“Am I really a man?”
According to masculinity expert Jack Donovan, this is purely a physiological question with no spiritual component. I have often disagreed with Jack’s zoological understanding of a man as “an adult male.”
In Chapter 3 John builds off of the notion that Christianity itself has been domesticated and begins suggesting avenues of questioning separation from the neutering aspects of modern life, encouraging a look into scripture and gospel for examples that are both cowardly and brave. His faith serves him well here, enabling him to remind the biblically grounded man to follow Christ and not Abraham, who was good but a “coward.”
In the bookmark Strength Gone Bad he again brings women into the discussion in terms of how we treat them emotionally. This method of his is endearing. For I believe that one of the faults in masculinity literature in general is the taking of the woman down off of her goddess throne and placing her in the Devil’s pit. Hating women for being weak and insistent when they are only insistent because we are too weak to give them the strength they crave but were not born with, is the hallmark of a dying race, and the man who points the finger of emotional hurt at women, is, in my view, a woman himself.
Chapter 3 offers a smooth transition into the text that follows.
This is the problem I have with many Christians. Not only do they think that by reading the KJV they can learn everything worth knowing about Judaism, but then they don't even read the KJV!
Abraham lived in a very dangerous neighborhood. He went out of his way to avoid conflict. But when it came down to it, when his cousin Lot was kidnapped by an invading Mesopotamian army in Sodom, he got together a battalion of his followers, pursued the army by foot to Dan (200 kilometers straight line distance from Hevron where Abraham lived, across very difficult mountainous terrain,) staged a night raid where he split his forces into multiple enemies and attacked the enemy army from multiple sides, broke them and pursued them on foot another 60 km to north of Damascus.
According to this schmuck, that's a coward?
B,
Thanks for the martial details. You should write a book on ancient warfare.
Could you tell me what is the best English translation of Judges? And if they are all flawed, what do I need to look for, particularly in passages that seem to indicate possession of Samson by the spirit of God?
I would really like to look at Samson without wondering if something is wrong with the translation.
Are you familiar with Michal Grant's A Historian's Review of the Gospels? He read the gospels in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek and seemed to conclude that Jesus was a Jewish anti-Roman patriot who had no concern with the salvation of outsiders, suggesting that Paul essentially founded the Church.
Thanks, James. I'm not well enough informed about ancient warfare to make it worth anyone's while to read any book I'd write.
I'm not familiar with Grant, but got the distinct impression that most of Christianity was based on post-Jesus additions by Peter, based on a dream, and Paul, who'd never met the guy. My cursory skimming gives me an impression of Jesus telling his followers to do as the Rabbis say (though not as they do,) skirting around violations of rabbinical law. After his death that all went out the window and you didn't have to keep anything.
KJV is a good translation, but any translation is inherently sort of a lie. Plus, no translation can provide context without serious study. For instance, Shimshon (Samson) is a nazir, someone consecrated and pure, yet he defiles himself with non-Jewish women and eats impure honey from the carcass of an unkosher animal. No translation will give you the taste of what these things mean to a religious Jew.
The commentators say about him that his perception of G-d, a sort of ringing, is characteristic of someone who is not worthy of revelation but whom G-d chooses to reveal himself to and to carry out a historic mission because of the necessity of the moment. I don't remember who said that it is like when you drop a pebble in an empty jar, and it rattles around making a lot of noise.
Anyway, from my perspective, to really understand what we read in the Torah, we need the whole context-the Rabbinical Midrash, the halacha and the medieval commentators. Try reading Judges with Abarbanel's commentary.
Catharism.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism
The Catharist believe that the old testament was not God but a demon. Any reading of the old testament with it's "kill them all" attitude would be a point in favor of Catharism.
Catharist believe the material world is evil. Any one who's stubbed their toe can attest this is true. I won't say matter is unreal but I don't believe it's eternal. Cold fusion works and can change matter to different types. In the Dewey B. Larson Reciprocal System matter eventually comes apart as the planet that used to be where the asteroid belt shows.
Catharist believe in reincarnation. I used to think reincarnation was stupid til I read a book by Ian Stevenson. Children have been able to remember many things that only a person who died would know. If reincarnation is not true then there's some other super strange effect.
reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1d2v7i/parents_of_reddit_what_is_the_creepiest_thing
The Catharist were defeated by the Jesuits which were expressly created for that purpose.
"...In contrast to the Catholic Church, the Cathars had but one sacrament, the Consolamentum, or Consolation. This involved a brief spiritual ceremony to remove all sin from the believer and to induct him or her into the next higher level as a perfect..."
The saying,"Kill them all, the Lord will recognize His own" was invented by a Man involved in the mass murder of the Catharist so opposing people who think this way is a good thing.
JESUS CHRIST, speaking to the Jews in the Gospel of St. John, 8:44 “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lust of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is not truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it. – then answered the Jews — ” (which makes it clear that Christ was addressing the Jews.)