Bible

A CHAPTER-BY-CHAPTER READING GUIDE FOR THE SCARLET LETTER A 1636 Plymouth Colony law required anyone convicted of adultery to “wear two Capital letters viz AD cut out in cloth and sowed on theire uppermost Garments on their arme or backe; and if att any time they shallbee taken without the said letters whiles they are in the Govrment soewarn to bee forthwith taken and publickly whipt. “[1] Other Massachusetts colonies had their own versions of this law.

In fact, “The Capitall Lawes of New-England, as they stand now in force in the Common-wealth, by the Court, in the years 1641, 1642, established within the jurisdiction of Massachusetts,” proclaim that “if any person committeth adultery with a married or espoused wife, the Adulterer, and the Adulteresse, shall surely be put to death. ” Chapter 1—The Prison Door Paragraph two explains the typical allotment of land in a Puritan town. What three establishments are early accounted for on Isaac Johnson’s lot? What does this information tell us about Puritan values?

How does Hawthorne describe the prison? Identify a significant metaphor in the second paragraph. A pathetic fallacy is a literary device in which Nature appears to understand human feeling and respond accordingly. An example is believing that the sun is shining because you are happy, or that a day is dark and rainy because you are feeling depressed. Hawthorne employs a significant pathetic fallacy in this opening description. Can you locate it? What grows near the prison? What does Hawthorne say it symbolizes? Chapter 2—The Market Place 1. When does the story take place? . For what purposes did people sometimes gather in front of the prison door? 3. Who seems especially interested in the punishment that is about to take place? 4. Pay attention to conversation among the women. What is their attitude toward Hester? Are they unanimous? 5. Note the description Of Hester, the novel’s heroine. What seem to be her outstanding characteristics? What is unusual about her? What do people notice first when seeing her (“the point which drew all eyes”)? 6. Note again the women’s conversation. What appears to be their opinion of Hester now? 7.

The beadle’s words, “A blessing on the righteous colony of the Massachusetts, where iniquity is dragged out into the sunshine,” might engender some thinking about values. Does it seem to you that exposing iniquity is worthy of a blessing? Do we seem to feel it proper today to expose personal behavior, especially wrongdoing, to public view? 8. What is Hester’s punishment that day? What does Hawthorne say about this kind of punishment, the kind that does not allow the culprit to hide his or her shame? 9. What is purpose of contrasting Hester and her baby to “the image of Divine Maternity”? 0. Pay particular attention to the description of “the man well stricken in years. ” Who do you think he is? Chapter 3—The Recognition Read carefully the second paragraph. Who is the man at the Indian’s side? Imagine that you are this man. What information do you, a stranger to Boston, learn from the townsman with whom you talk? The townsman says that the magistrates of Boston have, “in their mercy and tenderness of heart,” softened Hester’s punishment. What do you think of this mercy? For what reason do Governor Bellingham and the ministers speak to Hester? Why does Mr. Wilson think Mr.

Dimmesdale should speak to Hester? What is Dimmesdale’s feeling about this job? Note with care the first description of Dimmesdale. 5. What effect do Dimmesdale’ swords have on Hester? On the baby? 6. What kind of father does Hester say her baby will have? 7. Contrast the two ministers’ different reactions to Hester’s refusal to name her fellow sinner. Chapter 4—The Interview 1. Why did the jailer send for a doctor for Hester? 2. You ought to know for certain, by the seventh or eighth paragraph of this chapter, just who this man is. What clues (in previous chapters) has Hawthorne given you as to his identity?

Why, do you suppose, does want to keep his identity a secret? 3. It would be so easy for Chillingworth to kill Hester. Why does he want her to live? 4. Upon whom does Chillingworth put the blame for Hester’s sin? How much is her fault? How much is his own? 5. How much revenge does Chillingworth plan to get on Hester? (A particular line in their conversation tells us exactly. ) Who is the real object of Chillingworth’s revenge? 6. The paragraph beginning “Never, sayest thou? ” if read well, can reveal exactly what kind of person Chillingworth is.

Read it with a touch of villainy in thy voice and thou must needs quake with fearfulness at the plan this mis-shapen scholar. (Do you see how easy it is to get carried away? ) 7. Hester says something interesting about how a person’s words may lead to one interpretation of his character and his actions may lead to another. How do Chillingworth’s words present him? His actions? 8. What request does Chillingworth make of Hester? What is his reason? Chapter 5—Hester at Her Needle How does Hester feel upon leaving prison? What does the future have in store for her?

You might wonder why Hester doesn’t leave Boston, since it is only in Boston that she must wear the scarlet letter. What are her reasons? Be sure not to overlook the most important of them. What features of Hester’s home seem most appropriate? How does Hester make a living? In what ironic way does she advertise her skills? 5. Who were the only ones who made no use of Hester’s services? Why? 6. What does Hester do with the extra money she earns (“her superfluous means”)? What does this tell us about her character? 7. Hawthorne compares Hester’s scarlet letter with the mark on Cain’s forehead.

If you don’t know about Cain’s mark, you can read about it in the Bible in Genesis 4:1-16. Biblical allusions are not uncommon in literature, so a well-read person is familiar with the major stories of the Bible. This familiarity has nothing to do with a person’s religious beliefs. 8. What specific “tortures” (“the innumerable throbs of anguish”) does Hester endure? 9. In the penultimate (that is, the next to the last) paragraph of the chapter, Hawthorne begins to suggest that there might be some positive feature of Hester’s wearing the scarlet letter.

What is it? 10. Observe how Hawthorne uses one of his favorite devices, intentional ambiguity, in the last paragraph. Chapter 6—Pearl Why does Hester name her baby Pearl? Pearl is a significant character in this novel, so pay attention to the detailed description of her. Isn’t it a paradox that Pearl, the product of sin, is “worthy to have been brought forth in Eden”? In the fourth paragraph, the “Scriptural authority” is Proverbs 13:24, which reads, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. (In modern English, parents who withhold punishment actually hate their children, but those that love them correct their behavior early. “) What is Hawthorne saying about the way parents raised their children in Puritan times? How does Hester raise Pearl? Why does Pearl seem not to be a human child? Why is Pearl an “outcast of the infantile world”? What kind of games did “the Puritan nurture … permit” children to play? Do they seem like fun to you? What is the attitude of the Puritan children toward Pearl? 9. What does Pearl use for playthings? Hawthorne calls them “the puppets of Pearl’s witchcraft,” a good phrase. ) 10. The reference to “dragon’s teeth” (in the same paragraph) is an allusion to a Greek myth in which Cadmus kills a dragon and plants his teeth. The teeth grow into warriors who fight each other until only few are left alive. This myth, incidentally, is the beginning of the story that eventually comes to concern Oedipus Rex, but there is no association to be made between that story and this one. 11. What was the first thing Pearl noticed in her mother? 12. What happens when Hester sees her reflection in Pearl’s eyes?

This is still another example of intentional ambiguity. 13. Who do the gossiping neighbors claim is Pearl’s father? Chapter 7—The Governor’s Hall 1. What two reasons does Hester have for visiting the governor? 2. In what way does Pearl remind Hester of the scarlet letter? 3. Contemplate the tremendous significance of Hester’s looking into the armour, which reflects the scarlet letter disproportionately and hides Hester behind it. 4. The description of the garden recalls the Garden of Eden, an appropriate suggestion since we have already seen references to the Garden of Eden earlier in the novel.

Pearl’s crying for a red rose may suggest the desire for forbidden fruit, and the refusal by Hester (“I hear voices in the garden”) may correspond to Genesis 2:16-17 and 3:6-8 (“the voice of the Lord God walking in the Garden). A comment here about allusions, Biblical and otherwise: it can be frustrating to the student to encounter several allusions and need to have all of them pointed out. A common reaction is then to reject them or to express doubt that the author intended the allusion. Students need to be reminded that they are relatively inexperienced in reading literature intended for literate and educated readers.

Instead of being defensive about it, they will find it much more productive to accept whatever assistance is offered. The more they read the better they will become at recognizing references to other literature and history. In the meantime, they do best to keep their eyes and minds open. Biblical allusions present a particular problem among people who are sensitive about the presence of the Bible in the school. While that sensitivity is understandable, it is important for teachers, especially teachers of challenging academic programs, to remember and remind others of the enormous influence the Bible has had on western culture.

If we eliminate the Bible as literature, we eliminate a huge portion of mature literature, art, music, architecture, theatre, and all the other arts as well. Chapter 8—The Elf-Child and the Minister 1. Who arc Bellingham’s guests? Which is not in good health? Why? Which is the medical advisor to the sick one? 2. All of the descriptions of Pearl by Bellingham and his guests remind the reader of what important visual fact? 3. What matter were Bellingham and his guests discussing before Hester’s arrival? 4. Be sure you understand both sides of the argument between Hester and Bellingham. 5. How does Wilson “test” Pearl?

How does she do on this test? 6. Specifically, what is Pearl’s answer? How did she get such a strange idea? What else do you know about the prison rosebush? Think back to chapter 1, where Hawthorne said it was a symbol, and see if you can’t work out the symbolic significance of this incident. 7. How has Chillingworth changed over the years? 8. To whom does Hester turn for assistance in her attempt to keep Pearl? Why does she feel he can help? 9. Dimmesdale says that Pearl is both a blessing and a torture for Hester. How is this true? 10. Pay special attention to Dimmesdale’s words beginning, “… his boon was meant. ” 11. As Hester and Pearl leave, “it is averred” that something happened. Hawthorne likes to include hearsay, gossip, rumor, legend, and so on in his story. Where have we seen it already in this novel? Keep an eye open for other instances as we read on. 12. Who stops Hester as she departs? For what purpose? Chapter 9—The Leech When you look up leech in the dictionary, you will find several definitions. Which of the many possibilities seems most appropriate here? The first three paragraphs explain how Chillingworth sets up his medical practice in Boston. Who becomes Chillingworth’s prime patient?

What is his illness? What is Dimmesdale’s most characteristic gesture? Why do you suppose he makes this gesture? 5. Observe how typically the people of Boston, when they are unable to explain Chillingworth’s arrival out of the blue, create a rumor about him. 6. “So ” begins a really important section, describing the relationship that develops between Chillingworth and Dimmesdale. 7. What happens “after a time, at a hint from Roger Chillingworth”? 8. The penultimate paragraph (you had that word in chapter 5, question 9) compares or associates Chillingworth with whom?

Chapter 10—The Leech and His Patient 1. Dimmesdale develops a characteristic similar to Hester’s in that he was “suspicious of all mankind. ” The conversation between Chillingworth and Dimmesdale concerning confession of sin is worth special attention. Apparently Dimmesdale is concealing some sin. What might that sin be? Really? What occurrence interrupts this conversation? What is unusual about Pearl’s behavior? Do you see any symbolic meaning in Pearl’s placing the prickly burdock on Hester’s scarlet letter? If not, think some more until you do. When Dimmesdale refuses to “open … he wound or trouble” in his heart to Chillingworth, to whom does he say he will bare his soul? Hawthorne makes a joke! It doesn’t happen often, so let’s not let this one get by. Dimmesdale falls asleep over a book which “must have been a work of vast ability in the somniferous school of literature. ” (The humor depends on your knowing what “somniferous means. ) The final two paragraphs are exceptionally important. Hawthorne does not say what Chillingworth saw, but maybe you can imagine. Anyhow, you might wonder what could have made Chillingworth so happy. Can you think of a fairy tale character that Chillingworth resembles here?

Chapter 11—The Interior of a Heart 1. What has become of Dimmesdale’s attitude toward Chillingworth? 2. Even though his health is failing, how are Dimmesdale’s fortunes as a minister? 3. Interestingly, Dimmesdale is annoyed by the high regard his parishioners have for him (“the agony with which this public veneration tortured him”). Here is another example of intentional ambiguity, a form of irony. Dimmesdale is not what the people think he is. 4. It’s almost humorous how the congregation mistakes Dimmesdale’s statements of his sinfulness. (Almost, but not quite. ) 5.

Compare the visions Dimmesdale has in his “lengthened vigils” with Hester’s reminiscence in chapter 2. Why does Hester appear in Dimmesdale’s vision? What is important about her gesture? Chapter 12—The Minister’s Vigil Where does Dimmesdale go? Probably it’s not just accidental that it’s been seven years since Hester stood on the platform. Seven has been a magical number since ancient times. Why does Hawthorne say that “many culprits … have ascended” the platform? With what is he asking us to associate it? In other words, what is he making the platform a symbol of? Do you know by now why Dimmesdale is climbing it?

No one comes when Dimmesdale screams. Why? What does Dimmesdale see from the scaffold? Where has Wilson been that night? Where have Hester and Pearl been? Do you think it is a fitting place for a seven-year-old girl to be? Maybe she had to come along because her mother couldn’t get a babysitter. What does Dimmesdale invite Hester and Pearl to do? How does Dimmesdale feel as he touches Pearl’s hand? Why do you suppose he feels this way? The paragraph beginning “But before Mr. Dimmesdale had done speaking” is very important. Read it carefully. Most of the novel’s important symbols are brought together at this moment.

What is the light in the sky? What does this unnatural light reveal? How is Pearl a connecting link between Hester and Dimmesdale? (You might have two answers, one literal, one figurative. ) Why does Dimmesdale have his hand over his heart? 10. Who is standing across the way watching the scene? How does Dimmesdale feel about him? Are you surprised to hear him say so? 11. What does the sexton give to Dimmesdale? How does the sexton account for Dimmesdale’s loss of this item? 12. How does the sexton (speaking for the townspeople) interpret the light in the sky? 13. This chapter is the halfway point in the novel.

Because of the novel’s rigorous construction, the midpoint is the climax. From this point on, we are heading toward the resolution. Chapter 13—Another View of Hester 1. Can you explain why Hester feels an obligation toward Dimmesdale? 2. Hawthorne writes in the middle of the second paragraph that “It is to the credit of human nature, that… it loves more readily than it hates. ” Do you think he’s right? Has he illustrated this theme anywhere in the novel? 3. This chapter, which discusses Hester’s life, explains why the townspeople change their views of Hester. Although it is mostly descriptive, be sure you understand why they do. 4.

The sentence “Had she fallen among thieves, [the scarlet letter] would have kept her safe” is an allusion to the parable of the Good Samaritan, told in Luke 10:30-37. It’s worth reading. 5. What is the “sad transformation” that has come over Hester? 6. Notice that Hawthorne says of Pearl that her “nature had something wrong in it, which continually betokened that she had been born amiss. ” What other characters’ outward appearances suggest their inner natures? This is a significant feature of romantic literature, one that continues through our own time, especially in the movies. 7. This chapter is typical of Hawthorne’s circular style.

He begins by discussing Hester’s attitude toward Dimmesdale, and then wanders into related matters until he eventually returns (“Now, however, her interview with the Reverend Mr. Dimmesdale”) to the first thought. He did this before when Hester stood on the scaffold in chapter 2. Hawthorne builds entire chapters, as this one, around this device; or, more often, he constructs his longer paragraphs this way. This observation might help you to read the longer paragraphs with more comprehension. 8. How do you explain, in the first sentence of the final paragraph, the phrase “her former husband”? How did he get to be her former husband?

Did I miss a divorce somewhere? Or is there another explanation? Chapter 14—Hester and the Physician 1. Hawthorne says again that a great transformation has come over Chillingworth. He has changed “himself into a devil. ” We have seen before how Chillingworth has been compared to Satan. 2. The conversation between Hester and Chillingworth should be self-explanatory. Notice Hester’s request: “Forgive, and leave his further retribution to the Power that claims it. ” Perhaps this is a theme of the novel. 3. Chillingworth says, “Let the black flower blossom as it may. ” Do you remember what the black flower is? What does he mean here?

Chapter 15—Hester and Pearl 1. Hester declares that she hates Chillingworth. Do you think she has good reason? 2. How has Pearl been amusing herself? 3. Pearl makes a letter to wear herself. You might consider what significance the two colors of the two letters have: scarlet for Hester and green for Pearl. What might green symbolize in connection with Pearl? 4. Why is Pearl’s response to her mother’s questions concerning why she wears the scarlet letter ironic? 5. For what reasons does Hester consider telling Pearl why she wears the letter? 6. You can see how Pearl is getting on her mother’s nerves. How would you have answered Pearl?

Do you believe, as Hester does, that “There are many things in this world that a child must not ask about”? Notice that Hester, at the end of the chapter, answers Pearl “with an asperity that she had never permitted to herself before. ” Chapter 16—A Forest Walk This chapter begins what is for many readers the most memorable part of the novel. Remember that Hawthorne has called his novel “a tale of human frailty and sorrow. ” In chapters 16-19 you will be expected to respond to this sorrow. Watch especially how every possibility for happiness is eliminated. Watch also how Hawthorne uses images of light and dark in the forest.

If you are a romantic, you will find this scene especially moving. 1. Why won’t Hester visit Dimmesdale in his study? 2. Notice how the sunlight withdraws as Hester approaches it. What does the sunlight symbolize here? Why is there none for Hester? If you have forgotten about the pathetic fallacy, return to chapter 1, question 3 for a reminder. 3. What stories has Pearl heard? What does Pearl think Hester’s letter has to do with the Black Man? 4. Notice how Hawthorne compares Pearl to the brook. Showing people and Nature as one was a favorite technique of Romantic writers. 5. Observe, too, how sorrowfully Dimmesdale approaches.

Chapter 17—The Pastor and His Parishioner How do Hester and Dimmesdale approach each other? Notice the things they speak of—the weather, their health. Why is it so hard for them really to communicate with each other? Just before Hester tells Dimmesdale that Chillingworth was her husband (again she uses the past tense), she stresses the value of truth. Of what significance should this speech be to Dimmesdale? Hester asks Dimmesdale to forgive her and let God take care of her punishment—the same request she made of Chillingworth. Why does Dimmesdale consider Chillingworth to be the worst sinner of the three?

Hester speaks here one of the most important lines of the novel: What we did had a consecration of its own. Be sure you understand all the implications of this sentence. She (and Dimmesdale) considered their “sin” to be morally acceptable (it was consecrated) in a system of laws higher than those of the church. Hester is trying to justify herself by saying that in some cases state laws are imperfect and do not, or should not, apply in all cases to all people. But she cannot think that she was following God’s laws, because adultery is forbidden by the Ten Commandments. Then is she placing her individual law above even God’s law?

Can she do this? Does Hester consider her love for Dimmesdale to be more important or holier than the Ten Commandments? This is a topic—the conflict between personal law and public law— that appears in a great number of important literary works, such as Antigone, Crime and Punishment, and The Crucible, to name just a few. What courses of action does Hester suggest to Dimmesdale so that he can rid himself of Chillingworth’s menace? Why is none of them satisfactory to him? Chapter 18—A Flood of Sunshine 1. Again Hawthorne gives a positive result of the scarlet letter—it was Hester’s “passport into regions where other women dared not tread. 2. Was Dimmesdale’s sin a sin of passion or of principle? 3. In paragraph 4, Hawthorne gives a very succinct statement concerning Dimmesdale’s predicament: “between fleeing as an avowed criminal, and remaining as a hypocrite, conscience might find it hard to strike the balance …. ” This is an example of a dilemma, a choice between two equally unpleasant alternatives. To be in such a situation we say is to be “on the horns of a dilemma. ” If you interpret the metaphor to suggest being tossed by a bull, you see immediately how painful that can be. 4. What does Dimmesdale, after a struggle, resolve to do? What are his reasons? . What does Hester do to make it as though the past had never been? (Don’t let this question go unanswered. We’ve been waiting seven years … ) 6. How does she feel after she has done this significant thing? Note the line, “She had not known the weight until she felt the freedom. ” 7. The paragraph beginning, “The stigma gone … ” is important. Hester removes her cap and her letter, and lets her hair fall down. Look back to chapter 13, where the letter, cap, and hair had been mentioned as symbols of Hester’s “sad transformation” from beauty to plainness. These same symbols are used here to reveal Hester’s natural beauty.

Notice that this chapter is called “A Flood of Sunshine,” a title involving a metaphor, Hester’s hair is another such flood. What happens, concerning the sunshine, when Hester’s hair falls down? This is one the great pathetic fallacies in all of literature. 8. Notice how Nature reacts to the love between Hester and Dimmesdale. “Such was the sympathy of Nature … ” Hawthorne uses the word “sympathy” in its more general sense of feeling the same (“sym” meaning the same and “pathos” meaning feeling) rather than feeling sorry for someone. 9. Pearl is standing in a beam of sunshine, of course.

The flickering light makes her look “now like a real child, now like a child’s spirit. ” How Hawthorne loves visual ambiguity! How do the animals of the forest treat Pearl? Note the hearsay: “A wolf, it is said— but here the tale has surely lapsed into the improbable. ” Why does Pearl approach slowly when she is called? Chapter 19—The Child at the 15 rook side 1. Hester and Dimmesdale talk very lovingly of their child. 2. What is the effect of the reflection of Pearl in the pool? 3. What does Dimmesdale do when Pearl looks at him? Then, how does Pearl respond to this gesture? 4. Why won’t Pearl come to Hester? 5.

Does Pearl’s command “Come thou and take it up” seem to you as though she were reminding her mother of her guilt? 6. What happens as Hester puts up her hair? Why? 7. Remember that in the second scaffold scene Pearl asks if Dimmesdale will stand with Hester and her in broad daylight. What similar request does Pearl make of Dimmesdale now? 8. What does Pearl do when Dimmesdale kisses her? Chapter 20—The Minister in a Maze What arrangement has Hester made for Dimmesdale, Pearl, and herself? Why does Hawthorne consider Dimmesdale “so pitiably weak”? Note the final sentence of this paragraph (the third), which makes use of ambiguity.

What strange feeling does Dimmesdale have as he returns to the town? Be sure to know the meaning of the word “mutability. ” What three people does Dimmesdale meet? What does he want to do to each of these people? Why? In the paragraph about the old woman, Hawthorne writes that she might have dropped dead when she heard Dimmesdale’s words, “as by the effect of an intensely poisonous infusion. ” You might be interested to know that in the 1600s it was common belief that a person could be killed if poison were poured, or infused, into his ear. Shakespeare, writing in the early 1600s, used this belief as a method of death in Hamlet.

What is the importance of the episode between Dimmesdale and Mistress Hibbins? Chapter 21—The New England Holiday 1. “The day” in the first sentence is three days after the forest scene. The rest of the novel’s action takes place on this day. 2. How does Hester feel on this particular day? To what does she look forward? 3. Notice that Pearl’s “garb is all of one idea with her nature,” suggesting again the relationship between her outer appearance and her inner nature. 4. Why is Pearl confused as she and Hester reach town? 5. Notice the forms of entertainment popular in England that are not to be found in Massachusetts. . Hawthorne writes, “the generation [which came after the first Puritans] wore the blackest shade of Puritanism, and so darkened the national visage with it, that all the subsequent years have not sufficed to clear it up. We have yet to learn again the forgotten art of gayety. ” Do you agree? 7. Notice that Chillingworth is talking with the captain of the ship. Why do you suppose that he is doing that? 8. What news does the captain bring Hester? How does she respond to it? Chapter 22—The Procession The first part of this chapter is a lavish description of the groups performing in the parade.

Note the description of Dimmesdale as he marches. What does Mistress Hibbins know that Hester wishes she didn’t? The paragraph beginning “This vocal organ” is a description of Dimmesdale’s sermon. What message does the ship’s captain give to Pearl? It is sad to read in the penultimate paragraph the sentence beginning, “Hester saw and recognized. ” Chapter 23—The Revelation of the Scarlet Letter 1. What is the townspeople’s reaction to Dimmesdale’s sermon? 2. How does Dimmesdale feel about his career as a minister at this time? (Look in the third paragraph. ) 3. After he gives his sermon, what change comes over Dimmesdale? . Why does Chillingworth try to stop Dimmesdale? After all, hadn’t he wanted Dimmesdale’s guilt to be known? 5. Where is the only place that Dimmesdale could have escaped Chillingworth? What does this mean? 6. What does the crowd see as Dimmesdale tears away his “ministerial band”? Are you sure? 7. Does Dimmesdale think he and Hester will meet again in Heaven? Why? 8. “By giving me this burning torture to bear upon my breast”—is this line meant to be taken literally or figuratively? Note how the alliteration, which makes the line quite poetic, provides emphasis. 9. What happens as Dimmesdale dies?

Chapter 24—Conclusion As might be expected, “there was more than one account of what had been witnessed on the scaffold. ” What explanations are offered for what had happened? How does Hawthorne feel about those who say that Dimmesdale never said that he was Pearl’s father? Does the moral beginning “Be true! Be true! Be true! ” seem like a theme to you? Compare it to what Pearl said to Dimmesdale on the scaffold in chapter 12. What happened to Chillingworth? Why might love and hate be really “the same thing at bottom”? Who is Chillingworth’s beneficiary? Be sure you know what happens to Hester and Pearl.

Who discovers that Hester has returned? 10. What, according to rumor, has become of Pearl? 11. What role does Hester play in the community? What is Hester’s “firm belief of which she assures unhappy women? For a novel written in 1850 this is a remarkably contemporary idea, Beside whom is Hester buried? “”Gules” is the color red. “Sable” is black. The final sentence, which summarizes the whole novel in a remarkably concise and symbolic way, is the description of Hester’s tombstone. Before the days of colored printing, people had to find a way to instruct engravers who were oing to produce coats of arms, banners, flags, and the like. This sentence says that Hester’s tombstone, which has a black background (a field sable), will be engraved the letter A in red (gules). Think of all the other things in the novel that can be described with that sentence—the midnight sky in the second scaffold scene; Hester’s blouse; Hester’s life, which seems to have been very bleak with only one moment of happiness; even the Puritan period of American history, which was a dark period, as Hawthorne tells it, “relieved only by one ever-glowing point of light. Let us remember that the name Hester—an archaic form of Esther—means “star. ” You might remember that Chillingworth said that Hester “will be a living sermon against sin, until the ignominious letter be engraved upon her tombstone. ” Yet the letter can represent something other than Adultery. We have already come to see it represent Able, Art, and Angel. What else might the A have meant to Hester? Remember that in some Massachusetts communities, Plymouth among them, the punishment for adultery was to wear the letters AD.

What could AD have represented to Hester? Congratulations. By reading this novel you have accomplished something noteworthy and gained a great deal—you have increased your reading skills, expanded your vocabulary, considered value systems that might be different from your own, investigated human psychology, and, it is to be hoped, undergone an emotional experience that will never leave you. ———————– 1] Here is an opportunity for the teacher to point out that English spelling and usage were not firmly fixed in the seventeenth century. ‘Their” and “theire” appear in the same sentence, “sowed” in modern English would be “sewn,” and other word forms, while recognizable, have changed in the last three and a half centuries. ———————– NOTE: This is only to function as a “reading guide” to help you better understand the novel. We highly suggest that you use this to check for

Since the early 19th century archaeologists and Christian bible scholars have discovered a difference in archaeological and geographical evidence that supports a northern view of Sodom or a southern view of Sodom. The Southern site for Sodom is commonly referred to as the Bab edh-Dhra and the northern site for Sodom is referred to as the Tall el-Hammam. Since archaeologists have not uncovered exact evidence indicating a particular site as the biblical Sodom, the search for Sodom remains a mystery. To accurately investigate these sites and try to form a conclusion, key facts need to be revealed. The intention of this paper is to reveal certain facts pertaining to those areas. The specific facts are as follows; the site each position believes is Sodom, the evidence for destruction at both sites, and how each site meets the criteria for the biblical location of Sodom. In addition, this paper will compare and identify the strengths and weaknesses of each position. Two sites have been excavated as possible sites of the biblical Sodom.

Which one is it? First, the paper will focus on the southern site named Bab edh-Dhara, and then an analysis of the Tall el-Hammam will be done. Bab edh-Dhara is the excavated site along the Valley of Siddom, South of the Dead Sea. Many proponents of this site suggest that this site is located precisely on the eastern fault, which provides evidence for its destruction. Furthermore, they indicate that the Bible historically supports this location in Genesis. Penrose Harland explains that an overall agreement between the southern supporters and northern supporters is that the cities of the Plain are to be found in Ghor, or Valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea. However, Harland states, “the evidence is preponderantly in favor of a location at the Southern end of the Dead Sea”, which is described as Bab edh-Dhara. To better grasp this preponderant view the archaeological evidence for the destruction of Bab edh-Dhra should be revealed. Dr. Price is a prominent supporter of this site and he reveals that this site was never reoccupied after the Early Bronze date of 2300-2000 B.

This evidence supports the truth that after the destruction of Sodom by the wrath of God that this location was uninhabitable. Furthermore, significant ash layers were discovered, which supports Genesis 19: 24-28. Geologist Frederick Clapp surveyed Ghor, the southern end of the Dead Sea, and discovered abundant amounts of asphalt, petroleum, and natural gas. In addition, the smell of sulfur and ash deposits represented in Genesis 14:10 were present. Since the Bible informs us that Sodom was destroyed during the time of the Patriarchs one important discovery needs to be made in regard to the date of the Patriarchs. The site of Bab edh-Dhra provides a date of the second millennium B. C. Dr. Price confirms this discovery and states, “Only a second-millennium context will fit the type of inheritance practiced by the Patriarchs. Many bible scholars and archaeologists have spent numerous hours uncovering the site of Bab edh-Dhara. At this point the criteria that cause Bab edh-Dhra to be considered as biblical Sodom is the following; the Bible, the late Greek and Roman writers, from geology and topography, from hydrography, and archaeology.

Furthermore, Genesis 13:10 describes Sodom as “a well-watered land like the land of Egypt. Therefore, the Paleo-botanical studies done on and at the Bab edh-Dhra site reveal that the area has had a rich diversity of crops, meeting the criteria for a well-watered land.  Another huge discovery that causes Bab edh-Dhra to be recognized as Sodom is the reference in Genesis 19:1, where Lot is sitting at the city gate. Bab edh-Dhra actually means “gate of the arm. ” Wood describes this fortification when he describes what the gate and site measure. He states, “The city wall, enclosing an area of 9-10 acres, was a massive 7m (23 ft) wide and made of stones and mud bricks. Although the Bab edh-Dhara has not been confirmed as the definite biblical Sodom, there is very strong evidence linking it to the Sodom described in the infallible Word of God. However, a professor from Albuquerque has followed and found based on the geography and history presented in the Bible a site called Tall el-Hammam, the northern site in question. Dr. Collins and many other scholars believe that this site is actually the correct site for biblical Sodom. Therefore, throughout the next section of this paper, a detailed analysis of the Tall el-Hammam will be done. They form their conclusion based on an analysis of the Hebrew text and their understanding of geography. Dr. Collins explains that the place that Lot set out to is clearly between Bethel and Ai. This location provides the evidence for scholars to lean towards the Tall el-Hammam as the biblical Sodom, instead of the southern site, Bab edh-Dhara.

Supporting this, a majority of biblical scholars locate Bethel, near Beitin, about 12 miles north of Jerusalem. Therefore, if Sodom is located between Bethel and Ai, the Tall el-Hammam better fits the criteria for being the biblical Sodom. When looking at the archaeological evidence for the destruction of the Tall el-Hammam archaeologist have discovered the site was destroyed near the end of the Middle Bronze Age. Dr. Collins explains that they have discovered vast quantities of ash, consisting of 1. 5 to 3 feet thick of heavy ash associated with the Middle Bronze Age stratum. Some of the debris found is pottery, a few bones, some ash and something an exciting digger thought was part of the meteor some believers speculate God hurled at Sodom to destroy it.  In addition, the Tall el-Hammam site reveals that a temperature exceeding 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit destroyed the area; this gave evidence of catastrophic damage. Based on the evidence revealed through an archaeological excavation of the Tall el-Hammam, the supporters of this site date the Patriarchs as 17/16th Century, or Middle Bronze Age.

Collins says the “Bible makes it clear that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed during the Middle Bronze Age, the time of Abraham and Lot”. This dating is certainly the biggest difference between the two sites in question. Therefore, it is important to list how the Tall el-Hammam meets the criteria for biblical Sodom. The specific discoveries of the Tall el-Hammam meet the criteria are described briefly in this paragraph. First, the bible describes the place where Lot went as being a well-watered land, like the land of Egypt. Tall el-Hammam is located on a disk of well-watered plain 18 miles (30km) in diameter in the Jordan Valley north of the Dead Sea! This location is exactly where Dr. Collins believes the biblical Sodom exists. The Hebrew word Kakkar has special significance to the location of the Tall el-Hammam. This word was used to describe what Lot looked up and saw. Kakkar is a plain, round, or oval-shaped. Dr. Collins explains that when Kakkar is used to describe a geographical construct, it refers to a disk-shaped plain in the Southern Jordan Valley. The specific site of the Tall el-Hammam has revealed that it was a well-watered and fertile land, with large wadis wrapped around the fortification in exactly the described location. Another discovery was that in 3000-2350 B. C. E. the site was protected by enormous defenses. This indicated a strong government and settlements associated with an agricultural economy. When debating the two locations in consideration for the biblical site of Sodom, the strengths and weaknesses of each view exist. Some of the strengths of the Bab edh-Dhra site are the discovery that the location was destroyed in the Early Bronze Age and never occupied again.

This seems likely since God destroyed it with such great wrath. The strength of the Bab edh-Dhara is the fact that Lot was closely associated with Moab. Therefore, the southern half of the Dead Sea would seem appropriate. In addition, the charnel houses discovered in Bab edh-Dhra suggest a catastrophic event that burned many areas and came from above. As for the weaknesses of in the location of Bab edh-Dhara, one is the fact that the Bible does not indicate specifically a southern site. Also, the lack of an excavated gate complex like the one found at the Tall el-Hammam and the difference in the size of the two sites. Bab edh-Dhara is approximately 12 acres and Tall el-Hammam is 100 acres. When evaluating the weaknesses of the Tall el-Hammam some often mention the dating of the Patriarchs. Some believe that Dr. Collins has lowered the date of Abraham in order to create a match with his excavations. Dr. Collins absolutely denies that. Genesis 14 and 29 support an Early Bronze Age date for the Patriarchs and the Tall el-Hammam contradicts that date. Furthermore, the Tall el-Hammam was reinhabited hundreds of years after the destruction. This seems unlikely due to the soil being severely contaminated.

Some strengths of the Tall el-Hammam site are the amount of ash and “frothy” Magna indicating a temperature above 2000 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the northern location of Sodom seems more likely, since the Bible suggests that Sodom is between Bethel and Ai (Genesis 13:1-2). Tall el-Hammam is visible from that area which is ten miles north of Jerusalem. In closing, I would like to suggest that it is just too early to exactly say which site is the correct biblical Sodom. However, the amount of ash strongly points to the Tall el-Hammam. I have reservations because of the date of the Patriarchs given to that site and the fact of it being occupied once again in the Late Bronze Age. This certainly complicates the excavation. Interestingly, very intelligent evangelical biblical archaeologists disagree on which site is in fact the biblical Sodom. I find it very difficult to form an opinion, considering Dr. Price, the author of our textbook The Stones Cry Out concludes the Bab edh-Dhra as the correct site and my professor, Dr. David Graves, is the field supervisor of the Roman remains (Livias? ) at the Tall el-Hammam (Sodom? excavations in Jordan. Due to this reality and the evidence, I am undecided. I have chosen to let the reader form an individual conclusion based on the evidence I have presented in this paper. Hopefully, I have equally analyzed each site and the reader can participate in this exciting journey of biblical discoveries to uncover the biblical Sodom.

Reference

1. Collins, Steven. “Discovering the City of Sodom. ” Kirkus Reviews 3 (Feb 2013)
2. http://www.Kirkusreviews.com Collins, Steven. “If You Thought You Knew the Location of Sodom and Gomorrah… think again. Biblical Research Bulletin 7, no. 4 (2007): 1-6.
3. Collins, Steven. “North vs. South: Why the Southern Location Doesn’t Work. ” Sidebar to: Where is Sodom. ” Biblical Archaeology Society 39, no. 2 (Mar/April 2013)
4. http://www.basearchive.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/bswbBrowse.asp?PubID=BSBA &Volume=39&Issue=2&ArticleID=2&UserID=1037. Collins, Steven. “Where Is Sodom? The Case for Tall el-Hammam. ” Biblical Archaeology Society 39, no. 2 (Mar/April 2013).
5. http:www.basarchive.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/bswbBrowse.asp?PubID=BSBA &Volume=39&Issue=2&ArticleID=2&UserID=1037.  Harland, J. Penrose. “Sodom and Gomorrah: The location of the Cities of the Plain. ” The Biblical Archaeologist 5, no. 2 (May 1942): 17-32.
6. Higgins, Andrew. “Digging for Sin City, Christians Toil in Jordan Desert; Prof Collins seeks Sodom with Scriptures as Guide and Volunteers as Muscle. ” Wall Street Journal, A1 edition (February 2007).
7. http://search.proquest.com/docview/399037586?accountid=12085 Price, Randall. The Stones Cry Out. Oregon: Harvest House, 1997. Wood, Bryant G. The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. ” Bible and Spade 12, no. 3 (1999).
8. “Search for Sodom and Gomorrah. ” (August 2009).
9. http://blog.bibleplaces.com/2009/08/ Video-Searchforsodomandgomorrah.html
10. Bryant Wood, “The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah,” Bible and Spade 12, no. 3(1999)
11. J. P. Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah:The location of the Cities of the Plain,”The Biblical Archaeologist 5, no. 2 (May 1942):19.
12. Randall Price, The Stones Cry Out (Oregon: Harvest House, 1997), 120.
13. Price, 118-119. Price, 94. Harland, 28. Wood, 0.  Wood, 0. Steven Collins, “North vs. South: Why the Southern Location Doesn’t work,” Biblical Archaeology Society 39, no. 2 (Mar/April 2013)
14. Steven Collins, “Where is Sodom? The Case for Tall el-Hammam,” Biblical Archaeology Society 39, no. 2 (Mar/April 2013).
15. Collins, “Where is Sodom? The Case for Tall el-Hammam,” 0. ]Andrew Higgins. “Digging for Sin City Christians Toil in Jordan Desert, Prof. Collins seeks Sodom with Scriptures as Guides and Volunteers as Muscle,” Wall Street Journal, A1 edition (Feb 2007)
16. Collins, “Where is Sodom? The Case for Tall el-Hammam,” 0. The Journal for Jane Mahoney, “Digging a New Path to Lost Cities; Albuquerque Archaeologist uses Biblical Clues to Find what He thinks are the Ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah,” Albuquerque Journal (June 2006)
17. Steven Collins, “If You Thought You Knew the Location of Sodom and Gomorrah.. think Again,” Biblical Research Bulletin 7, no. 4 (2007)
18. Harland, 21.  Price, 117. [18] Collins, “Where is Sodom? The Case of the Tall el-Hammam,” 0. “Search for Sodom and Gomorrah,” (August 2009)
19. http://bibleplaces. com

The conversion of Russians to Christianity was a big step towards Slavic civilization. The role of converting these people was upon the Orthodox Church which played an important role in helping the neighbors of Byzantine to take Byzantine cultures while at the same time helping to spread Christianity. Emperors from Byzantine in their bid to help their neighbors change their barbaric and hostile ways of life tried to use such methods as church conversions, judicious diplomacy and promotion of international trade.

There were various reasons why Russians were converted to Christianity and in doing so; some strategies were employed by the Orthodox Church and the emperors. This paper is mainly going to focus on these two issues. One of the key steps that were taken in 863 was to provide the Russians or the Slavs who included the Danube who later were conquered by Magyars, the Czechs, the Moravians, Polinians and the Lyakhs who were also sometimes regarded as the Poles with a custom made Slavic alphabet or simply a modified Greek alphabet which was known as Glagothic.

This helped them to make these people feel proud of their work as the Slavic alphabets were to be used in scripture translation and translation of other liturgical works. Invention of Slavic language was a milestone in the spread of Christianity and this became the platform that future conversion activities for the Russians took place. As per the Russian Primary Chronicle, because of the presence of emperors who highly valued Byzantine cultures, many Moravians had been converted by the Orthodox Church into Christianity but the problem was that they could not read the scripture and interpret it in their own language .

This was because they were not familiar with Latin and Greek language that was used in the scripture and the problem was that there were preachers who would teach them this today and tomorrow interpret the same topic differently, now they wanted to be taught a language that they would use to read the bible for themselves and interpret it accordingly because those that came to preach to them would take advantage of their inability to read and interpret the scripture. We understand neither Greek nor Latin some teach us one thing and some another. Furthermore, we do not understand written characters nor their meaning. Therefore send us teachers who can who can make known to us the words of the scriptures and their sense” . To achieve this end, Moravian Slavs led by emperor Kostel, Rostilav and Sviatopolk requested Michael, the Byzantine emperor to help them with teachers who would assist in scripture translation into their native language.

After receiving their request, the emperor asked the most professional scholars in his region to lend a hand in the translation work and they agreed to help. The scholars went to Kostel, Rostilav and Sviatopolk and took it upon themselves the duty of teaching Moravian Slavs how to read the scripture especially after they successively translated it into their Slavic native tongue. They started by composing Slavic alphabet and later they started the work of translating the scripture especially the Acts and the Gospels.

Nothing made these Slavs happier than to hear the gospel preached in their native language. These scholars also helped in translating other pieces of work apart from the scripture for example they translated books such as Oktoechos and the Psalter among others . The zealots were not pleased by the idea of translating the scripture into Slavic language and thus they openly criticized this move. They argued that only Latin, Greek and Hebrew languages were supposed to be used in the scripture but the Pope did not share these sentiments and he dismissed these claims.

To facilitate the conversion work of the Russians into Christianity, Methodius was appointed by Prince Kostel as one of Apostle Paul’s seventy disciples and he was given the task of bible translation, a job that he effectively did within six months but with the help of the two priests who were also professional writers. Methodius being an apostle worked hand in hand in hand with Bishop Andronicus who had been appointed by Apostle Paul to help him in the spread of the gospel to the Moravians . Another major break in the conversion of Russians into Christianity was achieved during the reigns of Vladimir in 980.

Vladimir was a pagan leader who prayed idols and had even erected some of them on the hills and decorated them with gold moustaches and silver heads. Some of these idols were Khors, Stribog, Mokosn’, Dazh’bog and Simar’gi. People would sacrifice their offspring to these idols and thus this land was full of blasphemous blood. In 987 Vladimir after many trials by Bulgars to accept their religion summoned his ‘nobles’ to seek for their advice on whether they should abandon worshipping their idols and adopt other types of religion like that for Germans, Greek or for Jews.

All of these had approached Vladimir and asked him to join their religion and now he was at crossroads to know what step to take from there. The Greeks claimed that whoever worshipped their God would have eternal life but those who followed other faith would burn in eternal fire. After asking nobles their stand, they said that unless they experience immediate knowledge of those rituals then they were not in a position to advice.

They thus went and learnt for themselves but were not impressed by how Germans and Jews practiced their rituals but for the Greek the answer though not very direct was positive. “Everyman, after tasting something sweet, is afterward unwilling to accept that which is bitter, and therefore we can no longer remain here (Paganism)” . They argued that in German rituals they did not see any beauty and that for the Jews was bad but to the Greek’s ritual they could not know whether they were still on earth or in heaven because it was beauty beyond human description.

This made Vladimir jealous and attacked his opponents a year later and proceeded to Kherson and conquered this Greek city. After this he issued demands to the Greek emperors-Constantine and Basil that they had to give to him their unmarried sister or else he would destroy the whole city but they told him that he would only get the girl if and only if, he got baptized as it was against their Christian faith and teachings to sell off their Christian sister to a pagan.

Vladimir badly wanted this girl and thus he softened his heart and agreed to get baptized on condition that he would be baptized by this unwedded girl known as Anne. The emperors agreed to this and people rejoiced and danced as he got baptized. Vladimir then disclosed to them that he knew of their religion as he had sent emissaries before to enquire on the same and they gave him a positive answer . Just as it was a custom to pay bride price after marrying a girl, Vladimir returned Kherson to its rightful owners as his dowry.

When he went back home he ordered all idols to be destroyed and said that those who would not get baptized the following day were not his friends any more and thousands big and small, young and old went to the river to be baptized and a history was made as never before had so many people been baptized at one time. Vladimir after this constructed wooden churches on the grounds where he had set his idols to show the world that he was truly a converted Christian. He also sent priests to go all over the town and cities to preach to the unconverted and convert and baptize them.

The reasons that made the Russians to get baptized was their desire to be able to read and interpret the scripture without asking for an interpreter as those people who came to teach them took advantage of their inability to read and write. That was why they asked Emperor Michael to assist them in composing Slavic alphabets something that they did willingly. Another thing that acted as a catalyst towards Russians conversion to Christianity was Vladimir’s desire to marry Emperor’s unwedded sister. This led to his baptism as well as the baptism of other hundred thousands of his followers.

Because this portion of the gospel of John (John 7:53-8:11) does not appear in many ancient manuscripts, many scholars regard it as highly questionable (i.e. whether inspired and therefore must be included in the whole gospel of John) as to its place in the New Testament canon. Moreover, the so-called church fathers, in their writings, did not have comments for they did not, in the first place, refer to this portion of the currently widely accepted as John’s gospel.

And so, early manuscripts’ (the copies of the original) forms do not include 7:53 to 8:11. If ever this periscope appears in some of the early copies, it is there in a special position, and just like many scholarly journals today, it has asterisk markings at its opening and also at its ending.

Some even believe it to be Luke’s writing rather than John’s because of its structure, of which, obviously very unlikely. When one will just read through before and after, without any hunch regarding these scruples among scholars, one will not sense any inconsistency nor anything different in this contested portion.

It is as much the writing of John like all of the other parts and chapters in the gospel (Constable, 2000). The pertinent question now which bears upon the readership of the gospel of John is whether this portion to be taken as authentic part of the whole (i.e. part of the inspired word of God) or not.

Well, it is now beyond any shadow of doubt that the gospel of John is without a doubt the gospel of John. 1) Why was this small portion contested among scholars, 2) Why is it now well-established as authentic part, and 3) What spiritual truths is John 7:53-8:11 conveying to its readers, are the issues which will be dealt in what follows.

John 7:53-8:11 – A Contested Portion

As what has been said above, scholars debate relentlessly over this portion ever since the canonicity of the New Testament scriptures has been studied. And so, because this issue has been put forth, the concerned matter must be settled once and for all for the benefit of those who are/would be affected by it.

Those who have been, at least, given the background of the gospel of John, know that the basic truth about this gospel is that it, like all the rest of the books of the canonized scriptures, was a product of the process of numerous copyings of the original autograph of its author. In the ancient biblical times, there were no publishing companies nor printing machines, and computers, as what modern day world has for its use today.

Hence, the way that a manuscript was made public in those days was through the then called copyists. These professionals (they were also called “scribes”) would copy the original copy; and most of the times, because certain materials were fragile (like the papyrus) and would not last for long periods of time, these scribes would recopy the “copies” of the original.

The copies nevertheless were received as good as the original by the recipients. The trustworthiness of the scribes were a given and beyond doubt in those days. The same is the case with other non-biblical writings. Such classics as the Iliad by Homer, Socrates’ Apology, Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus, and others like the historical accounts written by known ancient Roman historians, etc., were all copied and recopied.

The only marked difference these ancient manuscripts have which is in total contrast to the manuscripts of the Bible is that they (i.e. non-biblical classics) are received today without cynicism by the critics. This is very much unlike any biblical manuscripts. And so, John’s gospel as it is today is a copy of many copies. Before it reached its current forms with its many translations in many different languages, it had undergone numerous recopyings.

When early Christian scribes were in the process of putting together the inspired books, and when they go through John’s gospel (like perhaps the translators who were commissioned by King James in 1600), they incorporated the parts which they saw were rightfully belonging to John. Some of them, as was mentioned in the Introduction portion, expressed their misgivings by making this portion of John (7:53-8:11) appear like an appendix or footnote.

The whole background of this pericope has made it to be irresistibly taken as it actually is (whether it was then a well established oral tradition or something else), a narrative which is to be taken as real incident which actually happened at certain point in the life of the Savior.

However, in any ways, this questionable portion (for definite reason of providence) has eventually become part of John’s gospel and not anywhere in the so-called synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). And so, the gospel of John is like it is today because of careful and responsible consideration on the part of the translators (McArthur, 2009).

Beyond Reasonable Doubt – A Part Of John’s Gospel

There are practical considerations which can be helpful to anybody considering the issue of authenticity of John 7:53-8:11. First to be considered is the fact that it does not interrupt the flow of John’s style of writing. It actually fits his writing style.

It would be observed that from chapter 5 through chapter 8, John’s pattern has been presenting a scene or incident and then proceed to Jesus’ teaching or elaborating spiritual truths. John 7:53-8:11 flows out of the same said pattern of the author. Another thing to be considered is the fact that it never (the truths taught in this pericope) contradicts the teachings of the whole Scripture.

In fact, it reinforces the well-established truths about God and Jesus in the entire inspired Scripture. Being thus (John’s original writing and God’s authentic revelation), why should it be left out or considered not a genuine part of the revelation God is giving to humanity.

To excise this important portion from the gospel is to deprive many of a very important account in the life of Christ which reinforces the fact of his grace towards sinners and the reality of hypocrisy which so often illusively deceives and eats the best of the religious sector of the human populace. It ought to be studied and meditated and benefited from as much as the other portions of the Bible.

Apostle John wrote it to point out an occasion in the life of Jesus while ministering and backs his claims of Jesus’ divinity, it supports the whole biblical revelation, and it is legitimate part of the gospel and important part of God’s revelation.

The attitude therefore among its readers should be an attitude of trust and assurance (and without any hint of a doubt) that the story of the adulteress and those Pharisees who caught her in an actual adulterous situation (probably, she’s a prostitute), who then brought her to Jesus interrupting his discourse in the temple, was a historical and inspired narrative of John.

Spiritual Truths

One more note as to its questionable legitimacy. Veteran pastor and scholar in his own right, John McArthur critically observed that probably the reason for early scholars hesitation to include John 7:53-8:11 was its seeming contradictory presentation of the Old Testament’s treatment of adultery (McArthur, 2009).

The story appears to be condoning the adulteress for her sinful act. It seems to violate the holiness of the Savior himself. Well, it only appears to be when looked at superficially. Actually, there’s a lot to be seen and discovered in this passage. When it is treated properly, important truths about God and his redemption would surface and become obvious to the observant eyes.

The scenario presented here does in no way introduce Jesus as one who disregards the issue of the woman’s life of immorality. John’s intention was not to put Jesus in a bad light. He was upholding as he writes all along the fact that God hates all forms of sin – adultery included. The issue, however, that was pertinent to John at the moment of his writing, was not whether adultery should be tolerated or not.

The issue being treated here was the Pharisaic attitude of hypocrisy. What really was happening at this point of Jesus Christ’s life and ministry was that the religious sector of the Jewish population were getting incensed at him, more especially, the Sanhedrin (this political group consisted mainly of the Pharisees).

At this particular point in time, there was already a plot to assassinate Jesus. And so, speaking in context, John was highlighting at the background of his presentation of Jesus as God in the flesh, the fact that there was already a very serious hostility building among the religious and political leaders of Israel. John was trying to convey here this reality of the whole situation (7:53-8:4).

This arrangement has supposed to have prepared everyone who has been following the narratives in this gospel to the spiritual truths and lessons it is conveying.

Christ’s Wisdom & Humility. The first to note here about Jesus is his incredible wisdom. He knew full well what was going on in the background. He knew the Pharisees’ true intentions. Yet, in spite of this, he was able to compose himself in genuine humility. Remember that Jesus was introduced by Apostle John as God the Creator.

God himself incarnated in human flesh. Look at how Jesus responded to the whole thing – the evil scheming and maneuvering all directed against this God who became flesh. If  this truth about Jesus is upheld at this junction of his life in this occasion involving all these characters in this narrative while reader reads, a deep and profound awe and admiration would inevitably overpower him/her.

It’s difficult to comprehend and unbelievable to see God in the flesh in such humble attitude enduring unjustifiable hostility in the midst of the people he created. Jesus’ profound wisdom and humility cannot be elaborated nor will ever be explored completely in its full sense in any study of the Scripture.

His wisdom and humility as they were both revealed can only be benefited from through the profound lessons they exude as they come from the fact that God the Creator showed them in his humanity.

Christ’s Forgiveness. This narrative shows how much God can forgive. It also shows the fact that God is not impressed with hypocritical observance of his laws and cannot be swayed by man’s superficial understanding of his commands.

God who planned redemption understands in the first place the sinfulness of man – how sin has actually corrupted the entire human race. And so, in his incarnation, he knew the deception of Israel’s spiritual leaders. He knew they were self-deceived.

The lesson then being conveyed in this story of the adulterous woman is the fact of humanity’s deluded perception of itself; even the best of its representatives – the religious Pharisees. No one here in this incident is sinless in the eyes of Jesus.

Yet, as the story unfolds, he was seen forgiving even the obvious adultery of this woman. As was noted earlier in this paper, this passage of John is not meant to condone adultery. The passage is critical of hypocritical righteousness as well as it condemns the sin of adultery in the life of the woman. Overruling all these sins is the fact that God forgives.

References:

1. McArthur, John. John Volume 3 (12 Part Series) Jesus Confronts Hypocrisy: A Study of John 7:53-8:11 Code: 1519. Date Accessed: May 12, 2009 at http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/1519
2. Constable, Dr. Thomas L. Notes on John. 2000 Edition. Published by DTS Publications.

Homosexuality remains one of the hottest topics in the modern society. We argue, whether homosexuality has the right to exist in society, and try to explain homosexuality notions in Biblical terms. Objectively, neither proponents, nor opponents of homosexual relations have ever suggested any single relevant system of arguments to defend their position. We try to rely on religion, and we try to interpret our views on homosexuality through the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality. Yet, we still fail to properly interpret Biblical provisions.

As a result, proponents and opponents of homosexuality use different (and even opposite) interpretations of the same Biblical texts to support their arguments. John Corvino vs. Vatican: Homosexuality and the Bible It is always interesting and useful to review the two opposite viewpoints, when it comes to evaluating the relevance of both arguments. Such comparison is even more useful, when the arguments are based on the Biblical texts – the texts which still lack single unilateral interpretation.

John Corvino has become a well known advocate for the rights of homosexuals. He has used the major Biblical provisions to support his approval of homosexuality. In his work The Bible Condemns Usurers, Too he has used the analogy between homosexuality and the process of lending money for interest. In the Book of Exodus, we read: “if you lend money to my people, to the poor among you, you shall not exact interest for them” (Childs 33).

However, contemporary society actively utilizes the principles of interest in traditional banking practice (with the exception of Islamic banking which still relies on lending without interest). Does this mean that while the Bible prohibits homosexuality it still has the right to exist? In Corvino’s view, it does. Moreover, Corvino uses one of the strongest Biblical injunctions against homosexuality to suggest that the Bible has probably been erroneous! The Bible explicitly refers to “dishonorable passions.

Their women exchanges natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men” (Ziesler 97). Corvino tries to suggest, that although the Bible condemns homosexuality, the times and social conditions have changed. “Suppose that in Paul’s time homosexual relationships were typically exploitative, paganistic or pederastic” (Corvino). For Vatican, though such suggestions are at least weak.

First of all, Vatican unilaterally condemns homosexuality. Second, Vatican grounds its position on the same Biblical injunctions against homosexuality. It is remarkable, that Vatican primarily uses the same letter of Paul to Romans to support its strong condemnation of homosexuality: “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator – who is forever praised.

Amen” (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality). It is not difficult to guess what the Church would respond to Corvino: the Church would certainly defend the holy union between a man and a woman. The letter of Paul to Romans is the direct condemnation of homosexuality, and it is difficult not to deny that the Bible takes homosexual behavior as immoral. In 1997, Vatican released a Statement on Homosexuality. That Statement has become the brightest and the most understandable interpretation of Vatican’s position towards homosexuality.

“To choose someone of the same sex for one’s sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator’s sexual design” (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality). Even in the light of such strong Church’s arguments, Corvino’s position remains unchanged. He persistently tries to assure the public that we misinterpret Biblical provisions. Corvino grounds his position on the irrelevance of contemporary Biblical interpretations, and on the fact that many Biblical injunctions against homosexuality are at least outdated. Vatican would hardly agree with that position.

When the Bible says “By their fruits ye shall know them” (Ziesler 99), this does not mean that the Bible stands for homosexuality. Moreover, Vatican openly recognizes that it has appeared under the serious pressure to accept homosexuality. While Corvino suggests that the Church refuses to see homosexual relations as good, Vatican responds that “there is an effort in some countries to manipulate the Church […] to conform to these pressure groups’ concept that homosexuality is at least a completely harmless, if not an entirely good, thing” (Vatican Statement on Homosexuality).

For Vatican to reject homosexuality means not only to rely on certain Biblical passages; it means to evaluate the position of homosexuality proponents, and to re-direct the proponents’ arguments against themselves. Conclusion We have seen that both Vatican and John Corvino ground their research of homosexuality on the Bible. Moreover, Vatican and Corvino evaluate the same Biblical injunctions against homosexuality to prove that each of them keeps to a more correct path in the homosexuality debate.

The Bible openly condemns homosexuality. John Corvino suggests that the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality are outdated and require re-consideration in the light of the changing societal conditions. Vatican keeps to the thought that homosexuality cannot be good, it cannot be harmless, and takes Corvino’s position as threatening to the religious stability of the society.

Both arguments deserve attention; both require detailed re-evaluation in terms of Biblical interpretations, and the analogies drawn by John Corvino. It would be incorrect to state that either Vatican or Corvino have failed to justify their position towards homosexuality. It will be better to say that as long as both positions exist and are defended in the society, we will be able to produce a more objective view on what homosexuality is, and whether it has the right to exist as a notion.

Works Cited Corvino, John. “The Bible Condemned Usurers, Too. ” Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review, 24 (1996): 29-32. Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus: A Critical Theological Commentary. Westminster John Knox Press, 1974. “Vatican Statement on Homosexuality”. 1997. Catholic World News. 06 March 2008. http://www. cwnews. com/news/viewstory. cfm? recnum=4548 Ziesler, John A. Paul’s Letter to the Romans. New Testament Commentaries. CRM Press.

“Battlefield of the Mind: Winning the Battle in Your Mind” Author: Joyce Meyer Reviewer: Lisa Hutson I believe many times in the Christian and especially in the Pentecostal realm, we tend to do things in the name of Christ because we “felt” like it was from the Holy Spirit and instead of determining that by lining it up with the Bible, the living word of God, we tend to trust that our “feelings” are correct. But what happens when those feelings steam from negative, confused, judgemental or passive thinking?I never realized until I read this book that the majority of the bad decisions I have made in my life were decisions I made based on present feelings and that those feelings came from faulty or negative thinking. After I read this book, I understood that it is the things that I think about constantly that are the things that soak up my life.

If those thoughts are positive, I will reap positive benefits. If those thoughts are negative, I will reap negativity but it is all in how I think. There are three life lessons that I have learned to incorporate into my daily life in order to live a Christ filled life.When I tend to go through those “wilderness mentalities”, I have learned to always do my best to be positive, to regularly meditate on the Word of God, and to be thankful at all times. Explaining the importance of being positive, Meyer tells us the mind is a battlefield. After reading 2 Corinthians 10;4,5, Meyer says that we are engaged in a war, our enemy is Satan and that our minds are the battlefield. The devil works diligently to set up strongholds in our mind and he does it through strategy and deceit and that he takes his time to work out his plan (16-17).

In order to prevent the devil’s lies from penetrating our minds, we must defend them. You cannot have a positive life and a negative mind. Your life will not get straightened out until your mind does (27-28). Positive minds produce positive lives. Negative minds produce negative lives. Positive thoughts are always full of faith and hope. Negative thoughts are always full of fear and doubt (41).

What really struck me about this concept is how Meyer tells us that thinking positive isn’t ignoring the negative, but it is believing that God is bigger than you and your situation and that all things will work together for good as His word promises.I am generally a happy person. I laugh at everything, I like making other people laugh and having good conversations. However, when negative things do arise, I tend to get angry or seclude myself. If I am having a disagreement with a co-worker or an argument with my parents, I will just refuse to talk to them. When the Holy Spirit brings them to my memory, I let negative thoughts produce even more feelings of strife and it takes a long time to get over it. I remember one time last semester when I was so upset with my mother that I refused to talk to her for almost four months!Learning to be positive does not mean that the negative situation did not happen but it simply means that we believe that God will heal it or bring good from it.

It means forgiving even if we don’t forget but allowing the Holy Spirit to work in our attitudes so that we do not become weighed down by our situations. Meditating on God’s word is another huge lesson I have learned from this book. I believe that my biggest mistake early on in my walk with the Lord was not reading His word for myself. I became a christian at the age of fourteen and filled with the Holy Spirit by the age of sixteen.However, I would rather go on Wednesday nights and hear my youth pastor tell me what the Bible said instead of reading it myself. When I tried to read on my own, I often became very confused and frustrated and gave up. I let other people tell me how to live instead of searching it out myself.

I continued this all through high school and finally during my senior year I had a very hurtful situation occur between myself and another family in the church. Since I wasn’t solid in my faith and relationship with the Lord, I let it tear me down significantly and I stayed out the church for about a year and a half.I let another’s faith become my own and when they failed me, I equated that with God failing me. “This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, that you may observe and do according to all that is written in it. For then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall deal wisely and have good success. ” Joshua 1:8 The Bible tells us that if we want to be a success and prosper in all of our dealings, we must meditate on the Word of God day and night.The Word of God teaches us what we should spend our time thinking about (57).

Meditation in this context means to spend a lot of time pondering and thinking on the ways of God, His instructions and His teachings (57). In my situation, I had let sermons, Sunday school, and people in the church mold my faith and thought process instead of spending time myself thinking about the Word. I thought about the Word while I was sitting in church but outside of that, I had not really let it sink in. Now, I am making a significant effort to seek the scriptures myself.Of course, I am involved in church again but I am also making an effort during my own time to spend quality time with the Lord, in prayer and in His word, allowing Him to mold me into what He has created me to be. The last thing that “The Battlefield of the Mind” has taught me is to be thankful at all times. How can the devil control us if we are going to be joyful and thankful no matter what our circumstances are? “I will bless the Lord at all times; His praise shall continually be in my mouth.

” Psalm 34:1We can be a blessing to the Lord by letting His praise continually be in our thoughts and mouths (162). Be a grateful person, one filled with gratitude not only toward God, but also toward people (163). Expressing appreciation is not only good for the other person but it is good for us, because it releases joy in us. Meditate daily on all the things you have to be thankful for. Rehearse them to the Lord in prayer, and as you do you will find your heart filling up with life and light (163). During my teenage years, my family went through a financial crisis. We lost our home and our vehicles.

I spent my junior year of high school with my parents living out of a garage that we made into a make-shift home. I remembered crying myself to sleep many nights in that garage. I was embarrassed about our situation, angry at my parents for getting us in this mess, and confused that the Lord could let this happen to us. After about fifteen months in that garage, things finally began to turn around. We were able to sell our property and the garage, move into a rental property and get decent vehicles to drive instead of the old sixties model truck my dad had bought for three hundred dollars during the crisis.I remember being so grateful for that new rental property. It was an old yellow brick home, but it was wonderful to me.

I had a room with real walls! I spent all of my savings on making my own bedroom beautiful with new paint, picture frames and curtains. It was through that situation that I truly learned how to be grateful. My parents and I have come a long way from that old garage but I still have a picture of that old garage in a frame in my room at home. Sometimes even now, I find myself being selfish and ungrateful for my many blessings.I think everyone does. However, that memory always shows me how far the Lord has brought me and how much farther He can take me as long as I stay faithful. “Battlefield of the Mind” by Joyce Meyer has many solid lessons that have taught me a lot about how to live victorious in Christ.

As a young Pentecostal believer, I always thought everything was spiritually supernatural. If God wanted me to think a certain way, He would just zap it into my head. However, as I grow in my relationship with Him, I realize He is not going to spoon feed me forever.He wants me to seek Him. If I put His lessons and teachings into practice, I will live victoriously. Being positive, meditating on His word and always being thankful to Him and to the people around me are just a few ways I can make my life a living sacrifice to Him. However, its really not even a sacrifice, for the blessings and benefits I receive from these practices far out weight the negatives.

I learn more and more about myself and about my Heavenly father as I delve deeper into His word.His word is what empowers my positive attitude and reminds me to be grateful not only for His sacrifice but also for the many blessings He bestows on my life daily. I loved this book. I’m sure I will keep it around to read occasionally and remind myself to get my mind in order! Thinking produces feelings and feelings behaviors and if I’m not happy with any certain behaviors, I must stem it back to what I spend my time thinking about. My mind is the battlefield and when it is renewed in Christ, I will be able to battle the enemy with confidence, perseverance, and power.

Not everyone has the same idea in mind about punishment, and nor did other countries from other times. The following books: The Iliad, The Odyssey, and The Hebrew Bible, entitling instances of cheating, kidnapping and murder, insulting and their punishment. Very rarely would you get away with something unseen because the Gods saw everything, and they could do just about anything known on earth to mankind or even to each other. Anything was punishable whatever time ear it was, and the Gods would cease the chance to take seeked revenge upon another. In many of the Greek based books, there was a lot of cheating going on.

In the Hebrew Bible, there are severe punishments for cheating. In book I of The Iliad, Agamemnon had stated: “the daughter of Chryses. I have set my heart on keeping her in my own house, for I love her better even than my own wife Clytemnestra, whose peer she is alike in form and feature, in understanding and accomplishments. ” In this statement, Agamemnon rathers Breisis, over his very wife because she is similar in looks, therefore would cheat instead of going back to his wife over some foolish love for a girl! Within the Odyssey, book III, one example is about how Nestor explains to Telemachus, – “… ut we were over there, fighting hard at Troy, and Aegisthus who was taking his ease quietly in the heart of Argos, cajoled (consoled? ) Agamemnon’s wife Clytemnestra with incessant flattery. ” In the Hebrew bible, it states, Leviticus 20:10 “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife–with the wife of his neighbor–both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. ” So if caught cheating, followed by what the Hebrew bible says to do, you will be put to death. So if you are the one putting someone to death for adultery, doesn’t that make you the murder?

To take away a living being’s life? Throughout the Iliad and the Odyssey, there are many points where women are given as prizes. So if the women are given as a prize, is it counted as cheating? In the Iliad, punishment to Agamemnon’s adulterous wife, Agamemnon kills her. In the Odyssey, Clytemnestra tries to take her love, Aegisthus for revenge. Soon enough, he is also put to the death, and she as well. In the Hebrew bible, one quote that represents well is Deuteronomy 22:22 “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.

You must purge the evil from Israel. So the average punishment for adultery, or cheating, was the death penalty. Kidnapping was also a big theme in the Iliad, in which Breisis, daughter of the priest Apollo, was kidnapped by Agamemnon, whom professes his love for her and does not want to give her up for life itself. Helen to was kidnapped by Paris, in order to fulfill their love, but making things worse. In the Odyssey, Persephone is kidnapped by Hades, and brought to the underworld six months of the year. s Exodus 21:16: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death. ” So is there a pattern for death at this time back then? Yes, indeed! In the Iliad, many people like Ajax the greater and Ajax the lesser and Agamemnon both insult Achilles for not fighting, but then Achilles also takes his prize of Breisis. Being insulted was part of the shame culture and many of the men would rather die than shame their village or family. In the Odyssey, book XVIII, Cached – SimilarYou +1’d this publicly.

Undo after suffering enough insults from the servant-girl: Melantho, Odysseus is taunted by Eurymachus, who also hurls a footstool, though missing. Insulting could get charges put on them. When you have insulted someone, due to what the Hebrew bible says, they are to be stoned to the death, even for the first offense. Punishment pretty well was all the same in the Hebrew bible, with even the first violation being stoned to death, but also anything that may not even be a violation tied together with another one. They all come out with the same outcome of death, usually stoning.

In the Iliad, many of the punishments too were death, and so to also in the Odyssey. Between these three books, they had just a different timing on things. Now days with cheating or adultery, it is taken pretty well lightly. Kidnapping is still yet not light, but it is taken more serious to find the kidnapped. Insults even now these days doesn’t compare with how minor they may be to any of these books, because they were not taken lightly, but in today’s society, things like that are okay. This is my essay over punishment and the comparison between The Iliad, The Odyssey, and the Hebrew Bible. ttp://messagenetcommresearch. com/myths/bios/pose http://www. fjkluth. com/clytem. html idon. html http://books. google. com/books? id=qdDrwupM0dUC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=where+is+there+kidnapping+in+the+odyssey? &source=bl&ots=oaVyOz5jgk&sig=3tsZ-Meye2UftnfMoDMQoMCZYAk&hl=en&ei=14qSToj5MOHJsQLu7Y2LAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false http://www. twopaths. com/faq_CapitalPunishment. htm http://ancienthistory. about. com/cs/troyilium/a/helenoftroybasc_2. htm