03-22-2005, 11:01 PM | #281 |
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Narnia
Posts: 1,656
|
hmm...I have a very good argument on why the U.S. should not have entered WWI...
[/lurking]
__________________
Mike nodded. A sombre nod. The nod Napoleon might have given if somebody had met him in 1812 and said, "So, you're back from Moscow, eh?". Interested in C.S. Lewis? Visit the forum dedicated to one of Tolkien's greatest contemporaries. |
03-23-2005, 04:22 AM | #282 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Nurvi, read and respond!
Nurvi, you mentioned a page or two ago that you feared you were hijacking the Theology thread. Don't worry about it! I'm enjoying listening to the conversation enormously. Getting on tonight, I read the conversation from the 15th page to the 12th, everything backwards . Then I had to read it all 12th to 15th to get it all in context again, which made it much more comprehensible and understandable. It's quite interesting and exciting to read and listen to!
One thing I just wanted to add, concerning RÃ*an's "solid general observations" about the different gender-caused traits of girls and boys. I just wanted to mention that that's all I've experienced too. I also wanted to bring up a particularly strong example that shows the differences between genders. In my family, my older sister stopped playing games of any kind faster then she ought to have . My younger sister tried to get her to play barbies and such, but she was simply not interested in any games, masculine or feminine. All she liked to do was read. All the boys play senseless battle games for fun, and she had to play barbie games by herself. She was fully aware that she was more then welcome to join into our battle games, but she preferred to play alone with her more feminine games then to join into ours, which she was completely uninterested in (which to me is perfectly understandable). She used to play romance games by herself, because no one else was interested. She plays a lot with us too, a lot a lot. As it happens though, in the enormously complex games she plays with us, she always leaves the battles to us to play. That says something! She's grown up in a household full of boys and enjoys it a great deal. The only "society pressure" that she goes through is to conform more to the games males enjoy, and she most strongly resists it. She's more relational too, as is my mother, while my father and his sons are much, much less. My older sister also is more relational, capable of forming friendships easily. Us boys stand around like statues in an ancient park, in public. As does my father. The girls do not. I think my younger sister, with the powerful opposite society pressure she encounters, is a very strong example of how gender causes people to be different. Oh yes, another example! My mother! She absolutely loves romance movies, 'chick flicks', and is extremely relational and all that. She grew up in a house with . . . let's see . . . at least three brothers and no sisters. She nonetheless managed to remain extremely feminine, in the face of all that. While she isn't as impressive an example as my younger sister, who is homeschooled and thus outside of much influence other than her brothers, it still is a strong example. My Mom's mother remarked to me about how her sons all played the shooting war games and such as well. I also have heard stories of parents attempting to keep their children away from all forms of violence. They bought them different toys, like cars and grocery stores and little people to play with, without any weapons or combat figures. The boys were extremely bored with these presents at first, but soon started using their imaginations to turn those toys into soldiers and the grocery stores into forts. That's us. Men.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
03-23-2005, 05:40 AM | #283 | |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
I just read through four pages at once, so it's entirely possible I've missed something, but never mind...
Quote:
What is the purpose of Biblical submission? You said that it wasn't just about keeping the peace. I can see that it could have benefits in that it's 'good for people' to learn to submit their own desires, and to learn how to exercise authority wisely... anything else? Why is it women submitting to men, rather than the other way around? You've said that it's because men and women are different, by which I imagine you mean that men are designed to be leaders and women are designed to be followers. How does this work for people who don't fit those roles - for the exceptions to the rule? I said a couple of pages ago (it got buried, I think ) that I was dismayed by the idea of a Christian ideal which can't possibly apply to every relationship. Are people in a marriage where the woman is the best leader justified in just ignoring the idea of submission? Lastly (kind of related...), would you consider submission a suggestion or a command for Christians? IOW, is it "try this if you have problems in your marriage, it could sort them out" or "these are the roles and duties prescribed for men and women in marriage, and it's wrong not to follow them"?
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
|
03-23-2005, 06:47 AM | #284 | |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
Quote:
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. Last edited by sun-star : 03-23-2005 at 06:51 AM. |
|
03-23-2005, 10:04 AM | #285 | ||||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Good to see you guys Lief, Mercutio, and Sun-star.
Quote:
Quote:
My brother and I experienced this to varying degrees. I played with dolls, my brother built models. We played together a lot - Brio train sets, chess, other board games, climbing our two trees, building forts out of couch cushions and whatnot, etc. We both played soccer (I played a lot longer though), we were both in karate (he joined first and got me into it, but I am still in it many years later). We were both into art and took art lessons, we both took music lessons (he was generally better at it and much more dedicated, but I do still play classical guitar. For some reason guitar is mainly a "guy instrument". I don't get it. My borther plays the oboe and piano, both "unisex instruments".) I played rugby, my brother played tennis seriously (we started playing together but I quit after a couple years, and he kept going and was quite good). My brother used to downhill ski race and he's still and awesome skiier. I took skiing lessons but always skiid for fun (I am good though. Or was anyway.) I also swam and was on the badminton team. Generally, I played more sports and my brother did more in music (band, jazz piano and singing, classical piano, and orchestra). He took two band classes in secondary school and I took metal shop/power mechanics and art. Where will all this apply to my future marriage? Well... my future husband is also in karate. We do and will train together. That wouldn't really affect our marriage though. Had my boyfriend taken the opportunity in high school, I imagine he'd be brilliant at rugby. All the experiences my parents gave us gave me a huge appreciation of art, sports, shop, cooking, and music. Everyone in my family is a good cook, and good, healthy food and skillful cooking is highly valued in our family. My boyfriend (and future husband) used to be a cook, and it still an excellent cook. I imagine our children will learn the value of good food early on. (I hope they take an interest in cooking, but I won't force them to participate beyond doing their share around the house.) I can't think of any other possible applications. None of the above is particulary gender-specific, barring that being a cook is also a "guy job". I didn't quote your example, but I did read it. It just so happens that your family fits the general obvervations RÃ*an made about relational behaviour etc. This probably applies to a lot of different people - enough for these generalizations to have basis in reality. However, I think that society allows this generalization to perpetuate itself by some people thinking they should do "what all women do". Boys are often ridiculed for playing "girly" games, for example. Parents may try to shield their children from all violence, but this disregards the significant influence of a child's peers. With respect to marriage, what good is a generalization unless it applies to you? If you and your spouse are having problems communicating, the observation that many women are good communicators is useless unless your wife actually is a good communicator. That's why I put such an emphasis on the skills, values, strengths, and weaknesses of the people actually involved in the marriage in question. I still fail to see why it matters so much what other people do when trying to solve problems (or any aspect of the marriage) in one's own marriage.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Nurvingiel : 03-23-2005 at 10:08 AM. |
||||
03-23-2005, 10:31 AM | #286 | ||||||||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
However, I will make one comment about social studies in general (oh no, it's that word! ). It is very easy to inadvertently introduce bias into your results despite all the precautions. In the study you mention, it's possible that the children altered their behaviour to varying degrees because there were adults making observations. (I'm not saying this did happen, I'm just saying it's certainly possible that it happened.) The children may have changed their style of play because they felt they were supposed to be playing a certain way. The boys may have felt shy letting a stranger see them talking the their truck. The girls may have felt silly making airplane noises and pretending their hand was an airplane for reasons they wouldn't be able to explain, but culture and society does affect children at a very young age IMO. In my opinion, children of all ages are very perceptive and intelligent. Quote:
Quote:
Ditto the above for husbands. I just don't see this being helpful. Like I detailed above, I really don't think individuals in a marriage need a generalization about gender as a frame of reference. Quote:
Well I do agree with this last part of your post. I think you and I will probably continue to disagree about the usefulness (or lack thereof) of generalizations WRT gender. Why don't you have one response to this post, then we can lay this aspect aside and move on to other aspects of Biblical submission? Maybe other points about submission will shed some more light on gender roles in society, and their relationship back to Biblical submission. For me, I still don't understand the idea of Biblical submission in general. Maybe once I "get" that, we can talk about gender issues, which, in this case, is a more specific issue. I do think that with respect to your sister and brother-in-law JD, I don't think RÃ*an would condone subscribing to Biblical submission just because the husband's a lazy ass who wants his wife to do all the work around the house. ( ) And then God did not say "Thou shalt slack off and then lo! the wife shalt bring you a brewsky."
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Nurvingiel : 03-23-2005 at 10:31 AM. Reason: t3h speeling |
||||||||
03-23-2005, 06:28 PM | #287 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
A quick post for consideration for everyone here, then I'll (hopefully) be back shortly ...
Forget studies. Let's look at economics. Let's look at two forms of literature (loosely defined!) - romance novels and pornography. Both are billion dollar industries. The dollar doesn't care about PC-ness. Which of the two are marketed primarily to women, and which primarily to men? Which of the two would be considered relational? (n.b. - I'm not saying all men are into porn, or all women are into romance novels, by any means. But IMO it's highly significant how these are marketed - as I said, the dollar is not PC.)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
03-23-2005, 06:31 PM | #288 | ||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
I like Maxim, the jokes are funny. And some of the articles. I did buy a romance novel once for 25 cents though. Oh wait, that wasn't your point was it? Well my boyfriend subscribes to Maxim, I just read his. I think romance novels are porn, for women. Maybe I should read more...
However, I think we can safely say this rabbit trail is pretty far from Biblical submission. EDIT: Edited to add... the fact that Maxim and Lurlene McDaniel are marketed at men and women respectively actually demonstrates my earlier point about how society perpetuates generalizations. In this case, Maxim execs know that men will buy their magazines. I think they could successfully market a Maxim for women. (Though one might argue Cosmopolitain fills this role.) However, it would be a risk - it may be huge, or it may not fly at all. It's smart business for Maxim execs to market Maxim only to men, no matter what women are really thinking. In this way it does not accurately reflect society. We seriously need to curtail this discussion though, at least for the meantime. (Go ahead and respond though, I won't insist on having the last word.)
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Nurvingiel : 03-23-2005 at 06:36 PM. |
||
03-23-2005, 07:21 PM | #289 | |||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
However, I think we can safely say this rabbit trail is pretty far from Biblical submission. [/qupte]IMO, it's HUGELY relevant, because my support of the issue hinges on my beliefs that men and women are different. Equally important, but different. And IMO, both studies and marketing prove this. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 03-23-2005 at 09:22 PM. |
|||
03-23-2005, 07:36 PM | #290 | |||||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Yer quote tags are showing...
Quote:
Quote:
First of all, I can see how my strongly egalitarian views could be construed as political correctness. This doesn't bother me, because I don't care if I'm being PC or not - that's not my goal. I believe all human beings have an intrinsic value equal to each other no matter how different each individual is. (I know you think this too, as do many people, I just had to state it because it's an important part of my views.) I'm also a bit suspicious of what society says about people's roles. I will evaluate different fairly though; I don't tend to reject things out of hand. Quote:
Anyway, that's not really the point. I don't believe that the goal of marketing executives to perpetuate generalizations in society. I believe that's an unintended result of the way business works. I agree that execs will market to people they know, or are at least pretty darn sure, will buy the product. They won't take a risk on a new market when they already have a captive market. That's why I said something to the effect of why would they risk marketing to women, who they aren't sure about, when they know they have a huge market in men. I think we agree about the marketing of porn and romance novels (which we're debating in the Theology thread... ) We agree that men and women are different, but why is this important in marriage? It's the people in a given marriage that must acknowledge and respect each other's differences IMO, not the differences of millions of random strangers.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
03-23-2005, 09:23 PM | #291 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
03-23-2005, 10:50 PM | #292 | |
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Narnia
Posts: 1,656
|
Quote:
~ my mom read some books (that my dad jokingly condemns as "pop pyschology") in the Mars/Venus series that really outline the differences between men and women, basically emotionally and mentally. *will find book tonight and read after writing school essay |
|
03-24-2005, 12:19 AM | #293 |
I am Freddie/UNDERCOVER/ Founder of The Great Continent of Entmoot
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plainsboro, NJ
Posts: 9,431
|
Nurv - I have several sites to give you about the Greek orthodoc - which is similar to Greek Catholic. YOu can listen to the masses on there and the chanting. There is one that also allows you to do searches on the MANY Bible translations.
If you are interested in a lot of information on the sacrements and videos that you can watch concerning the Greek Orthodox Church - this is an great site - Greek Orthodox Church of America St Marks - Boc Raton FL St George - Clifton NJ (here you can watch some weddings) There are some others I've found - but for the time being these should do. Here are some quotes from the New Living Translation bible when doing a search on "submit", other bibles don't have these translations. Colossians 3:18 You wives must submit to your husbands, as is fitting for those who belong to the Lord. Ephesians 5:23-24 23 For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his body, the church; he gave his life to be her Savior. 24 As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:21-23 21 And further, you will submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 You wives will submit to your husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his body, the church; he gave his life to be her Savior.
__________________
Come back! Come back! To Mordor we will take you! "The only thing better than a great plan is implementing a great plan" - JerseyDevil "If everyone agreed with me all the time, everything would be just fine"- JerseyDevil AboutNewJersey.com New Jersey MessageBoard Another Tolkien Forum Memorial to the Twin Towers New Jersey Map Fellowship of the Messageboard Legend of the Jersey Devil Support New Jersey's Liberty Tower Peacefire.org AboutNewJersey.com - New Jersey Travel and Tourism Guide |
03-24-2005, 03:51 AM | #294 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
And so are women! Here's some more of my thoughts and opinions on the issue to put out for thought and comment: As I said before, the Bible says that BOTH the man and the woman were made in the image of God. Yet it also shows that things were not complete UNTIL after Eve was made. This, to me, shows that Adam and Eve had different aspects of God, or else things would have been complete with just Adam. Actually, I think it's more accurate to say that God highlighted different characteristics of His in men and in women. Now here's where I'm going to start "exploring", as Nurvi says I agree with Tolkien that myth is vitally important, and myth illustrates deep, deep truths better than anything else sometimes, and that the world is deeply mythic. And I also agree with him that Christianity is the ONLY completely true myth. Yes, it's a story; but remember, stories can be true... It's his opinion, and mine, that this story is completely true, and the other myths were "exciting previews", as it were, so that we would be ready for the main attraction when it came. Look at myth, as it is in the world and in fairy tales. Fairy tales tell us that things are not what they seem. That peasant's youngest son will one day rise up and slay a dragon. Christianity says that a baby was born into the world that actually created the world and will save it - this baby is not what He seems - and He will one day slay the dragons that we call Satan and sin and death. The world shows us that seeds fall into the ground and die ... and new life is born. Christianity tells us that Jesus, this god/man, fell to the ground and died ... and new life was born for us all. Fairy tales tell us that beautiful princesses can be taken captive by evil forces, and it takes a wonderful prince to save them. Christianity tells us that God sees the beauty of our souls, and sees that we have been taken captive by sin and death, and God sends the wonderful Prince to come and save us. The world shows us that together, a man and a woman can create new life in their love, by the man in his strength giving seed to the woman who is receptive to it. Christianity tells us that an all-powerful God reaches out to us in love, and any that are receptive will receive new life. Fairy tells tell us that the princess has everything she needs and desires (including a wonderful Prince) in a magical castle, and yet she is told to not open the one room at the end of the hall on the top story. And she opens it - and she is separated from the Prince and must seek him with all her heart to be reunited with him again and live happily ever after. Christianity tells us that the first man and woman were in Paradise and in communion with God, yet with only one restriction - and they fell and were separated from God; yet that if they seek Him with all their hearts, they will find Him again and live happily ever after. And in the fairy tales, I think we see that strength is the glory of a man, and beauty is the glory of a woman. And this is deeply mythic, and portrays some deep truths. (Now, I think that women definitely have strength, and men definitely have beauty, but I think that God uniquely showcases strength in men and beauty in women (and I'm not talking outside beauty only by any means, or even primarily!) ) (con't - getting too long for this post!)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 03-24-2005 at 04:01 AM. |
|
03-24-2005, 04:27 AM | #295 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
(thoughts, con't)
So I firmly think, and I think it is firmly supported by the evidence that I see all around me, that men and women are different from each other in the very core of their being. They are absolutely equal - but they are different. And just as Henry Ford found out, specialization is more efficient, and so bringing a man with specialized talents in one area and a woman with specialized talents in another makes one powerful marriage! (it also makes it very hard sometimes! but most if not all good things take work.) As I said, I think the essence of the masculine is strength. I think there are two types of men that are deeply wrong - one is the one that abuses his strength, and the other is the one that suppresses his strength. The first would be those horrible men that abuse those around them, especially their wives and their children. Few things in this world are worse than a man abusing his strength - this is a shameful and terrible thing. The second would be the "milquetoast" guy - a man that lets others boss him around and never stands up for anything. This is deeply tragic and pathetic, for his strength should be used for the good of those around him. I mentioned how I was fighting for something in the family a few nights ago, and I'll share some details because it is relevant to this discussion. My oldest son is almost 15, and he and my husband have been butting heads for awhile. They love each other deeply, play together, work together, and are very close, but they're guys, and they butt heads sometimes like those rams you see on nature shows. (btw, there is NO violence involved, just raised voices. There is NO name-calling or verbal abuse, either - just very heated opinions flying around! We have clearly defined family rules for disagreements.) It was escalating, and by the sheer power of being a woman, I can walk into the room and they will both immediately settle down somewhat because they are honorable men. So we ended up talking, we three, for a long time, and at one point I realized something that I thought was helpful, and it was this. I told my son, "You know, you're a young man now, and you are MEANT to fight - God made you that way. That's why you do it with dad sometimes! However, you are meant to fight for GOOD, not for selfish reasons. You are meant to fight for what is right; for the poor and the oppressed, for the wronged and the hurting. God MADE you to be a fighter. But sometimes your fighting urge gets turned around a bit because of sin, and you end up fighting for the wrong reasons." This really hit both of them and helped them see that fighting itself isn't bad, it's only bad when you're fighting for the wrong thing. In fact, it's GOOD to fight for what is right, and that's the heart that God placed in ALL men, IMO. They are all different - we have men that play football and men that play piano - but I believe in their soul, they are fighters. And they reflect the very image of God, who is a mighty warrior for what is good and right. And this characteristic, among others, is why God has appointed men to the headship of the family. Marriage in the Bible is used over and over to represent how God loves His people. Jesus is called the bridegroom, and the Church is called the bride. And the bridegroom in his strength takes the bride in her beauty to Himself, and they become one. BTW, in Galatians chapter 3, it says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." See, I think the whole male/female thing came about BECAUSE of the fall (the "your husband will rule over you" didn't come about until AFTER the fall - before the fall they were jointly commanded to take care of the earth.) If the Church is called the Bride of Christ, then it's obvious that this includes men, because men are in the church! So I think, making it VERY simple, that God made two sexes on purpose for illustration purposes, and gave them different characteristics of His, and suited one better for the head of a marriage and one better for the - I don't know, I guess filling of the marriage or heart of the marriage or life of the marriage. I don't think it's accidental that the WOMEN are the ones that grow life in themselves. Women are awesome - nothing can replace a woman in a marriage. And the same for men. And together - woohoo! Well, it's very late, and this is a LOT of "exploring"!! I'll be interested to hear the comments (actually, kinda scared ) And I haven't touched the beauty in women thing, either - I'll do that later, I guess. And to reiterate, I think women are IMMENSELY powerful, but the power is tied to their beauty (again, NOT physical). (I also think men are immensely beautiful but the beauty is tied to their strength.)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 03-24-2005 at 04:35 AM. |
03-24-2005, 04:45 AM | #296 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Oh, one more thing - the verses JD provided made me think about translations.
I've talked with people about translations, and there's two things I wanted to briefly (hey, no snickers!) touch on. First - some people have thought that translations are based on previous translations, and thus errors compound. This is not true; scholars go back to the original language. As Tolkien's elves knew well, languages change and need to change their form as the need arises (Guys - check out my Shibboleth thread in the Middle Earth forum! Fascinating!), and in the time of the King James translation, "charity" was very well understood to mean what we would call "love" nowdays. So when the word meanings shifted, it's appropriate to make a new translation. Personally, I like the New American Standard Bible. It's an excellent, scholary work of translation, and it keeps the "thee"s and "thou"s in the language of prayer and in the Psalms. My husband likes the New International Version. So which is "right" or "better"? I think neither - I think it's a matter of preference. Both are accurate translations. Second - speaking of "accurate translations" - yes, translating is not an exact science. Yet I think making that objection misses the point. See, in a few days, my sister-in-law and her family will be coming here for Easter. She grew up in Colombia and Spain, and Spanish is her native tongue. But should I refuse to talk to her because I realize translation is not an exact science? I don't think so - it would be a great loss to not talk to her - I like her a lot! Sometimes something isn't clear, but then we just work on it and clear it up, and enjoy ourselves in the process. What about other countries - should the leaders in the US refuse to talk to any non-English speaking country because of possible errors of translation, or should they use trained scholars and translators and go ahead and talk? Personally, I think they should go ahead and talk - the benefits are enormous. I think the Bible translation thing is the same - people have been translating languages throughout history - and I think that God is a big enough guy to be able to deal with any translation problems, too. Well, it's very late. I'll be back hopefully tomorrow afternoon - I have a field trip in the morning - good night, er, morning all!
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 03-24-2005 at 04:47 AM. |
03-24-2005, 06:07 AM | #297 | |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
Quote:
BTW, did you see my questions in post 283 ? I know you've had a lot of comments to address
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
|
03-24-2005, 12:02 PM | #298 | |||||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
And why would these roles be given, then? IMO, the leadership of the man can take many shapes, too. More later. Quote:
The greatest freedom is found within boundaries, or laws, which sounds somewhat contradictory until you think about it a bit. There are boundaries/laws set up in the universe - physical and spiritual - and we have great freedom in these boundaries. Your country and mine has laws - and we have two of the freest countries on the planet. Science operates on the assumption of set laws, and endeavors to discover them and their relevance on things around us. A lack of laws isn't freedom, it's chaos and a lessening of freedom. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 03-24-2005 at 12:05 PM. |
|||||
03-24-2005, 12:38 PM | #299 | |
I am Freddie/UNDERCOVER/ Founder of The Great Continent of Entmoot
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plainsboro, NJ
Posts: 9,431
|
Quote:
__________________
Come back! Come back! To Mordor we will take you! "The only thing better than a great plan is implementing a great plan" - JerseyDevil "If everyone agreed with me all the time, everything would be just fine"- JerseyDevil AboutNewJersey.com New Jersey MessageBoard Another Tolkien Forum Memorial to the Twin Towers New Jersey Map Fellowship of the Messageboard Legend of the Jersey Devil Support New Jersey's Liberty Tower Peacefire.org AboutNewJersey.com - New Jersey Travel and Tourism Guide |
|
03-24-2005, 01:19 PM | #300 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol
Posts: 3,114
|
JD,
I really must protest against the canard you just uttered. To allege that any given translation of the Old and New Testaments is the result of political bias is a statement exhibiting an iganorance I do not usually associate with you - and I hope you did not mean what your wrote literally! The KJV was translated from the original tongues into a deliberately elevated vernacular according to the best available textual evidence (the Textus Receptus), in comparison with the previously rendered vernaculars (English, German, etc) and the Vulgate. The scholars who rendered the translation were quite eminent folks who had no political ax to grind. And the whole process was spectacularly successful in achieving its goal of making the Christian Scripture accessible to the masses. Because of the nature of the changes in language (eg, "let" and "prevent" changed meaning into opposites!), the work of re-newing the translation is called a revision (as in the Revised KJV), but that is updating the language - not politically charging the material! THE JERUSALEM BIBLE was a RC translation from the original languages into French under the guidance of the best Scholars and upon the best textual evidences (note this was post Dead Sea Scrolls!). This new translation in its study editions actually notes the differences in the textual materials and variant readings with citations to the variant manuscripts. When it was translated into English, the same materials were utilized in the same manner, BUT it was not translated from French to English! It was translated from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English and the resulting English vetted by noted English native language speakers (including Tolkien). The sense of the English and the French were compared to establish the correct expression of understanding of the text. But this is comparative language study in accuracy of expression of idiomatic original languages, NOT political alteration of the meaning. The JB follows in the footsteps of the Douay RC vernacular translation into English as a RC "production". What I think your comments apropos to is the phenomenon of the "paraphrase" type of text such as the LIVING BIBLE. There the correlation is accomplished by one person or small group people and could well -largely unconsciously or even deliberately- incorporate a particular stance on politics. But these types of renderings are NOT translations. Then you get the whole scholastic apparatus involved in assessments of true translations, revisions, and what-not. There is quite an extensive community of scholars capable of assessing the accuracy of a translation or revision and whole libraries of these critiques. It is not so much a cottage as a college industry. AND, when the scholarly assessments are done and perused, it is quite evident who has done their work properly and who has incorporated and agenda into their work. Read the reviews. Another type of confusion that may be in your thoughts is the attempt by specific intentional groups guided by overwhelming concerns to produce politically correct lectionary readings for liturgical churches. The feminist inspired gender-inclusive or gender neutral soporifics to political correctness come to mind. They are, IMHO, dung (KJV), refuse (RSV), and crap (personal polite preference, with a strong leaning towards anglo-saxon 4 letter variant starting with s and ending in t). Then there are legitimate colloquiallist renderings intended for reading and not scholarly accuracy nor political vendettas (though individual 'coloration' is inescapable) such as THE COTTON PATCH BIBLE (Southern USA with a strong black dialect) and others even unto Yea, verily, hip-hop. So your blanket condemnation of politicization of the Textus Receptus is not correct, good sir, in the particualr case of the KJV. Nor is it accurate in the actual scholarly translations. It may have applicability to paraphrases and colloquial versions. It undoubtedly has applicability to translations or paraphrases produced under the hand of specific agendized groups as noted. Now, the subject is more complex when one gets into the attempts to produce word for word or thought for thought or idiomatic retentive vs explicatory matters. But that is where the introduction and prefaces of these works come into necessary play. They should establish these factors in a clear and delineable way so the "buyer, beware" factor is obvious. And, these comments refer to the text-translation and not necessarily the interpretive notes of various "study" editions published by various individuals and groups - which may intentionally or unconsciously incorporate the materials you would object to. But that is a different category of problem.
__________________
Inked "Aslan is not a tame lion." CSL/LWW "The new school [acts] as if it required...courage to say a blasphemy. There is only one thing that requires real courage to say, and that is a truism." GK Chesterton "And there is always the danger of allowing people to suppose that our modern times are so wholly unlike any other times that the fundamental facts about man's nature have wholly changed with changing circumstances." Dorothy L. Sayers, 1 Sept. 1941 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Theological Opinions , PART II | jerseydevil | General Messages | 993 | 03-22-2007 05:19 AM |
LotR Films in Retrospect and Changed Opinions | bropous | Lord of the Rings Movies | 41 | 07-14-2006 10:14 AM |
Opinions for what book(s) to get next... | Dúnedain | Middle Earth | 40 | 11-17-2003 09:23 PM |
Opinions: Fëanor, ritcheous or over-proud? | Fëannel | The Silmarillion | 201 | 05-05-2003 06:39 AM |
need opinions: POLL: HAIR COLOR... | Sminty_Smeagol | General Messages | 33 | 02-16-2003 10:37 PM |