Timewaster's Guide Archive

I suppose if you really want to salvage your theory, you could speculate that Robert Jordan had some sort of psychic premonition of his death, a few years ahead of time while writing Knife of Dreams.  Or that an Aes Sedai Foretold it for him.

But yeah, I think probably he just realized he'd better start tying things up if he wanted to finish the story in 12 books, which turned out not to be possible after all.  He should have had this revelation a couple of books sooner.

According to Wikipedia, Knife of Dreams came out 10/11/05 and Robert Jordan announced his diagnosis 3/23/06.  Of course, he may have been ill for awhile before that, but it's unlikely he knew he was dying while he was actually writing Book 11.

Renoard, the literalists I am thinking of are not serious Bible scholars who have done their best to use all the tools at their disposal to determine the author's original intent, and determined that he was writing a literal, historical account.  I can respect them, even when I disagree with their conclusions.  Not that I always do disagree, of course - I believe that much of the Bible is meant to be read as historical narrative.

I'm thinking of people who say, "Why bother going to seminary and studying all those languages and history and archeology?  You don't need any of those liberal intellectuals to tell you what the Bible means - just read what it says and believe it.  Forget the lexicons and commentaries; all you need is the Scripture and the Holy Spirit.  Research just complicates the simplicity of faith.  Just take the Bible literally: God said it, I believe it, that settles it."  This is the attitude I try to combat with the Psalm 23 question, because it seems to me that these people are reading the text as if it were a science textbook written two years ago in English.  What's worse, they seem to believe that anyone who reads it differently is doubting the veracity of God.

Another, perhaps more pertinent question I like to ask these people is whether they believe in stoning rebellious children, as Moses's law requires.  Basically, what I'm trying to get them to admit is that they do make interpretive decisions and that it's not as simple as just "believing everything the Bible says."  I want to convince them that actually studying the Bible (including other relevant disciplines) is a worthwhile endeavor.  Since we all make assumptions and interpretive decisions, it's better to have some solid foundation for those choices than to make them intuitively.  Does this make sense?  Do you understand what I'm trying to argue here?  Have you met these people, and how do you deal with them?

By the way, if your big words and references to divinity students were intended to intimidate me, I should probably let you know they aren't working.  You see, I myself have been a divinity student; I earned a master's in biblical languages, and in the process I did occasionally encounter such terms as "hermeneutics" and "exegesis".   

Actually meeting famous people can be like that.  I lost a lot of respect for Elisabeth Elliott when I actually got to meet her and interact with her.  She was better on paper.

Of course, even famous people probably have bad days.

I'm kind of sad that Morgan & Anna seem to be finished.  And I agree with Ryos that Chuck can't suddenly be physically invincible like Casey and Sarah.  It seems like the next season (if there is one) will be very different, with no Morgan, no Buy More, and no physical incompetence from Chuck.  Where will they take the story next, and how can it possibly still be as good?

Nice finds, Zas!  I definitely like the oddly-white-beard connection, sounds to me like a promising theory.

And yet he could still write poetry, while he was a sheep?  Boy, that's even weirder!

Hmm, I haven't actually priced them but I would have guessed that real potatoes are cheaper than instant mashed.  Instant mashed certainly have the convenience advantage, though - as well as a much longer shelf life.