I'm growing more pleased with the habit I'm developing to pray for things big and small.
Being a mere mortal and contemplate the infinity of God may be a fool's errand, but just orienting myself to the glory and keeping in pitch with that cosmic tuning fork has indubitable benefits.
When you start to dance to the holy beat, it keeps you from stumbling or losing the rhythm.
[from sermon] do for others vs. do WITH others
25aug2013 [from sermon] do for others; vs. do WITH others (object or service done unilaterally) engage and relate.
Scripture reading from Luke, tells about Jesus and entourage being hosted at the home of the two sisters, Martha (focused on turning out the food and hospitality) and Mary (sits close to the Master to learn). Modern day story: minister asks campus crowd about ways to be God's hands and feet. They come up with service to give to others (tutor for non-native English speakers; aid to food pantry), but when minister suggests they sit with those alone at the cafeteria to form a momentary or longer growing relationship then the crowd hesitates.
The difference between one-way giving and two-way interchange seems small when the goal is the same; for example, to better a person's material environment or to relieve disease (medical mission), ignorance (educational mission), poverty (gainful employment opportunities). And yet how vast the difference in terms of risk when the other party can talk back or indeed offer to give you advice, material wealth, or labor/assitance in return.
Marcel Mauss was fixated on the implied (social, accumulating) debt and the ritual construction of gift-giving (even when coerced, politically loaded, or tactical as in Potlach event in Native American NW Coast; or the wedding obligatory gift bags & gift seasons in modern Japan), as he documented in the 1910s in his book, The Gift. There are also ritualistic elements in daily social contact (greeting, leave-taking, life events: condolences, birthday or graduation congratulations) and responses to serious health threats or high-stakes decisions/performances/events [lucky charms or magical sorts of routines one does in preparation]. So when both parties stand on equal footing and are prepared to benefit the other, rather than power asymmetry coloring the event, the result is more living, personal and impactful.
Scripture reading from Luke, tells about Jesus and entourage being hosted at the home of the two sisters, Martha (focused on turning out the food and hospitality) and Mary (sits close to the Master to learn). Modern day story: minister asks campus crowd about ways to be God's hands and feet. They come up with service to give to others (tutor for non-native English speakers; aid to food pantry), but when minister suggests they sit with those alone at the cafeteria to form a momentary or longer growing relationship then the crowd hesitates.
The difference between one-way giving and two-way interchange seems small when the goal is the same; for example, to better a person's material environment or to relieve disease (medical mission), ignorance (educational mission), poverty (gainful employment opportunities). And yet how vast the difference in terms of risk when the other party can talk back or indeed offer to give you advice, material wealth, or labor/assitance in return.
Marcel Mauss was fixated on the implied (social, accumulating) debt and the ritual construction of gift-giving (even when coerced, politically loaded, or tactical as in Potlach event in Native American NW Coast; or the wedding obligatory gift bags & gift seasons in modern Japan), as he documented in the 1910s in his book, The Gift. There are also ritualistic elements in daily social contact (greeting, leave-taking, life events: condolences, birthday or graduation congratulations) and responses to serious health threats or high-stakes decisions/performances/events [lucky charms or magical sorts of routines one does in preparation]. So when both parties stand on equal footing and are prepared to benefit the other, rather than power asymmetry coloring the event, the result is more living, personal and impactful.
text & context --quote and reflection
Men's Bible Study dwelt on 1 Tim. 6 and prompted a reference to this quote,
...quoting Dr. Donald A. Carson, professor of New Testament at the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and the author of several books, including (interestingly enough) one entitled Exegetical Fallacies.
The full quote, which Dr. Carson ascribes to his father, a Canadian minister, was "A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text."
A "proof text" was originally a neutral term for the scriptural text that proved (or was seen to prove) a particular doctrine. However, the overuse and even abuse of proof texts (i.e., Quoting Out of Context as an Appeal to Authority) to defend practically any position eventually led to "proof text" taking on a mainly negative―sometimes even pejorative―connotation (Guilt by Association, anyone?).
So, the original quote makes your point even more strongly: a contextomy used as an appeal to authority is usually misleading. Of course, a false premise does not mean that the conclusion is ipso facto false. We need not commit the Fallacy Fallacy. [http://www.fallacyfiles.org/quotcont.html]
The same thing is true of sound-bytes and bumper stickers: taking a short segment out of its ecosystem is like cutting off its roots and as a result it can be transplanted or transported any place. Ditto when a person from one culture is transposed to another society ---without the context of material culture and the interactions of one's own native language, the roots and shaping forces are gone. Ditto when a language is translated to another way of talking (and writing). Once the thread of meaning is put into a different language, the meaning is cut off from its rootedness.
...quoting Dr. Donald A. Carson, professor of New Testament at the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and the author of several books, including (interestingly enough) one entitled Exegetical Fallacies.
The full quote, which Dr. Carson ascribes to his father, a Canadian minister, was "A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text."
A "proof text" was originally a neutral term for the scriptural text that proved (or was seen to prove) a particular doctrine. However, the overuse and even abuse of proof texts (i.e., Quoting Out of Context as an Appeal to Authority) to defend practically any position eventually led to "proof text" taking on a mainly negative―sometimes even pejorative―connotation (Guilt by Association, anyone?).
So, the original quote makes your point even more strongly: a contextomy used as an appeal to authority is usually misleading. Of course, a false premise does not mean that the conclusion is ipso facto false. We need not commit the Fallacy Fallacy. [http://www.fallacyfiles.org/quotcont.html]
The same thing is true of sound-bytes and bumper stickers: taking a short segment out of its ecosystem is like cutting off its roots and as a result it can be transplanted or transported any place. Ditto when a person from one culture is transposed to another society ---without the context of material culture and the interactions of one's own native language, the roots and shaping forces are gone. Ditto when a language is translated to another way of talking (and writing). Once the thread of meaning is put into a different language, the meaning is cut off from its rootedness.