Seven Days that Divide the World

I saw and heard rhetoric used in a sermon/lecture we watched in bible class by a man named John C. Lennox. The sermon was about the first seven days of the world as described in Genesis one. Lennox is a professor of mathematics and an author.

Lennox wanted people to understand that the age of earth is never truly discussed, and that one can accept most scientific views on the age of earth while also believing the words of the Bible. The views he discusses aren’t simply the ‘twenty-four hour day’ views, either- they include time periods from as short as twelve hours to as long as ages. He makes it clear that the interpretations could easily all be correct, and that they may depend, as well, and the days might be of all different lengths.

Lennox uses logos by referencing the Bible and science both to back up his statements. He also brings up different examples of possible views. For example, the day could be seen as the period of time the sun is up in the sky, or twelve hours. According to another verse, many years to humans is like the blink of an eye to God, so the days could just as easily be ages. The days may also be viewed as being like chapters, or be the times God revealed the creation to man. He says that all are valid ways to interpret the Bible.

As for ethos, Lennox is a famous preacher, author, and scientist. He is well known for his book on the same topic as this sermon, Seven Days That Divide the World, as well as his debates with atheists on God’s existence and power.

There was not much pathos in this sermon, as Lennox is mainly relying on logos, and then ethos.

I believe that this sermon was very persuasive. It was good to hear someone addressing the topic of old and new earth in a biblical and scientific way. I also found it interesting that Lennox believes that whichever of these views we prefer isn’t as important as knowing who is the one that made it all, and that He could have made the earth in any length of time.

Comments

Marilyn Monroe's Shampoo

While browsing on Google I found an old advertisement. The ad was for Lustre-Crème Shampoo. It featured Marilyn Monroe, known for her beauteous looks and her parts in different movies. One of her movies was Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Lustre-Crème was attempting to sell their shampoo through the use of fallacies. By saying that Marilyn Monroe that tells you nothing about the actual product: it simply attracts you to the pretty face in the picture. Using this as an argument of why someone should buy your product is quite illogical. Just because Marilyn Monroe uses it doesn’t provide assurance of its abilities. They attempt using snob appeal by trying to make the audience believe that they could be like Marilyn Monroe if they use the same product as her. They use appeal to illegitimate authority by using Marilyn Monroe to promote their product. Although she herself is a customer, this is still rather irrelevant. She herself has no type of expertise in hair products and knows nothing that

Open Happiness

While at the movie theaters to see The Maze Runner , I saw a commercial that featured rhetoric. The commercial begins with a young woman named Jess purchasing two Coca Cola drinks in a convenience store. One has her own name on it, and one has the name of her friend Alisha on it. The cashier watches her forlornly as she leaves, hinting that he has a crush on his customer. Jess gives the Coke with Alisha’s name on it to her friend, and together the two friends drink them. Later, Jess, Alisha and two other friends come back into the store to buy more Coke, then leave and have a good time together. Jess keeps coming back to the store with more and more friends, each time purchasing Coca Cola with their names printed on the labels. The cashier smiles and watches, but it is clear that he wishes he was with Jess. Finally, as the cashier is closing the store for the night, Jess shows up at the door with a Coke that has the name Chris on it. She smiles and hands the drink to the cash

Is Hip Hop a Cancer or a Cure?

The speech I watched was a Ted Talk presented by one of my favorite music artists, who just so happens to be a Christian rapper. This rapper’s name is Lecrae Moore, but he just goes by Lecrae. Over the past five years or so, Lecrae has been able to break out of the small box that Christian music and Christian rap have been put in, and he has been able to get his music out to all types of crowds. So I was actually pretty excited when I saw that he had spoken at a Ted Talk in Nashville. The speech he delivered was titled, “Heroes and Villains: Is Hip-Hop a Cancer or a Cure?” In this speech Lecrae talked about how it is easy to look at certain people in history and label them as heroes or villains, but he talks about how not everyone views historical figures the same. Lecrae started off by defining where we get the words, “Hero” and “Villain”. Knowing the origin of these words really gave good context for what came to follow. He then went on to explain the history of hip-hop. W

Cultural Rhetoric

Search This Blog