I was cleaning up the attic, and I found a box full of old college stuff; books, notes, a computer program I wrote in an archaic language called ‘APL’, …. and this term-paper.
I took one of my four elective classes titled, “Women in the Scriptures”. I did so for pretty much only one reason; to meet some hot women. There were extremely few women in my major, computer science. It didn’t go well. I sometimes joke that they were probably all lesbians, for who could turn down the Stuckmeister? But, the real reason occurred on the third day of class.
The woman being studied was Delilah … the chick who fooled Sampson via many tears into revealing the secret of his strength (his hair), and then she cut Sampson’s locks thus turning him into a slobbering weenie. The instructor (a former nun) then asked what lesson we can learn from this Biblical story. I raised my hand, she called on me, and I said pretty much this; — “It’s clear that God wants us men (I was the only male in the class) to know that women are deceptive and cunning just like Eve was, and will use any means necessary to trick men into doing what they want, especially by crying a lot.” — That honest reply pretty much ruined my chances. Twenty pairs of eyes glared at me, one or two went into convulsions, and someone wailed to the heavens, “They shouldn’t allow men in this class!“. True, that last comment. Bunch of lesbians!
So, why am I posting an old term-paper? Mostly for posterity … maybe my great great grand-kids will find this a hundred years from now on the net, and give their dead gramps a thumbs up!
I wrote this in 1978. I was two years discharged (honorably) from the USAF, and was a born-again Christian for about three years. So, keep that in mind if you read this relatively short paper (only 2,500 words). What I wrote some forty years ago isn’t necessarily what I believe now. The original title was submitted as; “Conjectures And Facts Concerning Eve: The Mother Of All Living”. Ugh, that’s fairly pompous and arrogant!
On a more personal note, it is not often than one has the good fortune to review ones writings and thoughts suddenly, out of the clear blue, from many decades ago. It’s been a most fascinating and illuminating experience for me to examine my progression from a “baby Christian” to whatever it is I am today. Also interesting, if not scary, is in considering my writing skills/style from the two epochs; have I improved, stayed the same, or gotten worse? I don’t know as it is quite difficult to make an objective decision about oneself.
I receive an A+ for my efforts including this note scribbled on the back page from the professor; — “It is odd that the best paper I’ve received since teaching this course comes from a young man. I can help you get this published in some Catholic journals if you wish, and I urge you to do so. Well done!”
My own analysis today is that the first five pages are interesting and informative. In the last two pages I take a detour by becoming too “preachy” and dogmatic. I still recall doing this on purpose … because I wanted to be a “witness” for Jesus. If I were to grade the paper, I would only give myself a “B”.
I never pursued publishing it. Well … here ya go Sister Professor! Getting this published 40+ years later by my buddy, Jim Quinn, on his very religious Catholic-friendly website, TheBurningPlatform!
[Transcription Note: I wrote the paper on something called a ‘typewriter’. Google it. Oh yeah, that. There was no google to do research … I actually had to read something called “books” which I located by going to something called a “card catalog”. There was no spellcheck, and correcting errors on a typewriter was ugly. As such, I correct spelling errors, improved some punctuation, and “prettied up” the formatting (for example, italics were not available on typewriters.), I only include one of several footnotes, and none of the sixteen entries in the bibliography. That aside, the meat of the paper, the words themselves, are 100% complete and original as written way back when.]
================================================
The French existentialist philosopher, Simon de Beauvoir, in her book, “The Second Sex”, which is accepted by many as the most comprehensive and influential study on women yet produced has this general attitude towards women in relationship to Christianity;
“Christian ideology has contributed no little to the oppression of women … The creation of Eve, the geographical location of her rib, and her role of temptress in the story of the Fall, together establish beyond a doubt the patriarchs view of women’s immutable inferiority physically, intellectually, and morally.”
According to some theologians, chapters one and two of Genesis are two separate accounts of creation, and supposedly they present two distinct traditions about women.
Chapter 1 belongs to the Priestly tradition, probably written down in the 5th century, after the exile, although it contains more ancient material. Chapter 2 belongs to the Yahwist tradition, originating in Judea under David and Solomon, and therefore dating back to the ninth century. From these two chapters, modern scholars concoct some very interesting theories as to how the division of the sexes has come about.
I believe that the two verses in chapter one of the account of the creation of man sums up the larger account in chapter two, pruning its anthropomorphic aspects, and instead of paying attention to the details of the process of creation, throws a sharp light in the core of it. God creates man in his own image and he makes “man” male and female. The priestly tradition would have extracted the essence of the religious teaching of the Yahwist tradition.
Concerning woman, it would be a formidable task to determine why certain situations exist today and how they got this way. The sex stereotyping, the subjugation of woman into mere sex functions, the oppression of woman through the ages, the Women’s Lib Movement, etc… to trace the evolution of these and similar topics accurately is not the purpose of this paper. Rather, I believe it is possible to determine from the Genesis account a more focused goal; that is, to unearth what the actual intent of the male-female role was ideally meant to be.
In chapter one, the name given to the creator is not the unique name of Yahweh, but the plural name Elohim. Thus, in verse 26, Elohim speaks in the plural: “Let us make man in our image …“, whereas the next verse refers to Elohim in the singular: “God created man in the image of himself.”
Similarly, Adam is also made one and many, singular and plural. One and the same sentence passes from the singular to the plural: “Let us make man … and let them be ….“. The singular is Adam, the collective term for mankind and has no connotation of sex. The plural, with which Adam is identical, is explained in the next verse: “… in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.”
So, the image and likeness of mankind consists in being BOTH male and female. Neither male nor female alone is in the likeness of Elohim, but both together. There are not two origins of mankind; the creation of woman is not delayed, as it is in chapter two, the Yahwist tradition. Man and woman are not only two, they are also one, and in that oneness is the image and likeness of God.
Objecting to this interpretation are more conservative scholars who insist that this creation “in the image and likeness of God” is not linked to sexuality, for even animals have that. Rather, God is Spirit, and mankind, according to Scripture, is the only other creature which also has a spirit (Gen. 2:7 “… God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.“) They tell us that it is this specific characteristic, and only this, which makes mankind uniquely distinct from the animals and in the image of God. This happens to be my preference and personal belief.
It is the earlier creation account which is the main source of disparaging theories of woman. The creation of woman is far removed from the creation of man. It is as if she is the last and most mysterious of kindnesses God gives man. In the text of Gen. 2:18-24, the creation of woman is contrasted with that of animals. These are made and brought to God by Adam, with the twofold purpose of being named by him, who thereby affirms his understanding of and his authority over them, and of providing him with companionship. Animals should not be worshiped, since they suffer from a double inferiority in relation to man: it is from him they obtained their names and they are unable to fulfill his expectations. From this, some conclude that the chief lesson of the text refers to woman’s relationship to man. It is Adam’s solitude which provides the occasion for her creation. She is to be understood as an afterthought, as a being whose place could conceivably have been filled by animals, as one who, being created like the animals to remedy Adam’s loneliness, stands only a little higher than they. These disparagers see the creation of woman as the lowest in a series of creation attempts that begins on a triumphant note with the creation of Adam and follows a descending scale to that of Eden, of plants, of rivers, of animals … and finally of woman.
An alternative to this discouraging concept is to look at creation that grows from Adam to woman, with the intermediate creations serving to establish the stage for the higher creation that is achieved with the modelling of woman.
In Gen. 2:22, the Scriptures record: “… made he a woman …”. The word made here is the Hebrew, panah-builded, i.e., skillfully formed. As far as mankind is concerned, there is only one creation, that of Adam. The next step is a further development of what began with the creation of Adam. We could postulate a radical notion that woman is not in addition to mankind; rather, Adam himself is built up into woman! Woman, then, does not walk in on Adam from the outside as an alien element, but proceeds from the inside of Adam as the development that would make society-building possible and even as bringing mankind to its perfection.
[Footnote #4: In Gen. 2:18 the word “made” is the Hebrew, asah, which means to make out of already existing material, It is the opposite of, bara, to create from nothing. In Gen. 1:26 God says, “Let us make man ...”, that is to say that man is made from the already existing materials God had previously created. Man is made from the dust of the ground. In Gen. 1:27 the verse reads, “God created man in his own image“. Here, the creative act was the imparting of God’s own Spirit into a living creature, something not yet done. Our bodies are formed (made), but life itself is created.]
Adam exclaims in ecstasy, “This is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” Adam perceives clearly what his confrontation with the animals had only hinted at, his personality. Adam becomes aware of himself, reaching consciousness as mankind at the unveiling of woman. For woman is also mankind. Woman is not made as Adam’s help-meet just because he is lonely; she is created as the perfecting element, to the revelation of which he aspired when he refused companionship with the animal world.
Although they were naked they could not be ashamed because they were not viewing each other as strangers, but each saw the other as himself. Woman brought to Adam the completion of mankind as well as its’ perfection. In contrast to the other days of creation when upon completion God says, “This is good.“, when he creates man he says, “This is not good.” This of course does not mean that God has fumbled but, that the work is unfinished.
In Gen. 5:2 we read, “Male and female created he them: and blessed them, and called their name Adam in the day they were created.” Who, then, is Adam?
A name, in Hebrew philosophy unveils the true meaning of the reality it designates. Adam, or in Hebrew, adonah, means ‘the one from the soil’. The same word ‘dust’ in Gen. 2:7, from which man is formed, is translated in other places of Scripture as; ashes (Num. 19:17), powder (2 Kings 23:6), and even rubbish (Neh. 4:2,10). From his origin in the earth, mankind has received a name of humility translating the lowliness of his condition. This inclusive name implies that the divine ideal for man and wife is not merely that of association but an indissoluble unity. God made them “one flesh” and gave them only one name. Eve is the name given her after the transgression and its prophesied results, “… who called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” This was the name describing her function and destiny in spiritual history of which she was the beginning. For through the seed of the woman sin shall one day be vanquished, and death shall be swallowed up in victory.
Men and woman are of the same nature and destiny; to rule the earth, this is their mission as God originally established it.
The woman’s subordination in chapter three is the result of sin, not nature. The division of labor theme must be placed in the context of the Fall. Man is assigned or associated with the task of conquering nature. Woman is associated in the context of laboring under the burdens involved in reproduction. It is the result of the Fall then which isolates humanity into fixed sex roles. But there is no indication that things must always be this way because, it is not inscribed in nature, but the result of sin. It suggests that men and women should strive together to overcome the effects of sin and should evolve toward that partnership on all levels which is required if the image of God is to be realized in them, not in the next world but life in the here and now.
Gen. 2:20 states, “… and there was not a help meet found suitable for him.” This makes it appear that although God made someone for Adam to be like him, yet she was not identical with him, rather she was a mere counterpart or his complement. So, a position of inferiority is assumed because of the word “help-meet”. However, a certain linguist clears up this small matter;
“The old argument for feminine inferiority based in the word translated as ‘helper’ or ‘help-meet’ to describe Eve do not stand up against linguistic studies which demonstrate that the original word employed does not carry any implication whatsoever of subordination.”
It is my belief that Eve was probably the most beautiful woman the world has ever known. It is illogical to presume that a perfect God would create anything other than a perfect being. Eve reflected divine perfection in every aspect. The Talmudist says, “All women in comparison to Sarah are like monkeys in respect to men. But Sarah can no more be compared to Eve than can monkey be compared to men.” We have Biblical affirmation as to the beauty of Sarah, so how lovely Eve must have been!
If Adam was the world’s first tiller of the fields, Eve was the first seamstress. Clothing is a reminder of sin, for prior to their disobedience our first parents had no sense of shame for they had no sense of sin. Skins are a symbol of sacrifice. Spiritually speaking, God’s provision of the skins to Adam and Eve foreshadowed Calvary, where Jesus himself was to be the sacrifice.
Eve was the first sinner and saw the fruit of her sin as she stood at the world’s first grave and buried her dead son. Through a woman, God’s universe was blighted and became a world of sinners ruined by the Fall. However, God’s grace provides hope through the prophecy in Gen. 3:15. —– “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
Now, through a woman, a perfect salvation has been provided for a sinning race. When Jesus cried, “It is finished,” he meant that the serpent’s head, representing power and authority, had been bruised. He laid hold of all satanic principalities and powers that Eve’s transgression brought into the world, and put them under his feet.
Everyone experiences temptation, it is a universal occurrence, and each of us should learn from the first person ever tempted. There is no sin in temptation, but rather in yielding to it. The temptation was not in itself the will to transgress, but the will to possess; the transgression is merely a means. If the tempter had said, “Steal” he would not have been listened to for a moment. But, he did not say, “Steal.”, he says, “Speculate.”
Temptation since the days of Eden has always disguised itself in a desirable garment. Her bodily appetite was tempted — “The tree was good for food.” Her sensuous nature was tempted; ” … a delight to the eyes …” But, the most powerful temptation was the spiritual temptation to transcend the normal experience of men and to taste of the wisdom that belongs only to God; ” … and you shall be like Gods …”. The woman is tempted first not, as male pride might suggest, because she is the weaker, but because she is the perfection. Only a cowardly tempter would strike at the weakest link in the chain of being. But the serpent is not such a petty figure.
When God faced Adam with that first act of sin, he not only blamed Eve, but God himself; “The woman thou gave me ..” as if to say, “If you knew Eve would have tempted me, why did you create her for me?”. Man has ever since been finding a scapegoat for what is really his fault. Adam, the federal head of the human race is made responsible for Adamic sin.
As stated previously, I believe these accounts are historical realities, If Adam is a myth, so is Christ. Luke reminds us that Adam was a son of God (Lk 3:23-28), and the first man from whom Christ descended. How could a mythical son become one of the ancestors of Christ? Luke’s genealogy is based on the assumption that Adam was an actual person. Apostle Paul said, “… in Adam you die …” You can’t die in a myth. By deduction, if Adam is a myth, so is Christ … the Greatest Lie the tempter wants you to believe.
In closing, following is a portion of the great poem by Milton, “Eve”, which sums up the beauty and truth of the matter:
Oh fairest of creation, last and best
Of all God’s works, creature in whom excelled
Whatever can to sight or thought be formed,
Holy, Divine, Good, Amiable or Sweet.
That what seemed fair in all the world seemed now
Mean, or in her contained or in her looks;
Grace was in all her steps, Heaven in her eye,
In every gesture dignity and love.
The world was sad, the garden was a wild,
And man the hermit sighed till woman smiled.
Heaven’s best, last gift.
THE END
Christianity built a civilization of freedom loving people saved from sin and damnation by the grace of God. Whatever never built anything good. Your analysis of woman in creation was absolutely beautiful and correct.
You would have made a great preacher, Stuck, but for the doubt.
Great read, thank you Stucky. Gives me lots to think about but right now I’m thinking that Eve must have been really really freaking hot! ?
Mark Twain has a slightly different take on the story of Eve … it’s a fun read.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/8525/8525-h/8525-h.htm
Interesting and informative. It also reminds me of all the changes we have gone through since the 70’s with your mentioning of typewriters and arcane computer languages. Hard to even remember that we had to read books and magazines in a library for our papers. You gave me a lot to think about, especially the comment of how our great great grandchildren might see us.
An informative read Stucky. As they say, “That’ll preach!” I especially liked the part that referenced Adam being both male and female that when joined as one as God intended are the image of God. Beautiful. This is why homosexuality is against nature and an abomination to God as Paul says in Rom.1.
But, that man was a spiritual being from the time he was made goes against Paul’s teaching in 1Cor.15:45-50 where he explains that man was not spiritual from the time he was made a living soul. But, was only natural, of the earth earthy, and flesh and blood.
Genesis agrees with this by saying that the breath of life that was breathed into man’s nostrils was also breathed into the nostrils of every animal, bird, and creeping thing. Gen.7:15,22. Showing us that the breath of life was just air breathed into their nostrils that jump started their physical life.
This means that what happened in the garden was part of God’s plan to bring man from a natural being which had no knowledge of good and evil(Gen.3:22) and could not relate to God on a spiritual level. Just as Paul says of the natural man in 1Cor.2:14. To the spiritual man that Jesus said we must become by a second spiritual birth to see the kingdom of God.John3:1-8.
And because Adam had no law as Rom.5:12,13 says, or the knowledge of good and evil, the natural death that came was not a punishment for his sin, because sin is not imputed when there is no law. It instead was the necessary step in man becoming a spiritual being and heir to the kingdom of God according to God’s plan, that Peter says was from before the world was made(1Peter1:20).
If Adam had not eaten the fruit man would still be in a natural state equipped only for life in a natural world. But, since Adam ate men have now the choice to become the spiritual man that is heir to God’s spiritual kingdom.(1Cor.15:50-54). This is why I for one am thankful that Adam ate the fruit.
Eve lost two sons that day, old friend. And I have no doubt her anguish at the loss of Cain was equal if not greater since his failure to be his brother’s keeper is a failure seen again and again in the book of Genesis which I call the Book of Sibling Rivalry. Eve must have blamed herself or Adam. It is our nature to take or shift blame.
I am a big fan of Rachel’s sister Leah.
I have spent this day preparing lasagna, filled cookies and bread. It is my son’s 27 bday. He got a new job and will be exiting my basement apartment which adjoins the music laundrotorium.
Will try to comment again but am thankful the ban on my comments have been rescinded. Now. If that does not bring in the STMs I do not know what will.
Luv ya, GHOST!
Given the phallic symbolism that can be assigned to a “snake”, the proverbial “forked-tongue” (i.e. lying), and the apparent seduction that took place, it would not be too large of a leap to question if the Fall of Mankind was actually the very first sex scandal.
And how would God appear to a prideful Lucifer if not as one powerful enough to do as thou wilt. Hasn’t that been the story of mankind through the ages anyway?
Eve’s adultery and Adam’s later experimentation could be said to have broken God’s (later engraved / contractual / written) commandments and simultaneously bringing about major trust issues (i.e. separation / fractured unity).
We also see how many more times the topic of sexual sin appears all throughout the Bible. Even the word “naked” calls to mind sexual shame and the need to be “covered-up” with clothing, and otherwise. But the spiritual aspects would involve trust, unity and harmony between both God and humankind. Also, people today still associate the term “virgin” with naivete and innocence… and sex. But after virginity is lost it was either to love and marriage or a crash course in the knowledge of the “ways of the world”.
Or, it really could have been just about fruit and covering nudity.
That’s an interesting proposition. Every creation was more complex than the last and men are unable to form other humans in their bellies.
Or maybe Satan was trying to hit God where it would hurt the most – like in the same way as fathers have always been more protective of their daughters.
Even so, women will never rule the world. No balls and they can’t get along with each other.
I wish EC were still around. It would have nice to see his reply to that one ▲
Dear Me, what a bunch of neurotic males. Women will never rule the world? So who wants to rule the world? You think pathetic little humans rule the world? Hubris abounds here.
Women scare the crap out of men, they bleed but don’t die, they carry little humans around in their bodies and they make milk to feed those little humans. If it weren’t for sperm production, most women could get along just fine sans men.
The fallacy of the brave hunter feeding the tribe was tossed on its head when it became common knowledge that it was the women foraging and growing plants that actually fed the village while the men sat in the shade watching the women work, talking shit, spitting, scratching their balls and doing other manly stuff.
Men generally sat around and jaw-jacked, sometimes they fondled their spears and other such accoutrements and body parts, occasionally they got into pissing matches with each other, but, for the most part, they sat around. Sometimes they formed hunting parties where they got together and drank alcoholic beverages while hanging out around campfires, sometimes they climbed into little tree houses where they drank more alcoholic beverages while hoping an animal they could kill would wander by.
Some Injun tribes claim that first man was made from mud from the bottom of a pond. Creator, aka: God, sent first duck down into the pond to retrieve the mud and when first duck came up from the pond bottom he had that mud on his beak. First duck was really big, or maybe first man was tiny. Never mind, Creator fashioned the mud into First Man and turned him loose on an unsuspecting planet.
Time passed and first man grew lonely so Creator made first man a dog. That was great until first man grew horny and dog said he wasn’t into that shit so first man asked God for some help and God, not being into that shit either, made woman for first man. He needed more pond mud so he sent first snake down to grab some mud which snake did. God then fashioned woman out of the mud and she turned around and proceeded to beat the crap out of first snake which pissed him off (first snake was male) and he swore revenge on first woman.
When first man saw first woman he was besotted with lust but she had a headache and wasn’t in the mood so he sulked for a bit and then later, decided to invent whiskey which he did. He would’ve invented video games but tv was in its infancy. Meanwhile, first snake decided to get revenge on first woman so he tempted first woman with the whiskey, he told her it was made from apples and would make her butt look smaller so she tried it. After a few whiskies she realized that first man wasn’t too bad and that she didn’t really care about her fat butt, so that was when first sex happened.
We all know that it went downhill from there but, hey, it was fun while it lasted.
The End
ha, ha! preach it sister! foreplay to mygirlmaybe is when her man do the dishes!
“And in those days, they sat about the campfire camel dunging, as bullshit was yet unheard of.”
True.
BUT, snakes haven’t always been viewed by mankind as evil.
You’ve got the above serpent wrapped around a staff at clinics , hospitals, ambulances, etc. Even Moses used the image of a Bronze Snake to SAVE the lives of Israelites!”
They’ve also been used for worship, magic potions and, medicine. They’ve been used as the symbol of love, health, disease, medicine, pharmacy, immortality, death, and even wisdom …. for as long as recorded human history.
The snake was the original Dr. Pepper …… so misunderstood!!
Numbers 21:4-9
‘And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.
And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.
And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; pray unto the Lord, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.
And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.’
Stuck – you were unable to get pussy even though you had 20:1 odds? Jeebus that is sad. All I ever had to do was smile and lick my eyebrows.
Very religious indeed.
Stirring shit in 1978 probably furthur back than that. Still doing it treading into the man vs woman business. His fecal mixing helps expand our minds. That is why we love him kike a brother.
Thank you, Stucky. Very well done. I admire your writing and just had to say so this time.
Thumbs up Stucky. Very heady.
Interestingly I never caught the detour or the preachy bit.
Stucky, your paper deserved an ‘A’ it received.
As for your writing skills/ style today, I’ve only casually read through a few others you’ve written because of the time restraints. This one though was the first where I was able to complete the whole reading.
I can’t make a comparison of your writing today to your style in school, but you do write about interesting things if I might say. Looking forward to finding time to read others.
Interesting read.
To all …
…. today is the first chance I’ve had to read the comments. Thank you all for the compliments, as well as your comments. Means much to me.
===================================== =
I have one more term-paper (the last one) I will transcribe and submit … hopefully for the coming Sunday.
It is from my senior year Advanced Statistics class. Statistics??? Yuck!!! I agree, except for one thing, … statistics can be boring or interesting. It all depends on the topic!!
ANYTHING that can be measured can be analyzed statistically; the average number of raisins in a box, the weight of a newborn baby, the length of one’s weenie, whatever. It’s not the thing-being-measure in which the professor is interested in. Rather, he wants to know if the student understands the theory of statistics; significance, p-value, correlation, etc etc ….
Well, my topic consisted of … A 20 question survey regarding religious beliefs.
Yup, ol’ Stucky was doing QOTD way back in 1979! lol I think it will interesting to read because you’ll be able to “see” into the minds of young collegiates from the late 1970’s! Not often we get a chance to see that. And let me tell you something …. many, if not most, young people back then were as confused, illogical, and non-sensical back then as they are today. I’m not kidding.
.
This was a very nice essay or term paper or whatever we used to call them in Academia.
I spent too many years there learning how to write lengthy essays which informed, entertained and rarely proved my point.
Kinda like the methodology which has driven some of my prose here.
Over the past years, we’ve seen earthshaking and dramatic changes in our personal lives, our community lives and, now, on the national level. I personally do not expect to feel a dramatic impact if Trump does not prevail, at least not soon. However, I know my more conservative friends in and around the nation’s capital are a bit nervous about their jobs if Biden prevails.
There is a huge Procter & Gamble operation 30 miles north of Cape Girardeau. I can get you big packages of the “good stuff” (even Charmin!) according to my neighbor, whose grandson is a supervisor there.
Mostly, am teasing to lift my melancholia. We are out here in the boonies, isolated and unfearful of Covid, yet we do wear the mask when the request seems legitimate.
My son has taken a new software engineering position with a company which, coinky-dink, is in the medical data storage and sharing game, as was his old company, Cerner, Inc. in Kansas City. He will be working from “home” in his newly leased apartment (it was time!) close enough to check in every week or so but far enough to drive back before dark.
Win-win.
We saw on the news that many tens of thousands of people lined up for free food in Dallas. I have myself given away enough dried LDS food to feed a few families for a few months, so we see similar signs of need (and/or potentially greed) out here in flyover world. The unemployment problem will become apparent a full 9 months after the March shutdown, I bet, when the standard 3-month extension leaves a bunch of folks without even that little bit of income from their layoffs.
I am myself very thankful to see you back here and to have the privilege to comment to you from time to time.
A lot has happened to both of us, Stuckenheimer.
Yet, I will rejoice.
Thanks for the essay.
I believe understanding God and His creation perfected is understanding pre-fall vs. post fall.
Our original purpose is still the same, to fellowship with God.
It is not God that broke intimacy with man/woman but mankind with God via God’s gift of free will.
God has restored that intimacy by grace through faith in the sacrificial gift of His Son Jesus and His perfect gift of restoration for all who will willfully partake.
That restoration begins with our eternal soul and will once again be fully perfected on earth at Jesus second coming during His millennial reign.
Until then may the peace and love of God be with you always.