Page 14 of 105 [ 1680 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 105  Next

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

04 Feb 2015, 8:38 pm

I worked for a NFP agency. Other agencies are supposed to fill the gaps, but it just adds to their load.

As for what I write... everything and anything. The 650 page thing is a fantasy story. But I also have an historic fiction one half finished, as well as a Hemingway style homage, a few topical essays and other bits n pieces. I wanted to publish, but that's stressful. Writing is a purpose unto itself.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

04 Feb 2015, 8:46 pm

I like historical fiction--as long as it doesn't become like the TV series "The Tudors," where Henry VIII is a matinee idol.

I don't mind anachronisms at funny points, such as found in "A Knight's Tale," where they played 80's rock during a jousting tournament.

Irving Stone, I believe, was rather good at historical biography.



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

04 Feb 2015, 11:12 pm

There is so much to history about a time or a person, that the research is equally as enjoyable as the writing. And it's not just historic fiction. For my fantasy novel, I found myself doing almost as much research - weaponry, languages, mythology, bush-craft etc.

I can get immersed in reading a novel or series for weeks before coming up for air. Then I like to vegetate in front of Big Bang theory or a Bourne movie or something historic, or something like James May's silly shows.

Do you write too? Or are you more a reader/watcher?


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

05 Feb 2015, 12:11 am

I write nonmetered poetry and prose poems.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

05 Feb 2015, 12:37 am

Thinking about god is just as crazy as thinking about
Infinity. Some of the greatest minds went mental over these deeply topical questions.
And that's what I fear is going on in the world, everyone is going mental arguing over some god that could be a man, woman, black, white, cow, fish, snake, tiger, crab, dog, pig, chicken, goat, elephant, sky, sand, water, earth, fire, wind, sun, star, tree, flower, weeds, snails, slugs, house, church, cathedral, bus stop, pizza, vegetables, steak, cake, sport, music, maths, science, languages, love, learning, compassion, understanding, weather your Jewish, Christian, monk, Dali lama, Tibetans, Muslim, cowboy, American Indian,
Arabic, catholic, Kurdish, inca, Aztec, Egyptian, myan, Celtic, Jedi, Protestant, Sikh, Buddha, hindu, Rastafarian, paganism along with the other 4,174 religions or so including all 196 country's consisting of 7 billion people the last time I checked, every man, woman, child, all 8.7 million species of animal give or take 1.3 million, every atomic atom in the universe, every nucleus, electron, proton, quark, anti quark, lepton, neutrino, mesons, tau, tau neutrino, mu neutrino, muon, gluon, fermions, Higgs boson and the four forces, 12 dimensions, and your quantum brain. Every thing in entire existence including anti matter, but I won't go into that because I will only repeat myself.
Everything that is for seen by the human eye is god, without us there is no god, and there has only been speculation. There was the Precambrian times and the paleozoic era that didn't need god to survive. And here we are fighting in the cenozoic era 21 century 2015AD the year of our lord arguing over an existing or non existing god, the fact is we are god, god won't help us now, neither will the aliens we can't blame anyone else other than our selves if the the next age is extinction and the nuclear age. God will carry on without us creating new life at its will, and it will be a new age where god takes on a different perspective.

And just to clarify Everybody deserves each other's time without putting people in literal boxes, because we are all the same and everything we are part of this universe and will forever stay in the universe.

I think instead of fighting over religion, we should use the same amount of enthusiasm to create great minds to develop technology's, systems to stop the world of Atlantis sinking into the sea so to speak.
Much love to the world.
Peace.

God for me is everything that's good and if your intent is to be a good person then that is stronger than any AK47 or M16 and I will be willing to live and die by that rule, if no body likes that then there is no point living anyway.
I don't know how man kind lives with itself no wonder we all need god. Unless we learn to all get along we will never be free.
God help future generations if there ever really was a successful human cleanse. I would just shoot myself if I had to grow up bearing those facts. At least now it's mildly bearable knowing we have got a chance, until that day I prefer to stay away from the madding crowed on the fringes of nature. Knowing that there is a possibility that in my and urs tiny tiny life in comparison to the scale of the universe, we could be fighting ww3. What a waste of people, society, space and earths recourses. Just what are we all thinking. God exists alright because every day he keeps me from what I also call hell on earth. My god has turned to ignorance and it's bliss. I will do my time here on earth but no one owns my soul. In the mean time I hope to do as good as I can, with the least amount of pain, that's all I ask.

Now we know god just is can we all just get along :D



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

05 Feb 2015, 1:20 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
I write nonmetered poetry and prose poems.

That's pretty cool. I used to be able to write poetry when I was a kid, but somehow lost it.

We'll have to have a writing thread, but probably not in PPR.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

05 Feb 2015, 1:50 am

Narrator wrote:
There is so much to history about a time or a person, that the research is equally as enjoyable as the writing. And it's not just historic fiction. For my fantasy novel, I found myself doing almost as much research - weaponry, languages, mythology, bush-craft etc.

I can get immersed in reading a novel or series for weeks before coming up for air. Then I like to vegetate in front of Big Bang theory or a Bourne movie or something historic, or something like James May's silly shows.

Do you write too? Or are you more a reader/watcher?


Now I'm really curious. What time period are you researching?



sophisticated
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

05 Feb 2015, 3:40 am

Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Janissy wrote:
Don't you see the conflict between your statement that.....
sophisticated wrote:
Right, but every theory must have a basis. If you argue particles can appear out of nowhere, I will ask you where "nowhere" is, if you can't show me where "nowhere" then your argument falls part.


and your other statement that.......
Quote:
For me, we can establish that there is a God through common sense, .


How is common sense suddenly a good enough basis to establish that there is a God but it wasn't good enough to establish that particles may be able to appear out of nowhere? "Common sense" isn't much of a standard for establishing anything.


There's no conflict.

A claim that makes no sense, needs to be backed up by strong evidence.

A claim that makes perfect sense, needs no strong evidence as it is self evident.

God is self-evident and I don't have to write a huge essay to convince you that he is real.

You ask for evidence for one but say the other is self-evident? That doesn't make sense, because if it did everyone would believe in God.

We put a virus under a microscope as evidence of its existence, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the supernatural claim of possession was wrong. Why should any other supernatural claim not require the same scrutiny?

We use several methods to prove that the world is not flat, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the Ptolemaic universe of Genesis 1 was wrong. Why should any other religious claim not require the same scrutiny?


Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.

Humans have a tendency to believe in God, they have no tendency to believe in the spaghetti monster or the flying tea pot.

Questioning or doubting the existing of God is a heresy in and of itself.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

05 Feb 2015, 3:53 am

God is my fascination, the people it presents before me, my spark my fuel to keep me burning, yes faith....faith in good, faith is god.



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

05 Feb 2015, 3:58 am

sophisticated wrote:
Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.


So my non-religiousness is just a period of confusion? Good to know.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

05 Feb 2015, 4:16 am

sophisticated wrote:
Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:

Questioning or doubting the existing of God is a heresy in and of itself.


Not questioning yourself is a heresy in itself



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

05 Feb 2015, 4:29 am

sophisticated wrote:
Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Janissy wrote:
Don't you see the conflict between your statement that.....
sophisticated wrote:
Right, but every theory must have a basis. If you argue particles can appear out of nowhere, I will ask you where "nowhere" is, if you can't show me where "nowhere" then your argument falls part.


and your other statement that.......
Quote:
For me, we can establish that there is a God through common sense, .


How is common sense suddenly a good enough basis to establish that there is a God but it wasn't good enough to establish that particles may be able to appear out of nowhere? "Common sense" isn't much of a standard for establishing anything.


There's no conflict.

A claim that makes no sense, needs to be backed up by strong evidence.

A claim that makes perfect sense, needs no strong evidence as it is self evident.

God is self-evident and I don't have to write a huge essay to convince you that he is real.

You ask for evidence for one but say the other is self-evident? That doesn't make sense, because if it did everyone would believe in God.

We put a virus under a microscope as evidence of its existence, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the supernatural claim of possession was wrong. Why should any other supernatural claim not require the same scrutiny?

We use several methods to prove that the world is not flat, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the Ptolemaic universe of Genesis 1 was wrong. Why should any other religious claim not require the same scrutiny?


Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.

Humans have a tendency to believe in God, they have no tendency to believe in the spaghetti monster or the flying tea pot.

Questioning or doubting the existing of God is a heresy in and of itself.

I spent 35+ years thinking the same way.

But on what you said, you notion of heresy is not evidence. And our tendency to believe in a deity has a more logical explanation, as a hangover from our ignorant past, when supernatural notions explained the unexplainable, like disease, weather, what we see in the sky, natural disasters and so much more.

The idea that God is self-evident, as expressed in the NT, comes from that very same ignorance.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


sophisticated
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

05 Feb 2015, 4:32 am

trollcatman wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.


So my non-religiousness is just a period of confusion? Good to know.


One can be irreligious but believe in God.



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

05 Feb 2015, 4:42 am

trollcatman wrote:
Narrator wrote:
There is so much to history about a time or a person, that the research is equally as enjoyable as the writing. And it's not just historic fiction. For my fantasy novel, I found myself doing almost as much research - weaponry, languages, mythology, bush-craft etc.

I can get immersed in reading a novel or series for weeks before coming up for air. Then I like to vegetate in front of Big Bang theory or a Bourne movie or something historic, or something like James May's silly shows.

Do you write too? Or are you more a reader/watcher?


Now I'm really curious. What time period are you researching?

For the fantasy novel, it wasn't so bound by periods, but by topics. It's amazing the detail involved in archery, or decorative flutes or masonry. It's also fun to create a language based on a convergence of ancient languages.

For the historic fiction, my story covers different parts over the last century, but about half of it is between 1920 and 1934.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


sophisticated
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

05 Feb 2015, 4:58 am

Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Janissy wrote:
Don't you see the conflict between your statement that.....
sophisticated wrote:
Right, but every theory must have a basis. If you argue particles can appear out of nowhere, I will ask you where "nowhere" is, if you can't show me where "nowhere" then your argument falls part.


and your other statement that.......
Quote:
For me, we can establish that there is a God through common sense, .


How is common sense suddenly a good enough basis to establish that there is a God but it wasn't good enough to establish that particles may be able to appear out of nowhere? "Common sense" isn't much of a standard for establishing anything.


There's no conflict.

A claim that makes no sense, needs to be backed up by strong evidence.

A claim that makes perfect sense, needs no strong evidence as it is self evident.

God is self-evident and I don't have to write a huge essay to convince you that he is real.

You ask for evidence for one but say the other is self-evident? That doesn't make sense, because if it did everyone would believe in God.

We put a virus under a microscope as evidence of its existence, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the supernatural claim of possession was wrong. Why should any other supernatural claim not require the same scrutiny?

We use several methods to prove that the world is not flat, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the Ptolemaic universe of Genesis 1 was wrong. Why should any other religious claim not require the same scrutiny?


Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.

Humans have a tendency to believe in God, they have no tendency to believe in the spaghetti monster or the flying tea pot.

Questioning or doubting the existing of God is a heresy in and of itself.

I spent 35+ years thinking the same way.

But on what you said, you notion of heresy is not evidence. And our tendency to believe in a deity has a more logical explanation, as a hangover from our ignorant past, when supernatural notions explained the unexplainable, like disease, weather, what we see in the sky, natural disasters and so much more.

The idea that God is self-evident, as expressed in the NT, comes from that very same ignorance.


I understand where you are coming from.

Naturally you believed in God. But you was practising a religion that is not from God .. and after 35 years you realized this.

But, don't give up , there is still time for you to find Gods true religion. Don't take the easy route into atheism.



Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

05 Feb 2015, 5:34 am

sophisticated wrote:
Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Narrator wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
Janissy wrote:
Don't you see the conflict between your statement that.....
sophisticated wrote:
Right, but every theory must have a basis. If you argue particles can appear out of nowhere, I will ask you where "nowhere" is, if you can't show me where "nowhere" then your argument falls part.


and your other statement that.......
Quote:
For me, we can establish that there is a God through common sense, .


How is common sense suddenly a good enough basis to establish that there is a God but it wasn't good enough to establish that particles may be able to appear out of nowhere? "Common sense" isn't much of a standard for establishing anything.


There's no conflict.

A claim that makes no sense, needs to be backed up by strong evidence.

A claim that makes perfect sense, needs no strong evidence as it is self evident.

God is self-evident and I don't have to write a huge essay to convince you that he is real.

You ask for evidence for one but say the other is self-evident? That doesn't make sense, because if it did everyone would believe in God.

We put a virus under a microscope as evidence of its existence, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the supernatural claim of possession was wrong. Why should any other supernatural claim not require the same scrutiny?

We use several methods to prove that the world is not flat, because it is not naturally observable. Science has shown that the Ptolemaic universe of Genesis 1 was wrong. Why should any other religious claim not require the same scrutiny?


Everyone (cept for confused people) believes in God.

Humans have a tendency to believe in God, they have no tendency to believe in the spaghetti monster or the flying tea pot.

Questioning or doubting the existing of God is a heresy in and of itself.

I spent 35+ years thinking the same way.

But on what you said, you notion of heresy is not evidence. And our tendency to believe in a deity has a more logical explanation, as a hangover from our ignorant past, when supernatural notions explained the unexplainable, like disease, weather, what we see in the sky, natural disasters and so much more.

The idea that God is self-evident, as expressed in the NT, comes from that very same ignorance.


I understand where you are coming from.

Naturally you believed in God. But you was practising a religion that is not from God .. and after 35 years you realized this.

But, don't give up , there is still time for you to find Gods true religion. Don't take the easy route into atheism.

Hahaha... ohhh the assumptions in that one. But I can remember thinking similar things. It reminds me of how I thought of people who had "lost their faith," as if they had lost something of great value. But in quitting Christianity, I have gained a lot, not lost.

"Easy route into atheism?" Such a trite cliche. The route to atheism is the road less traveled, and with 35 years invested, it's no easy choice. Please don't assume you know my journey.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.