text:
BOSTON, MA (RNN) – Inconsistent statements from sources within the Boston bombing investigation may have led to a premature announcement of an arrest.
Federal law enforcement officials, including the FBI, Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney's office in Boston have denied that anyone was arrested. However, officials have identified a suspect.
According to the Associated Press, investigators have an image of the possible suspect, discovered while investigators pored over video and photos from the marathon.
Meanwhile, the FBI canceled a scheduled 5 p.m. press conference.
Earlier Wednesday, CNN cited an anonymous official and went with a report that an arrest had been made in the Boston Marathon bombing. Multiple sources quickly denied it.
"Despite reports to the contrary there has not been an arrest in the Marathon attack," the Boston Police Department tweeted.
The Associated Press amended its report to add that federal officials were denying they were holding anyone suspected of the crime.
AP earlier reported that a suspect was in custody and would be taken to a Boston federal court. Dozens of people began to congregate outside a courthouse in anticipation of the appearance.
CNN's earliest report of a breakthrough Wednesday claimed that an official said analysis of video from the Lord & Taylor department store on Boylston Street played a key role in identifying a possible suspect.
In addition, footage from a local TV station showed a man who appeared to drop a bag in the area of the second blast.
The source called it "substantial progress" in the investigation.
Wiring, a circuit board and remnants of a pressure cooker can be seen in images the FBI released of one of the marathon bomber's devices.
Officials circulated more photos Wednesday. Other things shown in photos released to Reuters included metal BBs fused together, nails, various pieces of unidentified metal, black nylon from a duffel bag and batteries.
Authorities also found the lid to the pressure cooker on the roof of a building near the blast site, according to CNN.
The FBI has repeatedly asked people for help in finding evidence to identify the person or people responsible. Members of the task force said someone may have seen a person carrying an unusually heavy nylon backpack weighted down with a bomb.
"At this time, there are no claims of responsibility," said Rick DesLauriers, FBI agent in charge in Boston. "But this is someone's friend, neighbor, coworker or relative. Someone knows who did this."
Boston area news affiliate WHDH published two viewer photos showing the scene before and after the bombs exploded.
The first picture shows a crowd of people lined up along the race course with a white bag in front of a barricade.
In the second photo, heavily blurred due to its graphic nature, the bag is not present. The viewer said the photos could have been taken an hour or more apart.
CNN reported 100 of the 183 people injured in the Patriots Day attack had been released from hospitals where they received care. At least 13 of the 183 required limb amputations.
A 9-year-old girl and 10-year-old boy were among 17 victims listed in critical condition Wednesday, according to the Associated Press.
In some good news, the AP reports that many of the doctors at area hospitals treating the wounded expect the patients to survive.
According to the Associated Press, Massachusetts General Hospital states 20 of the 31 bombing patients have been released. Tufts Medical Center has released seven of its 14 patients. Brigham Women's Hospital is still treating 12 patients - four of which are in critical condition. The hospital originally treated 35 victims. Boston's Children Hospital treated 10 patients and has released seven. St. Elizabeth, CArney Hospital and Norwood Hospital has released all of their patients.
Three people died when two bombs ignited near the finish line of the marathon at 2:50 p.m. ET Monday.
The third victim was identified Wednesday as Boston University graduate student Lingzi Lu. Krystle Campbell, 29, and 8-year-old Martin Richard were also killed.
Martin's mother, father and sister were injured by the blast as well.
"My dear son Martin has died from injuries sustained in the attack on Boston," his father, Bill Richard, said in a statement. "My wife and daughter are both recovering from serious injuries. We thank our family and friends, those we know and those we have never met, for their thoughts and prayers"
Campbell and Karen Rand were waiting for a friend to cross the finish line when the explosion happened. According to CNN, Campbell's family was initially told by Massachusetts General that she had survived, but it turned out Rand had been mistaken for her.
Her mother spoke from the family's home Tuesday.
"She was a wonderful person and everybody that knew her loved her," Patty Campbell said. "She loved her dogs. She had a heart of gold."
Boston-area public safety unions offered a $50,000 reward for information on the attack.
An interfaith service to honor the victims has been scheduled for Thursday in the city. President Barack Obama is expected to be in attendance.
Obama called the bombing an act of terror when he spoke Tuesday. He reasserted his pledge to bring those responsible to justice, as well as crediting people for rallying to help the victims.
"If you want to know who we are, who America is, how we respond to evil - that's it. Selflessly, compassionately, unafraid," he added.
According to AP, Massachusetts General said 12 of the 31 people who came in from the bombing remain under care Wednesday morning. Beth Israel still has 13 of the 24 people sent there.
Boston Medical Center has 19 of its 23 bombing patients still being treated, including a 5-year-old boy in critical condition, but all are expected to survive.
Brigham and Women's Hospital still has 15 of its original 31 patients, and reported five are in critical condition. Boston Children's has three remaining of its original 10 patients, and Tufts Medical Center has released half of its 14 patients, AP reported.
Police ask anyone with information to call 1-800-494-TIPS. Anyone looking for information on loved ones can call 617-635-4500.
Copyright 2013 Raycom News Network. All rights reserved.


text:
How Did I Find Myself Here? CD
More Information
The Dream Syndicate – How Did I Find Myself Here? CD
Track list:
- Filter Me Through You
- Glide
- Out of My Head
- 80 West
- Like Mary
- The Circle
- How Did I Find Myself Here
- ?Kendra's Dream
This purchase includes a digital download of the album. You will be emailed a link to access your download shortly after purchase.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
CNBC — Licence Requirements and How To Receive Us
To receive CNBC in any commercial environment requires a viewing licence, which can only be purchased directly via ourselves (i.e. we are not part of any "business package" a cable or satellite operator may offer).
All commercial premises will need to have satellite receiver equipment installed in order to receive CNBC. If you already have this in place correctly positioned to receive CNBC (our B2B team or any independent installation company could advise on this), we would simply offer you a viewing licence for your commercial premises, and for UK viewers, a decoder card as the signal is encrypted.
In the UK, no cable operator has the rights to deliver CNBC to any commercial premises.
In Europe, it may be more convenient to receive CNBC via your local cable operator, who will charge a small technical delivery charge. However, a viewing licence must still be purchased directly via ourselves.
Again our B2B team would be happy to advise on local operators who carry CNBC.
Commercial rate-card details can be obtained from the B2B team at CNBC in EMEA as follows, who would be happy to discuss your requirements with you:
CNBC B2B team
44 20 7653 9462
PLEASE NOTE: The distribution of CNBC in any commercial environment (office/hotel) requires a commercial viewing licence, which can only be purchased via CNBC B2B Services.


text:
|About Us
Vizzed is an all around gaming website dedicated to offering you the greatest gaming community as well as the greatest selection of online retro games on the web!
The goal of the Vizzed Board message board is to give people of all ages and locations a family-friendly community in which users can comfortably socialize with each other without the risk of being insulted, disrespected or attacked. Vizzed Board is a safe community and would never endorse anything that may harm any individual personally or their computer (which is why vizzed is spyware, adware and virus free).
The goal of the Retro Game Room was to not only offer free gaming to children and adults who cannot afford it but to also preserve these retro classics in hopes that they will not be forgotten and given the recognition they deserve.
|Affiliates and External Links
YouTube Channels
Twitch Channels
Other Sites
Vizzed was founded and created by David Auchampach (aka Davideo7) and is currently the only developer of the site. Most of the features, ideas, functionality and graphics are developed by him.
Vizzed Board forum is custom made software which is based on the Acmlm Board software. While the Acmlm Board software use to make up the majority of the Vizzed Board forum code, now it only makes up a small portion of the overall code. All other portions of the site have been made 100% by Davideo7 (which includes the Retro Game Room).
Although the majority of the site has been developed by Davideo7, throughout the years many other developers have contributed in various ways. These developers include:
JigSaw, BigBob85, Randy53215, Fragg3r, Acmlm, Emuz, Jesper, etc...
If you feel that you haven't been properly credited, please contact Davideo7
For information on the site features and who created what, please refer to the Terminology and Features page.
|General Disclaimer
Vizzed Retro Game Room (and retro toon room)
-All the games in the Retro Game Room are no longer being sold or distributed and it is assumed that they are all a form of Abandonware.
-Vizzed owns a physical copy of many of the digital copied games in the Retro Game Room, especially potential copyright violations.
-When playing the games on Vizzed, you are 'renting' a digital copy of each game and will not have the ability to download the game to your machine.
-Vizzed does not sell any software which Vizzed does not fully own nor does Vizzed condone that sort of act.
-Vizzed will remove any copyright violations upon request AND proof that the game is a violation.
-All of the games are free to play and although they cost Viz (site currency), Viz is also free and easy to earn (this helps reduce the costly bandwidth usage).
-Your save file of each game will be available for as long as vizzed is available or until you've deleted it or overwrote it.
Vizzed Board
Vizzed is a free community dedicated to gamers world wide. Vizzed is free but allows users to donate money which goes toward server fees and future features.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the legalities of this site, PM Davideo7, the owner of Vizzed.
|Privacy Policy
Vizzed strongly respects your privacy. All information collected at Vizzed will be kept strictly confidential and will not be sold, resued, or rented in any way. Any information we collect, such as operating systems, screen resolution and browser types are used to help make your visit more enjoyable.
Third Party Advertising
We use third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our web site. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address or telephone number) about your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements on this site and other sites about goods and services that may be of interest to you.
Third Party Cookies
In the course of serving advertisements to this site, our third-party advertiser may place or recognize a unique cookie on your browser.
External Links
Vizzed contains links to other sites and file downloads from other sites. We are not responsible for the privacy practices or content of such web sites.
If you have any questions about this privacy policy, please feel free to contact Davideo7, the owner of Vizzed.
Exponential Interactive
Exponential Interactive, Inc, as our partner, have a legitimate interest to collect and profile personal data in the form of IP address and cookie ID from users on our website in order to provide targeted online advertising and ad measurement. For more det ails including opt - out requests, access requests or complaints, please review their or contact their data protection officer via .
|History of Vizzed and Davideo7
Early 1998: David Auchampach (age 12) finally gets full access to a computer when his family get their first computer. David Auchampach gets into RPG Maker 95 and starts to make an internet presence by the name of Davideo77.
Around 1999: Davideo77 (around the age of 14) finds and posts on his very first message board forum on telefragged.com which is a forum dedicated to final fantasy. Davideo77 posts like a little newb but loves the concept of a message board and dreams of having his own site and forum some day.
Sometime in around 2000: Davideo77 becomes Davideo7. Originally he created an account with hotmail in around 2000 which was and than he made an email with yahoo around the same time but for some reason was unavailable so he got stuck with davideo77 and went by that name for a few months until he noticed was suddenly available. He does end up going by both Davideo7 and Davideo77 for a while.
Early 2000: Davideo7 makes a website with Homestead but ditches it within a month
Around 2001: Davideo7 makes a Geocities website dedicated to RPG Maker and Final Fantasy called 'Viz Video Games'. He also uses it to display his RPG Maker 95 games, primarily 'Fanisters Island'.
Late 2001: Davideo7 is referred to Stifu's Board by his personal friend DNG and Davideo7 becomes in love with the board and becomes an active member. (that wasn't my original user picture, the shenmue picture I was linking to changed after a few years)
Late 2001: Davideo7 discovers the original 'Acmlm's Board' from Stifu's board and becomes an active member there. (again, that user picture wasn't my original picture)
Early 2002 (or possibly late 2001): Davideo7 created 'Viz Board' and invites his personal friends to post on it. Davideo7 originally wanted to get an acmlm board but lack of knowledge and inability to get the board engine resulted into him setting up an ezboard. Known members from that board who also have accounts on this board: DudeNamedGlenn (DNG on vizzed board), greenlight30 (Cid on vizzed board) and el nino ninja (Mike on vizzed board). Captain Koga (aka Koga) was also an active member on that board and was an active member in the vizzed board community until around 2003 (he never made it to this board but posted on the last vizzed board)
2002: The very first Vizzed Board is created (but doesn't have it's own domain name, instead I use the same domain from the crappy hosting company I was going thru at the time known as rcthost). After many months of becoming a well known member in the Acmlm Board community, Acmlm himself finally grants me the permission to use his board engine (at that time only a few were priveleged with getting their hands on it). A lot of the board's members were either personal friends, friends from acmlm's board, or members from eponick's board (his board went down for a very long time and I was an active member on his board and told the members about my board and they came to my board to post until his board went back up).
2003: With the help of Jake-A-Roonie, Vizzed gets its own domain name. I was to young to purchase one (17) so I sent him money over paypal and he purchased it for me with his credit card.
2003: Davideo7s well know RPG Maker 95 site goes up which helps draw in a ton of the board's traffic.
Late 2003: Someone hacks Vizzed Board and destroys all posts and members by uploading a PHP file using the upload feature and dropping the tables in the database.
Late 2003: Vizzed Board 2 is created (aka 'The Previous Vizzed Board'). The previous Vizzed Board is still available and completely viewable Here A lot of the members who are from that board are on this board as well, just take a look at the Memberlist
Late 2004 (5 years ago): Randy suggests that Vizzed Board transfer to the new Acmlm Board engine. Davideo7 agrees which results into everything starting over and members having to register again. That new Vizzed Board is this Vizzed Board. Many complained (primarily Cid and Lowell) about having to start over and because of that, Davideo7 promised to never let a reset on posts and users happen again.
Mid 2005: After the board was incredibly active, it goes into an on and off drought for a few years.
2007: Board is probably deadest its every been, a few days during the summer it went over 24 hours without a single post.
2008: Get-Your-Rom is created by Davideo7 and JigSaw. It also helps draw in new activity to Vizzed Board
Early 2009: Retro Game Room is added and floods of activity is generated.
Throughout 2009: Davideo7 spends hundreds of hours working on the Retro Game Room. Also spends many many hours adding new features.
Summer 2009: Biggest Vizzed Board war starts and ends. The results: a few members leaving and never coming back and the board losing a lot of activity temporarily. (please don't ask me about this, I don't want to bring up past problems so therefore I will not further discuss this).
Fall 2009: Vizzed Board gets its new developer, Jigsaw, which helps add features to Vizzed Board.
Late 2009: Vizzed Board Retro Game Room exceeds expectations and brings the total traffic of ex3mer.com to be over 3,000+ unique visitors per a day. At this point, the board's activity is also great.
Early 2010: An agreement made between Davideo7 and JigSaw leaves Davideo7 again as the only developer. RGR receives a few new systems including N64 and GBA. Vizzed also receives a ton of new features.
Summer 2010: Vizzed exceeds 10,000 unique visitors per a day, the 1000s of hours gone into development and the 100s of hours gone into advertising were well spent, especially seeing how much vizzed has positively benefited many lives.
|Site Info
ex3mer.com © was created, designed, coded by & is property of:
David Auchampach
All Rights Reserved 2002 - 2015
Powered By: Vizzed Board, Acmlm Board and Adeon Dev.
|Affiliates: - -
Page rendered in 0.229 seconds.


text:
Events Calendar
Healthy U Holiday Bazaar
Make holiday shopping stress-free! Grab your gifts right on campus at the Healthy U Holiday Bazaar!
Date: December 5, 2019 - December 5, 2019
Time: 11 a.m. - 2 p.m.
Location: Campus Center Mainstage
Hosted by the Healthy U Committee
The holidays are just around the corner and Healthy U wants to help! The Holiday Bazaar features more than a dozen vendors who will be in the Campus Center Mainstage from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. Vendors include:
- Colorstreet Nail Polish Strips
- Friends of AbrePuertas
- Jackie's Jam & Jellies
- JM Parks
- KMBoutique
- Mary Kay Cosmetics
- Morning Star Quilts
- Prima Popcorn
- Purple Maze
- Sandie's Creative Crafts
- Tasteful Additions - Oils
- Tasteful Additions – Jewelry
- The Bag Lady
- Wood and Grayce
- Jean Foos-Sherry, selling her children's Christmas book, Santa and the Toy Nurse
*Cash, check and credit cards will be accepted.
Happy Shopping and Happy Holidays!!


text:
Things That Cannot Be Shaken
- K. Scott Oliphint and Rod Mays Authors
- 2008 10 Jun
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is an excerpt from Things That Cannot Be Shaken by K. Scott Oliphint and Rod Mays (Crossway).
Chapter One: Says Who?
He Whose Word Cannot Be Broken
Glorious things of thee are spoken,
Zion, city of our God!
He, whose word cannot be broken,
Form'd thee for his own abode.
On the Rock of Ages founded,
What can shake thy sure repose?
With salvation's walls surrounded,
Thou may'st smile at all thy foes.
The Question of Authority
Today's young adults face some special challenges.1 Whatever the proper label—whether postmodern, postconservative, or posteverything—the ideas and beliefs of popular culture have so inundated life in this world that such ideas and beliefs can all too easily become a natural part of our thinking and living. A college student on a typical campus today has learned the cultural drill well: "Doubt everything taught by anyone; submit your ideas to no authority." To fail to doubt is to fail to be heard. Perhaps no demographic in the history of our country has been fed a daily diet so heavy in tolerance and inclusiveness and so light in truth as these newer generations have. Any form of authority exists to be challenged, ignored, and likely rejected. To accept the ultimate authority of any person, document, or institution is to be bigoted, intolerant, unloving, and self-righteous.
The conventional wisdom dictates that we view the drama of life played out around us with a combination of cynicism, skepticism, and suspicion. In a context of such confusion, it is hard to convince oneself of what is real, or really important. We have been taught to take hold of our own destinies and to create our own reality. In far too many cases, we have attempted to do exactly this—and seen disastrous results.
The newer generations living in the twenty-first century have never known what life is like without television or videocas-sette/CD/DVD recorders or TiVO. Because of technology, we can, at least in some sense, "create" the reality we desire. It is now possible, for example, to program electronic screens with what we want to see when we want to see it. We can use pre-selected iPod tunes as the soundtrack for our lives. This has the double effect of, on the one hand, creating the feelings and ambience we desire, and on the other hand, letting the rest of the world go by.
In this kind of environment, many of the new generation say they believe in Christianity, that they trust God and his Word, but become tongue-tied, embarrassed, or defensive when their beliefs are questioned or challenged. Not only so, the notion of a universal authority that applies to one and all is almost completely foreign to the contemporary context. The authority of Christ and his Word is acceptable at the personal level perhaps, but it is almost a foregone conclusion that it cannot be applied to everyone.
Not too long ago, a group of students (twenty-somethings) gathered for a Bible study. The speaker had spent a fair amount of time discussing the authority and truth of the Bible with these self-professed Christian believers. Near the end of the meeting, group members began to ask questions: But what about the Koran? What about the Book of Mormon? How do the findings of numerology or "historical facts" contained in other ancient documents affect the authority of the Bible? Is there really only one way to God? Are not all religions just different ways of saying the same thing? Why should we believe the Bible's claims over the claims of other religions? There seems to be a significant gap in the ability of most today to synthesize the truth of the Bible with what we see around us. Because of this inability, the Bible is reduced to the level of helpful personal advice and inspirational thought.
The problem posed in reconciling biblical truth with apparent contradictions in experience, of course, is the problem of authority. This problem is not a new one. And the questions that come today have their central focus in the question of truth and authority. The focus of the question may change in different periods of history, but the basic question is always the same: To whom or what should I ultimately submit? How can I know what is true and what is not?
Authority's Sources
It may come as no surprise to students of history, especially the history of thought, that in today's confused climate two primary views on the source of truth or authority emerge. People seem either to believe that truth is what makes them feel good and works best with their experience (which is sometimes labeled "empiricism") or that truth is what makes sense to them objectively and intellectually (which is sometimes labeled "rationalism"). Are either of these approaches acceptable in developing and nurturing a system of truth and a notion of authority?
If It Feels Good . . .
Empiricism is, by definition, the obtaining of knowledge through the senses, or through experience. Right experiences will bring an understanding of truth—or so we think. These experiences, both emotional and physical, are often defined by the popular media that inundate today's generation, including music, television, film, and poetry. Media of this kind can create an ambience of authority because they tell stories in ways that are appealing. In music, the stories are told with a particular mood or beat, making them easy to remember and repeat. In television or film, they are told with images, visual art and effects, and musical score, all of which combine to capture imaginations and promote ideas and worldviews. In most cases, however, the stories told, the images produced, and the effects desired have their sources in just another human emotion, experience, or desire. It can be tempting to commit oneself to a particular song's or movie's "message." But these messages themselves only go as deep as the individual(s) who produced them.
If history teaches us anything, it is that human beings are not particularly good at defining their own happiness. We are not adept at articulating clearly what it is we really want. Some of what we think we want may be good; we may think what we want is simply the absence of conflict with other humans or the absence of conflict within ourselves. But even if these goals are good ones, the solutions offered may not be. Remedies offered for getting rid of these conflicts—things like more money, more time, fewer responsibilities, more autonomy, or maybe just the ability to have the ultimate makeover (of home, hair, teeth, or brain)—are all supposed to provide what we need. If they provide for our needs producing less conflicted lives, they must give us truth.
In keeping with the empirical, some may base their lives on what they "feel" like doing at any given time. They may not feel like going to class, or studying, or going to work. In seeking to orchestrate the right feelings, we may seek to change the atmosphere (music, entertainment, activity), the location (new city, new apartment, new bed), the vocation or the surrounding family (spouse, parents, siblings), and friends (new significant other, new group, or new church). Change may create a sense of busyness and thus a distraction from reality, an escape from the everyday grind, and an illusion of self-created happiness.
But isn't distraction really just a means of escape? We turn up the music and get lost in the melody and the words, hoping that the pain and negative feelings pass. Movies, concerts, and sporting events provide the opportunity to be caught up in the excitement of the crowd and carried along by our feelings for a little while. Enjoying music and attending sporting events certainly are not wrong. What is troublesome is when we expect these things to deliver the right feelings and thus to be a source of truth or authority.
I Think, Therefore . . .
Rationalism is knowledge or belief gained through reasoning. The fields of philosophy, science, and mathematics have long been the strongholds for rationalistic thought. This is mirrored in a perverse view of man's creativity and intellectual superiority in which such things are to be the source of truth and authority. Concepts that don't make sense to "the experts" are too easily and quickly rejected in today's culture, fostering the opinion, "I am right because I trust the experts on 'x.'" Educational credentials often become the sole basis for credibility. But educational credentials have their own agenda. Biblical teachings such as creation or miracles have been ruled out-of-bounds in much of academia.
Many questions from the disciplines of philosophy, science, and mathematics are designed to evoke a skeptical view of Christianity: "If there is a god, why are there not more positive miraculous occurrences and fewer calamities?"; "Why is there so much evil in the world if God is good?"; "Why would you put your trust in someone as narrow-minded as Jesus?" There are no philosophical, scientific, or mathematical formulae that can answer such questions. In a context of rationalism, this means that the questions themselves are designed to show thenaiveté or irrelevance of religion. Raising the dead by a spoken word, rather than heroic, scientifically-based medical means is not an activity science has any real interest in affirming.
Authority's Author
So how does the Christian respond to these challenges? How do we think about the empirical and the rational? How do we think about events recorded in the Bible when science disagrees? How do we think about the conflicts between Scripture and culture, or Scripture and philosophy, or Scripture and science, or . . . ? How do we face these difficulties and work through them in light of our Christian commitment and in light of God's word?
If the tendency is to approach Scripture as inspirational reading, is it possible to view it as an absolute authority? To speak of the Bible's authority is to be perceived as being intolerant, which is seen as the mark of the simpleminded and unintelligent. Above all, today's generations seek to be open and teachable and loving. Jesus' words of exclusivity do not fit with the rational, reasoned voices calling for freedom in religious practice. It doesn't seem right or wise to speak openly about a religion that states there is only one way to God or that there is only one God. It just doesn't seem to make sense.
But doesn't the notion of "making sense" itself have its own cultural, philosophical, and scientific bias? Does it make sense that God would part a sea to allow an entire nation to walk through on dry ground? Does it make sense that out of all the stars and planets, our one solar system supports human life and is the recipient of his grace? Does it make sense that Jesus, who is divine, would take a human body and suffer physical pain? Does it make sense that God's incredible range of creativity in plants and flowers and animals was given for man's enjoyment? These things do not make sense to our rational or empirical processes. It is no wonder, then, that students ask why the Koran, the Book of Mormon, or the writings of Buddha or Confucius don't hold just as much authority as the Bible.
Jesus and Authority
For the Christian, the question is, why should I stake my life and hope on the Christ of the Bible? Those who investigate the validity of Scientology, Christian Science, Ellen White and the Seventh Day Adventists, or groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses, have addressed the question of the authority of the Bible. The question is as old as history itself; it dates back to the Garden of Eden and extends through the New Testament. An incident at the initiation of Jesus' public ministry will help us to focus the issue:
Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased" (Luke 3:21-22).
When Jesus Christ began his public ministry, he was declared by his heavenly Father to be his "beloved Son." This announcement did not escape the notice of the powers of darkness. Almost immediately after the Father announced his good pleasure in his Son, Jesus "was led by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil . . ." (Luke 4:1-2).
How did the devil begin his temptation? He wanted Jesus to give him proof that he was the Son of God. The question the devil was asking was the question of truth and authority. He wanted to know how he could know that Jesus was God's only begotten Son. He wanted to know if it was true that Jesus was the Christ. So, he approached Jesus with three "opportunities"—three temptations through which Jesus could show the devil, and show him conclusively, that he was the One the Father proclaimed him to be. The devil gives Jesus three different offers. Two of the three are a demand for proof that Jesus was the Son of God, as the Father had said. Notice,
"If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread" (Luke 4:3).
And he took him to Jerusalem and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here . . ." (Luke 4:9).
One way to think about this temptation in the wilderness is to see it as a challenge by Satan to Jesus. Satan demands that Jesus provide, to his satisfaction, the ground for truth and authority. The devil was confronted with God himself, in his Son. But that was not enough; the devil wanted proof, and so he demanded, "Show me."
In that light, it is important for us to ask: "How did Jesus respond to the devil's requests?" How did Jesus "show" the devil that he was who God the Father proclaimed him to be? Surely if Jesus is God he could have easily turned stones into bread. He could have thrown himself down from the pinnacle of the temple without harm. But he didn't.
Instead, Jesus turned the devil's attention not to himself, but to God, and specifically to what God had said in his Word. In response to the challenge of authority, Jesus quoted Scripture. In response to the temptation to turn stones into bread, Jesus said, "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone'" (Luke 4:4). Why did Jesus respond this way? The devil wasn't asking about how we are to live or about whether one can live by bread alone. The devil wanted Jesus to do something that no mere mortal could do. Did Jesus just dodge the challenge he was given? No, he didn't.
Jesus responds this way because he knows that the devil's challenge will not be answered if Jesus performs some powerful act. The devil's problem is not that he has failed to see God act in miraculous ways. The devil's problem is the problem that plagues all who will not bow the knee to Christ; it is that he will not believe what God has said.
There was a similar temptation given many years before this one, as it turns out, by the same tempter. It was a temptation given not in the wilderness, but in a lush and plenteous garden:
Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" (Gen. 3:1).
The devil does not come to Eve to tell her to disobey, at least not at first. He comes to Eve so that he might get her to question the word of God. And he tempts her by asking a question that is close to the truth, but is actually a denial of it. God had not said that Adam and Eve could not eat from any tree; he had said that there was one particular tree from which they were not to eat. The devil knew that. His question was not one of curiosity. His question was designed to get Eve, and Adam after her, to disobey. And he succeeded.
When Jesus is tempted in the wilderness, he knows that the devil's design is to get him to stop trusting what God has said. So, instead of arguing with the devil about Jesus' own powers, Jesus replies to the devil in a way that shows that he is trusting what God has said. Even though he has been in the wilderness for forty days, and even though he is hungry, he knows, because God has said, that his life is not defined by what he eats. It is defined by the "spiritual" food of God's Word. God had already said, "You are my beloved Son." No more proof was needed.
Here is Jesus, the perfect Son of God. If anyone could trust his own experience, it was Jesus. He could have been a perfect empiricist. If anyone could trust his own thinking, it was Jesus. He could have been a perfect rationalist. His experiences and his thinking were never affected by sin. They were perfect. But unlike us, though Jesus could have trusted himself, he didn't. He trusted God's Word alone.
Now, the question we must ask is, whom do you trust? Do you trust your own experience to guide you into all truth? Do you trust your own mind to give you all that is necessary for this life and the next? Or do you trust "every word that comes from the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4)? Do you want to put your faith in yourself? Or would you rather put your faith in one in whom millions, for over two thousand years, have trusted, not only for their "spiritual food" in this life, but in the life to come as well?
The Authority of the Son
We have been discussing the problems unique to a "new" generation of people—people who have grown up in a context in which truth is supposed to be confined to each individual or group and in which the notion of authority, if applied at all, is meant to always be up for debate.
But, as we have been hinting all along, the problems that seem unique to this generation are not unique at all. Though contexts and concerns have varied over the centuries, the issues have not varied. They have remained relatively uniform throughout history.
Around two thousand years ago, there was a small but significant group of Hebrew Christians who were struggling with many of the same issues that we have been discussing.
The contexts, of course, were different. We should not expect that the issues faced by first-century Hebrew Christians would conform exactly to those faced by twenty-first-century folk. Though the contexts in which the Hebrews struggled and lived were different, the contours of their struggle were, at significant points, coincident with ours.
One of the occasions for writing the epistle to the Hebrews was that issues of truth and authority—issues that this group of Jewish Christians had, in the past, addressed by its strong commitment to Christ—were now under suspicion.
The Jewish people had a rich and deep tradition. It was a tradition that has no equal in history. As we write this, the United States has just celebrated another July 4. That date is set aside to mark the beginning of a new nation, now more than 230 years old. But 230 years, though it may seem like a long history, is merely a blink compared to the history of Israel.
Unlike any other nation on the face of the earth, God himself worked mightily and miraculously for the sake of Israel. In the United States, debates have swirled around the question as to whether God was "on our side" in various conflicts and wars. But there was no need for such debates in Israel. God had declared to Israel that he was on their side (see Gen. 17:8; Jer. 24:7; 31:33; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 37:23, 27; Zech. 8:8).
But, as is often the case, Israel's strength became her weakness. One of the things that plagued the Hebrew community to which this epistle was written was that it was in danger of letting its rich and deep traditions eclipse the truth.
Throughout history, the people of God had lived out their relationship to God by way of relying on God's appointed messengers. In some instances, those messengers were angels (see Gen. 19:1-22; 28:12; Ps. 91:11). In others, the chosen messenger of the Lord was Moses (see the book of Exodus). In still others, Israel was to live out its relationship to God according to the appointed Levitical priesthood (see Deut. 17:9, 18; 18:1; 24:8; 27:9; Josh. 3:3; 8:33; 2 Chron. 5:5, 12; 23:18; Jer. 33:18, 21-26; Ezek. 43:19; 44:15; Heb. 7:11).
To rely on these messengers, as God's appointed messengers, was not sinful; indeed, a lack of trust in these messengers would have been tantamount to a lack of trust in God. God had appointed them for various tasks, at various times in history. As appointed by God to serve him, they were also meant to be trusted with the tasks God had given them.
Part of the problem that the author to the Hebrews had to address was the confusion that had set in since Jesus Christ had come. Those messengers that were at one time and place the chosen vehicles for God's purposes for his people had now been, once and for all time, replaced by Christ himself.
Yet some were still tempted to put their confidence in lesser things—things that were, in themselves, not sinful, but were nevertheless not meant to be the "focus or locus" of their confidence and trust. These Christians had mistaken the instrument through which God's truth and authority came with that truth and authority itself.
And now we can begin to see that the problems immediately addressed in the book of Hebrews are problems that relate to our twenty-first-century predicaments. We should expect no less, since God has seen fit to give us, in his Word, principles that are applicable across the historical spectrum. We will look at these principles in the opening verses of this epistle:
Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs (Heb. 1:1-4).
Notice how abruptly the author begins this epistle. Compared to so many other epistles in Scripture, where Paul, for example, will first introduce himself, this epistle stands out as unique. It is so unique that many surmise that this letter was a sermon preached and then written to these Jewish Christians.
There were serious problems in this community of Christian Hebrews. The people were in danger of drifting away from the faith and of neglecting the salvation that had come to them (2:1-3); their disobedience was about to get the best of them, even as it had their forefathers in the wilderness (chapter 4); they were immature, not because they were recent converts (by this time, they should have been teachers), but because they had become dull of hearing (5:11-12). They still needed spiritual milk and were not prepared for solid food. So serious was their immaturity that some were in danger of irretrievably losing the salvation they had previously claimed to have (6:1-20). So, the author writes this word of encouragement (13:22) to bring about a repentance unto life.
It should strike us, therefore, that the author begins not with a personal introduction or even with a direct response to these serious problems, but with an acknowledgment of the rich and deep tradition of God's dealings with his people.
We should not pass over the first verse too quickly. The author is quick to point out that God indeed spoke to his people in various ways and at different times. The Hebrew Christians who received this epistle had not been wrong about their own tradition (at least not initially). They were right to see God's use of angels, and of Moses, and of the Levitical priests as important aspects of his relationship to them. The problem was not with the instruments of God's revelation through history. The problem was that some among them now wanted those instruments to become the ultimate source and ground of truth and authority for them. They had misplaced their notion of truth and of authority. Sound familiar?
We discussed the two primary sources of authority and truth that are often put forth: the senses (empiricism) and the mind (rationalism). These are not sources that have been chosen by God as messengers of his special revelation. But we, like this group of Hebrews, have mistaken these good and necessary instruments for ultimate sources or grounds of truth.
The question of authority is one that, perhaps now more than in times past, occupies center stage in much of contemporary discussion. Whatever postmodernism's identity, one of its abiding tenets was first set forth by Jean-François Lyotard and is contained in his (in)famous phrase that the postmodern condition is marked by an "incredulity toward metanarratives." This phrase is not as opaque as it may at first seem. Lyotard's point was simply that there should be no overarching and overriding principle or system (a metanarrative) that would determine the shape and direction of what we claim to know and believe. To put it another way, we are to reject such universal principles or systems. This has the effect of destroying any principle or system that would unify otherwise disparate beliefs or "truths." It also has the effect of assuring that there is no universal authoritative principle or system that applies to our own set of beliefs and practices.
Under the influence of this tenet, the question of truth and authority becomes paramount. I may decide that truth for me is whatever I can practice without causing personal harmful consequences. If I can sit at my computer and access illegal material without harming anyone, then it must be that such material is "true" for me; it is a legitimate understanding of "reality" for me. There can be no constraints against my actions; no authority that can hinder them. If I can engage in relationships that are personally satisfying to all involved, then such relationships must be "true" for us all. To paraphrase one postmodern, "Truth is whatever I can get away with." It is simply a matter of personal taste based on personal preference and practice.
Whatever it was that plagued these Hebrews, the author wants to make sure that his readers get the truth and authority matter settled before anything else can be addressed (and there is much more, as we will see, that needs to be addressed). The same is true for us (and for this book). Unless we settle the matter of authority first, we will be forever confused and confounded with the issues that press in on us every day. We may be able to live with the decisions we make on a daily basis; we may even be able to find others who are living with the same confusion. But "living with" such decisions and beliefs is only a way of avoiding what we know to be true. It is only a thin shield, able to mask and cover the reality that is deep within us.
What is it, then, that we need to know about God's authority and truth? What is itthat will solidify us, that will plant us firmly, so that we will not be confused and tossed about by every new idea that comes to us? It is the same thing that these Hebrews needed to know. It is that, though God chose various means of revealing himself to his people throughout history, all of those means were simply channels, rivers, and tributaries of God's revelation, flowing toward and leading inexorably to that great ocean of final revelation that God has given to us in his Son.
This is the first point to understand. God has spoken in Christ. Or, as the author of Hebrews puts it more pointedly, God has spoken (literally) "in a Son." The reason that the author writes this way ("in a Son" rather than "in the Son") is not to highlight that Christ is a Son among many sons. Given everything else that the author says about Christ in these few verses, the point he is making is a categorical one. In past times, God did speak through appointed means—"by prophets." But now, God has revealed himself by means of a completely different category of revelation; now he is revealed "by Son."
The Hebrews would have seen the tremendous import of this categorical shift. It was a shift that was declaring those former means of revelation to be past their time of usefulness. It was a shift from using human and temporary means of revelation to God now using himself as the final mode of revelation to his people.
Note also how the author frames the temporal categories. This revelation, "by Son," is the completion of a long history of God's revelation to his people. As completing God's revelation, the Son is in continuity with what God had done in the past, but is also uniquely discontinuous with what God had done previously. God spoke "long ago" or (as it could also be translated) "for a long time" at various times and in various ways "by the prophets." Here the author acknowledges the history of God's revelation to his people.
It is worth noticing in this opening chapter of Hebrews just how the author chooses to cite Old Testament references. Even though he quotes from Deuteronomy, 2 Samuel, and the Psalms, he is not concerned to note the human instruments God used to write these works. Rather, he notes in every case that this is what God says (1:5-13). In each case, the author states that God said these things. This is God speaking (through different human instruments) "long ago" at various times and in various ways. He then connects that history with the revelation that has come in the Son. This is its continuity.
More significant, however, is the way in which the author highlights the radical discontinuity between this diverse way of God revealing himself and the now climactic revelation that has come in Christ. The revelation that has come in the Son has come "in these last days." But just exactly why are these days "the last?"
The answer to that question points us again to God's revelation. The reason these days are the last days, is because God's last revelation has been given. The "days" of God's calendar are, in other words, defined not first of all by their length or their number on a calendar. The days of God are defined by the kind or category of revelation that he gives at a particular time in history.
To put the matter another way, if these days were not the last, then there would necessarily be another, and more, revelation that God would give in history. Not only so, but the clear implication would be, from what the author says, that the revelation given "in a Son" was itself insufficient and incomplete; more, better, and clearer revelation would still be needed.
But the logic of the author's argument in these first few, magnificently rich verses is striking in its opposition to such an idea. This Son, in whom God has now lastly spoken, is "the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature." It would be difficult to find a more exalted description of Christ. The two phrases, "the radiance of the glory of God" and "the exact imprint of his nature," are meant to say virtually the same thing in two different ways.
Students of the Bible will readily recognize echoes of the beginning of the Gospel of John in our passage. This should not be surprising, since, in spite of the different contexts and concerns of the author to the Hebrews and the apostle John, God authored both books. So, after John clearly sets forth the fact that the second person of the Trinity, the Word, is himself God (John 1:1), lest there be any mistake, he asserts, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14).
This Word, who is God, came down to dwell among us. And this One who came was not only the Word, he was the Son. John then recalls the time when he, with Peter and James, was given the opportunity, on the mountain, to see this Son in his eternal glory (Matt. 17:1-13, Mark 9:1-8). He recounts this event in the context of his declaration that the Word dwelt among us to emphasize that the dwelling with us in no way eliminated the great truth that this Word was God. His glory was "as of the only Son from the Father." The glory that John saw was "the radiance of the glory of God." It pointed to the fact that this Word, this Son, remained, even as he dwelt among us, "the exact imprint" of God's very nature.
These Hebrew Christians would have understood that the glory of which the author spoke was the very glory of God—his shekinah presence with his people (see Ex. 24:15-18) that was now revealed in the Son.
Is it any wonder, then, that the revelation that has now been given in the Son is the final and completed revelation from God? If that revelation was not only "in the Son" but was, in fact, God himself revealing himself, is it even possible that there might be more, better, or clearer revelation to come in history? How could there be an expectation of "more" or "better" when the highest and exalted One himself has condescended to reveal himself to us? Wouldn't any other revelation pale in comparison to the revelation that we have in the very Son of God himself, especially since this Son is the radiance of Yahweh's glory and the exact imprint of his nature?
But notice that the author of Hebrews is not only concerned that we understand clearly who this Son is. That is crucial. But just as crucial is that we understand that the revelation that has come to us in the Son has not come simply and only in his person, but (and this is all-important for our purposes) God has spoken to us in this Son. The author is not concerned simply with Christ as personal revelation, but he is primarily concerned (in this passage) to emphasize that God has spoken to us in this One who is "true God of true God."
In other words, it is the Person of the Word of God as he gives to his church the written Word of God that is paramount in the author's mind. The point his readers need to see, as do we, is that God has spoken through this final and complete revelation of himself in his Son.
This Son, through whom God has finally and lastly spoken, is the one who, having made purification of sins, "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high." There is no more exalted view of the authority of God to a Hebrew mind than this. To sit at God's right hand is to have all the authority of God himself. It is to be God himself in his sovereign capacity to reign (Pss. 60:5; 63:8; Matt. 26:64; Acts 2:33-34; 7:55; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Rev. 5:1, 7). So important is this to the author that he places the thought at strategic places in his letter (see Heb. 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2). He wants his readers to understand that this Son who has spoken has been given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18).
The "truth" question and the "authority" question are all summed up in the Person. That much is clear. But for the church in "these last days," the issues of truth and authority are summed up in the written Word of the Son in Holy Scripture. The truth of God and the authority of God are summed up in what God has spoken in his Son.
Has God Said?
But questions linger—questions that relate specifically to our current predicament. If God has spoken, how can we know such a thing? Don't we need the foundation of our senses, or our mental faculties, or both, to know that God has spoken? And if our senses and mental faculties are subject to so many variables, how can they be trusted to give us anything but probability?
In Charles Dickens's classic tale, A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge meets the spirit of his old business partner, Jacob Marley, for the first time, seven years after Marley's death. But Scrooge is initially skeptical:
"You don't believe in me," observed the Ghost. "I don't," said Scrooge.
"What evidence would you have of my reality, beyond that
of your senses?"
"I don't know," said Scrooge.
"Why do you doubt your senses?"
"Because," said Scrooge, "a little thing affects them. A slight
disorder of the stomach makes them cheats. You may be an
undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a
fragment of an underdone potato. There's more of gravy than
of grave about you, whatever you are!"
We all know that our senses and our mental faculties, no matter how acute, are too feeble and fickle to be ultimately trustworthy as sources of truth. This does not mean that they are not instruments of truth, but they are not equipped to generate what is needed when the source or ground of truth and authority is in question. Not only so, but since the entrance of sin in the world, we have a sinful bent against ultimate truth and authority, unless God so changes our hearts as to rejoice in such things.
So what can provide what we need? Is there any way to be sure that God's Word is just that—his Word? These questions seem to dominate our times, when all authority and certainty are being questioned. They are important questions; they are questions that get at the root of our relationship to God. In order to address these typical and natural questions, we need to delve more deeply into what we mean when we speak of the "ground" of truth and authority.
The question of the ground or foundation of the world and everything in it is not a new one.2 As far back (at least) as the philosopher Aristotle, the question of the ground of everything else was discussed and debated. In such debates, two things were clear: (1) whatever ground we determine to be in place, it must be such that it has nothing behind or beyond it. To posit something behind or beyond this ground would make that thing the ground; (2) it is impossible to continue positing a ground, of a ground, of a ground, of a ground, etc. For a ground to be a ground it has to be that upon which everything else rests. Aristotle argued that all grounds or first principles or beginning points are the "first point from which a thing either is or comes to be or is known. . . ." In other words, "grounds," according to Aristotle, provide the bedrock foundation for everything that is or is known. This concept of a beginning point, what some have called an Archimedean point, is a necessary and crucial aspect of everything that we think, indeed, of everything that is.3 Aristotle understood this, philosophy has continued to articulate this idea, and Christian theology has seen it as basic to its own discipline.
We can think of grounds, by analogy, the way we think of the physical ground underneath us. What is it that supports the room that I am now in? It is the boards in the floor. But what supports those boards? The beams underneath. What supports those beams? It is the ground underneath and around those beams. What supports the ground? Well, the ground supports itself. It is the support without which nothing else could be a support. As is the case physically, so it is with questions of ultimate authority, truth, etc. There is a "place" beyond which we cannot go and without which we cannot move. That place is the ground or "grounds."
The theology that was resurrected during the time of the Reformation (sixteenth century) and beyond argued that all disciplines, especially theology, require grounds, and that such grounds partake of at least the following characteristics: (1) they are necessarily and unchangeably true, and (2) they must be known per se, that is, in themselves, as both immediate and indemonstrable. "Immediate" here means that the status of a ground is not taken from something external to it, but is inherent in the thing itself. It does not mean, strictly speaking, that nothing mediates the truth therein, but rather that nothing external to the ground mediates that truth. Similarly, "indemonstrable" here means that the fact of a ground is not proven by way of argument using principles external to that ground, but is such that it provides the ground upon which any other fact or demonstration depends.
This concern for grounds, historically, had its focus in two primary disciplines: philosophy and theology. In philosophy, the concern was expressed in the thought and philosophy of René Descartes. For all that separated Descartes' philosophy from the Protestant theology of his day—and there was much that did—the concern for grounds was common to both. Descartes thought that his grounds were "clear and distinct ideas" concerning first the self and then God. These two, in that order, were supposed to provide the foundation for everything else that could be known. But Descartes' rationalism (since he wanted to begin with innate ideas) only led to skepticism.
Christian theologians during this time argued, against rationalism, that grounds could never be located in the human self. To do so would lead to the kind of skepticism that followed in the wake of Descartes' philosophy. What, then, is the ground of theology? What is it that can provide the foundation, the source and beginning point of all truth and authority? To ask the question is almost to answer it.
In the Westminster Confession of Faith (perhaps the ablest expression of Protestant doctrine in the entire history of the church), the authors set out, for the first time in church history, a Protestant doctrine of Scripture. In chapter 1 of the Confession, section 4, the authors wrote:
The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.
Notice that the subject of this section is the authority of Scripture. They are answering the question of grounds for such authority. On what grounds does this authority depend?
It does not depend on any man or church. This was stated, negatively, to make clear that this was a Protestant and not a Roman Catholic doctrine of Scripture. But notice here that the authors say, in effect, that the authority of Holy Scripture depends on its author. It is the author of Holy Scripture who makes Scripture what it is.
The fact of the matter is, if we fail to see Holy Scripture as authored by God, and therefore as the ground of its own authority, we will fail to understand what Scripture actually is.
And, as the Confession makes clear, if we want to know why we should accept Holy Scripture as the Word of God, it is "because it is the Word of God." That is, not simply because it says that it is; many books make such claims. Rather, we accept it because God is its author and God says that it is. To appeal to something behind, above, or beyond this is to think of Scripture (and God) as something other than the ground of truth and authority.
Isn't this what Jesus himself was saying to the devil in the wilderness? Jesus had the power to show Satan who he was. But Jesus also knew that whatever he did would detract from Satan's central objection. His objection was not that he hadn't seen all he needed to see. Jesus knew that Satan's objection was focused on the fact that he did not believe what God had said.
Jesus illustrated this same principle in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). The rich man in Hades asks that there be demonstrations of power and miracles displayed to his five brothers so that they might not suffer the same torment. What is the response to this request? "If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead" (Luke 16:31).
Hearing "Moses and the Prophets" means hearing the Word of God. Jesus reminds the rich man that his brothers, like him, have all that is needed to avoid the torment of Hades. They have the Word of God that was spoken "by the prophets" and by Moses, and that has now been spoken "in the Son."
John 6:63-71 gives us the same truth. There Jesus is teaching many of his disciples that the only way one may come to him is if the Father grants it. The message must have gotten through; it was a message that stripped away any hope of salvation by human merit or action. That message has never been a popular one. So, in the course of Jesus' instruction, "many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him" (6:66).
Jesus then asked the twelve if they, too, would turn away. Simon Peter's answer is instructive: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life" (6:68).
Peter's question gets to the heart of the matter as we think about the ground of authority and truth. Where else can we go but to the word of Christ himself? He alone has the words of eternal life. Is there any other standard, principle, or foundation that carries with it the authority of God himself? Is there any other standard, principle, or foundation that just is God himself, revealed in the flesh and thus giving to us "the words of eternal life"?
A Firm Foundation
In the hymn, "How Firm a Foundation," the author begins by attesting to the fact that the foundation that we have in the Word of God is both firm and complete:
How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, is laid for your
faith in his excellent word!
What more can he say than to you he hath said, to you who
for refuge to Jesus have fled?
The foundation that we have in God's Holy Word is firm. It is secure. It is certain. It is the ground upon which anything else—any truth or any authority—must rest. And the question asked in this stanza is meant to be rhetorical: What more can he say? God has spoken through his own Son. No other revelation can compare; no other revelation is needed.
And so, we can now see why the Word of God cannot be broken. It has its roots in God speaking through his various agents in history. It has its climax in God speaking through his Son. It has its focus in God speaking in every word of Holy Scripture, which is, itself, God's own speech.
No wonder Newton, as he contemplated this great truth, asked, "On the Rock of Ages founded, what can shake thy sure repose?" No wonder this truth gave him confidence in those things "that cannot be shaken" (Heb. 12:28). What, indeed, can shake thy sure repose? The Word of God, and the salvation it offers, are founded on the Rock of Ages.
No current trends, no sophisticated arguments, no intense temptation has the power to break that Rock. If it is on Christ the solid rock we stand, then we are always and everywhere protected from such onslaughts in the shadow of his mighty wings.
With salvation's walls surrounded,
Thou may'st smile at all thy foes.
Things That Cannot Be Shaken
by K. Scott Oliphint and Rod Mays
Published by Crossway Books, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers
1300 Crescent Street Wheaton, Illinois 60187
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided for by USA copyright law.


text:
Utility Billing
Read Your Meter
Proper water usage and conservation is an effective method for all citizens to help manage our available water resources. Understanding your water usage and finding and repairing leaks on a timely basis will contribute to the overall management of our resources and save you money.
What We Do
Utility Billing manages the billing, payment, and customer accounting functions for the City-owned utilities. We provide customers with the best service possible and ensure our billing and payment methods are efficient and customer-service oriented.


text:
The Bulova Story The realization of a great American dream began in 1875 when Joseph Bulova, a 23-year-old immigrant from Bohemia, opened a small jewelry store on Maiden Lane in New York City. This modest enterprise was to evolve into one of today's preeminent watch and clock companies. In 1911, Bulova began manufacturing boudoir and desk clocks, ...Read More
The Bulova Story
The realization of a great American dream began in 1875 when Joseph Bulova, a 23-year-old immigrant from Bohemia, opened a small jewelry store on Maiden Lane in New York City. This modest enterprise was to evolve into one of today's preeminent watch and clock companies. In 1911, Bulova began manufacturing boudoir and desk clocks, along with fine pocket watches, which he made and sold in unprecedented numbers. During World War I, wristwatches were issued in the military for their greater convenience. Returning veterans brought home the new fashion--and a new market emerged. Bulova already had sufficient production facilities and a mastery of jewelry design, so his company introduced the first full line of men's jeweled wristwatches in 1919. It was followed by the industry's first full line of ladies' wristwatches and the first line of diamond wristwatches. America ran on Bulova time, beginning with radio's first commercials, broadcast nationally in 1926: "At the tone, it's 8 P.M., B-U-L-O-V-A Bulova watch time." Two years later, Bulova introduced the world's first clock radio.
In 1931, Bulova conducted the watch industry's first million-dollar advertising campaign. And through the Depression years, Bulova supported retailers by offering Bulova watches to buyers on time-payment plans. As the next decade began, Bulova aired the first TV commercial. A simple picture of a clock and a map of the United States, it preceded a Brooklyn Dodgers baseball game on July 1, 1941, and proclaimed, "America runs on Bulova time." By then, Ardé Bulova, Joseph Bulova's son, was also producing timepieces for the military. With the U.S. entry into World War II, the Bulova factories immediately put their perfected mass-production techniques and skilled craftsmen to work on precision military equipment. Bulova provided the U.S. government with military watches, specialized timepieces, aircraft instruments, critical torpedo mechanisms and fuses. At the war's end, the Joseph Bulova School of Watchmaking opened its doors to help disabled veterans become self-sufficient. At the opening of the school, Ardé Bulova made the following statement:
"For the purpose of aiding war veterans who are physically handicapped, the Bulova School of Watchmaking has been founded to teach the art and trade of watch, clock and instrument making and repairing, including the use of tools, machinery and equipment necessary in carrying on such a trade. Graduates of the school are expected to be placed in positions in jewelry stores throughout the country and thus be assisted in finding a place in life in a useful and happy occupation. This is but a small measure of the gratitude that can be shown to these men for their service to our country in this greatest of all wars."
The school was supported entirely by the Bulova Foundation. No financial aid of any kind was received from any government agency or the students. Equipment at the school included magic-eye doors, wide two-way elevator entrances and exits, special workbenches, non-slip cork floors and other features so that disabled men could move about at no physical disadvantage. Complete medical facilities and a well-equipped recreation room provided treatment and relaxation. Graduates of the school were assured employment since over 1,500 positions were pledged by American Jewelers.
A new era in timekeeping dawned in the 1950s. Through persistent and dedicated research, Bulova developed Accutron, the first electronic watch. Keeping time to within two seconds a day, it was the first breakthrough in timekeeping technology in over 300 years.
During the 1960s, NASA asked the company to channel its Accutron efforts into making computers for the Space Program. As a result, Bulova's Accutron timing mechanism became an integral and vital part of space technology from the 1958 launch of Vanguard I to the first moon walk on July 21, 1969. A Bulova timer was placed on the moon's Sea of Tranquility to control the transmissions of vital data through the years. When Accutron precision became available to customers, Bulova was the first watch brand to offer a written guarantee of accuracy-in-use to within a minute a month. Another significant Bulova breakthrough occurred in the 1960s with the introduction of the Phototimer clock. Today, all Bulova watches contain the finest quartz-crystal movements, accurate to within three minutes a year.
In recent decades, Bulova timepieces have kept official time aboard Air Force One, and Bulova products have repeatedly been awarded to visiting dignitaries as Presidential Gifts of State. Bulova has also served as America's official watch to the U.S. Olympic Team.
In recent years, Bulova has presented a number of design innovations. Whether the customer prefers a high profile diamond watch, an heirloom quality 14-karat gold watch, a sporty elegant Marine Star watch, a day/date calendar watch or a contemporary career-style watch, Bulova offers a style for every taste and occasion. Each one is reminiscent of Joseph Bulova's demand for unique quality and beauty.
Year after year, having satisfied customers for over a century, Bulova continues its tradition of growth and innovation. Today, Bulova remains a totally U.S.-operated company. As a result, Bulova now offers the widest range of styles in its long history. With over a century of technological leadership and service, Bulova is among America's most recognized names.
Bulova timepieces use only the finest materials, precision craftsmanship and state-of-the-art technology for enduring quality and performance.
-- At the heart of each Bulova watch is precision accuracy. From the finest quartz movements to alternative technologies such as solar or mechanical energy, each Bulova watch is guaranteed to be accurate to within one minute a year.
-- Every Bulova is anti-magnetic, shock-resistant, and features our unique distortion-free and scratch-resistant Dura-Crystal®.
-- Bulova uses only the finest materials for its bracelets and straps. Many of Bulova's bracelets are solid stainless steel. Some are plated with Bulova's unique 23-karat hard gold process, which is tempered to give an extra durable finish. Other bracelets are ion plated with a patented gold process for an ultra-resilient finish. The straps are made from the finest leathers to resist wear and maintain their elegant look.
Only Bulova offers the range of styling and the scope of products to meet everyone's needs:
-- The Marine Star Collection represents elegance in a sport look. With stainless steel bracelets, screw backs, ratchet bezels and water resistance up to 200 meters (660 feet), Marine Star watches provide enduring performance with superlative style.
-- Bulova diamond watches use only genuine faceted diamonds for lasting quality and ultimate brilliance. With both classic and contemporary styles to choose from, it is easy to see why Bulova leads the industry in diamond dial, diamond case and diamond bracelet watches.
-- Bulova 14 Karat gold watches are heirloom quality timepieces. All styles have Swiss movements and either European or American bracelets. These sophisticated watches offer breathtaking styling and outstanding value in 14-karat gold as well as 18-karat gold and stainless steel.
From classic and contemporary straps and bracelets, to specialty chronographs and advanced technologies, Bulova offers several hundred styles to choose from.
Caravelle is today's lifestyle brand, offering a wide range of styles to fit all the varied roles of today's busy consumer. Tailored career, classically traditional, stylish fashion and contemporary sport watches fill these needs with dependable quality and truly affordable prices.
-- Precision quartz movements that guarantee accuracy.
* Superior plating using a 23-karat hard gold process that tempers the finish for added durability.
* Genuine leather straps, or finely made bracelets, including stainless steel for maximum wear.
* Genuine diamonds or fine Austrian crystal.
* Caravelle offers several hundred timepieces to satisfy the multiple needs of today's consumers.
Career Segment
Sophisticated designs for everyday wear. Perfect for the office, school or wherever tailored styling makes the best statement.
Classic Segment
Timeless, traditional designs that provide enduring style.
Fashion Segment
Contemporary designs for a modern look, in line with today's fashions.
Sport Segment
Performance and elegance. Bracelets and straps, water resistance up to 100 meters (330 feet).
Designed in America and handcrafted in Switzerland, each Accutron combines exceptional styling with the most advanced timekeeping technology. In the world of luxury watches, Accutron stands alone by offering:
-- The finest Swiss quartz movements available.
-- Solid stainless steel construction.
-- Solid-link, stainless steel bracelets and top-quality leather straps, many with hidden deployment clasps to provide a seamless look on the wrist.
-- 23-karat gold finishes applied with the most advanced plating technology.
-- Superior scratch-resistant sapphire crystals.
-- Water resistance from 30 meters (100 feet) to 200 meters (660 feet).
For hundreds of years, precision timekeeping was strictly mechanical. Then Bulova transformed the course of time forever with the world's first fully electronic watch . . . Accutron. A vital component of the U.S. space program from the 1958 launch of Vanguard I through the first moonwalk in 1969, Accutron revolutionized the watchmaking industry by bringing its state-of-the-art timing mechanism directly to consumers. Today, building on this extraordinary legacy, Accutron remains at the forefront of watchmaking technology, combining the most advanced Swiss quartz movements with the finest of contemporary styling.
Bulova's award-winning collection of classic and contemporary clocks is produced with strict adherence to Bulova's quality standards. Each clock features:
-- A one-year warranty.
-- A state-of-the-art precision movement. The quartz, battery-operated chime and standard movements are guaranteed to be accurate to within three minutes a year. Bulova keywind mechanical movements are produced in Europe to the exacting standards of master clock makers.
-- The finest quality materials including carefully selected woods, solid brass, lead crystal, imported marble, porcelain and leather.
-- Attention to design and engineering details. Bulova Clocks are distinguished by their precision movements, painstakingly assembled wood cases, engraved dials, flawless finishes and unique designs.
Bulova clocks span a range of styles and forms with unmatched artistry and technological excellence.
Licensed Products
Combining Bulova's reputation for technological excellence with the proven charm of cherished trademarked designs gives the Licensed Products Collection truly unique market appeal. Instantly recognizable, the Frank Lloyd Wright®, and Harley-Davidson® make particularly memorable gifts, while attracting both budding connoisseurs and established collectors.
Frank Lloyd Wright
Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959) is recognized as one of the greatest architects of the twentieth century. Using innovations in design and engineering made possible by newly developed technology and materials, his work heralded a new thinking in architecture, stressing "organic" structures in harmony with their natural surroundings.
Bulova's award-winning Frank Lloyd Wright® Collection honors this American genius with an exceptional group of clocks including tabletop and wall models, as well as a number of uniquely stylish watches. Each style is part of the Frank Lloyd Wright Decorative Designs Collection®, certified by The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, Taliesin West, Scottsdale, Arizona.
These products are part of the Frank Lloyd Wright Decorative Designs Collection®. A portion of the sales of these products supports the design and education programs of The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, Taliesin West, Scottsdale, Arizona. ©1999 - 2003 The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, All Rights Reserved.


text:
OverviewBy CIOinsight
Technology Spending 2002
The budding economic recovery doesn't mean that the nightmare budgets of 2001 are gone for good. Yes, the average IT budget has increased by 9% in 2002, but our second annual spending survey shows that the purse strings have been loosened only in larger companies, in certain industries, and for a select few IT budget areas. IT budgets at small companies have actually dropped by an average of 8% since last year. Still, many projects that were put on ice last year are back, and IT executives continue to spend on a variety of new technologies. The bottom line: 2002 won't hit the 7.8% compound growth levels of the pre-Y2K days, but it sure beats 2001.
Far fewer projects are being put on the back burner in 2002 than in 2001. Only about three out of 10 respondents say they are delaying or de-ferring spending on IT projects in 2002, compared with about three quarters of respondents in 2001. Likewise, just half as many firms are cutting or eliminating spending on IT initiatives this year as last.
Two thirds of IT execs say the IT budget is under closer scrutiny this year than last. Perhaps in response, companies are requiring that IT align itself with business strategy more closely, and more firms are adopting metrics to assess their IT investments.
The spending outlook for 2003 is far brighter than for 2002: Close to two thirds of smaller firms and 46 percent of larger companies are projecting IT budget increases. If they are rightand many IT execs doubt actual spending will match their budgetsIT budgets at smaller companies will rise 17% on average and 11% at larger companies.
It's been tough out there, what with companies battered by the worst recession in 10 years and the economic fallout from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And last fall's budget season arrived when the general feeling was at its gloomiest. Yet the results of this month's spending survey show that many companies bucked the trend, upping their 2002 budgets for IT spending. And many are confident that their budgets will hold through the year, and aren't just empty wish lists. But it's still unclear whether this is because companies feel they need to strategically position themselves for the hoped-for recovery or because they need the added capabilitiesand potential cost savingsoffered by the new IT systems.
Consider Argo Turboserve Corp., a privately held distributor of turbine and power generator parts based in Carlstadt, N.J. Many of Argo Turboserve's customers are in the hard-hit aerospace and nuclear power generation industries, yet the company plans to boost its IT spending 29 percent this year, to $1.8 million, with much of the increase going to new Web-based supply chain management systems that will help attract new customers. The lure? Argo Turboserve hopes to help customers better forecast demand so clients can order parts only when needed, thus cutting inventory costs, says Vice President of Information Systems and CIO Art Johnston.
Other companies are upping their budgets in hopes of preparing themselves for the recovery. As the economy slowed in the second half of 2001, the mandate for David Buzzell, CIO of The Sedona Group, a $75 million professional staffing firm in Moline, Ill., was "let's hold steady and keep costs down," he says. This year, Buzzell says, "it's just time to upgrade and get ready for the rebound of the economy." His $600,000 IT budget is up about 25 percent over last year, and the money will pay for a move to a new accounting platform, and to Web-enable some of its applications. That will help the company produce the customized reports and invoicing paperwork it prepares for its clients without the expensive manual labor now required, he says. The business benefits: reduced operating costs and new, better services for its customers.
Rochester, N.Y.-based Chase-Pitkin Home & Garden, a home improvement retailer with $275 million in revenues in 2001 and a division of Wegmans Food Markets Inc., is spending 8.5 percent more on IT this year to get more detailed, real-time information on product sales.
The chain has seen low double-digit sales increases for the first four months of 2002, says Controller and CIO Chris Dorsey. The Sept. 11 attacks actually helped business, he says, because of the "nesting factor"consumers seem to be spending less on travel and more on big-ticket home purchases.
However, faced with steep competition, retailers must "carve out as much waste as they can," says Dorsey. He is confident his spending increase will hold up because the chain needs new and upgraded IT capabilities to get the store-by-store and item-by-item information it needs to boost productivity and profits. The tough economic times, he predicts, will actually "put more of an emphasis on making sure that happens."
In some areas, such as the recession-resistant medical field, spending increases are even higher. The company owners at Panorama Orthopedics, a clinic and surgery center in Golden, Colo., believe "we've got to move forward," says CIO Christine Wilson, who reports that her IT budget is up 100 percent this year, to $1.2 million. The new funding will go to upgrade the firm's computerized imaging system and for a new electronic medical records system.
But scrutiny over IT spending is as strong, if not stronger, than ever, especially at organizations still under financial pressure. General Cinemas Theaters Inc., a Chestnut Hill, Mass.-based theater operator that was recently acquired by AMC Entertainment Inc., is playing "more of a devil's advocate role" on IT spending than in the past, says CIO Jim Barry, asking questions like: "Can we get a quicker return?" "Can we reduce expenses?" "What happens if we don't do it?"
The technology industry also remains tight. At Fortel Inc., a Fremont, Calif.-based developer of software that monitors the performance of networks, Web servers and other parts of the IT infrastructure, losses grew to $1.8 million for the fiscal first quarter ending Dec. 31, compared with a loss of $1.6 million one year earlier. Fortel is keeping its IT budget level at about $800,000 and cutting its maintenance costs for Oracle's business applications by 40 percent, says CIO Dave McCandless. Fortel is using Oracle Corp.'s accounts receivable module to do the work of the order entry module. "You lose some functionality, but you get the job done, which is to sell your product to your customer," says McCandless.
Even in companies with strong commitments to IT-based strategic change, the questions remain tough. IT spending at Zurich North America, a Schaumburg, Ill.-based provider of business insurance, part of Zurich Financial Services Group, will rise close to 9 percent this year, to $243 million, says David Patterson, vice president of governance for IT. Much of the increase is going to CRM, Web development, security and privacy-related projects, says Patterson, as part of a three-year overhaul of the IT infrastructure designed to make the financial services firm more efficient and profitable.
But even as spending on new projects rises, CFOs, corporate steering committee members and business managers at all levels are putting operational costs under a microscope. "Managers ask, `What if your capacity is growing? What are your internal labor rates, and how are they changing year over year? What is your cost per user?'" says Patterson.
Where there are genuine spending increases, security is one common item on the shopping list. Dorsey of Chase-Pitkin Home & Garden is spending more on security not only to defeat outsider hackers, but also to protect its internal data.
Another common area for new spending is to upgrade an organization's communications infrastructure. Companies also report spending more on storage. Argo Turboserve plans to boost storage spending 15 percent to 20 percent, says Johnston, to hold both e-mail and data produced by its CRM systems.
As the economy wobbles out of recession, CIOs and business managers are taking a harder, more business-like approach to IT spending than during the boom of the 1990s. For some companies, that means holding the line. For others, 2002 is the year to cautiously resume their investments in IT. "They realize that to make the money, they have to spend the money," says Panorama Orthopedics' Wilson. "In the past it's worked, and we're banking on it again."Robert L. Scheier is a freelance writer in Boylston, Mass.
Research Results
The results are available in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. To download the free Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in, click here.
Conclusion 01
Conclusion 01: Spending Trends
The average IT budget for 2002 is increasingup 9% over last yearbut the rising tide is by no means lifting all boats. Most of the spending increase is at larger companies, and just a few of them at that, while budgets are dropping at smaller firms, which don't seem to have the strength to continue spending in the downturn. Meanwhile, hard-hit industries like financial services remain cautious. Still, the budget slide is expected to reverse in 2003.
Larger-company budgets rose from $49 million to $55 million, while budgets at smaller companies declined from $7.0 million to $6.4 million.
Nonfinancial service industries such as retail, entertainment and computer services saw budgets rise 27% over last year, though much of that is thanks to increases at a handful of very large companies. But IT budgets at nonprofits, including government, education and associations, are down 1.7% in 2002. Financial services budgets, the highest-spending category, remained essentially flat.
CIOs are not changing how they divide up spending between hardware, software, staff, services, training and maintenance. IT personnel remains by far the highest line item in the IT budget, at 38% of the budget in 2002.
IT execs expect a far rosier spending picture in 2003. Fully 62% of CIOs at smaller companies and 46% at larger firms believe overall spending will rise next year. Even in companies where IT budgets declined in 2002, only 34% think it will decrease again.
Conclusion 02
Conclusion 02: Technologies and Projects
Not surprisingly, following the events of Sept. 11, 47% of all respondents are increasing funds for security software for 2002. And overall, the red light has changed to yellow for a variety of IT projects, especially technologies that can generate revenue, such as CRM, and strengthen the infrastructure, such as networking and communications hardware. Meanwhile, many respondents continue to experiment with cutting-edge technologies such as XML and Web services.
In 2001, 74% said they were delaying or deferring projects, technologies or services. This year, it's only 30%. And last year, 42% said projects were completely cut or eliminated, compared with only 20% in 2002.
CRM, CORPORATE PORTAL, DATA warehousing and e-business initiatives are the ones most likely to be included in 2002 budgets, ranging from 52% to 57% of respondents. In actual dollars, spending is clearly trending up in CRM, data warehousing and marketing.
forty-seven percent of IT execs are spending more on security software, more than any other technology. A variety of infrastructure categoriesnetworking, communication, storage and serverscame next, all falling in the range of 37% to 39%.
Among newer technologies, IT execs showed the greatest interest in PDAs, Web services, Gigabit Ethernet, storage area networks and XML, with 43% to 46% investing in 2002. Fifty-five percent of larger companies were also investing in storage area networks. Keep an eye out, too, for wireless networking, where investments are increasing at 30% of respondents.
Conclusion 03
Conclusion 03: 2001 Revisited
2001 was clearly one of the most parsimonious years ever for IT spending. The long-term legacy of 2001 is likely to be greater scrutiny of IT budgets, more attention to alignment, a move from stand-alone marketing systems to CRM, and a decline in knowledge management spending.
In last year's survey, two thirds of CIOs expected spending for 2001 would come in below budget. But such a drop occurred in just 42% of the companies that we surveyed.
Budget decreases aren't projected to be quite as frequent this year as they were last year. In 2001, 42% of CIOs say their budgets decreased from their original projections, against 35% projecting decreases this year.
When the budget ax swung in 2001, many high-visibility IT projects weren't immune: While 30% of companies that budgeted for CRM wound up raising their actual spending, 22% of companies budgeting for marketing automation software spent less than originally planned. At 37% of larger companies, knowledge management actual spending dropped below the 2001 budget. This year, CRM will continue to rise, at 36%, and knowledge management will be reduced further or eliminated at 29% of companies.
The recession led 66% of comPAnies to increase the scrutiny of their IT budget in 2001, and 62% to ensure that their IT spending is better aligned with business strategy. The push for alignment is consistent across large and small companies as well as companies that were increasing or decreasing their IT budgets, showing that alignment remains a universal concern among IT executives.
Conclusion 04
Conclusion 04: the Budget Process
Things certainly look better for 2002, but manyif not mostIT execs remain cautious, and they have little confidence in their budget numbers. Facing greater scrutiny from the CEOs, CFOs and COOs who watch their budgets, CIOs are reviewing their budgets frequently. Those who do so are much more confident about the numbers that result.
Forty-three percent say they lack confidence in their 2002 budget projections, and that's borne out by how few feel their spending will match their budget. Thirty-three percent of larger companies believe their spending will increase over their original projections for 2002, while 41% expect a decrease. Thirty-eight percent of smaller companies see an increase over their current budget, but 30% are anticipating a decrease in the months ahead.
Approximately two thirds follow a conventional annual budget approval cycle. However, they review the budget more frequently, with 37% revisiting the budget every three months or less, and just 25% saying they do so once a year.
Many IT execs are seeking or using ways to more closely manage the budget process. Of these, continuous budgeting, incrementally adjusting spending along the way, is the most popular method, favored by 39% of IT departments. There's also a clear shift toward more performance-based budgeting, with 35% saying they will consider these techniques in the future.
Conclusion 05
Conclusion 05: Hopes and Concerns
CIOs hope to raise revenues for their companiesnot just cut costs. But they feel that they need to spend more on IT to make more money for their companies. This might be behind the optimistic projections for the 2003 budget.
We may be living in uncertainand hopefully post-recessionarytimes, but CIOs' priorities remain solidly oriented to making money. Forty-seven percent say their organization's top priority is revenue enhancement, and another 17% cite customer satisfaction. Only 20% say cost reduction is their main goal.
However, IT execs are worried that they won't be able to meet these goals in the current budgeting environment. More than half (56%) believe IT isn't spending enough to keep up with this year's strategic goals for the organization. And 41% believe the company isn't spending enough on strategic initiatives.
IT executives do not feel that their departments are being singled out for budget tightening: 32% said their budgets were increased more or cut less than other internal groups in 2002, versus 21% who said their budgets were cut more or not increased as much as other departments.
In retrospect, 2001 wasn't quite the train wreck for it that it could have been. Cutbacks weren't that far off from the cutbacks projected for 2001, and some important initiatives made it through relatively unscathed. 2002 is clearly going to be a better yearhow could it not be? But CIOs remain cautious in most of their projections for budget growth. Perhaps most troubling, however, are concerns that the organization isn't spending enough on strategic initiatives. IT execs would do well to ensure that the non-IT CXOs watching the budget have the information they need to understand how specific IT initiatives are linked to supporting the direction the organization wants to go. Improving the budget process so that they are confident that their budget figures are accurate, and their investments are providing value, would also help CIOs win the spending increases they are seeking and expecting in 2003.
How the survey was done: CIO Insight designed the IT spending survey together with Advantage Business Research Inc. (www.advantageresearch.com), a Lake Success, N.Y.-based supplier of custom research services. CIOs, chief technology officers, and vice presidents of information technology and services gathered from a number of sources, including third-party lists and other Ziff Davis Media publications, were invited to participate in the study by e-mail. The questions were posted on a password-protected Web site, and 357 qualified respondents replied from March 22 to April 2, 2002. All qualified respondents described themselves as knowledgeable or very knowledgeable about their company's IT budget.