Bush To Appoint Someone To Be In Charge Of Country

OK. you know I stopped sending my daily "Bushisms" a couple of years ago, and stopped publically ridiculing GW because it's just too easy, and what with my personal changes, well, it was slightly....unseemly.

However, some things are just too hard to pass up. This is one of them. Yes, it's absurd, but in this day, with this man, you could believe it to be true...oh, and I *totally* support him in this effort!

Click here to read the story

BaRosh Yitbarà Elohim

a recent reordering of the hebrew letters that make up the first words of the Torah leads one Italian bibilical scholar to redefine the title or description of what we now refer to as "the Bible".

Now, so as not to frighten any of my fundy friends reading this, and to clarify, it's not changing the words per se, ('cause remember, it wasn't written in King James' English, it was ancient HEBREW), but rather changing where the syllables/letters are broken up.

This particular combination of hebrew letters is usually read as "Bereshyt barà Elohim et haShamayim ve'et ha'aretz", and translated as "In the beginning, G-d created the heavens and the earth."

This researcher is suggesting an alternate combination resulting in: BaRosh Yitbarà Elohim. (see how similar they are, yet different?)

Roughly translated, these letters could mean "In the head (or mind) God (will) create himself" or, in an even more Yoda-like translation, God Himself (the infinite imagination, the unnamable) creates (or created, since it was past tense). Now the problem with rough translations is that they're usually transliterations. And this (literally) is not how we tend to use our languages: we have lovely idiomatic expressions that have to be worked around to be understood by anyone unfamiliar with the original/common use of the language from which you are translating.

But I was excited by the prospects presented here. Now understand that I've spent some of my recent days looking at way too many documentaries on the Bible (babble) Code, and the use of mathematics to analyze hebrew used in the Torah to reveal/resolve/predict EVERYTHING. My little dinosaur brain may simply be on overload or so wide open you can drive a truck through it.

Anyway, upon first reading of this "new translation of the bible," I had an immediate brain flash (or brain fart, depending upon your own assessment) of the extraordinary possibility that this "In the Head God creates Himself" translation could mean that "in the minds of human beings the concept and construct of God and EVERYTHING is created", (lending some support to Voltaire's idea that "if God did not exist, it would be necessary to create him")

And then I calmed down...

...and started thinking--if you take "Head" to mean 'top of' or 'start' or even 'beginning', and "Himself" to mean "everything you see below/above/beyond" or 'the heavens and the earth', and 'Elohim' to mean 'God', just as we almost always do (rather than GODS, which the 'im' ending of the word reveals--but we know that's just sacriligious!); and if I further wanted to explain or translate this opening passage to JimmyJoe or Shanika, I might just end up saying: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..."

and they shall know you by your fruit

So, my question for today is: "Who's eating from your tree?"

Over the last week I've had a number of challenges to my walk; some have bested me, some I've overcome. Things I'd considered inconsequential in the past have come back to bite me. Some things which were perfectly fine with me a year ago have become obstacles because I don't look at them the same way anymore. Choices I make today are very different than those I made earlier. And for some in my life, this is not a good thing...

oops. gotta do some actual work now.
look for more later today...

geek freak

The fact that I am, in fact, a geek myself has nothing to do with this:

since childhood, I have had a deep affinity for those labelled as geeks, nerds, whatever; stemming from the time Gilbert Brodach asked me to dance in the 4th grade, it's been so.

The scene:
It's one of our class parties; everyone's brought a record to play, and we're dancing to these records. No one wanted to dance with Gilbert, 'cause, you know: the geek! Well, everyone cleared the dance floor and just stared when we started to dance because Gilbert *only knew one dance*: "The Soupy Sales Shuffle" (which I was completely familiar with, 'cause I was a geek & watched the show too; I just knew better than to think Soupy's dance qualified as a "real dance"). But anyway, Gilbert's flailing around, and everybody's looking at us, but I'm *daring* them to laugh. I started doing the same dance, but you know, better. We dance, alone on the dance floor, until it's time to go; and the payoff for me? the look on Gilbert's face.

Makes you wanna find the nearest geek and just kiss him!

stuff keeps happening

they say bad news comes in three's; I'm counting these as my three, so whoever's controlling the "bad" can stop now:

1. learned that a former colleague has been hospitalized for the last 2 weeks and diagnosed with Legionnaire's Disease. Damn case for the investigators on tv as to how these bacteria are transmitted and find a home in a specific body.
2. learned that the father of a current colleague died yesterday--he wasn't ill, so it comes as a great shock to his family: that's often the worst in terms of our ability to handle death.
3. my boss was in a car accident this morning on his way to work (though he refuses to call it an "accident"; says it was a "wreck"); he was planning to take his shiny new car on a road trip to visit family and show off his "prize". now, it's just a "wreck". He says he's learned a thing or two about vanity and pride in possessions. Guess he'll be about storing his treasures in heaven now.

just talkin'...

...shit.

some people have read my profile and found "talking shit" listed as one of my interests; surprisingly to me, this caused confusion to people, even though it's not particularly unique: I'm in the company of at least 30 others on blogspot confessing to that particular diversion.

it may have been that they were just unfamiliar with the term, or it could be they had difficulty reconciling the concept of "talking shit" with the angelic icon who resides in my body.

at any rate, for the assistance of those who may look and wonder, this was my response to one specific person; it pretty much covers how I define talking shit:

Re: "interests--talking shit": that was in fact intentional, and for me, the term describes word games-- any non-focused conversation without a specific objective or goal (or subject) that sometimes teases, often quips, is frequently intellectual, but just as often is not, is playfully competitive, and always witty, almost *requires* flippancy, and at its best, engages two or more highly intelligent people in verbal sparring that challenges all involved. *NOT* to be confused with scatology or conversations stemming from that particular obsession, though one can easily see how said confusion could occur.
Now, that said, I'm glad you asked for a definition: no one has ever done so before, as in real life, the term is usually applied in the past tense: e.g., "So what were you doing with *them*?" "Oh, Mary responded coyly, "we were just talking shit." The person asking has usually overheard some of the conversation, and knows *just* what you mean....