The Song Fight Bulletin Board

String theory explains EVERYTHING.

tonetripper wrote:Maybe if we all were a bit more into our spiritual consciousness perhaps we might become more aware of what the real archetypes are in the universe

Heh, M-W's first definition of "archetype" is

• a primitive generalized plan of structure deduced from the characters of a natural group of plants or animals and assumed to be the characteristic of the ancestor from which they are all descended.

There's a strange interconnectedness to all this stuff!

"messiah" is starting make me and P.J. look coherent.

Me$$iah wrote:and more to the point how can a God be both omnipotent and omniscient.

By being all-powerful and all-knowing.

BAH! /spills drink.

Erik, that was great!

deshead wrote:

tonetripper wrote:Maybe if we all were a bit more into our spiritual consciousness perhaps we might become more aware of what the real archetypes are in the universe

Heh, M-W's first definition of "archetype" is

• a primitive generalized plan of structure deduced from the characters of a natural group of plants or animals and assumed to be the characteristic of the ancestor from which they are all descended.

There's a strange interconnectedness to all this stuff!

Exactly, but I do want to make the concept clear that instead of "the universe" as it is posted should read "our universe". That keeps with the idea that it is something a part of this world or consciousness.

Kapitano wrote:

c hack wrote:I'm pretty sure the old testament was written in Hebrew, and the new testament in Aramaic.

Most of the old testament (or torah) was written in Aramaic, and most of the rest of it in Hebrew. The relationship between the two is like the relationship between Spanish and Basque - fundamentally the same, but with so many differences in vocabulary and idiom they can be mutually unintelligible.

Isn't Basque completely diferent from Spanish? - ie. Basque is not Indo-European in origin?

But back to the point - if we had mixed human-monkey soccer teams - there's no way I would want to play on the same team as, say a mandrill or crab-eating macaque - when the other side has capuchins or howler monkeys using their tails willy-nilly - no, the rule book would have to clearly state that any deliberate tail-play by a species originating from South or central America (except for marmosets or tamarins, of course) would result in a free kick to the opposing team.

And if apes were allowed to play as well as monkeys, we would have even more problems. Take gibbons for example. Surely they could argue that since their main form of locomotion is brachiation, then they should be able to use only their hands while playing - though the lack of close canopy forest cover over most major football stadiums would render them reasonably ineffective in open field play away from the actual goal mouths.

Caravan Ray wrote:Isn't Basque completely diferent from Spanish? - ie. Basque is not Indo-European in origin?

Speakers of Basque have historical reasons for distancing themselves from Spain, so the differences between the two languages are often exagerated.

It has been suggested that Basque derives from the Finno-Urgric group, making it a cousin to Hungarian, Estonian and Finnish. I'm not an expert in these languages, but IMO Basque doesn't have the vowel harmony or aglutinative structure to support that idea.

BTW, if anyone here is an expert and knows differently, please tell me.

It's also been suggested that Basque is an 'isolate' - the final remaining language from a family that died out long ago. If so, it's been heavily influenced by geographically surrounding languages. Much as a germanic language like English has been so influenced by latinate neighbours that some people believe English comes from Latin.

Mr. Caravan Ray,



you are a silly man.


And I love it.

Vatican Cardinal Condemns Schiavo Death

(03-31) 08:45 PST ROME, Italy (AP) --
A Vatican cardinal denounced the death Thursday of Terri Schiavo, saying that removing the feeding tube that kept her alive was "an attack against God."

Portuguese Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, head of the Vatican's office for sainthood, said that "an attack against life is an attack against God, who is the author of life."

an attack against God? please..... it's called death with dignity. maybe God doesn't like humans that think it's their mission in life to play God. and killing 300,000 innocent people with a tsunami...what's that?

God being God.

I'm not sure of all the facts on the Terri case, I don't know if she was aware or not, but I do know that it's not natural to have a "feeding tube", so isn't it a direct challenge to God to ulitize our free will (Puce....) to prevent a death he had pre-arranged?


...cause I completely have the down-low on God's motives... right.

I am stunned at the big political deal this was made out to be. I loved Jon Stewart's observation about Bush on this one. The guy comes home from vacation early to deal with this, but he didn't cut things short for the Tsunami tragedy... you had to hear Stewart's take on it... it was brilliant.

you guys have it all wrong, it was God's Plan to have the feeding tube removed.

You can't get away from your destiny, people.....even the people who think they are acting from free will, forget it. Your free will was destined to you so that you think you are making decisions, but in reality it's all been chosen for you.

This is God's way.

/bullshit (*this is me being a smartass about a God that allows things like tsunamis to occur. )

the really sad thing about this woman being used as a political pawn and plastered all over the media ad nauseum is that she will be most remembered for her death and not for her life and all she did with it.

TheHipCola wrote:/bullshit (*this is me being a smartass about a God that allows things like tsunamis to occur. )

well, god's not (if he exists) human you know. people like to attribute human thinking to him, but the dude's an alien. he/she/it doesn't think like you and me. people like to think god wants us all to live a long time, be happy and healthy, and never suffer. but obviously that doesn't suit his purpose (if there is one) because he's omnipotent. things are the way they are because he wants them that way, and tsunamis happen because he lets them happen, for whatever reason he's got going on.

people are nuts. at the same time they sing songs about the great mystery and how you can never figure god out, they then proceed to ascribe concrete reasoning and motives to what happens in the world as a result of "god's will".

so they're like "god hates fags" and then turn around and say "he works in mysterious ways".

people who pretend to know what god wants are infuriating and hilarious at the same time to me.

agreed JB, I should have been clearer...that line should have read:

/bullshit (*this is me being a smartass about a concept of God that allows for things like tsunamis to occur. )

It goes back to the cocknballs thing..people attribute human features and fixtures to God because those things are common to all people.

TheHipCola wrote:agreed JB, I should have been clearer...that line should have read:

/bullshit (*this is me being a smartass about a concept of God that allows for things like tsunamis to occur. )

It goes back to the cocknballs thing..people attribute human features and fixtures to God because those things are common to all people.

well, they do that 'cause the bible says we're "made in his image". and the bible is so trustworthy.

jb wrote:people who pretend to know what god wants are infuriating and hilarious at the same time to me.

I'm thinking that you didn't mean what this reads like you meant... or do you..

The "pretend" part kinda implies that the individual is consciously acting as if they know, when deep down inside they don't...
I'm assuming you meant "people who think they know what god wants...."

or some such thing.

Confirm/Deny?

yeah, you got it. i guess i just mean they're fooling themselves i suppose, because they fail to recognize their own contradiction.

HeuristicsInc wrote:Specifically, "image" is a word in a translated version of a book. Does anyone know the original word, in Greek or whatever that book of the Bible was originally written in? My prof for "Myths Dreams and Fantasies" which covered the similarities/differences between creation stories (including the two different ones in Genesis) mentioned a version of the Bible that had a lot of good footnotes on the original meanings of the words and phrases (for scholars).

I consulted a friend who's got this version. He says "image" here was written as a Hebrew word like "selem" with a little curlicue on the s. Evidently there is nothing in the direct translations of that particular word that supports any reading besides actual physical appearance. Now that's if you believe in the word-for-word truth of the book. Anyway, that's all I was checking, just the translation of the word. Interestingly enough the word(s) for "graven images" are different.
Also, in that section, he says "Adam and Eve" are referred to as a unit, a single name, lending some precedence to alternate interpretations of some sort.
-bill

jb wrote: people who pretend to know what god wants are infuriating and hilarious at the same time to me.

Amen.

Equally weird are the arguments against god citing the amount of suffering in the world. My religious days ended when I realized the 2x2 table was tautological:

Good thing happens: God loves us
Bad thing happens: Mysterious ways/testing us
Good thing doesn't happen: Protecting us
Bad thing doesn't happen: Answered our prayers

If faith is purely spiritual, and no amount of reason will create or destroy it, why do (some of) the faithful spend so much time worrying about God's impact on the world? I'm definitely the agnostic version of a Calvinist.

Mostess wrote:I'm definitely the agnostic version of a Calvinist.

Dude, you just blew my mind.