The Mystery of the Fig Tree
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
										Recommended publications
									
								- 
												  Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit Kimberley JChimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit Kimberley J. Hockings1*, Tatyana Humle2, James R. Anderson1, Dora Biro3, Claudia Sousa4, Gaku Ohashi5, Tetsuro Matsuzawa5 1 Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, 2 Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America, 3 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 4 Department of Anthropology, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal, 5 Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan The sharing of wild plant foods is infrequent in chimpanzees, but in chimpanzee communities that engage in hunting, meat is frequently used as a ‘social tool’ for nurturing alliances and social bonds. Here we report the only recorded example of regular sharing of plant foods by unrelated, non-provisioned wild chimpanzees, and the contexts in which these sharing behaviours occur. From direct observations, adult chimpanzees at Bossou (Republic of Guinea, West Africa) very rarely transferred wild plant foods. In contrast, they shared cultivated plant foods much more frequently (58 out of 59 food sharing events). Sharing primarily consists of adult males allowing reproductively cycling females to take food that they possess. We propose that hypotheses focussing on ‘food-for-sex and -grooming’ and ‘showing-off’ strategies plausibly account for observed sharing behaviours. A changing human-dominated landscape presents chimpanzees with fresh challenges, and our observations suggest that crop-raiding provides adult male chimpanzees at Bossou with highly desirable food commodities that may be traded for other currencies. Citation: Hockings KJ, Humle T, Anderson JR, Biro D, Sousa C, et al (2007) Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit. PLoS ONE 2(9): e886.
- 
												  Hawthorne AnalysisI was left puzzled from our discussion on Wednesday about the metaphor surrounding Rappaccini's Daughter and the Adam and Eve Garden of Eden story. Olga and Lindsay both asserted that Hawthorne's style is to construct blatant and solid-to-a-fault metaphors, and I agree with that conclusion. So if that is true, then how come we had such a difficult time in class coming to a consensus on the roles from Rappaccini's Daughter within the analogy? I had my own opinions on the content of the metaphor and will clarify them here. Adam is a reasonable place to begin: Adam is the original figure of good and of humanity. God brings him into the world and sets him in a good situation for him to be happy. Later, Adam is given a companion whom he loves and cherishes, but who ultimately gives him a gift (as she sees it) that is actually detrimental to him. Giovanni seems to be the Adam within Hawthorne's story - he comes into Padua innocent and bright, young and beautiful, and is situated in a comfortable condition: the apartment and university. However, he is lonely and seeks companionship in Beatrice. Beatrice is the Eve because she is the companion of Giovanni, the one who is his first friend in the world of Padua. She also is the one who gives him a gift which she feels is agreeable. Just as Eve innocently gives Adam the apple, Beatrice gives Giovanni the poisonous cloud and lets it permeate his being. The other clear analogy is the garden.
- 
												  How Can Original Sin Be Inherited?DEAR FATHER KERPER Michelangelo, The Fall and Expulsion from Garden of Eden. Web Gallery of Art sinned against obedience. But this act How can original represents much more: they actually rejected friendship with God and, even worse, attempted to supplant God as God. sin be inherited? To see this more clearly, we must rewind the Genesis tape back to chapter ear Father Kerper: I’ve always had a huge 1. Here we find that God had created problem with original sin. It seems so unfair. I can the first human beings “in the image of God.” (Genesis 1:27) As such, they understand punishing someone who has broken a immediately enjoyed friendship and law. That’s perfectly just. But why should someone even kinship with God, who had Dwho’s done nothing wrong get punished for what someone else lovingly created them so that they could share everything with Him. did millions of years ago? Though Adam and Eve had everything that human beings could Many people share your understandable In the case of speeding, the possibly enjoy, the serpent tempted reaction against the doctrine of original punishment – say a $200 ticket – is them to seek even more. Recall the sin. As you’ve expressed so well, it does always imposed directly on the specific serpent’s words to Eve: “God knows in indeed seem to violate the basic norms of person who committed an isolated fact that the day you eat it [the forbidden fairness. But it really doesn’t. How so? illegal act. Moreover, the punishment is fruit] your eyes will be opened and you To overcome this charge of unfairness, designed to prevent dangerous and illegal will be like gods.” (Genesis 3:5) we must do two things: first, reconsider behavior by creating terribly unpleasant By eating the forbidden fruit, Adam the meaning of punishment; and second, consequences, namely costly fines and and Eve attempted to seize equality rediscover the social nature – and social eventually the loss of one’s license.
- 
												  Chaos and Order, Order and Chaos: the Creation Story As the Story of Human CommunityChaos and Order, Order and Chaos: The Creation Story as the Story of Human Community James E. Faulconer Extended prolegomenon Along with a number of other contemporary scholars, Walter Brueggemann has asked us to remember that God speaks to us in scripture most often through narrative and storytelling rather than systematic theological exposition. Speaking of the rst chapters of Genesis, he makes the following observation: The story is not explained. It is simply left there with the listening community free to take what can be heard. There is, of course, talk here of sin and evil and death. But it is understated talk. The stakes are too high for reduction to propositions. The story does not want to aid our theologizing. It wants, rather, to catch us in our living. It will permit no escape into theology.1 As Brueggemann says, the story is both concrete and imaginatively open-ended, allowing us the freedom to consider the variety of ways in which present events and those of the story may overlap.2 Scripture calls for a different kind of reading than what we use for a modern history, philosophy, or theology text. I will try to take the substance of Brueggemann’s warning to heart and read scripture differently than I would read a theology text. And I certainly hope not to read it merely as an aid to theologizing. Nevertheless, I will be doing scriptural theology. But I do so precisely because I think that is a kind of theology that can “catch us in our living” by helping us to read differently than we previously have.
- 
												  The Biblical Metanarrative #1: Creation and RebellionBethel School of Discipleship – Year 2 The Biblical Metanarrative #1: Creation and Rebellion COURSE OVERVIEW This course is a brief overview of the great story of God and his purpose for humanity, also known as the biblical metanarrative. This story consists primarily of four major elements: God’s creation of the world and humanity Humanity’s rebellion against God God’s unfolding plan of redemption to restore his creation God’s consummation of his redemptive plan The more we understand God’s great story, the biblical metanarrative, the more we are able to attach real meaning to our own lives. God’s story frames our own stories. IMAGE OF GOD 1. Humans were created in the image of God. Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26–27, ESV) 2. The Hebrew word translated “image” is usually translated “idol,” as in the statues set up in pagan temples to represent various deities; (see Nu 33:52; 2 Kg 11:18; 2 Ch 23:17; Ez 7:20; 16:17; Am 5:26). When this word was used in Genesis 1 to describe the creation of humans, it necessarily would have been understood by the Israelites in their context. Its meaning in the ancient Near East (ANE) involved concepts already associated with the images of deities. Divine images in the ANE were believed to be: . A manifestation of the divine presence and glory .
- 
												  The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: an Inquiry Into the Legal History of American Marijuana ProhibitionVIRGINIA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 56 OCTOBER 1970 NUMBER 6 THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE: AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL HISTORY OF AMERICAN MARIJUANA PROHIBITION Richard ]. Bonnie* & Cbarles H. Whitebread, Il** Mr. Snell. What is the bill? Mr. Rayburn. It has something to do with something that is called marihuana. I believe it is a narcotic of some kind. Colloquy on the House floor prior to passage of the Marihuana Tax Act. • Assistant Professor of Law, University of Virginia. B.A., 1966, Johns Hopkins University; LL.B., 1969, University of Virginia . •• Assistant Professor of Law, University of Virginia. A.B., 1965, Princeton Uni versity; LL.B., 1968, Yale University. We wish to express our sincere appreciation to the students who assisted us in the preparation of the tables at Appendix A. Because the drug statutes of the several states are particularly confusing and difficult to find, and because so many jurisdictions have recently changed their drug laws, the preparation of the chart required long, tedious work which so many were kind enough to perform. To them, our most sincere thanks. We should like to thank especially Michael A. Cohen, John F. Kuether, W. Tracey Shaw, Alan K. Smith, and Allan J. Tanenbaum, all students at the University of Vir ginia School of Law, whose research assistance and tireless effort were invaluable. \Ve are particularly indebted to Professor Jerry Mandel who supplied us with much of the raw data used in the historical case studies in this Article. In his excel lent article on drug statistics in the Stanford Law Review, Problems 'With Official Drug Statistics, 2] STAN.
- 
												  The Challenges to Islam from Scientific Views AO1The challenges to Islam from scientific views AO1 The compatibility of Islam with scientific theories The key difference between Islam and science is that Muslims believe that Allah created the universe as part of his divine master plan. The Big Bang and other scientific theories of the creation of the universe suggest how matter could come together and split apart without the need to refer to a first cause. However, whether it is the Big Bang or one of the other theories, Muslims believe that God is at work in the creation constantly. The Qur’an seems to agree that change happened gradually; that planets moved apart; that life then came into being but it is the reason behind such changes that Muslims see as Allah as they argue that Allah creates the forces to control the universe, and in that way the events described by modern scientists in their version of creation can be accepted. Many Muslim philosophers such as Al-Biruni saw evidence in the world that pointed to Allah as a creator and the first cause. They also argued that the universe was created within time. Medieval philosophers used reason to analyse what they saw and tried to make sense of creation just like a scientist might do today. This scientific method has been used to show that there is beauty and meaning in the universe and a power behind it all. However, the creation of humanity brings in one of the most difficult and controversial of scientific theories for a Muslim: evolution. Just as with other religious believers from different religious traditions, many Muslims just reject outright the theory of evolution and accept that if Allah is ‘God’ then anything is possible.
- 
												  Evangelion Mythos and the Plot You Thought the Show Forgot! Anime Is Lit Podcast! Twitter: @Animeislitpod! What This Panel Will BeEvangelion Mythos and the Plot You Thought the Show Forgot! Anime Is Lit Podcast! Twitter: @animeislitpod! What this panel will be... Part 1.0! • Adam and Lilith! • Human Instrumentality! • The Impacts! • Q&A! . Part 2.0! • Symbols! • Tracking Shinji’s journey! • The psychological/thematic thread of the story and how it connects to the external narrative! • Q&A! . Part 1.0 + 2.0! • Extras! What this panel will not be... Exclusively memes! No need for bibles... What’s included: A Lot.! What it means: Not much.! Religious symbolism Assistant Director Kazuya Tsurumaki on religious symbolism in NGE:! “Because Christianity is an uncommon religion in Japan we thought it would be mysterious. None of the staff who worked on Eva are Christians. There is no actual Christian meaning to the show, we just thought the visual symbols of Christianity look cool...”! http://web.archive.org/web/20020622231224/http://www.akadot.com/article/ article-tsurumaki2.html! Anno:! “I am not familiar with many things in Christianity, and I have no intention of approaching it or criticizing it either.”! http://www.gwern.net/docs/eva/1997-animeland-may-hideakianno-interview- english! Lilith! Adam! . Seed of Humanity! . Seed of the Angels! . DNA -> Unit-01! . DNA -> All other EVAs! . Kept in Terminal Dogma! . Kept in Gendo’s Suitcase! . Soul -> Rei! . Soul -> Kaworu! . Bleeds LCL! . Everyone mistakes Lilith for Adam ! • Confusing af! 01!232!-F@'+ 01!232IJ!+28@KL@M(2CD*= I$N/672 8!"@$N/672</75F)(2 <7"62807/$#-(= <7"6 <#LO2(721IAJ= >75' %&'&-207-7/2 ?-+&"@29#:7/528>@@'@= 9#:7/52"&@+ 89#:7/5;+2 <7"6= !"#$ TU2 ,D*U2!S0S <&''&7-2 *+( ,-" W1XIY ./" <SVS WI-"27Z2 45$#-2 IP#-F@'&7-Y 8%&'&()2V/@#(@+2 ?-+(/5$@-(#'&(6 %&Z@27-2I#/()= ,DDD2 !S0S >75' *QRR ?-+&"@2A@& A@&2?? A@&2??? %&'&() 0&+L7P@/@"2 8<7"62&-2E@/$&-#'207F$#= <7"6 N62 8['5-F2(72 >@@'@ \77-= 01!232B-&(CD* B-&(CD*2G2>)&-H& ]2?$M#L(+ 01!23245$#-+ 45$#-&(6 .
- 
												  A Sheffield Hallam University ThesisThe influence of complimentary practices and spirituality on British design 1930-2005. NORTH-BATES, Susan T. Available from the Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/20298/ A Sheffield Hallam University thesis This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Please visit http://shura.shu.ac.uk/20298/ and http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html for further details about copyright and re-use permissions. snerneia s i iwb | ~ 2.56s/ 101 895 492 9 REFERENCE ProQuest Number: 10700944 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10700944 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 THE INFLUENCE OF COMPLEMENTARY PRACTICES AND SPIRITUALITY ON BRITISH DESIGN 1930 - 2005 Susan T. North-Bates A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Sheffield Hallam University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2007 Susan T.
- 
												  Cain and Abel — a Lesson in Acceptable WorshipCHRISTADELPHIAN BIBLE MISSION EXPLORING THE BIBLE Lesson 5 CAIN AND ABEL — A LESSON IN ACCEPTABLE WORSHIP Reading: Genesis 4 After Adam and Eve were driven from the garden of Eden, Eve gave birth to two sons, first Cain and then Abel. We are given specific details of the occupations that these two men pursued. Abel was a shepherd, whereas Cain was involved in horticulture (v1-2). Verse 3 “In process of time” The Hebrew expression means “at the end of days”. This tells us that there was a set time for them to present an offering to God in worship. “Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord” No doubt Cain selected for his offering the best fruit he had grown. He was sure that God would accept what he wanted to offer Him. Verse 4 “Abel also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof” These details indicate that not only did Abel understand that he was to offer an animal, but he knew that God had made known the way to worship acceptably. He understood that the fat must be offered, which became a special feature later of the sacrifices under the Law of Moses (Leviticus 3:16-17). Offering the firstborn of the flock was also a feature of that Law (Exodus 13:2,12-15). Evidently these details had been explained to both Cain and Abel. So Abel made his offering because he not only understood what God required, but also wanted to please Him “The Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering” Note the order that is set out here.
- 
												  “The Futility of the Fig Leaf” (GenGood Shepherd Lutheran Church & School 1611 E Main St., Watertown, WI 53094 (920)261-2570 www.goodshepherdwi.org First Sunday in Lent March 9, 2014 “The Futility of the Fig Leaf” (Gen. 3:7) Rev. David K. Groth “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of bother were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths” (Genesis 3:6-7). Collect of the Day O Lord God, You led Your ancient people through the wilderness and brought them to the promised land. Guide the people of Your Church that following our Savior we may walk through the wilderness of this world toward the glory of the world to come; through Jesus Christ, Your Son, our Lord, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen At my former church in St. Louis, we had a school, and a family in the school with three boys. The mom was growing tired of the mad dash to get the boys ready for school. They were not cooperative; they would drag their heels. Finally, the mom had had enough. She told the kids, “Whether you are ready or not, tomorrow we are leaving this house at 7:45.” Sure enough the next morning, three boys were marched into Grace Chapel Lutheran School in their pajamas, to the great amusement of their classmates.
- 
												  Inverse OperationsInverse Operations: Sinful Lust and Salvific Virginity in Central Italian Imagery of the Second Eve by Colleen Bache A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Approved April 2015 by the Graduate Supervisory Committee: Corine Schleif, Chair Anne Derbes Renzo Baldasso ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY May 2015 ABSTRACT Eighteen late medieval central Italian paintings featuring the figure of Eve reclining on the ground beneath the enthroned Virgin have been the center of a decades- long debate among scholars. The dispute centers on whether the imagery depicts Mary as Eve's counterpart in the role of virgin mother or intercessor as the Second Eve. I argue that these two possibilities are not mutually exclusive and instead support one another. I maintain that Eve and Mary appear as opposites according to their contrasting sexual statuses because their antithesis lies at the center of the theology of the Second Eve and the heart of the signification of these paintings. Though frequently overlooked, my exploration of this imagery begins with the attributes used to identify Eve: the woman- headed serpent, the fig, and clothing. Specifically, I analyze the relationship between the particular attributes employed and the theological interpretation of the Fall as a result of concupiscent sexual intercourse. My study then turns to the individual imagery of the central figure of Mary and its reference to church teachings. Appearing amidst allusions to the Annunciation and with emblems of her roles as mother and queen, the Marian imagery in these eighteen paintings specifically reiterates the dogma of her perpetual virginity.