090510 – T5 – Sunday after Indiction

Wendy Shalit’s essays have appeared in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, City Journal and other publications. Her book, A Return to Modesty, was published by Free Press in 1999, and last year was reissued in paperback by Simon & Schuster. This article was excerpted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College. (www.hillsdale.edu)

It is my hope that both men and women, and particularly parents, will take note of this important issue, and provide appropriate direction for their children. There is a reason the Orthodox Tradition prescribes certain practices, regarding modesty and it is pedagogical – to teach about ourselves, the world, and each other.

By Wendy Shalit

This afternoon I was reading a magazine for brides in which a woman had submitted the following question:

“My fiancé wants us to move in together, but I want to wait until we’re married. Am I doing our marriage an injustice?”

The editor responded:

“Your fiancé should understand why you want to wait to share a home. Maybe you’re concerned about losing your identity as an individual. Or maybe you’re concerned about space issues.”

Space issues? Losing her identity? If this woman cared about those things she wouldn’t want to get married in the first place. Her question was a moral one. She wanted to know what would be best for her marriage. And on this – however unbeknownst to the magazine’s new-agey editor – the evidence is in: Couples who live together before marriage are much less likely to get married; and if they do marry, they’re more likely to get divorced. Yet the vocabulary of modesty has largely dropped from our cultural consciousness; when a woman asks a question that necessarily implicates it, we can only mumble about “space issues.”

I first became interested in the subject of modesty for a rather mundane reason – because I didn’t like the bathrooms at Williams College. Like many enlightened colleges and universities these days, Williams houses boys next to girls in its dormitories and then has the students vote by floor on whether their common bathrooms should be coed. It’s all very democratic, but the votes always seem to go in the coed direction because no one wants to be thought a prude. When I objected, I was told by my fellow students that I “must not be comfortable with my body.”

Frankly, I didn’t get that, because I was fine with my body; it was their bodies in such close proximity to mine that I wasn’t thrilled about.

I ended up writing about this experience in Commentary as a kind of therapeutic exercise. But when my article was reprinted in Reader’s Digest, a weird thing happened: I got piles of letters from kids who said, “I thought I was the only one who couldn’t stand these bathrooms.” How could so many people feel they were the “only ones” who believed in privacy and modesty? It was troubling that they were afraid to speak up. When and why, I wondered, did modesty become such a taboo?

Modesty’s Loss, Social Pathology’s Gain

Many of the problems we hear about today – sexual harassment, date rape, young women who suffer from eating disorders and report feeling a lack of control over their bodies – are all connected, I believe, to our culture’s attack on modesty. Listen, first, to the words we use to describe intimacy: what once was called “making love,” and then “having sex,” is now “hooking up” – like airplanes refueling in flight. In this context I was interested to learn, while researching for my book, that the early feminists actually praised modesty as ennobling to society.

Here I’m not just talking about the temperance-movement feminists, who said, “Lips that touch liquor shall never touch mine.” I’m talking about more recent feminists like Simone de Beauvoir, who warned in her book, The Second Sex, that if society trivializes modesty, violence against women would result. And she was right. Since the 1960s, when our cultural arbiters deemed this age-old virtue a “hang-up,” men have grown to expect women to be casual about sex, and women for their part don’t feel they have the right to say “no.” This has brought us all more misery than joy.

On MTV I have seen a 27-year-old woman say she was “sort of glad” that she had herpes, because now she has “an excuse to say ‘no’ to sex.” For her, disease had replaced modesty as the justification for exercising free choice.

When I talk to college students, invariably one will say, “Well, if you want to be modest, be modest. If you want to be promiscuous, be promiscuous. We all have a choice, and that’s the wonderful thing about this society.” But the culture, I tell them, can’t be neutral. Nor is it subtle in its influence on behavior. In fact, culture works more like a Sherman tank. In the end, if it’s not going to value modesty, it will value promiscuity and adultery, and all our lives and marriages will suffer as a result.

Four Myths Exposed

A First step toward reviving respect for modesty in our culture is to strike at the myths that undermine it. Let me touch on four of these.

The first myth is that modesty is Victorian. But what about the story of Rebecca and Isaac? When Rebecca sees Isaac and covers herself, it is not because she is trying to be Victorian. Her modesty was the key to what would bring them together and develop a profound intimacy. When we cover up what is external or superficial – what we all share in common – we send a message that what is most important are our singular hearts and minds. This separates us from the animals, and always did, long before the Victorian era.

The second myth about modesty is that it’s synonymous with prudery. This was the point of the dreadful movie Pleasantville, the premise of which was that nobody in the 1950s had fun or experienced love. It begins in black and white and turns to color only when the kids enlighten their parents about sex. This of course makes no sense on its face: if the parents didn’t know how to do it, then how did all these kids get there in the first place?

But it reflects a common conceit of baby boomers that passion, love and happiness were non-existent until modesty was overcome in the 1960s. In truth, modesty is nearly the opposite of prudery. Paradoxically, prudish people have more in common with the promiscuous. The prudish and the promiscuous share a disposition against allowing themselves to be moved by others, or to fall in love. Modesty, on the other hand, invites and protects the evocation of real love. It is erotic, not neurotic.

To illustrate this point, I like to compare photographs taken at Coney Island almost a century ago with photographs from nude beaches in the 1970s. At Coney Island, the beach-goers are completely covered up, but the men and women are stealing glances at one another and seem to be having a great time. On the nude beaches, in contrast, men and women hardly look at each other – rather, they look at the sky. They appear completely bored. That’s what those who came after the ’60s discovered about this string of dreary hookups: without anything left to the imagination, sex becomes boring.

The third myth is that modesty isn’t natural. This myth has a long intellectual history, going back at least to David Hume, who argued that society invented modesty so that men could be sure that children were their own. As Rousseau pointed out, this argument that modesty is a social construct suggests that it is possible to get rid of modesty altogether. Today we try to do just that, and it is widely assumed that we are succeeding. But are we?

In arguing that Hume was wrong and that modesty is rooted in nature, a recently discovered hormone called oxytocin comes to mind. This hormone creates a bonding response when a mother is nursing her child, but is also released during intimacy. Here is physical evidence that women become emotionally bonded to their sexual partners even if they only intend a more casual encounter. Modesty protected this natural emotional vulnerability; it made women strong.

But we don’t really need to resort to physiology to see the naturalness of modesty. We can observe it on any windy day when women wearing slit skirts hobble about comically to avoid showing their legs – the very legs those fashionable skirts are designed to reveal. Despite trying to keep up with the fashions, these women have a natural instinct for modesty.

The fourth and final myth I want to touch on is that modesty is solely a concern for women. We are where we are today only in part because the feminine ideal has changed. The masculine ideal has followed suit. It was once looked on as manly to be faithful to one woman for life, and to be protective toward all women. Sadly, this is no longer the case, even among many men to whom modest women might otherwise look as kindred spirits. Modern feminists are wrong to expect men to be gentlemen when they themselves are not ladies, but men who value “scoring” and then lament that there are no modest women around anymore – well, they are just as bad. And of course, a woman can be modestly dressed and still be harassed on the street. So the reality is that a lot depends on male respect for modesty.

It is characteristic of modern society that everyone wants the other guy to be nice to him without having to change his own behavior, whether it’s the feminists blaming the men, the men blaming the feminists, or young people blaming their role models. But that is an infantile posture.

Restoring a Modest Society

Jews read a portion of the Torah each week, and in this week’s portion there is a story that shows us beautifully, I think, how what we value in women and men are inextricably linked. Abraham is visited by three men, really three angels, and he is providing them with his usual hospitality, when they ask him suddenly,

“Where is Sarah your wife?”

And he replies, famously,

“Behold! In the tent!”

Commentators ask, why in the world are the angels asking where Sarah is? They know she is in the tent. They are, after all, angels. And one answer is, to remind Abraham of where she is, in order to increase his love for her.

Yet it is not enough for there to be a Sarah who is in the tent; it is also necessary that there be an Abraham who appreciates her. So I think the lesson is clear if we want to reconstruct a more modest, humane society, we have to start with ourselves.

I don’t think it’s an accident that the most meaningful explication of modesty comes from the Bible. I was fascinated in my research to discover how many secular women are returning to modesty because they found, simply as a practical matter, that immodesty wasn’t working for them. In short, they weren’t successful finding the right men. For me this prompts an essentially religious question: Why were we created in this way?

Why can’t we become happy by imitating the animals? In the sixth chapter of Isaiah we read that the fiery angels surrounding the throne of God have six wings. One set is for covering the face, another for covering the legs, and only the third is for flying. Four of the six wings, then, are for modesty’s sake. This beautiful image suggests that the more precious something is, the more it must conceal and protect itself.

The message of our dominant culture today, I’m afraid, is that we’re not precious, that we weren’t created in the divine image. I’m saying to the contrary that we were, and that as such we deserve modesty.

HT: Mystagogy

Source

Are you one of those people who “used to go” to church, but just don’t anymore? Are you tired of trying to figure out life yourself? What about the Bible? What about things like faith, salvation, discipleship, grace, and most of all – forgiveness?

If you are like most Americans, you know quite a few, or maybe you are one of them yourself. According to the book American Church in Crisis by David T. Olson,

“Most Americans have been to church, and yet only 20 percent are regular attendees.”

Dr. Gary L. McIntosh from the Talbot School of Theology at Biola University estimates

“more than 76 million people have attended church at least once in their lifetime.”

Clearly, most people who do not currently attend church did attend at one time. Many of these people—maybe even you, might be willing to try church again, given the right opportunity.

Back to Church Sunday is designed to be that opportunity—a special service dedicated to people who do not regularly attend church, a time when those who have left the church are encouraged to return and give it another try. Considering most of them have never been inside, or even heard of, an Orthodox Church Sunday, September 12th will make an excellent opportunity for invitations.

St. George is currently the only Church in the Prescott area that is listed on the National Back To Church Directory (same as last year)!

The Newest Thing in Christian worship is the oldest thing in Christian worship. And worship is just the beginning of authentic Christian life.

Try the Orthodox Church. We’re Orthodox in doctrine, Orthodox in morals, Orthodox in worship (that’s why we’re called the Orthodox Church!).

We welcome you to a moment in eternity, such as you have never seen before.

How does a former Southern Baptist minister find his way into the Eastern Orthodox Church?

It was a long and winding road for Bob and Laurel Frisby and two of their grandchildren.

Bob spent his childhood and early teens without a church to call home. He was what he calls, “a lay me down to sleep Christian.” Bedtime prayers and an occasional foray to church were the extent of his religious upbringing. Bob grew up fairly oblivious to what it meant to be a Christian but all that was to change in the autumn of 1974. Bill, Bob’s identical twin brother, was killed in a car wreck while drag-racing on a country road in Illinois.

Bill’s death set in motion a chain of events that would lead to his parents and his brother Jack becoming Christians over the next few years. Eventually, Bob went on to a Baptist college where he met Laurel who was to become his wife. Laurel had been raised in the Southern Baptist church since childhood. Bob and Laurel were married in 1980 and soon began their family together. In 1985 Bob became a pastor in the Southern Baptist faith.

Bob and Laurel settled into pastoring and raising their 3 daughters over the years that followed. However, in 1997 Bob stepped out of the ministry and became a financial advisor. Finances and the pressures of raising three teenage daughters lead them to decide to find employment outside the church. He and Laurel continued to be very involved in church ministry but Bob was no longer pastoring a church.

Over the years Bob and Laurel were involved in charismatic, independent churches as well as Southern Baptist churches. Bob longed to be back in full-time ministry but continued to work in the financial services field. The desire of his heart was to be back in ministry but the time and place never seemed right during the years following his resignation. Interestingly, his desire to be back in ministry was accompanied by a growing dissatisfaction with the evangelical/Protestant churches he had attended.

Eventually, his need for a Christian church that emphasized both historical traditions and spiritual discipline drove him to search for something different from the churches he had known before. He began to read literature on spiritual disciplines and worship by Roman Catholic authors. He began to realize that what he was looking for was a historical, liturgical church. The question was, “Which one?” His search would eventually lead him to the Orthodox Church. In 2007, during the course of a conversation with a Roman Catholic friend and coworker, Robert was asked if he could see himself becoming Roman Catholic. He replied

“No, but I could see myself becoming Orthodox.”

Bob & Laurel Frisby

This statement had come about as a result of several conversations with the Roman Catholic coworker regarding the true church. Bob had extensively researched both the Roman and the Eastern Church on the internet.

And so, the seed was planted. In early spring of 2009, Robert came to find the Eastern Orthodox Church of Prescott on the Internet. He quickly realized it was the same church he had found two years prior while doing research. His curiosity and desire to know more led him to contact Fr. John Peck.

After meeting with Father John and attending Vespers, Bob knew he had found that for which his heart yearned.

Drawn by the beauty of the icons, the fragrance of the incense and the meaningful worship, he knew immediately that he had found the church he was looking for. The liturgy itself took some getting used to, but now it holds great meaning for him.

The best part came when his wife, Laurel, decided to join him on the journey to Orthodoxy. Laurel had been raised a Southern Baptist. The liturgical worship of the Orthodox Church was completely foreign to her. However, after just a few visits, she too decided that this was the church for her. The rich traditions and beautiful worship captured her heart.

To make things even more special Bob and Laurel’s grandchildren Marcus and Maya came to the Orthodox Church with them. They along with their mother, Sheena, were living with Bob and Laurel. Sheena, though she attended a Baptist Church, gave permission for Marcus and Maya to attend along with Grandma and Grandpa. She also gave permission for them to be Baptized into the holy, apostolic, Catholic Church!

As if to confirm that Bob did in fact choose the right church, his pastor, upon being told by Bob of his plans to convert, said to him

“If I had to choose one church for you to attend, I would have recommended the Orthodox Church.”

Bob served as an elder in his pastor’s church for two years and they remain close friends today.

Bob also received great support from many of the people that knew of his plans.

Upon being asked to summarize the day of his and his family’s baptism on August 15, 2009, which included his two beautiful grandchildren, Marcus and Maya, Bob responded with the following:

“It was great. I was thrilled that my grandkids were baptized along with Laurel and myself. It had been 33 years ago to the month that I had been baptized as an 18 year old at a Baptist church camp. When I first met Father John, one of my biggest questions was about Mary, the Theotokos. Interestingly, my family was baptized on the Feast of the Dormition of Mary! I don’t believe that it was all a coincidence of timing. It was immensely meaningful to me to receive communion that day. Every Sunday that we attended church and could not participate in the Eucharist was a day of longing for Laurel and I. We couldn’t wait to partake of the mystical supper. To be baptized, chrismated and take the Eucharist all in one day was an incredible blessing!”

HT: Journey To Orthodoxy

Source

If Acts is shown to be accurate history, then it brings credibility to its reports about the most basic Christian beliefs of miracles (Acts 2:22), the death (Acts 2:23), resurrection (Acts 2:23, 29-32), and ascension of Christ (Acts 1:9-10).

If Luke wrote Acts, then his “former treatise” (Acts 1:1), the Gospel of Luke, should be extended the same early date (within the lifetime of apostles and eye-witnesses) and credibility.

SEVENTEEN REASONS TO ACCEPT THE TRADITIONAL EARLY DATE THAT WOULD PLACE THE RESEARCH AND WRITING OF ACTS DURING THE LIFETIME OF MANY PARTICIPANTS. THESE STRONGLY SUPPORT THE HISTORICITY OF ACTS AND, INDIRECTLY, THE GOSPEL OF LUKE (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1).

1. There is no mention in Acts of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, an unlikely omission, given the content, if it had already occurred.

2. There is no hint of the outbreak of the Jewish War in A.D. 66, or of any drastic or specific deterioration of relations between Romans and Jews, which implies it was written before that time.

3. There is no hint of the deterioration of Christian relations with Rome involved in the Neronian persecution of the late 60′s.

4. The author betrays no knowledge of Paul’s letters. If Acts were written later, why would Luke, who shows himself so careful on incidental detail, not attempt to inform his narrative by relevant sections of the Epistles. The Epistles evidently circulated and must have become available sources, but an early date is suggested by the silence.

5. There is no hint of the death of James at the hands of the Sanhedrin in ca. 62 recorded by Josephus (Antiquities 20.9. 1.200).

6. The significance of Gallio’s judgment in Acts 18:14-17 may be seen as setting a precedent to legitimize Christian teaching under the umbrella of tolerance to Judaism.

7. The prominence and authority of the Saducees in Acts belongs to the pre-70 era, before collapse of their political cooperation with Rome.

8. Conversely, the relatively sympathetic attitude in Acts to Pharisees (unlike that in Luke’s Gospel) does not fit well in the period of Pharisaic revival after scholars of Jamnia met, ca. 90. As a result of that meeting, a phase of escalated conflict with Christianity was led by the Pharisees.

9. Some have argued that the book antedates the coming of Peter to Rome, and also that it uses language which implies that Peter and John, as well as Paul himself, were still alive.

10. The prominence of “God-fearers” in the synagogues in Acts would seem to point to the pre-Jewish War situation.

11. The insignificant cultural details are difficult to place with precision, but may best represent the cultural milieu of the Julio-Claudian Roman era.

12. Areas of controversy within Acts presuppose the relevance of the Jewish setting during the temple period.

13. Adolf Harnack argued that the prophecy placed in Paul’s mouth at Acts 20:25 (cf. 20:38) may have been contradicted by later events. If so it presumably was penned before those events occured.

14. Primitive formulation of Christian terminology is used in Acts which fits an early period. Harnack lists Christological titles, such as Insous and ho kurios, that are used freely, whereas ho Christos always designates “the Messiah”, rather than a proper name, and Christos is otherwise used only in formalized combinations.

15. Rackham draws attention to the optimistic tone in Acts, which would not have been natural after Judaism was destroyed and Christians martyred in the Neronian persecutions of the late 60′s. [Hemer, 376-82].

16. The ending of the book of Acts. Luke does not continue Paul’s story at the end of the two years of Acts 28:30. “The mention of this defined period implies a terminal point, at least impending” (Hemer, 383). He adds, “Its may be argued simply that Luke had brought the narrative up to date at the time of writing, the final note being added at the conclusion of the two years” (ibid., 387).

17. The “immediacy” of Acts 27-28: This is what we have called the “immediacy” of the latter chapters of the book, which are marked in a special degree by the apparently unreflective reproduction of insignificant details, a feature which reaches its apogee in the voyage narrative of Acts 27-28…The vivid “immediacy” of this passage in particular may be strongly contrasted with the “indirectness” of the earlier part of Acts, where we assume that Luke relied on sources or the reminiscences of others, and could not control the context of his narrative. [ibid., 388-89].

OTHER SUPPORT FOR HISTORICITY

The Book of Acts contains:

1. Geographical details that are assumed to be generally known. It remains difficult to estimate the range of general knowledge that should be expected of an ancient writer or reader.

2. More specialized details that are assumed to be widely known: titles of governors, army units, and major routs. This information would have been accessible to those traveled or were involved in administration, but perhaps not to others.

3. Local specifics of routs, boundaries, and titles of city magistrates that are unlikely to have been known except to a writer who had visited the districts.

4. Correlation of dates of known kings and governors with the ostensible chronology of the Acts framework.

5. Details appropriate to the date of Paul or Luke in the early church, but not appropriate to conditions earlier or later.

6. “Undesigned coincidences” or connective details that connect Acts with Pauline Epistles.

7. Latent internal correlations within Acts.

8. Independently attested details which agree with the Alexandrian against the Western texts. Since there are differences between textual families, independant corroboration can help when changes were imported into the textual tradition of Acts. A secondary reading may refer to conditions of a later period, and so indirectly help discriminate time periods.

9. Matters of common geographic knowledge, mentioned perhaps informally or allusively, with an unstudied accuracy which bespeaks familiarity.

10. Textual stylistic differences that indicate Luke’s use of different sources.

11. Peculiarities in the selection of detail, such as the inclusion of details that are theologically unimportant but that may bear on historical concerns.

12. Peculiarities in details from “immediacy” that suggest the author’s reference to recent experience. Such details are not so readily explained as the product of longer-term refective editing and shaping.

13. Cultural or idiomatic references that suggest a first-century atmosphere.

14. Interrelated complexes combining two or more kinds of correlation. Such a range of connections makes it possible to accurately reconstruct a fragment of history from the jigsaw of interlocking bits of information.

15. Instances where new discoveries and expanded knowledge shed more light on the background information. These are of use to the commentator, but do not bear significantly on history.

16. Precise details which lie within the range of contemporary possibilities, but who’s accuracy cannot be verified.

NUMEROUS THINGS CONFIRMED BY HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH:

1. A natural crossing between correctly named ports (13:4-5). Mount Cassius, south of Selucia, stands within sight of Cyprus. The name of the proconsul in 13:7 cannot be confirmed, but the family of the Sergii Pauli is attested.

2. The proper river port, Perga, for a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13).

3. The proper location of Lycaonia (14:6).

4. The unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra and the correct language spoken in Lystra. Correct identification of the two gods associated with the city, Zeus anf Hermes (14:12).

5. The proper port, Attalia, for returning travelers (14: 25).

6. The correct rout from the Cilician Gates (16:1).

7. The proper form of the name Troas (16:1).

8. A conspicuous sailors’ landmark at Samothrace (16:11).

9. The proper identification of Phillipi as a Roman colony. The right location for the river Gangites near Philippi (16:13).

10. Association of Thyatira with cloth dyeing (16:14). Correct designations of the titles for the colony magistrates (16:20, 35, 35, 38).

11. The proper locations where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey (17:1).

12. The presence of a Thessalonica (17:1), and the proper title of politarch for the magistrates (17:6).

13. The correct explanation that sea travel is the most convienient way to reach Athens in Summer with favoring east winds (17:14).

14. The abundance of images in Athens (17:16), and a reference to the synagogue there (17:17).

15. Depiction of philosophical debate in the agora (17:17). Use in 17:18-19 of the correct Athenian slang epithet for Paul, spermologos, and the correct name of the court (areios pagos); accurate depiction of Athenian character (17:21). Correct identification of altar to “an unknown god” (17:23). Logical reaction of philosophers who denied bodily resurrection. Areopogites the correct title for a member of the court (17:34).

16. Correct identification of the Corinthian synagogue (18:4). Correct designation of Gallio as proconsul (18:12). The bema (judgement seat) can still be seen in Corinth’s forum (18:16).

17. The name Tyrannus, attested on a first-century inscription (19:9).

18. The cult of Artemus of the Ephesians (19:24, 27). The cult is well attested, and the Ephesian theater was the city meeting place (19:29).

19. Correct title grammateus for chief executive magistrate and the proper title of honor, Neokoros (19:35). Correct name to identify the goddess (19:37). Correct designation for those holding court (19:38). Use of plural anthupatoi in 19:38 is probably a remarkably exact reference to the fact that two men jointly exercised the functions of proconsul at this time.

20. Use of precise ethnic designation beroiaios and the ethnic term Asianos (20:4).

21. Implied recognition of the strategic importance assigned to Troas 20:713).

22. Implication of the danger of the coastal trip in this area that caused Paul to travel by land (20:13). Correct sequence of places visited and correct neuter plural of the city name Patara (21:1).

23. The appropriate rout passing across the open sea south of Cyprus favored by persistent northwest winds (21:3). The proper distance between Ptolemais and Caesarea (21:.

24. Purification rite characteristic of pious Jewish (21:24).

25. Accurate representation of the Jewish law regarding law regarding Gentile use of the temple area (21:28).

26. The permanent stationing of a Roman cohort in the Fortress in the Fortress Antonia to suppress disturbances at festival times (21:31). The flight of steps used by guards (21:31, 35).

27. The two common ways of obtaining Roman citizenship (22:28). The tribune is impressed with Paul’s Roman rather than Tarsian citizenship (22:29).

28. The correct identifications of Ananias as high priest ( (23:2) and Felix as governor (23:34).

29. Identification of a common stopping point on the road to Caesarea (23:31).

30. Not of the proper jurisdiction of Cilicia (23:34).

31. Explanation of the provincial penal procedure (24:1-9).

32. Agreement with Josephus of the name Porcius Festus (24:27).

33. Note of the right of appeal by a Roman citizen (25:11). The legal formula of de quibus cognoscere volebam (25:18). The characteristic form of reference to the emperor (25:26).

34. Correct identification of the best shipping lanes at the time (27:4).

35. Use of the commonly joined names of Cilicia and Pamphylia to describe the coast (27:4). Reference to the principle port at which to find a ship sailing to Italy (27L5), Note of the typically slow passage to Cnidus in the face of a northwest wind (27:7). The locations of Fair Havens and neighboring Lasea (27: and correct description of Fair Havens as poorly sheltered for wintering (27:12).

36. Description of the tendency of these climes for a south wind to suddenly a violent northeast, the gregale (27:13). The nature of a square-rigged ship to have no option but be driven before a gale correctly stated (27:15).

37. Precise name and place given for the island of Clauda (27:16). Appropriate sailers’ maneuvers at the time for a storm (27:16-19). The fourteenth night judged by experienced Mediterranean navigators, to be an appropriate time for this journey in a storm (27:27). The proper term for this section of the Adriatic Sea at this time (27:27). The precise term , bolisantes, for taking soundings. The position of probable approach of a ship running aground before an easterly wind (27:39).

38. Correct description of the severe liability on guards who permitted a prisoner to escape (27:42).

39. Accurate description of the local people and superstitions of the day (28:4-6).

40. The proper title protos (tes nesou) for a man in Publius’s position of leadership on the islands.

41. Correct identification of Rhegium as a refuge to await a southerly wind to carry a ship through the strait ( 28:13).

42. Appii Forum and Tres Tabernae as stopping -places along the Appian Way (28:15).

43. Common practice of custody with a Roman soldier (28:16) and conditions of imprisonment at ones own expense (28:30-31).

The best evidence is that this material was composed by A.D. 60, only twenty-seven years after the death of Jesus. This places the writing during the lifetime of eyewitnesses to the events recorded (cf. Luke 1:1-4). This does not allow time for an alleged mythological develpment by persons living generations after the events.

The Roman historian Sherwin-White has noted that the writings of Herodotus enable us to determine the rate at which legends develop. He concluded that:

“tests suggest that even two generations are too short a span to allow the mythical tendency to prevail over the hard historic core of the oral tradition” (Sherwin-White, 190).

Julius Muller (1801-1878) challenged the scholars of his day to produce even one example in which an historical event developed many mythological elements within one generation (Muller, 29).

None exist.

Bibliography: A.N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament C. J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, C.H. Gempf, ed. J. Muller, The Theory of Myths, in It’s Applications to the Gospel History, Examined and Confuted W. L. Craig, The Son Rises

Source

082910 – T5 – Beheading of JTB

This class will be held on Wednesday evenings, immediately following our regularly scheduled 6 pm Vespers service at the Church, and is a part of the Crown Financial Ministries group of courses designed to introduce Christians to the very real Biblical principles for money and possessions set out in the Holy Scriptures. The Bible is packed with wise counsel about your financial life, and we want everyone to know what is says.

For example, did you know

There are over 2,350 verses in the Bible about money?

Nearly half of Jesus’ parables are about possessions?

Jesus had more to say about money than about heaven and hell combined?

Those who would benefit from this class include;

• Couples (finances are often the greatest source of marital stress)
• Professionals,
• Business owners,
• Parents, (teaching our children Biblical principles by example, and the results of that example)
• College Students;
• Anyone who desires to steer their life and possessions according to the God-given truths and instructions set out in the Bible.

This Bible Study course runs for 7 weeks.

A workbook is required, so registration is necessary. (couples can, of course, share a workbook!)

Workbooks are be $20 each, and will be ordered shortly.

If you could use more of the Lord’s blessings in your life, register now.

Contact Fr. John for registration information.

082210 – T4 – Sunday after Domition

At least 1,500 pilgrims, including from Greece and Russia, traveled to the Byzantine-era monastery of Sumela for the service led by Patriarch Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader of the world’s Orthodox Christians.

The Islamic-oriented government, which is aiming to expand freedoms as part of its bid to join the European Union, has said worship can take place at the monastery once a year. Services were previously banned.

The symbolic event was also likely to boost reconciliation efforts between Turkey and Greece, two NATO allies that came to the brink of war three times between 1974 and 1996 over the ethnically divided island of Cyprus and territorial rights in the Aegean Sea.

Sumela, a spectacular structure cut into the side of a mountain, was abandoned around the time of Turkey’s foundation in 1923. The last Liturgy was held a year earlier amid conflict between Turks and Greeks. The remote site near the Black Sea has become a big tourist draw in the last few decades.

The patriarch, who is based in Istanbul, wore a white robe with golden lace, and carried a staff. Priests sang hymns and spread incense amid faded frescoes. Visitors who could not fit into the crowded monastery watched on a giant television screen several hundred meters below the building.

“It is a very exciting moment for us Greeks because it’s the first time we get to have such a Mass,” said 24-year-old Ketevan Nadareishvili. “We can pray on the land of my great-great-grandfathers.”

The patriarch said he hoped the desire to pray would not be misinterpreted.

“The culture of living together is a heritage our civilization left for us. Let’s make that heritage live on, and let us teach all, so that we do not suffer anymore, and families do not perish,” Bartholomew said in Turkish after the service. “The Sumela monastery has lived like a legend for decades among us, patiently waiting for this day to come.”

Despite the sense of celebration, the story of Orthodox Christians and religious expression in general in Turkey is a troubled one. Turkey’s government says it will increase freedoms, but critics believe change is too slow in a country with a staunchly secular system introduced by the national founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

Most of Turkey’s 72 million people are Muslim, but even many of those feel that their rights are curtailed by law. Female employees of the state are not allowed to wear Muslim headscarves at work, and in 2008, the Constitutional Court struck down a government-backed amendment lifting a ban on the wearing of headscarves in universities.

The Greek Orthodox community in Turkey has dwindled to about 2,000 (interestingly, the Russian Orthodox have grown to over 20,000). One of their key demands is the reopening of the Halki Theological School, a Greek Orthodox seminary on Heybeliada Island near Istanbul.

The school was closed to new students in 1971 after a law put religious and military training under state control. It shut its doors in 1985, when the last five students graduated. Western leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, want Turkey to allow it to reopen. On a visit to Greece in May, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he was optimistic it would reopen.

Turkey has traditionally viewed the Istanbul-based patriarchate as a threat to state unity partly because of its ties with Greece, though relations between the two countries are improving. The patriarchate dates from the Byzantine Empire, which collapsed when Muslim Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople — now Istanbul — in 1453.

In a gesture to Armenian Christians, Turkey will also allow a Sept. 19 service at a newly restored Armenian church in eastern Turkey. Many international experts have judged the mass killing of Armenians around the time of World War I as a genocide. Turkey disputes the assessment.

For Videos of this historic event, go here.

Sept/Oct 2010 Messenger

Sept/Oct 2010 Messenger Newsletter