I’m not seeing it here, but the other ironic subtext is that Goliath was a Philistine, now known as a Palestinian (same root word).

That’s true. I mean, I’d welcome all those reforms. Still, at an political level, I’m not sure 50% of the world is politically savvy enough to actual appreciate what these reforms would do.

At some level I’m pretty cynical about the ‘average’ voter. I don’t think it would be possible to come out of this alive. Too many people want what immediately benefits them, not what would make a better world.

For example, the majority of the world is worried about climate change, but it seems like a small minority that would actually vote for useful reforms if it meant they would have to adjust their lives.

Know your audience.

50% of THE WORLD. You’re dead because I don’t believe anywhere near 50% of China or India cares about most of this list. This is a list of American issues.

I think you’re right. I didn’t think the “helper words” in the conditional should get conjugated, but I grabbed a Book of Common Prayer off the shelf and there’s a bunch of “thou shalt” + infinitive, so evidently the conditional does get conjugated (in addition to “thou didst” and “thou hast”.) Pretty sure I noticed some 2nd person weak verbs that looked like they had the same conjugation as the 3rd person (eg “Remember thou keep holy …”) I did note “he cometh”, so maybe that -eth ending is actually an older conjugation for the 3rd person that later morphed into an -s ending? Just noticed “he saith (says)”, and the confirmed -eth ending on a bunch of 3rd person congregations. Interestingly, I found a LOT of “thou shalt”, some “thou wilt”, but no “thou couldst” or “thou wouldst”. Probably because the BCP is all like, “you WILL, this is not an option, sinner.”

I don’t know though! I’m a typical English first language speaker and I’m just going with what feels right and using my understanding of grammar from my French education.

We actually do have a second person singular, “thou.” We just transitioned out of using it because ‘politeness’. Thou could useth the second person singular, but thou would soundeth quite archaic. (Think I conjugated that correctly.) You can still see it used in some religious texts in reference to God.

Fuck off, Meta. My children tell me they want to try cigarettes, driving, using an excavator, and rifles and every time I fail to consider their voices. Actually, I consider it and the answer is an easy, “no.” Considering the evidence, social media like FB appears to be quite deleterious to people’s mental health, young people in particular.

I’m pretty suspicious about all the AITA posts these days. So many of them just smell like rage bait designed to pit men and women against each other.

My little reader enjoyed “The Wizards of Once” by Cressida Cowell.

Yeah, in between the gold rush in San Fransisco, and the gold rush in British Columbia.

Fossicking and skerrig are related to mining activities, so may be more localized to areas were the gold rush was big. I confirmed they’re actual words.

My parents emigrated from Aus/NZ just before I was born, so I inherited a bunch of weird down-under, outdated vocabulary.

“What are you fossicking around in the pantry for?” “Did you find a few skerrigs of chocolate?” “I need to use the dunny.” “That guy in car dealership was apoplectic.”

Lots of other turns of phrase, but - with the possible exception of “dunny” are legit words.

EDIT: OK. A few others, I still use ‘blasted’ as an adjective. If my kids do something ridiculous, “Jesus wept, child,” sometimes comes out of my mouth. Then a bunch of, “running around like a sprayed blowfly,” or, “wandering around like a lost soul.”

Nosing (instead of reversing) into a parking spot. You always pick the conditions of your arrival, but not always your departure. Also, reversing into traffic is ridiculous and illegal in some places. Parking nose-first is dangerous and lazy.

EDIT: Love how you’re all justifying your bad driving habits. Camera? Still can’t scan for incoming traffic. Bad weather only on occasion? It’s more than bad weather that can make reversing out of a door dangerous.

… and I HATE angle parking.

I always get concerned that somehow I have packed hard drugs (I don’t do hard drugs.)

Motivation.

Is it? There are plenty of Jews and plenty of Muslims who are not involved in this and see it as wrong. Plus, that’s such a broad statement as to be meaningless. We could equally say government is the problem, but there aren’t many advocating for anarchy. Or people are the problem. I’d be more inclined to say tribalism is the problem, the very foundation of an “us” vs. “them” mentality. Sometimes assholes pick a fight and call it religious. There’s a strong case to be made that war has become much more brutal and far reaching since the Napoleonic wars and the rise of the nation-state. I mean, we can blame religion … that certainly erases the need to look within ourselves and ask why humans do this to each other.

It’s a bit like pretending Nazism was a German problem and pretending like the same dark forces don’t exist now and in many people everywhere.

There are definitely some religious dickheads, but there are dickheads of all stripes.

If religion is so vile, how do we hold in tension the fact that religious people are often behind the most charity towards the marginalised and disempowered? Atheists talk a good game, but rarely leave their armchairs to do anything positive. Religion can become a tribal marker, but it also is one of the main forces working against tribalism.

That’s kind of the point: there isn’t an authority on English. The closest we come is a bunch of English elites making up informal rules on grammar, spelling, and pronunciation and judging everyone else for not using their version. … And a bunch of try-hards who enforce their arbitrary and often nonsensical 'rules '.

If it parses, it rolls.

Canned tuna fish.

IRC one of mushrooms’ main effects is to increase seratonin levels, so … Yeah, same basic thing.

That is such an overly simplistic and reductionist take. I’m not even sure the most control and fear oriented, “OT” Christians would accept that interpretation. I’m not even sure that there are any hardcore Jews that would accept that interpretation.

From a Christian perspective, Jesus is evidently non-violent and encourages non-violence (“those who live by the sword, die by the sword,” “let he who is without sin cast the first stone,” and his refusal to start a riot in Jerusalem when he’s being tried.)

Also, I’d take your Matthew quote as Jesus seeing himself as in conversation with the Jewish corpus of teachings, not divorcing himself from it. He’s evidently NOT ok with the blind implementation of OT teaching. Anyway, I’ve got to clarify that the translation of Torah as “law” misses a lot of nuance. “Teachings” might be a better translation. “The Law and the Prophets” is basically shorthand for what Christians would call the “Old Testament”.

He obviously interpreted and prioritised Old Testament teachings to place love, mercy, and redemption at the heart of interpretation, so to say that, “Jesus wants you to kill your non-Christian family,” is absolutely disingenuous.