Since Hong Kong was handed back over to China in 1997 after 156 years as a British colony, the cultural differences, powerful government of the Chinese Communist party, and various other political and economic factors have caused many complications between regions in the last 26 years. Another key impact and aspect to these conflicts is the role of language and its effect on cultural identity and social opportunities. The linguistic impact of these conflicts have become very prevalent in education policies, employment opportunities, and representing and preserving identity in Hong Kong. Through delving deeper into these factors, we can further understand the unique circumstances of the conflicts and tension between Hong Kong and China and understand the ongoing struggle of those who feel they are losing their autonomy.
Language policies play a large role in shaping the culture and way of life of any region, specifically in Hong Kong, it has become an evident problem over recent years in residents fighting to protect their culture and mother tongue language, Cantonese. Since the handover in 1997, the mainland China government has increasingly influenced and promoted Mandarin; the official language in the mainland, onto Hong Kong in an attempt to integrate both regions and share the same language, essentially leading to the departure of Cantonese. Policies that have been made regardless of if they are in favor of preserving Cantonese or not, bring many challenges due to the complicated political, economic, and educational conditions.
Hong Kong has had various policies instituted in order to maintain Cantonese such as the Medium of Instruction (MoI) policy and having education centered around a biliterate and trilingual education system. The MoI policy ultimately allows schools in Hong Kong to choose from either Cantonese or English to teach in, however it is primarily Cantonese that is chosen and highly recommended by the Hong Kong government. Although this policy allows the mother tongue language in Hong Kong to thrive in the education system, many students may be set back or face struggles with a deficiency of English, a crucial international language in the new globalized economy (Kan & Adamson, 2010). The biliterate and trilingual system in Hong Kong which encompasses written proficiency in Cantonese and English, and spoken proficiency in Cantonese, Mandarin, and English also faces similar criticisms as some may argue the emphasis on English literacy proficiency comes at the expense of Chinese culture and heritage. Along with the increased promotion of Mandarin use in recent years by the Chinese government, this system continues to face challenges while trying to navigate Hong Kong’s unique linguistic and cultural context.
Continued policy changing and further intervention from the Chinese government has also contributed to the linguistic challenges and escalating tensions between Hong Kong and China. The introduction of the National Security Law in 2020 and promotion of the Mandarin language through the National Common Language Law in China have escalated the concern for the prosperity and preservation of Cantonese. The National Security Law caused a wave of the largest series of demonstrations in the history of Hong Kong because of a fear of lack of rights and freedom, along with loss of linguistic heritage due to promotion of Chinese national identity. As Lee & Chan (2022) states, although Hong Kong has never been a full democracy, it has always been a desired goal for the region, however due to the outcome of the implementation of the National Security Law, democratic backsliding has heavily accelerated and autonomy in the region has therefore been lessening. This lack of freedom for citizens in Hong Kong has brought about more emphasis for protecting Cantonese with the national language laws of China becoming more evident in the rise of Mandarin in Hong Kong.
Cultural erosion in Hong Kong is made apparent by the growing rise of Mandarin in the region from efforts by the Chinese government and ultimately causing a large decline of Cantonese significance within employment. Li (2022) finding increasingly positive effects of Mandarin proficiency for finding a job, along with receiving higher earnings in Hong Kong shows the decreasing use and importance of Cantonese, even where approximately 97% of the population are Cantonese speakers. The cultural and political instability within Hong Kong has also caused the tourism sector to take a large hit, leaving many people struggling or without jobs. Additionally, concerns with the autonomy of Hong Kong have negatively affected international trade with other countries, causing further economic and financial difficulties.
The conflicts between Hong Kong and China contain many difficulties and complications that make the situation complicated to navigate, but ultimately have led to a linguistic divide and cultural erosion for Hong Kong residents. The various language policies and other economic factors that help to alleviate tensions between Hong Kong and China along with the promotion and thriving state of Mandarin in Hong Kong, all contribute to Hong Kong’s cultural identity being put at risk and affecting social mobility within the region. To reduce these linguistic challenges and cultural complications, more recognition for the state of Cantonese and Hong Kong’s heritage and traditions is needed through things such as the Protecting Cantonese Movement (PCM) to promote understanding of these cultural and linguistic differences (Li et al., 2022). Overall, the importance of promoting and keeping Cantonese alive is a key factor to protecting Hong Kong’s values and identity when undergoing these political challenges with Hong Kong and China.
Kan, V., & Adamson, B. (2010). Language policies for Hong Kong since 1997. London Review of Education, 8(2), 167-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2010.487336
Lee, F., & Chan, C. (2022). Legalization of press control under democratic backsliding: The case of post-national security law Hong Kong. Media, culture & society. https://doi-org.libproxy.mtroyal.ca/10.1177/01634437221140525
Li, Y-T. (2022). How important is English, Mandarin, and Cantonese for getting a job? Exploring employers’ perceptions of linguistic capital in Hong Kong. Chinese Sociological Review, 54(2), 155-177. https://doi-org.libproxy.mtroyal.ca/10.1080/21620555.2021.1964948
Li, Y., Kang, Y., Ding, D., & Zhang, N. (2022). An overview of the “Protecting Cantonese Movement” in Guangzhou (2010–2021). Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00165-2
Yiu, P., (2022, June 29). Hong Kong's identity in crisis after 25 years of Beijing rule. NikkeiAsia.

I got an offer from ATT to trade in my 13 pro for a $1000 credit towards a 14 pro which basically makes it free. All I would have to do is keep my unlimited plan for 36 mo. which I plan to do anyways.
​
Are there any additional strings attached (I know about the sales tax and $35 upgrade fee)? I wasn't originally planning on upgrading my phone. Should I instead wait until september to upgrade to the 15 instead?

So I lost the pity for SW and pulled Clara. I'm not sure if I can use her anywhere though... Maybe a dual Aoe/DPS team?
This is primarily for MoC:
My current MoC teams are:
Team one:
JY, Ting, Welt, Gepard
Team 2:
Seeley, Bronya, Nat, Fire MC/Asta
Think Clara could fit in a team with Jin? Something like:
JY ,Ting, Nat, Clara
My thought is to have Clara act as a tank/ DPS with the occasional heal from Nat.
Nat and Ting will be as fast as I can get them to make up for the extra SP usage from Clara.
Team 2:
Seeley, Bronya, Welt, Gep
Standard Seely show- maybe save for Luo if not sustain is required. So far Gep has been able to handle it on his own.

Link to the master post
https://www.reddit.com/CFB/comments/13rssrf/bowls\_and\_the\_race\_for\_the\_mythical\_national/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3

Setting the Stage

​

Team	Record	AP	Coaches
Nebraska	12-0	1 (51)	1 (31)
Texas	11-0	2 (3)	2 (3)
Auburn	10-1	3	3
Illinois	10-1	4	5
Miami	10-1	5	4
SMU	10-1	6	6

​
Important games and other notes

• August 29th: Preseason #1 Nebraska and #4 Penn St were each granted an extra regular season game to play in the inaugural Kickoff Classic. The Huskers got revenge on the Nittany Lions with a 44-6 thrashing.
• September 10th: BYU lost its season opener to Baylor, 36-40. They wouldn't lose another
• September 10th: Illinois lost it's season opener to Missouri, 18-28. The Illini would run the table the rest of the year (including beating 3 top 10 teams in 5 weeks) to secure a B1G title and Rose Bowl berth.
• September 16th: unranked Miami lost its season opener to #16 Florida (in Gainesville), 3-28.
• September 17th: #3 Texas took down #5 Auburn 7-20 in Auburn. Both teams would win the rest of their regular season games from here.
• September 24th: Miami waxed #13 Notre Dame, and entered the polls for the first time as a result.
• October 29th: #2 Texas defeated #9 SMU 15-12. This would prove to be a de facto conference title in favor of Texas

Five teams entered the bowl season with national title hopes. Texas and Nebraska stood as the only two unbeaten, but as SWC and Big 8 conference champs, were tied to the Cotton Bowl and Orange Bowl and couldn't play for a de facto national title. Despite both being unbeaten, Nebraska was a heavy favorite to claim a consensus national title, having spent every week of the season being #1 in each poll. Waiting in the wings were #3 SEC champ Auburn who was heading to the Sugar, and #4/5 Illinois who was heading to the Rose bowl, meaning the top 4 teams in the AP were all heading to different bowls. Independent #5/4 Miami crashed the blue blood party and was paired up in the Orange bowl vs Nebraska.
​

The Bowls

Cotton Bowl #2 Texas vs #7 Georgia (January 2nd, 1:30pm EST)
The Longhorns path was simple . . . beat Georgia, then tune into to the Orange Bowl and root for Miami to pull off the upset, which would make them consensus national champions. The upset minded Bulldogs had other plans. It was a defensive slug fest, with the teams tied 3-3 at the half. The Horns managed two 3rd quarter field goals to lead 9-3 heading into the 4th. Texas muffed a punt in their own red zone late in the 4th and Georgia capitalized with a a 17 yard touchdown run by QB John Lastinger to deliver the Dawgs to an eventual 10-9 upset. Texas' title hopes were officially gone, while Auburn fans probably shouted "SEC! SEC!" as their conference rival's upset kept their national title hopes alive.
​
Rose Bowl #2 Illinois vs Unranked UCLA
Illinois spent all of September unranked, before shocking college football, becoming the first team in Big 10 history go 9-0 in their conference slate. They had a slim chance at a national title, needing Nebraska, Auburn, and Texas to all lose their bowl games. Additionally they would need the pollsters to give them more 1st place votes than Miami, which wouldn't be ideal since Miami would have the better bowl win. In any regard, unranked UCLA proved they didn't belong in the conversation in the first place. The Bruins raced out to a 28-3 first half lead and continued to pile it on in the 2nd half, in a 45-9 route. Illinois finished the game with 0 rushing yards.
​
Sugar Bowl #3 Auburn vs #8 Michigan (January 2nd, 8pm EST)
Auburn entered the Sugar bowl knowing Texas lost the Cotton, but now needed to take care of business and Miami to do the same in the Orange bowl, which kicked off around the same time. If those two things happened, it was assumed the voters would elevate them to #1 in the final polls. Michigan made them earn it. The Wolverines scored a TD in the first and led 7-0 at the half. Auburn used its rushing attack, led by the one and only, Bo Jackson, and its kicking game to claw back in it. Trailing 6-7 with 23 seconds left, Auburn kicker Del Greco made a 19 yard chip shot to deliver the Tigers to a 9-7 victory. I imagine they quickly looked for the nearest TV or radio to see what the Orange bowl result was to see if they're championship hopes were still alive.
​
Orange Bowl: #1 Nebraska vs #4/5 Miami (January 2nd, 8PM EST)
Tom Osborne was on the precipice of his first national championship as the Huskers head coach. As the #1 team in each poll since the preseason, all the Huskers needed to do was take care of 11 point underdog Miami, in their home stadium and they're your national champs. However, the Hurricanes had other plans. In what is considered one of the best bowl games of all time, it would become a game huge momentum swings. The Canes stunned Nebraska by racing out to a 17-0 1st quarter lead. The Huskers rallied with 14 in the 2nd, one coming off a trick play known as the 'fumblerooski, and then a field goal in the 3rd to tie it at 17. Miami countered again with two 3rd quarter TDs to lead 31-17. Then the Huskers rallied again with two 4th quarter touchdowns. The 2nd TD came on 4th and 8 from the Miami 24. With :48 seconds left to go in the season, three teams' championship hopes (Nebraska, Miami, and Auburn) hung in the balance. Tom Osborne had a decision to make: kick for the tie or go for 2 for the win. Thanks to Texas' earlier loss, in the Cotton bowl, a tie would be good enough for the pollster to vote Nebraska a consensus #1 as college football's only unbeaten. In a decision that would go down in both Husker and college football lore, Osborne elected to go for two to win win the game. Turner's pass to Jeff Smith in the end zone was batted away by Miami's Kenny Calhoun. The Canes pulled off the shocking upset 31-30, and put the college football world on notice as a new dynasty was born.

Final Results

​

Team	record	AP	Coaches
Miami	11-1	1 (47.5)	1 (30)
Nebraska	12-1	2 (4.5)	2 (6)
Auburn	11-1	3 (7)	3 (4)
Georgia	10-1-1	4	4
Texas	11-1	5	5 (1)

As a husker fan, this is a heart breaker, even if it occurred 5 years before I was born. Had they gotten the conversion, I'd argue this team would be considered on par with the 1995 team. Miami's monumental upset leapfrogged them from #4/5 in the polls to their 1st consensus national championship, and as we'll later see, that was only the beginning. This came much to the dismay of Auburn, who played arguably the toughest schedule in the nation, which included wins over #4 Georgia, #6 Florida (who beat Miami handily), and #8 Michigan. In fact, the Tigers didn't even jump Nebraska, who still received 1st place votes in each poll despite the loss. College football's lack of playoff or sanctioned national championship game was maddening to some but I have to be honest, I think I like the chaos and controversy better. That's what college football is (or at least was) all about.
​
Sources and other info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_season
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_rankings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoNs0mdKAO8 (the end of the Orange Bowl)

I moved to my new home 3 mo ths ago. I have a crush on my neighbor that lives behind my back yard and is a single dad. We can hear everything and are in close proximity. I dont really know him and have only talked to him once but find him very attractive based on looks and habits. From living in close quarters I can tell he has good qualities. I also think I've picked up on signs that show he has taken notice of me as well.
This last weekend I went to a winery with two friends and we came back to my place after where we continued to drink to the point of being loaded. We ate an edible as well. I definitely was loud and obnoxious while hanging in my backyard. When we were inside my house I told them all about my neighbor and how I want to slip him my number and think he may be interested. My friend happens to work at his son's school and told me about him and rumors about his sons mom. The next morning after waking up and not remembering going to bed, to my horror I realized my back sliding glass door and curtains which are apart of my bedroom in the back of the house had been wide open the whole time. The back door faces his driveway which he was in working on his truck late. I am positive he heard us and our conversations and now I am feeling humiliated. What do I do? Just pretend it never happened and stay away from him?
He came home today and I think I overheard him telling somebody about it and how I am hella dumb. He seemed very upset.

M29. Yung GF ko di ko talaga maintindihan. I’m not perfect but I’m trying to be a good person everyday, not only to my gf but to all humans. Itong gf ko magugulat ka na lang pagtingin mo sa IG/FB stories, kung saan2x na napapadpad, at wala akong heads up kung saan siya. Hindi naman need na magpaalam but at least I am informed, kasi yun ang ginagawa ko - I always inform her kung saan ako pupunta, kahit maglalaro lang ng badminton, I inform her. And this is before, pero ngayon hindi na ako nag-iinform, kasi matagal na tong issue na to. Hindi ko na rin tinitingan mga stories nya kasi I’m tired using social media. Evrytime magugulat ako at magtatanong kung saan siya lagi niya lang sagot e, “Gaano ka ba ka walang pake sa akin? Hindi mo kasi tinitingnan stories ko.” Ang problem dito is after nya gumala, magra-rant sa akin kesyo ganito daw mga kasama niya, ganito daw ang place, lahat negative.
Kanina napag-usapan namin ang kanyang phone data, at sabi ko, punta ka sa provider, hindi daw siya makapunta kasi langya na sa Manila siya and honestly I don’t know ilang days na, hindi na rin ako nagtanong. Sabi ko lang, “Wowsht! Amping.”
I tried to brought it up to her waaay back before, pero it always ends up in an argument. Palagi niyang sumbat e immature daw ako. Ewan. Sawa na ako. Sure ako pag-uwi niya, magra-rant na naman yun.
Jeeeeez! While writing this, it feeelt so good. Deeeymn!

GALATIANS  
Chapter Four (https://esv.literalword.com/?q=Galatians+4)
 
-3. … we were enslaved [משעבדים, MeShoo`eBahDeeYM] to fundamentals [ליסודות, LeeYÇODOTh] [of] the world.  

“The word τα στοιχεια [ta stoikheia], the elements ... meant (a) the letters of the alphabet… (b) the elements of which a thing was composed, as the fire, air, earth, and water of which the world was thought to be constituted; (c) the elements of the universe, the larger cosmos, including the sun, moon, planets, and stars; and (d) the spirits, angels, and demons which were believed to ensoul the heavenly bodies, traverse all space, and inhabit every nook and cranny of earth, particularly tombs, desert places, and demented persons. These spirits were said to be organized like human governments. In Rom. [Romans] 8:38 Paul calls them ‘principalities’ and ‘powers.’ And vss. [verses] 9 and 10 of our present chapter indicate that he has them in mind in vs. [verse] 3. …  
Paul … includes in ‘the elements of the universe’ all sub-Christian ideas and observances, both Jewish and Gentile. He regards these ‘elements’ as slave drivers who frighten men with curses for not propitiating them by observance of special days and seasons, food taboos, dietary fads, and circumcision. In Christ he declared his independence of Fate, Fortune, Luck, and Chance, and from astrology, the counterfeit religion and bastard sister of astronomy, whose practitioners exploited the superstition that the stars controlled men’s lives from birth to death.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 521 & 522)  
“The elements of the world] A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yasudey ‘olam hazzeh, ‘the principles of this world;’ that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 387)  

-4. But [אבל, ’ahBahL] as that was filled the time, sent forth, Gods, [את, ’ehTh (indicator of direct object; no English equivalent)] His son, born [of] woman, and subject [וכפוף, VeKhahPhOoPh] to instruction [Torah, Law].  

“The four words, το πληρωμα του χρονου [to pleroma tou khronou], the fullness of the time, express a whole philosophy of history. The Hebrew prophets and Jewish apocalyptists believed that their God was the creator of the universe and arbiter of the destinies of all men and nations. Nothing could happen that was not his doing, either directly or indirectly through angels and men. He had a time for everything, and everything happened exactly on time. … The completion of this present age would be marked by a blood-red revolution, in which all good men and good works would be ground under the heel of the tyrant, while the wicked reigned supreme. Then suddenly God would intervene with the lightning of judgment to snatch the world from the mouth of the bottomless pit and restore it to Paradise, whence it had fallen with the sin of Adam. Sorrow and sighing would flee away, and the Messiah would reign with the perfection of a theocratic king.  
At this juncture, says Paul, when the appointed period of history was ‘full,’ god sent his Son γενομενον εκ γυναικος, γενομενον υπο νομον [genomenon ek gunaikos, genomenon upο nomon], ‘born of woman, bοrn under law.’ … Jesus was not only born under law, but was subject to it all his life. ...The ‘yoke’ of the Torah demanded that he observe the customs of his forefathers, such as wearing phylactery and prayer fringes, ceremonial washing of hands before eating, giving thanks at mealtime, praying at stated times, bringing tithes and sacrifices, and obeying the Ten Commandments.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 522 & 523)  
Not to mention circumcision, kashrut, and the prohibition of associating with gentiles.  
“Sent forth refers to God’s sending of his Son from his pre-existent state in heaven (I Cor. [Corinthians] 8:6; Phil. [Philippians] 2:6-8; Col. [Colossians] 1:15-17). Yet this Son was born of woman. There is nothing in these words, or elsewhere in Paul’s letters, to prove or disprove that he knew the story of the miraculous conception. His point here is that the Christ, although he was the pre-existent Son of God, did not come into this world with a body composed of celestial substance, but was woman-born like all other human beings. … It was very different from the conception of royal sonship in Ps. 2, where the king is called God’s ‘Son; because he has been chosen to be the Messiah. In Paul, Jesus is God’s Son by nature, and his Christhood follows by virtue of this sonship. This belief was the fundamental cause of the split between the Jews and the Christians. The lowly birth, the obscurity of Nazareth, and the fact that Jesus was a common laborer, constituted a grievous scandal in the eyes of all who were expecting their Deliverer to come riding on a chariot of clouds wielding the lightning of judgment. Paul’s gospel contradicts every form of hyperspirituality that fixes a gulf between God and his material world. On the other hand, his conception of the coming of Jesus was poles removed from the pagan stories of the births of heroes, savior-gods, and kings, whose legends were freighted with illicit relationships and lawless conduct like the lives of the devotees who had created them in their own image.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 523-524)  
“Nothing is said explicitly about the Son’s preexistence, which is at most implied … born of a woman: … The phrase is derived from the OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (Job 14:1 …). So born, Jesus submitted to the law by being circumcised and thus became capable of falling under its curse. But lest the Galatians draw a wrong conclusion, Paul [and The Interpreters’ Bible] does not mention Jesus’ circumcision. Instead of genomenon, ‘born,’ some patristic writers read gennomenon, and understood this ptc. [participle] as referring to Mary’s virginal conception; but this is anachronistic interpretation.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 787)  

-7. Accordingly [לפיכך, LePheeYKhahKh], you are not [אינך, ’aYNKhah] a slave anymore [אוד, ’OD], for if [כי אם, KeeY ’eeM] a son, and, if a son, then [אזי, ’ahZahY] also heir from favor [מטעם, MeeTah`ahM] [of] Gods.  

“This is Paul’s proclamation of emancipation.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 528)  

…………………………………………  
Worry of Shah’OoL to Galatians
[verses 8–20]  

-8. In [the] past, in a time that you did not know [את, ’ehTh] Gods, you slaved [את, ’ehTh] who that in their nature [שבמנהותם, ShehBeMahHOoThahM] were not Gods.  

“The Jews never ceased to ridicule idols and denounce idolaters… They demoted the old gods to the rank of demons and made a list of detractive names for them: angels, shepherds, princes; kings, emperors, benefactors, heroes; demons, personifications, idols, nonentities. Some were living, some dead; some were good, but were not God. Most of them were bad, and their idols were but images of ‘things of nought.’ …  
Paul did not deny the existence of these beings whose ignorant worshipers called them gods, but he declared that they did not partake of the nature of God (I Cor. 8:4-6). God permitted them to plague mankind to punish sin, especially the sin of participating in the sacraments of the Gentile cults (I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-31). But Christ had conquered them and no Christian needed to fear them.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 529)  

-10. Behold, you are honoring days and new-[moons], seasons [מועדים, MO`ahDeeYM] and years.  

“Days like the Sabbath and Yom hakkippurim [“Day of Atonement”] are meant; months like the ‘new moon’; seasons like Passover and Pentecost; years like the sabbatical years… Paul can see no reason for a Gentile Christian to observe these.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

…  

…………………………………………  

Two the covenants
[verses 21-26]  

-21. Say to me, you, the wanters to be subject to Instruction, have you not heard [את, ’ehTh] the Instruction?
-22. Is it not written that to ’ahBRahHahM there were two sons, the one from the maid [האמה, Hah’ahMaH] and the second from the woman the free [החפשיה, HahHahPhSheeYah]?
-23. But [אך, ’ahKh] [the] son [of] the maid was born according to [לפי, LePheeY] the flesh,
and however [ואילו, Ve’eeYLOo] [the] son [of] the free upon mouth of the promise.
-24. The words the these, they are a parable to two the covenants:
the one from Mount ÇeeNah-eeY [Sinai], the birther to slavery, and she is HahGahR [“The Sojourner”, Hagar].  

“It is well known how fond the Jews were of allegorizing; every thing in the law was with them an allegory: their Talmud [ancient commentary] is full of these; and one of their most sober and best educated writers Philo, abounds with them…  
It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here; St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles: and neither he, nor we, have any thing farther to do with this allegory, than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds, who endeavour to find out allegories in every portion of the Sacred Writings; and by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God!” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 390)  
“Allegorical interpretation rests upon the belief that every word, figure of speech, and grammatical form in scripture has a special ‘spiritual’ significance besides its literal meaning. The theory is that the God who dictated it meant more than rests on the surface and that while he said one thing, he also meant something else in addition to the literal sense… The Greeks had long since applied the method to explain away the immoral things which the gods said and did in Homer… Then Greek-speaking Jews, like Philo Judaeus, employed it apologetically to read Greek philosophy into the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], proclaiming that Moses had said all these good things long before and better than Homer and Plato.  
The wonder is that Paul has so little allegory. His restraint is explained partly by his training as a Pharisee. The rabbis were suspicious of any interpretation of scripture that tended to make Jews lax in their observance of the law. Jews with Gnostic leanings, and those who considered some of their ancestral customs outmoded, could resort to allegory to justify their philosophy and conduct, while maintaining that they were the spiritual superiors of the conservatives who held to the letter of the law … His argument, however, is never strengthened by allegorical symbolism and typology, for these are convincing only to those who by imagination can find them so. Rather, as in Rom. 9-11, he introduces unnecessary complications such as the moral difficulties involved in predestination. His gospel does not rest on the quicksands of allegory, a specious method of interpreting scripture. Its interpretations are of interest to the historian not as correct representations of what the writers and first readers of the Bible had in mind, but only as source materials for understanding the life and thought of the allegorists themselves.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 540)  

-25. Hagar signifies [מסמלת, MeÇahMehLeTh] [את, ’ehTh] Mount ÇeeNah-eeY, that is in Arabia, and parallels [ומקבילה,OoMahQBeeYLaH] to Jerusalem of our day, for she is in slavery with her sons.  

“… why does Paul mention Arabia…? Possibly because Mt. Sinai is in Arabia[?], which is Ishmaelite territory; he thus associates the Sinai pact with the eponymous patriarch of Arab tribes … Paul thus suggests that the law itself stems from a situation extrinsic to the promised land and to the real descendants of Abraham. Paul’s Jewish former co-religionists would not have been happy with this allegory.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

-26. But [אבל, ’ahBahL] Jerusalem from ascended [מעלה, Mah`eLaH], [the] daughter [of] freedom [חורין, HOReeYN] is she, and she is mother to us.
 

“The Jerusalem which now is was a most unholy “Holy city”, full of injustice, violence and murder, and subject to the cruel and wicked rulers imposed by a Gentile empire. But over against this Jerusalem of slavery lay an ideal celestial city, unseen at present, but destined soon to supersede it. Paul called it the Jerusalem above. Sarah, the free-woman, was the ancestress of its citizens, who were the people of faith and of freedom in Christ…  
Paul speaks of Jerusalem above, because this new city of freedom already exists in heaven where Christ is, where dwell the souls of those who have died in Christ. But it also exists on earth as the church, the body of Christ, whose members are colonists from heaven sent to prepare men for the full establishment of God’s kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3).  
The biblical root of this conception of an ideal future and heavenly Jerusalem is Isa. [Isaiah] 54. Other descriptions appear in Ezek. [Ezekiel] 40-48; Zech. [Zechariah] 2:1-13; Hag. [Haggai] 2:6-9; Tob. [Tobias] 13:9-18 Ecclus. [Ecclesiasticus] 36; Pss. Sol. [Psalms of Solomon] 17:33. Historically the expectation assumed three forms. According to the earliest hope, God would build the new Jerusalem in Palestine and make it the capital of his theocratic world government. The plan of this glorious city was graven upon the palms of his hands (Isa. 49:16). From this idea it was but a step, especially for those influenced by Greek ideas, to think of this ideal Jerusalem as already existing in heaven. According to the Apocalypse of Baruch, God had shown it to Adam in Paradise before he sinned; to Abraham on the night mentioned in Gen. 15:12-21; and to Moses on Sinai, when he gave him the heavenly pattern for an earthly tabernacle (II Baruch 4:1-6; cf. [compare with] Heb. [Hebrews]12:22). The third conception combined these two ideas. The Jerusalem which was ‘above’ would come down to earth to be established in Palestine in place of the city that ‘now is’ (cf. Rev. [Revelation] 3:12, 21:2; II Esdras 7:26; 13:36; 10:54).  
So the new Jerusalem belonged to both worlds and to both ages, to heaven and earth, to the present and the future. Its constitution was the new covenant, and its citizens were the men of faith in Christ, a new kind of freemen who traced their spiritual ancestry through the line of Isaac and his mother Sarah as heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. As for Ishmael and his tribe, they were the men of law, predestined to be slaves forever. Needless to say, the Judaizers found Paul’s allegorical exclusion of themselves utterly unacceptable. They believed that the Torah was God’s blueprint for all creation, and that it would be observed forever in the new Jerusalem. That, they said, was why God was going to purge the old city – to establish an order of life in which perfect obedience to his law would be possible.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 541-542)  
“…it was a maxim among the rabbins [rabbis], that, ‘Whatsoever was in the earth, the same was also found in heaven; for there is no matter, howsoever small, in this world, that has not something similar to it in the spiritual world.’ On this maxim, the Jews imagine that every earthly thing has its representative in heaven: and especially whatever concerns Jerusalem, the law, and its ordinances. Rab. ["Master", Rabbi] Kimchi, speaking of Melchisedec, king of Salem, says, זו ירושלים של מעלה Zu Yerushalem shel me’alah – ‘This is the Jerusalem that is from above.’…  
There is a spiritual Jerusalem, of which this is the type; and this Jerusalem, in which the souls of all the righteous are, is free from all bondage and sin: or by this, probably the kingdom of the Messiah was intended; and this certainly answers best to the apostle’s meaning, as the subsequent verse shows.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 391)  

-27. That see, is written:  
“Chant, barren, not birthing, [רני עקרה לא ילדה RahNeeY 'ahQRaH Lo’ YahLahDaH] burst chanting and shouting, not travailing, [פצחי רנה וצהלי לא-חלה PeeTsHeeY ReeNaH VeTsahHahLeeY Lo’-HahLaH] for multitudinous are sons of her deserted than [מי, MeeY] sons of her mistress [כי-רבים בני-שוממיה מבני בעולה KheeY-RahBeeYM BeNaY-ShoMahMeeYHah MeeBeNaY Be'ooLaH].”  

“A telling item in the counterpropaganda of the legalists was the argument that even among the Christians only a radical fringe consisting mainly of foreign Jews, of whom Paul was one, were proposing to abandon the law of Moses. …  
In one respect his quotation of Isa. 54:1 does not fit Paul’s allegory. It was Sarah, the mother of freemen, who possessed the husband, and Hagar, the slave, who was the deserted woman. As usual with Paul’s illustrations (cf. Rom. 7:1-4; 11:17-24), the details cannot be pressed without making them go lame …  
The Isaian figure to describe the plight of Jerusalem during the Babylonian exile grew out of a common experience in Hebrew family life. Childlessness, particularly the failure to bear sons, was great grief and disgrace. Such was the sorrow of Jerusalem; but the prophet bade her look forward with courage to the time when all her scattered children would come back to her (Isa. 54:3). God was her ‘husband,’ and he would treat his faithful remnant with everlasting lovingkindness, making them more numerous than the former population and giving them a heritage of great peace and prosperity (Isa. 54:13-17).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  
“The prophet’s words are addressed to deserted Zion, bidding it rejoice at the return of the exiles.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  

-28. But you, my brethren [τεχνα, tekhna, “children”], you are the sons of the promise, as was YeeTsHahQ [“He Laughed”, Isaac].  

“The Judaizers claimed that Abraham had obeyed the law of Moses by anticipation, and that God’s promise was his reward. Consequently the descendants of Isaac were children of promise only if they followed Abraham’s example in obeying the law. Paul turned it the other way about: the promise must be taken on faith, not as credit for obedience.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)  

-29. And just as [וכשם, OoKhShayM] that then pursued, [רדף, RahDahPh] the son that was born according to [לפי, LePheeY] flesh, [את, ’ehTh] the son that was born according to the spirit, yes, also now.  

“In Gen 21:10 Sarah, seeing Ishmael ‘playing’ with Isaac and viewing him as the potential rival to Isaac’s inheritance, drives him and his mother out. Nothing in Gen is said of Ishmael’s ‘persecution’ of Isaac, but Paul may be interpreting the ‘playing’ as did a Palestinian haggadic explanation of Gen 21:9 (see Josephus, ANT. [Antiquities] 1.12.3§215 …” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)  
“A rabbinical tradition of the second century A.S. interprets the Hebrew participle מצחק [MeeTsHahQ, “play”] (LXX [Septuagient, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible] παιζοντα [paizonta] in Gen. 21:9 to mean that Ishmael’s ‘playing’ became so rough that Isaac’s life was in danger. This son of a slave is said to have shot arrows at Isaac to kill him, and Paul’s statement shows that some such tradition was current in his day. He applied it to the Judaizers who were trying to force the Christians to observe the whole law of Moses, and to the unbelieving Jews who were excommunicating the Christians and their families and getting them into trouble with the civil authorities (1:5; 4:17; 5:10; I Thess. [Thessalonians] 2:14-16).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 543)  

-30. But what says the Written [Scripture]?  
“Banish [גרש GahRaySh] the maid and [את, ’ehTh] her son,
for not will inheritI [יירש, YeeYRahSh], son [of] the maid [האמה, Hah’ahMaH], with son [of] the free.”  

“The quotation is from Gen. 21:10 … The speaker of these words is Sarah, who is filled with rage against Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham is represented as greatly grieved, but God is said to have sanctioned the demand of the cruel and jealous wife….  
This story was one of the effects and one of the causes of the perpetual feud between the Israelites and the tribes that descended from Ishmael. The Hebrews were so sure that God wanted them to have Palestine that they found no moral difficulty in saying that it was God himself who had overruled Abraham’s conscience (Gen. 17:18-21). They affirmed that Ishmael’s character and destiny had been predetermined (Gen. 16:12). Consequently, even his circumcision at the age of thirteen could not make him a member of God’s chosen people. However great this innocent victim of a family feud might become by virtue of the halfhearted blessing conceded by an uneasy conscience (Gen. 17:20-21), he and his descendants were barred forever from the higher blessing. Theirs was to submit to the religious imperialism of the most favored nation or die. Moreover, all Abraham’s other sons except Isaac were barred from the promise and sent away ‘unto the east country’ (Gen. 25:5-6). And yet while all this was said to be the Lord’s doing, it was in the same breath declared to be the doing of the human actors in this drama of the nations. Sarah herself was said to have suggested that Abraham become a father by her Egyptian slave girl. Then, too, it was explained that Hagar’s flight from the cruelty of her mistress was voluntary, making her, rather than the callous compliance of Abraham, responsible for her plight ‘in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen. 16:7).  
Paul’s use of Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and her child has its parallel in the equally heartless treatment of Esau which he employs in Rom. 9-11 in his longer discussion of the divine process of selection. Here too it was assumed that the hatred generated by centuries of war for the possession of Palestine lay in the heart of God. “I hate Esau,” said Malachi (1:3), making God the speaker; and Rom. 9:6-13 presses it to the utmost limit of predestination. But the love of God in Christ Jesus made Paul’s heart better than his inherited doctrine … When the history of the struggle for the possession of “the Holy land” is allegorized to justify a doctrine of “election” which foredooms countless souls to an eternity of torment in a future hell, it becomes as morally atrocious as it is irreconcilable with Paul’s gospel.  
Nevertheless Paul’s allegory gives the historian an insight into Paul’s mind as he wrestled with the insoluble problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 543-544)  
“Paul bids the Galatians rid themselves of the Judaizers – and, ironically enough, obey the Torah itself.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)   An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

You know what makes studying in UP hard aside from acads? The system.
My god, the bureaucracy sucks so much. Napakatagal ng proseso sa lahat ng bagay. Laging may delay. Laging kailangan mong maghintay. Mababaliw ka kahihintay sa sagot sa email kapag may concern ka. Kung kani-kanino ka pa ipapasa. Papirma dito, papirma d’yan.
Wala ka ngang babayarang tuition, pero sanity mo kapalit.
I really don’t think that UP is pro-student. Pahirapan talaga dito.

Hey, I'm currently in town for a convention, puro seniors kasama so medyo out of place. Anyone bored enough to join me for lunch or dinner? Pwede mo din ako samahan sa convention if you're up for it.
About me (if that matters): - medical professional - tahimik lang sa umpisa kahit di mo pilitin - pwedeng sumama kahit di lasing
About you: - bored din - hindi ako ililigaw (gusto ko pa umuwi sa nanay ko pls)

​
Our “love” story is sooo long, I don’t know how to summarize haha. We met during our SHS year. 1 year lang kami naging classmates ( during grade 11 lang). Let’s call him “Rae”. He is a kinddd guy, super, like sa lahat ng classmates namin, talagang mabait sya. Kaya mabilis din kami naging friends, to the point na lumilipat pa ako ng chair just to be near with him. Iniiwan ko friends ko para makasama sya during lunch 😅 anndd during that time, wala sa isip ko na crush ko sya or what, literal na friends lang tingin ko sa kanya. But at one point lagi ko na sya gustong kasama and it made me sad pag nakikita syang kasama yung ibang female friends nya. Due to his pleasant personality, ”crush ng bayan” sa room. Yung isang friend pa nga nya ay nag seselos sa akin since crush nya rin si Rae (well same haha, I am upset whenever nakikita ko sila together. ( well background lang kung gaano ka “ likeable” si Rae).
Ayun, parang naging hobby na namin lumabas as “friends” ( well for me feeling ko date na haha), we went ice skating, movies, UAAP games, and mejo bongga na restaurants. Always KKB kami sa lahat ng labas namin. Then, during grade 12 hindi na kami classmates but we still remained close friends and dito na nga ako officially umamin haha ( tho I know halata na ako nung grade 11). I confessed through a handwritten letter with printed photos namin. I personally gave it to him. But, sabi nya he cannot reciprocate my feelings and I accepted it naman. Mahalaga lang sa akin ay malaman nya there is someone who truly admires and cares for him talaga. Then mejo awkward ng slight after, but nung birthday ko that year he gave me a bracelet. Grabe, first gift ever na I got from a guy that I REALLY LIKE. So mejo mixed but I thought, well close friends naman talaga kami kaya ganun.Well fast forward….we we’re stuck in pandemic and nag first year tayong lahat online. I suddenly thought of him and kinamusta ko sya, I think mga August 2020 ito. Madami kami napag usapan and isa yung time na binasa daw nya yung confession letter ko. The night that he read it, super umiyak daw sya, super as in! 😅 Kasi dun nya lang daw na feel na super special sya however hindi nga raw same yung feelings nya sa akin. But he confessed, naging crush nya rin ako during our grade 11, but hindi same sa level ng sa akin. We expressed din how much we missed each other and we were planning to meet up pag nasa Manila na ulit kami. I really appreciate Rae, kasi he never tooked advantage of my feelings. Never nya pinagkalat or pinag yabang yung mga ginawa ko for him hahaha especially yung confession ko.
Then after nun, August - December 2020, araw araw na kami nag c-chat. He sends a photo of his new haircut, rants about school, chika about our SHS classmates and may mga times na niloloko ko sya na bakit hindi na lang kami ganun, but I noticed, lagi sya nag s-sorry. ( may mga times kasi na umiiyak ata ako sa chat na serious asking him bakit hindi na lang ako 😭🤣) Nag sorry sya kasi friends nga lang raw kami.Then January 2021 came, I sent a tiktok video sa kanya na may punchline na “magiging jowa din kita soon” type of tiktok. Ayun, he replied na may jowa na raw sya, I thought joke lang. But, totoo haha. Of course nagulat ako kasi yung closeness namin during August 2020 onwards, ay parang mag jowa na? Haha. Kaya pala lagi sya nag s-sorry kasi di nya raw masabi agad and baka hindi na raw kami mag usap ulit. Well, tama sya. We never talked na ulit from January 2021- August that year. Nag uusap pero matipid and short lang. Well alam nya na nasaktan ako kasi I felt betrayed haha.
Thennn fast forward ulit haha December 2022, it’s my birthday andd kaloka! Haha hindi nya ako binati. You know sya yung friend mo na talagang mag tatampo ka pag no greetings at all kaya naman I pmed him na. Then nakalimutan daw nyaaa HMP. Naka deac din lahat soc meds nya kasi super hectic sya sa course nya. Then right after our Agape Day, I had the urge to call him! Haha never ko pa sya na call like ever pero I super missed him na talaga na hindi na ako nahiya. He picked up naman and video call pa talaga haha buti na lang maganda ako that night. Well as usual, super wholesome pa rin nya and fun. 4 hours din kami nag kamustahan and of course natanong ko if kamusta na jowa nya, well they broke up! 🤣🥳 ( di ko pala nasabi na si Rae pa yung niligawan ni gurl! haha he is that type of guy super shy but super deds mga girls 😅).Well sabi nya parang nasakal daw sya and super possessive si girl haha and di nya nakwento lahat about their breakup, pag nag meet na lang daw kami, share nya lahat.
Ayun from December 2022- May 2023, puro usap lang sa chats kahit both nasa Manila na kami. ANDD right after my exam nag chat sya, 6:17 pm of May 31, he asked me if I am free daw ba since pupunta sya US and he asked me if may gusto daw akong pasalubong hahahxgsgx. That’s the FIRST time ever na sya yung nag initiate and asked talaga! Kasi dati lagi g akong yung planner and nag a-aya. So ayun kinabukasan agad nag meet kami.
June 1. Our first meet up after THREE long years. I was sooo excited and nervous haha. So I waited for him sa LRT then I saw him… so tumakbo ako sa direction where he was standing and I saw his arms widely open for a hug 🥺 Hay, Rae my ever wholesome crush. So we hugged for a bit and sumakay na agad ng train. I didn’t know what to do…hinihila ko shirt nya and nagtatago ako sa likod nya 😭 Well nakaya ko naman kausapin sya and ayun na nasabi na nya when date alis nya and after that trip, may summer sya sa school. Then after our ride, pumunta na kami sa restaurant where we ate and nagkwento sya sa life updates sa ate ( and bis other sibs ) nya 😅 last update was wala pang lovelife but now meron na haha super cute kasi pati yun nakwekwento nya. Kahit yung paninigarilyo ng Daddy nya, sinasabi nya sa akin. Even his Lolo na huling kwento nya ay nung SHS kami. I feel special and entrusted kasi suoer shy sya sa ibang tao but he is sharing stories like these sa akin.
While we were eating nag picture kami and sabi ko I will tag him sa story ko and gusto ko, i-restory nya. BUT, ayaw nyaaa hahaha. Nung una sabi nya pangit daw sya sa pic ganun but umamin sya na ayaw nya makita ng ”ex” nya kasi isa din sa reasons why they broke up is nag seselos na pala sa akin yung gurl haha. May attitude si girl na nabubuksan nya IG ni Rae without his permission and andun messages namin. I don’t know why he needs to hide sa kanya, tho I know pero wala naman na sila eh. But I understand the girl kasi jowa nya may kausap na babae din na sweet nga din ang messages. But I was really clueless that time. Kahit during SHS naman, ganun na kami ni Rae.Well, back to my story nag photobooth kami and super fun and happy namin. I dont know pero I had the urge to kiss him sa booth 😭 Pero di ko kaya kasi baka maging awkward after?? HAHA but and cute ng pics namin after. Thenn nag DQ kami and quick chika kasi uuwi na kami :((.
On our way to LRT ulit nag lakad kami and dun ko lang na experience yung “sidewalk rule” ng mga gentleman. As in. Sinadya ko na nga ako sa may lane na may cars to test him. But heyyy HAHAHAAH sabi nya “ sa gilid ka” HAHSBSH grabe mahihimatay na ata ako that time… di ko kinaya super ngiti naman ako under my mask. Super gentleman and wholesome nya talaga kahit sa bus, like inaayos ko kang yung shorts ko and malapit na kasi yung kamay ko sa kamay nya and iniwaa nya talagaa HAHAHS like why napaka good boy naman. But nung nag bye na ulit kami sa may train, ako na nag initiate to side hug him and nag respond naman sya, he slightly grasp din my braso, still ang gentle nya.
Ayun that is the end of my story. Ay also pala, during SHS labas namin puro KKB, but last week, lahat sya yung nag pay for it. Kahit LRT and yung DQ. 🥺 LAHAT pati yung Life 4 Cuts namin haha. I was just puzzled, ano gusto nya? Haha I know malalim din friendship namin kaya we can go out na kami lang. Pero will it go further? Kasi after nun, I miss him everyday. Nonetheless, super grateful talaga ako for him. Sa wholesome friendship namin na may halong kilig.It’s just that first time na sya yung nag initiate and libre yung “friendly” date namin. Ayun, thank you for reading my story.To Rae, ako na lang kasi HAHSHSHS hay :(
​

Based on other forum posts and plan description on ATT site the following changes I believe are happening with the plan:

• No more Rollover - instead the plan will now throttle to an increased speed of 1.5Mbps after 16gb of data is used - the plan is being marketed as an "unlimited" plan
• No more data in Mexico and Canada (you can go to AT&T Prepaid site and click on details and you will notice it says unimited calls and text but the word "data" was removed - " Unlimited talk & text: Includes unlimited talk and text within the U.S., Mexico & Canada and unlimited text from the U.S. to over 230 countries. "

I am guessing this affects only new customers, but not sure how it will affect existing customers upon annual renewal