• About
  • Books

memoirandremains

memoirandremains

Tag Archives: Interpretation

William Blake, To Tirzah

31 Friday Jul 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Hermeneutics, Literature

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Context, hermeneutics, Interpretation, Literature, poem, Poetry, Romantic Literature, Songs of Experience, To Tirzah, William Blake

This poem is a good example of how difficult it can be know what the poet intends, particularly when the poet is as deliberately ironic as William Blake. 

This poem also raises the issue of what it means to read something “in context.” Shakespeare and the Bible are famously misused by people who take a particular line wildly out of context. There is a television commercial which advertises a luxury automobile and plays a song which – in its original context — attacks pretension and put-on with material goods. But by using only a portion of the song lyric, the song meant to attack pretension is used to sell pretension.

This short poem is standing by itself one context. In that context, this poem seems to convey a sort of Gnostic Jesus, the body is bad, the soul is good, the hope of life is to be released from the body. “Tirazh” is used as a name for the Northern Kingdom of Israel, following the division of the kingdom into two after the death of Solomon. It is contrast to “Jerusalem,” which would be the heavenly and best.

Tirazh is called a mother of our earthly body which reproduces by means of sexual union, which traps us into a world of sense. The goal of this life is to be finally freed from the body – which the poet claims has been made possible by the “death of Jesus”.

But the poem was a late addition to a collection of poems known as Songs of Experience, which is paired with another collection known as Songs of Innocence. The poems also exist in a larger corpus of poems which develop Blakes philosophy, such as The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.

To this difficulty of context, we must remember that Blake is often deliberately ironic. We can never take anything he says at “face value.”

While not at all exhaustive, the following simply raises some questions as to how to interpret this poem when it is put into the context of Blake’s remaining (and largely earlier) work and Blake’s ironic posture as a poet.

To Tirzah

Whate’er is born of moral birth

Must be consuméd with the earth

To rise from generation free, 

Then what have I do to with thee?

Whatever is born will die and return to the earth. The last line is an ironic reworking of Jesus’ words recorded in John 2:4, where Mary tells Jesus that the wedding has run out of wine and Jesus responds, “Woman, what have I to do with thee? My hour is not yet come.” So the poet, seeking to be freed from the enslaving earth says, “What have I to do with thee?”

It also seems to state the poet’s aspiration, to be freed from generation, to be freed from this mother.

He then turns to the manner in which life is continued in this world:

The sexes sprung from shame & pride

Blow’d [blossomed] in the morn: in evening died;

But mercy changed death into sleep;

The sexes rose to work & weep.

This poem was added in the latter versions of his poems, Songs of Experience, and seems to have been written around 1805. But the collection also contains poems such as The Garden of Love (1794) which contend that shame and sexual repression are the result of the “Chapel” whose doors were shut and the words “Thou shalt not” were written over the door. 

Here the shame seems to be something inherent in the fact of mortality and the body.  Is Blake now arguing that sexual shame is not the result of societal norms and oppressive morality, but rather something inherent in birth and death of the body? Was it shame and pride which gave rise to this problem prior to the body?

Thou, Mother of my Mortal part,

With cruelty didst mould my heart

And with false self-deceiving tears

Didst bind my nostrils, eyes & ears.

This stanza echoes the poem The Tyger, also from the same collection and also from 1794. The poet meditates upon the dangerous tiger, who is quite dangerous (“the fearful symmetry”). 

This dangerous beast is blamed upon God

Did he smile his work to see?

Did he who made the lamb make thee? 

[The lamb is addressed in a poem from Songs of Innocence.]

In that poem, Blake asks

And what shoulder & what art

Could twist the sinews of thy heart?

In Tirzah, Blake blames the heart upon the earth – the physical part. Is God from Tyger the equivalent of mother in Tirzah? Is his heart cruel like the tigers, or is it merely the product of another’s cruelty? Does his heart give rise to the outrages elsewhere discussed in Songs of Experience?

This discussion of the senses in Tirzah also sits uneasily with Blake’s longer work, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.

In that poem, Blake praises physical desire as “energy” and writes such “Proverbs of Hell” as 

The lust of the goat is the bounty of God.

This mortal body of energy is now the moulder of cruelty and death. Does he celebrate the energy of the body, or does he see it as destructive?

And finally

[Thou mother]

Didst close my tongue in useless clay

And me to mortal life betray

The death of Jesus set me free

Then what have I to do with thee?

Jesus, in a Gnostic vein, is used as a trope to argue for an utter freedom from the “useless clay” of the body. How exactly Jesus’ death performs this feat is not clearly stated.

The question then becomes, does this poem reflect a change in Blake’s thinking (it would not be accurate to say that his earlier position was purely a sex-drugs-rock-n-roll ethos, but it was certainly not conventional middle class anachronistically called Victorian piety)? Blake constantly writes with great irony. His poem The Marriage of Heaven and Hell seeks a new negotiation of the body and soul along his idiosyncratic lines. 

But in this poem, one could read it as a movement beyond his earlier position (which was written during the early days of the French Revolution) to more escapist, Gnostic vision — complete with the common aspect of Gnostic asceticism due to its distrust of the body.

And one final question, should the context of Blake’s personal life be used to answer the question of what Blake means by this poem?

“Everyone knows Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken”—and almost everyone gets it wrong.”

26 Tuesday Jan 2016

Posted by memoirandremains in Literature, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Interpretation, poem, Poetry, Robert Frost, The Road Not Taken

But is this view of “The Road Not Taken” and its creator entirely accurate? Poems, after all, aren’t arguments—they are to be interpreted, not proven, and that process of interpretation admits a range of possibilities, some supported by diction, some by tone, some by quirks of form and structure. Certainly it’s wrong to say that “The Road Not Taken” is a straightforward and sentimental celebration of individualism: this interpretation is contradicted by the poem’s own lines.

The Most Misread Poem in America

Biblical Counseling, Interpreting the Data

04 Thursday Jun 2015

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Lectures

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

8i's, Biblical Counseling, Interpretation, Lectures

Here are the lecture notes for Interpreting the Data

And here is the lecture:

https://memoirandremains.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/20140406.mp3

There is no counsel to be compared

22 Wednesday Apr 2015

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Biblical Counseling, Counsel, Edward Reynolds, hermeneutics, Hosea, Interpretation, Jeremiah Burroughs, Word of God

The worst is the not the loss of any outward thing.

What is the most pernicious and destructive evil which a man is in danger of? Not the loss of any outward good things whatsoever, for they are all in their nature perishable; we enjoy them on the very condition of parting with them again; no wisdom can keep them: “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them,” 1 Cor. 6:13. Not the suffering of any outward troubles, which the best of men have suffered and triumphed over.

The greatest danger is the loss of the soul.

But the greatest loss is the loss of a precious soul, which is more worth than all the world, Matt. 16:26; and the greatest suffering is the wrath of God on the conscience, Psal. 90:11; Isa. 33:14; Heb. 10:31; Matt. 10:28. Therefore, to avoid this danger, and to snatch this “darling from the paw of the lion,” is of all other the greatest wisdom. It is wisdom to deliver a “city,” Eccl. 9:15; much more to deliver “souls,” Prov. 11:30. Angelical, seraphical knowledge, without this, is all worth “nothing,” 1 Cor. 13:1, 2.

Continue reading →

Tradition in Interpretation

19 Monday May 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in Bible Study, Theology

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Grant Osborne, hermeneutics, Interpretation, Preunderstanding, Reading, Scripture, Systematic Theology, Tradition, Understanding the Times

Systematic theology flows out of (1) exegetical decisions regarding the theological meaning of individual passages, (2) the collation of the meaning of passages on an issue of biblical theology, and (3) the use of models (good and bad) provided by a study of the history of dogma on the issue. In constructing a theology for today, four components form the “raw materials” – Scripture, tradition (both the creedal traditions of the church as a whole and the individual traditions of the theological systems), experience (personal experience, corporate experience in a local church, and the community of scholars whose works challenge and inspire us), and reason (ways of organizing the data into coherent patters for the current culture). Tradition, experience, and reason together form our preunderstanding, that set of hermeneutical awareness and beliefs that guide us when we study a text and draw theological meaning from it. This compendium of the reader’s strategies must he held consciously, lest they become an a priori that determines the textual meaning rather than a perspective from which we make decisions. Once again, the competing schools of thought are oru friend, for they force use away from presuppositional readings.

There is general agreement that Scripture must provide the basis for all theological formulation. The debate centers upon what part it must play and what place we gtive to church tradition in developing our belief system. The thesis of this essay is that Scripture has absolute primacy, and tradition is supplemental, informing us and providing models for the way Scripture has been utilized through the centuries, but not determining our present system.

Grant Osborne, “Hermeneutics and Theological Interpretations,” in Understanding the Times: New Testament Studies in the 21st, ed. Andreas J. Kostenberger and Robert W. Yarbrough (Wheaton: Crossway, 2010), 83-84.

Introduction to Biblical Counseling, Interpretation

10 Thursday Apr 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Biblical Counseling, Interpretation, Interpreting the Data, introduction to biblical counseling

The last post in this series may be found here:https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/introduction-to-biblical-counseling-week-six-inspiration/

The audio for the lecture for this lesson may be found here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.calvarybiblechurch.org/audio/class/biblical_counseling_2014/20140406.mp3

INTERPRETING THE DATA

Biblical counseling differs sharply from other forms of counseling in understanding the data. Any counselor, psychologist, psychiatrist would find out about the counselee’s [I hate that phrase. We do not see patients, we are speaking with brothers and sisters] history, present status, health, et cetera. Any of the various schools of psychology (and there are many) would typically look at such things.

Meaning

A point of data means something only with respect to some other concern. Take for example, the data point: Lois wore an orange baseball cap.  If we are concerned with college sports, this might “mean” she is Tennessee Volunteers fan. If we are concerned with style, we may be shocked or pleased when she showed up wearing the cap. If we are the police investigating a crime, we may be looking for someone wearing an orange cap (and thus Lois might be a suspect). All three things might be true at once.

Biblical counseling is the process of looking at a life in the context of the Scripture to determine what it means. A Freudian psychiatrist may look at a behavior or belief and understand it to have something to do with one’s weaning as a child. A Jungian might see some tie to the collective unconscious. A behaviorist will see stimulus/reward.  One following after Bradshaw will see a hurt inner child. Our question is, What does the Bible see?

The Heart

The Lord tells us that what we see in the life comes from the heart (Mark 7:21). Proverbs speaks of the heart as holding the springs of life (Proverbs 4:23). Therefore, we must consider the circumstance in light of the manner in which the human heart functions.

Worship

As discussed in previous lessons, the human heart is wired to worship, and thus, we must understand the life before us as a worshipping life.

Desire

The Bible sees outward conduct as proceeding from desire:

14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. James 1:14–15 (ESV)

The power to move one’s will does not exist in the object of temptation but in the desire for the temptation. (See, also James 4:1-3).

 

Use Biblical Categories

The first step in interpreting the data is to consider the correct categories, because the categories will in large part dictate one’s understanding.

For example, addiction as a “disease”:

Let us consider someone who has the “disease” of alcoholism. “Disease” indicates something which is beyond one’s control and thus something for which one cannot be morally responsible. If someone contracts cancer, we do not consider them to be morally responsible when they become so weak and tired they cannot work.

Compare that to being enslaved by alcohol. The Biblical category sees the trouble as arising from the heart’s desires which have not mastered the human being. None of this denies that habitual use of alcohol will not affect one’s body; nor does it deny that certain people may find alcohol a more powerful draw than other people (this draw may be affected by one’s physiology).  There may be many things which work together to create the desire to drink alcohol. However, it is still a matter of one’s volitional conduct.

For understanding of this from a biblical perspective, consider the following blogpost by Michael Graham[1] on the Gospel Coalition website:

Crack, Meth, Addiction, and the Puritans[2]

In a fascinating piece in The New York Times, “The Rational Choices of Crack Addicts,” Dr. Carl Hart presents his research on how crack and meth addicts choose future monetary rewards instead of another high. John Tierney writes:

Like other scientists, he hoped to find a neurological cure to addiction, some mechanism for blocking that dopamine activity in the brain so that people wouldn’t succumb to the otherwise irresistible craving for cocaine, heroin, and other powerfully addictive drugs.

But then, when he began studying addicts, he saw that drugs weren’t so irresistible after all.

“Eighty to 90 percent of people who use crack and methamphetamines don’t get addicted,” said Dr. Hart, an associate professor of psychology. “And the small number who do become addicted are nothing like the popular caricatures.” . . .

When the dose of crack was fairly high, the subject would typically choose to keep smoking crack during the day. But when the dose was smaller, he was more likely to pass it up for the $5 in cash or voucher.

“They didn’t fit the caricature of the drug addict who can’t stop once he gets a taste,” Dr. Hart said. “When they were given an alternative to crack, they made rational economic decisions.” [emphasis mine]

When methamphetamine replaced crack as the great drug scourge in the United States, Dr. Hart brought meth addicts into his laboratory for similar experiments—and the results showed similarly rational decisions. He also found that when he raised the alternative reward to $20, every single addict, of meth and crack alike, chose the cash. They knew they wouldn’t receive it until the experiment ended weeks later, but they were still willing to pass up an immediate high. [emphasis mine]

This piece is really interesting on multiple planes. First, it challenges many of the sacred cows of neurological science and behavioral psychology. Second, it highlights some intriguing spiritual truths.

Rationality and Irrationality of Sin

Sin is simultaneously rational and irrational. Sin typically has a “payoff” associated with it—whether the release of neurochemicals to the brain for some illicit or risky behavior, or the temporary and fleeting gratification of revenge, greed, lust, or hatred. It makes sense, then, that if one’s joy in Christ is minimal, then the payoff of sin would seem more attractive.

But the payoff of sin over-promises and under-delivers. Sin is deceptive—it promises one thing and gives you something else. Sin is always irrational because the payoff is always a lie. Sin promises you the true/good/beautiful and gives you gravel in your mouth instead. Therefore, when our joy and pleasure in Christ is superior to the payoff of sin, we choose Christ over the sin and its payoff.

Puritans and Crack Addicts

So what do the Puritans and crack addicts have in common? In this instance, quite a lot. When a superior pleasure is presented, we choose the superior pleasure. In the case of Dr. Hart’s study, the addicted participants chose the promise of future money over an immediate high. This is like what the Puritan Thomas Chalmers meant when he spoke of the “expulsive power of a new affection.”

And this is what Jonathan Edwards meant when he spoke of the human pursuit of happiness:

It is not contrary to Christianity that a man should love himself, or, which is the same thing, should love his own happiness. If Christianity did indeed tend to destroy a man’s love to himself, and to his own happiness, it would therein tend to destroy the very spirit of humanity. . . . That a man should love his own happiness, is as necessary to his nature as the faculty of the will is and it is impossible that such a love should be destroyed in any other way than by destroying his being. The saints love their own happiness. Yea, those that are perfect in happiness, the saints and angels in heaven, love their own happiness; otherwise that happiness which God hath given them would be no happiness to them. (Charity and Its Fruits, p. 159.)

Though not a Puritan, Blaise Pascal argued similarly:

All men seek happiness. There are no exceptions. However different the means they may employ, they all strive towards this goal. . . . God alone is man’s true good, and since man abandoned him it is a strange fact that nothing in nature has been found to take his place: stars, sky, earth, elements, plants, cabbages, leeks, animals, insects, calves, serpents, fever, plague, war, famine, vice, adultery, incest. (Pensees, #148.)

Worship Rules All

Because all men seek happiness, all of life is worship.

What you want is what you worship.

What you worship controls you.

How is your worship of God today?

Data as Evidence

When you look at the information concerning your brother or sister, you must first consider what the Scripture says about this circumstance. That information will give you insight into what the data means.

Evaluating it as Evidence

Do not think that just because the counselee has said something that it is necessarily true or complete. I am not suggesting that you begin with the idea that everyone is lying to you. Love does believe all things.

However, the Bible is plain about some matters. First, you must hear both sides of the story before you can make an honest evaluation:

17  The one who states his case first seems right,

until the other comes and examines him. Proverbs 18:17 (ESV)

Second, do not make a conclusion based upon insufficient evidence.

15 “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. Deuteronomy 19:15 (ESV)

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 2 Corinthians 13:1 (ESV)

 

Selectivity

In Insight & Creativity, Jay Adams explains that a counselor must give his attention to that data which is most important:

Selectivity is important because it allows the counselor to strip away all those things that might keep him from focusing on the real issue or issues. It keeps him off sidetracks, it protects him from becoming apprehensive about consequences and allows him to test his judgments about the counselee. There is more to selectivity than this….[3]

Adams goes on to give matters which one should eliminate from consideration: Psychiatric and psychological jargon; guesses and speculation on the part of the counselee; victim themes; blame-shifting; repetitive material; unnecessary or unrelated details; self-pity; [possibly] questions from the counselee; and a structure to the counseling, “I only want to speak about ….”

For example, guesses and speculation are not evidence of anything beyond the counselee’s heart and understanding. Thus, the guess may be important to understand the counselee but not the situation. Victim language may often be used to deflect responsibility for one’s decisions – however, in other circumstances, one may very well be a victim (such as an abused child). The selection process takes skill and experience. However, if you don’t engage in selectivity, you may very well end up missing the entire problem facing your counselee.

Sin, Sight & Judgment

It is a common theme throughout Scripture that the one who sins thinks that no one – particularly God – knows:

1  Transgression speaks to the wicked

deep in his heart;

there is no fear of God

before his eyes.

2  For he flatters himself in his own eyes

that his iniquity cannot be found out and hated. Psalm 36:1–2 (ESV)

 

Here the psalmist attributes one aspect of continuing transgression to the false belief that the sin is not known. This is tied to the additional ideas of God knowing and judging the sin: (1) there is no fear of God; and (2) the iniquity cannot be hated.

 

This goes back to the Garden. In Genesis 3:8, we read that Adam and Eve tried to hide from God. In Genesis 4:9, Cain denies any knowledge of his brother’s condition. In Proverbs 7, the young man goes out to sin “at the time of night and darkness”. All three seek to hide to avoid judgment.

 

We see this combination in the prophets. For example, Amos unveils the wealthy oppressors in the following language:

 

10  They hate him who reproves in the gate,

and they abhor him who speaks the truth.

11  Therefore because you trample on the poor

and you exact taxes of grain from him,

you have built houses of hewn stone,

but you shall not dwell in them;

you have planted pleasant vineyards,

but you shall not drink their wine.

12  For I know how many are your transgressions

and how great are your sins—

you who afflict the righteous, who take a bribe,

and turn aside the needy in the gate. Amos 5:10–12 (ESV)

First, there is the suppressed thought of judgment; “they hate him who reproves”. There is the sin, “you trample on the poor”. There is the false belief that their sin is unknown: “For I know how many are your transgressions”.

This mechanism is spelled out boldly in Romans 1: There is the fact of the knowledge of God’s judgment – which knowledge is suppressed (Romans 1:18). There is the pretending that God does not or cannot know.

So, when you look into the counselee’s life (if there is a pattern of sin), look to see how they are attempting to suppress the knowledge of God’s judgment.

Common Ways to Suppress the Knowledge of God’s Judgment

Thomas Brooks in his work Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices[4], provides a helpful list of common ways in which people seek to suppress the knowledge that God does not know (or care) about the sin:

  1. By presenting the bait and hiding the hook.
  2. By painting sin with virtue’s colors.
  3. By the extenuating and lessening of sin.
  4. By showing to the soul the best men’s sins and by hiding from the soul their virtues, their sorrows, and their repentance.
  5. By presenting God to the soul as One made up all of mercy.
  6. By persuading the soul that repentance is easy and that therefore the soul need not scruple about sinning.
  7. By making the soul bold to venture upon the occasions of sin.
  8. By representing to the soul the outward mercies enjoyed by men walking in sin, and their freedom from outward miseries.
  9. By presenting to the soul the crosses, losses, sorrows and sufferings that daily attend those who walk in the ways of holiness.
  10. By causing saints to compare themselves and their ways with those reputed to be worse than themselves.
  11. By polluting the souls and judgments of men with dangerous errors that lead to looseness and wickedness.
  12. By leading men to choose wicked company.

Motivations Behind the Conduct

Here is another place where Scripture gives clarity into a counseling situation.

Sexual Immorality

Consider sexual immorality:

3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. 4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. Ephesians 5:3–4 (ESV)

When we see the external behavior (immorality), we may immediately jump to the conclusion that the sexual immorality stems from a desire for sexual pleasure. However, that may not be so. Paul here seeks to defeat sexual immorality with an appeal to thankfulness: “but instead let there be thanksgiving.”

 

Think this through: sexual immorality is merely a

Church Conflict

In Philippians, Paul deals with a church split. Yet rather than directly address the content of their church dispute, Paul speaks at length about Christ, his incarnation and the resurrection to come.  Paul works out the implications of the facts of the Gospel before he gives the direct command to stop the bickering.

In laying out the doctrine of Christ, Paul seeks to show the people how they are misunderstanding both themselves and God:

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

14 Do all things without grumbling or disputing, 15 that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, 16 holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. 17 Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all. 18 Likewise you also should be glad and rejoice with me. Philippians 2:12–18 (ESV)

Paul has just spoken of the work of Christ in the incarnation. He therefore commends that they work out their salvation with fear and trembling. He then explains to them who they are, what they are doing: “that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world”. Their lives are not their own, but rather they are to exist to give glory to their Savior.

In chapter three, Paul explains how he gave up all of his privileges so that he could attain to the resurrection (Philippians 3:10-11). In 1 Corinthians, Paul also deals with a divided church. In that letter he also culminates his argument with an extended discussion of the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15).

From these things we could conclude that conflict among Christians may (at least in part) indicate a failure to understand what we are doing and where we are going.

In the book Redeeming Church Conflict, the authors – who have great experience in handling church disputes – explain:

Redeeming church conflict is less about resolving specific problems than it is about seeing conflict as a means by which God is growing his people into true saints, true eternal children who are being continuously conformed into his image.[5]

Conclusion

The Bible speaks extensively upon many subjects. Not every instance of sexual immorality will hinge ultimately upon thankfulness – you may find the motivation for the sin lies in fear of man. Not every church conflict will be tied directly to the question of the resurrection. Before you say X means Y, you must make sure that you fully understand what the Bible has to say on a topic.

The process of interpreting data will point you backwards toward more data gathering and forward toward instruction and inducement. As you gather information, you will begin to see things upon which the Bible speaks. This will lead you to seek more information in a certain area. It will also effect what and how you teach.

For instance, if you have a matter of sexual immorality which you begin to understand in terms of thankfulness as a remedy, you want to investigate how the counselee understands what God has given to them. You’ll want to understand what stands in the way of their understanding of God’s gifts and their response.

Your teaching and the response may again change your interpretation, which leads to more data gathering and an adjustment to your teaching.

 

 

 

[1] The blogpost contains the following notice respecting the author: Michael Graham serves as associate pastor of administration for Orlando Grace Church. He got his BA from the University of Florida in religious studies and Master of Divinity from Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando. He blogs at Modern Pensées. You can follow him on Twitter.

[2] http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/10/04/crack-meth-addiction-and-the-puritans/

[3] Jay E Adams, Insight (Woodruff: Timeless Texts, 1982), 11.

[4]An electronic copy of the book may be found here:  http://gracegems.org/Brooks/precious_remedies_against_satan.htm

[5] Tara Klena Barthel and David V. Edling, Redeeming Church Conflicts: Turning Crisis Into Compassion and Care (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2012), 55.

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior, Book 1.1.4
  • Anne Bradstreet Meditations: Consider
  • Those unheard are sweeter
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior, Book 1.1.3
  • Weakness

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior, Book 1.1.4
  • Anne Bradstreet Meditations: Consider
  • Those unheard are sweeter
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior, Book 1.1.3
  • Weakness

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • memoirandremains
    • Join 629 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • memoirandremains
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...