#real obscure bible passage at that | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

carolap53 · 2 years

Text

The Bible: God’s Inspired Word

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. — 2 Timothy 3:16

The call to memorize this verse and the intent of this chapter is not to defend the Bible. We do not have to do this. As Charles Spurgeon said, “There is no need to defend a lion when he is being attacked. All we have to do is open the gate and let him out. He will defend himself.” The Bible will still be the Book of all books when all the other writings of men throughout the centuries have passed into obscurity.

Let’s open the gates and let the Bible speak in its own defense. There are several important things to note.

The Defined Extent of the Bible's Divine Inspiration

“All Scripture . . .”

The little three-letter word all is very inclusive. It means what it says: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” The psalmist said, “The law of the LORD is perfect” (Psalm 19:7). King Solomon said, “Every word of God is pure” (Proverbs 30:5). Some find it popular today to contend that they believe only part of the Bible, not necessarily all of it. They say, “The Bible contains the word of God, but it is not necessarily the word of God.” But Scripture defends itself, saying, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.”

While there are different degrees of worth in the Scripture, there are not different degrees of inspiration. One might find more personal worth in reading the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5–7 than in reading the genealogy tables in Matthew 1. But one passage is just as inspired as the other: “All Scripture” . . . is inspired. When Jesus broke forth from the obscurity of the Nazareth carpentry shop to begin His public ministry, He was immediately tempted by the devil, and He replied with the Scripture: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God’” (Matthew 4:4). To what extent is the Bible inspired? The answer to that question is found in the first two words of our verse for the week: “All Scripture . . .”

The Detailed Evidence of the Bible's Inspiration

“given by inspiration of God”

The Scripture is “given.” It is supernatural. It is given by God. It originates with God, not with man. It is a library of sixty-six books written over a period of more than fourteen hundred years by at least forty different authors from all walks of life. Some were fishermen, and others were prophets, kings, shepherds, doctors, and rabbis. Yet this Book has come together with one theology, one plan of redemption, and one theme running throughout its pages, leaving no explanation for its unique nature outside of God Himself. It is “given” by God Himself.

And it is “given by inspiration.” This phrase literally means “God breathed.” God used men in the process, but He did not breathe on them. Instead, He breathed out of them His Word. Just as a skilled musical composer creates a score utilizing the flute, the trumpet, and other instruments, so God chose His own instruments. Some were as different as flutes are from trumpets. Yet God chose those instruments and breathed out His Word to us through them.

Inspiration means the words are God’s words, and He gave them to man through man. Peter said that “holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). Ironically, the identical Greek word translated here as “moved” appears in the account of Paul’s shipwreck recorded in Acts 27. There came a fierce storm, and the sailors onboard, unable to guide the ship because of the strong winds, simply let the winds take the ship wherever they blew it (vv. 15 and 17). Just as the sailors were active on the ship, yet had relinquished control over where it would go, so it was with the Bible writers. In a very real sense, the writings were not their own. God Himself expressed this very point to Jeremiah: “I have put My words in your mouth” (Jeremiah 1:9). The Bible does not originate with men; it originates with God. The writers’ personalities and styles are unique to them, but it was God who moved them to write by His Spirit. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.”

The Divine Effects of an Inspired Bible

“is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”

God’s Word is indeed “profitable” for these four things. There is a sense in which the Bible is like a roadmap. First there is doctrine, the way we begin our journey with proper teaching that shows us God’s plan of salvation and sanctification. But what happens if something causes us to veer off the road? The Bible is then profitable for reproof: it shows us our wrong turn. God asks, “Is not My word . . . like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29). However, the Bible does not leave us in our reproof. Next, the Bible is profitable for correction: it corrects our mistakes and gets us on the road again. Finally, Scripture is profitable for “instruction in righteousness”: the Word instructs us how to stay on the road so that we do not get off again.

We see the divine effects of an inspired Bible throughout the writings of Paul in the New Testament. He wrote the letter to the Romans to emphasize the importance of doctrine. His letters to the Corinthians are profitable for reproof. In the Galatian epistle, his emphasis was on correction.

And, in the Ephesian letter, Paul spoke of the need for “instruction in righteousness.” An effective ministry of God’s Word will do all four--teach doctrine, reprove sin, correct false paths, and instruct in godly living. Balance is the key. Some believers go overboard on doctrine to the virtual exclusion of reproof, correction, or instruction. Even though these folks are doctrinally sound, they are living without power. Others focus too much on reproof: they seem to think it is their God-given assignment to reprove everyone else about their sin. Others focus on correction, apparently thinking it is their calling to correct everyone else. Still others get out of balance on “instruction in righteousness” to the exclusion of teaching doctrine, and thus they have no direction in life. An effective Christian life is a balanced life.

The desired end of knowing Scripture is that “the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:17). As you memorize this verse, meditate on the fact that, when you study the Bible, you do not judge it; it judges you. God’s Word has withstood the test of time and will still be the Book of all books when all others have passed into obscurity. No wonder the psalmist said, “Your word I have hidden in my heart, that I might not sin against You” (Psalm 119:11).

Content drawn from The Joshua Code.

0 notes

meta-squash · 3 years

Text

Brick Club 2.3.8 “Inconveniences Of Entertaining A Poor Man Who May Be Rich”

This chapter is so long. Here goes.

Is it normal for Cosette to have to knock to get into the house she lives in? Or is Hugo just using that as a vehicle to make Mme Thenardier meet Valjean first?

It’s times like this that I desperately wish I knew more about biblical stories and fables and things. This, a rich man in disguise as a poor man being treated poorly by innkeepers and taking something from them, sounds like a bible story or a similar type of fable. But the only two bible stories I know with similar themes are the nativity story and Sodom and Gomorrah and neither of those seem quite right. Still, this entire episode reads like a fable or fairytale.

We’ve already seen how Evil the Thenardiers are re: their treatment of Cosette. Now we are seeing their Evil in the form of treatment of the poor.

You know, that’s an interesting thing that I’m not going to get into in this longass chapter. Javert’s evil and Thenardier’s evil are different because I feel like Javert’s evil is a lot more muddied or obscured by morality and duty and things like that. Where are the Thenardiers are bad but the badness of their actions is much more black and white. I think it’s also because, technically, they never have social power over anyone unless they are manipulative, whereas Javert always has the social power. I’m not sure where to go with either of these ideas but I will look back on it for a shorter chapter.

Cosette is ugly because she’s sad. It’s like the exact opposite of Roald Dahl’s description of ugliness. I called it on the orphanage thing and kids looking years younger than they are; she looks 6 when she’s 8. That doesn’t seem like a huge difference when you look at it written down but the difference between the size and maturity of a 6 year old vs an 8 year old is surprising.

In the way that the description of the doll was a distant echo of young Fantine, the description of Cosette here is a faded echo of dying Fantine.

“Fear was spread all over here; she was, so to speak, covered with it; fear squeezed her elbows against her sides, drew her heels up under her skirt, made her shrink into the least possible space...” I’m sure this description comes from Hugo observing children in his lifetime, but I also wonder if any of this comes from his brother who had schizophrenia and was institutionalized?

“The expression on the face of this child of eight was habitually so sad and occasionally so tragic that it seemed, at certain moments, as if she were on the way to becoming an idiot or a demon.” What an interesting pair of choices. Fear and sadness either stun and numb you completely or they turn you aggressive and evil. Hugo said the same thing before when talking about Valjean’s prison time. Again, like I said before, Cosette here is Valjean when we first met him: exhausted, scared, sad, numb, hatefully terrified of the people around her; the difference is that she still has hope. She had that moment of hoping someone would rescue her, she had the moment of pausing and wondering what the doll’s paradise was like; when we met Valjean he was past that kind of hope.

(Funny that Mme Thenardier doesn’t suspect the trick Valjean just pulled, despite Valjean “finding” a 20 sous piece instead of 15 sous piece.)

I love the description of Eponine and Azelma because it’s so innocent. They as little human beings aren’t morally bankrupt at the level of their parents yet. They’re still pretty and glowing. Partly because they are well-cared for unlike Cosette, and partly because they are still innocent.

“Eponine and Azelma did not notice Cosette. To them she was like the dog. The three little girls did not have twenty-four years among them, and they already represented the whole of human society: on one side envy, on the other disdain.”

Ah, human microcosms. Hugo loves those. The Thenardier children and Cosette are the pared down, simplified version of society. It’s also an excellent example of how Privilege works in layers. The girls’ doll is worn and old and broken, but the fact of them having a real doll and Cosette having nothing is already a layer of privilege Someone else, another little girl with wealthy parents and a new intact doll would have privilege over the Thenardier girls. There are layers.

I really love this passage too because it shows the start of the zero-sum game between Eponine and Cosette. At no point are Eponine and Cosette able to be equals. But the important thing is that neither of them are aware of this. Later, when Cosette and Eponine encounter each other again in the Gorbeau house, Eponine doesn’t have the awareness to be angry about the reversal of their fortunes. She seems sad, mostly, a jealousy born from a feeling of worthlessness rather than feeling slighted. And Cosette doesn’t even recognize Eponine, so there’s no room at all for disdain on her part, unless she’s disdainful of Eponine et al due to their poverty, though that never seems to be the case. But Eponine cannot be happy while Cosette is and Cosette cannot be happy while Eponine is, because their goals occupy the same fulcrum (Marius) and they can’t both be on the same level at the same time.

Fanfiction has explored this a lot in modern AU but I wonder the kind of havoc that could have been wreaked had Cosette and Eponine met and become proper acquaintances. Their teenage personalities are two sides of the same coin. I’ve always been of the opinion that had they switched places as children Cosette would have ended up like Eponine and Eponine like Cosette. Because Eponine has the capacity for kindness within her, except that she doesn’t know how to use it selflessly; and Cosette has the same stubborn ruthlessness as Eponine, except that she is held back by convention and reduced to talking a lot in order to try and somehow glean information from Valjean or Marius.

“Now your work belongs to me. Play, my child.” This is the second (or third?) Myriel moment for Valjean. Cosette is a child, an innocent child, but her soul doesn’t need to be bought for god. As far as I can tell, for Hugo, children are always holy. Instead, he’s buying her work. But that makes sense. For Valjean, his soul needed to be bought for god because he had already lost it to sin and to evil and to doubt. Cosette still has hope; what she needs bought from her is suffering.

And here is where the parallel continues. Cosette up until now has been Valjean as we first met him: sullen, suffering, scared, dulled, close to becoming “an idiot or a demon” and now, like Valjean’s soul, her work has been bought so she can be free.

I think it is within the walls of the convent that their parallels will catch up to each other and they will become more equal.

I feel as though the cat in a dress vs the sword in a dress must be some sort of parallel to Eponine and Cosette’s personalities but I’m not quite sure how to pull the meaning out.

“A little girl without a doll is almost as unfortunate and just as impossible as a woman without children.” Ugh. Gross, Hugo. This whole chapter was so lovely and then this misogynist bullshit.

I can explain the “water on her brain” line! Mostly because it’s a medical condition I actually have! So, “water on the brain” is another term for hydrocephalus, which is a buildup of cerebrospinal fluid in the ventricles of the brain. It can be caused by being born prematurely (like mine was) or by infections/head trauma. Nowadays they can put a shunt in your head that pumps the fluid into the abdominal cavity (which is what I have), but obviously they didn’t have the technology back then. So what happens to the head if the fluid doesn’t drain, is the head will start to increase in size, and the fluid buildup will squish the brain against the sides of the skull, causing seizures and brain damage/intellectual disabilities and vision problems and other such things. I function perfectly fine except for mild dyscalculia and ADHD (which might have been genetic anyway) but back in the 19th century hydrocephalus probably would have resulted in either mild-to-severe disabilities or death.

Cosette doesn’t have hydrocephalus, but what she does have is severe malnutrition, which can make a person’s head look much too large for their body. So Mme Thenardier is likely using Cosette’s appearance due to neglect to fake that she has a neurological problem and explain why they have to “take care of” her.

Jesus fucking christ this next bit is so much. There’s so much going on. Mme Thenardier is talking to Valjean about Cosette’s mother, the drinkers are singing vulgar songs about the Virgin Mary and baby Jesus, and Cosette is under the table singing “My mother is dead.” to herself. Woof. It is, yet again, an instance of the memory of “Fantine” (in the symbolic, saintly form of the Virgin) being sullied both by the foul songs of the drinkers and the callous, flippant commentary of Mme Thenardier. And Cosette is there under the table, staring at the fire, suddenly playing the role of her own mother, rocking the sword-baby (herself) to try and comfort herself from the shock of this new knowledge that her mother is dead.

(Anyone else read As I Laying Dying, by the way? All I could think of when I read that line was “My mother is a fish.”)

We start to see Cosette’s bold personality come out in fits and starts. She’s brave enough to sneak out and grab the doll Eponine and Azelma have abandoned. But it’s also an example of how desperate she is for something pleasurable and good, considering she’s doing that at the risk of a beating.

For the second time, we see Cosette so absorbed in her moment of “I Want” that she doesn’t see or hear anything else. Again, this seems unusual considering her constant hypervigilance. But her success in getting the doll and her increased confidence due to Valjean’s presence probably have something to do with her lack of awareness.

Cosette is caught with the doll. Is this the parallel of Valjean being caught with Myriel’s silver? Mme Thenardier says “That beggar has dared to touch the children’s doll.” The gendarmes don’t say as much when they return Valjean to Myriel, but it’s pretty obvious they’re thinking something similar.

“We are forced to add that at that moment she stuck out her tongue.” COSETTE IS SO CUTE I LOVE HER SO MUCH SHE DESERVES THE WORLD. Also I just love the way Hugo writes children, it’s so real.

Why did Hugo choose Catherine for the name of the doll? Is it to do with St Catherine? She (the saint) became Christian at 14 and converted hundreds of people before being martyred at 18 after rebuking the Roman emperor for his cruelty and winning a debate with his best philosophers.

“This solitary man, so poorly dressed, who took five-franc pieces from his pocket so easily and lavished gigantic dolls on little brats in wooden clogs, was certainly a magnificent and formidable individual.” Valjean is now Myriel. Outsiders are fascinated by him because he dresses so shabbily and yet is so benevolent and charitable with his money. Again, the difference is that Myriel’s name is always known, and Valjean’s is never known.

I know I say this so often but the distance with which Hugo treats Valjean is absolutely fascinating to me. Valjean has this incredible power to just go inside himself and not move, but we never get that kind if internality unless it’s really really important (like with the Champmathieu affair). Otherwise, Hugo keeps a respectful distance, and even when we get Valjean’s emotions described to us, I feel like Hugo is always holding back a little, like he’s not letting himself see all the way into Valjean, or Valjean isn’t letting him in.

Valjean asks for a stable; I think this is the first time we see his whole thing about sacrifice of physical comfort. Things like this asking for the stable and sleeping in the shed behind the house at Rue Plumet and not having chairs and only eating black bread etc. This is the first example we see of him feeling unworthy of physical comforts to such a degree.

(It’s interesting to me that we don’t see this characteristic when he was mayor, or at least not to this extreme. Is it because it would be unbecoming of a mayor and therefore would blow his cover? Or did going back to prison hammer in that feeling of worthlessness and lesser-than and warp his perception of what he is compared to others?)

“What a sublime, sweet thing is hope in a child who has never known anything but its opposite!” We’ve said this already, but Cosette is full of hope and life and light and that is Important because it is exactly what Valjean did not have when he was in her position. But it means that she doesn’t have to work as hard in her ascent towards happiness and goodness.

And, lastly, I love that the placement of the gold Louis in Cosette’s shoe isn’t just a sweet Christmas gesture or a gesture towards Cosette: it’s also an echo of M Madeleine breaking into houses to place gold pieces on the table.

Wow. Long af post for a long af chapter. Congratulations if you read through all of my rambling thoughts.

#les miserables meta #les miserables #brickclub #lm 2.3.8 #les mis #les mis meta #doing this chapter melted my brain a little

37 notes · View notes

ieatmypizzawithaforkandknife · 3 years

Text

MAG 020 - Desecrated Host (part 2)

Summary: Jonathan reads the second half of the statement of Father Edwin Burroughs, regarding “his claimed demonic possession.”

I’d like to propose an alternate title for this one: “Bartleby”. I couldn’t help but see the parallel between Bartleby the Scrivener’s “I would prefer not to” and Father Burroughs saying, “seeing those bound corpses before me, I made the decision to take no action ever again.” Ah, Burroughs! Ah, humanity!

I mentioned in my last post that this episode was very heavy in the “altered reality” theme. I’d like to amend that: this entire episode was one long, terrifying fever dream. I’ve never been high but I think this might be what a bad trip feels like.

Jonny Sims et al. really outdid themselves on this one though, in both the writing and the performance. So many episodes really suck you in (not literally, fortunately - we’re luckier than some of the characters that way) and grip you ’til the very end. But this was one of the best so far for that. We get more than standard descriptions of things - we get things like that small, whispered “it was bright...so bright” in Father Burroughs’ description of the “church” and the resounding, gonging bell sound accompanying the bell-speech Father Burroughs hears. You can almost feel his throbbing head and blurring vision, and at times it just feels so real.

But it wasn’t. At least, not in the way that we like to think of reality. Whatever an outside observer might have seen that night, this statement was Father Burroughs’ reality. We do know that at least some of this episode was real in the normal sense of the word though. There are snippets, like Father Singh’s reaction to seeing Father Burroughs in the small chapel, and Father Burroughs later seeing Father Singh in the hallway, that seem like they were part of objective reality. Was this slip between reality and the illusion just so that we, the audience, knew that it wasn’t real? Or was it because whatever was affecting him couldn’t keep an airtight grip on his senses? I’d like for it to be the latter, but I’m worried that’s not the case. I do not like how powerful this thing seems to be.

During the “confession”, “Father Singh” recounted all of Father Burroughs’ past sins...so this thing either actually knew about all of those events, or it made Father Burroughs imagine that “Father Singh” was naming all of his sins (a la the psychic paper in Doctor Who). Also disturbing was the detail about its accent during the “confession” - it had “a crisp and clipped RP accent”, as opposed to Father Singh’s Indian one. The change in accent made it obvious for us that it was not Father Singh speaking, but otherwise it just makes no sense to me. Was it unable to imitate Father Singh’s accent for some reason? That might fit if it’s the same thing that spoke in a “low, grating voice” to Laura Popham in episode 15. But those are the only two times (that I recall) that the person making the statement has noted a change in the person’s voice when that static appears.

There are two possibilities I’m seeing for how this thing operates. Either it’s little more than an illusionist, or it can actually alter reality itself. The first would certainly be easier to deal with, but I’m leaning towards the latter. My main reason for thinking that is not strictly things seen in this episode, but more how things in this episode seem to relate to things in the rest of the season so far. We hear that recurring creepy static/interference twice in this episode, once when Father Burroughs reads Genesis 4:14 (after opening his Bible to Luke, no less) and once when “Father Singh” says, “Spiritual pride that has led to quite a fall.” And of course we have another appearance of creepy eyes: “the church’s large round window shifted as I watched, as though it were a tremendous eye that were turning to focus upon me.” The eye and the staticky voice tie these events to many others from the first half of this season, including a few times when reality itself seems to have been affected, rather than just people’s perception of it.

There were two Bible passages referenced in this episode. The second was Mark 9:14-19, which appears to be a pretty straightforward reference to Father Burroughs’ situation, as that passage tells the story of a boy “who is possessed by a spirit that has robbed him of speech” (NIV). But the first, as mentioned in the paragraph above, was Genesis 4:14: “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the Earth, and from they face shall I be hid. And I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the Earth, and it shall come to pass that everyone that findeth me shall slay me.” And the writing around it seemed to swirl and was “obscured by dark stains”. This is obviously significant, given the static and the unexplained stains and the fact that this verse is actually quoted in the text (unlike the passage from Mark also in this episode, which was referenced but not quoted). But I can’t figure out the significance of this verse. Cain says the text of this verse to God after God banishes him for killing Abel. Cain is more or less saying that his punishment is too much to bear and that he fears for his life, presumably from others who will surely be angry about him killing Abel. The only possible parallel I can see between Cain and Father Burroughs is that they’re both cut off from God. If there’s anything more to this verse, I’m not getting it.

I’ve also been wondering about the various figures Father Burroughs sees throughout this hallucination. He sees shadowy figures along the street that “were always gone when I approached” - and then there were the parishioners in the pews at the “service”. Were the shadow figures the parishioners? Or were the shadow figures actual, real people, and his inability to reach them just a reflection of how trapped in this hallucination he was? And why did the parishioners come and go like that? Why were they leaving before the “service” was over? If they were real people then I think they had to have been members of the People’s Church of the Divine Host (episode 9). I just feel like there was something else going on at the “service” that Father Burroughs wasn’t privy to.

At the end of the episode, Jonathan calls attention to the man who met Father Burroughs at the Oratory door: “the altar server he described seems out of place with most of his other delusions, in that he appeared to have active agency.” We aren’t given much of a description of the “altar server” - he is tall, pale, and has thin, bony arms. None of that rings any particular bells (haha) to me, but I guess I’ll be on the lookout for a tall, pale guy with thin, bony arms. *shrugs*

“Cause of death was listed as blood loss from multiple lacerations all over their legs and torso, as well as removal of both their faces with a sharp blade, possibly a scalpel.” However, no tools or weapons were found at the scene, and “at no point did he perform any actions that might be analogous with the binding and actual murder of the students,” leading Jonathan to believe a second person was there. HMMM. I WONDER WHO THAT COULD HAVE BEEN.

The cause of death is very unusual, though, when you consider it from a real-world standpoint. It’s pretty easy to die of blood loss if, say, your carotid or jugular is cut. But lacerations on the legs and torso? Those lacerations would have to be extensive to cause fatal blood loss. It just doesn’t sit right with me - and it reminds me of another death we heard about previously. In episode 8, Ivo Lensik says his father was found dead in his study “with deep gouges along his wrists and arms”, and the coroner couldn’t identify the tool used on his arms. Robert Montauk (episode 9) also bled out, but that was after being stabbed 47 times, so it’s similar but not quite the same. The common threads I’m seeing in all three deaths are (a) cause of death being blood loss and (b) the idea that someone committed the murder who was not known to be there at the time.

Coincidentally, Father Burroughs was imprisoned at Wakefield Prison, the same place where Robert Montauk died a few years prior. I thought something might be up with that prison, so I did a quick search and apparently it’s a high-security prison for those who’ve committed crimes such as murder, rape, armed robbery, and kidnapping (Wikipedia). So there may not be any kind of supernatural connection there, but now I’m wondering if we’re going to get statements from or about anyone else in that prison.

One last observation. The sickly yellow color seen so many times in episode 18 made two appearances in this episode. Father Burroughs describes the parishioners at the “service” as having “fevered, jaundiced yellow” skin, and the stole that Mystery Altar Server gave Father Burroughs was “a pale, sickly yellow.” Oh, and that stole from Father Burroughs’ fever dream? An identical real one was delivered to the Oratory a few days prior to these events by Breekon and Hope Deliveries. And it must have been one of their last deliveries, since they liquidated some time in 2009, the year these events occurred.

Curiouser and curiouser...

This post is part of a series where I write my thoughts about each episode and obsessively connect dots in an effort to figure out The Big Mysteries of the series. All posts in this series are tagged “is this liveblogging?” Comments and messages are welcome but I have only listened to season 1, so I ask that you not spoil me for anything beyond episode 40. In the words of Jonny Sims…thanks for listening!

#personal #liveblogging #is this liveblogging?#The Magnus Archives #Bartleby the Scrivener #I'm tagging that in the hopes that some poor soul looking for help or commiseration on their high school English reading assignment #sees this post and is like 'what. pray tell. the fuck'

6 notes · View notes

script-a-world · 4 years

Note

hello. i want to write a story set in a very religious place. like fanatic level of religious. in my mind, this place is ruled by what the church says but has a "cover" figure to "connect" with the people. the people of this place are devoted to their religion, meaning they know passages, go to mass, and shun those who don't support it. here is my question: how does one go about creating a religion that feels real? what do i need to take into consideration (i'm not religious myself).

Mod Miri Note: At the same time this came in we also received from the google form the question “How do I world build a religion?” I can’t confirm they’re the same anon, but we’re combining them for the answer.

Brainstormed: You seem to have a very… narrow perception of religion? If you aren’t religious yourself and you’re (presumably) from a Western culture, it makes sense that the Christian church and more specifically Catholicism are your go-to images of hyperreligion. Saying “mass” and “church” and “passages” kind of gives away the fact that you’re trying to base your religion off of at least your idea of an Abrahamic religion, but I’d ask you to reconsider. Right now it sounds like you’re trying to create a negative critique of these religions, and even if that is what you’re going for, you need to do a lot of research on their theology, history, and practices before you can do so with any competence.

I’d suggest doing some basic research on types of religions, like animism, pantheism, polytheism, general superstition, etc. There are plenty of spiritual worldviews that you might consider way over the top, but whose believers find it more bizarre when people don’t follow their teachings. Fanatics are never fanatics in their own mind, and especially among their own people, but also… fanatic might be a relative term. If you’re approaching this from a nonreligious background, then you might consider X-amount of religion in one’s lifestyle to be fanatic-level. Whereas a person who actively practices religion would consider X-amount to be perfectly normal, and only folks who take it to XX-amount plus some shadier practices are the true fanatics.

Remember, religions start because people want to make sense of the world. There is a deeper feeling of wonder and personhood and power, both within a human being and in the whole world around us, that drives spirituality and generates superstition. Religion, at least to start, is beneficial to people, otherwise no one but sadists would follow its teachings. Now, like anything else, religion can devolve into a means of power hoarding and control of a populace, but only because of the people in charge getting greedy. The vast majority of religions I’ve studied have had radical, freeing, empowering teachings applicable to everybody when they first sprang up, and only later did adherents twist those teachings into societal oppression. If there is no satisfaction or benefit in your religion, there won’t exactly be any incentive for people to follow it so closely, aside from whatever negative consequences occur for those who fall away. And negative consequences aren’t often enough to keep people in a religion. If following religion is more painful than the consequences of leaving it, plenty of people will jump ship.

Religion can also show up in every single part of life. According to Wikipedia:

A religious experience (sometimes known as a spiritual experience, sacred experience, or mystical experience) is a subjective experience which is interpreted within a religious framework. The concept originated in the 19th century, as a defense against the growing rationalism of Western society. William James popularised the concept.

You look up and see a cloud, a spiritual person sees a portent, or a spirit, or a castle where the gods live. You take a break from work for a minute, a spiritual person now has time to mutter a prayer, or observe the mood of the world, or dedicate their work to their god. A person doesn’t have to be anywhere near a fanatic to have their religion be in every part of their life. Especially if they adhere to a more lax spirituality or superstitious worldview instead of an organized religion, the central spiritual experience of religious belief alters the perception of self and surroundings. It isn’t only a set of rules to follow.

It can even help areas of society that modern Western society considers nonreligious! Historically, medicine has always come under religion. Witch doctors, medicine men, witchcraft, even the hygiene laws laid out in the Christian Bible. Physical health has often been considered a reflection of spiritual health, which, in a way, is true! The placebo effect means tending to one’s mental and emotional health with the reassurance of religion will improve one’s physical health as well. Not only that, but the power of a “spiritual experience”, regardless of if you believe the supernatural is real, can cause religious ecstacy, something you might perceive as a serious psychological problem but those who experience it consider to be a deep form of spiritual expression to be treasured and sought after. The spread and preservation of information is also often aided by religion, even though that can change should those in power want to change history or obscure truth for their own reasons. Just look at the history of the printing press and how that was driven by the need for Bibles. Many cultures, most famously Australian Aboriginal peoples, have oral histories thousands of years long that tie in closely to their spirituality.

You also might be confusing religion with cults. If you think all religion is predatory, playing on people’s weaknesses and fears in order to coerce them into a miserable lifestyle of following strict laws and living under control of those in power, you definitely have conflated “religion” and “cult”. If you’d like to worldbuild a cult, go ahead! It’s likely to be smaller and less acceptable than an established organized religion, not very transparent to the outside world nor its members, and have a spirituality that is in fact just a veneer over gaining power, instead of genuine belief and devotion, and may in fact require people to murder or commit suicide. Just look at Scientology, or these, or even Jared Leto, and a more in-depth look from this organization covering many different kinds of cults.

On a more worldbuildy note, are those who practice this religion correct? Does their god(s) exist? Is the supernatural real? If yes, then are they really fanatics if they’ve been right all along? Even if they’re incorrect, the dedication and deep-held beliefs of religious people shouldn’t be mocked wholesale, in my opinion. Make sure to keep some genuine three-dimensional development for characters who are part of this religion, or include other religions with different practices, or the only thing you’ll accomplish is “waaaa religion bad believers dumb”. And if that is the story you want to write, feel free, but I can’t help you there.

Feral: What makes a religion feel real? Sincere faith.

Specifically among the leaders. I mean, sure, those lemming-like peasants who actually believe that superstitious nonsense will have sincere faith, but honestly? There is going to be a higher percentage of people faking it among the masses than among the clergy. Clergy members are generally required to go through rigorous studies and often take vows that can cause great discomfort. I am sure there are those who did it for the power - there are in atheist organizations as well, humans can be crap - but if you actually read the writings of important Church leaders of the past, not to mention rabbis, imams & mullahs, and archakas, you’re going to find that they have sincere faith.

Something you should always keep in mind when developing pre-modern religion in a Western context is that before the advent of modern scholarship, which starts to become a thing in the West during the Renaissance, all the important scholars were clergy. And again, those learned people either had to be really, really dedicated to their power-hungry ambitions or had to have sincere faith.

That does not make religions perfect by any means nor does it mean that the god they have sincere faith in is omnibenevolent (though the qualities of an omnibenevolent god will be strongly dependent on the culture that worships it). And religious leaders are absolutely capable of doing terrible, terrible things even if they profess to worship an omnibenevolent god, and politicians can definitely twist things around to suit their needs (again, this is not exclusive to religiosity). But your ask has this weird given that a major religion (on par with Catholicism/Christianity) in your world is a scam, and while yes, that happens in cults and alternative religions and in splinter groups*, as Brainstormed pointed out that’s just not how, at least, the four major religions of our world got started.

Yes, it’s true that bureaucracies of a certain size and age will inevitably begin to change focus to protecting its own existence. And yes, it’s true that ambitious sociopaths will be drawn to places of authority even if they are difficult to achieve. And yes, it’s true that an individual entering a toxic environment is more likely to be changed by the environment than to change the environment. But guess what! That has nothing to do with whether the organization is religious or not.

Why does a religion exist in the first place? It explains the universe in a pre-modern world; it provides organization and structure for community focus - in other words, many social programs have historically been run through religious organizations and leadership. And it provides hope and comfort in a very scary world.

Some clergy might be able to fake all of that for a little while, but a large bureaucracy with many clerics who are all in on the fake? No. Allow me to rephrase: hell no. People are not dumb. Maybe you believe that of all religious people, but you are wrong and they are not. The people in your world, if they’re anything like the people in our world, are gonna sniff out the bullshit if none of their religious leaders believe what they’re selling. There is a reason Scientology has to keep blackmail files on all its adherents, and I promise you, the Catholic Church does not do that.

*A note on cults, alternative religions, and splinter groups: Cults and alternative religions (their PR friendly name) are “religions” that are scammy and/or actively dangerous to the participants or others: People’s Temple, Branch Davidian, etc. Splinter groups are congregations that start as normal members of a large religion or denomination but its insular culture creates a divide that just takes things a little too far even for the most fanatical of the main sect (think terrorist groups that link themselves to religions). These types of religions might be what you are actually asking about. Groups like these can be highly, highly influential but in a very contained area. What cults often do is the leader settles in an area and buys property and builds a church and maybe a school and then encourages the members to all move either onto the plot of land if it’s large enough or to buy up surrounding land and homes and push out all the non-believers. That area can then be fortified or just have a de facto boundary with the rest of the world. Sometimes a group like this can become large enough to constitute an entire town, but rarely a city - groups that large will more often have centralized compounds but with the members living scattered among non-believers, as Scientology does. Obviously a group concentrated like that will have an impact on local politics, if they are allowed to participate, but it’s not going to go farther than the county line, so to speak. As we all know from the news, splinter groups like ISIS can become very large and globe spanning, but those types of groups have within them splinter groups and factions, and I don’t think that’s what you’re asking about anyway, so I’m just going to leave it there.

But frankly, your ask reads to me as “how do I create a fantasy!Catholic that is secretly evil and will show the audience how evil religion is in the real world? Opiate of the masses!” And my advice is… don’t. Because it lacks compassionate understanding of people of faith (many faiths), it lacks a factual understanding of how world religions differ and function, it totally lacks nuance, and finally, because it is absolutely, monumentally, extremely, really, very cliche.

Maybe the way your ask is coming across to me is totally not how you intended it. Maybe you only used the jargon you used because you assumed we wouldn’t know any other terms and maybe your understanding of world religions is actually quite sophisticated. Maybe you really do have this insanely clever way to spin a tired cliche into some new and original. In these cases, we strongly encourage you to come right back with as jargon-full and specific an ask as you can write, use our submission google form to do it. Otherwise, give our responses some thought and if after you’ve developed your religion, you want to come back with a specific ask other than “how do I world build a religion?” (which is a little too broad), please feel free.

#pylons #religion #Anonymous

44 notes · View notes

upennmanuscripts · 5 years

Text

The Early History of the Lewis Psalter

Fifty-two discoveries from the BiblioPhilly project, No. 17/52

Gallican Psalter with Canticles, Litany, and Prayers (he Lewis Psalter), Philadelphia, Free Library of Philadelphia, Lewis E 85, fols. 1v–2r (historiated initial B with King David Playing the Harp and King David Slaying Goliath; blank page with later prayer to Saint Martial)

One of the glorious treasures of Philadelphia is the so-called Lewis Psalter (Free Library of Philadelphia, Lewis E 185), produced in Paris in the first half of the thirteenth century, likely between around 1225 and 1230. Digitizing and cataloguing this sumptuous book anew was a real thrill, made much easier by the existence of Elizabeth A. Peterson’s excellent Ph.D. dissertation which describes the content all 150 of the manuscript’s historiated Psalm initials (the manuscript is in fact one of only eight surviving French manuscripts from the period to include illustrations for every psalm).[1]

Unlike some of its better-documented sister manuscripts, however, very little is known about the original user(s) and subsequent owners of the Lewis Psalter. Some later inscriptions within the book might help provide a clue as to where the book was prior to its reappearance in the nineteenth century in the collection of Henry Gee Barnard of Yorkshire (1789–1858). To begin with, an inscription on folio 2r, previously described as a prayer to Saint Martial, written in a what looks like a late-sixteenth-century cursive hand, reads:

Sanctus Martialis discipulus Chri[sti] virgo.

Crux enim domini armatura v[est]ra invicta contra satanam galea / custodiens caput. Lorica protegens pectus, clipeus tela maligni / repellens; gladius iniquitatem et angelicas insidias p[ervers]sae potestat[is] / sibi propinquare sinens nullo modo. Hoc solo signa celestis victoria / data est nobis et per crucem baptisma sanctificatum est

or, translated roughly into English:

Saint Martial, virgin disciple of Christ

The Cross of our Lord is the invincible armor against Satan: a helmet protecting the head, chainmail protecting the chest, a shield repelling evil darts, a sword warding off all approach of iniquity and of the perverse power of evil angels. This, the only sign of celestial victory, is given to us and is blessed by the baptism of the Cross.

Lewis E 85, fol. 2r (with detail of inscription of prayer to Saint Martial)

This unusual text is not in fact a prayer to Saint Martial, the venerated third-century Bishop of Limoges known as the “Apostle of Aquitaine,” but instead an excerpt from Saint Martial’s apocryphal letter to the people of Bordeaux. The text of this letter is preserved in a twelfth-century manuscript from Limoges now at the Bibliothèque nationale de France (ms. lat. 5296A), with the passage discussing the cross appearing on folio 38v. Of course, our early anotator might have been familiar with this passage through another source. The text was widely available in print by the early seventeenth century at the latest.

Vita sancti Martialis, discipuli Christi: authore Aureliano, successore illius atque discipulo. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, ms. lat. 5296A, fol. 38v (Saint Martial’s letter to the people of Bordeaux, with detail of excerpt concerning the Cross)

Another note, on folio 32r of the psalter, is written in the same hand: “Psalmodia, carmen est celeste: et eos a quibus colitur sedulo, ex hominibus in angelos transfigurat,” or, “the recitation of the Psalms is a heavenly song, and transforms those who carefully recite them from men into angels.” The author of the short fragment of text is Louis de Blois (1506–1566), an influential sixteenth-century Flemish Benedictine mystic. The rather lofty phrase stems from one of de Blois’ best known works, the Sacellum animae fidelis or Sanctuary of the Faithful Soul (Louis of Blois, Sacellum animae fidelis, 1575, p. 333).

Perhaps the presence of this quote alongside the excerpt from Saint Martial will one day help clarify this great manuscript’s obscure early history. In any event, it would seem to confirm the manuscript’s presence in a Benedictine institution in the sixteenth century. Given these two pieces of evidence, might we imagine that the book was among the possessions of the Benedictine Monastery of Saint Martial in Limoges, dissolved in the wake of the French Revolution? Raymond Gaucelm, whose abbacy lasted from 1225 to 1245, was known to have been responsible for enriching the foundation’s treasury considerably[2] as well as embarking on ambitious renovation campaigns, and his dates would accord perfectly with those assigned to the Lewis Psalter. Could he have been responsible for commissioning the Psalter, or at least bringing it from Paris to the Limousin? Given the fragility of the evidence, this remains merely a hypothetical, though tantalizing, suggestion. More research into Saint Martial’s early library inventories, which do survive, might provide more information.

Lewis E 85, fol. 32r (with detail of inscription with extract from Louis de Blois)

Finally, there is additional evidence to suggest that the Lewis Psalter was used liturgically early in its life, a finding that makes it more likely to have been housed within a monastic institution, rather than having been owned by a high-ranking aristocrat. Written in a different fifteenth- or sixteenth-century hand, a prayer simply entitled “Oratio” on fol. 191v, not previously identified, in fact consists of the Collects for the fifth and seventh Sundays after Trinity. The final word, misinterpreted as the proper name “J. Credor,” is simply the incipit of the Credo:

Lewis E 85, fol. 191v (with detail of inscription with Collects for the fifth and seventh Sundays after Trinity)

While by no means conclusive, we can hope that the identification and transcription of these later additions might help shed light on the history of this wonderful book.

[1] Peterson, Elizabeth A., “Iconography of the Historiated Psalm Initials in the Thirteenth Century French Fully-Illustrated Psalter Group” Ph.D. Dissertation., University of Pittsburgh, 1991. See also Peterson, “Accidents and Adaptations in Transmission among Fully-Illustrated French Psalters in the Thirteenth Century,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987), pp. 375-84; and Peterson, “The Textual Basis for Visual Errors in French Gothic Psalter Illustration,” in The Early Medieval Bible: Its Production, Decoration, and Use, ed. Richard Gameson, Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 177-204.

[2] Duplès-Agier, Henri, “Le trésor de Saint-Martial de Limoges au treizième siècle,” Bibliothèque de l’école des chartes 16 (1855): 28-35.

from WordPress http://bibliophilly.pacscl.org/a-catchphrase-by-a-sixteenth-century-mystic-in-the-lewis-psalter/

#Fifty-two discoveries #The Free Library of Philadelphia

25 notes · View notes

dailyaudiobible · 4 years

Text

01/05/2020 DAB Transcript

Genesis 11:1-13:4, Matthew 5:1-26, Psalms 5:1-12, Proverbs 1:24-28

Today is the 5th day of January welcome to the Daily Audio Bible I’m Brian it is wonderful to be here with you and this is the first time we get to do this, we get to turn the knob as it were and swing open the door and step through the threshold into a brand-new week and this would be our first full week of this new decade. So, I am excited to share it with you as we move forward on our journey that we have begun moving through the Bible this year and this week we will read from the New International Version, brings up another little thing to explain. You’ll notice when we began the year and worked through last week we were reading from the New Living Translation and now we’re reading the New International Version, next week we’ll be reading another translation, and the week after that another one, and we do this, working our way through the year for a number of reasons, but the primary reason is…is this, we may not ever think about this or we may know this, but not really think it matters that much, but the Bible's native tongue isn't English. It's Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. So, every single one of the words of the manuscripts that the Bible has been translated from are a different language than English. And, so, every word has to be poured over or translated or brought into the language for which its intended. Not necessarily an overwhelmingly big deal unless you are creating theological formulas and doctrines that…that affect the human soul and its eternal life, like it becomes more of a big deal. And it’s kind of at this time that some people raise their hands and I go, “I just stick to the good old tried-and-true King James. That’s the real one. That’s the inspired word of God.” But it's actually it's actually a translation into English, like all other translations into English. And…and I've sat…I've been able to observe biblical interpretation and translation in my…been able to watch teams of scholars around the table discussing the kinds of things like verb tense and obscure Hebrew words that have fallen out of use and what do they mean. And that’s just scratching the surface. I mean, there's a number of ways to do this kind of interpretation. So, you could go like, “well why don't you just look at one word in Hebrew, and then say what is that word and English? How do you say that word in English and then just put that down and then go to the next word? And there are translations that do that, that seek to do that, and we read from them. There also biblical translation teams that…well…basically every biblical translation team would acknowledge that oftentimes one word means more than one thing, depending on its context. And, so, if you try to port a word for word translation you can see this word and know that it has five or ten equivalents in another language, depending sort of on the nuance of the context and so then you get into interpretation, “what is this trying to say? What does this mean?” And, so, often biblical translation teams will then look at a complete thought. “Like what does the sentence mean? What is the point here?” Because word for word when you read it back in English doesn't convey the depth of the meaning and maybe even obscures it. And, so, then teams of linguists and historians looking at the context of the time that a particular passage might have been written try and get into the minds of the original hearers will then looking and go, “what is the complete thought? Like, how would what's being said here in Hebrew or Greek, how would that complete thought be said in English in a compelling way that would carry the same weight that it does in its native language?” And, so, there are translations that seek to work from this perspective and there are all kinds of hybrids in between. And, so, allowing ourselves to receive thousands and thousands and thousands, probably tens and tens of thousands of scholarship hours for us to be able to rotate and appreciate and receive all of that as we continue the rhythm of the year is the goal so that being English speakers we get the most comprehensive view of the word of God that we can…that we can short of learning all of the biblical languages and then, not only just understanding how, maybe for example, to read Greek but all the slang and all of the cultural reference…like all of the stuff that you would have to immerse yourself in. We have this scholarship, and this is why we rotate through so that we can appreciate this. And, so, this week we will be reading from the New International Version. And let's get to it. Let's get back into the book of Genesis. Today we will read chapters 11…well chapter 11 verse 1 through 13 verse 4.

Commentary:

Okay. So, we have already…we have already done some talking about some things, so I don’t want to spend a bunch of time because we’ll have plenty of opportunity. I just want to point out a couple of things, three things in particular that we have begun talking about. Alright. So, let's begin with what we what we were reading in Matthew today, the Sermon on the Mount and in particular the Beatitudes. And. they’re very, very famous, this is Jesus central core teaching. And it's interesting to read it as His core teaching because it's like everything that He talks about we don't quite understand exactly how that could be. It's like He's saying bad things are good things, right? “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Just…I mean…that…that one is…that one beatitude, that's disruptive because that seems out of sync with the world that we live in. “Blessed are those who mourn. Blessed are the meek”, right? So, what is Jesus telling us here? Like are we supposed to be week, feeble, cast down human beings with our shoulders slumped and our heads facing the ground as we move about the earth? It's disruptive and it forces us, if we want…I mean…we can blow by all of this, but if we are seeking what the Bible says and trying to understand what's going on in the Bible then we have slow down and go, “Okay. That does not look like the world I live in. The advice that I'm being given is to live almost backward to the world I'm living in.” And that is the point. So, we talked about Proverbs. We talked about wisdom. And listen, I believe Jesus is the son of God. He is my Savior, right? So, like, there's no problem there but let's…let's like step aside from that understanding and just look at Jesus appearing on the scene in the first century. Like, he just starts calling people together as a rabbi and starts teaching. And we could say that the reason that the people flocked to Jesus was because He was a miracle worker and that would be true, that would be part of it. We could also say that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, like He spoke of the end of things, He spoke of the kingdom of God, He spoke of an ultimate reality. So, people would've also understood Him that way. But Jesus also used a specific teaching style. We know them as stories or parables. We look often at the words of Jesus, and it seems as if He may not be answering what He's being asked or He may not be talking about what it seems like He should be talking about and this is also because Jesus was known as a wisdom teacher. And, so, when you see a story or something that's disruptive and you have to stop for a second and go, “what are we talking about here?” “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven?” We have to stop and go, “Okay. How does that work? What are we talking about?” It's disruptive because the ways of wisdom are disruptive. You have to be shaken awake, right? You’ve got to see something clearly all of the sudden and then it comes to you clearly. This is the way, walk in it, right? But if we look at our lives, we see that…that like that rarely happens when everything is perfect. Like when things are super great and we’re sort of like sailing with the wind at our back downhill, like everything is moving in the right direction. It’s wonderful to enjoy those times, but wisdom usually comes in disruption and we will find that this theme and these ideas, they are everywhere, everywhere in the Bible. We will not be able to turn a page when we start reading the apostle Paul, without coming face-to-face with these themes of enduring and looking deeper, like not just looking at what we can see but understanding that there is a vast reality beyond it and we are being transformed and that…that Jesus says this, Paul says this, Peter says this, John says this, James says this. Like, disruption is actually part of it. Like, being shaken awake from our slumber is part of the journey. So, as like we are just getting going, we are just in the first pages of the first gospel, so we’ve got a lots of time before we go through Mark and Luke and John to look for this, to begin settling in and looking for this when we listen to the words of Jesus.

Okay, then the book of Genesis we have another of these weird like stories that… “where did this story come from? And why is it situated here? And it's just a really short story and then we just kind of move on. And what's happening here?” And that is a very famous Sunday school story, the tower of Babel. So, we member a couple days ago we were talking about the sons of God and the daughters of Eve and just, you know, just exploring some of the different ways that that has been talked about or viewed or understood and this tower of Babel story is kind of a weird one like that. So, here's these people and they’re…they’re moving and they’re coalescing together, they decide to build a city and they decide to build a tower. And this is going to stabilize them, and they all speak the same voice there and they’re all on the same page. And God comes and He’s like, “yeah. this is not a good idea because if they stay here and they're allowed to do this, then, you know, they’ll be able to do anything. Nothing…nothing will be impossible.” So, He confuses the language and then people have to disperse into their language groups from there. So, we could say, “well, you know, the point of the story here is that this is where the languages on the earth came from, but many theologians would say, “no. this is tied to the sons of God and the daughters of Eve…like these…and the Giants. Like this is…there’s like this other kind of story happening before us. And, so,…so the thought here would be that the people come together at Babel and decide to exalt themselves because they are…are fully…they…they have fully inherited the knowledge of good and evil, the…the price that was paid for eating the fruit, and disobeying God and that awareness that conscious shift or whatever we want to call it, the Bible because it their eyes being opened, made them realize they were naked and separate from God. So, all of a sudden this is…and this is really interesting because we know this in child development, right? So, there is a certain period of time where a child doesn't have an awareness of themselves as a separate thing, as a separate being from their parent. And that grows and then we cultivate and then we work really, really hard to get our children to be individuals. And when out back out to the garden in Eden, we see man and woman and God, and they have no awareness of a separation. They have one understanding of their reality and it is them and God together and then eat this fruit and they become aware of all lot of things that make them sense a separation. They are…they are…I need to be careful how to say this, that they are the same as their parent, that they are separate. And, so, it's traumatic for them. And, so, we zoom forward all the way here to the Tower of Babel and see the repercussions that have happened since that event. We’ve read these repercussions and we’ve moved through a terrible flood on the earth. We’ve seen these repercussions. So, the people are exalting themselves and fully embracing their otherness, their separation and God’s like, “no. No. This isn’t going anywhere.” And, so, many theologians would say, “okay. You got…you got the lower gods or lower Elohim, you have the spiritual family of God, and they interact in different ways with the human family on earth and we see those types of interactions happening repeatedly throughout the Scriptures. But Gods not going to cooperate with His fallen spiritual family and His fallen human family attempting to exalt themselves. And this will not be the first time we see this kind of thing. God does not put up with that for very long, ever. And, so, one way of theologically looking at this is a disinheritance. God confuses the languages of the people and spreads the people out so they cannot be successful in sort of like deifying themselves. And, so, an end is put to that. When people begin to coalesce around their language. Then, immediately…immediately after that story we introduced to Abram. So, it’s like not out of place. This story happens, the people are spread out. Immediately we get interest to Abram who will become Abraham who will affect the entire rest of the Bible. So, God sends the people across the earth and then we get introduced to Abraham and it is through Abraham that God is going to do a new thing upon the earth and we’ll be watching that story and its challenges and victories for the rest of the year.

Prayer:

Father, we thank You. We thank You for the richness of Your word and we thank You for the opportunity to explore and to be disrupted and we ask Holy Spirit that You would come among us and help us to get comfortable with the idea of being disrupted or interrupted because we need to get used to this idea because this is one of the primary ways that Your word works within us. It challenges us, invites us to think, but it also invites us to tune into the ears of our hearts and understand that it's much deeper than what are five physical senses can become aware of. There is a lot more going on than we ever perceive. And, so, we invite You Holy Spirit into this week into everything that we’re going to do, all the choices that we’re going to make, all the words that we’re going to speak. May they be good. May they be honoring to You. And we pray this in Jesus’ name. Amen.

Announcements:

dailyaudiobible.com is the website, its home base, and its where you find what's going on around here, so be sure to stay tuned and stay connected in any way that you can and in any way that you will.

I will mention at dailyaudiobible.com in the Community section you will find links to all the different social media channels that the Daily Audio Bible level is on. And that is a great place to get connected.

I means, some of the pages, you know, you’ll want to follow because if we, you know, send out an alert, “there’s a problem with this or here's what's going on or whatever” then you’ll be able to be alerted. Others are groups, You can just interact with other brothers and sisters who are working their way through the Bible, like the Daily Audio Bible women's page that my wife champions. If you are a woman then…then it is her mission to encourage you and you find tremendous encouragement by staying plugged in to the women's group there. Then there’s DAB Friends, which is kind our loving free-for-all where conversation is continually happening. So, check out those links in the Community section at dailyaudiobible.com and stay connected.

Another thing about social etc. is like, once in a while, you know we read the Scriptures and talk about them, but there are times when it's like our hearts…the Scriptures have opened our hearts and the only way to really respond is in song or just to drive the point home it would take me, you know, 20 minutes and a bunch of words or it could be just this one song that moves beyond our intellect and just starts to speak truth into our hearts. And, so, we do that from time to time. And invariably, you know, we get asked, “who was that?” We post all that is to our social media channels so just if you’re following that you’ll always kind of know how that all works when it happens. So, there's today’s tip.

And if you want to partner with the Daily Audio Bible, you can do that dailyaudiobible.com as well. There is a link that lives on the homepage and I thank you with all of my heart for your partnership. If you’re using the Daily Audio Bible app, you can press the Give button in the upper right-hand corner or the mailing address, if that is your preference is PO Box 1996 Spring Hill Tennessee 37174.

And, as always, if you have a prayer request or comment you can now press the Hotline button, the little red button in the app at the top and just start talking or you can dial 877-942-4253.

And that's it for today. I’m Brian. I love you and I'll be waiting for you here tomorrow

Community Prayer and Praise:

Hello Daily audio Bible family this is Stephanie from Bangalore and I just wanted to call in. Its Friday, December 27th and I thank you all for praying, those of you who have been praying for me and my in-laws. This was my first Christmas, of course, as being married and my first Christmas away from my parent’s household as far as going there and celebrating and it really was in a lot of ways better than I could’ve ever imagined which is really, really great. So, thank you for praying and we were able to have a couple of my in-laws over for the afternoon and evening and that was actually just a really good time. So, praise God, thank you for praying. Please keep praying that I can build relationships there. And, of course, there’s always the next thing, always the next thing, always the next prayer request but thank you for that. Quick update on the little girl who got the kidney transplant. For the first time in 15 months she was able to go to bed the other night. She came home Christmas Day and she was able to go to sleep without any tubes at all. No catheter for dialysis, nothing. So, please just, you know, keep her in your prayers, keep the donor in your prayers as she is recovering from the surgery as well. But praise God for that. Thank you so much family and I am sure I’ll be calling back soon. Five.

Hi Daily Audio Bible family this is Rhula from the Sidney Australia. I was just listening to 27th December reading and prayers at the end of the reading. Anonymous called and she said something that really prompted me to call immediately. Anonymous, I’m just praying for you right now because that feeling that you feel where you’re in despair and you don’t know why you’re in a relationship with God because why, like you said, He’s always good and you’re not good and He’s always right and you’re wrong…you’re always wrong. Anonymous this is exactly why…why we need Him, because we can rest in his goodness and we can rest in his…in the comfort of knowing that the Lord Almighty who’s always right and who’s always…always knows everything, that He loves us unconditionally as we are. So, come to Him as you are anonymous, come to Him as you are because that is who He loves, you with all your flaws and all your mistakes and all your errors and everything that you feel like you’re just not good enough. Our Lord loves you as you are and that is the most profound and most amazing love that you could ever experience in the world, where it’s…He doesn’t judge us and He doesn’t condemn us and He’s a forgiver and He’s merciful and He’s grace and He’s good and his goodness will last forever and He will work all things for good because He loves us and He calls all things according to his purpose. So just remember that Anonymous. And remember that it’s not about you being as good as God. We will never be as good as God no matter what we do. He is enough, his love for us is enough and that’s what we need to know. And I just pray for you Anonymous. I pray that you get that strength for…from God…

Hi this is Marylin calling from the inland Northwest. This is my second call. I just started listening in October, somewhere around there. I do have an answer to prayer and that I asked prayer for my son who is in isolation in the psych ward, the hospital, he’s had a severe frontal brain injury back in 2002 and also mental illness. He is now out of isolation and actually they are wanting to release him, and he is very demanding and doesn’t listen, thinks he’s the medical professional and is going to be released. The problem is that I need prayer that he would be willing to…willing and understand that if he keeps doing the same old same old is insanity. He needs to be in a group home or something. He’s on very heavy-duty psych meds and he probably should be in a group home or some situation where somebody can be taking care of him and he can be monitored, and he can be also out of a very moldy sick apartment. So, I really appreciate it. I really appreciate everybody’s honesty on this podcast. I am so thankful for this program for everybody’s honesty and the vulnerability of everybody and I do pray for others as well and am so thankful I know I’m not alone being in a family with mental illness. So, thank you so much for your prayers and I am praying for everyone else that calls in. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful day. Bye.

Good morning this is Sally from Massachusetts and I’m calling for anonymous. Today is Friday, December 27th and I heard your call this morning. You were thinking about how you could meet Jesus if you pulled your car in front of the 18-wheeler. And I know what you’re saying when you say you feel like you’re very far from God. And when I feel that way, I remember that it’s me that’s turned away. God is still right there. And if you don’t know what to pray, sometimes “help me God” is the best prayer because that lets God know that you want Him to help you and He will help you. He will meet you wherever you are. And I know what you mean about how you don’t feel that you can go to anyone in your church or any of your friends to talk about your feelings. You know, you can call the suicide hotline. I did that myself. I was not suicidal but I just wanted somebody to listen to me cry and I had spent hours on the phone with a treasured friend but I still needed to talk and when I called them they didn’t offer advice or try to fix me the just asked me questions to keep me talking. And, you know, we as people, we want to offer advice, we want to help you and we want to reach out to you. Sometimes, just having someone listen and not judge is fantastic. So, I urge you to give them a call. And, also I’ve started journaling because I can get my thoughts down on paper and there out…

Hello, I’m calling myself “I am a Child of God”. I’m from Central Florida. I’ve listened since 2007 and this is the first time I’ve ever called in. I have two important requests. Sorry. I have two important prayer requests today. I’m praying for my father’s health. He has other issues that are causing him to have kidney problems. Of course, I pray that he be healed and not have surgery at all but if he does have surgery, I pray he is a very quick recovery. I’d like to have help from people that aren’t as stressful. I also pray for his salvation. He’s __ towards God. I pray God brings people into his life that he will listen to and that God talks to him in his sleep, in his dreams. I hope to call back again and get better at this. Thank you for your prayers. God bless you.

3 notes · View notes

thedcdunce · 5 years

Text

Dove

“You want our strength? You want our hope? You want our fear? You want our rage? COME AND TAKE IT!” - Dove

Real Name: Dawn Marie Granger

Gender: Female

Height: 5′ 9″

Weight: 120 lbs (54 kg)

Eyes: Blue

Hair: White

Powers:

Danger Sense Transformation

Abilities:

Hand-to-Hand Combat (Basic)

Base of Operations: Washington, D.C.

Universe: New Earth

Parents:

Russ Granger; father

Maire Granger; mother

Marital Status: Single

Citizenship: American

First Appearance: Hawk and Dove Vol 2 #1 (October, 1988)

Powers

Danger Sense Transformation: When in the presence of danger, whether to herself or others, Dawn Granger can call out the word "Dove" and be transformed into her Dove form. She does not need to be aware of the danger for the transformation to take place, so if she happened to say the word while unknowingly being in danger, the transformation would take place. The transformation only reacts to actual danger, so if Dawn incorrectly believed that she was in danger she would be unable to transform into Dove. The transformation wears off a short time after the danger has passed, unless Dove has received serious injuries which would kill Dawn, in which case she would remain as Dove until the danger from the injuries has passed. On high magic worlds she can remain as Dove for extended periods regardless of whether there is any danger present.

Hyper-Vigilant: As Dove her natural aptitudes are enhanced, such as her ability as a good judge of people and situations allowing her to read people and objects in a situation, within seconds, and know how they will act and react.

Flight: The transformation changes Granger into a minor force of Order and she gains some brilliant avian physical characteristics, which are usually hidden under her costume.

Superhuman Agility: Dove can dodge almost indefinitely, multiple times from multiple sources of action. She's dodged punches, swords, bullets and more multiple times.

Enhanced Durability

Concentrated Radiance: On high magic worlds her powers are enhanced, she can concentrate her radiance into a blinding beam of light. Likewise, during the Blackest Night, Dove was able to channel the White Light of Creation to destroy Black Lanterns with her aura.

Abilities

Hand-to-Hand Combat (Basic)

Origin

During the Crisis, Dawn Granger was in London with her mother. Her mother, a diplomatic courier, was at the American embassy when terrorists took it over, and threatened to blow it up. Unable to get help from the police, who were too busy with the panic caused by the Crisis, Dawn was contacted by voices that offered her the power to deal with the problem herself. She agreed, was transformed into Dove, and easily subdued the terrorists.

While she initially assumed she was one of a number of Doves, she later learned that the other Dove had died during the Crisis, and was concerned that he had died because she had taken his power. She traveled to the memorial service for the fallen heroes, where she managed to identify Hawk in his civilian identity, and followed him to try and discover who he was. She followed him for a while, seeing him become increasingly unstable, but lost him when she had to go into action as Dove.

Hawk and Dove

She eventually tracked him down in Washington, where both she and Hank Hall, were students at the Georgetown University. She deduced that the original Dove had been Hank's brother Don. While Dawn became part of Hank's circle of friends, Dove approached Hawk, although he was aggressively opposed to working with her. She helped him against Kestrel, an agent of the Lords of Chaos, who was trying to turn the increasingly erratic Hawk into their agent before the new Dove could act as a calming agent. Dove managed to calm Hawk down before he was completely transformed, and the Lords of Chaos, disappointed by this, destroyed Kestrel for his failure. Hawk accepted Dove as his new partner.

They took part in the resistance to the Invasion, where Dove first came into contact with other members of the superhuman community, then settled down to fighting crime mainly in the Washington area, where they fought such foes as Gauntlet, Azure, the Untouchables, Shellshock, Copperhead, Sudden Death, the Madmen, Velvet Tiger, and the Female Furies. She also began a relationship with Detective Brian Arsalla, head of the Washington Special Crimes Unit, both as Dove and as Dawn.

They were contacted by Barter, a very old trader, who offered them the identities of the mystic benefactors, if they would retrieve an old bible for them. They acquired it, from the Count St. Germaine, an old adversary of Barters, and he met his side of the bargain, by giving them the names of their benefactors, Terataya and T'Charr, Lords of Order and Chaos, respectively. When asked for more information, Barter insisted that a further service would be required for the additional information, and they declined.

Kestrel was recreated, and managed to gain possession of Hanks girlfriend Ren, in which it attacked Hawk and Dove, before traveling to another dimension, challenging them to follow. They contacted Barter, who agreed to arrange passage in exchange for the True name of the dimension, which Kestrel had told them. When they arrived on Druspa Tau, Hawk and Dove found their powers increased by the greater amount of magic on the plane, and that their costumes could now be removed. Doves form is faintly avian, constantly emitting a calming light. Dove joined the forces of Order, who peacefully ruled the world, while Hawk was convinced to join the forces of Chaos, led by the Lord of Chaos M'Shulla, who were seeking to overthrow Order. The two came into conflict, and battled to a standstill as the forces of Chaos overthrew the existing Order. T'Chaar and Terataya, who had been worshiped on this world, before M'Shulla had used magic to obscure the residents memory of their names, were eventually summoned, and fought M'Shulla. M'Shulla won, and T'Chaar and Terataya retreated to a nearby cave to die, summoning Hawk and Dove to them.

T'Chaar had been a Lord of Chaos, and Terataya a Lord of Order, who had fallen in love and become outcasts from both their houses. They had combined into a unity, to prove the potential of Order and Chaos working together. Their creation of Hawk and Dove had been a part of this experiment, which was to result in a child, who would be extremely powerful, a child of both Order and Chaos. As they died, T'Chaar and Terataya transferred their essences into Hawk and Dove, making the spells that empowered them permanent, and increasing their powers.

Responding to a mysterious message that her father was in trouble, Dove, along with Hawk and other former members of Titans West, went to his S.T.A.R. Labs workplace, and discovered that researchers had opened a portal to a Limbo where dead souls waited before going to the hereafter, and that they had lost a research team inside it. The group went in, and discovered a group of dead villains, including the Iron Major, the Top, and the Icicle, trying to escape. With the help of the reformed Icicle, and General Jeb Stuart, they stopped the villains. Before leaving, Hawk had considered trying to find his brother, and return him to life, but had been convinced that Don was in a better place, and had left nothing undone that he would need to come back for.

Hank was contacted by someone he was convinced was his dead brother, asking his help to return. Hawk agreed, and followed the instructions of his "brother", even stealing a gemstone from a museum, and abducting an already dead body from an accident, that of a family friend, Senator Tommy O'Neill. When the ceremony was completed, he discovered that the soul brought back from the dead was that of Roscoe Dillon, The Top, who claimed to the police that Hawk had tried to kill him. Realizing his mistake, Hawk went after O'Neill again, only to be stopped by Dove and Uncle Sam. While Uncle Sam convinced O'Neill to give up his seat in the Senate, Hawk gave himself up to the police. He was released to his parents custody until trial, and barred from becoming Hawk.

Monarch

Shortly before this, they had been visited by the being known as Waverider, and had sensed him reading their futures, although they could not see him or view the futures he saw. He had come from a future time, where the world was under the domination of the hero-turned-dictator Monarch. Waverider had the abilities to travel through time, and to read the futures of others. When reading the futures of Hawk and Dove, he found that in all their futures he could see, they ended up opposing Monarch, and they were the only one so scanned that did survive to oppose him.

Before Hawks trial could take place, while she was camping with Det. Arsalla, both she and Hawk were abducted by Monarch, who had traveled back from the future following Waverider, and Arsalla was killed during her abduction. Monarch seemingly executed Dove, and revealed himself to be an older Hank Hall. The younger Hank slew the older, took his armor, and became Monarch.

Dove had not actually been killed by Monarch. Mordru had used his magic to make it appear as though she had died. Mordru, a being of energy, needed a body capable of handling the powers of both Order and Chaos, so he drove Hank insane, turned him into Extant, then possessed him, and got Dove pregnant. Before Mordru could inhabit the body of their child however, the soul of Hector Hall was drawn to it. Mordru disguised Dove as the comatose Lyta Hall, in an attempt to weaken Hector's psyche, and she was only awakened from this as Mordru gained control of the body again. She helped the JSA defeat Mordru, allowing Hector to regain control of the body, then departed, claiming that there was a new Hawk out there that she needed to find.

Teen Titans

After reuniting with her estranged sister Holly, they became the new Hawk and Dove. Soon after, they helped the Teen Titans take down Dr. Light.

Later on, Cyborg formed a new team of Titans with Hawk and Dove on the roster. They were almost immediately attacked by an unknown assailant, and all were gravely injured. However, Hawk and Dove both made full recoveries.

Blackest Night

When Nekron attacked and the dead began rising from the grave, Dove's old partner, Hank, returned to life as a zombie. While he could not hurt Dove, he did manage to kill Holly. Dove later found that she was able to emit a mysterious white light from her body that could hurt Nekron's ring-wielders. She went on to be a great asset in taking down Nekron's followers. When Nekron was finally defeated, and the White Light was safe, a small group of heroes and villains were returned to life. Among that group was Hank Hall, who took back up the mantle of Hawk in place of Dawn's sister, Holly.

Since Hank's return from the dead, he has been really aggressive, even for him. This has lead Dove to grow increasingly concerned for him.

Some time later, Dove and Hawk joined the heroes of Gotham to fight off the Seven Men of Death and they kept them away from getting to their target, Vicki Vale.

Fun Facts

It is unknown how close to the danger she needs to be to transform.

The costume is normally irremovable while on Earth, but if it receives sufficient damage, it can tear and reveal part of her true form, which shines with the light of order, emitting a constant golden glow.

#dove #dawn marie granger #dawn granger #hawk and dove #titans east #dc #dc comics #thedcdunce

35 notes · View notes

thenightling · 5 years

Text

Oh, my God, my poor head. The irresponsibility of this website that so-called “Old school” witches are sharing a page long rant of misinformation that “Real” “pre-NeoPagan” witches were all Satanists

You fucking idiots...

Have you never seen a book from before the twentieth century!?? ...ever?!T

That stupidity passed off as fact was shared NINETY times and never corrected. Over 90 times!

Note: I was in a rush when I wrote this the first time around (about to head out the door). It has now been revised to be more accurate to what I meant to convey.

Okay, history lesson for you false Old-school Witches. You’re not going to like this but I will provide evidence explaining how wrong and headache inducing this is. I have news for you, old school Pre-Neo-Paganism witchcraft was NOT “Satanic”. No one said “Hail Lucifer” or signed a black book. No one said “Bless us, Satan.” And yes, there were practicing witches of the middle ages. I’ll provide the names of a few real world grimoires if you need. Sabrina does not portray old-school witchcraft practices. Old school witchcraft practices, much like neo-Paganism, did not have its roots in Christian lore. Let’s discuss Goethe’s Faust. Goethe was a closet Pagan in late eighteenth century Germany. He wrote the first part of Faust in the 1780s and the second part was found in his home in 1831 (after his death). Goethe was a closet Pagan. He was not pro-Satan. Goethe peppers Greek deities and even the Greek underworld in what was passed off as a very Christian story. In fact the final passage of Faust Part 2 he speaks of “Virgin (Maiden), Mother, Goddess,” and “eternal feminine.” This was a thinly disguised Triple Goddess reference passed off as The Virgin Mary. In Faust Part 1 Goethe had it that the Drudenfuss (pentacle) was the only thing that could trap or harm Mephistopheles (Who was a demon, by the way, and not Satan himself as the Urfaust- the deleted portion of the play featured a scene where Satan and Mephistopheles both are present). Faust, the character, even had a copy of The Key of Solomon which was famously only translated into English in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century by the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn believed in Hermetic magical practices rooted in the writings of Hermes Trismegistus. (Pre-Christian. Again: No Satanism here.) Now onto The Key of Solomon - This is a real Grimoire. The legends claim it is a translation of a Grimoire penned by King Solomon himself. This is not very likely as the oldest manuscript only dates back to the middle ages. That oldest known manuscript of it can be found in The British Museum. The Key of Solomon was not Satanic in nature. It was what we might call “Christopagan” or “Christomagi”. That means magick practiced within the confines of Christian lore. According to some legends (History Channel’s Banned from The Bible) King Solomon was given a ring with a pentacle carved into it, a gift from Michael The archangel, with the means to summon, bind, and control djinn (sometimes thought of as demons) and wandering ghosts. The grimoire mostly consists of sigils or elaborate pentacle circles for this purpose. It’s not Satanic, in fact it relies heavily on the idea that God wants us to be able to use benign magick to thwart the forces of darkness. There are some Christian sects that ignore the King James “Translations” that condemn the use of magick because of how contrary it is to the presence of the three Magi, the use of divination (Prophets) and other references to benign and even holy magicks in The Bible. (Note: There are similar Hebrew sects too.) There are some spells within the key of Solomon that The Hermetic Order of The Golden Dawn deemed “too dangerous” and “potentially black” and so was left out of the English translation. Aleister Crowley did not approve of this edit and so published the censored content as “The Lesser key of Solomon.” Faust was based on a fifteenth century German legend. Goethe’s version of the story is two centuries old but the original version is fifteenth century. And that brings us to the next point in my rebuttal. Johann Georg Faust AKA Johann Georg Faust (Faustus), the basis for the Faust legend. All legends have some root in truth. According to historic record Faust (the real Faust) was banished from Ingolstadt for practicing negromancy (black magick) and sodomy. (Note: In the fifteenth century Sodomy was any sexual act that was not between a married couple with a man on top, strictly for procreation. So if he was gay or bisexual is anyone’s guess. Mephistopheles is usually portrayed in the legend as gay, by the way and he wanted Faust as his slave). The historic Faust wrote at least two Grimoires. One of which is available in English. The Trifold Cohesion of Hell otherwise known as The Black Raven. Yet again, nothing actually pro-Satan in the book however there are invocations on how to summon and trap demons and one near-comical spell on cloak levitation with the warning to make sure the window is open first or there will be a disaster. Though many Christians believed Faust sold his soul to the demon, Mephistopheles (who is mentioned as a demon that can be invoked in his Grimoire) his Grimoire was mostly thinly disguised charms on how to protect yourself against demons, more than anything else and never praising them. It was a “Whose who” warning guide. Why this was obscured is anyone’s guess. Perhaps to frighten his enemies into thinking he was something more menacing than he was. I don’t know. Now, enough with historic or legendary Faust. Let’s move on to Shakespeare. There is an old legend / Semi-urban legend that the scene of the three Weird Sisters in MacBeth was based on Shakespeare observing a real witch Sabbath and so the play was cursed. This is why it’s bad luck to say MacBeth when talking about “The Scottish play” and why you should only say the name when talking about the character himself. If you pay attention to the famous scene, the three are not invoking any Christian lore demon but actually Hecate, the Greek Goddess of magick. This was in 1601. So a little early for modern Neo-Paganism. There’s also ample Hebrew magical lore which lead to things like the legend of the Golem, early Eastern orthodoxy which implied Saint Christopher was a werewolf, and Cabalism. None of these were pro-Adversary, mind you. Now let us go back further. Let us discuss Hecate and her worshippers or better yet let us discuss Druid magicks. Druid practices predate Christianity and the pentacle, as well, predates Christianity even if it was adopted by medieval Germany as a ward against demons. That’s why the German term for the pentacle (in Faust and earlier lore) was called the Drudenfuss (The Druid’s foot). As long as Christianity has existed there have been those who side with “The adversary.” there have been self-proclaimed Satanic witches, or Caininites (who felt Cain was a victim of a cruel and manipulative God), or “Luciferians.” But the majority of real magick practices (and I am not speaking of neo-Paganism here) has its roots either as christo-Pagan (Pagan with Christian elements like the Key of Solomon, which was also pro-Christian, not anti-Christian), or full-on Greko / Greek Paganism or even of Kemet (Early Egyptian) which would have had no concept of Satan as one to worshipped or called upon for aid. The Witch’s Hammer is NOT a history book. NEVER mislead people about history in front of me.

Sources for what I have said here: Faust by Goethe and translated by A. S. kline (to English)The key of Solomon and the Lesser key of Solomon (British Museum)The Black Raven by Johann Georg Faust (Faustus)Superstitions by Peter Lorie (Source of MacBeth superstition history)MacBeth by Shakespeare History Channel’s Banned from The Bible documentary And basic knowledge of Greek mythology The Golden Dawn: A history of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn

#Witchcraft #Wicca #Paganism #Neo-Paganism #Pre-Neo-Paganism #Chilling adventures of Sabrina is really starting to get people thinking stupid things...

6 notes · View notes

lifeafterthewatchtower · 6 years

Text

A critical look at “prophecy”

This post is written from the perspective of an ex-Christian and therefore with biblical prophecy in mind but can be applied to all sorts of prophecies. It is intended to give some food for thought when trying to determine whether something could be called “real prophecy”. “Why would I believe in the Bible?” A legitimate question. Especially since there are so many other “holy books”. What’s so special about the Bible? One “argument” of many bible believers is: “Fulfilled prophecy”. There are so many allegedly fulfilled prophecies in the Bible... so it has to be true, hasn’t it? Let’s look closer. Biblical prophecies are usually not used as arguments for the existence of God but rather as arguments in support of the existence of God and/or religious doctrine. They are used to build up confidence in the source of the prophetic claims: In this case the Bible, God, or any some religious figure (like a prophet).

But are these prophecies really reliable evidence?

What is a prophecy anyway?

Prophecies are clearly intended to be more than predictions. We need to have in mind that a prophecy is a supernatural claim, and the purpose of a prophecy is to demonstrate the reliability and power of the source of the prophecy (the Bible, God, the prophet, ...).

To count as a real “true prophecy”, it must fit all of the following criteria:

It must be in the Bible (change “Bible” to a holy book that fits if you examine non-biblical prophecies) - the original text, and not a later interpretation of the text. Retroactively adapting the meaning of words or even changing the words so that they fit events that were allegedly predicted can not count as prophecy.

It must be demonstrably accurate. If the fulfillment didn’t happen, or if we only (want to) believe it happened but have no real, demonstrable evidence, it cannot count as prophecy (Again: A prophecy is a supernatural claim to support the existence of a supernatural power. If we have no unambiguous evidence that it really happened the exact way it was prophesied, how would that support anything?). And if all "evidence” we have is a report about the alleged fulfillment found in the same book in which we find the original prophecy... and have no other account outside of that book to support the claim that it really happened, it cannot count as evidence. We do need external confirmation.

It must have verifiably been written before the predicted events. If all we have are copies of manuscripts that were written after the alleged fulfillment of the prophecy, things become really sketchy. And if the date and/or the events prophesied can’t be reasonably determined, it also cannot be a prophecy because then we have nothing to work with.

It must have clearly and intentionally been written as a prophecy. Claims or passages in the Bible that are taken out of their specific context and are retroactively projected onto events that happened (”retroactive shoehorning”, see here) are not prophecies. If something is not directly presented as prophecy or if we don’t clearly know whether something was meant to be a prophecy, it cannot count as prophecy.

It must be precise and unambiguous and not just a vague prediction or a symbolic claim that can be interpreted in numerous ways. A real prophecy can’t be open to interpretation. Or else it’s not prophecy. If it could mean something else it cannot count as prophecy. It needs to be specific about time and place and...

It needs to be answerable by a single clear occurrence or a set of occurrences. It can’t be open to fulfillment by a number of possible events. This wouldn’t be precise or unambiguous.

It must be improbable and extraordinary. Mundane predictions are of no use. Predicting “rain” is not prophecy. Predicting six months of continuous rain in a usually dry area... we’re getting closer. This could count as prophecy (if all the other mentioned criteria fit as well).

It must have been unknown. Educated guesses based off contemporary knowledge do not qualify as prophecies. Lucky guesses also don’t count as prophecies. They are not extraordinary, and therefore no evidence for a supernatural source. Predicting that a particular person will win the lottery is not prophecy. Even if they do. It’s a lucky guess. Predicting - say - 15 times in a row the exact amount of money 15 people will win in the lottery, and it actually comes true... we’re getting closer. This could count as a prophecy if all the other criteria fit. Or: Predicting a flood in an area that is known for floods or in which floods already happened is not prophecy. Predicting that “there will be darkness during daytime” followed by an eclipse (which could have been a calculation or a lucky guess) is not prophecy. If the eclipse was predicted for a time when it couldn’t have naturally happened... and then it did happen, we’re getting closer.

It needs to be time restricted and not open-ended. Given enough time, almost everything - no matter how unlikely it might seem - can happen. Predicting that there will be “a war” and not mentioning when exactly it will happen is not prophecy. It is almost inevitable that there will be some sort of war at some point in the future. No matter which place. You can apply this to almost every imaginable event. And the more time you give the more likely it will happen at some point.

It has to be publicly known but can’t be something that human beings can manipulate and/or achieve. It wouldn’t be a supernatural event anymore. A common argument by apologists is: “God prophesied that people will do it”. But believers will inevitably actively work for the fulfillment. A prophecy of that sort would be more like an instruction. Ordering a steak in a steakhouse and then getting it is not prophecy. Nor is “Fifteen years from now a boy will be born and he will be named Emmanuel. And this boy will become president” a prophecy. If it is publicly known, there will be people who will name their son “Emmanuel”. And the more people do this the more likely it is that one of the boys will indeed become president. And this is especially true in religious contexts in which believers are highly interested that a “prophecy” will be fulfilled. So - by definition - it wouldn’t be supernatural anymore.

If a prophecy is obscured though, it is automatically open to interpretation, therefore not unambiguous, and so cannot count as a prophecy.

In both of the last two cases, the prophecy would not be extraordinary (supernatural) anymore.

To sum it up: To count as prophecy, a claim needs to be absolutely unambiguous and fit all the above-mentioned criteria. Prophecies are used as arguments in support of the existence of God and his supernatural powers.

It cannot be emphasized enough that prophecies are supposedly supernatural and therefore they are extraordinary claims. And extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. An argument in support of the existence of God cannot be mundane, based on an ambiguous claim, based on something that could have happened by sheer chance, nor can it be “retroactive shoehorning” (the process of force-fitting some current affair into one’s personal, political, or religious agenda). Ambiguous “evidence” is not evidence. A god who wants to demonstrate his power through prophecy can not “keep a door open for interpretation”, this wouldn’t be a demonstration. The evidence needs to be clear and leave no room for doubt about the supernatural cause of the prophecy.

But most (if not all) biblical prophecies fail to meet not just one but even a couple of the above-mentioned criteria. Therefore these cannot count as real prophecies or count as evidence in the support of God or a religion.

This post is based on the following sources: 1) https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies 2) Atheist Debates - Prophecy Part 1 by Matt Dillahunty 3) Further reading: Prophecies for dummies and Skeptics dictionary: shoehorning

#prophecy #critical thinking #Atheism #Christianity #Bible #religion #prophecies #my writing

2 notes · View notes

randomnessunicorn-imagine · 6 years

Text

🎲 Cuphead Fanfiction ~

{ This is the second Chapter of another fiction I wrote and it’s very long, wow-! I have to say I had a lot of fun writing this chapter so I hope you all will appreciate it, and everyone can suggest me ideas and plot twists because it can be interesting, I accept every kind of advice. If you want you can visit my AO3 profile }

Pairing: King Dice x Neutral! Reader Rating: Orange (some thematic in this story can be considered blasphemous and harsh)

>>> FIRST CHAPTER <<<

Wicked Game [ second part ]

"Mother… Mother….Where are you? " you searched for your mother all over the house, with a little bouquet of violets in your hands that you wanted to donate to her. They were so colourful and beautiful, a sweet fragrance caressed your nostrils while you ran and some petals fell down to the ground leaving a trace of your passage. You kept screaming but none answered at your call so maybe your mother was not at home and you were talking with the air. This air was a dirty air; it smelled like dust and mould, because your mother did not pay a lot of attention to the home cleaning and so many times, you have to think about it doing the cleaning jobs for her.

Actually, you did not consider yourself like Cinderella because for you it was not a weight or a torture, you loved cleaning your house and it was still your home and living between the spider webs and rats did not make you feel comfortable. Then, you could distract and be alone with yourself. Cleaning was the only leisure you could have since, in her opinion, you should have spent all your free time reading the bible, praying and doing any activities that concerned religion and, how anyone could understand, they were not activities with which a child could have fun. The cleaning jobs helped you to escape from your Christian’s duties and maybe it was something more useful than praying or speaking with God. Your mother was nowhere to be found and maybe she was vanished into thin air, so you called her name again, "Moth—" when your voice fainted suddenly, hearing a voice. Her voice.

"Oh, God!" your mother yelled at the top of her lungs and you remained immobilized in front of her closed door so you posed your ear on it trying to hear what she was saying but her voice became a sigh and it was difficult to understand the words that came out from her lips. You supposed she was praying, this was one of the activities she practiced the most. She was devoted to God, but she was devoted in ways you could not even imagine… "Oh, Lord, you live in the Kingdom of Heaven, bless my soul…" said your mother with solemnity but there was something else. You opened, trying to be more careful and silent possible, the door, slowly. Shivers of fear were crossing your spine, you were not allowed to be here, and if your mother had found it out it would have not been a good surprise for you. Your mother was laying on the bed and it seemed she was too concentrate to her prayer to notice you. Her breath was heavier and from her mouth came out heavy breaths and sighs and you started worrying, thinking she had spams. She needed your assistance – thought your innocent mind- so, when you were going to show up yourself to help your mother, she spoke again with a louder voice and there was something strange in her voice that, at first, you did not recognize.

"My Lord, take me, I’m yours… Bring me to Heaven! " with your eyes wide open, incredulous in front of the scene that appeared in front of your sight, you held a gasp. That strange sensation, the origin of her screams was relating to lust even if you did not understand well the nature of her action because you were still an innocent child who has not experimented the sin of lust yet, but your instinct told you your mother was sinning. This was an awful truth to discover and you were shocked, tears fell down from your eyes while she was still screaming God’s name with her sinful mouth.

"God, my Saviour. I’ll be your forever!" she was touching herself, lifting her long skirt to show her slim and deformed legs that seemed the legs of a puppet or a branch of a tree. She opened her legs, inserting her own fingers inside her intimacy while she screamed the lord’s name in vain until her spasms became more luxurious and louder, you did not believe your eyes. Your violets were drowning under your own tears, which you were unable to hold back. "Oh, God, please…Come inside me… Yes!" your state of mind was so devastated that you were unable to decipher her words or her intentions. Everything just appeared so wrong in your eyes. So macabre and obscure and you refused to see this scene one more minute.

For all the rest of that day, you hid yourself in your room and, the moment you locked your door, you could hear the ultimate scream of your mother. Her yells of ecstasy echoed in the house as if they were ancient ghosts that paralyzed your body; your hands covered your ears, while she thanked God again.

***

Your vision blacked out and you came back to this reality, the sweat wet your forehead and your breath was heavy and irregular. It was as if you were emerged from the oceanic abyss. It was the abyss of your mind. Of your memories that did not stop to torment you, you shivered like a leaf on a tree during an autumnal night. You forgot where you were, what you were doing, all the audience made of abominable monsters that surrounded you, and they perceived your fears. They laughed of your fears and your terror was their primal source of nutrition.

"Our guest seems distraught" as you heard his voice, your state of mind got back sober even if this reality was too absurd to accept and you were so confused that you just stared at his green eyes without saying a single word. At the contrary of what you should have thought, Dice was not angry with you and he appeared so calm and relaxed while you were as tense as a bungee cord that was about to crack. "Do ya want to make a prayer before the game starts?" remarked Dice, noticing the particular pendant you wore, it was a golden crucifix and it was a gift your mother gave you to have God always by your side. This detail made the dice man a little disappointed but he seemed also so amused because it was rare seeing a believer in a place like this.

He asked himself if you were a sort of lost sheep and he would have been glad to show you the right path to follow. Actually, his thought was not completely wrong because you were so unsure about your faith. You were not an atheist and you were not even a sinner, but you were alarmed and sad, alone and lost in this mad world. "Did they take the wrong way? The church is on the other side!" said a monster and everyone laughed at his joke and you felt so embarrassed. This made your situation more complicated than before. You held your crucifix tightly as if it could help you for real but you were sure that praying was useless. It was useless in everyday life, much less in a demoniac place like this and you supposed sacred items lost their power in this place and maybe you were not even allowed to wear them here.

After a long silent and everyone supposed you became mute, you answered, keeping your head down, "No, I don’t!" and Dice was glad hearing it from you since nobody here had the patience to hear a sermon or some moralist declaration. "Oh, well! Let’s get this show on the road!" proclaimed Dice and all the crowd went wild. You just nodded not so sure about what was going to happen. An intense flash blinded you, as everything appeared so psychedelic and abnormal in your mind and the environment became so illuminated and effervescent that you asked yourself if you were in the same place.

In front of you, there was a big game table, King was staring at you with malice, curiosity, his figure, compared to yours, appeared so majestic and fearsome, and you questioned to yourself if he was the true Devil but you were just a lost soul in this Calvary. You held your breath trying to stay calm or, at least, appear calm since you were freaking out from your head to your feet. His smile was wide open, he was as if he was swinging to the rhythm of your beating heart, you kept your head down concentrating your vision to the table that was very huge, and coloured with words and numbers written on it and you had no idea of the meaning of all of this. Everything appeared just like a mysterious and alien symbolism for you.

"It’s such a shame a pure creature like you ended up in a damned place like this, have you lost your way home?" asked Dice, and his gaze never left you so you tried to look through his eyes but you found yourself caught again. You were not sure if you had to say the real reason why you were here. You took a deep breath before you answered, "I’m here by mistake, I just got lost" none in this hall was so stupid to believe your little lies, and King shook his head, showing a disapproval expression but it vanished instantly and his wicked smile appeared again. "Pure souls don’t tell lies" Dice smirked but the fact that you were not a complete candid soul was a gratification for him. You have still stolen your mother’s money and it was not a pure action, this fact came back to your mind and you understood lying was useless here. You were going to lose your soul, to disappear from this awful existence so you had no more secrets to keep or lies to tell. Everything was unworthy at this point.

"Pure souls don’t exist…" with your eyes still lowered, you confessed your inner thought. Nobody in this world was total good or total bad. Just like the ancient Chinese philosophy said, the yin and the yang could not live without the other. This was the equilibrium of the universe, the basis of life. "Well well, you have finally decided to speak. See, ladies and gentlemen, they’re not mute." all the crowd applauded like if they wanted to encourage you to talk about your story or philosophy of life even if you were not so enthusiasm to tell your thoughts and memories to them, so you decided not to answer keeping your mouth closed while you looked at the void in front of you.

"Ah, they’re so shy, why don’t you fellas be quite for a moment. They will never confide us their secrets if they are afraid so…" his eyes went wide open and he put his hand under his chin, observing you like if you were an object and not a person. You were a form of entertainment and people here could not get bored because of your lack of cooperation so Dice decided to make this game more interesting. You were still silent and impassive. "Let’s make this bet more stimulating" his voice made you worried and you swallowed some saliva as the light became more dazzling and you had to cover your eyes with your hands.

Everyone was waiting for your answer even this time, so you said «What? », you did not want to know in what way this game could be more interesting and you were so sick of everything. "You don’t have a lot to say, we’ll help you to open up a little more, darling" said Dice with a soft tone that scared you to death because it was obvious his intentions were not gentle. Then, he kept speaking again, " For every victory, you have to confess something about your distressed soul to us, are you in?" Dice was still sure your soul was pure despite your little theft and it was a theft he would approve and he could not wait to listen to your little secrets. It might appear not so useful for him but he would have obtained your soul anyway, so it was better to have fun as much as possible.

You were not a lucky person so you did not hope to win not even one time and you would have brought your secrets with you in your grave. This game was strange, you did not understand what Dice’s real purpose was, and maybe he just wanted to play with your little mind to entertain himself and all this audience. "Ok, I accept…" with the usual insecurity of your voice, you said and whatever would happen you were designated to lose some part of your dignity. "So, what do you offer for this match?" you really did not want to offer your soul, it was too odd and the instinct for survival told you to protect yourself. Yes, you wanted to leave your mother but you wanted to live too, despite you were so sad and confused, this was an instinct every human possessed. Then, you remembered the money you stole from your mother and maybe they could be useful for your aim and this was still a Casino, here cash flew but you had to be parsimonious and smart if you did not want to lose everything and then you would not have anything else to offer, other than your miserable soul.

"I have this…" you said showing your cash even if you have not even counted it and you were not so attached to money, you were not a materialist person. Your mother always spoke about humility, you had to be careful not to be tempted by the sin of avarice, and you still did not understand since she was the one who possessed money and not you. Your mother was so greedy and the only good actions she did possessed always an ulterior motive since her charity was a mere ostentation of her fake generosity. More you thought about her and more you understood how she was a true sinner.

"Looks like our guest doesn’t joke" from your appearance, nobody could say you were a rich person, and you did not wear designer clothes. Dice could understand something was wrong in you and he felt more curious than before, he chuckled before he continued, "Where did you steal all this money?" the crowd remained surprised and so many people started saying that maybe you were not that pure and you were going to burn in hell for all these sins. You just ignored them and you did not know how to answer to him because he guessed right and he could find out if you lied so you had to be careful with your words. "I took them from my mother, she didn’t know but I intend to give them back to her quickly." the crowd started mocking you saying how your heart was gold, you were worried about your mommy, what a precious child you were.

"Oh, but they are a lot of money and you have still stolen them from her. Are you sure to win?" King found you too amusing since you appeared so naive and he did not define you like a true sinner. Your action was just an infantile prank but your next phrase convinced him about your innocent mind. "Uhm, but they’re just pieces of paper…" you have never understood the true value of money, you just knew they were used for buying things and most of these things were useless, in your opinion. It seemed that your mother had booked a suite in Paradise if she had all that money aside, there were so many banknotes of 100 $ and some of 500 $ and maybe they were the saving of months since she was greed and she did not spend so much her money. It was absurd she wanted to give to the Church all this money but it was more absurd that you were going to lose all of it for a gambling, and she always said that gambling was the Devil’s work. You were committing the greatest sin of your life and you felt a little guilty for your mother, you had to admit even if she was worthless for you.

Then, Dice’s heart has softened hearing your comment because you were too naïve and he said, "It could be true, dear, but this world still turns around money, ya know!" his tone appeared so paternal and soft that you almost melted and you felt a little stupid. You realized you did not know a thing about this world and how could you win this game without not even know who you were or in what you believed. "Cut to the chase, darling. We’ve job to do and ya have to make your move!" he said smirking at you with his usual lascivious smile but you had to admit you got used to it. The entire crowd was staring at you but you did not care and you kept your cold behaviour. It seemed the time was frozen for you, and you had to start and push your luck –if it was present in you and you doubted very much-.

You had to launch your dice, hoping for some good result but you were still inexperienced in this game or in life in general. You did not know the sense of it and you supposed you were destined to lose. After a reflection, maybe you just wanted to lose time waiting for something or some help from God or some other divinity who could hear your prayer but nothing happened and everyone was still waiting for your move. Therefore, after you placed your bet, it’s your come out and you throw the dice. Your mind was so concentrated and immobilized that you saw the time moving in slow motion and your sight became foggy, it was like you were in another dimension or in another universe. While the dice rolled on the table all the crowd was screaming; the ones who bet on you and the ones who wanted to see you lose but maybe these lasts would have been dissatisfied. It seemed Lady Luck smiled at you this time and you did not even realize since your mind was still wandering in the land of confusion. "Look at that, you got 11!" the crowd applauded you and you did not even realize you won this first part and you have been lucky. With you, all the persons that have bet on the pass line have won with you while the others have lost their money but for now since it was the first round and nobody could say if you would have been lucky a second time.

You were just too incredulous to comment and even Dice was smiling at you but his grin was different, it was less malevolent and he was curious. He was sure yours was all some beginner’s luck and he has not forgotten the new rules about the game. Since you have won, you had to tell a secret. Maybe you forgot this little detail. "Is it ok…? " you asked with a calm and innocent tone of voice that he found adorable and he was almost sorry for you, that you had to confess your intimacies to this audience of monsters but a bet was still a bet. There was no coming back. He smiled at you with a malicious tenderness and you got worried. "Yes, it’s good. Maybe you are luckier than you thought, but we’re lucky, too" and then you remembered the new clauses of the game and you started freaking out.

If you did not lose your money or your soul, you had to lose your dignity, at least. You would not get out from this place safe and sound and without any scars because you knew the inner scars were the most painful and terrifying than any other visible wounds. "Pretend we’re your friends, darling. Here none of us wants to harm you, we’re playing for fun, it’s all a game, just trust in me. Nobody is going to hurt you. " you lost yourself staring at his green pupils and his soft and alluring voice was bringing you to Paradise and it gave you peace and serenity, you could tell to this man all your secrets. King was hypnotic like a sin and a temptation.

"Uhm… What should I say?" you asked trying to find yourself but it was so difficult and you did not want to recall your awful memories about your mother.

"Everything, darling. Everything…" the more you looked into his eyes and the more you desired to confide to him all your darkest thoughts and you felt trapped. You ran away from a cage to find yourself in another cage and it was not luck but only a miserable wicked game between you and him.

[ THIRD PART

FOURTH PART

FIFTH PART

SIXTH PART ]

#randomnessunicorn-imagine #cuphead dont deal with the devil #cuphead #cuphead fanfiction #king dice #king dice x reader #x reader #cuphead reader #fanfiction #cuphead king dice #neutral reader #reader with no gender

112 notes · View notes

abidingingodsgraceministries · 3 years

Text

◾TUESDAY NOVEMBER 3rd, 2020 ◾ABIDING IN GOD'S GRACE ©MINISTRIES ◾AIGGM BIBLE STUDIES ◾AIGGM Q & A ◾QUESTION: "Should Christians celebrate Christmas?" ◾ANSWER: The debate about whether OR not Christians should celebrate Christmas has been raging for centuries. There are equally sincere and committed Christians on BOTH sides of the issue, each with multiple reasons WHY or WHY NOT Christmas should be celebrated in Christian homes. BUT, what does the BIBLE say? Does the Bible give clear direction as to whether Christmas is a holiday to be celebrated OR not, by Christians? ▪First, let’s look at the reasons why some Christians do NOT celebrate Christmas. ◽One argument AGAINST Christmas is that the traditions surrounding the holiday have origins in PAGANISM. ◽Searching for reliable information on this topic is NOT difficult because the origins of many of our traditions are so obscure that sources often contradict one another, like MANY CLAIM! ◽Actually, it's the complete OPPOSITE! I have spent pretty much 4 YEARS ALONE, STUDYING, RESEARCHING, and LEARNING about holidays and their ORIGINS/ROOTS, PAGANISM, OUR TRUE HISTORY, Etc.. and almost ALL our "traditional holidays" stem from PAGANISM, PAGAN TRADITIONS, PAGAN HOLIDAYS, PAGAN RITUALS, PAGAN PRACTICES, Etc.. ◽ Bells, candles, holly, star[s], and yuletide/yule decorations, Etc.. are mentioned in the HISTORY of PAGAN WORSHIP! TAKE HEED and BE CAREFUL and EXTREMELY CAUTIOUS with the use of such in one’s home, that you do NOT return, partake, celebrate, practice, Etc.. to PAGANISM and ALL that that implies! [Also, look into the TRUE MEANING of the colors associated with Christmas, and so forth]. ◽There ARE definitely PAGAN ROOTS to ALMOST ALL of our traditions, there are SO MANY people, books, movies, shows, plays, groups, Etc.. That MASK, DECEIVE, and COVER UP these PAGAN TRADITIONS WITH associating them in disguised as and with OUR CHRISTIAN TRUE MEANING of Christmas! ◽Our Christian TRUE MEANING of Christmas is —the birth of the Savior of the world in Bethlehem. CHRIST makes up the name of Christmas for the most part, and IS the MOST IMPORTANT part of the NAME of Christmas. Now, Bells are played to ring out the joyous news, candles are lit to remind us that Christ is the Light of the world (John 1:4-9), a star is placed on the top of a Christmas tree to remember the Star of Bethlehem, and gifts are exchanged to remind us of the gifts of the Magi to Jesus, the greatest gift of God to mankind. ◽However, they have played us, deceived us, lied to us, Etc.. For YEARS .. For DECADES .. For CENTURIES, and masked their PAGAN PRACTICES and TRADITIONS IN and WITH our Religions, our Religious Beliefs, Etc.. About, Surrounding, and Around CHRIST! [Note To Add — Especially With Christmas, Easter, and Halloween?! (Etc..)]. ◽Another argument AGAINST Christmas, especially having a Christmas tree, is that the BIBLE FORBIDS bringing trees into our homes and decorating them. The passage often cited is Jeremiah 10:1-16, [part of this passage refers to cutting down trees, chiseling the wood to make an idol, and then decorating the idol with silver and gold for the purpose of bowing down before it to worship it], (see also Isaiah 44:9-18). The passage in Jeremiah makes a legitimate argument AGAINST Christmas trees. ◽Christians who choose to ignore Christmas, point to the fact that the BIBLE does NOT give us the date of Christ’s birth, which is certainly TRUE. December 25 is NOT even close to the time Jesus was born, and arguments on both sides are legion, some relating to climate in Israel, the practices of shepherds in winter, and the dates of Roman census-taking. ◽None of these points are without a certain amount of conjecture, which brings us back to the fact that the Bible doesn’t tell us when Jesus was born. Some see this as proof positive that God didn’t want us to celebrate the birth, while others see the Bible’s silence on the issue as tacit approval. ◽However, when you ACTUALLY READ and STUDY YOUR BIBLE'S, and do REAL TRUE RESEARCH, you'll find that Jesus' REAL Birth

0 notes

drmonte75-blog · 4 years

Photo

An Ordinary Commentary by Ordinary Men

“Living to Glorify God Brings Satisfaction to the Soul”

#Christianity #Church #Bible #Commentary

ordinarycommentary.blogspot.com

Righteousness and Ordinary Earthly Things - Matthew 6:19-34

Here we have presented the requirements for Christ’s followers to trust God completely and seek His kingdom first and foremost.

Andrew Fuller—Verses 19-20: “‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures.’ The Lord here proceeds to a variety of counsels, and all upon things in common life. The inhabitants of this busy world are taken up in accumulating something which may be called their own, and in setting their hearts upon it rather than upon God. So common is this practice that, provided they do not injure one another, it insures commendation rather than reproach. ‘Men will praise thee when thou doest well to thyself.’ Hence we are in greater danger of this sin than of most others. In opposition to this, we are directed to ‘lay up treasures in heaven.’ Not that the heavenly inheritance is the reward of our doings: but, believing in Christ, and setting our affections on things above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God, everything we do in his name, whether it be to the poor, or any others, for his sake, turns to our account. Heavenly enjoyment accumulates, as we in this way make much of it. It is thus that, in ‘giving alms, we provide ourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens which faileth not.’ Men commonly choose a safe place to lay up their treasure. It is said that many millions, during the late depredations on the continent, have been placed in the English funds; and no wonder. But still there is nothing secure in this world. If we would place our treasure in a bank where no marauder cometh, it must be ‘hid with Christ in God.’ From this passage, some have seriously concluded that it is forbidden us in any case to add to our property. To be consistent, however, they should not stop here, but go on to ‘sell what they have and give it to the poor: ‘for the one is no less expressly required than the other. But this were to overturn all distinctions of rich and poor, and all possession of property, which is contrary to the whole current of Scripture. To lay up ‘treasures upon earth’ is to trust in them, or make them our chief good, instead of using them as a means of glorifying God and doing good in our generation. This is evident from the reason given against it, that, ‘where our treasure is, there will our heart be also.’ The Lord prospered David; yet David’s treasures were not in this world. On the contrary, he was distinguished from ‘men of this world, who had their portion in this life;’ declaring, ‘As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied when I awake in thy likeness.’ If, however, our treasure be in heaven, we shall not be eager to lay up worldly wealth; but rather to lay out that which God intrusts in our hands for promoting the good of his cause, and the well-being of mankind.” 55 William Burkitt—Verse 21: “21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Observe here, 1. Something implied, namely. That every man has his treasure; and whatsoever or wheresoever that treasure is, it is attractive, and draws the heart of a man unto it: for every man's treasure is his chief good. 2. Something permitted; namely, the getting, possessing, and enjoying, of earthly treasure, as an instrument enabling us to do much good. 3. Something prohibited; and that is, the treasuring up of worldly wealth, as our chief treasure: Lay not up treasures on earth; that is, take heed of an inordinate affection to, of an excessive pursuit after, of a vain confidence and trust in, any earthly comfort, as your chief treasure. 4. Here is something commanded; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven: treasure up those habits of grace, which will bring you to an inheritance in glory: be fruitful in good works, laying up in store for yourselves a good foundation against the time to come, that ye may lay hold of eternal life. Observe, 5. The reasons assigned, 1. Why we should not lay up our treasure on earth; because all earthly treasures are of a perishing and uncertain nature, they are subject to moth and rust, to robbery and theft; the perishing nature of earthly things ought to be improved by us, as an argument to sit loose in our affections towards them. 2. The reason assigned why we should lay up our treasure in heaven, is this: because heavenly treasures are subject to no such accidents and casualties as earthly treasures are, but are durable and lasting. The things that are not seen are eternal. The treasures of heaven are inviolable, incorruptible, and everlasting. Now we may know whether we have chosen these things for our treasure, by our high estimation of the worth of them, by our sensible apprehension of the want of them, by the torrent and tendency of our affection towards them, and by our laborious diligence and endeavours in the pursuit of them. Where the treasure is, there will the heart be also.” 56 Albert Barnes—Verses 22-23: “22, 23. The light of the body. The sentiment stated in the preceding verses—the duty of fixing the affections on heavenly things—‘Jesus proceeds to illustrate by a reference to the eye. When the eye is directed singly and steadily towards an object, and is in health, or is single, every thing is clear and plain. If it vibrates, flies to different objects, is fixed on no one singly, or is diseased, nothing is seen clearly. Every thing is dim and confused. The man, therefore, is unsteady. The eye regulates the motion of the body. To have an object distinctly in view, is necessary to correct and regulate action. Rope-dancers, in order to steady themselves, fix the eye on some object on the wall, and look steadily at that. If they should look down on the rope or the people, they would become dizzy and fall. A man crossing a stream on a log, if he will look across at some object steadily, will be in little danger. If he looks down on the dashing and rolling waters, he will become dizzy, and fall. So Jesus says, in order that the conduct may be right, it is important to fix the affections on heaven. Having the affections there—having the eye of faith single, steady, unwavering—all the conduct will be correspondent. Single. Steady, devoted to one object. Not confused, as persons’ eyes are when they see double. Thy body shall be full of light. Your conduct will be regular and steady. All that is needful to direct the body is that the eye be fixed right. No other light is required. So all that is needful to direct the soul and the conduct is, that the eye of faith be fixed on heaven, that the affections be there. If, therefore, the light that is in thee. The word light, here, signifies the mind, or principles of the soul. If this be dark, how great is that darkness! The meaning of this passage may be thus expressed: The light of the body, the guide and director, is the eye. All know how calamitous it is when that light is irregular or extinguished, as when the eye is diseased or lost. So the light that is in us is the soul. If that soul is debased by attending exclusively to earthly objects—if it is diseased, and not fixed on heaven—how much darker and more dreadful will it be than any darkness of the eye! Avarice darkens the mind, obscures the view, and brings in a dreadful and gloomy night over all the faculties.” 57 Edwin Wilbur Rice—Verses 24-25: “No man can serve two masters. After saying that one must not hoard treasures of this world, Jesus next declared that one cannot have two objects, or, literally, be a slave to two masters. A free man might render such service, but here it refers to a slave. No man can be a slave to two masters, for a slave must render entire obedience, and the claims of masters will conflict. For it does not contemplate two partners, but two distinct masters, and none can render obedience to two conflicting orders at the same time. So we cannot serve God and mammon—mammon being an Aramaic word for wealth or riches, which are personified here. Thus Milton represents Mammon as one of the lost spirits. ‘Paradise Lost,’ bk. 2, 1. 228. Take no thought. or, ‘Be not anxious for,’ as in the Revised Version. The point is, do not spend your energies in getting wealth or in hoarding things for to-morrow. Do not even worry about your bread and butter, nor how you shall be clothed, nor where you shall live. Anxiety for this life is needless; anxiety for the life to come is needful. This does not mean to favor idleness and prevent industry, but only to prevent distraction of mind from God's service. Is not the life more. The meaning is, cannot God, who has given you life, be trusted to give food to sustain that life? For life is greater than food or raiment. This refers primarily to physical life; but the thought of spiritual life and spiritual food must not be overlooked. The Jews had a proverb, ‘Every one who has a loaf in his basket, and says, ‘What shall I eat to-morrow?’ is of little faith.’ But this teaching of Jesus goes far deeper than this proverb.” 58 Archibald Thomas Robertson—Verses 26-27: “The birds of the heaven. Luke (12:24) says ‘ravens.’ This beautiful illustration applies to the sustenance of life. The birds get food. Jesus does not, of course, mean for his illustration to be pressed too far. He is not advocating reckless indifference and idleness. Even the birds have to work for their food. Are not ye. If God takes the birds into his plans, he will his children. It is the argument from the less to the greater. Here again we must not put into the mouth of Christ what he does not expressly say. He assumes work and discountenances anxiety and distrust. He by no means advocates indifference to oppression and needless social inequalities, the problem of predatory wealth and of the unemployed. But the man in real straits must not lose sight of God his Father. Stature. The word is ambiguous. It is used for ‘stature’ in Lk. 19:3 and for ‘age’ in Jn. 19:21; Heb. 11:11. In the ancient writers it is more common for ‘age.’ In verse 26 Jesus has been discussing the ‘life,’ and ‘age’ would be the idea if he still has that point in mind. In verse 28 he turns to the ‘body,’ and ‘stature’ would best harmonize with that conception. It all turns on whether vs. 27 belongs to the discussion of vs. 26 or of vs. 28. The word ‘cubit’ certainly suits ‘stature’ better than ‘age,’ though a cubit added to one’s height would be no little increase. Before one is fully grown he does grow in stature, but not by ‘anxiety.’” 59 John Gill—Verse 28: “And why take ye thought for raiment. Having exposed the folly of an anxious and immoderate care and thought, for food to support and prolong life, our Lord proceeds to show the vanity of an over concern for raiment: consider the lilies of the field or the flowers of the field, as the Arabic version reads it, the lilies being put for all sorts of flowers. The Persic version mentions both rose and lily; the one being beautifully clothed in red, the other in white. Christ does not direct his hearers to the lilies, or flowers which grow in the garden which receive some advantage from the management and care of the gardener; but to those of the field, where the art and care of men were not so exercised: and besides, he was now preaching on the mount, in an open place; and as he could point to the fowls of the air, flying in their sight, so to the flowers, in the adjacent fields and valleys: which he would have them look upon, with their eyes, consider and contemplate in their minds, how they grow; in what variety of garbs they appear, of what different beautiful colours, and fragrant odours, they were; and yet they toil not, or do not labour as husbandmen do, in tilling their land, ploughing their fields, and sowing them with flax, out of which linen garments are made: neither do they spin; the flax, when plucked and dressed, as women do, in order for clothing; nor do they weave it into cloth, or make it up into garments, as other artificers do.” 60 Alexander Maclaren—Verse 29: “‘Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these,’ there is an instance of God’s giving more than barely enough; He lavishes beauty, He touches the flower into grace, and decks waste places with fairness, and ‘so’ clothes the grass of the field that we may learn that a fair spirit, who delights in a fair creation, a bountiful spirit who gives with both hands, presides over all things, and divides His gifts to men.” 61 Lyman Abbott—Verse 30: “30. The grass of the field .... cast into the oven. Weeds and grass were and still are used in the East as fuel. Ovens were constructed in various ways: sometimes of earth; sometimes a pit, lined with cement, served the purpose; sometimes baking was done simply on stones heated by fire previously kindled on them. The oven here mentioned was a large round pot of earthen or other materials, two or three feet high, narrow towards the top. This being first heated by a fire made within, the dough or paste was spread upon the sides to bake, thus forming their cakes. In all these cases the fuel was cast into the oven, and when the oven was sufficiently heated, was raked out again to make room for the bread, after the manner in vogue in the use of the old brick oven. The verse recurs to the underlying reason for not being anxious; God who cares for birds and flowers much more cares for us his children. Oh ye of little faith. He cares even for the untrusting (2 Tim. 2:13).” 62 Philip Doddridge—Verse 31: “Be not ye therefore any more distracted and torn in pieces (as it were) with anxious and unbelieving thoughts, saying, What shall we eat, or what shall we drink? How is it we shall be provided for, or what shall we wear, in the remainder of our lives? (For it is really beneath your character as my disciples, thus to distress yourselves on this account: the heathen, who are strangers to the promises of God’s covenant and to the hopes of his glory, do indeed seek after all these things: and it is no wonder that their minds are taken up with them: but you have greater business to employ you, and higher hopes to animate and encourage you;) for you may be assured that as your Father knows that you need all these things while you dwell in the body, he will not fail to provide them for you.” 63 John Calvin—Verse 32: “Matthew VI.32. For all those things the Gentiles seek. This is a reproof of the gross ignorance, in which all such anxieties originate. For how comes it, that unbelievers never remain in a state of tranquillity, but because they imagine that God is unemployed, or asleep, in heaven, or, at least, that he does not take charge of the affairs of men, or feed, as members of his family, those whom he has admitted to his friendship. By this comparison he intimates, that they have made little proficiency, and have not yet learned the first lessons of godliness, who do not behold, with the eyes of faith, the hand, of God filled with a hidden abundance of all good things, so as to expect their food with quietness and composure. Your heavenly Father knoweth that you have need of those things: that is, “All those persons who are so anxious about food, give no more honour, than unbelievers do, to the fatherly goodness and secret providence of God.” 64 John Heyl Vincent—Verse 33: “33. Seek ye first—Not only seek, it is ‘seek first.’ 1. First in point of time; morning conditions the day; twisted sapling gives of very necessity the gnarled and crooked tree. Even so youth’s best time for religious decision, and generally wisdom for all of us, is religion first in the life, first in the week, first every day. 2. Religion must be first in point of effort. We give energy, and care, and diligence to things according to their importance; even so, then, as eternity is longer than time, and the soul more precious than the body, in such proportion religion must be preferred to all other concerns that may engage us. 3. Religion must be first in the sense of being supreme; it is not a question of mere preference, but of rule.—J. M. Stott. Not with any reference to seeking all these things after our religious duties; that is, beginning with prayer days of avarice and worldly anxiety, but make your great object, as we say, your first care. —Alford. The kingdom of God—Be God's, wholly and singly; and let neither coveteousness on the one hand, nor mistrustful anxiety on the other, distract your attention or divide your service.— Vinet. His righteousness—Not here the forensic righteousness of justification, but the spiritual purity inculcated in this discourse.—Alford. 1. The aim of true life—‘The kingdom of God.’ 2. The business of true life—Seeking the kingdom. 3. The inclusiveness of true life—All these things shall be added.— W. W. Wythe. Shall be added—They shall be cast in as an overplus, or as small advantage to the main bargain; as paper and pack thread are given where we buy spice and fruit, or an inch of measure to an ell of cloth.—Trapp.” 65 David Thomas—Verse 34: “‘To-morrow shall take thought for the things of itself.’ To-morrow will bring its own blessings; the sun will rise and shine, the air will breathe its life, the refreshing streams will flow, the earth will bud and bloom, and all nature will work beneath its God to-morrow, to supply the wants of man and beast. To-morrow will have a God as yesterday and to-day, opening His liberal hand and supplying the wants of every living thing. The future has its trials. ‘Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.’ To-morrow will have its trials as well as blessings: afflictions, pains, sorrows, vexations, disappointments, are in the morrow. Our morrow will not dawn as the morrow of heaven upon a sinless world, and therefore will have its trials. The expression ‘sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof,’ implies that not only every day has its trials, but that anxieties for the future augment the trials of the present. There is a tendency in man to antedate his sorrows as well as his joys. Antedated trials are imaginary, and such trials are often the worst. First, they may never actually occur. Imagination is a busy prophet, it is ever speaking ‘of things to come,’ but its auguries are seldom fulfilled. It has not only promised us joys that have never come, but threatened us with evils that happily have never come to pass. How often have men looked on to some day in the future which they expected would be most disastrous to them; they have seen the looming clouds gather and blacken, and felt the most terrible foreboding. The day came, and there was no storm. Secondly, when imaginary trials occur, they are seldom so severe as was expected. Imagination exaggerates everything, it magnifies and colours all it touches. Thirdly, there is no consolation promised under imaginary trials. They are not calamities, they are crimes. Fourthly, they augment the real trials of life. Every day has its own trials. Providence has mercifully spread our trials over the whole period of life, to every day its own. By over anxiety we bring them together, and thus impose burdens on ourselves which often bar us from the pleasures, and incapacitate us for the duties of the present. ‘Let us not,’ says an old writer, ‘pull that upon ourselves all together at once, which Providence has wisely ordered to be borne by parcels.’ Be it ours to walk the changing path of life, identifying a God with loving every object along the road, and ever cherishing a child-like confidence in the parental providence which is over us, yes, and before us too. Let our steps be free and firm, let us bear the passing storms of the day, ever anticipating the sunshine of to morrow.” 66 Endnotes: 55 Andrew Fuller, The Complete Works of Rev. Andrew Fuller: Expository Discources and Notes-Sermons and Sketches-Circular Letters-Letters on Systematic Divinity-Thoughts on Preaching-Life of Pearce-Apology for Missions-Tracys and Essays-Reviews-Answers to Queries-Fugitive Pieces, Volume 2 (Boston: Lincoln, Edmands & Company, 1833), 102. 56 William Burkitt, Expository Notes, with Practical Observations, on the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Volume 1 (Philadelphia: Thomas Wardle, 1835), 29-30. 57 Albert Barnes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Gospels Designed for Sunday School Teachers and Bible Classes, Volume 1 (Philadelphia: Harper & Brothers, 1840), 86-87. 58 Edwin W. Rice, Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew (Philadelphia: The American Sunday-School Union, 1897), 83-84. 59 A. T. Robertson, Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1911), 111-112. 60 John Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament in Which the Sense of the Sacred Text is Given, Volume 1 (London: Mathews & Leigh, 1809), 65. 61 Alexander McClaren, The Gospel of St. Matthew, Volume 1 (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1892), 101. 62 Lyman Abbott, The New Testament with Notes and Comments: Accompanied with Maps and Illustrations (Matthew and Mark) (New York: A. S. Barnes & Company, 1876), 107. 63 Philip Doddridge, The Works of the Rev. P. Doddridge, Volume 6 (Leeds: Edward Baines, 1804), 229. 64 John Calvin, A Commentary On a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Volume 1 (Edinburg: The Calvin Translation Society, 1836), 343. 65 J. H. Vincent, The Lesson Commentary on the International Lessons for 1880 (London: Elliot Stock, 1879), 65-66. 66 David Thomas, The Genius of the Gospel: A Homiletical Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew (London: Dickinson & Higham, 1873), 69-70.

0 notes

austenmarriage · 4 years

Text

New Post has been published on Austen Marriage

New Post has been published on https://austenmarriage.com/1531-2/

Sifting Through Austen’s Elusive Allusions

Excellent researchers have divined many, many references and allusions that Jane Austen makes in her novels and letters. In his various editions of her works, R. W. Chapman lists literary mentions along with real people and places. Deirdre Le Faye’s editions of Austen’s letters include actors, artists, writers, books, poems, medical professionals, and others. Jocelyn Harris, Janine Barchas, and Margaret Doody have written extensively about people, places and things on which Austen may have based situations or characters. Some of Jane’s references are clear, some artfully concealed.

Yet we should be cautious about the great number of literary or historical finds uncovered by modern scholarship, because we often don’t know how many of these Austen knew herself. When a modern researcher cites an historical person from a couple of hundred years Before Jane, the marginal query must always be, “Did JA know this?” Many, she likely did. But probably not all. Maybe not even most.

Also, we don’t know how many references and allusions are tactical rather than strategic. Many authors include passing topical references with no other goal than to place the events of a novel in a particular time and place. A writer in 1960s America might show anti-war footage playing on a television. A current writer might mention a controversial American president or British prime minister. But unless a common theme directly connects the background references with the main storyline, these references are likely tactical rather than strategic.

Here, “tactical” means the reference has no profound meaning beyond the text. “Strategic” means an effort by the writer to establish a more general social, political, or historical context. A reference to a Rumford stove in Northanger Abbey, for example, is tactical, playing a newly invented appliance off the heroine’s expectations of dank passages and cobwebbed rooms. The naval subplot in Persuasion, on the other hand, is strategic. It incorporates not only the overall historical context but also the moral and intellectual contrast between the military men who have earned their wealth versus the wealthy civilians who are squandering theirs.

For many other items, it is difficult to determine the precise source. Education and literature in Great Britain then involved a small, fairly closed set of people. Limited common sources included the Bible, Shakespeare, and authors from the classical tradition. A common set of teachers came from the same small number of colleges using those limited sources. Everyone who admitted to reading novels drew on the same small pool of books.

It is conventional wisdom, for instance, that Austen took the phrase “pride and prejudice” from Francis Burney’s book Cecilia, where the capitalized phrase appears three times at the end. However, the literary pairing of “pride and prejudice” occurs elsewhere, including the writings of Samuel Johnson and William Cowper, two of Austen’s other favorite writers.

Even First Impressions, the original name for this novel, may have come from a common vocabulary. First impressions, and not being fooled by them, was a literary trope. In Ann Radcliffe’s The Mysteries of Udolpho, the heroine, Emily, and the secondary heroine, Lady Blanche, are warned not to rely on first impressions. This novel, shown above by the headline, is mentioned so often in Northanger Abbey that it is almost a character. The concept also arises in the works of Samuel Richardson. Austen may have borrowed from one of these specific authors. Or all the authors may have used a common literary vocabulary. Indeed, it was the recent publication of two other works with the title First Impressions that led Austen to change her title.

Another question is whether Austen knew the many layers of references that academics often point out. She apparently had free run of her father’s 500-book library, but we don’t know what it contained. As an adult, she had occasional access to the large libraries at her brother Edward’s estates at Chawton and Godmersham. How much she read of the classical material there, we don’t know.

Jane knew Shakespeare and the Bible well. She knew many poets, but would she have read a still earlier classical writer referenced by those poets? Did Austen know Shakespeare’s sources, which were often obscure Italian plays? We might be able to trace many connections back to the Renaissance or before, but she may have known only the immediate one before her.

Harris, Barchas, Doody, and others have given us multiple possible historical references to the name Wentworth in Persuasion. Austen might use the name to tie into this network of families and English history going back hundreds of years (strategic). Or she might use the name because of its fame in her day (tactical). The direct novelistic use is to contrast Sir Walter, who measures family names in terms of social status, with the Captain, who fills his commoner’s name with value through meritorious service. Sir Walter finally accepts Wentworth because of his wealth and reputation. He was “no longer nobody.” Yet the baronet can’t help but think the officer is still “assisted by his well-sounding name.”

Barring a letter or other source in which Austen states her purpose, we have no way of knowing whether Austen intended a broader meaning to “Wentworth” than its general fame. To some, the name in and of itself establishes the broad historical context. To others, it would take more than the three or so brief references to Wentworth, as a name, to show that Austen means to establish a meaningful beyond-the-book purpose.

Another consideration is that, cumulatively, commentators have found an enormous number of supposed references and allusions in Austen. Could a fiction writer, with all the work required in creating, writing, and revising a novel, have the time and energy to find and insert a myriad of outside references and allusions? Could a writer insert many references without bogging down the work?

Every writer who has tried her hand at historical fiction, for example, knows that too much history can overwhelm the novel’s story, leaving characters standing on the sideline to watch events pass by. Every external reference creates extra exposition that creates the danger of gumming up the plotline. It might also create a new emotional tone at odds with the characters’ situation or other complexities that must be resolved. We can’t underestimate the extra work for an author who already has her head full of practical book-writing issues—plot and character development—that need to be kept straight.

Finally, writers often plant things for no other reason than fun. In Northanger Abbey, John Thorpe takes Catherine Morland for a carriage ride early in the story. Barchas points out that he asks her about her relationship with her friends, named Allen, at just the point where their carriage would be driving past Prior Park, the home of Ralph Allen. This was the stone mogul who helped build Bath.

Austen does not explicitly call out the family home. Readers who know Bath’s geography and make the connection to the wealthy masonry clan get an extra chuckle. Readers unfamiliar with the geography, or with the wealthy Allen descendants, would not suffer from a lack of understanding.

All a reader needs to know is that Thorpe thinks the Morlands are connected to a very wealthy family, when in fact their friends named Allen are only modestly well-to-do. Thorpe’s misunderstanding drives the book’s plot. Very likely, all Austen wanted with the Prior Park allusion was to give a wink to the bright elves reading her book.

Thus the author may mean one thing, while later analysts might find something beyond what the writer ever intended. In Mansfield Park, for instance, Henry Crawford reads Henry VIII aloud. A broad interpretation might connect the attitude of the rogue Henry Crawford with the attitude of the rogue Henry VIII: Women and wives are interchangeable, expendable, to be taken at whim and tossed away at whim. Or perhaps the name Henry is nothing more than a tip of the hat to Jane’s favorite brother, Henry.

Austen may well have intended multiple levels of interpretation. But note that she has Henry Crawford himself say that Shakespeare is “part of an Englishman’s constitution … one is intimate with him by instinct.” Edmund Bertram agrees: “We all talk Shakespeare, use his similes, and describe with his descriptions.”

Others may feel that Austen deliberately weaves in as many references as she can. One must imagine her writing with a variety of concordances stacked to the ceiling. But she indirectly tells us of a different approach. One is “intimate” with Shakespeare by “instinct.” She knew the Bard and other writers in depth, and the references come out organically. Much more than by design, this fine writer pulls what she needs from history by “instinct.”

—

The Marriage of Miss Jane Austen, which traces love from a charming courtship through the richness and complexity of marriage and concludes with a test of the heroine’s courage and moral convictions, is now complete and available from Amazon and Jane Austen Books.

#18th century literature #Captain Wentworth #Jane Austen #Northanger Abbey #Persuasion #Regency era #Regency literature

0 notes

rajpersaud · 4 years

Text

Can your intellect save you in a pandemic? Zena Hitz on her new book 'Lost in Thought'

You can also listen to this interview on a free app on iTunes and Google Play Store entitled 'Raj Persaud in conversation', which includes a lot of free information on the latest research findings in psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience and mental health, plus interviews with top experts from around the world. Download it free from these links. Don't forget to check out the bonus content button on the app.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rajpersaud.android.rajpersaud

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dr-raj-persaud-in-conversation/id927466223?

An invitation to readers from every walk of life to rediscover the impractical splendors of a life of learning In an overloaded, superficial, technological world, in which almost everything and everybody is judged by its usefulness, where can we turn for escape, lasting pleasure …

Lost In Thought: The Hidden Pleasures of an Intellectual Life is newly published by Princeton University Press. In it I defend intellectual activity–reading, thinking, studying, pondering–as worthwhile for its own sake, and as a key part of human happiness. You can order it at the Press (50% off until June 28), with free shipping. Or, order it from Barnes and Noble or find it at your preferred bookstore.

Reviews

“The life of the mind”, Jonathan Marks, Wall St Journal.

“Surviving solitude: Why is quarantine reading so difficult?”, Elayne Allen, The American Interest.

“Cultivating the inner life in the time of COVID”, Flagg Taylor, National Review

“Reader with a cause”, Sophie Duncan, Literary Review.

“The real value of an education”, Jennifer Frey, Classical Learning Test blog.

“The intellectual vocation“, Josh Hochschild, First Things.

“Vidas occultas“, Daniel Capó, The Objective (in Spanish / en Español)

press.princeton.edu/ideas/escape-from-quarantine

Escape from quarantine

By Zena Hitz May 12, 2020

Lost in ThoughtAvailable in 2 editions

Like many professional intellectuals, books were my original escape. I was a strange child with abrasive manners, and real life was lonely and chaotic. I read ceaselessly, anything I could get my hands on. I read on the bus from school and got off, walking while still reading. My father and I went to the library on Sundays; there was an eight-book limit, so I took eight, and brought back the eight I finished last week. I laid waste to the rotating wire rack that held the young adult section and moved onto the fiction my parents liked.

In college I learned to read difficult books, to find a beachhead of clarity in a sea of words and to work my way out from there. Brutal honesty was required: if I didn’t understand something, I had to ask. Otherwise I’d be at sea in the classroom, nodding without agreeing, hearing without learning, caught in a pretense for which there was no honorable way out. Voicing uncertainty was the only way to connect. I developed a habit of uncertainty and then a taste for it. I discovered then that I could also get lost in puzzling through something, in finding patterns and parallels, tracking references, analyzing passages.

When I began trying to articulate the value of intellectual life, of reading and thinking, I was drawn to stories about the intellectual lives of prisoners. Consider Malcolm X, who was arrested in 1946 for theft and sentenced to eight to ten years in prison. At the time of his arrest, he lived a life dedicated to pleasures high and low: music, dancing, gambling, women, drugs. When he was released in 1952, he was a different man, impassioned and forcefully honest, devoted both to his new Muslim faith and to fighting for a better life for African-American communities. In the intervening six years, he had read most of the prison library: the Bible and the Qu’ran, Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche, and the histories of European and African peoples. He felt his old ways of thinking disappear, “like snow off of a roof.” He filled his letters with verse, writing to his brother: “I’m a real bug for poetry. When you think back over all of our past lives, only poetry could best fit into the vast emptiness created by men.” He described his time in prison in another letter as “a blessing in disguise, for it provided me with the Solitude that produced many nights of Meditation.”

There are many such stories: Andre Weil, Simone Weil’s brother, undertook a major mathematical proof while in a French prison in 1940; Antonio Gramsci produced voluminous writing, despite excruciating physical suffering, while imprisoned by Mussolini. Irina Rutushinskaya, a Russian dissident imprisoned in the 1980s, wrote poetry on bars of soap with matchsticks and washed it away when she had memorized it. She wrote out the poems on cigarette paper later to be smuggled to the West. The poems, the proofs, the notebooks, and the speeches cast a light that obscures the brutal suffering in which they originated. Through them we share indirectly in the escape that these prisoners found in themselves.

Much of the known world is now in enforced isolation, prying these stories loose to the surface. Isaac Newton, we are told, discovered calculus while quarantined, and Shakespeare managed to squeeze out King Lear in similar circumstances. And yet despite my years of intellectual training, and despite having written a book on the value of withdrawn inwardness, like most everyone else these days, I am unable to read seriously or to think. I am anxious and continually distracted. I would give anything to be able to lose myself in thought—but it feels impossible. What accounts for the gap between the determined, thoughtful prisoners and ourselves?

I can’t be sure, but I can speculate. The difference is surrender. To get to the inner depths, one has to give up on controlling one’s surroundings. For that, uncertainty has to give way to acceptance. We have to be able to say: “This is all there is, right now. What can be done with it?” But it is nearly impossible to say such a thing, much less to mean it, when we live and breathe uncertainty, when anxiety about the future is far more salient for us even than isolation.

We face an additional challenge that previous generations of isolati did not. Even apart from quarantine, a major sector of the economy is built to profit from our distraction. We live in environments designed in their smallest details to draw our attention, as Matthew Crawford catalogues in The World Beyond Your Head. Those of us (however privileged) who are able to work online have very little margin to escape. Anxiety is the perfect engine to churn the seamless slurry between our metrics-driven work and our chosen distractions. Our screens wall us off from ourselves.

T.S. Eliot warns that “human kind cannot bear very much reality”, and he is right. Distraction can be medicinal or wise. Nor can we continually punish ourselves for not having the discipline to recover elements of our education that might help us, or for not turning to our own library with the determination that Malcolm X took to his. What then can we do?

We can lower our expectations for ourselves, and face our anxious uncertainty with honesty and courage. We can seek out a beachhead, a base of operations, a time of peace however small, and work our way out from there. That said, the surrender that we need is frankly a gift of grace.

Fortunately, grace runs in channels. We will run ourselves down. The ultimate moment of exhaustion and despair may furnish the seed that blossoms into a new focus. Beyond the screens lie realms of wonder, truth, and connections with others that reach to our depths. We all know this. Let’s face each moment with all the clarity we can muster and wait for the door to open.

Zena Hitz is a Tutor in the great books program at St. John’s College in Annapolis, Maryland, where she also lives. She has a PhD in ancient philosophy from Princeton University and studies and teaches across the liberal arts. Website: zenahitz.net Twitter @zenahitz

Check out this episode!

0 notes