The Big Adventure Part 1

I’m back with adventures and pics! I know yall didn't believe I'd ever get to it, but here they are. This was from the first day of the trip camping down in the Keys. It was a perfect day and a perfect drive getting down there. We left early so there was no traffic encounters in the 2-3 bottlenecks in Kendall. We just breezed through.

" This was the view of a small island from one of many long bridges over the water.

We were the third arrival from our group at the site. I wanted a certain spot by a cluster of trees for our tent, but unfortunately, there was another group in the camp site using that area, and we were limited to certain sections. I did manage to get us a spot with some measure of shade, depending on the time of the day.

We were blessed with tent, because a friend of mine gave it to me two years ago. We have out little porch area in the front with deck chairs, and my table to the side of it. See those trees in the background with the hammock? That’s the spot I wanted, but this spot wasn’t too bad.

I went to the flea market with my cousin Friday and Saturday of that week, and got blessed again, because I got a deal on a bigger tent. This tent is a 3 person tent. That’s if you have no floor space at all, and just have sleeping bags. The tent I got looked like it had been used once or twice.

It is an Ozark, which is a very good brand. It looks like 4 could sleep in it with just sleeping bags, and it came with 2 sleeping bags and a cooler bag. It was supposed to have a small light with it, but that was the only thing missing. We have lights anyways. It also came in a zippered canvas bag with handle. This entire ensemble cost me...$20.00. Steal of a deal.

Plus, I just bought us two single fold out beds from Walmart, because I’m so beyond tired of messing with air mattresses that leak. Once again, on this trip, we had a faulty air mattress. My friend Simone had given me a new mattress last year, after yet another mattress had gone bad. She had bought it at Kmart, and let me just say that I clearly understand why this chain is going out of business. They have cheap products and they don’t guarantee them. I’ve had 5 bad mattresses from them. No more.

The new mattress she gave me had a leak, which I don’t fault her for in any way. I got the receipt and took it back on the last camping trip. For those who recall...I drove miles and to two stores to get the replacement while we were on the trip.

At any rate, it was this replacement that I took home still boxed. I never opened the box until this trip to the Keys. What do I discover? The mattress has two big stains and a slit from a knife. They replaced the damaged mattress with another damaged mattress, and taped up the box. (I should have realized with the taped box, but by the time I finally got the stupid thing, I was just relieved – see the last camping adventure for why.)

At any rate, I was not a “happy camper” when I saw that. We attempted to patch the stupid thing to no avail; so basically, we slept on the hard floor that night, which wasn’t comfortable at all.

Here’s lil man gettin’ ready for action. This was prior to us finding out about the mattress.

I’m snappin’ away, and here, he’s trying to ignore me, because I’m teasing him to get a reaction so I can take the picture. And...

Here’s the reaction. Works like a charm. He says I’m annoying because of the manner in which I play and horse around with him, but I have to keep reminding him that being annoying is part of my job as a parent. I keep asking him why he wants to take the fun out of my job...and I have to remind him of previous periods of him being annoying to me even after being told; to which he states... “That was then. I’m different now.” He figures he’s more mature. So I tell him, “Yeah, so now it’s my turn.”

As you can see from the background of this pic, we are practically on the beach. After messing with the mattress without any real success, lil man heads to the pier to do some snorkling.

There are a lot of rocks here. It’s like a big shelf and you can jump off the pier into the water, but you need water shoes around this area, because the rocks are sharp.

That bridge is old and no longer used, but it is just before the Bahia Honda Beach and campground. That beach is really nice too. We went there last year, but didn’t get a chance to go this year. But in all of these water filled areas where the kids are standing, they find all kinds of active sea life.

Lil man didn’t know I was takin’ shots at this point, so he goes down into the water, and comes back up with his hands clasp over his mouth. Left me wonderin’ what he saw down there, cause it looked like he was prayin’ afterwards!

Then I took a bunch of shots of the kids piddlin’ in the puddles.

The boys in hats were brothers, and their mother was the one in the cap out there with all of them. The youngest one with the cap...isn't he just precious? The cutest lil thing you ever saw.

The next set of shots was lil man again...at the pier. He was none too pleased with me photographing him at this point, and you will note in the pics...he's ignoring me, then giving me the look, then I finally got a chuckle cause I was teasing him with a little made up song: "Embarrassment man...Embarrassment man...nah nah nuh nuh...Embarrassment man..." sung to the tune of Spiderman. I told him...I'm going to have my fun as a parent.

These next few shots were caught at breakfast the following day. I was trying to get a good shot of the boy's mom, so you could see where they get those beautiful eyes from. More to come... Peace and blessings.

The Book of Isaiah

Chapter 1 V.1 Part 3.4

Paul & the Female Controversy 4

Again, I continue in the information I found in the previously mentioned book, “In Search of Paul.”

The basic Pauline principle of equality among Christians applies not just to slavery, but to patriarchy as well. In Paul’s theology, Christian gender inequality can no more exist than can Christian class inequality. Females and males are therefore equal in family, assembly, and apostolate within Christianity.

Equal in the Family

Paul received a set of questions from a divided assembly he founded in Corinth. They were inquiring whether complete sexual separation and total ascetic abstention were mandatory for Christians, and whether such celibate abstention was the normal form of Christian life. Was it not better, they asked, for a man not even to touch a woman?

In 1 Cor 7, Paul insists that marriage and intercourse are permissible, but still ascetic abstention is preferable.

1Cr 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

1Cr 7:17 ...as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk.

Paul distinguishes permissible marriage (you could) from preferable celibacy (you should), but accepts the latter himself rather than holding both options as equally good, equally holy, equally possible Christian states of life. We emphasize that Paul’s preference is about celibacy over marriage and not about inequality over equality for both women and men within either status. There is a consistent equality of female with male or male with female throughout Paul’s discussion in 1 Cor 7.

It is so explicitly done, so clearly exaggerated, that it is obviously intentional. Whatever he says of one spouse, he then says of the other: the wife does this, the husband does the same; the husband does that, the wife does the same. Watch the persistence of this mutuality as equality over four subtopics: On intercourse (7:3-5), on divorce (7:10-16), on virginity (7:25-28), and on worries and anxieties (7:33-34).

There is, however, one section in 1 Cor that seems to silence women within the Christian assembly, which would certainly exalt men over women with regard to ecclesiastical status. That, of course, would be a strange dichotomy, given what Paul says in Gal 3:28, that there is neither male nor female in Christ.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

How therefore are we to understand 1 Cor 11:3-16?

1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.

 1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.

 1Cr 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

 1Cr 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

 1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

 1Cr 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.

 1Cr 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

 1Cr 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on [her] head because of the angels.

 1Cr 11:11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

 1Cr 11:12 For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

 1Cr 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

 1Cr 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

 1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.

 1Cr 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

If you focus only on the women, it is plausible to argue that Paul is subordinating them to men (based on scriptural text, social dress and church custom). On the other, if you focus only on the men and realize that Roman males normally covered their heads for worship, as with the statue of Augustus as a priest at sacrifice, it is plausible to argue that Paul is opposing pagan religious practice.

If however, you notice how the text oscillates between women and men, men and women, you would have to take both sexes into any correct explanation.

Paul takes it for granted that both women and men pray and prophesy in liturgical assembly. That is not the problem of the text. Its a problem of the proper head covering for each of them in that situation. But why was that so important an issue?

At Corinth, presumably as a defiant challenge to inequality and a dramatic statement of equality, men and women had reversed modes of head covering in prayer, so that men worshipped with covered heads and women with uncovered heads.

In other words, Paul was confronted with a negotiation not just of gender hierarchy, but of gender difference, and he stutters almost incoherently in trying to argue against it. Of course, women and men were equal “in the Lord” and “from God,” but there should be no denial of ordinary dress codes or standard head coverings.

The difference between women and men, however, that was customarily and socially signified, must be maintained, even while hierarchy or subordination was negated.

The passage in 1 Cor 11:3-16 is the best Paul can do on that subject. But the text is emphatically not about hierarchical inequality, but about differential equality. Paul presumes equality between women and men in the assembly, but absolutely demands that they follow the socially accepted dress codes of their time and place.

Difference, yes. Hierarchy, no. That interpretation of a very difficult passage is strongly confirmed by the next section for if women are silenced in the assembly, how can they be prominent in the apostolate?

I am reading “The Accidental Asian.” It is a very interesting and eye opening book about expectations and the differences between one’s culture of origin and what happens to people of a certain culture that gets assimilated into American culture.  There’s both a gain and a loss, real and perceived.

And in the course of discovering what people from the Asian culture may experience whether assimilated or not; was an acronym I had not been aware of-SNAFU. Now I don’t know if most people know what this acronym means, but it shocked me because I was looking at the name of my former dog...a name I lovingly gave him because I thought it was cute. And discovering this acronym of my baby’s name caused me some measure of mild annoyance and insult.

Another thing that was mentioned seems to me to be a standard truth, and was simple enough in its concept, but surprised me because it was not something I had ever consciously thought about. “‘A’ students end up working for ‘C’ students.” Unbelievable just how true that is! And then the ‘A’ students are angry and frustrated because some ‘idiot’ put a ‘moron’ in charge, who doesn’t know squat about the job, the process, nor safety.

I thought these were very astute thoughts and observations:

“The irony is that in working so duteously to defy stereotype, I became a slave to it. For to act self-consciously against Asian “tendencies” is not to break loose from the cage of myth and legend; it is to turn the very key that locks you inside. What spontaneity is there when the value of every act is measured, at least in part, by its power to refute a presumption about why you act?”

For me, this speaks of putting an end to the manipulations by others through their expressed expectations and the pressure of their guilt trips. I so understand this man’s struggle, despite the fact that he was not at all pressured by his family to go one way or the other. It was societal pressures that influenced much of his struggle, particularly as a young man. In his case, he was only dealing with an internal battle between his culture of origin, and the culture of the country he lives in.

“...For while it may be possible to transcend race, it is not always necessary to try. And while racial identity is sometimes a shackle, it is not only a shackle. I could have spared myself a great deal of heartache had I understood this earlier, that the choice of race is not simply “embrace or efface.”

...For here I am now, standing in a new country. Not as an expatriate or a resident alien, but as a citizen. And as I survey this realm-this Republic of Privilege-I realize certain things, things that my mother and father might also have realized about their new country a generation ago. I realize that my entry has yielded me great opportunities. I realize, as well, that my route of entry has taken a certain toll. I have neglected my ancestral heritage. I have lost something. Yes, I can speak some Mandarin and stir-fry a few easy dishes. I have been to China and know something of its history. Still, I could never claim to be Chinese at the core.

Yet neither would I claim, as if by default, to be merely “white inside.” I do not want to be white. I only want to be integrated. When I identify with white people who wield economic and political power, it is not for their whiteness but for their power. When I imagine myself among white people who influence the currents of our culture, it is not for their whiteness, but for their influence. When I emulate white people who are at ease in the world, it is not for their whiteness, but for their ease.

I don’t like it that the people I should learn from tend so often to be white, for it says something damning about how opportunity is still distributed. But it helps not at all to call me white for learning from them. It is cruel enough that the least privileged Americans today have colored skin, the most privileged fair. It is crueler still that by our very language we should help convert this fact into rule. The time has come to describe assimilation as something other than the White Way of Being.”

In my case, the struggle was the result of the fact that I had assimilated without problem, and was quite comfortable around white people, and likewise, they were comfortable around me. When I moved to Florida, I came into contact with a greater volume of people from the darker race within my nationalities than I had ever encountered before in my sheltered life as an Air Force brat.

These people I encountered were jealous and had issue with the fact that I was so at ease in my assimilation, and they could not or would not assimilate themselves to gain access to the opportunity they desired. So they spurned me and pressured me with labels, calling me the “white queen, white princess,” and other aspersions of their choice; all meant to belittle me for my success in gaining access and for the fact that I was not like them. They found every thing imaginable to complain about concerning me, including and not limited to the color of my underwear, which I found to be a rather odd zone to focus on, if you feel me.

Their constant attacks upon my person caused me to make a few choices that were not a preference. Just as I am now explaining to my son, who is also having problems fitting in at school, I had to learn to assimilate. The comparison I gave him, (and I will have to borrow some videos from the library to give him a better perception of the issue) is the Borg on Star Trek. Everyone expects the hive mentality, whether it is within the social structure of school, or further within the subculture of culture and race.

I speak perfect proper English, but I had to make a serious effort to adopt street slang and some measure of Ebonics just to get by and speak enough broken English to satisfy my darker counterparts that they were acceptable and that I was not better them as they perceived.

As I explained to my son, I had to do this just to get by, not because I believed it, nor wanted to speak like that or be like the people who needed this validation from me. No one from any of my other inherited cultures has made this demand on me, nor had any issues with the fact that I’m a mutt of many nationalities. No other culture in my nationalities has required that I claim only them as my race, or even as the majority of who and what I am. It’s sad to me that so many in this one culture...this one aspect of who I am, have such an insecurity and need for self value and validation and just acceptance as a whole. There’s such an apparent lack of self-worth, and believe me, I’m not saying that their need for validation is not justified, but I do think its a sad state of affairs for an entire race of people.

This group attributed my success in the white arena to the fact that I had other cultures mixed in my bloodline, and particularly focused on the fact that the white race was among the other cultures. So they claimed that my more “white” features, hair and manner of speaking was the thing that gave me the privilege of access, and they felt that I was better than them as a result. They despised me for my parents and my upbringing. They despised the fact that I was impartial to race and had no issue with dating men of any race I choose. They despised me because I was not just like them; I didn’t live where they lived; I had not experienced the same sort of experiences nor the racism they’ve experienced. I did not have the hatred they had. I called their mentality ‘boxed in thinking,’ and like I said, it’s a sad state of affairs.

“In every assimilation, there is a mutiny against history-but there is also a destiny, which is to redefine history. What it means to be American-in spirit, in blood-is something far more borrowed and commingled than anything previous generations ever knew. Alongside the pain of migration, then and the possibility, there is this truth: American is white no longer, and it will never be white again.”

My goodness, if this election year isn’t evidence of this evolution, I don’t know what is. And this book was copyrighted in 1998-ten years ago. Like I said, I could identify with the reflections and struggles this man described as he analyzed his choices to assimilate from one culture into another.

With me, what he calls assimilation into the “white” race or arena came very naturally, and without much thought or conjecture, because I never viewed myself as any different than anyone else; nor did I define myself by my complexion, and therefore never really had exposure to racial issues until I moved to Florida. At that time, the first group that showed me bias was, as I said before, those of the darker culture in my identity.

But if you read the book and see the questions he examined, even from the perspective of someone of a culture outside the Asian set, but not white, you could clearly understand the reasons for his questions, thoughts and struggle, and I really love how well he articulated this. It is easily understandable by any person of any race or culture that lives in this country.

I was in Barnes and Nobles when I saw this book, as well as several other Asian based stories, which I am fascinated with in general. I find their culture as a whole very interesting, specifically the aspect of loyalty that they ascribe to. So I was interested in several of the books, as well as a book called “Black Like Me,” which was about a white man back in the 60’s getting a medical treatment to turn his skin black so that he could experience life as a black man. It looks very interesting, so I noted it along with the Asian books I was interested in, so I could find them in the library. Anybody else reading anything interesting?

Aside from this...the issue of Forgiveness has come up again. After much pain and internal struggle, I realized that my problem was not the idea of forgiving. My problem was other people’s expectations as to the status of the relationship in question, once I did forgive.

My sentiments are that of Christ...and please don’t misunderstand me. There are some people whose effect in one’s life is so negative; whose constant barrage of discussion and comments about a person is so detrimental; whose attitude is so defeatist in regard to everyone else’s life...critical and judgmental, that it is in one’s best interest to steer clear of that person, because they do nothing but wound with words, their behavior is usually unethical, and the relationships they have are built on lies. So my perspective on this is Christ’s when he said of people in his home town, “Wipe the dust from your sandals...and move on.” (That was paraphrased btw) I mean, I can forgive the person, but when did scripture say that forgiving them means that I have to allow them back into my life?

This has been my struggle because people close to me want to use labels and titles to justify why I should allow this person back into my air space. I’ve forgiven the person, but I cannot tolerate the negative package that comes with their presence in my life, and I don’t feel that the expectations or guilt trips and manipulations of others should factor into the equation. Thing is...this person has not changed, so the effects will still be the same. I’m not demanding change from the person, and didn’t demand it in order to forgive them. But I cannot allow myself to be put back into what equates as an enslaved position simply to please others close to me about the relationship they feel I should maintain with this individual, due to some title or label.

The words “imposing” and “obligation” came up in the midst of my struggle with this situation, and another friend dumped a load of her guilt on me using synonyms of these words because she had never established any boundaries in her life, and suddenly decided after reading a book on the subject, that I was the person she needed to establish them with. I have no problem with her setting up boundaries, but why should I be suddenly blamed for things that I was invited to do now that she has recognized this need in her life?

She claimed all the while that she was not offended and that we are alright, yet kept hurling incidents at me in the midst of telling me that she was trying to help me and that the enemy was attacking. As a result of all of this, I cried a lot and was very hurt and those two words above came floating back to me again, reminding me of the first individual, and reigniting the issue of struggle for me again, which has been a source of physical pain due to the history of the situation.

I had said I had forgiven this person last year, and I did; in fact I was praying heavily for the person in tears, so I know I forgave the individual, but because of other people’s ideology on forgiveness that was being thrown at me like a ball of guilt, I questioned if I had really forgiven based on their interpretation that the relationship must be fully restored with active communication and so forth, especially because of the title the other individual holds as a family member.

So again, I referred back scripture, and I see where Christ did not hold in any special or higher esteem, his own mother, brothers etc; and I still believe that forgiveness does not entail enslavement, and that if a relationship with another causes that, then the end result of forgiving them is to pray God’s blessing on their life and walk away. That’s my take on it. What’s yours? Peace.

The Book of Isaiah

Chapter 1 V.1 Part 3.4

Paul & The Female Controversy 3

The previous info gave us some background, but the next two books I examined ran a basic parallel in information, so I am going to combine the information of both books here, within several posts, only specifying areas or comments that were distinctly not contained in one of the books, and combining the ideas I found in both that were the same.

The first book was “What Paul Meant,” written in 2006 by Gary Wills. He pointed out that Paul believed in women’s basic equality via the following.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

There is no more man and woman since they were divided here.

Gen 1:27  So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

They are reborn; brother and sister are now (ktisis) “a new order of being.”

2Cr 5:17  Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Paul worked with, paid tribute to and received protection from his Sisters in Messiah.

In the functions of the Spirit - Paul stresses equal dignity, and talks about Junia and her husband Andronicus.

Rom 16:6  Greet Mary, who bestowed much labour on us.

Rom 16:7  Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

He included her among the apostles, and in some translations, referred to her as his fellow emissary; as well as one who joined the brotherhood before he did.

Junia’s name was changed to Iounia – in the accusative case – male – Iounian. Junias was only a hypothetical name which never occurs in all the ancient literature and inscriptions – whereas Iounia is a common name.

In the book, “In Search of Paul,” written in 2004, the eminent historical Jesus scholar, John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, an expert in biblical archeology – team up to examine what archeology and textual scholarship can tell us about the apostle and his role in Christianity. They reveal that Paul, like Jesus, focused on championing the Kingdom of God – a realm of justice and equality – against the dominant worldly powers of the Roman Empire.

In this book, Junia is mentioned as “a case that would be funny to ridiculous if it were not sad to tragic. For the first twelve hundred years of Christianity, commentators had no trouble identifying her name as female, presumably the wife of Andronicus (Rom 16:7), like Prisca is of Aquila (16:3-4).

In Greek, by the way, her name appears in the accusative case as Junian. Then the name started to be identified as male – Junian was alleged to be the accusative case of the male name Junia(nu)s. Unfortunately however,

there are over 250 known cases of a female Junia in antiquity and not a single one ever discovered for the male abbreviation of Junianus to Junias.

The problem of course was Paul’s supreme accolade for both members of that married couple and specifically for the female Junia. It was even suggested, as a backup position, that if Junia were female, Paul’s compliment should read “prominent to the apostles” rather than “prominent among the apostles.” Clearly then, the only reason for suggesting a masculine meaning is to avoid a major female apostle.”

In the news

Apparently, I have ruffled some feathers. Not that it concerns me, but apparently some people were not pleased with this post. Suddenly, I’m getting reaction months after the fact because students found the post and told the teacher. Btw...note the date of that post. It was last year. Then someone came in and commented, telling me basically, that it was “unnecessary” and mentioning this woman’s pregnancy as a factor.

This person does not identify themselves in regard to their relational interest in the situation (I wonder about pseudonyms), but does attempt to endorse the teacher with a statement about her “caliber.” For the record, know that the teacher made public comments to my son about my post in her classroom, telling him to notify me not to write any more “lies” about her in my blog.

Now, it seems unreasonable and “unnecessary” to me for an adult to publicly comment in a manner meant to embarrass and humiliate their students, yet be so incensed when an equal posts public comments in regard to that person’s unethical behavior in defense of the child.

If she wanted to address me, she has my number and email, and could have contacted me herself, but clearly, she is using every opportunity to attack my son, so this is the manner in which she communicated her annoyance with me. We’re talking about a 12 year old kid and a grown woman whose responsibility is to teach without bias, and without using her position to influence or deter the personal beliefs of the children in their care. She should know better.

I realize that some children are a handful, and some parents don’t care, but I’m not one of them. I also realize that my son is a bit outspoken (gee, wonder where he gets that from), and he does need to learn tact, but he is still a kid, therefore, his lack of tact is to be expected at times. I don’t expect to see that from an adult who has a responsibility to teach and/or influence children. Therefore, the “caliber” that was mentioned in regards to this teacher is still in question due to her conduct.

I have no problem with defending what we believe in, which was blatantly attacked in her classroom, so for those with an issue concerning that defense...sorry, but that will not change.

Recently, my son told me that he addressed this teacher after school (sensible) and asked her why she was contradicting her statements (basically every time they were challenged or brought up by me), and he flat out told her she was lying, because she kept trying to deny statements she made to him in class. Her response basically, was how dare he, (a kid) speak to her about her conduct.

Now, like I said, my son does get outspoken at times, and I don’t say that to excuse him. He will call me to the mat if he thinks for a minute that I’ve lied to him about anything. He still needs to be respectful, but he tends to speak this way when he’s been offended or is stressed or upset. It is apparent to me that this teacher continually gets him in that emotional state. None of his other teachers have this sort of issue with my son. Their issues have mainly been whether or not he’s completing his assignments and paying attention in class, and sometimes his tendency to be a little overemotional, but there is no personal problem with him and any other teacher.

He told me that after this teacher returned from her maternity leave, she told the class that she was going to start over with them. He said she showed them pictures of her baby on the computer, which he said was very cute. I told him, if she is willing to start over with everyone, then you do the same; forgive and let the past go. Unfortunately, it does not appear that sentiment of hers lasted long.

He told me a day or so later, that she had worn a nice outfit, and he simply told her that she looked nice. He said the next day she came back and told him not to “comment on her body parts.” He came home highly upset, because he couldn’t believe she would say that when his intention was only to give her a compliment. He said, “I was just trying to be nice.”

When the bias against my son is to the point that he can’t even give a simple compliment to this individual without being subjected to some harsh, extreme response, then I have an obligation as a parent to get involved, especially now that he has apparently been banned from her classroom.

He was not allowed in there last week after he addressed her after school about her comments. It is more than obvious her actions are punitive in nature, and his banishment from her class had nothing to do with disruptive behavior, but only with the fact that he dared to challenge her about her conduct. At least he waited until after school to address her, which is more professional than her public displays in the classroom meant to humiliate him.

I have to say that her banishment of him from her class was actually a blessing, because I had already requested that he be moved to another classroom due to her obvious bias against him.

What I wonder about is the reason this teacher’s students were looking her up on the web, because that’s how they found my site. Was it to discover more about this “caliber” of hers? (Whatever their opinion on it may be...)

Additionally, it seems that it is a necessity to defend children being subjected to this sort of unprofessional and unethical conduct. It is also apparent that such defense becomes necessary when the children’s comments are not taken into serious consideration because they are children.

I know my son, and I know when he’s exaggerating and when he’s being truthful. I tend to ask him “What did you do before this...” in reference to whatever he’s telling me, so I can see if he initiated something that caused the reaction he received. There are parents out here that do communicate regularly with their kids, and know them.

Perhaps the public schools need to initiate a feedback mechanism, so that the school and school board can have a better idea what’s really going on in these classrooms. One would think that if enough children were stating a problem with the same teacher, it would need to be looked into.

In college, we do an end of the semester anonymous evaluation of the instructor for each class. The instructor has to leave the room, while the students write their evaluations and their grade on the teacher; and those evaluations are placed in an envelope and sealed. The instructor is required to submit these envelopes to the department head or dean/principal for review. If the instructor is the department head, then naturally, it has to go to someone higher.

Maybe this is a practice that needs to be instituted in the public grade school system as well for younger kids so that they can freely express how they feel about what they were taught, the teacher, and the classroom. These forms also allow for comments on how the teacher, class or instruction can be improved, and after these are reviewed by the superior, the instructor also gets to review them so they can make necessary adjustments.

I’m sure that my son is not the only child in that classroom that is subject to this unethical conduct of hers, (perhaps not as extreme as with my son) but perhaps the other kids are too afraid of her to speak up. She already threatened to fail my son, and to cause him trouble, so my son got to the point of not caring much about being afraid to speak up.

Since children’s voices are so rarely heard and so little attention is given to their concerns in public school, this might be a way to accommodate them, and address problems that administrators cannot see or that may be hidden.

I also don’t think that teachers should be punitively grading students because they don’t like their attitude, or the frustration the child may express when communicating with them. They are the adults, and should at least attempt to encourage better communication or attitude especially by personal demonstration. Their response is going to demonstrate that, and lead that child in adjusting their attitude or communication, or digressing and ultimately making it worse.

To just punitively grade a child because they express some frustration is not making the situation better. It only serves to frustrate the child more, especially because they are supposed to be graded on their school work, not their attitude. I say this in regards to attitude vs. disruption in the classroom, but still the adult can address the frustration in a better manner than just a write off with a bad grade.

Just my thoughts on the matter, and I don’t apologize for them. Some may think that my posting my thoughts on this is unnecessary, but the reason these things continue to be unaddressed is that no one speaks up...too afraid to rock the boat. I have “He who overcame the world” within, so fear has no place in my life, and I’m obligated to speak up for righteousness.

Perhaps some teachers need to be more wary of what they say to impressionable children. Just knowing that there are parents out here willing to address this sort of stuff might help.

Pray for this teacher and all teachers, because clearly, prayer is needed. Age has little to do with dignity and respect, and I see no reason why teachers that expect such can’t give it as well. Aside from that, prayer is so badly needed for the public school system and the children subjected to it. Peace and blessings.

Yes, I know I promised photos, but this week, with Easter has been busy, so I beg your indulgence for a bit longer until after the holiday, and then pics will be coming. Meantime, I hope everyone's Easter celebrations are wonderful. Peace and blessings.

Hey all,

As usual, I have been MIA for a few days, but I'm back briefly to let you know that lil man  and I had an incredible adventure...one which I will have to return to tell you in part and in full, as....I may have to break it up into several posts. It will be so due to not only the entirety of the tale itself, which I need time to write, but also because I gots pictures this time. Now I know I have promised yall pics before, but...this time is different because I was using a digital camera, (borrowed from lil bro) and I took some awesome pics...about 162 of them...so yes...I have pics to show this time. I need time to download them and write my story, but I will be back soon to give yall the details. Peace and blessings.

The Book of Isaiah

Chapter 1 V.1 Part 3.4

Paul & the Female Controversy 2

In accordance to the book, “Paul, The Mind of the Apostle,” by A. N. Wilson, the following information about the problem Paul was dealing with in Corinth is as follows. (I will put direct information/quotes from the book in italics as opposed to quotation marks, and my comments and paraphrased notes from the book will be interspersed in the regular type.)

First, Corinth (Korinthiazesthai in the greek) means to fornicate. It was the sacred hill-city of Aphrodite which crowned the high mountain on which the city stood. The temple was staffed by a thousand female slaves. This was a place of sexual license.

Shortly after Paul left – the Christians in Corinth got involved in a sexual scandal. A member of the church had an affair with his stepmother. (Considering all of Paul’s boasting in the books of the Corinthians – this no doubt caused him great embarrassment.) Paul was scandalized, claiming that if the guilty couple intended to marry, they’ll be breaking Roman law, which had a code relating to the spouses of parents. Sons were not allowed to steal their father’s women. This issue was, according to this writer, the reason for the inequality scriptures in the books of the Corinthians. However, he did note a few things about the support of women to Paul as well.

The foundation of the church in Europe owed everything to Paul’s friendship with a rich business woman named Lydia. (It started with associations or trading communities; Lydia and the cloth makers, in Phillipi; Priscilla and Aquila and the tentmakers in Corinth.)

It is absolutely ludicrous to think that Paul, who was so supported by women in these communities, both in the spirit, financially and economically, and pretty much in whatever he requested of them; would turn on them in such a divisive and insulting manner and basically tell them all to just sit down and shut up. This ideology just does not flow with Paul’s doctrine in general, nor does it fit his efforts to explain in his letters the actions and attitude of those seeking to follow the Lord.

Further on, he references the perceptions of the modern church against the established “occasional” letters of Paul’s to his friends and converts.

Paul is the great libertarian of religious history. Though a Jew of Jews – by his own account – he had the most cavalier view even of the written word of God. These good evangelicals will produced phrases of Paul’s to enforce their arguments one way or another, as if Paul’s letters were ‘Scripture’ in the sense of the Torah being ‘Scripture.’

This is what Paul’s letters were destined to become in later ages of Christendom, in fact, remarkably soon after his death. But when he wrote his letters, they were all occasional pieces, in response to particular needs and queries which had arisen among his friends and converts.

2Cr 3:1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some [others], epistles of commendation to you, or [letters] of commendation from you?

 2Cr 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:

 2Cr 3:3 [Forasmuch as ye are] manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

Here, the author speaks about Ephesus as well. I felt this was relevant in that in both cases of Ephesus and Corinth, there was a problem of Aphrodite/Artemis/Diana worship, thus I thought it was pertinent to see what was happening in both places, seeing as how both were huge centers of this goddess worship.

Ephesus was a great centre of magic and magicians, and above all, its presiding deity, Artemis, had the most powerful magic of all and power over the ‘powers.’ The temple of Artemis was regarded as one of the Seven Wonders of the World. Artemis, or Diana, as the Romans called her, was more widely worshipped than any other deity known to the Greek traveler Pausanias.

Artemis was big business in Ephesus – an entire month was dedicated to her; festivals, temple merchandise etc; Paul and his followers were interfering with capitalism in Ephesus.

Act 19:23  And the same time there arose no small stir about that way.

 Act 19:24  For a certain [man] named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen;

 Act 19:25  Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.

 Act 19:26  Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:

 Act 19:27  So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.

 Act 19:28  And when they heard [these sayings], they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great [is] Diana of the Ephesians.

 Act 19:29  And the whole city was filled with confusion: and having caught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theatre.

 Act 19:30  And when Paul would have entered in unto the people, the disciples suffered him not.

 Act 19:31  And certain of the chief of Asia, which were his friends, sent unto him, desiring [him] that he would not adventure himself into the theatre.

 Act 19:32  Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together.

 Act 19:33  And they drew Alexander out of the multitude, the Jews putting him forward. And Alexander beckoned with the hand, and would have made his defence unto the people.

 Act 19:34  But when they knew that he was a Jew, all with one voice about the space of two hours cried out, Great [is] Diana of the Ephesians.

 Act 19:35  And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, [Ye] men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the [image] which fell down from Jupiter?

  Act 19:36  Seeing then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly.

 Act 19:37  For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess.

 Act 19:38  Wherefore if Demetrius, and the craftsmen which are with him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies: let them implead one another.

 Act 19:39  But if ye enquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly.

 Act 19:40  For we are in danger to be called in question for this day's uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account of this concourse.

The Book of Isaiah

Chapter 1 V.1 Part 3.4

Paul & the Female Controversy 1

Now, considering that it’s been a good two weeks since I was posting on this subject, I’m going to go back a bit to come forward, and repeat a few poignant points. This section is revolving around the issue of Asherah and the reasons for the worship of her in the “high places,” as referenced in the reason that Isaiah had his prophesy for the four kings.

The truth of God...the freedom in God was not being given or shown to be for women. Why?

God told Eve she had to be submitted to her husband, but my point is this: All of this has eventually snowballed into the women’s movement we know of today and throughout history. The only reason that women were able to step out into extremism in this arena is because of the lack of balance in viewing this Genesis story, and the place or position of women by men who rule over all; and because men have done what Adam did, and acquiesced on some level-giving women the lead then turning and accusing women because of their own weakness.

While prideful men in the church wish to claim the fall as the result of an act of Eve’s in usurping her husband, what we do know is that the serpent’s intent was to cause just such a situation of accusation between males and females. The question in my mind is...at that stage of creation...when there was no “war between the sexes,” why would the woman want to usurp her husband? This is the theology of the church as a whole, laying the blame for the fall on Eve. What reason would she have? I don’t see any. They were completely free in the garden. She had just been given to him. It seems she didn’t even know she was to acquiesce to him. I mean think about it...everything was innocence in the garden. They didn’t even know they had a sinful nature until this situation occurred, and then...how would they even know how to deal with that side of their personage? They were babes! Babes learn through trial and error.

Perhaps that is the reason for the judgment God gave Eve...so that she could understand her role and truly come along side her husband as his helper, not his/the ruler of their relationship; and certainly not as a punishment for trying to “assert herself over her husband” as we’ve been led to believe for years. I think the actual punishment was pain in childbirth, and I’m sure the ladies would agree with me.

But look how often God had to teach the children of Israel, via discomfort/pain/defeat that He was the only one they were to follow. Look how often He had to cast judgment on them for their disobedience and idolatry. Because it’s the end result of a training exercise, and in order to advance to the next level of growth, one must “pass the test.” If one fails the testing/proving, then judgment occurs to teach us. Pain is one of the best teachers around.

I don’t think God intended women to be subjugated in everything, nor prohibited from utilizing God given gifts for ministry as a result, particularly because this “fall” was already in the plans of God.

Does this sound like God? “I have chosen you out from the nations...out of many, I chose you, because I love you. You are special to me and I am going to send you forth into the fields to the harvest. I have endowed you with exactly the gifts you need to do my will and walk in my way. My Son did great things...miracles on the earth, and just as He told His followers, ‘You shall do greater things than these.’ Arise and go forth! Oh wait a minute! You’re the wrong gender. I can’t use you in this manner. My bad!”

God never intended for His church to be divided by a battle between the sexes. In fact, He authorized female leaders even in the Old Testament. Deborah was one such leader, and she not only led the army to victory, but the nation. She was one of the Judges. Not only was she a leader and judge of the nation, but she was also married, and God was with her.

In addition, Ruth and the women were the ones gleaning in the fields. Jesus mentions a harvest, and scripture clearly shows women in the fields gleaning the harvest. I realize there were reapers, but the women were still a valued part of the harvesting process, right there in the field. It almost looks like they were (in bowling terms) picking up the spares, or the ones that missed it the first time around. But the point is, they were still there in the fields of harvest, and it doesn't indicate that they were picking a separate type of grain or crop. It was exactly the same field of harvest...no distinctions.

Clearly, this is a foreshadowing of what is also supposed to be in the New Testament, as the Old Testament foreshadows the New. This is why I know that Paul was not biased against women as portrayed by some. He was addressing a particular problem in Ephesus and in Corinth because Ephesus was the capital of these pagan gods at that time, the Greek versions...and there were many of them; and Corinth was a center for the commercialization of pagan worship. He was addressing an extreme situation.

Now, to give you an idea of the extreme problems Paul was dealing with, I went to the library, and looked for books on Paul. One book I found, “Paul, The Mind of the Apostle,” by A. N. Wilson, gives the information that will be in the next post. I consulted three different books as sources of the information I found, which is part of the reason I haven’t posted on this for a bit...research. I will put this information out here and let you, the reader, formulate your own perceptions and opinions from it, but I definitely do not discourage your comments and discussion on the subject.

The Book of Isaiah

Chapter 1 V.1 Part 3.3 Asherah 8

God never intended for His church to be divided by a battle between the sexes. In fact, He authorized female leaders even in the Old Testament. Deborah was one such leader, and she not only lead the army to victory, but the nation. She was one of the Judges. Not only was she a leader and judge of the nation, but she was also married, and God was with her.

Jdg 4:4   Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time.

Lapidoth:

Torches. Deborah is called "the wife of Lapidoth" (Jdg 4:4). Some have rendered the expression "a woman of a fiery spirit," under the supposition that Lapidoth is not a proper name, a woman of a torch-like spirit.

Jdg 4:5   She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided.

Clearly, this is a foreshadowing of what is also supposed to be in the New Testament, as the Old Testament foreshadows the New. This is why I know that Paul was not biased against women as portrayed by some. He was addressing a particular problem in Ephesus, because Ephesus was the capital of these pagan gods at that time, the Greek versions...and there were many of them. He was addressing an extreme situation. The worship of Aphrodite, the then current version of Asherah, and the subsequent extremism in the attempts by the men to squelch it was causing a revolt among the women, not unlike the women’s liberation movement in modern times; it had to be addressed.

Basically, I’ve moved a bit more in the middle on this. While I don’t agree with the fundamentalist’s assessment of Paul as prejudicial against women; at the same time, I recognize that ministry begins in the home. I personally feel that if a woman has children, she needs to attend to family first and ministry second. In this vein, she is still submitted to her husband; but if her husband has no objection to her ministry in whatever capacity, and God has gifted her for such, then she should move in the flow of whatever God has blessed her to do.

However, as clearly seen above, Deborah was married, and God allowed her to lead both the men and the women. At this point, I don’t know if she had children or not, but in my personal opinion its better if the woman’s children are grown and gone, before she enters a full-time ministerial role such as pastor because that is a great responsibility.