Thoughts......Kinda Random

The noble Order of the Knights of Jubal traces its origins back to the Year Two Thousand A.D., when a group of distinguished persons of good and true character, founded the order to promote chivalry and honour. The order takes its name from our leader, Alexander Jubal McRae, who on two (so far) occasions has been seriously injured, in one case fatally, defending an innocent woman from attackers.

Moderators: Jamie, Greg

Postby Seldom on Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:39 am

I agree, Zolgar, that my conclusions are, in fact, my conclusions. My research was done through public access literature, and performed without the input of any organisation, and, where possible, used multiple translations of given literature. I tried to be thorough. But, no matter my measures, I still agree that my conclusions are my own, supported by my notes, and concluded from my thoughts. <P>However, your comment, "for example, anyone who is even remotly educated in the bible can use out of context, slightly reworded, or even perfectly quoted and proper conext verses to throw off alot of Christians... I could.", would send most of my brother scholars into a rage. Our intent is to be objective, and while I will not discuss objectivity in this post, it is still our devout intent to read all literature, and respond as often as possible with neutrality. Some of the things I left off the list of readings I gave earlier were Satan Worship, Scientology, Infernalism, African Blood Cults, Poly-American Polytheism, Catholic Heresy, Protestant Heresy, Shintai Ascendance Cults, Death Cults, Northern European Polytheism and Druidic Animism/Polytheism. While their addition to my research was frowned upon by some of my more traditional elders, I feel it added a level of completion to my work that would otherwise be lacking. <P>In theory, logic leads to only one conclusion, barring the interference of personal belief or personal emotion. While I will never claim to be a creature of untainted logic, I will state that I had plenty of time to attempt to filter any stain of my own prejudice from the work itself. I feel that the conclusions I reached are as clear and logical as I could make them, which was what was asked of me.<P>So, while I WILL agree with you, that yes, that was how I chose to see things, I WILL also attest that there are only so many conclusions to be drawn, and, barring human deceit, only so many logical conclusions to draw. In my work I strive to create objective view, and feel that I did so.<P>As a side note, have you ever noticed that you have a habit of contrarian behavior? It may only be the brevity of my contact with you, but you seem unable to accept a point without responding with an argument, even when you state an agreement with the point. While I agree with the need for the role of a questioner in all things, I have discovered that the Devil's Advocate is often burned for his questions. <P>just a note...<P>-Seldom<P>"An educated man is the enemy of faith, because the more a man knows, the less he fears the unknown, and without a fear of the unknown, he has no need for faith.."<P>-Tertias, The Agonies of the Faithful
Seldom
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: USA

Postby Deathscythe on Mon Jul 30, 2001 6:27 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Star Of Mars:
<B>Ohio USA here
People always smile and say "thankyou" to me when I hold open doors and help with burdens.. is it because I'm female?
Chivalry = being polite and courteous in general, smiling and nodding when you meet someone, helping those in need, protecting our rights .. I mean, I could go on forever ..<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>People in Ohio also are the best spoken people in the United States. Enunciation, grammar, and diction are all the best in Ohio, and it shows when visiting.<P>------------------
I don't mind if you try to kill me, but I might struggle a bit.
Deathscythe
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: U.S.A

Postby Zolgar on Mon Jul 30, 2001 10:32 am

Okay, I didn't read the entirety of your post Seldom, but, enough to make my response <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/smile.gif"><P>First, on my comment about taking the bible out of context, I did not mean to imply that YOU did it, I meant to state that it could b done, quite easilly. I was refering to like those who say that God condones homosexuality (I cannot recally the area, but..) it states "Let us rejoice and be glad in it", some translations, however, say "Let us rejoice and be gay in it" Therefor, they use that translation to say that God wants us to be homosexual (never mind the part that very bluntly states that man shall not lay with man, woman with woman, man with borther, man with sister and so on and so on.) If you red it wrong, sorry..<P>(Quick subnote on that too, if you believe th Bibe, even Satan himself does that, he played with out of context, and even in context, verses when he was testing the Messiah.) <P>The one about arguments, yes I argue alot, but I don't do it every time! *grin teasingly*.. Though that post was not an argument against yours, it was just an interesting point..<P>And, for the one about the devils advcate, Amen. However, the devils advocate also learns more if they pay attention. Because rather than just ask a question and get an answer, they ask a question, get an answer, and respond to it with a counter point. <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/smile.gif"><P>I find myself playing the devils advocate often.. And ometimes, changing sides mid argument.. *snickers* I miss a three ay arguent that used to get going alot.. Me, a christian and an athiest, I would go from argueing the athiest, to argueing the christian and back. (even though I believe Christianity is a right one <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/smile.gif">)<P>*quits typing and goes to roleplay*<P>------------------
To look death in the face
To end life, to take life
To damn this infernal race
Slay a man, slay his wife
Why, God, is it so simple
To destroy all we know
To make this world a temple
unto the demise we sow
And yet, it is so hard
to bring even the slightest
change to raise the standard
and, for once, give the world rest<P>(Okay, so, I'm not a good poet.)
Zolgar
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon May 28, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: city: Denile. State: Confusion. Country: Music

Postby Seldom on Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:18 am

Actually, no, I did not think you had acccused me of it. I meant that the intimation of intentional use of text out of context would send my fellow Knights of the Merciful Truth into a rage. Part of our Oath is to objectivity, and it is, strangely, one of our most vehemently defended points. The suggestion that we could acitvely misuse infromation is a terrible insult to our Order, and, though we cannot hold it against you, due to your ignorance of our Oath, we still take offense.<P>-Seldom
Knight Ambassador of the Three Orders<P>"I would rather Die than be acccused of corrupting a single word of my writings."<P>-Eric the Blind, Lord of Merciful Truth.<p>[This message has been edited by Seldom (edited 07-31-2001).]
Seldom
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: USA

Postby Silver Adept on Tue Jul 31, 2001 7:32 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Greg:
<B> Here's an anecdote which (I think) sums this up quite nicely:
</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>It does. In fact, I'd suggest adding that up to the KOJ webpage as a part of our "What is Chivalry?" or a page where it explains "Why do you do this anyway?" <P>It's a wonderful anecdote. And welcome back, too.
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Star Of Mars on Wed Aug 01, 2001 3:23 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Greg:
<B> If you think about it for a while, this sums up a lot about the Order of Jubal. The things we do and say, we do them because of who _we_ are and what we believe, not because the person we aid is more diserving or worthy than any other.<P>And because we do these things regardless of who or what the other person is (male or female, Christian or Pagan), it follows that we extend Chivalry to all people.
</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Maybe I am once again missing something .. but .. I wasn't commenting on the worth of those I extend my chivalry to, I was commenting that people never seem to look at me oddly, as the others posting in response seemed to experiance, they always smiled politely. I was thinking perhaps they reacted differently to me because they didn't think I might possibly be being chauvenistic or such (such as the woman in the story you gave seemed to think), but that since I were female, they just thought it was polite. (And so no one gets offended, I am in no way saying women are just more polite, or any such thing, I'm just giving a thought as to why people react differently to doors being held open by men, then they do to women)<P>and Deathscythe .. *laughs* You obviously have never visited my area .. there are remarkably few people who exhibit good enunciation, grammar, or diction .. (as you may notice by my confusing babble *lol*) .. I hear things like "There ain't no way I am gonna do that, I ain't gonna, those people suck, and those people are so stupid, and I ain't gonna be like them" *lol* but maybe it's just because I live in a small town, drug-infused, hick area of Ohio *joking chuckle*<P>------------------
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-S. G. Tallentyre, The Friends of Voltaire <P>Blessed Be
~*Crystal*~
The Star of Mars
CI
Star Of Mars
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Postby Silver Adept on Thu Aug 02, 2001 12:19 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Star Of Mars:
<B>I was thinking perhaps they reacted differently to me because they didn't think I might possibly be being chauvenistic or such (such as the woman in the story you gave seemed to think), but that since I were female, they just thought it was polite.
</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Salient point. Is there a difference of opinion here? Opening a door for someone can be interpreted differently depending on the sex of the person doing in and the person receiving it... that makes me wonder if this difference is in other acts of kindness...<P>Makes me want to do a random survey. <P>As for Random Acts, I've seen quite a few being performed. Little things here and there... nothing that would have been noticed if I wasn't there and happened to see it. <P>Maybe it's not that the deeds are being done, but that they aren't being seen...
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Gustav Snarp on Thu Aug 09, 2001 7:01 am

Funny how opening doors seems to come up as an example so often. I guess it is just one of the last gasps of politeness left in modern society. And if the trend toward automatic doors continues, where will we be then? Personally, I grew up in the American South, and was taught to open doors by example. I find that in the South, even though it is becoming a less prevalent behavior, it is at least not usually looked at strangely. Most people simply say thank you. (although recently a woman went on about how she always had trouble with those heavy doors and how nice it was). I think that the more common it is, the less people will look strangely on it. I remember during a trip to Nebraska I held the door for a woman and my friend then held the inner door. The woman was amazed. I don't remember what exactly she asked us about why we did it, but I recall our answer: "No ma'am, we're from the South". <P>Deathscythe, you must be from Ohio. Grammar, enunciation, and diction are more subjective than some might think, and personally, I have never heard the English language sound better than from the mouths of some ladies from Southern Mississippi.<p>[This message has been edited by Gustav Snarp (edited 08-09-2001).]
Gustav Snarp
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 11:00 pm

Postby Gustav Snarp on Fri Aug 10, 2001 7:46 am

Hmm, you're right, it is a stereotype, and it is certain there are still chivalrous men up north, just as there are plenty of rude people down here. In fact, it's getting worse in the South by the minute. (probably all you yankees moving down <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/wink.gif">). I submit that the reason is this. Chivalrous behavior has always co-existed with an agrarian culture. Mainly because that was all there was. When the industrial revolution swept through the Northeast; people had to move faster; more people were packed into less space; people were forced to work long hours in cramped, dark, dirty rooms. All this conspired to weaken chivalry. Suddenly people no longer knew their neighbors, you could see somebody one day and you might never see them again. No one could be trusted. Rudeness began to win the day. Meanwhile, the South remained largely agrarian for many years. Life was lived at a slower pace. You worked hard, but you worked in a field, you worked witht the earth, and life had a more natural cycle. And so old rules of politeness continued. When southern culture was reviled by others, they could still point to their manners. When industry moved in, fathers taught their sons these manners, sometimes harshly, because it was the one thing the South could claim as it's own, one thing they could look up to and say, see, we're not as bad as you think. Of course, now it's even disappearing in the South, but there are pockets where it holds on. That's why I love visiting my Grandmother in Missisippi. It's like stepping back into a South that no longer exists. People say sir and ma'am, gentlemen hold doors for ladies and offer them their seats. And then there are those accents. When some of those women speak, I fall instantly and hopelessly in love. Sometimes I fall in love five or six times in a day.<P>Anyway, that's my theory.<P>------------------
What you do may seem terribly unimportant, but it is terribly important that you do it anyway. - Mahatma Gandhi
Gustav Snarp
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 11:00 pm

Postby Silver Adept on Fri Aug 10, 2001 11:29 am

Ah, suddenly another stereotype springs to mind... that the Southern U.S. is full of antebellum, Dixie-whistling people. That adds the positive connotation that people in the South are exceedingly polite and well-mannered, and would love to do nothing more than spend a day talking with friends. <P>As opposed to us Northerners, who are cold, busineslike people who are always in a rush and never have time to do anything fun. Now I'm sure that both types of people exist in both areas, but it seems that the idea of chivalrous men seems to have anchored itself to the South. Any good ideas why?
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Silver Adept on Sat Aug 11, 2001 5:42 am

That could be it. As 'technology' progresses to the point where one does not need to have contact with the outside world to do everything that one would call 'necessary to survive', the average person knows his family (and that does include relatives, even estranged ones as may happen...), and has a few friends and co-workers, but nobody really just stops by the nieghbors and shoots the breeze with them anymore. (With exceptions...) Besides, everyone is too wrapped up in "getting ahead" that nobody thinks they can spare the time to get to know other people. <P>And I believe the proper term is "barn-raising". Barnstorming happens with a plane. But, you are both correct. Because our societal model prizes the individual over the whole, and the family structure is breaking down, (Think about it... how many aunts and uncles can today's children name? Grandparents? How about their grandmother's maiden name? Second cousins... etc, etc... the list goes on.) We're interacting less with people that we should be. The schools are expected to foster social behavior, but all you learn is when to pull Suzy's hair and not get in trouble... how to work the system. No actual communication or social skills really taught. <P>I guess the whole long-winded rant sums into this: Society prizes the individual, and has adapted itself to meet this change. Communication between people breaks down, because you don't need to go over to your neighbor's for a cup of sugar. Either you just don't bake the cake, or you go to the store and buy more sugar. Or better yet, you order the sugar on-line. That way you don't even chance running into another human being. They're all perverts and thieves and murderers, anyway. Each of them would easily cut your throat for them to get ahead... <P>...And that's what's wrong.
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Rei on Sat Aug 11, 2001 11:18 am

Hmm, or looking at your theory in another way, perhaps it was because the continued dominance of agrarian culture meant that people were more dependent on their wider community to survive. The example of a -- i think you call it a barnstorming, where everyone in the community pulls together without expecting material compensation to do some large work which could not be done by the individual?<P>In contrast, Fordian modes of production mean that the individual, the worker, was atomized and separated from the group, with their single skill or job, and the knowledge that they were easily replacable. They worked alone, and even though the dependance on workers who did a job before you is still there, it is not obvious. You're certainly not in a personal, reciprocal relationship with the guy.<P>So perhaps thats why chivalry persists in such cultures as you describe? Other people have other ideas?<P>Rei
curious as to the history and 'evolution' of chivalry
Rei
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Perth, WA, Australia

Postby Sekhmet on Sun Aug 12, 2001 8:45 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Silver Adept:
<B>(Think about it... how many aunts and uncles can today's children name? Grandparents? How about their grandmother's maiden name? Second cousins... etc, etc... </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Just to throw this out here, dear Silver, and to raise your hopes for "today's children" (Remember, I'm 17...."that age", as people out here often say).<P>My maternal grandmother's maiden name is Nicolson. Her parents' names were Homer and Irene. My maternal grandfather's mother's maiden name was Whitmore. My maternal aunts & uncles (including marriages) are Ron, Earlene, Glen, Marge, Rob, and Jann. My cousins are Michelle, Dawn, Ronald, Robyn, and Jonathan. My second cousins are Holly, Cody, Noel, Hunter, and Tanner.<P>My paternal grandmother's maiden name was Betts, and her parents' names were Perley and Ethel. My paternal grandfather's mother's maiden name was Dunbar. My paternal aunts & uncles (including marriages) are Irma, Carl, Barbara, Edwin Jr, Monica, David, Bernetta, Dave, Edwin Daniel, Claire, Charles, Kathy, Richard, and Todd. My cousins are Betty, Theresa, Edwina (whom we've disowned), ET (another one disowned), Charles Jr, Roy, Lili, Jessica, Zachery (the Younger), and Stephaine. My second cousins are Cedric, Curtis, Kevin, Sasha, and Zachery (the Elder).<P>I hope this raises your spirits. If you would like, I can also name my grandfathers, flawlessly, back twelve generations on both sides of the family.<P>(Don't mess with the person who writes the Christmas shopping list every year! <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/biggrin.gif"> )
------------------
"The waters, they are poisoned."
So reincarnate on some sane planet.<p>[This message has been edited by Sekhmet (edited 08-12-2001).]
Sekhmet
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: $in City, NV

Postby Atlas_v1.1 on Mon Aug 13, 2001 4:20 am

I could present a similar list, Seekhmet, (even if the names would all be in Danish (save one in Finnish...)) but the point remains.<P>When I speak of my family, people wonder at what it must be like to have so many people in your family. Then, when I ask them, it turns out they often have a comparably sized family, they just don't know them. For some strange reason, people are only concerning themselves with their closest family, parents, children and siblings, basically. Even grandparents often come out of the mix... Too often have I seen parents who avoid their own parents, thus depriving their children of grandparents. They may have reasons to do so, but does that make it any better?<P>I live in a building with 10 other apartments along the same stairwell, all inhabited. I don't know any of them yet, even though I've been living there for a good two weeks now. This is not right, I feel. And I aim to change it, too.
Atlas_v1.1
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Postby Sekhmet on Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:02 am

Atlas dear, beware... Though not everyone in our neighborhood knows everyone else, everyone knows the same lady, who lives across the street from us. We've lived in our house for six years now (the seventh starts in a couple of weeks), and it never fails that she calls three or four times a day. About coupons. About neighbors. About bad drivers. About her physical therapist. About the dog. About the wasps. About the dive-bombing mockingbirds next door. Knowing one's neighbors is a wonderful thing, because even if two people don't have a lot in common, they both know the affairs of the neighborhood. In South Dakota, what brought neighbors together was always yardwork. Mowing, planting, digging up...movement in a yard always attracted "sidewalk supervisors". Out here, everything is xenoscaped, and you only get sidewalk supervisors for car-washing and plant-staring. Living in an apartment building, you won't even have that. My advice, is make up a couple trays of confections and take one to each of your left- and right- hand neighbors. This is not only a lovely gesture, but it will really break the ice. Wear your most infectious and endearing smile! <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/smile.gif"><P>Luv
Sabi, CI<P>------------------
"The waters, they are poisoned."
So reincarnate on some sane planet.
Sekhmet
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: $in City, NV

Postby Silver Adept on Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:29 am

Excellent. You actually have a better recollection than I do, but it's mostly because I don't know my second cousins.<P>However, it does cheer me up to know that someone at some stage in life does know all of those things. (Although, I think you get helped by the Christmas thing...) <P>In any case, I have found out that cooking is still a good way to get to know the neighbors. (Especially if they have kids. Cookies are still yummy when fresh out of the oven at any age...)
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Cireecg on Wed Aug 15, 2001 2:24 am

Hail and well met.<P>I'm a newly ordained Companion, and thought I throw in my ideas on this topic.<P>On the original question of what good acts are, I believe that good acts are those that benefit others, done with no expectations of reward or compensation. I know this is a very simplified belief, but it is the core of what I believe good acts to be.<P>On the question of religion and chivalry. Chivalry is based upon religion, which tells us what is good and what is not. Without some form of religion originally, there would be no concept of chivalry. However, having religion is not equivalent to being chivalrous. Case in point: I am a member of the UC Davis Gospel Choir. During a recent trip to New York, I habitually held the door open for the rest of the troup if I was in front. Perhaps a quarter to a third of the choir ackowledged or thanked me. I believe this shows that religion, while showing what is good, does not necessarily equate to recognition or performance of it. <P> On religion itself: I am an agnostic, believing in the existance of A god, not necessarily the god of the Christians. Recently I have begun reading the Bible, and have just finished the Gospel of Luke. I find that while the Bible has shown me more of what is considered good behavior and actions, it hasn't greatly influenced my personal beliefs.
The source of a person's beliefs have a great impact upon them, I think. I was raised in a Christian community, and attended a Christian pre-school. At that time I had no idea what all the hoopla was about, why we had to pray before meals, etc. I didn't give it much thought. I assume, though, that living in such a community, that is where I developed my basic moral values. Chivalry came from a very different source: Books and games. Before my first novels, I can't think of anything depicting people doing things because they were good, right and needed to be done. From there stems my current set of beliefs.
There. Not bad for a first post, eh?<P>------------------
Eric Gau (CI)
Companion of the Order of Jubal
Knight of the Old School
Keeper of the Bear
Sigil-bearer
Songweaver
Cireecg
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Davis, California, U.S.A.

Postby Silver Adept on Sun Aug 19, 2001 11:25 am

In that case, I think I can assist. <P>If we were to amend the definition and insert the word "material" in front of the reward part of it, would it necessarily lose it's meaning? <P>Many a good deed, as you point out, is done in the name of God, Allah, YAWH, or by whatever name one wishes to call a higher power. (Many evils as well, but that's not the point...) <P>However, most people who do it are not expecting a material reward for their services, although they may be expecting a spiritual one. <P>So by adding one simple word, it clears the distinction there and allows for the meaning to hopefully stay intact. What do you think?
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Cireecg on Sun Sep 02, 2001 6:14 am

Thanks, Silver, I believe that would make the difference.<P>------------------
Eric Gau (CI)
Companion of the Order of Jubal
Knight of the Old School
Keeper of the Bear
Sigil-bearer
Songweaver
Cireecg
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Davis, California, U.S.A.

Postby Sekhmet on Sun Sep 02, 2001 9:40 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Deathscythe:
<B> Enunciation, grammar, and diction are all the best in Ohio, and it shows when visiting.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>
I hope you aren't saying that ONLY people in and from Ohio can speak the Queen's English well in this country. I've never been in Ohio save when I made a connecting flight there this summer, and some people tell me I have the best diction, grammar, enunciation, etc. they've ever heard. And I know plenty of people from Ohio whose diction isn't so wonderful (am remembering an old classmate of mine). Miraculously, there are people in other parts of America who can speak well as well.<P>------------------
"The waters, they are poisoned."
So reincarnate on some sane planet.
Sekhmet
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 15, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: $in City, NV

Postby Silver Adept on Mon Sep 03, 2001 7:40 am

I'm not sure if they live here or not. However, I'm willing to bet against myself in that particular case. Mwe he he... <P>Speaking proper English, I'm definitely not there. Speaking soemthing hopefully close, I try. But even so, I'm a slang/vernacular person as well. I guess it's all i nthe company that I seek. <P>Anyway, yer velcome for the definition work.
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby Silver Adept on Wed Sep 05, 2001 3:22 am

That may be true... but you don't really focus on that part of things. Yes, it is there that if you trust in Him, then he will provide for you. Sometimes this is a material blessing... but most people do good deeds with no designs for a material reward in their head... perhaps a spiritual one, yes, but not a material one. If something material happens to come out of it, fine and dandy. But usually, a good deed is done wth no material reward in mind... <P>Gads. I'm repeating myself. <P>Will learn to stop that at some time.
User avatar
Silver Adept
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The Lake of Grass in Michigan

Postby gwalla on Wed Sep 05, 2001 5:32 am

About the apocrypha:<P>The Apocrypha are a few books (and sections of books) that are accepted as cononical by the Catholic church but not by Protestants. Generally, they appear in the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament but not in the Hebrew originals.<P>There are many other books that "didn't make the cut" for the Bible, however. These are frequently called pseudepigrapha ("writings falsely ascribed"--actually, any book that purports to be authored by someone who did not actually write it is technically pseudepigrapha) and Christian Apocrypha. The pseudepigrapha include the books of Enoch, 3 and 4 Maccabees (although the Orthodox church accepts these), the Psalms of Solomon, the Odes of Solomon, and many more. The Christian Apocrypha include a few apocryphal books of Acts (like the Acts of Andrew and the Acts of Paul), and many apocryphal Gospels (the Gospel of Thomas is just one--there's also the gospel of Nicodemus, the Gospel of Philip, the Protoevangelium of James, the Gospel of the Hebrews, and others). There are also some apocalypses (the Book of Revelation is the only piece of apocalyptic literature that made it into the "final draft").<P>Many of these texts include Gnostic sentiments. Gnosticism was another form of early Christian mysticism that claimed that the God of the Old Testament was a false deity (sometimes called Ialdabaoth, Samael, Saclas, or the Demiurge) who created the physical world as a cage or in error, and that Christ was sent down to teach people how to transcend this world. It doesn't exist anymore (except for the Mandaeans, a small middle eastern society, and a modern attempt at revival) but in the early days of Christianity it was was a strong rival to what became "mainstream" Christianity: Valentinus (founder of the Valentinian form of Gnosticism) almost became pope at one point, and the Manicheans were only wiped out in the Albigensian Crusade.<P>Interesting books on the subject are "The Other Bible" (containing a lot of noncanonical books) and Elaine Pagels' "The Gnostic Gospels".<P>------------------
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
- Tom Waits, "Step Right Up"
User avatar
gwalla
Keenspot Deity
 
Posts: 10767
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA irc://us.nightstar.net/gwalla,isnick

 
PreviousNext

Return to Eqvites Ivbalis, Order of the Knights of Jubal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest