Posts
All Comments
"You can only be young once but you can be immature forever."
Wise words from Dave Barry, an American humourist, however I think his next bit of advice is more practical:
"Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night."
Most of the chiasmus quotes I post are word chiasmus, that is, the swapping of words in the sequence, a to b, b to a. Although chiasmus quotes (or chiasm as some people refer to it) can also be the swapping of ideas (not just single words), here is a special treat – a double word chiasmus. Enjoy.
"Painting is poetry that is seen rather than felt,
and poetry is painting that is felt rather than seen."
Leonardo Da Vinci
(Click here to see previous chiasmus posts)
This is as close as it comes to an implied visual chiasmus and I like it.
(Click here to read previous chiasmus posts)
The internet is wonderful for the way in which a topic like Christmas and the traditions of Christmas can be discussed by religious and secular fruitcakes alike (I’ll let you decide from my recent series on Christmas myths which category I fall into). But apart from the general discussion, I also love the debate, such as when newspapers or websites have forums in which the public can comment or criticise, question or query. I love following the threads between different people, including the tolerance displayed by some, and the bickering engaged in by others. However most of all I love the sarcasm and the silliness – here is one of my favourite comments from a forum which had a few hundred comments arguing for and against the idea of Christmas:
“Please put an end to all this religious claptrap. This really is not a good time for it. It's Christmas for gods' sake!”
Whenever I hear about “the true spirit of Christmas” I always feel a little bit confused or left out, as I really have no idea what the true spirit of Christmas is. It is usually parroted by anti-materialists or people who don’t like Santa or anyone who wants to rant about how the big department stores have taken over Christmas and turned it into just one big gift giving party. Well, this is perhaps what I think is the biggest myth of all: that Christmas is not about gift giving.
If it’s one thing that Christmas is about, it’s gift giving. In fact the ultimate gift was given on the very first Christmas when God gave his son to the world (and in so doing gave the world to his son). And if the only thing people (whether Christian or non-Christian) associate with Christmas is gift-giving and generosity at least it’s better than associating Christmas with not giving gifts and stinginess. But Christians recognise (or should recognise) that the whole caper of being generous and gift-giving is but a small symbol of God’s generosity and God’s ultimate gift – Jesus (which can also be described as the incarnation or the word become flesh if you want to use some religious jargon).
Because Christians are not just celebrating the birth of a baby, but they are celebrating the appearing of the grace of God, the forgiveness of sins, and the free gift from God (to use some more jargon), which Christians say ultimately comes through the person of Jesus. Or as the bible more eloquently puts it in the book of Isaiah Chapter 9 verse 6 (and which is famously sung about in Handel’s messiah), we are celebrating:
For unto us a child is born,
Unto us a son is given.
Every Christmas we hear stories and sing songs about the three wise men. They came from the east to Jerusalem. They visited baby Jesus in Bethlehem. They wore pointy hats and walked in single file and best of all came bearing gifts: gold, frankincense and myrrh. Now while I’m sure you all have a picture in your heads (as I do), the bible doesn’t actually portray it this way. In fact the bible doesn’t portray it in any way, but simply talks about the ‘Magi’ from the east, which has traditionally been translated as the three wise men.
But interestingly enough there is no evidence to suggest that there were three, or only three (the basis for this assumption is that because there were three gifts there must have been three people). There is no evidence that they were wise, and in fact in my view it doesn’t seem too bright to go wandering around Israel, at night, following a star that’s not moving. And there’s no evidence that they were men (although it’s assumed as they had been consulting King Herod they must have been men).
So as sad as it is for me to label it as thus, without any further evidence I have no choice: the three wise men are most probably a myth.
There is an idea floating around that Mary, after the miraculous conception of Jesus, remained a virgin for the rest of her life. As mentioned in a previous post about the virgin birth, the bible talks about how Joseph had no union with Mary until after she gave birth to a son. However, there is nothing in the text that suggests that Joseph did not have a normal ‘union’ with Mary after this birth. Further to this, the bible also talks of Jesus’ siblings without reference to any further miraculous conceptions. See for example in the gospel of Matthew at Chapter 13 verse 54 where his brothers are named and his sisters are mentioned when others are questioning the teaching of Jesus:
“‘Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?’ they asked. ‘Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?’”
Apart from the extreme comparisons these younger siblings must have endured (“James, stop doing that, why can’t be you more like your older brother Jesus who by the time he was your age was already conversing with the rabbis, feeding the hungry and healing the sick, and you can’t even keep your bedroom tidy”), my own opinion is that any suggestion that Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life is another myth, not directly associated with Christmas, but almost certainly arising out of the Christmas story.
Dr Greg Clarke has also written an article on the myth of baby Jesus for the ABC website (Click here to read Sweet Baby Jesus had a beard) . It is somewhat similar to what I wrote below however it appears more thoughtful, theological, intellectual and better, but please don't let this stop you reading both of them.
Another myth that has developed, and perhaps most because of the song “Away in a Manger”, is that as a baby, Jesus never wept (remember the lines … “no crying he makes” as he “lay down his sweet head”).
On what basis is there for saying that Jesus was a tear-free baby. While I don’t deny the possibility that it is true, the story from the bible is silent as to whether baby Jesus was a bawler or not. However, my main problem with the idea that as a baby Jesus never cried is that at some point during his childhood (or perhaps even in adulthood) he developed the ability. In the gospel of John at Chapter 11, verse 35, it states, in what is perhaps the shortest sentence in the bible, that “Jesus wept” after seeing and hearing about the death of Lazarus. (He also wept upon seeing Jerusalem in the gospel of Luke Chapter 19 verse 41)
Without intending on being sacrilegious or blasphemous, if Jesus was fully human, then it would follow that as a baby he would have been just as dependent as every other baby that has ever existed or will ever exist on those around him for feeding, comforting, cleaning, nourishing and nurturing. I just cannot believe and nor does it make any sense that Jesus cried like a baby as an adult and lived like an adult as a baby and this idea is, in my opinion, another Christmas myth.
Probably one of the most controversial aspects of the biblical story of Christmas is the conception of Jesus. The story goes that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived and that it was in fact a miraculous conception with God as the father. This has been the cause of endless jokes about God and Mary and Joseph and sex, some of which are quite funny, some of them not so funny.
But a myth has come about that somehow Mary wasn’t a ‘virgin’ and that she was in fact just a ‘young woman’. Despite knowing very little about Hebrew and Ancient Greek (the languages of the Old and New Testament) I am informed that in both of these languages the word for ‘virgin’ is the same or very similar to the word for ‘young women’. Some therefore say that a simple mistranslation explains away the idea of a virgin birth. But even if this translation of ‘young woman’ is correct it does not explain a lot of the surrounding commentary in the rest of the story. The gospel of Matthew Chapter 1 verse 18 reads:
“This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.”
And later in the same chapter referring to Joseph it states:
“But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”
Neither verse actually deals with the virgin / young woman translation problem: the texts simply state that before Mary and Joseph ‘came together’ or had ‘union’ she was pregnant.
But even where the translation swap could be used it is hard to reconcile, such as in Luke Chapter 1 verse 34 where Mary is told by an angel that she is pregnant and she replies:
“How will this be, since I am a virgin?”
It does not make sense for someone to doubt their pregnancy on the basis of being a young woman; it does however on the basis of being a virgin.
I am happy for people to ridicule the whole story of the birth of Jesus, or to suggest that the biblical story is not true or completely false, or that Jesus, whoever he was, had one mother/father, many mothers/fathers or no mother/father at all. However on a purely textual level we get four (if not more) bits of information: that Jesus was born in Bethlehem; to a woman; who had the name Mary; and was a virgin. Again from a purely textual level, to accept one of these would mean to accept all of them. The fact that many people reject the last of these, in my opinion, reveals more than anything the preconceptions (pardon the pun) that people have about whether virgin births are or are not possible. Again while the entire text may be wrong, the text itself does not allow anything other than a virgin birth and the idea that Mary was simply and only a ‘young woman’ from the text is a myth.
As it’s the season of greetings, I thought I would greet everyone not with any particular season, but with a big Merry Christmas. I really love this time of year, as all sorts of wonderful, crazy, enjoyable, and ridiculous things happen, mainly because wonderful, crazy, enjoyable and ridiculous things happened last year and that’s just part of what we all do around Christmas time and the end of the year. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for Christmas traditions, family traditions, work traditions and even most cultural traditions, but because it’s that time of year, I have decided (and wanted to let all my fans know - yes both of you) that I am going to write a series of posts on a few of the traditions and myths that have grown up around Christmas. My posts and comments are not necessarily going to be theological or intellectual or even that original, they are just going to be a bit of a rant about some of the various myths that I have at some stage believed or myths that other people believe.
Now before you stop reading, don’t worry, this is not going to be an anti-shopping anti-commercialisation tirade, or a series of posts about finding the “true spirit of Christmas”, (whatever that is). Nor will it be a extreme anti-Santa crusade or in fact anti-Christmas anything, it will simply be a look at the Christmas story as taken from the bible and a comparison to some of the traditional (or not so traditional) claims about what Christmas is or should be.
It will assume some basic knowledge of the Christmas story, so for anyone interested, you can read about it here in the gospel of Matthew or here in the gospel of Luke. You don’t have to read these passages, but for Christians it will be a great reminder of what you believe, and for non-Christians a great reminder of what you don’t believe.
But regardless of whether this is the only post you read in this series, (or even if you’re not reading this at all), I just wanted to again wish everyone a very Merry Christmas and a season of great greetings.
I have recently started reading some great wit and wordplay by George Carlin, (an all-American comedy superstar, who I had never heard of before, except after I had heard of him). Apart from a lot of the usual observational humour, he has some great unanswered questions – here are three:
"Is there another word for synonym?"
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"
"What was the best thing before sliced bread?"
Some blogs are intellectual, theological, rational, or analytical. Other blogs are personal, emotional, irrational or individual.
The following quote perfectly sums up what I am trying to do with my blog:
I was recently overseas in a country other than America and I came into possession of a two dollar American bill. For some this will mean nothing but for others it will be of surprise: “A two dollar bill – do they exist?”
Well that was my initial reaction, followed quickly by the sneaking suspicion that I was getting ripped off. My next reaction was, well if it is a forgery, it would be pretty cool to have it – so I kept it and here are two pictures of it.
To finish the story (as gripping and exciting as it is), when I got home I looked it up on the font of all knowledge, wikipedia, and found that they are actually legitimate American currency. But I also discovered that they are quite rare, and not generally used, or in circulation (wikipedia also told me that most cash registers do not have a space for them, which gives you an indication of how much they are used, or how stupid the people who design cash registers are).
As I can already feel the ripples of excitement and joy that there is now one of them Australia, I am willing to organise a viewing day. For anyone interested please register at www.twodollarbillviewingdayextravaganza.chanceofalifetime.com and sit by your computer for a return email saying that you have now entered into a draw to win tickets. Unfortunately the viewing will be limited to ten people, but the first two drawn out will also get the special bonus of holding it.
I don’t normally get Leunig cartoons. Perhaps I’m thick but I often finish looking at them quite confused. And to make things worse, sometimes people tell me that not getting them is actually getting them and that makes me even more confused. But this one I get and more interestingly it is a chiasmus on the words glass and ice. Enjoy.
Click here to view previous chiasmus posts
A number of years ago a friend told me a joke that I have never been able to work out. He told me that the word gullible was not in the dictionary.
Well I went and looked it up, and it was in the dictionary. So I went back to my friend, and I said “Hey, you said that the word gullible is not in the dictionary, but it is”. My friend then told me that I had misheard him and that the word gullible was in the dictionary, but because it is not actually an English word it was not in the Oxford English dictionary.
Well I went and looked up the Oxford English dictionary and it was there as well. So I went back to my friend and I said “Hey, you said that the word gullible was not in the Oxford English dictionary, but it is”. My friend then told me that I had misheard him and that it was in the dictionary and that it was an English word but because of complications with the word origin they had to change the spelling of the word gullible.
Well I went and looked up the dictionary again and the spelling hadn’t changed at all. So I went back to my friend, and I said “Hey, you said that they had changed the spelling of the word gullible, but they haven’t”. My friend then told me that I had misheard him, and that it was in the dictionary, it was an English word and it was the same spelling, but they were thinking of taking it out of the dictionary sometime soon.
Well I have been checking the dictionary ever since, including each and every new dictionary I see or buy, and it is still there, the same word, the same spelling. I have never found any of this funny, but my friend laughs every time it is mentioned. Can anyone explain the joke to me?
Not quite sure where this comes from, but I like it:
"Tell your boss the truth, and the truth shall set you free."
Working in criminal law is often depressing for a whole range of reasons, but every now and then there is a chance for a chuckle. A colleague of mine recently found a Court Attendance Notice (the thing police use to charge people with specific offences) for a charge of “possession of a prohibited rug”. The charge read that so and so on such and such date at main street anytown “did have in his possession a prohibited rug, namely 46 grams of cannabis”.
I knew they made clothes out of it, but it seems they have now moved on to the supply, cultivation and manufacture of rugs. So you heard it here first, and you will now know what the authorities are up to this Christmas, if you see the following signs all around Sydney:
“Police are now targeting carpets, mats, runners and other assorted floor coverings”
I don’t normally read the Economist Magazine, for a whole range of reasons including time, money, energy, degree of difficulty (I’ve never studied commerce), and also because I’m not much of a magazine person. But whenever I do read it, I enjoy it. I enjoy the reporting, and the coverage of issues, but most of all I enjoy the quality of writing.
For example, here is another chiasmus , perfectly intertwined in an article about Barrack Obama. The journalist is commenting on the United States need for someone to rescue the world economy, tackle climate change, reform global institutions, and above all revive America itself, and how it’s hardly the agenda Obama would have chosen for himself:
“But a new president cannot pick the place his story starts. ‘You may not be interested in war,’ Trotsky once said, ‘but war is interested in you.’ Thanks to the legacy bequeathed by Osama bin Laden and George Bush, Mr Obama will begin his term as a war president, one who has promised to end the war in Iraq but to win the one in Afghanistan. These, no less than digging America out of recession, will be preoccupations from day one."
(click here to read a previous chiasmus post)
Type of Business – Fishing store
Name of Business – “Oh my Cod baits and tackle”
Type of Business – Renovating essentials, including paints, paint equipment and other hardware essentials
Name of Business – “Oh what a ceiling interior decorators”
Type of Business – Buttons and beads store
Name of Business – “Just Bead it”
Type of Business – Art supply store selling pencils, paints, paper and canvas
Name of Business – “Kiss my Art supplies”
Type of Business – Diamond Jewellers selling gold, silver and platinum rings
Name of Business – “Finger lookin’ good Jewellery store”
Over the years I’ve had numerous friends and various family members start up a variety of businesses in a number of fields. But no matter who starts them, or what they are trying to sell, I always try to get involved in the naming process. Now I will be the first to admit that some of the names I have suggested haven’t been very good, but, in my humble opinion, some of them have and I thought that others may be interested to hear about my Top 5 suggestions for business names that have never been.
In releasing these names into the public domain I understand that I lose all rights and claims to the names, but even if I don’t lose all said exclusive privileges to such names, as long as at least one of them brings one smile to just one person’s face, then it has all been worthwhile. Well not really, but if anyone is actually thinking of starting up any of these types of businesses, please feel free to use my suggestions. The only thing I ask is that if you ever become famous enough to have a history page on a website of your newfound business venture, please reference me as the creator of the name (The unlikeliness of this will be quite apparent after having read through list of names).
To avoid the groans and moans, the mocking and the spitting, I will be listing them one per day for the next 5 days (I’ve also had medical advice that it would not be healthy for others to read them all at once). So sorry to disappoint you, but tune in tomorrow for Number 5 of my Top 5 business names that never were.
© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
