounters a great deal of sexism and discrimination among the troops. Just as naturally, she shaves of her hair, gets buff, perseveres and earns everyone's respect in the end. Lt. Jordan O'Neal a woman fighting for the right to stand shoulder to shoulder with her male counterparts in the U.S. Navy. Her traning officers and fellow applicants confront her regulariliy with sexist attitudes, the press spied on her with telephoto lenses the military men who wanted to maintain a male institution would hound her with unfounded charges of lesbianism. But non of her advesiariers counted on O'Neal singular strength. Even when she becomes fodder for compromising politicians who betray her, she refuses to surrender. Jordan O'Neal is a Navy Veteran who resents not being allowed into combat during the Gulf War. Now there is a move under way for full female equality in the fighting forces. One quarter of U.S. Navy jobs are still off limits to women still today. On April 28, 1993 Secretary of Defense Les Aspin announced a policy to open up nurse specialists and assignments to women in the armed forces. The policy means that women will no longer be excluded from military specialists simpily because the jobs are dangerous. It opened up combat aircraft to women. It instructed the Navy to open additional ships to women. In November Congress signed legislation repealing the law barring women from serving on combat ships. In the film Senator Dehaven was pushing the military to accept females in all possibiile military positions. In contemporary society, women are already now accepted into combat situations and previously all-male military academies. Of the nearly 260,000 combat and combat support positions opened to women in 1994 more than half were in the Navy. Still, the Navy has the highest percentage of non-restricted jobs after the Airforce, 91% and 99% respectively. In contrast one third of Army and Marine corps jobs are off-limits because women are barred from the ground infantry armor and artillery units (USA Today, 1998). In the closing scenes, the recruits final training exercise is diverted to aid in extracting American troops from the Middle East, the Master Chief was critically wounded. O'Neil gathered all her leadership experience and courage to save him and the mission, even at the cost of risking her own life. Demi Moore's portrayal of strong determined women should come as no surprise. Sampson Deborb (1760-1827) was the first women to enlist in the American armed forces under the name Robert Shurhlieff. She disguised herself as a man t serve in the Fourth Massachusetts Regiment in 1782 during the Revolutionary War. She was twice wounded first by a Saber in a skirmmish in Tarry Town, NY and then by a Musket shot near East Chester.

To what extent was Austrian and Russian rivalry in Essays

To what extent was Austrian and Russian rivalry in Essays To what extent was Austrian and Russian rivalry in the Balkans to blame for the outbreak of the First World War? Austro Russian rivalry in the Balkans only partly explains the reasons for the European conflict of 1914. It is true that they had been in conflict here before in the Balkan Crisis of 1908 and Russia was keen to avenge the humiliation. However neither side sought to escalate this to a wider crisis and wanted any conflict to be localised to the Balkans. Their local conflict was hijacked by the German Empire who sought to turn it into a much greater conflict that would involve a war with Russia and its ally France. Therefore the most convincing argument about the causes of WWI lie in an analysis of Germany's actions and less so with Russia and Austria. Austria Hungary saw itself as the natural successor to the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans. To Franz Josef, the Balkans was an easy option to exploit. However amongst the many peoples of this region there was an aggressive and ambitious group who embraced Slavic nationalism and wished to assert Serbian independence from any imperial power but notably Austria Hungary by the turn of the 20th century. These nationalists had a much more in common with Russia who was equally interested in extending its interest in the Balkan region because of recent humiliations e.g. Russo Japanese war and for warm water ports in the Mediterranean. You should add examples of: Conflicts between Austria and Russia in the Balkans in 1908 Balkan Wars 1912, 1913 Assassination of archduke Franz Ferdinand However these factors explain why a local conflict happened in 1914. They are less important in why it became a European wide conflict. Europe had been a cauldron of tension and rivalry for decades and the prospect of a European war had been the subject of much debate. You should explain how the following created such tensions and rivalry Anglo German Naval Race Weltpolitik, German militarism, the personal role of the Kaiser, military plans, the Fischer thesis. the role of the alliance system domestic problems Imperial Rivalry in Africa - Moroccan Crisis These factors help to explain why so many major powers were hostile in 1914 but it again it does not explain why it boiled over into full scale European War in 1914. The events of July Crisis 1914 were much more significant in turning this regional crisis into a European wide conflict. Germany saw an opportunity to fulfil its long term ambitions of dominating Europe. It realised that a war sooner rather than later was in Germany's best interests and encouraged Austria to make a bold stand against Serbia over the assassination of the Archduke. Germany knew it would draw Russia and France into war. The Schlieffen Plan would then be put into action. The Kaiser and German military were highly confident GB would not get involved and that victory would be swift. Austrian Ulitmatum, Blank Cheque Moltke Memo and Bethmann Hollwegg German Mobilisation Kaisers gamble over GB - contemptible little army' scrap of paper' Austria was manipulated by Germany into its aggressive action in the Balkans. Russia on the other hand tried very hard to stop the war escalating as the telegram exchanges between the Kaiser and the Tsar show, although it is worth pointing out that the Russian generals were encouraging the Tsar to fight. By July 30th 1914 war in Europe between most of the major powers was inevitable. Germany wanted it and engineered it. As hard as GB, and the Foreign Secretary Edward Grey, had worked to avoid war, after this date GB had no option but to go to war or else risk the permanent balance of power in Europe shifting in Germany's favour. Every major port in Europe would be under German control. This was unacceptable to this island nation as GB's Empire and economic interests would be at risk. Although it may appear that the long term causes of tension simply bubbled over into war in 1914 as Lloyd George claimed in the 1930's, it was not inevitable until Germany began to manipulate the regional crisis in the Balkans between Austria and Russia. The German military knew that if war was delayed any longer then the Russian and French forces

Business Ethics; Constitutional Law; Antitrust and Monopoly Essay

Business Ethics; Constitutional Law; Antitrust and Monopoly - Essay Example It dictates the kinds of businesses that investors indulge in, the legal specifications and tax requirements. Upcoming business enterprises must comply with these rules and regulations (Steven, 2008 p.78). Antitrust in the business world explains how it seeks to make sure that business enterprises compete fairly in the market. This in the past, has had an effect on the economy of many countries in the world. With beliefs that free, commercial trade is advantageous to consumers, businesses and economy, this law restricts monopolization and restraints of trade activities. Four main areas emanate from this: pursuit of monopoly power, agreements between competitors, contract arrangements between buyers and sellers and business mergers (Keith, 2007 p.120). A monopoly is a market whereby there is only one supplier or manufacturer or producer of a product. This means that a producer provides a good or service without any competition. The goods have no close substitutes (Jens, 2008 p.89). A legal doctrine describes a set of rules and regulations established through a process of precedence in the common law. This helps in making judgments in legal cases. Laws in legal doctrines stipulate that judges make a judgment about cases in reference to cases that in the past had judgment passed. Judges have the power to refer to other cases if the one he is handling is similar. This helps bring down time spent on cases and helps reach judgment faster. The law allows for use of this technique. Situations in legal doctrines are for instance; a company accused of counterfeiting goods that belong to an original company. If a person is before a court of law under the accusation of stealing the design of another person, he is to face the same judgment that the company undergoes. This shows that the two cases are common and that the same judgment applies to both the cases. An idea to the addition of the

The Comparision of two potential river or sea developments for one Essay

The Comparision of two potential river or sea developments for one city with the intention of attracting tourists - Essay Example However, there are hundreds of rivers that cut across the Rio de Janeiro state, most of them having cities, towns and settlements advanced along their banks. Therefore, natural resources and especially rivers are crucial for the life of Rio de Janeiro (Canadian Tourism Commission, 2013 p12). Among the popular rivers that cut right across the city of Rio de Janeiro are the Acari River and River Paraiba do Sul, which create spirited resources for the city (De Vries & Reilly, 2011 p21). However, the potential of these two rivers is completely tapped, and especially in favors to water-based tourism, which is evidently possible and attractive in these rivers. Therefore, any development and rehabilitation of the two rivers that is targeted towards this objective can deliver positive results and this is the major reason for the development of this river. The Acari River flows in the South eastern side of Brazil, through the Rio de Janeiro state, forming one of the major water-courses that s upply the city of Rio de Janeiro (Room, 1997 p311). The river cuts across the city of Rio de Janeiro from the western side, and it separates this city from the city of Duque de Caxias (Room, 1997 p303). The most substantial aspect about the strategic positioning of this River is that; it separates the most populous City in the Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Area, which is the City of Rio de Janeiro, from the third most populous city in the county, which is the city of Duque de Caxias (Ades, 2004 p.322). This fact is especially important, considering the number of people, who will have an access to the tourist activities established on this river. The other essential characteristic of the Acari River, which makes it most suitable for development for the purposes of water-based tourism, is the fact that the Acari River is controllable (De Vries & Reilly, 2011 p32). The river crosses through areas that are well gifted for boat and canoe riding, so making it a suitable river for developing towards these purposes. Additionally, the Acari River presents no danger of derailing the riding of canoes and boats used for water-based tourism explorations (Krystek, 2012 n.p.). The Acari River has a very large flow of water, meaning that it is a river that can be changed for the purpose of water-based tourism, since it can manage to sustain and supply the flow of water required for this purpose throughout all seasons. The vegetation along the regions of boundary between the river and the land surface also serves the need for soil conservation purposes, by ensuring that no soil from the land masses can directly cause the siltation of the river, while also preventing soil erosion, because it enhances the filtration process (Ades, 2004 p319). The river also has several species of fish, especially on the upper side that is before the section where the Acari River reaches the cities, making it even more viable for water-based tourism, which has fishing as one of the major components . The river has also been widely used for transportation, through crossing from the side of

Compare a shared theme between the book Don Quioxote and the movie Toy Essay

Compare a shared theme between the book Don Quioxote and the movie Toy Story - Essay Example The stories about the knights have sunken deeply into his mind that, somehow, it has misshapen his sanity. He grew up idolizing knights and their gallantry and even began to dress up like one and go out on adventures or quests of his own for reasons like "My armour is my only wear, My only rest the fray"2. He had his own damsel in the person of a peasant girl from Toboso named Aldonsa Lorenzo. Alonso Quijano was so much into his character that he also made up a name for himself and had others call him Don Quixote de La Mancha. Buzz Lightyear of Toy Story, on the other hand, is so caught up in his own reality as a high-tech, space ranger, and not simply a plaything. His belief in his reality is so profound that he even believed that he could fly - a feat he was able to prove to himself and to the other toys when he tried flying with his eyes closed. Falling with style as Woody puts it. Discussing the common theme between the story of Don Quixote and the film Toy Story, one can see how the characters lived in a world of their own made-up realities. Don Quixote fed on his imaginations of the gallant knights and was even caught saying this to himself: "Who knows but that in time to come, when the veracious history of my famous deeds is made known, the sage who writes it, when he has to set forth my first sally in the early morning, will do it after this fashion"3. The effect of the books on his thinking was as deep as his wanting to become a full-fledged knight. This is stated in the book as: "Day was dawning when Don Quixote quitted the inn, so happy, so gay, so exhilarated at finding himself now dubbed a knight, that his joy was like to burst his horse-girths."4 He also went to as far as dubbing, his so-called damsel, Aldonsa Lorenzo as Dulcinea del Toboso and swearing to offer his services to this "fair lady". Along with his absurd thinking are absurd behaviors such as talking to himself and saying verses like "O Princess Dulcinea, lady of this captive heart, a grievous wrong hast thou done me to drive me forth with scorn, and with inexorable obduracy banish me from the presence of thy beauty. O lady, deign to hold in remembrance this heart, thy vassal, that thus in anguish pines for love of thee5. He also named his donkey Rosinante to add more glamour to his stature as a knight. Adding to the extremity of his fondness for chivalry and knighthood, Don Quixote looked for a squire for himself to keep track of his adventures. He promised the laborer an island just to get that loyal travel companion. "Your worship will take care, Senor Knight-errant, not to forget about the island you have promised me, for be it ever so big I'll be equal to gov erning it."6 Those and Don Quixote's other bizarre actions were all caused by too much exposure to books on chivalry and knighthood. His actions were inevitable since these are based on a strong belief which he has stated as: Thou shalt never see it again as long as thou livest7. He was too engrossed on those legends that it was almost impossible to stop him from associating everything he sees with his adventure. One incident was when he fought against what he perceived to be as monsters: "Fortune is arranging matters for us better than we could have shaped our desires ourselves, for look there, friend Sancho Panza, where thirty or more monstrous giants present themselves"8. Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote and the movie Toy Story both

Gottfried Thomasius View Of Kenotic Christology Religion Essay

Gottfried Thomasius View Of Kenotic Christology Religion Essay Introduction The incarnation of Jesus Christ has been a subject of attention from the earliest decades of the formation of the Christian Church. It has not been without its subsequent controversies. Several early councils were convened to address the various issues regarding the Godhead and in particular, the person and nature of Christ. Of these, the fourth great council of Chalcedon established the parameters of the person and nature of Christ in the orthodox view.  [1]  In an attempt to articulate the person and nature of Christ, the German theologian Gottfried Thomasius published a work between 1853 and 1861 entitled: Christi Person und Werk (Christs Person and Work).  [2]  In this essay, Thomasius called attention to the Greek word kenosis found in Philippians 2:7 in demonstrating his theory of the emptying of Christ during the incarnation. Thomasius view of kenosis contributed considerably to the interest in the incarnation principles of Christology. His work became the basis for fu rther studies into what is more commonly called Kenotic theology. This paper will attempt to show that Thomasius view of kenosis is not completely consistent with the formula of Chalcedon and did not adequately comply with the orthodox principles of the incarnation. Development of Systematic Theology As the early church began to grow so did varying opinions as men began to think about the doctrines of scripture in a systematic way. Was Jesus God? First-century Christians saw that the answer was not simple. Nature is not simple, so why then should we expect the Creator of nature be simple?  [3]   Within the first four hundred years of Christianity there arose six major heresies and they all involved an aspect of the person of Christ.  [4]  Then, as now, there are doctrines, which men wrestle with and that still divide themselves over. Even today there are those who would say that some things are too complex to fully understand such as Robertson McQuilkin who said, As we approach the Bible intent on discovering all the truth God intends for us to understand, we should examine our expectations and attitudes, as there are limitations on what is possible.  [5]   Not withstanding, it is the obligation of every Christian to search out the truths of Gods word and to faithfully study it in order to build a competent system of beliefs. With regard to the person and nature of Christ, the words of Millard Erickson ring all the more true when he said, All departures from the orthodox doctrine of the person of Christ are simply variations of one of these [six] heresies. While we may have difficulty specifying exactly the content of this doctrine, full fidelity to teaching of Scripture will carefully avoid each of these distortions.  [6]   The Council of Chalcedon The early councils of the Christian church were ecumenical gatherings of church leaders and scholars who were brought together in order to address the issues that divided the church and sought to set forth declarations that defined the proper understanding of these controversial theological issues that had an impact on the church. Each of the great councils formulated certain dogma about these issues of controversy, which then became the orthodox view of the Christian church. Concerning the first great council of Nicea, Norman Geisler states, The Nicene Creed (A.D. 325) states the uniform belief of all orthodox Christianity that Christ was fully God and fully Man. All heresies regarding Christ deny one or the other of these.  [7]  One of the utmost important issues to the Church was, and rightfully should have been, a proper understanding of the person and nature of Christ. In regard to the council of Chalcedon, which was convened in 451, J. H. Hall wrote: The work of Chalcedon can be understood only in the light of a series of Christological declarations beginning with the Council of Nicea (325). The Nicene Creed declared that Christ is of the same divine substance with the Father, against Arius, who taught that Christ had a beginning and was only of similar substance. The Council of Constantinople (381) both ratified and refined the Nicene Creed, in opposition to continuing Arianism, and declared against Apollinarianism, which stated that Christs human soul had been replaced by the divine Logos. Moreover, Constantinople declared that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.  [8]   As questions continued to grow about the nature of Christ in the incarnation, so did controversy. The preceding councils established the churches opinion with regard to the deity of Christ that He is indeed of the same substance as the father. Later questions arose with respect to the human side and divine side of the nature of Christ. The Nestorian view held to a separation of the two natures of Christ as opposed to the Eutychian view, which theorized that Christ had only one nature.  [9]  The Nestorian view was rejected at the council of Ephesus but Eutychianism was later embraced. Seeing the continued discord, Pope Leo I instigated Emperor Marcion to call a new council and it was decided that it would be held in the city of Chalcedon. The Council of Chalcedon achieved three important things. J.H. Hall states, First, it reaffirmed the Nicene tradition; second, it accepted as orthodox the letters of Cyril and Leo; and third, it provided a definition of the faith.  [10]  Hall continues, There existed two overarching concerns- maintenance of the unity of Christs person and establishment of the two natures of Christ.  [11]   The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril of Jerusalem attribute a section of Epiphanius, Ancoratus, 118, c. AD 374, as being that which contained the Nicene creed which was read and approved at Chalcedon.  [12]  What Chalcedon effectively achieved was setting forth certain parameters about the nature of Christ. That which is formulated to the understanding of these two natures must therefore fall within these parameters in order to remain orthodox. In setting these parameters of orthodoxy, certain attributes must be maintained. One of the most important issues involves immutability. The Definition of Chalcedon sustained the continued immutability of Christ. The council declaration was as follows: Therefore, following the holy Fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the sa me son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us.  [13]   The Chalcedonian Creed provided the church with a statement that Christ indeed possessed two distinct natures, both a human side and divine side and that he existed in one person in an unchangeable way.  [14]   Gottfried Thomasiuss view of kenosis In the first part of the 19th century, when Ferdinand Baur became professor of theology at Germanys Tubingen University, he [following in the footsteps of G.W.F. Hegel] began in earnest to attack the historical credibility of the New Testament and in particular the Gospel of John.  [15]  But after a series of textual and archeological finds, Adolf von Harnack, who himself once sympathized with Baur, rejected his assumptions stating in 1897 that, The assumptions of Baurs school, one can almost say, are now wholly abandoned.  [16]  This confrontation sparked by the rise of modern criticism produced many such debates and it serves to illustrate the theological climate within which Gottfried Thomasius and other German theologians wrote. Gottfried Thomasius was a Lutheran theologian who in the mid-eighteen hundreds, attempted to develop an acceptable Christology that could withstand the criticism of his day.  [17]  In an attempt to do so, he published his Christi Person und Werk. David Law states, The first edition of Christi Person und Werk appeared between 1853 and 1861. Because of the criticism leveled at the early volumes of the first edition, Thomasius began revisions for the second edition before all three volumes of the first edition had appeared. The second edition was published between 1856 and 1863. A third and abridged edition, edited after Thomasiuss death by F.J. Winter, was published between 1886 and 1888, but it is the second edition that is regarded as the mature and authoritative statement of Thomasisus kenotic Christology.  [18]   Subsequent publications showed Thomasiuss efforts to expound on his notion of kenosis. David Law states, In Beitrag Thomasius argued that the tensions within Lutheran Christology could be resolved only by reformulating the doctrine of the person of Christ in terms of a self-limitation of the Logos.  [19]  In essence this self-limitation is the idea behind Thomasiuss view of kenosis. Law gives a more defined description of this idea stating, It was above all Thomasiuss contribution to kenotic Christology that established him as a major theologian. The noun kenosis and the adjective kenotic are derived from the use of the term ekenosen in Phil. 2:7, where we read of Christ Jesus who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself [heauton ekenosen], taking the form of a servant, being born in human likeness. On the basis of the use of the term ekenosen in this text, kenosis has come to be used as shorthand for a series of issues arising from the claim that Christ is both truly divine and truly human. How can divinity and humanity coexist in the one, united person of Christ without undermining the integrity of either nature? Kenotic christologies are those christologies which attempt to address this problem by arguing that Christ emptied himself of some aspect of his divine nature in order to become a human being.  [20]   The notion of Christ emptying himself of some aspect of the divine nature in an act of self-limitation has serious significance and questions the immutability of God the Son. This comes into direct contradiction with the statement of Chalcedon in several key areas. First, Chalcedon established that the incarnation of Christ did not change, effect or diminish any attributes of deity Christ had before the incarnation. He is without changeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ã‚  [21]  . Secondly, Chalcedon affirmed the distinction of natures, being no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature, being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistenceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.  [22]  The orthodox view is that the incarnation of Christ did not constitute a loss of any aspect of his divine nature, through the act of kenosis or any other such theory. Kenotic Theology Although Thomasiuss influence and that of kenotic Christology in general gave way in Germany in the 1880s to Ritschlianism, kenotic Christology enjoyed a second flowering in Britainà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.  [23]  In the years following, interest would subside but then unexpectedly grow again as theologians once again reexamine the kenotic theory. In recent years there has been a renewed interest in kenotic Christology (see, for example, Evans, 2006). Any current attempt to formulate a coherent and viable kenotic Christology will need to return to Thomasiuss work, above all to his Christi Person und Werk.  [24]  . In Christian Theology Millard Erickson gives his definition of kenoticism stating, The second Person of the Trinity laid aside his distinctly divine attributes (omnipotence, omnipresence, etc.), and took on human qualities instead.  [25]  In this view, Jesus is not God and man simultaneously, but successively. Kenoticism implies that Jesus is both God and man, just not at the same time.  [26]   Others have thought to develop the position of kenoticism in not such an abrogated way. Instead they incorporate the idea into a more mild form of kenotic theology. In a review of Michael J. Gormans Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Pauls Narrative Soteriology, Timothy G. Gombis of Cedarville University states, In chapter 1, Gorman develops Pauls master story that demonstrates the kenotic character of Jesus Christ and reveals the very identity of God as kenotic. He focuses on Phil 2:5-11 and argues, based on a thorough exegetical treatment of the passage, that the pattern although [x] not [y] but [z] reveals the narrative trajectory of the kenosis of Jesus. By this, Gorman means although [status] not [selfishness] but [selflessness] (p.16). Jesus Christ had status as God himself but did not exploit this, using it for his own comfort of personal gain. Rather, he pursued several progressively degrading positions on a movement of downward mobility, going eventually to the publicly shameful death on a cross (pp. 16-17). For Gorman, this passage is not properly understood to mean that Christ did this despite the fact that he was in the form of God. Rather, Christ pursued this path because he was in the form of God. In other words, and this is a crucial point for Gorman, Christs being in the form of God is most clearly seen in his self-emptying and self-expenditure (p. 25). In this sense, the very character of God is kenotic (self-emptying) and cruciform (cross-shaped).  [27]   In this passage, the reviewer (Gombis) notes that the author (Gorman) thinks the kenotic passages are not clearly understood. Noting this misrepresentation, he suggests a proper view of kenotic theology. Whether or not Gorman is true in his assumptions remains speculative however it does illustrate the contemporary effort to redefine the implications inherent in kenotic theology. Classical Theology The more classical view of the person and nature of Christ are theologies based more on the Chalcedonian formula and are replete in the theological community. Some theologians have attempted to address the problem of formulating an acceptable understanding of the human and divine nature of Christ always keeping a wary eye upon the parameters of the orthodox or Chalcedonian understanding of the incarnation. From the abstract of Robin Le Poidevins Identity and the composite Christ: an Incarnational delemma, the author states, One way of understanding the reduplicative formula Christ is, qua God, omniscient, but qua man, limited in knowledge is to take the occurrences of the qua locution as picking out different parts of Christ: a divine part and a human part. But this view of Christ as a composite being runs into paradox when combined with the orthodox understanding, adopting a philosophically and theologically contentious perdurantist account of persistence through time, or rejecting altogether the idea of the composite Christ.  [28]   Here the author points out a formula of Christology of the human and divine natures but at the same time, recognizes that it conflicts paradoxically with the Chalcedonian parameters of the incarnation. In this respect, many theologians still show deference to and recognize the importance of the Chalcedonian councils definitive statement. The Chalcedonian parameters have been a staple in guiding theological thought for centuries. George P. Pardington, who was a well-esteemed professor of theology among the Christian Alliance, makes this clear. In his theology primer Outline Studies in Christian Doctrine, He deals with passages in Philippians 2:6,7 and other verses that show the nature of the preexistence of Christ and the incarnations, stating, These and other phrases express ineffable relationships within the Godhead, which we cannot comprehend. On Phil. 2:6 Thayers Greek Lexicon says: Form (Greek, morphe) is that by which a person or thing strikes the vision, the external appearance. There is nothing in this passage, which teaches that the Eternal Word (John 1:1) emptied Himself of either His divine nature of His attributes, but only of the outward visible manifestation of the Godhead. He emptied, stripped Himself, of the insignia of Majesty (Lightfoot). When occasion demanded, He exercised His divine attributes (Moorehead).  [29]   Pardingtons view of the kenotic passages in no way contradicts the Chalcedonian parameters since Christ did not give up any of his divine nature or attributes. Contemporary Debate Roger Olsen has noted that the differing opinions among evangelicals. He states, Kenotic Christology-emphasizing the need to take with utmost seriousness Jesus true humanity, including limited consciousness- has made significant inroads among evangelicals, while other evangelical theologians have resisted and criticized it.  [30]  Olsen continues to describe what he characterizes as a very heated debate among more progressive and conservative Evangelicals stating, As recently as the mid-1990s heresy charges were thrown by conservative evangelicals at more moderate and progressive ones who dared to use the kenotic motif in writing about the incarnation.  [31]   Theologians who reaffirm the Chalcedon formula would be Bernard Ramm and Carl Henry.  [32]  Examples of some who are more outspoken against kenoticism would be Thomas V, Morris, Donald Bloesch, Millard Erickson and Stanley Grenz.  [33]  While Grenz is somewhat critical of kenotic theology, he nevertheless does not espouse the traditional Chalcedon formula either.  [34]  Olsen states, Two evangelical theologians who have attempted to push the frontiers of Christology are Clark Pinnock and Stanley Grenz. Both affirm that Jesus Christ is truly God and truly human, but they are dissatisfied with the classical expression of that belief in Chalcedonian Christology (hypostatic union). They are not so much interested in rejecting it as in supplementing it with new and more helpful thought forms. People today, they argue, are not as tuned as ancient people were to the substance ontologies of Greek metaphysics, and the times call for a new expression of the doctrine of Jesus Christs humanity and divinity.  [35]   While the purpose of this paper is not to critique the various forms of Christology espoused by many theologians among the ranks of evangelicals (and they are many), it is however concerned with the classical Chalcedonian formula of the incarnation, and whether or not kenotic theology adheres to it and why this is important. While there are those who strongly support the Chalcedonian formula, there are others who feel that it is flawed. Roger Olsen notes that both Clark Pinnock and Stanley Grenz are dissatisfied with the classical expression of that belief in Chalcedonian Christology (hypostatic union).  [36]  He once again points to the work of Stanley Grenz to illustrate this stating, Grenz argues in Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000) that classical Incarnational Christology falls short biblically and logically and revises it using the eschatological ontology (the future as the locus of being) of German theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg. According to Grenz, Jesus Christ is the Logos, who is not to be thought of as preexisting and then descending into human history but as revealing God and therefore belonging to the eternity of God by virtue of his resurrection.  [37]  [Emphasis is Olsens]. Olsen continues with his critique of Grenz showing how it is at variance with classical Christology. This is where the debate becomes relevant to this research with respect to the Chalcedonian formula. Olsen states, The main difference between this Christology and classical Christology [Chalcedonian] lies in its denial of a logos asarkos discarnate or preincarnate Logos or Son of God. For Grenz, Jesus Christ is the Logos, the second person of the Trinity. Whatever tensions or problems may exist in Pinnocks and Grenzs Christology, they are not so much revisions of the hypostatic union as restatements of the basic Christological vision in new terms.  [38]   The abandoning of the basic tenants of the Chalcedonian formula present some extreme difficulties, particularly in light of the doctrine of the Preexistence of Christ which was affirmed at Chalcedon. One of the issues in regard to the nature of Christ concerns his Consciousness. When did Christ come to the realization of who he was? Theologians like Myer Pearlman were more content to leave this question open stating, Just exactly when and how this self-consciousness came must remain a mystery to us. When we think of God coming to us in the form of a man we must reverently exclaim, Great is the mystery of godliness!  [39]  Erickson would say, There were within his person dimensions of experience, knowledge and love not found in human beings. We must recognize that in dealing with Christ, he was more than just a man. He had and maintained all the qualities of a divine nature and a sinless human nature as well.  [40]   Another important issue that must be addressed is that the hypostatic union is permanent and everlasting. What Christ became in the incarnation is what he shall remain eternally (Heb 2:17, 7:24).  [41]  This is a problem for the kenotic view of Christ since that in the kenotic view, according to Erickson.  [42]  Jesus is both God and man, just not at the same time. This would imply a doing away with what Jesus became in the incarnation after his ascension and glorification. Conclusion The question that this research is concerned with may be answered by saying that Gottfried Thomasiuss original view of kenosis is not completely consistent with the formula of Chalcedon and did not adequately comply with the orthodox principles of the incarnation. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Bettenson, Henry. Documents of the Christian Church ed. Henry Bettenson and Chris Maunder Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Byfield, Ted. ed., The Christians: Their First Two Thousand Years Edmonton: Christian Millennial History Project, 2002. Erickson, Millard J., Christian Theology Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998. Geisler, Norman L. When Skeptics Ask: a handbook on Christian Evidences Grand Rapids: Baker Publishing, 2008. Gombis, Timothy G. in review of Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Pauls Narrative Soteriology, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Vol. 52, Is. 4 2009, p. 866. Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity vol.1, The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation New York: Harper Collins, 1984. Hall, J.H., Chalcedon, Council of (451), in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009. Law, David R. Gottfried Thomasius (1802-1875) in The Blackwell Companion to the Theologians Volume 2, ed. Ian S. Markham Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2009. Le Poidevin, Robin. Identity and the composite Christ: an Incarnational dilemma, in Religious Studies, Cambridge: Vol. 45, Is. 2 2009, p. 167. McQuilkin, Robertson. Understanding and Applying the Bible Chicago: Moody Press, 1992. Mitchell, Daniel R. The Unity of the Person of Christ, Class lecture, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, April 15, 2010. Olsen, Roger E. The Westminster handbook to Evangelical Theology Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004. Pardington, George P. Outline Studies in Christian Doctrine Harrisburg: Christian Publications, 1926. Pearlman, Myer. Knowing the Doctrines of the Bible Springfield: Gospel Publishing, 1981.

Essay --

When asked about a certain food, the first thing that might come to mind is the taste, the look, or the texture. What does not come to mind is the ingredients that make the food for what it is. Today, many food items contain the ingredient high fructose corn syrup. While some people may cringe when they hear those words, others will explain the true meaning behind HFCS. Based on several articles, the truth of the matter is that high fructose corn syrup is just another replacement for sugar. There is no sufficient evidence proving that HFCS is worse than sugar, however that does not mean it is better for you either. HFCS is just as bad as sugar, meaning that there is no large effect on the body compared to sugar, but they both do have side effects if over consumed. When comparing and contrasting high fructose corn syrup with sugar, the similarities outweigh the differences. For instance, in the â€Å"myth vs facts† article it claims that HFCS is the same as sugar when it comes to the number of calories, composition and absorption in the human body. In addition, when it comes to sweetne...