Peter Kirby

(With apologies to E. E. Cummings for this faltering imitation, feel free to move this elsewhere. Otherwise, take it as an exercise in exegesis.)

I

So
Doubt
Your friend
Says to you
What you think
Is wrong but
I will defend
Your right to say it
Of course.

II

God
If
You believed it
Would that
You don't
Say that
You love him
But mean it
In fact.

III

Please
None
Of this
I am sure of
Your lunacy
Is your reason
For living
Not easy
Indeed.

Gooch's dad

Yes, I saw this on your blog, Peter.

It does nothing to meet the goal of discussing your recent conversion, which you promised to do on the other thread here. Someone asked you to explain what you said about the "message of the crucifixion", and rather than replying to that sincere question, you've come up with several new posts that don't really explain anything at all.

I'm curious, Peter--what do you actually believe, now? Do you believe in original sin? The doctrine of vicarious atonement? You said that you believe Jesus saved all of mankind--saved us from what, exactly? Do you believe in a hell and heaven?

Regards.

Vorkosigan

With apologies to Blake; Peter Speaks

Two paths divergent in a digital land,
and I, being of that singular type who,
must in all things try my own hand,
sought what excess could not understand.

I drove my cart over the bones of the dead,
I flew by my own wings and soared,
the tomes of wisdom I read,
wherein the world was known not, and certainty fled.

I learned in seed time, I harvested and taught,
I persisted in my folly, but butterfly wisdom flew,
and so the place to where my sorrows brought,
me bright and clear. I am. I stand. I'm caught.

These things my brothers cannot see,
though standing up, or perhaps just standing water, they be
but like the cut worm, I forgive thee, thee and thee,
for what could only be imagined, I have proved for myself.

The eyes of fire, the nostrils of air, the mouth of water, the beard of earth.
I do not know what, but I am been given birth.

Michael, April 30, 2007

Peter Kirby

Actually, I am fairly sure that I said I hesitated from discussing it on this forum, but would be discussing it more on my blog. And I did not forget that sincere question, but have saved it along with many others. Nothing will be revealed, in any case; here, only that I will be myself.

The gladiator said, "are you not entertained?" Well that you are not, for this is a bloody arena in which we are contesting.

[Refutations to the previous:

"Actually, I am fairly sure that I said I hesitated from discussing it on this forum, but would be discussing it more on my blog."

What a fool! Does he not see that saying he will not discuss it here qualify as a discussion?

"And I did not forget that sincere question, but have saved it along with many others."

And a liar! He clearly is dodging questions left and right!

"Nothing will be revealed, in any case; here, only that I will be myself."

Blah blah blah, are you okay?

"The gladiator said, 'are you not entertained?' Well that you are not, for this is a bloody arena in which we are contesting."

But this is the most critical dialogue-ish place on earth.]

Seriously, and plainly, if you want answers from me I will be a poor sport because I am not an answer man and never have been. If you want to tackle the questions with me, then I may join you with gusto, but I doubt this is the place to do it. I do believe, however, that we could dissect the words if we wanted a starting point.

Peter Kirby

See, this is good; why can't I write like this? More anon.

Julian

[MOD]
Not much BC&H material here, sending to the Lounge, although they may wish to move it somewhere else...

Julian
Moderator BC&H
[/MOD]

Peter Kirby

Okay, I did the exercise of making the divisions for the reader of my blog, so I figure I will do the same for the reader of this thread (who is not already violently disinterested, I hope).

"So doubt your friend says to you 'What you think is wrong but I will defend your right to say it of course.'" This is simply a doubt as to the sincerity of Voltaire's famous promise. Does your friend really respect you in your disagreement, or are you to be attacked on it and beaten into conformity? Is this doubtful friend really supportive of you?

"So, Doubt, your friend, says to you, 'What you think is wrong.' But I will defend your right; to say it, 'Of course.'" On this reading, doubt says you are wrong, but I will defend you and let you say "of course" to what statement you are thinking.

"So doubt your friend (says to you what you think) is wrong but I will defend your right to say it. Of course!" The friend who tells you what to think is wrong. I will defend your right to speak what you will. Again, the friendship is dubious.

Again, for the benefit of the reader of the blog, I will give my own divisions of the second part.

"God--if you believed it--would that you don't say that you love him, but mean it in fact."

"God! If you believed it! Would that you don't say that you love him, but mean it in fact?"

"A: 'God.'
B: 'IF you believed it!'
A: 'Would that...'
B: 'You don't say that! You love him, but...mean it! In fact!"

This time I will let you work out the meanings from the punctuations. A clue for the third division, which is salient, is the Gethsemane scene.

Again, for the benefit of the reader of the blog, I will divide the third part, and again in three ways.

"Please, none of this! I am sure of your lunacy. Is your reason for living not easy?" "Indeed."

"Please none, of this I am sure. Of your lunacy, is your reason. For living, not easy indeed."

"Please, none of this I am sure of. Your lunacy is your reason for living. Not easy? Indeed."

Again, I will leave the commentary to you.

And since people seem to deal best with easy questions of preference when it comes to aesthetic endeavors, I guess I can ask, which of the three parts did you like the best, and which of my three divisions of that part most closely resembles the way that you took it?

WWJD4aKlondikeBar

I thought that the "message of crucifixion" was that the Romans didn't do it until after 300 A.D. so if Christ even existed then he was more likely "noosified" than crucified.

rlogan

"The cat is black."


vs.


Yea, verily, unto those for whom the ears are but vestiges of sound but not understanding. I emote therefore from my breast, albeit with words.

Words, so tragic - that feelings cannot be captured but in their most tawdry form - yet without which the shade of the being which I speak remains though shrouded in mystery...

So boldy and without hesitation I speak forth of this hue, so deep, of the creature - clawed, as is wont by those of its kind. 'Tis but the lesser of the felines and still, with grace and poise stands against the sky in full glory.

Indeed, as bright as is the day this color shines yet in the opposite manner in its expression. So as the soul of it were sun and the make of it the void and utter darkness.

etc.



To each his own I guess.

spin

The soldiers of Spartacus that Pompey captured were all crucified along the road back toward Rome, so no crucifixion was already being done. In fact there is a long history before the Romans decided to use the method. Before the time of the Romans, the Jewish king Alexander Jannaeus crucified several thousand Pharisees for treasonous acts, the Pharisee Shimeon ben Shetah crucified a number of "witches", but then they learnt it from the Greeks and they got it from the Persians.


spin