Re: a comment on Prayer For The Church by sliver	7-Apr-05/5:28 AM
I was raised Catholic. You obviously weren't.
Re: a comment on Prayer For The Church by sliver	7-Apr-05/5:26 AM
Consider the following chart: God doesn't want a strong leader + Man prays = No strong leader. God doesn't want a strong leader + Man doesn't pray = No strong leader. God wants a strong leader + Man prays = Strong leader. God wants a strong leader + Man doesn't pray = Strong leader. 1)In any of the instances above, did praying actually change God from doing what He was already planning on? 2) So what good is praying then? 3) What truth are Catholics strayed from? If your answer is "The truth that -=Baptist=- or some other Christian God is better", let me tell you that's just not going to happen. 4) You still didn't say "But Your will be done" in the poem. That's still the whole point. 5) Can you answer a question without babbling irrelevantly? What if it's a question from God? What about this one: "Are you still so dull?" - Jesus, Mt 15:16
Re: a comment on Arab Shepherd (a belief poem for Dovina) by zodiac	7-Apr-05/5:08 AM
The original pillar of salt (i.e., formerly Lot's wife) is about 10 miles from here. Here's a picture: http://www.atlastours.net/jordan/salt_pillar.jpg
Re: a comment on Arab Shepherd (a belief poem for Dovina) by zodiac	7-Apr-05/4:55 AM
Yes, that about covers it. The non-parenthetical part is the real title. The parenthetical part is so you'll read it. I've been afraid you don't anymore. I wonder which you think you are: standing, walking against the wind, or walking with the wind. I really couldn't say. Me, I'm probably the guy who walks against till it changes and then walks against again. 'Twas isn't Old English. It's not even necessarily Middle or Shakespearean English. It was used in poetry as late as Robert Frost, whom this poem is basically a halfassed word-substitution of. (Hence the maintained meter, hence the cumbersome sentence.) To be fair, I could have used "It's no more toil" and been grammatically and metrically correct. I just didn't think people'd find 'twas olden.
Re: Moments (or) Suicide by Dovina	6-Apr-05/3:49 AM
I don't follow the last sentence. Are you going to be evaluated for the 70% ratio, or for your failure to have more Moments in thirty-something years of existing?
Re: Nothingness by beck2457	6-Apr-05/3:45 AM
It wasn't very interesting, except to you.
Re: Yesterdays testament by Caducus	6-Apr-05/3:45 AM
The Bible lies, not lays.
Re: Hanging Gallows by Hadasl	6-Apr-05/3:39 AM
"here" should be "hear" "Poseidon's wheeze" should be anything else.
Re: Celestial Veil by Hadasl	6-Apr-05/3:35 AM
When God is lonely, do you think He ever imagines looking at nude girls, the way humans do? PS-I know you don't separate Jesus and God in the poem, but I imagine them separate and, you know, like hanging out alot. I mean, why the hell wouldn't they?
Re: a comment on Prayer For The Church by sliver	6-Apr-05/3:24 AM
Where does silver say "nevertheless, not my will but yours be done"? Sure, he's backtracked and said it since -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. called him on it, and it was probably somewhere in his mind when he was writing the poem. But this whole conversation is about whether you're asking for your own will or God's will while praying, so you have to admit that's a pretty big thing to leave out. As far as the poem/prayer goes, he's only asking for his own will. PS-I notice you've totally changed your approach since posting this comment, and now prayer's not supposed to be logical. Well, I mean, duh. For one thing, you're talking to an invisible being with the omnipotent power to inconsistently grant incomprehensible gifts. For another thing, when you pray you pretty much have something in mind that you want (i.e., to pass this math test), but you're supposed to ask for whatever God sees fit to offer (i.e., a new Chevy Malibu), so you kind of want to remind God about the math test without seeming like you know better what you need. In that kind of bind, the Jesus model isn't a bad one; you tell God what you have in mind (i.e., not dying), then politely ask him to do whatever He was going to do in the first place (i.e., crucifixion). Unfortunately, that's not what silver did. That's the whole point.
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	6-Apr-05/3:07 AM
I get it. You still don't get it. Let's try a test: I'll explain how I get it, and you explain how you get it. If I can't explain or my answer's gibberish, I lose. Same for you. To make it easy for you, I'll go first. To make it slightly harder for you, after you're finished explaining you have to justify or apologize for contradicting yourself 4-Apr-05/8:21 AM, 4-Apr-05/1:40 PM, and 4-Apr-05/4:29 PM, to say the least. ZODIAC: Can you not see that the closed-minded under the first definition ONLY consider the source [i.e., I won't consider his proposition that my odor is offensive because he's Negro, or because he's zodiac], while the closed-minded under the second definition ONLY consider the content [i.e., I won't consider his proposition that my odor is offensive, because it goes against my pre-existing ideas about my odor]? ADDENDUM: As of 4-Apr-05/8:21 AM, Dovina had never said anything like the second definition, only the first. Since then, she's said the two are the same like ten times. (They're not.)
Re: a comment on Prayer For The Church by sliver	4-Apr-05/10:43 PM
Oh God, this conversation's going downhill fast. So why bother asking God to "help them elect a leader", etc? Why not just ask for His will to be done, even if it means not finding a leader at all, or finding one who's a total clod? Do you hope the new pope will have a stronger hand and take more stands than JohnPaul2 did, or do you just generally hope he'll have strong hands and take stands? If your answer is the first one, what do you hope he'll have stronger hands and better stands than JP2 about? I'm genuinely curious.
Re: a comment on Vietnam by the_poetess	4-Apr-05/10:35 PM
I recommend the exact opposite of pinkbunnyofdoom's suggestion. Only total hacks write about classics.
Re: a comment on tumbleweed by crooked_smile	4-Apr-05/10:23 PM
Is that your answer?
Re: a comment on He hit me over the head with a by T. Jonathron Remp	4-Apr-05/10:22 PM
Oh, sorry. I'll rephrase: You ought to have not used 'whence'.
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	4-Apr-05/10:21 PM
"Closed-minded people reject propositions for reasons other than the propositions' content, such as the race, sex, etc of the person presenting the proposition" is the exact opposite of "[closed-minded] refuse to consider CONTENT that conflicts with what they already believe." Can you not see that the closed-minded under the first definition only consider the source [i.e., I won't consider his proposition that my odor is offensive, because he's Negro, or because he's zodiac], while the closed-minded under the second definition only consider the content [i.e., I won't consider his proposition that Negroes are inferior, because it goes against my pre-existing ideas about Negroes.] You're going to say "-=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. already said that, and better, and besides they think you're dim." Whatever. You could not have more clearly not gotten it the first time.
Re: He hit me over the head with a by T. Jonathron Remp	3-Apr-05/4:25 AM
You misused "whence".
Re: All About Me by chocolate9009	3-Apr-05/4:20 AM
Welcome to the world! You must be five years old.
Re: tumbleweed by crooked_smile	3-Apr-05/4:15 AM
٠وعقة انت؟
Re: late night delirium by not_a_philosopher	3-Apr-05/4:10 AM
Yeah, we're not likely to understand, especially considering this exact idea has been overdiscussed since Torah times.