Special New Year's Eve edition. Happy New Year from Mary, Mike, and Saint!
Once a lapdog, always a lapdog...
Mary: December 2004 Archives
I try to wrap my mind around the suffering resulting from the tsunami in the Indian Ocean, and I just can't. It's all I can do to think about the suffering of just one person, one mother or one father who has lost one child. Even that seems beyond bearable to me.
I try. I imagine myself wearing a hijab or a sari, lifting the end of it and holding it over my nose and mouth to blunt the smell of decay, stumbling through the debris searching for my small child, terrified of what I might find.
I imagine myself as a small child stumbling through the debris, falling and skinning my knees, getting up again, crying, searching for mommy or daddy or a brother or a sister...
I try multiplying that by tens of thousands, and I just can't take it in, the suffering this has caused. My mind shuts down.
In this post I listed thirteen different (English) translations of verses 18 and 19 from the creation story in the second chapter of Genesis. Two of these translations were not literal, having been modified to remove a contradiction with the creation story in the first chapter of Genesis. One of those two modified versions was a recent translation, and the other was a translation by Darby, done in 1890. I couldn't find any information on this translation, but here is an interesting bit of information on Darby:
Oddly, the PMD prophecy heretics often have a hard time explaining exactly why it is that they believe the Antichrist will be "a man of peace." They love to quote (and twist) the Bible, but if you press them on this point, they're far more likely to quote instead from the received wisdom of some other "prophecy scholar." LaHaye is just saying it because Hal Lindsay said it. And Lindsay was just repeating Scofield and Ironsides. And those guys were just repeating Darby, who concocted the whole convoluted scheme and is notoriously hard to follow.
(Hat tip to the Slacktivist; link on the right.)
Well it seems I cannot put a picture in a comment, so here's the pic of me opening my package from "grandma":
and here's the best present, a ball that bounces crazy:
--Saint 
Well Mike came through with the digital camera after all. I was completely suprised and thrilled; I've wanted one for a long time. Naturally my first pictures are of my two favorite subjects.
Haha, I really wanted to get a "dog by fireplace" picture. It took me several minutes to get Saint to lie down in front of the fireplace, and he held the pose just long enough for me to snap the picture:
It's seriously cold here. When I sat down at the computer at about 8:30 this morning my weatherbug read 9 degrees. It now reads 19, so it's warmed up all of 10 degrees. It's expected to drop to 12 overnight. There's a dusting of snow on the ground that fell yesterday evening.
This is the first snow Saint has ever seen. Last night while it was snowing he went out through the doggy door and stood on the stoop for a long time, looking at the stuff lying around and falling from the sky. He snapped at a few snowflakes and licked tentatively at some snow on the ground. It took him quite a while to decide it was okay to walk on.
Amazingly, the cold doesn't seem to faze him. Mike and I took turns throwing the ball for him today, and while we both bailed out after a short time, Saint never wanted to stop and showed no sign of discomfort. The AKC describes the Labrador retriever's coat as "short, dense, and weather resistant". The dogs originated in Newfoundland, where the breed was developed by crossing small water dogs with Newfoundlands. I guess it makes sense that he'd be tolerant of the cold. Still, it's uncanny--he really doesn't seem to mind it at all.
You have the Vermeer girl look. A Vermeer girl
appealed mostly to the old masters of the Dutch
school, who painted pictures of everyday life
as they knew it. With her fine, fair skin, she
suited a light, natural, dewy make-up. The
Vermeer Girl loved homely things, such as
homemade soaps and candles. The following
artists would have liked to paint you; Pieter
de Hooch and Jan Vermeer.
'Pretty As A Picture' - Which Artist Would Paint You?
brought to you by Quizilla
 | You scored as alternative. You're partially respected for being an individual in a conformist world yet others take you as a radical. You have no place in society because you choose not to belong there - you're the luckiest of them all, even if your parents are completely ashamed of you. Just don't take drugs ok?
What Social Status are you? created with QuizFarm.com |
I watched "Now" with Bill Moyers Friday night. At the beginning of the program a woman was shown answering a reporter's question by saying that she believed God created the universe "in six literal days, about six thousand years ago." Man. How can I even begin to describe my frustration at this? I ask myself why I care. Let the fundies believe whatever they like. The problem is they have enough clout now to have a say in government policy, and that's scary, because if they get their way we'll all be forced to live by societal dictates established thousands of years ago.
One problem, as I see it, is the reluctance to tell someone they're wrong. It's impolite to criticize another person's religion, right? It's just not done. We think there is no "right" or "wrong" where religion is concerned, because it's all a matter of faith. So nobody says "Are you aware that no respectable Biblical scholar on the planet believes the Bible is the Literal Word Of God? Have you decided to reject all scholarship that does not study the Bible under the assumption that it is literally true?"
Biblical scholars know the Bible is lousy with contradictions; fundamentalists are in denial. Take the first two chapters of Genesis, now believed to have been written by different people, the texts combined sometime after King David united the northern and southern kingdoms of Judea and Israel. These two chapters tell two versions of the story of creation. Don't take my word for it--read Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard E. Friedman, a Harvard-educated Biblical scholar.
In chapter one, God creates all the animals before He creates man. The relevant verses are 25 and 26. In the King James version, they read:
25--And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26--And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
No matter which translation you read, it's clear that God creates the animals first, then man. In chapter 2, God creates man before the animals. The relevant verses in chapter 2 are 18 and 19, and this is how they read in a bunch of translations:
Amplified Bible:
18--Now the Lord God said, It is not good (sufficient, satisfactory) that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper meet (suitable, adapted, complementary) for him.
19--And out of the ground the Lord God formed every [wild] beast and living creature of the field and every bird of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them; and whatever Adam called every living creature, that was its name.
Contemporary English Version:
18--The LORD God said, "It isn't good for the man to live alone. I need to make a suitable partner for him." 19--So the LORD took some soil and made animals and birds. He brought them to the man to see what names he would give each of them. Then the man named the tame animals and the birds and the wild animals. That's how they got their names.
English Standard Version:
18--Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." 19--So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
Holman Christian Standard Bible:
18--Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is like him." 19--So the LORD God formed out of the ground each wild animal and each bird of the sky, and brought each to the man to see what he would call it. And whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
King James:
18--And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
19--And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
21st Century King James:
18--And the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper meet for him."
19--And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
The Message:
18--GOD said, "It's not good for the Man to be alone; I'll make him a helper, a companion." 19--So GOD formed from the dirt of the ground all the animals of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the Man to see what he would name them. Whatever the Man called each living creature, that was its name.
New American Standard Bible:
18--Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him."
19--Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
New Life Version:
18--Then the Lord God said, 'It is not good for man to be alone. I will make a helper that is right for him.'
19--Out of the ground the Lord God made every animal of the field and every bird of the sky. He brought them to the man to find out what he would call them. And whatever the man called a living thing, that was its name.
New Living Translation:
18--And the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion who will help him." 19--So the LORD God formed from the soil every kind of animal and bird. He brought them to Adam to see what he would call them, and Adam chose a name for each one.
Young's Literal Translation:
18--And Jehovah God saith, `Not good for the man to be alone, I do make to him an helper -- as his counterpart.'
19--And Jehovah God formeth from the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bringeth in unto the man, to see what he doth call it; and whatever the man calleth a living creature, that [is] its name.
Now check out these two, and note the difference:
New International Version (completed in 1978)
18--The LORD God said, It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.
19--Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.
Darby Translation:
18--And Jehovah Elohim said, It is not good that Man should be alone; I will make him a helpmate, his like.
19--And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought [them] to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name.
Emphasis mine. One of the translators of the NIV says they took a "balanced approach to difficulties." The Darby translation was apparently completed in 1890, and I can't find much information on Darby's approach. Evidently the translators of the NIV realized the "difficulty" in God's having created man first in the 2nd chapter, and edited the translation to remove the contradiction! Which means they had to have realized it was a contradiction.
It wasn't the only one--read the story of Noah again. How many animals was he told to take? Two of each? Seven of some and two of others? Two stories of the flood have been intertwined.
In short, Jewish tradition has always said Moses wrote the first five books of the Old Testament, but there isn't a respected Biblical scholar on the planet who believes Moses wrote a word of it.
You might think this doesn't matter to Christians--oh, but it does. Because in the New Testament Jesus referred repeatedly to Moses having written the law. Well, that's what Jews believed 2000 years ago. But think about what that says: either Jesus knew neither more nor less than the Jews of his day, or He didn't really say the stuff He's recorded as having said. Either way, bad news if you're a Christian.
I want somebody to have the nerve to tell the woman who believes the universe is 6000 years old that she's full of crap. I want people to stop being polite and challenge the religious beliefs of these nut cases. Politicians don't have the integrity or the guts, and neither does the news media.
Rant off.
Me
