Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

random linguistic, cultural, and religious trivia (Announce)

posted by Rugxulo(R) Homepage, Usono, 24.09.2018, 04:10

> Here they recently are upping the commercial break frequency, after
> American model. Annoying.

Strange to me that people use AdBlock while watching YouTube when over-the-air tv has always been way worse! Yeah, I just mute (sound) tv commercials because they're so nonsensical.

> >(TBN hispanic english) thought it a good idea! Isn't that weird??
> Very weird. If not language it must be cultural.

It's the same exact gospel, so how do you infuse extra cultural stuff into that? Same language, too. Seriously, sometimes people go too far with pointless divisions. Sometimes, divisions are imaginary.

(The main dude on OSNews website is Dutch, and he's in love with AAVE. IMO, that's just slang, not a separate dialect, but even that heavily varies based upon region.)

> Anyway, a language is a dialect with some rubber stamp of approval, usually
> fairly arbitrary.

Yes, everything is seemingly arbitrary, especially standards. Too rigorous is bad, but too weak is useless. Of course, most people always ignore interoperability unless forced.

Speaking of programming, apparently D and Modula-2 are still trying to get integrated into GCC proper eventually.

> > Obviously you know that the Latin Vulgate was Catholic
> Latin. The Latin Church is a subdivision of the Catholic Church. Some
> Easter Mediterranean and Middle Eastern churches are Catholic but not
> Latin.

Yes, so I've heard, but I've had little interaction with them because I'm in the "West". Anyways, Latin is more or less obsolete, everything is vernacular here (e.g. English). But the Vulgate is still the "official" Bible though most people just use an approved (imprimatur?) English translation or whatever (often directly from Hebrew/Greek, not from Latin).

> This was clarified by Pius-I-Forgot-his-number-but-during-WII.

Pius XII, presumably. A bit before both of our times, obviously.

Or were you referring to Divino afflante Spiritu? I've heard of it, barely, but I'm not directly familiar with it. I think they just went back to the original languages once the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered.

> No. Luther originally wanted to reform the church, not create a schism.

No, he definitely wanted reform and changed many things for no good reason. I'm surprised he thought he could get away with it. Excluding books from the Bible, diminishing the number of sacraments, ignoring celibacy, and calling the Pope the Anti-Christ? No, that's definitely schism, not minor fixes.

I don't want to vilify anyone, but he was not a good example of the faith.
Nor was Henry VIII (nor Swedish king, I forget his name).

> One of his critiques is that nearly all churchgoers couldn't understand
> the Latin services and had no direct access to religion's sources, except
> through priests.

Even if they couldn't literally read the Bible, translating it to German (whatever dialect) doesn't help the rest of the "Catholic" world. The Anglicans also translated the Bible to English but with so-called "corrections" ("obey your elders" instead of "presbyters"). They too deprecated some of the books, aka Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical, which were eventually removed.

Latin was dying, and even Catholics had vernacular translations in English (e.g. Douay-Rheims). Latin was at least mostly universal. It's hard work verifying every potential translation error or misuse. The reason for authority/tradition (bishops and priests) is to stay consistent. Having everyone make their own private interpretations is ridiculous. There's only one truth, and you can't change it. Otherwise you don't believe in truth at all, just ambiguity (moral relativism?), and that doesn't work.

> (what is the correct English for this? I meant a formal Church Ban here)


> > Not entirely sure what the Dutch history is.
> In a nutshell:
> Part Lutherian, larger part Calvinist (Presbyterians are Anglo Saxon
> Calvinists), which was also state religion of the Republic. Contra
> reformation by Spain (combined with a vast military offensive)

I assume you mean Counter-Reformation (mostly by Jesuits)? The Council of Trent did indeed fix, or at least clarify, many points of contention.

> Since the sixties large influx of immigrant labour, mostly from Morocco and
> Turkey. So there is also a 5% Islam nowadays.

Loreen ("Euphoria") from Sweden is a child of Moroccan Berber Muslims. (St. Augustine's mother, St. Monica, was Berber. He called himself Punic. Of course, here in America, I've heard him called "black"! Who the hell knows, maybe it's all true, none of it, who knows. "A rose by any other name ....")

> If you go to a church here on a Sunday service, it will mostly be elderly
> people. And a lot REALLY elderly (like 80+, the baby boom generation is
> already heavily secularized)

Parochial schools would disagree, but obviously not all children know what they're doing (nor care). Yes, it's a secular world overall, but there are still many faithful.

> > It's weird when reading about random people like Job Cohen (whom
> Wikipedia > described as a "Jewish atheist").
> Well, I'm a catholic one :-)

"Catholic atheist"? Sorry if I just lump you in with Job Cohen. (Agnosticism isn't much better, even Darwin was lapsed Anglican/agnostic. Funny/sad that people treat him as some kind of solitary prophet. And his wife was Unitarian, ugh. Messy world.)

> I'm not religious at all, but religion is a major factor in historic
> events, as which is why we got here,

Religion is frowned upon in political circles. Even though America has a reputation for its fundamentalists and conservatives, it plays very little role (overall). Religion has very little power in the U.S., and people expect it to sit on the sidelines and get out of the way (and get mad at any hint otherwise). Unfortunately, religious freedom isn't so great. Freedom is maybe a delusion anyways.

But worse is constant "change", i.e. rebellion on any- and everything that exists, which is psychotic. It's hard to believe (almost) that some people don't know their own weaknesses! They rally so hard against the system but constantly change their mind, constantly find a new battle, make new people enemies, can never rest, are never happy!

> the influence of 1500-1600s bible translations on the formation of
> their respective standard languages.

Bishop Challoner (himself a convert) cleaned up a lot of the archaic language in Douay Rheims translation. Even KJV has had several revisions (and even so-called Catholic editions, with corrections of course).

> Not that it helped, Europe was in for a century of religiously motivated
> warfare.

American secularism is much worse. It's changing ideology knows no bounds, and it vilifies everyone unfairly. "Rules for Radicals" is psychotic.

> > I mean, I *really* don't want to be too glib or rude here, but look at
> > France's recent world cup victory. Those Vikings sure are talented. :-P
> You do realize that Normandy is a terribly small piece of France? I
> wouldn't be surprised that the Norman invasion was like 200 people or so.

Well, that one autobiography implied it was a noticeable difference. But the world (before airplanes) was a smaller place.

> And then I'm not even counting football teams high percentage of people
> with non European roots. (Nothing wrong with that, but they probably don't
> trace back to 11th century Normandy)

Well, it's the least surprising thing in the world. People move around a lot these days. It's stranger (almost) to be nationalistic, but maybe that's easier to avoid for Europeans (and/or Catholics).


Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
16015 Postings in 1483 Threads, 271 registered users, 7 users online (0 registered, 7 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum