Soxy

Interesting. . . From the article: As angry aldermen lambasted the head of the company that sold Chicago new, controversial voting machinery, Ald. Edward Burke (14th) suggested Friday that the hardware could be part of a Venezuelan conspiracy to subvert American elections.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 09:24 PM) Different circumstances. But the outcome will be the same. Except this one might not even make it to trial.

QUOTE(G&T @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 05:35 PM) That's not what she asked, she asked what the differences were, then he pointed to every hot button issue and skewed it to his need. If she asked a Republican the same question and the Rep. said "Democrats kill babies, and if you don't like that then be a Republican," you'd be bothered. I'm not shocked by anything he says, it just bothers me. I don't remember which existentialist said it (I feel like it was Sartre, but it's been a long day) but he said, "When you choose whom you ask for advice your choose your advice." When I saw Jimmy Carter someone asked him a similarly leading question, he covered the mic, turned to the event organizer, asked a question, laughed, and basically said "vote democrat." Would you ask Dick Cheney that question and expect an unbiased opinion? Further, it's not like this even happened at a public school or in a public setting: it was Sunday school. You don't like what someone says you walk out. Was Carter speaking in hyperbole when he answered? Yeah. But if you want an unbiased answer on something like that don't ask a former president. I'm not sure I would have been that tactless in answering, but no one asked me that question. Oddly enough, CC didn't quote some of the other (far more important stuff) Carter said in the article. But hey, why play up the good someone does when we can just sift for s***. Nice stuff from article: Democrats "should talk about justice," he adds. "The extraordinary tax reductions for the richest Americans, that's not justice. "And peace," Carter says. "We worship the prince of peace, not the prince of pre-emptive war. The vast majority of evangelicals don't want global war."

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 04:39 PM) How if an emergency room physician and nurse who performed “rape kit” declared that allegations are consistent with their findings? How if you have a video tape showing the rape? It happens. Even if they are guilty as sin they won't get convicted.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 02:57 PM) This entire case is based upon what the DNA shows, regardless of the bulls*** both sides claim. They'll claim it was consensual. When you get an acquittal off a a taped rape, I have a hard time believing this will get a conviction. Especially given the possible racial motivation and the fact that she's a stripper. I would honestly be shocked if the DA manages to get a conviction. It makes me sick, but that's how I would predict this case to go.

My bold prediction: No one involved with the rape will be convicted. Actually, I'm not convinced this case will even make it to trial.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 11:51 AM) I really wish that the administration would quit spraying down the slope with Teflon. At some point it'll bite them in the butt, doesn't teflon cause cancer?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 10:42 AM) We should all just walk. And not have jobs. And stay at home all day and surf the internet mindlessly. BECOME CYBORGS. ENOUGH OF THE FREEDOMS! CYBORGS USA! COME ON! SAY IT WITH ME!!!! CYBORGS USA CYBORGS USA Awwwww, that's 2 Juggsian references today. We all miss him so much.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 7, 2006 -> 08:56 AM) Some of the pages ages of the document are going to be on display at the National Geographic building in DC starting today. Pretty cool. That actually might be worth the 5 hour drive. . .

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 09:39 PM) Trust me, it's more than 6 years. Are you including grad school? I think it's partially the school and how much you publish and how widely your stuff is cited and used in the field.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 06:15 PM) The difference, of course, being that one has to work his/her ass off to obtain tenure. Most of these people don't have to do s***. Hey, I'll work 6 years for endless job security. . .

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 08:42 PM) Then/Than is more annoying IMO. We'll add it to the list. As I mentioned, it is not an exhaustive list.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 05:01 PM) Didn't Judas commit suicide soon after the betrayal? And if so, why did he do it if he conspired with Jesus on it? (That might be covered in the link, but I don't have the time to read it right now.) I'll have to check that out, but I feel like it's only in one (maybe two) of the gospels. Either John or Matthew. . .

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 04:16 PM) Interestingly enough, you can still talk about putting your finger in a dyke (sic) and nobody bats an eye. . . Well, how else can you save the Netherlands?

lol, anytime you want to have a religious wack-o thread I'm in. Heresy is my specialty.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:57 PM) Maybe it is the years of Lutheran School upbringing that focused on the more bitter and acrid crucifiction march that colored my view of those events... Very interesting points though. I always thought the same thing, never really read all the accounts separately until college, but really changed the way I look at faith. They never read from John on Good Friday, it's always the my god, my god one. One of my favorite investments was a Gospel parallel, you can pick them up pretty cheaply (example, but not including john) and they're just invaluable at looking at the many facets of Jesus. I think really good for people that want to see what's different in each of the stories even within the canonical gospels. I'm not going to lie: having intelligent, well-informed discussions (like this one!) about religion are what I miss most about St. Olaf. *sigh*

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:40 PM) To me that really underminds a key idea that Jesus was abandonded and alone at the end, which this would be saying that the apostle/s were willing participants. I think if this Gospel truely comes from Judas or someone sympathic to him, it would stand to reason that they would soften his role, or even make it more noble here. To me it doesn't fit in the big picture of the crucifiction. I think the degree of "aloneness" at the time of his death really depends on which Gospel you're reading. In John Jesus is quite triumphant. In Gethsemene he even scoffs while praying, "Should I ask for this cup to be removed?" Which, I think, shows some cross-talk between the gospels and John's author taking a pot-shot at the others, saying that Jesus would never be defeated even at the crucifixtion. I think it's Mark, though, (maybe Matthew too), where Jesus' last words are "My God, my God why have you forsaken me?" I think it's those two gospels people usually conjure up when thinking about the crucifixtion, but John is really different in tone.

I've always thought Judas got a bum rap. If it's God's will that this would happen, why would Judas be eternally damned? I've always felt bad for him. Have you read Fear and Trembling, SS? It's sort of a treatise about what faith entails, starting with a meditation on Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah? Kierkegaard says that faith requires a belief in the absurd, so Abraham believed that he would sacrifice Isaac, but that he would not have to be without him. (sort of a paradox) This interpretation of Judas really fits in with Kierkegaards view that we must do the absurd and believe the unbelievable. Judas knew he would have to betray Jesus, but through the action of betrayal he knew he would become a.)the disciple that helped Jesus' mission culminate or b.) never have to be without Jesus because of teh betrayal. Really a provocative read, if you ever have ages of time to read a bit of theology. Also, it's where Kierkegaard really introduced the idea of a "leap of faith."

NYT article, registration required, but worth it.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:28 PM) To me Christ is a much more believable human if he acts like a human, and therefore needs forgiveness. Also I really believe no one would have listened to his message if he was unwed or didn't have any children, as that was a real sign of something being wrong with that person. Either God had cursed them, or something was wrong with them. I believe for anyone to even pay attention to his message he would have had to have had the basic credibility of marriage and children. Absolutely, 100% agree. I don't buy the whole him and MM thing, but, I think he would have been married. And the whole human side is why Mark (to me) is the most accessible of the Gospels. The rest make Jesus more God than human, and it really helps me to see him struggle with his disciples or be tired and irked. Plus, it's the only gospel where Jesus gets baptised FOR the forgiveness of sins without any apology for what that may mean. Also, the disciples are more believable there too, very human, afraid of what being followers may mean for them, etc. (Plus it's short so the easiest to get through).

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) Your kidding, right? Well, as usual, Iowans are the exception. . .It would be unfair to expect them to grasp such difficult grammatical concepts. . .

QUOTE(Texsox @ Apr 6, 2006 -> 03:09 PM) Whenever I think of Christ's childhood I can't help but believe that somewhere there were kids thinking Oh s***, I beat the crap out of him in 2nd grade. Actually, in one of the gnostic gospels there is a chronicle of Christ's childhood. It's not, um, really the most scholarly (though amausing). It's been a few years since I looked at it. I think they're all interesting, but well of varying spiritual importance But it includes something where this kid irritates Jesus and he does some serious damage. Oh, found a link. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas. English translation Kind of reminds me of the Fig Tree Incident in Mark. Actually, Jesus in this gospel kind of reminds me of Stewie Griffin. . .

Messing up usage of any of the following words is a bannable offense here in SLaM. its/it's their/there/they're our/are to/too (list is not exhaustive)

I read an article in Vanity Fair last year (or maybe 2 years ago), shortly before Pope John Paul II passed that discussed his more mystical side of faith. Do you know if he did any writing on some of these gospels? I think he might have had a more inclusive (or open minded) view of the gnostic gospels than the current Pope and I would have enjoyed reading his thoughts. My bible (Oxford NRSV ed 3) has the apocrapha, and I love reading those books. I also have looked at (I think Elaine Pagel?) The Gnostic Gospels (I think that's the title). Really just intriguing stuff.

Um, people here are generally a lot nicer than this thread would suggest. Except me, I'm always heinous.