(Inspired and/or otherwise 'lifted' from https://www.facebook.com/jay.graboski.3?fref=ts by my good friend Jay Graboski)
". . . Americans (are) literalists who “don’t know how to communicate in symbols except in the baldest of ways." Are symbolists and literalists the divisive ones who have a hard time understanding a messiah who came not parsing texts on vellum but speaking in signs and stories (semiotics)?"
Round every corner and fade into blue
The Angelus rings, she comes into view
Nine is her number
In nine she is due
She will never fail you
Singing creation, look into her eyes
Out of her mouth she is speaking the sky
Circling heaven, higher than high
She in time is movement
Why should I move from her world vibration?
Molding this clay into
Paleolithic Goddess Figurines
Streaming to rivers, she floats on the sea
Gathers her children who sit on her knee
Showing and telling them where they are free
She is softly speaking
Holding the line when she seems unpleasant
Molding this clay into
Paleolithic Goddess Figurines
There is no real dilemma
She has her own agenda
Though there's a vulture hovering above our heads
Go on and trust the pattern
Her sun and moon are lanterns
Painting the firmament with stars
She is the vision of attention engaged
Breaking the spell of automaton rage
A circuit of heaven, a luminous wave
All is seen before her
Why should I move from her world vibration?
Molding this clay into
Paleolithic Goddess Figurines
Round every corner and fade into blue
The Angelus rings, she comes into view
Nine is her number
In nine she is due
She will never fail you
(from Biblical Literalism: A Gentile Heresy by John Shelby Spong)
". . . "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor . . . and come, follow me". . . It was a hard teaching, one that could not be received by the questioner; Matthew tells us that the young man "went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.". . . That conversation then precipitated Jesus; teaching on wealth [in the gospel of Matthew] . . . I always find it interesting to see where biblical literalists cease to be literal. This is one of those places. Far from listening to the demands of Jesus, we have rather developed a Christianity of affluence, in which the poor are judged and blamed for being poor. In the United States the political party that claims to represent the 'religious' or the 'Christian' vote constantly seeks to cut programs aimed at assisting the poor, and to do away with health coverage for any who cannot afford it. . . "
My latest solo offering, No Frills, is now available at - No Frills
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
(from Biblical Literalism: A Gentile Heresy by John Shelby Spong)
". . . If we reduce this Matthean character (the Canaanite woman) to literal person, we can deal with her once and for all and then move on. If she is a symbol, an icon, her challenge will be eternal; her face will change throughout history, but her demands will remain, constantly challenging our security and eroding our barriers. Jewish readers of Matthew's gospel knew that she was a symbol. Gentile readers, later, would assume that she was a literal figure and that they had dealt with her once they had brought themselves to accept Canaanites. Perhaps we need to confront the possibility that Christianity has not failed, as our critics constantly assert; the reality, I believe, is that Christianity has never been understood and thus has never really been tried. . . "
My latest solo offering, No Frills, is now available at - No Frills
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
(from http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Movies/The-Nativity-Story/A-Religious-Santa-Claus-Tale.aspx?p=3#u36WE9MK6YKH4F3v.99)
". . . When we turn to the actual text in Matthew and Luke, the questions and problems indicating that these stories are not literal history multiply. Matthew, who wrote between 80 and 85 C.E., wrote the first stories of Jesus' birth. He was also the gospel writer most appreciative of and anchored in his Jewish background. Matthew introduced this birth story with a genealogy that grounds Jesus in a thoroughly Jewish past, describing his lineage from Abraham, through David and the kings of Judah, to the exile and finally to Joseph, whom he identified as "the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew 1:16). Provocatively enough, and quite rare in the ancient world, Matthew adds four women to this lengthy genealogy-- all of whom are sexually tainted in the stories about them in the Hebrew Scriptures.
First there is Tamar, the daughter-in-law of Judah who became pregnant by her father-in-law in an incestuous relationship (Matthew 2:1, Genesis 38). Yet Matthew says the line of Jesus came through this woman. Next, there is Rahab, who was called "the harlot," who assisted with Joshua's invasion of the promised land (Matthew. 1:5, Joshua 2). Matthew also says the line of Jesus came through this woman. Then there is Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David who in her time was said to have seduced her future husband, Boaz, with the aid of much wine. When Boaz woke up to discover Ruth in his bed, he covered her with his blanket and proceeded to do the honorable thing by marrying her (Matthew 1:5, Ruth 3). The hereditary background of Jesus includes Ruth, according to Matthew. . ."
OHO's
"Ocean City Ditty," the
CD single is now available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/oho4
(and, if
you're in town, at Trax On Wax on Frederick Rd. in Catonsville, MD) OHO is Jay Graboski, David Reeve & Ray Jozwiak
My latest solo release, '2014' of original, instrumental piano music, can be downloaded digitally at:
(or you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/rayjozwiak4)
(from http://www.11points.com/Books/11_Things_The_Bible_Bans,_But_You_Do_Anyway
All quotes are translations from the New American Standard Bible)
1. Leviticus 19:27 reads "You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard."
2. Football. At least, the pure version of football, where you play with a pigskin. And you're doubly breaking that if you wake up, eat some sausage. . . Leviticus 11:8, which is discussing pigs, reads "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you."
3. Fortune telling. Before you call a 900 number (do people still call 900 numbers, by the way?), read your horoscope or crack open a fortune cookie, realize you're in huge trouble if you do. Leviticus 19:31 reads "Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God." The penalty for that? Check Leviticus 20:6: "As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people."
4. Pulling out. The Bible doesn't get too much into birth control... it's clearly pro-populating but, back when it was written, no one really anticipated the condom or the sponge, so those don't get specific bans.
But... pulling out does. One of the most famous sexual-oriented Bible verses... the one that's used as anti-masturbation rhetoric... is actually anti-pulling out. It's Genesis 38:9-10: "Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother's wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also."
5. No tattoos. Leviticus 19:28 reads, "You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord."
Not even a little butterfly on your ankle. Or Thug Life across your abdomen. Or even, fittingly enough, a cross.
6. Polyester, or any other fabric blends. The Bible doesn't want you to wear polyester. Not just because it looks cheap. It's sinfully unnatural. Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."
7. Divorce. The Bible is very clear on this one: No divorcing. You can't do it. Because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you "are no longer two, but one flesh." And, Mark 10:9 reads, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." Mark gets even more hardcore about it a few verses later, in Mark 10:11-12, "And He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.'"
8. Letting people without testicles into church. Whether you've been castrated or lost one or two balls to cancer isn't important. The Bible doesn't get that specific. It just says you can't pray. Deuteronomy 23:1 reads (this is the God's Word translation, which spells it out better), "A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord." Oh, and the next verse says that if you're a bastard, the child of a bastard... or even have a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchild of a bastard, you can't come to church or synagogue either. Deuteronomy 23:2 reads, "No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord."
9. Wearing gold. 1 Timothy 2:9 doesn't like your gold necklace at all. Or your pearl necklace. Or any clothes you're wearing that you didn't get from Forever 21, Old Navy or H&M. "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments."
10. Lobster, shrimp and clam chowder: All banned. Shellfish. Leviticus 11:10 reads, "But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you." And shellfish is right in that wheelhouse. Leviticus 11 bans a TON of animals from being eaten (it's THE basis for Kosher law); beyond shellfish and pig, it also says you can't eat camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers (?), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon and snail.
11. Your wife defending your life in a fight by grabbing your attacker's genitals. No joke. Deuteronomy actually devotes two verses to this exact scenario: Deuteronomy 25:11-12. "If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity."
That's impossible to misinterpret. Ladies, if your husband is getting mugged, make sure to kick the mugger in the pills. Do not do the grip and squeeze (no matter what "Miss Congeniality" might advise). Or your hand needs to be cut off.
OHO's
"Ocean City Ditty," the
CD single is now available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/oho4
(and, if
you're in town, at Trax On Wax on Frederick Rd. in Catonsville, MD)
My latest solo release, '2014', can be downloaded digitally at:
(or you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/rayjozwiak4)
Many Christian ministers do not share things they learned in the seminary about the 'resurrection' passages in the new testament of the Christian bible during their Easter Sunday sermons. Nor will they share this information on any other of the 52 Sundays of the year. As a result, some members of the congregation will continue to read the Matthew resurrection story uncritically as factual history. Conversely, others will us the story to reconfirm their skepticism about the truth in Christian Faith. Then, there will be those who truly want to believe in something, but are left on their own to figure out what truth and value there may be in the Christian Gospel.
When the four canonical resurrection accounts (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) are compared side by side they cannot be reasonably reconciled. Nor can any of the versions of the story be connected to any eye witnesses. The Matthew account was written at least 50-60 years after the death of Jesus. But no one can doubt that within a few years a rapidly growing number of people believed that this man, Jesus, was raised from the dead.
Did Jesus come back from the dead in real flesh and blood as one could be led to believe from the the resurrection accounts? These accounts were written by devout and believing followers who claimed Jesus as their Lord. But it was recorded in a time tested and honored literary tool widely practiced at that time and place. Technically, mythology is any story or report in which a god is the primary actor. Mythology will always defy historical analysis.
Truth, value? Yes. History? No!
(Thanks to both The Rev. Howard Bess, a retired American Baptist minister, who lives in Palmer, Alaska. His email address is hdbss@mtaonline.net) and to John Shelby Spong, retired American Episcopal bishop, religion commentator and author. He calls for a fundamental rethinking of Christian belief away from theism and traditional doctrines. https://johnshelbyspong.com/ )
OHO's
"Ocean City Ditty," the
CD single is now available at http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/oho4
(and, if
you're in town, at Trax On Wax on Frederick Rd. in Catonsville, MD)
My latest solo release, '2014', can be digitally downloaded at:
(or you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/rayjozwiak4)
(from Wolfgang Mieder)
". . . This proverb certainly belongs to one of the most commonly used proverbs
in the English language. This should not be surprising since it
expresses the only too human idea of discontent, envy, and jealousy in a
metaphor which is easily understood. Interestingly enough, the proverb
is also literally true as has been demonstrated by James Pomerantz in a
scientific article on "'The Grass is always Greener': An Ecological
Analysis of an Old Aphorism" (1983).3 This scholar proves that optical
and perceptual laws alone will make the grass at a distance look greener
to the human eye than the blades of grass perpendicular to the ground.
The "truth" of this metaphorical proverb can, of course, also be
observed often enough in the countryside when a cow or a horse is trying
to get at that juicy green grass just on the other side of the fence.
And since people are equally dissatisfied with their lot in life, it
should not surprise anyone that a modern psychologist has spoken of "the
'greener grass' phenomenon"4 by which modern individuals continually
evaluate supposedly better alternatives for themselves.
The proverb thus expresses a basic behavioral truth in a rather
universal metaphor - after all, grass and fences aren't exactly anything
new. This should imply that the proverb belongs to those ancient bits
of wisdom that everybody knows, but when one consults the standard
paremiographical works, it comes as quite a surprise to see that the
earliest recorded reference stems from 1957! This appears absurd, and
there are bound to be native American speakers who will instantly claim
that they have heard or even used this proverb long before the 1950's.
But that claim needs to be proven in light of what Archer Taylor has
called the apparent "incompleteness of collections of proverbs". The
following remarks will present a few precursors to this proverb as well
as some synchronic variants, and it will be established that the "grass
is always greener" proverb is at least a bit older than proverb
collections would have us believe. In addition to tracing the
lexicographical history of the proverb it will also be studied in its
traditional and innovative use as the title of novels, plays, and
magazine or newspaper articles. Its iconographic depiction in cartoons,
caricatures, comic strips, postcards, and photographs will also be
analyzed with a special emphasis on modern parodies. . ."
