Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.usage.english > #579221
| From | Cheryl <cperkins@mun.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.usage.english |
| Subject | Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? |
| Date | 2016-01-04 19:11 -0330 |
| Message-ID | <df0aolF8vo3U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <n69q4j$btr$1@dont-email.me> <7f49$568a0971$569cca28$7391@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com> <c3fc9fcd-5c82-4af2-a7a8-d604bd51469f@googlegroups.com> <553caaa02fcharles@candehope.me.uk> <a91b5$568abf5f$2e0540ba$8589@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com> |
On 2016-01-04 3:22 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote: > On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:45:52 +0000, charles wrote: > >> It was fairly obvious to me that Book 1 = OT; Book 2 = NT. >> Book 3 still to be written. > > Correct. > > They are merely novels, two of which are in their umpteenth printing. > > The sequel is the one we're mostly talking about in this thread, > where the God is more politically correct than that of the first > two versions of the contrived story. > They are certainly not novels. Novels are a specific literary form. The Bible contains a variety of literary forms - poetry, myth, history, etc. but 'novel' isn't one of them. Although there are some claims that there are very early examples of novels, they aren't the Bible, or parts of the Bible, and most people think that the novel was a medieval development, with 'Tale of Genji' (1010) often cited as the earliest example. -- Cheryl --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Back to alt.usage.english | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-01 14:56 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-01 21:59 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-02 14:32 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-01 22:58 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-01 20:13 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-02 03:45 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-02 06:39 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-02 11:04 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 11:00 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 10:55 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Traddict" <Traddiction@hotmail.fr> - 2016-01-02 20:29 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Traddict" <Traddiction@hotmail.fr> - 2016-01-02 20:18 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-03 11:33 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-03 07:04 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2016-01-03 05:36 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? analyst41@hotmail.com - 2016-01-03 06:08 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-04 00:56 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2016-01-04 00:56 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2016-01-04 10:18 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-04 20:34 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 11:03 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 11:53 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 12:21 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 04:22 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> - 2016-01-04 12:45 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 06:38 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-04 13:52 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 11:49 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Cheryl <cperkins@mun.ca> - 2016-01-04 19:11 -0330
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-04 19:06 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 16:18 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 16:34 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-04 22:51 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 20:18 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-05 18:36 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 19:56 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 20:18 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2016-01-05 14:25 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Will Parsons <varro@nodomain.invalid> - 2016-01-05 02:36 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-05 16:29 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Will Parsons <varro@nodomain.invalid> - 2016-01-05 19:00 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 11:10 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 12:14 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-05 16:15 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2016-01-04 21:40 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 19:52 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 21:02 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 21:12 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-05 16:39 +1100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-05 07:38 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 10:26 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-01-05 22:10 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 19:43 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:14 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? bert <bert.hutchings@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-02 02:19 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-02 06:03 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-02 11:02 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-02 11:02 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-04 00:58 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-01 20:08 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2016-01-02 14:45 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-02 11:13 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 11:05 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2016-01-02 10:57 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2016-01-02 07:40 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@gte.net> - 2016-01-02 03:47 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Janet <nobody@home.org> - 2016-01-02 12:22 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 11:25 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2016-01-02 11:19 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2016-01-02 11:38 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Ross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2016-01-02 01:16 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2016-01-03 05:55 -0500
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Ross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2016-01-03 13:10 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Traddict" <Traddiction@hotmail.fr> - 2016-01-04 20:14 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Ross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2016-01-04 12:51 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? "Traddict" <Traddiction@hotmail.fr> - 2016-01-04 22:20 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2016-01-04 23:21 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? Ross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2016-01-04 16:53 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2016-01-05 14:27 +0000
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2016-01-02 11:38 +0100
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? analyst41@hotmail.com - 2016-01-02 09:22 -0800
Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? James Hogg <Jas.Hogg@gOUTmail.com> - 2016-01-02 19:34 +0100
csiph-web