ellauri101.html on line 56: In February 2020, Brooklyn native Lawrence V. "Larry" Ray, born Lawrence Grecco, who had resided in his daughter's on-campus apartment at Lawrence College in 2010 after his release from prison, was charged by prosecutors in Manhattan with conspiracy, extortion, sex trafficking, forced labor, and other related offenses, following nearly 10 years of alleged transgressions with students and former students. At a bail hearing held March 2, 2020, an Assistant U.S. Attorney disclosed to the Manhattan federal court that Ray had been arrested while in bed with one of his victims. Bail was denied.
ellauri111.html on line 339: The same thing applies to us as sinners, in principle. We have sinned against God's law and we are criminals--lying, stealing, killing, committing whoredom, taking candy from kids, etc. We have sinned and payment must be made for our crimes. God's penal code for any of these transgressions is rather steep - whatever it is, go to hell and the lake of fire forever, i.e. an eternity of burning in a grill. But don't worry, this need not happen, for:
ellauri118.html on line 410: ¹Aviorikos kirjallisena topoksena on ollut useankin tutkimuksen aiheena, mutta ei yhdenkään narratologisen tutkimuksen. Edelleen painavin kirjallisuustieteellinen esitys aiheesta on Tony Tannerin ambivalentin psykoanalyyttis-strukturalistinen Adultery in the Novel (1979), joka lähestyy aviorikosta sekä yhteiskunnallisena että kirjallis-kielellisenä transgressiona. Viittaan Tannerin tutkimukseen Rouva Bovarya käsittelevässä luvussa. Muut laajemmat esitykset kirjallisesta aviorikoksesta ovat tekstianalyyttisesti merkityksettömämpiä: Bill Overtonin Fictions of Female Adultery (2002) keskittyy aviorikoskirjallisuuden historiallisiin ja kulttuurisiin reunaehtoihin sekä soimaa aiempaa tutkimusta (lähinnä Tanneria) liiasta kieli- ja kerrontakeskeisyydestä; Patricia Mainardin Husbands, Wives, and Lovers (2003) on kulttuurihistoriallinen esitys aviorikoksesta taiteessa ja Overtonin tutkimusta rikkaampi esitys esimerkiksi aviorikoksen lainsäädännöllisistä ja kulttuurisista kytköksistä; niin ikään Judith Armstrongin The Novel of Adultery (1976), Naomi Segalin The Adulteress’s Child (1992) ja Maria R. Ripponin Judgement and Justification in the Nineteenth-Century Novel of Adultery (2002) sivuuttavat kerronnan kysymykset ja keskittyvät kulttuuris-poliittiseen kontekstiin ja pelkästään referentiaalisen tason temaattiseen toistoon (kuten siihen että aviorikoksesta syntyvä lapsi on mitä todennäköisimmin tyttö). Oma lukunsa ovat vielä tiettyihin aikakausiin ja kielialueisiin (esimerkiksi ranskalaiseen hoviromantiikkaan) keskittyvät tutkimukset. Näistä maininnan arvoinen on ainakin Donald J. Greinerin Adultery in the American Novel (1985), vertaileva tutkimus Updiken, Hawthornen ja Jamesin avionrikkojista. Kulttuuri- ja myyttihistoriallinen klassikko, Denis de Rougemontin L’Amour et l’Occident (1939) on myös tutkimus uskottomuusfiktioista (Tristanin ja Isolden perillisistä), sillä Rougemontilla juuri aviorikos on länsimaisen ”rakkauden rakastamisen” huipentuma, transgressiivinen olotila joka katoaa, jos siitä tehdään instituutio. Käsitys uskottomuudesta kulttuurisena rajailmiönä ja juuri siitä syystä kertomustaiteen pulppuavana lähteenä yhdistää siis Rougemontia ja Tanneria, mutta jostain syystä Tanner ei viittaa Rougemontin teokseen. Mixihän? [Heitän tähän heti sen edellä mainitun oivalluxen, että romantiikka on sitä kun panettaa muttei pääse pukille.]
ellauri118.html on line 534: In narratology (and specifically in the theories of Gérard Genette), a paradoxical transgression of the boundaries between narrative levels or logically distinct worlds is also called metalepsis.
ellauri151.html on line 640: confronting Adam with his transgression.’ Now I would not for the life
ellauri156.html on line 582: He who conceals his transgressions will not prosper, except for David, and a few others, come to think of it. But he who confesses and forsakes them will find compassion (Proverbs 28:13). And that is all he finds. Quite often compassion at his scaffold and grave.
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 574: The Lord here gave His people unmistakable proof that He who had wrought such a wonderful deliverance for them in bringing them from Egyptian bondage, was the mighty Angel, and not Moses, who was going before them in all their travels, and of whom He had said, "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of Him, and obey His voice, provoke Him not; for He will not pardon your transgressions: for My name is in Him." Ex. 23:20, 21.
ellauri164.html on line 900: “The smitten rock was a figure of Christ, and through this symbol the most precious spiritual truths are taught. As the life-giving waters flowed from the smitten rock, so from Christ, ‘smitten of God,’ ‘wounded for our transgressions,’ ‘bruised for our iniquities’ (Isaiah 53:4–5), the stream of salvation flows for a lost race. As the rock had been once smitten, so Christ was to be ‘once offered to bear the sins of many.’ Hebrews 9:28.” –Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 411
ellauri171.html on line 934: As for the matter concerning those enemies: people from your country and your own ships did this! And people from your country committed these transgression(s)...I am writing to inform you and protect you. Be aware!
ellauri370.html on line 94: It might be well, however, to inquire, What is sin ? What is the biblical definition of it ? We find the answer in the following language: " Whosoever committeth sin trans-gresseth also the law : for sin is the transgression of the law." Gresseth! The Jews did a lot of it. We quote the following from the Prophet Isaiah:
ellauri370.html on line 100: Since sin is the transgression of the law, and where there is no law there is no transgression, and only by the law is the knowledge of sin, it is evident that before the Israelites could appreciate the work of salvation as revealed in the sanctuary and in its ministrations, they must know and understand the nature and consequences of sin. Therefore it was necessary upon the part of God to proclaim amid the awful thunders of Sinai. His law, His great lie detector and informer of sin. Had the Israelites realized their need of a Savior from sin, there never would have been that continuous murmuring for dessert among them that always existed. But they didn't! So there!" Simply regarding their help from God as mere temporal benefits, when everything did not come just as they wished, and instantly at that, they were all ready to murmur. Source
xxx/ellauri013.html on line 1187: May god forgive you for your transgressions and games,
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 764: According to Genesis 9:20–27, Noah became drunk then cursed his grandson Canaan, for the transgression of Canaan's father, Ham. This is the Curse of Canaan, to which the misnomer "Curse of Ham" has been attached since Classical antiquity.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 766: The curse of Ham (actually placed upon Ham's son Canaan) occurs in the Book of Genesis, imposed by the patriarch Noah. It occurs in the context of Noah's drunkenness and is provoked by a shameful act perpetrated by Noah's son Ham, who "saw the nakedness of his father". The exact nature of Ham's transgression and the reason Noah cursed Canaan when Ham had sinned have been debated for over 2,000 years.
xxx/ellauri148.html on line 209: The fifth house [in the heavenly Paradise] is built of onyx and jasper stones, and inlaid stones, and silver and gold, and good pure gold. And around it are rivers of balsam, and before its door flows the River Gihon. And [it has] a canopy of all trees of incense and good scent. And[in it are] beds of gold and silver, and embroidered garments. And there sits Messiah ben David and Elijah and Messiah ben Ephraim. And there is a canopy of incense trees as in the Sanctuary which Moses made in the desert. And all its vessels and pillars are of silver, its covering is gold, its seat is purple. And in it is Messiah ben David who loves Jerusalem. Elijah of blessed memory takes hold of his head, places it in his lap and holds it, and says to him: “Endure the sufferings and the sentence of your Master who makes you suffer because of the sin of Israel.” And thus it is written; He was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities (Isaiah 53:5) until the time when the comes. (“Midrash Konen” BhM 2:29-30)[13]
xxx/ellauri225.html on line 275: Although Le Guin is primarily known for her works of speculative fiction, she also wrote realistic fiction, non-fiction, poetry, and several other literary forms, which makes her work quite difficult for librarians to classify. Her writings received critical attention from mainstream critics, critics of children´s literature, and critics of speculative fiction. Le Guin herself said that she would prefer to be known as an "American novelist". Le Guin´s transgression of conventional boundaries of genre led to literary criticism of Le Guin becoming "Balkanized", particularly between scholars of children´s literature and speculative fiction. Commentators have noted that the Earthsea novels specifically received less critical attention because they were considered children´s books. Le Guin herself took exception to this treatment of children´s literature, describing it as "adult chauvinist piggery". In 1976, literature scholar George Slusser criticized the "silly publication classification designating the original series as 'children's literature'", while in Barbara Bucknall´s opinion Le Guin "can be read, like Tolkien, by ten-year-olds and by adults. These stories are ageless because they deal with problems that beset us at any age."
17