*2 Samuel 9:4 MSG*
"Where is he?" "He's living at the home of Makir son of Ammiel in Lo Debar."
*2 Samuel 9:5 MSG*
King David didn't lose a minute. He sent and got him
๐ฐWORD4TODAY๐ฐ
Part 2
It's your day๐๐ผ
It's your week.๐๐ผ๐๐ผ
It's your month.๐๐ผ๐๐ผ๐๐ผ
๐๐ผ
*On a day like this, it was Mephistopheles day,
Reading thru 2Sam 9:1-5 KJV
And David said, Is there yet any that is left of d house of Saul, that I may shew him kindness for Jonathan's sake?
๐๐ผ
*2 Samuel 9:4 MSG*
"Where is he?" "He's living at the home of Makir son of Ammiel in Lo Debar."
*2 Samuel 9:5 MSG*
King David didn't lose a minute. He sent and got him
๐๐ผ
Lodebah, where Mephibosheth was, was a place of no pasture. ( *You recall I mentioned yesterday that, when it's your appointed day, your location isn't a barrier* .)
๐๐ผ
๐๐ผIn lodebah, Everyone had a sad story to tell.
๐๐ผ
He was forgotten by his nation and worst still, by his family.
๐๐ผ
*He had lost all.*
Down in Lodebar, Mephibosheth lost his rank, lost his prestige, lost his respectability, lost his reputation, lost his superiority,
More from Pastor 't.O.s.I.n. OLUNUGA
More from Messagethreadreaderapp unroll
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
