Anger

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 378 of 447 · 20 per page

• From City of Night (1963)

  People dart into doors, cross the street “Bring him with you,” an older man says peremptorily to me and another youngman who has witnessed the fight, and who, minutes earlier, had been with me and the blond boy at Les Petits bar. We hold the blond boy, the blood from his temple creating a growing dark-crimson flower on his white shirt. As quickly as we can move him—past the startled eyes of tourists as they dodge to one side to avoid Contamination—we turn into Royal, where the man who has asked us to follow him has already called a cab. Along the trellised balconied houses, the taxi flees from the afternoon, into the protective custody of the approaching night The youngman holding the blond one, who threatens to pass out at any moment (the older man sits in front, staring straight ahead; the driver is predictably unconcerned), is saying Toughly to me: “That dirty motherin bastard, we gonna come back and git him!”—asking me would we or wouldnt we kill the son of a bitch who had hit our buddy with a stick—although our buddy—the blond boy, whom both of us had met minutes earlier at Les Petits bar (all three of us with the same score), had done nothing but come on to the black-haired-youngman’s girlfriend; and she, sensing the possible conflict (easily brought into play in any hustling bar by the necessity of the hustler to assert his masculinity with a girl—any girl, any woman) and instigating the scene connivingly (by winking at us as the darkhaired youngman embraced her), had told her boyfriend that the blondhaired boy had leaned toward her as if to kiss her. On the street the fight had occurred. Somewhere beyond the Quarter, the taxi stopped before what looks like a boarded-up store, with black-painted windows. The man pays, we enter the building through an unlocked side door. Inside, the large room is dark, like a cell. Pushed against the walls are tables, chairs upturned on them. A couple of booths. Dark, smeared, ugly patches on the wall behind a bar without stools indicate that several panels of mirrors have been removed. Only one grayish-amber panel, smashed in the middle creating a glassy spider web, remained. A light is on in a room beyond the door. From the shadows, other faces begin to appear, slowly, dimly, peering impressionistically out of the darkness. They seemed to be crawling like giant insects from somewhere out of the woodwork. Now I can distinguish the faces clearly: three malehustlers I had seen at The Rocking Times, a bewildered girl, and a young painted queen.

• From H Is for Hawk (2014)

  White’s reworking of Arthurian legend was hugely influential: when you hear Kennedy’s White House described as Camelot, that is White – Jackie Kennedy quoted lines from the musical after her husband’s assassination. When you think of the wizard Merlin wearing a tall, peaked hat embroidered with stars, that is White too. And when I think of the U2 pilot up there reading a book about King Arthur , a book that had been wrenched strangely into a fairytale about American political life, I can’t help but think of a line written by the poet Marianne Moore: The cure for loneliness is solitude . And the solitude of the pilot in the spy-plane, seeing everything, touching nothing, reading The Once and Future King fifty thousand feet above the clouds – that makes my heart break, just a little, because of how lonely that is, and because of some things that have happened to me, and because T. H. White was one of the loneliest men alive. The Goshawk is the book of a young man. It was written before White’s better-known works, and before he was famous. It ‘ would be about the efforts of a second-rate philosopher’, he explained sadly, ‘who lived alone in a wood, being tired of most humans in any case, to train a person who was not human, but a bird’. When I read it again, years after that first childhood encounter , I saw more in it than bad falconry. I understood why people considered it a masterpiece. For White made falconry a metaphysical battle. Like Moby-Dick or The Old Man and the Sea , The Goshawk was a literary encounter between animal and man that reached back to Puritan traditions of spiritual contest: salvation as a stake to be won in a contest against God. That older , wiser me decided that White’s admissions of ignorance were brave rather than stupid. But I was still angry with him. First, because his hawk had suffered terribly as he tried to train it. And second, because his portrayal of falconry as a pitched battle between man and bird had hugely influenced our notions of what goshawks are and falconry is. Frankly, I hated what he had made of them. I didn’t think falconry was a war, and I knew hawks weren’t monsters. That small girl lying crossly on her bed was still cross. That is what I thought as I sat there staring at the open book on my desk, four months after my father died. I read on, and as I did, there was a tiny jolt that was a realisation of why my eyes had spurned the book for weeks. I knew that part of why I was cross was that I felt, for the first time, that my urge to train a hawk was for reasons that weren’t entirely my own. Partly they were his.

• From H Is for Hawk (2014)

  Rage crouched inside me, and anything could provoke it. One weekday morning I laboured into town under a sky the colour of wet cement to meet an Uzbek student I’d worked with on a research trip to Central Asia the previous winter. A quiet, neat man, a nice man. I’d camped with him in frozen deserts, eaten lamb-stuffed quinces at roadside shacks on the Silk Road, stood with him on the banks of the Syr Darya river. He had lately arrived in Cambridge and he wanted to see me. I sat down with him at a café table. I liked him. I knew I should talk to him, but couldn’t remember how. I tried a few words. They sounded wrong. I stuck a watery smile on my face and turned my head towards the window, desperately trying to remember how to have a conversation. And there, behind the plate glass of the bank across the street, a woman in a grey uniform was standing on a chair in her stockinged feet, reaching up to peel a huge vinyl sticker of a singing skylark from the glass. It had been advertising some kind of financial offer. Now the offer was finished, and so was the lark. She picked at its open beak with her fingernails, then started pulling its head from the window. Inch by inch the bird disappeared; first it hung there, decapitated, printed wings spread wide, then each wing was stripped from the glass, hacked at with fingers and a plastic scraper, until the last feather of its tail was gone. She screwed the skylark into a ball, and threw it to the floor. Blind, cold, shaking fury. I felt it rise. I hated that woman. I wanted to burst into the bank, scream at her, pick up the tangled ball that was a skylark and take it home. Smooth it out, save it from harm. Across the table my student friend was looking at me with the same expression of baffled concern that the waiter had worn on the night my father died. That also made me angry. I was angry with the woman for tearing down the skylark and angry with this nice, innocent man who gave me no cause to be angry at all. I mumbled an unsatisfactory apology, told him that ‘things have been hard since my father died’, and ‘it isn’t your fault’ and ‘I’m sorry, and this is awful, but I really have to go’. I walked past the window as I crossed the street. The woman was back on her chair, smoothing a new sticker out against the glass: a giant arrow that pointed at nothing. I could not meet her eye.

• From Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence (2014)

  In 1968 Latin American bishops met in Medellín, Colombia, to support the emerging themes of this new movement, which argued that Jesus was on the side of the poor and oppressed and that Christians must struggle for justice and equality. In Latin America, as in Iran, this kind of theology was deeply threatening to the political and economic elites. Liberation priests were dubbed “communists” and, like Iranian clerics, were imprisoned, tortured, and executed because they made it clear that the economic order imposed on the “Third World” by the colonial West was inherently violent: For centuries, Latin America has been a region of violence. We are talking of the violence that a privileged minority has been using, since the colonial period, to exploit the vast majority of the people. We are talking of the violence of hunger, of helplessness, of underdevelopment ... of illegal but existing slavery, of social, intellectual, and economic discrimination. 82 They insisted that because the world was now so economically interdependent, a North American individual was able to live a comfortable life only because other people, living perhaps in a Brazilian slum, were impoverished; they could purchase goods cheaply because others had been exploited in their production. 83 In the United States too, religion acquired a revolutionary edge and for the first time in the twentieth century opposed the policies of the American government. While presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson were careful to keep religion out of politics, liberal Catholics, Protestants, and Jews campaigned in the name of their faith against the structural and military violence of the United States. Like Iranian Shii Muslims, they took to the streets to protest the Vietnam War and joined Martin Luther King’s civil rights movement against racial discrimination at home. In 1962 the National Council of Churches asked Kennedy to commit the nation to “an all-out effort to abolish [poverty], both at home and abroad.” 84 Khomeini, often thought in the West to be a rabble-rouser, was not advocating violence. The crowds who protested on the streets were unarmed, and their deaths laid bare the ruthless ferocity of the shah’s secular regime. The assassination of Martin Luther King, who had insisted that a nonviolent response to injury was “an absolute necessity for our survival ... the key to the solution of the problems of our world,” 85 also revealed the latent violence of American society. King would have agreed with Khomeini’s demand for global justice.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  He insisted chiefly on the first point; so that Jerome devotes the whole first book of his refutation to this point, while he disposes of all the other heads in the second. In favor of the moral equality of married and single life, he appealed to Gen. ii. 24, where God himself institutes marriage before the fall; to Matt. xix. 5, where Christ sanctions it; to the patriarchs before and after the flood; to Moses and the prophets, Zacharias and Elizabeth, and the apostles, particularly Peter, who lived in wedlock; also to Paul, who himself exhorted to marriage,394 required the bishop or the deacon to be the husband of one wife,395 and advised young widows to marry and bear children.396 He declared the prohibition of marriage and of divinely provided food a Manichaean error. To answer these arguments, Jerome indulges in utterly unwarranted inferences, and speaks of marriage in a tone of contempt, which gave offence even to his friends.397 Augustine was moved by it to present the advantages of the married life in a special work, De bono conjugali, though without yielding the ascetic estimate of celibacy.398 Jovinian’s second point has an apparent affinity with the Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrine of the perseverantia sanctorum. It is not referred by him, however, to the eternal and unchangeable counsel of God, but simply based on 1 Jno. iii. 9, and v. 18, and is connected with his abstract conception of the opposite moral states. He limits the impossibility of relapse to the truly regenerate, who "plena fide in baptismate renati sunt," and makes a distinction between the mere baptism of water and the baptism of the Spirit, which involves also a distinction between the actual and the ideal church. His third point is aimed against the ascetic exaltation of fasting, with reference to Rom. xiv. 20, and 1 Tim. iv. 3. God, he holds, has created all animals for the service of man; Christ attended the marriage feast at Cana as a guest, sat at table with Zaccheus, with publicans and sinners, and was called by the Pharisees a glutton and a wine-bibber; and the apostle says: To the pure all things are pure, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  (2) Under the sons of Constantine, between the years 343 and 350, Julius Firmicus Maternus, an author otherwise unknown to us,121 wrote against heathenism with large knowledge of antiquity, but with fanatical zeal, regarding it, now on the principle of Euhemerus, as a deification of mortal men and natural elements, now as a distortion of the biblical history.122 At the close, quite mistaking the gentle spirit of the New Testament, he urges the sons of Constantine to exterminate heathenism by force, as God commanded the children of Israel to proceed against the Canaanites; and openly counsels them boldly to pillage the temples and to enrich themselves and the church with the stolen goods. This sort of apology fully corresponds with the despotic conduct of Constantius, which induced the reaction of heathenism under Julian. (3) The attack of Julian upon Christianity brought out no reply on the spot,123 but subsequently several refutations, the chief one by Cyril of Alexandria († 444), in ten books "against the impious Julian," still extant and belonging among his most valuable works. About the same time Theodoret wrote an apologetic and polemic work: "The Healing of the Heathen Affections," in twelve treatises, in which he endeavors to refute the errors of the false religion by comparison of the prophecies and miracles of the Bible with the heathen oracles, of the apostles with the heroes and lawgivers of antiquity, of the Christian morality with the immorality of the heathen world. § 12. Augustine’s City of God. Salvianus. (4) Among the Latin apologists we must mention Augustine, Orosius, and Salvianus, of the fifth century. They struck a different path from the Greeks, and devoted themselves chiefly to the objection of the heathens, that the overthrow of idolatry and the ascendency of Christianity were chargeable with the misfortunes and the decline of the Roman empire. This objection had already been touched by Tertullian, but now, since the repeated incursions of the barbarians, and especially the capture and sacking of the city of Rome under the Gothic king Alaric in 410, it recurred with peculiar force. By way of historical refutation the Spanish presbyter Orosius, at the suggestion of Augustine, wrote an outline of universal history in the year 417.

• From Educated (2018)

  In October Dad won a contract to build industrial granaries in Malad City, the dusty farm town on the other side of Buck’s Peak. It was a big job for a small outfit—the crew was just Dad, Shawn, Luke, and Audrey’s husband, Benjamin—but Shawn was a good foreman, and with him in charge Dad had acquired a reputation for fast, reliable work. Shawn wouldn’t let Dad take shortcuts. Half the time I passed the shop, I’d hear the two of them shouting at each other, Dad saying Shawn was wasting time, Shawn screaming that Dad had damned near taken someone’s head off. Shawn worked long days cleaning, cutting and welding the raw materials for the granaries, and once construction began he was usually on-site in Malad. When he and Dad came home, hours after sunset, they were nearly always cussing. Shawn wanted to professionalize the operation, to invest the profits from the Malad job in new equipment; Dad wanted things to stay the same. Shawn said Dad didn’t understand that construction was more competitive than scrapping, and that if they wanted to land real contracts, they needed to spend real money on real equipment—specifically, a new welder and a man lift with a basket. “We can’t keep using a forklift and an old cheese pallet,” Shawn said.

• From Educated (2018)

  as if my father had come to accept that if he were really going to do battle with the Government, he would have to take certain risks. Mother’s being a midwife would subvert the Medical Establishment, but in order to be a midwife she needed a phone. Perhaps the same logic was extended to Luke: Luke would need income to support a family, to buy supplies and prepare for the End of Days, so he needed a birth certificate. The other possibility is that Mother didn’t ask Dad. Perhaps she just decided, on her own, and he accepted her decision. Perhaps even he—charismatic gale of a man that he was—was temporarily swept aside by the force of her. Once she had begun the paperwork for Luke, Mother decided she might as well get birth certificates for all of us. It was harder than she expected. She tore the house apart looking for documents to prove we were her children. She found nothing. In my case, no one was sure when I’d been born. Mother remembered one date, Dad another, and Grandma-down-the-hill, who went to town and swore an affidavit that I was her granddaughter, gave a third date. Mother called the church headquarters in Salt Lake City. A clerk there found a certificate from my christening, when I was a baby, and another from my baptism, which, as with all Mormon children, had occurred when I was eight. Mother requested copies. They arrived in the mail a few days later. “For Pete’s sake!” Mother said when she opened the envelope. Each document gave a different birth date, and neither matched the one Grandma had put on the affidavit. That week Mother was on the phone for hours every day. With the receiver wedged against her shoulder, the cord stretched across the kitchen, she cooked, cleaned, and strained tinctures of goldenseal and blessed thistle, while having the same conversation over and over. “Obviously I should have registered her when she was born, but I didn’t. So here we are.” Voices murmured on the other end of the line. “I’ve already told you—and your subordinate, and your subordinate’s subordinate, and fifty other people this week—she doesn’t have school or medical records. She doesn’t have them! They weren’t lost. I can’t ask for copies. They don’t exist!” “Her birthday? Let’s say the twenty-seventh.” “No, I’m not sure.”

• From Educated (2018)

  I was failing my PhD. If I had explained to my supervisor, Dr. Runciman, why I was unable to work, he would have helped me, would have secured additional funding, petitioned the department for more time. But I didn’t explain, I couldn’t. He had no idea why it had been nearly a year since I’d sent him work, so when we met in his office one overcast July afternoon, he suggested that I quit. “The PhD is exceptionally demanding,” he said. “It’s okay if you can’t do it.” I left his office full of fury at myself. I went to the library and gathered half a dozen books, which I lugged to my room and arranged on my desk. But my mind was made nauseous by rational thought, and by the next morning the books had moved to my bed, where they propped up my laptop while I worked steadily through Buffy the Vampire Slayer. — THAT AUTUMN, TYLER CONFRONTED my father. He talked to Mother first, on the phone. He called me after and related their conversation. He said

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  "But I return to you, Sire. Let not your Majesty be at all moved by those groundless accusations with which our adversaries endeavor to terrify you; as that the sole tendency and design of this new gospel, for so they call it, is to furnish a pretext for seditions, and to gain impunity for all crimes. ’For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace;’ nor is ’the Son of God,’ who came to destroy ’the works of the devil, the minister of sin.’ And it is unjust to charge us with such motives and designs of which we have never given cause for the least suspicion. Is it probable that we are meditating the subversion of kingdoms? We, who were never heard to utter a factious word, whose lives were ever known to be peaceable and honest while we lived under your government, and who, even now in our exile, cease not to pray for all prosperity to attend yourself and your kingdom! Is it probable that we are seeking an unlimited license to commit crimes with impunity, in whose conduct, though many things may be blamed, yet there is nothing worthy of such severe reproach? Nor have we, by divine grace, profited so little in the gospel, but that our life may be to our detractors an example of chastity, liberality, mercy, temperance, patience, modesty, and every other virtue. It is an undeniable fact, that we sincerely fear and worship God, whose name we desire to be sanctified both by our life and by our death; and envy itself is constrained to bear testimony to the innocence and civil integrity of some of us, who have suffered the punishment of death, for that very thing which ought to be accounted their highest praise. But if the gospel be made a pretext for tumults, which has not yet happened in your kingdom; if any persons make the liberty of divine grace an excuse for the licentiousness of their vices, of whom I have known many; there are laws and legal penalties, by which they may be punished according to their deserts: only let not the gospel of God be reproached for the crimes of wicked men. You have now, Sire, the virulent iniquity of our calumniators laid before you in a sufficient number of instances, that you may not receive their accusations with too credulous an ear.

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  the pl. corresp. to SS ,as DN to אני‎ ; v. Wee; Ph. אנחן‎ oI 2 Aram. NON, XY also NI 2 Syr. eins”, gin Nae ink) Gn 13° 29% 37° 42 Nar ל‎ DE sa Jo 277% etc. Like "38, following a ptcp. as its subj. Gn 10% Nu 10” Ju 105 2 K 18”; appended to a vb. for emph. Juo™ 2 K 10% Is 20% pron. 1 pl. we (abbrev. from‏ נחֶנוּ m3,‏ בד TIS ; cf. the frie 3 71/01: NII, just cited ; also ae nini) Gn42" Ex 167* Nu 32 La 3”. (In 28 17” 39M) is ז‎ pl. perf. Qal from 7.) 7 yeN n.{m.] plummet (cf. words in cogn. lang. for lead, tin, etym. dub., perh. foreign; Ar. ו"‎ (v. Fra™) Syr. 13/7, Mand. ,אנכא‎ As. andkeu Lyon קר אל‎ Lag Am Stnd-$1 of, Td. BN) - אכ‎ exc.once on "7 נש‎ Am 77%. א/‎ NDI, i.e..a vertical wall v’. pron.1 sg. v. supr. sub "28.‏ אנכי [JAS] vb. only Hithpo. complain, mur-‏ + mi ir (Mish. ps, Aram. j28, Ar. =I As. [andnu], whence énénu, unninu, sigh Zim” *)—Impf. WIND? La 3% (sq. עַל-‎ in || member); Pe. D232802 "3 Nu 111 (sq. ace.; vid. Di). DIN f[(DIN] vb. compel, constrain (late, oft. Aish. id., Aram. DIS, 1/"(--081 Pr. DIS PS viz., to drink Est 1° (| BAN) (ְכָּרְצון אִיש‎ . TEAS, ואנף‎ vb. (breathe, snort) be angry (Al id., cf. Ar. ail, As. ete. in a) Pf. BIS y 60%, etc.; Lmpf. Ny 2%, etc.;—be angry, of 7"; usually sq. 2‏ יא ץ t ‘ 8%= 2 Ch 6* Is 12% ¥ 85° Ezr 9; abs.‏ cf. also ~ 2. Hithp. id. alw. sq. 3,‏ ;79° 60° עד 4% 1% Dt‏ הַתְאנַּף alw. of %, Pf.‏ & 2K 17.‏ "זז א aS Dt or‏ 1. FN,.n.m."2 nostril, nose, face, an- ger (As. appu, face 1711000 7-77 cf. Hpt KAT? Glos, Ar. = .גנוד‎ 116: nose; Aram.J3/”, PES ₪ ץש‎ 78" +5) estr. Gn 27* -; אפיה‎ Ex 2 9 666. ; du. ז ץק אפים‎ 7 +; YES Gn

• From Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence (2014)

  Our reading of the Hebrew Bible has been influenced by two and a half thousand years of monotheistic teaching. But Josiah, of course, had never heard of the First Commandment—“Thou shalt not have strange gods before my presence”—which the reformers would place at the top of the Decalogue. It pointedly condemned Manasseh’s introduction of the effigies of “strange gods” into the temple where Yahweh’s “presence” ( shechinah ) was enthroned in the Holy of Holies. But pagan icons had been perfectly acceptable there since Solomon’s time. Despite the campaigns of such prophets as Elijah, who had urged the people to worship Yahweh alone, most of the population of the two kingdoms had never doubted the efficacy of such gods as Baal, Anat, or Asherah. The prophet Hosea’s oracles showed how popular the cult of Baal had been in the northern kingdom during the eighth century, and the reformers themselves knew that Israelites “offered sacrifice to Baal, to the sun, the moon, the constellations and the whole array of heaven.” 105 There would be great resistance to monotheism. Thirty years after Josiah’s death, Israelites were still devotees of the Mesopotamian goddess Ishtar, and Yahweh’s temple was once again full of “the idols of the house of Israel.” 106 For many it seemed unnatural and perverse to ignore such a divine resource. The reformers knew that they were asking Judeans to relinquish beloved and familiar sanctities and embark on a lonely, painful severance from the mythical and cultural consciousness of the Middle East. Josiah was completely convinced by the sefer torah and at once inaugurated a violent orgy of destruction, eradicating the cultic paraphernalia introduced by Manasseh, burning the effigies of Baal and Asherah, abolishing the rural shrines, pulling down the house of sacred male prostitutes and the Assyrian horses. In the old territories of the Kingdom of Israel, he was even more ruthless, not only demolishing the ancient temples of Yahweh in Bethel and Samaria but slaughtering the priests of the rural shrines and contaminating their altars. 107 This fanatical aggression was a new and tragic development, which excoriated sacred symbols that had been central to both the temple cult and the piety of individual Israelites. 108 A tradition often develops a violent strain in a symbiotic relationship with an aggressive imperialism; fearing annihilation by an external foe, people attack an “enemy within.” The reformers now regarded the Canaanite cults that Israelites had long enjoyed as “detestable” and “loathsome”; they insisted that any Israelite who participated in them must be hunted down mercilessly. 109 “You must not give way to him, nor listen to him, you must show him no pity,” Moses had commanded; “You must not spare him, and you must not conceal his guilt.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Grosseteste’s predecessor, Hugh of Lincoln, protected the Jews when they were being plundered and massacred in 1190, and Jews showed their respect by attending his funeral.923 No charge was too serious to be laid at the door of the Jews. When the Black Death swept through Europe in 1348, it did not occur to any one to think of the Saracens as the authors of that pestilence. The Jew was guilty. In Southern France and Spain, so the wild rumor ran, he had concocted poisons which were sent out wholesale and used for contaminating fountains. From Barcelona and Seville to the cities in Switzerland and Germany the unfortunate people had to suffer persecution for the alleged crime. In Strassburg, 1349, the entire Hebrew population of two thousand was seized, and as many as did not consent to baptism, were burnt in their own graveyard and their goods confiscated. In Erfurt and other places the entire Jewish population was removed by fire or expulsion. The canonical regulations against usury gave easy excuse for declaring debts to the Jews not binding. Condemned by Tertullian and Cyprian, usury was at first forbidden to laymen as well as clerics, as by the synod of Elvira; but at the council of Nice, 325, the prohibition was restricted to the clergy. Later Jerome, Augustine, and Leo I. again applied the prohibition to all Christians. Gratian received it into the canon law. Few subjects claimed so generally the attention of the mediaeval synods as usury.924 Alexander III., at the Third Lateran, 1179, went so far as to declare usury forbidden by the Old Testament as well as by the New Testament. Clement V. put the capstone on this sort of legislation by declaring, at the council of Vienne, 1311, null and void all state and municipal laws allowing usury and pronouncing it heresy to deny that usury is sin. No distinction was made between rates of interest. All interest was usurious. The wonder is that, with such legislation on the Church’s statute-books, any borrower should have felt bound by a debt to a Jew. Eugenius III. offered all enlisting in the Second Crusade exemption from interest due Jewish creditors. Gregory IX. made the same offer to later Crusaders. The charge was frequently repeated against the Jews that they were guilty of the murder of Christian children for ritualistic purposes, especially at the time of the Passover. This almost incredible crime again and again stirred the Christian population into a frenzy of excitement which issued in some of the direst miseries the Jewish people were called upon to endure.925 In France, Philip Augustus, using as a pretext the alleged crucifixion of a Christian child, in 1182, expelled the Jews from his realm and confiscated their goods. The decree of expulsion was repeated by Louis IX.

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  mW) +1 5' (Ex 21* v. 1. (רע‎ ; Impf. 3 ms. ירע‎ (Ges'*?) Gn2r?+; 3 fs. YIN Dt 28°; 3 mpl. ירעו‎ Ne 2%;---1. be displeasing: **¥2 בע‎ Nur1” 22" (J), Jos 24° (E), 16 *ס4‎ Pr 24'8 )6. } consec.) impf. °2Y3 ירע‎ Gn 211? (EK), 48% (J), ד‎ ₪ 8° 18° 28 117; later, bs וירע‎ Jon 4! or . וירע‎ Ne 2% (intensified by נָּדולָה‎ AY), Th .ב וירע לי‎ 2. be sad: ירע לבב‎ Dt 15° 181°; "J WT Ne 2*. 3. be injurious, evil: וירע ל‎ 106” it went ill with Moses, pers. subj. 2 8 20°; עין‎ MY be grudging, c. ב‎ pers., Dtr5? 28%. | &. be evil, wicked, ethically : ם1) וירע בְּעִינִי י'‎ 38")1(2 0 117 Is 89% DYN PVR 1Chai?. + Niph. suffer hurt: Impf. 3 ms, (רע) ירוע‎ Prir® 13”. Hiph.,, Pf. 3 ms. YJ Ex5*+; 2 ms. הרעות‎ 1K 17”, etc.; Impf. 3 ms. YY Zp 1, א רע‎ 16%; 2ms. YIN 443+, etc.; Inf. abs. YI 1S 12% 1 Char”; estr. YIN Gn 3174 8 t., YI 18 1*+ 46; Pt. YD 189" Prx7*; pl. מְרְעִים‎ ₪ 1*+;--1- do אש‎ injury, hurt: abs. Gn 44° (J), 1811*=65%, Je31* Pr 4* 24°; היטיב.קקס‎ 141% Je 10° Zp 1” (all in proy. phr.= do anything at all, cf. 922); הרע ל‎ Gn 19° 43° Ex 5°35 Nu rr" (J) 20” Jos 24" )15( + 5 t.; 0.800. pers. Nu 16" (J)4+4 6; ¢. 3, 1 Ch 16"=y 105" 6. >) Je 25° 74°; c. WY Gn 31’ (E); 6. על‎ 7 Kir” bring evil wpon ; swear Y1'}),= to one’s hurt, ץש‎ 15* Lv 5% (P); Pt.=subst. yap? baad Durr (shall be) for mischief. 2. do evil, wickedly : abs. Gn19/(J) 1S 12°” +4 6 t.; opp. היטיב‎ Je4™ 137 2 6. ,קוטס כ‎ 1 15 14 16% 2 Kar Jems גז2 הרעה מַַללִיהֶם ו‎ 35 cf. כ ד‎ 2535 Pr. YI evil doer, Is 9% Pr 17‘; pl. Je 20% 23" 25+ ל‎ 5; VY עדת מ' ;317 בית מ" ;14% *ז‎ מ' ]227 ץ‎ DOP 267s ור‎ 7 Lt [Ly ₪0 vb. break (Aram. loan-word =Heb. 7/3) q. v.) ;—Qal Pf. 3 pl. 1 Je 11 Impf. 3 ms. ירע‎ Je 15” Jb 34%, 2 ms. sf. OYA y 2° (but v. infr.); Inf. abs. nya) Is 24% (del. ה‎ as dittogr. and read yo, v. Hithpo‘.); Pt. f. MY (for AY) Pr 25'°:—1. trans. bra yu ברל וגו"‎ Je15” can one break iron, tron out of the north ? cf. OAD YN Jb 34%; Dawa תְּרעֶם‎ bya y 29 (but rd. OVA, v. 1. myn, GSY Hup- Now al.). 2. intrans. break = be broken, of branches Je 11" (in fig.; Gf Or al.; > Hi Gie are in a sad state, VI. (רעע‎ ; nya שן‎ Pr 20 broken tooth רַעַעֶה= ר')‎ 1; Frankenb Niph. 7. mY, cf. Toy, but Niph. not elsewhere; 8 AVI bad).—1v4 Is 8° read YI (G Lo Che al.,

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  vb. boil (NH id.; Ecclus 43°‏ [רתח]ז Hiph. make hot; Aram. M07, wks boil);— Pi.‏ causat. Ez 24° cause to boil, bring‏ רתח Imv.ms.‏ to boiling, 0. ace. rei. Pu. Pf. 3 pl. 3) Jb‏ my bowels have been made to boil without‏ ”30 quiet (fig. of violent emotion). Hiph. Jmpf.‏ 958 רתת 3 ms, MON WDE MNT Tb 41” he (the crocod.) maketh the depth boil like the pot. 1 [רתח]‎ n.[m.] boiling; —pl. sf. 7M Ez 24°, as ace. cogn. cause its boilings to boil, make it boil vigorously; but rd. 71] Hi-Sm Co Da (poss.) and all mod. (cf. v**; || .(עצמים‎ ל vb. bind, attach (cf. Ar.‏ [|רתם]ז thread bound to finger as reminder) ;— Qal‏ DAN Mi 5.‏ 723197 לְרְבָש Imp. ms,‏ Tom n.m.1*%° 9 kind of broom-shrub, broom-plant, retem (N Hid.; Ar. « 1 (on form Lag®\™); XY NN, all= BH);—abs. 198 ר'‎ 1K 19% יצ ר' אחת‎ Kt אֶחָד)‎ Qr); pl. שרֶש רְתָמִים‎ ond Jb 30% (on text v. Bu Che™™); ּחלִי רְתָמִים‎ ש‎ I 20% Rob? 1. 84, 203, 205, 500 Low No. 313 Post 0 DB, ‘ Juniper ” Che .סח‎ Bib. עטק !הגוי‎ lara n.pr.loc. station in wilderness,‏ ז Nu3 7 00000 GL 0‏ vb. bind (Ar. 555 close wp and‏ [רתקןז1 repair, sew up; Talm. 820 fenced en-‏ PHI Nag” her‏ בוּקִים clostre); —Pu. Pf. 3 pl.‏ great ones were bound with fetters. Niph.‏ Kt), from‏ ירחק) Impf. 3 ms. PN Ec 12" Qr‏ context = be snapped, broken ; read prob. PN3*‏ (Pfannkuche Thes and mod.).‏ tT [רתקה]‎ n.[f.] chain (?);—pl. estr. IPM D2 Is 40, T רתוק‎ n.[m.] chain (on form Lag ®**);— abs./1 MWY Ez "ל‎ 1.6. for captives, but very dub.; Co וּבְקיק‎ MY, Krae =ב') עשי הַבַּתוק‎ As. | butdku, obstruction); hence perh. also pl. estr. 31 רתוקות‎ + K 6” Qr(Kt (רתיקות‎ , chains of gold before the 127 in temple. MIP, רתיקות‎ + foregoing. (vof foll.; NH 707, Aram. nm,‏ רתתת .(רטט all tremble; cf.‏ ,3 Tam n.[m.] trembling (on form Lag ו את‎ Ba $7»); ר'-‎ Ho 131 (si vera 1.) when Ephr. spoke trembling (AV Che al.); Ew al. spoke terror ; Hi Ke RV spoke, there was trembling ; text dub. (v. Now). UW Sin, 2186 letter (with ,ש‎ q.v.). (Vv of foll.; vb. unknown; cf. NH‏ שאר all Zeaven).‏ , כִיאוּרָא ND; JAram.‏ שָאוּר Ex 13°‏ ש' n.m.**" jeaven ;—abs.‏ שארז (J), Dt 164(D), Ex r2™ Ly 2" (all P).‏ שיב .+ IW‏ .נשא .+ שאת yaw (Vv of foll.; tnterweave; NH 720, der. spec., N22Y hatr-net, etc.; Ar. SS insert, interweave; Syr. yAco rush in, adhere, embrace, be mixed with, כם כב‎ velum reticulatum ; cf. As. 3000720, headdress, D1"“”*). n.{m.] network of boughs ;—cstr.‏ שובך1 S 18%‏ 2 ש' הָאֶלָה

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  off or ends abruptly RS™"; Sab. קצע‎ appar. cut off, or the like, Sab Denkm”). n.m.***?! place of corner-struc-‏ מִקְצע ture, (inner) corner-buttress (as (place of)‏ _eutting off of an inner angle if rightly expl.;‏ Ne 3+;‏ -צוע , +35 Ne‏ כ' y. RS'*7"*) ;_abs.‏ Ez 467)7!; ; pl. abs. nyspi Ex 26% 36”,‏ -צע estr.‏ Ex 26”‏ מִקְצְעַת v1, also‏ מִקָצועִי ,”46 Ez‏ -עות estr.‏ Thes Buhl" al. 5‏ קצע Di (not Pu. Pt. fr.‏ "36 מִקְצעיתָיו so SS Baen; sf.‏ , מִקְצעת pit rd. prob.‏ Ez 41”;—corner-post of altar Ez 41”, tabern.‏ (inner) buttress-place of court,‏ ;59 0 3 677% 2 אה where the small corner-courts were, Ez 467%‏ of inner (rock- 1( buttress at NE. corner of‏ 21-22 nearly=n.pr., Ne 3°,‏ ,הפ" all of Jerus.,‏ also (disting. fr. 733) vy 2Ch 26°,‏ (Ew‏ מִהֶקְצַָעוּת .% vb.denom. Hoph.‏ קצע nee Ol Ges!) Ez 46” cornered? set in‏ corners ? del. with M (cf. 01( 6 GY Hi Ko"‏ Y¥PN.‏ .ץצ 36% *26 Co Berthol Toy Krae.—Ex‏ ‘aL. קצף‎ vb. be wroth (NH id., Hiph. make wrathful (rare); Syr. כ‎ ₪ be wrathful, also be anwious, fearful) ; —Qal Pf 3 ms. ’p Gn 41°+, 640; Impf. 3 ms. 98? Lv 10°+, , 660.( Inf. 69. קצף‎ Is 54°; 21. קצף‎ Ze 1°;—be wroth: 1. of God; abs. Dt 1* Is לופו‎ 644° Zc ד‎ 6 by against, Ly‘10° Nu 16”(P), Dt 9” Is 47° הנ יו‎ 5 20 115 Ke 5°; ₪ DN Jos 22 (P). 0 תהתד‎ ; abs. Hst ?וז‎ 27! 2 Ks": 6 על‎ Gn 40° = (E), Ex 16° Lv 10* Nu 31"(P), Je 37” 1S 294 a. eae Pf. 2 ms. הַקְצְפְתָּ‎ ee Inf. 5% הקציף'‎ % git. Pt. pl. מקצפם‎ 0% provoke to wrath, 6. ace. Dt ל‎ 20% (acc. om.) 106”, ee we 0 és a rage; pressed people. 893 קץ TI. ALP n.m.’**” wrath ;—abs,’/p Nur®+;‏ WP Jos 22%; cstr. WP Je50%+4; sf. “BYP‏ BYP Je 10%; —‏ ,"102 קצפך ,38° Is 60"; JEYP‏ of God: abs, Nu17"(P), Dt 29” Is 60"‏ .1 Je ro” 21° 32%". co W387 10271 Ze 7; ea‏ (P),"2 K 3%‏ 22% ”9 708 18° "ד against. Nu‏ ו I Ch 275% 6 2 298 apse Is34? Zc‏ ASW Ts 5% 2. of man (late), Est 1"‏ ק' Ec 5**.—Ho ro’ .קצ .11 .ץצ‎ isi קצף‎ (of foll.; Ar. 3.25 break, snap off). fee n.f.a snapping or splintering (on abstr. formation v. Ba *® %); —Jo1’ (of fig-tree ; || § 1D), yu. ב קצף‎ .[m.] prob. splinter ;—only ‘P2 pyo-a-by Ho 10’ (sim. of helpless king).

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  idols Dt 7°”, Asherim 12°, chariots Jos 11°? 2 K 23}, house Ju 12! 14”, tower 9”, city-gates Ne 1° 2°" city Jos 6% Ju 18” cf. Is 174; also 2 אָש‎ MY Am 14704; wa Wye nb +Ju 1° 20% cf. 2 K 82; אֶתהָעִיר בָּאָש‎ msn Jos 8 Jexr7%4, cf. Jug” 2 8 14% (of field, cf. Ex 22° supr.) 2. of supernatural fire, attending theophany Ex 3? 19'* (both JE) Dt ו‎ specif. (הָ)אָש‎ TY Ex ne שי‎ 14” (all JE) Neg?” 61. Dt 1® (v. מרְאַהאש‎ Nu 9” P); of destructive fire from’ ד גוא‎ (J) 26° (P) Ly 10?(P); cf. א' אבָלֶת‎ in sim. of Yahweh’s glory Ex 24% (E) Dt 4* 9°; v. also 1 K 18" 2 K 1-2-2214 J}, 11 (perh. lightning intended), cf. further of lightning Ex 9*** (JE) ש‎ 18" 148% etc. 3. fire for cooking, roast- ing, parching, etc. אש‎ DY roasted at a fire Ex 1% (P) 61. Liv 2“ 2Ch35* Is 44° of tinder for lighting fire Gn 22°7(E); of fire for melting (gold for the idolatrous calf) Ex 327%; for re- fining Je 6%, where rd. with Qr N75) DA VND; 01. Mal 3? (sim. of purifying work of messenger of cov't). 4. esp. of altar-fire Ly 177 675° +; in offering incense Ly 10%, also 71 US strange jire, i.e. an incense not commanded, offered presumptuously ro’ Nu 3* 26"; fire from "' consuming sacrifice (cf. 2) Ly 9% 2 Ch 7"; of fire in child-sacrifice (usually (ל)‎ W83 {2 הַעָבִיר‎ ( 2 K 16% 21* ef. 17” 23” 2 Ch 33% also ‘Na שרף‎ 2K 17%, ’82 W22Ch28*. | 5. fig. of Yahweh's anger ¥ 89” (sim.) cf. Na 1° La 2* אַשְַעָבְרְתִי‎ Ez 21* 22% 38%, “NNIP-WS Ez 36°; v. also Is 66% 79° 89” etc.; of word of Je 23”; fig. of outbursting emotion w 39‘; of flagrant wickedness Is 9”, etc. 6. in various com- binations, US 725 Gn 15" (J) ₪ torch. of fire (cf. Di); לבתדאש‎ Ex 3? flame of fire, להב אש‎ Jo 2°, UN sped (in sim.) Dn "סז‎ ef. Ze 12°, להבות‎ WS ץ‎ 297 WN לְהְבִי‎ Ts 66* cf. MAND ץ א'‎ 105°, nano ‘S723 Ts 4° cf. Ho 7°; WR DI spark of his fire Tb 18° 66. כִּידודִי אָש‎ 414; VN WA yar” - oven of fire, US WD Ze 12°; אש‎ WS light of fire אש לְהָט ;"78 ץ‎ flaming fire + 1044; WS [WD Is 5** tongue of fire, לי אש‎ Ez 1 coals of fire, so 10”, cf. WN YAY Ct 8°; on WS 228 Ez 28" .זי‎ J28; NI אֶש‎ Dt 33°, lit. fire of a law, or fire was 6 law, but NI law is Pers. & late; rd. perh. [לפ]רת‎ WS cf. Ex 20" or NI[P*] WS ef. Is 65°. i.e. from‏ (מ)אשתם n.f. id. Je 6" Kt‏ [אשַה]1 their fire, but Qr DA ND, v. sub BN.‏

• From Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance (1995)

  I snorted. “Yeah. Right.” A part of me wanted to punch him right there. We started down the road toward town, and in the silence, my mind began to rework Ray’s words that day with Kurt, all the discussions we had had before that, the events of that night. And by the time I had dropped my friends off, I had begun to see a new map of the world, one that was frightening in its simplicity, suffocating in its implications. We were always playing on the white man’s court, Ray had told me, by the white man’s rules. If the principal, or the coach, or a teacher, or Kurt, wanted to spit in your face, he could, because he had power and you didn’t. If he decided not to, if he treated you like a man or came to your defense, it was because he knew that the words you spoke, the clothes you wore, the books you read, your ambitions and desires, were already his. Whatever he decided to do, it was his decision to make, not yours, and because of that fundamental power he held over you, because it preceded and would outlast his individual motives and inclinations, any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning. In fact, you couldn’t even be sure that everything you had assumed to be an expression of your black, unfettered self—the humor, the song, the behind-the-back pass—had been freely chosen by you. At best, these things were a refuge; at worst, a trap. Following this maddening logic, the only thing you could choose as your own was withdrawal into a smaller and smaller coil of rage, until being black meant only the knowledge of your own powerlessness, of your own defeat. And the final irony: Should you refuse this defeat and lash out at your captors, they would have a name for that, too, a name that could cage you just as good. Paranoid. Militant. Violent. Nigger.

• From The Four Vision Quests of Jesus (2015)

  The Spanish were all killed or chased away. So complete was the rout that they did not return for twenty years. In the meantime, the Hopi turned on the greatest symbol for their rage and resistance. They systematically dismembered the Christian churches stone by stone. They left no trace of what they saw as a threat to all life, a cult of death. This incredible experience for the Hopi people offers us a startling and sobering vision of the real power of spiritual transfiguration. The metamorphosis of a community of farmers, a society as committed to nonviolence as the Amish, into a lightning strike of violent retribution, illustrates the forces that can overwhelm our control if we do not treat them with great care and respect. Under the pressure of dehumanization, the Hopi reacted. They transformed themselves. They turned inside out spiritually and became the antithesis of their own ideal. In a galvanizing moment, their religious vision went from one extreme to another, mutated by the chemistry of the human soul, which can endure heroically for the sake of a belief, but also strike out viciously for exactly the same reason. As strange as it may seem, this undervalued part of Native American history has a great deal to tell us about the Christian gospel. At first glance, it would seem to be a total rejection of Christianity, a validation of all the horror stories of European colonialism and Christian imperialism. It would be easy to make the Hopi into the poster children for a campaign against Christian missionaries. However, if we go beneath the layers of racism and oppression to the spiritual center of the story, we begin to see a different vision: a vision of God and humanity that transcends the narrative of Spanish greed and Native courage. In fact, we come to a place we can only describe as a transfiguration. In Matthew 17: 1–8 we are told a strange story, the second vision quest of Jesus. Like the first vision quest, this one has all of the classic elements of a traditional Native American quest. Jesus has prepared himself; his lament is so deep that he has predicted his own death. He goes up to a high place, accompanied by his spiritual supporters, his three disciples, Peter, James, and John. He stands alone before God. A vision occurs, but this time one so powerful that his friends actually see it. The vision includes a voice, one that is audible to the disciples of Jesus. The second vision quest of Jesus is a defining experience. But not only for Peter, James, and John. I believe it is akin to the spiritual experience of the Hopi people as well. It is a vision and a voice the Hopi people believe they also saw and heard long ago. It was a moment of their transfiguration too. What made the Hopi cling so tenaciously to their religion?

• From Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence (2014)

  14 Not all Pharisees assumed this role, however. Most concentrated on the stringent observance of the Torah and the development of what would become rabbinic exegesis, and did not ally themselves too closely with the nobility. Had they done so, they would not have retained their popularity with the people. Indeed, so great was the esteem in which they were held that any Jew who hoped for a political career had to study civil law with the Pharisees. Josephus, the first-century-CE Jewish historian, for example, probably became a disciple of the Pharisees to acquire the legal education that qualified him for public life, although he may never have become a full member of the sect. 15 Once colonized, a people often depends heavily on their religious practices, over which they still have some control and which recall a time when they had the dignity of freedom. In the Jewish case, hostility toward their rulers tended to reach new heights during the important temple festivals, which spoke explosively to the Jews’ political subjugation: Passover commemorated Israel’s liberation from Egypt’s imperial control; Pentecost celebrated the revelation of the Torah, a divine law that superseded all imperial edicts; and the harvest festival of Weeks was a reminder that the land and its produce belonged to Yahweh and not the Romans. This simmering discontent erupted in 4 BCE, when Herod was on his deathbed. He had recently installed in the temple a large golden eagle, symbol of imperial Rome, and Judas and Matthias, two of the most respected Torah teachers, denounced it as an offensive challenge to Yahweh’s kingship. 16 In a well-planned protest, forty of their students climbed onto the temple roof, hacked the eagle to pieces, and then courageously awaited the attack of Herod’s soldiers. 17 Galvanized by fury, Herod rose from his bed and sentenced the students and their teachers to death, before dying in agony himself two days later. 18 It is important to note that most of the protests against imperial rule in Roman Palestine were nonviolent; far from being fanatically driven to suicidal aggression by their faith, as Josephus would later suggest, Jews conducted principled demonstrations that resorted to armed force only under extreme pressure. When angry crowds protested against the cruel death of their beloved teachers, Archelaus, Herod’s eldest son, asked them what he could do for them. The response reveals that their hostility to Rome was not solely inspired by religious intransigence: “Some clamoured for a lightening of direct taxation, some for the abolition of purchase-tax, others for the release of prisoners.” 19 Even though Jerusalem still rang with lamentation, there was no violence against the authorities until Archelaus panicked and sent troops into the temple. Even then the crowds merely pelted them with stones before returning to their devotions.