Jump to content

Do the Devils Have a Moses?


Devils Pride 26

Recommended Posts

While I think there are better comparisons to be made (like, maybe to another athlete who led his team out of the basement to the championship), I get the analogy the OP was making. That being said,many time you bring up religion in any context, this is what happens. It's why people say the only things that they won't talk about are politics and religion. It'll never go well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Why do several of you find it nexessary to give your religious imput? He didn't say that it was real or you had to believe the story. He was simply relating it to a common connection that is made. People like you are the ones who give athiests a bad name. Nobody wants to hear what you think about the bible. This coming from someone who is not religious at all.

 

The irony is literally killing me.   :rolleyes:   

 

It's not a fair comparison, Moses was from before free agency and before guys used to switch teams. If Moses played today, different story.

Of course, if Jesus played today, he'd be a goalie.

Of course, but Andy Greene was undrafed, Moses was adopted.  Moses totally switched teams if you've been reading along with the rest of the class, buddy.  

Edited by RizzMB30
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do several of you find it nexessary to give your religious imput? He didn't say that it was real or you had to believe the story. He was simply relating it to a common connection that is made. People like you are the ones who give athiests a bad name. Nobody wants to hear what you think about the bible. This coming from someone who is not religious at all.

 

Since you used the word "atheist" in your post, I'll respond.

 

What did I say that was so out of line?  I prefaced my post by stating that I'm an atheist, mostly to show that all I was really going on with regards to Moses was what DP26 stated in his opening post...to show that since I don't have the background on Moses' story that DP26 does, my Chico comparison may be flawed.  But I thought the question was interesting enough to take a stab at it, based on what Moses represents in this context.  I didn't say anything remotely derogatory about religion or the Bible at all.

 

Neb00rs clearly has a firmer grasp on the nuances of Moses' story than I do, so he was able to give a "better" answer.  I don't know if that's based on his being religious or simply being interested in religion without practicing any himself, but again, my whole point here is that DP26 came up with an interesting question and I thought it was worth answering, and I thought it best to be honest about my background so he could understand where I was coming from with an answer.  That's it.  Not trying to start a crusade against religion or anything like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you used the word "atheist" in your post, I'll respond.

What did I say that was so out of line? I prefaced my post by stating that I'm an atheist, mostly to show that all I was really going on with regards to Moses was what DP26 stated in his opening post...to show that since I don't have the background on Moses' story that DP26 does, my Chico comparison may be flawed. But I thought the question was interesting enough to take a stab at it, based on what Moses represents in this context. I didn't say anything remotely derogatory about religion or the Bible at all.

Neb00rs clearly has a firmer grasp on the nuances of Moses' story than I do, so he was able to give a "better" answer. I don't know if that's based on his being religious or simply being interested in religion without practicing any himself, but again, my whole point here is that DP26 came up with an interesting question and I thought it was worth answering, and I thought it best to be honest about my background so he could understand where I was coming from with an answer. That's it. Not trying to start a crusade against religion or anything like that.

My post was directed at whoever posted the simpsons gif and those who responded to that without giving any productive response to this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you used the word "atheist" in your post, I'll respond.

 

What did I say that was so out of line?  I prefaced my post by stating that I'm an atheist, mostly to show that all I was really going on with regards to Moses was what DP26 stated in his opening post...to show that since I don't have the background on Moses' story that DP26 does, my Chico comparison may be flawed.  But I thought the question was interesting enough to take a stab at it, based on what Moses represents in this context.  I didn't say anything remotely derogatory about religion or the Bible at all.

 

Neb00rs clearly has a firmer grasp on the nuances of Moses' story than I do, so he was able to give a "better" answer.  I don't know if that's based on his being religious or simply being interested in religion without practicing any himself, but again, my whole point here is that DP26 came up with an interesting question and I thought it was worth answering, and I thought it best to be honest about my background so he could understand where I was coming from with an answer.  That's it.  Not trying to start a crusade against religion or anything like that. 

 

I took this thread as the intellectual exercise that DP26 meant it to be and not as an exercise in proselytization. Nor did you; you on instinct (and without seeing the topic as threatening at all) responded with a worthy and excellent contribution (as usual) and that's why I think Louismydad wasn't directing his grievance at you but at the posters who acted like this was some big issue about to go down. He has a point, these kids see anything alluding to religion (or anything that makes them uncomfortable) at all and they freak. I had hoped that they would have read your post and took a hint from it on how to contribute to a topic that they don't relate to or take personal interest in, but alas, no such luck. Such is called "being an adult." My post certainly was not the words of some zealot; the level of profaneness that my post contained should demonstrate that I contributed in the way that I wanted to and would most enjoy participating in this thread. And by the way, I wouldn't be getting involved here, but people on this board need to learn this in general. In this case, their posts (and now this post too) may have already distracted from the thread enough to derail it. This is the type of thread that gets us through every summer, and it was original and interesting on top of that. I can't ask for much more mid-July. I'd like to see more of this kind of creative stuff on the board.

 

The framing by DP26 was simple: Moses is a significant figure (whether you believe in him historically or simply as an element in literature) and he is reading about him right now. Thus, try to draw a parallel between a Devils player and this figure. 

Edited by Neb00rs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do several of you find it nexessary to give your religious imput? He didn't say that it was real or you had to believe the story. He was simply relating it to a common connection that is made. People like you are the ones who give athiests a bad name. Nobody wants to hear what you think about the bible. This coming from someone who is not religious at all.

 

My post was directed at whoever posted the simpsons gif and those who responded to that without giving any productive response to this thread.

 

Holy sh!t - no where did I say I was an atheist.  Nor did I give any religious input about my thoughts on the bible (?!) whatsoever - the point of my harmless joke was that I prefer not speak about my beliefs or religion at all, because it's such a potentially volatile subject.  That's literally all I implied in my post.  In fact, your assumption that I'm an atheist is offensive in and of itself, but I digress.. don't be so sensitive.

And re: the bolded, that's some delicious irony.  Your only contribution to this thread has been complaining about what others have said.  Well done.

 

But here, I'll make a contribution so that we're all back to feeling warm and fuzzy, and on topic.  I'm gonna go with Jacques Lemaire.  Lou chose him to lead the Devils out of irrelevancy and into greatness.  And, in this scenario, I'm gonna say the "Promised Land" is the mini-dynasty era from '95 to '03.  Jacques got the Devils started (in 95', and almost '94) but wasn't here to take part in the later two championships.  

Edited by Devilsfan118
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.