Someone fooling around with the Large Hadron Collider back in 2016 might have caused the interstellar rift...or perhaps caused us to be projected into a parallel universe.
There may be other parallel universes WORSE than this one, though...
I KNEW the LHC would all end in tears! Making baby universes, I mean really.
{mutters grumblingly}
As far as Star Trek: this could be like the "Remember Me" episode of "Star Trek: The Next Generation". tl;dr: Dr. Crusher accidentally winds up in an artificial universe created by her thoughts and a physics experiment. She keeps realizing that things aren't the way she knows them to be. Other people don't notice any problems, and think there's something wrong with her.
People keep disappearing, as do parts of the ship, with no computer record left of any of them. She finally comes to the realization of "If there's nothing wrong with me, maybe there's something wrong with the universe!"
She gets out, and back to her normal reality. Just in time: the experimental universe collapses and ends, right as she gets out.
All this mention of Uncle Joe, makes me wonder. Over this side of the pond we have Uncle Joes Mint BallS, a minty sweet (candy) that you suck... that sounds rude. Anyway I am now imagining a Mint Ball as Leader of the Dems
I'm afraid the name *Uncle Joe* actually reminds me of the late Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin (born Ioseb Besarionis dzе Jughashvili - he was Georgian).
I'm sure Mr Biden bears no resemblance whatever to the egregious tyrant (Stalin, not Trump, but you know what I mean).
I'm afraid the name *Uncle Joe* actually reminds me of the late Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin.
Yes, it does. But I had an Uncle Joe, who has gone on to that great benevolent rocking chair in the sky. And I once lived in a place where one of my favorite restaurants was called Uncle Joe's Kitchen.
That was the point I couldn't get my head round from over here with the last US Presidential election. I accept that I wasn't there. It wasn't my election. Nevertheless, it struck me that Hillary Clinton was worthy but a bit dull,
Key point. In fact, from the PoV of an "average" US citizen, Clinton probably does come across as dull, as in "not entertaining, not titillating, not controversial." US culture is now devoted, perhaps addicted, to the notion of being shocked and titillated. There are households -- I've visited many back in my social-worker and also news-reporter days -- where the TV is never turned off. When it's not tuned to soap operas whose characters are entangled in wildly improbably social and familial scandals, it's turned to talk shows whose "discussions" hinge on equally bizarre and improbable situations, e.g. "My stepson insists I give up our transgender lovechild for bi-racial adoption in a non-Christian third-world country."
Daytime TV (outside of kids' programming) is mostly a vast cesspool of preposterous, stumped-up social "problems" for its viewers to be shocked by. Those viewers passively absorb (to the extent they pay some modest attention) this nonsense while ironing, folding laundry, making beds, putting away groceries, making out checks for gas, electricity and phone service, etc. The nearly-equally-preposterous claims made by the commercials which fund this trash must seem much of a piece with the rest.
Note, too, that the "issues" raised in these scenarios call for zero action (but plenty of disapproval or possibly support) from viewers. This encourages and normalizes passivity and disengagement in those consuming this trash.
The fact that this crap constitutes a major part of the (hack, cough, choke) "cultural" life of so many American citizens is a blight on our society. The result is the election of a highly visible, endlessly entertaining talking heads whose pronouncements seem utterly unconnected to "normal" life.
Here's the mindset behind this (and both political parties have spent decades depending on this): Does the President's announcement of XYZ lower the price of gas or corn flakes? No? Then what does it matter to me? Will the latest move by Congress raise my pay or send me a stimulus check? No? Then who cares? Above all, why disarrange the precarious juggling act which is my life in order to get to a possibly distant polling place or post office to register my discontent or approval? It won't change anything. My life has been like this no matter who has been in charge and despite all the rosy promises I've fallen for throughout my already difficult, debt-ridding, fear-haunted adult life.
That was the point I couldn't get my head round from over here with the last US Presidential election. I accept that I wasn't there. It wasn't my election. Nevertheless, it struck me that Hillary Clinton was worthy but a bit dull,
Key point. In fact, from the PoV of an "average" US citizen, Clinton probably does come across as dull, as in "not entertaining, not titillating, not controversial." US culture is now devoted, perhaps addicted, to the notion of being shocked and titillated. There are households -- I've visited many back in my social-worker and also news-reporter days -- where the TV is never turned off. When it's not tuned to soap operas whose characters are entangled in wildly improbably social and familial scandals, it's turned to talk shows whose "discussions" hinge on equally bizarre and improbable situations, e.g. "My stepson insists I give up our transgender lovechild for bi-racial adoption in a non-Christian third-world country."
Daytime TV (outside of kids' programming) is mostly a vast cesspool of preposterous, stumped-up social "problems" for its viewers to be shocked by. Those viewers passively absorb (to the extent they pay some modest attention) this nonsense while ironing, folding laundry, making beds, putting away groceries, making out checks for gas, electricity and phone service, etc. The nearly-equally-preposterous claims made by the commercials which fund this trash must seem much of a piece with the rest.
Note, too, that the "issues" raised in these scenarios call for zero action (but plenty of disapproval or possibly support) from viewers. This encourages and normalizes passivity and disengagement in those consuming this trash.
The fact that this crap constitutes a major part of the (hack, cough, choke) "cultural" life of so many American citizens is a blight on our society. The result is the election of a highly visible, endlessly entertaining talking heads whose pronouncements seem utterly unconnected to "normal" life.
Here's the mindset behind this (and both political parties have spent decades depending on this): Does the President's announcement of XYZ lower the price of gas or corn flakes? No? Then what does it matter to me? Will the latest move by Congress raise my pay or send me a stimulus check? No? Then who cares? Above all, why disarrange the precarious juggling act which is my life in order to get to a possibly distant polling place or post office to register my discontent or approval? It won't change anything. My life has been like this no matter who has been in charge and despite all the rosy promises I've fallen for throughout my already difficult, debt-ridding, fear-haunted adult life.
Sorry to double post pressed the wrong button.
We have some of that daytime programming over here. The BBC would never do anything so crass. ITV did have Gerry Springer and the like. One of our own home grown versions got taken off air due to the suicide of one of the participants. Mostly daytime TV is buying homes, holidays (vacations), drama and game shows.
I agree Trump is entertaining in a I can’t believe he did that way.
Not all posters are Christians, and yes this is Hell so it is ok. Keeping it in is not good.
I want Donny boy to lose, not be poorly. I don’t get to vote being British but in the magical new world outside of the EU I would rather we deal with an adult.
Admittedly this is Hell, but it sometimes seems to me that, for an allegedly Christian wesite, we get a little close to ill-wishing Donald Trump.
I wish him to be out of the White House in any lawful way possible. If that's by death or incapacity, so be it. Why is that inconsistent with Christianity?
When I am worked up, I do wish him ongoing physical incapacity and pain, betrayal by all around him, and an anonymous death. But are Christians supposed to be saints all the time?
...or complete annihilation - I've just remembered a short story by Lord Dunsany, called The King That Was Not.
IIRC, and I don't have a copy of Time and the Gods* to hand, a certain King displeases the Gods, who punish him by re-arranging time so that he has never existed at all...
Admittedly this is Hell, but it sometimes seems to me that, for an allegedly Christian wesite, we get a little close to ill-wishing Donald Trump.
Of course, many Christians are big on scripture; including all those juicy Old Testament bits about slaying enemies, and people digging pits for others falling into their own traps. It's at least therapeutic even if balanced with Christ's 'praying for one's enemies' command.
I usually like to focus on God's mercy. But there are times when - with a trembling spirit and an eye to myself - I feel I should pray for his justice.
I suppose it is ill-wishing Trump that he merely gets what he's brought on himself, and perhaps few of us would escape if that applied to all of us. But that guy is endangering millions of people in the most arrogant, ignorant, self-absorbed way it seems wrong not to at least wish him the 'ill' of not being the next President of the United States.
I want Donald Trump to get better. This is what I’ve always wanted for him, even before the pandemic, because he’s always been someone who desperately needed to get better. Lord knows he could hardly get any worse.
<snip>
Like his former counterpart, Trump has never been well. So when he falls sick, it is impossible to “wish him well” or to “hope he gets well” thinking only of his physical health. He now has a potentially deadly disease for which we do not yet have a cure, but this is still the least of his problems. So what could it possibly mean to “wish him well”?
<snip>
The best we can hope for him is that he gets better — that he changes into a different person and into a different kind of person.
That’s a tall order. It seems implausible or impossible. How can anyone be born after having grown old? I can’t imagine anything that might prompt such a transformation short of three spirits visiting him on Christmas Eve.
In that story, we long to see poor Tiny Tim get better. The child is sick and we wish him well. But Dickens also pulls off the harder trick of making us want to see the cruel, greedy Ebenezer Scrooge get better too. The old miser may not be physically ill, but his soul is rotten. He is deeply, thoroughly unwell. He has everything his crooked little heart desires and is, therefore, miserable. He gets better only when, miraculously, he learns to want to be someone other than the person he has chosen to be.
<snip>
There’s the rub when considering what it would mean for Donald Trump to “get better.” It would mean repentance and that, in turn, would require him to understand what it was he was repenting from — the “awful clarity” of seeing “how far he has failed the only justice of loving one another.” And if he ever saw that, ever really understood it, I imagine it would destroy him.
It seems, then, impossible to wish him well without, in some sense, wishing for his destruction.
But are Christians supposed to be saints all the time?
Actually, yes. Not that I am, and my feelings about Trump are not much different from yours. But we are in fact called to be saints.
Perhaps there are different concepts of saints. My, perhaps ill informed, understanding is that a saint is like a famed sports figure: I went to the NHL draft accidentally in Montreal one year, missing the conference I was supposed to be attending. The sweaters (jerseys) of some players were hung from the rafters in the Forum. Those are the saints of hockey.
I think the Roman Catholic Church defines a saint as someone who has died and is certified to have attained heaven, whereas most Protestant churches who admit to the existence of saints define them as persons who led exemplary lives worthy of imitation.
From what we read in the news of the behavior of some sports figures, I would not count them among persons who lead exemplary lives worthy of imitation.
We (Lutherans) basically define them as people who have been declared/made holy by Jesus Christ--so, Christians.
As for Trump, the good thing is that not all my wishing or praying is going to affect him directly, without going through the Father's will. So if I wish him dead or wish him well, that's going to get moderated. Which is great, because if I were in charge... let the reader understand.
"Saints" in Greek is "hagioi", that is, "holy ones." You get this in Paul's greetings all the time. Even in the letters where he goes on to rip them a new one for acting unholily.
From what we read in the news of the behavior of some sports figures, I would not count them among persons who lead exemplary lives worthy of imitation.
Depends on your perspective, I guess. A lot of folks will try to imitate the way various sports figures played their sports, trying to bat like Lou Gehrig or handle a basketball like Michael Jordan.
"Saints" in Greek is "hagioi", that is, "holy ones." You get this in Paul's greetings all the time. Even in the letters where he goes on to rip them a new one for acting unholily.
"Saints" in Greek is "hagioi", that is, "holy ones." You get this in Paul's greetings all the time. Even in the letters where he goes on to rip them a new one for acting unholily.
Holy means ‘set apart’.
It does indeed. Christian tradition has understood this as "set apart for God" or "God's own". Christians are supposed to belong to God, and not to another god, such as Mammon. We are supposed to be seeking first His kingdom. We are supposed to be doing His will on earth, as it is done in Heaven. In short, we're supposed to be saints.
The official saints of Catholic, Orthodox, and some other Churches are ones those churches are willing to say did that, and thus attained the Kingdom. But we also have "all saints day" in which we celebrate those who are not on the official roster, but still were saints in all the same ways. Sort of like the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, "known only to God" (paraphrase).
We happened to pass a school dedicated to St Thomas More today and discussed the appropriateness of making a saint of someone who sent people to be burned. The discussion then arrived in Alexandria with Cyril, who is supposed to have some influence on the martyrdom of Hypatia.
I do find some supposed saints a bit difficult.
We happened to pass a school dedicated to St Thomas More today and discussed the appropriateness of making a saint of someone who sent people to be burned. The discussion then arrived in Alexandria with Cyril, who is supposed to have some influence on the martyrdom of Hypatia.
I do find some supposed saints a bit difficult.
"Saints" in Greek is "hagioi", that is, "holy ones." You get this in Paul's greetings all the time. Even in the letters where he goes on to rip them a new one for acting unholily.
Holy means ‘set apart’.
"Holy" has a number of interpenetrating meanings, that being one of them.
Comments
Oh, I liked that one!
I KNEW the LHC would all end in tears! Making baby universes, I mean really.
{mutters grumblingly}
As far as Star Trek: this could be like the "Remember Me" episode of "Star Trek: The Next Generation". tl;dr: Dr. Crusher accidentally winds up in an artificial universe created by her thoughts and a physics experiment. She keeps realizing that things aren't the way she knows them to be. Other people don't notice any problems, and think there's something wrong with her.
People keep disappearing, as do parts of the ship, with no computer record left of any of them. She finally comes to the realization of "If there's nothing wrong with me, maybe there's something wrong with the universe!"
She gets out, and back to her normal reality. Just in time: the experimental universe collapses and ends, right as she gets out.
Or "the dark places of the inside"? There was a "Dr. Who" ep about the Mara (?) being, which was properly from there, but got out into the world.
These changes were decades in the making, they didn’t suddenly appear from nowhere.
THAT ship has definitely sailed!
True, but they did seem to suddenly manifest themselves, IYSWIM - we just hadn't noticed them before.
Maybe?
I'm sure Mr Biden bears no resemblance whatever to the egregious tyrant (Stalin, not Trump, but you know what I mean).
See the thread in the other place I suspect. People didn't notice the changes because until now they were targeted at other people.
Alas.
Yes, it does. But I had an Uncle Joe, who has gone on to that great benevolent rocking chair in the sky. And I once lived in a place where one of my favorite restaurants was called Uncle Joe's Kitchen.
Mr Biden OTOH does have a pleasant avuncular look and manner, so far as I can tell.
Wartime propaganda to justify the alliance with the USSR, wasn't it?
Key point. In fact, from the PoV of an "average" US citizen, Clinton probably does come across as dull, as in "not entertaining, not titillating, not controversial." US culture is now devoted, perhaps addicted, to the notion of being shocked and titillated. There are households -- I've visited many back in my social-worker and also news-reporter days -- where the TV is never turned off. When it's not tuned to soap operas whose characters are entangled in wildly improbably social and familial scandals, it's turned to talk shows whose "discussions" hinge on equally bizarre and improbable situations, e.g. "My stepson insists I give up our transgender lovechild for bi-racial adoption in a non-Christian third-world country."
Daytime TV (outside of kids' programming) is mostly a vast cesspool of preposterous, stumped-up social "problems" for its viewers to be shocked by. Those viewers passively absorb (to the extent they pay some modest attention) this nonsense while ironing, folding laundry, making beds, putting away groceries, making out checks for gas, electricity and phone service, etc. The nearly-equally-preposterous claims made by the commercials which fund this trash must seem much of a piece with the rest.
Note, too, that the "issues" raised in these scenarios call for zero action (but plenty of disapproval or possibly support) from viewers. This encourages and normalizes passivity and disengagement in those consuming this trash.
The fact that this crap constitutes a major part of the (hack, cough, choke) "cultural" life of so many American citizens is a blight on our society. The result is the election of a highly visible, endlessly entertaining talking heads whose pronouncements seem utterly unconnected to "normal" life.
Here's the mindset behind this (and both political parties have spent decades depending on this): Does the President's announcement of XYZ lower the price of gas or corn flakes? No? Then what does it matter to me? Will the latest move by Congress raise my pay or send me a stimulus check? No? Then who cares? Above all, why disarrange the precarious juggling act which is my life in order to get to a possibly distant polling place or post office to register my discontent or approval? It won't change anything. My life has been like this no matter who has been in charge and despite all the rosy promises I've fallen for throughout my already difficult, debt-ridding, fear-haunted adult life.
1. A miracle
2. A lie
We have some of that daytime programming over here. The BBC would never do anything so crass. ITV did have Gerry Springer and the like. One of our own home grown versions got taken off air due to the suicide of one of the participants. Mostly daytime TV is buying homes, holidays (vacations), drama and game shows.
I agree Trump is entertaining in a I can’t believe he did that way.
2. Yes I do wish that fucker ill.
I want Donny boy to lose, not be poorly. I don’t get to vote being British but in the magical new world outside of the EU I would rather we deal with an adult.
I wish him ill. A good long dose of Covid19 would remove him from his perch. Followed by a slow recovery and convalescence in oblivion.
I wish him to be out of the White House in any lawful way possible. If that's by death or incapacity, so be it. Why is that inconsistent with Christianity?
When I am worked up, I do wish him ongoing physical incapacity and pain, betrayal by all around him, and an anonymous death. But are Christians supposed to be saints all the time?
IIRC, and I don't have a copy of Time and the Gods* to hand, a certain King displeases the Gods, who punish him by re-arranging time so that he has never existed at all...
*the collection in which the story appears
https://sacred-texts.com/neu/dun/tago/tago08.htm
Actually, yes. Not that I am, and my feelings about Trump are not much different from yours. But we are in fact called to be saints.
Of course, many Christians are big on scripture; including all those juicy Old Testament bits about slaying enemies, and people digging pits for others falling into their own traps. It's at least therapeutic even if balanced with Christ's 'praying for one's enemies' command.
I usually like to focus on God's mercy. But there are times when - with a trembling spirit and an eye to myself - I feel I should pray for his justice.
I suppose it is ill-wishing Trump that he merely gets what he's brought on himself, and perhaps few of us would escape if that applied to all of us. But that guy is endangering millions of people in the most arrogant, ignorant, self-absorbed way it seems wrong not to at least wish him the 'ill' of not being the next President of the United States.
Blogger Fred Clark had a recent post on this subject.
The whole post is worth a read, and not too long.
Perhaps there are different concepts of saints. My, perhaps ill informed, understanding is that a saint is like a famed sports figure: I went to the NHL draft accidentally in Montreal one year, missing the conference I was supposed to be attending. The sweaters (jerseys) of some players were hung from the rafters in the Forum. Those are the saints of hockey.
From what we read in the news of the behavior of some sports figures, I would not count them among persons who lead exemplary lives worthy of imitation.
As for Trump, the good thing is that not all my wishing or praying is going to affect him directly, without going through the Father's will. So if I wish him dead or wish him well, that's going to get moderated. Which is great, because if I were in charge... let the reader understand.
"Saints" in Greek is "hagioi", that is, "holy ones." You get this in Paul's greetings all the time. Even in the letters where he goes on to rip them a new one for acting unholily.
Depends on your perspective, I guess. A lot of folks will try to imitate the way various sports figures played their sports, trying to bat like Lou Gehrig or handle a basketball like Michael Jordan.
Holy means ‘set apart’.
It does indeed. Christian tradition has understood this as "set apart for God" or "God's own". Christians are supposed to belong to God, and not to another god, such as Mammon. We are supposed to be seeking first His kingdom. We are supposed to be doing His will on earth, as it is done in Heaven. In short, we're supposed to be saints.
The official saints of Catholic, Orthodox, and some other Churches are ones those churches are willing to say did that, and thus attained the Kingdom. But we also have "all saints day" in which we celebrate those who are not on the official roster, but still were saints in all the same ways. Sort of like the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, "known only to God" (paraphrase).
I do find some supposed saints a bit difficult.
… and that’s only the dead ones!
Ain't that the truth.
Yes. Are? No. Supposed to be? Yup.
We're supposed to grown into it. I think I'm scheduled to get there in about {checks quantum sundial on wrist} five million years.
"Holy" has a number of interpenetrating meanings, that being one of them.