Articles

Greek Young Man

Greek Young Man


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

3D Image

Young man, Greece, 360 B.C., marble, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (Copenhagen, Denmark). Made with Memento Beta (now ReMake) from AutoDesk.

The young man is subdued by an adversary, floating cloak stresses the violence of the action. From a Greek temple pediment, but found in Rome.

For more update, please follow @GeoffreyMarchal on Twitter

Support OurNon-Profit Organization

Our Site is a non-profit organization. For only $5 per month you can become a member and support our mission to engage people with cultural heritage and to improve history education worldwide.


Top-16 Handsome Greek Men. Photo Gallery

Greek men have been capturing women's attention and affection throughout many centuries. Since old times Greeks have been in the center of attention accepted as incredibly sexual, unforgivably handsome and utmost masculine men. Being warriors by nature Greeks are not only strong physically but also by their characters. Their whole brutal appearance with strong features and perfect bodies is enough to make women lose their minds.

However, another amazing positive feature that Greek men have is their hard working nature. These men are born to work and provide their families with everything they deserve. They appear to be very clever and handy in everything. What concerns the attitude of these men towards women, like men of other nations, these men too range from utmost caring and women-worshiping to arrogant buffoons. The latter mostly appear after marriage.

Anyway, we are all different with our physical features, cultures, religions, reputations and ways. And as each nation has its peculiarities that may seem as positive so negative by others, Greek people do, too. There are some character traits that a foreign woman can find difficult to deal with. So, if you have fallen in love with a Greek man and wish to spent the rest of your life as his wife, you are undoubtedly obliged to know this brief guide how to survive with a gorgeous Greek husband!

  1. Perhaps the first thing a woman must be crafty in is cooking and baking. Unlike European and North American men Greek men still believe that a woman's place is in the kitchen. Accordingly, be prepared to dig into culinary books to find out interesting and tasty dishes that will serve as a key to his heart through his stomach. Yet, be also ready to finally accept the fact that no matter whether you own a chief cook's skills, they will never match his mother's!
  2. Another aspect to bare in mind if you wish to be with a Greek man, is dressing appropriately. You are to be always in good physical state and wear luxury clothes when going out with him. Anyway, when leaving alone get a modest outfit not to catch attention of other men.
  3. Greek men never wish to have an equal partner by their sides. Their women must agree with their opinions and never threaten their egos. Bare in mind that they wish to have weak creations by their sides whom they can protect. This perhaps appears on an instinctive level yet is essential for all Greek men. And if an infidelity from a wife's side is never forgiven or accepted by Greeks, that of a husband's is considered a norm and highly encouraged by other males.

Anyway, let us sum up both the cons and pros of a Greek man's nature.

  1. Beautiful traits and body
  2. High sex appeal
  3. Hard working feature
  4. High intelligence
  5. Skillfulness
  1. Unfaithfulness
  2. Feeling of superiority over women
  3. Too high ego
  4. Arrogance

The above mentioned cons may seem a bit harsh, but this data has been gained after a careful and detailed examination of as tourist so native women's opinions and feedbacks.

Top 16 Handsome Greek Men includes well-known Greek actors, singers, models and beauty pageant winner. Some of them have Greek roots of one of the parents, and reside outside Greece.

16. Kostas Sommer (17 May, 1975) - Greek model and actor.


Alcyone was the daughter of Aeolus, king of the winds. Her marriage to Ceyx was bliss&mdashtoo happy, in fact. The couple often referred to each other as "Zeus" and "Hera", which naturally infuriated the king and queen of the gods. Whilst at sea, Zeus hurled a thunderbolt at Ceyx's ship, drowning the man. He appeared before his wife as an apparition, telling her of his fate. Distraught, Alcyone threw herself into the sea in order to join him. The gods pitied the woeful couple and transformed them into kingfishers. This may be the origins of "halcyon days", seven days before and after the winter solstice when Aeolus demanded the calm of the seas in honor of the couple.

Yet another instance of a male pig abadoning his faithful companion after she becomes of no use to him. Ariadne was the daughter of the the king of Crete, Minos. Minos had instigated from Athens a sacrifice of seven youths and seven maidens to feed the Minotaur, and the hero Theseus was to be one of the victims. However, Ariadne fell in love with him, and she assisted him by giving him a ball of gold thread to help him in the labyrinth where the creature dwelt. She accompanied him back on the voyage to Athens but he soon dumped her on the island of Dia, or Naxos. The god Dionysus found the wounded girl and made her his wife. He placed her wedding crown, the Corona Borealis, into the heavens as a symbol of their love.


Greek Young Man - History

Men, women, and children in ancient Greece had different roles and responsibilities. Let's look at the roles you and your friends and family would have had if you had lived in ancient Greece.

The man was in charge of the family and the house. Most men worked during the day as businessmen or farmers. When they were at home, they were treated with great respect. Even during dinner, the men laid on couches and were fed and entertained by the slaves while the women and children ate in another room.

Men were given the most responsibility and, therefore, were considered the most important people in ancient Greece.

Women didn't have as many privileges as men in ancient Greece. For example, they were not allowed to eat or sleep in the same room as men, go to the Olympics, or go into the marketplace or streets of the city.

Since they spent a lot of time in the house, their most important tasks, aside from having children, were running the household and managing the slaves. Women in less wealthy households did not have slaves and had to do all the housework themselves. In peasant households, the women were in charge of working the fields.

Boys and girls had different roles in ancient Greece. Girls grew up helping their mothers around the house. All girls were taught to cook, weave, and clean. Girls also learned ancient secret songs and dances so they could participate in the religious festivals. Some girls were taught to read and write by their mothers, but this was rare. At age 15, the girls of wealthy families were expected to throw away their toys and marry the man that their father chose for them. Peasant girls found their own husbands while working in the fields.

Boys were considered to be more important than girls and were sent to school at age 6. At school they learned to read, write the alphabet, add on an abacus, and enjoy poetry and music. Boys were expected to have a healthy mind and body. They were taught to have healthy bodies by participating in gymnastics -- this included wrestling, running, jumping, and throwing the javelin. At age 16, boys began to train for their future jobs. If they wanted to be in the army, they would have started training at age 7 and entered the army at age 20. Other popular jobs were those of businessmen and Olympic athletes.

Men in Greece wore special clothes. Every Greek man owned several chitons, long, rectangular pieces of cloth with holes for the head and arms. The chitons were decorated based on the man's status in society. The richest men had the fanciest chitons, made out of the most expensive cloth and with the most decorations.

Women dressed in clothes much like those worn by the men. If you were married to a rich man, your chiton would have been made of brightly colored wool or linen. On special occasions women wore wigs and makeup.

Visit Mandy Barrow's Ancient Greece site to learn more about the clothing people wore.


4. Queen Elizabeth I

Elizabeth I was the Queen of England and Ireland from 1558 until the day she died. She has had many nicknames, the most famous of which being the Virgin Queen, because of the fact that she never depended on a King, but ruled quite well herself. Queen Elizabeth I set the model for a female ruler at that time and is probably one of the most successful female rulers in history. Before her reign, most females weren’t thought to be fit of such power and they were secondary to Kings or other male heirs. Elizabeth managed to prove that her gender could match and even do better than the rule of men.


Pubic Hair Trends, From Ancient Greece To Today

If you think the U.S. is the only country that demands that women sacrifice their wallets and test their personal pain thresholds in the name of vulva beauty, think again: Some women in Korea have recently begun undergoing pubic hair transplant surgery, a procedure that is intended to add extra hair to the pubic area, and will set you back a few hours and around $2000. In Korea, pubic hair is considered a sign of fertility and sexual health — which might sound like a beautiful dream to anyone who's spent roughly 100,000 hours of their adult life trying to wrangle their unruly pubes into an "acceptable" form. But while it might sound liberating, it appears this emphasis on an unnaturally fuller bush is just another pubic beauty standard for women to feel bad about not conforming to.

And pubic beauty standards — especially when it comes to female pubic hair — are fluctuating all of the time. A few years ago, everywhere I turned, I saw eulogies for The Pube. Who had killed thick female pubic hair, the trusted wiry protector of our lady bits? Was it porn, Sex and the City, those super low riding jeans? No one could agree, but everyone seemed to believe that the bush was gone forever.

But this past year, New York Times trend pieces and American Apparel window displays alike declared that the bush was back. While this whipsaw between extremes seems unprecedented — how can we go from no pubes to full pubes in three years? — the fact is that pubic hair trends have changed wildly from era to era, throughout recorded history. Which culture was the first to go fully bare? When did they invent the pubic hair wig? Find out as we explore our pubes, and ourselves.

ANCIENT EGYPTIANS, ROMANS, AND GREEKS: TAKE IT ALL OFF!

As much as folks like to blame our modern hairless vag frenzy on Sarah Jessica Parker and company, our forebears were also interested in a smooth pudenda. The Egyptians removed pubic hair, as well as almost all of the other hair on their bodies, with sharp flints, pumice stones, or via a proto-waxing process, as did some women from other Middle Eastern cultures and some women in ancient Turkey used early hair depilatory creams.

The Greeks were not quite so lucky: they removed pubic hair by plucking out individual hairs until the whole area was deforested, or sometimes even by burning off pubic hair. The ancient Greeks thought pubic hair on women was "uncivilized," though there is some debate about whether average women went hairless, or just courtesans. Upper class women of ancient Rome also kept their bonnets smooth, and some men removed their body hair, as well — though they were thought to be "dandies" because of it.

EUROPEANS OF THE MIDDLE AGES AND ELIZABETHAN ERA: LEAVE IT ON! (MOSTLY)

Pubic fads swung the other way in the Middle Ages, when the trend was to maintain pubic hair. But some women of the era still kept their junk hairless, for erotic reasons or for hygiene's sake (there was a lot of pubic lice going around). Some even used an early, homemade version of a Nair-like hair removal cream. Oftentimes, these women then kept up appearances by using a merkin — a pubic hair wig that first shows up in recorded history in 1450.

Queen Elizabeth I set further body hair removal trends by keeping her pubic hair, but removing her eyebrow hair, which proved that women have always lived under pressure to keep up with bizarre, borderline nonsensical body fashion trends. Bush hair removal stayed off the table in the Western world for the next few centuries (though most sculptures and paintings of female nudes remained curiously bush-free).

THE FIRST HALF OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY: SHAVE SOMETHING, BUT PROBABLY NOT YOUR BUSH

The first women's body hair razor was released by Gillette in 1915, though ads focused on armpit hair. Nylon shortages during World War II encouraged women to go bare-legged, which led to greater proliferation of leg shaving and thus, when the bikini was first released in 1946, the stage was finally set for American women to "clean things up" down yonder with a razor.

Though no advertising campaigns ever came out and declared that pubic hair shaving was now considered necessary for American women, the thought seemed to be swirling in the background of many of them — like an ad campaign by razor manufacturers Wilkinson Sword that seized upon the early 20th century cultural mania for pseudoscience, and declared female underarm hair "unhygienic and unfeminine." And though it's difficult to indicate exactly when the practice became mainstreamed or how it was publicized, look at this photo from 1946, which features a woman modeling one of the first bikinis — odds are, she wasn't born with the Barbie doll pubic area you see before you:

THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES: OOOH BABY BABY, IT'S A WILD BUSH

The sixties and seventies tied ideas about sexual liberation to natural and freely grown body hair, making a full bush and lush armpit hair a sexy symbol of the counterculture — and making the term "seventies bush" synonymous with going totally au naturale in the underpantualr region. Yeah, some people kept shaving and trimming throughout this era, but what a bunch of squares, am I right?

THE EIGHTIES, NINETIES, AND OUGHTS: Bushes For President, Not Women

In the '80s and '90s, trimmed pubes proliferated. There was even a section in the 1996 play The Vagina Monologues about how going full-hairless was creepy and degrading — which seemed, at the time, a pretty common thought. A quick glimpse at the era's nude art photography by Helmut Newton— or a flip through a less highbrow publication, like Playboy — revealed that manicured but very present pubic hair on women was considered sexy and desirable.

But in the very late '90s, Brazilians became a celebrity trend. Though the completely bare Brazilian wax was brought stateside by the J. Sister Salon in 1987, it didn't enter the cultural consciousness until 1999, when stars like Gwyneth Paltrow began claiming that the look was life-changing.

And when the infamous "Brazilian" episode of Sex and the City premiered on September 17, 2000, the style transformed from another kooky celebrity trend into a full-fledged national obsession. Every salon in the country seemed to suddenly offer the once-obscure procedure.

There aren't any clear statistics about how many women decided to pave their paradise and put up a parking lot in the early 2000s, but the look became, at the very least, culturally omnipresent. The enthusiasm for Brazilians seemed tied to a rise in the popularity of cunnilingus, as well. And the craze made the Brazilian a standard part of many women's beauty routines — the look became so ubiquitous, doctors confirmed that it caused pubic lice to nearly become extinct by 2013. In 2009, razor manufacturer Wilkinson Sword was releasing commercials that depicted shaving your nether regions as cheeky fun — which fit in with the Brazilian's cultural identity as a simple, sassy way to get a little bit naughty.

Present day: minge is back

Which brings us to today, where publications and trend pieces seem to be falling over themselves to declare the start of the age of the retro bush. The New York Times cited the fuller bushes of Naomi Campbell and porn star Stoya as evidence of a trend, while the Today Show used recent comments by Cameron Diaz, Kathie Lee Gifford, Jenny McCarthy, and Gwyneth Paltrow supporting fuller pubic hair as proof that the Brazilian's days were numbered. And there were, of course, those American Apparel pubic hair mannequins — one of the company's New York City stores boasted mannequins with enormous, visible merkins over a few weeks last winter.

A 2013 UK poll found that 51 percent of women polled didn't trim or wax at all — and that of those women, 45 percent used to be into pubic styling, but had given up the (vulvic) ghost. Still, eports of the death of the Brazilian wax may still be exaggerated — a 2014 poll of Cosmopolitan readers found that 70 percent of them still go for a full Brazilian, and the Journal of Urology reports that more than 80 percent of female college students remove most of all of their pubes.

If we do all end up growing back the crotch shrubbery that God gave us, it won't be a revolution or a scandal — it'll simply be another swing of the pendulum in the wild, extremely wooly world of pubic hair trends.


80. The Rich Young Ruler (Luke 18:18-23)

" 18 A certain ruler asked him, 'Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?' 19 'Why do you call me good?' Jesus answered. 'No one is good -- except God alone. 20 You know the commandments: "Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother."' 21 'All these I have kept since I was a boy,' he said. 22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, 'You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.' 23 When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth." (Luke 18:18-23, NIV)

This passage is a troubling one. It was troubling for the disciples, for the wealthy young ruler, and for us. It seems too radical, too abrupt, too . well, too immoderate to suit our tastes. But it's easy to miss the truth when it is delivered in moderation. The truth, however, can be unmistakable when delivered unvarnished, undiluted. And that kind of powerful truth-telling Jesus is known for.

Luke places this event in the midst of a series of incidents and parables designed to indicate the character of discipleship. All the Gospel-writers place it near the end of Jesus' public ministry, and Mark supplies a bit of the context: "As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him" (Mark 10:17a).

Jesus is about to leave the town. It is the man's last chance to ask his question, to meet Jesus face-to-face. And so he runs up to him and falls on his knees before him. It is a picture of urgency and earnestness and humility.

Profile of the Rich Young Ruler (Luke 18:18a)

We pick up the story in Luke's account:

"A certain ruler asked him, 'Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?'" (18:18)

The word translated "ruler" is Greek archōn, generally, "one who has administrative authority, leader, official." It is used of various Jewish leaders, including those in charge of a synagogue and members of the Sanhedrin. 774

Matthew's account (19:22) adds another detail and refers to the ruler as a "young man," Greek neaniskos, "a relatively young man, youth, young man (from about the 24th to the 40th year)." 775 Luke 18:23 tells us "he was a man of great wealth." "Wealth" is Greek plousios, "pertaining to having an abundance of earthly possessions that exceeds normal experience, rich, wealthy." 776 The adjective "great" translates Greek sphodra, "a very high point on a scale of extent, very (much), extremely, greatly." 777

And so we have an earnest young man, wealthy -- very wealthy, indeed -- and probably because of his wealth and earnestness about spiritual matters, a person entrusted with governance in the synagogue, a ruler, a respected person in the community.

And in his fine robes, immaculately groomed, he is kneeling in the dirt of the roadside at the edge of town, with a burning question on his heart.

Inheriting Eternal Life (Luke 18:18b)

"A certain ruler asked him, 'Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?'" (18:18)

Most of the wealthy, religious people who asked Jesus public questions were trying to trick him into some imprudent statement -- "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?" (Luke 20:22). "Why do your disciples pluck grain on the Sabbath?" (Luke 6:2). "This lady was caught in the very act of adultery. Shouldn't we stone her as Moses directed?" (John 8:4). But this man's question was no trick. It was a sincere question to which he needed to know the answer -- how to inherit eternal life. The word translated "inherit" is Greek klēronomeō, "acquire, obtain, come into possession of something, inherit." 778

The question tells us several things about the young man:

  1. He must be feeling inadequate in his spiritual preparation somehow or he probably wouldn't ask the question.
  2. He sides with the Pharisees rather than the Sadducees (another religious party in first century Judaism) because the Sadducees didn't believe in life after death, and this question clearly implies that he does.
  3. He believes that eternal life is something that one earns or merits by what he does.

Ask the common man or woman in your community and you'll probably come up with a similar belief. You go to heaven if you do good. You go to hell if you do bad things. Well, only very bad things. Eternal life is a reward for what you do on earth. That's what people tell you.

The young man's question betrays both his superficial understanding of inheriting eternal life, and his superficial understanding of a person's ability to do good deeds that are pure, unmixed by ulterior motives. The Prophet Isaiah's scathing words spoken 750 years before have somehow escaped the young man:

"All our righteous acts are like filthy rags." (Isaiah 64:6)

Notice that within the brief scope of a few verses, salvation is spoken of in various terms and figures: "eternal life" (18:18, 30), "treasure in heaven" (18:22), "entering the Kingdom of God" (18:24, 29), and "being saved" (18:26).

No One Is Good -- Except God Alone (Luke 18:19)

And so, in this sincere young man's superficial way, he addresses Jesus as "good teacher," a somewhat improper way to address a Rabbi. We don't see this expression elsewhere in rabbinical literature until the fourth century. The word "good" in both verses 18 and 19 is Greek agathos, "pertaining to meeting a high standard of worth and merit, good." 779

Jesus rebukes the young man concerning his careless address:

"'Why do you call me good?' Jesus answered. 'No one is good -- except God alone.'" (18:19)

The young man can't understand anything else Jesus will tell him, unless he grasps that our relative standards of goodness are much, much different than God's absolute goodness and God's standards of righteousness.

Some have felt that, by these words, Jesus is somehow denying his divinity. If Jesus had meant to do so, he would have replied simply that he was a sinner. But Jesus' divinity isn't the issue. Jesus is calling the young man to reflect on his words. Jesus is trying to teach him. Perhaps Jesus is trying to prompt him to reflect on who Jesus is, too. As Jesus said to the woman at the well of Sychar, "If you knew . who it is that asks you for a drink. " (John 4:10). But the man can't see, can't understand.

Comparisons to Jesus' Interview with Nicodemus

I can't help but recall another conversation Jesus has with an earnest Jewish ruler, Nicodemus, related for us in John's Gospel:

"Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, 'Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.'
"In reply Jesus declared, 'I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.'" (John 3:1-3)

I notice three points of comparison:

  1. The ruler greets Jesus with gracious praise.
  2. Jesus' response is not the expected gracious reply, but seemingly off-the-wall, jarring, and unanticipated.
  3. Lack of spiritual understanding.

Jesus doesn't exchange pleasantries with these men. He comes right to the point, he teaches, but in a completely unexpected way. In both cases these rulers are hungry for spiritual guidance. But they need to abandon some dangerous presuppositions about their state before God before they are able to understand any further truth.

Keeping the Commandments (Luke 18:20-21)

After pointing out the young man's inadequate understanding of "goodness," Jesus proceeds to inquire more of this man's -- and his culture's -- measure of righteousness.

"You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'
'All these I have kept since I was a boy,' he said." (18:20-21)

The verb "kept" is Greek phylassō, "to continue to keep a law or commandment from being broken, observe, follow." 780 The commandments Jesus mentions all relate to the man's relationships with other people. Jesus will approach in another manner commandments that relate to God.

The young man's response is immediate: "All these I have kept since I was a boy" (18:21), and his answer should not surprise us. The rabbis held that the law could indeed be kept in its entirety. This might be true if you were defining the commandments as the Pharisees did, but we know from the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:17-48) that Jesus' view of keeping these commandments goes far beyond the legalistic interpretations of his time. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus relates murder to its root in anger and adultery to its root in lust.

Sell Everything, Give to the Poor (Luke 18:22a)

The young man has kept all the commandments, but still senses a lack, an incompleteness, or else he wouldn't have come to Jesus in the first place. Now Jesus speaks to the young man's point of need:

"When Jesus heard this, he said to him, 'You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" (18:22)

Jesus affirms the young man's sense of need. The word translated "lack" is Greek leipō, "to be deficient in something that ought to be present for whatever reason, lack." 781

But Jesus' prescription is unpalatable -- to the young man and to us. "Sell everything" and give the proceeds to the poor. The word translated "give" is Greek diadidōmi, "apportion among various parties, distribute, give." 782

If the man does this, Jesus assures him, he will have treasure in heaven. "Treasure" is Greek thesauros, "that which is stored up, treasure." 783 It is an ironic exchange that Jesus proposes -- exchanging fabulous wealth here on earth for fabulous wealth in the Kingdom of God. Many in history have tried to buy their way into God's good graces. Many of the world's beautiful cathedrals, temples, and mosques are inscribed with the names of generous benefactors. But Jesus is not proposing buying anything or doing anything glorious. He isn't proposing a massive contribution to the Jesus Christ Evangelistic Association that will spread the Gospel in perpetuity.

Jesus proposes that the man sell all his property and give the proceeds to those who are least able to reciprocate -- the poor. St. James is right when he characterizes true religion:

"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world" (James 1:27).

How Money Corrupts

The truth is that money itself has a way of polluting us, that is, tempting us to compromise our values in order to gain and retain it.

"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." (1 Timothy 6:10)

Recently, Jesus has taught his disciples about the importance of faithfulness with regard to money:

"No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." (Luke 16:13)

Now his disciples have an object lesson to learn from -- an actual rich man, fabulously wealthy. Can he -- will he -- become a disciple?

Money, however, isn't the only thing that Jesus asks the young man to give up:

  1. Possessions, what money will buy, the accouterments of wealth. A new car, a nice house, a membership in the country club, and fashionable clothing.
  2. Status and influence that wealth affords. People make way for the wealthy, hoping that some of that wealth might rub off on them. At the very least, people kowtow to the wealthy to keep from becoming their enemies.
  3. Power. Wealth is power. It buys influence. It buys others who will now let the wealthy have their own way.
  4. Community leadership. The man isn't very likely to continue as a respected ruler without his wealth. If he gives up his wealth, he will be misunderstood and resented by the other influential people in his community. No, he won't be a ruler for long.
  5. Family. The young man probably comes from a wealthy family. But if he disposes of a huge chunk of the family wealth, will his siblings understand and accept it? Will his wife and family? His father or mother, if they are still living?

How often have you been tempted to do things that were wrong or unethical or self-serving because of the lure of money, even a little bit of money? Money must either be controlled or it will control us. It is a sad thing when our possessions begin to possess us!

Why Jesus' Words Upset Us

But Jesus' words don't just upset the rich young ruler. They also upset us. As a pastor I have heard many times the response to this passage: "That doesn't mean everyone should sell what they have, does it? If everyone did that it would result in chaos."

Obviously. But why are we even worried with the question? Do we, too, feel possessive of what we have? Do we fear that Jesus may require us to do something that would cost us too much? What are we afraid of? And why do we fear?

We fear because we sense that we are not fully surrendered, that's why. Jesus' words to the rich young ruler are quite consistent with what he has been saying to his disciples throughout his journeys:

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters -- yes, even his own life -- he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26-27).

"In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:33)

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it" (Matthew 13:44-46).

"For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it" (Luke 9:24).

"Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it" (Luke 17:33)

Then Come, Follow Me (Luke 18:22b)

The story of the rich young ruler exposes a raw nerve in us that causes a reaction. But disposing of wealth was not all that Jesus asked the man to do.

"When Jesus heard this, he said to him, 'You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" (18:22)

He concludes with two commands. "Come" is Greek deuro, an adverb functioning as an interjection, "here, (come) here, come!" 784 The word "follow" is the characteristic word of discipleship, Greek akoloutheō, "follow," figuratively, "to follow someone as a disciple, be a disciple, follow." 785

However, I don't think that the following Jesus invites this man to do is just figurative. Jesus looked at this man and loved him (Mark 10:21). I think he is inviting the rich young man to join him on his journeys, to become one of the disciples who enjoys the immense and unspeakable privilege of spending time with Jesus and learning from him on a day-by-day basis. What a wonderful invitation!

But the invitation implicit to us is no less wonderful. We, too, are invited to come to Jesus, and then to follow him on a spiritual life journey. To enjoy his company, his presence. To be taught along the way by his Word and Spirit. To become part of his great extended family, the Body of Christ throughout the world. And to be filled with hope in the closing days of our journey as we know his promises and feel his comfort with us.

"Come, follow me," is the invitation Jesus extends to you and me.

He Became Very Sad (Luke 18:23)

But this radical call to discipleship is too much for the rich young ruler.

"When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth." (18:23)

The word translated "sad" is Greek perilypos, "very sad, deeply grieved." 786 Matthew and Mark note that the man went away sorrowful. Jesus remains standing where he is, on the verge of continuing his journey. But the earnest and rich young ruler, his face stricken with grief ("the man's face fell," it says in Mark 10:22), rises from his knees. He averts his eyes from Jesus, as I see it, turns slowly, and moves away from the band of disciples.

He cannot go with them. He cannot go with Jesus, as much as he would love to. Because he loves one thing more, and he cannot leave that to serve God.

In a very real sense he has broken the first commandment: "You shall have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3). Nor can he obey the Shema which, as a devout Jew, he recites twice a day:

"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength" (Deuteronomy 6:4).

Jesus has pierced the man's naïveté, and has proved to him, and those who were privy to this conversation, that you cannot serve God and Money! "Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other" (Luke 16:13). It is true. And for the young man, sadly true.

There is more -- Jesus comments on the rarity, the impossibility of the rich or anyone being saved. We'll examine that in the next lesson.

But the challenge for disciples remains. My dear friend, is there anything, any hindrance, that you are unwilling to give up to follow Jesus? You may not be wealthy, but if there is something you possess, or that possesses you, laying it down is a vital part of following the Master. He must have your all. And he calls gently to you: "Come, follow me."

Prayer

Dear Father, Jesus' words have a way of piercing our hearts and defenses we have built up against you and doing things your way. Make us tender-hearted. Gently expose the reservations of our hearts, as you did for that wealthy young man those many centuries ago. But give us grace to be able to obey you, the Great Physician, who alone can heal our corrupt and deceitful hearts, and make us whole. Forgive us, O Lord, for clinging to the remnants of a life independent of you, and make us wholly yours. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen.

Key Verse

"You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." (Luke 18:22)


German translation

A German translation of the Bible showing the word "knabenschander" meaning "molester of boys." (The Forge Online Photo used by permission).

As I was talking with my friend I said, “I wonder why not until 1983? Was their influence from America?” So we had our German connection look into it again and it turns out that the company, Biblica, who owns the NIV version, paid for this 1983 German version. Thus it was Americans who paid for it! In 1983 Germany didn’t have enough of a Christian population to warrant the cost of a new Bible translation, because it’s not cheap. So an American company paid for it and influenced the decision, resulting in the word homosexual entering the German Bible for the first time in history. So, I say, I think there is a “gay agenda” after all!

I also have a 1674 Swedish translation and an 1830 Norwegian translation of the Bible. I asked one of my friends, who was attending Fuller seminary and is fluent in both Swedish and Norwegian, to look at these verses for me. So we met at a coffee shop in Pasadena with my old Bibles. (She didn’t really know why I was asking.) Just like reading an old English Bible, it’s not easy to read. The letters are a little bit funky, the spelling is a little bit different. So she’s going through it carefully, and then her face comes up, “Do you know what this says?!” and I said, “No! That’s why you are here!” She said, “It says boy abusers, boy molesters.” It turns out that the ancient world condoned and encouraged a system whereby young boys (8-12 years old) were coupled by older men. Ancient Greek documents show us how even parents utilized this abusive system to help their sons advance in society. So for most of history, most translations thought these verses were obviously referring the pederasty, not homosexuality!

So then I started thinking that of 4 of the 6 clobber passages, all these nations and translations were referring to pederasty, and not what we would call homosexuality today.

Q: How did the translation teams work?

Well, they didn’t operate out of a vacuum when they translated something. They used data available to them from very old libraries. Last week at the Huntington Library I found a Lexicon from 1483. I looked up arsenokoitai and it gave the Latin equivalent, paedico and praedico. If you look those up they means pederasty, or knabenschander, (boy molester, in German.) 1483 is the year Martin Luther was born, so when he was running for his life translating the Bible and carrying his books, he would have used such a Lexicon. It was the Lexicon of his time. This Lexicon would have used information from the previous 1000+ years, including data passed down from the Church Fathers.

So there is historical tradition to show that these verses aren’t relating to homosexuality?

Absolutely! Sometimes I’m frustrated when speak with pastors who say, “Well I believe the historical tradition surrounding these verses” and then proceed with a condemnation of LGBTQ individuals. I challenge them to see what was actually traditionally taught. For most of history, most European Bibles taught the tradition that these 4 verses were dealing with pederasty, not homosexuality. I am saddened when I see pastors and theologians cast aside the previous 2000 years of history. This is why I collect very old Bibles, lexicons, theological books and commentaries - most modern biblical commentaries adjusted to accommodate this mistranslation. It’s time for the truth to come out!

Yes! My brother, who is a pastor, also told me the same thing: that every sector of the church has seen same-sex relationships as sinful for 2,000 years. But the more i read and study though, the more i just don’t see this being true.

What was used before homosexual showed up in the RSV version?

King James Version triumphed the land and they used the phrase, “Abusers of themselves with mankind” for arsenokoitai. If you asked people during that time no one really wanted to tackle it. So that’s why I’m collecting Bibles, Biblical commentaries and lexicons, in order to show how theologians dealt with these passages.

Q: In your opinion, how would the church be different if the RSV didn’t change aresenkoitai and malakoi to homosexual in 1946 ?

In my opinion, if the RSV did not use the word homosexual in first Corinthians 6:9, and instead would have spent years in proper research to understand homosexuality and to really dig into the historical contextualization, I think translators would have ended up with a more accurate translation of the abusive nature intended by this word. I think we could have avoided the horrible damage that was done from pulpits all across America, and ultimately other parts of the world. But let’s don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater — the RSV team did a great job on most everything else. It was an honest mistake.

Q: And do you think your life would have gone differently as a result?

Yes, absolutely! I think my life would have been starkly different if the translation would have been translated with the accurate historical contextualization - especially within my own family, since they rely so heavily on the English translation and put a lot of faith in the translators for the final product in English. Since most people haven’t studied Greek or Hebrew, they have no concept of challenging a translation, and any potential errors that may have occurred during translation. Therefore, many people are unable to consider the implications of the text beyond the English translation in front of them.

Q: Based on your research, what advice would you have for LGBTQ Christians today?

My advice to LGBTQ Christians today would be three things:

1.) As difficult as it may be, try to extend grace and patience to the Church. The vast majority of pastors in America have not done their due diligence on this topic, so we can’t expect them to be any further along than they are currently. In the same way that God has extended grace and patience with us when we sin, we need to extend grace and patience toward others regarding their error on this topic. Bitterness will only manage to create further damage.

2.) Seek out other LGBTQ Christians who have already done their due diligence on this topic and reached a point of peace between their sexuality and God. We can learn a lot from others who are a little further up the trail.

3.) Often remind yourself that this mess is not caused by God, but instead is the result of people who have been entrusted with free will.


Greek Young Man - History

Today I found out about the history of the Rosetta Stone and how hieroglyphics were first translated.

Hieroglyphics were elaborate, elegant symbols used prolifically in Ancient Egypt. The symbols decorated temples and tombs of pharaohs. However, being quite ornate, other scripts were usually used in day-to-day life, such as demotic, a precursor to Coptic, which was used in Egypt until the 1000s. These other scripts were sort of like different hieroglyphic fonts—your classic Times New Roman to Jokerman or Vivaldi.

Unfortunately, hieroglyphics started to disappear. Christianity was becoming more and more popular, and around 400 A.D. hieroglyphics were outlawed in order to break from the tradition of Egypt’s “pagan” past. The last dated hieroglyph was carved in a temple on the island of Philae in 395 A.D. Coptic was then written and spoken—a combination of twenty-four Greek characters and six demotic characters—before the spread of Arabic meant that Egypt was cut off from the last connection to its linguistic past.

What remained were temples and monuments covered in hieroglyphic writing and no knowledge about how to begin translating them. Scientists and historians who analyzed the symbols in the next few centuries believed that it was a form of ancient picture writing. Thus, instead of translating the symbols phonetically—that is, representing sounds—they translated them literally based on the image they saw.

It wasn’t until July 19, 1799 when a breakthrough in translation was discovered by French soldiers building an extension on a fort in el-Rashid, or Rosetta, under the orders of Napoleon Bonaparte. While demolishing an ancient wall, they discovered a large slab of granodiorite bearing an inscription in three different scripts. Before the French had much of a chance to examine it, however, the stone was handed over to the British in 1802 following the Treaty of Capitulation.

On this stone, known as the Rosetta Stone, the three scripts present were hieroglyphics, demotic, and Greek. Soon after arriving at the British Museum, the Greek translation revealed that the inscription is a decree by Ptolemy V, issued in 196 B.C. in Memphis. One of the most important lines of the decree is this stipulation laid down by Ptolemy V: “and the decree should be written on a stela of hard stone, in sacred writing, document writing, and Greek writing.” The “sacred writing” was hieroglyphics and “document writing” referred to demotic—this confirmed that the inscription was the same message three times over, providing a way to begin translating hieroglyphics at last!

One of the big problems encountered was that they could try to translate written text all they wanted, but it wouldn’t give the translators an idea of the sounds made when the text was spoken. In 1814, Thomas Young discovered a series of hieroglyphs surrounded by a loop, called a cartouche. The cartouche signified something important, which Young hypothesized could be the name of something significant—kind of like capitalizing a proper noun. If it was a pharoah’s name, then the sound would be relatively similar to the way the names are commonly pronounced in numerous other languages where we know the pronunciation.

However, Young was still working under the delusion that hieroglyphs were picture writing, which ultimately caused him to abandon his work which he called “the amusement of a few leisure hours”, even though he had managed to successfully correlate many hieroglyphs with their phonetic values.

A few years later, Jean-Francois Champollion finally cracked the code in 1822. Champollion had a long-time obsession with hieroglyphics and Egyptian culture. He’d even become fluent in Coptic, though it had long since become a dead language. Using Young’s theory and focusing on cartouches, he found one containing four hieroglyphs, the last two of which were known to represent an “s” sound. The first one was a circle with a large black dot in the centre, which he thought might represent the sun. He dug into his knowledge of the Coptic language, which he hadn’t previously considered to be part of the equation, and knew that “ra” meant “sun.” Therefore, the word that fit was the pharaoh Ramses and the connection between Coptic and hieroglyphics was now perfectly clear.

Champollion’s research provided the momentum to get the ball rolling on hieroglyphic translation. He now demonstrated conclusively that hieroglyphics weren’t just picture writing, but a phonetic language. Champollion went on to translate hieroglyphic text in the temples in Egypt, making notes about his translations along the way. He discovered the phonetic value of most hieroglyphs. It was a good thing he kept extensive notes, too as he suffered a stroke three years later and died at the age of 41. Without those notes, much of the progress made on the translations would have been lost.

If you liked this article, you might also enjoy our new popular podcast, The BrainFood Show (iTunes, Spotify, Google Play Music, Feed), as well as:


Cats in Ancient Greece – August’s Cats in History

Ancient Greece was no stranger to cats. They likened cats to weasels which were also kept around the home to reduce rodent populations. While they were not as much of a cat-loving culture as the Ancient Egyptians were, the ancient Greeks played a pivotal role in the history of cats as domestic pets. The mythology and lure that came from ancient Greece was a big step in changing cats from the highly worshiped creatures of ancient Egypt to the witches’ familiars of the Middle Ages.

The birth of Heracles Disney didn’t quite get it right.

In ancient Greek mythology, the king of all the gods was Zeus. Zeus was a bit of a womanizer and had children with various goddess and human women. On one occasion, he desired to sleep with a human woman named Almene. Almene was a married woman who refused to sleep even with her husband until he returned victorious from war. While her husband was on the way back from his war, Zeus disguised himself as Almene’s husband and presented her with spoils from his victory. The deception worked and Zeus impregnated Almene with Heracles. Not an hour after Zeus left, Almene’s actual husband returned from battle, slept with her and impregnated her with his child as well.

Pottery from the 6th Century BC depicting Heracles fighting the Neaman lion. Photo Credit: Carole Raddato

Upon hearing the news of Almene’s pregnancy, Zeus’ wife, Hera, was not particularly happy about Zeus’ infidelity. She immediately hatched a plan for revenge. Hera convinced Zeus to declare that the next child born in Perseus’ line (Heracles could be that child) would be the high king of the city. Once Zeus made his announcement she conspired with the goddess of childbirth to cause Heracles’ cousin to be born 2 weeks early and to thwart the birth of Heracles.

The goddess of childbirth crossed her arms and legs to prevent Almene from giving birth. Almene writhed in agony as she was in labor, but unable to give birth. A quick witted friend of Almene, Galinthius, decided to help her friend by deceiving the goddess of childbirth. Galinthius announced to the goddess of childbirth that Heracles had been born (this was not true). Shocked by the announcement, the goddess of childbirth uncrossed her arms and legs just long enough for Heracles and his twin brother to be born.

Enraged by having her plan spoiled, Hera turned Galinthius into a cat. She was cursed to live a joyless life all alone. However, Hecate, the goddess of the moon and magic took pity on Galinthius the cat. Galinthius was taken down to the underworld to live as Hecate’s assistant. The cats of ancient Greece start becoming witches’ familiars are right there. Later in his life, Heracles honors Galinthius by building a sanctuary to her.

The Cats of Ancient Egypt Become the Cats of Ancient Greece

A cat with a statue of Artemis in the distance. Photo Credit: Rebecca Siegel

The ancient Greeks did take notice of the Egyptian cat goddess, Bastet. Though her worship didn’t take off in the same way as it did in Egypt, the Greeks adopted the goddess and called her Ailuros. This is the name from which we derive the Ailurophobia – the irrational fear of cats.

The ancient Greeks felt that Ailuros was a night-version of their goddess Artemis. Artemis was the virginal twin sister of Apollo Goddess of the hunt, wild animals, and fertility. She was always depicted as being flanked by animals of all kinds. In one story, the gods are fleeing from Typhon (a large monstrous Titan) and Artemis turns herself into a cat in order to escape.

Later on in Greek mythology Artemis takes a turn toward the dark side. She becomes a practitioner of magic arts. An eerily familiar story begins to unfold as she becomes the unmarried witch that has the ability to shape shift into a cat.

Cats in Ancient Greek Theatre

The cats of ancient Greece made it into some famous Greek plays. Famous ancient Greek playwright, Arisophanes, included cats in his pieces very often. Arisophanes wrote very bold comedy for his time. He wasn’t afraid to parody even the highest ranking politicians. He depicted the cats of ancient Greece as common, friendly household pets. Much like we say “the dog ate it” in reference to paperwork we don’t want to do, Arisophanes coined the tongue-in-cheek phrase “the cat did it” to blame the cat for anything that went wrong. If a character accidentally broke someone else’s family heirloom, they could announce “the cat did it” when the owner of the heirloom took notice.

Do you have a funny story about something your “cat did”?

As for me – During Christmas time “one of my cats” broke the head off of Joseph in the manger scene.


Watch the video: TOP 10 HOTTEST GREEK MEN (July 2022).


Comments:

  1. Damaskenos

    I beg your pardon that I interrupt you, but I propose to go by another route.

  2. Tarique

    Congratulations, your opinion will come in handy

  3. Eginhardt

    Not a word more!



Write a message