03-03-2004, 06:15 PM
But I said too little. Brrevity may be the soul of wit, but it can cause a thought to turn into an incomplete soundbyte.
The differing orders are an outcome of differing intellectual, and for that matter political, approaches by literate and educated minds, based on the same set of basic principles. (And of course tempered by limitations of time and place.)
I will disagree with your assumption in re the lack of a spiritual element, though I can't prove my position beyond my own observation of clergy from many sects, that for that millenium or two involved the principles were ignored or even not emphasized. My shortcoming to that observation is that I have not time traveled back to see how, for example, Martin Luther conducted a wedding, and what pastoral measures he and others of that period used to encourage adherence to the guidance provided, for example, in the letter to the Ephesians among other bits of collected wisdom.
The ideal was there. Again, the delta between achieving it and pursuing it depends on how it is sold (doctrine) and the obstacles to it (both in motivation and the insertion of other competing ideas, for example the chattel bit from post one.)
As to the Bible, the begats section made for some great character and NPC names in my old D&D games, since I never felt like calling the local healer or weapons smith Fred or dude. :)
As to what I know about history, I often synthesize and do what any number of amateur historians do: make inferences and guesses. Hell, real historians do that all the time. How else do their lively debates get started, ya know, the ones Pete refers to in acadamia that start along the lines of "my esteemed colleague is an utter nitwit because . . ."
The differing orders are an outcome of differing intellectual, and for that matter political, approaches by literate and educated minds, based on the same set of basic principles. (And of course tempered by limitations of time and place.)
I will disagree with your assumption in re the lack of a spiritual element, though I can't prove my position beyond my own observation of clergy from many sects, that for that millenium or two involved the principles were ignored or even not emphasized. My shortcoming to that observation is that I have not time traveled back to see how, for example, Martin Luther conducted a wedding, and what pastoral measures he and others of that period used to encourage adherence to the guidance provided, for example, in the letter to the Ephesians among other bits of collected wisdom.
The ideal was there. Again, the delta between achieving it and pursuing it depends on how it is sold (doctrine) and the obstacles to it (both in motivation and the insertion of other competing ideas, for example the chattel bit from post one.)
As to the Bible, the begats section made for some great character and NPC names in my old D&D games, since I never felt like calling the local healer or weapons smith Fred or dude. :)
As to what I know about history, I often synthesize and do what any number of amateur historians do: make inferences and guesses. Hell, real historians do that all the time. How else do their lively debates get started, ya know, the ones Pete refers to in acadamia that start along the lines of "my esteemed colleague is an utter nitwit because . . ."
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete