Discussion in 'Community' started by TiniTinyTony, Nov 4, 2013.
50 Shades of Gray
I'll let the Bible argument lapse. Except to say that there are in fact commandments against rape in the Bible; the way I read your post, it kind of intimated that there were none. And the example of offering your daughters up to rapists would be an example of something in the Bible that isn't condoned by the Bible. The guy who did that was no hero and God didn't tell him to do it. And the Bible is much less misogynistic than people say it is: the story of Tamar in Genesis is a wonderful example of the Bible giving us a female character that takes control of her own life and her own sexuality in the midst of a bad situation and, at the end of the day, she's noted as having been "more righteous" than any of the men in the story and she's put in the genealogies, a great honor for a woman in those patriarchal days. Rahab in Joshua too; a woman who makes her living as a prostitute, no less, but enough of a heroine that in the New Testament, she's specifically mentioned in the genealogy of Christ. The Bible is surprisingly interested in tweaking the societal gender inequities than in hewing to them. The whole purpose of the story of Tamar is that women were not treated fairly under the patriarchal society and that it was a good thing when a woman was intelligent enough and clever enough to even the scales, even if she had to break some societal norms and even bend the morality of the Bible. Tamar concludes by having sex out of marriage in order to get what she deserves and the story ends with her basically being applauded for that decision; it contradicts the rules against sex outside of marriage, but it even the score for her and got her what she deserved and, as Reuben says, "She has been more righteous than I." And she isn't slain, as the law seemed to say, or even punished in any way. But all this would have its own thread if I'd just get my Bible project going again. If I ever do, I definitely want you in that thread. Your dissenting opinions will be intelligent and hilarious, I'm sure. Rain check on this whole debate. I can certainly see why you wouldn't recommend the Bible; hopefully, you can see why I would. So, we'll differ.
The Apostle Paul? Yeah, kind of a jerk. I grant you that. As Will Durant said, "He was who he had to be to do what he had to do." He had no bedside manner, if you know what I mean. But any modern reader of the Bible takes cultural considerations into account. Inasmuch as the Bible contains timeless truths, it also contains things that were very specific to their time. At the time, Christianity probably would have crashed and burned if it had flown in the face of social norms to the degree of having women pastors. So, God winked at the cultural ignorance, as the Bible says, gave them a by "Because of the hardness of your hearts," Jesus said. That's why the rules changed during the period of the Bible and why they continue to change (to some degree). God works within the cultures he's given; He's playing a long game. If the current society can't accept women as religious leaders, fine - just teach love and forgiveness and compassion and eventually, they'll get okay with it, get over what the hangups are. The hangups can't survive the love that's the basis of the religion. And even at the time of Paul, women had important roles in the church; we know that, if there weren't women pastors, that there were women prophets/preachers. But no thinking Christian expects perfection of even Bible characters; Paul had his flaws, just like we all do. He was a bit of a chauvinist. Then again, he also wrote that in Christ, "there is no Jew or Greek, no bond or free, no male or female." All are one and equal in Christ. Like Whitman and God and me, he contained multitudes.
Everybody to their taste. I found the Koran pretty unremarkable myself. I suspect translation issues, though you'd think a college class in Comparative Religions would give you a good translation of the Koran to read. I've always wanted to try another translation though.
****. I said I was going to just let the conversation die and then I wrote two huge paragraphs. Darn it. Okay, you take the last word now and we'll call it good.
Most European pagan religions, including the dominant Roman religion of the time, had women priests.
The Scarlet Pimpernel.
As for why....well, because it's a modern take on the quintessential adventure story. It's "King Solomon's Mines" crossed with late-20th century corporate espionage. Though reading it NOW would be a bit of a chuckle when they get to the computer parts, since it was published in the 80s.
At one point, Karen Ross gets frustrated when Peter needs to contact another primatologist using the brand-new Internet. "HOW R U" "SLEPY WHER R U?" "VRNGA" and she complains about how expensive it is to use for idle chit-chat.
(in other news, Michael Crichton accidentally invented SMS lazy-type)
And reading the book will help you appreciate the silly liberties that Frank Marshall took with the film adaptation.
The book is pretty heavy handed and serious (Crichton always had the uncanny ability to turn even the worst death scenes into pure poetry)....and Marshall lightened it up big time.
If I had to recommend one book, it'd have to be Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! It has everything: humor, drama, mystery, even a small bit of adventure.
Plus, given the role Christianity had in raping and murdering so many cultures in Europe that previously celebrated women, and their sudden compliance with these social norms...
Why, the book could be written entirely in the blood it has indirectly shed. If it was, aside from commending its honesty, I would recommend it to other people on the novelty value!
Oh. If it had physics then you might have considered my curiosity piqued.
Slaughterhouse-Five is the only book you need to read.
All's Quiet on the Western Front.
Why on Earth would anyone want to study physics?
It's All Quiet on the Western Front - Im Westen nichts Neues.
@Lord Vivec, I tagged you in a Senate thread and you haven't responded!
I saw, I just couldn't find an opening! And besides, I couldn't think of anything to say that hadn't already been said.
So you agree that there's a danger of science being obscured by Sciencism?
I actually made a post there just now (since you made me feel bad for not posting after you tagged).
Oh good lord I just saw this movie. It truly is wonderful.
Handbook for Chemical Patents, by Edward Thomas.
Totally just read that as Alf's Quiet on the Western Front.
*sigh* I just can't get into reading, anymore.
From when I did read though, I'd highly recommend...I believe it was called Dragon's Eye? Not quite sure, but yeah I think it was Dragon's Eye by Stephen King. It was wow, just wow. An amazing read from start to finish, and the intense climax...simply epic.
after much thought ive decided i resent the question and refuse to answer. i feel this strongly enough that i thought i should post just to say so
that said i think the bible is a decent and sensible answer if you insist on answering such an apocalyptically absurd quesiton, simply because of the influence that the bible has had on other literature, particularly in english, the common tongue of this board. as some of the most strident celebrity atheists have conceded (i believe both hitchens and dawkins, though i believe i heard sam harris disagree with them on this point once) you pretty much have to be familiar with the bible to have any hope of finding your way in the rest of the canon of english literature
I'd have to ask to what end. Some people seem to be assuming that the person you are recommending to only gets to read that one book. If so, I'd go with On The Origin of Species
For pure fun I'd go with The Stand
I love the idea of "The Five People You Meet in Heaven." That almost makes me want to say "Tuesdays with Morrie."
But my first thought remains the same:<i>The Perks of Being a Wallflower</i>
I was thinking the same thing there.
and if ya dont know, now ya know