What specific action(s) should Christians take regarding the Essay - 1

What specific action(s) should Christians take regarding the environment and its preservation or restoration - Essay Example 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 every creeping thing that creepeth upon the Earth† (King James Version Genesis 6:26) One of the priorities that Christians should have within the framework of the way in which they conduct their lives is to be good stewards of the Earth. As good stewards of the Earth it is the responsibility of Christians to make sure that their associations and personal responsibilities are toward an effort to support the creation of the Earth in the manner that God intended. Through looking at the creation story in Genesis, one can clearly see that human kind was given dominion over the Earth. This is further supported in Psalms. However, the concept of dominion often is misunderstood as having the use of the Earth, rather than being held responsible for the way in which the Earth is cared for as a living world. The concept of free will is sometimes considered more the manifestation of God’s will rather than taking responsibility for what has happened to come to terrible outcomes where the Earth is concerned. In looking at the way in which the dominion over the Earth has be en considered, the way in which Christians engage their world should be revised with the attitude that in giving human kind this responsibility, a great trust was handed to human kind. This trust should not be violated by those who believe in Him. When God created the Earth and all of the creations within the realm that is the Earth, the Bible states that man was given dominion over all of His creation. Brown (2011) quotes a portion of Psalms to support the assertion that man was given this power. It states in the Bible that â€Å"You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet† (New King James

Is fair trade fair Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Is fair trade fair - Research Paper Example 1923). Fair Trade organizations works in opposition to the capitalist market system, but works within it (Fair trade critique, 2010). They are backed by consumers and are engaged enthusiastically in supporting producers, raising consciousness and in organizing campaigns for bringing changes in the existing policies and practices of international trade. The producers in the South are often found to be marginalized to a great extent. The Fair Trade Organizations are working to make trading a fair practice which would accommodate the interests of all the trading partners. The concept of fair trade is relatively new and is commanding the interest of many researchers in current times. This paper presents a critical analysis of the concept of fair trade and evaluation of the practice by utilizing the theory of economics. The benefits of fair trade One of the most vital market based mechanisms is the practice of fair trade, which helps in the improvement of the livelihoods of the producers based in the developing countries (Nicholls & Opal, 2005, p. 5). The partnership between the producers and the consumers is targeted to provide a fair share of the benefits of trade to the farm workers and the farmers. This addresses â€Å"the imbalance of power in trading relationships† (What is Fairtrade? 2011). In many countries, particularly in the countries in the South, the farmers and agricultural producers are deprived of the actual yield of profits. Under fair trade the price for the products they sell is set according to the norms of the Fair trade Standards. Involvement of these workers in fair trade helps them to get better deals and also a superior terms of trade (O’Neill, 2007). This in turn provides them with the opportunity to lead a better standard of life and make better plans for their future. Fair trade prices The fair trade price is the minimum price that has to be paid to the fair trade producers. This price acts â€Å"as a safety net† (Wha t is Fairtrade? 2011) for the farmers. It is determined by the regulations mentioned in the Fair trade Standards. This price is associated to all the products that are Fair trade certified. This price is set in such a way that it can cover the â€Å"average costs of sustainable production† (What is Fairtrade? 2011). When the markets fall below the level of sustainable production, the farmers obtain a meager price for their produces; the fair trade prices are designed to safeguard the interests of the vulnerable producers. Sometimes the prices are negotiated with the buyers to yield a higher price on the basis of the quality of the products. Classical theory of employment According to the classical school of economics â€Å"the wage is equal to the marginal product of labor† (Keynes, n.d.). This implies that the real wage entitled to an employed person is the minimum amount of remuneration provided to the person to induce him to put the amount of effort or labor that is actually exerted. The wage is equal to the value of output that is foregone when one unit of the labor is removed from the process of production. The classical theory of economics is built under the assumption of the competitive market, in which the amount of labor employed and the amount of wages are determined by the forces of the market. In this context, the disutility

Discrimination and the Arts Essay Example for Free

Discrimination and the Arts Essay 1. W.E.B Du Bois makes a strong and persuasive argument about â€Å"double consciousness† and racial struggle in America. ANSWER THIS QUESTION: Do you agree that â€Å"art†Ã¢â‚¬â€broadly defined—can be an antidote or a form of resistance against certain kinds of discrimination? 2. Take a position on this issue by first exploring at least three of our course texts, starting with Du Bois and leading through several of our other readings (Martin Luther King, Alice Walker, bell hooks, or any of the other writers we’ve read in this unit or the previous unit on disability). IN OTHER WORDS, you must use Du Bois and at least two other authors in Cultural Conversations. Is there, for example, an art to the practice of nonviolence such as King describes, or to the use of language discussed in Linton and Slackjaw? 3. Ultimately, your exploration of these connected ideas should lead to a clear position of your own, and you must demonstrate in this paper that you can synthesize a number of differing ideas in the pursuit of your own argument. We will discuss strategies to do so in class. 4. Provide an example from contemporary culture of people resisting (or not resisting) discrimination. Use this example to demonstrate your position on art as resistance. Consider questions such as: would art have helped the less empowered people fight back? Did art play a part in the arguments against discrimination? In what ways does art address discrimination in your example? You may use print or web sources for this example as long as you document these carefully. In addition, you must define what you mean by â€Å"art† in order to construct a strong argument. 5. Include in your paper an acknowledgement and rebuttal of an opposing or counter-argument. This section of your paper may be short, but it is a vital aspect of your paper, so don’t forget to include it. IN OTHER WORDS, give the other side of your answer to the top question about art as an effective form of resistance and then argue against it. If you answer â€Å"yes,† then say how people could argue â€Å"no† and argue against them. 6. You will need to use at least five sources for this paper: THREE from Cultural Conversations (Du Bois plus two others) and TWO related to your example (they can be nonscholarly). 7. GRADING BASED ON: forming a thesis, showing originality, constructing and organizing your argument, using  textual evidence, showing you understand the main themes of the course/unit, meeting stylistic and grammatical standards, and finding and using sources. 8. Use MLA format and citation style. Also use 1 inch margins and Times New Roman or similar font. No cover page please. Number your pages and include a header with your name and my name on it. Staple your paper. Don’t forget a title. Proofread. W.E.B. Du Bois Marcus Garvey Booker T. Washington Langston Hughes Anna Julia Cooper Frances E.W. Harper Anonymous Reviewer Lifting the Veil of Ignorance, B.T. Washington Memorial at Tuskegee University From Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man (1952): â€Å"Then in my minds eye I see the bronze statue of the college Founder, the cold Father symbol, his hands outstretched in the breathtaking gesture of lifting a veil that flutters in hard, metallic folds above the face of a kneeling slave; and I am standing puzzled, unable to decide whether the veil is really being lifted, or lowered more firmly in place; whether I am witnessing a revelation or a more efficient blinding.† Bob Marley â€Å"Redemption Song† â€Å"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery None but ourselves can free our minds.† Langston Hughes â€Å"I, Too, Sing America† Frances E.W. Harper â€Å"The Burdens of All† From W.E.B. Du Bois’ Criteria of Negro Art: PAGE 160: â€Å"The apostle of beauty thus becomes the apostle of truth and right not by choice but by inner and outer compulsion. Free he is but his freedom is ever bounded by truth and justice; and slavery only dogs him when he is denied the right to tell the truth or recognize an ideal of justice†¦ Thus, all art is propaganda and ever must be, despite the wailing of the purists†¦ I do not care a damn for any art that is not used for propaganda. But I do care when propaganda is confined to one side while the other is stripped and silent.†

Analysis of Traditions Concerning Mosaic Authorship

Analysis of Traditions Concerning Mosaic Authorship Introduction The Christian Holy Bible is not one book, but a library of sixty six books recorded over many centuries. Within its pages are literary genres that include Law, History, Wisdom, Poetry, Gospel, Epistles, Prophecy, and Apocalyptic Literature. The Bible can be likened to other literature in that it is made up of many types or kinds of language, however it can distinguish itself from other books known to man, in that it claims to be a written revelation of mans creator.[1] The Bible as used in Christianity is made up of the Old and New Testaments, these are combined and intended to compliment each other and form the canon of the Christian church. It is the first five books of the Bible and their authorship that will be of concern to this thesis. The first five books of the Bible include Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. These volumes narrate the story of Israel from the creation of the world through the period of the flood and the patriarchs, to the Exodus from Egypt, wanderings in the desert, and the giving of the law at Sinai. The books conclude with Moses farewell to the people of Israel.[2] McDowell and Stewart (1980) assert that, Christianity believes and teaches that the Bible alone is the revealed word of God, it is an anthology composed of His words and deeds; and as a result views itself as Gods word'[3]. McDowell emphasises that evidence for this claim can be found within the Bible itself, he quotes directly from scriptures such as; 2 Peter 1:21[4] and uses clauses like, And God spoke to Moses, as suggested evidence to back up the Bibles claim.[5] The first five books are known by several pseudonyms, some more common than others and often dependent on the religion one follows. Expressions includ e; the Pentateuch, the Five Books of Moses, the Torah and the Book of the Lawfor the purpose of this thesis the scriptures will be referred to as The Pentateuch. The contents of the Pentateuch can be seen as a partly historical, legal and narrative portrayal; the five books cover the history of the chosen people from chronicles concerning the creation of the world to the death of Moses and also enlighten us with the civil and religious legislation of the Israelites during the life of their great lawgiver.[6] This literary account is also a storya story that conveys the history of Israel. Pfeiffer (1957) describes the Old Testament as, the meagre surviving portion of the literature of the Israelites.[7] Therefore the authorship of these works, the time and manner of their origin and historicity are of great importance; the belief of Mosaic authorship or lack of it can affect the building blocks on which religion itself is structured. The books are not just of fundamental importance to one religion but have recognition in othersChristians put their faith in both the Old and New Testaments; whilst Judaism holds the first five books of the Old Te stament as the most important division of their Hebrew canon.[8] Although Islam believes the Quran is Gods last word to the world; it considers the Old and New testaments to also be divinely inspired.[9] The aim, therefore of this dissertation is to provide a critical analysis of traditions that surround Mosaic authorship. It will discuss the debate from its infancy and will pass through, albeit briefly, three centuries, culminating in its relevance and status in the modern world. This work is not an attempt to prove or indeed disprove Mosaic authorship, it is however an endeavour to take a glimpse into the dispute whilst attempting to understand its relevance in an historical, biblical and theological context. This work does not intend to uncover or discover new knowledge per se, but intends to discuss contemporary contributions and hypothesis. Sources to be used and accessed will include primary and secondary sources such as the Bible, journal articles and a myriad of published works scholarly, religious and secular in nature. A historical survey will include a review of relevant literature, some of which is dated, but still relevant in placing the debate in an historical setting. Much of the literature and indeed the hypotheses surrounding Mosaic authorship tend to remain in scholarly and academic distribution, it is within these circles that the primary interest has remained. As we shall see, scriptural translations have been proven to be less than exact and it is this that provides the background for the continuing debate. A breakthrough in authorship identity was put forward in the eighteenth century and came to be known as the Documentary Hypothesis. This hypothesis was and is however, simply a theory of evolution not of man, but of mans recorded dealings with God.[10] Chapter 1 Mosaic Authorship called into question Historical Survey History recognizes that there were a few problems with the traditional view of Moses as author. Walton and Hill (2000) explain that although the early church fathers challenged the integrity and antiquity of the Mosaic Pentateuch their methods were deemed as pre-critical. Furthermore they observe that, it was not until much later, that the Age of Reason spurned an era of critical study of the Bible and allowing traditional understanding of the Old and New Testaments to be questioned'[11] Challenges to Mosaic authorship were often explained as interpretation or the introduction of additional narrative details that did not appear in the text. Other explanations included the fact that Moses was Gods prophet and so was in receipt of His divine word.[12] However as biblical expertise grew so did the challenges and new answers to old questions began to emerge. As early as the eleventh century, allusions and suggestions were being tentatively voiced.[13] Abraham Ibn Ezra, a twelfth century Spanish rabbi held the belief that the language used in several passages of the Pentateuch reflected another time and place than that of Moses, views that he was unwilling to say outright. In references to his own views of the passages he wrote, If you understand, then you will recognise the truthAnd he who understands will keep silent.'[14] In the following centurys scholars such as Bonfils, Tostatus, Bishop of Avila, Andreas Van Maes and Thomas Hobbes put forward their own evaluations that questioned the authorship of the Pentateuch. Their findings ranged from citing a few sentences, to Thomas Hobbes declaration that the majority of the Pentateuch could not have been penned by Moses.[15] In the seventeenth century, Deuteronomy, which reports the death of Moses, and also describes Moses as the most humble man who ever lived'[16] was critically assessed b y Benedict Spinoza, who concluded that, It is clearer than the sun at noon that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses, but by someone who lived long after Moses.[17] Many of these scholars had attempts made on their lives, their works were placed on the Catholic index of Prohibited books or burned; others were arrested and forced to recant their views. The history of this dispute therefore shows that many renowned writers, philosophers and historians succumbed to the enticing plethora of hypothesis concerning Mosaic authorship. Josephus, the Jewish historian, states, He (Moses) also set down in writing the form of their Government, and those lawsthe laws he ordained were such as God suggested to him.[18] When looking more closely at the sacred books of the Jews he further declares: And of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the origins of mankind till his death[19] These words echo down from centuries past, representing the view and opinion of Jewish Scholars in attributing the Pentateuch to Moses. Further along in time, Luthers translations of each of the five books of the Pentateuch are entitled a book of Moses thus showing an acceptance of this belief in the historic Christian Church.[20] Opposing Josephus view and in contrast to Luther, the nineteenth century German critic Hartmann denied Mosaic authorship on the grounds that it was quite literally impossible because writing had not yet been invented. MacDonald (1995), disagrees and asserts that, Archaeological discoveries of the past 100 years have proven once and for all that the art of writing was known not only during Moses day, but also long before Moses came on the scene.'[21] These facts do not help prove or disprove Mosaic authorship, however it does provide us with a time frame within which the debate became anthropomorphized. An historic timeline in this debate is important in that it can be used as a reference point to work forwards or backwards from, particularly as disputes over the chronological timeline concerning events from the Pentateuch remain relevant today. Genesis as the foundation of Israel As the first book of the Pentateuch, Genesis purpose is to tell how and why God came to choose Abrahams family and make a covenant with them. A covenant that is significant in that it is the foundation of Israelite theology and identity.[22] Genesis also introduces us to the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the three patriarchs of the people of Israel. The patriarchal stories depicted in Genesis are important in that they, lent expression to the fundamental importance of the family for all other forms of society in the period when the tribes were developing into a people and state.'[23] However, controversy surrounds them, many Biblical scholars and archaeologists debate about whether or not the Patriarchs actually lived. Placing the Patriarchs on an Old Testament timeline depends closely on ones dating (if any) of the Exodus event.[24] Hendel (2001) believes that every kind of religious literature in the Hebrew Bible celebrates the Exodus as a foundational event; it is seen as the main historical warrant for the religious bond between Yahweh and Israel[25] [26] W. F. Albright was confident that the Exodus was an historical event and assigned a date of ca. 1297 BCE.[27] In comparison the renowned source critic Julius Wellhausen asserted that the Pentateuch conveys no historicity for the Patriarchs but merely reflects patriarchal stories retold in later age. In contrast, Claus Westermann asserts that, Storytelling is the predecessor of all history. [28] He explains further: Storytellers recounted what took place, what they observed, in order to share it with others. The original purpose of the stories was to allow new generations to share in the experiences and knowledge of their ancestors.[29] Many biblical scholars and theologians would agree that Mosaic authorship is relevant, however for others it is seen to be irrelevant and convey a Does it really matter? attitude. Yet there are references made within the Bible itself that attribute the authorship of the Pentateuch to Moses. These are often drawn upon in defence of Mosaic authorshipthere are about two dozen verses in the Hebrew Scriptures and one dozen in the Christian Scriptures which state or strongly imply that Moses was the author. [30] Old and New Testament Scriptures The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is intrinsically connected to the question of Moses as the author or intermediary of Old Testament legislation.[31] A Mosaic link between the Old and New Testaments can be found within the texts themselves. New Testament writers use references and quotes from the Old Testament just as Moses within the Old Testament prophesises of what was to comethus enabling an affiliation of the Old with the New, creating a volume that merges into one complete tome. The books of the Bible can be likened to any group of books that share the same subject; they express a similarity in their subject roots and yet provide a contrast that is inherited from their author. As one writes in the contemporary world ideas and words need to have references to back them up, evidence and proof that others perhaps have considered your own words. The same could therefore be said of the New Testament writers, following the same pattern allow the different expressions of writer s to be expressed. The burden of proof If the authorship of the Pentateuch were ever to be unequivocally disproved the consequences could be devastating for the religions involved, DeHaan (1982) explains, Prove that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch and you prove that Jesus was totally mistaken and not the infallible Son of God he claimed to be. Upon your faith in Moses as the writer of the five books attributed to him rests also your faith in Jesus as the Son of God. You cannot believe in Jesus Christ without believing what Moses wrote.[32] DeHaans view is made clear by this simple paradigm, however, closer inspection of the words and their implied significance opens up a chasm of queries and insinuations that require further investigation. When considering this statement one finds that the overarching subliminal message that appears within the text is the necessity of proof. Fundamentally this is a statement about the assumed relationship between Moses as author of the five books, and Jesus who within the New Testament attributes the Law to Moses. These words resound as a modern day echo of Jesus words as described by New Testament Gospel writer John, For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words? [33] Moreover, in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus makes the following statement; Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfil. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.[34] These words, ascribed to Jesus, show that Jesus himself acknowledges Moses as the author of the Pentateuch. Furthermore He is sending out a strong message by stating that, in not believing what Moses wrote about Him, we will not believe anything He has to say either. What then is the bearing of the words spoken by Jesus upon the question of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch? In the New Testament Jesus references to Moses are ampleMoses commands, Moses said, Moses wroteare all used within its context by the authors of the Gospels. Stevens (1889), an early Old Testament authorship writer, suggests that Jesus speaks of the Pentateuch using popular designations of the time and was not in fact confirming authorship.[35] Chapter 2 Enlightenment and the influence of Source criticism It was not too long ago that Jews and Christians held the universal view that Moses alone wrote the Pentateuch. A delve into the history of the debate shows that although numerous attempts were made to credit or discredit its composition and authorship, Mosaic authorship and its credibility remained stagnant for many years. The authorship debate first became apparent in the aftermath of what is known as the period of enlightenment. The Enlightenment is held to be the source of critical ideas and provided the cultural shift necessary for the emergence of a new confidence in the power of human reason.[36] Immanuel Kant (1784) in his essay What is Enlightenment? simply describes it as freedom to use ones own intelligence.[37] Clarke (1997) describes Kants view of Enlightenment as the point at which a human being recognizes his or her autonomy.[38] Whereas Ames (1925) depicts religion for Kant as being something a man lived and did not merely think about.'[39] Many scientists and religionists alike would gladly accept such a simplification of their problems, [40] nevertheless the Enlightenment period was marked by increasing empiricism, scientific rigor, and reductionism along with increasing questioning of religious orthodoxy.[41] Questions regarding Pentateuchal authorship had led to rumblings and critica l analysis by past Biblical Scholars, however it was French physician Jean Astruc who initiated modern literary or source analysis of the Old Testament.[42] According to Pfeiffer (1957) when the Pentateuch was canonized in 400 BCE, it was firmly believed that Moses was its author.[43] He explains further that Biblical investigations and critical analysis passed through different stages; here he cites Astruc (1753), Geddes (1798) and De Wette (1806) as principle theorists. [44] The Enlightenment thus created a significant shift that resulted in the historical-critical method which suggested that we should accept as true only that which can be empirically proven.[45] As a result by the 19th century, traditional views on Mosaic authorship had ceased to be entertained by mainstream scholars and by the closing decades of the 19th century, a theory by Julius Wellhausen became a theoretical forerunner, with the majority of critics coming to view his theory with accord. Julius Wellhausen In 1895 Julius Wellhausen gave an explanation of Pentateuchal origin, his hypothesis became known as the documentary or JEDP hypothesis.[46] This hypothesis explains that the Pentateuch was compiled from four original source documents—designated as J, E, D, and P. These four documents supposedly were written at different times by different authors, and eventually were compiled into the Pentateuch by a redactor (editor). The J is characterized by its authors use of the divine name Yahweh. Elohim is the divine name that identifies the E or Elohist document. The D, or Deuteronomist, document contained most of the book of Deuteronomy. The last section to be written was the P, or Priestly, document, which would have contained most of the priestly laws. We are told these documents were then redacted (edited) into one work about 300 years later in 200 B.C.[47] Wellhausens timing was perfect, the public were open to new theories as religiosity began to be questioned; textual criticism was able to find ground from which its roots could take hold and grow. Goshen-Gottstein explains, the rise of textual criticism depended on preconditions and on certain attitudes and dispositions, beyond the basic linguistic capabilities.[48] Wellhausen attained his results by a faithful application of the uses of evidence; he assembled relevant facts and built a reasoned construction upon them, this became the characteristic of the subsequent critical movement.[49] Oswald T. Allis (1943) explains Wellhausens method further, The slightest variations in diction, style, viewpoint or subject matter were seized upon as indicative of difference in author, date, and source. The miraculous element is viewed with suspicion and regarded either as evidence of the late date and unreliability of a narrative, or as proof that it represents a primitive and unscientific account of phenomena in which a modern writer would see only the operation of natural processes.[50] The analysis of the written word became paramount in defining Mosaic authorship as well as adding to the longevity of the debate. Hill and Walton (2000) affirm, the multiplicity and complexity of these literary forms that have been directly responsible for the ongoing debate over the composition of the Pentateuch.'[51] Furthermore they argue that the literature of the Pentateuch is considered to be a collection of rich and literary genres that enhance both the artistic nature and key theological themes that unify it.[52] This new modern world saw the naissance of an innovative period of science and technology; this opened the door for a myriad of explanations to be proposed concerning Mosaic authorship. McDowell suggests that the very origin of modern science rests upon the truth of the scripture he goes further to explain that there is a God that created and designed an ordered universe this prompted men like Newton to search for certain scientific laws to explain this order.[53] It can be said then that science and the scriptures do not cancel each other out; they simply look at the world from different perspectives, but are not finally contradictory.[54] Merrill Unger expresses concern about rejecting Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch in favour of the Documentary theory he suggests that conservative scholarship should realise anew the essential unsoundness of critical hypothesis and cease trying to reconcile its potent unbelief with the tenets of historic evangelical Christianity and conservative Judaism'[55] William Henry Green (1895) disagrees with this hypothesis and claims that the books of the bible have nothing to fear from investigations into its genuineness and credibility he goes on to suggest that thorough searching can only result in establishing more firmly the truth of the claims, which the Bible makes for itself, The bible stands upon a rock from which it can never be dislodged. [56] Hill (2000) explains that the source analysis approach, which gained prominence during the nineteenth century, not only affected the way scholars viewed the Pentateuch as a literary composition, but also had far reaching implications for the historicity of the patriarchal narratives. Furthermore he states that, Julius Wellhausen, the most influential of the source critics asserted that the Pentateuch conveys no historicity for the patriarchs, but merely reflects patriarchal stories retold in a later age.'[57] Towards the contemporary world: a look at archaeology Scholarship can sometimes become stagnant, however in the case of Pentateuchal studies the debate between different points of view continues to ebb and flow. As yet, no new consensus has emerged about the composition of the Pentateuch.[58] Publications over the past one hundred years show that many other theories or indeed modifications of theories have arisen. The Wellhausen theory itself has come under much criticism and though it still has its proponents, it is no longer a universal agreement of authority in critical scholarship. The subject then remains an enigma and is no closer to a solution now, than it was when first queried. Yet the debate does continue to thrive, aided because, with the passage of time the earth unleashes its hidden treasures and technological inventions are created that allow us to peel back the centuries and glimpse into the past. Fresh discoveries it seems wield new evidence that scholars pounce upon to argue their case. One area in contemporary society that has emerged in favour of biblical accuracy is the field of archaeology. Archaeology is defined by Muncaster (2000) as the systematic study of things that cultures have left behind.'[59] W. F. Albright the great archaeologist concludes that the past 100 years has seen archaeology verify some of the history contained in the bible, he states: There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition. [60] Finkelstein and Silberman (2002) attest that, Archaeology has helped us to reconstruct the history behind the bible.'[61] More recent publications aim to verify the historicity of the Old Testament using archaeological evidence, Muncaster (2000) suggests that the accuracy of the Old Testament is vital to the Bibles message and that archaeology provides one means of confirming the historical accuracy.[62] To confirm or prove the historical accuracy of the Bible one needs to consider the implications of proof. Does proof relate to disproving the facts of the Bible and the account held within it, does this mean that the words spoken by Jesus in the New Testament and the history of the Israelite nation is condemned to hearsay? Archaeology offers some answers, but is it concrete? Gnuse (1994) expresses the opinion that, Who or what Moses was ultimately is irrelevant; for he stands as a symbol of process. The traditional figure of Moses symbolizes the initiation of the religious journey.[63] McDowell stresses a cautionary note in relation to archaeology, as he says, all too often the phrase Archaeology proves the Bible arises, in answer to this he uses the word prove to stress the interpreters usage that could cause incorrect assumptions, Archaeology cannot prove the Bible, if by that you mean prove it to be inspired and revealed by God. If by prove, one means, Showing some biblical event or passage to be historical. Then it would be a correct usage. [64] The world within which we now live is far removed from the world of Wellhausen and even further removed from the era of scribes and patriarchs. In a time where archaeology has uncovered scripts that peel back time and allow modern technology to wield its powerthere is still no right or wrong answer that appears as a forerunner. Using science and technology as an aid, scholars, theologians and archaeologist are still embroiled in a quest to answer the questions that revolve around Bible authorship. Scrolls retrieved from the caves in Qumran are being drawn on by scholars to provide scriptural evidence and possible explanations of Mosaic authorship. Cook (1994) explains that the Old Testament prophets, Foresaw a golden age for Israel when her various trials, punishments, exiles and tribulations were over'[65] This Golden Age includes the arrival of a messiah one who would reign by peace and blessings of every kind.[66] Verification of these prophecies can be established and linked to M oses; in Deuteronomy Moses speaks of a coming prophet like himself[67]. Further, Isaiah describes the one who brings good news, who proclaims peace, who brings good tidings, who proclaims salvation.'[68] Qumran, harbour of the Dead Sea Scrolls, held within cave four a scroll that refers to Moses as Gods anointed, Strugnell cited in Cook (1994); Cursed is the man who does not arise and observe and do according to all the commandments of the Lord in the mouth of Moses His Anointed One, and to walk after the Lord, the God of our fathers, who commands us from Mount Sinai.[69] Could this then be seen as Proof that Moses was a prophet, an anointed one who prophesized the coming of another like him? A prophet who was himself to foretell all that was to come[70] If so then is this proof that Moses also wrote the Pentateuch? One could argue that if Moses words are proven to be reliable through the fulfilled prophecies within the Bible and the archaeological findings that appear to corroborate them. McDowells admonitory note on archaeological evidence re-surfaces in Bartlett (2002), when he states that, There are still major problems between the relationship of the archaeological findings to the fact and contents of the scrolls. However, he also professes a hope that, subsequent research will throw light on them.'[71] Scholarly differences of opinion are clearly visible as is the interpretation of related scripture. Bernstein (1997) in reviewing Lawrence Schiffmans work, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls points out that the narrative and legal Pentateuchal texts found in the caves, show the array of exegetical methods ready for the Qumran interpreter.'[72] There is no doubt, declares Bernstein, That any reviewer will find one or another chapter of the book deficient from some specific perspective; this will always be the case when a broad synthesis of the Dead Sea Scrolls is written by virtually any scholar, for no one is equally competent in all the complex fields of Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship. What Schiffman has done is to contextualize these texts for interpretation, and that is more important than his particular interpretation of any specific issue. [73] It is this difference in interpretation that allows the debate to continue to thrive. A contemporary scholar in biblical studies, Richard Elliot Friedman equates Mosaic authorship to, a detective story spread across the centuries with investigators uncovering clues to the Bibles origins one by one [74] Furthermore, he states that, There is hardly a biblical scholar in the world who would claim that the Five Books of Moses were written by Moses or by any one person.'[75] And yet Moses is arguably a leading figure in both religion and history, his words are the foundation of faith for over half the earths population.[76] Phillips (2003) clarifies that the three great monotheistic religions of the world have derived from the revealed holy laws of the ancient Israelites. He concurs that Moses God became not only the God of Judaism but of Christianity and Islam.'[77] For the authors of scripture then, history is a theological tool by which God reveals Himself. Archaeology can authenticat e history but it cannot authenticate theology, and from the biblical perspective, history devoid of theology is meaningless.[78] Prophecy The Jewish nation believes that history and prophecy are inextricably intertwined,[79] history was recorded by more than one culture and was therefore documented, however for Israel, prophecy was assurance that the writings were from God.[80] [81] Prophecies detailed in the Old covenant are said to be longer-term prophecies those fulfilled by Jesus in the New Testament and ultimately classed as inspiration from God.[82] McGrath (2007) describes the majority position within Christian theology has, in one hand emphasized the continuity between the two testaments, while on the other noting the distinction between them.'[83] One of the strongest arguments used by adherents to Mosaic authorship, stems from the predictions it makes within its pages about the future. These events are what give Biblical scholars reason to continue their pursuit of Mosaic verification. Of these prophecies one in particular is used to corroborate Mosaic authorship: the advent of an anointed one who was to ar rive in the future. Often when one reads about the Mosaic Pentateuch one can find statements that refer to the infallibility of scripture, in particular with regards to Jesus Christ. Livingston (2004) claims that Christ knew the scriptures thoroughly, even to words and tenses[84] and that Jesus also believed, every word of scripture, the historicity of the Old Testament and that it was spoken by God Himself, thereby affirming that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, even thought the pen was held by men.'[85] Furthermore, Livingston states that, if we are to believe that his life was guided by prophecy, then he was subject to a life that was written for him, does this limit the choices he had to make or was he just Gods tool, there to fulfil Gods plan? However Jesus obeyed Gods word and His authority. He came to do Gods will and in doing so fulfilled Old Testament He fulfilled Old Testament prophecies about Himself.[86] LangMarch (1995) explains that Jesus places a great amount of emphasis on the fulfilment of s cripture; this he maintains confirms its veracity.[87] However this point is one that cannot be overlooked for if Biblical Scholars find the scriptures to be in error then the obvious conclusion would be that Jesus too was in error and could not have been the infallible son of God. Chapter Three Current views and hypothesis Throughout the history of this debate scholars have battled in order to propose their own interpretation of scripture. These battles are still relevant and consume the minds of contemporary scholars. Time, it seems has not diminished the pursuit of truth, contemporary scholars are just as committed in their attempts to solve the authorship problem as their past contemporaries. In the past four decades there have been numerous publications concerning Pentateuchal authorship and views are still divided. P.N. Benware (1993) states that, Moses was the human author of Genesis and the other books of the Pentateuch he adds, These five books of the law were written by Moses alone, with the exception of Deuteronomy 34, which records the death of Moses The Pentateuch, therefore, is an inspired, inerrant, authoritative document written by the man Moses. [88] The authors of the New C

Moll Flanders :: Moll Flanders Essays

George Eliot wrote, "It is never too late to be who you might have been." As I read those words, I was hard pressed to find another who fit them as well as Moll Flanders. Despite circumstance and luck and odds set against her at every turn, this woman refused to bow to the conventional wisdom that normally rules the downtrodden and the dispossessed. And it is in that tenacity of spirit I find Eliot's words ringing true. Moll Flanders born into a world of pad-locked doors and dark menacing corners was destined for greatness simply because she lived it. The story begins as a tale told to an orphan recovered and claimed by Hibble, a man of mystery, dark and wise. The orphan, Flora, has been retrieved by Hibble and is on a journey to America to meet a fate she does not understand. Along the way, Hibble has been instructed to read to her the diary of her mother, Moll Flanders. It is an introduction to a woman who’s soul does not come across well on the written page, but Hibble struggles along, trying to entice the young girl with the memory of an extraordinary friend and confidante. Threats and lectures begin a journey that soon intrigues the young woman on its own merit. Her mother, it would seem, was more than she ever dreamed. And it is in those pages that we find a hero of our own. Moll Flanders, born to a convicted thief, was orphaned the day she was born as the state carried out the sentence of death put upon her mother. Moll landed at the foot of the Church, learning how to read, to pray and to fend off hypocrisy and the groping hand of the priest in the bargain. Leaving the Church in an unorthodox manner, Moll bounced from home to home, finding herself too much for some and too little to ward off others. Along the way, she learned to laugh and to limp because of the kindness and cruelty that abound in our worlds. It was in the kindness that Moll found herself bound in love to an unlikely artist and it was in that union Flora was conceived.

Franklin D. Roosevelt: An Influential Leader Essay -- History Roosevel

Franklin D. Roosevelt: An Influential Leader Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was a man of unusual charm and great optimism, which he was able to communicate to others. He had a broad smile and was a charismatic optimist whose confidence helped sustain the nation through its darkest moments during crisis like the Great Depression and World War II. He became one of the most beloved of U.S. presidents for four terms in office. But beneath his outward friendliness was an inner reserve and an iron will. His admirers emphasized the way in which he met the nation's problems. They praised him for insisting that the federal government must help the underprivileged and that the United States must share in the responsibility for preserving world peace. Franklin Roosevelt made a profound and very important impact upon his times and his policies exerted great influence on the future (Freidel). Assuming the Presidency in 1932, at the depth of the Great Depression, Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. He brought hope to the people when he promised prompt, vigorous action, and asserted in his Inaugural Address, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" (The White House). FDR’s first one hundred days in office were known as "The Hundred Days" (The Great Depression). The main drive of Roosevelt's administration was toward a balance of economic interests. He believed that he should represent all the people--farmers, laborers, and white-collar workers as well as businessmen (The Great Depression). With this in mind, he presented a wide variety of legislation to Congress, which brought relief to the needy and helped improve the economy. This legislation gave authorization to a sweeping program that was designed to bring reform, recovery to business and agriculture, relief to the unemployed and to those in danger of losing farms or homes. "T he Hundred Days" set a new standard for Presidents and members of Congress that followed Roosevelt (The Great Depression). The first order of business for FDR tackled was the banking crisis. Since the start of the Depression, Americans had lost their life’s savings. Roosevelt recognized that if he kept the banks open, panicked depositors would withdraw their money and more banks would fail. FDR declared a â€Å"bank holiday† during which time a hastily prepared emergency banking bill gave the Secretary o... ...pe it needed to revive itself by delivering prompt and vigorous action. Roosevelt held office during two of the greatest crises ever faced by the United States: the Great Depression of the 1930s, followed by World War II. His domestic program, known as the New Deal, introduced far-reaching reforms within the free enterprise system and gave people a new perspective on government. FDR rallied the country after the near disaster of Pearl Harbor, mobilizing over ten million troops. His military and diplomatic skill as the Commander in Chief during World War II, won him an award in the hearts of many Americans. Both in peacetime and in war, his impact on the office of president was enormous, making him one of the most influential leaders in US history. Works Cited American Experience: The Presidents. September 7, 2004, Boorstin, D. J., Kelley, B.M., and Boorstein, R. F., A History of the United States. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2003. 624, 659-60. Freidel, Frank. †Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal.† The New Book of Knowledge. 2004 ed. September 7, 2004, The Great Depression: FDR and the Depression. September 7, 2004, The White House. September 7, 2004,

Living Alone Essay

At some point in our lives we must all grow up. Growing up usually involves moving out on one’s own and beginning one’s journey to adulthood. Amongst the many aspects of becoming an adult, with adulthood often comes living alone. Living alone is not easy but it’s a part of growing up. There are often times in my life that I wish I never had to grow up. To live alone can have both advantages and disadvantages and it isn’t the best decision for everyone. There can be many advantages to living alone. When one lives alone he/she can dictate his/her life as he/she sees fit. One does not have to consider another person’s preferences when it comes to food, chores, nor entertainment. An especially important advantage of living alone is also the fact that you learn independence and responsibility because you must remember about paying bills on time or about doing your own shopping for your own necessities. You learn to take care of yourself and not depend on others to do things for you. Despite the many advantages of living on your own there are still quite a few disadvantages. When you live alone you are actually alone. It can be especially difficult for those whom enjoy a lot of social interaction because quite honestly, living alone gets lonely. Having a place of your own requires a lot of responsibility. When you are on your own you don’t have anyone to help you. Help with chores, cooking, and especially financial needs can definitely be the deal breaker on whether or not one can actually handle living alone. Living alone is not meant for the faint of heart. There are people in society who find it quite difficult to not have companionship. Some people do not want to make any compromise and deliberately choose to live alone. I believe that anyone can adjust without companionship after some time. As a young women living on my own I find it most difficult to maintain a work, school, and social life balance. I have to work often to afford my bills. When I am not working I am attending school. There isn’t much time left for a social life. Truth is living alone is not easy. There are both good and bad sides to being on your own. A person shouldn’t move out on his/her own unless he/she is committed to being responsible. Despite all the good and the bad aspects there is no doubt that one must learn responsibility in order to live alone. One must make sacrifices and prioritize one’s life accordingly. Growing is never going to be easy but it can be worth the entire struggle.