Miscellaneous desk
< January 15	<< Dec | January | Feb >>	January 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 16

What is Nu Austerity? 59.167.252.197

Aside from being misspelled, this Googley searchey seems to indicate that it's a company of some sort. As with most other companies having flashy names, they seem to produce mainly buzzwords and cliches. (Okay, I didn't look that far into it, but I got turned off before I could get much more involved.) V-Man737 02:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be a name invented by a marketing company called thefuturelaboratory for a supposed trend they want us to seek their advice about how to exploit. --mglg_(talk) 04:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which literature/historical/fictional characters are similar/can be compared to Jesus? For example: Simon in "Lord of the Flies" by William Golding. Jamesino 02:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Loads of 'em. Perhaps one of the more famous examples is Valentine Michael Smith in Stranger in a Strange Land. Grutness...wha? 02:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aslan, Donnie Darko, Simba, and Neo are the first to come to my mind. (edit: I neglected to mention Spock and Brett Favre(see thread on him above) - I am so ashamed.)V-Man737 02:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gandalf. He comes back from the dead, or so the other characters thought, he goes from being Gandolf the Grey to Gandalf the White, white being a color for purity. He performed what may be viewed as miracles. He could communicate with animals which may be looked upon as a trait of a Christ figure. Dismas|^(talk) 03:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does he really communicate with animals, minus the Great Eagles? I thought that was mostly Radagast. But aside from that, he has been compared to Jesus. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I always thought his relationship with Shadowfax at the least bordered on direct communication. Dismas|^(talk) 05:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prometheus as well. Check out Christ figure for more. Wolfgangus 03:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Budd (amazing--he's not in Christ figure, at least not yet). Casey in Grapes of Wrath. There's lots... it's fun thinking of these. Antandrus (talk) 03:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Santiago in The Old Man and the Sea. Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 04:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The man in Whistle Down The Wind (a great film, btw) is mistaken for Jesus by a group of children. And then of course there's Brian... --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghandi? | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 12:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gandhi! ^_^ V-Man737 13:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Long John Willoughby in Meet John Doe. —Chowbok ☠ 15:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brett Favre? <g,d&r> JIP | Talk 17:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tommy

Atlant 17:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dill in scar night.

Superman - he died, attracted a cult and then returned from the dead. --Larry laptop 20:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with JIP Rya Min 21:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please shed some light on the life of Izola Ware Curry, the woman who attempted to kill Martin Luther King, Jr at a New York City book signing and photo op event in 1958. She was whisked away to a mental institution (where she may still be), and the public was told she was just paranoid-schizophrenic. My husband worked for MLK Jr in the early 1960's, and the word then was that MLK Jr knew Mrs. Curry back in Georgia and may have had some responsibility for her taking leave of her senses. Was she ever able to get back to a normal life? Or were they able to make their diagnosis permanent? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Livylee (talk • contribs) 03:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

There doesn't seem to be much in the way of activity beyond her institutionalization. It would have been big news to hear that a previously would-be assassin of Dr. King had been released; this Google search doesn't shed much light beyond 1958 (Although this website should be useful for entertainment purposes). On a sidenote, an article on Izola Ware Curry would be a great addition to Wikipedia, especially in light of the holiday. V-Man737 03:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone help me to find decent quality circumaural headphones for under ninety dollars with a good range (at least 20 hz to 20.5 Khz) and even frequency response (low bias toward or away from any frequency range), or at least reasonably so for the price? And not wireless? And don't say Sennheiser HD 497; they're apparently discontinued. Thanks. Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 04:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sony has never let me down; those are 99 bucks, though... *still searching* these cost $35.49, making me wonder what's wrong with them (site lists full details); this Google search provided those links. For the sake of optimism, this might interest you. V-Man737 05:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tryin'...the second Sony ones were wireless (forgot to specify that in the original query). Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 21:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The daughter of the first wife is the stepdaughter of the second wife. What is the relationship of the daughter of the second wife to the first wife. BD LongBdlong 09:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be referred to as "daughter's step-sister" by the first wife, or "step-sister's mother" by the 2nd wife's daughter. V-Man737 09:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If so, is a pejorative term applicable?

lots of issues | leave me a message 12:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Bible doesn't say if Mary and Joseph were married at the time Jesus was born, but certainly they were not married when he was conceived. Mary was a virgin. And, for the same reason, a pejorative term is not applicable. BenC7 12:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mary and Joseph were Jewish. According to Jewish law, a marriage is not complete until consummated, so if you believe she was a virgin her whole life, she never married. I suppose you could argue that she therefore married God, as the reverse also applies in Jewish law (ie sexual intercourse is a method of marriage, willy nilly) but I believe that only applies to sex between Jews... and Judaism certainly doesn't regard God as Jewish. --Dweller 12:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(in general, you really shouldn't apply pejorative terms to religious figureheads - it's rather tactless.) V-Man737 12:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also to my knowledge the marriage was the public taking home, which Joseph did before the pregancy was apparent to the public, in order to avoid the implications for Mary. Agathoclea 12:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some people have claimed that Mary wasn't a virgin at the time, just that she hadn't had sex with Joseph. 惑乱 分からん 13:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph and Mary were married according to Jewish law, thought the marriage had not yet been consummated. Still they were married.

Agathoclea is completely right in what he said.

Wakuran, "some people have claimed" is not enough for such claims. You are simply stating the most sensible alternative to the Virgin Birth.

God certainly is not Jewish but that whole issue is irrelevant because God has not, does not, will not, cannot have sex with a human being.

Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 13:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah... I guess I am... 惑乱 分からん 15:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Str1977, even if they had a wedding ceremony, they were not married. They're not the same thing in Jewish law. Nor, it would seem, in some versions of Church law... I recall that Henry VIII used this argument in his efforts to have an inconvenient marriage annulled.

I'd be interested to learn whether conventional Christian teaching has it that Mary and Joseph ever consummated their relationship. --Dweller 16:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dweller, your take is not accurate. They were married even if they did not consummate. Of course, this could be a ground for an anullment (to use canon law language) but that only applies if anyone wants to annul it.

Tradititional Christian teaching held that Mary was ever Virgin and they did not consummate their marriage. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 00:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mary and Joseph weren't Christians. They were Jews. As such, a wedding ceremony is only part of the Jewish marriage process, which in their day would have comprised separate erussin and nissuin ceremonies and intercourse. Marriage is incomplete until consummated. Just to enlighten you as to how different this is from conventional understanding of wedding ceremonies, the erussin (betrothal) would often take place a year before the nissuin (wedding), but if a couple decided not to proceed with the nissuin, they would need to divorce. --Dweller 09:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first chapter of Matthew deals with this question quite thoroughly, especially the first verse, which establishes that Jesus was descended (via Joseph) from Abraham.--Shantavira 16:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew gives a legal descent but also says that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, who - according to Matthew - conceived by the Holy Spirit. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 00:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may be of significance to note that all four Gospels make reference to Jesus' mother and brothers trying to talk with him while he is surrounded by a crowd (implying that Mary did, indeed, go on to have more children, and thus must have consummated the marriage with Joseph). V-Man737 09:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brothers was used as a figure of speach; it means his friends/followers. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 11:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I always figured Jesus used the situation to make it a figure of speech by hyperbole: "Hey, JC, your mom and brothers wanna talk to you." "My mom and brothers? Look, see these people following me? They're my mom and brothers!" V-Man737 11:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Tiberius Iulius Abdes Pantera. See also Desposyni. User:Zoe|(talk) 16:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I remembered hearing (in a human geography lecture, I think) about a sequence of stages that someone came up with which all fields of study were supposed to go through.

It went something like (a completely mangled version):

1. Description: early work in a field just describes observations (what?)
2. Categorization: later work groups observations
3. Theorization: finally, (why? / how?)

My question is, who came up with it and what did it actually look like (I think it's fairly well-known).

Thanks, --Halidecyphon 14:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MARRIAGE OF JOSEPH AND THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY There is the example in the Old Testament which shows the marriage customs of the Jews, (duplicated with Joseph and Marry), in the story of Abraham, (the Father), his good and faithful unnamed servant (the Holy Spirit), and Isaac, (the son) who received the bride (the church), Rebekah. The Father, (Abraham -- not the son, Isaac), sent the servant to get a bride for the son. The servant chose the bride, (Rebekah). She was not asked if she WILLED to be the bride of the son. He went to the father of Rebekah and asked for her for Isaac, the son. The servant took with him a great price. When agreement was made between her father and the servant the price was paid --- she was married. The Good News, (Gospel), was then delivered to her that she had a husband and he was described. She was thrilled. Fulfillment for a woman was to be married and a rich one was even better. The custom was then to leave home and visit the home of one or more relatives and tell them the Good News, (the Gospel), that she was married and had a wonderful husband who paid a great price (crucifixion) for her. In Rebekah's case she was asked if she wanted to forgo the visits and go directly to her husband, Isaac, which she did.

Advance now to the marriage of Joseph and the Blessed Virgin Mary: She was his espoused wife. She was fully wife. The only part of the marriage that was pending was the consummation. When Joseph heard through gossip that Mary was pregnant, he thought he would put her away (divorce her) quietly. If they were not fully married, he would have had no authority to put her away. Until the woman is married, she is still under the authority of her father. There is no mention of a ceremony anytime before, or after she conceived or after the birth of Christ. They were poor and probably could not afford that extra. But they were already married for in the New Testament references to Joseph he is called, "her husband." The Holy Spirit tells Joseph to "fear not to take unto thee Mary, thy wife."

If the Blessed Virgin Mary had not been legally married, then according to Jewish Law Jesus would not have qualified to be a priest. For a conception outside marriage would have meant the Mosaic Law was broken. Jesus was sinless, spotless, and never broke the Law. He fulfilled all righteousness according to the Law.

Following typical Jewish custom, Mary went immediately after the marriage to visit Elizabeth and give her the Good News— more than that she had a husband but about the conception of Jesus. The paver-of-the-way, John the Baptist, proclaimed it to Elizabeth by leaping in her womb before Mary got the chance. Mary stayed three months and left as Elizabeth was about to deliver. For to touch blood was contamination and associated with uncleanness.

When Joseph and Mary arrived at Bethlehem and the Inn keeper saw she was about ready to delivery there was no room for them. If she gave birth in his inn, that room would have been considered unclean for 30 days and would have deprived him of revenue.

Help me out! 206.176.119.180 16:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click on the Random article link to read a random Wikipedia article. Or if you want something more active, take a look at the list of tasks atWikipedia:Community Portal. If you are new to Wikpedia, you can learn more about how it works by starting at Wikipedia:Introduction. Gandalf61 16:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's no good anymore. Now 1 in 5 articles you get will be a stupid, boring stub about some municipality or county. I wish there was a "random article" from inside a category — Kieff 22:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I wish that too, buddy. --Taraborn 19:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Wikitravel[1]. Vranak

Get StumbleUpon. Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 21:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the largest number of tennis balls that can be stacked in a pyramid on a tennis racket? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.38.127.235 (talk) 17:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Wouldn't that largely depend on the size of the racket? Oversized ones can be about twice as big as old, wooden ones used in the past. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

one, the rest would fall off :]Hidden secret 7 19:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can make a big one (the largest I know of); my mid-size (100 square in.) raquet can hold 35 balls. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 11:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would rackets be square or hexagonal, the stacking would be improved. -- DLL ^{.. T} 19:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why anybody supports animal rights. Could somebody provide a list of the main reasons supporters use? Thanks.--216.164.249.7 18:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

15:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
The following is an archived answer to the question above. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007_January_16&oldid=1051927619"