Random Playlist Song: Prokofiev - Romeo And Juliet Suite No. 2 - Montagues and Capulets
Prokofiev?! What's Prokofiev doing on my computer? Aiee!!!!! My ears...
(Okay, this piece isn't that bad, which is why it's still on my system)
***
I just had a look at my Picosearch Internal Search Engine stats.
What are you people doing?!
***
The archives from December 2001 have been restored, and I've helpfully marked the restored posts, like so: Restored Post
Highlights:
- Reading how stilted my blogging style used to be, composing mostly of hurriedly transcribed notes and observations
- Introspection and reflection on slavery (you don't see much introspection and reflection on these pages these days), in the days when I didn't get 400 unique hits a day and thus felt less inhibited
- Damning critiques on the Stupidity, Senselessness and Sadism of Slavery
1 month down, 12 months to go.
***
Who is You-Know-Who?
"The names can be used to draw a parallel between Voldemort and God (Old Testament)... So, man is not allowed to pronounce God's name. God himself on the other hand does this quite a bit, AND has a fondness of speaking of himself in the third person.
... Something really hit me when I re-read GoF and OotP this week: the scene in the graveyard and the scene in the Hall of Prophecies. In the graveyard, Voldemort says, "Listen to me, reliving family history... (he said quietly.) 'Why, I am growing quite sentimental... but look Harry! My true family returns....'" The word "true" is in italics (i.e. emphasised), and it's ambiguous whether it's Voldemort or JKR doing the emphasising (possibly both). So, who is Voldemort's true family? His Death Eaters, of course; a small number of faithful followers who follow him and who do his bidding. In OotP, we learn that Voldemort had many other followers, people who supported him without being DEs (e.g. the Black family).
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says: "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" and stretching out his hand towards his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father, is my brother, and sister, and mother." Jesus' true family are those who follow him (and the will of God), Voldemort's true family are those who follow him. Also, the parallel between Jesus and Voldemort in the graveyard can be established in many other ways: Voldemort is restored to his body, "resurrected" you might even say. Sure, he was never truly dead, but then you could argue that Jesus wasn't either since per definition, a god is immortal. Plus, with the whole Trinity thing, it'd be hard to say that Jesus was 100% dead, as the Father and Holy Spirit supposedly were still alive to perform the miracles at the crucifixion.
Further, the DEs approach Voldemort with the same wonder and disbelief as Jesus' disciples when THEY first saw their master resurrected (note also how the DEs and the Disciples all use "Master" and "Lord" when they address their masters)."
Ahh, the wonders of literature. One can make the text say anything they wish it to.
***
"Of philosophers
Notwithstanding the fashionable irreligion which prevailed in the age of the Antonines, both the interests of the priests and the credulity of the people were sufficiently respected. In their writings and conversation, the philosophers of antiquity asserted the independent dignity of reason; but they resigned their actions to the commands of law and of custom. Viewing, with a smile of pity and indulgence, the various errors of the vulgar, they diligently practised the ceremonies of their fathers, devoutly frequented the temples of the gods; and sometimes condescending to act a part on the theatre of superstition, they concealed the sentiments of an Atheist under the sacerdotal robes. Reasoners of such a temper were scarcely inclined to wrangle about their respective modes of faith, or of worship. It was indifferent to them what shape the folly of the multitude might choose to assume; and they approached, with the same inward contempt, and the same external reverence, the altars of the Libyan, the Olympian, or the Capitoline Jupiter."
- Edward Gibbon, The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire. In The West - Chapter II (Of the Union and Internal Prosperity of the Roman Empire in the Age of the Antonines)
Someone: gibbons (Ed: sic) argues that the enlightened elite in the high roman era were contempuous of religion, but as men of culture continued to pay respect to religion
Me: so should be do likewise? haha
Someone: i do.
Me: let's just say that in the Roman Empire, religion wasn't taken as seriously as it is now, nor were its effects as pernicious.
Someone: hm...."now" meaning the 20th or the 15th?
seriously i doubt...pernicious definitely
Me: now meaning the *21st*, but of course the 15th also
polytheism is much more friendly than monotheism, generally.
eh
gibbon wrote in the 18th century lah
where did 15th century come in
Someone: just an example....well the 18th century was the time of the enlightenment.
more specifically, the god of abraham. ugh.
Me: what about that god? proclaiming his omnibenevolence and perfection yet failing to live up to it
the pagan gods never said they were perfect or all-loving
Later...
Someone in an earlier SMS: Curious. How do christians view the lord's command to samuel to wage genocide upon the amalekites in 1 samuel 15? I mean...How can anyone gain faith reading a bible unless they've been brainwashed into its assumptions by a charismatic preacher, friends or family prior to reading the book?
Me: "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
SAB note: God orders Saul to kill all of the Amalekites: men, women, infants, sucklings, ox, sheep, camels, and asses. Why? Because God remembers what Amalek did hundreds of years ago.
There are a few answers as to how genocide is justified:
- we cannot understand or question this god
- they had offended him, so they got their just desserts
- the consequences of disobeying this god are somehow hereditary, so it is just to punish descendants
- killing children saves them from growing up in sin and going to hell, since innocent children go to heaven
any more you can think of?
Someone: i think the above is sufficient and sickening enough.
Me: the justifications? yeah
if all evil can be justified, good and evil lose their meaning
so much for morality
which fundies like to harp about
Someone: yet another rebuttal for people who claim "the bible" as their basis of morality.
Me: indeed.
Certum est, quia impossible est. - Tertullian
(The fact is certain because it is impossible)
damn I'm using that line too much
but it's such a great line
