« Left’s Assault on Free Speech Unabated | Main | Ruminations - 13dec2013 »

11 December 2013

Comments

Bill Tozer

Mr. Brother Ben: Women have made great strides in politics and business. I remember when HBO first had a woman at the helm and they cut way back on the frontal nude shots. Bummer. I like women and I like boobs. Oh well, at least Showtime and Cine-Max stepped up to fill the gap.

Women are the biggest majority in our country. Think it is 50.46% of the population and they will outlive us dastardly white fascists of the male gender.

My point is to give credit where credit is due. The people of The Golden State have elected Maxine Waters, Boxer, Nancy and Iron Man Competition Winner Diane. That is an estrogen overload in my humble opinion. And look at our Native American squaw from Massachusetts and the homely Patty from WA State. Shows you don't have to be part of the Beautiful People to get elected.

We have Carly and Meg and the richest person in Australia is another homely dame. Most of the top brass in my organization are Afro-American obese chicks in the HR Department and they make a heck of a lot more money that most. They have come a long way baby and they ain't turning back.

So, give credit where credit is due. Heck, we might even have a gash as the next President of these here United States. We even have homely women on the US Supreme Court, one of which lost every single case she brought forth as US Solicitor General. I often masturbate to my pin up gal, the esteemed cripple Ruthie Bader G, but I digress. I did like that bird Sara O from Arizona who retired from the court. Nice rancher with nice jugs. Love a cowgirl when she takes that black robe off.

In the Cabinet we have had Dr. Rice (two!) and Hillary (before she bonked her head after Benghazi and came down with amnesia) and who can forget my favorite gash, the Honorable Discharge Former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders and her self gratification theory of trickle down rugged individualism safe sex.

Just saying change takes time and give credit when credit is due. We are still evolving until the day our fairer sex will take over the world and we will all be watching the sequel to The Attack Of The 50 Foot Woman. Gives new meaning to Amazon.com.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: Bill Tozer | 22 December 2013 at 07:07 PM


Nice blog you have here George. I bet you are so proud.

Bill Tozer

Brother Ben, here is one heck of a woman and someone who evokes my respect. "Wimps fail." Against all odds, she never listed to those who told her she is too short or America is racist or even the deck is stacked against her or women are inferior. She is of good stock and rose above all obstacles. That is her American dream, the land of opportunity.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-20/black-woman-named-to-a-top-u-s-navy-job-says-wimps-fail.html

Ben Emery

Yep, strong lady. I would point to these women before her that allowed Michelle Howard to even consider joining the Navy let alone achieve any kind of ranking.
http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/content/womens_leadership/black_suffrage.html

I think this is where the divide comes from on our part. Nothing goes from A to Z without taking steps B-Y first. When we are on point A we fight for point Z and we achieve point B. Always keeping our eyes on the prize and fighting for it. We as white males don't need to feel guilty about the past we only need not stand in the way of moving forward.

Eyes On The Prize (Mavis Staples)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZWdDI_fkns

fish

We as white males don't need to feel guilty about the past we only need not stand in the way of moving forward.

Well....this special dispensation is certainly a departure from your previous stance!

When did you decide to cancel the denunciations and show trials Ben?

Ben Emery

George,

"Texas legislature’s attempt to pass a women’s health bill was disrupted by an “unruly mob” of liberals. Gov Perry vows to push it through in a later session with more security present."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/28/us/texas-abortion-law/

Just follow the thread on your post on the "two bodies problem". Ryan Mount made a very sincere attempt at pulling your definition of the second body but you danced around it. I didn't read the entire thread but read enough attempts to see you did not want to answer that question.

I am in full agreement with Ryan on that thread on the issue of abortion. Last resort but ultimately it is a poverty issue once again. Women of means will have no problem seeking a safe procedure while poor women will die.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/10/abortion-and-the-two-bodies-problem.html

Ben Emery

Sorry Fish,
It is nothing different than what I have been saying in so many different ways for a couple years now. Being accused of white guilt many times here on RR. Nothing for me to feel guilty about but continuing to stand in the way of equality and justice for all is something most definitely something to feel guilty about.

fish

It's exactly different. I imagine you find that "saying in so many different ways" is awfully convenient when you need to change your position. I may have judged you too harshly Ben....I think you have what it takes to be part of today's "flexible" Democratic Party.

Bill Tozer

Wow Brother Ben, I have to tip my hat off to you. Great song you posted from You Tube. I liked it so much that I played it not once, not twice, but 3 times with the music cranked up and got me dancing. That be my kind of music. Keep your eyes on the Prize, hold on. Hold on!

Yes, we go from A-Z step by step. Or, as a dear wise cleaning lady once told me, its not about going from point A to point B, its a matter of simply leaving Point A.

All people who leave Point A have courage. I know this because to face and overcome obstacles is the ornament on the tree of courage. Yes, no need to constantly bring up the Deep South in the 50's or pre-Women's Suffrage. We never forget, but we are moving on. Otherwise, without courage and faith in something, challenges will become insurmountable and they will always be there until they are breached and we walk along until the next huge boulder lies before us. If we don't get past that next hurdle, then we will face it time and time again in various forms and and presentations and it will not simply disappear. Once we climb over the next hurdle, there will be yet another one in our path. They built the Great Wall of China one stone at a time and all that stuff.

Nobody can provide the chutzpah to get off the pity pot/sofa. Circumstances and mentors may provide the catalyst to leave point A, but it must ultimately come from within. One place where you and I part ways is I see you bringing a horse to water and I reply "But, you can't make him drink."

This is one nation that was founded solely upon ideals. Those ideals are open for any individual to embrace, no matter their position in life. Not all will achieve or overcome, but hope burns eternal within the bosom of mankind. Thus I lean toward rugged individualism and faith and courage to address challenges, while you appear to embrace tackling society's ills as the primary solution to obstacles. Either way (right, wrong, or indifferent) that song lifted my lowly spirits tonight. Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on.

Ben Emery

George and his minions believe each individual is pretty much on their own. At the same time do not want American workers to be able to earn a decent living wage.

An exchange between George and myself. Fish here is an example of how I conducted myself in the early months of my participation on RR. Until months of snide remarks from others and George in his own way finally wore me out.

01 June 2011

George,
You are making the claim that American workers need to compete with third world nations.

I moment of clarity just hit me. I am not saying this in a negative context at all but a statement of reality. You seemed to be very comfortable with your positions and are honest.

A global labor market is a perfect way to create laissez-faire/ Ayn Rand style capitalism. All labor will be competing for bottom end wages/ benefits.
Is this the idea? The makers and takers social dichotomy. 01 June 2011 at 09:13 PM

BenE - I am indeed making that claim about American workers as long as we must import the stuff that maintains an acceptable quality of life for us.

I am reminded that we will be no richer - indeed, we will be poorer - if we attempt to create wealth by sealing our borders, and then mandate that a person emptying bed pans will be paid the same as an engineer designing a new medical scanning system.

Returning to Eisler's Caring Economics: her ideas were presaged by B.F. Skinner (father of behaviourism and operant conditioning) in his 'Walden Two' published soon after WW2. It's a good read, and not too long.


George Rebane

BenE 1016pm - not sure what question you claim I didn't answer.

Ben Emery

George,
You answered the question. Again I am currently just stating what I have come to learn of your and four or five "conservative" regulars ideology at the moment.

This might not mean anything to you but I will say it again, although I find your ideology appalling I do not equate a person political leanings to their worth as a human being. My guess is you are a good man, good husband/ father, and caring citizen that has a very different approach to achieve goals we both agree upon.

And yes I do mean authoritarian fascist/ corporatist blog in a derogatory way but really I am must trying to put stamp on what is discussed at RR as a regular discourse like they are supported ideas. Just as you do with the progressive label.

Todd Juvinall

I guess I am totally confused by BenE's definitions. For instance, I know George and myself are for the Constitution and the rule of law yet BenE calls us "fascists". BenE, please define the obvious conflict I see in your comments.

Then BenE says "My guess is you are a good man, good husband/ father, and caring citizen"... Now BenE, where do you get your accusations from when even you admit this? You see BenE, you are simply misguided. A victim of your own avarice. You do not work within the society but are a constant complainant of it. If you were an entrepreneur, hell, even an employee of McDonald's, you would better understand the folly of your ridiculous views.

I would say that George probaly donates more to the poor in a year than you have all your life (he just is quiet about it). He does this becasue he is a doer. You are a taker BenE so you really have no real world experience in these things.

But it is Christmas tome and I will wish your misguided and ridiculous opinions and Very Merry One.

Bill Tozer

Mr. Juvinall. A reasoned response. Lest I forget, Merry Christmas to you this fine year.

I believe that Brother Ben does not realize that many of the slave owners he decries in the fast food industry are actually franchise owners. Them franchises cost a bundle and most have to hock their homes, take out huge loans from the bank and friends, and sell their left nut just to get a foot in the door. Once in, there are massive contract agreements that must follow including spending so many dollars on advertising and keeping bathrooms pristine. Not cheap for the little guy who pays slave wages. You know the guy who lays awake at night wondering how he will come up with another 90k by Friday to pay the banks and employees. Its easy to use blanket statesmen decrying Mickey D's until you open the hood. Wonder why Wendy's and Jack-in-the -Box are left out of the wholesale condemnation of The Golden Arches? Yep, I digress again. Never mind these places pay more than the evil minimum wage.

So, Mr. Juvinall, have a good year. And don't let Mr. Gerry Pelline or Mr. Jeff Fedor bug ya too much. As that dynamic duo would say, LOL! Boy, his LOL's get old, but his writing style never changes. Remember to sit on a big fat happy face now and then. Cheers.

Todd Juvinall

Mr. BillT, Merry and Happy to you as well. I think BenE is just ignorant about life. He must get his info from Das Kapital of the Anarchists Handbook. Even his questions are totally inane and without merit. But he is why America has failed its young in the education process. The system is turning out too mnay BenE's. People who want to take the stuff of those that work, then skim some for themselves and pass the rest on to "takers". I can see why that would be a racket BenE would be attracted to. It frees him up to cut and paste Marx in every post!

The other "sock puppets" are too funny. They think they have something but they nly have air.

Ben Emery

Bill and Todd,
If you look at a single company than you opposition is justified but if you look at big picture your opposition doesn't hold water. But I will leave it alone because you have made my point once again.

Todd Juvinall

BenE, honestly dude, you are delusional. Capitalism has been the greatest boon to removing people from poverty in the history of the planet. Corporations are simply a conglomerate of people. Tell us BenE, how do you feel about a "Credit Union"? Are they bad? They are the repository of people's money. Once they get enough they lend it out to those who need say, a car. That vehicle that gets them to work. So, the "Savings and Loan" is simply a banking corporation under a set of laws and rules. Give us your detailed Wiki copy paste on how you feel or regard a Credit Union.

You are just the gift that keeps on giving BenE. Your opinions are anti-freedom.

Ben Emery

Continuing off of the comment 23 December 2013 at 05:57 AM

Walmart, Nike, Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic,
http://www.theearthcenter.com/templates/firefly/archives/ffarchivessweatshops1.html

In the United States the practice and legality of slavery ended with the Civil War along with Constitutional Amendments. Today in western nations we support a different type of slavery, wage slavery.

The wages being fought for are a monthly minimum wage. If we average out hours worked with compensation garment workers are being offering $0.40 an hour in Cambodia.
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/strike-picks-steam

Up until now the garment worker wages was $61 a month or $0.25 an hour. Walmart and H&M shut down a garment factory without notice and refused to pay their workers $200,000 of back wages until they lost in a lawsuit.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/rights/cambodian-workers-win-200000-settlement-wal-mart-hm

Ben Emery

Todd,
Credit Unions are cooperative and not for profit, big difference. Do you understand what that means?

Since we are in the season watch "Its A Wonderful Life" and compare the philosophies between Potter and Bailey. I side with Bailey and you side with Potter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ne13Zft9Q

Todd Juvinall

BenE, you are too funny. I tell you about a SansL like Bailey represents and somehow I am for Potter. No wonder you are lonely. You do all the thinking and talking for yourself and the person you are with. What a hoot.

A Sand L is exactley what I said it is and if you are for Bailey, you are a scumbag capitalist. Just like me and the rest here. Bailey makes loans from the deposits others make and then they make a profit off the interest they charge on the loans. My GOD man, get an education!

Ben Emery

Todd,
Can your pea-brain comprehend incentives actual change the mission, vision, and policies of institutions?

Your limited view of capitalism is unreal.

Here you go big guy, a link that will explain credit unions for you.
http://www.mycreditunion.gov/about-credit-unions/Pages/How-is-a-Credit-Union-Different-than-a-Bank.aspx

Ben Emery

Todd,
Can your pea-brain comprehend that the incentive changes the mission, vision, and policies of institutions? The point of the Potter vs Bailey clip is to show even within the same business their are different philosophies. The Bailey's ran the business while Potter sat on the board trying every chance he could to shut it down so he could gain full control over the town.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZjT_90Ny2c

Go ahead and search through all my comments anywhere and everywhere and it will be almost impossible to find a criticism outside large corporations and industries, including banking.I am not against business, I am against unaccountable business whose incentives have shifted from product/ service to bottom line profits and power.

Todd Juvinall

BenE, all that I pointed out to you went in one ear and out the other. There was not a bit of lingering time. The answer is if people have two similar businesses the one that caters to the will of the customers, gives good service and a good return, will do better. That is capitalism. You really need to go back to school and study up. You do not understand even the basic rudimentary things here. My goodness.

I do not have a "pea brain" as you say Ben Emery, my brain is more like wow brain.

Ben Emery

Todd,
From your S&L lesson above it appears to me that is the way you believe the financial services industry works. No mention of large commercial banking institutions, fractional reserve banking, federal reserve, investment banking, commodity speculation, compound interest, and no outside forces or hostile takeover just a very simplified version of a sector within financial services that has been decimated by large banking. As we have shifted away from the very good financial service industry regulations of FDR administrations we have seen an explosion in consolidation, corruption, economic bubbles, private and public debt. During the Reagan Revolution the financial deregulation coupled with anti trust laws being ignored we experienced the merger and acquisition era of the 1980's, do you remember that? We have followed those policies in every administration since and what we have today is a very dysfunctional form of capitalism and governance in the US. Of, By, and For big business/ industry, which will lead me how you guys are fascist/ corporatist.

Not a single issue stands by itself let alone an entire industry filled with working parts. How to come up with the causation and thus solutions of these problems we have to reflect on the thinking of the day of society in its macro sense not try to make mountains out of mole hills by getting trapped at the micro level.

My wife and I ran a successful small business for years, thanks for the lessons pops.

Todd Juvinall

Well BenE, you are still wet behind the ears with a lot of learning to do but you are already stuck in your ways. I give you a simple example and you just don't have the smarts to figure it out apparently.

Keep trying.

Where is the successful business you ran?

Ben Emery

Todd,
You gave an over simplified example of how financial services in the US operate and then an even more simplified example of how business works.

We sold it. The last month the new owner made a profit was the my last month managing it for him, I left due to an emergency. He basically let me run the daily operations why he sat back in the office because his dealing with average people skills were something to be desired. Very nice man but appeared to have very little high volume costumer service experience. He had a business degree and corporate experience from a city on the east coast and thought he knew better than 12 years of records and experience we offered him. It was in a tourist town with distinct seasons, which he did not plan for and the first slow season on his own put the business in a downward slide. Didn't have the funds to restock before the tourists started showing up again so he had limited product to sell. It was a shame because it was a good business that the locals really liked and he was a nice man that got in over his head.

Todd Juvinall

BenE, what was the business? How many employees and what was the dollars earned, gross and net.

Ben Emery

None of your business on some of those questions. Food Service/ Restaurant at peak season we would have up to 20 employees. Put it to you this way, we earned a comfortable living while the "fine dining" establishments came and went many times over. We catered to locals, backpackers, and festival goers on limited budgets. Our average sell was under $10. Never made a killing but always earned a decent living. Owned a home, raising a family, health care, took vacations and had a basic IRA going. If you haven't ever owned a restaurant you are lying the restaurant owns you.

Ben Emery

correction
If you say you HAVE ever owned a restaurant you are lying, the restaurant owned you.

Bill Tozer

I can't wait until somebody puts some hot lead in Bailey' noggin, just for fun. I love Mr. Potter. He was misunderstood and stood up to those rabble-rousers and also cherished the rule of law, unlike Bailey. Bailey was just some soulless wife beating spastic.

Ben Emery

Right on cue, Bill. Of course you like Potter, his inability to feel sympathy towards others is actually pretty funny. How a person can be so oblivious to the circumstances of others always amazes me, even in fiction.

Take a lesson from "It's A Wonderful Life" - Move Your Money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT6ZGKPk9Cw

Todd Juvinall

Potter gets his in the afterlife BenE. You believe in GOD don't you. He is the judge, right?

Ben Emery

But in the process Potter promotes suffering for those on earth needlessly.

I do believe in GOD but do not believe GOD is a he or she. The creator is so great we cannot even begin to understand what GOD really is but we know GOD is within all of us and everything.

Here is the funny thing Todd. I try to treat others with compassion, sympathy, and respect not because it has to be done for an afterlife but rather because it is the most rewarding way to live in the life we have now.

bill tozer

http://www.theonion.com/video/the-onion-looks-back-at-its-a-wonderful-life,34838/

Todd Juvinall

BenE, you should follow your own advice. So, when the Bible says man was created in God's image that could mean he is a woman? Ir some amorphous energy within us? OK, I think I understand you now.

Regarding treating others as I would wish to be treated. Yep, that is how I live. Of course liberals have others do that for them and then sit around the campfire and toast each other for being so compassionate.

Ben Emery

Todd,
huMAN, MANkind, huMANity, what does "MAN" mean? Do you think it includes woman so the term "MAN" is all embracing when spoken in terms of huMAN beings?

"Regarding treating others as I would wish to be treated. Yep, that is how I live. Of course liberals have others do that for them and then sit around the campfire and toast each other for being so compassionate."

Whatever dude!

Todd Juvinall

Well, So you don't agree with the Bible BenE that man is made in the image of GOD? Woman means "out of man" so perhaps a little brushing up in Jesus would help you. I see you agree that liberals have others do their compassionate work for them. Thanks for that, I knew it was true.

The word "woman" means "from man". Did you know that Ben Emery? I detect some frustration in your last post. Is that because you have been unable to keep up?

Ben Emery

Todd,
Are you serious?

Literally, your entire 27 December 2013 at 11:30 AM comment is ridiculous.

Are you a person who believes the earth is only thousands of years old?

Ben Emery

Todd,
Are you joking?

Todd Juvinall

Ben Emery, why don't you answer the questions? Are you afraid? Apparently. I don't answer questions with questions like liberals do. So, read what I wrote again and answer all the questions.

Ben Emery

Todd,
"Literally, your entire 27 December 2013 at 11:30 AM comment is ridiculous."

I think this addresses your questions and comments clearly.

Todd Juvinall

So BenE, why do you not like to debate theology? Are you afraid that we will see the real you? You are such a predictable liberal. All you need to do is honestly answer the questions. Nothing more.

Ben Emery

Afraid to debate theology? I love debating theology.

If that is what you want to do lets get it on.

No I don't agree with the Bible. Let me add, any version of the Bible. The bible was written and translated many times by human beings long after the time of Jesus. Human beings are fallible. Then we are taught or preached to by other human beings on their interpretations of what the parables actually mean.

Todd Juvinall

So you are not a Christian then BenE?

stevenfrisch

Seriously Todd I don't know where you get this nonsense. The word 'woman' does not mean 'from man'. Even in its Old English etymology the word meant 'female human'.

Not only are you wrong on the meaning, if one tries to tie the word woman to 'female' to make your case not even the word 'female' means 'from man'; it is from the Latin 'femina' which means woman... 'femina' had no etymological connection to the word for male until the 14th century when it was altered in English to parallel the spelling of the word 'male'. Since there was no no word 'woman' until it was altered in English to match the word for male...long after any faux Biblical meaning you may have in mind from reading the King James version of the Bible your theory on its meaning only works if the Jews of ancient Palestine were speaking the King's English, kind of like a Monty Python sketch.

This is what happens when we translate Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, into Latin, into Old English, into modern English; Ignorant people attribute meaning to things that have no meaning or are a mere accident of history.

Todd Juvinall

TheFrisch is wrong again. Do a search and you will find I am correct and you, as usual, are a wiki junkie.

So, butt out TheFrisch, I am talking to BenE and trying to get his views. We already know yours.

stevenfrisch

Hey Todd, how can you say 'do a search' on the one hand, and call me a Wiki junkie on the other? There is nothing wrong with using the tools at our disposal to access information....would you have called someone a 'library' junkie...what is unique is the ability to interpret that information to reach a logical conclusion...an ability you lack.

But, to be clear, I merely confirmed information that I gleaned from once taking a women's literature in history course many years ago....

And I will post here any time I want, as long as George tolerates it, so fu@# off.

What a moron!

Ben Emery

Steve,
Here is how fair I am to Todd proven nonsense. I knew what he was talking about and why he would he would think such a thing, I probably thought it as well until I asked someone around the age of five years old. Anyway I searched for his definition and came up a big goose egg and then when to etymology of the word. I was correct and Todd was his usual wrong. But to try and argue that wasn't worth my time so I called his entire comment ridiculous.


Ben Emery

Todd
I answered your question about the Bible.

Now it is your turn to answer a question.

Do you believe the bible is literal or figurative?

Todd Juvinall

SteveFrisch, why do you insist on namecalling? Is that what your momma taught you? You need yo grow up and maybe we might listen.

BenE. You never answered aby questions because you always know what everyone else is thinking. You and the Frisch are not Christians yet you are experts in the religion. OK, Wiki is your master I get that. Do a search and get back to us. You too lovelies re sooo funny!

Bill Tozer

Gentlemen, I will side step the origins of the word "woman" and just ramble on a few points. Make of it as you will.

All translators of The Bible have come across the same problem. There are words in ancient texts that cannot be translated, thus footnotes stating that a particular word sounds like the oral tradition word so and so.

Remember, the King James Bible was translated by a group of scholars under orders to get it right or death.

There is no correct translation of the pronoun God from Hebrew to English. We simply have only one word for something that is neither male or female, that word being "it". It would be of no service to refer to God as "it". Before going off on the King James Bible was written by a bunch of sexist old men, it is important to remember that they were told to get it right or they would be put to death. All versions since have struggled with the exact meaning of words hence and some words are perhaps lost forever.

Even since 1611, many English words have changed their meaning. For instance, the word conversation today used to mean conduct. The word comprehend used to mean apprehend. Miles apart in meaning. And vanity (Biblical speaking)now means emptiness.

There is one phrase that Brother Ben has referenced that is the ultimate trump card. When debating Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses or those of the Pharisee type legalistic doctrine, that phrase is "That passage cannot be trusted." Now, that ends all debate right there.

Often man creates God in his own image (and understanding) rather than God created man in "his" image. That's my story and I am sticking to it. Carry on.

stevenfrisch

Nice to see you could break away from you life sized posters of Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sandra Day O'Connor to comment Bill!

George Rebane

Gentlemen - the etymology of 'woman' has a number of threads acceptable to people of various origin theory beliefs. I may have missed something, but I haven't detected any RR commenter to believe is the literal interpretation of creation as described in Judeo-Christian scripture.

Life's evolution on earth has promoted species that are mono-sexual, bisexual, and even tri-sexual in the sense that a mediating critter has to get involved in making progeny. So it is difficult for me to follow the debate here, almost as difficult as it appears for the debaters.

It seems that science has several acceptable/debatable explanations of how gender specialization came about to promote procreation and sustain the so adapted species. But then, maybe that discussion is a bit too staid, and we can continue the exciting search for Adam's missing rib.

Bill Tozer

Why thank you Mr. Frisch. I knew that post would get ya. Yep, that got you good. Sticks in the craw don't it? My Christmas present to you, the gift that keeps on giving.

No pictures of Sandra Day. I respect her too much. First woman to graduate from Stanford Law and even took time off during her career to raise her children. Sandra Day may not be a Superwoman, but she sure is a super woman. Now Ruthie is just an object, simply a boy toy.

Ben Emery

Bill,
To go even further than what you have shared. These are some summaries from a book written by Bart Ehrman "Misquoting Jesus". I read it when it came out, I guess in 2005 or so. It seems much longer than that but I'm hitting middle age rather hard these days and time is starting to get real blurred. Mr Ehrman was an evangelical Christian in every sense but through his devotion and study came to the conclusions in the book.

"Conclusion: Changing Scripture: Scribes, Authors, and Readers (pp. 207-218). 'The more I studied the manuscript tradition of the New Testament, the more I realized just how radically the text had been altered over the years at the hands of scribes, who were not only conserving scripture but also changing it' (p. 207). The changes in the New Testament make it impossible to believe that God inspired the original words."

Faith is a personal relationship with God or Truth or whatever we want to call what cannot be expressed in words or pictures. Some choose Christianity others choose different path to their own personal relationship with God or Truth. I LOVE the fact that people have faith and belong to different churches. At the local level faith based houses are amazing and provide very important services from the spiritual to serving the needy a bowl of soup. The problem I have with religion is when one form of religion imposes itself upon others.

Here is an interview with Bart Ehrman

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5052156

Ben Emery

George,
Would you agree with either of these statements?

Woman means "out of man"

or

The word "woman" means "from man"

27 December 2013 at 11:30 AM

Ben Emery

Todd,

Do you read the Bible as literal or figurative?

If you want to discuss a topic it is a two way street. I will give one more answer in hopes to start the process. I do not consider myself an expert on Christianity in any sense. What I am an expert in is my faith in God and how the teachings of Christ fit into that faith. Just like you I am entitled to my interpretation of the Bible.

If pressed I would say I was raised Catholic but do not consider myself Christian. I married into a very overt evangelical Christian family and it has been good experience on both of our parts. I go to services, join in on prayers, respect Christian observances/ rituals, and have even helped with my youth minister brother in law Awana camps.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 28 December 2013 at 10:30 AM

Just for the record I was not disputing the origin of women; I was disputing the definition of the word 'woman'. Considering the narrowness of that topic my observation that Todd is full of beans holds true.

And also for the record, there are at least two and probably three 'creation' stories in Judeo-Christian scripture; one where Adam and Eve are created in God's image (either literally or spiritually) simultaneously after the creation of the heavens and earth, one where Adam and Eve are created in series after the creation of the heavens and earth (10th century BC); and one in which the heavens and earth and man and woman exist simultaneously sans a timeframe.

Which just goes to show you that these things are really should not be considered literally, but rather as a mythos, or set of stories to think about, to learn from, to draw inspiration from, to guide us in living a moral and just life, rather than a literal history.

George Rebane

BenE 1050am - Sorry Ben, I am too ignorant on origin of languages to take a position on such a limited set of choices. In any case, I don't believe there is any evidence that the female member of any species sequentially derived 'from' or 'out of' its male member(s). I take questions like that to hew to a pre-scientific version of the creation narratives that still give comfort to many.

As a Christian (self-avowed, not necessarily accepted by the establishment), I believe that Man is among the transcendent critters in this universe, and that God has revealed to us enormously more about the cosmos since the Renaissance than S/he/it revealed to more primitive peoples before that epoch. And these revelations continue today at an increasing pace. (For more, please see the 'Religion' and 'Science' sections of RR.)

Todd Juvinall

BenE, either you are or are not a Christian. You seem to keep one toe inside the church doors to save your soul? Too funny.

BillT, you did a great job on the discussion of interpretation of words. I was simply pointing to the origin of the word and it is my research that says woman means "out of man" based on the rib. Frisch does his Wiki and namecalluing amd marginalizes himself as a person with little gray matter once again.

BenE never answers the questions but he always fills in our side in a discussion.

George, I think the libs her took something I said earlier and started this divergence. It is not about a definition of the word but its origins.

Bill Tozer

Well, this is proof positive that Adam was not from the Deep South. No Southern Boy worth his grit would ever give up a rib.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 27 December 2013 at 11:30 AM


Show us where 'woman' is defined as or has a word origin meaning 'from man' please.

Ben Emery

Todd,
Do you want to try and discuss theology or not?

I answered your two first questions, now answer my first question before we continue.

I have not told you what you think or what you should think in this discussion. Just answer the question,

Do you read the Bible as literal or figurative?

Ben Emery

George,
28 December 2013 at 11:27 AM

I refer you to the comment 27 December 2013 at 11:30 AM.

Those were definitive statements made to me by Todd Junivall. He was challenging my assertion that the term 'man' has more to do with human beings than gender.

Ryan Mount

Woman is a relatively new word in the English lexicon. You see it in Middle and late Old English as wyfman, which was an expression of how the wife belonged to the husband. It was later shortened, as we tend to do in English to just "Wyf"(pronounced Weef) or "Wif." Chaucer preferred to use "Wyf" in case you were interested, which you probably aren't.

Anyhow, there is no mistaking the etymology woman has explicitly stating that the woman belongs (as in property) to the man; as "coming from him" which was slightly more esteemed than his cattle or pigs. And prior to the word woman, there was just a man's wife or "wyf."

On a related note, long before post-modern feminist lexical cart tipping of the 1960s, "man" was considered gender neutral. It was neither masculine nor feminine. People were just "men." (Our revisionists minds must avoid the temptation to project our values into 9th Century English) But then again, we didn't invent left and right shoes until the 17th-ish Century.

It is generally excepted that the division of men and woman ("wee man" and "woe man" are seen in early Renn literature) into distinct English nouns happened in the late Middle English period with the Liberal reforms brought about by the impending Renaissance.

Ben Emery

Todd,
I will use the refusal to answer the first question a sign of conceding victory to me in, The Great Debate Of Theology 2013! To funny.

Oxford English Dictionary

theology (n.)- the study of the nature of God and religious belief.

woman (n.)- an adult human female.

man (n.)- 1. an adult human male.

man (n.)- 2. a human being of either sex; a person:

Ben Emery

Todd,
Now to address another ridiculous comment.

"either you are or are not a Christian. You seem to keep one toe inside the church doors to save your soul? Too funny."

What part of this don't you understand?

"If pressed I would say I was raised Catholic but do not consider myself Christian."

If death came to my door tomorrow I would die a non Christian believer. Something might change over time but I doubt it.

Our family is the melting pot or tossed salad of America.

My dad's family who am extremely close with are Portuguese/ Spanish Catholics (Grandmother) with Anglican/Episcopal English (Grandfather). My dad's family were raised mostly catholic and they all went to Catholic schools.

This one will really make your head spin. My mom's family is Ukraine Jew (Grandmother) with Irish Catholic (Grandfather).

My parents raised all of us with the understanding that there was a God and it was up to us to find the correct path to that relationship.

I respect the faith of others to the point it is individual and personal (extended to immediate family) but will push back any religion once it is forced upon others.

Just as in any institution once a religion reaches a certain size the incentives shift to self preservation instead of the original mission/ vision.

I consider tolerance a major tenet of the teachings of Jesus, which I find ironic when Christians tell me my faith is wrong while I am accepting theirs.

Have a good New Year's.

Bill Tozer

Damnit Ben. You never said your got Portagee blood in ya. This changes everything. Sad day. This might be a deal breaker to our blossoming relationship.

The comments to this entry are closed.