Posted: 24 Apr 2007, 03:19
ROFLMAO!Dr. Moody wrote:How the f**k does he know anyway ? "oops just been on the phone to God, forgot to mention that Limbo is out this year...
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/lolol.gif)
![We are not worthy! :notworthy:](./images/smilies/icon_notworthy.gif)
ROFLMAO!Dr. Moody wrote:How the f**k does he know anyway ? "oops just been on the phone to God, forgot to mention that Limbo is out this year...
Way back in the thread now, but this that seemed familiar to me; I've found it, and it's not Aquinas I was thinking of:sultan2075 wrote:I can think of passages in Thomas's Summa where he explicitly rejects literal readings, saying that if scripture and science disagree, it's because you've not understood scripure correctly
Augustine of Hippo wrote:We must be on our guard against giving interpretations which are hazardous or opposed to science, and so exposing the word of God to the ridicule of unbelievers.
Saint Augustine, De genesi ad litteram libri duodecim (The Literal Meaning of Genesis) (415), I, nos. 19, 21, 39
I wouldn't call Joyce and Eliot post-modernists, but modernists, yet they were infuriatingly obscure due to referential writing. Joyce's Ulysses can't exactly be well read without a copy of Homer's Odyssey at hand, nor can Eliot's The Waste Land without Dante's Divine Comedy, and I would say Von is simply following in their footsteps (as is evident through his allusions to Eliot in early TSOM songs, such as "Valentine")....which is curious in itself since Von's particular referential writing style and sampling of lyrics, lines of poetry and "stolen guitars" could be easily described as post-modernist, despite his modernist protestations.