Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.usage.english > #579078
| From | charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.usage.english |
| Subject | Re: Why is it "The powers that be"; but not "The powers that are"? |
| Date | 2016-01-04 12:45 +0000 |
| Organization | None |
| Message-ID | <553caaa02fcharles@candehope.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <02403f17-2603-40ba-a204-ff23864c1c71@googlegroups.com> <8beec$56878e25$adb2c544$2595@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com> <n69q4j$btr$1@dont-email.me> <7f49$568a0971$569cca28$7391@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com> <c3fc9fcd-5c82-4af2-a7a8-d604bd51469f@googlegroups.com> |
AFIn article <c3fc9fcd-5c82-4af2-a7a8-d604bd51469f@googlegroups.com>, Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote: > On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 12:56:03 AM UTC-5, Paul M. Cook wrote: > > On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:33:50 +1100, Peter Moylan wrote: > > > True, the god of the early parts is a rather detestable psychopath by > > > today's standards, but that shows that standards have improved over > > > time. If we were inventing a god today, he would have more admirable > > > qualities. > > > > This is also a good point, in that the "original" A(1st book) god was > > despicable, while the "sequel" had a much nicer god (2nd book). By the > > 3rd book (the god of today), he'd be multi-racial, hermaphroditic, and > > downright genteel! > What do you mean by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd books? It was fairly obvious to me that Book 1 = OT; Book 2 = NT. Book 3 still to be written. -- Please note new email address: charles@CandEhope.me.uk
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