Before we begin, a disclaimer from Dr. Candise Lin, the linguist who recorded the video. She wants people to understand that the words following each English name are not what that name means in Mandarin, but what it sounds like to a Mandarin speaker. This is similar to translating “thank you” to Greek, which sounds like “Sah F Harry Stowe” (Sas efcharistó). So, enjoy the funny English names for the humor that occurs in pronouncing them in an unfamiliar language. The name Robin sounds like Luo ben, which translates to “running naked,” or “streaking.” The surname Robinson sounds like Luo ben shen, which translates to “God of running naked.” Right now, Robin Williams is looking down here and laughing. Because if anyone could laugh at how we say a funny English name, it is him. Please bear in mind that Mandarin is a spoken language only. The written language is either Chinese (Simplified) or Chinese (Traditional), and refers to the symbols you see on the video. Dr. Candise Lin can only approximate the spellings in her pronunciation examples. This is what can make translations from one language to another fun. Mason in English sounds like the Mandarin word mei shen, which means “God of beauty.” Nicholas isn’t so favorable. It sounds like Ni kou si le in Mandarin and translates to “You are so stingy.” Robert reminds a Mandarin speaker of Luo bo, which is “carrot.” Martha brings us another food “twist” because it sounds like Ma hua, which is “fried donut twist.” Jeff sounds like Jie fu, which is “brother-in-law” in Mandarin. Why English Names Sound Funny To A Mandarin Speaker Dr. Candise Lin offered more funny examples of how English names remind a Mandarin speaker of words in their language. All languages and dialects have similarities in some words. Sometimes, the words are very close in meaning, such as “computer” in English and “kumbiutir” in Arabic. In these examples from the spoken Mandarin language, the similarities end with the sound, providing us with a laugh. Dr. Candise Lin holds a PhD in Educational Psychology. She tutors Cantonese and Mandarin. She also provides cultural commentary and language lessons blended with good old-fashioned comedy. You can follow her on YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram for similar content and laugh while you learn. Please share. You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Chinese Woman Shares “English Names That Sound Funny To Mandarin Speakers” appeared first on InspireMore.

Anyone who knows will tell you, “Once a Rockette, always a Rockette.” The Radio City Rockettes celebrated 100 years in March 2025. There is no better time to recognize a 90-year-old Rockette dancer who is still in the groove. Meet Patsy Elliott, who graduated from high school in 1953 and became a Rockette dancer. Joining a line dancing class, Patsy is still active at First Colonial Inn Assisted Living Facility in Virginia Beach, Virginia. @first.colonial.in Meet Patsy, a proud 90-year-old former Rockettes and professional dancer! Her love for performance shines through as she joins our line dance class today. At Kisco, we celebrate lifelong passions and the joy of living in community. Patsy reminds us that once a dancer, always a dancer. Ready to dance your way to happiness? Join us and discover your rhythm! #FosteringTrust #LivingInCommunity #kiscoseniorliving #livingwellatfci #dance ♬ original sound – First Colonial Inn Patsy began her dance lessons at the age of five under instructor Billy Tryall in Salisbury. She excelled and went to New York after high school. We aren’t sure how long Patsy stayed with The Rockettes. The practices and performance schedules were said to be grueling. She went on to develop a comedy dance act, and she performed the nightclub circuit in New York. She signed on to the Gary Moore Show in 1966 for one episode. To say that Patsy made her mark on New York would be an accurate assessment. Image from TikTok. The Rockettes had strict standards for dancers. In 1953, the Rockette dancers’ height requirements were between 5 feet 5 inches and 5 feet 10.5 inches tall. Because of the intricate dance routines, the women had to be proficient in jazz, ballet, tap, and modern dance. Don’t forget the famous high kicks, which were also a requirement. You can see by looking at Patsy’s lanky body and long legs that she was perfect as a Rockette dancer. Her enthusiasm during this line dancing class is enough to make you smile. She is igniting the entire room. It’s likely she could share some wonderful stories that would fill in the history of The Rockettes during her era. Please share. You can find the source of this story’s featured image here and here. The post 90-Year-Old Former Rockette Dancer Proves She’s Still Got It In Nursing Home appeared first on InspireMore.

Near the end of C. S. Lewis’s science-fiction novel Perelandra, his protagonist, Dr. Elwin Ransom, saw two idyllic forms—the celestial guardians of Mars and Venus: Malacandra [Mars] was like a rhythm and Perelandra [Venus] was like a melody. . . . The first held in his hand something like a spear but the hands of the other were open. . . . What Ransom saw in that moment was the real meaning of gender. Many today will bristle at Lewis’s Neoplatonic description of gender ideals. But complementarians should at least agree with the Inkling’s assumption that manhood and womanhood aren’t merely physical concepts. Gender begins with our sexed male and female bodies, but it doesn’t stop there. We should affirm for ourselves and our children that even if the two terms are sometimes difficult to define, manhood and womanhood are larger, teleological realities. God’s Purposeful Design In theology, “teleology” involves looking at the nature of God’s created works to uncover the purpose in his design. As Catholic scholar Abigail Favale writes, “The ‘whatness’ of a thing, its essential identity, is connected to its purpose.” Complementarians look at biological sex and gender, the psychosocial aspect of sex, through a teleological lens. We believe there’s a God-designed link between being male or female and the doing roles God has called us to inhabit as men and women. In both the Danvers Statement from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (1988, affirmations 1 and 2) and The Gospel Coalition Confessional Statement (2007, article 3), we have confessed not only that God made our first parents male and female with equal dignity and value but also that after creating them, God immediately commissioned the man and woman, giving them work to do (Gen. 1:26–27). As complementarians, we believe there’s a purposeful connection between the way God made us and what he’s made us for. Complementarians have argued from Genesis 1–2 that, by God’s design, the “essence” of our biological sex and the gendered “roles” we inhabit in our families and church communities are linked. As Kendra Dahl writes, “Each of us is born with . . . [an] intrinsic desire to know the end for which we’re created, rightly seeing a straight line between our being and our doing.” But though complementarians keep essence (being) and function (doing) together, we’ve often been tempted to emphasize one aspect of God’s design over the other. Emphasizing Function in Response to Feminism Danvers’s framers wrote to combat “a rising tide of feminism that they perceived within evangelicalism.” The statement rejects the feminist assumption that male-dominated society has imposed traditional gender norms on women, and it promotes motherhood, homemaking, and vocations historically performed by women. In their response to evangelical feminism and egalitarianism, Danvers’s framers emphasized what it means for men and women to relate to one another functionally. Though complementarians keep essence (being) and function (doing) together, we’ve often been tempted to emphasize one aspect of God’s design over the other. In complementarianism’s seminal text, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (RBMW), mature masculinity is defined as the “benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women” at home, in the church, and in society. It also says mature femininity is “a freeing disposition to affirm, receive and nurture strength and leadership from worthy men.” This emphasis on men and women’s sociological differences has been complementarianism’s most consistent note, and it’s often been a great strength. But as Gregg R. Allison writes, “RBMW, while well-meaning for the context it addresses, did not penetrate below the surface to define manhood and womanhood in terms of nature or essence.” As a result, it left gaps in application. RBMW made marital (husband and wife) and ecclesial (elder and congregant) roles paradigmatic for all male-female relationships. The Bible describes these roles in terms of sacrificial headship/authority and submission (Eph. 5:22–24; Heb. 13:17). But the dominant way Scripture talks about men and women in the church is, as Patrick Schreiner observes, “through the image of sibling.” In brother-sister relationships, headship and submission don’t come into play. What does manhood and womanhood look like in these contexts? How is it expressed between brothers, sisters, and friends? A more robust complementarianism would be prepared to answer questions like these. The Danger of Overemphasizing Function: If we skip over essence to function and overemphasize biblically prescribed roles, we can give the impression that manhood and womanhood are life goals to achieve rather than gifts to steward in accordance with God’s design. In this way, we leave the door open for narrow traditionalists to smuggle legalism into complementarian teaching. It can sound like this: “You aren’t a real man until you have a job and provide for your family.” “You aren’t a true woman unless you set up house as a trad wife and mother.” Such statements put doing before being, confusing root and fruit. Emphasizing Essence in Response to Transgenderism If RBMW emphasized roles in the face of feminism, conservative evangelicals over the past decade have begun to stress men and women’s essential and beautiful difference in the face of transgenderism. We’ve emphasized the truth that maleness or femaleness is imprinted on a person’s body before it’s ever expressed in procreational, developmental, and relational differences. As Allison argues, all conservative evangelicals, whether complementarian or egalitarian, can affirm that “by divine design, women and men are significantly different.” As evangelicals have engaged public discourse over women’s sports and experimental “gender-affirming” medical procedures, we’ve clearly taught both that men and women are biologically distinct and that the Bible prohibits a willful disregard of one’s biological sex in an effort to be seen as, or identified with, the opposite sex (Deut. 22:5). Conservative evangelicals over the past decade have begun to stress men and women’s essential and beautiful difference in the face of transgenderism. Conservative evangelicals have been clear about the essential difference between the sexes, and among many complementarians the emphasis on function—especially related to roles within the church—has continued. But at the same time, descriptions of day-to-day gender expression and roles are often vague. Scholars like Gracilynn Hanson acknowledge that “the various disciplines of science and philosophy have recognized men and women generally think and behave differently.” But because we want to emphasize women and men’s common dignity and avoid merely repeating traditionalist stereotypes, some complementarians today avoid saying anything about how biblical manhood and womanhood function socially. We’ve been clear that transgender ideology is unbiblical, but is that all we can say about gender expression? Isn’t there also something positive we can say about lived manhood and womanhood? A complementarianism that reaches the next generation must answer these questions, too. The Danger of Only Emphasizing Essence: Both complementarians and egalitarians can emphasize men and women’s common creation in God’s image, their equal dignity, and their equal capacity to embody human virtues. Both can affirm the biological-sex binary and men and women’s interdependence—the truth that we need each other to fulfill the creation mandate and the Great Commission. But as complementarians, if we only understand men and women in terms of essence and never disciple our people on how to navigate the weeds of gender expression and function, we’re quietly abandoning the foundations of our movement. More importantly, we’re leaving our congregants and kids without a clear sense of how their maleness and femaleness relates to the way they live each day. Better Definitions Elisabeth Elliot once said, “I can’t pin [masculinity and femininity] down once and for all, or spell out all the ramifications, or dictate the details of how they ought to look in late twentieth-century America. They are, I admit, elusive symbols.” I get what she’s saying. Like Ransom’s ethereal vision, a clear definition of manhood and womanhood can be hard to trace, but as Elliot knew, that fact shouldn’t keep us from trying. In 2020, Schreiner proposed these working definitions of manhood and womanhood: The fundamental meaning of masculinity is sonship, brotherly love, and potentiality toward paternity. The fundamental meaning of femininity is daughterhood, sisterly love, and potentiality toward maternity. Unlike early complementarians, Schreiner doesn’t make gender roles in marriage and church leadership the paradigm for masculinity and femininity. He rightly refuses to read the functions of authority and submission into every gendered relationship. But at the same time, Schreiner makes clear that sexed bodies should set the trajectory for gender expression. Make Teleology a Part of Your Discipleship Following Schreiner, parents and church leaders should make appeals to God’s design a part of their discipleship. As I’ve written before, we must teach children and youth what it means to be a “godly son or daughter, brother or sister, wife or husband, mother or father.” Our sons are male, and if they develop typically, they’ll grow to be adult men with the strength of a male musculoskeletal structure. In light of this design and their potential roles as husbands and fathers, we should train boys to take sacrificial initiative, work hard, and protect others. Our daughters are female, and if they develop typically, they’ll grow to be adult women with bodies that can incubate and sustain a baby’s life from conception through infancy. In light of this design and their potential roles as wives and mothers, we should train girls to be influential helpers who cultivate the relational structures necessary to nurture others. I’m not suggesting men don’t contribute to society’s relational structures; a father shouldn’t be all authority with no nurture. Nor am I saying women should never provide for and protect their families and communities; there are too many biblical examples, such as the wise woman of Proverbs 31, to the contrary. But as Jordan Steffaniak observes, while “human beings of either sex can practice every virtue indiscriminately . . . our biology does determine that men have differing levels of capability than women [and vice versa] to display particular virtues.” Prescription and Prudence For this reason, I think it’s necessary to teach children and youth how to steward with Christlike character the unique strengths God gave us when he made us male and female. Such appeals to teleology prepare young people to live out healthy gender expression even if they never get married and become parents. As Wendy Alsup writes, “Whether individuals ever have biological children, the two sexes are integral in bearing and growing spiritual children.” Each sex’s importance can be lost if we fail to celebrate the distinct gifts each contributes to the home, church, and world. It’s necessary to teach children and youth how to steward the unique strengths God gave us when he made us male and female. Having said this, I don’t think our appeals to God’s design always need to be prescriptive. Instead, like Alastair Roberts observed recently, they can be “prudential.” I’m not going to dictate particular careers for my daughters, but when we talk about the college majors and job paths they’re considering, I’m also not afraid to ask, “How does this opportunity fit with your gender? How might walking down this road affect you if in a few years you want to get married and have kids?” ‘It Is Not for Nothing That You Are Named’ Lewis ends Perelandra with Ransom’s vivid vision of masculinity and femininity, but that’s not where the novel’s reflections on God’s design begin. Themes from Genesis 1–3 give shape to the book’s entire plot. At the turning point, Ransom confronts a demon-possessed Un-man who, like the biblical Serpent, tempts Venus’s first Lady to transgress the one law God gave her. Unlike the Genesis 3 narrative, Perelandra’s temptation account extends for chapters. During this prolonged conversation, God puts both the Un-man and the primordial Lady to sleep, leaving Ransom to reflect on why he’s there at all. Ransom wonders what part his presence on Venus will play in God’s design for the planet. Only one purpose makes sense: Ransom must stop the Un-man. But, he wonders, how could he—a man who’s not stereotypically masculine but is instead a “sedentary scholar with weak eyes and a baddish wound from the last war”—possibly defeat an immortal enemy? Then, Ransom hears God’s voice: “It is not for nothing that you are named Ransom.” At that moment, the middle-aged scholar knew that even if it came to violence, he’d fight for the sake of the Lady—his sister. What he would do, how he would act, would follow the arc of the story God had written for him. God has designs for us just like he had for Ransom. It’s not for nothing that we’re named man and woman. When we define biblical manhood and womanhood, when we teach our children about masculinity and femininity, let’s not miss his purpose. Let’s trace the grain of reality, following the arc of God’s design from being to function, and let’s help the next generation do the same.

Working among college students, I get a firsthand look into the trends that dominate the cultural landscape at any particular moment. Over the years, I’ve witnessed fashion fads like the “man bun,” wearing winter hats on top of your head and in no way covering your ears, skinny jeans, and jeans with a crazy number of holes. Popular songs by Taylor Swift or the latest Disney movie sung at random. Even slang that’s necessary for relational capital, like “that slaps,” “fire,” “that’s gas,” and hearing female students call one another “bruh.” Some of trends items are innocuous, but many convey the subversive vibe that dominates our Western milieu. And it’s not just college students. We all engage in practices that shape who we are, how we think, and what we love. The world is catechizing us, whether we realize it or not. In Making Disciples: Catechesis in History, Theology, and Practice, Alex Fogleman, assistant professor of theology at Trinity Anglican Seminary, is attempting to equip Christians for better catechesis. Fogleman defines catechesis as “the art of instructing new believers in the faith, with a view toward comprehensive instruction in the basic tenets of belief, spirituality, and ethics” (9). The whole process of catechesis is about grounding believers in the fundamentals of the faith, giving us a countercultural grammar for Christian living and lifelong discipleship. This book is meant to be “a first point of entry for those seeking an apprenticeship in the craft of disciple making” (6). Historical Disciple-Making To some evangelical ears, the concept of catechesis may seem foreign. It’s been a mainstay among higher church traditions like Presbyterians and Lutherans, but hasn’t been a consistent feature among many Baptists or nondenominational Christians. Fogleman’s work is therefore instructive as it shows the connection of catechesis to worship and mission, and articulates the kinds of relationships, resources, and approaches that help make catechesis the center of the life of the local church. The church has always sought to ground and build up new believers and continue to see their membership grow in the faith. In many traditions, however, activities like “evangelism, mission, small groups, Bible studies, Sunday school, [and] Alpha” have displaced the “foundational, ground-laying work that catechesis does.” These programs can be good. But Fogleman argues, “None give a basic but comprehensive introduction to the faith” (4). For example, Fogleman writes, “Catechisms were gradually eclipsed by the use of Bible stories. Ironically, it seems that the rise of Sunday school is part of the reason that catechesis went out of fashion” (52). Rather than focusing on memorization and recitation of doctrinal questions and answers, the Sunday school movement was intended “to teach reading and literacy to children, but mainly to help them read Scripture” (52). Certainly, literacy is a noble end, but efforts toward that goal eventually displaced the traditional doctrinal focus. Fogleman isn’t criticizing attempts at educating children or adults. He does, however, show how modern attempts differ from the catechetical approach that sustained the church for millennia. As we see a rising need for catechesis in our increasingly post-Christian culture, it may be helpful to look to earlier models of discipleship for inspiration. Counter-Catechesis The world is always teaching us in such a way as to conform our thoughts, affections, and wills to its intended ends. We’re being algorithmically shepherded toward worldliness, toward seeing holiness as strange and sin as normal. Christians must be aware of such forces arrayed against us, which is why we need catechesis—or, better, counter-catechesis—in the church. We need to be formed by Christ, not by the world. As we see a rising need for catechesis in our increasingly post-Christian culture, it may be helpful to look to earlier models of discipleship for inspiration. If we’re not attentive, the church can be awash in worldliness and not even perceive it. That’s why counter-catechesis is so important. We need to identify the world’s cultural narratives and intentionally reinforce comprehensive narratives that run counter to them. But we need to do so with grace. The sort of catechesis Fogleman proposes “moves beyond polarizing hot takes and addresses fundamental issues—Jesus Christ and his love for humanity” (85). The good news is that what Fogleman proposes is already underway among evangelicals. For example, Trevin Wax and Thomas West have recently published The Gospel Way Catechism, where they “offer the old truths of Christianity in a way that identifies cultural narratives so they can be seen and considered . . . and finally shown only to be fulfilled in and through Jesus Christ.” It’s an attempt to name false ideologies—like inordinate emphasis on identity, freedom, and happiness—and uproot them with biblical truth. Fogleman’s academic work shows why this approach is vital for the church in our age. Practical Guidance Making Disciples is more theoretical than practical. Fogleman’s goal is to provide a foundation and apology for a return to catechesis. However, he also offers examples to help readers think through catechesis within their own contexts. In two brief appendixes, he outlines basic questions for beginning catechesis in a local church and a bibliography of catechetical resources that includes works ranging from Augustine’s Enchiridion to J. I. Packer’s Growing in Christ. We’re being algorithmically shepherded toward worldliness, toward seeing holiness as strange and sin as normal. None of his suggestions is novel. They all align with Packer’s call to evangelicals to return to a catechetical approach to discipleship. The primary need is to reshape the content and goal of the church’s discipleship approach, rather than to move to some rigid ideal for premodern worship. So Fogleman recommends having a new-believer class focused on basic doctrine and offering small group cohorts to study a catechism. Modern structures can be used for ancient methods. There’s room for flexibility, but we need to be more purposeful in our ends. Fogleman’s overall message is clear and correct. He shows that churches need to foster believers’ faith in straightforward, systematic ways. Making Disciples provides pastors and theologically informed church leaders with an excellent framework for revitalizing their approach to discipleship in the local church.

The law prohibits sex-based discrimination

A disturbing video from a pro wrestling event in California shows the MMA-fighting son of UFC great Quinton “Rampage” Jackson attacking a wrestler in the ring to the point that he appeared unconscious.Raja Jackson hopped into the ring to take down Syko Stu at KnokX Pro’s KnokXperience event on Saturday in Sun Valley. Stu had allegedly hit Jackson in the head with a can outside the venue earlier in the night, and Jackson saw his moment and took it.Jackson’s father came to his defense in a post on X.“I want to clear up the misinformation about my son Raja. I’ve been confirmed that the wrestler (Stewart Smith aka Syko Stu) is awake and stable,” Rampage Jackson wrote. “Raja was unexpectedly hit in the side of the head by him moments before Smith’s match, Raja was told that he could get his ‘payback’ in the ring. ... It was bad judgement, and a work that went wrong. Raja is a MMA fighter not a pro wrestler and had no business involved in an event like this.”“I don’t condone my son’s actions AT ALL! He suffered a concussion from sparring only days ago and had no business doing anything remotely close to physical contact. As a father, im [sic] deeply concerned with his health AND the well being of Mr. Smith. That being said I’m very upset that any of this happened, but my main concern now is that Mr. Smith will make a speedy recovery. I apologize on his behalf and to KICK for the situation.”“It looks bad,” BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock comments on “Jason Whitlock Harmony.” “This looks like another one of these black fatigue videos. Holy cow. What could have happened that would provoke Rampage’s son to hop into the ring and to pummel this man in this way?”However, the incident was livestreamed to Jackson’s Kick account — where he was explaining what he was going to do to Stu beforehand to an audience.“He’s a streamer on a stream, talking to an audience, and he’s trying to become famous. He’s trying to build up his stream. ... He’s getting gassed up for conflict because that’s what works in this new world we’ve created, this social media matrix,” Whitlock explains.“This feels like a publicity stunt that went too far,” he says, “got out of hand.”“You’d be shocked at what desperate people, unskilled people, unprepared people will do in pursuit of fortune and fame,” he adds.Want more from Jason Whitlock?To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

An Indiana mother says she had a very creepy interaction with a fourth-grade teacher before he was arrested a week later for allegedly possessing child sex abuse material.Julian Wachner, 55, was a composer and a fourth-grade math teacher before he was arrested on Wednesday over cryptocurrency purchases he allegedly made on a dark-web site, according to court records.'I came across the previous allegations. ... It did raise some type of red flag because it was all very public information.'Wachner allegedly admitted to making the purchases in interviews with investigators."He further stated that, over the course of several years, he had downloaded and subsequently deleted [child sex abuse material] that he had obtained from the Dark Web," the court records read.A woman who did not want to be identified told WTTV-TV that she had agreed to let her daughter have a playdate with Wachner's daughter after he insisted numerous times for her child to come to his home. Her daughter had been in the same kindergarten class as Wachner's daughter the previous year."Every time we did see him, he was like, 'We have to set this up. We have to do this. We have to do this,'" she said.On the day of the playdate, the suspicious mom said that she googled the man's name after getting "weird vibes" about the request and was shocked by what she found."I came across the previous allegations, the sexual misconduct allegations, and I read up on everything," the mom said. "It did raise some type of red flag because it was all very public information."RELATED: Ex-Texas county GOP official sentenced to more than 400 years in prison over child sex assault and child porn possession Wachner was fired as a musical director at Trinity Church Wall Street over allegations of sexual misconduct going back to 2014. He vehemently denied the allegations and later became a teacher at the Invent Learning Hub in Indianapolis. He had sued for defamation over the charges, but the case was dismissed.The mom says she decided to accompany her child at the playdate to be safe."Just to think if I was to have left, if I wasn't the type of parent that would have stayed for a playdate, and I left my child, it just makes me angry," the mom said.She showed WTTV some of the texts she received from Wachner the day of the playdate. The school told parents of students that they had conducted a background check on Wachner before they hired him. They said none of the children at the school were impacted by Wachner's alleged behavior. "If anyone that is working with kids has any type of sexual allegation against them, even if it's not with minors, I really don't think they should be working in close proximity to kids," the mom added. Julian Wachner in 2010. Photo by Hiroyuki ito/Getty Images Court documents said that police found cocaine and a laptop with the child sex abuse material at the man's home when police served a search warrant. Wachner was arrested on suspicion of child exploitation and child pornography. Police are continuing their forensic analysis of the laptop, and a decision on the final charges is yet to be made. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!