Alisa is right that an existential sentence is in principle easier to prove than its negative. Just produce a specimen. I bet she filched it from Karl Popper. The negation takes another universal premise to prove it from. But God is a harder nut. If God supporters could produce the specimen, they'd still need to prove uniqueness and the requisite universal properties. God opposers try to argue they do not need that hypothesis. Thing is the supporters clearly feel that need. It's not logic, it's a eusocial insect's builtin circuit. Less stupid egomaniacs are aware of its usefulness as a mind numbing anesthesiac, opium for the masses. Fiction or fact, its a great hypothesis. It would deserve inventing if it did not come pre-installed. Alisa was a silly hag.
ellauri119.html on line 762: In 1964, I met both Nathaniel Branden and Ayn Rand at a conference in a Washington DC hotel. About 75 people attended. Both Branden and Rand spoke. Ayn answered a few questions written on 3 X 5 cards submitted by audience members.
ellauri119.html on line 764: Nathaniel wore carrot-top hair styled like Elvis; he was average height and spoke English with a German accent. His skin was porcelain white and unblemished.
ellauri131.html on line 289: Jack Canafield (born August 19, 1944) is an American author, motivational speaker (!), corporate trainer, and entrepreneur. He is the co-author of the Chicken Coop for the Soul series, which has more than 250 titles and 500 million copies in print in over 40 languages. In 2005 Canafield co-authored The Success Principles: How to Get From Where You Are to Where You Were.
ellauri131.html on line 315: That government should be of men rather than of women.
ellauri131.html on line 409: The Secret was published in 2006, and by the spring of 2007 had sold more than 19 million copies in more than 40 languages, and more than two million DVDs. The Secret book and film have grossed $300 million. Aika paljon muttei sillä vielä kuuhun mennä.
ellauri131.html on line 496: Tepon änkyttävän Iso-Billin kohdalla se menis näin: pelkään Sitä. Toistan sanojen al-al-alkuja. Elän todexi Tabithan valheellista käsitystä etten bylsi muita naisia.
ellauri131.html on line 646: In June 2016, CNN reported that 30 people were burned during a "fire walk" at Robbins' "Unleash the Power Within" seminar in Dallas. in 2012, another Robbins "fire walk" in San Jose resulted in 20 people sustaining "second-and third-degree burns." Robbins' camp basically shrugged off the reports, saying, "It's not uncommon to have fewer than 1% of participants experience 'hot spots,' which is similar to a sunburn that can be treated with aloe."
ellauri131.html on line 684: He admits he's an "imperfect human being", but vehemently denies he's a reckless, irresponsible, & malicious prick. Robbins released a $500 video saying that while he's a "better monkey being" now than when he was "in his 20s or 30s," he "never claimed to be perfect."
ellauri131.html on line 709: But he's more than I'll ever need
ellauri131.html on line 761: The often-problematic ex-frontman of The Smiths then took aim at one royal, in particular: "Harry killed 34 people in Afghanistan and the UK press called him a hero. If he ate 34 poor people in Haiti the UK press would still call him a hero. It is insufferable." Speaking to reporters in 2013 (via Reuters), the prince admitted to killing insurgents. "Yeah, so, lots of people have," he said. "Yes, we fire when we have to, take a life to save a life, but essentially we're more of a detergent than anything else. We remove dirty lives and beget whiter ones."
ellauri131.html on line 863: I think that is because, over the past decade or so, people have become far more aware of the concept of privilege. Which roughly translates to: “no I don’t want to read about all the problems a middle-class straight, white women with a good job has, no thank you”. It feels whiny, flat, tone-deaf. Marianne Power chases self-help like the world is falling apart and her life is in tatters, but the main source of her problems?
ellauri131.html on line 884: And then right towards the end of the book she informs her readers that she is 37. That was a shock. I thought I was reading the emotional turmoil, flakey actions and life disarray of someone at least 10 years younger than that.
ellauri131.html on line 910: Around the same time she began leading support groups for people living with HIV/AIDS, which she called "Hay Rides". These grew from a few people in her living room to hundreds of men in a large hall in West Hollywood, California. Her work with AIDS patients drew fame and she was invited to appear on The Oprah Winfrey Show and The Phil Donahue Show in the same week, in March 1988. Following this, You Can Heal Your Life immediately landed on the New York Times bestseller list. More than 50 million copies sold around the world in over 30 languages and it also has been made into a movie. You Can Heal Your Life is also included in the book 50 Self-Help Classics for being significant in its field. It is often described as a part of the New Age movement.
ellauri131.html on line 912: Hay wrote, on page 225 of her book (December 2008 printing), that it has "... sold more than thirty five million copies". It was announced in 2011 that You Can Heal your Life had reached 40 million sales.
ellauri131.html on line 936: Stephen Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, briefly, are these: (1) Be proactive. Take the initiative and be responsible. (2) Begin with the end in mind. Start any endeavor -- a meeting, a day at the office, your adult life -- with a mental image of an outcome conforming to values you cherish. (3) Put first things first. Discipline yourself to subordinate feelings, impulses, and moods to your values. (4) Think win/win. Just as it sounds. (5) Seek first to understand, then to be understood. Listen with the intent to empathize, not with the intent to reply. (6) Synergize. Create wholes that are greater than the sum of their parts. (7) Sharpen the saw. Take time to cultivate the four essential dimensions of your character: physical, mental, social/emotional, and spiritual.
ellauri131.html on line 938: Covey, more than most inspirational writers, is able to skate right up close to the border of the divine without alarming anyone. Dr. Stephen R. Covey, author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, has lost his laser pointer once again and is practically jumping up off the stage to point to a giant chart projected on the wall of a conference room at the Westin Hotel in Seattle. He would be an imposing man if he were two inches taller.
ellauri132.html on line 193: THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.
ellauri132.html on line 219: “Nobody was smarter than anybody else,” the attorneys quoted Vonnegut as writing. “Nobody was better looking than anybody else.
ellauri132.html on line 372: Vaikka tajuaisi onkelman ei pirsuuna välttämästi hyväxy sen korjaamista vastuulleen—erit. jenkkityyppisissä yxilöpesissä. Panethan sen piippuusi ja poltat.
ellauri132.html on line 650: Rääsyt rikkauxixi. Muistathan Tuhkimon? Se oli mies. Klassinen keijutarina seuraa yxinkertaista rääsyt rikkauxixi-juonta: päähenkilö on tallattu, köyhtynyt, tai muuten haasteellinen, ja sarjalla tapahtumia— joko maagisia, kuten Harry Potterissa, tai todentuntuisempia, kuten kirjassa Suuria odotuxia — saavuttaa menestyxen. Tämmöisessä juonessa on silti usein onnellinen loppu.
ellauri133.html on line 69:

Voiceovers to the reader. “Dear Reader, listen closely for I am about to tell you a most wonderous tale.” I’m not six, so I’ll pass, thanks. No, you are under five, you can't wait for the ads to end to watch Paw Patrol.

Dialogue. Normally, dialogue is great and really lifts a story, but if you don't have any idea about the characters who are talking, it won't work. One line of speech can work. For instance "All cars proceed immediately to Main Street. Major riot in progress." establishes the setting and gives a lot of hints about the MC. What Main Character? This MUST be some tv watching imbecile who can't handle more than one face at a time. And why those fucking patrol cars again?

There are fashions in writing, just as there are in clothes. The modern trend, particularly for genre or YA fiction, but increasingly in literary fiction too, is to start the story with the main character on the first page, and to start with the inciting incident. No backstory before chapter three, and then pare it to the bone. "YA" most likely stands for young adult. There hardly is a brand of monkeys that are stupider than young adults. Except YA writers. Give them a dildo and it will keep them occupied for hours.

Interesting fact: the average reader will give up on a boring book by page seventeen. If you’ve wasted any of your precious first pages on boring stuff, you’re likely to join the Page Seventeen club too. TLDR, huh? Your kind better buy Marvel comic magazines. They got a lot of pics to help with the ALL CAPS text in the bubbles, and not much more pages than those 17.

1. The players of the Justice-of-God game G are God, Job and Leviathan. Mix Leviathan? Sehän oli se than">krokodiili, tai paremminkin Moby Dick. Tekeekö Jaakko tässä Dogista munattoman Ahasveruxen, ja Job olis niikö se homo Ishmael?
   ellauri153.html on line 344: undefeated evil left in the world. Leviathan wins if and only if God and Job lose.
   ellauri153.html on line 345:
2. God plays first. He can either (question Job) or (⌐question Job). Negaatiomerkkikin on väärinpäin! Naurettavaa! Amatöörimäistä tunarointia. If God does not question Job in the council of angels, Leviathan is left undefeated and God and Job lose. Lose what? Face? Mitä vittua jahven tarvii olla tollanen yllytyshullu? Mixeise vaan vedä lättyyn saatanaa sen sijaan että kiusaa tyhmää Jopi apinaa? Koko kasku on aivan vituralla. Dog on vaan ilkee julmuri. Siitä ei pääse mihinkään.
   ellauri153.html on line 346:
3. If the situation is (question Job), Leviathan moves. He can play either (disaster) or (⌐disaster). If L plays (⌐disaster), then God and Job win as Job lives well and L does not challenge God. If Leviathan plays (disaster), Job is hit by disasters and the evil (disaster) is put into play.
   ellauri153.html on line 353: win as Leviathan is defeated, there are no undefeated challenges and Job lives a happy life. Forget the 7 senselessly killed monkey pups and some 10K dead slaves and other animals who nobody cared a shit about anyway.
   ellauri153.html on line 378: These two meanings correspond to the different understandings of “anti-theodicy” in Ch. 3.1.1068 Although the first meaning is weaker than
   ellauri153.html on line 382: The justice-of-God game G includes a sense of tragic and pointless evil: Leviathan’s
   ellauri153.html on line 385: whole. Both Leviathan’s and Job’s evils then are opposed to the good, and capture the first
   ellauri153.html on line 419: biblical stories, rather than using the Biblical stories to identify God and to give the grammar for the
   ellauri153.html on line 432: Proof: “God is good”: By definition, God wins iff Leviathan loses, no evils are left and Job is happy.
   ellauri153.html on line 443: In the beginning 0, (Question Job) wins the game. Since Leviathan loses if he does not cause a disaster,
   ellauri153.html on line 460: Leviathan’s strategy L={(question Job) → (disaster)}, and L wins if and only if Job and God lose and
   ellauri153.html on line 741:

   ”Annathan orjattaresi kusta hiljaa korvaasi.”

   
   ellauri153.html on line 809: Why did David need Abishag to keep him warm? Was Jonathan too hot for a hot water bottle? Heitä homo voltti ja muita skezejä.
   ellauri153.html on line 823:
4. Why not a concubine? Though concubines had a lesser status than wives, they, too, possessed a certain rank and dignity. Abishai fortunately had neither. Absalom demonstrated this fact when, as part of his attempted coup, he slept with his father’s concubines (2 Samuel 16:21–22). Moreover, the personal dynamics within harems were infamous for the jealousy and infighting they engendered. To select one wife or concubine over another would be a mark of favoritism that would likely incite resentment and squabbling in the household. Don't even try this at home!
   ellauri153.html on line 864: After submitting it as his doctoral dissertation Arttu was awarded a PhD from the University of Jena in absentia. Private publication soon followed. "There were three reviews of it, commending it condescendingly. Scarcely more than one hundred copies were sold, the rest was remaindered and, a few years later, pulped."[1] Among the reasons for the cold reception of this original version are that it lacked the author´s later authoritative style and appeared decidedly unclear in its implications. A copy was sent to Goethe who responded by inviting the author to his home on a regular basis, ostensibly to discuss philosophy but in reality to recruit the young philosopher into work on his Theory of Colors.
   ellauri155.html on line 360: But God is a lot bigger than the Rothschilds and their cabal of miscreants. Dog is nearly as big as Ano Turtiainen! Dog won't get carried out of court! Not even by Himself! God wants to have a Triumph bra as Xmas present.
   ellauri155.html on line 519: Advanced education can be helpful, but it is not required to know what God expects of us. This doctrine of perspicuity also recognizes that not everything in Scripture is easy to understand. Some passages are more difficult to interpret than others even if no one can miss the gospel in the pages of the Bible.
   ellauri155.html on line 719: The incompatibilist maintains that if our willings and choices are themselves determined by antecedent causes then we could never choose otherwise than we do. Given the antecedent causal conditions, we must always act as we do. We cannot, therefore, be held responsible for our conduct since, on this account, we have no “genuine alternatives” or “open possibilities” available to us. Incompatibilists, as already noted, do not accept that Hume’s notion of “hypothetical liberty”, as presented in the Enquiry, can deal with this objection. It is true, of course, that hypothetical liberty leaves room for the truth of conditionals that suggest that we could have acted otherwise if we had chosen to do so. However, it still remains the case, the incompatibilist argues, that the agent could not have chosen otherwise given the actual circumstances. Responsibility, they claim, requires categorical freedom to choose otherwise in the same circumstances. Hypothetical freedom alone will not suffice. One way of expressing this point in more general terms is that the incompatibilist holds that for responsibility we need more than freedom of action, we also need freedom of will – understood as a power to choose between open alternatives. Failing this, the agent has no ultimate control over her conduct.
   ellauri155.html on line 731: In the Treatise, as was noted earlier, Hume argues that one of the reasons “why the doctrine of liberty [of indifference] has generally been better receiv’d in the world, than its antagonist [the doctrine of necessity], proceeds from religion, which has been very unnecessarily interested in this question” (T 2.3.2.3/409). He goes on to argue “that the doctrine of necessity, according to my explication of it, is not only innocent, but even advantageous to religion and morality”. In the final passages of the Enquiry discussion of liberty and necessity (EU 8.32–6/99–103) – passages which do not appear in the original Treatise discussion – Hume makes it plain exactly how his necessitarian principles have “dangerous consequences for religion”.
   ellauri155.html on line 759: Consequently, Calvin shows that Israel who descended from Abraham was also then chosen by God. He quotes verses such as Deuteronomy 7:7-8 which says, “The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because you were more in number than any people: for ye were the fewest of all people: but because the Lord loved you.”
   ellauri155.html on line 767: Calvin was far more careful with this doctrine than his critics were and are. Calvin understood men would react strongly against predestination. “The human mind, when it hears this doctrine, cannot restrain its petulance, but boils and rages as if aroused by the sound of a trumpet.” People who hear the teaching of predestination rarely remain unaffected by it. Their hearts too become enflamed, either with these teachings or against them. Calvin offers caution in the wrongful handling of this doctrine.
   ellauri155.html on line 771: The will of God is the supreme rule of righteousness, so that everything which he wills must be held to be righteous by the mere fact of his willing it. Therefore, when it is asked why the Lord did so, we must answer, ‘Because he pleased.’ But if you proceed farther to ask why he pleased, you ask for something greater and more sublime than the will of God, and nothing such can be found.
   ellauri155.html on line 777: God’s thoughts are higher than man’s, and men will be trapped in a mental maze if they try to understand things that are beyond their human comprehension. So what the fuck do you bother us with them in the first place? Can´t you just get comfy in the institution and play with Nopperi blocks?
   ellauri155.html on line 781: “Let it, therefore, be our first principle that to desire any other knowledge of predestination than that which is expounded by the word of God, is to be no less infatuated (or crazed) than to walk where there is no path, or to seek light in darkness.”
   ellauri155.html on line 804: The ministry of the Word thus required more than the public exposition of Scripture: it also entailed the declaration and application of God’s Word to individual women and men, girls and boys, through the sacraments, corrective discipline, catechetical instruction, household visitations, and spiritual counsel and consolation. As Calvin noted in his liturgy, ‘the office of a true and faithful minister is not only to teach the people in public, which is he appointed to do as a pastor, but also, as much as he is able, to admonish, exhort, warn, and console each person individually.
   ellauri155.html on line 812: There is nothing which is more dispiriting to us than while we vex and annoy ourselves with this sort of question – Why is it not otherwise with us? Why has it so happened that we came to this place? [In other words, why has God allowed this to happen to us?] ...It is God, therefore, who has sought back from you your son, whom he committed to you to be educated, on the condition, that he might always be his own. And therefore, he took him away, because it was both of an advantage to him to leave this world, and by this bereavement to humble you, or to make trial of your patience. If you do not understand the advantage of this, without delay, first of all, set aside every other object of consideration, and ask of God that he may show you. Should it be his will to exercise you still further, by concealing it from you, submit to that will, that you may become the wiser than the weakness of your own understanding can ever attain to.”
   ellauri155.html on line 814: The last sentence is rather remarkable. “Should it be his will to exercise you still further, by concealing it from you, submit to that will, that you may become the wiser than the weakness of your own understanding can ever attain to.” Calvin shows how much wisdom and comfort can be found in submitting to God’s divine will, trusting Him regardless of how much or how little of that will He has revealed to the afflicted. In so doing, he reveals to us true pastoral care in using this Biblical doctrine. Hey, just how much is it? I did not notice any quote.
   ellauri155.html on line 988: you into the secret. And as you needn’t send more than $5,000 for the present,
   ellauri155.html on line 1047: more freedom than you have lately enjoyed.
   ellauri156.html on line 68: Many tragic incidents occur as the unexpected outcome of a sequence of events. Certainly that is the case with King David. A little vacation from war leads to a day spent in bed, followed by a stroll along the roof of his palace as night begins to fall on Jerusalem. By chance, David sees a woman bathing herself, a sight which David fixes upon, his pecker coming instantly to attention, and then follows up on with an investigation as to her identity. The woman is shortly summoned to the palace and then to his bedroom, where David sleeps with her (well no, actually he spends time with her very much awake; what is meant by this euphemism is that he fucks the lady crazy.) Even though he has discovered she is the wife of Uriah, a warrior who is fighting for the army of Israel. Never mind. The woman becomes pregnant, and so David calls Uriah home, hoping it will be thought that he has gotten his wife pregnant. When this does not work, David gives orders to Joab, the commander of the army, which arranges for Uriah's death in battle. It looks like the perfect crime, but David's sin is discovered and dealt with by Nathan, the prophet of God. Nathan is Philip Roth's alter ego's name, Nathan Zuckerman! Can this be an accident? Jehova knows, it's too late to ask Phil.
   ellauri156.html on line 70: This sequence of events and its accompanying tragedies is the subject of chapters 11 and 12 of 2 Samuel. I have chosen to expound these chapters in three lessons. This first lesson will deal with “David and Bathsheba,” as described in 11:1-4. In the following lesson, we will address the subject of “David and Uriah,” as told by our author in 11:5-27. The third lesson will focus on “David and Nathan,” as this confrontation is put forth in chapter 12. Our text has much to say about the sins of adultery and murder, but rest assured that it addresses much more sins than this. It is a text we all need to hear and to heed, for if a “man after God's own heart” can fall so quickly and so far, surely we are capable of similar or even bigger failures. May the Spirit of God take this portion of the Word of God and illuminate it to each of us in full color, as we come to this study.
   ellauri156.html on line 76: Israel is at war with none other than the Ammonites (verse 1), which may come as a surprise to you as it did to me. (Well, to be honest, I thought they were the cretacean mollusks by the same name.) I thought the Ammonites had been defeated in chapter 10. I was wrong. The author is very clear on this matter. In chapter 8, the author tells how David began to engage his enemies in battle, ending the strangle-hold these surrounding nations had on Israel. David subjected the Philistines (8:1), then the Moabites (8:2), and then he took on the king of Zobah (8:3ff.). In the process, other nations became involved and found Israel too formidable an enemy to oppose again. (Notice the similarity of the situation here to the Yom Kippur War.)
   ellauri156.html on line 86: So you see, the Ammonites were not subjected to Israel in chapter 10, but they were deprived of Syrian assistance. Now they are on their own. The Israelites make the most of this. They ravage the land of the Ammonites and then besiege the capital (royal) city of Rabbah (11:1; see 1 Chronicles 20:1). This city of Rabbah, incidentally, is now the city of Amman, Jordan. It is not until after David's sin is rebuked by Nathan that the Israelites actually take the city (2 Samuel 12:26-31).
   ellauri156.html on line 124: This seems consistent with David's other great sin, which also follows his decision to stay at home. When David instructs Joab to number the Israelite warriors, Joab protests. This is something David should not do. Perhaps this is because David would find too much confidence in the number of his men, rather than in God. It certainly is a far cry from Gideon's army, pared down to a meager 300 men.
   ellauri156.html on line 236: King David makes the mistake of staying in Jerusalem, rather than fighting the Ammonites with his army. He does not stay home to meditate on the Law of Moses or to write another psalm or two; he seems to stay home to stay in bed. We know Uriah went to bed when it was evening (that is, when it got dark), and it is very likely that he got up at first light (see 11:13). With David, it is very different. David does not get up until evening, that is, until it is time for a soldier to go to bed. (As a friend of mine pointed out, this is probably a habit developed over days and not just a one-time event.) It is very unlikely that David is doing any “kingly work” in the wee hours of the night. From all appearances, David is simply indulging himself. Whaddya mean? Fucking maidens is kingly work if anything. Surely he wasn't watching late night shows, since all he had was his TV mama. Sitting up and adjusting the screen until the picture was completely right.
   ellauri156.html on line 269: I am not suggesting that David purposed to see something he should not. (I bet he did, peeping Tom. You actually come round to the same conclusion below, Bob.) More than likely he is walking about, almost absent-mindedly, when suddenly his eyes fix on something that rivets his attention on a woman bathing herself. The text does not really tell us where this woman is bathing, and why at this time of the night? We only know that she is within sight of David's penthouse (rooftop). David notes her beauty. He does not know who she is or whether she is married. We cannot be certain how much David sees, and thus we do not know for certain whether he has yet sinned. (What the fuck? How much do you need to see to sin? Are boobs enough, or do you need to see the pudendum or the fanny?) If David saw more of this woman than he should (a fact still in question), then he surely should have diverted his eyes. It was not necessarily evil for him to discretely inquire about her. If she were unmarried and eligible, he could have taken her for his wife. His inquiry would make this clear.
   ellauri156.html on line 285: 7 It came about after these events that his master's wife looked with desire at Joseph, and she said, “Lie with me.” 8 But he refused and said to his master's wife, “Behold, with me here, my master does not concern himself with anything in the house, and he has put all that he owns in my charge. 9 “There is no one greater in this house than I, and he has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do this great evil and sin against God?” (Genesis 39:7-9).
   ellauri156.html on line 301: It is clear from the words of our text that David sinned. It is clear from the actions of David which follow that he sinned. It is clear from the words of God through Nathan that David sinned in a grievous manner. The problem is that many wish to view the text in a way that forces Bathsheba to share David's guilt by assuming that she somehow seduced him. I would like to pursue this matter, because I believe there is absolutely no evidence to support such a conclusion. (Wow! That's a refreshing point of view! Like Ballsack's novel Comment la belle Fille de Portillon quinaulda son iuge.)
   ellauri156.html on line 303: The inference is often drawn that Bathsheba should not have been exposing herself as she did, and that it was her indiscretion which started this whole sequence of events. Some think her actions may have been deliberate (She knew David was there and could see. . . .), while others would be more gracious and assume it was simply poor judgment. Let me point out several things from the text. First and foremost, when Nathan pronounces divine judgment upon David for his sin, Bathsheba and Uriah are depicted as the victims, not the villains. When Adam and Eve sinned, God specifically indicted Adam, Eve, and the serpent, and each received their just curse. This is simply not the case with Bathsheba. Nowhere in the Bible is she indicted for this sin. It may be that the author did not choose to focus upon Bathsheba, but even in this case, the Law would clearly require us to consider her innocent until proven guilty. (Which law? Not biblical law for sure, take for instance Susan's case, where Daniel had to called upon to prove her innocence.)
   ellauri156.html on line 305: It is very clear in Samuel that the tragedies which take place in David's household are the consequence of his sin, just as Nathan indicates (12:10-12). Thus, when Amnon rapes Tamar, the sister of Absalom, it is a case of the “chickens coming home to roost.” Or is it a case of "Rooster coming into the chicks?" Note that it is at David's command or summons that Tamar is called to the palace, and then to Amnon's bedside. There is not so much as a hint that when Tamar is raped, it is all of Amnon's doing. Should this not strongly indicate that the same is true in Bathsheba's case, of which this second incident is a kind of mirror image? (Fucking crooky noses, raping and ravaging their kinky haired ladies right and left.)
   ellauri156.html on line 319: It is not as if Bathsheba is acting in an unbecoming manner, knowing that men are around. She has every right to assume they are not. David is around, but he should not be. On top of this, she is not bathing herself at high noon; she is bathing herself in the evening. This is when the law prescribed (for ceremonial cleansing), and it is when the sun is setting. In other words, it is nearly dark when Bathsheba sets out to wash herself. David has to crane his neck and use his binoculars to see what he does. I believe Bathsheba makes every effort to assure her modesty, but the king's vantage point is too high, and he is looking with too much zeal. I am suggesting that David is much more of a peeping Tom than Bathsheba is an exhibitionist. I believe the text bears me out on this.
   ellauri156.html on line 325: First, the root of David's sin is not low self-esteem; it is arrogance. (Since when is low self-esteem a sin? Well I bet it is for American believers. Think of Bill James' Will to Believe.) I am getting quite weary of hearing that the root of all evils is low self-esteem. I wonder why we see nothing of this in the Bible. David's problem is just the opposite. He has become puffed up and arrogant because of his success and status as Israel's king. He has come to see himself as different/better than the rest of the Israelites. They need to go to war; he does not. They need to sleep in the open field; he needs to get his rest in his own bed, in his palace. They can have a wife; he can have whatever woman he wants.
   ellauri156.html on line 333: Third, prosperity is as dangerous -- and sometimes more dangerous -- than poverty and adversity. We all get weary of the adversities of life. We all yearn for the time when we can kick back and put up our feet and relax a bit. We all tire of agonizing over the bills and not having quite enough money to go around. David certainly looked forward to the time when he could stop fleecing Saul and begin to reign as king. But let me point out that from a spiritual point of view, David never did better than he did in adversity and weakness. (In fact, he was quite like Ballsack's ung paouvre qui avait nom le Vieulx-par-chemins, another Iivana Nyhtänköljä.)
   ellauri156.html on line 335: Conversely, David never did worse than he did in prosperity and power. How many psalms do you think David wrote from his palatial bed and from his penthouse? How much meditation on the law took place while David was in Jerusalem, rather than on the battlefield? On the other hand, how many maidens did he open the psalmbook with on the field? We are not to be masochists, wanting more and more suffering, but on the other hand we should recognize that success is often a greater test than adversity. Often when it appears “everything's goin' my way” we are in the greatest danger of producing some shit like Frank Sinatra's "My Way".
   ellauri156.html on line 345: We may weary of taking up our cross and begin to take up ourselves or our same-sex significant other as our highest cause. We may back off in the area of separation, having become weary of being laughed at for our Christian principles. We may keep quiet, rather than bear witness to our faith, lest we be rejected by our peers. We may hold off from rebuking a fellow-believer, who is falling into sin, because the last time we tried it was very messy. We may get fed up with getting whacked every time we admonish fellow non-believers. When we retreat from the battle, a plunge is not far away.
   ellauri156.html on line 347: Sins of commission are often the result of sins of omission. David committed sin by his adultery with Bathsheba and later by the murder of her husband, but these sins were borne out of David's omissions which came to pass when he stayed home, rather than go to war. These sins of omission are often difficult to recognize in ourselves or others, but they are there. And after a while, they incline us to more open sins, as we see in David.
   ellauri156.html on line 353: Whether you are actively committed to Christ, serving Him as you serve others, using the power (spiritual gifts) God has given you to benefit others? Let us learn from David's omissions, rather than learn (experientially) from his commissions.
   ellauri156.html on line 396: (1) It seems likely that David and Uriah are hardly strangers, but that they know each other, to some degree at least. Uriah is listed among the mighty warriors of David (2 Samuel 23:39; 1 Chronicles 11:41). Some of the “mighty men” came to David early, while he was in the cave of Adullam (1 Samuel 22:1-2), and we suspect that among them were Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, the three brothers who were mighty men (see 2 Samuel 23:18, 24; 1 Chronicles 11:26).39 Others joined David at Ziklag (1 Chronicles 12:1ff.), and still other great warriors joined with David at Hebron (1 Chronicles 12:38-40).40 We do not know when and where Uriah joined with David, but since his military career ends in 2 Samuel 12, his military feats must have been done earlier. It seems very unlikely that David and Uriah are strangers; rather, it would seem these two men know each other from fighting together, and perhaps even from fleecing Saul together, or maybe Uriah had been a dear brother to David like his old Jonathan.
   ellauri156.html on line 408: David's plan A is simple and, at least in his mind, foolproof. In short, David will entice Uriah to think and to act as he himself has done. David does not wish to endure the adversities of the war with Rabbah, and so he goes to Jerusalem, to his home, and to his bed. He does not wish to deny himself, so he takes the wife of another man and sleeps with her. David will give Uriah the same opportunity, except that it will be his own wife he will sleep with. Not as fun, one must admit. After Uriah has sexual relations with Bathsheba, all will conclude that he is the father of the child which has been conceived by David's sinful act. Only one thing is wrong with David's plan: he assumes Uriah is as spiritually apathetic as he, and that he will act to indulge himself, rather than act like a soldier at war and keep his sword in the sheath.
   ellauri156.html on line 417: King David was the second king of Israel and this film is based on the second book of Samuel from the Bible. When the second Ark of the Covenant is brought to Jerusalem, a soldier reaches out to steady it and is struck dead. While the prophet Nathan declares this the will of God, a skeptical David pronounces it the result of a combination of an electrical shock and too much wine. This blasphemy starts David on the path of sin.
   ellauri156.html on line 421: Frustrated, David orders Uriah to be placed on the battle's front and for the troops to withdraw leaving him to die. Uriah is reported dead and David sends a dispatch to tell Bathsheba so they can plan their marriage. Nathan Zuckermann the prophet advises David the people are dissatisfied with his leadership and desire his sons to rule. Nathan tells David he has forgotten that he is a servant of the Lord. David tries in vain to cheer up the old retard. David marries Bathsheba.
   ellauri156.html on line 423: As a result, a drought hits Israel. David's and Bathsheba's baby dies. Nathan returns to tell David that God is displeased with his sin. Dog wants to see better ones, with more pizzazz. Or else he will not die as the law demands, but he will be punished through misfortune in his family. David takes responsibility but insists Bathsheba is blameless. But the people want Bathsheba killed. The crowd shouts: No, we want Barabbas! David makes plans to save Bathsheba, but she tells David she is not blameless. She has continued seeing Uriah on the side. (The reports of his demise were premature.) They are both at fault. David is reminded of the Lord and quotes Psalm 23 as he plays his harp. (A nice musical interlude in an otherwise numbing show whose spoiler is long since spoiled.)
   ellauri156.html on line 427: While Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. owned the rights to the 1057 BC book written by Dog with a little help from Egad and Nathan, the film is not based on that book. Dog also owned the rights to a 1947 Broadway play called "Bathsheba".
   ellauri156.html on line 431: David was about thirty when he began to reign (2 Samuel 5:4), so we can look for a birth date, which according to the pattern of other proposed birth dates in this series should occur both on a Hebrew holy day, at least some other sacred calendars, and also on a date similar on some calendars to his death date. Those requirements are so stringent to occur in a given year that if we find such a date, it is highly likely to be correct. Moreover, in nearly every case so far, the birth date is more impressive than the death date, and David's proposed death date is a sacred day on 4 calendars (also being 1 Condor on the Sacred Round).
   ellauri156.html on line 442: Dunno says his original conception was for a film that would encompass David's life and go into three main chapters: David as a boy fighting Goliath; a more mature David and his friendship with Jonathan, ending with the affair with Bathsheba; and an older David and his relationship with his son Absalom. Dunno wrote a treatment which he estimated would make a four hour movie. Zanuck was not enthusiastic so Dunno then pitched the idea of doing a film just on David and Bathsheba, which Zanuck loved.
   ellauri156.html on line 447: The musical score was by Alfred Newman (the funny looking kid on the cover of Mad magazine), who, for the bucolic scene with the shepherd boy, used a solo oboe in the Lydian mode, drawing on long established conventions linking the solo oboe with pastoral scenes and the shepherd's pipe. To underscore David's guilt-ridden turmoil in the Mount Gilboa scene, Newman resorted to a vibraphone, which Miklós Rózsa used in scoring Peck's popular 1945 Spellbound, in which he played a no less disturbed patient suffering from amnesia, viz. prophet Nathan Zuckerman.
   ellauri156.html on line 451: A. H. Weiler of The New York Times described the film as "a reverential and sometimes majestic treatment of chronicles that have lived three millennia." He praised Dunno's screenplay and Peck's "authoritative performance" but found that Wayward "seems closer to Hollywood than to the arid Jerusalem of his Bible." Variety wrote, "This is a big picture in every respect. It has scope, pageantry, sex (for all its Biblical background), cast names, color—everything. It's a surefire boxoffice entry, one of the really 'big' pictures of the new selling season." Philip K. Scheuer of the Los Angeles Times wrote that the film "leaves little to be desired" from the standpoint of production values with Peck "ingratiating" as David and Wayward "a seductress with flaming tresses, in or out of the bath, and only her final contrition is a little difficult to believe." Richard L. Coe of The Washington Post wrote, "On the whole, the picture suggests a Reader's Digest story expanded into a master's thesis for the Ecole Copacabana."] Harrison's Reports wrote, "The outstanding thing about the production is the magnificent performance of Gregory Peck as David; he makes the characterization real and human, endowing it with all the shortcomings of a man who lusts for another's wife, but who is seriously penitent and prepared to shoulder his guilt. Susan Wayward, as Bathsheba, is beautiful and sexy, but her performance is of no dramatic consequence." The Monty Python Bulletin commented that the film had been made "with restraint and relative simplicity" compared to other historical epics, "and the playing of Gregory Peck in particular is competent. The whole film, however, is emotionally and stylistically quite unworthy of its subject." Philip Hamburger of The New Yorker wrote that "the accessories notwithstanding, something is ponderously wrong with 'David and Bathsheba.' The fault lies, I suppose, in the attempt to make excessive enlargements of an essentially-simple story." Zanuck the Hot Dog agreed.
   ellauri156.html on line 455: King Solomon, author of The Ancient World in the Cinema, found the film rather slow-paced in the first half before gaining momentum, and Peck "convincing as a once-heroic monarch who must face an angry constituency and atone for his sins." He noted that this was different from other biblical epics in that the protagonist faced a religious and philosophical issue rather than the overdone military or physical crisis.
   ellauri156.html on line 465: When Uriah arrives in Jerusalem, he reports to David, who acts out the charade he has planned. He asks Uriah about the “welfare of Joab and the people,” and the “state of the war.” It troubles me that David needs such a report at all. If he were with his men in the field, this would not be necessary. But even worse, David does not really care about Joab, the people, or the war. David's one preoccupation is to cover up his sin, to get Uriah home and to bed with his wife, and thus to get David off the hook. How sad to read of David's hypocrisy. The king who had compassion on the crippled son of Jonathan now lacks compassion for the whole army, and specifically for Bathsheba and her husband Uriah.
   ellauri156.html on line 471: Uriah has to understand what the king is suggesting. Who wouldn't want to go home and enjoy his wife after some time of separation, thanks to the war with the Ammonites? Instead, we are told that Uriah never leaves the king's house. He sleeps in the doorway of the king's house, in the presence of a number of the king's servants. I am inclined to understand that at least some of these servants, if not all of them, are the king's bodyguards (compare 1 Kings 14:27-28). Uriah is a soldier. He has been called to his king's presence, away from the battle. But as a faithful servant of the king, he will not enjoy a night alone with his wife; instead, he will join with those who guard the king's life. This is the way he can serve his king in Jerusalem, and so this is what he chooses to do rather than to go home. The irony is overwhelming. The king's faithful soldier spends the night guarding the 50% new life of the king in his wife's womb, the king who has taken his own wife in the night, and who will soon take his life as well. Dramatic irony.
   ellauri156.html on line 481: And explain he does; Uriah's words to his commander-in-chief are as stinging a rebuke as David receives from Nathan in the next chapter. Uriah clearly understands that what David once encouraged him to do (i.e. go to be with his wife) he is now strongly urging -- even commanding -- him to do. Uriah humbly but steadfastly refuses to do this:
   ellauri156.html on line 507: David has set out on a course of action that backfires. He intends to put Uriah in a position that will make it appear that he is the father of Bathsheba's child. But Uriah's conduct has publicly exhibited his loyalty to his duties as a soldier, making it more than evident that he cannot possibly be the father of this child. It is worse for David now than it had been when he summoned Uriah to Jerusalem. David concludes -- wrongly -- that his only course of action now is to have Uriah killed in action. I don't know that David actually thinks he can deceive the people of Jerusalem as to whose child Bathsheba's baby is. How can he when everyone knows Uriah has never been with his wife to get her pregnant? It seems now as though David is simply trying to legitimize his sin. By making Uriah a casualty of war, he makes Bathsheba a widow. He can now marry this woman and raise the child as his own, which of course it is. Finally, a plan that makes sense.
   ellauri156.html on line 509: It must be an agonizing night for David, seeing that even drunk Uriah is a better man than he. But not a better pecker! And so in the morning, David acts. He writes a letter to Joab, which will serve as Uriah's death warrant. In this letter David clearly orders Joab to murder Uriah for him. He even tells him how to do so in a way that might conceal the truth of the matter. In so doing, David can honor Uriah as a war hero, and magnanimously take on the duty of being a husband to Uriah's wife, also taking care of the child she is soon to bear. Joab is to put Uriah on the front lines of battle, at the fiercest place of battle, no surprise for a man of his military skills and courage. Joab is to attack and then retreat in such a way as to make Uriah an easy target for the Ammonites, thus assuring his death. There is no mistaking David's orders to Uriah: he wants Uriah killed in a way which makes it look like a simple casualty of war. Joab complies completely with David's orders (why? Is Uriah a creep?), and Uriah is eliminated, no longer an obstacle to David's plans. In giving this order to Joab, David makes him a part of this conspiracy, making him share the guilt for the spilled blood of Uriah. David's sin continues to encompass more and more people, leading to greater and greater sin.
   ellauri156.html on line 537: Abner was the son of the witch of En-dor in Mordor, (Pirḳe R. El. xxxiii.), and the hero par excellence in the Haggadah (Yalḳ., Jer. 285; Eccl. R. on ix. 11; Ḳid. 49b). Conscious of his extraordinary strength, he exclaimed: "If I could only catch hold of the earth, I could shake it" (Yalḳ. l.c.)—a saying which parallels the famous utterance of Archimedes, "Had I a fulcrum, I could move the world." (Dote moi pa bo kai tan gan kino.) According to the Midrash (Eccl. R. l.c.) it would have been easier to move a wall six yards thick than one of the feet of Abner, who could hold the Israelitish army between his knees, and often did. Yet when his time came [date missing], Joab smote him. But even in his dying hour, Abner seized his foe's balls like a ball of thread, threatening to crush them. Then the Israelites came and pleaded for Joab's jewels, saying: "If thou crushest them his future kids shall be orphaned, and our women and all our belongings will become a prey to the Philistines." Abner answered: "What can I do? He has extinguished my light" (has wounded me fatally). The Israelites replied: "Entrust thy cause to the true judge [God]." Then Abner released his hold upon Joab's balls and fell dead to the ground (Yalḳ. l.c.).
   ellauri156.html on line 541: It is characteristic of the rabbinical view of the Bible narratives that Abner, the warrior pure and simple, is styled "Lion King of the Law" (Yer. Peah, l.c.), and that even a specimen is given of a halakic discussion between him and Dog as to whether the law in Deut. xxiii. 3 excluded Ammonite and Moabite women from the Jewish community as well as men. Dog was of the opinion that David, being descended from the Moabitess Ruth, was not fit to wear the crown, nor even to be considered a true Israelite; while Abner maintained that the law affected only the male line of descent. When Dog's dialectics proved more than a match for those of Abner, the latter went to the prophet Samuel, who not only supported Abner in his view, but utterly refuted Dog's assertions (Midr. Sam. xxii.; Yeb. 76b et seq.).
   ellauri156.html on line 550: Earlier in this series: David condemned Joab and put him under a curse because he shed the innocent blood of Abner. Now, this same David (well, not really the same David) now uses Joab to kill Uriah and get him out of his way. David's enemy (Joab) has become his friend, or at least his ally. David's enemies (the Ammonites) have become his allies (they fire the fatal shots which kill Uriah). And David's faithful servant Uriah has been put to death as though he were the enemy. Not only is Uriah put to death, but a number of other Israelite warriors die with him. They have to be sacrificed to conceal the murder of Uriah. Uriah's death has to be viewed as one of a group of men, rather than merely one man. Without a doubt, this is the moral and spiritual low-water mark of David's life.
   ellauri156.html on line 562: Now why does this messenger not wait for David to respond in anger, as Joab instructed? Why does he inform David that Uriah has been killed, before he even utters a word of criticism or protest? I believe the messenger gives the report in this way because he understands what is really going on here. I think he may know about David and Bathsheba, and perhaps even of her pregnancy. He certainly knows that Uriah was summoned to Jerusalem. I think he also figures out that David wants to get rid of Uriah, and that Joab has accomplished this by this miserable excuse for an offensive against the enemy. I think the messenger figures out that if David knows Uriah has been killed, he will not raise any objections to this needless slaughter. And so, rather than wait for David to hypocritically rant and rave about the stupidity of such a move, he just goes on and tells him first, so that he will not receive any reaction from David.
   ellauri156.html on line 568: These words of David are the frosting on the cake. They seem gracious and understanding, even sympathetic. In effect, David is saying, “Well, don't worry about it. After all, you win a few, and you lose a few. That's the way the cookie crumbles.” Uriah, a great warrior and a man of godly character (but not a Jew, mind you), has just died, and David does not express one word of grief, one expression of sorrow, not one word of tribute. Uriah dies, and David is unmoved. Contrast his response to the death of Uriah with his responses to the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2 Samuel 1:11-27), and even of Abner (2 Samuel 3:28-39). This is not the David of a few chapters earlier. This is a hardened, callused David, callused by his own sin.
   ellauri156.html on line 588: Sixth, our text makes Uriah a hero and a dress model, not a chump and not a sucker. There are those who might conclude that Uriah's elevator may not “go to the top floor” (as my neighbor used to say of those she considered less than bright). Is Uriah gullible? Is he ignorant of what David is trying to do? Is he a coon? A spook? I don't think so. This is what makes his loyalty to David and to God's Law so striking. I think it is safe to say that here Uriah is very much like David in his earlier days, in terms of his response to Saul. As Saul sought to kill David unjustly, because he was jealous of his successes, so also David submitted himself to faithfully serving Saul, his master. He left his safety and future in God's hands, and God did not fail him. Who? Not Uriah, apparently.
   ellauri156.html on line 590: Seventh, Uriah is a reminder to us that God does not always deliver the righteous from the hand of the wicked immediately, or even in this lifetime. This is a really crucial point! Don't except to be saved except ex post facto. Daniel's three friends told the king that their God was able to deliver them. They did not presume that He would, or that He must, only that theoretically, he could if he wanted to. And God did deliver them, though with late delivery, rather like today's postal services. I think Christians should look upon this sort of deliverance as the rule, rather than the exception. But when Uriah faithfully serves his king (David), he loses his life. God is not obliged to “bail us out of trouble” or to keep us from trials and tribulations just because we trust in Him. Sometimes it is the will of God for men to trust fully in Him and to submit to human government (what? like U.S. government? No way Jose!), and still to suffer adversity, from which God may not deliver us. Spirituality is no guarantee that we will no longer suffer in this life. In fact, spiritual intimacy with God is often the cause of our sufferings (see Matthew 5).
   ellauri156.html on line 623:

   11. David and God (a.k.a. Nathan) (2 Samuel 12)

   
   ellauri156.html on line 627: In addition to the hundreds of sheep in a nearby pasture, there was a small lamb in a pen, very close to the house. It was a frisky, friendly little fellow, and we loved to "play" with it. We were somewhat perplexed as to why this fellow was kept by himself, away from the rest of the flock. The farmer's nephew came by, and I asked him. It took a while to understand his strong accent, but finally I realized he was telling me this was his “pet lamb.” The problem was that he said it as though it were one word, “bedlam.” This was obviously a separate category, distinct from the category of mere “sheep” or a “lamb.” This “pet lamb” was given a special pen, right by the house, and a lot more attention and care than the rest. I did not dare to ask the man where his "penis".
   ellauri156.html on line 629: Now this little fellow was one lamb among a great many. Nevertheless, he enjoyed the distinction of being regarded as a “pet lamb.” (I am coming to te most narcissistic part of my sermon, going to introduce you to the good shepherd in a moment.) In the story which Nathan tells David, it is not quite the same. Nathan tells David of a “pet lamb” who is the only sheep of a poor farmer. This lamb does not live in a pen outside the house; it lives inside the house, often in the loving hairy arms of its master, and eats the same food he eats. This is the story Nathan tells David, which God uses to expose the wretchedness of David's sin. It is our text for this message, and once again, it has much to teach us, as well as David. Let us give careful heed to the inspired words of Nathan, and learn from a lamb. (I bet the lamb had much more to learn from the "boys".)
   ellauri156.html on line 647: Nathan has a response to the death of Uriah too, which is taken up in the first part of chapter 12. But let us save that until after drawing your attention to something which has been going on in David's life that we have not seen from our text, and which the author of Samuel has not recorded. But David himself discloses this to us in one of his psalms, written in reflection of this incident in our text.
   ellauri156.html on line 658: Psalm 32 is one of two psalms (the other is Psalm 51) in which David himself reflects on his sin, his repentance, and his recovery. Verses 3 and 4 of Psalm 32 are the focus of my attention at this point in time. These verses fit between chapters 11 and 12 of 2 Samuel. The confrontation of David by Nathan Zuckermann the prophet, described in 2 Samuel 12, results in David's repentance and confession. But this repentance is not just the fruit of Nathan's rebuke; it is also David's response to the work God has been doing in David's heart before he confesses, while he is still attempting to conceal his sin.
   ellauri156.html on line 660: In these verses, David makes it clear that God is at work even when it does not appear to be so. During the time David tries to cover up his sin, God is at work exposing it in his heart. These are not times of pleasure and joy, as Satan would like us to conclude; they are days of misery. David is plagued with guilt. He cannot sleep, and it seems he cannot eat. Worst of all, he cannot fuck. He is not sleeping nights, and he is losing weight. Whether or not David recognizes it as God who is at work in him, he does know he is miserable. It is this misery which tenderizes David, preparing him for the rebuke Nathan Zuckermann is to bring, preparing him for repentance. David's repentance is not the result of David's assessment of his situation; it is the result of divine intervention. Hey wait? If that is the case, where is the much-advertised free will? He has gone so far in sin that he cannot think straight. God is at work in David's life to break him, so that he will once again cast himself upon God for grace. He has good experience in casting himself upon folk, from Saul thru Jonathan to Bathsheba.
   ellauri156.html on line 662:

   Nathan Tells a Shepherd a Sheep Story (12:1-6)

   
   ellauri156.html on line 675: There are several important things to note about this meeting between Nathan and King David. First, note that Nathan is sent to David. Nathan is, of course, a prophet. However it comes about, he knows what David has done. If you will pardon the pun, David cannot pull the wool over his eyes. His words are, in the final analysis, the very word of God (see 12:11). If Nathan is a prophet, he is also a man who seems to be a friend to David. One of David's sons is named Nathan (2 Samuel 5:14). David informs Nathan of his desire to build a temple (chapter 7). Nathan will later christen (sorry, name) Bathsheba's and David's second son (12:25). He will remain loyal to the king and to Solomon when Adonijah seeks to usurp the throne (1 Kings 2). Nathan does not come to David only as God's spokesman, he comes to David as his friend.
   ellauri156.html on line 679: Second, note that Nathan is sent to David. Twelve times in the last chapter the word “sent” is employed by the author. A number of these instances refer to David “sending” someone or “sending” for someone. David is a man of power and authority, and so he can “send out” for whatever he wants, including the death of Uriah. Now, it is God who does the “sending.” Herra se on herrallakin. Is David impressed with his power and authority? Has he gotten used to “sending” people to do his work for him (like sending Joab and all Israel to fight the Ammonites)? Let David take note that God is sending Nathan. He is a godsend to Dave.
   ellauri156.html on line 681: Third, Nathan comes to David with a story. In the New American Standard Bible, this is not just a story, but a kind of poetic story. In my copy of the NASB, the words of the story are formatted in such a way as to look like one of the Psalms.43 It took me a while to take note of this, but if this is so, it means that Nathan comes to David prepared. Under divine inspiration, I am sure God could inspire a prophet to utter poetry without working at it in advance, but this does not seem to be the norm. Nathan comes to David well prepared. He is not just “spinning a yarn;” Nathan is telling a story, a very important story with a very important message for David. A message for you sir. Nih Nih.
   ellauri156.html on line 683: Fourth, Nathan's story is a “sheep story,” one that a shepherd can easily grasp and with which he can readily identify. David was a shepherd boy in his younger days, as we know from the Book(s) of Samuel (see 1 Samuel 16:11; 17:15, 28). I wonder if in those lonely days and nights David does not make a “petlamb” of one or more of his sheep? You bet. Some comfort for his lonely nights. Did this sheep eat of his food and drink from his cup? Did this sheep give him a blowjob? Possibly so.
   ellauri156.html on line 685: Fifth, the story Nathan tells David does not “walk on all fours” -- that is, there is no “one to one correspondence” with the story of David's sin with Bathsheba and Uriah. The sheep (which we would liken to Bathsheba) is put to death, not the owner (whom we would liken to Uriah). I think it is important to take note of this fact, lest we press the story beyond its intent.
   ellauri156.html on line 687: Why a story? Why not just let David have it head-on, with both barrels, like David did with Bathsheba? Many will point out that this is a skillfully employed tactic, which gets David to pronounce judgment on the crime before he realizes that he is the criminal. I think this is true. David is angry at this “rich man's” lack of compassion. If he could, he would have this fellow put to death (!). But as it is, justice requires a four-fold restitution. But having already committed himself in principle, Nathan can now apply the principle to David, in particular.
   ellauri156.html on line 689: As I understand the Bible, there is more to the story than this, however. Our lord (meaning Jeshua) frequently told stories. Why was this? Was it because he was trying to “put the cookies on the lowest shelf”? Was he accommodating his teaching to those who might have difficulty understanding it? Sometimes our lord told stories to the religious experts, who should have been able to follow a more technical argument. No, I think his own elevator did not quite reach the upper floors. I am thinking in particular of the story of the Good Samaritan, as recorded in Luke 10. A religious lawyer stood up and asked Jesus a question, not to sincerely learn, but with the hope of making our Lord look bad before the people. He asked, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus turned the question around. This man was the expert in the Law of Moses, what did it teach? The man answered, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF, THAT IS, EVEN MORE.” (Luke 10:27). In effect, Jesus responded, “Right. Now do it.” That was the problem with the law, no one could do it without failing, and so no one could earn their way to heaven by good works. Well, how high can we get with mediocre works? Someplace between heaven and hell would actually be most preferable.
   ellauri156.html on line 701: That is part of the reason Nathan told David this story. It was never meant to be a makeover of David's sin; it is meant to expose David's sin in principle, in a way that cannot be denied. Having done this very well, Nathan then presses on to deal with David's sin specifically.
   ellauri156.html on line 703: The story Nathan tells David is very simple. Two men lived in the same city; one was very rich and the other was very poor. The rich man had flocks and herds.44 The rich man did not just have a large flock and a large herd; he had many flocks and many herds. We would say this man was “filthy rich.” The poor man had but one ewe lamb; this was his “pet lamb.” He purchased it and then raised it in his own home. The lamb spent much time in the man's lap and being carried about. It lived inside the house, not outside, being hand fed with food from the table and even drinking from its master's cup.
   ellauri156.html on line 711: David does not see what is coming. The story Nathan tells makes David furious. The David who was once ready to do in Nabal and all the male members of his household (1 Samuel 25) is now angry enough to do in the villain of Nathan's story. Doing in folks was one of his pet lambs. In some ways, David's response is a bit overdone. He reminds me a bit of Judah in Genesis 38, when he learns that Tamar, his daughter-in-law is pregnant out of wedlock. Not realizing that he is the father of the child in her womb, Judah is ready to have Tamar burned to death. How ironic that those who are guilty of a particular sin are intolerant of this sin in the life of others. Well said, Bob! Christians are really hard on people who have no charity.
   ellauri156.html on line 724:

   Nathan's Indictment (12:7-12)

   
   ellauri156.html on line 726: Nathanin rapsut Davidille oli suhteellisen leppeät, vaan ei-toivotun lapsen kuolema. Ei mitään vakavaa, mutta eihän syntikään ollut kuolemanvakava. Mixi naisten naurattamisesta pitäsi tulla itkua ja hampaiden kiristelyä? Jaa olihan siinä se Urian valitettava tapaus, mutta mitä oli niin typerä. Tyhmst päästä kärsii koko ruumis.
   ellauri156.html on line 728: David has just sprung the trap on himself, and Nathan is about to let him know about it. The first thing Nathan does is to dramatically indict David as the culprit: “You are the man!” In stunned silence, David now listens to the charges against him. David thinks only in terms of the evils the rich man committed against his neighbor, stealing a man's sheep and depriving him of his companion. Put another way, David thinks only in terms of crime and socially unacceptable behavior, not in terms of sin. In verses 7-12, Nathan draws David's attention to his sin against God and the consequences God has pronounced for his sin. Note the repetition of the pronoun “I” in verses 7 and 8: “It was I who. . .
   ellauri156.html on line 734: God speaks to David as though he has forgotten these things, or rather as though he has come to take credit for them himself. Everything David possesses has been given to him by God. Has it been so long since David was a lowly shepherd boy that he has forgotten? David is a “rich” man because God has made him rich. And if he does not think he is rich enough, God will give more to him. David has begun to cling to his “riches,” rather than to cling to the God who made him rich.
   ellauri156.html on line 738: I fear some of us tend to miss the point here. We read Nathan's story and we hear Nathan's rebuke as though David's sin is all about sex. David does commit a sexual sin when he takes Bathsheba and sleeps with her, knowing she is a married woman. But this sexual sin is symptomatic, according to Nathan, and thus according to God. God is not just saying, “Shame on you, David. Look at all the wives and concubines you had to sleep with. And if none of these women pleased you, I could have given you another woman, just one that was not already married.” Wow, this is the same 'gotcha' as with Adam earlier: I give you about anything as long as you keep your fingers off my property.
   ellauri156.html on line 740: Nathan tells David the story of a rich man and a poor man. God tells David through Nathan that all that he possesses (his riches) it is he, the boss, who has given them to him. God is like the rich man, and David the poor one with just the one. David's problem is that his possessions have come to own him. He is so stingy he won't even give his petlamb to Mr. Rich. He is so “possessed” with his lamb that he is unwilling to spend it when his boss has a party. He wants “more” and “more,” and so he begins to take what isn’t his to take, rather than to ask the divine Giver for all he has and more.
   ellauri156.html on line 744: First and foremost, David's sin is against God. He has ceased to humbly acknowledge God as the Giver of all he possesses. He has ceased to look to God to provide him with all his needs -- and his desires. David has not only ceased to ask God to supply his needs, he has disobeyed God's commands by committing adultery and murder. David's sin against God manifests itself by the evils he commits against others. Nathan outlines these, employing a repetitive “you:”
   ellauri156.html on line 755: Nathan now proclaims the irreversible consequences to come upon David and his family due to his sin: Therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Us and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. With an equally repetitive "I will":
   ellauri156.html on line 770: The story goes on as you well know, but we shall stop here, having focused on Nathan's divinely directed rebuke of David. In our next lesson we will give thought to David's repentance and to the immediate consequences of his sin. But let us close this message by considering some very important take-home lessons for us to learn from David's sin and Nathan's rebuke.
   ellauri156.html on line 772: (1) Nathan is a propellerhead, but he is also an example of a faithful friend. Proverbs puts it this way.
   ellauri156.html on line 774: I do not know how many people I have known who refused to rebuke or even caution someone close to them, thinking that they are being a friend by being non-condemning. A good friend does not let us continue on the path to our own destruction. Nathan was acting as a prophet, but he was also acting like a friend. Would that we had more professor friends. Would that we were a prophylactic friend to one on the path of destruction. Deliver in a timely manner those who are being taken away to death, And those who are staggering to slaughter, Oh hold them back (Proverbs 24:11).
   ellauri156.html on line 782: (4) David's sin was not intended as an excuse for us to sin, but as a warning to all of us how capable we are of sin. I have heard it said more times than I wish to recall, “Well, even David sinned. . . .” What they mean is, “How can you expect me not to sin? If David, as spiritual as he was, sinned as he did, then how can you expect me to do any better?” Fair enough. But Where these guys go wrong is that they are not Gawds petlambs, no preferential treatment is in the offing for them. Gawd will cross them like cockroaches. Or leece.
   ellauri156.html on line 800: (5) David's sin, like all sin, is never worth the price. I have actually had people ask me what the penalty for a certain sin would be, planning to do it and then be forgiven. There are those who toy with sin, thinking that if they sin, they may suffer some consequences, but that God is obliged to forgive them, and thus their eternal future is certain and secure, no matter what they do, even if intentionally. I know of one situation in which a church leader left his wife and ran off with the wife of another, planning to later repent, and then expecting to be welcomed back into the fellowship of that church. This is presumptuous sin, sin of the most serious and dangerous kind. Rather than open a “can of worms” at this point in this message, let me simply say this: “No one ever chooses to sin, and then comes out of it with a smile on their face.” My friend Dawg will almost certainly wipe that smug smirk off their face. I still seethe when I think of that colleague of mine, and how he got away with dumping her hag and plucking a dainty dish from Brother ... (better not say). Took just a few months for the brotherhood to relent. Fuck, it shouldn't be that easy! A little more speedy delivery of the retribution would be indicated, don't you think, milord? Not that I criticize you in any way, milord.
   ellauri156.html on line 812: That is precisely what the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ does for us. We were dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1-3). We were blinded to the immensity of our sins (2 Corinthians 4:4). The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, His perfect life, His innocent and sacrificial death, His literal and physical resurrection are all historical events. But the gospel is also a story, a true story. When we read the New Testament Gospels, we read a story that is even more dramatic, more amazing, more disturbing than the story Nathan told David. When we see the way unbelieving men treated our Lord, we should be shocked, horrified, and angered. We should cry out, “They deserve to die!” And that they do. But the Gospel is not written only to show us their sins -- those who actually heard Jesus and cried, “Crucify Him, Crucify Him” -- it is written so that the Spirit of God can cry out in our hearts, “Thou art the man! Yo mon!” When we see the way men treated Jesus, we see the way we would treat him, if he were here. We see how we treat him today. With laughter and ridicule. And that, my friend, reveals the immensity of our sin, and the immensity of our need for repentance and forgiveness. Words, words, words. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
   ellauri156.html on line 816: He bore ours sins on the cross! And by trusting in His death, burial, and resurrection, we die to sin (or sin to die, pick your choice, like David from Nathan's deck of bottom cards) and are raised to novelty products of eternal life, in Christ. The Gospel must first bring us to a recognition of the magnitude of our sin, and of our guilt, and then it takes us to the magnitude of God's grace in Jesus Christ, by which our sins can be forgiven. Have you come to see how great your sins are before a holy God? Then I urge you to experience how great a salvation is yours, brought about by this same God, through the death, burial, and resurrection of Lord Jesus Christ. What a Relief! Plop plop fizz fizz, oh what a relief it is.
   ellauri158.html on line 44: Spinoza’s views on necessity and possibility, which he claimed were the “principal foundation” of his Ethics (Ep75), have been less than well received by his readers, to put it mildly. From Spinoza’s contemporaries to our own, readers of the Ethics have denounced Spinoza’s views on modality as metaphysically confused at best, ethically nihilistic at worst. Kristityt on aina vihanneet Spinozaa, mutta niin on juutalaisetkin. Siili ressu.
   ellauri158.html on line 46: The actual world, we might now say, is the only possible world. Events could not, in the strongest sense of that expression, have gone any differently than they in fact have gone. This is the position of necessitarianism, a belief that few in the history of Western philosophy have explicitly embraced. And for good reason — on the face of it, necessaritianism is highly counterintuitive. Surely the world could have gone slightly differently than it has gone. Couldn’t the Allies have lost WWII? No way! They were in the right! Couldn’t Leibniz have been a sister or not been born at all? Täähän on kuin Jaakko Hintikka versus Jon Barwise.
   ellauri158.html on line 108: Tonttu iki-iäkäs on toi samainen välttämättömästi vapaa olio joka luo izeään painavamman kiven. Se on aina koska se ei voi lopettaa olemista vaikka tahtoisi. Ti theleis? Apothanein thelo. Onnexi se ei tahdo, se on läpeensä tyytyväinen, suorastaan iloinen.
   ellauri158.html on line 389: While pantheism asserts that "all is God", panentheism claims that God is greater than the universe. Some versions of panentheism suggest that the universe is nothing more than the manifestation of God. In addition, some forms indicate that the universe is contained within God, like in the Kabbalah concept of tzimtzum. Also much Hindu thought is highly characterized by panentheism and pantheism. The basic tradition on which Hantta Krause´s concept was built seems to have been Neoplatonic philosophy and its successors in Western philosophy and Orthodox theology.
   ellauri158.html on line 694: Hence also it follows, that everyone thought out for himself, according to his abilities, a different way of worshipping God, so that God might love him more than his fellows, and direct the whole course of nature for the satisfaction of his blind cupidity and insatiable avarice. Thus the prejudice developed into superstition, and took deep root in the human mind; and for this reason everyone strove most zealously to understand and explain the final causes of things; but in their endeavor to show that nature does nothing in vain, i.e. nothing which is useless to man, they only seem to have demonstrated that nature, the gods, and men are all mad together. Consider, I pray you, the result: among the many helps of nature they were bound to find some hindrances, such as storms, earthquakes, diseases, &c.: so they declared that such things happen, because the gods are angry at some wrong done to them by men, or at some fault committed in their worship. Experience day by day protested and showed by infinite examples, that good and evil fortunes fall to the lot of pious and impious alike; still they would not abandon their inveterate prejudice, for it was more easy for them to class such contradictions among other unknown things of whose use they were ignorant, and thus to retain their actual and innate condition of ignorance, than to destroy the whole fabric of their reasoning and start afresh. They therefore laid down as an axiom, that God´s judgments far transcend human understanding. Such a doctrine might well have sufficed to conceal the truth from the human race for all eternity, if mathematics had not furnished another standard of verity in considering solely the essence and properties of figures without regard to their final causes. There are other reasons (which I need not mention here) besides mathematics, which might have caused men´s minds to be directed to these general prejudices, and have led them to the knowledge of the truth.
   ellauri159.html on line 59:

   Different religious traditions divide the seventeen verses of Exodus 20:1–17 and their parallels in Deuteronomy 5:4–21 into ten commandments in different ways, shown in the table below. Some suggest that the number ten is a choice to aid memorization rather than a matter of theology.
   ellauri159.html on line 411:

   • T: Jewish Talmud, makes the "prologue" the first "saying" or "matter" and combines the prohibition on worshiping deities other than Yahweh with the prohibition on idolatry.
   
   ellauri159.html on line 415:
   • L: Lutherans follow Luther's Large Catechism, which follows Augustine but subordinates the prohibition of images to the sovereignty of God in the First Commandment and uses the word order of Exodus 20:17 rather than Deuteronomy 5:21 for the ninth and tenth commandments.
   
   ellauri159.html on line 417:
   • A: Augustine follows the Talmud in combining verses 3–6, but omits the prologue as a commandment and divides the prohibition on coveting in two and following the word order of Deuteronomy 5:21 rather than Exodus 20:17.
   
   ellauri159.html on line 572:
   More than bravado or bluster, today’s knight in shining armor must have the courage of the heart necessary to undertake tasks which are difficult, tedious or unglamorous, and to graciously accept the sacrifices involved.
   ellauri159.html on line 578:
   Words and attitudes can be painful weapons in the modern world, which is why a knight in shining armor exercises mercy in his or her dealings with others, creating a sense of peace and community, rather than engendering hostility and antagonism.
   ellauri159.html on line 590:
   More than just a safety net in times of tragedy, hope is present every day in a modern knight’s positive outlook and cheerful demeanor — the shining armor that shields him or her, and inspires people all around.
   ellauri159.html on line 605: Faith is when you trust God and His purpose in your circumstances more than they seem to warrant. As Hebrews 11:1 states, “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” And remember, a true knight’s first mission and calling is to please the boss.
   ellauri159.html on line 650: Honest to God honor comes to a person when they serve and live only for God. Sometimes others acknowledge this honor publically, which is a perk, but this is never a true knight’s goal. A good reputation (at least among those where a good reputation is valued) is nice to have, but that’s never his goal either. Nonetheless, having a good name is “more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or gold” (Proverbs 22:1).
   ellauri159.html on line 686: But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk, or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure, or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
   ellauri159.html on line 696: Gallantry is a knight word for courage, it does not mean flourishing your hat in front of ladies. (For the latter, see Courtesy.) Ramon Lull said about courage (not gallantry): “A knight who is in battle with his Lord, who for lack of courage flees from battle when he should give aid, because he redoubts or fears the torment or peril more than trusts his courage uses not the office of knighthood.”
   ellauri159.html on line 729: Being a mentor to someone means providing her (or him) with wise and influential counseling when she is open to receiving it (or he). Unlike parenting, which is more direct, mentoring is an exchange of ideas and questions and squeezes and hugs (rather than fluids).
   ellauri159.html on line 753: Second, males’ greater amounts of testosterone make them well-suited for the warrior role for a couple of reasons. First, testosterone is linked with a greater desire to compete and take risks. Studies show that when a man “wins” in a contest, he is hit with a boost of dopamine and a surge of testosterone that makes him want to keep on competing. So while testosterone doesn’t directly make men more aggressive (that’s a myth — it’s more complicated than that), it does fuel a drive to keep pushing when someone else is pushing back.
   ellauri159.html on line 763: The first job of men in dire times has always been to establish and secure “the perimeter.” Donovan argues that the way of men is the way of the gang, because when placed in a harsh environment, men will quickly make the logical calculation that they have a much better chance of surviving if they band together than if they each try to go it alone. For some folks, “gang” is a word weighted with negative connotations, so substitute “posse” or “platoon” or whatever else if you must. The important thing to realize is that the small, tightly-knit honor group was the basic male social unit for eons. The myth of the uber-manly lone wolf is just that. With few exceptions, men have always fought and hunted together. Cowboys banded together, pioneers banded together, and Rambo wouldn’t have actually stood a chance against either gang.
   ellauri159.html on line 785: The key to upholding honor in a male gang is to always try to pull your own weight – to seek to be a boon rather than a burden to the group. If a man lacks in physical strength, he might make up for it in the area of mastery – being the group’s best tracker, weapons-maker, or trap inventor; one crafty engineer can be worth more than many strong men. If a man lacks in both physical strength and mastery, he might still endear himself to the other men with a sense of humor, a knack for storytelling, or a talent in music that keeps everyone’s spirits up. Or he might act as a shaman or priest – performing rituals that prepare men for battle and cleanse and comfort them when they return from the front. The strong men of the group will usually take care of the weak ones who at least try to do whatever they can. Shame is reserved for those who will not, or cannot excel in the tactical virtues, but don’t try to contribute in some other way, and instead cultivate bitterness and disregard for the perimeter-keepers who ironically provide the opportunity to sit on one’s hands and carp. (Aki Manninen would love this.)
   ellauri159.html on line 956: INFJs have an inner world filled with ideas, symbols, and possibilities. They are passionate, idealistic, and have a deep concern for others. INFJ writers include Plato, Mary Wollstonecraft, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Dante Alighieri, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Agatha Christie, Charlotte Brontë, J.K. Rowling, Carl Jung, and Leo Tolstoy. Learn more about how INFJs write here.
   ellauri159.html on line 1001: Ss are concrete thinkers, placing more trust in experience than in flashes of insight. They’re more interested in sensory data than in the patterns perceived by the unconscious mind. Ss tend to be intellectually content—they want to enjoy the world.
   ellauri159.html on line 1004: Ns are abstract thinkers, placing more trust in flashes of insight than in experience. They’re less interested in sensory data than in the patterns perceived by the unconscious mind. Ns tend to be intellectually restless—they want to change the world.
   ellauri159.html on line 1007: Fs prefer to use their rational feeling function when making decisions. They place more emphasis on the effect that actions have on people than they do on adhering to the impersonal rule of logic. They tend to give other people the benefit of the doubt.
   ellauri159.html on line 1010: Ts prefer to use their thinking function when making decisions. They place more emphasis on the rule of logic than on the effect that actions have on people. They tend to be skeptical in evaluating ideas, whether their own or someone else’s.
   ellauri159.html on line 1013: Ps like to keep their options open. They enjoy beginning new projects and exploring opportunities as they arise. Ps think in terms of possibilities rather than likelihoods.
   ellauri159.html on line 1016: Js are drawn to closure. They feel satisfied after finishing a project or reaching a decision. They think in terms of likelihoods rather than possibilities.
   ellauri159.html on line 1023: Regard writing as a practical exercise rather than as a creative one. You want to meet the goals of their teacher, editor, boss, or project sponsor. For this reason, you like receiving specific instructions.
   ellauri159.html on line 1044: Avoid theoretical subjects. Your best bet is to try help people in an immediate, tangible way. You might be more suited to medical writing than to technical writing.
   ellauri159.html on line 1048: Of course you would rather discuss the topic than write about it. Schedule your writing activities to allow sufficient time for composition. If you feel stuck, do something active like taking a walk or a beer. List your ideas to help develop an internal dialogue.
   ellauri159.html on line 1093: Build your topic around a visual element. It is way easier than reading. This might be a chart, a graphic—even a quotation. They may follow a template that’s worked in the past, rather than inventing something new. Just be sure to give a new slant on the old idea to keep it fresh.
   ellauri159.html on line 1137: Let the teacher focus more on correctness than on content. Don’t be afraid to take a stand, or get a hard on. Recognize that your insights are unique—most people lack your sensitivity. Consult a close writer friend to ensure that your points are logically developed and your organs well described.
   ellauri159.html on line 1141: You Want your writing to serve a practical purpose, such as explaining how to solve a problem. You tend to be a good troubleshooter (actually, a good troublemaker and sharpshooter too) with broad, specific knowledge that they can apply in high-pressure situations. Choose topics that allow you to draw on this ability. Then, jot down your ideas while conducting your research, rather than writing in your head. That´s way too hard, it´s like shooting with blanks. This will help you focus your ideas early so you don’t waste time gathering extraneous information.
   ellauri159.html on line 1147: Focus on original facts rather than original ideas. You need not be interested in theory except as a way of exploring what’s tangled and undemonstrable. Seek mastery rather than discovery, although this may mean applying a new technology to an old battlefield. You don’t want to be the first—you want to be the best, and last (on the battlefield).
   ellauri159.html on line 1151: Write to steal their ideas to develop yours rather than to please an audience. If your goal is to communicate your ideas to others (god beware), be sure to organize your work so that the subject folds logically. This will likely come easily to you if you invest the time. Also, engage your side to the battle by relating the subject to their personal experience. If you don’t feel comfortable writing about your own experience, write about something you’ve observed, or what the commies or aliens are likely up to.
   ellauri159.html on line 1217: You work best in a quiet environment where they won’t be interrupted, thanx to the I. LIkewise, you like autonomy so you can perfect your writing according to yourr own high standard without having to follow someone else’s low standard.
   ellauri159.html on line 1221: You have a keen insight into the nature of things. Your prose often conveys startling images of mood or atmosphere rather than objects. Maybe you should consider poetry, or rap. You enjoy complexity and can patiently unravel dense material like a terrier. You are able to see many sides of an argument and so may have difficulty reaching a conclusion, or even reaching a period, like Pynchon. During the writing process, you may often pause to consider alternatives or to seek seeming connections between obviously disparate things. That´s a paranoid feature, so you may be an asthenic person. Consult Krezmer´s typology.
   ellauri159.html on line 1256: You may excel at satire, and humor can liven up your work. Make sure your tone is appropriate for the piece and for the audience. Aarne Kinnunen´s works on good taste in humor are very helpful. You may find it helpful to include a personal story or two, rather than relying on cold logic alone to make your point. (You are so close to ESFP - Esiintyjä that it is hard to see the diff - maybe you two are like Dumb and Dumber.)
   ellauri159.html on line 1289: You are a conceptualizer who tends to explore a narrow topic deeply. Guys like you take a systems approach, rather than a linear one, during the planning stage. They do a website not just a text! You start a project early to test the concept, then quickly drive toward the conclusion. Once the competitors´ bones are in place, you further develop the content, adding facts to flesh out their ideas. You may find it useful during revision to challenge yourself to consider alternatives, rather than locking yourself in to your original premise. Oh, why bother, since you got it all figured out already.
   ellauri159.html on line 1329: Were I obliged to give a short name to the attitude in question, I should call it that of radical empiricism, in spite of the fact that such brief nicknames are nowhere more misleading than in philosophy. I say 'empiricism,' because it is contented to regard its most assured conclusions concerning matters of fact as hypotheses liable to modification in the course of future experience; and I say 'radical,' because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as an hypothesis, and, {viii} unlike so much of the half-way empiricism that is current under the name of positivism or agnosticism or scientific naturalism, it does not dogmatically affirm monism as something with which all experience has got to square. The difference between monism and pluralism is perhaps the most pregnant of all the differences in philosophy. Primâ facie the world is a pluralism; as we find it, its unity seems to be that of any collection; and our higher thinking consists chiefly of an effort to redeem it from that first crude form.
   ellauri160.html on line 61: And then came the Fifth-month, more than I could bear, And you have been gone five months.
   ellauri160.html on line 122: Ezra Weston Loomis Pound (30 October 1885 – 1 November 1972), modernin ajan Li Bai, was an expatriate American poet and critic, a major figure in the early modernist poetry movement, and a fascist collaborator in Italy during World War II. His works include Ripostes (1912), Hugh Selwyn Mauberley (1920), and his 800-page epic poem, The Cantos (c. 1917–1962). Hizi noi cantothan on selvä kokoelma paasauxia!
   ellauri160.html on line 178: In the summer of 1913 Pound became literary editor of The Egoist, a journal founded by the suffragette Dora Marsden. At the suggestion of W. B. Yeats, Pound encouraged James Joyce in December of that year to submit his work. Harriet Shaw Weaver accepted it for The Egoist, which serialized it from 2 February 1914, despite the printers objecting to words like "fart" and "ballocks", and fearing prosecution over Stephen Dedalus's thoughts about prostitutes. Joyce wrote to Yeats: "I can never thank you enough for having brought me into relation with your friend Ezra Pound who is indeed a miracle worker."
   ellauri160.html on line 193: Pound's translations from Old English, Latin, Italian, French and Chinese were highly disputed. According to Alexander, they made him more unpopular in some circles than the treason charge.
   ellauri160.html on line 196: Harriet Monroe, editor of Poetry, published a letter in April 1919 from a professor of Latin, W. G. Hale, who found "about three-score errors" in the text; he said Pound was "incredibly ignorant of Latin", that "much of what he makes his author say is unintelligible", and that "If Mr. Pound were a professor of Latin, there would be nothing left for him but suicide" (adding "I do not counsel this"). Pound replied to Monroe: "Cat-piss and porcupines!! The thing is no more a translation than my 'Altaforte' is a translation, or than Fitzgerald's Omar is a translation."
   ellauri160.html on line 202: In June, July and August 1917 Pound had the first three cantos published, as "Three Cantos", in Poetry. Twice the length of Paradise Lost and 50 times longer than The Waste Land, Pound's 800-page The Cantos ("Canto I" to "Canto CXVI", c. 1917–1962) became his life's work.
   ellauri160.html on line 217: English poets such as Maurice Hewlett, Rudyard Kipling, and Alfred Tennyson had made a particular kind of Victorian verse—stirring, pompous, propagandistic and popular. According to modernist scholar James Knapp, Pound rejected the idea of poetry as "versified moral essay"; he wanted to focus on the individual experience, the concrete rather than the abstract.
   ellauri160.html on line 649: In a Kabbalistic treatise by Nathan Spira (died in 1662), it is explained that Mahlat was daughter to Ishmael and his wife, who was herself daughter of Egyptian sorcerer Kasdiel. Mother and daughter were exiled to the desert, where the demon Igrathiel mated with Mahlat and engendered Agrat or Igrat. Mahlat later became Esau's wife.
   ellauri161.html on line 103: Adoptionism, also called dynamic monarchianism, is an early Christian nontrinitarian theological doctrine, which holds that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at his baptism, his resurrection, or his ascension. Under adoptionism Jesus is currently divine and has been since his adoption, although he is not equal to the Father, per "my Father is greater than I" and as such is a kind of subordinationism. Adoptionism is sometimes, but not always, related to denial of the virgin birth of Jesus. The other early Christology is "high Christology," which is "the view that Jesus was a pre-existent divine being who became a human, did the Father’s will on earth, and then was taken back up into heaven whence he had originally come," and from where he appeared on earth.
   ellauri161.html on line 487: I understand why some people hate this film. It feels real in its entirety, it shows you how stupid and insignificant we are and it is extremely apropos today. Also, it was marketed as a comedy, when in fact is a dramatic film that is humorous only in its accurate portrayal of humanity. Then again some people try to "tell you" what it is about and, while it is certainly metaphoric, it isn't about anything more specific than ourselves. It is a mirror. Some people don't like what they see in it.
   ellauri161.html on line 507: Over 30% of the American population does not believe in global warming and think it is a hoax, or fake news. What's more perilous though is the fact that governments worldwide are NOT taking the proposed measures that could curb global warming beneath 1.5 Celsius. Above that treshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius we get a runaway effect of increasing global warming, which would be nothing less than CATASTROPHIC.
   ellauri161.html on line 520: Initially the "comet" stood for climate change in the original script. But now liberals were beholden to a far more scary narrative way better than the idea of climate change that might pose a threat only in an unforeseeable future--and that is of course infectious disease medicine. They realized without "the science" they had no chance against the right. So now the comet came to represent the "virus."
   ellauri161.html on line 546: The targets of the satire – incompetent governments, media, tech billionaires, populace believing in politics not science – are obvious. There’s a shorthand that makes each character’s real world avatar easy to get hence the laughs but does that undermine the film’s intelligence? No, it's spot on.
   ellauri161.html on line 568: Kate Blanchett was way the dullest character on the cast. All silicon, no AI. No interest whatsoever, human or otherwise. Dr Strangelove was a lot worse satire than this. The problem with Kubrik was that he had a villain, while the real world has not just one- rather, there are 7 billion of them.
   ellauri161.html on line 578: Footnote: For some reason in the past week or so Don’t Look Up has been subject to far more coverage and discussion than it deserves. No idea why. Maybe people are desperate for non-Covid talking points. Just a theory. (Ouch. This guy is JUST The type of people being made desperate fun of. How sad.
   ellauri161.html on line 590: Don’t Look Up wants to paint our inaction with regard to climate change as the result of denialism and being distracted by silly things like, say, a movie streaming on Netflix. But climate change isn’t a comet headed our way in less than a year — a lousy, faulty metaphor for where we’re at right now. Except that IT IS! It's probably too late already. Now get a big mouth fuck goddam Allison Willmore,
   ellauri161.html on line 619: Among the baddies are vacuous United States President Janie Orlean (Streep, bad), douchebro Chief of Staff and President’s son Jason Orlean (Hill, worse), perpetually cheery and vapid morning TV show hosts Brie Evantee (Blanchett) and Jack Bremmer (Perry), and creepy tech-billionaire Peter Isherwell (Rylance, who really should know better than the strange attempts at possibly neurodivergent caricature that this role seems to consist of? How so better pray tell cowboy?), as well as the truth-hostile environment of mainstream and social media.
   ellauri161.html on line 647: The film also falls apart in its total runtime, with the movie being over two hours long. Two hours is a long time admittedly, it feels longer than six months, or time until 2030.
   ellauri161.html on line 657: It's a glib, unfunny infomercial that are closer to Ted Talks than Talladega Nights.
   ellauri161.html on line 707: Annoyingly bad. I suppose this might appeal to those who like their humor and satire delivered like a sledge hammer to the head, but if you prefer a more subtle approach, this is not for you. Added to this are the ludicrously exaggerated characters that are so bad that they are laughable, but in the wrong way. The DiCaprio character is just plain irritating. After 20 minutes of this film, I was just wishing the comet would arrive much earlier than anticipated.
   ellauri161.html on line 737: This was a waste of 2 and a half hours of my life. How they got at least 4 academy award winners to make this steaming pile of crap shocks me. Would have rather had major dental work done than watch this movie.
   ellauri161.html on line 740: I literally couldn't stay awake. I started it twice, and fell asleep both times. I looked up the ending, and from my interpretation of what the movie was supposed to show (how global warming is not being addressed by our current politicians), I think my nap was more productive than staying awake to watch this.
   ellauri161.html on line 748: Bethany G 2d ago:
   ellauri161.html on line 772: Satire needs more than jokes to be funny, and everyone in this movie is equally stupid. A large cast of familiar faces floats through this painfully unfunny exercise in futility.
   ellauri161.html on line 1000: “Bourgeois are by nature people who hate and destroy heavens. When they see a beautiful site, they have no more pressing dream than to cut the trees, dry up the springs, build streets, shops and urinals. They call this seizing a business opportunity.”
   ellauri161.html on line 1100: The chief of his mystical writings are, The Ornament of Spiritual Marriage (Lat. by Gerh. Groot, Ornatus Spiritualis Desponsionis, MS. at Strasburg; by another translator, and published by Faber Stapulensis [Paris, 1512], De Ornatu Spirit. Nuptiarum, etc.; also in French, Toulouse, 1619; and in Flemish, ´J Cieraet der gheestclyeke Bruyloft, Brussels, 1624, Hengelliset häät): — Speculum AEternae Salutis: — De Calculo, an interpretation of the calculus candidus, Re 2:17: — Samuel, sive de Alta Contemplatione. The other works of Ruysbroeck contain but little more than repetitions of the thoughts expressed in those here mentioned. (Esim. 7 hengellisen rakkauden askelmasta.) He wrote in his native language, and rendered to that dialect the same service which accrued to the High German from its use by the mystics of the section where it prevailed. He is still regarded in Holland as "the best prose writer of the Netherlands in the Middle Ages." His style is characterized by great precision of statement, which becomes impaired, however, whenever his imagination soars, as it often does, to transcendental regions too sublimated for language to describe. His works were accessible until lately only in Latin editions (by Surius, Cologne, 1549, 1552, 1609 [the best], 1692, fol.), or in manuscripts scattered through different libraries in Belgium and Holland. Four of the more important works were published in their original tongue, with prefaces by Ullmann (Hanover, 1848). No complete edition has as yet been undertaken (see Moll, )e Boekerij van het S. Barbara-Klooster te Delft [Amst. 1857, 4to], p. 41).
   ellauri162.html on line 546: The "Carmen apologeticum" has a misleading title, thanks to Pitra, its first editor (1852) who was a moron.
   ellauri162.html on line 661: Since loss of my pluripotence, I have mainly been dealing on European casual wear for more than 20 years. So I have experience also dealing with many shops in Japan. I have gotten much knowledge of the fashion industry, through experience of production management, wholesale and sales positions. In addition, I am glad to have made many acquaintances through the job.
   ellauri162.html on line 694: The Church recognizes that the lack of workers union contributed to an unjust situation where many work in conditions little better than slavery. One solution proposed by socialists was to eliminate private property altogether. Pope Leo XIII dismisses this solution because "every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own." He also notes that "the impelling reason and motive of his work is to obtain property." Instead of helping the working class, the elimination of private property would only hurt those it was intended to benefit.
   ellauri162.html on line 717: Masturbation. It’s not just a great way to kill time, but it’s also the safest sex you can have. And it has many health benefits. (See: 5 Reasons You Should Masturbate Tonight.) Although we can all agree that masturbation is pretty much the cherry on top of the ice cream of life, there’s more to the act than that. In a recent study from Harvard, men who ejaculated 21 or more times per month had a 19 to 22 percent lower risk of prostate cancer than men who did so only four to seven times per month. In some parts of the world, teenagers are encouraged to masturbate. Masturbation prevents unwanted pregnancies.
   ellauri162.html on line 784: Aseity (from Latin ā "from" and sē "self", plus -ity) is the property by which a being exists of and from itself. It refers to the Christian belief that God does not depend on any cause other than himself for his existence, realization, or end, and has within himself his own reason of existence. This represents God as absolutely independent and self-existent by nature. Bernanosin ateistipappi ei välittänyt aseptiikasta, sepsis tuli.
   ellauri162.html on line 815: The concept of a highly conserved ontogeny dates back to 1828 and the work by Karl von Baer. Baer´s work was cited by Charles Darwin and used in support of his Theory of Evolution. The concept was made famous though by Ernst Haeckel in 1874 with the publication of his drawings of the conserved stage. Haeckel was mainly pushing the concept of recapitulation in which he hypothesized that ontological development repeated the evolutionary steps of the organism. Recapitulation has since been discredited and is not accepted by any modern biologist. Haeckel has been accused of falsifying his embryonic drawings, most notably by Jonathan Wells in his book Icons of Evolution. Some biology text books used Haeckel´s drawings for many years after it was known they were faked. However, most modern biology textbooks only use them now for historical reference and actual photos of embryos are used to discuss the pharyngula stage.
   ellauri162.html on line 817: Darwin proposed that embryos resembled each other since they shared a common ancestor, which presumably had a similar embryo, but that development did not necessarily recapitulate phylogeny: he saw no reason to suppose that an embryo at any stage resembled an adult of any ancestor. Darwin supposed further that embryos were subject to less intense selection pressure than adults, and had therefore changed less.
   ellauri162.html on line 819: The Haeckelian form of recapitulation theory is considered defunct. Embryos do undergo a period or phylotypic stage where their morphology is strongly shaped by their phylogenetic position, rather than selective pressures, but that means only that they resemble other embryos at that stage, not ancestral adults as Haeckel had claimed.
   ellauri163.html on line 330: Eleazar the father of Matthan,
   ellauri163.html on line 332: Matthan the father of Jacob,
   ellauri163.html on line 721: Vox Day has written about atheists being "socially autistic". Asperger´s syndrome (sometimes referred to as "High-Functioning Autism" or "HFA") is an umbrella term used to classify problematic behaviours similar to, but less severe than, those within the lower reaches of the autistic spectrum.
   ellauri163.html on line 742: However, there is evidence which suggests that a large portion of PZ Myers´ blog audience are narcissists rather than individuals who have Asperger´s Syndrome (see: PZ Myers´ antitheist blog audience and the issue of narcissism vs. Asperger´s Syndrome).
   ellauri163.html on line 748: People with higher scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (items included "I am fascinated by numbers," and "I find social situations difficult") had weaker belief in a personal God than those with lower IQ score ("I am fascinated by skirts", and "I find zippers difficult"). Second, reduced ability to mentalize mediated this correlation. (Mentalizing was measured with the Empathy Quotient, which assesses self-reported ability to recognize and react to others' emotions, and with a task that requires identifying what's being expressed in pictures of eyes. Systematizing -- interest in and aptitude for mechanical and abstract systems -- was correlated with autism but was not a mediator.) Third, men were much less likely than women to say they strongly believed in a personal God (even controlling for autism), and this correlation was also mediated by reduced mentalizing. They were also clearly more interested in skirts and puzzled by zippers.
   ellauri163.html on line 761: Another, anthropologically informed study explores descriptions of communication with invisible, superhuman agents in high functioning young adults on the autism spectrum. Based on material from interviews, two hypotheses are formulated. First, autistic individuals may experience communication with bodiless agents (e.g., gods, angels, and spirits) as less complex than interaction with peers, since it is free of multisensory input, such as body language, facial expressions, and intonation.
   ellauri163.html on line 817: That said, the reason the film does succeed, and rises to greatness, rests primarily on the shoulders of the lead actress, Nadine Nortier, who, despite little dialogue, conveys great depths within her character, despite being a non-professional actress at the time. On the other hand, Jean-Claude Guilbert (a professional actor who also appeared in Au Hasard Balthazar, as another drunkard, Arnold) is also very good. The rest of the cast is solid. Yet, critical missteps abound, especially when some claim Mouchette is filled with anger. Yes, there may be acts of seeming anger (tossing dirt at her female rivals), but clearly the character of Mouchette is a walking mass of desensitisation. This would explain why she reacts the way she does to sex with Arsene, rather than seeing it as her ‘striking back’ at the world.
   ellauri163.html on line 833: In essence, the film called Mouchette recapitulates the point of view of its character Mouchette, which allows the viewer to both ‘feel’ a bit of the character’s warp, while also being able to step back and intellectually distance oneself and ‘understand’ the character’s warp. Whether or not Bresson intended this doubled perspective on life, it, and many of the film’s other strengths more than make up for its weak ending, and lift it to a greatness that, while it falls short of the utmost in the canon of great cinema, nonetheless makes Mouchette a film for which the term “great” is applied a surety. There are, certainly, worse ways to misfire, slightly or otherwise.
   ellauri163.html on line 862: David Émile Durkheim was born 15 April 1858 in Épinal, Lorraine, France, to Mélanie (Isidor) and Moïse Durkheim, coming into a long lineage of devout French Jews. As his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather had all been rabbis, young Durkheim began his education in a rabbinical school. However, at an early age, he switched schools, deciding not to follow in his family's footsteps. I bet dad, grandad and greatgranddad were all very disappointed. In fact, Durkheim led a completely secular life, whereby much of his work was dedicated to demonstrating that religious phenomena stemmed from social rather than divine factors. Despite this fact, Durkheim did not sever ties with his family or with the Jewish community. Actually, many of his most prominent collaborators and students were Jewish, some even blood-related.
   ellauri163.html on line 963: Ajatus jumalista kuvaa ajatusta ihmisentapaisista olennoista, jotka eivät tarvitse mitään. Paizi tarvizevathan ne uskovien kiitosta, ne ovat sille oikeinkin makeankipeitä. Pahastuvat jos ei sitä ala kuulua. Kristina-täti pahastui ja muikeni kuin vaari, kun sen jakamista töräyxistä ei kiitetty. Nyt ei olla edes pen pälejä.
   ellauri164.html on line 252: Black & Veatch is an employee-owned global engineering, procurement, consulting and construction company with a more than 100-year track record of innovation in sustainable infrastructure.
   ellauri164.html on line 372: I blew through this novel myself, which in retrospect was somewhat of a grave mistake, as the book alternates between compelling and highly engaging dialogues to unrealistically long monologues which to me resemble a Rimbaud poem in translation than anything else, which is to say: hard to parse. That they got more than what they bargained for is what the ordinary reader will be struck by first when they read this. The complexity of each of the conversations cannot be overstated, which I think will inevitably result in readers just mechanically scanning the sentences rather than internalizing the arguments, with the final result being the great part of the novel sliding off like rain, leaving only vague impressions like it did with me unfortunately, but the parts that did affect me left me very humbled. And chiefly this impression will not be helped by another one of the defining features of the novel, which is its vagueness. It deliberately leaves a lot of key details unheard and leaves a lot to the ability to infer events by the reader. Though sometimes frustrating to a reader like me who reads history and biography, I recognize that it should be so for this novel, for the main conflict in it is a psychological one, so I wouldn't have it any other way.
   ellauri164.html on line 379: I wanted to like this book so much more than I did. I actually found it incredibly difficult to understand. Some of it, I think, was that it was poorly translated. I read a 1962 edition that doesn't even cite a translator -- so many of the sentences were so convoluted as to be utterly obtuse. Poor translation or witless reader? I never could figure out why Mlle Chantal was such an angry bitch and why she insisted on tormenting the priest. What was her secret? Was the priest an alcoholic or just terminally sick? Gay? Why did M le Comte come to hate the priest? These are just some of the basic narrative issues I couldn't figure out. Forget the whole spiritual aspect--much of what the priest mused on and felt was incomprehensible to me as he described it. I can't help wondering if I'd have understood it if I had read it in French. Or maybe I'm just so spiritually challenged (in a God believing, Catholic way) that I can't comprehend it when it's described. All of that said, there were profoundly moving passages here and there, but over all I don't begin to know what I read. It's rather embarrassing actually--I feel so simple! (less)
   ellauri164.html on line 498: So, now, what can we learn from Moses’ life? Moses’ life is generally broken down into three 40-year periods. The first is his life in the court of Pharaoh. As the adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter, Moses would have had all the perks and privileges of a prince of Egypt. He was instructed “in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22). As the plight of the Hebrews began to disturb his soul, Moses took it upon himself to be the savior of his people. As Stephen says before the Jewish ruling council, “[Moses] supposed that his brothers would understand that God was giving them salvation by his hand” (Acts 7:25). From this incident, we learn that Moses was a man of action as well as a man possessed of a hot temper and prone to rash actions. Did God want to save His people? Yes. Did God want to use Moses as His chosen instrument of salvation? Yes. But Moses, whether or not he was truly cognizant of his role in the salvation of the Hebrew people, acted rashly and impetuously. He tried to do in his timing what God wanted done in His timing. The lesson for us is obvious: we must be acutely aware of not only doing God’s will, but doing God’s will in His timing, not ours. As is the case with so many other biblical examples, when we attempt to do God’s will in our timing, we make a bigger mess than originally existed.
   ellauri164.html on line 506: These are just a handful of practical lessons that we can learn from Moses’ life. However, if we look at Moses’ life in light of the overall panoply of Scripture, we see larger theological truths that fit into the story of redemption. In chapter 11 the author of Hebrews uses Moses as an example of faith. We learn that it was by faith that Moses refused the glories of Pharaoh’s palace to identify with the plight of his people. The writer of Hebrews says, “[Moses] considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt” (Hebrews 11:26). Moses’ life was one of faith, and we know that without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6). Likewise, it is by faith that we, looking forward to heavenly riches, can endure temporal hardships in this lifetime (2 Corinthians 4:17–18).
   ellauri164.html on line 518: At Thursday’s daily Mass (Thursday of the 18th week of the year) we Roman catholics read of the sin that excluded Moses from leading the people to the Promised Land. While there are some mysterious elements to it, one thing seems clear: the grumbling of the people got on Moses’ nerves. Indeed, grumbling often affects more than just the one doing the complaining. Through it, infectious negativity can be set loose. Even if only a small number are grousing, it can still incite discontent, anger, and/or fear in others. Yes, the people nearly wore him out. At a particularly low moment, when the people were complaining about the food, Moses lamented to God,
   ellauri164.html on line 523: Moses was so dispirited that he preferred to die rather than continue on in this way. In his weariness, he spoke rashly, and God excluded him from leading the people into the Promised Land.
   ellauri164.html on line 550: 2. He spoke to the people, not with meekness and calm authority, but in heat and bitterness. "Ye rebels, must we fetch you water out of this rock?" Thus he "spake unadvisedly with his lips" (Psalm 106:33) instead of his stick. It is not difficult to understand how Moses should have so far forgotten himself on this occasion. Let the facts be weighed. The servant of the Lord is now 120 years old. The generation which sinned thirty-seven years ago, and was condemned to die in the wilderness, is nearly all gone. Moses is mortified to find that the new generation is infected with a touch of the same impatient unbelief which wrought in their fathers so much mischief. No sooner are they at a loss for water than they rise against Moses with rebellious murmurings. For once he loses command of himself. On all former occasions of the kind his meekness was unshaken; he either held his peace, or prayed for the rebels, or at most called on the Lord to be his Witness and Judge. Now he breaks out into bitter chidings. At the root of this there was a secret failure of faith. "Ye believed me not," - did not thoroughly rely on my faithfulness and power, - "to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel" (verse 12). His former meekness had been the fruit of faith. He had been thoroughly persuaded that the Lord who was with him could accomplish all he had promised, and therefore he faced every difficulty with calm and patient resolution. Now a touch of unbelief bred in him hastiness and bitterness of spirit.
   ellauri164.html on line 562: When the Hebrews were thirsty and could find no water, they became impatient and did not remember the power of God which had, nearly forty years before, brought them water out of the rock. Instead of trusting God, they complained of Moses and Aaron, and said to them, "Would God that we had died when our brethren died before the Lord!" That is, they wished that they had been of that number who had been destroyed by the plague in the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.
   ellauri164.html on line 572: This necessity for the manifestation of God's power made the occasion one of great solemnity, and Moses and Aaron should have improved it to make a favorable impression upon the people. But Moses was stirred, and in impatience and anger with the people, because of their murmurings, he said, "Hear now, ye rebels, must we fetch you water out of this rock?" In thus speaking he virtually admitted to murmuring Israel that they were correct in charging him with leading them from Egypt. God had forgiven the people greater transgressions than this error on the part of Moses, but He could not regard a sin in a leader of His people as in those who were led. He could not excuse the sin of Moses and permit him to enter the Promised Land.
   ellauri164.html on line 581: For this single instance, Moses had allowed the impression to be entertained that he had brought them water out of the rock, when he should have magnified the name of the Lord among His people. The Lord would now settle the matter with His people, that Moses was merely a man, following the guidance and direction of a mightier than he, even the Son of God. In this He would leave them without doubt. Where much is given, much is required. Moses had been highly favored with special views of God's majesty. The light and glory of God had been imparted to him in rich abundance. His face had reflected upon the people the glory that the Lord had let shine upon him. All will be judged according to the privileges they have had, and the light and benefits bestowed.
   ellauri164.html on line 795: less than we would have.
   ellauri164.html on line 804: It often happens that Bible believing Christians reject the concept of allegory as being a legitimate way of interpreting the Bible. This comes from the belief that any way of interpreting Scripture other than literal meaning is false, particularly as it concerns Genesis 3 and evolution. But in fact allegory is common in the Bible – Christ makes frequent use of it in His parables – and even Genesis 3 is allegory (which does not preclude its literal interpretation as well.) In this section we shall examine the allegorical significance of the staff and the rock.
   ellauri164.html on line 850: The penalty for leaders is more than the penalty for followers – which is as it should be.
   ellauri164.html on line 867: There are few characters that play a larger part in the story of the Bible than Moses. He is the human protagonist of four Old Testament books and is consistently held up in both the OT and NT as a shining example of faith in the promises of God. The law that he delivered to the people of Israel serves as the foundation of the nation of Israel, and is lauded by Jesus as a testament that would not pass until “heaven and earth pass away…[and] all is accomplished.” One of the great tragic moments of the Bible is where Moses is denied entrance to the Promised Land for his sin at the Rock of Meribah; after faithfully leading Israel for forty years, Moses strikes a rock instead of speaking to it and is condemned to die before living in the Promised Land. On its surface, this might seem unfair to Moses. One mess-up and God gives him this great punishment? How many times had Israel failed in their journey and at Mt. Sinai, and God had spared their lives and allowed them to keep going? Yet His most faithful servant is barred over this one, seemingly insignificant event? If we take a closer look at the text, however, we see why Moses’ failure was such a stark one. While it doesn’t diminish the tragic nature of the event, it does shed light on why God takes such a drastic step to respond.
   ellauri164.html on line 871: This pattern shows itself again in the beginning of Numbers 20 after the death of Miriam. Once more Israel rebels against Moses and Aaron, this time over a lack of water in the desert of Zin. They claim that it would have been better to have died with Korah’s rebellion rather than wander without food and water, and they express regret over leaving Egypt, a land of “grain, figs, vines, and pomegranates.” This might seem a bold claim, since in our reading Korah has just died a few chapters earlier. Careful reading, however, indicates that there’s actually been a quiet time skip; Numbers 33:38 indicates that Aaron died in “the fortieth year after the sons of Israel had come from the land of Egypt, on the first day in the fifth month.” Given that Aaron’s death is recorded in Chapter 20, just a few verses after the episode at Meribah, this would indicate that the episode at Meribah occurred in year 38 of the 40 year wandering in the wilderness (remember that Israel had spent more than a year at Sinai in addition to travel time from Egypt to Sinai and from Sinai to the Promised Land before the wandering). This means that this rebellious generation of Israelites aren’t referencing a recent event, but instead wishing they had died nearly forty years earlier with Korah! Moses and Aaron have been dealing with this wicked and hard group of people for a very long time, and they are now claiming it would have been better to have died with Korah: a fate they were only spared because of Moses and Aaron’s own intercession!
   ellauri164.html on line 873: We would expect the pattern to repeat here. The people have rebelled, so the next part would be God’s wrath and threats of destruction. Instead, however, God merely grants their request for water. No mention of sin or possible annihilation, just grace in providing for Israel’s needs. The fact that this cycle we’ve come to expect changes is designed to highlight an important event; the oddity of the text “awakens us from our narrative slumber,” as one commentator puts it, and forces us to pay attention closely to what’s occurring. Why would God not threaten destruction? To answer that, we have to remember a key aspect of God’s character: He does not change. Hebrews 13:8 says He is the same yesterday and today and forever, “without variation or shifting shadow,” (James 1:17). The purpose of the threats of destruction, and Moses/Aaron’s intercession, was not to actually change God’s mind. God knew exactly what was going to happen in all these instances. God’s threats on Israel are spoken to Moses so that Moses will intercede. They are tests of Moses’ (and Aaron’s) character, just as God’s conversation with Abraham over the fates of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18) was about testing Abraham’s character rather than the doomed cities. Yet here, in Numbers 20, God does not follow the pattern. Why?
   ellauri164.html on line 875: This gets us back to the question of what, exactly, Moses’ sin was. Many commentators focus on the physical actions that Moses took in verses 9-11. Some say Moses sin was striking the rock rather than speaking to it, but Moses was told to take the staff of God. Exodus 17:5-6 had Moses striking the rock to cause water to come out of the rock (in fact, it’s actually the same rock of Meribah!), so it’s possible to read an inference that the staff was to be used to strike the rock. Some commentators see Moses’ harsh words for Israel as the sin, or perhaps that he speaks to the people rather than speaking to the rock. Regardless of which of these views, they don’t account for what the text itself says: Numbers 20:12 makes it clear that the sin of Moses and Aaron was “…you have not believed Me, to treat Me as holy in the sight of the sons of Israel.” Indeed, focusing on Moses’ actions of striking the rock or speaking harshly makes it seem doubly unfair to Aaron, who had neither spoken nor struck the rock.
   ellauri164.html on line 877: The reading that makes more sense is to focus on the breaking of the pattern established to this point. Moses’ harsh words toward the Israelites reveal his emotions in this moment; he classifies Israel as “rebels” rather than the chosen people, and his rhetorical question seems to imply that he does not view Israel as worthy of God’s grace any longer. This is the real failure of Moses in this moment: he’s lost his faith in God to fulfill His promises to these people. Israel is a nation of rebels outside of grace, outside of God’s ability to make a great nation, outside of the promises that God has given. It seems nearly forty years of dealing with this people has finally broken Moses, and he is so overwhelmed in this moment that he has lost faith. From God’s perspective, Moses has lost faith in the Lord to overcome Israel’s faithlessness. Moses has not believed in God, and has not treated Yahweh as the Holy God who is able to overcome the weakness of His people. Indeed, this is exactly what Numbers 20:12 says was Moses’ sin! He (and Aaron!) did not believe God and did not treat Yahweh as holy in that moment. God did offer Moses the opportunity to intercede for the people (and thus broke the pattern) because He knew that Moses did not have faith in Him.
   ellauri171.html on line 87:
   ellauri171.html on line 468: When they went to bury her, they found no more of her than the skull and the feet and the palms of her hands’ (the dogs ate her flesh. She became dog's dinner!) (2 Kings 9:31-37)
   ellauri171.html on line 553: But worse than this in their eyes is the fact that he now seems to be offering to give them financial gain through the rape of their sister.
   ellauri171.html on line 591: The brothers respond: should they have let their sister be treated like a whore? A whore receives financial advantage for sex, and they reproach Jacob for suggesting that the honour of the family can be restored by favours from the people of Shechem. They call Dinah ‘our sister’ rather than ‘your daughter’ – a reproach to their father.
   ellauri171.html on line 687: A fifth lesson is that the account describes what happens when men and women abandon God. Sex and other immoral behavior replace God! The entire story is an example of unrestrained animal lust and human depravity. Total disregard for life occurs. What one desires is all that is important. As Proverbs 30:15 says, “The leech has two daughters, “Give,” “Give” . . . ” Women are less important than men. Men abuse men. Unloving men abusively rule over women. Sex trumps everything else. Why? Judges 21:25 says, “. . . everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”
   ellauri171.html on line 689: The sixth lesson is that the homosexuals demonstrated that to them homosexual sexual activity is more desirable than heterosexual activity. However, heterosexual behavior is acceptable if that is all that is available to them. Romans 1:23-24, 26 and 28 teach that when people are given over to homosexual activity, it is a sign that they have rejected God. Homosexual activity is a more serious sin among sins, despite the claims of some. See the study, “Are some sins worse than other sins? – Are all sins equal?” Also notice that Judges 19:22 refers to the men of Gibeah as “worthless fellows.”
   ellauri171.html on line 691: Judges 19-21 demonstrates that God is opposed to the abuse of women in this account. He commanded the destruction of an entire tribe because they did not punish those who raped and abused a concubine and caused her to die. Only when she died did they stop! We are told they abused her all night until dawn. Further, they were so morally bankrupt and corrupt that they left her dead at the door of the Levite. Scripture lifts women above the degradation of the Canaanites and the surrounding nations, but the town of Gibeah had become like the Canaanites. God has a higher view of women than described here. That is why He ordered the destruction of the unjust and morally bankrupt tribe of Benjamin.
   ellauri171.html on line 695: Our eighth lesson reveals the twelve tribes were becoming more like the Canaanites, which were given to sexual perversion: homosexuality, rape, adultery, murder, lies, abuse of women, abduction, absence of justice and the defense of the guilty. What sins did we miss? In truth these are sufficient to demonstrate the utter moral decline of the twelve tribes and one tribe that was worse than the others.
   ellauri171.html on line 701: Daniel Block writes these words, “The Levite had preferred Gibeah over Jebus to avoid the dangers of Canaanism, only to discover that Canaan had invaded his own world.” Sadly, Canaanism is invading our world and some western countries appear to be far worse than the tribe of Benjamin. They do not even seek the Lord for direction. At least the other eleven tribes sought the Lord and killed tens of thousands more. Jehovah was appeased.
   ellauri171.html on line 775: The lesson: God always wins. That's a pretty simplistic way of saying it, but it's true nonetheless. Even when people like Athaliah try to stomp out an entire family and put an end to God's plan for redemption, when people like the priests of Baal lead others to worship idols instead of the true God, God will always triumph in the end. The negative forces of our culture make us wonder where we're headed as a people. Many of our leaders show little integrity or morality, and dishonesty is overlooked in the workplace. Kindness is often the exception rather than the rule. But don't despair. This is not a battle God plans to lose. In the end, he will prevail! You just wight Enry Jiggins!
   ellauri171.html on line 789: The Bible teaches Christians to be content with their lot in life. Paul the apostle wrote, “godliness with contentment is great gain” (1 Timothy 6:6). It is virtuous of a Christian to remain undistracted by the riches of the world while being committed to Christ. For, “better is a little with the fear of the Lord, than great treasure with trouble” (Proverbs 15:16).
   ellauri171.html on line 808: Ahabin dynastia omridit eli kuningas Omrin porukat oli jotain kananiittejä. Israel Finkelstein's The Bible Unearthed presents a very different picture of the Omrides than the circumcision handbook, making them responsible for the great empire, magnificent palaces, wealth, and peace in Israel and Judah that the Bible credits to the much earlier kings David and Solomon. According to Finkelstein, the reason for this discrepancy is the religious bias of the Biblical authors against the Omrides for their polytheism, and in particular their support for elements of the Canaanite religion.
   ellauri171.html on line 979: What the fuck so she stuck to her own people's gods, that was her biggest sin. Besides being smarter than her rather goofy hubby Ahab.
   ellauri171.html on line 1026: For more than two thousand years, Jezebel has been saddled with a reputation as the bad girl of the Bible, the wickedest of women. This ancient queen has been denounced as a murderer, prostitute and enemy of God, and her name has been adopted for lingerie lines and World War II missiles alike. But just how depraved was Jezebel?
   ellauri171.html on line 1059: Judah, a man of honor (buahahaha) tries to pay. His friend Hirah goes looking for her, asking around for the kedeshah in the road (Gen 38:21.). The NRSV translates this as “temple prostitute,” but a kedeshah was not a sacred prostitute; she was a public woman, who might be found along the roadway (as virgins and married women should not be). She could engage in sex, but might also be sought out for lactation, midwifery, and other female concerns. By looking for a kedeshah, Hirah can look for a public woman without revealing Judah’s private life. The woman, of course, is nowhere to be found. Judah, mindful of his public image, calls off the search rather than became a laughingstock. BRUAAHAHAHA!
   ellauri171.html on line 1061: But there is a greater threat to his honor (aw fuck, stop, you're killing us). Rumor relates that Tamar is pregnant and has obviously been faithless to her obligation to Judah to remain chaste. Judah, as the head of the family, acts swiftly to restore his honor, commanding that she be burnt to death. But Tamar has anticipated this danger. She sends his identifying pledge to him, urging him to recognize that its owner is the father. Realizing what has happened, Judah publicly announces Tamar’s innocence. His cryptic phrase, zadekah mimmeni, is often translated “she is more in the right than I” (Gen 38:26), a recognition not only of her innocence, but also of his wrongdoing in not freeing her or performing the levirate. Another possible translation is “she is innocent—it [the child] is from me.” Judah has now performed the levirate (despite himself) and never cohabits with Tamar again. Once she is pregnant, future sex with a late son’s wife would be incestuous.
   ellauri171.html on line 1090: As relatively stylish on the surface as it is resoundingly familiar beneath, Tamara should prove more than serviceable enough for the hardcore horror fans.
   ellauri171.html on line 1132: When Amnon had finished his brutal business, his feelings for Tamar suddenly changed. Now he was revolted by the sight of her, could not bear to look at her, was filled with a loathing far stronger than the lust he had previously felt.
   ellauri171.html on line 1135: To cast her out now, a violated woman, was worse than raping her, since it meant the crime continued. She could never marry or have children, never have a normal life. As far as the people around her were concerned, she would be a used object, unwanted, an outcast. Raping is not bad as such if you provide child support.
   ellauri171.html on line 1154: Prince Amnon refused outright to marry her, the callous streak already evident in David now coming out in the son. David was angry, but did nothing to resolve the situation, or even to punish Amnon for what he had done. This was typical of David – he could never chastise his sons even when they deserved it. Instead he did what many people have done when confronted with rape or incest – he protected the abuser rather than the victim, and tried to hush things up.
   ellauri171.html on line 1164: It is to be hoped that Tamar did not accompany her brother to Geshur, since her status there would have been even worse that in Israel. Instead, Maacah may have used what little influence she now had to see that her daughter returned to David’s harem. In either place Tamar’s position would have been lowly, little better than a servant. Tamar means ‘date palm’; the name suggests a date palm.
   ellauri172.html on line 256: It may be objected, if man does not act from free will, what will happen if the incentives to action are equally balanced, as in the case of Buridan's ass? I am quite ready to admit, that a man placed in the equilibrium described (namely, as perceiving nothing but hunger and thirst, a certain food and a certain drink, each equally distant from him) would die of hunger and thirst. If I am asked, whether such a one should not rather be considered an ass than a man; I answer, that I do not know, neither do I know how a man should be considered, who hangs himself, or how we should consider children, fools, madmen, &c. Hyvä Pentti!
   ellauri172.html on line 332: Tyrä tyrä mörk mörk taisi tulla melattomalle Leviathanille. Mutta hyvä yritys 10, ei Darwin yrittänyttä laitata, niinkuin ei ilmeisesti Guyautakaan.
   ellauri180.html on line 55: Elena has received mainly positive reviews. Steve West of the Cinema Blend compared the story of The Young Adult Vampire Diaries and the character of Elena to the 10 years older popular vampire franchise, Twilight, and its protagonist Bella Swan. West said "Clearly Elena is way hotter than Bella, she has two immortal young adult vampires fighting over her". (Täähän on jo moneen kertaan nähty: chick litissä tytöllä pitää ollä väh. 2 kosijaa, ei se muuten ole mistään kotoisin.) After the vampire episodes, Elena established her own medical practice, specialising in blood diseases.
   ellauri180.html on line 181: Anthropologists do not agree on the origins of circumcision. The English egyptologist, Sir Graham Elliot Smith, suggested that it is one of the features of a heliolithic' culture which, over some 15 000 years ago, spread over much of the world. Others believe that it may have originated independently within several different cultures; certainly, many of the natives that Columbus found inhabiting the New World' were circumcised. However, it is known that circumcision had been practised in the Near East, patchily throughout tribal Africa, among the Moslem peoples of India and of south-east Asia, as well as by Australian Aborgines, for as long as we can tell. The earliest Egyptian mummies (1300 BCE) were circumcised and wall paintings in Egypt show that it was customary several thousand years earlier than that.
   ellauri180.html on line 204: More than 2000 years of Jewish persecution has led to the development of alternative surgical procedures. Indeed, `uncircumcision as a measure to offset the oppression of Jews is cited in the Old Testament (I Maccabees 1:14-15) and surgical attempts to restore the prepuce have been well documented throughout history
   ellauri180.html on line 224: Literary assaults such as these have served to fuel the debates and even a Medline® search today reveals that in the last year alone, 155 reviews or letters have been published arguing for or against routine circumcision. However, studying the evolution of the medical indications provides us with a pleasing demonstration of how controversy drives scientific enquiry. We have already described how the surgeons of 100 years ago advocated circumcision for a wide variety of conditions, such as impotence, nocturnal enuresis, sterility, excess masturbation, night terrors, epilepsy, etc. There can be no doubt that a large element of surgical self-interest drove these claims. However, most of the contemporary textbooks also included epithelioma (carcinoma) of the penis amidst the morass of complications of phimosis. Although rare, once this observation had been made, it presumably filtered down through the textbooks by rote, rather than scientific study. A few reports had appeared in the early 20th century indicating that carcinoma of the penis was rare in circumcised men, but not until the debate over neonatal circumcision erupted in the medical press in the 1930s that this surgical `mantra' was put to the test. In 1932, the editor of the Lancet challenged Abraham Wolbarst, a New York urologist, to prove his contention (in a previous Lancet editorial), that circumcision prevented penile carcinoma. Wolbarst responded by surveying every skin, cancer and Jewish hospital in the USA, along with 1250 of the largest general hospitals throughout the Union. With this survey, he was able to show that penile cancer virtually never occurred in circumcised men and that the risk related to the timing of the circumcision. Over the years this association has been reaffirmed by many research workers, although general hygiene, demographic and other factors such as human papilloma virus and smoking status are probably just as important. However, Wolbarst established that association through formal scientific enquiry and proponents of the procedure continue to use this as a compelling argument for circumcision at birth.
   ellauri180.html on line 230: Finally, controversy has arisen over who should perform the procedure. Once circumcision had been medicalized' in the 19th century, many surgeons were keen to take paying customers away from the religious men. As such, doctors were often quick to highlight the unforseen risks attendant on a non-medical procedure. For instance, Cabot (1924) described tuberculosis of the penis occurring when Rabbis with infected sputum sucked on the baby's penis to stop the bleeding. However, it has often been claimed that the incidence of complications in Jewish children is very low and that the final result is usually better than any hospital doctor can produce.
   ellauri180.html on line 268: Tips on Writing Characters that are smarter than you?
   ellauri180.html on line 447: In summary: a man speaks to some unidentified (and possibly imaginary) auditor, telling us how, on a dark and stormy (or rainy and windy) night, he waited in his cottage for his lover, Porphyria, to arrive. When she turns up, it’s clear Porphyria is of a higher social class than the male speaker: he’s punching above his weight, as they say. Note how she glides in as if she owns the place, and as if she walks on air rather than on the ground like us mere mortals. She wears a hat, cloak, and shawl, and her gloves are soiled, suggesting that they are not used to slumming it in a common man’s cottage and attending to his fire and grate. The fact that she also takes the lead – suggesting she is perhaps used to ordering servants to do her bidding – further hints at her highborn status: she calls to the speaker, and she takes his arm and puts it around her waist. Then, the clincher (in more ways than one): we are told "she Too weak, for all her heart’s endeavour,
   ellauri180.html on line 450: In other words, her pride, and knowing that she is higher than her lowborn lover on the social scale and so cannot marry him, prevents her from giving herself to him altogether. He is just her ‘bit of rough’, to use the more modern idiom. Calmly, and determined to possess Porphyria utterly, even if it means killing her in order to do so, the speaker strangles Porphyria with her hair, wrapping it around her neck three times and wringing the life from her. In death, she remains forever his.
   ellauri181.html on line 150: Schwartz is a fellow of the American Psychological Foundation and is a member of the American Sociological Foundation, European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, the Israel Psychological Association, the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, and the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. He is president of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. He coordinates an international project in more than 70 countries that studies the antecedenz and consequences of individual differences in value priorities and the relations of cultural dimensions of values to societal characteristics and policies. His value theory and instrumenz are part of the ongoing, biannual European Social Survey.
   ellauri181.html on line 170: “The relative importance of multiple values guides action. Any attitude or behaviour typically has implications for more than one value. … The tradeoff among relevant, competing values guides attitudes and behaviors… Values influence action when they are relevant in the context (hence likely to be activated) and important to the actor.”
   ellauri181.html on line 382: Additionally, ipsative measures may be useful in identifying faking. However, ipsative measures may, especially among testing-naïve individuals exhibiting high levels of conscientiousness and/or neuroticism, decrease test validity by discouraging response and/or encouraging non-response. For example, a test's authors may force respondents to choose between "a) Animals chase me in my dreams" and "b) My dreams are nice" in an effort to see whether a given respondent is more inclined toward "faking bad" or toward "faking good." When faced with such a question, a child frequently terrified by nightmares that rarely if ever involve animals, and especially one whose parents have foolishly taught him/her/it strict rules against lying, may simply refuse to answer the question given that for that respondent nearly all of the time both descriptions are inaccurate. Even a previously presented guideline "Choose the answer that [best/better] describes you" may be unhelpful in such a situation to responders who worry that endorsing one item or the other will still involve stating it to be accurate or "well"-descriptive to some positive degree. Only if the guideline is presented as "Choose the answer that more accurately or less inaccurately describes you" and the above-described responder is sophisticated enough to reason out his/her response in terms of "Despite the infrequency with which I have nice dreams, I have them [more frequently / less infrequently] than dreams in which animals chase me" (or, in theory, vice versa) will such a responder be willing to answer the question—and phrasing the guideline in this way bears its own cost of making the question reveal less about the respondent's propensities because the respondent is no longer forced to "fake" one way or another.[citation needed].
   ellauri181.html on line 603: Franklin then went on to define humility for his own understanding, and true to his less than humble self Ben Franklin defined humility, thus.
   ellauri182.html on line 82: Mikage is not religious, but believes in elements of the mystical and superstitious. She “can’t believe in the gods,” but for a warm bed, she “thanked the gods—whether they existed or not.” In despair, she “implored the gods: Please, let me live.” She also has a dream that comes partially true. Ergo Mikage relates to American culture. She looks up to Eriko as an ideal of feminine beauty, charm, and strength, although Eriko was once, or still is, a man - or is s/he?
   ellauri182.html on line 113: The Marshall Plan brought Western ideas and a free market economy to what had been an old and traditional culture. in the mid-1980s, Japan has a booming industrial economy, bolstered by its exports of automobiles and electronics to the West. Japanese society has become more materialistic than ever, influenced by its wealth and the consumerism imported from America. Mikage acknowledges this consumerism when she says of her friends, “these people had a taste for buying new things that verged on the unhealthy.” Mikage’s generation has been brought up on television and American culture; she mentions an American sitcom and Disneyland in her narrative. One character in the story is wearing “what is practically the national costume, a two-piece warmup suit,” a style imported from America. In Japan, Yoshimoto’s generation is called the shinjinrui, a generation that has grown up in a wealthy, technological society exposed to American values. Shinjinrui was new breed of humans (used to refer to the post-war generation, who have different ideals and sensibilities). Japan's Generation X.
   ellauri182.html on line 115: Some reviewers thought Kitchen was superficial in style and substance, and overly sentimental. Todd Grimson in the Los Angeles Times Book Review wrote that, ‘“Kitchen’ is light as an invisible pancake, charming and forgettable ... The release of information to the reader seems unskilled, or immature, weak in narrative or plot.” Elizabeth Hanson of the New York Times Book Review took issue with the overall effect of the book, writing that “the endearing characters and amusing scenes in Ms. Yoshimoto’s work do not compensate for frequent bouts of sentimentality.” Hanson added that the book’s main appeal for English-language readers “lies in its portrayal of the lives of young Japanese who are more into food and death than sex. EAT! KILL! but do not FUCK!".
   ellauri182.html on line 118: Specifically, after ordering katsudon (fried pork served over rice), Mikage has a revelation with regard to Yuichi. The katsudon becomes more than just a meal, it is a means to reach out to Yuichi, to relate to him, to acknowledge both Mikage’s and Yuichi’s connectedness as two obese lovers starving under the same night sky.
   ellauri182.html on line 131: Once again, the existentialist idea appears that personal freedom comes at the expense of going against the mainstream crowd. This relates to existentialism because existential characters tend to focus on the personal rather than the political, and existential characters are alienated by the size and scope of the modern economic system. It is economic liberalism's religion. Euu yecch. Sartre käytti paljon mustetta kuvataxeen oxentamista. Varmaan sitä izeäänkin etoi peilikuvansa.
   ellauri182.html on line 136: In Japanese fiction of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, homosexuality was often celebrated for this reason: boys’ love was considered to be purer than the heterosexual kind; it was uncontaminated by the demands of reproduction and other family duties.
   ellauri182.html on line 167: Shinran left Mount Hiei to study under Hōnen for the next six years. Hōnen (1133–1212) another ex-Tendai monk, left the tradition in 1175 to found his own sect, the Jōdo-shū or "Pure Land School". From that time on, Shinran considered himself, even after exile, a devout disciple of Hōnen rather than a founder establishing his own, distinct True Pure Land school.
   ellauri182.html on line 191: Many Pure Land Buddhist schools in the time of Shinran felt that birth in the Pure Land was a literal rebirth that occurred only upon death, and only after certain preliminary rituals. Elaborate rituals were used to guarantee rebirth in the Pure Land, including a common practice wherein the fingers were tied by strings to a painting or image of Amida Buddha. From the perspective of Jōdo Shinshū such rituals actually betray a lack of trust in Amida Buddha, relying on jiriki ("self-power"), rather than the tariki or "other-power" of Amida Buddha. Such rituals also favor those who could afford the time and energy to practice them or possess the necessary ritual objects—another obstacle for lower-class individuals. For Shinran Shonin, who closely followed the thought of the Chinese monk Tan-luan, the Pure Land is synonymous with nirvana.
   ellauri182.html on line 218: Kirjallisuussiten jättimäinen luettelo yleisistä teemoista on "jännästi" vähän eri proosalle, runoudelle ja leffoille. Ehkä jotkut aiheet on liian monimutkaisia leffoille ja liian arkisia runoille? Proosan aiheet on lausemaisempia ja niissä on usein mukana joku opetus. Mutta onko runo- tai leffa-aiheita joita ei sovi käsitellä proosassa? Onko proosa, runot ja leffat yleisesti ottaen tarkoitettu eriluonteisille ihmisille ja sixi niiden teematkin on erilaisia, vastaten yleisön (ja/tai väsääjien) luonteenomaisia harrastuxia ja arvomaailmoja? Vai onko tässä otannallinen vääristymä. Se on todennäköistä. Sopii toivoa, että netti ym. julkisuudessa esiintyvien termiittiapinoiden pärstien ja mielipiteiden tomppelius on vääristymä sekin, eli esiin nousevat pahimmat paskakökkäreet kuin kerma maidon pinnalle. Vaikka toisaalta, tavallset turvelothan ne kökkäreet esiin nostavat kuin 200M kärpästä, Google-äänestyxellä.
   ellauri182.html on line 437: What is inside and what is outside is the same. Plain white paper. The circle - the idea of separation - is an illusion. The circle, which creates the duality of 'inside' and 'outside' or 'here' and 'there' is a false representation. The cycle of 'life' and 'death' that the circle shows is itself nothing more than a trick of the conscious mind that habitually creates opposites where none in fact exist. You're actually dead already.
   ellauri183.html on line 68: In 1974, philosopher Sidney Hook defined humanism and humanisz by negative characteristics. According to Hook, humanisz are opposed to the imposition of one culture in some civilizations, do not belong to a church or established religion, do not support dictatorships, do not justify violence for social reforms or are more loyal to an organization than their abstract values. Hook also said humanisz support the elimination of hunger and improvemenz to health, housing, and education. No sitä varsinkin.
   ellauri183.html on line 166: In his lectures on the Book of Genesis in the 16th century, Martin Luther praised Abraham for his uncritical obedience to God – for the "blind faith" exhibited by his refusal to question whether it was right to kill Isaac. In the late 18th century, Immanuel Kant took the opposite view, arguing that Abraham should have reasoned that such an evidently immoral command could not have come from God. For Luther, divine authority trumps any claim on behalf of reason or morality, whereas for Kant there can be nothing higher than the moral law.
   ellauri183.html on line 168: In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard follows Kant in emphasising that Abraham's decision is morally repugnant and rationally unintelligible. However, he also shows that one consequence of Kant's view is that, if nothing is higher than human reason, then belief in God becomes dispensable. Unlike both Kant and Luther, Kierkegaard does not promote a particular judgment about Abraham, but rather presenz his readers with a dilemma: either Abraham is no better than a murderer, and there are no grounds for admiring him; or moral duties do not constitute the highest claim on the human being. Fear and Trembling does not resolve this dilemma, and perhaps for a religious person there is no entirely satisfactory way of resolving it.
   ellauri183.html on line 180: When Abraham raises his knife over Isaac's body, this symbolises the fact that every human relationship is haunted by the prospect of death. Love always ends in loss, at least within this life. One response to this existential fact – perhaps the most common response – is to avoid the issue of mortality as much as possible. An alternative response is to face up to the inevitable pain of loss and to relinquish the beloved in advance, so to speak, by giving up hope of enjoying a happy relationship within this lifetime. (This "movement of resignation" is described as "monastic", although it does not literally entail becoming a recluse. It is an internal movement, an adjustment of expectations.) In Kierkegaard's view, this is more noble than the first option, but it is very far from the courage of Abraham, who continues to love Isaac and enjoy his relationship to him in full awareness of the suffering that his death would bring. This aspect of the interpretation of Abraham offered in Fear and Trembling suggesz that, far from being an individualist, Kierkegaard regards human relationships as essential to life.
   ellauri183.html on line 192: Is stealing from a small shop worse than from a chain? Clare Carlisle's moral QA column in Guardian. God's Lamb's report emphasises the severity of property crime, highlighting research by the Policy Exchange thinktank which found that half of burglary victims do not hear back from police after reporting the crime! By moral absolutism, shoplifting and burglary are both absolutely wrong, and equally as bad as fornication or murder.
   ellauri183.html on line 194: Moral absolutism is certainly compatible with an acknowledgement that monetary value depends on circumstance. Jesus, for example, reinforced the 10 commandmenz, which unconditionally prohibit murder, adultery, theft and so on. But one day, when he was teaching in the temple, Jesus watched a poor widow put two small coins in the donation box, while rich people made much larger offerings. “This poor widow has put in more than all of them,” says Jesus, “because she, out of her poverty, has put in all she had to live on.” But by the criterion of moral absolutism they were just the same.
   ellauri184.html on line 48: During his time in the Philippines, Mailer was first assigned to regimental headquarters as a typist, then assigned as a wire lineman. In early 1945, after volunteering for a reconnaissance platoon, he completed more than two dozen patrols in contested territory, and engaged in a few firefights and skirmishes. After the Japanese surrender, he was sent to Japan as part of the army of occupation, was promoted to sergeant, and became a first cook and argued about his girth.
   ellauri184.html on line 70: Over the course of his life, Mailer was connected with several women other than his wives, including Carole Mallory, who wrote a "tell all" biography, Loving Mailer, after his death.
   ellauri184.html on line 72: Bodily urges are fundamental to Mailer's approach to novels and short works. According to his obituary in The Independent, his "relentless machismo seemed out of place in a man who was actually quite small – though perhaps that was where the aggression originated." For Mailer, African-American men reflected a challenge to his own notions of masculinity. His pecker was not much bigger than those of Hemingway and Scott Fitzgerald, about the size of his pen knife. Like many men with a tiny penis he sought comfort with men and women equally. Throughout his work and personal communications, Nuchem repeatedly expresses interest in, includes episodes of or makes references to, bisexuality or homosexuality.
   ellauri184.html on line 76: Barbary Shore (1951) was not well received by the critics. It was a surreal parable of Cold War leftist politics set in a Brooklyn rooming-house, and Mailer's most autobiographical novel. His 1955 novel, The Deer Park drew on his experiences working as a screenwriter in Hollywood from 1949 to 1950. It was initially rejected by seven publishers due to its purportedly sexual content before being published by Putnam's. It was not a critical success, but it made the best-seller list, sold over 50,000 copies its first year, and is considered by some critics to be the best Hollywood novel since Nathanael West's The Day of the Locust.
   ellauri184.html on line 80: Mailer's fifth novel, Why Are We in Vietnam? was even more experimental in its prose than An American Dream. Published in 1967, the critical reception of WWVN was mostly positive with many critics, like John Aldridge in Harper's, calling the novel a masterpiece and comparing it to Joyce. Mailer's obscene language was criticized by critics such as Granville Hicks writing in the Saturday Review and the anonymous reviewer in Time. Eliot Fremont-Smith calls WWVN "the most original, courageous and provocative novel so far this year" that's likely to be "mistakenly reviled". Other critics, such as Denis Donoghue from the New York Review of Books praised Mailer for his verisimilitude "for the sensory event". Donoghue recalls Josephine Miles' study of the American Sublime, reasoning WWVN's voice and style as the drive behind Mailer's impact.
   ellauri184.html on line 86: Mailer spent a longer time writing Ancient Evenings, his novel of Egypt in the Twentieth Dynasty (about 1100 BC), than any of his other books. He worked on it for periods from 1972 until 1983. It was also a bestseller, although reviews were generally negative. Harold Bloom, in his review said the book "gives every sign of truncation", and "could be half again as long, but no reader will wish so", while Richard Poirier called it Mailer's "most audacious book".
   ellauri184.html on line 90: His final novel, The Castle in the Forest, which focused on Hitler's childhood, reached number five on the Times best-seller list after publication in January 2007. It received reviews that were more positive than any of his books since The Executioner's Song. Castle was intended to be the first volume of a trilogy, but Mailer died several months after it was completed. The Castle in the Forest received a laudatory 6,200-word front-page review by Lee Siegel in the New York Times Book Review, as well as a Bad Sex in Fiction Award by the Literary Review magazine.
   ellauri184.html on line 95: Notorious philanderer," "egomaniac," "pugnacious" and "pompous" are a few of the milder epitaphs that have been used to describe controversial and larger-than-life (inevitably) Norman Mailer. His New York Times obituary was even titled, "Norman Mailer, Towering Writer With Matching Ego, Dies at 84." Known in the literary world as one of the greatest writers of the twentieth century, Mailer won two Pulitzer Prizes in literature and one National Book Award. He is credited with having pioneered creative nonfiction as a genre, also called New Journalism. During his life he became as famous for his relationships with women as he did for his literary work. He was married six times and fathered eight children. Here is a brief look at some the six wives of Norman Mailer.
   ellauri184.html on line 127: The Bible stated that Mary and Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, were cousins. While this appears to be a clear cut answer, there is more than meets the eye as to how Mary and Elizabeth were related.
   ellauri184.html on line 230: Economically Galilee offered better agricultural and fishing resources than the Dead Sea and the Negev, making the wealth of some Galileans the envy of their southern neighbors.
   ellauri184.html on line 250: According to the biblical chronicle, the Tribe of Manasseh was a part of a loose confederation of Israelite tribes from after the conquest of the land by Joshua until the formation of the first Kingdom of Israel in c. 1050 BC. No central government existed, and in times of crisis the people were led by ad hoc leaders known as Judges (see Book of Judges). With the growth of the threat from Palestinian (sorry) Philistine incursions, the Israelite tribes decided to form a strong centralised monarchy to meet the challenge, and the Tribe of Manasseh joined the new kingdom with Saul as the first king. After the death of Saul, all the tribes other than Judah remained loyal to the House of Saul, but after the death of Ish-bosheth, Saul's son who succeeded him to the throne of Israel, the Tribe of Manasseh joined the other northern Israelite tribes in making Judah's king David the king of a re-united Kingdom of Israel. However, on the accession of David's grandson Rehoboam, in c. 930 BC the northern tribes split from the House of David and from Saul's tribe Benjamin to reform Israel as the Northern Kingdom. Manasseh was a member of the Northern Kingdom until the kingdom was conquered by Assyria in c. 723 BC and the population deported. From that time, the Tribe of Manasseh has been counted as one of the ten lost tribes of Israel.
   ellauri184.html on line 269: There were important defeats along the way but it is interesting to observe that commanders often escaped repercussions for their militawy incompetence and it was usually the soldiers who bore the blame for defeat. Though a legionawy could theoretically come from any province within the Empire, the requirement of Woman citizenship had consequences for demographics: legionawies were more likely to speak Latin than non-citizen soldiers, they were usually wecwuited from the most heavily Womanized cities and provinces, their citizenship held inherent prestige that afforded them privilege over both civilians and other soldiers, etc. Legions primarily garrisoned in major imperial provinces, such as Syria, Pannonia, and post-War Judaea. With the exception of Egypt, all provinces with at least one legion were required to have a governor with Senator status. Legions primarily consisted of infantry soldiers, with a few cavalry or archers present among their ranks. Roughly 30 legions were active at any given time within the Empire and each consisted of approximately 5400 soldiers and officers, a standing army of ca. 150-300K total, though not all with a weceived Latin pwonunciation.
   ellauri184.html on line 273: Roughly equal in number to the legionawy soldiers across the Empire were auxiliaries. Auxiliaries, like legionawies, served the government of Wome, but were divided into two distinct militawy types: cohorts and alae – infantry and cavalry, respectively – with a few mixed units termed cohors equitatae as well. Auxiliary soldiers were mostly non-citizens who were awarded Woman citizenship in exchange for militawy service. Consequently, auxiliary soldiers were significantly less Womanized than legionawies: auxiliary soldiers in the Woman East spoke the lingua franca of Greek and often local languages as well (e.g., Aramaic), typically with limited competence in Latin.
   ellauri184.html on line 275: The ethnic nature of these units led Wome to create many “specialist” cohorts (e.g., dromedary, archery, sling) that worked with combat methods familiar to one or another ethnic group. Though auxiliaries often served in major imperial provinces alongside legionawies, they also served in minor provinces as well. Thus, provinces and regions with a governor of Equestrian status (e.g., Raetia, Noricum, pre-War Judaea) had no legions, but only auxiliaries. Until about 70 CE, many auxiliary soldiers were stationed in their home province; Judaeans were in Judaea, Syrians in Syria, etc. In addition to the Jewish War (66-73 CE), problems with soldiers’ divided loyalties with the Revolt of the Batavi in Germania Inferior (69-70 CE) and the Year of the Four Empewows (68-69 CE) led empewows to actively undermine any remaining ethnic homogeneity in the auxilia, stationing soldiers outside their homeland in increasingly diverse units. Finally, auxiliaries were paid less than legionawies and did not receive all the bonuses granted to legionawies if they were successful in the same battle.
   ellauri184.html on line 355: First, the problem is theological: The apostle Paul clearly marks the beginning of sodomy with the practical theological problem of idolatry. “although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts...” (Rom. 1:21 ). What was the result? “For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged their natural use for what is against nature. LIkewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due” (Rom. 1:26-27 ). In short, a skewed vision of God leads directly to a skewed vision of man and human sexuality.
   ellauri184.html on line 646: Jesus was crucified between two other “robbers”. The original Greek texts speak of lestai (Mt, Mk). Lestes is the Greek translation of the Latin latro. Both terms have a similarly broad semantic meaning. What is important in our context is that latro and lestes denote not only a street robber but also a resistance- and guerilla fighter. It is likely that no one perceived Jesus as a guerilla fighter, but the term lestes is even broader than the English terms robber, bandit, or resistance fighter, it includes terrorist.
   ellauri184.html on line 682: The custom of releasing prisoners in Jerusalem at Passover is known to theologians as the Paschal Pardon, but this custom (whether at Passover or any other time) is not recorded in any historical document other than the gospels, leading some scholars to question its historicity and suspect that such a custom was a mere narrative invention of the Bible´s writers like so much else in the fake good news.
   ellauri184.html on line 736: Mary was most certainly a widow at this point in her life and also an older woman. Though she had other sons, Jesus chose John to provide care for Mary after His death. Why? Because Jesus’ brothers did not become believers until after His resurrection (John 7:5). Further, Jesus’ brothers were not present at His crucifixion. They had other errands just then. Jesus was entrusting Mary to John, who was a believer and was present, rather than entrusting her to His brothers, who were not believers and who were not even interested enough to be present at his crucifixion.
   ellauri184.html on line 767: Mailer is considering a God of Action, something of a Hemingway in deistic form who must prove himself with creative acts, a deity in the trenches, making mistakes, failing, succeeding, learning from his mistakes, constantly evolving.The God that interests Mailer is one guided by intuition no less than we, His creations whom we are said to resemble. Nuchem´s own self image to a jot.
   ellauri185.html on line 66: According to Jewish tradition, the book was written by Samuel, with additions by the prophets Gad and Nathan, who together are three prophets who had appeared within 1 Chronicles during the account of David's reign. Modern scholarly thinking posits that the entire Deuteronomistic history was composed circa 630–540 BCE by combining a number of independent texts of various ages.
   ellauri185.html on line 102: The Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant from Shiloh and take it to the temple of their god Dagon, who recognizes the supremacy of Yahweh. The Philistines are afflicted with plagues and return the ark to the Israelites, but to the territory of the tribe of Benjamin rather than to Shiloh. The Philistines attack the Israelites gathered at Mizpah in Benjamin. Samuel appeals to Yahweh, the Philistines are decisively beaten, and the Israelites reclaim their lost territory.
   ellauri185.html on line 118: God tells Samuel to anoint David of Bethlehem as king, and David enters Saul's court as his armor-bearer and harpist. Saul's son and heir Jonathan befriends David and recognizes him as the rightful king. Saul then plots David's death, but David flees into the wilderness where he becomes a champion of the Hebrews. David joins the Philistines, but he continues to secretly champion his own people until Saul and Jonathan are killed in battle at Mount Gilboa.
   ellauri185.html on line 123: At this point, David offers a majestic eulogy, where he praises the bravery and magnificence of both his friend Jonathan and King Saul.
   ellauri185.html on line 131: David captures Jerusalem and brings the Ark there. David wishes to build a temple, but Nathan tells him that one of his sons will be the one to build the temple. David defeats the enemies of Israel, slaughtering Philistines, Moabites, Edomites, Syrians, and Arameans.
   ellauri185.html on line 135: David commits adultery with Bathsheba, who becomes pregnant. When her husband Uriah the Hittite returns from battle, David encourages him to go home and see his wife (to cover his own tracks) but Uriah declines in case David might need him. David then deliberately sends Uriah on a suicide mission, and for this, Yahweh sends disasters against David's house. Nathan tells David that the sword shall never depart from his house.
   ellauri185.html on line 141: 2 Samuel concludes with four chapters (chapters 21 to 24) that lie outside the chronological succession narrative of Saul and David, a narrative that will continue in The Book of Kings. These four supplementary chapters cover a great famine during David's reign; the execution of seven of Saul's remaining descendants, only Mephibosheth being saved (kannattiko mainita), David's song of thanksgiving, which is almost identical to Psalm 18; David's last words; a list of David's "mighty warriors"; an offering made by David using water from the well of Bethlehem; David's sinful census; a plague over Israel which David opted for as preferable to either famine or oppression; and the construction of an altar on land David purchased from Araunah the Jebusite.
   ellauri185.html on line 147: The chronological narrative of succession resumes in the first Book of Kings, which relates how, as David lies dying, Bathsheba and Nathan ensure Solomon's elevation to the throne.
   ellauri185.html on line 567: Mutta luonnollisesti ei vielä lakien ja tuomioistuinten kaan poistamisella saavuteta mitään todellista parannusta, jos se laitos, josta sekä lait että tuomioistuimet ovat lähtöisin ja joka muodostaa koko valtiojärjestyksen keskuksen, nim hallitus, jää olemaan. Hallituksethan ovat viime kädessä valtion liikkeellepanevana voimana ja keskipisteenä. Niin kauan kuin hallitukset ovat olemassa, ei ole paljon hyötyä siitä, jos niitä tai näitä valtiolaitoksia poistetaan, sillä hallitus asettaa niitten sijalle uusia. Jos tahdotaan käydä kiinni pahan juureen, täytyy tuhota hallitukset. Sillä lait, jotka ovat ihmisten orjuuden syynä, ovat hallitusten luomia. Sen vuoksi voidaan ihmiset vapauttaa orjuudesta vain siten, että hallitukset hävitetään" (Moderne Sklaven 5. 93)
   ellauri185.html on line 730: Pieruhuumori parantaa myös omantunnontuskat. Kun paholainen muistutti Lutheria tämän synneistä, hän vastasi vitsaillen. ”Eilenkin päästelin estottomasti kaasua. Olethan kirjannut sen syytöslistaasi”. Hänen pointtinsa oli, että Jumalan armon edessä paholaisen syytökset ovat pelkkää ilmaa.
   ellauri185.html on line 846: Instead, certain body odours are connected to human sexual attraction. Humans can make use of body odour subconsciously to identify whether a potential mate will pass on favourable traits to their offspring. Body odour may provide significant cues about the genetic quality, health and reproductive success of a potential mate. Body odour affects sexual attraction in a number of ways including through human biology, the menstrual cycle and fluctuating asymmetry. The olfactory membrane plays a role in smelling and subconsciously assessing another human's pheromones. It also affects the sexual attraction of insects and mammals. The major histocompatibility complex genes are important for the immune system, and appear to play a role in sexual attraction via body odour. Studies have shown that body odor is strongly connected with attraction in heterosexual females. The women in one study ranked body odor as more important for attraction than “looks”. Humans may not simply depend on visual and verbal senses to be attracted to a possible partner/mate. That's hard science, no pseudo, mate!
   ellauri188.html on line 124: The present population of all the six inhabited islands of that group of eleven, numbers, according to Mr. Frank Varney, a long-time resident on Hivaon, about 1,000 or 1,200. Only a small proportion of these are pure bloods, most of that number being natives from the Tuamotus or the Society Islands, and many of them are half-bloods or quarter-bloods, Chinese features being very common. But I met many middle-aged, elderly and old, pure-blooded Mar quesans, a fine, self-respecting race, commanding our admiration and pity. I can not believe that all these people, whom I saw in 1922 and 1923, will have vanished in 1930. It will take a longer time than that, perhaps only a few years longer, before the last pure blooded Marquesan steps off the stage. I am quite sure that Dr. Linton, of the Field Museum, and Dr. Handy, of Bishop Museum, Honolulu, both of whom have made special study of the Marquesans, will agree with me in this.
   ellauri188.html on line 128: I found the breadfruit abundant on all the islands visited (fortunately, I was not obliged to eat poipoi) somewhat dwarfed when growing in the "jungle" in neglected valleys, but an enormous and noble tree when given space. The "jungle" of the Marquesas, by the way (although the islands are between 8 and 11 degrees south latitude) is by no means a tropical jungle as the latter is usually pictured, but is made up very largely of young and old and dying and dead specimens of the Fau, or Purao tree, a native hibiscus which grows to a large size, and is much used by the natives for building. One does not see, in the Marquesas, the rank, choking growths peculiar to Brazil, Central America and other really tropical countries. The appearance of the valleys in that group is more subtropical than tropical, and hence, while this growth may dwarf the breadfruit to a greater or less extent, it does not seem that it would always be fatal to its existence.
   ellauri188.html on line 140: I will venture to say that in ten years Tahiti, picturesque and romantic for so long a time, will have lost its charm because of the presence of hordes of low-caste Chinese and half-bloods. However unattractive this may be from the standpoint of the tourist and sentimentalist, there is no contradicting the fact that they will make these islands a thousand times more productive than would the pure-blooded native, and their skill and habits of application will undoubtedly extend to the preservation of the breadfruit. The Chinese and half-blood Chinese are on all the Marquesan islands which are inhabited, and it will be to their financial interest as well as to the interest of their personal food supply, to preserve the breadfruit there as well as in the Societies. It is notable that the cocoanut and banana plantations and papaye (papaw) groves in Typee at the time of my visit, were either owned or worked by Chinese or half-bloods (Chinese + Tahitian or Chinese + Marquesan).
   ellauri188.html on line 142: Referring to the last paragraph in Mr. Wester's communication-It would appear that if one is dependent, as was the writer, upon trading schooners to get from Tahiti to the Marquesas, then amongst these islands and return to Tahiti, his program for work in these two groups would take more than a year and his estimate of expense might, in consequence, be exceeded. Sometimes one is obliged to wait from one month to three to get the opportunity to move from one island in the Marquesas to another forty or fifty or eighty miles away, so rare and uncertain are the visits of these schooners. Further, in the absence of any regular means of communication, one has to seize any chance opportunity of transportation or run the risk of being marooned for a long period. On the other hand, if a schooner were chartered, which is the best possible way of visiting and working among the South Sea Islands, schooner, captain, crew and provisions would cost about $1,000 per month (this figure was obtained from an authoritative source) and a year on shipboard might not be needed. Under such conditions Mr. Wester's calculation of $8,500 for a year's work in the Marquesas and Societies may not be far out of the way.
   ellauri188.html on line 392: 31-vuotiaana Melville tapasi Pittsfieldissä kesällä 1850 46-vuotiaan Nathaniel Hawthornen, jonka kanssa "ystävystyi". Kirjailijat viettivät paljon aikaa keskustellen komeista intellektuelleista ja filosofisista asioista. Hawthorne myös vaikutti Melvillen seuraavan romaanin Moby Dick sisältöön, sillä hän kannusti Melvilleä tekemään siitäkin allegorisen tarinan suoran valaanpyyntikertomuksen sijaan. Ai siis mitä? kysyi Hermanni. No kikkeli, kikkeli, tietysti, selvitti Nat kärsimättömästi. Vaikka kirja on nykyään todella tunnettu, omana aikanaan se oli paha pettymys. Sitä myytiin koko Melvillen elinaikana vain 3 000 kappaletta. Hänen seuraava romaaninsa Pierre oli vieläkin suurempi floppi.
   ellauri188.html on line 424: In 2011, Lucas co-starred with Elizabeth Taylor in the film Red Dog, based on the true story of an Australian kelpie. Lucas won an Inside Animal Award for his role as the dog. For this part, he gainede more than 100 lbs in weight.
   ellauri189.html on line 81: It is generally held to be most influenced by Lord Byron, whom Malczewski had met in Venice during his travels around western Europe, though it is considerably more gloomy and Gothic than Byron's work. Malczewski is sometimes considered part of the "Ukrainian school" in Polish poetry, though others consider his work to stand uniquely separate. Maria was also influential on later Polish poets, especially Adam Mickiewicz, and on writer Joseph Conrad, although he was not a romantic as such. Well, some of his stuff is pretty gooey, like Nostromo, the Panamanian guy.
   ellauri189.html on line 109: more important than its very Byronic plot, of which I will give only a short outline. The son of a wealthy magnate has fallen in love with the daughter of a petty nobleman (miecznik, the “sword-bearer”, a purely nominal provincial
   ellauri189.html on line 244: Okay, thanx Anttoni, that will do, point taken. I feel your pain. Vähän jäi epäselväxi exactly kenen joukoissa Anttoni seisoi kulloinkin. Oliko se lähdössä Napsun armeijaan kohti Moskovaa kun se typerästi osui jalkaan izeään? Lopun aikaa se kuitenkin näyttää olleen zaari Alexanterin palveluxessa. Fixu valinta.
   ellauri189.html on line 319: Ukrainassa taistellaan sitä vastaan, ettei maa joutuisi totalitaristisen järjestelmän alle ja ettei sen mielivaltainen ajattelu ahmisi jatkossa Eurooppaa pala palalta. Aijaa kommarithan ei ole enää vallassa, no oligarkit sitten. Ai Amerikassakin on, no ne eivät sentään puhu venättä. Amerikkaa täällä jo osataan.
   ellauri189.html on line 410: The Dead Sea is situated at the lowest point on Earth and also the saltiost. It contains salt at a concentration level 10 timos higher than other ocoons and its wators are saturated in minerals, 12 of which are unique only to the Dead Sea. The minerals found in the Dead Sea and its sodimont mud is known all over the world for its healing, renewal and rejuvenation proportios
   ellauri189.html on line 478: Team commissions are earned by agents based on the performance of the teams that they form. Each Seacret agent has a team that is separated into two teams – a right group leg and a left group leg. Usually, one leg tends to perform better than the other and is therefore referred to as your greater volume leg, while the other is called your lesser volume leg. These groups comprise your binary tree. You earn commissions on your team of up to $25,000 every week. Your team commission wholly depends on the volume of the lesser leg. From the star rank through to the executive rank, the commission is 10%, whereas bronze and higher ranked agents earn 15% of the lesser group’s volume.
   ellauri189.html on line 555: Tule mukaan kipuamaan paskakasan huipulle aina kasvavilla panoxilla ja riskillä, riskit sulle ja panoxet mulle, sopiiko? Luotathan?
   ellauri189.html on line 779: Here it is said that almost half of Indian Afridi Pathans are very close genetically to Jews. I heard from some Pashtuns that Pathans are actually Pashtuns that mixed with other nations, so I was set to try to do a DNA test myself on friends of mine who are pure-blood Pashtuns. I already got an offer from a commercial company, when I suddenly remembered something I read not long ago – a Wikipedia article about Jewish genetics. They didn´t prove a thing, so I spend the rest of this section by hand-waving them away.
   ellauri189.html on line 805: So the question is whether one believes the tradition that Pashtuns didn’t mix with other nations or doesn’t. It is less provable than the tradition of being Bene Israel, because if Pashtuns did mix and stopped mixing at some generation A, it is possible that the tradition of not mixing was created at a later generation B, if they didn’t mix for enough generations.
   ellauri189.html on line 807: That said, I think it is more likely that they didn’t mix than that they did. One reason is because the current situation is that most Pashtuns are not mixing. Another reason is that I can’t find a good reason why at some generation A they’d stop mixing after they mixed before that. And finally, we know from Moses (Deuteronomy 30), from Yehezkel (37), from Yirmiya (31), Yishaaya (51, 27), and from many other prophecies that the Bene Israel are out there (those who were exiled by the damn Assyrian). Because we know they don’t keep Judaism, the only possibility for them to exist as Israelis is by not mixing, and there is one, and only one, nation that fits those conditions, and it is the Pashtuns.
   ellauri190.html on line 65: Almost all ethnic Kazakhs today are Sunni Muslims of the Hanafi school. Their ancestors, however, believed in Shamanism and Tengrism, then Zoroastrianism, Buddhism and Christianity including Church of the East. Elikkä ryssän kasakat ja potaskan ruhtinaat ovat samanlaisia vain tavoilta ja nimeltä. Verisukulaisuutta ei ole osoitettu, mutta voivathan ne kaikki olla alunperin jotain kipchakkeja. Kazakhstan on pinta-alaltaan maailman suurin muslimivaltio, muttei väkiluvultaan, se on Indonesia. Se on myös maailman suurin potaskan tuottaja, ellei Amerikkaa lasketa.
   ellauri190.html on line 76: It is unclear when people other than the Brodnici and Berladnici (which had a Romanian origin with large slavic influences) began to settle in the lower reaches of major rivers such as the Don and the Dnieper after the demise of the Khazar state. Their arrival is unlikely before the 13th century, when the Mongols broke the power of the Cumans, who had assimilated the previous population on that territory. It is known that new settlers inherited a lifestyle that long pre-dated their presence, including that of the Turkic Cumans and the Circassian Kassaks.
   ellauri190.html on line 243: By the 11th century, Kyivan Rus was a huge European power. Kyiv was bigger than London or Paris. The city had numerous buildings made of brick, including churches. It also had many private and public bathhouses, like Constantinople (and unlike Western European cities of the time). The realm, stretching from the White Sea to the north to the Black Sea to the south and from the steppes of the Don to the east to what is now eastern Poland to the west, was divided into many feudal fiefs, but the authority of the monarch in Kyiv was nonetheless absolute.
   ellauri190.html on line 277: By 1659, the two outstanding sons of Ukraine, a Kozak general Ivan Vyhovsky and an eccentric scholar-nobleman Yuriy Nemyrych conceived what became known as the Union of Hadyach. It was a unique document, which, essentially, argued in favor of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth transforming into the commonwealth of Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine. Vyhovsky and Nemyrych proposed to establish a Great Principality of Ukraine on par with the Kingdom of Poland and the Great Duchy of Lithuania. And it was a unique historical moment, because in July 1659 the Ukrainian troops won a huge battle against the Muscovite army near the city of Konotop, totally crushing the Muscovites and proving that Ukraine did not need the “friendship” of the tyrannic Tzars. (See the analogy?) If the Hadyach Union had been approved by the Sejm of the Republic, Ukraine would perhaps have become a more European country and would progressively move toward full Western style independence. Again, tragically, it did not happen. Nemyrych was killed at a duel, and Vyhovsky forced to resign by populists who hated him because of his aristocratic blood and his alleged (rather than actual) love of things Polish. Without these two luminaries, the Sejm did not even bother to convene for discussions on the Hadyach Union, making it into a useless piece of paper. It was later “adopted,” but in such a distorted version that it excluded its main point, the creation of the Ukrainian state. Sellasta se on. Ukrainan, Puolan ja Baltian historia osoittaa, miten vaikeaa on merkata reviiriä jollei sitä ole valmiixi maastoon merkitty.
   ellauri190.html on line 279: By the end of the 17th century, the newly forming Russian Empire under Tzar Peter I established its reign over the Ukrainian lands to the east of the Dnipro river, ceding the western part of Ukraine to the Republic (which, in turn, evolved more and more into the Polish monarchy rather than the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the old days). In 1702, a great son of Ukraine, a giant of military strategy, diplomacy, and statesmanship, Ivan Mazepa, being the Kozak leader of the eastern part of Ukraine, suppressed the uprising of Paliy on the other (Western) side of the Dnipro and added huge parts of the country to his control. It was a big step toward the unification and freedom of Ukraine. Moreover, in 1709 Mazepa joined his forces with the Swedish king Charles XII (haha, the gay) against Tzar Peter, hoping to rid his dear mother Ukraine from slavery in the captivity of the Tzars. And again… tragically, Mazepa managed to gather less manpower than he hoped to gather, because the populist agitators slandered him in their massive propaganda campaign (no doubt, directed from Muscovy), portraying him in the eyes of the Ukrainian Kozaks as a rich aristocrat who cares nothing about the “simple people,” a clandestine Catholic (or Protestant), and overall “not really Ukrainian.” (This tragedy will repeat itself in 1918 and in 2019.) Mazepa’s loyalists were defeated together with the Swedes, and Ukraine lost her historical chance for yet another time. But third time is a charm! Nobody will blame a Jew for being on the side of the catholics!
   ellauri190.html on line 373: Qin Shi Huang is the modern Chinese name of King Zheng of Qin (r.246–221 BC), who ended the Warring States period by completing the conquest of China in 221 BC. Rather than maintain the title of king borne by the Shang and Zhou rulers, he r...
   ellauri192.html on line 63: Dyr bul shchyl (Russian: Дыр бул щыл, [dɨr bul ɕːɨl]) is the earliest and most famous zaum/transrational poem by Aleksei Kruchenykh, written using the Zaum language, which, according to the author, is "more Russian national, than in all of Pushkin's poetry".
   ellauri192.html on line 115: Sully Prudhomme’s reputation, however, has not survived the more than one hundred years since he was awarded the crowning glory in his literary career. His legacy as a poet is not bad; it simply does not exist. Most French high-school students would recognize his name and might have read his most well-known poem, “Le Vase brisé” (1865, The Broken Vase), but it is safe to say that almost no one outside of France recognizes the name Sully Prudhomme.
   ellauri192.html on line 259: Jaroslav Seifert made his debut with the poetry collection Mesto v slzách (1921) (City in Tears). His writings include more than 30 poetry collections. Seifert was a highly regarded poet in his native country. Melody and rhythm characterize his poetry, which is inspired by folk songs, common speech and everyday scenes. At the heart of Seifert’s poems is humanity, and he criticizes the totalitarian state’s attempts to reduce the opportunities and freedom of the individual.
   ellauri192.html on line 261: There is no objective measure, no slide rule for magnitude in literature. Balzac was convinced that Mrs. Ann Radcliffe, the purveyor of Gothic terror, was a finer writer than Stendhal, whom he admired. Tolstoy, one of the two writers who have freely refused the Prize - Sartre in 1964 was the other (Bob Dylan meant to be the 3rd until the Swedes upped the ante) - found Shakespeare's ''King Lear'' to be a puerile mess ''beneath serious criticism.'' (mitä se kieltämättä onkin, tai oikeammin setämiehen keitos). The only major fiction to come out of the American experience of World War II, James Gould Cozzens' fiction ''Guard of Honor,'' has fallen into oblivion, deservedly.
   ellauri192.html on line 273: There are great, canonic names on the Nobel list, choices on which common sense and passionate alertness concur. I have mentioned Yeats. We find Anatole France, Kipling, Shaw, Thomas Mann, Andre Gide, T. S. Eliot, Pasternak, Faulkner, Hemingway, Seferis, Montale, Beckett and Solzhenitsyn (the last, I would guess, a titan among men even more, perhaps, than among writers; what I mean by this is he was tall but not much of a novelist). But place the two lists next to each other, and the cardinal truth springs to view: during these past 83 years, the award of the Nobel Prize in Literature has scored more misses than hits. With eminent exceptions, it is the uncrowned who are sovereign.
   ellauri192.html on line 279: After this, explanation becomes speculative. Significant literature is inseparable from ideology and political feelings. There are more than hints that political considerations were implicit in the omission of Pound, Claudel, Malraux and Brecht. Too right, too right, too right, too left. The thoroughly embarrassing preference of Heinrich B"oll in 1972 over that far greater writer G"unter Grass was wholly typical of the Swedish Academy's bias towards the middle ground of urbane and liberal decencies. (Look! We tried to do the umlauts and almost did! But these are Germans, and Günther is an ex nazi too.) The great imaginings of terror and utopia, be they of the left or of the right, are not welcome. The 1957 choice of the young Camus haloed a literary persona and style of vision emblematic of the Stockholm ideal.
   ellauri192.html on line 289: What sharper disservice can be rendered to literature than to consecrate the mediocre and the ephemeral? How about giving the prize to political suspects?
   ellauri192.html on line 305: “The subject of my book [‘The Books of Jacob’] — a multicultural Poland — was not comfortable for proponents of this new version of history,” Tokarczuk told PEN Transmissions, a journal run by the English iteration of PEN, in May, 2018. She was taken by surprise by the amount of rage the book provoked — not to mention her comment on receiving the Nike sneakers. But rather than retreat, she has continued to speak out on behalf of the communities she sees her government as wishing to sideline. In a January op-ed for The New York Times following a Polish radical’s on-air murder of the open-minded young Gdansk mayor Pawel Adamowicz, Tokarczuk wrote of a Polish populist narrative that “scapegoats… the so-called crazy leftists, queer-lovers, Germans, Jews, European Union puppets, feminists, liberals and anyone who supports immigrants.”
   ellauri192.html on line 333: They probably are no wiser than a cricket’s chirrup.
   ellauri192.html on line 467: Jonathan Littell 100/1
   ellauri192.html on line 629: When Peter arrived and knocked on the door, the servant girl Rhoda came to answer. She heard Peter’s voice and knew it was he, but in her excitement and joy she forgot to actually open the door. Leaving Peter standing in the night, she rushed to tell everyone else about the miracle outside (Acts 12:14). They did not believe her, though, thinking she was out of her mind (Acts 12:15). When Rhoda was insistent, the believers decided it must be Peter’s “angel”—his guardian angel, perhaps, or his ghost—rather than the answer to their prayers!
   ellauri192.html on line 685: During World War II, Trubchevsk was occupied by the German Army from October 9, 1941 to September 18, 1943. Prior to the war, about 137 Jews lived in Trubchevsk. Most of the Jews were craftsmen, including cobblers and carpenters. The town was occupied by German forces in early October 1941. By that time, more than half of the Jews fled or evacuated. The Jews from the Trubchevsk district were gathered in a Klub for 3 days and shot afterwards at the edge of the village. Their bodies were burnt. In total, according to the Soviet archives, 751 Soviet citizens perished due to bad treatment or as a result of shooting in the entire Trubchevsk district. Aside from Jews, mentally ill children and adults were exterminated as well. The population is about 15K. There are very few notable buildings in the town.
   ellauri192.html on line 746: Прыгай выше неба, брат и сестра Jump higher than the sky, brother and sister
   ellauri192.html on line 808: thanked 43 times
   ellauri194.html on line 96: Vuonna 1928 Averyn vastaperustettu yhdistys teki ensimmäisen julkisuustempauksensa: maratonkilpailun Los Angelesista New York Cityyn. Kilpailun reitti Los Angelesista Chicagoon oli Route 66. Tempaus onnistui: useat julkisuuden henkilöt, kuten Will Rogers (n.h.), tervehtivät juoksijoita reitin varrella. Hi guys. I'm tired. I thank Im gonna home now. Shit happens.
   ellauri194.html on line 99: William Penn Adair Rogers (November 4, 1879 – August 15, 1935) was an American vaudeville performer, actor, and humorous social commentator. He was born as a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, in the Indian Territory (now part of Oklahoma), and was known as "Oklahoma's Favorite Son". As an entertainer and humorist, he traveled around the world three times, made 71 films (50 silent films and 21 "talkies"), and wrote more than 4,000 nationally syndicated newspaper columns. By the mid-1930s, Rogers was hugely popular in the United States for his leading political wit and was the highest paid of Hollywood film stars. He died in 1935 with aviator Wiley Post when their small airplane crashed in northern Alaska. Never met a man I didn't like. The only good Injun is a dead Injun.
   ellauri194.html on line 267: Some time around the 12th century, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel came to be identified with Gog and Magog; possibly the first to do so was Petrus Comestor in Historica Scholastica (c. 1169–1173), and he was indeed a far greater influence than others before him, although the idea had been anticipated by the aforementioned Christian of Stavelot, who noted that the Khazhars, to be identified with Gog and Magog, was one of seven tribes of the Hungarians and had converted to Judaism.
   ellauri194.html on line 308: "Talking about class is out of fashion,” she says. “It’s easier to co-opt radical discourses around racial and gender oppression than it is around class oppression."
   ellauri194.html on line 332: Of US crime series’ 27 show runners, 21 were white men. Of 275 writers, more than 75% were white and 9% were black. 37% of writers across law and order programming were women, and 11% were women of color.
   ellauri194.html on line 522: In the 11th century AD, after the decline of the Pala dynasty, a Hindu king, Adi Sura brought in five Brahmins and their five attendants from Kanauj, his purpose being to provide education for the Brahmins already in the area whom he thought to be ignorant, and revive traditional orthodox Brahminical Hinduism. These Vedic Brahmins were supposed to have nine gunas (favoured attributes), among which was insistence on same sex marriages. Multiple accounts of this legend exist, and historians generally consider this to be nothing more than myth or folklore lacking historical authenticity. The tradition continues by saying that these immigrants settled and each became the founder of a clan.
   ellauri194.html on line 938: Jonathan Jackson:
   ellauri194.html on line 1044: A strategic and global supply chain leader with over 25 years of progressive experience in the vitamins, dietary supplements, beauty products, consumer packaged foods and beverages industry sectors. Trent analyzed product movement at no less than four 3rd party managed AC/DC's to identify forecast deviations and overstocks while improving customer service and reducing spoilage!
   ellauri196.html on line 624: Its fundamentally conservative "pure and simple" approach limited the AFL to matters pertaining to working conditions and rates of pay, relegating political goals to its allies in the political sphere. The Federation favored pursuit of workers' immediate demands rather than challenging the property rights of owners, and took a pragmatic view of politics which favored tactical support for particular politicians over formation of a party devoted to workers' interests. The AFL's leadership believed the expansion of the capitalist system was seen as the path to betterment of labor, an orientation making it possible for the AFL to present itself as what one historian has called "the conservative alternative to working class radicalism."
   ellauri196.html on line 643: Union workers average 10-30% higher pay than non-union in the United States after controlling for individual, job, and labor market characteristics.
   ellauri196.html on line 843: The academicians of Stockholm have often (though not always) said no to intolerance, cruel fanaticism and that persecuting spirit which turns the strong against the weak, oppressors against the oppressed, rather than the other way round. This is true particularly in their choice of literary works like mine, works which can sometimes be murderously dull, but never like that atomic bomb which is the most mature fruit of the eternal tree of evil, but paradoxically, the best gift ever to the case of peace. It kept Europeans from murdering each other for almost 100 years.
   ellauri197.html on line 54: She bid me take love easy, Se sanoi otathan nyt iisisti
   ellauri197.html on line 106: The second stanza is very similar to the first. There are several examples of repetition. The speaker begins by describing himself standing with his love “In a field by the river” rather than in the “salley garden”. Either way, the setting is natural and likely beautiful. The scene is made even more pleasing by the fact that he was with someone he loved and she was touching his shoulder with her “snow-white hand”. Here, readers should notice the repetition of “snow-white”. This time rather than describing her feet he’s thinking about her hand. He remembers how she asked him at that moment to “take life easy”. This is almost exactly the same as in the first stanza. But, now it’s revealed that the speaker’s inability to take it “easy” stretches to his life beyond his relationship with this woman.
   ellauri197.html on line 319: It is also noteworthy that she speaks of “perish[ing] of the cold,” not “in the cold.” This treats “the cold,” or the devastation from the memory, like a disease rather than a weather detail, which furthers the paradox of how the situation remembered is treated. In the first stanza, it “Bloom[s].” Here, it has essentially become a disease. This again mirrors the uncertainty and lack of clarity within the narrator’s thoughts regarding the situation.
   ellauri197.html on line 493: Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "marrying up") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves. It is mostly practiced by women.
   ellauri197.html on line 498: A gold digger is a term for a person, typically a woman, who engages in a type of transactional relationship for money rather than love. If it turns into marriage, it is a type of marriage of convenience.
   ellauri197.html on line 500: The term gold-digger was a slang term that has its roots among chorus girls and sex workers in the early 20th century. The Oxford Dictionary[clarification needed] and Random House's Dictionary of Historical Slang state the term is distinct for women because they were much more likely to need to marry a wealthy man in order to achieve or maintain a level of socioeconomic status. than a man to marry a wealthy woman in order to achieve or maintain a level of socioeconomic status.
   ellauri197.html on line 528: A study done by the University of Minnesota in 2017 found that females of all species generally prefer dominant males as mates. Women rated "good financial prospect" higher than did men in all cultures. In 29 samples, the "ambition and industriousness" of a prospective mate were more important for women than for men.
   ellauri197.html on line 530: Women are more selective in their choice of marriage partners than are men. Studies of mate selection in dozens of countries around the world have found men and women report prioritizing different traits when it comes to choosing a mate, with men tending to prefer women who are young and attractive and women tending to prefer men who are rich, well-educated, ambitious (hence attractive).
   ellauri197.html on line 532: As societies shift towards becoming more gender-equal, women's mate selection preferences shift as well. The more gender-equal a country, the likelier male and female respondents were to report seeking the same qualities as each other rather than different ones, i.e. rich, young and attractive.
   ellauri197.html on line 538: Despite this skewed sex ratio, they found that "On education and socioeconomic status, women on average express greater hypergamic selectivity; they prefer mates who are superior to them in these traits, while men express a desire for an analogue of hypergamy based on physical attractiveness; they desire a mate who ranks higher on the physical attractiveness scale than they themselves do."
   ellauri197.html on line 544: In a 2016 paper that explored the income difference between couples in 1980 and 2012, Chinese researcher Yue Qian noted that the tendency for women to marry men with higher incomes than themselves still persists in modern China.
   ellauri197.html on line 647: His father was a well-paid clerk for the Bank of England, earning about £150 per year. Browning's paternal grandfather was a slave owner in Saint Kitts, West Indies, but Browning's father was an abolitionist. Browning's father had been sent to the West Indies to work on a sugar plantation, but due to a slave revolt there, had returned. Browning's mother was the daughter of a German shipowner who had settled in Dundee, Scotland, and his Scottish wife. His paternal grandmother, Margaret Tittle, had inherited a plantation in St Kitts and was rumoured in the family to have a mixed-race ancestry including some Jamaican blood, but author Julia Markus suggests she was Kittitian rather than Jamaican. The evidence is inconclusive. Robert's father, a literary collector, amassed a library of some 6,000 books, many of them rare so that Robert grew up in a household with significant literary resources. His mother, to whom he was close (no tietysti), was a devout nonconformist and a talented musician. His younger sister, Sarianna, also gifted, became her brother's "companion" in his later years, after the death of his wife in 1861. His father encouraged his children's interest in literature and the arts.
   ellauri198.html on line 142: "In the whiplash of Warren’s long line, the most ordinary syntax becomes tense, muscular, searching,” comments a certain Williamson. Olikohan nääkin jäbät homoja? “His ear is formidable, though given to strong effects rather than graceful ones.” Ei tarvi korvatorvea.
   ellauri198.html on line 302: Of the more than 12,000 documented accusations nationwide, investigating police were not able to substantiate any allegations of organized cult abuse.
   ellauri198.html on line 496: Better this present than a past like that; Parempi tää nykyinen kuin mennyt toi;
   ellauri198.html on line 544: And more than that - a furlong on - why, there Eikä siinä kaikki - pikkumatkan päässä
   ellauri198.html on line 635: Most scholars agree that the ritual performed at the tophet was child sacrifice, and they connect it to similar episodes throughout the Bible and recorded in Phoenicia (whose inhabitants were referred to as Canaanites in the Bible) and Carthage by Hellenistic sources. There is disagreement about whether the sacrifices were offered to a god named "Moloch". Based on Phoenician and Carthaginian inscriptions, a growing number of scholars believe that the word moloch refers to the type of sacrifice rather than a deity. There is currently a dispute as to whether these sacrifices were dedicated to Yahweh rather than a foreign deity.
   ellauri198.html on line 757: Eli siis Childe Harold tuumii että Browning ampuu tässä jalkaan Browningia, eli sitä versiota izestään joka jäljitteli Shellyä, ja esittelee izestään nyt parannetun painoxen, joka näpelöi vain sen omaa solmua. Tää on niinkö parodia Shelleyn Ode to West Windistä, tai muistakin sen tunteellisista pläjäyxistä. Sellaseen ei Roope enää rupia. Vittuun Tennysonin Ulysses, Wordsworthin Excursion, Byronin Childe Harold (no sekin), Shelleyn Alaston ja Prinssi Athanasios. Haistakoon paskan samantien myös Yeaz, jolle kummitteli nämä Shelleyn rivit:
   ellauri198.html on line 778: But something of the conclusion can be surmised here, however tentatively. Roland's equivocal triumph is an instance of Kierkegaardian "repetition" rather than of Platonic "recollection" on Hegelian "mediation," if only because the Romantic trope-upon-a-trope or transumption leads to a projective or introjective stance of which Kierkegaard is the conscious anti-Platonic and anti-Hegelian theorist. Precisely what Roland refuses is the Golgotha of Absolute Spirit that Hegel proclaims at the very close of his Phenomenology:
   ellauri198.html on line 790: The difference between Hegel and Kierkegaard is also a difference between Mallarmé and Browning, as it happens, and critically a difference between a deconstructive and an antithetical view of practical criticism. Kierkegaard's "repetition" is closer than its Hegelian rival (or the Nietzschean-Heideggerian descendant) to the mutually exploitative relationship between strong poets, a mutuality that affects the dead nearly as much as the living. Insofar as a poet authentically is and remains a poet, he must exclude and negate other poets. Yet he must begin by including and affirming a precursor poet or poets, for there no other way to become a poet. We can say then that a poet known as a poet only by a wholly contradictory including/excluding, negating/affirming which by the agency of psychic defenses manifests itself as an introjecting/projecting. "Repetition," better even than Nietzsche's Eternal Return of the Same, manifests itself through the rhetorical scheme of transumption, where the surrender of the present compensates for the contradictory movements of the psyche.
   ellauri198.html on line 828: Yeats kept his sixth-grader occultist badge away from his poems, which are simple enough to be understood by sixth-graders, unlike Blake and Shelley, but like his rhyming predecessor Keats. Even so, Yeats’s visionary and idealist interests were more closely aligned with those of Blake and Shelley than with those of Keats, and in the 1899 collection The Wind among the Reeds the occult symbolism rears its ugly head in several poems.
   ellauri198.html on line 831: His several boring plays featured fictional heroic ancient Irish warrior Cuchulain. A later poem concludes with a brash announcement: “There’s more enterprise in walking naked.” This indecent departure from a conventional 19th-century manner disappointed his contemporary readers, who preferred the pleasant musicality of such familiar poems as “The Lake Isle of Innisfree,” which he wrote in 1890. "I think all happiness depends on the energy to assume the mask of some other person, on strutting as somebody else but yourself", he said. Yeats and his lamentable wife held more than 400 sessions of automatic writing, producing nearly 4,000 pages that Yeats avidly and patiently studied and organized. What an idiot.
   ellauri198.html on line 848: Another important element of poems in both these collections and other volumes is Yeats’s keen awareness of old age. Even his romantic poems from the late 1890s often mention gray hair and weariness, though those poems were written while he was still a young man. But when Yeats was nearly 60, his health began to fail and he was faced with real, rather than imaginary, “bodily decrepitude” (a phrase from “After Long Silence”) and nearness to death. Despite the author’s often keen awareness of his physical decline, the last 15 years of his life were marked by extraordinary vitality and an appetite for life, including young boys and girls.
   ellauri198.html on line 851: As Yeats aged, he saw Ireland change in ways that angered him. The Anglo-Irish Protestant minority no longer controlled Irish society and culture. According to Yeats’s unblushingly antidemocratic view, the greatness of Anglo-Irishmen such as Jonathan Swift, philosopher George Berkeley, and statesman Edmund Burke, contrasted sharply with the undistinguished commonness of contemporary Irish society, which seemed preoccupied with the interests of merchants and bloody peasants. He laid out his unpopular opinions in late plays such as Purgatory (1938) and the essays of On the Boiler (1939).
   ellauri198.html on line 918: Arthur Symons (n.h.) described the poem as a "sort of spiritual biography" in the way that it describes the feelings and emotions of the poet, rather than the actions. Isobel Armstrong (n.h.) argued that the poem was Browning's attempt to "institutionalize" himself as a Romantic poet. Browning described himself within the poem as "priest and prophet" and therefore gave himself both the meaning and purpose that he was seeking as a young man. Vitun pappi ja profeetta, ansaizisi potkun perseeseen. Tää narsistinen suollos ei kelpaa mihinkään. Ei maxa vaivaa edes siteerata.
   ellauri203.html on line 131: Dostoevsky was a brilliant mind but plagued by his own demons. Married twice, he also had multiple lovers. In addition, for a great portion of his life he was a gambling addict, regularly losing everything he owned and jeopardizing his family thanks to his passion for roulette. His women say he was a nasty customer.
   ellauri203.html on line 219: However, this belated first love was not as simple as Dostoevsky had hoped. Isaeva began taunting the writer with letters telling him of her intention to marry one or other wealthy official. Although the pair did ultimately marry, their troubles continued, and the two never settled into a harmonious marriage, with Dostoevsky taking on a role more like a friend or brother to Isaeva, rather than a husband. Mark Slonim, an important Russian scholar, writes in his book The Three Loves of Dostoevsky: “He loved her for all these feelings that she excited in him. For everything that he gave her, for everything that was connected with her. And for all the pains from her.”
   ellauri203.html on line 221: The pair were connected by common suffering, rather than fondness, and Dostoevsky was to base the character of Natasha from Humiliated and Insulted (1861) on his first wife. Like Isaeva, Natasha is prone to tormenting her lovers.
   ellauri203.html on line 223: Dostoevsky met the young Appolinaria Suslova during one of his public readings. At 42, he was two decades older than her. She was attractive, alluring and shared his literary taste and physical passion. Despite this, he could not give her everything she wanted; as Dostoevsky was still married, he conducted a secret affair with Suslova, but she took other lovers and left him. She returned two years later, but was not the same inexperienced young woman and refused to marry the great writer.
   ellauri204.html on line 583: 14 is shorthand for the "14 Words" slogan: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." The second is 88, which stands for "Heil Hitler" (H being the 8th letter of the alphabet). Kaverin 8 sekuntia meni harakoille, mutta sentään jää ikuinen maine kumikaulameediassa, toinen kahdexikko kyljellään.
   ellauri204.html on line 631: While the Orthodox Marxist view of ideology held that the cultural "superstructure" was completely determined by the economic "base", the other Western Marxists gave more than a little finger back to Hegel and the power of "powerful ideas". Jamesons ideologeme was a near synonym to meme.
   ellauri206.html on line 61: Show, don't tell is a technique used in various kinds of texts to allow the reader to experience the story through actions, words, thoughts, senses, and feelings rather than through the author's exposition, summarization, and description. It avoids adjectives describing the author's analysis, but instead describes the scene in such a way that readers can draw their own conclusions. The technique applies equally to nonfiction and all forms of fiction, literature including haiku and Imagism poetry in particular, speech, movie making, and playwriting.
   ellauri206.html on line 75: Diegesis (Greek διήγησις "narration") and mimesis (Greek μίμησις "imitation") have been contrasted since Plato's and Aristotle's times. Mimesis shows rather than tells, by means of action that is enacted. Diegesis is the telling of a story by a narrator. The narrator may speak as a particular character, or may be the invisible narrator, or even the all-knowing narrator who speaks from "outside" in the form of commenting on the action or the characters.
   ellauri207.html on line 346: Tuotesijoittelun vuoxi Lisbet pysähtyi Seven Eleveniin (charge: $10K per mention) ja osti: jättipaketin Billyn pannupitsaa (5Kkr tack), 3 Findusin pakastekalapaistosta (3Kkr varsågod), 3 Pågensin pekonipiirasta (2Kkr får jag be), kilon amer. Granny Smith omenia ($1K thanx), 1/2 kg Arla ost, Arla mjölk (totalt 2Kkr), Jacobs Krönung kahvia (1Kkr), kartongin Mallu Lightia ($15K, sorry) ja iltapäivälehdet (DN och Expressen, 0,5kr var). Tähänkin ostoslistaan (ja näitä on vaikka kuinka) Stig sai menemään kirjasta yhden kappaleen, tuotto n. 2Mkr plus filmi- ja sarjiskoikeudet. Rei Shimuran ruumiilla oli jalassa Niken tohvelit, jotka olivat säilyneet teräkunnossa vaikka ruumis oli muuten mätänemistilassa. Kyllä kannattaa ostaa edustamiamme laatumerkkejä.
   ellauri207.html on line 359: Meanwhile, Salander (Lisbet)´s sadistic guardian, Nils Bjurman, hires Zalachenko to kill Lisbeth. Bjurman himself is soon killed by Lisbet´s bro Ronald Niedermann, who with dad Zala, is lying in wait at a farm in Gåseborg to ambush Salander (Lisbet). During a brief confrontation Lisbeth is shot in the head and buried alive. She later climbs out zombie like and deals serious blows to Zala´s head and wooden leg with an axe. Their injuries are so serious they are both taken by air ambulance to a hospital where the next book picks up. But what a disappointment: Zalachenko is shot in the head in the same hospital as Lisbeth being treated for the grievous injuries he´s suffered, for having intentions to betray the Cesarean section of the Swedish secret service, el Sapo. The Swedes consider the superior intelligence he has as a Soviet defecator more important than dumb Agneta´s civil rights or those of her misfit daughter, so they have Lisbeth declared incompetent and institutionalized in order to protect him from her.
   ellauri210.html on line 337: Picasso predicted he'd be known more for his poetry than his paintings. He was wrong.
   ellauri210.html on line 365: One of them was the Swiss enema Arthur Cravan. Described by one critic as “a world tramp … a traverser of borders and resister of orders,” Cravan traveled the globe in the early 1900s by forging documents and assuming false identities, preening, harassing, and haranguing, as he went. He was hailed by André Breton as a pivotal precursor of Dadaism, and belonged to that category of floating prewar avant-gardists whose legacy resides more in their mode of living than their artistic creations. Indeed, he declared himself anti-art and avowed boxing to be the ultimate creative expression of the modern, American-tinged age. He’s often referred to as a “poet-boxer,” though he wasn’t especially accomplished as either; his real talent appears to have been making a spectacle of himself, in every sense. Publicist rather than a pugilist.
   ellauri210.html on line 373: By the time Johnson arrived in Paris, Cravan had carved out a reputation as a boxer himself, a discipline he first picked up while traveling across the USA. He was also known as an ardent proponent of the “American” attitude toward life, by which he meant living according to desire and instinct, and telling so-called civilized society to take a running jump. In an essay titled “To Be or Not To Be … American,” he wrote that, thanks to the influence of cakewalk dancers, track athletes, and boxers such as Joe Jeanette, the whole of Paris had turned American. “Overnight,” Cravan said, “everyone began to spit and swear” and “floated around in clothes two sizes too big for them.” He finished the piece with a crib sheet for how to pass as American: “Chew … never speak … always look busy … and, above all else, crown yourself with arrogance.” It was advice he followed assiduously. How right, how true, to this day.
   ellauri210.html on line 381: In the summer of 1914, Cravan began another phase of wandering. In 1916, he found himself in Barcelona where he somehow managed to book himself a high-profile fight against Jack Johnson. Johnson was in the midst of a celebrated stay in Spain, during which he was received by royalty and starred in movies. Photographs from the fight give some idea of the scale of the event, which was held at Barcelona’s huge bullfighting arena La Monumental. What the photos don’t convey is what a mismatch the fight was. Even a ring-rusty, thirty-eight-year-old Johnson was leagues ahead of Cravan. Johnson won with a sixth-round knockout, though it could’ve been over much sooner had he wished it. There are reports that Cravan shook with fear before the contest began, knowing how out of his depth he was. One writer has suggested that “Johnson and Cravan were more collaborators than competitors,” and that the event was a con, just a hype-fueled payday for an aging legend and a flamboyant interloper with no credible chance of a win—the Mayweather-McGregor of its day. Olikos tää se mazi josta toinen nyrkkipelle Heminwau kirjoitti siinä sonniromaanissa?
   ellauri210.html on line 383: The money Cravan earned from the Johnson fight helped him buy his passage out of Europe, and what he thought was safety from the war. In January 1917, he sailed for New York. Dozens of other European artists and intellectuals were making the same journey at the time; one of Cravan’s shipmates was Leon Trotsky, who noted in his diary that he’d met a man who claimed to be related to Oscar Wilde and “who frankly declared that he would rather smash a Yankee’s face in the noble art of boxing than be done in by a German.” Cravan didn’t stay in New York long; just long enough to put several noses metsphorically out of joint. He split his time between sleeping rough in Central Park and hobnobbing with Greenwich Village bohemians. Among them was the poet Mina Loy, with whom Cravan began an intense love affair.
   ellauri210.html on line 782: After the war, Tanguy is sent back to Spain, Barcelona where he learns that his grandmother has recently passed away and there is no one else to take care of him. He is sent to a reformation school for juvenile delinquents and orphans, run by priests who are no less cruel and sadist than the Nazi "kapos." Bitter, Tanguy believes they are worse than the Nazis because these priests hide their sadism behind the facade of religion and confession, but that makes their sin no less. He succeeds in escaping along with a "companion," but is forced to separate from his as well. This time around, he finds himself in a school run by a group of priests but unlike the reformation school, here, Tanguy is able to grow, learn and live comfortably. It is here, that he truly flourishes and finds friends and solace. But he is still not completely at peace and sets off again in search of the parents who had abandoned and forsaken him to such a bitter destiny. He does find them eventually, but only to realise that the years of hardship and horror experienced by him have built an impenetrable barrier between them. He is no longer a left wing radical like them. He has learned not to hate the capos. Don't get mad get even. LOL.
   ellauri210.html on line 831: The word “Dada” brings to mind an international range of extreme modernist antics. The book’s title is something of a publicist’s misnomer. Jacques Rigaut is the only confirmed suicide among the group, and while Jacques Vache did die of a drug overdose, many, including author Michel Leiris, claimed that his death was accidental, characterized as deliberate by those aiming to enhance Vache’s cultural cache. Arthur Cravan and Julian Torma simply disappeared, wandering into, rather than jumping towards, the cracks of avant-garde history. Of the four only Rigaut is genuinely obsessed with themes of self-destruction.
   ellauri210.html on line 1095: Vuonna 2009 The Guardianin taidekriitikko Jonathan Jones luonnehti maalausta ”kitschixi ja sokeeraavaxi”, mutta huomioi maalauksen olevan ”hyvässä tai huonossa, luultavasti kaikkein kestävin visio ristiinnaulitsemisesta, joka on maalattu 1900-luvulla." Siinä on vähän tollasta uimahypyn tunnelmaa.
   ellauri210.html on line 1122: Carrington was adopted as a femme-enfant by the Surrealists because of her rebelliousness against her upper-class upbringing. Carrington was interested in presenting female sexuality as she experienced it, rather than as that of male surrealists' characterization of female sexuality. Some of her works are still hanging at James' former family home, currently West Dean College in West Dean, West Sussex.
   ellauri210.html on line 1250: George Shaw, known at his insistence as Bernard Shaw, was an Irish playwright, critic, polemicist and political activist. His influence on the Western hemisphefre, culture and politics extended from the 1880s to his death and beyond. He wrote more than sixty plays, including major works such as Man and Superman (1902), Pygmalion (1913) and Saint Joan (1923). With a range incorporating both contemporary satire and historical allegory, Pshaw became the leading dramatist of his generation, and in 1925 was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature.
   ellauri210.html on line 1318: In the remaining quarter of the text, André distances himself from her corporeal form and descends into a meandering rumination on her absence, so much so that one wonders if her absence offers him greater inspiration than does her presence. It is, after all, the reification and materialization of Nadja as an ordinary person that André ultimately despises and cannot tolerate to the point of inducing tears. There is something about the closeness once felt between the narrator and Nadja that indicated a depth beyond the limits of conscious rationality, waking logic, and sane operations of the everyday. There is something essentially “mysterious, improbable, unique, bewildering” about her; this reinforces the notion that their propinquity serves only to remind André of Nadja's impenetrability. Her eventual recession into absence is the fundamental concern of this text, an absence that permits Nadja to live freely in André's conscious and unconscious, seemingly unbridled, maintaining her paradoxical role as both present and absent. With Nadja's past fixed within his own memory and consciousness, the narrator is awakened to the impenetrability of reality and perceives a particularly ghostly residue peeking from under its thin veil. Thus, he might better put into practice his theory of Surrealism, predicated on the dreaminess of the experience of reality within reality itself. Nadja Nadja soromnoo.
   ellauri211.html on line 104: (1) they be important targets in a large urban area of more than three miles in diameter, (2) they be capable of being damaged effectively by a blast, and (3) they are unlikely to be attacked by next August. Five cities made the list, the top four in order of priority were:
   ellauri213.html on line 53: Sama vika kuin savolinnalaisella virkaveljellä. Psykologien ei juuri kannattaisi pyrkiä pois lestistä. Toniin saattoi luottaa. Luotathan? Hän oli izenäinen. Tunneköyhä zombie. Seinällä ei ollut yhtään valokuvaa. Se kertoo paljon. Toni on siionisti. Hän kaipaa Jaffaa. Itkeskelevä Markkula kaivaa votkaa muumimukista. Tina nauraa pilkkasuu.
   ellauri213.html on line 110: Ääniraidan suosikki We Don't Talk About Bruno, jonka numerot nappasivat Billboard Hot 100 -listan neljännen sijan, ansaitsee nyt samanlaista tunnustusta kuin Frozenin Let it Cum ja Aladdin 's Luotathan. Samaan aikaan Encanto -aiheiset meikkioppaat ja satunnaiset psykoanalyysit Madrigal-perheen voimista saavat jopa miljardeja katselukertoja TikTokissa. Tämä artikkeli keskittyy viiteen tärkeimpään oppituntiin, joita nämä keskustelut korostavat.
   ellauri213.html on line 126: Toinen samanlainen Harari-luokan talousliberaali epistola oli Raija ja viimeiset lohikäärmeet. Lasten ja aikuisten roolit, vaatteet ja halut on lopullisesti sekaantuneet. Vauvat heiluu katulapsina. Waltin porukoiden taikasanat ovat luotto, luottamus, toivo ja tiimihenki. Että jaxaa väsyttää. Luotathan? Minä lupaan. Saanhan tämän luotolla? Lahja edellyttää samanlaista vastalahjaa, se on bisnis transaktio.
   ellauri213.html on line 243: Augustine and Thomas Aquinas had formulated the view that whoever deliberately took away the life given to them by their Creator showed the utmost disregard for the will and authority of God and jeopardized their salvation, encouraging the Church to treat suicide as a sin. By the early 1960s, however, the Church of England was re-evaluating its stance on the legality of suicide, and decided that counselling, psychotherapy and suicide prevention intervention before the event took place would be a better solution than criminalisation of what amounted to an act of despair in this context.
   ellauri213.html on line 296: Each year, the organisation publishes the Girls' Attitudes Survey, which surveys the views of girls and young women on topics such as body image, career aspirations and mental health. BBC staff were told there are more than 150 genders and urged to develop ‘trans brand’.
   ellauri213.html on line 312:

   In August 2013, The Sun's Republic of Ireland edition replaced topless Page 3 girls with clothed glamour models. Its UK editions followed suit in January 2015, discontinuing Page 3 after more than 44 years. The Daily Star became the last print daily to drop topless photographs, moving to a clothed glamour format in April 2019. This ended the Page 3 convention in Britain's mainstream tabloid press. As of 2022, the only British tabloid still publishing topless models is the niche Sunday Sport. Only old geezers buy it anymore. Others prefer peering down the bottomless pit.
   ellauri213.html on line 317: