Other № 114480
Call upon the wrath of god on ye
Call upon the wrath of god on ye
who see fit to tamper with such purity
of that which once lost can not be found
for such diseased ticks must be picked
and squashed between ones fingers
lest they spread their scurge upon that fertil ground
for once the soil is soured
within all fruit it bare the disease lingers
no blooms we see from those deflowered
call upon the wrath of god
for the wrath of god is truth
and it maybe the only cure
call upon the wrath of god
and the seed you sow may grow and bloom
into something that is pure
47 comments
Sorry tree huggers.
I value your opinion and look forward to more critiques from you.
"pestis! furcifer!" caecilius exclamat. multus sanguis fluit.
for blooms: The flower of a plant. (no flower ie. no bloom)
for deflowered: 2 To destroy the innocence, integrity, or beauty of; ravage (not just women)
for fruit:definition 3,4,and 5 A plant crop or product: the fruits of the earth.
Result; outcome: the fruit of their labor.
Offspring; progeny
"Call upon the wrath of god on thee" Is like a curse (A pox upon thee)
As far as half archaic speech half common speech.
Go to church or drama schools. Poetry isn't about speaking proper english It's about redefining the language. If you like free verse then you must understand that. Child abuse is something that must be overcome. no revenge can compensate for the damage it does. Only through acknowledgement can you begin to reverse the damage. The truth will set us free.
Thank you for your input it was quite challenging.
"Call upon the wrath of God, to fall upon those who see fit to tamper with..."
If it means "I call upon", then it's still awkward, because you're saying "I call upon the wrath of God on you", which is full of ambiguities. Are you calling upon a wrath of god that's sitting on someone? Are you calling upon the wrath of God whilst standing on someone? Or are you calling upon the wrath of God, to fall upon someone? You want the latter, but the sentence as you've written it could be read all three ways.
There are other problems with this poeme, mostly due to a lack of punctuation. In short, what you have is a garbled mess :(
\Thou\, pron. [Sing.: nom. Thou; poss. Thyor Thine; obj. Thee. Pl.: nom. You; poss. Youror Yours; obj. You.] [OE. thou, [thorn]u, AS. [eth][=u], [eth]u; akin to OS. & OFries. thu, G., Dan. & Sw. du, Icel. [thorn][=u], Goth. [thorn]u, Russ. tui, Ir. & Gael. tu, W. ti, L. tu, Gr. sy`, Dor. ty`, Skr. tvam. [root]185. Cf. Thee, Thine, Te Deum.] The second personal pronoun, in the singular number, denoting the person addressed; thyself; the pronoun which is used in addressing persons in the solemn or poetical style.
"Call upon the wrath of God on thee" is a decluration or a curse
ie. "A pox upon thee" .It's an answer like you should call on god's wrath to be your vengence.
In short either you get it and go with it or you don't.
You guys are tough. I like that.
Art thou he that should come? --Matt. xi. 3.
"You" and I quote :"Used to refer to an indefinitely specified person; one: You can't win them all." But I understand your confusion with this so I will change "thee" to "Ye" because I value your opinion so much. Even if your an insulting asshole.
For another thing, "may god have shame on you" isn't the same kind of phrase as "Call upon the wrath of god on ye" is. In order to be structured the same way, it would have to be, "Call upon the shame of God on ye," which doesn't make any more sense than your original.
For another thing, you've totally missed the point! All you have to do, you fucking clod, is "Call the wrath of God upon ye/thee/you/whateverthefuck." That's how you do it. And here's an interesting sideline: The Bible wasn't written in King James English, you fucking moron!!!!! It was just re-written in King James for people using it during King James's time, and after awhile everyone thought it made them sound kind of cool and powerful, when really it just made them all sound like dolts and hopeless anachronisms. In short: forget all this Biblical reference gobble; you just thought it made you sound intelligent and poetic. I hope you're feeling horribly horribly wrong about that now.
The thing is that it's a command, so it still sounds dodge if you say "Call the wrath of God upon thee". Commands are in the 2nd person. Because thee means you, you're commanding someone to call the wrath of God upon themselves! Is that really what he means? He should get rid of the you/thee/ye altogether, and put:
"Call the wrath of God to fall upon those who see fit to..."
For instance: "no blooms we see from those deflowered". The reason I interpreted it as once you chop the heads off flowers they never flower again (which would be incorrect) is because otherwise all you are saying is flowers which have had their flowers taken away are not flowering which is a tautology. Why say it.
The archaic line is a reflection of the bible. Meaning you should think of the line in biblical terms.
I will admit the "no blooms" line is redundant at some level but so is "Dead men tell no tales." That doesn't mean it doesn't have a secondary more poetically implied meaning.(Kill the snitch). I do believe you're all quite smart but to state these arguments with little if nothing to back them up seems somewhat arrogant.
"to state these arguments with little if nothing to back them up seems somewhat arrogant."
What I am saying is no different from what any other member of a poetry site will say. The use of excessively archaic language when the poem works without is a no-no. Metaphors that are open to misinterpretation are not good metaphors. Also when I said published, I meant a piece that a respectable publisher would put in their magazine. 'Whilst the bells ring' has a good last verse but the title alone would be enough to get an editor to throw the poem in the bin.
call upon the wrath of god
for the sword he yields is truth
and through his word procure
A spot of holy ground
and the seed you sow may grow and bloom
into something that is pure
Truth is a powerful thing. Look what it did to Nixon.
Secondly, it should be (as in my rewritten versions) 'on THEM', due to the fact that 'Thee' is the singular pronoun. As it stands, you're telling the abuser to call the wrath of God on himself -- an admirable sentiment, perhaps, but not very practical or likely. Besides, to make it work as it is, you'd have to change the tense in the second line to 'Who sees' -- again, 'Thee' being singular. Also, the fourth and fifth lines are just plain silly. And the spelling's a disaster.
I am not god I can't call his wrath but I can request it.
I wish you guys would bring proof to back up your argument.
By the way I like your poems.
To order or request to undertake a particular activity: called on our friends to help.
Take a look at your example, "called on our friends to help". Do you see anything there even halfway grammatically similar to the line in your poem, "Call upon the wrath of god on ye", other than the phrase "call upon"? There isn't anything. Your friends are people; wrath is a thing. To make your comment example even slightly correspond to your poem, you'd have to say, "Call upon the help of our friends on us." That, of course, is gobble.
On the other hand, to make the poem line similar to your comment, you'd have to say "called upon God to bring his wrath upon ye." This is just fine. THAT'S HALF OF THE FUCKING POINT.
But it still doesn't take care of -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I.'s point that you don't know who's calling or where God is. If you're telling the abuser, or whatever, to call the wrath of God upon themselves - well, that doesn't make sense, does it? All they'd have to do is pretend they didn't hear or understand you, and there'd be no wrath, would there?
Or maybe you meant, "[I] call the wrath of God upon ye". Then why didn't you just say so? Oh, because it sounded deeper this way. Well, I hope you see what kind of mess that's gotten you in.
But I bet you just didn't know what the fuck you were saying. You thought, in some dim highschool English lit fashion, that the way you get wrath to fall on someone is to tell it, the wrath, "Call upon the wrath of God etc. etc." It's as if I called you on the phone (which I wouldn't) and said to you, "Find yourself and tell you to come over for videogames and cornchips." Am I right? Sheesh! Even the Jameses weren't that dim.
You can't have reduplicated prepositions in english that split the object
"Call upon the wrath of god on ye" Is an excellent bit of mockery of those who have no idea how to sound archaic but try to anyway. "scurge" is a nicely subtle way of shortening the line to the author's specifications in the manner of the great Robert Duncan. The pun on "may be" in the fourth to last line is an example of supreme wit matched only by the uncapitalized god, a most original way of indicating the author's displeasure with religion.
In short, there are few poems better crafted than this.
Thus this poem most certainly merits a score of.....
HAHAH
Gotcha there. Just kidding.
"Call upon the wrath of god on ye" just sounds like an illiterate wanker trying to sound biblical
"scurge" should be scourge
"it maybe" should be "it may be"
Now, since you posted a "correction" I would assume that you would at least fix those utterly guffy fuckups if not delete the whole dribbling amorphous, artless and musicless pseudopoem. However, since you did not, I can only assume that your edit was to get your poem up to the top of the list again and erase the 7 and the 8 you'd gotten (which were really generous)
Before you wonder about it, yes I really do mean it. Please, try again. On second thought, don't!
-10 of shame-
Celestine V didn't want to be pope and tried to retire to monastery
By Tony Staley
Compass Editor
St. Celestine V
When: 1210-1296
Where: Italy
What: Founder of an order of monks and pope
Canonized: 1313
Feast: May 19
An old saying warns: Be careful what you ask for, you might get it. St. Celestine V may have wished he had heeded that warning.
As the abbot of an order of monks, he told the College of Cardinals to stop their fighting, which had gone on for two years, and elect a new pope. If they didn't, he warned, he would call the wrath of God down upon them. So on July 5, 1294, the cardinals elected the 84-year-old abbot as the new pope.
Try... just TRY to understand: "he would call the wrath of God down upon them" is completely correct. The line in your poem, "Call upon the wrath of God on ye", is TOTALLY DIFFERENT. For one thing, the internet line has only one prepositional phrase, "down upon them"; yours has two, "upon", and "on ye," which combine to cause a kind of completely bumming reaction. THIS IS THE POINT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE ALL WEEK. THIS IS MOSTLY WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE FUCKING POEM.
For another thing, the internet quote has a subject, "he", which is doing the calling. Yours does not. No one knows who's doing the calling, or who is being called. THIS IS THE OTHER THING THAT'S MAINLY WRONG WITH YOUR POEM. ARE YOU THAT FUCKING DIM??!? SHEESH! GET A LIFE, BUDDY!!!!1!
Among the Pastors of the Saxon Churches
Entered into the Public Record at the Synod of Mediasch
22 June 1572_.
by Lucas Ungleich [aka Lukas Unglerus], 1526-1600
-:But as many as scorn the Son by their unbelief are condemned,
and the wrath of God remains upon them.
but the blame falls back on ourselves, who stubbornly resist
the divine will, and by our sins call the wrath of God and punishments upon ...
By Mary M. Bodie
"We emphasize the fact which is especially interesting and instructive to us, that it is not Christ alone but His people also - His Body - who will have part in the thrilling scenes of the Day of the Lord. We notice the significant fact, that the living creatures will call the wrath of God into evidence - Rev. 6."
'He would call the wrath of God upon them' -- NOT 'would call upon the wrath of God on them'.
'by our sins call the wrath of God and punishments upon...' NOT 'by our sins call upon the wrath of God and punishments upon...'
'the living creatures will call the wrath of God into evidence' NOT 'the living creatures will call upon the wrath of God into evidence.'
Look. Let me put it as simply as possible. You call UPON or ON something to make it do something. 'I call upon the name of God to witness my oath' or whatnot. Or you call something down on someone: 'I call hours of boring Bible-reading on all illiterate sprogs.' You can't do both.
And to take a poem literally and not for It's implied meaning is even more retarded. You guy's would look at a Picasso and say "That don't look anything like a woman."
Divine retribution for sin
The line can be interpreted as.
Request the vengeance of god on those who see fit...
It's meant as an answer to "what should I do about these people. Obviously I'm barking up the wrong tree.
Log in to add a comment.