Your’s Truly appears on satirical image viral on Demotywatory.pl
The image here shows my 1 November 2009 appearance on the popular Polish daytime TV show “Dzien Dobry TVN”. In fact what the caption says has nothing to do with what I said (you can see the original interview here under the “Goldlist Methodology” section) but they must have found the image on YT and used it to make an alternative caption making a joke about the, well, daytime-TV-ishness of the programme, and the blithe way it vacillates between the important and the trivial.
The caption says
“So, that was how I saved a person’s life”
“OK… in that case, let’s go and see what Kasia Cichopek is cooking up for us today”
I feel quite honoured to have my image used for a funny piece like that, and hope it goes viral. The original can be found here. There quite a few other things there to enjoy also.
Join me on Ushi.cn
What is Ushi.cn?
It’s a great business network for anyone interested in China.
It’s like Linked In, but for China.
Enjoy.
“Packed lunches not safe” – latest UK Gov-no advice.
A UK Gov-no Quango, the oxymoronically named “School Food Trust”, in the person of its chairperson Mr Rob “Daylight” Rees, has been quoted in today’s online Torygrass as saying that parents “are hampering efforts to cut obesity in children by sending them to school with packed lunches”. Mr Daylight said “the best solution would be the parents to pay for their children to eat healthy hot meals and canteens rather than giving them lunchboxes”. He also wants to give schools the right to open packed lunch boxes at the school gates and ensure that inappropriate content is not allowed onto school premises. Apparently he wants sophisticated entry controls at school gates similar to those at airports, with students being asked if they packed their satchels all by themselves, and mineral water only being allowed on board if it is bought in the airside shops and has high enough fluoride levels in it to control all risks of explosions or independent thought.
We at Huliganov.TV am naturally shocked that such incursions into parental liberties should be being allowed under a newly elected democratic government in the UK. We had assumed that with the passing of Gordon Brown’s junta, people would now be allowed to give what they want to their own children. For example if I wished to include in my children’s Bento box some butterfish sashimi, I wouldn’t expect some unelected Eurocrat to turn up at the school gates of my childrens’ alma stabat mater quoting EU directives about the wax content in the flesh of the butterfish at them, and poking their noses into the wasabi to assess the isothiocyanate levels. It’s not like I’m putting unlicensed fugu into the bento box (I’m saving that for their University days, as about the only way to keep kids from going wrong once the parental shackles are struck off seems to be to have them paralysed from the mouth outwards).
Thankfully, there is a voice of relative sanity being quoted as well in the Torygrass : Margaret Morrissey founder of the Parents Out Loud lobby group (although it sounds more like a pop group) said “I understand the Full Scud Trust, Jamie Oliver and the Gulferment having an opinion on our children and their health, but at the end of the day parents must make the decision”. We wholeheartedly agree, although we would say that what goes into the child’s lunchbox should be preferably decided in the beginning of the day rather than at the end thereof, as they do tend to get very hungry by that time.
Five years ago, YouTube star Jamie Oliver led a campaign to improve school dinners, insisting on a reduction in coconut contents in the Satay sauces and certain Balinese specialities offered by schools in the more middle-class postcode areas. He insisted on low nut-allergy pesto sauces to be provided to all gluten-free tagliatelle rigatoni options in order to reduce the pasta’s carbonara footprint, as well as recommending a caffeine-free alternative of raspberry flavoured Genmaicha in addition to the usual cuppatea provided in the traditional school meal. However, Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, lashed out stating that this method of addressing obesity in children would not be effective, and that the only way of getting kids to really burn those calories would be to ensure that every school meal began with a Grapefruit and Mango Fruit Macedoine Julienne with an Ananas Jus, and that at least once a week every child be required to eat a scientifically assessed quota of Jerusalem artichokes drizzled in acacia honey and Grey Poupon dijon mustard sauce. With lashings and lashings of ginger beer.
When asked for an opinion on the lunchbox controversy, the Prime Minister Mr Cameron said “Lunchboxes can be healthy or unhealthy, depending entirely on their contents. For instance, I make sure that Sam Cam always packages my porky-pies in properly lacquered Shōkadō bentō made from antique rosewood, with hashioki carved by hand from rhinoceros molars by monks especially blessed for the purpose by the Dalai Lama personally. None of this tupperware nonsense.”
Huliganov.TV naturally went out onto the streets to interview people with regard to their plans for changing the packed lunches they would be giving to their children in the light of Rob Rees’ comments. One mother, Mrs Tracey Ardurumbumwalla, said that she intended to ensure that her children’s obento boxes would be “as healthy as can be” since they would contain nothing but an apple. “An apple a day keeps the doctor away”, Mrs Ardurumbumwalla constipulated, “which is just as well, as they’re all I can afford, even with me scrumping them from me neighbour’s back gardin”. However, when we referred this comment back to the Fool Scud Trust, we were told by one of Mr Raylight’s meanials that the assumption that apples were healthy can no longer be relied on in the light of the recent iPhone 4 recall warning.
Protected: For Claude’s Polyglot Project 2nd part
A question on Russian grammar
One of my viewers on the Russian Course asked the following question:
So I’m beginning to get a pretty good grasp of how Russian grammar works, but one point is still unclear to me. A lot of times the accusative case is used when it seems the nominative would convey practically the same meaning. With the other cases it’s very clear which needs to be used. Can you help me?
Well, naturally I can help, although I prefer not to do one-on-one, so if a question is worth answering it’s more likely to be answered if you either ask me in a place where others can also share it, or let me answer it in such a way, as indeed I’m doing now.
It also helps, by the way, when you ask a question if you’re one of my subscribers. This person hadn’t remembered to subscribe to me prior to asking the question, but I thought, “ok, interesting question, I’m going to look into this anyway…”
However, I wasn’t sure what he meant, so I asked him for an example, and the answer came back:
I’m sure there’s something I’m missing, but here:
Июльский вечер, любимые глаза И нашу встречу вернуть уже нельзя.
How would this sentence accurately be translated into English, and what would be the difference in meaning if ‘нашу встречу’ were changed to ‘наша встреча’?
Incidentally, would you mind giving me a brief history of your attraction and subsequent path to the mastery of Russian language?
Thanks!
OK, with regard to the latter point, I am writing a whole article about that which is going to be in Claude Syzygycc’s Polyglot Story Book, and that’s actually on here too, a work in progress at the moment and passworded so that people don’t read it here but go and get Claude’s book when it comes out. There’ll be a free online version and hopefully also a paper version.
OK, now to the question. The example comes from the lyrics to the song ‘Proshchay naveki’ (Goodbye forever) by Vadim Kazachenko. For those who are interested the full text is as follows:
В город приходит вечер За окном уже третий день ноябрь Я зажигаю свечи Предо мной фотография твоя Снова и снова память Возвращает меня в те дни, в те дни Снова и снова я грущу о них Снова и снова память Возвращает меня в те дни, в те дни Снова и снова я грущу о них Прощай навеки последняя любовь Прощай навеки - и нет печальней слов Июльский вечер, любимые глаза И нашу встречу вернуть уже нельзя Нас познакомил случай И я думал, что он счастливым был Мне бы не верить лучше А я встретил тебя и полюбил Сказочный праздник лета Был прекрасен и чист, как ты, как ты Яркое солнце, травы и цветы Прощай навеки последняя любовь Прощай навеки - и нет печальней слов Июльский вечер, любимые глаза И нашу встречу вернуть уже нельзя.
The reason why in this case the accusative is used is because of the word “нельзя” which should be translated “you cannot/may not”, or “one cannot/may not”. That means you have an unspoken, impersonal subject. You also have the same with “mozhno” and various other words. It is part of the Russian love of impersonals, which I talk about in some of the Huliganov Russian lessons.
Arkadiy Vainer, an old boss of mine and I would say also a friend, now sadly departed, wrote the book – which became under his directorship also a famous film with Vysotskii – “Mesto vstrechi izmenit’ nel’zya”. “You may not change the meeting place”. This is the same idea. “Vstrechi” is genitive but “Mesto” is in the accusative. You can’t see it in a neuter noun or an inanimate masculine one, but if we said using a feminine noun, let’s say “povestka” the agenda of the meeting, you would say “Povestku vstrechi (actually, for that kind of meeting ‘zasedanie’ would suit better, but I’ll gloss over it) izmenit’ nel’zya”.
In the example you gave, “the July evening”, “the beloved eyes”, and “our meeting” are all things which you (or “one”) cannot bring back. So the impersonal subject is implied, but not stated expressis verbis.
Do we have such impersonal subjects in English? Well yes, we do. Take for example the famous song by Elton John and Kiki Dee (aka Reginald Dwight and Pauline Matthews, but “Elton John and Kiki Dee” sounds better) “Don’t go breaking my heart”. Now, in this “my heart” is direct object, not subject, and if you need any proof of that, then just replace “my heart” with the first person singular pronoun – would you say “Don’t go breaking I” or “Don’t go breaking me”? Clearly the second. So if “my heart” is the object, what’s the subject, “go”? That’s a verb, how can it be the subject? In fact the subject, unspoken as it often is with imperatives, is “you”. You can add it if you like – “Don’t you go breaking my heart”. So you see it’s not just Russian that throws up these grammatical puzzles from time to time.
Hope this helps.
Protected: For Claude’s Polyglot Project
Calling Rebbe Piper
I received today a comment on the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiYRheI9aQM from Rebbe Piper. He has seven uploads on his channel including his beautiful performance of the song “Sandals” and some pieces by another person relating to the need to understand Hebrew in order to get a perspective on biblical teleology. Since I have not seen everything that Rebbe Piper has posted a you tube, neither have I have any conversations with him at length on what he believes, I don’t want to come to this debate making any assumptions as to where he is coming from ideologically. There seems to be a lot about Judaism in what he’s posted up, and clearly also, he seems to be interested in Jesus Christ. Whether or not he is a messianic Jewish believer is not 100% clear to me. From what I’ve seen from him, it seems most likely, but I don’t want to jump to conclusions, and hopefully in the course of this debate he will be more forthcoming on what he does think on a variety of matters. My apologies if he has made this clear, and I simply haven’t watched or read that far yet.
In any event, I will simply for the purposes of this post just addressed the words that he says in his quote below
Perhaps a reading of the early church fathers would serve to educate the ignorant: Church Canon XXXVII: “It is not lawful to receive portions sent from the feasts off Jews or heretics, nor to feast together with them.” Masons have no problem with Jewish fellowship in Lodges, apparently some of the Church does. How odd, in the model prayer, Jesus ended it not with his own name, but rather..for thine is the kingdom and the power, and the glory forever and ever RebbePiper 18 hours ago
Since there is an awful lot to talk about just in answering what he says here, I thought it was pointless to start to discuss it on you tube, where there is barely any space for debate at all because of the limit of characters on each comment. So I obtained Rebbe Piper’s permission to take this discussion here, and in hand. I hope that he will read what I have to say now about his comment above.
I understand that he commented because of a little bit of discussion that happened in other comments regarding the Masons, beginning with one commentator who criticised the Masonic symbols in the architecture of the Church where this song was being sung. Another commentator then came in and said that the Masonic organisation is fine and not at all unchristian. I then chimed in and suggested that any Christian thinking of being recruited into the Masons ought to do some research on you tube as to what happens are at higher levels in the organisation. Rebbe then gives an example of some early Church “Canon” in which Jews are likened to heretics. Without particularly wishing to confirm or deny the veracity of that “Canon”, or getting into discussions about the date of it, I prefer to say that there are plenty of cases where people ought to know better in the Church don’t have the correct approach to Judaism. If we’re talking about the Roman Catholic Church, then of course they ride ride roughshod over many scriptures anyway, ignoring for instance when Paul mentions that forbidding to marry is a “doctrine of demons” – which you will find in his letter to Timothy. In fact, they can’t even get the order of the 10 Commandments correct.
They placed their traditions over the Word of God consistently and repeatedly. And ever since the time of Constantine, they have been largely a political structure, and not really a spiritual structure. Which of course means that they are not really the Church at all, because of course they are of this world with political power, and the Church of Christ, which is the bride of Christ, the fellowship of believers, is not a political earthly structure.
Of course there are many Roman Catholics and Christians who are in the Church well enough, but that’s not exactly the church that they think it is. If they believe in Jesus Christ and love him, and of course they’re in the Church, and this regardless of what people dressed in black gowns and other effeminate clothing either confirm or deny to them.
The Church as a political entity is absolutely full of emissaries of the devil, and by this I don’t even mean only the Roman Catholic Church. Much of Protestantism is the same, only worse. It started out well, by referring back to the Word of God instead of to tradition, but it soon went off the rails also. Every generation needs to rebel against traditions and go back to the Word of God for itself. Every individual believer needs to take his guidance in this life directly from God’s Word. God wrote this book for people, other people have been burned alive or buried alive or both so that you can read this in your own language. If you read it carefully and prayerfully, in the main you can expect that God will enlighten your mind and heart to have some understanding and guidance from the Bible. But what these so-called church fathers may have said interests me very little, especially bearing in mind that Jesus Christ himself said: “Call no man ‘Father’.” Again, this is a piece which the Roman Catholic Church, in which just about every minister is called Father, conveniently ignores, knowing of course better than God what they should do.
I don’t expect anything of spiritual use coming from church leaders once the Constantine era has gone past. Before Constantine, if you were a leader in the Church you could expect to be thrown to the lions. That means getting held down by a very large cat, while other large cats appear and start to pull your muscles away from the bone as you bleed to death in tremendous agony. This is not what I recommend for those of you who are concerned with obtaining all the modern comforts. Oh yes, and most of the church leaders prior to that point in time were also Jews, as were most of the Christians. After Constantine, if you were a church leader, you could expect to have a nice salary, a public office, all the perks, respect, a cushy career. Naturally, people who would have gone anywhere near the church for the simple reason that they have no real faith in Christ were suddenly queueing up to take offices in the Church as indeed they are today. And of course the official church went downhill slowly but inevitably from that point onwards. Because of the real genuine faith of some people in the church, this rot was not as fast as it otherwise would have been. Nevertheless, if we see somebody in the post-Constantine period writing that church officers should not eat with “Jews and heretics”, we ought to be able to dismiss it with the contempt it deserves.
I would not like to give anyone the impression that I am blaming the Roman Catholic part of the Church with the bulk of anti-Semitism. This is in fact, probably not the case. Often people think that because Adolf Hitler was a Catholic, at least in name, that the Catholics were the worst of the lot, but that simply is not true. In the 1880s, the revival of Russian Orthodoxy in czarist Russia as well as the abandoning of some of the reforms made by Alexander I, led to a vicious pogrom against the Jews, and also of course harassment and prejudicial behaviour towards Roman Catholics and Protestants living in the Russian Empire. One also ought to mention that the greatest supporters of Adolf Hitler when he was elected to government were actually not from the Catholic parts of Germany. The Prussian controlled areas were actually more Nazi than than the Bavarians and Swabians. If we go back a few centuries before, when Germany was really the centre of the Hexenwahn or the obsession with the burning of witches, there are also records of Catholic areas being safer for women than the Protestant areas. And it was of course Protestant extremists who were responsible for the Salem witch burnings in America. If we go back to Martin Luther himself, regarded as the father of the Reformation and deferred to even by Calvin, you would be hard pressed to find any more anti-Semitic a piece of prose than his pamphlet “On the Jews and their lies”, which has been described as a blueprint for the Night of the Long Knives. It has been said that Martin Luther started out hoping that his Protestantism would be the vehicle whereby the Jews would be converted en masse to Christianity, but that when they refused him, he spat out his dummy and started to rail against them. It remains a massive blemish on his image to this day.
John Calvin and the Calvinists were relatively pro-semitic, and in Calvinist England the Jews, who had been banished previously, were invited to return and since that time have been largely safe in Britain. The same applies to Calvinist Holland, except for the fact that Holland was invaded by Nazi Germany and of course many Jews became the victims of that regime notwithstanding the brave attempts of the Dutch to save many of them. In today’s America can see two forms of Protestantism: you can see the pro Israel pro-Jewish evangelicals, but as well there is still an organisation called the Ku Klux Klan which is anti-Semitic – and by the way Masonic in origin and there is no big secret in that – you can simply look at the credentials of the founders of the Klan – and (one is ashamed to say) the KKK also have their catchment area in the Bible Belt and the more ignorant end of the Protestant churches.
So when we come to really look at whether Masonic lodges are more welcoming to Jews than the Christian church is, I would tend to regard the issue rather differently to the way you put it. I fully acknowledge the shortcomings of many believers in Christ, in many of the so-called churches, to approach the covenant people with the correct love and friendliness, as well as humility and deference which the Holy Bible explicitly expects of us. I can promise you that in my own case I fully believe that God Almighty has got the backs of the Jewish people in a way that no other people can claim, and that things will turn out okay for them in the end even though they’ve been through the toughest history of any people. God Almighty had a difficult plan for them, but also he has in hand for them privileges above all the other peoples on the earth.
God promises to Abraham that in his seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, and Christians understand this to refer to the Messiah whom they see as Jesus Christ. But God further promises that whoever blesses the offspring of Abraham he will bless, and whoever curses the offspring of Abraham he will curse. In fact no weapon was formed against the children of Israel will ever prosper for long, and moreover I have discovered that some of the greatest blessings of my life have come to me via friendship with Jewish people. I don’t go every Friday, but quite often you’ll find me at the Beit Warszawa for the sabbath service, and I greatly enjoy both the singing and the speaking by Rabbi Schumann as well as of course eating with the community afterwards. I can tell you that this is one Christian who takes absolute delight in breaking bread with Jewish worshippers, and whatever they may be sensing, whoever they may be sensing in the worship of God, I personally feel that when the bread is broken and a glass of wine is pressed into my hand and we raise it and say “leChaim”, I feel Jesus Christ is very near to me in that moment. It seems more similar to his communion supper than most of the Eucharists I have ever seen practised in Christian churches by New Testament believers. I personally believe that Jesus Christ is coded into almost every aspect of Jewish worship. I don’t even need to say to the people in the congregation “oh, this refers to Jesus Christ”, because Jesus Christ himself is right there amongst them, but as it says in Romans, God put a blindfold on their eyes. They can’t tell that he’s there, but he is. Jesus Christ belongs to Jews much more than he belongs to us, and the only way to be right with Jesus Christ is not to be at enmity with the people that Jesus Christ was born among when he walked this planet.
It says “and so shall all Israel be saved” , which I take to mean that when Jesus Christ himself decides that the time is up for the cultivated olive tree to be grafted back onto the wild one, which was drafted into the cultivated root in the first place, he will graft them in again just as Paul says to the Romans. I don’t have to do the grafting. I don’t have to shove the gospel down the throats of people are already worshipping the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If they want to ask me any questions about my theology can always explain them to them, but it will be with humility. I would rather hear about their traditions and theology, and the things that have been handed down in their people, which God has always protected, and kept alive even in the worst of adversities, this being a miracle that accompanies their Scriptures through to the present day, and gives life and validity to the Torah right through to our time. Neither the ancient Egyptians, nor the Ammonites, nor the Philistines, nor the Romans, nor the Russians, nor the Nazis, nor the Arabs have been able to extinguish from the earth the bearers of the Word of God, although so many of them have wanted to and still want to. No other nation has come up against such opposition. A multitude of nations have existed that have seemed stronger than the Jewish people, but they have come and gone. Hittites, Goths, Assyrians -they may have come down like a wolf on the fold, but they died like dogs in ditches time after time while the bearers of the sacred scrolls struggle on. A massive historical miracle.
Back to the Masons. In my view the masons are an organisation of control of many millions of people from a small number of people. The motivation behind the people joining the Masons is generally a good one – it is sold to professional men as an organisation trying to take good men and make them better. It positions itself as a public benefit organisation. Of course, most people who join it are aware that they will be able to network with people who could be good for business, and maybe they also expect that certain benefits will come to them from knowing the “signs and tokens and perfect points of entry” that would not be available to them otherwise. And that certainly does exist. If you are a mason, you can pretty much expect another mason who has identified you in a public situation to have your back and you’ll have to do the same for them. A harmless club? A mafia? Somewhere between the two, maybe.
Certainly these benefits are not fair, they do not make for a level playing field in society, and by no stretch of the imagination can the organisation be called transparent. But up to the third degree, most Masons probably don’t have much of an idea of what is going on in the higher reaches of Freemasonry, especially the Scottish Rite (headed in the past by the same people who put the KKK into existence), which goes to 33 levels, after which there are a range of hidden organisations which are open to people who have achieved, by a process of selection at every stage, 33 degree freemasonry. There is plenty of information about these things on the Internet, often given by people related to masons or occasionally by ex-masons.
At the 33rd degree, however, the Mason is already worshipping a very different God to the one he came in on, be that the Jewish view of God or a Trinitarian one, as required in some Rites. Certain rites will accept you as long as you believe in God, in some rites you have to be Trinitarian, and in one rite, the French rite, you can even be an atheist, and that is why the French lodges are not in regular amity with the English and Scottish lodges, although individual French rite masons can transfer from 3rd degree French masonry into Scottish lodges, and many do so, as it is the only way for them to advance in the esoteric knowledge that is opened that way. The 33 degree mason receives a name for God which is in fact diabolical, and takes part in Satanic worship rituals. So the people at the head of the organisation handing down edicts to the porch level masons are in fact Satanists, and they will make Satanists of the “successful” lower level Masons. They are actively recruiting men with influence, not only from the Church and from Judaism, but from Islam also.
They don’t mind who they take in, they will put them through their programme anyway, because what comes out the other end is a compromised believer anyway, someone entirely sold out to the devil in a Faustian way. So they’ve infiltrated most of the established churches – almost no Church is free of them, and many churches are riddled with them placing their symbols amongst the Christian ones in order to confuse and confound the Christian believer. They’ve infiltrated Roman Catholicism at the highest levels even though the Vatican has an edict that Catholics should not become Masons. The P2 lodge, a descendent of one of the Lodges that founded modern Italy (many modern countries were put in place by Masons, including the US, where 13 of the 33 founding fathers were practising Masons and they were the ones pulling the strings there) contains may figures from Church life, political life and the upper echelons of organised crime. And they’ve also infiltrated the Jewish community, and they’re working on the Muslims also. They’ll have a finger in every pie.
So strong are their links with some Jewish families of larger wealth, that some people wrongly attribute the conspiracies to Zionists or Jews, when ordinary Jews are as innocent of these things as ordinary Christians are, and the people doing it, whatever their origins may be, don’t care really for the Torah or the New Testament, and have completely different beliefs and interests altogether, and certainly not the public interest.
Lodges are the places where the greatest hypocrisies of modern political life are hammered out, and the crimes against democracy and equality for ordinary people committed. Wars are planned in them, and peoples carved up into so-called countries and set against each other. They will welcome any of us with open arms as long as they think they can use us and compromise us. Dear Rebbe Piper, I hope you are not deceived by them, just because they have sweet words for Jews, and we Christians have behaved disgracefully towards the Jews so often. Sometimes the biggest enemy is the nicest towards us of all.
Let me now come on to your point about the Lord’s Prayer. It is a prayer addressed to God the Father, and it addresses God as Father. Old Testament prayers did not tend to address God as Father, and to today, in the synagogue, I will hear not “Avva” but “Baruch hashem Adonai” and we all bow the knee and bow forward. Jesus Christ invites us to pray to God as our Father, which is out of synch with the Jewish theology of the day, indeed the Pharisees say that if Christ calls God the Father his Father, then he makes himself equal with God. Yet Christ invites us to pray to His Father as “Our Father” and to speak of His glory, His kingdom, His power, His will that shall be done. Prior to the cross Jesus Christ says “Father, if it be Thy will, take away this cup from me. Nevertheless, Thy will, not mine, be done”. Jesus has explained to his disciples that if they have seen Him, they have seen the Father, and that “I and my Father are one”, and yet He also acknowledges that for the purposes of achieving the salvation of mankind, he has placed himself in a position where he is separate – His will may differ from that of the Father, but the will of the Father and not His in this case, should prevail. This was necessary in order that God Himself could be born among us, His own creation, and unite with us in taking on the flesh of humankind via Mary, live out a life of obedience to the law and die taking the punishment that was rightfully ours, so that by faith we could be united with him. A dispensation of justification by faith, even as Abraham had, for it is written that “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him as righteousness”. This was only possible because God had provided the lamb, or the young ram, for the sacrifice, as it was when Abraham went obediently to sacrifice Isaac. God did for us what Abraham was ready to do for God. But in order for that to happen the second person of the Trinity needed to place himself vis a vis the Father in a place of eternally begotten sonship.
This is what is meant when we come to the words of the New Testament in Philippians 2 v 5-11:
“Let this mind be in you which also was in Christ Jesus who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and has given him a name that is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
This passage is very full of meaning related to how to understand the particular position of Jesus Christ with relation to the godhead on the one hand and human beings on the other, indeed, all of creation on the other. Prior to becoming a man, Jesus Christ had glory with the Father equal to that of the Father. He “thought it not robbery to be equal with God”. And indeed, He says, “I and my Father are one”, and the only reason why Jesus Christ would appear to be any less God the Father, or to submit his will to that of the Father, is that he should become obedient to death, even the death of the cross, and then be raised up and given the Name (a clear reference to Hashem) above every name. So that in the end by the will of the Father and to his glory, every time will confess that it’s Jesus Christ, who is the Lord, (Adonai).
There are passages in Colossians as well as certain aspects of the way the account is written in Genesis which show to the reader that Jesus Christ is the actual creator of this physical world. When we see God’s footsteps walking in the garden and his confrontation of Adam in Eden, we can understand this to be Jesus Christ and none other. We can understand that Jesus Christ is the one “like unto the son of God” walking in the fiery furnace with Shadrach, Mishach and Abednego. We can understand that it’s Jesus Christ who speaks with Abraham bargains with him over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. Indeed, he speaks of this to the Pharisees when they ask him “hast thou known Abraham?” and He says “before Abraham was, I am”, again taking upon himself the name of God eternal, given to Moses on Mount Sinai. At which point they tried to kill him, and he is taken from them, but with no attempt to appease them with an explanation that He did not really mean that He was equal with God.
It pleases God the Father and gives glory to God the Father when we confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. When we pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ then we are told by Christ himself that we will be granted our prayers. And whilst at the time in which He was asked to teach the disciples to pray close to the beginning of His ministry, Jesus Christ does not say to his disciples to pray in His Name, it is implicit in the fact that they are calling God “our Father”, that they are placing themselves within Christ Jesus, because only Christ Jesus is in fact, the son of God and our sonship and adoption as children of God proceeds derivatively from the Sonship, which Jesus Christ has got the Father. That is why neither Judaism nor Islam prays to God as “Father”, indeed the term is regarded as inappropriately familiar, as indeed it should be if Christ had not stood in our stead and become our second Adam, he being the true and acknowledge Son of God the Father, and one with him, and one with us now by the vehicle of faith also, faith which by the way he produces in us, therefore re-uniting the penitent believer with God in a way which no angel or any other being of heaven has ever experienced.
And this was in the end the sense of making this world, with all its sins and sufferings – the redemption is more blessed than the sin was accursed. The health that emerges is greater and more appreciated than the health that existed before the sickness that led to the healing. They who are forgiven much, love much. They that are whole have no need of a physician but them that are sick, so Christ came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance. And then it is like the return of the prodigal, the feasting and the joy, more than over the elder brothers, the angels, who never went astray. There is not so bitter a tear that the God of heaven cannot dry it with sweetness and eternal joy. Abraham says “Shall not the Judge of all the Earth do right?” Of course He will, and “eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath entered into the heart of man those things which God hath prepared for them that love Him”.
Huliganov’s “End of the World”
Production date: 15 June 2006
Playout date: 16/6/2006
Camera: Logitech webcam
Post Production: Windows Movie Maker
Location: ul Kopernika, Katowice, in my then office.
In this video, Huliganov discusses the literary device known as the “pathetic fallacy” and illustrates it with a 50′s song by the poet Skeeter Davis, “The End of the World”.
This was a piece I did impromptu, as I had half an hour before a meeting and the idea had presented itself on the drive down to Katowice. Here we see the early Huliganov crystallising into the character we see in later videos.
This still has a medium degree of popularity, and even the same day as I upload this there is a video response by Atticus Stount. I also used stills from this video for a couple of channel icons that are going around, which you may have spotted.
For example, this one:
A thorn in the thide of thpeech?
Someone over on the forum at How-To-Learn-Any-Language had the following query about the thorn, or ‘th’ sound in Germanic and other European language families:
It’s interesting that Gothic had this sound but of the Germanic languages, only English and Icelandic have this now. Greek and Spanish have it also. What’s the connection, and why the other languages haven’t this sound more?
I found this query very interesting so I wrote the following response.
There was a ‘th’ to ‘d’ shift in German. Martin Luther should have actually been called ‘Luder’, but as that was not befitting to a theologian of his stature, his ancestors didn’t join in that sound-shift. There was an opt-out clause if the result gave you a rude sounding name, you see. That is probably why it got retained just about everywhere in Icelandic and English, come to think of it…
In all honesty, I think the reason it was one of the first to be dropped in languages was that the sound is not economical. It needs the tongue to move further forward in the mouth than other consonants. Also ‘th’ in English is problematic – some people voice it in words that other people would leave it unvoiced. The British, I mean those of us who can be bovvered to make a ‘th’ sound at all, say ‘with’ with a voiced ‘th’. Americans can often be heard to pronounce the same word with an unvoiced ‘th’. And then there is the problem that within England alone those who find ‘th’ a trouble to pronounce do default to a variety of replacement letters. I heard people defaulting ‘th’ to ‘d’, in accordance with Old Germanic tradition, and was very proud of them. But many default ‘th’ unvoiced to ‘f’, not ‘t’. The Irish and I think Liverpool defaults the unvoiced sound to ‘t’, but Savvern Inglish, especially Saaf Landen, does an ‘f’ for unvoiced and by analogy a ‘v’ for voiced ‘th’. (And we still don’t have our own Wikipedia language, which is a bleedin disgrace, Jimbo moy san).
Let me give an example – some years back when regulation of the high-cost information telephone lines was just getting under way, adverts for info lines had to show you the country you would be ringing to. One advert said “Calls terminate in Tuvalu”. One of my colleagues speaking Saaf Landen read this out, and another one laughed, thinking he had said that the calls terminated “into the loo”, that is, the toilet.
(No disrespect intended to that island nation. In fact, I have a .tv domain myself. Pluggy-pluggy-plug.)
The argument that ‘th’ is dropped because it is less economical to pronounce can be backed up by looking at how the equivalent to ‘th’ unvoiced aspirate in the dental group in the other groups are fairing. In the labial group (no porn intended) the ‘f’ is dropped from most Slavic languages, except in loan words. Its popularity in Germanic is all down to the First Sound Shift, a linguistic event that is grimm to look into. The ‘ch’ in the velar group as in ‘Loch’ is barely used in English and most Germanic languages have demoted it to simple h in many cases, and of course even simple ‘h’ is regularly dropped in many English dialects. ‘sh’ in the sibilant group has been reduced or dropped in a number of languages also. It is not easy to find in Greek, for instance. Unvoiced aspirates have a hard time in the human mouth, you can’t be in denial about it. Even the well-worn joke about denial being not just a river in Africa refers back to what I’m talking about.
The one conundrum is why Castillian Spanish, in its European version, actually prought in a ‘th’ sound, which we have admitted is a hard one to keep going, into the language, admittedly though not in the same place, but as a lisped version of ‘c’ and ‘z’. One benefit it has there, of course, is to facilitate diferenciacion between ‘c/z’ and ‘s’which is not audible in Latin American Spanish. I have no idea what impact that has on the frecuencia of espelling miztakes in that part of the world, perhaps someone here can enlighten me. One answer I heard was that it was a feature of aristocratic speech to lisp, and that people copied it to show how genteel (as in ‘inbred’) they were. I do give this theory some credence as there are parallels elsewhere – it puts me in mind of when the court was at St Petersburg and it became fashionable to adapt the style of that court, which in addition to ‘okanie’ happened to include an inability to roll one’s ‘r’s for the camera, and also the same lisp on ‘s’. Today there is a tendency in so-called “World Spanish” to lose the ‘th’, and the Russian courtly lisp was put paid to rather more rapidly by the revolutsia. Anyone going around talking in courtly accents during that epic upheaval would be taking an unnethethary rithk.
In English the lisp became associated in the twentieth century and possibly earlier with camp speech, with all the TV sitcoms which showed stereotyped homosexuals having them lisping, which wasn’t very nice for people who lisped because they couldn’t help it, although it may well be some new friendships started that way for some people, who wouldn’t otherwise have been exposed to them.
In case you are wondering on what basis I am positing that lisping only became relatively recently associated with homosexual speech in English, let me tell you what evidence I have – if you look up the popular hymn “O worship the King, all glorious above” by Sir Robert Grant (1785-1838) you will find that the original hymn has the following final verse:
“O measureless Might! Ineffable Love!
While angels delight to hymn thee above,
The humber creation, though feeble their lays,
With true adoration shall lisp to thy praise.”In post-war hymnals this was often replaced with “… sing to thy praise”. Interesting that they felt no need to update the archaic “thy” but couldn’t handle any more the idea of “lisping” at God! You will find both versions in abundance in search engines, as well as an entirely modernised “you/your” version with a theologically modified version of the last verse here.
In Germany today there seems to be a tremendous amount of lisping going on, and nobody feels that they need to draw attention to it, neither does it seem to go hand in hand with campness, so it seems perfectly in Ordnung to hear “Sie sind so sauer” as if they were saying in English “Thee thinned though thou-a”, and not a rainbow flag or an earring in sight. So, maybe the sound is actually returning to German, just in a different place. As long as no-one calls Martin Luther “Martin Loser” when the trend inevitably reverses again in the future, then why not?
Scenes from the Polish Countryside
Production date: 10 June 2006
Playout date: 16/6/2006
Camera: Fuji Finepix
Post Production: Windows Movie Maker with various effects
Location: West Poland
This was on the way back from Copenhagen, I was about to go on to Gorzow Wielkopolski and meet one client there – someone who later became a firm friend and still is – and just kept on with the experimental filming and photography here and there, but it’s still small because of the tiny memory card. Looking back I really regret not getting a bigger one sooner and not starting filming sooner. Thanks to this hobby my memories of the last four years will always be crisper and newer than those of the previous time.
I would liken having film with the motion and the sound included in comparison with pure stills photography as something akin to the comparison of having a still camera and not having a camera at all. Video with sound adds more than you might think.
However, it also enables you to add your own sound, and what this may well be my first ever attempt at is adding own recorded sound (this one was a recording taken with a sony dictaphone in Church) on an “environmental” vid (that is a video taken outside where you would be going anyway – your natural environment. It’s not about environmentalism) or “travlog”. I had already added bits of mp3s not recorded by myself to films, but I think this is the first to do this. It was a nice match between the Church choir singing a song – not very technically excellently, but with a fine spirit – the Church is http://www.kosciolbozy.org – and the scenes of a girl feeding her goat which I was lucky enough to spot, and the poppies growing by the roadside and the stork footage (the latter gets repeated in its own film). There is something of Poland in the film.
The sepia effect you’ll see on this film, by the way, is a technique which I only ever used the once, although in theory it wouldn’t necessarily hurt to use again – this is in fact the holding of polarising sunglass over the camera lense. No sepia after-effect was actually used here. This could be useful in situations where there really is too much glare of the sun.
Arty-farty hotel room
Production date: 9 June 2006
Playout date: 16/6/2006
Camera: Fuji Finepix
Post Production: Windows Movie Maker with various effects
Location: First Skt Petri Hotel, Copenhagen, Denmark
I found this hotel overpriced at the time, although probably everything in Denmark is and so in retrospect I blame the country and not the hotel per se. This was four years back and these days you can pay as much if not more for less good hotels in less interesting places. And this despite the recession! There was some pleasure in the arty-fartiness of it. I still took very little footage at that time because of the memory card situation. I regret I didn’t buy a bigger memory card earlier, as I really got very little footage of Copenhagen, in fact what I filmed was really only inside the hotel room!
The Goldlist Method – Response to Appraisal and Critique by Group of Hardcore Polyglots and Linguists
Here is an article on the goldlist method which I wrote very recently on the How to Learn any Language forum in a thread which was very useful on the whole for the system – some of the top linguists and polyglots you can find on the net are there in that discussion, and they are putting this methiod to the test. Now some of them have already had the most tremendous success learning languages with their own preferred methods and are naturally suspicious of new-fangled approaches like this here Goldlist Method – some of them had criticisms to make, which are addressed below, but among them are plenty of hardcore linguists and polyglots who seem to really like the method. They are the hardest group to please, and you’ll see that despite the dissenting voices there are many who stand up for the method and more people do seem to approve of it than disapprove. And I don’t think I’ll ever have a tougher audience for this.
Here’s what I said, but by all means go and join that forum and have a look at the thread and other threads. It’s a wonderful place for a linguist to be, and I immediately paid to be a supporting member, or a “pro” member, as the site owner calls it, and I hope more people will follow my example.
I have read all the posts in this thread, and I assume that since as you know I am a videographer, that I may make a response in full to this discussion on video. This will hopefully have the knock-on effect of attracting new members, assuming you want them, to this splendid community. I hope that the owner of the site and the contributors to the forum will not mind that way of reply, in any event it seems a fairly standard thing to give someone a right of reply and at least let them choose the method, and therefore I trust that this idea will not be seen as controversial, or as poor netiquette.
Many thanks first of all for your kind attention to this method, and for trying it out as a group. I will not go into detail here as I fear to tamper with your most intriguing discussion and experiment, which is exceptionally valuable for the fine-tuning of the method, which in turn will hopefully help more people.
I will, however, say one or two things now, before the film.
This method was never intended to be more than the claims made for it by me in the videos. I do not say, at any point, that this is ‘the best method’. What it is, is ONE way to help people move away from short-term memory methods based on cramming which is in my opinion utterly useless for language learning, although it certainly has a role in some other types of learning.
The same school curriculum imposes a certain way of learning both on biology or physics and on languages, whereas another way of learning is required as the disciplines and the parts of the brain involved are at any rate broadly acknowledged to be different, albeit at times overlapping, especially when biologists use Latin names for things and really you have to be a bit of a linguist to learn the difference between your Macropus and your Macropodus, or to tell your Diptera from your Diphtheria.
The state education of children results in generations of children leaving schools having spent enough time to learn several languages in the classroom, and yet having learned none. Instead they go on through life thinking that *they* failed, not the method, and they sphexishly go on trying language school after language school, believing that the stupid lessons they get given, and the good old “learn these words for next Tuesday’s test” rubbish is actually the proper way to learn a language, and of course that industry is not about to disabuse them. I wouldn’t care to hazard a guess how much the adult education of languages in paid classes is worth per annum, and how much of that spend simply fails to add value to people who believe they are making an investment in themselves. The schools and the courses often offer the money back after 16 days or thereabouts (16 comes from the famed “Callan” method and also the Paul Daniels courses of some years back, based on short term memory tricks, also used this 16 day period too, if memory serves) because they know that up till that time the short-term memory works, and will carry the students’ confidence, only to fail them later, but leave them convinced that they themselves were at fault and need to try again buying another course later.
Cainntear, I believe it was, asks where is the objective evidence about the two-weeks, and where’s my research? Well, I didn’t research this, it’s something that I observed from the practice of these companies, and just put two and two together. In point of fact I have not measured, and do not know, whether the best cut off is REALLY 14 days or 16 or whether 12 would do it, but what I do know is that ancient man developed a type of conscious memory that he could control consciously, in the same way that he could learn to consciously hold his breath – animals don’t do this, as far as I can tell. The conscious takeover of memory, as with breath, means that the function doesn’t work quite as well as it does in the state when it works unconsciously, which it does perfectly well most of the time. With breathing you end up hyperventilating, which enables you to do interesting tricks like swim the length of a swimming pool underwater without coming up for air – I used to be able to do this in my youth but I’m too fat and old now – but you cannot keep on hyperventilating or you will keel over.
By the way, I made some points in one of the Polish language videos on the method addressing Chomsky’s observations about the “loss” of ability to learn langaues with such facility once we get to the age of five or six, and deconstructed that to say that it’s not that we really *lose* anything, it’s that we add a layer of perception – the layer of consciously trying to memorise when we learn, and it is that which impedes the memory so much and ruins language learning, we are “hyperventilating” our memories, so to speak. Prior to that age we made no attempt to learn words and phrases, but still we did so very naturally, and not only that but we ALL did, including those who claim they have no “gift for languages”. It is an observable fact that, while the learning of additional languages can give a speaker much more style and facility and a broader vocabulary in his own language, there are still plenty of people with excellent command of their native tongue who have tried and failed to achieve functional fluency in any other languages.
Let’s consider a further corollary. If we say that there is such a thing as a controllable short-term memory which is different to the unconscieous and uncontrollable long term memory, then it follows that we must have evolved the function of short-term, consciously controllable memory for a reason. If natural selection can be taken at face value it must have been a survival trait for early humans, or it would not have come into existence at all. I take the reason, if indeed evolution played a role at all in man’s origin, (but I assume most of you are more convinced about that than I am, but if not, then the reason it was given by the Creator could be the same), is to enable early man to go on expeditions to find food and to return again, remembering the way back to the camp where the women remained with the children, bringing back the much needed food. The hunters and long-range gathering tribesmen would have needed to get back to the home base within less than two weeks – if not then the women and children would be starving and starting to exhibit signs of malnutrition. So they would go as far afield as they could in the search for flesh and fruit, and needed to be able to find their way home, so they learned how to force themselves to observe and retain landmarks. Now if you leave a landmark too long it changes anyway – a tree changes colour, a rock gets kicked away by an elephant, but more than that the tribe simply could not afford to let them be away that long. Also you have the cycle of the moon – the group would see the moon at half-way to fullness and take that as the signal to leave on a new hunting expedition. The best hunting is to be done at night by the light of the full moon and man’s predatory instinct still today shows strongest at this time, as underlined by the various werewolf legends and leitmotifs that there are. On the other hand the group would have wanted to be back by the time the moon’s cycle was giving darker nights, which is not a good time to be away from home, and so for those two weeks where the moon is darker they would have been at home. Even the menstrual cycle of our women evolved around that pattern of the availibility of the partners. Seven days before and seven days after the first day of menstruation are generally (don’t rely on this necessarily) considered not fertile times, and on this basis the Roman catholics practice their “rhythm method’ of allowable contraception. And that is how I think the short-term or conscious learning memory came to be in evolutionary terms, and why it is two weeks, or if you are not an evolutionist then you could say that we were given this for precisely the same above reasons.
Now of course I cannot give you evidence for either proposal, as it is not susceptible to tangible evidence, but I’ve just been reading Dawkins’ “Greatest Show on Earth” where he hangs very big ideas on bases no more empirical than the ones I just offered, and everybody seems to think he is a marvellous thinker, and no doubt he is, even though I beg leave to differ on the majority of his conclusions…
In any event, I don’t even need to be providing evidence, despite what Cainntear says, because all the work on staged presentation, which is all this is – a version of staged presentation which anyone should simply be able to manage for themselves putting themselves in control of pace and progress, and disengage from these hopeless teachers – was done 80 years ago, and anyone with a mind to can see the arguments for staged presentation. Ebbinghaus, who discovered it, was the first psychologist to have any kind of evidential or empirical standard, and his empiricism was very highly regarded. That’s why he is seen as the Daddy of psychology, especially that of memory, and I doff my hat to him. At the same time, as some of you have noted, there are aspects of what I think that go beyond Ebbinghaus – in particular he doesn’t distinguish so much between the long and short-term memory, but then I already gave you the main reasons why I use that, and also using that kind of cut off is the key way to draw the learners off using cramming, short-term methods which are so toxic for them. Work on the unconscious mind was largely done after Ebbinghaus and you cannot expect one man to think of everything. So I am not positing that the whole method is one hundred percent Ebbinghaus, but it does produce effects which approximate in practical terms very closely to Ebbinghaus’ findings on a numerical basis, and if you want to get in closer to Ebbinghaus ideal lengths of stages then you really beed to be using a computer program (there is one somewhere and I forget what it is called but a gentleman from Szczecin produced it) and then you don’t have the benefits of a manual system which the gold list method incorporates.
Had I gone about making claims about some new scientific discovery, then Cainntear’s demands for me to start furnishing peer reviewed research might be more justified, but show me where I ever made such assertions? I think, on the contrary, I’ve been careful to avoid doing so, which is why I have to admit I regard Cainntear’s criticism as rather unfair to me in this area. In point of fact, I would dearly love to be able to go and fund some research for some of the ideas I have that would support the scientific validity of the method, had I ever wished to make that claim, but I don’t have that kind of money. Last year I did not get paid by my previous company for six months. There where times I didn’t know how I could feed my children, two of whom are severely disabled and wife, also severely disabled, or buy them the treatments they need, or clothes for their backs, and yet not once did I even suggest that anybody made even so much as a voluntary donation for the use of this method. Now by the grace of God and the kindness of friends in my profession of accountancy who helped me to re-employment in a better place, I do not have this problem any more, but still I cannot go funding research. Bearing in mind how much money governments around the world are wasting on the miseducation of languages in schools, I think they should be the ones actually eager to stump up some funds to research this, and not me, (I’d gladly give input or steering as far as I can, but I cannot fund it) so I thank you, Cainntear, for your sarcasm.
Anyway. More on the whole thing in my future film, in which everyone, without exception, will be answered, because you all have said things that are important to me. I’m afraid that if I type too much now, then a) nobody will read my book when it’s ready as they will have already read everything I have to say on the matter, and I would like to have at least one book to my name even if not everybody likes it, and b) at some point the software won’t be happy, and I might lose everything I’ve written this evening!
Please keep discussing regardless, and I hope that people will be as critical as they have been previously, only within reason, not suggesting that I shold be funding teams of researchers out of my pocket, and please do not tone it down just because I’m in the room. The important thing is to get the results of your kind experiment, be happy for those of you who were helped, and analyse the reasons why some of you may be less helped than others.
To seasoned linguists such as this august group, I would expect the Goldlist Method to be a plaything which some of you will like and use as a favoured technique (which is exceptionally flattering, that my method should find favour among other polyglots) however to those who falsely believe they have no gift for languages and who dearly wish to learn a language, I would expect that this is more of a lifeline, a great chance to try a new method – not the only method but a new method for them, which will work for them by breaking bad habits and wrong ideas about what second language learning really is, and what tasks it’s really made up of. In the main I started offering the method as an adjunct to the Huliganov Russian course on YouTube, which was aimed at helping people who are not really linguists (or who tried and failed in the past to be linguists) and help them to achieve their language ambitions. Not only can you see a number of people making videos or comments publicly that they were greatly benefitted by the method, even though at first they didn’t believe it, but I can assure you that the private mail I get overwhelmingly (although not exclusively) praising the method runs into hundreds of people, just as the view count runs into thousands.
If I have helped to empower some people to find a way they can be more organised or efficient linguists which had evaded them before, or to keep going as linguists even when the amount of time at their disposal has been reduced by life’s other claims, and I have indeed had cases of all the above, then for me that is the greatest aim, and at the same time I’m also delighted to see people who don’t really need it themselves also play with it and have their thoughts about the language learning process provoked by it.
I am actually hoping that, in addition to helping hundreds and maybe thousands finally get to call themselves linguists when they couldn’t before, the Goldlist Method will be taken up by an existing polyglot as an extra tool in their workshop, and used to help that person become the greatest ever polyglot. If I could help in some tangible way someone to become the the greatest linguist on earth, knowing more languages than anyone else has ever known, someone who has much more time for the process than I do, then that would make me very happy indeed.
Bear necessities
Production date: 12 June 2006
Playout date: 16/6/2006
Camera: Logitech webcam
Post Production: Windows Movie Maker
Location: Home, Ochota, Warszawa
How this got to over 1600 views is beyond me, it’s just a musical muckaround to calm down my daughter, who had woken in the night. One thing I can tell you from the stats is that almost all that was in the first two years – the second two years it has been up have had next to nothing. The line on the graph has gone flat.
It goes to show two things, I suppose. One is that YT is a bit of a lottery – a much better film which happens to be allocated less auspicious referral points will get fewer views than a purely incidental film which had no work in it. The second is that cute evidently counts for something, and using a Disney title can help. It would be interesting to see whether new life can be breathed into this film by using it a s a video response – the problem is that these days the vast majority of “heavy duty” content providers on YT are ignoring or rejecting video responses even for relevant videos, let alone speculative ones. Also it will be interesting to see if purely the act of placing this here on 3rd May 2010 has any impact on that flat line or not!
Sorry, purely nerdy spiel in this one, but it may interest you-tubers who also speculate on why some of their vids sink and others swim, or as in this case at first inexplicably swim, but then suddenly sink!


Recent Responses