Posts
1. Zosia Zaks, Life and Love: Positive Strategies for Autistic Adults, page 120:
I always ask the doctor before he begins to examine me or use equipment. I also ask him to verbally explain each step of what he is going to do. In general, I like doctors to tell me what I am about to experience. This way, I am less startled by sensory surprises. If your doctor does not have the time to prepare you for what is coming next, switch doctors.
I don’t have the magnitude of sensory issues that others on the spectrum possess. But I still like doctors to explain what they’re about to do. And, usually, they do so, without me having to ask.
2. Sara Japhet, The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought, pages 309-311:
Abijah’s speech in 2 Chr 13:4-12 expresses some of the principles underlying the Chronicler’s attitude towards the northern kingdom. The speech makes two main points: (a) YHWH gave the monarchy to David forever (v. 5), and therefore rebellion against David’s monarchy constitutes rebellion against God (v. 12). (b) Only Judah maintains legitimate worship of YHWH: the ritual of the northern kingdom serves “no gods” (v. 9)…In Abihah’s speech the very existence of the northern kingdom is condemned; yet, a related verse elsewhere depicts its creation as the fulfilling of God’s word: “So the king did not hearken to the people; for it was a turn of affairs brought about by God that the LORD might fulfill his word, which he spoke by Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat” (2 Chr 10:15). Since this verse has been transferred from 1 Kings 12:15, we might ask if it really reflects the Chronistic point of view. It would seem that it does. The fact that the verse was not deleted in spite of the problems it poses for Chronicles’ system of retribution indicates that its retention was deliberate, not merely the result of a redactional oversight. 2 Chr 10:15 states explicitly that the success of Jeroboam’s rebellion represents the fulfillment of YHWH’s will. The Chronicler’s attitude towards the northern kingdom may be described in terms of the tension between these two views.
3. D.A. Russell, Criticism in Antiquity, page 109:
Quintilian promulgates the conventional opinion that we must ourselves feel the emotions we wish to promote in others. How are we to do this, given that emotions are not in our control? By forming in our mind clear phantasiai—’visions’—of absent things; this means putting to practical use the faculty of day-dreaming and fantasy which we often employ in an idle moment. From vividness of vision will come vividness of expression, both in poetry (Quintilian quotes Virgil) and in oratory.
This reminds me of a Biography I saw on Robert De Niro. He practiced “method acting,” in which he tried in his day-to-day life to be the characters he played in movies, so as to better empathize with them. That led to the dissolution of his marriage, for his wife didn’t like living with the weirdo from Taxi Driver, the guy who later inspired John Hinkley!
Can we influence our emotions, or are they outside of our control? Does visualization help us to shape our emotions in certain directions?
4. R.P.C. Hanson, Allegory and Event, page 91:
Hebrews (7.26) says that the Jewish High Priest cannot be perfect, whereas Philo says that he is perfect; Hebrews says unconditionally that Jewish sacrifices could not remit sins but only served to bring it again to remembrance, whereas Philo says that the sacrifices of the wicked serve to bring sin to remembrance but those of good people really remit sin.
5. N.F. Marcos, The Septuagint in Context, page 81.
The Septuagint version of Jeremiah is shorter than that of the Masoretic Text. According to Marcos, the translator of Jeremiah into Greek didn’t shorten the Book of Jeremiah that was in front of him, as many exegetes have proposed. Rather, what was in front of him was a Hebrew version that was earlier than the Masoretic Text and was shorter. The version transmitted by the Masoretic Text is an expansion of that earlier version.
