Posts Tagged ‘Persuasion’
New Emma Movie
Posted in Jane Austen, movies, tagged BBC, emma, Jane Austen, Jane Austen adapatations, Masterpiece Classic, Northanger Abbey, PBS Masterpiece, Persuasion, Romula Garai on December 24, 2009| 2 Comments »
Books Read in 2008 – Updated
Posted in Bible, ecclesiology, family, history, Jane Austen, life, literature, philosophy, politics, tagged A Walk with Jane Austen, America, anarchists, anarchy, Ann Coulter, beginning, Bible, Billy Graham, biography, Brave New Family, Calvinists, church, Cold War, Collin Hansen, Dan Betzer, Dead Heat, Democratic Party, democrats, denominations, ekklesia, Elizabeth George Speare, England, fairy tales, faith, family, feelings, Frederica Vernon, Genesis, GK Chesterton, Godcast, Having a Mary Heart in a Martha World, house church, Iceland, Jane Austen, Jesus, Joanna Weaver, Joel Rosenberg, Lady Susan, liberals, Lori Smith, Mark, McCarthyism, Medieval Iceland, Michael Crichton, Napoleon of Notting Hill, New England, New Testament, New Testament Restoration Felloship, North Korea, pain, Persuasion, Puritan, rebellion, Regina Doman, Reginald de Courcy, relationships, sovereignty, Sphere, Steve Atkerson, The Man Who Was Thursday, The Midnight Dancers, The Preacher and the Presidents, The Shack, The Witch of Blackbird Pond, theology, tragedy, Treason, Trinity, Vietnam, War on Terrorism, William Young, Young Restless and Reformed on September 17, 2008| Leave a Comment »
The Man who was Thursday by GK Chesterton is a sort of allegorical tale about sovereignty and the war of the anarchists. It is filled with character sketches. The full impact of this book did not hit me until after I had read it and proceeded with life, when I began to encounter ideas and people frighteningly similar to those in this book. I think Chesterton based some of them off real people whom he had met as well. Hang in there for the end of the book. It will blow your mind.
Ekklesia, edited and compiled by Steve Atkerson of the New Testament Reformation Fellowship, is an exposition of the New Testament’s descriptions of and instructions for the Church. Apart from the business model, consumer structure of traditional church meetings, the authors argue from the Bible for a more personal and interactive gathering in homes. There was very little in this book with which I could disagree. Not only was it informational, reading Ekklesia was also challenging and encouraging. The theology and exposition is spot on, well supported with biblical references. In an age when God is working in many hearts to produce a desire to engage in community and God-powered ministry, this is a good book for direction. An added bonus is that NTRF has not copyrighted Ekklesia, encouraging you to distribute portions to your friends or quote it in publications.
The Shack, by William Young, is a novel of a man dealing with the tragic death of his daughter and his feelings about God. He ends up spending a weekend with God, dealing with classic issues of the problem of pain and our acceptance of God’s goodness despite what we feel. God is incarnate in three persons, with whom he has many vivid interactions and conversations. At the end of the story, he is left with more peace about God and the life he has experienced, but still does not have answers about what God expects of him. The story is written in a way that tempts you to believe it is based on a true history. At the end when I read the “making of” that told me it was only fiction, I was much relieved. There is enough truth in the philosophy and theology that I could not believe the book represented demonic activity (producing the supernatural things described). But there were also enough problematic elements (God as a girl wearing blue jeans) that I could not believe the events were truly from God. Realizing that the author used fiction to introduce his own thoughts on theology must allow for him to be mistaken yet in some areas. Most concerning are the indications that God would not send any of His creations to hell, because He loves ‘all His children’ – with an unbiblical definition of God’s children. The semi-gnostic tendencies and references, including a conference with Sophia, the goddess of wisdom, provide insight into the background of Mr. Young. The book is not keen on the Bible or church, either. For a best seller, this book is a quick read and an interesting visit to theology. But God gave us the Bible as His personal revelation; don’t substitute anything for it.
The Midnight Dancers is Regina Doman’s fourth fairy tale novel. I don’t know whether she was a rebel herself or consulted heavily with people who had been there, but all of her observations on motive and inner conflict resonated well with my observations, and actually explained things. Her main character is very human, torn between desires to be responsible and to be appreciated as an adult, between her love of freedom and her love of people. Midnight Dancers also shows the slippery slope of sacrificing even a little bit of discernment while justifying your freedom and pleasure. Like all of Mrs. Doman’s books, I was entranced. However this edition, similar to Waking Rose, got pretty graphic and even too intense for my spirit to remain healthy. I skipped a few pages near the end. Fairy tales are fairly predictable in their endings, and this is no surprise. They all lived happily ever after.
Mark is a book that transports me immediately back in history. Full of action with little explanation, it is a biography of acts more than teachings, of impact rather than influences. Beginning with a scene straight from a screenplay, of a voice crying in the wilderness, climaxing with the compassionate passion of a good Man suffering in the place of others, and closing with a simple instruction to pass the story on, Mark is a book for the ages. Even though Jesus is the main character, the other characters are just as active and many are vivid personalities. Mark himself may even make a cameo in a humble role at Gethsemane. First to last this gospel is glorious.
It never ceases to amaze me how many facts are tucked into Genesis. Details of the lives and failings of men who lived so long ago surprise me with their human reality. Places and people, kings and battles, ancestries and inventions cover the pages. Of course Genesis begins with creation, establishing the understanding of matter, time, energy, life, marriage, science, music, farming, boats, rain, rainbows, government, justice, worship, sacrifice, truth, possession, family, and judgment. The generations are also sprinkled with hints of redemption and unwarranted preservation and forgiveness, of the second man supplanting the first. Read in light of the New Testament’s references to this first book, Genesis is remarkably alive with parables and theology. My favorite part in this reading was the theme of changed lives.
Treason by Ann Coulter is a history book with a strong political bent. She documents how the Democratic Party is always cheering for and or supporting America’s enemies. In the very least they have a record of opposing any efforts Americans make to defend themselves against enemies. She describes the myth of McCarthyism, pointing out that all those people whose lives McCarthy’s trials (and just his influence) supposedly ruined were either open Communists or eventually found out to be Communists. And most of them enjoyed long, pleasant lives (not getting everything their way, but who does?). McCarthy, on the other hand, died young, at age 48. But Ann Coulter doesn’t stop with the post World War II McCarthy. She goes on to discuss Vietnam, the Cold War, North Korea, and the War on Terrorism. History is dirty, and she both addresses some mature issues and references them to make jibes. But I appreciate the excessive documentation of the habit of Democrats to stand up on the side most opposed to America’s interests. They used to call such blatant and effective acts “treason.”
Lady Susan by Jane Austen (To balance the post-election doldrums this week, I read Lady Susan, a complete short novel written by Jane Austen, the last on my list of her works to read. Consisting entirely of letters except for the last two or three pages (which summarizes both why the story could not be continued in letters and the fates of all the main characters). For my part I wish that the story had been developed more. I want to know the young Miss Frederica, and the smart Mr. Reginald de Courcy. Perhaps the value is in the art by which Miss Austen communicates so much leaving almost the whole unsaid. One feels that there is a whole story and world of events that Jane Austen knew but wouldn’t share because she didn’t have to. The worldview of the widow Lady Susan is summed up in her words from Letter 16, “Consideration and esteem as surely follow command of language, as admiration waits on beauty.” She is a scandalous flirt and insufferable liar, scheming throughout the novel to acquire pleasure, money, and importance at the expense of all her relations, friends, and even her daughter. Jane Austen tends to end with her villains unpunished. They don’t go to prison, or suffer a life-long illness or poverty or death. The world may scorn them, but generally they never cared what the world thought. We the good readers may pity the partners with whom they finish the tales, but the villains themselves will not wallow, we think, in self-pity for long, rather getting something for which they have always aimed. Lady Susan is a novel where, with the concise style, these patterns are readily exposed. Read Lady Susan. It’s a light, funny story with a background romance. Characters are typically Jane Austen even if we see little of them. And the style makes a good template for understanding the rest of Jane Austen’s beloved books.)
Dead Heat by Joel Rosenberg (see full review)
Having a Mary Heart in a Martha World by Joanna Weaver (There wasn’t a lot of new Christian stuff in this book, but it was a good read and some challenging reminders. This book covers topics ranging from worry to service to worship to personal devotions. I love how the book draws everything together into the One Thing conclusion. Joanna invites you to join her journey of seeking a Mary Heart in a Martha World.)
Miss Austen Regrets
Posted in literature, movies, tagged Becoming Jane, brothers, Cassandra Austen, Elizabeth Bennett, Jane Austen, Jane Austen Season, Jane Bennett, love, Mansfield Park, marriage, Masterpiece, Masterpiece Theater, Miss Austen Regrets, Mr. Darcy, Persuasion, Pride and Prejudice, romance, Sense and Sensibility, sisters on June 22, 2008| Leave a Comment »
Books Read in 2008
Posted in literature, tagged A Walk with Jane Austen, Anne Elliot, Billy Graham, Christianity, England, history, Jane Austen, Lori Smith, Michael Duffy, Nancy Gibbs, Persuasion, politics, The Preacher and the Presidents on March 31, 2008| 1 Comment »
February:
Persuasion by Jane Austen (ok, so I re-read it, but loved it more the third time. The tale of a good, intelligent woman on the verge of being forever an “old maid,” whose family ignores her but whom she helps all the same. There is a handsome man she loved before he was rich, and so turned down at the influence of her family and friends, and very much regrets. He comes back into her life and suddenly everyone realizes Anne Elliot is the girl they want to marry. I underlined every word that illustrated persuasion, steadfastness, or persuad-ability. There are a lot.)
March:
The Preacher and the Presidents by Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy (a modern history book looking at leadership, politics, and big decisions as associated with Billy Graham.)
A Walk With Jane Austen by Lori Smith (Single Christian girl in early thirties goes to England to trace Jane Austen’s life. She dreams of love, finds something special, and goes on to share her very human, very female thoughts about life, love, and God – often borrowing words from Jane Austen herself.)
To God be all glory, Lisa of Longbourn
Buying the Jane Austen Season DVD’s
Posted in Jane Austen, movies, tagged BBC, emma, Jane Austen, Jane Austen Season, Masterpiece, Masterpiece Classic, Northanger Abbey, PBS, Persuasion, Romula Garai, Sally Hawkins on March 17, 2008| 3 Comments »
PBS has slowly been airing the new series of Jane Austen movies. (They have made other movies in the past. Make sure you don’t get the old Mansfield Park, Sense and Sensibility, Northanger Abbey, or very old Pride and Prejudice).
The new movies of the “Jane Austen Season” are:
Persuasion (labeled 2007 or 2008 – since BBC England released some of these earlier than USA, starring Sally Hawkins; see my review) buy individually at PBS Shop Persuasion $20 (as of now it is backordered 2-4 weeks) or Amazon.com $17
Northanger Abbey (2007 or 2008; written by Andrew Davies, starring Felicity Jones; I liked it with one exception – see my review) buy at PBS Shop Northanger Abbey $25 (as of now it is backordered 2-4 weeks) or Amazon.com $17
Mansfield Park (2007 or 2008, starring Billie Piper; not extremely faithful to the book or the period, but not a bad movie – my biggest complaint is that they seemed to make Fanny give in on her morals, which the literary Fanny Price would never do) buy at PBS Shop Mansfield Park $25 or Amazon.com $20
Pride and Prejudice (Andrew Davies’ classic, the best, 1995 Colin Firth & Jennifer Ehle) buy at ebay, your local bookstore, (you might try Target, Walmart, Costco, Sam’s, etc.) or Amazon.com $20 or the Collector’s Set for $33 or PBS Shop Pride and Prejudice $40
and still to come is:
Emma on March 23 (1997, Kate Beckinsale; I watched this movie once a long time ago, and since it was not the movie for which I was looking – the bright, witty Gwyneth Paltrow version – I hated it. But I’m ready to repent a little.) buy at Amazon.com $13 or PBS Shop Emma $20
NEW!! Masterpiece Emma (2009/2010) starring Romula Garai; I LOVE this movie – see my review. $35 on the PBS Shop on February 9, 2009. Or on Amazon for about $25.
The 2008 Sense and Sensibility also done by Andrew Davies starting March 30. Starring Hattie Morahan and Charity Wakefield, for about $35 you can buy the movie with Miss Austen Regrets at PBS Shop Sense and Sensibility or spend $25 at Amazon.com
The Sense and Sensibility Collector’s Set is $50 on the PBS shop, and includes the new Sense and Sensibility, Persuasion, and what I understand was a remarkably entertaining dramatized bio, Miss Austen Regrets.
The Sense and Sensibility DVD’s are not available until April 8, 2008.
All prices are estimates, not including shipping or tax.
I prefer the Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root Persuasion, even though I don’t really like it.
(NEW December 2009: I discovered I like the old version of Persuasion, from the 70’s!) Emma Thompson’s Sense and Sensibility (also starring Kate Winslet and Hugh Grant) is excellent, and I don’t expect it to be supplanted even by Andrew Davies. None of the Mansfield Park adaptations are worth seeing. Gwyneth Paltrow’s Emma is the best; even guys like this Jane Austen movie! See Amazon.com’s list to purchase these DVD’s.
To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn
Masterpiece Jane Austen Season: Persuasion
Posted in Jane Austen, movies, tagged alternative ending, Andrew Davies, Anne Elliot, Bath England, BBC, Captain Wentworth, England, Jane Austen, Jane Austen Season, Masterpiece, PBS, Persuasion, Sense and Sensibility on March 17, 2008| Leave a Comment »
If BBC/Masterpiece wanted to just to photograph illustrations for each chapter of the book, they should have done that. A movie is supposed to present dialogue, motives, characters, emotion… I did spend some moments enjoying the visual manifestation of Jane Austen’s sentimental classic. I said, “Awwhh!”: appreciation for seeing the tender and uncertain love come alive. Anne Elliot was well-cast, and Captain Wentworth was sufficiently handsome to be a hero in this adaptation. Captain Wentworth’s early snubs were a great set-up for the rest of the story, but then, well…
At the beginning of this new version I was disappointed by the made-for-tv staleness quite unlike P&P. But I reconciled quickly, acknowledging they were setting a somber tone for the beginning.
They said everything only once except for how unmarriageable Anne was, and then inexplicably every man is after her. So we had to remember the Mrs. Russell relationship to everything, and that Anne was responsible (demonstrated by nursing and inventory skills).
What did I like? Anne. I think that except for the end, she was perfect. I liked Capt. Wentworth ok. Mr. Musgrove was nice (felt sorry for his old depiction of Edmund Bertram). Mr. Elliot was well-cast. And I really liked the widowed friend (despite her miraculous and unexplained recovery sufficient for running across Bath herself to warn her friend).
I so wish they’d had Andrew Davies do this one instead of Sense and Sensibility. We already had a really good version of Sense and Sensibility. That is to say, the writing for Persuasion was horrible.
Knowing the book was the only key to what was going on. They left out or destroyed all the conversations (isn’t that most of what makes Jane Austen so great – her wit?).
However, in the book I was made to believe Anne might settle for Capt. Benwick or Mr. Elliot. At least she cared about Capt. Benwick, and had scruples about how to deal with Mr. Elliot, which the movie entirely omits. In the movie I was never convinced that Capt. Wentworth loved Louisa, or that Anne was truly despairing and desperate expecting her beloved’s constancy to Louisa no matter what. Louisa got better too quickly. Capt. Wentworth’s reluctant “entanglement” with Louisa wasn’t even addressed. Everything happened too quickly, with no suspense. They seemed set on telling the end of everything from the beginning. At the end they told almost nothing.
The title represents the theme of the story, and the movie seems to have forgotten to bring it to resolution. The end was incredibly choppy and ridiculous. What was wrong with Anne? She’s supposed to be this quiet, thoughtful, patient woman, and she takes off running, alone, all over the city pursuing a man whom she has every reason to believe will effect an opportunity to see her soon anyway? She doesn’t even read the whole letter in the horrible revision of the letter scene. And then they don’t finish the story. In all fairness, Jane Austen did write an alternate ending, and they rather mixed the two and added parts of their own. I much prefer the standard, “letter” ending.
My family came in just as it was getting ridiculous, and made excessive fun of the kiss.
There was no depth in this movie, rarely was there subtlety, and yes, they rushed through an outline of a beautiful story. But I like some parts still better than the 1995 version. Mary was a little more believable, I think. The dowager was less disturbingly ugly.
The best thing about this movie? It inspired me to read the book again. And I did enjoy the book very much.
To God be all glory,
Masterpiece Jane Austen Season: Northanger Abbey
Posted in Jane Austen, movies, tagged BBC, Catherine Morland, Henry Tilney, Jane Austen, Jane Austen adaptations, Jane Austen Season, Mr. Tilney, Northanger Abbey, PBS, Persuasion on March 17, 2008| Leave a Comment »
The only other main plot change, I thought, was that Henry seemed to be after Miss Morland the whole time. Didn’t she sort of grow on him, in the book, despite being virtually a child? Her enthusiastic admiration won him over. This change to the movie lessened the importance of Elinor’s friendship with Catherine.
Ok. Northanger Abbey is a comedy. The book is, and the movie kept the tone and a lot of the original dialogue and situational comedy along with interesting, ridiculous people. I’m not saying that Jane Austen practiced on Northanger Abbey what she would put into later novels, but we can see similar characters and story lines. Isabella’s manipulative confiding in Catherine is like Lucy in Sense and Sensibility. Catherine’s family is like that of Fanny Price. Henry is in a similar economic situation to Edward Ferrars. Elinor, Mr. Tilney’s sweet younger sister, is reminiscent of Georgiana. Mrs. Jenkins and Mrs. Allen have a lot in common. Northanger Abbey, by Jane Austen, was a lighter novel, with less-developed characters.
Emergent Links
Posted in Bible, changing church, church, philosophy, theology, tagged 1 Corinthians, Almighty God, atonement, Bible, Brian McLaren, broad is the way, Buddhists, cloister, disciples, Doug Pagitt, Emergent, emergent church, Emergent Movement, Emerging, emerging church, English, exclusive, exclusivity, faith, glory, God, God's glory, gospel, grace, guilt, Heaven, Hell, heresy, humanism, humanist, hypocrites, idiosystematic theology, Isaiah, Isaiah 4:28, Jesus, John 14:6, John 3:16, John MacArthur, Judaism, Kingdom of God, legalistic, Man of Sorrows, McLaren, moralism, music, Nooma, Paul, PBS Jane Austen Season, Persuasion, Peter, Pharisees, praise, proclaim, rabbi, Redeemer, Rob Bell, sacrifice, salvation, Savior, shedding of blood, sing, spiritual, spirituality, submit, teacher, truth, Velvet Elvis, walk on water, worship, worth, worthy, wrath, yield on March 14, 2008| 1 Comment »
Emergent Cloister – Emerging Church Nothing New
Idiosystematic, a critique of change in the Emerging Movement
John MacArthur on The Emergent Church
Evaluation of the “gospel” in Rob Bell’s Nooma videos in 3 parts. Part 1.
A long review of Rob Bell’s book, Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith
Doug Pagitt on whether Good Buddhists go to Heaven
Brian McLaren sounds like my brother’s Buddhist friend explaining John 14:6
Too many web pages open – and most of them are about the Emergent Church. Rob Bell and Nooma, Brian McLaren’s broad-way interpretation of John 14:6, and a variety of Christians warning other Christians about the subtle heresies of the Emergent authors and leaders. I have a lot more links about Rob Bell, and I think that’s because he’s more accepted by the people I know. He doesn’t push everyone into joining the Emergent Movement. But he’s a part, and basically he wants to infiltrate the existing Church with emerging theology – which is actually more philosophy, because God is a song in everyone’s heart.
McLaren, Pagitt, they say things that are extreme. The links I have up for them are not ones that say: when McLaren said this, he was wrong because… No. The links I have for them are from their own mouths or pens, self-explanatory in their heresy. Yes. Heresy. The Bible may not be all about who gets to heaven and who goes to hell, but it is about something; it’s about God, the God who so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Jesus is the center; not only His teachings or His compassion, but also His fulfillment of prophecy, His divine miracles, His judgment, His death, His resurrection, His ascension, His return. The Bible is about having a relationship with God, God dwelling with individuals, but it is about grace. God chooses. God pursues. God enables the relationship when we rebel and deserve to perish.
I read a McLaren page to my brother, and afterward I asked him, “Isn’t that horrible? That someone can teach that about John 14:6? I don’t understand how he can believe that.” My brother added that the sad thing is, McLaren had a lot of cool stuff to say mixed in with the bad theology.
Emergent books are like that. Especially the beginning is usually full of the enthusiastic, God-acknowledging, people-loving, truth-seeking community we’re looking for. And then, slowly at first, the authors begin to slip in their man-centered words, and then they talk about worship and evangelism. I wonder if the authors or editors intentionally include the controversial things in the latter halves of their books. My friends read these books very trustingly. Without being too critical, they think these books and teachers are just encouraging us to have a personal faith, to fulfill Jesus’ command to love.
But if I read closely, and look at other things these guys have said, I start to wonder… Faith in what? Who is the Jesus they say commanded love? What is worship? What gospel are we bringing to the world through our love and concern for social justice and community?
Rob Bell interprets Peter’s walk on water as faith (or little faith) in himself. The Jesus these guys mention omits mention of condemnation, hell, judgment, and sin. Their Jesus was an all-inclusive non-judgmental type. If we must acknowledge Jesus criticized some people, it was the favorite bad-guys, the hypocrites of Judaism, the exclusive and legalistic Pharisees. Good followers of Jesus would be the opposites of the Pharisees. Their gospel is some vague idea of the kingdom of God, a culture where people interact with God and love each other, all accomplished here on earth by Jesus’ trusted followers. Their gospel is joining God on His mission to make the world a better place.
They don’t talk about the gospel of life for the spiritually dead, or salvation for the sinners who have earned the eternal wrath of God. Without acknowledging our horrible guilt and God’s just right to wrath, we have no ability to understand His grace and His love and His sacrifice. Without acknowledging our total depravity, religion is not only not about the awesomeness of God; it inevitably plummets to being all about us.
Which is maybe why the emergent definition of worship is so disturbing. Worship to them is recognition of the spiritual. It can be expressed in more than music because candles are also spiritual, and painting is spiritual, and the beauty of nature is spiritual. To me, to the Bible, and to the English language, worship is recognition of the worth of its object. Yes; worship has an object, not in name only, but an inspiration. We don’t just sing praise songs because we feel like it, or because it’s a spiritual experience. Worship is not an experience; it’s an action. It either proclaims God’s glory or yields to it. We sing because God, about whom and to whom we sing, is worthy of it. Worship is more than music because our lives, sacrificed to His service and to His glory, can be a response to His wisdom and sacrifice and glory. God spoke light into the world, and created the nature we like to paint. He has done great things; therefore we will not keep silent. We will thank Him for His goodness toward us, marvel at His attention, proclaim His mighty works to the nations.
What worship should never be is about us. It should never be about recognizing the spirituality of a candle-lit room. Our songs cannot be about how much we love God, unless they are the overwhelmed effusions of people who cry on Jesus’ feet in gratitude. It isn’t about the art, or the environment, the sensation; worship is about the Almighty Creator of the universe who knows my name and who died for a wretch like me.
Rob Bell says in his Rhythm Nooma, “An infinite, massive, kind of invisible God—that’s hard to get our minds around. But truth, love, grace, mercy, justice, compassion…the way that Jesus lived. I can see that. I can understand that. I can relate to that. I can play that song!” But Isaiah said, “Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.” I relate to – and worship – a God who is bigger than me or my comprehension!
A month ago or more I watched Persuasion on PBS’s Jane Austen season, and commented that the best thing about the movie was that it made me want to re-read the book. The best thing about studying the Emergent Movement is that it makes me want the real thing, the solid truth against which I need no guards. I read the Bible to see what God really said, who Jesus really was, to find the passages where Jesus is the Savior, the Man of Sorrows, the Almighty God. And I get caught up again in the story. The story that has to do with my day, right now, but that casts me to my knees. I despised and rejected God. I betrayed and abused Him. And He loves me. He will never leave Me. He died for me. He gave me a beautiful day, and His pure Word. He enables me to teach about Him, and to coach my friends in study of His Word. Truth. His understanding is unsearchable, but whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing.
1 Corinthians 2:12-16, “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.“
To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn