Jan
28

Little Syria (Now Tiny Syria) Finds New Advocates

1327749203 61 Little Syria (Now Tiny Syria) Finds New Advocates

In 1891, Yusuf Sadallah arrived in Lower Manhattan from the town of Baskinta, in the part of the Ottoman Empire that is now Lebanon. Going by the name of Joseph Sadallah, he set up a trading shop on Washington Street, where other immigrants from the Levant — Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians — had created a vibrant Arab quarter known as Little Syria.

Most residents were Christian, their loyalties divided only between St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church at 103 Washington Street and St. Joseph’s Maronite Church at 57 Washington Street, later at 157 Cedar Street.

Other villagers who had journeyed to New York had let those in Baskinta know: “There’s a great place to make money; you don’t have to worry about the Turks collecting taxes or drafting you into the Turkish army” — or words to that effect, said Mr. Sadallah’s great-great-grandson, Carl Anthony Houck Jr., who goes by Carl Antoun to emphasize his Lebanese roots.

David W. Dunlap/The New York Times Carl Antoun

Mr. Antoun’s great-grandfather, Antonio J. Sadallah, whose name at birth was Tanus, ran the family business — importing and exporting dry goods, notions and jewelry — at several locations along Washington Street. Much of their trade was with Central and South America. The family has kept some of the calling cards, ledgers, invoices, correspondence and ephemera from the early 20th century.

Mr. Antoun was born in 1991, a full century after his forebear arrived in Manhattan. But he talks about Little Syria as if he can recall it himself. “I always get a deep chill down my spine,” he said the other day outside what used to be St. George’s, near Rector Street. The building’s facade was designed by a Lebanese-American draftsman, Harvey F. Cassab; the church is now an official landmark.

“I kind of freeze in time,” said Mr. Antoun, a junior at St. Francis College in Brooklyn. “In the back of my mind, I envision peddlers from here down to the water. I see tenements, with mothers screaming out to their children to come to dinner.”

He has a lively imagination.

Much of Little Syria was demolished in the 1940s to allow construction of entrance ramps to the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. What was left was bulldozed two decades later to make way for the World Trade Center.

About all that survives today with a demonstrable connection to the old settlement — apart from the St. George’s building — is the six-story building at 105-107 Washington Street, formerly the Downtown Community House. When the cornerstone was laid on Oct. 1, 1925, in a ceremony attended by Gov. Alfred E. Smith, The New York Times noted that “Wall Street financiers rubbed elbows with Nordic, Slav and Levantine neighbors in colorful crowds which packed Washington Street.”

Four years later, the Bowling Green Neighborhood Association, which built the community house, estimated the full-time population of the financial district at 12,500, including Greeks, Italians, Russians, Slovaks, Syrians and other nationalities.

In recent years, the building housed the True Buddha Diamond Temple. It is now empty. It is owned by Pink Stone Capital Group, which also owns a cleared site, 111 Washington Street, at Carlisle Street, where it is planning a tower more than 50 stories tall, with rental apartments and stores. The company has not announced its plans for the 105-107 Washington Street parcel.

David W. Dunlap/The New York Times 105-107 Washington Street

The old community house and a tenement at No..109 are buildings that Mr. Antoun, together with Todd Fine and Norah Arafeh, would like to see preserved, alongside St. George’s, as a miniature historic district. They have set up a Save Washington Street Web site and created an online petition that had garnered 1,085 signatures by Sunday night.

“Tens of millions of tourists will walk every year from Battery Park and the Statue of Liberty to the 9/11 Memorial and Museum — all through historical Arab New York! — and these three buildings deserve to be preserved as landmarks,” the petition declares.

A senior staff committee of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, however, has already analyzed the community house and found it wanting. Mary Beth Betts, the commission’s director of research, said in a letter to Mr. Fine in August that “the property does not appear to meet the criteria for designation and will not be recommended to the full commission for further consideration.”

“The commission has recognized the significance of the Little Syria neighborhood through the 2009 designation of the (former) St. George’s Syrian Catholic Church,” her letter continued, “and the senior staff noted that there are better examples, from both an architectural and historical point of view, of the settlement house movement in other neighborhoods of Manhattan.”

Mr. Fine professes not to be discouraged. He said Ms. Betts’s letter “at least indicated to me that they were taking these arguments more seriously and saw how this could become an issue, with the cultural and historical value becoming weighed more substantially.”

He added, “Carl and I hope that if the Arab-American community makes a strong stand on the buildings, and we get additional political support, the L.P.C. valuation might shift.”

No matter what happens, the members of Save Washington Street are performing the service of calling attention to the lost legacy of Little Syria. Mr. Fine is promoting the centennial of what he calls the first Arab-American novel, “The Book of Khalid,” by Ameen Rihani. It describes the Syrian quarter through the eyes of Khalid and Shakib, newly arrived from Baalbek, Lebanon. They quickly learn that their new environs, built on a landfill, are subject to flooding:

In the front part of this cellar we had our shop; in the rear, our home. On the floor we laid our mattresses, on the shelves, our goods. And never did we stop to think who in this case was better off. The safety of our merchandise before our own. But ten days after we had settled down, the water issued forth from the floor and inundated our shop and home. It rose so high that it destroyed half of our capital stock and almost all our furniture. And yet, we continued to live in the cellar, because, perhaps, every one of our compatriot-merchants did so.

Among the supporters of Save Washington Street is Msgr. James A. Root, rector of Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Cathedral in Brooklyn Heights, where one more tangible reminder of Little Syria can be found: the cornerstone of St. Joseph’s. It was discovered in October 2002 as the rubble and ruins from the Sept. 11 attacks were being cleared around Cedar Street.

“For me,” Monsignor Root said, “it’s a sign that God is still present.”

David W. Dunlap/The New York Times In the vestibule of Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Cathedral, 113 Remsen Street, in Brooklyn Heights, is the cornerstone of St. Joseph’s Maronite Church from Little Syria.

Jan
28

A church returns downtown

1327747987 81 A church returns downtown

Houston’s First Baptist Church has a presence again downtown.

In the 1970s, the church quickly outgrew its building at 1010 Lamar, leading to relocation to a main campus at 7401 Katy Freeway. In October, the church established downtown services again at the same address as the old church.

The environment has changed much in four decades. The old church was demolished and a new office tower was built at the site, which is near the Fannin intersection.

“When the property downtown was sold, it was written into the contract that we would always be able to use a space in the new building for Bible study,” said Diane Bagby, assistant to the executive pastor.

Attendance at the Wednesday lunchtime Bible study, High Point, has grown to an average of 175.

“We thought there wasn’t a real strong evangelical presence in the downtown area,” Bagby said. “There is certainly some great churches downtown, but they are mostly on the outskirts of downtown, like in the Museum District, but not so much right in the heart of town.”

About 225 come to Sunday services at the Lamar site. A typical Sunday service consists of Sunday School classes, worship and a message.

Pastor Gregg Matte’s 9:30 a.m. message at the Katy Freeway campus is recorded and then replayed for the 11 a.m. downtown service. When Matte is out of the pulpit, Lee Hsia, the pastor for the Lamar location, preaches the message.

Hsia, 39, is a graduate of Rice University and was born in Shanghai, China. While attending Rice, he attended church at First Baptist. He also served with Evangelism Explosion, a ministry that counsels with pastors and church leaders on the strategy for relational evangelism. One of the churches he worked with was First Baptist.

“My emphasis is outreach and equipping,” Hsia said. “The Bible tells us to equip the saints for work in ministry. I do a lot of leadership training, teaching evangelism and outreach. We are about to start diversity training at our downtown campus; we really want our church to reflect the city of Houston in its diversity. I am excited about how diverse we are; we have a big range of ages, races and socio-economic levels.”

Hsia said five groups are targeted – the homeless, college students, artists, business people and Texas Medical Center professionals and students.

“There are so many performing and visual artists in the downtown area,” Hsia said.

“We would love for them to come to our church and check out the claims of Christ,” he said.

He added, “We have had quite a few homeless people come, and many of them have started coming regularly for worship, becoming a part of our church family.”

Houston’s First Baptist Church has always been involved in missions.

“The DNA of Houston’s First Baptist is in our church,” Hsia said.

“We have the feel of a small church, but with the resources of a big church.”

Jan
28

Former Killswitch Engage Vocalist Jesse Leach Offers ‘No Comment’ to Possible Reunion

1327746789 90 Former Killswitch Engage Vocalist Jesse Leach Offers ‘No Comment’ to Possible Reunion

Facebook: Jesse Leach

After the official announcement that longtime Killswitch Engage vocalist Howard Jones was leaving the band, talk quickly turned to who is replacement will be. The first name that came to many minds was original Killswitch vocalist Jesse Leach. However, Leach has pleaded the fifth on the rumors and officially gave fans a “no comment” on his personal Facebook page.

Within the original statement explaining Jones’ departure, Killswitch Engage were very clear about continuing their saga even without the beloved vocalist. Only two days later after the announcement, former KsE vocalist and current Times of Grace / The Empire Shall Fall vocalist Jesse Leach posted bible verse, ‘Ecclesiastes 3.’ The King James version states, “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.”

Whether intentional or unintentional, the vocalist further added fuel to the fire of his KsE comeback rumors even when he posted, “I go where the spirit leads me,” with various fans responding, “To Killswitch?!”

Leach continued to leave the question unanswered until today (Jan. 9) with the post, “Stop trying to read in between the lines of my posts. If I have something to say, I WILL say it. For the moment I have no comments on KSE.”

With no announcement of a new singer having been recruited, fans are left to continue their speculation regarding just who will wield the microphone for the popular metalcore act.

Jan
28

Free Times: Movie Reviews – Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, Red Tails, Underworld Open

1327745622 94 Free Times: Movie Reviews   Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, Red Tails, Underworld Open

Opening This Week

Thomas Horn and Tom Hanks star as son and father in Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close ★★★ The central story elements — the 9/11 attacks; a grieving family; a mysterious, mute neighbor — are the stuff that make critics numb with fear of emotionally manipulative preciousness, but the sentimentality here has an unexpected edge. The adaptation of Jonathan Safran Foer’s novel casts Thomas Horn as 11-year-old Oskar Schell, whose father (Tom Hanks) died in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. One year after the attacks, a still-mourning Oskar finds among his dad’s belongings a key bearing the enigmatic label “BLACK,” launching Oskar on a quest through New York City to find its meaning. Oskar’s one big collection of quirks as a character, and the suggestion is that he’s somewhere on the autism spectrum. That single-mindedness helps bypass potential sad-boy stumbling blocks, with director Stephen Daldry finding off-kilter ways to explore the search for closure. Max von Sydow (as the aforementioned mysterious mute neighbor) adds gravitas to another oddball character; the story never has as much impact once he leaves. But give Daldry and company credit: It’s a tearjerker that somehow doesn’t leave you feeling like you’ve been jerked around. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong)

Haywire A black ops super soldier (Gina Carano) seeks payback after she is betrayed and set up during a mission. (R) (AMC Dutch Square; Regal 7; Regal Sandhill) Red Tails ★★★ For all his fascination with cutting-edge visual effects, as a storyteller George Lucas is as resolutely old-fashioned as contemporary filmmakers get — and both sides of that cinematic identity get a workout in this Lucas-produced WWII drama. It’s the fact-based story of the 332nd Fighter Group of the U.S. Army Air Corps, the first wave of black fighter pilots from the pioneering Tuskeegee Airmen. Director Anthony Hemingway bounces between the flyboys themselves — including the obligatory hot-headed hotshot (David Oyelowo) and his hard-drinking captain (Nate Parker) — and the senior officers (Terrence Howard and Cuba Gooding Jr.) advocating for them to see real action in opposition to institutional bigotry about the capabilities of “negroes.” Plenty of tin-eared dialogue and whoop-it-up take-it-to-jerry action ensue, the kind that almost dares you to snicker at its unapologetic use of war-movie tropes older than World War II itself. The characters are thin, but the dogfights are well-staged, and the throwback sensibility is surprisingly disarming. If Lucas could ever embrace movies where people talk like, well, people, he’d really be on to something. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Sandhill) Underworld: Awakening When human forces discover the existence of the Vampire and Lycan clans, a war to eradicate both species commences. The vampire warrioress Selene (Kate Beckinsale) leads the battle against humankind. (R) (AMC Dutch Square; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Sandhill)

Now Playing

The Adventures of Tintin ★★★ Adapting the comic-book series created by the Belgian writer and artist Hergé in 1929 into motion-capture animation, Steven Spielberg follows the titular hero (Jamie Bell), a young investigative reporter, seeking a lost treasure connected to the perpetually inebriated Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). Visually, Tintin offers an exponential leap in the potential for the technology, with action set pieces — most notably the remarkable, dizzying centerpiece chase through a Moroccan seaside village — that it’s hard to imagine any other filmmaker pulling off as effectively. But Tintin suffers from a central character who’s a bland engine of determined, cowlick-haired pluckiness. While supporting players provide occasional energy and humor, our hero simply grinds from one plot point to another whenever stuff isn’t flying or exploding. It’s like Raiders of the Lost Ark, if Indiana Jones had been played by Taylor Lautner. (PG) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike 14; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Sandhill)

Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked ★ Hey, kids! You’ve wasted enough money watching excruciatingly formulaic kid-flicks; why not make one instead and take advantage of suckers instead of being one? It’s easy! First, grab some sort of familiar characters (e.g., the Chipmunks) that you can turn over to computer animators. Then, generate a random conflict, like having them stranded on an island, unaware that their “father,” Dave (Jason Lee, who at least had the good sense to spend most of the previous film in traction) and antagonistic ex-record mogul Ian (David Cross) are similarly marooned. Choreograph some vaguely amusing slapstick chases. License the rights to a half-dozen pop hits that can be recorded in helium-high cover versions. Waste the talents of people like Anna Faris and Amy Poehler on unrecognizable voices. Be sure to add a couple of pop-culture references that only parents will get (here, a couple of nods to Cast Away). Then just market the hell out of it and wait for lazy parents to throw their cash at you! C’mon, the rights to Hong Kong Phooey and Captain Caveman are just sitting out there with dollar signs all over them. (PG) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

Beauty and the Beast 3-D ★★★★ I was surprised to learn that Disney’s Beauty and the Beast would be re-released in 3-D, because in my mind, it has ever been thus. Twenty years removed from being the last animated feature to receive a Best Picture Oscar nomination, the fairy-tale romance between the smart, bold Belle (Paige O’Hara) and the surly, isolated Beast (Robby Benson) is still gloriously charming in its eficiency. The songs by Alan Menken and the late Howard Ashman are among the finest in the entire Disney canon, from the exuberant “Be Our Guest” to Angela Lansbury’s lovely performance of the title song. But I’m not sure I ever fully appreciated the character animation of Belle; watch for slight eye movements and wrinkles of the nose that convey an emotional range in keeping with the magnificent music. While technology might only now be allowing Beauty and the Beast to be in actual 3-D for the first time, see it again to appreciate how much depth it always offered in so many ways. (G) (Carmike 14; Regal 7; Regal Pastime)

Contraband ★★ There’s a flicker of hope when Chris Farraday (Mark Wahlberg) — a reformed talented smuggler forced back into “the life” from workaday domesticity to help pay off his screw-up brother-in-law’s debt to a criminal (Giovanni Ribisi) — admits that he’s actually excited about his return, because he’s missed it. But director Baltasar Kormákur — who starred in the Icelandic thriller of which this is a remake — quickly abandons character dynamics for tangled plot machinations and a grittiness that doesn’t blend well with the attempts at Ocean’s Eleven-style heist shenanigans. Predictability isn’t exactly the issue, as the narrative weaves into funky, unexpected territory and the supporting cast features funky work from Ribisi, J.K. Simmons, Diego Luna and others. It simply grinds along without paying off on the idea of a criminal who still romanticizes “the life” suddenly confronting the darker side. (R) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande)

The Darkest Hour In Moscow, five young people lead the charge against an alien race that has attacked Earth via its power supply.  (R) (Carmike 14; Regal Sandhill) The Devil Inside In Italy, a woman becomes involved in a series of unauthorized exorcisms during her mission to discover what happened to her mother, who allegedly murdered three people during her own exorcism. (R) (AMC Dutch Square; Regal 7; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo ★★★ The riveting opening credits convey everything director David Fincher could bring to Stieg Larsson’s über-bestseller — while the rest of the film reminds us how much he can’t change. The centerpiece remains the intersection of disgraced journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) and enigmatic hacker Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) during an investigation into a girl’s long-ago disappearance. Superficially, the material feels like a good fit for Fincher; there’s impressive visual style at work, and Fincher’s masterful pacing had me gripping armrests during scenes where I knew exactly what was coming. But structurally, it’s a plot-heavy potboiler with long stretches of expository interviews occasionally punctuated by sex scenes, and a 20-minute denouement that loses all momentum from the true climax. Larsson deserves credit for introducing an iconic pop-culture character, but it’s not always worth slogging through 150 minutes for parceled-out doses of Lisbeth. (R) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Sandhill)

The Iron Lady ★★★ The opportunity to see Meryl Streep — America’s answer to Shakespearean acting royalty — play Margaret Thatcher is the main reason for checking out this biopic. And, as it turns out, really the only reason. Director Phyllida Lloyd and screenwriter Abi Morgan open in 2009, with a retired Thatcher living under supervised care in the early stages of dementia, before her memory spins her back to her youth and political career. The setup offers hope that the narrative might ditch the relentlessly chronological structure that mires so many cinematic life stories in Wikipedia-entry detail. Then there’s the slump-in-the-chair moment when it turns resolutely conventional. Even as the timeline shifts between 2009 and the past, Lloyd and Morgan focus on the most obvious and least interesting bullet points of each era. It’s disappointing because Streep’s performance is most compelling when she’s conveying the ferocity of Thatcher’s convictions — whether at a time when she has the power to do something about them, or when she no longer does. Streep’s presence guarantees you won’t doubt for a moment that you’ve seen the story of Margaret Thatcher; the rest of the film can’t decide what that story is. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Sandhill)

Joyful Noise ★★ Writer and director Todd Graff’s would-be-uplifting musical dramedy theoretically revolves around a small-town Georgia church choir and its efforts to win a national competition, with the rivalry between the new choir director (Queen Latifah) and the widow of the previous director (Dolly Parton) acting as a loose anchor. But in practical terms it bounces between a half-dozen melodramatic plot threads: the romance between Latifah’s daughter (Keke Palmer) and Parton’s grandson (Jeremy Jordan); the struggles of Latifah’s autistic younger son; economic hardships hitting the choir’s town; tension between Latifah and her soldier husband (Jesse L. Martin). It’s like Glee for audiences who don’t want to have to watch gay characters. Of course, there’s plenty of talk about God’s will and plenty of big gospel-funk production numbers attempting to persuade us it’s all about something bigger than a vanity project for the two female leads, each of whom gets a solo spotlight song. Tossing in enough gratuitous naughtiness to land a PG-13 rating while simultaneously scolding the idea of gratuitous naughtiness, it’s a movie where the only thing distracting from its narrative incoherence is the cynical insincerity with which it panders to its Christian target audience. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

Mission: Impossible — Ghost Protocol ★★★ There was once a time at the movies when the merely spectacular was enough — but that was decades and several generations of CGI ago. Impressively choreographed action abounds in the latest installment in this espionage thriller series, in which Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) and his team (Jeremy Renner, Paula Patton and Simon Pegg) become international fugitives while trying to track down nuclear terrorist Hendricks (Michael Nykvist). The finest moment comes from Ethan’s dizzying climb up the side of Dubai’s Burj Khalifa skyscraper, which director Brad Bird (The Incredibles) turns into a breathtaking showcase for IMAX viewings. But the strong romantic relationship and killer villain that invigorated 2006’s Mission:Impossible 3 are both lacking here; there’s almost no effort made to make Hendricks’ motivations a central plot element. And the bantering interaction between Cruise and company are amusing while doing little to establish strong connections. For two hours, it’s almost entirely about showing off cool technology — and in an age where most of us carry around cool technology in our pockets, we need to expect a little more from our action movies. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Regal 7; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

The Muppets ★★★★ Maybe you have to love everything the Muppets were in their late-’70s heyday to appreciate why five chickens performing an all-clucked version of Cee Lo Green’s “F#!k You” is so quintessentially Muppet-tastic: musical, silly and subversive in equal measure. Co-writer and star Jason Segel and writing partner Nicholas Stoller tell the story of  a Muppet fan named Walter (Peter Linz), whose brother Gary (Segel) helps him reunite the long-retired Muppets for a benefit show. The resulting plot is a mix of Muppet Movie road trip, Andy Hardy “Let’s put on a show” musicals, and the “We’re putting the band back together” premise of The Blues Brothers, allowing for 97 minutes of puns, broad visual gags, self-referential asides, hilarious musical numbers and genuine warmth — and nearly every last bit of it works. It’s hard not to ponder how much nostalgia plays into one’s response, but this a brand of nostalgia that comes from showing such a deep respect for your source material that you allow another generation to fall in love with them for the exact same reason the previous generation did. Segel and Stoller loved the Muppets enough to give them a showcase that’s a clucking masterpiece. (PG) (Regal Columbiana Grande)

My Week With Marilyn ★★★ There’s a certain safety to nostalgic tales of a wide-eyed kid meeting a show-biz legend — My Favorite Year, Me and Orson Welles — but they keep delivering the goods. Based on the memoir by Colin Clark, My Week With Marilyn tells of how the 23-year-old Colin (Eddie Redmayne) uses family connections to land a job as production assistant for the 1956 filming of Laurence Olivier’s (Kenneth Branagh) The Prince and the Showgirl in London. That means a chance to meet Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams), and Colin become her confidant when her erratic behavior alienates the rest of the crew. Director Simon Curtis and screenwriter Adrian Hodges find an effective balance between the Colin-Marilyn relationship and the on-set scenes, the latter a terrific showcase for Branagh as the increasingly infuriated Olivier. And while Williams is likely to earn awards attention simply because she’s playing a famous person, she finds a unique way under the skin of a woman who understands the fiction of her own persona enough to ask “Should I be her?” when meeting a bunch of fans. There’s nothing revelatory either in approach or execution, but it’s as effortlessly easy to watch as Marilyn herself. (R) (Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande)

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows ★★★ It was far from elementary that director Guy Ritchie would try to improve on a formula that banked $200 million in 2009, so give him credit for coming up with something more satisfying than its predecessor. A more streamlined plot finds Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Watson (Jude Law) investigating the connection between the cunning Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) and a series of bombings that have pushed Germany and France to the brink of war. The mere presence of the detective’s greatest enemy raises the stakes; the over-the-top action sequences have been toned down such that the climactic confrontation between Holmes and Moriarty takes place mostly in their minds. Most notably, the film commits boldly to a more-than-casual bromance between Holmes and Watson; the two men even share a formal dance as they ponder the details of Moriarty’s plans. Ritchie being Ritchie, the action he does include often feels more frantic than exciting, and some plot explanations make no chronological sense of you take a moment to think about it. But for significant stretches uninterrupted by pointless bombast, A Game of Shadows is fun, witty and — shockingly — occasionally restrained. (PG-13) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike Wynnsong; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

The Sitter A college student on suspension is coaxed into babysitting the kids next door, fully unprepared for the wild night ahead of him. (R) (Carmike 14)

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy ★★★★ How is it that so many people seem to agree that this new adaptation of John Le Carré’s novel is terrific, even as so many people seem to agree that it’s nearly impossible to follow cleanly? That’s the tangled appeal of this sedate espionage thriller, set in Cold War-era 1970s England, where veteran intelligence agent George Smiley (Gary Oldman) investigates which high-ranking British intelligence official might be a mole feeding secrets to the Soviets. The sensational cast — Tom Hardy, Colin Firth, Toby Jones, Mark Strong — becomes part of a story that’s less about the whodunit than it is about the personal secrets that make every operation open to compromise. And yet there are also effectively tense set pieces in director Tomas Alfredson’s adaptation, less dependent on overt action than on trying to keep the best poker face. Only the overly complex plot keeps Tinker Tailor from being thoroughly engrossing, leading viewers to stumble their way towards the realization that the spy game is even more of a game — and one without winners — than one might have imagined. (R) (Nickelodeon Theatre)

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part One The Quileute and the Volturi close in on expecting parents Edward (Robert Pattinson) and Bella (Kristen Stewart), whose unborn child poses different threats to the wolf pack and vampire coven. (PG-13) (Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Sandhill)

War Horse ★★★ Steven Spielberg’s version of Michael Malpurgo’s book-turned-Tony-winning play follows a thoroughbred named Joey, from an English farm in 1912 with the boy who loves him, Albert (Jeremy Irvine), through adventures in wartime France serving in the cavalry. It’s not easy finding a through-line for a horse’s-eye-view narrative, but Spielberg and his screenwriters do successfully explore different ways to be brave, with some fascinating PG-13 tweaks to the graphic brand of battle scene Spielberg mastered in Saving Private Ryan. He also falls back on old tricks to make sure we grasp capital-S significance: trademark under-the-chin hero shots; glorious landscapes set to John Williams music. It’s risky leaving Albert for a large chunk of the film, because the boy in this boy-and-his-dog tale begins to seem somewhat irrelevant. As effective as some of the episodes might be, War Horse still feels essentially episodic. (PG-13) (Regal 7; Regal Columbiana Grande; Regal Pastime; Regal Sandhill)

We Bought a Zoo ★★★ Cameron Crowe makes the kind of nakedly emotional movies that inspire adoration when they work (Say Anything, Jerry Maguire) and derision when they don’t (Elizabethtown). His adaptation of British journalist Benjamin Mee’s memoir re-casts Mee (Matt Damon) as a Southern Californian, recently widowed and left with two young children. Looking to give the family a fresh start, Mee buys a property that includes a small, run-down wildlife park, and joins the remaining staff in trying to get it operational again. Crowe treads in dangerously sentimental waters here by combining grief, animals and adorable kids (Maggie Elizabeth Jones, as Mee’s 7-year-old daughter, takes the Jonathan Lipnicki torch). But he shows his usual deft touch with dialogue that’s heartfelt yet sharp, and puts together a terrific supporting cast including Scarlett Johansson, Thomas Haden Church and Elle Fanning. While the surrogate-family vibe that Crowe seems to be looking for in Mee’s rag-tag bunch of employees doesn’t quite come together, We Bought a Zoo pulls off a nifty trick: It puts a lump in your throat without making you feel that you’ve been given saccharine through a feeding tube. (PG) (AMC Dutch Square; Carmike 14; Regal 7; Regal Sandhill)

Theaters

AMC Dutch Square 14 800 Bush River Rd., 888-262-4386 Carmike Cinemas 14 122 Afton Ct., 781-3067 Carmike Wynnsong 10 5320 Forest Dr., 782-8100 Columbia Place Stadium Cinemas 7201 Two Notch Rd.,  419-5454 Monetta Drive-In 5822 Columbia Hwy North, Monetta, S.C., 803-685-7949 Nickelodeon Theatre 937 Main St., 254-3433 Regal Cinema 7 3400 Forest Dr., 790-9001 Regal Columbiana Grande Stadium 14 1250 Bower Pkwy., 407-9898 Regal Pastime Pavilion Cinemas 8 929 North Lake Dr., Lexington, 951-3604 Regal Sandhill Cinemas 16 450 Town Center Place, 736-1811 St. Andrews Road Multi Cinemas 527 St. Andrews Rd., 772-7469

Jan
28

First step to victory is conceding defeat

1327744394 83 First step to victory is conceding defeat

ATTENDANCE at Alcoholics Anonymous is the best method of helping alcoholics remain sober.

There are no dues or fees for membership in this unique organisation, which is entirely self-supporting. The only requirement for membership in Alcoholics Anonymous is a desire, no matter how inchoate or half-hearted, to stop drinking.

In terms of long-term abstinence from alcohol and other drugs, AA has the numbers. Even so, not all alcoholics remain receptive to AA’s simple message that, for an alcoholic, it is the first drink that does the damage. No matter how long they are sober, alcoholics are only given a reprieve from active alcoholism if they know that they need help.

It is not easy for alcoholics to stop drinking and to stay stopped. It is also often extremely difficult for alcoholics to negotiate the internal and external world with nothing in their blood but blood (that is, free of alcohol and all other drugs) and without damaging themselves in other ways. This is in part because many alcoholics, no matter how they might seem on the outside, are often extremely vulnerable in the first few years of not drinking. Often other addictions go hand in hand with active alcoholism.

Achieving stable abstinence is, for an alcoholic, a difficult and tricky business. One of the founders of AA in Australia, Sydney-based psychiatrist Dr Sylvester Minogue, used to say he had never seen an alcoholic get anywhere near emotionally and mentally together under three to five years.

My experience is that this applies to many, if not most, recovering alcoholics.

One of the many fallacies about AA is the claim that to be a member one has to be a Christian. This is just not true. Many members are atheists or agnostics.Although fundamentalist religions of all sorts do so much damage, one of my favourite Bible quotes is: "The Lord’s house has many mansions."

This means that in AA there is room for us all – atheists, agnostics, god-botherers, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus. As one wag puts it, AA is comprised of those who believe in God, those who don’t believe in God, and those who think they are God!

In AA I have always been an atheist. Yet on Australia Day, I was 42 years free of alcohol and other drugs – which is wonderful, but what really matters is what I am going to do from now on. And the great reality for me, as for all other members of the AA movement, is that from this specific place and time, I need never drink alcohol or take other drugs again.

When I say that I am an atheist I mean that I am not a theist. But in AA’s language I do believe in a "power greater than myself" – if only the AA group to which I belong, the other groups I attend, and indeed the AA movement as a whole.

I don’t believe that I am sober because of an isolated exercise of the will. In contrast, I believe that I am only sober because I realise, in the words of AA’s first suggested step of recovery, that, on my own, I am "powerless over alcohol" and that I need to surrender to that crucial fact, each and every day.

If I am to remain sober, I believe that I need to regularly attend AA meetings and to consciously do what I can about AA’s program of recovery.

That is to say, I am only free of alcohol and other drugs, not because I am smart or wilful or clever, but because I have accepted a key of AA lore.

In the words of one AA stalwart, the late Australian boxing champion Bobbie Delaney: "I’m not a retired alcoholic. I’m a defeated one."

I like that way of putting it. I’m not fighting alcohol and other drugs. I’ve thrown in the towel, and accepted defeat. But in my opinion I need to surrender every day. Otherwise I would forget where I came from and start to drink again. Then, very soon, I would be back where I was when I finished drinking – which was at the gates of insanity and death.

Hence I strongly believe that, for me, to drink is to die.

This doesn’t mean that other things don’t matter at all but that everything else is contingent on my sobriety and my good relations in AA. This fundamental fact places everything else in its true perspective.

Emeritus Professor of History and Politics at Griffith University Ross Fitzgerald is the author of 35 books, including his memoir My Name Is Ross: An Alcoholic’s Journey, published by NewSouth Books, Sydney

Jan
28

AD 2012 or 2012 CE?

1327743187 43 AD 2012 or 2012 CE?

In the English-speaking world, the use of the secular phrases “Before the Common Era” and “Common Era,” abbreviated “BCE” and “CE,” have shown up in academia, in scientific and historical works, and increasingly among the mainstream media.  Among reasons for replacing the fifteen-hundred-year-old societal norms of “BC” and “AD” is the the perceived need for sensitivity toward those who do not embrace the Christian values expressed in denoting years by “Before Christ” and “Anno Domini,” or “Year of our Lord.”  For a number of reasons, though, not only does the new dating standard fail in its desired effect, but it may ultimately cause unintended confusion and polarization, not to mention offense to the Christian majority.

Before AD 532, there was no real dating system which distinguished between the eras we now think of as BC and AD.  At that time in Rome, a monk by the name of Dionysus Exiguus, while put to work by Pope John I setting out dates for future celebrations of Easter, estimated the year of the incarnation and birth of Jesus Christ as being 753 years after the founding of Rome.  This AD method of dating was later adopted by the eighth-century Venerable Bede in Historia Ecclesiastica.  His use of “Anno ab incarnatione Domini” was shortened to” Anno Domini,” or AD.  Bede was also the first to use a designation for the distinction of the years before the birth of Christ, though he did not, of course, use the modern English “Before Christ.”  As it became necessary to reform the Justinian calendar, the BC/AD method was then incorporated into the Gregorian calendar of 1582.  That calendar has been used widely since, and although many other cultures continue to use their own, it has become, for the sake of consistency in international trade and communication, the standard.

In the nineteenth century, though, an alternative to the BC/AD dating standard showed up in English-language works of Jewish history.  ”CE,” or “Common Era,” began to be used around 1838, and the use of “BCE,” or “Before the Common Era,” is found starting in about 18811.  Of course, since the latter date is actually the year 5642 in the Hebrew calendar, these are designations superimposed upon the Gregorian calendar (used by the Jewish world for many day-to-day functions) while referring to Jewish history.  So this use of “BCE” and “CE” — until the late 20th century — was rather esoteric.

However, in 1999, then-United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan proclaimed that “the Christian calendar no longer belongs exclusively to Christians.  There is so much interaction between people of different faiths and cultures — different civilizations, if you like — that some shared way of reckoning time is a necessity.  And so the Christian Era has become the Common Era”2.  Not long after, instances of more mainstream use of the new designations emerged.  (For the sake of convenience, I shall here on out refer to “BCE” and “CE” as PCD, for Politically Correct Dating).  Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia has a somewhat cautious entry for PCD in 2001, stating that “some people use” these designations as opposed to the traditional standard3.  But by 2008, The World Almanac and Book of Facts authoritatively refers to PCD as the “notation now preferred”4.

Preferred for what reasons?  And by whom is it preferred?  In 1997, attorney Adena Berkowitz preferred that “in the year of our Lord” not be included with the date (an option then newly offered) on an application to practice law before the Supreme Court.  She said, “Given the multicultural society that we live in, the traditional Jewish designations — BCE and CE — cast a wider net of inclusion, if I may be so politically correct”5.

But as this more widespread use began to be noticed, negative reactions arose as well.  The late William Safire opined, “For non-Christians to knock themselves out avoiding the word ‘Christ’ when it so clearly refers to a person from whose birth we date our secular calendar’s count seems unduly strained and almost intolerant”5.  An interesting development making the news five years ago was the turnaround by the Board of Education of the State of Kentucky; in the spring of 2006, educators were to include PCD in curriculum standards “for exposure to those terms” and “to facilitate students’ familiarity”6.  Later that year, it was decided that those designations were to be removed from instructional guidelines, following not only input from certain Christian groups, but general public outcry as well.

Another development which brought about great public reaction was the announcement by the British Broadcasting Company in late September 2011 of the adoption of PCD.  A Church of England spokesman insisted that the traditional time standards of BC/AD “more clearly reflect Britain’s Christian heritage”2.  Andrew Marr, a well-known BBC “presenter,” presented his own refusal to make the switch7.  Then, in early October, a Department of Education spokesman clarified the British government’s position after the pro-PCD announcement by the publicly funded broadcasting company.  He stated that BC/AD naming was, in fact, not offensive, and that educators should continue to use the system2.  Obviously, attempts to promote PCD for the sake of sensitivity to and inclusiveness of non-Christians have offended the Christian majority.

Confusion reigns as well.  For one, PCD still has, as its point of reference, the birth of Christ.  For convenience in not having to change the widely used hinge upon which history is set forth, “79 CE” refers to the same year as does “AD 79.”  A different dating standard, then, is using the same reference as that of the traditional for “before” and “after” — that of the foundational event for the Christian faith.  The only difference is in how it is referred to.

Also confusing is precisely what “common” means in referring to an era.  If the Webster’s New World Dictionary main definition for the word — “belonging equally to, or shared by every one or all”8 — seems to make the most sense for its use in “Common Era,” why, then, are the years before the birth of Christ not a Common Era as well?  What distinguishes that era from the following one, if one uses Webster’s definition?  Perhaps the true definitions which fit the reason for the use of “common” are the seventh — “having no rank” — and the ninth — “not refined; vulgar; low; coarse.”

In fact, the European use of the “Era Vulgaris” or “EV,” meaning “Vulgar Era,” as predecessor to the English “Common Era” originally referred to the EV system as “non-regal.”  This makes the most sense in the case of Johannes Kepler, who used the EV notation in a book in 1615.  Kepler was at odds with the Catholic Church, hence with the Holy Roman Empire, and therefore would have used Era Vulgaris to mean “not regal.”  A Lutheran, he may not have necessarily meant it as a secular affirmation, though.

EV was also used interchangeably with AD among other European Christians of that day.  In this case, the current use of “common” in “Before the Common Era” and “Common Era” is accidental, and totally nonsensical, as well.  (Adding to the confusion, some present-day sources allow for the “C” to stand for “Christian” while others admit that it is sometimes used to mean “current.”)  When curious schoolchildren want to know why one era is common and the one that precedes it is not, there is no real answer.  There has always been an easy explanation, however, for the delineation between the eras BC and AD — the birth of one Jesus Christ.

“Before Christ,” if one is concerned about sensitivity towards non-Christians, may not necessarily be viewed as referring to the belief system that Jesus is the Messiah, since it is not always known in contemporary culture that “Christ” means just that.  “Anno Domini,” however, translated as “The Year of Our Lord” (what the Jewish attorney objected to using in her application to the Supreme Court), is another story altogether.  That it asserts that a new era was brought about by the birth of Jesus, being Lord and Messiah, makes the phrase an affirmation of the basis of Christianity.  But we live in a predominantly Christian society.  We are surrounded by a multitude of Christian names.  Are we to rename St. Louis, St. Albans, and Christchurch in an attempt to be culturally sensitive?  The renaming of St. Petersburg is brought to mind — an agenda of de-Christianization was at work in Russia as the city was renamed Leningrad in 1914.

What is happening now seems to be almost pre-emptive.  In anticipation of offense by those of other faiths, or of no faith, the promotion of PCD is oddly ubiquitous in a mainly Christian society.  And, as Reverend Austin Miles protests, we are experiencing “a major alteration of history, without notice, or fanfare.”  The instances cited earlier — the reaction to the Kentucky board, the reaction to the BBC’s pronouncement — were by citizens and groups who felt blindsided by something for which they had not been warned, prepared, or given any option for input.  This scenario is offensive to the Christian majority.

Regarding any perceived offense to non-Christians by traditional dating standards, I am not able to find instances where they are described as discriminatory until after PCD began to be promoted.  (Ms. Berkowitz made her decision, having already had it suggested to her.)  Where was the outcry, the widespread insistence upon changes that precipitated such decisions?  There has never been a dating standard Rosa Parks, nor has there been a Politically Correct Dating March on Washington.  No politician has run on the platform that publicly funded schools and museums must adopt a more culturally sensitive dating reference.  No related initiatives have been up for vote.  Also, where was the public-square discussion before such pronouncements of changes?

As well, the reason for eliminating a fifteen-hundred-year-old non-problematic time standard is lost on many who acknowledge and accept the Christian values implicit in BC and AD (though many in our society use the initials without ever expanding them to their full terms).  We all in our daily lives, in a Western society with a lengthy and complex history, use a great number of names of pagan origin.  Our weekdays — for example, “Thursday,” named for the Norse god Thor — originate in decidedly non-Christian cultural history.  A great deal of our vocabulary , including the names of many months of the year, as well as the Hindu-Arabic numerals we use, also reflect contributions to our Western culture which are not Christian.  We of the Christian majority tend to accept these factors for what they are — elements from diverse sources making up a mature, complex culture.  Indeed, unless we are to open a can of worms and suggest that non-Christian elements be expunged, there should not be such cavalier disposal of any Christian aspects of our culture in pre-emptive moves to appease non-Christians.  Duncan Steel in Masking Time rejects the secular assignments of PCD as “selective.”  Anglican Bishop Peter Jensen claims that such changes reflect an “intellectually absurd attempt to write Christ out of human history.”

Here, then, is where polarization comes into the picture.  In the attempt to appease non-Christians in our society, we are pre-empting sensitivity with PCD.  An environment filled with attempts at political correctness may lead someone to feel offense at AD dating.  But we live in a predominately Christian society.  Is it possible, then, that those things which may not have mattered much to non-Christians suddenly have become issues, merely due to the implied responsibility of the supposed victim of offense to accept his or her assigned status of victimhood?  This reeks of disingenuousness on the part of both PCD promoters and the so-called “victims” of the traditional BC/AD.

Disingenuous, too, is the already-mentioned fact of the point of reference in time not changing — only how PCD refers to it, by ignoring that date as being that of the birth of Christ.  Polarization occurs as Christians recognize this fact.  It may appear, then, as change being made merely for its own sake.  In this case, inclusivity, as the Jewish attorney chooses to define it, is not inclusivity at all; rather, she decides to ignore a fifteen-hundred-year-old dating standard used by Western civilization, when, in the true spirit of inclusivity, she might have embraced it as we in our daily lives embrace the multicultural hodgepodge which makes up our overall culture.

BCE and CE are anemic forerunners of a Non-Culture which is to be avoided at all costs, for such a world reflects the unwillingness of citizens to get along.  Politically correct dating’s ability to confuse, conflict, and polarize must be dealt with by frank discourse aimed at deciding whether these changes really make any sense at all.

1 The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, #3rd Ed. 2005

2 Chris Hastings. “BBC Turns its Back on the Year of Our Lord.” Mail on Sunday, 9/25/2011

3 Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th edition; 10/01/2001, p.1-1

4 Helen A. Gaudette. “Chronology of World History” World Almanac and Book of Facts, 2008, p.658-658.

5 Wire, S. “William Safire-On Language-moon plaque Copyright Times Colonist Victoria 08/17/1997

6 Education Week “Kentucky board Gives Tentative Nod to Secular Time Designation” 4/26/2006, Vol.25 Issue33, p.15-15,1/5p

7 Ben Todd, Paul Sims; Daily Mail 9/26/2011 p.12

8 Webster’s New World Dictionary of theAmerican Language The World Publishing Company, New York 1964

Jan
28

Controversial revision of Bible receives approval

1327741987 45 Controversial revision of Bible receives approvalCHRIS GARDNER

A biblical scholar from Cambridge who had a hand in translating the world’s most popular English Bible has given his blessing to a controversial new revision.

Murray Harris, whose speciality is koine or Hellenistic Greek spoken between 330 BC and 330AD, told the Waikato Times he supported the latest revision of the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible which has been criticised by some Christians as being too inclusive when it came to translating gender related words.

A lot of the debate is around the word adelphoi which can mean brothers or brothers and sisters, depending on context. Critics prefer it to only be translated as brothers. The US based Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood complained the NIV 2011 kept most of the 3,600 gender-related problems it had found with the 2005 revision called Today’s New International Version (TNIV).

Mr Harris, professor emeritus of New Testament Exegesis and Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, disagreed with the criticism.

The former faculty member of the Divinity School at the UK’s Cambridge University helped translate the New Testament books of Colossians and Ephesians from the original anicent Greek into English ahead of their first publication in 1973 and reviewed other translators work for the New Testament books of Romans and Hebrews.

The whole NIV text was reviewed by the Committee for Bible Translation, on which Mr Harris served until about 10 years ago, resulting in the publication of the revised editions in 1984 and 2005.

“General the changes in the TNIV have been incorporated into the NIV 2011,” Mr Harris said. “In no case has there been a change that alters any Christian truth. It’s on textual matters.”

Mr Harris said a  lot of the changes had been to clarity language which was unclear, such as in the book of Romans Chapter 3 Verse 25 which has read: “God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished.”

It now reads: “God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished.”

Asked whether the revised NIV was the most accurate translation of the Bible yet, Mr Harris said: “I would not like to say the most accurate, but it is as accurate as can be expected.

“I think the NIV 2011 reads better than new Revised Standard Version. For accuracy and clarity it’s hard to beat the NIV 2011. It’s what we call the crown jewel and is the finest version to eclipse the King James Version in terms of sales.”

Don Moffatt, a Hamilton based lecturer in biblical studies, said most of the controversy around the TNIV was an emotive reaction based on tradition rather than good translation practise.

“Those who stirred up the most trouble were generally people with little or no knowledge of the original languages or of translation processes. The translation committee reviewed all the cases of gender neutral language  and I’m pleased the committee retained the emphasis on keeping the language inclusive where warranted.”

He downloaded a copy of the revised NIV after the Times contacted him and, after a brief review of the revision, said he was generally happy with it.

“Most of the modernising word changes seem to be fair and reasonable, for example ankle chains to anklet. They also reflect advances in the understanding of the original languages.”

Mr Moffatt was pleased the translators had made it clear in the revision where there was ambiguity around a word.

“It allows general readers to raise questions about ambiguous texts rather than assume they are unambiguous,” he said.

He thought the committee had handled controversial texts with care.

“No translation is perfect. Like any scholar I can find things I’d quibble about but in general I think the translation committee has done a good job.

Dr Bob Robinson, senior lecturer at Laidlaw College’s School of Theology, Mission and Ministry studied under the late Francis Foulkes, another New Zealander involved in translating the original NIV.

“I think Francis might be disappointed that NIV 2011 doesn’t go as far as it could in inclusive language,” Dr Robinson said.

Mr Foulkes was also part of the international Committee of Bible Translation which delivered the original NIV translation in the 1970s.

Dr Robinson said Mr Foulkes  would almost certainly approve of much of the latest revision.

“I say that both because of years of working with Francis and because of published material from him in which he defends the principles of Bible translation that undergird the NIV and the importance of inclusive language,” Dr Robinson said.

Dr Robinson described himself as a fan of the revised NIV.

“The NIV is easily the most widely accepted and used Bible in New Zealand Protestant churches as a whole, and certainly in the (still-growing) evangelical and charismatic/pentecostal parts of Protestantism.

“In a number of key passages in Paul the tone is less defensively Protestant and more faithful to the original Greek. It’s more inclusive, than the original NIV, in its people reference, but not as inclusive as the TNIV. That’s a pity.”

Dr Robinson said most of the alternatives to the NIV were worse.

“Either archaic or too loose or modern but too stilted. The New Revised Standard does compete but, despite being around since, 1989 simply hasn’t gained traction in the churches  and certainly not among young people.”

Dr Robinson put much of the NIV’s popularity down to its being published by Zondervan, an American giant among Christian publishers, which put out a range of editions.

“This not only means that a huge range of editions are available but an extensive range of related electronic material as as well – and that’s an important plus in a digital age.”

The NIV 2011 willl be on sale, with other Bible translations, at the Manna Christian Store.

New International Version (2011) Study Bible

Reviewed by Chris Gardner

Have you ever tried translating one language into another? It can be difficult rendering the simplest of modern English phrases into another languages with different grammatical rules.

The simple English word “sorry”, for example, is translated in German into “es tut mir leid” which, when literally translated back into English, means “it gives me pain”.

So imagine the difficulty facing the Committee on Bible Translation whose members translated the original 66 books of the Bible into English in the 1970s.

Their source material was written between about 3,500 years and 2000 years ago in ancient versions of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

Previous English translations, the most loved being the King James Version published in 1611, were word for word translations. They would have been clunky to their original English audience, and are clunkier still to a modern reader not used to the use of words like thy, thou and whosoever.

The NIV translation moved away from word for word towards the thought for thought method of translation so was easier to understand for modern readers.

The first NIV translation of the 27 books of the New Testament was published in 1973 and the 39 books of the Old Testament followed in 1978.

The English language has changed considerably since then, and scholars have a much better understanding of the source languages, prompting a few revisions since then.

The last, Today’s New International Version, took 10 years to complete and was published in 2005 to an outcry from some conservative Christians for its gender inclusive language. Where the original text said “sons of God“, for example, but the committee thought it meant both men and women, they translated it as “children of God”.

Ninety five per cent of the 2011 revision is exactly the same as the 1984 text.

The word “saints”, used 68 times in the 1984 translation, is now translated as “God’s people”.

Film directors Steven Speilberg and George Lucas are to blame for one major change.

The word “alien”, which crops up 102 times in the 1984 translation, has been changed to “foreigner” thanks to the modern meaning of the word explored in films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, ET the Extra Terrestrial and the Star Wars franchise.

Another change, because of evolving English, is around the nation Moab’s “overweening pride”, written of in Isaiah 16:6, which is now rendered as “great arrogance”.

The Greek word kataluma, previously thought to refer to an “inn”, is now understood to mean “guest room”, which changes the Christmas story as told in Luke somewhat.

The Easter story, told in Mark, is also changed with the revelation that those crucified either side of Jesus were, in fact, “rebels” and not “robbers” as previously translated. And, where the Gospel of John blames the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus in previous translations, the 2011 holds the “Jewish leaders” responsible.

Many modern editions of the Bible have charts, to help you convert ancient measurements into metric or imperial measurements if the translator hasn’t already done so, and maps.

But the Study Bible, just one of many different 2011 editions, goes much further. So much so that a colleague who picked a sample off my desk remarked, “Oh, a Bible with pictures.” It has 400 full colour photographs, maps, charts and illustrations to help make those alien, sorry foreign, biblical lands more real.

There are many ways of dividing the Bible up. The most common is Old Testament, written before the birth of Jesus, and the New Testament, written about his birth, life, death and resurrection and the effect he had on the then known world.

Scholars divide it into six section. The Pentateuch comprised the five books of Moses, then there’s History, Poetry and  Prophets in the Old Testament. The New Testament starts with Gospels and Acts, written by those who knew Jesus, Letters, from early disciples to the growing church, and the Revelation of John.

All six of these sections get an introduction, from the Committee on Bible Translation, as do each biblical book. The book of Genesis, for example, gets a six page introduction which looks at authorship, audience, date and theme. This can be very useful for the first time reader, and refresh those returning to a particular book.

Once you get into the main part of the Bible the NIV 2011 text is accompanied by notes which take you through a commentary of the text one verse at a time.The most fascinating of the 20,000 study notes are the archeological ones which pair verses with actual sites.

– © Fairfax NZ News

Would the Book of Joshua show that genocide is one of the commandments of a Jealous God ? fundamental What is the relevance and impact of Num 31:14-18, Ps 137:0 and Mark 16:18 on contemporary issues of violence by Jews vs Palestinian Muslims, Fundamental Evangelical Christians and the Baby Killers, Islam against all Infidels and even among themselves ?

Jan
28

Book of Inspiration: Preacher’s book picked up by publisher

1327740787 76 Book of Inspiration: Preachers book picked up by publisher

In his early days of the ministry, Rev. C.M. Cole was in Los Angeles getting a lot of experience. And when a prominent preacher spoke, Cole was inspired by four simple words, “revival in a graveyard.” “At that time, as far as our particular group was concerned, this Northeast Missouri area was a ‘graveyard’,” Cole, the reverend of New Hope Gospel Center in Hannibal, said. “A number of the churches have gone defunct and declined, and had members that disappeared or grown up, grown away and the rural churches of Northeast Missouri were in trouble. So I was inspired by that message. “It hit me in the heart. I took it literally and believed it. And I came back, had no resources, no financial resources or supports. Just a message.” So not only did Cole do everything he could to revive these areas, he used the message as the title of his new book, “Revival in a Graveyard.” He’s written other works before in his attempts to resurrect church participation, but this is the first of his writings to get the attention of a publisher. “The message of God is a message of power and achievement, and accomplishment,” Cole said in the hopes his book provides readers with inspiration. “The losers, failures, and people who have generally experienced defeat can become winners.”

STORY CONTINUES AFTER VIDEO

The idea of the book came from Cole’s college days, and it just took off from there. “My adviser, when I was working on a graduate degree, he advised that I should do a survey and a study of this area and of the church experience in this area, especially of the churches that declined from holiness tradition churches,” the reverend said. “I did it, he enjoyed it and got a pretty fair grade on my thesis. So, then my brother suggested that I do some more work on it and actually do a revision.” Signings are already planned for Christian Ambiance Ministries, the Mark Twain Museum and the Hannibal Public Library. And while Cole is hoping to teach others through his book, he couldn’t help learn a few things himself while writing it. “I learned that the power of God is just as real as it was in the Bible days. In fact, when the Lord began to inspire me to come back to Missouri, he told me two things. First thing was that if he can raise the dead, he could raise a dollar. He told me also that if he could create in Genesis, he could create in Hannibal,” Cole said. “Over the years I’ve seen God keep his word, literally, exactly as it’s written.”

In his early days of the ministry, Rev. C.M. Cole was in Los Angeles getting a lot of experience. And when a prominent preacher spoke, Cole was inspired by four simple words, “revival in a graveyard.” “At that time, as far as our particular group was concerned, this Northeast Missouri area was a ‘graveyard’,” Cole, the reverend of New Hope Gospel Center in Hannibal, said. “A number of the churches have gone defunct and declined, and had members that disappeared or grown up, grown away and the rural churches of Northeast Missouri were in trouble. So I was inspired by that message. “It hit me in the heart. I took it literally and believed it. And I came back, had no resources, no financial resources or supports. Just a message.” So not only did Cole do everything he could to revive these areas, he used the message as the title of his new book, “Revival in a Graveyard.” He’s written other works before in his attempts to resurrect church participation, but this is the first of his writings to get the attention of a publisher. “The message of God is a message of power and achievement, and accomplishment,” Cole said in the hopes his book provides readers with inspiration. “The losers, failures, and people who have generally experienced defeat can become winners.”

STORY CONTINUES AFTER VIDEO

The idea of the book came from Cole’s college days, and it just took off from there. “My adviser, when I was working on a graduate degree, he advised that I should do a survey and a study of this area and of the church experience in this area, especially of the churches that declined from holiness tradition churches,” the reverend said. “I did it, he enjoyed it and got a pretty fair grade on my thesis. So, then my brother suggested that I do some more work on it and actually do a revision.” Signings are already planned for Christian Ambiance Ministries, the Mark Twain Museum and the Hannibal Public Library. And while Cole is hoping to teach others through his book, he couldn’t help learn a few things himself while writing it. “I learned that the power of God is just as real as it was in the Bible days. In fact, when the Lord began to inspire me to come back to Missouri, he told me two things. First thing was that if he can raise the dead, he could raise a dollar. He told me also that if he could create in Genesis, he could create in Hannibal,” Cole said. “Over the years I’ve seen God keep his word, literally, exactly as it’s written.”

Jan
28

Let’s (not) talk about sex, baby

1327739585 94 Lets (not) talk about sex, baby

Sex is both very ambiguous and very prevalent in the Bible. Take the Song of Solomon from the Old Testament, which can be interpreted as an erotic piece of literature, or the fact Abraham fathered sons from both his wife and his servant, and let’s not even mention the incest that seems to take place on more than one occasion. Depending on how you read it, the Bible is filled with sex.

But can one really deduce the promotion of masturbation and the use of sex toys from the ol’ Good Book?

“Real Marriage: The Truth about Sex, Friendship and Life Together” is written by Pastor Mark Driscoll and his wife, Grace.

Driscoll is the founder of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. The book explores the couple’s journey through marriage and gives advice on how to rekindle the flames in a receding love life, and maintain a healthy marriage through a happy sex life. Driscoll wants to write about his personal experiences with improving his marriage and sex life? Fine, but he also attempts to sell to his readers the idea that the Bible backs up his love theories.

While the first half of the book might be an advice narrative, the second half really puts Driscoll in hot water. After all, he introduces one of the chapters with “If you are older, from a highly conservative religious background, live far away from a major city, do not spend much time on the Internet, or do not have cable television, the odds are that you will want to read this chapter while sitting down, with the medics ready on speed dial.”

Who knew a pastor could be so raunchy?

In one chapter, Driscoll reveals his approval of various sex acts, many of which are Christian taboos, based on his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 6:12. The passage reads, “I have the right to do anything,’ you say-but not everything is beneficial. ‘I have the right to do anything’-but I will not be mastered by anything.” Based on this, Driscoll deems activities such as masturbation, oral sex, sex toys and cybersex perfectly permissible within marriage.

Can one really infer from a few broad passages that any sex act is fair game in marriage? Just because the Driscolls deem a certain sexual lifestyle worthy of praise doesn’t mean the Bible backs them up.

The Driscolls should be free to enjoy lovemaking in any sense of the word, as should any married couple, so long as it’s consensual and beneficial to their marriage. But Driscoll also supports the act of masturbation, a self-satisfying and lustful act. Good luck finding rationale for that in the Bible.

Associate professor of Biblical studies at Boyce College, Denny Burk writes, “I think chapter 10 has the potential to wreak havoc in such marriages where one spouse will feel a whole range of taboos to be ‘permissible’ if he can convince his spouse to participate. This to me seems like a recipe for marital disaster.”

Driscoll stretches the words in Scripture to justify what he believes and preaches. If he wanted to write a book on a successful marriage and love life, he should have left the Bible out of it. Anyone can justify anything depending on how he or she interprets the Bible, and everyone has the right to his or her interpretations; however, that doesn’t mean one should publish these interpretations and turn it into advice for others.

Tips & Warnings Some Christian magazines do not pay for articles so, if payment is important to you, pay attention to the guidelines and do not submit to those magazines.How to Become a Christian Speaker The world of Christianity has spawned quite a few Christian speaker, most of them preachers or evangelists: Billy Graham, Jim Bakker, Pat Robertson, Kenneth Copeland, Joyce Meyer, etc. Christian Publishers Make Your Dreams a Reality Christian publishers have the ability to publish books from aspiring authors. The premise of that may be seen in Couple of Corinthians 5:15, that Scriptures reveals, ?o not be yoked utilizing unbelievers.??To get yoked identifies partnership or perhaps in the modern framework rapport, that may fall into a relationship. This brings up another point. I passionately protest that horrible meaning. "The feeling of being on a tropical island watching the vibrant sunset, sipping on brilliantly colored cocktails and being intoxicated with the aromas around me. News contains a wide variety of topics ranging from everyday living to world politics. Discount Christian Louboutin Pumps Open any one gossip magazine, or fashion magazines, or on the discussion boards, blogs to go up immediately to the decayed red shoes brand , both big and small cards will star at a variety of shoes to wear Louboutin , from the classic to the color patent leather small round satin patent leather open toe sandals to the latest.

Jan
28

Why has the Bible’s advice on finances stood the test of time?

1327737198 52 Why has the Bible’s advice on finances stood the test of time?

John 6:63 says “The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” 

I’ve always been amazed at how relevant the information in the Bible is.  After all, it was written thousands of years ago to an audience that would be completely amazed and dumbfounded by our modern world and yet the wisdom, direction and guidance that it contains seems so fresh that it could just as easily have been written last week. 

I find this to be especially amazing with the Bible’s financial advice.  The audience for much of that advice literally had only their daily bread and the clothes on their backs.  How could that same advice speak to you and I in our great abundance and complex financial dealings?  After all, far from just having our daily bread, most of us have cars, houses, 401(k)s, credit cards, mortgages, wardrobes, computers, and savings accounts.

I read a book awhile back that helped me understand why this is the case.  In The Pursuit of God, A.W. Tozer he writes:

“God did not write a book and send it by messenger to be read at a distance by unaided minds.  He spoke a Book and lives in His spoken words, constantly speaking His words and causing the power of them to persist across the years.”

In other words, if it seems like God is talking specifically to you and your situation, it’s because God is talking specifically to you and your situation.  His word is alive and new each day.  Keep that in mind as you think about your finances.  The things that the Bible says about saving, giving, contentment, stewardship, and borrowing aren’t just words on a page spoken to an ancient audience.  They are God’s words spoken today to you.

Thanks for reading.  Touch base if I can ever help.

Older posts «