Male and Female Paralysis in James Joyces Dubliners Essay -- Dubliner

Male and Female Paralysis in Dubliners Critics widely recognized that each story within James Joyce’s Dubliners contains a theme of paralysis. In fact, Joyce himself wrote, â€Å"My intention was to write a chapter of the moral history of my country and I chose Dublin for the scene because that city seemed to me the centre of paralysis† (Joyce, letter to Grant Richards, 5 May 1906). Contained in this moral history called Dubliners are twelve stories that deal with the paralysis of a central male character and only four that deal with so called paralysis within a central female character. It could be said that Joyce did this merely because he is a male, therefore could write the character better. However, Joyce writes female characters just as convincing as male characters. In looking at the male-centered stories versus the female-centered stories I find a difference. As the author Marilyn French says in her book Shakespeare’s Division of Experience, â€Å"The basic distinction in human social o rder since the beginning of recorded history has been gender† (French, 11). While it is obvious that each of the stories within Dubliners deal with paralysis, I contend that the paralysis within a male character and the paralysis within a female character are essentially different. Male paralysis is evident in the story â€Å"Araby,† about a young boy’s obsession over his friend’s sister. His life revolves around thinking about her and when the next time he is going to see her will be, even though he has never had a conversation with her. He comments, â€Å"I had never spoken to her except for a few casual words, and yet her name was like a summons to all my foolish blood† (Joyce 20). His life is ruled by this fascination, and when she final... ...wrote the male and female characters differently within Dubliners. Works Cited: Benstock, Bernard. Critical Essays on James Joyce. G.K. Hall & Co. Boston, Massachusetts: 1985. French, Marilyn. Shakespeare’s Division of Experience. Summit Books. New York, New York: 1981. Joyce, James. Dubliners. Washington Square Press. New York, New York: 1998. Seidel, Michael. James Joyce: A Short Introduction. Blackwell Publishers, Inc. Oxford, UK: 2002. Works Consulted: Fairhall, James. James Joyce and the Question of History. Cambridge University Press. New York, New York: 1993. Garrett, Peter K., ed. Twentieth Century Interpretations of Dubliners. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: 1968. Torchiana, Donald T. Backgrounds for Joyce’s Dubliners. Allen & Unwin, Inc. Winchester, Massachusetts: 1986.

Forensic Scientists Essay -- Criminal Investigative Laboratories, DNA

â€Å"Even with the reliability of DNA examinations, forensic scientists need additional safeguards to ensure the significance of their findings are not over- or under-interpreted† (Willis, 2011, p77). While laboratory techniques for DNA recovery and profiling are well established in criminal investigative laboratories (Bond, et al, 2007, p129), it can be argued that a possible weakness of the use of national databases are understaffing and/or under training of investigators and laboratory staff. Standardization of testing, analysis, evaluation and result presentation to the courts such as that the jury may understand how many people in the population are possible to match the particular DNA profile. This allows the jury to decide on all information presented to direct judgment (Lincoln, 1997, p26). Walsh et al. derived â€Å"an inferential model for DNA database performance using data from major national DNA database programs in 2010 using the parameters that optimizes desirable database outputs as matches† (Walsh et al., 2010, p1556). Research has taken â€Å"important steps toward identifying measures of performance for forensic DNA database operations† (Walsh et al., 2010, p1556). With the expansion of the national DNA database, hit â€Å"rates will continue to increase as approximately 25,000 to 35,000 new arrestee and convicted offender DNA profiles are entered† monthly (Gabriel et al., 2009, p408). Proper use of national DNA databases will strengthen both laboratory and policy efforts with â€Å"standards that guard against bias and error† (NAS, 2009, p111). Regardless of methods, automation or legislation laboratories and criminal investigators involved in forensic sciences must maintain integrity and professional training to expect credibility... ...f how a sample is deemed suitable for entry into the National DNA Database. For example the FBI Criminal Justice Information Service Division (Wide Area Network) recognizes entry into the NDIS of a forensic profile requires a DNA profile to contain ten or more specific CODIS core loci (FBI, 2011). As of 2010, England maintains authority at a National level under Home Office and National DNA Database Strategy Board (FSS, 2010) to regulate NDNAD entries under seven of 10 core loci requirement. These regulations can often change as technology advances such as that in England new PCR kits allow for testing of 15 loci, and as such if DNA samples are capable of being individualized by an increased number of loci authorities will have to address the possibility of enhanced core loci regulations for entry into national databases, while other countries advance accordingly.

Hsm Appendix

Instead of confronting the husband trying to talk rationally with him and defuse the situation while alarming the authorities is the best route for dealing with a person like that. In the case of the wife the programs offered through the agency promote self-worth and help prevent her from feeling bad about herself. Learning new Job skills and healthy ways of thinking about oneself should prepare her for an Independent lifestyle to provide for her and her children. Scenario 2: Closure of a Planned Parenthood Clinic In Scenario two the prevention level being used is the Secondary level of prevention.Secondary prevention can be defined as the early detection and treatment of dysfunction. In this scenario I see the human services program attempting to prevent teenage pregnancy and the rate in their community from steady climbing up by offering services to help teens prevent unplanned pregnancies. I would handle this situation a little differently than how it is handled in this scenario. I would I would still organize a group of other health and human service providers to help In assisting the county to solve the issues, but In Dalton to that I would bring wariness to the community and local politician through getting the media involved.I would also look into doing different fundraising drives to help build money as well as charity drives to keep the clinic open. I would make sure I explain to the public and politicians how unique our program is from others and why it's essential that we stay open. Scenario 3: Caring for the Homeless In scenario three the prevention level being used is the tertiary prevention. This type of prevention is generally defined in terms of efforts to rehabilitate and return to the community those afflicted with severe mental disorders.In this scenario I wouldn't change anything I think that bringing health services In the clinics is the best solution to ensure that the homeless are getting the attention and care they need since they genera lly wouldn't go on their own. Having the health resources there onsite makes it physicians and staff to work towards rehabilitating them and ensuring they are healthy. Bringing the services into the clinics will ensure that their needs are being met properly and it will also help to clean up the community of those who are mentally ill by making sure they are well taken care of.

Mexican and american mexican

Mexican American forms one of the most oldest and largest of ethnic communities living in USA. The overwhelming majority of Mexican Americans live in four southern US states, although many of them are spread also in upper northern parts. Spanish Mexicans were among the first people to explore and inhabit USA, even before arrival of western settlers. Later, as USA expanded its territories after the Mexican war of 1846, Texas was annexed from Mexico and thousands of Mexicans automatically found themselves as part of United States, forced to assimilate themselves with a distinct culture. The assimilation of Mexicans has been a very slow and comparatively unaccomplished process and ethnic Mexicans have always formed a distinguished niche for them, continuing in their traditional docile and peaceful outlook that stands at sharp contrast with materialist and high paced American lifestyle. This paper analyzes the social, political and economic factor that have guided the relation between Americans and Mexican Americans History of Mexican American Relation Spanish explorers had conquered Mexico by 16th century and they used Mexican territories as base to continue their exploration of USA. As the Spanish empire crumbled, Mexico struggled to get its independence, which it achieved in 1826. However, Mexican independence was not a sanguine affair by all accounts and there were numerous issues of internal discord, the chief one them being the problem of Texas. Mexico had allowed American settlers to inhabit the barren and desolate landscapes of its northern states, bordering with USA that included, Texas and   California in particular. However, the number of American settlers increased dramatically in these areas, and it reached to the proportion that Americans began to dominate the political and economic life of these areas. The dominance of Americans started episodes of conflict between the two people as Americans would not accept the hierarchical, state centric and rather outdated political and social model of Mexican people and this caused frequent incidents of friction among them and Mexican authorities. The American settlers of northern Mexican border areas definitely perceived that their future lay with a far more prosperous, secure and economically sound USA than a comparatively regressive and stagnant Mexico. Meanwhile US senators also perceived the economic and strategic importance of these northern bordering states. The troubles in these areas rapidly snowballed into a major problem when Texas seceded from Mexico in 1836, a decision that Mexico did not recognize. As the mutual affinity of both Texas and US was to each other, USA formally annexed Texas and as result Mexico entered in a two years war with USA. The results of war were disastrous for Mexico and it lost more than one third of its territories to USA at the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. However, the effects of the war were not limited to mere annexation of territories but also of Mexican people living in this huge geographical area who overnight became subjects of USA. The relations among Americans/Yankees and Mexicans were always strained due to superior attitude of Anglo-Americans that had always made them behave with certain arrogance towards Mexicans. In this context, the results of war were more humiliating, and the loss of national land created a lasting perception of injustice and wrong that stayed with American Mexicans for decades, and to an extent even today. Alienation of Mexican Americans Of all the major ethnic groups living in USA, the Mexican American community is unique in several respects. Despite their living in a predominantly American society, they have been able to preserve their value system, their culture and tradition, their family structure and their belief, a fact that has puzzled many social scientists. Although the likeliest explanation of this phenomena relates to the fact that most of the Mexican-American and newly arrived Mexican immigrants continued to settle in southern states of USA, bordering with Mexico, providing a sense of continuousness and native familiarity that helped them to stay in their niches. However, this is only partially true and doesn’t throw full light upon the causes. A major reason of separate and distinguished Mexican identity has been long lasting grievances of many Mexicans on account of their forced assimilation in USA and subsequent highhandedness of Americans towards Mexicans after the war years. The American superiority in terms of education and affluence when contrasted with general level of impoverishment, illiteracy, and ignorance of early Mexican Americans definitely presented a great divide between two people with a firm notion that any assimilation among them would be impossible. This stereotype further caused Mexican to recede in their self formed shell, and minimize their interaction with one of most rapidly changing and advancing world, of which they had become an unwilling part. Even the fact they were granted all the rights as any other American citizen and no discrimination, at theoretical and ideological level was practiced with them, it did not help in their assimilation in an completely alien and foreign political and social system. As a matter of fact, the very decisions of American government allowing complete political and religious freedom to Mexican population at the time of Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo allowed Mexican people to preserve their cultural and traditional identity in the great cultural potboiler called USA. However, the ground political, social and economic realities worked to gradually dilute the barriers that Mexican American had created around them. Slowly many of them started to interact with the mainstream society as they realized the necessity of assimilation in order to exist in circumstances that had changed irrevocably. Most of the Mexican Americans fanned out, taking participation in the world around them, though maintaining their cultural roots intact. Those with deeper sense of wrong and who found new system unacceptable, took violent methods of protests while some who completely failed to get assimilated continued to live isolated lives. Although some dissatisfied Mexicans tried to express their anger through means of violence, in general the Mexicans rejected violence as expression tool, for they realized that through peaceful course alone they could ensure the survival in a largely Anglo USA. As the Mexicans realized their future destiny to be intertwined with USA and their new status as Mexican Americans, they also gradually accepted the new political and social system. Mexican Americans formed their own political parties, elected representatives in the democratic processes and for a time become influential political force in the southern states, owing to their numerical superiority. The Mexican political leaders tried to protect the rights and privileges of their people to the best extent possible for them, notwithstanding the fact that among themselves there were frequent instances of both political and economic exploitation. However, the influence of Mexican politics lasted only as long as they could held to their numerical superiority. As the southern states were connected to rest of the country through extensive system of railways by 1880s, the inflow of North Americans (Yankees) reached steadily, and soon they outnumbered the native Mexicans to end their political and even cultural influence, gradually absorbing them in the Yankee mainstream. As the general trend showed in perspective, Mexicans Americans were successful in preserving their cultural roots and identity in all those places where they enjoyed numerical superiority, such as Southern Arizona, New Mexico and South Texas. In other places, where they were outnumbered, they become American Mexicans from Mexican Americans. The composition of Mexican Americans changed after the heavy immigration of Mexicans in USA in early 20th century, when USA offered much better employment opportunities. For a considerable time, the immigrants identified themselves merely as workers in an alien land, while culturally mingling with their own countrymen. But since 1960s Mexican community has seen wave of cultural liberation and social assimilation and integration in the mainstream American system. Reference David J. Weber. 1973. Foreigners in Their Native Land: Historical Roots of the Mexican Americans.; University of New Mexico Press, 1973. Leo Grebler, Joan W. Moore, Ralph C. Guzman, et al., 1970. The Mexican-American People: The Nation's Second Largest Minority . New York, p. 10. â€Å"The Mexican-American People: A Review Symposium†, Social Science Quarterly 52, no. 1 ( June 1971): 8-38, El Grito. 1968. The Anthropology and Sociology of Mexican-Americans: The Distortion of Mexican-American History†, 2, no. 1 (1968) The Anthropology and Sociology of Mexican-Americans: The Distortion of Mexican-American History†, El Grito 2, no. 1 (1968)            

Circulatory System Essay

His first point criticised Paley’s analogy of the watch. The first part of the analogy claimed that if you found a rock while walking through a heath, you would not think anything of it. However, if you had seen a watch you would examine it and find that it had moving parts that demonstrate that the watch has a purpose, the parts work together for a purpose and they are ordered to make the watch function because if they weren’t, the watch won’t perform its function. He concluded the first part of his analogy by saying that the watch had a maker who must have existed at some time and place. The second part of the analogy claimed that if we suppose the watch had another imaginary function, and this function was the producing of other watches, then our admiration for the watchmaker would be increased. He concluded this part of his argument by saying that anyone who finds such a watch would conclude that the design of the watch implies ‘the presence of intelligence and mind’. Paley said that just like the watch being designed necessitates a designer as an explanation of its existence, all of nature requires a much greater designer. The complexity of nature is far greater than any machine human beings can make and therefore a grand designer is needed, this designer is God. Hume criticised this point by saying that the analogy is limited. For example, you could conclude from a study of the human blood circulatory system that animals had the same system. This would be a weak and mistaken analogy however to compare a human’s and an animal’s circulato ry system to the way sap circulates in a plant. Hume maintained his criticism of Paley’s analogy of the watch by an analogy of his own. This analogy said that we can conclude that a house had a builder and an architect but we cannot, however, deduce a builder or architect of the universe in the same way because there is no similarity between the two. He mentioned that if the house is faulty, what does this suggest about the designer? And so, if God did design the world, is he directly responsible for the evil within it? Paley, however, rejected this point because the issue was whether the universe exhibited signs of design. He was not concerned with questions relating to issues of quality concerning the design. Paley’s response was criticised to be unsatisfactory. Hume argued that there are other possible explanations than God for apparent design in the universe. Hume claimed that one of these possible explanations might be that as well as the possibility that there is a grand designer of the universe, it is equally possible that ‘matter may contain the spring of order originally within itself, as well as mind does’ and that unless there is perfect similarity between the object of comparison and what is being compared, you cannot draw a conclusion with any certainty. Another possible explanation for apparent design in the universe might be that any effects that we observe in nature may be caused by a variety of causes. This view supports the discovery of natural selection and the DNA and its role of shaping the growth of all living organisms. Hume claimed that there might not be just one single designer for the world. For example, we may look at a great ship and think about the great design of it, but the ship may be the result of years, even generations of trial and error. The ship may be the product of many hands and not just one great designer. From this, Hume concludes that there is no evidence to suggest the ‘unity of the deity’. Hume suggested three more theories as explanations for the design of the universe; aptness of analogy, the epicurean thesis and the argument from effect to cause. The aptness of analogy said that a watch is not a suitable analogy for the world. For example, just because a cabbage is fitted together/designed perfectly, does not mean that it has a maker/designer. By using a machine as an analogy, you would have already determined the outcome you want; you want there to be a designer and you’re already assuming that something natural, i.e. the cabbage, has a designer. The epicurean thesis was explained using an example. This example spoke about particles and said that if they were freely moving around over infinite time, by chance, one of the combinations they make would just happen to represent a stable order and this stable order is what we now live in. This example represented the view that the universe might have happened by chance. The argument from effect to cause claimed that we cannot go from an effect to a greater cause than that needed to produce the cause. We cannot say whether he made the watch alone or had some little helpers. This would mean that we do not and cannot know whether he is still active or even still alive, we can only say if the universe does/doesn’t have a designer and can’t list its traits by saying that he is benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient and infinite as many would portray him. Overall, Hume criticises the teleological argument in a number of ways. He very explicitly criticises Paley’s views on the teleological argument, using them to explain why he believes that the argument is deeply flawed.

Hassan in The Kite Runner Essay

A perfect friend could be described as someone who is honest and trustworthy, they make you laugh, someone you enjoy spending time with, and most of all they know how to have a good time and pick you up when you’re down. The novel The Kite Runner written by Khaled Hosseini depicts the setting of a great friendship in the best and most thoughtful way but the definition does not seem to match with what others seem to think. Hassan and Amir show utmost loyalty and humility towards each other but with one event the course of both of their lives change and both sides of their friendship do not remain equal. In their childhood days in Kabul Hassan acts as a brave, humble, considerate and hardworking, young boy who only wishes for Amir to succeed and be happy, almost to the extent of being too good to be true. Hassan displays these qualities and attributes through a number of important and notable events. First, Hassan protects Amir in any situation even if it puts him in danger. Second, after retrieving the kite from Assef, Hassan doesn’t even mention what took place to Amir showing his utmost loyalty. Third, Even after he is betrayed by Amir, Hassan continues to lie for the person he considers his best friend. Through these sets of events it will be evident how Hassan shows his attributes and how he, as a character in the novel, might be considered as â€Å"too good to be true† Hassan and Amir were raised together, grew up with each other and lived together for a large chunk of their lives. Although Amir is the only one that goes to madrehseh, school, Hassan does a very good job of trying to keep up with Amir. In Afghanistan â€Å"school smarts† don’t get you that far in public life, situations arise where a young boy cannot merely â€Å"think† his way out of it. This sort of Situation arises between Hassan, Amir and a couple of boys who seemed to be up to no good. Assef, a notorious sociopath and violent boy, and his two friends Wali and Kamal mock Amir for socializing with a Hazara, which, according to Assef, is an inferior race whose members belong only in Hazarajat. One day, he prepares to attack Amir with stainless steel brass knuckles, but Hassan bravely stands up to him, threatening to shoot out Assef’s eye out with his slingshot Amir had bought him. Assef decides to walk away promising to be back. The fact that Hassan was only being bullied and not the one being threatened and still decides to stand up to Assef shows his absolute love and true loyalty to Amir. Even though this situation is early in the book, its significance is still that of utmost importance for the fact of it showing how Hassan will protect Amir in any and all situations even if it puts him in danger. The kite fighting tournament is an event that almost every child in Kabul participates in. For each child that flies a kite, there is one who runs and grabs the kite loosing kites as they fall. Amir and Hassan form a team and they work together every year to try to win the tournament, Amir flies and Hassan runs the kites down. Against all odds they win the competition and Hassan goes to run it down. Soon enough Amir finds Hassan with Assef once again. Too scared to intervene, Amir stands and watches his most loyal friend Hassan get raped. One of the many climaxes of The Kite Runner is this scene because for the rest of Amir’s life he lives with it on his conscience, that he did not do anything to help. Amir and Hassan never speak of that moment again but both of them know what had happened that day. Just like any other average person Hassan could have gotten very mad at Amir, but the fact that he chooses not to shows how humble, caring and considerate of Amir. Not only does Hassan later want to continue their relationship how it was before but he in fact looks to take the blame as he asks Amir later on what he had done wrong to upset him. All of Hassan’s actions are shown in the most loyal and confederate way. As our novel progresses Hassan and Amir become further and further apart from each other, to the point that Amir eventually decides he would no longer like to live in the same household as him. All this time Hassan has been trying to make things wright between them but Amir would refuse to listen. Amir’s frustration ultimately leads to him framing Hassan to get him to leave. In a confusing exchange of dialogue Hassan takes the blame and apologizes, Baba accepts but Ali insists on their immediate dismissal. Again we see Hassan’s sheer love for Amir as he does not want him to get into trouble. Taking all the blame seems to be one of the best ways that Hassan can show his friendship. Doesn’t seem like much, but having the courage and bravery to do it to this extent truly makes Hassan a literally unbelievable character. Although Hassan and Amir’s relationship does not match that which others believe to be true, it is much more. The reason their friendship isn’t the same as others is because they are not friends; they are and always will be brothers. Hassan character is a brave, humble, considerate and hardworking, young boy who only wishes for Amir to succeed and be happy. Hassan displays these qualities and attributes through a number of important and notable events. First, Hassan protects Amir in any situation even if it puts him in danger. Second, after retrieving the kite from Assef, Hassan doesn’t even mention what took place to Amir showing his utmost loyalty. Third, Even after he is betrayed by Amir, Hassan continues to lie for the person he considers his best friend His character is without a doubt too good to be true because of the fact that Khaled Hosseini puts him in the wrong position, Hassan is not Amir friend nor will he ever be. They are brothers for life.

Analyzing Jesus Christ in the Gospels vis-a-vis Galilean Lifestyle

Analyzing Jesus Christ in the Gospels vis-a-vis Galilean Lifestyle AUTHORS NOTE: The following paper received first place at the 2005 Concordia University Presidents Showcase, Tier Two, and was presented at the Southern California Conference on Undergraduate Research at the University of California, Riverside. Jesus in Context: The Influence of the Galilee Region on the Life and Ministry of Jesus and His Followers Introduction: History, Faith, and the Cultural Context of Jesus of Nazareth According to the popular periodical Newsweek, 93 percent of Americans believe that Jesus of Nazareth existed as a historical figure (The Christmas Miracle), yet scholars continue to struggle with the question of how best to understand the founder of the worlds largest religion. Assuming that Jesus lived in a definite historical period, one of the most significant factors in developing an accurate portrait of Jesus life is an understanding of the cultural setting in which he lived. Due to the lack of a common foundation on which to build a thesis for such a portrait, however, scholars often clash over the specifics of the major influences that contributed to Jesus ministry. Many scholars contend that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet of the Judaic tradition, the exclusive product of Hebrew beliefs and customs. In such Judaic renderings of the life of Jesus, put forward by scholars like E.P. Sanders, gentile culture plays only a peripheral role in the development of Jesus beliefs and mi nistry. By contrast, others have de-emphasized Jesus role as a Jewish prophet and cast him instead as a Hellenistic teacher of wisdom, who inherited much of his material from the philosophy of the Greek cynic school. Writing from this perspective in his book The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, J.D. Crossan describes Jesus as a peasant Jewish cynic (Crossan 421). In addition to the question of Jesus cultural influences, scholars often question whether studying and assessing the Jesus presented in the Bible the Jesus of faith can be anything other than an obfuscation or interference in discovering the historical man who lived in the first century A.D. the Jesus of history. At the extreme end of skeptical scholarship are contentions that dismiss the Jesus of faith not as irrelevant or obfuscating, but as outright fraudulent. Scholars in this camp will often argue that the Jesus presented in the New Testament is an elaborately constructed myth, with St. Paul often credited as the intelligence behind the construction. In contrast to the skeptical view, early 20th century scholar Rudolph Bultmann suggests, in his influential writings such as The History of the Synoptic Tradition, that attempts to find the objective Jesus of history apart from orthodox Christian faith produced only diverse and often conflicting results (McLaughlin). Following Bultmanns suggestion, I begin this study with the presupposition that the conflict between history and faith whether artificial or actual has been largely fruitless as a focal point of historical Jesus research. Rather than attempting to reconcile competing theories, I suggest that secular scholars and religious researchers alike would benefit from the introduction of a common foundation on which to construct a portrait of the historical Jesus. Such an interpretive approach can be found in what I and other scholars have termed Jesus Galilean Context. I suggest that the Galilean Context of Jesus can serve as a mutual focal point between the two often juxtaposed poles of Biblical scholarship those that favor a purely secular interpretation Jesus, and those that wish to emphasize the Christ of tradition while offering fresh insights for both the scholarly community and the Church. A broad survey of the Galilean Contexts ramifications for contemporary scholarship lies beyon d the scope of this study. However, an overview of the Galilee regions cultural, historical, and geographic makeup is sufficient to demonstrate the significance of Jesus Galilean Context as an interpretive tool for shedding light on the development of his life and ministry. Furthermore, a Galilean interpretation of Jesus offers insight into the differences between Jesus and the religious establishment of his time, and can be useful in explaining the characteristics of Jesus ministry that caused him to be put to death. Barring Jesus of Nazareths alleged supernatural activity, the trait that most sets him apart from his contemporaries is his uncanny ability to reach across cultural boundaries and appeal to those who were traditionally excluded from first century Jewish society. Taking into account both Biblical and secular sources, it is clear that Jesus utilized the cultural diversity, economic climate, and geography of the Galilee region as the primary vehicle by which to communicate his message to both Jews and Gentiles. Historical Context: An Intercultural Crossroads Just as Galilee culturally stands at the center of Jesus life and ministry, likewise the Sea of Galilee (see Figure 1) itself is central to understanding what it was for Jesus to be a Galilean. A natural depression surrounded by fertile hills, the Sea of Galilee forms a natural amphitheater 690 feet below sea level, making it the second lowest point on the Earths surface. In contrast to the low elevation of the sea, the adjacent Hills of Galilee rise 1,500 feet above sea level on the western coasts, while the Golan Heights reach over 2,000 feet above sea level to the east. With a circumference of 33 miles and an approximate area of 64 square miles, the Sea of Galilee is the largest freshwater body in Israel. Because of its freshwater composition, the Sea of Galilee would more accurately be described as a lake or inland sea. The Sea of Galilees status as a lake was well known in ancient times, as is revealed in Josephus description of the region in The Jewish War: The Lake of Gennesar has sweet, excellent water, perfectly pure, and the lake ends in pebbly or sandy beaches everywhere (Maier 310). Similarly, the author of Luke 5:1 records that Jesus stood by the Lake of Gennesaret when he addressed the masses. Both authors associate the Sea of Galilee with the fruitful plain of Gennesaret, which lies on the seas northwestern coast. Luke is not unique in using alternate names for the body of water commonly called Galilee, and the names attached to this lake are often indicative of the cultural composition of the region. In Hebrew, Galilee is often known as Yam Kinneret or Chinneroth, both of which describe the lakes elegant lyre shape (Dunston). Galilees roots in Jewish history reach deep into the soil of the Old Testament, with the first mention of the region being made in Joshua 20:7. In Isaiah 8:23, Galilee is called by the Hebrew word Gelil haggoyim, meaning the region of nations (Galilee: Etymology). In its Old Testament context, the word nations is synonymous with gentiles or heathens, which strongly implies that Galilee was wedged within the vicinity of many non-Jewish peoples. In spite of the groping fingers of the nations, however, the region would remain under the control of the Israelites until the armies of Assyria flooded the Northern Kingdom in 732 B.C., seizing Galilee from its Semitic masters (Sea of Galilee). Along with the rest of Palestine, Galilee would later buckle beneath the pressure of Alexander the Greats quest for Hellenistic hegemony in c. 330 B.C. Scholars who see echoes of the Greek cynic school in Jesus teachings find support for their position in the resulting fusion of Jewish and Greek culture, which still permeated the region in the first century A.D. Out of Alexanders conquests rose the Decapolis on Galilees eastern shore (see Figure 1) a collection of ten Greek cities eventually unified under Roman rule (Middendorf). The Gospels indicate that Jesus and his entourage visited the Greek Decapolis on the eastern shore of Galilee, where they journeyed to the city of Gadara as recorded in Mark 5:1. Among the Gentile population, Christ performed a series of miracles including the exorcism of the demon Legion mentioned in Mark 5. Following the miracle, Jesus saw the opportunity he had to spread his message amongst the Gentile population of the region and used the cured man as a vehicle for his reputation, as revealed in the Gospel narrative: As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demonpossessed begged to go with him. Jesus did not let him, but said, Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you. So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed. (Mark 5:18-20; emphasis mine). As a result of this missionary activity, Jesus popularity grew in the region, as evidenced by the great multitudes of people from Decapolis mentioned in Matthew 4:25. Based on Scripture, it seems that Jesus actually made a second trip into the Decapolis later in his ministry. Mark 7:31 reports that after an interlude in Tyre and Sidon to the north of Galilee, Jesus returned to the Galilee region and went into the region of the Decapolis. In the decades following his ministry, Jesus influence on the Decapolis would continue to reverberate in the growing Christian community. Philadelphia, a Decapolis city far south of the Sea of Galilee, would become the site of a thriving church for whom the author of Revelation offers the highest praise in verses 3:7-11. Following Alexanders conquests, Galilee would remain in cultural and political flux until the Maccabean revolt during the last century B.C. briefly reclaimed the lost crown of Jewish sovereignty. With a large Jewish migration into the region during the mid-100s B.C., Galilee briefly regained its Jewish character, only to fall again to Roman conquest in 63 B.C. The author of John refers to the Sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberias (John 6:1), connecting Galilee with the Roman city of Tiberias (see Figure 1), which stood on the lakes western shore. For Jews living in the era of Roman occupation, Tiberias was a place of dubious reputation. Constructed under the direction of Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, Tiberias was a stalwart monument to the Roman presence in the region. In spite of Tiberias pre-eminence, the citys odious cemetery repulsed the local Jewish population, who viewed the presence of a burial ground as ritually unclean (Sea of Galilee). Intercultural tolerance was in short supply in first century Palestine, however, and Herod eventually attracted Jewish settlers to the city by force. Left to brace themselves against a crumbling wall of ethnic identity, these Jews would continue to practice their traditions throughout the first century, eventually transforming the once profane city of Tiberias into a center of Jewish scholarship that would play a decisive role in the compilation of rabbinical commentaries such as the Mishna and the Talmud (Sea of Galilee). In a technical sense, first century Galilee was a client kingdom of the Roman Empire, meaning that it was essentially self-governing but ultimately subjugated to the greater will of its imperial masters (Hanson). A client king, such as Herod Antipas, would rule autonomously, but he, in turn, would be responsible for maintaining Caesar Augustus good will by sending tribute to Rome. From a practical standpoint, this meant that the local region could maintain much of its cultural identity, as it did under the Jewish Antipas (Hanson). However, the peace that such a system created was ephemeral, being constituted by the necessity of compromise rather than contentment. On the occasions when this structure weakened, the stirrings of rebellion could burst through the dam of stability. Josephus reports in Jewish Antiquities that while the Romans were distracted by internecine strife between Archelaus and Antipas, revolutionary activity took its toll on the Galilee region: the whole country was without any government, and erupted in violence. Judas, son of Ezekias the bandit plundered Galilee, while Simon, a slave of Herod, crowned himself king and burned the royal palace in Jericho until he was caught and beheaded Athronges, a huge shepherd with his burly brothers conducted a guerilla campaign and others also spread ruin and desolation over the country (Maier 258). It was this internal tension that stirred the authorities of Jesus time to question his motives and accuse him of undermining the Roman authority. Reporting for PBS From Jesus to Christ, L. Michael White, Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin, posits that the term Galilean itself carried loaded connotations in the first century. To some, he suggests, it just might mean an outsider, or someone whos not really an old Jew of the traditional sort. Precisely because the Galilee had traditionally not been Jewish at the time of the Maccabean Revolt a hundred or 150 years before Jesus. But from another perspective, Galilean also took on the coloration of being rebellious, or insurrectionistso for some, the term Galilean might also mean something political (From Jesus to Christ). Many of Christs followers, in fact, wanted him to be a revolutionary figure in the vein of Judas the Galilean, as evidenced by their attempts to crown him king in John 6:15. Yet, Jesus himself seems to have been alienated from the anti-Roman movement, because he responds to the attempted coronation by departing into a mountain himself alone. Nonetheless, the Roman authorities appear to have associated him with the more radical currents of the Galilee. Ironically, the immediate consequence of Jesus teachings was the same as that of many Galilean radicals, as described by Josephus: Tiberius Alexander crucified James and Simon, the sons of Judas the Galilean, who had aroused the people to rebellion (Maier 273). Developmental Context: Galilee During Christs Formative Years Because of the ethnic composition of the region, it would be possible for an individual living in first century Galilee to experience aspects of both Jewish and Gentile culture. As the two worlds became, of necessity, more entwined, it is likely that each succeeding generation would become more of a composite of the two. Little of Jesus youth is revealed in the Gospels, yet the impact that these years would have on his ministry cannot be underestimated. In the isolated hills of the Galilean town of Nazareth (see Figure 1) that Christ would find the raw materials of many of his most enduring parables seeds being sown, grapes ripening on the vine, and farmers ardently shaping the land. Such images resurface throughout the teachings of Christ, as in the parable of the farmer and the seeds in Matthew 13, the parable of the sheep in Matthew 18, and the parable of the fruit tree of Matthew 3. By contrast, Jesus rarely draws on examples from commerce or military life in his teachings, nor does he employ the legalistic language that would be expected of a teacher from Jerusalem. Although the New Testament is our only source of Nazareths history until the 4th century A.D., the agricultural character of this small community can be inferred by two means. Although such etymological constructions are at best speculative, many linguistic scholars believe that the name Nazareth derives from a root word meaning separated, which describes the towns relative distance from the rest of the Galilean community (Baird). While this may be one shade of meaning, the word Nazareth may have its origins in the Hebrew word netser, which means sprout or shoot (Baird). Some argue that this refers to the towns being an offshoot of the greater Galilee region (Baird). This may be true, but to argue that sprout refers to the towns size would be to read into the Hebrew language an idiom for which there is little evidence, and it seems apparent to me that a literal reading of netser is most appropriate. If this is the case, the name clearly carries agrarian connotations. Secondly, it must be remembered that Galilees primary source of food production was its shoreline fishing industry. Geographically cut off from the regions cornucopia and too small to participate in any significant trading, Nazareth would, by necessity, have relied on small-scale agriculture for its survival (Hanson). Much like the Kibbutzim small, socialistic Jewish settlements of modern Israel, Nazareth would most likely have been a self-sufficient village that produced most of its own goods. Aside from its rural qualities, other characteristics of Nazareth must be inferred from the Biblical texts. In particular, the question arises as to where and when Jesus developed his sage knowledge of Jewish scripture and tradition, as well as his provocative orators skill. According to John 7:15, the initial reaction to Christs literacy was one of surprise: The Jews were amazed and asked, How did this man get such learning without having studied? The picture seems to be one of a supposedly ignorant villager suddenly displaying a profound knowledge of Jewish learning, revealing himself to be distinct from the other peasants of his day. Although Nazareth appears to have been a Semitic island in an intercultural sea, it seems implausible to assume that Jesus grew up in ethnic isolation. Consider, for example, his easy tolerance of non-Jewish peoples and customs and his eventual conflicts with the conservative element of the Jewish religion. According to many Biblical scholars, these skills could hardly be expected in a man who had been reared in isolation, with limited cross-cultural contact (Reed 104). A plausible explanation, then, must be sought outside of Nazareth. While Nazareth did exist apart from the Sea of Galilees cosmopolitan coastline, the Jewish hamlet was only an hours walk worldly-wise Sepphoris, Antipas capital of Galilee (Reed 105). In his book Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus, Professor Jonathan Reed asserts that it would be almost impossible for Jesus not to have seen Sepphoris (see Figure 1) at some point in his life, out of curiosity, if not necessity (Reed 105). In spite of its prominence in Galilean society, however, Sepphoris is completely absent from the Gospel narratives. That the Bible never mentions Christ teaching in this city has usually been explained as a political snub to Antipas or a necessity for Christs safety, in light of John the Baptists execution (Reed 104). Other scholars contend that Jesus did teach in Sepphoris, but that his teachings there were not well-received and thus dismissed by the Gospel writers (Reed 104). The latter theory seems odd, since the Gospel writers include multiple accounts of audienc es unfriendly to the teachings of Jesus, including his childhood neighbors in Nazareth. What both of these theories fail to recognize, however, is the probability that Jesus had visited Sepphoris in his youth, but chose not to return in adulthood. According to the Gospels, Josephs trade was carpentry, and as sons usually took on the trade of their fathers in first century Palestine, Christ is also called a carpenter in Mark 6:3. Assuming that Christ was born in the first decade of the first century, he would likely have been too young to participate in Antipas ambitious construction of Sepphoris in A.D. 3 or 4. However, should Joseph have been contracted to work in the city, it is likely that he would have taken the young Jesus with him for on the job training. Putting aside Antipas initial building project, Nazareths close proximity to Sepphoris would seem to indicate that Joseph, or perhaps Jesus himself, would have sought work in the bustling Roman city. If Jesus career did bring him to Sepphoris, then a plausible explanation can be offered for the ease with which he learned to cross traditional cultural boundaries. Recent excavations of the site reveal that its inhabitants were mostly from the upper-class, as evidenced by the presence of extravagant ritual baths called miqweh in the houses of the city (Reed 107). The sheer cost of transporting fresh, clean water from the Sea of Galilee into the city of Sepphoris would have made these a luxury (Meyers). While Jesus would denounce elitist attitudes during his ministry, he draws from a wealth of material that may have been engendered by contact perhaps as a hired worker with Sepphoris urban nobility. For example, the parable of the royal banquet in Matthew 22:1 -14 describes an occurrence that Jesus may have witnessed while in Sepphoris, while the rich men of Luke 12 and 16 may have been based on personages met in the city. Assuming that Jesus did have contact with Sepphoris, then it may have been his experiences as a hired laborer that fueled Christs later criticisms of the wealthy. A traditional picture of class warfare begins to emerge when one recognizes that Jesus belonged to a lower-income family. In Luke 12:24, Mary the mother of Jesus makes an offering of a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. This offering of birds was customary of poor families, who could not afford to offer the usual lamb (LaSor 83). While Sepphoris no doubt brought Jesus into contact with the gentiles, evidence suggests that the city was largely Jewish in character, but of a less traditional style (Reed 107). In archaeological digs, ample piles of pig bones have been found in the second and third century strata, but the first century layer of the city includes almost none indicating that the Jews, who did not eat pork, were the dominant citizens of the city during the time of Christ (Reed 107). In spite of the Jewish presence in the city, the culture of Sepphoris would have been of a more urbanized type than that found in Judea. Writing in Jewish War, Josephus reports that Sepphoris took a pro-Roman position in the first-century Palestinian revolt (Chancey). Sepphoris decision to routinely harbor Roman garrisons is described by Josephus as a betrayal of the allies of their tribe and an insurrection against the common religious center of Jerusalem (Chancey). German Scholar Walter Bauer, cited in Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus, argues that the religious life of Sepphoris was distanced from the legalistic religion of the Pharisees and contends that by extension so was Christ in his early years. Clearly, the rift between Christ and the legalism of the Jerusalem authorities that resulted from Christs upbringing offers one plausible explanation for his death. However, while Bauers argument may be sufficient in explaining Jesus later conflicts with the Pharisees, it may overemphasize the role of Sepphoris in shaping the religious life of the young Christ. Because of Jesus economic position, it is unlikely that he would have viewed the aristocracy of Sepphoris of as role models to be emulated. Like the majority of Galileans, Jesus was alienated from both the secular wealthy and the religious elite. If, as the saying goes, individuals are defined by the company they keep, then Jesus distance from the prominent people of his time is proved in his choice of average Galilean fishermen as companions. Socio-Economic Context: On the Shores of Galilee It was shortly after his baptism that Jesus made his way to the shores of the Sea of Galilee itself. A remarkably fertile country, the hills of the Galilean seashore would have been brimming with life as Jesus strolled among them, teaching the people and proclaiming that the kingdom of God is at hand (Mrk 1:15). For the fishermen who worked along Galilees coasts, however, the iridescent majesty of the sea would not have been the primary motive for slogging around its waters on a daily basis. Rather, these men were motivated by the perennial need for economic survival. Although many Galileans owned their own fishing boats and equipment, there is little evidence to suggest that they participated in a free market economy, such readers in the Western world might envision. While Galilean society was not communistic by any stretch of the imagination, its primary economic movers were political and familial structures, with production largely seen as an ends to maintaining the stability of both (Hanson). Generally speaking, the legs that carried Galilean society were peasant fishermen or farmers whose primary economic motive was to feed their families, with family units serving as both producer and consumer (Hason). It must be realized, however, that the Galilean concept of family was much broader than that with which most Americans are familiar, and usually included a complex network of inner and outer relations. In order to maximize production and prevent domestic squabbles semi-formal trade relations were established among kin, creating endeavors of mutual interest (Hanson). Fishing in Hellenistic Galilee usually took one of four forms: casting a line with bronze hooks, dipping a flaxen net into the sea, primitive fish traps, or pronged tridents (Hanson). It is unclear from Mark 1:18-19 what type of net Simon and Andrew were using, since the Greek word used in this passage, dictua, is a generic term for nets (Hanson). Matthew 1:18 clarifies in telling us that Simon and Andrew were working with an amphiblestron, or hand-held casting net (Hanson). In spite of their relative independence, the fishermen of first century Galilee crawled through life at subsistence level, producing only enough to meet their basic needs (Hanson). Roman client kings, such as Herod Antipas, were supportive of the fishing industry only insofar as it gave them the ability to profit by levying severe taxes and tolls on the fishermans product. This constant taxation which allowed Antipas to pay tribute to the reigning Caesar left the average fisherman in Galilean society just slightly above the status of the average laborer. So, it was in keeping with his concern for the marginalized of society that Jesus first followers were drawn from the decks of Galilean fishing boats. Mark 1: 16 records that as Jesus walked by the shores of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon and Andrew, casting a fishing net into the sea. Although John 1:36 records that Andrew was a disciple of John the Baptist and already knew of Jesus coming, the response of the fishermen to Christs invitation to become fishers of men (Mrk 1:17) is profound. Considering that the very survival of these men rode on their ability to bring in a bounty of fish each day, their abrupt decision to forsake their nets and follow him (Mrk 1:18) reveals the unique skill of Jesus in appealing to the average Galilean. His ability to frame his invitation (follow me) in a Galilean context (fishers of men) drove home a provocative point that would have been lost on these brothers had Christ engaged in sophisticated theological argumentation. Because of Christs clever association of his message with the Galilean fishing economy, the fishermen were drawn to Christs larger theme of eternal life. Jesus invitation to the fishermen is consistent with the teaching style he used during his Galilean ministry, which relied on the imagery of the region to convey theological points. In Mark 6, for example, Jesus uses a boys small fish most likely sardines and five loaves of bread to feed a five thousand people. Through this example, Jesus demonstrates the process by which his teachings would reach the world first from through his death (illustrated by the broken bread and fish), then through the Apostles on Pentecost (He gave them [the loaves and fish] to the disciples), and from the Apostles to all the nations of the world (and the disciples gave them [the loaves and fishes] to the crowds). A large fishing net, called a sagene, is mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 13:47 as an illustration of the Kingdom of Gods cross-cultural reach (Hanson). Like a net dragged behind a boat, Jesus explains, the Kingdom of Heaven pulls in a diversity of people some good for consumption and some stale and rotten all which will be sorted out at the end of the age. Where most Jews expected the Messianic kingdom to be exclusively Semitic, Jesus sagene illustration is a bold departure from tradition, especially when one considers that Galilee is home to over thirty different species of fish. James and John, Jesus second set of seafaring apostles, may have been mending such a net in Mark 1:20. Their reaction to Jesus call to ministry was the same as that of Simon and Peter, and it may have been partially inspired by the endorsement that the former pair of fishermen had given to the traveling Messiah. It is likely that some knot of kinship bound the Yonah family of Simon and Peter together with the Zebedee family of James and John, for in Luke 5:10, the Gospel writer records that the sons of Zebedee were partners with Simon. The Greek word usually read as partners koinonoi would more be more accurately translated as cooperative-members, implying that familial trade relations existed between the two fishing interests (Hanson). Based on the fact that both families owned their own boats and fishing equipment, some scholars have concluded that they represent a sort of upper middle class in Galilean society (Hanson). Others argue that this conclusion inappropriately reads free-market ideas into the Galilean economy and infers a degree of economic stratification that probably did not exist in first century Galilee (Reed 165). While the inference of an upper middle class may be a historical hyperbole, Mark 1:20 does indicate that the Zebedee family at least had hired servants. Accordingly, it can be inferred that Galilean fishermen were higher up the economic ladder than those who contributed the raw materials and manual labor that supported the fishing trade. Nonetheless, it is true that the hiring of itinerant peasant workers was a common practice that in no way indicates membership in the upper class (Reed 165), although we may assume that the Zebedee family was capable of maintaining a living. Jesus not only mingled with the fishermen of Galilee, but he also lived with them during his ministry at Capernaum (see Figure 1). Archaeological evidence suggests that Capernaum was near the bottom of Galilees social registry, lacking in niceties such as marble, frescoes, mosaic, and ritual baths (Reed 165). While the affluent left their indelible mark on society by sponsoring public buildings like the theater at Sepphoris, no such projects have been found among the ruins of Capernaum (Reed 165). Thus, Capernaum became the setting for Jesus to work with common or even lowly people, who would become his primary followers throughout much of the Galilean ministry. Capernaum clearly influenced Jesus treatment of the poor, satisfying his drive to reach those of his own social class with his message. In addition, Capernaum would have extended Christs interaction with Galilees non-Jewish population. Although the unassuming city lingered on the edge of Antipas tetrarchy, Capernaum appears to have been part of a regional trade network (Reed 165). Because of this, the city would have witnessed a steady stream of gentile merchants and sojourners passing through on business. This intersection of Jews and Gentiles is exhibited by Matthew 8:5, in which a Roman centurion implores Jesus to heal his dying servant. Much like American peacekeepers in Iraq today, the centurion may have been viewed by Jewish peasants as a necessary, but unwelcome, foreign intruder. Apparently, the Gentiles faith startled Jesus (Matt 8:10), who immediately healed the mans withering servant and declared the centurions faith superior to that of Jewish Israel. During a later trip through Capernaum, Christ would again display his tendency to cross cultural boundaries by calling Mattew, a tax collector, into his retinue (Mark 1:14). In the pristine holiness of dusty Renaissance paintings and chapel windows, we tend to imagine the apostles as