100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: Do you think that it's ironic | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Peccy
on
Fri 11/06/09 09:31 AM
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well.
Your thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well. Your thoughts? Absolutely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well. Your thoughts? Well since virtually everything in the bible is borrowed from other cultures, and since many of those other cultures did worship "heavenly" bodies, it makes sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well. Your thoughts? my thoughts never envolve the old testament. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<=== Is slow today.
Why is this ironic? Because some people think the Christian mythology is less mythological than ancient Greek & Roman mythology? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<=== Is slow today. Why is this ironic? Because some people think the Christian mythology is less mythological than ancient Greek & Roman mythology? The Christian mythology is Jewish mythology. It's not even that; it's just a story book. In Greek and other multi-deity religions there is action removed from man. Man is boring when put next to a god. And in Christian mythology there is just God and Man. God always wins, he always can smite us, no repercussion. What sort of a fair game is that? That's why monotheist religions are so boring, theocratic, despotic, and -- you guessed it -- stupid. There is no process that would propel the system into a better and brighter future. Satan is a sorry attempt at playing the devil's advocate. Christian / Jewish religion is boring, and you can't really call something an epic mythology when there is one hero, and nobody else in the celestial line-up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well. Your thoughts? my thoughts never envolve the old testament. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't really understand the OP, while Wux and Arc seem to. Whats it all about?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't really understand the OP, while Wux and Arc seem to. Whats it all about? It's about gods that are constellations, or their original ideas sprung up from stars and/or constellations, or else the gods, after they disappeared, became celestial constellations. I don't know how you could miss this. The idea is that the OP asked "Your thoughts?", which, when taken in its literative sense, does not force you to talk about what the OP is talking about, liberates the participants to talk about anything they like. But since Nom Chomsky we know that language is far from precise while being incredibly precise, but the meaning is not necessarily mapped from the precise thought of the asker, we must also entertain the idea that the OP may have asked "What are your thoughts on stellar deities?" I had to address the issue somewhat relative to this reformed question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't really understand the OP, while Wux and Arc seem to. Whats it all about? OP? Ocean Pacific? Wasn't that a preppie t-shirt company from the 80's? And really, "what's it all about" is a question philosophers have been debating for millenia. Do you really want to get into it right now? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peccy
on
Tue 11/10/09 02:17 PM
|
|
I still don't really understand the OP, while Wux and Arc seem to. Whats it all about? It's about gods that are constellations, or their original ideas sprung up from stars and/or constellations, or else the gods, after they disappeared, became celestial constellations. I don't know how you could miss this. The idea is that the OP asked "Your thoughts?", which, when taken in its literative sense, does not force you to talk about what the OP is talking about, liberates the participants to talk about anything they like. But since Nom Chomsky we know that language is far from precise while being incredibly precise, but the meaning is not necessarily mapped from the precise thought of the asker, we must also entertain the idea that the OP may have asked "What are your thoughts on stellar deities?" I had to address the issue somewhat relative to this reformed question. OP= original poster |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's about gods that are constellations, or their original ideas sprung up from stars and/or constellations, or else the gods, after they disappeared, became celestial constellations. Ah, so it was ambiguous. My confusion lies in the phrase "can simply be". If he had said "originally were" or "should have been" or "are similar to" or "might have been inspired by" or "became" or "actually are" I would have parsed the first sentence as something very specific. With "can simply be" I had the feeling that he meant to saying something more specific, which I had failed to properly infer. the meaning is not necessarily mapped from the precise thought of the asker Yes, exactly. (As applied to the first sentence.) For the last sentence, he had clearly stumbled upon some thoughts, and was asking whose they were. ------------------------------------ Peccy, please know that I am not, in any way, intending criticism of your post. I just wanted to be sure that I understood your intentions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peccy, please know that I am not, in any way, intending criticism of your post. I just wanted to be sure that I understood your intentions. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chomsky is a hard core, pull no punches intellectual He is also a kind and magnanimous man. I called him in company 'Tom Chomsky' and he still did not laugh at me. Granted, he was nowhere near the company where I uttered my stupid mistake. But still. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chomsky is a hard core, pull no punches intellectual He is also a kind and magnanimous man. I called him in company 'Tom Chomsky' and he still did not laugh at me. Granted, he was nowhere near the company where I uttered my stupid mistake. But still. Joe Namath, on the other hand, is an entire different cup of ballgame. Please, don`t remind me of the beating I received. Not by him, but someone just as tall, strong and good-looking as he was. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't really understand the OP, while Wux and Arc seem to. Whats it all about? It's about gods that are constellations, or their original ideas sprung up from stars and/or constellations, or else the gods, after they disappeared, became celestial constellations. I don't know how you could miss this. The idea is that the OP asked "Your thoughts?", which, when taken in its literative sense, does not force you to talk about what the OP is talking about, liberates the participants to talk about anything they like. But since Nom Chomsky we know that language is far from precise while being incredibly precise, but the meaning is not necessarily mapped from the precise thought of the asker, we must also entertain the idea that the OP may have asked "What are your thoughts on stellar deities?" I had to address the issue somewhat relative to this reformed question. OP= original poster You sure OP doesn't mean Operations Personell? Or Operator Personified? Or Other Person? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament can simply be personified stars, planets, and constellations as well. Your thoughts? my thoughts never envolve the old testament. they involve a great deal that has not a thing to do with the old testament. if you'd be specific i'd be specific. |
|
|
|
|
