…combine the romantic and innocent side, with the insolent and daring side. For some reason, you only ever see that combination in Russian characters
on filming To the Wonder
So, for example, he recommended that Kurylenko read The Idiot with a particular eye on two characters: the young and prideful Aglaya Yepanchin, and the fallen, tragic Nastassya Filippovna. “He wanted me to combine their influences — the romantic and innocent side, with the insolent and daring side. ‘For some reason, you only ever see that combination in Russian characters,’ he said to me.”
When it says further down “Most Millenials Want Both,” caveat lector: I assumed it meant most millenials want a good marriage and good parenting. That’s not what it says. While they want both marriage and parenting, the overall premise that parenting is more important than marriage is emphasized throughout the research.
How do we apply the fact that Jesus made room in the Twelve for both Simon the Zealot and Matthew the Tax Collector? Certainly, it must remind us that Jesus’ invitation was to a wide and deep mercy in God. Simon, who was ready to take down the institutionalized, status quo, Roman occupation is at one end of the spectrum. On the other, Matthew earned his bread and maintained a social status feeding off of the very institution Simon was seeking to destroy. Both of them need salvation found in Christ alone.
So are these political opposites, with the application being Jesus calls neo-socialists as well as fascists? Democrats and Republicans? Or does Rome function more as an icon of the passing-away-world, and not politics per se? In this case, Simon is the ascetic, jihadist, fundamentalist; Matthew the cosmopolitan, worldly promoter of any/every zeitgeist. Or is there some other taxonomy that these two disciples map on to?
David Lose: [One viewpoint is that] the passages may or may not refer to homosexuality as we know it, but they – and all of Scripture – are conditioned by the cultural and historical realities of the authors and so offer an incomplete and insufficient understanding of creation and nature and so cannot be used to prohibit homosexual practice today. Rather, one needs to read the larger biblical witness to discern God’s hopes for caring, mutually-supportive relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual.
PastorDaddy82: Classic speaking to the word without letting the Word speak to you…
LoveAndPeace: That comment is judgmental and indicates lack of value and respect for individual interpretation by all God centered people. Maybe the Word is not speaking to the author of the comment….? That statement cuts both ways.
Me: Dear LoveAndPeace,
Please stop being so judgmental and intolerant of PastorDaddy82′s comment.
You would have more value and respect for his comment if you understood that Bible verses may or may not refer to Internet comments as we know them today, but they – and all of Scripture – are conditioned by the cultural and historical realities of the authors and so offer an incomplete and insufficient understanding of creation and nature and so cannot be used to prohibit anybody from saying anything on a blog/message board today.
Thank you in advance for not judging my comment to you, but recognizing that is in fact correct, as nature itself reveals.